There's no dickering with John Dickerson, chief political correspondent for Slate. I agree, George W. Bush sets the precident for a casual president behind the podium. And I agree, George W. Bush has a wit about him when he doesn't have to think about spin.
Just look at the photo on the link (right click and open a new window)! This president is cassssual. Either that, or he's trying to keep back from letting out a huge belch. Look at his hand on the photo gripping the podium. He forgot to take his Beano or Gas-X before eating that bean burrito grande. Or maybe his hand is looking for a drink at the end of the podium because his throat is so parched from answering all these inconsequential questions from reporters.
Who knows. But George W. Bush certainly handles the podium much differently that past presidents.
Friday, January 27, 2006
Is Your Fallout Shelter Ready?
You may have noticed that I didn't post yesterday, even though there were several breaking news stories that needed a dip in Indigo Lake (like this one about Hamas Voted In in Palestine and the stretched US Army). Well, I took that time to get my fallout shelter ready.
Ok, ok. You don't know what a fallout shelter is? Back in the days there were forces, big forces, that just would have loved to see the United States blown to smithereens. Oh, wait. I guess that's still the case. Well, going back in the days, there were buildings designated as fallout shelters. My school when I was growing up had an old partially rusty sign on it that said "Fallout Shelter" on it. I gues they were popular back then, because many old brick government and public buildings had these signs on them.
Back in the 50s, when the scare was really big, families would dig bomb shelters in their back yards and stock them so they would be prepared to live there if the "bomb" were to drop.
Hmmmm... You'd think that after 9/11, there'd be companies sprung up to help scared people build their terror fortresses. Why didn't that happen? Maybe terrorism isn't scaring people as well as they though.. They need Monsters, Inc.
Anyway, do you have a fallout shelter? I'd love to hear about it!
Ok, ok. You don't know what a fallout shelter is? Back in the days there were forces, big forces, that just would have loved to see the United States blown to smithereens. Oh, wait. I guess that's still the case. Well, going back in the days, there were buildings designated as fallout shelters. My school when I was growing up had an old partially rusty sign on it that said "Fallout Shelter" on it. I gues they were popular back then, because many old brick government and public buildings had these signs on them.
Back in the 50s, when the scare was really big, families would dig bomb shelters in their back yards and stock them so they would be prepared to live there if the "bomb" were to drop.
Hmmmm... You'd think that after 9/11, there'd be companies sprung up to help scared people build their terror fortresses. Why didn't that happen? Maybe terrorism isn't scaring people as well as they though.. They need Monsters, Inc.
Anyway, do you have a fallout shelter? I'd love to hear about it!
Wednesday, January 25, 2006
Love: Controversial Subject in Catholic Church?
It may have come as a surprise to many: an ageing theologian known for his conservative stance on sex exploring a highly controversial subject for the Roman Catholic Church -- love.--Mail & Guardian Online
Huh? Whhhhaaat? For many Christians and Catholics, God is love. Nothing about that is controversial to those who know the true meaning of love.
With Pope Benedict the 16th's first official writing, he strives to define love, with the true meaning.
And then, he brings up two Greek (human) concepts of love "eros" (erotic form) and "agape" (spiritual and selfless form).
The pope also brings up "philia," Greek for the love of friendship in this encyclical.
Did Christianity "kill" eros? Nah, not necessarily. We still have that commandment to "be fruitful and multiply," and the Roman Catholics know that very well.
As the pope states, a disciplined and purified form of eros is a "foretaste of the pinnacle of our existence, of that beatitude of which our whole being yearns."
According to the Mail & Guardian article, the pope puts on his best moral polite jacket to say that eros without agape is a weak form of love, that both go hand in hand together.
What about agape without eros? All priests ordained in the Roman Catholic Church in all correct senses should only espouse agape love, and put to death any thought or action of eros love in their lives. Isn't having agape without eros, stifling to the eros love in priests? Thus, do priests have a weakened form of love? Hmmmm....
I think many Christians, both Catholic and protestant, are raised with a certain notion that sex is mysterious and virtually untouchable until marriage and is only practical in creating a new generation. In some way, shape or form, the encyclical reads that married Christians need to put the spiritual back into our love lives. Maybe married couples need to pray before sex (although some probably do that during the act), like praying before your meal.
"Bless us, O Lord, and these Thy gifts, which we are about to receive from Thy bounty..." Hmmmm...
If you have ever checked out the Kama Sutra, they meditate before the act, so in some ways a prayer or spiritual meditation to focus the couple with the connection between eros and God would likely help to elevate ecstasy that could transport them to the gates of St. Peter. Maybe that's why Brian Adams sings about heaven so much?
Much of the pope's writing reminds me of a Jewish website I came across recently (while looking for low carb recipes, of all things). It described kosher Jewish sex, and the Jewish stance on sexuality.
Stop smiling... Hehe. I know I got a chuckle from those three words together, too (You don't have a silly grin, yet? Just think of what normally is kosher: salt, hot dogs, pickles... ok, ok, you sort of get it. Ok, so you are wondering how a rabbi could bless kosher sex? Me, too.).
This writing about kosher Jewish sex really made me appreciate the Jewish culture and how they cherish their traditions. It also made me wonder why the Roman Catholic Church didn't have much to say in a positive fashion about sex and spirituality, until now.
Thank you, Pope Benedict XVI! Now, when are you going to let priests be married and properly enjoy this eros gift from God, too?
Huh? Whhhhaaat? For many Christians and Catholics, God is love. Nothing about that is controversial to those who know the true meaning of love.
With Pope Benedict the 16th's first official writing, he strives to define love, with the true meaning.
And then, he brings up two Greek (human) concepts of love "eros" (erotic form) and "agape" (spiritual and selfless form).
The pope also brings up "philia," Greek for the love of friendship in this encyclical.
Did Christianity "kill" eros? Nah, not necessarily. We still have that commandment to "be fruitful and multiply," and the Roman Catholics know that very well.
As the pope states, a disciplined and purified form of eros is a "foretaste of the pinnacle of our existence, of that beatitude of which our whole being yearns."
According to the Mail & Guardian article, the pope puts on his best moral polite jacket to say that eros without agape is a weak form of love, that both go hand in hand together.
What about agape without eros? All priests ordained in the Roman Catholic Church in all correct senses should only espouse agape love, and put to death any thought or action of eros love in their lives. Isn't having agape without eros, stifling to the eros love in priests? Thus, do priests have a weakened form of love? Hmmmm....
I think many Christians, both Catholic and protestant, are raised with a certain notion that sex is mysterious and virtually untouchable until marriage and is only practical in creating a new generation. In some way, shape or form, the encyclical reads that married Christians need to put the spiritual back into our love lives. Maybe married couples need to pray before sex (although some probably do that during the act), like praying before your meal.
"Bless us, O Lord, and these Thy gifts, which we are about to receive from Thy bounty..." Hmmmm...
If you have ever checked out the Kama Sutra, they meditate before the act, so in some ways a prayer or spiritual meditation to focus the couple with the connection between eros and God would likely help to elevate ecstasy that could transport them to the gates of St. Peter. Maybe that's why Brian Adams sings about heaven so much?
Much of the pope's writing reminds me of a Jewish website I came across recently (while looking for low carb recipes, of all things). It described kosher Jewish sex, and the Jewish stance on sexuality.
Stop smiling... Hehe. I know I got a chuckle from those three words together, too (You don't have a silly grin, yet? Just think of what normally is kosher: salt, hot dogs, pickles... ok, ok, you sort of get it. Ok, so you are wondering how a rabbi could bless kosher sex? Me, too.).
This writing about kosher Jewish sex really made me appreciate the Jewish culture and how they cherish their traditions. It also made me wonder why the Roman Catholic Church didn't have much to say in a positive fashion about sex and spirituality, until now.
Thank you, Pope Benedict XVI! Now, when are you going to let priests be married and properly enjoy this eros gift from God, too?
Storm Papers? Where?
I love this headline:
White House Declines to Provide Storm Papers
"Yeah, the storm blew them away... Hey, we can't be responsible if the storm came and blew them away before we had the chance to put our papers in a safe place."--a possible quote from Scott McClellan?
White House Declines to Provide Storm Papers
"Yeah, the storm blew them away... Hey, we can't be responsible if the storm came and blew them away before we had the chance to put our papers in a safe place."--a possible quote from Scott McClellan?
Tuesday, January 24, 2006
Ford, GM & US Education: Living in a Box?
You've probably seen these headlines: US Schools Lag Behind; College Grads Deficient in Basic Skills...
I've read expert comments about the results of these recent research studies, stating that much of the issue surrounding the lack of skills in students and graduates is due to teachers and educators instructing inside the box. That is, when educators instruct in the classroom, they don't let their students use their knowledge and creativity in every day situations. It is allowing that thinking and working "outside of the box" that students are missing.
Part of the issue is that schools and colleges are not in the business to teach students how to understand a credit card offer or balancing the checkbook. Nooooo, they are in the business of teaching them readin', 'ritin', and 'rithmetic (and then expound upon that in college).
Nothing beats the experience of figuring something out on your own, even after you fail, and fail again. Look at Einstein, Edison, Bill Gates... all college dropouts.
So, what's this got to do with the widespread layoffs and changes at Ford and GM? Well, there's a lot of similarities between the two, if you think about it. Ford and GM are restructuring because of foreign competition. The same is true with US education. In fact, neither groups can hold a candle up to their past successes. We've lost that competitive edge, both in innovative industry and excelling education.
Why? I don't think it is so much that we have gotten worse, in as much as we haven't advanced like our competition. I enjoy driving my 1994 Toyota Corolla, and plan to enjoy driving it for many years to come. Why? Because it is dependable. It is not a Fix Or Repair Daily vehicle. It is not tempramental and doesn't break down on me without reason. I also have in my possession a 1997 Chevy Malibu (I didn't buy this one, long story...). It is a good car. It has a lot more balls in it than the Corolla, but it also eats gas more than the Corolla. But I don't feel comfortable in it, like I do in the Corolla.--This is why Ford and GM are struggling to compete. Ok, probably not top on their list, but it is on mine. And, probably a lot of others, too.
Have you noticed how many of the American-origin car manufacturers (i.e., Ford, GM, etc.) are styling their new vehicles to look just like their foreign counterparts? That's because they want people to think their cars are just as good as their competitors, that they are in the same league. However, you can't mimic the quality and feeling of foreign cars. After test driving the VW Touareg, I noticed it has such a commanding style compared to its US imposters, and a feel like it is solid (btw, that wood look on the dash--that's real wood). Cheaper made vehicles cannot equal that feeling of being solid and dependable.
So, how does that convert to education in the United States? Regarding school education, there are so many variables that distinguish the education of our youth, including the rise in divorce, the rise in students who must be drugged due to apparent ADHD or another type of mental issue to be in the classroom, the fall of discipline in schools, and the rise of dual income homes where both parents must work to make ends meet. Put on top of that the rise in costs to educate our students have risen way above the adjusted rate of inflation.
Sigh. These are among the reasons why US students, and US industry is declining against foreign competition. Educators, school boards, and car manufacturers do not seriously address our competition and truly understand and get a grasp why foreign students or vehicles are exceptional compared to ours. They don't get why the foreign cars are selling (or foreign students are excelling) and translate that into their own product. And, they aren't innovative to think beyond the box and see how they can take the concept of solid dependability (or scholarly achievement) and make it even better.
Why? Maybe it costs too much. Maybe it would involve them to think. Maybe they get too many headaches from thinking too much. Maybe they have been living in a box way too long.
I've read expert comments about the results of these recent research studies, stating that much of the issue surrounding the lack of skills in students and graduates is due to teachers and educators instructing inside the box. That is, when educators instruct in the classroom, they don't let their students use their knowledge and creativity in every day situations. It is allowing that thinking and working "outside of the box" that students are missing.
Part of the issue is that schools and colleges are not in the business to teach students how to understand a credit card offer or balancing the checkbook. Nooooo, they are in the business of teaching them readin', 'ritin', and 'rithmetic (and then expound upon that in college).
Nothing beats the experience of figuring something out on your own, even after you fail, and fail again. Look at Einstein, Edison, Bill Gates... all college dropouts.
So, what's this got to do with the widespread layoffs and changes at Ford and GM? Well, there's a lot of similarities between the two, if you think about it. Ford and GM are restructuring because of foreign competition. The same is true with US education. In fact, neither groups can hold a candle up to their past successes. We've lost that competitive edge, both in innovative industry and excelling education.
Why? I don't think it is so much that we have gotten worse, in as much as we haven't advanced like our competition. I enjoy driving my 1994 Toyota Corolla, and plan to enjoy driving it for many years to come. Why? Because it is dependable. It is not a Fix Or Repair Daily vehicle. It is not tempramental and doesn't break down on me without reason. I also have in my possession a 1997 Chevy Malibu (I didn't buy this one, long story...). It is a good car. It has a lot more balls in it than the Corolla, but it also eats gas more than the Corolla. But I don't feel comfortable in it, like I do in the Corolla.--This is why Ford and GM are struggling to compete. Ok, probably not top on their list, but it is on mine. And, probably a lot of others, too.
Have you noticed how many of the American-origin car manufacturers (i.e., Ford, GM, etc.) are styling their new vehicles to look just like their foreign counterparts? That's because they want people to think their cars are just as good as their competitors, that they are in the same league. However, you can't mimic the quality and feeling of foreign cars. After test driving the VW Touareg, I noticed it has such a commanding style compared to its US imposters, and a feel like it is solid (btw, that wood look on the dash--that's real wood). Cheaper made vehicles cannot equal that feeling of being solid and dependable.
So, how does that convert to education in the United States? Regarding school education, there are so many variables that distinguish the education of our youth, including the rise in divorce, the rise in students who must be drugged due to apparent ADHD or another type of mental issue to be in the classroom, the fall of discipline in schools, and the rise of dual income homes where both parents must work to make ends meet. Put on top of that the rise in costs to educate our students have risen way above the adjusted rate of inflation.
Sigh. These are among the reasons why US students, and US industry is declining against foreign competition. Educators, school boards, and car manufacturers do not seriously address our competition and truly understand and get a grasp why foreign students or vehicles are exceptional compared to ours. They don't get why the foreign cars are selling (or foreign students are excelling) and translate that into their own product. And, they aren't innovative to think beyond the box and see how they can take the concept of solid dependability (or scholarly achievement) and make it even better.
Why? Maybe it costs too much. Maybe it would involve them to think. Maybe they get too many headaches from thinking too much. Maybe they have been living in a box way too long.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
