Tuesday, December 14, 2010

No Labels = No Integrity?


In a very quick cash in of their credibility chips, the website/organization No Labels, having only officially launched yesterday, has already been outted for swiping graphics for their website. To make it worse, the lead designer for No Labels, Dave Warren, initially vehemently denied his thievery. “I do my own thinking, man,” he said.

Full article after the jump »

God on Global Warming

Does God have something to say about global warming? I think He does. But I’m guessing it’s not what you think. That was a teaser. I’m going to tell you some other stuff now before I get to the money quote.

Friday, December 10, 2010

Is Ted Turner right on global one-child policy?

Ted Turner says that, to save the planet, the whole world needs a one-child policy. The human population is predicted to reach 10 billion by 2050—that’s pretty soon—and Ted doesn’t think the planet can take it. I did do a little slogging around on Google, and it seems the current expert consensus is on that number for Earth’s maximum occupancy. So is Ted right? Let’s look into it…


Sunday, November 21, 2010

New T-shirt design: TSA

It's been awhile since I've done a new T-shirt design, but I found some motivation. Hope you like it. I really hope you buy it:

Click on the image or the link to be taken to my Zazzle store: zazzle.com/mobwear/

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

America says “Yes” to Just Say “No”

Well, it sure didn’t take long. The Democrats are singing a different tune after taking a shellacking at the ballot box yesterday. Overnight, mandates have given way to working together to move forward. Suddenly gridlock is the worst thing that could ever happen. Well, it bears repeating–again and again and again–that this is what happens every time Democrats face a setback in their political agendas.

Thursday, October 21, 2010

Nothing Beats Knowing

Memorization. That’s not a very fun word for most. I enjoy acting as a pastime, but I consider memorizing my lines the trade-off to all the fun. In high school I was in the band. Every so often, the director had us memorize a piece. Yuk! I was also a member of the public speaking club. It’s a lot more fun to write a speech than to memorize it, even when it’s your own words. Church school included memorization of many, many Bible verses. And in sixth grade, I had an English teacher who felt it was very important to practice memorizing speeches and poems.

Full article after the jump »

Thursday, October 7, 2010

Green or Die!

I really want to do my part. That’s why this video needs to go viral. But first, a little info. The four-minute short, titled “No Pressure,” comes from comedy writer Richard Curtis and was produced for the 10:10 Environmental Campaign. It was posted to the organization’s website on September 30 and, as best as I can tell, was pulled before 2pm the same day. As to why it was pulled, I can only offer the film itself as explanation. (I love how nothing on the interwebs ever really dies.)

Full article after the jump »

Go directly to the video »

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

The Constitutional Time Machine

Oh, I could just pull my hair out over this one. Because no one watches C-SPAN, we all have to tip our hats to the internet for passing this gem around. It’s Cass Sunstein, White House Administrator of Regulatory Affairs, telling us what we already know, that he (along with the entire administration) has no regard for the Constitution.

Full article after the jump »

Thursday, September 16, 2010

O.D. on Democrats

The Democrat party website has a new look for the November election season. Seems kind of a last-minute, especially when one considers the amount of thought, or lack thereof, apparently put into the new logo and slogan.

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Race and the Rally

I've been listening to far too much coverage of the 8/28 Restoring Honor Rally, and do you know what I keep hearing? I keep hearing about race. Race, race, race!

Full article after the jump »

Monday, August 30, 2010

HuffPo vs. Beck Rally

No surprise, HuffPo has a lot of MB devoted to trashing the Restoring Honor Rally on their site, much of which read as though they had actually been written before the rally. There are so many articles, I won't bother linking to any but my favorite, a photo gallery entitled Glenn Beck's Restoring Honor Rally: The Most Ridiculous Messages. Unfortunately, this morning the article boasted 30 photos, but as of right now, that number has been culled to 20. I wish I'd thought to grab them all, just to show how non-ridiculous many of them were. For example, one missing photo depicts a pleasant, likely octogenarian lady, wearing a stars and stripes scarf and smiling for the camera. Totally ridiculous, right? Even though the folks at HuffPo have culled their selection to the most "ridiculous" I don't think they even hold a candle to The Best Anti-Glenn Beck Signs At The 'Restoring Honor' Rally.

Anyway, I perused and participated in the flood of comments accompanying the article, and I wanted to preserve some of my thoughts as they are already being deleted by the HuffPo moderators.

Full article after the jump »

Thursday, August 12, 2010

Go ahead, call Obama a Socialist

David Frum wants to make the case on why conservatives ought not to refer to Obama as a socialist. Though he seems to define socialism in much the same way as others using it, he doesn’t seem to know who its practitioners are. His fear seems to be of muddying the political waters when really it ought to be of clearing them. He claims conservatives are railing against the wrong thing, but his case is weak because it stands on a nonexistent comparison.

Full article after the jump »

Read the Frum Forum article »

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

Trouble with the accreditaton system

In the last post I pointed out that, technically, the government does not accredit schools; accrediting agencies like the Higher Learning Commission exist as private entities. Indeed, Ed.gov pointedly defines accreditation thus: "Accreditation in the United States is a voluntary, nongovernmental process, in which an institution and its programs are evaluated against standards for measuring quality."

But the agencies exist in a highly political atmosphere where the Secretary of Education determines which agencies are recognized. All I can learn about the process is that their accreditation standards are reviewed by the U.S. Department of Education and must meet certain criteria. Accreditation by a recognized agency is part of the requirements for institutions to participate in federal student aid programs. Further, Ed.gov asserts that "Many employers in the United States only recognize degrees earned from institutions accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the Secretary of Education." and "In some states, it can be illegal to use a degree from an institution that is not accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency, unless approved by the state licensing agency." So, the chain of influence becomes apparent.

And, as I pointed out, the accrediting agencies' tight vested way of announcing decisions really smacks of a highly political entity.

Is this the next "Big" under attack? Has the Obama White House singled out"Big College" or "Big Diploma" or whatever they decide to name it? Is it a coincidence that on June 19, five Democrat Senators called for investigation and new regulation of for-profit colleges and universities and on June 30, Dana College loses its accreditation over its purchase by a for-profit investor? Even if it is just coincidence, the DoE and Congress have started rolling against those who have the audacity to make a profit whilst delivering an education. They've armed themselves with terms such as "Diploma Mill" and "Accreditation Shopping." If there is one thing I know about the anti-capitalist left, they invent a vocabulary, then they attack with it.

Monday, July 5, 2010

D.C. killed my school

You may already be aware that hottest topic on the Department of Education's agenda these days surrounds the issue of accredited nonprofit colleges and universities being purchased by for-profit entities. Given the current political climate in Washington, it should be no surprise that DOE's stance is decidedly against such events taking place, regardless of whatever merits there may be. There is even a snarky term applied to the practice: "Accreditation Shopping".

I won't say that abuses could not or have not occurred in such transactions, but I must point out that the term itself belies the realities of such a purchase taking place. A company buying a school does not automatically receive the accreditation of its purchase; it must submit a "Change of Control" request. In essence, the school is renewing its accreditation at that time, albeit, with a new and peculiar type of scrutiny.

Now, accreditation is not granted by the government, but it is required if a school is to receive any government monies. The unfortunate state of higher education at present is that most schools will find it impossible to operate without that money. Furthermore, no one wants to go to an unaccredited institution. Thus, accrediting agencies are under enormous pressure from Washington to bend with the political winds regarding education. So, if D.C. doesn’t want accredited nonprofit schools being bought by for-profit entities, the accrediting agencies are the tool to keep that from happening.

So, why do I care about any of this? Indeed, why do I even know about any of this? Well, it seems my Alma Matter, 126-year-old Dana College of Blair, NE, is one of the first to fall prey to the latest political attitudes on this subject. I don’t want to retell the whole story, frankly I’m exhausted with is, but here is link to one of the most comprehensive early articles from the Lincoln Journal Star. Here’s another, interesting one.

As an alum of Dana College, I've been monitoring the situation closely, and while I won’t diminish the role of the school leadership in allowing the college to arrive at the financial state it is in, it looks to me that the Higher Learning Commission pulled a fast one on Dana. The school acted in good faith to fulfill all the HLC's requests and address their concerns only to be turned on at the end.

The purchasing entity, the Dana Education Corporation (mind the name) was formed solely for the purpose of acquiring and strengthening the school based upon it's established mission. Kevin Abourezk of the Lincoln Journal Star states the situation most succinctly when he writes, "In denying Dana College's request for continuing accreditation, the Higher Learning Commission essentially rejected the proposed buyers' assertions they would retain the college's mission."

In a related Omaha World Herald story, Dana's board chairman and the president of the DEC are both sited believing that the accrediting body made its decision to send a message — that it's going to be much tougher for for-profit groups to buy nonprofit colleges than in the past — rather than simply reacting to the facts of Dana's specific situation.

At this time, the college, with support from various Nebraska leaders, including the governor, hope to pressure the HLC into reconsidering its decision. Of course, there is no formal appeal process, nor are the official reasons for denial of accreditation released to the public, or even the requesting institution, for that matter.

These practices, when viewed along with the matter at hand, put one question in my mind: "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"