Muda69

Looks like the end is close for Mr. Vinatieri: https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/colts-insider/2019/11/12/colts-working-out-4-kickers-amid-adam-vinatieris-struggles/2572910001/

Update: 'They discredited the entire Indiana judiciary': Judges in White Castle fight suspended: https://www.jconline.com/story/news/crime/2019/11/12/white-castle-fight-judges-suspended-without-pay/2576064001/ Justice has been meted out.

As one of the comments to this opinion piece states:

Wow, fancy stuff for a government school. They actually serve Starbucks brand coffee there?

I know. There should be a lot more tacos, burritos, and quesadillas on that menu.

Could be on Friday.

Ahh, makes sense. In contrast I hear Frankfort High School's weekly menu goes something like this: Mon: Gruel, hardtack, weak tea. Tues: Pizzaburger, green beans, weak lemonade. Wed. Beans, cornbread, water. Thurs: Liver, onions, donated fruitcake, cool-aid. Fri: Chef's roadkill surprise. ? What is the difference between the 'cafe' and the 'cafeteria'?

Why just two?

Both DT and myself and elaborated on this topic many times, ad nauseam. In fact DT has a nice enumerated list in a recent thread, go find it.

Only the best of the best of the best at CHS. Does the Center Grove High School meal service serve sushi?

https://mises.org/wire/19th-century-americans-didnt-support-troops This attitude, Richard Bruce Winders explains in his history of James A. Polk, "illustrates the image of soldiers, common in the 1840s, as slackers on the public dole."2 Indeed, even as late at 1891, a speech published in the Christian journal The Churman recounted Grant's anecdote and concluded "the national contempt" for the army was based on the fact "it is 'such a lazy life.'"3 Nor did such attitudes begin in the 1840s. In his biography of George Washington, Mason Locke Weems notes the lack of concern over American casualties suffered under Anthony Wayne in a battle with the Shawnee in 1794: The Militia vs. The Federal Military This general contempt for soldiering wasn't applied to all soldiers. In nineteenth century America, it was considered honorable to be a militia man — a part-time soldier tasked with protecting one's community from raiding Indians and gangs and thugs. It was something else, entirely, however, to be a professional, full-time soldier. Those people, it was commonly felt, were indeed what we today would call "welfare queens" living off the hard work of American taxpayers. In other words, for Americans of the time, it was laudable to take up arms in defense of one's community. But one was also expected to get a real job. [RELATED: "Why We Can't Ignore the 'Militia' Clause of the Second Amendment" by Ryan McMaken.] Put another way, the militias were one thing. The "standing army" was something else entirely. This isn't surprising given the general disdain for standing armies in early America. The fear and contempt for standing armies was the primary motivation for the Second Amendment — an amendment designed to encourage and protect local militias and the ownership of firearms outside of federal control. According to historian Marcus Cunliffe, this attitude goes back to the days of American resentment over British regulars being quartered and fed using the using the housing and food of American civilians. In many cases, Americans begrudgingly tolerated the imposition, but after the Revolution, this attitude toward professional soldiers was simply transferred from British troops to American federal troops.5 Indeed, even members of the military were aware of their semi-pariah status.In a speech to military cadets, officer Benjamin Butler concluded in 1849 that, "large standing armies" are "productive of needless expenditure; injurious to the habits and morals of the people." Even within military families full off federal officers, one brother might advise another in 1845 that "I by no means desire that my sons should ever wear a sword. I would certainly prefer that they should become honest, industrious mechanics."6 This would echo a common sentiment of the period that even for those who did spend some time as a professional soldier, it was best to use "every kind of negative and positive inducement" to encourage a soldier "to turn himself back into a civilian before it was too late."7 In practice, of course, few Americans ever had to deal in person with any of these federal officers they so disdained. As Cunliffe notes, Decades later, the rarity of federal officers remained a point of pride for critics of the standing army up until the First World War. In a 1914 semi-humorous editorial in Collier's magazine titled "Why We Cannot Have a Standing Army," George Fitch is grateful the United States is not like the Old World where "working people of Europe must" support millions of soldiers "in idleness." In America, Fitch happily reminds his readers , "millions of people live and die without seeing a member of the regular Army." When forced to deal with a standing army, however, Fitch suggests the soldiers be equipped with a rickshaw and "plac[ed] at the service of the public" so that the taxpayers might go "joyriding" and thus more easily endure the burden imposed by the "armed hordes."9 Such rhetoric in the mid-nineteenth century would have extremely commonplace. But in the decades following the Civil War, the sheer number of military veterans — combined with the fact their state militia units had been mostly federalized in the conflict — meant soldiers more commonly came to be regarded as objects of reverence rather than suspicion. It was just one of the ways the United States became "federalized" after the Civil War. Military service became less about service to one's particular community, and more about national service. This change was helped along by federal legislation which blurred — and eventually all but abolished — the line between state militias and the federal military. Today, the militias have been transformed into the National Guard and made de facto permanent instruments of federal military policy. The distinction between the "citizen soldier" and the professional hireling been almost totally erased, and there is no longer any cultural mandate to suspect federal troops of wasting the taxpayers' hard-earned cash. Indeed, the taxpayers are often now expected to thank the soldiers for doing a service the taxpayer already pays handsomely for. Our nineteenth century time traveler would find this state of affairs to be very odd indeed. Yes, very odd.

Eating Sushi I guess.

Generated the attached pdf document from here: https://www.doe.in.gov/finance/school-financial-reports It shows that from 7/1/2017 to 6/30/2018 the Carmel Clay School Lunch Fund received $129,933.37 from state sources and $1,418,154.62 from federal sources, aka taxpayers. In fact if you look at the total of receipt accounts, $8,268,854.48 versus the total of expenditure accounts, $7,704,623.56 The Carmel Clay Food & Nutrition Services Department needed those taxpayer dollars to stay solvent. Not exactly 'financially self-supporting' as their web page describes. DescriptiveListingByFundAndAccount.pdf

https://www.fns.usda.gov/nslp/nslp-fact-sheet https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/child-nutrition-programs/national-school-lunch-program/ https://youth.gov/feature-article/learn-facts-national-school-lunch-program-and-alternative-schools A shell game.

Lafayette joins 75 other districts out Nov. 19, as teachers take off for 'Red for Ed' rally at Statehouse: https://www.jconline.com/story/news/2019/11/11/lsc-cancels-school-nov-19-130-teachers-plan-go-red-ed-rally-statehouse/2562848001/ So families that have already scheduled plans for 2020 Spring Bring have to now modify those plans, possibly costing them $. Nice. If yesterday's weather was any predictor when we do get into the actual winter season look for most government school corporations to burn through their built in snow days pretty quick. So those 'snow make up days' will have to be used, therefore the end result of this ISTA political stunt will be reduced summer vacation for thousands of Indiana children.

Self-sustaining? I thought USDA pours billions into school lunches across the country every year? Are you saying Carmel Clay schools choose not to participate in this program? I don't use Turbo Tax.

Yet they are still most likely "here on our shores" today, regardless of the American lives lost of the last 20 years.

Guess it depends on your perspective. My last property tax bill was for approx. $900. For the entire year.

While I understand the meaning behind Veteran's Day, in today's America or the America of the last say 60 years, the statement "the other died for your freedom" frankly doesn't hold water. What military event since WW2 has been even a remotely serious threat to American sovereignty and "my freedom"? I say zero, and most it not all the recent military adventurism in the Middle East has been to protect oil or drug interests.

Where did I say that I cared? Only an observation, that's all. Sushi at a government high school cafeteria is not the norm for the state of Indiana, wouldn't you agree?

Care to share your most recent yearly property tax bill?

I don't recall ever saying that it was.

I couldn't afford the sushi even it was available.

It was closed. I had a cheese sandwich, a stale bag of chips, and some lukewarm lemonade for lunch.