Working on it. Finding a job in the city was first priority because I have really cheap rent where I am now (really cheap). It would have been stupid to pay for a place in Portland then potentially spend months looking for a job.
Hey guys just letting you all know I’m not dead, well… yet. The lack of posting and original content is due to me still not having the intrawebz and being in a transitional phase. I finally found a job in Portland. Though it has zero to do with my degree and it’s not a career move, I am really enjoying it. I am out in the city with clients pretty much all day so I’m learning the area very quickly. It’ll do until I can find something more permanent. The commute into the city is a pain. I want to find something along the Blue or Red Max lines (job pays for a monthly pass).
Anyways, eventually I’ll be using Tumblr again, but for another two or three weeks I’ll be close to a ghost on here.
I think the big mistake in schools is trying to teach children anything, and by using fear as the basic motivation. Fear of getting failing grades, fear of not staying with your class, etc. Interest can produce learning on a scale compared to fear as a nuclear explosion to a firecracker.
Stupid (only acceptable answer).
One day we are going to talk about how everyone uses the poetry reciting Slam Style of Black folks for effect and punch. Like that is pretty much the standard now…. I dont know if I have a problem with it persay… But much like everything thing else I feel like that will be forgotten and folks will be talking about its universal and American. I need it to be known that that style comes from Black pain, rage, and triumph….
Politicians have a slightly different information diet. They spend more time gleaning information from lobbyists and rich donors whose concerns and opinions graft themselves onto representatives as easily as the pithiest economists’ opinions attach themselves to me. If politicians naturally gravitate to the issues rich folks want to talk about, it doesn’t make them bad people. It makes them normal people in a broken system that elevates polarization — both between parties and between the priorities of high-income and low-income families — while subtly concealing the issues that most affect Americans who cannot afford a lobbyists’ luncheon or a number on a congresswoman’s speed-dial. The centrality of big money in politics makes it nearly impossible for an issue like long-term unemployment to buy a sliver of mindshare. Our priorities are shaped not only by the stories we choose to believe, but also the stories we happen to hear, from the ideas we give a hearing …
“There is a divide within the [Republican] party,” says Samuel Thernstrom, who served on President George W. Bush’s Council on Environmental Quality and is now a scholar of environmental policy at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank. “The position that climate change is a hoax is untenable.”
A concerted push has begun within the party—in conservative think tanks and grassroots groups, and even in backroom, off-the-record conversations on Capitol Hill—to persuade Republicans to acknowledge and address climate change in their own terms. The effort will surely add heat to the deep internal conflict in the years ahead.
Republicans have been struggling with an identity crisis since the 2012 presidential election. In particular, the nation’s rapid demographic changes are forcing the GOP to come to terms with the newly powerful influence of Hispanic voters and to confront the issue of immigration. For now, climate change isn’t getting anywhere close to that kind of urgent scrutiny from Republicans, at least not in public. GOP strategists say that Republican candidates hoping to win primary races, where the electorate tends to be older and more ideologically driven, are still best served to deny, ignore, or dismiss climate change.
Today, a Republican candidate “wouldn’t be able to win a primary with a Jon Huntsman position on this,” says strategist Glen Bolger.
The problem is, as polling data and the changing demographics of the American electorate show, it’s likely that the position that can win voters in a primary will lose voters in a general election. Some day, though, the facts—both scientific and demographic—will force GOP candidates to confront climate change whether they want to or not.
The IRS is under siege for investigating conservative political groups applying for tax-exempt status. But the real problem wasn’t that the IRS was too aggressive. It was that the agency focused on the wrong people—“none of those groups were big spenders on political advertising; most were local Tea Party organizations with shoestring budgets,” writes The New York Times—and wasn’t aggressive enough. The outrage that Washington should be talking about—what my colleague Chris Hayes calls “the scandal behind the scandal”—is how the Citizens United decision has unleashed a flood of secret spending in US elections that the IRS and other regulatory agencies in Washington, like the Federal Election Commission, have been unwilling or unable to stem.
501c4 “social welfare” groups like Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS, the Koch brothers’ Americans for Prosperity and Grover Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform—which don’t have to disclose their donors—spent more than $250 million during the last election. “Of outside spending reported to the FEC, 31 percent was ‘secret spending,’ coming from organizations that are not required to disclose the original sources of their funds,” writes Demos. “Further analysis shows that dark money groups accounted for 58 percent of funds spent by outside groups on presidential television ads [$328 million in total].”
IRS guidelines for 501c4 groups state that “the promotion of social welfare does not include direct or indirect participation or intervention in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office…a section 501(c)(4) social welfare organization may engage in some political activities, so long as that is not its primary activity.” It’s ludicrous for groups like Crossroads GPS—which spent at least $70 million during the last election—to claim that its primary purpose is not political activity. Only the likes of Karl Rove would believe that running attack ads against President Obama qualifies as social welfare.
There were 74 schools that showed a return of $1 million or more on the investment in an education, while 30 schools had a negative return on investment—meaning the cost of attending was more than what the students would make up with increased wages, even over a 30-year period.