2008-11-07

Different Answers

A rel­a­tive of mine once con­fided that he voted for Ronald Reagan barely more than a decade after he asked that copies of The Daily Worker be mailed to him in Vietnam. I asked him why he did so, and his answer was that he “was tired of feel­ing ashamed of being an American.”

28 years later, my gen­er­a­tion answered that same chal­lenge in a com­pletely dif­fer­ent way.

Be the first to comment on this...


2008-10-15

The Last Debate

Some ran­dom thoughts from the debate:

  • I’ve twit­tered about this before, but I hon­estly am glad that Obama got a new pro­jec­tor for the Adler Planetarium. The plan­e­tar­ium is a mon­u­ment in it’s own right, along­side the Museum of Science and Industry, the Shedd Aquarium, and the Field Museum; the longer it oper­ates the bet­ter. Also, it appears to have increased in price by $1m since the last time McCain men­tioned it, mak­ing it per­haps the safest invest­ment in the United States.
  • Obama’s per­for­mance was pretty bad, but the fact that ACORN and Ayers are even being dis­cussed marks a return to the “flag lapel-pin” bull­shit of the Pennsylvania Democratic debate.
  • I missed the first 20 min­utes, but in what I saw nei­ther one of them men­tioned the fact that we’re on the cusp of a sec­ond global depres­sion or appeared to have any clue what to do about it.
  • Given how pre­car­i­ous our eco­nomic sit­u­a­tion is (and how bad the “real-world econ­omy” was before the credit cri­sis), a spend­ing freeze by the Federal Government would make the depres­sion longer, deeper, and more painful. The fact McCain is still push­ing that mad­ness after today’s events — and worse, fruit­cakes like that CBS News “unde­cided voter” are buy­ing it — makes him very dan­ger­ous in his own right.
  • Neither can­di­date has the right answer for edu­ca­tion. It’s very sim­ply this: teach the sci­en­tific method, log­i­cal rea­son­ing, and intel­lec­tual rigor as soon as pos­si­ble. That is the fun­da­men­tal par­ti­cle of edu­ca­tion, and the fact that we don’t drill it into stu­dents’ minds as soon as pos­si­ble is why we suck. Period. Every other edu­ca­tion pro­gram we have — vouch­ers, Head Start, char­ter schools, NCLB — is only even worth con­sid­er­ing in rela­tion to how it helps or hurts the trans­mis­sion of the basic ideas of the Enlightenment. Since we’re not trans­mit­ting those ideas any­ways, talk­ing about those other pro­grams is a waste of time.
  • McCain’s plan for more teach­ers (recruit vet­er­ans from the war and let them skip cer­ti­fi­ca­tion exams!) is 100% pure crazy.

Comment on this...


2008-10-14

Pick A Side

Compare:

In the years of its rise, the move­ment lit­tle by lit­tle brought the community’s atti­tude toward the teacher around from respect and envy to resent­ment, from trust to fear and sus­pi­cion. […] By 1933 at least five of my ten [Nazi] friends (and I think six or seven) looked upon “intel­lec­tu­als” as unre­li­able, and among these unre­li­ables, upon aca­d­e­mics as the most insid­i­ously sit­u­ated. They Thought They Were Free

Contrast:

It was only three words in his 20-minute speech announc­ing his can­di­dacy — “taught con­sti­tu­tional law.” But his stu­dents and col­leagues at the University of Chicago say those words would make Barack Obama a dif­fer­ent kind of president.

“It cer­tainly is an advan­tage that he really knows the Constitution of the United States,” said Professor Cass Sunstein. “I don’t know if we have had a pres­i­dent that knows as much about the found­ing doc­u­ment as he does.” Professor Obama was a lis­tener, stu­dents say, Sun-Times 2007-02-17

Be the first to comment on this...


2008-09-26

Notes on the Debate

[Disclosure: I live in Chicago, and have finan­cially sup­ported Obama already.]

The first note is about the orga­ni­za­tion that McCain cited at the begin­ning of his speech, Citizens Against Government Waste. The one he was using as his cita­tion for the 900-million-dollar fig­ure he was hang­ing around Obama’s neck. They’ve are a lob­by­ing orga­ni­za­tion, which has the fol­low­ing accu­sa­tions against it:

  • Astroturfing for Microsoft, against the anti-trust actions in the late 90s.
  • Astroturfing for Phillip-Morris, to label a pub­lic health cam­paign that was show­ing results in reduc­ing smok­ing “gov­ern­ment waste,” and for a tobacco-industry sup­ported anti-tobacco bill.
  • Labelling the YMCA “gov­ern­ment waste” after tak­ing con­tri­bu­tions from pri­vate health clubs.

And per­haps most damning:

  • Laundering money for Jack Abramoff

That’s who McCain was using as his source when he obliquely accused Obama of corruption.

Also worth not­ing was Obama’s descrip­tion of the prac­tice of sup­port­ing friendly dic­ta­tors the prod­uct of “a 20th cen­tury mind­set.” A bril­liant state­ment, in no small part because Obama knows how to get your mind going in the direc­tion he wants it to go. The rest of the debate I had the recur­ring sen­sa­tion that McCain sounded like a throw­back to the late 1980s — great for ironic, trashy, brit­pop. For a U.S. President? Not so much.

Comment on this...


2008-04-12

Elections

[Disclosure: I dropped a day’s pay on Obama’s cam­paign about a week before the pas­tor thing hap­pened, and hope I never feel com­pelled to write about this elec­tion again.]

Matt Taibbi is (as usual, and in spite of his ridicu­lous hump­ing of Hunter Thompson’s legacy) repeat­edly cor­rect in his assess­ment of American pol­i­tics as a bunch of nin­nies totally inca­pable of see­ing ele­phants in liv­ing rooms. Conversely, Taibbi and myself are instead part of Generation Meta, and tend to be more engrossed by the men­tal gym­nas­tics required to avoid­ing see­ing ele­phants inside liv­ing rooms than the ele­phants themselves.

Proving Taibbi’s point (again), Obama is cur­rently attempt­ing to “limit the dam­age” (changed to “lim­it­ing fall­out”) for para­phras­ing “What's the Matter with Kansas?" to a well-heeled audience in San Francisco.

Choice quote from the Taibbi arti­cle (mainly because it’s still rel­e­vant in this lat­est mountain-out-of-molehill): “It’s also a great exam­ple of how the pres­i­den­tial elec­tion process has become more about enforc­ing the atti­tudes of a cul­tural ortho­doxy than a sys­tem for choos­ing leaders.”

Be the first to comment on this...