Dennis K is before a judge to get into a D debate

This topic, debate inclusion / exclusion, might be good enough for its entire blog.

As I post this, Dennis K, D, is before a judge. He got the word that he would be in the debate. Then they changed their minds and sent a 'so sorry' letter to the campaign.

Now they are in a court room.

Dennis also pressed the vote recount in NH to a judge.

He must be climbing in the polls.

A paper that covers a special demographic in Michigan gave endorsements to Dennis K and Ron Paul. I saw that only in passing, so I don't know of the details.

Petition for Drafting Mike Bloomberg for President | Unite For Mike

I'm not going to sign, but, I'll take a peek.

Petition for Drafting Mike Bloomberg for President | Unite For Mike Mike Bloomberg, please become a candidate for the office of President of the United States

Oil prices are up. The economy is failing. Well, puttering.

Local campaign finance reform proposed

Link to the PDF of the campaign finance reform legislation now hitting city council from Bill Peduto.

local-campaign-finance-reform-proposed.pdf (application/pdf Object)

I've seen this before. Two years ago as this bill (or one sorta like it) was introduced to city council, I put up a quick challenge to it. As a citizen, and with other citizens, we put in a petition to call for a public hearing.

At the public hearing, there was strong desire to look further at the bill. So, a task force was formed.

At first blush, I was NOT asked to be on that task force. But, then I got an invite.

As a task force, we had meetings for a few months. We had opinions. We reached some agreements. Our findings were slated for another public hearing or post-agenda. But, that never came. The case from Philly was moving along in the courts and a wait-and-see attitude won the day from Bill Peduto.

Now, I await the re-formation of the task force. We should meet again to review our notes. We should compare the old legislation and our suggestions with what is hitting now, in 2008. We should try to get onto the same page, again.

Our task force was called by Bill Peduto, but he kept a hands-off approach to our work. That was good. But, when it was time to go hands on again -- it stayed hands off.

Furthermore, a public hearing is necessary, again. I'm sure Bill Peduto is going to call for that. So, with that trust, I'm not going to jump through the hoops to get a public hearing forced upon city council. But, I'd sign a petition from any other who wants to coordinate such an effort.

Speaking of petitions -- I think it would be wise to have a petition to talk about the 'spray parks' that are due in Pittsburgh at a cost of $200,000 or so.

Let's get into the issues as desired.

Reform Pittsburgh Now � Local Campaign Finance Reform: "Local Campaign Finance Reform"

Wall Street Journal, OPINION - Ron Paul and Foreign Policy

Today's WSJ has an article. A friend called to point it out to me. I asked if it was good or bad. He said, "You'll have to read it." So, here goes.

Global View - WSJ.com: "Ron Paul and Foreign Policy
January 15, 2008; Page A12

The guy gets it right to a point -- and then wrong to the finish.

Ron Paul (and I) want peace. We don't want the USA to police the rest of the world. This quote makes perfect sense to me. "It's time that we come to the point where we believe the world can solve some of their problems without us." That is, without the US war ships, without the US bombs, without the US Marines.

Dr. Paul is a libertarian, and a libertarian's core belief is that a person's pursuit of happiness is, or ought to be, his own affair. Up to a point, most of us are probably sympathetic to that argument. But is it true of all people? And is what's true of some or all people also true of countries? The libertarian conceit -- which now extends well beyond Dr. Paul's cult-like following -- is that it is.

Glad to know that most people are sympathetic to freedom and personal liberties.

Of course all people are NOT excited about ANYTHING. Some people like to have authorities. Some people like to have and control aircraft carriers. Some people like to have and operate US Fighter Jets. A military and industrial complex has been built. CMU likes to win money from the US Defense Department to design new robot cars that can drive without soldiers to deploy destruction and pain on people on the other side of the world -- if not on other planets. Some people like to rule with an 'iron fist' and some others like to be under handed and of the 'winning side' even if that takes away one's freedom and liberty when it matters the most.

Everyone in the US isn't for peace and liberty. Everyone in the American colonies in 1776 didn't sign the Declaration of Independence either. Loyalists to the king (as then) and to the neo-cons exist.

This quote from candidate Paul works for me too: "We need to recognize they deserve their sovereignty, just as we deserve our sovereignty." I don't want top level 'officials' in D.C. picking leaders of other nations. They've been known to do that in the past. And often, they've guessed wrongly. Their feuds should NOT be owned by the US and the US citizens.

I agree, America needs to get its armed forces out of the way of harm. America needs to keep the taxpayer money from Americans out of the hands of those who aim to do harm to the US, today or into the future. The US Foreign policy has proven to be wild with weapons and wild with federal funds.

In a previous debate, Ron Paul mentioned that that "they attack us because we've been over there." Well, to be fair -- it is much more than just being over there that has generated some of the hate to the US. The US has been over there killing. The US has been over there funding others who have killed. The US has been over there funding both sides of the fights so that they can kill each other faster and cheaper. Being over there isn't the problem. Being there in the wake of the destruction and death, attributed to US involvement is the problem.

Dr. Paul's own remedy is that if "we trade with everybody and talk with them . . . there's a greater incentive to work these problems out." Exactly. The RUB is found within the degrees that the editorial does NOT put forth.

It was precisely out of a desire to "trade with everybody" that the early American republic was forced to build a navy, and then to go to war, to defend its commercial interests, a pattern that held true in World War I and the Persian Gulf "Tanker War" of the 1980s.

No. The word, "FORCE" is what is wrong. The early NAVY was built out of 'desire,' not 'force.'

The American nation went to war (built a navy) to fight the pirates because of commercial interests. That history does NOT support the intellectual architecture of libertarianism itself. The history is valid. But, the article pins the history upon the ideal and those dots do not connect.

It is crazy to say that trade between nations is only possible in the absence of robbers, pirates and other rogues. Wrong. And this is wrong for a few reasons.

First, trade does not happen between nations. In a libertarian world, the US does not trade with other nations. The trade happens among merchants, individuals and business concerns. I don't want DC politicians selling Amish furnature to third world nations nor do I want congress critters representing Boeing or Westinghouse.

Same too when it comes to what comes into the US as imports. Those decisions rest with consumers, buyers in wholesale and retail settings, and perhaps bankers who invest in those types of transactions.

The government isn't to be the force so as to drive the trade with different nations -- not in a libertarian world.

If there are pirates or thugs along the silk road -- where and when they surface -- those that are the Marco Polos of the time need to fend for themselves. It is a nasty world. There are a lot of bad guys, from South LA to street gangs to less than honest dockworkers. Work it out and go with the flow of enterprise.

Whose job is it to get rid of them (the bad guys)? Well, it isn't the role of the US ARMY and US NAVY to get rid of the bad guys all around the world.

This next part is really bad. He is out to lunch by writing:

A strict libertarian might offer that mercenaries could be authorized to build aircraft carriers, Aegis cruisers and nuclear submarines to keep the freedom of the seas in the Straits of Hormuz and Malacca. But what happens when the pecuniary interests of mercenaries collide with the political interests of the U.S. or some other government? Ultimately, some kind of decisive power is needed there too, at least if the trading opportunities libertarians claim are so precious stand any chance of flourishing.

Mercenaries could be deployed. They won't need aircraft carriers, I dare say. Nor will they need nuclear submarines so that Sears can deliver Maytag washing machines. Absurd.

Another kicker. The interest of the mercenaries would NEVER collide with the political interests of the U.S. The U.S. won't have an interest in those quarters. That is the whole point of live and let live. The USA should not care who the next king of the outback village is. The USA should have not own "political interests" there -- or at least no interest that needs to be protected by those wearing US uniforms.

Even in the US, think of the Brinks Armored Trucks. They come into the neighborhood to pick up deliveries of cash. They carry guns. They are good for business. Transactions occur. Losses are prevented. They are 'mercenaries' of a sort. They ahve a job to do and it gets done -- without the need of 'political interests' getting in the way -- be it a red state or blue state.

Ultimate and decisive power is NOT needed. The trading opportunities that the libertarians crave, and they are precious, can come about without big-time power brokers. The chance to flourish comes without the 'big man.' Cuba has Castro and not much in terms of trade. The USSR had the politburo and Supreme Soviet authority -- and there wasn't much trade going on with the USA then -- as grocery shelves were empty in Leningrad.

The argument of the article makes no sense.

Other question: Does U.S. diplomacy invariably facilitate peaceful outcomes in the region? Bad question. The problem isn't US diplomacy. The problem is the destruction from the US funded counter-measures. The problem is the military domination that the US seeks to impose by force. Ron Paul (and I) want diplomacy. We want to be aware. We want to understand. We want to witness. We want to communicate. We want to travel freely. We want to be smart. Diplomacy should flourish. Torture should not rear its ugly head on the calls of Americans in the name of diplomacy.

Does it make sense to arm Saudi Arabia and Egypt at the same time we arm Israel? No. There is no sense in that. Do not arm all sides. Do not arm one side. The third option is what I want -- arm no side abroad.

The USA can be armed -- in America to protect the USA. That's radical -- and that's logical.

The verdict does NOT depend on what kind of governments the other nations have. Not now. Not later. The verdict is known when we look in the mirror. The verdict for the US is going to be within the US. The verdict for the Arab states, or Israel, or Iran, or elsewhere -- is going to be mostly theirs to answer for themselves.

We write our own destiny. They write theirs. That's the way it should be. That's how we should think of it in our policy and with our leaders.

I confess. Ron Paul, once elected President of the USA, I expect, won't be a good leader of the free world. No. President Ron Paul would be a GREAT leader of the USA, and we'd become more free and greater as a free nation. Ron Paul would leave the rest of the world free to solve their own problems, struggle by struggle, without the our guns pointing and firing at them throughout.

The verdict will depend on what kind of governments the two Arab states have in, say, 10 years time. Should the Bush administration have backed Pervez Musharraf to the hilt these past seven years?

What is done is done. The Bush administration ran and won the White House on the concept that the USA would not do any more 'nation building' as had been the policy of Clinton. But, once the neo-cons got into office, their missions changed. President Bush has been a huge downer, to say the least.

Electing Ron Paul as President fixes the policy of free-for-all war and moves the future into a time of new focus on peace and self-determination.

These questions turn on differences of tactics and strategy, whereas Dr. Paul's objection is philosophical. True. But, the tactical and strategy questions asked in the article stink. There are no right answers to those horrid questions.

Another example, "... the "blowback," as he puts it, from supporting Saddam at one moment and opposing him the next ..." Hold the phone. The word 'blowback' is NOT something that Ron Paul came up with. Blowback comes from the CIA. The US Intelligence community understands 'blowback.' That is a page from their playbook. Blockback is part of the downside to the neo-con and nation-building ways. Blowback is part of today's international landscape.

Blowback becomes big pimple in the history of the world when a real libertarian policy takes root in the US White House and with the deployment of real diplomacy and strict use of military force.

This is funny too. The writer speaks of the cost of US withdrawal from the Middle East. There is a cost of staying. There is a cost of lives. There are massive spending costs. The costs get reduced with a vote for Ron Paul for President.

The savings need to be counted when we talk of Ron Paul's foreign policy and a return home for our troops abroad. Some of the best and brightest people are not home today. They are elsewhere and that is costly, expensive and all part of the duty for the roles of a nation who aims to be the police force for the world.

Nobody can say what, precisely, the cost would be of U.S. withdrawal from the Middle East or, for that matter, disengagement from rest of the world.

No again. There is not going to be a 'disengagement from the rest of the world.' Consider the US and Canada. The US does not have troops and bases stationed in Canada. There is no 'disengagement' of the US to Canada because we don't have troops there. The engagement of the economy will grow among people of this nation and the rest as our military departs.

Ron Paul does not want to disengage the US citizens and US economy from the rest of the world. Rather, Ron Paul wants that to increase friendships, commerce, trade, and cultural understandings. More gets done when the guns are not pointing at heads of your friends abroad.

But John McCain was on to something when he quipped, in reply to Dr. Paul, that the only items al Qaeda likes to trade in are burqas, and that they only fly on one-way tickets.

John McCain is dangerous and more of the same. That is quote is spoken like a true bigot.

FYI: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burqas.

Another crock of bull:

Mankind is not comprised solely of profit- and pleasure-seekers; the quest for prestige and dominance and an instinct for nihilism are also inscribed in human nature, nowhere more so than in the Middle East. Libertarianism makes no accounting for this. It assumes the relatively tame aspirations of modern American life are a baseline for human nature, not an achievement of civilization.

No. Here is an accounting, from a libertarian. Don't go. I've not gone to Iraq. I'm a Libertarian. There is your accounting.

Yes, in America, we are tame. We settle lots of issues by looking at the Constitution and then voting, from time to time. That is tame. We don't take it to the streets. Some pitch a fit in a passive way. Fine. That's tame. That's great if you ask me.

If other parts of the world are wild -- and you can't get a handle on them. Here is a tip. Vote with your feet. Don't go. Or, if those settings are too near to your place at present -- leave. Figure out a way to get out. Run. Swim. Crawl. Escape. That's the libertarian way.

Not too long ago, Pittsburgh was the 'gateway to the west.' The wild west had it all. Outlaws, gunslingers, rattlers, herds of buffalo could mow you down. For some, the wild west was silly. For others, it was an adventure. To each his own. That's the deal.

Libertarianis and pacifism have a good deal of overlap -- but not fully. They are not the same. To the ignorant, they might be. A libertarian would walk into the wild west looking for Walden's next pond with a six-shooter and a bunch of buddies a couple hundred yards behind -- with rifles. Meanwhile, the pacifist just carries a bible.

There is a not-incidental connection here between libertarianism and pacifism. George Orwell once observed that pacifism is a doctrine that can only be preached behind the protective cover of the Royal Navy. Similarly, libertarianism can only be seriously espoused under the protective cover of Leviathan.

The closing statements are all wrong too.

That's something worth considering as Americans spend the coming year debating the course of things to come in the Middle East. It is beguiling, and parochially American, to believe that things go better when left alone. In truth, as Yeats once wrote, things fall apart. With so much at stake in this election, it's no small blessing that Dr. Paul remains a man of the fringe.

As a Libertarian, I don't think things go better when left alone. I get involved. I speak out on countless issues. I engage. Everyone can't be as hyper, of course.

As a coach, I coach. I teach. I'll get in and challenge. I'll push, pull or just make sure that people don't have lots of comfort. Things do fall apart when left alone.

Ron Paul isn't about leaving things alone. Rather, Ron Paul is about leaving things to those who can best fix them. Ron Paul isn't about an over-reaching federal government. Ron Paul understands that the president has a role -- and that isn't to do everything for everyone.

When Ron Paul says it is up to the states to decide -- then that is NOT leaving things alone. The states can decide upon the issue then. Let the states decide about public schools, not the feds.

Ron Paul would leave plenty alone as president -- such as schools. But, then things can get done at the other level. That, in my humble opinion, is parochially American.

That's the guy that I'm going to vote for. He is open minded. He sees the whole picture. He understands his role. He is only one guy. He is the best choice for the US at this time.

Write to bstephens@wsj.com -- as I just did.

DFA-Link: Event, May 30 and June 1, 2008

DFA-Link: Event DFA Training Academy in Pittsburgh, PA
Event Type: Training

Saturday May 30th through Sunday June 1st
9am-6pm

Christopher Kutruff | NBC Blocks Kucinich From Debate

Another crock from another TV News Network. This time it is NBC, not FOX.

Christopher Kutruff | NBC Blocks Kucinich From DebateTwo days after inviting Dennis Kucinich to Tuesday's January 15 presidential debates, NBC decided to change its previously announced criteria and exclude the Ohio congressman.

So you wanna be in politics? Parties seek challengers -- themorningcall.com

Who is running for office?

So you wanna be in politics? Parties seek challengers -- themorningcall.com The recruiting effort is one of three taking place in area congressional districts as the parties scramble to nail down challengers with a little over a week before candidates begin circulating nomination petitions.

Federal REAL ID Jeopardizes Civil Liberties and Security

Bipartisan Coalition urges Pennsylvania to reject REAL ID

Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania (LPPA) &
Green Party of Pennsylvania (GPPA)

For more information contact:
Michael Robertson (LPPA Chair) at 1-800-R-RIGHTS / chair@lppa.org

Hillary Aisenstein (GPPA Chair) at 1-267-971-3559 / hillarya@pobox.upenn.edu

Harrisburg, PA – Two of Pennsylvania's political parties found common ground and issued a joint announcement to fellow Pennsylvanians calling on the General Assembly to reject the federal REAL ID Act. In 2008, Pennsylvania will be required to begin implementation of the REAL ID Act, mandating that driver’s licenses contain specific personal information, providing the federal government with a database of all records, and developing the ability to track citizens. This will result in a never before seen massive collection of personal information.

Intended to enhance domestic security, REAL ID instead makes us more vulnerable. According to Berks County State Representative Samuel Rohrer, “There are no safeguards in this Act to sufficiently guarantee that this massive national database will not be compromised.”

To make matters worse, negotiations are underway to share database access among participants in the North American Free Trade Association (NAFTA) to allow bureaucrats in Mexico and Canada access to our personal information.

Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania Chair Michael Robertson noted “There is opposition to REAL ID because of the costs to implement this system, but the threat posed by this Act to civil liberties and personal security cannot be measured in dollars.” Governments could easily require the REAL ID for bank and credit card transactions; healthcare purchases; public event admittance; or firearm and ammunition purchases, all of which would become part of the database.

Marakay Rogers, a civil rights attorney from York, who also serves on the Green Party of PA Steering Committee, said “Under the cover of a so-called War on Terror, our government has steadily eroded the rights and liberties of citizens, immigrants, and visiting foreigners. The REAL ID legislation is one more effort to invade our privacy at the state level.”

"A national ID system will redefine privacy as we know it,” observed State Senator Mike Folmer, “[It will] create a mountain of new bureaucracy and increase fees and taxes – without making us any safer.” The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation has estimated the cost of REAL ID implementation at $100 million, but the loss of liberty for Pennsylvanians will be incalculable.

Concerned members of the Pennsylvania Senate have introduced S.B. 1220, a bill strongly rejecting the federal REAL ID. Pennsylvania's Green and Libertarian Parties urge all Pennsylvanians to contact their state senators and ask them to support S.B. 1220 by becoming a co-sponsor.

In addition, we urge Pennsylvanians to contact their Congressional representatives and Senators Specter and Casey. Remind them of Pennsylvania’s growing opposition to the REAL ID and urge them to work to repeal REAL ID at the federal level.

The Libertarian and Green Parties of Pennsylvania stand together in support of the rights of Pennsylvanians and in opposition to a federal mandate that will erode our liberty and make us no more secure.

Green Party of Pennsylvania P.O. Box 11962 Harrisburg, PA 17108-1962 1-888-PA1-GREE(N) www.greenpartypa.org

Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania, 3915 Union Deposit Road #223, Harrisburg, PA 17109 1-800-R-RIGHTS www.lppa.org info@lppa.org

Nice to have a JOINT Press Release from both the Libertarians and Greens.

Irony City - FAQ

Are these folks funny?

Irony City - FAQ Irony City! At long last, the unnamed improv troupe has a name that honors both its Pittsburgh pride its appreciation of clever (?) puns.

2008 LP Platform - Internet Response

2008 LP Platform - Internet Response: "2008 LP Platform - Internet Response"

Carbolic Smoke Ball listens and does a feedback posting

Carbolic Smoke Ball Submit your questions

If you have a question you'd like Judge Peckham to answer on our weekly Trib p.m. page (appears every Monday) -- on any topic at all -- send it to thecarbolicsmokeball@yahoo.com

The Smoke Blog becomes more 'blog-like' with this post, as I had suggested. (or did I has have had suggest????)

Trees -- winning or not

Why is it we are so quick to tear down. They want to take down trees. They want to take down historic buildings, even grand libraries. They want to tear down older houses. They want to tear down the Civic Arena. They want to tear down schools that work.

Then they churn. What comes later is generally more expensive and often not as good. New isn't as authentic. New is often with massive debt.

UPDATE ON ARRESTS AT THE SUPREME COURT

Source: announcements@witnesstorture.org

UPDATE ON YESTERDAY'S ARRESTS AT THE SUPREME COURT

January 12, 2008 - 82 people were arrested at the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday as part of Witness Against Torture's January 11th action to Shut Down Guantánamo to mark six years of unjust imprisonment and abuse for the men held in Guantánamo. About half were arrested inside the U.S. Supreme Court; the others were arrested on the steps of the Court.

As of 8pm, Saturday, all 82 people have been released. Many of the arrestees were denied food and water for most of the 30-some hours they were detained.

46 pled not guilty are going back to trial. Some people got cited and released and have yet to receive arraignment - so even more could be going to trial.

About 70 of those arrested withheld their legal name and instead gave the name of a detainee upon arrest. Today in court they gave their legal name but stated that their arrest on behalf of a detainee. Thus one of the main goals for the action was achieved because a number the court dockets as well as individual citations now have one of the detainees' names on them.

People were charged with "unlawful free speech on supreme court grounds." People who were arrested inside the building received an additional charge of "causing a harangue within the supreme court."

Arrestees included: people from all over the country; teenagers and octogenarians; first time arrestees; members of the Witness Against Torture's original delegation that walked to Guantanámo to visit the prisoners; and Dorothy Day's granddaughter, Martha Hennesey.

The arrests followed a solemn march from the National Mall of 400 persons that included a procession of activists dressed like the Guantánamo prisoners in orange jumpsuits and black hoods. The procession, in turn, was preceded with a short rally at the Mall organized by Amnesty International, National Religious Campaign Against Torture and Witness Against Torture. The event was part of an International Day of Action that was endorsed by over 100 groups and that included 83 events around the world.

Witness Against Torture would like to thank everyone who helped make yesterday's action the success that it was. Your prayers, your participation, your endorsements, your publicity and of course your financial support are all deeply appreciated. (If you haven't yet make a donation to Witness Against Torture and would like to do so, please visit our website to donate on-line or else send a check made out to "Witness Against Torture" to Mary House Catholic Worker, 55 E. Third Street, New York, NY 10003.)

Photos, videos and press clippings will be posted to www.witnesstorture.org in the coming days, so please check our website regularly.

Witness Against Torture http://www.witnesstorture.org
info@witnesstorture.org

CBA = Community Benefit Agreement - Wear RED

Click for larger image.

special event -- to gather signatures for getting on the ballot

Special musical guests at the Signature Bomb Party on Saturday, January 26th at Scooby's in Bridgeville.

The band Poker Face will be preforming live!!

Poker Face is a group of Ron Paul supporters and Freedom Rockers from Bethlehem, PA.


The band has preformed at the Live Free or Die Festival in New Hampshire in the defense of Ed and Elaine Brown. They have also preformed at the Ron Paul rally after party in Philadelphia on November 10th, as well as for other Ron Paul meetup groups around the state such as Erie and Harrisburg.

We are certainly honored to have them in Pittsburgh!!

Check out their video on YouTube: Kontrol

Check out their website: PokerFace.com

This is the event that you do not want to miss!!! We need to get Dr. Paul and his delegates on the ballot!!

Come out and party with the Pittsburgh and Western PA Ron Paul supporters and Poker Face!!!!

Please RSVP 'YES' at our meetup site.

To RSVP and for more details go to Pittsburgh and Western PA Ron Paul 2008 Meetup Group and click on the calender of events.

21 and over only please

Any questions please email ronpaulpgh@gmail.com

See you there!!!

Double-amputee's Olympic bid stirs debate - Saturday January 12, 2008 7:50PM

SI.com - Olympics - Double-amputee's Olympic bid stirs debate - Saturday January 12, 2008 7:50PM The double-amputee sprinter from South Africa longs to run on his artificial Cheetah blades in Beijing. At the heart of the complex case is a straightforward question: To what extent can a disabled athlete enhance his ability with mechanical aids?

The Busman's Holiday: Oh, The Things You Can Count: My Ethics Board Request

The Busman's Holiday: Oh, The Things You Can Count: My Ethics Board Request My fourth request was answered within two hours on Friday--not by the Ethics Board itself--but by City Solicitor George Specter.

Why in the world is the city's top attorney (joke) doing the work of the Pittsburgh Ethics Hearing Board?

This is bad. Sister Patrice wants to make Pittsburgh ethical. But, she has this to deal with the Law Department!

Good Day Sunshine!

FreeAtLast2008.com - Ron Paul For President

FreeAtLast2008.com - Ron Paul For President: "Please join us this January 21st as we honor Dr. Martin Luther King, by acting together to support Dr. Ron Paul, a new hero who fights for the same American principles of liberty and justice for all.

Presidential race insights

You know that there is going to be a recount in NH, right?

Furthermore, John McCain might not be on the ballot in Ohio.

More on schools in advance of a double-bill meeting on Sunday

After we scheduled our Sunday, 2 pm at Blvd of the Allies Panera meeting, we learned that there is a board meeting on Sunday as well scheduled from 2-7 pm. We will still meet at Panera --it won't be a 5 hour meeting, so you can always go to the other one as well.

The meeting at the board is open to the public for viewing (not for speaking). Our understanding is that the administration will lay out in greater detail (at the board's request) their plans and overall goals for reforming the district. They will also provide the names of people on various task forces that have been formed. The format for the meeting is that the administration will present for 15 minutes, followed by 30 minutes of questions or discussions from board members.

If you have friends that feel that decisions being made now don't affect them because their kids don't go to Schenley or are in different programs, let them know that this meeting will begin to outline some of the changes coming for everyone else, as well. Now is the time to be informed if you want to have a say!

It's an incredibly long meeting (and I believe there are more to follow), but if you can go even just for an hour, please report back -- the more info we can get the better. Some of the administration's ideas are really exciting; getting support for them now seems like the best way to help the good ideas succeed (and to nip the bad ideas before money is spent on them).

Public Hearing at the board meeting is this MONDAY, JANUARY 14th, 7 PM Board of Ed building. Sign-up through noon, written testimony taken until 5 pm. If you hear anything you really liked or didn't like at the big meeting Sunday, talk about it on Monday -- or just thank the board for requesting more information about the coming changes.

Jen Lakin