pigo

I'm shocked that the "church" can legally censor TV programming.
I'm also happy that someone is standing up and airing the program
anyway?

How is it that the "church" can do that? Who would one turn to to
correct the situation. What else do they not show that they deem us
unable to handle?

pigo

Raptor

pigo wrote:
> I'm shocked that the "church" can legally censor TV programming.
> I'm also happy that someone is standing up and airing the program
> anyway?
>
> How is it that the "church" can do that? Who would one turn to to
> correct the situation. What else do they not show that they deem us
> unable to handle?
>
> pigo

How long have you been living here again? The Church did the same thing
with SNL a few years ago, when KSL and KUTV swapped affiliates. That's
why SNL is on the WB. The Church owns KSL and they can show or not show
pretty much whatever they want.

I don't watch a lot of network TV, but I bet there's a LOT of crap on
KSL that should be objectionable to the prudes here. It would be
interesting to correlate the advertising revenue with sleaze factor of
KSL's current fare.

--
--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall
"I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we could to protect
our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security."
--Microsoft VP in charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.

pigo

"Raptor" <me@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:3F71BF56.4080308@attbi.com...
> pigo wrote:
> > I'm shocked that the "church" can legally censor TV programming.
> > I'm also happy that someone is standing up and airing the program
> > anyway?
> >
> > How is it that the "church" can do that? Who would one turn to to
> > correct the situation. What else do they not show that they deem us
> > unable to handle?
> >
> > pigo
>
> How long have you been living here again? The Church did the same
thing
> with SNL a few years ago, when KSL and KUTV swapped affiliates.
That's
> why SNL is on the WB. The Church owns KSL and they can show or not
show
> pretty much whatever they want.

22 years. Does that have anything to do with it. The constitution is
over 200 years old.
How is that _not_ censorship?

> I don't watch a lot of network TV, but I bet there's a LOT of crap on
> KSL that should be objectionable to the prudes here. It would be
> interesting to correlate the advertising revenue with sleaze factor of
> KSL's current fare.

I guess they pick their battles. I know that the head of KSL thought
"Seinfeld" was the devil.
You know, it's not porn. The show is acceptable in 99.9% of he markets
in the USA. I would think that the fact that KSL is _"church" owned_
would be more of a problem than it would be for the merely "church"
controlled (run by members) stations here. Being "church" owned I would
think that they would have to go that extra mile to eliminate even the
appearance.......that the others may not.

Personally, I'm offended by the "700 Club'', and sports pre-emption by
"conference". But I change the channel. And before the standard reply to
my thoughts is put forth, let me say: this isn't "mormon bashing" for
me. It's a RIGHTS and censorship issue.

pigo

Steve Christensen

In article <fr-dnRJtGqdsXuyiU-KYvg@comcast.com>, pigo wrote:
> Personally, I'm offended by the "700 Club'', and sports pre-emption by
> "conference". But I change the channel. And before the standard reply to
> my thoughts is put forth, let me say: this isn't "mormon bashing" for
> me. It's a RIGHTS and censorship issue.


Censorship and hypocrisy, maybe. But, rights?

I do agree with you that KSL is acting very lame, but they are a
business. You have a choice to watch what you want, they have a choice
to play what they want. If they choose to respond to complaints from the
little old ladies in their audience rather than play everything NBC
sends them, it's their choice. And, I assume, a choice they have to
defend to NBC.

If you don't like it, contact NBC and complain. If they get enough
complaints, it'll weaken KSL's position that the community doesn't want
certain programs.



-Steve

Pam

You wouldn't happen to have any address to complain TO would ya?
This has been pissing me off ever since I moved here in 1995.
I would love to send a letter to NBC to complain about the censorship here
in Salt Lake.
Pam

"Steve Christensen" <stnchris@xmission.com> wrote in message
news:slrnbn3hp0.3c5.stnchris@shell2.xmission.com.. .
> In article <fr-dnRJtGqdsXuyiU-KYvg@comcast.com>, pigo wrote:
> > Personally, I'm offended by the "700 Club'', and sports pre-emption by
> > "conference". But I change the channel. And before the standard reply to
> > my thoughts is put forth, let me say: this isn't "mormon bashing" for
> > me. It's a RIGHTS and censorship issue.
>
>
> Censorship and hypocrisy, maybe. But, rights?
>
> I do agree with you that KSL is acting very lame, but they are a
> business. You have a choice to watch what you want, they have a choice
> to play what they want. If they choose to respond to complaints from the
> little old ladies in their audience rather than play everything NBC
> sends them, it's their choice. And, I assume, a choice they have to
> defend to NBC.
>
> If you don't like it, contact NBC and complain. If they get enough
> complaints, it'll weaken KSL's position that the community doesn't want
> certain programs.
>
>
>
> -Steve

kevin zollinger

"Pam" <dontmailhere@invalid.com> wrote in
news:rzlcb.71$N24.28278@news.uswest.net:

> You wouldn't happen to have any address to complain TO would ya?
> This has been pissing me off ever since I moved here in 1995.
> I would love to send a letter to NBC to complain about the censorship
> here in Salt Lake.

You'll find the address on their website (http://www.nbc.com) but I don't
suspect that you'll have much luck in your complaints. Were you to complain
you will probably get routed back to KSL, where they've already decided
that they will get more complaints from airing the program than they will
get from not airing it. I suspect that they exchange will go something like
this:

You: I want to watch Coupling!
Them: So set your TV reciever to channel 15 on your TV and watch it.

Anyway, the address:

NBC
Viewer Relations
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY 10112

Good luck.

PS: There is a blurb on the WB web site:
http://www.wb30tv.com/Community/index.asp?subpage=5

--
~ kevin zollinger
kevin@mailsoap.com

pigo

"Steve Christensen" <stnchris@xmission.com> wrote in message
news:slrnbn3hp0.3c5.stnchris@shell2.xmission.com.. .
> In article <fr-dnRJtGqdsXuyiU-KYvg@comcast.com>, pigo wrote:
> > Personally, I'm offended by the "700 Club'', and sports pre-emption
by
> > "conference". But I change the channel. And before the standard
reply to
> > my thoughts is put forth, let me say: this isn't "mormon bashing"
for
> > me. It's a RIGHTS and censorship issue.
>
>
> Censorship and hypocrisy, maybe. But, rights?

Is a constitutional issue one to do with rights? I assume so, but if you
don't like that specific label, that's ok with me. I think you get the
point.

> I do agree with you that KSL is acting very lame, but they are a
> business. You have a choice to watch what you want, they have a choice
> to play what they want. If they choose to respond to complaints from
the
> little old ladies in their audience rather than play everything NBC
> sends them, it's their choice. And, I assume, a choice they have to
> defend to NBC.

Yes, they are a business. But a regulated one. IMO there are censorship
issues here that would not apply to Albertsons covering up
"Cosmopolitan" , for example.

> If you don't like it, contact NBC and complain. If they get enough
> complaints, it'll weaken KSL's position that the community doesn't
want
> certain programs.

Suppose for a minute that "the community" decided that conference wasn't
wanted. Do you think they'd pull that? Given that SLC is now over 50%
normal I'd venture a guess that the majority here would rather that not
be aired.

I have contacted NBC and the FCC. I posted here for the discussion of
it.

I also contacted KSL and received polite email back. I got the feeling
that KUWB serves the propose of diluting this issue for the parties
involved. Maybe NBC allows the censorship because they can still air it
in the market. The KSL representative didn't have the time to go back
and forth and answer each question that his answers brought up.

pigo

pigo

"Pam" <dontmailhere@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:rzlcb.71$N24.28278@news.uswest.net...
> You wouldn't happen to have any address to complain TO would ya?
> This has been pissing me off ever since I moved here in 1995.
> I would love to send a letter to NBC to complain about the censorship
here
> in Salt Lake.
> Pam

There are programming links on both KSL and NBC sites. I have a feeling
that the NBC one will end up in a giant junk pile. KSL responded almost
immediately. Nothing more than you would expect.

AFAIAK At least there is the compromise of another network carrying the
show. But the larger issue is the one of censorship by a "church" of a
major network. kybu? Fine.

pigo

> "Steve Christensen" <stnchris@xmission.com> wrote in message
> news:slrnbn3hp0.3c5.stnchris@shell2.xmission.com.. .
> > In article <fr-dnRJtGqdsXuyiU-KYvg@comcast.com>, pigo wrote:
> > > Personally, I'm offended by the "700 Club'', and sports
pre-emption by
> > > "conference". But I change the channel. And before the standard
reply to
> > > my thoughts is put forth, let me say: this isn't "mormon bashing"
for
> > > me. It's a RIGHTS and censorship issue.
> >
> >
> > Censorship and hypocrisy, maybe. But, rights?
> >
> > I do agree with you that KSL is acting very lame, but they are a
> > business. You have a choice to watch what you want, they have a
choice
> > to play what they want. If they choose to respond to complaints from
the
> > little old ladies in their audience rather than play everything NBC
> > sends them, it's their choice. And, I assume, a choice they have to
> > defend to NBC.
> >
> > If you don't like it, contact NBC and complain. If they get enough
> > complaints, it'll weaken KSL's position that the community doesn't
want
> > certain programs.
> >
> >
> >
> > -Steve
>
>

Steve Christensen

In article <GcqcnWYZRvuxa-yiU-KYvw@comcast.com>, pigo wrote:
> I also contacted KSL and received polite email back. I got the feeling
> that KUWB serves the propose of diluting this issue for the parties
> involved. Maybe NBC allows the censorship because they can still air it
> in the market. The KSL representative didn't have the time to go back
> and forth and answer each question that his answers brought up.

Maybe another route to take is to contact the advertisers that pay NBC
to air their commercials during Coupling on a national level.

I have no idea how you'd go about getting that list, but that could make
NBC take more notice of the situation.



-Steve

Thant Tessman

kevin zollinger wrote:

> <Note to Lynn & Thant> Yes, I know that the stewardship of the public
> airwaves has been deemed to be a public resource. Yes, I am aware that you
> *could* (as does the FTC!) perhaps stretch that to indicate that KSL has an
> obligation to air programs that are considered to be in the "public good"
> in compensation for getting exclusive broadcast rights to a specified
> spectrum. It just that 1) I don't think that *any* sit-com rises to the
> level of being in the "public good" and that 2) KSL has a right to choose
> when and how it meets that requirement. </Note to Lynn & Thant>

The notion of a "public good" is a fabrication of the politician--a
fallacy of the economist--a tool of the oppressor--a lie. I won't invoke
the concept in defense of my arguments, and I deny others likewise.

-thant

--
America goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is
the well-wisher of the freedom and independence of all. She is
the champion and vindicator only of her own. -- John Quincy Adams

Pam

Well, I've sent my letter.
Let's start one of those email campagins like they do for those stupid fake
viruses and 'don't go to the mall on Halloween' things.
This is important. I'm so tired of people legislating morality around
here....
Pam
Cranky Menopausal Jew

"kevin zollinger" <kevin@mailsoap.com> wrote in message
news:Xns940083AD8A07Akevinmailsoapcom@206.127.4.25 ...
> "Pam" <dontmailhere@invalid.com> wrote in
> news:rzlcb.71$N24.28278@news.uswest.net:
>
> > You wouldn't happen to have any address to complain TO would ya?
> > This has been pissing me off ever since I moved here in 1995.
> > I would love to send a letter to NBC to complain about the censorship
> > here in Salt Lake.
>
> You'll find the address on their website (http://www.nbc.com) but I don't
> suspect that you'll have much luck in your complaints. Were you to
complain
> you will probably get routed back to KSL, where they've already decided
> that they will get more complaints from airing the program than they will
> get from not airing it. I suspect that they exchange will go something
like
> this:
>
> You: I want to watch Coupling!
> Them: So set your TV reciever to channel 15 on your TV and watch it.
>
> Anyway, the address:
>
> NBC
> Viewer Relations
> 30 Rockefeller Plaza
> New York, NY 10112
>
> Good luck.
>
> PS: There is a blurb on the WB web site:
> http://www.wb30tv.com/Community/index.asp?subpage=5
>
> --
> ~ kevin zollinger
> kevin@mailsoap.com

pigo

"Steve Christensen" <stnchris@xmission.com> wrote in message
news:slrnbn3upa.8ac.stnchris@shell2.xmission.com.. .
> In article <GcqcnWYZRvuxa-yiU-KYvw@comcast.com>, pigo wrote:
> > I also contacted KSL and received polite email back. I got the
feeling
> > that KUWB serves the propose of diluting this issue for the parties
> > involved. Maybe NBC allows the censorship because they can still air
it
> > in the market. The KSL representative didn't have the time to go
back
> > and forth and answer each question that his answers brought up.
>
> Maybe another route to take is to contact the advertisers that pay NBC
> to air their commercials during Coupling on a national level.
>
> I have no idea how you'd go about getting that list, but that could
make
> NBC take more notice of the situation.

Some of the sting is taken out of the situation by the fact that KUWB is
picking it up.

I still think it is WRONG though.

pigo

"Pam" <dontmailhere@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:tWocb.429$%a3.97660@news.uswest.net...
> Well, I've sent my letter.
> Let's start one of those email campagins like they do for those stupid
fake
> viruses and 'don't go to the mall on Halloween' things.
> This is important. I'm so tired of people legislating morality around
> here....
> Pam
> Cranky Menopausal Jew

As we get closer to "election" time here behind the zion curtain you'll
start to see more "legalize adulthood" bumperstickers. Nothing ever
comes of it though. They know how to play the game and insert just
enough "non-members" to keep from bringing the army back.

GMAN

In article <fr-dnRJtGqdsXuyiU-KYvg@comcast.com>, "pigo" <pigopowderNoSpam@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>"Raptor" <me@attbi.com> wrote in message
>news:3F71BF56.4080308@attbi.com...
>> pigo wrote:
>> > I'm shocked that the "church" can legally censor TV programming.
>> > I'm also happy that someone is standing up and airing the program
>> > anyway?
>> >
>> > How is it that the "church" can do that? Who would one turn to to
>> > correct the situation. What else do they not show that they deem us
>> > unable to handle?
>> >
>> > pigo
>>
>> How long have you been living here again? The Church did the same
>thing
>> with SNL a few years ago, when KSL and KUTV swapped affiliates.
>That's
>> why SNL is on the WB. The Church owns KSL and they can show or not
>show
>> pretty much whatever they want.
>
>22 years. Does that have anything to do with it. The constitution is
>over 200 years old.
>How is that _not_ censorship?

When you own the station and you pay for the programming you pretty much can
do or show what you want,

\\



>
>> I don't watch a lot of network TV, but I bet there's a LOT of crap on
>> KSL that should be objectionable to the prudes here. It would be
>> interesting to correlate the advertising revenue with sleaze factor of
>> KSL's current fare.
>
>I guess they pick their battles. I know that the head of KSL thought
>"Seinfeld" was the devil.
>You know, it's not porn. The show is acceptable in 99.9% of he markets
>in the USA. I would think that the fact that KSL is _"church" owned_
>would be more of a problem than it would be for the merely "church"
>controlled (run by members) stations here. Being "church" owned I would
>think that they would have to go that extra mile to eliminate even the
>appearance.......that the others may not.
>
>Personally, I'm offended by the "700 Club'', and sports pre-emption by
>"conference". But I change the channel. And before the standard reply to
>my thoughts is put forth, let me say: this isn't "mormon bashing" for
>me. It's a RIGHTS and censorship issue.
>
>pigo
>
>

Raptor

kevin zollinger wrote:
> "pigo" <pigopowderNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in news:GcqcnWAZRvuwa-yiU-
> KYvw@comcast.com:
>
>
> [...]
>
>
>>In most instances your "constitutional sense" argument might hold a
>>little bit of water. BUT here, the state govt. KSL and the "church" are
>>all the same thing.
>>
>
>
> You've said that a number of time. I suspect that Patrice Arent might be
> surprised that she was now part of the church machinery. I think that
> Jackie Biskupski might be similarly surprised. Rocky Anderson might drop
> his re-election bid once he hears that he has been co-opted by the church!

The net effect is the same. Utahrds get the government they deserve. I
do not, coincidentally, have a shred of respect for the state
legislature as a body. I DO have shreds of respect for elements of the
state government.

And of course, MY representatives are good.

(And since you or someone will inevitably ask, I stay here because the
mountains and deserts are so special.)

> You've made this allegation numerous times of the years but have yet to
> provide any kind of specific example of when or how the LDS church has ever
> passed legislation. Yes, most of the people who run for office are LDS,
> leading to a legislature that is mostly LDS. AS far as a I know, there is
> no rule that says that only LDS church members are allow to hold political
> office. Does the the LDS church carry a lot of political weight? Yes. Does
> the LDS church pass legislation? No. Does the LDS church set rules and
> regulations? No. Does the LDS Church enforce the laws? No. Does the LDS
> church serve as government at any level in Utah? No.

I can't cite a specific instance, but I believe there have been cases
where the Church issues a statement pro or con to a controversial
measure, and it passes or fails as "appropriate." If you want proof,
wait four months.

--
--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall
"I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we could to protect
our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security."
--Microsoft VP in charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.

Raptor

Pam wrote:
> Well, I've sent my letter.
> Let's start one of those email campagins like they do for those stupid fake
> viruses and 'don't go to the mall on Halloween' things.
> This is important. I'm so tired of people legislating morality around
> here....
> Pam
> Cranky Menopausal Jew
>

Been there, done that. Save your effort. I got politically active once
and got zero change for my effort. We gentiles are way outnumbered, and
the voting populace is truly a herd of sheep. All we can do is maintain
our little cabal of semi-happiness and decadance here in SLC. Vote for
Rocky. (If you don't live in SLC, move so you can vote for Rocky.)

--
--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall
"I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we could to protect
our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security."
--Microsoft VP in charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.

pigo

"GMAN" <glenzabr@removethisspamtrapxmission.com> wrote in message
news:bktpif$ft2$1@terabinaries.xmission.com...


> When you own the station and you pay for the programming you pretty
much can
> do or show what you want,

That's true for non network programming that they pick, choose or
produce specifically for this market. When they single out a program for
religious reasons sent to them from the network whose programs carry on
a regular basis and that is shown in virtually every other market,
that's censorship.

pigo

Pam

Well, I have this book, have never read it and I don't know where it is
right now, like all the books I bought in the past 2 years. Anyway, I have
that Michael Moore book and the reason I bought that book was well, #1 to
read it, and #2 because he said you and your 20 buddies can change the
political demographic all by yourselves. How? By showing up to the party
meetings. NObody shows up to those things is his theory and by showing up
with your friends you completely throw the entire system out of whack.

How about that?
Pam

"Raptor" <me@attbi.com> wrote in message news:3F727AF7.6010405@attbi.com...
> Pam wrote:
> > Well, I've sent my letter.
> > Let's start one of those email campagins like they do for those stupid
fake
> > viruses and 'don't go to the mall on Halloween' things.
> > This is important. I'm so tired of people legislating morality around
> > here....
> > Pam
> > Cranky Menopausal Jew
> >
>
> Been there, done that. Save your effort. I got politically active once
> and got zero change for my effort. We gentiles are way outnumbered, and
> the voting populace is truly a herd of sheep. All we can do is maintain
> our little cabal of semi-happiness and decadance here in SLC. Vote for
> Rocky. (If you don't live in SLC, move so you can vote for Rocky.)
>
> --
> --
> Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall
> "I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we could to protect
> our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security."
> --Microsoft VP in charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.
>

Raptor

Pam wrote:
> Well, I have this book, have never read it and I don't know where it is
> right now, like all the books I bought in the past 2 years. Anyway, I have
> that Michael Moore book and the reason I bought that book was well, #1 to
> read it, and #2 because he said you and your 20 buddies can change the
> political demographic all by yourselves. How? By showing up to the party
> meetings. NObody shows up to those things is his theory and by showing up
> with your friends you completely throw the entire system out of whack.
>
> How about that?
> Pam

That's what I did, only it was the Democrat meeting in a solid Democrat
district. I believe I became the district vice president. :-) I hear
that the Republican meetings ARE well-attended, frequently by the rabid.
Good luck swaying groups like that, unless it's further to the right.

I don't have 20 buddies though, and like I said, we'd be Dems in one of
the few Dem districts.

--
--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall
"I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we could to protect
our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security."
--Microsoft VP in charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.

Rich

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Raptor <me@attbi.com> spake the secret code
<3F727AF7.6010405@attbi.com> thusly:

>(If you don't live in SLC, move so you can vote for Rocky.)

Hell no. I'm happy with one less layer of government telling me what
I can and can't do.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ:
<http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/>
Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty
<http://pilgrimage.scene.org>

Pam

"GMAN" <glenzabr@removethisspamtrapxmission.com> wrote in message
news:bkvlcs$a3p$2@terabinaries.xmission.com...
> >joints
> I raely see teenage kids working at McDonalds or any of the fast food
places.
> It seems they are non english speaking hispanics or Ugandans. I get
pisssed
> when my super sized fries are half filled. Damnit whats so hard about
giving
> me what i paid for. Forgetting straws, Sauce for nuggets , etc.... I
ALWAYS
> have to look in the bag to make sure we get what was ordered.

I did not get my onion rings yesterday and I'm still pissed about it.
If Johnnie could read then JOHNNIE would be at the fast food place
filing your order and not the guy from Mexico, Uganda, whatever.
If Johnnie could read the stupid simple application then he'd have a stupid
job. Employers wouldn't have to hire immigrants and deal with all the
problems that entails.

So while Johnnie can't read and either can't fill your order at the fast
food joint,
or he's been fired because he can't make change, other Johnnie's are down
at Pioneer park selling meth.

If you ever want to have a little sick fun, then give Johnnie $20.02 for an
order that is $15.02. It is sad and educational when you see what happens.
You have to wait for the cash register to say the change first. So first
give
him a $20 and then when he rings it up, then go, "OH! Wait! I have 2cents."
Pam

pigo

"Pam" <dontmailhere@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:0VIcb.292$0p3.66865@news.uswest.net...

> Hardly. How on earth can anyone raise a family on 35 grand a year?
> But actually, I do not think they make even that much. They are the
> society's babysitters and the babies have guns. Go talk to a teacher.
> These people should start at 50 grand a year.

$35G/yr. is pretty good for 6 hrs/day 9 months/yr. After the first
couple of years it's all boiler plate. You have a lesson plan, you're
done. Go in and put in your time.

I have friends that work in the offices at high schools. The paychecks
that she's seen put the teachers at around $5G/mo.

If 35 isn't enough to raise a family on you either get a job for more or
don't have the family.

And them being "society's baby sitters" is a problem for society to
address. They shouldn't be. That is the parents fault and the parents
should be sanctioned in some way for that. That's the main problem with
this society I think. *Most* people shouldn't be parents. We should
place more value on the ones that shouldn't and don't have them, than
the ones that shouldn't and do, as it is now.

Pam

"pigo" <pigopowderNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5VudnbMJM6Du9u6iXTWJkA@comcast.com...
> $35G/yr. is pretty good for 6 hrs/day 9 months/yr. After the first
> couple of years it's all boiler plate. You have a lesson plan, you're
> done. Go in and put in your time.

No, doesn't seem to work that way with the teachers I know. They
are writing lesson plans, doing homework stuff after classes, paying
for supplies out of their own pockets, etc. They don't get to go home
after 6 classes.

>
> I have friends that work in the offices at high schools. The paychecks
> that she's seen put the teachers at around $5G/mo.

From a Salt Lake Trib article:
"Despite the salary growth of the 1990s, the average Utah teacher's pay in
2001-02 still fell below the national average of $44,367 by more than
$6,200, ranking 35th in the country and third among the five Rocky Mountain
states. Utah ranked 39th in 1999-2000 and 36th in 2000-01.
Beginning teachers made $26,806 in 2001-02, nearly $4,000 less than the
national average of $30,719.
The AFT's annual survey compiles and compares teacher salary and
demographic data for each state, the District of Columbia and U.S.
territories.
California had the highest average teacher salary at $54,348. Rounding
out the top five were Michigan ($52,497), Connecticut ($52,376), Rhode
Island ($51,619) and New York ($51,020). States with the lowest average
salaries were South Dakota ($31,383), North Dakota, ($32,468), Oklahoma
($32,870), Mississippi ($33,295) and Montana ($34,379). "

The way I see it, I'm REALLY hoping that our future President of the US does
NOT come from Utah.
I hope that my doctor when I'm old was not high schooled in Utah.
Pigo, these kids in these overcrowded classrooms being taught by the bottom
of the barrel teachers who will work for those wages are YOUR future, dude.
They are YOUR next community leaders. They are the people who are going to
be in the political system, they are the people who are going to be running
this local society and signing contracts that are paid for by your tax
dollars.
Do you want your future to be taught by the well paid teachers, or by the
teachers who will or have to work for rock bottom wages?

Your friend might be looking at a few checks from teachers who have been
there 20 years.
As they die off, they are being replaced by teachers who cannot work in
other states,
some because they can't get hired for those wages.

>
> If 35 isn't enough to raise a family on you either get a job for more or
> don't have the family.

See the threat to your personal future above. You really don't want that to
happen.
And people have kids. Its kinda in our own best interest that somebody
does.

>
> And them being "society's baby sitters" is a problem for society to
> address. They shouldn't be. That is the parents fault and the parents
> should be sanctioned in some way for that. That's the main problem with
> this society I think. *Most* people shouldn't be parents. We should
> place more value on the ones that shouldn't and don't have them, than
> the ones that shouldn't and do, as it is now.

Talk to a teacher at your next opportunity. You would not believe what
parents are putting those teachers through.
They don't raise their kids and its so bad now that they EXPECT the teacher
to do and tell them so!
It is such an outrage! But this is the way it is now. The parents have
completely dropped out of the picture of the typical kid's life.
Sure, it needs to change before these brats kill us all, but how?
Pam

marika

"Pam" <dontmailhere@invalid.com> wrote in message news:<3eKcb.1591$ws2.29873@news.uswest.net>...
>
> No, doesn't seem to work that way with the teachers I know. They
> are writing lesson plans, doing homework stuff after classes, paying
> for supplies out of their own pockets, etc. They don't get to go home
> after 6 classes.


Is this a dig at our recent storms.... or are yo just generally an
odd-ball?

mk5000



"(or should) from "I can
but" or "I cannot but" (which are synonomous). Indeed, the
form ought not to be used when that idea of "in spite of" would
not fit the context--despite which"--eric walker

GMAN

In article <o3Jcb.487$0p3.68288@news.uswest.net>, "Pam" <dontmailhere@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>"GMAN" <glenzabr@removethisspamtrapxmission.com> wrote in message
>news:bkvlcs$a3p$2@terabinaries.xmission.com...
>> >joints
>> I raely see teenage kids working at McDonalds or any of the fast food
>places.
>> It seems they are non english speaking hispanics or Ugandans. I get
>pisssed
>> when my super sized fries are half filled. Damnit whats so hard about
>giving
>> me what i paid for. Forgetting straws, Sauce for nuggets , etc.... I
>ALWAYS
>> have to look in the bag to make sure we get what was ordered.
>
>I did not get my onion rings yesterday and I'm still pissed about it.
>If Johnnie could read then JOHNNIE would be at the fast food place
>filing your order and not the guy from Mexico, Uganda, whatever.
>If Johnnie could read the stupid simple application then he'd have a stupid
>job. Employers wouldn't have to hire immigrants and deal with all the
>problems that entails.
>
>So while Johnnie can't read and either can't fill your order at the fast
>food joint,
>or he's been fired because he can't make change, other Johnnie's are down
>at Pioneer park selling meth.
>
>If you ever want to have a little sick fun, then give Johnnie $20.02 for an
>order that is $15.02. It is sad and educational when you see what happens.
>You have to wait for the cash register to say the change first. So first
>give
>him a $20 and then when he rings it up, then go, "OH! Wait! I have 2cents."
>Pam
>
>
>
>
Heheh , sad but true.

GMAN

In article <0VIcb.292$0p3.66865@news.uswest.net>, "Pam" <dontmailhere@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>"pigo" <pigopowderNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:kWydnVuY4fgxsO6iU-KYgg@comcast.com...
>> > Vote for me, I'll give you:
>> > Smoking and nonsmoking sections
>>
>> I'd settle for baby and non-baby sections as a substitute.
>
>I listen to my supporters, okay, baby areas. Man, I hate sitting
>around people with kids. I am however, someone is having them
>so I don't have to, but couldn't they sit in the next room so I can eat in
>peace?
>Ever read Ogden Nash's poetry? Its a hoot. He hated kids too.
>
>> > School will once again be frickin' FREE, what's this crap about
>> parents
>> > having to PAY
>> > to put their kids in public school? Where the HELL did that come
>> from?
>>
>> Parents should pay for everything above the basics. Having kids is a
>> choice, pure and simple.
>
>Back in MY day, school was free. It should continue to be FREE.
>If it isn't free then they don't go and I can't get any decent help at
>the fast food joint.
>
>
>>
>> > Booze for sale everywhere merchants want to sell it, grocery stores,
>> the
>> > mall, whereever
>>
>> Without price controls.....
>
>Not like they are now anyway. I would like to take the state's profit
>out of it and give it to a deserving entrepeneur. But it does need some
>controls and that has to pay for itself.
>
>> > A health department that actually goes to restaurants to check them
>>
>> mormons policing mormons???????? Puleeeeeeeez!
>
>Nooooo, I am not Mormon, my advisers and employees would be
>hired on merit, not temple recommend. And you know how all us
>jews like to stick together.... it would be Jews supervising Mormons.
>
>
>>
>> > Decent pay for teachers and classroom sizes of 20-25 students.
>>
>> They make waayyyyyyy to much already.
>
>Hardly. How on earth can anyone raise a family on 35 grand a year?
>But actually, I do not think they make even that much. They are the
>society's babysitters and the babies have guns. Go talk to a teacher.
>These people should start at 50 grand a year.
>
>>

I'd have a permanant hard on if i even came close to making that each year.
Even when both me and my wife work, we never came close to that.

Plus that 35000 is for a stinking 8.5 months!!!


>>

kevin zollinger

Thant Tessman <thant@acm.org> wrote in
news:bkt5im$enn$1@terabinaries.xmission.com:

[...]

>
> No, I have no doubt that were it not for the FCC, broadcast television
> frequencies would have been put to other uses long ago.
>

Or total chaos. I'm not sure which I would prefer....

--
~ kevin zollinger
kevin@mailsoap.com

Thant Tessman

kevin zollinger wrote:
> Thant Tessman <thant@acm.org> wrote in
> news:bkt5im$enn$1@terabinaries.xmission.com:
>
> [...]
>
>
>>No, I have no doubt that were it not for the FCC, broadcast television
>>frequencies would have been put to other uses long ago.
>>
>
>
> Or total chaos. I'm not sure which I would prefer....

The airwaves are an economic resource like any other. There are
basically two ways that economic resources get allocated: Either the
market directs the allocation of resources through voluntary exchange
and the price mechanism, or governments do it at the whim of the
politically influential. (The latter is, when put into practice,
referred to as "socialism.") Why do you trust the marketplace to
properly allocate resources toward the production of, say, food, yet not
trust it to allocate the airwaves?

-thant

pigo

"kevin zollinger" <kevin@mailsoap.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9401EDCB52B2Ekevinmailsoapcom@206.127.4.25 ...


> So you are saying that if KSL refused to air NBC programming more
often it
> would *not* be censorship? Basically, if you do it once it *is*
censorship,
> but if you do it a dozen times it is *not* censorship? I must admit
that
> the logic of your position escapes me. Perhaps I've grown to attached
to
> standard and typical logic and my connection to reality doesn't have
the
> same elasticity that yours does. If it is censorship when yo do it
once it
> is censorship when you do it 1000 times. Frequency should have no
bearing
> on whether or not a specified action is censorship.

I'm saying that as an NBC contractor they have an obligation to air what
NBC presents.

> > Besides the fact that your "comparison" is bogus. Do you really
think
> > that if KSL aired "Coupling" that they would lose anything besides
that
> > 1/2 hour (or whatever)? Given station ownership they'll be right
back.
> >
>
> So you are saying that because the majority of KSL viewers are LDS it
would
> be OK for KSL to air Coupling because the viewers will "be right
back?" It
> seems to me that having a specific demographic be that strong you
would
> have a responsibility to cater to their tastes, not to show programs
that
> they don't want to watch in the hope that they will “be right back.”
It
> makes *zero* business sense to chase away your core viewers.

They are more like a public utility than totally private biz.

> > I know for a fact that they are. When I'm in those places that you
> > mention I'm not bombarded by constant commercials for their
churches. Or
>
> I've already said that I don't watch much TV, but even so you would
think
> that I would have seen at least one of these commercials during a
football
> game. I must be watch the wrong TV stations. Of course when I was in
> Mississippi, Missouri and Ohio I did see frequent teasers for the
Sunday
> church TV shows.

Hmmm. Missouri and Ohio are two of the eight states I haven't been to.
Odd. But the attempted brainwashing is far heavier here than other
states I've been in.

> Funny, I just learned from the news that the Pope is ill. OK, it's not
> funny that the Pope is ill, but it is ironic that I say that on the
> National news just yesterday. I also suspect that when Jim & Tammy
Faye had
> their troubles it was big news in their local news. It goes back to
the
> idea of programming to your core audience. In this state the core will
> always be LDS. If that is a problem for you, it is a problem that
probably
> can't be solved.

Hey if you want to put yourself in the same legitimatacy pool as Jim and
Tammy Faye I think we agree on something again. And if you guys did your
own thing and didn't interfere with me, I wouldn't care. Do you think J
& TF could have nationwide, network programming changed in their town?

> > I don't mean to say that the "church" is involved in Utah politics.
They
> > *ARE* Utah politics. For you to deny that minimizes everything else
you
> > say.
> >
>
> What I deny is that Utah's elected representatives are puppets of the
LDS
> church leadership. For you to continually assert that to be the case
> without ever providing verifiable proof "minimizes everything else you
> say." It also reveals much more about your personal bias than anything
that
> I ever could.

Main St. Plaza. UABC. KSL was one of TWO stations in the country to
censor the show (which I didn't watch). Utah is one of TWO states that
don't have at least some type of gambling (and need it most).

> > I don't have a low opinion of all people that live in Utah. When one
has
> > to generalize I will admit that, by association, I have a low
opinion of
> > many. There are also mormons that I have fine relationships with. We
> > just know not to bring it up.
> >
>
> All I have to go on are statements made here. I can't remember ever
hearing
> you suggest you have any amount of respect for Utahns.

I guess that's a societal thing. You don't hear much about the guy that
makes it safely to work either, or that zillions that can talk and drive
at the same time, and to be fair the parents that *have* taught their
kids manners.

> > What makes you think that I have a "wide"? That's more of a mormon
trait
> >:-)
>
> And a trait that you "have a fine relationship with?&qu