War on Terror Cannot be Won

What Bushies and his neocons never seem to understand is that we cannot "win" a war against insurgency any more than police can win a riot. We can only quell and mollify. Certainly we need to eliminate as much of the murderous al-Qaida who actually instigated the terrorism as we can, but in a manner that those most directly affected will accept as right and sensitive to their morality and culture.

We'd have done much better in Afghanistan had we poured money and rebuilding immediately after the initial 2002 invasion coupled with a more direct and stronger hounding of OBL's Taliban in Bora Bora. This was the only time when we likely had them on the ropes, but let them off when we diverted resources by invading Iraq.
We sacrificed our moral high ground at that point. Our high-handedness and failure to study the British examples produced the chaos and increased resentment. The clumsy use of torture (of course we’ve always used it; everybody does, but discreetly and sparingly) and the sanctioning of it gave the antiwar extremists legitimacy.

We created them monster that we later have to defend ourselves from. It’s called “blowback.” It’s also called “come-uppance” by some who would either support us or not oppose us had not President Bush declared “You’re either with us or against us.”

Right now, the Afghan economy is supported almost entirely by the opium trade, but all we do is destroy their fields and tell them not to plant. In the meantime, we're allowing Turkey to plant opium since it is the only source of our analgesics. Perhaps we ought to extend that monopoly to Iraq, thereby both lowering our price for it and providing them with a legitimate means of making a profit. There are not many other cash crops that can be grown in that semiarid environment. It's about being "smart", something sorely lacking in the former administration that was ideologically based.
“If we don’t stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, we’re going to have a serious problem coming down the road.” - George W. Bush

Boy, was that man smart!

AIG call and stall

When my wife lost her job last year, the income reduction left us perilously close to home foreclose. In a last-ditch attempt to stave it off, I contacted AIG to cash out my Sun America annuity February 27 thus beginning a pattern of call-and-stall which I can only conclude was deliberate and methodical.

The AIG representative did send me the form I requested which I immediately filled out, had notarized and faxed to the number given before noon that Friday. Three hours later I tried calling for confirmation (I had been asked for a PIN which had not been requested before after frantically searching my records for any sign of a PIN, I called another AIG number only to find out that the four-digit PIN was merely the last four numbers of my SSN so I called the original number initiating a the next in a series of 20-30 min. holds). I finally spoke with a representative who said she had no way of knowing if the company received my fax and it might be as long as 48 hours before that could be ascertained. Nearly 48 hours later (that Friday) I found another open half-hour and called to see if they had indeed received my request. They hadn’t.

I took off from work the following Monday, calling again (the extension number I had been given to expedite my call hung up on me three times-I reverted to the original number which resulted in an additional 20-min hold) only to find out I had submitted the wrong form, and that the correct one would be mailed to me. I was also told that it could be downloaded from their site and was given a form number. Possessing reasonably competent Internet skills, I located the AIG site and search engine, entered the form number given only to be told there was no such form available. Using common sense, I located two forms that appeared to request annuity account liquidation, (one called ERISA and the other non-ERISA). Just to be certain, I sacrificed another half-hour to confirm I indeed had the right form and filled out correctly. I recited the information I had written line-by-line to the representative and asked directly if there was anything else I needed to fax. He said that since I had already sent the notarization, the form I was sending would be sufficient to release the funds.

I finally faxed this document at 11 a.m., calling back near 5 (only 10-min. hold this time!) to find out if the fax had been received. Again, the canned response to my increasingly irritable challenge was that it may be as long as 48 hours before they could even ascertain whether the form had been received. I took off that Wednesday, calling ion the morning only to find out that I had not submitted documentation proving the necessity of obtaining these funds. I asked if “Notice of Default” would be sufficient and was told it would. Again, I promptly submitted the required form, calling in the next day to see if it had been received. I was told that it had been received and that to expect another 5-7 working days before the request could be processed.

So nearly three weeks after the initial request and my mortgage default hanging in the balance (Texas law permits foreclosure proceedings to begin only 20 days after notification of default) I can only wait and beg the mortgage company to have patience while AIG holds the money I’ve paid them, taking full advantage of the time value of this insignificant (to them, not me) amount.


March 18, 2:30 pm update:

I received a check for $600 today with the following explanation dated March 13 from Angie Davis, Distributions Team 2:

"We have received your request to surrender your annuity under a hardship qualification. We were unable to process your request asyou (sic) cannot surrender the annuity under a hardship. We have processed a hardship withdrawal for the maximum available."

Can somebody please explain their logic for their NOT releasing the full amount of that annuity ($1631)?

Oprah's school fix not all it's cracked up to be

As so many programs on education have done before this one, Oprah’s show Aug. 7 revealed much, but proposed little of value. All of us who teach are aware of the myriad of problems that mitigate our providing children with the education they need, but a unified approach to dealing with any of these issues is sorely lacking. Now the Gates family wants to throw some money at the issue. Like most previous solutions, this commendable effort will do some good somewhere, but falls short of addressing the overall problem, even when the diagnosis is correct.

As impressive as the Gates’ $51 billion dollar fortune is, it hardly justifies their superficial understanding of the issue.

Hardly surprising, then, that a corporate executive would identify a media-based problem, state plausible causation that removes corporate responsibility, then propose a costly remedy that the government is unlikely to adequately fund.

Like so many theoreticians and talk show hosts seeking audiences, blame was delivered as scattershot in fog, blindly aimed and only occasionally on target. The deplorable District of Columbia model of public school dilapidation was presented by CNN’s indignant Anderson Cooper (Vanderbilt family scion and former host of Whittle Communications’ Channel One). The decaying infrastructure of one of the nation’s best publicly funded school systems (its $12,000 per-pupil expenditure exceeds the national norm by some $4,000), indicate the problem may not be purely financial. As one student put it, “the school looks good on the outside, but the inside it is crumbling.”

The basic problems with education are addressed daily, but sporadically. Those with workable solutions are largely unrecognized and scattered about the country. Those in charge of the educational apparatus are largely the result of academic semi-competence, political manipulations, non-competitive pay, and public apathy. The resulting scholastic bureaucracies tend to encourage uniform mediocrity while discouraging personal initiative.

Only in passing is the educational deficit attributed to an overall lack of reading emphasis in our schools. Most telling was the “Kid Swap” episode in which several students from inner city Chicago’s low income Harper High School traded places with their affluent cohorts at suburban Naperville’s Neuqua Valley High School which “graduates 99 percent of its students” the program gushed, while Harper “graduates just 40 percent of its 1,500 students.” Another example of the common educational tool of comparison and contrast meant to display inequitable results buried something less obvious: “At Neuqua Valley, 78 percent of students meet Illinois' reading standards, 76 percent meet the science standards, and 77 percent meet the math standards. At Harper, 16 percent meet the reading standards, 1.5 percent meet the science standards and just .5 percent meet the math standards.”

That only 76 percent of the students in the $65 million school met Illinois reading standards should be cause for alarm. Houston’s KIPP Academy which has a mostly low-income student body similar to Harper’s boasts a passing rate on the Texas TAKS test of nearly 100%. It would seem that either the TAKS is far easier or KIPP’s adherence to stern measures is incredibly effective.

What we have, instead, is an expensive glossing-over of the true literacy issue. Immerse these richer kids with enough expensive media and entertaining instructors and something is bound to soak in. That “something” however, still leaves us far behind our European cohorts and many of our schoolchildren will likely stand by as we’re exceeded by several rising third-world countries who understand the shortcut to a good education---well, there is none. It’s hard work, something our over-mediated, over-medicated, overindulged, overweight, and over-schooled students cannot be made to understand.

Public schools cannot fix what’s wrong with American students because ultimately, they’re beholden to the driving force in this country, corporate consumerism. Unrealistically high expectations, fueled by a never-ending flood of overly optimistic ads and adult pandering has given us a predictable “product,” the fruits of our “affluenza.”

We get what we pay for, and in the case of education, we suffer because of it. Intrinsic motivation to read and learn cannot be bought; reluctant youngsters must be prodded and pushed, for when the “light” comes on in their heads—usually around 10^th grade—that education is the key to future achievement and collegiate success, they must have enough of the basics to convert that knowledge into critical thinking—something not actively taught in public schools despite protestations to the contrary.

The service industry, for which most of our public school students are groomed, neither need nor desire most of their workers to be able to do much more than show up and follow instructions. Since the tenets of Marxism are only rarely a scholastic discussion, the ugly realities on which it is based must be experienced by the workers before they even discover the need to revolt. By then, the lack of unions and other organizational skills leaves them prey to unscrupulous employers whose knowledge of union-busting and unrest suppression is buttressed by the better-educated private school graduates. Class privilege then becomes the de facto marker of the ever-increasing wage and income gap; immigrant (or outsourced) labor becomes its tool.

When I first heard about the tragic shooting of the Eli Escobar child in northwest Houston in 2003, my first reaction was sympathy for the parents of the child shot, even though the news reports indicated that the child was something less than an ideal citizen.

Later, when I heard the officer’s name, I was shocked: first that this mild-mannered former student of mine was even a policeman, for my impression of him was that he was not of particularly rigid stock, like most policemen I’ve known; second, that anyone could possibly accuse him of intentionally hurting anyone dismayed me even more. This was a gentle giant, a tall, genial student who got along with everyone and never had a malicious word for anyone. I would never advised him of that vocation, for I wouldn’t have adjudged him “harsh” enough, or physically stout in mind or body.

This assessment was confirmed in 2007 when I read about his case in The Houston Chronicle:

The rookie Houston Police Department officer who shot and killed a 14-year-old special education student in one of the decade’s most controversial shootings earned his badge and gun despite flunking a crucial test of firearms handling as well as initial police field training, according to documents recently made public as part of a civil rights lawsuit.

Officer Arthur J. Carbonneau also failed 16 of 30 subjects in his mandatory Texas peace officers’ test, including “use-of-force law,” “use-of-force concepts” and “arrest, search and seizure,” records show.

In field training, records show, he repeatedly got lost trying to find locations he was called to and became so rattled that trainers had to take over his calls. When the 23-year-old rookie was assigned to remedial training because of the problems, he mishandled the subduing of an agitated person — a mistake his instructor said could have cost lives.

Yet, Carbonneau still became a full-fledged officer in December 2002. Eleven months later, he killed Eli Escobar II, 14.

The system let us all down; this was certainly a tragedy that could have been avoided.

Book availability crucial for learning

I usually hit a wall on the several bulletin boards to which I post (Slate, Houston Chronicle) when I bring this up. Folks like to debate politics, but ignore the fact that as we have become a less literate society (more oral) we fail to encourage our children to read. That, of course, is the root of the problem. Schools success is limited by what parents fail to impart.

What teachers in the lower grades do well is teach reading and, if standardized testing pressures permit, allow for reading aloud and silent reading. Somewhere around the sixth grade, however, the intrinsic pleasure reading imparts is supplanted by the required readings--including dry textbooks--and the classroom time allotted is minimized since TAKS is all. I believe this fuels naturally rebellious students, and mischievous proclivities turn to subversiveness, discouraging the few remaining readers from doing so openly, thereby losing "cool."

"A man ought to read just as inclination leads him; for what he reads as a task will do him little good." - Dr. Samuel Johnson

I'm a geography teacher, so my point about a World Almanac pertains to my experiences with both in the hugely successful computerized learning game: Where in the world is Carmen Sandiego? and the need for students to know how to look things up manually without the use of a computer. Particularly with boys who naturally tend to read nonfiction (studies confirm this) an almanac or even a Guiness Book of World Records provides an unmeasurable amount of information that some kids will read on their own. That's why the books (most Dollar stores have some in stock) need to be in their actual possession.

Strunk & White is recommended simply because of its portability and its usefulness in directly addressing the grammar issues some folks have. Besides, so many of them were produced that they're easily available secondhand.

Not all methods reach all people, but each reaches somebody.

Yeah, I'm cheap. If I was not, I wouldn't have thousands of volumes of books in my house, cluttering up my living room. The fact that books are so readily available to our children, however, means that they're readers, too, without us having to push it onto them.

"[Book collecting] is a curious mania instantly understood by every other collector and almost incomprehensible to the uncontaminated." - Louis Auchincloss, A Writer's Capital, 1974

When I ask students how many books they have in their houses, few can list more than a dozen. I know, for example, that for every ten books, our kids my only peruse two, but if we have a hundred, that means they gone through at least twenty. Spending time at a local libray is useful as well, but I'm dismayed at how soon they close. I do my best reading at night.

“To sit alone in the lamplight with a book spread out before you, and hold intimate converse with men of unseen generations--such is a pleasure beyond compare.” - Kenko Yoshida

A Bible, even a Qu'ran is necessary, not because I want to preach, but as a matter of common reference. Since so much of what we value in society has its rootys in our religions, simply pointing out where a Bible references this can provide one more realistic tie to their lives, relevance. Churches provide an ideal opportunity to add a day of education; if students can relate what they learn in school to religious belief, learning can be supplemented without having to cross the church/state boundary. Schools need not teach a belief, but it is perfectly valid to tie in factual information to what students already believe (e.g. geographical places & concepts: Tigris/Euphrates rivers, Sinai Peninsula, Israel, Zionism).

Should churches be taxed?

Many have questioned why churches should retain tax-exempt status. Huge property holdings by some churches allow them, to operate with quite a lavish budget with a bit more pocket change than Jesus was accustomed to carrying.

By what logic is this profiteering allowed to continue?

Keep in mind that they're not required to disclose records, either. This applies to Muslims as well, which has frustrated the U.S. Treasury's attempt to "follow the money" after 9/11.

Several of the Founding Fathers would have taxed them if they could have: Jefferson, Adams, Madison, and Franklin were among those who had no special affinity for organized religion as it was then.

"When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not care to support it, so that its professors are obliged to call for the help of the civil power, 'tis a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one." - Ben Franklin, (Poor Richard's Almanac, 1754)

Image at right shows Houston Mayor Bill White addressing my Presbyterian Church congregation on city-state issues.

Here's a valid point from SM's Atheist "Bible":

"It is not just one tax that religious organizations are excused from paying, but an entire constellation of them. Clergy are exempt from federal taxes on housing and can opt out of Social Security and Medicare withholding. Religious employers are generally exempt from federal and state unemployment taxes, and in some states, religious publications are exempt from sales tax. Church benefit and retirement plans do not require the church employer to match its employees' contributions. Churches are automatically exempted from filing annual public informational reports on their financial status and activities, and donations made to churches are eligible for income tax deductions. And, of course, the two major tax breaks: church groups do not have to pay income tax and do not have to pay taxes on property which they own.

Repealing churches' tax exemption threatens no one's freedom of religion. If a church sought to rent property from a private owner to conduct religious services but could not afford the rent that the owner was asking, would the church members' freedom to practice their religion have been destroyed? ..."

Postville Round-up time!

Looks like The Houston Chronicle doesn't like the way ICE took it to the employees up in Postville, Iowa. Apparently they think non-Americans have due process rights.

Here's how the venerable Des Moines Register's covered the story as it was happening.

One way to deal with an issue such as this in the classroom is to explore its many facets with a New York Times Learning lesson plan. Check out their Learning Network for archives, crossword puzzles, and Current Events quizzes for a supplement to Social Studies learning.

For a more irreverent view on Mexican-American issues, I cautiously suggest reading Gustavo's Arellano's Ask a Mexican Column. Bring your sense of humor and prepared to be edified.