Thursday, June 30, 2005

MODERN ZOMBIES, EXPLAINED

I just figured out something today about the Terri Shiavo case. The fight to starve and dehydrate her was driven by zombie-phobes.

Really!

Think about it - what is a zombie?

It's an apparently living creature, with no thinking processes intact. Zombies can move, and apparently direct their movements, but there's not a thought directing the purpose of those movements. To the uninitiated, recognizing a zombie is not easy; they move, look at you, may vocalize slightly, and respond to noise.

But you can kill a zombie, because, without the capacity for rational thought, they cannot be considered human.

In fact, it's your duty to kill a zombie, since their only purpose is to cannabalize the living. They survive by eating them.

That's what the pro-death, Michael Shiavo supporters believe about Terri. That, essentially, she was a non-living being, i.e., a zombie. As such, it would be not only legal to kill one, it could be considered a public service.

That belief in zombies is unscientific and irrational doesn't affect the zombie-phobes. When you point out that Terri's living hurt no one, they countered by saying that Terri (i.e., The Zombie, TZ for short) needed to have her body join her non-living brain.

This insistence supports the hypothesis that the MS supporters believe in the literal existence of zombies - the belief that you cannot let a zombie live. To do so endangers human beings' lives. Like Michael Schiavo's. OK, so he wasn't really in danger of being eaten alive by Terri - but, in his mind, he METAPHORICALLY was. His money and time were being nibbled on by the (his belief) non-living, although bizarrely moving and somehow existing, wife.

I know this all sounds bizarre, but I honestly think there's a core of truth to this idea.

Wednesday, June 29, 2005

TO BE AN AMERICAN

John Fund writes about the change in Philadelphia's curriculum that will mandate a course in Black History for all city graduates. He's of the belief that such a course services only Black students, while diluting the effectiveness of basic American History.

I'm prejudiced. I was a History major in college. I was fortunate enough to have professors who were passionate about the discipline, so I both learned about the broad sweep of history over time, and fundamental research methods and techniques. That last served me well, as I've never gotten a teaching job in social studies, but in my other area of science.

America is different - we don't categorize residents as citizens by ancestry, but by choice:
the major reason why it is important for students to study our history: America is an exceptional country in that we were born out of a shared set of ideas--human liberty and opportunity, accompanied by a common set of values. It is often said that while being a Frenchman or German is bound up in ethnicity and ties to the soil, it is possible to become an American by adopting this nation's creed and beliefs.

You CHOOSE to become an American. Yes, I realize that some are fortunate enough to be born here, and so can escape the study that precedes naturalization. All the more reason to hammer into our young the bedrock principles and structures that make our nation possible.

Found via Betsy's Page. I've been reading her for some time. Don't know why it took so long to add her to the blogroll.

VISION VS. GRABBING FOR MARKET SHARE

Asymmetrical Information has a post up that I think many are going to want to read. It's an analysis piece, that examines political parties in marketing terms. Jane dissects the current Democratic crisis (and I think they have reached the crisis point, where their continued existence as a viable party is threatened), and writes about what measures may yet save their party.
On the one hand, you've got the folks who think that if Democrats can just turn themselves into Republican Lite--one third less dour moralism than regular GOP!--they will storm the storied "middle" and seize the reins of power. This is unlikely--the mathematics of winning an election without a motivated base are unappealing, which is why 3rd party candidates do so poorly. Worse, it's pointless. The moderate middle, almost by definition, produces little in the way of big ideas, and its little ideas generally end up as muddy messes--if you start compromised, what you generally end up with is pork-laden monstrosities. And why should people put out the phenomenal amount of energy it takes to get people elected in order to get 2% more spent on teacher salaries?

The other wing of the progressive movement appears to think that all they really need to do is shout louder, since America seems to be getting a mite deaf. I watched Howard Dean on The Daily Show last night, and rarely have I seen a major political figure so thoroughly, even painstakingly, inept at appealing to voters. His remarks elicited cheers from the true-blue supporters in the audience, but only at the expense of alienating every single other person in the country. If he wasn't making ham-fisted attempts to prove Democratic moralistic superiority* by selective and theologically shallow quotation from the bible--an activity that even bible-thumping Republican congressmen undertake with more caution (and erudition) than Mr Dean did--he was claiming that his was the party of real moral values. Cringe. When was the last time you heard an RNC chair say something like that? Answer: you don't, because the "Family values" guys know that you do not garner votes by saying "Everyone who voted for the other guy is immoral" . . . especially when the other guy got a majority. You get votes by talking about what your values are, which (other than gay marriage) Howard Dean had a hard time doing.

It's a meaty piece, that provides plenty of protein to digest. My only complaint about Asymetrical Information is that Jane doesn't post often enough - probably some silly idea about actually having a life offline. As if life really exists offline!

Tuesday, June 28, 2005

MIT SURVEY

I just took a survey on blogging, and I got this neat image.

Take the MIT Weblog Survey

MORE ON KELO

I found this post via A Face Made 4 Radio, A Voice Made 4 the Internet, another Cleveland blog you need to bookmark.

He points out the essential issue with Kelo, that:
Justice Thomas understood that the Court’s action in itself is unconstitutional, a “dangerous” act because the American people now have no other recourse to regain control of their property rights except by another amendment to the Constitution.

I urge you to read it.

It's time we stopped electing legislators who know the law, but are ignorant of our country's history. We need legislators who are informed citizens, and have a feel for what America is. We've been putting "elite leaders" in office, who protect their contributors, but somehow don't see the "common man" (and woman) as their ultimate boss. We don't need any more Progressives, who see their public service as a means of bringing the rabble into line with what they "know" they should want. We need some new Populists - people with average lives, who will always consider what the Founders intended for the common people.

Sunday, June 26, 2005

CLEVELAND COOL

I found this stuff at Blogthings (click on the title link. I found the site courtesy of An American Housewife, a blog you've absolutely GOT to check out.




You Know You're From Cleveland When...


Your idea of fine cuisine includes keilbasa and Stroh's beer

You think the Antichrist walks among us and moved to Baltimore in 1995

You refer to Pittsburgh as a Third World nation

You have to look at a map before you realize Cincinnati is NOT in Kentucky

You think political correctness involves using the term "certain ethnic" when telling a joke

You believe plastic lawn flamingos are essential in any landscaping project

Your second car is completely dissolved by salt by the time April rolls around

The phrase "lake effect" strikes terror in your heart

You actually remember when Dennis Kucinich was mayor

You see nothing wrong with wearing white sox with black shoes, even when wearing a tux

Party music involves an accordion

You always knew you lived in the Rock n Roll Capital of the World

You know more about Frankie Yankovic than Weird Al Yankovic

Tourists ask you what time the river catches fire

You believe the Second Coming meant the Browns returning in 1999

You don't really know any homosexuals, you just know that there are a lot of them in Lakewood.

You know you don't really have an accent, the rest of the world does.

You hear there are always famous people in town, but you have never seen one.

You hate country music, don't know anyone that does like country music, and yet WGAR just won the country music station of the year.

You take credit for Cedar Point even though it is 2 hours away.

You honestly believe that Cleveland is the best city in the world.

The Tri-C jingle "students for life" scares the hell out of you.

You take Dead Man's Curve at 60 mph holding your breath.

You know about the Eastside/Westside rivalry, but don't really understand it.

"Good Morning from the Buzzard Morning Zoo" is a jingle you'll never forget.

Your neighborhood schools went without sports because all the senior citizens refused to pass the levies.

You actually know how to pronounce Cuyahoga.

You can't tell Brook Park, Brooklyn, or Old Brooklyn apart.

You see Christmas lights still up in July.

You love BW-3, but have no clue what the heck weck is.

You find yourself singing "Garfield 1-2323" in the shower.

You're still dumbfounded by the Leaping Fountain in Tower City.

You have never ridden in a taxi.

You wear shorts the first day of the year it isn't below 30 and snowing, just because you can.

You have gotten 3 speeding tickets, and they are all from the mile long stretch of a suburb named Linndale.

You have no idea how exactly to get to the Flats, you just kind of end up on a bank and start partying.

You really don't know what the Warehouse District is, you just know that it's a great place to party.

You know who the Jake really is

You hate Baltimore and you have never been there.

St. Patty's Day is your number one holiday, and you aren't Irish.

You're still relishing 1987 when we ALMOST made it to the Super Bowl.

You counted down with the monument in Tower City to the exact second in 1999 when the Browns came back.

You heard Bill Clinton and Drew Carey love Parma Pierogies, but you have yet to ever eat there.

You know Tower City isn't a city at all.

You're Polish.

Stories of Little Italy still send chills down your spine.

At least half of your wardrobe is Tribe apparel.

You actually get these jokes and pass them on to other friends from Cleveland.




Saturday, June 25, 2005

A JUST RESPONSE TO THE KELO DECISION

UPDATE: I was checking out other blogs, and noticed that Villainous Company also quoted the same sections of Thomas's dissent that I did. Just in case I read it there first (and forgot), I want to give her credit, and a trackback.


The Kelo decision on eminent domain being used for private purposes is truly the most awful decision I've seen in a long time. The good thing is that it puts the liberal Supremes on record; likewise, the conservatives came down squarely on the side of the people.

I think the most valuable aspect of the decision is that it underlines the necessity of confirming conservative judges - after all, Clinton was only responsible for Ginsberg and Breyer. Republicans have to take credit (?) for all the other judges. Bush can't afford to select a "compromise" candidate - the impact is too far-reaching.

It was nice to see that Thomas, in particular, used straightforward reasoning in his decision. He pinpointed the essential issues, and based his decision on the historical precedent. I particularly liked:
Something has gone seriously awry with this Court’s interpretation of the Constitution. Though citizens are safe from the government in their homes, the homes themselves are not.


The consequences of today’s decision are not difficult to predict, and promise to be harmful. So-called “urban renewal” programs provide some compensation for the properties they take, but no compensation is possible for the subjective value of these lands to the individuals displaced and the indignity inflicted by uprooting them from their homes. Allowing the government to take property
solely for public purposes is bad enough, but extending
the concept of public purpose to encompass any economically
beneficial goal guarantees that these losses will fall disproportionately on poor communities. Those communities
are not only systematically less likely to put their lands to the highest and best social use, but are also the least politically powerful.

Thomas further explains that, historically, those affected by eminent domain abuse have been, disportionately, black.

Yippee-Ki-Yay! suggests a constitutional amendment to remedy the situation. It's a hoot! Check it out.

Friday, June 24, 2005

SCROLL DOWN FOR TEXT

UPDATE:

7:54 pm - Eastern time

I've been playing around with this blog WAY too long. What happened was that the text no longer displayed anywhere the sidebar appeared. That meant, as the blogroll and stuff was there, that the text of the current posts didn't show up until near the bottom of a very long page.

What I did was play around with the template (after trying all other solutions). I changed it, and it should appear fine in any browser. The down side is that I really liked the original template. Be aware, I'm going to play around with it this weekend (you can tell that I really don't have a life off the web). If I can't get the original template back, I'm going to try to design my own - OMG, that sounds like a real geek talking.


It appears that the text may be appearing below - WAY below. I'm going to play with it to see if I can fix it.


Don't know what's going on, but when I bring up my blog, all that displays is the first line of the last post. The sidebars are intact, but the "guts" of the blog is absent. I checked at blogger, and everything is intact, so I guess it's a temporary problem of display.

I get the same problem in Internet Explorer, so it's not browser-specific. If it doesn't straighten out by the time I get home, I'll try calling tech support.

Wednesday, June 22, 2005

AFRICAN DEBT, EXPLAINED

I've been reading lately about the US, and a major drive to get us to forgive the African countries their debts. The idea behind this is that, by effectively allowing the in-over-their-heads countries to declare bankruptcy, we will be giving them a clean slate, and letting them start over again. Which, according to the theory behind the debt forgiveness, should set things right.

Oh, yeah?

In 1996, a campaign began to persuade the wealthier nations to cancel debts to HIPCs - Heavily Indebted Poor Countries. It's been a popular cause with many liberals.

Folks, allowing the African countries to walk away from their debts does several things, all of them bad:

  • It lets the governments that incurred the debts to continue their spending, without penalty.

    Many Christian groups favor debt-forgiveness. They point out that it's Biblical - regularly recurring forgiveness years are built into the ancient system of Old Testament justice.

    And that's true.

    But, the difference is that the OT debt was incurred to buy animal stock, food, seed, and the like.

    Not enrich themselves.

    One thing that has to be looked at is what the original money was spent on. Yes, that requires a judgement. And we all know how liberals hate JUDGEMENTAL people.

    But, realistically, if we don't make some attempt to apply some criteria for debt cancellation, we risk encouraging countries to spend foreign aid on non-necessary projects. Sort of like allowing a bankrupt person to keep ALL their assets, regardless of whether it is a beat-up car, or a Mercedes. A basic wardrobe, or furs, designer dresses, and Manolo Blahniks. A black & white TV, or a 5-foot HD-plasma screen.

  • It subverts the democratic process. When a leader of a country can bring in the goodies, whether or not he has the support of the people, that dilutes the impact of participatory democracy.

  • It teaches them nothing. It's like enabling a drunk - we'd be enabling Paris Hilton-like spending.

    Like it or not, suffering teaches you something. Generally, it teaches you not to act like such an idiot. By having consequences, life delivers more lessons than The Old Red Schoolhouse.

Not all African countries are in favor of debt cancellation.
"(Debt cancellation) ... cannot work if African governments do not adhere to fiscal discipline, a critical phase in the management of a country's resources," Malawi treasury secretary Milton Kutengule told Reuters in the commercial city Blantyre.

Furthermore,
"Those faithful in servicing their debt like Kenya are being ignored while HIPC (Highly Indebted Poor Countries) who have failed to service the debt are getting more attention. This is not good for Africa," Kenyan Planning and National Development Minister Peter Anyang Nyongo told Reuters in Nairobi.

We do that all the time in American life. And it's not a good thing. People who are totally out of control, like a sodding drunk, are given special treatment by the courts when they create havoc. A one-time drunk gets the book thrown at him.

Someone who tries to clean up their debt pays a lot more money than someone who ignores the whole thing until a crisis brings the house of cards falling down on them.

We need to encourage the countries that have tried to meet us 1/2 way.

A DISTORTED VIEW OF PAYSCALE

Click on the above link to see a CNN Money list of TV Dad's incomes (adjusted for constant dollars). Does anyone else see some glaring mistakes?

The first 20, I don't have a real problem with. I mean, I don't know anyone in those occupations, so I can't say whether the salaries are reasonable from first-hand experience. I will say that the person preparing the table doesn't seem to understand the difference between gross and net (which is scary, given that CNN Money is supposed to be money-savvy). Dr. Huxtable, the OB, is unlikely to take home anywhere near that $ 238 thousand - he would have large malpractice premiums, equipment and employee costs, etc.

No. 26 is the one that fairly jumps off the page. Andy Taylor, sherrif in a small town - $ 84,019?

Not bloody likely.

In Ohio, the top pay for a deputy sheriff in the largest county, with many employees, is $55,889.60. Mayberry was an itty-bitty town in a rural region, with one deputy sheriff of little ability. Is it likely that the pay was so generous?

The discrepancy doesn't give one confidence in CNN Money's analysis. Hope you're not depending on them to steer you right for retirement.

Monday, June 20, 2005

OPINION VACCINATION

In response to a request for reading suggestions for a teen from Amy Welborn, Disputations describes a book he'd like to see:
give me an idea for a book I think would be very helpful for teenagers: The Not-So-Great Ideas, a compendium of bum philosophies that captivate nineteen-year-olds when they first encounter them. Objectivism, solipsism, Marxism, materialism, nihilism: the dead-end sinks of human thought and sources of human misery. Collect them in a single book for high school students that, if nothing else, will teach them their parents aren't the only grown-ups who have lousy ideas.

The trouble with encountering loony ideas for the first time in college is that the person who introduces you to the concept is generally a true believer. As such, they seldom give a balanced presentation, but use their influence to bring you on board, as well.

As with a Comparative Religions class, or an Intro Philosophy class (one that is run on old-fashioned principles), students should be given a broad introduction to the concepts of that philosophy, selected readings, and some critique of its flaws. Think of it as similar to a medical vaccination - a way of innoculating our youth against something potentially harmful to their development.

Sunday, June 19, 2005

BREAKING NEWS ON THE DOWNING MEMOS

You know, I must be the most credulous person on the planet. I thought the Downing Memos didn't prove what the headlines seemed to say they did, but I never questioned their authenticity - until now:
Times reporter Michael Smith admitted that the memos he used are not originals, but retyped copies (via LGF and CQ reader Sapper):

The eight memos — all labeled "secret" or "confidential" — were first obtained by British reporter Michael Smith, who has written about them in The Daily Telegraph and The Sunday Times.

Smith told AP he protected the identity of the source he had obtained the documents from by typing copies of them on plain paper and destroying the originals.

The AP obtained copies of six of the memos (the other two have circulated widely). A senior British official who reviewed the copies said their content appeared authentic. He spoke on condition of anonymity because of the secret nature of the material.

Have the MSM learned NOTHING from the Rather debacle? At the very least, trying to pass off re-typed copies as "documents" is bad journalism. At its most sinister interpretation, it's fraudulent. The reporter involved (British "reporter" Michael Smith) should, at a minimum, lose his job.

Captain's Quarters has more on the story.


You know, this reminds me of a time in my youth, when the stories that kept coming out about government seemed more and more unbelievable. Then, later, confirmation would appear, that made situations seem more bizarre than anything conspiracy theorists could dream up. For a time, my husband and I would jokingly say, in response to any odd event, "The CIA is behind that". We got a little spooked when our kidding around was confirmed by later documentation.

Now, I would be more suspicious about that "documentation". I would question whether it was fabricated to "confirm" liberal suspicions of conservative actions.

Wow - I better lay down. My head is starting to spin. Not unlike I'm sure the news media may do later today with this story.

Saturday, June 18, 2005

TEMPORARILY MIA

I've not been posting as regularly for the last several weeks. There are 2 main reasons:
  • I've been working a temp job. Not terribly exciting, therefore I come home absolutely whipped. More so than if I was doing something interesting. I should be working it for another couple of weeks at most. I've interviewed for another job, and I have a lead on a 2-week physics workshop I might be co-leading.

    So, although I will still be busy, I have hopes that I'll be getting back to a more normal posting schedule soon.

  • I've not been very well. My asthma has gotten worse in the last week, and I've had several major attacks. I started prednisone again (boy, do I hate it - water retention, bad insomnia, etc. But, it works), so I should start improving in a few days.



My take on the main topics right now:
  • The Michael Jackson verdict - hard as it is to take, the jury probably got it right. One of the factors a jury has to evaluate is the credibility of the witnesses against a defendant. And, they were not that credible.

    Did abuse happen? Very likely. Will Jackson be emboldened by the verdict? Unfortunately, probably.

    But am I willing to go to the mattresses over it? NO!

  • Senator Dick Durbin (yeah, he's a real Dick!) - let me understand this.

    He's a Democratic Senator, from Illinois, who:
    teamed up with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) and local law enforcement agencies to launch an initiative to help Illinois become the first state to voluntarily trace every crime gun recovered from a crime scene.

    Right, like no crime would ever happen if the big, bad gun pushers hadn't FORCED the crim- I mean, law-abiding, hard-working accused-but-innocent ALLEGED perp to use a gun to get what a truly compassionate and rational society would have voluntarily given to him, right after they took it from that nasty, evil, WHITE CHRISTIAN rich person.

  • The Schiavo autopsy results - the best anyone can say is that they were inconclusive on the cause for the initial physical collapse. However, heart problems and eating disorders were ruled out.

    I'm iffy on the investigation Jeb Bush ordered. I tend to buy Mr. Schiavo's explanation about the confused times. But, then, I'm not a person who is precise about times.

    On the location of the grave - look, man, throw the parents a bone, and let them know where you have planted the body. It looks petty and spiteful to withhold the information.

    The big push for me, personally, and for everybody I can influence is the Living Will issue.

    DON'T sign the Living Will. Instead, go to The Will to Live site, and download the form. I'm currently in the process of both getting it filled out, and updating my will.

    Do both.

    Now.

  • The Hijacking of the WTC Memorial - I'm a'gin it.

    If the concept of de-emphasizing the 9/11 victims, in favor of wallerin' in "Hate that Evil America" seems twisted to you, go to Take Back the Memorial to find out what you can do about it.

  • The Guantanamo "Human Rights Abuses"? - look, pal, they's killers and bad guys. They's got no right to complain. (I have no idea why I'm channeling my West Virginia ancestors - the modern ones don't even talk that way).

    Room too hot? Room too cold? People screaming at you? Threatening to smack you one? Not able to go to the bathroom?

    Big deal.

    I worked a job like that - in a public, urban school system, which shall be nameless. Only the tough can be teachers today. If this is the best evidence of human rights abuses the liberals can come up with, they need to get a life.

    Or, maybe, try going to a part of the world that TRULY has abuses, and start hollering about it.

    That should work - until they decide to find out how you like the same treatment. You'll get a real education about the abuse, first hand.

    If you live.

  • The African genocides - pick a country, any country (Sudan, Zimbabwe, whatever), and make it your cause. Write to influential people, post about it, make yourself a pest with friends and family.

    It's the only hope these people have. It's a sure bet that the UN won't do anything useful.

    Try printing out a map of the region, and put it up where you will be reminded every day (bathroom mirror? kitchen sink?). Use that reminder to take some action every day. They may still die, but at least you will have made good efforts to stop it.

    Let me be clear about it. You can't possibly save them all, but do whatever you can to save some. Then, write me, and I'll post about what you've done. Maybe, someone else will do the same, or something else, and, together, we can make a difference in their lives.

    We can but do our best.

Thursday, June 16, 2005

PERUSING THE OTHER SIDE

I was reading a fisking of a liberal columnist, and I thought about finding out how the other side thinks. When I first started reading blogs, one I read every day was AlterNet. I decided to return to the site, and see what they were talking about.

The headline "What’s Really Behind the ‘Student Bill of Rights’?" caught my eye.
The latest attempt to return to the time of red-baiting is called -- ironically -- the "Student Bill of Rights." Despite its fine, democratic ring, the phrase is being used to restrict teachers from introducing controversial or provocative ideas into their classrooms.


Actually, that's a strong mis-statement about the intent and meaning of the Academic Bill of Rights. If you doubt it, try reading the entire text - it's relatively short.

The Bill of Rights is designed to INCREASE freedom of speech, not surpress it. In my experience, many professors have little restraint in their liberal expressions of political belief. But, many students self-edit their opinions, both for fear of a lowered grade, as well as disinclination to receive abuse for non-PC thought.

The article uses the example of Santa Rosa College.
Evidence to support charges of biased teaching seemed just as scarce. In a forum on the controversy, student trustee Nick Caston pointed out, "I have been on the Board of Review (the last step of the grievance process) for three years and have never heard a complaint about bias in the class room."

"I've never even talked with any of the students who were involved in this," says red-tagged professor Marty Bennett. "But I do teach a lot of labor history in my social sciences classes, and I'm identified in the community as someone involved in the labor movement. That's probably why I was chosen."

From the Rate My Professor site:
  • Carol Alen - Political Science
    She is very opinionated, and has no problem telling someone that they are flat out wrong, even if it is a matter of opinion. There are only three test the whole semester and a editorial thing, so it make it hard to get a good grade. Doesn't review for the test at all, and lectures by flipping through the book page by page. It's all participation.

    Only has three tests and a debate over a current event. Way to opionated no science to this class all opinion, it helps to be a democrate. Class is boring and not completely factual statistics are thrown out into the class discussion with no back up info such as where they came from.

  • Jeanette Benfarhat - Political Science
    .The problem with this class is that you get into discussions that are based on the current affairs and not coving the text material.


Professor Bennett's ratings and comments are generally positive, but I am questioning just why he focuses on labor history so much in a Women's Studies class. His political opinions are apparently no secret, as one student writes that "He is also on the Santa Rosa Coalition for a Living Wage."

Frankly, the ease of having students post their evaluations on the web is so well known, I wonder why they still use paper and pencil evaluations in most schools. It seems simpler and more useful to put it all on the web. Perhaps that's the problem.

Another useful site for students to express their unhappiness with the level of indoctrination in class is No Indoctrination. The form is longer, and requires specific information. I filled it out on a professor of mine (revenge is sweet), and they even asked for more clarifying information by email.

Sunday, June 12, 2005

GREATEST AMERICANS?

I found the above link from Betsy's Page. I've read her blog for some time, but, for no good reason, never added her to the Blogroll, until now.

I just checked the Greatest American nominees, and it's a truly terrible list.

How can you not have Jaime Escalante, who showed American teachers that, even in the most poverty-ridden minority school, you could demand, and get, excellent work from the students?



How could you create a list that doesn't include the Four Chaplains of WWII, who demonstrated a committment to the greater good, and sacrificed their own lives, that other men might live?



For crying out loud, HUGH HEFNER made the list!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is a VERY great distance between notorious and great. Just because someone is well-known, does not make him/her great.

Wednesday, June 08, 2005

SUMMERS, YOU IDIOT!

I really can't believe that President Lawrence Summers of Harvard fell for that feeble blackmail effort by Nancy Hopkins, of MIT, and other women in science. For their Victorian-maiden-like swooning at the very mention of a gender-based difference in aptitude for science, women faculty members benefited to the tune of $ 50 MILLION. That's right, he ponied up the cash.

And why?

Because he pointed out the unthinkable - that the reason there's fewer women in science is because fewer women have the innate ability.

Bestill my heart!

To a certain extent, Summers did no more than speak the truth. Fewer women are willing to spend the hours necessary to excel in science, math, and engineering. That's a fact.

Those of us who do like those subjects are in the minority. And, I say "US", because I am a science teacher, computer geek (let's just say I can quote Star Trek episodes, program in several languages, and, yes, have a Linux machine or two), and a woman.

But, I know I'm in the minority. At any workshop, convention, conference, or meeting, my gender is less represented. Particularly in the physical sciences or the geekier end of computers.

I kind of like it. Being one of the few girls in the room. I get treated very well, and, after I establish my credentials, am accepted as "one of the guys". I don't take having to prove myself as evidence that men don't want women around - after all, the guys also put the new guys through the same testing.

Being the Rose among Thorns is cool. It does require that you speak "guy" - but, after all these years, I'm fluently bi-lingual. And, in a female way, I really enjoy having the undivided attention of so many men.

A few years ago, I talked to a woman who had quit a Calculus class because the professor said that women never managed to pass. She felt that her experience was evidence of discrimination.

I felt that it was evidence that she could be conned. Guys say stupid stuff like that all the time. But they fold when you hang tough.

180 STATUS

As did many bloggers, I took down my 180 clock (the timer created by PoliPundit to mark the number of days since Kerry promised to sign his 180 form. After all, he did sign the form, and the



rather unflattering photo and school records would seem to prove that, right?

Well, not exactly.

According to Power Line,
The SF 180 directs the National Personnel Records Center to release records, at the request of the documented veteran, and send them to whomever he designates (usually himself) - period. What is the Navy doing in the middle of this? The Navy must have been the designated recipient, on this specific SF 180 (not the Boston Globe, as Kranish explicitly admits). As a Federal entity, the Navy is then subject to Privacy Laws and any release by them had to be additionally waived by Kerry - or not. He could then easily not waive specific documents for release that he found damaging. What the Boston Globe got was the remainder of whatever the Navy received from NPRC, less what Kerry wished to withhold.

There you have it - we got what we asked for - sort of. But, we're still in the same situation as before - we, the public, don't have full access to the information contained in the records. I have no boubt that Kerry will stall for another good length of time, then release some relatively unflattering smidgen of info from the files, saying, "That's all!"

It will be up to the bloggers to continue hammering on the case. Without our constant chivvying and nudging, Kerry the Stoneface will stonewall.

Monday, June 06, 2005

WASHINGTON STATE ELECTION

Just watched the judge's decision on video, and Gregoire's the official governor. After about 1 minute, I suspected that the judge would uphold the certification. My first thought was, "Boy, was that judge on the take".

That's probably not fair; it was, in fact, an extremely conservative ruling on the law. Washington law on elections, you could drive a truck thru. It seems to accept an extremely loose standard for a legal vote.

Now, what should the Republicans do?

Mobilize. They need to meet with the RNC, and strategize on ways to make sure that this NEVER happens again. They need to get the legislature to pass tighter controls on local boards of election, they need to set a standard that NO vote that falls out of the chain of custody can be voted. They need to set up a system of bi-partisan observation at every step of the process, from registration to precinct outposts. It should be clear that everything has to be videotaped, other than the actual voting.

It would be a pity to have to take such draconian measures, but when your adversary is dedicated to winning, no matter what, you have to work harder to keep it legal.

It goes without saying that the first step is a massive effort at voter registration. But that alone won't do the trick. At the national level, the Congress should enact a National Voting Rights Act that compels people to have valid photo ID, in hand, when they vote. No ID, no vote.

COUNTDOWN TO ROTS

I've been following the buzz about Revenge of the Sith for the last few weeks. I haven't gone, yet, because my son and I are waiting for my eldest daughter to arrive in town this week. Going to the movies is something we do as a family.

The reviews I'm reading are mixed. Generally, the special effects aren't faulted, but the ideology behind the movie is.

I wasn't too thrilled with the first 2 episodes. They seemed to have that European, too-cool lack of emotion in the main characters. I yearned for some over-the-top kick-ass American attitude.

Instead, I got Jar-Jar Binks. Yuck.

The whole thing about wrenching Anakin away from his mother seemed contrived, and unnecessary. It seemed to treat the kid as though his prodigy-like abilities allowed the adults to ignore his need to be a kid. Just because you need him to fight for you, is not an adequate excuse for putting him in the middle of a war zone.

Unless, of course, you're Palestinian. In which case, you not only shove him onto the front line, you hold his hand as you walk, with bomb, towards the evil ones Israeli troops.

Jackson's Junction agrees with me:
Lucas' value system is so corrupt he offers us no heroes. In Menace, Obi Wan and Qui Gon (?) meet Anakin. He's like nine years old and a slave to that purple flying thing. A slave. A slave! Do they liberate Anakin? No. Even though they could've done so easily. So, what do they do? They put a little boy in an unbelievably dangerous pod race. If he wins, he's free. If he loses, the Jedi leave him enslaved. What kind of horseshit is that? And even after Anakin wins his freedom the Jedi take him but leave his mother a slave! Those aren't heroes. Those are United Nations workers.


Come on, George [Lucas]! You needed to add humor, the gallant willingness to throw oneself into danger for the sake of another, the courage to live after your loved one dies. Instead you give us wooden METROSEXUAL MEN, and WIMPY WOMEN.

Thursday, June 02, 2005

COMPASSION? OR A COOLY CALCULATED PLAN?

On Right Nation, I found a link to an attempt to use Christian compassion as a way to let convicted felons teach in schools:
A handful of times in the last few years, the members of the Oregon commission charged with determining who will get a license to teach in the state's public schools have found themselves faced with an application from a former prostitute.

Who could be against the desire to see a sinner turn their life around? After all:
The bill, sponsored by Sen. Margaret Carter, D-Portland, would have allowed a school district to employ a woman convicted of prostitution if at least seven years had passed since the conviction, and if she has not been convicted of any other crime in the interim.

This sounds, at first glance, to be a good thing - after all, the WOMEN were probably victims, weren't they?

Or were the intended beneficiaries of the bill WOMEN?

Oregon is one of those "gay-friendly" states. So, any bill that is sponsored that seems to benefit women must be scrutinized carefully to determine whether the hidden effect of the bill is to benefit gay men.

Women have the benefit of the doubt when it comes to crime. It's assumed that female prostitutes are totally victims. That's the "broken blossom" theory. On those grounds, why not allow the reformed victim to teach after she has rehabilitated herself?

I have just 3 words - Mary Jane (should be KAY) Letourneau.

I, like most people, would have said that the very idea of a grown woman sexually abusing a child was ludricrous. It was unthinkable.

Still, despite the recent rash of similar crimes in the last few years, women sexually abusing young boys remains relatively rare.

So, why not let the former felons teach?

Because it would mean that Oregon couldn't keep men who were convicted of sex crimes out of the classroom. And, unfortunately, men constitute a great number of sexual felons, many of whom are totally unsuitable to be teaching. Male prostitutes have a very limited shelf life - they are unlikely to be working "boys" much beyond late teens or early 20s. So, by the time they would be entering the classroom, they could very well qualify for the relaxed rules.

Many gay men have been either denied a teacher license, or had theirs removed, because of a sexually-related crime. Be sure, this bill is a way to get them back into the classroom.

There's a lot of jobs for which convicts could qualify - but teaching young people isn't one that should be on the list.

Wednesday, June 01, 2005

MY FIRST MEME

Mitchell Hadley of Our Word and Welcome to It, has tagged me with the book meme.

1. Total number of books I own: If I just limit it to the ones in our house (not counting the ones at our schools), I'm guessing around 10,000. That's not a typo.
2. The last book I bought: Blow Fly, by Patricia Cornwell. I'm finding her work to be more and more predictable. But, it's great to take on an airplane - it takes my mind off the fact that I might crash, and it doesn't cause hangovers (my other method of handling the fear is to drink copiously).
3. The last book I read: Witness, by Whittaker Chambers. I had to get it in the public library, but it was worth it.
4. Five books that mean a lot to me:
Witness to Hope, by George Weigel - Still finishing it, but in spurts. I dip into it late at night. A great way to fall asleep.
How the Irish Saved Civilization, by Thomas Cahill - One of those Celtic Pride things.
Rebecca, by Daphne du Maurier - One I read in early adolescence. The first anti-heroine of my acquaintance.
Rebecca's Tale, by Sally Beauman - Terrific follow-up to the original. I hesitated to read it, because I'd loved the first part. Usually, those follow-ups totally destroy good memories of the original, but this one ties up loose ends, and yet retains the enigmatic quality of Rebecca.
The Gathering Storm, by Winston Churchill - It reads just like Churchill talked. Pure Winnie! And, the movie they made out of the book is pretty good, too, even if Vanessa Redgrave is in it.
5. Tag five people: Keith (Thompson At Large), David (Sed Contra), Nykola (it'll give her something to do while she has jury duty), Rachel (ArmyWifeToddlerMom), Jimmie & Nicole (The Sundries Shack).

CARNIVAL OF BEST-KEPT SECRET BLOGS

I've decided to hold the 2nd round-up of lesser-known blogs. It's not meant for the beginners, but for those blogs that have been around for a while, but are not ranked in the top 100. Pick your best 3-5 blogs, and send them (with URL) to me.

Remember, we're looking for blogs that haven't had their day in the sun (as yet). We all have our favorites, blogs that post regularly, but, for some reason, haven't broken into being on everybody's blogroll.

Link to the last round-up.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE AN AMERICAN?

This is a video of the famous Farmer speech from Green Acres.

Posted by Hello

I grew up in the Baby Boom years. During that time, it was considered natural to have the students in school, from kindergarten to senior in high school, recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Sometime during high school, all students had a year-long course in Civics. Our society didn't take citizenship for granted; it was expected that you would need to formally teach the basis for our government and culture to the young.

And the schools did teach it. We studied the great documents of our nation's founding - the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. National, state, and local government, and how they worked. Enough of law to have an appreciation of the process, without bogging down in details that were beyond our level of understanding.

We also learned about the fight to preserve our freedoms - how the military, with the active support of the civilians, fought for our liberty. We learned about socialism and communism. As an added bonus, we had some eyewitness testimony from students who themselves, or their families, had experienced other systems of government. We learned about immigration and the contributions of immigrants. For a final, ego-destroying example of the least we should know, we took a practice citizenship test. Most did OK; but it was humbling to realize how much was expected on the test, and how little prepared most people were. I remember talking at the dinner table about the questions. Other than my dad, few of our family or neighbors could answer the questions correctly.

We don't teach citizenship anymore. We're more likely to dwell on the problems of our society. It's too bad, really. We need to know about the framework that forms the basis of our society, and our part in it.

In these days of multi-culturalism, kids are exposed to propagandiziing about the wonders of other cultures. They seldom learn about their own. The assumption that, somehow, they will "pick it up" without a conscious effort is sadly in error.

The funny thing is, on the day of the state proficiency test in Citizenship a few years ago, I had some students who were in a panic about the test. I reminded them about the song from School House Rock that sang about how a bill becomes law. They walked out of class to take the test, humming the song.

When they came back the next day, they were ecstatic about how well they did on that part of the test.

I had a heated discussion (OK, a downright argument) with a professor a few years ago about what it means to be an American. My answer was (and is):
An American is anyone born in the US, or naturalized.

She wasn't satisfied with that answer - she kept asking for more. Knowing what I know about how that class turned out, I realize that she wanted me to commit to limiting citizenship to those who had similar political viewpoints or cultural heritage. Then, naturally, she would devote class time to tearing my racist thinking down.

I wouldn't have then, and don't now, limit my perspective to those who are "like me". I've known people all the way from anarchists to near fascists (from South America). I count among my friends a wide variety of backgrounds, linguistically, racially, and religiously.

But, I've come to believe that being an American is more than an accident of birth. Being an American means committing to the principles laid down in the early days of the Republic. Without that committment to principles, we wouldn't have a United States of America - we'd have a loose collection of states without unifying cohesion - we'd have the EU.

OK, YOUR LIFE DOES SUCK!

Found on Conservative Revolution's headline banner:
You think your life sucks? My Senators are Voinovich and DeWine.

I know how he feels, I'm also from Ohio.

AND I THOUGHT IT ONLY HAPPENED IN CANADA

I'd read about PC gone wild in Canadian education. I never would have believed that it could happen here. This is from the always excellent Common Sense and Wonder
Brooklyn College's School of Education has begun to base evaluations of aspiring teachers in part on their commitment to social justice, raising fears that the college is screening students for their political views.

The School of Education at the CUNY campus initiated last fall a new method of judging teacher candidates based on their "dispositions," a vogue in teacher training across the country that focuses on evaluating teachers' values, apart from their classroom performance.

Critics of the assessment policy warned that aspiring teachers are being judged on how closely their political views are aligned with their instructor's. Ultimately, they said, teacher candidates could be ousted from the School of Education if they are found to have the wrong dispositions.

I was lucky - I was credentialed in 1987, before PC nonsense was firmly entrenched in state schools. Although I was then, as now, more than a little outspoken and irascible, my professors were more amused than otherwise, and did not penalize me for expressing myself in blunt terms.

No so today. Two years, I needed a class in education, with a focus on some aspect of social science. I chose EDB 609: Comparative & International Education.

As Julia Roberts said in Pretty Woman - Big mistake. Huge.

Initially, I threw myself into discussions, antcipating that they would be moderated so as to keep them on focus and civil.

Wrong.

Quickly, it became apparent that the professor steered some of the class (the "right" students - those of color) to respond to any non-PC comment with attack mode. She approvingly nodded as they made one illogical statement after another, completely ignoring any calls to back up a statement with proof.

It didn't take long for the class to polarize. And to marginalize the dissenters. Most folded, wanting to preserve their GPA. I didn't care. I didn't believe that I would suffer in a lowered grade. After all, the final project (a majority of our grade) was a PowerPoint presentation of a research project, and I was very good at both PowerPoint and research.

Boy, was I wrong.

As soon as I started my oral presentation, I knew I was in trouble. She made a face like she'd smelled something bad, and kept that expression on her face the entire time.

Initially, I assumed that I was making my report (Distance Education) too technical for her. So I simplified and added to my explanation.

That made no difference. My final grade was B-.

I got even, though. I posted the story of my experiences on No Indoctrination, which allows you to publicly nail the ba$tard$ who use their position to push their agenda on the unsuspecting.

Lies of the Left

This COULD be a lengthy post. But, I'll try to winnow it down to a reasonable length. The CA Parent Bribery 'Scandal' - the 1...