Blogroll

Weekend Edition: 10-12

Interesting Reading in the Interweb Tubes

Blog Headline of the Week

Legal Ruling of the Week

Saddest Sentence of the Week

  • “The reading skills of American adults are significantly lower than those of adults in most other developed countries.”

Bookish Linkage

Nonbookish Linkage


Once in a while I hear wind whistling through my brain.

Thomas DeBaggio, Losing My Mind

How I know I succeeded

Like most parents, I’m proud of my kids and what they’ve accomplished — especially considering I’m their father (To quote a Ben Folds song, “You’re so much like me. I’m sorry.”) They’re all far braver and more accomplished than I was at their age. While that’s gratifying, I was reminded this morning about an important measure of success.

Shortly after I arrived at work, I got a text out of the blue from my middle daughter. In its entirety, it said, “Just thinking about you this morning. Miss you and love you. :)”

A bit later, I checked my personal email. Monday night my oldest daughter emailed my wife and me about a potential career road bump. As usual, my reply Tuesday morning told her exactly what I thought but as graciously as possible. I saw her reply this morning. It started, “I FREAKIN’ LOVE YOU!! Your email actually helped a lot, so thank you! :)” (They both apparently like emoticons, something they didn’t learn from me.)

It’s easy to tell kids you love and support them. Yet it doesn’t t mean much if that’s not put into practice. When they lived at home, attending and supporting their activities, functions and interests took precedence over anything else. Even making it home in time to have dinner with them was a priority. Once they leave the nest, telephone calls and emails are important but I make it a point to take time off when they have the opportunity to come home. Not everyone has the same scheduling freedom I do but, regardless of any business or economic cost, you can’t be there when your kids need you if you’re not there otherwise.

Granted, this is somewhat boastful. But I know in a heartbeat that just what I got this morning is far more valuable than more money and material objects.


Language is euphemism. Love is truth.

Matt Haig, The Humans

Book Review: Public Enemy: Confessions of an American Dissident by Bill Ayers

Although likely becoming prosaic, the phrases “walk the walk” and “talk the talk” remain effective shorthand. Their meaning is seen in the story of Bill Ayers. A founder of the radical Weathermen, Ayers and his wife Bernardine Dohrn spent 10 years underground as a result of their actions against the Viet Nam War. After their emergence Ayers maintained his political beliefs, earned masters and doctorate degrees in education, and became a Distinguished Professor of Education and Senior Scholar at the University of Illinois at Chicago — and a lightning rod in the 2008 presidential campaign.

public enemyThe title of his new book, Public Enemy: Confessions of an American Dissident, is based on his portrayal in the media and blogosphere in 2008. During a debate with Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama was asked about his association with Ayers, who was described as someone who “never apologized” for bombings at New York City Police Department headquarters, the United States Capitol building and the Pentagon in the early 1970s. Ayers’ connection with Obama consisted of hosting a fundraiser for him when he ran for the Illinois Senate in 1995, serving on some nonprofit boards together and living in the same neighborhood in Chicago. For the most part, though, he was portrayed as an “unrepentant domestic terrorist.”

Ayers examined his time with Students for a Democratic Society, the Weathermen and life underground in Fugitive Days: Memoirs of an Anti-War Activist — released on September 11, 2001. Public Enemy traces his life after that, with particular focus on becoming “a punching bag” in the 2008 presidential campaign. Becoming the captive of a political whirlwind led to cancellation of speeches and appearances, people chanting “Kill him!” when Sarah Palin mentioned him at a campaign rally, inaccuracies about him and his past, and significant hate email and mail and threats. For example, Ayers received a letter from “Sniper,” saying, “Watch your back! Your time is coming!” The letter, postmarked in California, included a recent picture of his front door.

The charges leveled against him during the campaign included killing people in Weatherman bombings and shooting and killing a police officer. Yet, Ayers points out, “[n]ot only did I never kill or injure anyone, but in the six years of its existence the Weather Underground never killed or injured anyone either.” He contends the Weather Underground’s “notoriety, then and now, outstripped our activity on every count.” Ayers, in fact, was never prosecuted on any charges for his role in or actions with the Weathermen. (Dohrn did plead guilty to and was placed on probation for aggravated battery and jumping bail.)

This statement is one example of what some may see as spin in Public Enemy‘s version of various events and history. For example, while not intended, three members of the Weathermen died when a bomb being constructed in a New York City townhouse exploded in 1970. And the six-year timeframe allows Ayers to exclude the 1981 Brinks robbery involving several Weather Underground members in which two police officers and a Brinks guard were killed. In fairness, though, that occurred the year after Ayers and Dohrn turned themselves in and several years after the Weather Underground splintered and essentially ceased to exist.

There is one thing on which Ayers is crystal clear. He is, in fact, unrepentant and remains committed to the ideals that motivated his activism in the first place. Despite repeated demands made by the media and others during the presidential campaign, Ayers refuses to apologize for things he never did and stands behind his beliefs.

I was happy to discuss anything and I was able to openly regret lots of things in a range of settings, but somehow stubbornly unwilling to say a single line: I’m sorry I engaged in extreme tactics to oppose the [Viet Nam] war; I’m sorry I destroyed war materials and government property.

I’m not sorry about that, and I can’t say with any conviction that I am. Opposing the US invasion of Viet Nam with every fiber of my being was simply not one of my regrets.

Likewise, he makes clear that he and Dohrn remain “open and outspoken radicals” with “a strong reserve of romance and idealism” aimed at “a freer and more peaceful future.” Public Enemy does, though, recognize that dogmatism, orthodoxy and inflexibility perhaps doomed the New Left of the Sixties and Seventies. “My own strict system of received wisdom and right beliefs was as controlling and totalizing as any other fundamentalism — religious, political, or cultural,” he writes. “It left me along with several close comrades isolated in a well-lit prison of our own construction with a blinding light bulb hanging from the ceiling by a single strand of wire.”

That light came back on in the 2008 presidential election, making Ayers a poster boy for so-called domestic terrorism and a not-so-subtle contention that Obama was a radical. Even if his methods changed with age, Ayers’ insistence on both talking the talk and walking the walk of his political beliefs helped elevate him to the status of a public enemy. Public Enemy is his way of detailing the cost of the divisive factions in American politics and telling people that he remains unbowed and unrepentant.


The Sixties were neither as brilliant and ecstatic as some wanted to imagine, nor the devil’s own workshop as others insisted, and whatever it was, it remained mostly prelude.

Bill Ayers, Public Enemy

Weekend Edition: 10-5

Interesting Reading in the Interweb Tubes

  • The Reign Of Morons Is Here (“We have elected an ungovernable collection of snake-handlers, Bible-bangers, ignorami, bagmen and outright frauds, a collection so ungovernable that it insists the nation be ungovernable, too.”)
  • The price of free speech (“If the First Amendment did not protect offensive expression, why would we need it?”)
  • Mark Twain hated God (“We call Him the source of morals, while we know by His history and by His daily conduct, as perceived with our own senses, that He is totally destitute of anything resembling morals.”)

Blog Headline of the Week

Bookish Linkage

Nonbookish Linkage


The theory behind representative government is that superior men-or at least men not inferior to the average in ability and integrity-are chosen to manage the public business, and that they carry on this work with reasonable intelligence and honest. There is little support for that theory in known facts.

H.L. Mencken, Minority Report

A proselytizing paper

For quite a while now, I’ve been meaning to write about how dismayed I am by what passes for a local newspaper these days. Given my age, a variety of things irk me. But one that had been lurking in the background became fairly apparent last week. What I noticed and believe would be borne out by by past reporting is how the local daily tends to proselytize Christianity.

I admit I disdain religion. Yet even though I don’t buy what it’s selling, if someone finds it to their liking, so be it. I’m fine with that as long as you’re not preaching to me. Yet our society seems to be incessantly insisting not only on preaching but to impose certain Christian views and beliefs on everyone. What I noticed tends to be in the preaching category.

The first one that got me was a story about a young woman whose entire family was killed in a car accident earlier this year. Given that she attended a Christian high school, most readers probably weren’t surprised when she said she had “the hope of seeing each other in heaven.” That’s all well and good but what got me is that the reporter asked her to “explain” why she believes that. Her answer:

I base that hope on Jesus, because he came to this world and died on the cross for our sins. He didn’t have to do that. But he did, so we have that hope.

Why ask her to explain why she believes that, let alone make it part of the story? The article already twice told readers she had that view and made it clear why she would. More important, what does quoting someone saying Jesus “died on the cross for our sins” have to do with the story itself? It comes off as little more than promoting the Christian faith.

I might have ignored that but the very next day there was an article (by a different reporter) about the discovery of a car missing for 42 years in which two high school girls were last seen. The last handful of paragraphs mentioned the recent death of the father of one of the girls and that one of the topics at his funeral was his was a “very strong” Christian family. Okay, I understand. But why does the report end the article with the following quote from a family friend?

That’s how they weathered this. Most families that have this kind of tragedy, the family can’t make it. But I think the strong Christian influence is the most significant part of this story.

So it turns out that the discovery of a car that is part of a 42-year-old mystery isn’t really that important. Instead, readers are told that “the most significant part” of the story is that one of the families had a “strong Christian influence”? In essence, the newspaper is “reporting” that unless a family is strongly Christian, it will fall apart if tragedy should strike. How does any of this advance the real story about the car being discovered, let alone give readers any insight into its significance in the context of what has long been considered a murder mystery?

Undoubtedly, some will see this post as an overreaction. But ask yourself this: Is there any legitimate basis to believe those quotes would have been solicited, let alone in the story if the families were Hindu or Muslim or even Jewish? Isn’t the newspaper espousing the position that a non-Christian or, horror of horrors, an atheist family simply would have no hope and could not survive a tragedy?

For myself, these as simply more recent and blatant examples of an underlying bias in local news stories, a bias most are happy to ignore. The newspaper is sad enough as it is these days. I don’t need religious dogma served with my morning coffee.


If Christ were here there is one thing he would not be — a Christian.

Mark Twain’s Notebook (1935)