This topic has been locked by a moderator.
Also, we are all AFAICT extrapolating from not a lot of data. I have a few deaf friends, but they are all adults without children. I’ve seen a documentary and have taken some ASL classes (and I’m pretty much shit at all languages, soak in the irony). That’s my total net exposure to the whole deaf community. I have some autistic friends, but they are all high functioning/asperger’s end of the spectrum. And I’ve seen Rain Man, and have seen a few episodes of Parenthood. That’s about it for autism and me. It’s actually been great that Jeebus has been here for this discussion, I just wish we didn’t have to make arguments-by-proxy for the deaf.
EDIT: Re: other stuff. I often use “you” conversationally, like “You’re here today, you’re gone tomorrow”, when I don’t mean literally you, but just your generic person. “One” is too stuffy. “They” too impersonal, sometimes.
And when ASL is your first language, and then you learn English, then English is your second language, with all the complexities of a second language (let me assure you, the grammar is way different, because I think ASL is derived from French–so it may actually be easier to learn French as your–dang, I did it again!–second language) Your second language could even be another sign language, which wouldn’t necessarily be much easier.
somehow, I still think learning Spanish when your original language is English to be quite different than learning any spoken language when your only language has been sign language(remember you are not just learning language, you are learning how to operate your vocal chords to make speech sounds).
I suspect that by now my question may be redundant, but I’ll ask anyways…
I am pretty ignorant about the autism spectrum, but have had several students over the years with varying degrees. Having observed many of them perform at a VERY high level in my technical classes, I’ve wondered whether it is rightly considered a disability at all?
Again, I’m not expressing an opinion - just asking the prevailing views from people more knowledgeable on the subject than I am.
"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars
The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time is a rather good book that is told from the perspective of someone with high-functioning autism.
You probably don’t recognize me because of the red arm.
Episode 9 Rewrite, The Starlight Project (Released!) and ANH Technicolor Project (Released!)
Having observed many of them perform at a VERY high level in my technical classes, I’ve wondered whether it is rightly considered a disability at all?
Well, that depends on how you define disability:
Now, if you think there’s more to the definition of disability, then maybe it doesn’t fit. But the fact that someone can “pass” doesn’t make them not disabled. In fact, it can make things a lot more complicated because they still may need the accommodation, but nobody recognizes/respects that fact. And autism is really honestly not that well-defined, and it covers a huge range of people–many of whom could not pass as easily. So those in your classroom may not be representative of the whole spectrum.
Also, just in general for everyone–meet someone with a disability and talklisten to them. While I’m sure it’s important to get answers to your own questions, if you meet a deaf person and start right in with cochlear implants, you’re more likely to get punched in the face than get an answer.
Having observed many of them perform at a VERY high level in my technical classes, I’ve wondered whether it is rightly considered a disability at all?
Well, that depends on how you define disability:
- It’s a significant difference from the norm (not neurotypical)
- It’s not transitory (i.e. not like the neurological effects of eating certain mushrooms)
- It can potentially impede or cause difficulty with day-to-day activities, without some sort of accommodation (classrooms are possibly the easiest place for them, but lunchrooms could be baffling)
Now, if you think there’s more to the definition of disability, then maybe it doesn’t fit. But the fact that someone can “pass” doesn’t make them not disabled. In fact, it can make things a lot more complicated because they still may need the accommodation, but nobody recognizes/respects that fact.
This has been a huge concern for us as our daughter has progressed through (and changed) school(s). First to get an official diagnosis, then to get services, and finally to retain services. There is sometimes the attitude that “oh, she’s doing great, she doesn’t need services anymore” when the services are a large part of the reason she’s doing so well.
Having observed many of them perform at a VERY high level in my technical classes, I’ve wondered whether it is rightly considered a disability at all?
Well, that depends on how you define disability:
- It’s a significant difference from the norm (not neurotypical)
- It’s not transitory (i.e. not like the neurological effects of eating certain mushrooms)
- It can potentially impede or cause difficulty with day-to-day activities, without some sort of accommodation (classrooms are possibly the easiest place for them, but lunchrooms could be baffling)
Now, if you think there’s more to the definition of disability, then maybe it doesn’t fit. But the fact that someone can “pass” doesn’t make them not disabled. In fact, it can make things a lot more complicated because they still may need the accommodation, but nobody recognizes/respects that fact.
This has been a huge concern for us as our daughter has progressed through (and changed) school(s). First to get an official diagnosis, then to get services, and finally to retain services. There is sometimes the attitude that “oh, she’s doing great, she doesn’t need services anymore” when the services are a large part of the reason she’s doing so well.
Yep. That fight never ends, I’m sorry to report.
Luckily since we moved we’re at a school that is more receptive to her needs and understands the role that support plays in her progress, but the rug can be pulled out from under us at any time.
Talk about an empty gesture. And also not a charity.
President Trump has donated his salary from his first few months in office to the National Park Service, making good on a campaign pledge to forego a presidential paycheck.
His gift represents a small fraction, however, of the money the Park Service stands to lose if Trump’s budget were adopted.
Instead of collecting a salary of $400,000 a year, Trump has volunteered to donate that money to charity. He chose the Park Service as the beneficiary of his first installment, $78,333, which covers the first ten weeks Trump was in office.
Zinke hinted, however, that the president’s gift won’t go very far.
“We’re about $229 million behind in deferred maintenance on our battlefields alone,” he said.
Trump is proposing deep cuts to the Interior Department, which includes the Park Service. The president’s budget proposal for the coming fiscal year would trim $1.5 billion or 12 percent from the department’s budget. Ultimately, it’s up to Congress to determine how much money the department can spend.
Conservationists denounced Trump’s donation as a “publicity stunt.”
“If Donald Trump is actually interested in helping our parks, he should stop trying to slash their budgets to historically low levels,” said Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club. “America’s parks, and the people and economies they support, need real funding, not a giant fake check. Parks are a good investment and we must invest now if we want them to be around for our kids,” Brune added.
Rice has not commented on the report. It would likely be legal for Rice to request the unmasking—“The standard for senior officials to learn the names of U.S. persons incidentally collected is that it must have some foreign intelligence value, a standard that can apply to almost anything,” Lake notes.
As Lake notes, nothing he—or anyone else—has uncovered lends credence to President Trump’s outlandish and unsupported claim that Obama ordered surveillance of him at Trump Tower prior to the election. Nor does the new story suggest any illegal behavior on Rice’s part. As with each step in the story, this one offers only a small sliver of information. Many experts seem to think the Bloomberg View story does not imply anything improper or unusual. Others withheld judgment, saying there’s simply not enough information to judge.
“In a situation where there’s incidental collection and it appears that they’re discussing U.S. incoming or current officials, it would not be unusual for a national security adviser to try to understand what it is this foreign government is trying to do to manipulate their position against the U.S.,” said Nada Bakos, a former CIA analyst and national-security commentator. “That’s how the game is played.”
Here’s a WaPo piece that tries to strike a balance between the defense of Rice and the outrage at Rice.
Rice has not commented on the report. It would likely be legal for Rice to request the unmasking—“The standard for senior officials to learn the names of U.S. persons incidentally collected is that it must have some foreign intelligence value, a standard that can apply to almost anything,” Lake notes.
As Lake notes, nothing he—or anyone else—has uncovered lends credence to President Trump’s outlandish and unsupported claim that Obama ordered surveillance of him at Trump Tower prior to the election. Nor does the new story suggest any illegal behavior on Rice’s part. As with each step in the story, this one offers only a small sliver of information. Many experts seem to think the Bloomberg View story does not imply anything improper or unusual. Others withheld judgment, saying there’s simply not enough information to judge.
“In a situation where there’s incidental collection and it appears that they’re discussing U.S. incoming or current officials, it would not be unusual for a national security adviser to try to understand what it is this foreign government is trying to do to manipulate their position against the U.S.,” said Nada Bakos, a former CIA analyst and national-security commentator. “That’s how the game is played.”
Here’s a WaPo piece that tries to strike a balance between the defense of Rice and the outrage at Rice.
It is my understanding that the question is about the pattern of her requests for the unmasking timeline is what is causing the biggest concern. It was discovered as an anomaly, not the normal pattern, that these things generate when done. She was in a position where she could legally request unmasking of names and I understand the law on this. If what she got was what was disseminated to all those other agencies before Obama left, than yeah, she got huge explaining to do about it and the anomaly of requests.
I remember when Susan Rice said she didn’t know anything about the unmasking … LOL
God I hope this is the end for Papa Bear.
In the end, it is only money, that speaks the loudest in most situations.
😦
Irony broke a few weeks back. Anyone know when they plan to get it up and running again?
^ I believe that is handled by FOIA?
😉
Talk about an empty gesture. And also not a charity.
President Trump has donated his salary from his first few months in office to the National Park Service, making good on a campaign pledge to forego a presidential paycheck.
His gift represents a small fraction, however, of the money the Park Service stands to lose if Trump’s budget were adopted.
Instead of collecting a salary of $400,000 a year, Trump has volunteered to donate that money to charity. He chose the Park Service as the beneficiary of his first installment, $78,333, which covers the first ten weeks Trump was in office.
Zinke hinted, however, that the president’s gift won’t go very far.
“We’re about $229 million behind in deferred maintenance on our battlefields alone,” he said.
Trump is proposing deep cuts to the Interior Department, which includes the Park Service. The president’s budget proposal for the coming fiscal year would trim $1.5 billion or 12 percent from the department’s budget. Ultimately, it’s up to Congress to determine how much money the department can spend.
Conservationists denounced Trump’s donation as a “publicity stunt.”
“If Donald Trump is actually interested in helping our parks, he should stop trying to slash their budgets to historically low levels,” said Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club. “America’s parks, and the people and economies they support, need real funding, not a giant fake check. Parks are a good investment and we must invest now if we want them to be around for our kids,” Brune added.
KDK1 to KDK12…I’m sorry, Mrs. Torrance, due to budget cuts, we regretfully don’t have the funds to come up and rescue you from your crazy axe wielding husband. We recommend finding a secure location in the hotel, and locking yourself in until spring. Over and out.
Where were you in '77?
Talk about an empty gesture. And also not a charity.
President Trump has donated his salary from his first few months in office to the National Park Service, making good on a campaign pledge to forego a presidential paycheck.
His gift represents a small fraction, however, of the money the Park Service stands to lose if Trump’s budget were adopted.
Instead of collecting a salary of $400,000 a year, Trump has volunteered to donate that money to charity. He chose the Park Service as the beneficiary of his first installment, $78,333, which covers the first ten weeks Trump was in office.
Zinke hinted, however, that the president’s gift won’t go very far.
“We’re about $229 million behind in deferred maintenance on our battlefields alone,” he said.
Trump is proposing deep cuts to the Interior Department, which includes the Park Service. The president’s budget proposal for the coming fiscal year would trim $1.5 billion or 12 percent from the department’s budget. Ultimately, it’s up to Congress to determine how much money the department can spend.
Conservationists denounced Trump’s donation as a “publicity stunt.”
“If Donald Trump is actually interested in helping our parks, he should stop trying to slash their budgets to historically low levels,” said Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club. “America’s parks, and the people and economies they support, need real funding, not a giant fake check. Parks are a good investment and we must invest now if we want them to be around for our kids,” Brune added.
KDK1 to KDK12…I’m sorry, Mrs. Torrance, due to budget cuts, we regretfully don’t have the funds to come up and rescue you from your crazy axe wielding husband. We recommend finding a secure location in the hotel, and locking yourself in until spring. Over and out.
I was thinking about this exact scene when I saw the original post.
Carrying a conversation over here from the admirable drug advocacy thread.
I’d just like to point how tone deaf Frink is on one of the most important social topics of the day, despite his neverending propaganda here.
Keep fighting the good fight, Frink!
Tone deaf? I just like Neglify and dislike you. Drugs have zero to do with it, just like Politics have nothing to do with it.
It is fun to watch you flailing around, though.
So you spam the politics thread with dozens of nonsense propaganda articles a day, for what reason? You want to make the world a better place? You want to direct your anti-Trump hatred at whom exactly? You want to feel important?
But then on one of the biggest political issues of the day, you throw that faux altruism out the window, to score some points with the ratpack for what, a petty grudge?
Be a man for once in your life, Frink.