In regards to my fellow blogger, Michael Vilaythong, I agree that teens under the age of 16 1/2 years old shouldn't be allowed to tan it all. What's the point of rocking a tan if you're not even allowed to drive or even go to events or certain outings. Nonetheless student's aren't even allowed to wear anything article of clothing that isn't fingertip length, has three fingers worth of a sleeve/strap, or backless/halter tops without a cover jacket on top.
Hmmm, I vaguely remember the dress code for most public schools, but does it even matter anymore? Public schools are starting to one by one establish uniforms so that it'll avoid gang affiliation, sexual harassment, and so forth.
I think it's hilarious that Rep. Jodie Laubenberg had the audacity to say that it'll "interfere with which is sacred to Texas." LET'S SEE -- She can stick her cheerleaders and drill team members or models under the natural sunlight alongside with tanning lotion with a high level of SPF because natural sunlight is much safer then the ultraviolet rays in the tanning beds. Half the time people do not bother to even use the eyelid goggles to block the rays from harming ones eyesight.
Hollywood has rotten the minds of children. Majority of the stars are getting airbrush tanned, mist tanning, and or tanning beds. Rarely are there any stars that just kick it under the sun! That's why everyone's streaky orange or bronze. Talk about being "idols" to these kids, I don't think the wealthy actors/actresses realize the example that they must set.
Until next time, STAY GOLDEN! ;]
May 13, 2009
May 01, 2009
Known to blow fuses, watch your step.
"Bang bang, I shot you down
Bang bang, you hit the ground."
Sorry, I had to pull a Kill Bill real quick! So on the rare occasions that I do turn on the tele and decided to learn something new...it happened to be one of the most mind boggling news update EVAAARRRR. Will somebody tell me why Texas wants to pass a bill allowing college students to carry firearms? I mean really? WOW. That just boggles my mind that they would even waste air time speaking of this issue.
Apparently a former UT student, John Woods, was sitting in the classroom feeling unsafe due to the thoughts of the VA Tech massacre back in 2007 and a few other historical shootings on campuses. It was a brief newscast on News 8 Austin, so I decided to look for an article online backing up the story.
I'd like to slap John Woods upside the head. Why? Well lets see...within the article it states:
Alright, so therefore he just contradicted his own statement. Texas already has enough problems with the Swine flu and unemployment rates skyrocketing; I don't think we need college students carrying guns. I mean really our campus could turn into a World of Warcraft/Halo/Counterstrike ***LIVE!!! --- OK really though, it would be kind of tight to pull a Lara Croft if someone tried to point a gun at me...HAHA! Super sike, I am so kidding. Let me ask the professors how they feel about handing back papers/tests graded with an "F" for FAIL, or any of the students that have "beef" with another person attending the college.
Uh, no deal! I already have to deal with the intense heat and humidity living here in Texas. That alone makes me sweat like a refugee. But the thought of the kid next to me or anyone that I reject in some way pulling out at 9mm to my head. YOU MUST BE TRIPPIN'! Do you know how many angry people there are in this world with mental hit lists?
Well here's all the NOT helpful informational bit of this story that the governement's trying to spin for people to vote on this bill.
Yeah, maybe the Texas heatwave is getting to their heads?
Bang bang, you hit the ground."
Sorry, I had to pull a Kill Bill real quick! So on the rare occasions that I do turn on the tele and decided to learn something new...it happened to be one of the most mind boggling news update EVAAARRRR. Will somebody tell me why Texas wants to pass a bill allowing college students to carry firearms? I mean really? WOW. That just boggles my mind that they would even waste air time speaking of this issue.
Apparently a former UT student, John Woods, was sitting in the classroom feeling unsafe due to the thoughts of the VA Tech massacre back in 2007 and a few other historical shootings on campuses. It was a brief newscast on News 8 Austin, so I decided to look for an article online backing up the story.
I'd like to slap John Woods upside the head. Why? Well lets see...within the article it states:
There were times when Woods thought to himself that maybe he should get a gun.
"Then I learned pretty fast that wouldn't solve anything," said Woods, who is now a graduate student at UT. "The idea that somebody could stop a school shooting with a gun is impossible. It's reactive, not preventative."
Alright, so therefore he just contradicted his own statement. Texas already has enough problems with the Swine flu and unemployment rates skyrocketing; I don't think we need college students carrying guns. I mean really our campus could turn into a World of Warcraft/Halo/Counterstrike ***LIVE!!! --- OK really though, it would be kind of tight to pull a Lara Croft if someone tried to point a gun at me...HAHA! Super sike, I am so kidding. Let me ask the professors how they feel about handing back papers/tests graded with an "F" for FAIL, or any of the students that have "beef" with another person attending the college.
Uh, no deal! I already have to deal with the intense heat and humidity living here in Texas. That alone makes me sweat like a refugee. But the thought of the kid next to me or anyone that I reject in some way pulling out at 9mm to my head. YOU MUST BE TRIPPIN'! Do you know how many angry people there are in this world with mental hit lists?
Well here's all the NOT helpful informational bit of this story that the governement's trying to spin for people to vote on this bill.
"Supporters say the bills would do two things: protect the rights of those licensed to carry concealed weapons, and help prevent another massacre on the scale of what happened at Virginia Tech and another shooting last year at Northern Illinois University."
Yeah, maybe the Texas heatwave is getting to their heads?
April 17, 2009
666 {just kidding, 6 or fail!}
RE:"The Number is 6." AzNWiLdMaN
*two thumbs up*
I agree with your post because each and every single college student has dropped a class and retaken it due to either one of the reasons stated above or other reasons. If the government really wanted to interfere with the amount of class drops/withdrawals then student's shouldn't even be given the option of dropping a course.
I don't see what the problem is for dropping 6+ classes throughout your undergraduate career. Honestly, the policy already states that they are going to charge a student higher for dropping and retaking the course x-amount of times. First off that's more money for the institution and secondly, at least the student is trying.
I think this also ties in with the issue of the government trying to move the "at risk" student's into a private institution. Instead of helping the better understand the material. That also incorporates with class options, like the remedial, intermediate, regular, advance course levels. There are other options rather than interfering with the college crediting system.
Pretty much the state's expecting all or nothing from college students.
Pfft, and they have the audacity of referring to us as "the faces of tomorrow."
*two thumbs up*
I agree with your post because each and every single college student has dropped a class and retaken it due to either one of the reasons stated above or other reasons. If the government really wanted to interfere with the amount of class drops/withdrawals then student's shouldn't even be given the option of dropping a course.
I don't see what the problem is for dropping 6+ classes throughout your undergraduate career. Honestly, the policy already states that they are going to charge a student higher for dropping and retaking the course x-amount of times. First off that's more money for the institution and secondly, at least the student is trying.
I think this also ties in with the issue of the government trying to move the "at risk" student's into a private institution. Instead of helping the better understand the material. That also incorporates with class options, like the remedial, intermediate, regular, advance course levels. There are other options rather than interfering with the college crediting system.
Pretty much the state's expecting all or nothing from college students.
Pfft, and they have the audacity of referring to us as "the faces of tomorrow."
April 07, 2009
JACKPOT $$$ (x10)
So they say everything's bigger in Texas....I wonder if it's true.
If that's the case, is everyone's pockets full of knots?
Pfft, I thought you knew!! TEXAS = HIGH ROLLERS!
SUPER SIKE (!!!) --- No, really though that's a big bluff.
Can you imagine if Governor Perry actually legalizes gambling?! Maybe it's because I'm not a native, but is it just me...or do Texans like to "go big or go home." The government has been throwing out a lot of unexpected wild card issues this past year. Evolution, gambling, border patrol, abortion or abstinence programs. Come on, there are bigger issues out there! That's like reviewing the past issues and trying to make those overrated topics legalized or "better under governmental control ." The main focus of local government should be job/economy related. But no sirree bob, Texas likes to keep picking at things that were a big fat flop back in previous years.
Imagine Vegas, now convert that with Texas. Are you picturing that image? Cause I certainly cannot. Although there are a lot of illegal slot machines in town, gambling has always been an easy addiction. Governor Perry thinks the state would be able to regulate it in some way if the proposed bill were to pass. --- It's already bad enough that gambling is an addictive sport/game; the usage of credit cards might be incorporated with it. Man oh man, Chase Bank is about to become like a big Walmart of debt for the gamblers of Texas.
Before voting for this bill, I hope the locals will consider the side effects of gambling. Just like any drug it may cause a pot of problems. Legalizing gambling will affect the taxpayers more than this mini depression we are going through as a nation because the rates of: crime, welfare, bankruptcies, and etc will sky rocket. Due to the fact that Texas's population is basically a full house -- a lot of families will be destroyed due to possible domestic violence, abandonment, suicidal issues.
If we legalize gambling because illegal slot machines already exists around town, then I propose we legalize weed/drugs in general because everyone and their moms are getting caught for having an ounce. Go figure, what are the odds? It's funny how a lot of citizens are getting laid off and receiving unemployment checks, but a lot of the money is still being blown on compulsive buys.
Before everything is said and done, it should be taken into consideration if this could benefit Texas as a whole, or would it add on to the list of problems? Otherwise it would change the statement: "Everything's bigger in Texas."We would have nothing to offer anymore, Texas would be dryer than a drought!
If that's the case, is everyone's pockets full of knots?
Pfft, I thought you knew!! TEXAS = HIGH ROLLERS!
SUPER SIKE (!!!) --- No, really though that's a big bluff.
Can you imagine if Governor Perry actually legalizes gambling?! Maybe it's because I'm not a native, but is it just me...or do Texans like to "go big or go home." The government has been throwing out a lot of unexpected wild card issues this past year. Evolution, gambling, border patrol, abortion or abstinence programs. Come on, there are bigger issues out there! That's like reviewing the past issues and trying to make those overrated topics legalized or "better under governmental control ." The main focus of local government should be job/economy related. But no sirree bob, Texas likes to keep picking at things that were a big fat flop back in previous years.
Imagine Vegas, now convert that with Texas. Are you picturing that image? Cause I certainly cannot. Although there are a lot of illegal slot machines in town, gambling has always been an easy addiction. Governor Perry thinks the state would be able to regulate it in some way if the proposed bill were to pass. --- It's already bad enough that gambling is an addictive sport/game; the usage of credit cards might be incorporated with it. Man oh man, Chase Bank is about to become like a big Walmart of debt for the gamblers of Texas.
Before voting for this bill, I hope the locals will consider the side effects of gambling. Just like any drug it may cause a pot of problems. Legalizing gambling will affect the taxpayers more than this mini depression we are going through as a nation because the rates of: crime, welfare, bankruptcies, and etc will sky rocket. Due to the fact that Texas's population is basically a full house -- a lot of families will be destroyed due to possible domestic violence, abandonment, suicidal issues.
If we legalize gambling because illegal slot machines already exists around town, then I propose we legalize weed/drugs in general because everyone and their moms are getting caught for having an ounce. Go figure, what are the odds? It's funny how a lot of citizens are getting laid off and receiving unemployment checks, but a lot of the money is still being blown on compulsive buys.
Before everything is said and done, it should be taken into consideration if this could benefit Texas as a whole, or would it add on to the list of problems? Otherwise it would change the statement: "Everything's bigger in Texas."We would have nothing to offer anymore, Texas would be dryer than a drought!
March 26, 2009
BORDER-line | Perry vs Obama (!!!)
HOT TOPIC OF THE DAY:
Whose right about the border? Perry or Obama?!
-----------------------------------------------------------
This article is about what Governor Rick Perry and President Barack Obama's thoughts are on the case of border patrol. Governor Perry thinks that National Guard troops should be along the border and "guard." While President Obama thinks that this is a matter that should be left to Homeland Security (federal agents) so that they can better search for drugs and regulate the cash flow crossing the border.
My two cents of this topic is very biased, my boyfriend is in the National Guard and not too long ago he discussed that he got an offer to work as a border patrol guard or whatever the government want to label the job title as now a days. We were discussing this because he was trying to pick a base and of course TEXAS (whoooot!) is one of his choices, more reasons than one *ahem, mememe!; just kidding! But no seriously, I think that him sitting at the border would be a waste of his training and skills. Basic training is a grueling enough process for a soldier, why make them learn the intricate procedures for whatever field they're in if you're going to throw them into a position of basic formation checks as cars/people pass. Though Obama has good reasoning to his agrument, but at the end of the day who knows what's best for Texas and what's best for the US?
William sides with Obama on this matter. McKenzie spent over 12 years in Washington, DC so I'm assuming he's gotten a good inside look on how things work. Having said, his current project is an online discussion board/blog for the Dallas Morning News called, "Texas Faith." Since this is a blog, McKenzie is stating his opinions and inputs on the matter of whose going to be able to handle this case better, the Govenor or the President. He sides with the President in this matter but he fails to present good reasoning to each persons argument.
Yes, President Obama is trying to do what's best for our country, BUT and this is a huge but, Govenor Perry's main focus is Texas in general. So whose willing to pay more attention on what's going on IN Texas? Simple answer. Though the answer is simple, this ordeal is more intricate because its not only a matter of choosing agents or troops, its a matter of whose better trained for the task at hand! In a perfect world if we got our way, it'd be bad ass to see a bunch of troops (G.I.JOES!) at the border singling out all the criminals that are smuggling drugs, guns, and money across the border! So here's my biased opinion, since I'm dating a soldier, I'm more aware of how much money the government wastes on training/investigating/and ecetera to try and prevent a problem rather than stopping it. NEWS FLASH (!!!) The whole problem of regulation of drugs/money/weapons has been around for a while now, it's just all a sudden put to our attention more. So instead of wasting time figuring out whose right or wrong, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT! All talk, no action!
McKenzie is bringing good reasoning to his audience, which is us the people. But he lacks an in depth discussion as to what's what. After, it is a blog...a place to rant, like I sure did on this post! :)
Whose right about the border? Perry or Obama?!
-----------------------------------------------------------
This article is about what Governor Rick Perry and President Barack Obama's thoughts are on the case of border patrol. Governor Perry thinks that National Guard troops should be along the border and "guard." While President Obama thinks that this is a matter that should be left to Homeland Security (federal agents) so that they can better search for drugs and regulate the cash flow crossing the border.
My two cents of this topic is very biased, my boyfriend is in the National Guard and not too long ago he discussed that he got an offer to work as a border patrol guard or whatever the government want to label the job title as now a days. We were discussing this because he was trying to pick a base and of course TEXAS (whoooot!) is one of his choices, more reasons than one *ahem, mememe!; just kidding! But no seriously, I think that him sitting at the border would be a waste of his training and skills. Basic training is a grueling enough process for a soldier, why make them learn the intricate procedures for whatever field they're in if you're going to throw them into a position of basic formation checks as cars/people pass. Though Obama has good reasoning to his agrument, but at the end of the day who knows what's best for Texas and what's best for the US?
William sides with Obama on this matter. McKenzie spent over 12 years in Washington, DC so I'm assuming he's gotten a good inside look on how things work. Having said, his current project is an online discussion board/blog for the Dallas Morning News called, "Texas Faith." Since this is a blog, McKenzie is stating his opinions and inputs on the matter of whose going to be able to handle this case better, the Govenor or the President. He sides with the President in this matter but he fails to present good reasoning to each persons argument.
Yes, President Obama is trying to do what's best for our country, BUT and this is a huge but, Govenor Perry's main focus is Texas in general. So whose willing to pay more attention on what's going on IN Texas? Simple answer. Though the answer is simple, this ordeal is more intricate because its not only a matter of choosing agents or troops, its a matter of whose better trained for the task at hand! In a perfect world if we got our way, it'd be bad ass to see a bunch of troops (G.I.JOES!) at the border singling out all the criminals that are smuggling drugs, guns, and money across the border! So here's my biased opinion, since I'm dating a soldier, I'm more aware of how much money the government wastes on training/investigating/and ecetera to try and prevent a problem rather than stopping it. NEWS FLASH (!!!) The whole problem of regulation of drugs/money/weapons has been around for a while now, it's just all a sudden put to our attention more. So instead of wasting time figuring out whose right or wrong, DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT! All talk, no action!
McKenzie is bringing good reasoning to his audience, which is us the people. But he lacks an in depth discussion as to what's what. After, it is a blog...a place to rant, like I sure did on this post! :)
February 26, 2009
ILL-MINDED.
RHINOVIRUS has a possible cure?
I never knew that the common cold gets this much light in the pharmaceutical world. Honestly, that's full of complete and utter pish posh! I laughed mega hard when I finished reading this article. Personally, I am very grateful that I came across this because my major is currently listed under pre-pharmacy (most likely, pharmacy tech) so this just motivates me to study harder.
The COMMON cold is normally toughed out because in my mind minor illnesses like the cold/flu/etc can be fought withOUT antibiotics because even though people think it speeds up the healing process, it actually prolongs it! It's all in your head. The medication just simply eases the symptoms that cause one to feel miserable --- for the time being. Interesting how the flu vaccination shot always causes you to get sick within a week of getting it. Supposedly you feel as if your body is immune to the flu or common cold because you got this defensive wall ready to attack the icky germs, but that's a big fat lie.
"It is wonderful to think that millions of people would no longer be forced to stalk the aisles of the pharmacies wondering if this tablet or that pill or some elixir will knock out the virus and end the misery. The common cold has enriched pharmaceutical companies for centuries as people the world over try various drugs to relieve the cold symptoms."
*Pfft, if there's an illness there's a pill serving as a remedy; pharmacists will always make bank! (It's all a big hu$tle!) -- No really though, the author of this post is unknown but I give him/her kudos for posting this because the last thing people want to do right now is let their health crumble. The fact that our nation is going through some serious issues, money stacks aren't as high anymore if you know what I mean. I'm pretty sure we as consumers would like to avoid being sick! So we can clock in as often as possible and get paidddd at our 9-5's or whatever it be.
It's all a matter of opinion. Would you cough up x amount of dollars just to get rid of a cold quicker? "However, there could be trouble ahead. Experts say the cost of bringing a new drug to market is now about $700 million, which means the cost of a cold remedy could be quite expensive. There are tests and trials, regulatory authorities to satisfy and side effects to consider."
This last statement did however tickle my funny bone. "Despite all the hurdles ahead, there is a great deal of confidence that an antidote for the common cold is just around the corner. A drug to cold-cock a cold is too sweet a discovery to let languish."
January 29, 2009
TEXA$ GET$ MONEY!
-- Yes, you read correctly! Texas is about to get PAID (!!!)Don't worry, I thought my eyes were going bonkers also when I came across this article. I knew we were asking for changes to President Obama, but who knew he'd deliver so quickly! Mr. Barack Obama kindly signed off on the federal stimulus bill that is expected to be a major amount of grant money for state education programs and local school districts.
Texas is expected to get at least $5.4 billion for public education over the next two years. Millions shall go to the school districts of special educational programs and for the low income students. Can I hear a little golf clap for the presidents desire to help educate everyone?! *golf claps*
Austin will be getting about $41 million within the next two years. About $39 million shall be distributed between:
- Round Rock- $9 million
- Pflugerville- $4.3 million
- Leander- $3.9 million
- San Marcos- $2.7
With this huge state bonus coming in, hopefully the job opportunities will open up because Austin reported a 5.4 unemployment rate as 2008 was wrapping up. The stimulus money could be spent on reducing class sizes and hiring more TA's to help better the academic performance rates.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
