Headed to Geneseo High School in Illinois to watch Metamora and Cooper Koch play in the Illinois playoffs tonight. It'll be my first time watching him in person. I'm pretty excited. Hope I can talk with JR a bit, too.

Then staying in the Quad Cities before I head to Champaign in the morning.

Login to view embedded media
Wow. Not surprising. But wow. Panera sucks btw. Hasn't been good for at least the last decade.

Oregon woman holds Guinness world record for largest tongue circumference (female). It’s wider than a soda can.

Link

Needs surgery?

Just in case any of our cult members have forgotten. I thought I'd give you a brief reminder. Impeachments; Trump 2, Biden 0. Criminal charges filed/pending; Trump 91, Biden 0. Total fines for criminal activity; Trump $450,000,000, Biden 0. Tried for Sexual abuse charges and found liable: Trump 1, Biden 0. Scoreboard looking bad for your dear cult leader.

What’s a must “read” type of a classic? I’m thinking of something like “The Falconer” or “Slaughterhouse 5” or something like that. What do you educated and cultured people got for me?

Ted Stilwill​

February 17, 2024 3:43 pm​

Last fall, Governor Reynold’s Department of Administrative Services contracted with a business consulting firm to produce a report critical of Iowa’s Area Education Agencies (AEAs). The study was translated into a bill submitted by the governor to decimate the AEAs and weaken Iowa’s public education system.
The authors of the report are not listed. The costs are not known. The directions to the consulting firm have not been shared. The consulting firm has no apparent expertise or track record in the education world. There is no documentation in the report that a single Iowan was engaged in the preparation of the report. Most importantly, I believe the conclusions about AEAs are flawed.
Of the three general negative charges against AEAs, none hold up to scrutiny, even when using data from the report.

Lack of accountability​

There is an accusation that there is little or no accountability for AEAs. Here is what the report says:

As the analysis in this report will show, Iowa’s special education structure gives AEAs vast control over the education of students with disabilities with little oversight from school districts and the Iowa Department of Education. (page 8)


Despite school districts funding the operation of AEAs, school district staff members – including school superintendents – are prohibited from sitting on AEA boards of directors and lack formal oversight and accountability mechanisms over AEAs. (page 9)


So, the sole basis in the report for claiming lack of accountability is the legislated prohibition for local teachers and administrators to sit on their local AEA Board.
This ignores several important facts. The local district boards appoint the AEA board members, which certainly provides accountability from the local community side and is free from the possible conflicts of interest in staff serving on a governance function.
This criticism for lack of accountability inexplicably totally ignores an active state accreditation system and annual reporting to the Iowa Department of Education and annual budget approval by the department and the state board. This is the same sort of mechanism the state uses to provide accountability to school districts. There is no evidence that this process is not working.

Academic achievement​

The report raises a concern about the academic achievement of special education students. Here is what the report says:

In the most recent administration of NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) in 2022, students with disabilities in Iowa scored below the national average, despite the state investing several thousand dollars more on a per pupil basis for special education students for that year in comparison to the national special education spending average. (page 8)


If you look on page 21 of the consultant’s report, you see that in 2022, Iowa Special Education students scored 1 point below the national average on a 500 point scale. This is for a test that only samples students in each state. We should not even be using NAEP data for state-to-state comparisons because, as stated on NAEP’s own website:

“Although every effort is made to include as many students as possible, different jurisdictions have different exclusion policies, and those policies may have changed over time. Because SD (students with disabilities) and EL (English learners) students typically score lower than students not categorized as SD or EL, jurisdictions that are more inclusive — that is, jurisdictions that assess greater percentages of these students — may have lower average scores than if they had a less inclusive policy.”


Practically speaking, districts and states, for what I believe are legitimate reasons, might exclude some of the more severely cognitively handicapped students from testing on a grade level oriented test. Including or excluding even a few very low scoring students would affect the overall average significantly. (The governor’s comment that we have been “failing these students for 20 years” may not be warranted.)
This doesn’t mean that current student performance is acceptable, but it would not warrant the radical reduction in non-special education services and the centralization of control and services to the state level.

The governor's consultant report does not support her changes to Iowa's AEAs - Iowa Capital Dispatch

The only evidence for changing Iowa's AEA system comes from "bogus conclusions" in the governor's consultant report.

iowacapitaldispatch.com

Login to view embedded media

Just wondering if the date for the Spring football game/practice has been announced yet?

If I were a Democrat in Michigan, I would be breaking the emergency fire alarms,” the pollster says

Donald Trump is trouncing Joe Biden in Michigan — but the state’s Democratic governor would fare much better against Trump in a hypothetical matchup, a new poll showed.

The poll, conducted by the Michigan-based Glengariff Group from Jan. 2 to Jan. 6, has the former president beating Biden by 8 points — 47 to 39 percent — among likely voters in the state.

Pretty much the only promising development I've seen on the subject....

The House speaker, who has previously met with Biden, is seeking a one-on-one meeting ahead of any movement on legislation that would provide aid for the U.S. allies.

WASHINGTON — House Speaker Mike Johnson wants an in-person, one-on-one meeting with President Joe Biden before proceeding with a supplemental aid package with funding for Ukraine and Israel, a source close to Johnson said.

Johnson, R-La., and his staff have requested the meetings with Biden through senior White House officials several times over the past two months after Johnson's trip last month to the U.S. border in Eagle Pass, Texas, the source said.


The most recent request for a meeting came just over a week ago, several days before the Senate passed a bipartisan $95 billion national security package and before House Republicans impeached Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

Johnson's requests for a meeting were not necessarily about the Senate’s version of the supplemental aid but rather about a general path forward on a legislative package.

The Senate bill, which includes aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, passed with support from 70 senators.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., said Tuesday that Biden "refuses" to meet with Johnson.

“Ultimately, the two of them could come to an agreement that can become law,” Scalise said. “And yet the president refuses to even meet. So the president can’t say he’s serious about Ukraine or the border when he refuses to meet with the speaker so they can come to an agreement on this issue.”

A White House official pointed to what the administration characterized as Johnson’s inconsistencies on the border, saying he needed to wrap the negotiations he has having with himself and stop delaying national security needs in the name of politics.

“That body language says: ‘I know I’m in a tough spot. Please bail me out,’” said a Democratic source involved with the supplemental aid package.

Biden met with Johnson alongside other congressional leaders less than a month ago to discuss a bipartisan immigration deal that would have unlocked aid to Ukraine. Johnson at the time called it a “productive” meeting.

Let them rot in Guantanamo with the rest of the vermin. Public hangings! Arm yourselves Americans!!! The Dems and our government won’t protect you. The Dems are giving them checks. Be ready to shoot when called upon to protect yourselves and your families from these pieces of shit. I’m ready!!! And justice for all!

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/28/...ytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

A state judge in Illinois ruled Wednesday that former President Donald J. Trump had engaged in insurrection and was ineligible to appear on the state’s primary ballot.
The decision by Judge Tracie R. Porter of the State Circuit Court in Cook County was stayed until Friday. Judge Porter, a Democrat, said the State Board of Elections had erred in rejecting an attempt to remove Mr. Trump and said the board “shall remove Donald J. Trump from the ballot for the General Primary Election on March 19, 2024, or cause any votes cast for him to be suppressed.”
Early voting in the Illinois primary is already underway. Because Judge Porter stayed her order, Mr. Trump can remain on the ballot at least until Friday, giving him a chance to appeal the order.
“Today, an activist Democrat judge in Illinois summarily overruled the state’s board of elections and contradicted earlier decisions from dozens of other state and federal jurisdictions,” a Trump campaign spokesman, Steven Cheung, said in a statement. “This is an unconstitutional ruling that we will quickly appeal.”
Judge Porter’s ruling made Illinois the third and most populous state where Mr. Trump was ruled ineligible on constitutional grounds.
The Colorado Supreme Court and Maine’s Democratic secretary of state, Shenna Bellows, each found Mr. Trump ineligible. Mr. Trump, who is leading in Republican primary polls, has appealed those decisions, and his campaign has described the attempts to remove him from the ballot as antidemocratic.
Mr. Trump has appealed the Colorado and Maine rulings and is likely to appear on ballots in both states. The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the Colorado appeal on Feb. 8 in a case that could determine Mr. Trump’s eligibility for the ballot nationally. Justices across the ideological spectrum appeared skeptical of the reasoning used to disqualify Mr. Trump. It is not clear when they will issue a ruling.
Judge Porter said her ruling would be further stayed if the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion in the Colorado case inconsistent with her findings.

Both assistants are out watching 2025 four-star guard Braylon Mullins tonight in Indiana.

Here’s our story on Mullins from his visit this fall:

This would be the same guy who'd be pissed if he had to audition for a role in the school play.

Login to view embedded media

Is that a travel?

I couldn’t stop laughing at that question!! Definitely a “rim shot” moment…

You have my permission to share that with the ones you love so they too may have a chuckle.

To cover the men’s team….😂🤣😆🤣😂

Four major nonprofits that rose to prominence during the coronavirus pandemic by capitalizing on the spread of medical misinformation collectively gained more than $118 million between 2020 and 2022, enabling the organizations to deepen their influence in statehouses, courtrooms and communities across the country, a Washington Post analysis of tax records shows.


Children’s Health Defense, an anti-vaccine group founded by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., received $23.5 million in contributions, grants and other revenue in 2022 alone — eight times what it collected the year before the pandemic began — allowing it to expand its state-based lobbying operations to cover half the country. Another influential anti-vaccine group, Informed Consent Action Network, nearly quadrupled its revenue during that time to about $13.4 million in 2022, giving it the resources to finance lawsuits seeking to roll back vaccine requirements as Americans’ faith in vaccines drops.
Two other groups, Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance and America’s Frontline Doctors, went from receiving $1 million combined when they formed in 2020 to collecting more than $21 million combined in 2022, according to the latest tax filings available for the groups.



The four groups routinely buck scientific consensus. Children’s Health Defense and Informed Consent Action Network raise doubts about the safety of vaccines despite assurances from federal regulators. “Vaccines have never been safer than they are today,” the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said on its webpage outlining vaccine safety.
Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance and America’s Frontline Doctors promote anti-parasitic or anti-malarial drugs as treatments for covid, long after regulators and clinical trials found the medications to be ineffective or potentially harmful. Leaders of these groups say they disagree with medical consensus and argue that their promotion of alternative treatments for covid and other conditions is safe.
Arthur Caplan, head of the division of medical ethics at the New York University Grossman School of Medicine, said that in his view, the four groups endanger lives with their spread of misinformation.



“These groups gave jet fuel to misinformation at a crucial time in the pandemic,” Caplan said. “The richer they get, the worse off the public is because, indisputably, they’re spouting dangerous nonsense that kills people.”
The influx of pandemic cash sent executive compensation soaring, boosted public outreach, and seeded the ability to wage legislative and legal battles to weaken vaccine requirements and defend physicians accused of spreading misinformation.
Some doctors following guidance by Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance or America’s Frontline Doctors have been disciplined or face the possibility of discipline from state medical boards alleging substandard medical care. In cases involving two doctors alleged to have followed Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance guidance, three patients died.



Public health experts, including Caplan, worry that the well-funded anti-science movement could lead to devastating long-term public health consequences if childhood diseases once vanquished by vaccines come roaring back.
Many of the contributors are not known because nonprofits are generally not required to publicly report their donors. But nonprofits are supposed to disclose groups to which they contribute more than $5,000. In addition to the tax forms filed by the four groups, The Post reviewed more than 330 filings by nonprofits that donated to the groups during the pandemic. Half of those gifts over $100,000 were made through a tax vehicle popular among the ultrawealthy known as “donor-advised funds,” which allow individuals to obscure their identities. The Post identified two funds dedicated to advancing biblical, libertarian or conservative values that each had given at least $1 million in total to at least three of the groups since 2020.
Pierre Kory, president and chief medical officer of Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance, said the group gained prominence — and donors — during the pandemic as the public sought “medical information free from special interests.” The money has allowed the organization to expand its influence into other areas, he said.



“Our team continues to develop guidance and educational materials on other chronic conditions,” Kory said in a statement to The Post.
Jose Jimenez, a lawyer for America’s Frontline Doctors, said donors recognize that the group is “fighting for the freedom of choice and health care for individuals and fighting for physician independence.”
“There’s been a lot of support by donors to get that message out,” Jimenez said in an interview. “The level of revenue, the level of donations is a recognition that this is something that Americans are yearning for.”
Neither Informed Consent Action Network nor Children’s Health Defense responded to requests for comment.

Dipshits

Since the end of last season the topic of adding a post to Iowa WBB via the portal has come up in various threads multiple times. Coach Bluder has addressed this by saying the staff felt there were only a handful of options that they felt could play at Iowa, and when contacted, said they weren't interested. This seems very possible to me, but there have been multiple posters who continually say there were many more post players in the portal that would represent a significant upgrade to our trio of O'Grady, Goodman, and Ediger. I wanted to see if I could find some hard facts that would support either point of view.

This website far and away has the most extensive data base with respect to the D1 portal:


I tried to find out what really was out there for possibilities. I randomly categorized a 'post' as a player that was 6'3" or taller, since that is what our posters are calling for. I'm not a statistician, but here's what I found out:

1) Of the 1124 players listed as in the portal, 111 of them were 6'3" and taller.

2) The 6 major D1 conferences (ACC, Big 12, Big East, Big 10, Pac 12, SEC) were the best source of better options.
45 of the 257 players in the portal from these schools were 'posts'.
Of those 45, 23 landed at another D1 school. 1 did not sign anywhere.

3) In the remaining 26 D1 conferences there were 867 portal players, but only 65 were 'posts'.
Of those 65, only 10 signed with another D1 school. 26 of them signed nowhere.
Seems to indicate that if you wanted a D1 level post, the main 6 conferences were the place to look.

4) The top 2 players from the 26 smaller conferences were Camilla Emsbo, who went from Yale to Duke, and Isnelle Natabou, who
landed at Iowa State from Sacramento State. Here's their numbers: Emsbo 4.6 ppg/2.9 rpg/15.7 minutes; Natabou 5.2/4.3/12.6.
Definitely not moving the needle at their new schools.

5) Top Power Conference options:
Lauren Betts (6'7") Our dream candidate; landed at UCLA. 15.3/8.4/25.2
Lauren Ware (6'5") Arizona to Texas A&M. 9.7/8.4/27.2
Sedona Prince (6'7") Oregon to TCU. 20.8/10.3/31.8. Has missed most of Jan and Feb with broken finger; back in the lineup.
Hannah Gusters (6'5") LSU to Okie St. 14.8/4.1/24.3. Also has missed significant time due to injury.

6) My methodology is somewhat flawed in that it brought up a 6'3" player with great stats this year, but she's actually a guard.
Therefore I exclude her from the above list. This is Destiny Adams; at Rutgers via North Carolina. 15.2/7.5/29.6.

7) Why only 4 players in #5? They were the only 4 that actually exceeded what we have now. Since our 3 bigs in question never
are on the floor together I compiled their stats to create a composite post player for us. What does this look like?
10.1 ppg/6 rpg/21.6 minutes. That's what our three-headed post is giving us currently. No other D1 post outside of the 4 listed
above have better stats.

There are all sorts of ways to poke holes in what I've listed, but it is based on factual data. I'd like to hear everyone's comments and criticisms; I would like to have reasons listed for any assertions.

My conclusion is that Coach Bluder was correct when she said there were very few options out there that would represent an upgrade to our current roster.

Go Hawks!