AJC.com > Opinion > Woman to Woman > Archives > 2006 > April > 26 > Entry
Will unbundling cable packages improve broadcast decency standards?
Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Diane Glass, a left-leaning columnist, responds.
Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Diane Glass, a left-leaning columnist, responds.
Commentary
Will unbundling cable packages improve broadcast decency standards?
Let me give you a scenario: you’re at the grocery store with your small children, and the cashier rings up your purchases. Milk, bread, eggs, diapers, Maxim men’s magazine. No, wait! “How did that get in the basket?” You stammer, as you try to shield little eyes from the cover picture, “I don’t want that!”
“I’m sorry,” the cashier says, ringing it up, “if you want the groceries, you have to buy this, too. That’ll be $27 please.”
You try again. “But I don’t want it!”
“Well, just throw it away. No one is forcing you to read it.”
You are angry, now. “I don’t want my money to support that magazine!”
The cashier shrugs. “Well, I can put your groceries back if you like.”
This, essentially, is the choice the cable company monopoly has been forcing on consumers for years. By bundling channels, they force consumers who want ESPN and CNN to also pay for FX and VH1, home of un-family-friendly programming like “Nip/Tuck” and the latest raunchy videos.
The existence of bundling means that by definition there’s a lot of cable programming that most people would prefer not to support. If cable channels were instead offered a la carte — as the FCC is now pushing for — many broadcasters would have to either change to meet what the market demands, or go out of business. I’m sure there will still be market demand for some programming that I do not agree with. But if cable is unbundled, at least my money won’t be helping them produce and broadcast it to me or other families.
Back in 1999, the Association of National Advertisers commissioned an International Communications Research study that found that 80% of U.S. adults wanted more family-friendly programming, and that number jumped to 85% and 90% among adults with various-aged kids at home. Since television decency standards have only slipped since then, I frankly think programmers will be shocked at the volume of consumers who will elect to not subsidize non-family-friendly programming. And I think we will all be pleasantly surprised to find that once market forces are allowed to work, they will push even cable programmers to clean up their act.
Rebuttal
I felt lucky when I caught an emotionally-riveting documentary while vacationing in Europe. It was the kind of reality programming you’d never see here in the States. Everyone was naked, sitting in a sauna discussing body image, while sporting nothing but their imperfectly-perfect birthday suits. If I never ventured outside of American television, I wouldn’t have seen it. Which makes me wonder if self-selected media is really as liberating at it may seem. So before we convict cable programmers of hawking trash to an unsuspecting audience, we should consider a few facts.
It’s a huge leap to assume those who checked off a survey box in favor of “family-friendly” entertainment are the beginning of the end for adult entertainment. It’s understandable for parents to want child-friendly programming but it’s quite another thing to imply that television programming is a conspiracy by lascivious television producers and not a result from public demand.
I imagine plenty of adults viewing “Nip/Tuck” on their own time, when the kids are fast asleep. Besides, what “family-friendly” actually means is so subjective that quoting statistics is a meaningless exercise. It’s like asking people if they support “family values,” a concept so sweeping that everyone agrees, conservative and liberal alike.
But under the vast generalizations you’ll find the devil in the details.
The study Shaunti cites to make her point is weakened by its source. An intelligent and informed audience will never shape future programming because the strongest support for “family-friendly” programming comes from lower-income families or families with high-school educations. The amount of parental support for family-friendly programming shrinks as the level of education increases, which means the more educated the parents the more they want sophisticated TV fare.
We could assume highfalutin educations were wasted on the witless or we could draw some insight: What good is information if we self-select what we hear? Maybe that’s not education but inculcation.
While there are many times I’d love to block out the 700 club, limiting exposure to personally objectionable programming may only create deeper chasms between opposing camps. Choice is a wonderful thing. But a separatist attitude bent on total exclusion of some media isn’t the answer to discord. Sometimes it’s just the beginning.
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By candide
May 1, 2006 07:04 AM | Link to this
American adults are in large percentages so devoid of common decency and rational good will. If cable standards are raised, how will the youth learn to be like their parents?
By bilabong
May 1, 2006 07:20 AM | Link to this
Oh, Shaunti Honey, just because the grocery store forced you to buy the magazine, it didn’t mean you had to eat it with the rest of your groceries. But I understand what you mean. Everytime I open my groceries bags at home from that grocery store, the first item I pull out is the “Blood o’ Christ” wine coolers. It seems so wholesome, but it make my kids self-righteous and lactose intolerant. Just throw those items away, first thing. They only come back when the power goes out.
By Lyrazel
May 1, 2006 07:48 AM | Link to this
So dont get cable! Duh! Put your money where you want to spend it! If you dont want the full package—opt out! Read a book, save 85/month on television shows and have a grand vacation somewhere—buy board games—buy bicycles—the list goes on and on and on. Why buy television cable if you are constantly complaining about supporting monopolies that do not support your values? Cripe give it up, Shaunti. Unplug the plug and walk away from the tube. Sure, you wont get Disney but Disney does not tell you it also owns the broadcasting of shows like Nip/Tuck…which is why that is offered in the Family Viewing packages! So dont support it…unplug for your family decency. Cable is luxury goods and is not necessary in life so stop complaining that your purchase is not buying you what you want! Dont buy it. Be a smart consumer not a whining one…
By The72John
May 1, 2006 08:07 AM | Link to this
Shaunti’s only valid point is that cable is a monopoly supported by Federal regulation. There are no viable competitors, which negatively impacts the consumer. Satellite is an indirect competitor, but is for the most part only available to homeowners and a few renters.
“Cleaning up decency standards” is just another catchphrase for “making TV reflect only my values”. Programs don’t survive if there isn’t an audience for them.
I’m not sure why a previous poster suggested a link between Nip/Tuck and Disney…Nip/Tuck runs on FX, which is a Fox channel. It also comes on at 10 PM, so…if a parent can’t control what his or her child is watching at 10 PM on a school night, maybe the cable channels aren’t the problem.
By Brian Curtis
May 1, 2006 08:20 AM | Link to this
Both Shaunti AND Diane are making the same mistake: pretending that cable content is somehow “forced into my home.” This is a marketplace situation, folks; consumers should have choice. In fact, they already do, but it’s a poor one—lousy content or no content at all.
The “unbundling” approach will offer consumers more choice and more control over what content they want to see—and what they want their families to see. Diane, you may not agree with some of their narrowminded choices, but who are you to say what they “must” be exposed to? This is a consumer/vendor situation, where any increase in the available choices is to the consumers’ benefit.
Could this have unforeseen consequences, like making less-popular “adult” content unavailable due to the overwhelming influence of prudes (i.e., Shaunti’s crowd)? Of course; and that’s why it needs to be implemented carefully. Reacting to this option with a knee-jerk cry of “censorship!” or “filth!” is simpleminded.
By Tim
May 1, 2006 08:34 AM | Link to this
like a couple people have stated… cable is not forced in your home… if you don’t want certain channels don’t get cable
By Bruce
May 1, 2006 08:37 AM | Link to this
Is it possible that the cable companies are behind this for the sole purpose to be able to charge consumers more for less? I can see where “special” packages in programming could be a bad thing.
By Renee
May 1, 2006 08:38 AM | Link to this
Good Morning everyone and missed you all!
Another ridiculous topic I see. I’m in total agreement with your comment John, and just to piggyback on what you said, channels don’t survive without an audience.
I’m sure Shaunti’s crowd would like any channel they don’t agree with, have their availability in a pay-per-view status.
It’s very simple. If you don’t agree with it, don’t put any of your money towrds it. Just like one grocery store may force you to buy the “filthy” magazine, another won’t. Research which companies are in agreement with you and your values, and frequent those establishments. Demanding that a company, whether a cable company or any other type of company, change to conform with your standards, is just ridiculous.
By E. Lewis
May 1, 2006 09:03 AM | Link to this
The first channels I wouold get rid of are 99% of those religious, sports and all the outdoor channels.
By E. Lewis
May 1, 2006 09:05 AM | Link to this
Just look at the top rated television programs. Personally, I wouldn’t want a child to watch any of them, but far be it for me to tell you what you and your children view.
By Monica
May 1, 2006 09:10 AM | Link to this
Cable companies aren’t stupid. If the FCC pushes unbundling channels, cable companies would charge a ridiculous amount per channel. “Sure, Mrs. Jones, you can choose whatever channels you want - it’s just $3 per channel.”
Those who are worried about non-family friendly shows should pay attention to what their children are exposed to. Our boys have a TV with a DVD player, but it’s not hooked up to cable. They can watch movies that we deem appropriate on that. They don’t watch cable unless we are watching with them.
I abhor most programming on Spike TV, but they do have two hours of CSI on weeknights, and an occasional marathon. I love FX. I never watch Nip/Tuck, but what other channel offers re-runs of Beverly Hills, 90210? Oops, I wasn’t supposed to admit that, was I? :)
By Jack
May 1, 2006 09:20 AM | Link to this
They should show whatever the public wants. If TV isn’t nasty enough,there is always the internet where everything can be seen.
By Chilao
May 1, 2006 09:21 AM | Link to this
Thanks for the laugh, The 700 Club.
What Shaunti neglects to mention in that nice little grocery store analogy is the person who wants only the Maxim(what is that, a Playboy-type mag with lousy articles but much better pics?…LOL), also has to buy the milk, bread, diapers, etc. just to get the Maxim. A sort of load-balancing, like health-insurance.
Not an expert on cable economics, but I would think that like the additional subscriber in a house, on a road that has the cable line, incremental cost to the cable company is Zilch, an additional program/channel on the line, spread out over millions of subscribers, is also Zilch. Combining all channels on one set price helps reduce the cost for each. Will the cable company have a lower rate for a 10-20 channel Family-Values option? Who knows.
I DO know that I have the land-line BellSouth phone package, I think they call it Total Package, it has all the bells and whistles. I called them up once to piecemeal the options since some I really did not need or want. Coming to find out, piecemeal for what I DID want would cost me about the same as the Total Package and I can only guess the same would apply to cable.
Isn’t there a V-chip in newer TVs that allow specific channels to be blocked?
Or better yet, get rid of the TV all together. I like Springsteen’s song way back, 57 Channels and nothing On. About to get DirectTV, for better DWH reception and that Discovery Channel Alaskan Crab fishermen show. Otherwise, the highlights of two different times I have had cable, in an apartment, were TNT’s Friday night Bullriding and Beavis and Butthead on MTV. LMAO. I have always found a book to be more intellectually stimulating.
Talked to a sister this weekend, about this issue, she agreed there was alot of ‘junk on’(she has an 11 and 14 year-old). but they do many family-things in general and the kids do not have their own TV, in their rooms. Takes care of any monitoring needs.
By Carlton Wyatt
May 1, 2006 09:22 AM | Link to this
I suppose Shaunti wouldn’t mind paying MORE for less channels because of “unbundling”? That is what would happen. Because the channels are bundled, the cable company gets certain deals with the programmers. Those deals would cease with unbundling, making the cost of each channel more for the cable company, thus they would pass that extra cost on to the customer. Perhaps Shaunti and her “ban Harry Potter” types should stop trying to force their “values” upon everyone else. I’ll take “Nip/Tuck” over any of those freakish religious channels any day.
Every cable box, every TV sold, every DVR sold has the capability to block any channel or program based on ratings. Can Shaunti and her type not figure that out?
By RF
May 1, 2006 09:24 AM | Link to this
Monica- shame on you for still watching 90210!!! LOL I only say that because I got hung up on reruns of Dawson’s Creek last summer! LOL
My boys too have a TV and DVD player in their playroom. I simply programmed their channels and we talk about why they shouldn’t watch certain programs. So far, so good. Some parents in my neighborhood let their kids watch whatever, whenever, so I have to be careful even letting my boys go to certain houses. So far, they’ve kept their standards and come home if their friends are watching things my boys aren’t allowed to watch. Although, I had to call a parent for letting the neighborhood kids watch Mr. and Mrs. Smith!!!! Luckily mine called a few minutes into it and came home after I nearly fell out!
By The72John
May 1, 2006 09:28 AM | Link to this
Ultimately, emerging technology and consumer demand is going to partially accomplish what Shaunti is suggesting. The traditional cable company is going to face the same changes in distribution model that the music industry already faces, and that the movie industry is beginning to face.
With broadband speeds increasing, and as access becomes more and more commonplace, industry insiders predict that an inexorable shift to on-demand viewing will occur. If start-ups like Vonage can begin to challenge the phone companies, then surely a similar start-up can make some headway against the cable companies. (I highly recommend Vonage to all you broadband users, btw).
Again, there’s nothing inherently wrong with a-la-carte access to programing. It might even be a very smart move for Comcast and its cronies. It’s the logic behind Shaunti’s argument that’s flawed, that what she perceives as indecent programming is attributable to bundling, and the cable industry “forcing” a particular show or kind of show on the viewing public. Unfortunately, audiences and viewership DO determine if a show survives. Witness the untimely demise of the brilliant Arrested Development, brought down by low numbers.
By Renee
May 1, 2006 09:32 AM | Link to this
Chilao - I have been enjoying the Alaskan Crab fisherman show on Disovery.
By Chilao
May 1, 2006 09:33 AM | Link to this
Tim - I misspelled, it is McKee Bakery in Collegedale.
72John - found the Active X option, it under security tab in IE and is still there, default is prompt, I changed to enable and it did not make any difference Friday. I DID take home FireFox 1.5 Friday, and the full last week, at home on dialup, loaded 10 times faster using Firefox then it had been here at work, using IE on a T1. And faster than IE had been loading it at home as well. So definitely an IE issue.
I have to agree with Diane’s sometimes it is just the beginning. This whole decency thing(that open to interpretation anyway), is just the beginning of regulation of all airwaves for the enforcement of the Religious Police on the rest of us.
Like I know people I would not even allow in my house with their kids. WHY? Because that particular family looks at National Geographic as porno, and I am not about to pack all mine up, just for their visit. Nor am I about to hide any Playboys I have. I read them and give them away, but once my sister and her family dropped by, her 10-year-old son, at the time, zeroed in on one REAL FAST. LOL. we had to set it aside.
But the whole Gee, the kiddies saw a breast. don’t know what to say there. LOL
By Jack
May 1, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this
“also has to buy the milk, bread, diapers, etc. just to get the Maxim.”
Sort of like buying half the drugstore just to get condoms. Surely the cutie behind the counter will be distracted by the other items and not notice them.(snicker)
By Chilao
May 1, 2006 09:38 AM | Link to this
DWH reception meant DHW - Desperate Housewives, the best show on air-wave TV.
By Julia
May 1, 2006 09:39 AM | Link to this
Chilao-actually Lex Luger is the “Total Package”. LOL
I saw him and his son at Gwinnett Place once. They were eating in the food court. I spotted him when he stood up-he’s hard to miss. (For more reasons than one!) His son plays ball with a co-worker’s son.
As far as cable goes, I’ll gladly do the $3 per channel deal. I just want a few kids channels and my soap network…and the learning channels. I don’t need 80% of the ones I pay for.
By Jack
May 1, 2006 09:46 AM | Link to this
I was off Friday and I missed all of my “invisible friends” Hope everyone had a good weekend.
By chuck
May 1, 2006 09:46 AM | Link to this
Well, Well, Well…The liberals true stripes are showing. Come on people, where is your support of CHOICE? I guess that only applies to killing babies. These are the most disingenuous arguments that I have heard from the left on any issue. I love this statement from Diane:
We could assume highfalutin educations were wasted on the witless or we could draw some insight: What good is information if we self-select what we hear? Maybe that’s not education but inculcation.
So we don’t even need a channel selector on our TV’s anymore. Diane will decide what we need to see and just pipe it into our homes. That way we can indoctrinate our children to be “tolerant”, speak with a potty mouth, and act like…well, Diane. That is the most ABSURD thing among many absurdities, that Diane has ever put forth.
So I guess that all of us non-smokers should just go to restaraunts that don’t allow smoking. We don’t need no stinking anti-smoking law. Maybe we should take the names off of films, too. That way we can just pay our money and Hollywood can decide what we get to see. After all we should NOT be allowed to self-select what we see and hear. Forget being a Braves fan or an Auburn fan. We cannot self-select what team we should root for.
Diane, I can’t believe you wrote that with a straight face.
By chuck
May 1, 2006 09:50 AM | Link to this
There is only one problem with what you said Renee. Cable companies have, in many communities, a government sponsored MONOPOLY. If you want anything besides local channels, the only option is cable or Sattelite, neither of which offer choice.
By Reason
May 1, 2006 09:53 AM | Link to this
Never ask the clerk at the video store if a certain movie has cussing in it. Most of the time they’ll say “Nah, I don’t remember any”. Then you get it home and it’s full of foul/offensive language. Society has built up such a tolerance that they’re immune to these things. And it’s unfortunate that their idea of “Family” movies are all cartoons(?) It’s amazing that Jerry Seinfeld made hundreds of millions of dollars and didn’t utter one cuss word. Maybe he’s on to something.
By Renee
May 1, 2006 09:54 AM | Link to this
So I guess that all of us non-smokers should just go to restaraunts that don’t allow smoking.
Yes, if you wish to be in a smoke-free environment.
By Monica
May 1, 2006 10:00 AM | Link to this
True, Reason, Seinfeld didn’t use cuss words. But I would hardly call his stand-up or his sit-com family friendly. I don’t want my children to watch it, especially the one about being the king of his domain!
By RF
May 1, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this
goodness chuck, you make a mountain out of a mole hill. And you do it on purpose, so John will come at you and then you can complain about him “attacking you for no reason”. You really enjoy it, don’t you?
It’s understandable for parents to want child-friendly programming but it’s quite another thing to imply that television programming is a conspiracy by lascivious television producers and not a result from public demand.
What’s so hard to understand or so “leftie” about this? You don’t like it, don’t watch it. I personally cannot stand most of the crap the 700 club and TBN show (TBN is laughable), but I respect their right to be on the air. You can’t have one extreme without the other. I choose what I and my boys watch, and I don’t want the TV police to choose. It’s about choice and you can’t legislate that beyond your own living room.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this
Well, Well, Well…The liberals true stripes are showing. Come on people, where is your support of CHOICE
Way to start off the discussion rationally - it’s always helpful to throw the liberal “slur” around first thing. That let’s everyone know that it’s going to be a reasonable discussion.
I’m pretty sure I’m in favor of choice. Watch what you want, or don’t. I wasn’t aware that you were forced to watch any channel you didn’t want to, nor are you unable to block any channel you don’t want to.
You ought to check your facts - it’s not “liberals” fighting a-la-carte programming. Heck, I’d be happy to pay for only the 20 or so channels that I watch regularly. It’s the CABLE COMPANIES. In fact, they hired Ralph Reed to lobby on their behalf, in opposition to a-la-carte programming.
Besides, as has been pointed out, Cable television isn’t forced on you, period. You choose to have cable in your homes. If you want a-la-carte options, I suggest you start petitioning your cable company for them. Use that “power of the market” your so passionate about when it suits your purpose to be so.
I guess that only applies to killing babies
Typical red-herring emotional argument. Unworthy of someone who believes himself to be “logical”.
So we don’t even need a channel selector on our TV’s anymore. Diane will decide what we need to see and just pipe it into our homes. That way we can indoctrinate our children to be “tolerant”, speak with a potty mouth, and act like…well, Diane. That is the most ABSURD thing among many absurdities, that Diane has ever put forth
Again, who is forcing you to watch these things? Who is forcing your children? No one…In fact, the only person who implies that programming should be eliminated (I’m sorry - cleaned up) is Shaunti.
By RF
May 1, 2006 10:09 AM | Link to this
chuck- choice comes in a v-chip in my tv and my remote control. How much choice did we have when we only had three major channels? We watched what they showed or we turned it off.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 10:10 AM | Link to this
So I guess that all of us non-smokers should just go to restaraunts that don’t allow smoking
Lol - missed that one, Renee - thanks for pointing this one out.
Chuck - aren’t you Mr. Free-Market Conservative? That’s what you keep saying, but then you say something like this.
Do you think that you are entitled to eat at any restaurant you want? Do you not think that a restaurant owner, a private businessman, should have the right to have a smoking restaurant if he chooses? And do not you, as a customer, have the power of the purse to frequent or not frequent such an establishment? And do not those market forces determine whether his restaurant will survive or fail?
Which is it, Chuck - ARE you a free market conservative or not?
By Mara
May 1, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this
I’m wondering if one can still get local stations via “rabbit ears” or antenna. Cable was initially supposed to be the conduit for “adult” content. It was once thought that since most television broadcasts were avialable free of charge that cable companies would be allowed to show pretty much whatever they pleased. It was thought that having to pay for content would mean anyone who objected, well, they didn’t have to pay for it. After all, most television was free at that time. Much like radio is today, so Sirius and XM are to the early cable companies. How long will it be until Shaunti and her ilk start complaining about being forced to pay for “objectionable” content bundled into their satallite radio membership?
By GOB
May 1, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this
Unfortunately, audiences and viewership DO determine if a show survives. Witness the untimely demise of the brilliant Arrested Development, brought down by low numbers.
That was the most intelligent show on tv in years. Hence where i got my name for this blog…
By RF
May 1, 2006 10:18 AM | Link to this
Mara- my parents don’t have cable and have the old fashioned antenna mounted on the chimney. What’s funny is watching my 66 yr.old dad on a ladder adjusting the doggone thing when the race gets fuzzy on Sunday!! Mom uses rabbit ears on her TV in the kitchen and they work pretty well.
By Chilao
May 1, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this
Jack - I actually listened to the first LZ again this weekend. Like I said, I stay here long enough, will get through all CDs again. LOL.. By the time I was introduced to them, everybody on to II and III. I knew the first songs, but… anyway, when I got this ten-pack, I began to understand why they really hit the scene with their first one. Nothing like their version of You Shook me. Ramble On is another of my top-10(of probably 30), but that is on LZ-II.
By Jack
May 1, 2006 10:26 AM | Link to this
Remember when they showed Psycho on TV? They came on before hand and told the parents to NOT let their children near the TV. Ah, the old days…
By Jack
May 1, 2006 10:32 AM | Link to this
Mara. Yes rabbit ears still work. Used them at our other place until we got the dish.
Chilao. Now I’ll be singing “Ramble On” all day. (that’ll drive them nuts here at the office. One day I sang Zappa all day and they threatened me with the men in white coats)
By Shaunti Is Never Happy
May 1, 2006 10:33 AM | Link to this
Shaunti and her ilk will never be happy, until all the gays are gassed, the Jews are slaves, and her particular sect of Christianity is the national religion and Sunday church-a-going is mandatory, the government chooses our jobs, our mates (of course male-female), women stay in a huts while menstrating, and birth contol is illegal and drs can be sentenced to d Shaunti and her ilk will never be happy, until all the gays are gassed, the Jews are slaves, and her particular sect of Christianity is the national religion and Sunday church-a-going is mandatory, the government chooses our jobs, our mates (of course male-female), women stay in a huts while menstruating, and birth control is illegal and drs can be sentenced to death for counseling a female patient about her body. The word sex will be punishable by death, the GOP owns the press, and nudity is forbidden, because we all know women’s bodies are dirty filthy things!!
Great! Please unbundle the packages. I won’t have to fish through all the religious programs, shopping channels, cartoons, to get to what I really want to watch. Let’s see how many of Shaunti’s stations actually make it. My money is on Desperate Housewives, Grey’s Anatomy, Nip/Tuck, The Badge…all the things she thinks we shouldn’t be watching.
Shaunti better watch out for what you wish for! That pink haired lady, Pat Robertson, Fatso Fallwell and the rest of those con-artist you love, admire and worship will go the way of the dinasour. You might actually have to start parenting instead of putting your kid in front of the TV.
By Chilao
May 1, 2006 10:35 AM | Link to this
Mara - I have an antenna atop a telephone pole(behind my house, prior owner worked for the power company), and I am 40 miles from the urban towers. Get NBC, FOX, and PBS great, and if I turn the pole it is mounted on, (a long metal pole against the telephone pole that pivots easily), I get better reception for ABC and CBS. get WBN(WPN?) as well.
the inside motor turner went out a few years ago, but I paid the owner $175 for him to leave the antenna there. Since the day I moved in, he moved out, he had planned on taking it, it not part of the sale. So when I want best reception for DHW, like last night, I just pivot the antenna, manually, outside. and pivot back when done, since my regulars, FOX/NBC/PBS best when turned back.
but when stormy/rainy, my Desperate Housewives gets snowy and static-y, CANNOT have THAT. LOL
By Jack
May 1, 2006 10:40 AM | Link to this
Is everyone boning up on their Spanish? We’re gonna need it.
By Netbanker
May 1, 2006 10:41 AM | Link to this
Good comments, all.
I think 72J nailed it for me with “If you want a-la-carte options, I suggest you start petitioning your cable company for them.” Why is Ms. Shaunti Conservative suggesting GOVERNMENT regulation or control over something that should be taken care of by market forces? Why not the call to arms to protest to cable companies the same way that boycotts have been called about American Girl (remember that blog a few months ago?) or Disney, or other companies? Why the seeming NEED to regulate citizens’ personal lives and what options are available to them? Where is the call to action for personal responsibility to monitor what one’s children are watching, to use the V-chip in a TV OR the parental controls available through the cable company?
I also think that Diane makes a good point about limiting one’s exposure to ideas that may conflict with your own. Use of the web, blogs, etc. has caused many people to consume media that only reflects their ideas and ideals. This re-inforces the idea that they are the ONLY ones that are right and any opposition is not acceptable. People already do this by choice and look at the state of American society. We’ve moved into a very US v.s. THEM polarization in a vast number of realms. We’ve become a nation where each group appears to have adopted the “You’re either with us or against us” attitude.
By Jack
May 1, 2006 10:42 AM | Link to this
” I met a girl so fair…”
By The72John
May 1, 2006 10:43 AM | Link to this
My money is on Desperate Housewives, Grey’s Anatomy, Nip/Tuck, The Badge…all the things she thinks we shouldn’t be watching
Erm…I think you might mean The Shield
By Netbanker
May 1, 2006 10:49 AM | Link to this
Much like radio is today, so Sirius and XM are to the early cable companies. Mara…EXCELLENT point! Tiara to you!! Since no one is forced to purchase cable AND it’s original intent was to provide a market alernative with content people woud PAY to watch, why do conservatives want to tinker with a market that did what it’s supposed to do? If you don’t like the product or the way it’s sold then don’t buy it!
By Shaunti Is Never Happy
May 1, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this
Touche
By RF
May 1, 2006 10:56 AM | Link to this
But Net- it’s soooo sinnnnnful, and we all know if that trash weren’t on TV then noone would do drugs, have sex, commit crimes, or become terrorists, right?? We’d all be part of the cult and drink the Kool-Aid when told!! Goodness, how will the fundies ever take over if cable TV keeps making us think???
By Jack
May 1, 2006 10:57 AM | Link to this
I’ll bet Mara would look very nice wearing just the tiara. Heehee.
By Mara
May 1, 2006 10:57 AM | Link to this
Hey Jack, RF. Glad to know that low-tech isn’t quite dead and still works pretty well!
And I have to second SiNH in pointing out that the christian broadcasting companies are staunchly against ala carte programming because they know that very, very few households would actually pay to be preached at. Actually it’d be kinda fun to find out how many households that choose CBN also choose HBO…
By The72John
May 1, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this
Much like radio is today, so Sirius and XM are to the early cable companies. Mara…EXCELLENT point! Tiara to you!! Since no one is forced to purchase cable AND it’s original intent was to provide a market alernative with content people woud PAY to watch, why do conservatives want to tinker with a market that did what it’s supposed to do? If you don’t like the product or the way it’s sold then don’t buy it
Yep - a good point. Of course, if my Sirius ever goes up from its very affordable fee to something on par with my cable, it’s going to be rapidly cancelled.
It’s really silly to try to make this a conservative -vs- liberal issue, too (another sign of that polarization Net mentioned). The simply fact is that it’s a big business -vs- consumer issue. Cable companies don’t want to abandon their current profit structure by changing their distribution model, and they are using lobbyist clout to make sure the FCC is acting in their favor. It has nothing to do with the 700 club, or Nip/Tuck, or anything else.
It’s. all. about. the. money.
By Mara
May 1, 2006 11:06 AM | Link to this
(blush) why thank you Net, Jack. I’m not usually a tiara wearing sort, but this one does bring out the sparkle in my eyes ;^)
By Jack
May 1, 2006 11:18 AM | Link to this
I read the Supreme Court backed Anna Nicole Smith. Good for her. I hope she marries the pool boy just to spite the old man’s greedy children.
By Julia
May 1, 2006 11:21 AM | Link to this
Jerry Seinfeld: You see, Elaine, the key to eating a black and white cookie is that you wanna get some black and some white in each bite. Nothing mixes better than vanilla and chocolate. And yet still somehow racial harmony eludes us. If people would only look to the cookie, all our problems would be solved.
George Costanza: Kramer goes to a fantasy camp? His whole life is a fantasy camp. People should plunk down $2000 to live like him for a week. Sleep, do nothing, fall a$$-backwards into money, mooch food off your neighbors and have sex without dating… THAT’S a fantasy camp.
[discussing George’s ATM code]
Jerry: Oh, come on, just tell me your code already. What is it?
George Costanza: I am not giving you my code.
Cosmo Kramer: I’ll bet I can guess it.
George Costanza: Pssh. Yeah. Right.
Cosmo Kramer: Oh, alright. Yeah. Uh, let’s see. Um, well, we can throw out birthdays immediately. That’s too obvious. And no numbers for you, you’re a word man. Alright, let’s go deeper. Uh, what kind of man are you? Well, you’re weak, spineless, a man of temptations, but what tempts you?
George Costanza: Huh?
Cosmo Kramer: You’re a portly fellow, a bit long in the waistband. So what’s your pleasure? Is it the salty snacks you crave? No no no no no, yours is a sweet tooth.
George Costanza: Get out of here.
Cosmo Kramer: Oh you may stray, but you’ll always return to your dark master, the cocoa bean.
George Costanza: I’m leaving.
Cosmo Kramer: [building up steam as George bolts for the door] No, and only the purest syrup nectar can satisfy you!
George Costanza: I gotta go.
Cosmo Kramer: If you could you’d guzzle it by the gallon! Ovaltine! Hershey’s!
George Costanza: Shut up!
Cosmo Kramer: Nestlé’s Quik!
George Costanza: Shut up!
(At a health club, in the sauna, Kramer is hot and flushed]
Cosmo Kramer: God… it’s like a sauna in here.
George Costanza: I have a bad feeling that whenever a lesbian looks at me they think “That’s why I’m not a heterosexual.”
George Costanza: Divorce is always hard. Especially on the kids. ‘Course I am the result of my parents having stayed together so ya never know.
Jerry:This isn’t a good time.
Telemarketer: When would be a good time to call back, sir?
Jerry: I have an idea, why don’t you give me your home number and I’ll call you back later?
Telemarketer: Umm, we’re not allowed to do that.
Jerry: Oh, I guess because you don’t want strangers calling you at home.
Telemarketer: Umm, no.
Jerry: Well, now you know how I feel.
[hangs up phone]
Jerry: I had a dream last night that a hamburger was eating me.
Jerry: Boy, a little too much chlorine in that gene pool.
Elaine: [making a toast] Here’s to those who wish us well, and those who don’t can go to hell.
Jerry: I don’t know if it’s possible, but could you people conduct the psychopath convention down the hall?
[George trying to find a parking space]
Elaine: Why don’t you park in a garage?
George Costanza: …Parking at a garage is like going to a prostitute. Why pay for it when you can apply yourself, and then may be you can get it for free.
[Knock on door]
Jerry: [opens door, and sees three Cuban guys] Yes?
Cuban Man: Jerry Seinfeld?
Jerry: Yeah. Oh, you must be Kramer’s guys. So, you got the cigars?
Cuban Man: What cigars?
Jerry: Kramer told me I was supposed to pick up some Cubans.
Cuban Man: Yes. We are the Cubans.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 11:26 AM | Link to this
I read the Supreme Court backed Anna Nicole Smith. Good for her. I hope she marries the pool boy just to spite the old man’s greedy children
Just…randomly introducing new topics so early, Jack? :-)
Well, in response, I’m sure that the old guy felt he got his money’s worth, so let the trashy ho have the money!
By Billy
May 1, 2006 11:27 AM | Link to this
Well, what if I want ABC so I can watch “Lost”, but don’t want my money going to produce more seasons of “Dancing With the Stars”? Can we unbundle the specific shows?
Can I get rid of the half dozen religious channels and replace them with a couple of adult channels for the same price? I shouldn’t be forced to pay for preaching when all I want to see are some Tig Ol’ Bitties.
Seriously, I am all for unbundling, but not because of decency. I want more choice. I’ve got a bunch of channels right now, but I only watch about a fifth of them with any regularity at all. With half of them I never even bother checking the listings. Give me the choice to pick some channels a la carte, but do it because it’s better for the customer, not because it will “improve decency”. There’s nothing on TV anywhere more indecent than the crap running through Pat Robertson’s head.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 11:27 AM | Link to this
Julia…what was your point, exactly?
By Renee
May 1, 2006 11:32 AM | Link to this
Good point Billy.
By google pr main
May 1, 2006 11:34 AM | Link to this
Welcome!!! http://www.areaseo.com/contacts/ google pr. [URL=http://www.areaseo.com]pagerank 5[/URL]: SE marketing, High Rankings, SEO consultant. Also [url=http://www.areaseo.com]online pr16[/url] from google pr .
By Jack
May 1, 2006 11:35 AM | Link to this
I wanted to throw that one in for Justin.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this
Can I get rid of the half dozen religious channels and replace them with a couple of adult channels for the same price? I shouldn’t be forced to pay for preaching when all I want to see are some Tig Ol’ Bitties
Please don’t ever post this phrase again - I think I just snorted part of my brain through my nose, and my co-workers are all looking at me strangely.
I’m in total agreement on your point, though. IF it will cut my costs, I’m completely in favor of a-la-carte channel selection. I think right now that’s a big if, because there is no significant competition for the cable companies.
Well - no LEGAL competition. Torrents are a different story.
By Julia
May 1, 2006 11:43 AM | Link to this
George Costanza:Why do they make the condom packets so hard to open?
Jerry: Probably to give the woman a chance to change her mind.
Jerry: Have ya been to the Motor Vehicle Bureau? Its a leper colony there.
Elaine: So, basically what you’re saying is 95% of the population is undatable?
Jerry: UNDATABLE.
Elaine: So how are all these people gettin’ together?
Jerry: Alcohol.
George Costanza: So I’m the bad boy. I’ve never been the bad boy before.
Jerry: Why not? You’ve been the bad employee, the bad son, the bad friend…
George Costanza: Yes, yes, yes…
Jerry: The bad fiancé, the bad dinner guest, the bad credit risk…
George Costanza: OK, the point is made.
Jerry: The bad date, the bad sport, the bad citizen…
[George leaves]
Jerry: The bad tipper.
By Tim
May 1, 2006 11:43 AM | Link to this
lol @ Jack
By RF
May 1, 2006 11:44 AM | Link to this
There’s nothing on TV anywhere more indecent than the crap running through Pat Robertson’s head.
ROFLMBO!!! No wonder he’s such a good preacher. He practices what he preaches against!!
By The72John
May 1, 2006 11:47 AM | Link to this
Wow, could we maybe save the long cut-and-paste jokes for Friday, please?
It’s already hard enough to get the blog to load by Wednesday without throwing in completely irellevant fluff.
By Julia
May 1, 2006 11:48 AM | Link to this
George Costanza:So, did you get your new plates?
Cosmo Kramer: Oh… yeah. I got my new plates. But they mixed them up. Somebody got mine and I got their vanity plates.
George Costanza: What do they say?
Cosmo Kramer: A*******man.
Jerry: A*******man?
Cosmo Kramer: Yeah. A*******man, Jerry. I’m Cosmo Kramer, the A*******man!
Jerry: Who would order a license plate that says “A*******man”?
George Costanza: Maybe they’re Wilt Chamberlain’s.
Jerry: It doesn’t have to be someone who gets a lot of women. It could be just some guy with a big a$$.
Cosmo Kramer: Yeah, or it could be a proctologist.
Jerry: Yeah. Proctologist.
George Costanza: Come on! No doctor would put that on his car.
Cosmo Kramer: Have you ever met a proctologist? Well, they usually have a very good sense of humor. You meet a proctologist at a party, don’t walk away. Plant yourself there, because you will hear the funniest stories you’ve ever heard. See, no one wants to admit to them that they stuck something up there. Never! It’s always an accident. Every proctologist story ends in the same way: “It was a million to one shot, Doc. Million to one.”
Jerry:[George plans to name his first child “Seven”] Awright, let’s see. How about Mug? Mug Costanza, that’s original. Or uh, Ketchup? Pretty name for a girl.
George Costanza: Alright, you having a good time there?
Jerry: [Jerry is in the kitchen, and opens a cupboard] I got fifty right here in the cupboard. How about Bisquik? Pimento. Gherkin. Sauce. Maxwell House.
George Costanza: Awright already! This is a very key issue with me, Jerry. I had this name for a long time.
By Julia
May 1, 2006 11:57 AM | Link to this
George Costanza: And to think I’d fail at failing…
Jerry: Aw, come on, now.
George Costanza: I feel like I cant do anything wrong.
Jerry: Nonsense. You do everything wrong.
George Costanza: You think so?
Jerry: Absolutely. I have no confidence in you.
George Costanza: Well, I guess I’ll just have to pick myself up, dust myself off, and throw myself right back down again.
Jerry: That’s the spirit. You suck.
Cosmo Kramer:You know, they botched my vasectomy?
Jerry: They botched it?
Cosmo Kramer: I’m even more potent now.
By Billy
May 1, 2006 11:58 AM | Link to this
Yes Julia. Please hold off on the long posts that are unrelated to the topic of the week.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 12:09 PM | Link to this
JULIA
If you are trying to point out that television has content that some people would deem “family unfriendly” then congratulations, you have won the “That’s a No-Brainer” award for the week.
If you are trying to make some OTHER point, then please do so, and stop the bloody cut-and-pastes.
By Mara
May 1, 2006 12:10 PM | Link to this
Did anyone actually read through any of Julia’s Seinfeld posts? Lord knows the T.V. program was barely worth watching….
By Chilao
May 1, 2006 12:14 PM | Link to this
ditto for the Seinfeld stuff. yuck.
but think they may have fixed that slug-load, may be a little premature, for me to say that, but it loading super great this morning. I have FireFox all ready to install at work, if it gets bad. LOL. As an ITer, with admin priv on my box, I can do that sort of thing.
Julia’s point(perhaps) may be that much of Seinfeld was adult in nature. and?……that means? what, exactly?
If I did not like that terrible adult stuff on TV, or that Sunday morning hicks-ville preacher, what do I do? I CHANGE THE #@&% channel. Real Simple Concept.
By chuck
May 1, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this
RF, that would be SO TRUE IF cable companies did not have a MONOPOLY. In most communities you only have one choice so there IS NO FREE MARKET. Most communities give exclusive franchises to cable companies. For those who have more than 1 company, most of the time they choose not to wire areas where there is service already because it isn’t profitable to do so. I live in the central part of the city so I have 3 different choices but most people don’t have the options that I have. It has really helped me to keep my costs down. I just call my provider anytime I get an offer from a competitor and they give me whatever deal is out there.
As someone noted, the cable companies are AGAINST a la carte programming because they get PAID for carrying certain channels like the shopping networks and so forth. My televisions have no v-chips and I only have one digital cable box, so I can’t block channels from the other tv’s. With a la carte programming I could eliminate probably 30 of my 90+ channels.
Diane outlined the liberal case very well. The reason MOST on the left don’t want a la carte programming is because they want this trash to be available to kids. IT IS about indoctrination…but not by parents.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this
Did anyone actually read through any of Julia’s Seinfeld posts? Lord knows the T.V. program was barely worth watching….
Oh, you and I are going to have to disagree on that point.
Chil - it ALWAYS seems to work fine on monday…it’s only later on that it moves more slowly than my old 286.
By chuck
May 1, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this
Oh, and by the way…a la carte programming is the definition of FREE MARKET. I only buy the channels that I want. It is the only way to get a free market within the monopolistic system of cable companies.
By Jack
May 1, 2006 12:23 PM | Link to this
Hey Chuck. My employer is going to be offering TV via phone lines. We are going to kick the cable company’s butts.
By chuck
May 1, 2006 12:24 PM | Link to this
Yes Chilao, you have the right to change the channel. The problem is that in order to bring the Braves and ESPN, the Discovery channel, and HGTV into my house I have to have cable which also brings MTV trash and QVC/HSN crap and OTHER stuff that I don’t want. The technology is available to bring in ONLY those channels that I want, but cable companies will not allow it because they are getting money from these other channels AND because they have a monopoly.
By chuck
May 1, 2006 12:27 PM | Link to this
I hope so Jack. I’m for it if it will save me money.
By RF
May 1, 2006 12:27 PM | Link to this
The reason MOST on the left don’t want a la carte programming is because they want this trash to be available to kids.
Really?? Soooo, I must be a rightie then because I don’t let my kids watch trash.
IT IS about indoctrination…but not by parents.
Well, there’s today’s over-generalization of the day. Prove that one with facts. Are your really that paranoid about those dang libruls?
I agree, by the way, that choice in what channels you buy would be nice, but let’s get past the political slam-fest and try to keep it civil this week, shall we??
By Tim
May 1, 2006 12:29 PM | Link to this
The reason MOST on the left don’t want a la carte programming is because they want this trash to be available to kids.
I thought the jokes were saved for Fridays?
By The72John
May 1, 2006 12:32 PM | Link to this
The reason MOST on the left don’t want a la carte programming is because they want this trash to be available to kids. IT IS about indoctrination…but not by parents
Television is about INDOCTRINATION now? How ludicrous. And how utterly typical of the religious right. Because they are so worried about thought control, they assume others must be as well.
You do understand that as a parent you can turn off any program you don’t want your child to watch, right? You can activate your v-chip, use the rating locks on your cable box…
Chuck’s so anxious to rant and rave about some religious conservative issue or another that he isn’t paying attention to the fact that no one is disagreeing that a-la-carte programming could be a good thing. Once again, we have to make this some vast social conspiracy when it’s really about money.
Religious fanatics.
By Monica
May 1, 2006 12:32 PM | Link to this
“Did anyone actually read through any of Julia’s Seinfeld posts? Lord knows the T.V. program was barely worth watching…”
Okay, Mara, NO SOUP FOR YOU!! Sorry, I couldn’t resist!
By The72John
May 1, 2006 12:34 PM | Link to this
Yes Chilao, you have the right to change the channel. The problem is that in order to bring the Braves and ESPN, the Discovery channel, and HGTV into my house I have to have cable which also brings MTV trash and QVC/HSN crap and OTHER stuff that I don’t want. The technology is available to bring in ONLY those channels that I want, but cable companies will not allow it because they are getting money from these other channels AND because they have a monopoly
Watching the Braves is a choice.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 12:35 PM | Link to this
Hey Chuck. My employer is going to be offering TV via phone lines. We are going to kick the cable company’s butts
Mmm…I told Bellsouth ‘cya when I got Vonage. No tv-over-phone for me.
By Justin
May 1, 2006 12:44 PM | Link to this
I would just like the option to pick and choose which channels I receive via cable or satellite. Half of the channels I don’t watch anyway and it would be best ala carte.
By chuck
May 1, 2006 12:48 PM | Link to this
RF, what uncivil thing have I said to you OR about you. My comments have been directed to what Diane said. When I addressed you it was about the monopoly of the cable systems which you have not yet addressed.
This is a “crossfire” type column. Shaunti represents the conservative side and Diane represents the liberal side. Since it was HER comments I objected to I used the term liberal because that is who she claims to represent.
By RF
May 1, 2006 12:48 PM | Link to this
I may be uninformed here, but I thought satellite was becoming the competition for cable. The cable companies will go the way of Ma Bell eventually, don’t you think? Sooner or later, technology is going to have it all coming in through the phone line anyway, so the monopoly will be AT&T in the future, seems to me.
By Chilao
May 1, 2006 12:50 PM | Link to this
The problem is that in order to bring the Braves and ESPN, the Discovery channel, and HGTV into my house I have to have cable which also brings MTV trash and QVC/HSN crap
those are on my list of DON’T NEEDS LOL (People really need ESPN? what is this world coming to?)
oh, wait, isn’t that Alaskan crab fishermen on Discovery Channel? Well, have survived quite well without it(the show), and have done some vessels like that anyway(why the appeal for me, nothing like being top of the wheelhouse, not knowing if it is going to roll over or not, dang, that is living. LOL).
By Netbanker
May 1, 2006 12:52 PM | Link to this
Oh, and by the way…a la carte programming is the definition of FREE MARKET. I only buy the channels that I want. It is the only way to get a free market within the monopolistic system of cable companies. Well, Chuck, way to nicely NARROW the market. Isn’t the real definition of free market in relation to television inclusive of free broadcasts and pay options (cable, satelite, direct tv, and via phone lines)?
By Monica
May 1, 2006 12:53 PM | Link to this
RF, I thought that sattelite was cable competition until someone told me that DirecTV was owned by Media One (or Comcast, or something like that). Anyone know if this is true?
By The72John
May 1, 2006 12:54 PM | Link to this
I would just like the option to pick and choose which channels I receive via cable or satellite. Half of the channels I don’t watch anyway and it would be best ala carte
What if a-la-carte is only marginally less expensive than your current cable bill? Would that be best?
What if it winds up being more expensive?
The only way that a-la-carte selection WOULD be better would be if it represents a significant reduction in costs. The content issue is simply a red herring thrown out by social conservatives to try to whip up more “culture war” frenzy. Everyone has control of what they watch, and SHOULD have control of what their children watch.
That said - if you could create a viable alternative to cable that would allow you to pick and choose only the channels you watch at a significant reduction in costs, then heck yeah, I would be all for it.
I keep mentioning Vonage becasue I see it as an excellent point of comparison. The phone industry is similarly monopolistic and consumers have very few choices when it comes to traditional phone service. However, with Vonage I pay $14.99 a month for 500 minutes of talk time anywhere in the US. For $24.99 I could have UNLIMITED talk time. That includes all the features of regular phone service: call-waiting, caller ID, voice mail, multi-line conferencing, forwarding, etc. PLUS it has extra features, like e-mail forwarding of voice mail in .wav format so that you can listen to it through the e-mail, automatic forwarding to a second phone if your network goes down temporarily, etc.
If someone could create an alternative like that to cable, then Comcast and its cronies would be sweating buckets and bending over backwards to compete.
By chuck
May 1, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this
Yes john, I understand that very well, but I’m not always home when my kids are. I don’t have v-chips in my TV and it is not a matter of choice when you are just flipping through the channels and an expletive, or a dismembered body or a naked one comes up. If I don’t want those in my house I have to give up things that I do want. That makes NO SENSE.
If the technology is available and you can choose what channels you want, why would anyone be against that…especially those on the left supposedly represented by Diane.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 12:57 PM | Link to this
I may be uninformed here, but I thought satellite was becoming the competition for cable. The cable companies will go the way of Ma Bell eventually, don’t you think? Sooner or later, technology is going to have it all coming in through the phone line anyway, so the monopoly will be AT&T in the future, seems to me
Satellite isn’t considered a direct competitor because it isn’t consistently available to all potential cable users. Most renters, for example, aren’t able to use satellite. It’s an indirect competitor at best.
By RF
May 1, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this
Chuck— I didn’t say you were addressing me personally. I was hoping to point out that you seemed to be deliberately trying to provoke attack by making ridiculous generalizations about liberals which you know will get a rise out of some. What comments you ask??
The liberals true stripes are showing. Come on people, where is your support of CHOICE? I guess that only applies to killing babies.
and then there’s this one:
The reason MOST on the left don’t want a la carte programming is because they want this trash to be available to kids.
Sooo, when john starts calling you names, just remember you opened the can of worms first today.
By Chilao
May 1, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this
DirectTV just may be a way to get cable to rural America, with the advances of satellite technology, since it sure alot cheaper(for the cable companies) than stringing all those telephone poles with cable.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 01:02 PM | Link to this
Sooo, when john starts calling you names, just remember you opened the can of worms first today
I think I’ll let him hang himself on this one. His true ideological obsessions are really showing through with this non-topic.
By Netbanker
May 1, 2006 01:02 PM | Link to this
It just occured to me that this entire topic sounds a lot like whining about wanting our cake and eating it too. Seems like everyone WANTS cable for the offering, but since it doesn’t give them exactly what they want we need to use the FCC to force a-la-carte options.
Bundling is ALWAYS cheaper as a delivery mechanism. It will take a heck of a lot of changes to systems to enable and track/bill what every single household selects. The cost of that type of infrastructure will have to be supported by…oh let’s take a guess here…fee increases. It would be a billing and administrative NIGHTMARE! Anyone who thinks they’ve had billing issues in the past over cable TV just wait until a-la-carte!
Chilao you got my back on this from an IT perspective?
By GOB
May 1, 2006 01:04 PM | Link to this
Hey Chuck. My employer is going to be offering TV via phone lines. We are going to kick the cable company’s butts.
Too bad it isnt going to happen in the next 10 years…
By Monica
May 1, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this
Sorry for the sp error - I had two t’s instead of two l’s (satellite).
By chuck
May 1, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this
I’m not sure what you mean NetB. I don’t think anyone is arguing that those things be made UNAVAILABLE. The question is whether or not WITHIN those choices we have the additional choice to select the channels that we want included in our homes. That doesn’t NARROW the market. It does force the various cable/satellite networks to look at their content to determine if it is reaching the market they want to reach. It could ultimately affect content offerings in the long run. It may also increase offerings as smaller “niche” networks come into the market place.
By Chilao
May 1, 2006 01:10 PM | Link to this
NetB - yeap, I pointed out the economies of scale issues related to bundling in my first post, for both delivery and content. read between the lines perhaps but that is what I meant.
Now blaming us programmers for billing issues, now that a whole other ballgame. LOL and (Joking!)
have to hire all those additional data entry folk, with all the errors they make, dang… (too funny.)
By Netbanker
May 1, 2006 01:10 PM | Link to this
If I don’t want those in my house I have to give up things that I do want. That makes NO SENSE. And here’s an example of that whining I mentioned. It’s about CHOICE and SACRIFICE. The 1st Amendment does not ever guarantee freedom from being offended, shocked, or morally challenged. You want to live a certain way then you make a CHOICE based on what is most important. If what you don’t want in the house is more important than the pieces you do want, then make the sacrifice or shut up and learn to live the bad or find a way to ameliorate it.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 01:12 PM | Link to this
Bundling is ALWAYS cheaper as a delivery mechanism. It will take a heck of a lot of changes to systems to enable and track/bill what every single household selects. The cost of that type of infrastructure will have to be supported by…oh let’s take a guess here…fee increases. It would be a billing and administrative NIGHTMARE! Anyone who thinks they’ve had billing issues in the past over cable TV just wait until a-la-carte
Comcast already has a digital on-demand delivery service in place for both regular and pay-per-view content. I don’t think it would be TOO difficult ultimately to extend this technology to include the kind of channel selection we’re discussing.
Hence my qualification to Justin - the only way this would be truly beneficial would be if it DID result in significant cost reduction. That’s a big maybe.
By Billy
May 1, 2006 01:12 PM | Link to this
The “OnDemand” content is what would be nice. Movies and some premium channels have already become available like that. Of course, it would work out to a pay-per-view system that would see plenty of quality programs that have less-than-mass appeal fall off the face of the planet. I mean, I see plenty of shows on TLC, Discovery, the History Channel, etc, that I like, but I doubt I’d have ever watched them were I paying for them on a per-show basis…
By GOB
May 1, 2006 01:15 PM | Link to this
The cost of that type of infrastructure will have to be supported by…oh let’s take a guess here…fee increases. It would be a billing and administrative NIGHTMARE!
And if even in reality it wasnt a billing or administrative problem, you can be sure we would be told that it is as a way to justify fee increases.
By chuck
May 1, 2006 01:22 PM | Link to this
Sorry for the copy and paste, but this article is right on point. This is only the first half of the article. If you want to read the rest of it go to:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/chi-0602100152feb10,1,1472568.story?coll=chi-business-utl
Cable a la carte endorsed FCC study finds most would save
By Jon Van Tribune staff reporter Published February 10, 2006
Most cable TV customers would save money if allowed to pay for only the channels they want to watch, a report from the Federal Communications Commission concluded Thursday, reversing an earlier finding that so-called a la carte programming would raise cable bills.
The report set off howls of protest from the cable industry, praise from consumer advocates and mixed reactions from special interest groups trying to calculate whether mandated channel choices help or hurt their causes.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a longtime a la carte advocate, praised the new FCC study and said he would introduce legislation next week to require channel choice.
“The report confirms what I have believed for years: If consumers are allowed to choose the channels their families view, then their monthly cable bill will be less,” McCain said.
The cable industry’s main trade group, the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, does not support the notion of a la carte programming.
“Over the last 25 years, the American free enterprise system created the most diverse video programming on earth with the best value for the customer,” said Kyle McSlarrow, the group’s president. “It is disappointing that the updated report relies on assumptions that are not in line with the reality of the marketplace.”
FCC Chairman Kevin Martin said last year that he ordered the agency’s staff to restudy the matter because assumptions used for a previous study were flawed.
The 2004 report, ordered by then-FCC Chairman Michael Powell, concluded that mandating channel choice could boost cable bills by as much as 30 percent. This stemmed from the expectation that people would watch less TV and drive up costs of equipment, marketing and customer service for cable operators, which would pass those higher costs on to customers.
The new study, which assumes most customers watch 17 or fewer channels, found that viewers could cut their monthly bills by up to 13 percent if they paid only for the channels they want.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 01:24 PM | Link to this
And here’s an example of that whining I mentioned. It’s about CHOICE and SACRIFICE. The 1st Amendment does not ever guarantee freedom from being offended, shocked, or morally challenged. You want to live a certain way then you make a CHOICE based on what is most important. If what you don’t want in the house is more important than the pieces you do want, then make the sacrifice or shut up and learn to live the bad or find a way to ameliorate it
True. I don’t want to watch The 700 Club, or any of the other shows like it…so…I just don’t turn to those channels. Very simple. No self-righteous hysteria about having “those shows” in “my home”. No wailing and gnashing of teeth because in some Schroedinger’s Cat-like quantum reality a different me might have turned to Pat Robertson instead of Supernatural.
Which brings us back to “Content is irrelevant - cost is everything”.
By chuck
May 1, 2006 01:27 PM | Link to this
UHHHHH NETB. Wouldn’t a la carte BE a way to ameliorate the problem? You are talking about FREE MARKET where there IS no free market. Since NONE of these companies OFFERS a la carte AND since most communities have only one cable company (a monopoly) how do you suggest the free market SHOULD work in this environment.
Look at the article I posted.
In this instance, Shaunti’s analogy is exactly on target.
By RF
May 1, 2006 01:38 PM | Link to this
Seems the issue isn’t about free market, but what that free market would cost the consumer. If we were billed by channel chosen/programs viewed, it would I am sure, end up costing us more. As if cable isn’t expensive enough now, we’ll ultimately end up paying for the change. Wasn’t the break up of Ma Bell supposed to increase competition, thereby lowering prices?? My phone bill has only gone up since.
By RF
May 1, 2006 01:41 PM | Link to this
The 1st Amendment does not ever guarantee freedom from being offended, shocked, or morally challenged. You want to live a certain way then you make a CHOICE based on what is most important. If what you don’t want in the house is more important than the pieces you do want, then make the sacrifice or shut up and learn to live the bad or find a way to ameliorate it.
Amen, brotha, amen!! You don’t like it, don’t watch it, or turn the dang thing off. Seems awfully simple, doesn’t it?
By Julia
May 1, 2006 01:41 PM | Link to this
Jerry: I hear that all the time.
Elaine: What?
Jerry: That I’m gay. People think I’m gay.
Elaine: People ask me that about you all the time.
Jerry: Yeah, because I’m thin, I’m single, and I’m neat.
George Costanza: Guess that leaves me in the clear…
George Costanza: I was free and clear. I was living the dream. I was stripped to the waist eating a block of cheese the size of a car battery.
Jerry: Before we go any further, I’d just like to point out how disturbing it is that you equate eating a block of cheese with some sort of bachelor paradise.
George Costanza: Oh, see? that’s why I don’t have cable in my house. Because of that naked station. If I had that in my house, I would never turn it off. I wouldn’t sleep, I wouldn’t eat. Eventually, firemen would have to break through the door, they’d find me sitting there in my pajamas with drool coming down my face.
By RF
May 1, 2006 01:43 PM | Link to this
And if even in reality it wasnt a billing or administrative problem, you can be sure we would be told that it is as a way to justify fee increases.
Somebody’s gotta get the CEO a new Lear Jet. I mean, who wants the big man flying around in less than the best?
By Jack
May 1, 2006 01:45 PM | Link to this
RF. Yet again the gov’t screws something up. Como Estas?
By Renee
May 1, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this
Chuck - any problems you have with not being home with your kids, or not having a v-chip or any other list of problems, is what it is; your problem. Since you seem to have personal regulatory problems, you want to pass them on to the members of society who are having no problems.
So lets say while flipping through, one of your children does flip by a scantily clad woman? OMG, they’ve seen it. Now what? Life is a downhill spiral of drugs, depresion, and anger to the family?
I would think they would get over it, along with proper explanation from adults in the household.
By Chilao
May 1, 2006 01:49 PM | Link to this
The new study, which assumes most customers watch 17 or fewer channels, found that viewers could cut their monthly bills by up to 13 percent if they paid only for the channels they want.
We are talking big-dollar savings then, and then be able to only get what we want. Bill of $40 * 0.13= $5.20, so bill is reduced to $35. 2 burritos or so?
How much for three channels, instead of 17? Oh, there’s that pesty minimum. LOL
By Reason
May 1, 2006 01:50 PM | Link to this
The72john, Last week Diane began her column “Religious morality…” “Way to start off the discussion rationally”, huh? Keep the Seinfeld quotes coming Julia!
By The72John
May 1, 2006 01:50 PM | Link to this
JULIA. Seriously…you’ve been asked nicely numerous times, now STFU. Geeze. Are you freaking LEARNING IMPARIED? Make a g******* point or go away.
How’s THAT for indecent material, huh?
By The72John
May 1, 2006 01:53 PM | Link to this
So lets say while flipping through, one of your children does flip by a scantily clad woman? OMG, they’ve seen it. Now what? Life is a downhill spiral of drugs, depresion, and anger to the family?
I think we all know that it’s IDEAS that Chuck is afraid of.
By Scalia
May 1, 2006 01:58 PM | Link to this
I agree about the a la carte. But…having channels that I never watch available has shown me that some shows are actually worth watching on those channels.
And Billy, the tig ol bitties was hilarious.
Chilao…Desperate Housewives rocked last night. Bree, Gabby, and Lynette are my favorites. They will manipulate any situation to get what they want.
RF….I love Dawson’s Creek. I woke up early last summer just to watch the reruns on TBS.
By FatMoose
May 1, 2006 01:59 PM | Link to this
Do you all understand how much WORSE TV would get if a-la-carte was the standard?
The only stations that could be opted for in that world are the ones that generate the most revenue.
And which ones are those? The exact simple minded and “lewd” ones that many are complaining about. Look at the top 20 shows or top 5 channels…that is what your options will consist from.
Sundance would die as would history channel and many more like them. Chuck, MTV would be one of the few you could choose in the world you are avocating.
Look at the movie theater for more proof if needed. 99% of the movies are crap and address the lowest common denominator.
I agree with NetB, a-la-carte sounds nice but that is because “having and eating your cake too” always SOUNDS nice.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 02:01 PM | Link to this
The72john, Last week Diane began her column “Religious morality…” “Way to start off the discussion rationally”, huh? Keep the Seinfeld quotes coming Julia
Identifying a philosophy and using a word in a perjorative fashion are two very different things. Particularly when one follows up with an inflammatory comment about “killing babies”.
We all know that Chuck wasn’t using “liberal” to identify a specific philosophy, he was using it in the “those dirty liberals are ruining the country” manner.
By Chilao
May 1, 2006 02:01 PM | Link to this
Will unbundling cable packages improve broadcast decency standards?
to be facetious: not sure broadcast decency standards an issue even if cable is unbundled. We all know what I get right now over the airwaves on that FOX channel. LMAO
Just on COPS or AMW alone, geez….and then that AI, all those skimpy outfits(skirts above the knees even, gasp), and that The O.C show. geeez.
Reminds me I was in a PUBLIX this weekend, they had opague-ish slip-covers for magazines like Teen People, Cosmo, Redbook, if there was a bikini babe on the cover. Springtime even. I know they are based in Lakeland FL but come’on. Does that mean no one goes to the beach anymore?
By Renee
May 1, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this
I agree, Desperate Housewives WAS awesome last night. Gabby almost brought tears to my eyes at the end. The beginning was hilarious.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 02:03 PM | Link to this
Well, it’s monday - FM is here to tell us what simpletons we all are and how he is intellectually and spiritually superior to all of us.
Thanks, FM. Wouldn’t know how to start the week off without you.
By Scalia
May 1, 2006 02:06 PM | Link to this
Dang John, I actually am enjoying reading the Seinfeld quotes. The point that Julia is making is: just because Seinfeld didn’t utter a cuss word or expletive does not mean that the content is any better.
I really hope that one day, Americans will get over their obsession with nudity. A naked breast…the world is going to tilt off of its axis and fall into the sun.
By Netbanker
May 1, 2006 02:07 PM | Link to this
You are talking about FREE MARKET where there IS no free market. It all depends on how one defines the free market. I’m choosing not to make it about the cable television market since there ARE alternatives to this type of pay to view delivery that are also pay to view as well as free. Chuck, you are deciding to focus on a slice of the television market and talking about free market within the confines of that delivery channel.
Isn’t a move to force change to a la carte through the FCC an attempt to INCREASE the regulation of business? If enough consumers demand it by taking their TV dollars elsewhere then the companies will change. THAT is a free market and I don’t hear anyone calling for that. No one is forcing individuals to spend their dollars with a cable provider in order to view TV if they don’t want to…unless you live in a condo that supplies cable and the cost is included in monthly HOA fees.
I don’t trust either FCC study because all they needed to do was to change the assumptions and viola!…we get the results we want to support our position. How about letting customers decide with their dollars?
By Jack
May 1, 2006 02:10 PM | Link to this
John. That is just the way he is.
“Oh Lord it’s hard to be humble when you’re perfect in every way”
Ramble On.
By Julia
May 1, 2006 02:12 PM | Link to this
George Costanza: Why would I spend seven dollars to see a movie that I could watch on TV?
Cosmo Kramer: Well, why go to a fine restaurant, when you can just stick something in the microwave? Why go to the park and fly a kite, when you can just pop a pill?
[George is eating all the shrimp]
Riley: Hey George, the ocean called, they’re running out of shrimp.
George Costanza: Yeah, well, the jerk store called, they’re running out of you.
Riley: What’s the difference? You’re their all-time best seller.
George Costanza: Yeah well… I had sex with your wife.
Board member: His wife is in a coma.
George Costanza: [while waiting in a restaurant, Elaine refuses a bet of $50 to walk over to a table full of strangers and start eating an egg roll] For fifty bucks I’d put my face in their soup and blow.
By chuck
May 1, 2006 02:15 PM | Link to this
So Renee, choice that PROTECTS children is BAD.
The naivete’ on this board is astounding. I’ve read a number of articles on this topic and it seems that almost all of the cable companies are AGAINST a la carte programming. What does that tell you? If you have any common sense, it should tell you that prices will go DOWN if a la carte programming goes into effect. OR, do you think that the cable companies are AGAINST something that will enable them to make MORE money.
By chuck
May 1, 2006 02:21 PM | Link to this
Senator John McCain who is considering attaching an amendment to a bill that forces cable and satellite companies to OFFER a la carte programming put it this way:
“When I go to the grocery store to buy a quart of milk, I don’t have to buy a package of celery and a bunch of broccoli,” McCain said in an interview on Wednesday. “I don’t like broccoli.” He argues that it’s not an either-or situation for cable companies: They could continue to offer packages for consumers who wanted them and a la carte for other viewers.
That really makes arguments against a la carte programming, moot. If the bill allows them to sell content both ways(bundling and a la carte) who could POSSIBLY be against it? You can buy it the way you want to and I can buy it the way I want to. Just like Burger King. Have it your way.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 02:23 PM | Link to this
Julia, if you find the things you’ve been posting (incessantly) offensive, then you are the biggest prude on the planet.
You still have yet to make a point beyond “Ooo look, I can cut-and-paste Seinfeld”. I can find material in the Bible that is FAR racier, more sexual and more “taboo” than ANYTHING you have posted.
By Brian Curtis
May 1, 2006 02:23 PM | Link to this
Chuck, you’ll notice that no one here is agreeing with Diane, and no liberals are fighting the a la carte/unbundling initiative… so there goes your “lockstep liberals” argument. Diane really isn’t representing the “liberal side” at all here, since liberals are solidly behind the idea of a la carte programming.
And FM, I understand that bundling enables us to enjoy price breaks. But I don’t want the SAME channels for less money; I want FEWER channels for less money. Specifically, only those channels that actually interest me. And because of local cable monpolies, I have virtually no choice in what programming’s available—it’s all or nothing. That’s not acceptable. So let’s see how the prices would break down, per channel, in an a la carte plan, before we condemn it as unworkable.
By Helen Lovejoy
May 1, 2006 02:26 PM | Link to this
Won’t someone think of the children? Oh, won’t someone PLEASE think of the children?
By The72John
May 1, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this
Would someone please tell Chuck that the board consensus is that if, in fact, a-la-carte programming would represent a cost savings for the consumer, then no one is really opposed to it? Apparently he is so carried away will telling everyone how naive they are and using ALL CAPS that he has failed to appreciate that point.
He isn’t happy unless he’s being intellectually “superior” to everyone else, it would seem.
By Jack
May 1, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this
Now John, make up your mind. Is it Chuck or Moose?
The cable companies are making “X” money. Do you really think they will set things up so they can get less than “X” ?
By FatMoose
May 1, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this
And J72 is the resident a*******hole without a purpose.
Well, it’s monday - FM is here to tell us what simpletons we all are and how he is intellectually and spiritually superior to all of us.
Thanks, FM. Wouldn’t know how to start the week off without you.
You are just a pi$$y boy - name calling and all.
Kudos for showing no more intelligence than you expect; what a hypocrite.
Or did you have a point to make and your anger issue took over again? Seems to always be in control of you john - what a sorry way to live.
Ummm, Exactly where did I use name calling or demeaning words? Oh yea, I didn’t!
Kind of have to wonder about someone who FINDS offense in everything, or performs pre-emptive strikes out of fear of being hurt. I remember you from gradeschool - the 12yo rebel without a cause. Who hurt your widdle feelings so bad that you vent so? NM, I know.
This is the type of behavior that I expect on here and why YOU little boy are a simpleton.
By GOB
May 1, 2006 02:40 PM | Link to this
So Renee, choice that PROTECTS children is BAD.
Chuck - Every time you leave your kids at home, and have cable in the house, you are making a choice. If you are truly that concerned about what they might see while you are gone, then you can make the choice to get rid of cable all together, move the tv to a room they cant get to, or take the chance that they wont watch something you deem inappropriate. Having a-la-carte cable might make the choice easier, but at the end of the day, the potential for exposure to things you dont like is your choice.
By GOB
May 1, 2006 02:40 PM | Link to this
And well done on the Helen Lovejoy quote…
By The72John
May 1, 2006 02:44 PM | Link to this
Ummm, Exactly where did I use name calling or demeaning words? Oh yea, I didn’t!
You’re SOOO right FM. Everyone who has pointed out to you that you are a condescending a* is completely wrong.
How’s this for condescending? And please note that YOU are the only name-caller in this topic so far.
Do you all understand how much WORSE TV would get if a-la-carte was the standard?
See, this is implicitly condescending in that it suggests that you have knowledge that you take for granted that the rest of us obviously lack, and you are letting us in on that knowledge as a favor. That’s the definition of condescending, Fat.
By Julia
May 1, 2006 02:46 PM | Link to this
OK, who in the HECK is posting that Seinfield stuff in my name? Good grief-whoever you are please STOP! These people are going to think I’m nuts!!! I know others here have had people use their names in posts before. That’s just not cool. Use your own name please….
(This is the thanks I get for working through most of the day!)
:(
By Billy
May 1, 2006 02:46 PM | Link to this
No kidding, Chuck. The “liberal” side of this argument is that un-bundling cable service should be done if it brings potential savings to the consumer, not if it might make it easier to leave kids in front of the TV for hours on end without them catching a quarter-second glimpse of an areola.
And I can easily see where cable companies would be against un-bundling service. They aren’t necessarily make more money out of it. It would increase fees because it would increase account tracking and whatnot at the cable company. They’d have to keep up with each channel on each account. That increased work is going to require another employee or two. What if the increased costs to the company were as high as 20%? That’s probably the maximum amount of channels with which I’d be willing to depart without any savings to me…I think we’d be looking at drastically reduced channels in exchange for a $5/month savings or something.
I’d personally be willing to part with about a third of my channels if it meant dropping the cost of my bill by a fourth. If the savings were any less that that, though, I’d just as soon keep them on the off chance I stumbled across something on them that was enjoyable.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 02:47 PM | Link to this
Now John, make up your mind. Is it Chuck or Moose
It’s both, actually. Both prefer informing others to discussing points. Both assume that their knowledge and information is superior to everyone elses. Both lay claim to special understanding of all situations, and both assume that no one but themselves can ever hope to have such wisdom.
Note FM’s completely ballistic diatribe when called out on his arrogance.
By FatMoose
May 1, 2006 02:47 PM | Link to this
And FM, I understand that bundling enables us to enjoy price breaks. But I don’t want the SAME channels for less money; I want FEWER channels for less money. Specifically, only those channels that actually interest me. And because of local cable monpolies, I have virtually no choice in what programming’s available—it’s all or nothing. That’s not acceptable. So let’s see how the prices would break down, per channel, in an a la carte plan, before we condemn it as unworkable.
I am not talking price breaks. Tell me, if every channel was avail individually, which ones could AFFORD to BE available?
Our choices would be slashed massively.
Currently, you get a ton of channels, and you can choose which to watch of those. In an a-la-carte system, you would be able to choose which channels but from a pool of 10-20. That is bc without being able to ride on the backs of big co’s like ABC, sundance and history channels could not offer their services. You see, the current system gives us the MOST control in reality - but only if you can turn the channel;)
Sorry, but I had this topic 3months ago and I am starting where that one left off on another blog. Seems that you all would rather argue tho.
Peace out.
By Monica
May 1, 2006 02:51 PM | Link to this
The question for this week, just to remind everyone, is, “Will unbundling cable packages improve decency broadcast standards?” We are all getting worked up for no apparent reason, and it’s only Monday. Of course unbundling will have no effect on decency standards. There are many shows on the Big 3 local networks that are as “bad” as shows on cable channels. I don’t care for Desperate Housewives, so I don’t watch it. It’s really a simple concept.
Chuck, I understand your concern about your children being at home and watching certain shows without your knowledge. However, I can assure you that they have at least heard about those shows anyway if they attend public school. The language they are exposed to in the hallways is much worse than what’s on television. If your kids happen upon something that you would not approve of, then hopefully they will remember their upbringing and will change the channel. I don’t think unbundling is going to affect any decency standards. Unless you have premium channels like HBO or Showtime, or your kids spend lots of time at home alone in the evenings, they won’t be exposed to anything that they wouldn’t see or hear about at school. If your kids are old enough to be home alone, then they are old enough to have your trust on certain issues, such as not watching programs that you don’t approve of.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 02:52 PM | Link to this
Sorry, but I had this topic 3months ago and I am starting where that one left off on another blog. Seems that you all would rather argue tho
Hmm. Yet again, FM declares victory over the argument (after one post) and implies that we are all stupid for not just agreeing with him.
No, I can’t see how that’s condescending at ALL.
By Renee
May 1, 2006 02:52 PM | Link to this
Julia, I didn’t think that was you.
By RF
May 1, 2006 02:55 PM | Link to this
Won’t someone think of the children? Oh, won’t someone PLEASE think of the children?
I think of mine, but who am I to tell you what your kids may or may not watch?? I think of mine every time I change the channel or hit the ‘off’ button to play a board game with them. I think of them by sending them outside to play on a sunny day rather than watch it. I think of them by not watching the idiot box myself and modeling behavior. What else can parents do? I am the v-chip in my house, the remote, and the final say as to what my kids watch, period.
By GOB
May 1, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this
They could continue to offer packages for consumers who wanted them and a la carte for other viewers.
If this option is given to the cable companies, it isnt hard to see how they would respond. Look at what the phone companies did when they were forced to unbundle their services. They simply priced them in a manner that made it totally ridiculous to use. You can get the full package deal for less than it would cost to get just the options you want.
The cable companies will still get your $50 every month, they will just provide you less in return for it.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 03:00 PM | Link to this
Monica, while I find the term “decency standards” to be a loaded phrase, you are correct.
What Shaunti’s so-called argument fails to take into account is that there are already viewership measures in place that determine whether a show succeeds or fails. Desperate Housewives is succesful because it’s a hit! No one is forced to watch it, they choose to.
Shaunti’s argument basically says - if we eliminate channels, we’ll force the dirty shows off the air. How nice of her to want to control what everyone else watches.
By Julia
May 1, 2006 03:01 PM | Link to this
Thanks Renee! Why do people want to pull this stuff anyway? I thought we were all adults here. But then again maybe it’s a “lurker” just having a little fun with us.
Mr.Lurker-NOT FUNNY!
By the way, whatever happened to “Jack K”??? Hmmmmmm…..
By RF
May 1, 2006 03:02 PM | Link to this
Monica- good 2:51. I really can’t see what all the fuss is about either. TV is tame compared to what I see and hear in the hallways at school. I actually busted a drug deal in my classroom once. And we worry about decency standards on TV???? HAHAHAHAHA!
By FatMoose
May 1, 2006 03:04 PM | Link to this
Sorry, but I had this topic 3months ago and I am starting where that one left off on another blog. Seems that you all would rather argue tho
Hmm. Yet again, FM declares victory over the argument (after one post) and implies that we are all stupid for not just agreeing with him.
You have some weird translator you use to create a Victory notion as IF there is a battle and as if I claimed it. John, We do not all adhere to your belief that life is a battle and everyone is trying to hurt us.
The only way for you to gain satisfaction in the world is to CREATE a battle by changing peoples messages into one you can FIND offensive.
Let go of your anger and fear young jedi.
By RF
May 1, 2006 03:07 PM | Link to this
EXACTLY, GOB! They’re not going to lower the rates. Actually, they’ll just find a way to raise the rates, which is all they’ve done steadily for years, anyway!
By The72John
May 1, 2006 03:08 PM | Link to this
Let go of your anger and fear young jedi
Only if you abandon your condescension and arrogance, Darth.
By chuck
May 1, 2006 03:13 PM | Link to this
They didn’t/don’t go to public schools for that very reason. My son is 17 and finishing his first year of college with finals this week so this is his first experience with a public intitution of learning. He’s heard more trash from the professors than he has from his peers.
My daughter is a 9th grader and is homeschooled.
The topic is about content not cost. The point I am trying to make is that we should have the option of controlling content coming into our homes without having to take the draconian measure of eliminating cable. It does not have to be EITHER/OR. It can be BOTH. The insanity of the whole discussion today is that the Bill being proposed will have BOTH options available. Those who want to continue with their current package of channels, CAN. Those who want (even at additional cost) to select the channels they want, CAN.
My position is that IF cable networks start losing customers because of content, then they will change the content to meet the expectations of their MARKET. They may not lose customers, but if they do they are going to modify their content to make it less offensive. I believe that the decency standards will improve voluntarily if the market is given a chance to work.
By Netbanker
May 1, 2006 03:14 PM | Link to this
The cable companies are making “X” money. Do you really think they will set things up so they can get less than “X” ? Jack, I’m sure they won’t. I do really believe that the cost to switch to an a la carte and support it will not reduce prices enough to make a difference or could actually result in a price increase.
I also agree with FM that we’d have fewer choice because cable can afford to supplement smaller channels that don’t have either the viewership or corporate sponsorship that large channels have.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 03:19 PM | Link to this
My position is that IF cable networks start losing customers because of content, then they will change the content to meet the expectations of their MARKET. They may not lose customers, but if they do they are going to modify their content to make it less offensive. I believe that the decency standards will improve voluntarily if the market is given a chance to work
False, false, FALSE. The market has ALREADY spoken, that’s why the content that is there is there. Television content is COMPLETELY dictated by the market. Advertisers don’t pay for things that people don’t want. How that programming is delivered is utterly irrelevant to the market.
What Chuck is really saying is “I think that my moral minority can bully the networks into taking programming I find objectionable off the air”.
By GOB
May 1, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this
I also agree with FM that we’d have fewer choice because cable can afford to supplement smaller channels that don’t have either the viewership or corporate sponsorship that large channels have.
Some cable channels probably would have to fold, but not many. There are only a handful of companies that currently own cable channels (TimeWarner, Viacom, Disney, etc), and all of them have the economic force to keep channels afloat that dont bring in big ratings (they all do it already). They make up the vast majority of what is out there, so there would not be an appreciable decrease in options.
By FatMoose
May 1, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this
Only if you abandon your condescension and arrogance, Darth.
Your taking offense at a benign statement is not PROOF of condescension and arrogance.
And more-over, your a*******ertion that YOU set the standard is in itself “condescension and arrogance” at its height. You are the one that posts 3rd grade names at the drop of a hat my padiwan which means you feel your above conversing normally - that is more proof of your condescension and arrogance.
9999999999990000000000000000000
And for the normal people: Either they would raise prices across the board as stated OR (addressing the actual question) the programming would get worse. Shock sells as well as sex, and they would all be going for ratings, competing in the market using tactics that rake in the viewers: sex&violence.
By chuck
May 1, 2006 03:21 PM | Link to this
Actually NETB, it would free them from the REQUIREMENT of carrying channels that they are currently forced to carry to get the channels they want to carry. For instance, you can’t get ESPN and ESPN2 in many markets unless you agree to carry ESPN Classic. That is one of the reasons I believe prices will go down. I think it would also free up space for cable companies to carry more independent networks that are not controlled by the ABC’s, NBC’s etc.
By Jack
May 1, 2006 03:21 PM | Link to this
Chuck. Isn’t it a bit hypocritical to teach in a public school and at the same time home-school your own children? I think you said you were a teacher in a public school, if you are not, please disregard.
By FatMoose
May 1, 2006 03:23 PM | Link to this
I also agree with FM that we’d have fewer choice because cable can afford to supplement smaller channels that don’t have either the viewership or corporate sponsorship that large channels have.
Thanks; and not for agreeing, but contributing in a decent manner.
By Jack
May 1, 2006 03:27 PM | Link to this
“1,2,3,4,5,6,7, All good children go to Heaven”
By RF
May 1, 2006 03:29 PM | Link to this
My position is that IF cable networks start losing customers because of content, then they will change the content to meet the expectations of their MARKET.
Very possible, if there are enough people concerned about it. I would think if there were, the programming wouldn’t be so objectionable on standard network television. We’re letting them get away with it, so they push it further.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 03:30 PM | Link to this
Thanks; and not for agreeing, but contributing in a decent manner.
Anyone who isn’t FM think I haven’t contributed to this discussion?
And again, FM - you are the only person in this discussion who has been calling people names.
By Julia
May 1, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this
No, I don’t think that “unbundling” will improve decency standards. Number one, people will still watch the same shows regardless of how they have to “package” their cable channels. The same people will watch the sex shows, the same people will watch religious programming, and some will even watch BOTH.
Anyone with a brain knows that if you have children you need to be careful when it comes to having cable TV in the house.
By GOB
May 1, 2006 03:32 PM | Link to this
For instance, you can’t get ESPN and ESPN2 in many markets unless you agree to carry ESPN Classic.
In the real world, what will happen is ESPN knows that the majority of homes will want their service (that is how they got the cable companies to cave when they increased their price), so they will simply raise the rates for ESPN and ESPN2 (which are already about 3X higher than any other cable channel). You wont see any appreciable price reduction. in 2002, ESPN charged cable companies $2/month per customer, and you know the cable comapany adds their markup.
In an unbundled environment, ESPN would simply charge each customer $4/month, but you would have to pay for ESPN Classic. I dont see how that is really beneficial to consumers.
By GOB
May 1, 2006 03:36 PM | Link to this
We’re letting them get away with it, so they push it further.
I dont think it is that they are getting away with anything. The reality is, for as much as people complain about what is on TV, so many people still watch it. TV is an advertising dollars driven business. If the “indecent” programs were not generating enough advertising revenue, they wouldnt be on.
The content really isnt about anything other than money. The advertisers dont care what is on the show, as long as people are watching.
By GOB
May 1, 2006 03:38 PM | Link to this
In an unbundled environment, ESPN would simply charge each customer $4/month, but you would have to pay for ESPN Classic.
That should have read “wouldnt have to pay for ESPN Classic.”
By Netbanker
May 1, 2006 03:40 PM | Link to this
I hate to go kids, but everyone in the office has realized that I’m taking off tomorrow morning for our LA offices the rest of the week and are bombarding me with email, phone calls, and office visits because they know I’m pretty much unavailable.
Have a good week. Everyone BEHAVE! I might just manage to check the blog at the end of the day to see what’s going on. I’d hate to be disappointed with just a bunch of worthless name calling and p** contests instead of the active and intelligent discussion of which I know all y’all are very capable.
By FatMoose
May 1, 2006 03:42 PM | Link to this
Some cable channels probably would have to fold, but not many. There are only a handful of companies that currently own cable channels (TimeWarner, Viacom, Disney, etc), and all of them have the economic force to keep channels afloat that dont bring in big ratings (they all do it already). They make up the vast majority of what is out there, so there would not be an appreciable decrease in options.
Not true for the majority GOB, and for the ones that are enveloped by the larger companies (like The History Channel i belive), they will abandon their little channels bc people will not opt for them enough.
Right now, it is no sweat off the co’s back. Say TimeWarrener owns The Animal channel or Sundance. They only can afford producing it bc it IS bundles with their other stations.
Take the coffee joint down the street for example. They sell Dancing Goats 50 cent less than you could FROM the retailer in BULK. This is bc they buy their coffee in bundles and the others are cheaper, then they average the price. They FIRST had to do some marketing and see what cheaper coffees people would drink, for if everyone bought Dancing Goats the place would go out of business. That is the only “marketing” that has been proven here. If it was a free economy in the TV world the majority would win out - and that is going to be sex and violence, not The History Channel.
Just like fireworks: You can get the Big package with some decent stuff and then all the crap in the bottom, or pay MORE for just what you want. But remember, what will be offered is WHAT SELLS. So if you like the growing snakes, you will be out of luck - and therefore there will also be less of a choice to be had.
(FYI- PRI had a debate on this 3months ago with a blog that followed. That is what I refered to previously;)
By Renee
May 1, 2006 03:42 PM | Link to this
I was going to ask that same question, Jack.
By Confused
May 1, 2006 03:43 PM | Link to this
I think Hollywood should pay us to watch their crap. They should provide free cable so they can build their loyal fan base and sell their movie tickets and memorabilia.
By the way, Julia or whoever posted them, great Seinfeld lines. I loved that show!
By Julia
May 1, 2006 03:49 PM | Link to this
Confused-I did NOT post the Seinfeld stuff. Someone else with my name or someone using my name to be cute. Wasn’t me buddy. By the way, what’s your real name?
By Billy
May 1, 2006 03:50 PM | Link to this
“Actually NETB, it would free them from the REQUIREMENT of carrying channels that they are currently forced to carry to get the channels they want to carry. For instance, you can’t get ESPN and ESPN2 in many markets unless you agree to carry ESPN Classic. That is one of the reasons I believe prices will go down. I think it would also free up space for cable companies to carry more independent networks that are not controlled by the ABC’s, NBC’s etc.”
Chuck, that’s exactly why I think those independent channels will suffer. I love being able to watch things on the History channel or Discovery. Or some of the even more obscure ones. But I seriously doubt I’d be willing to pay for the Discovery channel when the only show I’d watch on it even semi-regularly is the MythBusters. We’d see things reduced to the major networks and a few of the more popular cable channels.
72John — I think you contribute to the discussion.
By FatMoose
May 1, 2006 03:53 PM | Link to this
And again, FM - you are the only person in this discussion who has been calling people names.
You stating I called names does not make it so: Read my first post and yuor reply a*******erting I was calling names.
Your imagination is wild.
Note FM’s completely ballistic diatribe when called out on his arrogance.
Ummm, ballistic? Your first post to me, READ:
Well, it’s monday - FM is here to tell us what simpletons we all are and how he is intellectually and spiritually superior to all of us.
Thanks, FM. Wouldn’t know how to start the week off without you.
Kind of, dare I say Snotty, condescending and arrogant?
By The72John
May 1, 2006 03:53 PM | Link to this
FM’s argument pre-supposes that the channels he mentions aren’t self-sustaining. Where is the evidence for this? Where are the facts?
It’s possible that new, small channels might not succeed in an A-L-C environment, but why should we automatically assume that anything but the top few channels are independently profitable?
By GOB
May 1, 2006 03:58 PM | Link to this
Not true for the majority GOB, and for the ones that are enveloped by the larger companies (like The History Channel i belive), they will abandon their little channels bc people will not opt for them enough.
FM - The majority of cable channels that are currently available, are corporatly owned by some larger entity. The bulk of the independently owned channels are not available on the major cable providers. They say they have 200+ channels, but go down the list and see how many different Fox Sports Channels there are. They make up about 30 of the channels alone, and music channels make about 40-50 more. If you take a look at the list of options you have right now from your cable provider, you will see that the bulk are owned by giant parents.
The parent companies wont get rid of them simply because they are marketing tools. Sure, they wont get as much money from them, but the people that arent watching them now, wont be watching them in the future. They will use them to promote the shows that are on their major channels that people are paying for. Ever watch ESPN Classic, or any of the Fox stations? All they seem to do is promote the big shows on their other networks. That wont change in an unbundled environment.
Almost all of the channels that would go under are ones that you dont get now anyway.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 04:01 PM | Link to this
I’ll let you count for yourself, Fatty.
You are just a pi$$y boy
what a hypocrite
Kind of have to wonder about someone who FINDS offense in everything, or performs pre-emptive strikes out of fear of being hurt. I remember you from gradeschool - the 12yo rebel without a cause. Who hurt your widdle feelings so bad that you vent so? NM, I know
This is the type of behavior that I expect on here and why YOU little boy are a simpleton
Hmmm…I see some names in there…
And yes, my post WAS arrogant. The difference between you and me is that I KNOW I’m arrogant. You are, but you don’t realize it. Apparently.
By GOB
May 1, 2006 04:04 PM | Link to this
but why should we automatically assume that anything but the top few channels are independently profitable?
Almost no cable channels are independently profitable. Of the top 20 cable channels, only 1 (the weather channel) isnt owned by some media giant (this is from a website avocating ALC programing). Those channels almost always rely on financial support from their corporate parents.
By Chilao
May 1, 2006 04:06 PM | Link to this
72John contributes, we all know that. LOL
Was not sure it was Julia either, almost said something then but not inclined to get accusatory with minimal facts. LOL
With all the crap on airwave TV, (talking all those reality shows), should we object to that? Oh, wait, I do, I change the channel or find non-TV entertainment. LOL
By RF
May 1, 2006 04:09 PM | Link to this
I’d hate to be disappointed with just a bunch of worthless name calling and p* contests instead of the active and intelligent discussion of which I know all y’all are very capable*
Yes mother, we’ll behave (fingers crossed and evil grins in place!!). Yeah, like this bunch can go all week and get along and not sputter “he did it FIRRRRSST!! LOL Safe travel and hurry back, mom!
By RF
May 1, 2006 04:15 PM | Link to this
I love being able to watch things on the History channel or Discovery. Or some of the even more obscure ones. But I seriously doubt I’d be willing to pay for the Discovery channel when the only show I’d watch on it even semi-regularly is the MythBusters.
That’s why I personally would keep paying for the bundle. I generally don’t watch FX, but every now and then there’s something there that gets me while I’m channel surfing. I like the variety and choice I have now. I don’t watch any channel but CNN or Weather Channel enough to pay for if unbundled, but I like the package so if I decide I want something else, I have the option. I think a minority would pay per channel fees.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 04:18 PM | Link to this
I’ll behave if the other guy will.
By FatMoose
May 1, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this
FM’s argument pre-supposes that the channels he mentions aren’t self-sustaining. Where is the evidence for this? Where are the facts?
If that is your concern regarding my post, ask;)
The debate I heard was bw Sundance, History Channel, ABC, and maybe FOX (forget the last one). They all concurred that the funding for the first two, and many other small channels (think above ch13), is not self sustaining and the programs/channels would tank.
The reason is that they (station owners) sell advertising in bulk too. So the advertisers not only buy X number of spots on ABC during primetime, but also on the Animal channel and others. These advertisers, like many of the people that watch tv, would not sponsor such small shows at the price that it would cost unbundled.
I agree it is a difficult situation, and I am not stating that I am providing an answer except that a-la-carte is NOT it.
It is not really different than Starbucks moving into Athens when I lived there. There was the (potentially valid) a*******ertion that SB creates an unfair competition. This is the reasoning: while the local coffee joints slowly go out of business, SB can loose money at this store and use revenue from others to keep it afloat until the local shops close down. This is exactly what happened too - all the coffee joints closed but two (one of those is on way out now) that were doing great. This would be normal free economy except that SB has inferior coffee at a higher price, but wins out bc the number of idiots that choose to go there is large.
Same will happen with TV if a-la-carte occurs without real consideration. Survivor, Sex and the City, and (the next) Millionaire show will be all thats on TV.
By Billy
May 1, 2006 04:26 PM | Link to this
GOB, I undterstand what you are saying about parent companies/channels, but would the owners of those channels let the individual channels be bought? Would NBC let you get A&E without also getting Bravo?
To what extent will this bundling be broken? I have few problems with my local company’s (Charter) basic cable package. Then they have the “tiers” — the family tier, the sports tire, the movie tier, the family tier…Are we talking building your service from scratch or mixing and matching for anything more than what is considered “basic”? I would like to be able to change several channels, but all in all I don’t have much of a problem with the system…
By FatMoose
May 1, 2006 04:33 PM | Link to this
And yes, my post WAS arrogant. The difference between you and me is that I KNOW I’m arrogant. You are, but you don’t realize it. Apparently.
There is being above someone elses actions of anger and hostility. Yes, I am above your anger and will not apologize for it.
This notion is your way of trying to share blame. Admit it john, you go off on people on SUPPOSITIONS all the time. As you did today, again, and THAT is arrogant without a reason except…anger.
Plus, you have an inability to quote: Thanks; and not for agreeing, but contributing in a decent *manner.
Anyone who isn’t FM think I haven’t contributed to this discussion?
Decent is the operative word. How can I even expect you to be able to debate with that kind of reasoning? Really?
We all agree that you contribute lots; No one will argue that. Whether it is informative is subjective.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 04:40 PM | Link to this
If anything, it sounds like bundling is a result of individual network strategies rather than anything deliberately foisted on us by the cable companies. I’m certain it’s advantageous to both the networks and the companies.
Personally, I’m inclined to agree with - sorry, but I can’t remember who said it - the statement that most people would choose NOT to take bundling simply because they are willing to pay slightly more for the option of choice. So - why don’t cable channels just ADD an a-la-carte option to their packages?
Let the homeschoolers and the technologicaly challenged folk who can’t work the channel block function have their a-la-carte, and let everyone else use the standard bundling.
It seems to me that the REAL issue behind Shaunti’s post is (as I said earlier) the desire of a a minority to control content. Shaunti seems to think that 1 million lost subscribers might influence ABC to cancel Lost (enjoyed by 35 million people) because it’s not “family friendly”. Yet again, the morality police are knocking at YOUR door.
By FatMoose
May 1, 2006 04:42 PM | Link to this
This is what type of programming will become MORE abundant if everything is a-la-carte (top 20 shows and channel they are on):
1 AMERICAN IDOL-TUESDAY FOX 8:00PM Tue 19.2 28.0 21,157,000
2 AMERICAN IDOL-WEDNESDAY FOX 9:00PM Wed 15.9 24.0 17,575,000
3 DESPERATE HOUSEWIVES ABC 9:00PM Sun 13.5 20.0 14,910,000
4 CSI: MIAMI CBS 10:00PM Mon 13.0 21.0 14,333,000
5 60 MINUTES CBS 7:39PM Sun 11.0 17.0 12,077,000
6 TWO AND A HALF MEN CBS 9:00PM Mon 10.5 15.0 11,600,000
7 DEAL OR NO DEAL-MON NBC 8:00PM Mon 9.8 15.0 10,800,000
8 UNIT, THE CBS 9:00PM Tue 9.8 14.0 10,770,000
9 GREY’S ANATOMY ABC 10:01PM Sun 9.7 16.0 10,679,000
10 LOST ABC 9:00PM Wed 9.7 14.0 10,672,000
11 OLD CHRISTINE CBS 9:30PM Mon 9.7 14.0 10,699,000
12 UNAN1MOUS FOX 9:30PM Wed 9.5 14.0 10,434,000
13 COLD CASE CBS 8:39PM Sun 9.4 14.0 10,310,000
14 LAW AND ORDER:SVU NBC 10:00PM Tue 9.2 15.0 10,149,000
15 CSI: NY CBS 10:00PM Wed 9.1 15.0 10,055,000
16 E.R. NBC 9:59PM Thu 9.0 15.0 9,963,000
17 DEAL OR NO DEAL 3/22(S) NBC 8:00PM Wed 8.9 14.0 9,806,000
18 CBS NCAA POST GUN SU 2(S) CBS 7:31PM Sun 8.5 15.0 9,353,000
19 24 FOX 9:00PM Mon 8.3 12.0 9,160,000
20 AMERICAN INVENTOR ABC 9:00PM Thu 8.0 12.0 8,783,000
And remember, these advertising spots are BUNDLED as well, and if advertisers have to choose bw these shows/channels and The History channel…
Which leads us to: Would NBC let you get A&E without also getting Bravo?
See, they sell ad spots across the board. Who would BUY ad time on Bravo alone? But there are major companies advertising on them NOW bc of bundling of ad spots that parallels the purchasing you and I do. So, the network can guarantee the ad company certain # of viewers on Bravo.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 04:44 PM | Link to this
We all agree that you contribute lots; No one will argue that. Whether it is informative is subjective
You’ll forgive me, but I’ll take the postive opinions of many over the negative of a few.
By FatMoose
May 1, 2006 04:49 PM | Link to this
“Both the older FCC study and a separate contracted study by Booz Allen Hamilton indicate that, in many cases, prices would rise under an a la carte model. This finding held true regardless of whether that model was a complete free-for-all, where customers would always pick all channels”
Link: http://www.ncta.com/pdffiles/BoozAllenalaCarteReport.pdf
They go one to state that many of the nich programms and networks would indeed tank.
By Julia
May 1, 2006 04:51 PM | Link to this
72john: Are you freaking LEARNING IMPARIED?
Actually, NO I’m not. But thanks for asking. ;)
By FatMoose
May 1, 2006 04:56 PM | Link to this
You’ll forgive me, but I’ll take the postive opinions of many over the negative of a few.
Of course. Human nature dictates that you would listen to the positive opinions, no matter where they come from or in whatever #s over the negative ones.
And, as you misread again, I only said it is subjective - which applies to everyone. I stated no personal opinion, for I know it does not, and should not, matter to you.
By The72John
May 1, 2006 04:56 PM | Link to this
Actually, NO I’m not. But thanks for asking. ;)
Well, not YOU you, but you know, the other you…
The word “you” appeared too many times in that thought.
By Julia
May 1, 2006 05:02 PM | Link to this
I understand 72. It’s ok.
By GOB
May 2, 2006 08:14 AM | Link to this
FM - The list of shows above has nothing to do with this discussion. The reason you will continue to see more and more of those kinds of shows has one reason…People watch them. How many realty shows are on A&E now? I can think of 4 off the top of my head.
Remember, the content of a TV show is irrelevant as long as it gets people to watch. From an advertiser’s standpoint, the TV show is just a vehicle to deliver eyeballs to their ad. Nothing more.
To your point on bundled advertising, you are only partially correct. If an advertiser wants to buy a spot on the Discovery Channel, for instance, they can do so without having to buy anything on another channel. They can, however, advertise on Discovery and then get a slightly reduced rate if they want to run some on TLC (a sister channel).
By Billy
May 2, 2006 09:04 AM | Link to this
“Which leads us to: Would NBC let you get A&E without also getting Bravo?
See, they sell ad spots across the board. Who would BUY ad time on Bravo alone? But there are major companies advertising on them NOW bc of bundling of ad spots that parallels the purchasing you and I do. So, the network can guarantee the ad company certain # of viewers on Bravo. “
And? But? So? Therefore? Does that not mean that NBC would be hesitant to un-bundle Bravo and A&E because there would be little demand to advertise on those channels? Were we to switch to an a la carte system, they’d have to let the smaller channels die or insist that all the systems carry them bundled to each other.
By Jack
May 2, 2006 09:16 AM | Link to this
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
By GOB
May 2, 2006 09:19 AM | Link to this
Billy - I think what is likely to happen is that the corporate parents will end up subsidizing the small channels like Bravo. This is essentially what they are doing right now anyway, so that is unlikely to change.
Those smaller channels would simply be turned into marketing vehicles for their larger parent networks. Bravo, for instance, has replayed NBC shows later in the week with new footage. That sort of thing would just increase.
The other possibility, however, is that we might finally see some creative new shows. If channels know they have to put out a good product to survive, they will be less likely to simply rehash the same sitcom format or law and order ripoff. Perhaps we will see more shows like Arrested Development or Scrubs, etc.
By Monica
May 2, 2006 09:25 AM | Link to this
I’m with you Jack.
FM, which coffe shop is still open in Athens? I used to frequent the Espresso cafe on East Broad Street when I lived in Athens. Great Hazlenut coffee! What a shame if it’s closed.
By GOB
May 2, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this
Monica - I am pretty sure Jittery Joe’s at 5 Points is still open. That is where I used to go. Grab a quick milkshake at Hodgkins…Ahhh, to be back in Athens.
By chuck
May 2, 2006 09:43 AM | Link to this
Good morning all.
Let me give you an example of what cost savings would be involved in a la carte programming:
CNN costs each subscriber about $.40
Fox News costs each subscriber about $.25
MSNBC costs about $.14
If I chose Fox News, which I watch occasionally and dropped MSNBC, CNN, CNN Headline News, and CNBC, I would probably save over $1.00 each month. I’m sure there would be other savings as well.
By Billy
May 2, 2006 09:46 AM | Link to this
The other possibility, however, is that we might finally see some creative new shows. If channels know they have to put out a good product to survive, they will be less likely to simply rehash the same sitcom format or law and order ripoff. Perhaps we will see more shows like Arrested Development or Scrubs, etc.
Yeah, you wish. ;-)
I guess what I am saying is that the networks might subsidize their niche channels much like they are doing now, but I think they’d insist that they be bundled when they do that. So either people would get all the sam channels as now with only a few exceptions, or people would end up choosing one or two network bundles. All the people who only watch Fox News would choose the Fox bundle, even in it meant getting F/X. And they’d demand that they not receive CNN. They might even eschew the NBC bundle just so they don’t have to have MSNBC on their TV service or risk stumbling across a “gay” on Bravo.
I guess my point is that it will lead to:
a) increased fees due to the increased cost on the part of the providers b) a lack of good choices should networks decide to bundle their “child” channels or a lack of programming variety should they decide not to subsidize their smaller, less (if at all) profitable stations c) increased polarization in society, as the only cable news channel Chuck would want is Faux News, which not coincidentally is the only cable news channel that, in my eyes, lacks any redeeming qualities.
By Billy
May 2, 2006 09:50 AM | Link to this
Oh my god! As I was typing that, Chuck actually came on here and said exactly the same thing! He doesn’t want any information except for that which comes from Fox!
Honestly — ClearChannel, anyone? I mean, these media conglomerates own all the outlets. We need more variety in the media, not less.
Oh, by the way — I think everyone who thinks programming on F/X is indecent should show their opinions by boycotting it and all other media outlets owned by its parent company. Including Fox News.
By chuck
May 2, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this
Another example: Discover Channel profit margin = 52%
CBS on 6 times the revenue profit margin = 4%
Discover is independent of the big 3 networks.
By FatMoose
May 2, 2006 09:54 AM | Link to this
Both of those are the ones left.
ERC (Esspresso Cafe Royal) is hurting quite bad still from the arrival of SB.
FM - The list of shows above has nothing to do with this discussion. The reason you will continue to see more and more of those kinds of shows has one reason…People watch them. How many realty shows are on A&E now? I can think of 4 off the top of my head.
I dissagree, the topic is whether programming would get better if unbundled. As you also pointed out these are the types of shows that pull in the viewers, and they would only proliferate under a totaly a-la-carte system.
Under the current system the networks can have their flagship shows for the masses, and on the side provide a little bone for those of us that are more discerning of what we watch. Of course not ALL, but most of these side ventures would tank.
For example, how do you think Broke Back Mtn would have emerged in a system that appealed to only the masses? I doubt that it would have had the chance to catch on (i know it is a movie, but still decent example).
By GOB
May 2, 2006 09:56 AM | Link to this
Billy - In your scenerio, however, we will never have ALC anyway. The only way it will ever happen is if the government forces the cable companies to do it. At that point, the larger companies wouldnt have the option of forcing bundled programming.
The bottom line, though, is that it will likely cost more in the long run for ALC programming.
Chuck - your argument assumes that the cost wont increase if they are allowed to unbundle. As soon as the Fox News knows that people will pay for it alone, they will simply increase their charge. Those numbers you gave are what the channels charge the cable providers, not the consumer. Go through all the channels you get and see how that math works out for you compared to your bill.
By chuck
May 2, 2006 09:57 AM | Link to this
Discovery has 21 network entertainment brands, including Discovery Channel, TLC, Animal Planet, Travel Channel, Discovery Health Channel, Discovery Kids and a family of digital channels. Discovery’s networks are carried by the cable television and satellite distributors in the United States and abroad. Discovery also distributes British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) America to cable and satellite operators in the United States.
These channels as part of the Discovery network of channels COULD BE bundled together or purchased separately. Since I watch most of these channels at least occasionally, I would probably purchase them in a bundle to save money.
By chuck
May 2, 2006 09:59 AM | Link to this
I meant to add also that advertising revenue would not be likely to change drastically since these networks are independent of the broadcast networks.
In 2004, approximately 59% of the revenue for Discovery’s U.S. networks came from advertising sales and approximately 38% was subscription revenue.
By GOB
May 2, 2006 10:01 AM | Link to this
FM - Here is where your logic hits a snag. Unbundled programming would be implemented as an “opt out” system. Many people would likely be unaware that they even had the option. Also, as “opt out” people would keep the bulk of their channels on the assumption that something interesting might be on sometime, especially if it is only going to cost them an extra $.50/month.
I dont think you would see too many channels disappear, and the ones that did are likely struggling quite a bit already.
By Monica
May 2, 2006 10:04 AM | Link to this
GOB, When were you in Athens? I was there from ‘89 to ‘94 - the four and 1/2 year college plan! Ahh, Hodgkins ice cream for 25 cents a scoop. You just can’t beat that! I absolutely loved Athens in the spring. I lived on South Milledge (NOT in a sorrority house), and we used to walk to Memorial Park to catch a few rays after class. Wish I were there right about now!
By chuck
May 2, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this
The only thing I watch on the Fox Network besides FNC is the NFL on Sunday afternoon. For about a year or so I couldn’t let my son watch the football games without me because they spent so much time advertising the TRASH they show at night. The commercials were obscene. I would watch with him and change channels during the commercials.
By Archie
May 2, 2006 10:16 AM | Link to this
I am in favor of a la carte programming but not for the same reason as Shanti. My answer to the topic question is no unbundling channels will not improve broadcast decency. Heck what’s decent is in the eye of the beholder. I think it’s being kind of silly to say you only want your money for this and that based on your decency standards but more programming packages would definitely be welcome because there are so many channels that I simply don’t watch and that’s what I don’t want to pay for. You get about 150 channels on satellite and cable tv but I know I watch less than a third of those channels. I could live with getting some channels that I don’t want if I could get as many channels that I really watch in a basic package.
By Jack
May 2, 2006 10:18 AM | Link to this
Chuck. Please respond to my 3:21pm post from yesterday.
By chuck
May 2, 2006 10:24 AM | Link to this
While I would love to have the OPTION of a la carte programming, I don’t know how likely I would be to opt for it. A more common sense approach to me would be to put all of the channels with exceptionally objectionable or child un-friendly content at the end of the channel list so you don’t have to run through them while channel surfing. If they required the same standards for “basic” cable networks as for broadcast networks, especially during the so-called family friendly hours before 10:00, that would help too. The main reasons I get cable anyway is for sports programming and for high speed internet service. Right now I would be happy if my stupid cable company would just use a logical way of assigning channel numbers.
News channels all together…sports channels all together, etc…
By FatMoose
May 2, 2006 10:31 AM | Link to this
Unbundled programming would be implemented as an “opt out” system. Many people would likely be unaware that they even had the option. Also, as “opt out” people would keep the bulk of their channels on the assumption that something interesting might be on sometime, especially if it is only going to cost them an extra $.50/month.
Lets put it this way: IF your system worked as you state, I would be for it. From what I have heard and read I do not think it would play out as you do, but that is a simple impasse and difference of opinions given what we have read on the subject.
I would love to have on demand ALC TV and if done smart it may be able to maintain diversity; I just have not heard a means of doing it yet.
As to the topic though, under any of the more “capalist” systems, the amount of baseline mentality TV would increase.
Can we agree on that? Or do you think ALC would reduce the amount of bad tv?
For an example I would turn you to the internet. All sites are on equal footing (it is completely unbundled) and which ones are raking in the customers?
By The72John
May 2, 2006 10:35 AM | Link to this
I suspect that all the speculation on the effects of unbundling are rather pointless - I doubt that the cable channels would ever go to a purely a-la-carte distribution mechanism. If such a thing were ever introduced, it’s likely that it would be as an alternative to, and not a replacement of, the current system.
Those who watch very little TV and those prone to hystrionic fits over the prospect of maybe, possibly catching a millesecond glimpse of Jackson-Boob might take advantage of the option, but for the most part, I suspect that the average person would continue to buy the bundle.
By chuck
May 2, 2006 10:40 AM | Link to this
Jack, sorry, I missed that one. NO it is not hypocritical at all. First, EVERY parent has not only the RIGHT but the RESPONSIBILITY to direct the education of their children. We are supposed to make sure that they get the best education that we can provide for them. We are also supposed to make sure that they are as safe as we can make them.
You act as if I am “working for Coca-Cola and drinking Pepsi. It is not the same thing. Public education must be offered to every child in Georgia, but no child in Georgia is obligated to attend public school. Right now, the vast majority of children are educated in public schools. I teach in public schools because 1)that is where I can make the most difference in the lives of kids 2)that is where the jobs are in my chosen field 3)For the most part, public schools pay better than private schools and have better benefits 4)I enjoy it.
There are 2 separate issues: 1 is my choice of jobs the other is the selection of the best educational opportunity for my kids. One has no bearing and SHOULD have no bearing on the other.
By Billy
May 2, 2006 10:41 AM | Link to this
Exactly, FM. We’d see only reality TV and a few quality shows, many of which would be considered racy. It’s not like Fox would put a Wiggles clone on in primetime. Hell, if ALC lowered the price of Playboy TV, I might go for that.
By chuck
May 2, 2006 10:48 AM | Link to this
john, the actual bill being proposed in the Senate, would do just that. They would be required to OFFER a la carte but would not be required to DROP bundling. It is simply a matter of choice and giving people the OPTION to keep certain programming from coming into their homes IF THEY WANT TO. That is why I can’t understand anybody being opposed to it.
By Jack
May 2, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this
Do you give the same quality education in your selected subjects to your students as you do your children?
By chuck
May 2, 2006 10:57 AM | Link to this
As long as we are talking about the technological capabilities of cable tv, here’s one that I wish was available…the ability to assign ANY network to ANY channel we want to on our televisions. If we could do that we could put all the cannels we watch together and all the ones we do’nt at the end. It would make channel surfing so much easier. Write your congressman.
By RF
May 2, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this
Jack and Chuck- I’ve always been amazed at how many people teach public and put their kids in private schools. Seems a bit elitist to me, but I understand it too. You see too much as a public school teacher and it tends to make you afraid for your own kids. Mine go to public and so far I’m happy. I know what they’re up against, and I don’t think I’m really going to do them any favors by going private to ‘protect’ them. I can do just as much for them in public school where I can choose teachers and be in close proximity. Besides, as I recall, my friends growing up who were in private school were far wilder than us public school kids.
By chuck
May 2, 2006 11:02 AM | Link to this
Yes I do Jack…even better, but I only teach one subject, and I can’t control the environment of the school outside of my classroom. Just the amount of sexual harrassment the girls have to put up with is astounding. We just had 2 students charged with sexual battery for grabbing the chests of girl students. And the school I teach in is one of the best in the state.
By Jack
May 2, 2006 11:05 AM | Link to this
Isn’t that what “favorites” do Chuck? Why can’t you use channel block on those channels you wish to keep from your children? BTW I agree with your 1st paragraph in your response.
By Monica
May 2, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this
Chuck, go satellite. You can even create different user profiles, and the channels that you don’t watch don’t even come up when you channel-surf. They only come up if you enter it into the remote.
By Billy
May 2, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this
And the school I teach in is one of the best in the state. …despite the fact that I teach there…
By GOB
May 2, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this
Monica - I was there from 1996-2000. I took the 4 1/2 year plan too. Got an extra football season out of the deal without having to contribute to the athletic association. I wish I was in Athens now too. I could go for some Guthrie’s for lunch…Too bad they all closed down too.
By The72John
May 2, 2006 11:13 AM | Link to this
Chuck - I don’t think anyone really is opposed to it. FM’s objections seem to be based more on the idea that this would represent a sea change in the way cable is distributed, and I’m just not seeing that.
By Monica
May 2, 2006 11:15 AM | Link to this
There are two types of kids in private school: 1those whose parents want to shelter them from the bad element, and 2those who are the bad element whose parents want them to be around kids who are a good influence.
By GOB
May 2, 2006 11:15 AM | Link to this
I dont see homeschooling your kids while teaching in a public school as hypocritcal at all. As a teacher,your job to provide your students the best education possible. As a parent, your job to provide your child the best education possible, but at the same time to protect them and make sure that the things they are exposed to meet your standards. As a parent, you have a much greater responsibility, and therefore, if you feel like homeschooling is a better option, you should choose it.
By Monica
May 2, 2006 11:19 AM | Link to this
WHAT??? Guthrie’s is CLOSED???? I shall now take a moment of silence (insert Taps here).
By Jack
May 2, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this
Teachers in high schools should be armed. When my boys were in MIDDLE school, the girls were developed and the boys had 5:00 shadows. gotta be all the additives in the food!
By GOB
May 2, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this
Yeah, both of them are closed. i think Zaxby’s did them in. I will join you in your moment of silence…
By Julia
May 2, 2006 11:25 AM | Link to this
Monica-my son will start kindergarten this fall and is going to a Christian school. This school’s SAT scores are higher than the county, state and country. I just want him to have the best education.
By The72John
May 2, 2006 11:34 AM | Link to this
Monica-my son will start kindergarten this fall and is going to a Christian school. This school’s SAT scores are higher than the county, state and country. I just want him to have the best education
Mmm. I’m sure he will have the best education available that leaves out all references to modern science.
By Jewish and Proud of It
May 2, 2006 11:34 AM | Link to this
Why don’t you guys come spend a few weeks in Israel where each school hass a minimum of 6 security guards ALL armed with M-16 assault rifles…you might come back with a different perspective on the safety of public schools in America. Of course, the difference is, the threat isn’t so much from the students as the millions of would-be suicide bombers sitting right across the border…
By GOB
May 2, 2006 11:34 AM | Link to this
On the school topic, what do the teachers on here think of the TAPP program?
By Jack
May 2, 2006 11:37 AM | Link to this
The only down side I see with home schooling is the lack of social interaction with other children their age and lack of sports. Although I think they’re trying to make it possible for homeschooled children to play sports in the public schools.
By The72John
May 2, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this
Why don’t you guys come spend a few weeks in Israel where each school hass a minimum of 6 security guards ALL armed with M-16 assault rifles…you might come back with a different perspective on the safety of public schools in America. Of course, the difference is, the threat isn’t so much from the students as the millions of would-be suicide bombers sitting right across the border
Or the Israeli tank lobbing shells across the street.
By Billy
May 2, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this
JaP, perhaps if the Palestinian peoples — Muslim, Christian, and Jewish — had not been ethnically cleansed to make way for Israel, that wouldn’t be a concern…
By RF
May 2, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this
Jack- I read somewhere that we are reaching puberty faster. My 9 year old will be shaving by 12, I bet. It’s strange, and I’ve read it’s all the growth hormone fed to cattle, chicken, etc forcing them into puberty sooner. That and music videos!! LOL
Julia- wish I had your options, but I couldn’t afford it if I sold everything. Just remember, the school is only half the equation. Your baby’s success will hinge on how you have prepared him for learning and how devoted you are to his education. From what I’ve read from you to date, I bet he’ll do great. Remember also that if you find yourself unable to afford the private school, he’ll do just as well in public because you’ve prepared him. The kids that make public schools bad places are the ones from bad families. The parents make them what they are.
By Chilao
May 2, 2006 11:43 AM | Link to this
Has anyone given any thought to the fact that having bundled cable for non-premium(HBO, etc) channels will require every household to have a cable-box? Back to that, since apparently straight cable nowadays gots straight into the back of the TV. All the signal is on the one line and you would need something on the subscriber’s end to differentiate the different possible packages. An IP address if you will. (for those who do not use their cable for web-access).
Are you all aware of the current big-issue? Internet-backbone-providers(AT&T, Verizon, etc) want to have high-speed lines for preferential speed-service. In other words, if you have not greased their squeeky wheel, financially, your web-site might be extremely slow in loading to your users/customers/visitors. That’s a definite Write Your Congressman. The only sites that will load quickly, from a user’s perspective, will be those who have paid for faster world-web-wide speeds. Effectively shutting out many sites.
By RF
May 2, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this
GOB- TAPP is great if they would make up their freakin’ minds what these folks are going to have to do. They keep changing the requirements. I think it’s an excellent way to find out if you really want to teach. We hire several every year, and those who stay in the program turn out to be very good teachers. They come in with interesting and varied life experiences that make them very good teachers.
By Monica
May 2, 2006 11:48 AM | Link to this
Julia, I didn’t mean to offend. I say that tongue-in-cheek. If things get much worse, I might consider private school for my own children!
By Jack
May 2, 2006 11:53 AM | Link to this
“Mmm. I’m sure he will have the best education available that leaves out all references to modern science”
Not true Mr. J. If that were the case, the SAT’s would not be so high. Just because a school is termed Christian doesn’t make it inferior. It makes it superior. Their curriculum is much more difficult than GA public schools.
By Jewish and Proud of It
May 2, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this
JaP, perhaps if the Palestinian peoples — Muslim, Christian, and Jewish — had not been ethnically cleansed to make way for Israel, that wouldn’t be a concern…
Now that’s funny, ridiculous, but funny…
By Julia
May 2, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this
LOL @ 72John on the science issue!!!
Ever consider becomming a comedian? (j/k)
By chuck
May 2, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this
Billy, I’ve had students like you before…usually for 2 YEARS
By Jewish and Proud of It
May 2, 2006 12:00 PM | Link to this
Or the Israeli tank lobbing shells across the street
If it keeps the terrorists from killing my family…
By chuck
May 2, 2006 12:00 PM | Link to this
I think TAPP is a great program if they do it in a completely separate school Gob.
By Julia
May 2, 2006 12:01 PM | Link to this
I’m sorry 72John. I was just trying to be funny.
Jack is right. The curriculum is more rigorous than public school. And yes, science is taught-but they are not taught that humans evolved from monkeys. (Is that what you mean by ‘science”?)
By Jack
May 2, 2006 12:01 PM | Link to this
I sub’d for my son’s 5th grade class for teacher appreciation day. Gave me a greater appreciation for teachers. I’ll bet I counted 32 heads 100 times that day. Lunch time was really fun too.
By The72John
May 2, 2006 12:11 PM | Link to this
Not true Mr. J. If that were the case, the SAT’s would not be so high. Just because a school is termed Christian doesn’t make it inferior. It makes it superior. Their curriculum is much more difficult than GA public schools
I realize the test has changed since I was a student, but it still tests mathematical and language skills only, yes?
Religious institutions don’t have problems with these - it’s science and other areas where a student is likely to receive a slanted and skewed education.
By RF
May 2, 2006 12:11 PM | Link to this
Honestly, Jack, their curriculum isn’t always so advanced, it’s the fact that they don’t have to put up with any kids they don’t want that makes them excel. If you took the bottom five to ten percent of students from public schools and didn’t test them, you’d see sharp score increases. We offer similar curricula, in some cases better because we have more money to spend. But, we have to teach it to alllll the kids and that’s what makes us look bad.
By GOB
May 2, 2006 12:13 PM | Link to this
I think TAPP is a great program if they do it in a completely separate school Gob.
What are your reasons for thinking it should be seperate?
By The72John
May 2, 2006 12:14 PM | Link to this
If it keeps the terrorists from killing my family
Yes, and I’m sure the innocent women and children slaughtered by the Israeli army were just waiting to kill your family.
Please understand I have no sympathy for either side, or that actually I have sympathy for the innocents on both sides. Neither Israel or Palestine is remotely blameless - both are full of bloodthirsty war-mongers who have helped perpetuate this conflict.
The best hope for peace was murdered by one of his own people.
By GOB
May 2, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this
I think TAPP is a great program if they do it in a completely separate school Gob.
What are your reasons for wanting it seperate?
By The72John
May 2, 2006 12:16 PM | Link to this
And yes, science is taught-but they are not taught that humans evolved from monkeys. (Is that what you mean by ‘science”
Creationist Strawman#1 - Evolution teaches that man evolved from monkeys.
False.
Evolutionary theory suggests that at some point far in the past, primates all shared a common ancestor that through various evolutionary forces developed into a variety of species.
By Chilao
May 2, 2006 12:17 PM | Link to this
Well, IE had started to SLUG the load of this page, but now, on Firefox, back to loading SuperFast. sidebar: at home, on Firefox, I learned the DNS lookup was much quicker as well, versus IE.
Guess I will have to use FIREFOX to come here(W2W) the rest of the week. LOL
By Billy
May 2, 2006 12:20 PM | Link to this
Well, Jack, when I took the SAT it had no “Science” section. Just math and verbal.
By chuck
May 2, 2006 12:23 PM | Link to this
Gob, my brother taught in a HS that had a TAPP program within the school. It included a childcare center and parenting classes in addition to the regular curriculum. He said that there was always “drama” going on. They ended up taking it out of the school and making it a separate program and it has done much better. The girls can actually concentrate on their work. They don’t have to deal with the extraneous garbage that happens in a regular HS. They have common goals and the school is able to concentrate specifically on their needs as young Moms. Just anecdotally from those who have taught in both settings, I think it is better for both groups.
By GOB
May 2, 2006 12:27 PM | Link to this
Chuck - I dont think we are talking about the same thing. I meant the alternative teacher certification program.
By Jack
May 2, 2006 12:27 PM | Link to this
Doh! I screwed up on the SAT but I still think Christian schools are more difficult.
By chuck
May 2, 2006 12:29 PM | Link to this
Julia may have been referring to the SAT9 test or Stanford Achievement Test form 9. Many private schools give this test instead of the ITBS or Iowa Test of Basic Skills. It tests all subject areas.
The SAT is a HS college entrance exam taken in HS and it still contains the Verbal and Math sections, but they have added a Writing section to it now.
By GOB
May 2, 2006 12:32 PM | Link to this
To the SAT scores as a judge of a school…RF totally hit the nail on the head. If you can be selective about who takes a test, or who you allow in your school to begin with, your scores will be much higher. That isnt a true reflection of the school.
It is the same as a lot of Ivy League colleges. Students can drop classes up to the day of the final with no negative impact on their GPA. That contributes mightily to the number of honors graduates, but isnt a true reflection of how the students did in the class. Anyone can get an A the second or third time in a class.
By Jack
May 2, 2006 12:39 PM | Link to this
Yes. Let’s defend the fact that Ga spends more per student than any other state and is 49th or 50th in scholastic performance. What is the drop out rate again? If, if, if. If doesn’t get it.
By chuck
May 2, 2006 12:43 PM | Link to this
OOPS, I thought you were referring to a TeenAge Parenting Program.
I have no problem with alternative certification programs as long as the underlying degrees give them the requisite content knowledge that they need to be successful. The biggest problem I see with alternative certification is that in the cases of people who may be educationally “qualified” to teach, they may not be cut out for teaching. You have to be able to transmit the knowledge as well as understand it yourself. In a traditional teacher prep program, the crazies are usually weeded out. Most supervising teachers are very conscientous about reporting student teachers who they think will have a hard time being an effective teacher in the real world. I’ve seen some who had to take additional classes in classroom management and then repeat student teaching. I’ve seen others who have been booted out of the program altogether. The system works most of the time.
By The72John
May 2, 2006 12:49 PM | Link to this
Doh! I screwed up on the SAT but I still think Christian schools are more difficult
Private schools are more difficult in general, and some of those Private Schools MAY be Christian schools. But there are a lot of Christian schools out there that are a complete joke educationally speaking.
By Jewish and Proud of It
May 2, 2006 12:50 PM | Link to this
Yes, and I’m sure the innocent women and children slaughtered by the Israeli army were just waiting to kill your family.
The difference, my friend, is that we do not target innocents. The terrorists do. As I said before, you might change your perspective if you were there. My son (at the time, 4 years old) was hit by a piece of schrapnel from a bus that was destroyed by a suicide bomb. He now, and will forever, walk with a limp. He, and a dozen others, were casualties of a madman intent on destroying innocent lives. It is relatively rare that we injure or kill a civilian Palestinian and when it happens it is collateral, never intentional. However, part of the reason we came to the US for the year was to escape that everyday conflict so…shall we put it behind us, my friend?
By Jack
May 2, 2006 12:54 PM | Link to this
I can buy that John. I went to school in PA, NY and GA. My 6th grade courses in NY were more difficult than my 10th grade courses here. Way more. That is why people educated up North refer to us as dumb hicks. (then they get a knuckle sandwich)
By The72John
May 2, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this
Chuck, do you think that the people who are drawn to teaching after they have entered the professional world in other fields generally make good teachers?
I was just reading through the requirements of the TAPP, and they seem fairly rigorous to me. While I haven’t had any experience with secondary school teachers, I did have at least two graduate level professors who were retired high-level executives who had given up their high-powered high-paying careers because they realized they just wanted to teach…they were both excellent.
It seems to me that a lot of students major in education because they think teaching is going to be easy, that their jobs are going to be guaranteed, and that a nice pension will be waiting for them at the end. They don’t seem to care much either way about BEING a good teacher.
I would think someone who later in life voluntarily chooses to become a teacher would make up for their lack of education courses with passion and life experience.
Or maybe I’m misunderstanding the purpose of the program completely.
By RF
May 2, 2006 01:03 PM | Link to this
Jack- yep, we rank 49th because we have 65% taking the SAT when most won’t even finish college. Compare that to Iowa where 10% take the test. Do some math. Break down the groups taking the test and we are right on target. Among states with high percentages taking the SAT, wer’re like 15th of 23. Not stellar, but not bad. Our curriculum is exactly the same as everyone else’s. I’m a teacher, I should know.
By Jack
May 2, 2006 01:04 PM | Link to this
There will be no peace in the Middle East until it is vaporized. You may disagree, but it is unfortunately true.
By Jack
May 2, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this
Ok. My kids are out of school. If you are Ok with being 49th well then….
By The72John
May 2, 2006 01:09 PM | Link to this
Statistics from an Israeli human rights group, via the BBC.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4294502.stm
Guess who’s killed more of whom.
By Jack
May 2, 2006 01:20 PM | Link to this
Gotta say, zero tolerance=zero common sense. There are good teachers and bad. The good ones are underpaid for sure. It seems to me that the school principle interfears too much with the teachers. They need to administrate and leave the ones doing the real work alone. Thoughts?
By GOB
May 2, 2006 01:31 PM | Link to this
72John - Your reading of the TAPP program is right on. The reason I brought it up is because it has been something I have been thinking about for awhile and was interested in hearing what the teachers on here thought of the program.
By Billy
May 2, 2006 01:35 PM | Link to this
This girl was an innocent.
By RF
May 2, 2006 01:37 PM | Link to this
Generally, they do, at least in the schools I’ve worked in. Principals that don’t respect teachers end up losing them to better situations.
I’m not satisfied with 49th, but check your sources. We’re being compared to states that only let the kids take the test who are definitely going to college. Georgia encourages everyone to take it, thus lowering the scores. Our top ten percent score pretty close to as well as the top ten percent of any state. I’ll post you the article on it when I have time to find the link again.
What we have in GA is kids from bad families who don’t care one bit about education, the future, or anything beyond the TV screen. If you want to fix GA schools, start with the homes. Our school reflect the society with which we must deal, we don’t determine it. We teach what we’re given. Change that, and the schools will score better.
By Jewish and Proud of It
May 2, 2006 01:39 PM | Link to this
John, it’s a shame that study only goes back for the last 5 years. I’d like to see a study that goes back to Israel’s statehood…
By RF
May 2, 2006 01:40 PM | Link to this
We are dumb hicks, but not because the school don’t try. Dumb hicks choose to be that way. WE don’t make them that way.
Sorry, I’m just getting sick of people complaining when we’re busting our butts to make it better but we can’t improve the quality of homes. I battle that every day and I’m just about tired of the battle. Kids don’t want to learn, don’t care, and the parents aren’t any better. The ones that care make it and do well. It’s that simple to me.
By Julia
May 2, 2006 01:44 PM | Link to this
But there are a lot of Christian schools out there that are a complete joke educationally speaking.
72John-Why do you say that? Where are you getting your information from? I’m just curious.
For the record, my son’s new school is outstanding…(educationally speaking).
By Billy
May 2, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this
John, it’s a shame that study only goes back for the last 5 years. I’d like to see a study that goes back to Israel’s statehood…
I would, too. Though you might not like the results. It was interesting listening to one of the (if not the) top bishops in the Methodist Church talk about Israeli statehood. Specifically how people were run out of their homes to make way for the country. Yes, the bishop’s Palestinian.
JaP, what’s your take on the USS Liberty? Does Israel often attack allies while using aircraft marked to resemble an enemy’s aircraft?
By The72John
May 2, 2006 01:52 PM | Link to this
72John-Why do you say that? Where are you getting your information from? I’m just curious
Experience? Cousins who teach in those schools, and I know what their curriculum is like? Being in college classes with people who went to Christian schools and hearing how their thought processes work?
Any school where education and curriculum is secondary to religious or ideological indoctrination is going to suffer academically. I’m surprised some of them don’t still teach that the world is flat.
By Julia
May 2, 2006 01:55 PM | Link to this
RF-It blows my mind to think that there are parents out there that don’t care about their child’s education. What do you suggest we do to “improve the quality of homes”?
I’ve been talking to my son about school for about 2 years now. I’ve been telling him how great it is and how much you learn. He’s very excited about going this fall. (I was the opposite-I dreaded going.)
By Jack
May 2, 2006 01:55 PM | Link to this
RF. Yes. A lot of parents don’t care wehter their children learn or not. My son’s 4th grade teacher (Dekalb Co.) didn’t assign homework because none of the parents would see that it was done so most didn’t do it and she didn’t want to deal with it.
By Julia
May 2, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this
Wow! The school we chose has a 95% college acceptance rate and higher SAT scores than the country. They must be doing something right.
By chuck
May 2, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this
72john, I do think that it can be a great advantage to get some life experience before becoming a teacher. I went into business before I finished my bachelor’s degree. There weren’t many opportunities in teaching at the time and it didnj’t pay very well either. I quit school and went into retail management in a sporting goods store. Later I got my insurance and real estate licenses and eventually opened my own office, but I knew I was supposed to be a teacher. I went back to school, cut back to part time in my business, and 16 years ago finished up and got my first teaching job. I’ve never looked back. I love what I do and I’m really good at it. While I still got my certification in the traditional way through a school of education, I didn’t do it in a traditional way.
As for TAPP and other alternative routes to certification, the only problem I have with the requirements is that they have a full year in the classroom with minimal supervision. Principals don’t have time to spend long periods of time in one classroom. They will make regular visits if they are any good, but depending on the subject matter, students for that year may really miss content that will keep them from being successful at the next grade level. Is it worth a year of those students’ educational careers? I don’t know.
If the screening process included some sort of direct supervision by another teacher…close supervision…like a student teaching situation, I would be more comfortable with it. We had a retired military guy a few years ago (before TAPP) when they had to go through a certification process BEFORE coming into the classroom, who really wanted to teach, but he was just horrible. He had no idea what he was doing, how to construct an effective lesson, or how to manage the classroom. He had to repeat student teaching, but he washed out after about a month. Under TAPP, he would have had a classroom of kids for a full year before a decision was made one way or another and it would have been based on just a few 15 minute visits by the principal rather than hours and hours of observations from experienced teachers. That is the difference.
By The72John
May 2, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this
C’mon now Billy - I’m sure that the people who lived in the region pre-Balfour Declaration voluntarily gave up their homes and lands so that all those Europeans could have a place to live.
By Reason
May 2, 2006 02:04 PM | Link to this
So and handful of friends and cousins constitute a fair polling of Christian education? Beats black and white statistics anyday. And wasn’t Julia chastised for not staying on the whole a-la-carte cable topic?
By Julia
May 2, 2006 02:06 PM | Link to this
Jack-That’s just incredible. The teacher didn’t give homework because it wouldn’t get done anyway?! Amazing…absolutely amazing.
By Monica
May 2, 2006 02:07 PM | Link to this
I have a friend from Michigan who says that Georgia schools will never be at the top in an education poll because people in the south don’t value education as much as people in the north. As much as I hate to say it, he is right. I am amazed at the number of students I currently teach who will “just take the zero” on a daily assignment because they don’t want to do the work. They don’t care about reading a book by Ernest Hemingway, learning about the Puritans who started our country, or studying MLK’s “I Have a Dream” speech. They have no desire to go to college because their parents have either worked the system and have just enough to get by, which is fine for them, or they come from an agrarian background and don’t see the value in school when they will just end up working at the poultry farm with their daddy. On paper, when you educate the masses, you have lower performance.
By RF
May 2, 2006 02:09 PM | Link to this
Jack- yep, that happens a lot more than any of us like to admit. You get done with fighting the tide. I love teaching, but I spend more time managing my classroom to the point of absurdity. It’s hard to “raise the bar” when you need to use it to keep ‘em behaving right!! LOL
Julia- no easy answers to fixing families. You yourself prove that we single parents can do it just as well as the ‘normal’ family. I don’t know what’s wrong with so many out there, but they just don’t care about the things we do, like education. One parent, two, whatever doesn’t matter- it’s the devotion to the kids and their future. I honestly don’t know how we’re ever going to get people to think about how to be good parents. Nothing has worked so far and our public schools have to try to deal with all the problems the kids have and find a way to make the kids care whether or not the parents do.
By The72John
May 2, 2006 02:12 PM | Link to this
So and handful of friends and cousins constitute a fair polling of Christian education? Beats black and white statistics anyday. And wasn’t Julia chastised for not staying on the whole a-la-carte cable topic?
I never said it was a fair polling - I said that there were Christian schools out there that were crap. If I have encountered ONE Christian school that is crap, then that’s a vaild statement.
And Julia wasn’t Julia, and in case you didn’t know, we generally drift off-topic after the topic has been exhausted.
Either you know that because you are a cowardly regular hiding behind a self-agrandizing (and poorly chosen, frankly) moniker, or you don’t, and you are just some luker who has decided be an a*.
By RF
May 2, 2006 02:12 PM | Link to this
chuck- they do have supervising teachers. I supervised one two years ago, and we had a LOT of work to do together. I had to be in his classroom frequently. They also have a summer of classes to take before they begin, so they’re not thrown in completely blind. They’re also in classes all that first year so they’re studying as they go. That’s if it’s done right which depends on the school.
By GOB
May 2, 2006 02:15 PM | Link to this
If the screening process included some sort of direct supervision by another teacher…close supervision…like a student teaching situation, I would be more comfortable with it.
Chuck - Not sure if you are familiar with the latest requirements, but now, each TAPP candidate is assigned a mentor who teaches in the school, in the same subject area. The mentor is required to log something like 100 hours of work with the TAPP teacher during the year. I think it probably depends on the school you are in, as to how much help the teachers get.
By BibleThumper
May 2, 2006 02:16 PM | Link to this
C’mon now Billy - I’m sure that the people who lived in the region pre-Balfour Declaration voluntarily gave up their homes and lands so that all those Europeans could have a place to live.
what does that have to do with anything? The Bible clearly states Judea was given to the Jewish people by God. End of discussion. Or to quote Menachem Begin’s wife, when she was playing him a game of Monopoly over the kitchen table “You can quote Biblical scripture all you want, Menachem, but that still does not give you the right to annex Boardwalk”.
By chuck
May 2, 2006 02:18 PM | Link to this
How much time were you able to spend in the classroom with the teacher you supervised, RF?
By GOB
May 2, 2006 02:19 PM | Link to this
RF - I am not looking forward to spending almost every night this summer in a classroom, but that is the price you pay…A lot cheaper and quicker than going back and getting an education degree.
By Julia
May 2, 2006 02:23 PM | Link to this
I take my hat off to all of the teachers out there (and all of you on this blog). It takes a special person to be teacher. You guys are terrific!
My son just turned 5 and can count into the thousands. He can add and subtract (and even multiply a few numbers). He loves learning about the planets (among many other things). He’s even starting to read. We’ll be going through the store and he’ll be asking me math problems-such as “what is 542 minus 130”. It’s so exciting to see how much he loves to learn. He can’t wait to start school.
By chuck
May 2, 2006 02:23 PM | Link to this
It sounds like ya’ll did it the right way then RF. That is pretty rigorous. How’d the teacher do? What was his/her background?
We haven’t had a TAPP teacher here so I haven’t seen it in action. Most of the TAPP candidates end up in schools that have a hard time getting teachers in our county…the rougher schools. They kind of toss them to the lions. As I said, if induction is done well, TAPP can be a really good way to attract teachers who have some life experience.
By The72John
May 2, 2006 02:28 PM | Link to this
Or to quote Menachem Begin’s wife, when she was playing him a game of Monopoly over the kitchen table “You can quote Biblical scripture all you want, Menachem, but that still does not give you the right to annex Boardwalk”
This may be the funniest thing I have read all year.
By RF
May 2, 2006 02:32 PM | Link to this
My planning period every other day (or at least twice a week if the school calendar was too full), after school almost every day (depended on the meeting schedule), and lots of time on the phone as needed. I even had to trade planning periods a few times to get in and observe other periods. Our principal is determined to make it work, so we try to do it right. I put way more than the minimum one hundred hours into it. The guy was good, but he decided after the first year that he wanted to teach at college level and left. I’d much rather have that than someone who spent several years getting a degree and being miserable and stuck to pay off loans.
By The72John
May 2, 2006 02:32 PM | Link to this
Sounds like an interesting program. If it weren’t for the fact that I am utterly unequipped with the patience needed to be a teacher - no, no, now, don’t argue! - I might consider giving it a go some day.
Oh wait…as the child of two teachers I have to say…”No f’in way”.
Does sound like a very good way to get good teachers into the systems though.
By RF
May 2, 2006 02:33 PM | Link to this
GOB- it’s a great way to get to teach and find out if it’s really for you. When are you thinking about starting the program?
By Julia
May 2, 2006 02:36 PM | Link to this
You’ll never guess what’s playing on my Yahoo Launchcast Music Player….”Hot For Teacher”. LOL!!!
By chuck
May 2, 2006 02:37 PM | Link to this
I would hate to think that all of that work was for nothing though, RF. I think that would have ticked me off.
By Billy
May 2, 2006 02:44 PM | Link to this
You’ll never guess what’s playing on my Yahoo Launchcast Music Player….”Hot For Teacher”. LOL!!!
Huh. Mine was “Every Sperm Is Sacred”…
By RF
May 2, 2006 02:46 PM | Link to this
well, the way I looked at it was, I’d rather him know and be able to change rather than end up feeling he had to stay because he had invested so much money and time in the degree program. I enjoyed most of it, but I wish there were some sort of balance for the mentors (like extra planning time, etc.). It makes for a busy year, but it’s worth it to help someone either become a teacher or learn that this isn’t for them. Are you a TSS (mentor teacher)? You can mentor a TAPP person if you are.
By GOB
May 2, 2006 02:46 PM | Link to this
RF - I am in the process of trying to get a job offer right now. I am already signed up for the classes in the summer, and would like to start this fall if possible. My ideal is to teach history, but because my degree wont allow that, I will probably do business or special ed to start and then during summers, etc, get the credits I need to teach history (unless I find I want to stay in whatever subject I start in). Luckily, I enjoy several subjects, so my options are pretty decent (I could even do middle school math).
I have a lot of experiance working with kids from all backgrounds (mainly sports related, but some tutoring), so I have a pretty good idea of what I am getting myself into.
By RF
May 2, 2006 02:46 PM | Link to this
Julia- now I got that tune in my head!!! I’ll be humming it all through the faculty meeting today! LOL
By GOB
May 2, 2006 02:48 PM | Link to this
I have a little Iron Maiden on XM…
By The72John
May 2, 2006 02:50 PM | Link to this
Great, thanks Billy. Now I have Monty Python stuck in my head…I just know that it’s going to turn into “Finland”, and then “Traffic Lights”…and then inevitably, “Spam”.
By Julia
May 2, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this
Hey Billy! Who sings that song? I don’t think I’ve heard it. (Must be some of this new heavy metal stuff!)
ROFL!!!
By RF
May 2, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this
GOB- just be careful. That “pretty good idea” could be totally off if you get the wrong school. Choose carefully! Don’t take the first one that comes along. Principals tend to hire you guys after the certified folks are all taken, so you may not get an offer until summer or even after school starts. Special ed. positions are available everywhere—make sure the school/county has a strong program and a good dept. chair. Stay away from Clayton county and city of Atlanta!!
By Julia
May 2, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this
Alright Chuck, Jack and John-what are you listening to?
By Billy
May 2, 2006 02:59 PM | Link to this
From Wikipedia: ” is a song from the movie Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life and the album Monty Python Sings. The song deals with Catholicism and Catholic views on sex.
The song is a tongue-in-cheek take on Catholic teachings which stress that sex is merely for procreation and not for pleasure. The song starts with a man and his family of many, many children. So many in fact that they fill the entire first story of their small rowhome and the mother calls one of them to “get the others”, implying that there are many more outside. The man comes home from work to tell his family he has lost his job at the mill and he must sell his kids for medical experiments. The kids ask why he couldn’t wear a condom, but the man says that to do so would go against their Catholic faith. One child suggests to his father that he cut his testicles off, but the father explains that God would know. He then explains, through song, that in the eyes of God, every sperm is sacred and can’t be wasted. If sperm were to be wasted, God would seek revenge.”
Lyrics: “There are Jews in the world. There are Buddhists. There are Hindus and Mormons, and then There are those that follow Mohammed, but I’ve never been one of them.
I’m a Roman Catholic, And have been since before I was born, And the one thing they say about Catholics is: They’ll take you as soon as you’re warm. You don’t have to be a six-footer. You don’t have to have a great brain. You don’t have to have any clothes on. You’re A Catholic the moment Dad came,
Because
Every sperm is sacred. Every sperm is great. If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate.
Every sperm is sacred. Every sperm is great. If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate.
Let the heathen spill theirs On the dusty ground. God shall make them pay for Each sperm that can’t be found.
Every sperm is wanted. Every sperm is good. Every sperm is needed In your neighbourhood.
Hindu, Taoist, Mormon, Spill theirs just anywhere, But God loves those who treat their Semen with more care.
Every sperm is sacred. Every sperm is great. If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate.
Every sperm is sacred. Every sperm is good. Every sperm is needed In your neighbourhood!
Every sperm is useful. Every sperm is fine. God needs everybody’s. Mine! And mine! And mine!
Let the Pagan spill theirs O’er mountain, hill, and plain. God shall strike them down for Each sperm that’s spilt in vain.
Every sperm is sacred. Every sperm is good. Every sperm is needed In your neighbourhood.
Every sperm is sacred. Every sperm is great. If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite iraaaaate!”
By Julia
May 2, 2006 02:59 PM | Link to this
Did you guys see what made the front page this morning?
KEITH RICHARDS FALLS FROM PALM TREE
What I want to know is what was he doin’ in the palm tree in the first place?…LOL
By The72John
May 2, 2006 03:00 PM | Link to this
Hey Billy! Who sings that song? I don’t think I’ve heard it. (Must be some of this new heavy metal stuff!)
Please say you’re just teasing…
By Monica
May 2, 2006 03:04 PM | Link to this
GOB, Good luck finding a teaching position. A word of warning: you won’t get a job teaching history unless you can coach something!
By Julia
May 2, 2006 03:07 PM | Link to this
Billy-Thanks for the break down on the song. Funny stuff. However, I’ve never seen Monty Python.
By The72John
May 2, 2006 03:07 PM | Link to this
What I want to know is what was he doin’ in the palm tree in the first place?…LOL
It’s Keith Richards…the answer seems self-explanatory…he was HIGH.
By GOB
May 2, 2006 03:08 PM | Link to this
RF - Yeah, I am being very careful. I had one offer already, but after researching the school decided against it. And when I say I have a pretty good idea, I simply mean that I wont be completly blindsided by the behavior.
I am on the northside of the city, so will be focusing up here. Most of the schools (Cobb, North Fulton, Cherokee) are pretty good, all things considered. That being said, they are harder to get into though.
By GOB
May 2, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this
A word of warning: you won’t get a job teaching history unless you can coach something!
Well, I already coach a couple of teams, so that is certainly in my favor. Unfortunatly, my undergrad degree will keep me from getting a job teaching history under the TAPP program.
By Chilao
May 2, 2006 03:11 PM | Link to this
Great movie, The Meaning of Life.
across the street from the Catholics are a Protestant couple, and the husband is constantly berating the Catholics for the every sperm is sacred concept.
“Phyllis, we can have sex anytime we want to without having to reproduce”(husband)
Phyllis gets all excited “Oh, really now”(seems they do not do it as much as the Catholics).
Phyllis ” You mean, like right now?”(getting even more hot and heavy for *getting some).
Husband “Oh, don’t be silly, Dear”.
LMAO
By Julia
May 2, 2006 03:13 PM | Link to this
72-Of course he was high! He’s been on a continuous high since 1962.
By RF
May 2, 2006 03:13 PM | Link to this
GOB- yeah, you’re on a good side of town. Consider Forsyth, Cherokee, and even Gainesville city. They’re good from what I’ve heard.
Julia- you sniffin’ glue over there or something? You’re plumb silly today!! My question is, how did Keith get in the tree at his age?? What a hoot!
By Tim
May 2, 2006 03:15 PM | Link to this
listenin to “Too Funky” George Michael
By Julia
May 2, 2006 03:16 PM | Link to this
Reminds me of an old joke…
Scientists have determined that in the event of a world wide nuclear holocaust two things will survive…cockroaches and Keith Richards!
By RF
May 2, 2006 03:16 PM | Link to this
Monica- meant to tell you your 2:07 was right on the money!! I have a high school friend in Michigan who just shakes her head and laughs at the crap we put up with down here. I’m ‘bout done with these ninth graders today who think they’re grown!!
By Jack
May 2, 2006 03:16 PM | Link to this
Julia. I can only listen to the music playing in my head here at the office. I have a good selection. LOL
Keith Richards was up there playing with his coconuts.
By Chilao
May 2, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this
How about the DrudgeReport headline a few months ago: The Scrolling Bones or The Strolling Bones (something like that), in announcing a new tour.
those palm trees are often angled and have footpaths/foot-notches cut into the trunk.
but if you want a delicacy, try coconut palm hearts, from a real young one(sapling). the interior of the trunk. YUMMY!
By RF
May 2, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this
Tim - did you have a good birthday celebration? George has some good stuff, but sadly doesn’t get radio play anymore.
Don’t ask me why, but I’ve had Tim McGraw Dancing When the Stars Go Blue in my head today.
By Julia
May 2, 2006 03:34 PM | Link to this
RF-Just high on life-not glue. You silly guy. (Anybody remember that 96 Rock skit many years ago called “I’m High On Life”?)
Maybe Keith’s wife Patty threw his stash on top of the tree and he was retrieving it…he gets up there and smokes one then passes out…spends the night in the tree until that thud woke him up this morning! LOL
By FatMoose
May 2, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this
The troll casting…
But there are a lot of Christian schools out there that are a complete joke educationally speaking.
The on-point, non-aggressive rebuttal…(kudos for not falling in his anger trap)
72John-Why do you say that? Where are you getting your information from? I’m just curious
His proof…
Experience? Cousins who teach in those schools, and I know what their curriculum is like? Being in college classes with people who went to Christian schools and hearing how their thought processes work?
His removal of stating it was proof of his original statement by altering his premise…
I never said it was a fair polling - I said that there were Christian schools out there that were crap. If I have encountered ONE Christian school that is crap, then that’s a valid statement.
Yes, only if you change what your first statement is.
Same thing goes for the Israel issue. You popped off before and laid into someone who has first hand knowledge, as do I, using your knowledge from where? More cousins? And to further it, your premise is one of non-anger, what a joke for such an angry man!
I am glad you have no power, bc it is hard for me to believe that you would not use it in a manner that is simalar to terrorists. Pop off on anything you do not like with aggression as your first solution.
And having knolwedge that this is what you do makes your actions purpose driven - scary.
By Jack
May 2, 2006 03:36 PM | Link to this
“from a real young one(sapling). the interior of the trunk. YUMMY!”
I could go somewhere with this one! (door wide open. LOL)
By Chilao
May 2, 2006 03:36 PM | Link to this
Jack - here’s one for your head, the cd serenaded me into work this morning: Rock My Plimsoul (Beck/Stewart)
It reminded me I played that Greensleeves at about 12 as a piano solo at a recital.
By Chilao
May 2, 2006 03:44 PM | Link to this
“from a real young one(sapling). the interior of the trunk. YUMMY!” I could go somewhere with this one! (door wide open. LOL)
well, know that you mention it. LOL
My two little sisters had 100-percent private religious education. and only got public school their last two years of COLLEGE. You want to meet some extremely resentful kids (over the private religious education). Man, they still have major attitude about it.
By Chilao
May 2, 2006 03:47 PM | Link to this
Did we all notice the nationwide shut-down yesterday?
I caught something on the news about it last night. I must have been too busy at work and missed it. LOL
By Julia
May 2, 2006 03:52 PM | Link to this
Hey Tim! Still celebrating?
Jack-LOL at the coconuts!!! What’s playing in your head this afternoon on radio WJCK?
Sammy Hagar’s “Your Love Is Driving Me Crazy” is on now.
By Jack
May 2, 2006 04:02 PM | Link to this
Been singing Heart’s “Crazy on You”
By The72John
May 2, 2006 04:03 PM | Link to this
Fatty, the only troll here is you, with your constant claims of intellectual and experiential superiority.
You constantly makes claims of absolute knowledge with far less basis than my anecdotal experience with the graduates of Christian schools, yet you choose to take me to task for something that every single person on this board does.
As for the Israeli question, my opinions are based on history, facts, and impartiality. I know people who have lived in that country on both sides of the not-so-metaphorical fence, but I suppose that yet again, you will tell me that your knowledge is superior.
Fatty, please allow me to invite you to stop speaking to me, period. You condescending, arrogant, far-less-educated-than-you-pretend twit.
By Tim
May 2, 2006 04:09 PM | Link to this
Julia… celebrated BIG time Saturday… had soooo much fun!!!! had to have a day of recovery on Sunday (gettin too old for all that lol)… the celebration will start back up on Saturday when we leave for a week of fun in the sun in Puerto Vallarta… hay Papi!!!!
(now playing “unbreak my heart (remix)” Toni Braxton)
By kimberly
May 2, 2006 04:18 PM | Link to this
I was a willow last night in my dream….
By Jack
May 2, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this
Hi Sweetness. Been busy today eh?
By FatMoose
May 2, 2006 04:28 PM | Link to this
Fatty (3rd grade name calling again - nice), the only troll here is you, with your constant claims of intellectual and experiential superiority.
You make that claim about me and I have not. So, again you are arguing with your fabricated premise that you projected.
You constantly makes claims of absolute knowledge with far less basis than my anecdotal experience with the graduates of Christian schools, yet you choose to take me to task for something that every single person on this board does.
Nope, that is how you take my positions/opinions on subjects. And, yes I take you to task for being a hypocrite. I have never stating my knowledge is absolute or superior, but your post DO follow that notion. This is just your latest example.
Do some people have an issue with me staying on topic and having an opinion that I back up? Sure, but how people perceive another is largely based on their bias and not to do with the logic of their point. Chuck is an example of this: Although he rarely (sorry chuck) has a good point, if he does, you slam him for any past doings irregardless of ANY connection.
Your an angry man looking for a fight is all. Who bullied you so bad, and why don’t you realized they are still in control of you? You would be happier for it.
Fatty, please allow me to invite you to stop speaking to me, period.
With pleasure, yet I expect you to adhere to it too seeing as you are the instigator on the board.
By FatMoose
May 2, 2006 04:34 PM | Link to this
Talk about a mind-job:
Woke up this morning thinking it was Saturday. Was considering getting the leash, frizbee and dog ready to go to the park and then it hit me:It is only Tuesday and I have to get moving to work.
Must have been the wonderfull weather…at least I got 10min of ignorant bliss;)
By Jack
May 2, 2006 04:56 PM | Link to this
Woof, woof!!!! Gotta go. Stop in more often Kim, miss ya.
By Tim
May 3, 2006 08:24 AM | Link to this
RF… hey sorry I didn’t respond to you yesterday… I scrolled over your message and didn’t even see it the first time… I didn’t want you to think I was ignoring you :)… I did have a WONDERFUL bday… it was definitely one of the best so far
By Jack
May 3, 2006 09:33 AM | Link to this
The ladies will like this one.
LETTER FROM A FARM KID,
(NOW AT San Diego MARINE CORPS RECRUIT TRAINING)
Dear Ma and Pa,
I am well. Hope you are. Tell Brother Walt and Brother Elmer the Marine Corps beats working for old man Minch by a mile. Tell them to join up quick before all of the places are filled.
I was restless at first because you got to stay in bed till nearly 6 a.m., but I am getting so I like to sleep late. Tell Walt and Elmer all you do before breakfast is smooth your cot, and shine some things. No hogs to slop, feed to pitch, mash to mix, wood to split, fire to lay. Practically nothing.
Men got to shave but it is not so bad, there’s warm water. Breakfast is strong on trimmings like fruit juice, cereal, eggs, bacon, etc., but kind of weak on chops, potatoes, ham, steak, fried eggplant, pie and other regular food, but tell Walt and Elmer you can always sit by the two city boys that live on coffee. Their food plus yours holds you until noon when you get fed again. It’s no wonder these city boys can’t walk much.
We go on “route marches,” which the platoon sergeant says are long walks to harden us. I f he thinks so, it’s not my place to tell him different. A “route march” is about as far as to our mailbox at home. Then the city guys get sore feet and we all ride back in trucks.
The country is nice but awful flat The sergeant is like a school teacher. He nags a lot. The Captain is like the school board. Majors and colonels just ride around and frown. They don’t bother you none.
This next will kill Walt and Elmer with laughing. I keep getting medals for shooting. I don’t know why. The bulls-eye is near as big as a chipmunk head and don’t move, and it ain’t shooting at you like the Higgett boys at home. All you got to do is lie there all comfortable and hit it. You don’t even load your own cartridges. They come in boxes.
Then we have what they call hand-to-hand combat training. You get to wrestle with them city boys. I have to be real careful though, they break real easy. It ain’t like fighting with that ole bull at home. I’m about the best they got in this excep t for that Tug Jordan from over in Silver Lake. I only beat him once. He joined up the same time as me, but I’m only 5’6” and 130 pounds and he’s 6’8” and near 300 pounds dry.
Be sure to tell Walt and Elmer to hurry and join before other fellers get onto this setup and come stampeding in.
Your loving daughter, Alice
By Scalia
May 3, 2006 09:41 AM | Link to this
RF—I agree with your 1 p.m. or 2:00 posts yesterday. I’m tired of the battle. Half your kids turning in projects. The other half not caring if they get an F. The parents don’t care. The kids can’t tell time by 5th grade, and lapse time is a joke. Their spelling is atrocious. They don’t listen to anything but extremely suggestive rap songs. They have little to no respect for authorities or parents.
On the other hand, you have the really bright kids that say the smartest things. But the negative seems to outshine the positive because you can’t teach the brighter kids because the ones that can’t read, etc. are so distracting. I can tell you that maybe four or five of my students honestly say that they love to read.
By Jack
May 3, 2006 09:49 AM | Link to this
Scalia. You couldn’t have said it better. Good post.
By Renee
May 3, 2006 09:54 AM | Link to this
Scalia, I agree good comment. It always goes back to parenting.
By lozen
May 3, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this
I’ve been so busy this week haven’t had time to check in but… I got this email this morning I just have to tell you all about.
My Dear in christ. Greetings in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, I am Mrs.Jennifer kimberly,a widow to Late james kimberly, I am 64years old,I am now a new Christian convert,suffering from long time cancer of the breast.From all indications my condition is really deteriorating and it’s quite obvious that I won’t live more than two months according to my doctors. This is because the cancer stage has gotten to a very bad stage. My late husband was killed during the US raid against terrorism in Afghanistan,and during the period of our marriage we couldn’t produce any child.My late husband was very wealthy and after his death,I inherited all his business and wealth. The doctor has advised me that I may not live for more than two months, so I now decided to divide part of this wealth, to contribute to the development of the church in Africa, America, Asia and Europe. (Yeah, I really, really want to see the development of the church!)
I selected you after visiting the website *(what website?)and I prayed over it, I am willing to donate the sum of $9.5 Million Us Dollars to you for the less privileged.* (Does this make sense or What?) Please I want you to note that this fund is lying in a security company and upon my instruction, you will file in an application for the transfer of the money in your name. Lastly, I honestly pray that this money when transferred will be used for the said purpose, because I have come to findout that wealth acquisition without Christ is vanity upon vanity. May the Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you and your family. I await your urgent reply. kindly contact my lawyer BARR JOSEPH KOFFO and his email address: joseph_koffo_chambers2@yahoo.com Yours in Christ. Mrs.Jennifer kimberly
She selected ME not chuck or randy or zack! It pays to be a non-believer! I can’t wait to get my millions, uh, I mean the millions for the “less privileged and the church.”
By Renee
May 3, 2006 10:16 AM | Link to this
Lozen sounds like you hit the jackpot.
By Tim
May 3, 2006 10:18 AM | Link to this
lozen… remember your chilrens!!!!! :)
By Chilao
May 3, 2006 10:23 AM | Link to this
Lozen - you better sign right up, do what she wants. she has let you know in her first sentence and even in her salutation, she a very honorable individual. Certainly cannot be any scam involved there. hahahahahah
without that, that would certainly look like one of those Nigerian/Burkina Faso scams. LOL
By Chilao
May 3, 2006 10:27 AM | Link to this
Jack- i had a phonetic typo yesterday, that should have been “NOW that you mention it” not “know that you mention it”
By Jack
May 3, 2006 10:31 AM | Link to this
Lozen. Let us know how much the application fee is. Clark would love this one.
By RF
May 3, 2006 10:41 AM | Link to this
~~Mornin’ all~~
Lozen- oh by all means, you must sign up for that!! Imagine how they chose you to represent such christian love!! LOL The scary thing is there’s always one out there who will believe those e-mails!!
Scalia- I know how you feel!!(nodding my head in sympathy) My oldest and I just worked out butts off on his George Washington project this past weekend (including a four-foot tall drawing of George-now that was an experience!!). It just kills me that parents choose not to care and be involved. June’s coming—hang in there!!
By Julia
May 3, 2006 10:43 AM | Link to this
Hey, don’t laugh. She just sent me $10 million. I just quit my job today. (Boy was my boss shocked!)
Just think of all the people I can help with this money.
Don’t I WISH!!! LOL
By Jack
May 3, 2006 11:05 AM | Link to this
I caught your drift Chilao.
By Julia
May 3, 2006 11:08 AM | Link to this
Chuck and Monica-did you get your 10 million too? We’re meeting up at Lozen’s house later…she wants us all to start handing out Christian tracts in her neighborhood. Said she wants to use this money to bring people to Christ.
(She also mentioned a mission trip to Sudan.)
ROFL!
By Jack
May 3, 2006 11:15 AM | Link to this
South America would be much more fun. Rio here we come.
By RF
May 3, 2006 11:18 AM | Link to this
OOOOOkay, the irony of this is hysterical!!
Julia- you too much girl!! I’m just trying to form a picture of lozen handing out religious tracts with all her bangles and baubles and flowing caftans. What a hoot!
By Monica
May 3, 2006 11:18 AM | Link to this
Yeah, lozen, just send directions to your house, and Julia, Chuck, Randy, Zack, and I will come over to help you get started! LOLOL
By Julia
May 3, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this
OK, change of plans. We’re heading to Rio and Jack’s coming with us. (Of course we’re taking a pit stop at the Cayman Islands…because we need a little extra R&R before we get started!)
Monica-are you driving us to lozen’s house?
LOL
By Jack
May 3, 2006 11:30 AM | Link to this
You Know You’re in a Redneck Church if … The finance committee refuses to provide funds for the purchase of a chandelier because none of the members knows how to play one.
You know You’re in a Redneck Church if … People ask, when they learn that Jesus fed the 5000, whether the two fish were bass or catfish, and what bait was used to catch ‘em.
You Know You’re in a Redneck Church if … When the pastor says, “I’d like to ask Bubba to help take up the offering,” five guys and two women stand up.
You Know You’re in a Redneck Church if … Opening day of deer season is recognized as an official church holiday.
You Know You’re in a Redneck Church if… A member of the church requests to be buried in his 4-wheel-drive truck because “It ain’t never been in a hole it couldn’t get out of.”
You Know You’re in a Redneck Church if … The choir is known as the “OK Chorale.”
You Know You’re in a Redneck Church if … In a congregation of 500 members, there are only seven last names in the church directory.
You Know You’re in a Redneck Church if … People think “rapture” is what you get when you lift something too heavy.
You Know You’re in a Redneck Church if … The baptismal pool is a #2 galvanized “Wheeling” washtub.
You Know You’re in a Redneck Church if … The choir robes were donated by and embroidered with the logo from Billy Bob’s Barbecue.
You Know You’re in a Redneck Church if … The collection plates are really hubcaps from a ‘56 Chevy.
You Know You’re in a Redneck Church if … Instead of a bell you are called to service by a duck call.
You Know You’re in a Redneck Church if … The minister and his wife drive matching pickup trucks.
You Know You’re in a Redneck Church if … The communion wine is Boone’s Farm “Tickled Pink”.
You Know You’re in a Redneck Church if… “Thou shall not covet” applies to huntin’ dogs, too.
You know You’re in a Redneck Church if … The final words of the benediction are, “Y’all come back now, Ya hear.”
By RF
May 3, 2006 11:31 AM | Link to this
Well, dang, I’ll pass out tracts if it means the Caymans and Rio!!
By Julia
May 3, 2006 11:44 AM | Link to this
Jack-LOL at this one especially: You Know You’re in a Redneck Church if… A member of the church requests to be buried in his 4-wheel-drive truck because “It ain’t never been in a hole it couldn’t get out of.”
RF-glad to have you aboard! Start packing your bags…and don’t forget your sunscreen.
Anyone ever been to the Cayman’s and fed the stingray? I’ve always wanted to do that. (The closest I’ve gotten is the Myrtle Beach aquarium.)
By RF
May 3, 2006 11:53 AM | Link to this
You Know You’re in a Redneck Church if … In a congregation of 500 members, there are only seven last names in the church directory.
I actually grew up going to a church like that. Scary thing is, they’ve grown since then and I bet there aren’t more than ten names now!
By Renee
May 3, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this
are sinners like me invited?? LOL
By FatMoose
May 3, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this
Anyone ever been to the Cayman’s and fed the stingray?
Yea - fun times there.
I would highly recommend Marshall Islands if looking to scuba and chill out or one of the Fiji islands. Even better if you surf.
By Jack
May 3, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this
Renee’. I don’t think they allow sinners in Rio. HAHAHAHAHA!
By Jack
May 3, 2006 12:07 PM | Link to this
My favorite kind of diving doesn’t involve water. LOL
By RF
May 3, 2006 12:10 PM | Link to this
Renee’. I don’t think they allow sinners in Rio. HAHAHAHAHA!
Yep, and I’m looking at some ocean front property in Arizona!! LOL
Y’all just crazy today!
By chuck
May 3, 2006 12:12 PM | Link to this
Ya’ll only got 10 million?
Lozen I’m glad to hear that you have seen the light.
RF, go ahead and pack your bags, but I ain’t bunkin’ with ya, Bro.
By Scalia
May 3, 2006 12:13 PM | Link to this
Thanks everybody. And RF…you are right. That’s cool that your son put so much time into the project. Teachers really do appreciate hard work. I keep the best projects. This fifth grader wrote a paper on the economic problems in the Dominican Republic and how it is expressed in merengue music and lyrics.
I’m looking forward to some RR.
By candide
May 3, 2006 12:14 PM | Link to this
All Christians are rednecks.
By Scalia
May 3, 2006 12:16 PM | Link to this
Jack…shame on you.
I love those tee shirts that say “Fallopian Swim team” and “Orgasm Donor”.
By chuck
May 3, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this
Scalia, I have a few kids who try to act like that, but as a teacher, you don’t have to put up with it. The legislature passed a law 3-4 years ago that allows you to put disruptive kids out of your class. I have had to do that ONCE. Now the kids understand that if they are a constant class disruption that they won’t be coming back in here. I can put up with a lot, but when they cross the line and constantly interfere with the rights of the other students to an education, they have to go. When you do it, the only hoop you have to jump through is a teacher committee meeting. As long as they agree (and you have documentation), the administration has to find somewhere else to put them.
By FatMoose
May 3, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this
My favorite kind of diving doesn’t involve water. LOL
Dumpster diving? hehe
By Monica
May 3, 2006 12:21 PM | Link to this
Julia, I’ll drive to lozen’s house. I probably live the furthest out, so I’ll just pick everyone up in my minivan - I hope you don’t mind sitting on stale Goldfish and Teddy Graham crumbs.
Jack, the Redneck church - my students wondered why they were quietly working and I suddenly burst out laughing!
By chuck
May 3, 2006 12:25 PM | Link to this
Jack, you are a nasty, nasty, boy.
By Jack
May 3, 2006 12:28 PM | Link to this
Didn’t think of that Moose…but I’m sure you know what kind of diving I was referring to.
By chuck
May 3, 2006 12:28 PM | Link to this
You know you are in a redneck church if every piece of furniture has a little engraved plaque on it telling who donated it.
By chuck
May 3, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this
You know you are in a redneck church if EVERY part and pacel of the property is named…“The Jackson Smith Sidewalk of Prayer and Meditation.”
By Jack
May 3, 2006 12:34 PM | Link to this
Thank you Chuck. LOL
By Kevin
May 3, 2006 12:44 PM | Link to this
Question for Diane, are you truly pro-choice or just pro-abortion? If you were truly pro-choice (as democrats claim to be) you would want to make the choice of television viewing easier by allowing channels such as CBN or VH1 to be excluded from an individual’s channel line-up. Let’s allow the individual to choose which channels they want to pay for.
By RF
May 3, 2006 12:46 PM | Link to this
dont’ worry chuck, you’re not my type anyway dude! :-)
Monica- do you ever drop the crumb munchers off and the golfish fall out into the school driveway?? Now that’s embarassing when the elementary principal gets stale goldfish dropped on her feet. They’ve learned to stand back at my boys’ school in the morning. Hot Wheels, Legos, you name it roll around in the back seat! LOL
By Billy
May 3, 2006 12:57 PM | Link to this
Kevin, have you read the forum at all? We’ve repeatedly said that such a choice would be fine if it actually lowered prices, but that having such a choice would, in no way, decrease the amount of “indecency” on the air. If anything, such shows, which appeal to our basest urges, would be the ones that proliferate under an a-la-carte system.
By lozen
May 3, 2006 01:10 PM | Link to this
Wheeew, supervisor gone finally! Renee, sinners are more than welcome, he, he, he. Thanks a lot Monica! Really it does sound like fun … some of you anyway. Tim, darlin’ you get your share! Jack, the red-neck church is great! Here’s the song I’m humming all day:
Million Ways by Will Downing
“Mmm…hmm…hmm…hmm… This one’s for fellas
Chorus
A million ways to please a woman (Yeah) A million ways to please a woman (A million ways, a million ways) A million ways to please a woman (Hear me now) A million ways to (Ooh) please a woman
A million ways to please a woman And when she’s down, she needs a hug That’s the time to show her love Or maybe just a foot rub
A million ways to please a woman Don’t talk a lot, listen instead You wanna know, get in her head ‘Cause makin’ love just ain’t in the bed, somebody say
Give her candy hearts and Hallmark cards If that’s what she likes If you didn’t know before Then let this be your lesson of life (Million ways) chorus: A million ways to please a woman You got to be her best friend Let her know she can depend Be her rock until the end
A million ways to please a woman When she’s in heat, she needs a freak Represent, put her to sleep Be a man, don’t be weak That’s how you got to please a woman
A million (A million, million ways, a million, million ways) A million ways to (Oh) please a woman (Got to be a million ways) A million (So give her a hug before you make love) A million ways to (Million ways) please a woman
A million ways (Oh…oh…oh…oh…) Please a woman (Million, million ways) A million ways to (To love her, a million ways to hug her) A million ways to please a woman (A million ways) A million ways to please a woman (So give her a hug) A million ways to please a woman (Make love sweet love) A million ways to please a woman.”
By Jack
May 3, 2006 01:11 PM | Link to this
Warning. DO NOT let your young children go to rotten.com on the internet. They will see thing you don’t want them to see. I heard my boys talking about it and I blocked it as soon as I saw what it contained. I joke a lot but I am serious this time.
By Monica
May 3, 2006 01:15 PM | Link to this
Yep, RF, that’s my kind of car! I used to have an immaculate interior in the days BC - before children. It’s really embarassing when I do offer to drive to lunch or something on a teacher work day, and I move one of the car seats; wow, we are pigs!
By Scalia
May 3, 2006 01:15 PM | Link to this
RF- We can bunk. You will have to leave though when I find Rodrigo Santouro, the Brazilian guy from Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle and Love Actually. He was the surfer in Charlie’s Angels.
By Billy
May 3, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this
Yeah, that’s definitely not a site for kids. Or sane adults.
By RF
May 3, 2006 01:28 PM | Link to this
Scalia- we’ll have to have a sign for the door when one of us has the “Brazilian Fever” you know?? LOL
Monica- I went to the car wash and emptied out all the door pockets, moved booster seats, etc. It was GROSS! I didn’t know whether to get the vacuum or the shovel!! LOL But I cherish every minute of it. They grow up SO fast!!
By Jack
May 3, 2006 01:37 PM | Link to this
Where’s Kimberly?
By lozen
May 3, 2006 01:43 PM | Link to this
Wheeew, supervisor gone finally! Renee, sinners are more than welcome, he, he, he. Thanks a lot Monica! Really it does sound like fun … some of you anyway. Tim, darlin’ you get your share! Jack, the red-neck church is great! Here’s the song I’m humming all day:
Million Ways by Will Downing
“Mmm…hmm…hmm…hmm… This one’s for fellas
Chorus
A million ways to please a woman (Yeah) A million ways to please a woman (A million ways, a million ways) A million ways to please a woman (Hear me now) A million ways to (Ooh) please a woman
A million ways to please a woman And when she’s down, she needs a hug That’s the time to show her love Or maybe just a foot rub
A million ways to please a woman Don’t talk a lot, listen instead You wanna know, get in her head ‘Cause makin’ love just ain’t in the bed, somebody say
Give her candy hearts and Hallmark cards If that’s what she likes If you didn’t know before Then let this be your lesson of life (Million ways) chorus: A million ways to please a woman You got to be her best friend Let her know she can depend Be her rock until the end
A million ways to please a woman When she’s in heat, she needs a freak Represent, put her to sleep Be a man, don’t be weak That’s how you got to please a woman
A million (A million, million ways, a million, million ways) A million ways to (Oh) please a woman (Got to be a million ways) A million (So give her a hug before you make love) A million ways to (Million ways) please a woman
A million ways (Oh…oh…oh…oh…) Please a woman (Million, million ways) A million ways to (To love her, a million ways to hug her) A million ways to please a woman (A million ways) A million ways to please a woman (So give her a hug) A million ways to please a woman (Make love sweet love) A million ways to please a woman.”
By lozen
May 3, 2006 01:45 PM | Link to this
Scalia, you might like RF better than Rodrigo Santouro!
By Jack
May 3, 2006 01:47 PM | Link to this
Lozen I’ll have to get my fan if you keep posting that song. :)
By Billy
May 3, 2006 01:50 PM | Link to this
Isn’t there really only one way to please a woman? Do everything she says?
By Monica
May 3, 2006 01:54 PM | Link to this
RF, my “heart song” for today: my two year old standing in the window by the doorway, waving and saying, “Bye Mama Bye Mama Bye Mama Bye Mama Bye Mama!” Yes, they do grow up so fast. Do you have those days at work when you miss them more than usual? I can’t wait to get home!
By RF
May 3, 2006 02:04 PM | Link to this
Oh geez, Monica, I used to leave during my planning period and fly down the road to daycare to see them during naptime!! Now they’re a mile or so away at school and I can’t wait to see them some days. I go out to the bus ramp and meet them, and even at 9 and 8 they still get my heart!! I know how you feel!
By Chilao
May 3, 2006 02:13 PM | Link to this
and here I thought the punch line for that million ways to please a woman post was going to be a one-liner of: “And one way to please a man…” LOL
By Julia
May 3, 2006 02:17 PM | Link to this
I hope you don’t mind sitting on stale Goldfish and Teddy Graham crumbs.
Monica-Thank God,I thought I was the only one!!!
By Julia
May 3, 2006 02:31 PM | Link to this
RF-what about all those Burger King/Happy Meal toys!!! Thanks to you and Monica I don’t feel so bad now. ;)
FM-As far as beaches go which is better Cayman or Fiji? (I’ve always wanted to go to both.)
Monica-I definitely have days like that. Today is one of them.
By Julia
May 3, 2006 02:34 PM | Link to this
On our trip let’s remember to stay out of the palm trees!!!
ROFL!
By Monica
May 3, 2006 02:39 PM | Link to this
Is the sequel to “Million Ways to Please a Woman” called “Fifty Ways to Leave Your Lover” (just slip out the back, Jack. Make a new plan, Stan. You don’t need to be coy Roy…).
By RF
May 3, 2006 02:50 PM | Link to this
Julia- I threw away about a dozen of those not too long ago from out of the truck!! I periodically go through the toy buckets in the house after the little crumb munchers are in bed and throw out all the Happy Meal toys from the bottom of the buckets. But let them see a new one on TV and off we go to Mickey D’s!!
Monica “Just hop on the bus Gus, no need to discuss MUCH…just drop off the key Lee, and get yourself free…”
By Tim
May 3, 2006 02:51 PM | Link to this
Julia… I’ve never been to either… but I would think Fiji would be better… from what I’ve seen… if I got to choose where to go between the two… I would choose Fiji
By RF
May 3, 2006 02:51 PM | Link to this
Monica and Julia- y’all stop talking about missing the little ones!! Now I’m counting the minutes till they get here! LOL
By RF
May 3, 2006 03:02 PM | Link to this
Tim- flip a coin, I’d take either one. Lots of beach, lots of sun, scantily clad scenery… MAN do I need a vacation!!! LOL When are you leaving for south of the border fun?
By Julia
May 3, 2006 03:03 PM | Link to this
Those “I love you Mommy“‘s in the morning are what get me through the day.
Tim-I was thinking the same thing…Fiji it is! (Once I win the lottery.) Maybe I’ll check the net and find a Fiji beach photo to use as my computer wallpaper….
By Renee
May 3, 2006 03:04 PM | Link to this
Wait until your little ones get to be the age of my big one. You won’t be able to count the days until they are gone. LOL JK…..well, sometimes, LOL…
By Jack
May 3, 2006 03:05 PM | Link to this
HAHAHAHAHA! I want to hear that when they are teenagers. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
By Chilao
May 3, 2006 03:06 PM | Link to this
the second Anaconda movie, Anacondas:The Hunt for the Blue Orchid, was filmed in Fiji.
now, never mind they are no anacondas outside Central/South America, those more like burmese pythons(for where the movie was supposed to be taking place, SE Asia, but.LOL)
beautiful scenery, if you saw the flick.
By kimberly
May 3, 2006 03:07 PM | Link to this
Hey Jack! All busied up this week, Hon. Stop by to read now & then, though. smooch!
By Tim
May 3, 2006 03:12 PM | Link to this
RF… well I certainly wouldn’t turn down a trip to either lol… we leave Saturday morning… I’m sooooo ready!
Julia… I have a picture of the view from the balcony of the room we will be staying in when we are in Puerto Vallarta… it overlooks the ocean… ahhh 2 1/2 days!!!
I don’t have any lil ones yet… but my mom told me a story that when my sister was about 3 or 4 when my mom dropped her off at daycare my sister looked up at her with her big blue eyes and said “mommy you can have alllll the pennies in my piggy bank if you will just stay home with me”… my mom said she cried the entire way to work… I was like ok not so sure I want munchkins anymore lol
By RF
May 3, 2006 03:12 PM | Link to this
I figure when mine are teenagers, that’s when I’ll do what my dad did-hold the car and money hostage until the grass is cut, the trash taken out, etc., etc.!!! LOL
By Jack
May 3, 2006 03:14 PM | Link to this
XOXOXOXOX
By RF
May 3, 2006 03:15 PM | Link to this
Renee- so you’re at the rolling eyes stage where everything you say is lame, huh? As I read in The Prince of Tides—-“teenagers, by definition, are not fit for society.” As I survey my room today, I have to agree. I love ‘em, but they do know how to irritate!
By RF
May 3, 2006 03:16 PM | Link to this
somebody get the fan- Jack needs it!
By kimberly
May 3, 2006 03:22 PM | Link to this
Sentimental Mommy stuff: UGH! So when my girl was a sweet tot, I’d always kiss the back of her little hand with my freshly painted lips when dropping her off at daycare. Then I’d show her, “Look, you have mommy’s kiss to keep with you!” The good stuff lasts for hours, you know. {;->
By Jack
May 3, 2006 03:24 PM | Link to this
Teenagers are God’s punishment for enjoying sex. (wait and see)
By Jack
May 3, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this
I agree. If it’s good, it will last hours! Heehee.
By Renee
May 3, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this
RF - if it was only eye-rolling life would be good. Right now, she knows everything, I know absolutely nothing, I don’t understand anything, and basically I just get in her way. When she wants to “chill with her friends” I’m interrupting her with those pesky chores that I should be doing….because of course my sole purpose in life is to make her miserable. I look at her and wonder where o where that sweet little tike went, LOL.
By RF
May 3, 2006 03:39 PM | Link to this
Jack- considering the way I see teenagers act every day, I figure their parents must have really enjoyed sex if this is their punishment!! LOL
By Julia
May 3, 2006 03:51 PM | Link to this
Tim-You’re a lucky, lucky fella!!! Take lots of pictures….well, not that we’ll get to see them…(sob)…but you can put them on your computer.
By RF
May 3, 2006 03:52 PM | Link to this
Renee- the sweet one went away when hormones kicked in and boys got cute!! I’m not looking forward to those years. Well, my still nice guys are here so I’m off to buy Lego’s (progress reports were good ) Have a good one all!
By Tim
May 3, 2006 04:06 PM | Link to this
Julia… I always say I’m gonna take lots of pics and then always end up not… I will attempt to take lots of pics this time… we shall see how that works out
By Julia
May 3, 2006 04:07 PM | Link to this
Tim-Oh my gosh! I hope you know that when I typed “sob” that I meant it like when a person cries…I hope you didn’t think I was calling you an SOB!!!
By hewhoasks
May 3, 2006 04:10 PM | Link to this
I’m very sympathetic to Shaunti’s viewpoint on being forced to pay for channels that are not wanted. I’m not: I don’t buy cable or satellite access. And that’s part of the reason I don’t buy. In essence such services give you a much larger number of channels not to watch. I can not watch all of them for free.
It’s skewing the evidence to claim that wanting more “family friendly” TV is directed at solely at cable channels, which have somewhat looser decency standards. I’ve seen plenty of what I regard as raunch on broadcast TV. Worse, the rules of broadcast TV require that sex be treated trivially, dishonestly, and inappropriately. The rules for portraying violence and cruelty are far more lax, but TV, being TV, also treats those trivially, dishonestly, and inappropriately. The major result is that we breed a generation that views most of life trivially, dishonestly, and inappropriately: it’s what they’ve experienced as they grew up.
Unbundling cable packages won’t improve quality: the lack of quality is too pervasive. It might still be a good and proper thing to do: why force people to pay for channels they never, ever want to watch?
P.S. My wife and I watched part of “Network” this week. It’s a poor movie, as far as we’re concerned, but the attitude isn’t all that bad. (We watched the beginning and then skipped to the last 4 DVD chapters.) The cynicism about the motives and taste of TV executives was a little off target in terms of the crap they’d put on but the crap on TV today is close enough to make the movie an accurate prediction of what would come (and did come.) And why.
By Tim
May 3, 2006 04:31 PM | Link to this
lol @ Julia… I knew what you meant hahaha
By Chilao
May 3, 2006 04:34 PM | Link to this
Network? it that that Peter Finch saying We’re mad as hell and we aren’t going to take it anymore flick?
He’s better in Wolfen but… LOL
By Julia
May 3, 2006 04:59 PM | Link to this
One more hour and I’ll be getting a hug from my little guy.
Tim-Your story about your sister and her piggy bank brought tears to my eyes!
Good evening everyone…
By Tim
May 4, 2006 08:29 AM | Link to this
Julia… good morning… when my mom told me that story it made me tear up too lol… oh and I wanted to tell you I heard Bohemian Rhapsody (sp) this morning on my way to work… I turned it up and thought of you lol
By Julia
May 4, 2006 08:40 AM | Link to this
Hi Tim! Looks like we’re the early birds this morning. I’ve got to plan a beach trip soon. We’ll probably go back to Myrtle Beach.
By Tim
May 4, 2006 08:48 AM | Link to this
yes we are the early birds Julia lol… I can’t wait to get to the beach… I grew up in Fl so I am used to frequent trips to the beach… the last time I was at the beach was in August… that is entirely too long lol
By Julia
May 4, 2006 09:00 AM | Link to this
It was last September for me. But since school starts in August I guess we’ll have to jo in June or July. We usually go in September when the rates are better but all the seasonal stuff is still open.
Myrtle Beach has at least 3 amusement parks & I have a 5 year old son…need I say more? Then there’s the aquarium and all the putt-putt you can handle. He has a blast!
I just love the atmosphere at the beach. Every time we go I always consider moving there.
(Tom Petty’s “Refugee” playing on my Yahoo Launchcast Player.)
By Julia
May 4, 2006 09:01 AM | Link to this
It was last September for me. But since school starts in August I guess we’ll have to jo in June or July. We usually go in September when the rates are better but all the seasonal stuff is still open.
Myrtle Beach has at least 3 amusement parks & I have a 5 year old son…need I say more? Then there’s the aquarium and all the putt-putt you can handle. He has a blast!
I just love the atmosphere at the beach. Every time we go I always consider moving there.
(Tom Petty’s “Refugee” playing on my Yahoo Launchcast Player.)
By RF
May 4, 2006 09:20 AM | Link to this
Mornin’!! Julia, were those hugs sweet yesterday or what?? Mine looked at me like I had two heads, but they hugged me anyway!!LOL We all piled in my bed last night and palyed with our classic convertibles collection until WAY past bedtime last night. I love having an excuse to be a kid!!
How sad is this? My brother lives a block off the beach just south of Daytona, and we haven’t been down there since last summer!!! We’re going just as soooooon as we can after school gets out this year. I can’t wait!
By RF
May 4, 2006 09:22 AM | Link to this
Mornin’ to you too Tim!! I just realized I left your name off the last post. Didn’t want to be rude- my sweet southern grandma would rise from the grave and haunt me for that!! LOL
By Julia
May 4, 2006 09:24 AM | Link to this
“Killer Queen” playing now. Tim-are you a fan of Queen? My all time fave has to be “We Will Rock You”.
By Tim
May 4, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this
Julia… I’ve never been but that sure sounds like a great place for a munchkin… once we have children there will be a lot more kid friendly vacations (I honestly cant wait for that!!!!!)… but until that time comes I honestly don’t have much of a desire to be around rug rats while I’m on vacation… there are a lot of queens I’m a fan of… oh wait you meant the group lol… I do like their music but I must say I don’t know a lot of their stuff… it may be cliche with I do think Bohemian Rhapsody is one of the all time greats
good morning RF… no worries… I did the same thing to you the other day… we’re even… and I know what you mean about the Southern Grandma’s… I have two of em :) RF…
By Monica
May 4, 2006 09:38 AM | Link to this
Mornin’ all! Julia, this past Chrismas my in-laws bought a truck for my 2-year old that moves with the touch of a button. He has great fun with it. However, this truck also plays “We Will, We Will Rock You.” Not the whole song, but the first few lines of the song and of course the “rock you” part. I don’t know if I am amused or horrified that my son knows the words to Queen!
RF, We had extra long before bedtime cuddles last night as well! Maybe we should start a parent’s blog, other than the current MOMania!
By chuck
May 4, 2006 09:45 AM | Link to this
Good morning all!!
Thought I would start a new topic today…Top 10 punishments for Moussoui(sp).
10) Make him spend 3 days a week with Louis Farrankan
9) Out him in the General Population at Riker’s Island
8) Drop him from the Empire State Building
7) Use Jack’s rusty hacksaw on him
6) Put him in any prison…Roommate? Jim Bakker
5) Put him in drag and drop him off at “Christopher Street?”
4) Make him listen to speeches by Joe Biden…electric shock if he falls asleep
3) Make him respond negatively to EVERY ONE of 72john’s posts
2) Make him live under the bridge with Jack
1) Put him in the same prison in Colorado, but make him watch 23 hours a day of the 700 Club
By Julia
May 4, 2006 09:47 AM | Link to this
RF-Good morning to you too. Yeah, isn’t it great going into a Toys R Us. The first time I ever went into one for my son was a blast! It was like being a kid again. (Except this time I get to play with boys toys-the trucks, cars, trains and Spiderman stuff-all the stuff I never got to play with growing up. LOL
By chuck
May 4, 2006 09:53 AM | Link to this
Enjoy ‘em while they are young. My son won’t sit on my lap anymore. He thinks because he’s in college (and 6’2” to my 5’9”) that he doesn’t need Dad anymore…except for gas money. I still kiss him on top of his head when I wake him up in the morning. My “little” girl will still come sit with me at 15. We’ll see how long that lasts.
By Julia
May 4, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this
Monica-We have t-ball tonight at 5:45. Only 5 more games left!
Do you & RF feel the same way I do about the twist ties they put on toys nowadays? It takes 20 minutes sometimes just to get one toy out of a box! Good grief!
By RF
May 4, 2006 10:15 AM | Link to this
Julia- there’s some little Asian folks getting paid pennies an hour to package those things, and they’re getting a big laugh at “those rich American- have to work hours to get toy out of package-HAHAHAHA!!”
I can’t stand opening toys these days. I just wonder how they get so many dang twist ties in so many places!! LOL At least my two angels are old enough to open their own doggone twist ties now!
By RF
May 4, 2006 10:18 AM | Link to this
chuck- My almost ten year old asked me the other day when he could get a cell phone!! After I regained my composure, he told me there are kids in his fourth grade class that have them already. Are some of the parents completely crazy now or what?
By Tim
May 4, 2006 10:20 AM | Link to this
Julia those twist ties are INSANE… I spend half of Christmas day trying to get a stupid cabbage patch doll out of the box for my 6 year old little sister… it was a lot of fun when she looked at me and told me I wasn’t very good at it lol
By Renee
May 4, 2006 10:35 AM | Link to this
Chuck - you weren’t trying to hide the racial undertones in your list were you?
By Jack
May 4, 2006 10:38 AM | Link to this
Hi Everyone. I’m busy today so I cannot post as much as I like. Chuck the only problem with number 2 is that he wouldn’t live very long. Since he didn’t get the death penalty, he should be equipted with a shock belt and 4 times a day at random times, someone will hit the button and bring him to the floor. I’ll be glad to man the button.
By RF
May 4, 2006 10:38 AM | Link to this
My youngest asked me last Christmas, “why did the elves put so many twisty things on my toys?” I told him it was just in case Santa dropped them down the chimney so they wouldn’t rattle and wake us up!! LOL He accepted that story! LOL
By Monica
May 4, 2006 10:41 AM | Link to this
I am convinced that those twist ties are the creation of the devil, conceived for the purpose of making us say swear words while celebrating the birth of our Lord.
By Jack
May 4, 2006 10:44 AM | Link to this
That’s why I wanted a daughter Chuck. I haven’t been allowed to kiss my children for about 10 years. A daughter will kiss her Dad forever.
By Julia
May 4, 2006 10:47 AM | Link to this
Morning Chuck! I cherish every hug and kiss believe me. Great list by the way. I’ve got my own list to add…
10-Prison roommates are: Tammy Faye Bakker, Dee Snyder (in full costume!) and Marilyn Manson 9-Must write on blackboard “I Love America” 10,000 times a day for the rest of his life…in his own blood 8-His prison food will consist solely of ALL of the gross items ever used on FEAR FACTOR 7-His prison cell must contain 500 rats and 1,000 huge spiders (including tarantulas) 6-Nose hairs plucked out every day 5-24 hour reruns of “The Facts Of Life”…throw in free tshirt that says “I Love Tootie” 4-Let Mike Tyson use him for a punching bag…or a snack 3-The old honey and fire ant treatment 2-Cosmetic surgery to make him look like John Kerry 1-Dress him up as Monica Lewinsky and have him spend the weekend servicing Bill ClintonBy Jack
May 4, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this
They need to just surgically remove his manhood and put him in with the general prison population. They would take very good care of him.
By chuck
May 4, 2006 10:58 AM | Link to this
Yep, RF. Totally nuts. You will really appreciate this. I am giving an end of the year test that covers everything. I am giving them a study guide tomorrow. One of the parents e-mailed me a thank you for giving them a study guide, but accidentally did it in a reply page that had another parent’s email to her on it. She apparently just changed the e-mail address without erasing the e-mail. The other parent was in yesterday THANKING me for challenging the kids, but in the e-mail she was telling the other parent how ridiculous it was for me to give them a test covering everything. I cracked up when I got it.
What is even funnier is that she sent the math teacher an e-mail and accidentally included an e-mail exchange between her and another parent COMPLAINING that my class was too hard. All sugary face to face but poison behind the back.
By Tim
May 4, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this
hey hey… ease up on Tammy Faye… Mrs. Messner is actually a wonderful human being… we would be lucky if more people had a heart like hers… very very sweet woman
By Tim
May 4, 2006 11:04 AM | Link to this
any teacher I had during school that was an a***** my mom told them they were an a***** to their face… and most people were usually able to hear it 3 doors down… what fun I had in those classes
By chuck
May 4, 2006 11:06 AM | Link to this
I love your list Julia especially the t-shirt.
Jack, you are so right. Just catch the boys while they are asleep.
I lost my Dad to lung cancer last February. I’d give just about anything to be able to give him a kiss on the top of his head. Wouldn’t have thought of doing that from 16-25. After 25, I realized how much he meant to me and always gave him a hug and a kiss when I saw him.
By chuck
May 4, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this
Maybe Tammy Faye could just come in once a week to do his make-up.
By Julia
May 4, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this
Chuck-I lost my granddad to lung cancer two February’s ago. (I’ll remember the kiss them while they sleep trick!)
Sorry Tim.
I’ll bet Jack would have a GREAT list for us…
By Tim
May 4, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this
EXCELLENT idea Chuck!!!!
By Julia
May 4, 2006 11:27 AM | Link to this
ROFL at Monica’s last post.
Great idea Chuck-about the makeup…but maybe we could just dress him up as Dee Snyder of Twister Sister (wig and all)!LOL
By Tim
May 4, 2006 11:39 AM | Link to this
no worries Julia
By Jack
May 4, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this
I lost my Dad at 15. He never got to see my boys. I never got to talk to him man to man.
We shouldn’t send Tammy-Faye. She is a real female and wouldn’t want any chance of him enjoying anything. Send in Tiny Tim.
By chuck
May 4, 2006 12:00 PM | Link to this
Even better Jack…tiptoe through the tulips
By lozen
May 4, 2006 01:13 PM | Link to this
I am having to work! I miss you terribly! Well, some of you anyway…. Tim, I loved PV because it’s a real town, unlike Cancun. Have fun!
Billy: Isn’t there really only one way to please a woman? Do everything she says? No. We don’t respect men like that just as you wouldn’t respect a woman like that, right?
By Tim
May 4, 2006 01:32 PM | Link to this
lozen… thanks mah… I am looking forward to it… it seems like a really cool place from what I have read… seems touristy but not a total tourist trap like Cancun… PV is about the only place the other half would agree to go to in Mexico lol
By candide
May 4, 2006 02:23 PM | Link to this
Check out truthdig.com. Christians in Colorado are running dances for girls with intact hymens. Who is going to check the state of hymens at the door?
This is what Christian nuts will do to this country if they are not stopped now.
Kill a Christer, save America!
By Billy
May 4, 2006 02:24 PM | Link to this
Well, lozen, if everything I tell her to do is within reason, it’s just a bonus!
;-) j/k!
By Scalia
May 4, 2006 02:24 PM | Link to this
Tim…you should try Acapulco. Cool place. The divers rock, and are way more ballsy than I could ever be. They jump from these extremely high cliffs. I was like, oh hell nah!
By RF
May 4, 2006 02:32 PM | Link to this
Scalia- but they’re certainly fun to watch!!!
By Tim
May 4, 2006 02:34 PM | Link to this
Scalia… sounds fun… I wouldn’t be jumpin off a rock either… I’m a lil nervous of water… well I’m not afraid of the water… I’m just not so sure about everything in the water… the other half is trying to convince me we need to scuba dive… I made sure I am his beneficiary and then told him to go have fun… I’ll wait in the boat lol… I told him I MAY snorkle but ONLY if I can stay right next to the boat… I know… I’m a big ol chicken… but I’m a big ol chicken that doesn’t have to worry about Jaws lol
By chuck
May 4, 2006 02:49 PM | Link to this
duh duh
duh duh
duh duh duh duh duh duh duh duh duh duh duh duh duh duh
By Jack
May 4, 2006 03:00 PM | Link to this
For a while there I thought everone had left to go to Rio.
By Julia
May 4, 2006 03:13 PM | Link to this
I could say something to “candide” but I’m just going to refrain……
Tim-I’m right there with ya’…after watching Jaws I’ll never go too far out in the ocean. But did you know they say most shark attacks occur in 3 feet of water? Still…I’m not taking any chances!
By RF
May 4, 2006 03:19 PM | Link to this
Thursday…brain is fried. Man has this been a long week or what? And I am just about a mile past done!!
Tim- don’t blame you. I don’t swim in anything I can’t see the bottom and sides of! I love boating, not afraid of the water, but I’m soooo not swimming where I can’t see what’s about to chow down on me.
By chuck
May 4, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this
Terrible News from the WEB:
Pop N. Fresh died. Here’s his obituary:
Veteran Pillsbury spokesman Pop N. Fresh died Wednesday of a severe yeast infection He was 71.
He was buried Friday in one of the biggest funerals in years. Dozens of celebrities turned out including Mrs. Butterworth, the California Raisins, Hungry Jack, Betty Crocker, and the Hostess Twinkies The graveside was piled high with flours, as longtime friend Aunt Jemima delivered the eulogy, describing Fresh as a man who “never knew he was kneaded”.
Fresh rose quickly in show business, but his later life was filled with turnovers. He was not considered a smart cookie, and wasted much of his dough on half-baked schemes. Still, even as a crusty old man, he was a roll model to millions. Fresh is survived by his second wife. They had two children, and… one in the oven.
By Jack
May 4, 2006 03:27 PM | Link to this
Good one Chuck. Julia/Tim, it may be of comfort to know that humans taste very bad to sharks and other predators. All the preservatives and all. Look at all of the attacks, one bite and they spit us out! (if I was a shark I would probably take a bite of K—, J——, or M—-, and L——. LOL)
By Tim
May 4, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this
Julia… amen to that… I like my chances in 3 ft of water… at least I can still stand and try to get away lol… my aunt one time convinced me to go out farther (I think I was about 16 or 17)… we get out to where the water was at my neck (I am almost 6’1” so for me I felt VERY far out in the water)… I then saw something… my aunt was like… it’s your imagination… about 10 seconds later I saw it again… I said bull s** that’s not my imagination that was a fin!… and I was on shore before she knew it lol… when we both got to shore there were about 15 people standing there… they had been trying to get our attention… why?… well only about 10 ft from where we had been was a school of about 10 or 12 sharks… I was like “YOU SEE THERE!!! The ONE time I go out there I almost become shark bait!!!” lol… havent been out that far since lol
RF… I dont even like swimming in blacked tiled pools… you cant see the bottom… and growing up in Fl… it’s not that unusual to look out your window and see an aligator floatin in your pool… so I always made other people go in and swim around first… I would rather the gator eat them then me lol
By Tim
May 4, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this
Jack… I keep telling myself that… it doesnt help too much cus I dont even have a desire to be bitten just the once lol… I had a friend who was just in Puerto Rico… I talked to him at about 5 or 6 in the evening one day and he was like I’m gonna go for a swim in the ocean… I was like NOOOOO… sharks feed at dusk… that’s why all those dumb people get bit when they are out in the water at that time… scared him so bad he went for a swim in the pool instead lol
By Julia
May 4, 2006 04:04 PM | Link to this
Tim-thank God you weren’t bitten by those sharks! I had something bump against my leg in the water once when I was about 12…that did it for me as far as going out far into the ocean.
Jack-what can I say? Luv ya’! But no biting in the pool when we all get to the Caymans…;)
By Tim
May 4, 2006 04:09 PM | Link to this
Julia… yeah that would have been it for me too lol… when my lil bro was about 9 he was fairly far out (well for a 9 year old) and something bumped him… then brushed up against him again… he was so scared… then it jumped over him… it was a dolphin… it was playin with him… it would bump him and then jump over him and swim around him in circles… I was like good for you… I’ll stay over here with the other toddlers LOL
By Julia
May 4, 2006 04:24 PM | Link to this
Oh wow, that must have been so cool to have a dolphin come up to you and do that. And what a relief that it WASN’T a shark!
Have you ever went to one of the aquariums and “petted” a stingray? We do that every year at MB. They’re very friendly.
As a kid/teenager we used to stare out at the ocean trying to spot a fin. All we ever saw were dolphins though. We were hoping to see something like JAWS! (As long as we were on fry land.)
By Jack
May 4, 2006 04:25 PM | Link to this
My boys and I were in the water at Gulf Shores and a jellyfish went across my back. It was very hard to pretend that it didn’t hurt.
By Tim
May 4, 2006 04:30 PM | Link to this
Julia… yeah he thought it was really cool… I stayed up in the shallow water… I didn’t have any desire to go out there and “play” lol… growing up in Orlando I have been to Sea World quite a few times… I never petted anything though… I have no desire to touch anything that is in the water lol
By Julia
May 4, 2006 04:31 PM | Link to this
LOL…I meant on “dry” land.
Almost time to go get my boy and go play t-ball….
By Julia
May 4, 2006 04:37 PM | Link to this
Got to run…hugs,kisses and high fives to most of you. We all know what tomorrow is…FRIDAY & JOKE DAY!!!
Sweet dreams to my blog buddies…
By Tim
May 4, 2006 04:43 PM | Link to this
Jack… yeah I doubt that was fun
By Julia
May 5, 2006 08:30 AM | Link to this
Well, t-ball got rained out for the 5th time!
I’m ready for joke day!!!!! ;)
By Tim
May 5, 2006 08:44 AM | Link to this
ok… well this may be old… but my mom just sent it to me yesterday so it’s new to me… and I liked it
A married man is having an affair and the woman gets pregnant… since he doesnt want to lose his wife he tells the woman that if she moves to Italy he will pay for everything and send her money until the baby is 18… the woman agrees but asks how he will know when the baby comes… he told her to send him a post card with the word “spaghetti” on it and that is how he will know… so about 9 months later the guy comes home and his wife tells him he got a post card with a weird message on it… he asked for the post card and said he would explain later… when he read the post card he passed out… written on the post card was “spaghetti spaghetti spaghetti spaghetti… 3 with meat balls one without”
By Monica
May 5, 2006 09:02 AM | Link to this
Julia, I don’t know about y’all, but we have only had 2 games so far, and they way it’s looking, the makeup game scheduled for tonight will be rained out too!
Bring on the jokes everyone!!
By Monica
May 5, 2006 09:22 AM | Link to this
Got these off of danggoodjokes.com
Church Bulletin Bloopers 1. Bertha Belch, a missionary from Africa, will be speaking tonight at Calvary Methodist. Come hear Bertha Belch all the way from Africa. 2. Announcement in a church bulletin for a national PRAYER & FASTING Conference: “The cost for attending the Fasting & Prayer Conference includes meals.” 3. The sermon this morning: “Jesus Walks on the Water.” The sermon tonight: “Searching for Jesus.” 4. Our youth basketball team is back in action Wednesday at 8 PM in the recreation hall - Come out and watch us kill Christ the King. 5. Ladies, don’t forget the rummage sale. It’s a chance to get rid of those things not worth keeping around the house. Don’t forget your husbands. 6. The peacemaking meeting scheduled for today has been cancelled due to a conflict. 7. Remember in prayer the many who are sick of our community. Smile at someone who is hard to love. Say “Hell” to someone who doesn’t care much about you. 8. Don’t let worry kill you off - let the Church help. 9. Miss Charlene Mason sang “I will not pass this way again,” giving obvious pleasure to the congregation. 10. For those of you who have children and don’t know it, we have a nursery downstairs. 11. Next Thursday there will be try outs for the choir. They need all the help they can get. 12. Barbara remains in the hospital and needs blood donors for more transfusions. She is also having trouble sleeping and requests tapes of Pastor Jack’s sermons. 13. The Rector will preach his farewell message after which the choir will sing: ” Break Forth Into Joy.” 14. Irving Benson and Jessie Carter were married on October 24 in the church. So ends a friendship that began in their school days. 15. A bean supper will be held on Tuesday evening in the church hall. Music will follow. 16. At the evening service tonight, the sermon topic will be “What Is Hell?” Come early and listen to our choir practice.
By Chilao
May 5, 2006 09:25 AM | Link to this
Cinderella is now 95 years old.
After a fulfilling life with the now dead prince, she happily sits upon her rocking chair, watching the world go by from her front porch, with a cat named Bob for companionship.
One sunny afternoon out of nowhere, appeared the fairy godmother.
Cinderella said, “Fairy Godmother, what are you doing here after all these years?” The fairy godmother replied, “Cinderella, you have lived an exemplary life since I last saw you. Is there anything for which your heart still yearns?”
Cinderella was taken aback, overjoyed, and after some thoughtful consideration, she uttered her first wish:
“The prince was wonderful, but not much of an investor. I’m living hand to mouth on my disability checks, and I wish I were wealthy beyond comprehension.
Instantly her rocking chair turned into solid gold.
Cinderella said, “Ooh, thank you, Fairy Godmother”.
The fairy godmother replied, “It is the least that I can do. What do you want for your second wish?”
Cinderella looked down at her frail body, and said, “I wish I were young and full of the beauty and youth I once had”.
At once, her wish became reality, and her beautiful young visage returned. Cinderella felt stirrings inside of her that had been dormant for years.
And then the fairy godmother spoke once more: “You have one more wish; what shall it be?”
Cinderella looks over to the frightened cat in the corner and says, “I wish for you to transform Bob, my old cat, into a kind and handsome young man.”
Magically, Bob suddenly underwent so fundamental a change in his biological make-up that, when he stood before her, he was a man so beautiful the likes of him neither she nor the world had ever seen.
The fairy godmother said, “Congratulations, Cinderella, enjoy your new life.”
With a blazing shock of bright blue electricity, the fairy godmother was gone as suddenly as she appeared.
For a few eerie moments, Bob and Cinderella looked into each other’s eyes.
Cinderella sat, breathless, gazing at the most beautiful,stunningly perfect man she had ever seen.
Then Bob walked over to Cinderella, who sat transfixed in her rocking chair, & held her close in his young muscular arms.
He leaned in close, blowing her golden hair with his warm breath as he whispered…
“Bet you’re sorry you neutered me.”
By Chilao
May 5, 2006 09:40 AM | Link to this
Q: what do you call a guy in the ocean with no arms and no legs(assuming after the sharks bit them off…LOL)
A: Bob
By Jack
May 5, 2006 09:41 AM | Link to this
An 80 year old woman was arrested for shop lifting. When she went before the judge he asked her, “What did you steal?”
She replied: a can of peaches.
The judge asked her why she had stolen them and she replied that she was hungry.
The judge then asked her how many peaches were in the can. She replied 6.
The judge then said, “I will give you 6 days in jail.”
Before the judge could actually pronounce the punishment the woman’s husband spoke up and asked the judge if he could say something.
He said, “What is it?”
The husband said “She also stole a can of peas.”
By Jack
May 5, 2006 09:44 AM | Link to this
25 INTERNATIONAL RULES OF MANHOOD
>
1: Under no circumstances may two men share an umbrella.
2: It is ok for a man to cry ONLY under the following circumstances:
a. When a heroic dog dies to save its master.
b. The moment Angelina Jolie starts unbuttoning her blouse.
c. After wrecking your boss’ car.
d. One hour, 12 minutes, 37 seconds into “The Crying Game”.
e. When she is using her teeth.
3: Any Man who brings a camera to a bachelor party may be legally killed and eaten by his buddies.
4: Unless he murdered someone in your family, you must bail a friend out of jail within 12 hours.
5: If you’ve known a guy for more than 24 hours, his sister is off limits forever unless you actually marry her.
6: Moaning about the brand of free beer in a buddy’s fridge forbidden. However, complain at will if the temperature is unsuitable.
7: No man shall ever be required to buy a birthday present for another man. In fact, even remembering your buddy’s birthday is strictly optional.
8: On a road trip, the strongest bladder determines pit stops, not the weakest.
9: When stumbling upon other guys watching a sporting event, you may ask the score of the game in progress, but you may never ask who’s
playing.
10: You may flatulate in front of a woman only after you have brought her to climax. If you trap her head under the covers for the purpose of flatulent entertainment, she’s officially your girlfriend.
11: It is permissible to drink a fruity alcohol drink only when you’re sunning on a tropical beach… and it’s delivered by a topless model and only when it’s free.
12: Only in situations of moral and/or physical peril are you allowed to kick another guy in the nuts.
13: Unless you’re in prison, never fight naked.
14: Friends don’t let friends wear Speedos. Ever. Issue closed.
15: If a man’s fly is down, that’s his problem, you didn’t see anything.
16: Women who claim they “love to watch sports” must be treated as spies until they demonstrate knowledge of the game and the ability to drink as much as the other sports watchers.
17: A man in the company of a hot, suggestively dressed woman must remain sober enough to fight.
18: Never hesitate to reach for the last beer or the last slice of pizza, but not both, that’s just greedy.
19: If you compliment a guy on his six-pack, you’d better be talking about his choice of beer.
20: Never join your girlfriend or wife in discussing a friend of yours, except if she’s withholding sex pending your response.
21: Phrases that may NOT be uttered to another man while he is lifting weights:
a. Yeah, Baby, Push it!
b. C’mon, give me one more! Harder!
c. Another set and we can hit the showers!
22: Never talk to a man in a bathroom unless you are on equal footing: i. e. Both urinating, both waiting in line, etc. For all other situations, an almost imperceptible nod is all the conversation you need.
23: Never allow a telephone conversation with a woman to go on longer than you are able to have sex with her. Keep a stopwatch by the
phone. Hang up if necessary.
24: The morning after you and a girl who was formerly “just a friend” have carnal drunken monkey sex, the fact that you’re feeling weird and guilty is no reason for you not to nail her again before the discussion about what a big mistake it was occurs.
25: It is acceptable for you to drive her car. It is not acceptable for her to drive yours.
I hope this clears up any confusion!
By Chilao
May 5, 2006 09:47 AM | Link to this
I grew up seeing shark fins, BIG ONES, on the outside reefs and once or twice saw them being landed on transport craft, hook and line, thrashing about. Therefore, was PETRIFIED of sharks. At some point, about 20, I was in a row boat in a small pond/lake in Nova Scotia, we rowed out to a small island(say 20x40 feet..small) to relax and play around(wink, wink), and did some swimming off that small island. At one point I looked sideways and say a tree-trunk sticking out of the water, it looked just like a fin. You have never seen someone get out of the water any faster. LMAO
I later conquered my ‘fear’ with some serious ocean scuba diving.
By Chilao
May 5, 2006 09:50 AM | Link to this
If a man’s fly is down, that’s his problem, you didn’t see anything.
ain’t that the truth! (“what you doin’ lookin’ in my crotch, boy?”) LMAO
By Chilao
May 5, 2006 10:09 AM | Link to this
hook and line - line being a 3/8 inch steel cable. I watched a 14-footer or so completely snap the steel cable as it came up to the back of the boat. Gonzo(back into the water), trailing the hook and about 15 feet of line. not a scene to endear you to sharks, at about 8 y/o, that’s for sure. LOL
By Jack
May 5, 2006 10:10 AM | Link to this
DICTIONARY FOR DECODING WOMEN’S PERSONAL ADS
40ish……………………………………49 Adventurous….Slept with Everyone Athletic……………………………….No Breasts Average looking………………….Mooooooooo Beautiful…………………Pathological Li Emotionally Secure………………On Medication Feminist………………………………Fat Free Spirit…………………………..Junkie New-Age………………Body hair in the wrong places Open-minded……………………….Desperate Outgoing…Loud and Embarrassing Professional…………………………Witch with a “B” Voluptuous…………………………..Very Fat Large Frame………………………..Obese Wants Soul Mate…………………Stalker
Women’s English 1. Yes = No 2. No = Yes 3. Maybe = No 4. We need = I want 5. I am sorry = You’ll be sorry 6. We need to talk = You’re in trouble 7. Sure, go ahead = You better not 8. Do what you want = You will pay for this later 9. I am not upset = Of course, I am upset, you moron! 10. You’re certainly attentive … Is sex all you ever think about?
Men’s English 1. I am hungry = I am hungry 2. I am sleepy = I am sleepy 3. I am tired = I am tired 4. Nice dress = Nice cleavage! 5. I love you = Let’s have sex! 6. I am bored = Do you want to have sex? 7. May I have this dance? = I’d like to have sex with you. 8. Can I call you sometime? = I’d like to have sex with you. 9. Do you want to go to a movie? = I’d like to have sex with you. 10. Can I take you to dinner? = I’d like to have sex with you. 11. I don’t think those shoes go with that outfit = I’m gay
By Tim
May 5, 2006 10:12 AM | Link to this
If a man’s fly is down, that’s his problem, you didn’t see anything.
if you’re in a gay bar that means he’s advertising
By Chilao
May 5, 2006 10:21 AM | Link to this
on that personals translation, in the South, “average” means about 50 lbs overweight. Learned that one, for sure. LOL
By chuck
May 5, 2006 10:35 AM | Link to this
Every newspaper in New York sent a reporter and a staff photographer to the office of a local ophthalmologist when it was learned that he recently performed a successful sight- saving operation on the wife of the country’s most celebrated mural artist, who, in addition to paying the doctor’s usual fee, had gratefully insisted on painting one of his contemporary masterpieces across an entire wall of the doctor’s waiting room.
The mural turned out to be an immense multicolored picture of a human eye, in the center of which stood a perfect miniature likeness of the good doctor himself.
While cameras clicked and most of the newsmen crowded around the famous artist for his comments, one cub reporter drew the eye specialist aside and asked:
“Tell me, if you can, Doctor-what was your first reaction on seeing this fantastic artistic achievement covering an entire wall of your office?”
“To tell the truth,” the physician replied, “my first thought was, thank goodness I’m not a hemorrhoid specialist!”
By GOB
May 5, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this
Wow. All the way to Friday with no gay/religion/abortion stuff. I didnt think it could be done.
By chuck
May 5, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this
A guy walking along the beach finds a bottle and picks it up.
A genie pops out and says, “Thanks for letting me out. For your kindness I will grant you one wish.”
The guys says, “I’ve always wanted to go to Hawaii, but I can’t because I’m afraid to fly and ships make me deathly sick. My wish is for you to build a road from here to Hawaii.”
The genie says, “I’m sorry, but I don’t think I can do that. Just think of all the work involved. Think of the huge pilings we’d need to hold up that highway and how deep they would have to be to reach the bottom of the ocean. And think of all the cement that would be needed. Plus, since it’s such a long span, there would have to be gas stations and rest stops along the way. No, that’s just too much to ask. Impossible.”
The guy says, “Well, there is one thing I’ve always wanted to know. I’d like to be able to understand women…what makes them laugh and cry…you know, what makes them tick.”
The genie thinks a second, then asks, “You want two lanes or four?’
By Monica
May 5, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this
GOB, SHHH!!! The day is not over yet!! Wait until 4:59 to make that statement! (It’s like telling a pitcher during the 8th inning that he’s throwing a no-hitter).
By Julia
May 5, 2006 11:15 AM | Link to this
These are actual police officer quotes collected from numerous people stopped for moving traffic violations.
“If you run, you’ll only go to jail tired.”
“The handcuffs are tight because they’re new. They’ll stretch out after you wear them awhile.”
“So, you don’t know how fast you were going. I guess that means I can write anything I want on the ticket, huh?”
“The answer to this last question will determine whether you are drunk or not. Was Mickey Mouse a cat or dog?”
“No sir, we don’t have quotas anymore. We used to have quotas, but now we’re allowed to write as many tickets as we want.”
“Warning! You want a warning? Okay, I’m warning you not to do that again or I’ll give you another ticket.”
“Life’s tough, it’s tougher if you’re stupid.”
“In God we trust, all others are suspects.”
By Julia
May 5, 2006 11:25 AM | Link to this
Some examples of why the human race has probably evolved as far as possible. These are actual instruction labels on consumer goods…
On Sears hairdryer: Do not use while sleeping. (Gee, that’s the only time I have to work on my hair!)
On a bag of Fritos: You could be a winner! No purchase necessary. Details inside. (The shoplifter special!)
On a bar of Dial soap: Directions: Use like regular soap. (and that would be how?)
On some Swann frozen dinners: Serving suggestion: Defrost. (But it’s ‘just’ a suggestion!)
On Tesco’s Tiramisu dessert: (printed on bottom of the box) Do not turn upside down. (Too late! you lose!)
On Marks & Spencer Bread Pudding: Product will be hot after heating. (Are you sure? Let’s experiment.)
On packaging for a Rowenta iron: Do not iron clothes on body. (But wouldn’t that save more time?) (Whose body?)
On Boot’s Children’s cough medicine: Do not drive car or operate machinery. (We could do a lot to reduce the construction accidents if we just kept those 5 year olds off those fork lifts.)
On Nytol sleep aid: Warning: may cause drowsiness. (One would hope!)
On a Korean kitchen knife: Warning: keep out of children. (hmm…something must have gotten lost in the translation…)
On a string of Christmas lights: For indoor or outdoor use only. (As opposed to use in outer space.)
On a food processor: Not to be used for the other use. (Now I’m curious.)
On Sainsbury’s peanuts: Warning: contains nuts. (but no peas?)
On an American Airlines packet of nuts: Instructions: open packet, eat nuts. (somebody got paid big bucks to write this one…)
On a Swedish chainsaw: Do not attempt to stop chain with your hands. (Raise your hand if you’ve tried this…)
On a child’s Superman costume: Wearing of this garment does not enable you to fly. (Oh go ahead! That’s right, destroy a universal childhood belief.)
By Chilao
May 5, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this
Julia’s great ones reminded me of one I learned the other day:
It is illegal in North Carolina to plow your cotton fields with elephants.
must have been a big problem at some point in history. LOL
By BigOleRedneck
May 5, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this
Julia…
I saw this with my own eyes, years ago when I was in school and working part-time in a toy store.
On a box for a brass doll bed showing girl playing with doll and bed Box does not include doll or child.
By Monica
May 5, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this
Julia, you know on the back of the shampoo bottle it says, “rinse, lather, repeat.” What are the chances that someone is still in the shower washing hair (it says to repeat)?
RF and Chuck - TGIF! I only have 15 more days. How about you?
By Jack
May 5, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this
Here are some great ways of dealing with the burdens of life:
Accept that some days you’re the pigeon, and some days you’re the statue.
Always keep your words soft and sweet, just in case you have to eat them.
Always read stuff that will make you look good if you die in the middle of it.
Drive carefully. It’s not only cars that can be recalled by their maker.
If you can’t be kind, at least have the decency to be vague.
If you lend someone $20 and never see that person again, it was probably worth it
It may be that your sole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning to others.
Never buy a car you can’t push.
Never put both feet in your mouth at the same time, because then you won’t have a leg to stand on.
Nobody cares if you can’t dance well. Just get up and dance!
Since it’s the early worm that gets eaten by the bird, sleep late.
The second mouse gets the cheese.
When everything’s coming your way, you’re in the wrong lane.
Birthdays are good for you. The more you have, the longer you live.
You may be only one person in the world, but you may also be the world to one person.
Some mistakes are too much fun to only make once.
We could learn a lot from crayons…Some are sharp, some are pretty and some are dull. Some have weird names, and all are different colors, but they all have to live in the same box.
*A truly happy person is one who can enjoy the scenery on a detour.
By The72John
May 5, 2006 11:58 AM | Link to this
Dangit, BigOleRedneck was a joke-title from another blog.
It’s just ole me.
By GOB
May 5, 2006 12:00 PM | Link to this
RF and Chuck - TGIF! I only have 15 more days. How about you?
Way to rub it in for the rest of us…that is just mean…
By chuck
May 5, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this
10 for me Monica
By Monica
May 5, 2006 12:08 PM | Link to this
Here is a history lesson for you today. Subject: Mayonnaise
Most people don’t know that back in 1912, Hellmann’s mayonnaise was manufactured in England. In fact, the Titanic was carrying 12,000 jars of the condiment scheduled for delivery in Vera Cruz, Mexico, which was to be the next port of call for the great ship after its stop in New York. This would have been the largest single shipment of mayonnaise ever delivered to Mexico. But as we know, the great ship did not make it to New York.
The ship hit an iceberg and sank, and the cargo was forever lost. The people of Mexico, who were crazy about mayonnaise, and were awaiting its delivery, were disconsolate at the loss.
Their anguish was so great, that they declared a National Day of Mourning, which they still observe to this day. The National Day of Mourning occurs each year on May 5th and is known, of course, as…
Sinko de Mayo.
By Monica
May 5, 2006 12:17 PM | Link to this
Sorry GOB. But hey, chances are at your job you have an hour for lunch (instead of 27 minutes),you can go to the bathroom when you need to, and you don’t have to talk to your worst co-worker’s parents! :)
By GOB
May 5, 2006 12:27 PM | Link to this
Monica - I would take that trade in a heartbeat…Believe me. Sitting in a grey cubicle looking at spreadsheets all day is no way to spend your time. At least you have some variety. My big variety comes from finding an error is a SQL statement…Good times.
By Jack
May 5, 2006 12:33 PM | Link to this
I told the Mrs. that the theme song for this weekend is “Row, row, row your Boat” She said, “What”. I said I’ll show you later….heehee.
By chuck
May 5, 2006 12:37 PM | Link to this
Jon’s working at the lumberyard, pushing a tree through the buzz saw, and accidentally shears off all ten of his fingers. He goes to the emergency room.
The doctor says, “Yuck! Well, give me the fingers, and I’ll see what I can do.”
Jon says, “I haven’t got the fingers.”
The doctor says, “What do you mean, you haven’t got the fingers? It’s 2006. We’ve got microsurgery and all kinds of incredible techniques. I could have put them back on and made you like new. Why didn’t you bring the fingers?”
Jon says, “Well, heck, Doc, I couldn’t pick ‘em up.”
By RF
May 5, 2006 12:53 PM | Link to this
Monica and Chuck- fortunately, there’s no way to show you the hand gesture I’m displaying at the moment, but let your imagination comjure one up and it’ll probably be the one!! LOL
I have 19 days left with the kiddies. YES,we have to go until June 2nd. What a rip!! At least I get to miss postplanning- going to a conference.
By Monica
May 5, 2006 01:13 PM | Link to this
A young brother and sister realize that they each know one curse word, and while they don’t exactly understand why they are bad, they decide to try them out at breakfast. When their mother asks the little boy what he wants for breakfast, he says, “I’ll think I’ll have some of those damn cheerios.” His mother slapped the poor child across the other side of the room. Then she asked the little girl what she wanted for breakfast. She said, “I don’t know, but you can bet your sweet a* that it won’t be any damn cheerios!”
By Renee
May 5, 2006 01:35 PM | Link to this
Hi everyone, been super busy, but dropping in to say hello. No deep topic right now??
By chuck
May 5, 2006 01:43 PM | Link to this
AND, Gob, We only get PAID for working 190 days.
By chuck
May 5, 2006 01:53 PM | Link to this
A man walks into a book store and asks the clerk if she could tell him where the “self-help” area is.
She replied, “Of course I can, but that would defeat the purpose, now wouldn’t it?”
By The72John May 5, 2006 11:58 AM | Link to this Dangit, BigOleRedneck was a joke-title from another blog. It’s just ole me.
And I thought you were Monogomous.
You been cheatin’ on us with another blog.
By Tim
May 5, 2006 02:01 PM | Link to this
alright people… it’s about time for me to head out… hold the fort down next week while I am gone… try not to miss me too much!!!!!
By The72John
May 5, 2006 02:01 PM | Link to this
chuck, you forgot to mention how you have to walk to school barefoot and fight your way to class through angry hordes of switchblade wielding children…
By RF
May 5, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this
chuck- amazingly there are still people out there who think we get paid for summer break, christmas break, etc. They look confused when I explain to them that we only work 190 days versus the average worker who works 250 or so.
By GOB
May 5, 2006 02:05 PM | Link to this
AND, Gob, We only get PAID for working 190 days.
If my wife and I were to both become teachers, we would make more than we do now.
By The72John
May 5, 2006 02:07 PM | Link to this
I’m not cheatin! I just…bumped into the other blog.
By RF
May 5, 2006 02:10 PM | Link to this
Tim- bring back a few “souvenirs” (tall, dark variety preferably)!! LOL Have a wonderful trip!
By RF
May 5, 2006 02:15 PM | Link to this
GOB- two teachers can live quite well. The pay’s not bad for the number of days we work. For those of us single parents, the budget’s a little tight, but I wouldn’t trade jobs with anybody!
By chuck
May 5, 2006 02:17 PM | Link to this
That may be true Gob, but you’ll earn every penny. Especially this time of year.
By Monica
May 5, 2006 02:24 PM | Link to this
72John, I found it ironic that you posted under BigOleRedneck. Based on your posts, I hardly think that description is fitting!
Julia, T-ball has been cancelled again! Oh well! Is it just me, or do those little darlin’s look Charlie Brown running the bases with those big batter’s helmets?
By GOB
May 5, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this
RF, Chuck - From my research, I wouldnt want to try and provide for more than just myself on a single teacher’s salary, but two really isnt that bad. In reality, the chances of making a ton of money in a corporate job are pretty slim. There arent too many VPs in a company, and the ones that get there have to sacrifice any personal life they might have had.
Also, there isnt a lot of personal satisfaction in working 10-12 hours a day (with 2 whole weeks off every year…sweet!) just to make the CEO some more money. I would rather teach a kid something that will make them a more productive member of society if I am going to working those hours. Thus, I am working on the job search for TAPP now.
By GOB
May 5, 2006 02:28 PM | Link to this
Monica - Why do they wear batting helmets if no one is pitching??
By The72John
May 5, 2006 02:42 PM | Link to this
Monica, I was being ironic :-)
I’m guessing the batting helmets are more like “less-than-perfect fielding” helmet. Some of those kids are a little wild on their throws.
By RF
May 5, 2006 02:43 PM | Link to this
GOB- that’s one of the reasons I’m still teaching after all these years. The stress is worth it when one of them “gets it” and you get to watch him/her grow and become somebody. It isn’t an easy job, but it has sooooo many rewards.
By GOB
May 5, 2006 02:51 PM | Link to this
Good point on the helmets John…
RF - My feelings are that if I only help one kid make something of there life, I have already accomplished more than anything I possibly could in a lifetime of sitting in a cubicle working for a corporation.
By Monica
May 5, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this
Those little guys also don’t have a lot of control with the bat, and I have seen them hit themselves in the head. Hence, the helmets.
GOB, a teacher’s job is quite rewarding. All joking and complaining aside, I can’t imagine doing anything else. I truly love my job.
By RF
May 5, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this
My feelings are that if I only help one kid make something of their life, I have already accomplished more than anything I possibly could in a lifetime of sitting in a cubicle working for a corporation.
Yep, you said it. Some people make a living- teachers make lives.
By Julia
May 5, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this
Monica-I’m hoping the Saturday game won’t be rained out. I know what you mean about those helmets. My guy has a problem with getting bored in the outfield…he likes to watch the scoreboard and pull up grass! Hopefully tomorrow will be different because I’ve tried talking to him about paying attention out there.
Tim-Here’s hoping you have an absolute BLAST on your vacation!!! Don’t get sunburnt honey. ;)
72John-Big Ole Redneck? No one would ever suspect it was you.LOL
I’ll see if I can find some more jokes…
By RF
May 5, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this
My feelings are that if I only help one kid make something of their life, I have already accomplished more than anything I possibly could in a lifetime of sitting in a cubicle working for a corporation.
Yep, you said it. Some people make a living- teachers make lives.
By chuck
May 5, 2006 03:00 PM | Link to this
I’m sure SOMEONE has heard that story before john.
Questions to Ponder:
If Con is the opposite of pro, is Congress the opposite of progress?
Why do fat chance and slim chance mean the same thing?
Before they invented drawing boards, what did they go back to?
If love is blind, why is lingerie so popular?
If one synchronized swimmer drowns, do the rest have to drown too?
If work is so terrific, how come they have to pay you to do it?
If you’re born again, do you have two bellybuttons?
If you ate pasta and antipasto, would you still be hungry?
If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?
Is a castrated pig disgruntled?
Why are hemorrhoids called “hemorrhoids” instead of “asteroids”?
Why is the alphabet in that order? Is it because of that song?
Why is there an expiration date on sour cream?
If most car accidents occur within five miles of home, why doesn’t everyone just move 10 miles away?
Don’t sweat the petty things and don’t pet the sweaty things.
Why do they put Braille dots on the keypad of the drive-up ATM?
Why is abbreviation such a long word?
Since light travels faster than sound, is that why some people appear bright until you hear them speak?
If it’s zero degrees outside today and it’s supposed to be twice as cold tomorrow, how cold is it going to be?
Isn’t Disney World a people trap operated by a mouse?
Can you imagine a world with no hypothetical situations?
By Julia
May 5, 2006 03:06 PM | Link to this
In honor of Big Ole Redneck:
Things a Redneck Would Never Say…
“I’ll take Shakespeare for 1000, Alex”
Duct tape won’t fix that.
Come to think of it, I’ll have a Heineken.
We don’t keep firearms in this house.
Has anybody seen the sideburns trimmer?
You can’t feed that to the dog.
I thought Graceland was tacky.
No kids in the back of the pick-up, it’s not safe.
Wrasslin’s fake.
Honey, did you mail that donation to Greenpeace?
We’re vegetarians.
Do you think my hair is too big?
I’ll have grapefruit instead of biscuits and gravy.
Honey, do these bonsai trees need watering?
Who’s Richard Petty?
Give me the small bag of pork rinds.
Deer heads detract from the decor.
Spitting is such a nasty habit.
I just couldn’t find a thing at Wal-Mart today.
Trim the fat off that steak.
Cappuccino tastes better than espresso.
The tires on that truck are too big.
I’ll have the arugula and ridicchio salad.
I’ve got it all on a floppy disk.
Unsweetened tea tastes better.
My fiancée, Paula Jo, is registered at Tiffany’s.
I’ve got two cases of Zima for the Super Bowl.
Little Debbie snack cakes have too many fat grams.
Checkmate.
She’s too old to be wearing a bikini.
Does the salad bar have bean sprouts?
Hey, here’s an episode of “Hee Haw” that we haven’t seen.
I don’t have a favorite college team.
Be sure to bring my salad dressing on the side.
I believe you cooked those green beans too long.
Those shorts ought to be a little longer, Darla.
Elvis who?
By Chilao
May 5, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this
72John-Big Ole Redneck? No one would ever suspect it was you.
seems I remember seeing that name on a blog here at ajc.LOL
What did they go back to before the drawing board? a stick and a wide swarth of SAND.
By The72John
May 5, 2006 03:14 PM | Link to this
Heck, I heard the switchblades part from my mother…and she taught 3rd grade.
Now y’all are making me want to rush out and be a teacher.
By Julia
May 5, 2006 03:16 PM | Link to this
Lengthy but worth it. I got this from www.countryhumor.com
Redneck Horoscope
OKRA Dec 22 - Jan 20
Although you appear crude, you are actually very slick on the inside. Okra have tremendous influence. An older Okra can look back over his life and see the seeds of his influence everywhere. Stay away from Moon Pies!
CHITLIN Jan 21 - Feb 19
Chitlins often come from humble backgrounds. Many times they’re uncomfortable talking about just where they came from. A chitlin, however, can make something of himself if he’s motivated and has plenty of seasoning. When it comes to dealing with Chitlins, be very careful. Chitlins can burn and then erupt like Vesuvius, and this can make for a really terrible mess. Chitlins are best with Catfish and Okra. Remember that when marriage time rolls around.
BOLL WEEVIL Feb 20- Mar 20
You have an overwhelming curiosity. You’re unsatisfied with the surface of things, and you feel the need to bore deep into the interior of everything. Needless to say, you are very intense and driven as if you had some inner hunger. Nobody in their right mind is going to marry you, so don’t worry about it.
MOON PIE Mar 21- April 20
You’re the type that spends a lot of time on the front porch. It’s a cinch to recognize the physical appearance of Moon Pies. Big and round are the key words here. You should marry anybody who you can get remotely interested in the idea. It’s not going to be easy. This might be the year to think about aerobics. Maybe not.
POSSUM APR 21 - May 21
When confronted with life’s difficulties, possums have a marked tendency to withdraw and develop a don’t-bother-me-about-it attitude. Sometimes you become so withdrawn, people actually think you’re dead. This strategy is probably not psychologically healthy, but seems to work for you. One day, however, it won’t work and you may find your problems actually running you over.
CRAWFISH May 22 - June 21
Crawfish is a water sign. If you work in an office, you’re always hanging around the water cooler. Crawfish prefer the beach to the mountains, the pool to the golf course, the bathtub to the living room. You tend to be not particularly attractive physically, but you have very, very good heads.
COLLARDS June 22- July 23
Collards have a genius for communication. They love to get in the “melting pot” of life and share their essence with the essence of those around them. Collards make good social workers, psychologists, and baseball managers. As far as your personal life goes, if you are Collards, stay away from Moon Pies. It just won’t work. Save yourself a lot of heartache.
CATFISH July 24 - Aug 23
Catfish are traditionalists in matters of the heart, although one: Whiskers may cause problems for loved ones. Your catfish are never easy people to understand. You prefer the muddy bottoms to the clear surface of life. Above all else, Catfish should stay away from Moon Pies.
GRITS Aug 24 - Sept 23
Your highest aim is to be with others like yourself. You like to huddle together with a big crowd of other Grits. You love to travel, thought so maybe you should think about joining a club. Where do you like to go? Anywhere they have cheese or gravy or bacon or butter or eggs. If you can go somewhere where they have all these things, that serves you well.
BOILED PEANUTS Sept 24 - Oct 23
You have a passionate desire to help your fellow man. Unfortunately, those who know you best — your friends and loved ones-may find that your personality is much too salty, and their criticism will probably affect you deeply because you are really much softer than you appear. You should go right ahead and marry anybody you want to because in a certain way, yours is a charmed life. On the road of life, you can be sure that people will always pull over and stop for you.
BUTTER BEAN October 24 - Nov 22
Always invite a Butter Bean because Butter Beans get along well with everybody. You, as a Butter Bean, should be proud. You’ve grown on the vine of life and you feel at home no matter what the setting. You can sit next to anybody. However, you too, shouldn’t have anything to do with Moon Pies.
ARMADILLO Nov 23 - Dec 21
You have a tendency to develop a tough exterior, but you are actually quite gentle. A good evening for you? Old friends, a fire, some roots, fruit, worms and insects. You are a throwback. You’re not concerned with today’s fashions and trends. You’re not concerned with anything about today. You’re really almost prehistoric in your interests and behavior patterns. You probably want to marry another Armadillo, but Possum is another somewhat kinky, mating possibility.
By Julia
May 5, 2006 03:21 PM | Link to this
If you go to that website you have to go to the lower right and click Redneck Libs. Try it out-it’s hilarious! (Like the old Mad Libs…I used to love those!)
By Julia
May 5, 2006 03:28 PM | Link to this
As to the batting helmets-the coach pitches 3-5 balls to the kid at bat and if he doesn’t hit it then they hit off the tee. That’s how we do it anyway.
By Zack
May 5, 2006 03:29 PM | Link to this
Censorship is a good thing, and most of what is on cable TV does need to be censored.
Heck, a lot of commercials on network TV need to be censored.
I’ve been too busy to post over the last few days. I only can imagine what I’ve missed: The72John (a gay screen name) probably has accused everyone disagreeing with him of performing a hate crime. He probably has tried to run people down and has found his usual disappointment resulting from his lack of credibility. I don’t wish anything bad on this guy.
If it weren’t so sad and wrong, it’d be laughable how the gay community threw its weight around. John comes in here and spews hatred and bigotry (he’s not alone; Lozen and Whiley—and others—do it also) and then acts like every heterosexual person in the world is a bigot. This type of imbecilic thinking is not a new tactic from the gay community. Even though gays are the ones spewing hatred, many are afraid to speak up against them because they’re afraid THEY’LL be called a bigot from these hypocrites and that society will believe the lie. Thankfully, more and more people are waking up to this sick, hypocritical reality and are becoming less and less afraid to speak up against homosexuality.
As for you, John, I find it hard to communicate with someone full of hatred, and I find it basically impossible to reason with you. For the sake of conversation, why do you always type out strong putdowns toward others? Is it because gays, being full of fear as they are, think that typing an outlandish insult makes them men? It doesn’t.
Don’t ask me to apologize for referring to John’s screen name as “gay.” Ask the gay community to apologize for its years and years of bigotry, hatred, and lack of sensitivity for those who don’t endorse their perverse lifestyle.
Have a good weekend, John. Don’t be mad at what I’ve typed. I’m actually doing you a favor by putting you in your place again. If you’d put aside your propaganda for a moment and listen to reason and wisdom, you might be amazed.
By Chilao
May 5, 2006 03:32 PM | Link to this
since we are picking on rednecks: I forwarded this from home for a previous week’s joke-day but never posted it:
Technology for Country FolkLog on: Making a wood stove hotter
Log off: Don’t add no more wood
Monitor: Keeping an eye on the wood stove
Download: Gettin’ the farwood from the truck
Mega Hertz: When you’re not kerful gettin’ the farwood
Floppy Disk: Watcha git from tryin’ to carry too much farwood
RAM: That thing that splits the farwood
Hard Drive: Gettin’ home in the winter time
Prompt: What the mail ain’t in the winter time
Windows: What to shut when it’s cold outside
Screen: What to shut when it’s black fly season
Byte: What them dang flies do
Chip: Munchies for the TV
Micro Chip: What’s in the bottom of the munchie bag
Modem: Watcha did to the hay fields
Dot Matrix: Old Dan Matrix’s wife
Lap Top: Where the kitty sleeps
Keyboard: Where ya hung the dang truck keys
Software: Them dang plastic forks and knives
Mouse: What eats the grain in the barn
MainFrame: What holds up the barn roof
Port: Fancy Flatlander wine
Enter: Northerner talk for “C’mon in y’all”
Mouse Pad: That’s hippie talk for rat hole
Random Access Memory: When you can’t ‘member what ya paid fer the rifle when yur wife asks
By Chilao1
May 5, 2006 03:34 PM | Link to this
GOB spoke to soon, it seems.
By GOB
May 5, 2006 03:38 PM | Link to this
I still dont believe that Zack is real. Just a troll trying to get people worked up.
By RF
May 5, 2006 03:45 PM | Link to this
Well, at least we made it to Friday at almost 4:00 before Zack got loose from the guards again. Lord I wish they’d get his straight jacket and meds right for a while.
By Julia
May 5, 2006 03:57 PM | Link to this
By the way…I’m a possum.LOL
By Chilao
May 5, 2006 03:58 PM | Link to this
spoke TOO soon, it seems
and I hate it when people cannot get two, to, and too correct. LMAO
and hear I done it myself(trying to stay with the redneck theme) LOL
By Elvis
May 5, 2006 03:59 PM | Link to this
A rope walks into a restaurant, the host says “I’m sorry we don’t serve ropes”. So he went back outside. He thought about it for a moment then he tied himself in a bow and made his ends frazzled. He went back inside and the host stated “Hey, aren’t you the rope I just kicked out?” And he exclaimed “No, I’m a frayed knot”.
By Jack
May 5, 2006 04:09 PM | Link to this
I know I married Miss Right…i just didn’t know her first name was Always.
By GOB
May 5, 2006 04:16 PM | Link to this
I know I married Miss Right…i just didn’t know her first name was Always
So you married a Florida State kicker, Jack?
That is my contribution to joke day, for the sports fans out there…
By Elvis
May 5, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this
Chilao, I know what you mean. What about those that can’t seem to understand the difference between there, their and they’re? Not to mention yea, yeah and I’ve even seen yay. Don’t get me started.
By Jack
May 5, 2006 04:22 PM | Link to this
?
By Julia
May 5, 2006 04:25 PM | Link to this
Yeah, GOB-next time wait til 4:55 to make that observation! LOL
Come on now Zack-even Chuck’s been getting along with 72john lately. We’ve been laughing and having a good time. Don’t spoil it.