High School Memories: The reason this post is a week "late." Over June 20-22, my high school graduating class (1955) enjoyed our 55th reunion in my hometown, Meadville, PA. Our class is blessed with a group who still live in the area and enjoy each other's company. The group's continual planning has allowed our class to celebrate every five years. This year nearly 70 classmates (of 302 graduates) attended one or more of the weekend's get togethers. Our class includes several published authors, two respected local journalists (now retired), plus numerous and sundry other pillars of their respective communities.
Mindset lists of American History. A friend graduated from Beloit College, where two professors create these lists which make interesting reading. The book's subtitle is From Typewriters to Text Messages, What Ten gGenerations of Americans Think Is Normal :-) All of which call to memory Bob Dylan's line, "The times, they are a-changin'."
For any of my readers who have spent time in the classroom, this is a book you might well have used periodically with your students and it still makes for interesting reading. I wish I had been aware of it. Each list is about those who graduated from high school in a specific year; the opening chapter is "The Class of 1898," entitled "Women have always ridden bicycles," goes on to investigate what these graduates would have experienced in their lifetime.
At one time my American history assignments included a short essay titled, "Where were your parents on November 22, 1963?" (That infamous date when JFK was assassinated.) For many years it proved an interesting assignment, a reason for students to have a conversation with their parent(s). I relegated it to the dust bin when the parents began telling their kids they were in 1st, 2nd, or 3rd grade......
I would guess today's equivalent would be, "Where were your parents on 9/11?" Like many of you, I vividly remember both days. An assignment based on Mindsets would provide another interesting topic for conversation and parental recollections. Mindsets also provides fertile ground for adult cocktail-hour conversations.
Hillary soldiers on. In a recent story, Don Balz (Washington Post) noted the problems faced by potential candidate Hillary. His point about her long involvement in American politics and the subsequent need to "reinvent" herself rings true, and so she "trudges on," hoping to find and then exploit her new political self.
For myself, I find it depressing that Hillary may be the best the Democrats have to offer and, among Republicans, 'ole Mitt's name is again being bandied about. As Harry Carey used to exclaim, "Holy cow!"
Separatism closer to home. Here is an interesting reference to an upcoming vote this September in Scotland, essentially a referendum for/against Scottish independence. "We welcome a strong, prosperous, and united United Kingdom..." The speaker was neither English nor Scottish, rather it was Chinese premier Kequing on an official state visit. The Chinese are ever uneasy about the specter of separatism, either at home or among their near-neighbors, even among friends as far away as the British Isles.
Echos of the past. In the post-WW II years, after the Chinese Communists had taken over mainland China, American conservatives continually demanded to know, "Who had 'lost' China?" The same scenario is playing out today: "Who 'lost' Iraq." Today's questions and answers may prove no more informative than those of the past.
The political "whip" In Roll Call, David Hawkings notes the word originates from non-legistlative fields. "Legislative whips get their name from the vocabulary of fox hunting, where the “whipper-in” is the guy assigned to keep the dogs on task during the chase." Adds another dimension to the old phrase, "Riding to [the] hounds."
Howard Baker. The death of the much respected former senator (R, TN), later President Reagan's chief of staff, was well noted from both sides of the aisle. Baker was truly one of the last bi-partisan figures in Washington. Perhaps his most remembered remark was the simple, central question he softly asked during the Watergate hearings: "What did the president know, and when did he know it?" The answer, of course, led inevitably to the resignation of Richard Nixon.
I remember, too, the prominent role Baker played in securing passage of the Panama Canal treaty. I was in the Senate with students on a week-long government studies trip and we watched an hour or so as Senator Baker quietly led this historic debate.
Let the Iranians do the checkmating, pay the costs and risk the unintended consequences. No-one is going to take over the Middle East or South Asia. The sectarian, ethnic and political rivalries will continue as they have for centuries and will balance out over time. Given their long term view of history, they know this well. What we can do is keep this out of partisan politics...The colleagues with whom he corresponds seem of a similar mind. He continued,
It would be nice if just this one time the loudmouthed and bellicose democrats and republicans kept their ignorant mouths shut and thought of the well- being of our service folks.As we say here in the west, the US seems well advised to "fight shy" of any further involvement in this ongoing and mounting chaos. My bet is that Afghanistan, like Iraq, will see increasing violence among the myriad of rival groups as US troops are finally withdrawn.
Was the decision to attack in Iraq all a terrible miscalculation? Chris Hedges reviews the case for why we erred so grievously.
Our jihadists—George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle, Thomas Friedman and Tommy Franks—who assured us that swift and overwhelming force in Iraq would transform the Middle East into an American outpost of progress, are no less demented than the jihadists [now] approaching Baghdad.This is a conclusion with which Professor Andrew Bacevich agrees; he thinks we have created/entered a new multipolar world, one in which the US will most certainly not wield unchallenged power.
Hobby Lobby. This decision was much anticipated and has engendered more than a few comments. Not all commentators, though, seemed to grasp (or have left unsaid) the fact that "closely held" corporations (very few owners) employ many thousands of employees, all of whom are impacted by corporate decisions.
No comments:
Post a Comment