Happy official opening of the 2014 "Holiday Season!"  With this new "holiday" season upon us, can we just all sit back, chill and reflect on where America stands in today's World?  Are we better off than we were four years ago?  I know I am.  I know my children are.  Other than health issues, I know my entire family is.  So who are the ones complaining all of the time about things being so bad?  Yes, we are at war against seen and unseen enemies hellbent on destroying our way of life.  But when has there been a time when that has not been the case?  Yes, we seem to be having trouble determining who are international friends and enemies are sometimes - but I venture to guess we already know the truth to that quandary but we simply refuse to make those determinations public (you know, national security).  We also know there are real problems in America and no matter how hard we try to ignore them, they simply keep rearing their ugly heads.
          Yet I ask again those who dwell on the idea that "we need to take America back" to rethink their demands and to ask themselves, back from whom?  Back from corporations and the oligarchy created by them while controlling our United States Congress?  Back from the Billionaires that contribute large sums of campaign cash on issues affecting states in which they neither live nor work?  Back from the world of the ideologically oriented for-profit media that engages in constant manipulation of the news and our impressions created solely to push our thoughts one way or another, and most frequently against each other?  Back from whom?
          All that I ask this holiday season is for Americans to ask themselves a truly important question.  If you honestly think America has been hijacked, who has done it, who has facilitated it and how can we collectively get "her" back?  Anyone with half a brain realizes quickly that IF our country has in fact been hijacked, it could not have been done by one person and certainly not without the assistance of many others.  So can Americans please stop assessing blame on Obama and the "Socialist Liberals?"  Can they also recognize that those on the "Fascist Right-Wing Conservatives" along with their deep pocketed corporate and Super-PAC benefactors also are involved in this "greatest heist of the century?"  And what about those in a position to protect society engaging in self-serving investigations, that ultimately reveal a deep distrust of one another?  You see how I cleverly used the labels "Liberal" and "Conservative" in my statement?  And isn't that also a major part of the problem?  You see, those pitting Americans against Americans use these labels to divide and "We the People" are too sleepy from eating turkey to realize we are the real turkeys in this equation for following their lead.  America is beautiful not because of our elected officials and their political ideologies and not because of the media that support them. America is beautiful because it has the capacity to rise above the political machinations of those engaged in active manipulation of our people.  And one day (soon), I can only hope Americans wake up from their collective slumber and force those that have hijacked our ideals as a United States, through the use of the ballot box to advance not what is good for the very few, but what it good for the entire nation. 
           President Andrew Jackson is quoted for many things, but in this regard, two stand out.  Jackson once wrote; "It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their own selfish purposes" and "The planter, the farmer, the mechanic, and the laborer... form the great body of the people of the United States, they are the bone and sinew of the country men who love liberty and desire nothing but equal rights and equal laws."  So as we enter the Holiday Season of 2014, let US take America back, after we all agree on whom we are to take it back from!  Have a great week!

          Last Friday night while waiting for our high school's football game to be aired on local radio, I was privileged to listen to the Sean Hannity show.  For those that have not listened to Sean Hannity on the radio, I suggest you drop in for a segment of two.  I mean, what I heard on his show from himself and his "panelists" was nothing short of racism and Anti-Americanism, all under the guise of being real patriots - except their vitriolic, hyperbolic rhetoric would be considered treasonous by anyone with a brain cell in their head.  Think I am going too far in describing his rantings?
          The main theme of the evening's show was to classify all African-Americans in Ferguson, Missouri as criminals and thugs while identifying law enforcement as nothing short of "angelic."  Seems law and order only means cracking down on the masses because the "black masses" only resort to violence (without regard to the amount of crime perpetrated by white folks).  After a complete setting of their argument that Blacks in America are easily duped by their alleged "leaders" (Al Sharpton, et. al.), they then went on a rhetorical rant about the current criminal living in the White House.  The "Liar in Chief" who plays golf all of the time and who has taken upon himself to "trample the Constitution" is enough (in their collective minds) to lead to armed insurrection (exactly what they were ranting against when it comes to Black folks with weapons upset with their treatment by state and local government).  As I have mentioned previously, had black folks been the ones armed at Cliven Bundy's ranch instead of "Tea Party Patriots" taking on an "out of control federal government" Hannity and his ilk would never have publicly supported them as they embraced lawbreaker Bundy as his supporters.  Aren't the lines of racial divide clearly delineated by these folks in their rhetorical hypocrisy?  Yet they assert all of the division in America today is because of Obama and only because of Obama (while they spew hatred and division like babies take to their mother's milk).
           Just yesterday I was in a conversation with Conservatives about Ferguson and they honestly believe that Blacks looting deserve to be shot on the spot by a militarized police - IN AMERICA!  When I pointed out that our military is prohibited from providing actual policing, they screamed "Since when!"  And that gets to my point. Americans listening to Ideologically Oriented For-Profit Media while engaging in selective perception hear what they want to hear and then solidify this misinformation as concrete knowledge, when in reality, they have been duped by the media's ideological talking points and narratives.  When another attorney in the group agreed with me on the prohibition of the military as a police force, folks began to argue more vociferously.  You see, folks claim they know the law when they really do not.  The entire conversation came to a screeching halt when the attorney that was siding with them all along turned to me and said "You can't argue the law with non-lawyers, they simply cannot understand!"  And there you have it.  Folks, with very little actual knowledge of the Constitution, have been duped by the media or their selective perception of political ideologies to take a side when in fact, it has no rational basis.  Far too many Americans cite the law and the Constitution while ignoring they both come in conflict with their very own arguments.  To understand this requires actual knowledge of law and the Constitution, but that never seems to get in the way of their arguments.  They simply think it is okay to use one part of the Constitution they have heard of to act in a way that violates another part of the Constitution they have not heard of.  And the ignorance of the Constitution is spreading - with the help of the talking heads in our collective Media. 
          To complete my thought, just look at the report recently released by the GOP-led House Intelligence Committee reviewing Benghazi (for the 10th time).  Just like the rest of the bi-partisan committees, this Committee found that there was NO wrongdoing by President Obama, Secretary of State Clinton, Ambassador Rice, or anyone else in the administration for the tragedy that killed Americans including our Ambassador, Christopher Stevens.  According to the AP,  the Committee reported, "Overall, the panel's findings were broadly consistent with the Administration's version of events."  (See http://online.wsj.com/articles/house-report-cia-military-acted-properly-in-benghazi-attacks-1416616698).  After 2 years of name calling, finger pointing, media inspired vitriolic rhetoric, the conclusion by the GOP itself, was that NONE of what the public has been told by the Right Wing Media Machine is true (Obama or Clinton did not tell the military to sacrifice our personnel by ordering them to stand down or mislead the public about the tragedy).  And how does Fox notify the public they made a huge mistake and Obama is not a liar? That Clinton should no longer be considered a "murderer" and Benghazi should not be used against her should she run for president in 2016?  Now what would make anyone think Fox would report the truth on this?  And you know if they do, it will be a short and limited disclosure with no intention of rehabilitating the damage caused by constant barrages of Anti-Administration rhetoric.  Two years of demands for investigation with wild accusations?  And Hannity and others on Fox claim Obama has divided this nation?  
           As President Andrew Jackson once wrote; "Any man worth his salt will stick up for what he believes is right, but it takes a slightly better man to acknowledge instantly and without reservation that he is in error." Don't hold your breath waiting on Hannity, Limbaugh, Levin or those like them, because in Jackson's mind, they are not "better men."   Have a great week. 

        Just a short blog to reflect on the continued nonsense coming out of Congress this week.  In case you missed it, the GOP introduced a major change to their existing rules requiring all Chairs of House committees to step down should they seek a new political office (ie., Governor, Senator or President).  As we all know, politicians at virtually all levels of government leverage their existing political positions to run for new positions while taking exploiting their inherent elevated media exposure.  Certainly, the advantages Senators Ted Cruz and Rand Paul have while using their senatorial spotlight are high when considering runs for president.  The same goes for Rep. Paul Ryan's elevated media exposure as upcoming Chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee. Yet, a new rule was enacted by the GOP Conference restricting existing committee Chair's ability to run for a new position without first stepping down from their existing chairmanship.  Sounds great right?  
       Haven't we all been waiting for something like this to happen so we eliminate the use of existing political standing as a mere stepping stone to higher office?  I mean, aren't the taxpayers being defrauded when elected politicians swiftly move into campaign mode for another office instead of completing the jobs already elected to? Does anyone else find it distasteful when Senators and Congressmen spend most of their time running for another office (presidential campaigning) instead of being in Washington doing their existing jobs? So the GOP rule change makes sense right?  Except like all things truly political, the rule only passed the GOP with an allowance to "waive" the requirement! Seems Speaker of the House Boehner would only approve the measure provided candidates for higher office have a chance to seek a "permission slip" to ignore the rule.  So what good is the rule then?  About as good as the things coming out of Washington (not much)!  Just another example of cynical politics from both sides of the political aisle and the American people still have no clue of such games being played. 
        On another note, the House passed a Bill (HR5682) this week approving the Keystone Pipeline (again) and the GOP has threatened to force a similar bill through the upcoming GOP controlled Senate.  Seems those accepting campaign contributions from those that benefit from the construction of the pipeline simply won't give this project up - despite the fact that it has been shown than between 22-33 permanent jobs would be created by the project.  Also despite the fact that none of the energy produced from the Canadian Tar Sands oil will be for the American market.  To go one step further, the GOP-led House actually voted to exempt the pipeline from being required to pay into the Treasury Department's Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund in a measure sponsored by the Democrats with the Bill.  Yes, you read that correctly.  Not only does the GOP demand the Keystone Pipeline be built (even though the benefits to America are virtually non-existent) but they also want to keep it from providing funds in the event of a massive oil spill.  Is THIS what the American public voted for?  I doubt it.
       And on a final note - President Obama came out in favor of FCC rules protecting consumers from telecommunication companies monopolizing the Internet.  Seems the few companies controlling the Internet want to act like traffic cops, slowing down the Internet for companies not willing to pay higher and higher fees to the telecommunication providers - which in turn will require consumers to pay more for Internet access when those in control determine profits are just not high enough for them.  Controlling the flow of information on the Internet is a form of regulating Free Speech and Obama should be commended for taking this position.  In typical fashion, the Right Wing immediately opposed the idea - not because it is inappropriate, but because Obama says we need it.  According to Texas Senator Ted Cruz (R) - Net Neutrality is equal to ObamaCare.  Huh? The guy who wants to be President actually has said Net Neutrality will stop cable companies from being "bold, innovative and fair."  But the very folks that make bold programming, innovations and seek Internet fairness are NOT the cable companies.  If AT&T and Comcast are allowed to merge, they will control over half of the cable and Internet systems in the United States.  How could this lead to more competition?  But to be fair, Ted Cruz says a lot of crazy things just to get attention.  Unfortunately, many Americans cling to his words and will promote him to run for President of the United States.  
       So instead of spending time on a new budget that includes massive infrastructure spending which would lead to massive employment opportunities, politicians paying back their campaign supporters have made the Keystone Pipeline a priority instead.  I mean, millions of jobs for Americans to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure certainly can't be as important as building a pipeline that benefits Canada's petroleum industry and creating 22-33 permanent jobs right?  And who cares if the American public foots the bill for any oil spills the pipeline has over the years?  And who cares if the Internet created with the support of American taxpayer money is diverted to become a pot of gold for a select few Internet and Cable providers, right?  Who cares?  I do and so should all Americans!
       As President Dwight D. Eisenhower once wrote; "I have one yardstick by which I test every major problem - and that yardstick is:  Is it good for America?"   Now that's a stick We The People need to wield more and more upon our elected politicians.  How long before We The People learn though?  Have a great week!

          I am sure you have all seen the press making a huge splash about the chance that Jeb Bush may be entering the 2016 Presidential race for the GOP.  Unlike others who think he would be a "fine president", I take great issue with what the man stands for.  You see, as an educator I am not easily swayed that the man has done anything positive for those of us that teach.  Note that I say I am not "swayed" which means I might be convinced he actually means well, but when it comes to students and their achievement - I know he does not mean well.
          As you may recall, Jeb Bush was the architect of the national policy of "No Child Left Behind" - a thinly veiled effort to push national student achievement designed instead to do two things and two things only - to use mostly invalid testing data to fire teachers (in an effort to destroy teachers' unions) while maximizing the amount of public tax dollars being moved into the private sector.  Now, I know this sounds harsh and I detest throwing mud on anyone.  How about I throw Mr. Bush's own words back at him instead?  According to Bush, the only (and he says ONLY) reason education today is failing our students in schools is because of the 13,000 teachers unions.  Yep, he has said it repeatedly and continues to.  The guy who built a nation of test takers - driving tax dollars to support text book publishers and their test bank creators, claims everything would be fine with our system of education if it was not for the damn teachers unions.  Now, I know there are some bad teachers out there, but their are also bad politicians, lawyers, doctors and well, in just about everything.
         What struck me the most is the absence though of other causes for poor student achievement that Mr. Bush can't seem to think of.  But what pray tell could those be?  How about hunger?  Statistics have shown that students that do not eat a nutritious breakfast come to school hungry and less interested in learning.  Now I know these are just studies, but how well do you all concentrate when you have not eaten or are hungry?  But what about a student that has not eaten a decent meal for several days?  Weeks?  Months?  It can't all be the unions' fault for student failures!  But according to Jeb it is!  What about students that have no support at home? No parents around to help them learn to read or write, or for that matter, think?  I guess its also the unions' fault for so many folks failing there own children as poor parents  What about students who wear the same clothes to school everyday because their parents can't afford to buy them new (or new to them - "gently used" clothes)? Now low self-esteem wouldn't be a problem achieving in school would it?  Not according to Mr. Bush!  The teachers' unions are the sole reason for these problems.  And what about school systems that provide little to no support to students and/or teachers (textbooks, computers, projectors, even basic classroom supplies)?  That too would be the unions' fault right?
          And now we have a pile of evidence that Mr. Bush is paid a king's ransom to push for the privatization of public schools through the initiation of "vouchers".  Yes, free tax money for private corporations in the "business" of education.  Yet there is one problem with this initiative.   Students are not widgets that can be evaluated like a business selling inventory.  When a bad piece is received from a parts manufacturer and it does not conform to the specifics and standards of the manufacturer, those "widgets" can be rejected and returned to the parts supplier.  But what about students that arrive at school already "damaged in the box?"  Do we simply return them home with a rejection notice because they don't meet the specifications of the school, made even more stringent by State laws imposing unrealistic state standards and education gains?  I say "unrealistic" because the sole purpose of the state-mandated testing is not to ensure academic achievement.  It is in reality, an effort to undermine public school education, teachers and their unions.   You see without unions, principals and administrators can freely terminate any teacher for any reason.  So if a teacher isn't teaching the ideology of the administrator or they have a relative or friend they would like to employ instead, there will no longer be a high hurtle for them to fire that teacher.  
            Once again, there are bad teachers in education, but from the collective bargaining agreement in our district, bad teachers can be terminated if they are really bad at their job.  What stops them from being terminated?  It's not the union making sure teachers are treated fairly!  It's the failure of the administrators to make the effort to terminate the teacher.  Procedures exist to do get rid of bad teachers - they actually do. Administrators though are unwilling to make the effort.  Can you imagine a prosecutor failing to seek a conviction of a thief or murderer because a defense attorney is involved making the state prove its case?  We would never think a prosecutor would use such an excuse not to try to obtain a conviction against an indicted criminal, would we?  Then why do administrators make little to no effort to use the procedures agreed upon in the collective bargaining agreement with unions to try to actually get rid of bad teachers?  Because it is much easier to blame the unions for "protecting" bad teachers.  Has anyone ever asked the unions if they enjoy protecting teachers that do not belong in the classrooms?  I'm willing to bet they too would like the bad teachers out and it's obviously if you believe Jeb it makes the unions look damn bad, right?!
             The bottom line is that privatization of public schools is just plain Un-American.  Education has always been a public right.  Claiming Johnny can't read or write solely on unions is both naive and well, down right dishonest.  Again, there are bad teachers, like in any profession.  But destroying teachers unions will accomplish just that - destroying basic protections for ALL teachers from administrators pushing personal agendas.  How do I know?  I had a problem with an Assistant Principal when I first started teaching.  He claimed I failed to follow procedures when I clearly had.  He claimed I did not post required information in my classroom when I clearly had.  And when I challenged him before my principal while also attaining considerable success in the classroom - he coordinated a group of students to make wild accusations about me.  When the truth came out, my UNION saved my career.  The AP?  He's gone.  Was I a bad teacher?  No!  Did I encounter a bad administrator with an agenda?  Yes!  (As a side note - Florida teacher evaluations are public record.  You can look my 2013-14 rating up...a "Highly Effective" rating speaks for itself).  
               President Thomas Jefferson once wrote; "Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty."  I doubt he had private school businesses in mind when he wrote this.  Have a great week!

        A blog will be posted tomorrow...or at least when I can get to it.  Spent my day with fellow AP Gov. Reader Tom Fleming who also works as an NFL Player Participation Official.  Tom invited me to the Buccaneer-Falcon game at Raymond James Stadium.  It was fun, but he did put me to work!  Many thanks to Tom and his colleagues for putting up with me today!  It's fun "playing" official every once in a while.  Check back tomorrow for a real blog posting.  Until then, be well.

        Now that Election Day 2014 is upon us, I would just like to remind all of you to vote.  There are a lot of issues at stake in this election, therefore, there is no reason to sit back and expect "others" to get involved.  As a nation, we can no longer afford to sit back and allow a small minority to establish political agendas that never meet the objectives or concerns of the majority.   "We The People" have the control to move our great nation in the direction we wish it to move, unless "We The Lazy" continue to leave it to others to decide.  
       I find it interesting that as we approach Tuesday's elections, we are witnessing a flood of political campaign ads that are as far from honest as possible - from both sides of the political aisle.  The only difference?  There is none!  If Democrats win, the Republicans will try to delegitimize the victory by claiming the election was tainted by fraud.  If the Republicans win, the Democrats will blame GOP-led Gerrymandering, outside campaign financing, and well, a "stupid" electorate for voting while a "smart" electorate stayed home.  Which gets to my point.  Anytime voters stay away from the polls, they themselves are guilty of being "illegitimate, non-participating and stupid." How else can one expect change in our political system if we continue to allow those within the faulty system to remain in power?  All politics are local and elections do have consequences!
       As President Andrew Jackson once wrote; "Our government is founded upon the intelligence of the people.  I for one do not despair of the republic.  I have great confidence in the virtue of the great majority of the people, and I cannot fear the result."  I wonder what Andy Jackson would say today knowing a vast majority of Americans are both apathetic, susceptible to political manipulation, and well, just plain unintelligent?  I think Mr. Jackson would actually be in great despair and very fearful.  Bottom line, stop complaining and start voting! And when the elections are over, suck it up and accept the fact that in America, a democracy is dependent upon an educated electorate.  Like the old saying, "you get what you pay for", we Americans, get what we deserve when we fail to vote.  Have a great week!