Sunday, September 13, 2009

Federer the Magician

Incredible:

Football of the Fantasy Variety

I love football. I grew up playing football since I was 5 years old. In some years, I played for multiple leagues. I even got in trouble during my Freshman year of high school for playing both on the high school Freshman team AND the little league team at the neighborhood playground. Apparently, unbeknownst to me or my family, this was in violation of LHSAA rules and I caused my high school Freshman team to forfeit all the games I played in. I stopped playing competitive tackle football after High School, though I had been in a couple of flag football leagues since then. And even though my bum knees make it impossible now for me to continue actively playing even in flag football leagues, I remain a big fan of the sport. However, I do have to admit that my enjoyment of football these past few years has come not from following the rise and fall of particular teams, whether high school, college, or professional, but rather from the mix and match world of fantasy football.

This weekend marks the start of the fantasy football season in earnest, and I'm very much looking forward to it. I have three teams in three separate fantasy football leagues, and I always enjoy following all the professional games on Sunday to see how my fantasy teams perform.

Friday, September 11, 2009

Cass Sunstein and the Myopia of Conservatives

As someone who is familiar with Cass Sunstein's writings and who has read (and discussed) Sunstein's most recent book, Nudge, a collaborative effort with Richard Thaler, I have to say that I find the conservative opposition to Sunstein's appointment as the director of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the Obama Administration's Office of Management and Budget to be very puzzling. Sunstein's basic thesis in Nudge was very much coming out of a libertarian tradition that prioritizes the freedom of choice and looks suspiciously on any practice or policy that might compromise choice beyond a fairly innocuous "nudge," whether that practice or policy originates in the state or the private sector.

Conservative columnist and pundit, David Frum, (currently a pariah among modern movement conservatives for his opposition to Sarah Palin and his criticism of the unthinking reactionary conservative bombast of folks like Mark Levin and Glenn Beck) has written an extremely thoughtful piece defending, with a persuasive conservative rationale, the appointment of Sunstein.

Here's part of what he said:

To anyone who knows anything – anything! – about what Cass Sunstein has actually written or actually said, it’s [conservative opposition to his appointment] a travesty and scandal. And ironically enough, if successful, it would have been a travesty and scandal in which conservatives would find themselves the main victims.

Had Cass Sunstein somehow been stopped, the next OIRA nominee would certainly have been less favorable to markets, enterprise, and competition. The next nominee would not have supported John Roberts and Michael McConnell, would not have chaired seminars with the American Enterprise Institute, might not have been endorsed by the Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers, and very likely would not have shared with conservatives so many of the values that Beck purports to uphold but in fact betrays.
I, too, think Sunstein is better for conservatives, by leaps and bounds, than any other potential Obama administration appointment. If conservatives want to be masochistic, and work to dump Sunstein in favor of someone more radical from the left, that's their prerogative. It just makes no sense to me.

Quote of the Day: On Hayek

"According to the current Republican orthodoxy, Friedrich Hayek was a socialist." Andrew Sullivan.

Sullivan quotes directly from Chapter 9 of Hayek's The Road to Serfdom, one of the canonical, almost biblical, texts of conservatism. Read Sullivan's whole entry, which focuses on Hayek's defense of the kind of government program of the sort that the healthcare reform proposals of today represent.

I, myself, have been giving Hayek's book a re-reading over the past weeks to try to understand how far "modern" conservatism, the Limbaugh/Bachmann/Hannity/Wilson kind, has strayed from conservative orthodoxy into the realm of the absurd.

More Hayek pearls of wisdom from The Road to Serfdom will be coming soon. Stay tuned!

Wednesday, September 09, 2009

Obama's Speech to Schoolkids and Republican Rectal-Cranial Inversion

From the annals of contemporary conservative implosion, here's Neal Boortz, conservative Town Hall columnist, frothing over the rightwing's puerile imbecility regarding Obama's speech to schoolkids:

TeamObama must have loved this one. Talk about a hanging curveball. Once the manic inanity started all they had to do is sit back, prepare an innocuous speech for The One, and let the people scratch their heads wondering what in the hell the Republicans were so upset about! Now the next time the right comes up with an objection to some Obama concept, people who last week might have been on board will stand back and look at the Republicans with a jaundiced eye.

This one was so easy for the left I can’t even think of another 300 words to fill out this column. So just move on to the next one. Two steps forward and three steps back. Unless PrezBO really messes up his address to Congress tonight watch for his popularity ratings to rise. Thanks, Republicans! See if there’s some drug available for that rectal-cranial inversion you’re suffering from.
They're falling apart, man. Bashing each other. And I'm loving it. If you do check out Boortz's column, you absolutely must also have a quick read of the comments there. The frothing is legion! If these folks don't calm down, I think we might witness a mass death-by-aneurysm moment.

[H/T: Andrew Sullivan, who marvels at the genius of what he so aptly calls Obama's "rope-a-dope." Now, I'm not so sure Obama is that clever, but the coincidence of this "rope-a-dope" happening the day before Obama is poised to give a major speech on healthcare does raise eyebrows, doesn't it? When conservatives instinctively start frothing about Obamunism up to and following Obama's healthcare reform speech tonight, one has to wonder if sane Americans, fresh off the nuttiness of the recent conservative "sky is falling" chicken little performance regarding the talk to schoolkids, won't look askance at conservative frothing about Obama's healthcare reform proposal. Seriously, all Obama has to do tonight is come across as calm and reasonable on his healthcare reform proposal and the skeptical just might think that the "death panel" screechers on the right really are the lunatics in this debate and that Obama is the sane one. It might be just the edge Obama needs to prevail.]

UPDATE: Wednesday, September 9, 2009, 11:00PM: South Carolina GOP Congressman Joe Wilson, who rudely heckled Obama and blurted out "You lie!," just gave Obama that edge. The nuttiness at the Healthcare Town Halls rears its ugly, unbecoming head on national television in the "august" halls of Congress. Joe Wilson, you are a crude hick. Thanks, Joe Wilson, for revealing the true face of the modern GOP to the world. It was a wonderful gift to Obama.

A Few Good Letters

Letter 1:

Re: "Echoes of Bush in health care effort: Older voters show skepticism over plan, " Page A2, Sept. 8. First, everyone on Medicare who opposes health care reform as a socialist enterprise should relinquish all Medicare benefits.

Second, every anti-reform child and grandchild of Medicare recipients should urge their parents and grandparents to give up all Medicare benefits and then personally assume their parents' and grandparents' medical bills.

When both camps do this, then they can take the high ground on health care reform.

Kris Lackey

New Orleans
Amen, Kris Lackey! I couldn't have said it any better.

Letter 2:
"Re: "Obama student address decision is up to principals, archdiocese says," Metro, Sept. 4. As a high school teacher of U.S. government and a James Madison Fellow, I feel an obligation to voice my disappointment in some of our local educational leaders for caving in to partisan politics.

Parents who are worried that their children may be politically indoctrinated by President Obama's speech need to consider the following.

As a teacher, I do not give my students the option of not reading the Federalist Papers, the Bill of Rights or President Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, all of which were, in their day, more politically indoctrinating than anything President Obama can say in his speech.

Giving the students the option to disregard a president's address reeks of partisan politics and lacks a genuine motive.

Vanesa Gentinetta

Metairie
Common sense from a High School teacher more interested in teaching than in politicizing education. And, yes, Ms. Gentinetta, it does reek of partisan politics, indeed. Ronald Reagan can extol the benefits of low taxes to students, but Obama can't even tell them to stay in school and work hard? But I do have one beef with Ms. Gentinetta's letter: there is no lack of a "genuine motive" behind not requiring students to listen to Obama's speech. The motive exists and it's clear. Only it's not a very admirable motive. It's a motive of hate and disrespect for Obama. It's a motive of: "Break his teeth, O God."

Hitler on Obama's Speech to Schoolkids

I thought this was just too damn funny:

Tuesday, September 08, 2009

St. Tammany Parish High Schools and Obama's Speech

Part of a transcript of a WWL TV news report I heard earlier today while sitting in the Jury Pool lounge:

Not all schools embraced Obama’s speech, as some were beset with criticism from concerned parents.

All six St. Tammany Parish high schools and Terrebonne Parish schools did not air the speech live, opting to record the speech because it interfered with lunch. Students were given the opportunity to watch it later.
I assume this report concerns only public high schools, because apparently some of the Catholic High Schools showed the speech. Nevertheless, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if all Public High Schools in St. Tammany Parish refrained from showing the speech live. It is the Northshore, after all. Well, to whichever schools didn't show the speech live, I say fie on them. Let them look small, petty, paranoid, and imbecilic.

"Break his teeth, O God."

Words fail:



[H/T: Andrew Sullivan]

Obama's "Socialist" Message to Schoolkids

Whole thing is right here. Here's some of the choice "socialist" lessons Obama has to share:

But at the end of the day, we can have the most dedicated teachers, the most supportive parents, and the best schools in the world – and none of it will matter unless all of you fulfill your responsibilities. Unless you show up to those schools; pay attention to those teachers; listen to your parents, grandparents and other adults; and put in the hard work it takes to succeed.

And that’s what I want to focus on today: the responsibility each of you has for your education. I want to start with the responsibility you have to yourself.

Every single one of you has something you’re good at. Every single one of you has something to offer. And you have a responsibility to yourself to discover what that is. That’s the opportunity an education can provide.

...

And no matter what you want to do with your life – I guarantee that you’ll need an education to do it. You want to be a doctor, or a teacher, or a police officer? You want to be a nurse or an architect, a lawyer or a member of our military? You’re going to need a good education for every single one of those careers. You can’t drop out of school and just drop into a good job. You’ve got to work for it and train for it and learn for it.

...

We need every single one of you to develop your talents, skills and intellect so you can help solve our most difficult problems. If you don’t do that – if you quit on school – you’re not just quitting on yourself, you’re quitting on your country.

...

But at the end of the day, the circumstances of your life – what you look like, where you come from, how much money you have, what you’ve got going on at home – that’s no excuse for neglecting your homework or having a bad attitude. That’s no excuse for talking back to your teacher, or cutting class, or dropping out of school. That’s no excuse for not trying.

Where you are right now doesn’t have to determine where you’ll end up. No one’s written your destiny for you. Here in America, you write your own destiny. You make your own future.

...

That’s why today, I’m calling on each of you to set your own goals for your education – and to do everything you can to meet them. Your goal can be something as simple as doing all your homework, paying attention in class, or spending time each day reading a book. Maybe you’ll decide to get involved in an extracurricular activity, or volunteer in your community. Maybe you’ll decide to stand up for kids who are being teased or bullied because of who they are or how they look, because you believe, like I do, that all kids deserve a safe environment to study and learn. Maybe you’ll decide to take better care of yourself so you can be more ready to learn. And along those lines, I hope you’ll all wash your hands a lot, and stay home from school when you don’t feel well, so we can keep people from getting the flu this fall and winter.

Whatever you resolve to do, I want you to commit to it. I want you to really work at it.

I know that sometimes, you get the sense from TV that you can be rich and successful without any hard work -- that your ticket to success is through rapping or basketball or being a reality TV star, when chances are, you’re not going to be any of those things.

But the truth is, being successful is hard. You won’t love every subject you study. You won’t click with every teacher. Not every homework assignment will seem completely relevant to your life right this minute. And you won’t necessarily succeed at everything the first time you try.

That’s OK. Some of the most successful people in the world are the ones who’ve had the most failures. JK Rowling’s first Harry Potter book was rejected twelve times before it was finally published. Michael Jordan was cut from his high school basketball team, and he lost hundreds of games and missed thousands of shots during his career. But he once said, "I have failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed."

These people succeeded because they understand that you can’t let your failures define you – you have to let them teach you.

...

Don’t be afraid to ask questions. Don’t be afraid to ask for help when you need it. I do that every day. Asking for help isn’t a sign of weakness, it’s a sign of strength. It shows you have the courage to admit when you don’t know something, and to learn something new. So find an adult you trust – a parent, grandparent or teacher; a coach or counselor – and ask them to help you stay on track to meet your goals.

And even when you’re struggling, even when you’re discouraged, and you feel like other people have given up on you – don’t ever give up on yourself. Because when you give up on yourself, you give up on your country.

The story of America isn’t about people who quit when things got tough. It’s about people who kept going, who tried harder, who loved their country too much to do anything less than their best.

...

Your families, your teachers, and I are doing everything we can to make sure you have the education you need to answer these questions. I’m working hard to fix up your classrooms and get you the books, equipment and computers you need to learn. But you’ve got to do your part too. So I expect you to get serious this year. I expect you to put your best effort into everything you do. I expect great things from each of you. So don’t let us down – don’t let your family or your country or yourself down. Make us all proud. I know you can do it.

Thank you, God bless you, and God bless America.
Holy moly! That secular, atheist, Muslim fundamentalist, Kenyan-born, son-of-a-many-times-divorced-and-remarried mother even mentioned "God" to the kids while they were in school! How dare he coopt God for his nefarious brainwashing purposes?! Call out the good Christian soldiers to prevent Obama from marching our kids off the gulags and re-education camps! Obamunism is poised to pollute our kids' minds! God forbid that Obama usurp the authority of parents!

Seriously ...

This is a speech that one would think conservatives would wet their pants over. What a shame that they're so damn afraid of Obama that their kids are likely going to miss out on this inspirational message.

One thing I know for certain: Obama has once again upstaged the paranoid delusionals among the rightwing. Any rational, sane, honest parent would read this speech and would WANT his or her kids to hear it. And any individuals who persist in their absurd, insane hyperventilations about it will merely expose themselves for the idiots that they are.

Monday, September 07, 2009

To Kill A Mockingbird

Today, I took squirrely girlie the elder to see the movie To Kill a Mockingbird on the big screen. The Prytania movie theatre, one of the few neighborhood theatres that has managed to survive the mega movie complexes, is running a Classics movie series over the noon hour on the weekends. It is quite a success. My eldest daughter, who read Harper Lee's novel this summer and loved it, thought the movie was great. I did, too. Of course, Gregory Peck was wonderful as Atticus Finch. But the big revelatory surprise for me was realizing for the first time that the Great Santini, Robert Duvall, played the part of the mysterious Boo Radley. I've seen the movie a handful of times and never once did it register that Robert Duvall played this part.

I once had an idea some 6-7 years ago for converting another local neighborhood movie theatre, the one up on Robert E. Lee Blvd. in Lakeshore (I can't remember its formal name), to one that would specialize exclusively in children's/family theatre. You know, old Disney classics, etc. And then market it for birthday parties and such. And if I had the investment dollars, I might just have done it. I still think it would be a successful venture.

Nevertheless, the Prytania has done a great thing and I was happy to partake today.

Sunday, September 06, 2009

Lusher Lions Football

I guess it's admirable that the new Lusher High School has even fielded a football team. But I went to their first game of the season this past Friday night, and the performance was a disaster. For one, the team was out of shape. Second, there was absolutely zero offense. The team had negative yardage on offense. The offense racked up more negative yardage due to penalties than positive yardage adding rushing, passing, and return yards combined. Speaking of penalties, there must have been about 20-25 total just against Lusher. In just one series of downs that I witnessed in the 3rd quarter, there were 2 offsides penalties, 2 delay of game penalties, and one holding penalty. It was absolutely painful to watch. In fact, there were so many penalties, delays, official time outs, etc., that the 12 minute third quarter alone lasted more than an hour. The best performance of the night was the halftime show, which featured the Lusher High School dance club doing a modern dance number. Needless to say, Lusher lost the game by a shut out -- 0 to 34.

What's even worse is that Lusher is in the district that contains John Curtis Christian High School -- the perennial state champion. I shudder at the thought of that game. God bless Lusher for pulling together a football team, but lord help them and help us all.

Saturday, September 05, 2009

TP Letter Writer Misses the Obvious on Obama's Speech to Students

In a letter to the editor in today's Times-Picayune, Ms. Judi McGovern from Folsom on the Northshore in St. Tammany Parish writes the following:

Some of the loudest protests to the Obama "student chat" come from St. Tammany Parish parents and educators. It is interesting to note that not a single St. Tammany school is rated "academically unacceptable."

Could it be that St. Tammany parents and teachers have already taught their children the value and importance of education?
First, that some of the loudest protests are coming from ultra-conservative St. Tammany Parish residents comes as no surprise. The mere mention of Obama is enough to elicit the frothing madness of Northshore conservatives. It was this way before the election and has been this way ever since. Let's remember also that some of the state's most notorious racist hate-mongers like David Duke find a comfy perch in St. Tammany Parish from which to spew their filth. It's in St. Tammany Parish where white supremacist groups thrive and carry out their sometimes murderous mischief. Everyone knows the unvarnished truth about the nature and extent of the ideological leanings of St. Tammany Parish.

But, leaving all that aside, what I would like to ask Ms. McGovern is how having President Obama reinforce the "value and importance of education" that she claims is so successfully imparted by St. Tammany Parish parents and teachers to their own superior youth is somehow bad? You'd think that having this country's President reinforce the values that St. Tammany Parish's extraordinary parents and teachers convey so well is something Ms. McGovern would embrace. Instead, Ms. McGovern thinks a censorious pre-screening of a Presidential address on the virtues of staying in school is recommendable, and says that it is "a sad commentary for a president who has been in office for such a short time to have succeeded in raising so many obvious issues of trust." I think Ms. McGovern ought to re-evaluate her claim. It is not Obama that has succeeded in raising so many obvious issues of trust. I'd say it's the opposite. It's folks like Ms. McGovern, in collusion with the likes of Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, and Rush Limbaugh, who have succeeded in raising the issues of trust where they simply do not exist. Obama has, from the very beginning, extolled the values of family, has exhorted parents to be involved in their kids' lives, has defended the discipline of study and respect for teachers. But, in St. Tammany Parish, Obama could read, without commentary, verbatim from the Bible to students and Ms. McGovern would want to shield kids from it, simply and only because it is Obama doing the reading. The fact is that folks in St. Tammany Parish don't trust Obama because they never have and they aren't even interested in doing so. Ms. McGovern thinks the current controversy is some commentary on Obama; but I think the truth is that it is more a commentary on her. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that Ms. McGovern was never open to placing her trust in Obama. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts she never will be. And it is that which is the "sad commentary" here.

My Advice to Parents Opposed to Obama's Speech on Education to Students

Home school your kids.

Conservative Pansies

A reader at Andrew Sullivan's site had this choice comment about the NIMBY (Not-in-my-backyard) folks who get all apoplectic about transferring detainees from Guantanamo to maximum-security prisons in the United States:

The Republican Party has gone from the party of fear to the party of being afraid. If the left ever acted like pansies about something the way the right has about this, they'd be taken to task and labeled "weak" or "soft".
I thought this was perhaps the most succinct capturing of the irrational thinking behind conservative opposition to the plan for closing Gitmo and dealing with its prisoners. Conservatives are nothing but irrational these days, it seems.

Obama's Education Speech to Students

Again, I am simply dumbfounded, astounded, and increasingly angry at rightwing hyperventilating at the simple mention of Obama.

It's almost to the point that I will refuse to have anything at all to do with such imbecility.

I have never seen a reaction to a President as I have seen by the rightwing to Obama. It's shameful.

This is my message to the folks who think that Obama's encouraging kids to stay in school and work hard is socialist indoctrination:

(1) At this point, I think rational communication with you is fruitless. So I will refuse to engage you in communication about such stupidity. From now on, we can only talk about sports and the weather.
(2) Your attitudes are hardening mine. If you want a war, I will oblige.
(3) You are a paranoid delusional nutcase. Completely irrational, mentally unstable, and intellectually bankrupt.
(4) You are a petty, small, bitter nothing.

Oh, there's so much more invective I can hurl. But it's almost not even worth it. It is clear that I am becoming increasingly angry and maddeningly frustrated, not by a thoughtful opposition to Obama, which I can respect and deal with, but by the damn stupidity and utter imbecility that is behind this current absurd madness. People have just lost their minds. Really, if left-liberals had voiced the same kind of inane nonsense about any conservative President giving such a speech to schoolkids, I would have had the same reaction to them. I would have told them to stop with the stupidity. I would have exhorted such liberals to get behind even the most conservative of Presidents, as it would be at least one area where nothing but good can come of such Presidential leadership.

I am just at a loss for what to say. And I even have a very difficult time wrapping my mind around this behavior. It seems completely senseless. I really can't seem to find the words to convey the incomprehensibility of all of this nonsense. Are there any thoughtful conservatives out there who can explain this rationally to me? Can someone please tell me how having Obama (or any President, for that matter) extol the virtues of education and staying in school is an unmitigated danger to my children?

Thursday, September 03, 2009

Cal Thomas Is An Idiot. Seriously.

That conservative blowhard, Cal Thomas, wrote a column that appeared on the Op-Ed pages of the Times-Picayune this morning. This column was so gobsmackingly stupid and playgroundish. It actually was offensive in its stupidity. Here's a passage from this piece that was particularly atrocious:

Here is the way I believe it works at liberal universities. Some professors require their students to repeat back to them on test papers and in theses what the professors believe. Unless students hate Republicans, revile George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan, renounce God, support abortion and gay rights, they can sometimes expect a lower, even a failing grade. When my wife studied for her master’s degree in counseling, she felt pressured to repeat her professors’ beliefs instead of stating her own. A friend with a Ph.D. told her, “Write what they want and get the degree. Then you can counsel the way you like.” This is academic freedom? It sounds like indoctrination. Why is it OK at liberal universities to tell professors what they want to hear, but not OK at conservative ones to do the same?
Where does one start with such trash? I mean, really, as far as arguments go, it is embarrassingly poor. It smacks of whininess and is something you might see in a playground taunting episode among third grade boys. First, Thomas pontificates on how "it works" at "liberal" universities as if he has any clue what goes on at universities these days. I'd bet he hasn't set foot in the academic culture beyond perhaps giving an invited speech now and then since God knows how many years ago. Here's what I know from actually working in the university academic environment: (1) I would say it is true that a majority of college professors in the Liberal Arts lean leftwards in their personal politics. But I can also categorically state that a vast majority of college professors, whether liberal or conservative in their personal politics, does not engage in any form of ideological brainwashing. And no faculty that I know penalizes any student simply because of a particular ideological inclination. Cal Thomas has bought hook-line-and-sinker into the conservative canard that university education at a "liberal" university (whatever the hell that means) is nothing but an experiment in ideological indoctrination. (2) What dimwits like Cal Thomas absolutely fail to recognize is that this belief is simply not borne out by the evidence. A significant number of conservatives in this country went through "liberal" universities. If the academy were such an indoctrination mill, how in the hell can there be so many college educated conservatives? (3) Another fact that these myopic ideologues like Cal Thomas fail to note is that the "liberal" liberal arts faculty does not a "liberal" university make. The professional schools, the natural sciences, and some of the "pure" social science disciplines even in the Liberal Arts tradition, tend to be populated much more heavily by conservative leaning professors. Does this mean that students are being indoctrinated into ideological conservatism by these professors? No. At least no more nor less than by any liberal-leaning academics indoctrinating students into ideological liberalism. Cal Thomas is just full of crap.

If you still don't believe Cal Thomas is an idiot, take a look at the only evidence he claims supports his "belief": His wife's friend's advice to parrot the professor's beliefs. That's not pressure coming from the Professor! That's pressure coming from a friend "with a Ph.D." who has probably been brainwashed herself from having read too many of Cal Thomas's columns! And is this "Ph.D. friend" a liberal or a conservative? Because if the friend is a conservative, wouldn't that seem to indicate that it's the conservative academic who is perpetuating what Cal Thomas seems to think is more "indoctrination"? When Cal Thomas actually shows me a reasoned, well-argued, well-written, critically-crafted paper or exam that gets a poor grade simply because the professor didn't like the "politics" of the paper, THEN I might think he has a point. And it's not enough for some ideologue who says "Damn the evidence and the science to the contrary, I'm going to argue that the world is 2000 years old, because the Bible says so!" and gets points deducted because there's no critical engagement with the science and evidence that says otherwise. That person earns a lower grade. Not because of any failure to adopt the "politics" of the professor, but simply for shoddy scholarship. In the end, Cal Thomas hasn't produced a shred of concrete evidence, NOT ONE BIT, beyond his paranoid delusions, that expressing a conservative point of view ends in a failed grade.

Finally (and here's where the playground silliness comes into play), Cal Thomas spends his whole time ranting about how horrible liberal indoctrination is and then posits a moral equivalence in which he gives a pass to conservative schools indoctrinating their students in conservative orthodoxies because he thinks liberal universities do it. Let's repeat the question Cal Thomas asks to end his little playground pout. He writes: "Why is it OK at liberal universities to tell professors what they want to hear, but not OK at conservative ones to do the same?" To which I say: "Well, Cal, you tell me? You're the one who seems to have a problem with what you perceive to be 'indoctrination' at universities? And isn't your whole complaint precisely about why it's not o.k., period?" Goodness gracious! What Cal Thomas seems to be saying in this question is that if liberals can get away with doing something "bad," then conservatives ought to be able to get away with doing something "bad," too. Whatever happened to "bad" being "bad" no matter who does it? This little bit of relativism strikes at the paranoid, delusional core of Cal Thomas's stupidity when it comes to the "liberal" university brainwashing meme of an unthinking, idiotic, ideologically partisan, knee-jerk conservatism. It's pitiful and it's actually embarrassing for the man. I hope he would be able to recognize this; but, then, he'd probably point to me as a liberal academic and dismiss it as nothing more than that liberal indoctrination he is talking about. Sheesh!

Oh, and one final point: If students were to write a paper for me in which they "hate Republicans, revile George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan, renounce God, support abortion and gay rights" just because, I promise you they wouldn't win accolades for such a thing. No sirree. They'd fail like a Cal Thomas column because there would be nothing at all scholarly or critically thoughtful about such a screed. Maybe they can cry to Cal Thomas about my unfair discrimination, my grade-penalizing tendencies, or my indoctrinating agenda and get some sympathy from him on the principle of it; but they'd still get a failing grade from me.

Wednesday, September 02, 2009

FEMA and the Tulane University Library

The good news is that FEMA has come through with a nice chunk of change to help repair the University's main campus library's physical plant infrastructure. [ASIDE: This not only will help maintain the Library's significant collection, but will also help reduce the University's energy expenditures and help to save the environment in the process; for, as most anybody who passes by the library will know, the temporary repairs made to the AC/Heating system have huge cooling and heating seepage problems outside the building. At certain locations on the outside of the Library building, one could find it actually chilly in the midst of a sweltering August day, or one could find it toasty warm in the midst of a near freezing February night. The claim that Tulane was making a valiant attempt to cool down the neighborhood in August is not an exaggeration.]

In the middle of this good news story, I came across this little tidbit which has particular meaning to me:

Joining the books and equipment from the library's basement will be contents of the library's Special Collections division, which had been in the basement of nearby Jones Hall. Those holdings, along with the building's mechanical equipment, were also flooded.
What is of particular interest to me here is the mention of materials stored in the basement of Jones Hall. Although not a part of the Library's Special Collections Division, my own department's historical archives had been stored in the basement area of Jones Hall. In fact, the bitter irony of our story is that, not more than a month before the storm hit, we had just transported all of our archives down into our small basement storage area. When we returned after Katrina, of course everything in our basement storage area was long gone with nary a mention to us from the authorities about what had happened to it. We had all just written off these archives as forever disappeared; but this comment makes me think there is at least a glimmer of some hope that our archives have been preserved, cleaned, and restored. Now that would be a nice silver lining in a story that is already pretty golden.

For all its bungling, FEMA gets some credit (and some redemption -- at least in my eyes) for doing right by the Tulane Library.

Tuesday, September 01, 2009

Jury Duty

Spent my first day in the Jury Pool Lounge of the New Orleans Criminal Court. I have to say it wasn't all that unpleasant an experience. The folks running the Jury process seem to have the system pretty much down pat, and are very nice and willing to try to accommodate anyone's scheduling issues.

On my first day, I lucked out and didn't even get called up for the Voir Dire, which is the process of questioning a select group of potential jurors for possible seating in a jury. We, the unneeded, were released at 11:30am. I have to admit to being impressed by the whole experience and think that there is some truth to the claim that the New Orleans Criminal Court is "gaining in efficiency." And the free coffee was pretty darn good, too! Thick, black, and flavored with chicory. Just how I like it.

Thinking on what my month in the jury pool might look like, I couldn't help but read with interest a jury handing down a death sentence for a man convicted of murdering five people in a shooting rampage in Central City. I wondered if I might be called to serve in a capital murder case and if I would be selected. Of course, I am morally opposed to the death penalty; but I think I could honestly answer a question on the subject during a Voir Dire session by stating that I recognize that our legal system recognizes the legitimacy of the death penalty as an appropriate punishment for particular crimes. Of course, that skirts answering my own position on the subject, but it would be a true statement and might cause a defense attorney to fight for my inclusion in such a jury and might be vague enough for the prosecution not to object to my inclusion in a jury pool. But, if they ask me point blank about my position, I'd have to declare my moral opposition to the death penalty. Given this, though, my goal would be to get on such a jury and hopefully be able to save a life.

In any event, I should be able to get a lot of reading done while waiting in the jury pool lounge!

Adonde vas, Lee Zurik?

Lee Zurik, local news anchor and reporter for WWL-TV, is ending his run with that station. I remember Zurik from Rising Tide III and found him to be incredibly down-to-earth and with a wonderful attitude. He definitely deserved his Peabody. I count Zurik as a friend and promoter of the blogging community and medium, which is a somewhat rare thing among traditional media types. I wish him well wherever he ends up, even if it is the local FoxNews affiliate.