Math Education

If I was to recommend a website for math education I would suggest khanacademy.com. He has good clear lessons. No matter what level of math your studying khanacademy.com has a lesson for you.

Having found the discovering algebra and geometry books, I am looking forward to studying them and gain some understanding why students do not do well with this method. I like the idea of them discovering mathematical principles. I do wonder if there needs to be a more of a Singapore math foundation with a tiny amount of investigation. And start the discovering of items sooner.
We should consider increasing the school year. Start by adding an hour of school Mon to Thursday. Then we start school a week earlier and end it a week later. Not in order to do more but to allow a longer time to learn what we are teaching.

Stop the gloating!

After the 2010 mid-term election, an extensive amount of gloating by talk show hosts. I heard at least three times the song "Ding Dong The Witch is Dead". So hear it is on Monday after the election and now is the time for the gloating to end. One of the elements of the downfall of the Democratic congress is the arrogance of thinking the victory in 2008 represented approval of anything they wanted to do. As it was then the republican victory is in part to the rejection of Democratic policy.
It is not surprising to hear Nancy Pelosi is going to try to gain the position of minority leader. She may have had water poured on her, but she is not melting away. Her willing to stay and fight and not just disappear is admirable. Will the Republicans listen to the American people and begin to cut spending. Will they do all they can do to repeal the new health care reform law.

On the issue of raising the debt ceiling. Continuing to have United States fall deeper and deeper in to debt must stop. The ability for the congress to propose a budget that doesn't have a deficit is difficult to imagine. But would like to see them cutting spending. I want to see that is being done first. If the President does not like the spending cuts, let him veto the budget. Only after we have severely cut spending would I be willing to see the debt ceiling go up.

It is going to require abandoning the status quo thinking. Start thinking that federal government does not need to be the one doing everything. It means we may have to allow a company to file bankruptcy. Understand it is not a bad thing Imagine what would happen if we would allow the American people to have the money for the education of their children and be allowed to shop around for the best schools. Could we legalize drugs and be able to save money or would it cause so much harm that the money spent on the war on drugs would be small in comparison. Start repealing laws and reduce regulations.

The gloating has to stop. It's the time to be making sure the message is clear on what we need done.

HOPE

Its not the beliefs people hold but why they believe it. Some person do not believe in the Holocaust. Some of these people believe it happen but will attempt to propagate the such a lie in hopes of getting people to begin to come over to their side. Others don't believe its true because they would NEVER be in favor of anyone doing such horrible acts again any other being. It is the latter group that would be reachable. The best chances of converting someone, is to find the person who could never continue to belief if one was presented with the truth.

I have hope of converting those who will deny President Obama's policies are socialistic. I would suspect most would not consider socialism as having more than one meaning and only apply a meaning that would seem the furthest from the polices. If one could successfully convince someone about President Obama's views, you could bring them back from where they came.

MISC.

Filibuster

Except for Senate only decisions, a Republican controlled house and a Senate controlled by the Democrats will virtually eliminate the use of the filibuster. The house would be able to hold up legislation unless the democratic controlled Senate is willing to give the Republicans some ground. And the Democratic Senate will be able to hold up legislation. But with momentum on the Republican side, it will be essential for both houses to be able to start doing things that the 'Tea party' is seeking. What is needed: Cut spending, lower taxes, roll back provisions of the health care reform (passed only because the house had to gave into the Senate version after losing a the 60th vote which would have protected against the filibuster) a lot of people were upset with the way things were done. Many people would be happier with gridlock than continuing in the direction the president has been heading. So it needs to be a net change more republican than democrat. If that does not happen the Democrats will lose the Senate, and The White House.



Obama's magic
People have put too high expectations on President Obama. His lack of experience to accomplish the things people had in mind Also some expectations would not be possible no matter who is president.

President Obama needs to learn to move to the center. Political positions are on a bell curve. If you insist on staying in the far left, your positions will be unpopular by many people and you will find yourself out of the White House. Will Obama learn and move to the right and start supporting positions held by more of the American people. Will he find himself a Dick Morris. He does not need to move to the absolute center but will simply need to move just to the left of center.

Obstructionist

Listening to MSNBC, Rachel Maddow stated it was obstructionism when Rep Boehner told Republican members not to compromise with President Obama and did not want one vote for the legislation. But doing this did not result, in any way, blocking the legislation. It simply gave President Obama everything he wanted. It perfectly demonstrated the American people were not in favor of Obama's agenda.

Last night's election showed the American people do not want President Obama's agenda. If President Obama wants to make a difference, he will need to move to towards the center. if he does not President Obama will be voted out of office in 2012 and the Republicans will gain the Senate.

Who is going to filp?

So I wonder if anyone is going to flip parties. In the house it would not surprise me if some Democrats would flip to the Republican side in order to preserve their seat in the next election. But will any one flip in the Senate? If someone does it will be to gain power. But since the filibuster number is 60, it will be a surprise that someone will flip. I could see Murkowski going to the Democrats if she feels like she was betrayed by the Republicans. So we will see what happens their, one can not assume that Murkowski received all 40% of the vote. The write-in vote will take time to determine who got what vote. Could someone have written in McAdams or Joe Miller? And how many people signed up for a write in campaign in order to confuse the write-in count.

What will happen? It is going to be interesting.

The purposed measure reads:

SECTION 1. A new section to chapter 36-01 of the North Dakota Century Code is created and enacted as follows: Fee killing of certain captive game animals prohibited – Penalty – Exception. A person is guilty of a class A misdemeanor if the person obtains fees or other remuneration from another person for the killing or attempted killing of privately-owned big game species or exotic mammals confined in or released from any man-made enclosure designed to prevent escape. This section does not apply to the actions of a government employee or agent to control an animal population, to prevent or control diseases, or when government action is otherwise required or authorized by law.
SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Act becomes effective on November 1, 2012.
YES – Means you approve the measure as stated above.
NO – Means you reject the measure as stated above.

Published October 26, 2010 The section on measure two is presented here.
Forum editorials: Vote ‘yes’ on Measure 1; ‘no’ on Measure 2

‘No’ on Measure 2
Measure 2, the so-called high-fence hunting ban, is not about hunting. Nor is it about property rights. Nor is it an invitation for the anti-hunting crowd to get a foothold in North Dakota. Nor is there evidence it’s a threat to traditional hunting in the state.
Measure 2 has the potential to be a legal nightmare. Despite claims the language is iron-clad, the measure is ambiguous enough to have lawyers salivating over the prospect of going to court should the measure pass. That potential should send proponents of the measure back to the drawing board.
High-fence, or canned, “hunting” is not hunting in the tradition North Dakotans cherish. Shooting animals raised on game farms in fenced enclosures – no matter how large the enclosure – is akin to plinking fish in a shallow stock pond. It’s an insult to North Dakota’s hunting tradition. “Hunters” who brag about a trophy elk or deer bagged inside the fence are worthy of scorn. They are shooters, not hunters.
That being said, Measure 2 is a flawed instrument. If North Dakotans want to control or limit high-fence operations, Measure 2 is not the way to go. Vote “no.”

I could not find but I hope there was or will be an analysis explaining why they think its an ambiguous. Here is what I think might be ambiguous.

“...if the person obtains fees or other remuneration from another person for the killing or attempted killing...”

Killing: Did not the U.S. Supreme Court rule that using the term 'killing' is vague. No specifics about how the killing is to be done.

Direction of payment: The person receiving the fund may or may not be the person performing the killing. In terms of harvesting crops, it would be illegal to pay someone to combine your crops. This would be illegal to hire someone to kill your animals. (but what about the exemptions?) The exemptions are for government employees and agencies not private individuals, not even butchers. Nothing says the recipient of the money is the owner of the animal.

Allowing other options: If you simply allow the sale of the animal DEAD or ALIVE then the fee is for only the sale of the animal. But you could take the animal out dead or alive. Still the question becomes at what point am a paying someone to kill the animal?

“...confined in or released from any man-made enclosure designed to prevent escape...”

Always confined: I am going to always have the animal confined. But I could not even release it in order to have another person I pay kill the animal. I have to buy the animal and once I am legal owner of the animal I could kill it myself.

Confined HOW?: I could have it In a barn or a trailer and would prevent killing in these places.


Definitions

This does not include definitions.

Define
exotic mammals
big game species (we might assume we know the meaning but would farmed elk be included or is it another category all together?)

A Missing Word
Hunting is not even mentioned let alone defined.

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

The Democrats are celebrating the passage of the health care legislation. If this had been a super bowl game, it would be like they one by one point after being able to get being able to re-kick a just missed field goal. Allowed after the defense was called off sides; after a false start by the offense, which was missed by the game officials. Its not a great victory. We will see how many fans the democrats have when the 2010 elections take place.
With President Obama signature the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is now law
we can now look at the final language. Opponents of the health care bill need to point out the negatives within this bill, along with a reverence to where in the law the provision is located.
The Democrats need to come with two positive items for every negative item. They also need to start working on a piece of popular legislation. They need to pass a popular bill, which Republicans could not vote against. If they work on any issue as unpopular as health care, it will continue to push them toward losing the House or the Senate.
Much of the legislation takes effect on Jan 1st 2014, if the Democrats lose both the House and the Senate, and then the White House in 2012; They may find themselves having to fight to keep the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act from being repealed. It would be a mistake for them to eliminate the filibuster.
Now is the time to closely examine the new law. I know I will be spending a good amount of time researching the new law.

Do they ever get it right?

Its amazing how often someone will bring up some topic at work and how wrong they have the facts. When someone brings up an issue they are probably wrong about the topic 60 percent of the time. Certain parts of it may be right but mostly they have it wrong. It takes about five minutes of research to discover they are wrong. The latest of this concerns Rush Limbaugh. I am told about how Rush is back tracking on a statement he made. I am told he had said he would MOVE out of the country if the Obama health care reform bill passes. I was listening the day after and heard his comments concerning the news stories that came out. I would explained that Rush would leave the country to get his health care and not for the purpose of moving out. I am then assured that is not what he said originally and he is only saying that now but there is a recording of his original statement which you could listen to him talk about moving out of the country. This is just huge. They are salivating over this. There so happy that he said such a stupid thing. Mind you one person was a Conservative Republican Rush fan who at time seems to have lost all ability to reason. Seems like he needs some kind reassurance that his changing sides and going off the deep end for Obama. Well I come home from work and do a google search on this. On the Huffington post

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/09/limbaugh-ill-leave-us-if_n_491536.html

your read about it AND you hear a recording of it in complete context. Rush takes a call from Richard in Naples who asks a two-part question. 1) Where would [Rush Limbaugh] go for health care? And 2) what happens to the doctors? Would they be forced to go in to a federal program? He consider that doctors may be able to opt out and then have a small private practice where clients would pay a retainer, but he does not know if the senate bill outlawed it. So if everything was implemented, and doctors were forced to participate in the federal program he would leave the country and go to Costa Rica. For anyone to listen to this and believe Rush said he will move to Costa Rica, well, that might be just wishful thinking or they have lost the ability to think.

Obama wastes time

President Obama should have found someone on the opposing party and worked with the person to create legislation. Also find an issue that would have a high majority of support. He needed to learn some lessons from Clinton. Political views and the support for them are like the bell shaped curve. To each end the amount of support is low. Only in the middle do you find high support. Finding those middle issues will allow you to accomplish things, and not waste time was key to a successful first year. Take those issues to the left of the center, which have more popular support. It could allow some of the other issues further to the left to become more acceptable. Either that other views will be more acceptable, or some will be willing to give something that is less desirable a chance if first something they desire is given to them. You waste time when you do too much too soon. One should understand political reality. A senator who has not served much in Washington may not fully understand those realities. President Obama has done damage. He needed to have had such a spectacular year, that people would not want to see his agenda stopped. Instead people worry about President Obama being out of control and want to see some control brought in.

Bill Nye made me more skeptical

A few years ago I was listening to my XM radio as I was heading to a restaurant for some spaghetti in an attempt to gain weight. He continued to emphasis the term ‘climate change’. I wondered why ‘climate change’ and not global warming? He never explained why a change in terminology. So as I ate my spaghetti I thought about why one would chose the term climate change over global warming. If the evidence for global warming was weaker, one might need to change what you called the evidence presented before you. Maybe he never believed in global warming, and simply wanted to present an alternative. Would the continuing use of the term global warming force one to find evidence for warming? While using climate change, would allow one to be open up to other possibilities.

For the person wanting to use the term global warming, I submit this for your consideration. If all countries in the world began performing on 10 different actions which if each one started in the next 5 years, global warming would be eliminated. Would you, as a global warming believer, be happy if everyone agreed and did those 10 actions? The person who believes in global warming and only uses climate change because it’s a more accepted term may say “YES!”. I would want to know why? The person who believes in climate change would refrain for drawing a conclusion. The person would need to know how it would effect the various climates and not just the GLOBAL temperatures. You could have enough areas of cooling combined with areas of warming resulting in no GLOBAL warming. The result could be disastrous, but no more GLOBAL warming.

People continued to use the term ‘Global Warming’. I would wonder if they worked on making the evidence fit this preconceived conclusion. One could allow for different scenarios under climate change, and allow the evidence to lead wherever it leads too. One could and I will continue to be skeptical of the evidence. I want to know that others could have access to the raw data and able to look how the models are created to determine if they are made well.

To stop questioning things is to stop thinking and I will not stop thinking.

Will Obama be able to adjust

When President Obama gave a poor answer during a debate with Hillary Clinton, he continued to cling to his answer. He did not want to be wrong. Will he adjust to not having a filibuster proof senate?

Jumping Ship

Will Joe Lieberman jump ship? He is already in a small boat being towed by the Democratic ship. President Obama would need to be careful how he responds to this election. If his response is aggressive, he may find that he has others willing to jump ship. My question is would Webb or even Bayh jump ship if it appears that President Obama and the other democrats respond aggressively.

Coakley

Martha Coakley became the Sarah Palin of Democrats in Massachusetts. It became difficult to defend someone who did not have a good grasp on the issues.. Had Sarah Palin ran for a Senate seat in Alaska, and made similar mistakes, people would have been ridiculing her. They also does not seem to be any thing to lose in voting for Scott Brown. The desire to see the health care bill pass was not high enough to want to elect Coakley over someone who seemed better aquatinted with the issues.

This should be a good wake-up call for the Democrats and President Obama to make some changes. I would like to see proposing a budget where spending is limited to revenues. And not delaying the balancing of the budget for some time in the future. I would want to see President Obama force congress to work together by vetoing any bill that does not have a reasonable number of Senators and Representatives from both sides of the aisle. Learn some lessons from Bill Clinton. (No No! Not that lesson! I did not mean it that way!) Take polls and use focus groups to determine what the American people want. With today’s technology, one no longer need to hope theirs action will be approved of by their constituents. We the people… can seek out enough information to know what is being purposed. They can have nearly instant feedback on their actions. Learn to listen to the PEOPLE.

Elected office is not a birthright. If the incumbent is not polling well by Feb 1st, you began looking for someone to replace them. With out 60 democratic votes in the Senate, you may see some (Lieberman) who will defect to the Republicans. You will need to negotiate with some Republicans and get them to cross over to the Democratic party. This will be difficult when one looks at how Specter was treated.

When will Scott Smith be sworn into office? Looking through the Wikipedia article about the Late Ted Kennedy, I found something interesting. Ted Kennedy was elected in a special election held on November 6th, 1962. Ted Kennedy was sworn into the Senate on November 7th, 1962. In both cases their was someone who had been appointed to the Senate to replace a Kennedy. So what has changed between 1962 and 2010 to justify any delay in the swearing in of Senate elect Scott Brown of Massachusetts? So with Coakley conceding the election would the Secretary of State of Massachusetts need to certify the election results? Will Paul Kirk be allowed to continue to serve or is he now n