Sorry, no featured properties currently.
1. I am praying for you.2. Government has gone from being "non religious" to favoring atheists.3. Atheists, like everyone, follow their own morals. The question is; "where do those morals come from?" An atheist's morals come from belief in the biggest lie ever perpetrated.4. As to your response to MrRight, I am confused. How can you acknowledge his "God" if you are supposedly an atheist?5. As far as praising God, we were created for that reason, and it is the best reason for existence.6. The Supreme Court of the United States cannot by legal fiat rule God out of existence. The "wall between church and state" is a farce.
November 12, 2012 at 8:33 a.m.
so so clever. Get of of middle school name-calling and intelligently address the truth of what I said.
November 12, 2012 at 5:09 a.m.
Some women not only want control over their own bodies, they want to exercise life and death decisions over the lives of their unborn children.
This election, more than any other I've ever seen was about "good v. evil." Unfortunately, Mr. Evil won.
November 12, 2012 at 5:06 a.m.
The Catholic Church will never die. Speaking of hate filled..., you seem pretty hate filled to me.
Expecting the Catholic Church to change its stand on same-sex marriage is like expecting it to eliminate one of the Ten Commandments.
November 12, 2012 at 5:01 a.m.
Legalizing "same-sex marriage" makes about as much sense as legalizing incest, child molesting, and rape. They are all perversions of Natural Law.
November 10, 2012 at 11:51 a.m.
This just shows me that the majority of Americans have been duped.
November 10, 2012 at 8:31 a.m.
Your attitude is typical of the "cry babies" who still think teachers should be on a pedestal, still believe in the "goodness" of the public education system, and still think it's not about the money to teachers. I stand by my previous post. (#3)
Teachers have got it made - with Cadillac perks and bennies, early retirement, and excellent working conditions. Have you have a 36% increase in your pay the last 5 years like Mr. Conley?... No?
Parents like me have seen the good, the bad, and the ugly in the education system. It's not all bad - it just has gotten out of hand. Teachers these days make way too much money for 9 months of work.
Where are you coming from with your "diversity" comment? Diversity is just another name for "political correctness." Do you believe parents don't have any rights to criticize the education system?
There is an unsavory smugness and "air of superiority" in the teachers, administrators, and pro-levy parents in Canfield. Believe me, you people don't know it all.
Where are all the yard signs, public meetings, and multiple "letter to the editor" chastising people to vote for the levy this time?
I think it's all an organized effort to stay under the radar and hope the levy "sneaks" through.
October 21, 2011 at 9:04 a.m.
I have several problems with your letter:
1. In the last 5 years your salary has increased 36% - from $45,791 to $62,299. People in the private sector haven't seen their wages go up like that.
2. You talk about "lines of communication" between teachers and parents. Basically, you are referring to parents voting for or against the school levy. We are on opposite sides, don't your see? We pay you out of our taxes. It is in our best interest to get the most from school employees in the form of services for our tax dollars. That's why there exists a Board of Education - to represent the taxpayers' interest in negotiating contracts with your union. You don't care about "lines of communication" with parents when levies pass, only when they fail. This is because you need only have a line of communication with the school board to negotiate your contracts.
3. Why has it been "awkward" for you to converse with parents who don't support the school levy? It isn't awkward for us. Is it perhaps that you have a personal agenda that conflicts with the taxpayers' desire to get the most services for our employee dollars?
4. Your job is to secure the most lucrative contracts for teachers that you can. That is your job as president of the union. How can you possibly be "proud" that the board of education is asking for less money for your members? How can you say that you "worked" with the BOE to give back 2 million in planned increases? You fought them every inch of the way, or you should have as union president.
5.The whole tenor or your letter is that we are all on the same team. This is poppycock. Parents and teachers are on different teams when it comes to delivering an educational "product" to our children. We want the best for least cost and your members want the most pay for the least amount of exertion.
6. Your approach to this whole question of the school levy is disingenuous, sophomoric, and lacking in humility. That is probably the biggest problem I have with this letter and the reason the levy will fail - if it does.
October 20, 2011 at 11:18 a.m.
This is typical of the "hurt-feelings" arguments the "NO" on Issue 2 people put forth.
No one said we should eliminate the public sector or that we don't need a public sector to provide important services.
All the "YES" on Issue 2 voters are saying is that:
1. We have a "spending in the public sector" problem,
2. It's not the public sector workers' fault, but the changes needed require more sacrifice from the public sector workers,
3. The changes that are being advocated are not unfair to the public sector - when compared to what is happening with workers in the private sector, and,
4. Its one thing or the other - either reduce the cost of government - or increase government revenues (taxes) to pay for the public sector expenses.
That's as simple as you can put it.
October 19, 2011 at 10:57 a.m.
Post # 9 - Rocky, you started the name-calling - calling Paul Parks a socialist. So if he calls you a communist, so what!
I'm tired of you liberal maniacs attacking people.
Shows you the world you know - the world of privilege for public sector employees is changing.
Now you can call me a moron. How clever of you!
October 18, 2011 at 4:07 p.m.