The update to the article mentioned a disagreement about grades. I hope hope HOPE that he is just hiding out somewhere in anger, and that he is found soon. To that end, I hope they are looking again in the house - in closets, under beds, under the house, etc., just in case he has not gone far.

If you travel a lot, it can be as simple as grabbing the wrong bag. You know you packed it right - but since you grabbed your other travel bag by mistake, it's NOT packed like you thought it was. I don't carry a gun, but I carry other equipment that I usually try NOT to carry through a security checkpoint...and I have made a similar mistake before. The difference is that people don't tend to freak out about that equipment as much as a gun - largely because many of those people have never even seen a gun before.

What? Opposition? But the phone message left by the school board indicated overwhelming support by parents and staff from both York and Bruton! Shocked, I tell ya...shocked!!

The supporters of these schedules simply can't fathom why anyone would oppose them - after all, this is what college looks like, how can you be opposed to that?? However, some aspects of high school that people take for granted are not to be found in college - and, college offers different freedoms not afforded in high school to continue other familiar activities. (Chief among these is that as a legal adult, a college student can make their OWN decisions about workload, driving to class, choosing to participate in extracurricular activities at hours not feasible for a high school freshman, choosing to punt a class if the workload is too much, etc.)

Also forgotten in the "4x4 hybrid" high school schedule is the need for students to be well-rounded to even get IN to college in the first place - and the people who love this schedule do not seem to be concerned about the impact on the arts, on SOL test dates, students in AP classes, on students who will be continuing math or foreign language in college. Oh, sure, there are supposed to be exceptions for many of these things - which will either happen, and make 4x4 implementation across the board even MORE difficult - or WON'T happen, which will wreak havoc upon college bound students. How does it make sense to gap math or a foreign language for an entire semester - and if students DON'T gap these classes, what is the plan for students who "run out of classes"? Are they really just supposed to not take any more classes in such a subject until college?

The worst part of this "4x4 hybrid" schedule is the 'cramdown" approach. If it is so much better, why is it meeting such opposition? Why can't it sell itself? The "people fear change" argument doesn't really hold here - but people do fear change if all of the potential consequences haven't been explicitly addressed.

The "freedom from religion" crowd has been extremely successful in perpetuating the template that Christians are TRYING to establish a theocratic government. Apparently, you have bought into it as well.

John,

Well done on learning the lessons on American healthcare. Yes, it sucks - and the only thing that sucks worse is EVERYTHING ELSE. At least in the American system, you still have the freedom to learn the lesson that DOCTORS AND NURSES ARE HUMAN, and that you, the consumer, ARE NOT AS STUPID AND HELPLESS as we have been conditioned to believe. In a government-run system, inevitably government becomes god, and challenging the status quo punishes the patient.

I learned this lesson when helping my mother through a number of health issues and surgeries. I advocated for her until she finally learned that she, too, could advocate for herself. She is alive and healthy today because we learned these lessons in THIS country, and not a country where she was not age-eligible to have some of these procedures done.

The 0bama White House is indeed puzzled - and not that this would be perceived as a snub; they KNOW that. What is puzzling them is that anyone, ANYONE could doubt their oh-so-lofty goals, their oh-so-genius intellect, and their oh-so-worthy efforts. It is ever thus with egomaniacs.

...and Hillary is letting him do it to himself, thinking somehow that SHE will be able to swoop in for 2012.

It's called an "object lesson". Now, go back and report to your dark overlords.

Statement: He was being ironic - "I've got a lot of issues....and I've got a young man that I killed." That's sounds like something I would have said - and I would have said it to the questioner in such a sarcastic tone of voice that it would have been obvious that the last part was the MOST disturbing part of it to me. I would have been in no mood to face the media, either.

I know the jogger probably wouldn't expect a plane to land on him - but given the number of people hit by cars and trains while 'lost in iPodland', and the number of beach buggies that have been running over sunbathers - well, a bit more caution never hurts.

As for the people telling the pilot to "ditch in the water"...ever been in the water in an overturned aircraft (which frequently happens in ditchings)? Unless you know the pilot saw the jogger and aimed for him, don't fault his choice. It's the one I would recommend for him every time.

Charles,

I very much appreciate your perspective on this. Reasonable Christian conservatives like myself recognize the difference between philosophical arguments about homosexuality, and legal strictures against/for it. (Realize that the nurture or nature arguments about homosexuality don't hold much relevance with me, since society seems to have little problem judging other behaviors that may have genetic roots - but interesting that they all deal with various appetites: sexual, nutritional, chemical, material...)

While I obviously disagree with many of your views, we do seem to share the viewpoint that the overt focus by the left fringe on promoting radically promiscuous agendas helps NOBODY. It's hard to have an elevated discussion on the larger rights questions while those issues are dangling in our faces (pardon the expression).

(We probably diverge on the gay marriage issue, but likely mainly on which way to follow the logic argument. My thoughts are simply "Either we follow the thousands of years of tradition WRT state sanctioning of marriage - or get the state out of the marriage business altogether - which would seem to be the more libertarian approach. Meanwhile, for benefits purposes, we expand the legal definition of a household to include more than just one narrow additional slice of the population.")