It hasn’t been a good week here at the blog–my apologies for denying any of you who visit the opportunity to read snarky commentary about Brad Johnson. I know you miss it, but I’ve just been feeling a bit overwhelmed with school the past week, and haven’t had the mental energy to jump on here and make an irreverent post.
It’s probably not fair to say that school has drained my energy; the education part of what I do is incredibly invigorating, and though there is the occasional week with an enormous workload, I’m lucky enough to have a job that produces more energy than it takes. Being in a classroom with bright, articulate people, discussing the best things anyone has ever written, could hardly be exhausting.
What is exhausting, though, is the enormous weight of the institution involved in education and the pressure to “reform” our schools. The pressure, much of it warranted, is coming from every direction-an administration skeptical about the future of public education, parents worried about low achievement, and employers concerned that their workers aren’t prepared for the job.
With all this pressure, schools feel forced to show a response. Unfortunately, we’re always looking for quick fixes for our systemic problems, for slogans that will cover up our failures, and for gimmicks that offer false hope. If you survey the literature about educational reform, its history is littered with amazing new technique after amazing new technique, almost all of which failed to live up to the claims of the people hyping them. Keep Reading
Stunning news from the mind of Brad Johnson: Montana either should have or could have or did secede from the United States in 1939, when the Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Miller that the right to own guns was subject to a two-part test: the type of weapon and its connection to a legitimate militia function.
Fortunately, wiser heads than the one possessed by Mr. Johnson did not conclude that day, nor in the intervening 70 years, that the Supreme Court decision invalidated Montana’s entry into the United States. According to a recent letter and legal brief, Secretary of State Johnson thinks we all ought to get ready for secession if the Supreme Court does not rule “correctly” in the upcoming Heller v. Washington D.C case.
Johnson’s letter, submitted to the Washington Times, is an embarrassment to the state. In terms of syntax and logic, it makes so little sense that Johnson comes across as an illiterate hillbilly, holed up with Johnny Reb, still fighting the War of Northern Aggression, desperately clinging to his guns. In the often over-heated and anti-intellectual debate about gun control, Johnson’s argument stands out as a towering monument to logical fallacies and absurd hyperbole.
It’s understandable that Mr. Johnson wants to pander to his base with a largely self-serving, public relations driven reminder that he’s pro-gun. Is it too much to ask that when he does his purely political work on the dime of Montana taxpayers that he construct a logical, well-written argument?
So, Max Baucus has announced his run for a 6th term. You’ll excuse me if the announcement has me less than excited.
On Iraq, the Senator said this:
Baucus also said he’d like U.S. troops to leave Iraq “as expeditiously as possible,” and that while America will continue to have a presence in the Middle East, it shouldn’t have bases or active troops permanently in Iraq.
“We can’t stay there indefinitely,” he said.
Another bold statement on the war. Remember when Baucus said on January 10, 2007, that we needed to start bringing the troops home by mid year? I do. He hasn’t exactly stuck his neck out on the issue since then, has he? As much heat as the Democratic leadership is getting from some of us here in Montana, I wonder why more ire isn’t directed at Baucus. Isn’t one of the reasons he’s running for a sixth term because of his leadership position and seniority?
I, for one, am tired of Democrats like Baucus acting like they are helpless victims, passive agents, unable to effect change. If Baucus can’t lead on the war, maybe it’s time to let someone else do it.
On taxes, he offered this well-thought out position:
He said he favors extending tax cuts for moderate-income earners, but hasn’t decided on the cuts for other income brackets.
That bold policy statement sure must have pained him to make. Yes, I will lower your taxes, but will I vote to continue the obscene cuts for corporations and millionaires that helped push back into huge deficits? Gosh, I guess we’ll have to wait and see on that one.
I stumbled across an interesting discussion about the role of newspapers over at Ed Kemmick’s blog today, and it’s a fascinating give and take between Ed and a critic of the current Billings Gazette, who argues that hard news has been supplanted with public relations and features coverage at the paper.
It’s an interesting discussion, and one that probably plays out in newsrooms across the country. I’m increasingly seeing myself as one of the curmudgeons who want more hard news and often find myself incredibly frustrated about the lack of “hard news” coverage in my daily local, the Independent Record.
The subject I am most familiar with is, of course, education, and in my mind, it’s a perfect lens with which to view the lack of substantive news coverage in my local. This week provides an instructive example. On Tuesday, the Helena School Board met to discuss anticipated budget shortfalls for the 2008-09 school year. It was a tough meeting, lasting hours, with a lot of information presented, including the idea that the district will either have to dip heavily into one time money or cut programs and staffing next year.
That’s important news, right? From Tuesday, and still uncovered. Not a word.
This isn’t an aberration. In my time in Helena as a teacher, there has been little attention paid to hard news about the schools. Instead, education coverage in Helena is almost always feature stories, about a particular program or class. It’s not that those don’t have value or a place in the news; it’s that they don’t mean much without the context that hard news would provide. I enjoyed editor John Doran’s story about visiting Smith School today. I just would have enjoyed it more if his paper covered the news, too.
It’s not that hard news isn’t easy to find. In fact, I and others have sent story suggestions to the IR, only to be met with deafening silence. Maybe Ed is right, and the Gazette is better than it was 20 years ago; I’m just not seeing the same thing in Helena.
What a waste when there are undoubtedly many chairs of economics ready and waiting for him:
Rehberg attended the monthly board meeting of the Billings Chamber of Commerce Monday. He said the current economy is similar to the Chicago Bulls basketball team in that it’s in a rebuilding phase, but he said Montana is not likely to feel much from the potential recession.
