January 19th

Am I missing an anniversary of something? My head's been spinning around this date all day. Does anyone know anything I don't?

Some interesting articles and blogs flying around today:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070205/madrick "Is Education Widening the Class Divide?" Sorry, Nation, but this one's an er duh statement. Isn't that the purpose of education, if most of us believe that this and any society should be meritocracies? Not to sound ruthless nor like Ayn Rand here, but an education for the more than eighty years has been seen as a way for those in ANY economic class to prove their worthiness and worth by using their intelligence as a way to move "up". Read about the history of the SAT. Look at the writers of The Nation. Look at the diploma on your wall. However, without crying "bleeding heart liberals!", the tragic aspect of education is not its widening of the class divide but the commidification of the entire system itself. Why are so many people attending college? Do people really use their degrees in their line of work? Does someone in sales really need to have mastered nineteenth century existenialist philosophy to hit monthly quotas? Notice how young people have bought into the idea that the B.A. will deliver them wealth? The purpose of the degree? a high-paying job. "The Master's degree - the new B.A." as I've heard. And the purpose for all of this education? Salary. Not wisdom. Not to be able to impart that knowledge in any arbitrary setting. To get paid better. Perfect example: the "on-line university". For crimony's sake (and I've been forced to rely on one myself, so I'm just as guilty - made to for work), how does one "learn" in a "social" setting by jumping through a series of e-mail hoops and impersonal critiques from someone the student will never be able to meet? Forget growth over time and intellectual maturation; shovel the shit in and whatever sticks will be regurgitated (with the help of your open book on the final since you're on "your honor" for tests) back and look good.

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/ex-vice-president-says-cheney-goes-too/20070119114609990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001 What, NOW we're worried that Dick Cheney has created a Constitutional crisis as our vice president? Let's see, let's work backwards here: wiretapping, torture, WMD, energy policy, 9/11 and Iraq, Bush's selection committee chair. C'mon, Walt, Cheney's a walking need for Amendment 28: Clearly defining the powers of the vice president and their limitations.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/19/washington/19repubs.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin Outgoing GOP chair Ken Mehlmen reminding his own party that it faces trouble in 2008. What would make you think that? Besides, you've got nothing to worry about if the same boys who worked the last two elections are on the clock: Find your "focus" state, make sure you rig its election and then call a mandate. It's worked well the last two times. Ken is right, however: look at the GOP's record on just the basics: gov't spending, domestic programs and issues, healthcare, U.S. image internationally, relationships with other "allies", the debt, the deficit, the debt, the deficit, the debt debt debt, immigration, corruption (not that the Dems walk scott-free here), protecting the nation from terrorism, honesty, war. I still have good faith that fear-mongering, social, religious and educational (or lack thereof) prejudice will deliver the White House to another mid-western hard-right conservative whose wrapped HIMself around the flag and a flat earth and a God that believes that the United States kills in His name.