OK, some crossword puzzle clues are a bit obscure. And, who wants easy ones all of the time? The Sat and Sun AM NY Times puzzles are hard! And they are fun, my favorites. But, what about those I found this week?
"Old French measurements"
"Blame: Scot."
"Former coin of Egypt"
They seemed a bit of a stretch. And isn't it just coincidental when different puzzles, The Times, The Globe, The Observer in the same week have the same clues? I wonder if the puzzle makers collude.
I still love Crosswords (difficult ones, not the usual everyday newspaper ones) and Kakuros. Sodukus (or however it's spelled) are OK, but I prefer the others.
Sunday, May 23, 2010
Saturday, May 22, 2010
"A Teachable Moment"
Ah, tell me this isn't all too typical:
http://www.theoaklandpress.com/articles/2010/05/22/opinion/doc4bf7405d8f57d367379337.txt
And yet another two parents were complaining about the "stupid" (their word, not mine, although I agree completely) math now being taught in our schools. One dad said he's teaching his kid "the old way," regardless of what's going on in the class. I wonder if that is confusing to the kid. Again, I say, the people who make decisions in the schools should not be allowed to make decisions.
And what about naming schools after people, not trees???? In SE Michigan, maybe the entire state, there are only two high schools named after A. Lincoln, none after Washington. I think there is one named for M.L. King and one for Jefferson. What's with "Oaks" and "Lakes" and... when there are people whose names could be used? (Of course, one might ask, why are there also two Detroit-area schools named after Adlai Stevenson????) Naming the schools this way could provide a broad opportunity to teach history, as if that's important. It could teach students that lives matter, that we honor those whose lives really mattered. But, I see no clamor among our adminstrators and teachers to push this--and, over the years, who ever listened to me???? Right....
Out...
http://www.theoaklandpress.com/articles/2010/05/22/opinion/doc4bf7405d8f57d367379337.txt
And yet another two parents were complaining about the "stupid" (their word, not mine, although I agree completely) math now being taught in our schools. One dad said he's teaching his kid "the old way," regardless of what's going on in the class. I wonder if that is confusing to the kid. Again, I say, the people who make decisions in the schools should not be allowed to make decisions.
And what about naming schools after people, not trees???? In SE Michigan, maybe the entire state, there are only two high schools named after A. Lincoln, none after Washington. I think there is one named for M.L. King and one for Jefferson. What's with "Oaks" and "Lakes" and... when there are people whose names could be used? (Of course, one might ask, why are there also two Detroit-area schools named after Adlai Stevenson????) Naming the schools this way could provide a broad opportunity to teach history, as if that's important. It could teach students that lives matter, that we honor those whose lives really mattered. But, I see no clamor among our adminstrators and teachers to push this--and, over the years, who ever listened to me???? Right....
Out...
Friday, May 21, 2010
Here We Go Again
Sometimes I think about how tiresome it must seem (and sometimes is!) to constantly be critical, to rant and grouse. I remember words written by one of the Amherst professors, Henry Steele Commager, once the dean of US historians. He noted that the most important members of a society are its critics. I could go on to demonstrate how some of the greatest leaders this country and even the world have had followed this precept. Among them are Washington, Augustus, and, of course, Lincoln. But, back to the point.... I can't let people get away with what they are trying to do. It is like it was with the schools. Stupid stuff after stupid stuff, for the most part, unchallenged by the vast majority of teachers or the community. And see what's happened to our schools over the past 30-40 years??? Don't begin to try to convince anyone they are better now than they were then--you'll be a laughingstock.
The Mexican president comes here and lectures us on immigration, jobs, human rights, you name it. Now, this is America. People can say what they want. No doubt, this guy's asinine remarks might have played well at home. All that's fine and good. What I find galling is that the Democrats in Congress gave the guy a standing ovation!!!! Who are these fools? Are they that ignorant? Do they dislike the US that much? Every one of that bunch who stood and applauded deserves to get thrown out on his ear next election.
First, el presidente commented on our immigration policy, commented very critically. Hmmm... Shall we examine Mexican immigration laws? He was later interviewed by some CNN guy, hardly a bastion of America First. The questions were something like this: Do you have open borders, allowing anyone to come into Mexico? Of course not, was el presidente's reply. Do you require aliens to have the proper paperwork in your country. Well, of course. Can they come in and not contribute to taxes, but get all the benefits of citizenship? Certainly not. Hmmm.... And this boob is lecturing us????
Second, why is it that so many of his Mexicans feel the need to come to the US? What is it about Mexico that doesn't offer the same opportunities for success that we do? After all, if people in Mexico could get the things there that they can get here, why would they come, often imperiling their and their families' lives?
Third, this guy starts talking about oil and the need for a green economy. I wonder if he says that to his own people, when Mexico's economy is built, to a sizable extent, on oil, that is, selling oil to us.
OK, like I said, this guy has every right to say what he wants. This is America. Regardless of how stupid, hypocritical, etc. it is. He can say it.
But, first, why do these Congressional boobs stand for this stupidity, hypocrisy? Well, of course, we all know why--does an idiot, hypocrite critize himself???? Second, why doesn't our President stand up for us? Can it be he wants the unspeakable, to drag the US as we know it down? I say "unspeakable" because he doesn't come right out and say it, well, not often, but acts like it. I don't understand why more, even most, people aren't up in arms over this guy. Third, where is the media in all of this. I guess most of them are poorly educated, really not knowing their own history let alone that of Mexico and other countries.
Jefferson thought that the key to a strong, surviving democracy was education. Can it be, that after the boobs who have run education into the ground, we are so ignorant Jefferson's words are coming true, in an obverse sense?
The Mexican president comes here and lectures us on immigration, jobs, human rights, you name it. Now, this is America. People can say what they want. No doubt, this guy's asinine remarks might have played well at home. All that's fine and good. What I find galling is that the Democrats in Congress gave the guy a standing ovation!!!! Who are these fools? Are they that ignorant? Do they dislike the US that much? Every one of that bunch who stood and applauded deserves to get thrown out on his ear next election.
First, el presidente commented on our immigration policy, commented very critically. Hmmm... Shall we examine Mexican immigration laws? He was later interviewed by some CNN guy, hardly a bastion of America First. The questions were something like this: Do you have open borders, allowing anyone to come into Mexico? Of course not, was el presidente's reply. Do you require aliens to have the proper paperwork in your country. Well, of course. Can they come in and not contribute to taxes, but get all the benefits of citizenship? Certainly not. Hmmm.... And this boob is lecturing us????
Second, why is it that so many of his Mexicans feel the need to come to the US? What is it about Mexico that doesn't offer the same opportunities for success that we do? After all, if people in Mexico could get the things there that they can get here, why would they come, often imperiling their and their families' lives?
Third, this guy starts talking about oil and the need for a green economy. I wonder if he says that to his own people, when Mexico's economy is built, to a sizable extent, on oil, that is, selling oil to us.
OK, like I said, this guy has every right to say what he wants. This is America. Regardless of how stupid, hypocritical, etc. it is. He can say it.
But, first, why do these Congressional boobs stand for this stupidity, hypocrisy? Well, of course, we all know why--does an idiot, hypocrite critize himself???? Second, why doesn't our President stand up for us? Can it be he wants the unspeakable, to drag the US as we know it down? I say "unspeakable" because he doesn't come right out and say it, well, not often, but acts like it. I don't understand why more, even most, people aren't up in arms over this guy. Third, where is the media in all of this. I guess most of them are poorly educated, really not knowing their own history let alone that of Mexico and other countries.
Jefferson thought that the key to a strong, surviving democracy was education. Can it be, that after the boobs who have run education into the ground, we are so ignorant Jefferson's words are coming true, in an obverse sense?
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Lincoln
I finished, last week, Father Abraham by Richard Striner. It's an outstanding book that paints Lincoln the the hagiographic light I have been for years now. From piecing together bits from these Lincoln books, those Lincoln quotations, and other Civil War books, I have been teaching that, no, Lincoln was not a racist, that, no, his goal was always emancipation, not merely to hold together the Union, that, yes, he grew as a man and a President/politician, etc. For instance, how could anyone read of Abe's meetings with Frederick Douglass and not come away with these views? This book confirms all that and more.
It's certainly a book well worth reading, if only from its uplifting story.
It's certainly a book well worth reading, if only from its uplifting story.
Musings on a Tues
On yet another day fit for neither man nor beast--cold, windy, rainy....
I went to a local Tea Party on Sun. I rode my bike up to Central Park, figuring parking would be at a premium. It was, as there were a couple thousand folks there, I'd guess. It was pretty tame. No rebels, no extremists, no radicals. It was interesting in that Sat night, at a party, I heard from several libs, obviously, the same "talking points," word for word!, about the Tea Partiers. "They just angry and have no ideas and they're racists." I was stunned, a bit, by the exact word for word descriptions, given by more than one person, out of earshot of the others, at different times of the evening. I was stunned, even more, by the narrow- or close-mindedness of the anti-Tea Partiers. And, yes, these people at the Tea Party seemed upset. No, they did have ideas, quite a few of them. And, I couldn't detect a racist among them. They might have been there, but I coudn't tell. Amazing how easy it is to call names rather than engage in dialogue.
This is repetitive, but I wonder why The Oakland Press carries the columns of E.J. Dionne. Really, I wonder; maybe his brother-in-law runs the paper or its parent group???? I see, though, that Bill Press has not been in there for quite a while. But Dionne's column was lunacy, claiming that Obama's administration shows that gov't works by using the examples of the failed Times Sq bomber, the oil rig blast in the Gulf, etc. First, it was pure dumb luck that the bomb didn't go off in Times Sq. The administration had nothing to do with it and, in fact, showed itself to be incompetent in the wake of the matter. For instance, can you say "No Fly List?" How about making multi-trips to Pakistan, with several stay-overs of a couple weeks? And I guess the Obama administration oversight commission had awarded this BP oil rig a great safety rating (or whatever these things are called). Anyway, back to Dionne. I understand the desire to present opposing viewpoints on an editorial page. But to get the lib view, certainly there are better choices than Press and Dionne. Maybe they are "low-bid?" How about Leonard Pitts instead? Even when disagreeing with him, his columns give me pause for thought. Of course, to articulate the con viewpoint, I'm pretty sure I can find someone better than Cal Thomas--Bill Bennett, Thomas Sowell, Emmett Tyrell, among them.
I love to hear people talk about how "greedy" others are. If it's not "big oil," it's the bankers, Wall Street, CEOs in general, etc. Now, I happen to think most, if not all, CEOs are vastly overpaid--their jobs aren't that difficult. But that's what the market seems to bear--which might be a topic for another blog, but.... So, when folks talk about the "greed" of the above groups they distinctly omit professional athletes, hippy rock stars, the Hollywood-types, politicians (what did I read recently, that about 60% of the US Senators are millionaires, and just under 50% in the House are, too!!!!), and even doctors. Come to think of it, lawyers haven't been lumped in with the "greedy" group for quite a while--at least Congress hasn't done it. And, these folks often have nice homes, most far more expensive than mine (and I have a nice enough house, perfectly fine for me). They have enough cars, cottages or condos for vacations, eat out often enough, etc. I'm not saying these people aren't nice. But their definitions and preceptions of greed seem to be limited/restricted. Hmmm....greed?
With all of the anger directed at BP and the rig blast and pollution, what's going to come of off-shore drilling? Oh, I could go on about other spills that received far less attention, about why we need to drill off-shore instead of inland, but I won't today. I wonder how all these folks who want to stop off-shore drilling will react when the price of a gallon of gas hits $5 or $6. Oh, I know--those greedy oil companies!!!!
I went to a local Tea Party on Sun. I rode my bike up to Central Park, figuring parking would be at a premium. It was, as there were a couple thousand folks there, I'd guess. It was pretty tame. No rebels, no extremists, no radicals. It was interesting in that Sat night, at a party, I heard from several libs, obviously, the same "talking points," word for word!, about the Tea Partiers. "They just angry and have no ideas and they're racists." I was stunned, a bit, by the exact word for word descriptions, given by more than one person, out of earshot of the others, at different times of the evening. I was stunned, even more, by the narrow- or close-mindedness of the anti-Tea Partiers. And, yes, these people at the Tea Party seemed upset. No, they did have ideas, quite a few of them. And, I couldn't detect a racist among them. They might have been there, but I coudn't tell. Amazing how easy it is to call names rather than engage in dialogue.
This is repetitive, but I wonder why The Oakland Press carries the columns of E.J. Dionne. Really, I wonder; maybe his brother-in-law runs the paper or its parent group???? I see, though, that Bill Press has not been in there for quite a while. But Dionne's column was lunacy, claiming that Obama's administration shows that gov't works by using the examples of the failed Times Sq bomber, the oil rig blast in the Gulf, etc. First, it was pure dumb luck that the bomb didn't go off in Times Sq. The administration had nothing to do with it and, in fact, showed itself to be incompetent in the wake of the matter. For instance, can you say "No Fly List?" How about making multi-trips to Pakistan, with several stay-overs of a couple weeks? And I guess the Obama administration oversight commission had awarded this BP oil rig a great safety rating (or whatever these things are called). Anyway, back to Dionne. I understand the desire to present opposing viewpoints on an editorial page. But to get the lib view, certainly there are better choices than Press and Dionne. Maybe they are "low-bid?" How about Leonard Pitts instead? Even when disagreeing with him, his columns give me pause for thought. Of course, to articulate the con viewpoint, I'm pretty sure I can find someone better than Cal Thomas--Bill Bennett, Thomas Sowell, Emmett Tyrell, among them.
I love to hear people talk about how "greedy" others are. If it's not "big oil," it's the bankers, Wall Street, CEOs in general, etc. Now, I happen to think most, if not all, CEOs are vastly overpaid--their jobs aren't that difficult. But that's what the market seems to bear--which might be a topic for another blog, but.... So, when folks talk about the "greed" of the above groups they distinctly omit professional athletes, hippy rock stars, the Hollywood-types, politicians (what did I read recently, that about 60% of the US Senators are millionaires, and just under 50% in the House are, too!!!!), and even doctors. Come to think of it, lawyers haven't been lumped in with the "greedy" group for quite a while--at least Congress hasn't done it. And, these folks often have nice homes, most far more expensive than mine (and I have a nice enough house, perfectly fine for me). They have enough cars, cottages or condos for vacations, eat out often enough, etc. I'm not saying these people aren't nice. But their definitions and preceptions of greed seem to be limited/restricted. Hmmm....greed?
With all of the anger directed at BP and the rig blast and pollution, what's going to come of off-shore drilling? Oh, I could go on about other spills that received far less attention, about why we need to drill off-shore instead of inland, but I won't today. I wonder how all these folks who want to stop off-shore drilling will react when the price of a gallon of gas hits $5 or $6. Oh, I know--those greedy oil companies!!!!
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Lives of Consequence
What is "a life of consequence?" It has sparked a lively discussion/dialogue on one of my Amherst listserves. It's the motto for fund raising at the college, but what, exactly, is its meaning? Hmmmm....
More later, but remember what Socrates (or was it Plato?) wrote: The unexamined life isn't worth living.
More later, but remember what Socrates (or was it Plato?) wrote: The unexamined life isn't worth living.
Books
I had a nice long conversation with one of my college roommates last weekend. Among our humorous barbs and catching-up, we discussed, however briefly, the most influential book we've read. Wow, how to choose!?!?
I was a bit surprised and delighted to have him say, among others, Lincoln by Gore Vidal. yes, that's been a favorite of mine, too. There have been several of the books/biogs I've read about Lincoln I would rank pretty high, too. (I've read about 3 dozen.) I only half jokingly tell folks that when I get down about the way we are headed today, I grab a book about Abe and his determination, forthrightness, courage, vision, etc. all serve to revive my spirits.
Yes, there are lots of books that I think about long after I've read them. Some have changed the ways I've thought and acted. Again, they are many, many. And, I continue to read some of these important ones. I hope I never stop.
I was a bit surprised and delighted to have him say, among others, Lincoln by Gore Vidal. yes, that's been a favorite of mine, too. There have been several of the books/biogs I've read about Lincoln I would rank pretty high, too. (I've read about 3 dozen.) I only half jokingly tell folks that when I get down about the way we are headed today, I grab a book about Abe and his determination, forthrightness, courage, vision, etc. all serve to revive my spirits.
Yes, there are lots of books that I think about long after I've read them. Some have changed the ways I've thought and acted. Again, they are many, many. And, I continue to read some of these important ones. I hope I never stop.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
