Message Forum

Welcome to the Watterson High School Message Forum.

The message forum is an ongoing dialogue between classmates. There are no items, topics, subtopics, etc.

Forums work when people participate - so don't be bashful! Click the "Post Message" button to add your entry to the forum.


 
go to bottom 
  Post Message
  
    Prior Page
 Page  
Next Page      

07/20/21 01:16 AM #9666    

 

Mary Margaret Clark (Schultheis)

Sorry about the length of this post and the format. I saw this shared on Facebook today and had to do a copy and paste. It seemed to be a relevant topic.
 
OPINION: Talk Politics
An analysis by JEFF SNOOK
July 19, 2021
I have been wanting to write this column for about 10 years or so, but I always put it off for fear of alienating friends and readers, for fear of being verbally assaulted for broaching a subject many of us detest. So, let me start by asking a question:
Have you ever headed out to dinner among friends, to a party, to a family get-together, or to a gathering of any sort, when someone, perhaps your spouse, makes a simple demand: “Now, don’t talk politics!”
Let’s face it, it’s not that you haven’t heard it before. We all have. The question is, how many times have you heard it?
I have heard that line hundreds of times over the years. And I usually responded with one word, “Why?”
That demand, and unwritten rule of society, is just ingrained in most of us. As the saying goes, “don’t talk politics, religion or abortion” – at least don’t do it if you want to keep the peace and harmony among friends and family. We don’t want to debate any longer, we don’t want to argue, and we don’t want to hurt others’ feelings and often we certainly don’t want to hear an opinion that differs from ours.
Let’s face it: Discussing politics can be stressful. But why should that be?
Why has the P-word replaced the F-word as the dirtiest word in America’s lexicon?
According to the Pew Research Center, 83 percent of Americans are “very uncomfortable” when talking about politics. (I will always applaud the brave 17 percent).
It really seems now as if we can appropriately discuss our sex lives, our bathroom habits, the size, or lack thereof, of our bank accounts, the rumors and gossip we hear long before we ever discuss politics in public. That is, unless we are surrounded by like-minded people. It is only then we can all nod in agreement and slap high-fives and poke fun at the other side.
But I contend right here and right now that we have had it all wrong all along.
Discussing our foreign policy, our economy, our immigration laws, our taxes, our health-care system, our first and second amendments, and generally, the government’s role in our lives, and even the symbolism and meaning of our U.S. flag, isn’t just talking politics to me.
These are all issues that affect our daily lives, our existence and our pursuit of happiness.
Did you notice the word I used the most in those last two sentences?
OUR.
OUR existence. OUR lives. OUR happiness.
So, if these issues are so damn crucial, and they are ours, we should be able to discuss, debate and dissect them without screaming, shouting, and name-calling.
Twenty-one years ago, soon after the USS Cole was bombed in Yemen, resulting in the loss of 17 American servicemen, I was having dinner one night with a longtime friend in Miami. He bluntly stated, “Why do we even have a Navy ship over there to begin with? We should be an isolationist country and stick to our own business. We never should get involved in any wars and we shouldn’t be sticking our noses in what happens in Europe, the Far East, the Mideast, or anywhere else for that matter … “
My friend was very educated, had a college degree, lived in a million-dollar condo on the beach and earned more than $300,000 annually.
"I understand what you are saying, but what if we took that approach throughout our history?” I asked him. “History teaches us lessons. What if we never got involved in World War I or World War II? What if we had ignored the Japanese after they bombed Pearl Harbor? What if we had stayed out of Europe?
“Like it or not, we have evolved into the world’s watchdog of sorts, because we are about the only country which has the ability to keep the dictators and the bullies of the world in check. To answer my own question, without our involvement, the Nazi Empire likely would rule over every European country as we speak, with statues of Hitler everywhere -- and you really have to wonder if the entire Jewish population would have eventually been exterminated.”
My friend, a democrat and Jewish, paused, digested my words and then admitted, “Yeah, I guess I never thought of it that way.”
He paused again, before asking, “Who’s the favorite to win the national title this season?”
Our political discussion was quickly intercepted by college football, a mainstream topic most of my friends enjoy discussing.
So, we moved on.
Which reminds me of another analogy. I have three or four good friends who root for the school up north. That’s right, the M-word. We get along great. We laugh together, dine together and talk about college football together, so why in the world can’t we translate that spirit of friendship and civility to our differences elsewhere? I know I would never change them to become Ohio State fans, nor would I ever try. And that’s the point.
However, we do have the ability to listen, understand and enjoy each other even if we root for different teams.
If you really think about it, are sports, our favorite foods or wines, music, movies, TV shows and the weather more important to us in the grand scheme of things?
And if they are, and that’s why we talk about them and them only, then we may live very superficial lives. Yet, we continue walking – and talking – on proverbial eggshells just so we don’t start arguments or cause hard feelings.
So, how did we get here?
Well, I call this the “Obama-Trump Effect.”
If you think back to the Clinton presidency, and even the George W. Bush presidency – a culmination of 16 years from 1993-2008 – things were never this bad. America seemed way more united, especially in the wake of Sept. 11, 2001.
But the following 12 years have changed all that.
Obama’s eight years and Trump’s four brought out the fangs and to be blunt, the pure hatred, of the party and followers not holding the Oval Office. It’s been “Us versus Them” ever since.
And it’s grown only worse since January.
To be honest, there is no denying that policies have shifted and headed to the fringe, further escalating the divide. Whoever would have thought on 9-11-01, and the days that followed, that a portion of this country, and even some in the media, could actually label the patriotic act of flying the U.S. flag as racist, only 20 years later?
I think this sad state of life could all be fixed, or at least improved.
Let’s start with the P-word itself. I would claim that we have mislabeled it all along. Why do we call these issues, which are so crucial to us, “politics” in the first place? Maybe we should just re-label these topics as “daily life topics?” Or better yet, why don’t we eliminate any labels altogether? Let’s not throw umbrella terminology over these issues.
In this country, we have way too many labels as it is: gay, straight, white, black, liberal, conservative, democrat, republican …. I could go on and on. Now we even give acronyms that define people. It’s as if our bodies should be adorned with one of those grocery-store scans you see on every product you buy. Scan me. What does my label tell you?
We should be able to return to what America was like in the 1940s or ‘50s, to a time when we could discuss, reasonably and calmly, OUR daily life topics. Following World War II, our so-called political strife and division were nothing like they are today. At cocktail parties, adults paused to listen to the so-called opinion of others. Voting for one candidate or the other didn’t automatically make you a pariah among your peers.
I often believe it’s a shame we have an aisle in Congress to begin with, which has become a metaphor of division in the country. You think the Grand Canyon is the largest gap in America? Nope, it’s that proverbial aisle separating the Ds from the Rs. Maybe we should just abolish the multiple-party system altogether, but that’s another subject for another time. These days, it is all about red vs. blue. Do you live in a red state or a blue state?
I long for the days of red, white and blue. But even saying that has somehow digressed into a political statement.
But that is where we are today.
And that is sad.
We don’t have to be persuaded to change our minds, we just have to change our ability to listen.
We have to try to understand those who disagree with us – and demand calmly that they give us the same respect. To those with other viewpoints, backgrounds or upbringings, no matter how unreasonable we deem them, we must listen.
Because listening is the first step to understanding.
While at dinner among friends, we should be able to say, “Now Joe, your parents arrived at Ellis Island in the 1950s, right? So, what do you think about our immigration laws today?” And we should be able to listen to Joe’s answer without the veins on our necks bulging while we prepare our retort.
The real problem we face today is not Joe’s answer, it’s the fact he may choose not to answer altogether, even if he has some valuable perspective to offer. Like everyone else, he has labeled these subjects as taboo, and Joe may even be offended if someone asked such a harmless question.
I say, since we are living in the midst of the so-called cancel culture, it’s high time we cancel that taboo of discussing these crucial issues in our lives. Then the next move is to cancel the cancel culture itself. Free speech should always be a two-way street.
There has been historical debate whether it was Voltaire or British author Evelyn Beatrice Hall who said, “I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend with my life your right to say it.”
Whoever it was would laugh at us in 2021.
I have lost a few friends in the past five or six years after making a post on Facebook which they deemed offensive. Some even texted me nasty, irrational remarks that dipped into name-calling all because they disagreed with my post either supporting or criticizing a certain U.S. policy. Furthermore, some even disagreed with my right to state my opinion in the first place. But if you believe Facebook and social media exists only for posting recipes, pictures of puppies and wishing others happy birthday, then you are missing the point altogether.
My friends became heated, angry and righteously claimed they were offended over my posts. And in the end, they became former friends – all because their opinion differed.
But here’s the bottom line: I didn’t leave them. They left me.
I didn’t want the friendships to end. I have Michigan friends. I have liberal friends. The way I look at it, the more the merrier. After all, must we surround ourselves, and our way of thinking, with only people who think the same way?
Listening to the other point of view should only heighten our awareness and curiosity.
I would contend that if we cannot discuss these crucial issues, to listen or read others’ opinions, we can grow complacent and even enter a realm of unrelenting stubbornness, an inability to reason, understand and solve problems in more than one way.
We have lost our ability to be civil to each other, and that does go for both sides of that aisle.
Because if you really think about it, if we the people cannot calmly and reasonably discuss our current daily issues together like Critical Race Theory, masks vs. no masks, Coke vs. Pepsi, Ford vs. Chevy, the vaccinated vs. the unvaccinated, voter ID laws, the economy, and so on and so on, then how in the world can we demand our elected officials such as Jim Jordan and Chuck Schumer to sit down together on our behalf and do the same?
_ _ _
Jeff Snook is a guest columnist for The Ohio Press Network. Snook, a 1982 Ohio State graduate, has written 14 non-fiction books, including 12 on college football. He resides in Atlantis, Florida, and Mifflin, Ohio.

07/20/21 11:28 AM #9667    

 

Michael McLeod

That byline is familiar to me. Maybe from my stint teaching at osu.


07/20/21 01:14 PM #9668    

 

David Barbour

Mike, you should get your gf to look up chinese media showing what is going on in Hunan!

State news is showing clips of Germany while the locals post pictures inside subway cars

shoulder deep inside with water levels a foot deeper outside!

DB


07/20/21 02:37 PM #9669    

 

Michael McLeod

David I have no time to shilly shally around with news of the day when there is the matter of buttlicking to clear up. With all due respect to Dr. J. this info is a bit more thorough than his explanation. You will all love nature even more than you did before after reading this. That's my gift to you. No need to thank me but if you want to give me a pat on the ass next time I see you, even if it's in public, we'll both understand the gesture.

 

While its mother is away, the fawn hides in tall grass and remains vigilant — eyes open and ears pricked, listening for movement. When the doe returns, she feeds her baby milk and licks it all over to remove its scent. She licks its genital areas to coax the fawn to urinate or defecate, and then she may even eat its waste. Her cleaning ensures that predators will not detect a whiff of her baby.


07/20/21 03:02 PM #9670    

 

James Hamilton, M. D.

Mike,

That was great biology reporting! Another animal behavior solved.

I had not seen the twins for a few days but was greeted by them playing under our window as I retrieved this morning's newspaper. They are both growing fast and stand about 3 feet tall. Momma was not around so I suspect she was either out foraging or looking for a bottle of Listerine for use later this afternoon.

Jim


07/21/21 11:40 AM #9671    

 

Michael McLeod

Jim: The other thing that was mentioned in the article was the matter of the fawn's dappled camouflage, which perfectly suits the sunlight flickering through the tree canopy onto a forest floor.

It's just breathtaking/mind boggling how finely detailed evolution is - the magical concoction the eons devised. It's not exactly a mystery but it feels like one. There's a Robert Frost poem about a spider that comes to mind and If I can remember its title and track it down I will post it here.  


07/21/21 02:17 PM #9672    

 

James Hamilton, M. D.

Mike,

The spots/dappling also works well when nesting on rocks and Ponderosa Pine needles!

 

Evolution's camoulflage really "rocks"! (Sorry, couldn't avoid that one surprise.)

Jim


07/22/21 09:46 AM #9673    

 

Monica Haban (Brown)


07/22/21 09:47 AM #9674    

 

Monica Haban (Brown)

See the attached photo!  Guess Who was the celebrant at this morning's Mass at St. Andrew?  Best homily for the feast of St. Mary Magdalene ever !  

Father Robert Steve Hodges 


07/22/21 10:48 AM #9675    

 

David Mitchell

WOW! 

Thanks for the photo Monica.


07/22/21 11:31 AM #9676    

 

James Hamilton, M. D.

Monica, 

Yes, thanks for posting that photo of Steve. (By the way, excellent portrait technique that captured him and his priesthood!)

Jim


07/22/21 11:31 AM #9677    

 

Michael McLeod

He has clearly aged a helluva lot better than I. It's my own damn fault. I shoulda been the priest my momma wanted me to be. Intstead I chose a sordid career in the fake news business. 


07/22/21 11:48 AM #9678    

 

Sheila McCarthy (Gardner)

Monica, thank you for Steve's picture. He looks great .... we go back to the first grade .... 

 


07/22/21 12:09 PM #9679    

 

Mary Margaret Clark (Schultheis)

Thank you Monica for sharing the photo.of Fr. Steve......he appears ageless!!.. 


07/22/21 02:02 PM #9680    

 

David Mitchell

Mike,

Steve has also been a teacher at high school level. But thank God Steve didn't choose to be another one of those Engish Majors!


07/22/21 02:24 PM #9681    

 

David Mitchell

I hope some people will consider this a "credible source".

Sounds quite different fron his fellow Kentucky Senator doesn't it?




07/23/21 05:25 PM #9682    

 

David Mitchell

Can somebody tell me how Tucker Carlson is still allowed to be on the air?

 

A few months ago I was stunned to hear him say "people who see parents with children with their mask on should report them to child services". 

 

Then a few months later I was sickened to hear him call Joint Chief of Staff General Mark Milley, "Not smart and not brave." and then concluded his rant with calling Gen Milley a "Stupid Pig". 

(are you kiddig me?)

 

But a few nights ago he actually dared to accuse Capital Police officer Harry Dunn, who helped to defend the capital from the attack on January 6th with this quote; 

“Dunn will pretend to speak for the country’s law enforcement community,” Carlson said. “But it turns out Dunn has very little in common with your average cop. Dunn is an "angry left-wing activist".

(oh by the way, Tucker Carlson has failed to mentioned that his own son, a capital "page" was inside the Capital building at the time.) 

 

But as his predicessor, Bll O'Reilly used to say, "Oh, it's really not about the news. It's all about the ratings".  

And yes, that's the same Bill O"Reilly tha has paid a fortune to keep several of his former female sexual assalt cases quiet.


07/23/21 11:07 PM #9683    

 

Mary Margaret Clark (Schultheis)

Dave, Tucker Carlson is no more incendiary than Don Lemon or Joy Reid,....they are opinion commentators.  The context for his remarks about Gen. Milley are in part what Rep. Dan Crenshaw, a war veteran, offered as very real concerns about what is happening in the military today.    
 
Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) reported on his website the following:
 
During training at Fort Bliss in Texas, in one particular instance, soldiers were forced to wear personal identification badges that listed their race, ethnicity, social class, and other things.  The badges reduced soldiers to a list of characteristics that have “nothing to do with their service or their training or the content of their character.” He added:

Most soldiers do not believe that they are the sum of identity groups and it’s absurd that our military is instructing people to view themselves and others that way. In the SEAL teams, our bond is forged in large part by our common history, our ethos and our trial by fire training. We never asked each other for our social class or other identity groups, because that would be ridiculous.

The only thing that should be on a soldier’s uniform is their name, their rank and most importantly, the American flag. Yes, we are all individuals and we’re all different. The military requires us to put aside those differences and focus on one mission as one team, not highlight differences, this type of woke training doesn’t help strengthen a unit and weakens it severely and it must stop. 
 
Crenshaw and Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) — both veterans — last month set up a whistleblower page for service members to submit examples of critical race theory and woke training spreading in the military. They said they have received more than 400 credible submissions. Crenshaw plans to highlight some of these submissions through videos on Instagram.
 

He added:

This places a huge amount of pressure to say something that you don’t believe at all. Did you have the audacity to claim that you’re not a racist, not a privileged bigot, well the instructor could fail you according to this report and the instructor is judging you, and if they don’t like what you have to say, or don’t think it’s sincere, you risk damage to your career.

This isn’t only insane, it’s actually a type of compelled speech, and certainly raises free speech concerns. And this training is clearly shaped by critical race theory in the sense that it’s designed to force participants to believe that any of their behaviors is just a product of their inherent racism and the dynamics of power associated with that.

In another video, Crenshaw said members of an Air Force squadron at Moody Air Force Base in Georgia were forced to do a “privilege walk.” He said airmen were told, “If you are white, take a step forward. If you are a male, take a step forward. And so on through every possible point of privilege one might have, according to their intersectional hierarchy.”

“So let’s just point out the obvious. This is meant to shame people and shame people for something they have no control over. It also literally creates manufactured divisions in an environment that requires comradery and puts down certain service members over others, not on merit, but on skin color or gender,” he said.

“We cannot let the armed forces become some sort of massive social justice experiment — which is clearly what some want,” he said. “We’re going to keep exposing this because there are too many senior officers in the military that are pushing for this.”

Crenshaw said in a video on Friday that special operators at U.S. Special Operations Command were being encouraged to read a book from 1989 called “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack.”

“The military is still the strongest in the world, but wokeism, identity politics, critical race theory and blatant political activism have indeed seeped into this critical institution,” he said.

Note:  Fort Bliss was contacted for comment, but did not reply by publishing deadline.


07/24/21 09:53 AM #9684    

 

Michael McLeod

Please, MM1. Tucker Carlson is in a class of his own. Though I hesitate to use the word "class."

 

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/list/?speaker=tucker-carlson

 

Here's a more even-handed look at it from The Military Times. 

 

Arkansas Republican Sen. Tom Cotton continued his campaign against what he sees as a scourge of racist training in the military Thursday. In a webinar hosted by the Heritage Institute, he again alleged he has received hundreds of complaints of “critical race theory” teachings in military units.

Cotton and his allies have publicly confronted Pentagon leaders in recent weeks, concerned that the Defense Department’s push for diversity and inclusion training and education is a thinly veiled vehicle for indoctrinating troops into the idea that white men are oppressors, people of color are victims and that America is an intractably racist country.

“But what happens if it harms unit cohesion and morale and esprit de corps in our military?” Cotton asked. “Then we literally are risking our freedom. And that’s why it’s so important that the military’s highest priority should remain what it always has been: to fight and win real wars, not to get distracted by culture wars.”

In many ways, the military has been dragged into this particular culture war. What started as an effort to increase morale and unit cohesion has been derided by both conservative lawmakers and commentators as divisive and partisan.

The issue has come up in multiple budget hearings in the Senate and House Armed Services Committees in recent weeks, taking up time that lawmakers usually spend questioning leaders about procurement and personnel programs.

On Tuesday, during a press conference with reporters, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash., said he hopes to avoid any amendments or lengthy arguments on the issue of critical race theory in drafting the defense authorization bill, which is already running behind schedule because the Biden administration didn’t release its budget proposal until May.

“I don’t see anything that needs to be put in our bill one way or the other,” he said. “That’s an administration ― that’s the DoD, and people can fight that out over there. We’re going to try to avoid legislating on that issue.”

What Cotton has diagnosed as “critical race theory” sounds much more like ham-fisted attempts at diversity and inclusion training.

Get the military's most comprehensive news and information every morning

Top of Form

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  

Subscribe

Bottom of Form

“It’s often hard to ignore when you’re being forced to watch a video that declares, there’s systemic racism and white privilege throughout our military, which is one of the complaints we received, or that white soldiers were singled out during equal-opportunity training, that they didn’t have much to say,” Cotton said, citing a whistleblower site he launched with Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas, in early June.

For a largely nascent effort, it’s not surprising that commanders would be experiencing some trial and error with how they convey the notion that the color of a person’s skin might affect their experiences in the world.

After all, the discussion of ideas like systemic racism and white privilege are new for a lot of Americans, who for decades have been told that simply not acknowledging race or ethnicity was the best way to demonstrate one’s own lack of bigotry.

“We cannot have an Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force or Space Force, where young troopers are looking to their left and right, and seeing not fellow citizen took an oath to the Constitution ― someone who’s willing to lay down their life, not just for their country, but to keep you alive,” Cotton said, describing what was considered non-racist in the past. “We can’t have [troops] looking at their noncommissioned officers and their officers, wondering if they’re getting a tough duty because of the color of their skin. We need them to see each other simply as fellow Americans, and fellow warriors who are there to perform the mission.”

The irony is that military leaders would agree with Cotton ― that would be ideal, but feedback from the force has shown that’s not the experience troops are having. It’s seen not only in disparate outcomes in the military justice system, but also in Pentagon leadership, which is far more white and male than the rest of the force.

“You know, back then it was like, say, the fact that we all believed that this country is committed to colorblindness, and we respect everyone irrespective of the color of their skin or their ethnicity, or for that matter, their political beliefs or their religious views or anything else,” Cotton said. “And it was a regular reminder, that was the expectations we have for all of our soldiers and if they didn’t meet those expectations, there’d be severe consequences.”

The disagreement is over whether talking openly about diversity race or ethnicity, and the experiences that go along with it, is a boon to cohesion, or a death blow.

When everything changed

According to multiple surveys of active-duty troops by Military Times, white nationalist and supremacist rhetoric is not uncommon in the military workplace.

 

To change that, diversity and inclusion training has become a feature of many organizations, public and private alike. That includes DoD, after the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis set off nationwide protests.

The ripple effects in the Pentagon were less explosive, but still represented a tectonic shift.

Then-Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force Kaleth Wright, who is Black, posted a Twitter thread in which he expressed identifying with a long list of Black men and boys who had been killed by police officers in recent years.

He vowed a review of the Air Force justice system, which ― along with the other services ― studies have shown disproportionately punishes people of color.

Leaders from the other services fell in behind Wright, expressing their dismay not only at Floyd’s death, but at the stories they’d heard from their own troops about the disparate treatment they’d received both in the military and out of it.

Diversity and inclusion projects launched in the Army, Navy and Air Force, while Defense Secretary Mark Esper stood up a team to make suggestions for immediate policy changes that could erase the racial bias so many service members said they had experienced, with an eye toward a more long-term board that would oversee diversity and inclusion efforts.

Promotion packets were the target of one of Esper’s first changes. Feedback from the force suggested removing headshots from the paperwork, removing any possibility that appearance could play a role in a board’s decision to green-light a service member for the first step in the promotion process.

Esper also got suggestions to remove name and sex from the paperwork, to narrow consideration down to nothing but accomplishments, though those changes haven’t been implemented.

More than outright racist comments, troops tell Defense Secretary Mark Esper that they face unintentional insults.

Meghann Myers

That same month, the current controversy over what has been erroneously called “critical race theory” was born.

It had been mostly known in legal and academic circles, as a framework for analyzing the American legal system and its historically unequal treatment of people of color.

In July 2020, according to a profile by the New Yorker, a conservative Washington state journalist used the term to describe some city of Seattle diversity training documents a source had sent him.

A series of stories caught the attention of Fox News pundit Tucker Carlson, who brought Christopher Rufo on his show on Sept. 2. The following morning, Mark Meadows, then the White House chief of staff, called Rufo. He told him President Donald Trump had tasked Meadows with eradicating this “critical race theory.”

In the months since, critical race theory has become something of a catch-all bogeyman, used to describe any sort of discussion about the disparities people of color report experiencing, framed as a dogmatic demonization of white people.

Critical race theory itself is defined as “an interdisciplinary approach that seeks to understand and combat race inequity in society. The approach views race as a socially constructed identity that plays a hugely important role, which goes largely unrecognized by members of the majority population. CRT defines racism more broadly than is usual in the mainstream. Rather than seeing racism as an individual manifestation of hatred, CRT explores the social structuring of racism as a complex, changing and often subtle aspect of society that operates to the benefit of White people, especially White elites.”

There are different schools of thought within the framework itself, though its 1970s roots can be traced back to some radical feminist and Marxist thought leaders.

Rufo, by his own admission, thought the term perfectly tapped into the fears conservatives had been expressing for years, about “political correctness” and “cancel culture,” despite only being loosely related.

“ ‘Its connotations are all negative to most middle-class Americans, including racial minorities, who see the world as ‘creative’ rather than ‘critical,’ ‘individual’ rather than ‘racial,’ ‘practical’ rather than ‘theoretical.’ Strung together, the phrase ‘critical race theory’ connotes hostile, academic, divisive, race-obsessed, poisonous, elitist, anti-American,” the New Yorker piece reads. “Most perfect of all, Rufo continued, critical race theory is not ‘an externally applied pejorative.’ Instead, ‘it’s the label the critical race theorists chose themselves.’ "

Since then, conservative pundits and politicians have warned that critical race theory is not only rampant in higher education, but seeping its way into elementary schools and, alarmingly, military training.

The rhetoric has steadily picked up steam since January, when DoD, in response to revelations that dozens of those arrested for rioting at the Capitol on Jan. 6 were either current or former service members, began a line of effort against extremism in the services.

While the Pentagon’s definition, still in the works, has leaned more toward white nationalist ideology and advocating for violence against certain groups or the government, some conservatives have seen that push as yet another thinly veiled attack on conservative, Christian beliefs.

CRT in the ranks?

The only clear example of critical race theory being taught in the military is at the U.S. Military Academy.

In April, Rep. Mike Waltz, R-Fla., sent a letter to West Point’s superintendent, inquiring about extracurricular workshops cadets had attended in the name of diversity, equity and inclusion education.

During a June 23 hearing, Waltz confronted Austin about a presentation titled “Understanding Whiteness and White Rage,” as well as lesson plans within some West Point classes that cover critical race theory.

Waltz conflated these academic settings with “military training,” which is of course one of the key features of West Point, in addition to the earning of bachelor degrees.

The comparison set off Army Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who launched into a monologue deriding the idea that critical race theory is so dangerous that not even college students should discuss it.

“The United States Military Academy is a university. And it is important that we train, and we understand ― and I want to understand white rage. And I’m white, and I want to understand it,” he said.

play_circle_filled

Gen. Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, made a staunch defense of having a military that is well educated and well read on diverse topics.

Cotton on Thursday conceded that an academic setting was more appropriate for discussing controversial theories, though he did express concern that professional military education might too closely resemble civilian higher education.

“I think that’s especially, in professional military schools, a reflection that they become too much like graduate schools, for people who are going to get masters or PhDs, as opposed to going to hone their craft of war-fighting,” Cotton said. “Every minute they dedicate to some critical race theory primer could have been an hour better dedicated to books on seafaring or [Ulysses S.] Grant’s memoirs or studying Chinese military doctrine ― things that we actually expect and need our officers to know.”

Perhaps, he suggested, all general and flag officers should go before the Senate for confirmation hearings, the way it’s done for those who’ve been nominated for the chief of staff of a service or head of a combatant command.

“I may start, you know, probing nominees to be promoted to the ranks of O-7 to O-10 on their views on it, and what’s happened in their command,” he suggested.

“Maybe it’s time that we start ensuring that our flag officers subscribe to those very basic principles that are outlined” in the Declaration of Independence or Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech, he said.


07/24/21 10:50 AM #9685    

 

James Hamilton, M. D.

Mike McL.,

I came across this article yesterday and would like to see if you, as a journalist, have an opinion on it. Yes, it was on Fox News but it is not so much about news items as it is about how news is reported. Much has been said about that topic and often denied by the reporters. This article appears to show that  many reporters of news (not opinion) admit their use of bias and feel it is not only good, but also necessary.

Do you agree that this is happening  and do you think it is good for journalism?

https://www.foxnews.com/media/journalists-bias-dismissing-fairness-era

 

Jim


07/24/21 11:29 AM #9686    

 

Michael McLeod

ok Jim I will look at it in the meantime a more pleasant diversion. This ran in the Washington Post today.

 

By Christine Dell'Amore

Yesterday at 10:00 a.m. EDT

35

“It’s Halloween in there, Mama?” my 2-year-old asked, gripping my hand tightly as we took in the dramatic tableau before us: a sandstone cliff, more than 100 feet high, cleaved neatly in half by a long, narrow cave. I could understand his trepidation: From our vantage point on the hiking trail, the opening in the rock looked like an endless maw. But, as we soon discovered, Old Man’s Cave — named for a hermit trapper who lived there in the 18th century — is a recess cave, a hollowed-out space with a gigantic rock ceiling. It’s also the perfect spot for a kid to play, or, in the case of my son, Everett, scamper about hooting like an owl.

Recess caves abound in Hocking Hills State Park, a compact natural wonder of hemlock forests, waterfalls, ravines and gorges in southeastern Ohio, accessible via a well-maintained trail network ideal for families with young kids. Most hikes, which follow an organized, one-way system, are short and relatively easy, yet showcase knock-your-socks-off scenery.

Having spent the pandemic hiking almost every weekend, my D.C.-based family of three is already used to long hours in the car getting to outdoor destinations. So, when my Indiana-based in-laws, Diana and Allan, suggested meeting up over July Fourth weekend to hike at an Ohio park I’d never heard of, the roughly seven-hour trip didn’t seem so daunting. In fact, for highway driving, it was beautiful — the first time I’d driven straight across the lush state of West Virginia. My husband, Everett and I left on a Friday morning, and by 6 p.m., we were relaxing with my in-laws at our secluded log cabin outside the park, equipped with a hot tub, pool table and fire pit — not to mention loads of free entertainment for Everett in the form of catching (and releasing) fireflies.

In North Carolina’s High Country, soaring scenery and simple pleasures

The next morning, we woke up early to tour the state park’s huge new visitor center, where we learned that native peoples had inhabited the region for centuries, the most recent being the Delaware, Shawnee and Wyandot peoples. European settlers took over the land in the 1700s, wiping out nearly all the original old-growth forests. Ohio began protecting the land in the 1920s, and in the 1930s, the Civilian Conservation Corps built much of the state park’s infrastructure, such as its stone steps and trails, and replanted many of the lost trees.

The park’s dominant black-hand sandstone — a label inspired by an ancient petroglyph of a handprint carved into a nearby cliff — formed about 350 million years ago, when a vast inland sea drained away, depositing sand and gravel that compacted over time into the impressive rock formations. During the last ice age, glaciers came close to Hocking Hills, leaving behind species, such as eastern hemlock and Canada yew, more often seen on the alpine tundra. Hocking derives from a native word, “hockhocking,” which means “bottleneck,” a reference to the Hocking River’s narrowed shape. As we absorbed all this history, Everett amused himself by running through the visitor center’s play cave and mini hiking trail.

 

Allan Howard and Everett Howard enter a tunnel carved out of sandstone on the Old Man’s Cave trail. Hocking Hills State Park has seven major hiking areas, most of them short and accessible to families. (Christine Dell’Amore for The Washington Post)

 

The Conkle’s Hollow trail features diverse vegetation, particularly ferns. Many of Hocking Hills’ plants, such as hemlocks and Canada yew, are more typically found on the alpine tundra. (Christine Dell’Amore for The Washington Post)

We set off on the 1.5-mile Old Man’s Cave loop trail, following Old Man’s Creek as it tumbled downstream, traipsing over bridges and past fern-blanketed cliffs. We stopped to admire Upper Falls, which pours into a jade-green pool, and Devil’s Bathtub, a basin of swirling water (a natural hot tub of sorts) scoured out by millennia of the creek’s relentless flow. Everett ran excitedly into a long tunnel gouged into the rock, which led to that impressive wide-angle view of Old Man’s Cave. A little farther south, at Lower Falls, Everett skipped rocks into the waterfall’s large, clear pool, framed by a halo of stately hemlocks. Though the holiday crowds were sparser here, we were disappointed to see people swimming in the waterfall pools, despite the many signs stating it’s not permitted.

In search of more solitude, we opted for a strenuous spur trail to Broken Rock Falls, which dead-ended in a single jet of water streaming from above, a more intimate waterfall experience that allowed us (and one delighted toddler) to feel the spray and hear its thunder. On our way back to the visitor center, we climbed up rock stairs through another CCC-hewn tunnel, dutifully looking for bats, at Everett’s suggestion. (We had no such luck.) “Bye, hike!” Everett called as we emerged from the forest, the air noticeably warmer than the refreshing coolness of the caves.

A monumental journey through New Mexico

I was eager to get to the park’s marquee attraction: Ash Cave, a 700-foot-long recess cave that’s the largest east of the Mississippi. A short, flat walk through a narrow gorge gave way to the monumental space, capped by a 90-foot-high ceiling that stretched like a giant C over our heads. Settlers dubbed it Ash Cave when they found huge piles of campfire ashes, probably left by people who had sheltered here over the centuries. Native American arrows and pottery remnants, for instance, were discovered among the debris. “It’s the beach!” Everett cried when he saw the wide expanse of sand, plopping down to dig. Rock pigeons cooed and gurgled inside small crevices in the cave walls, marred in places by graffiti from long-ago visitors.

 

The 50-foot-high Cedar Falls is the most voluminous of the park’s waterfalls. It was misnamed by early settlers, who thought the nearby hemlocks were cedars. Although signs are posted to not enter the water, visitors sometimes disregard them. (Christine Dell’Amore for The Washington Post)

 

Rock House, the only true cave in Hocking Hills State Park, boasts a 200-foot-long, tunnel-like corridor and 25-foot-high ceilings. Bandits allegedly hid out here in the settler days, earning it the nickname “Robber’s Roost.” (Christine Dell’Amore for The Washington Post)

Ash Cave was hushed, its grandiosity begging you to slow down, to stop envisioning that silly Instagram picture and let all its natural goodness fill your cup. As we walked along the cave wall, covered in places with patches of lime-green lichen, my husband, Brian, said he felt a “cave kiss,” the term for a drop of water that hits you inside a cave. “It could have been a rock pigeon kiss,” Allan joked. On the far end of the cave, a thin waterfall emptied into a pool ablaze with a ray of late-afternoon sunshine, like a spotlight at the theater. We lingered as long as a 2-year-old would let us, sitting on boulders scattered around the cave floor and gazing upward at the massive overhang.

Over the following two days, we immersed ourselves in more Hocking Hills delights, such as Cedar Falls — the park’s most voluminous waterfall, misnamed by settlers who thought the hemlocks were cedars — and Conkle’s Hollow, one of the deepest gorges in Ohio, where super-tall hardwoods and hemmed-in cliffs block out almost all sunlight, enveloping you fully in the green, dewy valley.

One of our last — and most special — hikes took us into Rock House, the only true enclosed cave in the park, which boasts a 200-foot-long, tunnel-like corridor and 25-foot-high ceilings. Water eroding the sandstone over time scoured tall windows into the cave, providing multiple entrances through which to scramble into the main chamber.

This unique cave has long been a draw: In the 1800s, a 16-room hotel complete with a ballroom and U.S. post office stood not far from Rock House, and bandits allegedly hid out here, giving it the moniker “Robber’s Roost.” Carvings and other archaeological evidence show it was visited by native people, who carved out troughs in the cave floor to collect drinking water and used its hominy holes — horizontal openings in the rock — as baking ovens by building a fire inside. (I envisioned a delicious cave pizza, made in the Neapolitan brick-oven style.)

By this point in our trip, Everett was no longer wary of caves — or their inhabitants. As we scrambled out of Rock House, he looked up at me and smiled, his entire body caked in dust. “No ghosts!” he announced happily.

Dell’Amore is a National Geographic editor based in the District. Find her on Twitter: @cdellamore


07/24/21 11:48 AM #9687    

 

Michael McLeod

Ok now to your point, Jim:

Yes, I am aware of that trend towards abandoning objectivity, and it does involve both sides.

I was trained at a time when "objective" stories ran on the front page and the writers who wrote news stories used writing strategies meant to keep their own slant out of the story, mainly by quoting one side of the story and then the other side of the story and using a neutral tone in delivering the information.

You can find stories like that now but they are overwhelmed by the louder, flashier, opinionated voices on both sides.

This came up right here quite recently and at that point I tried to emphasize that it's buyer beware these days BUT individuals have access to so many many sources of news and if you keep yourself out of the silo mentality - namely reading and watching news that agrees with your point of view - you certain can educate yourself about a world that is far more complex than the one we knew decades ago. 

I've had my students study conspiracy theories -- they are the most extreme examples of modern information overload -- just so they can see the pattern of stories that are fictional as opposed to those based on fact. For example, conspiracy theories are very, very complicated, with lots of characters. If, say, the moon landing was faked, the government was involved, the "astronauts" were involved, everybody at Nasa was involved, journalists were either fooled or bought off. If the covid vaccine is really a ploy to implant tracking devices in citizens - well, you get the picture. Think of all the people, highly intelligent people, who had to be part of the conspiracy. Life is complicated. But not THAT complicated. And yes, this formula can be applied to the notion that thousands upon thousands would have been involved had our election been rigged. Watch what they come up with out of their Arizona audit and if it's not a Rube Goldberg affair I will meet you at the edge of the earth and jump off.

I guess my advice boils down to: Pay attention to the source. Discount people who are playing on your fears and preconceptions. Know that the strategies of deception have kept up with the worthwhile and enlightened information now available at the touch of a finger. Read a lot. Educate your gut. Then trust it.  

 

 


07/24/21 05:56 PM #9688    

 

Mary Margaret Clark (Schultheis)

Mike, you left out the fake Russia collusion narrative which every traditional news media devoted endless hours broadcasting on for three consecutive years. 

I am wondering why CNN suddenly developed a conscience by fact-checking Biden.....hmmmm, here is a conspiracy theory I am just developing on my own.....the Democrats must be worried that Biden is not handling,these media events very well and are planning to do something about it. wink

https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/22/politics/fact-check-biden-cnn-town-hall-july/index.html?utm_source=twCNNp&utm_term=link&utm_medium=social&utm_content=2021-07-22T19%3A50%3A02


07/24/21 07:09 PM #9689    

 

John Jackson

Please forgive me - I know I pledged to recede into the background for a while, but I ask your forbearance as my mind is addled due to the troubling magnetism I’m experiencing from my Moderna vaccinations.

Jim, on your Fox News article I would offer a couple of points:

1.  People who comment on the media constantly confuse the “news” side of the organization with the “opinion” side, which in responsible organizations are separate.  As an example, I have argued that I think the news reporting of the Wall Street Journal is reliable (and not that different from what you find in the New York Times or Washington Post) but is often at odds with WSJ opinion pages.  Some of the examples in the Fox News article seem not to appreciate this distinction between news reporting and what appears on opinion pages.

2.  No one denies that EVERYONE with a beating heart has their biases, but responsible mainstream news organizations follow time-honored journalistic standards that keep “news” reporter biases in check.  This is mostly done by editors and fact checkers who check sources and make sure reporters don’t get out over their skis.

An example of applying the two points above is MSNBC, which I would rate as a half news/half opinion outlet (or maybe even more opinion than news if you average across the various prime time anchors).  So MSNBC definitely blurs the traditional hard line between “news reporting” and “opinion”.  But, in their defense, MSNBC’s parent company is NBC and NBC has in its DNA (evoking Huntley and Brinkley as well as John Chancellor) to ensure that at least that the “news” component of what MSNBC reports is factually correct.  So MSNBC relies on video clips, verbatim quotes, etc to substantiate the opinions of its anchors. Some of the opinions may, depending on your point of view, may be a stretch, but what MSNBC reports as having factually occurred is accurate.

Contrast this with Fox News whose DNA is dominated by Rupert Murdoch, who got his start and made much of his fortune showing the tits of Page 6 girls in Australian and British tabloids  (why he hasn’t utterly corrupted the news reporting of WSJ I’ll never know).  Fox news anchors regularly spotlight stories that are demonstrably untrue – the Big Lie that Trump lost the 2020 election due to widespread voter fraud (if you place any credence on the outcomes of more than 50 lawsuits in state and federal courts), that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are not overwhelmingly safe and effective, or that human-caused climate change is not real (and serious).

And let me say I have only respect for Lester Holt’s “fairness is overrated” comment which, following the typical rightwing news playbook, was utterly wrenched from context.  Responsible news outlets are obliged to report only CREDIBLE views, not random opinions from internet “experts” – see paragraph above about the stolen 2020 election, and other follies.  I’m sure we still have a few flat-earthers around - should we give equal time to them?

Let me give a final example - the “lab leak” theory for COVID-19 - that I think illustrates the differences between the mainstream media and Fox News and most of right wing media.   Mainstream media initially dismissed this idea, not out of bias, but because most of the scientific community expected the cause to be animal(bat)-to-human transmission similar to  previous respiratory diseases from China/Asia such as bird flu and SARS.  More information on this question, triggered by Biden’s May directive to the U.S. intelligence community to take a second look, seems to have raised the likelihood of the lab leak theory to 50-50 or even 60-40 (percentages totally my guess).  Since that time, the mainstream media (NYT, WP, NBC, CBS, ABC) have been awash with reporting about the possibility that the virus was inadvertently released from the Wuhan lab.

Two points regarding the lab leak theory::

1.  The mainstream media occasionally (in my mind once, in a very great while) gets it wrong although in the lab leak case they were reporting the consensus of the scientific community.  However, I have to say I’m disappointed they did not dig deeper and ask hard questions (which is job 1 for any serious news organization).  But I can’t think of another case in the past decade  (or more) when mainstream media has failed to give a credible argument equal time or tried to dig below the surface.

2.   In the extraordinarily rare  incidents where the mainstream media gets it wrong, they self-correct as evidenced by an avalanche of stories 3-4 weeks ago suggesting that the lab leak theory deserves a second look.  Contrast this with Fox News that continues to dig in and foment ridiculous stories that the 2020 election was stolen, and that climate change is overblown despite the overwhelming consensus among climate scientists (as well as the Exxons and GMs and Fords of the world) is that climate change is real and needs to be addressed if we care about the future of our kids and grandkids.

P.S.  I applaud MM’s recent posting of CNN’s reporting of inaccuracies in Biden’s statements – our elected leaders should be accurate and careful with their words.  But these inaccuracies were minor and Biden, when he misspeaks, at least has the intelligence and integrity to learn and either walk back or not repeat his mistakes.  This is in contrast to his predecessor who, time and again, has doubled down and repeated inaccuracies/lies over weeks and months.


07/24/21 11:35 PM #9690    

 

James Hamilton, M. D.

John J.,

I did imply in my Post #9685 that I was reading that article in terms of news and not opinions and was asking for a journalist's viewpoint from Mike.

In regards to a couple of statements you mentioned:

  "But I can’t think of another case in the past decade  (or more) when mainstream media has failed to give a credible argument equal time or tried to dig below the surface."

I guess that's why the NYT and WaPo shared a Pulitzer Prize for their 3+ year long coverage of the Trump Russian Collusion story.

  "But these inaccuracies were minor and Biden, when he misspeaks, at least has the intelligence and integrity to learn and either walk back or not repeat his mistakes."

At this point I have a problem with President Biden's "intelligence". It is sad to say - and sad for America - that his intelligence is, at the very least, questionable. As a physician I do not want to even attempt to render an accurate diagnosis on any person that I have not examined or on whom I have not even done a simple, basic test of cognition. Many called for President Trump to have such a test, which he did have, and passed it. Do you feel that President Biden should undergo such testing? Personally, I do, but then some might say that is just a conservative's conspiracy theory.

Jim

 

 


go to top 
  Post Message
  
    Prior Page
 Page  
Next Page