GOP maligns teachers, Biden saysAnd what are those questionable education policies that are causing "widespread unhappiness" among teachers? Could one be school vouchers that Obama has supported since the days of his bid for the Presidency? (See this for the discussion back in February 2008.)
CHICAGO — Vice President Joe Biden says the “new Republican Party” fundamentally doesn’t believe in public education the way Democrats do.
“There is an organized effort to place blame for budget shortfalls on educators and other public workers. It is one of the biggest scams in modern American history,” he was quoted as saying by the Chicago Tribune.
The Democrat spoke Sunday before thousands of educators at the National Education Association’s annual convention in Chicago. The association bills itself as the largest labor union nationwide.
The speech came a day before the union’s vote on whether to endorse President Barack Obama’s reelection campaign.
Biden says Republicans in states like Wisconsin and Ohio would once have negotiated better with teachers and labor unions. But he says there’s now an organized effort to place blame for budget shortfalls on their shoulders.
Biden’s speech largely praised teachers, but he drew applause when he briefly acknowledged there’s widespread unhappiness among them for the Obama administration’s education policies.
Saturday, July 23, 2011
Biden Schmoozes the NEA and Comes Away with Support for Obama and $32 M
The same week (early July) Biden spoke to the AFL/CIO, saying if you vote Republican, "you're on your own, jack!", he was also schmoozing teachers at the NEA conference held in Chicago. Biden warned the teachers that the GOP doesn't believe in public education like the Dems do. Here's the story from Politico (emphasis added):
Murdoch's News Corp Empire: England's Scandal Hitting U.S. Shores
I have been a fan of FoxNews for probably close to 6 years now, daily watching its different shows and reading its website. And, as many of you are (whether pro- or anti-Fox), I've been monitoring this whole scandal involving Rupert Murdoch's "News of the World" tabloid scandal in England. It is a very sordid and twisted trail reaching into many different aspects of England's business, political and police circles. I nervously wait to see what kind of impact the scandal will have on FoxNews and The Wall Street Journal here in the U.S., both entities owned by News Corp.
I will reserve final judgment for when all the facts are in. I won't go all "Casey Anthony" on this, convicting with a shadow of doubt before all the facts are in. I worry: Will I have to give Fox and WSJ the heave-ho like I did NPR in the wake of the Juan Williams fiasco? Journalism. We need true journalism .... but, the field is full of a bunch of dishonest, scandal-seeking, lasciviousness-loving hacks.
Until all accounts have been proven and recorded and all evidence is in, I will meanwhile monitor the situation, as I hope you will, too. For now, here is a small collection of news, op-eds, and varying perspectives:
• from good ol' FoxNews today (emphasis added):
• Many of us are familiar with Piers Morgan from his CNN show "Piers Morgan Tonight" and as one of the hosts of "America's Got Talent." Well, it turns out that before his U.S. gigs here, Morgan was the editor of two non-News Corp related papers over in England, and a former reporter claims that phone hacking widespread under Morgan's reign, as well. From the UK's Guardian (emphasis added):
It's a very intricate, twisted spider's web of intrigue. In fact, if you're feeling a bit embarrassed feeling a tad incapable of keeping up, don't. Apparently, the Brits are, too. So much so, that the BBC has posted a Q&A section on the scandal: "Q&A: News of the World phone-hacking scandal." It's pretty good!
"Schadenfreudegasm" -- that's funny!
I will reserve final judgment for when all the facts are in. I won't go all "Casey Anthony" on this, convicting with a shadow of doubt before all the facts are in. I worry: Will I have to give Fox and WSJ the heave-ho like I did NPR in the wake of the Juan Williams fiasco? Journalism. We need true journalism .... but, the field is full of a bunch of dishonest, scandal-seeking, lasciviousness-loving hacks.
Until all accounts have been proven and recorded and all evidence is in, I will meanwhile monitor the situation, as I hope you will, too. For now, here is a small collection of news, op-eds, and varying perspectives:
• from good ol' FoxNews today (emphasis added):
U.S. Justice Department Prepares Subpoenas in News Corp Inquiry• and from another of News Corp's U.S. interests, The Wall Street Journal (which I also love ... alas!) offers a continuation of the above (click here).
New York – The U.S. Justice Department is preparing subpoenas as part of preliminary investigations into News Corp. relating to alleged foreign bribery and alleged hacking of voicemail of Sept. 11 victims, The Wall Street Journal reported in its Friday edition, citing a government official.
The issuance of such subpoenas, which would broadly seek relevant information from the company, requires approval by senior Justice Department leadership, which has not yet happened, the person said.
The issuance of subpoenas would represent an escalation of scrutiny on the New York-based media company. While the company has sought to isolate the legal problems in the U.K., it has been bracing for increased scrutiny from both the Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), according to people familiar with the company's strategy.
The Justice Department has said it is looking into allegations that News Corp.'s now-defunct News of the World newspaper in the U.K. paid bribes to British police. It has been unclear whether the Justice Department or the SEC have begun formal probes.
The FBI separately has begun an inquiry into whether News Corp. employees tried to hack into voicemails of Sept. 11 victims, people familiar with the early-stage probe have said.
A person close to News Corp. said the preparation of subpoenas is "a fishing expedition with no evidence to support it."
Commenting on the FBI inquiry, another News Corp. spokeswoman said, "We have not seen any evidence to suggest there was any hacking of 9/11 victim's phones, nor has anybody corroborated what are clearly very serious allegations. The story arose when an unidentified person speculated to the Daily Mirror about whether it happened. That paper printed the anonymous speculation, which has since mushroomed in the broader media with no substantiation."
• Many of us are familiar with Piers Morgan from his CNN show "Piers Morgan Tonight" and as one of the hosts of "America's Got Talent." Well, it turns out that before his U.S. gigs here, Morgan was the editor of two non-News Corp related papers over in England, and a former reporter claims that phone hacking widespread under Morgan's reign, as well. From the UK's Guardian (emphasis added):
Phone hacking also rife under Piers Morgan at Mirror, claims ex-reporter• an interesting angle: how News Corp could impact Israel ... from The Jewish Times (emphasis added)"
Former City Slicker reporter offers evidence for public inquiry, alleging phone hacking was widespread at Mirror and People
Phone hacking was not confined to the News of the World but was widespread at other newspapers, including the Daily Mirror, a former Mirror reporter has claimed.
James Hipwell, who worked as a financial journalist under the editorship of Piers Morgan, said the practice was "seen as a bit of a wheeze" and offered to give evidence to the public inquiry into hacking ordered by David Cameron.
Hacking also took place at other titles in the newspaper group, including the People, he alleged.
"You know what people around you are doing," he told the Independent. "They would call a celebrity with one phone and when it was answered they would then hang up.
"By that stage, the other phone would be into [the celebrity's] voicemail and they would key in the code, 9999 or 0000. I saw that a lot."
He added: "It was seen as a bit of a wheeze – something that was slightly underhand but something many of them did. What a laugh.
"After they'd hacked into someone's mobile, they'd delete the message so another paper couldn't get the story. There was great hilarity about it."
Piers Morgan, a former editor of the Mirror, and the News of the World, has strenuously denied any link to the phone-hacking scandal....
Murdoch Scandal's Israel Fallout• Cal Thomas points out the hypocrisy on the part of the MSM here in the U.S. (from Newsbusters.org) -- with emphasis added:
Pro-Israel leaders in the United States, Britain and Australia are warily watching the unfolding of the phone-hacking scandal that is threatening to engulf the media empire of Rupert Murdoch, founder of News Corp.
Murdoch’s sudden massive reversal of fortune—with 10 top former staffers and executives under arrest in Britain for hacking into the phones of public figures and a murdered schoolgirl, and paying off the police and journalists—has supporters of Israel worried that a diminished Murdoch presence may mute the strongly pro-Israel voice of many of the publications he owns.
“His publications and media have proven to be fairer on the issue of Israel than the rest of the media,” said Malcolm Hoenlein, the executive vice-chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations. “I hope that won’t be impacted.”
...
Jewish leaders said that Murdoch’s view of Israel’s dealings with the Palestinians and with its Arab neighbors seemed both knowledgeable and sensitive to the Jewish state’s self-perception as beleaguered and isolated.
“My own perspective is simple: We live in a world where there is an ongoing war against the Jews,” Murdoch said last October at an Anti-Defamation League dinner in his honor. “When Americans think of anti-Semitism, we tend to think of the vulgar caricatures and attacks of the first part of the 20th century. Now it seems that the most virulent strains come from the left. Often this new anti-Semitism dresses itself up as legitimate disagreement with Israel.”
...
Murdoch’s affection for Israel arose less out of his conservative sensibility than from his native Australian sympathy for the underdog fending off elites seized by conventional wisdoms, according to Isi Liebler, a longtime Australian Jewish community leader who now lives in Israel ...
About The Glee Over Murdoch's Troubles
"Glee" is not just an American TV show, it is also the emotion many people feel and express toward the trouble Rupert Murdoch's News Corp is having, since they consider Murdoch's properties a blight on their formerly pristine media landscape.
There are two strains running through the phone-hacking scandal that monopolizes much of the media attention in the UK. One is the attitude of the mainstream media types who are frustrated by the success of Murdoch properties, most notably Fox News Channel in America (to which I contribute). They see Murdoch's troubles with the now shuttered News of the World tabloid as an opportunity to destroy the Murdoch empire, which they have been unable to do by competing with it.
The second strain is legal. After the apparent suicide of a former News of the World reporter and unprecedented resignations of high-ranking officers at Scotland Yard, whose allegedly paid connections with News of the World are at the center of parliamentary and police inquiries, Labour and Tory politicians are positioning themselves for major political advantage.
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder confirmed the Justice Department is looking into allegations that employees of News International, a division of News Corp, hacked, or attempted to hack, into the phones of 9/11 victims. Several Democratic members of Congress and Rep. Peter King (R-NY) have called for such an investigation.
The response to this by the British and American mainstream media reeks of hypocrisy. Whatever one thinks of the morality of paying for news stories, the British press, under Labour and Tory governments, have been doing it for years. Fleet Street was built on cash for gossip. American media are slightly more sophisticated in pursuing "exclusive" stories.
There are other forms of "payment" U.S. media make to politicians -- mostly liberals -- with whom they agree. They repeat the talking points of Democrats or refuse to challenge statements that are factually incorrect. They frequently fawn over people they like and challenge those they don't like. Call it a political version of an "in-kind" contribution.
People who broke the law by hacking into phones should be punished, but this is more about liberal attempts to destroy Fox News, which liberals hate because it communicates ideas, issues and opinions that were mostly unavailable, or ignored, until the network launched in 1996. Fox News has not been implicated in the British phone hacking, but that won't stop its enemies from trying to make the connection. MSNBC's Martin Bashir compared Murdoch to Jack Abramoff and mobster James "Whitey" Bulger. There were similar over-the-top comments by other broadcast "journalists."
People can debate Fox's slogan "we report, you decide," but the liberal mantra might more accurately be stated, "we distort, we decide."
The faux "virgins" in big media like to portray themselves as "above" the standards and practices of media owned by Murdoch, but past behavior exposes them as two-faced. Examples: In 2003, the New York Times reported that, "Michael Jackson struck a deal with CBS to be paid in effect an additional $1 million for both an entertainment special ... and his interview on "60 Minutes" ... part of yearlong negotiations." The news magazine denied paying Jackson for the interview, but an associate of Jackson's said at the time the deal included the "60 Minutes" appearance.
According to one of Casey Anthony's attorneys, ABC News paid $200,000 for photos of her dead daughter, Caylee. CBS News got off with a mere $20,000 "licensing fee" paid to Caylee's grandparents.
When hero passenger Jasper Schuringa helped subdue the Christmas Day bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, on a flight to Detroit and later snapped cellphone photos of the suspect being escorted off the plane in wrist restraints, CNN paid Schuringa a "licensing fee" for the images. CBS and ABC reportedly bid for the photos, according to TVNewser.com, ultimately earning Schuringa $18,000.
If tabloids paid British police for information, then that would be a violation of journalistic ethics, if they still exist. American journalists had better look to their own motivations before casting stones at Rupert Murdoch.
Whatever happens in Britain, Fox News will survive and prosper. And that will be a cause for glee to those who dislike reporting that comes from a single ideological worldview.
I do think, however, that some of the cases Thomas mentions to back his "hypocrisy" accusation against the American MSM are a little week. They pale in comparison to the English press making pay-offs to police officials. But, I do agree with Thomas' charge of hypocrisy. I believe a more convincing "proof" of the media's hypocrisy could better start with reminding readers of the Wikileaks scandal -- many papers, especially The New York Times, published "leaks" that involved national security and endangered people's lives?
Michelle Malkin skewered The NY Times two summers ago for its numerous incidents of printing such sensitive material:
Michelle Malkin skewered The NY Times two summers ago for its numerous incidents of printing such sensitive material:
...From September 11, 2001 to the present, the terror-tipping blabbermouths of the New York Times have repeatedly undermined national security by disclosing sensitive/classified information about many key counterrorism programs. The paper has gone to court to force the government to release such information. The paper has shown reckless disregard for the consequences of disclosure....We already know the Times suppresses inconvenient information. Now, we know that other media outlets will suppress info on their behalf in a conspiracy of silence for national security purposes.
Just imagine if the newspapers were, say, banks cooperating in secrecy with intelligence/counterterrorism officials to help track jihadists.
Why, it would be a front-page national scandal.
It's a very intricate, twisted spider's web of intrigue. In fact, if you're feeling a bit embarrassed feeling a tad incapable of keeping up, don't. Apparently, the Brits are, too. So much so, that the BBC has posted a Q&A section on the scandal: "Q&A: News of the World phone-hacking scandal." It's pretty good!
Let's see how this all pans out ... after a humorous interpretation of the scandal from Jon Stewart:
"Schadenfreudegasm" -- that's funny!
Labels:
foxnews,
Israel,
journalism,
media,
MSM
Friday, July 22, 2011
NPR: Juan Williams Soon Releases Scathing Book
Back in October, Juan Williams was fired from NPR for making comments on FoxNews' The Factor which NPR deemed inappropriate. Next week, according to Politico, Williams will be releasing his latest book “Muzzled: The Assault on Honest Debate,” in which he harshly criticizes NPR for being elitist and claims the news organization attempted to censor him. Here are some excerpts from Keach Hagey's story at Politico (emphasis added):
Don't forget what happened to Mara Liasson back in December of '09, when she was pressured by NPR to reconsider her affiliation with FoxNews. Also from Politico:
Williams on NPR: Elitist and White
No single person has had a greater impact on National Public Radio in the past year than Juan Williams.
The political wildfire started by his firing ultimately took down the media organization’s CEO, top news executive and top fundraiser, and sparked multiple votes on the floor of Congress to strip the public broadcaster of federal funding.
As if this were not vindication enough, in “Muzzled: The Assault on Honest Debate,” a new book out next week, Williams details a decade of what he said was NPR’s effort to “censor, control and belittle” him because of his longstanding relationship with Fox News, and, to some degree, he said, his race.
“It is a very elitist and in this case white institution that I think is struggling with the changing demographics of American society,” he said. “And it struggles with the idea that there are capable thinkers and journalist and people who don’t fit into some box.”
He points out that, after he was fired from his NPR news analyst job for saying on “The O’Reilly Factor” that he gets nervous when he boards a plane and sees people “in Muslim garb,” there were no more black males on NPR’s airwaves. And he writes in the book that “it was clear they wanted me out the door,” an NPR news executive told him, “because I did not fit their view of how a black person thinks.”
NPR spokeswoman Anna Christopher took issue with Williams characterizations of his tenure at NPR.
“Diversity of opinions, ideas, sources, voices, and staff is very important to NPR, as evidenced by the work we do and the people who do it,” she said.
...
His last book, “Enough,” was inspired by Bill Cosby’s controversial speech accusing the black community of failing to live up to the promise of Brown vs. Board of Education. And for many years, as a contributor to both NPR and Fox News, he provided two very ideologically divergent audiences a window into the other side.
Fox News, Williams writes, was quite happy with this arrangement, but NPR was not. His relationship with Fox made NPR editors and producers questions his journalistic independence to the point, he said, that NPR would ignore tips he gave them and at one point even passed on an interview with President George W. Bush because the White House had offered it to Williams, not NPR.
“When it served their purpose,” he writes, “NPR officials were all too happy to use my connection to Fox.” Later, when Elena Kagan was nominated to the Supreme Court, Williams was suddenly much in demand as the author of a biography of Justice Thurgood Marshall, for whom Kagan had clerked. But when he pitched a piece on it to NPR, he was told there was no room for “a Juan Williams piece.”
The official behind much of this bad blood was Ellen Weiss, NPR’s senior vice president for news, who later made the call to Williams telling him that he’d been fired and whose head was the first to roll after an investigation into NPR’s handling of the firing. He claims in the book that NPR had long been just looking for an excuse to fire him because of his Fox work, and didn’t do so sooner because NPR reporter Mara Liasson also contributed to Fox.
But if things were so bad, why did he stick around?
“I guess I was an abused kid,” Williams said. “I just kept thinking they just made this mistake today, but it will get better.”
...
In the book, Williams argues that neither his firing nor his previous fights with NPR management were isolated incidents, but rather part of a wider resurgence of what he calls “political correctness” in culture today.
“You are not supposed to say certain things in political conversation and I think it is political correctness, like the walking dead, back from the grave,” he said. “Left and right it is all around us. I don’t think most people identify it as the political correctness of the 60s, but believe me, it is back with a vengeance.”
He distinguishes his version of “political correctness” from the more traditional liberal policing of language to avoid offending women, minorities and people with disabilities that is grounded in the civil rights movement and that sparked a backlash in the 1990s. For him, “political correctness” means any adherence to dogma, and refusal to enter into a kind of middle space where persuasion is possible.
True to his manifesto of straight talk, Williams also offers some unusually frank assessments of Fox News for someone employed by the channel.
“The news channel looks for the conservative slant in the stories it selects to tell,” he writes, veering rather substantially from the Fox News script that ideology on the channel is confined to primetime and opinion shows in the same way a newspaper’s opinions are confined to the editorial page.
He devotes an entire, not particularly laudatory chapter to “The Provocateurs,” in which he singles out Glenn Beck of particular criticism.
“[R]ather than spark a genuine debate, Beck seeks to ignite our ire and go on the attack,” he writes. “There is no progressive conspiracy to destroy the United States of America from within, and it is absurd to suggest there is.”
The one “provocateur” who is noticeably immune from Williams criticism is Bill O’Reilly, who he calls a “friend” and on whose show he appears routinely.
...
Williams ends the book with a final jab at NPR by calling for an end to its federal subsidy. Yet he is also critical of another public broadcasting funding source that would be likely to fill the hole if Republicans were ever successful in their attempts to strip public funding: wealthy individuals and foundations.
Although Williams had nothing to do with the fundraising sting video by James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas that took down former NPR CEO Vivian Schiller and top fundraiser Ron Schiller, his firing did create the political environment that made them targets in the first place. And the condescending comments that were caught on tape fit perfectly with his own criticism of the organization.
“NPR editors and journalists found themselves caught in a game of trying to please a leadership team who did not want to hear stories on the air about conservatives, the poor, or anyone who didn’t’ fit their profitable design of NPR as the official voice of college-educated, white, liberal-leaning, upper-income America,” he writes.
He also believes that NPR’s coverage is skewed by its major donors – the most famous of whom, George Soros’s Open Society Foundations, gave a $1.8 million donation the same week he was fired, further stoking accusations of NPR’s liberal bias.
...
In the end, Williams’s most stinging criticism of NPR is not racism or liberalism, but arrogance.
“I think the ethos was one in which we operated at a higher level, and people who don’t understand it, and don’t appreciate it, they are the ones that are not as smart, or as well-informed, or as well-educated as we are,” he said. “They felt that they were superior. Is that always liberal? It turns out that in NPR’s case, yes.”
Don't forget what happened to Mara Liasson back in December of '09, when she was pressured by NPR to reconsider her affiliation with FoxNews. Also from Politico:
Executives at National Public Radio recently asked the network’s top political correspondent, Mara Liasson, to reconsider her regular appearances on Fox News because of what they perceived as the network’s political bias, two sources familiar with the effort said.Good for you, Juan and Mara!!!
According to a source, Liasson was summoned in early October by NPR’s executive editor for news, Dick Meyer, and the network’s supervising senior Washington editor, Ron Elving. The NPR executives said they had concerns that Fox’s programming had grown more partisan, and they asked Liasson to spend 30 days watching the network.
At a follow-up meeting last month, Liasson reported that she’d seen no significant change in Fox’s programming and planned to continue appearing on the network, the source said.
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
The Food Stamp President
Remember back in May when Newt Gingrich stirred up a storm by calling Obama the "Food Stamp President?" I love the humorous response from The People's Cube --
Superkommissar Maksim
Every day President Obama is freeing toiling masses from the bonds of wage slavery. An ever growing number of former oil rig, construction, and retail workers, who once toiled under the yoke of capitalist oppression, have now heroically joined with liberated multitudes whose daily wants and needs are provided by the government.
In just three years Obama has emancipated 12 million former wage earners, adding them to the glorious Food Stamp program - that is a victorious 38% increase for a total of 44 million. No longer exploited for their labor, these men and women are free to live a sparse life without the stress of unnecessary choices, or the burden of supporting the decadent consumer society. Those who once were mere cogs in the monstrous capitalist planet-raping machine, now can enjoy a guilt-free life of government dependency.
As impressive as Obama's success has been, there still remain those who are bitterly clinging to self-reliance - a debilitation condition caused by false consciousness, the dark legacy of capitalist propaganda. To those still shackled to a job: do not give up hope! Our progress is unstoppable! Obama has plans for many more regulations and taxes - a tried and true way to beat back the vicious creation of jobs and prosperity in the reactionary private sector.
Soon you too will enjoy a scant existence with your very own Obamacard. Experience the glory of heroic and selfless sacrifice for the Greater Good™ as your children grow up loving the indiscriminate largess of the government's giving hand!
~

These are glorious times, comrades! The Progressive World of Next Tuesday™ is close at hand. We all must work tirelessly to ensure that Obama is not defeated by the evil Koch Brothers' Republican puppets. The future is in your hands!

Obamacard Food Stamp Electronic Wealth Transfer is preferred by 5 out of 5 government officials.
The Food Stamp President
Every day President Obama is freeing toiling masses from the bonds of wage slavery. An ever growing number of former oil rig, construction, and retail workers, who once toiled under the yoke of capitalist oppression, have now heroically joined with liberated multitudes whose daily wants and needs are provided by the government.In just three years Obama has emancipated 12 million former wage earners, adding them to the glorious Food Stamp program - that is a victorious 38% increase for a total of 44 million. No longer exploited for their labor, these men and women are free to live a sparse life without the stress of unnecessary choices, or the burden of supporting the decadent consumer society. Those who once were mere cogs in the monstrous capitalist planet-raping machine, now can enjoy a guilt-free life of government dependency.
As impressive as Obama's success has been, there still remain those who are bitterly clinging to self-reliance - a debilitation condition caused by false consciousness, the dark legacy of capitalist propaganda. To those still shackled to a job: do not give up hope! Our progress is unstoppable! Obama has plans for many more regulations and taxes - a tried and true way to beat back the vicious creation of jobs and prosperity in the reactionary private sector.
Soon you too will enjoy a scant existence with your very own Obamacard. Experience the glory of heroic and selfless sacrifice for the Greater Good™ as your children grow up loving the indiscriminate largess of the government's giving hand!
~

These are glorious times, comrades! The Progressive World of Next Tuesday™ is close at hand. We all must work tirelessly to ensure that Obama is not defeated by the evil Koch Brothers' Republican puppets. The future is in your hands!

Obamacard Food Stamp Electronic Wealth Transfer is preferred by 5 out of 5 government officials.
Heatwave: How Hot Is It?
With the present heatwave sending 17 states to the 100-degree mark yesterday and 40 others with 90+ degrees, I wonder if where you are is hotter than where I am
.... here's my neighborhood ice cream truck!!!
Tee, hee!
.... here's my neighborhood ice cream truck!!!
Tee, hee!
Helicopter Parents: Hovering Over the Workplace
In education, we teachers a few years back talked about the phenomenon of "helicopter parents." Here's how Urban Dictionary defines them:
We had heard stories of how these clingy, pushy parents would call professors to complain about their kids' grades. (Ironically, I've had some colleagues turn into helicopter parents, with one calling a college professor to find her daughter a tutor and another doing the online regisration of her son's coursework!)
Well, it seems now that after their kids have graduated, now helicopter parents are following them to the workplace. Here's a recent story on this parentinghorror story phenomenon from Steve Giegerich at The St. Louis Post Dispatch (emphasis added):
Parents that hover over their children, hawkishly "helping" them face the college learning scenario. It is debated whether or not parents that hover are good or bad for their child's overall development.They can also be referred to as "Hummingbird Parents."
We had heard stories of how these clingy, pushy parents would call professors to complain about their kids' grades. (Ironically, I've had some colleagues turn into helicopter parents, with one calling a college professor to find her daughter a tutor and another doing the online regisration of her son's coursework!)
Well, it seems now that after their kids have graduated, now helicopter parents are following them to the workplace. Here's a recent story on this parenting
'Helicopter parents' are descending on hiring managers
A staunch advocate has emerged to defend maligned employees or put in a good word with hiring managers.
Workplace supervisors report she can be relentless in trying to right the wrongs of impertinent bosses. And no one better extols the virtues an applicant might bring to an office or shop.
Meet mom.
In a report destined to chill the spines of executives everywhere, a global staffing firm recently disclosed that so-called helicopter parents — long the bane of teachers from kindergarten through college — are descending on the workplace, too.
The survey of its senior managers by Robert Half International suggests that most parental intervention takes place during the hiring process.
Still, the meddling sometimes continues even after a child has landed a job.
"It's a lot more prevalent than we thought," says Melinda Alison.
A regional vice president in the Robert Half International St. Louis office, Alison reports fielding more than a few résumés from email addresses assigned to the parents of applicants.
That might signal the age-old problem of parents' inability to let go. But a job market that has forced untold numbers of college graduates to move back to their childhood bedroom cannot be discounted.
Parents "have just spent all this money on school, and they want to get them out of the house," Alison said. "Their intentions are great, but it can backfire because employers want to hire people who exhibit independence, a sense of responsibility and self-motivation."
Undaunted, many parents persist. And an equal number of children permit it to happen.
The Robert Half International report, based on interviews with 1,300 supervisors, overflows with examples:
Alison added a personal perspective to the report's findings.
- The parent who asked to participate in her child's job interview.
- The manager who pressured a co-worker to give his daughter, also a company employee, special treatment when an opportunity for a promotion presented itself.
- The mother who contacted a human resources department demanding to inquire why her son was deemed unqualified for a job opening.
Her father had a habit of leaving clipped job opportunities from the classified section of the newspaper atop her dresser after Alison moved home following college graduation. Happily, Alison says, her dad's heart-in-the-right-place efforts were limited to the occasional not-so-subtle nudge.
Other parents, unfortunately, seem incapable of exercising restraint.
Part of it could fall into the psychological categories of internalization or projection.
Because, as Alison notes, a lot of mothers and fathers lately know the pain of unemployment.
"There's a trickle effect," she said. "Parents who have lost their jobs are nervous for the future of their children. They know how difficult it is to find a job in this market, so they take matters into their own hands."
Alison has one word of advice to helicopter parents feeling the urge to contact their children's boss or would-be employer: Don't.
In an overly involved parent of an applicant, hiring managers see the potential for an overly involved parent of a future employee. And as often as not, that translates into the position going to the job seeker with, well, a stay-at-home mom.
Wow! I would be embarrassed if my parents interfered with intervened in my job hunting. I am so grateful that I had parents who taught me responsibility and self-reliance from an early age. They taught me to use an alarm clock when I started first grade, they never did my homework for me (helped occasionally, yes), and never called in lame excuses to the school or my teachers when I was irresponsible in getting work done. In high school, I did my own class registration (which they would check over in the evening, of course), and I did my own college application and job search. They would kick my butt at home, but I had to do the phone calling, mailing, and job hunting.
Thanks, Mom and Dad!
Cremation: Another Idea for Ashes
I decided a long time ago that cremation would be my mode of "The Big Final Exit." What I want done with my ashes afterward ... well, tossing them from the top of Monarch Pass in Colorado would be nice. That's one of the visually outstanding places that sticks in my mind. Another would be from the top of the Xochicalco pyramids in Mexico. The view and buildings were breath-taking.
The other day I ran across a new idea for those of you who are scuba fans and/or are interested in helping our oceans' reefs (emphasis added) --
The other day I ran across a new idea for those of you who are scuba fans and/or are interested in helping our oceans' reefs (emphasis added) --
Sending Your Ashes Out to SeaI think that's a pretty cool idea. If you have ocean / scuba friends, you should pass this info along to them.
NBC - Sarah Spiekers stood sweating in 90-degree heat Friday, stirring a bucket of cement.
A volunteer with Eternal Reefs then slowly added the cremated remains that Spiekers brought with her, all the way from Minnesota. In all, eight family members made the trip to Sarasota to take part in this moment, at the last request of her brother, David Kemp.
"He told us over the last several years that when he died he would like to have his remains go in this direction," said Kemp's father, Jack.
Before he passed away in March after a long illness, David Kemp did a lot of research into his final resting place. Kemp loved the ocean and enjoyed snorkeling. He also was interested in reef preservation. That's why he decided to be memorialized by a Decatur, Georgia based company called Eternal Reef.
"What we do is we take people's cremated remains and integrate it with concrete," said Don Brawley, Eternal Reef founder. "We form an artificial reef habitat for fish and sea life."
Family members can decorate the concrete domes with shells and hand prints. The reef balls also have a bronze headstone plaque on the front. Each member of the Kemp family placed something special in wet concrete.
"David just loved beautiful things," his sister said. "His life is going to be preserved by providing new life, and I just think it's so much what he would have wanted."
Brawley believes the creation of the reef ball helps the family heal.
"Originally, I thought we were in the memorial reef business and very quickly I realized we're in the closure business," he said.
It's a hands-on way for family members to say goodbye. The Kemps completed their reef ball Friday morning. Jack Kemp and his wife, Sharon, held hands as they took a last look before leaving for the day.
The Kemps are treating this as a celebration of David's life, rather than mourning his death. "We scheduled a very happy week here in Bradenton Beach as a family," Jack Kemp said.
On Sunday, the Kemps accompanied the reef ball to its final resting place. It was taken 1 1/2 miles off Lido Beach and installed in an underwater memorial reef garden.
"We have more and more people coming to us every year," Brawley said. "I think part of the reason is, we're not just laying their loved ones to rest, but we're doing such environmental good."
Jack Kemp says there is some peace knowing David's memorial will provide shelter for aquatic life. "We were very pleased," he said. "Of course, we never anticipated we'd be doing it, this, so soon. He was in his 40s."
Labels:
cremation,
death,
ocean reef
"Digital Detox": Hotels and Spas Offer "Unplugged" Get-Aways
Yet again, I must smirk and shake my head. How funny that at the start of the Tech Boom we all though that these crazy new gadgets would make our lives easier. However, not only do they allow us to work more, enabling us to bring work home and on our vacations, but they add so much stress to our lives (and probably fat to our waistlines ... see post below about stress and weight gain) that the vacation industry is now offering "unplugged" vacations to their packages.
Here's a recent story by Anne Tergesen at The Wall Street Journal (emphasis added) --
Here's a recent story by Anne Tergesen at The Wall Street Journal (emphasis added) --
When Guests Check In, Their iPhones Check Out
When booking a weeklong yoga retreat, Amanda Levy signed up for a special package. Called "digital detox," it promised a 15% discount if Ms. Levy, a sales executive at a San Francisco social-networking company, would agree to leave her digital devices behind, or surrender them at check-in.
"I am constantly on my iPhone and checking my email," says the 29-year-old, who admits she sometimes "feels naked" without her smartphone. "But it was nice to be able to shut it off. It gave me an excuse to feel OK about not checking in."
With hotels, resorts, and travel companies scrambling to fill rooms, a small but growing number are rolling out "unplugged" and "digital detox" packages to entice people who need a push to take a break from their screens.
Marketing the deals on Twitter, Facebook, and their own websites, many hotels are offering discounts. Others are focusing on amenities designed to reduce stress, including spa treatments, kayak lessons, and guided hikes.
Starting this month, guests at the Renaissance Pittsburgh Hotel can book "Zen and the Art of Detox" on some summer weekends. The Hotel Monaco Chicago offers anyone who reserves its "tranquility suite" the option to add a "Technology Break." Others with similar packages include the Quincy in Washington, D.C., the Teton Mountain Lodge & Spa in Teton Village, Wyo., the Lake Placid Lodge in Lake Placid, N.Y., and Via Yoga, a Seattle company that specializes in luxury yoga and surfing retreats in Mexico and Costa Rica, including the one Ms. Levy took in April.
The services take similar approaches. Typically, they ask travelers to surrender their electronic devices upon check-in. In return, concierges provide them with old-fashioned diversions, from board games to literary classics. (Most, but not all, also yank TV sets and telephones from "detox" rooms.)
The programs are tied to Americans' seeming inability to detach their eyes and ears from their cellphones, e-readers, tablets and laptops—even when on vacation. According to a recent survey of more than 2,000 people by American Express, 79% of travelers expect to remain connected all or some of the time on their next vacation.
For many, the goal is to stay in touch with friends and family. Still, among those planning to check email, 68% say they will do so—daily or more frequently—for work, up from 58% in 2010.
At least some are taking extreme measures to remain connected. More than one-third of people admitted to checking email on vacation while engaged in such fast-paced activities as skiing, biking and horseback riding, according to a May 2010 survey of 241 people by Osterman Research Inc. on behalf of Austin, Texas, software company Neverfail Inc. A similar percentage report hiding from friends and family to check email. Neverfail provides technical disaster-recovery services and says it uses the survey in marketing its services.
"Technology has freed us up in many ways," says Edward Hallowell, a psychiatrist based in Sudbury, Mass., and New York City and author of "CrazyBusy: Overstretched, Overbooked, and About to Snap—Strategies for Coping in a World Gone ADD." "But there are unintended consequences." In some cases, he says, users "become addicted without knowing it. It's the new cigarette."
John T. Peters, 46, decided to go "cold turkey" during his six-day stay in May at the Cove Atlantis, a resort in the Bahamas. His inspiration: his 4-year-old daughter, who, seeing him without his iPhone, asked where it was.
"It really struck a nerve," says the Munster, Ind., resident. "I realized maybe I was too connected if a 4-year-old associates a phone with Daddy."
...
People used to constant connectivity say going cold turkey can be rough, especially the first couple of days.
After working up to four hours a day on most vacations, John S. DeLanoy, 42, a lawyer at Seattle law firm Cairncross & Hempelmann, decided to leave his iPhone at home when he and his wife, Elizabeth Chambers, 40, booked a May retreat with Via Yoga.
But at the airport, the Bainbridge Island, Wash., resident found himself eyeing his wife's iPhone. "I needed that iPhone to disappear. It was too tempting." Ms. Chambers, also a lawyer, put the phone away after sending a text message to the couple's nanny.
...
Before going off the grid, some people prepare by notifying clients and enlisting the support of colleagues. After working long hours around Christmas to close a real-estate deal, Mr. DeLanoy and two colleagues made a pact. "We agreed that during the course of this year, each of us could leave his or her iPhone behind and the other two would provide coverage."
Do people cheat?
Mr. Peters says he would "glance at my business device at night, just to see if there were any major emergencies." After hesitating, he adds: "I think there were a couple of days when I checked it in the morning, maybe once or twice. But I didn't respond."
Upon re-entry, life can quickly return to normal.
"It was sort of disappointing," says Mr. DeLanoy, who estimates he checks his email 50 to 100 times a day. "You instantly fall back into the same habits."
Mr. Peters, for his part, says he has made a few changes, including keeping his devices on charging stations while at home—rather than in his pockets.
Technology, he says, "has really enriched some of my relationships. But there are times when it can turn into a time-waster. I have worked hard to eliminate that."
Obese Children: Offspring of an Obese Nation
Last week's news story fired up a debate about whether or not obese kids should be taken from their "neglectful" parents and placed in foster care. The ruckus was kicked up by an article that appeared recently in JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) addressing the present national obesity epidemic and suggesting that, in extreme cases, obese children should temporarily be placed in foster care, believing that this would be more ethical than obesity surgery.
Here's more from KVEO, an NBC affiliate in Brownsville, TX (emphasis added) --
1) Rather than take the kids from the home, the State should first send in counselors to help the family resolve the problem(s), not only providing information on diet and exercise, but including counseling to get to the root of the extreme eating. If the kid is obese, what do you want to be that the parents are, too?;
2) "Education" is not the sole missing component in the problem. Anyone who does not know the "do's & don'ts" of eating and exercise has no excuse. The information is everywhere, easily accessible, and free. It's taught in school, on TV, in magazines, available in libraries and workplaces, and is even a topic in most people's everyday conversations. As stated above, there needs to be some psychotherapy with the individuals to discover and work on the cause(s) of the lifestyle habits the individuals have created, adopted and propagate.
3) I continue to believe that obesity is our nation's allowable bias. I've heard some individuals use it to slam another person in just as ugly a fashion as using a racial epithet. So, in this case of obese children, it appears to be another permissible attack on fat folks. How many times have I wished the State would intervene on a child's behalf in cases of clear-cut abuse? The State will act far more quickly in the case of a dog than for a child. Why doesn't the State intervene in other cases of "neglect", such as cases where parents "contribute to the delinquency of a minor" by allowing their children to skip school, in giving them alcohol, or standing idly by as their kids reproduce irresponsibly? Those behaviors impact a child's life as much, if not more, than obesity. And, like an unhealthy lifestyle, those delinquency behaviors are also propagated to coming generations.
What is the impact of our unhealthy lifestyle? Here are some sobering statistics from Psychology of Medicine (emphasis added):
Our obesity has been deemed a threat to our national security. (Huh?!? Here's why: "Since 1995, the proportion of potential recruits who failed their physical exams because of weight issues has increased nearly 70 percent ..." Go here for that article.)
So, what are the causes of our nation's obesity epidemic? Sure, there's the medical explanation of what leads to gaining weight; but, I'm asking from from a psychological perspective. We very well know what causes weight gain and know what we should be doing; but, we obstinately refuse. Why are we so food obsessed, existing in a perpetual state of denial about our habits? Everyone complains about the huge portions of food offered in restaurants and the ongoing snacking we engage in. We know supersizing is bad for us, and I, too, am soooooooo guilty of ongoing grazing throughout the day.
I decided to do some fishing around for some possible answers ...
• Of course, there's the depression-eating link. Besides being bombarded with all kinds of food commercials and print ads, we also see quite a few ads for pharmaceuticals, including anti-depressants. (It makes you wonder if we are we depressed as a nation.) Here's an excerpt from a Psychology Today article about childhood obesity and depression:
As with all cases of an individual being counseled, it's always a good idea for the entire family to involved. I wonder how many parents browbeat their kids about their weight. How many parents themselves have poor habits, not to mention self-esteem? I think of a friend who continually berates herself because of her weight. One evening after a huge meal at a restaurant followed by chowing down during a movie, she said to me "I just hate myself!" That was just one instance of her mentally beating herself up. How often has her teenage daughter witnessed this behavior? I imagine the daughter herself has adopted the same "ritual" of an eating binge followed by a round of mental self-flagellation.
• Personally, I think it's a bit of a retaliation against this "food police" mentality we've had for a generation or two. It started with my mother's generation -- all the women wanting to look like Audrey Hepburn. It kicked in full-bore with Twiggy in the 60's and this trend has continued ever since. Women's magazines at the grocer story check-out scream guilt-inducing headlines at me: "Lose 20 Pounds in 5 Days!" "How Celebrity-So-And-So Dropped Her Baby Weight In Time for the Oscars", "20 Foods That Make You Fat!", "20 Foods That Burn Fat!" ... and that always sickly include one headline that says something like "20 Scintillating Treats to Bake for Your Family."
• Another personal thought: marketing. There is a boatload of money to be made off of diet and fitness products. We are awash in a sea of commercials and ads for food -- fattening and diet, exercise programs and contraptions, and pharmaceuticals. According to Bloomberg Business, Americans spend $40 billion a year on weight-loss programs and products. $40 billion?!?
Apparently, there's a fancy-shmancy professor of political science at the University of Chicago that agrees with me! J. Eric Oliver, in his book "Fat Politics: The Real Story Behind America's Obesity Epidemic", writes about a sick culture drowning in the paradox of too much choice and the shame of too much consumption. Here's a description of his book from Amazon.com (emphasis added):
Here's more from KVEO, an NBC affiliate in Brownsville, TX (emphasis added) --
Dr. Donald Schwarz, Philadelphia Health Commissioner, says "we're talking about children who have not only the health issues, but who have parents whose behavior is seen as neglectful."A few points in response to the news story:
Dr. Donald Schwarz, a Philadelphia deputy mayor and the city's health commissioner, explains extreme cases can be defined in three ways: a child who is overly obese, has medical complications and whose parents have been deemed intentionally neglectful. He says only then the issue of foster care may be raised. He adds, in Philadelphia, the Department of Human Services, for example, would only remove a child in danger.
Dr. Schwarz says "in a case where we believe a parent is being neglectful, we would always consider whether or not that parent is an appropriate caregiver for a child "
Pediatrician Dr. Denise Baker says "I'm seeing it every day more and more however what is the real issue here. The issue is education."
Pediatricians like Dr. Denise Baker, who has been practicing for nearly 20 years, wonders if parents are truly neglecting their children or simply uneducated.
Dr. Baker says "we have to really go back to basics, eating meals at the table having healthy snacks around- go back to basics and prevention."
1) Rather than take the kids from the home, the State should first send in counselors to help the family resolve the problem(s), not only providing information on diet and exercise, but including counseling to get to the root of the extreme eating. If the kid is obese, what do you want to be that the parents are, too?;
2) "Education" is not the sole missing component in the problem. Anyone who does not know the "do's & don'ts" of eating and exercise has no excuse. The information is everywhere, easily accessible, and free. It's taught in school, on TV, in magazines, available in libraries and workplaces, and is even a topic in most people's everyday conversations. As stated above, there needs to be some psychotherapy with the individuals to discover and work on the cause(s) of the lifestyle habits the individuals have created, adopted and propagate.
3) I continue to believe that obesity is our nation's allowable bias. I've heard some individuals use it to slam another person in just as ugly a fashion as using a racial epithet. So, in this case of obese children, it appears to be another permissible attack on fat folks. How many times have I wished the State would intervene on a child's behalf in cases of clear-cut abuse? The State will act far more quickly in the case of a dog than for a child. Why doesn't the State intervene in other cases of "neglect", such as cases where parents "contribute to the delinquency of a minor" by allowing their children to skip school, in giving them alcohol, or standing idly by as their kids reproduce irresponsibly? Those behaviors impact a child's life as much, if not more, than obesity. And, like an unhealthy lifestyle, those delinquency behaviors are also propagated to coming generations.
What is the impact of our unhealthy lifestyle? Here are some sobering statistics from Psychology of Medicine (emphasis added):
F as in Fat: How Obesity Threatens America's Future 2011 - Trust for America's Health
Adult obesity rates increased in 16 states in the past year and did not decline in any state, according to F as in Fat: How Obesity Threatens America's Future 2011, a report from the Trust for America's Health (TFAH) and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF). Twelve states now have obesity rates above 30 percent. Four years ago, only one state was above 30 percent.The obesity epidemic continues to be most dramatic in the South, which includes nine of the 10 states with the highest adult obesity rates. States in the Northeast and West tend to have lower rates. Mississippi maintained the highest adult obesity rate for the seventh year in a row, and Colorado has the lowest obesity rate and is the only state with a rate under 20 percent.This year, for the first time, the report examined how the obesity epidemic has grown over the past two decades. Twenty years ago, no state had an obesity rate above 15 percent. Today, more than two out of three states, 38 total, have obesity rates over 25 percent, and just one has a rate lower than 20 percent. Since 1995, when data was available for every state, obesity rates have doubled in seven states and increased by at least 90 percent in 10 others. Obesity rates have grown fastest in Oklahoma, Alabama, and Tennessee, and slowest in Washington, D.C., Colorado, and Connecticut."Today, the state with the lowest obesity rate would have had the highest rate in 1995," said Jeff Levi, Ph.D., executive director of TFAH. "There was a clear tipping point in our national weight gain over the last twenty years, and we can't afford to ignore the impact obesity has on our health and corresponding health care spending."
Our obesity has been deemed a threat to our national security. (Huh?!? Here's why: "Since 1995, the proportion of potential recruits who failed their physical exams because of weight issues has increased nearly 70 percent ..." Go here for that article.)
So, what are the causes of our nation's obesity epidemic? Sure, there's the medical explanation of what leads to gaining weight; but, I'm asking from from a psychological perspective. We very well know what causes weight gain and know what we should be doing; but, we obstinately refuse. Why are we so food obsessed, existing in a perpetual state of denial about our habits? Everyone complains about the huge portions of food offered in restaurants and the ongoing snacking we engage in. We know supersizing is bad for us, and I, too, am soooooooo guilty of ongoing grazing throughout the day.
Why do we do it?!?
I decided to do some fishing around for some possible answers ...
• Of course, there's the depression-eating link. Besides being bombarded with all kinds of food commercials and print ads, we also see quite a few ads for pharmaceuticals, including anti-depressants. (It makes you wonder if we are we depressed as a nation.) Here's an excerpt from a Psychology Today article about childhood obesity and depression:
Depression in children is often linked with obesity. But it seems to be a case of chicken and egg. The two conditions often occur together, but it is unclear exactly which is cause and which is effect.
Obesity rates are soaring. One study, published in Pediatrics, found that the longer a child is overweight, the more he or she is at risk for depression and other mental health disorders.
The study followed nearly 1,000 white children in North Carolina, ages 9 to 16, over eight years. Young boys, but not girls, proved especially prone to the dual problem of obesity with depression.
"The link could have to do with social factors or it could be neuroendocrine-related," says Sarah Mustillo, Ph.D., of Duke University Medical Center. "It could be that if you're only obese for six months, there's not as much of an effect as if you were obese for five years."
At the center of obesity-depression link is biology, notably the hormonal pathway known as the HPA axis. It is the route of communication between the hypothalamus, the peanut-sized part of the brain that governs parts of the nervous system, and the pituitary and adrenal glands, which secrete a variety of hormones.
These three points of the body work together to maintain chemical equilibrium when the body is under stress. The HPA axis is responsible for releasing cortisol, the so-called "stress hormone." It plays a critical role in energy metabolism as well as other functions. The problem is, cortisol prompts the body to deposit fat around the abdomen, a pattern that is especially hazardous to health. Chronic stress also begets depression.
"Obesity, depression and behavioral disorders have all been linked to abnormal functioning of the HPA axis," says Mustillo. While social factors such as teasing and isolation may contribute to depression in obese kids, Mustillo believes the problem is much more complex.
"It's probably a combination of social and biological factors," she says, noting, "There's an interaction between what's outside your body and what's inside." Obesity carries a large social stigma and may bring on depression if it negatively affects self-esteem, body image or social mobility. It may even disrupt the normal hormonal pathways. Then again, depression may also bring on obesity, if a child lacks the energy to exercise or is immobilized by stress....The best thing parents can do is to treat obesity as a health issue, not a problem of appearance, and to accurately record their child's height and weight. He urges parents, physicians and psychologists to press insurance companies to cover behavioral therapy for obesity.
It's also important to recognize that obesity isn't necessarily caused by overeating. Says Elizabeth Goodman, M.D., of Brandeis University: "There are different types of depression and different types of obesity. It's easy to say that it's all behavioral. That makes it sound like there's a choice; I'm not sure that it is."
As with all cases of an individual being counseled, it's always a good idea for the entire family to involved. I wonder how many parents browbeat their kids about their weight. How many parents themselves have poor habits, not to mention self-esteem? I think of a friend who continually berates herself because of her weight. One evening after a huge meal at a restaurant followed by chowing down during a movie, she said to me "I just hate myself!" That was just one instance of her mentally beating herself up. How often has her teenage daughter witnessed this behavior? I imagine the daughter herself has adopted the same "ritual" of an eating binge followed by a round of mental self-flagellation.
• Personally, I think it's a bit of a retaliation against this "food police" mentality we've had for a generation or two. It started with my mother's generation -- all the women wanting to look like Audrey Hepburn. It kicked in full-bore with Twiggy in the 60's and this trend has continued ever since. Women's magazines at the grocer story check-out scream guilt-inducing headlines at me: "Lose 20 Pounds in 5 Days!" "How Celebrity-So-And-So Dropped Her Baby Weight In Time for the Oscars", "20 Foods That Make You Fat!", "20 Foods That Burn Fat!" ... and that always sickly include one headline that says something like "20 Scintillating Treats to Bake for Your Family."
• Another personal thought: marketing. There is a boatload of money to be made off of diet and fitness products. We are awash in a sea of commercials and ads for food -- fattening and diet, exercise programs and contraptions, and pharmaceuticals. According to Bloomberg Business, Americans spend $40 billion a year on weight-loss programs and products. $40 billion?!?
Are our pudgy waistlines merely a symptom of a bigger problem?
Apparently, there's a fancy-shmancy professor of political science at the University of Chicago that agrees with me! J. Eric Oliver, in his book "Fat Politics: The Real Story Behind America's Obesity Epidemic", writes about a sick culture drowning in the paradox of too much choice and the shame of too much consumption. Here's a description of his book from Amazon.com (emphasis added):
It's not obesity, but the panic over obesity, that's the real health problem, argues this scintillating contrarian study of the evergreen subject of American gluttony and sloth. Political scientist Oliver condemns what he feels is a self-interested "public health establishment"-obesity researchers seeking federal funding, pharmaceutical and weight-loss companies peddling diet drugs and regimens, bariatric surgeons and other health-care providers angling for insurance reimbursement-for spuriously characterizing fatness as a disease. He debunks the dubious science and alarmist PR that fuels their campaign, taking on arbitrary Body-Mass Index standards that slot even Michael Jordan in the overweight category, state-by-state maps of obesity rates that make fatness look like a contagion spreading over the countryside, and flimsy research studies that vastly exaggerate the danger and costs of weight gain. Oliver also examines American attitudes towards obesity, probing the abhorrence of fatness implicit in the Protestant ethic and, less plausibly, tying our contemporary feminine ideal of the emaciated supermodel to a confluence of sociobiology and the economics of the urban sexual marketplace. Arguing that fatness is perfectly compatible with fitness, he contends that scapegoating obesity drives Americans to experiment with dangerous crash diets, appetite suppressants and weight-loss surgeries, while distracting us from underlying harmful changes in the American lifestyle-mainly our incessant snacking on junk food and shunning of exercise and physical activity, of which weight gain is perhaps merely a "benign symptom." Oliver provides a lucid, engaging critique of obesity research and a shrewd analysis of the socioeconomic and cultural forces behind it. The result is a compelling challenge to the conventional wisdom about our bulging waistlines.I've promptly downloaded a free chapter to my iPad! His theories sound exactly like what's been playing in the back of my mind as my colleagues pound the table in disgust at "fatties." (Something tells me I'll soon be buying the entire book!)
Labels:
big brother,
family,
health,
obesity
Dogs & Middle Eastern Culture: Dogs Winning Hearts ... Of Course!!
I am such a dog lover, and it's been difficult for me to understand why a culture would deem dogs as "unclean." Well, I guess given some of my pup's habits, I can at times see why. But, looking into those chocolately pools of love (i.e. "eyes"), you can't help but fall in love. I was thrilled to read this the other day at The Wall Street Journal (emphasis added) --
Ah, the dog -- another great Western value to infiltrate and destroy Iran. Love it!!!!!A Craze for Pooches in Iran Dogs the Morality Police
Western TV Makes Owning Pups Fashionable, Despite Ayatollah's Fatwa
By Farnaz Fassihi
Iranians have turned to the Internet to organize antigovernment protests. Now they're flocking online to defy another Islamic Republic edict: buying and selling dogs.
Pooch lovers in Iran are clicking on popular websites like Woof Woof Iran Digital Pets and Persianpet to pick their favorite canine, study dog grooming or swap pet tales.
Buying and selling dogs is illegal in Iran, unless they are guard dogs or used by police. Dogs are considered "haram," or unclean, in Islam. Until recently, keeping dogs as pets was limited to a small circle of Westernized Iranians.![]()
A trainer and puppy outside the kennel ofWoof Woof Iran in Karaj, Iran.
But access to satellite television—and American programs depicting families playing with pups—has turned dog ownership into a sign of social status in Iran.
"It's the latest fashion now to buy each other puppies as birthday gifts," says Amin, a 25-year-old. He had never pet a dog until traveling to a village two hours outside Tehran to obtain a German Shepherd puppy.
Authorities are striking back. Last year, Ayatollah Nasser Makarem Shirazi issued a fatwa, or religious edict, denouncing dog ownership. In April, Iran's parliament passed a bill to criminalize dog ownership, declaring the phenomenon a sign of "vulgar Western values."
This summer, so-called morality police are cruising the streets looking to enforce the anti-dog law. The punishment varies from a fine of up to $500 if the dog is seen in a public space to temporarily confiscating cars and suspending drivers' licenses if the dog isn't contained in a carrier inside the car.
To evade detection, pooch owners are resorting to middle-of-the-night walks and driving hours to the countryside just so their pets can roam. Vendors charge the equivalent of up to $10,000 for top dogs and operate so covertly that some blindfold potential buyers en route to the kennel.
"It was crazy," says Ali Shekouri, a 32-year-old businessman who pursued three dicey strategies before obtaining a local beagle. "After a while I didn't know if I was buying a dog or dealing in an international drug trade."
When Mr. Shekouri set out to buy a puppy last year, a friend first took him to a small electronics shop in downtown Tehran near the grand bazaar. In actuality, it was a front for a middle-aged man selling dogs. After enduring a one-hour intense interview to make sure he wasn't an undercover cop, Mr. Shekouri was whisked away in a car to the kennel's secret location. During the ride, he says, he was blindfolded. He didn't find a pet he liked.
Mr. Shekouri then turned to the Internet for his puppy hunt. A quick Google search provided over a dozen domestic websites scattered across Iran from Rasht, a coastal city in the north, to the southern city of Ahwaz.
A pet in Tehran
The Rashtpet website offers puppies from a database of photos. First the buyer must wire a payment—between $500 and $10,000 depending on the breed—into a bank account. Then the illicit pet is delivered within two weeks by a truck driver who hides the dog amid the cargo, according to Mr. Shekouri and the website.
The Petpars website promises a puppy equipped with a faux international passport hand-carried from Ukraine via a flight passenger. Mr. Shekouri says he was told he would receive his puppy in the arrival lounge of Tehran's international airport. Fed up with the hassle, he eventually settled for a beagle from a local breeder.
Dog-selling websites like Rashtpet and Petpars confirm they import dogs by paying traveling Iranians to act as illicit couriers and claim the puppies are their own. While importing dogs for sale is illegal, passengers are allowed to bring personal pets in on commercial flights.
The flight from Ukraine to Tehran has been nicknamed "the puppy flight" because many of its passengers, mostly university students, are carrying puppies for sale, according to several pet website owners who import from Ukraine.
When airport authorities caught on last year, they increased the tax on importing pets from $50 to $800, according to sellers. Some dog vendors diverted their operation so dogs are transported from Ukraine to Armenia and Turkey and from there smuggled in the cargo section of tour buses and trucks returning to Iran, vendors say.
"We have a large and very capable network expanding from Iran to Europe and beyond to help unite Iranians with dogs," says the 30-year-old owner of Petpars, who asked that his name not be published.
Sanaz, an art student in Tehran, bought a St. Bernard puppy from a student coming from Moscow.
Now the dog is the size of a small pony and she doesn't know what to do with it in her small apartment given the restrictions on walking dogs in public.
On the entrance to many of Tehran's parks and neighborhood gardens, a municipality sign reads: "Pets (dogs…) are absolutely prohibited from entering the park."
"I used to take him out for walks but the police have stopped me several times and threatened to confiscate him, so I just take him to the roof of our apartment building now and pray he doesn't bark," says Sanaz, who, like many owners, declined to use her surname for fear of having her pooch confiscated.
Milad, a 24-year-old owner of a white terrier, had a harrowing run-in with the morality police. He was driving home in Tehran with the dog in the front seat from a friend's house when a police car spotted him and signaled for him to pull over. He refused and, he says, the police chased him to the door of his house. He opened the car door to let the dog escape but an officer jumped out and pulled a gun on the dog, he says.
"I threw myself on my dog and said, 'You have to shoot me before you kill him,'" Milad says. A group of neighbors came out to defend him and, he says, eventually the police backed off from killing or confiscating the dog. But they suspended Milad's driver's license for six months and took his car for three months.
Labels:
dogs,
Iran,
Islam,
middle east
Friday, July 1, 2011
President Obama's 50th Birthday: Let's Celebrate!
This is sweet. The St. Louis Tea Party will be celebrating President Obama's 50th birthday on Thursday, Aug. 4th in downtown St. Louis at Kiener Plaza. He has been invited to speak. Let's see if he will make an appearance.
Here's the announcement:
Here's the announcement:
There will be cake! YEAH!!
ST. LOUIS TEA PARTY COALITION ANNOUNCES RALLY FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE……
In acknowledgement of the President’s landmark 50th birthday, the St Louis Tea Party Coalition has announced they will be throwing a “Tea Party for The President” Rally. The event will take place on President Obama’s actual birthday, August 4th, from 6-8 pm at Keiner Plaza in downtown St. Louis.
President Obama has been formally invited as the keynote speaker, along with a host of several celebrity speakers across the political spectrum. “The point is to unite as Americans” explained St Louis Tea Party Coalition Co-Founder Bill Hennessy. The organization will be providing birthday cake at the event, and a special musical guest will lead participants in singing “Happy Birthday” to the President.
Mark Halperin's Comment: What We've Come to Expect from the Press
Yesterday morning I was doing my usual routine: while working out on the elliptical at the Y, I was bouncing back and forth between Morning Joe and Fox & Friends in my usual game of "who's more biased?". I almost fell off watching this:
Now, everyone has their panties in a wad over Halperin's crudeness. But, if you watch the entire thing unfold you'll notice the absolute hypocrisy on the part of Morning Joe's hosts Mika and Joe: they both egged on Halperin, laughed and snickered at the comment, and then feigned disgust and shock. Turds ... As the show continued on, Halperin made several apologies, all the while having a wide-eyed, fearful look on his face. The end result: Halperin was suspended indefinitely by MSNBC.
The uproar is ridiculous. I do agree that all members of the Press should be respectful of the President and the office; however, that went by the wayside years ago. So, for the MSM to now have their panties in a wad over Halperin's comment is ludicrous and hypocritical. Let's not forget the years of nasty comments the MSM made about President Bush. Perhaps no one used a crude term like "dick" in reference to Bush; but, let's not forget the Press's onslaught of accusations of being a war criminal, having designed or allowed 9/11, being a racist a la Hurricane Katrina, describing Bush as "murderous", labeling him a "fascist."etc. Forget not the years of invective language and slander from such talking heads as Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow, Ed Schulz et al. (Gee, aren't those all MSNBC folks?)
Check out Geoffrey Dickens' summation over at Newsbusters.org:
Now, everyone has their panties in a wad over Halperin's crudeness. But, if you watch the entire thing unfold you'll notice the absolute hypocrisy on the part of Morning Joe's hosts Mika and Joe: they both egged on Halperin, laughed and snickered at the comment, and then feigned disgust and shock. Turds ... As the show continued on, Halperin made several apologies, all the while having a wide-eyed, fearful look on his face. The end result: Halperin was suspended indefinitely by MSNBC.
The uproar is ridiculous. I do agree that all members of the Press should be respectful of the President and the office; however, that went by the wayside years ago. So, for the MSM to now have their panties in a wad over Halperin's comment is ludicrous and hypocritical. Let's not forget the years of nasty comments the MSM made about President Bush. Perhaps no one used a crude term like "dick" in reference to Bush; but, let's not forget the Press's onslaught of accusations of being a war criminal, having designed or allowed 9/11, being a racist a la Hurricane Katrina, describing Bush as "murderous", labeling him a "fascist."etc. Forget not the years of invective language and slander from such talking heads as Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow, Ed Schulz et al. (Gee, aren't those all MSNBC folks?)
Check out Geoffrey Dickens' summation over at Newsbusters.org:
Flashback: MSNBC Hosts Called Bush Fascist, Murderous and War Criminal, Never Faced Suspensions
On MSNBC you can call a sitting president a "murderous" "fascist" even muse about putting the President on trial for war crimes, so long as that president is a Republican. But if you dare call a Democratic president a "d–ck," as MSNBC analyst Mark Halperin did this morning it's grounds for indefinite suspension.
While calling any president the D-word is probably not showing the proper respect for the office, it has to be asked where does it rank compared to essentially accusing a president of mass murder and war crimes?
The following is a collection of quotes from MSNBC employees past (Keith Olbermann) and present (Chris Matthews, Ron Reagan Jr.) who had some particularly distasteful things to say about a then sitting President George W. Bush:
"Good evening. A President who lied us into a war and, in so doing, needlessly killed 3,584 of our family and friends and neighbors; a President whose administration initially tried to destroy the first man to nail that lie; a President whose henchmen then ruined the career of the intelligence asset that was his wife when intelligence assets were never more essential to the viability of the Republic; a President like that has tonight freed from the prospect of prison the only man ever to come to trial for one of the component felonies in what may be the greatest crime of this young century."
Another prime example from Dickens' report:
I don't know about you, but I would take the insult of "dick" a lot better than the things that were said about Bush.
"As a final crash of self-indulgent nonsense, when the incontrovertible truth of your panoramic and murderous deceit has even begun to cost your political party seemingly perpetual congressional seats....When somebody asks you, sir, about the cooked books and faked threats you foisted on a sincere and frightened nation; when somebody asks you, sir, about your gallant, noble, self-abnegating sacrifice of your golf game so as to soothe the families of the war dead; this advice, Mr. Bush: Shut the hell up! Good night and good luck."
Labels:
Morning Joe,
MSM,
Obama
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)















