SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: JohnM who wrote (11028)10/6/2003 5:15:18 PM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 793790
 
I doubt it but if you have some data, I would love to look at it

I have posted that data before on California. Did it from memory this time. Will do so again the next time it comes up on the Radar.

But the hours and days of actual schooltime are where the system can get an easy fix. The Union is after infinite pay for zero work, like all of them, and has really reduced the time the teachers spend in class with the kids. Again, you will get the exact numbers when I find them. You have to break the Union to fix this, however. They will never agree to going back to their old work schedule on their own.



To: JohnM who wrote (11028)10/6/2003 5:20:33 PM
From: DavesM  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 793790
 
Yes, I also have read that CA now has the highest
paid teachers in the country.

I believe CA is currently spending around $8500 per student k-12.



To: JohnM who wrote (11028)10/6/2003 7:12:14 PM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793790
 
The "Times" reviews an author you would enjoy. They will cover Moore, but they have "spiked" Miniter's book. Shame on them.
________________________________________________

BOOKS OF THE TIMES | 'DUDE, WHERE'S MY COUNTRY?'
Man With a Mission: Regime Change
By JANET MASLIN

In his latest book, Michael Moore reveals the identity of his favorite political candidate: someone who bracingly advocates "a free country, a safe country, a peaceful country that genuinely shares its riches with the less fortunate around the world, a country that believes in everyone getting a fair shake, and where fear is seen as the only thing we need to fear." Oh, wait a minute — he's talking about himself.

When "we, the people" enters the vocabulary of someone who likes to give marching orders, watch out. Our self-appointed spokesman may have an agenda of his own. At the end of "Bowling for Columbine," Mr. Moore almost ruined an otherwise terrific documentary by grandstanding with Charlton Heston and a photograph of a dead child. As someone with a penchant for demagoguery, someone who thinks that the present political structure needs "to be brought down and removed and replaced with a whole new system that we control," Mr. Moore plays to the camera even when he's doing it on the page.

Mr. Moore's previous book, "Stupid White Men," was such a hit that it was last year's best-selling nonfiction book. It was in its 52nd printing when he completed the very timely "Dude, Where's My Country?," a book eager to mention its author's accomplishments. Mr. Moore's antiwar outcry at last year's Academy Awards presentation is also immortalized, supposedly mentioned to him by a great-granddaughter named Anne Coulter Moore: "Mom said you were once famous for a few minutes for yelling about something during one of the oil wars. Now all we have is this old photo of you with your mouth open and pointing at something." That sounds about right.

"Dude, Where's My Country?" includes one chapter in which Mr. Moore adopts the voice of God — only playfully, of course. In another chapter he invites you, the reader, to join what he calls Mike's Militia. And then he gives out instructions, "as your commander in chief." The smart, subversive sense of humor that brings one million visitors a day (another number trumpeted here) to Mr. Moore's Web site (where they can relive his speeches and take more of his instructions) is seriously strained by the burden of so much self-promotion.

When "Stupid White Men" appeared, its brand of name-calling was more of a novelty on the best-seller list. Now it is luxuriantly in flower. Mr. Moore will no doubt share a readership with Al Franken's "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them" (which is funnier), Molly Ivins and Lou Dubose's "Bushwhacked" (which is better informed) and Joe Conason's "Big Lies" (also better informed), if not with Bill O'Reilly's "Who's Looking Out for You?" (politically opposite, but no less self-serving). But Mr. Moore, through real conviction along with showboating personality, does make himself the most galvanizing and accessible of the lot.

With any such book, you — or "the American people," as Mr. Moore repeatedly speechifies it — can expect a certain amount of over-the-top invective. As he draws on earlier books, notably Robert Baer's "Sleeping With the Devil," to identify connections between the Bush family and Saudi Arabian royalty, Mr. Moore exhorts: "George, is this good for our national security, our homeland security? Who is it good for? You? Pops?"

But at the same time Mr. Moore is rounding off sums of Saudi money to the nearest trillion, he is being more precise in other areas. For instance, he identifies such members of the Coalition of the Willing in Iraq as Palau, a group of North Pacific islands, with a population smaller than the audience at many rock concerts. Palau has "yummy tapioca and succulent coconut but, unfortunately, no troops."

This isn't new information, but it is deployed effectively here. So is a demonstration of how unreadable the text of the U.S.A. Patriot Act is, and the fact that the Internal Revenue Service has a specific form for tax refunds of $1 million or more. (It is reprinted here.) And so is Mr. Moore's digging into underpublicized news events like a Taliban visit to Texas, for oil-related reasons, in 1997. He wonders why 20-year-old video images of Donald Rumsfeld embracing Saddam Hussein have been broadcast only by Oprah Winfrey. She, incidentally, is his draft pick for president in 2004 — though he also sees Wesley Clark "or any one of the Dixie Chicks" as possibilities.

"Dude, Where's My Country?" is much sharper about election strategy than it is about uncovering the Bush administration's transgressions. One chapter here, entitled "Bush Removal and Other Spring Cleaning Chores," presents ways for Mike's Militia to get out the vote. ("We've got the people on our side.") However outnumbered the left may feel ("go crawl into that phone booth with the Noam Chomsky fan club, you miserable loser!"), Mr. Moore devotes a chapter to arguing that American voters are more liberal than they know.

In "How to Talk to Your Conservative Brother-in-Law," Mr. Moore has some specific hints. He recommends agreeing that men and women are different, that animals don't have rights, that granola is fattening and that a little sunlight is actually good for your health. "We have a namby-pamby way of saying things," he writes, along with "a hoity-toity view of religion." He asks readers to recognize that "this arrogance is a big reason the lower classes will always side with the Republicans."

Mr. Moore has marshaled all of his impassioned, populist bluster to effecting that change. That makes "Dude, Where's My Country?" a bumper sticker that doubles as a book.

nytimes.com



To: JohnM who wrote (11028)10/6/2003 7:36:25 PM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 793790
 
How do you get an academic to blog?

At the BloggerCon Blogging and the Law panel yesterday, someone asked: How do you get an academic to blog? I'll set aside the "Why would you want to get an academic to blog?" question, and instead answer the one that was asked: Get him to start reading other profbloggers. Find a couple of blogs that you think he'd like, and pitch them to him. If he starts reading them, and gets hooked, then one or more of the following will happen:
He'll think "Hey, I can do that."

He'll think "Wow, that guy seems to be having fun blogging -- and he's getting his ideas out to [hundreds / thousands / tens of thousands of readers] while my articles are being read by the usual 17 readers that the typical scholarly article has."

He'll start sending the blogger messages that he hopes the blogger will post. The blogger will post some, and the mark -- er, the person you're trying to persuade to blog -- will be happy. But at some point, the blogger may also say, out of a mixture of respect and exasperation, "Say, maybe you should get your own blog." So the mark is hooked on the possibility of getting his stuff published, but his supplier has cut him off. Next stop: Growing your own.
This won't work for most professors, who quite reasonably conclude they have better things to do. But I think it's the only thing that can work, and I'll bet that most profbloggers got started more or less this way.
volokh.com



To: JohnM who wrote (11028)10/6/2003 7:40:54 PM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 793790
 
"I firmly believe we aren't capable of debating the deeper issues that Rush alluded to in his two- or three-sentence comment." - Translation: We can't handle the truth.
__________________________________

“No Big Deal”
Americans want to see people succeed.

By Jennifer Graham

A couple of years ago, the husband and I were eating out — something you don't do often with four kids under 10 — when he lowered his voice and gestured for me to look at the next table.

I did so, expecting to find something peculiar, such as Karl Rove conspiring with Elvis.

What I saw: A young family of five — father, mother, three young children, well-dressed, well-behaved, enjoying their night out, too. Except for the well-behaved children — mythical creatures with which we have no personal experience with — the family was unremarkable.

But they were black. And my husband whispered that in a nation where 70 percent of black children are born into homes without fathers, it was great to see a picture-perfect black family dining together. "I almost want to go give the guy a high five," he said, somewhat sheepishly.

He didn't, of course. When we left, we nodded, smiled at the children and promptly forgot the exchange...in which both of us unconsciously revealed that — horrors! — we are very desirous that black Americans do well.

It's true. We desire Condoleezza Rice to do well! We desire Colin Powell to do well! We desire Clarence Thomas to do well! We desire practically every black American — with the possible exception of O.J. — to do well!

So sue us.

With all due respect to Rush Limbaugh — who is not a bigot and said nothing racist on ESPN — what's lost in the uproar is the truth of the offending statement — and the beauty contained therein.

When Limbaugh said, "The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well," he meant to insult not black athletes, but the liberal media, which he loathes. The liberal media — particularly the variety that covers football in Philadelphia — were obligingly insulted. They bit back, lethally. And they spent the week gloating.

"Limbaugh was bound to say something dumb. He was hired to say something dumb," wrote Gary Shelton at the St. Petersburg Times. "His statements were flat-out wrong. Not morally wrong. Factually wrong," opined Mitch Albom at the Detroit Free Press.

No, guys, you're wrong. In your haste to perform your triumphant end-zone boogie, you are so missing the point.

What we have here is a failure to communicate among people who ought to know better: the communicators. A caller to Limbaugh's show Friday correctly summarized the problem: The core issue here could not be confined to a sound bite, and Americans are not broadly possessed of the mental dexterity that this debate requires.

As a newspaper editor in Philadelphia wrote me this week, "I firmly believe we aren't capable of debating the deeper issues that Rush alluded to in his two- or three-sentence comment."

Translation: We can't handle the truth.

Truth is, we live in a nation where, despite the rantings of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, most white people — not just the media, but regular folks eating side-by-side at Applebee's — want black people to succeed.

This is a good thing even when it is the deeply felt longing of the dastardly liberal media (sorry, Rush). The people on Rosa Park's bus did not want her to succeed. Today, with few exceptions, they would. This is progress. But the only writer I've seen noting this is Mark Madden, who hosts a sports talk show and writes a column for the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

Says Madden, in what may be the best writing on the most-overwritten topic of last week: "....There is undoubtedly a societal push to see blacks get and succeed in NFL jobs they don't usually have, namely quarterback and head coach. Limbaugh seemed to imply there's something wrong with that. There isn't, a as long as those blacks who get said jobs are qualified."

He goes on: "But that was just Limbaugh being Limbaugh. He wasn't being hateful....What Limbaugh said was no big deal."

No big deal. Buried in this statement, rife with irony, is the truth: America does want to see blacks succeed. America wants to see Hispanics succeed. America wants to see Asians and Indians and Iraqis succeed. America — God bless her — even wants to see white males succeed. That's who we are. That's our core. May it always be no big deal.

— Jennifer Graham is a freelance journalist who lives in Richmond, Virginia.
nationalreview.com