Desultory Thoughts

My wife, Heather, took the plunge today and started her very own blog, which now makes us officially a blog family. I’ve been blogging in some form or another since 2001 and I’ve found it interesting to watch as it gets more and more popular. There must be something theraputic about sharing your thoughts with others. Heather has vowed to share her positive thoughts since she admittedly shares many of her negative thoughts with her private journal. As you can guess, I’m thrilled to hear it!

Check her out at heatherslack.com!

Since Tyler’s August 26 post on school vouchers in Utah, several people have asked me to weigh in with my $.02 on the issue. Normally I’m more of a national and international politics kind of guy. But I have kids in public school now, so I should probably start paying better attention to local politics- especially when it could mean big changes for my kids’ schools. So I’ll change the channel for a moment from Headline News to KSL and set the Wall Street Journal aside and pick up (forcing back the dry heaves) the Salt Lake Tribune.

A little context first- just so you know where I’m coming from. Regular readers of this blog may have noticed that I lean a little bit to the Right, politically speaking. Ok, anatomically speaking as well (my right leg is slightly longer than my left, which means I go through pairs of shoes as quick the government goes through my tax dollars). Being conservative, I have an intrinsic distrust of and disdain for government programs of any kind. This is because democratic government, by definition, is inefficient and ineffective. Believe it or not, that’s a good thing. The only efficient and effective governments are dictatorships. Unfortunately, this results in government programs- take welfare for example- that are bloated and misguided.

Government programs also tend to be run by bureaucracies fatally afflicted with Leftist groupthink. Modern American Liberalism (or neo-Marxism) bleeds into most government programs on both federal and state levels. This includes public education. The highest levels of Utah’s public education system are populated and run by social liberals. The school system is heavily influenced by teachers’ unions, which make up a sizable chunk of the Democratic Party. I am employed in a position that has me dealing with a smorgasboard of public education officials, school principals, and teachers intimately on a daily basis. Were I not writing under a pseudonym on this blog, my business relationships would be tense and strained.

The most troubling aspect the whole voucher debate for me is that I’ve met precious few people who actually possesses a clear understanding of the issue. People who lean Right tend to favor vouchers because they see public education as generally lacking and a voucher system theoretically gives the public a greater say in education. Left leaners tend to oppose vouchers because theoretically it amounts to government subsidizing of private enterprise and threatens the established system. Unfortunately, once a theory fits a person’s political framework, that’s usually where the thinking stops.

The heart of the problem is a combination of cultural misunderstanding and dubious politics.

Voucher proponents tend to look at the issue through the prism of business. In the private sector, a competitive atmosphere nets a better product. If something isn’t working, it goes under. It’s scrapped. It gives way to something better. The business world is fluid and ever evolving. Change is the only norm.

The exact opposite is true of government. Bureaucracies are innately resistant to change, and even the smallest financial and policy changes literally require an act of Congress. Because the overall structure and purpose of government is so different from the private sector, the concept of competition doesn’t apply the same way. Voucher opponents tend to approach the issue from a government standpoint.

Since private sector enterprise and public administration overlap in the arena of education, the framework for the debate is flawed. We’re comparing apples to oranges in order to describe grapes. Neither side can understand the other- and neither seems to want to.

Misunderstanding leads to heated debate. And just as a basketball team may resort to throwing elbows and flagrant fouls in a down-to-the-wire fourth quarter, both sides of this political battle have resorted to nasty tactics.

No, I don’t think Utah’s schools are as great as many, including Tyler, think they are. But it doesn’t help the pro-voucher cause that it’s primary media proponents are resorting to religious intimidation and out of state funding from phantom interest groups.

Conversely, Utah’s school system certainly isn’t as bad as many voucher proponents think it is, but it doesn’t help that much of the push to kill the voucher program comes from the decidedly liberal National Education Association, out of state unions, and other liberal activist groups.

The caricatured activists on the front lines of this debate further solidify the unresearched opinions most voters have on this issue. Further aggravating the fight is the issue of precedent. Utah is now the battleground for national education debate. Hence the pervasive involvement of out of state interests. Everybody- not just Utahns- seems to have a dog in this fight.

So where do I stand? I think Utah schools are generally well run. They’re well organized and run by good people with a passion for education. I admire most everybody I deal with in the education establishment. When I send my child to the bus stop every day, I know he is in good hands.

My beef with public education lies only in the politics. I despise the fact that public education is so deeply influenced by Marxist ideology. I was outraged when several Utah school districts refused to mention 9/11 on its six year anniversary. I was very frustrated that my elementary student’s class last year had 32 students in it and total chaos was only avoided when several parents per day volunteered in the classroom. Most of my child’s papers came home having been graded by me or some other parent. I hate that Utopian concepts of multiculturalism and diversity are given higher priority than accountability and individualized instruction.

That said, a voucher system- at this time and in this form- is not the answer. I predict that the referendum will fail (because referendums in Utah have historically failed- even hotly-debated ones) and that the passed voucher legislation will be implemented. But it will be ineffective and inequitable, for the very reasons Tyler mentioned in his post. There is no need to rehash the points he’s articulated.

But let’s consider a heretofore unexplored aspect of the issue. The voucher system will not only hurt public education, it will also be the long term downfall for private schools. Many studies suggest that taxpayer-funded voucher systems will likely increase the cost of private education. One must also consider that no money has ever come from government without strings attached. Many private schools worry that vouchers will effectively turn private schools into de facto public schools, essentially stripping them of the things that made people want to send their kids there in the first place. Private schools will become dependent on public money and will eventually subject to government regulation. That prestigious Catholic private school might someday lose it’s religion.

I’m not sure there’s any way now to clarify the argument this late in the game. It’s unfortunate that the issue is so politically charged. The spin from both sides has clouded the facts, and honest dialogue has given way to malicious rhetoric. It’s sad that neither side is willing to appeal to the other by simply laying out the facts, divorced from politics and ulterior motives.

Brace yourselves, my friends, we’re in the fourth quarter. It’s going to get even more interesting.

Do you know who Che Guevara is? Probably not. But you know what he looks like. You know, the t-shirt. The one you see at night clubs, college campuses, and leftist protests across the country. The famous posterized image was even recently spotted on the streets of Baghdad. But I’m willing to bet 300 carbon offsets that outside of Latin America, nobody knows anything about the guy gracing their $30 t-shirts. I’m not going to waste space on the guy. Google him if you care. Better yet, Wikipedia him.

The only thing that bugs me worse than political stupidity is fads. The Atkins diet, beanie babies, Survivor. They hit the pop culture scene, drive hordes to obsession, then disappear as quickly as they came. Ok, so Survivor hasn’t yet been voted off the island, but when was the last time you heard “Sorry, I can’t tonight. Survivor’s on.”

Today it’s myspace, organic food, and “going green.” Of course if I were smart and would have been the guy who invented these things, I’d be on sitting on some beach counting my stacks of green.

Today’s Che Guevara is Al Gore. Who’da thought? Some turds just don’t flush. Seven years ago I would never have believed that Al Gore would lead pop culture’s pantheon of idols. Of course Gore would be nothing if his pet cause hadn’t taken the world by storm. Al Gore has become the face of Global Warming. And he’s recruited quite a cabinet of indoctrination pros- Hollywood, national news media, academia, and education. Musicians like Pearl Jam croon about green living while distinguished climate experts like Sheryl Crow and Leonardo DiCaprio preach about conserving toilet paper and living “carbon neutral” lifestyles. Network news reporters poo-poo even the most intellectual challenges to Global Warming theory and college professors teach it as gospel. Even red state elementary schools have made “An Inconvenient Truth” a curriculum staple (never mind that the premise of this Gore flick is shaky and packed with exaggerations and stretched truths).

Global warming will go down in history as the super fad of modern times. I’m constantly amazed at how it has gripped the country. I recently attended a large educational conference whose keynote speaker was Bill Nye (the Science Guy). The subject of his speech, as stated in the conference program, was “promoting educational technology.” After a few self-serving stories about his various inventions, the lovable geek we all grew up watching on PBS launched a tirade on Global Warming (known nowadays by it’s current fad name, “climate change”). Nye told the several thousand educators present that their main goal should be to raise awareness of the dangers of global warming. He ended with the following:

“We are facing a serious business here on Earth; we are facing a very serious future unless we get on it,” he warned. “This is where we, as educators, must change the world.”

I think I was the only one that didn’t give him a standing ovation. So much for educational technology. Can I get a refund?

Come on, you say. Climate change isn’t a fad. It’s science. Al Gore says so. Well there’s plenty about this “science” that doesn’t sit right with me, which I’ll discuss in subsequent posts. Even if the science is sound and humans are indeed affecting global climate, today’s climate change chic is still a fad. And like all other fads, most of the people wearing the t-shirts don’t have a clue what’s behind the graphic. And also like all other fads, it will be gone once the hype dries up.

Now I consider myself an environmentalist. I love nature and I contribute annually to several conservation organizations. I drive a fuel efficient vehicle, recycle, and actively oppose unwise land development in my county. I believe humans should be good and wise stewards of the earth. Climate change I can believe, but I’m not so quick to believe the change is caused by humans. But even if any of the hype pans out, there are a few things about the hysteria that bug the hell out of me:

1. Al Gore. Ok, you must realize by now that I think Al Gore is a lying, hypocritical, steaming pile. I couldn’t stand him during the Clinton years and I can’t stand him now. The man has no credibility and I’ve never understood his appeal. The best way to convince me of something’s falsity is to have Al Gore promote it.

2. Celebrity activists. First of all, to think your average celebrity has any sense of reality is ridiculous. How much in common with the everyday Joe do actors and musicians have? And they’re telling me how to live my life? Shut up and sing.

3. Carbon offsets. Nothing like buying off guilt.

4. Indoctrination. Despite what Al Gore and Bill Nye say, global warming science is not set in stone. There is a difference between scientific hypothesis and scientific law. I’m no scientist but I’ve read enough to know that there are many, many climate experts who seriously doubt the theory of human-caused global warming. But you’ll never hear them on the news and your kids will never read their side of the story in school. On the other hand, Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” is required viewing in many American schools. It is widely shown in elementary schools. Some students have reported seeing the movie several times in several classes. I do not pay thousands of dollars in taxes for the government to ram these things down my kids’ throat.

5. Purging dissidents. Scientists who have doubts about Global Warming theory face a modern-day witch hunt. Just ask Oregon state climatologist George Taylor, who faces possible removal by Governor Ted Kulongoski because his views aren’t in line with “the consensus.” John Christie, Alabama state climatologist, told Cybercast News Service “It seems if scientists don’t express the views of the political establishment, they will be threatened and that is a discomforting thought.” Read the New York Times or watch a network newscast. Anybody skeptical of man-made global warming is painted as a marginal hack funded by Big Oil, while the fact that global warming alarmists are openly paid by environmentalist groups and far-left foundations goes unscrutinized. I’m no expert on Democracy, but since when was silencing critics a democratic value?

Global warming alarmists may be able to indoctrinate a sizable portion of our kids, but as long as they promote their agenda by fad, they’ll never reach adults with half a brain. I anxiously await the day when celebrities and scientists alike will lament the fact that they tarnished their names with the global warming fad- like an old lady regrets getting that huge tatoo on her back in her younger, more ignorant days. Environmental problems can only be tackled with true open debate, exhaustive peer review, and politics-free analysis.

Thanks to Glenn Beck for the awesome Al Gorevara graphic! Somebody should put that on a t-shirt…

My good friend, Clint, has begun recording his adventures in a new blog entitled “BonnevilleMariner“. The current story is one that I had the pleasure of being involved in; a noisy ride to Nevada in my oil-leaking Jeep with Clint and John. We nearly ran out of gas at least once and we were completely lost at one point. I can honestly say that that was the only time I’ve been lost and were it not for the insistence of the majority that we were finally walking up the right road, I might have been lost forever. I’ll comment more on his blog for history’s sake.

I look forward to reading more stories as they’re posted and I’m sure you’ll enjoy a lore or two if you take a moment to visit and browse. It will be more reminiscent for me seeing as how I’m Clint’s adventure buddy and have been involved in many of the adventures he’ll share. The one place he didn’t follow me was down an old, dark, long-forgotten mining tunnel. And wisely so. (Yet again, because he was there I am not still lost or now dead.) Thanks, Clint!

“They’re very effective if people don’t wear masks.”

“You mean they will kill thousands?”

“Yes, they will kill thousands,”

No, this is not Michael Moore bragging to Al Franken about his flatulence.

“If you arrest any of them, cut off their heads. Show no mercy. They only joined the security to avoid having to join the army and fight Iran.”

The voice is Saddam Hussein’s. It’s an excerpt from several recently revealed recordings of the former dictator in conversation with his subordinates, in this case telling them to execute internal security officials for “incompetance.”

Oh, there’s more.

“Some commanders who abandoned their positions when they found themselves in an awkward situation, who deserved to have their necks cut, and did.”

The most disturbing dialogue discusses the effectiveness of chemical weapons (from Tuesday’s NY Times):

On one recording, Mr. Hussein presses the merits of chemical weapons on Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, his vice-president, and now, the Americans believe, the fugitive leader of the Sunni insurgency that has tied down thousands of American troops. Mr. Douri, a notorious hard-liner, asks whether chemical attacks will be effective against civilian populations, and suggests that they might stir an international outcry.

“Yes, they’re very effective if people don’t wear masks,” Mr. Hussein replies.

“You mean they will kill thousands?” Mr. Douri asks.

“Yes, they will kill thousands,” Mr. Hussein says.

Mr. Hussein sounds matter of fact as he describes what chemical weapons will do. “They will prevent people eating and drinking the local water, and they won’t be able to sleep in their beds,” he says. “They will force people to leave their homes and make them uninhabitable until they have been decontaminated.”

As for the concern about international reaction, he assures Mr. Douri that only he will order the attacks. “I don’t know if you know this, Comrade Izzat, but chemical weapons are not used unless I personally give the orders,” he says.

The tapes, made a decade ago and played at the continuing trials of his cohorts, reveal Saddam as the calculating, evil incarnate rat bastard that we knew he was.

Well, not all of us, I guess. CNN censored their own reporting of Saddam’s terrors in order to retain access in Baghdad. Leading up to the coalition’s 2003 invasion, foreign media painted Saddam as an enlightened moderate. The UN (including Kofi Anon’s own son) privately sucked millions from the Oil For Food program while publicly turning a blind eye to Saddam’s tyranny. Russia and France were dead set against taking any action against Saddam’s regime that amounted to anything more than empty rhetoric. The Angry Left defended Saddam and and sent human shields to Baghdad to protect him. Jaded politicos still bark that Iraq was better off under Saddam’s rule.

The New York Times, until Tuesday’s article, seemed convinced of Saddam’s innocence, accusing Iran of gassing the Kurds.

In reality, Saddam was a devil that murdered millions of his own people. There were the Kurds (the victims of Saddam’s “very effective” gas), the mass executions following the Shi’ite uprising, the revenge killings, and the random beheadings of his own security forces. I could go on and on.

Say what you want about the Bush. Say what you want about the war. But I admire a country and an administration with the juevos to actually look evil in the eye and send it to hell.