[Washington Examiner] A suburban Southern California mayor has resigned days after his arrest for a purse-snatching and wild ride through streets with a woman clinging to his sport utility vehicle.
San Gabriel Mayor Albert Y.M. Huang says in an e-mail Tuesday to The Associated Press that he's confident his reputation will be restored but decided to resign because of overwhelming media attention.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/20/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Note, there's NO political info given.
Means he's a Democrat.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
10/20/2010 2:53 Comments ||
Top||
#2
My,My,My took a look online, TEN newspapers and NO MENTION, finaly found what I suspected in a blog Yup he's a Democrat.
Media bias anyone? NAW doesn't exit (Heavy sarcasm)
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
10/20/2010 4:58 Comments ||
Top||
#3
At least it was an honest act. The Mayor was just cutting out all the bureaucracy between him and a taxpayer's money. We don't need no stinkin' rituals like filing forms, hiring collectors, and dealing with layers of other governmental grasping hands. No comment was issued from SEIU on this new collection method and its impact upon its members. /sarc off
#4
Restored reputation means he will cop a plea to reduce charges and go to rehab or anger management school. He resigned? Finally an intelligent decision by a lefty.
See if you can read this without seething. I dare you.
DC Students Receive Dinner at School
WASHINGTON - Getting kids to eat three healthy meals a day can be a challenge, especially if money is tight. But D.C. Public Schools have found a way to take some of that burden off parents. They are now serving dinner at school.
On the menu are things like salmon salad, a whole grain roll, orange juice, one percent milk and a corn and pepper relish.
"With positive feedback, the kids will enjoy the food," Chef Edward Kwitowski said.
He is in charge of whipping up healthy dinners for D.C. school kids as part of this new program to provide three healthy meals a day at school.
"Our program is from scratch cooking with local produce," said Kwitowski. "And definitely low fat cooking."
It's a far cry from the muffin or bagel and juice kids used to get in the after school program, which was often was the last food some would eat until the next day at school.
"It's good and it's healthy," fourth grader Emanuel Gross said. "So I can stay on task."
D.C. joins 13 states which serve three meals a day at school -- and to the tune of $5.7 million. Officials here have embraced the program because they realize healthy, well-fed kids learn better.
"We're reaching 10,000 kids a day at 99 of our 120 schools," said Anthony Tata, Chief Operating Officer of D.C. Public Schools.
That's about 25 percent of the student population. And another big benefit of the after school dinners are that more kids are enrolling in after school programs where they can get some academic help as well.
So the dinners are really serving three purposes - fighting hunger, obesity and offering help with classwork too.
And the best news of all is this is a federally-funded program.
"We're reimbursed on a per meal basis," Tata said. "We can already see the good it's doing for our kids."
Federally-funded dinners for school kids. Why, back in my day my dinner was provided BY MY PARENTS. They even paid for it! I didn't get grilled salmon, either, I got hot dogs, or spaghetti, or meat loaf, whatever my mother could whip up for seven people and stay within my father's working man's paycheck.
This is the idiocy of our government today: it's not enough to buy up the banks and take over GM; it's not enough to lecture us over the sugar in our soda-pop and the salt in our cheeseburgers; and it's not enough to tell us how racist we all are for objecting to any and all of this.
Now they're going to provide the three squares for our kids and just push the parents to one side.
They have to go. All of them. And if the Republicans don't get the message, they have to go too.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/20/2010 11:38 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Heck, might as well let them stay overnight at that point. Give'm a cot, show an educational movie, and a nice uniform to wear the next day. They could see their parents on the weekends, if the paperwork is in order of course.
#2
Why even bother with parents at this point, DC? Just seize the kids when they get to be school age and you can churn out perfect little drones for your socialist machine.
#3
I remember reading an article or two in the 80s about schools which were trying to cope with large numbers of students from terribly dysfunctional, improvident families, where the school administrator (IIRC, a very resourceful and creative woman) who just flat-out said that for many of her students the best hope for becoming functional and well-adjusted adults was for her school to become a kind of boarding school. Their family life was awful to non-existent; school was the only kind of stability for them, and their teachers about the only admirable role-models. I have to say, it might not be that bad an idea, especially if it interrupts a cycle of dysfunction.
#4
Apparently the big push is now on to increase the reimbursement for free school breakfasts and lunches to a dollar more per meal. I just saw it on the news a couple of weeks ago. The spiel was to get rid of the awful pizza kids had to eat and instead have a healthy, sit-down type of meal.
While it is a nice idea, all I could think of was the million of kids on two free school meals a day costing an extra dollar each meal, so two dollars extra per kid per day. So millions more in expense every single day. It must be nice to have direct access to someone else's pocketbook.
Posted by: Black Charlie Chinemble5313 ||
10/20/2010 12:38 Comments ||
Top||
#5
they should ask sheriff Joe Arpaio what he does to keep food costs down and help his inmates lose weight..."help keep them on task."
#6
What Sgt. Mom said. Back when I was one of those frighteningly involved PTA moms at the elementary school, I had two little kindergarteners to tutor in reading readiness to catch them up with the rest of the class -- letters, numbers, colours, that kind of thing. One didn't know he had a last name, his father turned out to be illiterate; the other could name his last half dozen "uncles", and had cheesy popcorn for breakfast if he got anything to eat at all. For both of them I stopped in at the cafeteria to get a peanut butter and jelly sandwich before we started, or they'd have trouble concentrating. for the second boy this was a revelation -- he'd never eaten anything like that before.
Saying that their parents should be taking care of this is all very well, except that their parents simply don't, even when they have the resources. That's the difference between not having enough money and actually being poor, in my opinion. If one doesn't know how and refuses to learn, the income doesn't matter; if one knows how, one can stretch a very limited income, so long as there are no catastrophes.
#7
I'm really torn on this one. One the one hand, even though we didn't have much we did have breakfast before school (Cream of Wheat and Oatmeal in the cold months, Corn Flakes in the warm months). Lunch at school was 25 cents but Mom fixed us something to take and we paid a nickel for milk. Nowdays prices are much higher. We went to a small, country school and there were no kids who didn't eat lunch or breakfast. This was rural Alabama in the 50's and 60's. In these highly populated urban areas nowdays there are thousands of kids who don't get the right attention at home.I am not opposed to helping those kids but there is a line between education and indoctrination that must not be crossed. Teach, don't indoctrinate.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
10/20/2010 15:55 Comments ||
Top||
#8
One more way to make people's lives easy enough that they decide to ride in the wagon rather than pull it. One more way to disintegrate the family as the glue of society. One more way to buy votes.
#9
I'd like one of the polling organizations to run a single-question public opinion survey:
"Should the government pay for everything?"
I bet you'd get over 10% agreement. You might get 30%.
Posted by: Matt ||
10/20/2010 17:18 Comments ||
Top||
#10
"I stopped in at the cafeteria to get a peanut butter and jelly sandwich"
Nothing wrong with peanut butter and jelly, or cheese, or even bologna, tw.
But "salmon salad, a whole grain roll, orange juice, one percent milk and a corn and pepper relish"?
D.C. wants to feed these kids better than I (or quite a few others) am fed - and use my tax dollers to do it. >:-(
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/20/2010 17:50 Comments ||
Top||
#11
D.C. wants to feed these kids better than I (or quite a few others) am fed - and use my tax dollers to do it. >:-(
That depends on what that menu really means, Barbara. Watch the FoxNews video -- these kids aren't eating off the fat of the land. That was a tuna-salad sandwich made with salmon on a roll instead of bread slices.
#12
I open up the CafeTORIUM at 6 a.m...... after September 1. I don't like the guys sitting out in the dark. To paraphrase: you go to the skool with the kids you have, not the kids you want.
Dr. White, the average age of the parent(s) of our students is under 23. We do what we can. If that requires 3 meals a day then I am all in favor of it. Perhaps you are under the impression that cutting school meals will encourage the parent, guardian or what-have-you to pack a fine lunch and cook a good wholesome AMERICAN-BREAKFAST-JUST-LIKE-I-HAD, then you are incorrect.
I frankly (F-150) think boarding schools may be a solution.
Posted by: Goldies Every Damn Where ||
10/20/2010 19:07 Comments ||
Top||
#13
The problem is where this leads. On the face of it it is not so bad now....BUT...let's get the NEA & SEIU involved and pretty soon ALL kids will "have" to be offered 3 course gourmet meals and their parents won't be allowed a veto even if they want to. This is the kind of "do gooderism" that can rapidly devolve into the situation found in Paleostinian camps where multiple generations are sucking on the UN tit.
How about we put in some mandatory parenting classes for any parent whose kid isn't properly nourished. Food isn't that expensive and with food-stamps and proper knowledge we can get the responsibility back where it belongs.
If not then there is the bording school approach.
Posted by: Alan Cramer ||
10/20/2010 19:16 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Mr. Cramer raises a good point. While I don't have an issue with this idea going where it is specifically needed, it needs to be offered to those who need it most and only those kids. But if these kids have parents who are unable or unwilling to deliver adequat care for their children, shouldn't social services take those kids away or at least do an upclose assessment of the parents?
#15
"Shouldn't social services take those kids away or at least do an upclose assessment of the parents?"
Yea. Agreed one thousand percent. Excuse me fiscal conservatives, I am one of you and do not like big government, excepting a line drawn against child abuse. Malnourishment is abuse. I do not want the next generation punished for the sins of the father or mother. /Rant off
#16
Have you seen Social Services? There's a reason they do everything they can to keep the families together instead of moving children into the system.
"Boarding school" means what in the olden days was referred to as the orphanage. Back in the day, as I understand it, most of the residents had at least one living parent... who dropped the children off for someone else to care for because he/she couldn't or wouldn't. Kind of like the children Mr. Goldies Everywhere feeds in the dark of the morning.
For some of those parents, parenting and cooking classes -- hell, just call them "life skills" classes and be done with it -- will help. But for a lot of them, all one can do is give the children a chance to move into the working class when they're old enough. After all, the ones whose parents know how to manage limited resources already had some sort of nutritious breakfast and will get some sort of nutritious dinner, just as we all did.
Mr. Goldies Everywhere, thank you for the care you give the students in your hands. I've no doubt that most of them properly appreciate it.
#17
I think breaking apart extremely dysfunctional families and giving children a chance in a foster home is preferable, so while social services may try to keep families together this is often the *worse* thing.
Two members of my family were orphaned, because they escaped Germany with whatever relative was living (no parents), and more recently another friend of mine was in foster care and liked his foster mother much more than his biological parents. WHY? Because his father was a murderer in prison and his mother is a druggie. Also, another relative of mine is a regular parent AND a foster parent that saved a young sweet girl from being gang raped in a crack house.
Social services tries to keep families together that long ago fell apart in a lot of cases Im afraid. I believe a lost child might be less lost in foster care, getting meals, and under the supervised care of foster parents, then stuck in a home of abuse, drugs, murder or incest. Sorry, social services should be looking at homes that can't scrape together meals.
#18
Compare wid WAFF > THE "PERFECT STORM" THAT THREATENS AMERICAN DEMOCRACY | THE TOP 1/10TH OF ONE PERCENT [1.0%] OF AMERICANS NOW EARN AS MUCH AS THE BOTTOM 120.0MILYUHN OF US.
* ARTIC = Amers are covertly + steadily losing their Freedoms-Rights + American-style Democracy to Elitist PLUTOCRACY.
------------
Also from WAFF > ELEVEN FREEDOMS THAT DRUNKS, SLACKERS, PROSTITUTES, + PIRATES PIONEERED WHICH THE FOUNDING FATHERS OPPOSED | WHAT THE US FOUNDING FATHERS CALLED/TERMED AS CORRUPTION, DEPRAVITY, VENALITY, + VICE [etc.] MANY OF US TODAY WOULD CALL "FREEDOM" [+ Natural Rights].
D *** NG IT, SUPPORT YOUR INNER, LOCAL UNDERWORLD CRIME LORD + BAD BOYZ-GIRLZ - YOU KNOW YOU WANT TO!
#19
This reminds me of Hamas, who, after destroying their society from the inside, get kudos for providing social services.
While palliative care is nessary, as stated by several on this thread, we also need to address the policies that have resulted in disfunctional families. But that won't happen with the current rulers, because destroying the family is a feature, no a bug. Get the kids early and indoctrinate them so they can "stay on task". (Real 4th graders don't talk like that, you know.)
We've got to take our country back from the "progressives" who are replacing our traditional American local institutions with a bloated Federal nanny state. Vote them all out.
#21
I don't have a problem paying for meals at school in principal. I would NEVER allow it for my kids, but I am a somewhat attentive parent. I don't think the feds should have anything to do with it however.
#22
Also, another relative of mine is a regular parent AND a foster parent that saved a young sweet girl from being gang raped in a crack house.
Some foster parents are like that, Private Eye. I have two foster daughters that I know are not dead because we took them in -- but trailing daughter #2 brought them home, they didn't go through the system. In fact, the social worker dealing with Formerly Temporary Daughter told me bluntly that if I registered, I would never get her -- her upper middle class parents might possibly respond to the threat of juvenile hall, but giving her to me would not make them feed their children.
And some foster parents wrap their charges in duct tape and lock them in closets while they go off for the weekend, then neglect to mention there's no reason for the department to continue paying them because the child has died.
I vote for feeding those kids and brainwashing them into doing their schoolwork, getting legal jobs, and marrying before making babies.
[Washington Examiner] One of a surprising number of old, well-established politicians being challenged in this year's election by some unknown newcomer is Senator Russ Feingold, D-Wis. In a recent debate between Feingold and his new challenger, businessman Ron Johnson, the difference between the old pol and new guy on the block stood out.
Feingold was clearly smoother and more glib-- and his arguments may have sounded more plausible to those unfamiliar with the facts. But what Johnson said would have resonated better with those who did know the facts. How many people are in which category may determine the outcome of this election.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/20/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Posted by: Frozen Al ||
10/20/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Ruth's two points ahead...but she'll need to widen that lead a lot to cancel out the impact of the Nonrespiratory-American, Feline-American and Canine-Amercan voting blocs.
Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) ||
10/20/2010 2:14 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I've sent her as much money as I can.
(Maybe I could squeeze out $25 more....)
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/20/2010 13:19 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
