Devouring Maidens Out Of Season

I certainly agree that the future of any nation has and always will reside in the education of its citizens. Debating the need for government sponsored high speed railways, or how little/how much to regulate banks is one thing, but the only debate as to education spending should be where can we find the money to be continually improving our schools and curriculum. In a rapidly globalizing world, a country's commitment to providing its children an education that will allow them to succeed in this New World is the absolute best investment it can make--no question.

I can't believe you know about that G5, that is like one of the best kept Democratic secrets. But you don't even know the half of it....get this: when you register to vote, if you mark democrat, you are immediately shuffled into a dark room where officials in long suits and black masks recite a demoniac incantation that summons the ghost of FDR. After a strange seance in which you are forced to allow the ex-president to posses your body for a few minutes, you then swallow a few drops of blood from a sacrificial Republican. Then, under pain of death, you are forced to make the "pledge of eternal fidelity." And, before they send you bleary eyed and confused back into the world, you are given a packet of poverty seeds with clear instructions that you are to begin cultivating immediately.

Yup...its a good system. Heck just last year alone I started 9 new poverty farms stretching from South Dakota to the Oklahoma pan handle. The last 8 years have been pretty stressful, I figured with a Republican in office there would be some kind of backlash, or maybe even a concentrated and full blown ethnic/urban cleansing. Luckily, Bush's extreme incompetence kept our production levels safely intact.

But you mention a growing area of concern for us. White people still have a strangle hold on crime in rural areas. We are trying our damnedest to bring ethnic and racial diversity to rural crime but it remains an almost exclusively all white club.

A National Institute of Justice (NIJ) study http://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles/crimepol.t... found that in regard to rural crime rates, blacks were almost completely absent. This was true even though rural drug manufacturing required few resources and few specialized skills.

It also reported that although the minority population may be smaller in rural areas, it wasn't clear why their crime rates relative to whites should be lower in rural areas, or why minorities have such a small role in rural drug manufacturing. The study calls for this pattern to be explored further, because it raises questions about assumed links between race/ethnicity and crime.

Indeed! I have been trying to get my beautifully and painstakingly cultivated poverty seeds to bloom in rural areas so that they can take over drug trafficking....but almost every time they are run off by all the white trash rednecks who already have a strangle hold on crime in these communities. It is depressing the hell out of me.

"Someone please explain why Wall Street appears to be so reluctant to jump on board re the spending."

One explanation is that, as you point out, we are all in a kind of wait and see gig right now. In the meantime consumers are not consuming, investors are not investing, and the wild boys on Wall Street are still trying to turn a fast buck in a collapsing market. This doesn't bode well for the short term prognosis. But there was an unexpected spike in consumer spending in January that some are taking as an indicator that credit regulations and restrictions placed by the Bush administration are starting to level out. http://www.marketingcharts.com/topics/co...

And if that isn't enough, I found this in the Wall Street Journal. Maybe this will increase your "hope":

"However, that weakness in consumer spending spelled a small piece of good news. Goldman economists now think that the worst is over for spending. "Consumers will begin to see some benefits from the recently enacted fiscal package, which should help ease the tight budget constraints imposed by the labor market deterioration," Goldman economists said. "In addition, the tightening in credit standards during the second half of 2008, which probably played a significant role in the contraction in consumer spending, has since eased."

They expect consumer spending to start rising again in the second quarter, and they see economic growth returning in the third quarter. Though the pain will continue in the labor market, the economists expect the economy to expand in the second half of 2009 -- at a 1% annual rate -- and throughout 2010, though it is expected to remain slow -- below 2%.

"On balance, the pattern of recent data surprises and their impact on our economic outlook is encouraging in the sense that our forecast adjustments are concentrated in sectors that tend to lag economic activity," Goldman economists said, but they still see some problems remaining in housing.

Housing "appears to be even a larger drag in the current quarter than we had anticipated," they said. "However, given the low levels to which starts have fallen, we continue to think that home building will stabilize later this year."

--Phil Izzo

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/03/0...

jhat and r.j., thanks for your reasoned responses. And yes, the republicans grew the national debt tremendously; I believe that is the reason they are out of power now - they were spending like democrats. I dont see how increasing it even more under the dems is going to help any. I hear you all saying the spending is going to spur economic growth; like the rest of you, I will have to wait to see if that actually happens. Someone please explain why Wall Street appears to be so reluctant to jump on board re the spending.

RECOGNIZE REALITY.

Obama took office at the end of January.

The budget before Congress had been in development for 18-60 months.

There is a simple rule in our constitution:

THE PRESIDENT PROPOSES, THE HOUSE DISPOSES AND THE SENATE GETS WHAT IT CAN.

Power of the purse lies with the House constitutionally -- NOT THE SENATE -- and most certainly not with the President.

There was no way Obama was going to get an entire new budget out of the House -- PERIOD.

The GOP knows this.

The new president and his administration can begin influencing the next budget -- and also realistically -- already have.

The difference now is that Halliburton and KBR do not have a direct pipeline into the U.S. Treasury.

The Enron people will not be walking in and out of the White House with VIP passes.

The petroleum industry no longer controls the White House, Senate and House. The operative word is CONTROL.

Before all the uber-conservatives keep screaming "..spending Democrats and LIBERALS"- remember - Poppa and Dubyah Bush have saddled the U.S. taxpayers with more than $30-TRILLION in final payout, principal, interest and "FRICTION" in federal debt --and both of these conservative Republicans increased both the annual deficits and national debt, every second of every minute, of every hour, of every day, of every week, of every month and of every year -- during the 16 years they controlled the White House.

Neither of these "sainted" Republicans even attempted to produce a balanced budget.

The only chief executive within the past half century to effectively balance the budget and reduce debt was the most hated by the GOP -- Bill Clinton.

Doodle Bug, My sense is that a new era of anything is a mixture of what and who is already in place and what is likely to be developed. Hence, the very large stimulus plan seems to accommodate both parties. It's difficult to predict reliably who viable government picks are until they're investigated. That usually happens after they're chosen. We are only seven weeks into a new administration. I doubt we can really ascertain with any precision what "business as usual" means yet for the executive and legislative branches. I hope it will be thoughtfully productive leadership for the country.

this question in general: Why do so many of Obama's picks for government officials seem to have tax issues? How can anyone claim Obama and the Dems are not doing "business as usual" when there were 8000+ pork projects in the latest stimulus bill? Yes, the Republicans did it too - Obama's claim was "a new era in government". Is he lying or not?

Mrs Smith,

I appreciate your sources and what you are saying, I even agree to a certain extent with your apparent mistrust of unions--very often they end up causing more harm than good. But you are arguing the NEA "destroyed education", and Mrs Smith, you couldn't be further from the truth. Why? The first reason is that education is not destroyed. Are we falling behind? Sure we are, but as long as there are decent and hard working parents, teachers, administrators, paras, professors in teachers colleges, etc...education will not be destroyed.

The second reason (and this won't be too shocking I am sure) is because in terms of detriment to the educations system, Bush's "greatest domestic achievement," NCLB, makes the NEA feel like a Swedish massage. Here is why:

*Under NCLB the Federal Government has the authority to tell the states how to measure school success, how to control and apply interventions for failure, legislate qualifications for teachers and even prescribe to local curriculum the best way to teach reading.

(As a Republican, can you support this kind of big Government infringing on states rights?)

*According to Time magazine: "More than 30,000 educators and concerned citizens have signed an online petition calling for the repeal of the 1,100-page statute. Some offer comments like this one from a former superintendent of schools in Ohio: "NCLB is like a Russian novel. That's because it's long, it's complicated, and in the end, everybody gets killed."

(The existence of NCLB has ruined lives, cut budgets, closed schools, made classrooms bigger, and turned schools into factories who view students as economic tokens rather than critical democratic citizens)

*The Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) system creates a backwards, illogical, and in my opinion, corrupt system of incentives. The AYP feature of NCLB actually rewards schools that focus on kids on nearest to the minimum grade-level requirements. However, there is no reason or incentive in the plan for schools to do anything to ameliorate the kids who are merely meeting grade level, or who are high achievers.

(Follow this logic: Schools face budget cuts from Bush, schools have to meet the AYP, Schools have to spend their precious resources on those below grade level, Schools neglect those at or above grade level, Schools graduate mediocre students. NCLB HAS MADE ACCEPTING MEDIOCRITY IN EDUCTION STANDARD PRACTICE)

* It links precious Federal dollars to scholastic achievement in way that is not based on research, logic, or the best interests of the students. For example, there is usually a substantial gap between State standardized testing and Federal standardized testing. Why? The answer is because states have figured out that in order to get their pittance of Federal education money, they don't have to increase education standards, rather they can simply lower the difficulty of the State standardized tests.

(According to Time: "Mississippi is tied for the best score in the country. But on the U.S. test, the state drops to 50th place--a whopping 71 points lower.")

As an educator myself I have taught high-school English, English as a Second language, and English as a Foreign Language; I have experience teaching on multiple continents, and I have a vast network of friends of almost every nationality teaching literally in every corner of the world. Here is what I know: Without exception, EVERY teacher I have ever discussed NCLB with (regardless of experience level) has expressed either: concern, frustration, or outright hatred for the law. So while I understand your disdain for the politicization of teacher's unions...this is but a minor episode in the long and sad saga that is Bush's "greatest domestic achievement." He leveraged the future of our children's education to pay for the Iraq war effort.

PS: You can think Sam is right, or anyone else...two things though: 1) dear sweet Mrs Smith, just because you think Sam is correct, doesn't make it true; and 2)Sam is xenophobic, hypocritical, counter-productive, and wants to overthrow the Government...nice company you keep, is this what they teach in Christian schools for half the money? The Bible I read leads me to interpret Christianity as very different from claiming "genetic superiority", supporting racial bigotry, and aligning with anyone who does. Be careful of the company you keep.

Guillermo Inglaterra:

http://www.afa.net/pdfs/unionfacts_nea.p...

The organization that has destroyed American education: The NEA - in 2004 alone, they spent $65.6 Million on political donations...20% of their budget supporting leftist politics instead of education. This is an ongoing pattern - "Between 1990 and 2004, 94 percent of donations made by National Education Association political action committees and individual officers went to Democrats, according to the Center for Responsive Politics."

http://www.teachersunionexposed.com/poli...

And yet, the only meaningful reform in decades was under...**gasp** Pres. Bush

http://www.newamerica.net/files/FEBP_Bus...

As for spending on education...I've had my children in Christian schools, which do a far better job educating on about 1/2 the money.

Sam is far more right - and correct - than you are.

Sam, you know what's inside the heart of every single liberal across this country? Wow, i'm impressed. Some would call you God. And I bet you'd love it if they did.

Stereotype lately?

Wow Sam, with all this keen insight into the heart and soul of every liberal out there, it's hard to imagine you're a former blogger instead of a political strategist for the Republicans (it seems like they could use your help).

However, what's not hard to believe is that you're just putting words into peoples' mouths and using generalizations to classify a certain group of people because that's a lot easier than trying to find a positive solution to the political issues you routinely comment on.

Best o' luck Sam, I hope you find a constructive way to air out your political views.

G5,

Your first sentence prompted hiccups. I recognize the jest in words.

Institutions do protect as long as people are agents within them. That agency results in inquiry, change, improved conditions, a questioning of the status quo. Social justice evolves out of our individual and collective participation and questioning of institutions. You're right to point out, as Foucault has in the past, that people become de-centered and invisible under the institutional gaze, but the United States is a place where we have laws and a system of courts and a population that constantly revisits its institutions. Sometimes we don't do that quickly enough, i.e., as a country we didn't really question collectively the war in Iraq until more recently, but when we do, we take action. The latest presidential election is such an action.

You give me hope, G5, when you say that the laws should be changed regarding the complicated and complex immigration issues we face. I agree with you. You're calling for reasonable discourse and are questioning the current laws given that they don't make sense in light of the hard working people from other countries who work alongside citizens of this country and help stabilize our economy even when they don't have the appropriate paper work. It delights me to no end that you see that there must be change for the better.

I think people hyphenate for different reasons. I wouldn't argue that people shouldn't/can't do that in this country. Other countries don't allow for hyphenated identities and are "disappeared" for that. (Think of the Dirty Wars in South America in the early-to-mid 1980s.) I think that there has always been a deep collective shame about what happened to people of Japanese ancestry during the WWII era. There's a wonderful book called Dear Miss Breed: True Stories of The Japanese American Incarceration During WWWII and of a Librarian Who Made a Difference that you you ought to read on this topic. Maybe what IS American is to be able to articulate one's cultural or ethnic or gender or any other affiliation in relative peace. Again, we do depend on the institutions (as imperfect and problematic as they are) we erect to accomplish our goals.

One last point in response to your post: Ayn Rand was a powerful writer, one who gave generations of readers pause. She's made us question and think about the primacy of the individual in relation to the power and good of the collective society. I think it's smart that you point that out in your quote. However, that quote prompts questions rather than answers or solutions. In other words, I come away with more questions rather than answers when I read Rand. I think you should do the same.

Thank you for the compliment Mccookreader...I spent a little time on that, but it was fun to write. And yes, I am sure I give the impression that Sam gets under my skin, but even when I am most provocative, I still have a smile on my face when push send, and sometimes I am laughing like a fool.

To answer your question (which I don't think is ignorant at all), my father was a native Spanish speaker but knew English, and my mother spoke English and Spanish, so I was lucky because in a way I really had one enormous 1st language.

Wow, that was great satire Guillermo.

But at the same time, I feel you let Sam get under your skin too much. I hope you didn't spend too much time and energy on this.

But again, that was well written sir.

This is going to sound very ignorant but onward I trudge, I believe you stated that you are from Spain, is English your 2nd language.

If so I am impressed. I comprehend spanish pretty well, but am not fluent. And i am in the process of teaching myself portuguese and french. But I know, that I could not piece together something filled with sarcasm and wit in spanish.

Well done

In a mystical and far away place called Imerica, a bold, valiant, and courageous, but aging knight named Sham wandered across his kingdom, crisscrossing the expansive countryside in search of adventure, but could find none. Complacency had Sham in her unforgivable clutches, for Sham had the blood of a long and proud lineage of warriors in him, but he was too old to go off and fight, and yet he yearned for the old days oft regaled by his grandfather of civil conflict between kingly rivals, as these often provided even the most seasoned of veterans a chance to experience glory one last time.

Sham was raised far from a formal education, unlike the king and those within the king's inner circle, but he had a higher faith in his father and grandfather's wisdom, and in the Christian God. Despite Sham's lack of formal education, he fancied himself a moderately effective leader, mostly because his belief in the old value system was so strong that when he spoke, people believed what he said. But even still, Sham felt his usefulness waning.

You see, a long time ago, before Sham was even born, his father's father had sworn allegiance to a line of proud and noble kings, and a part of this oath was that his progeny would always be taught to serve the kind of leadership these great kings stood for. But somehow, the values and principles of these great kings were diluted as they were passed down over the generations, until it seemed they were nothing more than words.

So, on the one hand Sham had this sacred familial oath to uphold, but secretly, he blamed the current king and the king's advisers for many things, for he knew in his heart that the king was not virtuous or courageous or even honorable. In fact, Sham knew that the king, and all those around him getting fat and rich off of his selective benevolence, was shameful and wrong, but because of the oath and his knightly upbringing, he could not bring himself to speak against the king.

As the public began noticing the king's greed and malpractice, Sham drew further and further away from the pleading cries of his fellow countrymen--until all he was left with was his lonely traveling. Torn between his oath to the king and to the people he knew were right about the expanding Monarchical corruption, Sham fell further and further into seclusion.

One day, while Sham was away, contemplating the direction of his beloved kingdom, the people revolted! In a bloodless coup, the corrupt king was disposed and exile was imposed, and the people chose from among them a man, who despite his meager upbringing and foreign appearance, appeared to them to have their best interests at heart.

Sam received word of this coup and made haste in his travels to return home at once...expecting to find the country in turmoil and the kingdom in ruin. He entered into his kingdom with sword drawn and soul prepared for the ever-after, but rather than discord and violence, he found the once saddened and roughshod people speaking of hope and change. He flew into a valiant rant of honor and death, morals and history, but Sham's old eloquence didn't have the same effect anymore. Over the first few months of the new rule, Sham tried publicly rallying support to return to the old ways. When that failed, he tried to gain support to undermine and even talked of overthrowing the new king. But the people were cautiously content with their decision, and were optimistic for the first time in a long time about the kingdom's future.

Sham, was stumped. He wanted to uphold his oath and honor, and dispose what he thought was a false king, but the people seemed happy. He decided to make the long voyage across the oceans to consult the very wise and experienced oracle in a country called Plain. After a grueling journey, Sham finally found the oracle and asked, "I am lost. I know that my father and grandfather would fight this tyranny, and thus I should too, but the people seem to welcome this change. What should I do?" The oracle, being the wisest and most objective source of truth in the known world, revealed to Sham, that his troubles stemmed from reluctance and rigidity. The oracle told him that he was merely defending an idea, in fact, the ghost of an idea, that no longer held the same meaning to the people of his kingdom. The oracle said to Sham, "you have ample faith in your father, and your grandfather, in your knightly code, and in your God, but you have none in your countrymen. Your allegiance is not to an idea or a person, but to the shared prosperity of all the people of your kingdom."

Sham did not like this news. He wasn't even sure he wanted to return to Imerica if his people were going to choose this new direction over the old way. But somewhere on his journey back across the ocean he realized that the oracle was right....what made the kingdom great was never an idea, or any one kind of king versus another, but rather it was the people that had always made the kingdom so great. As he realized this he understood that the kingdom could not go back to the way it was when his grandfather fought in it's defense. But that night on the ship, a dream came to Sham, a dream that sealed his decision to follow the will of the people, despite his own ideology....in his dream, Sham--with his deep foundations in morality, honor, and knightly duty as strong and stringent as ever--helped guide and construct, and thus ultimately shared and reveled in this new vision of Imerica, one in which all people were able to take a measure of satisfaction, a measure of pride, that together they had helped create a more perfect union.

very, very good, Sam. Glad you're not going away with your tail between your legs. Maybe you should run for office.