Discussion:
Why Guitar is not taught in schools
(too old to reply)
e***@yahoo.com
2008-03-27 19:50:45 UTC
Permalink
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.

I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.

But guitar is another matter. I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical". Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.

Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?

Ed S.
ktaylor
2008-03-27 20:08:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter. I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical". Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
1) Instructional ignorance.
2) Curricular absence.
3) It is thought to be a solo instrument (that is why piano is rarely
taught).
4) Resistance by band instructors.
5) Lack of qualified, literate guitar teachers in the schools.
6) No acceptable ensemble repertoire.

I suppose I could think of a few more reasons. But I have to go teach,
now.

Kevin Taylor
www.childbloom.com
Steve Freides
2008-03-27 20:27:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by ktaylor
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter. I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical". Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
1) Instructional ignorance.
2) Curricular absence.
3) It is thought to be a solo instrument (that is why piano is rarely
taught).
4) Resistance by band instructors.
5) Lack of qualified, literate guitar teachers in the schools.
6) No acceptable ensemble repertoire.
I suppose I could think of a few more reasons. But I have to go teach,
now.
Kevin Taylor
www.childbloom.com
A lot of school instruction is group instruction, and it's much harder
to teach polyphonic instruments in a group setting (also another reason
piano isn't taught in schools). At least in my town here in NJ, when
you play an instrument, you go to both ensemble rehearsal and small
group lessons, the latter possibly including more than one instruments,
e.g., all the winds or all the brasses.

And, of course, what Kevin says is true - it's outside the mainstream
and there aren't, e.g., guitar parts in school arrangements, although
there could easily be.

-S-
t***@lycos.com
2008-03-28 18:34:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Freides
Post by ktaylor
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter.  I'm thinking it's because all the
other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical".  Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
1) Instructional ignorance.
2) Curricular absence.
3) It is thought to be a solo instrument (that is why piano is rarely
taught).
4) Resistance by band instructors.
5) Lack of qualified, literate guitar teachers in the schools.
6) No acceptable ensemble repertoire.
I suppose I could think of a few more reasons. But I have to go teach,
now.
Kevin Taylor
www.childbloom.com
A lot of school instruction is group instruction, and it's much harder
to teach polyphonic instruments in a group setting (also another reason
piano isn't taught in schools).  At least in my town here in NJ, when
you play an instrument, you go to both ensemble rehearsal and small
group lessons, the latter possibly including more than one instruments,
e.g., all the winds or all the brasses.
And, of course, what Kevin says is true - it's outside the mainstream
and there aren't, e.g., guitar parts in school arrangements, although
there could easily be.
-S-- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Outside the mainstream? It IS the fucking mainstream you idiot!

Troy Donaghue III
e***@yahoo.com
2008-03-28 19:23:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Freides
Post by ktaylor
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter.  I'm thinking it's because all the
other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical".  Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
1) Instructional ignorance.
2) Curricular absence.
3) It is thought to be a solo instrument (that is why piano is rarely
taught).
4) Resistance by band instructors.
5) Lack of qualified, literate guitar teachers in the schools.
6) No acceptable ensemble repertoire.
I suppose I could think of a few more reasons. But I have to go teach,
now.
Kevin Taylor
www.childbloom.com
A lot of school instruction is group instruction, and it's much harder
to teach polyphonic instruments in a group setting (also another reason
piano isn't taught in schools).  At least in my town here in NJ, when
you play an instrument, you go to both ensemble rehearsal and small
group lessons, the latter possibly including more than one instruments,
e.g., all the winds or all the brasses.
And, of course, what Kevin says is true - it's outside the mainstream
and there aren't, e.g., guitar parts in school arrangements, although
there could easily be.
-S-- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Outside the mainstream?  It IS the fucking mainstream you idiot!
Troy Donaghue III- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
cue the music from Jaws...
Steve Freides
2008-03-29 23:32:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Freides
Post by ktaylor
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind
instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter. I'm thinking it's because all the
other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical". Guitar
has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
1) Instructional ignorance.
2) Curricular absence.
3) It is thought to be a solo instrument (that is why piano is rarely
taught).
4) Resistance by band instructors.
5) Lack of qualified, literate guitar teachers in the schools.
6) No acceptable ensemble repertoire.
I suppose I could think of a few more reasons. But I have to go teach,
now.
Kevin Taylor
www.childbloom.com
A lot of school instruction is group instruction, and it's much harder
to teach polyphonic instruments in a group setting (also another reason
piano isn't taught in schools). At least in my town here in NJ, when
you play an instrument, you go to both ensemble rehearsal and small
group lessons, the latter possibly including more than one
instruments,
e.g., all the winds or all the brasses.
And, of course, what Kevin says is true - it's outside the
mainstream
and there aren't, e.g., guitar parts in school arrangements,
although
there could easily be.
-S-- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Outside the mainstream? It IS the fucking mainstream you idiot!
Troy Donaghue III- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
cue the music from Jaws...

Perhaps I should have said outside the mainstream of what's been done in
schools for the last umpteen years. I thought that was clear from the
context but obviously not to some.

-S-
Learnwell
2008-03-30 01:22:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve Freides
A lot of school instruction is group instruction, and it's much harder
to teach polyphonic instruments in a group setting
Not at all, it is done successfully all of the time.
Post by Steve Freides
And, of course, what Kevin says is true - it's outside the mainstream
The double edged sword here is that the guitar is the single most
popular instrument among young people. what an opportunity to attract
young people to art music and through the use of the gutar is a
'classical' setting. The potential is amazing.
ktaylor
2008-03-30 03:57:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Learnwell
Post by Steve Freides
A lot of school instruction is group instruction, and it's much harder
to teach polyphonic instruments in a group setting
Not at all, it is done successfully all of the time.
I agree. I've seen it. I've done it. But I've also seen it done not
very successfully. And I've not done it successfully before, also. And
I've also seen situations where the teachers claimed it was successful
but I would not have the same perception.
Post by Learnwell
Post by Steve Freides
And, of course, what Kevin says is true - it's outside the mainstream
The double edged sword here is that the guitar is the single most
popular instrument among young people. what an opportunity to attract
young people to art music and through the use of the gutar is a
'classical' setting. The potential is amazing.
Agreed the potential is amazing, for the reasons you state. But it is
not true that the guitar is the single most popular instrument among
young people. We've done at least 4 surveys to that end (as well as
NAMM) and none say guitar is the instrument most preferenced to play.

Kevin Taylor, Pres.
Childbloom Inc.
h***@verizon.net
2008-03-30 04:08:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by ktaylor
Post by Learnwell
Post by Steve Freides
A lot of school instruction is group instruction, and it's much harder
to teach polyphonic instruments in a group setting
Not at all, it is done successfully all of the time.
I agree. I've seen it. I've done it. But I've also seen it done not
very successfully. And I've not done it successfully before, also. And
I've also seen situations where the teachers claimed it was successful
but I would not have the same perception.
Post by Learnwell
Post by Steve Freides
And, of course, what Kevin says is true - it's outside the mainstream
The double edged sword here is that the guitar is the single most
popular instrument among young people. what an opportunity to attract
young people to art music and through the use of the gutar is a
'classical' setting. The potential is amazing.
Agreed the potential is amazing, for the reasons you state. But it is
not true that the guitar is the single most popular instrument among
young people. We've done at least 4 surveys to that end (as well as
NAMM) and none say guitar is the instrument most preferenced to play.
Kevin Taylor, Pres.
Childbloom Inc.
An interesting survey! What is the most preferred instrument for
those surveyed to play?

Seth
ktaylor
2008-03-30 15:06:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by h***@verizon.net
Post by ktaylor
Post by Learnwell
Post by Steve Freides
A lot of school instruction is group instruction, and it's much harder
to teach polyphonic instruments in a group setting
Not at all, it is done successfully all of the time.
I agree. I've seen it. I've done it. But I've also seen it done not
very successfully. And I've not done it successfully before, also. And
I've also seen situations where the teachers claimed it was successful
but I would not have the same perception.
Post by Learnwell
Post by Steve Freides
And, of course, what Kevin says is true - it's outside the mainstream
The double edged sword here is that the guitar is the single most
popular instrument among young people. what an opportunity to attract
young people to art music and through the use of the gutar is a
'classical' setting. The potential is amazing.
Agreed the potential is amazing, for the reasons you state. But it is
not true that the guitar is the single most popular instrument among
young people. We've done at least 4 surveys to that end (as well as
NAMM) and none say guitar is the instrument most preferenced to play.
Kevin Taylor, Pres.
Childbloom Inc.
An interesting survey! What is the most preferred instrument for
those surveyed to play?
Seth
Namm had surveyed teenagers in the 80's. The Childbloom Co. has done
four. Piano, everytime.

Kevin

KT
l***@deack.net
2008-03-30 15:44:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by ktaylor
Namm had surveyed teenagers in the 80's. The Childbloom Co. has done
four. Piano, everytime.
Kevin
How many self taught piano compared to self taught guitar?

I bet the survey results for the general public would differ from
any surveys of people who have had lessons. I also bet more people
read notes on piano than on guitar and fewer play piano by ear than
play by notes.
ktaylor
2008-03-30 16:03:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@deack.net
Post by ktaylor
Namm had surveyed teenagers in the 80's. The Childbloom Co. has done
four. Piano, everytime.
Kevin
How many self taught piano compared to self taught guitar?
I bet the survey results for the general public would differ from
any surveys of people who have had lessons. I also bet more people
read notes on piano than on guitar and fewer play piano by ear than
play by notes.
All these were preference surveys - not actual playing surveys.

Surveys are expensive to produce. Some say the knowledge gained is
valueless. I don't believe so.
Two of ours were random phone surveys to adults. Two were with large
universes of children grades 1-5.
Very interesting results - all within 2% of each other. No good piano
teacher should be out of work.

Kevin T.
l***@deack.net
2008-03-30 04:26:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by ktaylor
Agreed the potential is amazing,
The potential in most people is amazing. The reasons so many never
fall in love with learning are not trivial.

Currently the California public school systems are planing cutbacks
to art and music programs. My local school system set aside enough to
cover the next year but if it goes two years as most expect I think
you are going to have some unemployed band teachers around here soon
along with a lot of other teachers.
Miguel de Maria
2008-03-30 17:09:36 UTC
Permalink
One could say that modern American society constitutes a huge
conspiracy against mastery. Every bit of marketing portrays a world
where enjoyment comes from sliding a debit card through the slot, and
then the wonderful music plays and all is well. Mass entertainment
cuts away from the work, the study, the patient and satisfying journey
toward skill, so all we see is the before and after. Stimulation from
many sources teaches us to tune out our senses, resulting in
instrumentalists unaware of their fingers and musicians not attuned to
their ears! The Western cult of talent tells Romantic tales of the
genius, ignoring the idea that perhaps the common schmo could achieve
something near genius if he applied himself. After all, if he wasted
his time practicing, when would he have time to watch 3 hours TV after
his 2 hour commute from 8 hours of pretending to work with Classic
Rock playing nearly inaudibly over the background of clicking
keyboards and inane phone conversations?
   The potential in most people is amazing. The reasons so many never
fall in love with learning are not trivial.
l***@deack.net
2008-03-30 17:50:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Miguel de Maria
One could say that modern American society constitutes a huge
conspiracy against mastery.
It's not just American society. There are other cultures that really
struggle with eucation.
Post by Miguel de Maria
 Every bit of marketing portrays a world
where enjoyment comes from sliding a debit card through the slot, and
then the wonderful music plays and all is well.  Mass entertainment
cuts away from the work, the study, the patient and satisfying journey
toward skill, so all we see is the before and after.  Stimulation from
many sources teaches us to tune out our senses, resulting in
instrumentalists unaware of their fingers and musicians not attuned to
their ears!  The Western cult of talent tells Romantic tales of the
genius, ignoring the idea that perhaps the common schmo could achieve
something near genius if he applied himself.  After all, if he wasted
his time practicing, when would he have time to watch 3 hours TV after
his 2 hour commute from 8 hours of pretending to work with Classic
Rock playing nearly inaudibly over the background of clicking
keyboards and inane phone conversations?
None of his helps but there seems to be more to it than that since
it's not just a US problem.

Recording arts seem to have really reduced the number of people who
play musical instruments. Very few teachers these days play a musical
instrument. It's depressing to see so many school programs using
recorded music for plays and musicals.
ktaylor
2008-03-30 17:54:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Miguel de Maria
One could say that modern American society constitutes a huge
conspiracy against mastery. Every bit of marketing portrays a world
where enjoyment comes from sliding a debit card through the slot, and
then the wonderful music plays and all is well. Mass entertainment
cuts away from the work, the study, the patient and satisfying journey
toward skill, so all we see is the before and after. Stimulation from
many sources teaches us to tune out our senses, resulting in
instrumentalists unaware of their fingers and musicians not attuned to
their ears! The Western cult of talent tells Romantic tales of the
genius, ignoring the idea that perhaps the common schmo could achieve
something near genius if he applied himself. After all, if he wasted
his time practicing, when would he have time to watch 3 hours TV after
his 2 hour commute from 8 hours of pretending to work with Classic
Rock playing nearly inaudibly over the background of clicking
keyboards and inane phone conversations?
� �The potential in most people is amazing. The reasons so many never
fall in love with learning are not trivial.
Check out the number of "Guitar Hero" units were sold last year.

When I was in college I studied cultures that did not acknowledge in
their non-religious language the connection between intercourse and
pregnancy.
There is a similar ignorance (of what you speak) between craftmanship
or artistry and effort. This does not bode well for our culture. It is
a necessary challenge for all parents to raise their children with a
realistic attitude of praexeology. As an educator, the will towards
work is what we try to grow. We often fight the culture.

Kevin T.

Kevin T.

Lare
2008-03-27 20:40:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by ktaylor
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter. I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical". Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
1) Instructional ignorance.
2) Curricular absence.
3) It is thought to be a solo instrument (that is why piano is rarely
taught).
4) Resistance by band instructors.
5) Lack of qualified, literate guitar teachers in the schools.
6) No acceptable ensemble repertoire.
I suppose I could think of a few more reasons. But I have to go teach,
now.
Kevin Taylor
www.childbloom.com
Let me add that the guitar...

1) has an adolescent pedagogy, and our collective results are historically
poor. There is much recent improvement, though.
2) has a lack of respect or recognition for the instrument's repertoire.
Most department chairs have no idea that the guitar has a concert and
chamber music history because it is documented/discussed in any classroom
music history texts, such as Grout-Palisca or Stolba.
3) has a "tavern house reputation". If the pipe-organ is the "King of
Instruments", and violin "The Queen", then the guitar is certainly the
"cheap, drunk carnival strumpet" (maybe this is why I'm attracted to it).

Back to practice...
Larry McDonald
Learnwell
2008-03-30 01:25:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lare
1) has an adolescent pedagogy, and our collective results are historically
poor. There is much recent improvement, though.
Yep, but there the iron is hot, the time is right, and the resources
and enough established programs are out there to get anyone with a
guitar degree who also understands how to teach going.
Post by Lare
2) has a lack of respect or recognition for the instrument's repertoire.
Most department chairs have no idea that the guitar has a concert and
chamber music history
right on, advocacy is needed.
Tommy Grand
2008-03-27 21:07:20 UTC
Permalink
But I have to go teach, now.
I hope your not teaching punctuation!
Learnwell
2008-03-30 01:20:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by ktaylor
1) Instructional ignorance.
By both administrators and teachers
Post by ktaylor
2) Curricular absence.
due, in part, to ignorance
Post by ktaylor
3) It is thought to be a solo instrument (that is why piano is rarely
taught).
Ton's of ensemble rep for the industrious educated teacher
Post by ktaylor
4) Resistance by band instructors.
funny thing here is that many of the pre-college guitar 'teachers' are
band instructors. Are you aware that there is a very successful
program that takes existing band directors, give them a one week (that
is right, one week) workshop and sends them back to their schools as
certified to start a guitar program. Nowhere else would we accept this
from another instrument or subject. The best argument anyone has made
to me is that band and orchestra enrollment is down so that the
addition of these 'classes' attract more studnets and save director's
bacon. The loser is the guitar and those students in those programs.
Post by ktaylor
5) Lack of qualified, literate guitar teachers in the schools.
but they are out there waiting to be hired, see 1 and 2
Post by ktaylor
6) No acceptable ensemble repertoire.
There is an abundance of acceptable ensemble repertoire. I own a lot
of it.
ktaylor
2008-03-30 03:52:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Learnwell
Ton's of ensemble rep for the industrious educated teacher
There is much in a disparate sense. But there is no curriculum in the
sense that a teacher can teach a large class of varied skilled
guitarists and have a developmentally sound system. Typically the
teachers must individually construct the curriculum and that means
that the many decisions that go into that are as varied as the
individual teachers. It becomes a continual process of curriculum
development. This means that the teacher cannot be a novice guitarist,
nor a novice educator since so many decisions are a function of an
understanding of their student's capabilities. This is not the case
with band instruction. IOW the guitar has a disadvantage because it
lacks a history in that context. It will take time for that history to
accumulate.
Post by Learnwell
Post by ktaylor
4) Resistance by band instructors.
funny thing here is that many of the pre-college guitar 'teachers' are
band instructors. Are you aware that there is a very successful
program that takes existing band directors, give them a one week (that
is right, one week) workshop and sends them back to their schools as
certified to start a guitar program. Nowhere else would we accept this
from another instrument or subject. The best argument anyone has made
to me is that band and orchestra enrollment is down so that the
addition of these 'classes' attract more studnets and save director's
bacon. The loser is the guitar and those students in those programs.
You are referring to the Hal Leonard course. Other than in the
Northeast, I did not think that had any significance. If it becomes
significant, it will likely be challenged by Mel Bay, Publ. if not
others as a breach of the Lanham act.
Post by Learnwell
but they are out there waiting to be hired, see 1 and 2
Post by ktaylor
6) No acceptable ensemble repertoire.
There is an abundance of acceptable ensemble repertoire. I own a lot
of it.
(See above).

I like your optimism, though.

Kevin Taylor
Lutemann
2008-03-30 15:38:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Learnwell
Ton's of ensemble rep for the industrious educated teacher
There is much in a disparate sense. But �there is no curriculum in the
sense that a teacher can teach a large class of varied skilled
guitarists and have a developmentally sound system. Typically the
teachers must individually construct the curriculum and that means
that the many decisions that go into that are as varied as the
individual teachers. It becomes a continual process of curriculum
development. This means that the teacher cannot be a novice guitarist,
nor a novice educator since so many decisions are a function of an
understanding of their student's capabilities. This is not the case
with band instruction. IOW the guitar has a disadvantage because it
lacks a history in that context. It will take time for that history to
accumulate.
Post by Learnwell
Post by ktaylor
4) Resistance by band instructors.
funny thing here is that many of the pre-college guitar 'teachers' are
band instructors. Are you aware that there is a very successful
program that takes existing band directors, give them a one week (that
is right, one week) workshop and sends them back to their schools as
certified to start a guitar program. Nowhere else would we accept this
from another instrument or subject. The best argument anyone has made
to me is that band and orchestra enrollment is down so that the
addition of these 'classes' attract more studnets and save director's
bacon. The loser is the guitar and those students in those programs.
You are referring to the Hal Leonard course. Other than in the
Northeast, I did not think that had any significance. If it becomes
significant, it will likely be challenged by Mel Bay, Publ. if not
others as a breach of the Lanham act.
Post by Learnwell
�but they are out there waiting to be hired, see 1 and 2
Post by ktaylor
6) No acceptable ensemble repertoire.
There is an abundance of acceptable ensemble repertoire. I own a lot
of it.
(See above).
I like your optimism, though.
Kevin Taylor
Post by Learnwell
Post by ktaylor
Post by ktaylor
But there is no curriculum in the
sense that a teacher can teach a large class of varied skilled
guitarists and have a developmentally sound system. >>>>

I have a nice system for class guitar that takes into account all
levels of players, but this is for the 12 and older crowd. Usually,
the more guitar they know before they start the class, the slower the
progress. I start out with my Book 1 (I think you have that , Kevin)
where the students play in unison and I play the 2nd part. Then I work
into ensemble pieces where the parts are at different levels of
difficulty. Since we meet everyday, I tell them not to play outside of
class for the first 6 weeks or so. This allows me to control the
technical side. At the end of the semester we give a concert.

I start each session from the beginning ever time. They form a semi-
circle and I inspect the positioning, correcting things as I walk
around. Then everyone plays P-stroke on the 3rd string, and I do the
same thing. Rest stroke crossing, free stroke crossing, pim arpeggio,
etc. I work them like a drill sergeant and they never play a note
unless I give the order. It works.
ktaylor
2008-03-30 15:57:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lutemann
I have a nice system for class guitar that takes into account all
levels of players, but this is for the 12 and older crowd. Usually,
the more guitar they know before they start the class, the slower the
progress. I start out with my Book 1 (I think you have that , Kevin)
where the students play in unison and I play the 2nd part.
I don't know why you think I have that. I do not.

Kevin
Lutemann
2008-03-30 16:48:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by ktaylor
Post by Lutemann
I have a nice system for class guitar that takes into account all
levels of players, but this is for the 12 and older crowd.   Usually,
the more guitar they know before they start the class, the slower the
progress. I start out with my Book 1 (I think you have that , Kevin)
where the students play in unison and I play the 2nd part.
I don't know why you think I have that. I do not.
 Kevin
For a few weeks I offered it to anyone for free. I thought you got
one. It's very much like the first 40 or so pages of the Shearer Vol
2 excpt it goes slower, Also, I don't use eighth notes. That comes in
the 2nd book.
dofrenzy
2008-03-27 20:34:18 UTC
Permalink
The reasons why we don't see more guitar taught might be related to
the reasons why the other instruments ARE taught. I imagine it's much
easier for a child to play one note at a time.

Most instruments that are taught also have relatively fixed hand
positions. Much easier for a child to adapt to.

Other instruments fit better into an ensemble. This provides a bit of
socialization. In an ensemble setting, children also learn to play
with others (something guitarists are notorious for being unable to
do).

Most school instruments will fit in a locker and are easy to transport
on a school bus.

All of these reasons and more add up to arguments against the guitar
in a typical school setting. What we can hope is that a child's
*music* education is strong enough to be applied to another
instrument, such as the guitar, in a different setting.

Also, guitars need frequent tuning. And they need new strings all the
time. High maintenance! Unlike a flute, sax, clarinet, trumpet,
etc. For the most part, with typical school instruments, it's just
assemble and play.
dsi1
2008-03-27 21:11:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter. I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical". Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
Band in school is mostly about playing music as a group while the
guitar's great fault is that it's a great solo platform. There's no
point in teaching the guitar at school if it does not fit in a band
environment. A kid could try out for that one spot for electric guitar
player in the jazz band. Most of the guitar players that want that spot
will probably end up playing bass. It always ends up that way. :-)

School is also not a place to have kids carrying around guitars - they
might just whip out their axe and start playing. This is disruptive.
Better they carry around clarinets and flutes which they are only likely
to open in the band room.

In my school that does not exist, the kids would be encouraged to bring
their guitars and whip them out and start playing if they felt the need. :-)

david
Learnwell
2008-03-30 01:26:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by dsi1
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter.  I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical".  Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
Band in school is mostly about playing music as a group while the
guitar's great fault is that it's a great solo platform. There's no
point in teaching the guitar at school if it does not fit in a band
environment. A kid could try out for that one spot for electric guitar
player in the jazz band. Most of the guitar players that want that spot
will probably end up playing bass. It always ends up that way. :-)
School is also not a place to have kids carrying around guitars - they
might just whip out their axe and start playing. This is disruptive.
Better they carry around clarinets and flutes which they are only likely
to open in the band room.
In my school that does not exist, the kids would be encouraged to bring
their guitars and whip them out and start playing if they felt the need. :-)
david- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
None of this is reality in schools with academically sound guitar
programs (that exist side by side with choir band band programs,
incidentally).
dsi1
2008-03-30 01:51:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Learnwell
None of this is reality in schools with academically sound guitar
programs (that exist side by side with choir band band programs,
incidentally).
I think that is a good thing.

david
ktaylor
2008-03-30 04:00:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Learnwell
None of this is reality in schools with academically sound guitar
programs (that exist side by side with choir band band programs,
incidentally).
Although I don't know this as a rule, I do know it does exist and a
number of HS teachers have good relations with the band teachers.

KT
Tashi
2008-03-27 22:00:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter.  I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical".  Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools? My son has gone to school here in New Mexico
form 1 through 12 and I don't recall ever hearing about any musical
instrument being taught in public schools here.
I did happen to find him a good guitar teacher, as well as a cello
teacher, but it had nothing to do with the public school system.
MT
all thumbs
2008-03-27 22:06:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tashi
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter. I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical". Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools? My son has gone to school here in New Mexico
form 1 through 12 and I don't recall ever hearing about any musical
instrument being taught in public schools here.
I did happen to find him a good guitar teacher, as well as a cello
teacher, but it had nothing to do with the public school system.
MT
You live in New Mexico. If you lived in the civilized world you would
find schools that devote almost as much money and school real estate
to the music program as they do to the football program.
sycochkn
2008-03-27 22:36:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by all thumbs
Post by Tashi
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter. I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical". Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools? My son has gone to school here in New Mexico
form 1 through 12 and I don't recall ever hearing about any musical
instrument being taught in public schools here.
I did happen to find him a good guitar teacher, as well as a cello
teacher, but it had nothing to do with the public school system.
MT
You live in New Mexico. If you lived in the civilized world you would
find schools that devote almost as much money and school real estate
to the music program as they do to the football program.
The all children left behind program is not helping matters any.

Bob
Lutemann
2008-03-28 12:58:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by all thumbs
Post by Tashi
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter. I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical". Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools? My son has gone to school here in New Mexico
form 1 through 12 and I don't recall ever hearing about any musical
instrument being taught in public schools here.
I did happen to find him a good guitar teacher, as well as a cello
teacher, but it had nothing to do with the public school system.
MT
You live in New Mexico. If you lived in the civilized world you would
find schools that devote almost as much money and school real estate
to the music program as they do to the football program.
Even in Alabama they have have huge music program at the high school
my daughter attends. Two jazz bands, a string program and marching
and concert bands. Arizona is kind of a fascist enclave, so you
wouldn' find much of value there.
Miguel de Maria
2008-03-28 17:00:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lutemann
Post by Tashi
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter.  I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical".  Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?  My son has gone to school here in New Mexico
form 1 through 12 and I don't recall ever hearing about any musical
instrument being taught in public schools here.
  I did happen to find him a good guitar teacher, as well as a cello
teacher, but it had nothing to do with the public school system.
  MT
You live in New Mexico.  If you lived in the civilized world you would
find schools that devote almost as much money and school real estate
to the music program as they do to the football program.
Even in Alabama they have have huge music program at the high school
my daughter attends.  Two jazz bands, a string program and marching
and concert bands.  Arizona is kind of a fascist enclave, so you
wouldn' find much of value there.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Kent,
I just moved to North North Scottsdale.... beautiful place. As we
were moving, getting a bite to eat, I picked up the local newspaper.
It's a weekly, very nice. At the top it reads "The Conservative Voice
of Arizona". Ouch! "We don't like your kind 'round here, pilgrim."

At least it gives me a reason to wear my cowboy hat.
Tashi
2008-03-28 17:13:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lutemann
Post by Tashi
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter.  I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical".  Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?  My son has gone to school here in New Mexico
form 1 through 12 and I don't recall ever hearing about any musical
instrument being taught in public schools here.
  I did happen to find him a good guitar teacher, as well as a cello
teacher, but it had nothing to do with the public school system.
  MT
You live in New Mexico.  If you lived in the civilized world you would
find schools that devote almost as much money and school real estate
to the music program as they do to the football program.
Even in Alabama they have have huge music program at the high school
my daughter attends.  Two jazz bands, a string program and marching
and concert bands.  Arizona is kind of a fascist enclave, so you
wouldn' find much of value there.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Kent,
I just moved to North North Scottsdale.... beautiful place.  As we
were moving, getting a bite to eat, I picked up the local newspaper.
It's a weekly, very nice.  At the top it reads "The Conservative Voice
of Arizona".  Ouch!  "We don't like your kind 'round here, pilgrim."
At least it gives me a reason to wear my cowboy hat.
Miguel, you might want to invest in some cowboy boots too! with
spurs.
MT
Dicerous
2008-03-27 22:57:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tashi
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter. I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical". Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools? My son has gone to school here in New Mexico
form 1 through 12 and I don't recall ever hearing about any musical
instrument being taught in public schools here.
I did happen to find him a good guitar teacher, as well as a cello
teacher, but it had nothing to do with the public school system.
MT
Did you teach him where to buy his pot?


David
Tashi
2008-03-27 23:57:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dicerous
Post by Tashi
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter.  I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical".  Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?  My son has gone to school here in New Mexico
form 1 through 12 and I don't recall ever hearing about any musical
instrument being taught in public schools here.
  I did happen to find him a good guitar teacher, as well as a cello
teacher, but it had nothing to do with the public school system.
  MT
Did you teach him where to buy his pot?
David- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
You and your ilk can't possibly understand the concept of pro-creation
and the difficulties involved. A typical response from an
irresponsible pleasure addict.
MT
Dicerous
2008-03-28 02:27:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tashi
Post by Dicerous
Post by Tashi
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter. I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical". Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools? My son has gone to school here in New Mexico
form 1 through 12 and I don't recall ever hearing about any musical
instrument being taught in public schools here.
I did happen to find him a good guitar teacher, as well as a cello
teacher, but it had nothing to do with the public school system.
MT
Did you teach him where to buy his pot?
David- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
You and your ilk can't possibly understand the concept of pro-creation
and the difficulties involved. A typical response from an
irresponsible pleasure addict.
MT
woah daddy-o don't be so harsh!


David
Tashi
2008-03-28 04:12:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dicerous
Post by Tashi
Post by Dicerous
Post by Tashi
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter.  I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical".  Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?  My son has gone to school here in New Mexico
form 1 through 12 and I don't recall ever hearing about any musical
instrument being taught in public schools here.
  I did happen to find him a good guitar teacher, as well as a cello
teacher, but it had nothing to do with the public school system.
  MT
Did you teach him where to buy his pot?
David- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
You and your ilk can't possibly understand the concept of pro-creation
and the difficulties involved.  A typical response from an
irresponsible pleasure addict.
MT
woah daddy-o don't be so harsh!
David
You know David I'm pretty sick of your derogatory comments about my
son on this forum. You may think your being funny, and cute, but
it's highly disrespectful. Your free to say whatever you like about
me, I could careless. It's obvious you have a lot of problems with
your own father to constantly ridicule me. Take it somewhere else!

MT
Dicerous
2008-03-28 04:24:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tashi
Post by Dicerous
Post by Tashi
Post by Dicerous
Post by Tashi
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter. I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical". Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools? My son has gone to school here in New Mexico
form 1 through 12 and I don't recall ever hearing about any musical
instrument being taught in public schools here.
I did happen to find him a good guitar teacher, as well as a cello
teacher, but it had nothing to do with the public school system.
MT
Did you teach him where to buy his pot?
David- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
You and your ilk can't possibly understand the concept of pro-creation
and the difficulties involved. A typical response from an
irresponsible pleasure addict.
MT
woah daddy-o don't be so harsh!
David
You know David I'm pretty sick of your derogatory comments about my
son on this forum. You may think your being funny, and cute, but
it's highly disrespectful. Your free to say whatever you like about
me, I could careless. It's obvious you have a lot of problems with
your own father to constantly ridicule me. Take it somewhere else!
MT
All my pupils are dilated Mike!


David
Dicerous
2008-03-28 04:27:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dicerous
Post by Tashi
Post by Dicerous
Post by Tashi
Post by Dicerous
Post by Tashi
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter. I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical". Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools? My son has gone to school here in New Mexico
form 1 through 12 and I don't recall ever hearing about any musical
instrument being taught in public schools here.
I did happen to find him a good guitar teacher, as well as a cello
teacher, but it had nothing to do with the public school system.
MT
Did you teach him where to buy his pot?
David- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
You and your ilk can't possibly understand the concept of pro-creation
and the difficulties involved. A typical response from an
irresponsible pleasure addict.
MT
woah daddy-o don't be so harsh!
David
You know David I'm pretty sick of your derogatory comments about my
son on this forum. You may think your being funny, and cute, but
it's highly disrespectful. Your free to say whatever you like about
me, I could careless. It's obvious you have a lot of problems with
your own father to constantly ridicule me. Take it somewhere else!
MT
All my pupils are dilated Mike!
David
< * > < * >
^

0
Dicerous
2008-03-28 04:34:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dicerous
Post by Dicerous
Post by Tashi
Post by Dicerous
Post by Tashi
Post by Dicerous
Post by Tashi
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter. I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical". Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools? My son has gone to school here in New Mexico
form 1 through 12 and I don't recall ever hearing about any musical
instrument being taught in public schools here.
I did happen to find him a good guitar teacher, as well as a cello
teacher, but it had nothing to do with the public school system.
MT
Did you teach him where to buy his pot?
David- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
You and your ilk can't possibly understand the concept of pro-creation
and the difficulties involved. A typical response from an
irresponsible pleasure addict.
MT
woah daddy-o don't be so harsh!
David
You know David I'm pretty sick of your derogatory comments about my
son on this forum. You may think your being funny, and cute, but
it's highly disrespectful. Your free to say whatever you like about
me, I could careless. It's obvious you have a lot of problems with
your own father to constantly ridicule me. Take it somewhere else!
MT
All my pupils are dilated Mike!
David
< * > < * >
^
0
^
/
/
/
your son, wondering why his daddy-o is such a bitch. You know Mike
you spoke awhile back about megalomania...all I can say is that it
takes one to know one. Go to hell.


David
ktaylor
2008-03-27 22:59:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.

Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.

Kevin T.
Tashi
2008-03-27 23:51:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
I'm sure he is. Funny those Republicans Clinton had a nice
surplus, and Bush's absurd war is bankrupting this country, along
with his cronies, and private contractors.
Post by ktaylor
Happily, the federal government does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Everyone knows the republicans want to do away with everything
including NPR and funding of the arts!
I long for the days when the Roman emperors coated the buildings
with marble.... they knew how to set priorities.
MT
Wollybird
2008-03-28 01:38:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons
Lare
2008-03-28 02:55:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons

***********
I pay $6000 a year in property taxes and I still have to pay for my
daughter's private lessons. Paying more taxes doesn't help, Wollybird. Our
large, multi-campus high school doesn't have an orchestra, and we are in one
of the richest per capita districts. Take this from a Wi$con$in resident;
vote your taxes low, Tashi.

But Kevin T. isn't wrong in this. According to NAMM surveys (I'm a member),
entry level band and orchestra instrument sales and rentals are up a healthy
4-6% nation wide in 2007, continuing a steady, multi-year growth cycle.
Apparently, these instruments are going into the hands of new students.
Cool.

More problematical for us is that domestic introductory grade guitar sales
are way, way down. I've heard whispers that sales are off as much as 40% in
3 years. These figures include not only traditional guitar shops, but the
big box sellers like Sam's Club and Costco as well. This could mean that
many fewer kids are starting guitar and/or that the U.S. guitar market is
saturated.

Larry McDonald
Wollybird
2008-03-28 03:25:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons
***********
I pay $6000 a year in property taxes and I still have to pay for my
daughter's private lessons.  Paying more taxes doesn't help, Wollybird.  Our
large, multi-campus high school doesn't have an orchestra, and we are in one
of the richest per capita districts.  Take this from a Wi$con$in resident;
vote your taxes low, Tashi.
But Kevin T. isn't wrong in this.  According to NAMM surveys (I'm a member),
entry level band and orchestra instrument sales and rentals are up a healthy
4-6% nation wide in 2007, continuing a steady, multi-year growth cycle.
Apparently, these instruments are going into the hands of new students.
Cool.
More problematical for us is that domestic introductory grade guitar sales
are way, way down.  I've heard whispers that sales are off as much as 40% in
3 years.  These figures include not only traditional guitar shops, but the
big box sellers like Sam's Club and Costco as well.  This could mean that
many fewer kids are starting guitar and/or that the U.S. guitar market is
saturated.
Larry McDonald
I don't miss the property taxes in Sconie. They are 3 times (on your
average house) what they are in Minnesota, unless you have commercial
property (you do have commercial property, don't you?) Then it can run
a nifty 5% of assesed value. I'm OK with the band programs here for
the average kid. We pay $100 per month for bassoon lessons, which
isn't taught in school, and the kids are fortunate to get voice
lessons at their church, where they sing, from a full time music
director. The tax increase for our community was in part for the music
programs. The local school board was threating to eliminate it.
ktaylor
2008-03-28 04:05:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lare
More problematical for us is that domestic introductory grade guitar sales
are way, way down. I've heard whispers that sales are off as much as 40% in
3 years. These figures include not only traditional guitar shops, but the
big box sellers like Sam's Club and Costco as well. This could mean that
many fewer kids are starting guitar and/or that the U.S. guitar market is
saturated.
Larry McDonald
That's interesting. How do you know this about the decline in guitar
sales? NAMM data?

Have you checked with Strunal Inc? I can usually get the worldwide
scoop from them.

Our teachers had a banner year last year. Generated about 900 new
students and over $1,000,000 in tutiions. I still think there are
about twelve million potential guitar students in the US.
If its saturated, I'm in big trouble.

Kevin T.
Lare
2008-03-28 15:44:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by ktaylor
Post by Lare
More problematical for us is that domestic introductory grade guitar sales
are way, way down. I've heard whispers that sales are off as much as 40% in
3 years. These figures include not only traditional guitar shops, but the
big box sellers like Sam's Club and Costco as well. This could mean that
many fewer kids are starting guitar and/or that the U.S. guitar market is
saturated.
Larry McDonald
That's interesting. How do you know this about the decline in guitar
sales? NAMM data?
Have you checked with Strunal Inc? I can usually get the worldwide
scoop from them.
Our teachers had a banner year last year. Generated about 900 new
students and over $1,000,000 in tutiions. I still think there are
about twelve million potential guitar students in the US.
If its saturated, I'm in big trouble.
Kevin T.
Kevin,

I looked for the trade magazine -Music Merchandise Review, IIRC- that had
this data, but it's gone. I'll have to check further, but yes, this is NAMM
data. I suspect that the 40% figure is conservative because companies hold
sales figures close, especially declining sales figures. But I want to
quote accurately, even if the figures are inaccurate.

I believe we are approaching sales saturation, but not necessarily
lesson-market saturation. People don't throw away old guitars, they pass
them on to their kids, a neighbor, or a garage sale. As hip as the rock and
roll industry is, we still all want to play our grand parents guitars. I
would love to play a '39 Hauser, wouldn't you? So as teachers, I think we
are still safe. We had a great year in our educational department as well.
We have 2400 students in our single location. Sales were up, too,
especially high end instruments like grand pianos and step-up strings. Guys
like Tashi are going to be in great demand, I believe, as the population of
good guitarists expands faster than the rate concert instrument production.

In 2000, the U.S. had 12,500 music stores in the U.S. Now we have a little
over 8,000, and they're dropping fast. I place the blame for this squarely
on the shoulders of the big box retailers, and by extension, the
short-sighted manufacturers. None of these outlets have teaching
departments. They rely on the traditional Ma and pa stores to do their
teaching for them, which builds demand for new instruments. The big boxes
then "bottom-feed" the market. (Here's more scuttlebutt for you, Best Buy
will be opening 100 music instrument departments in their existing stores in
the next year or so). Since the ma and pa stores have lost market share to
the big boxes, these small teaching studios are going away. Marty Albertson
(Guitar Center CEO) gave a speech at NAMM '08 in Anaheim where he discussed
the need for teaching and expanding the market base. I almost puked.

BTW, that's my wife on the cover of the current issue of Music, Inc.
magazine. She is a retired NAMM board member.

Larry McDonald
Miguel de Maria
2008-03-28 05:04:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons
***********
I pay $6000 a year in property taxes and I still have to pay for my
daughter's private lessons.  Paying more taxes doesn't help, Wollybird.  
I would guess he threw out the $5000 he thought it made him look good,
not because of any opinion he holds about taxation.
Wollybird
2008-03-28 11:30:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Miguel de Maria
Post by Wollybird
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons
***********
I pay $6000 a year in property taxes and I still have to pay for my
daughter's private lessons.  Paying more taxes doesn't help, Wollybird.  
I would guess he threw out the $5000 he thought it made him look good,
not because of any opinion he holds about taxation.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
it makes me look average, dumbfuck
Wollybird
2008-03-28 11:38:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Miguel de Maria
Post by Lare
***********
I pay $6000 a year in property taxes and I still have to pay for my
daughter's private lessons.  Paying more taxes doesn't help, Wollybird.  
I would guess he threw out the $5000 he thought it made him look good,
not because of any opinion he holds about taxation.- Hide quoted text -
It makes me look average, oh clueless one. I'd much rater pay taxes to
a local unit of government where I get an up or down vote on the
matter, and get to see the results,or lack of results, btw
Wollybird
2008-03-28 11:51:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Miguel de Maria
Post by Lare
***********
I pay $6000 a year in property taxes and I still have to pay for my
daughter's private lessons.  Paying more taxes doesn't help, Wollybird.  
I would guess he threw out the $5000 he thought it made him look good,
not because of any opinion he holds about taxation.- Hide quoted text -
It makes me look average, oh clueless one. I'd much rather pay taxes
to a local unit of government, btw than to a humongus central
government,. At least I get an up or down vote (sometimes) and I get
to see the results or lack there of, of the spending.
Tashi
2008-03-28 12:57:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Post by Miguel de Maria
Post by Lare
***********
I pay $6000 a year in property taxes and I still have to pay for my
daughter's private lessons.  Paying more taxes doesn't help, Wollybird.  
I would guess he threw out the $5000 he thought it made him look good,
not because of any opinion he holds about taxation.- Hide quoted text -
It makes me look average, oh clueless one. I'd much rather pay taxes
to a local unit of government, btw than to a humongus central
government,. At least I get an up or down vote (sometimes) and I get
to see the results or lack there of, of the spending.
Wollybird why don't you move to the planet Zenion. I heard that the
women there like to have sex with old boring republicans, turned
libertarians, they won't charge you guys, and best of all, there is NO
central government, to speak of.
MT
e***@yahoo.com
2008-03-28 14:20:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by Miguel de Maria
Post by Lare
***********
I pay $6000 a year in property taxes and I still have to pay for my
daughter's private lessons.  Paying more taxes doesn't help, Wollybird.  
I would guess he threw out the $5000 he thought it made him look good,
not because of any opinion he holds about taxation.- Hide quoted text -
It makes me look average, oh clueless one. I'd much rather pay taxes
to a local unit of government, btw than to a humongus central
government,. At least I get an up or down vote (sometimes) and I get
to see the results or lack there of, of the spending.
Wollybird why don't you move to the planet Zenion. I heard that the
women there like to have sex with old boring republicans, turned
libertarians, they won't charge you guys, and best of all, there is NO
central government, to speak of.
  MT
Are you sure he's republican? He doesn't mind paying taxes. ;-)
e***@yahoo.com
2008-03-28 14:19:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Post by Miguel de Maria
Post by Lare
***********
I pay $6000 a year in property taxes and I still have to pay for my
daughter's private lessons.  Paying more taxes doesn't help, Wollybird.  
I would guess he threw out the $5000 he thought it made him look good,
not because of any opinion he holds about taxation.- Hide quoted text -
It makes me look average, oh clueless one. I'd much rather pay taxes
to a local unit of government, btw than to a humongus central
government,. At least I get an up or down vote (sometimes) and I get
to see the results or lack there of, of the spending.
You have a good point there. I don't mind too much of a problem with
the local taxes I pay. The schools are excellent, K - 12. The taxes
we send to the federal government are squandered and we have very
little say.

Ed S.
Tashi
2008-03-28 04:26:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons
Wollybird complain, complain, complain........is that all you guys
know how to do. Poor Wolly one more tax horror story after another,
it brings tears to my eyes.
Your buddy Bush is coming to the rescue and is handing out economic
stimulus bribes. It should keep you guys satisfied for the next four
years. In the meantime please "stop your sobbing" see link
below.......

Wollybird this ones for you......



MT
Wollybird
2008-03-28 11:27:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons
Wollybird complain, complain, complain........is that all you guys
know how to do.  Poor Wolly one more tax horror story after another,
it brings tears to my eyes.
 Your buddy Bush is coming to the rescue and is handing out economic
stimulus bribes.  It should keep you guys satisfied for the next four
years.  In the meantime please "stop your sobbing" see link
below.......
Wollybird this ones for you......
http://youtu.be/1cguXYfVuSg
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, Bush ain't my buddy, some of the shit he does is so liberal, it
would make LBJ blush. You will be sending in a little extra with your
IRS return this year, won't you? Fire up the incense pot and meditate
with your swami on the effect of this on your son:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/bush-big-govt.html
Tashi
2008-03-28 13:12:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons
Wollybird complain, complain, complain........is that all you guys
know how to do.  Poor Wolly one more tax horror story after another,
it brings tears to my eyes.
 Your buddy Bush is coming to the rescue and is handing out economic
stimulus bribes.  It should keep you guys satisfied for the next four
years.  In the meantime please "stop your sobbing" see link
below.......
Wollybird this ones for you......
http://youtu.be/1cguXYfVuSg
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, Bush ain't my buddy, some of the shit he does is so liberal, it
would make LBJ blush. You will be sending in a little extra with your
IRS return this year, won't you? Fire up the incense pot and meditate
with your swami on the effect of this on your son:http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/bush-big-govt.html- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
And you are still waiting until you get to the voteing booth to
deciede? I'll break it down for you Wollybird, Republicans = BIG
government....OK? do you get it now? Or do you exist in a permanent
state of denial? Even when they are trying to convence you that up, is
down, and down is around, try and overcome.

I know it hard for an old republican like you to give, but first try
with some blood, then give a hand full of food to an animal, then a
human....try sponsering school children in a far off land, and the
money your buddies take from you won't hurt so much. Try and enjoy the
simple things in life. That money can't buy.

MT
Wollybird
2008-03-28 13:39:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons
Wollybird complain, complain, complain........is that all you guys
know how to do.  Poor Wolly one more tax horror story after another,
it brings tears to my eyes.
 Your buddy Bush is coming to the rescue and is handing out economic
stimulus bribes.  It should keep you guys satisfied for the next four
years.  In the meantime please "stop your sobbing" see link
below.......
Wollybird this ones for you......
http://youtu.be/1cguXYfVuSg
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, Bush ain't my buddy, some of the shit he does is so liberal, it
would make LBJ blush. You will be sending in a little extra with your
IRS return this year, won't you? Fire up the incense pot and meditate
with your swami on the effect of this on your son:http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/bush-big-govt.html-Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
And you are still waiting until you get to the voteing booth to
deciede?  I'll break it down for you Wollybird, Republicans = BIG
government....OK? do you get it now? Or do you exist in a permanent
state of denial? Even when they are trying to convence you that up, is
down, and down is around, try and overcome.
  I know it hard for an old republican like you to give, but first try
with some blood, then give a hand full of food to an animal, then a
human....try sponsering school children in a far off land, and the
money your buddies take from you won't hurt so much. Try and enjoy the
simple things in life. That money can't buy.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, you comprehend what you read almost as well (but not quite) as
Larry Deak.
Inspire us with tales of your charity.
Tashi
2008-03-28 13:54:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons
Wollybird complain, complain, complain........is that all you guys
know how to do.  Poor Wolly one more tax horror story after another,
it brings tears to my eyes.
 Your buddy Bush is coming to the rescue and is handing out economic
stimulus bribes.  It should keep you guys satisfied for the next four
years.  In the meantime please "stop your sobbing" see link
below.......
Wollybird this ones for you......
http://youtu.be/1cguXYfVuSg
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, Bush ain't my buddy, some of the shit he does is so liberal, it
would make LBJ blush. You will be sending in a little extra with your
IRS return this year, won't you? Fire up the incense pot and meditate
with your swami on the effect of this on your son:http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/bush-big-govt.html-Hidequoted text -
- Show quoted text -
And you are still waiting until you get to the voteing booth to
deciede?  I'll break it down for you Wollybird, Republicans = BIG
government....OK? do you get it now? Or do you exist in a permanent
state of denial? Even when they are trying to convence you that up, is
down, and down is around, try and overcome.
  I know it hard for an old republican like you to give, but first try
with some blood, then give a hand full of food to an animal, then a
human....try sponsering school children in a far off land, and the
money your buddies take from you won't hurt so much. Try and enjoy the
simple things in life. That money can't buy.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, you comprehend what you read almost as well (but not quite) as
Larry Deak.
Inspire us with tales of your charity.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Sorry I can't do that, I keep that stuff to myself.
MT
Wollybird
2008-03-28 13:58:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons
Wollybird complain, complain, complain........is that all you guys
know how to do.  Poor Wolly one more tax horror story after another,
it brings tears to my eyes.
 Your buddy Bush is coming to the rescue and is handing out economic
stimulus bribes.  It should keep you guys satisfied for the next four
years.  In the meantime please "stop your sobbing" see link
below.......
Wollybird this ones for you......
http://youtu.be/1cguXYfVuSg
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, Bush ain't my buddy, some of the shit he does is so liberal, it
would make LBJ blush. You will be sending in a little extra with your
IRS return this year, won't you? Fire up the incense pot and meditate
with your swami on the effect of this on your son:http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/bush-big-govt.html-Hidequotedtext -
- Show quoted text -
And you are still waiting until you get to the voteing booth to
deciede?  I'll break it down for you Wollybird, Republicans = BIG
government....OK? do you get it now? Or do you exist in a permanent
state of denial? Even when they are trying to convence you that up, is
down, and down is around, try and overcome.
  I know it hard for an old republican like you to give, but first try
with some blood, then give a hand full of food to an animal, then a
human....try sponsering school children in a far off land, and the
money your buddies take from you won't hurt so much. Try and enjoy the
simple things in life. That money can't buy.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, you comprehend what you read almost as well (but not quite) as
Larry Deak.
Inspire us with tales of your charity.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Sorry I can't do that, I keep that stuff to myself.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I know, you are a liberal. Sheesh, according to this liberal
economist, you guys don't even want to give your own blood.
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/204/story_20419_1.html
Tashi
2008-03-28 14:02:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons
Wollybird complain, complain, complain........is that all you guys
know how to do.  Poor Wolly one more tax horror story after another,
it brings tears to my eyes.
 Your buddy Bush is coming to the rescue and is handing out economic
stimulus bribes.  It should keep you guys satisfied for the next four
years.  In the meantime please "stop your sobbing" see link
below.......
Wollybird this ones for you......
http://youtu.be/1cguXYfVuSg
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, Bush ain't my buddy, some of the shit he does is so liberal, it
would make LBJ blush. You will be sending in a little extra with your
IRS return this year, won't you? Fire up the incense pot and meditate
with your swami on the effect of this on your son:http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/bush-big-govt.html-Hidequotedtext-
- Show quoted text -
And you are still waiting until you get to the voteing booth to
deciede?  I'll break it down for you Wollybird, Republicans = BIG
government....OK? do you get it now? Or do you exist in a permanent
state of denial? Even when they are trying to convence you that up, is
down, and down is around, try and overcome.
  I know it hard for an old republican like you to give, but first try
with some blood, then give a hand full of food to an animal, then a
human....try sponsering school children in a far off land, and the
money your buddies take from you won't hurt so much. Try and enjoy the
simple things in life. That money can't buy.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, you comprehend what you read almost as well (but not quite) as
Larry Deak.
Inspire us with tales of your charity.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Sorry I can't do that, I keep that stuff to myself.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I know, you are a liberal. Sheesh, according to this liberal
economist, you guys don't even want to give your own blood.http://www.beliefnet.com/story/204/story_20419_1.html- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Your beginning to sound more and more like Jackson. Wollybird less
reading bullshit articles and perhaps some more introspective self
reflecting.

MT.
l***@deack.net
2008-03-28 14:48:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Tashi, you comprehend what you read almost as well (but not quite) as
Larry Deak.
Wolly Buddy, you almost spell as well as Trashi Dude.
Post by Wollybird
Inspire us with tales of your charity.
I've got some kids you could help get an education if you are
feeling generous. One well known guitar player donated two guitars to
this school already. They have several wealthy folks sponsoring
students at this school.

Big government is big corporations... like the freaking banks that
got us in this credit card and mortgage mess. Bunch of greedy assholes
who think it's moral to charge 35% interest and ever increasing fees.

The bank lobbies even got the "government" to say that these rates
were legal when anybody who can do the math knows that at that rate
folks sink like a rock no matter how fast they swim. No government
"for the people" would allow that kind of loan sharking and strong
arming using the "law".

Why do people fall for this "big government" crap yet somehow not
see it's "big corporation" run? Perhaps because anybody who mentions
corporate rule of system is marginalized so the only people left are
those in the pockets of BIG FAT CORPORATIONS who are making record
profits as local governments fire school teachers.

How many times do taxpayers have to bail out BIG CORPORATE fat
cats?
Wollybird
2008-03-28 14:58:09 UTC
Permalink
    How many times do taxpayers have to bail out BIG CORPORATE fat
cats?
What would Milton Freedman have said about that?
l***@deack.net
2008-03-28 15:28:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
    How many times do taxpayers have to bail out BIG CORPORATE fat
cats?
What would Milton Freedman have said about that?
Size matters.


I take it you are not feeling generous.
Wollybird
2008-03-28 15:37:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@deack.net
Post by Wollybird
    How many times do taxpayers have to bail out BIG CORPORATE fat
cats?
What would Milton Freedman have said about that?
Size matters.
I take it you are not feeling generous.
Freedom includes freedom to fail
l***@deack.net
2008-03-28 15:57:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Freedom includes freedom to fail
Freedom is shared power. You can't fail if you are making up the rules
as you play the game.
Tommy Grand
2008-03-28 15:26:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@deack.net
Big government is big corporations... like the freaking banks that
got us in this credit card and mortgage mess. Bunch of greedy assholes
who think it's moral to charge 35% interest and ever increasing fees.
Larry, is it moral to live beyond one's means? Do tell us.
l***@deack.net
2008-03-28 15:33:21 UTC
Permalink
Larry, is it moral to live beyond one's means?  Do tell us.
Jeremy, is it moral to treat people's lives as FICA scores? Local
banks locally owned... Wolly would agree since he likes things local.
Wollybird
2008-03-28 15:38:43 UTC
Permalink
Larry, is it moral to live beyond one's means?  Do tell us.
   Jeremy, is it moral to treat people's lives as FICA scores? Local
banks locally owned... Wolly would agree since he likes things local.
I've worked for both,,,, I much prefer the local ones for that reason.
It works the same in government
Tommy Grand
2008-03-28 15:42:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@deack.net
Post by Tommy Grand
Larry, is it moral to live beyond one's means? Do tell us.
is it moral to treat people's lives as FICA scores?
No. See, that is how you answer a question. So I repeat: is it moral
to live beyond one's means?
Tashi
2008-03-28 15:55:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@deack.net
Larry, is it moral to live beyond one's means?  Do tell us.
is it moral to treat people's lives as FICA scores?
No.  See, that is how you answer a question.  So I repeat: is it moral
to live beyond one's means?
Hey Tommy, I tried the repeat question thing to Jackson, but he always
opts for the 5th. Jackson's an educated guy and knows his rights, but
larry just sounds like....well like Larry.

MT
Tommy Grand
2008-03-28 16:00:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tashi
Hey Tommy, I tried the repeat question thing to Jackson, but he always
opts for the 5th. Jackson's an educated guy and knows his rights, but
larry just sounds like....well like Larry.
Larry seems like the type of guy who brags about his favorite
guitarist, and says something like "he won the GFA...not that it means
anything". You probably know the type.
l***@deack.net
2008-03-28 16:09:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tommy Grand
Larry seems like the type of guy who brags about his favorite
guitarist, and says something like "he won the GFA...not that it means
anything".  You probably know the type.
Nope. My favorite guitarist never won the GFA.

Jeremy, CG is a rather small world and the GFA is rather new so it
might surprise you to find out that many of the best players that have
lived on this planet never won the GFA.
Tommy Grand
2008-03-28 16:13:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@deack.net
it
might surprise you to find out that many of the best players that have
lived on this planet never won the GFA.
I've never thought much about it and don't care. But thanks for
proving my point!
l***@deack.net
2008-03-28 16:18:26 UTC
Permalink
I've never thought much about it and don't care.   But thanks for
proving my point!
No problem. Do you think Pujol could win the GFA today?
Tommy Grand
2008-03-28 16:20:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@deack.net
Post by Tommy Grand
I've never thought much about it and don't care. But thanks for
proving my point!
No problem. Do you think Pujol could win the GFA today?
Doubt it. I hear he was a shitty player.
Tashi
2008-03-28 15:43:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Tashi, you comprehend what you read almost as well (but not quite) as
Larry Deak.
 Wolly Buddy, you almost spell as well as Trashi Dude.
Still angry with me Larry? lighten up dude, I liked it better when
you protected us from evil trolls, please can you resume your former
duties?
Post by Wollybird
Inspire us with tales of your charity.
   I've got some kids you could help get an education if you are
feeling generous. One well known guitar player donated two guitars to
this school already. They have several wealthy folks sponsoring
students at this school.
Your story bring tears to my eyes Larry! I was just in Sikkim
where people with 8 kids live on 20 rupees for a day laboring in the
rice fields. Twenty rupees is 30 cents. I give these kids an education
and that's their only way out.
MT
    Big government is big corporations... like the freaking banks that
got us in this credit card and mortgage mess. Bunch of greedy assholes
who think it's moral to charge 35% interest and ever increasing fees.
   The bank lobbies even got the "government" to say that these rates
were legal when anybody who can do the math knows that at that rate
folks sink like a rock no matter how fast they swim. No government
"for the people" would allow that kind of loan sharking and strong
arming using the "law".
   Why do people fall for this "big government" crap yet somehow not
see it's "big corporation" run? Perhaps because anybody who mentions
corporate rule of system is marginalized so the only people left are
those in the pockets of BIG FAT CORPORATIONS who are making record
profits as local governments fire school teachers.
    How many times do taxpayers have to bail out BIG CORPORATE fat
cats?
Larry, dude are you suggesting somethings not on the up and up here?
Sounds like some pretty crazy conspiracy theories floating around in
your head. If your government tells you they are not influenced by
lobbyists you shouldn't question them, they always tell the truth, you
know like how many 757's can you fit through the eye of a needle.

BTW Larry, have you ever made cheese? Boil some milk and squeeze in
some lemon juice in, you can then see the curds and whey separate.
Government and corporations are like milk. Don't expect your
republican buddies to hand out the lemon juice.

MT
Wollybird
2008-03-28 15:46:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Tashi, you comprehend what you read almost as well (but not quite) as
Larry Deak.
 Wolly Buddy, you almost spell as well as Trashi Dude.
   Still angry with me Larry?  lighten up dude, I liked it better when
you protected us from evil trolls, please can you resume your former
duties?
Post by Wollybird
Inspire us with tales of your charity.
   I've got some kids you could help get an education if you are
feeling generous. One well known guitar player donated two guitars to
this school already. They have several wealthy folks sponsoring
students at this school.
    Your story bring tears to my eyes Larry!  I was just in Sikkim
where people with 8 kids live on 20 rupees for a day laboring in the
rice fields. Twenty rupees is 30 cents. I give these kids an education
and that's their only way out.
MT
    Big government is big corporations... like the freaking banks that
got us in this credit card and mortgage mess. Bunch of greedy assholes
who think it's moral to charge 35% interest and ever increasing fees.
   The bank lobbies even got the "government" to say that these rates
were legal when anybody who can do the math knows that at that rate
folks sink like a rock no matter how fast they swim. No government
"for the people" would allow that kind of loan sharking and strong
arming using the "law".
   Why do people fall for this "big government" crap yet somehow not
see it's "big corporation" run? Perhaps because anybody who mentions
corporate rule of system is marginalized so the only people left are
those in the pockets of BIG FAT CORPORATIONS who are making record
profits as local governments fire school teachers.
    How many times do taxpayers have to bail out BIG CORPORATE fat
cats?
Larry, dude are you suggesting somethings not on the up and up here?
Sounds like some pretty crazy conspiracy theories floating around in
your head. If your government tells you they are not influenced by
lobbyists you shouldn't question them, they always tell the truth, you
know like how many 757's can you fit through the eye of a needle.
 BTW Larry, have you ever made cheese?  Boil some milk and squeeze in
some lemon juice in, you can then see the curds and whey separate.
Government and corporations are like milk. Don't expect your
republican buddies to hand out the lemon juice.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, for you amusement and bemusement, I have dragged Larry out of
the weeds for you to play with. Such is the bitter fruit of putting
labels on me.
Tashi
2008-03-28 15:58:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Post by Wollybird
Tashi, you comprehend what you read almost as well (but not quite) as
Larry Deak.
 Wolly Buddy, you almost spell as well as Trashi Dude.
   Still angry with me Larry?  lighten up dude, I liked it better when
you protected us from evil trolls, please can you resume your former
duties?
Post by Wollybird
Inspire us with tales of your charity.
   I've got some kids you could help get an education if you are
feeling generous. One well known guitar player donated two guitars to
this school already. They have several wealthy folks sponsoring
students at this school.
    Your story bring tears to my eyes Larry!  I was just in Sikkim
where people with 8 kids live on 20 rupees for a day laboring in the
rice fields. Twenty rupees is 30 cents. I give these kids an education
and that's their only way out.
MT
    Big government is big corporations... like the freaking banks that
got us in this credit card and mortgage mess. Bunch of greedy assholes
who think it's moral to charge 35% interest and ever increasing fees.
   The bank lobbies even got the "government" to say that these rates
were legal when anybody who can do the math knows that at that rate
folks sink like a rock no matter how fast they swim. No government
"for the people" would allow that kind of loan sharking and strong
arming using the "law".
   Why do people fall for this "big government" crap yet somehow not
see it's "big corporation" run? Perhaps because anybody who mentions
corporate rule of system is marginalized so the only people left are
those in the pockets of BIG FAT CORPORATIONS who are making record
profits as local governments fire school teachers.
    How many times do taxpayers have to bail out BIG CORPORATE fat
cats?
Larry, dude are you suggesting somethings not on the up and up here?
Sounds like some pretty crazy conspiracy theories floating around in
your head. If your government tells you they are not influenced by
lobbyists you shouldn't question them, they always tell the truth, you
know like how many 757's can you fit through the eye of a needle.
 BTW Larry, have you ever made cheese?  Boil some milk and squeeze in
some lemon juice in, you can then see the curds and whey separate.
Government and corporations are like milk. Don't expect your
republican buddies to hand out the lemon juice.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, for you amusement and bemusement, I have dragged Larry out of
the weeds for you to play with. Such is the bitter fruit of putting
labels on me.
Thank you wolly, I already had him for lunch see this link..... watch
closely


MT
Tashi
2008-03-28 16:00:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Post by Wollybird
Tashi, you comprehend what you read almost as well (but not quite) as
Larry Deak.
 Wolly Buddy, you almost spell as well as Trashi Dude.
   Still angry with me Larry?  lighten up dude, I liked it better when
you protected us from evil trolls, please can you resume your former
duties?
Post by Wollybird
Inspire us with tales of your charity.
   I've got some kids you could help get an education if you are
feeling generous. One well known guitar player donated two guitars to
this school already. They have several wealthy folks sponsoring
students at this school.
    Your story bring tears to my eyes Larry!  I was just in Sikkim
where people with 8 kids live on 20 rupees for a day laboring in the
rice fields. Twenty rupees is 30 cents. I give these kids an education
and that's their only way out.
MT
    Big government is big corporations... like the freaking banks that
got us in this credit card and mortgage mess. Bunch of greedy assholes
who think it's moral to charge 35% interest and ever increasing fees.
   The bank lobbies even got the "government" to say that these rates
were legal when anybody who can do the math knows that at that rate
folks sink like a rock no matter how fast they swim. No government
"for the people" would allow that kind of loan sharking and strong
arming using the "law".
   Why do people fall for this "big government" crap yet somehow not
see it's "big corporation" run? Perhaps because anybody who mentions
corporate rule of system is marginalized so the only people left are
those in the pockets of BIG FAT CORPORATIONS who are making record
profits as local governments fire school teachers.
    How many times do taxpayers have to bail out BIG CORPORATE fat
cats?
Larry, dude are you suggesting somethings not on the up and up here?
Sounds like some pretty crazy conspiracy theories floating around in
your head. If your government tells you they are not influenced by
lobbyists you shouldn't question them, they always tell the truth, you
know like how many 757's can you fit through the eye of a needle.
 BTW Larry, have you ever made cheese?  Boil some milk and squeeze in
some lemon juice in, you can then see the curds and whey separate.
Government and corporations are like milk. Don't expect your
republican buddies to hand out the lemon juice.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, for you amusement and bemusement, I have dragged Larry out of
the weeds for you to play with. Such is the bitter fruit of putting
labels on me.
Oh I forgot to mention, Larry was the real dumb looking one that got
eaten first.
MT
l***@deack.net
2008-03-28 16:15:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Tashi, for you amusement and bemusement, I have dragged Larry out of
the weeds for you to play with.
That was an invitation to play just like my banker return fire.
You're just too much fun, WollyBuddy, and with Trashi Dude we can make
the old Larry, Moe and Curley Joe routine work almost like the good
old days in RMCG.
Post by Wollybird
Such is the bitter fruit of putting labels on me.
Bitter can be good when combined with sweet.
Wollybird
2008-03-28 16:18:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Tashi, for you amusement and bemusement, I have dragged Larry out of
the weeds for you to play with.
   That was an invitation to play just like my banker return fire.
You're just too much fun, WollyBuddy, and with Trashi Dude we can make
the old Larry, Moe and Curley Joe routine work almost like the good
old days in RMCG.
Post by Wollybird
Such is the bitter fruit of putting labels on me.
   Bitter can be good when combined with sweet.
And we all know you are such a sweetie, Larry-Pie!
l***@deack.net
2008-03-28 16:21:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
And we all know you are such a sweetie, Larry-Pie!
You too Wolly Buddy, U2.
Tashi
2008-03-28 16:59:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Post by Wollybird
Tashi, for you amusement and bemusement, I have dragged Larry out of
the weeds for you to play with.
   That was an invitation to play just like my banker return fire.
You're just too much fun, WollyBuddy, and with Trashi Dude we can make
the old Larry, Moe and Curley Joe routine work almost like the good
old days in RMCG.
Post by Wollybird
Such is the bitter fruit of putting labels on me.
   Bitter can be good when combined with sweet.
And we all know you are such a sweetie, Larry-Pie!
Yea until he gets really pissed, then he gets even sweeter.
MT
Wollybird
2008-03-28 13:44:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons
Wollybird complain, complain, complain........is that all you guys
know how to do.  Poor Wolly one more tax horror story after another,
it brings tears to my eyes.
 Your buddy Bush is coming to the rescue and is handing out economic
stimulus bribes.  It should keep you guys satisfied for the next four
years.  In the meantime please "stop your sobbing" see link
below.......
Wollybird this ones for you......
http://youtu.be/1cguXYfVuSg
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, Bush ain't my buddy, some of the shit he does is so liberal, it
would make LBJ blush. You will be sending in a little extra with your
IRS return this year, won't you? Fire up the incense pot and meditate
with your swami on the effect of this on your son:http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/bush-big-govt.html-Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
And you are still waiting until you get to the voteing booth to
deciede?  I'll break it down for you Wollybird, Republicans = BIG
government....OK? do you get it now? Or do you exist in a permanent
state of denial? Even when they are trying to convence you that up, is
down, and down is around, try and overcome.
  I know it hard for an old republican like you to give, but first try
with some blood, then give a hand full of food to an animal, then a
human....try sponsering school children in a far off land, and the
money your buddies take from you won't hurt so much. Try and enjoy the
simple things in life. That money can't buy.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Also note, that while liberals are great at spending other peoples
money and money that doesn't exist, when it comes to charitable
giving, they tend to be notorious cheapskates:
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/11/charitable_giving_liberals_vs_conservatives/
Tashi
2008-03-28 13:57:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons
Wollybird complain, complain, complain........is that all you guys
know how to do.  Poor Wolly one more tax horror story after another,
it brings tears to my eyes.
 Your buddy Bush is coming to the rescue and is handing out economic
stimulus bribes.  It should keep you guys satisfied for the next four
years.  In the meantime please "stop your sobbing" see link
below.......
Wollybird this ones for you......
http://youtu.be/1cguXYfVuSg
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, Bush ain't my buddy, some of the shit he does is so liberal, it
would make LBJ blush. You will be sending in a little extra with your
IRS return this year, won't you? Fire up the incense pot and meditate
with your swami on the effect of this on your son:http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/bush-big-govt.html-Hidequoted text -
- Show quoted text -
And you are still waiting until you get to the voteing booth to
deciede?  I'll break it down for you Wollybird, Republicans = BIG
government....OK? do you get it now? Or do you exist in a permanent
state of denial? Even when they are trying to convence you that up, is
down, and down is around, try and overcome.
  I know it hard for an old republican like you to give, but first try
with some blood, then give a hand full of food to an animal, then a
human....try sponsering school children in a far off land, and the
money your buddies take from you won't hurt so much. Try and enjoy the
simple things in life. That money can't buy.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Also note, that while liberals are great at spending other peoples
money and money that doesn't exist, when it comes to charitable
giving, they tend to be notorious cheapskates:http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/11/charitable_giving_l...- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Wollybird, what a hellish world you live in. One minute your blaming
the republicans the next munite you blame the liberals...... do you
see a pattern here? I think you need to make your own reality and
happiness, and not reley so much on the government to do that for you.

MT
Wollybird
2008-03-28 14:30:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons
Wollybird complain, complain, complain........is that all you guys
know how to do.  Poor Wolly one more tax horror story after another,
it brings tears to my eyes.
 Your buddy Bush is coming to the rescue and is handing out economic
stimulus bribes.  It should keep you guys satisfied for the next four
years.  In the meantime please "stop your sobbing" see link
below.......
Wollybird this ones for you......
http://youtu.be/1cguXYfVuSg
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, Bush ain't my buddy, some of the shit he does is so liberal, it
would make LBJ blush. You will be sending in a little extra with your
IRS return this year, won't you? Fire up the incense pot and meditate
with your swami on the effect of this on your son:http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/bush-big-govt.html-Hidequotedtext -
- Show quoted text -
And you are still waiting until you get to the voteing booth to
deciede?  I'll break it down for you Wollybird, Republicans = BIG
government....OK? do you get it now? Or do you exist in a permanent
state of denial? Even when they are trying to convence you that up, is
down, and down is around, try and overcome.
  I know it hard for an old republican like you to give, but first try
with some blood, then give a hand full of food to an animal, then a
human....try sponsering school children in a far off land, and the
money your buddies take from you won't hurt so much. Try and enjoy the
simple things in life. That money can't buy.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Also note, that while liberals are great at spending other peoples
money and money that doesn't exist, when it comes to charitable
giving, they tend to be notorious cheapskates:http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/11/charitable_giving_l...Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Wollybird, what a hellish world you live in.  One minute your blaming
the republicans the next munite you blame the liberals...... do you
see a pattern here? I think you need to make your own reality and
happiness, and not reley so much on the government to do that for you.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
But Tashi, you say one moment I am a republican, the next, I am a
libertarian. could it be you don't know the difference? You should
take a break from contemplating the fuzz in you navel and read up a
little.
Tashi
2008-03-28 15:49:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons
Wollybird complain, complain, complain........is that all you guys
know how to do.  Poor Wolly one more tax horror story after another,
it brings tears to my eyes.
 Your buddy Bush is coming to the rescue and is handing out economic
stimulus bribes.  It should keep you guys satisfied for the next four
years.  In the meantime please "stop your sobbing" see link
below.......
Wollybird this ones for you......
http://youtu.be/1cguXYfVuSg
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, Bush ain't my buddy, some of the shit he does is so liberal, it
would make LBJ blush. You will be sending in a little extra with your
IRS return this year, won't you? Fire up the incense pot and meditate
with your swami on the effect of this on your son:http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/bush-big-govt.html-Hidequotedtext-
- Show quoted text -
And you are still waiting until you get to the voteing booth to
deciede?  I'll break it down for you Wollybird, Republicans = BIG
government....OK? do you get it now? Or do you exist in a permanent
state of denial? Even when they are trying to convence you that up, is
down, and down is around, try and overcome.
  I know it hard for an old republican like you to give, but first try
with some blood, then give a hand full of food to an animal, then a
human....try sponsering school children in a far off land, and the
money your buddies take from you won't hurt so much. Try and enjoy the
simple things in life. That money can't buy.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Also note, that while liberals are great at spending other peoples
money and money that doesn't exist, when it comes to charitable
giving, they tend to be notorious cheapskates:http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/11/charitable_giving_l...quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Wollybird, what a hellish world you live in.  One minute your blaming
the republicans the next munite you blame the liberals...... do you
see a pattern here? I think you need to make your own reality and
happiness, and not reley so much on the government to do that for you.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
But Tashi, you say one moment I am a republican, the next, I am a
libertarian. could it be you don't know the difference? You should
take a break from contemplating the fuzz in you navel and read up a
little.
Wollybird do you deny telling me you are a Rockafeller republican, as
well as telling me you are a Libertarian?
MT
Wollybird
2008-03-28 16:11:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons
Wollybird complain, complain, complain........is that all you guys
know how to do.  Poor Wolly one more tax horror story after another,
it brings tears to my eyes.
 Your buddy Bush is coming to the rescue and is handing out economic
stimulus bribes.  It should keep you guys satisfied for the next four
years.  In the meantime please "stop your sobbing" see link
below.......
Wollybird this ones for you......
http://youtu.be/1cguXYfVuSg
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, Bush ain't my buddy, some of the shit he does is so liberal, it
would make LBJ blush. You will be sending in a little extra with your
IRS return this year, won't you? Fire up the incense pot and meditate
with your swami on the effect of this on your son:http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/bush-big-govt.html-Hidequotedtext-
- Show quoted text -
And you are still waiting until you get to the voteing booth to
deciede?  I'll break it down for you Wollybird, Republicans = BIG
government....OK? do you get it now? Or do you exist in a permanent
state of denial? Even when they are trying to convence you that up, is
down, and down is around, try and overcome.
  I know it hard for an old republican like you to give, but first try
with some blood, then give a hand full of food to an animal, then a
human....try sponsering school children in a far off land, and the
money your buddies take from you won't hurt so much. Try and enjoy the
simple things in life. That money can't buy.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Also note, that while liberals are great at spending other peoples
money and money that doesn't exist, when it comes to charitable
giving, they tend to be notorious cheapskates:http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/11/charitable_giving_l...text -
- Show quoted text -
Wollybird, what a hellish world you live in.  One minute your blaming
the republicans the next munite you blame the liberals...... do you
see a pattern here? I think you need to make your own reality and
happiness, and not reley so much on the government to do that for you.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
But Tashi, you say one moment I am a republican, the next, I am a
libertarian. could it be you don't know the difference? You should
take a break from contemplating the fuzz in you navel and read up a
little.
Wollybird do you deny telling me you are a Rockafeller republican, as
well as telling me you are a Libertarian?
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
You weren't ready for the truth, my son. Now you must figure out what
a libertarian is. It can be anything from Noam Chomsky to an anarco-
capitalist
Tashi
2008-03-29 04:52:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons
Wollybird complain, complain, complain........is that all you guys
know how to do.  Poor Wolly one more tax horror story after another,
it brings tears to my eyes.
 Your buddy Bush is coming to the rescue and is handing out economic
stimulus bribes.  It should keep you guys satisfied for the next four
years.  In the meantime please "stop your sobbing" see link
below.......
Wollybird this ones for you......
http://youtu.be/1cguXYfVuSg
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, Bush ain't my buddy, some of the shit he does is so liberal, it
would make LBJ blush. You will be sending in a little extra with your
IRS return this year, won't you? Fire up the incense pot and meditate
with your swami on the effect of this on your son:http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/bush-big-govt.html-Hidequotedtext-
- Show quoted text -
And you are still waiting until you get to the voteing booth to
deciede?  I'll break it down for you Wollybird, Republicans = BIG
government....OK? do you get it now? Or do you exist in a permanent
state of denial? Even when they are trying to convence you that up, is
down, and down is around, try and overcome.
  I know it hard for an old republican like you to give, but first try
with some blood, then give a hand full of food to an animal, then a
human....try sponsering school children in a far off land, and the
money your buddies take from you won't hurt so much. Try and enjoy the
simple things in life. That money can't buy.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Also note, that while liberals are great at spending other peoples
money and money that doesn't exist, when it comes to charitable
giving, they tend to be notorious cheapskates:http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/11/charitable_giving_l...-
- Show quoted text -
Wollybird, what a hellish world you live in.  One minute your blaming
the republicans the next munite you blame the liberals...... do you
see a pattern here? I think you need to make your own reality and
happiness, and not reley so much on the government to do that for you.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
But Tashi, you say one moment I am a republican, the next, I am a
libertarian. could it be you don't know the difference? You should
take a break from contemplating the fuzz in you navel and read up a
little.
Wollybird do you deny telling me you are a Rockafeller republican, as
well as telling me you are a Libertarian?
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
You weren't ready for the truth, my son. Now you must figure out what
a libertarian is. It can be anything from Noam Chomsky to an anarco-
capitalist- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
" Libertarian's are republicans who want to get laid, and smoke
dope" Bill Maher

MT
Wollybird
2008-03-29 13:53:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons
Wollybird complain, complain, complain........is that all you guys
know how to do.  Poor Wolly one more tax horror story after another,
it brings tears to my eyes.
 Your buddy Bush is coming to the rescue and is handing out economic
stimulus bribes.  It should keep you guys satisfied for the next four
years.  In the meantime please "stop your sobbing" see link
below.......
Wollybird this ones for you......
http://youtu.be/1cguXYfVuSg
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, Bush ain't my buddy, some of the shit he does is so liberal, it
would make LBJ blush. You will be sending in a little extra with your
IRS return this year, won't you? Fire up the incense pot and meditate
with your swami on the effect of this on your son:http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/bush-big-govt.html-Hidequotedtext-
- Show quoted text -
And you are still waiting until you get to the voteing booth to
deciede?  I'll break it down for you Wollybird, Republicans = BIG
government....OK? do you get it now? Or do you exist in a permanent
state of denial? Even when they are trying to convence you that up, is
down, and down is around, try and overcome.
  I know it hard for an old republican like you to give, but first try
with some blood, then give a hand full of food to an animal, then a
human....try sponsering school children in a far off land, and the
money your buddies take from you won't hurt so much. Try and enjoy the
simple things in life. That money can't buy.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Also note, that while liberals are great at spending other peoples
money and money that doesn't exist, when it comes to charitable
giving, they tend to be notorious cheapskates:http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/11/charitable_giving_l...
- Show quoted text -
Wollybird, what a hellish world you live in.  One minute your blaming
the republicans the next munite you blame the liberals...... do you
see a pattern here? I think you need to make your own reality and
happiness, and not reley so much on the government to do that for you.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
But Tashi, you say one moment I am a republican, the next, I am a
libertarian. could it be you don't know the difference? You should
take a break from contemplating the fuzz in you navel and read up a
little.
Wollybird do you deny telling me you are a Rockafeller republican, as
well as telling me you are a Libertarian?
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
You weren't ready for the truth, my son. Now you must figure out what
a libertarian is. It can be anything from Noam Chomsky to an anarco-
capitalist- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
 " Libertarian's are republicans who want to get laid, and smoke
dope"  Bill Maher
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
"You get your news from comedians?"
-Tashi sometime in 2007
Tashi
2008-03-29 14:57:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wollybird
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by Tashi
Post by Wollybird
Post by ktaylor
Post by Tashi
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the republicans do away with the
arts in public schools?
That's absurd. Bush is spending more on education than Clinton did.
Happily, the federal govenment does not determine specific curriculum
in public schools - though it would if it could. Doing away with art
programs is a local decision. When it happens it is based on budgetary
constraints. Budgetary constraints are caused when the local public
schools are not getting the economic support they need from the local
community and must rely on funds taken from other communities. Music
education will always be de-prioritized in a fiscal fight.
Kevin T.
Yea, Tashi. be a man and vote to have your property taxes upped 30%. I
did. My two older kids play flute, basoon, saxaphone and voice. of
course, if I wasen't paying $5,000 per year in property taxes, I could
probably afford private lessons
Wollybird complain, complain, complain........is that all you guys
know how to do.  Poor Wolly one more tax horror story after another,
it brings tears to my eyes.
 Your buddy Bush is coming to the rescue and is handing out economic
stimulus bribes.  It should keep you guys satisfied for the next four
years.  In the meantime please "stop your sobbing" see link
below.......
Wollybird this ones for you......
http://youtu.be/1cguXYfVuSg
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Tashi, Bush ain't my buddy, some of the shit he does is so liberal, it
would make LBJ blush. You will be sending in a little extra with your
IRS return this year, won't you? Fire up the incense pot and meditate
with your swami on the effect of this on your son:http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/bush-big-govt.html-Hidequotedtext-
- Show quoted text -
And you are still waiting until you get to the voteing booth to
deciede?  I'll break it down for you Wollybird, Republicans = BIG
government....OK? do you get it now? Or do you exist in a permanent
state of denial? Even when they are trying to convence you that up, is
down, and down is around, try and overcome.
  I know it hard for an old republican like you to give, but first try
with some blood, then give a hand full of food to an animal, then a
human....try sponsering school children in a far off land, and the
money your buddies take from you won't hurt so much. Try and enjoy the
simple things in life. That money can't buy.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Also note, that while liberals are great at spending other peoples
money and money that doesn't exist, when it comes to charitable
giving, they tend to be notorious cheapskates:http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2006/11/charitable_giving_l...
- Show quoted text -
Wollybird, what a hellish world you live in.  One minute your blaming
the republicans the next munite you blame the liberals...... do you
see a pattern here? I think you need to make your own reality and
happiness, and not reley so much on the government to do that for you.
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
But Tashi, you say one moment I am a republican, the next, I am a
libertarian. could it be you don't know the difference? You should
take a break from contemplating the fuzz in you navel and read up a
little.
Wollybird do you deny telling me you are a Rockafeller republican, as
well as telling me you are a Libertarian?
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
You weren't ready for the truth, my son. Now you must figure out what
a libertarian is. It can be anything from Noam Chomsky to an anarco-
capitalist- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
 " Libertarian's are republicans who want to get laid, and smoke
dope"  Bill Maher
MT- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
"You get your news from comedians?"
-Tashi sometime in 2007- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Don't we all? Think about it.
MT
JacquesMoran
2008-03-28 01:27:15 UTC
Permalink
A couple months ago I attended my states annual music educators'
conference. There was one lecture (really more a sales pitch for a "learn
to teach and play guitar in one week" summer workshop) on starting a guitar
program in middle or high school. It was geared at non-guitar playing
band/orchestra/choral directors. The few pedogical tidbits that I heard
were more dreadful than you can imagine, but it was interesting to hear
about the growth of school guitar programs. My guess would be that since
traditional band/orchestra programs are on the decline (by 50% in CA over
the last ten years if I'm to believe a recent article in a music educator's
journal) the folks running these programs have to look for alternatives if
they want to keep their jobs.
Learnwell
2008-03-30 01:29:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by JacquesMoran
A couple months ago I attended my states annual music educators'
conference. There was one lecture (really more a sales pitch for a "learn
to teach and play guitar in one week" summer workshop) on starting a guitar
program in middle or high school. It was geared at non-guitar playing
band/orchestra/choral directors. The few pedogical tidbits that I heard
were more dreadful than you can imagine,
did you take a closer look to see who was finding that? That is right,
a guitar accessories marketing group. Their sole purpose is to sell
more guitars on the front end, not teach music in the long term. I
havent looked in a few years, but their website used to proclaim this
proudly and gave stats.
Richard Spross
2008-03-28 02:54:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter. I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical". Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
Ed and concerned readers.

Some times schools K - 12 offer guitar in the classroom.
In the K - 6 grades I've seen it offered as an after school
class. I taught such a class for children of combined grades 5 and 6
once upon a time many years ago. My approach worked and as far as the
administrator and myself were concerned it was a success. The only
drawback which hindered my continuing was the hour long drive to get
to the school, so I bowed out.

I have seen it offered in Middle School as well as High School,
but in these instances it could be called "general guitar" playing,
that is learning to accompany, learning the fundamentals of reading,
learning chords and progressions etc.

These things occurred when there was a serious interest in promoting
music in the public schools and were in fairly affluent neighborhoods
in the suburbs of the S.F. East Bay.

I can't speak authoritatively of much of the rest of the Bay Area, but
I would wager that there are such programs appearing in the South Bay
San Jose and environs since that area is very habitable for families.
Very low crime rate, higher average income, a couple of strong guitar
societies, such as the "South bay Guitar Society" and the San Jose
Flamenco Society or something along that line.

In private high schools, in the East Bay, there is a likelihood of
such classes. I believe at one Catholic High School here in Oakland,
Bishop O'Dowd high school there is a guitar teacher who teaches classes
in guitar.

I taught an after school guitar class and private lessons once upon
a time at a private boarding and commute prep high school in Danvile,
California named 'The Athenian School'. Very prestigious with really
energetic bright young people. I lasted two years. There was no contract,
the school collected the money and paid me at the end of the term after
taking out money for their operating costs.

I don't recall exactly what got to me, but it probably had something
to do with the effective renumeration vs the time and work spent.

So getting back to what are some of the obstacles, and some one mentioned
objections from "band teachers". There is some truth to that, since most
budgets are limited, but the real problem goes back systemically to
the teaching in college, where students are required to choose a course
direction, such as majoring in music performance or music education,
or music theory/composition or music history.

Each of these 'tracks' have their own projected futures.
Performers are the idealists. Educators are the pragmatists.
Theorists and Historians are mostly academics.

The performer goes off and quickly learns that there is a scarcity for
their performing service, especially soloists, unless they are playing
an orchestral or band instrument which can be converted to popular usage.

The Educator gets in to their job, as the "all knowing, all seeing,
all doing" musician who is the center of all learning for the young.
Here is why guitar doesn't get a foothold. The music educator mostly
has little or no knowledge of classical guitar, if they come with a
self taught background in popular styles they can combine that knowledge
into their curriculum, but if they don't they don't want their
territory subdivided into more choices which would affect their job
security. Especially if said teacher is well entrenched in their music
program and feels threatened by an "expert" performer who might
inadvertently challenge what is being taught.

I gave a demonstration to a middle school class in which everyone
had learned to hold the guitar on the right leg with the neck level
to the ground. I tried tactfully to show the difference between holding
it that way and the way we hold it, going around and making sure that
every child could hold it the way I was teaching so they could 'feel'
the distinction. Well unfortunately the effect of unintended consequences
occurred and I had just shown the poverty of what their teacher knew.
That was just the beginning, and when all was said and done, I was
hurried out of the classroom, briefly thanked and never invited back.
Heh heh. I can only hope that some of the kids were wise enough to
see the value. Mind you, I never ever criticized what their teacher
was doing. Anyway.....

So there is this systemic distrust between Educators and Performers
when Performers due to the lack of performing opportunities, attempt
to make a headway into the public school system.

'Disclaimer'. I'm sure in some communities across America there are
pockets of successful music teaching in all grade levels and that in
a few the guitar is included. After all I believe the guitar is include
as an acceptable instrument in the National String teachers Association
which tries to influence string teaching in the public schools. I just
don't know where.

Here in the East Bay, the battle lines between K - 12 public schools,
private prep high schools and the Community College Districts have
been established for well over 50 years.

Well I haven't heard of any improvement, and it could be that I'm not
up on the current situation, but to give an example, when I taught
the private students at Diablo Valley College in Pleasant Hill, Ca
back in 1991-93 before losing my position to lack of funds, I had
tried to get the head of music education for the Diablo Unified
School District to be aware that DVC was now offering private instruction.

Well the head of the music dept at DVC, was not concerned enough to
contact the other administrator in fact it hadn't even occurred to him
to do so. So guess what? All the students from the local high schools
who might have benefited by going to the community college for the
first two years and then could have transferred to the State University
system were left uninformed of the opportunity.

The director of the music education programs for the School District,
never responded to my letter and had no interest in contacting DVC's
music dept head even to verify my information!

Today i believe they have reinstated the guitar's private lessons
there, but it is one of the few JC's in the State of California, which
has followed the law requiring that AA degrees in the JC programs
be on parity with the State University and the University system in order
for their transfer students to qualify as transfers. Before this edict
the JC students would arrive generally unprepared and would need an
extra two years of private instruction to make up the loss.
The legislature eventually wrote into law the means to correct this
injustice, but by in large it has been ignored and no one in power
cares to find a way to make it happen.

I remember talking to my dear friend and third teacher Jim Bertram,
20 years after graduating about this dilemma, and had mentioned to
the ombudsman for DVC, who just happened to be privately studying with
me, that there was this systemic disconnect between educational
jurisdictions. Bertram a few weeks later called and said, " I can't
believe this, so and so called and asked me if anyone from his
community college had ever inquired about the requirements for entering
CSU, Hayward, ( recently renamed CSU East Bay ). I said, "And what did
you say?" He then told me, that that was the first time anyone from
an institution below the college level had ever inquired about said
requirements. Bertram was amazed. So was I. However these things
quickly go back to the path of least resistance and I doubt seriously
anything has changed.

There you go folks. Some anecdotal information from a weary warrior
of the front lines of battle in the music field. I respect Che's
ability to not have fit in and still have had a great life with the
guitar. I have years of other stories, but times change, people change
and life goes on.

Maybe some day some where some people in public education will take
advantage of all the guitar offers for musical growth and appreciation.

Richard Spross
Carlos Barrientos
2008-03-28 05:25:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard Spross
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter. I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical". Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
Ed and concerned readers.
Some times schools K - 12 offer guitar in the classroom.
In the K - 6 grades I've seen it offered as an after school
class. I taught such a class for children of combined grades 5 and 6
once upon a time many years ago. My approach worked and as far as the
administrator and myself were concerned it was a success. The only
drawback which hindered my continuing was the hour long drive to get
to the school, so I bowed out.
I have seen it offered in Middle School as well as High School,
but in these instances it could be called "general guitar" playing,
that is learning to accompany, learning the fundamentals of reading,
learning chords and progressions etc.
These things occurred when there was a serious interest in promoting
music in the public schools and were in fairly affluent neighborhoods
in the suburbs of the S.F. East Bay.
I can't speak authoritatively of much of the rest of the Bay Area, but
I would wager that there are such programs appearing in the South Bay
San Jose and environs since that area is very habitable for families.
Very low crime rate, higher average income, a couple of strong guitar
societies, such as the "South bay Guitar Society" and the San Jose
Flamenco Society or something along that line.
In private high schools, in the East Bay, there is a likelihood of
such classes. I believe at one Catholic High School here in Oakland,
Bishop O'Dowd high school there is a guitar teacher who teaches classes
in guitar.
I taught an after school guitar class and private lessons once upon
a time at a private boarding and commute prep high school in Danvile,
California named 'The Athenian School'. Very prestigious with really
energetic bright young people. I lasted two years. There was no contract,
the school collected the money and paid me at the end of the term after
taking out money for their operating costs.
I don't recall exactly what got to me, but it probably had something
to do with the effective renumeration vs the time and work spent.
So getting back to what are some of the obstacles, and some one mentioned
objections from "band teachers". There is some truth to that, since most
budgets are limited, but the real problem goes back systemically to
the teaching in college, where students are required to choose a course
direction, such as majoring in music performance or music education,
or music theory/composition or music history.
BANDS ARE AN ADJUNCT TO FOOTBALL. Sometimes the travel comes out of
Football budgets. And that's in the 'enlightened' programs. Wanna
scolarship? Play the Tuba and be ready to march. Then audition for
Deathtongue- the band!
Post by Richard Spross
Each of these 'tracks' have their own projected futures.
Performers are the idealists. Educators are the pragmatists.
Theorists and Historians are mostly academics.
And composers... well, we know...
Post by Richard Spross
The performer goes off and quickly learns that there is a scarcity for
their performing service, especially soloists, unless they are playing
an orchestral or band instrument which can be converted to popular usage.
See above.
Post by Richard Spross
The Educator gets in to their job, as the "all knowing, all seeing,
all doing" musician who is the center of all learning for the young.
Here is why guitar doesn't get a foothold. The music educator mostly
has little or no knowledge of classical guitar, if they come with a
self taught background in popular styles they can combine that knowledge
into their curriculum, but if they don't they don't want their
territory subdivided into more choices which would affect their job
security. Especially if said teacher is well entrenched in their music
program and feels threatened by an "expert" performer who might
inadvertently challenge what is being taught.
You mean overqualified for your own good?
Post by Richard Spross
I gave a demonstration to a middle school class in which everyone
had learned to hold the guitar on the right leg with the neck level
to the ground. I tried tactfully to show the difference between holding
it that way and the way we hold it, going around and making sure that
every child could hold it the way I was teaching so they could 'feel'
the distinction. Well unfortunately the effect of unintended consequences
occurred and I had just shown the poverty of what their teacher knew.
That was just the beginning, and when all was said and done, I was
hurried out of the classroom, briefly thanked and never invited back.
Heh heh. I can only hope that some of the kids were wise enough to
see the value. Mind you, I never ever criticized what their teacher
was doing. Anyway.....
So there is this systemic distrust between Educators and Performers
when Performers due to the lack of performing opportunities, attempt
to make a headway into the public school system.
'Disclaimer'. I'm sure in some communities across America there are
pockets of successful music teaching in all grade levels and that in
a few the guitar is included. After all I believe the guitar is include
as an acceptable instrument in the National String teachers Association
which tries to influence string teaching in the public schools. I just
don't know where.
Here in the East Bay, the battle lines between K - 12 public schools,
private prep high schools and the Community College Districts have
been established for well over 50 years.
Well I haven't heard of any improvement, and it could be that I'm not
up on the current situation, but to give an example, when I taught
the private students at Diablo Valley College in Pleasant Hill, Ca
back in 1991-93 before losing my position to lack of funds, I had
tried to get the head of music education for the Diablo Unified
School District to be aware that DVC was now offering private instruction.
Well the head of the music dept at DVC, was not concerned enough to
contact the other administrator in fact it hadn't even occurred to him
to do so. So guess what? All the students from the local high schools
who might have benefited by going to the community college for the
first two years and then could have transferred to the State University
system were left uninformed of the opportunity.
The director of the music education programs for the School District,
never responded to my letter and had no interest in contacting DVC's
music dept head even to verify my information!
Today i believe they have reinstated the guitar's private lessons
there, but it is one of the few JC's in the State of California, which
has followed the law requiring that AA degrees in the JC programs
be on parity with the State University and the University system in order
for their transfer students to qualify as transfers. Before this edict
the JC students would arrive generally unprepared and would need an
extra two years of private instruction to make up the loss.
The legislature eventually wrote into law the means to correct this
injustice, but by in large it has been ignored and no one in power
cares to find a way to make it happen.
I remember talking to my dear friend and third teacher Jim Bertram,
20 years after graduating about this dilemma, and had mentioned to
the ombudsman for DVC, who just happened to be privately studying with
me, that there was this systemic disconnect between educational
jurisdictions. Bertram a few weeks later called and said, " I can't
believe this, so and so called and asked me if anyone from his
community college had ever inquired about the requirements for entering
CSU, Hayward, ( recently renamed CSU East Bay ). I said, "And what did
you say?" He then told me, that that was the first time anyone from
an institution below the college level had ever inquired about said
requirements. Bertram was amazed. So was I. However these things
quickly go back to the path of least resistance and I doubt seriously
anything has changed.
There you go folks. Some anecdotal information from a weary warrior
of the front lines of battle in the music field. I respect Che's
ability to not have fit in and still have had a great life with the
guitar. I have years of other stories, but times change, people change
and life goes on.
Maybe some day some where some people in public education will take
advantage of all the guitar offers for musical growth and appreciation.
Richard Spross
Great post and tough life, sir, my hats off to you, particularly for
remaining ever hopeful!
--
Carlos Barrientos
"mailto:***@sprintmail.com"
Phone: (512) 218 - 8322
David Raleigh Arnold
2008-03-28 06:49:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many expensive
painos and keep them tuned.
That's not just speculation. Remember the autoharp? Very easy to play
chords on, but forever to tune, so they rust away in storage.

The easiest possible instrument to learn a very few chords on is the
original four string banjo, 3 long and one short: (4)g' g b d'. C =
0012, G = 0000, G7 is 0003, Em = x002, and D is 7777. With polyester or
carbon strings it could stay in tune decently, and it is easy to tune.
One can move on to guitar, uke, lute, mandolin or any sort of banjo with
a considerable head start.

Another interesting starter instrument is the tin whistle.
Post by e***@yahoo.com
But guitar is another matter. I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical". Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
I've been working at that. See the "Ten Lessons".
Post by e***@yahoo.com
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Sure. It's not taught in the schools, that's why.

Part of the problem is the essential insanity and immorality of funding
schools through taxes on residential property. When residential
property was income producing farms or home businesses, real estate
taxes were income taxes. The solution is to tax the owners of
residential property according to the adjusted gross income of the
residents, and for the federal government to do most of the funding of
the schools under their *mandate* to "promote the general welfare".

I think that it is unfortunate that the generic unamplified guitar is
not regarded with more respect as a melody instrument. Young guitar
players are bullied into becoming accompanists, will he nill he. Many
reasons for it are obvious, the existence of the electric guitar for
instance.

IAC, it's not a problem, it's a whole mess of them. daveA
--
email: ***@cox.net (put "poisonal" anywhere in subject)
DGT: The very best technical exercises for all guitarists:
http://www.openguitar.com/dynamic.html. Original easy solos at:
http://www.openguitar.com. :::=={_o) David Raleigh Arnold
b***@verizon.net
2008-03-28 12:29:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by e***@yahoo.com
I've been talking to several people with kids in grade school and they
were telling me there are classroom lessons for most wind instruments
except piano and guitar.
I can see why piano is excluded - schools would need too many
expensive painos and keep them tuned.
But guitar is another matter. I'm thinking it's because all the other
instruments have one basic teaching method, "classical". Guitar has
multiple methods for steal string and classical guitars, methods for
folk, popular, rock, jazz and classical, pick style, finger style folk
and classical, etc, but not one basic (accepted) way of learning the
guitar.
Since there are people here who have direct experience with teaching
children, individually and in school environments, can you comment on
the reasons guitar is considered a one on one teacher/student taught
instrument?
Ed S.
and can

All instruments are one-on-one teacher/student taught instruments,
really.
Public school music classes are meant by design as an exposure of a
student to an instrument as part of a well rounded, general
education, and the hope is that the student so inspired will continue
further studies on his own, just as a science student is expected
to further his desired speciality on his own.
That they accomplish as much as they do under those circumstances is
noteworthy, but to expect more than that is unrealistic.
As a private guitar teacher, I wouldn't imagine attempting to teach a
wide variety of instruments in which I'm untrained, for
the obvious fear of passing on bad habits and poor technique instead
of anything more reliable, a common occurrence in school programs (has
anyone here found a high school music protégé who can give a half
note 2 beats?).

The teacher usually has an instrument specialty, and is expected to
teach a lot of instruments at which he knows very little.
The hope of the school is that the students can perform some school
shows and special school functions. The hope of the teacher is that
some
along the way will go on through more specific training to bigger and
better things. The general misconception is that the school program
offers more than that,
and that the parent shouldn't have to actively participate if his
child is going to succeed further.

Then there's always the politics. Parents complain that their taxes go
up for anything other than that in which their own children benefit,
and school
boards acquiesce. This will never change. Schools pour in huge
investments of time and funds in after-school sports programs, knowing
it's the only
way they're going to win matches. Parents of musicians usually benefit
zero from this, but their taxes contribute, like everybody else's. I
don't think that that
kind of bias is healthy for a kid, but that's just me.

Adding guitar to this mix is tricky. In the first place, the guitar is
not a traditional orchestral instrument. It's not included in standard
orchestral repertoire, a staple of
school music programs. In this respect, it's not any more suited for
school music programs than would be the accordian. To work around this
through non-standard
pieces by, say, Rodrigo would raise concerns by parents of other
instrumentalists about favoritism, and would be beyond the
capabitilies of the typical high school guitarist
(not to mention the capabilities of the teacher).

Secondly, the misconception that the guitar is merely a chordal, folk/
rock instrument would be insurmountable, and everybody on this list
has experienced this.

My hope would be that schools offer exposure the guitar, and that from
there I would get some pretty serious students. Usually, though, what
I see are situations in which
parents refuse private lessons for their kids in the belief that
they're getting them at school. Public is public, and private is
private, and ne'er the twain shall meet.

Hey, I'm preaching to the choir!
best,
Bob Hansmann
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...