Hahaha!

Mumbai's Traffic Generates It's Own Ad Campaign

Why Must Teachers Close The Budget Deficit?

Of course, there is also the long-term damage to the state through these crippling education cuts. Larger class sizes and fewer classrooms mean fewer students will learn. Fewer students will attend college, fewer will get good jobs or create new businesses and technologies. The state will be set back even further - California will become Mississippi.

Unfortunately, our country doesn't really think about the future consequences of our actions. To name a few current examples: Iraq, global warming, our dependence on oil, factory farming, environmental destruction, suburbia, genetically modified food and abstinence only education. And I think to myself, what a wonderful world.

I had posted a NY Times article on MySpace about a new book coming out on how Americans are hostile to knowledge, and another article came out recently about teenagers being rather ignorant of history and literature facts ( granted some of the questions I could not answer). I would love to do a science survey. Just when our students seem to be learning less, falling behind other countries, California, home to some of the most prestigious universities in the country, is ready to slash funding so crucially that we are going to layoff teachers in the thousands?! And that's just in Orange County.

No Child Left Behind has done plenty by itself to make education into an assembly line, why must we make our students suffer any more?

On another note, as an aspiring teacher, where does that leave me? When will the budget include hiring new teachers? Do I give up and go back to school in something else? Since we're in a recession, its not like I can get a random job till things get better, so I'm not sure I can just wait it out. I have the worst timing.

----------------
Now playing: Stateless - Bloodstream
via FoxyTunes

P.S. I LOVE this song....thank you Peter

From the Democratic Caucus's Senate Journal:

War in Iraq has cost the lives and livelihoods of thousands of brave men and women in uniform:

3,972 U.S. Troops Have Been Killed in Iraq. According to iCasualties.org, 3,972 American troops have been killed in Iraq as of February 25, 2008. [iCasualties.org, 2/27/08]

29,080 American Soldiers Wounded Through January 2008. According to iCasualties.org, 29,080 U.S. troops have been wounded in support in Iraq through January 2008. [iCasualties.org, 2/27/08]

Iraq war has had tremendous fiscal and economic costs:

Current Cost of War in Iraq Is Almost $11 Billion Per Month. “In FY2007, DOD’s monthly obligations for contracts and pay averaged about $12.3 billion including about $10.3 billion for Iraq and $2.0 billion for Afghanistan.” [CRS Report, 2/22/08]

That Amounts to…

• $332,258,064 Per Day
• $13,844,086 Per Hour
• $230,734 Per Minute
• $3,845 Per Second

U.S. Has Already Spent $526 Billion on War in Iraq. “This $700 billion total covers all war-related appropriations from FY2001 in supplementals, regular appropriations, and continuing resolutions including not quite half of the FY2008 request. Of that total, CRS estimates that Iraq will receive about $526 billion (75%), OEF about $140 billion (20%), and enhanced base security about $28 billion (4%), with about $5 billion that CRS cannot allocate (1%).” [CRS Report, 2/22/08]

The Bush Administration Requested $72.8 Billion for War Costs in 2009 So Far. “For FY2009, the Administration has requested about $72.8 billion for war costs including a “placeholder” DOD war request of $70 billion, $1.5 billion for State Department/USAID foreign and diplomatic operations, and $1.3 billion for VA medical care for OIF and OEF veterans. Details for DOD’s request are expected after General David Petraeus makes his recommendations about future troop levels in April. With the pending FY2008 and FY2009 requests, the total for enacted or requested war funding is about $878 billion.” [CRS Report, 2/22/08]

Funding for Iraq War Increased 160% Between 2004 and 2008. “Annual war appropriations more than doubled from about $34 billion in FY2001/FY2002 to about $80 billion with the preparation for and invasion of Iraq in FY2003 (see Table 3). Based on passage of the FY2007 Supplemental, annual DOD funding are growing by an additional 75% between FY2004 and FY2007. If DOD’s total FY2008 request is enacted, the level in FY2008 would be 160% higher or more than one-and-one-half times larger than FY2004.” [CRS Report, 2/22/08]

Joint Economic Committee Estimated Total Cost of the at $1.3 Trillion Through 2008 - $16,500 for a Family of Four. The Joint Economic Committee has estimated that the total budgetary and economic costs of the Iraq War from FY 2002-2008 to be $1.3 trillion. This cost amounts to $16,500 in war costs for a family of four. These economic costs include the ongoing drain on U.S. economic growth created by Iraq-related borrowing, the disruptive effects of the conflict on world oil markets, the future care of our injured veterans, repair costs for the military, and other undisclosed costs. [Joint Economic Committee, 11/07]

Joint Economic Committee Estimated Total Cost of $2.8 Trillion Through 2017, Assuming Gradual Drawdown to 55,000 Troops. The Joint Economic Committee also estimated that assuming troops are gradually drawn down to 55,000 troops by 2013 and that level remained constant through 2017, the total economic cost of the war would be $2.8 trillion, or $36,900 for a family of four. [Joint Economic Committee, 11/07]

While pouring money into Iraq, we have failed to invest in domestic priorites here at home:

No Child Left Behind Has Been Underfunded By $71 Billion Since 2002. Since 2002 when it was enacted, the No Child Left Behind Act has been underfunded by $71 billion. This cumulative funding gap is comprised of the difference between funding authorized by the bill and the actual annual appropriations from FY 2002 through FY 2008. [NEA, 2/25/08]

American Society of Civil Engineers Estimated U.S. Must Invest $1.6 Trillion Over 5 Years to Bring the Nation's Infrastructure to Good Condition. In 2005, the Americans Society of Civil Engineers estimated that $1.6 trillion is needed over a five-year period to bring the nation's infrastructure to good condition. [American Society of Civil Engineers, Action Plan for the 110th Congress]

The Cost of 4 months in Iraq Could Modernize and Ensure Interoperable Communications for America’s 2.5 Million First Responders. The Department of Homeland Security has estimated that it would cost $40 billion to modernize communications for the 2.5 million first responders in the United States. [Department of Homeland Security, 3/17/04]

The Cost of 3 Months in Iraq Could Secure All Weapons-Usable Materials in Russia, to Prevent This Material From Falling Into the Hands of Terrorists. In the countries of the former Soviet Union there is currently enough unsecured radioactive material to build 40,000 nuclear weapons. In 2001, the bipartisan Baker-Cutler Commission stated that the “most urgent unmet national security threat to the United States today, is the danger that weapons of mass-destruction or weapons-usable material in Russia could be stolen and sold to terrorists or hostile nation states and used against American troops abroad or citizens at home. The Commission reported that it would cost $30 billion over eight to ten years to secure all weapons-usable material in Russia. [Campaign for America’s Future, A Report Card on the Department of Energy’s Nonproliferation Programs with Russia, 1/10/01]

The Cost of 22 Days in Iraq Could Safeguard Our Nation’s Ports from Attack. The Coast Guard has estimated that $7.5 billion over ten years would be necessary to implement the requirements of the 2002 Maritime Transportation Safety Act, which would protect U.S. ports and waterways from terrorist threats. [Center for American Progress, 7/1/04]

The Cost of 18 Hours in Iraq Could Secure U.S. Chemical Plants. According to the CBO, it would cost $255 million over five years to fully fund the Chemical Facilities Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006. [CBO, 6/26/06]

There's a lot more

----------------
Now playing: Tool - Eulogy
via FoxyTunes

Teaching Boys and Girls Separately

I cant help it. Whenever I read anything about segregating by sex, I want to hit something. There is only one area I would be indifferent to such segregation and that's sports, only because I know there was no way I could have played water polo against high school boys, then again, that's just me.

Are their differences between girls and boys, men and women? Of course, but that doesn't mean that those differences are more important than our similarities. This article uses such example as girls ability to hear and smell better. So what? Basically all I got from this article is plain old gender sterotyping

On that November day in Foley, Ala., William Bender pulled a stool up to a lectern and began reading to his fourth-grade boys from Gary Paulsen’s young-adult novel “Hatchet.” Bender’s voice is deep and calm, a balm to many of his students who lack father figures or else have parents who, Bender says, “don’t want to be parents. They want to be their kids’ friends.” Bender paused to ask one of his boys, who said he was feeling sick, “Are you going to make it, brother?” Then he kept reading. “ ‘The pain in his forehead seemed to be abating. . . .’ What’s abating, gentlemen?” The protagonist of “Hatchet” survives a plane crash and finds himself alone by an insect-infested lake. Bender encouraged his boys to empathize. They discussed how annoying it is, when you’re out hunting, to be swarmed by yellow flies.

Meanwhile, in Michelle Gay’s fourth-grade class, the girls sang a vigorous rendition of “Always Sisters” and then did a tidy science experiment: pouring red water, blue oil and clear syrup into a plastic cup to test which has the greatest density, then confirming their results with the firsthand knowledge that when you’re doing the dishes after your mother makes fried chicken, the oil always settles on top of the water in the sink.

I don't have enough room to put up all the stupid generalizations in this article, this is just the first one that really pissed me off.

The following is my rant on singe sex education;

We do not live in a single sex world. How are we preparing our children to deal with the world we live in when they have only dealt with the SAME KIND OF PEOPLE. You can say that girls will have the more self esteem when they go to an all girls school, but does that mean she is prepared for the bullshit she will deal with when she hits the real world. By separating by sex you 1) put way too much emphasis on the differences, which I think is dangerous 2) you make having to deal with real world sex integration come later in life 3) Gender stereotypes become rampant and not everyone identifies with gender roles ( i sure as hell don't).

Education is not only about content standards. We are educating our children to not only to be competent intellectually, but socially as well. Learning how to talk with each other, form alliances, agree to disagree and make compromises is very important when the majority of your life is in the presence of the opposite sex. I never regret an education that involved boys, to me it only made me work harder to disprove myths about my intelligence. How are we ever to achieve equality if we, from the beginning, teach our children that the differences between us are so great they have to be separated to learn? What does that do about differences between us in other aspects? Already our schools are segregated by class, which in turn segregates us based on race and ethnicity. In addition, reducing the way someone thinks to their having a penis or a vagina is clearly ridiculous, stereotypical and dangerous.

The evidence that single sex education was working, to me, could be implemented in any coed education and bring the same results 1) 26 kids in one class? Yes, please! Also there was one piece where a teacher was working with only 9 boys! 2) a sense of self worth and knowing someone cares about you 3) Parents who give a shit 4) a curriculum that seems to based on a well rounded child than a test.

Seriously, WTF!?

We Scream, We Swoon. How Dumb Can We Get?

"Women 'Falling for Obama,' " the story's headline read. Elsewhere around the country, women were falling for the presidential candidate literally. Connecticut radio talk show host Jim Vicevich has counted five separate instances in which women fainted at Obama rallies since last September. And I thought such fainting was supposed to be a relic of the sexist past, when patriarchs forced their wives and daughters to lace themselves into corsets that cut off their oxygen.

I can't help it, but reading about such episodes of screaming, gushing and swooning makes me wonder whether women -- I should say, "we women," of course -- aren't the weaker sex after all. Or even the stupid sex, our brains permanently occluded by random emotions, psychosomatic flailings and distraction by the superficial. Women "are only children of a larger growth," wrote the 18th-century Earl of Chesterfield. Could he have been right?

I am beyond insulted. I am the first to admit that I am a highly emotional creature, but to relate that to being dumb? This is exactly the same stereotype that continues to keep women out of male dominated interest and careers. I read "Eat, Pray, Love" and really enjoyed it, but I also love organic chemistry and generally dislike small children. All I can say is Fuck You Charlotte Allen!

So I don't understand why more women don't relax, enjoy the innate abilities most of us possess (as well as the ones fewer of us possess) and revel in the things most important to life at which nearly all of us excel: tenderness toward children and men and the weak and the ability to make a house a home. (Even I, who inherited my interior-decorating skills from my Bronx Irish paternal grandmother, whose idea of upgrading the living-room sofa was to throw a blanket over it, can make a house a home.) Then we could shriek and swoon and gossip and read chick lit to our hearts' content and not mind the fact that way down deep, we are . . . kind of dim.

A couple weeks ago, a guy approched me in a bar. He started talking to me, and being the friendly person I am, I answered his questions. While talking, I noticed what was on the TV, the news was talking about how astronomers had found a solar system similar to ours. I mentioned to the guy I had read an article on that, and how neat I thought it was. I turned my head to involve a friend of mine in the conversation, and when I turned back, maybe seconds later, the dude was gone. In my reading, I have learned that some girls try to seem "dumber" than they really are to get a man. In my case, I felt pretty kick ass. Besides, if you find a girl talking science lame, you are definitely not the guy for me.

What has happened to our media, that this type of bullshit is allowed to be published? We may have come a long way, but we still have a long way to go.

----------------
Now playing: Girl Talk - i want you back
via FoxyTunes

I'm back! It was a very difficult week, having internet service once for only 10 minutes, waking up at 5 am everyday to travel in manageable traffic, and at one point, a dead cell phone battery. I was in LA taking a week long teacher training class. Once I turn in all my paperwork, I will become a substitute teacher for LA Unified School District. The most common response to this is "Are you crazy!?" Maybe, and after hearing this often, I began to doubt myself (as usual). But after meeting some amazing people in my class and what I learned inside and outside the classroom, I'm feeling much better about my decision.

On Wednesday, I had to observe at a school the program picked for me due to its proximity to where I was staying. Since I want to teach secondary, I was sent to a middle school. With Google map directions in hand, I set out for an unknown area of LA. I got lost multiple times, and during this time, I passed a sign that said Lincoln Heights. A chill ran down my spine. My mother is from Lincoln Heights.

I finally found the school, parked and took in my surroundings. Lets just say the area is very different from the comfortable suburban living I am used to. Having never been in the area, and also utterly confused by the way LA names its geographical areas, I didn't really know if I was still in Lincoln Heights. With only one battery bar on my phone, I figured Id call my mom later to tell her where I ended up. I tried to read the newspaper (I was early) but something was bothering me. I gave into my urge to text my mother, thinking that maybe she remembered where the school was.

Thirty five years later, I returned to the same middle school my mother and her six brothers attended. At that moment, when I read my mother's response to my text , the fear and doubt I felt, although still strong today, morphed into a purpose. Ive always known that my mother did not enjoy the same carefree childhood I had, or the opportunities I take for granted. And there I was, full circle. The need in these schools is great and because of stigma (and fact) schools represented by the majority of LAUSD are seen as scary. Don't get me wrong, I'm still scared to death, and if any of these kids are anything like my mother, as I'm sure they are, Ill have my hands full. My grandmother told me that she was once called to the middle school to pick up my mother. My mom had told another student she was going to beat them up after school. Checking this story with my mom, she admitted that she really was going to beat her up.

My point is this; I have struggled for years over where I'm supposed to be and what I'm supposed to do with my degree. Even while going to school for my credential, I have doubted that I'm capable of being a good teacher and that I might be better off doing something else. I wont say that this doubt has left completely, but after spending the day at Florence Nightingale Middle School, I feel, regardless of my insecurity, that my life is falling into place just as it should.

Pic is of my mom and I at Bryce Canyon National Park, UT- It's my favorite picture of us

George Schaller's Grand Plan to Save the Marco Polo Sheep

An interview with George Schaller, a field and conservation biologist

Some of my favorite parts:

Has any animal gained a special hold on your affections?
When you are near a mountain gorilla, you recognize it as kin. You feel as though you might put your arm around it and have a chat. When I first saw a gorilla, I felt a desire to communicate with him, to let him know that I intended him no harm and only wanted to be near him. And I wondered if he shared this feeling of kinship with me. Never before had I had that feeling meeting an animal. You don’t get that feeling when you see a tiger, but your mind almost glows with the sight—they’re absolutely gorgeous—and to see a tiger is one of the great wildlife experiences. I can also get enamored of capybaras, which are giant rodents and look like big guinea pigs, and even wild pigs. I have had two kinds of pig, a warthog and a white-lipped peccary, as pets. They are just as intelligent and social as dogs. I have an attachment to all the animals I’ve studied and keep involved in what’s happening with them. Emotionally, they cannot leave me.

A lot of the conservation news seems very grim these days. How do you keep going in moments of discouragement?
I don’t get up each morning and say, “I’ve got to save the world, starting with the United States government.” I have very specific projects, where I can see progress. And that keeps you going because, in a small way, I see that I can have an influence. And especially if you teach others, and have students and assistants to work with, and can find a way they can continue the work—that’s satisfying.

What about steps we can take right here in the United States?
We have an overabundance of everything. I’ve got two cars sitting in the garage. People must understand that everything they do is an ecological act. How much does it cost to bring grapes here from Chile (pdf)? Not just the grapes, but the fuel spent in carbon emission? If you have a cup of coffee, that means some rain forest in Colombia is being cut down to make coffee plantations. Do you have a cell phone? OK, inside it there’s a mineral called coltan, mined mostly in the eastern Congo by a lot of the Rwandans who fled after the genocide, and they’re living in the forest, and they’re killing gorillas and elephants for meat because they don’t have much else to eat. I’ve got two lights on in here. [Gets up and turns off a light.] I don’t need two lights on in here! You know, this is endless

You’ve said that there are no final victories in conservation.
The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is a good example. It’s been a continual battle since the 1970s to keep the oil companies out. We claim to be the richest, most educated country in the world, and we can’t keep one little fraction undamaged? You think you have something, and the minute you look away, somebody is trying to destroy it. Look at what has happened recently with tigers, which were safe in a number of reserves. Almost overnight, they were completely wiped out of several places, because, suddenly, there was a demand for skins. When something is so beautiful and valuable, you can never turn your back.

Read the whole interview


----------------
Now playing: Al Green - Aint No Sunshine
via FoxyTunes

This pissed me off

Whether you acknowledge it or not, there’s good reason to worry. By the time 35th-birthday-brunch celebrations roll around for still-single women, serious, irreversible life issues masquerading as “jokes” creep into public conversation: Well, I don’t feel old, but my eggs sure do! or Maybe this year I’ll marry Todd. I’m not getting any younger! The birthday girl smiles a bit too widely as she delivers these lines, and everyone laughs a little too hard for a little too long, not because we find these sentiments funny, but because we’re awkwardly acknowledging how unfunny they are. At their core, they pose one of the most complicated, painful, and pervasive dilemmas many single women are forced to grapple with nowadays: Is it better to be alone, or to settle?

My advice is this: Settle! That’s right. Don’t worry about passion or intense connection. Don’t nix a guy based on his annoying habit of yelling “Bravo!” in movie theaters. Overlook his halitosis or abysmal sense of aesthetics. Because if you want to have the infrastructure in place to have a family, settling is the way to go. Based on my observations, in fact, settling will probably make you happier in the long run, since many of those who marry with great expectations become more disillusioned with each passing year. (It’s hard to maintain that level of zing when the conversation morphs into discussions about who’s changing the diapers or balancing the checkbook.)

Read the rest of Marry Him!

I think its better to be "alone". At this age, I have no desire to marry or have children. The reasons being that I want to do my own shit and not have to take care of anyone else. Is that selfish? It depends on how you look at it. From my view, its not selfish at all, but being honest with my emotional limitations and the goals I have for myself. If you look at it from a traditional view point, that is, getting married and having a family is the highest aspiration for a women, then yeah, Im an emotional mutant. What pisses me off so much about this article is that it 1) assumes women's happiness is found only in having a family 2) that we are a bunch of manipulative animals that only want a husband because of "business" purposes. If you're willing to settle for someone integral to your happiness, what does it say about the quality of the rest of your life. As I get older, I assume my needs from a man will be different than what I look for now, but Im definitely not settling so Im not "alone". Besides, Ill never really be "alone", Ill always have family and friends. And since settling in this article suggests that you probably wont have sex anyways (marriage = celibacy) why does it matter if all my future relationships are platonic? And if I want a baby, there are plenty of wonderful children who are just waiting to be adopted, no sperm needed. I think this article is also insulting to men. Not all men are bad or terribly flawed and Im sure they don't want to feel like prey. If they felt this way towards me Id feel rather defeated and resist at first mention of it. I dream of finding love just as much as the next person, and have no doubt that its in my future, but I refuse to lower my expectations in order to get married. I have better things to do if its been reduced to running a business.

Here is an article in response to Marry Him! The Latest Insult to Women: "Settle for Mr. Good Enough"

A Global Journey, Relying on Kindness and a Donkey

JONATHAN DUNHAM is walking the earth. Assisting him in this endeavor is his donkey, named Judas. They have stopped to rest for a few days in Colinas de San Lorenzo, a slum in this dusty town on the cattle-raising plains of northwestern Venezuela.

On a recent Sunday morning, reggaetón blared from a house near the abandoned shack where Mr. Dunham has been sleeping on the floor. Barefoot children wandered up to his hovel, petting Judas. They giggled and stared at Mr. Dunham, 33, whose disheveled look evokes that of a graduate student for whom surfing, or maybe foosball, is high art.

“Are you an athlete?” one of the children asked him. “Or a missionary?”

“No,” Mr. Dunham replied. “I’m just a guy.”

In fact, Mr. Dunham is just a guy searching for the meaning of life.

His quest began more than two years ago in Portland, Ore., where he was working as a substitute teacher in the public schools. One day, he decided to start walking south, down through the western United States. From Texas he crossed the border into the northern Mexican state of Tamaulipas, where he stopped for a while. He said he hoped to walk for two more years across the rest of South America until reaching Patagonia.

Read More

I have always been intrigued by wanderers. Maybe cause deep down Ive always wanted to be one. But I think my wanderlust would be better satisfied if I was working, maybe in a clinic or school. Ill never get rid of the mother hen do gooder in me.