Vulgar Display of Ignorance

In the hours following the tragic Arizona shootings, many media members have engaged in what can best be described as a vulgar display of ignorance, choosing to play a game of political finger-pointing, rather than simply reporting the facts. Void of any evidence to link the shoot to the Tea Party or any of its affiliates, progressives began an aggressive campaign to link the shooter to the group. Only minutes after news of the shooting broke, several left-leaning figures, including Daily Kos founder, Markos Moullitsas, began posting tweets that seemed to imply that the rhetoric of certain conservative leaders, such as Sarah Palin, could have led to the shootings. As the day progressed and we learned more about the suspect, more and more progressive journalists began to engage in similar tactics, ignoring the facts about the suspect, and instead building on the assertion that conservative rhetoric played some role in causing the senseless act of violence.

Several writers from Slate, including Dave Weigel, New York Times contributor, Heidi Moore, and Wonkette’s Ana Marie Cox all used their Twitter stream to blithely point their fingers at the right for causing the day’s events. Even Pima County Sheriff, Clarence Dupnik, joined in the fray, decrying “rhetoric of hatred, mistrust of governmentt, paranoia about government that inflames public daily, especially unbalanced people.”  Sheriff Dupnik went on to lash out the Arizona state legislature for being too soft on gun control. Thankfully, Fox News’ Megyn Kelly displayed the intestinal fortitude to hold the Sheriff accountable when he appeared on her program.

I understand the human need to try and find some closure when something as horrific as the shooting of Rep. Gabby Gifford occurs. On 9/11, we all asked, “who could do this to us and why?” When you examine the history of the alleged shooter, Jared Loughner, you see a young man with a history of exhibiting signs of extreme mental unbalance. The sad fact is that it is a difficult proposition to understand what motivates mentally unbalanced or mentally unstable people and this is what causes so many people distress about this particular case. We may never be able to wrap this case up, place it a box of understanding and prevent a similar event from happening again. It does seem that were will remain some loose ends remaining, even if and when Mr. Loughner is prosecuted. This scares the hell out a lot of people.

For whatever reason, conservatives deal with uncertainty better than progressives. Even the most extreme right-wingers I follow on Twitter refrained from pointing fingers at the Left for this tragedy. In fact, almost all of the conservatives I followed offered their sincere condolences to all those effected and seemed shocked that progressives would attempt to politicize the situation.

While we may never be able to understand the motives behind Saturday’s shooting, or understand why bad things happen to good people, we can do our part to help the country move forward. First, we quit trying to point the finger of blame at political figures we disagree with for causing this tragedy. The only person responsible is the person who pulled the trigger. It’s now in the hands of the judicial system to handle the prosecution. Next, support your elected officials by showing up at their next public meeting in your community. Even if you disagree with their positions, show up, let them know how you about the issues that matter to you, but remember they “are human and need to be loved, just like everybody else”, so leave them with a handshake and a smile. Don’t let this shooting scare you away from being politically active and aware. Finally, find a way to engage in constructive dialogue with those you disagree with politically.

The Cheapening of Liberal Arts Education

An article published in the March 31, 2010 edition of the New York Times, examining the burgeoning role of psychology and neuroscience in college English departments, sparked a debate on a recent podcast of Slate’s “Culture Gabfest,” regarding the future of college English departments and humanities studies as a whole. The three panelists expressed outrage at the thought of English departments nationwide filling their curriculum with theoretical science (i.e. using MRI scans of people’s brains as they read different texts to determine the impact they have on the brain), in hopes of adding practical applications to their degree program, thus attracting more students, but sacrificing the notion of literature for literature’s sake.

I test drove literally every degree program that the humanities department at my colleges offered before ultimately earning a bachelor’s degree in English. The question of whether or not these departments should do more to make their degrees more marketable is one that I’ve wrestled with for some time. Even though we were the brightest, most creative and unique students on campus and even though we took the most interesting classes, being able to write a paper on the role of misogyny in Hamlet or being able to thoroughly explain the difference between an Italian sonnet and a Shakespearean sonnet has yet to earn me a single job.

God knows I spent many a sleepless night in college asking myself, “what in the hell are you going to do with a degree in (depending on the semester and college: philosophy, history, religion, political science or English),“ but through it all, I never once considered pursuing a degree outside the field of humanities. For me, and many other liberal arts students, college was never about developing marketable skills, but rather about the pursuit of knowledge and honing our analytical skills, which in turn produces students prepared for any field.

Like the podcast panelists, I too am outraged at attempts to cheapen a classical education in the name of economics (and make no mistake about it, this is ALL about economics). I graduated from Texas A&M University-Texarkana, a rural, commuter school in far Northeast Texas. Of all the students in the school’s English department, I was the only one not seeking teacher certification. As a result, much of the departments curriculum was geared towards training these students for the classroom. I always felt the courses, especially the reading lists, to be extremely watered down. As President of the university’s English club, I tried to expand the scope of the department’s emphasis, sponsoring student symposiums and starting a book club where we would tackle some of the best contemporary literary fiction.

I don’t blame my professors. Their hands were tied by administrators who had in essence turned the English department into a glorified vocational school. While I don’t fear Yale, Stanford, Duke, etc. will ever turn their English departments into a trade school, I do fear the trend of cheapening liberal arts education will continue to spread like a virus across academia. The only way to stop the spread is to convince students that knowledge is far more valuable than any salary they may earn in their career

The Truth of Health Care Reform Revealed

On Thursday, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released their preliminary cost estimates for the pending health reform legislation. Democrats lauded the reports findings, noting that the figures–cost of $950 billion and reduce the deficit by $150 billion over ten years–hit the marks President Barack Obama laid out when the health care debate began over a year ago. While these numbers may fall within the parameters dictated by President Obama–the New York Times does an excellent job of explaining how it was impossible for them not to–this battle has little to do with deficits or health care reform. In the end, it comes down to one word–”power.”

Regardless, it appears Democrats have the votes they need and passage is inevitable. Over the past couple of days, I’ve watched the reactions of several different factions involved in the debate.

As expected, members of the “Tea Party Movement” have expressed outrage at the bill and out of frustration have started directing their anger at the politicians involved with ramming the bill through. NBC reporter, Luke Russert, tweeted earlier that Tea Party activists were hurling racial slurs at  Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC), one of the more visible faces in the health care debate, and other Democratic politicians. It’s unfortunate that some people feel the need to resort to ignorance to voice their opposition. Clyburn and other Democratic politicians are making a huge mistake in supporting the current bill, but it has nothing to do with the politicians’ race, hurling racial slurs at politicians will not prevent the bill from passing, nor will it help reduce the size of the Federal government.

Another group I’ve followed reaction from is the intellectual elitist/Hollywood crowd. This group, largely made up of people who have made a lot of money from doing virtually nothing–either through trust funds, inheritance or bad art–feels guilty for having so much and doing so little. This creates a void in their life and they spend their free time–something else they have plenty of–searching for ways to give their life meaning, supporting health care reform gives their lives’ this meaning. After all, they believe everyone will now have free health care and that a perfect utopia cannot be far behind. This group is ecstatic. While I strongly disagree with this segment of society, they’re so far out of touch with mainstream American society that I cannot hold this instance of bad judgment against them. They lack the proper knowledge to fully understand the practical implications this bill will have on American society.

Without a doubt, the most smug group are the Democratic politicians. Power drives politicians. This goes for Republicans as much as Democrats, but the Democrats have control of both houses of Congress and are the party responsible for this health care bill. This bill was born out a hunger for power, but sold to the American people as a humanitarian necessity. Simply put, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Barack Obama could care less how much the average American is paying for insurance premiums, nor do they have any real interest in the number of Americans currently without health insurance. These politicians care only about power and health care reform provided the perfect opportunity to control over a large portion of the American economy currently run by the private sector. This group is walking around D.C. right now, chest stuck out, nose stuck up, fake smiles chiseled on their faces, overjoyed that their dream is nearing reality, soon they will have power our Federal government has never seen.

Then there’s me. I’ve made it clear from the beginning that I don’t believe the Federal government has any role to play in health care reform, unless it’s removing itself from the equation altogether. While I do believe reform is needed, I don’t believe that the Federal government is the proper to agent to usher in that reform.

But what about the poor people without health insurance? Our nation is filled with the most generous people on the face of the planet. I have no doubt that, if provided with sufficient tax credits, American people would gladly increase their charitable donations to churches and other altruistic organizations. People run charities a lot better than the Federal government.

When I look at this health care bill, I am saddened by the unabashed bigotry of some of the bill’s detractors. I’m offended by the bravado of the elitists on the East and West Coasts of this nation, who look to the government to solve their personal issues, at the cost of millions of average middle-Americans. I’m disgusted by the egos of the Democratic politicians, so hungry for power, that they’re willing to totally destroy our constitutional Republican form of government, which has worked so well since the founding of our nation. Most importantly, I remain resolute that this socialism starter course will not take hold in the bowels of the Americans people, but rather be discharged as the filthy excrement it is. The first big BM? November 2010.

Top 5 Podcasts

Since getting my first iPod as a gift some four years ago, I’ve downloaded countless gigs of all forms of media. One of my favorite things to download is podcasts. Over the last few years, I’ve tried out hundreds of different podcasts, but have now narrowed it down to 15 or 20 that I listen to on a regular basis. I thought I would share with you my top 5 podcasts:

1.) Slate Culture Gabfest – This is a must listen if you want to stay current on all things related to culture. The shows regular panel consists of Dana Stevens, Julia Turner and Stephen Metcalf, though they are frequently joined by other members of the Slate.Com staff. The content leans towards the “high brow” and much of it involves material published in Northeast publications (i.e. New York Times, The New Yorker, Atlantic Monthly, etc.), but it provides an inside look at what intellectual elitists all over the nation are talking about.  The most recent episode included a review of the controversial new Lee Daniels’ movie Precious, a review of the Ian McEwan novel Black Dogs to coincide with the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall and Jim Windolf’s recent Vanity Fair article on “cuteness.”

2.)  Slate Political Gabfest – Functions in pretty much the same fashion as the Culture Gabfest–three person panel discusses three issues–only involving politics instead of cultural issues. The normal panel consists of John Dickerson, Emily Bazelon and Slate managing editor, David Plotz. Be warned, the panel leans Left–far Left, but it’s entertaining and informative all the same.

3.) Anything You Ever Wanted to Know – This show is produced by KERA, Dallas’ local public radio station. The show airs each Friday afternoon, but I always listen to it via podcast. The show provides an open forum for listeners to submit questions, either on the phone or through e-mail, to be answered by other members of the listening audience and is moderated by Jeff Whittington. Over the past three years, I’ve learned some fascinating things from the show.

4.) The Writer’s Almanac Podcast – Hosted by Garrison Keillor, the show serves as a “this day in literary history” for lovers of words.  Normally, Keillor lists off several key events for each day and then will focus heavily on one birthday or event before reading a selected “poem of the day.” More than anything else, the show has introduced me to some great new poetry.

5.) NPR Playback – While the other podcasts I listed are released on a weekly or daily basies, the NPR Playback podcast is released on a monthly basis and features audio clips from the archives from 20 years prior. For example, the November podcast features audio from NPR segments from November 1984. I love being transported back to the 80′s and this podcast does just that.

The Daily Kos

Over the course of the past week, I have listened and watched as many of the major media outlets in our nation tried to attack Sarah Palin, especially the New York Times and the various television networks owned by NBC.  These obviously biased media outlets decided to run with less-than accurate leads and ended up having to retract some of their stories.

Though never directly tied to any of these stories, the media often passed the blame of these malicious stories off to the “blogosphere”, specifically the Daily Kos. I originally discovered the Daily Kos during the 2004 general election. Like many, I wanted change in the White House and the progressive media was hyped up about this new progressive blog. I checked it out and found it all a bit boring.

Over the next few years, as the Daily Kos became a larger part of the political landscape, I would visit the site from time to time, just to get a feel of what topics were being discussed. I never put much stock in the website, even as an idealistic, self-described “progressive” in college.

I decided to revisit the Daily Kos this week and what I found was quite telling. When Phil Gramm made the statement that the United States had become a “nation of whiners,” he spoke of the people involved with the Daily Kos, and those who support it. For example, look at this discussion involving the Wednesday night festivities at the Republican National Convention.

Several of the Kos readers/responders attack Palin, comparing her to the “popular girl” in high school, which says a lot about them. These are the people who got picked on in high school. They were never able to reconcile this and still live with the scars of being a loser, so they remain losers.

They’re like the kids I played football with on the playground. They provided the new, fancy Nerf football, but when things didn’t go their way, they took their ball and went kicking and screaming to the teachers, “they’re not playing fair.” In life, when things don’t go their way, they go and bitch and moan to the government, “They make more money than me. Boo! Tax them, tax them, make it fair Daddy Government, make it fair!” That’s why they admire Barack Obam; he promises to take from those who have more and give it to those who have less–classic redistribution of wealth.