tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-48120392286466016402024-02-19T03:25:45.673-06:00Ward on WordsFocused on the stories we share... Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.comBlogger269125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-37644497532621236972021-07-18T11:46:00.001-05:002021-07-18T11:57:00.431-05:00On a the contradictions of a [slave-owning] nation conceived in liberty<span style="font-family: arial;">We are in the midst of a dedicated push on the part of some politicians to remove "critical race theory" (CRT) from our schools. My question to those politicians: where is CRT being taught in K-12 schools? </span><span style="font-family: arial;">I was an American Studies major in college and CRT was never a part of the curriculum. It is not part of the curriculum my children have learned in their school. I am not sure why Republicans have decided that CRT is the bane of our existence and the reason for white people to feel bad about themselves, but that's where we are today and they are working hard to ban CRT from schools. </span><div><span style="font-family: arial;"><br /></span></div><div><div><span style="font-family: arial;">In my own state of North Carolina, the <a href="https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article252757753.html" target="_blank">NCGOP is working to pass legislation</a> that would ban affirmative action and prevent teachers from "''</span><span style="background-color: white; caret-color: rgb(34, 34, 34);"><span style="font-family: arial;">indoctrinating' students with Critical Race Theory concepts."</span></span><div><span style="background-color: white; caret-color: rgb(34, 34, 34);"><span style="font-family: arial;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: arial;">Just<i> who</i> is teaching children that "</span><span style="background-color: white; caret-color: rgb(34, 34, 34);"><span style="font-family: arial;"><a href="https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article252757753.html" target="_blank">people solely due to their race or sex should feel guilt, anguish or discomfort"</a>? I don't know the answer to that question - do you? </span></span><div style="box-sizing: inherit; font-stretch: normal; height: 1px; line-height: normal; outline: none; overflow: hidden; width: 1px;"><span style="font-family: arial;"><br style="box-sizing: inherit; outline: none;" />Read more here: https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article252757753.html#storylink=cpy</span></div></div><div><span style="font-family: arial;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: arial;"><span style="background-color: white;">As I noted, the schools in my district do not cover CRT as part of their curriculum. Anecdotally speaking, I have never seen teachers "indoctrinate" children with pernicious theories - not as my experience as a student nor as a parent of students. The hatred for teachers and public education is alarming, however. NC Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson, however, is heading a <a href="https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article249974424.html" target="_blank">task force </a>investigating the indoctrination of our children in schools. One of the complaints he's received: a student was asked to read a story about a transgender person and his family decided to pull the student out of school as a result of this assignment. </span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: arial;"><span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: arial;"><span style="background-color: white;">So what exactly <i>is</i> CRT? According to "<a href="https://www.americanbar.org/groups/crsj/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/civil-rights-reimagining-policing/a-lesson-on-critical-race-theory/" target="_blank">A Lesson on Critical Race Theory," an article by Janel George published in January 2021 on the American Bar Association's</a> website, CRT is "</span></span><span style="font-family: arial;">a practice of interrogating the role of race and racism in society that emerged in the legal academy and spread to other fields of scholarship." In other words, it is an examination of how race and racism have impacted our society. I do not see how anyone can avoid the unpleasant and uncomfortable truth that race and racism have had an enormous impact on our society. Nor do I see issues with students learning about the racism that has impacted our history. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: arial;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: arial;">However, in September 2020, President Donald Trump did assert such a claim when he issued a<a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/09/28/2020-21534/combating-race-and-sex-stereotyping" target="_blank">n executive order "combatting race and sex stereotyping"</a> that prohibited contractors from providing diversity and inclusion training to their employees. In this order, the president speaks of "many people" who are promoting "<span style="background-color: white; caret-color: rgb(51, 51, 51);">the pernicious and false belief that America is an irredeemably racist and sexist country...."</span></span></div><div>
<span style="font-family: arial;"><br /><i>WHO</i> is claiming that America is "an irredeemably racist and sexist country"? Again, anecdotally, I don't hear ANYONE claiming this. I DO hear people discuss the history of racism and sexism in our history. It is a fact that <a href="https://www.loc.gov/classroom-materials/elections/right-to-vote/voting-rights-for-women/" target="_blank">Susan B. Anthony tried to vote in 1872</a> and was arrested for her efforts. Women were not granted the right to vote until the <a href="https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/amendments-11-27?_ga=2.91687315.882854406.1626622766-1693309486.1626622766" target="_blank">19th Amendment </a>passed in 1920. Blacks were considered sub-human and after emancipation, faced enormous challenges in voting until the 1965 Voting Rights Act was passed. Until that point, voting was nothing Black Americans could take for granted. And since SCOTUS rolled back VRA protections in the <i>Shelby vs Holder</i> case, Black voters can no longer take their voting rights for granted. (NC was among the first states to <a href="https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/north-carolina-voter-id/" target="_blank">pass legislation </a><a href="https://on.cc.com/2NNKAMf" target="_blank">targeting Black voting patterns</a> with "<a href="https://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/7-29-16%204th%20Circuit%20NAACP%20v%20NC.pdf" target="_blank">surgical precision</a>.") </span></div><div><span style="font-family: arial;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: arial;">Our problem today is not that some companies provide diversity and equity training, or that academics and lawyers engage in an academic examination of the role of racism in American society. The problem we face today is that America is a nation born of a terrible and divisive hypocrisy - many of those who declared "all men to be created equal" were in fact slaveholders or supporters of slaveholders. So many of the founding fathers owned human property - and yet they went to war against England to defend their own individual liberties. <br />
<br />
And slavery haunts the early years of the nation. It haunts <a href="https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript" target="_blank">the Constitution</a> - you can see this in Article 1 Section 2 of this important founding document: representation and taxation would be determined by the number of free persons and "three fifths of all other persons." It was a brilliant way for slave-holding states to game the system. <br />
<br />
To own people, to hold people as property, one must develop a peculiar pathology - one must believe in the diminished nature of the "beast" one owns. Thomas Jefferson spoke in detail about the differences between Blacks and Whites in his <i><a href="https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=nyp.33433081883005&view=1up&seq=155" target="_blank">Notes on the State of Virginia</a>.</i> Of course that did not stop him from <a href="https://www.monticello.org/sallyhemings/" target="_blank">having children with Sally Hemings</a>, a Monticello slave whose father was also Jefferson's father-in-law. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: arial;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: arial;">That racism was bred into southern plantation life for centuries - and insinuated its way into northern sensibilities as well. How else can it be that slavery was allowed at all in the new nation devoted to freedom and individual liberties? Though Thomas Jefferson found fault with slavery, could his Monticello have been built without slave labor? Could he have had the time and energy to ponder the nature of liberty without slaves to take care of his every need? Imagine the additional <a href="https://www.monticello.org/site/research-and-collections/debt" target="_blank">debt</a> he would have acquired had he been forced to actually pay for labor! <br />
<br />
Reconstruction failed not just because Andrew Johnson was the weakest president we've had. It failed because a seam of racism runs through the core of our nation. It failed because the founding fathers did not have the courage to eliminate slavery from a nation "conceived in liberty." It failed because we went to war to preserve the union - and in doing so, we won the right to maintain citizenship with those who believed fervently in their right to own people. Instead of slicing slave states off the American border, we fought long and hard for the right to call them our fellow Americans. <br />
<br />
Reconstruction became an impossible dilemma. A nation tired of war, devastated by war, consumed by mourning the hundreds of thousands who had died in that war, had to continue the war that actually had begun some four-score years earlier when the founding fathers seceded from England to create a [slave-owning] nation devoted to the principles of liberty and freedom. <br />
<br />
What to do with slaves and their owners was a complex problem that vexed some of the very best minds of the 18th and 19th centuries.<br />
<br />
Reconstruction under Johnson was an abysmal failure. But the question lingers: in the absence of Lincoln and the "better angels" his nature, what leader implementing what policy would have bound the nation's wounds in ways that healed instead of continued the division?</span></div></div></div><div><span style="font-family: arial;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: arial;">Today, rather than silence the discussion of racism in American history, we should be discussing the issues racism has created in our society and celebrating the heroes who have moved us closer to our founding ideal that "all are created equal." </span></div>Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-39960872548352098892014-07-06T15:35:00.000-05:002014-11-15T05:54:44.484-06:00On the religious values of Hobby Lobby<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;">Sometimes I feel like the nation has moved into some weird alternative universe. Hard as it may seem, SCOTUS has me thinking about the IUD. Yes, the IUD, the intra-uterine device. There are two types, one made of copper and one that uses hormones in someway to prevent pregnancy. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;">Until the Hobby Lobby decision, I had no idea that the IUD was viewed by some in America as a murder weapon. I thought it was birth control, plain and simple. Here's <a href="http://www.acog.org/~/media/For%20Patients/faq184.pdf?dmc=1&ts=20140706T1454264919">what the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has to say about how the IUD works</a>:</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-weight: 300;">Both types of IUDs work mainly by preventing </span><span style="font-style: oblique; font-weight: 700;">fertilization </span><span style="font-weight: 300;">of the </span><span style="font-style: oblique; font-weight: 700;">egg </span><span style="font-weight: 300;">by the </span><span style="font-style: oblique; font-weight: 700;">sperm. </span><span style="font-weight: 300;">The hormonal IUD also thickens
cervical mucus, which makes it harder for sperm to enter the uterus and fertilize the egg, and keeps the lining of the uterus
thin, which makes it less likely that a fertilized egg will attach to it.
</span></span></span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;">ACOG also views the IUD, along with the birth control implant, as "the most effective forms of reversible birth control available."</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;">SCOTUS says otherwise. In the Hobby Lobby ruling, SCOTUS codifies the idea that the IUD is a device used to murder fertilized eggs. And the Hobby Lobby ruling codifies the idea that a fertilized egg is a person and that life begins at conception. And the Hobby Lobby ruling also codifies the idea that a corporation is a person who has devout, religious beliefs that must be protected from egregious governmental interference as per the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;">So <i>who</i> is Hobby Lobby? Hobby Lobby is a company owned by the David Green family, whose religion is Pentecostal Christian. <a href="http://www.toledoblade.com/Retail/2014/07/06/For-the-Green-family-which-owns-Hobby-Lobby-business-religion-are-inseparable.html">David Green once characterized himself</a> as the black sheep of the family, as everyone else was engaged in church work. And now, David Green is also involved in church work. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><a href="http://www.forbes.com/companies/hobby-lobby-stores/">According to Forbes</a>, he/she (<i>it is insulting to call a "person" an "it" and I don't want to get in trouble with SCOTUS!) </i>is one of the largest privately held corporations in America. He/she employs 23,000 people, has 578 stores throughout the country, and had sales of $3.3 billion in 2012.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;">And now Hobby Lobby is as religious as the pope! And as opposed to abortion as the pope himself. Thus, Hobby Lobby does not have to include methods of birth control his/her owners find objectionable.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;">Here's a bit from <a href="http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/13-354_olp1.pdf">the majority opinon of SCOTUS</a>:</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">According to HHS and the dissent, these corporations are
not protected by RFRA because they cannot exercise religion. Neither HHS nor the dissent, however, provides any
persuasive explanation for this conclusion.
</span></span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"> It may seem obvious to some that a corporation cannot exercise religion, but apparently, because non-profit religious entities are religious, so too are for-profit companies that sell a load of Chinese junk to American hobbyists.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;">Here's some more from the five pro-Christian white men on the Supreme Court:</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><span style="font-size: small;">The Hahns and
Greens believe that providing the coverage demanded by
the HHS regulations is connected to the destruction of an
embryo in a way that is sufficient to make it immoral for
them to provide the coverage. This belief implicates a
difficult and important question of religion and moral
philosophy, namely, the circumstances under which it is
wrong for a person to perform an act that is innocent in
itself but that has the effect of enabling or facilitating the
commission of an immoral act by another.
</span></span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;">This is terrible language and reasoning from the five conservative justices of the Supreme Court. Abortion is a legally sanctioned medical procedure under today's laws. It <i>is</i> considered immoral among some religious people. But that does not make it immoral. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;">As a legal, medical procedure, abortion is <i>not</i> deemed immoral by the laws of the United States. <i>(I have a feeling it won't be long until SCOTUS changes this - to avoid offending some citizens of the United States whose religion deems this legal medical procedure "immoral.") </i></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;">And so what I don't understand - how the Greens' religion must supersede the law of the land. How are the Greens' morals thwarted when Hobby Lobby's health insurance plan covers IUDs and morning-after pills? How is including the IUD in the Hobby Lobby insurance plan "a substantial burden" on the exercise of religion? The Greens are not obligated to use these products. Hobby Lobby employees are not obligated to use these products. Yet SCOTUS has decided that this corporate entity gets to impose its religion on its employees.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;">It may make sense to the five justices who made this decision, but it makes no sense to me. And the Hobby Lobby decision has opened up a Pandora's box of new court cases from corporations who don't want to lose their religion just because of ACA.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Times,"Times New Roman",serif;">Time for some <a href="http://bit.ly/1lLAaXZ">REM!</a></span> Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-8521594042813083422014-06-09T10:28:00.001-05:002014-06-11T12:14:17.327-05:00On the mythology of the "student-athlete"Do universities provide "student-athletes" with a proper education in exchange for their athletic performance on the field?<br />
<br />
I suppose it depends on the sport. But for the high-profile, high-profit sports, it is not clear that athletes are getting what they deserve from the university. Football and basketball athletes who participate on high-profile teams, the ones we watch on TV, are engaged in <a href="http://www.indystar.com/story/news/2014/03/27/ncaa-approaching-billion-per-year-amid-challenges-players/6973767/">a highly profitable activity</a> (<a href="http://www.policymic.com/articles/85763/here-s-how-many-billions-college-players-will-make-during-march-madness-this-year">Final Four rakes in more advertising dollars than the NFL playoffs</a>) - but due to NCAA rules, the profits do not trickle down to the athletes - they require college <strike>profit centers</strike> student-athletes to remain "amateurs."<br />
<br />
Scholarships are provided to these student athletes, of course - many of these highly skilled athletes are provided full-ride scholarships to excellent universities. <br />
<br />
But are student-athletes getting a good deal? <br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
A California federal court is exploring the issue of whether or not student-athletes are getting their fair share of the enormous profits reaped by the NCAA. From a Chronicle of Higher Ed article:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The plaintiffs, who include Ed O’Bannon, a former UCLA basketball star, and other current and former Bowl Subdivision football players and Division I men’s basketball players, say the NCAA has unfairly prevented them from earning a share of the billions of dollars of revenue the association brings in from television broadcasts and other commercial products in which they appear. They are seeking an injunction that would put an end to the NCAA’s rules limiting their ability to profit from their images.<br />
<br />
The NCAA denies the allegations and has vigorously defended its system, arguing that its rules are necessary to maintain competitive balance and to protect academic values. NCAA athletes are students first, the association has long argued, and allowing them to license their images would create a "bidding war" for players that would undermine their ability to be effective students.<br />
<br />
Lawyers for the plaintiffs say they plan to poke holes in the NCAA’s education claims, calling witnesses who will expose details about colleges' channeling of athletes into easy classes and putting extensive demands on their schedules. Those commitments, which can require up to 40 hours a week of their time, prevent many athletes from receiving a meaningful education, the plaintiffs say.</blockquote>
<br />
Certainly, the NCAA wants to do nothing that would "would undermine their ability to be effective students." <br />
<br />
However, do highly profitable athletes have the time to be "effective students"? That's debatable. In March, t<a href="http://slate.me/OXWAfW">he National Labor Relations Board issued a ruling </a>that paves the way for Northwestern football players to unionize. According to the NLRB ruling, the time college athletes on their high-profile sport far outweighs the time spent in a classroom - this makes them "employees" rather than students. Of course, this case focuses solely on football players who, at Northwestern, tend to graduate from that highly selective school in high numbers. <br />
<br />
In North Carolina, there's a question of a different sort being debated about the role of the "student-athlete" at University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. Has the oldest public university in the country lived up to its promise of educating its student-athletes?<br />
<br />
Rashad McCants, member of UNC's 2005 championship basketball team, says no. <a href="https://draft.blogger.com/McCants%20told%20the%20network%20that%20tutors%20wrote%20his%20papers,%20that%20he%20went%20to%20classes%20about%20half%20the%20time%20at%20UNC-Chapel%20Hill%20and%20that%20no-show%20courses%20in%20the%20Afro-%20and%20African-American%20Studies%20Department,%20or%20AFAM,%20kept%20him%20eligible.%20%20Read%20more%20here:%20http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/06/06/3915764/former-unc-star-rashad-mccants.html#storylink=cpy">According to a Raleigh News Observer story</a>, McCants says that to keep him eligible, "...tutors wrote his papers, that he went to classes about half the time at UNC-Chapel Hill and that no-show courses in the Afro- and African-American Studies Department, or AFAM, kept him eligible." McCants also links his coach to the practice of steering students to no-show or "paper classes" - where the only requirement was a paper at the end of the term.<br />
<br />
Roy Williams, UNC-CH basketball coach and the highest paid public employee in the state of North Carolina, is shocked, <a href="http://bit.ly/1oKgPtv">SHOCKED</a> that one of his former players would accuse him of academic fraud.<br />
<br />
But he also offers this peculiar perspective on these questionable paper classes:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“I thought that meant that a class was on paper but it didn’t really
exist, and then come to find out people are using that terminology
‘paper classes’ to signify independent study courses that you do papers.
... I’ve been told by people that some of those are really, really
good. It shows a lot of discipline because you’re self-directed. If my
players took independent study courses that were offered by this
university for a reason that the university thought they were valuable,
my players, if they took those courses, did the work, and I’m proud of
that part of it.” <br />
<div style="color: black; font: 10pt sans-serif; height: 1px; overflow: hidden; text-align: left; text-transform: none; width: 1px;">
<br />
Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/06/07/3919631/williams-shocked-by-mccants-interview.html#storylink=cpy</div>
</blockquote>
Williams seems not to have been reading his university's press releases about these paper classes; his university, the employer paying him millions of dollars to coach those young men, does not think these particular classes were valuable. From the university's website, <a href="http://bit.ly/1nuaeUN">a message from the new Chancellor, Carol Folt </a>(who was not at UNC when these infractions were happening, FYI):<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“The scrutiny that is taking place here is, of course, part of a much larger national conversation about the role and the impact of college sports and even further about the commitment schools are making to ensure that students are receiving the support they need to succeed in the classroom, to advance to graduation, as well as on the playing field....</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
...Even though there is no evidence that anomalous courses in the since-renamed African and Afro-American studies department were initiated to benefit student-athletes, nearly half of the students who took those courses were student-athletes, she said.<br />
<br />
“Offering courses that were unsupervised was not reflective of the standards that we expect for our University,” Folt said. “All of those students who were involved in those courses deserved better from us.”<br />
<br />
And for years, she said, the University permitted these fraudulent courses to continue because of a lack of academic oversight. “This, too, was wrong and it has undermined our integrity and our reputation, and it’s created a very unhealthy atmosphere of distrust,” Folt said. </blockquote>
UNC has acknowledged that it offered no-show classes - but because they were not only offered to athletes, they're clearly <i>not</i> a part of an unhealthy focus on cheating athletes of their academic accomplishments. They're just the result of a "lack of academic oversight" that many athletes utilized to jack up their GPA and remain eligible.<br />
<br />
Since these infractions came to light several years ago, UNC has taken several different actions to address this problem. The university has fired Julius Nyang’oro, the chairman of the African
American Studies department, where these classes were clustered. They've
launched numerous investigations into the allegations of academic
"irregularities." They've repeatedly attacked Mary Willingham, the whistle-blower, resulting in her resignation from her post as a reading specialist at UNC-CH.<br />
<br />
But it's a problem that just won't die. McCants claims these "fraudulent" classes helped him to go from academic probation to the Dean's list. And he was not the only basketball player from the 2005 championship team to be enrolled in these courses -<a href="http://bit.ly/1ouJlBa"> he's one of five key players on the championship team to be enrolled in these courses.</a> <br />
<br />
All this makes me wonder if UNC-CH would have won at all if these five key players were not academically eligible to play. <br />
<br />
It is highly likely that this problem of the "student-athlete" is not isolated to Chapel Hill. Perhaps, as Taylor Branch wrote in The Atlantic in 2011, it's simply "t<a href="http://bit.ly/1hAeSRI">he shame of college sports.</a>" <br />
<br />
Perhaps, however, it is time to stop ignoring this issue. Perhaps it is time instead to acknowledge that these players in highly lucrative college sports are professional athletes, and since universities - like UNC - are not providing these students with an education, let's pay them their due, in cash, as a salary. It seems only fair. Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-1359845491150046132014-05-28T12:19:00.001-05:002014-05-28T18:34:12.823-05:00The unbearable insanity of being in the state of North CarolinaSo three years ago, I moved away from <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/05/01/people-in-illinois-really-want-to-leave-illinois/">a state</a> that half of the residents want to leave. We left Illinois to settle (for now) in the Tar Heel state.<br />
<br />
And I have to say - coming from a state everyone wants to leave, a state that has nothing in the coffers but a lot of IOUs to state employees looking for their pensions, a state with political corruption famous throughout the nation - nothing I witnessed in the Land of Lincoln has prepared me for politics in the Tea Party Tar Heel state. Nothing in Illinois - not a series of governors on the path to jail, not Blago and his big mouth (and fondness for Kipling), not RM Daley and his crony capitalism that helped the Loop grow pretty flower boxes and a very expensive <a href="http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/66068.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.panoramio.com/photo/66068&h=195&w=258&tbnid=iLW0ycciCcTzmM:&zoom=1&tbnh=160&tbnw=211&usg=__18syAjec_z5ZOyCyMVEWkWya5Is=&docid=H6KGl4W34lz_3M&itg=1&client=safari&sa=X&ei=Cg-GU97GE8WayATz9IDwCg&ved=0CL0BEPwdMA4">Bean</a> as the neighborhoods withered, not the epic failures of privatization set into play by Daley before he retired - none of this prepared me for politics in North Carolina.<br />
<br />
That's how crazy it is in this state today. <br />
<br />
When we moved to North Carolina from up north, it was in part because North Carolina had a reputation for being a moderate Southern state - purple, not blue or red. This is a Southern state that even went for Obama in 2008 (!!!)<br />
<br />
Everything changed in 2010 when the GOP took over the state senate and house. And then it became one of the angriest red states in the country in 2012 when the GOP won all three branches of state government.<br />
<br />
Since achieving super party status, the NCGOP has ripped up everything in the social contract - the NCGOP refused Medicaid expansion, initiated some of the worst voter suppression legislation in the country, looked the other way when a big donor started polluting the Dan River, shrank unemployment compensation (which shrank the labor force participation rate), slashed a huge amount of money from the UNC-system budget (no raises for professors either, under NCGOP rule), etc. and so on. <br />
<br />
It has been more than half a decade since K-12 teachers were given a substantive raise. A couple years ago, they got a 1.2% raise - but that's not a raise - that didn't even cover cost-of-living increases since the last raise. It was PR that could be spun as a raise, but really, the "raise" probably wouldn't even cover a state politician's Starbucks budget. <br />
<br />
Last week, the Republican governor proposed a modest pay raise for many (not all) teachers, and to do so, he had to pull money from the UNC system budget to cover the raises. <br />
<br />
Today, after years of starving K-12 teachers (their pay rank dropped from middle of the pack in 2008 to 46th in 2014), the NCGOP-led state Sentate magnanimously announced generous raises for all teachers - raises that would bring NC back up into the middle of the national pack on the teacher pay scale.<br />
<br />
Of course there is a catch... teachers must give up tenure if they want the raise. Those who do not want to give up tenure do not get a raise. <br />
<br />
Now I may not be the biggest fan of tenure, but this is not the way to get rid of it. To get a long-delayed, much deserved raise in North Carolina, a teacher must first align with NCGOP ideology that tenure has no purpose and no reason for being. In NC, K-12 "tenure" is the right of due process before being dismissed. With that protection removed, I can see a future where teachers who do not teach what the NCGOP deems ideologically appropriate will get fired.<br />
<br />
This is a state that <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/US/north-carolina-bans-latest-science-rising-sea-level/story?id=16913782">made it illegal in 2012 to discuss global warming trends</a>. This is a state that today <a href="http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/disclose-fracking-chemicals-go-jail">wants to make it a felony to discuss chemicals used in fracking</a>. This is a state that passed legislation <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/23/north-carolina-gun-concealed-carry_n_3642182.html">allowing guns in bars and in parks and on college campuses</a>, but arrests citizens for <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/06/how-to-get-arrested-on-moral-monday-a-north-carolina-ministers-protest/277070/">exercising their right to peaceably assemble</a> at the state capitol. <br />
<br />
So it is not far-fetched to think that this is a state where untenured teachers who do not teach creationism will get fired. <br />
<br />
And that is part of the unbearable insanity that comes with being and living and paying taxes and sending one's children to school in the state of North Carolina. Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-30586068667630770202014-05-24T18:09:00.002-05:002014-05-28T17:41:15.362-05:00Geithner gets an F on his stress test. I have not read Tim Geithner's memoir of the crash, <i>Stress Test.</i> [I did read Hank Paulson's memoir of the crash - and discovered that we shared three things in common - birding, residence in Barrington IL (I lived there once, a long time ago) and a love of the boundary waters near Ely MN. Otherwise, Paulson and I do not see eye-to-eye on much, particularly on his handling of the bailout.] <br />
<br />
I don't know if I will read Geithner's book. It is <a href="http://nyti.ms/1jOOxiM">well-written,</a> says Michael Lewis (author of Liar's Poker) in a NY Times review. But as I read Lewis's review, I wanted to throw the book at a wall - and I don't even own the book. Lewis quotes Geithner as saying: <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"We did save the economy, but we lost the country doing it..." </blockquote>
<i>(My God! Is the economy "saved"? Not in my neck of the woods! But the country was indeed lost as a result of the crash.)</i><br />
<br />
Lewis goes on to say:<i><br /></i><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>"</i>Geithner seems genuinely to believe that the details of the behavior inside the financial industry are largely irrelevant — that investors who bought subprime mortgage bonds simply suffered from the same misconceptions as everyone else. But he doesn’t begin to explain why, if investors were so numb to risk, Wall Street went to such lengths to disguise that risk. Why did our financiers stuff so many bad loans into incomprehensibly complex securities that even sophisticated investors were unlikely to understand, and then pressure deeply conflicted ratings agencies to declare them risk-free?"</blockquote>
I can only imagine why the banks hid the risk of their activites, and it was not out of ignorance or stupidity. They knew what they were doing, and they were blessed by a US government seemingly uninterested in holding them accountable for egregious failures. For Geithner, holding bankers accountable is apparently some kind of "Old Testament
vengeance" rather than the normal course of action when people screw up
as spectacularly as bankers did.<br />
<br />
Apparently Repo 105 and over-leveraging
one's business and <a href="http://wardonwords.blogspot.com/2010/01/unlocking-code-to-financial-innovation.html">betting against</a> the US housing market (<i>there's no place like home if you're a Goldman Sachs banker looking to pad the bonus) </i>are
standard business practices we should continue to encourage. And funneling billions and billions and
billions of dollars to bankers was the ONLY way
to solve the issues of the financial sector (<i>Geithner seems unaware
that there was an economy outside of Wall Street, an economy that has
ramped up to putter-speed right now, more than a half decade after the
crash.</i>)<br />
<br />
Geithner spent time on the Daily Show this week, listening to Jon Stewart talk about the book. Stewart devoted quite a bit of time to talking about the book to Geithner - here's <a href="http://on.cc.com/1lJoMfr">part 1</a>, <a href="http://on.cc.com/TE5m5A">part 2</a>, <a href="http://on.cc.com/1jFtIoK">part 3</a>, <a href="http://on.cc.com/1p2mu1q">part 4</a> and <a href="http://on.cc.com/1kybs0y">part 5</a> of the interview. You'll see if you watch the segments, that Geithner, former Treasury Secretary, could barely get a word in edgewise. <br />
<br />
And that's the problem with Geithner. <br />
<a name='more'></a>The man Obama put in charge of
hauling the nation out of the abyss is not very assertive. Michael Lewis
notes this in his review of the book, pulling a quote from Geithner
about this very issue:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“'I had always
been a backstage guy,' Geithner writes by way of general explanation,
but referring specifically to his first, spectacularly unsuccessful,
public speech as Treasury secretary. 'I had spent my career behind the
scenes. Ever since high school, I had dreaded public speaking. . . . I
swayed back and forth, like an unhappy passenger on an unsteady ship. I
kept peering around the teleprompter to look directly at the audience,
which apparently made me look shifty; one commentator said I looked like
a shoplifter. My voice wavered. I tried to sound forceful, but I just
sounded like someone trying to sound forceful.'”</blockquote>
As Geithner acknowledges, the former head of the US Treasury Department, a man who needed to shove the US economy out of its catastrophic free-fall into forward gear, the man charged with jump-starting a near-dead economy, was a failure at being forceful. <br />
<br />
When Geithner does talk in the Daily Show interview, he sounds really wishy-washy. Worse, his spectacular blind spot is revealed over and over and over. In Geithner's world, bankers are good guys who got caught up in a bad thing. It's excruciating to watch - at least, I found the interview to be excruciating to watch. Geithner kept claiming that the bank rescue prevented the terrible downturn from being worse. Stewart kept prodding Geithner to explain why bankers got bailed out and consumers got left holding the bag. "The bankers paid back their loans! America reaped the benefits of this investment! The economy was saved, though the country was lost!" <br />
<br />
In reading/viewing all the publicity over Geithner's <i>Stress Test, </i>I realized this: Obama put a lamb up to defend the nation against bulls and lions - and guess what? We all got eaten by those who like to eat what they kill. Not the change we were looking for back in 2008.... Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-5313774509258727822014-05-15T22:04:00.000-05:002014-05-28T17:41:27.349-05:00Yes, Jill Abramson's firing had everything to do with genderEarlier this year, Bill Keller, former executive editor of the New York Times, was not happy with the reception given to h<a href="http://bit.ly/1hnngzZ">is wife's story</a> in the Guardian about a cancer patient. Emma Keller's story looked at the "ethics of tweeting a terminal illness" and focused attention on Lisa Bonchek Adams, a woman tweeting and blogging about living with Stage IV breast cancer. Emma's post was so polarizing that the Guardian took it down (here's a <a href="http://bit.ly/1hnngzZ">cached version</a>.)<br />
<br />
A couple days after Emma Keller published her story about Lisa Bonchek Adams, Bill Keller wrote a piece about Adams as well. It was called "<a href="http://nyti.ms/1hRis8H">Heroic Measures</a>" and it essentially called on Lisa Adams to shut up and die already. Here's how he opened the essay:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
LISA BONCHEK ADAMS has spent the last seven years in a fierce and very public cage fight with death. Since a mammogram detected the first toxic seeds of cancer in her left breast when she was 37, she has blogged and tweeted copiously about her contest with the advancing disease. She has tweeted through morphine haze and radiation burn. Even by contemporary standards of social-media self-disclosure, she is a phenomenon. (Last week she tweeted her 165,000th tweet.) A rapt audience of several thousand follows her unsparing narrative of mastectomy, chemotherapy, radiation, biopsies and scans, pumps and drains and catheters, grueling drug trials and grim side effects, along with her posts on how to tell the children, potshots at the breast cancer lobby, poetry and resolute calls to “persevere.”</blockquote>
Keller's essay unfortunately has some factual errors - I guess he's perhaps become a careless reporter (like so many reporters these days!) Keller misreports the number of children Adams has (he said two; she has three). He also misrepresents Adams' condition. Adams does not feel she is in a "cage fight with death." She feels she is an example of living with cancer - and she's seeking to prolong the time she has to spend with her very small children. Keller also seems unable to comprehend why/how Adams has amassed this "rapt audience of several thousand" people. And he thinks her efforts to persevere are wasteful and wrong:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"In October 2012 I wrote about my father-in-law’s death from cancer in a British hospital. There, more routinely than in the United States, patients are offered the option of being unplugged from everything except pain killers and allowed to slip peacefully from life. His death seemed to me a humane and honorable alternative to the frantic medical trench warfare that often makes an expensive misery of death in America."</blockquote>
In Keller's mind, instead of engaging in that "medical trench warfare," Adams should choose as his father-in-law chose - to die, rather than seek to prolong life (because young mothers and very old men diagnosed with cancer should always choose death so as not to be a drain on the healthcare system).<br />
<br />
Here's how Keller ends his essay:<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Her digital presence is no doubt a comfort to many of her followers. On the other hand, as cancer experts I consulted pointed out, Adams is the standard-bearer for an approach to cancer that honors the warrior, that may raise false hopes, and that, implicitly, seems to peg patients like my father-in-law as failures.<br />
<br />
"Steven Goodman, an associate dean of the Stanford University School of Medicine, said he cringes at the combat metaphor, because it suggests that those who choose not to spend their final days in battle, using every weapon in the high-tech medical arsenal, lack character or willpower.<br />
<br />
“'I’m the last person to second-guess what she did,' Goodman told me, after perusing Adams’s blog. 'I’m sure it has brought meaning, a deserved sense of accomplishment. But it shouldn’t be unduly praised. Equal praise is due to those who accept an inevitable fate with grace and courage.'”</blockquote>
And that, as we say, is that. Both Kellers feel that Lisa Adams needs to accept her fate (death at a young age) with grace, rather than do what she can to attempt to halt the cancer in her body.<br />
<br />
I write about Keller's "Heroic Measures" essay after reading about Arthur Sulzberger's dismissal of Keller's successor, Jill Abramson. Keller's essay drips with condescension and inaccuracies. One can perhaps infer that as a boss, as a manager, he would likely be assertive, brusque and a bit pushy. When he left that position in 2010, he was replaced by Abramson, the first woman named as executive editor of the New York Times. <br />
<br />
Like Bill Keller, Jill Abramson is considered to be assertive, brusque and pushy. Once, after an unpleasant meeting with her boss, she left the meeting so enraged that she hit a wall and left the office for the rest of the day. And so her boss had to fire her yesterday...<br />
<br />
<br />
Oh wait. That wasn't Jill who hit a wall after an unpleasant meeting. That was Dean Baquet, the guy who reported to her - AND the guy who will now replace her as executive editor. Because Jill Abramson DID get fired yesterday.<br />
<br />
Wall-slamming was Baquet's thing, not Abramson's. According to a <a href="http://politi.co/1jko5NS">snarky Politico story</a> from a year ago - a story focused on how brusque and mean and pushy Abramson was - Baquet had had it with Abramson, and thus was pushed to violence:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"One Monday morning in April, Jill Abramson called Dean Baquet into her office to complain. The executive editor of The New York Times was upset about the paper’s recent news coverage — she felt it wasn’t “buzzy” enough, a source there said — and placed blame on Baquet, her managing editor. A debate ensued, which gave way to an argument. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Minutes later, Baquet burst out of Abramson’s office, slammed his hand against a wall and stormed out of the newsroom. He would be gone for the rest of the day, absent from the editors’ daily 4 p.m. meeting, at which he is a fixture."</blockquote>
The point of the Politico story was to show how awful Abramson was to work for. And they had some info from anonymous sources on how difficult she was as a boss. And then I think, really - was the guy who wants the mom with breast cancer to shut up and die really so good to work for? Was he warm and cuddly and not prone to being "brusque"? Somehow I doubt it. But he got to retire on his own terms. <br />
<br />
And when I read about the second-in-command "bursting out" of his boss's office in a rage, I see a man with a bit of an anger-management problem. In many workplaces, hitting a wall and storming out of work would be considered alarming ways to respond to your boss. <br />
<br />
But because the boss was a woman, Baquet felt emboldened to do so. Would he have stormed out of a meeting with Bill Keller? Somehow I doubt it. And if he had, I doubt the Politico story would make him the sympathetic character. <br />
<br />
I talk about Abramson's "brusque" quality because that's the New York Times has said is the reason for Abramson's departure. From their story on Wednesday:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Arthur O. Sulzberger Jr., the publisher of the paper and the chairman of The New York Times Company, told a stunned newsroom that had been quickly assembled that he had made the decision because of 'an issue with management in the newsroom.' </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Ms. Abramson, 60, had been in the job only since September 2011. But people in the company briefed on the situation described serious tension in her relationship with Mr. Sulzberger, who was concerned about complaints from employees that she was polarizing and mercurial. She had also had clashes with Mr. Baquet."</blockquote>
<i>She was polarizing and mercurial. She had also had clashes with Mr. Baquet..."</i><br />
<br />
They put out a newspaper - it seems inevitable that clashes would occur on occasion.<br />
<br />
Let's take a minute to look at what Abramson DID do as executive editor - other than fight with her second-in-command. According to Margaret Sullivan, the New York Times' public editor, <a href="http://nyti.ms/1jknVpE">Abramson can claim a number of accomplishments</a>. Under her leadership, share price went up; the paper won eight Pulitzers; there was no scandal under her watch; she stood up for her reporters (and opposed certain business practices like "native advertising" - which did not make her popular with the business side)<br />
<br />
And then there is the issue of compensation. <i></i>But I'll leave that for <a href="http://nyr.kr/1jO7CAO">Ken Auletta to explain</a>... it's a great read!Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-44831711553001575332014-04-20T06:30:00.001-05:002014-04-20T06:30:31.322-05:00Reposting an oldie, in honor of the day...<h3>
<b>The advantages of size and might, as revealed by the Easter Egg Hunt</b></h3>
A large crowd clusters near the glass doors. All are gathered together
on this morning via the annual ritual known as the Easter brunch,
celebrating the epic Christian holiday that commemorates resurrection
and rebirth.<br />
<br />
Outside, it is a sunny but chilly spring morning. Inside, the room is
full of people preparing for the Easter egg hunt. Little girls dressed
in pretty dresses. Boys wearing button down shirts and khaki pants.
Adults happy with the knowledge that spring has (hopefully) arrived.<br />
<br />
All of the children are eager for the impending hunt. They cluster near
the door for easy access to the patio outside. They see bright plastic
eggs splash vibrant color on the beautiful green lawn. The excitement
builds. You can hear the murmur of children wondering when it will
start.<br />
<br />
And finally, the moment all the children have been waiting for arrives.
The doors open - and the crowd spills out past the patio and onto the
well manicured lawn where the eggs lay in plain view.<br />
<br />
Only the eagerness has turned into a frenzy. Younger children are
getting pushed around by the bigger children. In the adults who watch, a
worry tickles the mind - that the race for the eggs may get ugly. The
stampede may result in a trampled child. That the lovely Easter morning
may turn tragic.<br />
<a name='more'></a>The fears of tragedy are not realized on this day, however. There is, however,
another issue to address. The larger, bigger, stronger children are
scooping up all the eggs. Smaller, younger, weaker children are getting
shoved out of the way. Some of the smaller children look to their
parents and wonder why there are no eggs for them. Larger children come
back to the patio with their bags stuffed with goodies.<br />
<br />
In the competition for eggs, size matters. With larger size comes
strength and agility that give the older children a decided edge.
Smaller, younger children are simply muscled out of the game.<br />
<br />
Leaving parents to intervene, should they desire, to achieve a more
equitable distribution of eggs. For some, the Easter egg hunt teaches
children that egg wealth goes to the big and mighty. And for other
families in attendance on this day, parental intervention that slightly
changes the distribution of eggs is seen as essential for keeping the
peace at home....
<span class="fullpost"></span>Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-44626887470623402742013-09-21T07:17:00.002-05:002013-09-24T18:48:47.420-05:00"Upsetting the system"<a href="http://nyti.ms/1aTurfY">Joe Nocera's column</a> takes a look at Jamie Dimon's "very long day."<br />
<br />
It was a "terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day" (<i>LOVE that <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Alexander-Terrible-Horrible-Good-Very/dp/0689711735">book</a>!</i>) for Dimon because it included fines of more than $1 billion - $920 million to appease for overwhelming splash of the London Whale, and $389 in fines and restitution for "selling bogus services" to its credit card customers.<br />
<br />
FINALLY, a bank is forced to pay for its criminally foolishness behavior! But it's 2013 - banks have long been acting criminally foolish - why have there been no real fines up to now? (I simply cannot accept<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/16/business/16goldman.html"> the $550 million fine $GS had to pay</a> for the fraudulent Abacus deal as being a serious and significant fine for a company with $13.4 billion in <i>profit</i> that very same year.)<br />
<br />
So why so long before seeing a relatively serious fine for extremely serious infractions? Nocera attributes this to "unfortunate timing." Had the Whale flopped in 2009, the government would have bent over backward to accommodate Chase. According to reporting done by American Banker newspaper, timing is everything:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“The reason is simple,” said the newspaper. “The government then was more worried about harming the system and did not want to potentially upset markets by assessing large fines.”</blockquote>
I see. In a system that had harmed itself in ways that dramatically brought down the global economy, people in power firmly believed holding those responsible would "harm the system." That it has taken five terrible, horrible, no good, very bad years to begin to hold bankers accountable for fraudulent and damaging behaviors is five years too long. And that's a terrible legacy for Obama to leave.... Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-30968056658898599252013-08-03T07:02:00.000-05:002013-08-03T08:22:51.918-05:00Hoarders: the updateGuess what! After <a href="http://nyti.ms/17bOLEZ">news reports</a> focused attention on the company's unnecessary hoarding practices of metal, Goldman Sachs now pledges <a href="http://nyti.ms/1b2Pa0N">a way to make the delays disappear.</a><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">The news is too late for at least <a href="http://nyti.ms/15CupqD">one institution</a> that decided to change a key business practice due to the recent high costs of metal. </span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">I wonder how this will change Goldman's <a href="http://read.bi/17coXbY">strategic outlook on metals.</a> Perhaps metals are not so lucrative now that the artificial shortage is alleviated? </span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">Metals are not the only market Goldman likes to manipulate. Goldman's <a href="http://on.wsj.com/1cit8Kv">sacrificial lamb</a> has been found liable in the massive CDO fraud case that lost one of its clients $1 billion as the same deal gained another client an equal sum.</span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">And there are other recent stories about the damage inflicted by Goldman in other areas:</span><br />
<ul>
<li><span class="fullpost"> HuffPo notes Goldman's "<a href="http://huff.to/MaInVn">predatory pursuit of students</a>" in higher ed</span></li>
<li><span class="fullpost">Washington Post shares Goldman's "<a href="http://wapo.st/w8ljah">long history of duping clients</a></span></li>
<li><span class="fullpost">A blogger discusses <a href="http://bit.ly/keTwXw">Goldman and synthetic CDOs</a></span></li>
<li><span class="fullpost"><a href="http://wardonwords.blogspot.com/2010/01/unlocking-code-to-financial-innovation.html">I discover </a>that Goldman's success at unlocking the code to financial innovation makes me queasy </span></li>
</ul>
<span class="fullpost"><br /></span>
<span class="fullpost">At some point, someone, somewhere is going to have to halt the predatory practices of this company. What's good for Goldman is NOT good for the rest of us. </span>Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-83019054420162393512013-08-01T11:25:00.000-05:002013-08-01T11:25:02.007-05:00Seems I moved to Oceania... Two years ago, I moved from Illinois to North Carolina. It was a jarring move - I'm a life-time resident of the Land of Lincoln, a state where politics are considered a true sporting event. Yet despite the state-wide passion for political sport, governance of that state is at an all-time low. Governors tend to end up in jail. Illinois is facing a terrible fiscal crisis caused by unfunded pensions. Pat Quinn, Illinois' current governor, is now withholding legislator salaries until the passage of pension reform; House Speaker Mike Madigan, the most powerful man in the state, has filed suit because he wants his paycheck regardless of whether or not a significant, long-term problem is solved for the state.<br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">Because of the serious and ongoing political issues of Illinois, I was, to be frank, looking forward to a change of pace. </span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">And the Tar Heel state CERTAINLY has provided that for me... in spades! The GOP has taken charge - and as a colleague told me the other day, the state today is vastly different than the state I moved to two years ago. </span><br />
<br />
<b>What is the Tar Heel State?</b><br />
<span class="fullpost">North Carolina is a fascinating state; very rural in many places, but with an extraordinary focus on innovation in the Research triangle area (Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill). According to the <a href="http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/37000.html">US Census</a>, the median family income is about $46,000, ranking it in the bottom half of the United States. Poverty is a significant issue - about 16 percent of the state's residents live in poverty. </span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">Geographically, it's the widest state in the nation; bordered on the east by the Atlantic Ocean and the beautiful Outerbanks, and on the west, it holds the magnificent beauty of the Blue Ridge mountains. This is a state with historical significance - North Carolina is one of the 13 original colonies; home of some of the first English colonial settlements. </span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">The Wright brothers first took flight here in this state, <a href="http://www.history.com/topics/wright-brothers/videos#wright-brothers">at Kitty Hawk</a>. Sometimes, what happens in North Carolina can transform the world. </span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost"><b>Education long a priority</b> </span><br />
<span class="fullpost">North Carolina has been known for its focus on education. My children are in the local schools; I've been exceptionally happy with their teachers, with their principal, with their supplementary teachers in band and art. I love my school; I appreciate the local businesses who support our fundraisers. </span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">It seems, however, that North Carolina is in a transformational moment right now. And not for the better. The 2013 legislative session was one that seized (for a moment or two) the attention of the nation, with stories by the <a href="http://nyti.ms/16quX0v">New York Times</a>, <a href="http://wapo.st/11oeSez">Washington Post</a>, <a href="http://bit.ly/19qd8Wn">The Atlantic</a>, <a href="http://rol.st/189IUDi">Rolling Stone</a>, among others.</span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">At one point, the 2013 North Carolina legislative session floated the idea of creating <a href="http://huff.to/13R4wpl">a state religion</a>. This was the session that introduced "<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/07/17/1224588/--Motorcyclevagina-Tees-Get-yours-today#">motorcyclevagina</a>" into our cultural lexicon, <a href="http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/07/31/4204714/north-carolina-suspends-license.html">shut down abortion clinics</a> in the state and created what <a href="http://bit.ly/19gNZg3">some call the worst voter suppression bill</a> in the country.</span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">And then there's education. The 2013 budget has an enormous impact on education as well. </span><br />
<span class="fullpost"><br /></span>
<span class="fullpost"><b>Why I live in Oceania</b></span><br />
If you look at <a href="http://www.governor.state.nc.us/budget/education">the governor's website</a>, the new budget seems like a dream come true for educators, with more money than ever before for education, allowing for investments in early childhood education, $10 million set aside for merit pay for deserving teachers, more resources for digital learning. <br />
<br />
But people <a href="http://bit.ly/1aWXcs5">are not happy</a>. Why is that?<br />
<br />
Because North Carolina has become an Orwellian Oceania. Because the <a href="http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/07/31/let-them-eat-cookies-mccrory-offers-baked-goods-to-abortion-law-protesters/http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/07/31/let-them-eat-cookies-mccrory-offers-baked-goods-to-abortion-law-protesters/">governor who likes to give cookies to people protesting serious issues</a> is being disingenous with the facts. <br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
Yes, the education budget is bigger by $400 million than last year's budget. But this is in a state that has systematically chopped funding from education since the crash of 2008. When inflation is factored into the budget, <a href="http://www.ncpolicywatch.com/2013/07/25/vouchers-gain-ground-public-education-loses-in-final-budget/">educators are working with significantly less dollars than in 2008</a>. And there are more children entering the system. North Carolina is also one of the states with a high number of English language learners, which means teachers without support are taxed even further in the classroom. $10 million dollars will go toward vouchers, disinvesting funds from public schools. <br />
<br />
This is a system where <a href="http://www.wral.com/report-nc-teacher-pay-slides-against-peer-states/12190793/">teacher's pay is among the lowest in the nation</a>. Five years ago, North Carolina ranked in the middle for teacher pay. Because of the terrible crash of the economy, teachers have gone without raises for years. This lack of investment in teachers is costly - the state has lost 4,000 new teachers over the last few years - they simply cannot afford to work within the North Carolina system. Losing so many new teachers now has ramifications in the future. <br />
<br />
And that $10 million set aside for merit pay?<a href="http://bit.ly/1edUNcc"> That translates to $500 </a>for each teacher deemed worthy enough to get it. <br />
<br />
Even some Republicans <a href="http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/07/29/3067671/ann-goodnight-massive-mistake.html">are angry</a>. <br />
<br />
<b>Tweeting the "truth" the McCrory way</b> <br />
Today, @PatMcCroryNC, the verified account for the governor, is issuing a stream of tweets about education that are incomprehensible to parents who want the best for their children. Here's an assortment:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Education is everyone’s business & only by working together will we make North Carolina a beacon of educational excellence.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Our people deserve better and I know you will join me in making sure education is the leading factor in North Carolina’s economic comeback.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Education is more than testing, pay scales & rankings. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
It’s about unleashing teachers & focusing on outcomes that will produce highly qualified workers for well-paying jobs. </blockquote>
That's why I know I've moved to Oceania. Moments after passing a budget that offers no raises, values "merit" work as being worth $500, removes any financial incentive for a teacher to seek a master's degree in education, provides teachers with one-to-four year contracts (a one-year contract
is no way to build a curriculum for a classroom, no way to know what you
will be doing next year, what matters, how it matters, very unstable!),
McCrory takes to Twitter to brag about how much he cares about education. <br />
<br />
McCrory is a man who understands the
concept of paying people "so that they could afford to live." In fact, one of
his first acts as governor was to give his cabinet significant raises so that "they could afford to live." Unfortunately, he seems to feel that only his cronies are deserving of this.<br />
<br />
Refusing to acknowledge the fact that pay for North Carolina teachers is among the worst in the nation is a recipe for disaster. Talent will flee. Talent IS fleeing. As a result of the governor's appalling and dishonest approach to governance, the state that once gave us the future of flight is allowing education - the ticket to opportunity and success - to crash down in ruins. <br />
<br />
And that is a terrible legacy for McCrory to leave a state that has so much potential. <br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost"><b>More links...</b></span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost"><a href="http://osbm.nc.gov/thebudget">NC 2013 budget</a></span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost"><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/30/anastasia-trueman-north-carolina_n_3677593.html">NC teacher calls it quits </a></span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost"><a href="http://bit.ly/hHAsKb">What do teachers make? </a><b> </b></span>Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-26058105818218386062013-07-29T19:26:00.001-05:002013-08-14T07:50:07.214-05:00Hoarders - the Bank Holding Company version... Americans, dragged down by a sagging economy, high unemployment and <a href="http://nbcnews.to/13oSb65">a rather astonishing number of people living at risk of poverty</a>, have new reality show to watch: <i>Hoarders - the bank holding company version.</i><br />
<br />
Emboldened by bonuses supplied by the US taxpayer and bolstered by the lack of any oversight or consequences for reprehensible behaviors on Wall Street that led to the collapse of the economy, America's biggest "<a href="http://wardonwords.blogspot.com/2009/08/even-with-benefit-of-hindsight-who-knew.html">bank holding companies</a>" are expanding their businesses. No longer content to supply loans and CDOs and <a href="http://wardonwords.blogspot.com/2010/01/unlocking-code-to-financial-innovation.html">synthetic CDOs</a>, those clever Ivy-educated bankers are in the commodities storage business.<br />
<br />
And <a href="http://nyti.ms/14eBlNN">they're hoarding these commodities</a> like those hoarders <a href="http://www.aetv.com/hoarders/video/">you can watch on A&E.</a><br />
<br />
What does this mean? Your cans of Pepsi, Budweiser and Heineken have just gotten pricier. And the hoarders on Wall Street have just gotten richer.<br />
<br />
This <a href="http://read.bi/17coXbY">Business Insider story</a>
quotes a Goldman Sachs "commodities strategist" on how "for investors,
the case for holding commodities as a strategic move is still
clear...."<br />
<br />
Of course a Goldman Sachs strategist will say
that - they're in control of the strategy and the activity that will
lead to rising prices for commodities that the bank holding companies
are pushing from storage facility to storage facility. (Once the
commodity reaches the actual market and is sold, the price can't go up
any higher, an alarming thought for any Goldman strategist...)<br />
<br />
<a href="http://bit.ly/1aTIxxC">John Oliver on The Daily Show </a>refers to it as a "merry-go-round of
metal," and notes that "the new version of Monopoly is actually perfect.
You just move pieces of metal around and around in a circle, collecting
money whenever you want, and it's guaranteed that nobody is going to
jail." <br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost"><a href="http://nyti.ms/17bOLEZ">New York Times</a> has weighed in on this, noting that:</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="fullpost">"Policy makers must thoroughly investigate the aluminum warehousing strategies to determine whether Goldman and other warehouse operators distorted prices. They should also take a fresh look at whether banks should really be in the business of owning warehouses and other physical infrastructure."</span></blockquote>
Fat chance! In 2009, <a href="http://bit.ly/vfgO30">Dick Durbin went on a radio show</a> and said:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"And the banks -- hard to believe in a time when we're facing a banking crisis that many of the banks created -- are still the most powerful lobby on Capitol Hill. And they frankly own the place."</blockquote>
So they own Congress. And now they own the storage facilities that can be used to park various commodities. And there's nothing <i>anyone</i> can do to stop them.<br />
<br />
Or wait... perhaps there IS an entity that can hit back at the bankers with equal force. Not Congress... not consumers. The white knights that may come to America's rescue could be other capitalists - l<a href="http://slate.me/14vuQyR">ike those at businesses whose bottom line is being reduced by the greedy bankers who are hoarding what they need.</a> Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-73518057486054892562013-07-23T21:16:00.002-05:002014-05-27T09:31:32.989-05:00North Carolina is what happens when the Tea Party is in chargeThe North Carolina General Assembly (NCGA) has been exceptionally busy this week. They passed a budget that trashes primary and secondary education - siphons money from public schools to charter schools, offers no raises to teachers (who've been without a raise for years), offers no incentives for teachers to get a masters degree; removes the possibility of tenure from new hires. <br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost"></span>
And that's just education. And it follows <a href="http://bit.ly/UJjMhq">remarks McCrory made </a>earlier in the year about higher education in North Carolina, home to the first public university in the country:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
“If you want to take gender studies that’s fine, go to a private school and take it,” McCrory told host Bill Bennett, a former U.S. Secretary of Education. “But I don’t want to subsidize that if that’s not going to get someone a job."</blockquote>
<br />
<span class="fullpost"></span>
They've just passed one of the most restrictive voter ID bills in recent history (THANK YOU SCOTUS, NOT!)<br />
<br />
They've also passed one of the most alarming gun bills in America - allowing guns in schools and on campus (in locked cars), allowing patrons to bring concealed guns into bars, and prohibiting local municipalities from regulating the presence of guns in their parks and on greenways.<br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost"></span>
<a href="http://bit.ly/13bDiE2">More than 900 people have been arrested for peaceably assembling</a> in front of the capital during Moral Mondays. Apparently, the constitutional rights of citizens only matter when it comes to the 2nd Amendment.<br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost"></span>
This is a state that has also made <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/11/stateline-unemployment-benefits/2508115/">"disturbing" cuts </a>to unemployment benefits.<br />
<br />
Of course, the loudmouths in Raleigh keep talking about jobs... but never act to create them. <br />
<br />
One of the first acts of the newly elected Governor earlier this year was <a href="http://bit.ly/166FSxq">to give his cabinet a raise</a>, "so they could afford to live...." <br />
<br />
Unfortunately, McCrory and his cronies are creating a state where only he and his buddies will be able to live. <br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost"></span>
More on the actions of NCGA <a href="http://bit.ly/19gLgDs">here</a> and <a href="http://bit.ly/19gNZg3">here</a>.Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-34871249916448075172013-07-16T21:19:00.001-05:002013-08-09T08:27:28.307-05:00David Brooks completely misinterprets The SearchersDavid Brooks was probably feeling very smart and intellectual and clever when he posted <a href="http://nyti.ms/1aN7kXA">his most recent column</a>. He links a great John Ford Western with a look at manhood today in America; he covers current unemployment stats, reflects on boy culture and school culture; he quotes the American Enterprise Institute along with lines from <i>The Searchers</i>. It's all in there.<br />
<br />
The column is a muddled mess.<br />
<br />
He opens with a rather vast claim: "As every discerning person knows, <i>The Searchers</i> is the greatest movie ever made."<br />
<br />
Now I think we can say that discerning people know <i>The Searchers</i> is <i>one of the greatest</i> movies ever made. [I make that claim myself <a href="http://wardonwords.blogspot.com/2009/11/in-time-for-thanksgiving-film-review-of.html">here</a>.] But to assert as fact that it is the very greatest film ever made and to note that if you don't get that fact, you are not a <i>discerning</i> person - which is disdainful and argumentative - is perhaps not the best way to open this column. <br />
<br />
He goes on to note that the close of the West has left American manhood in a perilous state:<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Classics can be interpreted in different ways. These days, <i>The Searchers</i> can be profitably seen as a story about men who are caught on the wrong side of a historical transition.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"The movie’s West was a wild, lawless place, requiring a certain sort of person to tame it. As the University of Virginia literary critic Paul Cantor has pointed out, that person had prepolitical virtues, a willingness to seek revenge, to mete out justice on his own. That kind of person, the hero of most westerns, is hard, confrontational, raw and tough to control.<br />
<br />
"But, as this sort of classic western hero tames the West, he makes himself obsolete. Once the western towns have been pacified, there’s no need for his capacity for violence, nor his righteous fury."</blockquote>
<i>[It seems Brooks has missed coverage of a high profile trial in Sanford, Florida - the trial that gave us a hotly debated verdict on Sunday. It appears that we in America remain fond of those "prepolitical virtues" - that "willingness to seek revenge, to mete out justice on (our) own." And why does Brooks say it can "be profitably seen...?" What does "profit" have to do with this movie review? Or does the conservative mind only value something within the context of "profit?"]</i><br />
<br />
Edwards is a Confederate veteran. He accepts the Southern perspective that misegenation is a tragedy - that mixed blood is something that must be wiped out.<br />
<br />
The late, great <a href="http://bit.ly/15Eh4wl">Roger Ebert notes</a> in his review of The Searchers that:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"The
film is about an obsessive quest. The niece of Ethan Edwards (Wayne) is
kidnapped by Comanches who murder her family and burn their ranch
house. Ethan spends five years on a lonely quest to hunt down the tribe
that holds the girl Debbie (Natalie Wood)--not to rescue her, but to
shoot her dead, because she has become “the leavin's of a Comanche
buck.” Ford knew that his hero's hatred of Indians was wrong, but his
glorification of Ethan's search invites admiration for a twisted man."</blockquote>
Of
course Brooks, an American conservative, admires this twisted
character. In the mind of Brooks, Ethan Edwards is morally ambiguous, but not necessarily "twisted." For Brooks, Ethan Edwards is a powerful symbol of the kind of man that made this nation great, a man whose work made his kind of man "obsolete."<br />
<br />
And this brings us to the fact that we have this terrible male-focused unemployment problem in America. There's this shift in our culture:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Many men were raised with a certain image of male dignity, which emphasized autonomy, reticence, ruggedness, invulnerability and the competitive virtues. Now, thanks to a communications economy, they find themselves in a world that values expressiveness, interpersonal ease, vulnerability and the cooperative virtues."</blockquote>
And in a world that requires cooperation, men who aspire to be Ethan Edwards find themselves blocked from this brave, new world. As Brooks notes:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"There are millions of men on the threshold. They can see through the doorway to what’s inside. But they’re unable or unwilling to come across." </blockquote>
Brooks looks at Ethan Edwards and sees a hero. In his mind, clogged as it is by conservative mind-speak, Brooks fails to see as Ebert does that with <i>The Searchers</i>, "...Ford was trying, imperfectly, even nervously, to depict racism that justified genocide."<br />
<br />
And quite frankly, the world is a better place when Ethan Edwards becomes obsolete. It's unfortunate that conservative thought-leaders do not realize this. <br />
<br />Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-13640846460820147772013-07-15T21:14:00.000-05:002014-04-27T12:56:08.653-05:00On guns and groceries: a look at the Zimmerman trial... Two days ago, as we were watching <i>Saige: An American Girl</i>, our
program was interrupted to give us the verdict in a trial
reflecting today's American zeitgeist - that violent and bloodied intersection of guns and race, the George Zimmerman trial. It was a very jarring end to the sugar-sweet American Girl story about the travails of a 9-year-old artist. My children were upset; they wanted to see the end of the movie; instead we all watched the verdict.<br />
<br />
Today, as I ponder the news and analysis of this trial, I remain melancholy. Was it appropriate to let my 9-year-olds watch the verdict? What about my 13-year old? I remain torn about this. I know that as the verdict was announced, my three children wanted to know what happened. What was this trial about - a trial so significant it cut into the conclusion of an American Girl movie? After I explained the details, they did not understand how an armed adult could kill an unarmed teenager and be considered "not guilty." In our house, we talk a great deal about accountability for one's actions.<br />
<br />
I find I don't understand a lot about this case. I don't understand why a man packed a gun alongside his grocery list (George Zimmerman claimed he was on his way to Target when he spotted the threat to the neighborhood.) I am repulsed and terrified by the idea that people are armed at the grocery store. I googled "taking a gun to a grocery store" today and came across <a href="http://bit.ly/15h4004">this story</a> - about a man who showed up at Kroger's in January with his AR-15 to promote his Second Amendment right to carry a gun (the semi-automatic weapon used in the Sandy Hook massacre.) According to the news story, even the NRA was not amused. But it was the man's legal right to do this. <br />
<br />
I don't understand the threat posed by a 17-year-old in a hoody who was walking to his father's house early in the evening. In his call to <a href="http://bit.ly/15h80h4">the authorities</a>, Zimmerman said "this guy's up to no good." Apparently, he was walking in the neighborhood "looking at all the houses."<br />
<br />
And now that "f***ing punk" is dead.<br />
<br />
The trial of George Zimmerman for the shooting death of Trayvon Martin is over and I have so many questions. <br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
If race was not an issue (and there are many who think the race has nothing to do with this case; here's <a href="http://on.tnr.com/17hbRfz">one</a> such person), what did Trayvon Martin do to attract the attention of the neighborhood watchman? Look at houses? Resemble other "f***ing punks" who'd apparently robbed the community earlier?<br />
<br />
Why didn't Trayvon call 911? Why didn't he run home?<br />
<br />
Who threw the first punch?<br />
<br />
How could a man <a href="http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/state/george-zimmerman-was-arrested-before-trayvon-martin-case-previously-accused-of-domestic-violence">who'd been charged with domestic violence</a> get a gun, and be named as the neighborhood watchman?<br />
<br />
How much will Zimmerman get for a book deal? <br />
<br />
Why did Zimmerman get out of the car? If you<a href="http://thebea.st/146WqbI"> listen to the 911 call</a>, it sounds like Zimmerman gets out of the car when he sees Trayvon Martin start to run; and it sounds like he gets back into the car before the call comes to a close. In pre-trial testimony, Zimmerman claimed he got out of the car to give the authorities a street name; but he was never asked by the dispatcher to give a street name in that call; instead he agrees to meet police at the mailboxes. So why did he feel compelled to jump out to look at street signs when there was a threat so dangerous that <a href="http://nyti.ms/15IWA7Z">Zimmerman didn't want to roll down his windows </a>and ask what the "punk" was doing in the neighborhood?<br />
<br />
How did the neighborhood watchman not know the street he was on?<br />
<br />
Why
did George Zimmerman feel the need to carry a gun on his trip to Target?
Without a gun, George Zimmerman would have been a 28-year-old man
embroiled in a fistfight with a 17-year-old teenager. Instead, he's at the
center of a very polarizing event - the shooting death of an
unarmed teen who'd somehow threatened the neighborhood by walking home from the store with a pack of Skittles in his pocket. When did we become a nation of vigilante citizens, armed to the hilt for even the most mundane of household chores? <br />
<br />
It always bothered me that the infamous <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney_King">1992 L.A. trial into police brutality</a>
was known as the "Rodney King" trial. For whatever reason, it was
labeled with the name of the man assaulted by members of LAPD - not the
names of the policemen actually on trial for the brutality. I don't even
know the names of the cops who were acquitted, but I remember the
victim; I remember the video of him being battered by cops; I remember
the post-verdict riots. It was a moment that forced our nation to focus
on the state of race relations in America. Clearly, we were a troubled
nation when it came to race in 1992. <br />
<br />
More than 20 years later, we're still a troubled nation when it comes to race - even with an African-American man as president. I'll be curious to see how this verdict plays out - will history remember this as the Zimmerman trial or the Trayvon Martin trial? As <a href="http://bit.ly/17fEDNC">GW Bush says,</a> "history takes a long time for us to reach." We'll have to wait to see which way this goes.<br />
<br />
When it comes to the Zimmerman trial, I agree with <a href="http://bit.ly/15gzDqI">one of the great American essayists of our day,</a> who wrote this about the case:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"In trying to assess the killing of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman, two seemingly conflicting truths emerge for me. The first is that based on the case presented by the state, and based on Florida law, George Zimmerman should not have been convicted of second degree murder or manslaughter. The second is that the killing of Trayvon Martin is a profound injustice." </blockquote>
Given the evidence presented at the trial, I don't know how the jury could have come back with anything but a "not guilty" verdict. And that's what is so profoundly sad about this case. We've grown so fond of our guns that a scuffle that ends with a bullet to the heart can logically be considered legal. An armed man perceived an unarmed teenager to be a threat. A scuffle ensued. The man with the gun emerged to tell his side of the story. The unarmed teenager is dead. The shooter is "not guilty." It is an American tragedy played out on a national stage. Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-3989182143726908202013-06-21T20:44:00.001-05:002013-06-21T20:44:45.805-05:00David Brooks mourns the loss of the humanities educationDavid Brooks has <a href="http://nyti.ms/16nokOn">a post</a> on the decline of the humanities. He seems not to understand that educating students to think critically has been under attack for quite some time now. His president, GW Bush, focused money and attention on "teaching to the test." It has been a cataclysmic failure.<br />
<br />
Of course for Brooks, the Ivies are the benchmark. Brooks notes: "Even over the last decade alone, the number of incoming students at Harvard who express interest in becoming humanities majors has dropped by a third."<br />
<br />Brooks seems not to understand that that Ivies are the food source for the Wall Street Banks. An Ivy education focused on the humanities is not the best for those voracious enough to drag down the US economy and then expect a bonus as a result.<br />
<br />
But the focus on the big bucks is not to blame. According to Brooks, humanities professors have "lost faith..." <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Somewhere along the way, many people in the humanities lost faith in this uplifting mission. The humanities turned from an inward to an outward focus. They were less about the old notions of truth, beauty and goodness and more about political and social categories like race, class and gender. Liberal arts professors grew more moralistic when talking about politics but more tentative about private morality because they didn’t want to offend anybody."</blockquote>
Brooks does nail something right. He acknowledges the importance of the teachers who create thinkers out of teenagers: "A few years in that company leaves a lifelong mark."<br />
<br />
Yes. A thousand times yes. Unfortunately, we live in a time where such teaching is belittled and devalued. And that is a tragedy for America. <br />
<br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost"><br /></span>Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-64527015166570010842012-12-20T06:49:00.000-06:002012-12-20T10:23:35.078-06:00On music, memory and a massacreThe other night, we took a family trip to the middle school, to see our son play in the middle school band concert. It was in the gym. It was crowded. It was lovely. I've learned that one of my absolute favorite activities of adulthood is to see school performances of any kind; there is something eternally endearing about watching young children perform in front of a crowd of parents. <br />
<br />
Last night, at our concert, the students played beautifully. They played Ode to Joy; Joyeux Noel, Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer, a Hanukkah Song and many, many more tunes. Yes, there were squeaky notes. Yes, there were some off-kilter renditions of classic holiday tunes. Yes, there were, on occasion, very young and very bored young siblings cantering up and down the gym floor in front of the band. But each musician was so intent on the performance; each musician had practiced diligently prior to the concert; each musician did his or her best last night. It was indeed a lovely night. <br />
<br />
Each class had its own band; the concert started with the 6th graders and moved up to the 8th grade jazz band. Each class showed progressive improvement; when you compared the 6th graders, who are new to the band, with the 8th graders, you could hear the value of the experience a year or two brings. <br />
<br />
But as I sat there, waiting for the concert to begin, I found myself looking at the door of the gym. Waiting for the black-clad angry white youth to show up, pull out a semi-automatic rifle and spray the room with bullets. I was angry with myself for expecting this, but really, quite frankly, it seems appropriate now to expect the appearance of an angry white male armed to the hilt, eager to take out any number of people as an expression of his rage. <a href="http://wapo.st/R4U5HA">This year alone</a>, angry white men have made their feelings of rage known at far too many places, which include a movie theater, a house of worship, a high school cafeteria, a coffee shop, and now, of course, at an elementary school in Newtown, CT.<br />
<br />
The Newtown shooter killed 26 people in 10 minutes. Ten minutes. 600 seconds. A sixth of an hour. Not much time at all. 20 first graders were slaughtered in 10 minutes. A principal and five teachers. I am haunted by this statistic. <br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
I am haunted by the incredible fury those little children saw in the last seconds of their life. I am haunted by the thought of a sunny first grade room, decorated with weather maps and the alphabet and birthday dates, now transformed into a blood-splattered "crime scene." I am haunted by the memory of those <a href="http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/newtown-sandy-hook-school-shooting/hc-newtown-school-shooting-the-victims-20121215,0,6667493.photogallery">smiling, happy photos of the dead</a>; I am haunted by the <a href="http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/newtown-sandy-hook-school-shooting/hc-pictures-newtown-school-shooting-20121214,0,4395918.photogallery">media images </a>of the surviving children wailing, a sister wailing, a community wailing in grief. We tend not to place these overwhelming and powerful and bloodied emotions within a placid and affluent suburban setting. <br />
<br />
<br />
Most of all, I am haunted by the shooter. By the shooters, actually, all of them. By the rage that fills them up and turns them into my worst nightmare. I am haunted by the fact that in America, it is easier to get a semi-automatic rifle that can destroy 26 lives in 10 minutes than it is to get mental health care.<br />
<br />
And I am haunted by the fact that 20 young children, first graders, will never have the opportunity to grow, to see the changes a year or two can bring. They will never fall in love. They will never celebrate Christmas or Hanukkah ever again. They will never experience the joy I felt this week watching my son play in the school band. <br />
<br />
The images of Newtown are lodged deeply in our collective memory. As a nation, we have come to a very dark place, a place where schools and movie theaters become the stages for armed and bloody conflict. <br />
<br />
Our journey to this point has brought with it an opportunity to change. We can, as some suggested, start arming teachers, so as to protect those who claim protection under the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms. Or we can change our view of this amendment - we can understand that it does not provide for the unquestioned ability to own any weapon we desire. We can stop the sale and criminalize the possession of assault rifles. We can stop the sale and criminalize the possession of ammo clips that can mow down an entire first grade in less than the time it takes to watch an episode of "Clifford the Big Red Dog."<br />
<br />
We are at a point where we <i>must</i> change - in order to protect our children from the next potential massacre. In our heart of hearts, we know the answer does not lie in arming teachers to protect children against gun violence. Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-82688220255156475192012-11-10T10:47:00.001-06:002012-11-10T10:47:53.880-06:00The ultimate failure of visionAgainst what (at times) seemed to be insurmountable odds, Americans have re-elected a black man presiding over a bitterly divided America still wallowing in a sludge-filled economic trough.<br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">How did this happen?</span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">A miracle? God's will? What happens when white men became minorities in America? </span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">Perhaps.</span><br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<span class="fullpost"><br /></span>
<span class="fullpost">But what really happened, what really changed the trajectory of the race was the fact that one party in our two-party system has gone missing. The Grand Old Party of Lincoln, Eisenhower, Nixon, and Ford has vanished without a trace. </span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">In its place: madmen pretending to be rational. Pretending that <i>rational</i> thought governs markets. Pretending that science is somehow the provenance of lunatics. That evolution is somehow acceptable only if viewed <a href="http://creationmuseum.org/">through a biblical filter.</a> </span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">The GOP has been hijacked by men (and supported by rather thoughtless women) who state with all seriousness that <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/23/richard-mourdock-abortion_n_2007482.html">pregnancy from rape is "God's will,"</a> - and that <a href="http://www.npr.org/2012/08/20/159308741/weekend-campaign-news">legitimate rape is a powerful contraceptive device</a>. </span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">The GOP propped up a candidate in Illinois - Joe Walsh - a man who never served in war - <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/07/03/510443/joe-walsh-tammy-duckworth-service/">who said his opponent, a veteran who lost her legs in combat, was less of a hero </a>because she mentioned her military service. </span><br />
<span class="fullpost"><br /></span>
<span class="fullpost">The GOP's Mitch McConnell famously stated in the fall of 2010 that <i>"the single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.</i>" For <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/when-did-mcconnell-say-he-wanted-to-make-obama-a-one-term-president/2012/09/24/79fd5cd8-0696-11e2-afff-d6c7f20a83bf_blog.html">some</a>, this was an acceptable use of language. For <a href="http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_16528492">others</a>, McConnell's rhetoric indicated that the GOP was "intensifying their confrontation" with the president, a confrontation that began the day Obama was inaugurated. </span><br />
<span class="fullpost"><br /></span>
<span class="fullpost">For years, we've had a party obsessed with protecting the interests of the wealthy, a party that promotes this thinking under the guise of "the trickle down theory," a long-held GOP belief that concentrating wealth upward will somehow create a rainfall of prosperity in the nation.</span><br />
<span class="fullpost"><br /></span>
<span class="fullpost">It is a theory that has failed to prove true. <a href="http://www.economist.com/node/7055911">Inequality has risen</a>, not diminished since Reagan launched the Laffer Curve onto the nation. And <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/frederickallen/2012/10/02/how-income-inequality-is-damaging-the-u-s/">inequality is increasingly being viewed as a serious problem </a>for the nation. </span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">This year, four years into a terrible economic crisis that crash-landed during the waning days of the Bush administration, the GOP gave us a candidate who refused to share his tax returns, refused to elaborate on his plans to jump-start jobs for Americans, who, <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/full-transcript-mitt-romney-secret-video">when speaking to an elite audience of wealthy donors</a>, characterized nearly half of the citizens of this country as people who are:</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="fullpost">"...dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them.</span></blockquote>
<span class="fullpost"><br /></span>
<span class="fullpost">To the GOP, half the nation is filled with victims. Talk about the ultimate failure of vision. </span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">Unfortunately, post-election analysis by key GOP operatives continues to focus on smearing others as a way to distribute blame for failure. <a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/President/2012/1109/Karl-Rove-on-why-Romney-lost-Obama-was-suppressing-the-vote">Rove claims</a> Obama won by suppressing the vote. <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/332941/mendacity-and-malice-won-mary-matalin#">Mary Matalin claimed victory</a> for a "political narcissistic sociopath [who] leveraged fear and ignorance with a campaign marked by mendacity and malice rather than a mandate for resurgence and reform."</span><br />
<span class="fullpost"><br /></span>
<span class="fullpost">All I can say - I'm glad I do not live in the world as depicted by the GOP. Because that world is fiction. And what I hope will happen is for logical, smart GOP operatives to soon recognize that <i>that</i> world is as much of a fiction as the "news" presented by <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/09/daily-show-jon-stewart-fox-news-bullshit-mountain-romney-secret-video">Fox News</a>. And they will focus on creating policy that unites the nation, rather than divides it; policy that truly seeks prosperity for all, not just a chosen few; policy that reflects the changing complexion of the nation, not just the needs and desires of white men. </span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">What I truly wish for - a Grand Old Party that somehow regains its sanity, its principles and a true vision that will help America move <i>forward. </i>Do you see that coming anytime soon? </span>Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-44364742776715631302012-09-02T10:12:00.001-05:002012-11-17T09:16:12.787-06:00On the dangerous deceptions revealed in Tampa...It was a convention that began in turmoil, disrupted as it was, by an act of God named Isaac. An association with a hurricane was likely <i>not</i> what the Republicans were looking for. There were <a href="http://bit.ly/OE4KVD">too many voices</a> from the GOP base <a href="http://bit.ly/PPAWt3">pointing the finger of blame at godless NOLA</a> after Katrina hit.<br />
<br />
GOP president, GW Bush, was on vacation when Katrina hit. (He <i>loved</i> his vacations! Oh God how GW Bush loved his vacations!) When the President <a href="http://bit.ly/Oe9Mr4">finally showed up</a> to see the devastation wrought by Katrina, he assured the nation that Brownie was doing one "heck of a job," leaving much of the nation outside of his administration scratching their heads about his ability to process critical information about the worst national disaster to hit our shores. <br />
<br />
So beginning the 2012 Republican National Convention under the gloomy God-forsaken, storm-tossed skies brought by Hurricane Isaac was off-script indeed.<br />
<br />
<i>(Making some wonder, what, exactly, was God trying to say to the GOP by sending Isaac their way as their moment in the sun was to begin? )</i><br />
<br />
It was a convention that brought many vivid moments...<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<ul>
<li>Ann Romney promising to talk about love and assuring us, once again, that we could trust her husband. <i>(Reminding us subtly that we need to trust</i><i> </i>her<i> when she says all's well in their tax returns; we're not trusted enough to get that information from them.) </i>She also assured us that "I love you women!" It seemed, however, the women she loved were all mothers - women without children were not necessarily on her radar. (Subtext of her speech could potentially be read as: <i>Breed baby breed...</i>)</li>
</ul>
<br />
<ul>
<li>Paul Ryan gaining for himself a new moniker: <i>Lyin' Ryan</i> for the <a href="http://nyti.ms/NFsEnk">falsehoods </a>sprinkled throughout his speech. Even FoxNews, our fair and balanced supporters of the GOP platform, noted <a href="http://fxn.ws/NFsNas">the separation between rhetoric and fact</a> in Ryan's speech.</li>
</ul>
<br />
<ul>
<li>Electric buzz generated for a "mystery speaker" that turned out to be <a href="http://mashable.com/2012/08/31/clint-eastwood-talking-to-a-chair-video/">Clint Eastwood rambling senselessly to the silent chair</a> in the room. Clint so memorably made everyone's day that no one really remembers the main event - Romney's speech - at all.<i> </i>When it became clear that Eastwooding was more of a negative, the game of <a href="http://nyti.ms/PB5x95">assigning blame</a> got hot. <i>(Making some wonder if the Romney camp will ever accept responsibility for anything they do.)</i></li>
</ul>
<br />
<span class="fullpost">Peggy Noonan has a <a href="http://on.wsj.com/T6qeiv">vividly titled op-ed</a> offering up her notions about the event. According to her piece, with less than three months to go before the election, <i>Republicans </i>[finally] <i>join the battle</i>. I don't quite know where Noonan thinks the Republicans were during the battle for the GOP nomination, but, in her mind, when it was all said and done, they'd shown up in Tampa, ready for war. </span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">Of Mitt, Noonan said this:</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="fullpost">"Mitt Romney's speech? The success of the second night of the convention left people less nervous about the stakes. Nobody expected a great one. There was a broad feeling of, "Look, giving great speeches is not what Mitt does, he does other things."<br /><br />He had to achieve adequacy. He did."</span></blockquote>
And in that summation, Noonan provides a beautiful illustration of the phrase, "the soft bigotry of low expectations."<br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">Because what we need right now is <i>the achievement of adequacy</i> in our presidential candidates....</span><br />
<span class="fullpost"><br /></span>
<span class="fullpost">Noonan also noted: </span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="fullpost">"Condi Rice was a star. She took the role of accomplished and knowledgable public instructor, boiling down the conservative critique of Mr. Obama's foreign policy. What are they upset about? That he's not serious, that he doesn't understand what America must be in the world. The great unanswered question now is where America stands. When the world doesn't know, it becomes 'a more chaotic and dangerous place.'"</span></blockquote>
Condi neglected to mention the dual wars her president had taken America to in the time that she was a principle player on the national security scene. Two wars, and one was "pre-emptive," launched on flimsy evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq - WMD that turned out to be ephemeral, fictional, non-existent.<br />
<br />
Condi forgot to mention that she helped whip up pro-war sentiment back in 2002 by <a href="http://bit.ly/Rzv5qD">going on CNN </a>and saying "we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud." <br />
<br />
Condi forgot to mention that her president once declared the war in Iraq to be a "Mission Accomplished" - way back on May 1, 2003, and she failed to note that that mission is still ongoing today. <br />
<br />
Condi neglected to mention that under the 'unserious' President Obama,
Osama Bin Laden, the man responsible for the 9/11 bombings, was taken
down. <br />
<br />
Condi avoided mentioning that under the previous Republican president - her boss - the world was an incredibly chaotic and dangerous place; that under GW Bush's reign, terrorists so hated America that they flew jets into buildings to try to tear us down; that the <a href="http://bit.ly/PVlJVM">GOP administration failed to note key intelligence that perhaps could have prevented 9/11</a>; that a terrorist operation based in Afghanistan had nothing to do with Saddam Hussein, that a democracy imposed from outside forces onto a country is indeed a fragile democracy. And perhaps such a fragile transformation of a Middle Eastern nation should not require the deaths of American soldiers to attain. <br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">What both Condi Rice and Peggy Noonan fail to acknowledge is that Republicans have been waged in a battle to make Obama a one-term president <i>from the moment he was elected</i>. At a moment of terrible crisis in America, unemployment rising above 10 percent; banks perched on the edge of a precipice; businesses closing down all across the Main Streets of America, the GOP made the decision to obstruct any and every potential solution. Their goal was NOT to get America back on track, but to make sure Obama was <a href="http://bit.ly/NFwYmw">a one-term president</a>. They haven't just shown up last week in Tampa - they've been engaged in creative destruction since well before November 2008. </span><br />
<span class="fullpost"><br /></span>
<span class="fullpost"><i>Their </i>policies under Bush created the worst economic disaster since the Great Depression. <i>Their</i> policies under Bush created TARP, one of the largest welfare programs in US history. <i>Their </i>programs saw bankers receive vast sums of federal money that led to vast bonuses for bankers at a time when jobs were being shed by the millions in the private sector. </span><br />
<span class="fullpost"><br /></span>
<span class="fullpost">We are indeed waged in a battle, a battle for the soul of America. </span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">One party - the Grand Old Party of Lincoln, Eisenhower, Nixon, and Reagan - wants the nation to believe that <i>all</i> of our ills stem from the actions of the current president, that the policies of the Republican president who inhabited the White House from 2000 to 2008 had <i>nothing</i> to do with the terrifying crash of our economy, that a plant closing in Janesville that happened under Bush was really the fault of Obama, that the current president lacks the gravitas to take us into "pre-emptive" wars to save us from WMDs that don't actually exist; that Osama bin Laden must still be alive because to acknowledge his death is to acknowledge an Obama success; that a business built on the destruction of companies is the admirable and forward-thinking way to run American companies today; that rape is a crime that requires the addition of an adjective ("<a href="http://wapo.st/RAoHvd">forcible</a>" via GOP Paul Ryan or "legitimate" via GOP Todd Akin) to fully define it. </span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">In a nation so swept up in a catastrophic economic tsunami, the goal of every policy maker should be the recovery of our nation. Instead, we've got a party devoted to bringing down one man, the man who replaced their man (GWB) who trashed the economy, launched us into two wars that are still going on today, created a federal backstop for failed banks that let them reap the rewards of failure, initiated policies that increased government spending and the deficit. </span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">Instead of taking a deep, thoughtful look into the fissures that led to catastrophe, the GOP's one goal is to destroy the current occupant of the White House.</span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">As <a href="http://bit.ly/OIApDS">Rush Limbaugh noted earlier this year,</a>
"<i>the dirty little secret ... is that every Republican in this country
wants Obama to fail, but none of them have the guts to say so....</i>" </span><br />
<span class="fullpost">
</span>
<br />
<span class="fullpost">That's a terrible focus, and a terrible failure of vision. What we saw in Tampa was a party for whom <i><a href="http://cbsloc.al/T9GdL6">facts are dangerous things</a>.</i> What we saw in Tampa was a party so primed for lying that truth is non-existent for them. </span><br />
<span class="fullpost"><br />What we saw in Tampa was a party with no vision, no goal, no hope for the future of America. What they want more than anything is the removal of Obama from office. Beyond that, they are as silent about the future as they are about Romney's taxes.</span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">What we saw in Tampa was a room full of angry
white people. And we can thank <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qiHNVYRTKP8">Clint Eastwood for illuminating the GOP platform</a> with such vivid intensity. <i>A grumpy old man stood up on stage and argued vaguely with an empty chair.</i> In less than 12 minutes, he summed up the GOP platform - an emotional, rambling tirade of hate focused on an Invisible Obama. </span><br />
<span class="fullpost"><br /></span>
<span class="fullpost"><i>Trust us,"</i> they say. We can <i>trust them</i> once again. Or we can look facts squarely in the face and know that the GOP's SOP is not at all good for America. <br />
</span><br />
<span class="fullpost"><br />
</span>Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-20222721092563128292012-06-06T14:40:00.003-05:002012-07-16T13:18:03.273-05:00Oh ye of little faith! The apocalypse is nigh!And it's not because Walker won in Wisconsin.<br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">No, clearly we're approaching <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0GFRcFm-aY">the end of the world as we know it</a>* because Clint Eastwood has decided to share his <a href="http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-05-18/news/31769224_1_dina-eastwood-show-mixes-clint-eastwood-show">wife and daughters with the world via reality TV</a>. Says the NY Daily News:</span><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="fullpost">"Ultimately, [Dina] Eastwood says, the family drama is a TV version of comfort food, 'like the macaroni and cheese of reality TV.'" </span></blockquote>
<span class="fullpost">This is not making my day. </span><span class="fullpost">I just don't want to admit the anti-hero of the spaghetti western is now serving up mac & cheese.</span><br />
<span class="fullpost"><br /></span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost"><br /></span><br />
<span class="fullpost">*<i>One of my favorite songs. Know some Knox people who like the line about their college. Here's a link to the video: http://youtu.be/Z0GFRcFm-aY</i></span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost"><i><br /></i></span>Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-88432224785130049822012-06-05T09:29:00.001-05:002012-06-05T09:29:37.104-05:00WTF WI?!!!Judgment day has arrived in America's Dairyland. At the end of the day, will Scott Walker still be governor?<br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">That Wisconsin is in such turmoil is a bit of a surprise to me. I grew up on the northern edge of Illinois - as teens, my friends and I would drive into Wisconsin for fun. So my early memories of the state are of a gentle playground: enjoying Milwaukee Summerfest, going to Alpine Valley for concerts; skiing down the Wilmot "Mountain" (a bunny slope from start to finish), strawberry picking, swim meets, catching my first Blue Gill at Lake Geneva (at 5 years old) using a bamboo pole, more intense fishing up in the Great North Woods. As a parent, I brought my children up to Door County for some camping on <a href="http://bit.ly/L5L1wB">Rock Island</a>, a great place to get off the grid for a week.</span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">Today, Wisconsin is the scene of some of the most turbulent politics in America. As <a href="http://bit.ly/LieBRZ">the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel says</a>:</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="fullpost">"Voters will have to decide whether to support Gov. Scott Walker or to dump him from office after less than a year and a half in favor of Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, the candidate they rejected for the job in 2010. On jobs, taxes, education, health care and unions, the candidates are already marking out positions that differ sharply."</span></blockquote>
Walker's got the money (an article in Mother Jones lists him as having raised $30.5 million vs Tom Barrett's $3.9 million.) Will that kind of money be the differentiating factor? (Go to <a href="http://bit.ly/M3Tnmp">this story</a> in MoJo for info on who's trying to buy this win - and note that Walker's support comes predominantly from out-of-state funders.)<br />
<br />
This is an election where every vote will matter; where democracy in
action will determine the course of a state - and perhaps even the
course of a nation.Will out-of-state contributions be the deciding factor? Stay tuned....<br />
<br />
For more stories, check out these links:<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/Governors/2012/0605/Wisconsin-recall-a-big-deal-for-GOP-conservatives-not-just-Scott-Walker-video">Christian Science Monitor</a> on how WI is a big deal for conservatives <br />
<br />
Chicago Trib calls this a <a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-bitter-wisconsin-recall-race-in-voters-hands-20120604,0,4807073.story">"bitter race"</a><br />
<br />
WSJ says "<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303506404577446862029155018.html?mod=WSJ_hps_LEFTTopStories">all eyes are on the turnout</a>" in this race<br />
<br />
WaPo story from a few days ago notes "<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303506404577446862029155018.html?mod=WSJ_hps_LEFTTopStories">the debate moment everyone is talking about</a>" - where Tom Barrett says ""I have a habit of arresting felons; [Scott Walker] has a habit of hiring them."<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.esquire.com/archives/blogs/politics/by_tag/scott%20walker/50;1">Links</a> to a bunch of Esquire stories about the Wisconsin political scene<br />
<br />
For more on Walker's hiring practices, see <a href="http://wardonwords.blogspot.com/2011/04/finding-walker-at-intersection-of.html">this </a>Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-23737043258769793212012-06-02T14:24:00.002-05:002013-01-01T09:47:59.324-06:00How the "lessons of the Banana Man" fail to include the most important lesson of all...The Wall Street Journal has a <a href="http://on.wsj.com/KFQPyf">laudatory story providing "five lessons to be learned from the Banana Man</a>." Samuel Zemurray, the Banana Man, is the typical American success story. Born in 1877, Zemurray was a Russian immigrant who in the later years of the 19th century "recognized his opportunity" in a pile of freckled yellow fruit. Little more than 100 years ago, the banana was an exotic fruit, known by few, and Zemurray was instrumental in widening its appeal and reach to consumers.<br />
<br />
To do so, Zemurray, in 1932, took over United Fruit, a huge multinational company that was struggling during the Great Depression. He turned the company around and "by the time he died in 1961, in the grandest house in New Orleans, he had been a hauler and a cowboy, a farmer, a trader, a political battler, a revolutionary, a philanthropist and a CEO."<br />
<br />
What a life!<br />
<br />
And here, from the WSJ, here are the top five lessons of the Banana Man - but as you read them, please note that they leave out the most important lesson of all:<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"<b>1. Go see for yourself.</b> When Sam decided to become a banana grower, he moved to the jungle in Honduras. He planted stems, walked the fields and loaded banana boats. He believed that this was his great advantage over the executives of United Fruit, the market-leading behemoth that he battled for over a decade. U.F. was bigger, but it was run from an office in Boston. Sam was on the ground; he understood his workers, how they felt, what they feared and believed. Telling fruit honchos in Boston why he knew better, Sam would curse and say, "You're there, I'm here."<br />
<br />
"<b>2. Don't try to be smarter than the problem.</b> In the late 1920s, United Fruit and Sam's company were trying to acquire the same piece of land, a fertile expanse that straddled the border of Honduras and Guatemala. But the land seemed to have two rightful owners, one in Honduras, the other in Guatemala. While U.F. hired lawyers and commissioned studies, trying to determine the legal property holder, Zemurray simply purchased the land twice, once from each owner. A simple problem deserves a simple solution.<br />
<br />
"<b>3. Don't trust the experts.</b> In the 1930s, with United Fruit staggered by the Great Depression—its stock price fell from $100 a share to just over $10—the company's executives, in search of a game plan, consulted experts, solicited reports and interviewed economists. Zemurray wanted answers to the same questions—by then, he was the biggest holder of United Fruit stock—but he went instead to the New Orleans docks, where he buttonholed the sea captains and fruit jobbers who really understood the situation on the ground.<br />
<br />
"He learned, for example, that banana-boat captains had been ordered to cross the Gulf of Mexico at half-speed, thus saving fuel. He also learned that, in the course of the extra days on the water, a large percentage of the cargo was going from yellow to ripe. One of Sam's first orders when he took over U.F. in 1932 was: Don't slow down; cut the number of crossings. Within six months of Sam's ascension, the stock had rallied and reached $50 a share.<br />
<br />
"<b>4. Money can be made again, but a lost reputation is gone forever.</b> Early in his career, Sam joined in a partnership with United Fruit. The behemoth gave him money and helped to distribute his product; he gave the company the use of his ships. One year, when banana workers went on strike in Nicaragua and blockaded the country's rivers, U.F. broke the blockade with Zemurray's ships, his company logo painted in big letters on the side. It made his name hated in Nicaragua. It was one of the events that convinced Sam to dissolve his partnership with U.F., no matter how much he had come to depend on its deep pockets. A person who doesn't control his own name and image has nothing. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"<b>5. When in doubt, do something!</b> When Zemurray took over United Fruit in 1932, the company was a few months from collapse. The stock price was heading to zero, the best workers fleeing. As soon as he took control, he set off on a whirlwind tour, crisscrossing Central and South America, meeting workers in the field and asking for their ideas. The perception of activity, he explained, is just as important as the nature of that activity. The boys in the fields need to know that there is a person in charge. If they think you know what you're doing, they'll follow you anywhere."</blockquote>
<br />
It is indeed an interesting list of lessons to be learned by the Banana Man. But the list omits a critical piece of information - the role played by Zemurray's company in the 1954 coup that removed democracy - and Jacob Arbenz, a democratically elected leader - from Guatemala.<br />
<br />
Here's some background from a <a href="http://nyti.ms/LoskTy">2008 NY Times book review of Peter Chapman's book</a>, <i>Bananas: How the United Fruit Company shaped the world:</i><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"For much of the 20th century, the American banana company United Fruit dominated portions of almost a dozen countries in the Western Hemisphere. It was, Peter Chapman writes in “Bananas,” his breezy but insightful history of the company, 'more powerful than many nation states ... a law unto itself and accustomed to regarding the republics as its private fiefdom.' United Fruit essentially invented not only 'the concept and reality of the banana republic,' but also, as Chapman shows, the concept and reality of the modern banana. 'If it weren’t for United Fruit,' he observes, 'the banana would never have emerged from the dark, then arrived in such quantities as to bring prices that made it available to all.'"</blockquote>
In Guatemala, the company dominated government and the society. Again, from the NY Times book review:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"When a left-wing democratic president named Jacobo Arbenz tried to roll back the company’s dominance in the 1950s (by, among other things, redistributing its fallow land), United Fruit executives saw it as an affront — and set out to help pressure the United States government to engineer a coup. Fortunately for them, virtually every major American official involved in the plotting had a family or business connection to the company itself. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"A young Argentine traveler named Che Guevara happened to be in Guatemala when Arbenz was overthrown in 1954. After that, Che told his mother, 'I left the path of reason.' And so, too, did Latin America. That day marked a turning point, the end of a hopeful age of reform and the beginning of a bloody age of revolution and reaction. Over the next four decades, hundreds of thousands of people — 200,000 in Guatemala alone — were killed in guerrilla attacks, government crackdowns and civil wars across Latin America."</blockquote>
And so the key lesson from the Banana Man should also include this valuable nugget (learned well by some of America's banks):<i> align your company with those in power, and persuade them that the health of your company is instrumental to the health of America. </i><br />
<br />
And if the health of your company requires the CIA to remove a democratically elected leader from power, so be it. <br />
<br />
Links to more info on this topic:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://bit.ly/JXSdxY">Kai Ryssdal interviews Peter Chapman in 2008</a> on NPR's Marketplace<br />
<br />
Historycommons.org gives a <a href="http://bit.ly/KVcWiH">timeline of events in Guatemala</a><br />
<br />
PRwatch.org <a href="http://bit.ly/Mkh13Q">book review of <i>The Father of Spin</i></a>, which talks about the role Ed Bernays played in whipping up the passion needed for a mid-century Central American coup <br />
<br />
Salon.com article on "<a href="http://bit.ly/LWm9ET">America's original fast food</a>" - the banana<br />
<br />Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-57458064769507146272012-01-06T09:41:00.003-06:002012-01-06T09:42:08.502-06:00After all these years, green shoots at last?!!WSJ covers <a href="http://on.wsj.com/x67mLM">the emerging green shoots</a> of the economy - the unemployment rate is dropping, as are the new claims for unemployment.<br />
<br />
Kinda looking like THIS drop in unemployment is for real, not just the "fuzzy math" that comes by not counting people who've given up all hope of ever getting a job.<br />
<br />
Can it be that years after Ben Bernanke so optimistically groomed us for "green shoots," they're finally popping up at last?! Well, according to the WSJ, the Fed's not doing a jig just yet:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"The Federal Reserve, charged with maintaining stable prices and maximum employment, has remained cautious."</blockquote>
Strange to see such caution from an organization that proclaimed the <a href="http://n.pr/xwYgaU">arrival of [the false] spring</a> back in March 2009...Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-57992533769949235272012-01-06T06:23:00.002-06:002012-04-29T12:18:25.892-05:00A "tweaker's" guide to real genius....Am reading <a href="http://amzn.to/Ay7IJx">Isaacson's bio of Jobs</a> right now - it's one of those great, can't-put-down kind of reads, a fascinating glimpse into the life of a man whose inventions literally changed our lives.<br />
<br />
Concurrently, I've just read Malcolm Gladwell's <a href="http://nyr.kr/y6nOWO">New Yorker review</a> of the bio. And feel his characterization of Jobs as a "tweaker" is about as far off base as one could be.<br />
<br />
To prove his point, Gladwell takes us to England at the dawn of the Industrial Age, pondering why England proved to be the center of innovation at that time:<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"In an article published earlier this year, however, the economists Ralf Meisenzahl and Joel Mokyr focus on a different explanation: the role of Britain’s human-capital advantage—in particular, on a group they call “tweakers.” They believe that Britain dominated the industrial revolution because it had a far larger population of skilled engineers and artisans than its competitors: resourceful and creative men who took the signature inventions of the industrial age and tweaked them—refined and perfected them, and made them work. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In 1779, Samuel Crompton, a retiring genius from Lancashire, invented the spinning mule, which made possible the mechanization of cotton manufacture. Yet England’s real advantage was that it had Henry Stones, of Horwich, who added metal rollers to the mule; and James Hargreaves, of Tottington, who figured out how to smooth the acceleration and deceleration of the spinning wheel; and William Kelly, of Glasgow, who worked out how to add water power to the draw stroke; and John Kennedy, of Manchester, who adapted the wheel to turn out fine counts; and, finally, Richard Roberts, also of Manchester, a master of precision machine tooling—and the tweaker’s tweaker. He created the “automatic” spinning mule: an exacting, high-speed, reliable rethinking of Crompton’s original creation. Such men, the economists argue, provided the “micro inventions necessary to make macro inventions highly productive and remunerative.”</blockquote>
For Gladwell, Steve Jobs is the Richard Roberts of the Information Age - the "tweakers tweaker" - one of many men man provided "micro inventions" that pushed the productivity of the creations of true inventors:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"But Isaacson’s biography suggests that he was much more of a tweaker. He borrowed the characteristic features of the Macintosh—the mouse and the icons on the screen—from the engineers at Xerox PARC, after his famous visit there, in 1979. The first portable digital music players came out in 1996. Apple introduced the iPod, in 2001, because Jobs looked at the existing music players on the market and concluded that they “truly sucked.” Smart phones started coming out in the nineteen-nineties. Jobs introduced the iPhone in 2007, more than a decade later, because, Isaacson writes, “he had noticed something odd about the cell phones on the market: They all stank, just like portable music players used to.” </blockquote>
In the end, Gladwell writes, "...Jobs’s vision, brilliant and perfect as it was, was narrow. He was a tweaker to the last, endlessly refining the same territory he had claimed as a young man." To Gladwell, Jobs' contributions are simply refinements of existing tools; Jobs was a man who somehow (inexplicably) "tweaked" his way into the zeitgeist.<br />
<br />
But he is so very wrong. <br />
<br />
Gladwell is pushing 50. He is old enough to remember talking to a friend on the phone while twining oneself in the cable that connected the phone's receiver to the base in another room. Gladwell is old enough to understand that it was the original cell phones that were "tweaks" on Alexander Graham Bell's original invention (an invention that "<a href="http://www.biography.com/people/alexander-graham-bell-9205497?page=2">was the subject of the most involved patent litigation in history</a>" - seems that any true invention is something often claimed by many inventors.)<br />
<br />
And he is right to say that in launching the iPhone, Apple focused its attention on improving an existing technology. In <a href="http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1576854-1,00.html">an article on the initial iPhone launch</a>, Time magazine says:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Cell phones interested Jobs because even though they do all kinds of stuff--calling, text messaging, Web browsing, contact management, music playback, photos and video--they do it very badly, by forcing you to press lots of tiny buttons and navigate diverse heterogeneous interfaces and squint at a tiny screen.</blockquote>
The iPhone, on the other hand, pushed the boundaries of what phones could do. Apple created a entirely new communication tool, one that combined phone connectivity with music, photography and video. Anyone who owned one of those original iPhones could create personalized set lists of favorite songs and take video of events as they're happening and post them on the web. He turned the phone, that communication tool once anchored firmly to the wall,<i> into a revolutionary new tool for use in the Digital Age.</i><br />
<i><br /></i><br />
We saw the power of this "tweak" just this fall with the UC Davis pepper
spray incident. Cell phone video taken by protesters showed a policeman calmly
spraying pepper spray into the faces of students who were passively
seated on the ground. With videos of the event circulating on YouTube,
we did not need to see this event through a UC Davis communications
blitz or via the Fox or MSNBC newsroom filter. We could see just the
event and judge it for ourselves.<i> </i><br />
<br />
Now, thanks to Apple's innovative approach to phone technology, the whole world is indeed watching - but we don't need to wait for Walter Cronkite to explain it to us,.<br />
<br />
Time says this about the initial iPhone launch: <br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
"Perhaps it's not quite right to call the iPhone revolutionary. It won't create a new market or change the entertainment industry the way the iPod did. When you get right down to it, the device doesn't even have that many new features--it's not like Jobs invented voice mail, or text messaging, or conference calling or mobile Web browsing. He just noticed that they were broken, and he fixed them.<br />
<br />
But that's important."</blockquote>
Yes, that's important. And to call the iPhone a "tweak" is like saying Hemingway "tweaked" novel-writing, or George Eastman "tweaked" photography. What Hemingway and Eastman and Jobs did was to revolutionize literature and photography and communication. In taking radically different approaches to existing forms, these men<i> changed how we looked at the world. </i><br />
<br />
You simply cannot say that about the first generation of cell phones, created and produced by people whose names we never knew, not geniuses we remember. <br />
<br />
In reading Gladwell's review, it's as if he feels compelled to "tweak" the existing hagiography of Jobs in order to make an impression of his own. In an article where the genius of Jobs is referred to only in the headline, it's as if Gladwell needs to diminish the giant in order to stand apart from the collective adulation of a true innovator.<br />
<br />
Perhaps it is Gladwell who is the tweaker, not Jobs.<br />
<br />
A read of Isaacson's bio is all you need to understand that Jobs was no saint. He was a confrontational boss, a conflicted parent, and a man who viewed much of the world as populated by "bozos." His insistence on perfection was imperfect, yet it was this insistence that led his teams to improve, innovate and invent tools that have changed how we work, how we listen to music and how we communicate with the world around us. <br />
<br />
And in this age of golden parachutes, bloated CEO salaries and economic wreckage wrought by greed, Jobs was a leader who never forgot why he was in business - to innovate products in ways that enhanced the consumer experience, not just fatten his paycheck. Sadly, that focus on the consumer experience showcases Jobs' innovation in leadership as well.<br />
<br />
In calling Jobs a "tweaker to the last," Gladwell is simply wrong. Steve Jobs was indeed a man who "reimagined the world."Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-657208008772202652011-12-07T07:19:00.001-06:002011-12-07T16:53:50.971-06:00A day that will live in infamySeventy years ago, the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, igniting a force that changed history.<br />
<br />
Though it's a movie about the European theater of World War II, I think of that lovely quote near the end of <i>Saving Private Ryan, </i>when the mortally wounded Captain Miller leans in to Private Ryan as he whispers his last words... "Earn this."<br />
<br />
Those are words that should inspire all of us. <br />
<br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost"></span>Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4812039228646601640.post-85434923306010280022011-11-16T13:05:00.001-06:002012-01-06T12:36:58.410-06:00Showers of doubt and shameIn 1998, a boy came home from school one day with wet hair. His sharp-eyed mother noticed. A conversation was had.<br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">And Jerry Sansdusky first fell into the sightlines of the law.</span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost"> </span><br />
<span class="fullpost">You can find this described in the state of Pennsylvania's <a href="http://www.attorneygeneral.gov/uploadedFiles/Press/Sandusky-Grand-Jury-Presentment.pdf">grand jury presentment </a>about the Sandusky criminal investigation. This is the story of Victim 6.</span><br />
<span class="fullpost"><br /></span><br />
<span class="fullpost">In 1998, Sandusky was still coaching for the Penn State Nittany Lions. In 1998, Sandusky was a highly respected, very successful man who devoted a great deal of free time to The Second Mile, a charity he founded to help "at-risk" youth. </span><br />
<br />
<span class="fullpost">In the case of Victim 6, there was a lengthy investigation by University Police. But the case was closed "after then-Centre County District Attorney Ray Gricar [who vanished without a trace in 2005] decided there would be no criminal charges."</span><br />
<span class="fullpost"><br /></span><br />
<span class="fullpost">However, the mother of Victim 6 decided to have a couple of conversations with Sandusky, conversations that local detectives had eavesdropped on. According to the grand jury presentment, the conversations were about the wrongness of showering naked with young boys:</span><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="fullpost">"The mother of Victim 6 confronted Sandusky about showering with her son, the effect it had on her son, whether Sandusky had sexual feelings when he hugged her naked son in the shower and where Victim's 6's buttocks were when Sandusky hugged him</span><i>.</i></blockquote>
</blockquote>
<i>[Asking a man about the sexual feelings he has for her child while showering naked with him is not a question any mother expects to be asking a highly respected icon of the community! Just saying!]</i> <br />
<br />
The grand jury presentment continues....<br />
<a name='more'></a><br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span class="fullpost">"Sandusky said he showered with other boys and Victim 6's mother tried to make Sandusky promise never to shower with a boy again but he said he would not. She asked him if his 'private parts' touched Victim 6 when he bear-hugged him. Sandusky replied, "I don't think so... maybe.' At the conclusion of the second conversation, after Sandusky was told he could not see Victim 6 anymore, Sandusky said, 'I understand. I was wrong. I wish I could get forgiveness. I know I won't get it from you. I wish I were dead....'"</span></blockquote>
</blockquote>
More than a decade ago, Jerry Sandusky was confronted by a woman who wanted him to promise that he'd never again shower with young boys. He refused to make such a promise. And clearly, he continued to shower with little boys long after he ceased talking to the mother of Victim #6. Long after he acknowledged to the mother that he "was wrong."<br />
<br />
Now in a highly publicized interview, Sandusky tells Bob Costas that yeah, the only wrong thing he did was that inappropriate activity known as showering with young boys.<br />
<br />
In the Costas interview, Jerry certainly set the record straight. He's a man who showered repeatedly with young boys. And he did this despite the conversation he had had with the mother of Victim 6 back in 1998. <i>He knew it was wrong. </i>And, as Sandusky knew then, he's going to have a hard time finding forgiveness for this, and other things.... <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Ward on Wordshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16395634759293431481noreply@blogger.com0