This morning, the TODAY SHOW hosted an interview with Kitty Kelly on her new book trashing the George W. Bush family. Kelly is a gossip writer, and she makes some embarrasing little suggestions that Dubya used cocaine while his daddy was in office....go figure. NBC tried to stop the interview, and Matt Lauer was openly hostile with Kelly, while sparing no efforts to help Kelly's source, Sharon Bush, distance herself from what she allegedly saw taking place at Camp David...Dubya and his brother powdering thier noses.
Here's my little letter:
I am writing to express my extreme displeasure with Matt Lauer's pathetic attempt at an interview with Kitty Kelly. I really enjoy the Today Show. I usually think it's one of the best morning shows, but Mr. Lauer's attitude and antagonistic attitude was offensive to watch. I find it interesting that he had the audacity to challenge Ms Kelly's journalistic methods and biases considering his obvious absence of impartiality. I've never considered anything Kitty Kelly has written to be more than gossip column filler, but I'm beginning to think that Matt Lauer reportage is rapidly falling into the same category.
Compared to his subsequent interview with Sharon Bush, I question Mr. Lauer's journalistic methods. I don't think he could have been more blatant in attempting to destroy one accusation concerning the President's alleged cocaine usage at Camp David, and trying to tie Ms Kelley into some strange relationship with the publicist at the Kelley/Bush meeting. I went to college in West Texas, and although was familiar with the younger Bush's alcohol abuses, was very surprised to hear stories of his cocaine abuse, not from one person, but several Midland-area residents. Like the Bush twins party habits, their father was not circumspect about using illegal drugs. Based upon what I've learned about George W. Bush's family, I don't doubt that Bush used cocaine. Simply having a "conversion" experience doesn't negate the strong addictions of cocaine or alcohol. I respect Mr. Bush's religious beliefs, but find him far from perfect. He was a terrible governor in my home state, and his presidential record has not been much better.
I'm also a little upset with the positive spin NBC tried to cast over the Bush twins at the Republican National Convention. These women are not children, but the media seems to believe that by constantly casting them as some sort of political Olsen Twins creation. If Chelsea Clinton had engaged in illegal, underage drinking, or went to the late-night college "thrash" parties that the Bush girls seem to enjoy, I doubt that the TODAY SHOW hosts would have painted her in such a favorable light.
The fact that NBC had concerns about the interview with Ms Kelley and tried to prevent the interview also makes me seriously rethink my loyalty to NBC and its news programming. Mr. Lauer's interview and the NBC complicity with the White House also seem to conflict with the role of the press. Perhaps you have decided to fall in line with Fox News and their "balanced" reporting. In fact, at least they’re honestly biased, and make no attempt to hide behind some pretended impartiality.
Monday, September 13, 2004
Tuesday, August 17, 2004
Saturday, July 17, 2004
Saturday, June 19, 2004
The Dissertation is DONE!
Well, I mailed off the revisions to my dissertation.....finally!
I'm set to defend on the 28th of June. Then graduate on August 7th!
I began the PhD program at Tech in 1995, although took some courses in the fall semester 1994. Now it's 2004. I did take some time off from 1999 onward, and restarted the dissertation in earnest July 2003 after I was terminated from Southwest Museum Services.
It's been a long road, and I should have finished sooner. But thankfully it's over!
I'm set to defend on the 28th of June. Then graduate on August 7th!
I began the PhD program at Tech in 1995, although took some courses in the fall semester 1994. Now it's 2004. I did take some time off from 1999 onward, and restarted the dissertation in earnest July 2003 after I was terminated from Southwest Museum Services.
It's been a long road, and I should have finished sooner. But thankfully it's over!
Wednesday, June 02, 2004
The Ten Commandments - Texas Style
People here in Texas have trouble with all those shalls and shall nots in the 10 Commandments. Folks here just aren't used to talking in those terms.
So, some folks out in west Texas got together and translated the "King James" into "King Ranch" language: Ten Commandments, cowboy Style.
Cowboy's Ten Commandments posted on the wall at Cross Trails Church in Fairlie, Texas.
(1) Just one God.
(2) Honor yer Ma & Pa.
(3) No telling tales or gossipin'.
(4) Git yourself to Sunday meeting.
(5) Put nothin' before God.
(6) No foolin' around with another fellow's gal.
(7) No killin'.
(8) Watch yer mouth.
(9) Don't take what ain't yers.
(10) Don't be hankerin' for yer buddy's stuff.
Now that's kinda plain an' simple don't ya think? Y'all have a good Day.
So, some folks out in west Texas got together and translated the "King James" into "King Ranch" language: Ten Commandments, cowboy Style.
Cowboy's Ten Commandments posted on the wall at Cross Trails Church in Fairlie, Texas.
(1) Just one God.
(2) Honor yer Ma & Pa.
(3) No telling tales or gossipin'.
(4) Git yourself to Sunday meeting.
(5) Put nothin' before God.
(6) No foolin' around with another fellow's gal.
(7) No killin'.
(8) Watch yer mouth.
(9) Don't take what ain't yers.
(10) Don't be hankerin' for yer buddy's stuff.
Now that's kinda plain an' simple don't ya think? Y'all have a good Day.
Tuesday, May 25, 2004
Sunday, May 23, 2004
What a Great Job?!
Here are some of the issues and events that happened during our time at my last full-time job.
1. Sexual Discrimination
2. Racial Discrimination
3. “Whistleblowers” Terminated
4. People With Medical Needs Fired
5. A Threatening Atmosphere Existed
-
I dunno! You think it was a bad place to work?
1. Sexual Discrimination
- Following one installation, although at least four people tested positive to a drug test, only one person-a women-was fired.
- We were told on several occasions that women should not be in management positions because they get “bitchy” at least once a month.
- One woman feared physical violence from a vice-pres. They arranged a plan for one of the men to protect her if the v. p. came to her area to harass or frighten her.
- A crony regularly sexually harassed women.
- Two cronies began intimating that several man were homosexuals.
- A crony would commonly make sexually explicit comments about women. In one case he loudly proclaimed how he enjoyed choking women while he had sex with them.
2. Racial Discrimination
- A crony commonly used the word “nigger.”
- When management was told that one musuem wanted to include information about the African Americans in their community, I was sarcastically told, “There aren’t any African Americans there!"
- The Vice President made no secret that he opposed interracial dating and marriage although several employees violated his views.
- After a woman got a negative review and was denied a raise, the V.P. mentioned that he opposed her interracial dating. He also suggested that she should go off and have some children (sexual discrimination)
- An attitude against hiring or working with African Americans
- The men working in the back were called “vatos” and management made no secret that they were undocumented workers. The owner made it known that if there was any question, the company line was that their paperwork was in process. The new bookkeeper noted that some of the Social Security numbers were incorrect. It was common knowledge that one of the men had the same number as an 80 year old man.
- One man was told not to use his real first name because it was too ethnic.
3. “Whistleblowers” Terminated
- I was aware of the sexual discrimination and harassment issues and encouraged several women to bring the issue to the owner.
- We counseled a woman about the v. p.'s threats, and even went to upper management.
- Several people were all fired after the OSHA investigation and all has talked to OSHA during the investigation. It was commonly known who called OSHA in the first place.
- Although it was announced at a meeting, we both knew that after a Labor Department investigation that resulted in a fine because the company wasn’t paying the construction laborers overtime the owner told the staff that he was paying the men in cash
- A crony told us that the owner ordered him to doctor the time sheets not to reflect overtime.
4. People With Medical Needs Fired
- The people fired in the last round of terminations had medical conditions
- One had had sinus surgery and was taking regular medication
- One was pregnant and was the initial concern over the misuse of chemicals at work.
- Another had had recent cervical surgery.
- Another man had had intestinal problems.
- Another woman had recently taken several sick days and was concerned about her health because of the chemical smell in the office.
- When told the front entrance was not ADA compliant, one of the owner's cronies said, “I don’t know why we need to be compliant, we’re not going to hire any cripples.”
5. A Threatening Atmosphere Existed
-
Women believed that if they complained about sexual harassment they would lose their jobs.
- The owner's henchman would skulk around the office eavesdropping on conversations.
- Any criticism could result in termination. One man was fired after he told the previous owner that the reason components had not been ordered was that the request was sitting on the other owner's desk for approval. One man was fired for pointing out defects in design plans. Two employees were fired for bringing attention to misunderstandings about their pay.
- At various meetings the owner would announce that he did not want people to talk about work amongst themselves, if they had any problems they should come to him, and that really meant termination.
- He commonly fired people citing only “bad attitudes.”
- It was widely known that upper management only wanted “blue sky” reports. Negative reports could result in the charge of having a bad attitude.
- The V.P. usually tried to intimidate employees
I dunno! You think it was a bad place to work?
Friday, May 21, 2004
Sophisticated, Smart and Down to Earth!--Write that Down!
Athena
?? Which Of The Greek Gods Are You ??
brought to you by Quizilla
Now here's another good quiz to take if you have aspirations of godhood.
The Passion of the Gene
I was doing a little research today. I subscribe to The Daily Gospel, which gives you the daily Catholic readings. I saw in the first reading today (Acts of the Apostles 18,9-18) a
reference to Gallio, proconsul of Achaia. I decided I would find out more about this historical character. I found out his appointment was in the year 51 AD.
As a historian, I guess this is just a part of life-to check on historical accuracy. I finally got around to seeing the Mel Gibson movie, The Passion of the Christ. I was a bit overwhelmed by the movie, but did find the punishment scenes to be very believable. I think that punishment and especially crucifixion recreations were probably pretty close to what happened. Of course this information has long been available for many years. Medical analysis of the crucifixion can be found on the web, too.
I liked the way the Passion portrayed Pilate, and the role of his wife. According to the New Advent Catholic Enclycopedia entry on Pilate, some believe he and his wife became Christians, and in some circles they are considered Saints. I think Gibson's movie was especially sympathetic to Pilate's position and I liked his guard's attitude toward Jesus. I found it believable that Pilate's closest guard would have seen Pilate's wife's concern and understood that Pilate did not consider execution a just punishment, so his attempts to protect Jesus from brutality were not off-character. I found that this more sympathetic view of Pilate originated in one of the Apocryphal Gospel, the Gospel of Nicodemus. I read it (it's pretty brief) and discovered much of the trial of Jesus, as it appears that the movie Passion of the Christ, was based upon the Nicodemus text.
If you're interested, check it out HERE
reference to Gallio, proconsul of Achaia. I decided I would find out more about this historical character. I found out his appointment was in the year 51 AD.
As a historian, I guess this is just a part of life-to check on historical accuracy. I finally got around to seeing the Mel Gibson movie, The Passion of the Christ. I was a bit overwhelmed by the movie, but did find the punishment scenes to be very believable. I think that punishment and especially crucifixion recreations were probably pretty close to what happened. Of course this information has long been available for many years. Medical analysis of the crucifixion can be found on the web, too.
I liked the way the Passion portrayed Pilate, and the role of his wife. According to the New Advent Catholic Enclycopedia entry on Pilate, some believe he and his wife became Christians, and in some circles they are considered Saints. I think Gibson's movie was especially sympathetic to Pilate's position and I liked his guard's attitude toward Jesus. I found it believable that Pilate's closest guard would have seen Pilate's wife's concern and understood that Pilate did not consider execution a just punishment, so his attempts to protect Jesus from brutality were not off-character. I found that this more sympathetic view of Pilate originated in one of the Apocryphal Gospel, the Gospel of Nicodemus. I read it (it's pretty brief) and discovered much of the trial of Jesus, as it appears that the movie Passion of the Christ, was based upon the Nicodemus text.
If you're interested, check it out HERE
Wednesday, May 19, 2004
New Saints!
Pope John Paul II cannonized six new saints in May 2004.
1. Gianna Beretta Molla (1922-1962), an Italian doctor who chose not to have an abortion that would have saved her life.
2. Josep Manyanet y Vives (1833-1901), a Catalan priest who founded two religious orders and was known as the “prophet of the family.”
3. Father Luigi Orione (1872-1940), Italian founder of Little Work of Divine Providence to assist the poor and disabled.
4. Father Annibale Maria Di Francia (1851-1927), Italian founder of Rogationist Fathers of the Heart of Jesus, and the Daughters of Divine Zeal.
5. Nimatullah Kassab Al-Hardini (1808-1858), a priest of the Lebanese Maronite Order
6. Paola Elisabetta Cerioli (1816-1865), an Italian widow and founder of two religious congregations for women dedicated to helping families.
Tuesday, May 18, 2004
The Liberal Controlled Media?
THANK GOODNESS!
I've been forced to listen to more and more conservative talk radio lately. The talk radio stations in Houston have realigned their schedules to concentrate more conservative shows at the same drive time slot. So, instead of listening to someone with some credibility and sense, like Sam Donaldson who I really liked, I now hear Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, or local prank-monkey Chris Baker. Here's a puzzle for the right-wingers, Riddle Me This: If Liberals Control the Media, why are Conservative Talk-Shows the only ones on the radio?
I will admit sometime I think these guys have legitimate concerns and thoughts....after all a broken clock is correct twice a day....but for the most part they are parrots and limp-minded runny butts. They all ape Rush Limbaugh, who is really the undisputed king of conservative talk radio. I actually used to enjoy Rush, and despite the fact that he is full of bloviation the sounds of his borborygmus rants sometimes cause me to laugh uproariously (a hazard when I am in traffic). I actually think Rush is more entertaining and doesn't really take himself seriously...I sure don't.
nbsp;
NOW! a new website published by former conservative mouthpiece David Brock and others, is a welcome relief from the verbal diarrhea free-flowing from their mouths. Consider Media Matters for America, a watch-dog group that lists the libel, slander, and unsubstantiated vituperation from the right-wing. Check out the site!
Back to Rush. You know, I was looking over his list of drugs....of course he smokes cigars, and thus I feel a sort of brotherhood with the man and will not disparage him for this...Hydrocodone, Lorcet, and OxyContin, all of them narcotic analgesics that can affect the central nervous system causing lightheadedness and a false sense of well-being. How seriously can you take a man who sat in a chair behind a microphone and criticized people like Ted Kennedy for his alcohol abuse, Bill Clinton for his sexual tomfoolery, and any number of other so-called liberals for any of their weaknesses? I remember something once said by Jesus:
"Stop judging, that you may not be judged. For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you. Why do you notice the splinter in your brother's eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me remove that splinter from your eye,' while the wooden beam is in your eye? You hypocrite, remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother's eye."
I found that in Matthew 7 of my bible, of course, it may not be in the Conservative Bible
Here's another cool word for the women
Ok, here's a new word for the women-folk to consider:
If I said, "My, you're looking callipygous today," you should reply, "Why, thank you."
The word callipygian comes from the Greek kallipygos, and means having shapely buttocks, so it is a compliment. Of course, if you consider it came from the Greeks, it was something men usually said to one another.
Wow! This Looks New!
Oh, yes, my friends! The fine folks at Blogger have redesigned their site, and extended this option to their users.....namely...me!
That's really fantastic, because for some time now Blogger has been under the iron thumb of Google and has been promising changes--improvements, if you will--but they have not been forthcoming.
UNTIL NOW, MY FRIENDS!
Now the layout has changed, apparently you can make silly comments, and send notes of love. Ain't it grand?
That's really fantastic, because for some time now Blogger has been under the iron thumb of Google and has been promising changes--improvements, if you will--but they have not been forthcoming.
UNTIL NOW, MY FRIENDS!
Now the layout has changed, apparently you can make silly comments, and send notes of love. Ain't it grand?
Friday, April 23, 2004
Rules for being a Republican
My good friend Page sent these to me. Of course, they are for humor only (that's to confuse my Republican friends):
1. Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you are millionaire conservative radio jock, which makes it an "illness" and needs our prayers for your "recovery".
2. You have to believe that those privileged from birth achieve success all on their own.
3. You have to believe that the US should get out of the UN, and that our highest national priority is enforcing UN resolutions against Iraq.
4. You have to believe that government should stay out of people's lives but it needs to punish anyone caught having private sex with the "wrong" gender.
5. You have to believe that pollution is ok, so long as it makes a profit.
6. You have to believe in prayer in schools, as long as you don't pray to Allah or Buddha.
7. "Standing Tall for America" means firing your workers and moving their jobs to India.
8. You have to believe that a woman cannot be trusted with decisions about her own body, but that large multi-national corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind with no regulation whatsoever.
9. You have to believe that you love Jesus and Jesus loves you, and that Jesus shares your hatred of AIDS victims, homosexuals, and Hillary Clinton.
10. You hate the ACLU for representing convicted felons, but they owed it to the country to bail out Oliver North.
11. You have to believe that the best way to encourage military morale is to praise the troops overseas while cutting their VA benefits.
12. You believe that group sex and drug use are degenerate sins that can only be purged by running for governor of California as a Republican.
13. You have to believe it is wise to keep condoms out of schools, because we all know if teenagers don't have condoms they won't have sex.
14. You have to believe that the best way to fight terrorism is to alienate our allies and then demand their cooperation and money.
15. You have to believe that government medicine is wrong and that HMO's and insurance companies only have your best interests at heart.
16. You have to believe that providing health care to all Iraqis is sound government policy but providing health care to all Americans is socialism personified.
17. You believe that tobacco's link to cancer and global warming are "junk science", but Creationism should be taught in schools.
18. You have to believe that waging war with no exit strategy was wrong in Vietnam but right in Iraq.
19. You have to believe that Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush's daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney was doing business with him, and a bad guy when Bush needed a "we can't find Bin Laden" diversion.
20. You believe that government should restrict itself to just the powers named in the Constitution, which includes banning gay marriages and censoring the internet.
21. You have to believe that the public has a right to know about the adulterous affairs of Democrats, while those of Republicans are a "private matter".
22. You have to believe that the public has a right to know about Hillary's cattle trades but that Bush was right to censor those 28 pages from the Congressional 9/11 report because you just can't handle the truth.
23. You support state rights, which means Ashcroft telling states what locally passed voter initiatives he will allow them to have.
24. You have to believe that what Clinton did in the 1960's is of vital national interest but what Bush did decades later is "stale news" and "irrelevant".
25. You have to believe that trade with Cuba is wrong because it is communist, but trading with China and Vietnam is just dandy.
1. Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you are millionaire conservative radio jock, which makes it an "illness" and needs our prayers for your "recovery".
2. You have to believe that those privileged from birth achieve success all on their own.
3. You have to believe that the US should get out of the UN, and that our highest national priority is enforcing UN resolutions against Iraq.
4. You have to believe that government should stay out of people's lives but it needs to punish anyone caught having private sex with the "wrong" gender.
5. You have to believe that pollution is ok, so long as it makes a profit.
6. You have to believe in prayer in schools, as long as you don't pray to Allah or Buddha.
7. "Standing Tall for America" means firing your workers and moving their jobs to India.
8. You have to believe that a woman cannot be trusted with decisions about her own body, but that large multi-national corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind with no regulation whatsoever.
9. You have to believe that you love Jesus and Jesus loves you, and that Jesus shares your hatred of AIDS victims, homosexuals, and Hillary Clinton.
10. You hate the ACLU for representing convicted felons, but they owed it to the country to bail out Oliver North.
11. You have to believe that the best way to encourage military morale is to praise the troops overseas while cutting their VA benefits.
12. You believe that group sex and drug use are degenerate sins that can only be purged by running for governor of California as a Republican.
13. You have to believe it is wise to keep condoms out of schools, because we all know if teenagers don't have condoms they won't have sex.
14. You have to believe that the best way to fight terrorism is to alienate our allies and then demand their cooperation and money.
15. You have to believe that government medicine is wrong and that HMO's and insurance companies only have your best interests at heart.
16. You have to believe that providing health care to all Iraqis is sound government policy but providing health care to all Americans is socialism personified.
17. You believe that tobacco's link to cancer and global warming are "junk science", but Creationism should be taught in schools.
18. You have to believe that waging war with no exit strategy was wrong in Vietnam but right in Iraq.
19. You have to believe that Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush's daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney was doing business with him, and a bad guy when Bush needed a "we can't find Bin Laden" diversion.
20. You believe that government should restrict itself to just the powers named in the Constitution, which includes banning gay marriages and censoring the internet.
21. You have to believe that the public has a right to know about the adulterous affairs of Democrats, while those of Republicans are a "private matter".
22. You have to believe that the public has a right to know about Hillary's cattle trades but that Bush was right to censor those 28 pages from the Congressional 9/11 report because you just can't handle the truth.
23. You support state rights, which means Ashcroft telling states what locally passed voter initiatives he will allow them to have.
24. You have to believe that what Clinton did in the 1960's is of vital national interest but what Bush did decades later is "stale news" and "irrelevant".
25. You have to believe that trade with Cuba is wrong because it is communist, but trading with China and Vietnam is just dandy.
Friday, March 19, 2004
"You're Fired!"
The news today carried an interesting story. Billionaire Real Estate mogul Donald Trump wants to trademark the phrase he’s made famous on The Apprentice—“You’re Fired!” The Smoking Gun published the trademark application.
What would this mean if Trump’s application were successful? Theoretically, no one could use the term without license from Donald. I was fired back in July. My supervisor, who cried when he fired me, never said, “you’re fired.” But what if my next boss fires me and uses the words, “you’re fired?” Could I then turn him into Trump Properties so they could sue the company because they used the phrase without license? What will this mean for all the jobs that are being “outsourced?” You know this could be a good thing for the Bush administration. Perhaps it will help the economy. People will be able to keep their jobs without fear of hearing the words: “You’re fired!” That would be great for Bush. He’s fortunate that there are enough issues to obfuscate voters from realizing they’ll have to pay at least $3.00 to put enough gasoline into their cars to get to the polls to vote for him.
Forbes magazine says “The Donald” is worth 2 ½ billion. He told Wolf Blitzer he’s probably worth more. CNN also reports that 98% of Americans know who Trump is. With that wealth and name recognition, Trump may be on to something. I’m reminded of Lisa Beamer’s attempt to trademark the phrase “Let’s Roll” after the September 11, 2001, attack on the Pentagon and World Trade Center. The phrase was one of the last statements her late husband, Todd Beamer. Beamer, who died when the United Airlines flight he was flying on was hijacked and crashed a Pennsylvania field, and other passengers attempted to retake the flight from the hijackers.
My friends Dan, Shawn, and I should have thought about trade marking the phrase, “HOWDY!” We used to say that in the mornings when we were all working as history teaching assistants in grad school. My office mate was a freak. A sexually harassing freak. One morning, we were all saying “HOWDY!” to one another, and my office mate shouted, “No more HOWDYs!” Of course, that simply encouraged us even more to say “HOWDY!” Boy, was he ticked off. And we were pleased. Until at the end of semester when we were informed that our contracts would not be renewed. At least they didn’t say, “You’re fired!”
What would this mean if Trump’s application were successful? Theoretically, no one could use the term without license from Donald. I was fired back in July. My supervisor, who cried when he fired me, never said, “you’re fired.” But what if my next boss fires me and uses the words, “you’re fired?” Could I then turn him into Trump Properties so they could sue the company because they used the phrase without license? What will this mean for all the jobs that are being “outsourced?” You know this could be a good thing for the Bush administration. Perhaps it will help the economy. People will be able to keep their jobs without fear of hearing the words: “You’re fired!” That would be great for Bush. He’s fortunate that there are enough issues to obfuscate voters from realizing they’ll have to pay at least $3.00 to put enough gasoline into their cars to get to the polls to vote for him.
Forbes magazine says “The Donald” is worth 2 ½ billion. He told Wolf Blitzer he’s probably worth more. CNN also reports that 98% of Americans know who Trump is. With that wealth and name recognition, Trump may be on to something. I’m reminded of Lisa Beamer’s attempt to trademark the phrase “Let’s Roll” after the September 11, 2001, attack on the Pentagon and World Trade Center. The phrase was one of the last statements her late husband, Todd Beamer. Beamer, who died when the United Airlines flight he was flying on was hijacked and crashed a Pennsylvania field, and other passengers attempted to retake the flight from the hijackers.
My friends Dan, Shawn, and I should have thought about trade marking the phrase, “HOWDY!” We used to say that in the mornings when we were all working as history teaching assistants in grad school. My office mate was a freak. A sexually harassing freak. One morning, we were all saying “HOWDY!” to one another, and my office mate shouted, “No more HOWDYs!” Of course, that simply encouraged us even more to say “HOWDY!” Boy, was he ticked off. And we were pleased. Until at the end of semester when we were informed that our contracts would not be renewed. At least they didn’t say, “You’re fired!”
Saturday, February 28, 2004
An Old Look at the Death Penalty
This is a letter I wrote back in mid-May, 2002. I wrote the letter to the editor of the New Braunfels Herald-Zeitung about a article about an upcoming execution at Huntsville:
I hope reporter Erika E. Durham is satisfied. She was on the media list to witness the execution of Rodolfo B. Hernandez for the brutal murder of Victor Cervan, and I hope she attended. I remember hearing about the murder when it happened, and thinking how horrible it was for the victims. I had no sympathy for Mr. Hernandez when he was found guilty and sentenced to death for his crimes. I generally support the death penalty, although I am concerned with the slaps on the wrists we give those who turn state’s evidence and other deals the DA’s office makes in order to secure one conviction (for example, Hernandez’s brother-in-law only got four years for theft in the case).
What disturbs me recently, is the attitude of the New Braunfels Herald in regard to Hernandez’s execution. I get the general impression that your intrepid reporter was inconvenienced because the execution scheduled changed. I’ve been to death row, at the Polunksy Unit and to the death chamber in Huntsville recently, and I don’t understand her eagerness to witness a criminal’s execution. I see the death penalty as a last resort. Something reserved for those who have proven that they could no longer share in humanity. Durham’s attitude seems to be one of revenge.
I am especially outraged by the disregard she seemed to convey in her writing that Mr. Hernandez was diabetic. She wrote on April 22, 2002, “As a diabetic and the only man on death row in a wheelchair, Hernandez’s upkeep is far from average, with costly insulin shots required each day to keep the disease under control.” She then went on a litany of expenses that citizens spent on Hernandez and the money the San Antonio Police Dept. spent on visiting Hernandez to get information on other crimes. Information the SAPD deemed important. She even complained about the Last Meal, despite the fact that her source contradicted her concern stating, “There is really no money involved with the meal,” TDCJ spokesperson Larry Todd said. “As long as they request something that we have within the state system, they can have as much as they want.” Unbelievably, she even listed the amount it would cost to put him to death. Neither does she understand that the requested Last Meal is only a request, not a mandate.
Following Durham’s thinking, the Nazi’s had it right. When sick, handicapped, mentally ill, and other prisoners the Nazi’s deemed unfit came into prison camps they were allowed to die. No state money spent on on-going health care. The prisoner was condemned to death, why spend money on wheelchairs or insulin injections like Texas did for Mr. Hernandez.
Fortunately, I was pleased that the prosecuting DA in the case, William Schroeder, expressed concern over the way the death penalty was carried out. “We are so high on the idea of due process of law, which means fairness to everybody. If you’re going to put a man through this, then be fair to him, too.” Thank goodness the man who was responsible for seeing to it that Mr. Hernandez paid for his crimes understands the weight of the burden. It is shocking that the Herald can treat such a decision with such caustic flippancy, and hopefully it will assume half the responsibility it bears in promulgating such tabloid-style tripe that passes for journalism. The people who read the Herald deserve better.
I hope reporter Erika E. Durham is satisfied. She was on the media list to witness the execution of Rodolfo B. Hernandez for the brutal murder of Victor Cervan, and I hope she attended. I remember hearing about the murder when it happened, and thinking how horrible it was for the victims. I had no sympathy for Mr. Hernandez when he was found guilty and sentenced to death for his crimes. I generally support the death penalty, although I am concerned with the slaps on the wrists we give those who turn state’s evidence and other deals the DA’s office makes in order to secure one conviction (for example, Hernandez’s brother-in-law only got four years for theft in the case).
What disturbs me recently, is the attitude of the New Braunfels Herald in regard to Hernandez’s execution. I get the general impression that your intrepid reporter was inconvenienced because the execution scheduled changed. I’ve been to death row, at the Polunksy Unit and to the death chamber in Huntsville recently, and I don’t understand her eagerness to witness a criminal’s execution. I see the death penalty as a last resort. Something reserved for those who have proven that they could no longer share in humanity. Durham’s attitude seems to be one of revenge.
I am especially outraged by the disregard she seemed to convey in her writing that Mr. Hernandez was diabetic. She wrote on April 22, 2002, “As a diabetic and the only man on death row in a wheelchair, Hernandez’s upkeep is far from average, with costly insulin shots required each day to keep the disease under control.” She then went on a litany of expenses that citizens spent on Hernandez and the money the San Antonio Police Dept. spent on visiting Hernandez to get information on other crimes. Information the SAPD deemed important. She even complained about the Last Meal, despite the fact that her source contradicted her concern stating, “There is really no money involved with the meal,” TDCJ spokesperson Larry Todd said. “As long as they request something that we have within the state system, they can have as much as they want.” Unbelievably, she even listed the amount it would cost to put him to death. Neither does she understand that the requested Last Meal is only a request, not a mandate.
Following Durham’s thinking, the Nazi’s had it right. When sick, handicapped, mentally ill, and other prisoners the Nazi’s deemed unfit came into prison camps they were allowed to die. No state money spent on on-going health care. The prisoner was condemned to death, why spend money on wheelchairs or insulin injections like Texas did for Mr. Hernandez.
Fortunately, I was pleased that the prosecuting DA in the case, William Schroeder, expressed concern over the way the death penalty was carried out. “We are so high on the idea of due process of law, which means fairness to everybody. If you’re going to put a man through this, then be fair to him, too.” Thank goodness the man who was responsible for seeing to it that Mr. Hernandez paid for his crimes understands the weight of the burden. It is shocking that the Herald can treat such a decision with such caustic flippancy, and hopefully it will assume half the responsibility it bears in promulgating such tabloid-style tripe that passes for journalism. The people who read the Herald deserve better.
Wednesday, February 04, 2004
Church at Crossroads?
George Weigel recently posted an Opinion piece to the Washington Post. Is the Catholic Church at a crossroads, he wonders? I would agree with Weigel, yes, the Church is at a Crossroads.
As I read the Weigle article, I perceive him asking the question “is the future of Europe more important than the social issues the Church faces?” As another posting to this list states, the Church is under much criticism. Whether it is traditional anti-Catholic bashing from our American media, or the ranting of neo-separatist, traditionalist Bishop Bernard Fellay, the Church today is under criticism. I think that Pope John Paul has opened up the Church to more people, and has initiated many ecumenical reforms that have tried to incorporate the teaching that Christians are of one body. John Paul’s efforts have revitalized the Church and made it possible for many to look anew at the Church as a welcoming home for many who left it previously, or who are searching for a religious home. When I toured the recent exhibit in Houston, “Saint Peter and the Vatican: The Legacy of the Popes,” I was struck by the design of St. Peter’s in Rome. In the architect’s drawings (I believe they were Michelangelo’s), the wings of the basilica’s courtyard were to by symbolic of two gigantic, outstretched, embracing arms. I think our present Pope, John Paul II, has done the same, opened the arms of the Church to greater numbers. I do not want to reduce the criticism to the circular logic that states when you’re doing something right people will be against you, but the empirical evidence shows that more people are coming to the Church, and that does pose a threat to many.
In Guy Coq’s article in the January 30, 2004, New York Times, “Scarves and Symbols,” he states, “More and more, European democracies are multireligious. They no longer have a base of common religious tradition. Instead, they are constructing social guidelines built around ethical, universal values like justice and liberty of conscience.” Compare that with new figures released by the Vatican that full Catholics made up 1.07 billion of the world's 6.2 billion population. That's 17.2%. And half of the Catholics are in the Americas compared to just over 26% in Europe. In fact, the Catholic population in the Americas constitute over 62 % of the population as opposed to only 40% in Europe.
The Church is at a crossroads much as it was after the Protestant Reformation. Catholicism is growing in the Americas while it is declining in Europe, a trend that began in 1531 when the vision of the Virgin of Guadalupe appeared outside Mexico City; as millions joined the Church in the Americas, millions were leaving in Europe. I think that by looking at the numbers of declining Catholics in Europe, maybe Roberto Pazzi’s article in the January 11, 2004, edition of the New York Times, “Why the Next Pope Needs to Be Italian,” is a reaction to what is perceived, and rightly so, of a decline in European Catholicism.
As I read the Weigle article, I perceive him asking the question “is the future of Europe more important than the social issues the Church faces?” As another posting to this list states, the Church is under much criticism. Whether it is traditional anti-Catholic bashing from our American media, or the ranting of neo-separatist, traditionalist Bishop Bernard Fellay, the Church today is under criticism. I think that Pope John Paul has opened up the Church to more people, and has initiated many ecumenical reforms that have tried to incorporate the teaching that Christians are of one body. John Paul’s efforts have revitalized the Church and made it possible for many to look anew at the Church as a welcoming home for many who left it previously, or who are searching for a religious home. When I toured the recent exhibit in Houston, “Saint Peter and the Vatican: The Legacy of the Popes,” I was struck by the design of St. Peter’s in Rome. In the architect’s drawings (I believe they were Michelangelo’s), the wings of the basilica’s courtyard were to by symbolic of two gigantic, outstretched, embracing arms. I think our present Pope, John Paul II, has done the same, opened the arms of the Church to greater numbers. I do not want to reduce the criticism to the circular logic that states when you’re doing something right people will be against you, but the empirical evidence shows that more people are coming to the Church, and that does pose a threat to many.
In Guy Coq’s article in the January 30, 2004, New York Times, “Scarves and Symbols,” he states, “More and more, European democracies are multireligious. They no longer have a base of common religious tradition. Instead, they are constructing social guidelines built around ethical, universal values like justice and liberty of conscience.” Compare that with new figures released by the Vatican that full Catholics made up 1.07 billion of the world's 6.2 billion population. That's 17.2%. And half of the Catholics are in the Americas compared to just over 26% in Europe. In fact, the Catholic population in the Americas constitute over 62 % of the population as opposed to only 40% in Europe.
The Church is at a crossroads much as it was after the Protestant Reformation. Catholicism is growing in the Americas while it is declining in Europe, a trend that began in 1531 when the vision of the Virgin of Guadalupe appeared outside Mexico City; as millions joined the Church in the Americas, millions were leaving in Europe. I think that by looking at the numbers of declining Catholics in Europe, maybe Roberto Pazzi’s article in the January 11, 2004, edition of the New York Times, “Why the Next Pope Needs to Be Italian,” is a reaction to what is perceived, and rightly so, of a decline in European Catholicism.
Monday, January 26, 2004
Howard Dean's Rant
Dr. Howard Dean’s Iowa Caucus concession speech on MLK day 2004 has all the political pundits and late-night comedians talking, that I cannot help but write something about it.
Although you’ll never again see the speech in its entirety, you can read it off the The New York Times website, where you’ll find a transcription of the speech. After coming in third in Iowa, Dr. Dean addressed his campaigners:
DEAN: Well, you guys, you have already got the picture here. I was about to say, you know, I'm sure there are some disappointed people here. You know what? You know something? You know something? If you had told us one year ago that we were going to come in third in Iowa, we would have given anything for that. And you know something? You know something? Not only are we going to New Hampshire, Tom Harkin, we're going to South Carolina and Oklahoma and Arizona and North Dakota and New Mexico, and we're going to California and Texas and New York. And we're going to South Dakota and Oregon and Washington and Michigan. And then we're going to Washington, D.C. To take back the White House. Yeah.
(APPLAUSE)
We will not give up.
AUDIENCE: No.
Ok, so the NY Times transcription is a little sterile, but you’ve seen the video clip and know how much noise and excitement (and disappointment) there was in the hall. I saw the TV clips and wondered if Dean hadn’t been a bit too enthusiastic. But did his enthusiasm invite the constant media attention that it has received? I thought to myself, wow, he’s really fired up! Did I think he was crazy? Did I think, “hey, should this guy have his finger on the red button?” Not any more so than when I see George “Dubya” in his cowboy boots and hat trying to act like a Texan! Wait, I don’t think Bush should be president…bad example.
You know, in the old days, presidential candidates didn’t even campaign on their own behalf. It wasn’t considered “proper” for someone to make speeches for their own election. Not even George Washington went out and stumped for his presidency. Of course, everyone knew that he would be the President, but even Jefferson, Jackson and most other candidates did not campaign for presidency. That changed in 1896, when William Jennings Bryan, the “Boy Orator of the Platt” ran for president on both the Democratic and Populist ticket. He crisscrossed the country by rail, speaking and taking his message to people in large countries and the “boys at the forks in the road,” as rural areas were called.
Dean is no Bryan. But, the “I have a Scream” speech, as some are now calling it certainly has made the news, and not all good for dean. For example, on this weekend’s Chris Matthews Show, Chris, humorist Dave Matthews, political insider Joe Kline, and Campbell Brown asked each other “Is Dean Dead?”
On David Letterman’s Late Show, Dr. Dean made an appearance on the Top Ten List segment with the topic: Top Ten Ways I, Howard Dean, Can Turn Things Around:
10. "Switch to decaf"
9. "Unveil new slogan: 'Vote for Dean and get one dollar off you next purchase at Blimpie'"
8. "Marry Rachel on final episode of 'Friends'"
7. "Don't change a thing -- it's going great"
6. "Show a little more skin"
5. "Go on 'American Idol' and give 'em a taste of these pipes"
4. "Start working out and speaking with Austrian accent"
3. "I can't give specifics yet, but it involves Ted Danson"
2. "Fire the staffer who suggested we do this lousy Top Ten list instead of actually campaigning"
1. "Oh, I don't know -- maybe fewer crazy, redfaced rants"
If you support Dean and his level of energy, you can also get Howard Dean “Yarrrr!” t-shits available at CaféShops. There is also a thong, which I find quite interesting.
I’m not saying I’m for Dean, I don’t really know that much about him. I do know that Dr. Dean has been the five-time governor of Vermont, and although he is known as being somewhat cheap, he does come from a prominent New York family. He is not the “political unknown” that some in the media like to portray him.
What of the comparison between Dean and Bryan? Unfortunately for Bryan, he lost the election to William McKinley who held his campaign in the traditional way. He sat at home in what was called the Front Porch Campaign. He would entertain reporters’ questions while sitting on his porch in Canton, Ohio.
So much for political enthusiasm.
Although you’ll never again see the speech in its entirety, you can read it off the The New York Times website, where you’ll find a transcription of the speech. After coming in third in Iowa, Dr. Dean addressed his campaigners:
DEAN: Well, you guys, you have already got the picture here. I was about to say, you know, I'm sure there are some disappointed people here. You know what? You know something? You know something? If you had told us one year ago that we were going to come in third in Iowa, we would have given anything for that. And you know something? You know something? Not only are we going to New Hampshire, Tom Harkin, we're going to South Carolina and Oklahoma and Arizona and North Dakota and New Mexico, and we're going to California and Texas and New York. And we're going to South Dakota and Oregon and Washington and Michigan. And then we're going to Washington, D.C. To take back the White House. Yeah.
(APPLAUSE)
We will not give up.
AUDIENCE: No.
Ok, so the NY Times transcription is a little sterile, but you’ve seen the video clip and know how much noise and excitement (and disappointment) there was in the hall. I saw the TV clips and wondered if Dean hadn’t been a bit too enthusiastic. But did his enthusiasm invite the constant media attention that it has received? I thought to myself, wow, he’s really fired up! Did I think he was crazy? Did I think, “hey, should this guy have his finger on the red button?” Not any more so than when I see George “Dubya” in his cowboy boots and hat trying to act like a Texan! Wait, I don’t think Bush should be president…bad example.
You know, in the old days, presidential candidates didn’t even campaign on their own behalf. It wasn’t considered “proper” for someone to make speeches for their own election. Not even George Washington went out and stumped for his presidency. Of course, everyone knew that he would be the President, but even Jefferson, Jackson and most other candidates did not campaign for presidency. That changed in 1896, when William Jennings Bryan, the “Boy Orator of the Platt” ran for president on both the Democratic and Populist ticket. He crisscrossed the country by rail, speaking and taking his message to people in large countries and the “boys at the forks in the road,” as rural areas were called.
Dean is no Bryan. But, the “I have a Scream” speech, as some are now calling it certainly has made the news, and not all good for dean. For example, on this weekend’s Chris Matthews Show, Chris, humorist Dave Matthews, political insider Joe Kline, and Campbell Brown asked each other “Is Dean Dead?”
On David Letterman’s Late Show, Dr. Dean made an appearance on the Top Ten List segment with the topic: Top Ten Ways I, Howard Dean, Can Turn Things Around:
10. "Switch to decaf"
9. "Unveil new slogan: 'Vote for Dean and get one dollar off you next purchase at Blimpie'"
8. "Marry Rachel on final episode of 'Friends'"
7. "Don't change a thing -- it's going great"
6. "Show a little more skin"
5. "Go on 'American Idol' and give 'em a taste of these pipes"
4. "Start working out and speaking with Austrian accent"
3. "I can't give specifics yet, but it involves Ted Danson"
2. "Fire the staffer who suggested we do this lousy Top Ten list instead of actually campaigning"
1. "Oh, I don't know -- maybe fewer crazy, redfaced rants"
If you support Dean and his level of energy, you can also get Howard Dean “Yarrrr!” t-shits available at CaféShops. There is also a thong, which I find quite interesting.
I’m not saying I’m for Dean, I don’t really know that much about him. I do know that Dr. Dean has been the five-time governor of Vermont, and although he is known as being somewhat cheap, he does come from a prominent New York family. He is not the “political unknown” that some in the media like to portray him.
What of the comparison between Dean and Bryan? Unfortunately for Bryan, he lost the election to William McKinley who held his campaign in the traditional way. He sat at home in what was called the Front Porch Campaign. He would entertain reporters’ questions while sitting on his porch in Canton, Ohio.
So much for political enthusiasm.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)