Showing posts with label Bill Clinton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bill Clinton. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Coming to a Classroom Near You: The Cheating Narrative

Coming to a Classroom Near You: The Cheating Narrative

Cheating is epidemic in American society. Just take look at our public figures, for heaven’s sake: Cheating seems to be a prerequisite for the governorship of New York whether you're coming or going; cheating helped curious Georgey win the presidency in 2000; bad dog Bill cheated on Hillary; and just recently Hillary attempted to cheat the media with her Bosnia “fairy tale,” got caught, and subsequently received yet another zero for this latest pathetic attempt at creative campaigning.

So it should come as no surprise that while American students might not excel in certain academic subjects, they more oftentimes than not exceed standards when it comes to cheating. And every teacher, instructor, and professor, I’m sure, has a treasure trove of stories about cheating, about those who cheat, and about how they struggled to maintain their sanity when confronting those who cheat but who also pretend NOT TO know that they cheated. Mind boggling, I know.

On the high school level, cheating is a constant in the cult of adolescent personality. And generally speaking, the “cheating” narrative ascribes to the following plot points:

1. The cheater knowingly cheats regardless of being warned a 1.000 times.
2. The cheater usually can’t help make it obvious that s/he has cheated; in short, s/he is seldom “good” at it.
3. When caught, the cheater immediately PRETENDS NOT TO KNOW THAT s/he cheated.
4. Denial sets in.
5. The cheater then finds some lame-a## way to blame the teacher, instructor, or professor.
6. The crying game happens—and I’m not referring to the film of the same name.
7. At this point, the narrative goes one or two ways:

a. The cheater recognizes the obvious: s/he has been INCREDIBLY stupid, got caught, and SHOULD NOT do this again, although chances are s/he will.

b. The cheater CAN’T abandon a win at this point and thus resorts to the ultimate act of desperation: S/he brings in a parent as a "special operations" cheerleader, as an enabler of sorts, as the ultimate “character” witness.

I regret to inform you that choice “b” is the preferred choice of cheaters and their cheating parents, which brings me to my major point: How can we educators ever expect to stop cheating when parents blindly pass on their cheating behaviors to their children whom they are cheating out of some sort of moral growth and development?

Thursday, January 24, 2008

Dividing & Diverting

Dividing & Diverting

On this week’s edition of the mainstream media narrative, we find one of their more tried and true numbers: dividing and diverting. Last week, we had everybody and their grandmother going to confession; this time around, we have everyone dividing…and the mainstream media diverting us from the real news that matters most.

It began late last week. Extra! Extra!—everyone get diverted by it: “Barack did this MLK event here, while Hill had to save face and do her MLK event there.” “Hillary’s losing the black vote.” “Barack’s alienating whites.” “It’s all about race and gender.” “It’s all about Bill (we like u, but would you PUHLEEZE shut up!)” “Dems. are divided here; they are divided there; they are divided everywhere.”

Tensions grew more heated in Monday’s debate. Hillary and Barack were trying to channel their inner “Hit Me with Your Best Shot:” Barack showed Hillary that he was a “real tough cookie” by mentioning her time with Walmart; Hill put another “notch in her lipstick case” by claiming that Barack once represented a slum lord. So as Hill and Barry went into death-match mode with John Edwards as the only real victor, the mainstream media had set its story no sooner than the debate ended: the Dems. are d-i-v-i-d-e-d. And what’s worse, both the Clinton and Obama campaigns blindly followed in sync with one scud attack after another. The latest word is that yet another truce has been reached.

MEANWHILE, on the other side of the moon—they clearly don’t know what to do or whom to choose. Adrift with Huck Finn, Slick Mick, Nosferatu Giuliani and Rising McCain, the Republicans are far more divided than the Dems. And yet had the media focused on what the republican candidates didn’t do to commemorate MLK’s memory and/or to court minority voters, maybe we could’ve had a fair and balanced discussion on race. Had the media put more emphasis on the 935 lies the Bush administration told about Iraq rather than the half-truths and untruths of Billary and Barack, maybe we could’ve focused more on the war. Had the media greatly publicized the 720 million dollar a day cost of the Iraq war, maybe we could focus less on Hillary’s and Barack’s positions and more on Bush’s bad decisions. Had the media not put the dividing democrat narrative in the foreground, maybe more people wouldn’t have been diverted from the troubling news about the Gaza strip that stays in the background. Should the Democratic Party and its candidates become more focused on taking the White House, they will hopefully shift the focus from these inflated divisions in the party to the many divisions George W. Bush and his party have caused for the last seven years.

Monday, December 17, 2007

Off the Wagon


Off the Wagon

My name is sptmck, a part-time blogger, and I AM “off the wagon.” After spending months of de-toxing and painfully abstaining from “going negative” on Judas Joe, formerly Captain Lieberman, formerly Oedipus Lieberman, formerly Joe Lieberman, Democrat from CT, I thought for sure that I twelve-stepped my way to a new found serenity. Unfortunately for me, and many CT Bloggers, God neither granted me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change nor the wisdom to know the difference.

It’s official: Judas Joe is back and more heinous than ever. Talk about a “double-birdie” to us Ned Lamont supporters, and, more surprisingly, to the Democratic Establishment that should’ve seen shameless Joe for what he was before they granted him those committee assignments.
Media-blitzing on his endorsement of Senator John McCain, Captain LIEberman just did a spot earlier tonight on Furball in which he stated to Chris Matthews—brace yourselves—that in his heart he IS a TRUE Democrat and that because Senator McCain ASKED HIM for his support, he said…yes. “Vengeance is mine,” sayeth Judas Joe.

Things are getting interesting in Presidential Politics, aren’t they? One can’t help ponder how Judas Joe’s latest move affects Billaryworld. Remember, it was ol’ Billy who came to CT in the summer of’06 to stump for then-known Oedipus Lieberman. Remember, it was Hillary to whom Oedipus appealed to get Billy out there to do his thing. And remember it was Hillary who remained on the quiet side when it came to her support of Ned Lamont. Much more can’t be said about Barack who, in the summer/fall ’06, during his book tour, slided around CT to AVOID a public appearance with Lamont, Oedipus’s nemesis at the time.


Maybe we should revisit John Edwards’ analysis of Washington insiders and how their actions have consequences. Maybe Mr. Edwards, who proudly supported Ned Lamont and true change, can offer a viable, sobering alternative to establishment politicians and the betraying bedfellows they keep.

Sunday, September 30, 2007

Foreground & Background

Foreground & Background

Everyone—left, right, and center—are once again fixating on the Clintons. I can’t say I blame them entirely since Hillary blitz-krieged the Sunday morning shows last week and Billy did a lap dance or two today with George Stephanopoulos and Tim Russert. From last Sunday to this Sunday, it’s been a mainstream media, Clinton bookend bonanza. Extra, extra: Will Barack slam Hillary? Will Hillary slam Barack? Can Johnny be as tough as his wife on Hill? Will GQ remain emasculated or grow a pair to run that piece on Billary? NO WAY!: Rudy “call me” Giuliani will predicate his campaign on the ASSumption that he can beat Hillary? Wow, there’s a shocker.

Even in today’s New York Times, both Frank Rich, whose columns I savor, and mean girl Maureen Dowd, whose columns, as of late, tend to make me and several people I know sick, focus on none other than Hillary. It’s not that I mind the criticisms of the Clintons, or of Hillary, in particular. Quite frankly, many of them are fair and accurate—and not in a Fox fiction sort of way. It just amazes me how much the Clinton narrative, to borrow the rhetoric of Frank Rich, dominates the mainstream media foreground and all other narratives are assigned to the background, or better yet, to the media hinterland. Even Ahmadinejad’s crazy cameo—and even crazier claim of no gays in Iran—at Columbia had a short shelf life in the big, mainstream media scheme of things.

Meanwhile, in the media background more of our soldiers continue to die in Iraq and it seems that NO ONE—Democrat or Republican—has a lucid plan to get us the f**k out. Who knows what the deal is with the possibility of going to war with Iran? There continues to be “no-shows” of Republican candidates at minority-sponsored debates, although this IS the party of the BIG TENT—only if you’re white. Children in need might NOT get appropriate insurance because George W. Bush says that there’s a better way; remember: he’s the dude that insisted there WERE weapons of mass destruction. And who the heck knows what Condi’s up to; maybe she’s having more surgery finally to close that gap between her front teeth.

The bigger gap that concerns me is the enormous difference between the media foreground and background, between the OJ resurgence and the Iraq insurgence, between what’s over-emphasized and what barely registers as a blip, between the over-saturation of fake news and the drowning of real news…that should be “fit” to print.

Sunday, June 17, 2007

Married to the Mob


Week in Rear View: Married to the Mob

Bada bing: Who would’ve thought that the ending to a popular mob series would capture the zeitgeist of the American political scene? Yes, many of our politicians—on both sides of the aisle—are no better than the shady characters in The Sopranos. In today's column, “Scooter’s Sopranos Go to the Mattresses," Frank Rich does a “buuuutifull job makin’” the connection stick. Fo’get ‘bout it!

But mob mentality is not new to America. Hell no! In fact, we, the American people, are unequivocally married to the mob, and this becomes abundantly apparent in our literature and in our every day lives. Just take a look. Need I remind you all of the old hags in The Scarlet Letter who wanted to brand Hester, the “shit don’t stink” East Eggers in The Great Gatsby who resented the G.’s new “monay,” or those heinous hypocrites in Jackson’s “The Lottery” who would stone their own mother just to blindly obey tradition? Mob rule is as American as apple-pie at Thanksgiving time, or as American as the NASCAR dads and those micromanagerial soccer moms—mob groups for a new, American century.


And Team Bush is no different. As Rich points out, that the Bush loyalists are pleading, f**king begging for Poopy Scooter’s pardon is the height of hypocrisy; do yourself a favor and get over to The Smoking Gun. Not only does this forgive-Paris-Hilton groveling reveal the administration’s blatant lies that led to Iraq, this also reveals how many self-righteous conservatives/neo-conservatives, and yes folks, establishment Democrats have no shame—not an iota. The “save Scooter” campaign truly sheds light on the “Kill Bill” hysteria, doesn’t it? Remember the Monica news hour update? The Monica minute? The Monica, genetic-material themed nano-second? The countless millions of taxpayers’ money that Kenny Star wasted? Sure, Billy bent the truth—and maybe a cigar or two—by questioning what the definition of is is, but this was to justify his own Bada’ Monica affair, not a Bada’ war, not a Bada’ 3,500 + troops dead.

As much as I admire Rich, though, there’s one crucial element of the American mob he neglected to emphasize: the mainstream media. Without them, Americans…won’t stop believing the fake news that fuels many lives of quiet desperation.

Saturday, March 10, 2007

PARDONERS' TALES

PARDONERS’ TALES

Our 3½ year old is just beginning to internalize what it means to be sorry. Still deep in the egocentrism stage, he’s slowly but surely inching his way towards perspective thinking. Thanks to the help of his nursery school teachers—patron saints indeed, the cheeky and oftentimes penitent Thomas the Tank Engine, Shane’s Kindergarten Countdown, and my better-half and me, N. is learning not to throw sand, not to demolish his classmates’ building blocks projects; and not to push O. whose father is a good colleague of mine, twice my size, and could easily send me into the ICU just by sitting on me. In short, N. is not just saying “he’s sorry,” he means it.

Pardon me: we Americans have a strange understanding of what it means to be sorry, what it means to forgive, and whom should be forgiven and/or pardoned and why. Perhaps we need to revisit the learning lessons of toddlers, past history, and/or great works of literature—something. Because more so than the much-ado-‘bout-nothing “morals and values” narrative assigned to the right in the wake of the 2004 election, this past week’s news showed a different story. While the MSM has indulged the hard right with their pontificating about all the ills and vices of Americans, the hard right has shown America that hypocrisy is no different today than when Chaucer wrote “The Pardoner’s Tale” in the 14th century.

Just take the I. Scooter Libby trial this week; check out David Corn’s analysis for The Nation. No sooner had the jury rendered its verdict then the right came “out” for Libby’s pardon in grand National Review fashion; never mind that the verdict was more about the illegal prosecution of the Iraq war than the Fitzgerald prosecution of Libby. Interestingly, some of these “pardoner” folks were the same people who raised holy hell against Bill Clinton when Monica’s genetically stained dress came out of its closet. Interestingly, these are the same people who’ve come out again and again sometimes on TV, sometimes in speeches, and sometimes in sermons about morals, values, and how to lead a “right” life amidst the sinners in the hands of angry mainstream America.

Most interestingly, what did “come out” this week from the hermetically sealed, right- wing closet was pretty amazing. In a mea culpa moment, Newt Gingrich did confess that he was having an extra-marital affair while he and his cohorts tattooed Bill Clinton with a scarlet letter M. Hey, give the guy a break: it’s Lent and some Republican candidates are tanking. And Mann Coulter, who in a speech called John Edwards a “faggot” and whose last book Godless criticized the religion of liberals among other things, was actually seen with a “closeted” gay Republican male—there’s a shocker—whose alter ego is better known as gay porn star Rod Majors. Now if only Rod were to check out if Mann had a “rod” then we (and my favorite radio personality Randi Rhodes) would all have clarity—once and for all—on why Mann makes fun of gay people on a regular basis. For more on Mann’s hypocrisy and the media’s enabling of it, be sure to check out Savoir Faire Scribneoir’s meditations in WTF!

Pardon me: in these desperate times, what will it take to move our culture away from egocentrism towards perspective thinking? Do we all need a dose now and again of Thomas the Tank Engine and the lessons we learn in nursery school? Can we ever pardon the sins of the past and the present to forge some kind of better tomorrow?