Total Pageviews

Saturday, December 21, 2013

You Live and You Learn

One of the things I’ve learned this week is that there’s not enough hours during the day for me to have a good discussion on Facebook and on the online forum and still have time to keep up with my two blogs. I know, I bragged that I was retired so I certainly had the time to accomplish that. You live and you learn.

The best thing I learned is that Facebook allowed me to have a couple of good civil discussions. It can be addictive because the responses are in real time.

We had a week that started with the “White Santa” controversy and ended with the Duck Dynasty head duck’s comments.

I still believe that the Duck Dynasty issue has a lot of support from those who want to say controversial things without any repercussions. I also believe that A&E made a free market decision to protect the integrity of what they portray as a Christian family espousing family values. A& E’s sponsors may have gotten, spooked and decided that a short suspension would ease the minds of their viewers. I think Duck Dynasty’s 14 million viewers have the same mind-set as Phil Robertson. I know a lot of people like Phil Roberson, who partied hard until they got old, and then they found religion. I also know a lot of people that age who are generational racists. These people have a misconception that minorities were happy go lucky before several pieces of civil rights legislation were passed. I’m pretty sure if someone reminded Phil of the lynching, discrimination, and other reprehensible events, that took place in that era, he would agree it was wrong, and that he was taken out of context because he was just describing the environment he grew up in. I’m sure Phil Roberson is a good man but he’s not one that I would discuss world events with. I used to have a lot of Phil Robertson types in my family and I’ve worked with many but they are a dying breed. I don’t buy the notion that he was standing up for orthodox Christianity and I think we can agree that he was not denied his freedom of speech. I see the divide between social conservatism and the fiscal conservative belief in the unfretted free market.

Newt Gingrich has got to be the most quotable man in history and not in a good way. I don’t know how many WWIII he’s compared conflicts with but he took a sentence from a Phil Roberson quote and immediately compared him to Pope Francis. The man has no shame; he’s a flimflam man who knows his outrageous remarks will make the evening news.

In between the two stories during the week, I discussed Georgia’s Rep. Kingston’s remark that children should sweep the floors of the school they get their free lunches from. Jack Kingston is not a Tea Party nut. He's a pretty reasonable Republican, but he’s being challenged by a couple of extremists. He has backtracked a bit, now he’s saying that he wasn’t talking about a specific group and that everyone who gets meal paid by the taxpayers should pay at least a nickel or a dime for it. He wants to let them know that nothing is free. Well, for one thing, it is my understanding that only those who are 130% below the poverty level get a free meal, so if that’s the case, he is targeting that group. It is my opinion that these children need to go to school to learn math, science, English, and history and they shouldn’t be a pawn for social experiments or a political message


born2Bme said...

When my husband was in school and they got free lunches, they had to work in the cafeteria during lunch time. I do think it was a good teaching opportunity for everyone in school. I wish schools were still allowed to do those kinds of things.

Mike said...

I'm sorry but I disagree because that's punishing children because their parents are poor. That's also setting up poor children to be ridiculed even more than they already are.

Besides the obvious administration problems of 100 students working and not being in the classroom with their classmates,there's the obvious child labor laws...

Want to teach a lesson?Increase the minimum wage so more children get out of poverty. I think we have thinking backwards and the reason so many people make the poor the scapegoat.

I think children learn the lesson of hard work from their parents.

I understand what you are trying to say but I don't think it will achieve what you think it will.

born2Bme said...

This was back when nothing was free. It was not mandatory to give the free lunches (I don't think). It was something each school district decided to do. Husband didn't mind because he felt like he was earning his meal. Other kids didnt' mind because they felt like husband was earning his meal. Paying kids learned that if you don't work, you don't eat. Paying kids also learned that they didn't want to ever be in that position, so they worked harder to make the grades.
It was a much simpler time.

Mike said...

I had a lengthy discussion about work for school lunches on FB....The proponents of that idea think that it will instill a work ethic and a belief that nothing is free....Ok,how do we prove that? We could single out a few schools to test the theory and then revisit it in 5 years.

I've already mentioned my objections.

The " Leave to Beaver" era is long behind us,we are now a multi culture country. Today's world is a lot more complicated.What would we do if the kids refused to work? Are we going to deny them breakfast?

Mike said...

Free or reduced meals was started by Pres. Truman in 1946 and yes,during that time there were government programs. We've HD free programs since FDR's New Deal.

Mike said... said it makes you learn to make good grades,how is that? Unemployment is at 7.0 (12% for African -Americans)and people with college degrees aren't getting jobs but unemployment is lower for that group.

I don't believe people wake up wanting to be poor.

born2Bme said...

I cannot speak for how it is today. Kids, and parents, think they are owed everything, even though they have no other choice. There are so many kids on public aid, and free lunches, that it is not possible to find jobs for all of them to do.
I'm just remembering my days in school and some of the thoughts that went through my head at the time. I've heard how my husband felt about his time in school. He developed a great work ethic, both on the farm and in school. He never believed in taking something for nothing and still doesn't.
Today, it's a different story and I'm not blaming the poor of today. It's not their fault that there are no jobs and too many low-paying jobs.

Mike said...

I cannot make a blanket statement because I don't the percentage of people who think they are owed everything and those who who actually for what they had.I do know a lot of them are sick and tired of income inequality and they are letting their voices be heard. There's a difference between a hand up and a hand out.

Today,believe it or not,Mike Huckabee said that his conservative friends look down on those who receive public aid but didn't lift an eyebrow when our government bailed out Wall Street ($ 700billion)...He shocked me....:-) You see those execs paid for their school lunches and still held out their hand for the bailout...Just saying

born2Bme said...

I'm not meaning to ruffle your feathers. :)
You know I don't go by statistics and this is something that cannot possibly have any statistics.

born2Bme said...

oops, didn't remember to answer the second part of that.
Rich people never think they are taking handouts because they also think that everything is owed to them, only it is on the other side of the same coin.
But, by the same token, the rich people look down their noses at the poor that are forced to take handouts because they think are better than "those" people....NOT!!
It's all about perception.

Mike said...

Not angry at all.....:-)
Everything has stats. From Wiki
"Social science is an academic discipline concerned with society and the relationships among individuals within a society, which often rely primarily on empirical approaches. It includes anthropology, economics, political science, psychology and sociology. "

I think the rich are greedy and a dollar that goes to the poor is a dollar that does not go to them....