For Secretary Whitman’s information that there had not been an energy

policy until Bush II:

"The energy crisis is real. It is worldwide. It is a clear and present danger to our Nation. These are facts and we simply must face them.…We will protect our environment. But when this Nation critically needs a refinery or a pipeline, we will build it." Jimmy Carter, 1979

Individualized universal accounts are bogus and a nightmare to administer. I would trust someone like former secretary Rubin to manage a substantial portion of social security in mutual funds before I would trust myself. Moreover the reason the returns on the trust fund is so low is that congress is continually raiding it. If it were left to itself as with any organizational retirement fund it would grow by the rate of Government Securities.

Another August

 I for one do not apologize for Truman’s decision. As a marine who had experienced bloody Okinawa and having witnessed the Kamikaze off shore assaults on the Navy which lost 8,000 sailors as a consequence, I am reluctant to believe that the Japanesewere ready to surrender anyway despite the so-called five out of seven five star officers who in hindsight disagreed with the Hiroshima and Nagasaki decision. Admiral Halsey — in his air attacks on Okinawa was not concern for the women and children there — nor did he not seem at all upset because I after the surrender had pulled sentry duty at the Yokosuka naval base where he and his fellow officers had drinking fests in the sumptuous Japanese officers club. Nevertheless, some of the top brass might have resented Truman pulling the rug from under them as they were preparing for the glory of the greatest beachhead in history, dwarfing even the Normandy invasion. Moreover, in Guam where marines had been convalescing after Okinawa, were ready to embark either to Formosa or the Japanese mainland and fully aware that the "fanatics" would never surrender their cherished homelands; for the closer the landings got to Japan — Iwo Jima and Okinawa — the bloodier they got.

And if indeed the Japanese sent "feelers" to the Soviets, how is it on the day of Hiroshima, Russian soldiers by the tens of thousands crossed the Manchurian border? I say hogwash to these Monday morning quarterbacks. For years now critics never mention that the Japanese had ample warning of the terrible weapon and time to surrender, yet chose to sacrifice the people of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Furthermore, the waves of B-29 napalm attacks on Yokohama — the entire city burned out — were far more destructive than both atom bombs. Nor do critics ever mention that contrary to popular belief of an unconditional surrender, had MacArthur not agreed to the condition not to hold the Emperor responsible, the war would have continued. I just wish this annual ritual of blame be put to rest and realize that untold destruction and millions of lives were spared, thanks to Truman.

Era of Innocence Gone

As a fourteen year old I was caddying up at North Hills, word spread

"Pearl

Harbor was bombed!" The response was usually "What the heck is Pearl

Harbor?" Ah, the innocence! Worse now--where has the innocence gone?

September 11, 2001, a day that will forever be the marrow of horror and

hate. This inexplicable frenzy from hell is the measure of a religion

gone mad. Make no mistake about it, this is driven by extremists of a

perversive cult that demeans all humanity, including Muslims,

promulgating there is no universal right to stride proudly upon the

earth, but rather should be buried in it until destitution, atrocities to

women, and stone age mentality prevail as the true qualities of life.

However much we fear to admit it, the nations of Islam are partly to

blame for permitting this outrageous subculture to penetrate the psyches

of their people; they are no less free from blame than the Catholic

hierarchy in the century of the Inquisition or the ferocious leaders of

the Irish Republican Army .

Islamic nations must shed their ancient robes in the realm of politics

and democratize, granting freedom to both genders and getting on with the

business of building a modernity toward opportunity for their people. It

should go without saying that prima facie politics and religion don’t mix

— thus, the wisdom of separation of church and state. Religion is a

private matter between the believer and his God. Organized religion is to

give comfort and spirit to believers, not thrust fear into their hearts —

extremists of the religious right take note — nor wreck their souls.

Politics is affairs of state in behalf of the governed protected from the

powerful of any strain bent on oppression. The categorical imperative is

that Muslims — as indeed some states have — take strides to secularize

government, the bread side of life, and concentrate on feeding the souls

with the true intent of Mohammed’s teachings.

In the meantime, Muslims as Egypt has tried for years and partly

successfully, must take the lead in ferreting out in their midst these

heartless criminals posing as having the last word in the Koran. It is

not enough — as the Sardis have — to exile them to other countries. It is

heartening that Pakistan even in face of radical fundamentalists is

attempting to coöperate; for they know that these thugs are but a

rabble-rousing minority as is the case in many other nations. Iran, too,

has shown sympathy for the United States’ victims, though part of it is

owing to their hatred for the Taliban who are a broadside embarrassment

to the Arab world.

Should the outcome be that Afghanistan becomes a strategic target, it

should be looked upon by Muslims as a gift from Allah to finally free a

people from callous brutality — particularly toward women. Religious

tolerance is valid only if that religion or its denominations are

tolerant: sadly, that is not the case currently in Afghanistan. No

religion should dehumanize its women; their spirits are needed to give

love and sensitivity to their children. Obviously, the seventeenth child

out of a harem, bin Ladin, had no such loving training. Religious leaders

should be as chivalric as the knights of old.

Lest it be construed that this country is perfect, it is indispensable

that we clean up our own act with regard to extremists of any kind —

religious or political — that view human life expendable for a twisted

cause. Although this nation be united for a time, it is hypocrisy if in

interpersonal relations we hate each other. Moreover, U.S. relations with

Israel must change.

As much as the media and political figures perceive the Palestinian

factor as unrelated to the catastrophe, this cancer festers in all of

Islam, and the blunt reason it is so difficult to form a true coalition

among the Arab states. Is it not deja vu that the current administration,

as was the case with virtually the same officials eleven years ago, has

to ignore Israel which more than any other nation has felt the blow of

terrorism? If relations continue as they have Israel will eventuate into

another Vietnam. Any future negotiations of this explosive situation must

be done through the United Nations, along with a resolution endorsed by

Arab nations that Israel is entitled to a peaceful existence on the

condition that territorial rights be pushed back to its 1948 origin.

To Sun-Sentinel

Editorial Buffoonery

How dare you! — make such an assertion : "It has long been the policy and

practice of teachers unions to put jobs, salaries and seniority ahead of

educational quality. The idea of weeding out incompetent teachers is

anathema to them. That ‘s one of the chief reasons children are so poorly

educated in Florida and other states." [editorial 11/26/01] This is in

face of the cry for federalized employees to safeguard airports! This is

in face of untold numbers of union members who risked their lives at

Ground Zero! This in face of 8,000 children eyeballing the smoking Twin

Towers safely evacuated from their schools by unionized teachers!

Teachers unions for a half century have always supported and urged

quality education at teacher’s colleges and within education departments

at universities. For instance New York State Union Teachers [NY Teacher

11/21/01] endorses programs such as:

Achieving Student Learning Though Cooperative Learning, stressing

particular subject areas.

Assessing Student Learning by connecting state standards to curriculum

and target different ability levels and exceptional-needs students.

Creating a Balanced Reading and Writing Classroom by integrating reading

and language arts.

Key Concepts And Best Practices in Math [ K-8] by using inquiry, problem-

solving and mathematical reasoning in the teaching process.

Also the same approach in Key Concepts And Best Practices in Science [

K-8].

Some more powerful locals [unfortunately in other states] have managed to

negotiate better education at the table with their respective school

boards. Only recently the teachers union after years of lobbying in

Albany finally was instrumental in obtaining an $82 million grant for the

state’s teachers professional development of a core curriculum for pre

K-3 reading. Because of the traditional structure of primary school in

which pupils have one teacher most of the day, in-service courses were

designed in 1916 by AFT’s inception to assist teachers in disciplines

beyond their major. The reason the elementary level is not set up by

subject area is that at this early stage it is imperative that there be a

sense of comfort and security for the "whole child" by identification in

a closely knit ambience. Frankly, I have always believed that experts in

the sundry areas be in transit — but not without themselves having

training in the sensitivity of the whole child — to conduct some class

instruction or assist the classroom teacher in areas of weakness. Of

course, owing to the Scrooge mentality in education this is ruled out.

However late the arrival of a strong union in Florida education, and in

spite of local boards and state legislators’ indifference to serious

education, the union will directly and indirectly improve the skills of

teachers and students.

Obviously the editorialist — whose own competence is in question,

grasping at straws and slanted by private school elitists and charter

school illusionists — is unaware of the problem in Florida’s failure to

fully endorse public education: One need only visit a portable classroom

that is but a few steps above Afghanistan to symbolize the state’s

commitment. Moreover, it is so obsessed with Charter Schools and private

vouchers, Tallahassee couldn't care less about teacher competence and

true democratized education.

As for the First Lady, one must remember she was a librarian, in Texas at

that, and with my apologies to all school librarians they are not really

privy to the massive problems that beset the classroom teacher. Besides,

LB has dredged up a tired old grudge within the profession since the

prairie schools that teachers colleges are inferior to subject area

universities. That old concept died after WWII at least, that is, in

advanced states — Florida in the past twenty years — where more energized

and dedicated young people entered the field.

And as for Debra Robinson, shame on her to question the competency of

Palm Beach teachers who are intelligent, dedicated professionals

upgrading their students in the midst of unspeakably neglectful

conditions. Should there — I question its integrity even for students —

be an insulting, humiliating competency test for board members,

attorneys, physicians, politicians and editors?

Again how dare you — and shame on you.

Dear TNR[The New Republic]:

Kaplan’s chop logic [TNR, 01/28/02] on Iraq and McGovernism is unbecoming

senior editorship playing into the hands — together with Lieberman’s

stupidity — of W’s warmongering. Kaplan excoriates the Democrats dovish

inclination on Iraq and equates their having "less interest in foreign

policy" — a Munich Pact, as it were. Where was Kaplan when the Republican

hordes decried Clinton’s policy on Bosnia and Kosova? Or does the editor,

too, lack the disinterestedness in behalf of humanity at the expense of

America’s self-interest? And where were the Republicans when the first

Bush chose not to "go after Saddam?"

The assumed plan of attack since 9/11 was to go after al-Qaida in the

clear interest of self defense. Saddam, on the other hand, has no use for

Islam and in that sense is a stabilizing factor in Iraq, and the very

reason Powell and the first Bush did not go into Baghdad, rightly or

wrongly. In spite of Iraq’s reign of terror on the home front and being

on the State Department’s, terrorist list, it has not been branded an

active participant, ranking it with Cuba. In fact, of the "axis", only

Iran is listed as active. In contrast to Kaplan’s criticism of Clinton’s

failure in 1996, Saddam actually intervened in behalf of the Kurd

Democrats [KDP] to help end the violence between the two Kurdistan

factions in northern Iraq. Ironically this made possible Clinton’s

brokering a Kurd peace agreement. Do the warmongers really believe that

Iraqis are sophisticated enough to embrace democracy and ward off Islamic

fanatics [thankfully scarce in the country] and Kurdish independent

fighters? Moreover, once again the Republicans overestimate Iraq as a

relevant power as though it had not been decimated by the war and

sanctions. With a population less than Afghanistan and a budget laden

with debt, the Republicans are tuned to the roar of a mouse. To be sure

Hussein is a murderous thug but he is not a madman. Our nation acts as

though we had no nuclear arsenal. Saddam knows full well that Israel has

as well and he would not dare aim a missile of mass-destruction at her,

let alone at us. However, if indeed he is harboring terrorists or as some

claim al-Qaida training camps why have all the surveillance and flights

over Iraq for a decade not sighted and targeted them? That Saddam was

gleeful over the collapse of the twin towers as were millions of other

Arabs is not reason enough to attack a sovereign state, thereby leading

to the dumb logic of proceeding to Iran and then onto North Korea.

Suddenly the policy now, according to Kaplan, is coalition be damned even

though there had been such praise for the "seasoned veterans" of the

administration for sealing a coalition before acting in Afghanistan,

notwithstanding it was not warranted in defense of a nation. As far as

the "three-quarters of Americans favor" deposing Hussein, how many would

commit ground troops or are they thinking of the clean Clinton approach

displayed in Kosova? This reckless dialog is carried on as though the

sleeping cells will not stir. An attack on Iraq is an attack on millions

of Arabs eager to further justify their jihad madness. The sad note here

is that Bush W is eager to play the role of avenging angel for the sake

of his father, equivalent to the motive to run for president.

To link McGovern’s opposition to the pathetic Vietnam war to the current

scene is unconscionable. I guess that makes Robert Kennedy’s legend

dovish as well. Nor does Kaplan bother to mention that Clinton lobbed

cruise-missiles over Baghdad in retaliation for Saddam’s plot to

assassinate the first Bush; a year later deployed troops on Kuwait’s

border in response to Iraqi troop build up, plus in ‘99, air strikes at

defense installations.

If indeed the "Bush team liberates Iraq," I trust, the Clinton team that

liberated Bosnia, Kosova and indirectly Serbia still will be buried in

Kaplan’s convenient lapses into "moral evasion."

The Nation: A Letter to Democrats

Michael Crowley, a political columnist of sorts for The New Republic,

claims the Democrats have a "Speech Impediment" [3/18/02] since the war

on terrorism because they "don’t know what they want to say." In face of

a 90% president approval rating is that so difficult to understand that

they have to tip-toe through the superpatriotism patch created by a

horrid event that served as a dictum of action for the administration?

Daschle’s tentative statement suggesting the administration has "no clear

direction" in expanding the war — unless reflective speech is taboo — is

by no means subversive, which is what DeLay meant by "disgusting." On the

other hand, there was nothing tentative about Kerry’s caution against

"shield[ing] policies from scrutiny behind a false cloak of patriotism."

He has not forgotten the pall that Johnson-McNamara and Nixon-Kissinger

draped over the minds of too many Americans during the Vietnam debacle.

For Crowley to hop on the wagon of put up or shut up with a "substantive

policy critique" on the war is disingenuous and premature.

As for criticism of the Afghanistan campaign, second-guessing on the use

of more U.S. troops would be as outrageous as the Republican clamor for

ground troops in Kosova. The campaign has been relatively successful,

despite Al Qaeda leaders apparent escape [still, we do not know this for

sure what with the demolition of caves]; for the Democrats to carry on as

irrationally as the Republicans had during the Clinton "humanity" wars

would be disastrous for the party as Crowley himself points out that

there are too many border line [yellow-blue dogs] in congress up for

re-election.

Nevertheless, a broadside critique — thanks to the "axis of evil" gaff —

is forthcoming with Kerry driving it and all Democrats re-reading

Profiles in Courage.

The policy should be as follows:

Military advisers lead ineluctably to escalation; therefore matériel only

should be extended for the purpose of unearthing Al Qaeda in places such

as Yemen, Sudan, Phillippines, and Pakistan, along with terrorist gangs

everywhere, such as Palestine, Israel, Ireland, and Colombia. Air strikes

on verified terrorists camps should be conducted only by permission of

respective governments and assurances of minimal collateral damage.

Uncooperative nations harboring Al Qaeda and terrorists known to do harm

to the United States, its embassies and citizens, should be subject to

surveillance flights and subsequent strikes on discovered terrorist

camps.

To undo diplomatic damage to axis of evil reference, negotiations with

North Korea and Iran should be pursued. In the case of Iraq, sessions

with Russia and France should take place to set up reasonable dismantling

of sanctions, suspension of the no fly-zones in exchange for no-nonsense

UN weapons inspection and the Iraqi army to raid Al Qaeda camps if proven

to exist. If Saddam does not accede, there should be swift and thorough

British and U.S. air strikes on known Al Qaeda camps and facilities of

mass-destruction.

Paramount should be aggressive U.S. leadership at the UN on withdrawal of

Israeli occupation forces to be supplanted by a viable UN peace-keeping

force manned by Spain, France, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan,

Jordan, and Russia during, and indefinite years following, the formation

of a Palestinian state.

A Camp David approach to the tensions in Kashmir should be on the drawing

board.

Unless Abdullah makes an honest effort to democratize and banish hate

texts from their schools, gradual withdrawal of U.S. troops from Saudi

territory should be enacted.

Aid to Egypt and Israel should be terminated except for matériel as

defense against terrorism. Generous loans would be offered to Egypt for

the express purpose of furthering democracy. Loans to Israel would be for

infrastructure to handle the influx of those resettling from the occupied

areas.

There needs to be constant diplomatic pressure on China concerning

progress in human rights and tolerance toward religious groups that are

in themselves tolerant; progress is expected in their acceptance of

Taiwan as a free capitalistic province with multi-party governance.

Use of special forces on foreign soil must be suspended unless attached

to the immediate presence of an overwhelming U.S. parent force. Special

forces are to be delimited to rescuing American military and civilian

hostages and embassy personnel, together with a clearly doable skirmish

based on an intelligence report of an imminent terrorist attack.

Direct financial aid to Russia from Europe and the U.S. should

materialize in helping to rid itself of the Mafia and terrorists.

More up front effort should be made in assuring that global free trade is

fair trade, particularly in behalf of underdeveloped nations.

Afghanistan’s provisional government must move toward the destruction of

its poppy crop in exchange for massive European and U.S. assistance in

irrigation and the development of staple crops.

Finally, a delegation to Cuba headed by Jimmy Carter should be forged,

aimed at opening up the country through trade and tourism to waft in the

fresh air of gradual democracy. What’s good for China relations should be

good for our own hemisphere.

This should serve as a deterrent to Bush’s "irrational exuberance" over

his self-discovery as wartime president. George is no Winston, nor

Franklin. September 11th , however horrific, is no reason to declare a

world war when in truth we are engaged in tracking down an invisible gang

of thugs. Al Qaeda and terrorism in general, a crime wave against

civilians, should be relentlessly pursued but put in perspective of

constant vigilance so as not to create global, political turmoil. Defense

against murderous thugs of all kinds should prevail but it requires cool

heads willing to develop a network of intelligence and a top-notch

international police force in order to localize assaults against the

conspirators of destruction. Painstaking indeed is patience in the face

of evil, but short of a holy war against a terrifying, intolerant

religion, it is better to let calm justice guide our way.

Input, output — 0 w/o the 1

The lead story in the local section [3/27] of the Sun-Sentinel uncovers the shame of a poorly managed school system. The number of computers in each classroom is not the point; it is the number of teachers who are willing to submit detailed plans on how to put them to use. On the secondary level, it is a no-brainer. The greater challenge is K-6.

In a Long Island high school where I taught many years ago, the district’s audio-visual department obtained in the mid 60's a federal grant for a video system — a monstrous Ampex camera and recorder on 1½" reels of tape.[This was before the portable camcorder’s time.] The problem was what do with it. That was easy from my perspective as I taught drama and journalism electives [along with my other English classes]. Until then the only A.V. used in journalism was to rent newsreels and an occasional relevant movie such as His Girl Friday. In drama, we used famous plays on records and an 8mm camera for pantomimes, along with audio tape to record readings and rehearsals.

Needless to say, and despite its breaking down continually, the Ampex was an intriguing facilitator. In journalism we focused on the interview in class, and students during lunch periods would set up the equipment in the cafeteria and interview students, teachers and cafeteria workers, then analyze and discuss the play backs later in class as leads for follow up stories in the school paper. Sports editors moved the equipment to the gym to attempt action play back clips and analysis, together with interviewing players — and, of course, cheerleaders. [In ensuing years the camcorder gave the journalist students greater mobility in covering news throughout the school.] In drama we were able to record class readings, pre-rehearsal stage blocking and body language, then move the equipment to the "Little Theatre" to record rehearsals.[This instructional process was greatly facilitated with the advent of the camcorder.]

In the 70's the math department set up a 64K computer lab to enrich instruction in basic and advanced math, including programing.

In the early 80's the business department removed from one classroom the IBM Selectrics and replaced them with 128K IBM computers for the purpose of learning not only word-processing, but database, spread sheets and file processing. At the same time I asked for and received an advanced dot-matrix printer and two 256K computers based on the CPM operating system [rivaling the Apple] for my journalism class, and for the school paper staff to perform paste-up which was later sent to a professional printer. The motivation and productivity were so improved that the quarterly paper became a fortnightly issue. The better journalism students — usually staff members — took turns proof-reading and copyediting weaker stories retrieved from the current school paper files. Other students who knew how to type could input their corrected or edited stories for submission to the editor. Still others were instructed on labeling and would type up mailing lists to advertisers and other school papers throughout the Island or try to design pages and cartoons. My point here is that all equipment was appreciated and put to use.

Sun-Sentinel’s article, "Schools question computer plan" brings to mind Kennedy’s While England Slept or the phrase asleep at the switch. Wake me! — is this not the year 2002? On the elementary level, first and foremost is overcoming the fear of computers and classroom management which can become messy. Teachers familiar with computers and successful in the use of them in class could assist their colleagues. There is, however, no substitute for the inexperienced to have a computer at home and to familiarize themselves with educational programs offered on state and national sites. All teachers experienced or not, elementary or secondary, know that student shortcomings are mainly reading and writing. A major share of computer time would be for students in need of remediation in these fields. However, to avoid the label of Dunce sitting in the corner, one computer of enrichment should be available to the better student at all times. Students with severe learning disabilities should be sent to the resource center to learn the computer and its programs. FCAT put aside, large chunks of class-wide instruction on the use of the computer, keyboard and programs are essential. Moreover, in order to assign homework and extra work for the absent based on relevant programs, computers should be present at home — even if the household has to delay buying a new TV though there are many organizations that would donate slightly outdated machines. Homework in learning the keyboard is essential for students to improve writing skills by focusing on copying and rephrasing or outlining the 5W’s of any news item or simple story.

On the elementary level there is no need for networking, which tempts students to browse and forget purposeful action — not to mention the cost of rewiring. The World and U.S. Atlas are sufficient for geography. Encarta and Compton are more than enough for catch-up and enrichment in history. Math and science programs can be downloaded by the school’s central computer for disc distribution to the staff. The regional business department should honor teachers requisitions of kid’s educational stuff, such as typing, writing and reading coupled with audio, creative writing, math and science, U.S. and world history, history of art, and language arts [bi-lingual].

There will be elementary classes without computers and others with a dozen, depending on the degree of acceptance and usage. Yet every school building’s library should be abundantly equipped with state of the arts computers for all student and teacher use, particularly reluctant teachers who would rather schedule their class to receive instruction by the expertise of the library staff.

PC hardware is so reliable today that technicians on the school payroll is unnecessary. As for software glitches, I wager that there are hundreds of high school students, any one of whom would welcome a day from his or her schedule to solve a problem. Besides, a $191.7 million contract surely includes a lifetime warranty. Upgraded wiring, but for fibre-optics and cable for extensive labs in the main on the high school level, should not be required. It would be hard to believe that the circuit breakers even in portable classrooms would trip because of a few computers; in any case, any upgrading of portables would be obscene — tear them down! Any serious teacher would have his own laptop or certainly a high-tech computer at home; arming all teachers with laptops would be absurd as most of them would be for personal use.

Everett Abney needs to take a crash course in good old fashioned audio-visual and CAI. There is no excuse for this chaos. The superintendent of technology and the superintendent of curriculum [assuming there is one] obviously do not work together. Solve this nonsense by coordinating technology and curriculum, together with input from students and teachers. How do you suppose I got two computers twenty years ago? Before the board, I let my editor and her staff do the talking.

Dear TAP:[The American Prospect]

In the "Family of Politics" issue I suppose a liberal magazine needs the

luxury of self therapy in repeating the painful obvious — what the heck

the conservatives harass us obsessively with their trite commentary.

Still, I find it vexing to read such commentary as:

Portes’ "Many children of immigrant parents are not living out the

American Dream. Until better jobs and schools materialize, they are at

risk of becoming the next underclass."

Coontz: "The most constructive way to support modern marriages is to

improve work-life policies so that couples can spend more time with each

other and their kids."

Ooms: "Poverty and unemployment can stress couples’ relationships to

their breaking point."

Sawhill: "Better-educated women are increasingly delaying both marriage

andchild-bearing until they are in their mid twenties and even older."

Gornick: Children need and deserve the time of both parents. But the

current social arrangements put a disproportionate burden on women."

Root: "Younger people, on average, are far more open to inter-marriage

than those who grew up in an era of segregation. The trend is a major

gain for tolerance and pluralism in America, and families that

successfully navigate the challenge of interracial marriage often become

more open generally. But large pockets of discrimination continue to

exist."

My, my, such penetrating observations, yet totally meaningless in the

matrix of a frightening conservative nation! Portes is whistling in the

wind if the professor thinks the low-life status of immigrants is going

to change but for all too few that might scrape up an opportunity to

enroll in a decent public school, let alone higher education. Perhaps he

hadn’t heard that American politics is no longer the breeding ground for

Trumans and Roosevelts. The so-called Democratic party today is

pre-occupied with trying to make a go of it by desperately squeezing some

half-baked compromise from the confederate blue dogs that with the drop

of a hat would become Republican.

Coontz, too, is a dreamer: "work-life" policies disappeared from great

possibilities of the 40s and 50s when there was much discussion about the

coming of the thirty-hour work-week and how to utilize quality leisure

time. But even if such wishful thinking became reality — all Republicans

would have to be like Javitts and Nelson Rockefeller and Democrats like

Wellstone — the kids would turn to the internet and rap CDs while

Victoria Secret and the Final Four enculturate the parents. By definition

poverty is stress! Gone are the days when romantic couples settled for a

25¢ movie and afterwards shared a pretzel stick with their cherry cokes.

When young couples today are bombarded with news of the glamor and

obscene wealth of CEOs, sports stars, and entertainers while they subsist

on minimum wage and know that the political climate has become so

insensitive to their needs, it is almost comical to utter the tautology

of breaking point.

Sawhill deserves the Oscar for stating the obvious, but forgot to mention

that putatively better-educated men keep it zipped up, However, she

suggests providing "flexible funding" to the states for sundry approaches

to reduce teen-pregnancies as though all states were like Vermont or

Massachusetts. Frankly, I would not trust Mississippi, New Hampshire or

Florida to do justice.

I have news for Gornick: No matter what era women have always been

disproportionately — some would say, naturally — "burdened", though most

women do not look upon time spent as "unpaid," unless she is saddled with

a typically spoiled brat for a partner who feels he is above household

chores and caring for his children. The problem lies with the male ego of

which, alas, most women are responsible.

As for Root, he wants to take a very personal choice — very much a matter

of taste — and turn it into a case for pluralism and tolerance as if to

say without blending the skin colors there can never be a tasteful

melting pot.

I’ve saved Christopher for last because her stats are all too

predictable. Obviously an ethically cleansed Netherlands and a greatly

more liberal UK are going to come out smelling like a rose. Here, poverty

is prevalent among immigrants and persons of color for whom there is no

national empathy. Anyone with an ounce of thought knows we are Ugly

Americans domestically as well as abroad. The American voter that has

resisted universal health care since Truman, that goes ballistic over

single mothers on welfare, that has given up on public education in

blighted communities, that endorses war sacrifice by rushing to the

malls, that applauds the armed services while their own children are

tucked away in universities, surely does not give a damn about a "policy

package that makes it easier for all parents to combine caregiving with

employment." As for dreaming about "higher rates of unionization," unions

today are dreadfully dysfunctional in light of the Reaganomics assault on

the nation; and in face of the appalling number of members, fortunate

enough to reap benefits by being unionized, nonetheless, vote Republican.

This professorial colloquy does no harm, but it is tiresome rhetoric that

has its roots in the New Deal. We should be discussing ways of weaning

the national psyche from myopic interests by educating voters to become

sensitized to universal challenges that may or may not directly affect

them, but is still in the national interest that every citizen gets a

fair return. Liberals are whining cowards who are too lazy to put meat on

their skeletal approaches. The primary thrust should be to purchase a

cable channel or two supported by unions, publications, such as The New

York Times, The Prospect, The New Yorker, The Atlantic Monthly, the

Nation, Free Inquiry, and New Republic, along with massive financial

contributions from the Democratic Party, grass root and wealthy liberals

and bombard the psyche with the likes of the above compassionate insights

to counteract the shallow ideologies tossed out by today’s media.

Silent Spring.

    Moreover, in Africa, particularly, prevalent sickle-cell

anemia is a haven for the deadly insect. The current protection is to

issue specially treated bed-nets in undeveloped countries, but again the

developed countries commitment is only partial. Research is being done

for a vaccine for this utterly complex problem. If successful, it still

will not reach the ends of the earth because of the high cost, the

"unintended consequences" of the conservative minded like Sowell who

always stalls progress because it costs too much.

    To accuse the "moral elite", the environmentalists in California, of

blocking the building of power plants is ludicrous when in fact they have

continually urged the construction of alternative energy plants. Long

before the word environmentalist was in vogue the University of

California paved the way for the Berkeley and Livermore National

Laboratories researching nuclear fusion reactors and the environment

since the early 30s. Even though Jerry Brown banned additional nuclear

plants, California, nonetheless, has four plants that fulfil 30% of the

state’s energy needs. The state requires only 23% of fossil fuel plants

because long ago it shared the energy output of the Hoover Dam with its

neighbors. Hydro-electricity in the northern and southern tiers amount to

43%; the remainder comes from wind and geo-thermal production. California

has long been a leader in environmental protection; but not resistant —

beyond the usual "not in my backyard" mentality prevalent in all states —

to low level fossil-fuel backups in case of drought. Sowell has a bad

memory if he never heard of smog that enshrouded L. A. The actual fault

lies with tinkering with the regulation of energy prices, ironically

initiated by the Carter administration, thinking it would be an incentive

to the oil industry to drill — it didn't — the "unintended consequences"

— prices soared to add to the malaise. Yet at the same time $100 million

was extended to oil companies and wildcatters for geothermal exploration

— with slow results. When Carter said, "We will protect our environment.

But when this Nation critically needs a refinery or a pipeline, we will

build it." 1 the oil barons only heard "pipelines" — where the money was.

The environmentalists had nothing to do with the incompetence of the oil

industry’s failure to build refineries.

Since after World War II, it has been a well-known fact that domestic oil

production no longer was as profitable compared to extracting the black

gold from the Mideast. While the price of the New York Times rose from 3¢

to 20¢, heating oil remained at about 12-15¢ a gallon and gasoline

between 17-20¢ a gallon until the 70s. It was Carter who sparked the oil

industry into returning to domestic production, which never fully

materialized because even with OPEC hikes, domestically the industry

could not compete — and still can't. However, because of environmental

concerns gas became a windfall.

    After exhausting his outrage over energy and malaria, Sowell makes a

stupendous leap to rent controls causing " housing shortages that

inevitably follow." Give me a break! Then he trivializes the admirable

effort of this country and others to send overseas untold billions of

free grain and processed foods to those in dire need. Why, even in the

Philip Morris commercial, the company proudly led a caravan of mercy to

Kosovo! Sowell would say, "Humph, just to feel good about themselves."

    Well, as a teacher for twenty-eight years, I strived to instill in my

students the value in feeling good about themselves.

Lest you think I am one-sided, take the Anthony Lewis June 5 article on

the Mideast. Though he sets up a strong argument against Israeli

expansionism, he fails to address the other side of the equation that the

Palestinians are not just against the settlements but the very presence

of Israel itself.

    In the same issue, Maureen Dowd in her enthusiasm over vengeance begets

revenge, she doesn't bother to discuss that regardless of Bush’s problem

with Jeffords and McCain, the real issue is what will Daschle do about

the treacherous senators from Georgia and Louisiana? I doubt that Bush is

as wary as she portrays, as long as he has these lack lusters in his

hip-pocket.

    Perhaps my problem is that I was an adviser to a high school paper for

too long during which I tried to impress on my "opinionated" youngsters

to look at both sides. Professional columnists, regardless of their slant

should at least exercise respect for the truth. And when they don’t a

newspaper’s editorial policy should be a check and balance on extreme

bias that poses as intellectual inquiry.