Politics; Politicians;
and Public Concerns


Public education; Local issues; and Tax-matters
(Author's op-ed pieces, articles, and essays)

( A section of "The Doctor's Terrific Tablets" )
( http://www.terrific-tabs.com )
by
John N. Todd III, M. D. (link -- about the author)


SEE these related pages also: EDITORIAL PAGE (link)
AND:
Editorial PAGE; Page 2 (link)
AND:
VOTING... WHY do we VOTE the way we do? (link)

Last revision: 3/02; 6/02; 11/02; 1/7/03; 1/03; 3/03; 12/03; 9/04; 3/05; 10/5/05

CLICK HERE to go to the "FRONT PAGE" of "The Doctor's Terrific Tablets"
CLICK HERE for ALPHABETICAL INDEX of this ENTIRE WEBSITE
CLICK HERE to EMAIL your thoughts to the author

OR.... Email your comments directly to the author's office.... JNT@terrific-tabs.com




LINKS to other pages:

FRONT PAGE of "The Doctor's Terrific Tablets"

ALPHABETICAL INDEX of ENTIRE WEBSITE

Editorial Page
Politics; Public Education
Todd's Truth I
Todd's Truth II
Todd's Truth III
Todd's Truth IV
Bible Favorites of Author
Bible Favorites II
Bible Favorites III
Bible Favorites IV
Pop's WISDOM
Pop's WISDOM, PAGE 2
Pop's Wisdom -- Page 3
PJT's Page

Terrific Tablets Page i
Terrific Tablets II
Terrific Tablets III
Terrific Tablets IV
Terrific Tablets V
Terrific Tablets VI
Terrific Tablets VII
Terrific Tablets VIII
Terrific Tablets IX

Tuscaloosa NOOSE
Tuscaloosa Snooze
Temporary Items


"Tablets" on this page:

"If you ACCEPT.... you TEACH"

"Taj Mahal" public-schools

Problems in Public Education in Alabama

$50,000 for Tuscaloosa Public Schools

GAYS in the U. S. Military

Education Summit; Tuscaloosa 1991

Ebonics and Albonics

Property-Tax Referendum in Tuscaloosa

Alcohol, and Alcoholism



Click HERE for linked Alphabetical SUBJECT List


10/5/05

Political nonsense:

On 7/29/05, the Speaker-of-the-House, Dennis Hastert, on CNBC.... made a brilliant remark:
"We need to look forward.... and we need to look-at those things that work."

Ain't that profound ! ! !
From the mouth of one of our nation's leaders.



11/12/02

Someone's answer to a question from a person with a childish mind:
"What do our politicians do?"


One answer: Nothing.... except spend other people's money.... (actually, by way of "authorizing", then "appropriating" the expenditure of money -- which the U.S. government, the States, the counties, and the cities receive from various taxes.... extracted from the productive, tax-paying citizens).




7/15/01; 7/25/01; 11/28/02

Originally posted In "Pop's Wisdom", on 11-13-98.
Supplemented, here, for the "Todd Squad" to consider....




CLICK HERE for "Easy-Print" format of this "tablet"


The following axiom was quoted on a news program, in November 1998:

"If you accept -- you teach."

When I heard this quotation, my first thought related to the "rearing" of children. If a child is allowed to "get-away-with" misbehavior -- that is, if the parent "accepts" a juvenile "malfeasance" -- then the "child" is thereby "taught" that the parent will not respond with an authoritative form of correction or discipline, or "punishment".

Similarly, one can readily extrapolate this concept -- from dealing with "children"-- to consideration of more "mundane" matters -- such as the necessary discipline imposed by a workplace supervisor -- or a college football coach.... or a teacher in the classroom.... or even a circumstance in political and/or international relationships.

If those who are "in charge" of a situation "accept" inappropriate responses from those under their control or "command" -- then the "subordinates" quickly learn that they are not required to perform as directed -- and hence they may be more inclined to "expand" their under-performance.... or their "mischief".



7/25/01

Now, consider the following extrapolation:

If you accept -- you teach.
If you "accept".... over and over; then you "teach" and teach and teach.... until you find yourself repeatedly "yielding" .... and then you find yourself weakening -- and tacitly encouraging and "supporting" that which you, at first, refused to "accept".

Beyond that, is another potential spiral-downward. If one continues to "accept", over and over (and hence to "teach") -- then that which is repeatedly "accepted" soon becomes a "RIGHT" -- an "entitlement" -- to those who are the free recipients of your "understanding", and your "leniency", and your correctness.... or your weakness.

And then --- the phase of "dependency" may develop.... sometimes hostile dependency..... when the "receivers" become dissatisfied because they are not being "allowed" more "rights" -- and because they are not being given more -- more, and greater "benefits".

Next.... the phase of "victimization" -- in which "benefit-receivers" complain that they have been "victimized", and intentionally held back in their situation -- by the "system".

And so, the cycle starts again -- and repeats.... over and over..... sometimes for an individual's lifetime.

(Just consider the "welfare" system, and our "income transfer" process -- and the "public schools" -- and "SSI" -- and food stamps --and rental subsidies -- and on and on.
How do
YOU feel about these "social" benefits, that have developed in our USA .... in response to: "if you accept, you teach".)




Remember, too, another basic Toddian axiom:

"The more you give away, the more you take away."

What are your thoughts about this "truth"?



Now.... YOU extrapolate the following ANTITHESIS of the primary axiom:

"If you refuse to accept --
you also teach."



 

 

 

 

 

Posted here 2/1/99;
6/27/00
1/9/03


Copy of op-ed article by John and Phyllis Todd. This article was published in its entirety in Tuscaloosa's local newspaper, in April 1992.

(Underlining and "bolding" have been added for this Web-version.)

 



$50,000 for Tuscaloosa Public Schools

Posted here 2/1/99
(
Copy of op-ed article by John and Phyllis Todd. This article was published in its entirety in Tuscaloosa's local newspaper, in April 1992.)

CLICK HERE for Easy-Print format of this tablet

 

Will the Tuscaloosa News help us to give away $50,000?

In two separate letters to the Tuscaloosa City Board of Education, my wife and I have offered to donate money to the City Board of Education -- money to be invested in a fund, or foundation-- the benefits from which would be utilized by the local school system, for special projects. Our only stipulations were that our contributions be "legal"; and that the "principal" of the fund not be spent; and that we be allowed to have some input into how the income (yield) would be expended.

Both of our letters to the City Board were hand-delivered by me or my wife (so that these letters would not be "lost" in all the "paper-work", at City Board); and our letters were placed into the hands of Dr. Ingram, and/or Dr. Peggy Collins. In our second letter (December, 1991), we offered to contribute $10,000 a year for 5 successive years, starting now -- a $50,000 donation. To this date, neither Dr. Ingram, nor Dr. Collins, nor anyone else at the City Board, has deigned to respond to our offer

We are rather puzzled about this lack of response. Our feeling is that there may be many other individuals, or groups, or businesses, that would genuinely enjoy helping the local public educational system, if they felt that their efforts would not be lost in the same sinkholes that now swallow education-dollars. Contributors, by making tax-deductible donations to an "education" fund or foundation of their own choice, might find some satisfaction, as we would, in being able to stipulate how their donations would be spent, rather than seeing their tax-dollars vanish, with no perceptible benefit to the teaching process.

Perhaps the City Board thought that we were only teasing, in our offer. Maybe they thought the Todd's didn't really want to be "involved"; and that we would "just go away". Or, maybe the City Board doesn't want "outside" interference, and oversight -- and new ideas that may disrupt the "status quo". After all, we Todd's don't have degrees in "elementary education" -- so what could we possibly know? Or...... could it be that the city schools already have enough money?

In regard to the establishment of an "endowed fund", we received a detailed advisory opinion from a local tax-attorney, who explained how a "private foundation" could be set up, to be funded with tax-deductible donations, from individuals, groups, or corporations. In this arrangement, it would be specified, legally, who would control and manage the foundation, and how the funds would be accumulated, distributed, and spent -- all under close voluntary (gratis) scrutiny of the contributors. (We were complimented, not only for having the idea, but also for being willing to "stand behind our position", with our financial commitment.)

We would now like for the "City Board" to respond to this idea. We realize that $10,000 a year would probably not even buy the pencil-erasers for Dr. Ingram's local office staff, realizing the billions that Alabama "education" already consumes; but, if $1,000,000 could be raised for a "foundation", then the annual "yield" could be as much as $100,000; and $100,000 could purchase the services of, say, three school-teachers, for class-rooms like we describe, below.

We would like to suggest that the earnings of a private foundation be spent on a local group of first-grade students; and, later, on second and third and fourth grades, somewhat like the concept of Alabama's "Math and Science" project for high-school students (that is, partially "privatized"). We would like for "tracking" to begin early in all students' school-life (as it logically should) -- and not later, when even good students may have become polluted, and ruined. We envision that an initial class of, say, 50 first-grade students, could be accepted, with the only stipulation being that each of them must have demonstrated genuine "teachability", in kindergarten. The only requirements necessary for a student to be retained in the class, would be: satisfactory and progressive and verified learning; proper "conduct" in and out of the classroom; plus unqualified support and active participation by the parent, or parents, of each and every student.

Two talented teachers -- tested, and known to be desirable -- assisted by a pool of dedicated and caring volunteers -- would be assigned to these 50 students. This "pool" of volunteers could include individuals chosen from parents, retired teachers, the elderly, college students, civic clubs, etc. -- anyone who earnestly wanted to help our public schools. The volunteers would assist not only in academic matters, but in individual encouragement and tutoring; and on field trips, athletic training, recesses, and snack-time -- and in causing the school-environment to be calm, quiet, cordial -- and fun. The classroom for these students would be incorporated within a "regular" elementary school; and the students would "mix" with all other students for recess, playtime, and lunchroom.

Perhaps all of the above-proposal would be blocked by the vested powers of the A.E.A. and N.E.A. -- who cannot tolerate the thought of "volunteers". Or..... it could be that court-ordered rules and edicts will not allow this type of "private" and voluntary participation (even though there is clearly no "racial" or "civil-rights" implication in this plan).

Is there anything wrong with doing something new and different -- or even daring? The idea of starting-out teachable students on proper "tracks", early, seems to make sense. "Privatizing", at least partially, may be a desirable way to obtain the "involvement" of willing and interested individuals and organizations -- especially since voluntary, "earmarked" contributions would allow a "voice" in how one's donated money would be spent. As it stands, now, the people's tax-money is sucked away -- and squandered; and we taxpayers are allowed no voice -- and no recourse.

(We even have a name to propose for this privately endowed public-school foundation: "Mutual Involvement Foundation For Education". The acronym would be M.I.F.F.ED., or just "MIFFED".)

To the Tuscaloosa News: can you help us donate our $50,000? If the public schools cannot use our "offering", perhaps the local private schools will condescend to accept.

 




 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/2/99

7/9/00

12/23/00

 

 "Gays"
in the U. S. Military

(An essay written by John N. Todd III, in January 1993,
responding to a newspaper article.)

Posted here 2/2/99

Click HERE for Easy-Print Format of this essay 


I am writing this essay in order to express my strong opposition to any change in the existing laws that ban homosexuals from service in the United States Armed Forces. I feel qualified to discuss matters concerning the military, for I served on active duty, both overseas and in the continental U.S., for seven years, as a medical officer in the U.S. Air Force -- at two different Strategic Air Command bases.

I am fully familiar with military esprit-de-corps; and I remember well the manly pride of those serving in our United States Military -- those who represent our Nation, and who fight to protect the wholesome and honorable values that the United States represents -- throughout the world. It grieves me to think that our military service may soon become a haven (the "gays" may be inclined to call it a "heaven") for homosexuals, who will hungrily rush to enlist -- so that they can aggregate closely together with others of their same deviant ilk -- while being fully "subsidized", and "sponsored" -- by our own government.

If the ban on homosexuals in the military is lifted, no one should worry that there will suddenly be a decline in military enlistments. Quite the contrary -- for there will almost certainly be a stampede of male and female homosexuals, who will suddenly and avidly choose the military "life-style" -- and enlist, so that they can openly flaunt their "sexual preferences", among each other -- without shame or reprobation. Of course, those of the normal or "straight persuasion", who cannot bear even the thought of co-existing in the presence of homosexual activities, will quickly exit the military; and leave the protection of our country under the limp-wristed leadership of an ever-enlarging homosexual military population.

I feel a deep sense of frank abandonment because of all the recent sermonizing, by President Clinton -- concerning his openly advocating that flagrant homosexuals be allowed to enlist, unashamedly, in the military service of our proud nation. I just cannot believe it!

The "gay life-style" is an absolute abomination to the vast majority of thinking citizens of our nation. Even the name "gay", or "queer", or "homosexual" evokes feelings of disgust, and shame, and revulsion -- in the thoughts of most normal humans. The very idea that "sodomy" (anal intercourse) between male human-beings, should be "accepted" as a variety of normalcy, makes most of us cringe in misery. We now openly read, even in our daily newspapers, such nauseating terms as "fecal-oral contamination", resulting from various homosexual acts -- as if that type of "contamination" were a simple "common-cold". We are instructed, almost daily, by the various media, in a homosexual lingo of terms and "acts" -- the thought of which makes almost all normal people retch -- and gag.

I hope that the President and our congress will remember that the current United States "plague" -- "AIDS" -- originated in the bath-houses and public toilets of our own California, thanks to the reckless "life-style" of California's "gay" population. Our country does not need any new circumstance that will further encourage "gay" misbehavior, realizing that the average homosexual male already "accepts" as many as 300 to 500 "partners" during his active deviant sex-life. Try to imagine how many more sexual "encounters" there will be if homosexual soldiers and sailors are granted, by presidential edict, the umbrella of approval and protection by the United States military "code" -- at all U. S. military bases, and on all ships-at-sea -- and on the battlefield.

To most human-beings, the widely-heralded current concept of "tolerance" -- not "discriminating" against anything --- regardless of how weird and vulgar and filthy it may be -- has finally gone to a disgustingly unacceptable extreme. The theory of "live and let live" has now advanced to a sad phase of repugnancy that must, hopefully, at last, force the "pendulum" to swing toward the direction of wholesomeness, and cleanliness, and decency, and propriety. The unacceptability of "queers" in the Armed Forces of the United States of America, may finally be a rallying-point around which the "straight" and normal citizens of our nation will rally.

In that regard, the formerly powerful national "moral majority" -- currently being low-rated by liberal politicians, and by "the media" -- has been swept aside, under the rug; and is now widely denigrated as a useless and defunct and impotent group known disparagingly as "the religious right". But, maybe now -- under the stimulus of the current homosexual assault upon the minds and consciences and beliefs of cognizant citizens -- the "conservatively-correct" thinkers of America will coalesce once again into a "moral majority" -- and awaken, and be seen, and heard, and counted -- and become effective again. Many of us devoutly hope so !

I am sending a copy of this essay to my congressional representatives, hoping that they will know and understand how most of us American citizens feel. As for me, personally, I intend to observe closely how the congressmen who represent me, vote on this critical issue.

Respectfully submitted, 

John N. Todd

 




 

 

 

 

 

Posted here 11-18-98

Linked 3/27/01;
9/29/01

 

This opinion-piece ...... composed by JNT and PJT -- was published verbatim in the "Tuscaloosa (Alabama) News", on Sunday
2-16-92


Problems in Public Schools in Alabama
 

PERSONAL OPINIONS and CONCLUSIONS of two EDUCATED "non-Educators" --
after attending Tuscaloosa's 1991 "EDUCATION SUMMIT"

CLICK HERE for Easy-Print format of this article




My wife and I attended the "Education Summit", in Tuscaloosa, in early December, l991. The majority of attendees were education "insiders", plus a few "politicians" -- and a number of us "outsiders". We attended the "Summit" with great eagerness and anticipation, thinking that we would hear the cream of the "education" leaders, and the best of the local and state legislators -- and that we would be greatly enlightened about profound changes that were being formulated, to revise and improve our city and county schools. Much to our disappointment, we heard virtually nothing about the real problems in the schools, or about what should and would be done to correct "intrinsic" problems. Instead, we heard almost solely about the need for "more funding", and about the urgent need for more "revenues" (taxes) in order to generate the additional "funding". Beyond that plea, there were all kinds of vapid, "generic" remarks concerning idealistic (as contrasted with honest) "goals" -- goals that need not even be dreamed about, until the intrinsic and ingrained problems are first admitted -- and then attacked.

About two weeks after the "Summit", we attended the "Summit Review". Again, the same predictable remarks were heard -- banal terms like "community involvement", "local input"; "vision", "working together", "we need your support", and "something's got to be done" -- all of which sounded to us like shallow euphemistic terms for: "You just get us more money, more 'revenues', more taxes. We 'educators' and 'legislators' know what to do. The 'people' don't really understand about all these technicalities. We'll solve all the problems, just like we've been doing, for all these years" (and probably with the same results). "All we really want is money -- not advice."

Our impressions and thoughts concerning the "Summit", are as follows, based on our thirty years of experience at all levels of "education" in Tuscaloosa -- and based on our adult lifetime of business experience in Alabama:

In the medical profession, when a physician agrees to treat a sick patient, he first makes an honest diagnosis -- and then he treats the illness for what it really is. If there is a malignancy, the physician does not label the disease "the flu" -- hoping that the real disease will "just wish away". Treatment for "a cold" will not cure a cancer. When a correct diagnosis is obvious, proper treatment is mandatory. Then, if simple treatment fails, non-conventional, or even experimental therapy is indicated. To continue a persistently failing therapy wastes not only money, but desperately needed time. In the "education business", now, there seems to be a plan of treatment aimed at "a cold", while the "patient" is dying of an erosive cancer.

Concerning "funding" for education, it is agreed, and generally accepted, that more money, if available, can always be put to use by any and all school systems. But...... if more money were suddenly found, now, from some source (like increased taxes, or corporate donations), for this year's needs and wants, would "education's" quest for further additional "funding" recur soon -- and again next year -- and the next, and the next? The answer is "YES". Will there ever be an end to the perpetual quest for "more revenues", additional taxes, and greater funding for "educational reform"? The answer: NO.

If no additonal "funding" is obtained -- now or later -- will the public-education system disintegrate, and disappear? No.

Does "educational reform" mean simply obtaining more money to increase the salaries of teachers and administrators, and other "insiders" in the "educational" bureaucracy? Some would say "Yes". If a billion dollars were found, today, for Alabama schools, would the real and basic problems of "public" education be magically solved? You answer that one. (No.)

Would new school buildings, new buses, fresh paint in all classrooms, patching all the roofs, better lunchrooms, tastier foods, free paper and pencils, free and different textbooks, better athletic facilities and equipment, more teachers in "the arts", more "counsellors", more "social workers", and on and on -- would all these "improvements" help the basic and real problems? Read my lips: N--O.

Would unlimited funding alter, in any way, the following real, true, and basic "problems" in the public schools:

Inadequate, poorly trained, unproven teachers
(Intermingled with good, very good, and splendid teachers);
Intellectually and psychologically inferior students;
(Mixed with good, very good, and superior and dedicated students);
"Top-down" federal and state and local edicts;
"Civil rights" rules and regulations;
Cross-town busing;
Cross-county busing;
Assignment to schools, regardless of parents' choice;
Poverty in students' homes;
How families spend their income;
"Fatherless" families; broken families;
Absence of male "role-model" at home;
Drunken and drugged parents;
Unemployed parents;
The color of a student's skin;
The ethnic background of each student;
"Families at risk";
Sexual proclivities and sexual habits of students;
Fighting and stealing in schools;
Gangs; and incorrigible students;
Psychological and behavioral problems;
Medical and nutritional problems of students;
Clothing and dress of students;
Juvenile pregnancy;
Problems related to discipline and deportment;
Average "achievement-test" scores;
Racial mis-trust;
Religious differences --
And on, and on, and on?
The answer to the questions: NO -- or very doubtful.

Unchangeable and uncorrectable factors should not, and cannot, be managed and financed by the public school system. Is it within the domain of "public education" to treat and hope to cure all of the societal problems facing Alabama and the United States, today? No! Should more "education-dollars" be poured into a sinkhole -- applying more effort and time and money -- using the same tired and failing "techniques", to alter the "unalterable", especially those problems that are clearly unrelated to the teaching of teachable students? The answer: "No".

Are the parents of intelligent, clean, proper, disciplined, teachable students -- black or white -- satisfied with the instruction their children receive, now, in "public schools"? No! Does not every parent of every "teachable" student -- black, white, native American, rich or poor -- want and deserve schools and classrooms where circumstances conducive to learning are mandated, and offered, and maintained? Yes!

What follows is a partial list of what some of us "non-educators" think should be considered by the "education bureaucracy" -- not just locally, but state-wide, and nationally. Although our recommendations may not be new or profound, at least they are honest. Our "list" cannot be extrapolated here, because of space considerations -- but is available to share with others. The headings of our "list" include the following: (1.) "Teachability" of students; (2.) Early "tracking" of students according to aptitude and educability; (3.) Testing of students; (4.) Competency testing of teachers; (5.) "Accountability" (justifying) of education expenditures; (6.) "Privatizing" of certain elements of "public" education; (7.) "Volunteerism", properly used in classrooms; (8.) Discipline in schools; (9.) Dealing with drugs, alcohol, fighting, weapons, and gangs; (10.) Juvenile illegitimate pregnancy; (11.) Voluntary locally endowed funds and foundations, controlled by contributors.

The purpose of our writing this is not to be pedantic; although we can imagine how all of this comes across to "educators" and politicians -- and how they must feel about all the "help" and "advice" that everyone seems to want to give. But.... our feeling is that, somehow, the pretending must stop! Somehow, the teasing and the deceit (no one would ever call it "lying") must be stopped . For how long must the "system" tease and deceive itself -- and the "public" -- and the students themselves? For how long will certain students be deceitfully allowed to believe that they are qualified for the work-place and for college -- when the school knows, and the teachers know, and the non-learning students (themselves) know, and the "public" (the voters) know, and the in-state employers know, and the out-of-state industries know, and the accredited four-year colleges know -- the TRUTH.

Who is kidding whom?

The Alabama "education industry" does not need or deserve more "funding" -- at the present time. This overweight and lethargic "education" giant urgently needs adrenalin, dieting, and lipo-suction..... not tomorrow -- but today.


 

 

 

 

 10-9-98
6-27/00
12/4/00
3/29/02
11/12/02

This essay was written by JNT in response to an editorial in the Tuscaloosa News, 12-96 (slightly revised for inclusion here).

 


"EBONICS" and "ALBONICS"

Click HERE for Easy-Print format of this essay



In the Tuscaloosa News (12-22-96), the editorial-page-editor presented an interesting editorial about "Black English", euphemistically referred to as "Ebonics" ("Ebony" -- black; plus "phonics"). (Da editur done a pritty-good job, but I seen a buncha stuff dat wuz lef' out.)

Recent news stories report that the Oakland, California School Board has unanimously approved "Black English" as an alternative "second-language" for students in the public schools. Presumably, federal funding will now be sought to pay for this additional instructional burden on the Oakland teachers. (One would suspect that the grammatical rules of "Black English" have not yet been agreed-upon, and published.)

The editor's article failed to mention "Albonics" (Latin albus, "white"; plus "phonics"), which is my coined-word for today's U.S. version of "White English" (not to be confused with "The King's English"). Furthermore, it must be emphasized that there is a seldom-mentioned derivative of "Albonics", which I shall refer to as "Southern Albonics" -- to avoid using the term "Redneck Albonics", or "Plowboy English".

As the reader will quickly discern, I am a self-designated bilingual "authority" in both Albonics and Ebonics -- as I was born and bred in "The Deep South", and "grew-up" in the red-clay sections of Alabama and Georgia -- with both "black" and "white" playmates and friends (indiscriminately). I learned "Primitive English" -- a mixture of Ebonics and Southern Albonics, from my companions and their families. Only later, after 12 laborious years of repetitious, forceful, hammering of "Real English" -- into my brain -- by devoted, diligent, knowledgeable (and "mean") public-school teachers -- did I ever shake many of the bad habits of Southern Albonics, and Ebonics.

I have still never mastered "Yankee-Talk", especially the Brooklyn variety (which I am not certain should be called "English"); and I do not currently plan to abandon my sophisticated linguistic achievements -- to adopt "Yankee-lingo".

There are yet other derivatives of "Albonics", which can be referred to, loosely, as "Radio, TV, and Movie English". And, don't forget the foreign-sounding "English" that we are exposed to in "Rap-Music" -- sometimes heard even on Albonics-speaking radio and TV shows.

Here's my question: Whatever happened to "real" English. What happened to the teaching and learning of participial phrases, and principal parts of a verb; and "conjugation of verbs"; and "diagramming" of sentences, and "parsing" of a word or phrase? Whatever happened to the understanding of gerunds, and gerundives -- and infinitives, and subjunctives; and the proper use of "who" and "whom"? Who is being taught that clauses and phrases can be "subjects" and "objects" of verbs? Who is being required to learn nominatives, and objectives, and possessives -- and to understand propositions, and objects of prepositions?

Do today's students understand the absolutely essential importance of "English" -- and have teachers informed their students that "English" includes not just grammar, and sentence-structure,... but also "vocabulary", and orthography ("spelling"), and orthoepy ("pronunciation"), and "reading", and English "composition"? No "American" can master any method of communication,,,, except the "language of the street" -- without comprehending and utilizing all of these proper elements of "English".

("English" is not just grammar and "rules" of written composition. English is also the correct and understandable use of words in "speech", and in speaking. "English" includes the proper pronunciation, enunciation, clarity,... and "delivery" of spoken words.)

Like it or not.... if you expect to be "heard", you'd better articulate your thoughts clearly.... and correctly.

English is the world's language. No one who is unskilled in "real English" can expect ever to "climb the ladder-of-success". The world will seldom see a highly-paid manager or executive who is unable to communicate his ideas and instruction -- either in speech, or in writing -- using correct English grammar, sentence-structure, and "syntax".

My conclusion is this: Success in the learning of any subject depends on the combination of good teachers, paired with attentive and teachable students. If a teacher understands only the rudiments of a subject, how can that teacher convey sophisticated concepts? How can talented and receptive students enhance their skills, if they are seldom exposed to "advanced" knowledge? Contrariwise, if a student is intellectually or socially incapable of progressive learning, then the skill of a superior teacher will be wasted, or grievously ineffective.

Could it be that we now have, in many public schools (even in California), a mixture of talented teachers, side-by-side with inadequate teachers, attempting to impart much-needed sophisticated information unto a cross-section of students.... many of whom are ill-prepared, or unresponsive, or incapable of advanced learning?

To summarize..... it is obvious, today, that "The King's English" is not being taught and spoken and learned -- as it must be. It should be understood that "English" is THE stepping-stone without which NO diligent and ambitious individual can succeed. There ain't no short-cuts.





6-27/00

I'll wager that there are very few "Americans" who are familiar with these beautiful and true words of the fourth stanza of our National Anthem.



O, thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved homes and the war's desolation --
Blest with victory and peace, may the heaven-rescued land
Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just;
And this be our motto: "In God is our trust."
And the Star-Spangled Banner, in triumph shall wave,
O'er the land of the free -- and the home of the brave.




 

 

 

 

 

 

6-15-98
6/27/00
11/12/02


Property-tax in Tuscaloosa --1995

by John N. Todd, M.D.

 

 

 

 

Tuscaloosa Property-tax referendum

Composed and published December 1995

An op-ed essay by Dr. John Todd -- published verbatim in "The Tuscaloosa News"

Click HERE for Easy-Print format of this tablet

I am very disappointed that the Tuscaloosa News is favoring the position that the taxpayers of Tuscaloosa County should vote to impose more taxes upon themselves in order to give additional funding to "public education".

I regret to awaken the T. News, but there is much county-wide opposition to the silly notion that if we vote still more tax on ourselves, that schools will be better, teachers will become more talented, students will become more teachable, achievement scores will improve, that students will learn the basics; that graduation rates will increase, that behavioral problems will vanish; etc.

The News has not only given wide publicity to the "Tuscaloosa County Citizens for Better Education" (TCCBE), but the editorial board has also seen fit to publish, day after day, another maudlin letter from a student or parent in the County schools, begging the taxpayers to "save our children". Presumably the County-High Cheerleaders will soon appear, in person, at the Tuscaloosa News Building.

In the T. News of 12-10-95, an article was published indicating that three different tax-measures have been proposed for getting more funding for the County Schools. I hasten to add, however, that one outstanding alternative has remained unmentioned, and that is that Tuscaloosa County's voting taxpayers are not required to approve any new funding for the public schools.

In the Monday 12-11-95 Tuscaloosa News there is another very offensive "lead editorial", this one attacking ALFA and Tuscaloosa's farmers, concerning their opposition to increased property taxes. How can our only local newspaper be so one-sided -- and so wrong !

Consider this truth -- without new taxes of any kind, revenues designated for the County Schools will grow greatly, each year, for the indefinite future. County property is already being routinely re-valued (upward), every 4 or 5 years. Many of the new families now moving into the County will pay property tax. There are numerous new businesses -- including Mercedes-Benz -- that will pay property taxes. And. as new students enter the County system, each student will be funded by the State with at least the same $3,400 per student per year now being allocated.

If Tuscaloosa Countians foolishly vote to tax themselves additionally -- is there anyone other than Kris Kringle who seriously believes that the AEA/NEA "education" bureaucracy won't be back again, in a year or two, pleading for more funding to "save the schools". Once "bricks and mortar" have been funded, don't you know that "they" will be right back, with another long list of demands requiring more of your tax dollars.

Furthermore, regardless of how we Tuscaloosa Countians vote, you can be sure that the State will also soon try to increase our property tax, or add an ad valorem tax on all of our assets -- to funnel to "public education". Maybe you have heard about Alabama's Robin Hood plan for "Equity Funding", where counties like Tuscaloosa County, with a relatively high property-tax-base, will help finance the school systems of Alabama's "poorer" counties? You and I will pay for that, too.

The scheme of the TCCBE seems to be, "Let's convince all of those voters who do not pay property taxes to vote to increase the taxes on all those 'rich' people who own their own houses, or farms, or small businesses." Or, to the voters: "You'll be voting to tax their assets, not your own. What difference does it make to you -- you may pay a few pennies a day -- but most of that new tax money, from those rich-folks, will accrue to your benefit."

Or, the County Schools might say this -- "Let's extract more money from the taxpayers who have no children in public school (80% of all families); and from those taxpayers who send their children to private schools; and from those parents who find it necessary (and safer) to teach their children at home; and from the many citizens of the City who own property in the County. Make those opulent City-dwellers pay taxes in both places."

We must remember that Alabama is a relatively poor State. Since the average annual wage of Alabamians is among the very lowest in the USA, why should tax-paying Alabamians be expected to keep-up with the education-funding of "rich" and populous states? And besides that, who can quote honest statistics to show that greater and greater funding of public education has ever yielded higher scholastic achievement?

Now let's understand this -- Tuscaloosa County's working and tax-paying citizens genuinely appreciate the value of "education" -- there's no argument about that -- but all of us wonder: how much tax-money is enough? When will improving scholastic and behavioral achievement in the public schools become apparent? When will educators say, "You taxpayers have done your share -- now it's up to us."

Let the "educators" look within themselves for reform of their spending habits -- and not always seek ways to squeeze more and more from the productive taxpayers.

Remember this: A new tax is forever. Aren't you tired of having your income "transferred" to everybody in the world -- except you.

Back to Top of Page


 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted here
5-24-98 and 2/5/99
6/27/00
9/1/00
10/6/00
11/12/02


By John Todd

My response in July 1993 (slightly revised)
to an article in the Tuscaloosa News


PUBLIC-SCHOOLS --
"Taj Mahal" Public Schools

Click HERE for "Easy-Print Format" of this tablet



This responds to the Tuscaloosa News' front-page article (Sunday, July 25, 1993) concerning "horror stories" told by Alabama public-school superintendents, in their testimony last week before Governor Folsom's Education Reform Task Force. The superintendents did not "mince words" in their description of public school problems that allow a "minority of students to ruin (the educational process) for the majority". One superintendent observed that "no pressure of a judge's ruling" (for more funding) will correct the educational system -- unless the facts are recognized.

After reading that article, I had a dream. In this dream, I could see an Alabama public school, for students in the 6th through the 12th grades. This "dream-school" was modeled after the Taj Mahal, with all of its rich extravagances. Each of the students attending this school was individually chauffeured to school in a Cadillac limousine. After arriving at this beautifully constructed and immaculate school, each day, every student was warmly greeted at the front entrance by a "counselor", who cordially patted the student on the head, and said, "We care about you. Have a nice day". (This greeting was pre-planned, so as to give every student a sense of worth, and self-esteem.)

A psychologist, a nurse, and a social worker were available for each grade. They and numerous teacher's assistants busily evaluated each student, and attended to all the whims of dissatisfied or rebellious students.

Upon arrival at school, each student was immediately served a full breakfast, prepared by a gourmet chef. Later, sumptuous mid-morning snacks were supplied, by waiters. Then -- a catered lunch, that spared no cost -- hamburgers, pizza, ribs, "greens", black-eyed peas, and fries!

Metal-detectors were at every entrance to the school; and policemen walked the halls, to protect the children, "just in case". Knives, guns, and brass-knucks were confiscated each morning; but were returned to each student, at the end of every school day -- for personal protection, as the students returned to their home neighborhoods.

The school was "funded" by a generous local population, which opted to spare no expense to "save the schools", and to educate the children ("children" -- repeatedly referred to as "the hope of the future"). The local property tax was increased to a level designed to fund each student with $15,000 per year in local funding, plus State and Federal contributions. Each teacher in this grand school-system was compensated with an annual salary of at least $100,000 -- so as to compare with the income of other "professionals", such as accountants, lawyers, and physicians.

In this Taj Mahal school, the teacher/pupil ratio was enhanced..... so that no teacher had more then four students.

Every student was supplied with brand-new textbooks, especially selected by the Washington D. C. Board of Education (because, in Washington, they fully understand "education" -- and they know what is best for us in Alabama).

Condoms (including mint-flavored condoms) were freely available, at no cost, to both boys and girls. Sex education in both heterosexual and homosexual "love" was a mandatory course for all students, regardless of a student's sexual "persuasion". Pregnant children, from the 6th grade through the 12th grade, were not required to take English-composition, math, and science; but were shunted to classes in "parenting", instead.

A sophisticated computer was supplied for the desk of each student, and every teacher. Computer "games" were available in every classroom, for those teachers and students who were unable to learn how to use a computer, or a word-processor. Many Nintendo game-champions were "crowned" at this school..... among students........ and teachers.

In the wealthy environment of this school, "Tech-prep" and vocational training languished -- for lack of interest among the administrators, and the students, and their parent (or parents). All students were encouraged to go into either nuclear physics, or "brain-surgery".

Then, my dream suddenly changed, and became a nightmare. In the nightmare, I discovered that the teachers in this splendid Taj Mahal-school, were the same teachers (good and bad -- with many still untested, untaught, and unproven) that we now have in all public schools, in "real life". The PARENTS, too, were the same -- with the usual public-school admixture of parental-qualities (good-and-bad). The students, too, were the same -- including those who were bright, those who were less bright -- and all the others, including many unfortunate students, who suffer from learning disabilities, physical abnormalities, psychological quirks, and behavioral disturbances.

In my Taj-Mahal-dream-turned-nightmare, "TRACKING" was absolutely forbidden in all school classes..... for fear of "hurting someone's feelings" (either students, or their parents).

The students, in my nightmare, came from the same variety of families that are seen in today's public schools -- some students from traditional families; and many from "other" families -- like families with one or two mothers, fatherless families, poverty-stricken families, "gay" couples", drunken or drugged parents, mentally-impaired parents, "dysfunctional" families -- and all the rest.

The "bottom-line" horror, of course, in my dream-turned-nightmare, was that educational achievement (the only reason for any school to exist) of the students in this richly-funded "Taj Mahal" school -- did not improve, at all, in spite of all the money and beautiful facilities and advantages that were benevolently and freely lavished upon this school -- by productive individuals and businesses in the community. {Of course, no obligation, or financial responsibility, or cost, was ever imposed upon the students, or upon the PARENTS, or upon the teachers -- in spite of all the "benevolence" of the taxpayers, whose money was extracted to "fund" the public schools.)

When I awoke from my dream/nightmare, and faced the facts, I realized -- like the school superintendents mentioned above -- that unless the entrenched problems of public schools are first admitted, and then corrected -- no amount of "funding", however great, will ever improve public education, in Alabama -- or anywhere else.

Scholastic achievement in Alabama's public schools is now miserable. Enrollment has been declining steadily, for 25 years. Thousands of teachable students have already abandoned the public schools...... to attend private schools, or to receive home-schooling. If change is not instituted soon, all teachable students, and all desirable teachers, will totally abandon the public schools. Construction of "Taj Mahal" school-buildings, and the addition of countless "counsellors" and assistants..... will not help.

I concluded this: Time is short. "Reform" is the by-word, on all cognizant lips. The "justifying" of all public-education expenses is now mandatory. "Business as usual" is no longer an option.

Discipline in the classrooms must be required, and maintained. Adequate "punishment" of aberrant behavior will have to be returned to the teachers, and to each school's principal. Misbehavior, back-talk, fighting, truancy, weapons, wilding, tardiness, vulgarity, childhood pregnancy, stealing -- and all the rest -- must not be tolerated. At least one "volunteer" parent should be required to attend (on a "rotating" basis) each and every classroom -- every day; all day..... to function as a "sergeant-at-arms", when necessary -- or as an unpaid teacher-assistant, when (and if) the class is functioning normally, and quietly.

"Tracking" (by whatever euphemistic nomenclature one wants to call it) of dull or unteachable or refractory or incorrigible students will be necessary -- to prevent polluting the learning habits of responsive, educable students.

Unsatisfactory teachers are another problem. The NEA and AEA have prevented dismissal of almost any teacher, frequently regardless of a teacher's inadequacy. (Of course, it must be remembered, the function of the NEA is not to improve "teaching" and "education", but to enhance the salaries and benefits of its teacher-members.) (Perhaps you can figure out a solution for this intrinsic and severe problem.)

And, furthermore -- how do we escape (obviate) the U.S. government's (and Federal Courts') rules, regulations, restrictions, and mandates -- in all phases of public education?

The only reasonable and attainable solution to all these problems (and questions) may be abandonment of public schools. Obviously, many parents have already opted for this "flight"-choice.

Like you, I have many other suggestions. There is just no one to listen to us well-educated (non-"educator") outsiders -- even though we tax-payers pay all the salaries, and the other bills. One conclusion, however, is painfully obvious: pouring more and more money into a sinking ship is not the answer. "Taj Mahal" schools may look pretty -- but they will not teach our students, or correct the real underlying problems.

Politicians and "educators" continue to sing only one song (to feather their own nests): "Give us more of your money. We know what's best for you, and your money".

Shouldn't everyone -- all the "insiders" -- especially our "educators" and "legislators", awaken from their impossible Taj Mahal dreams...... and face these realities?

Back to the top of this page





 

 

 

 

 

 

5-21-98
6/27/00
1/7/03



ALCOHOL and Alcoholism--


An article by Dr. John Todd.
This article was published in its entirety in the Tuscaloosa News, in October 1994.


(Bolding and underlining have been added)

 



Alcohol and Alcoholism
An Essay by Dr. John N. Todd
Click HERE for Quick-Print format of this tablet



An article entitled "A few drinks a day improves health", appeared recently in the Tuscaloosa News. That article, supplied by the Associated Press, quoted a study reported in the British Medical Journal, indicating that "people who enjoy a couple of drinks a day are 40% less likely to suffer a heart attack or stroke", when compared with non-drinkers. The implication of the article, of course, is that a few drinks a day will magically protect a drinker's health.

That's all we need -- another insidious lure for the young, and for the poor and ignorant and unsuspecting -- to be duped into believing that there can possibly be anything "good", or protective, from the consumption of alcohol.

Now hear the truth. I must tell your readers, here and now, without equivocation. that the harmful "health" effects, and the potentially devastating "social" and financial results of alcohol consumption, immeasurably outweigh any conceivable health benefit. I base that conclusion on my 35 years of experience in treating "private" medical patients, from all walks of life -- and on statistics gathered from my recent review of several reports from the medical literature (some of which I will quote, below).

Let me state another obvious truth: there has never been -- not once, in all of history -- a human individual who started consuming alcohol, with the deliberate plan of causing himself to become an "alcoholic". And yet, in the United States, today, there are at least 15 million overt alcoholics -- and many, many more "borderline alcoholics". Let me repeat: not one of today's 15 million alcoholics ever considered, when he or she took the first drink, that they would ever become addicted to alcohol. And, similarly, not one of them ever started "drinking" for the purpose of "protecting" his health.

Addiction to alcohol "happens", insidiously -- to young and old -- to males and females alike. Alcoholism is the devastating result of a flippant public attitude toward "social drinking". And, as we all know, "social drinking", even when not associated with alcohol-addiction, is the source of a huge array of physical, financial, emotional, and societal side-effects.

(It is a parenthetical point, but in the Clinton administration's recent health-care "reform" package, the political "spin" on the financing of reform was that the plan could be paid for by a tax on tobacco products. How ludicrous! And just think, no mention was made of additional taxes on alcohol, the major scourge of the world's "health". Hopefully, many Americans will understand the "politics" of why alcohol and drunkenness were neither attacked, nor taxed -- by the Clinton's health reform scheme.)

Alcohol is by far the most frequently used harmful "drug", in the U.S. There are many more addicts to alcohol than to cocaine, "crack", heroin, marijuana, etc. And yet, we glamorize the use of alcohol, on TV and in movies. We openly advertise the sale of alcohol. Contrariwise, we criminalize and imprison other "drug" users, and peddlers. Can anyone rationalize that?

In many instances, alcohol is the initial "drug" addiction, leading consequently to a combined addiction involving other substances.

Consider the following statements, and related statistics:

Of the 15 million alcoholics in the U. S., 25 % suffer serious medical complications, including cirrhosis of the liver, ulcers, hemorrhagic disorders, chronic brain damage -- and various other ailments causing absence from work, and "disability" -- and huge costs to "welfare", and to our health-care system.

The use of alcohol, in the U. S., is associated with: 50% of homicides; 33% of suicides; 50% of all traffic accidents.

50% of felons in penitentiaries have alcohol-related problems.

25% of alcoholics are under age 30; and 80% are under age 50.

22,000 people died in alcohol-related auto accidents in 1990, and there were nearly 80,000 permanent disabilities in alcohol-related wrecks.

Alcoholism is fourth among the U.S. health problems, behind heart disease, cancer, and mental illnesses.

100,000 people die each year from alcohol-related illnesses.

There are 50 to 60 million "victims" of alcoholism, including crime victims -- and victims of domestic violence, divorces, homelessness, etc.

And on and on. There is much more. So, when you hear anyone touting the beneficial effects of alcohol, watch out. The black beast is prowling -- perhaps looking for you.

END HERE