My guess is that as a Democrat, I shouldn't be too worried about this. In fact, I should be elated. I look at the line-up of Republicans vying for their party's presidential nomination and I think to myself, 'this is it?' I mean, I'm even counting that "any minute I'm throwing my hat in the ring, I mean it this time" Thompson. Is he supposed to be the bench?
First of all, the starters look like a farm team--double A ball at best and they just keep looking worse. Last night, my husband had on an episode of The Family Guy in which the wife, Lois, runs for mayor. In a debate, she isn't getting any where with her well-thought out point-by-point plan, so she just starts answering every question with "9-11". Cheers erupt from the audience and she goes on to win the election.
Last night the Republicans also had a debate. If you didn't already know it, they're strong on defense--especially post 9-11. A high-point or low-point might have been Mitt Romney's remark that Bush "may have made some mistakes, but he has kept us safe." Is that all you can offer? I mean, if one terrorist slips through, Mitt's got nothing.
And anyway, has Bush really kept us safe? We've spent a gobzillion dollars on airport safety, but every other week there's a report about the latest test of the system where someone got through with a gun or a knife or whatever. Meanwhile, our subways are at risk, our cargo is not checked. Anyone can rent a truck and load anything into it. The infrastructure is crumbling. The weather patterns are shifting and wreaking havoc. I'm not crawling under my bed and hiding, but Mitt, man, you've got to do better.
Why not stand up and say, "Our party's in trouble. Bush screwed up. He took every opportunity after 9-11 and squandered it. We need to take back the party?" I don't know what these guys are thinking. Republicans--where is your bench? If there ever was a time to call in a wringer, now's the time. And guys, Thompson's not it. Thompson is not going to save your ass.
So now the question becomes, is there a bench? Or is President Bush just the tip of a very slushy iceberg? Did the Republican Party in some sort of drunk with power free for all, put everything behind that greedy, self-righteous, winner-take-all crowd headed by the likes of DeLay, Cheney and Rove and blindly follow them, leaving in their wake would-be statesman within the party who may have actually put the country's interest before their own wealthy constituencies?
There are some honorable Republicans out there: Warner, Snow, Lugar, Hagel. But I don't know if they even want to play on the same team with the current line-up. Guilliani? Okay, he looked in charge when the Towers fell, while George Bush read My Pet Goat and looked confused, but does the country know anything else about him? Look at the people he chooses to be around him. Remember the fiasco when he urged Bush to nominate former New York City Police Chief, Bernard Kerik, to head the Homeland Security Department? The guy's name was removed from the nomination process as skeletons began leaping from his closet. He has since plead guilty to corruption charges. Good guy.
Like I said, as a Democrat, I should be really pleased with this bunch, but as an American it is pretty hard to watch. The Republican Party represents a large percentage of Americans. We should want to see both parties put forth a roster of top talent--if only because it will force everyone to elevate their game.
Gratefully, I have at least five candidates on the Democratic side who I would happily pull the lever for in November: Biden, Edwards, Clinton, Obama and Richardson (in that order for now), but I'd like to think that it would be a hard choice.
Monday, August 06, 2007
Friday, August 03, 2007
Go Joe! and Immigration Legislation in the U.S. Senate
I don't know how many of you saw the CNN U-Tube debate the other week, but I was really happy to see one of my old favorites, Sen. Joe Biden of Deleware, mixing it up with the best of 'em. I am a big fan of Biden and have been for years, though he does occasionally put his foot in his mouth (describing Obama as "clean", for example). He puts his foot in his mouth precisely for the reason that most career politicians don't -- he speaks his mind. He is not nearly as guarded as you'd expect someone who has been in the Senate since 1972 to be. Yes, he was there for Watergate. The man has seen it all--and come out with a sense of humor and a profound understanding of foreign policy, finance--you name it. And he has friends on both sides of the aisle.
The problem with the U-Tube debate, though it was far better than any format I have seen in a long while, was that there were soooo many candidates on stage. I mean, I am thinking of coming out with trading cards--a Democratic and a Republican set--just to keep track of everyone. The plus side of the U-Tube debate was that all of the real contenders were pretty darn good. Besides Biden, I was really impressed with Hillary Clinton, who it seems, is actually winning over a good number of the Hillary-Haters. There are still a lot out there, but I am really pleasantly surprised. And Obama isn't bad. Not too much gravitas, but I could definitely live with him in the Oval Office. Refreshing, isn't it to actually have favorable opinions of multiple candidates. I think Edwards in right on with his war on poverty, too. He got my vote in the 2004 primary even though he was pretty much washed up by the time we got to vote in Texas--and he made Kerry look better, though not good enough, it seems.
But I liked Biden before I'd even heard of any of these other players. I liked Biden when I was in high school in the late 80s. I liked Biden before the Hillary-Haters hated Hillary (say that five times fast). I don't know if he can do it. He is betting on retail politics in the initial primary states, and I hope he gives everyone a run for his or her money. Even if he doesn't make it all the way to the nomination and the presidency, having someone as serious and as frank as he is on the stage at these debates is going to elevate the conversation of all the candidates. He's right about Darfur. He's right about Iraq--his federalist plan for the three regions is right on--and he's been saying it forever. He's right about the Dream Act of 2007 that I am going to address in a bit.
Go Joe!
As I said before, the problem with the U-Tube debate is that we don't hear enough from any one candidate. If you want to hear more from Biden, he gave a great interview yesterday on the Diane Rehm Show, which is produced by wamu, the Washington, DC NPR station out of American University. If you go to their website, http://www.wamu.org/ or to the blog on Biden's official site, http://www.joebiden.com/, you can find the podcast and listen to Biden for an hour. He discusses his past, his stand on issues, takes callers' questions and basically tells it like he sees it. I recommend it.
Meanwhile, there is legislation before the U.S. Senate called The Dream Act of 2007, it's bill number is S.774 and it was introduced by Senator Durbin of Illinois, but is co-sponsored by a number of senators, including Joe Biden. It actually has bi-partisan support. Wow! Basically, it gives illegal immigrants, who were brought here as minors (under 16), who've been here for five or more years and who completed high school and two years of college without getting into trouble with the law a chance at a pathway to legal residency and eventually citizenship. If you want to check out the details, I found the bill at: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110:2:./temp/~c110vkLRMA:e1418.
Note, if you go to http://www.thomas.loc.gov/ you can search all the legislation before Congress. Cool tool.
For those of you who have followed my blogs, I am very adamant that illegal minors who are doing the right thing and getting their education, should not be punished for the decisions of their parents. These kids often don't have the ties to be successful in their home countries. They've been educated here. I have an inquiry into Sen. Durbin's office to see whether or not kids currently in high school and here for more than five years can be considered for the pathway if they continue on and graduate and move to higher education. I'll keep you updated. I have some really highly motivated, smart, hard-working kids in my classes now that deserve a break. They keep trying to do the right thing, hoping that it will pay off somehow. But regardless, this will help some of my former students and I am grateful.
Okay, everyone. Get motivated. Get informed. Get going. And Go Joe!
The problem with the U-Tube debate, though it was far better than any format I have seen in a long while, was that there were soooo many candidates on stage. I mean, I am thinking of coming out with trading cards--a Democratic and a Republican set--just to keep track of everyone. The plus side of the U-Tube debate was that all of the real contenders were pretty darn good. Besides Biden, I was really impressed with Hillary Clinton, who it seems, is actually winning over a good number of the Hillary-Haters. There are still a lot out there, but I am really pleasantly surprised. And Obama isn't bad. Not too much gravitas, but I could definitely live with him in the Oval Office. Refreshing, isn't it to actually have favorable opinions of multiple candidates. I think Edwards in right on with his war on poverty, too. He got my vote in the 2004 primary even though he was pretty much washed up by the time we got to vote in Texas--and he made Kerry look better, though not good enough, it seems.
But I liked Biden before I'd even heard of any of these other players. I liked Biden when I was in high school in the late 80s. I liked Biden before the Hillary-Haters hated Hillary (say that five times fast). I don't know if he can do it. He is betting on retail politics in the initial primary states, and I hope he gives everyone a run for his or her money. Even if he doesn't make it all the way to the nomination and the presidency, having someone as serious and as frank as he is on the stage at these debates is going to elevate the conversation of all the candidates. He's right about Darfur. He's right about Iraq--his federalist plan for the three regions is right on--and he's been saying it forever. He's right about the Dream Act of 2007 that I am going to address in a bit.
Go Joe!
As I said before, the problem with the U-Tube debate is that we don't hear enough from any one candidate. If you want to hear more from Biden, he gave a great interview yesterday on the Diane Rehm Show, which is produced by wamu, the Washington, DC NPR station out of American University. If you go to their website, http://www.wamu.org/ or to the blog on Biden's official site, http://www.joebiden.com/, you can find the podcast and listen to Biden for an hour. He discusses his past, his stand on issues, takes callers' questions and basically tells it like he sees it. I recommend it.
Meanwhile, there is legislation before the U.S. Senate called The Dream Act of 2007, it's bill number is S.774 and it was introduced by Senator Durbin of Illinois, but is co-sponsored by a number of senators, including Joe Biden. It actually has bi-partisan support. Wow! Basically, it gives illegal immigrants, who were brought here as minors (under 16), who've been here for five or more years and who completed high school and two years of college without getting into trouble with the law a chance at a pathway to legal residency and eventually citizenship. If you want to check out the details, I found the bill at: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c110:2:./temp/~c110vkLRMA:e1418.
Note, if you go to http://www.thomas.loc.gov/ you can search all the legislation before Congress. Cool tool.
For those of you who have followed my blogs, I am very adamant that illegal minors who are doing the right thing and getting their education, should not be punished for the decisions of their parents. These kids often don't have the ties to be successful in their home countries. They've been educated here. I have an inquiry into Sen. Durbin's office to see whether or not kids currently in high school and here for more than five years can be considered for the pathway if they continue on and graduate and move to higher education. I'll keep you updated. I have some really highly motivated, smart, hard-working kids in my classes now that deserve a break. They keep trying to do the right thing, hoping that it will pay off somehow. But regardless, this will help some of my former students and I am grateful.
Okay, everyone. Get motivated. Get informed. Get going. And Go Joe!
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
How I failed at High School and Why It's Been So Long Since I Last Blogged
Well, it has been quite a while since I blogged--over half a year in fact and the reason is that I failed at high school. The high school where I teach--not the one where I studied (and graduated, thank you very much!) I didn't fail in the traditional sense. I failed because first I overestimated some of my colleagues, secondly because I folded my cards rather than play out my hand and thirdly, because I was just had too much going on with my classes and my dance group to expend energy on a fight.
Maura,
I read your blog from the 16th about education and feel compelled to write to you. I agree with so much of what you have to say. Living in Fairfax County, land of educational competition, is a rather interesting experience. Although my kids are too young to be directly affected by some of the debates currently going on in the county educational system I have been following them closely. Not only will my kids be affected by the outcome eventually but I will be living in an area populated by graduates of this system. Sometimes I have to wonder at the pressure put on students in this county.
I was reading an article in the Washington Post a few months ago about a new problem facing the summer school program. Apparently increasing numbers of students are taking advantage of classes being offered over the summer not for remediation but in order to skip ahead during the school year. If they take basic biology over the summer they can then take the AP class in the fall and not risk getting a C or B in the class. Some students are so worried about their GPAs that they are taking summer school classes in order to assure that they will be familiar with the material in the fall and will be assured of getting an A in the class. Where does this leave the students who actually need assistance in these subjects? Teachers are having a hard time teaching to all the levels in these summer classes. Often times they find themselves teaching to the brighter/ more talented students and the others are left out. Teachers who were expecting to teach a class aimed at students who needed a little extra assistance/motivation in learning a subject are finding themselves teaching a very mixed group of students. Apparently the brighter students tend to monopolize the teacher's time and attention making it very difficult to reach students who may be difficult to reach to begin with. This could not possibly be what the summer school program was intended for. What happened to going to the beach or the pool over the summer? What happened to the concept of relaxation???
There also has been debate about the Gifted and Talented Centers here in Fairfax. Currently students are placed in the Gifted Program based on test taken in 2nd grade. (Teacher recommendations and parent input are a part of the process as well) Once in the program students, beginning in 3rd grade, are bussed to the nearest GT center where they attend school through 5 or 6th grade with other equally academically talented kids. Where is the diversity in these GT centers? (Racially Fairfax County has plenty of diversity but diversity is about more then race) How does this help kids learn that everyone has different talents, abilities, and interest? Does this contribute to the craziness of high school? Why do kids need to change schools in 3rd grade and then again for middle school? What has happened to the idea of the neighborhood school? There is some talk about getting rid of the GT centers at the elementary levels but opponents point out how much more they are able to offer in terms of special programs and advanced classes. How many advanced classes does a 10 year old need? Why can't the neighborhood school support a GT class for each grade where students are being challenged and taught with other advanced kids but part of a larger school community where there is greater diversity of talent and interest? What happens to the kid who does not do so well academically in 2nd grade but by 4th grade is a whiz? (My understanding is that is very hard to get into the GT program after the placements are done for 3rd grade) And we wonder why our high school kids are stressed.
Many graduates of this school system report of being bored and "over prepared" for college. What is the point of putting kids through "hell" for 4 years of high school so that they can be bored in college? Something is wrong with this picture. Also, not every kid needs to go to an Ivy League College. Who do we think will be our hairdressers, repair people, and car mechanics? There are plenty of fields that do not require an Ivy League education.
I have been trying to understand exactly how the AP system is set up here, but I do know that the high schools are encouraged and rewarded for having a high percentage of students in the AP classes. It is good to challenge students and encourage borderline students to stretch themselves but at what point do we draw the line. I never took one AP class, did very well at a good college, and am happy with my life. Honestly I am glad I have a solid education but some would argue that I am wasting it by staying home taking care of kids. At what point do we need to develop and encourage skills not measured on standardized tests?
I think the question that has not been asked by our society as we think about our educational system is "What does it mean to be well educated and what is the goal of that education?" It is well and good to challenge students to excel at biophysics but do they have the skills they need to be successful in other areas of life??? Until we really figure out what the point of a solid education, beyond having a "good" job, we will continue to miss the boat in creating a system that really meets the needs young people.
Just felt a need to rant and felt you would appreciate it. Hope all is well and talk to you soon!
Chris
Let me explain. Last January 16th I posted an entry that I was very proud of, which was inspired by an article I had read in the New York Times about students from elite, public high schools that were bored at Ivy League Schools as undergraduates, or who could just coast through because their high school curriculum had been so rigorous and so advanced that college was a time to finally catch an episode of The Family Guy. During their high school careers, they had never had time to see TV. Anyway, I contrasted the experiences of those students with the ones of my students in my regular level Spanish III classes, in a good public high school in Austin, TX. That week I had been forced to teach roman numerals to my students, who could not understand their cultural reading about a pre-colombian culture not because of the Spanish, but because the centuries were expressed as roman numerals. In four classes, I had only one student who knew them. I was also constantly monitoring my English, because my active, everyday vocabulary in English confused too many students. Once I used the word "glee" and I was accused of always using such big words. Thankfully on that one, another student pointed out it was only four letters long.
Anyway, the point was that I was teaching good students (many never take level three of a language and the truly ambitious usually take the honors level) at a good school and these kids were no where near studying nano-physics or whatever it was that the kids in Virginia and New York state featured in the New York Times were up to. Too many of my students weren't getting beyond football games and episodes of My Super Sweet Sixteen. I actually had students who wouldn't take their books home--ever. Something was wrong. But something was equally wrong with the kid at Princeton who was spending his time watching episodes of The Family Guy, because he'd already done papers on everything on his reading list for freshman year.
Both the culture of achievement to the point of insanity (that's why kids are taking Aterol illegally--to keep awake and concentrate and accomplish everything on their parents' and guidance counselor's list to pump up bragging rights for family and school) and the culture that allows bright students from well-off homes to think it is okay not to take books home and get mad if we ask them to participate in class instead of listening to their i-pods.
That's the summary version of the original posting (lost, once I pulled it from my blog, as my hard drive crashed--another story for another day).
The scene:
I was teaching my fifth period class, when another teacher from my department (notice I am careful not to name names), waved me into the hallway. "I'm teaching" I mouthed. She gave me a look like "This is a matter of life and death", so I excused myself from my students and went into the hallway.
"Do you have something about the high school on your blog?", she asked in a concerned whisper.
"What?", I was expecting something like, "There's been a bomb threat." or "Help, can my kids come into your room for the rest of the period--there's an emergency and I have to go." I did not expect a question about my blog. I mean, did anyone even read my blog? And, so what? I'm teaching.
"Teachers are saying you have things about the high school on the blog and if I were you I would take it down right now, " she warned, sounding frantic.
"What? I'm teaching."
"Take it down. Look don't worry. Just take it down. I can't talk now, but I would really take it down."
Okay, yeah, I won't worry.
"Who said what?", I asked, my mind running a million miles an hour in at least as many directions.
"Look, I don't want to say. Don't worry about it. Just, if you can take it down, I would do so...now."
Okay, I am really worried now. I have found schools to be a hotbed of shit and you don't want to be in the shit, because if some sticks to you, you'll smell forever--its like getting on the wrong side of the "it" crowd in seventh grade. And people love a scandal. Had someone hacked into my blog? Had someone said something about students by name? Was there going to be an investigation? Would I end up on the front page of the Metro Section as the latest teacher gone wrong?
Once I got my kids onto their next task, I opened my computer to see my blog. No one had hacked in, but indeed, as I thought about the last entry I had written, I had said some negative things. Thank god I hadn't been focusing on "No Child Left Behind"--that would have made this one look sweet. Well, I figured I better get rid of it (not foreseeing the later meltdown of my hard drive, because I just meant from my blog--if any of you printed out the January 16th post, I'd like a copy). I deleted it.
Now, just the day or two before, another of my department members had written me an evil email about my class management and cc'd my supervising assistant principal, without ever coming into my class or speaking to me. Luckily, I was backed up by the administration, but I thought, "What is going on here? Does someone want me to quit? How many people are involved in this?". Public education will make you paranoid. People talk about "inside the beltway politics", but they need to step inside the school house.
I went to one of the assistant principals who didn't know anything about it. That ap called in another who confirmed that he and yet another had reviewed the blog entry after receiving an anonymous complaint from one of my fellow teachers, who would remain anonymous. Apparently, they'd let it go, because as far as they could see I had only been exercising my freedom of expression, but that if I felt so negatively about the school and thought schools in the North East were so superior, why was I teaching?
Okay, apparently they missed the point that I think both extremes are bad. But okay, I wasn't being fired. Below, you'll find the email of one of my high school friends, who, I was shocked to find out reads my blog. Months ago I asked her if I could use her email and she agreed, but then I didn't blog again. She got the point of the email and lives in one of the uber-districts in Virginia. She has good perspective, so you may want to check it out.
So, I was busy with school, busy with the folklorico program; we were going to competition; we had spring season of shows coming up; I was tired and I stopped blogging. I just couldn't deal with the stress of knowing that someone out there, some cowardly person, who couldn't write a response or even come to me with concerns (if they really had any other than trying to get me into trouble--sounds pretty seventh grade, right?) before running to the administration and then gossiping to at least one other teacher in my department about it (the one who "warned" me) could be waiting to "get me" and use my own words against me. Seventh grade sucked the first time. I was too busy to do seventh grade over again.
Now it is this post that is sounding really negative, but the truth of the matter is that I couldn't and I can't do anything about anyone who is destined to live in the seventh grade forever. And I knew that. I had shared the fact that I blogged in conversation openly while eating lunch with other teachers and it was possible that some of them would actually read it. I mean I write it, so hopefully someone will read it, right? But, I guess I had that little hope still burning in me (because, I promise, I am not really a negative person) that if someone liked something very much or if someone really thought I was off base or even if they thought I was really negative, they would respond to the blog or start a conversation with me. I mean, that's what blogs are, right? A means of communication--a conversation with the World. I guess I am an idealist.
Maybe I should just stick to politics. No one ever gets upset with that.
No, I will continue to write about what I want to write about and I will continue to think about and respond to things I read in the Times, hear on NPR and observe in the World around me. Because I have a freedom of expression. The assistant principal who shall not be named told me so with another assistant principal as a witness!!! So does the teacher trapped in the seventh grade, but if they ever get to high school, they can write me back. We'll talk--we'll do lunch. (okay, that's pushing it).
...Since January, my folklorico group performed well at contest in March, put on a great spring show in April, performed four shows in three venues for Cinco de Mayo and ran an successful concession stand during summer school. I led a group of students to Peru and Bolivia in June (and my folklorico kids managed the concession stand without me physically present!), and we had a fabulous time (I got food poisoning in Peru and went to the hospital, but I am saving that episode for a health care entry). I got back and found the new dance floor that my wonderful principal (so beyond 7th grade) had ordered for my dancers. My husband and I are currently just three weeks away from receiving an exchange student from Brazil, who will go to the same school where I teach--very cool. I have registered for two dance classes that I will take, rather than teach during the month of August--and hopefully beyond. And finally, I am excited about teaching two classes of ESL (English as a Second Language) in addition to Spanish this school year. Can't you tell I am sooooo negative. Not. I am really looking forward to this new year--new classes, new challenges (new material for the blog).
Okay, now you all know the story! I am sorry if I let anyone down. I actually had two different people ask me about my blog this week and it spurred me on! I am grateful, even if you are the only two people out there reading this. Thank you.
Below is what my friend, bless her heart, sent me after the infamous school entry:
Maura,
I read your blog from the 16th about education and feel compelled to write to you. I agree with so much of what you have to say. Living in Fairfax County, land of educational competition, is a rather interesting experience. Although my kids are too young to be directly affected by some of the debates currently going on in the county educational system I have been following them closely. Not only will my kids be affected by the outcome eventually but I will be living in an area populated by graduates of this system. Sometimes I have to wonder at the pressure put on students in this county.
I was reading an article in the Washington Post a few months ago about a new problem facing the summer school program. Apparently increasing numbers of students are taking advantage of classes being offered over the summer not for remediation but in order to skip ahead during the school year. If they take basic biology over the summer they can then take the AP class in the fall and not risk getting a C or B in the class. Some students are so worried about their GPAs that they are taking summer school classes in order to assure that they will be familiar with the material in the fall and will be assured of getting an A in the class. Where does this leave the students who actually need assistance in these subjects? Teachers are having a hard time teaching to all the levels in these summer classes. Often times they find themselves teaching to the brighter/ more talented students and the others are left out. Teachers who were expecting to teach a class aimed at students who needed a little extra assistance/motivation in learning a subject are finding themselves teaching a very mixed group of students. Apparently the brighter students tend to monopolize the teacher's time and attention making it very difficult to reach students who may be difficult to reach to begin with. This could not possibly be what the summer school program was intended for. What happened to going to the beach or the pool over the summer? What happened to the concept of relaxation???
There also has been debate about the Gifted and Talented Centers here in Fairfax. Currently students are placed in the Gifted Program based on test taken in 2nd grade. (Teacher recommendations and parent input are a part of the process as well) Once in the program students, beginning in 3rd grade, are bussed to the nearest GT center where they attend school through 5 or 6th grade with other equally academically talented kids. Where is the diversity in these GT centers? (Racially Fairfax County has plenty of diversity but diversity is about more then race) How does this help kids learn that everyone has different talents, abilities, and interest? Does this contribute to the craziness of high school? Why do kids need to change schools in 3rd grade and then again for middle school? What has happened to the idea of the neighborhood school? There is some talk about getting rid of the GT centers at the elementary levels but opponents point out how much more they are able to offer in terms of special programs and advanced classes. How many advanced classes does a 10 year old need? Why can't the neighborhood school support a GT class for each grade where students are being challenged and taught with other advanced kids but part of a larger school community where there is greater diversity of talent and interest? What happens to the kid who does not do so well academically in 2nd grade but by 4th grade is a whiz? (My understanding is that is very hard to get into the GT program after the placements are done for 3rd grade) And we wonder why our high school kids are stressed.
Many graduates of this school system report of being bored and "over prepared" for college. What is the point of putting kids through "hell" for 4 years of high school so that they can be bored in college? Something is wrong with this picture. Also, not every kid needs to go to an Ivy League College. Who do we think will be our hairdressers, repair people, and car mechanics? There are plenty of fields that do not require an Ivy League education.
I have been trying to understand exactly how the AP system is set up here, but I do know that the high schools are encouraged and rewarded for having a high percentage of students in the AP classes. It is good to challenge students and encourage borderline students to stretch themselves but at what point do we draw the line. I never took one AP class, did very well at a good college, and am happy with my life. Honestly I am glad I have a solid education but some would argue that I am wasting it by staying home taking care of kids. At what point do we need to develop and encourage skills not measured on standardized tests?
I think the question that has not been asked by our society as we think about our educational system is "What does it mean to be well educated and what is the goal of that education?" It is well and good to challenge students to excel at biophysics but do they have the skills they need to be successful in other areas of life??? Until we really figure out what the point of a solid education, beyond having a "good" job, we will continue to miss the boat in creating a system that really meets the needs young people.
Just felt a need to rant and felt you would appreciate it. Hope all is well and talk to you soon!
Chris
Saturday, January 13, 2007
But keep your enemies closer
In all the rhetoric coming out of the Bush Administration this week in their attempt to convince Congress and the American people that a military "surge" is the right strategy for "success" in Iraq, did you all notice the list of demands that Condaleeza Rice insisted be met in order for her to meet with her Iranian counterpart? It is, says the Bush Administration, Iran and its described "colony", Syria, that are supplying the insurgents and stoking the fires of the Shiites in Iraq. Either the Iranians basically lay down, roll over and play dead, or we are not going to have anything to do with them. Otherwise, says Rice, we would be like "supplicants".
Of course, we are in this position, because the Bush government has made such a point of not talking to the Iranians through out the deteriorating situation in the Middle East that it may indeed look like only desperation would drive us to the table. But that is just one more blunder to add to the growing Bush blunders in the region. In fact, it was a die-hard Republican, Senator Hagel, not some raging liberal Democrat, who called the administration's handling of the war in Iraq the "nation's biggest blunder since Vietnam". I would argue that this is a bigger blunder, seeing as we had a chance to learn from Vietnam, but didn't. But that's neither here nor there. The issue is, we need to talk to Iran.
We need to talk to Iran. We need to talk to Syria. We need to talk to quite a number of world leaders that we find distasteful, because you know what? They talk to each other. Take for instance the extremist thorn in our side, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, recently sworn in for his third term as president of one of our principal oil suppliers. This week he announced his plans to nationalize CANTV, the nation's largest telecommunications corporation (of which Verizon has a large interest), as well as Electricidad de Caracas and various energy projects, in which numerous U.S. oil companies have a stake. Sure he called President Bush the devil in a speech at the U.N. Sure he has Fidel Castro on speed dial, but guess who's currently visiting with him? No other than Mahomoud Ahmadinejad, President of Iran.
From Venezuela, the Iranian president is off to meet with some of our other neighbors, in Nicaragua and Ecuador, both of which have recently elected governments not particularly friendly to the United States. And Chavez has his hands in everything. Recently, two dozen uniformed members of Venezuela's military showed up in Bolivia, much to the chagrin of President Morales' opponents, as the Congress was not consulted prior to the arrival. Violence has erupted this week in that country and more unrest is feared, as Morales encourages large numbers of highland peasants to move to the eastern portion of the country diluting opposition support in the area, which is the center of his opposition.
If the situation in the Middle East is critical to our national security, then surely the situation in our own hemisphere is, as well. And now, linked by oil and mutual dislike of the "American Devil", alliances are forming between the two. But we wouldn't want to look like "supplicants". Of course, saving face is more important than developing a relationship that may give us insight into an enemy. At least that is what the Bush administration would have us believe.
We talked to the Soviet Union. We talked to China. We didn't talk to Cuba. The Soviet Union fell apart. China supplies Wal-Mart. Cuba is Cuba. So much for the poor, deprived masses rising up at the first sign of weakness from its aging President. We had no clue what to expect. Castro's been bed-ridden for months and all goes on as usual on the island. We don't know if he is dying. We don't know much of anything. Why? We don't talk to Cuba.
Sun-Tzu, the famous Chinese Military General and author of "The Art of War" is credited with the saying, "Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer". I personally think he had something there. It might be cool to hang out for some fish and chips in a pub with the Brits, but I don't think it is nearly as important as having some tea with Iranians. Cuba is a small island, whose most famous and dangerous export is the cigar. Ever since the Soviet Union pulled the plug on its nuclear missile program there, we haven't had much to fear from the island but for illegal second-hand smoke.
Iran exports, arms, money, terrorists and oil. It also exports dialogue with unfriendly governments in our hemisphere, including one of our biggest sources of, yes, oil. And now, we have Venezuela itself exporting military advisers to additional neighbors. Do you see what I see? Maybe "supplicants" isn't too far from the truth.
Of course, we are in this position, because the Bush government has made such a point of not talking to the Iranians through out the deteriorating situation in the Middle East that it may indeed look like only desperation would drive us to the table. But that is just one more blunder to add to the growing Bush blunders in the region. In fact, it was a die-hard Republican, Senator Hagel, not some raging liberal Democrat, who called the administration's handling of the war in Iraq the "nation's biggest blunder since Vietnam". I would argue that this is a bigger blunder, seeing as we had a chance to learn from Vietnam, but didn't. But that's neither here nor there. The issue is, we need to talk to Iran.
We need to talk to Iran. We need to talk to Syria. We need to talk to quite a number of world leaders that we find distasteful, because you know what? They talk to each other. Take for instance the extremist thorn in our side, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, recently sworn in for his third term as president of one of our principal oil suppliers. This week he announced his plans to nationalize CANTV, the nation's largest telecommunications corporation (of which Verizon has a large interest), as well as Electricidad de Caracas and various energy projects, in which numerous U.S. oil companies have a stake. Sure he called President Bush the devil in a speech at the U.N. Sure he has Fidel Castro on speed dial, but guess who's currently visiting with him? No other than Mahomoud Ahmadinejad, President of Iran.
From Venezuela, the Iranian president is off to meet with some of our other neighbors, in Nicaragua and Ecuador, both of which have recently elected governments not particularly friendly to the United States. And Chavez has his hands in everything. Recently, two dozen uniformed members of Venezuela's military showed up in Bolivia, much to the chagrin of President Morales' opponents, as the Congress was not consulted prior to the arrival. Violence has erupted this week in that country and more unrest is feared, as Morales encourages large numbers of highland peasants to move to the eastern portion of the country diluting opposition support in the area, which is the center of his opposition.
If the situation in the Middle East is critical to our national security, then surely the situation in our own hemisphere is, as well. And now, linked by oil and mutual dislike of the "American Devil", alliances are forming between the two. But we wouldn't want to look like "supplicants". Of course, saving face is more important than developing a relationship that may give us insight into an enemy. At least that is what the Bush administration would have us believe.
We talked to the Soviet Union. We talked to China. We didn't talk to Cuba. The Soviet Union fell apart. China supplies Wal-Mart. Cuba is Cuba. So much for the poor, deprived masses rising up at the first sign of weakness from its aging President. We had no clue what to expect. Castro's been bed-ridden for months and all goes on as usual on the island. We don't know if he is dying. We don't know much of anything. Why? We don't talk to Cuba.
Sun-Tzu, the famous Chinese Military General and author of "The Art of War" is credited with the saying, "Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer". I personally think he had something there. It might be cool to hang out for some fish and chips in a pub with the Brits, but I don't think it is nearly as important as having some tea with Iranians. Cuba is a small island, whose most famous and dangerous export is the cigar. Ever since the Soviet Union pulled the plug on its nuclear missile program there, we haven't had much to fear from the island but for illegal second-hand smoke.
Iran exports, arms, money, terrorists and oil. It also exports dialogue with unfriendly governments in our hemisphere, including one of our biggest sources of, yes, oil. And now, we have Venezuela itself exporting military advisers to additional neighbors. Do you see what I see? Maybe "supplicants" isn't too far from the truth.
Friday, January 05, 2007
Not running away to nowhere
Something crazy happened to me last night. I listened to myself yell at my husband, and it scared me. It was terrifying, because I don't know where the voice came from. I mean, I couldn't hear my voice inside my head and it didn't sound like my usual voice. I know that I was crying, but that was not enough to distort my voice into this screeching, screaming, blood curdling, wounded animal kind of primordial shriek that rushed to the surface from some hidden depth and defended me. I know that this stream of sound, that these words were coming from inside of my body but I heard them as though I was not the one uttering them.
And I say that they defended me, because my I saw my husband recoil from them in a way that he had never recoiled from me. I might have been pathetic and unattractive when I have fallen into a real slobbering, catching my breath, please hear me, because you don't really seem to hear me when I speak to you in a regular way kind of cry, but I never saw him recoil, as though rather than annoyed or angry that he had to deal with me and I couldn't just be agreeable and make his life easy all the time and oh shit, there she goes again--no he looked horrified. He looked like he was looking at something or maybe hearing something, like I was, that meant more business than I had ever meant in my life.
This voice was not sad. It was not hurt. It was not frustrated and tired, though it left me and my body exhausted. This voice was angry. It didn't want understanding or support or love or affection or someone to believe in it and to share its life like what I always seem to end up crying about. The voice that answered my husband's angry "get up" as I sobbed on the floor because my actions, sacrifices, words, love or whatever had not been enough again, told him to, I believe it was something to the effect of "Shut the fuck up." and "Don't ever talk to me like that again when I am upset". But it wasn't hurt and desperate. The voice had authority to it. The voice wasn't going to take it anymore. The voice said "me", but it wasn't a "me" that I recognized.
This "me", this voice, was desperate, but not in a way that I had ever been. This me was not running away to nowhere and finding a way to cope and make due. This me was not running in circles trying to be okay and carry on. This me was a wild animal that had been suddenly wounded, caught off guard, and it was cornered, but it would not lie down and be eaten. It could not crawl off and lick its wounds again. This me lept out of that corner with its claws primed and screamed out a warning so desperately strong that the hunter and the prey switched places. This voice,that came from inside of me, was not someone to be underestimated, pushed around, kept waiting or placated. It was a voice to be feared.
God knows I feared it. And from the look on my husband's face, he feared it. I certainly don't want to become whatever it was. But I would like to harness it, if wild animals can ever be harnessed, and learn its energy and its fight and determination.
I want to write. I want to start my own business. I want to have people read my words and I want them to change and to make the world better. I don't want to terrify anyone, but I want them to know that I have a voice to be heard and to be paid attention to--not because they feel sorry for me, but because I have something valuable to say. And I want to say what I think needs to be said, not what someone thinks is okay for me to say or what is next in the Spanish curriculum for my classroom or what nice girls say. I want to say what I think needs to be said.
That is what this "me" said last night. It said I was hurting, that I didn't want to hurt and that addressing a person in pain with anger was wrong. And it is wrong. But I think now that I don't have to be that person in pain. Now I have that voice that defended me. I have that that voice that sprung into action and protected me.
At that moment I think I split in two. The exhaustion I felt must have come from giving birth to that voice. From deep inside me it burst out and its first birth cries saved me. With God beside me, I won't have to run away to nowhere ever again. I will speak.
And I say that they defended me, because my I saw my husband recoil from them in a way that he had never recoiled from me. I might have been pathetic and unattractive when I have fallen into a real slobbering, catching my breath, please hear me, because you don't really seem to hear me when I speak to you in a regular way kind of cry, but I never saw him recoil, as though rather than annoyed or angry that he had to deal with me and I couldn't just be agreeable and make his life easy all the time and oh shit, there she goes again--no he looked horrified. He looked like he was looking at something or maybe hearing something, like I was, that meant more business than I had ever meant in my life.
This voice was not sad. It was not hurt. It was not frustrated and tired, though it left me and my body exhausted. This voice was angry. It didn't want understanding or support or love or affection or someone to believe in it and to share its life like what I always seem to end up crying about. The voice that answered my husband's angry "get up" as I sobbed on the floor because my actions, sacrifices, words, love or whatever had not been enough again, told him to, I believe it was something to the effect of "Shut the fuck up." and "Don't ever talk to me like that again when I am upset". But it wasn't hurt and desperate. The voice had authority to it. The voice wasn't going to take it anymore. The voice said "me", but it wasn't a "me" that I recognized.
This "me", this voice, was desperate, but not in a way that I had ever been. This me was not running away to nowhere and finding a way to cope and make due. This me was not running in circles trying to be okay and carry on. This me was a wild animal that had been suddenly wounded, caught off guard, and it was cornered, but it would not lie down and be eaten. It could not crawl off and lick its wounds again. This me lept out of that corner with its claws primed and screamed out a warning so desperately strong that the hunter and the prey switched places. This voice,that came from inside of me, was not someone to be underestimated, pushed around, kept waiting or placated. It was a voice to be feared.
God knows I feared it. And from the look on my husband's face, he feared it. I certainly don't want to become whatever it was. But I would like to harness it, if wild animals can ever be harnessed, and learn its energy and its fight and determination.
I want to write. I want to start my own business. I want to have people read my words and I want them to change and to make the world better. I don't want to terrify anyone, but I want them to know that I have a voice to be heard and to be paid attention to--not because they feel sorry for me, but because I have something valuable to say. And I want to say what I think needs to be said, not what someone thinks is okay for me to say or what is next in the Spanish curriculum for my classroom or what nice girls say. I want to say what I think needs to be said.
That is what this "me" said last night. It said I was hurting, that I didn't want to hurt and that addressing a person in pain with anger was wrong. And it is wrong. But I think now that I don't have to be that person in pain. Now I have that voice that defended me. I have that that voice that sprung into action and protected me.
At that moment I think I split in two. The exhaustion I felt must have come from giving birth to that voice. From deep inside me it burst out and its first birth cries saved me. With God beside me, I won't have to run away to nowhere ever again. I will speak.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
