We pay a substancial amount of our taxdollars for education. The sole purpose for schools is to prepare the students for the workforce - and based upon available testing scores, the schools are doing a lousy job.

Part of the reason for the school's failure is that parents refuse to get involved, they would rather be their childs "friend" than a parent. Then little Jr. is shocked when he goes into the workforce, and some low level manager fires his behind for not doing what he was told to do.

This student thought that as "mommy's pet" she was above the rules that applied to everyone else. So, she disregarded the teacher, then she tried to lie her way out of it. I'm glad she got caught, maybe going to an alternative school where she has less freedom and more discipline is exactly what she needs.

Then people wonder why the incoming workforce is lazy, disrespectful and demands that they get their way on every issue - it's because they have been taught that their poor 'self-image' might be hurt if any form of discipline was used. It's way beyond time for them to face reality.

Or, we could wait until she has a family and pulls this type of stunt at work and gets fired. Then she'll be uneducated, undisciplined and unemployed.

"Satire is not harassment"

Tell that to your boss when you make a 'satire cartoon' of him available on the internet. I'm almost certain he'll consider 'your' rights as he exercises 'his' rights to re-evaluate your employment.

A doubt a High School Principle can be considered a 'public figure' as he is not a celebrity, he does not hold press conferences, appear as a public spokesman, present himself as a public figure, nor is he employing any public relations agencies. He's merely filling a required managment position. He is in a position of authority, over a group of immature children/teenagers.

Now, as to the punishment; that was absolutely out of bounds. A stern talking to, maybe a day or two detention and an apology were all that was warranted, IMHO. If the child refused to apologize, I can grant that the Principle would be within his rights to tell the student that he is not welcome to return, and must go elsewhere to further his educational goals. This would set the tone that the school has rules, and other students would learn a lesson vicariously. Learn to respect those in positions of authority while you are in school; and when you join the workforce the chances are that you'll not be fired for talking back to a supervisor. (You wouldn't believe the attitudes we see coming into the workforce!)

While I agree with your accessment on the judge (we can measurably determine how much time he sent 5000 teenagers to jail, we can measurabley access the fiscal kick-back), he should have his day in court. And if he is indeed found guilty, and we are relatively sure this will happen, he should be held accountable.

For the reasons you gave - I agree that a capital punishment should be pushed for. How many lives is a man placed in a position of authority allowed to destroy? He took an oath of office, and he raped pretty much every principle of office he swore to uphold. There are consequences to actions, he knew this and chose to abuse his authority for personal gain - so his life should be forfeit.

Same things with Bernie Madoff. Give him his day in court, treat him like any other robber or con-artist, scaling the magnitude of the crime to what a candy-bar thief would get. If stealing a $1.50 snickers means 1 day in jail, then $10 Billion should be a lifetime.

What has Dick Cheney been charged with? Exactly, what did he do wrong? This seems more of a political stab at someone, rather than one based on an actual charge. If you can produce a charge, then give him his day in court like everyone else.

There is no slave labor - that is illegal (unfortunately), the inmates are not forced to do anything but serve their time.

The state pays $x/inmate that is sentenced to prison. This cost includes the cost of the prison, food, medical care, guards and administrative costs. If a commercial interest comes forward and says that they can provide a facility that meets state requirements with regard to living space, food, access to medical care and guards - but can do it for some cost less than what the state pays for a state owned and managed institution, then the state can opt to send inmates to the commercial entity. Given the established effectiveness of a commercial entity compared to a state managed entity - it's not uncommon to find commercial enterprises that can run a profit, and provide better care than the state.

That said, the commercial entity found it in their fiscal best interests to pay the judges over $2.6 Million to send them juveniles (innocent or guilty .... the pay is the same) from their court dockets. So, how many kids who committed very minor crimes, or committed no crime at all - were sent to prision so the judges could make an extra $2.6 Million?

I think a judge should spend the rest of his life in jail for this atrocity; and everything he owns should be confiscated and sold, with the proceeds given to the victims of his corrupton. I would personally jump at the opportuntiy to spend 17 months in jail for a $2.6 Million payoff. I could comfortably retire on $2.6 Million! Consider, just living off the 7% interest rate would be a cool $182,000 a year for life - without ever touching the principle. Heck yeah! Where do I sign up? Throw me in the slammer for 18 months, say nasty things about my mommy, make me watch cable TV and lift weights. That would be the easiest money I've ever made!!

Back in the days of the Apple clone start-up "Power Computing", Apple discovered that not only did they have the task of supporting their software on non-Apple hardware, that the Apple clone-makers made BETTER Mac's than Apple did. By this, I mean that Power Computing produced memory bus speeds of 66 MHz, when the best that Apple could muster was 33 MHz. So, how did Apple compete against superior engineering?

Yup, Apple allowed Power Computing to only make memory buses half the width of Apple's offerings. At the eng of the day, Apple killed off the clone industry; because Apple realized that they were NOT gaining marketshare, but rather the clones were cannibalizing their hardware sales. Why buy a Mac for $3000, when you can get a faster, more feature laden offering that runs the same software for $2000?

If Pystar ultimately wins, it may not increase the Mac marketshare, but may mean that Apple is now forced to support hardware that is 'compliant' to various specifications instead of 'compatible' with those same specifications. Those two words, compliant and compatible, do not mean the same thing. This means that instead of supporting a thin set of hardware products, Apple will be forced to support a wide range of 3rd party hardware - while maintaining thier OS and software prices static.

Sometimes a step forward means you are stepping on a landmine.

I hate to throw some logic and common sense into your delusion - but consider a few things.

- there is no 'magic' weather forecasting software. The same weather forecast system that cannot predict the weekend's weather is used to predict 5, 10, 50, 100 and 1000 years out. Any errors made are carried over and compound the overall error.

- The Sun's output is not a constant, nor has it ever been, nor is it likely to stabilize anytime soon. In fact, we have seen near record setting declines in Sunspot activity. Sunspots generate a LOT of energy, look it up.

- Mars has lot it's polar ice cap. Is this our fault too?

- Who gains from spreading this myth? A similar myth produced the EPA, a group of unelected people, who answer to no one, who can declare your house an environmental impact zone and have it condemned without trial, jury nor a right to appeal.

- The cooling period we say in 2008 more than made up the difference for over 20 years worth of the increase that Global Warming fanatics have been prancing about.

- We constantly move through climatic change, we always have, we always will. There is nothing you can do about the weather, other than to talk about it.

You are making a false assumption. H1B workers are NOT Americans, they do not live here, they have no vested interest in the success of this country. They are simply hired guns.

As such, neither they, nor their employer pay FICA or Social Security taxes.

Think about that for a second.

Both H1B employees and you earn the exact same paycheck; but your employer does not have to pay Social Security nor FICA taxes on the H1B employee. So, the cost to the employer is several tens of thousands dollars LESS than hiring an American. At the same time, this employer is getting tax abatements and tax cuts for his investment in helping and doing business with these same countries.

So, when layoff time comes - guess who takes it in the rear? You cost the employer more to have around than a foreign national who pays no taxes. Then take a good look around your company, and ask yourself again "Gee, why are 20-50% of the engineers at my company from outside America?"

When layoffs hit, the H1B employee has a contractual obligation to be relocated to his country of origon should his employment end. This means that in terms of laying off a H1B employee, that not only is he cheaper to have hanging around the company, he's also more expensive to lay off.

Think about this as you get your pink slip- then look around at your next job and you may see a trend. Are H1B employees simply 'better' in that they don't get laid off - or is the system rigged against Americans?

What would give you that idea? He's a politician who's job is to read and enact bills in the Senate, right? For this role, he's given perks and priviledges that very few in our society are able to obtain. Since his tenure in the US Senate, Sen. Obama managed to vote 20 times out of a possible 100 voting opportuntities between 4/28/08 and 10/28/08

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/votes/

130 times as a Senator for Illinois, he chose not to vote 'for' or 'against', but rather to simply declare that he was 'present' for the vote nearly 130 times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/20/us/politics/20obama.html

His cabinet is full of DC lifers, he has never championed 'change' either as a state senator, nor as a US Senator; what makes you believe that he is capable of preserving anything? His resume' is pretty unimpressive - but that really doesn't matter does it? He's the 'messiah'.

Whether it's been for the better or not, I don't know. I want to comment on your last remark, though, "We are all expendable..."
My response? Well duhhhh...

It appears you have bought into the mindset that individuals have no significance in a company, which is relatively sad. Without good people, a company isn't anything more than concrete walls and an asphalt roof. Name any successful company, and that company will proudly point to their early employees. You'll see the founding owners, surrounded by their workers - the boss's proud of their workers, and the workers are proud to be a part of a collective effort. They are the one's who worked to create their product, they are the one's that got the company started. Even Mikey Dell has a listing of 1,000 of his original employees who require his personal approval for them to be fired. That is the only kind thing I can say about that man, is that he recognizes his wealth is due to the work of people - not cogs.

In any start up, or privately held company you will find an attitude of "We need you, no one here knows how to do 'x' as well as you - you are the expert in your field and we will all suffer if you should leave". A company grooms their employees to become vital staff, the experienced mentor the fresh hires. You are treated like you have value, which in turn makes it difficult for one to entertain leaving that job to go elsewhere.

Consider the Hershey Company. The Hershey company built a town for their workers, then started a college and schools so their worker's families could be garranteed an education. People worked their entire life at Hershey, and Hershey prospered. You can go almost anywhere in the world and find Hershey bars. The Hershey company even went so far as to build an amusement park (and college, hospital, library) for their employees to use. Who wouldn't be proud to work at a company that treats their employees like they matter? Today, Hershey is still union free, families still work at the various plants, and attend the Hershey college tuition-free, as well as free admittance into the Hershey Park to ride the rollercoasters and other assorted rides.

That was the attitude that made America great. Attract the best employees you can, pay them an honest wage, and do everything in your power to make them want to stay. If you love your employer, chances are that you'll work harder and stick around. If you hate your employer (like many of these companies fostering) you will do what is required to keep your job, and be looking to leave as soon as you have another employer willing to pay x% more.

I've done the Dollar Dance before. You end up losing, and losing big.

Work for company 'x' for 10 years. Get rewards, bonus's and patents. Leverage to get a 50% raise at company 'y'. But wait, company 'y' expects you to single-handedly pull them out of years worth of poor investments and bad managment decisions. A year later the plant closes. Now you and 5,000 of your fellow workers (all skilled) are competing for limited job opportunties in the area. This translates to a glut of houses on the market at the same time, as you have to move to find work. Sell your home for a loss (what color Lexus do you want me to buy you?)and move somewhere else to try to recover. But wait, this company is underfunded and goes down too. Hmmm, I've almost doubled my income in 3 years, moved 2x and am out several tens of thousands of dollars because I had to pay to buy and sell multiple homes - each one at a loss.

Do this for 10 years, and watch your retirement approach depletion. When you find a stable job, that pays a fair salary - you will give very SERIOUS thought before you consider jumping ship for a job that may pay more in the short term, but may mean you are on the job market involuntarily in a year or two. "Slow and steady wins the race" is a very wise saying. I was unwise in that I chose to ignore it.

Jack Welch, when he took over GE started the whole 10% of your under-achiever hog-wash.

Now, if you have poor achievers in your company, who have been there for decades - as GE had - perhaps a 1 time 'cleansing' is necessary. But, if you are doing your interviewing competently, and are teaching and mentoring your new hires - to continuously 'fire' 10% of the workforce is not only stupid, it's counter productive.

Consider, how long does it take a person to learn his job function and all the nuances that take it from being merely fulfilled, but where he can then magnify it? Given the proper motivation, a below average performer can become a top-performer. If a person knows what's expected, is shown how to do this, and is encouraged - he will either refuse to conform (termination case) or he will improve. I've seen this, I've done this and it works.

Other employees see this, and morale improves. People do not want to leave that group/company. Motorola USED to be like this. When Samsung came into town, they had to offer 20%+ salary bumps to attract Motorola employees to leave. Why? Because the people at Motorola knew that they were 'safe', that they had a career and a future with the company. Then Hector Ruiz came along and killed Motorola, before moving on to AMD and killing them.

I do not subscribe to the 10% cull; because you very quickly come to the point that you are cutting good people, and replacing them with good people who you will fire in a year or so. This creates a hostile work environment (why should I welcome you, help you or agree to work with you - if I'm competing against you to keep my job?), slows projects down (people shift departments constantly, at the slightest rumor of a reduction in headcount in a particular division), and you spend a great deal of your time where 90% of your employees are waiting for 10% of the team to come up to speed with their job requirements.

Show me a company that embraces the 10% cull, and I'll show you a company that is on the way down the tubes. Companies that terminate the poor performers, not due to some obscure quota, but do to performance - tend to retain their employees for the long haul. IBM used to be famous for this, and they rose to world domination. Motorola used to embrace this, and they used to have a world-class semiconductor market, communications division, automotive parts, space, micro-controllers and cell phone groups. The people make a company great - not the managment. Management has never made a company great, but poor managment has certainly killed more than a few.

Once upon a time, a company had loyalty to it's people, and the worker's were expected to have some loyalty to the company. If the company had a rough quarter or a poor year, people pulled together and worked harder. A company USED to do layoffs to avoid going bankrupt. Workers viewed each other as extended family members - it was common for workers to get together at each other's homes on weekends and holidays. Families got to know each other, work was done in a 'team' enviroment; and if you pulled your weight and did your job - you could expect to retire with the company you worked for. 20 years of service was celebrated, opportunties for promotion were biased such that someone who had shown loyalty to the company had first dibs, over someone coming in from the outside.

Today, despite record profits, companies close plants and terminate people - so the few executives can reap huge bonus's. Getting laid off by a plant closing, business downturn, or poor managment decisions punishes employees who were powerless to avoid the mistake - but end up taking full responsibility in that they have to sell their homes, and re-locate to find work elsewhere. With the cost of housing - this means that the 401K money must be robbed today, so they can continue to make mortgage payments while they try to sell their home, and have money to bring to closing when their home sells for less than what they paid for it.

I've been there, I've had my retirment almost depleted because companies transferred jobs to India, a plant closing, terminating a project I was involved with, a company purchased and moved overseas, and a company that failed due to poor managment. Now after 20 years, I finally have solid career.

When did all this change? Why did this change? It certainly hasn't been for the better - for the USA used to lead the world in production, in technology and development. People used to matter, now each of us is just a cog in the company machine. We are all expendable, and will be dropped on a whim. I wonder why.

I'm a bit more blunt than you. I'd ask myself "What makes me believe that Doug will not stab me in the back? He betrays his co-workers, he betrays his staff - why wouldn't he use the same technique to my boss, and take my job? Then, I'd fire Doug.

A smart manager surrounds himself with smart, people he can trust, and who trust him. This is called a 'team', Doug's group is little more than a 'mob'.

Given the lack of perceiveable performance improvements over the past several years, there really isn't a need to upgrade your home PC. Back before the XBox (BX?) the PC was still a considerable factor in gaming. Today, the cost of a single video card almost justifies the cost of an XBox by itself. The internet connectivity on the gaming consoles, the video and audio streaming and the game selection/quality means that the 'need' for a gaming PC ($$$) is reduced, because the XBox or PS3 can do the same or better for less money.

To the best of my knowledge, aside from the MS Flight Simulator X program - is there a 'killer app' that will drive PC sales? The only reason I caveat MS Flight Simulator X as a PC game "Killer App" is because hours spent playing this game can be applied toward actual Flight School (under specific guidelines, planes and conditions).

"If this can save so much money why isn't the health care industry already doing it?"

Who is going to define the format? The medical industry is in this for medical reasons, not software. The medical groups each have whatever format they 'liked' in place. There has been no overwhelming reason for them to create a standardized form, because it has not been in their fiscal interest to do so.

This is not to say that there isn't a good reason - we would all profit by having some 'universal' format that all hospitals and MD's could access. But, why would you, as an independant hospital or clinic develope this? Conversely, there is a flourishing industry of Medical Transcriptionists that make a living by transferring this information into a program like "Medi-soft" for insurance billing. If you create a digital standard for your medical information, then you have to make sure that every clinic and hospital can import/export this new format into their existing billing and insurance software. Too bad the Medical industry doesn't have a IT steering committee like most other technical groups.