education news

Teacher of the year now going to teach more teachers

shanna

I have this friend — with whom I used to work in a previous life — who this past year received the highest honor someone in her profession can get.

She was named National Teacher of the Year. Shanna Peeples went to the White House, where she was honored by President Barack Obama, who said many wonderful things about her and the dedication she has demonstrated in educating young people.

Peeples, quite naturally, turned the emphasis on her colleagues who also were gathered on the White House lawn. Shanna accepted the teacher of the year award in their honor, she said.

What makes her such a stellar teacher? Her undying love of the children who learn from her. She teaches English … and until just recently she was teaching students at Palo Duro High School in Amarillo.

Now, though, she’s being promoted.

The Amarillo Independent School District has decided to put her teaching skills to work at a higher level. As Peeples writes about her new assignment: ” … I’ve been trusted with the task that my friend, Jennifer Wilkerson has done so well for our district: Core Curriculum Specialist, ELAR 6-12. For my non-Ed-jargon friends: that’s the responsibility for growing teachers and shaping literacy learning in middle and high school.”

Are we clear? She’s going to teach the teachers how to do their jobs better. At least that’s what I read in what she wrote.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/shanna-peeples/you-cant-burn-the-suit/10209664555035203?utm_content=buffer7daf4&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

The next thing I want to say might be taken the wrong way. I do not intend at all to sound like a Negative Norm. There’s a certain irony, it seems to me, in taking a teacher who’s just been told she’s the best in the nation at what she does and then assigning her to do something different.

Shanna Peeples certainly doesn’t dismiss the new task she’s been given at Amarillo ISD. Nor do I. Her many friends throughout the Texas Panhandle are proud of her and proud of what she has accomplished in the classroom.

Her emphasis now will be on helping other classroom teachers become the best they can be, which then will enable them to pass on the joy of learning to the young people assembled before them.

As Shanna writes: “God help me, I’m a teacher. As I told a radio interviewer: ‘It’s like Peter Parker being bitten by the radioactive spider. You can’t just quit being a teacher like I say, quit being a deejay or a short order cook at the bowling alley. You’re a teacher for life.’

“Trust me, I’ll have plenty of assignments for other people. This work is big, important work. And it won’t ever be even partway done before I die. But that’s what makes it worth giving my heart to. And my heart is with teachers as much as it is with students. Always and always and always.”
Well said. As always.
national news

Lower the flags, fella!

flag

Tucker Dorsey needs to have his head examined.

He might be certifiably … well, let’s just say he’s as wrong as he can be.

Dorsey chairs the Baldwin County, Ala., commission. He has refused to order flags on county buildings lowered to half-staff in honor of the 49 people slaughtered this past weekend in Orlando, Fla., per orders from President Obama and Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley.

What passes for Dorsey’s “reasoning” defies logic, common sense and several basic tenets of human decency.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/alabama-county-wont-lower-flags-for-orlando-victims/ar-AAhgaQ1?li=BBnb7Kz

According to CBSNews.com: “Once again I have to copy this post regarding lowering the flags because another follower of Islam decided to shoot up a bunch of innocents in a place where they didn’t have the chance to defend themselves or flee,” Dorsey began a Facebook post explaining the decision. “When are we going to acknowledge the truth? When will we stop the PC and identify the enemy?”

I’m a bit slow on the uptake at times, but someone’s got to explain what political correctness and “identifying the enemy” has to do with honoring the memories of those who died at the hands of a madman.

There’s more. Again, from CBSNews.com:

“When the flag is at half-staff, our country’s head is figuratively held low, and quite frankly, I am not willing to hang my head down because of a terrorist attack against our people and our allies,” Dorsey said. “I am not willing to hang my head down because evil shoots up a church, school, or movie theater. We need more than a gesture as a response. I want us, as Americans, to stand tall, courageously, and fight back against the forces of evil, and let’s fight like we intend to win.”

Good grief, dude. You grieve for the lives lost. Then you resolve to do what you must to eradicate the evil that resulted in this tragedy.

What is so difficult about doing that?

And despite what this guy says, lowering the flags to half-staff to mourn these national tragedies is quite consistent with long-standing tradition.

International news, legal news

Ex-SS guard gets five years for atrocities … enough?

hanning

This one is giving me fits and I’m likely to ask for some guidance on what to think about it.

A court in Germany has just sentenced a 94-year-old former SS guard to five years in prison for complicity in the atrocities that occurred at Auschwitz, the infamous Nazi death camp where many thousands of people were sent to their death.

Reinhold Hanning accepted the sentence apparently without emotion.

My questions are many:

Is the sentence long enough for a man nearing 100 years of age? Is it tantamount to life in prison? What has this man done with his life since the end of World War II? Would any contribution to society be enough to erase what he was accused of doing? Has he sought spiritual salvation for what he did?

“This trial is the very least that society can do to give… at least a semblance of justice, even 70 years after and even with a 94-year-old defendant,” chief judge Anke Grudda said.

“The entire complex Auschwitz was like a factory designed to kill people at an industrial level… You were one of those cogs” in the Nazi killing machine, she told the accused on convicting him as an accessory to murder in 170,000 cases.”

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ex-ss-guard-94-convicted-for-complicity-in-auschwitz-murders/ar-AAhc6I3

auschwitz

As the son of a World War II veteran who saw intense combat against Hitler’s war machine, I grew up believing that the men who carried out the madman’s orders bore a large measure of responsibility in the crimes against humanity they committed in Fuehrer’s name.

My hatred for Hitler over what he did in committing the atrocities hasn’t wavered.

I’m struggling, though, with the punishment being handed out so many decades later to those who were following orders. Did they understand fully — in the moment — that they were committing unspeakable atrocities?

Just seven years ago I had the honor of touring the Yad Vashem memorial and museum near Jerusalem, which chronicles the story of the Holocaust from its victims’ point of view. One cannot come away from seeing that exhibit without feeling the combined sense of horror and shame over what human beings are capable of doing to other human beings.

Therein lies the crux of my conflict.

I am inclined to believe the sentence was as just as one can expect, given the defendant’s age. I also am inclined to hope that his time in prison is made as miserable as is humanly possible. I know, of course, that the German prison system must not inflict on Hanning the same horrors he’s been convicted of inflicting on his victims at Auschwitz.

Your thoughts on this?

national news, political news

Trump facing lukewarm — at best — nomination cheer

gop-convention-3

Let’s play out the rest of the Republican Party’s presidential nominating process.

Donald J. Trump will receive his party’s nomination in Cleveland in just a few weeks.

GOP moguls will try and fail to wrestle the nomination away from Trump, who defeated 16 primary opponents. He scored a record number of GOP primary votes while marching to his party’s nomination.

Then, on the Thursday night of the convention, after the balloting has been completed and the RNC convention chairman, House Speaker Paul Ryan, says through gritted teeth that Donald Trump is the party’s presidential nominee.

Someone will introduce him to the crowd.

Trump will stride onto the stage.

What kind of reception is he going to get? The norm is for political convention delegates to deliver throaty cheers. They cheer, whoop and holler, wave their signs, whistle, blow horns, laugh and weep tears of joy.

That’s the norm.

This primary season has been everything but normal.

Trump will be a badly damaged nominee. He won’t enjoy the support of many hundreds of delegates spread out before him on the convention floor. Those delegates who wanted someone else nominated will serve as a metaphor for the voting public across the land.

I was struck by the stinging critique in this week’s New Yorker by the magazine’s editor, David Remnick, who writes:

The current leadership of the Republican Party and most of its traditional funders show every sign of knowing that a pernicious buffoon has become their standard-bearer. And yet they have largely fallen into line. They dare not betray “the wisdom of their voters.” There’s Orrin Hatch, of Utah, with his reputation for integrity, telling his constituents that Trump “doesn’t have a prejudiced bone in his body.” There’s Paul Ryan, the self-advertised model of Republican probity and deep thinking, allowing that, yes, Trump is guilty of “textbook” racism, but refusing to edge away from his squeamish endorsement. And there is Mitch McConnell, the Senate Majority Leader, providing this piece of moral discernment: “Well, what I am willing to say is that Donald Trump is certainly a different kind of candidate.” McConnell has hinted that he could rescind his support, but what are the odds?

Here’s the entire essay:

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/06/20/the-choice-hillary-clinton-or-donald-trump

It’s all coming together at the GOP convention in Cleveland.

I’ll be waiting with bated breath to see how the nominee’s acceptance speech is received by the actual Republicans who will have sent him into battle against Hillary Rodham Clinton and the Democrats.

national news, Uncategorized

Filibuster provides a rare Senate ‘victory’

Chris Murphy was incensed at his U.S. Senate colleagues.

Four years after his Connecticut constituents suffered the unspeakable grief from the Newtown school massacre, Congress hadn’t done anything to curb gun violence.

So, the Democratic lawmaker took the Senate floor the other day and began filibustering.

He was spurred to talk and talk and talk by the latest mass slaughter, of 49 individuals in Orlando, Fla., this past weekend.

I want to applaud Sen. Murphy for something he achieved from his 15-hour gabfest. He persuaded the Senate Republicans who run the place to hold votes on at least a couple of key bills that proponents say will help curb gun violence.

Hey, it’s a big deal. As big a deal is that it came about by a senator persuading his colleagues to schedule these votes by talking the issue to death.

Filibusters are unique to the Senate. The House doesn’t allow it.

A filibuster allows senators to talk about whatever they want. They can use the procedure to stall legislation. Some prominent lawmakers have used the filibuster to obtain legendary status. The late Sen. Strom Thurmond holds the record for non-stop Senate blabbing. My former senator, the late Wayne Morse of Oregon, was another well-known blowhard who knew how to use the filibuster to maximum advantage.

Sometimes senators’ use of the filibuster backfires. Ted Cruz of Texas sought to filibuster the Affordable Care Act to death in 2013. He failed.

Murphy, though, managed to get a vote on one of the knottiest issues of our time: gun control.

I am not sure where it will go. There are some interesting compromises to what Murphy favors, dealing with disallowing suspected terrorists from obtaining a firearm.

I won’t comment further here on the merits of what Murphy desires.

However, I applaud the senator for talking long enough to get the Senate leadership to at least put this issue to a vote.

national news, political news

VP choice becomes a problem for GOP

Donald J. Trump stands poised to become the Republican Party’s next nominee for president of the United States.

Is there anyone out there who believes Trump’s nomination will be welcomed with a warm GOP embrace, that the party brass that’s now condemning the candidate will back him without objection?

This brings to mind the question that Politico is asking: Who is willing to become the vice-presidential nominee along with Trump? Who is going to hoist the candidate’s hand in the air from the convention podium in Cleveland? Who’s going to be willing to sing the praises of the candidate who’s insulted just about every voting bloc he’s going to need to defeat Hillary Rodham Clinton?

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/donald-trump-vice-president-224488

Prominent GOP officeholders have drawn the barbs from Trump.

What about the women of the party? New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez? She’s out. South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley? No can do. U.S. Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa? Forget about it.

Hispanics? U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida? Hardly. U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas? Pfftt!

Anglo males? Trump might have some takers among that group. Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey comes to mind. Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry says he’s interested. Some buzz is mentioning former House Speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia.

This is a half-serious suggestion for why someone might accept a veep nomination from Trump. It has to do with what might occur on the remotest of remote chances that Trump gets elected president in November.

Perhaps the No. 2 man/woman could see a clear path to the presidency in the hope — or perhaps the expectation — that Trump commits an impeachable offense.

Look at it this way: Trump would have few friends and allies in the House of Representatives, which could actually impeach him. He also would have few friends in the Senate, which would actually try him. And the Senate, given the responsibility to consider whatever charges would be brought against Trump, might be inclined to convict him on the promise of getting someone better able to govern.

What might a “President Trump” do to compel an impeachment?

He’s spoken freely and loosely about all the things he would do as president, ignoring the fact that the president shares power with Congress and the federal judiciary. He doesn’t understand how government works.

Might he then to try some kind of end-around on a policy that requires congressional approval?

As we saw during the 1990s, members of Congress need little provocation to file charges and to deliver an impeachment.

I’d be inclined to say the selection would be difficult to make. Then I read this in the Politico piece:

“Ironically, the presumptive nominee’s own toxicity is making the job of finding a vice presidential nominee that much easier, because the short list is so short.”

national news, political news

Some polling data to ponder

th

The RealClearPolitics.com average of polls is quite a fascinating barometer of the nation’s political mood.

Consider this bit of information from the latest surveys.

According to RCP, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton holds a 5.8 percent lead nationally over Republican opponent Donald J. Trump.

Remember, this is an average of polls — some of which lean left, others of which lean right. The RCP average factors all of them.

Now, when you add Libertarian Party nominee — and former New Mexico Republican governor — Gary Johnson into the mix, you see something a bit different. Clinton leads the three-way race by 5.3 percent over Trump.

What does that mean? It means to me, at least, that Johnson is pulling nominally more from Clinton than from Trump.

It kind of reminds me of the canard that’s been tossed around since 1992 about how Ross Perot “cost” President Bush his re-election effort against Bill Clinton. The reality was that Clinton was going to win that election anyway, by roughly the same margin with which he won.

Is Gov. Johnson going to become an election spoiler? I don’t see it. At least not yet.

Then again, this is now. These things do change … don’t they?

 

media news, national news, political news

This scandal produced a suffix

Forty-four years ago today, some goofballs broke into the Democratic Party headquarters in Washington, D.C.

They rifled through some files looking for dirt they could find on the party bigwigs. They left.

The cops arrived and discovered that the office had been burglarized. They launched their investigation at the Watergate Hotel and office complex.

Thus, a political suffix was born.

The Watergate scandal took flight eventually. The Washington Post assigned a couple of reporters from its metro desk — Robert Woodward and Carl Bernstein — to cover it as a run-of-the-mill cop story. They buried their initial coverage of it.

Then the reporters’ phones start ringing. “There’s more to this story than meets the eye,” snitches told them. The reporters badgered their editor, Ben Bradlee, to allow them to look more deeply into it. Finally, Bradlee relented. He turned the fellows loose.

They uncovered a scandal that would turn into a monumental constitutional crisis. We would learn that President Nixon told the FBI to stop snooping around, that he had ordered the CIA to spy on his enemies. Nixon would quit the presidency, Woodward and Bernstein would win the Pulitzer Prize — and their names would become synonymous with investigative journalism.

Since then, every political scandal under sun — or so it seems — has had the “gate” suffix attached to it. Here’s what I found on Wikipedia. I know, take it with a grain of salt. Still, it’s rather interesting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scandals_with_%22-gate%22_suffix

There’s more of them than I ever imagined.

But for my money, the original “gate” scandal — and it’s listed in there — remains in a class by itself.

June 17, 1972 is a date many of us will always remember — in the words of the president who would succeed Richard Nixon — when our “long national nightmare” was just beginning.

 

national news, Uncategorized

Bring your hiking shoes, first family

cave

President and Mrs. Obama are taking their daughters to Carlsbad Caverns, N.M., as part of a commemoration of the National Park Service’s centennial celebration.

The park service turns 100 and the Obamas are going to mark the occasion by touring the caverns, along with Yosemite National Park in California.

Take it from my wife and me, Mr. President and your lovely family: You need to have comfortable shoes if you’re going to go deep into the cavern.

We just went there ourselves.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/06/17/obama-family-to-visit-carlsbad-yosemite-to-highlight-national-parks/

I’ve got some good news and some bad news for the first family.

The good news is that they’ll be amazed at what they see once they start hiking down the path into the cavern. It’s about 750 feet down vertically from the main entrance. Sure, they’ll have plenty of company with them as they make the journey.

The bad news?

The elevator is broken. We heard some park officials say it’s going to take many months, perhaps a year or two, to repair the elevator that’s supposed to haul tourists back to the top if they don’t want to make the hike. Now you have no choice. It’s a haul.

I get that the president and first lady are quite fit. Mrs. Obama has made nutrition and exercise a hallmark of her first ladyship. She has a chance now to show she practices what she has preached.

As for Malia and Sasha, well, they’re young. Enjoy  yourselves, girls.

If a couple of older folks can make the invigorating climb out of the cavern, so can you.

 

national news, political news

With a ‘friend’ like this …

mccain

I am acutely aware that politicians toss the word “friend” far too loosely.

It’s abundantly true on Capitol Hill or perhaps in state capitols across the land, where politicians debate each other on the legislative floors, referring occasionally to their “friends on the other side of the aisle.”

Have you heard Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Minority Leader Harry Reid refer to each other as “my friend”? C’mon, dudes. Give me a break!

Well, the “friend” reference comes up now with Sen. John McCain backtracking on a statement about his former Senate “friend,” Barack H. Obama. He said that the president was “directly responsible” for the slaughter this past weekend in Orlando, Fla. He took that initial statement back — sort of — by saying it is the president’s decision to pull combat troops out of Iraq that gave rise to the Islamic State, to which the gunman reportedly pledged allegiance before opening fire in the nightclub.

I truly had thought in my heart of hearts that McCain and Obama actually were friends before they ended up running against each other for the presidency in 2008.

Do you remember the incident at a McCain town hall forum that year when an audience member questioned whether Sen. Obama was actually an “American,” and whether he was constitutionally qualified to run for president? McCain cut her off, defending his “friend” as a “fine American” and a “patriot”?

These “friendships” — if that’s what they are — seem so tenuous and fragile in the heat of political battle, which makes me wonder why these pols use the term so loosely in the first place.

You want transparency? Most of us can see right through such declarations of friendship.

 

Commentary on politics, current events and life experience