Reflections on 9-11
Last Thursday I was asked if I would share something in chapel, Friday about 9-11 since the plans for the day fell through. That night I pulled out what I had written ten years ago when I was asked to share and added some thoughts. This is what I shared, more or less.
Ten years ago, on a Tuesday morning the teachers gathered in my room for an in-service dealing with child abuse. When I was getting a cup of coffee, another teacher asked if I had heard about a plane crashing into one of the World Trade Towers. I hadn’t but when we got to my room, we turned on the television. Instead of watching the video for our in-service we spent most of the morning watching the building burn, the second jet crash into the other tower, and then both buildings collapse.
No one knew what was happening or why. There were reports that other jets had been hijacked and were headed towards Washington DC, Chicago or other cities. All planes were told to land immediately, planes arriving from overseas landed instead in Canada, Mexico, or they risked being shot down by the US military.
The next question was, what do we do with the students when they arrive? It was decided to meet in the chapel, now the library and to tell students what had happened, read some scripture and have a prayer. Some came already knowing, while others knew nothing. For some the primary concern was, would the soccer game go on as scheduled. The game was canceled to the dismay of some of my players who were looking forward to the long bus ride to Ft Madison.
I’m not sure what happened in other classrooms, but in mine, we spent much of the time watching the television coverage. I did not have a computer in my room so watching things over the internet was not an option. Students wanted to know why someone would attack the U.S., and some quickly realized that our country and their lives would be changing. Someone got the bright idea that I should talk about what happened in chapel so I spent the weekend reading news articles and thinking about what to say.
In my talk, I tried to answer four questions a lot of students were asking. They were:
Question #1 Why do so many people and countries hate us (the United States) and want to harm us?
Question #2 Where do we find safety and security?
Question #3 How should Christians, especially those of us who claim nonresistance, respond to the attack?
Question/ Thought #4 What is our place as Christians in American society?
Looking back at what I wrote I think my answers made sense, but I think it is still important for us to think about these questions. What I wrote ten years ago is in italics since I couldn't figure out how to do it in a different font. Or you can read the previous post if you are so inclined.
Question 1 –Why would people want to attack the US?
We are the biggest most powerful country in the world. Our country has done some great and wonderful things, but at times our country has acted arrogantly and selfishly. In the last ten years I have had the privilege of traveling to China, Israel/Palestine, and Poland. In every country I was told the same thing, “We love Americans, but we don’t care so much for your government.” Can I distinguish between individuals and the actions of their governments?
Question 2. Where will we find our safety and security?
I wrote, Will it be in adding millions to the budgets of the FBI, CIA and the military? Will it be as the article titled“ Shaken Americans take comfort in guns.” Where a gun dealer is quoted, “People in Peoria don’t have to go out and buy a handgun to protect themselves from a stolen 747, but people are afraid and they go out and look for something that will make them feel better. Or will we choose to remember the Psalm, “God is our shelter and strength, always ready to help in times of trouble. So will we not be afraid even if the earth is shaken and mountains fall into the ocean depths. Even if the seas roar and rage and the hills are shaken be the violence.” Psalm 46 Can we say with David? “Some trust in their war chariots and others in their horses, but we trust in the power of the Lord our God” Psalm 20:7 Today will we put our trust in guns, missile defense systems, new security measures, or can we rest secure in the arms of God?
According to some estimates, since 2011 our country has spent at least 7.6 trillion on “security” costs. Because of secrecy and the nature of some of the anti-terrorist work, according to a recent Frontline report we may never know how much has been spent.
Since 2000 “...the Pentagon’s annual “Base” budget (not including war costs or the nuclear weapons activities of the Department of Energy) from FY 2000 to FY 2011 has risen 235.6 Billion.”
http://costofwar.com/en/publications/2011/ten-years-after-911/top-ten-security-spending-numbers-you-need-know/
These numbers provide evidence of the choice made by our government. To use the words of David in Psalm 20, we put our trust in war chariots and horses, rather than in the power of the Lord our God.
Some of you were likely annoyed by my last comment, which brings us to the third question I asked.
Question #3 How should Christians, especially those of us who claim nonresistance, respond to the attack?
In response to 911 many Christians pledged their support to President Bush. A prayer service was held at the National Cathedral where prayers were offered for the victims, for our leaders and for God’s guidance. It wasn’t long before President Bush talked of a crusade to rid the world of bin Laden and his evil followers
Calvin Thomas, a professed born-again Christian in an article titled, “If this terrorism act is war, then lets start acting like it,” wrote: “Evil exists. It must be opposed. It is self-defense to kill people intent on killing you. If this is war…lets start acting like it and tell America’s enemies that if they are so intent on seeing their God, we’ll help them get there. As for us, we intend to die of natural causes.”…“Those humanistic, ‘can’t we all get along, profiling potential terrorists is racism, we’re all God’s children, kumbaya, all we are saying is give peace a chance’ moral equivalency equivocators will soon be back. …. They should be ignored. …. We know the enemy. We know where they live. Let’s go get them before they get any more of us, and let the moralizers sort it all out later.”
We have had to sort it out, whether or not we were “moralizers”
2,977 people died during the attacks against the United States on 9-11. Since going to war there have been 6,026 U.S. fatalities in Iraq and Afghanistan. Civilian casualties are more difficult to come by. Remember Rumsfeld’s line, “We don’t do body counts.” Conservative estimates suggest a minimum of 100,000 Iraqi civilians have died while others suggest it is over 900,000. In Afghanistan nearly 20,000 civilians have been killed.
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/ see also http://www.unknownnews.org/casualties.html
Our country has had to debate whether “enhanced interrogation techniques” are torture. We cringe at the name “Abu Ghraib” and the images it brings to mind. It is easy to find stories about the struggles faced by returning veterans and the demons they face as they deal with their combat experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan.
I remember the words of Jesus, “love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.” Or the words of Paul in Romans 12, and I wonder, am I one of Cal Thomas’s “We’re all God’s children, kumbayah, moral equivocators? Am I being naïve if I reject Thomas’s call to violence and revenge?
Now ten years later I wonder if we are naive if we assume we can engage in war, violence and torture without consequences.
Question/ Thought #4 What is our place as Christians in American society?
In the aftermath of 9-11, 93% of Americans supported taking military action and 77% supported military action even if it meant innocent civilians would be killed. 71 % said they would be willing to give up some personal liberties and privacy. Flags were sold by the millions, newspapers and magazines printed paper versions so everyone could put them in the window of their house or display them in their car.
“As patriotism is mixed with prayer,” as our nation gets ready for war, is their room for the 7% of us who oppose using a military response?
As a “people of peace” in a country preparing for war, how are we to act? Especially if it becomes a war without borders fought in a variety of ways. Will we choose to place flags supplied by our local newspapers in the windows of our cars and homes? Will we keep our voices low and our opinions silent to avoid detection and perhaps persecution?
Am I willing to be treated as an alien in my own land?
We are faced with a choice, Will we choose to join our country as it draws its sword, beginning its “crusade to wipe out the people who would strike at our freedoms….” Or will we choose instead to believe and follow Jesus the Prince of Peace.
Methodist Bishop Will Willimon recently said in the evangelical magazine Christianity Today: “American Christians may look back upon our response to 9/11 as our greatest Christological defeat … when our people felt vulnerable, they reached for the flag instead of the cross.”
http://blog.sojo.net/2011/09/08/10-years-after-911-the-good-and-the-bad/
The last ten years have not always been easy ones. Some families decided not to have their children return to IMS, fans of visiting teams were sometimes vocal about the absence of a flag and the national anthem, the state athletic associations punished our sports teams. During this time some relationships were broken, yet others were developed and maintained.
In the end, if we are to be faithful we have a choice to make. Ten years ago I asked,
Will we choose to join our country as it draws its sword, beginning its “crusade
to wipe out the people who would strike at our freedoms….” Or will we choose instead to believe and follow Jesus the Prince of Peace?
Today, ten years later I am going to tell you my answer to that question. If we are to be the people of God, we need to choose to believe and follow Jesus, the Prince of Peace. In the words of the Methodist bishop, we need to reach for the cross instead of the flag. We need to follow Jesus in spite of the costs if we are to be a people of faith.
Sunday, September 11, 2011
Friday, September 09, 2011
9/11 reflection from 2001
I was asked to share some reflections about 9/11 today in chapel. I pulled out what I shared ten years ago. Since it was before blogs, or at least before I was aware of blogs, I thought I would put it on here. I had a hard time finding a digital copy of it since I had apparently saved it on one of those 31/2 in floppy discs. I'll put up my ten year update later.
Chapel talk Sept 17, 2001
Tuesday, September 11, 2001 it is said has changed America and Americans forever. President Bush described the terrorist attacks as “acts of war” and later talked about the first war of the new century.Our newspapers have shown headlines saying, “We’re at War,” “War Looms” and “The New Battlefield.”
I was asked to talk about how we might respond to the events of last week. I’m not sure why I agreed to do this. As a historian it seems as if I need more time,
say a year at least, to formulate a satisfactory answer but all I had was the weekend. I would have liked time to reread Niehbuhrs’ thoughts on Christian realism, to look at Bonhoeffer’s struggle to remain a faithful Christian in Nazi Germany, and to look at John Howard Yoder’s writings or those of Menno Simons on Christian citizenship. So what follows are some random thoughts and questions I have been asked this past week. I hope you find them to be helpful in your thinking.
Question #1 Why do so many people and countries hate us and want to harm us?
There are numerous reasons why some groups and some countries do not like us and so these answers are on the simplistic side. First remember, we are the wealthiest, most powerful nation on earth. Just being in that position makes us a target. Using a sports analogy, who doesn’t want to knock off the number one ranked team? When teams like the Yankee’s and Braves play who do you cheer for? It is difficult for me to be excited because I know one of them is going to win.
Second, some of our policies, while perhaps good for us, are not so good for other countries. Why do we have troops stationed in Saudia Arabia? Is it to protect the Saudi’s, or is it to keep them in line and to assure low oil prices? It doesn’t really matter what our reasons are- as long as many middle easterners perceive it as the latter. When we criticize Arab countries for cracking down on political dissent, but are seen as giving a blank check, along with weapons, to Israel while it aims missile’s at Palestinian residents and uses assassination as a way of silencing dissent, our country appears to be hypocritical and it makes many people angry.
There is not time to look more closely at this but I would encourage you to read James 4:1-2.
Question #2 Where do we find safety and security?
When I was little I often said this prayer as I went to bed. “Now I lay me down to sleep, I pray the Lord my soul to keep. If I should die before I wake, I pray the Lord my soul to take.” When I said the words, “If I should die…” I did not see myself dying peacefully in my sleep. Instead I saw myself being blown to bits as the mushroom cloud of an atomic blast rose above my obliterated house.
In the 60’s and 70’s, many of us went to bed knowing thousands of nuclear missiles’ were aimed at our country, while our country aimed even more at our enemies. Our country sought security in a policy referred to as MAD or Mutual Assured Destruction. Our countries security rested in the idea that if the Soviets launched an attack, we could launch a counter attack and destroy them several times over. For many it was a fearful time.
Over the course of history countries have sought security in their weapons and strategies. The Roman legions conquered much of their known world, the Spanish king placed his faith in his Invincible Armada, a vast fleet of the largest, most powerful
ships of the 16th century, Napoleon created the largest army in Europe and conquered the continent.
New weapons, new strategies and technology have all been sought after as countries tried to expand their borders, their influence and preserve their way of
life, but all of these and many others have come and gone.
Where will we find our safety and security? Will it be in adding millions to the budgets of the FBI, CIA and the military? Will it be as the article titled
“Shaken Americans take comfort in guns.” Where a gun dealer is quoted, “People in Peoria don’t have to go out and buy a handgun to protect themselves from a stolen 747, but people are afraid and they go out and look for something that will make them feel better.” Or will we choose to remember the Psalm, “God is our shelter and strength, always ready to help in times of trouble. So will we not be afraid even if the earth is shaken and mountains fall into the ocean depths.
Even if the seas roar and rage and the hills are shaken be the violence.” Psalm 46
Can we say with David? “Some trust in their war chariots and others in their horses, but we trust in the power of the Lord our God” Psalm 20:7
Today will we put our trust in guns, missile defense systems, new security measures, or can we rest secure in the arms of God?
Question/Thought #3
In class this past week a student asked how I thought our country should respond to the terrorists attacks, I answered that as a nonresistant Christian I would answer one way, but that as a realist I would answer another. Something about that troubled me as the week went on. Does Jesus call me to be a realist, or does he call me to be his follower even if it doesn’t make sense to the world?
As the week went on I read articles by men who have described themselves as Christians and I wondered some more. Calvin Thomas, a professed born-again Christian
in an article titled, “If this terrorism act is war, then lets start acting like it,” wrote: “Evil exists. It must be opposed. It is self-defense to kill people intent on killing you. If this is war…lets start acting like it and tell America’s enemies that if they are so intent on seeing their God, we’ll help them get there. As for us, we
intend to die of natural causes.” “Those humanistic, ‘can’t we all get along,
profiling potential terrorists is racism, we’re all God’s children, kumbaya, all we are saying is give peace a chance’ moral equivalency equivocators will soon be back. …. They should be ignored. …. We know the enemy. We know where they live. Lets go get them before they get any more of us, and let the moralizers sort it all out later.”
But then I remember the words of Jesus, “love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.” Or the words of Paul in Romans 12, and I wonder, am I one of
Cal Thomas’s “We’re all God’s children, kumbayah, moral equivocators? Am I being naïve if I reject Thomas’s call to violence and revenge?
Question/ Thought #4 what is our place in American
society?
Saturday’s Press Citizen reported the results of anABC poll showing that 93% of Americans supported taking military action, and 77% supported military action even if it meant innocent civilians would be killed. 91% approve of the way Bush has responded so far and 71% said they would be willing to give up some personal liberties and privacy. A Philadelphia Inquirer reporter wrote, “The attack on America has triggered a rare moment of consensus in governing circles. Democrats and
Republicans, without bothering to check the opinion polls, are invoking war … as the ominous end game of US policy-violence without mercy, in the service of national retribution.”
In a related example one flag company reported receiving 2 million requests for flags as Americans in the words of a CNN anchor said, … “It seems as if when
Americans don’t know where to turn, they turn to the flag.”
“As patriotism is mixed with prayer,” as our nation gets ready for war, is their room for the 7% of us who oppose using a military response?
During times of war the United States has shown a strong tendency to restrict personal freedom and to squelch dissent. During World War I some Mennonites
spent time in prison rather than to wear a military uniform. During World War II Japanese-Americans were interned in prison camps, and many of German descent gave up the German language in order to avoid harassment from their neighbors.
As a “people of peace” in a country preparing for war, how are we to act? Especially if it becomes a war without borders fought in a variety of ways. Will we choose to place flags supplied by our local newspapers in the windows of our cars and homes?
Will we keep our voices low and our opinions silent to avoid detection and perhaps persecution? Am I willing to be treated as an alien in my own land?
We are faced with a choice, Will we choose to join our country as it draws it sword, beginning its “crusade to wipe out the people who would strike at our freedoms….” Or will we choose instead to believe and follow Jesus the Prince of Peace?
M.Miller 9/17/2011
Chapel talk Sept 17, 2001
Tuesday, September 11, 2001 it is said has changed America and Americans forever. President Bush described the terrorist attacks as “acts of war” and later talked about the first war of the new century.Our newspapers have shown headlines saying, “We’re at War,” “War Looms” and “The New Battlefield.”
I was asked to talk about how we might respond to the events of last week. I’m not sure why I agreed to do this. As a historian it seems as if I need more time,
say a year at least, to formulate a satisfactory answer but all I had was the weekend. I would have liked time to reread Niehbuhrs’ thoughts on Christian realism, to look at Bonhoeffer’s struggle to remain a faithful Christian in Nazi Germany, and to look at John Howard Yoder’s writings or those of Menno Simons on Christian citizenship. So what follows are some random thoughts and questions I have been asked this past week. I hope you find them to be helpful in your thinking.
Question #1 Why do so many people and countries hate us and want to harm us?
There are numerous reasons why some groups and some countries do not like us and so these answers are on the simplistic side. First remember, we are the wealthiest, most powerful nation on earth. Just being in that position makes us a target. Using a sports analogy, who doesn’t want to knock off the number one ranked team? When teams like the Yankee’s and Braves play who do you cheer for? It is difficult for me to be excited because I know one of them is going to win.
Second, some of our policies, while perhaps good for us, are not so good for other countries. Why do we have troops stationed in Saudia Arabia? Is it to protect the Saudi’s, or is it to keep them in line and to assure low oil prices? It doesn’t really matter what our reasons are- as long as many middle easterners perceive it as the latter. When we criticize Arab countries for cracking down on political dissent, but are seen as giving a blank check, along with weapons, to Israel while it aims missile’s at Palestinian residents and uses assassination as a way of silencing dissent, our country appears to be hypocritical and it makes many people angry.
There is not time to look more closely at this but I would encourage you to read James 4:1-2.
Question #2 Where do we find safety and security?
When I was little I often said this prayer as I went to bed. “Now I lay me down to sleep, I pray the Lord my soul to keep. If I should die before I wake, I pray the Lord my soul to take.” When I said the words, “If I should die…” I did not see myself dying peacefully in my sleep. Instead I saw myself being blown to bits as the mushroom cloud of an atomic blast rose above my obliterated house.
In the 60’s and 70’s, many of us went to bed knowing thousands of nuclear missiles’ were aimed at our country, while our country aimed even more at our enemies. Our country sought security in a policy referred to as MAD or Mutual Assured Destruction. Our countries security rested in the idea that if the Soviets launched an attack, we could launch a counter attack and destroy them several times over. For many it was a fearful time.
Over the course of history countries have sought security in their weapons and strategies. The Roman legions conquered much of their known world, the Spanish king placed his faith in his Invincible Armada, a vast fleet of the largest, most powerful
ships of the 16th century, Napoleon created the largest army in Europe and conquered the continent.
New weapons, new strategies and technology have all been sought after as countries tried to expand their borders, their influence and preserve their way of
life, but all of these and many others have come and gone.
Where will we find our safety and security? Will it be in adding millions to the budgets of the FBI, CIA and the military? Will it be as the article titled
“Shaken Americans take comfort in guns.” Where a gun dealer is quoted, “People in Peoria don’t have to go out and buy a handgun to protect themselves from a stolen 747, but people are afraid and they go out and look for something that will make them feel better.” Or will we choose to remember the Psalm, “God is our shelter and strength, always ready to help in times of trouble. So will we not be afraid even if the earth is shaken and mountains fall into the ocean depths.
Even if the seas roar and rage and the hills are shaken be the violence.” Psalm 46
Can we say with David? “Some trust in their war chariots and others in their horses, but we trust in the power of the Lord our God” Psalm 20:7
Today will we put our trust in guns, missile defense systems, new security measures, or can we rest secure in the arms of God?
Question/Thought #3
In class this past week a student asked how I thought our country should respond to the terrorists attacks, I answered that as a nonresistant Christian I would answer one way, but that as a realist I would answer another. Something about that troubled me as the week went on. Does Jesus call me to be a realist, or does he call me to be his follower even if it doesn’t make sense to the world?
As the week went on I read articles by men who have described themselves as Christians and I wondered some more. Calvin Thomas, a professed born-again Christian
in an article titled, “If this terrorism act is war, then lets start acting like it,” wrote: “Evil exists. It must be opposed. It is self-defense to kill people intent on killing you. If this is war…lets start acting like it and tell America’s enemies that if they are so intent on seeing their God, we’ll help them get there. As for us, we
intend to die of natural causes.” “Those humanistic, ‘can’t we all get along,
profiling potential terrorists is racism, we’re all God’s children, kumbaya, all we are saying is give peace a chance’ moral equivalency equivocators will soon be back. …. They should be ignored. …. We know the enemy. We know where they live. Lets go get them before they get any more of us, and let the moralizers sort it all out later.”
But then I remember the words of Jesus, “love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.” Or the words of Paul in Romans 12, and I wonder, am I one of
Cal Thomas’s “We’re all God’s children, kumbayah, moral equivocators? Am I being naïve if I reject Thomas’s call to violence and revenge?
Question/ Thought #4 what is our place in American
society?
Saturday’s Press Citizen reported the results of anABC poll showing that 93% of Americans supported taking military action, and 77% supported military action even if it meant innocent civilians would be killed. 91% approve of the way Bush has responded so far and 71% said they would be willing to give up some personal liberties and privacy. A Philadelphia Inquirer reporter wrote, “The attack on America has triggered a rare moment of consensus in governing circles. Democrats and
Republicans, without bothering to check the opinion polls, are invoking war … as the ominous end game of US policy-violence without mercy, in the service of national retribution.”
In a related example one flag company reported receiving 2 million requests for flags as Americans in the words of a CNN anchor said, … “It seems as if when
Americans don’t know where to turn, they turn to the flag.”
“As patriotism is mixed with prayer,” as our nation gets ready for war, is their room for the 7% of us who oppose using a military response?
During times of war the United States has shown a strong tendency to restrict personal freedom and to squelch dissent. During World War I some Mennonites
spent time in prison rather than to wear a military uniform. During World War II Japanese-Americans were interned in prison camps, and many of German descent gave up the German language in order to avoid harassment from their neighbors.
As a “people of peace” in a country preparing for war, how are we to act? Especially if it becomes a war without borders fought in a variety of ways. Will we choose to place flags supplied by our local newspapers in the windows of our cars and homes?
Will we keep our voices low and our opinions silent to avoid detection and perhaps persecution? Am I willing to be treated as an alien in my own land?
We are faced with a choice, Will we choose to join our country as it draws it sword, beginning its “crusade to wipe out the people who would strike at our freedoms….” Or will we choose instead to believe and follow Jesus the Prince of Peace?
M.Miller 9/17/2011
Monday, August 22, 2011
"Government Schools"
I hate to pick on Tim Pawlenty since he has dropped out of the presidential race but something he said when he was in the area has been rumbling around in my head. When someone asked him about education he refused to use the term, "public education" or "public school" and instead insisted on using the term "government school." He said "if parents want to send their child to a private school they should be given that choice, if they want to home-school, why God-bless them for that, and if they need to, we should provide the best government school possible." Former Senator Santorum has used similar terms to describe public schools.
I teach at a private, faith based school, which is struggling with enrollment issues. I suggested we borrow from Pawlenty and Santorum and start referring to the local public schools as government schools and do it with the most sinister sounding sneer we can muster. My suggestion didn't meet with a positive response and I said it in jest. But when did public schools begin to be described as "government schools," or even as "indoctrination centers?" It doesn't take long on the internet to find references to both. Some might be considered to be fringe opinions but others such as Milton Friedman, wrote for the Cato Institute in 1995 that public schools should be abolished. (http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp-023.html)The blame is generally placed on teachers and the teachers unions. Sometimes government corruption and waste is mentioned. Rarely is poverty, the lack of resources, and poor parenting mentioned. The solution most suggested is to give family vouchers and letting them choose where to go. Never mind that the amount of the voucher would generally only cover 1/3 to 1/2 of the tuition most private schools charge. In other words, I don't think it would work.
One surprising line I ran across was from Milton Friedman, the supply-side economist who won a Nobel Prize back in the 90's. It goes as follows, "If the widening of the wage differential is allowed to proceed unchecked, it threatens to create within our own country a social problem of major proportions. We shall not be willing to see a group of our population move into Third World conditions at the same time that another group of our population becomes increasingly well off. Such stratification is a recipe for social disaster." Friedman wrote this in 1995. It now seems as some folks think it would be best if the difference in wealth was encouraged, or at least they don't see it as a problem. And in that context, it seems some, including Presidential candidates, think it is time to get rid of public schools, effectively consigning many citizens to a permanent underclass.
I teach at a private, faith based school, which is struggling with enrollment issues. I suggested we borrow from Pawlenty and Santorum and start referring to the local public schools as government schools and do it with the most sinister sounding sneer we can muster. My suggestion didn't meet with a positive response and I said it in jest. But when did public schools begin to be described as "government schools," or even as "indoctrination centers?" It doesn't take long on the internet to find references to both. Some might be considered to be fringe opinions but others such as Milton Friedman, wrote for the Cato Institute in 1995 that public schools should be abolished. (http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp-023.html)The blame is generally placed on teachers and the teachers unions. Sometimes government corruption and waste is mentioned. Rarely is poverty, the lack of resources, and poor parenting mentioned. The solution most suggested is to give family vouchers and letting them choose where to go. Never mind that the amount of the voucher would generally only cover 1/3 to 1/2 of the tuition most private schools charge. In other words, I don't think it would work.
One surprising line I ran across was from Milton Friedman, the supply-side economist who won a Nobel Prize back in the 90's. It goes as follows, "If the widening of the wage differential is allowed to proceed unchecked, it threatens to create within our own country a social problem of major proportions. We shall not be willing to see a group of our population move into Third World conditions at the same time that another group of our population becomes increasingly well off. Such stratification is a recipe for social disaster." Friedman wrote this in 1995. It now seems as some folks think it would be best if the difference in wealth was encouraged, or at least they don't see it as a problem. And in that context, it seems some, including Presidential candidates, think it is time to get rid of public schools, effectively consigning many citizens to a permanent underclass.
Saturday, August 13, 2011
Iowa straw poll and political organizing
“The former Minnesota governor has a platoon of smart political operatives in his corner and is thought to have the best ground game in the state. But despite planting an early flag in Iowa and improving his performance on the stump in recent weeks, the Midwesterner remains stuck in single-digits in state polls.” CNN article
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/08/13/iowa.straw.poll/index.html
“In case I hadn’t sent this information to you, here is the specific information for our straw poll bus. I apologize for the time I’m sending this, but I sat down with my computer a few hours ago, and almost immediately fell asleep!!” excerpt from an email sent by the Pawlenty organizer at 1:30 am Saturday morning.
The Republican’s held their straw poll today in Ames to raise money. I was tempted to go, especially after the Pawlenty people called and offered me a free bus ride and a ticket (worth $30) to get into the event. But we start school Monday and I had some other things planned for the day, plus it would have ticked off the wife.
The line from the CNN article about the Pawlenty organization having “the best ground game in the state” made me chuckle. When I went to see him in Washington, there were less than 25 people present to hear him. Even Dennis Kucinich had more people than that show up to his events four years ago. At the event they asked if I wanted to go to the straw poll, to which I said “I hadn’t made up my mind yet.” This morning I got an email from one of his workers who make up “the best ground game in the state.” Frankly it was too late, but the offer of a Pawlenty t-shirt made me think twice.
Santorum was no better, with only 18 people present. That included the camera women and a newspaper reporter. I talked to his volunteer after the event who said he had driven over from Des Moines. I asked if they had anyone local and he wasn’t sure. He said one of the volunteers was originally from Keota but he was working out of Des Moines. Someone from Bachmann’s campaign called to ask if I would support her in the straw poll. I asked if she was going to be in Washington County any time soon because I would like to see her first He said, “I think she is going to be in Cedar Falls tomorrow. That should be close. Unfortunately it would be at least a two hour drive from Washington County so I told him she would have to do better.
All of these guys have made fun of President Obama and his experience as a community organizer. He certainly hasn’t been a perfect President, but at least he knew how to run a campaign. The people he had working for him locally in the last election were impressive and they made sure they knew the state well. They targeted high school government teachers and developed some creative class room activities to help students understand the caucus system. They kept it “non-partisan” but it certainly didn’t hurt that they were cute, handsome, articulate, very engaging, and they just happened to have campaign giveaways to hand out, if anybody wanted them. If Pawlenty has the best ground game in the state, I hate to imagine how bad some of the other campaigns are organized.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/08/13/iowa.straw.poll/index.html
“In case I hadn’t sent this information to you, here is the specific information for our straw poll bus. I apologize for the time I’m sending this, but I sat down with my computer a few hours ago, and almost immediately fell asleep!!” excerpt from an email sent by the Pawlenty organizer at 1:30 am Saturday morning.
The Republican’s held their straw poll today in Ames to raise money. I was tempted to go, especially after the Pawlenty people called and offered me a free bus ride and a ticket (worth $30) to get into the event. But we start school Monday and I had some other things planned for the day, plus it would have ticked off the wife.
The line from the CNN article about the Pawlenty organization having “the best ground game in the state” made me chuckle. When I went to see him in Washington, there were less than 25 people present to hear him. Even Dennis Kucinich had more people than that show up to his events four years ago. At the event they asked if I wanted to go to the straw poll, to which I said “I hadn’t made up my mind yet.” This morning I got an email from one of his workers who make up “the best ground game in the state.” Frankly it was too late, but the offer of a Pawlenty t-shirt made me think twice.
Santorum was no better, with only 18 people present. That included the camera women and a newspaper reporter. I talked to his volunteer after the event who said he had driven over from Des Moines. I asked if they had anyone local and he wasn’t sure. He said one of the volunteers was originally from Keota but he was working out of Des Moines. Someone from Bachmann’s campaign called to ask if I would support her in the straw poll. I asked if she was going to be in Washington County any time soon because I would like to see her first He said, “I think she is going to be in Cedar Falls tomorrow. That should be close. Unfortunately it would be at least a two hour drive from Washington County so I told him she would have to do better.
All of these guys have made fun of President Obama and his experience as a community organizer. He certainly hasn’t been a perfect President, but at least he knew how to run a campaign. The people he had working for him locally in the last election were impressive and they made sure they knew the state well. They targeted high school government teachers and developed some creative class room activities to help students understand the caucus system. They kept it “non-partisan” but it certainly didn’t hurt that they were cute, handsome, articulate, very engaging, and they just happened to have campaign giveaways to hand out, if anybody wanted them. If Pawlenty has the best ground game in the state, I hate to imagine how bad some of the other campaigns are organized.
Tuesday, August 02, 2011
Rick Santorum
Rick Santorum is running for President. If you don’t know this, it isn’t because he hasn’t campaigned hard enough, raised enough money, or put enough commercials on television. “It is because the liberal media doesn’t want you to know about him because I (he) has the best chance of beating Obama.” “The liberal media is ignoring him because they don’t want him to succeed.” Never mind that at an 8:00 am town hall in Washington, Iowa, whose newspaper could hardly be described as liberal, (it is hard to even describe it as a newspaper) there were only 18 people present to greet the former Senator Santorum.
Santorum entered the room at the Washington Library at 8:10. He went around the room shaking the hands of all eighteen people, asking our names, and offering the occasional “God bless you for being here.” He introduced himself and talked for the next 30 – 35 minutes before opening up for questions.
In his remarks he talked about why he decided to run for President. We got the sob story right away as he told us about his grandpa, a World War I vet who immigrated to the United States from northern Italy in 1927. He didn’t quite make it clear that his grandfather fought in the Italian army so I doubt some of the 18 folks in the audience figured out that he was not a U.S. veteran. The grandfather “came for freedom and scratched out a living, scratching out the ore in the mines of Pennsylvania.” As Santorum put it, his, “grandfather came for freedom, not government mandates.”
A lesson in American history ensued as he explained to us that at its core, “America is a moral enterprise.” He did some expository preaching on the Declaration of Independence explaining that “the pursuit of happiness” is not “licentiousness,” something he pinned on the far left and far right of both parties. In this section he sounded more and more like a preacher delivering a sermon with great conviction.
Next on the list was healthcare and the dangers of “Obamacare.” He told us that in 1776 life expectancy was 46 and that at the time of Jesus the life expectancy was 46. Instead of telling us he wants to lower life expectancy, he said that in the U.S. life expectancy doubled as “we released individual freedoms coupled with moral teachings.” In his view the healthcare bill takes away freedom and morality, leading to his conclusion that “if we don’t defeat Obama we will be the generation that gave freedom away.”
The first question was “Can Obamacare be gotten rid of?” As he answered it became clear he wasn’t going to take a lot of questions because he took 10 minutes to answer each one and he was scheduled to leave at 9:00. Santorum gave a lesson on the three branches of government and the need to control the legislative bodies, but he told us his “first promise is to get rid of Obamacare.” He then went on to talk about the need for a balanced budget amendment, plus the story of how he almost got us one but that John McCain and George W. pulled the carpet out from underneath him.
As he rambled on about cutting I raised my hand and asked if it would be necessary to cut defense spending in order to balance the budget. He asked what the main purpose of government is and quoted the preamble for me and said he would prefer not to cut defense spending. That it was really the only function the federal government should be worried about, that State’s should take care of everything else.
The next question was about his support for Israel. He told us he was the strongest supporter of Israel one could be, then moved to a criticism of current US policy in the Middle East. Here he argued that Obama has been supportive of the critics of the US (Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood) while throwing our friends, (Mubarek) under the bus.
The last question was from a middle-aged women concerned about the distortions of the liberal media. After he finished, he shook everybody’s hand again. When he got to me, he thanked me for my concern and asked what I do. I told him I was a history teacher which he seemed to like. I said that in the midst of his talking about freedom and individualism I wondered about the concept of the “public good.” He referred me to a book he had written but talked until his aid pulled him away.
He seems like a nice guy, but frankly when you read more about some of his positions he is on the scary side, at least if you have a libertarian bent. Outside of Iowa and some real conservative states, he doesn’t have a chance of winning and it doesn’t have to do with the liberal media.
Santorum entered the room at the Washington Library at 8:10. He went around the room shaking the hands of all eighteen people, asking our names, and offering the occasional “God bless you for being here.” He introduced himself and talked for the next 30 – 35 minutes before opening up for questions.
In his remarks he talked about why he decided to run for President. We got the sob story right away as he told us about his grandpa, a World War I vet who immigrated to the United States from northern Italy in 1927. He didn’t quite make it clear that his grandfather fought in the Italian army so I doubt some of the 18 folks in the audience figured out that he was not a U.S. veteran. The grandfather “came for freedom and scratched out a living, scratching out the ore in the mines of Pennsylvania.” As Santorum put it, his, “grandfather came for freedom, not government mandates.”
A lesson in American history ensued as he explained to us that at its core, “America is a moral enterprise.” He did some expository preaching on the Declaration of Independence explaining that “the pursuit of happiness” is not “licentiousness,” something he pinned on the far left and far right of both parties. In this section he sounded more and more like a preacher delivering a sermon with great conviction.
Next on the list was healthcare and the dangers of “Obamacare.” He told us that in 1776 life expectancy was 46 and that at the time of Jesus the life expectancy was 46. Instead of telling us he wants to lower life expectancy, he said that in the U.S. life expectancy doubled as “we released individual freedoms coupled with moral teachings.” In his view the healthcare bill takes away freedom and morality, leading to his conclusion that “if we don’t defeat Obama we will be the generation that gave freedom away.”
The first question was “Can Obamacare be gotten rid of?” As he answered it became clear he wasn’t going to take a lot of questions because he took 10 minutes to answer each one and he was scheduled to leave at 9:00. Santorum gave a lesson on the three branches of government and the need to control the legislative bodies, but he told us his “first promise is to get rid of Obamacare.” He then went on to talk about the need for a balanced budget amendment, plus the story of how he almost got us one but that John McCain and George W. pulled the carpet out from underneath him.
As he rambled on about cutting I raised my hand and asked if it would be necessary to cut defense spending in order to balance the budget. He asked what the main purpose of government is and quoted the preamble for me and said he would prefer not to cut defense spending. That it was really the only function the federal government should be worried about, that State’s should take care of everything else.
The next question was about his support for Israel. He told us he was the strongest supporter of Israel one could be, then moved to a criticism of current US policy in the Middle East. Here he argued that Obama has been supportive of the critics of the US (Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood) while throwing our friends, (Mubarek) under the bus.
The last question was from a middle-aged women concerned about the distortions of the liberal media. After he finished, he shook everybody’s hand again. When he got to me, he thanked me for my concern and asked what I do. I told him I was a history teacher which he seemed to like. I said that in the midst of his talking about freedom and individualism I wondered about the concept of the “public good.” He referred me to a book he had written but talked until his aid pulled him away.
He seems like a nice guy, but frankly when you read more about some of his positions he is on the scary side, at least if you have a libertarian bent. Outside of Iowa and some real conservative states, he doesn’t have a chance of winning and it doesn’t have to do with the liberal media.
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Tim Pawlenty
Tim Pawlenty
Tim Pawlenty is the first Republican presidential candidate to come to Washington County this summer. When I walked into the Washington Library there were twenty or so elderly people seated around the tables. It was clear they weren’t expecting a big crowd as one of the volunteers ran to get some more chairs. I’m 53 but other than the volunteers and Pawlenty, I was one of the youngest people in the room.
Pawlenty arrived a few minutes after 8:00 am and without any introduction he started in with a short speech. It didn’t take him long to start criticizing President Obama who he described as the most inept President since Jimmy Carter. He particularly criticized the health care bill, the stimulus bill and the mounting deficits.
Though he didn’t mention her by name he took some swipes at Michelle Bachman. He described how all the Republican candidates will talk about being pro-life, for traditional marriage, border security, strong defense and for limited government. What makes him different is that “he as done something about it.” He then went on to list some of his accomplishments as governor of Minnesota. Items he mentioned included limiting the power of public employee unions, cutting taxes, and balancing the budgets.
Then came the sob story. Child of working class parents, his mother died when he was 16, his father lost his job as a truck driver and his brothers and sisters sacrificed so that he could be the first in his family to go to college.
After some generic remarks about the importance of freedom he asked for questions. The first questioner, a guy with a long white beard and wearing overalls asked if the current situation in Minnesota’s government reflected poorly on his years as governor. Pawlenty blamed the recent shutdown on the new governor and his misguided policies. Question number two came from an old guy wearing a Marine t-shirt that didn’t quite cover his belly. He asked about “dealing with all this terrorisms.” We learned that Pawlenty was the first governor to send troops to the border when President Bush asked for them; that we need to maintain security and our defense budget. He took some jabs at Obama’s Middle Eastern policy and said, “we need to stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel.”
I asked him if he saw the growing disparity in wealth as a problem and if so, how would he fix it. He seemed to like this question. He talked about improving and growing the economy, getting government off the backs of business people, not inciting class warfare. From this he mentioned educational disparity and threw in the stat that 1/3 of high school students are dropping out. The key difference is the parents who should be given a choice of sending their children to the “government school” or to private school’s or they should be allowed to home-school, if they don’t want to use the “government school.” I assume “government school” meant public school.
Questions followed about the use of Executive Orders, an invitation to Crawfordsville (birthplace of the Republican Party), Social Security (President Obama should lead, he might use “means testing” so the wealthiest recipients might not get cost of living raises, and he argued for privatization; unemployment (put people back to work and reform welfare) and energy (drill in ANWAR, more off-shore drilling, use new methods of finding natural gas, and an emphasis on renewable’s “when they make sense.”
A lady asked him to autograph her book, and so I asked if I could ask one more question. He said yes. In answering the question about Social Security he also talked about defense spending and reiterated his strong support for Israel, including a comment that we need to defend them and he used his “shoulder to shoulder” line again. So I asked, if you were President and led the country to war against Iran to help Israel, would you raise taxes to pay for the war? He said it is a hypothetical question, but that he does not like to raise taxes. I said, “So my children would pay for it?” He went back to the hypothetical line so I said, “it seems we are involved in two of those hypothetical wars right now. He then said it was time to end and started his autographing process. I don’t think I was being overly sensitive but when I stood in line to shake his hand, before he got to me, he turned and went to the other side of the room. When I went over there, he went back to table, at which point I decided the guy is either a bit of a weasel, or he is scared of me. Neither are qualities I want in a President.
Tim Pawlenty is the first Republican presidential candidate to come to Washington County this summer. When I walked into the Washington Library there were twenty or so elderly people seated around the tables. It was clear they weren’t expecting a big crowd as one of the volunteers ran to get some more chairs. I’m 53 but other than the volunteers and Pawlenty, I was one of the youngest people in the room.
Pawlenty arrived a few minutes after 8:00 am and without any introduction he started in with a short speech. It didn’t take him long to start criticizing President Obama who he described as the most inept President since Jimmy Carter. He particularly criticized the health care bill, the stimulus bill and the mounting deficits.
Though he didn’t mention her by name he took some swipes at Michelle Bachman. He described how all the Republican candidates will talk about being pro-life, for traditional marriage, border security, strong defense and for limited government. What makes him different is that “he as done something about it.” He then went on to list some of his accomplishments as governor of Minnesota. Items he mentioned included limiting the power of public employee unions, cutting taxes, and balancing the budgets.
Then came the sob story. Child of working class parents, his mother died when he was 16, his father lost his job as a truck driver and his brothers and sisters sacrificed so that he could be the first in his family to go to college.
After some generic remarks about the importance of freedom he asked for questions. The first questioner, a guy with a long white beard and wearing overalls asked if the current situation in Minnesota’s government reflected poorly on his years as governor. Pawlenty blamed the recent shutdown on the new governor and his misguided policies. Question number two came from an old guy wearing a Marine t-shirt that didn’t quite cover his belly. He asked about “dealing with all this terrorisms.” We learned that Pawlenty was the first governor to send troops to the border when President Bush asked for them; that we need to maintain security and our defense budget. He took some jabs at Obama’s Middle Eastern policy and said, “we need to stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel.”
I asked him if he saw the growing disparity in wealth as a problem and if so, how would he fix it. He seemed to like this question. He talked about improving and growing the economy, getting government off the backs of business people, not inciting class warfare. From this he mentioned educational disparity and threw in the stat that 1/3 of high school students are dropping out. The key difference is the parents who should be given a choice of sending their children to the “government school” or to private school’s or they should be allowed to home-school, if they don’t want to use the “government school.” I assume “government school” meant public school.
Questions followed about the use of Executive Orders, an invitation to Crawfordsville (birthplace of the Republican Party), Social Security (President Obama should lead, he might use “means testing” so the wealthiest recipients might not get cost of living raises, and he argued for privatization; unemployment (put people back to work and reform welfare) and energy (drill in ANWAR, more off-shore drilling, use new methods of finding natural gas, and an emphasis on renewable’s “when they make sense.”
A lady asked him to autograph her book, and so I asked if I could ask one more question. He said yes. In answering the question about Social Security he also talked about defense spending and reiterated his strong support for Israel, including a comment that we need to defend them and he used his “shoulder to shoulder” line again. So I asked, if you were President and led the country to war against Iran to help Israel, would you raise taxes to pay for the war? He said it is a hypothetical question, but that he does not like to raise taxes. I said, “So my children would pay for it?” He went back to the hypothetical line so I said, “it seems we are involved in two of those hypothetical wars right now. He then said it was time to end and started his autographing process. I don’t think I was being overly sensitive but when I stood in line to shake his hand, before he got to me, he turned and went to the other side of the room. When I went over there, he went back to table, at which point I decided the guy is either a bit of a weasel, or he is scared of me. Neither are qualities I want in a President.
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Flag Day
Today, June 14 is apparently Flag Day. According to the "Today in History" the Continental Congress adopted the stars and stripes as the national flag in 1777, and the words "under God," were added to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954. The Pledge was written by Francis Bellamy in 1892. Bellamy was a Baptist minister but the real surprise for many people is that he also described himself as a socialist. Wonder what the tea party folks would think?
The other flag related event which happened today was that the Supreme Court issued its ruling in West Virginia State Board of Education v Barnette in 1943. My guess is they timed it for the day since it had to do with the flag and the pledge of allegiance. In the case the Supreme Court ruled that States and schools could not require students to say the Pledge of Allegiance. The case revolved around some folks who were Jehovah Witnesses who did not want their children to say the Pledge or to salute the flag as they said it was idolatrous. Needless to say this irritated lots of people and the case made its way to the Supreme Court. The Justices pointed out that one could not force or demand allegiance, especially in a democracy.
Last week Goshen College, a Mennonite college in Indiana, decided that after playing the Star Spangled Banner before athletic events for a year that they would discontinue doing so this fall. Prior to last year they hadn't played the anthem before sporting events. A lot of folks I know were surprised the college changed its position and as might be expected the decision has caused a lot of wailing and moaning in some circles. Accusations are made that the college is unpatriotic, that the decision disrespects all the soldiers who fought and died, and on and on.
What I would argue is that the decision to not play the anthem, especially in the face of such harsh criticism, is in itself an act of great patriotism. What does the freedom of speech and expression mean if people never say anything controversial? Somewhat related, the Supreme Courts ruling in Barnette pointed out that our guaranteed freedom of expression also gives the right to not have to express things, in this case, the anthem, or for some, the Pledge of Allegiance.
The school where I work does not have a flag and does not play the anthem before athletic events. After being penalized for some years by the state athletic associations, it was suggested that they were violating the constitution. After further discussion, their disciplinary actions were rescinded. If you go back to the beginnings of the school, one reason it was started was so that Mennonite youths would not have to be subjected to the strong patriotism in the years following World War II.
The school now attracts a fair number of "other than Mennonite" students. Somewhere along the way they occasionally realize their isn't a flag, anthem, or pledge. Some will ask, a few have sort of protested, but most come to an understanding of the schools position, especially if we have done a decent job of exposing them to some of the traditional Mennonite ideas about how we relate to the State. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out, especially for the folks at Goshen who are facing lots of criticism both locally and nationally.
The other flag related event which happened today was that the Supreme Court issued its ruling in West Virginia State Board of Education v Barnette in 1943. My guess is they timed it for the day since it had to do with the flag and the pledge of allegiance. In the case the Supreme Court ruled that States and schools could not require students to say the Pledge of Allegiance. The case revolved around some folks who were Jehovah Witnesses who did not want their children to say the Pledge or to salute the flag as they said it was idolatrous. Needless to say this irritated lots of people and the case made its way to the Supreme Court. The Justices pointed out that one could not force or demand allegiance, especially in a democracy.
Last week Goshen College, a Mennonite college in Indiana, decided that after playing the Star Spangled Banner before athletic events for a year that they would discontinue doing so this fall. Prior to last year they hadn't played the anthem before sporting events. A lot of folks I know were surprised the college changed its position and as might be expected the decision has caused a lot of wailing and moaning in some circles. Accusations are made that the college is unpatriotic, that the decision disrespects all the soldiers who fought and died, and on and on.
What I would argue is that the decision to not play the anthem, especially in the face of such harsh criticism, is in itself an act of great patriotism. What does the freedom of speech and expression mean if people never say anything controversial? Somewhat related, the Supreme Courts ruling in Barnette pointed out that our guaranteed freedom of expression also gives the right to not have to express things, in this case, the anthem, or for some, the Pledge of Allegiance.
The school where I work does not have a flag and does not play the anthem before athletic events. After being penalized for some years by the state athletic associations, it was suggested that they were violating the constitution. After further discussion, their disciplinary actions were rescinded. If you go back to the beginnings of the school, one reason it was started was so that Mennonite youths would not have to be subjected to the strong patriotism in the years following World War II.
The school now attracts a fair number of "other than Mennonite" students. Somewhere along the way they occasionally realize their isn't a flag, anthem, or pledge. Some will ask, a few have sort of protested, but most come to an understanding of the schools position, especially if we have done a decent job of exposing them to some of the traditional Mennonite ideas about how we relate to the State. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out, especially for the folks at Goshen who are facing lots of criticism both locally and nationally.
Monday, June 13, 2011
Republican debate June 2011
I sat through the Republican debate tonight. It helped that I had taken a Vicodin because I had a tooth pulled earlier in the day. Otherwise I doubt I could have made myself sit through the two hour event.
By now I had hoped that I would have had the chance to see a couple of the candidates when they come to Iowa but so far my rules haven't been met. I don't want to drive any farther than Iowa City/Coralville or Washington, though in special circumstances I might consider a drive to Cedar Rapids or Muscatine. I won't go to any fundraisers and I won't take off work. A few have made their way to Iowa City but it was still while I was in school and coaching so it didn't work. As far as I know none of them have made their way to Washington.
According to the guys on TV, Michelle Bachman was the winner with Romney doing well and Gingrich keeping his campaign alive. I don't see any of the three doing particularly well in Iowa. Like it or not the Iowa Republican party is controlled by religious conservatives and all three have some problems. Gingrich has some moral issues to deal with plus his Iowa adviser's all resigned last week. Romney is Mormon, a problem for many of the religious fundamentalists, plus he comes across as a bit too slick for many Iowan's. Bachman's problem is that she is female and Iowa has yet to elect a woman as a governor or to the US House or Senate. Maybe some of the religious and social conservatives will surprise me but I think many would prefer to vote for a male.
The other four on the stage, Ron Paul, Herman Cain, Tim Pawlenty, and Rick Santorum were there. Pawlenty and Santorum should do well among the Iowa Republicans, Paul could do well especially if he can figure out a way to get young folks to attend the caucus. Cain is there, sort of the Al Sharpton, or the African-American Republican candidate from a couple of years ago. Apparently the vicodin is kicking in and I can't remember his name.
That leaves Pawlenty and Santorum as the two likely to win the caucus in Iowa, at least at this point. Both will try to out conservative the other and tout their desire to cut taxes and government. If tonight is any indication they will bash Obama on the economy but when pressed for specifics they will switch to issues like abortion, gay marriage, and "keeping our country strong." If that sounds cynical,its because I am.
By now I had hoped that I would have had the chance to see a couple of the candidates when they come to Iowa but so far my rules haven't been met. I don't want to drive any farther than Iowa City/Coralville or Washington, though in special circumstances I might consider a drive to Cedar Rapids or Muscatine. I won't go to any fundraisers and I won't take off work. A few have made their way to Iowa City but it was still while I was in school and coaching so it didn't work. As far as I know none of them have made their way to Washington.
According to the guys on TV, Michelle Bachman was the winner with Romney doing well and Gingrich keeping his campaign alive. I don't see any of the three doing particularly well in Iowa. Like it or not the Iowa Republican party is controlled by religious conservatives and all three have some problems. Gingrich has some moral issues to deal with plus his Iowa adviser's all resigned last week. Romney is Mormon, a problem for many of the religious fundamentalists, plus he comes across as a bit too slick for many Iowan's. Bachman's problem is that she is female and Iowa has yet to elect a woman as a governor or to the US House or Senate. Maybe some of the religious and social conservatives will surprise me but I think many would prefer to vote for a male.
The other four on the stage, Ron Paul, Herman Cain, Tim Pawlenty, and Rick Santorum were there. Pawlenty and Santorum should do well among the Iowa Republicans, Paul could do well especially if he can figure out a way to get young folks to attend the caucus. Cain is there, sort of the Al Sharpton, or the African-American Republican candidate from a couple of years ago. Apparently the vicodin is kicking in and I can't remember his name.
That leaves Pawlenty and Santorum as the two likely to win the caucus in Iowa, at least at this point. Both will try to out conservative the other and tout their desire to cut taxes and government. If tonight is any indication they will bash Obama on the economy but when pressed for specifics they will switch to issues like abortion, gay marriage, and "keeping our country strong." If that sounds cynical,its because I am.
Sunday, April 10, 2011
"Caught in the Middle: America's Heartland in the Age of Globalization"
If you live in the Midwest or care about the future of the Midwest you should read Caught in the Middle: America's Heartland in the Age of Globalization by Richard C. Longworth. Though Longworth's analysis and predictions are rather depressing I found the book to be interesting and at times rather amusing. It seems obvious Longworth cares deeply about the Midwest and hopes for a positive future but at the same time he recognizes most Midwesterner's are content to either ignore the problems, or to blame their problems on others.
Longworth's description of the Midwestern mentality - complacency in the face of change, seems accurate though in the part of Iowa where I live,it is often accompanied by a certain fatalism. At times this is expressed in religious language in phrases such as, "it must be God's will." If it is indeed God's will there is obviously little we can do but long nostalgically for the good old days and bemoan the fact that our children are growing up and leaving for the coasts.
Longworth doesn't talk much about religion though he did have a line which also rings true. "In a world of the Next New Thing, devotion to biblical inerrancy and traditional values doesn't cut it. The global world is diverse, open, multinational, with no loyalty to place or places. The rural world is still white-on-white, local, fixed on itself as the homeland of all virtue."
I have contended that recent arguments in our area about the six-day creation and a 4,000 year old earth, reflect a subliminal fear, or acknowledgment that life is changing in ways we don't understand. At these points it becomes easy to latch onto something which seems foundational to our beliefs. If someone refuses to believe the way I do, then I can write them off, or if they represent the forces of globalization I can demonize them, especially if they refute my belief in a six day creation, or if I refuse to acknowledge the relevance of the issue.
Longworth offers several ideas for changing the Midwest, some of which will be controversial. Opening the doors to all immigrants is probably not going to play well in most Midwestern states or towns.
The idea of cities working together, the development of clusters centered around biotech, biofuels and other new industries may have promise, though Longworth doesn't have much hope. Longworth also critiques the politicians who have added to the mess he see's in the Midwest. He is especially hard on those who demonize immigrants, foster fear, and cut education and research budgets.
Globalization is here and it isn't going to reverse itself anytime soon even if gas goes to $5 a gallon or more. It will only hasten the decline of the small towns which still dot Iowa as people will no longer be willing to pay for the hour long commute to work or to buy groceries.
Is it entirely hopeless? I like to think there is hope. Midwesterners are resilient, know how to work hard, and many are still willing to sacrifice, if not for the good of their state or country, then for the good of their family. Solutions will emerge and people will adapt, much as many have done for the last hundred plus years. It may be ugly, it will certainly be messy, but the Midwest will survive in some form.
Longworth's description of the Midwestern mentality - complacency in the face of change, seems accurate though in the part of Iowa where I live,it is often accompanied by a certain fatalism. At times this is expressed in religious language in phrases such as, "it must be God's will." If it is indeed God's will there is obviously little we can do but long nostalgically for the good old days and bemoan the fact that our children are growing up and leaving for the coasts.
Longworth doesn't talk much about religion though he did have a line which also rings true. "In a world of the Next New Thing, devotion to biblical inerrancy and traditional values doesn't cut it. The global world is diverse, open, multinational, with no loyalty to place or places. The rural world is still white-on-white, local, fixed on itself as the homeland of all virtue."
I have contended that recent arguments in our area about the six-day creation and a 4,000 year old earth, reflect a subliminal fear, or acknowledgment that life is changing in ways we don't understand. At these points it becomes easy to latch onto something which seems foundational to our beliefs. If someone refuses to believe the way I do, then I can write them off, or if they represent the forces of globalization I can demonize them, especially if they refute my belief in a six day creation, or if I refuse to acknowledge the relevance of the issue.
Longworth offers several ideas for changing the Midwest, some of which will be controversial. Opening the doors to all immigrants is probably not going to play well in most Midwestern states or towns.
The idea of cities working together, the development of clusters centered around biotech, biofuels and other new industries may have promise, though Longworth doesn't have much hope. Longworth also critiques the politicians who have added to the mess he see's in the Midwest. He is especially hard on those who demonize immigrants, foster fear, and cut education and research budgets.
Globalization is here and it isn't going to reverse itself anytime soon even if gas goes to $5 a gallon or more. It will only hasten the decline of the small towns which still dot Iowa as people will no longer be willing to pay for the hour long commute to work or to buy groceries.
Is it entirely hopeless? I like to think there is hope. Midwesterners are resilient, know how to work hard, and many are still willing to sacrifice, if not for the good of their state or country, then for the good of their family. Solutions will emerge and people will adapt, much as many have done for the last hundred plus years. It may be ugly, it will certainly be messy, but the Midwest will survive in some form.
Sunday, February 20, 2011
American Arrogance
"Obama and his staff have made a complete mess of the situation in Egypt."
"Obama will go down in history as the president who lost Egypt." http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/obama-will-go-down-in-history-as-the-president-who-lost-egypt-1.340057
O'REILLY FACTOR: Obama Has Screwed Up Egypt, And Is Not Likable Enough To Save His Presidency." http://www.businessinsider.com/bill-oreilly-egypt-obama-interview-smoking-video-2011-2
These are a few headlines I found declaring President Obama "screwed up," "lost," or "made a complete mess" of Egypt. This type of attitude expresses the height of American arrogance when it comes to an understanding of foreign policy and the role of the U.S. in the world. Yes, the U.S. is a superpower, yes we have interests all over the world, particularly in the Middle East, but since when is Egypt ours to lose? Have they been a U.S. colony since Sadat signed the Camp David Accords? Maybe since the one quote is from Haaretz, one of the main Israeli papers, the answer would be "yes."
Listening to the US media as they report what happened in Egypt and across the Middle East has irritated me. Arguments over whether it was President Bush's speech and efforts to promote democracy, or whether it was President Obama's Cairo speech which prompted the protests seem highly irrelevant. For that matter discussions about the role of facebook, twitter, and other social media somehow overlook that the Egyptian people may finally just be pissed enough to protest.
Last summer I spent a month in Poland. A number of Poles would ask, "when did World War II start?" They were pleased when I answered, "1939" because they said most Americans answer with "1941." From there the quiz would turn to the end of the Cold War. I finally asked one questioner, "You want me to say, communism collapsed when President Reagen said, 'Tear down this wall.'" His response was, "Isn't that what all Americans think?" He went on to express his frustration at reading histories of the collapse of the Cold War, which somehow ignored or overlooked the work of Solidarity, the Catholic Church and the many average Poles, who along with the East Germans, Czechs and others, got irritated enough to stand up at the risk of their lives, and to say, we don't want to live like this anymore. As the Polish guy said, "You Americans think you are responsible for everything." Unfortunately many of us do.
Personally, Obama did the best he could dealing with some uncharted waters. If anything, it was a victory that Egyptians were not burning U.S. flags, even though the tear gas canisters fired at them said, "Made in U.S.A." or the F-15's flying overhead, and the tanks patrolling the streets were gifts of the U.S., sure to make us beloved among the Egyptian populace.
Finally,if you are going to promote democracy and free elections you better damn well be ready to live with the consequences. Traveling in the West Bank, Palestinians were quick to tell me they understood American democracy. "You pushed for elections, so we held elections. Then when Hamas won, you said,"we won't recognize a government led by Hamas." With smiles on their faces they would ask, "So, do you believe in democracy or don't you, because to us, your government is a hypocrite."
As protests spread across the Middle East and north Africa perhaps a little humility from the U.S. would be the best response. Daring to acknowledge that perhaps we don't know what is best for the Egyptians, the Libyans, or the Tunisians would be a first good step. The Egyptians, Tunisians, Lybian's, Iranians and other folks may just be able to figure it out for themselves.
"Obama will go down in history as the president who lost Egypt." http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/obama-will-go-down-in-history-as-the-president-who-lost-egypt-1.340057
O'REILLY FACTOR: Obama Has Screwed Up Egypt, And Is Not Likable Enough To Save His Presidency." http://www.businessinsider.com/bill-oreilly-egypt-obama-interview-smoking-video-2011-2
These are a few headlines I found declaring President Obama "screwed up," "lost," or "made a complete mess" of Egypt. This type of attitude expresses the height of American arrogance when it comes to an understanding of foreign policy and the role of the U.S. in the world. Yes, the U.S. is a superpower, yes we have interests all over the world, particularly in the Middle East, but since when is Egypt ours to lose? Have they been a U.S. colony since Sadat signed the Camp David Accords? Maybe since the one quote is from Haaretz, one of the main Israeli papers, the answer would be "yes."
Listening to the US media as they report what happened in Egypt and across the Middle East has irritated me. Arguments over whether it was President Bush's speech and efforts to promote democracy, or whether it was President Obama's Cairo speech which prompted the protests seem highly irrelevant. For that matter discussions about the role of facebook, twitter, and other social media somehow overlook that the Egyptian people may finally just be pissed enough to protest.
Last summer I spent a month in Poland. A number of Poles would ask, "when did World War II start?" They were pleased when I answered, "1939" because they said most Americans answer with "1941." From there the quiz would turn to the end of the Cold War. I finally asked one questioner, "You want me to say, communism collapsed when President Reagen said, 'Tear down this wall.'" His response was, "Isn't that what all Americans think?" He went on to express his frustration at reading histories of the collapse of the Cold War, which somehow ignored or overlooked the work of Solidarity, the Catholic Church and the many average Poles, who along with the East Germans, Czechs and others, got irritated enough to stand up at the risk of their lives, and to say, we don't want to live like this anymore. As the Polish guy said, "You Americans think you are responsible for everything." Unfortunately many of us do.
Personally, Obama did the best he could dealing with some uncharted waters. If anything, it was a victory that Egyptians were not burning U.S. flags, even though the tear gas canisters fired at them said, "Made in U.S.A." or the F-15's flying overhead, and the tanks patrolling the streets were gifts of the U.S., sure to make us beloved among the Egyptian populace.
Finally,if you are going to promote democracy and free elections you better damn well be ready to live with the consequences. Traveling in the West Bank, Palestinians were quick to tell me they understood American democracy. "You pushed for elections, so we held elections. Then when Hamas won, you said,"we won't recognize a government led by Hamas." With smiles on their faces they would ask, "So, do you believe in democracy or don't you, because to us, your government is a hypocrite."
As protests spread across the Middle East and north Africa perhaps a little humility from the U.S. would be the best response. Daring to acknowledge that perhaps we don't know what is best for the Egyptians, the Libyans, or the Tunisians would be a first good step. The Egyptians, Tunisians, Lybian's, Iranians and other folks may just be able to figure it out for themselves.
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Elizabeth Edwards
Elizabeth Edwards died this past week of cancer. I got to meet her a couple of times and talked with her once while she campaigned with her husband, John, here in Iowa. When the presidential candidates tromp around the state of Iowa seeking support at the caucus, they often have their wives and sometimes their children along. Usually the spouses are impressive in their own right, and occasionally you think, she would make a better candidate than her husband. Elizabeth Edwards was a good example of this. She came across as intelligent but down to earth. She related better to Iowan's than I think her husband often did. Some old duffer once told me you should never trust an older man with too much nice hair, or one who wears white dress shoes. In Edwards case that would have been good advice. There was just something about him which seemed a little "slick." Elizabeth didn't have that problem. I helped organize one of his events, and one of the first questions people asked was, "Will Elizabeth be there?"
Another spouse who impressed me was Jackie Dodd, wife of Chris Dodd. They stopped in Wellman on July 4th and my son and I went to see them. While he did his thing his wife kept two kids in line plus schmoozed with the crowd in a way that her husband seemed unable to do, without seeming a bit fake. Or in looking at his head of silver hair, he probably violates "the man with too much nice hair rule." During their short stay in Wellman, I ended up standing next to her while Sen. Dodd doled out ice cream and argued with my son about his mandatory "volunteer service" idea. (Not all that many people came to hear him that afternoon) It didn't take much to realize she was bright, more articulate than her husband, and frankly in my opinion would have made a better candidate.
Others who made a positive impression were Jill Biden and Christie Vilsak, though with the latter, it seemed to me she wanted her husband to be President more than he did. She was the one with ambition oozing out her pores. I didn't get opportunity to see Michelle Obama, and as for Bill Clinton, his wife kept him out of the state if I remember correctly.
Another spouse who impressed me was Jackie Dodd, wife of Chris Dodd. They stopped in Wellman on July 4th and my son and I went to see them. While he did his thing his wife kept two kids in line plus schmoozed with the crowd in a way that her husband seemed unable to do, without seeming a bit fake. Or in looking at his head of silver hair, he probably violates "the man with too much nice hair rule." During their short stay in Wellman, I ended up standing next to her while Sen. Dodd doled out ice cream and argued with my son about his mandatory "volunteer service" idea. (Not all that many people came to hear him that afternoon) It didn't take much to realize she was bright, more articulate than her husband, and frankly in my opinion would have made a better candidate.
Others who made a positive impression were Jill Biden and Christie Vilsak, though with the latter, it seemed to me she wanted her husband to be President more than he did. She was the one with ambition oozing out her pores. I didn't get opportunity to see Michelle Obama, and as for Bill Clinton, his wife kept him out of the state if I remember correctly.
Monday, November 29, 2010
more from the classroom
Tales from the classroom.
The first day back from break is always a bit stressful. The students are busy catching up with their friends activities and in the case of Thanksgiving, describing how much they ate. Some are more focused on all the stuff they bought on Friday, while others remember they didn't look at any of their homework since leaving school on Wednesday.
Today in World History we looked at the chapter titled "Renaissance and Reformation." I did a time line activity with the class before I gave them another activity. I put the date 1517 on the line and asked if anybody was Lutheran. The first response was, "Why would that matter?" One student said she goes to a Lutheran church but doesn't really consider herself to be Lutheran. Next I asked if anyone had heard of Martin Luther. One student said, "He's that black guy, isn't he?" I told her she was thinking of Martin Luther King Jr. Another student blurted, "aren't they they same person?" I told them "no" and asked if anyone had any idea when Martin Luther King Jr. lived. Guesses were made from 1700 to 1950. From there we went back to the Reformation. I wrote the date 1525 on the board and asked if anyone knew why that might be important. Nobody seemed to know, so I wrote "Anabaptist's begin." The next question, from a Mennonite student, was "What's an Anabaptist?" followed by, "what does Anabaptist mean?" By the time we got through this there wasn't much time for the activity.
Next was U.S. History where we are finishing the Civil War and looking a bit at Reconstruction. The one group of students seemed mystified that many in the Union thought the Confederates had committed treason. I discovered part of the problem was they didn't know the meaning of the word, "treason." One well meaning young woman, summed it all up (at least for her) when she said, "Why couldn't they just have their own country?" It only got worse, but it did bring to mind what I read somewhere, "teaching history to 15-16 year olds is an unnatural act."
The first day back from break is always a bit stressful. The students are busy catching up with their friends activities and in the case of Thanksgiving, describing how much they ate. Some are more focused on all the stuff they bought on Friday, while others remember they didn't look at any of their homework since leaving school on Wednesday.
Today in World History we looked at the chapter titled "Renaissance and Reformation." I did a time line activity with the class before I gave them another activity. I put the date 1517 on the line and asked if anybody was Lutheran. The first response was, "Why would that matter?" One student said she goes to a Lutheran church but doesn't really consider herself to be Lutheran. Next I asked if anyone had heard of Martin Luther. One student said, "He's that black guy, isn't he?" I told her she was thinking of Martin Luther King Jr. Another student blurted, "aren't they they same person?" I told them "no" and asked if anyone had any idea when Martin Luther King Jr. lived. Guesses were made from 1700 to 1950. From there we went back to the Reformation. I wrote the date 1525 on the board and asked if anyone knew why that might be important. Nobody seemed to know, so I wrote "Anabaptist's begin." The next question, from a Mennonite student, was "What's an Anabaptist?" followed by, "what does Anabaptist mean?" By the time we got through this there wasn't much time for the activity.
Next was U.S. History where we are finishing the Civil War and looking a bit at Reconstruction. The one group of students seemed mystified that many in the Union thought the Confederates had committed treason. I discovered part of the problem was they didn't know the meaning of the word, "treason." One well meaning young woman, summed it all up (at least for her) when she said, "Why couldn't they just have their own country?" It only got worse, but it did bring to mind what I read somewhere, "teaching history to 15-16 year olds is an unnatural act."
Thursday, November 25, 2010
American Gospel by Jon Meacham
Found this to be interesting but for some reason it was slow going. Meacham argues America's founders recognized the value of religion and the importance of religious values in establishing a new country,but at the same time realized if the new country was to survive it would have to be tolerant of different religious beliefs. Rather than create state support for one set of doctrines, Meacham documents how Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Madison and others set about creating a new religion, what Meacham calls "American public religion." Describing God as transcendent, or "Natures God" leaves it ambiguous enough that nearly anyone, except the most avowed atheist, can believe. So if you are a fundamentalist, or evangelical who "wants America to get back to its Godly heritage," Meacham says you can find support for that position. If you are Jewish, and don't buy into the Jesus stories, American public religion is broad enough to include you. If you lean towards a God who doesn't get involved in the daily goings on of people, the idea of nature's god should be enough to keep you happy.
I found the idea of American public religion to be useful in thinking about the country's history and our contemporary situation. Thanksgiving has become one of the high holy days of American public religion. Driving across the mid-west on Thanksgiving it was interesting to hear what some of the "Christian" radio stations had to say - some preacher ranting about being more thankful, prayers for the soldiers serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, prayers for all the men who have "kept our country free," gratefulness for a country bestowed with such blessings, with the occasional song thrown in.
Coming from a sectarian church background, it is easy (tempting) to see the many contradictions between what is generally considered to be "true Christianity" and American public religion. The most dangerous of these are the belief in American exceptionalism and the idea of "redemptive violence. Meacham's book did help me understand those people I know, who devoutly salute the flag, say the pledge of allegiance, pray at the pole, and then work to raise money for missions in other parts of the world. The question for me is, to what kind of Christianity do we want these people to convert? Is it to buy into the American public religion described by Meacham, or is it a universal Christianity with an emphasis on spreading good news to the poor? (less)
I found the idea of American public religion to be useful in thinking about the country's history and our contemporary situation. Thanksgiving has become one of the high holy days of American public religion. Driving across the mid-west on Thanksgiving it was interesting to hear what some of the "Christian" radio stations had to say - some preacher ranting about being more thankful, prayers for the soldiers serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, prayers for all the men who have "kept our country free," gratefulness for a country bestowed with such blessings, with the occasional song thrown in.
Coming from a sectarian church background, it is easy (tempting) to see the many contradictions between what is generally considered to be "true Christianity" and American public religion. The most dangerous of these are the belief in American exceptionalism and the idea of "redemptive violence. Meacham's book did help me understand those people I know, who devoutly salute the flag, say the pledge of allegiance, pray at the pole, and then work to raise money for missions in other parts of the world. The question for me is, to what kind of Christianity do we want these people to convert? Is it to buy into the American public religion described by Meacham, or is it a universal Christianity with an emphasis on spreading good news to the poor? (less)
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
How JFK changed my life
Yesterday was the 47th anniversary of the assassination of John F. Kennedy. I have vague memories of watching the funeral on television but since I was only five I don't remember much. Still his death changed my life, at least in a round about way.
My parents had grown up in a conservative Mennonite church which did not allow its members to have television. They were living in Idaho in 1963 and since there were no conservative Mennonite churches in the area they made do with a regular Mennonite church. Sometime I will have to ask if they were just being good members, or if they didn't want to spend the money, but in any case we did not have a tv.
This changed with the assassination of John F. Kennedy. After the assassination, my father rented a television in order to watch the funeral and the many news stories. Walter Cronkite, along with Huntley and Brinkley, must have made an impression and my parents decided to keep the television. I may have been allowed to watch Captain Kangaroo but probably not much else. It is also where I learned that disappointment would long be a part of my life. NBC had its peacock, and the slogan, "Bringing this program to you in living color." I always waited eagerly for the black and white images I saw on the screen to appear in "living color" but for some reason, (we had a black and white tv) the "living color" never appeared.
We moved back to southeastern Iowa a few years later and I don't know if the tv came with us, or if the decision was made to buy another one once they arrived. The conservative Mennonite churches in the area still had a rule against tv, so my parents eventually joined Kalona Mennonite, a congregation which allowed tv's. By now 60 Minutes was on the air, and in our home, it was required viewing. All of my first cousins in the area attended the conservative churches so our house became a favorite destination. If an Iowa basketball game was televised we had company.
If my parents had not purchased the tv, they may well have remained in the conservative church. I may have attended Rosedale and married a nice girl who wore a covering and didn't cut her hair. Instead I was corrupted by shows such as 60 Minutes, Hogan's Heroes, and Carol Burnett. I was one of the few kids allowed to watch the Smother's Brothers before they were kicked off the airwaves. Maybe that is why I struggle with trying to not be too cynical.
The conservative churches dropped the tv rule a number of years ago when it became impossible to enforce. There seems to be little difference between what these churches and regular Mennonite churches say about the use of technology. I certainly don't see a difference in the gadgets the students use and carry to school.
My parents had grown up in a conservative Mennonite church which did not allow its members to have television. They were living in Idaho in 1963 and since there were no conservative Mennonite churches in the area they made do with a regular Mennonite church. Sometime I will have to ask if they were just being good members, or if they didn't want to spend the money, but in any case we did not have a tv.
This changed with the assassination of John F. Kennedy. After the assassination, my father rented a television in order to watch the funeral and the many news stories. Walter Cronkite, along with Huntley and Brinkley, must have made an impression and my parents decided to keep the television. I may have been allowed to watch Captain Kangaroo but probably not much else. It is also where I learned that disappointment would long be a part of my life. NBC had its peacock, and the slogan, "Bringing this program to you in living color." I always waited eagerly for the black and white images I saw on the screen to appear in "living color" but for some reason, (we had a black and white tv) the "living color" never appeared.
We moved back to southeastern Iowa a few years later and I don't know if the tv came with us, or if the decision was made to buy another one once they arrived. The conservative Mennonite churches in the area still had a rule against tv, so my parents eventually joined Kalona Mennonite, a congregation which allowed tv's. By now 60 Minutes was on the air, and in our home, it was required viewing. All of my first cousins in the area attended the conservative churches so our house became a favorite destination. If an Iowa basketball game was televised we had company.
If my parents had not purchased the tv, they may well have remained in the conservative church. I may have attended Rosedale and married a nice girl who wore a covering and didn't cut her hair. Instead I was corrupted by shows such as 60 Minutes, Hogan's Heroes, and Carol Burnett. I was one of the few kids allowed to watch the Smother's Brothers before they were kicked off the airwaves. Maybe that is why I struggle with trying to not be too cynical.
The conservative churches dropped the tv rule a number of years ago when it became impossible to enforce. There seems to be little difference between what these churches and regular Mennonite churches say about the use of technology. I certainly don't see a difference in the gadgets the students use and carry to school.
Saturday, November 20, 2010
getting back to this - Social Studies Conference
With all the summer activities I seem to have not got back into the habit of writing every so often. Maybe over the next few weeks I can catch up a bit since some interesting things have happened.
Back in October I attended the Iowa Council on Social Studies meeting for the first time in my teaching career. I drove over to Des Moines and arrived in plenty of time. At the registration table I received the packet of information including my name tag. I was tempted to not put it on, but as everyone else seemed to have them on, so I wore it. What resulted was a day with rather interesting questions.
"You teach at a Mennonite school. Do you use technology?" "Yes", I replied. "You mean you have electricity?" Another "yes." Another women asked, "How do the kids get to school?" This seemed normal until she added, "those buggies don't travel very fast, do they?" Next, another teacher said, "Since you have a beard, does that mean you are Amish?" At this point I was about ready to take off the name tag and head to the fake seaside bar in the hotel.
Among the interesting things I learned - Elkader, Iowa is named after a Muslim prince and religious leader. Today he might be called a terrorist as he fought to keep the French from colonizing Algeria.
Iowa schools are struggling with technology and the many changes it is bringing. Some schools have a lap top for every student 9-12. Some schools struggle to keep their computer labs up to date. One school requires its teachers to have Twitter accounts, while other schools tell their teachers they shouldn't have Twitter, Facebook, or other social networking sites. Most schools, including the public schools, are struggling with finances and the costs required to keep up with the latest technology.
All in all it was a good day. I met some interesting people, heard some decent speakers, and had a safe and pleasant drive home.
Back in October I attended the Iowa Council on Social Studies meeting for the first time in my teaching career. I drove over to Des Moines and arrived in plenty of time. At the registration table I received the packet of information including my name tag. I was tempted to not put it on, but as everyone else seemed to have them on, so I wore it. What resulted was a day with rather interesting questions.
"You teach at a Mennonite school. Do you use technology?" "Yes", I replied. "You mean you have electricity?" Another "yes." Another women asked, "How do the kids get to school?" This seemed normal until she added, "those buggies don't travel very fast, do they?" Next, another teacher said, "Since you have a beard, does that mean you are Amish?" At this point I was about ready to take off the name tag and head to the fake seaside bar in the hotel.
Among the interesting things I learned - Elkader, Iowa is named after a Muslim prince and religious leader. Today he might be called a terrorist as he fought to keep the French from colonizing Algeria.
Iowa schools are struggling with technology and the many changes it is bringing. Some schools have a lap top for every student 9-12. Some schools struggle to keep their computer labs up to date. One school requires its teachers to have Twitter accounts, while other schools tell their teachers they shouldn't have Twitter, Facebook, or other social networking sites. Most schools, including the public schools, are struggling with finances and the costs required to keep up with the latest technology.
All in all it was a good day. I met some interesting people, heard some decent speakers, and had a safe and pleasant drive home.
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Poland
I was in Poland for the month of June, came home, went to Montana for a family event, came home, the basement flooded, and now school has started. This explains a bit of what we experienced in Poland.
Poland
On June 5th, I left Cedar Rapids with five Iowa Mennonite School students for Poland as part of the US-Poland Parliamentary Youth Leadership Exchange Program. The goal of the program is to build and improve relationships between Poland and the US and is funded by the US State Department. Two other US high schools also participated in the program, one from Des Moines and the other from Chicago.
The group from IMS spent three weeks in Łodź (pronounced “woodge”), a city of approximately 800,000 people. I stayed with Angelika, the Polish teacher who was here in February and her parents. They lived in a relatively new home on the edge of the city. In, Łodź we attended classes and visited many different historical and cultural sites. Łodź had been the leading industrial center of Poland but since the fall of communism the factories have closed and the city has had to reinvent itself. Currently Łodź is competing to become “the European city of Culture” for 2016. The city is home to a famous film school, hosts several important film festivals and bills itself as “Holly Łodź.” In addition to the cultural activities and sites the city has attracted new industries including a large Dell plant and Infosys.
After the home stays, we traveled by train to Warsaw and met the other US schools. In Warsaw we were hosted by the European Academy of Diplomacy. We spent much of the time in Warsaw meeting government officials, politicians, and former diplomats. We were also shown some of Warsaw’s historic buildings. The impressive thing to note is that 90 per cent of the buildings in Warsaw were destroyed during World War II, so most of what we saw had been painstakingly rebuilt since 1945.
One of the more sobering visits was to the newly opened “Uprising Museum.” This museum was built to commemorate the attempt by Poles to resist the German army after nearly four years of occupation. At least 6 million Poles, including 3 million Jewish Poles, were killed during the war, if not by the Germans, then by their Russian “liberators.” Nearly every Polish person I asked could tell stories of family members who were killed, or who disappeared during the war.
From Warsaw we traveled to Krakow where we met the Polish students. This portion of the trip was led by the Kosciuszko Foundation. The students worked on developing community service projects for the host Polish cities along with visiting some of the historic spots in the city.
Some observations:
95 % of Poles identify themselves as Roman Catholic. Of these, 80% describe themselves as attending mass regularly. http://countrystudies.us/poland/38.htm. During the 19th century when Poland did not exist on the maps, it was the Catholic Church which kept alive the Polish language, culture and sense of national identity. More recently, the Catholic Church played a key role leading to the fall of communism. When Pope John Paul II, the first Polish pope, traveled to Warsaw, the communist government was powerless to stop people from going to hear him say mass. We saw many statues of Pope John Paul II as we traveled. As Poland becomes more in tune with the more secular western Europe there is debate about what role the Catholic Church should play in the life of the nation.
Religious identity is important. It felt odd to have people ask if I “was a Christian.” This usually happened when people noticed I did not know how to cross myself, when to kneel, or when to put my hands in the holy water. Discussions about sin, confessionals, and the role of Mary, also raised concerns about my salvation as I was the one expressing a view very different from most Polish Catholics.
Similarly, when we said which school we were from we were often asked to explain “what is a Mennonite?” This included both Polish people we met as well as the students and teachers from the US. One US student admitted she was surprised the IMS girls were not wearing bonnets.
The average Pole is much more knowledgeable about foreign affairs than is the average American. Situated between Germany and Russia, Poles are keenly aware of the actions of those countries as well as the US. Poland sought and gained membership in NATO and the European Union and is pushing its neighbors, Ukraine and Belarus to join in spite of strong Russian opposition. Poland is sometimes described as the European country most supportive of the U.S. Unfortunately, many Poles feel the US government takes this support for granted.
Many Poles assume that all Americans are wealthy, carry guns and have sex with many different people. These ideas come from watching American television shows and movies. TV shows which are popular include, House, The Bold and Beautiful, Grey’s Anatomy, the CSI and Law and Order shows along with some of the reality shows.
The food in Poland is fairly basic. I ate lots of pork, kielbasa (sausage), potatoes and cabbage. The majority of this was locally grown.
Farms in eastern Poland are much smaller than in Iowa. The largest tractor I saw was similar to a John Deere 4010. One day when were driving through the countryside many farmers were raking hay. The surprising thing was to see people using long wooden hand rakes in addition to the tractor pulled rakes. The most common crops were wheat, barley, potatoes, cabbage and strawberries.
Gasoline is expensive; approximately $5.60 a gallon and most people drive small cars. On most purchases there is a Value Added Tax (sales tax) of 22%. This is in addition to personal income tax rates similar to the US. The current exchange rate is around $1 US to 3 zlotys. Poland is scheduled to switch to the Euro in early 2012, the year they host European Soccer championships.
Finally, the people we met were friendly, open, and glad we were visiting. A number of times I was asked, “why would you visit Poland?” They seemed surprised, yet pleased, when we told them how beautiful the country is and how well we were being treated. It was a wonderful learning experience for myself and the students.
Poland
On June 5th, I left Cedar Rapids with five Iowa Mennonite School students for Poland as part of the US-Poland Parliamentary Youth Leadership Exchange Program. The goal of the program is to build and improve relationships between Poland and the US and is funded by the US State Department. Two other US high schools also participated in the program, one from Des Moines and the other from Chicago.
The group from IMS spent three weeks in Łodź (pronounced “woodge”), a city of approximately 800,000 people. I stayed with Angelika, the Polish teacher who was here in February and her parents. They lived in a relatively new home on the edge of the city. In, Łodź we attended classes and visited many different historical and cultural sites. Łodź had been the leading industrial center of Poland but since the fall of communism the factories have closed and the city has had to reinvent itself. Currently Łodź is competing to become “the European city of Culture” for 2016. The city is home to a famous film school, hosts several important film festivals and bills itself as “Holly Łodź.” In addition to the cultural activities and sites the city has attracted new industries including a large Dell plant and Infosys.
After the home stays, we traveled by train to Warsaw and met the other US schools. In Warsaw we were hosted by the European Academy of Diplomacy. We spent much of the time in Warsaw meeting government officials, politicians, and former diplomats. We were also shown some of Warsaw’s historic buildings. The impressive thing to note is that 90 per cent of the buildings in Warsaw were destroyed during World War II, so most of what we saw had been painstakingly rebuilt since 1945.
One of the more sobering visits was to the newly opened “Uprising Museum.” This museum was built to commemorate the attempt by Poles to resist the German army after nearly four years of occupation. At least 6 million Poles, including 3 million Jewish Poles, were killed during the war, if not by the Germans, then by their Russian “liberators.” Nearly every Polish person I asked could tell stories of family members who were killed, or who disappeared during the war.
From Warsaw we traveled to Krakow where we met the Polish students. This portion of the trip was led by the Kosciuszko Foundation. The students worked on developing community service projects for the host Polish cities along with visiting some of the historic spots in the city.
Some observations:
95 % of Poles identify themselves as Roman Catholic. Of these, 80% describe themselves as attending mass regularly. http://countrystudies.us/poland/38.htm. During the 19th century when Poland did not exist on the maps, it was the Catholic Church which kept alive the Polish language, culture and sense of national identity. More recently, the Catholic Church played a key role leading to the fall of communism. When Pope John Paul II, the first Polish pope, traveled to Warsaw, the communist government was powerless to stop people from going to hear him say mass. We saw many statues of Pope John Paul II as we traveled. As Poland becomes more in tune with the more secular western Europe there is debate about what role the Catholic Church should play in the life of the nation.
Religious identity is important. It felt odd to have people ask if I “was a Christian.” This usually happened when people noticed I did not know how to cross myself, when to kneel, or when to put my hands in the holy water. Discussions about sin, confessionals, and the role of Mary, also raised concerns about my salvation as I was the one expressing a view very different from most Polish Catholics.
Similarly, when we said which school we were from we were often asked to explain “what is a Mennonite?” This included both Polish people we met as well as the students and teachers from the US. One US student admitted she was surprised the IMS girls were not wearing bonnets.
The average Pole is much more knowledgeable about foreign affairs than is the average American. Situated between Germany and Russia, Poles are keenly aware of the actions of those countries as well as the US. Poland sought and gained membership in NATO and the European Union and is pushing its neighbors, Ukraine and Belarus to join in spite of strong Russian opposition. Poland is sometimes described as the European country most supportive of the U.S. Unfortunately, many Poles feel the US government takes this support for granted.
Many Poles assume that all Americans are wealthy, carry guns and have sex with many different people. These ideas come from watching American television shows and movies. TV shows which are popular include, House, The Bold and Beautiful, Grey’s Anatomy, the CSI and Law and Order shows along with some of the reality shows.
The food in Poland is fairly basic. I ate lots of pork, kielbasa (sausage), potatoes and cabbage. The majority of this was locally grown.
Farms in eastern Poland are much smaller than in Iowa. The largest tractor I saw was similar to a John Deere 4010. One day when were driving through the countryside many farmers were raking hay. The surprising thing was to see people using long wooden hand rakes in addition to the tractor pulled rakes. The most common crops were wheat, barley, potatoes, cabbage and strawberries.
Gasoline is expensive; approximately $5.60 a gallon and most people drive small cars. On most purchases there is a Value Added Tax (sales tax) of 22%. This is in addition to personal income tax rates similar to the US. The current exchange rate is around $1 US to 3 zlotys. Poland is scheduled to switch to the Euro in early 2012, the year they host European Soccer championships.
Finally, the people we met were friendly, open, and glad we were visiting. A number of times I was asked, “why would you visit Poland?” They seemed surprised, yet pleased, when we told them how beautiful the country is and how well we were being treated. It was a wonderful learning experience for myself and the students.
Tuesday, June 01, 2010
Mennonite in a Little Black Dress
Mennonite in a Little Black Dress
I recently read Mennonite in a Little Black Dress by Rhoda Janzen. The book has become a bestseller and many people have written reviews, so I’m sure someone has said what I think. The title is misleading, not that anyone but Mennonites would care. Her stories are at times funny, at times a bit mean, and sometimes just repetitive. How many times do we need to hear about her former husband, his charm, manic-depression, and that he “left her for a guy named Bob”?
The book did prompt some thoughts. For example, I could identify with the strong sense of being different, or odd, as a child because my parents were Mennonite (the kind who thought Janzen’s Mennonite Brethren were “worldly”) and my grandparents were members of the Conservative Mennonite Church having left the Amish when my parents were young. Now, if I ask my students at Iowa Mennonite if they have ever felt different because they are Mennonite, they look at me as if I am some kind of moron. “Why would they feel different because they were Mennonite?”
I’m not sure exactly why I felt different. I didn’t dress much differently from the Catholic kids at Kalona Elementary, I ate the school lunch, and as third graders we weren’t drinking, smoking, or having sex, but still I felt different. It only got worse as I got older. Most of my relatives did not have TV. We did, but were not allowed to watch certain shows because they might be too violent. On the other hand I was one of the few kids allowed to watch the Smothers Brother’s.
The book also reminded me of a lot of the young Mennonites we met when we lived in Philadelphia. They were often from a conservative or plain family in Lancaster, PA. They had gone to a Mennonite college and done well and now they were in the city for grad school or med school, or their first professional job. We usually didn’t get to know them well. The first time we would meet them was the Sunday morning the weekend they had moved to the city. Their parents had helped them move, had stayed the night, and before leaving their child alone, they sought out our little Mennonite church.
We usually wouldn’t see them again until their parents came for another visit three months later. The smart ones at least came the weekend before. If they were really smart they found out when we were having a potluck and came for the meal. Then when they came with their parents we could act like we knew them and that they were part of us, and their parents could leave, reassured that their child had found a church home.
Some of these folks wanted nothing to do with Mennonite’s, even one’s who made up our congregation, where no topic was to sacred to be argued about and where we were proud in a Mennonite sort of way of our openness. They wanted to get away from the rules of their childhood, the foods, the clothes, the whole works. Others liked to hang around the edges. Some I think valued what the little congregation was trying to do and what it represented. For others, it was just good to have a close reminder around of what they didn’t want to be and what they were trying to flee.
That is what Janzen's book seems to be. An acknowledgment that it is nice to have this Mennonite "stuff" around because, for one, some of its not so bad, and besides who doesn't feel better after making fun of their stodgy, backward, and repressed background, especially when it lands you on the bestseller list.
I recently read Mennonite in a Little Black Dress by Rhoda Janzen. The book has become a bestseller and many people have written reviews, so I’m sure someone has said what I think. The title is misleading, not that anyone but Mennonites would care. Her stories are at times funny, at times a bit mean, and sometimes just repetitive. How many times do we need to hear about her former husband, his charm, manic-depression, and that he “left her for a guy named Bob”?
The book did prompt some thoughts. For example, I could identify with the strong sense of being different, or odd, as a child because my parents were Mennonite (the kind who thought Janzen’s Mennonite Brethren were “worldly”) and my grandparents were members of the Conservative Mennonite Church having left the Amish when my parents were young. Now, if I ask my students at Iowa Mennonite if they have ever felt different because they are Mennonite, they look at me as if I am some kind of moron. “Why would they feel different because they were Mennonite?”
I’m not sure exactly why I felt different. I didn’t dress much differently from the Catholic kids at Kalona Elementary, I ate the school lunch, and as third graders we weren’t drinking, smoking, or having sex, but still I felt different. It only got worse as I got older. Most of my relatives did not have TV. We did, but were not allowed to watch certain shows because they might be too violent. On the other hand I was one of the few kids allowed to watch the Smothers Brother’s.
The book also reminded me of a lot of the young Mennonites we met when we lived in Philadelphia. They were often from a conservative or plain family in Lancaster, PA. They had gone to a Mennonite college and done well and now they were in the city for grad school or med school, or their first professional job. We usually didn’t get to know them well. The first time we would meet them was the Sunday morning the weekend they had moved to the city. Their parents had helped them move, had stayed the night, and before leaving their child alone, they sought out our little Mennonite church.
We usually wouldn’t see them again until their parents came for another visit three months later. The smart ones at least came the weekend before. If they were really smart they found out when we were having a potluck and came for the meal. Then when they came with their parents we could act like we knew them and that they were part of us, and their parents could leave, reassured that their child had found a church home.
Some of these folks wanted nothing to do with Mennonite’s, even one’s who made up our congregation, where no topic was to sacred to be argued about and where we were proud in a Mennonite sort of way of our openness. They wanted to get away from the rules of their childhood, the foods, the clothes, the whole works. Others liked to hang around the edges. Some I think valued what the little congregation was trying to do and what it represented. For others, it was just good to have a close reminder around of what they didn’t want to be and what they were trying to flee.
That is what Janzen's book seems to be. An acknowledgment that it is nice to have this Mennonite "stuff" around because, for one, some of its not so bad, and besides who doesn't feel better after making fun of their stodgy, backward, and repressed background, especially when it lands you on the bestseller list.
Tuesday, May 04, 2010
game with Regina
IMS 2, Regina, Iowa City 1
IMS put their unbeaten season on the line as they hosted defending 1A state champion Iowa City Regina Tuesday evening at IMS. Regina began the game with the wind at their backs but it was IMS which nearly scored in the opening minute as Truman Shetler gathered in a ball, outran his defender and put a shot on goal only to see it skim the outside of the post. From that point on the intensity level of the game picked up as both teams worked hard to maintain possession and to create good scoring chances. Despite going into the wind Jacob Yoder and Shetler were able to create several opportunities, while midfielders, Brian Miller and Vince Rhodes along with Stephan Peters and Seth Miller upped their level of play to match that of the skilled Regina team. The back line of John Nicholson, Marshall Schrock, Kyle Miller and Chris Perez did an excellent job of knocking away balls while trying to contain the speed of Regina’s forwards. Goalie Michael Darby made several key saves when tested during the first half. Regina scored first with 9 minutes left in the half after Daniel Larew gathered a ball in the midfield, turned and cracked a wicked shot from about 30 yards out which ripped into the goal for the 1-0 halftime lead.
The second half saw more fast paced soccer as both teams worked hard to create scoring opportunities only to see good defensive play knock the balls away. As time passed the halfway point of the second half, Brian Miller gathered in a ball, beat a defender and took a shot from about the 18 yard line and sent it low to the far post where it escaped the grasp of the goalie to equalize the score. The goal energized the tired legs and bodies of IMS players. Ten minutes later, Vince Rhodes dribbled towards the box, passed the ball to Miller, who sent it back to Rhodes in stride and he took the shot for the 2-1 lead. As the final minutes ticked away, Regina tried to find the equalizer which opened up several scoring opportunities for IMS but shots either went wide or were saved by the goalie.
The IMS team showed tonight that not only are they a skilled team but that they have a lot of heart and determination, requirements for beating a quality opponent like Regina. With the win IMS moves to 11-0 for the season.
IMS put their unbeaten season on the line as they hosted defending 1A state champion Iowa City Regina Tuesday evening at IMS. Regina began the game with the wind at their backs but it was IMS which nearly scored in the opening minute as Truman Shetler gathered in a ball, outran his defender and put a shot on goal only to see it skim the outside of the post. From that point on the intensity level of the game picked up as both teams worked hard to maintain possession and to create good scoring chances. Despite going into the wind Jacob Yoder and Shetler were able to create several opportunities, while midfielders, Brian Miller and Vince Rhodes along with Stephan Peters and Seth Miller upped their level of play to match that of the skilled Regina team. The back line of John Nicholson, Marshall Schrock, Kyle Miller and Chris Perez did an excellent job of knocking away balls while trying to contain the speed of Regina’s forwards. Goalie Michael Darby made several key saves when tested during the first half. Regina scored first with 9 minutes left in the half after Daniel Larew gathered a ball in the midfield, turned and cracked a wicked shot from about 30 yards out which ripped into the goal for the 1-0 halftime lead.
The second half saw more fast paced soccer as both teams worked hard to create scoring opportunities only to see good defensive play knock the balls away. As time passed the halfway point of the second half, Brian Miller gathered in a ball, beat a defender and took a shot from about the 18 yard line and sent it low to the far post where it escaped the grasp of the goalie to equalize the score. The goal energized the tired legs and bodies of IMS players. Ten minutes later, Vince Rhodes dribbled towards the box, passed the ball to Miller, who sent it back to Rhodes in stride and he took the shot for the 2-1 lead. As the final minutes ticked away, Regina tried to find the equalizer which opened up several scoring opportunities for IMS but shots either went wide or were saved by the goalie.
The IMS team showed tonight that not only are they a skilled team but that they have a lot of heart and determination, requirements for beating a quality opponent like Regina. With the win IMS moves to 11-0 for the season.
Friday, April 30, 2010
more studentism's
Speaking of students who don't know much, this week a junior in US history became confused when another student asked when New Mexico became a state. She wondered why anyone cared when New Mexico became part of Mexico. The shocked stares of her classmates must have convinced her she said something which was a bit on the outlandish side, but all she seemed able to say, was, "It's part of Mexico, isn't it?" Another student asked where she would be going on class trip when the seniors visit Washington DC. She said "to Washington state, isn't that in the north somewhere?" Her classmates tried to help her out but I'm still not sure she gets it. Plus looking at a map would probably be way too much work.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
students
This year has made me wonder whether students are becoming dumber, lazier, or some combination of both. I have been making notes of some or the comments students have made which just make me wonder what is going on (or not going on) in their heads.
When we were looking at Greece we were looking at the philosophers Plato, Socrates and Aristotle along with some of the others. One young man raised his hand and blurted, “Did they invent soccer?” I asked, “What?” He repeated his question, “Did they invent soccer?” I asked, “why would you ask that?” His response, “Whenever I hear about the old Greeks, someone always talks about “soccer tee’s.”
More recently when we were looking at India I showed the movie, “Gandhi.” The movie starts with the assassination of Gandhi, shows his funeral, and then goes back to when he was a young lawyer in South Africa. A girl in the class asked me to stop the dvd because she was confused. So I found the pause button and asked for clarification. She then asked, “Was he just reincarnated?”
In general their vocabulary is more limited than it should be. On the test which had a question about the partition of India and Pakistan, the word “partition” created serious problems for half the class. This despite it being one of the text’s vocabulary words meaning it is printed in dark bold letters followed by the definition. A fifth grade teacher told me it was on the vocabulary test for his kids last week.
This doesn’t include students who can’t remember the US government has a Senate and a House of Representatives, name the States which border Iowa, and sometimes think the Atlantic Ocean is really where the Pacific is located.
When we were looking at Greece we were looking at the philosophers Plato, Socrates and Aristotle along with some of the others. One young man raised his hand and blurted, “Did they invent soccer?” I asked, “What?” He repeated his question, “Did they invent soccer?” I asked, “why would you ask that?” His response, “Whenever I hear about the old Greeks, someone always talks about “soccer tee’s.”
More recently when we were looking at India I showed the movie, “Gandhi.” The movie starts with the assassination of Gandhi, shows his funeral, and then goes back to when he was a young lawyer in South Africa. A girl in the class asked me to stop the dvd because she was confused. So I found the pause button and asked for clarification. She then asked, “Was he just reincarnated?”
In general their vocabulary is more limited than it should be. On the test which had a question about the partition of India and Pakistan, the word “partition” created serious problems for half the class. This despite it being one of the text’s vocabulary words meaning it is printed in dark bold letters followed by the definition. A fifth grade teacher told me it was on the vocabulary test for his kids last week.
This doesn’t include students who can’t remember the US government has a Senate and a House of Representatives, name the States which border Iowa, and sometimes think the Atlantic Ocean is really where the Pacific is located.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)