This is the time of the year when there are college graduations, while the regular school year for kids is also wrapping up. I used to really love this time of year, when the weather grew warmer, and summer vacation neared. Like most kids, summer was a time to get away from school, and just simply enjoy ourselves. Perhaps attend summer camp, and most likely, engage in other fun activities. We dreaded when the time came to go back to school in September.
Now, with a son of my own in fourth grade, it saddens me that kids (and that includes him, as well as myself when I was in school many years ago now) feel unhappy about going back to school. After all, school is the peak time for socializing with others, and it also is about learning. And for far too many kids, including my son now and me decades ago, there is an automatic, and most unfortunate, association with education as exclusively falling into the domain of being a burden.
I think it is urgent to understand that learning is fun. It can and should be exciting. Looking back now, I can remember actually feeling excited about learning things. The major difference between my high school years and Rutgers was simply this: by the time that I was attending Rutgers, I had discovered how to incorporate my excitement in learning with my academic performance.
In 1998, I transferred from Bergen Community College to Rutgers. I had been attending Bergen for years on a part-time basis, and felt really pleased to transfer. I had screwed up at times during Bergen, although finished strong, which probably had something to do with maturity. Rutgers offered me the chance to wipe the slate clean and start over, and that was both inviting and refreshing. I was determined to make good on it. Ultimately, I did, eventually graduating with High Honors.
It was inspiring to feel that whole worlds of deeper understanding were opening up for me at Rutgers University in particular, when there was the combined excitement of doing very well academically, while also feeling like my mind was blown at times with all that I was learning, and the deeper understanding that came with it.
Now, it is my son who is learning, and of course, as any dutiful parent is apt to do, I try to encourage this at every turn. Recently, he had a school project, which was called the Wax Museum Project. The kids in his grade had to select someone who had made an impact on New Jersey in history.
So, we set to work on finding a good person that no one else would pick. Ultimately, we chose "Mad" Anthony Wayne.
Now, part of what was needed was to dress as this person, which proved a bit challenging. After all, Wayne fought in the Revolutionary War for American Independence, and that required finding a look that is radically different than we have available these days.
It took me longer than it should for the lightbulb to come on, and think of Washington's Headquarters in Morristown. This was one perfect example of my own enthusiasm for learning as a kid, and being unable (r perhaps even unwilling) to employ this learning into my academic work. My parents took us to Morristown, and seeing something so prominent in history, and so close to where we lived, made this great era feel alive. So, it seemed to do the same a couple of weekends ago with my son, when we went there, as well. It helped us get many visuals that were also a part of the project, as well as the tri hat that was the style back then.
He enjoyed it, and even compared it to Tombstone, which seems to be his standard of excellence in his judgment.
We used what we got there for the school project, and even though he denied it, I did get the distinct impression that he actually learned something that might just last.
Oh, and he got an A+ on the wax museum project, as well. With the hat, and with his mother taking an old, navy blue jacket of hers and sewing some gold frills on the shoulders, as well as a white scarf that she puffed up to look like a colonial-era shirt, he looked quite good. The visuals were strong, as we spent a good amount of time making a solid poster. Plus, I had also picked up a replica of an old map of New Jersey dating back to colonial days. The speech was informative, yet remained within the 45-second time limit for the presentation. It was informative and intriguing and, luckily, we recited it enough that he knew it by heart, as required, by the day of the presentation, which was last Friday.
What an awesome day that was!
I will give further updates on how he is doing.
Monday, May 16, 2016
Sunday, May 15, 2016
Blog Writing Not Coming So Easily Lately
My concentration has been detracted quite a bit recently, and I fear that it has been affecting the quality of my blog entries here in recent weeks, and possibly even months.
This has been an extremely busy time, and my mind has been wondering from place to place, although the focus has not been as much on making sure that I produce at least one blog entry of halfway decent quality every day.
Yes, I am admitting to having slipped up a bit in this regard recently.
Not that this serves as an excuse, or anything, but the hours that I have been working have something to do with it, and not just because this takes me away from home for many hours of the day and week, either. It is because of the exhaustion that often comes with working some crazy hours, and the lack of energy and motivation that comes along with it, when seated before a computer screen showing a lot of blank, white space. A vast emptiness, that I then am supposed to fill up with something that, hopefully, is of decent quality.
Frankly, I have not felt up to the task lately nearly as much as has been the case in the past.
Hopefully, this is just a passing phase, although we shall see.
All I wanted to say was that I apologize for this, and hope to get back on the wagon and writing more, and better quality, in the near future.
This has been an extremely busy time, and my mind has been wondering from place to place, although the focus has not been as much on making sure that I produce at least one blog entry of halfway decent quality every day.
Yes, I am admitting to having slipped up a bit in this regard recently.
Not that this serves as an excuse, or anything, but the hours that I have been working have something to do with it, and not just because this takes me away from home for many hours of the day and week, either. It is because of the exhaustion that often comes with working some crazy hours, and the lack of energy and motivation that comes along with it, when seated before a computer screen showing a lot of blank, white space. A vast emptiness, that I then am supposed to fill up with something that, hopefully, is of decent quality.
Frankly, I have not felt up to the task lately nearly as much as has been the case in the past.
Hopefully, this is just a passing phase, although we shall see.
All I wanted to say was that I apologize for this, and hope to get back on the wagon and writing more, and better quality, in the near future.
Saturday, May 14, 2016
Orlando's Short Lived Magic of the 1990's
Image courtesy of Michael Tipton's Flick page - 2013 Orlando Magic 1: https://www.flickr.com/photos/rmtip21/9163132285/in/photolist-eXHrZp-qGJXbj-eXHsxi-nhgfJY-bQVS8Z-nx6j1a-67iJzJ-ofYzXh-oDaqFk-oftkh3-oJf7wH-qUDpHf-fdP4Gv-mwvB3n-oftGA3-5VEsQu-oBuPXW-9tQLfK-p7D9Jn-nfAUmw-eb1YoA-ozurRA-qRqkXr-fLB3fq-5VAaUi-fKSnB2-bC2aWu-5KrhVt-4LCvc9-qWw98X-6K6CRP-owRHSq-8uuC4J-9mDXsc-neV5Yd-os5Wvx-nfAK2Q-oJWXem-nx6k3F-oBpjeZ-95eCxP-e42YzH-mwwc8z-66Vjf6-nx6fwg-8urvxc-qnHmRn-ouSUo9-e4dJk3-mww5Gi
Creative Commons License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/
It's kind of funny how things can do that, isn't it? I mean, I was a basketball fan back then, but also a fan of a whole lot of other things, too. A fan of the NFL, a fan of the NHL, and a fan of soccer - particularly the World Cup, which had just been hosted by the United States in 1994. My brother even managed to score tickets to a quarterfinal game. Don't ask me how, since they were hot tickets, obviously. He even managed to get better tickets for the 1998 World Cup, this time the semifinals (that is, one of the two games to determine who meets for the championship in the final championship match). In both cases, he invited me to attend with him, and I took him up on the offer both times.
To boot, there was also tennis, and this was at a time when Andre Agassi was, for the first time, truly rising to meet his potential, as he would go on to win the US Open in 1994, and followed that up with the 1995 Australian Open title, beating arch-rival Pete Sampras in the final to capture it, and eventually grabbing the number one ranking for the first time in his career.
Add to that, some intriguing Olympics, as the 1992 winter games were also in France (no, I did not attend those), before the Winter Olympic Games broke off from the tradition of being in the same year as the summer with the Lillehammer games in 1994.
So indeed, it was a busy time for sports, and sports are not even what I think of the most about the 1990's, because there was all of that amazing music, and there were the increasingly exciting time in my personal life, since I was a young man in my prime. This was a time when concerts, which had for so long seemed like a luxury that only other people managed to enjoy, were suddenly becoming accessible to me, and I went to a lot of concerts, including some truly great and memorable ones. Plus, all of the great albums and unbelievable music that was coming out helped to really define the 1990's, for me and for millions of others.
But the 1990's were also a fantastic and exciting time in the NBA, as well. There were those mighty Chicago Bulls, who pulled off three straight titles to start off the 1990's. The New York Knicks, who along with the Nets, were my favorite team, were on the rise and presenting what seemed like a tough challenge, although the Bulls won out in the end, anyway. Then, there were the Indiana Pacers, who when Jordan first retired after the 1993 season, rose up to challenge what appeared to be the automatic supremacy of those Knicks, forcing them to a tough Game 7 win to scrape by to the NBA Finals, where the Houston Rockets finally beat the Knicks in another tough, seven game series. There were some other great stories going around back then in the NBA, such as Charles Barkley going to Phoenix, and the Suns enjoying a dominant season in 1992-93, before bowing to the Bulls in the NBA Finals. There were the Seattle Supersonics, who enjoyed a dominant season in the 1993-94 season under coach George Karl, who did not shy away from his team's status as favorites in the absence of Michael Jordan, and how they were shocked in the first round by the upstart Denver Nuggets, the first eighth seed to stun a top seed. Plus, there were all of those great laser light shows, when arenas would darken as the home team was being introduced. The trend started with the Bulls (of course), but before too long, each team tried to top all others, until it got rather ridiculous.
Yet, one of the most intriguing stories of the NBA at the time was something that, ultimately, did not even pan out in the long run, and that was the story of the Orlando Magic.
It is hard to forget how they managed, against all odds, to obtain the first pick in the NBA draft by winning the lottery two straight years - and the last one was after they had a 1 in 64 chance, as they had only one ping pong ball. So, one year after obtaining the once in a lifetime talents of Shaquille O'Neal, they had the first pick again, and drafted Chris Webber. Then, they orchestrated a deal that sent Webber to the Warriors, who really, really wanted him, in order to obtain Anfernee Hardaway, plus three additional draft picks. An unbelievably profitable deal, and the Magic soon cashed in with a tremendously successful and promising season in the 1993-94 season, which was the franchise's first ever playoff season.
They got swept by Indiana, but the possibilities for the future seemed limitless. After all, they had picked up a dominant center in Shaq in 1992, and then picked up one of the most explosive threats in the league with Penny in 1993. Then, they obtained Horace Grant in 1994, and he seemed to be the last, missing piece in the championship puzzle. This was going to be the team of the future, the next dynasty. That was what people expected, and nobody expected any less.
In the 1994-95 season, the Magic were dominant, and wrapped up the season as the top seed in the Eastern Conference. They went back to the playoffs, and easily got past the Boston Celtics, closing out the old Boston Garden. But in the next round, they had to face the Chicago Bulls, and Michael Jordan had made his return just a couple of months earlier. Everyone expected Chicago to win, but Orlando managed to get the best of what seemed like an aging Bulls team, and they clinched it in six, with Horace Grant, the ex-Bull, being hoisted onto the shoulders of his teammate in triumph. Finally, the Magic barely scraped by the Indiana Pacers in Game 7 of the Eastern Conference Finals, to earn their first NBA Finals trip.
They were happy, and celebrated a little too much, as they had the defending NBA champs, the Houston Rockets, as their opponents. Horace Grant tried to warn them, having been there before and knowing what to expect. Still, the Magic still looked dominant in the first half of Game 1, and seemed to have the game well in hand. They could do this, they could win the series. But they came out flat after the half, and the Rockets got back into the game. By late in the fourth quarter, the Magic still seemed on the way to a win, but they just had to be careful, holding a three point lead. Nick Anderson was fouled, and all he had to do was sink one shot, and Orlando would in all likelihood win. He missed both shots, but managed to get a rebound, and was fouled again. And again, all he had to do was make one shot. He missed both of the next two, which meant four straight misses from the free throw line at the most crucial time. The Rockets then sank a three-pointed to tie it, and would go on to win in overtime.
Orlando never recovered. They lost Game 2 at home, and did not manage to win a game on the road in Houston to avoid the sweep. As the Rockets celebrated their second straight title, Magic coach Brian Shaw called his team together, and forced them to stay on the floor and to watch the celebrations, so that they could feel the disappointment, but also see what they were missing out on, so that they would not miss out on it the next time. After all, everyone expected this to be the first of many NBA Finals appearances that the young Orlando Magic would enjoy.
As it turned out, that is not quite how it happened. The Magic would still be an elite team the next year, but they began to have problems. Young egos got in the way, as the rise of Penny Hardaway's fame detracted from Shaq's thunder. There were injuries and distractions, but the Orlando Magic still managed a very successful 60-22 season. No one remembers that, though, because the Chicago Bulls that season went 72-10, and they were regarded as the best team of all time. When both teams breezed through their first two rounds to set up an Eastern Conference showdown, it looked like there might be similar fireworks as the previous year, in what had been a highly entertaining playoff series.
However, the Chicago Bulls were having none of it. They dominated in the first two games at home, and then took Game 3 in Orlando. The Magic tried to avoid the sweep, but they failed. For the third straight season, the Magic left the playoffs after suffering a sweep.
In the offseason, the biggest thing for Orlando to do was retain the services of their biggest star, Shaq. However, the whole problem with young egos really grew out of control, and the Magic lost him to the Lakers, who offered him more money than any other player had ever gotten to that point. Orlando had lost their best player and their greatest asset, and would never recover. They were knocked back down to the pack, and before too long, their coach was ousted from a unanimous decision by the players, who elected to get rid of him. After that, Penny Hardaway started having some serious problems with his knees, and he would never again be the same player, and the Magic were essentially done.
Yet, despite this rather quick decline from what otherwise had been incredibly great fortunes, the Magic of the 1990's have remained as one of the great and most intriguing stories from that era. I remember personally thinking that they were the team of the future, and they reminded me a great deal of another sports franchise, but not an NBA one. Yes, they reminded me of the Dallas Cowboys, who were beginning to cash in on their tremendous good fortunes right around the time that the Magic were on the rise. The Cowboys had bottomed out in the late 1980's, after a decline which had begun in the 1986 season. But they took chances, hiring coach Jimmy Johnson, and then trading Herschel Walker for what seemed like a million draft picks. In the meantime, they got top flight offensive talent in three consecutive seasons, grabbing wide receiver Michael Irving in 1988, quarterback Troy Aikman in 1989, and then Emmitt Smith in 1990. With trades and with all of those draft picks, the Cowboys reversed their fortunes, going from a dismal 1-15 season in 1989, to winning their first of three Super Bowls of the decade in 1992, as they went onto clinching "Team of the Decade" honors.
Both teams were young, flashy, and both also seemed to have a certain youthful arrogance about themselves. Also, both teams had a buzz about them, with almost all of the so-called pundits and experts predicting a long reign of dominance for each. Everyone seemed sure that the Dallas Cowboys were going to start winning, and in a big way, in the very early 1990's, right around the time that obtaining Emmitt Smith proved to be a very strong move following his strong showing in the 1990 season. To that point in time, it seemed that everything that they did to build themselves up looked charmed and magical, and destined for greater things in the not so distant future. So it was with Orlando, as well, as they obtained one superstar after another, and looked poised to produce great results on the basketball court, as well. And both teams did produce some great things in the field of play, as the Dallas Cowboys finally followed up on that tremendous promise and faith that people had in them by beating the recent dynasty of the time, the San Francisco 49ers, in the NFC Championship Game, and then following up by blowing out the Bills in Super Bowl XXVII. Orlando, too, seemed to follow up on their tremendous promise by beating the recent dynasty of their time in the Chicago Bulls.
Orlando's rise in fortunes, and the promise that came out of that, seemed to be on that level. Hell, the two teams even looked similar, with similar colors and even somewhat similar logos. If the Cowboys would have a basketball uniform, it might very well look like those Orlando Magic uniforms. Orlando's future dynasty seemed inevitable. As Ahmad Rashaad suggested in the 30 for 30 documentary, "The Orlando Magic were like a fairy tale team in a fairy tale city."
But part of their legacy is that the bell tolling midnight chimed much earlier than expected, and ultimately, they did not cash in, largely for the reasons stated above. Shaq moved on to LA, and won championships there. The coach got fired, and Penny was hampered by injuries. The Magic dynasty was not to be, and the Bulls, who had gotten embarrassed in the semifinal series against Orlando in 1995, returned the favor big time in 1996, their most dominant season. The Bulls had already won three NBA titles prior to that season, but they were so strong, that the historically dominant 1996 Bulls not only won that title, but defended it successfully the next season, and then again the year after that.
That was the main difference between the Magic and the Cowboys. Both eventually got beaten by the old guard team, after knocking them out of the playoffs. But Dallas lost following the 1994-95 season, in the third straight NFC title showdown between the two teams. By then, however, the Cowboys had knocked the Niners out in two consecutive seasons, and had captured two straight Super Bowl championships. They would add a third the following season, after the 49ers suffered a shocking loss to Bret Favre and the Green Bay Packers. The Cowboys would win that third title in January of 1996, in the Arizona sunshine in Super Bowl XXX. Orlando, by contrast, lost to the Bulls in the very next season, after having failed to win the 1995 NBA Finals. The Bulls went on to win the 1996 NBA Finals, giving themselves a four titles to none advantage over their presumed successors, before the Magic began to disintegrate, also in 1996, without having captured an NBA title.
So, while Dallas was unable to completely shut out their main rivals, the 49ers, from a title in the 1990's, their own three titles largely overshadowed San Francisco's sole Super Bowl title. By contrast, Orlando only produced one NBA Finals appearance, and they got swept. That clearly pales by comparison to Chicago's six NBA championships in a span of eight years, which included some historically dominant individual seasons in 1992, 1996, and 1997. Chicago overshadowed the youthful promise of the Orlando Magic even more completely than the youthful Dallas Cowboys managed to eclipse the more established San Francisco 49ers in the nineties. The decline of both teams, the Dallas Cowboys and the Orlando Magic, had some similarities. In both cases, the coach departed on relatively hostile terms. Major talents departed for greener pastures financially. Yet, by the time it happened in Dallas, they had two titles to their name, and managed to win another Super Bowl championship nonetheless. But in basketball, where only five players are on the court at any given time, the loss of talent - particularly as great and dominant a talent as Shaq's, was simply too much for Orlando to overcome. The ouster of the head coach did not help, and then the injuries that continually hampered Penny just killed whatever promise and potential those Orlando Magic once had. All that was left for fans were bittersweet memories of some great moments during incomplete runs, and ruminations of what might have been.
Now, to be fair, the Dallas Cowboys and Orlando Magic both were handed uniquely exceptional opportunities to capitalize on. The Cowboys translated these into championships, while the Magic did not. But the Magic were not alone. The Los Angeles Rams were given a similar chance for incredible success when they traded Eric Dickerson to the Indianapolis Colts, getting a ton of draft picks in return, and an opportunity to build a good, young team. For a while there, it looked like the Rams might have done something with that, as they looked like an emerging team in the late 1980's and into the 1990 season. However, the Rams went from one of the favorites in 1990, to a 5-11 season, and would suffer nine straight losing seasons. The most pronounced symbol of their failure would be 17 straight losses to their biggest rival, the San Francisco 49ers, who's success made the failure of the Rams all the more complete. So, Orlando is hardly the only team that had a chance to build a young and hugely talented team seemingly destined to do great things, only to ultimately disappoint.
Those Bulls humbled the team that was supposed to have been the next great dynasty, the Orlando Magic. However, the Chicago Bulls were themselves a uniquely great dynasty, even by the standards of dynasties. After all, their six titles in eight years eclipses almost every other dynasty not just in the NBA in recent decades, but in all sports. After all, most of the NFL franchises that earned "Team of the Decade" honors did so by winning three or four championships. The Edmonton Oilers of the 1980's and the Montreal Canadiens of the 1970's each won five titles. The New York Yankees won four titles in the late 1990's and early 2000's. And in basketball, the Los Angeles Lakers won five titles in the eighties, and again five titles in the 2000's. None of those teams won six titles in eight years, let alone with the level of dominance that the Bulls displayed. The fact that most people place an asterisk on the championships won by the Houston Rockets in the mid-nineties, and point to the fact that Michael Jordan had retired during that same stretch as evidence that Houston had gotten away with not having to face the truly best team of the era. So, Orlando was up against stiff competition, to say the least. And the words that seemed so apt in describing the Magic of the 1990's was that they never really recovered from some devastating setbacks. The first chink in the armor came when Nick Anderson missed those four free throws that might have changed the outcome in the 1995 NBA Finals. Then, they never appeared to have recovered from that embarrassing and humbling sweep by the Bulls. But they especially never recovered from Shaq's departure. They never recovered from Grant's ousting as head coach. And finally, they never recovered from Penny's injury problems with his knee.
The Magic might have been the NBA equivalent of the Dallas Cowboys in the 1990's. But they were two different sports, two different teams, and obviously, two different stories. One was hugely successful, as the Cowboys became the first team in NFL history to win three of four Super Bowl titles (since matched by the New England Patriots of the early 2000's. But all of the talk of the inevitable Orlando Magic dynasty came to one NBA Finals appearance, and the run to the Eastern Conference Finals the next year. Both series resulted in the Magic getting swept.
Then, slowly but surely, the talent that the Magic were so blessed with went away, and all that remained from their tremendous great fortune, and the hype that followed, were memories and thoughts of what might have been...
Here is the full episode of 30 for 30 on those Orlando Magic of the 1990's:
Friday, May 13, 2016
Hillary Clinton & Democratic Establishment Still Alienating Progressive Voters
We are told that it is already basically etched in stone. That come November, you will essentially have to choose, once again, between the lesser of two evils. I prefer the way Michael Moore once referred to it as "the evil of two lessers."
Indeed, if there was ever a major political race where this sad truth was the case, it would indeed be a fight for the White House between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.
She's not a good person, and will say everything and anything to get herself elected.
Once she gets the office that she seeks, political pragmatism will inform her decisions, whether or not that is in the best interests of the people that she is supposed to represent. After all, as a Senator from New York, she voted for the Iraq invasion, which President Bush was aggressively pining for. She voted in favor of the Wall Street bailout. She worked out much of the Trans-Pacific Partnership that she now, suddenly, is against, since polls show that a majority of voters are against it. She votes for tax breaks for the rich.
Also, she opposes reinstating Glass-Steagall, which her husband got rid of while serving in the Oval Office.
Oh, she's sounded very progressive in the last few months. But that is only because she needed to, as Bernie's phenomenal popularity suddenly was challenging her formerly virtually uncontested ascendance to be the nominee for the Democrats. Suddenly, and surely painfully for her, she had to talk the talk of the progressives that she has not only ignored for so long, but seems to disdain. Suddenly, she had to talk about getting tough on the big banks and Wall Street, which Bernie was right to sarcastically reply that they must really be shaking in their boots over that. After all, can she really be believed, when she takes millions of dollars from those very same banks that she is vowing to get tough on?
And if you believe that she will, I have a bridge connecting Manhattan and Brooklyn that you might be interested in purchasing.
Many of her supporters seem to like her simply because she would get an important and inevitable milestone in American history out of the way. Specifically, she would become the first woman elected president. However, she would continue some of the worst excesses that men have been known for, and thus would not be a refreshing change in that regard, but very much more of the same. In fact, it would be worse in some ways, because the thought that a woman could simply continue with things the way they are, and would make no real changes, is depressing. All the more depressing when you stop and consider that she has already gotten away with a lot probably because she is a woman, and thus has gotten a free pass for her ties to big money from corporations and very wealthy donors.
It's too easy to pay a few politicians of either party to forward the interests of moneyed elites, even when these things are not only not good for Americans, but actively against their best interests. I wish we had a viable alternative to the Democrats and Republicans. Perhaps a real first round of voting, where people could vote their conscience and not necessarily for either of these two parties, like they have in Europe. Or, at the very least, it would help to have a viable third or fourth option than the two major parties, both of whom reek of insider entitlements and corruption.
We need options that would represent legitimate modes of political thought. I am not one of those who dismiss conservatism automatically, out of hand. The idea of fiscal conservatism of course makes sense, and is hard to argue against. As Andrew Bacevich suggested, at the end of the day, the books have to balance. Also, there is something to be said for continuity, for consistency. For a healthy respect of established institutions. There are conservatives that I respect, such as Dwight Eisenhower.
Also, it sure would be nice to have a truly progressive political movement or party to vote for during election season, instead of a heavily watered down political party with far too many ties to big corporations and banks, with an obscene amount of money being poured into the war machine. Each election season, particularly during the primaries, some Democrats will outdo one another in praising progressive values, and then, they turn much more "moderate", which is to say corporatist, in time for the general election. Every now and then, they might throw the voters a bone, such as with Obamacare. But by and large, any truly progressive ideology has not been advanced for many decades now.
The same can be said for true conservatism.
It is time for a change, and this has never been as evident for many Americans as it appears to be right now, when the establishment candidates from both parties have been strongly challenged and, in the case of the GOP, even ousted.
Now is the time for real political expression.
Hillary Clinton says she isn’t sure Bernie Sanders is a Democrat Dylan Stableford Senior editor April 6, 2016
https://www.yahoo.com/news/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-isnt-a-real-142724784.html?soc_src=mail&soc_trk=ma
Indeed, if there was ever a major political race where this sad truth was the case, it would indeed be a fight for the White House between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.
She's not a good person, and will say everything and anything to get herself elected.
Once she gets the office that she seeks, political pragmatism will inform her decisions, whether or not that is in the best interests of the people that she is supposed to represent. After all, as a Senator from New York, she voted for the Iraq invasion, which President Bush was aggressively pining for. She voted in favor of the Wall Street bailout. She worked out much of the Trans-Pacific Partnership that she now, suddenly, is against, since polls show that a majority of voters are against it. She votes for tax breaks for the rich.
Also, she opposes reinstating Glass-Steagall, which her husband got rid of while serving in the Oval Office.
Oh, she's sounded very progressive in the last few months. But that is only because she needed to, as Bernie's phenomenal popularity suddenly was challenging her formerly virtually uncontested ascendance to be the nominee for the Democrats. Suddenly, and surely painfully for her, she had to talk the talk of the progressives that she has not only ignored for so long, but seems to disdain. Suddenly, she had to talk about getting tough on the big banks and Wall Street, which Bernie was right to sarcastically reply that they must really be shaking in their boots over that. After all, can she really be believed, when she takes millions of dollars from those very same banks that she is vowing to get tough on?
And if you believe that she will, I have a bridge connecting Manhattan and Brooklyn that you might be interested in purchasing.
Many of her supporters seem to like her simply because she would get an important and inevitable milestone in American history out of the way. Specifically, she would become the first woman elected president. However, she would continue some of the worst excesses that men have been known for, and thus would not be a refreshing change in that regard, but very much more of the same. In fact, it would be worse in some ways, because the thought that a woman could simply continue with things the way they are, and would make no real changes, is depressing. All the more depressing when you stop and consider that she has already gotten away with a lot probably because she is a woman, and thus has gotten a free pass for her ties to big money from corporations and very wealthy donors.
It's too easy to pay a few politicians of either party to forward the interests of moneyed elites, even when these things are not only not good for Americans, but actively against their best interests. I wish we had a viable alternative to the Democrats and Republicans. Perhaps a real first round of voting, where people could vote their conscience and not necessarily for either of these two parties, like they have in Europe. Or, at the very least, it would help to have a viable third or fourth option than the two major parties, both of whom reek of insider entitlements and corruption.
We need options that would represent legitimate modes of political thought. I am not one of those who dismiss conservatism automatically, out of hand. The idea of fiscal conservatism of course makes sense, and is hard to argue against. As Andrew Bacevich suggested, at the end of the day, the books have to balance. Also, there is something to be said for continuity, for consistency. For a healthy respect of established institutions. There are conservatives that I respect, such as Dwight Eisenhower.
Also, it sure would be nice to have a truly progressive political movement or party to vote for during election season, instead of a heavily watered down political party with far too many ties to big corporations and banks, with an obscene amount of money being poured into the war machine. Each election season, particularly during the primaries, some Democrats will outdo one another in praising progressive values, and then, they turn much more "moderate", which is to say corporatist, in time for the general election. Every now and then, they might throw the voters a bone, such as with Obamacare. But by and large, any truly progressive ideology has not been advanced for many decades now.
The same can be said for true conservatism.
It is time for a change, and this has never been as evident for many Americans as it appears to be right now, when the establishment candidates from both parties have been strongly challenged and, in the case of the GOP, even ousted.
Now is the time for real political expression.
Hillary Clinton says she isn’t sure Bernie Sanders is a Democrat Dylan Stableford Senior editor April 6, 2016
https://www.yahoo.com/news/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-isnt-a-real-142724784.html?soc_src=mail&soc_trk=ma
Thursday, May 12, 2016
Kids Need Wilderness & Adventure to Stimulate Their Brains
I try and take my son hiking, and expose him to the benefits of the great outdoors every chance that I get. This is because I truly believe there are wonderful benefits from this that far transcend a simple, pleasant afternoon out. It stimulates a child's imagination, as well as connects them to what used to be our surroundings.
Usually, when the idea of going for a hike is mentioned, my son is reluctant, and often even tries to get out of it. This is a little puzzling, because once we are there, usually he gets very excited, jumping onto and off of boulders, collecting walking sticks, slamming these sticks into trees, throwing sticks and stones as far as he can into the woods, playing with water, finding ways to splash around, climbing rocks, etc.. There are literally no limits to what he can do to enjoy the outdoors, and he always has a blast.
Not only is it fun for him, but I strongly suspect that it is good for him as well. And in this world, it seems that we are doing everything possible to lose that precious, even crucial, connection to where we come from, and what we are still very much a part of, even if we have largely lost sight of this obvious fact.
For the most part, I think that we in this culture have tried, rather pointlessly, to separate ourselves from the wilderness, or nature, in this world. It seems to me that many people almost make a point of avoiding it, for reasons that remain mysterious to me.
Case in point, I see a lot of classrooms in a lot of schools with the window shades drawn, and the artificial, neon lights serving as the only illumination.
Now, while I can understand and even appreciate when teachers answer with suggestions that it is difficult enough to capture the kid's attention to begin with, and that their minds will tend to wonder if they have a clear view of the outside, it still seems to me somehow stifling and counterproductive to shut the entire world out, so that the kids supposedly have an easier time focusing on the lesson being taught on a given day.
The fact of the matter is that our approach in this regard seems to reflect our values, which is to say a humorless, business only approach. Many schools began to cut down on "wasteful" activities, such as recess, although studies have actually shown that the more playtime children get, the more positively active their brains are, because they are engaged.
I am a believed in this, and this is due to my own personal experience. In the woods, your senses feel as if they sharpen. Visually, it might be pleasing to see lush, green surroundings on hikes, but you also begin to notice more things. And other senses really feel stronger, including the sense of hearing, since everything is magnified in the woods, as well as your sense of smell. You just notice things more when removed from the artificially controlled world of our culture. Hell, it even enhances our sense of taste, as food seems to taste better, more pronounced when eating outside!
Kids seem to absorb everything, and if all that we provide for them is a dulled down world with no outdoors, and no sense of risk or adventure, then what we will eventually produce are dulled down adults, in every sense of that word.
Indeed, kids need the outdoors. They need that play time, and what they do not need is the excessive sheltering that they are given, particularly here in the United States. Too often, recess is essentially cancelled when it is a little cold, rainy, or snowy out. Why? I can understand if the conditions are truly treacherous or extreme, but if it is manageable, even if it is cold, why prevent kids from going outside for recess?
We should be encouraging more outside time, and more exposure to our natural world, not less of it. One of the biggest thrills for kids when I was growing up were those rare classes when we went outside. Sometimes, the weather was so beautiful, that the teacher would bring the classroom outside, so we could all enjoy it. I remember a science class when we went out looking for insects or leaves, I do not remember which. All I know is that the kids came alive, and it was plain to see that they were engaging and learning about things with a real sense of wonder, able to see for themselves some aspects of how this world works, and the wonders within.
It seems that we are always learning new things about how things work, and this includes how kids are learning. For some reason, it surprised many people that kids would learn better if they received more free time to play during recess, even when our own cultural values here in the United States seemed to be leaning towards being dismissive of recess as wasteful time. Turns out that it is far from the case, that this is perhaps the most active time for children, as it fosters creativity.
Let us learn these lessons and implement them for better results in our education system. Finland has done this, and they shot up to the top of the rankings worldwide when it comes to education. We could certainly do worse than learn some lessons of our own, and implement this one, simple change, at the very least.
And to the extent possible, let us also make sure to expose kids to the natural environment that surrounds us and, lest we forget, that we ourselves are a part of.
Why Kids Need Wilderness And Adventure More Than Ever by: Brynn Schmidt
Usually, when the idea of going for a hike is mentioned, my son is reluctant, and often even tries to get out of it. This is a little puzzling, because once we are there, usually he gets very excited, jumping onto and off of boulders, collecting walking sticks, slamming these sticks into trees, throwing sticks and stones as far as he can into the woods, playing with water, finding ways to splash around, climbing rocks, etc.. There are literally no limits to what he can do to enjoy the outdoors, and he always has a blast.
Not only is it fun for him, but I strongly suspect that it is good for him as well. And in this world, it seems that we are doing everything possible to lose that precious, even crucial, connection to where we come from, and what we are still very much a part of, even if we have largely lost sight of this obvious fact.
For the most part, I think that we in this culture have tried, rather pointlessly, to separate ourselves from the wilderness, or nature, in this world. It seems to me that many people almost make a point of avoiding it, for reasons that remain mysterious to me.
Case in point, I see a lot of classrooms in a lot of schools with the window shades drawn, and the artificial, neon lights serving as the only illumination.
Now, while I can understand and even appreciate when teachers answer with suggestions that it is difficult enough to capture the kid's attention to begin with, and that their minds will tend to wonder if they have a clear view of the outside, it still seems to me somehow stifling and counterproductive to shut the entire world out, so that the kids supposedly have an easier time focusing on the lesson being taught on a given day.
The fact of the matter is that our approach in this regard seems to reflect our values, which is to say a humorless, business only approach. Many schools began to cut down on "wasteful" activities, such as recess, although studies have actually shown that the more playtime children get, the more positively active their brains are, because they are engaged.
I am a believed in this, and this is due to my own personal experience. In the woods, your senses feel as if they sharpen. Visually, it might be pleasing to see lush, green surroundings on hikes, but you also begin to notice more things. And other senses really feel stronger, including the sense of hearing, since everything is magnified in the woods, as well as your sense of smell. You just notice things more when removed from the artificially controlled world of our culture. Hell, it even enhances our sense of taste, as food seems to taste better, more pronounced when eating outside!
Kids seem to absorb everything, and if all that we provide for them is a dulled down world with no outdoors, and no sense of risk or adventure, then what we will eventually produce are dulled down adults, in every sense of that word.
Indeed, kids need the outdoors. They need that play time, and what they do not need is the excessive sheltering that they are given, particularly here in the United States. Too often, recess is essentially cancelled when it is a little cold, rainy, or snowy out. Why? I can understand if the conditions are truly treacherous or extreme, but if it is manageable, even if it is cold, why prevent kids from going outside for recess?
We should be encouraging more outside time, and more exposure to our natural world, not less of it. One of the biggest thrills for kids when I was growing up were those rare classes when we went outside. Sometimes, the weather was so beautiful, that the teacher would bring the classroom outside, so we could all enjoy it. I remember a science class when we went out looking for insects or leaves, I do not remember which. All I know is that the kids came alive, and it was plain to see that they were engaging and learning about things with a real sense of wonder, able to see for themselves some aspects of how this world works, and the wonders within.
It seems that we are always learning new things about how things work, and this includes how kids are learning. For some reason, it surprised many people that kids would learn better if they received more free time to play during recess, even when our own cultural values here in the United States seemed to be leaning towards being dismissive of recess as wasteful time. Turns out that it is far from the case, that this is perhaps the most active time for children, as it fosters creativity.
Let us learn these lessons and implement them for better results in our education system. Finland has done this, and they shot up to the top of the rankings worldwide when it comes to education. We could certainly do worse than learn some lessons of our own, and implement this one, simple change, at the very least.
And to the extent possible, let us also make sure to expose kids to the natural environment that surrounds us and, lest we forget, that we ourselves are a part of.
Why Kids Need Wilderness And Adventure More Than Ever by: Brynn Schmidt
Wednesday, May 11, 2016
Bernie Sanders Wins Coal Rich West Virginia
Photo courtesy of iprimages Flickr page - 06122015_BernieSanders_Drake_102_3x2_1080: https://www.flickr.com/photos/iprphoto/18631623858
Creative Commons License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/2.0/
Yes, Bernie Sanders won the West Virginia primary last evening, and convincingly, at that.
It was the 19th primary that Sanders has won.
Of course, the major news media, at least here in the United States, always add that he is basically too far behind to have any hope of catching Hillary Clinton up, and that seems to be the recurring theme. It is a bit strange that they do not focus too much on why the presumptive nominee, Hillary Clinton, is not winning these primaries by now, like Donald Trump is doing on the Republican side.
But hey, it has been a long time since we have had anything resembling fair news coverage, since certain corporate interests with obvious interests in who gets elected control the media coverage. That is why Hillary seems to be everyone's darling.
Still, despite all of this favorable coverage, and despite the media not taking her to task for so much corruption and shady ties and deal, and despite the millions that she receives from corporate sponsors, and finally, despite her presumed position as the inevitable Democratic nominee, she continues to lose primaries like this.
Bernie keeps moving forward, keeps urging his followers to keep fighting, and keeps trying to push a political agenda that would redesign the national priorities, so that the system will not be so lopsidedly, transparently favorable to what amounts to corporate supremacy via tax breaks and incentives and corporate welfare, as well as tax breaks for the wealthiest among us, while those who need help are turned away as a matter of course. Very costly wars in every sense should be truly the very last resort, instead of being promoted as a new business opportunity to sell to the American taxpayer.
We can have many of the most beneficial things that are taken for granted in literally every other industrialized nation, such as affordable, universal healthcare, a healthier environment to live in via more stringent environmental regulations and enforcement, affordable investment in rebuilding infrastructure, and an improved education system that actually prepares kids for the future.
A better world, and a better country, is possible. But we are not going to get there by doing the same things and repeating the same mistakes from our past. We are not going to see meaningful change if we elect Hillary Clinton into the White House, because on so many levels, she represents the very worst elements of the old way of doing things. She is a politician - a career politician - with a team that tells her what she should say, and who she should say it to. She knows how to say one thing, and do another, yet spin it so that it does not sound nearly so bad. She has ties to the biggest banks and corporations that have been such a huge problem, and this corporate culture that Clinton so shamelessly promotes is starting to feel like a virus spreading across the globe, affecting people's quality of life for the worst.
If we elect Hillary into office, it will be much more of the same.
If we elect Bernie Sanders, we will get someone who at least fights for real change, and who has a vision for a brighter, more noble future for America, and for all of us who live here.
The choice is ours. Let's make it a wise one.
Tuesday, May 10, 2016
Information on Colonial Era Musket Rifles
As I wrote about earlier, my son was really quite taken by the visit to Washington's Headquarters in Morristown this past weekend.
One thing that he particularly enjoyed was learning about muskets, and he had a ton of questions. Unfortunately, he was probably too nervous to ask our guide, so these questions remained unanswered, since I am hardly an expert when it comes to muskets.
He asked me questions like how long it took to load, how you could reload, how many shots could be fired, and how quickly, etc..
So, I did a little bit of online research, and found this video that, I hope, might answer his questions. It seemed like a good idea to share it here, to boot.
Here it is:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)