Soapbox

I was confused today by an editorial in The Dispatch called “Forbidden Notions”. The editor asserted that student Scott McConnell, who wrote that he thought he should be allowed to hit children in his classroom and that multi-cultural education is un-American, should not have been asked to leave Le Moyne Jesuit College in New York.

I agree. But if having unusual ideas should not prevent one from getting an education, neither should it prevent one from teaching. It is ironic that under Rep. Larry Mumper’s proposed “college witch hunt” bill, a professor with the above stated views would not be allowed to teach them at a public college in Ohio if someone found them “controversial” (which I certainly do). Yet the Dispatch has not taken a public stand on this legislation. Is free speech to be protected only when it is the students speaking?

I am not sure just what McConnell finds offensive about learning the role other cultures have played in shaping American society, but I expect there are many schools who would be happy to employ him, paddle and all. As a parent, I would prefer that my child not be in his class, but that is a separate issue. As the paper states, just because he thinks that corpral punishment is a valid educational “tool” that doesn’t mean that he would spank student if school policy forbade it.

What confuses me is that The Dispatch suddenly finds this issue worthy of taking an editorial stand. Why have we not heard similar concern from them that student’s can be dismissed from Bob Jones University for listening to Christian Rock or holding hands with someone of the opposite race? Isn’t this an equally egregious violation of personal liberty? Aren’t they denying students an education just because of a belief or activity that surely has nothing to do with their education, unlike McConnell’s case? Surely The Dispatch is not concerned only when conservative speech is suppressed!

Bob Jones is a private, religious college and as such is allowed to have controversial, even ridiculous standards for their students if they wish. So is Le Moyne college. If they do not want to be known for having a graduate who wants to hit children and teach that learning about others is treasonous, so be it! I’m sure there are plenty of other colleges where McConnell’s unusual views would be welcomed.

Just not in Ohio. We don’t allow controversial ideas here. Well not liberal ones, anyway.

Yesterday, in a naked grab for political capital, the congress of the United States enacted emergency legislation to intervene in the case of Terri Schiavo, the woman in Florida whose feeding tube was removed over the weekend to allow her to die at last.

I am at a loss to explain yesterday’s action by Congress in this case. Why has congress been silent for 15 years while ump-teen judges ruled on this case? Does Dennis Hastert, who insists that Terri is not in a persistent vegetative state suddenly know more about medicine than the doctors who have run test after test and all the judges who painstakingly reviewed the evidence?

It is completely hypocritical for the President to be so eager to sign this bill to keep Terri alive. You see, when he was governor of Texas, ( in addition to executing more prisoners than any governor in U.S. history) George Bush also signed a little bill called the Texas Futile Care law. Ever heard of it? It allows hospitals to terminate life support in patients with no hope of revival if they are poor and cannot pay for their care. Just last week, against its mothers wishes, a baby in Texas was removed from life support under this law. Can the President explain why Terri matters and that baby and others like it do not?

Surely it couldn’t have anything to do with their ability to pay? Because under the tort reform champoined by the president and fellow republicans, families like the Schiavos would no longer be able to file malpractice claims like the one whose award is paying for Terri’s care, the care they want to continue. And under the bankruptcy bill just passed, families who can’t get a malpractice award to pay their staggering medical bills would be unable to file for bankruptcy protection to keep from losing the shirts off their backs to pay those bills.

The sad truth is that people in this country have their feeding tubes removed and are allowed to die peacefully every week. Why have congress and the president never cared about any of them? Because there was never political hay to be made from careing. A memo leaked to the Washington Post reminds Republicans that intervention on this issue will please their religious base and put the democrats in a tough spot. Indeed, 47 Democrats in the house voted for the bill, rather than be painted “pro-death” by George the baby killer.

If congress is so concerned with questions of life and death, why did they refuse to investigate the 107 prisoners who have died in U.S. custody since the war began? Many of their deaths would make Terri Schiavo’s seem like a walk in the park!
I empathize with the family members on both sides of this tragic case and they are in my prayers. I also find it hypocritical and inappropriate for Congress to act so intrusively and exploit this suffering for political gain.

Some good can still come of this tragedy if it reminds us all to sign a living will today!

Yesterday the US senate missed yet another chance to plan work toward true energy independence of America when they voted to open the Arctic National Refuge to oil drilling. Supporters of this measure said that despoiling one of the last remaining pristine places on earth is a matter of “national security”. Senator Thune spoke of the high gas prices in his state, as if drilling ANWAR is going to bring gas prices down.

The truth is very different than we have been led to believe.

The Arctic National Refuge is estimated to contain approximately a 6 month’s supply (at current rates) of oil. The U.S. could save that much right now simply by increasing mileage standards in cars by only a few mpg. It is believed it will take nearly 10 years for the oil from ANWAR to be recovered and processed, and even then, it will probably not end up in your tank. The oil will probably be sold to China and Japan, for a greater profit for the oil companies. Remind me again why we are drilling there?

Our national security is much more threatened by the fact that China owns a huge and growing portion of our National Debt. It’s true that US dependence on foreign oil is a problem, but how will 6 months more oil for Asia change that? Conservation, mass transit and alternative energy research will do far more to address that concern.

If the Bush administration is concerned about energy independence, why have they just eliminated ALL funding for Amtrak? Many republicans have the ridiculous idea that Amtrak is a failure because it does not completely pay for itself. A modern and efficient high-speed rail system, such as the TGV in France, could save the country billions in highway construction costs and reduce dependence on foreign oil in a way ANWAR can never do. Yet we will continue to bail-out the airline industry and provide back-door subsidies for big oil and the auto makers by pouring money into highways, while killing a transportation system that could help secure the future of this vast country.

Congratulations Senator Mike DeWine for seeing through the rhetoric and voting against ANWAR drilling. Shame on George Voinovich for once again voting to short-change the future of America.

It’s tough to know what to believe any more.

It used to be that it you read it in the newspaper or saw it on the news, you could believe it. It might be just one side of the story, but at least you could assume it was true.

No longer. When a story appears in the paper, we don’t know if it was written by modern-day Woodward and Bernsteins or by a local Jason Blair, who stayed home and made up interviews, quotes or even entire stories. Are the facts and figures they quoted accurate, or were the scientists and economists some of those pressured by the Bush administration to change their data to fit the Bush agenda?

Things are just as bad on television. Is that snappy, upbeat story on U.S. policy you just saw a real report from the TV station, or was it one of hundreds of government propaganda pieces, paid for with your tax dollars and passed off as real news? Is the commentator being paid with your taxes to say a new Bush policy is great, or does he genuinely think it is good for America?

And now we have to wonder if the headlines are even true at all. It turns out that there are stricter requirements for truth in advertising than in the news, a fact that Fox News is only too happy to exploit but would rather you didn’t know about.

This story is found on a site called “Project Censored�, because the mainstream media wasn’t interested in covering it, for reasons that may become apparent once you read about it. http://www.projectcensored.org/publications/2005/11.html

In the late 1990’s, Jane Akre and her husband, Steve Wilson were hired by Fox to investigate and produce a series on Bovine Growth Hormone in the nation’s milk supply. Fox was initially happy with their finished product, but within a week insisted that changes be made. They wanted to add some statements by Monsanto Corp (which had appeared in an unfavorable light) and several other revisions. Akre and Wilson refused, pointing out that based on their research, they knew these statements and revisions were false. “So what?� said Fox. When the pair threatened to tell the FCC if Fox made those changes, they were fired.

The pair sued, claiming that they were fired for “whistle-blowing” and so deserved legal protection. 5 other large media groups filed briefs in support of Fox’s position that Akre and Wilson were not whistle-blowers, because Fox has a right to lie on the news if they want to. Really.

In 2003 the Florida Appeals Court overturned the earlier jury verdict and found in favor of Fox News! Incredibly, they ruled that the FCC regulations against falsification of news is just a recommendation, and not an actual rule. The media doesn’t actually have to tell the truth on the news unless they want to, the court said. Fox, who never denied that they tried to insert false statements into the story or that they fired the pair for refusing to do so, felt so vindicated by the verdict that they have sued Akre and Wilson for court costs to pay for Fox’s high-powered corporate attorney.

The FCC had no comment or reaction to the ruling that they care more about honesty and accuracy in a margarine commerical than in the evening news.

This story is stunning in its scope, and rammifications for TV viewers. Yet have you heard anything about this story on any other networks’ “newsâ€?? I guess we have to put that word in quotation marks now, since we can’t know if what they are saying is true, and therefore news, or mere fiction; some giant Republican, big-business soap opera.

Of course you haven’t heard, and you won’t. Why would the media want us to know that they consider it part of their first amendment rights to lie and pass it off as truth? We can only wonder how it jibes with Fox’s claim to be “Fair and Balancedâ€? for them to go to court to defend their right to lie if they want to.

So what’s a viewer to do? My only suggestion: go read a book. At least in the library the stories that are made-up go on the “fiction� shelf.