Reference check / LJWorld.com

Archive for Thursday, June 28, 2007

June 28, 2007

To the editor:

As the presidential candidates prepare for the 2008 election, I will be preparing my credentials for a teaching job in the state of Kansas. I will be spending the next year completing the prescribed requirements, putting together my resume, references, getting my physical including a flu shot and TB tests, taking standardized tests in subject content and teaching techniques, putting together a portfolio and a credential file and submitting online applications to each school district which duplicate the whole process. After I am scrutinized and interviewed, I hope I am deemed worthy to teach music to elementary school students. It's taken me a good five years.

Now, I want to see the credentials of the potential presidential candidates. I don't want to rely on their election machines and spin doctors. I want to see their resumes, their college transcripts, their letters of reference. I want to see that the doctor gives them the good bill of health. I want to call their references and interview them. I want the raised seals, the notarization and the certified paperwork.

After the last fiasco, presidential candidates should have to prove they are intelligent, healthy and qualified to lead our nation by providing the people, the electors, with the same hard data we demand of our teachers.

Megan Helm,

Lawrence

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

28 June 2007
at 4:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Kookamooka (Anonymous) says…

Yeah. I'd like to see George W.'s college transcript from Yale!
28 June 2007
at 5:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Dracul (Bill Chapman) says…

I'd like to see every presidential candidates' school records and grades. I would also like to see all military records and, at the least, a financial summary. An I.Q. test would be nice too.
28 June 2007
at 5:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ontheotherhand (Anonymous) says…

Very nicely stated! Bravo!
28 June 2007
at 6:04 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Ragingbear (Anonymous) says…

Georgie Boy had his records sealed, illegally I might add.
28 June 2007
at 7:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

packrat (Anonymous) says…

http://www.insidepolitics.org/heard/h… Some interesting college information regarding Bush, Gore, and Kerry.
28 June 2007
at 7:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

blue73harley (Anonymous) says…

Megan is comparing apples and oranges. Political candidates are actually under much more scrutiny that most job applicants. Employers are restricted from asking many questions of job applicants due to EEOC regs. Sex, age, race, religious affiliation, etc. questions are all taboo when it comes to job applicants but are discussed freely in the political world.
28 June 2007
at 8:25 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Kookamooka (Anonymous) says…

I think it's pretty clear she just wants to look at the same documents any employer would ask for when hiring someone for a job.

28 June 2007
at 8:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

acg (Anonymous) says…

Lol! RT is still whining about something that happened 15 years ago. That is too funny! Obsess much?
28 June 2007
at 8:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

dorothyhr (Dorothy Hoyt-Reed) says…

packrat, I'd like to see their official transcripts please. Do you believe everything you read on the internet?
28 June 2007
at 9:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Confrontation (Anonymous) says…

“After the last fiasco, presidential candidates should have to prove they are intelligent, healthy and qualified to lead our nation by providing the people, the electors, with the same hard data we demand of our teachers.”

How can a teacher, who is only required to have a 2.5 GPA, demand that a future President be intelligent?
28 June 2007
at 9:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Defender (Anonymous) says…

“how many illegit kids does Willy have, and as far as that goes, who's Chelsea's real fatherlotsa questions about them danged ol' crazy Arkansas hillbillies.”

So, got any proof of your idiotic assertions, or are you just part of the extreme right wing spin/propaganda machine? This is just incredibly stupid.
28 June 2007
at 9:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Ragingbear (Anonymous) says…

Vote for Ralph Nader for President, just to screw with people.
28 June 2007
at 11:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

44x15 (Anonymous) says…

“How can a teacher, who is only required to have a 2.5 GPA, demand that a future President be intelligent?”

you're kidding, right? i'd like to think that all people, even those who never went to college, would like to have someone with some smattering of brains in their head to make decisions in their names.
28 June 2007
at 12:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

packrat (Anonymous) says…

dorothyhr :
There are sources listed in the article. Search the newspapers listed, you will find the information.
28 June 2007
at 12:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

aeroscout17 (Anonymous) says…

“Vote for Ralph Nader for President, just to screw with people”

Yeah and insure the Republicans win again by splitting the ticket. I am sick and tired of partisan politics. Vote for the best person that can do the job.

28 June 2007
at 12:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Confrontation (Anonymous) says…

“you're kidding, right? i'd like to think that all people, even those who never went to college, would like to have someone with some smattering of brains in their head to make decisions in their names.”

Of course we would, but she makes it sound like she was stuck to a higher standard than the President. I agree that Dubya is stuck at a third grade level of intelligence. No offense to any third graders out there.
28 June 2007
at 1:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

SettingTheRecordStraight (Anonymous) says…

Another liberal public school teacher ranting.

Ms. Helm, I assume you went to Yale and Harvard?
28 June 2007
at 2:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

bender (Anonymous) says…

If wanting to know all the facts about a candidate, including their college transcripts is liberal ranting, then count me in as a ranting liberal. I guess us crazy liberals just want as much information as can be made available while conservatives are content to plug their brains into Fox News and suck all that right wing propaganda straight into their brains.

That said, I think there are other qualities beyond pulling a high GPA in college that go into making great leaders. Still, in my mind, college records are germane with respect to political candidates.
28 June 2007
at 2:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

mick (Anonymous) says…

I'd like to see a lie detector test asking the question about whether they intend to uphold the Constitution.
28 June 2007
at 4:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

altarego (Anonymous) says…

I agree with Megan Helm. A basic Civics and Geography test would be nice. Fundamentals of grammar. Spelling. And I wouldn't necessarily demand an expert in every world religion, but knowing, say, the difference between Shiite and Sunni would be nice. Considering how much blood could spill and all.

I also want anybody, left or right, who doesn't realize that this presidency has been a fiasco to meet me at Hooters for wings and beer. I have got to meet these people.
28 June 2007
at 5:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

bisky1 (Anonymous) says…

i agree with altarego a future president should have to meet ME for a beer, and they should also have to detail my car, mow my lawn and do what ever silly ass thing i can dream up that will help me confirm my opinion of them.
one of the problems of being 22 and looking for a job is you got no perspective, call me back in twenty years megan.
also when you say intelligent does that mean you cannot be intelligent unless you agree with me?
29 June 2007
at 12:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

HangingOnToHope (Anonymous) says…

Megan, you're going to make an awesome teacher! Welcome to one of the toughest, unappreciated and most rewarding professions in the world. I hope that both I and my child see you the local school system.
29 June 2007
at 12:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

shirinisb (Anonymous) says…

Yay Megan- I agree with hangingon^

29 June 2007
at 7:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ontheotherhand (Anonymous) says…

bisky1, I am twice as old as Megan and my perspective is the same as hers. Too bad you do not get what she is saying. I have been saying this same thing with respect to our Kansas Legislature. It constantly amazes me that we vote in people to make fiscal policy for our state and yet they have no idea what “fiscal” means. We will never have a decent budget until we stop voting in single-issue candidates (pro abortion, anti abortion, pro gay, anti gay, etc). We would never let some of these people even work in our businesses and yet we vote them into office. Sheer amazement. Now THAT's a reason to cry in your beer at Hooters!!
29 June 2007
at 9:32 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

deec (Anonymous) says…

Candidates' arrest records would be good, too, like DUI's.
29 June 2007
at 10 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

penguin (Anonymous) says…

well I am guessing megan went to KU and their education program is a 5 year program.

Also the 2.5 GPA requirement only applies to out-of-state teachers coming in to Kansas to teach. Although the KS requirement is only 2.75 (those who graduate from Kansas colleges), but you also have to pass a general exam and a subject specific exam for those who teach at the secondary level.

Oddly enough…Kansas has one of the more difficult licensure standards in the country.

While Texas, home of W. and former Ed Secretary Ron Page (Superintendent of the Houston Schools…where a massive standardized test cheating scandal took place), does not place testing requirements on teaching candidates.

just some food for thought on those who commented on her credentials as a student and a teacher.
29 June 2007
at 10:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Defender (Anonymous) says…

“If Megan is assigned to one of my children's schools, I will have to contact the principal and get assurance that she will not be allowed to indoctrinate the kids with her far-left views.”

Once again the fool speaks foolish things. Just because someone disagrees with you Arminius, doesn't mean they are a liberal. My God, you're an idiot. Why don't you go play on your 'Clinton Obsession' website instead of wasting our time?
29 June 2007
at 10:42 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

altarego (Anonymous) says…

Megan:

You should take bisky1 out for wings and beer for accusing you of being 22.
29 June 2007
at 11:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

JJE007 (Anonymous) says…

Weird. I just can't find the horror in seeking as much information as possible about candidates for the presidency of the US.

A candidate's backers could always debate what were the important attributes of a good leader if their party animal seemed to come up a bit short. Hmmm… Hasn't that happened? It's not a deal breaker if you're not the sharpest: tack on the floor, knife in the drawer, spear in a war, etceteraRight?
29 June 2007
at 11:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

mom_of_three (Anonymous) says…

I see Megan's point. What we really know about our candidates is what they choose for us to know. Do we assume everyone is qualified to be president because they say they are?
29 June 2007
at 12:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Pywacket (Anonymous) says…

I have met Megan several times. She is much older than 22 (although she doesn't look a day over 25 ;-), and she is a wife, mom, homeowner, and has already enjoyed a very successful career, thank you very much. In the midst of a very busy life, she decided to go back to school.

This info won't shut up all the idiots, but at least it should stop the gobs of the snarky, presumptuous ones who pegged her as 22 (are you listening, bisky1?) or the sheep who took that assumption as truth (ontheotherhand—if you ARE twice as old as Megan, congrats on being an awesomely tech-friendly granny or grandpa!).

A teaching degree from KU takes 5 years for traditional students, ferdinand(fullofbull)langhoff: try doing it as an older, nontrad student with a household & kids in the same amount of time and then come back here and tell us all about how “slow” Megan is. Dipsquat.

Whether you agree with her point or not (I happen to find her views refreshing, amusing, and right on the money), it's bizarre and ignorant to make the sweeping (and hideously wrong) assumptions some of you have made. You just lowered your own credibility—if you had any to begin with.

29 June 2007
at 2:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

penguin (Anonymous) says…

obviously you are not checking into how KU's program works….it is a 5 year program!!!!

I attempted to return with two degrees already in hand and was informed it would be 5 years …regardless. It has nothing to do with taking more hours, but it has everything to do with how the program is designed. In addition, they also have to do a year of student teaching…most student teaching programs are only one semester long.

However, feel free to give it a whirl. Kansas teaching standards are such that with a degree in Poli Sci and International Studies that it took me less time to switch to another field for licensure than it would to become a History or Government teacher.
29 June 2007
at 3:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

pelliott (Anonymous) says…

rt as always, the wingnut, smearing a child as if that was a reasonable point about competency of the candidates, you don't even want information, you prefer to sit in a sewer of slurs and make aspersions that is just a dark spot in your brain. Then he is a crybaby that his buddy (special friend in dirt) literally was so vile he got kicked off. He blames that on all the liberals. it wasn't his friend's fault, he isn't responsible for what he wrote. RT isn't responsible for what he writes or how he reasons.
We should look at our candidate not only for signs of intelligence, if we plan to vote for someone to do a job, it is not unreasonable to ask them show us not only what they plan to do but that they can do it. I don't care if it is a liberal or conservative, is the person really stupid and who is funding the campaign? If you can't find out either answer it is best not to vote for them.
Yes, not just mealy mouthed gossip and head nodding,
29 June 2007
at 4:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Kookamooka (Anonymous) says…

All she said was she thought the last President we elected was a fiasco. I think a lot of people, Republican and Democrat, are feeling that way right now. Sheeesh.

The really scary thing is, people like RT and Langhoff, could run for President. They should get in touch with the Republican party before it's too late!
29 June 2007
at 9:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Pywacket (Anonymous) says…

greyheim~ amen to that.

I'm sure there's more to his self-serving little success story than he is disclosing. What degrees in what disciplines from what schools? Probably AA degrees in general studies from a community college—where everybody is finished in 2 years.

Nonetheless, whether longhoof earned a PhD in nuclear physics at Columbia in 6 months with highest honors or a BGS in nosepicking from the Ozark Holler Skool O Lurnin, he beautifully illustrates the principle of being educated beyond one's intelligence.
30 June 2007
at 5:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Kookamooka (Anonymous) says…

Sly? Why would she be sly? I don't think distrusting our current administration makes someone sly. I think deceiving the American people the way our presidential pinocchio G.W. and his puppet masters, Rove and Cheney, have is more sly and deceitful than someone saying, let's not make this mistake again. It was a big mistake and America pays for it everyday!
30 June 2007
at 6:32 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

Well, at least we know that the right-wing contingent is simply resorting to attacking the messengers, and changing the subject now. I suppose that could mean they've realized that the president himself is indefensible.
30 June 2007
at 7:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

And win the senatorial majority back again. Don't forget that.
30 June 2007
at 7:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

“Moreover, after a short period of time, I learned that facts, knowledge, reason and/or simply an opposing view offered up to the same looney majority is greeted with any number of slurs, debasing remarks, ridicule, harassment, threats, intimidation and prompt dismissal.”

You must have learned that from watching someone else do it. You yourself very clearly enjoy posting factually-starved and generally insulting posts to rile people up, and you pretty much have since you started. Unless you're referring to posts made under another sign-on, because I've been here since you registered, and you haven't changed at all.

30 June 2007
at 8:03 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

Yes, that is true, though I think that I'm including one more group in the guilty section than you probably are.
30 June 2007
at 8:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

I suppose its understandable desperation, though. When the facts tend to clearly illustrate that all most politicians, regardless of professed ideology, really care about is maintaining their own power and increasing it if possible by whatever means, adopting a one-sided blind-spot and then just following it can save you some feelings of hopelessness and depression. Lord knows there are times that I wished I could do it.
30 June 2007
at 8:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

And that lots of people have strong opinions only loosely based on reality, and simply deny the holes and problems in their beliefs to themselves and everyone else. I should have included that.
30 June 2007
at 9:01 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

That could be why.
30 June 2007
at 9:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

Yeah, especially as your explanation is rather irrational and paranoid. But whatever floats your boat.
30 June 2007
at 10:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

pelliott (Anonymous) says…

'he sure taught the Dems a thing or too. Still teach'in them and all they can do is whine and holler.'

He sure did , he taught them how to take the house and senate back. And he not only taught the democrats to whine and holler, he is teaching republicans.

Rt, thanks for apoligizing for making the nasty absurd remarks, we all make errors .
30 June 2007
at 4:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

erod0723 (Anonymous) says…

I think all presidential candidates should have to take a high school civics test, and if they do not pass, then they cannot be elected. Hmm… what idiot leader way high up in our country would that get rid of…? Don't try to say that he went to Yale. The only reason he got in was because of who his daddy was.
30 June 2007
at 6:02 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Kookamooka (Anonymous) says…

Oh Dear Spywell, I think you mean “chess” not “chest”. Maybe you had an aggressive queen on your mind. I love imagining George Bush as an aggressive queen. He and Rudy Giuliani should put on their panty-hose and high heels and do the town. Maybe they'll run into Donald Trump.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IrE6F…

30 June 2007
at 8:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas (Anonymous) says…

I assume that being told to grow up by someone who names himself 4th grade education, and then acts the park, was supposed to be pleasantly ironic, so I'll laugh now.
30 June 2007
at 8:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Stain (Anonymous) says…

If you want a resume that qualifies a man to be president based on his education and experience, you are asking for Al Gore.

Unfortunately I do not think he is going to run. Pity.
30 June 2007
at 9:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

pelliott (Anonymous) says…

spywell (Anonymous) says:

Pelliott: Do you ever play chest, Bush … does the most damage.

mate,
actually i appreciate optimistic dreamers. i don't know how you got to the place you are but it sounds like we are not reading the same news or have the same goals. My goals are wider than going down fighting and taking civilians, children, economies, honor, and democrasy with us. It isn't like this just happened all the sudden. We are losing rights that people died defending. Bush still seems stupid to me. I don't like how he skipped over the UN when he started this thing and then asked them to bail us out. he is like a little baby.