Dan J

If the goal is to help students cognitively, what does it matter what the economic opportunities are?

If this was a private school, who cares. But since its getting public funding, that money should be used in ways that best benefit the state overall. The state does not have an unlimited amount of resources, and with two teachers in the classroom, it probably costs more to educate these students than it does students in other schools. That can be justified if the students are learning languages that have more use than Hebrew.

No, not really. I'm not even certain there is a problem. If there was a problem, it would be a purposeful circumventing of the separation between church and state by this school. If that was the problem, it would also raise the strong possibility that bureaucrats in the state capital approved this charter school's application for reasons other than the application's merit.

That all said, I'm still unconvinced there is a problem.

I don't think there is any problem with language immersion schools, and I think we would actually be better off with them. However, if the state is going to fund these school, they should be teaching a language that has a significant economic opportunity. I really don't think Hebrew is one of those languages.

How about Arabic charter schools? Apparently they exist - I didn't know until a few minutes ago - and are doing quite well.

http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070916/NEWS04/709160331/-1/NEWS

Unfortunately its going to suffer the same issues with being tied to a particular religion. However, as a language Arabic is much more common.

That has occurred to me as well. But I will tell you, they are very active right now in promoting themselves in the community as a school that will foster intercultural understanding. They're going out of their way to talk to non-Jewish parents and non-Jewish teachers for recruitment purposes. It's all very confusing.

I think they have to. If anything to create the illusion that they are not a religious school. But when it comes down to it, Hebrew is not going to be as useful as Spanish or Mandarin would be and they will probably attract very few if any non-jewish students.

How many people outside of Jewish communities speak Hebrew?

Unlike the Tea Party which is an angry mob organized and financed by such Right Wing staples as FreedomWorks and Americans For Prosperity.

I think they should really be calling themselves the whiskey party. It would better fit the anger and rhetoric.

Ok. I applied for a K1 in 03 that was delayed due to a request for more information.

This is the scenario. I lived with a woman for 6 years in Texas and we never actually applied for a marriage licence. We split and I decided to try and marry a foriegn bride. I listed my "common law" as my wife on the application. I explained that we never ever actually had a marriage licence but they still asked me to produce a divorce certificate. I never followed up because my foreign fiancee and I decided not to get married.

My question is do I have to list this on my current K1 application as a rejection.? Also how do I get past them asking for a divorce certificate if we never were actually married?

Yes you to have to list it.

Common law marriage is recognized as a legal marriage in some states (including Texas). However, getting out of it can be difficult. You will have to look at your state laws for that.

Lawyer will not speed anything up. If your case is straightforward, you probably wont need one. Even with a lawyer, you will still need to get all the information needed for the forms and filing anyway. If it affords you peace of mind, it might be worth it for you.

We do!

They don't go to an average hospital in the US, instead they go to very specific clinics such as the Mayo clinic. We have some of the best clinics/hospitals in the world but the overall health system is not even close.

i think the same thing every single time an illegal immiration thread pops up on VJ.

Most people who acknowledge that the immigration system is broken are not advocating illegal immigration, but instead suggesting changes to the law to fix problems and address needs.

In this case, and cases like it, there are people who are advocating getting rid of constitutionally protected right to a fair trial. For no reason other than its inconvenient.

She is correct. How utterly stupid that terrorist be defended in the same manner, with the same rights, as an American citizen...

It just illustrates that numerous folks still think the threat of terror is some sort of fabricated joke concocted by folks with a hidden agenda.

Of course you cannot do anything in America without some reference to the Constitution or the founding fathers. The British empire wanted their territory back, they didn't want jihad or to kill as many Americans as possible. Huge difference there.

Why are some people so adamant about following the laws, but quick to dismiss them when they become inconvenient?

Has President Obama ever volunteered for anything beyond being president of the Harvard Law Review? That's not an act of self-sacrifice either.

Obama has done a great job swelling the ranks of the unemployed so they have more free time than ever.

Obama was solely responsible for the economic crisis? Remember unemployment is a lagging indicator. Unemployment will start increasing only after other indicators show an economic decline and markets can improve long before employment does.

Let's be fair. If we advocate for retracting corporate or private sector funding from influencing people, surely this should apply to disingenuous groups like this.

There is no denying that they were caught red-handed advocating breaking the law.

If Michael Moore releases a video accusing someone of wrongdoing, are you going to say the same thing? The video was edited to make a political point. The original unedited video did not hold up as evidence in a court of law. Acron was cleared in that case.

This is falls into line with the politics of the country and the way they look at life. So no surprise here.

About 40 % of the population lean to the Liberal side and 60% Conservative.

Libs dont make decisions for the future and most Conservs do.

Pretty straight forward

To bad that doesn't hold up. The recent financial crisis is proof of that. Republicans at the helm with very bad future decision making.

Is the downtown a poor place to live?

No, most of the high end condos and lofts are located in downtown or nearby. Or in and around uptown/Lake Calhoun area which is 1-2 miles south of downtown.

I think some people do put certain choices ahead of saving for retirement, but I don't think that is the largest reason. For many people, especially with kids, there is not much, if any money left over after all the bills are paid.

Limbaugh is such is dickheaded douchebag. Maybe he can get a job in PR for Toyota.

I would like to see him as PR for Wellpoint. Trying to explain why rates need to increase by 39%.

When is the big Obama tax increase coming to help pay for the war, he rode Bushs A$$ for a year about how irresponsible it was to not ask the American people to "sacrifice" in a time of war.

Or is this another example of the -Obama Bush Show?

Since when did Obama invade Iraq and Afghanistan?

Obama's mind control machine did a great job on you. You guys fall for the Democrats slight-of-hand every time.

Keep blaming the out of power party for everything with your rose-colored glasses squarely in place.

Try reading this article which backs Obama in the end but it's going to a bumpy ride for years to come.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archiv...e-america/7293/

Who did I blame? The Republican approach to fiscal responsibility certainly contributed to the problem. Deficit spending in a growth economy. Lax enforcement of financial regulations. There are certainly not really offering any alternative solutions other than playing the obstruction game and hoping to trip of up the Democrats enough so that we can go back into the status quo and back into another economic bubble.

You forgot a whole lot of Leftwingers were furious at Rush for saying he hoped Obama would fail. Look it up.

In Obama's America the only industry that may flourish would be the tin foil manufacturers.

Yes of course, the right wingers need to keep their pea sized brain safe from the Obama mind control machine.

Revenues increased until the economy went down. What's so hard to understand about that?

We only have to borrow money because our government can't control its appetite for spending.

Revenues went down when the tax cuts were first implemented. Do you tell your boss that to increase your company's profitability, you need to reduce your sales?

The Left blamed Rush for hoping Obama would fail. He almost single-handedly killed the economy according to the Left by not believing in Obama.

I expect the attacks on the usual rightwing types to escalate as Obama and the Democrats desperately need someone to blame. Hard to find a thread on here that doesn't change the subject from Obama's economic policies to blaming Fox News or Rush et al as if they are running the government and the economy.

You need your tinfoil hat, Rush is frying your brain again.

Tax cuts are revenue not budget items.

Of course it isn't, but since spending cuts didn't match the revenue cuts, it increased the amount we had to borrow to balance the budget.

you're joking right?

Tax revenues still increased even with the tax cuts because of a growing economy.

When the economy tanked, tax revenues went down.

Spending by the government went up and continues to go up.

The problem isn't taxation. The problem is the spending!

The reason we had to borrow money was because tax revenues were cut. So in a sense, we borrowed to pay for the tax cuts.

yeah, you'll be wondering ####### happened to those tax cuts when they expire here (though I highly doubt they'll let them expire).

We will still be paying for them, as we increased the deficit to put them in place.

Hey, I have a better shot of not being denied with a private carrier vs. the current government sham we have going today....

With a private carrier, there is a real incentive to deny coverage or claims. It increases profitability. With a public system, that sort of incentive is not there. The income of the health system is more or less fixed as its often politically difficult to keep raising premiums. The incentive for private companies operating in this model is to cut costs. Often costs can be reduced while not reducing quality, but that depends on the leadership of that particular company.