Saturday, January 14, 2006

Pat the jackal


Imagine if Marion Gordon 'Pat' Robertson were Muslim.

Mullah Robertson--host of a TV show watched daily by a million Muslims, founder of major Muslim organizations, sought out regularly for comment by newspapers and broadcasters, a visible and prominent pillar of the Muslim community.

What would the reaction of the country be if Mullah Robertson said Ariel Sharon's massive stroke was punishment from God?

If Mullah Robertson warned the citizens of a small town that God may forsake them and hit the with a disaster after they decided not to proselytize for Islam in public schools.

If Mullah Robertson called for the assassination of the leader of a country to our south?

I wonder if Pat thanks God ever day for being born white and Christian.

I personally don't care too much about Pat; like his peer Pat Buchanan (what's Pat Sajak like? Pat Benatar?) he serves as a canary in a mine--his open words reveal what his followers and bedfellows try to keep hidden.

But I wonder about people like Daniel Ayalon, Israel's ambassador to the U.S., who called Robertson "a great friend of Israel".

Are you kidding? Robertson's a friend of Israel the same way a farmer's a friend of his slowly-fattening hog.

Pat, like many evangelicals, believes in order for the Rapture to come, Israel must be united--he sees Israel's entire existence as merely a stepping stone to what really matters... and once the Rapture comes, of course, Israelis as well as the rest of the non-evangelical world will be wiped out as God separates the wheat from the chaff and brings his chosen people home.

So I guess if you think a friend is someone who values you as a stepping stone to their eternal life, yeah, Pat Robertson is a friend of Israel (and all Americans).

Photo of Pat Robertson in Jerusalem by Brennan Linsley for the AP, via mentalblog.com.

There's an interesting Slate article, Supersede Me: Evangelicals rethink how to convert Jews that discusses Robertson, evangelicals and Jews that includes these lines:

The shift away from supersessionism is best articulated in the influential 2001 essay "Salvation Is From the Jews" (a quotation from John 4:22), by Richard John Neuhaus, the Catholic priest who edits the journal First Things. Neuhaus argued that American Christians needed to relate to Jews in a new spirit not of proselytism but of mutual edification. Jews in America aren't just potential Christians, he argued. They are unique conversation partners with insights that may help Christians better understand their own faith. "The salvation that is from the Jews cannot be proclaimed or lived apart from the Jews," Neuhaus writes. And elsewhere: "[W]e can and must say that friendship between Jew and Christian can be secured in shared love for the God of Israel." In other words, the continuing existence of Jews is not a failure of evangelism.

But Neuhaus does not mean that Christians should give up on converting Jews. Evangelicals are evangelicals, after all, not Unitarians. Rather, Neuhaus writes, "[W]e can and must say that we reject proselytizing, which is best defined as evangelizing in a way that demeans the other." ...

Most traditional evangelicals would agree with the Jewish literary critic Stanley Fish, who has argued that evangelicals are obligated, if they're intellectually honest, to proclaim frankly that theirs is the universal truth. Any hemming and hawing is just caving in to liberal sensibilities."

Friday, January 13, 2006

One day, 1/5th the size of China


The Times: Come October, Baby Will Make 300 Million or So

If the experts are right, some time this month, perhaps somewhere in the suburban South or West, a couple, most likely white Anglo-Saxon Protestants or Hispanic, will conceive a baby who, when born in October, will become the 300 millionth American.

As of yesterday, the Census Bureau officially pegged the resident population of the United States at closing in on 297,900,000. The bureau estimates that with a baby being born every 8 seconds, someone dying every 12 seconds and the nation gaining an immigrant every 31 seconds on average, the population is growing by one person every 14 seconds.

The bureau estimates that with a baby being born every 8 seconds, someone dying every 12 seconds and the nation gaining an immigrant every 31 seconds on average, the population is growing by one person every 14 seconds. ...

In 1967, when the population reached 200 million, Life magazine dispatched 23 photographers to locate the baby and devoted a five-page spread to its search. Instead of deciding on a statistically valid symbol of the average American newborn, the magazine chose the one born at precisely the appointed time.

Life immortalized Robert Ken Woo Jr. of Atlanta, whose parents, a computer programmer and a chemical engineer, had immigrated seven years earlier from China. Mr. Woo graduated magna cum laude from Harvard and is a litigator. Now 38, he still lives in Atlanta with his wife, Angie, who is also a lawyer, and their three daughters.

"He did feel an obligation to do well," Ms. Woo said. "But I think he would have done well, regardless."
It's interesting to me that an Asian American man in 1967 was Life's official face of the 200 millionth American.

I'm curious as to what the reaction was at the time, with America having recently fought to an armistice in Korea against Red China and in the midst of the quagmire in Vietnam.

Was the reaction from some anything like when Maya Lin was revealed as the winner of the blind Vietnam War memorial competition?

Maybe it was like the reaction of the 40% of voters in Alabama who in 2000 voted to keep the state's miscegenation laws.

The great thing about this country is it changes--and in unexpected and sometimes unpopular ways. We're not near perfect, but we struggle and argue and fight in pursuit of getting better.

People by virtue of not being in control of their community are forced to confront their racism and other prejudices, often times in reaction to judicial fiat--the civil rights movement--or increasingly in response to pop culture--gay and lesbian rights.

Which is why things like gated communities, public vouchers for private schools, and even socially-isolating iPods should be fought.

Now just imagine how great would it be if Census demographers annoit an Arab-American as the face of the 300th millionth American!

In any case, Mr. Woo seems to have done well for himself.

Photo of Robert K. Woo from King & Spalding.

Modern day fairy tale


It's very strange, but just about every film review I've ever read gets details about the movie wrong. I'm not just talking about matter of interpretation--I'm talking about easily-verifiable facts that anyone with a half-way decent memory ought to get right to begin with.

It's not even that I have such a superior memory in comparison to the Eberts of the world. Rather, I think that if you 'get' a film, it's easy to remember things about the film--there tends to be an interior logic to things, especially if the film is well-crafted. And even for bad films, things tend to be bad the same way, so wrong details in reviews still jump out.

Just out of curiosity, I looked up Roger Ebert's review of a film I just watched for the first time, The Princess Bride. Which, incidentally, I liked--it's a good mix of sweetness and silliness, with lotsof quotable lines. I don't think it's an astonishing film; perhaps if I'd seen it aged 10 I'd have been bowled over. But I doubt it; it's too self-referential and clever, actually, to really be deemed astonishing.

Anyway, Ebert's eight-paragraph review gets scads of things wrong:

""The Princess Bride" begins as a story that a grandfather is reading out of a book. But already the movie has a spin on it, because the grandfather is played by Peter Falk, and in the distinctive quality of his voice we detect a certain edge. His voice seems to contain a measure of cynicism about fairy stories, a certain awareness that there are a lot more things on heaven and Earth than have been dreamed of by the Brothers Grimm."
-I think this is wrong; the grandfather isn't cynical at all, it's his grandkid who is. The grandfather has a certain roughness to him, but it's feigned and instead conveys great affection.

"The story he tells is about Buttercup, a beautiful princess (Robin Wright) who scornfully orders around a farm boy (Cary Elwes) until the day when she realizes, thunderstruck, that she loves him. She wants to live happily ever after with him, but then evil forces intervene, and she is kidnapped and taken far away across the lost lands, while he is killed."
-I don't find her tone scornful at the beginning, it's more indolent or this faux high-handedness, like she's practicing being nobleborn. He's not really a farm boy--there's really no such thing, that's just what she calls him (it'd be like saying Chewbacca is a 'fuzzball' since Han Solo refers to him that way); he's more like farm hand. She's not really thunderstruck when she discovers she loves him, it's not such a huge gap to overcome, they've constantly been around each other growing up. Her wanting to live happily ever after isn't interrupted by evil forces and she isn't kidnapped and taken far away across the lost lands--he goes away to make his fortune so they can afford to get married, she stays on the farm, then she hears he's been killed by pirates, and then she's selected to be princess and goes willingly because she thinks he's dead and has given up. After that, she's kidnapped, but the stuff in between is pretty key.

"Is this story going to have a lot of kissing in it?" Falk's grandson asks. Well, it's definitely going to have a lot of Screaming Eels.
-Well, there are two screaming eels in one one-minute scene, so that's not really a lot.

"The moment the princess is taken away by agents of the evil Prince Humperdinck (Chris Sarandon), "The Princess Bride" reveals itself as a sly parody of sword and sorcery movies, a film that somehow manages to exist on two levels at once: While younger viewers will sit spellbound at the thrilling events on the screen, adults, I think, will be laughing a lot. In its own peculiar way, "The Princess Bride" resembles "This Is Spinal Tap," an earlier film by the same director, Rob Reiner. Both films are funny not only because they contain comedy, but because Reiner does justice to the underlying form of his story. "Spinal Tap" looked and felt like a rock documentary - and then it was funny. "The Princess Bride" looks and feels like "Legend" or any of those other quasi-heroic epic fantasies - and then it goes for the laughs."
-This is kindof true, but not particularly apt, I feel like there's too much sweetness and purposeful fantasy in PB to be compared to Spinal Tap.

"Part of the secret is that Reiner never stays with the same laugh very long. There are a lot of people for his characters to meet as they make their long journey, and most of them are completely off the wall."
-This is partly true, but one of the noted things about the PB is the same lines do come up again and again, to the point that one of the characters in the movies comments upon it at the end.

"There is, for example, a band of three brigands led by Wallace Shawn as a scheming little conniver and including Andre the Giant as Fezzik the Giant, a crusher who may not necessarily have a heart of gold. It is Shawn who tosses the princess to the Screaming Eels, with great relish."
-This is totally wrong--the princess jumps into the water to get away from the 'brigands,', the whole point is Shawn wants her to die on the border--not in some dark sea--so that he can start a war between two kingdoms. Andre the Giant at all times illustrates he does have a heart of gold, and ironically it's him who saves her from the eels, so that's made up too by Ebert or at least very clumsily written.

"Another funny episode involves Mandy Patinkin as Inigo Montoya, a heroic swordsman with a secret. And the funniest sequence in the film stars Billy Crystal and Carol Kane, both unrecognizable behind makeup, as an ancient wizard and crone who specialize in bringing the dead back to life. (I hope I'm not giving anything away; you didn't expect the princess's loved one to stay dead indefinitely, did you?)"
--Montoya has a secret to the extent he reveals it early in the film as soon as he gets a chance to talk a little--it's not something he even tries to keep secret, if anything he insists on broadcasting it. And his character is not defined as heroic--he's driven by a desire for revenge, while heroes generally are more selfless. The Crystal sequence is no way the funniest--and he (let alone they) doesn't specialize in bringing the dead back to life, it's miracles he specializes in. Ebert makes it seem that the princesses' beloved stays dead from when he's 'killed' by pirates until Crystal shows up, but that's not true either. And Crystal isn't unrecognizable behind makeup, his voice is the most distinctive thing about him and comes through loud and clear.

""The Princess Bride" was adapted by William Goldman from his own novel, which he says was inspired by a book he read as a child, but which seems to have been cheerfully transformed by his wicked adult imagination. It is filled with good-hearted fun, with performances by actors who seem to be smacking their lips and by a certain true innocence that survives all of Reiner's satire. And, also, it does have kissing in it."
-I mean, given that Ebert gets things wrong that I saw with my own eyes, who knows if these additional 'facts' are properly copied from the film's press packet or not....

I actually generally like Ebert as a reviewer because he watches interesting movies, and he doesn't get details wrong any more than any other reviewer. And in the grand scheme of things, it's not such a big deal that film reviewers make mistakes.

It's just odd--and it does make me wonder when I read things other journalists write about things that are not as easily independently verifiable.

Are we living in an age when most people, even those supposedly masters of their craft, lack the ability to closely-read/watch/listen?

Princess Bride production still of Cary Elwes and Robin Wright Penn from Yahoo Australia movie page.

Tuesday, January 10, 2006

Going the way of the dodo?


White Flight in Silicon Valley As Asian Students Move In

Wall Street Journal: By most measures, Monta Vista High here and Lynbrook High, in nearby San Jose, are among the nation's top public high schools. Both boast stellar test scores, an array of advanced-placement classes and a track record of sending graduates from the affluent suburbs of Silicon Valley to prestigious colleges.

But locally, they're also known for something else: white flight. Over the past 10 years, the proportion of white students at Lynbrook has fallen by nearly half, to 25% of the student body. At Monta Vista, white students make up less than one-third of the population, down from 45% -- this in a town that's half white. Some white Cupertino parents are instead sending their children to private schools or moving them to other, whiter public schools. More commonly, young white families in Silicon Valley say they are avoiding Cupertino altogether.

Whites aren't quitting the schools because the schools are failing academically. Quite the contrary: Many white parents say they're leaving because the schools are too academically driven and too narrowly invested in subjects such as math and science at the expense of liberal arts and extracurriculars like sports and other personal interests.

The two schools, put another way that parents rarely articulate so bluntly, are too Asian.
This has got to be one of my favorite articles of all time.

It's poorly written, and pretty close to racist--in order to create a context for the open racism of the white parents quoted and thus smooth their bigotry, the reporter uses 'Asian' instead of Asian-American as a way of ascribing otherness and foreignness to kids who in many cases were born and raised here.

But oh, the quotes--so full of unintentional irony. Most whites walk around with such an engrained sense of racial superiority that it's funny watching them spin anything that goes against their self-delusion.

So for example, as Asian Americans have started outperforming whites in school, Asian Americans have simply been put into a special non-counting class of their own, allowing headlines to continue reading 'Minorities score lower on test.'

But what happens when whites become not just the numerical, but also embarassingly obvious performance, minority?

At Cupertino's top schools, administrators, parents and students say white students end up in the stereotyped role often applied to other minority groups: the underachievers

In one 9th-grade algebra class, Monta Vista's lowest-level math class, the students are an eclectic mix of whites, Asians and other racial and ethnic groups.

"Take a good look," whispered Steve Rowley, superintendent of the Fremont Union High School District, which covers the city of Cupertino as well as portions of other neighboring cities. "This doesn't look like the other classes we're going to."

Ms. Gatley, the Monta Vista PTA president, is more blunt: "White kids are thought of as the dumb kids," she says. ...

On the second floor, in advanced-placement chemistry, only a couple of the 32 students are white and the rest are Asian. Some white parents, and even some students, say they suspect teachers don't take white kids as seriously as Asians.

Heh, heh; imagine, not being taken seriously, just because of the color of your skin! The nerve of people to have lower expectations of you and not listen to you just because of what you look like!

So what's a white parent to do? Tell your kid to study more and prepare for life in the wide-open 21st century? Nah, too hard.

Suck it up and reflect on the lessons of people in glass houses? Nah, too hard.

Spend more time with their kids and pay more than lip service to the importance of education? Nah, too hard.

Easier to just move.

As in move to another school. Or, easier yet, move the goalposts and redefine success. In the process, of course, let's be sure to definine Asian Americans as other, and denigrate their achievements.

Cathy Gatley, co-president of Monta Vista High School's parent-teacher association, recently dissuaded a family with a young child from moving to Cupertino because there are so few young white kids left in the public schools. "This may not sound good," she confides, "but their child may be the only Caucasian kid in the class." All of Ms. Gatley's four children have attended or are currently attending Monta Vista. One son, Andrew, 17 years old, took the high-school exit exam last summer and left the school to avoid the academic pressure. He is currently working in a pet-supply store. Ms. Gatley, who is white, says she probably wouldn't have moved to Cupertino if she had anticipated how much it would change. ...

The white exodus clearly involves race-based presumptions, not all of which are positive. One example: Asian parents are too competitive. That sounds like racism to many of Cupertino's Asian residents, who resent the fact that their growing numbers and success are causing many white families to boycott the town altogether.

"It's a stereotype of Asian parents," says Pei-Pei Yow, a Hewlett-Packard Co. manager and Chinese-American community leader who sent two kids to Monta Vista. It's like other familiar biases, she says: "You can't say everybody from the South is a redneck."

Jane Doherty, a retirement-community administrator, chose to send her two boys elsewhere. When her family moved to Cupertino from Indiana over a decade ago, Ms. Doherty says her top priority was moving into a good public-school district. She paid no heed to a real-estate agent who told her of the town's burgeoning Asian population.

She says she began to reconsider after her elder son, Matthew, entered Kennedy, the middle school that feeds Monta Vista. As he played soccer, Ms. Doherty watched a line of cars across the street deposit Asian kids for after-school study. She also attended a Monta Vista parents' night and came away worrying about the school's focus on test scores and the big-name colleges its graduates attend.

"My sense is that at Monta Vista you're competing against the child beside you," she says. Ms. Doherty says she believes the issue stems more from recent immigrants than Asians as a whole. "Obviously, the concentration of Asian students is really high, and it does flavor the school," she says.

When Matthew, now a student at Notre Dame, finished middle school eight years ago, Ms. Doherty decided to send him to Bellarmine College Preparatory, a Jesuit school that she says has a culture that "values the whole child." It's also 55% white and 24% Asian. Her younger son, Kevin, followed suit. ...

"It does help to have a lower Asian population," says Homestead PTA President Mary Anne Norling. "I don't think our parents are as uptight as if my kids went to Monta Vista."
Oh well. The reality of the situation is demographically, whites are already minorities in many parts of the country--it's a trend that will only accelerate.

And the emergence of China and India on the world scene only emphasizes the fact that the world is not only flattening, but whites may even find themselves in the valleys at times. Since whites always like to use words like sea/hordes in conjuction with Asians and Asian Americans, it'd be funny if this torrent of high-achieving Asiatics actually does wind up burying whites in an ocean of mediocrity.

Whites are just going to have to learn to fit in, just as Hispanics and blacks and Asian Americans have always had to. White parents are going to have to start thinking about the importance of sending Johnny to school with the Hous of the world, because they want to prepare Johnny for a workplace where Hou is his boss and it's always good to rub shoulders with upper management. Gives you a better shot at getting invited to play golf at the country club, if nothing else.

In short, whites are going to have to become part of society, instead of blithely believing they are society.

What happens when a people who have been used to defining society and forcing others to adapt have to at times live by the rules and expectations of others?

What happens when a people who are always grumbling about having to tolerate others find themselves the ones being tolerated?

What happens when a people who are always lecturing others about the right way to do things find themselves at the back of the class?

What happens when a people who never thought of themselves as a people discover their assumptions and cultures are not only not universal, but may not even be competitive and thus have to change?

And what happens when a people used to peering at and analyazing 'minorities' as if they were some strange subspecies find themselves on the other end of the scope? The Internet has truly allowed a thousand flowers to bloom, just see Backlash of Wall Street Journal Story Reverberates in Bay Area Chinese Community .

I'd hope whites don't retreat to hide behind their gated communities and private schools. After all, society is richer when all members fully participate; we need a diversity of voices.

And don't worry, white parents, there's no doubt your children can do just as well as Asian American kids, given the same environment and encouragement.

Just have a little confidence in them--and yourself.

Photo of dodo bird in unspecified museum taken by V. K. Balagopal via Alphabetic Bird Photo Index.

Saturday, January 07, 2006

Russia?



The Guggenheim's Russia! exhibit was, on the whole, a disappointment for me. It takes up the entire five floors of spiral exhibit space--and yet I only saw a few works that I really liked.

One of them was the Barge Haulers; as I was speculating to a friend about why the painting seemed familiar, a woman next to us said it was probably because it was 'very famous,' that every Russian knows it.

I can see why; it's not only powerful, but also metaphorical--Russia has always seen way more than its share of suffering, yet somehow it always goes on. Usually at great cost to its stolid people, forced to do things people in other countries would quail at (or have done by machines). And there are always more people, as the boy in the middle seems to represent.

I also liked the almost photo-realistic Quiet Dwelling--just something about the trees, the reflection in the water, and the spires pointing out. Russian civilization among the brutal wilderness, holding out from the successive wave of murderous invaders.

And that was about it. Oddly enough, despite all the press about this exhibit puffing its comprehensiveness and significance, I feel like I've seen better examples of Russian art just by happenstance, mixed in among permanent collections.

Maybe one problem was because the exhibit had to represent historical eras, a lot of the works were included on their merits as good examples of their time period or a particular artistic movement.

Unfortunately, for a lot of their history it seemed like Russian art was behind and just aping continental Europe. Likewise, the icons didn't wow me, perhaps because I've seen the 'originals' from Byzantium.

Ilya Repin, Barge Haulers on the Volga, 1870–73. Oil on canvas, 131.4 x 280.7 cm. Photo: © State Russian Museum, St. Petersburg, via Guggenheim website.

Isaak Levitan, Quiet Dwelling [aka Quiet Abode], 1890. Oil on canvas, 87.5 x 108 cm. Photo: © The State Tretyakov Gallery, Moscow, via Guggenheim website.

Friday, January 06, 2006

Running Windows


Microsoft Shuts Blog's Site After Complaints by Beijing

New York Times: Microsoft has shut the blog site of a well-known Chinese blogger who uses its MSN online service in China after he discussed a high-profile newspaper strike that broke out here one week ago.

The decision is the latest in a series of measures in which some of America's biggest technology companies have cooperated with the Chinese authorities to censor Web sites and curb dissent or free speech online as they seek access to China's booming Internet marketplace.

Microsoft drew criticism last summer when it was discovered that its blog tool in China was designed to filter words like "democracy" and "human rights" from blog titles. The company said Thursday that it must "comply with global and local laws."

"This is a complex and difficult issue," said Brooke Richardson, a group product manager for MSN in Seattle. "We think it's better to be there with our services than not be there."

The site pulled down was a popular one created by Zhao Jing, a well-known blogger with an online pen name, An Ti. Mr. Zhao, 30, also works as a research assistant in the Beijing bureau of The New York Times.

The blog was removed last week from a Microsoft service called MSN Spaces after the blog discussed the firing of the independent-minded editor of The Beijing News, which prompted 100 journalists at the paper to go on strike Dec. 29. It was an unusual show of solidarity for a Chinese news organization in an industry that has complied with tight restrictions on what can be published.
Ugh, as if we needed another reason to hate Microsoft.

It's really gutless for a billion-dollar company to shrug its shoulders and say well, what can you do. They should just be honest--we'll pour millions into fighting software piracy in China because it's costing us money; we won't fight censorship because to do so would cost us money.

It's quite shameless; Bill Gates and his company owe everything they have to being from America. But when it comes to sticking up for American values abroad, they turn traitor.

And that's what it is. We're not talking about an American company complying with local laws or customs outof a desire to respect their host country, or as a result of a careful balancing act. There's no inherent 'good' reason to help enforce Chinese censorship--no countervailing value on the other side.

Microsoft's spokesperson says it's better to be in China than not. I doubt the Chinese could afford to throw Microsoft out, so it's a red herring to say those are the stakes.

In this day and age, software is like gunpowder--writing software with built-in censorship on spec for the old generals in Beijing is no different than running guns for some banana republic dictatorship.

Microsoft's already a collaborater at best; by helping the government keep the lid on self-expression in China, it may wind up one day with blood on its hands.

And if what happens to some Chinese guy doesn't matter to you, it can be put in terms even the most xenophobic among us can understand.

As the Times reports: Rebecca MacKinnon, a fellow at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School, wrote on her blog, referring to Microsoft and other technology companies: "Can we be sure they won't do the same thing in response to potentially illegal demands by an overzealous government agency in our own country?"

First they came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Jew.

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.

Quotation by Rev. Martin Niemoller is one of various versions found in various places on the Internet, see here for a discussion of the quote.

AFP Photo of Bill Gates in Beijing in 2003 via CNN story.

Thursday, January 05, 2006

Climbing out of the dark hole


I don't know what to make of the West Virginia coal mining disaster.

You could go after Wilbur Ross, the billionnaire who recently bought the Sago mine that has been described as the most dangerous in America--with ABC News citing 16 major safety violations, a dozen orders of partial shutdowns from the government, 20 roof collapses...

You could blame the Bush administration, whose cozy relationship with mine owners allows all involved to wink at safety violations; in the words of the man who until recently was responsible for training mine inspectors: "The inspectors have been forbidden from being as aggressive as they need to be.... They can't go ahead and close the mine and use the authority that they have to do the job that they've been charged to do."

You could blast Ross's on-the-spot management team, for their role in the safety violations, for the slipshod way they allowed rumors of 12 miners being found alive to slip out to desperate family members, for the hours they waited before correcting the false jubilation.

You could slam the news media for playing its increasingly commonplace role of cheerleaders--for the way reporters exulted along with the family members when the claims of a miracle came in, instead of doing the hard job of asking pointed questions; for acting, to borrow Maureen Dowd's withering dressing-down of Judy Miller, as stenographers instead of journalists in passing on rumor and feel-good wish fulfillment without qualifiers, both on-the-air and in cold print.

You could take the chance to slap at the Christian right and its corrosive me-centered faith and resultant attaching the word 'miracle' to everything as an in-your-face assertion of their position as God's chosen people... for if it was a miracle when 12 were thought saved, what is it when 11 turn up dead--a punishment?

But you know, I think that ultimately, the families who lost their loved ones in this disaster have had enough thrown on them the last few days without having to also see their personal tragedy turned into talking points for everyone's favorite stalking horse. That is not to say let's just chalk this up as an act of nature and go on--it was a man-made tragedy, and lessons need to be drawn and people fired if not indicted.

But for now, what's foremost in my thoughts are the people in that part of West Virginia. The miners and their families seem like such decent, hard-working, salt-of-the-earth people--unassuming, almost preternaturally good and honest and emotionally vulnerable. Their anger at being 'lied to,' at whooping and hollering for hours when their men were dead, at celebrating in church when they should have been mourning, had the hard edge of a people jerked around once too much.

You forget that people like that not only exist, but may even be the majority in this great country--people who drive hours to go down into a dark, hellish hole for 15 hours a day to put food on the table for their families, people who at the end of the day reserve whatever time and energy they have with their kids and loved ones, people who aren't always trying to work every angle and claw and scratch their way to the top, people who aren't any good at spin and pinning the blame, people who suffer great pain and hurt and don't allow each other to give up, people who staring death in the face hold fast to their faith in God and write notes telling their family not to worry.

As far as I can tell, all the people of Sago mine want right now is their men back. Barring that, for the next few days I'm not sure there's anything the rest of us can say or do to offer them true comfort.

Expect say we're sorry, and we grieve with you.

Photo: Daniele Bennett becomes emotional while speaking to the media after learning her father was one of the coal miners that was killed in the Sago Mine in Tallmansville, West Virginia. Photo and caption by Getty Images/AFP/Mark Wilson.

They like us! They really like us!


A non-profit named Terror Free Tomorrow has recently made news with its release of "the first poll in Pakistan since the earthquake of October 8, 2005", undertaken by the Pakistan branch of ACNielsen.

The group says its poll, which surveyed 1,450 Pakistani adults--with a margin of error of "2.6%", found:

-73% of Pakistanis surveyed in November 2005 now believe suicide terrorist attacks are never justified, up from 46% just last May.

-Support for Osama Bin Laden has declined significantly (51% favorable in May 2005 to just
33% in November), while those who oppose him rose over the same period from 23% to
41%.

-US favorability among Pakistanis has doubled from 23% in May to more than 46% now,
while the percentage of Pakistanis with very unfavorable views declined from 48% to 28%.

-For the first time since 9/11, more Pakistanis are now favorable to the United States than
unfavorable.

-78% of Pakistanis have a more favorable opinion of the United States because of the
American response to the earthquake, with the strongest support among those under 35.

-79% of those with confidence in Bin Laden now have a more favorable view of the US
because of American earthquake aid.

-81% said that earthquake relief was important for them in forming their overall opinion of
the United States.

-The United States fared better in Pakistani public opinion than both other Western countries
and radical Islamist groups

-While opinion of the United States itself improved significantly, this did not translate into
increased support for US-led efforts to fight terrorism. Tellingly, those who oppose US
efforts against terrorism grew, from 52% in May to 64% now.

Wow--a lot of interesting data there. For some reason, I feel like taking it all with a grain of salt; am reminded of the old sporting dictum, that coaches/quarterbacks always get too much credit when the team wins, too much blame when the team loses.

Likewise, I never thought most Pakistanis hated the U.S. after our 'response' to 9/11, anymore than I think that $156 million in earthquake relief will make a Pakistani Muslim who hates the U.S. for its decades-long destructive meddling in the governance of his country love us.

And if it did--we shouldn't want that kind of support. Checkbook diplomacy is easy-come, easy-go; simply providing aid isn't what will change hearts and minds, it's getting Pakistanis to understand that the aid stems from values consistent with a compassionate people that will make a difference.

Besides which, does the rah-rah Terror Free Tomorrow group really want to make U.S. foreign aid the foundation of our argument to other nations that they shouldn't hate us? Because if so, they'll have to explain why as a percentage of our economy, U.S. foreign aid ranks near last among developed nations.

So maybe it's the Norwegians whom the Pakistanis really love?

Deep in the heart of Texas

I gotta tell you, in all my years of watching college football, I don't remember ever seeing a performance like Vince Young's in tonight's national championship game, leading #2 Texas to a 41-38 victory over #1, undefeated in 34 games 2-time defending national champ USC.

The numbers--30 of 40 passing for 267 yards, an unbelievable 10 for 200 rushing for 3 TDs, including the game winner on 4th down with 19 seconds left--tell part of the story.

But you had to see it with your own eyes--how he ran through USC tacklers time and time again, even when everyone in the stadium knew he was going to run. How he calmly directed his team from behind time-after-time, eventually outlasting USC's historic offensive juggernaut of a 3,000 yard QB, two 1,000 yard RBs, and two 1,000 WRs. How he just put his team on his shoulders and willed them to victory.

What a game; both teams made eye-popping plays one after the other. In the end Young was just playing on an entirely different level.

Wednesday, January 04, 2006

Lion in winter


Like many people, I always assumed the first line of Ariel Sharon's obituary would center around his responsibility in the massacre of civilians at a Palestinian refugee camp in 1982; and his deliberately provocative visit to the al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem that many say was one of the sparks for the Palestinian intifada.

One an act of criminality; the other cynical political calculation of the worst kind.

But in 2001 Israeli voters elected 'Arik' prime minister--and everything changed. It didn't happen all of a sudden, but over the past five years, Sharon, much like Yitzhak Rabin before him, has gone from a tough, brutal general to a statesman.

I count Rabin as one of the great leaders of our time; his 1995 assassination was a tragedy from which the Middle East has only recently begun to recover. Sharon isn't at his level, but his recent pullout from Gaza, and his plans for pullbacks in the West Bank, boded well for his continued development. As did his formation of his own party, freeing him from the Likkud party's historic burden of hawkishness.

And now... it's a Shakespearean tragedy, Israel's two recent great leaders cut down as they appeared on the verge of historic, irreversible change.

But I have faith in Israelis. Surrounded by hostile neighbors, they nevertheless continue to try--there are a lot of things wrong with their policies, but underlying the nation, like ours, is the premium they place on debate. Ideas matter, and can make a difference on the ground.

Israelis keep hoping against hope that their worst fears won't be realized, that they too can one day be a normal nation like any other. They could crush all of their adversaries... but instead, they talk and shout everything out. And their leaders evolve, when blessed with time; even someone who spent his entire career about as right-wing as you can get has the space to change his policies, to open his eyes and shift his entire political philosophy.

Sharon is still fighting for his life Wednesday night; unlikely as it might seem, millions of Palestinians are praying for him tonight, along with their Israeli brothers. But ultimately, it seems like it will be a losing battle, among the few this warrior has failed to win.

Will the torch now pass to Shimon Peres, Israel's perennial bridesmaid? Or will Benjamin Netanyahu surprise us all, like Sharon did once upon a time.

Graphic image from BBC's Israel's Generals documentary.

Slouching toward Gomorrah


Throughout a City, Lessons of the Fall

Dana Milbank in the Washington Post: [Jack] Abramoff had a lunchtime appointment ... at the federal courthouse. There, in black raincoat and fedora, he pleaded guilty to conspiracy, fraud and tax offenses that could cost him $25 million and put him behind bars for at a least a decade.

"I just want to say words will not ever be able to express my sorrow and my profound regret for all my actions and mistakes," Abramoff, slouched over the defense table, said quickly and softly into the microphone. "For all of my remaining days, I will feel tremendous sadness and regret for my conduct and for what I have done. I only hope that I can merit forgiveness from the Almighty and from those I have wronged or caused to suffer."

Abramoff cut a wretched figure as he shuffled into the courtroom of Judge Ellen Segal Huvelle. The once-athletic lobbyist was slouching, his newly overweight frame wrapped in a double-breasted suit. His hand shook when he took his oath. After his plea, he closed his eyes and looked as if he were going to cry. He accepted soothing pats on the back from his lawyer. He clasped his hands together and rubbed fingers as if attempting to thumb-wrestle himself. Only the cufflinks and sharp blue tie hinted at the vast wealth and power Abramoff had amassed.
And so, the Gingrich revolution comes to an end.

11 years after their startling takeover of the House, the Republicans have dragged political corruption to new lows. All the lofty rhetoric of Newt et al's Contract with America, and even its concrete achievements, have been laid low by that oldest of all evils, corruption.

In this case, it wasn't power that corrupted; it was engrained arrogance, a the rules don't apply to us and nobody cares anyway attitude that may slide when the good times are rolling but always gets slapped down in the end.

Oh well; happy 2006 Jack Abramoff. We look forward to hearing more from you.

Photo by Gerald Herbert for the Associated Press, via the Washington Post.

Tuesday, January 03, 2006

Asleep at the gates


Publishers toss Booker winners into the reject pile

The Times of London: They can’t judge a book without its cover. Publishers and agents have rejected two Booker prize-winning novels submitted as works by aspiring authors.

One of the books considered unworthy by the publishing industry was by V S Naipaul, one of Britain’s greatest living writers, who won the Nobel prize for literature.

The exercise by The Sunday Times draws attention to concerns that the industry has become incapable of spotting genuine literary talent.... The rejections for Middleton’s book came from major publishing houses such as Bloomsbury and Time Warner as well as well-known agents such as Christopher Little, who discovered J K Rowling.... Critics say the publishing industry has become obsessed with celebrity authors and “bright marketable young things” at the expense of serious writers.
Wow; and yet, not surprising. I think it's funny how the Times had to detail who Naipaul is.

I've only read Naipaul's The Mystic Masseur, about an overly-educated man in Trinidad-Tobago who makes something of himself. I really enjoyed it, thought it was bitingly funny and conveyed well both TT and, ironically enough, how a little knowledge can go a long way in our undereducated world.

In a lot of areas, it seems there are no standards anymore, and things are no longer properly judged on their merits. Some thoughts on why:

-As big corporations gobble everything up, everything becomes homogenized and safe. Nobody is willing or able to ditch the company line and go with their gut, so we get a bunchof slush pile readers at publishing houses unable to go beyond the vapid and formulaic.

-The standards at all the broadcast networks have slipped so much that we're regularly exposed to unwitting mediocrity--bad writing and illogical stories dominate our comedies, dramas and most damning of all our journalism. Fed tripe, is it any wonder that we're unable to discern pearls?

-It's interesting, I think people in general are more arrogant now. They're pandered to by advertising and personal technology, and everyone belives they're deservedly the man. But when you go strutting around, it's hard to pay attention to--and respect--your surroundings, and learn. Paradoxically, people who deep down know they're hollow have this surface arrogance but lack the real confidence that comes from actual competence.

-In our lowbrow culture, who reads anymore? How many people actually have a liberal education, learning for the sake of learning rather than to make more money? And who has the patience to develop good taste? Much easier to be as crass as popular culture has become, to go with the flow and skim through life.

-Closely linked to all this is how celebrities and the wealthy have hijacked everything around us. Even the gatekeepers get overwhelmed by the tidal wave of spin and hype; awed and bullied by star power and money, they find it easier to say no to a seeming nobody than to a celebrity who comes pushing their latest 'book.'

Things will be okay, though. The Web, like no other medium, both rewards competence and punishes idiot gatekeepers. And it has an insatiable appetite for good content--most of it consisting of the written word.

Even if we're still waiting for www.vsnaipaul.com.

Cover image of V.S. Naipaul's In a Free State via A Novel Idea website.

White mountain, blue sky


This is a photo taken in December of 2005 at Mt. Deokyu in Muju, North Jeolla Province. Snow flowers blossom on the winter trees. Above the snow flowers, the sky seems transparent rather than blue.

Post title, caption and photo by Seo Jong Gyu, from Oh My News International's first "Korea Geographic" slideshow.

Those damn numbers


Surprise -- Europeans Approve of Immigrants, Study Says

New America Media: Editor's Note: The notion that anti-immigrant sentiments are rapidly spreading in Europe due to the massive influx of workers and refugees from Africa and the Middle East may be false, if a new study is to be believed.

Among all Europeans, the French have the most positive view of immigration and minorities. Huge majorities of Germans and Italians would give immigrants, legal and illegal, free access to their health care systems. Americans are the most trusted foreigners in Europe.

These startling findings emerged in a study done by a prestigious Italian university just months before riots in France's suburbs left officials pondering what to do with the country's restive non-white minorities and immigrants.

The Fifth Report on Immigration and Citizenship in Europe was prepared between June and September by the University of Urbino, one of Europe's oldest higher education institutions, and by Fondazione Nord Est, an Italian foundation focusing on social policy, economics and immigration.

"The research results seem to contradict the current debate on immigration in Europe, particularly after the recent events in France," says Ilvo Diamanti, lead investigator for the University of Urbino. "It's even more surprising considering that the lowest degree of anti-immigrant alarm was found in the metropolitan area of Paris."
This study flies in the face of everything I've read and believe about the attitude of Europeans towards immigrants.

I wonder if I drilled down what I'd find in the numbers themselves--the article, after all, says: Italy's urban centers with more than 500,000 residents, less than 30 percent of the population view immigration negatively. In Germany the percentage rises to 32 percent while in France it drops below 13 percent.

That's good news? Only one-third of the population views immigration negatively? What if you took out immigrants themselves from the poll sample?!

I half-want to go look up Gallup polls from the 50s asking white Southerners what they think of blacks, which I think is a comparable era to Europe today when it comes to race relations. My guess is you might have large numbers telling pollsters they think negros are great, they should be treated equally and well--while they went on using firehoses, dogs and bullets on them in the streets. And keeping them out of their country clubs.

Or, alternately, you could have large numbers of Northeners and enlightened Southerners having positive views of negros, while a relatively smaller number of Southerners continue enforcing Jim Crow. But in which case, a headline of U.S. Approves of Negroes headline in the 1950s would need a subhead of U.S. Also OK With Segregation.

Given that, believe it or not, there is a website, Gallup Brain, that allows you to research old polls; it's interesting to compare some numbers:

-2005: 71.7% of French citizens perceive immigration as a positive social and economic phenomenon
-1962: 69% of Americans think Negroes in their community are treated very or fairly well

-2005: 82.1% believe that immigrants who pay taxes should be allowed to vote in local elections
-1965: 76% of Americans would support making sure negroes are allowed to vote in local elections

So it is possible to have seemingly-rosy numbers even while your society at-large is actively repressing a minority group. I wouldn't dismiss the Europe study, but it should be kept in perspective.

On a related note, it's depressing to read through Gallup polls and be reminded of how easily prejudiced most Americans were, even after the civil rights movement forced the country to examine itself:
Question qn27 (The Gallup Poll #658) 5/1/1962-5/1/1962
What do you think are the BEST qualities about the Negroes in the United States? (3664 answered question)
In music (7.34%), In athletics (5.27%), Humble, respect white people, stay in their place (2.32%), Loyal, faithful, dependable (3.66%), Well-behaved, polite, agreeable (3.14%), Kind, gentle (1.09%), Honest, sincere (3.49%), Patient (1.88%), Hard working, want to get ahead (14.98%), Religious, devout in religion (3.63%), Sense of humor - humorous (0.57%), Happy, good natured, pleasant, nice, good (8.68%), Charitable, will help you, compassionate (1.50%), Good servants, cooks (1.15%), Intelligent, quick learners (2.13%), Stick together, help each other (1.42%), Just same as whites, as anybody else (9.14%), Work cheaply; will do dirty, menial work (1.61%), Have to be judged as individuals (6.58%), No good qualities, can't think of any (2.48%), Miscellaneous, others (0.71%), Don't know, no answer (34.74%)

Question qn28 (The Gallup Poll #658) 5/1/1962-5/1/1962

What do you think are the POOREST qualities about the Negroes in the United States? (3663 answered question)
Uneducated, illiterate, ignorant, not capable of learning (15.53%), Immoral - less moral training, low morals; inmoral, general (5.95%), Criminal - steal, kill, fight (5.16%), Lazy, don't want to work, slothful, no initiative, no ambition, shiftless (18.02%), Dirty, slovenly - live in dirt, miserable housing, carelessness (11.08%), Aggressive - chip on shoulder; smart-alecky, nasty, impolite, no manners (5.38%), Don't stick togeher; don't help their own people (1.64%), Won't stay in their place -- want equality, want to eat with you, etc. (3.41%), Dependent on others - beggars. (1.83%), Pretentious, show offs (1.04%), Common-law marriages, don't marry (0.93%), Dishonest, can't be trusted (3.22%), Drink too much, always drink (1.77%), Spend money foolishly, can't save money (1.75%), Superstitious (0.33%), Same as whites, same as anybody (4.80%), Have to be judged as individuals (2.87%), No poor qualities (0.71%), Miscellaneous, others (1.28%), Don't know, no answer (29.84%)
Given that many of those poll respondents and their peers are still alive, anyone who believe there isn't meaningful racism in America today is whistling past the graveyard.

And anyone who doesn't believe that Europe--which has never gone through the searing yet ultimately cleansing civil rights battles America has seen over the last five decades--isn't even more racist is ignorant. No pain, no gain; Europe has spent its last five decades with its head in the sand, except when it lifts up to lecture America about its "race problem."

But it's important to keep in mind at some point it may not matter what Europeans today think of immigrants. Like the Israeli settlements in the West Bank, the facts are on the ground already.

Short of another Holocaust, Europe not only needs but is going to get more of its immigrants; unless white Europeans wanna turn every day into a pitched street battle, they'll eventually come around.

Riots that force the topic into public discourse--and interracial dating!--will see to that.

After all, in 1957 Gallup asked, "Do you think the day will ever come in the South when whites and Negroes will be going to the same schools, eating in the same restaurants, and generally sharing the same public accommodations?"

Yes (54.17%), No (30.12%), Don't Know (13.49%), No Code or No Data (2.22%)

Just six years later, the same question got this response:

Yes (82.62%), No (12.85%), No Opinion (4.53%)

The original Europe report, in Italian, is available via Fondazione Nord Est's website. To view Gallup's polls relating to race, type 'Negro' into the search engine at http://brain.gallup.com (registration required--but worth it!)

Iconic AP File Photo by Bill Hudson taken between May 2 and 3, 1963 in Birmingham, Alabama as Police Chief “Bull” Connor used dogs on a crowd of peaceful young people.

Monday, January 02, 2006

King of the hill


Mmmm....

Photo of offerings at Egg Custard Cafe by Tien Mao, from his blog.

Waking up to a new world


The first babies born in New York City in 2006--both at 1 second after midnight--are 'Zahi' Saher and Vicky Tang.

Appropriate for a metropolitan area that's now nearly 40% foreign-born; take into account the kids of immigrants, and it's again a city where the immigrant experience is the norm.

Not that you'd know it from reading most media coverage in the area--where to take just one example the word 'exotic' regularly makes its appearance, always in relation to non-white people and cultures.

Photo by Charles Eckert for Newsday; more cute photos here.

Monday, December 26, 2005

Not gone in 30 seconds


Is it possible that the most powerful communicators in human history have gone from working on epic poetry to plays to novels to movies to :30 second tv commercials?

I feel like I now regularly see commercials that I really like, to the point I'll stick around to watch it (whether it gets me to buy the product is incidental).

I wonder if we're living in some sortof golden age of commercials, the last days of an art form that's being strangled by Tivo and the end of a mass audience.

Here are some of my favorite tv commercials from this year:

-Snickers "Bald': Starts with a bald guy wearing the 'wig' made out of Snickers bars sitting in his car crying while thinking of his day, while Make Your Own Kind of Music by Bobby Sherman plays in the background. It's an odd concept, but it's well-done, from starting the commercial with the guy just sitting there quietly crying to the quaver in his voice when he responds to his office mates. BBDO New York

-Nextel 'Dance Party': Three (diverse!) coworkers are dancing in an office to Salt N' Pepa's Push It when their boss walks and demands some answers. The expressions on the faces of the two dancers and their moves are hilarious, as is the dead-pan look on the guy just sitting there holding the boombox and watching.

-T-Mobile 'Caffeinated Cheerleader': An arena of white-coated scientists study a teen cheerleader as she talks a mile-a-minute on her phone. Her voice is funny and she says these totally real-sounding yet random things, I particularly like the chewwwing gum and whole she was like whatever, I was like whatever part at the end.

I think commercials really started getting better after Nike was able to license the Beatles' Revolution for their AirMax shoe--after that, it was okay for all these reputable musicians to let commercials in the U.S. use their music, which add so much to a commercial's appeal.

(Incidentally, it's interesting that big Hollywood stars never used to do commercials here, only in Japan--as if what happens in Japan, stays in Japan. But as the article mentions, now the Japanese, like other Asians, are starting to prefer their own in commercials... wonder if someday historians will look back on this as one of the early signs of Asia's rise).

Frame grab of Nextel commercial from Adweek.

A good soul, passing through


He Loves New York, and It Loves Him Right Back

The Times: Yuki Endo was just 10 years old when the city first took hold of him. His life in New York might have been a lonely one after his mother moved him here from Japan in early 1996. He was born with a rare chromosome disorder that left him disabled and makes it hard for him to speak clearly.

But in the decade since, the city has nurtured Yuki in small, graceful ways and become his best friend. Through a quirky combination of luck and his own bottomless curiosity, he has formed a kind of extended family out of the firefighters, doormen, security guards, teachers, librarians and shopkeepers he meets on his daily explorations.

He is a landlocked Huckleberry Finn, restlessly caught up with the mystery and minutiae of New York, at least until 7 p.m., when his mother wants him home. He writes poetry about the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and memorizes train conductors' announcements. He entertains firefighters by singing to them in their firehouses, unaccompanied by music, because he likes to. His first home is an Upper East Side apartment; his second is the Metropolitan Museum of Art. He has spent so many afternoons inside the Met that the security guards call out his name when they see him. He tells them what subway lines to avoid because of weekend service changes, which he monitors religiously.

"I want to make sure they won't be late to the museum," explained Yuki, now 20.
This is definitely one of my favorite New York Times articles of 2005. It's got all the hallmarks of what makes the paper great--it's interestingly well-written, it looks at something seemingly small slant, it makes you sad/happy, you appreciate it in different ways depending on whether you live in New York (wow, I never knew) or not (boy, what a city), there's no sense of strings being pulled, you've never seen it anywhere else before, you wonder how the Times found this guy, you forward it to your friends, you find yourself giving it a new headline, you shake your head after reading it and want to go back and read all the back issues of the newspaper you've missed.

And who knows, maybe Endo will one day write for the Times, just as he's written for Wordsmiths: An Anthology of Writing by Teens on the Web.
Don't give up!
When you come to something difficult
Never give up
Just do it or just skip and come back when you have time
Photo of Endo Yuki by Robert Caplin for the New York Times.

Thursday, December 22, 2005

When pigs develop wings


You can slap some lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.

Just because you start calling Christianity 'Intelligent Design' doesn't make it a suitable reference for a science class.

If you read the judge's opinion in the celebrated Dover case (ok, the excerpt that appeared in the Times), all Christians have done is taken the textbooks that have been sitting in the basement since the Supreme Court ruled you can't teach creationism as science, and replaced the word 'creationism' with the phrase 'intelligent design'.

Don't let the weasel phrase ID fool you--just substitute the word Christianity whenever you hear it. None of these textbooks or Christians are saying let's tell kids in a biology class to check out how Muslims believe the world started, when you push kids toward ID textbooks you're pushing Christianity.

The judge's point is there is no such thing as a scientific theory called 'Intelligent Design'.

ID is Christianity... which is a religion. Its precepts depend on faith, not replicable laboratory experiments.

So you can't answer whether a religion is 'good science', as entirely separate fields the standards by which you would judge one doesn't apply to the other. It'd make as much sense to ask whether science is 'good religion.'

That's why you study one in a religion class, the other in a science class.

I actually have no problem if someone wants the Bible to inform their science class, to inform their economics class, to inform their math class. That's what Catholic schools do.

I obviously have a problem when it's my taxpayer dollars in a public school that's going to evangelize for Christianity.

Let's be clear: To require teachers to tell kids in a science classroom to check out a textbook on ID for an alternate to Darwin is to force public school teachers to evangelize for Christianity.

To suggest ID as an alternate to Darwin is like suggesting loaves and fishes as an alternative to Adam Smith in an economics class.

It's a silly game to say jeez, evolution used to be thought wrong, just like people are saying I.D. is wrong; so let's expose kids to both and see what turns out to be right. There are lots of theories that people think are wrong--we don't teach any of them in a science class.

The whole point of developing a school curriculum is not to say this is everything that anyone thinks about anything. From a logistics and standpoint, schools teach what the most expert current view of each subject matter is--if there is strong debate, then you teach what the most current views are.

There is no debate in this case. 99.9% of biologists think Darwin is the explanation for how life as we know it came to be. Sure, the .1% of biologists who believe Christianity explains life could be right--just like the .1% of scientists who believe horoscopes foretell the future could be right. If we open the door to Christianity in science classes, it would only be fair to teach horoscopes too.

The judge's point is Christianity's proper place in a public school is among its peers in a religion class, not shoulder to shoulder with Darwin in a science class.

Gary Larson's "Great moments in evolution" cartoon from Oxford's Astrophysics department website.

Race runs through it


I was skeptical at first, reading Jimmy Breslin's take on the New York transit strike, Race underlies transit strike.

But, as usual, Jimmy was right.

A day later, we read in the Times: Race Bubbles to the Surface in Standoff

The standoff between the Transport Workers Union and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, tense and perilous, was already taking a harsh physical and economic toll on New Yorkers.

But now, as representatives of a mostly nonwhite work force trade recriminations publicly with white leaders in government and at the transportation authority, the potentially volatile issue of race, with all its emotional consequences, is bubbling to the surface.

The examples are both blatant and subtle, some open to interpretation, some openly hostile. Regarding the latter sort, the union - representing workers who are largely minority - shut down a Web log where the public could comment on the strike after it became so clogged with messages comparing the workers to monkeys and calling them "you people." (Seventy percent of the employees of New York City Transit are black, Latino or Asian-American.)

And what may have begun inadvertently, when Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg said on Tuesday that union leaders had "thuggishly turned their backs on New York City," took on a life of its own yesterday as minority leaders and union members attacked the mayor's conduct as objectionable, or worse. "There has been some offensive and insulting language used," said Roger Toussaint, the union leader. "This is regrettable and it is certainly unbecoming for the mayor of the city of New York to be using this type of language."

But others were more extreme in their response. Leroy Bright, 56, a black bus operator who is also a union organizer, saw racial coding in Mr. Bloomberg's choice of words. "The word thug is usually attributed to people of color whenever something negative takes place," he said, adding that the language was "unnecessarily hostile."

...

The Rev. Al Sharpton, who called an evening news conference to blast Mr. Bloomberg, said in an interview: "How did we become thugs? Because we strike over a pension?"

...

Ed Skyler, a spokesman for Mr. Bloomberg, dismissed those comments, saying, "It's despicable for anyone to inject race into this situation.".
Inject race into the situation? It's already there, Ed. Like most white Americans, Ed seems to think racism only exists when a white guy says it does.

It's bad enough the MTA and Mayor Bloomberg are using the kind of language that usually precedes the Bush administration sending troops to take out some foreign leader. But to then turn around and tell us it's just rain you're feeling?

Come on--people feel what they feel, you can say that's not what was meant, but you can't say you aren't allowed to feel that way.

Unfortunately, I think it's indicative of the way the city is treating the Transit Workers Union, almost as chattel. Listen carefully to the language that's being used--there's a tone of how dare you, if you know what's good for you boy, you'll take what we give you, say thank you, and go back to work.

But the people of New York--a city that is rapidly approaching majority minority status--feel through it and still support the workers. Those who can afford the strike least, those who don't have the money for cab rides and trade hours waiting in the cold for the chance to get to work, are the ones who are telling the workers to fight the fight, brother.

Tell the MTA that when they announce a $1 billion surplus and blow it all on 'holiday farecards' to try and buy the public's support right before they sit down at the table and tell the union to tighten their belts, it's insulting at best, downright despicable at worst.

Tell blue-stockinged MTA Chair Peter Kalikow when he deigns to come down from their Park Avenue offices only an hour before the deadline to negotiate, they shouldn't be surprised if talks go nowhere.

And keep up the fight for benefits that allow blue collar workers to live a middle class existence in New York City.

Photo of Transit Workers Union president Roger Touissant by Stephen Chernin/ Getty Images.