I just don't know what this means -- and I'm not being snotty. I don't understand what's pinging you.
I know you're not, and also that I'm doing a crap job of explaining myself. As I said, I have no problem either believing or accepting that anyone in her position would have a lot of worries. But the pings are twofold -- first, that the "in your heart" phrasing isn't just for emphasis in charismatic/evangelical rhetoric. It's a binary thing. You accept him in your heart, or you don't. Second, I've heard the notion that you simply
have
to accept a child, whatever its problems, come out in a lot of pretty hateful conversations when the subject isn't a social-conservative hero.
If I'm right that it's a dog-whistle, then by definition it's not a perfectly clear signal to begin with; plus, it's not my native culture. But the phrase made my "oh, my god, it's just like those fundiewomen from the inlaws' church!" meter go off, much more than just the normal stresses. (And neither am I saying that she was actively planning to ditch the kid. I can't guess what she was planning -- just that, on an emotional level, it didn't read to me as "we'll love him, but it's going to come with challenges".)
Given that last night she promised to be an advocate for all families with special needs children, I can only hope it was an innocent comment.
Well, now she is. It's not unusual for politicians of any stripe to pick up pet causes after it actually affects them.
Given that last night she promised to be an advocate for all families with special needs children, I can only hope it was an innocent comment.
She slashed education funding for special needs students in Alaska by more than half, but I guess it's different for her these days. Now she just needs to give birth to a gay child, a Jewish child, a poler bear cub, a wolf cub, a librarian, and a fully formed alternative energy advocate and abortion doctor, and perhaps she'll take into consideration some other areas where her expressed attitudes have raised some concerns.
Billytea! I went to a lecture last night by a scientist who's an expert on smell. She told us all about the Australian orchid that spreads its pollen by emitting pheromones that make male wasps want to hump it.
Oh... dear. I just saw the Jerry Seinfeld/Bill Gates commercial.
Jerry is still Not Funny.
Totally not slagging on Microsoft, either. The commercial would've been bad regardless of the product. Because the product? Not really mentioned.
Credit where due - she didn't actually cut special ed funding. One of the programs under Special Schools got moved to its own funding line in the budget - the actual funding stayed basically static.
ETA: Thought I should add some numbers to that.
For 2007 the Special Schools budget showed:
Special Education Service Agency (SESA) - $2,072.3 (thousands)
Providence Heights School - $145.0
Alaska School for the Deaf - $319.0.
The Department of Education & Early Development - $637.4.
Alaska Challenge Youth Academy Program - $5,724.7
For 2008 the last item was moved out of Special Schools. So the numbers show:
Special Education Service Agency (SESA) - $2,054.6
Providence Heights School - $145.0
Alaska School for the Deaf - $319.0.
The Department of Education & Early Development - $637.4.
The Youth Academy is funded separately, and shows a boost to 6 million and change for 2009.
[2007 Special Schools budget: [link]
2008 [link]
Youth Academy [link] ]
Here's a description of the program, which at first read doesn't sound like it falls under what's normally understood as Special Ed.
This instructional program is operated in Anchorage with student enrollees from across the state. Students work on challenging academic programs in a “boot camp” environment. Completing high school and building career goals and skills are the goals.
Timelies all!
Healthma to all who need it.
G's grandfather is in town for a visit, so we had dinner with him and G's mom.
Yikes, ita. I hope they get you taken care of quickly. I think you might like this.
