Salem State Preschool: Fill & Download for Free

I've only traveled to both cities, although my sister lived in Seattle for a time and raised her daughter there during the preschool years. I have, however, lived in Quebec while attending university there, so I know something about living in Canada. I also live in a foreign country right now (Mexico).While both cities are great, my vote would be for Vancouver. It's a bit more cosmopolitan than Seattle, and I love the little microclimates there--boreal pine forest on one side of Stanley Park, palm trees on the other. I also find Canada to be cleaner, safer, and more staid than the US, in general. I believe the education system to be better too.The cost of living may somewhat depend on the value of the Canadian dollar, which will fluctuate in relation to the US dollar and other currencies. Are you getting paid in US dollars? If so, right now $500 US will get you about $685 Canadian. That sounds great, as long as Canada doesn't raise its prices to compensate for the exchange rate. So, you're not really making the same money. When I first moved to Mexico, I could only get about 10 pesos for an American dollar. Now I can get more than 18. I'm self-employed, paid in US dollars, and my money goes a lot further than it did a few years ago. It could go the other way too, and you could wind up losing money.While certain things may be more expensive in Canada compared to the US, I think you'll find that Canada is a bit less driven by consumerism than the States. This is something to think about when raising kids. Not only will it save you money, it will give them a better sense of appreciation for things in the long run.

I think the context missing is as to how universities are supposed to operate.I’ve researched the idea of protest as it regards to university campuses as they regarded some protesters against various speakers and regarding the infamous UC Davis pepper spray incident. I’ve found that universities have some pretty specific language regarding how their facilities can be used and who is allowed to do things.Let’s look at the claims offered through the two fliers offered by Fox[1]:The first one details a tweet from the account of one Nancy Salem. She was a preschool teacher who wrote some pretty horrendous stuff about which she should be ashamed (and about which she has claimed she is ashamed). First, she did say, “How many Jews died in the Holocaust? Not enough.” Second, she tweeted, “Kiss the Palestine ground for me and kill some jews” [sic]. This last was apparently to a friend going on a trip to the Middle East.[2] One issue is that Nancy Salem didn’t attend the University of Texas but was instead, “involved in the school's chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine” (per some watchdog group).[3] So the label at the top off the left-hand item isn’t strictly speaking accurate. We also don’t know what “involved in” means.What we then have here is that one poster stakes a claim that may not be strictly accurate. Was Salem a member? Was she involved? That remains unclear, but that slice of ambiguity is missing from Fox’s statement. If she wasn’t (and again, there isn’t much evidence that she was), then painting the school group with the same brush as someone who writes hate speech isn’t the right thing to do.As for the item on the right, there isn’t a lot of data there to support the contention that Hamas created the SJP. We don’t know how direct the link there is simply from reading this poster.The next issue is that there are laws regarding what can be disseminated, even at a university campus. There certainly isn’t an absolute right to freedom of speech, especially not for people who aren’t students, faculty, or in any other way related to the facility. Without knowing exactly what the university’s policies are, I can’t really comment on whether they were violating anyone’s first amendment rights.If the David Horowitz Freedom Center is inaccurate in its statements, they may be guilty of violating some hate-speech ordinance.If they aren’t connected, they are completely disconnected and may then not be allowed to post fliers.It may be that they posted the fliers in such a way or place that no one (connected or not) is allowed to post.Without more background, we can’t say what is going on.Regardless, I don’t think that a university (especially one in Texas) would be complicit in protecting antisemitic organizations. I’m not going to state this as an absolute fact, but I would be very surprised.Footnotes[1] Conservative group claims university banned them for fliers allegedly exposing anti-Semitism on campus[2] Arlington preschool teacher fired over 'Kill some Jews' tweet, other anti-Semitic posts[3] Arlington preschool teacher fired over 'Kill some Jews' tweet, other anti-Semitic posts

I would dispute the premise of the question; this is not an “either/or” kind of situation—it is far more nuanced that people are willing to admit.I don’t think either of them were intentionally misleading anyone and I think both are victims of a politicized hearing run amok.The Kavanaugh hearings should serve as a warning to us that it is time to get our society back to a civil discourse. Honestly, I wonder if it is possible at this point.Could we actually descend so far that when one party manages to secure control of the Congress and the Presidency we simply impeach every judge that was chosen by the other party? I hear people actually talking that way and it is utter nonsense.The next hearing on a Supreme Court candidate needs to present clear deadlines for presentation of allegations after which they are not heard. In my opinion, Dr. Ford was victimized by those who alleged they were trying to help her. Heavens, who leaked the letter?Do we really intend to disqualify anyone from public service if they draw any type of serious allegation based on conduct when they were a juvenile? Last I checked, juvenile records are still sealed in recognition that the decision-making capacity of young brains aren’t fully developed. Should such an allegation erase a distinguished record of service. It is appropriate to put the burden on the candidate to prove innocence? Likewise, must an accuser be made to testify in public? Should there be a statute of limitations applicable to Senate Confirmation Hearings?I find it appalling that a record of 12 years of flawless judicial demeanor is being revisited by the ABA simply because a man accused of the most disgusting conduct fights back. Frankly, I think I prefer a Supreme Court Justice who knows what it means to be falsely accused and not believed by those who should know better. See, American Bar Association Gives Kavanaugh Unanimous ‘Well-Qualified’ Rating | National ReviewMemory is not as perfect as we think. Many of our favorite memories bear little if any relationship to actual events—memory is changed a tiny bit each time something is recalled. See Donald Trump’s attack on Christine Blasey Ford’s memory is cruel — and wrongThis is why we have a criminal justice system with complex and often confusing rules of evidence. We have learned over years that you don’t just take accusations at face value. The way this hearing went, we are headed right back to the Salem witch trials - WikipediaAsk yourself why people are doing jail time because they confess to a crime they didn’t commit. Police can be so insistent and forceful that people in the heat of a nine-hour ordeal actually come to believe that they must be guilty and they confess just to end the interview.Hopefully, we learn from this. There was no excuse for sitting on these accusations until the committee was close to a vote; that was pure politics and nobody can convince me that such a move was kind to Dr. Ford. And, after the verdict was rendered, watching people banging on the doors of the Supreme Court was awfully close to seeing a mob of people with pitchforks and torches. Look, the system operated Constitutionally—sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. We lost Robert Bork, who would have made a fine justice, why? Because the opposition decided he was unfit and they got the votes on their side. Robert Bork - WikipediaWe need to learn how to disagree with each other without being disagreeable. The Senate should be an example of compromise, but somehow we have this false notion that if someone from one party actually agrees with something said by the other that they are traitorous.We need to buttress the presumption of innocence. Historical wrongs and injustices visited upon people are not avenged or atoned for by taking every accusation at face value. We would all do well to revisit history and find out why we have a presumption of innocence.What we are creating now is the medieval Trial by ordeal - Wikipedia If the candidate sinks and drowns, well, then they were innocent. If they survive, they must be guilty.Consider the McMartin preschool hearings. Kids being abused in satanic rituals—tunnels from buildings to buildings—innocent children being coaxed by questionable psychological methodology into making allegations that offended any right-thinking person. In hindsight, the entire thing was a farce begun by a paranoid schizophrenic mother and propelled by a psychologist who was later determined to have actually planted memories of sexual abuse in the minds of these children. Supporting evidence came from criminals who were trading false testimony for favorable custodial changes. McMartin preschool trial - WikipediaYears later, Peggy McMartin’s teaching credentials were restored and she was exonerated of any wrongdoing. Her husband Ray did five years in jail despite never being convicted—after two juries could not reach a verdict, charges were dismissed.The McMartin case was the longest and most expensive trial in United States History—and, it appears, we haven’t learned a thing from it.I’m hoping that we learn from the Kavanaugh hearings.We all have our biases—I’m glad Justice Kavanaugh made it through.