last.fm Playlist

Recent Tracks:

rrlane

I'm rrlane

This is the 3D me.
Make your own,
and we both get Coinz!

Home

Gonna make the switch

I've been a Republican since I've been 18, and even though I've disagreed with policy during this entire administration, I've been loathe to change. I don't really agree with the Dems that much, and I think being an Independent is almost pointless as it bars you from voting in primaries in PA.

 

But Charlie Reese, a very conservative southern Democrat columnist who I disagree with as much as agree with, had an interesting point in today's column concerning capitalism and the global marketplace. To paraphrase, he pointed out succinctly that the idea of unrestrained capitalism only works to benefit a nation whose capitalist corporations profits are tied directly to the fortunes of that nation.

 

However in these days of multinational corporations, an "American" company can send work overseas to its own subsidiary, pay the native work force a pitance, ship the product back here for and sell it for exorbitant prices to a work force it won't employ. The foreign country loses, its workforce loses, the American work force loses, America loses...and the only winner is the corporation.

 

I realize this isn't a new revelation, and it isn't new to me either. But what Reese pointed out was the fact that technically it is possible that this paradigm shift is making us a third world country if you go by the definition that a third world country is one that imports more manufactured goods and exports more raw materials than the other way around. This is a simplistic definition to be sure, but there is some veracity to it.

 

The GOP as it stands now has strayed from the notion that capitalism is a means to an end, and that end is a successful and prosperous country that is conducive to the pursuit of happiness. Now, it seems, capitalism is the means and the end, and that I cannot abide.

Bill O'Reilly has lost it

Here's where we separate the true believers from the apologists. Apparently Bill O'Reilly had a meltdown on his radio show the other day and threatened to have "Fox Security" visit the guy's house.


I tend to not get on the case of people who watch Fox News (though I don't understand why they do it) because I'm willing to concede that some folks just have a different outlook on the state of the world than I do, but honestly, anybody who doesn't think Bill has crossed the line on this one really is rather thick, or they're so wrapped up in the idea of rooting for their own team that they just can't see the forest for the trees.

Teachers and "opening minds"

I've read that teacher Jay Bennish, the fellow who compared Bush to Hitler, says that there is more to the story than the 30 seconds of tape that are played on TV.

 

I hope so.


While I personally agree that there are similarities betwixt the policies of the two compared, I also think he took the wrong approach in the classroom in bringing it up. What he failed to take into account is that there are many people who feel that Bush is a good president, and he was bound to have students in class that feel that way. While he may have indeed "opened some minds" as he put it, he also probably alienated a good number of his students who will now shut out anything he has to say on any subject.


I have very strong feelings about a number of issues, but I do my level best not to bring them up in the classroom. This is not because I'm afraid to voice my opinion, but because I feel it more important that all my students be able to relate to me. I've been told by some students at the end of the year that they think I'm a liberal. Some think I'm a conservative, some think I'm a devout Christian, some think I'm an aetheist. Usually, they all think I follow the thinking they do.


Again, I'm not trying to be a idealistic chameleon--I just feel I should point the way to deep thought, not blaze the trail.

Tennyson's Ulysses still resonates with me

I've never had a problem telling my classes when we hit a poem or work that I'm not particularly enamored to, mainly because I want them to know I'm serious when we begin something that is one of my favorites. This unit we're doing a number of works that I'm very fond of, but none more so that Alfred, Lord Tennyson's "Ulysses." Ulysses, of course, is the Roman name of the Greek hero and protagonist of Homer's epic poem The Odyssey. It tells the tale of the king of Ithaca's ten year voyage home, and though he never stops trying to reach his kingdom and family, he enjoys the many adventures he has along the way. Tennyson's poem is continuation of that story that picks up several years after his return. Ulysses tires of the mundane and tedious duties of tending to his homeland and yearns for a return to the adventurous life he once knew.

"How dull it is to pause, to make an end,

To rust unburnished, not to shine in use!"

Thus, he turns his kingdom over to his son Telemachus and begins a dramatic plea to his old crewmates (those who didn't sail with him on his last voyage, apparently) to join him on one last glorious adventure.I've loved this poem for decades. I inherited most of my grandmother's books when she died, and one of those books was an old collection of Tennyson's works that smelled of attics and memories. I enjoyed Tennyson's poetry as far back as seventh grade because of his affection for classic heroic subjects like King Arthur and Odysseus, and I've always been a sucker for heroic fiction.

Yet it wasn't until college that I truly appreciated it, and for that I have to explain the time frame. I was going for my teaching certification at Edinboro University back in 1990. This was just shortly after the fall of the Berlin Wall and near worldwide collapse of Communism.

To those for whom the Berlin Wall is merely the stuff of text books and retrospective segments on Channel One, I will say that these were exciting times. The world was divided between East and West for as long as I'd been alive, and nothing represented that delineation more than that dour piece of masonry, machine gun posts, and barbed wire. Seeing it topple and be smashed by thousands of frantic Germans seemed like a vindication of everything I'd ever read that pontificated on the virtues of Freedom and Democracy. The only bastions of the Communist menace left it seemed were Cuba (big whoop) and China...and China seemed like it was next.

I remember watching the events in Tianamen Square unfold over the course of a few days. It seems odd now to think about it without also feeling the sense of horror and loss that accompanies the knowledge of how it inevitably turned out. I remember how exciting it was to see the hundreds, then thousands of young men and women gathering to request, then demand a measure of democracy in their country.

I didn't have any reason to think they wouldn't succeed; after all, Communism had been shown not to work, and the name U.S.S.R. was already being measured for a coffin and plot for it was being dug to lay it to rest in the potters' fields of new social studies books. Nothing seemed more impressive to me at the time than the way the protesters (almost instantaneously it seemed) erected their own version of the Statue of Liberty. It was one of the most interesting times I could imagine being alive.

I had forgotten, however, that "may you live in interesting times" is considered a Chinese curse.

Dictatorships are notoriously fond of remaining in power, and the old, morally bankrupt men running China were no exception. They sent the People's Army in to quell the protests by any means necessary. The dread we felt watching the tanks rolling down the street towards the students was tense enough, but the tension was amped up to an unbelievable degree when we first saw the now iconic image of the lone student facing down those tanks while armed only with a book bag.

We don't know this guy's name or face. I'm still not sure we're 100 percent positive it was even a guy, but his actions in front of those tanks that day redefined the way I look at heroism. Standing in front of moving tanks in the United States would be risky proposition, but here we have oversight, we have the media scrutinizing everything the military does, and we have redress for grievances. In China none of that can be counted on to make a tank commander pause to consider the consequences when he finds 120 pounds-soaking-wet agitator yelling at him from in front of his fifteen ton vehicle. By rights that kid should have become a big flat slice of street pizza. But he wasn't. After a stand off of more than a half hour, this kid cajoled, coerced and shamed the tanks into turning around.

That student had no way of knowing that he'd succeed that day. In fact, having lived in China and knowing what his government was capable of, I'd dare say he had to know he was likely going to his death.

He did it anyways.

The next day, of course, the tanks came back. They did not stop or turn around, and hundreds, perhaps thousands of protesters were killed or imprisoned, and to this day China remains a hidebound dictatorship.

So what does this have to do with "Ulysses"?

When we read this poem back in Edinboro, the professor had decided to show off some newfangled presentation material for the poem that involved watching various images of heroic acts caught over the years while a Shakespearean actor read a stirring rendition of the poem in voice over. There were many images that we're all familiar with: Martin Luther King giving a speech, the flag planting at Iwo Jima, the rescuers pulling baby Jessica out of a well in Texas. But when the poem got to the end,

"It may be that the gulfs will wash us down: It may be we shall touch the Happy Isles, And see the great Achilles, whom we knew. Though much is taken, much abides; and though We are not now that strength which in the old days Moved earth and heaven; that which we are, we are, One equal-temper of heroic hearts, Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will"

The presentation focused on the scene with the tanks. And when it got to

"To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."

The image froze and zoomed in slowly on the grainy image of the young student. And at that point I got it.

Heroism isn't about doing the right thing knowing you're going to succeed; it's about doing the right thing even when you know you will probably lose. See, Ulysses doesn't plan on coming back from his voyage. He knows he will likely bump into Achilles, the great hero who died in the Trojan War. Doesn't matter--he's going anyways. True heroism is doing what's right for the sake of doing what's right. I probably wouldn't have picked up on that had I not scene a modern day Ulysses holding a book bag on a dangerous street in China back in 1989. Like his Greek counterpart, he realized the gulfs were ready to wash him down, but he faced them anyways because it was the right thing to do.

Mandated Testing

Today our district completes the mandated testing required by the state in order to satisfy the NCLB. It takes three hours a day for three days, so I haven't seen my ninth graders in class since Monday. In addition, my district has the students take diagnostic reading tests three times during the year to gauge students ability to pass these tests. So that's over a week of school lost to this mandate.

This of course doesn't include all the teaching to the test that is done to keep a building out of "school improvement," the state coming in and usurping local authority and dictating what the curriculum will be. Amazing, isn't it--the administration that preaches less government regulation comes up with more and more ways to yank authority away for the local population, and that states that kids' education is lacking (after all, our President had to ask us "is our children learning"), puts in effect a system that makes us drop everything educational for days at a time.

This made me chuckle

The Best Colbert Interview In A Long Time

Colbert had George WIll on last night.  Will is, in my opinion, one  of the few conservative  pundits around anymore that I still respect.  He's got one of the sharpest minds around, and he's unfailingly  proper.  Seeing him on Colbert's show shocked me, not because it satirized modern "conservatism" (which WIll really isn't a part of, but because I would have thought he simply would find distastefully chaotic. But appear he did, and what struck me was how fun it was watching Colbert's frantic, frenetic faux blowhard interact with the calm, cool, unflinchingly assured, and piercing gaze of WIll.    At a couple of points, it looked like Will's responses actually left Colbert a bit taken back.  I don't think I've ever seen Colbert intimidated by a guest before, but I think that's exactly what happened here.

 

Indignation And Condescension At The Movies

A few months ago I started getting links from some of my more conservative friends and family to sites containing trailers for Ben Stein's movie Expelled, which purportedly exposes the hypocrisy and wrong-headed thinking of elitist educators who are so thick that they refuse to give any credence to the idea of "intelligent design." I got them because people tend to think of me as someone who appreciates humor, and, I guess, because I must need saving from the heathen ideas that have corrupted our institutions of learning (y'know...like the ones I've taught at for the last fifteen years). I have not seen this movie yet, but from the previews and reviews I've seen, Stein comes across as smug, condescending, and disdainful of anything that does not support the thesis of the film.

 

Today online, I came across the trailer for a new movie by comedian Bill Maher called Religulous. From the trailer, the movie apparently exposes the hypocrisy and wrong-headed thinking of religious believers who are so thick that they refuse to give any credence to the idea of intelligent thought. This movie isn't out in the theaters yet, but from the preview, Maher comes across as smug, condescending, and disdainful of anything that does not support the thesis of the film.

 

While I do have definite feelings that favor one side over the other, I find myself rolling my eyes at both these films. Neither one appears at all interested in giving the other side anything that resembles fair representation. All they seem interested in doing is stirring up ill will against those in philosophical opposition to them. Enough, please. I'm fed up with dividing this country into us and them camps. I'm tired of being told one side is evil by advocates of the other. We've had more than a decade of that in politics, and now when we finally have two political candidates who seem to be focusing on what they consider their own strengths rather thane their opponent's potential weaknesses, I don't want it spilling over into full blown religious conflict. History shows those kinds of conflicts don't have happy endings. Ever.

 

You want to debate religion, fine...debate it. Rationally. No name calling, No mocking the other side. No ad hominem attacks. I don't see it happening though, as rationale discussion doesn't usually make good theater.

Teachers carrying guns? Are they #%&$@ SERIOUS?

Hey, I’ll admit it; I have had students over the fifteen years that were so frustrating, so grating, so disruptive that I’ve momentarily considered picking them up by the scruff of the neck and shaking them like a dog will shake a rat until its neck snaps.

 

I’m not the first teacher to feel that way.  I remember when I was back in seventh grade.  My homeroom teacher had enough of the loudmouth punk who sat behind me.  This kid was three years older than me because he liked grade seven soooo much he refused to leave.  After about three months of trying to discipline the kid, sending him to the office, and suspending him.  This guy’s luck ran out.  He mouthed off to the teacher, and I swear I think I saw steam coming from the man’s collar—about ten seconds before he leaped over the top of his desk (literally) and pulled the kid from his desk by his throat.  He dragged the kid out the door, and those of us left in the class heard the Bang! Bang! Bang!  of what I assume was him bouncing the kid off lockers all the way down to the principal.   I never saw that particular student in class again, and to this day I don’t know what happened to him.

 

Homeroom was very well behaved for the remainder of the school year.

 

I’ve not seen anything like that in the years that I’ve been working in the schools, but believe me when I say that while I emphatically think that teacher was flat out in the wrong for what he did, I certainly empathize with the feeling.  Every teacher has them.

 

So what the hell is Texas doing by allowing teachers to carry guns in school?

 

I’m sorry, but that’s just plain, friggin’ stupid, and simply saying “well, it’s Texas” just doesn’t cut it.

 

How will this make the schools safer?   I don’t care how “responsible”  the gun totin’ educators are reputed to be, if there is a situation in a school with an invader that would warrant them pulling their weapons, all this would do is put more bullets in play that might find an innocent student.  Teachers aren’t trained in the same techniques that cops and SWAT members are.

 

Worst case scenario, you may end up with a guy like my seventh grade teacher who, rather than leaping over the desk, decides to put one between an obnoxious twit’s eyes.

Senator McCain--C'mon, Man...Enough is ENOUGH

I'm not going to pretend for an instant that I didn't make up my mind some time ago who I'm going to vote for, nor can I say with a straight face that I've been silent about it when the election has come in conversation.  Up to this point, however, I've been able to resist the temptation to broach the topic on my own in this blog or on other venues out and about on the intertubes. After seeing what happened at a McCain campaign recently, I just have to speak up.
 
McCain and Palin have been on a kick lately that shows they believe that if you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your bullshit.  Rather than talking about the economy or Iraq or loss of civil rights over the last eight years or, well, anything that actually matters to intelligent, rational human beings, they've been methodically trying to tie Obama to a guy and events that happened back when he was eight years old.  
 
Yeah, yeah...old news.  It's been on Maddow and Olbermann, the Huffpost, and every other left leaning media outlet you care to discuss.   I watch or read all of these source, but I don't go in with blinders on.  I know they've got an agenda, and thus I take everything they say with a grain of salt.  If they say something especially inflamatory I try to find other sources to corroborate before I get up in arms.  I started out my political adulthood as a conservative, and my migration to the other side of the fulcrum came with a healthy dose of skepticism.
 
So I certainly squinted in incredulity when I read today that McCain/Palin supporters have started screaming that Obama is a terrorist and calling to "kill him!"  without a word of chastisement from the candidates. I did some checking and sure enough I found video of the incident, proof positive that it indeed did happen. 
 
 
Sure, I've been disgusted by McCain and Palin's steadfast refusal to talk about real issues, but I guess I was hoping there was some little part of the John McCain I once voted for in the primaries years ago that was simply lying dormant.  This, however, was inexcusable and the final straw as far as I'm concerned.  I don't think that the people shouting these obsenities were McCain plants; McCain looks a bit taken aback when he hears it himself, so I think the venom took him by surprise.
 
Still, he stood silent.  
 
He ignored the comment and continued his own flaccid rant against his opponent.  He let it go.   I wanted to see him silence the crowd and shame the man who shouted it.  I wanted him to take charge and look presidential by taking his own followers to task for what was hopefully brief dip into barbaric insanity.  He didn't, and his silence took what could have been an aberration and codified it.
 
A while back he said about Iraq that he'd rather lose the election than lose the war.  While I vehemently disagreed with him then as I disagree with him now on his stand on the war, I understood the point he was trying to get across.  He was trying to say that he was a man whose own personal integrity meant more to him than becoming President.  I, naively it appears, took him at his word on that and decided it was simply a point in which I would simply have to agree to disagree with him.  I now truly see what kind of man he's become.  Here is a man who is so desperate to get that title, the golden round as the Bard called in eerily prescient Tragedy of Macbeth, that he has given up dignity, integrity and honesty to get it.