We receive every station's digital signal except channels 9 and 13. The system says the signal is too weak when we try to add it. We've tried the automatic system. We've tried doing it manually. We tried unhooking the VCR/DVD player and Wii. We've even tried deleting everything else first. Nothing works.
Any suggestions? I don't want to lose you guys.
Mariposa Xochipilli
Which one of us would be willing to relinquish the rights which make this nation unique in the world? Who, if anyone, has the authority to ask or force that of any lawbiding American citizen?
Would you, if asked by a public official, elected or not, relinquish your right to free speech? Would you relinquish your right to reasonable search and seizure? Fair Trial? Voting? Education, an obligation assigned to states during the infancy of this country?
What if someone came to you and said that you could keep your right to be protected against unreasonable search and seizure as long as you forfeited your right to free speech? That, if you violated forfeiting your right to free speech, there'd be serious legal ramifications.
Having forfeited the right to free speech, how would you be able to let anyone know if the Amendment protecting you from unreasonable search and seizure, which you did not forfeit, had been violated?
Under the proposed settlement composed by one of the school district's many attorneys, we, the identified Claimants, are being asked to sign, in order for funds to be released so our daughters' education can be pursued, as allowed for under federal laws and regularly upheld by the US Supreme Court, outside of a system whose own records show they have not been willing/able to meet accurately established educational needs, is included the following ...
"For the consideration set forth above, Claimants , for themselves and their heirs, legal representatives, assigns, successors, representatives, and attorneys, hereby release, acquits and forever discharge and their respective successors, predecessors, board members, administrators, appointees, officers, employees including any accused persons, agents, representatives, related entities and attorneys, and any liability insurers from any and all claims, demands, debts, liabilities, and causes of action, known or unknown, relating to ______'s education for the period July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2009, including but not limited to claims:
a) arising under the Indivduals with Disabilities in Education Act or Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004;
b) arising under 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973;
c) arising under the Americans with Disabilities Act;
e) arising under 42 U.S.C. 1983; and
f) arising out of any other act, omision, or event relating to ______'s education program for the period July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2009."
42 U.S.C. 1983 states ... "CIVIL ACTION FOR DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privledges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act of omission taken in such officer's judiccial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia."
Isn't that the slightest bit overkill against the family of a disabled American veteran on a limited income (not that we are yet receiving the retirement payments, we aren't) in these tough economic times? Especially in a state that has given school districts governmental immunity and eliminated monetary damages in educational malpractice cases!? Monty Python's 'Mosquito Hunter' skit comes to mind.
If they've done nothing wrong, why would they need us to acquit them in order for our daughters to receive an education? Why would they include a statute dealing specifically with deprivation of civil rights if they've done nothing to deprive us, or anyone else, of our civil rights?
It's already half way through the terms of the proposed contract. No signing is forthcoming. In six months, the 'problem' will become the new school district's responsibility to fix. That's, simply, not right. Not to mention that a new school district won't have the resources to fix what their predecessors broke.
In the meantime, the district is not allowing full visual access to the education records. In Winkelman, which the Supreme Court ruled on as a rare united voice, Chief Justice Roberts emphasized the importance of having the knowledge in the full records.The Jordan School District is getting away with what not even Richard Nixon was able to get away with.
With our having 'voluntarily' relieved them from accountability under this nation's laws, what would be the district's motivation for actually providing what they've said for years they are willing to provide? They just never mention the attached conditions to anyone in a position of being able to hold them accountable.
How did they become so powerful as to be able to ask us to relinquish our rights in order to receive what the law mandates ... what they receive our tax dollars to provide?
In White Plains, New York, a seventh grade teacher had an interesting way of showing how the African Slave trade 'felt' to those whose lives had been 'dehumanized'.
The teacher bound the hands and feet of two students, and made them crawl under desks to show how slaves were mistreated, the conditions they had to endure. One of the students was so traumatized, she hasn't been able to return to school.
Any guesses as to the race of the students the teacher did this too? There were students of multiple races to choose from. She didn't ask for volunteers. She hand picked these two young ladies. The teacher doesn't see that she did anything wrong.
The Superintendent's take on the controversy was partly that they encourage teachers to be creative. The teacher apologized only for the students becoming 'upset'. We haven't been told if this exercise was discussed in curriculum meetings prior to being presented in the classroom.
Teachers like this discredit the majority of teachers who do their profession honor. They feel that they are above reproach; that they can operate by a different set of societal rules.
When such autonomy results in harm to children, perhaps the rules need to be tweaked. Perhaps there should be consequences for exhibiting bad judgement; just like there'd be for employees in any other field. This teacher did something to two children she would not have allowed be done to herself.
I specifically don't mention the race of the teacher in this post because, in my opinion, such bad judgement is colorless. The act would still be considered harmful (remember, the students were not given a vote as to their participation) no matter how much pigment or what undertones were in this teacher's skin.
Where I applaud Good Samaritans, something is simply not right when a person feels they have to make their vehicle look like a police vehicle.
Why couldn't Mr. Deter take the action he did without putting flashing lights on his car?
How could he know if the person he stopped for wasn't a danger to him or others?
How does a 20 year old have been a Marine when enlistments are four and six years in length unless he was uncerimoniously discharged?
If he took a hardship discharge, how is it he can afford to act independently and without financial compensation?
If he took a medical discharge, what is the disability that prevented him from serving this nation yet allows him to act as he has been?
No, as admirable as his actions can be considered, something simply is not adding up where Cooper Deters is concerned. My theory is that he either couldn't handle the pressure, he was caught doing drugs, or psychological issues came out in boot camp ... all of which would indicate that his actions, however well-intentioned, are not in society's best interest.
Today is an auspicious day in this nation. We've reached beyond past limitations and boundaries.
Lost in the wonders of today is what some might consider an insignificant end to an unimportant, as held in perspective to the other matters being recognized, matter. A soldier's career ended, effective today, due to a medical retirement.
My husband has worn his military uniform to work for the last time. He's served this nation for most of his entire adult life - a quarter of a century. His back has finally given out. Yet, he is so respected that many officers offered to stand up for him so he might remain with our armed forces should he so desire. His retirement date from his federally funded civilian position with the Utah National Guard is December 4. Regulations do not allow him to keep that postion without maintaining military status.
The first time my husband wore a uniform was during the Vietnam War. He had enlisted in the Air Force, became a security officer (military police), and spent time in Germany. The nearest 'base to the Munich Olympic tragedy was where he was stationed. He saw the return of the zeppelin and addressed European terrorist 'concerns'.
He spent six years stateside and is the last non-commissioned sergeant from his old SP unit to give up the uniform. The current Lieutenant Colonel retires in ten days. We asked if the Army would be willing to postpone my husband's retirement for two weeks so he could be the last man still in the game.
He was in Kuwait on 9/11.
So, when you made your choices known today and in the future, please take a moment to remember that your freedom was able to happen on the backs of those who choose to serve our nation.
To those of us who were facinated by this 'big brown' colt, how his career has ended seems oddly fitting ... a foot injury.
A bad ride and a loose fitting horse shoe might have caused his one loss this year, but Big Brown's heart is big. It would have been nice to see him race one last time; if only to allow him to rid people of the doubts created from the Belmont mishap.
Monday morning at Aqueduct racetrack, Rick Dutrow had his colt workout on the turf course with a stablemate. Big Brown came back with a piece of flesh torn out of a hoof ... he had caught himself. This type of injury is relatively rare - a fluke injury.
With Big Brown scheduled to arrive for stud duty at the beginning of the year, there is no time for another race. The minimum recovery time would be two months. Big Brown's new job starts before then.
