Letters to the Editor
-
@ unschooler
Yes, I choose hope.
And on that note, goodnight to you, and thank you so much for the heartening conversation. Keep fighting the good fight (for Obama, but more importantly for your kids!) and I'll see you around.
(Oh, and I googled "unschooling," btw. It looks interesting. Is it related to homeschooling? I have a kid in kindergarten, so this is of deep interest to me. Perhaps some time you can educate me about this)
-
@ Fester
And goodnight to you too, Fester, lurking around.
:)
Thanks for making me feel welcome around here.
-
@Un,WFB Lot's
Exactly. I think he has a strong libertarian streak woven into his more traditional liberal values. We need to support individual initiative, avoid mandates, encourage responsible behavior, self-sufficiency etc.
That's my impression. I'm a Founding Fathers buff, and I really got the impression that Obama had done some extensive meditation on the Constitution and the lifes and thought processes of the Founders that went into it. I may be wrong, but I'm left with the impression that he is no lightweight.
I think Obama is facing a hardened shell of cyncicism and let's face it, Empathy and the ability to shift perspectives/perception is not something that the public is encouraged to excel at. Since you like quotes:
When the real becomes unreal, then the unreal is seen as real --LaoTzu.
It'll be a tough job to crack through that shell. One of peculiar aspects of this one dimensional Rev. Wright coverage is that Obama's church does promote individual initiative and self-determination. Old school, Poor Richard type stuff.
I'm fascinated by Autism, though it sounds like it would be difficult at times to work with children like that. I wonder what reality they preceive that we don't? I'm a big believer that we're all stuck in our own little bubbles of perception. The problem with corporate life is that is discourages people with passion, so I can relate.
Why didn't Salon spend more time actually discussing the content of what he said?
An excellent question! Maybe the speech was too huge and off the normal perceptual range, so that all we could discuss was grandmothers. I'm not ready to put this speech in the top ten hall of fame just yet (give me 10 years), but that speech was really good. It definitely upgraded my appraisal of the potential of Obama as a president. And while Salon hasn't really talked much about the content of the speech, we, the (not) humble readers, were certainly affected. We've spent an awful lot of electrons on this speech. It touched a lot of people. Maybe it's that rock dropped in the pond. The rock quickly disappears, but the ripples keep spreading. And based on his polling numbers, it looks like the speech had a great effect. We shall see.
-
@weeping for brunnhilde Good Night
We'll leave the light on for you.
-
You're right!
The continuing battle keeps the GOP spin machine off the front pages, sharpens the skills of both combatants, and adds Super Bowl type excitement to what could be a long dull slog between Feb. 5 and November 7. Such excitement can attract, as you have pointed out, more patriotic Americans to the Democratic camp.
-
@ weeping for brunhilde
So nice conversing here.
I have no idea how that ad got in that one post! Must have copied it with the quote and not noticed it on preview. sorry!
I love to talk about unschooling.
write me at averybizzymom@live.com
Yes, it's a form of homeschooling, but can also be a mindset and a way of approaching life. How we choose to spend our time is important, and this is as true for kids as for adults. My kids are young adults, so I've been there and done it.
-
@uncle Fester OT here!
I'm fascinated by Autism, though it sounds like it would be difficult at times to work with children like that. I wonder what reality they preceive that we don't?
getting pretty off-topic here aren't I? LOL.
Difficult is an understatement. But you develop calmness and learn to focus on tiny gains. And you have to understand what motivates behavior (have empathy).
Reality perceived is as varied as there are children. Children with ASD have more in common with children without ASD than they have differences. The differences in sensory perceptions and cognitive strengths/weaknesses varies.
The only thing individuals with ASD do have in common with each other are the core behaviors involving language disorder, restricted interests, and deficits in social/behavioral interaction. This is because this disorder is defined entirely based on behaviors rather than specific brain processes or functions. It's also why diagnosis is so "messy".
-
@ unschooler: Nipping Democracy In The Bud
She is hurting our country.
She needs to be stopped.
Were you around in in 1980? How about 1984? If you were, then my apologies. But reading your posts about the "horror" of what you presume Hillary Clinton to be doing to our country and our party, it seems that you weren't around then.
This campaign is relatively mild compared to the two above. In 1980, for example, Ted Kennedy ran one of the nastiest, most personal, "kitchen sink" campaigns of any in modern history. He was ruthless in his attacks of Jimmy Carter and the Carter presidency. It certainly didn't stop at that. Kennedy essentially took a machete to Jimmy Carter, all the way to the convention. And he didn't stop there. He maneuvered pledged delegates; sat on people until they voted his way; threatened delegates and elected Democratic officials; refused to support Jimmy Carter in any way, shape or form. He turned his back on Carter on nomination night, refusing even to shake his hand! That was BRUTAL.
1984 was yet another example of true nastiness by both Gary Hart and Walter Mondale. Mondale was the nominee, but Hart was as nasty as he could be in the nomination primaries, setting Mondale up in debates and speeches, going after him personally, engaging in personal hit jobs. Mondale -- no slouch as a politician -- wasn't afraid of standing up to Hart, and did. It may have been that Hart was the more exciting candidate (he was new, he had some intriguing libertarian-like ideas, was good looking, and was seen by many as the new face of the Democratic Party). Anyway, this battle royale also went all the way to the convention, but finally ended for Hart when it was discovered that he had had an affair and photos were produced of Hart and his girlfriend on a boat trip (I forget her name).
I understand the need to vilify somebody in a campaign. This time it's Hillary Clinton. But what is happening here is not cruel or unusual by any stretch. And frankly, I think it behooves Obama's followers to take a breath and a step back and ask what it is they fear about this lengthy nomination process -- not all that unusual, by the way, so far as Democratic Party nominations are concerned; just unusual in that WE have become accustomed to closing things off quickly and easily so that we can move on to the next diversion.
If you are afraid of what it will do to Sen. Obama, perhaps you should ask why. If indeed you believe in his strength and his message and his vision and his ability to unify, then this "tussle" in which he and Clinton are engaged will have no bearing on his abilities.
Clinton is a politician. That word - that whole notion - may be anethema for you, but it is what it is. Obama is also a politician. He has not come this far on his high-minded rhetoric, or his looks, or his abilities alone. All one need do is go back to his political beginnings in Chicago to see just how much a politician he is. Nothing wrong with this. It's the way it is.
But it is naive and dangerous to be calling on one candidate or the other to drop out or to "be stopped." That is the antithesis of democracy. We have not had this kind of democracy in our nominating contests for about 20 years. And I think it's a damned good antidote to the 7-plus years of this administration. Let's not nip that in the bud, shall we?