Fairness, Again?

I was reminded of the issue of "fairness" again the other day in an e-mail. It was suggested that one's property tax be based on one's wealth, not necessarily the value of one's home. Of course, "that's only fair." Certainly it is; if one has more money, one should without question pay more in taxes.

Of course that's "fair." For example, two guys go to the same restaurant and order the same meals. But the wealthier guy pays more for it than the other guy. Isn't that "fair?" Who could argue with that? The rich guy has more money, so his hamburger should cost him more than the exact same one bought by the guy without so much money. How about ballgame tickets? Two guys in the grandstand, sitting right next to each other don't pay the same price. The guy who is richer pays more for the exact same tickets. But, isn't that "fair?" After all, he has more money than the other guy....

A lot of folks forget that those with more income do pay more taxes, even with a flat tax rate such as here in Michigan. Simply put, 4.4% of $400,000 is more than 4.4% of %50,000. But the issue here, as brought up in the e-mail, was a progressive tax, where the person with more income pays a higher rate, not just more tax (see the previous sentence). Again, it is offered, "that's only fair."

I guess my question is "why?" Why is that "fair?" Who says? I don't think I do. Consider this (and, to avoid pointing fingers at anyone else, I'll use my own experiences: Oh, about 15 years or so ago, at the dinner table one night, Matt asked from out of nowhere, "Mom, how come Dad has, like, five jobs and you have only one?" We laughed and joked about it at the time. But I think it is instructive. I'm not sure I had "five jobs," but I was drawing paychecks from five different places. Now, I obviously made more money than had I just had one, my primary, job. But should I, with four other "jobs," have paid at an even higher rate? Let's examine that. First, I put myself in the position to get those other four jobs. I took the initiative to find them. I worked to give myself the experience, the education/resume, the abilities to do those other jobs. I could have sat back and watched "The NFL on CBS" or other boob tube shows all the time, but I didn't. Second, I took the initiative to find those jobs. Nobody came knocking on my door to ask me if I wanted any of them. Third, I gave up two or three evenings a week and my Saturdays to work at these jobs, either at home or away. But, again, I wasn't just sitting home watching the boob tube. OK, I'm out of the way. What about that guy who just sits home and watches television every night and all weekend? Let's add someone who didn't graduate from college or even high school, that is, goofed off and didn't prepare himself. He ignored everything people told him about the future and jobs. In these instances, this other person might well make less money that I did. But consider the premise behind the progressive income tax. Because I was ambitious, took initiative, prepared myself, I should be penalized? Because he was lazy or at least not ambitious and took no initiative, he should be rewarded? There is something seriously flawed with that sort of reasoning, if it can be called that.

I'm late on a deadline, but there's another aspect that needs to be examined, at a later time. Where does the money involuntarily taken from the person who was ambitious, prepared himself, took initiative, worked instead of played, go? Can we surmise that a lot of it goes to the ones who weren't ambitious, didn't prepare, took no initiative, played instead of worked? But, that's for a later time to discuss.

Just Wondering....

How times change! I laughed as I picked up the Sports Section of this AM's newspaper, after reading everything else and then found there wasn't a single story I wanted to read!

I also saw online this AM that Time Magazine's Person of the Year is "The Protester/or." I'm not sure what that means. Why wasn't "The Protester/or" the Person of the Year in 2010? Hmmm....could it be that the "protester/or" of consequence last year was the Tea Partier? Just asking. Exacty what is it that the 2011 version in the US has accomplished? Certainly nothing compared to the Tea Partiers did in the 2010 elections. What about world-wide? That, too, is in doubt. OK, Mubarak and Ghaddafy are gone, but at what price? Who have taken their places? Ask the women in Cairo what they think of the new regime?

A Few Thoughts...

...before retiring with my book. It's been a long two or three days. I don't think many people know how tiring, really exhausting writing can be. I'm out of gas after about 4 to 6 hours of it each of the past three days!

One humbling experience.... For the winter solstice a member of the Class of '70 sent around a photo of the celebration Stonehenge. Accompanying the picture were quite a few solstice greetings, in Greek, Hebrew, German, Yiddish, whatnot. Over the course of the next couple of days, more than one other member jumped in with translations, complete with corrections of gender, tense, inflection, etc. No doubt, I was out of my league!

I open my computer and on my Home Page is something about what some Maher guy said about this Tebow football player. First, who cares what this Hollywood-type says? Who, in the first place, decided these Hollywood-types know any more than the rest of us, that they don't have their own share of Bozos? Second, what's the big deal about what somebody says about some NFL guy? Don't people have better things to think about, care about? How about what Obama said, that he lies if he things it will make things better? Or what about Gingrich and his words about ignoring court rulings if the majority of people disagree? The list is practically endless, the list of things to really care about.

Perhaps the end of days is near?

We Have What We Deserve

I don't know how many times I've heard people snicker about the people of Detroit and say, "They get what they deserve." The corrupt and inept politicians over the years have betrayed the trust of Detroiters. And I don't blame Detroit voters from turning from white candidates, whose history has hardly been one of benefit to blacks. But, back to "They get what they deserve."

The same can be said for the rest of us, for electing the same "Bozos" (thanks to Lee Iacocca for reminding us what our elected officials really have become) time and time again. And, when we do throw some of them out, we are stupid enough to think the two parties (both the Democrats and the Republicans) can be trusted to provide good people. Here are two examples from today's newspaper alone.

First, with so many people hurting, with the need to help others still so great, what does the state government do? It eliminates the tax credit for charitable contributions! C'mon, the credit is only $100 for an individual and twice that for couples. "Oh, the state treasury will gain..." so many millions of dollars. Give me a break! There is still a lot of cutting that can be done. I know where and so do you. How about the state legislators and governor making up the difference? If the donations aren't that big a deal, then they can give to help others. I don't give to get the credit; in fact, few of my donations qualify for it. But, that's not the point. Shame! Shame on the state government!!!!! But, I waste my time--politicians have proven again and again that they have no sense of shame.

Second, the payroll tax extension of two months shows us again that adults are not present in DC. What a joke that is! It proves that these guys have no idea of how to run anything--not businesses, not government, not anything! Both sides, but esp the President and Democrats are playing politics with this. Gee, it's an election year; is anyone surprised? Just for that, we should vote the Bozos out--but they provide many more reasons. What company can plan this crap for two months--two months? And, if the "plan" is to just come back in 2012 and extend the break for 12 months, then why not just do that in the first place? As disappointing as this joke of an extension is (And who doesn't expect "jokes" coming out of DC? Will Rogers said of Washington, "Every time someone makes a joke [there], it becomes a law. And every time someone makes a law, it becomes a joke." Some things never change.), the cave-in of the House Republicans is more so. Finally, an initial show of courage and principle (although the cut should be made permanent), the House Rep lost their spine. Let's repeat this: Shame! Shame on the President and Congress!!!!!! But, I say again, I waste my time....

And shame on all of us for settling for and electing and re-electing these same Bozos again and again. Good news, though, I heard American Idol is coming back in January! And, the Lions are in the playoffs! Who cares??????

And nobody cares....

I see where the federal gov't gave China about $19 million for some educational and/or cultural programs this year. Let's ignore why we are giving the commies anything. But, you might ask, where did we get teh $19 million? Good guess--we borrowed it from China!

And I see where Country Wide, the big lender that went broke, paid some $300 million "settlement" for its role in the housing market collapse. Two items: First, why was the former CEO permitted to get a $400 million parachute, with an agreement he'd never work in the banking industry again? (Think about that one!) Second, where is the investigation and subsequent penalties for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and their executives such as Franklin Raines, who also left with huge buyouts? And what about Congress and its members, say, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd?

How cool! Attorney-General Eric Holder claimed people don't like him because he's black. I'm not even sure I knew he was black--at least I never think about it. What I don't like about him is his policies.

??????

Is everyone losing his/her marbles? Perhaps it's just me.

I see an ad in today's newspaper for a hippy rock group called "5 Finger Death Punch." What kind of name is that? Pretty cool?

I hear Ron Paul say that Iran isn't a threat to anyone, that it's only responding to the threat from the US. Huh? He also said the Iranians aren't developing a nuclear weapon because they say they aren't. Hmmmm.... Perhaps we should just send the Iranians a nasty letter, sort of like we did with Hitler, Mussolini, and the Japanese war lords in the '30s. And we know how well that worked out. Oh, no we don't. I keep forgetting that history isn't important or, if we do learn history, it's not accurate, but some propaganda being foisted off as truth. (Example? How about that FDR's New Deal pulled us out of the Depression? Not so; not so.)

It's becoming more and more aggravating to me, listening to all these "do-gooders" complain about the "greed" of others. I was reminded of it passing a gas station today that charged 9 cents more for charges than for cash purchases. It's OK to charge more, but from what I understand, the cost of charges is 3 or 4 cents. So, why 9 cents? Isn't that "greedy?" But, more than that, it's those who complain about "greedy" others who irk me. Almost always, they have nice houses--nicer than mine--and big, expensive cars--bigger and more expensive than mine, and long and/or foreign vacations--ones I can't afford. I'm not at all envious. I have what I need and want. It's the hypocrisy of those decrying the "greed" of others, while spending their own money on, well, on themselves! Why don't they step down a few steps, buy a cheaper car and give the money they'd save on monthly car payments as a monthly charitable donation? Why don't they forgo those vacations or, perhaps, go more locally, and give the money to those they claim are needy? I'm not saying anyone should do that; it's their money and they can do with it as they like. More power to them. I just find the hypocrisy more and more galling. (OK, I actually called someone on that last week. I didn't get anywhere. No, hypocrites practice "situational ethics."

I know there are some really needy people out there, many through no fault of their own. But there an awful lot of people who milk the system, almost professional system players. I've heard of several in just the past few days. They should be punished, not only for milking the system and take undue advantage of it, but also for the stereotyped aspersions they cast on those who really need help. Who polices these situations and are there any repercussions/consequences for the fraud?

Out to read Harlan Coben, one of my favorite novelists.

Out of Touch?

So, I see and hear that the Dems are all over Mitt Romney for his "bet" of $10,000 against Rick Perry. Several Dems, including the head of the Mich Dem Party, said this shows how "out of touch" Romney is with middle-class America. Yeah, right. Then how do these folks explain away their guy Obama's $30,000 a plate dinner last week, oh, with the Wall Street-types and bankers? I forgot--that's different. Here we go again, situational ethics and principles. Another great example of hypocrisy.

K told someone the other day that, according to Ron, Ron is never wrong. That in itself is wrong. I'm wrong a lot and in important things. But, when I discuss matters with people, there are two things I won't tolerate. People can have their own opinions, right or wrong. But they aren't entitled to their own facts. And, they aren't allowed to be hypocrites. Those things, I think, were got me a bit riled up the other day.

George Will had a very good column yesterday. He makes a very convincing case that Gingrich shouldn't be the Rep nominee; nor should Romney. Esp with Gingrich, there was always something about the guy that I didn't like that I couldn't put my finger on--but Will did, explaining it very well. If Gingrich or Romney (or even Paul, esp with his foreign policy) is your guy, you'd do well to read this column. It would certainly, at least, make you think about your choice. Google Will and the recent date.

I see there's a flap about Lowe's not sponsoring that Arab show on one of the cable networks. (Yeah, "reality show" my bejabbers!) I have never seen the show and don't plan on it. I have far more important things to do with my life (winding down to my personal "final days") than to watch television, esp those kinds of shows. (No, I've never seen Survivor, American Idol, Great Car Race, etc.) Lowe's is free to sponsor what it wants. Other companies are, too. People, then, are free to boycott Lowe's for not sponsoring and others for sponsoring. This is America. People and companies should realize that their actions have consequences. I think a Detroit News columnist, whose name escapes me, missed the point in yesterdays's or today's newspaper. And I wonder if she's ever been to Dearborn, in an Arab store waiting to be served and continually get pushed to the back of the line as Arabs who come into the store are waited on first. I'd think not. Obviously, that doesn't have in every store, but in enough of them to be noticeable. No, the columnist doesn't see stuff like that.

Greed?

I received an e-mail yesterday about a couple of Major League players' new contracts. I didn't see the figures until this AM.

$254 million for 10 years????? And, last week, the Tigers gave a utility player $4 million for two years (I actually like the player, but c'mon....)

So, where is the "greed" there? I know baseball is a "business," but it's, in essence, only a game. Where are the protests? After all, 1000 families could be given $25,000 a year for 10 years.

I know, I know...this is different. As one of my AC classmates has cited, "situational ethics and principles." That can explain away a lot of hypocrisy, can't it?

Heh Heh

One of my favorite bumper stickers read, "No Blood for Oil." It was during the early days of the Iraq War and was pasted on the bumper of a huge SUV doing more than 80 mph down the freeway! I saw something that rivaled that in Las Vegas last weekend. Some guy, laden down with what looked like ample drink, was wearing a button that read, "99%." Yep, exactly!

Who'd have ever thought a liberal arts education would have to be defended? I guess I should have seen it coming. "Going to college" is now primarily a means to get a job. Those with degrees in English and Philosophy and other liberal arts subjects are considered mostly unemployable. In the high schools, History isn't important. So, here we are, with the governor of Fla wanting to spend state dollars on higher education for more science and high-tech studies, not "[to] educate more people who can't get jobs in anthropology." And, he's not the only one. Check out your nearest campuses and see where the money goes--new buildings and facilities for business, science, and technology. Note all the computers going into your local schools. I have nothing against these disciplines. I do have difficulty accepting that education's primary purpose is to "get a job" for a graduate. And where has all this de-emphasis on liberal arts got us? We have doctors who are brilliant, but can't sympathize or communicate with patients. Imagine a liberal arts major designing airplane seats, ones in which a person can actually comfortably sit. And what engineers plan a grocery store parking lot (with shopping carts that roll!) on a hill? Perhaps we need more anaestheologists who were Fine Arts majors, banking executives who were English majors, and real estate managers who were Psychology majors? (I picked those because I graduated with some of them.) Maybe there would be just a little more consideration for all of us....

Marvels

Unable to sleep on the return plane ride from Las Vegas, I was left with my thoughts. (Don't you feel sorry for me?) Staring at the only thing I could see (the cabin lights were out and my overhead wouldn't turn on), the in-flight information such as the map of our trip, speed, temperatures, etc., I was struck by this: What was I doing, with 270 other people, more than 7 miles in the sky, traveling at 636 mph in a long steel tube?????? I know air travel is commonplace, even ho-hum in 2011. But, seriously, think about that: 270 people, 7 miles up, 636 mph! Wow!

I was reminded of the Wright Brothers, who were successful with their own money, while a Smithsonian-sponsored effort to fly, complete with federal government subsidies, failed miserably. There's a lesson in that somewhere, isn't there?

That said, who designed airplane seats? I was very tired, yet couldn't find any position that was comfortable enough to allow me to sleep. Of course, tie in the last half of the flight, quite bumpy, and I never dozed off. So, I was up at 5:30 AM on Sun and went to bed/sleep at 10:30 PM on Mon. I don't think I've ever stayed up so many consecutive hours. I think I'm still dragging a bit.

And, one last thing, obesity isn't a handicap. How many wheelchairs impeded others' in moving through the airport, wheelchairs pushing obese people? And, several of us, tired at the late hour, noted before the flight the number of grossly obese people. Each of us noted, "I'm not sitting next to that guy...." The few of us who were talking about it, grousing, were fortunate enough not to draw an obese seat-mate. But there was a tiny woman who wasn't so lucky, smooshed into her seat next to a window. I know, I know, "Obese people have rights." Yep, they do. But so do people who aren't obese. I do nothing to infringe on their rights, but they, in this seating situation, do infringe on mine. Airlines have luggage size limits--weight, length and width--for carry-on baggage. There should also be limits for people, requiring the purchase of two seats if needed. (And, being obese shouldn't qualify one for a handicapped parking sticker!)

Snow

Yesterday AM was the first measurable snow of the winter. We had about 2-3" on the grass and maybe 1-2" on the road. Bopper said he had a bit more up in White Lake. It was very pretty.

Anyway, it was Round One with the shovel. I won the round, pretty easily and enjoyed it! The snow was pretty wet and heavy, but only 1-2" on the driveway. I didn't even have on gloves; I was done that soon. Almost finished, a neighbor drove by, rolled down his window, and yelled, "Hey, man! What are you doin'? It'll be melted by this afternoon." Maybe it would and maybe not. But, that wasn't the point of shoveling, was it?

I also noted some things never change. Out running or driving with the Codester, I noted that some people just won't clean the snow from their car windows. They brush off the front and don't touch the back or sides. Oh, well....

Wed AM

Interesting how leopards never change their spots. Clarence Page is one of them. He takes the Reps on the Super Committee, indeed, all Reps who favor spending cuts over higher taxes, to task. It's their fault the SC didn't succeed because they refused "to cut a deal." Yep, curioser and curioser. Why is it that the Reps always need "to cut a deal," never the Dems? How about, for once, the Dems don't get everything they want? In fact, how about Americans getting something they want, not some half-baked "compromise," "bi-partisanship," or whatever new name is used to call that hooey? This Page guy cites some poll, but not naming it, that claims Americans are willing to pay higher taxes and cut spending to reduce the deficit. Maybe, maybe not...but I don't know of many people who want higher taxes, unless they are on the "other guy." And, of this, "higher taxes and cut spending," the history of the past four or five decades has been "a deal," one which the Dems have lied. They get an agreement for more taxes and reduced spending, then renege on "the deal." They don't reduce spending, merely going back to the dolts who keep agreeing to "deals" the Reps must know aren't being kept. Fools, all of them.

BTW, I got a laugh out of the "cartoon" on the same page. OK, it wasn't a cartoon, but a photo that accompanied the column. Its caption read, "Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget." Yep, that's really the old committee's title..."Responsible." Heh Heh.

I see Barney Frank is leaving the House. No doubt he'll be lionized by the media. There's no choice. To point out how much he hurt the country would be "homophobic." Bah! The guy is a major reason for, at least, the housing trouble. Just check his record on it, specifically Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Or, perhaps, I am wrong, that there was nothing wrong with the housing market, Fannie, and Freddie, among other things. He's another guy who is addicted to spending other people's money because he knows what's good for us better than we do. I wonder why there's been no investigation, no real investigation, into Fannie and Freddie, esp the high salaries and bonuses their obvious less than capable managers received.

Here's another one of those "You Can't Make This Stuff Up" stories. Actually, it's a bunch of them, from George Will. At least half a dozen states, maybe more, and who knows how many local gov'ts have shut down kids' lemonade/Kool-Aid stands because they didn't procure the necessary licenses from whatever bureaucracies. Imagine that, telling kids they can't have their lemonade/Kool-Aid stands because the gov't is there to protect us from them (and from us)! How can we let the fools continue with this crap??????

I had a talk with a guy a few weeks ago about the Wayne Co mess, the "patronage" among politicians and their friends, the "cronyism" that is so lambasted everywhere else. I was assured that Ficano "is OK," that he wasn't like his predecessor(s). Hmmm.... So, in yesterday's newspaper comes this--he has 85 "at-will" appointees who make at least $100,000. Where to start? Let's see, that number, 85, is more than Detroit, Oak Co, and Macomb Co combined. Oh, you say, but Wayne Co is larger than those. OK, let's toss in the number of "at-will" appointments by the state/governor. Oh, if we do that, the number in Wayne Co is still more than all the other combined. Hmmm.... $100,000 a year? Gee, I wonder what it is that these guys do. What is it they do that, say, Bittinger and Kittle couldn't do--and did do, for a far lot less money? What ever happened to the Founders' concept of citizen-servants or even Frederick the Great's "first servant of the servants?"

First, they came after the communists, but I wasn't a communist, so I said nothing. Then they came after the Gypsies, but I wasn't a Gypsie, so I said nothing. Then they came after the Jews, but I wasn't a Jew, so I said nothing.... Then they came after the lemonade/Kool-Aid stands, but I didn't have a lemonade/Kool-Aid stand, so I said nothing. I'm not being frivolous or irreverent here, but mindful of the Dutch editor who said of the censorship over the Muhammad cartoons, "I was too busy enjoying my freedom to do anything to protect it." Yep, that's us. As long as we can watch the NFL on CBS, Dancing with the Stars, the Simpsons, I guess we're OK. Death, slow death, by gov't is for the other guy.

More from Will: Yale is offering a course on "How people with disabilities are portrayed in fiction." Huh? Study after study shows that our college grads, yes even our Ivy Leaguers, don't know a lot. So, this is being offered. And the part of the course description Will adds is funny, if it wasn't true. Will reminds us that Obama has said ATMs have cost us many jobs and that Jesse Jackson Jr claims I-Pads are "responsible for eliminating thousands of American jobs [including] all of the jobs associated with paper." And these elitists think they are smarter than the rest of us?

In the education dept, Rahm Emanuel sends his kids to private, not public, schools, admitting he made the choice, not as the mayor of Chicago, but "as a father." Hmmm, there's one for thought. And, in a Seattle school, Easter eggs are now called "spring spheres." Yep, there are our teachers, too. How much can a flight from Denver to Ely, NV cost? Ignoring who might actually be making that flight, the federal gov't contributes almost $4000 to subsidize passenger service, that's each ticket!, between the two "hot spots."

Good joke, he adds. "A Spaniard, an Italian, and a Greek go into a bar. They drink until dawn. Who pays the tab? A German." I suppose, with some of the talk going on in DC, soon the punch line will be "An American."

Out to run before the kids get up.

Under My Government

Decades ago, a Free Press columnist, Judd Arnett, had a frequent column entitled "Under My Government." In it, he solved the problems of, if not the world, at least our United States. So, here goes my version of "Under My Government."

College athletes would have to be bona fide students, not sham students. I heard an interview with an Amherst professor at halftime of a Jeffs game a few weeks ago. He said something like, "Amherst players have to take the same classes and do the same work as everyone here." Yep, that's how it should be. If they can't handle it, find someplace else to play, but not at a college. People, namely professors, coaches, and alumni, if caught helping players to evade this academic responsibility should be charged with fraud or some other crime. The same goes for college administrators who aid and abet, or even look the other way.

Any players, at whatever levels, should be penalized for showboating. Especially so are those who carry on after making a tackle when their team is losing by four TDs. A second violation will result in "disqualification" from participation.

There will be no high school football playoffs. I was reminded of this in an e-mail by one of my college teammates, who was getting set to go to a Thanksgiving Day game, the last one of the season in CT, his old HS vs the biggest rival. What's wrong with ending a season that way? One of my buddies noted how much fun playing in the Rubber Bowl in Akron on Thanksgiving Day. Without the playoffs, the high school football season is 12-13 weeks long, far too much. And what's wrong with not having a champion "on the field?" Why can't people debate what team is best? How much more interesting! In '73, Fordson and cross-town rival Edsel Ford played the last game of the season; both were undefeated and ranked #2 and #3 respectively. What a great game to finish with! FHS won by about 4o points and yet didn't finish ranked #1 in the newspaper poll, the only rankings at the time. What a great conversation starter for years and years to come.

For that matter, colleges would return to the old bowl system, getting rid of this BCS crap. We don't need a "champion on the field." Leave all that to the professionals. We can have voting, by coaches and by writers. Then we can argue all winter, spring, and summer long about how right or wrong they were. That's much more fun.

High school basketball? A tournament? Well, OK, maybe. But, I'd cut the season to 18 instead of 20 games or limit the number of weeks--to play 20 games, a team needs to play twice a week and that includes during the Chris break. And there would be no more 40+ game baseball or softball seasons in HS either. I'd go down the list and pare back the number of contests in all sports if needed.

Recent immigrants to the US will not immediately qualify for welfare. Those who circumvent this law will be deported--after being fined or made to pay back. If they don't have any money, they can pick up papers along the side of the road, pick weeds, etc.

Elected officials cannot tell people what kind of light bulbs to use, what types of televisions to watch, what kind of cars to buy, etc. They should not be able to tell me what kind of food, fast food, I can or can't eat. I'm a big boy and can make decisions for myself.

Elected officials must also follow the same laws we do. For instance, Nancy Pelosi and John Boehner engaged in inside trading based on what they had exclusive knowledge about and did nothing but make money. Martha Stewart and many others went to jail. NO MORE!

Politicians who promise one thing during campaigns and then do another once elected would be prosecuted for fraud. Let a jury of their peers decide their fate.

School administrators will be chosen from among the best teachers, not the worst or, at the least, the most mediocre. And, they will be required to teach at least one class each semester or term so they don't forget what it's like to teach.

"Greed" will be applied to more than CEOs, Big Oil, Wall Street, or Big Bankers. They don't hold a monopoly on greed. What about the Hollywood-types, professional athletes, hippy-rock singers, etc.? They, too, will then be wearing the same label. Gas station owners who charge a dime or more for credit card purchases will have to justify the extra money or be compelled to post a sign reading, "WE ARE GREEDY!" I think we might also do the same for electricians, plumbers, etc. who charge more for a half hour of work than I do in teaching two nights a week.

Public shame and humiliation will return. This will help to hold people accountable and responsible for their actions. It will be illegal to continue with "Let's not point fingers," "Let's not cast blame," "Let's move on," "Let's get beyond this," "Let's not look at the past," etc. Those who deserve blame will be identified and held accountable.

Politicians who cut taxes (or at least make speeches touting tax cuts) in election years, after ranting against them in the past, will have to wear large campaign buttons that read, "Fraud" or "Hypocrite."

That should help get our new gov't off the ground....

"The Two Most Important Questions"

Bill Bennett the other day claimed that the two most important questions a society can ask of itself are "Who are the teachers?" and "What are they teaching?" I don't know if they are the most important, but they are right up near the top.

And, upon reflection, the answers don't exactly inspire confidence that we are on the correct path. I'll preface my brief remarks by saying there are some great, great teachers out there. I know that from personal experience. And, in fact, I commiserate over their frustration with incompetent and insecure administrators, unprepared and unmotivated students, and a society that rewards celebrity far more than achievement.

But, if I recall correctly (and I don't remember the studies), the teachers of the past 30 years wouldn't have been admitted to colleges 40 or 50 years ago. The education majors of today, with their easy education classes, still have the lowest GPAs of any college major. To answer the first question, those are our teachers (again, recognizing there are exceptions, some great teachers out there).

And they buy into all the crap the colleges, media, etc. throw at them. For instance, how many classes in the schools incorporate "man-made global warming" into their lessons/studies, even though it's purely theoretical, not at all provable (at least it hasn't been yet)? How many claim that carbon dioxide is a "pollutant," when it's actually a vital component of the eco-system? How many echo that FDR was a "great President" because that's what their textbooks and college professors have insisted? The list goes on. What follows from the previous paragraph is that there are no critical-thinking skills; there is no ability or even thought of questioning what is being taught. So, the same stuff gets passed down to current generations of students. What is it the computer geeks say, "Garbage in, Garbage out?"

Speaking of "out," out to take my casserole out of the oven and pop in my berry pie.

Reminders

I'm glad newspapers like The Oakland Press run columns by people like E.J. Dionne. It's good to be reminded of how bereft of reality many columnists are. This guy is out of it. Really, though, I do wonder how anyone can pay him for what he writes. Today, he talks about "mindless opposition to government." "Mindless?" Of course, he's using this gambit to attack conservatives, who, according to Dionne are stupid. OK, he sort of makes it seem he doesn't give such a blanket indictment by signalling Bill Bennett as reasonable. But, c'mon.... Opposition to gov't isn't mindless in most people concerned with the growth of the federal gov't, its intrusion into people's lives, and its rewards for bad behavior. The gov't has no business telling me what kind of light bulbs I have to use, what type of television I must have, what sort of car I will have to drive, etc. It's none of gov't's business. That the gov't debt is completely ridiculous, amounts nobody can reasonably fathom cannot be argued by anyone with half a brain. The malfeasance of corporate execs in banking, the auto industry, etc. was rewarded with the bailouts; members of Congress can engage in insider trading that sent Martha Stewart and others to jail; mothers are encouraged to have more and more babies with whatever fathers they can find because the gov't steals our money to give to them. But, Dionne insists opposition to gov't is "mindless." And that comes from someone whose columns are almost always "mindless."

On the same page, Walter Williams has this to say about Robert Reich, "Berkley's pretend economist." Great line!

Fumbling

I guess I could never be a candidate for President. When Rick Perry the other night in the OU debate (and it's not a debate) couldn't remember the third Cabinet post he'd eliminate or curtail, the pundits claimed that was the end of his candidacy. I forget stuff all of the time. The very next day, in class, I was going over the Zimmerman Telegram from the First World War. I couldn't remember that it is/was also called the Z Note and the Z Dispatch. I've taught this stuff, what?, a million times? But I couldn't recall those until, as usual, I hit the expressway on the drive home.

Should this disqualify someone for President? Hmmm. Wouldn't that same President be surrounded by dozens of aides who might give him a cue? And hasn't Obama fumbled for words occasionally? Where were the comments about those? Don't we all forget things, things we know very well?

Mottos and Goals?

I've always wondered about mottos and goals of individuals and teams. I've never been a big fan of them. No doubt, when teams win championships, they cite their mottos and goals. "We won this because we set a goal...." Hmmm.... Didn't a lot of teams set goals, even to win the same championships? So, why was it one goal worked, but more than one didn't? I'm not saying failure to win a championship means a failed season; not at all. Look at all the tee shirts and signs in weight rooms...it was those that played major roles in winning. So, does that mean all the losing teams didn't have tee shirts and signs? Is that all it takes? If so, why aren't there more championship teams? Oh, that's why.....

Why does one need a goal or a motto to work hard, to try one's best, to play hard? I don't think it's necessary. I don't need a tee shirt to tell me I work harder than you so I finished ahead of you, whether I did or didn't.

My guess the mottos and shirts are for the times the playing days are over. Isn't everyone, ten years afterward, "All-League" or "All-State" or whatever "All-" they want to believe they were? I even had one guy tell me he was a high school "All-American," but, it seemed odd to me, wasn't offered a college scholarship--not Div 1, not Div 2, not Div 3, or even some community college. It's sort of like Springsteen's "Glory Days."

I suppose these things don't hurt, but I'd guess they are vastly overrated, given far too much credit because the winner always seem to wear the shirts, spout the mottos, etc. Gee, what would it look like if the losers are wearing the same shirts, spouting the same mottos?

Wouldn't practicing and playing hard, trying to be the best one can be just as good?

Education

I'm opposed to the incessant state and national mania surrounding standardized testing. On the whole, it's counterproductive, doesn't really measure education, leads to cheating (deliberate or otherwise), etc. But I fully understand the clamors for it.

People can't trust teachers any more. For instance, how is one to assess a school where the GPA for all students is 3.5 or higher? How can a whole dept have grades that average to 3.2? At some universities A- or B+ is the average course grade. C'mon, we've all seen the products of these schools and depts and they certainly don't merit grades like that. So, why, then, are such grades given? Hence, the need for standardized testing. Teachers and schools say one thing (in giving high grades) when the evidence points in the opposite direction. And, compounding this is the claim by teachers and administrators of demanding higher standards. Bologna/Baloney!

Britain has a national system, one that is highly resented by teachers and students alike. But it serves its purpose: it keeps educational programs/classes, etc. honest.

On the college/university level, and I suspect in the public schools as well, the number of administrators and other nonteaching employees has multiplied over the recent decades. The primary purpose of schools is no longer classroom learning, that is, education.

Far too many instructors at all levels have become enamored with technology. Technology, no doubt, has its place. But it has become a way to avoid real teaching. Oh, the justification is that today's students relate more to the visual, the video games (oops! did I mean to write that? yep.), but face-to-face academic confrontation, the stuff of learning, is lost.

Yet, many US colleges and universities remain the standards for the rest of the world to envy and try to emulate. I guess a good question is why other colleges and universities and even public schools don't try to emulate (and adapt, obviously, for age/grade/level differences) the teaching at these top schools. (See my earlier post on the Socratic method for one possible explanation why they don't.) It's almost as if we design our schools with the lowest common denominators in mind, setting up students for the most mediocre of educations.

But, who will listen? The education-types will bring out all kinds of studies, some flawed, some deliberately misleading, some with results all too predictable because of current methods to justify the latest trendy fashion in education. But how many have actually tried what worked in the past, what works at the best colleges and universities? Has anyone tried hard work, with lots of reading and writing? Has anyone tried really high standards? If so, they are in the minority.

Worth?

Out running the other AM, I ran past a guy loading his SUV outside a very, very nice house on a lake. The whole package must have cost a pretty penny. And, then, the guy must have had a job that paid a whole lot. I thought, "I wonder if this guy thinks he is worth it [his pay]." No doubt the answer is he does. How about his co-workers or others who do the same type of work he does? Does he think, do they think they are worth what they are paid? My guess is they think so. How about the UAW folks who received $6000 merely for ratifying their recent contract(s) with the auto companies? Of course, just for ratifying, they think they deserve the money. Why, then, is it always teachers (and other public employees) who are "overpaid" and get "extravagant perks" such as health insurance and retirement packages? Remember, I still think far too many teachers get far too much money (while others don't get nearly enough). Yet, the $100,000 incentive to retire at the auto companies makes my incentive pale in comparison (and, it was a one-time deal with the school district). OK, I'm not arguing others aren't what they get paid (although maybe I could). What concerns me is the guy with the mansion on the lake, with the car that costs as much as my house and the guy who makes $100,000 working in a factory. Many of them think teachers make too much money. Many of them think the bankers, Big Oil, Wall Street, etc. are "greedy." I guess it's in one's definition of "greed," isn't it?

I also saw where some school board member (I forget if it was local or state) thinks teachers should be compelled to undertake some after-school activities. I don't remember if it was community-based or just within a school or school district. But I bristle as these do-gooders! First, I hope they are volunteering their time in such endeavors. Second, do they expect teachers to do this for free? No doubt they do. So, I would be, for free, giving up time with my own family, my own children to do things for other people's children? Is that it? Yeah, right. Third, who says many teachers don't already do things like this, maybe not with the school district, but with other community organizations?

Maybe I don't know the entire story, but it seems to me we have a strange system of justice here. In Detroit, a judge acknowledged that the mayor's people destroyed evidence against him in the case of a murdered stripper/party girl, then dismissed the lawsuit due to a lack of evidence. What? Is it that simple to beat the rap? Somehow/Someway, there's something rotten in Denmark.

Priceless

What is it the commercials say, "Priceless?" Well that's what about 10-15 minutes outside this evening were, "Priceless!" Michael and I were outside with binoculars looking for the International Space Station, which was scheduled to be overhead just before 8:00.

Waiting, we first focused our binocks on Venus, rising in the Eastern sky. Then we took in a bit of the half moon. While searching for the ISS, suddenly a "shooting star" came flying across a neighbor's roof! And that was particularly cool because on the way home from basketball practice the other night, Bopper saw a shooting star that I missed. He was giddy over it all night and then tonight....

But we didn't have time to think much about tonight's because following a high-soaring plane we originally thought might be the ISS, the real ISS showed. We actually spent more time looking without the binocks, just watching its very steady pace across the sky, from about ten o'clock to six o'clock (NNW to almost due S). While watching it, I asked Bopp if he'd like to be on it, like the astro/cosmonauts and scientists have been. He just thought about it.

Amid our thoughts and conversation, I had a more solemn moment. For whatever reason, I recalled nighttime labs in Prof. Cogan's Astronomy course at AC, watching the skies from Memorial Hill and Hitchcock Field with Bill Bradley. It capped a moving and memorable 20-minute episode this evening. Nope, I couldn't put a price on it....

Ageing or Aging

Hmmm...which spelling is correct? I don't have time to look it up, but as I often say in my classes, "I can do anything I want. It's my TV show." So....

Perhaps I haven't yet reached "old age." I know I was talking with someone the other day about "senior discounts." Gee, from what this guy was saying, I certainly qualify for all of them now. I think the only one I've ever really had is at the Denny's/Lenny's in Las Vegas. I don't remember any others, but I don't remember them. But, it was a humorous conversation.

Old, but not old enough yet.... That's what I've been thinking. According to conventional wisdom, once one reaches a certain age, he doesn't care what he says--favorable or unfavorable. Well, I still have a few things I'd like to tell people, mostly very favorable and flattering, but am leery of doing that. I guess, among other things, I don't want any embarrassment--and not on my part.

So I guess I'll wait just a little longer, but not too long!

Delusional

I was watching C-Span (don't tell anyone!) and the President's press secretary was holding a q-and-a session. I got in on a question about the President taking a $500,000 donation from somebody and then getting rewarded with gov't largesse. The press secretary was great, "This President has had the most transparent and open administration of any President. No other President has been as forthcoming as this one. We can only hope later Presidents will match that." The questioner had a look of disbelief on his face when he asked the same question in another way, since he got a non-answer. The press secretary contined, "This President has had the most transparent and open administartion of any President. No other President...." A third time this happened and the reporter gave up and another one was picked for a question. It was something the press secretary knew nothing about and admitted it--and that's fine. Then a woman asked a similar question to the first and the press secretary replied, "This President has had the most transparent and open administration of any President. No other President...." I don't know if I laughed harder or got angrier. Is this guy delusional?????? How can he stand up there and say that? Let's not even start with birth certificates and college records (no, I'm not a birther or conspiracy guy). And let's ignore "The Chicago Way." But we can begin with the Czars. How about tossing in waivers to certain favored groups with ObamaCare. Yep, those have all been right out there in the open, with the press secretaries making those announcements. Oh, they haven't????? How about the tax cheats in the Cabinet and other administrative positions? Can we include the President's behind-the-scenes efforts to have important votes in Congress take place late Sat evenings and Chris Eve? How about the executive orders dealing with illegal immigrants? Or the White House directives not to pursue legal actions against, say, Black Panthers who intimidate voters in Philadelphia? Need I go on?

I know history isn't important, but it shows that who yells first and the loudest gets to write the history, whether it's accurate or not. How many examples of that do you need, yep, even in American History? Hitler and Goebbels knew that; the pursued "the Big Lie Theory." Tell a lie big enough, loud enough, and often enough and it becomes the "truth." Is that what's going on here?

Roads?

I heard one of the governor's spokesmen on the radio yesterday explaining the new plain for increased taxes on auto registration. The tax increase would pay to fix the roads. I'm not sure I buy it. And, the spokesman's explanation wasn't very convincing. He had some flaws in his argument.

First, the gas tax is now 19 cents/gal, but, due to inflation its now worth only 15 cents/gal compared to just a few years ago. Well, it may come as a surprise to the fellow, but inflation has hit us now, too. What was 19 cents for us is now 15 cents for us, too!

It was brought up that perhaps the sales tax on gasoline (which includes a sales tax on the 10 cents/gal gasoline tax!) could be used for the roads, in addition to the registration fees. But the guy argued that the sales tax on gas goes to the schools. Hmmm...the schools? There's a whole lot of difference on 6% of $1.50/gal than 6% of $3.50/gal. In other words, there has been a huge windfall with the price of gasoline over the past two years. Where is that extra money going, if indeed the schools are financially hurting? There should be no education budget crunch, if as this guy claims, the sales tax on gas goes to the schools. On gasoline purchases then, we have been giving twice as much to the state/schools in the past two years. Hmmm???

The guy claimed that if we "do nothing," costs of repairs will skyrocket in the future while the roads getting increasingly bad. Again, what's going on here? What is this guy talking about? "Doing nothing?" Who's "doing nothing?" Is there no road and highway budget now? Oh, there is? Then why isn't that considered "doing" something?

This seems like another half-baked idea from the governor's office, like the business tax cut that came free of any conditions, such as that companies would have to hire more workers or cut prices (which would lead to more hires) before qualifying for the cut. The gov's spokesman said the gov is "willing to listen" to other ideas, yet I've never received even a "go jump in the lake" from any of my e-mails sent to him.

Have you seen where a Canadian scientist's (a Canadian!) report has led the Canadian gov't (Canadian!) to delay the mandatory CFL bulbs instead of incandescent ones? Hmmm...Canadian! But not here. I wonder, just wonder, sometimes. Why isn't the American gov't doing the same thing, instead of telling us no more incandesecent ones by 2012? This Canadian scientist criticized the "science behind" the CFL bulbs. She cited the dangers and health hazards, not to mentions the inefficiencies, costs, and inconvenience. Where is our gov't on this? I've heard nothing; it's apparently full speed ahead on forcing the change/ban. I guess that leads me to one of several conclusions about why the CFLs instead of incandescents. Is somebody stupid? Is the fix in, with a bribe of sorts? Or, I suppose, the Canadian scientist seemed pretty astute, specific about her criticisms. Can we get a response or an honest and earnest answer from our gov't, one not fraught with ideology, but with real science? Doubtful.

Greed v Envy

(By the way, it's great to get comments!)

Is there a difference between "greed" and "envy?" Perhaps they are just degrees of the same thing. And maybe it's about time we began "labeling" things the way they really are. (I know, I know--"Let's not point fingers" and "Let's just move on" and "Let's not affix blame." If we don't do that, who, then, ever has to be held accountable? Doesn't that just throw responsibility out of the window? Ah, "Your public schools. There's no better place to learn.")

OK, the Wall Street folks, Big Oil, Bankers, and their ilk are all "greedy." I get that. They bear the label and maybe deserve it. After all, with much of the US in economic freefall, do the CEOs and other corporate managers really deserve the incredible amounts they get? Nope, not at all. And, I might argue, just like MLB players and other professional athletes, college coaches, Hollywood-types, and hippy-rock stars, they get far too much money. Who, seriously, is worth tens of millions of dollars a year? And, how much money is enough? Is money the only thing that drives people to success, to innovation? I hope not and don't think so. (How interesting that those who do think so--likely "conservatives--are giving credence to a philosophy of Karl Marx, the commie!) But, I don't begrudge them the money. Would I turn down more money if my employer offered it? Would I give back money from my paycheck? Nope. And my strong feeling is that not many people outside of Mother Teresa would either. In that sense, perhaps "greed" takes on new meaning or at least can be seen in another light.

But what about the Wall Street Protesters? What is it that drives them? Is it, as one of them was quoted in the newspaper this AM, "crony capitalism?" Indeed, if it is "crony capitalism," then they are protesting in the wrong place. They should be in Washington, DC! Is it that some people have things and they don't? Listen to some of them blathering away and that's a logical conclusion. They want what other people have. Isn't that "envy?" And, of course, isn't that "greed?"

Would I want more money? Of course I would. Even Mother Teresa would, although she would use it far differently than most folks. But I don't obsess over it and never have. (OK, this is where I was misunderstood in the schools. Far too many took the very simplistic view that I wanted more money and that was the root of my disenchantment. Those closest to me or those who actually listened knew better. Among other things, it was the dishonesty of my employers/bosses more than actually higher pay. It was the ridiculous ways things were done--policies, programs, and whatnot. But, I digress....) I don't covet what other people have or have earned (and, again, it's debatable whether CEOs who drive their companies to the brink or farther deserve or earn their salaries). What they get doesn't deprive me of what I have.

Thomas Sowell in his recent book (and thanks to Walter Williams for pointing this out) makes this situation abundantly clear. Two poor boys live in Russia. One has a goat; the other doesn't. The one who doesn't finds a magic lamp and, upon rubbing it, gets a wish from his genie. His wish is for his friend's goat to die. Huh? you wonder. Yep, that's what the Wall Street Protesters want. They want all those who have to not have. Looking at Sowell's example shows the folly in this. "Greed" or "Envy?"

Williams had just a great column! Oprah Winfrey made $290 million in 2010. Do you think she paid her make-up person $100,000? Even if she did, the make-up person "earned" about 1/2900 of what she did! And, remember, 1% is 1/100. According to Forbes Mag, the average salary of the best-paid CEOs was a bit higher than $100 million. (Of course I don't think anyone is worth that, but if that's what they can finagle out of others, more power to them!) So, hmmmm.... Why aren't the Wall Street Protesters picketing and sitting in on Oprah's house or studio? Or what about the studio of Lady Gaga, who made $90 million? Howard Stern took home $76 million. I wonder what he pays his sound man?????? The top ten CEOs averaged almost $43 million while the top ten celebrities averaged $100 million. And I wonder why the media and politicians don't demonize Tiger Woods ($75 million) and LeBron James ($48 million). I wonder how many protesters they could attract if they attacked these "superstars."

Yep, I know the answer...and so do you.

Stuff I Can't Make Up

Yep, sometimes truth is stranger than fiction:

According to ABC News (and that a member of the LameStream Media would report this is in itself astounding), the Obama Administration gave more than half a billion bucks to an auto company, purportedly to create jobs. That it did--about 500 jobs were created. 5oo! Using my calculator, as usual, that works out to about $1 million per job. I guess one might ask why we didn't just give, say, $100,000 to each worker. We'd have come out ahead, much farther ahead. Oh, and those 500 jobs? They were "created" in Finland. The auto plant was manufacturing electric cars (oh, the hallowed "green jobs!"). Of course, that explains a lot.

Electric cars.... Those cars the government is foisting on us (like television sets, light bulbs, incessant school testing, and even, locally, no Big Macs), those electric cars...the Chevrolet reportedly sold just about 300 of its Volts in the US in July. Turning, again, to my trust calculator, that works out to about 10 a day, one for every 5 states. I'd say, even with the gov't freely handing out our money as rebates to buy electric cars, even with gov't pressure on the car companies to make them (note the sudden increase of television ads!), Americans don't want them. I know this American doesn't want one--ever! Wasn't this already said, "Government of the people, by the people, and for the people?"

With that in mind, why aren't our two US Senators, Stabenow and Levin, fighting this tooth-and-nail, at every step, loudly? And, Stabenow is up for re-election. Her opponent, will it be Pete Hoekstra?, should bombard us with this reminder. But, I suppose, who can be against "green?" It's like opposing the 0.08 blood alcohol level (about two beers or a glass of wine in two or three hours)--who can be against MADD and SADD or for drunk driving? It's not for drunk driving--it's for a little bit of common sense. It's like opposing anything (and I mean anything) the schools do--who can be against "the kids?" After all, "it's for the kids." But it's not "for the kids," or, rather, it often isn't. For instance, "the kids" wait in the dark around 6 AM for there buses each day; is that "for the kids?" Class sizes are back in the mid-30s range; is that "for the kids?" Go "green!"

That said, it's hard to root for MSU these days. I guess I'm old-fashioned, but why did the MSU coach wait for the Big Ten office to suspend the player who not only threw a punch in the open field, but also, in a pile up (he didn't think he'd be seen?) tried to unscrew the UM QB's head? And last year, he started a player who had been released from jail just a few days before.n I know, I know....

Apparently Moammar Khadafy was killed after being captured. Isn't that, if not murder, but capital punishment--without a trial? I'm not saying he didn't deserve exactly what he got, but where are the protesters, in the US and throughout the world? They hold candlelight vigils at the execution sites of murderers and rapists here. The whole world condemns the US for its "barbarity" and worse. I don't ask these people to change their minds. They have a good point. I just ask, as always, for some consistency and a little less hypocrisy.

But, maybe it's just another reason to bash the US. Maybe it's a case of envy. I think envy is a worse attribute than greed. The Wall Street Protesters, more than being against greed, are envious. They want what others have earned or at least have. Listen to that boob (which goes a lot toward seeing what college students are like today? "Everybody goes to college!") who ranted, the rich should pay his college bills because he wants them to. I spoke with someone last night who agreed, it looked reluctantly, that the protesters, if they were in the shoes of the wealthy, would be just like the wealthy. Of course they would. It's not about greed, but envy. And the rest of the world is envious of the US and Americans and our wealth. Instead of trying to emulate the US and Americans, say in matters of government freedom and economics (you know, getting rid of tyrannical and "greedy" dictators!), it's easier to just hate and criticize us.

How does Smokey Robinson, in all the songs he wrote, always manage to strike a chord in people's (OK, in my) emotions? Beats me, but he does. From reminiscing to facing today, from sad to elated...he's right there many more times than not. I even pick out days, from playing football at the ice rink on Chase Rd to selling hot dogs at Orr Arena to the basement at TD. How cool!

Shopping last weekend, I spent about $35 on groceries. I hadn't shopped in two weeks and I'm not shopping this weekend. With coupons and returnables, I save more than $145! Yep. Now granted, $20 was a coupon for filling a prescription there earlier (one that cost $4, a generic). Still, that's a lot of money. And, to add to the savings, it's the equivalent of income and there is no income tax on it--federal or state. I don't understand why people don't clip and use coupons. (Admittedly, I don't save that much with every trip. But with double coups, it's unusual for me not to save at least $50 each time.) It really takes maybe ten minutes to cut them from the Sun inserts. In fact, they become sort of a game or, at the least, a hobby.

Heroes

I heard the tale end of a radio show about heroes this AM on the way to class. I didn't catch the guest who was talking about heroes, but did get some of the host's comments and phone calls. (BTW, another radio host who said this AM, "It could have became...." is not a "hero.) We need heroes, as role models, as people whose good qualities we can aspire to emulate, for their ideas and ideals. I don't remember if it was the host or a caller who talked about one of my favorite nebulous days, "Presidents' Day." What kind of crap is that!?!?!? What happened to Lincoln's Birthday and Washington's Birthday, two days to honor two Presidents deserving of honor? Instead, some fool(s) decided we'd let Abe and George share their honor with the likes of W.H. Harrison, Jimmy Carter, Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton, James Garfield, and even the racist and elitist Woodrow Wilson. As the host or caller asked, "How did we let that happen?" I guess we were too busy watching Dancing with the Stars, the NFL on CBS, or the Simpsons. In that vein, on more than one occasions I have suggested to the local school board that school names be changed to reflect "heroes," be they national, state, or local. Now, names reflect plants and bodies of water! Of course, I received no responses, none. But that was to be expected. Remember Mark Twain's observation of more than a century ago, with not much changing, "In the first place God created idiots. That was for practice. Then he created school boards." Let's share "the wealth" with that, too. In the three-county Detroit Metro area, only one high school is named after Lincoln (and it may be closed), none after Washington, and one after ML King. (Yet two are named after Adlai Stevenson, who didn't even realize when he had a quarter-size hole in the sole of his shoe and was swamped twice in elections by Ike!) Fools all around me....

"Greed." Isn't that one of the catchwords of recent times? Yet, flipping through the radio stations this AM, I heard talk of two MLB infielders (I never heard of them) who the Tigers should consider acquiring. Talk turned to their price tags. One was $8 million a year!!!!!! But the other was $12 million annually!!!!!! Why aren't the Future Bums of America, er, the Wall Street Protesters picketing on their lawns or, at least, MLB front offices? And the NBA is on strike (and, no, I don't know if the players won't play or if the owners locked them out--I don't care). I read on the op-ed page of a kid right out of high school, signed by the NBA to a six-year contract worth $126 million! Now, the players lament, that contract could only be as high as $76 million--yep, only $76 million. And remember that guard who complained about having to sign for three years at $21 million, "Hey, my kids have to eat, too!" Where are the FBA, er, WSP on that one?

K is watching some silly show about people buying houses. Invariably, young couples, in their 20s or early 30s, are looking for houses worth $500K or $600K or more! Sometimes I think the only lesson of history is that we don't learn anything from history. Of course, perhaps they've learned from the recent past: those who live within their means are increasingly being forced to pay for people who don't live within their means.

I've written how the CKLW radio lady in the AM seems to be a very hard worker, that her show reflects that whenever I tune in. I heard for a few minutes this AM and a caller was telling us we should know our history about Halloween being a pagan holiday, that Christmas shouldn't be celebrated because the early Christians picked a pagan date for it. I immediately thought, "A little knowledge is dangerous." The lady was right; we should know our history--all of it, though. She left out some important pieces of the puzzle in her assessment of these "pagan" holidays. She also, I guess, doesn't consider the joy of giving during the Chris season to be a Christian attribute.

Out to build a castle with blocks with the Codester and then finish grading a set of papers.

Fri Moanin'

It was great to read about one of the Wall Street protesters, one joining in on the "fun" in Detroit. She admitted to being a "30-year teacher" in Detroit, but can't make ends meet. Huh? If memory serves me correctly, Detroit teachers were paid more than I was. I'm not saying that Detroit teachers, at least some of them, don't deserve what they get (and maybe a lot more than that!). But I don't feel a lot of empathy for them either. 40+ years ago, out to save the world, I tried to get hired to teach in Detroit. Ivy League (Amherst) degree, a year and then two of experience, leadership in several areas, etc. When I didn't get word with my first application, I even hand-delivered a second one to the adminstration building (the Stevenson Bldg, I recall) on Woodward. Still, nothing. Of course, my family and friends thought I was nuts, but, again, I was going to save the world or, at least, Detroit. My guess over the years is that nobody in the Detroit administration ever heard of Amherst College. And, to let them off of the hook a bit, I did send out about three dozen applications in Southeast Michigan--gaining two, yep two, interviews. And one wasn't even for a job; the principal just wanted to interview somebody from an Ivy League school! I was finally hired, but only because the assistant principal used to be a drinking buddy/opposing swimming coach for one of my football coaches/teachers. But, I've digressed....

Anyway, why can't this Detroit teacher pay her bills? She claims she's making now what she made ten years ago. Well, join the club. My wife is making less than she did ten years ago--and that doesn't include paying more for her insurances. Of course, if this Detroit teacher is joining the protesters, it's likely she just wants other people's money, even if they've earned it. And, no doubt, she "deserves" the money other people have earned.

Hey, I just realized she's making $20K or more than I get with my pension. Maybe I should join the protesters to get some of other people's money??????

BTW, have you listened to any of the protesters when they are interviewed? If they are college kids, maybe they should go back to school before opening their mouths. In fact, some of them maybe should go back to high school. What they say is almost always stupid ("My college bills should be paid for me because it's just what I want."), most often incoherent, and should not be taken seriously by anyone with any sense at all. Then again, why would anyone need college--or high school for that matter--if they are going to be given other people's money?

I've asked this before, but it bears repeating. What if the Tea Parties had acted like these protesters? Unless a lot of people are lying and my ears are deceiving me, it's not just protesting these demonstrators are doing. Profanity probably pales to the open sex in the park, huh? Open drug use is also pretty prevalent. And apparently the right to have "sex with animals" is also a demand of theirs. Imagine if Tea Partiers took dumps on police cars?????? Once again the LameStream Media have shown their colors--they are biased, hypocritical, and dishonest. As I've said before, I have rarely identified myself as a teacher, past and present, because I don't want to be identified with the majority of teachers. If I was a reporter right now, I'd feel the same way.

Some guy in the newspaper wrote a letter that asked what US Postal Workers (those who deliver the mail) do that is different from the pizza delivery boy. He cited that they make $80K more plus benefits. OK, that got me to thinking. I have nothing against pizza delivery boys (or postal workers for that matter), but why does Karen earn what (perhaps even less!) than the pizza delivery guy gets? She's an elementary school secretary. Anyone who knows what el school secretaries do know they run the buildings. Over the years, I've learned that el principals are out of the bldgs as often as not. So, who do you think runs the show half of the time? Yep, the ones making less that the pizza delivery guy. Who disciplines kids? Who watches students when teachers throw them out of class? Who takes care of problems on the playground? Who watches the budget(s) and often is miscast as the bad guy? Who takes care in illness and injury? Who answers the angry questions from parents about bad teachers, lousy bus planning, and who knows what else? Yep, the ones making less than the pizza delivery guy.
I don't want to know why postal workers make a lot more than the pizza delivery guy. I want to know why school secretaries make less than he does. Hey, why don't the Wall Street protesters ask that question, too?

Off to learn more about the fur trade....

Testing

Good letter in the newspaper this AM. I don't think the guy is a teacher. At least from his previous letters, quite a few, he didn't seem like one. He writes, "It is unfortunate that the Michigan Board of Education and professional academics believe that a single score on a standardized fill in the bubble test give to children whose brains are still developing means something. It's no wonder education isn't working since those in positions of power within the system and their partners in the legislature rely on a simplistic and globally discredited testing regimen to inform them about learning." Amen!!!!!

The Norwegian model of education shoots the "testing mania" out of the water. Hmmm...I guess "professional academics" includes administrators and teachers. And, "it's no wonder education isn't working since those in positions of power within the system...." must refer to the lack of intelligence, courage, and integrity (and any combination of them) shown by and within the education establishment.

Of course, who's going to listen to this guy when those with fake, er, "professional" degrees in education repeat "test," "test," test?"

I wonder if sooner or later we will ever start to listen, not only in education, but in all areas of life, to people who make sense. I'd like to think so, but I'm not counting on it.

Radio

I continue to be surprised (but not surprised) at the lack of quality on talk radio. I'm not talking about ideas, whether I favor or oppose. It's the very poor English (and I get a laugh that some of the worst are the "English-only" folks!) and poor communication skills. They really don't explain things very well. Yet, these are the guys who, somehow, have the programs and, often, are the ones bringing down the big bucks. Go figure.....

That said, on the drive to class on Tue and Th AM, I sometimes tune in to CKLW. If Beckmann is talking about American Idol, I don't want to listen to sports with Shep, and Beck is more insufferable than usual, I switch to CKLW and Lynn Martin (I think that's her name). She doesn't always have interesting topics, but mostly she does. And she asks good questions. Mostly, though, I am impressed at how hard she works. She seems to really work at making her show/program a good one. More often than not I am glad I flip on 800 on my radio dial.

OK, tell me again how the Wall Street Protesters are different (superior?) to the Tea Partiers? Is it that they don't have jobs? That their ideas of more gov't are better than less gov't? (If so, they are very ignorant of history, both far in the past and more recently--that gov't policies helped lead to the current state of Wall St affairs. Why, according to eye-witness accounts, are the Wall St Protesters allowed to openly use drugs, engage in sex, hurl profanities, etc.? An even bigger "why" is why this isn't reported in the newspaper. How do the WSP get a "free pass?" Is drug use, open and public sex, profanity, etc., now within the realm of the acceptable? Why do I think that, had the Tea Parties engaged in this type of behavior, the LameStreams would have made it headlines? Like I rarely admit to being a teacher, I think I'd likewise not admit to being a journalist.

And why does Obama rant on certain wealthy people (you know, the airplane and big boat owners), but he never, never, never cites professional athletes, Hollywoood-types, and their ilk for being greedy, for not paying their "fair share," etc.? Is it really that hard to figure out why? No, not really.

Are the Republican bigwigs goint to foist Romney on us? I tried to like him; I really did. But his track record shows his true colors--a Democrat in Republican clothing, like most of the Republicans of the past 30+ years.

Out....

Update

Gee, I see where only one member of the state Senate (or was it the House?) voted against cutting retirement health benefits for members of the state legislature. Ah, but let's rail against teachers and other public employees and their (as opposed to "there") benefits. The hypocrites!

And how can the new Detroit school czar be given any credibility? First, he's a career administrator. Second, the school district he came from had lousy results. Hey, in light of those, let's give him a huge salary!!!!! All right.

I think the AL umpire behind the plate last night was pretty lousy. If that television strike zone is at all accurate, he was missing badly, very badly. There were at least a half dozen key pitches Verlander threw for strikes that were called balls. And, a Tiger, I forget who, struck out on a pitch that was apparently 3" or 4" outside. The next guy was put in a hole by a "strike" that was even more inside than that. These umpires are supposed to be better than that. And, in the NY series, they seemed to miss a lot of low pitches.

I was surprised, but not surprised to find out this weekend that the NBA doesn't have a rule book! That's what I was told. How great? That lends credibility to my view that the NBA isn't too far removed from the WWF. So, guys can just make up the rules as they go along?

There is plenty of evidence that gov't involvement in business, industry, trade is bad news. If you want that evidence, look at gov't's attempts in the fur trade two hundred years ago. More recently, check gov't's role in the development of the first airplane. The solution to failure is just to throw more of other people's money at it. Again, to quote Casey Stengel, "You could look it up." That is, you could unless you don't want facts to get in the way....

Rights

What is this "right to work" crap? Who, other than employers of large numbers of workers, can seriously support this?

First, how about if we have a "right to eat" state? Yep, "right to eat." I can go to the grocery store and buy the food I want/need, just like everyone else. Then, I decide I want the benefits of shopping at the store (the food and other stuff), but I don't want to pay for it. You know, like workers in a factory, school, or even a whole state who get the benefits unions have brought, but don't want to pay for them.

Second, from the gov't's own statistics, six of the ten states with the highest unemployment rates are "right to work" ones. Hmmm.... What does that do to the argument of those in favor of right to work who claim union membership costs jobs? Oh, I forgot...never let facts get in the way.... And, the average income in a union state is $6000 more annually than in a right to work state.

Third, c'mon...think about it. Who would really be behind the right to work movement? Isn't it really pretty obvious? It certainly shouldn't be workers--not when union membership doesn't lead to greater unemployment and that it does lead to more pay. Hmmm...gee, I wonder who wants right to work and what politicians have urged it? What's the adage? "Follow the money." Yep, follow the campaign money and you'll see a pretty clear picture.

Fourth, what other Bill of Rights guarantees can state legislatures throw out? How about freedom of religion or freedom of speech? Right to work attacks freedom of assembly. Yep, that's in there, right after religion, speech, and the press. As Casey Stengel once said, "You could look it up." Hey, all these right to work guys would probably also support state legislation limiting other rights, such as the right to keep and bear arms and even the right to a trial by jury, wouldn't they?????? Heh Heh Heh....

Now, all of this isn't to say, "Hooray for today's unions." There are lots of flaws in them. But that's up to the membership to straighten out. And, if they don't, then shame on them. They then deserve what ill-fate befalls them.

Hmmmmm......

Interesting that GM workers receive a $5000 bonus for merely signing the new contract, yet I haven't heard the "G" word thrown their way. Nobody has, as far as I know, called them "greedy." I'm not saying they are. I'm not saying they shouldn't get it or take it. I'm just asking why they aren't being called "greedy" when practically everyone else (except those who take "free" government money) who makes some money is called "greedy." This becomes a bit more troublesome when other factors are considered. Has GM paid back the money taxpayers, er, gov't gave it? BTW, with that "loan," what interest rate was that again? And, what about all the stockholders and bondholders who got the fickey-doo, losing their investments/money? Well, at least we can't call them "greedy!" I'll bet GM could sell a lot more cars if it lowered prices on them, using, say, all those $5000 bonuses to lower prices instead. Oh, but I forgot--the GM workers "deserve" the bonuses.

How about those Wall Street protestors? And, aren't there similar protests scheduled for other cities? Gee, it would be great to join them if only the rest of us didn't have to go to work, you know, make money. I wonder where the protestors are getting their money? They are obviously not at work. Could they be getting gov't money, free money, from those who actually are working? Perhaps I'm being a bit harsh here. After all, the protestors "deserve" other people's money. BTW, how, again, are these guys different from the Tea Parties? I mean, how different other than the Tea Partiers aren't taking other people's property? How great to be able to be selectively indignant and outraged! I guess that's another way of say "hypocritical."

Out to research....

Gov't Regulation

While we're all enjoying Dancing with the Stars, the NFL on CBS, etc., the regulators are at it again. According to George Will, a woman in Az started a business, investing $50K, in which people put their feet in a pool to have them nibbled by small fish. It sounds a bit weird to me, but apparently it's something that is enjoyed by some folks. Fine, if they like it, they can take advantage of this lady's business.

But, whoa, wait a minute! She was shut down, losing her entire investment by a state regulatory board. The board cited concerns that the "cosmetology equipment" must be sterile before being used on people and, obviously, it's not real easy to sterilize fish (unless we neuter them?). So the business was forced to close, money lost, several workers losing their jobs. Oh, the cosmetology board is composed of "professional cosmetologists," a group like to lose business by not enforcing such silliness.

And we wonder why people aren't starting new businesses, aren't hiring more people--why the unemployment rate refuses to dip?????? Let's not look too far for the answers.

Oh, and I heard today that some MIT economist figured that if Obama's "jobs plan" passes and creates the maximum number of jobs touted, the cost will be in excess of $200,000 per job!!!!! Now, there's a pretty good deal. It took me three and four years at my peak years of earnings to bring home $200K. And, the number was, what, ten times higher per "created" job with the original "stimulus!" That's some stimulus.

Here's an idea, instead of spending half a trillion dollars on this boondoggle, why not just give every adult $20,000 to do with as he/she finds fit?????? That will stimulate lots, esp buying, and will save a lot of federal money. Instead of spending all this money, how about a 40% tax cut? That would about equal $500 billion and still give people more money to spend. Surely their spending sprees would do a much, much better job of creating jobs than the feeble gov't attempts to do so have.

Gee, do you think I ought to float these ideas on Stabenow and Levin??????

Running

After all these years of running, I am still surprised by it. First, I can't fathom that I really like it. I enjoy going out there so often and pounding down some miles. I never liked running as a kid unless it was chasing a ball. The idea of running track or cross country never, even crossed my mind. The track portion of gym classes were, next to gymnastics, the worst! Yet, here I am, running when I don't have to.

Second, I was out there the other day, getting in a 16-miler. I laughed to myself, "What are you doing out here running 16 miles? You're 62-years old!" Yep, and I'm glad to still be able to do it. I know there are other old guys out there running, too. I'm glad and thankful I'm one of them. When I registered for the Las Vegas Half Marathon, a question asked how many half marathons I'd completed. Hmmm...I wondered. One of the choices was "more than 10." Without really thinking about that or caring what I put down, I checked that. But, I still wondered. I figured I'd done about 10 or 12, but maybe a few less. Then I checked some old records and combed my (not my hair, since I don't have much) memory. I had forgotten about the West Bloomfield Half Marathons I had run in the past decade and about the Flushing Halfs and even the Dexter-Ann Arbor Halfs. How I managed to forget those, I don't know, but I had. In the final tally, I've run between 20 and 24 half marathons, likely closer to 24 since I may have forgotten a few. But I can account for at least 20. I impressed myself. They go along with my twelve marathons. Now, that is really something I can't believe!

Third, still sometimes running can be full of mind-games. I had run the other day about 7 miles and was at Proud Lake, a little more than 2 miles from home. I thought about "2 miles" and briefly thought, "Hey, I can't run 2 miles. That's a long way." Indeed, at one time it was. Maybe it still is. But, how funny, 2 miles seemed so long.

Words

I had a letter-to-the-editor in the News this AM. It was "edited," which is the newspaper's prerogative. But it was a lesson in the importance of words, how they can mean something or mean something less.

By cutting it down, the editor(s) changed my intent, I think. I can't tell if the letter now includes my original aim, sarcasm. It seems like a straight-forward letter. But the meaning of the letter, what I intended, isn't captured in what was printed today.

Perhaps, though, to credit the editor(s), I wasn't as clear in my original letter as I thought. Regardless, the editor(s) or me, it was an important lesson for me on the importance of using words properly. To me, this is significant because I think words are "game-changing."

In fact, I'm not even certain I expressed myself very well in this blog! Out to grade papers....

Here We Go Again

I see the White House has pressured Red Lobster, Olive Garden, and "sister" restaurant to cut down on portions, "evil" ingredients like salt, and offer substitutes for fries. OK, we have an obesity problem, no doubt. In fact, I think it's understated, but that's not the point here.

If Red Lobster and Olive Garden are going to cut back, will their prices also be lowered? Hmmm. Why do I think not?

And I see the schools are getting into the health stuff, too. They are discouraging cookies in packed lunches. Well, other "evil" foods, too, are being targeted. All this, like the White House initiative, is being done in the name of fighting obesity. Again, OK, we have an obesity problem and it's noble to be fight it, but the schools would have a lot more credibility if they didn't also cut their physical education requirements. (Of course, "We're there for the kids," except when that conflicts with money matters. "Money" always trumps "kids.")

I note that Wendy's has cranked up its prices. There are few sandwiches on the dollar menu. Instead, they are as much as $1.39 and $1.59. Just last fall and winter I was buying the dollar menu burgs--they aren't a dollar any more. But, 39- and 59-cent increases? Hmmm...who's going to be the first one to throw out the latest trendy word, "Greedy?" No, only Big Oil, the bankers, and Wall Street are greedy. The plumber who charged me $250 for a job that took him barely an hour (more than I make in a week--about 7 or 8 hours of work--at one of the colleges!) Now, is he, too, "greedy?" Or can only certain people be greedy? I'll have to look that up.

Cool Stuff

I think most people know my thoughts on prizes and awards given to institutions, schools, businesses, etc. OK, I'm not a real big fan of them, largely because they are based on inane criteria.

That said, I think it's pretty cool that Mott CC has been selected one of the top ten community colleges in the nation! And, I teach there! I don't know the criteria for this, although I guess I could ask. And, regardless of my normal aversion to such awards/rankings, it's a whole lot better being in the top 10 than the bottom 10. Good for Mott CC!!!!!

Tue Eve

Nolan Finley had an interesting column/editorial in Sun's Det News. No doubt, it was met with a lot of cluck-clucking from the diversity crowd, but I wonder how many people really agree with Finley's point. Those who bombed and continue to try to bomb the US seem to be getting away with it. That means the actual perpetrators, the nations which sponsor and even train them, and people who applaud/abet the bombings of the US.

If you missed his piece, here it is: http://www.detnews.com/article/20110911/OPINION03/109110309/1008/opinion01/Finley--Bombs-instead-of-bells-on-9/11

I know, I know, we have to "accept and respect all cultures and all people and their ideas," even if they are Nazis, Commies, etc., you know, those who have mass-murdered. And the Islamo-fascists must be included there, too, I guess. We have to try to understand their discontent and then change what we are doing to tick them off, I guess. They are perpetrating their actions because of what we do.

Why do we have troops in Iraq and Afghanistan? To what purpose have the lives of 6200 US military personnel been lost?

If these Afghanis, Iraqis, Iranians, etc. don't want the freedoms we have in our democracy, perferring to live under brutal regimes and tyrants, that's fine with me. It's like with teachers: If they won't stand up for themselves, then they deserve what they get. Unfortunately, there are others who don't deserve what the majority get, but get it anyway. If those countries want to be what they are, let them. But make it clear if they start to mess with us, again and in any way, we'll drop the big boys on them--read that as Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Leave us alone or pay the consequences. Enough of this "Let's open a dialogue and talk out our differences." In theory, I suppose this is great. It worked just wonderfully in the 1930s with Mussolini's Italy, Hitler's Germany, and the War Lords' Japan--didn't it? In fact, our insistence on talking instead of acting, led to bolder aggression on their parts. After all, "If all they are going to do is send us 'nasty letters,' let's keep up the plan!"

How soon and after 65 million deaths we forget.

Thoughts

The guy might do a good job; I don't know. But I cringed when I heard the latest "savior" of the Detroit Public Schools is a career administrator. I think, far more than the teachers' unions, that these career administrators are responsible for the lousy state of American education. They may or may not admit or even know it, but they are more concerned with perpetuating their jobs than anything else. They adopt the latest ineffective programs. Go ahead, name one and then look back to see how it's failed under another name. They want, not independent thinkers, but sycophants/bobbleheads, teachers willing to go along with the latest ineffective programs. So, I guess I wonder why yet another career administrator is chosen to "save" Detroit??????

Speaking of schools, why are the standards for state student tests being raised? This raises all sorts of questions. First, the state superintendent moans that the tests "reward average." So, what's wrong with "average?" Not everyone can be a superstar and anyone who thinks everyone can be is delusional. Remember how much people laugh at Lake Woebegone and its "above average" motif?????? Well, here it is in real life and we're supposed to take it seriously. Second, so, then, there was something wrong with the old standards? Hmmm.... If so, why did it take so long to identify the errors/weaknesses? Who was responsible for them in the first place? This stinks of a political move, doesn't it? Think about this for a minute or two and tell me it doesn't. And, once again, this shows the absolutely silly obsession administrators have with tests/testing. Oh, I know why they are. First, teachers have nobody to blame but themselves. They lowered standards while they raised grades. They weren't teaching a whole lot. Second, the politicians grabbed this and made it a hot potato, challenging the schools and education in general. Unwilling or unable to show any backbone, administrators just caved in to the calls for incessant testing. Think how much wasted time and money there are with testing--preparation, administration, evaluation. Remember when courses for administrators were called "Educational Leadership?"

And speaking of yet another career administrator being selected as the "savior," are Republicans going to select Romney as their "savior?" If so, why? Right next to the word RINO in the dictionary is Romney's photo. He's not a staunch conservative, one willing to stand up and fight to take back what the liberals have taken. What's he going to do about handouts and entitlements? Check his record--the answer is painfully obvious. Republican leadership reminds me of school leadership--it's lacking. The media tell us that Ron Paul is not electable and the Republican leadership buys it, hook, line, and sinker. I guess our two politcal parties are now the Democrats and the Media. If Romney is nominated, the Republicans deserve to lose. And that's too bad for the future.

How great to hear Robt Reich, the economist, on the radio today. He was very skilled at dancing around the questions and points made by Frank Beckmann. Hmmm.... And I think his history and/or interpretation of it is not so hot. Were FDR's New Deal jobs programs "marvelously effective" if they cut unemployment from about 13 million to 11 million in four years--oh, and tax rates of 75% and higher for those with the largest incomes, you know, those most likely to spend money to create jobs? Didn't, at least in part, John Maynard Keynes himself say Keynsian principles (more, more, more gov't spending) they didn't work? Was it really gov't spending in WW2 (hey, Mr Reich, what about that New Deal spending?) that ended the Depression? More and more evidence points to the post-war consumer spending, not any gov't programs. But he was very good at avoiding his host's questions.

Out for a thrilling lecture, I'm sure, on the early US colonies.

Two Ideas....

I uncovered this the other day and I think it deserves more thought. I was reminded of the US fur trade of late 18th/early 19th Century, the first American industry to collapse after receiving a gov't subsidy and regulation--until saved by John Jacob Astor and his private market management. The parallels to today are relevant and remarkable. Gov't makes incredibly stupid decisions, ones that on face value can't work, in order to advance their own social, cultural, financial, etc. agendas. Oh, I believe in their own self-anointed minds of superiority, many of the gov't officials mean well, but they ignore history. They are blinded by ideology and, often, arrogance that they are smarter than anyone.

I also want to examine Henry Steele Commager's premise that society's greatest contributors (that's not the word I want to use, but I can't think of the right one) are its critics. I have an essay he wrote about it and want to re-examine it.

Hmmm....

It was suggested to me the other day by my brother-in-law that I write a book about my "heroes," those who I have respected, sort of Ron's "Profiles in Courage." Notions of a book aside for now, who would be my choices?

Certainly, A. Lincoln would be my first selection. I've blogged about him enough so that the reasons for that are out there. Thinking of Presidents, Washington and Jefferson immediately came to mind. But further thought makes them not so obvious. I might still include them, but they aren't anywhere near the league that Lincoln played in. It was suggested to me that Reagan might be one, but he's not a favorite of mine. The more I learn about him, Eisenhower might make the list, perhaps Truman, too. But of the Presidents, only Lincoln would be a certain inclusion.

The words and courageous actions (he risked and eventually lost his life for his ideas; how many of us would be willing to do the same, even risk our lives?) of Martin Luther King would likely get him serious consideration. So would Frederick Douglass, also a brave man in the face of personal danger.

I'd seriously think about the first Roman emperor, Augustus, too. He wasn't a democrat or a republican in his views and actions, but he was a remarkable man. Although he wielded immense power and control, he first and foremost thought about Rome. Times were different then and what he did doesn't seem so liberating (is that the right word?) today, but his rule was pretty enlightened. I'd also look at Churchill. He, too, stood up, but I wonder if I might include him so I could tell some funny stories about him??????

There are lots of historical figures to consider, but I find that I find very few definite inclusions. Maybe I should think about this.

I wonder if I would include some of my teachers. Prof Romer immediately comes to mind, as do a few others.

Just what I need, more things to think about! But, I think a worthwhile thing. Thanks, Jack.

Wed AM

Wed is a great day for the newspaper puzzles!

The op-ed pages were, ahem, "interesting" this AM, too. First, the head of the UAW thinks we need more taxes on the wealthy and on businesses. Hmmm.... Fine, let's tax the bejabbers out of, say, the auto companies. That ought to lead to more jobs and higher pay for autoworkers--NOT! I guess I don't quite understand some things. Don't autoworkers know that healthy auto companies mean higher pay and more jobs? Of course they do. I think it's the leadership knows, too, but is too wrapped up in, well, being at the top than in representing the best interests of its members. The same thing happens with teachers' unions, likely many, if not most, of them. Maybe the autoworkers ought to think about some new "leadership."

A letter writer says, "Taxes are not evil." No, I suppose not. But our current situation of constant tax and spend, spend and tax is evil. C'mon, even this guy must realize that Congress has behaved very irresponsibly, that it wastes money because it's not theirs, and that its solution to practically everything is raising taxes. Maybe he doesn't, esp if he's one of the 47% who pays no taxes or even the 28% who get a net payment from the gov't.

Chas. Krauthammer has a good column today. He cites the President's reliance on the old "bad luck" excuse to explain why his policies haven't worked. CK refutes them all. In fact, he cites a number of things I've noted in the past. The hypocrisy of the left and Dems. The fallback on calling names when arguments are pathetic, specious, or just plain stupid. As CK rightly notes, name-calling "den[ies] the legitimacy to those on the other side.... [It] is the ultimate political ad hominem. It obviates argument, fact, logic, history." Yep. I wonder if there's a connection between these Dems/libs and those running the schools. They employ the same tactics, namely "name-calling" and bullying. I think there is.

So, why are all Detroit public school kids getting free lunches? I don't have a problem with feeding kids who are really in need of food. I do have a problem with gov't determining who is really needy. I do have a problem with taking other people's money to fund this. I do have a problem with yet another gov't policy/program that rewards bad behavior (parents having kids when they can't afford them, the epidemic of fatherless households, etc.), esp at the expense of the successful, those who play by the rules.

A nice letter about the obsession politicians and school leaders have with test scores. It's as if they are addicts! The author calls the rationales behind the need for higher test scores, "to prepare [students] to compete in a global market and that all our students should be college- and career-ready," "nice sound bites." But, of course, who will listen? What school administrators are courageous enough to stand up and say, "No!"? We all know the answer.

A not-so-good letter takes aim at "fast food." It is blame for "the increase in obesity rates." Look Lady, leave me alone. Let me make my own choices concerning "fast food." In fact, she contradicts her own argument in the first sentence, noting "families choosing...." That's the key, choice. She or the gov't acting as her surrogate shouldn't be allowed to make my choices for me. I will agree about "lowering...the cost of health care." Yep, not eating so much fast food will do that. And, to encourage that insurance companies should be allowed to charge higher rates for obese and even overweight people. Why should people who are in shape subsidize health insurance for those who aren't? Oh, that's discrimination? Hooey!

Well, it's Wed and still no comment from the LameStreams and the President about Hoffa's comments. Oh, it was all over talk radio yesterday, but we all know that talk radio is populated by "terrorists," "bigots," "racists," and "barbarians." Name-calling...it's so much easier than reasoned dialogue and debate.