Too f-ing far.

       I was made privy to knowledge that I ordinarily remain ignorant of; my daughters' school supply lists.  One daughter needs 7 (seven) dozen pencils, and the other 5 (five) dozen; in unbroken, new packs.  Pencils come in packs of 10 (TEN).  The reason they need so many, I have been told, is to supply the kids who don't have any.  The list always asks for a ridiculous amount to be supplied and then they send them home with most of them at the end of the year, so I don't think they are being used to redistribute the wealth, but seriously, why 7 dozen?
       Last year they needed dry erase markers, so when asked, they could write on the board.  God forbid they use one that someone else had touched!?  But the king of all stupidity, the straw that broke the camel's back, is the ruler.  (pun intended)  One child is required to have a wooden ruler.  You can tell me my child needs a ruler.  You can even say it needs a straight-edge on it.  But to specify the material?  What the f#@% difference does it make?
       If an inner-city teacher specifies plastic only, out of fear that the metal on the edge of the wooden ones could be sharpened, I would understand.  If a mechanical drawing class requires an architect's scale, I get it. But this is crossing the line.  I will only be nannied so far.
       Mind you this is not the same for each child.  Different grades require different tools.  I get that.  No problem.  But your child's list depends on your child's teacher, (not state, not district, not school, not grade) and that is another point where I call B.S.  The teacher's individual preference should not decide how much my child's school supplies cost.  The argument is, of course, teaching is facilitated by standardization.  Fine, but it starts with the teachers.  The teachers for each grade need to get together and decide, grade-by-grade what is needed.
       Of course I have the option of placing my children in a private school, and paying twice for the privilege.  Also I could home-school them, at the expense of social growth.  But why should any of us put up with such petty intrusions.  I'm not angry about this despite how petty it is, I'm angry BECAUSE of how petty it is.
       There is a basic issue at the heart of this.  This issue is one that is touching every corner of our country.  A consummate lack of accountability.  When I didn't bring in enough pencils, I suffered.  My bad planning was related to my parents via a note sent home to be signed, and I learned to be responsible.
       What message is being taught here.  You (well, your parents) pay for things that are turned over to a government appointee; who will distribute them back to you on an as need basis.  No personal accountability.  Dependence on "authority", to provide for your needs.  You can't be trusted to be accountable for yourself.
       If it seems like I'm reading a lot into this; it is because I am.  But this story is just used to highlight the flaws in a system that I have been cataloging since my oldest began school.  Don't worry though, they are being taught important things like: "You have to do something nice for the Earth every day."   (and God, I wish I were kidding.)  If I want my children indoctrinated, I'll send them to church, or I'll do it myself.  I don't need public schools, that I pay for, to indoctrinate my children into a credo, to which I do not subscribe.

S 3414 Cyber Gun Control.

http://votesmart.org/bill/15638/41248#41248

       A quick synopsis: S3414 is yet another attempt by government to place scary "big brother" style laws in place to monitor / protect us from ourselves.  This of course is in the guise of "cyber security".  While this is deplorable enough in its own right, it is what was done to the proposed bill that really agitates me.
       An addendum was made to the end of the bill, after it was proposed, to "reinstate" the assault weapons ban.  I place that in quotes because the "ban" really only served to aggravate law abiding citizens, and make money for collectors who sold "Pre-ban" guns at ludicrous mark ups.  The only saving grace is that any cyber security bill has no chance of passing.
       Rather than bemoan a liberal power grab, which this is an attempt at; I want to address the "root-cause" of this problem.  At the heart of this is the congress' ability to add irrelevant language to a proposed bill.  Bad enough when it is a pork barrel rider, but downright asinine here.
       The time has come for a law to be passed stating that each separate issue needs to be a separate bill.  End this behavior now.  How many perks were hidden in the Affordable Care Act, to entice state representatives and senators to vote for it.  Those should all be separate issues, and would never have passed alone.  This means that the congress would have had to pass it on its own merit.  (I will not speculate as to whether it would have happened, we all lived through it)
       Imagine, congress legally obligated to a degree of honesty.  Now if only we had one honest person in congress to propose such a bill.  (Which would, naturally have language added by opponents to kill it.)
       If only there were some other way to get this done.  Wait, I have a foggy memory of something from my constitution studies... (as should you all)
http://www.lexisnexis.com/constitution/amendments_howitsdone.asp

Although that method depends on state governments... Not likely to happen then is it...

       But then, in my world, people would shut off the TV long enough to be appropriately enraged at this behavior, by the people claiming to represent their interests, and leave the house to go vote.  A man can dream, can't he.