lol keep thinking we cant do anything and nothing will be done. we arnt finished yet, round two starts Monday.
The difference between "exhibiting" a great painting & "connecting audiences" with a great painting doesn't exist outside of speeches like Ben's. Is this a true distinction? An aesthetically pleasing false distinction for the current audience, possibly? The real problem is this: we hold fast to the idea that CULTURE is an inalienable right, like mail delivery. This is something we inherited from Europe. From an aristocratic culture, for whom high art always ever was, is, & will be for. This democratic culture has no need for art distinct from the mass media. Why would we be interested in "art"? & Why SHOULD we be interested in "art'? For the job security of specialists? Museums are trying to stay relevant to democratic tastes, which is absurd & bound to fail.
Transom, fair points. I'll respond by answering your last point first. Have USAFA's leaders made an effort to reach out to grads with a candid assessment of some of the problems highlighted in this article? Before reading this article, were you aware that the Prep School no longer has a GPA requirement for graduating from the Prep School? That its students have no minimum standardized test score threshold, or military performance score? Did you know that 45% of each incoming Prep School class are recruited athletes, while less than 25% are prior enlisted, but that recruited athletes have a much higher attrition rate than any other demographic brought into the Prep School? My point is, how does a grad reach out to USAFA leadership directly and in private if he isn't even aware such problems exist? I know these problems weren't brought up at my last reunion. I haven't seen them in Checkpoints. I'd prefer not to find out about them in a free newspaper. But that's where we are.
As far as the Prep School budget is concerned, you're right. I am guessing that their 2013 budget is more than their 2005 budget. But according to the article, the size of their student body hasn't changed since 2005 (the Cadet Wing is on track to shrink by 10%), and it doesn't appear the staff size is much smaller either. Is it possible the current Prep School budget is less than it's budget in 2005? I guess, but given the laws of basic economics over the last decade, I don't know how you could shrink the budget significantly without reducing students and faculty, or the length of the school. Care and feeding of 240 kids hasn't gotten cheaper in the last 10 years.
Finally, if Academy leaders have actually tried to improve the performance of Prep School grads in recent years, I would actually be more dismayed than I am now, because given the stats provided in this article and its accompanying articles, several things have gotten worse. Read the three paragraphs preceding the section titled "No Requirements" and then read the no requirements section. Things are not improving. You can't blame the current Supt. She just showed up. And it looks like the current Prep School commander is not only aware there's a problem, but has started moving the curve in the other direction. But my original questions still stand. Is this really the best we can do? How did we get here? With drawdowns the norm across the Air Force, how is it the Prep School remains the same size despite declines in the performance of its graduates in recent years? What is its real purpose? The article says the current class is 22% prior enlisted, 43% minority, and 45% recruited athlete. What does that say about our priorities?
The focus on football has become so great that the AFA just changed their primary mission from "developing leaders of character" to "producing lieutenants for the AF." Look at the usafa homepage for that in the upper left corner. If we're just producing officers what makes this place any different than any other school out there?
Anothergrad, I'm not disputing the 2005 audit report. What I am saying is that there is no data quoted in the article to support the contention that the cost per student and other pieces of information reported in the 2005 report have either not changed or gotten worse, as you contend.
As a grad, I'm sure you're aware that, like the rest of the federal government, USAFA has experienced budget cuts. What makes you think this is not also true for the Prep School? Further, what data specifically supports your contention that no attempts have been made by USAFA to improve the areas called out in the 2005 report?
You are mixing facts reported in previous years with supposition about what may be happening now, I'm assuming because there are no statistics provided in this article to refute your suppositions (which does not mean they don't exist, and actually gets to the point I was originally trying to make).
I find it really interesting that some grads, rather than trying to support USAFA leadership in the challenges they face by approaching them directly and in private in a constructive manner, feel it is more effective to attack USAFA leadership publicly in forums like this one.
It is important to remember that the word "Marriage" refers only to the union between a man and woman. Saying gay marriage is a oxymoron. Call it something else. maybe legal union, binding partnership, anything other than marriage. That word has already been taken.
Is it the mission of a healthy art institution to accommodate the putative, changing taste of the public? Or should these art institutions conserve the artistic achievements of the past in order to educate a contemporary audience? The second option isn't as sexy as the first, obviously, but a museum isn't a contemporary art gallery (Adam Lerner may not agree). Floyd Tunson's "Son of Pop" was a powerful show due in large part to the art history that, not only his work referenced, but the context of the exhibit itself embodied - The Fine Arts Center. In a coffee shop or a commercial gallery, Tunson's work would have lost some of its capacity to dialogue with & critique a rich and complex art history that, were it not for art institutions like the Fine Arts Center, would disappear under a wave of changing popular tastes & technologies.
Tong-Tong is my go-to Korean restaurant in Colorado Springs. The service has always been outstanding, with attentive, friendly servers that go out of their way to make you feel at home. They have always been ready with a smile and a suggestion of what I should try next. The food is likewise outstanding, with the wide assortment of soups being particularly good.
Everything from standards like bulgogi (thin sliced marinated beef) and japchae (a sweet potato noodle dish) to more unusual dishes like sundubu-jjigae (a spicy soft tofu soup) are served sizzling in their dishes and incredibly good. Unless you ask for it spicy, the level of hotness is under control, so this non-Korean can enjoy it without sweating the whole time.
I would suggest trying it at lunchtime, as their lunch menu has most of the standards at substantially reduced prices (around $6.99 for most). Even at lunch, you receive a wide assortment of traditional side dishes with your entre. The staff will gladly refill any of them if you ask for more.
The only knock on this place (and the only reason I didn't give it five stars) is that it could use a good remodel. The carpeting is worn in many places, the booths and tables have seen better days, and the restrooms, though clean, need some maintenance work.
Still, that shouldn't deter you from trying this place. Before you know it, you'll be a regular like me.
The Air Force would be better just paying all of the preppies to go to a year of junior college or a state school to improve their chances at success at USAFA. Of course, that wouldn't really help the football and basketball teams red-shirt student-athletes and train them with another year of playing experience, so one has to believe that sports is the primary driver for the P-school.
The article lists the cost per Prep School graduate at $93,800. It says that number comes from an Air Force audit published in 2005 looking at data from 2002 and 2003. I share your willingness to doubt the accuracy of things I read in the media, but the number and the attributed source seem pretty specific. And unfortunately, those numbers are from a decade ago. Nothing in the military seems to get less expensive over time, and I would be willing to guess that the cost per Prep School student is higher now than what was published in 2005. As for the graduation rates, the numbers listed in this article are consistant with historical numbers I've read in other places. Roughly 25% who enter the Prep School don't make it to USAFA, and another 25% who do don't graduate from USAFA. What surprised me are the percentages of Prep School graduates involved in honor offenses and other problems at USAFA. I would think the percentages would be LOWER than direct entry cadets. Not higher. Regardless of the specific cost per Prep School graduate, shouldn't a year of exposure to USAFA military and honor standards give them an advantage over their direct entry peers? If this has been an known problem since at least 2005, what exactly is being done to make positive changes? Is there a better solution? Even if this article is only mostly accurate, I can't believe USAFA can't do better. Is it even trying?
Anothergrad, I'd be inclined to say you might have a point if I knew for sure that the cost per student, graduation rates etc quoted in the article are correct. I'm willing to bet they are not. I'm also inclined to believe maybe there's some broad over-generalizing here.
While I agree with his sentiment and am 100% for legalization. What is really going to happen is that 1 or 2 shops will be allowed to open that are owned by the people who have paid the council the most money and they will have a monopoly. I would totally support this is anyone who had the funds to comply with all regulations and the ability to pass all criminal checks was allowed to open a shop and compete in teh open market, however this is not the case and sickens me to support monopolization. Doesn't matter because in the end Monsanto will control everything anyway.
Do you support the new, revised, upgraded, expanded version of City for Champions?
Amy Lathen's support of C4C is surprising since she's a staunch guardian of public money and opposed to squandering tax dollars on frivolities. And C4C is a frivolity, pursued only because a portion of the money needed is "free" in the form of sales tax rebates receivable over a 30-year period. One of the 4, the UCCS sports medicine center, should be paid 100% by the state, and not COS taxpayers, since it is a state institution. What COS taxpayers, who will be paying the lions share of the cost of C4C, should be asking about the stadium/events center is DO WE WANT THIS FOR US, because it's US, the locals, who will be paying for and maybe patronizing it.
COS presently has 2 major events centers, the World Arena - located 4.5 miles south of downtown on I-25 - and Stargazers - located 2 miles east of downtown. Together they host less than 200 events a year. Stargazers will host 14 events over the next 3 months and World Arena will be used 18 days over the next 4-1/2 months. C4C promoters are telling Denver the new downtown stadium will host 200 events annually, which is unlikely, if not impossible.
COS citizenry has been told that after COS is awarded the sales tax rebate (on Dec 16) that WE will have an opportunity for input. Not true. The "free" money will be awarded for C4C and for no other projects. And after the "free" money is awarded there will be an intense push by C4C promoters to get the locals to agree to taxing themselves in order to not lose the "free" money.
Promoters of C4C have told the state that COS citizens enthusiastically support this proposal. Voice your opinion to Denver: Jeff.email@example.com AND Virginia.firstname.lastname@example.org AND Simon.email@example.com
What I would like to see happen to revitalize downtown is a gorgeous new library/media center on the eastern edge of America the Beautiful park and a bit further east, a year-round farmers market. These 2 will anchor the sodo area and spur development of housing, retail, and restaurants that the locals, as well as tourists, will patronize. And we can do this ourselves, without the state's "free" money.
Long waits for health care? Thats the excuse from those that dont like the fact that its one of the many things no one can live without. Well let me ask you. Have you done without health care insurance? Talk about waiting. Have you been dropped? Talk about waiting. Have you paid into a program then told it dont cover a needed procedure? Talk about waiting. Welcome to my world. Paid the insurance company for 14 years only to find out they wouldnt cover a heart attack because they the insurance company decided it was caused from some cancer treatment 25 years before. They knew about that cancer when I applied but took my money anyway and not only dropped me but my wife was dropped as well. Yea waiting is a real bitch but guess what not getting is even worse.
'Enough with the hypocracy.' ...you got that right Mr. Mayor! Huge, just huge!
Bach wants the Colorado Springs tax payers to chip in on a stadium for no team, a museum for an international corporation that has the funds to build their own museum, a medicine facility for a state owned university and a new visitor center for the federal government. I am glad he is so generous with our money. If it ever comes to a public vote I will be first in line to campaign against this project. This is all about making his friends and possibly himself richer. If it is about jobs, attract the tech industry again. One tech company can bring in more and higher paying jobs. In the 90's and early 2000's they were here. Do you remember when Intel and HP were here? Now Colorado Springs gets excited when we get a new retail store (Bass Pro Shops) that brings in new jobs that pay below the national average. The city government needs to look at an intelligent jobs plan and not how to stuff their friends pockets with cash.
We now have another definition to contend with: People who go to the clinic for sports medicine advice are no longer called patients but now called "tourists". There is a commitment letter sent in with the application talks about a professional soccer league team that would like to use the stadium. Unfortunately the president of the United Soccer League- PRO Colorado Springs forgot to incorporate until 12 Nov 2013. A full seven days after signing the letter of commitment. USL-PRO has not disclosed their relationship with Ragain Sports LLC. Much less his commitment to use our stadium. However, several new themes and comments have emerged from this briefing:
"Having Fun doubling down with the City's Bonds" author Steve Bach (no this is not a tax right now.....:+}
"WHO's in your wallet" a take off from the Capital One commercial.
"Due Diligence is for Suckers" a take off from the C4C pro forma statement
"WHAT?-Me Worry" Mad magazine's take off of Doug Price's Media Circus
"The Emperor doesn't need any Clothes" commentary from the DeBachAL communicators guide to civic understanding
"What the City Council doesn't know can't hurt them" from the guide to strategic market timing- Doug Price (author)
"My term limit cannot be extended again so I will support C4C and run for mayor" Ms Amy Lathem (after all its only a application and not really a commitment)
"We can sell more popcorn and hot dogs in the stadium if they allow rec pot" Young professionals looking for jobs in Colorado Springs...line forms at city hall....
|==| / ___()
|==| / /
|oo| / /
The "poorest of the poor" were already covered by Medicaid. All Obamacare has done is redefine "poor", resulting in hundreds of thousands more Americans lining up for something someone else is paying for.
All content © Copyright 2013, The Colorado Springs Independent
Website powered by Foundation