Sorry for the extended absence. December and June are always difficult for teachers.
I managed to get myself truly behind the paper-grading 8-ball (no, not the 8-ball that grades papers, silly) this year when I decided to write The Adventures of Adelbert A. Kendall. That would be my great-great-grandfather--who'd have thought I could write 6600 words about a man about whom there are no books, no scholarly papers--just a newspaper article here and an Internet paragraph there. Plus a dischronologized account by my grandmother, God rest her. Writing these 6600 words (plus all the research involved, plus footnotes) took hours and hours, during which time my better half lovingly watched the kids. I've seen a lot of payoff already, but I'm not sure I'd do it again--and that's the paper-grading problem.
Having completed the biography around the 10th or 15th, I was able to attack the grades (including the major project I'd assigned) well in front of today's deadline. But then, last night, we watched A Christmas Carol (starring Patrick Stewart) with the kids and three guests. The guests stayed until 10, because I knew I didn't have to go to work until 8 AM (instead of the usual 7:25). But that night, Oob got up three times, including one 90-minute marathon, and Leena threw up twice. And, for extra bonus points, my better half got sick, too.
Now, this 2:30-PM-on-12/21/07 grade deadline is a H-A-R-D deadline. I mean, they have maybe half-an-hour's wiggle room built in. But there was no way I could leave the prime minister in charge--she could barely make it from the bed to the bathroom.
So I went to work and brought five out of six kids, all but the now-passively-sick-and-excited-because-she-gets-to-wear-PJ's-and-watch-movies Leena. I grabbed the (heavy) box of still-ungraded papers, and home we went. I then stuffed videos in the kids faces, sometimes using two televisions at once, took care of my wife, made meals, and graded like a maniac. My wife arose from her stupor (arose figuratively; she stayed in bed) in just enough time to prove that she is, indeed, my better half by volunteering to help me grade the projects. We finished at 1 PM, at which point I took the 7-month-old Oob to work with me, and I got the grades in by 2:15. (Oob wanted to play with the electrical cords. I eventually unplugged them and just let him play, looking at him every five seconds to ensure that they hadn't encircled his throat.)
I guess this is why you don't leave grading papers until the last day--which would be why one doesn't write 6600-word biographies of ancestors during the month of December.
Friday, December 21, 2007
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Frustration
It's so frustrating to have an ancestor whom you're 99% sure was in the local newspapers 100+ years ago . . . and to have all of the newspapers gone, destroyed, never to be unearthed . . .
It reminds me of Aaron Rice, whom we know is from Litchfield, CT, but can't records of . . . or our ancestors in Woodford, Vermont, where the court building with all the records burned down . . . or of the Obuses, who chose Obus as their last name more or less at random so that no one could track them down as Jews . . . or even the family questions I should have asked my Aunt Toni on her deathbed, almost two decades ago . . . but I didn't know the right questions yet . . .
The death of information is a terrible thing . . .
It reminds me of Aaron Rice, whom we know is from Litchfield, CT, but can't records of . . . or our ancestors in Woodford, Vermont, where the court building with all the records burned down . . . or of the Obuses, who chose Obus as their last name more or less at random so that no one could track them down as Jews . . . or even the family questions I should have asked my Aunt Toni on her deathbed, almost two decades ago . . . but I didn't know the right questions yet . . .
The death of information is a terrible thing . . .
Fascinating presidential poll
Just studied this national poll a bit. Especially outstanding:
1) I posted a while back on Hillary Clinton's negatives. This poll records them: 50% of adults hold an unfavorable opinion of her. How in the world can she get elected president if the general election hasn't even started and her unfavorable rating is already 50%?
2) Huckabee is now #2 nationally among Republicans. Last poll, he was in 5th place. Talk about meteoric--I can't recall the like. Bizarre election.
3) Huckabee has a 17-point spread between his "favorable" and "unfavorable" ratings (33% and 16% respectively).
4) Perhaps most importantly, Huckabee is still unknown by 33% of the electorate. If they, as they learn about him, mirror the electorate who have heard of him, his rise will only continue.
OK, back to teaching . . .
1) I posted a while back on Hillary Clinton's negatives. This poll records them: 50% of adults hold an unfavorable opinion of her. How in the world can she get elected president if the general election hasn't even started and her unfavorable rating is already 50%?
2) Huckabee is now #2 nationally among Republicans. Last poll, he was in 5th place. Talk about meteoric--I can't recall the like. Bizarre election.
3) Huckabee has a 17-point spread between his "favorable" and "unfavorable" ratings (33% and 16% respectively).
4) Perhaps most importantly, Huckabee is still unknown by 33% of the electorate. If they, as they learn about him, mirror the electorate who have heard of him, his rise will only continue.
OK, back to teaching . . .
Friday, November 30, 2007
Excellent article on stem cell research
I haven't seen a non-science writer who understands stem cells as well as this one.
He discusses, of course, this fabulous news for science released last week.
He discusses, of course, this fabulous news for science released last week.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Trust
Those who know me know that I survive by dint of a daily verse of Scripture, chosen from the day's Mass readings or the Divine Office. I just read the readings, and one verse "jumps out" at me. (I try to use Lectio Divina, but time constraints usually prohibit that.)
Today's threw me for a loop; the second time in the four months I've been doing this. Daniel 6 told me, "Daniel was removed from the den, unhurt because he trusted in his God."
Trust in God is the very issue that came up in November's spiritual direction. My medical problems (originally misdiagnosed as migraines, later re-classified as occipital neuralgia) have put me through--well, more suffering than I'm used to, anyway. It's been quite a roller coaster since December 2004, when the problem first started. Only now are we finishing up the minor issues, like why my gut has been hurting.
But I feel like I can't trust God. After what I've been through, my reaction really was, "If God did this to me when I trusted Him, I can't make that mistake again." Now, intellectually, I know God *allowed* it, not "did" it, but I'm talking about my emotions here. I also know that the medical problems really did work to my good--I have better control over my temper, I know more about what it means to "offer it [suffering] up," I'm more focussed on my family than on outside commitments (e.g. politics), I'm more sympathetic to the suffering of others, and I have a greater love for Christ, who suffered all of what I go through--purposefully.
But I still can't trust Him. Emotionally, I feel like I don't know what He's going to do to me next. Which is ridiculous, and intellectually I realize that there's a misconception of God there, a lack of theological hope, etc. So I'll get past it, with the help of my spiritual director. But it might take a while.
Daniel trusted in his God. Note the possessive pronoun "his." There's an intimacy there. And the word "because"--his trust resulted in his being unharmed. That goes against my thinking. And my thinking is what's wrong.
I may keep this verse for a couple of days. I'll try to write back with additional thoughts later.
Today's threw me for a loop; the second time in the four months I've been doing this. Daniel 6 told me, "Daniel was removed from the den, unhurt because he trusted in his God."
Trust in God is the very issue that came up in November's spiritual direction. My medical problems (originally misdiagnosed as migraines, later re-classified as occipital neuralgia) have put me through--well, more suffering than I'm used to, anyway. It's been quite a roller coaster since December 2004, when the problem first started. Only now are we finishing up the minor issues, like why my gut has been hurting.
But I feel like I can't trust God. After what I've been through, my reaction really was, "If God did this to me when I trusted Him, I can't make that mistake again." Now, intellectually, I know God *allowed* it, not "did" it, but I'm talking about my emotions here. I also know that the medical problems really did work to my good--I have better control over my temper, I know more about what it means to "offer it [suffering] up," I'm more focussed on my family than on outside commitments (e.g. politics), I'm more sympathetic to the suffering of others, and I have a greater love for Christ, who suffered all of what I go through--purposefully.
But I still can't trust Him. Emotionally, I feel like I don't know what He's going to do to me next. Which is ridiculous, and intellectually I realize that there's a misconception of God there, a lack of theological hope, etc. So I'll get past it, with the help of my spiritual director. But it might take a while.
Daniel trusted in his God. Note the possessive pronoun "his." There's an intimacy there. And the word "because"--his trust resulted in his being unharmed. That goes against my thinking. And my thinking is what's wrong.
I may keep this verse for a couple of days. I'll try to write back with additional thoughts later.
The week of great news
Wow--can things get any better around here?
1) Medical tests revealed that I don't have to have surgery on my abdomen! Hurrah!!! My problem should be easily treated with short-term prescription medicine.
2) I just got word from a museum and a library (both in Nebraska) that they have photos, obituaries, and even newspaper stories by and about my great-great-grandfather! We've lacked photos of him up until now, so this is huge. I'd say more, but I'm keeping it a secret from Little Things until, uh, the end of December... Anyway, for you genealogists out there, consider local museums as a source; it hadn't occurred to me until this week, and the photos were just there waiting all this time.
3) Watched The Incredibles with two friends, one of whom is a priest who'd never seen it before. The combination of scathing social commentary and the issues relating to one's personal philosophy really hit him, as did its insights into married relationships; he left amazed that a "cartoon" could be so good, saying he'd have to take a couple of ideas just to process all the ideas. It was my third time through, and I got things from it I hadn't seen the first two times.
4) I just this morning got invited to teach International Baccalaureate English next year. Have to pray on that one, but it's a huge honor.
5) Myxl, who just got third place in the children's division gingerbread house contest (and whom I hope has a shot of the Viewer's Choice Award, given some comments from a friend who visited the show), just earned three--count them, three!--Webelos cub scout badges at home, which will be added to the two he's so far earned at the meetings. That makes five, one more than is necessary to get his first "compass point" out of three possible. I'm so proud of him! (He was already the first in his den to get his compass patch, so he's really doing extremely well.)
1) Medical tests revealed that I don't have to have surgery on my abdomen! Hurrah!!! My problem should be easily treated with short-term prescription medicine.
2) I just got word from a museum and a library (both in Nebraska) that they have photos, obituaries, and even newspaper stories by and about my great-great-grandfather! We've lacked photos of him up until now, so this is huge. I'd say more, but I'm keeping it a secret from Little Things until, uh, the end of December... Anyway, for you genealogists out there, consider local museums as a source; it hadn't occurred to me until this week, and the photos were just there waiting all this time.
3) Watched The Incredibles with two friends, one of whom is a priest who'd never seen it before. The combination of scathing social commentary and the issues relating to one's personal philosophy really hit him, as did its insights into married relationships; he left amazed that a "cartoon" could be so good, saying he'd have to take a couple of ideas just to process all the ideas. It was my third time through, and I got things from it I hadn't seen the first two times.
4) I just this morning got invited to teach International Baccalaureate English next year. Have to pray on that one, but it's a huge honor.
5) Myxl, who just got third place in the children's division gingerbread house contest (and whom I hope has a shot of the Viewer's Choice Award, given some comments from a friend who visited the show), just earned three--count them, three!--Webelos cub scout badges at home, which will be added to the two he's so far earned at the meetings. That makes five, one more than is necessary to get his first "compass point" out of three possible. I'm so proud of him! (He was already the first in his den to get his compass patch, so he's really doing extremely well.)
Monday, November 26, 2007
Why Clinton can't win and Huckabee can
This post started as a reply to my big sister Little Things, but it outgrew itself.
1) The nation hasn't elected a senator president but twice in the last 75 years. We like governors and vice presidents to be presidents, but not senators. This factor works against Clinton and for Huckabee.
2) With any political campaign, you have to consider the general election's "anti" vote. For example, Romney, as the nominee, would have to fight the anti-Mormon contingent of the Republican Right, who would really have to be courted quite hard not to just stay home. Guliani attracts such a strong "anti" vote from the Right that they've threatened a third-party bid (well, fourth-party, if you count Bloomberg). However, Huckabee lacks the strong "antis" so far, as far as the general election goes.
Clinton has such a high "anti" factor that people who have never participated in politics before would actively volunteer just to ruin her chances (and in my social circle, I know some of these people). It's not nice, nor is the vehemance of their vitriol logical, but there we are.
Here's an excerpt from pollster.com that plays off that idea:
A new SurveyUSA automated survey of 523 registered voters in oregon [sic] (conducted 11/9 through 11/11) finds:
General Election Match-ups:
McCain 48%, Clinton 45%
Clinton 46%, Giuliani 45%
Clinton 48%, Romney 44%
Clinton 50%, Huckabee 40%
Obama 45%, McCain 45%
Obama 51%, Giuliani 40%
Obama 52%, Romney 37%
Obama 54%, Huckabee 33%
Obama handily outperforms Clinton in each match-up. Huckabee's low name recognition nationally (compared to prior candidate McCain, Hizzoner Guliani, and front-runner/multi-millionaire Romney) accounts for his poor performance in these polls.
3) America doesn't tend to go for Democratic presidential candidates. From 1966 to the present, the U.S. has only elected two Democrats to the presidency. One was elected in the wake of the Watergate scandals. The other failed to get past 50% either time he ran.
This works against Clinton and favors Huckabee.
4) Immigration is the dark horse issue that could really work against Democrats. I'm pretty liberal on immigration (I supported the bipartisan McCain/Kennedy reform package), but the nation doesn't share my views. Clinton, already shown vulnerable here, will be walloped on immigration, no matter who the GOP candidate is.
More disturbingly for Dems, most African-Americans agree with Republicans on immigration. Some have already held their noses and voted Republican over abortion and gay marriage; if immigration pulls even an additional 5-10%, the Dems could be in real trouble, working to the advantage of the Republicans. BTW, Huckabee, in his Arkansas re-election bid, earned 49% of the African-American vote statewide. (Ironically, Huckabee is actually fairly moderate on immigration, despite all his nay-saying, but immigration will still be used as a "wedge" issue.)
P.S. As a registered Dem, I'm voting for Obama, who has really impressed me of late with his statements on education.
1) The nation hasn't elected a senator president but twice in the last 75 years. We like governors and vice presidents to be presidents, but not senators. This factor works against Clinton and for Huckabee.
2) With any political campaign, you have to consider the general election's "anti" vote. For example, Romney, as the nominee, would have to fight the anti-Mormon contingent of the Republican Right, who would really have to be courted quite hard not to just stay home. Guliani attracts such a strong "anti" vote from the Right that they've threatened a third-party bid (well, fourth-party, if you count Bloomberg). However, Huckabee lacks the strong "antis" so far, as far as the general election goes.
Clinton has such a high "anti" factor that people who have never participated in politics before would actively volunteer just to ruin her chances (and in my social circle, I know some of these people). It's not nice, nor is the vehemance of their vitriol logical, but there we are.
Here's an excerpt from pollster.com that plays off that idea:
A new SurveyUSA automated survey of 523 registered voters in oregon [sic] (conducted 11/9 through 11/11) finds:
General Election Match-ups:
McCain 48%, Clinton 45%
Clinton 46%, Giuliani 45%
Clinton 48%, Romney 44%
Clinton 50%, Huckabee 40%
Obama 45%, McCain 45%
Obama 51%, Giuliani 40%
Obama 52%, Romney 37%
Obama 54%, Huckabee 33%
Obama handily outperforms Clinton in each match-up. Huckabee's low name recognition nationally (compared to prior candidate McCain, Hizzoner Guliani, and front-runner/multi-millionaire Romney) accounts for his poor performance in these polls.
3) America doesn't tend to go for Democratic presidential candidates. From 1966 to the present, the U.S. has only elected two Democrats to the presidency. One was elected in the wake of the Watergate scandals. The other failed to get past 50% either time he ran.
This works against Clinton and favors Huckabee.
4) Immigration is the dark horse issue that could really work against Democrats. I'm pretty liberal on immigration (I supported the bipartisan McCain/Kennedy reform package), but the nation doesn't share my views. Clinton, already shown vulnerable here, will be walloped on immigration, no matter who the GOP candidate is.
More disturbingly for Dems, most African-Americans agree with Republicans on immigration. Some have already held their noses and voted Republican over abortion and gay marriage; if immigration pulls even an additional 5-10%, the Dems could be in real trouble, working to the advantage of the Republicans. BTW, Huckabee, in his Arkansas re-election bid, earned 49% of the African-American vote statewide. (Ironically, Huckabee is actually fairly moderate on immigration, despite all his nay-saying, but immigration will still be used as a "wedge" issue.)
P.S. As a registered Dem, I'm voting for Obama, who has really impressed me of late with his statements on education.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
