Author Archive

A quick list:

  • Not quite a Nee Year’s resolution, but a resolution times to the new year: After several years of not closely tracking my spending, I bought a new budgeting program and I’m going to try to observe exactly where my money goes. I expect I will soon be alarmed by what I spend on food in various forms.
  • I do hope that I resist the urge to make some purchases simply because I don’t want to have to do the data entry.
  • I had to break up a trip to the grocery store into three different categories. Someone needs to create financial tracking software for obsessive-compulsive philosophers. “Is the essential nature of these paper towels that of ‘groceries’ or ‘household items’?”
  • We decided to celebrate the last day of break with a trip to the movies. We were not the only ones. The theater was more crowded than I have seen it at any point since we watched the last Harry Potter movie.
  • We got Alex a set of DVDs from the first five Potter movies for Christmas. We should have all the special features memorized very soon.
  • Today we saw The Adventures of Tintin, which I think was a very nice combination of animation and motion capture. A nice adventure story with good action and good humor.
  • Doesn’t look like I’m gonna have much luck getting Alex to the theater to see Star Wars Episode I when it gets re-released. As she pointed out, we already own it, so we’d be paying money to see something we already have.
  • I’m going to remember this conversation if she ever wants to see a Potter re-release.
  • With the Iowa caucuses tomorrow, I’m trying to think of ways that my ethics class can spend the time between Iowa and New Hampshire analyzing the candidates and their positions to try to see what that says about American society. Haven’t quite cracked the nut yet, but hey, I still have 24 hours.
  • Happy New Year, everyone. Let’s make it a good one.
Be the first to comment

We saw The Muppets last week. I think it’s the first Muppet film I’ve seen in a theater since the original Muppet Movie, and I am not even 100 percent sure that I saw that one at the movies. If you want to know what I think about the movie, keep reading. If you want to know how I feel about it, skip to the last paragraph.

The Muppets is definitely a throwback to the original film – the characters are trying to put on a show while also being aware that they’re in a movie about them trying to put on a show. The breaking-the-fourth-wall and entertainment inside humor are the source of many of my favorite jokes in the film. The story and the character development serve mainly as pegs for the humor – they’re all drawn very broadly and don’t have a lot of room to develop. Conflicts are introduced and quickly resolved before the audience has a chance to really get invested in them.

The one character element that I had a problem with is that Kermit seemed a bit passive in the film. He needs to be prodded into doing just about everything, and there’s an untold story about how Kermit let the gang drift apart in the first place. He rallies a bit toward the end, but as someone who’s always liked Kermit, I felt a little let down.

The interesting theme of the movie is that the Muppets have been out of action for so long that they’re out of fashion and ignored. So they have to prove to themselves and the world that there’s still a place for their kind of entertainment. The movie plays up the idea that the Muppets are stuck in the 80s, even introducing a character called 80s Robot. It was a little weird to me to see this element. The Disney Muppets had a TV show and several theatrical movies in the 90s. They made a couple of TV movies and several viral online videos in the 2000s. I felt like the movie ignored all of that and pretended that the Muppets went dormant after The Muppet Show ended and The Muppets Take Manhattan left theaters. By all means, the movie is free to pick and choose its continuity – it’s not like there’s ever been a single coherent canon for the characters – but the meta theme didn’t totally click with me.

All of that said, toward the end of the movie, Kermit and the other Muppets perform “The Rainbow Connection,” and Alex started to sing along. In that moment, The Muppets became one of the most joyous experiences I’ve ever had in a movie theater, and left no doubt that there’s still a place for these characters.

Be the first to comment

Another roadblock that I encounter as I try to live up to the ideal of teaching that I have in my head is an ongoing conflict between two ideas. The first is my dislike of the idea that school should be a place where the teacher takes his or her knowledge and transfers it to the students; I am much more comfortable with the idea that students have to learn things for themselves and can’t just sponge it from another source. But the second, competing idea is that I see myself as an authority figure with certain expertise that should be used in the shaping of the learning environment. I don’t think it’s a bad thing for me to say, “Yes, you have to build the knowledge yourself, but right now you also have to listen to me tell you what knowledge to build and how to do it.” When I write that, part of me is turned off by the arrogance implied in it, but another part of me doesn’t see any way around the truth of it. When I look back at my own career as a student, I find numerous cases where a project that seemed utterly irrelevant at the time turned out to be quite important. In many cases, the teachers did know best.

I have the good fortune of being Facebook friends not only with a number of my high school classmates, but with several of my teachers as well. (It speaks volumes of my high school experience that my teachers and I each left enough of an impression on each other that we’d want to talk to each other almost 20 years later, but that’s another post.) Yesterday one thread evolved into a discussion of an assignment in my English class in sophomore year. We had to read Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man, and write a reflection journal that was supposed to run about 50 pages.

Now I can still remember that this assignment was the bane of my existence in 1990. Invisible Man is a dense novel, and the longest paper I had ever written was 5 pages. Now I had to go up by an order of magnitude. I don’t think I actually made it . . . I got to around page 35 before I just ran out of things to say. I honestly don’t remember if what I had to say was worth anything – those assignments are long gone, consigned to the dustbins of 5.25-inch floppy history. But what I do remember is that I wrote that much.

That’s an important memory, because when I got to Fordham I was admitted to the honors program, where I had to write and defend a 50-page senior thesis on the topic of my choosing. It was hard work, and the bane of my existence in 1996, but throughout the process I could look back at high school and know that I had done this, or something like it, before. So I had every reason to believe that I could do it again. In the end, I did, and while I have not really pursued any further research into artificial intelligence theory, I had to spend a lot of time thinking about the ways that human beings learn (and how they’re different from the ways that machines learn). That’s certainly information that’s come in handy in my current career.

Once I knew I could write a 50-page philosophy paper, I moved on to other academic mountains. When it came time to write a 200-page dissertation, I figured out how to divide the thesis up into chapters. Each chapter would be a chunk of about 35-50 pages. While those chapters were the banes of my existence from 2003-2006 (I have a very baneful existence, if you haven’t noticed), I did finish. Without that graduate research and dissertation, I would not have the grounding in philosophical pragmatism that I do, and I think I would be a poorer person, citizen and teacher as a result.

So 35-year-old Dave in 2010 could draw a line straight back to work that 15-year-old Dave did in 1990 and see how the 1990 work had made 2010’s successes possible. But if you had asked me as a 15-year-old to explain why I was doing that journal, the only thing I could have told you was, “The teacher told me to do it and I need to get a good grade.” The book and the reflection did not connect with my own experiences, and I was too young to realize how limited my own experiences were and how much more there was to understand in the world.

One more example that doesn’t paint me in such a flattering light: In my junior year, we had a religion class called Social Justice. I was very fortunate, and through a combination of my mother’s efforts, my own talents and hard work, and some meeting-the-right-people-at-the-right-time, I was able to attend a private Catholic high school in the suburbs. There were many advantages to this education, but one major drawback was that we were a very homogeneous group. Again, my own experiences didn’t tell me much about what people in different social or economic groups lived through, so issues of poverty or class were abstract notions. The Social Justice class was meant to help us look beyond our lives and think about the obligations that we have to our fellow people.

I am putting it mildly when I say we were a reluctant audience. We watched videos about how agribusiness companies affected the economies and environments of countries around the world. We discussed the Bretton Woods financial institutions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary fund. We read books about the life of families on welfare in the 1970s or the Catholic Church’s notion of a “preferential option for the poor.” And when we weren’t pushing back against the idea that we had some kind of unfair advantage in the world, we were bored. We doodled in the margins or made jokes after class about agribusiness, agribusiness, agribusiness. Around the time that we were discussing the IMF, the teacher saw some rather unkind doodles in my binder and gave me a talking-to about making a positive contribution to the class. The next day I gave my notes the subtitle “Contributing Positively.”

Yeah, feel free to give 16-year-old me a metaphorical slap. He deserves it.

The point is, in 1997 I was working in a PR firm whose client made financial planning software. So during this time period, I was trying to understand a lot of stuff about how the financial world worked. And right about this time, several Asian countries saw their economies run into major trouble. Suddenly I was seeing the World Bank and the IMF all over the news. Now why did they seem familiar?

Oh, yeah.

A few years after that, I’m married and trying to rely on something other than takeout and premade taco dinner kits to eat. Pattie and I start learning about the food industry and the influence of big agricultural companies over what we eat and how we eat it. Large agricultural companies. I feel like there was a term for that. What was it?

Oh, yeah.

Now, do I think that my English teacher or my Social Justice teacher could predict exactly which classroom experiences would provide me with useful insights or skills in the future? Of course not. If they could predict the future that well, I’d be disappointed if they were spending all their time teaching high school when they could be out making a fortune in the stock market or reshaping world culture. But they had pretty good judgment about what might be useful, and when I trusted that judgment, more often than not I was better off for it.

I believe that we learn things, and think about things, because knowledge is useful – it helps us make our way through the world and accomplish what we set out to do. But that doesn’t mean that everything we learn has to be obviously useful right now. William James wrote

[T]he advantage of having a general stock of extra truths, of ideas that shall be true of merely possible situations, is obvious. We store such extra truths away in our memories, and with the overflow we fill our books of reference.

One of the things that teachers can do is use their knowledge to help students build up that extra stock of knowledge, to have it ready in years to come when it may prove useful.

Now, as I look at our curricula and the classes that we require students to take, I definitely think that we can do a better job of this. (I learned about calculus in high school math, but I learned much of what I knew about the importance of compound interest in an elective social studies economics class.) And we need to have some space for dialogue with the students, so that we can understand how they view this collection of information that we (possibly) find fascinating but they find frustrating. As I work to do that, though, I’m also going to try to forgive myself for thinking that sometimes the teacher knows best.

Be the first to comment

Roadblocks: Beyond Hot Cross Buns

By Dave Thomer | Filed in Education

As I get ready for the new year, I’ve been having a number of conversations with myself about how to implement the vision of teaching I have in my head. In my head, students take their questions about the world and seek out answers to them, while I provide resources and guidance to help them use the lessons of history to answer those questions. This works perfectly between approximately 3 AM and 5 AM, and then the alarm clock goes off and I face a bunch of realities that serve as roadblocks to that vision. My own limitations are certainly among those roadblocks, but they’re not the only ones. So in an effort to widen the conversation beyond myself and I, consider this post the beginning of a short series.

One thing I’ve been thinking about is the idea of authenticity in education. I like the idea of projects as a form of assessment – have the students create something that requires not just memorization of facts, but thinking about those facts. If there’s creativity and room for individual analysis and expression, then you’re on to something. And if it’s something that the students connect to, that they care about for its own sake and not because the guy with the grade book is telling them to do it, then you have a project that’s authentic.

Now, the roadblock I want to talk about now is that completing a project that requires 1) factual knowledge about a subject; 2) critical analysis of that knowledge; and 3) creation of content is going to require a number of skills. Part of the goal of the project is to help students develop those skills, but one challenge for the teacher is to match the complexity of the project to the skills that the students have. Ideally, you want the project to be near the edge or even slightly beyond the edge of the comfort level, so they have to stretch and build a little bit to get there. Without that, there’s no challenge, and that can lead to boredom. But with too much of a gap, students won’t know where to go, and they won’t feel like they can solve the problem themselves.

This means that the teacher is almost certainly going to have to put some artificial limitations on the project, and those simplifications run the risk of taking the project further away from something that the students feel is authentically relevant to them. Is there a way to get around this? I’m not sure.

When I was in grade school, I played snare drum for the grade school concert band. If you have ever been to a grade school music concert, you are probably familiar with the song Hot Cross Buns. It is a very simple tune that many music students learn when they are first getting the hang of their instruments. Now, whatever goals someone might have when they start playing an instrument, giving a rousing performance of Hot Cross Buns is not likely to be one of them. But learning this song lets you practice reading the music and hitting the notes, and hopefully after a little while you’re ready for something more engaging. I eventually played a few John Philip Sousa marches and a barely recognizable version of the Beatles’ “Yesterday” before hanging up my drumsticks.

Now, is there a more authentic way of helping music students get those initial building blocks? Or is Hot Cross Buns (or something like it) just something you have to grin and bear to get on with the good stuff? I honestly don’t know. I suspect that a certain amount of grinning and bearing is necessary, but that could be my lack of imagination.

And to being this back around to the high school classroom, if I need a Hot Cross Buns to help students build their research or their critical thinking skills, how can I get beyond that phase as quickly as possible and let them loose on more complex, and hopefully more engaging, material?

One possibility would be to build out my start-of-year introduction. In World History, instead of starting with australopithecus and the dawn of humanity, I begin with the last chapter of the book and discuss the present day. The Internet and global warming are a little more accessible than cave paintings and the Stone Age. I could try to create a few projects based on researching personal history, and put the focus more on the thinking and the application than the content itself. I might hit other roadblocks, like the assigned curriculum and its associated schedule, but that’s a hurdle for another day.

Be the first to comment

A few weeks ago I had one of those right-place-at-the-right-time opportunities that prove that the universe is not devoid of a sense of good timing. The Art Sanctuary invited a group of Parkway students to attend a special student matinee performance of selections from Can You Hear God Crying? The finished work is expected to premiere in Philadelphia in June, but composer Hannibal Lokumbe and a group of singers and musicians that included students from Philadelphia and Camden were ready to give a sneak preview to hundreds of Philadelphia-area students as part of the Reading in Concert program. Through the generosity of the Art Sanctuary, we were able to bring a group of ninth graders to the Kimmel Center for no charge.

I can not emphasize how important that last sentence is. I’ve been trying to organize a ninth grade field trip for two years and every time, the cost has become a hurdle. Now we were going to have a chance to bring students inside Verizon Hall at the Kimmel Center to hear a live musical performance.

Heck, I was going to have a chance to go inside Verizon Hall and hear a live musical performance. That’s been on my To Do in Philadelphia list for quite some time.

In keeping with the good timing theme, Can You Hear God Crying? is inspired by the passage of captured Africans to the Americas as part of the slave trade, but it takes the idea of the Door of No Return and extends it to everyone, to represent those turning points in our lives where we lose touch with something dear. The good timing is that in World History we had just finished discussing the slave trade the week before the performance, so here was an opportunity to show students that something that occurred hundreds of years ago was still resonating with people in the present day and shaping events in the world around us.

The performance itself was a great experience for me, for several reasons. It was inspiring to see high school students from this area on that stage, ready and able to perform. I was intrigued by Lokumbe’s work with prisoners to use music and the arts as a means for introspection and self-improvement (the Music Liberation Project). And I welcomed the opportunity to broaden my own cultural horizons a little bit. The work has choral pieces, some of which were performed by a Liberian choir in Philadelphia. It is easy for me to forget how much power the human voice has simply as an instrument; I am so familiar and comfortable with words that I tend to focus on the meaning of lyrics rather than the emotion of the performance, but that isn’t an option when you don’t know the language.

It was also interesting to me to see the students’ response to the pieces. The earlier choral pieces, especially a mournful selection about the “Jonah people” trapped in the belly of a slave ship, were the kind of music that requires stillness and concentration to appreciate. Long single notes helped me think of a ship, tossing and lurching through turbulent seas, whose passengers had lost control of their own destiny. I am far from a musical critic or expert, but this part of the program was not what I would call accessible, and I think it was a little alien to some of the students as well.

But in the second half of the performance, the drums and piano and other instruments kicked in, and Lokumbe attempted to convey the possibility of joy and hope that exists in each of us. The music was more of a jam session with an upbeat tempo, and as the students began to clap along and move in their seats I could tell that this was a musical experience that they could completely engage with. It made me think of the impromptu singing performances I’ve seen break out at school, and it reminded me once again that art is not an option in human lives – it’s something we need and a fundamental part of who we are.

As the performance came to a close, Lokumbe answered some questions from the audience, and one of our students got to ask the final question. Another student turned to me, out of the blue, and said, “I’m glad we came to this.”

Some days, teaching isn’t just a holding action against all the challenges we face. Some days, you get to do something special. I’m very grateful to the Art Sanctuary, the Kimmel Center, Hannibal Lokumbe, the performers, and to the students and my colleagues at Parkway for making December 13 one of those days. And until June, I’ll be keeping my eye on the Kimmel Center site for more information about the finished version of Can You Hear God Crying?

Be the first to comment

By the time 1997 hit October, I had already started calling it the Year from Hell. I had graduated from Fordham and already found myself foundering professionally. I had compiled a jack-of-all-trades/master-of-none resume that left me unsure of what field to pursue and without the confidence to sell myself in interviews. I was about to leave my second job since graduation, my apartment in New York was a disaster waiting to happen, and I often supplied the disaster. Friendships strained as my fellow grads and I adjusted to “the real world” and its new demands on us. Wherever my happy place was, it was pretty vacant.

And then I read that Bill Berry was quitting R.E.M. Clearly, the universe had quit playing fair.

I can’t say I was surprised. The poor guy had an aneurysm on stage. If he wanted to go take it easy for life, he was more than entitled. Still, it was one more signal. The glory days of high school and college were over. Time to start moving on. Except, of course, I didn’t. I went to the library, checked out a book collecting all of Rolling Stone’s articles about the band, and served myself a crash course of R.E.M. history as it happened. And I waited for the next album, to see what Berry, Buck, Mills, and Stipe minus Berry would produce.

Read the remainder of this entry »

Be the first to comment

When Endings Loom

By Dave Thomer | Filed in Special Order Speeches

There are a lot of angles to the Penn State case, but one thing that keeps coming into my head is how almost no one saw this particular ending coming. I wonder, did Joe Paterno, at any point in the last decade, think about what his final game as head coach of Penn State would be like? Did he imagine that moment as a final recognition and culmination of his career? Maybe he didn’t care. Maybe he didn’t want that final moment. Maybe he wanted to keep going until he dropped, so he would never have to think “This is my last moment as coach.” I don’t know. But whatever he thought, whatever he hoped for . . . I wonder how many times in the last ten years (at least) he’s known how quickly that vision would fall apart if the truth ever came out. I wonder if he ever thought about what it would take to truly go out on his own terms with his reputation and integrity intact.

Be the first to comment

Couple of quick notes while I try to de-sludge my brain and the rest of my body from this cold:

  • Remember that last city council spot I mentioned in yesterday’s piece about the election day turnout? We’re still waiting for a couple of precincts to report, but right now the margin between the guy who would get the job and the guy who be almost-but-not-quite-there is 76 votes.
  • Joe Posnanski has become one of my favorite sportswriters. He has been living in State College working on a book about Joe Paterno. Um, get me rewrite?
  • My current Facebook status: The Penn State story continues to be a tragedy, but now it’s adding farce. The “Blue Out” T shirts that are supposed to send an anti-child abuse message this weekend say “Stop child abuse, Blue out Nebraska.” Really? It’s really a good idea to add a sports slogan to the “Stop chid abuse” message? And correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t recall Nebraska employing, giving facilities access to, or covering up the actions of an alleged child abuser. Pretty sure it was a different school that did that.
  • Now that Alton Brown has retired Good Eats I should probably do a retrospective of the things he’s taught me to cook. This week we’re getting a lot of mileage out of his recipe for Perfect Popcorn. I use safflower oil instead of peanut oil because I do not like peanut oil. And I take the melted butter (2 tablespoons) and drizzle it over the kernels right as they start popping. Gotta be careful not to burn it but it saves me from having to drizzle it over the popped kernels.
  • Mike Mills and Michael Stipe are doing lots of promotion for the upcoming retrospective. NPR will stream the double album until it comes out. I have two major thoughts right now: 1) I will finish the next part of my own retrospective this week; 2) With all the talk that Mike Mills in particular has done about leaving on their own terms, I desperately hope that there is no reason to fear a revelation that would tarnish everything that the band has meant to its fans for three decades. Not that there are any contrasting stories in the news or anything.
  • Did I mention I really hate being sick?
  • Before I go, if you’re not reading Autodizactic, here’s the kind of post you’re missing.
Be the first to comment

Election Day in Philadelphia came with pretty sparse turnout on a beautiful day. I was home sick from work, which kind of made me miss the days when my house was the polling place. On the other hand, I didn’t have to clean my garage.

On the one hand the sparse turnout is no surprise, since there was very little chance that Michael Nutter was going to lose his re-election bid. After the Philadelphia Republican Party couldn’t beat John Street in two tries, it’s kind of given up on the mayor’s races.

On the flip side, I’m checking out election results at Philadelphia’s unofficial reporting site, and it looks like the last City Council at-large race is going to be decided by about 1000-1500 votes. In a city of a million people, that’s a pretty tiny margin, and if a determined group had wanted to they might have been able to control who won that last seat. (On a side note, I’ve spent most of the last 25 years trying to remember that Brian O’Neill is my councilman and Denny O’Brien is my state representative. Now they’re both my councilman because O’Brien gave up the state House for an at-large council seat.)

There was also a race for the City Commissioners’ office. The City Commissioners are officially in charge of running elections in the city, and it looks like two of the three members have been voted out this year – one in the primary, and one tonight. A small but significant number of people voted for mayor – an election that was high profile but never really in doubt – but not for commissioner – a race that got much less attention but was much closer, at least for the third and final seat on the board. And since that position will influence elections for the next four years, there was a lot of bang for the buck to be had in that election.

On the other hand, some people make the argument that we should have voters select lower-profile officials like that – the nominations get swept up in party politics because no one is really paying attention, and it costs the city money to go through the election process anyway. Maybe, at least for now, we would be better off with fewer offices to vote for so we could pay more attention to each one.

Be the first to comment

Occupy the Voting Booth Revisited

By Dave Thomer | Filed in So Now What?

OK, so maybe I’m a little sensitive since I just wrote my piece on why the Occupy movement needs an electoral strategy. (And yeah, Occupy a Voting Booth does not really appear to be a unique title on my part, but sometimes the obvious choices are good ones.) But this piece in the Philadelphia Daily News putting down the idea that Occupiers should care about voting really aggravated me. It came off as ax-grinding, and poorly-researched and poorly-thought-out ax-grinding.

Will Bunch sets up the question like this:

The main kiosk at the west entrance to Occupy Philly is plastered with fliers for a “die-in” later today at PNC Bank and a Tuesday night event,”Why Does the Curfew Matter to Occupy Philadelphia?” but not one reference to Election Day.
Indeed, when it comes to the anti-corporate-greed Occupy movement that has blown open the national political dialogue in just six short weeks since it debuted on Wall Street, the main election debate is this:
Do elections even matter?

Bunch then dismisses those voices saying that Occupy should be part of the electoral process by calling them “voices of the Establishment” before approvingly quoting Michael Moore:

Michael Moore, the left-wing filmmaker and rabble rouser who has spoken at Occupy rallies from New York’s Zuccotti Park to Oakland, says that an emphasis on voting is tantamount to an endorsement of politics as usual.
“This movement is so beyond just, ‘Hey, let’s get behind this candidate, get them elected to office,’ ” Moore told CNN’s Anderson Cooper last week. “Those days are over. You know, we’ve all worked for candidates. We’ve all voted. We’ve all participated. And what have we gotten out of it?”

OK, here’s the thing. Since 1968 there have been 11 presidential elections. Call 2000 a split, and Republicans have won six and Democrats have won 4. So if Moore’s wondering why it doesn’t seem like voting has gotten him and the left very much, it’s because they’ve lost more than they’ve won. So one possibility is that the public doesn’t agree with Moore and the leftward tilt of movements like Occupy – in which case it’s pretty silly for Occupy to say “We are the 99%” when they’re not even 50% plus one. Another possibility is that Occupy does represent a majority of Americans – but that majority can’t enact its preferences because, despite Moore’s claim, they’re not participating.

Bunch then goes on to cite a common justification for not-voting:

“If elections changed anything, they would be important,” said C.T. Lawrence Butler, a founder of the Food Not Bombs movement, who was visiting Occupy Philly from a commune north of Baltimore. “But most of the time it’s between Tweedledee and Tweedledum.” Surveys have shown that a majority of Occupy protesters voted for Obama in 2008, but are fed up over his coddling of Wall Street or the unending war in Afghanistan.

I’m going to put aside the reference to “his coddling of Wall Street” because that’s an entire topic on its own, but are we really still going with “There’s no difference between the candidates” in 2011? Are there people who think that Al Gore would have pursued the same policies that George W. Bush did? Are there people who think that John McCain would have signed any kind of law expanding access to health insurance or any kind of law regulating Wall Street or setting up a consumer finance protection bureau?

Go ahead and say these measures aren’t enough. Go ahead and demand more. But recognize that the conservative movement has been pushing its agenda since 1980. They didn’t get it all when Ronald Reagan was elected. They didn’t get it all when George H.W. Bush was elected. They didn’t get it all when George W. Bush was elected or re-elected. But they’ve kept pushing and they’ve kept turning out to vote. The only way to push back is to vote against them.

Bunch quotes an independent party candidate for a local office who is frustrated that she can’t get more support from the Occupiers, who don’t seem interested in voting at all. Then he turns his fire at the “pundits” again, including his own bosses who, apparently, envisioned a different article from Bunch and share my good taste in titles:

To the “grown-up” punditry class – including even the Daily News editors who assigned me to this article to match a front page picturing a voting booth with the words “Occupy This!” – a move into elections will be a much-needed sign of maturity for the Occupiers.
Here’s why the political pundits (including Daily News editors) are wrong, in my opinion.
Remember the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., the guy with the national holiday and that big statue on the National Mall. Do you know how many political candidates or parties King endorsed in his career? Zero.

OK. The entire piece was bad, but now we have just gone horribly, horribly wrong.

First of all, so far, the entire article has been about voting. Not endorsements, not running candidates, but voting. Does anyone want to claim that King and the civil rights movement didn’t care about participating in the voting process? Does anyone want to claim that King didn’t want people to vote because it didn’t really matter? Do I have to write a few hundred words about the Voting Rights Act, or the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party’s attempt to seat African-American delegates to the 1964 Democratic National Convention, or the voter registration drives, or the confrontations with Southern sheriffs provoked merely by an African-American attempting to register to vote? No? Good.

But let’s go to the larger point about King and endorsements. OK, King never said “I endorse so and so.” But in 1960, when he was in jail due to a traffic ticket, John F. Kennedy called his wife Coretta and Robert F. Kennedy worked behind the scenes to get King released. King’s father endorsed Kennedy over Nixon. King himself came out with effusive public praise of Kennedy even though he said he needed to remain officially neutral. King knew that he was helping Kennedy, and he thought that was a good idea. In 1964, King was not as fond of Lyndon Johnson, but he denounced Barry Goldwater and urged people not to vote for him. That doesn’t sound like someone remaining neutral in the electoral process.

OK, we’re in the home stretch now. What else does Bunch have to say?

In six remarkable weeks, the movement that began with Occupy Wall Street has changed the national conversation so that foreclosure, student debt and the lack of jobs are no longer taboo words on cable-news shows. Everyone should vote, and there will surely be some 2012 campaigns – consumer-advocate Elizabeth Warren’s Massachusetts Senate bid is a template – that stir this movement.

Side note – hey, you know who else started talking about the lack of jobs and student debt back in August and September? Some guy named Barack Obama. Just a coincidence, I’m sure.

But look at that last sentence. “Everyone should vote.”

Everyone should vote? Really? You’ve just spent how much time questioning whether elections really matter and arguing that it’s between Tweedldee and Teedledum but in the end you’re going to say that everyone should vote? Which, by the way, is the point of the newspaper cover you mocked your editors for using?

Who’s the more foolish, the fool or the fool who spends two hours critiquing his foolishness?

Be the first to comment