1. Owning the Moon
This is absolutely ludicrous, particularly Bigelow’s claims that there are compelling and profitable reasons to stake out a claim on the moon. Owning the moon would without doubt not be profitable for the United States at all, at least not anytime this century. If private enterprise wants to make a go of it, I’m all for it. If they’re successful, the US can buy tracts of moon land from them on which to build whatever it likes. But for God’s sakes, no more space race nonsense!
2. Green Berets
I’m a bit torn on the US military contracting for alternative energy for strategic reasons. I absolutely understand the non-environmental motivation behind it, and in terms of government funding cutting-edge technologies or alternative energies, I’m of the mind that the military is really the only part of government that has any business doing it. But being intimately familiar with defense contracting and all the antics that go on in it, and coupled with the fiasco that the administration’s “green shoots” policy of alternative energy subsidies that essentially amount to kick-backs and crony capitalism, I have serious misgivings about how this will work out practically. And of course I’m extremely wary of the military being used to advance a political/environmental agenda.
3. Tunisian Elections
The latest on the Tunisian elections, the first free elections in the nation’s history. It’s too early to say anything with certainty, but the early leader seems to be a moderate Islamist party, which, from reports, seems to have been an expected development. The party’s willingness to join other coalitions, regardless of whether it wins an outright majority in the Parliament, in order to ensure this caretaker government is as broad and collaborative as possible is encouraging. Will continue to watch with interest.
4. School Report Cards to Include Your Child’s BMI?
This is insane, absolutely insane. An Ohio law that requires schools to measure their students’ BMIs and report them via the Ohio Health Department to their parents seems to be facing some broad resistance from state schools, with nearly 40% of the state’s school districts opting out of collecting the measurements. The argument, I would assume, for even involving the schools in this is that they provide lunch to the children five out of seven days of the week and so they’re in part responsible for the child’s health. But school lunch, which of course is in no way is required to be purchased at school, only constitutes 24% of the meals those children consume. The other whopping 76% comes from home. So why in the hell does this argument continue to gain traction (rhetorical question)?
1) I have two words for you sir: Moon Olympics.
ReplyDelete2) I see what you did there. With the title. Clever.
3) Yes, something to be watched, and later lamented I am sure.
4) If it were not evident on its face that easily half of parents are unwilling or unable to take an active interest in their childrens' well-being, the teachers-cum-governments may not be so gun-ho about taking over.
4) I think you're putting the cart before the horse... or the chicken before the egg. Or some such. The state/federal eduction apparatus began inserting itself into parents' business during the Civil Rights movement out of necessity and used the excuse to run roughshod ever since. Parents' apathy (speaking as a parent) in large part arises from the fact that the state has already happily assumed the responsiblity of assisting in raising of your child. If you don't like how they do it you have to show up at PTA and school board meetings, which is time that you could spend on work, laundry, soccer matches, etc. Parents, rather than go through the additional aggravation of arguing with the state, go about their business. Same as they do on taxes, health care, the economy, etc. The responsible ones get a word in edgewise and roll back the indoctrination, make their kids eat their veggies and play sports/exercise. The irresponsible ones leave that sh*t up to the school system.
ReplyDelete