home

Overnight Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Mon May 26, 2008 at 12:30:33 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

I'm watching the repeat of Recount. TalkLeft was just a website and not a blog in 2000, but I tracked the events daily and when it was over, made a compendium page. It's accessible here and if you're fuzzy on the chronology of events, it may provide some information. The links to the AP articles are no longer valid, but most of those to other news sources still work.

As for Indiana Jones, don't ask. Aside from the fire alarms going off in the 15 theater movie plex, requiring evacuation of all of them about 20 minutes after the movie started, and then having to watch all the previews and first 20 minutes again, it just wasn't very good or memorable. I did enjoy Karen Allen, but the plot strained credulity and there was too much of the 1950's in it for my taste.

If anyone's still up and online and has something to say, here's the spot.

Comments now closed

< Recount Open Thread | Krugman On Unity >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Overnight Open Thread | 220 comments (220 topical)
    Spouse saw Indy Jones yesterday (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Cream City on Mon May 26, 2008 at 12:42:03 AM EST
    and said almost exactly the same thing, Jeralyn.  But c'mon, isn't it still worth it, looking at Harrison Ford for hours? :-)

    Reaction to the movie might be generational.  Son and friends in their late 20s liked it fine.  Then again, maybe they still think fire alarms are fun, too.

    Heh (5.00 / 3) (#12)
    by Steve M on Mon May 26, 2008 at 12:51:16 AM EST
    I saw Harrison Ford being interviewed on one of those movie review shows the other night.  He looked like a very, very old man.  About the only person who could be cast as his father at this point would be John McCain.

    [ Parent ]
    Sean Connery still gets away with it. (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by andgarden on Mon May 26, 2008 at 12:52:37 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I resent this (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by nellre on Mon May 26, 2008 at 02:21:52 AM EST
    Mr. Ford is only a couple of years older than I am. I don't even qualify for senior discounts most places! :-)

    [ Parent ]
    Yes, but that one would have to be called. . , (5.00 / 3) (#137)
    by LarryInNYC on Mon May 26, 2008 at 08:23:43 AM EST
    the only person who could be cast as his father at this point would be John McCain

    Indiana Jones and the Campaign of Doom.

    [ Parent ]

    I never Liked Harrison Ford (none / 0) (#184)
    by Mrwirez on Mon May 26, 2008 at 09:24:43 AM EST
    I always thought he over-acted. I was 12 when the first Star Wars came out, and loved it, but not for Harrison Ford. I never really liked the Indiana Jones movies either, I much preferred the Bruce Willis, Die Hard flicks. You give me a good cop and bad guy movie and I am hooked. Btw, isn't he a tad too old to be saving people with a whip, its like McCain running for president.....

    [ Parent ]
    what do you think of Obama's address (5.00 / 4) (#27)
    by wrkn129 on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:08:51 AM EST
    to the graduating class of Wesleyan University?

    To me, it sounded like he made it about him instead of about them. And he campaigned...saying what he would do as president on a few issues. As far as I am concerned, a commencement should be about the graduates, not about the speaker.

    sermon (5.00 / 4) (#73)
    by nellre on Mon May 26, 2008 at 02:08:33 AM EST
    Preachy


    [ Parent ]
    fwiw (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Turkana on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:09:48 AM EST
    i had the same reaction to the first indy, but i was being too much of a literalist. it was later pointed out to me that the movie was designed around '50s serials, and you could even break it down into 15 or 20 minute segments (i forget which), as if it had been shot to be a serial series. credulity was never intended. it was just comic book fun. i hope to take that attitude into this one, although i'm feeling ornery, of late...

    The "Millennials" Are Coming (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by nycstray on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:12:28 AM EST
    anybody catch this on 60 Minutes?

    Millenials (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by formerhoosier on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:21:04 AM EST
    Brief synopsis?  Do not do network sites, too many images and flash that take forever to load.  Understand if not easily summarized.

    [ Parent ]
    OOPS, I messed up. The reply is below and (none / 0) (#49)
    by nycstray on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:29:54 AM EST
    called here's the intro :)

    [ Parent ]
    nycstray- I saw that report and thought (none / 0) (#168)
    by kenosharick on Mon May 26, 2008 at 09:07:01 AM EST
    that it was over the top and a bit hysterical. I think they found a few examples of Ivy-league educated rich kids and extrapolated that in a bizarre manner.

    [ Parent ]
    They'll make up anything (none / 0) (#192)
    by JavaCityPal on Mon May 26, 2008 at 09:38:48 AM EST
    to give consultants a new mission to use for flooding the market.

    Same topic was on Dateline. They showed the surge of management training being done for how the baby boomers need to change their expectations, AND manners classes for the Millen... kids (i.e., how to eat with the proper utensils taught by a former WH chef).

    I have one of those kids. He's had a job since he was 15, he's now 26. He never missed a day of school (including his college courses), and he's never missed a day of work. When he should have, and I said so, he explained that if he didn't show up someone else would have to do his work. He isn't much different than all his friends. I suppose the working class kids don't fall too far from the tree.

    It seemed like a problem the upper middle class created. I sure remember the endless flow of trophies for nothing, but workplace rewards and incentives have been around for a couple decades now, too, and I sure don't understand those, either. I want my thanks in the paycheck.


    [ Parent ]

    Here's the intro to it (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by nycstray on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:28:03 AM EST
    It's about the latest generation entering college and the workforce:

    It's graduation time and once again we say "Stand back all bosses!" A new breed of American worker is about to attack everything you hold sacred: from giving orders, to your starched white shirt and tie. They are called, among other things, "millennials." There are about 80 million of them, born between 1980 and 1995, and they're rapidly taking over from the baby boomers who are now pushing 60.

    They were raised by doting parents who told them they are special, played in little leagues with no winners or losers, or all winners. They are laden with trophies just for participating and they think your business-as-usual ethic is for the birds. And if you persist in the belief you can, take your job and shove it.

    As correspondent Morley Safer first reported last November, corporate America is so unnerved by all this that companies like Merrill Lynch, Ernst & Young, and scores of others are hiring consultants to teach them how to deal with this generation that only takes "yes" for an answer.

    the site isn't too bad as far as network sites go and you can watch the video of the segment. I tend to stay away from the overdone network sites also  :)

    Hehe! (5.00 / 4) (#50)
    by Stellaaa on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:31:53 AM EST
    I had to raise my kids with these parents and I used to go nuts.  I call the parents the "meritocrats" they have done everything to keep their gains through merits for their children.  So, they rigged the system.  Because I did not push and shove teachers and coaches I used to feel like I was failing my children.  

    By the way, and if the child was not a high achiever, they pushed to have the child diagnosed with something.  

    [ Parent ]

    Heh (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by Steve M on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:38:12 AM EST
    Are these the parents who sued the school because their kid got a B in math?

    [ Parent ]
    I saw a lot of that (5.00 / 2) (#127)
    by stillife on Mon May 26, 2008 at 07:46:41 AM EST
    when my kids were in school, at public school gifted programs and later private school (so you know those parents were the worst of the worst).  Seems to me that learning disabilities are vastly overdiagnosed.  One of my friends, a teacher (she knew how to work the system) got her son diagnosed with a learning disability so that he got unlimited time to take tests.  

    When my daughter was in junior high (at a private school) a fair percentage of the boys were diagnosed with ADHD and prescribed Ritalin.  She told me they'd wait for the nurse to come around with their lunchtime dose, banging their spoons on the tables and yelling, "We want Ritalin!"  

    If I weren't a "bad mom", I probably could have gotten my son some kind of diagnosis when he was younger.  He was in the gifted program, but struggled with reading.  Somehow he survived and grew out of it.  He graduated college last year and is working as a financial analyst.  

    I think for boys in particular in the lower grades, school is not a good match.  Not to gender stereotype, but my son and his friends were like puppies.  Lots of excess energy and needing to run around and get their ya-yas out.  In the olden days, they called it "frogs and snails and puppy-dog tails."  Today, they call it ADHD.

    [ Parent ]

    I had a preview of this back (4.00 / 4) (#62)
    by nycstray on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:43:36 AM EST
    when I was teaching college in SF. A 'entitled' student who never showed up for my class, but needed it to graduate, had her daddy call my dept head. Heh, I made her earn it  ;) Apparently they just hand the cell phone to the teachers now. Oy.

    I'm thinking us 'older' workers are going to start looking a heck of a lot more appealing in some job markets. I generally worked with freelancers and then would pick the ones I wanted to bring on. Body language was generally a good indicator of their work ethic. That and how quickly they plugged themselves into all their gadgets and the internet (creative field). They usually didn't last long with me. I have no patience for BS attitudes and me, me, me. I also have deadlines!  ;)

    [ Parent ]

    My daughter who is of that generation (5.00 / 3) (#65)
    by Stellaaa on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:50:00 AM EST
    used to get so angry at Professors who let people say stuff that was not relevant to the subject.  She said it was because in younger grades, "participation" was a bid deal.   She thought the professors needed to nip it in the bud.  

    [ Parent ]
    participation is important (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by nycstray on Mon May 26, 2008 at 02:01:18 AM EST
    and especially so for some that may hang back. But it needs to be relevant. I do think focus is lacking with the text/cell phone generation. And it obviously started before they were texting.

    [ Parent ]
    I was known throughout the district (none / 0) (#195)
    by JavaCityPal on Mon May 26, 2008 at 09:44:47 AM EST
    trying to get a high IQ, right brained, funny, physically big (ended up 6'6') boy through public school. What the public schools do to these kids is child abuse, IMHO.

    [ Parent ]
    Didn't see it (5.00 / 5) (#61)
    by Valhalla on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:42:40 AM EST
    but I wish I had.  I'm reading The Dumbest Generation right now and it sounds like it sounds a lot of the same themes.  TDG isn't just about Millenials though, it's about most people under 30.

    Basically, it's entertainment all the time, raised to resent any sort of guidance from adults or attempts to get them to learn lit, history, etc because it stifles their 'inner creativity' and 'athenticity.'  Losing the ability to retain and analyze information because so much info is readily available on the web (basically, they're all cache, no hard drive), and all the social networking just reinforces the teen culture instead of making them part of both a 'horizontal' and 'vertical' culture with their parents and family.  Learning, facts, history -- all that stuff is a big drag.

    The author backs up his stuff with a lot of research, so it's not just one of those trend books about trends.

    [ Parent ]

    "all cache, no hard drive" (5.00 / 3) (#66)
    by nycstray on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:51:17 AM EST
    thank god I didn't have anything in my mouth!!! WAY too funny! {says the person with 6 external and a massive internal ;) }

    Check the link in my original comment, you can read or watch the segment. They do touch on the age and mention that adulthood gets pushed back to the late 20's to 30. My niece is of this generation, but she's a hard luck kid. She's got work ethic beyond belief and if it takes three jobs to survive, she gets 3 jobs. She's going to try and go to college or a career school, as she would like to have "a path".

    I may check out that book. Afraid it might freak me out though . . .

    [ Parent ]

    Critical thinking (5.00 / 2) (#68)
    by formerhoosier on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:54:24 AM EST
    Seems critical thinking has been replaced with rote memory.  So many have difficuly transitioning from high school to college because they never had to critique what they read.  It seems some colleges are also in this mind set, which is deplorable.  Plane Geometry might be good if you are focusing on applied mathematics but Euclidean Geometry is needed for theoretical math and logic.  Seems very few have an understanding of basic statistics.

    [ Parent ]
    I've been thinking of going back to college (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by nycstray on Mon May 26, 2008 at 02:10:05 AM EST
    and am aware I haven't used my 'study' brain for awhile, so I'm a tad concerned. Research brain is there, but it's been quite some time since I did the school thing. It will be interesting to see the difference in the students and teaching since I studied and then taught.

    [ Parent ]
    I returned to college in my mid-40s. (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by Boston Boomer on Mon May 26, 2008 at 08:29:26 AM EST
    I'm close to getting a Ph.D. now.  Younger people have quicker reaction time, but there are a lot of advantages to being an older student.  You have a lot more basic information stored away that you can connect with what you are learning in courses.  This is a big help in studying and doing well on tests.  

    I was also much more motivated when I went back to school than I was at 17-18 when I first went to college.  I was so thrilled to be learning again that loved every minute of it and was grateful to have a second chance.  You also have opportunities to be a kind of mentor for younger students.

    [ Parent ]

    Well you'll probably kick a$$ (none / 0) (#83)
    by Valhalla on Mon May 26, 2008 at 02:19:13 AM EST
    with just a bit of work, rusty study skills or no, if the research in TDG is valid.

    [ Parent ]
    Heh, I hope so! (none / 0) (#91)
    by nycstray on Mon May 26, 2008 at 02:36:21 AM EST
    The research I do now is mostly for personal use and I adapt it into what I'm working on. It becomes part of what I do and I just keep evolving on. I need to move it back to classroom use, if that makes sense. For instance, I studied canine behavior quite a bit and did volunteer work in shelters/canine behavior depts for hands on. I can work with and train dogs with behavior problems, but to break it down on paper, pass a written exam, EEP! And I was a damn good test taker back in the day. I just need to readjust my brain, I think.

    I'll def pick up the book. It may come in handy for what I'm going back to school for. Education. Hope to work in Special Ed, but may start out in mainstream.

    [ Parent ]

    You will do well (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by Cream City on Mon May 26, 2008 at 03:29:13 AM EST
    I went back at 30, then life happened, and I didn't finish until I was 40.  Just keep in mind that you're going to be 40, anyway; that bit of advice I came across at the start kept me going.:-)

    It was weird in some classes, surrounded by those much younger than me without worries of raising kids and much else that happened to me -- deaths, divorce, natural disasters (seriously, a tornado that killed a neighbor and caused a lot of damage) as well as juggling several jobs, etc.  But I felt sorry for them, not having that purpose in life that I had, coming home to my kids.

    There are advantages and disadvantages, as the brain does work differently from the late 20s on.  Before that, it's better at rote memory work; after that, it's better at synthesis.  So I tended to not do as well on some forms of tests as the younger students -- I had been a good test-taker, too -- but I was way ahead in the work that is more crucial at upper levels and grad level.

    A tip: Among the most difficult adaptations for me, after a decade in the business world and in management, was relearning to raise my hand in class.  I went into it like brainstorming meetings, which was quite unsettling to my profs being treated by me as peers -- and many were younger than me.  So remember the power imbalance, remember to raise your hand -- and have fun.

    [ Parent ]

    Do go back (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by mikeyleigh on Mon May 26, 2008 at 07:00:12 AM EST
    if you have the time, money, and desire.  My wife loves having older students in her medieval literature classes.  Not only are they better prepared, but they are, without exception, much more interested in learning.

    [ Parent ]
    Heh, way past 40 :) (none / 0) (#103)
    by nycstray on Mon May 26, 2008 at 04:21:29 AM EST
    but I have taken a few courses and continuing Ed over the years. But because of what I do, most are more interactive than study based (Commercial and Fine Arts). I'm actually going back to what I originally started out to do. Special Ed/ECE.

    I figure I'll take just one class first to adjust my brain and start morphing my work with transitioning to having student time. Thanks for the raising the hand tip! lol!~ I used to be afraid to raise my hand, but in business, speaking up doesn't seem to be a problem. Brainstorm girl here! I think it will help that I'll be going back to something that I know a bit about, but have a big learning curve now. If it was a program that had anything to do with what I've been doing for over 20yrs . . . raising my hand wouldn't be my first reaction :) I'm a pain in da butt :D

    [ Parent ]

    Where to sit? (5.00 / 1) (#129)
    by samanthasmom on Mon May 26, 2008 at 07:49:58 AM EST
    The young folks pay big bucks for front row concert tickets, but the back rows fill up first in the classroom.  Freak them out and take the front and center seat.  A good prof will smile to see you there, pay attention to your body language, and probably anticipate that you have something to say before you even get a chance to raise that hand.  Expect to be resented a little by the little kids in the class because you'll be raising the expectation bar. Many education classes are being offered online these days. The idea is not only for you to be able to fit a class into your busy schedule but also for you to become familiar enough with online teaching and learning methods to consider teaching that way yourself.  Many special ed students do very well in an online learning environment although few are encouraged to try it. I hope you have a great time!

    [ Parent ]
    So true! There is a direct correlation (none / 0) (#222)
    by Cream City on Mon May 26, 2008 at 11:53:13 AM EST
    from front-row seating, often filled with my "gray haired women like me," and final grades of A.  And yes, many courses even at "traditional" campuses are online these days or hybrids, half online and half "f2f."  And many, many more courses use online tools these days that are great for the youngsters so familiar with computers but can be problematic for some oldsters -- so those who can combine computer familiarity with better brain power and ye olde experience do fantastically well.  Plus, they don't spend class time and beyond worrying about whether they'll get a date on Friday night. :-)

    [ Parent ]
    nycstray- I went back to get my BA at 43 (none / 0) (#177)
    by kenosharick on Mon May 26, 2008 at 09:13:25 AM EST
    and am half way though my MA at 45. There are quite a few "non-traditonal" students in school these days. My hardest part was the technology- There were NO pcs when I started school and I have to learn the technology that everyone else already knows.

    [ Parent ]
    FYI (none / 0) (#115)
    by TeresaInPa on Mon May 26, 2008 at 05:49:58 AM EST
    Special Ed is glutted I think.  Do some research before you go that direction unless it is a real passion in which case follow your passion.I am sure you will find that college is much easier this time around and with a bit of effort you will get straight A's.  It is what all of us who went back experienced.
    Have fun, you are going to be a prize student and will find it so much easier and more fun this time.

    [ Parent ]
    I am back in school (none / 0) (#237)
    by BackFromOhio on Mon May 26, 2008 at 02:15:26 PM EST
    After 20+ years as a lawyer, I have returned to graduate school to study psychology.  The work has been challenging, but enormously interesting, and I have done exceedingly well.  I think there are several reasons for this -- motivation; study skills picked up in law school (I outline all of my psych subjects to extent I can each week); mental discipline -- part based on law study & practice and part based on willingness to work hard.  

    There's a most interesting article on point in today's NY Times; I do not have linke, but article is called "Older Brain May Really be a Wiser Brain" by Sara Reistad-Long.  

    [ Parent ]

    The book talks about this (4.00 / 4) (#75)
    by Valhalla on Mon May 26, 2008 at 02:08:42 AM EST
    only it points to a problem with eliminating most rote memory exercises and going straight to developing kids analytical skills.  The problem, though, is that without a basic grasp of the facts in the first place, personal opinion replaces analysis yet is still validated as if it were real analysis.

    Not that I'm defending rote memorization in situtations where facts and information could be (truly) acquired some other, more interesting way.  But one of the things I keep observing about some of the younger folks I work with is that "they think their opinion is important just because they have it."  It drives me a bit crazy.

    [ Parent ]

    nothing wrong with rote memorization (5.00 / 2) (#114)
    by TeresaInPa on Mon May 26, 2008 at 05:44:18 AM EST
    it is a boomer failing that we decided memorization was a bad thing.  Most kids would be better off if they learned to memorize stuff they could bring to the surface to give them a fact base.... like the multiplication tables for instance and a basic idea of history and when things happened.  And it is good brain exercise, kind of like lifting weights for the brain.
    I think we have become way to obsessed with "critical thinking" as if it was a skill that could be taught separate from being a person who knows something.

    [ Parent ]
    Exactly. There is need for a framework (none / 0) (#224)
    by Cream City on Mon May 26, 2008 at 12:01:19 PM EST
    of dates, events, etc., in history, for example, before analysis is possible.  Causation is a crucial concept, and if students don't know that the Civil War was in the 1860s (some don't, they really don't), they fail entirely at grasping the era of Reconstruction, the spread of the Industrial Revolution beyond the East, etc.

    Even numbering the wars in the last century, i.e., WWI and WWII, doesn't seem to help some. :-)  It's so sad when they get to college and still lack what they ought to have learned in elementary school.  But from what I saw of it with my own progeny, their teachers spent too much time getting students in touch with their feelings and not hurting those feelings by actually grading down, oh, bad spelling and grammar.  

    I had many teachers tell me not to correct my little darlings when they spoke and wrote poorly.  Both of their parents are writers, so we ignored that bad advice.  (It often came from teachers who, for example, spelled "alot" as one word.)

    [ Parent ]

    Memorization Skills (none / 0) (#82)
    by formerhoosier on Mon May 26, 2008 at 02:18:56 AM EST
    NOt an educator and my limited exposure to ECE was many years ago, but my recollection is elementary school is where this should be emphasized since children do not have the capacity to think abstracts until late elementary or middle school.  If that is mistaken, am sure some educators/child psychologists could correct.  My objection is to the continuation into high school, the 'factual' basis for introductory subjects should already be known.  Not really getting into the sciences and advanced mathematics since there are still some basics to be applied.  That is more a factor of knowing which theorem or principle to apply rather than memorizing the specific formulas.

    [ Parent ]
    I had the experience (none / 0) (#132)
    by samanthasmom on Mon May 26, 2008 at 08:09:39 AM EST
    of grading essays for our state's competency test. At the middle school level the test is a persuasive essay.  The kids are given a writing prompt about a topic that they should have an opinion about. School uniforms, mandatory bicycle helmets, etc. Each essay gets two grades - one for style and the other for grammar, spelling, and punctuation. The kids are allowed to use a dictionary. You can tell that the kids are being prepped because the vast majority of the essays are five paragraphs long, and each paragraph has five sentences- a topic sentence, three sentences that support the topic, and a "clinching" sentence.  Each paragraph begins with a "connecting word or phrase" that bridges it to the preceding  paragraph like "however" or "next".  Many of the last paragraphs start with "In conclusion". We were not allowed to grade on content which is where some of these essays get really funny.  Having very little factual knowledge at their fingertips, the kids make up all kinds of statistics to support their position and write outrageous anecdotes about "things that really happened". As part of some research that I was doing, I took the writing competency test that the state makes new teachers take.  I used the same template for writing the essay that is being taught to the kids, (My facts, however, were true) and scored 99/100 on the test. I know some of you are teaching at the college level.  Have any of you noticed your students writing this way?

    [ Parent ]
    I have discovered... (none / 0) (#136)
    by kredwyn on Mon May 26, 2008 at 08:20:55 AM EST
    that we have tutors on campus who're encouraging students to write "In this essay, I will argue X." or something to that effect.

    I brought it up with one of the students who told me that's what the tutor is advising they do.

    ::sigh::

    But your example is the standard formatting for a 5 paragraph theme essay. Some of our faculty use the same sort of template for the developmental classes.

    [ Parent ]

    Memorization is important, not for the (none / 0) (#190)
    by FlaDemFem on Mon May 26, 2008 at 09:33:51 AM EST
    things that the kid memorizes, but for training the mind to retain and recall information. When I was a child memorizing poetry and nursery rhymes was a family activity. So was reciting them. I can still recite things I memorized as a child. And as a result of that training, I remember what I read, where I read it and what part of the book I read it in. When I go down my bookmarks on the browser, I can remember why I bookmarked it and what basic information is at that bookmark. I also think television is a great enabler of the scatter-brained mind. Television does not require extended attention spans. Everything is in 15 minute, or shorter, increments. The mind is not required to maintain attention for longer than that for a great deal of the child's formative years. It makes a difference, a huge difference.

    When I was growing up, we were mostly overseas, ergo no TV. When the kiddies started their "Mom, there's nothing to DO!!" whine, my parents standard answer was "Go read a book." Now they just plop the kid in front of a TV. Books are brain food, TV, for the most part, isn't. The reason that most kids today are scatterbrains is that their brains have never been trained to be anything else. And when the electricity goes off, the only people who will be able to remember enough to actually get anything done are the readers. Their minds will remember the information the computer generation kept on their hard drives. And they will be able to recall and implement it.

    If there are any of us left by then.

    [ Parent ]

    In my daughter's honors geometry class.. (none / 0) (#145)
    by Maria Garcia on Mon May 26, 2008 at 08:42:00 AM EST
    ...which was about 5 years ago, but I doubt much has changed....during parent-teacher night the teacher dropped the bomshell that students wouldn't be doing proofs. The curriculum had been changed so that the teacher would do the proofs and the students would "appreciate" them. Half of the parents in the room cracked up laughing...in disbelief. We thought it was a joke. And then since this was an honors class, they expect these kids to move on to calculus by the time they finish high school. Trust me, most of them did not "appreciate" pre-calculus very much, let alone move on to calculus. And then of course you get the inevitable hand wringing---why aren't more students taking higher math classes.

    [ Parent ]
    Wow (none / 0) (#178)
    by andgarden on Mon May 26, 2008 at 09:13:39 AM EST
    Well, I don't think that's so common. I was in the stupid math class in 10th grade, and we did full proofs in geometry.

    OTOH, I went to a very good high school that frankly made college seem easy.

    [ Parent ]

    ...This was a very good high school... (none / 0) (#212)
    by Maria Garcia on Mon May 26, 2008 at 10:31:16 AM EST
    ...in prosperous Montgomery County, Maryland. Possibly they have put proofs back into the curriculum by now, I don't know. All I know is that my daughter never really learned geometry, although she passed it with an A and got a "mastery" score in the MD state geometry assessment. The proof was in her SAT scores. We paid to get her score analysis after she took the SATS the first time and almost all the "easy" math questions she missed were in geometry. We got her an "old school" math tutor who focused on Geometry and her scores went way up in Math. So basically she learned in 6 weeks what she should have learned in that one class. The real problem is that some of these districts choose an instructional strategy that garners the best grades for the largest number of students, regardless of whether they actually learn or not.

    [ Parent ]
    dumbest? uh huh. i concur. (none / 0) (#100)
    by hilldemgoneindie on Mon May 26, 2008 at 03:29:43 AM EST
    i taught young adult students at a trade college for a year and a half. every six weeks i'd get a new bunch in. i taught english comp and speech in the paralegal program. as we'd introduce ourselves, i'd ask them to tell me their name, where they were born, and to include something interesting about themselves. as an ice-breaker, i'd begin the intro. when i told them an interesting thing about me was that i was born in the same hospital that bobby kennedy died in (which was fascinating to me at the age of 11 1/2 mostly because my mom also worked right across the street from good samaritan hospital and had since i was born), they'd look at me like i was from another planet. who's bobby kennedy? for the many times i shared that personal history, no one under thirty-five knew of whom i was referring. that is a snapshot of the lack of exposure or interest in current events or civics in the young adult generation. pathetic and imho, planned.

    [ Parent ]
    Whose fault is that?.... (none / 0) (#197)
    by kdog on Mon May 26, 2008 at 09:47:21 AM EST
    You can't blame somebody born in 70's or after for not knowing who Bobby Kennedy is...that's on parents and schools.

    I was lucky to go to good schools and be born to caring parents...they covered RFK is HS History, but it took my dad to teach me about Huey Newton and Abbie Hoffman.

    We're all generalizing of course, but parents today seemed more concerned with themsleves, where generations ago people lived for their kids, and took the time to raise them instead of expecting the school system to do it.  I see it too...kids today are selfish and self-centered...and you need only look at their parents to understand why.

    [ Parent ]

    Many people under 30, not MOST (none / 0) (#200)
    by JavaCityPal on Mon May 26, 2008 at 09:49:30 AM EST
    I have 2 in their 20's. Knowing them and all their friends growing up, I have always felt this is a generation that has a lot to offer. Those I know, and those I've worked with are better than the Gen X group in the workplace, IMHO.

    [ Parent ]
    I hired one of those types (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by txpolitico67 on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:44:44 AM EST
    and fired him right at his 90-day probation period ended.  Real business people are not going to brook that kind of behavior.

    I sure didn't.  This may sound very discriminatory, but when I hire salespeople, (part of my job),  I prefer those over 35.  

    [ Parent ]

    I had an intern last summer.... (5.00 / 2) (#150)
    by Maria Garcia on Mon May 26, 2008 at 08:48:00 AM EST
    ...straight out of college who broke the mold. Yes he was brilliant, but he also knew that there was much to learn from elders and mentors. (That boy was exceptionally well raised. I commend his parents.) In a summer, he wrote an entire booklet on the science of learning which was reviewed by a committee of about 8 experts and required only minimal revision. And unlike other young people who have written things for me who whined and moaned about having to change one syllable of anything they wrote, he considered each comment a challenge and an opportunity for improvement. So there are gems out there, thank goodness for the world.

    [ Parent ]
    Millenial intro (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by formerhoosier on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:44:54 AM EST
    Thanks, interesting perspective.

    Ten to fifteen years ago the CW was college grads were not motivated by money but were looking for other criteria in selecting employers.  Think a lot of times too many businesses listen to consultants who have no idea what they are talking about.  Not to disparage (since we have a cross section here), but had really incompetent consultants on a project from a major consulting firm years ago.

    [ Parent ]

    My experience is (5.00 / 4) (#71)
    by Valhalla on Mon May 26, 2008 at 02:02:18 AM EST
    that they are interested in other things, 'lifestyle' considerations, but they also want the money.  That is, they want to not work crazy hours under crazy deadlines, but they want the same benefits as those who do work crazy hours et al.

    I don't put my experience out as scientific, and I do understand that many things outside one's control can shape one's outlook.  When I was in high school the economy was really bad, and I was extremely lucky to get a summer job at a fast food restaurant.  Lucky.  Extremely.  People under 30 haven't lived through a countrywide crashed economy, so they don't put as much importance on the economic situation the country is in now, and aren't as able to imagine how bad it could get.

    [ Parent ]

    economic situations matter (5.00 / 2) (#87)
    by nycstray on Mon May 26, 2008 at 02:25:48 AM EST
    I think that is partly why my niece is the way she is. She was shaped by less than desirable circumstances. She has a down to earth type of personality anyway, so she knows the job needs to get done etc. You also see the same in different 'hoods around where I live. Work means something different and the kids coming out of hardworking environments understand achievement. I live across the street from a high school that was one of the worst. Since Bloomberg has been overhauling our schools, there's been quite a difference. Kids were always pretty nice and polite etc, but now the whole feel is different. They've split the school into smaller schools and you now see a different type of student. And they are from the same 'hoods as the prior ones. They just have more opportunity now, and know it.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm glad Bloomberg (none / 0) (#131)
    by stillife on Mon May 26, 2008 at 08:01:01 AM EST
    is doing something about the awful schools.  Giuliani was a disaster.  Did you read that article (I think it was in GQ of all places) a few months ago about his feuds with the various school chancellors?  I always wondered at the time about the rapid turnover.  

    As the mother of two millenials, I hesitate to make generalizations, but my son is one of a very few of his group of friends, some of whom he's known since kindergarten, others since high school and some from college, who actually graduated on time and got a job.  I can't really credit his upbringing - he's just got a highly focused personality.  He's rather conservative and more materialistic than I would like, but the materialism seems to be a motivating factor.  There was never any question that he was going to be a business major.  

    My daughter, OTOH, has her head in the clouds and wishes she'd grown up in the 1960's.  She's only 18, so hopefully she'll get more focused in the next few years of college.

    [ Parent ]

    I Saw That Segment (none / 0) (#169)
    by creeper on Mon May 26, 2008 at 09:07:41 AM EST
    Part of it didn't make sense.  If we're in a recession and losing good jobs overseas, why would employers need to coddle new workers?  Let's face it...the deck is stacked firmly on the side of businesses.

    I have no doubt that the "me, now" mindset is widespread among the "millenials" but I question whether the workplace is going to accommodate them to the extent portrayed by CBS.

    [ Parent ]

    The flip side (none / 0) (#204)
    by cmugirl on Mon May 26, 2008 at 10:03:40 AM EST
    I read an article a while back about "Helicopter Parents"  - those who swoop in and take care of every little thing for their babies.  Some of these parents were doing things like one father went to a career fair and handed out his daughter's resume for her, and some called employers after their son/daughter got less than a stellar performance review and wanted to discuss the reason for the rating.

    I can't even imagine my parents doing something like this!!!  I'm not MUCH older than these people (I was only 11 in 1980).

    These are the same people who allow their children dictate who they vote for!

    [ Parent ]

    Phoenix has landed (5.00 / 3) (#51)
    by Lupin on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:31:53 AM EST
    Stunning Phoenix Mars images here. One reminded me of Stephen King's Dark Tower landscape in Vol. 1, with the Dark Tower far away in the distance.

    Food for thought: the cost of this mission = 2 days in Iraq. Iraq = two missions to Mars every week.

    Where would be today if we hadn't...? The mind boggles.

    Some if you "deadenders" (and I'd say the same to Obama fanatics) really ought to consider the stakes in November more carefully. I have no doubt that if Sen. Clinton doesn't get the nomination, she will rally behind the Dem ticket -- as indeed she said yesterday.

    Two missions to Mars every week, 104 missions a year, over 600 missions since we started... We could probably have a manned base by now. Instead, I won't see it in my lifetime.  Heartbreaking.

    Although I couldn't (5.00 / 5) (#80)
    by txpolitico67 on Mon May 26, 2008 at 02:15:58 AM EST
    agree more about traveling and exploring space, e it would behoove us to get our country's infrastructure back on track.  Certainly dedicate resources and research into our scholastic inquiries of outer space but let's get our roads, bridges and dams up to par first.

    No more Mpls mishaps.  Let's get New Orleans as close to pre-Katrina as possible.  And let's help the heartland where storms and tornadoes have wreaked havoc on minds, spirits and dwellings.

    I too would have liked to have seen a moon-station in my lifetime, but doubt it.  

    [ Parent ]

    Indeed! (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by Lupin on Mon May 26, 2008 at 02:26:57 AM EST
    I entirely agree, though I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. There was enough money in the Iraq War for a sensible space program AND a significant infrastructure upgrade.

    It reminds us what the stakes are in November.

    [ Parent ]

    But that's DEBT! (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by Fabian on Mon May 26, 2008 at 05:21:19 AM EST
    It's not as if the war was 90% tax payer financed.  That's a huge problem.  If you are going to sink yourself or country into debt, it should be for solid long term gains - like moving the economy away from fossil fuels and onto long term energy solutions.

    [ Parent ]
    Since you mention misplaced priorities ... (5.00 / 4) (#88)
    by dwmorris on Mon May 26, 2008 at 02:26:28 AM EST
    how about this one?

    Annual budget of the National Cancer Institute is just under 5 billion = approximately 2 weeks in Iraq. The deaths from cancer in the US during any 2 week period are approximately 20,000 (you read that right ... more than 6X the number of people that died on 9/11).

    The odds are astronomically low that anyone reading these words will be killed in a terrorist attack. In contrast, about 40% of you will get cancer sometime in your life and about 20% of you will die from it.

    Good thing Bush is keeping us all secure.

    [ Parent ]

    What are my odds living in NYC? (5.00 / 2) (#93)
    by nycstray on Mon May 26, 2008 at 02:47:29 AM EST
    Actually, I don't worry about cancer as much as I do about Parkinson, Diabetes, (Genetic?) High Blood Pressure and Cholesterol. All run in my family. One of the reasons I'm so for Hillary. Health care and Science. I think I'm the only one of my circle of female friends here that hasn't had a tumor or cancer related female issue. Insurance issues have had my one friend at deaths door 3 times.

    I'll be leaving the 'dangers' of NYC to move back to Earthquake, Mudslide, Wildfire and Flood land in CA, lol! Still more concerned about medical though.

    [ Parent ]

    EXCELLENT (none / 0) (#90)
    by txpolitico67 on Mon May 26, 2008 at 02:33:06 AM EST
    observation.  I never would have thought of it that way (terrorism vs. cancer angle).

    Talk about a lump in my throat.  I hope that our society DOES evolve (because right now it doesn't seem to be) and moves in more practical terms to save lives.

    [ Parent ]

    Good observation and ... (none / 0) (#183)
    by BostonIndependent on Mon May 26, 2008 at 09:24:02 AM EST
    One of my primary reasons I moved toward Hillary initally! After reading her web site papers on science education and healthcare -- she actually has detaile (see Hillary's plan for cancer and her Innovation Agenda had details such as:
    Increase the basic research budgets 50% over 10 years at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's Office of Science, and the Defense Department.

    and
    Increase the NIH budget by 50% over 5 years and aim to double it over 10 years.

    Now .. if you read Senator Obama's policy proposals, there are no details that are similarly spelled out. In his Obama's complete health-care plan he does not mention NIH or NCI (it does not appear in his technology paper either) and does not seem to understand very basic links between research, development and deployment. However we get more bureaucracy:

    Comparative effectiveness research. Obama will establish an independent institute to guide reviews and research on comparative effectiveness, so that Americans and their doctors will have the accurate and objective information they need to make the best decisions for their health and well-being.

    and non-specific blather like this that could come from any politician:
    As a result of biomedical research the prevention, early detection and treatment of diseases such as cancer and heart disease is better today than any other time in history. Barack Obama has consistently supported funding for the national institutes of health and the national science foundation. Obama strongly supports investments in biomedical research, as well as medical education and training in health-related fields, because it provides the foundation for new therapies and diagnostics. Obama has been a champion of research in cancer, mental health, health disparities, global health, women and children's health, and veterans' health. As president, Obama will strengthen funding for biomedical research, and better improve the efficiency of that research by improving coordination both within government and across government/private/non-profit partnerships. An Obama administration will ensure that we translate scientific progress into improved approaches to disease prevention, early detection and therapy that is available for all Americans.

    Seriously, I think anyone who has actually read the contents of their proposals -- cannot but come away with a deep appreciation for the stark differences between them. Hillary is much more knowledgeable and specific, and Obama has not studied the issues or taken positions on them. Period. The fact that the MSM has portrayed the two candidates's positions on various policy issues is "largely similar" etc. is  untruthful, ill-informed and a true example of the MSM's gross dereliction of duty in this primary campaign.

    But.. I do have a bone to pick w/ comparing medical research to terrorism. Both are problems, and both require vast funds. We need to be smart about how to have discussions about resource allocation. While it is true that cancer research will improve life expectancy for all Americans, terrorists (or Katrina -- as one of the others mentioned upthread) can wreak untargeted havoc on the entire economy (and not just the US). Also note, that while terrorism can be ameliorated (by containment among other strategies) and even eradicated (perhaps long term), health-care risks such as cancer or environmental issues require sustained and consistent funding. I believe therefore it is entirely appropriate to have increased funding for terrorism and ammunition (to pick on a gross counter-example) in times of need and war, but we cannot have downward trends in long-term research.

    [ Parent ]

    Cancer is just one of many hundreds of metrics ... (none / 0) (#221)
    by dwmorris on Mon May 26, 2008 at 11:52:56 AM EST
    that could obviously be used to illustrate our grossly misplaced priorities.

    People aren't acutely aware of the economic havoc caused by these problems because it's already baked into the system ... but it is in the trillions.

    Also, I don't think it's valid to equate the monthly costs of the war in Iraq with any discussion about the validity of the war on terror. Too many strategic and tactical disconnects.

    [ Parent ]

    Oh man, there are lot of things (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Mon May 26, 2008 at 03:41:29 AM EST
    that I find far more heartbreaking than not having a manned base on Mars. The comment below talks about health-care for starters. Did you know Obama has talked about drastically scaling back the space program?

    "Mars ain't the kind of place to raise your kids, in fact it gets as cold as hell".

    So said Elton John. This VIDEO includes amazing documentary footage of the first manned mission to the moon (I think). I've seen the original moon-landing documentary, made by the astronauts, the guys had cameras on-board. They were so introspective, articulate and un-macho about the whole thing - I was moved by them more than the mission.

    [ Parent ]

    From popular mechanics (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by Lupin on Mon May 26, 2008 at 05:06:00 AM EST
    The three candidates on space program: hardly inspiring.

    [ Parent ]
    I'd be for a manned moonbase (5.00 / 3) (#112)
    by Fabian on Mon May 26, 2008 at 05:27:34 AM EST
    tomorrow IF GWB and Cheney were the first permanent inhabitants of it.

    Permanent off planet exile - it's expensive, but the future of democracy is worth it.

    (Outside of petty political vendettas, the best plan for any colonization involves decades of robotic missions.  Robots are just so much cheaper and better suited to the tasks.)

    [ Parent ]

    LOL (5.00 / 2) (#119)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon May 26, 2008 at 06:09:31 AM EST
    Me too!

    [ Parent ]
    As the only Robot on this ... (5.00 / 4) (#128)
    by Robot Porter on Mon May 26, 2008 at 07:48:05 AM EST
    blog I take offense at being called "cheap."

    ;)

    [ Parent ]

    LOL (5.00 / 1) (#148)
    by talktruthfully on Mon May 26, 2008 at 08:46:51 AM EST
    That's too funny. I second that motion.

    [ Parent ]
    Awesome... (none / 0) (#53)
    by Stellaaa on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:33:59 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Beautiful pics! (none / 0) (#171)
    by Kathy on Mon May 26, 2008 at 09:08:15 AM EST
    Most people have no idea what NASA does for us.  Space exploration is a small piece of the pie.  The Jet Propulsion lab is vital to national security and keeping our aviation partners on the cutting edge.  Various medical experiments are performed in zero G (certain bacteria and viruses can only be studied in zero g) and of course, two of the new antibiotics we use to treat drug-resistant strains of staph were discovered in the lab aboard the space shuttle.  And most of this was done with 1960s technology, because funding has been cut so much that they can't jump into the present,  let alone lead into the future.

    NASA also improved on many inventions, making them more accessible to users: velcro, teflon, cordless power tools, adjustable smoke detectors, barcodes, quartz clocks...  A lot of the stuff we use today was tweaked into common usage by NASA.

    [ Parent ]

    Very nice that you kept OpEd pieces (5.00 / 2) (#118)
    by andrys on Mon May 26, 2008 at 06:08:42 AM EST
    formatted for your page so that we could read them still!

    LOTS of great stuff there.  The headlines are so dramatic.

    Thanks!

    I remember waking up and thinking Czechoslovakia and tanks when I heard that '...stop the count' thing.  It was so shocking and depressing.

    Jeralynn: Two repeated comments from yesterday (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by Molly Pitcher on Mon May 26, 2008 at 08:24:27 AM EST
    But principles must be upheld by at least a few people, and the party will not be fixed by nominating and electing an unqualified person to the highest office.  I see too much likeness to Bush 2, and a scary and totally repelling similarity to a number of demagogues and con merchants I have observed.

    And now, I shall take myself off this thread.  When this site descends to the point of throwing words like 'despise' around, we are already broken.  That was a word 'too far.'

    Today
    So--any resolution of this? Or shall I inquire about the Clinton site a bunch of people were registering on yesterday?

    Can I get the link (none / 0) (#156)
    by Dr Molly on Mon May 26, 2008 at 08:50:16 AM EST
    from someone to the Clinton site please? (Just in case this place descends into some silly, melodramatic soap opera...? I saw the comments from yesterday and all I can say is - give me a break.)

    [ Parent ]
    Do you recall the (none / 0) (#188)
    by Molly Pitcher on Mon May 26, 2008 at 09:30:20 AM EST
    site name?  I think it belongs to someone on this site....I sure would hate to go back thru all that spewing to locate the mention.

    [ Parent ]
    here (none / 0) (#191)
    by Molly Pitcher on Mon May 26, 2008 at 09:38:42 AM EST
    use this

    [ Parent ]
    Thank you! (none / 0) (#194)
    by Dr Molly on Mon May 26, 2008 at 09:40:03 AM EST
    It's good to have another alternative to check out.

    [ Parent ]
    Is playing (5.00 / 2) (#163)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon May 26, 2008 at 08:59:40 AM EST
    the race card a constant? Sure it's fine to critique a site but the constant race baiting is why lots of people are saying that they'll never vote for Obama.

    A "racist haven"? (5.00 / 1) (#165)
    by Democratic Cat on Mon May 26, 2008 at 09:01:55 AM EST
    Ok, whatever. I wouldn't reference no quarter either, but you shouldn't throw around accusations like that.

    Have you visited the site? (none / 0) (#173)
    by talktruthfully on Mon May 26, 2008 at 09:08:53 AM EST
    Seriously, have you? It's not a baseless accusation. I'm not saying everyone at No Quarter is a racist. I'm saying that they, to borrow a sullied phrase, "give aid and comfort" to such individuals. It's heartbreaking.

    [ Parent ]
    I have visited the site a number of times (5.00 / 1) (#185)
    by kenosharick on Mon May 26, 2008 at 09:27:10 AM EST
    and have seen NOTHING CLOSE TO RACIST!!! I am so sick of Obama campaign and supporters screaming "racism" at anyone who dares disagree or criticize "Saint Barack." They may have won a primary using this sleazy tactic, but it is a losing strategy for November.

    [ Parent ]
    GA6th (5.00 / 1) (#193)
    by Kathy on Mon May 26, 2008 at 09:39:44 AM EST
    Backlash is an understatement.  Do you feel the tension in Atlanta right now?  I think it's rather rich that folks living in states with a  2-5% minority population, are flinging around that charge.  It's dangerous how they have diluted the meaning.  When real racism occurs, what will they call it?

    Don't know if anyone else has posted (5.00 / 0) (#210)
    by frankly0 on Mon May 26, 2008 at 10:25:54 AM EST
    this, but Oprah's ratings are going down, and it may well be due in part to her embrace of Obama:

    Her endorsement of the presidential bid of Senator Barack Obama appears to have alienated some of the middle-aged white women who make up the bulk of her television audience, many of whom support Senator Hillary Clinton.

    "Not too long ago, she was like the pope," rarely criticized by her ardent supporters, said Janice Peck, an associate professor of mass communication at the University of Colorado and the author of "The Age of Oprah," a new book on Ms. Winfrey's cultural influence.

    Since the endorsement, however, angry criticism of her political stance became a regular feature of the message boards on Oprah.com, Ms. Peck said. "There are a lot of her fans who are not Democrats or who support Hillary Clinton who feel betrayed," she added.
    My own belief is (none / 0) (#211)
    by frankly0 on Mon May 26, 2008 at 10:28:19 AM EST
    that Obama will end up being the Destroyer of Reputations of the same order as Bush himself has ultimately proved to be.

    Obama will use his endorsers, damage their credibility in their audiences/constituencies, and then turn around an drop them as is convenient.

    [ Parent ]

    I dropped my sub to her magazine n/t (none / 0) (#219)
    by Eleanor A on Mon May 26, 2008 at 11:22:19 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Just in time (4.88 / 9) (#1)
    by andgarden on Mon May 26, 2008 at 12:33:48 AM EST
    for me to direct everyone to Paul Krugman's latest:  

    To the extent that the general election is about the issues, Mr. Obama should have no trouble winning over former Clinton supporters, especially the white working-class voters he lost in the primaries. His health care plan is seriously deficient, but he will nonetheless be running on a far more worker-friendly platform than his opponent.

    Indeed, John McCain has shed whatever maverick tendencies he may once have had, and become almost a caricature conservative -- an advocate of lower taxes for the rich and corporations, a privatizer and shredder of the safety net.

    But elections always involve emotions as well as issues, and there are some ominous signs in the polling data.

    In Florida, in particular, the rolling estimate produced by the professionals at Pollster.com shows Mr. McCain running substantially ahead of Mr. Obama, even as he runs significantly behind Mrs. Clinton. Ohio also looks problematic, and Pennsylvania looks closer than it should. It's true that head-to-head polls five months before the general election have a poor track record. But they certainly give reason to worry.

    [. . .]

    [I]t's up to Mr. Obama to deliver the unity he has always promised -- starting with his own party.

    I am convinced, BTW, that he has been reading Talk Left.

    And while we're on Editorials, (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by andgarden on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:00:49 AM EST
    it's time for another edition of endorsement watch!

    Today, and Philly Inquirer endorses Rep Bob Andrews for Senate over Frank Lautenberg in the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate in New Jersey.

    I personally have no great love for Lautenberg. His push to raise and nationalize the drinking age to 21 was, in my opinion, not good policy. I also disagree with him on a variety of issues related to censorship (he is, I think, a videogame cop). However, I don't believe that Andrews is any better on these issues, and in other respects he is running against Lautenberg from the right.

    And there is plenty to praise with Lautenberg. For example, he is primarily responsible for making all flights in the U.S. nonsmoking. He is getting old, but he is a solid liberal voice in the Senate. I disagree with the Inquirer on this endorsement, and I did several months ago when they endorsed Obama over Clinton. There is a regional factor involved I think--Andrews is from South Jersey--but I think the Inquirer does not make a good case for him on his own merits.

    [ Parent ]

    Hm (none / 0) (#34)
    by Steve M on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:13:46 AM EST
    I am new to Jersey, but it strikes me that the South Jersey thing is almost entirely what this primary is about, far moreso than the age factor.  South Jersey just doesn't seem to feel like their interests get represented sufficiently.

    Lautenberg is a bare-knuckles politician, but he is a pretty solid liberal vote, and I have a personal soft spot for WWII vets.  I expect to be voting for him.

    TL readers might be curious to view Andrews' ad targetting Lautenberg's age.  Opinions are split on whether it's a fair attack.

    [ Parent ]

    That is one nasty ad (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by andgarden on Mon May 26, 2008 at 01:18:35 AM EST
    If some other Congressman were running against Lautenberg. Say Rush Holt, I'd be inclined to vote for him. But Andrews is running against Lautenberg from the right, and in a really underhanded way. So yeah, if I lived in NJ, I'd be voting for Lautenberg.

    [ Parent ]
    Andrews is a hypocrit (none / 0) (#166)
    by