Jeff & Becky

A couple Loudoun Valley grads. The wedding took place at Heritage Hunt in Gainesville. To see more images, please go here.

Answer Me This

I have this question, but I have no idea what the answer is for this question. During the Bush administration, people on the left were screaming over the potential government intrusion into citizen's privacy via the Patriot Act. They were rightly concerned that the government could listen in on private conversations of private citizens, all in the name of national security. I say "rightly" only because we as citizens should be concerned about these kinds of things. I don't believe the Bush administration was doing anything wrong here however. Their intent, as I understood it, was to monitor certain communications between suspected terrorists on calls coming from outside our country. But while I thought the people on the left who were screaming were screaming for no good reason, buried underneath was a legitimate concern: keeping the government from intruding in the lives of private citizens.

So here is my question: where are those same screamers now that the Obama administration is intruding far wider and deeper into our lives than Bush ever dreamt of going? Some 4 months into his position, Obama has managed to take ownership of the American auto industry and the banking system, all while trying to take a larger role in state and local education systems, the health care industry, the credit card industry, and the energy industry. Make no mistake, Obama believes the government in general, and he specifically, knows what is best for us; and he is intent on imposing his will in our lives. He is bypassing contract laws in order to give sweetheart deals to unions. He is telling corporate America what they should pay their leaders. He seems ready to impose sanctions on medical personnel who, because of religious beliefs, refuse to do medical procedures (abortions, for one) that they find immoral. If he gets his way, each one of us will be wholly dependent on the government for our most basic needs. The government, specifically the federal government, will have far greater power on our lives than ever before, and certainly far greater than our Constitution allows.

I want to know where are the screamers? Are they so blinded by their devotion to "the One" that they cannot see what is going on here? What would happen if Obama now pushed for the Patriot Act like George Bush did? Would the screamers stay just as silent as they have been with all this other nonsense Obama has been doing? Please let me know if you know the answer to my question.

John & Jennifer

Had the pleasure of photographing John and Jennifer's wedding Saturday. We dodged a couple rain storms . . the timing was perfect . . a gift from God. This wedding was a good example though of the value in doing all the photos prior to the ceremony. Even though we got in some more after the ceremony, we were kind of pushed for time with the lighting and all. No way we would have gotten the shots we did of John and Jennifer if we had waited until afterwards.

"We Were Misled" - Same Old Excuse

Roughly ten years ago, Hilary Clinton, John Edwards, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, and a number of other Democrats spoke very directly and confidently that we need to put an end to Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction. None of them were prepared to act on that . . it just made political sense to make those kind of pronouncements. When George Bush became president, and with 9/11 fresh in our memories, Bush decided it was time to put an end to the speculation and to the trouble Hussein was causing. While many of the Democrats whined about taking action, most signed on to it. When the WMD was not uncovered, and the Iraqi war became a Viet Nam type war among the left, and many of the above personalities were running for president, they quickly changed their tune. They were misled about this whole WMD ordeal . . misled by Bush and misled by the intelligence community.

I remember thinking during that time that this "we were misled" excuse cannot be helpful for these people. It seemed to me that they were essentially saying one or more of the following: 1) I don't have the judgement to tell good information from bad information; 2) I never used my contacts and/or power to search out the best information before making an important decision; 3) I knew better back then, but did not have the courage to act on those convictions; and/or 4) I am easily misled. Barack Obama was basically a baby back when these kinds of decisions were being made, so he escaped having to make this kind of excuse.

Today we have Nancy Pelosi trying to make the same kind of excuse when it comes to briefings, what she knew, and when she knew it concerning interrogations of terrorists. The CIA misled Congress, and so did the Bush administration. Does anyone believe Pelosi's sorry and painful explanations? Talk about torture. And this is the person third in line to lead our country (behind Biden . . yikes!). I have next to zero confidence in Obama, Biden, Pelosi, or Reid . . and not one of them is doing much to make me change my mind. Pelosi though is an embarrassment.

D.C.'s School Voucher Program

According to the Democratic Congress and teacher unions, the Washington D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program has not been effective in raising test scores and abilities of the 1700 students who have participated in the program each year over the past five years. They site a recent three year analysis conducted by the Department of Education which found limited gains in reading and no significant progress in math. This all very well might be true, although it goes against the anecdotal evidence provided by the students and their parents who love their new schools and the safer environment they provide. But if test scores don't live up to the anecdotal evidence, you do have to wonder if the program really is working. And if the program is not working, as the Dems and teacher unions claim, what does that then mean?

The Washington D.C. public school system, like most inner city public school systems, is an expensive, low quality, problem plagued system. Test scores are traditionally low, there are problems with school buildings, safety, and teacher performance. There are some very good charter schools within the system, but they are the exception. Most people of means who live in Washington will send their children to private schools. Indeed some 38% of the members of Congress with children in school send them to private schools. So 1700 public school students are given the chance to go to a private school of their choice, armed with a $7500 voucher courtesy of the federal government. Because a school is private does not necessarily mean that the school is superior in every manner, but presumably a private school should offer better teacher to student ratios, safety, discipline, perhaps better motivated teachers, and perhaps better motivated students. And while there is not the governmental accountability that public schools supposedly have, private schools are indeed accountable to their customers . . parents who are shelling out thousands of additional dollars beyond taxes for a better education for their children. That means that underperforming teachers are let go.

So 1700 students, spending the past three years in private schools rather than public schools, show no noticeable improvement in their learning? If that is the case, what does that mean? Are they saying that the private school experience has no affect on these kids? Are they saying that these kids, given the opportunity to learn, are still unable to learn? Does this then mean that any argument for more funding or for higher salaries for public school teachers really will not translate into better test scores? If a private school setting cannot help these students, and if the public school setting is failing these students, what now? Again, the school system will most likely say they need more resources (money) invested into the system. But to what end, especially if these students were unable to improve even under the best of educational circumstances?

I have not heard much of anything that addresses these kind of questions. All we hear is that the voucher program was ineffective. Of course these same people will never admit that the Washington D.C. public school system is ineffective as well. Meanwhile thousands of District kids are losing out. There are of course larger issues present in any inner city school system: too many kids from single parent homes, too many parents and kids on public assistance, too much crime, perhaps too many kids with dysfunctional parents, too little hope. It can be tough teaching and learning in that kind of environment, public or private. These are societal problems though, not school system problems. School systems have to deal with the kinds of kids they are given. I believe that most kids can transcend their circumstances if given the chance. Seems to me that a private school choice provides them with at least one more option to achieve this.

Chris & Lisa