Marksmu

I never said teach MY Morals - I said parents need to teach their kids THEIR morals. Its not the schools jobs to teach any kind of Moral or Religious belief system. I am not against a cause/effect teach the body to the kids. Kids should learn about the body itself, in a scientific biological way and not a sexual way. Teach the body parts, and leave the sexuality out of it. What I am against is the inevitable interjection by the teachers that its normal to think you should be having sex when you are 12 and the how to have sex, etc. Just teach the biology behind the act, and leave the moral debate/abstinence/how to wear condom, out of the discussion. Its not the schools jobs. This issue is the same as the greater problem with public schools....we have 20-30% truly stupid kids who have no desire to learn at all, 20-30% smart kids, and 20-40% in the middle....the left wants the 20-30% of stupid not caring kids to not get left behind, so we drag the rest down....I dont want the stupid kids left behind, but we need to quit dragging the normal kids down, and making the schools entire agenda revolve around what is best for the worst, and instead make it revolve around what is best for majority....and especially what is best for the smartest because its clear they are the future. We may be the teen pregnancy capital but that capital was made up of only 6,591 teen births...out of how many Hundreds of thousands of teens?.....Ya, I think its pretty stupid to drag down the MAJORITY to teach to the Minority...I am firmly against dragging down the majority to prop up the minority. Im not saying its not a problem, but I am saying its not a problem for MOST teens.

Well if it didnt work for Sarah Palin.....This is not a political issue, its a moral issue. Teach Morals and responsibility and kids will make the right decisions. Will they still have sex? Some will....but they will do so responsibly and it will be made more embarrassing by them having to pay for the condom at the store. We should not be trying to tell them, well your going to do it anyways so here you go take these....Kids get alcohol too, but we still try to make it harder to do so. Making it easy to access the things that they need to do something only tells them its ok to do. Parents need to start taking responsibility and teaching their kids right from wrong. Stop deferring the blame to someone else.

First off, I dont have kids yet - but if I did, I would not want the schools teaching them about sex and birth control and everything else. It is NOT the governments job to teach YOUR children to keep their pecker in their pants and their legs closed. As a parent its YOUR job to do that. Parents now think that its someone else's responsibility to teach their kids everything. Its YOUR job to teach YOUR kids, morals, good nutrition, and how to behave. A school should not be responsible for this. Schools are very liberal in everything they teach now a days, and it is this liberal mindset, of acceptance, and progressiveness that teaches our kids that its part of growing up to experiment with drugs, alcohol and sex. Its progressive now to try these things, and to learn from them. Teaching kids about sex, and handing out condoms is not going to stop them from doing it. Its your job as a parent to teach your kids morals and responsibility. When I have kids I dont want teachers who have a much more accepting view on sex and sexual habits telling my kids what is right and wrong, or handing out condoms in school so they can get away with it without being embarrassed going to the store and buying them. Take some responsibility...if your kid is pregnant, its through your own failings as a parent to teach morals and responsibility. Its funny how teen pregnancy is not a very large problem in those households where the parents are involved in their kids lives....

If you can't safely drive and talk please by all means do not, your just a danger to everybody else out there - but I can do it safely, I've done it safely for years, I do it safely daily, and I am confident that I can continue do it safely in the future, and I don't need a study, a politician, a cop, or any other person who thinks more laws and more regulations are the answer to all our problems to tell me not to do it. More rules, regulations, laws and more of a police state are not the answer to our problems. Why don't we put in mandatory breathylzers in cars, and stop checks and road blocks everywhere to check for everything? I had an open bottle of wine in my car this morning from a dinner party last night...I guess I should have been hauled in and gotten an open container violation at the local road block this morning...Its ridiculous. Everyone here seems so willing to give away all of their freedoms for more "protection", its a weak spineless stance on life... At least with this law I can happily ignore it and go about my day and there isnt anything anyone else can do about it...this will definitely be a law I ignore if it progresses past the hands free restriction. Besides I dont trust the studies at all- for every study that takes one particular side I can find 3 that take the other side. All the "studies" now a days, come with a predetermined outcome that the "researchers" are looking for anyway. Global warming...I mean "climate change" is a great example; there are countless studies that say global warming is a myth, and just as many that say its a fact. All are based on "facts" and "experts"

I'm not dumb, I can see your point, but I can assure you with absolutely no proof whatsoever to back it up that I am one of the most defensive drivers on the road - Ever since I got a big truck that does not stop or start quickly, cannot weave in and out of traffic and keep up with the quick starts and stops of traffic, I have become content to be the guy who stays mostly in one lane, gets cut off frequently and coast to the lights....it does not take many $500/mo gas bills when diesel was $5.40/gallon, and your getting 18mpg to completely change your driving habits. I'm not saying I have never been distracted by the phone- I have had my battery start to die or something, and that has been a distraction, but I pay alot of attention to my driving and more importantly to those driving around me, and my record reflects it. No accidents since I was 16 (13 yrs) and I have not even been pulled over since I was 20. I seldom speed, and in a truck like mine flying over the heights oh so wonderfully smooth roads would do nothing more than spill everything in my truck everywhere. Im not saying everyone can drive just as safely on the phone, but I am confident I can.

Im not disagreeing with you one bit! I cant stand people who talk on their phone in public, or those folks who let their phone ring, look to see who it is, then let it keep ringing....mute it for the love of god....But, I talk on my phone only in the car, and pretty much only on my way home from work, and I make 2 calls - one to the wife Im on the way, and then to my mom - she waits for my call every day about the same time, I would much rather talk on the phone in the car on the way home, then have to set aside time to ignore my family at home, when I could have had that conversation earlier instead of doing nothing. I enjoy talking to my mom, and it makes her day. I actually ride my wife's rear end daily about her dang blackberry - she cant put it down - in fact, almost everyone I know always has it on the table, texting, checking email, and responding to work things all the time...it drives me crazy - but talking on it in the car when your by yourself - that doesnt bother me.

Yall must have some kind of attention deficit problem...I can talk on a phone, and drive, in exactly the same manner and fashion as if I were not on it at all. If Im not on the phone Im listening to the radio, paying the same amount of attention to it, as I would be a person on the phone. It does not take one single bit more of concentration (for me) to be on the phone than it does to talk to a person in the car, which I also do when I have a passenger. As I said in the first 2 responses, I use my hands free blue tooth - and I never text, or dial the phone while driving....heck I dont even dial when Im not using the bluetooth...its just easier to say, call (insert name here) than it is to look the number up and dial it. I have seen the studies, they all show that texting is the same as drinking and driving, not talking with a blue tooth device, and I don't disagree with that - its almost impossible to text and drive...heck its difficult to just text with how small the keys on the phones have gotten. But if your not holding the phone, which I dont, I do not see at all, how your driving is effected unless your just old and slow. Like it or not, I am confident in my ability to drive while I talk on the phone - your opinion, or a stupid law to grab money is not going to change that. And study or no study, I still think a person in the car is a larger distraction than a hands free phone ever could be. A baby is constantly requiring attention, a toddler is worse, a young child is screaming, spilling, unbuckling, fighting,etc... teenagers do whatever it is that they do now, and normal adults talk - they talk about the same things they would talk about if they were on the phone, so there is no difference there. The difference between having a passenger and being on the phone is that you have the added distraction of the persons movements, and emotions, but a slight advantage in a second set of eyes. To me all the studies show is that some people cant do both safely - I know I can. I can also handle a gun safely - Im sure its the same groups of people who are out to save us from ourselves that dont want cell phone in cars, also dont want people to have guns. Its all a money grab in the name of safety - and its very difficult for a politician to stand up and say he is not for safety, let alone the extra money it brings. It may sound like Im some cocky punk kid who thinks the rules dont apply to him, but thats not the case - I know my driving abilities, I don't speed, I don't drive aggressively, and I do a whole lot of coasting... for me (maybe not you) its not distracting or difficult to talk and drive, and I suspect its not for a huge problem for alot of folks. Its just the politicians out to govern all us to protect us from those who probably should not be driving anyway.

I dont disagree that it is safer to not talk on the phone, but I also think its much safer to talk on the phone than it is to have a passenger in the car...any passenger, any age, any level of driver. A person with their talking and body movements is much more distracting than a person on a hands free phone. Let alone a parent with a kid they are trying to get safely out of the car to school with all the things they are supposed to remember to take with them that day. So I guess we should ban passengers in cars too...or better yet, force each individual passenger into a sound proof containers, so the driver is completely isolated from any distraction they may encounter. Banning a cell phone is that ridiculous. And I am absolutely as safe as I think I am. I am a slow driver around town b/c I drive a big truck, which gets bad city fuel economy and cannot zip and weave, and cut through traffic even if I wanted too...I have not been pulled over, or received a ticket since I was 20 years, old - 9.5 years ago. Doesnt matter anyway, I wont stop talking on the cell phone, same as the bad drivers wont stop speeding...its just a money grab.

I actually feel sorry for people who are too stupid to both drive and talk on a phone at the same time. I see plenty of them, but I for one, and am 100% certain that I can accomplish both, safely, and in a school zone...I have been doing it for years, without an accident, and without even so much as a ticket, or being pulled over. I use my hands free blue tooth device, and my phone stays in my pocket. I use voice dialing, to call and receive calls. I absolutely can not stand the blanket bans on everything in the name of our "safety" its ridiculous....its only a matter of time before they make it a total ban instead of just a hands free ban.... Sure, some people are incapable of doing both, but I would even go so far as to say more can do both, than cant. Before cell phones it was radios, then passengers, etc, etc...I mean you dont see people banning bill boards b/c they are distracting because of the revenue. This is another money grab. I am so sick of people deciding for me what I can and cant do - I will not give away any more liberties for safety. And spare me the old argument that driving is a privilege, and you abide by the laws if you want to keep on doing it blah blah blah....I will keep on talking on my hands free bluetooth even in a school zone....I would love to see a cop pull me over b/c it looks like I am talking to someone....how can he tell the difference between talking and singing to the radio? He cant...its a stupid law, being passed, not out of safety, but to give cops another reason to pull people over and write tickets for more money b/c the city governments are strapped. People today are all too willing to give away all their liberty in the name of safety....which reminds me yet again, of the old saying, those who so easily give away liberty for safety, deserve neither, or something like that. Quit being total idiots, learn to drive, and stop trying to tell me what to do. There were idiot drivers long before there were cell phones. There will be idiot drivers long after they ban cell phones.

Your sob story sure sounds like the republicans ruined everything, but wait...the housing crisis which plunged us into this mess in the first place was caused by DEMOCRATS - NOT republicans...it was the Democrats and the Black Caucasus which lobbied Bill Clinton NOT BUSH into forcing, NOT ALLOWING, forcing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to write bad loans...100% of which every single person writing them knew they could not pay off....That was not some get rich scheme by the Republicans, it was done in the name of Fairness, happiness, inclusiveness....instead of common sense, JUST EXACTLY like this health care bill AND the cap and trade bill. (cite - http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/11/business...ton&st=cse) (http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/09/28/franks_fingerprints_are_all_over_the_financial_fiasco/) Were there republicans getting rich on these notes - yup - were the democrats getting rich on these as well - Yup - but none of the banks would have done these, if they had not been forced by the government and then guaranteed that if they failed they would be taken care of. It may have been a bunch of wall street fancy pants who magically turned D paper into A paper with credit default swaps and made up insurance policies, but as has been so proudly pointed out by liberal after liberal - the educated voted for Obama, more than for McCain - so its not a huge leap here to say alot of those insurance company employees and Wallstreet bankers who got us into this mess voted Obama - since you have to be pretty educated to get away with stealing that mush cash from the people. It was not 30 years of republican rule that got us into this situation, and if you think for one minute that taxing the people who are actually productive in this country is going to magically turn this country around...that by taking their money and giving it to others who are not working, or who need free health care...that it will solve the problems in this country you are certifiably insane. Health care is not a right. Its a privilege, one that comes from WORK. People in this country are so spoiled though they think they deserve everything for free....Most of these "poor" people who do not have health care because they cant "afford" it - can magically afford - new clothes, a Car, a cell phone, and cable tv....its not a matter of being poor, its priorities, its a matter of knowing what others are going to give you for FREE. They know that if they goto the hospital to get treated, they will get treated....but if they call up time warner and say Im poor - hook me up with free cable, they will get hung up on...if they dont pay their cell phone bill it gets cut off. Its a matter of priorities, and a sense of being owed - and here everybody is starting to think everybody else who has more, owes them something - and the Democrats, got elected on that stance - all Obama did was promise freeby, after freeby, after freeby - and every problem in this country is b/c the rich are fleecing the poor. Its sick - its untrue - and its being propogated by the media which the people blindly believe. And I never propogated more of the same course - I want controls, but its not the controls you want, its not a socialist take from the working people mandate. Tort reform on medical malpractice would be a HUGE step in the right direction. Cap a recovery for a doctor who missed something because he didnt do 1000 unncessary tests - its what you will be getting in government controlled health care anyway, except that the option for more will still exist if you want it in private medicine. Doctors, are hog tied - they know whats wrong usually, but they have to test for all the things it also COULD BE, becuase if they misdiagnose, every dang person thinks they just hit the lottery and calls up a lawyer. There are so many things that can be done to solve the problems, except that the different groups, who stand to PROFIT from the action or inacation, are aligned on opposite sides of the aisle...Its getting us nowhere - we need to reintroduce commone sense back to the people - it seems we left it behind long ago.

You can watch the whole thing here...might want to have a few drinks first though... http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id...,%20resizable=1

Not yet - but nothing would surprise me anymore.

Watched the "debate" last night...Ill start it off saying it was a total joke. Obama was left almost completely unchallenged. The allegedly serious questions people actually wanted answers to he was allowed to dodge without the "moderator" (comrade) even bringing him back to topic. Over and over again he would say lets think about it more broadly...even went so far as to come out right and say that elderly will not be cared for anymore as they would if they were receiving private care...but hey they lived their life already, so I guess we dont need to care for them anymore. I for one am amazed that anyone could back this program...The health care industry needs to be brought back to reality, but this certainly is not the way to go. He talked about "Waste" care - the numerous tests that are performed that the doctors dont need to perform simply because they want to bill for it. Thats all a load of bull - The democrats are ANTI TORT REFORM - the doctors run the tests that they know they dont need to run, and drive the cost of the care way up, because if they do not, and something was missed, the lawyers come tear the door down....But the Democrats wont stop the lawyers - its all a way of nationalizing and gaining control. I bet, and I have not seen a single page from the Obama care plan, but I bet - that the doctors operating under Obama care will be immune from prosecution when they dont perform the all of the tests...while doctors operating on private plans (while they last) will not be. People we need to wake up - you cannot keep taking things away from people, taxing those who do not choose to participate, and replacing what was previously private with national programs. The government is not efficent or good at anything it does - this is a huge mistake. This medical joke and cap and trade will bankrupt the country - and these stupid sheep for Democrats in office are cramming this all through and they even intend to VOTE on it WITHOUT ever reading it. Finally, I ask anyone if they honestly thought that the program did not appear VERY one sided and scripted...what a joke. The DNC should have to pay for that entire 75 minute program out of their coffers.

I am personally neither for or against this project - It would be strange, and possibly ugly, but I have a big problem with people thinking they get to control the private property of another person. It would be a much more aesthetically pleasing thing to have a smaller building on that site, but if the site is unrestricted, and the developer bought it because of that reason - just because you dont like it, does not mean you should get to put a stop to it. Its not yours! Any single person who wanted to keep the area the way it is, could go buy everything they want to preserve. But in my opinion, if you cant afford to buy it, you dont get a say on what happens with it. If you dont like it, you have two options. 1) deal with it, 2) move....apparently now people think there is a 3rd option - complain and sue, and make it such a hassle to do anything, that nothing gets done. People who take that route, should have to post a bond to reimburse the builder for his lost income as a result of their apparent dislike. I actually feel sorry for developers who have to deal with people who think they get to tell them how to build on their own property.

I think pretty much its the builders that are tearing the houses down....most individuals who purchase, are remodeling unless the house cannot be salvaged. The house I remodeled cost me nearly 2x as much as initially budgeted to modernize.....the whole house first had to be leveled....that destroyed the sheetrock, and the plumbing....so out it all comes ..then when you get to the studs, you find the termite damage, the leaking drain damage, and the rotten floor, subfloor, and joists that you didnt think looked that bad before you closed....so then you have to fix that....then you realize the wiring is old, and the city wont let you fix the plumbing without modernizing the wiring too, which brings a whole new set of contractors and inspections.... What started out as a lets just replace a few things became a complete remodel from the studs up & down....at some point (which I didnt hit) its cheaper to recreate it than to continue to try to fix it. I will say though, I havent seen a new build from a spec builder that was done correctly...After fixing this smaller house, and dealing with my own builders problems on my newer house, I feel like I know virtually every code, and the correct/incorrect way of building ways, and its sad to say that I havent seen a spec home built correctly yet, and Ive walked through many that are asking $750K+. They throw them up, and then they leak water everywhere, and the drywall starts cracking, and as you said, 3 years later its a piece of junk sitting where an older house used to be. And I do see the value in the history - the heights has a lot of history - and some more accurate recreations would be great to see. I for one like the old one story homes with the extremly high ceilings... I dont like seeing the same house on every block anymore than I did in the suberbs. I am just adamantly against someone else telling me what I have to do with my property. I hate deed restrictions with a passion, which is one of the reasons I moved to the Heights area. Setbacks are great, minimum lot sizes, etc - but deed restrctions are awful.

I apologize about the politically biased section of my rant, and the agressiveness of it...it was likely inappropriate given the current topic.... BUT, the Heights is changing, mostly for the better (the subdiving of the lots & the townhomes are exceptions to this)...the area is beautiful and convenient, and most of the people are great...but there is this group of individuals who attempt to fight property owners from doing what they want with their own property tooth and nail. Having gone through it myself, and won the battle, its nothing but a roadblock that costs money to improve an area. I love many of the new homes who attempt to recreate the old look on the exterior, but very few people want to live in a period house that has been fixed because they have so many problems. Having restored an older "period" home with modern amenities, and having built from the ground up after knocking a mess down....its much easier and cheaper to start from scratch...but there is a group of people who think they are special because they can get in your way, cost you money, and slow down your plans, because its not what they want...and that is what infuriates me. If you don't own it, and are not willing to pay for it, you don't get a say in how it comes out period. If anyone thinks the McMansion line is anything but a slam against new building then they are crazy....the people who use the term McMansion, are often the same people who are getting in the way. I think this house is gorgeous, the exteriors and interiors are wonderful, the garage area is wonderful, and the lot is wonderful, though the entire thing is overpriced, especially given its location so near to main. I apologize for the aggressiveness of the previous rant, but Im so sick of hearing people whine about "McMansions" simply b/c its not their taste, especially when their "taste" is in the minority.

I find it hilarious that any house with modern amenities you call dime a dozen, McVic - That house is beautiful, inside and out. I would guess that less than a half of a half of A percent of people looking to buy a house, especially in the 1 Mil + range, want to buy an old house that is "Period" - Period means no air conditioning, period means old and lots of maintenance. Its infuriating to hear you snobs thinking your better than everyone else, becuase you bought a dump, and fixed it up using old stuff. Most people dont want old things- the heights will never be the same as it was 2,5,10,25, 50, or even 100 years ago. Get over it. Your not special because your house is old looking and has old looking stuff inside. I see hundreds of "Period" homes everyday that need to be torn down. Im so sick of all the hippy snobs thinking they are special b/c they live in an old house. Your not special - only you and your hippy obama loving friends think you are. So go hang around in your tiny circles of snobs, who think they are better than everyone else becuase their house is old, and they drive priuses and let people do what they want without you complaining about it. I think most people who complain about the current direction of the heights (with the exception of the subdiving of lots & townhomes those are valid complaints) are just upset because the welfare you have been living on is not going to cover all your new property taxes as the area becomes nice again. Ya - I hear this stuff all the time, so its infuriating to me.