Visiting The Thoughts Of Yet One More Person

I'm just back from vacation with lots of cool things to say - but wanted to wait till I at least emptied my suitcase. But checking the news got me riled up, as usual:

"The Supreme Court ruled yesterday that local governments may force property owners to sell out and make way for private economic development when officials decide it would benefit the public, even if the property is not blighted and the new project's success is not guaranteed."

Full article: What happened to "by the people"?

It's been several months now since the announcement, and several weeks since the event, so I thought I'd ask people around town today, "So, how do you feel about Paul Wolfowitz heading the World Bank?" Lots of blank stares. I feel it's extremely intriguing that Wolfowitz & Clinton are now working together.

In 1998 Wolfowitz & others tried to enlist Clinton in attacking Iraq with unsubstantiated claims of "weapons of mass destruction" and a "misguided" United Nations. Of course, waiting in the wings was Bush with open ears, who hired Wolfowitz to be his front man on the war, and waited patiently from Jan 20, 2001 to Sept 11, 2001 so he could slap the demonization of Sadam Hussein onto the Amercan public. Few, sadly very few, people even remember that it was not Iraqis that attacked the United States, but Saudi Arabians. Front page news, but who was listening. Even Paul Wolfowitz admitted that Cheney was lying by implying Iraq had anything to do with September 11; but who was listening?

And who is listening now? I do not know what Paul Wolfowitz plans to do with the World Bank. His politics tell us he's going to use his position to further US interests overseas. But, that's nothing new. What interests me is how he was able to gain the support of the people who control the position of President Of The World Bank. Fascinating stuff, none of which bodes well for any sign of world stability.

Anyone who has never visited the web pages of The Project For The New American Century ought to do so. This is not a secret government conspiracy. Their conspiracy has been open and publically available since it's inception. But, again the question - who's listening? The mere fact that Paul Wolfowitz becoming the head of the World bank was front page news, yet no one remembers two weeks later is damn scary.

It's fascinating how people can drop in and out of the music scene & do wonderfully exciting things and leave lasting impressions, yet not be known for their accomplishments. I was going through the 1962 Billboard songs yeasterday and ran across two singles from Bobby Gregg & Friends and was immediately blown away. Wow! I had to look several times to be sure I was in 1962 - the guitar playing was something I didn't think would exist till 67. I assumed it was Bobby Gregg on guitar, since that seemed to be the featured instrument. Whoever it was was doing a lot of fantastic guitar theatrics without the benefit of a foot pedal.

Thanks to the internet and av.com, I was able to find out a wee bit more. Turns out Roy Buchanan is the guitar player - that explains a lot! Good stuff. Want to track down more from these guys, if possible. Has been released on a rhino compilation: Legends Of Guitar - Rock: The '60s, Vol. 2 - but only the one song. Also appears on Cameo Parkway 1957-1967 [Box] , which seems to be a much more interesting collection to me - Some rare Seger included. Again, only the A side is included. Potato Peeler, apparently the first release, is cool, but more pedestrian than Jam - still, some really interesting sounds teased outta the guitar for 1962! Found evidence of an album released. Bobby Gregg was the drummer, and apparently played on several Bob Dylan albums. His big moment in 1966 was to start off "Like A Rolling Stone" with his drum.

That's it - all I found out. Was he a session musician playing on hundreds of hits? Probably. Just can't find a bio on the guy, though I found two bios on Roy Buchanan that were repeated hundreds of times over and over - seems like copying and pasting information from one web page into your own web page is kosher enough; but a royal pain for someone like me trying to find the sources.

In my travels, I came across some cool resources:

http://www.top40db.net/Downloads/Hot100-1960s.txt

http://www.top40db.net/Downloads/Hot100-1970s.txt

http://www.top40db.net/Downloads/Hot100-1980s.txt

http://www.top40db.net/Downloads/Hot100-1990s.txt

http://www.top40db.net/Downloads/Hot100-2000s.txt

http://www.gramble.com/music/60speak.html

http://www.critterbob.net/top40/top40.htm

My favorite part of the internet is actually meeting people and seeing things they have to say. I met Hank Beukema through Marquetta, who had reviewed one of my Cds on her website. Through her website, she introduced me to Hazy Davey, and Italian songwriter with a Springsteenish nickname. I was intrigued enough by his music that I subscribed to his newsletter. His newsletter is also subscribed to by Hank, who from time to time lets us all know he has posted a new article.  So, I really don't "know" Hank except through his articles; but his articles strike so close to home that I feel we've passed paths in bars from time to time.

Anyway, today was one of those times Hank let us know he posted a new piece. It is purportedly a review of an album that has been out for 4 years and spent lots of time on all our turntables (if you can call a cd player a turntable?). You can wonder at that, till you notice the date of the review. I won't spoil it for you - it's simply a powerful piece of writing. It is very subdued - with the proper glee and elegance at hearing an extraordinary album. Of course, juxtaposed with the date of the listening party gives us this fabulous line - I thank you so much for this - says everything a body can't say in the extraordinary circumstance of the the previous day:

The link to Marquetta's site is http://www.lonestarwebstation.com/mtmkfront.html

The link to Hazy Davey's site is http://www.lonestarwebstation.com/davideravera.html

I've been listening to the top 40 hits from 1957 all day. Part of a long-term project I'll probably write about sometime; but for now I have a question that I am simply amazed by.

QUESTION:

Pledge Of Love is such a poor song - how could four different people record it? On top of that, how could all 4 reach the Top 40???? Dick Contino, Johnny Janis, Ken Copeland & Mitchell Torok all hit the charts with Pledge Of Love.

Granted, these are not top names, and I doubt if any of these guys had other hits; but it is still kind of amazing.

From Alta Vista I learned some things. The song was written by Ramona Redd, who went on to have some hits by Glen Campbell (Arkansas & Marie) in the 60's. Hank Snow recorded Mysterious Lady From St Martinique. All these songs were apparently  co-written by Mitchell Torok.  Amazon has two albums for sale that contain one of her songs - one for  $160 (Hank Snow) & the other for $100 (Carl Perkins).  So, while my opinion is that this is a pretty poor song, it's obvious that someone thinks real highly of this talent. She wrote a film score also, for the Glen Campbell film "Norwood".

Pledge  Of Love is so beloved that it's also featured in a play http://www.geocities.com/cathyvernham/144.html

Well, I finished the preface of Leaves Of Grass today under interesting circumstances. Sitting and waiting for my tires to be changed. It took 5 hours! Mostly due to incompetence, but that's another whole story because the new tires are happily on my vehicle and I should be good to go for at least another 5 years. So, back to Whitman. I'm glad it took them 5 hours - I got to bite & chew, bite & chew my way through the preface. I decided to save the poems themselves for another day. There's 12 poems, so should take a few readings to chew on those again. Cheated and found out this is not the Leaves of Grass I read as a young grizzly. This is a copy the first edition (I peeked at the afterword a bit - this is put out in anniversary of the 150th year since it's first publication). The paperback I had torn into was something like "the complete leaves of grass" because Whitman kept adding to it year after year till it got itself good and thick.

The preface was both a chore and a joy. Lots and lots of quoatable lines & lots of lots of "lemme think a bit". It's put together in a pretty complex manner, mostly trying to convince the reader that they are in the presence of great poetry. Lots of lopsided arguments trying to prove that, but still fun to read through and consider swallowing. The funniest bit arrives just about right smack dab in the middle of this fairly densely worded 14 page diatribe:

The preface, to this reader, is not simple. I have a hard time making up my mind if the preface is excess or simply full of definiteness. I'm sure Whitman's call would be that his verboseness is simply because of his complete attempt to be definite. I can simply say I'm not sad I read it, and I would recommend it as a good read for anyone interested in high ego gratification (on Whitman's part).

Today I have to quote an entire artile, because it's good to see a voice in leadership position speaking out in truth, without fear of the repurcussions that will obviously come. It's really sad when our government needs to be reminded that democracy means to be "governed by the people". Our elected representatives are pretending democracy means "what we say goes." Here's the article, from the BBC:

US pushes democracy at OAS summit

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has called for greater intervention by the Organisation of American States in promoting democracy in Latin America. Opening an OAS summit in Florida, she highlighted concerns over political crises in Bolivia, Ecuador and Haiti. Private groups and individuals should be able to raise concerns with the OAS to help monitor democracy, she said.

But Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez accused the United States of seeking to impose a "global dictatorship."

"So, they're going to try to monitor the Venezuelan government through the OAS, they must be joking!" he said, speaking in Caracas shortly before the conference opened on Sunday.

"If there is any government that should be monitored by the OAS, then it should be the US government," he added.

Hundreds of alleged terrorism suspects have been held at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba without charge for up to three years. The US holds these prisoners "off-shore" because it would be illegal to do this within the US because of our Constitution. So, we openly flaut our own laws to show the world exactly what democracy (read capitalism) means - rights for the rich and famous, the heck with everyone else.

Today Senator Joseph Biden said that the US should close its detention centre at Guantanamo Bay. He said the controversy over the camp put Americans at risk from terrorism rather than protecting them from it. It took three years for someone in a leadership position to speak out. Let's see how far he pushes. We all know how disgusting it is for this "great" country to openly deny human rights to a group of people - any people. But no one wants to speak too loud in fear of the capitalist warlords. Sad case study for a country which used to be known for it's freedom of speech. 

If I read the preface as a young man, I have completely forgotten it. Some excellent thinking material here. As a young man Whitman made me feel like I could write poetry. As an old man I stand in awe at how easy he makes it seem. This is a small quote from the preface, which I'm slowly chewing through:

If the poet "breathes into anything that was before thought small it dilates with the grandeur and life of the universe. He is a seer. . .he is individual. . .he is complete in himself. . .the others are as good as he, only he sees it and they do not. He is not one of the chorus. . .he does not stop for any regulation. . .he is the president of regulation. What the eyesight does to the rest he does to the rest. Who knows the curious mystery of the eyesight? The other senses corroborate themselves, but this is removed from any proof but its own and foreruns the identities of the spiritual world." - Walt Whitman, 1855

Well, I know I have to get this off my chest sooner or later. Been mulling it over the past few weeks, trying to analyze my own feelings. I think I've finally found the source of my consternation.

First the story. I was a chaperone to take the kindergarten kids on a field trip. The were going on a bus to see a movie, Bambi. I teach PE to all the kinders, but am not their classroom teacher, and none of the children are assigned to me for special ed; thus my role was simply chaperone. When we arrived at the theater, one child picked up a pebble and thre it in the street. She then picked up another pebble and was going to throw it when her teacher stopped her, looked her in the eye, and said "Do not throw that rock, put it back on the ground". The child looked at the teacher, then threw the pebble into the street.

The teacher blew up because the child did not "listen", and made the child sit in the lobby - during the entire movie. This one child who did not immediately obey the teacher was left alone in a lobby for a period of 90 minutes. I was, to say the least, angry. Very angry. There were 180 other students allowed to see the movie who many times during the school year had not immediately obeyed a teacher. Why was this one child picked on?

Well, I never got an answer for that. I do feel that the teacher has some childhood issues that need to be worked out if she is ever to be a great teacher. But I wanted some immediate solving of this for the child's sake. What do I see when a child does something like this? A communication. I won't try to guess what the child was communicating without observing the child in other settings; but the child could have been making a statement of some sort. There is another possibility - the child simply wasn't processing what the screaming teacher was saying. In either case, this was not a deed that deserved ostracation from the tribe for 90 minutes.

If the teacher had her sit out for 5 minutes I would not have gotten so angry, but she insisted the child had to sit out for the entire movie. I tried going over her head. The principal was also there - as a chaperone. I went to her right away with the issue, and was told, "You're right, the child should not be punished like this. I certainly wouldn't do it if I were the teacher. But we can't interfere with another teacher's discipline plan. I will see if I can convince her to let the child come in 1/2 way through". That's not the action I wanted, but it was a compromise. We are forced to compromise so much.

I went to the principal because she claims to be a true believer in positive action, and positive discipline. It was obvious to me that this discipline was not positive in any manner. It was - simply - punishment way beyond the crime. In some circles this is known as abuse.

I checked on the child from time to time. She sat in the lobby like a good little soldier, never moving from her seat. The entire movie!!! The principal was not successful in getting the teacher to back down 1/2 way. The 5 year-old child remained compliant to her punishment the entire time. Most five year olds would have been out of the seat and messing with things. So, this child has been through a lot in her short live to mold her into this.

Okay, so it happened, live goes on. Why was I dwelling on this for 2 full weeks - sometimes almost blinded by the injustice of it? I think I've finally found the source of my continued anger. I have from time to time thought about possibly entering administration. I ran my own business for many years, and have good business sense. However, this episode taught me that my vision is not correct. I have always seen the principal as a leader and a master teacher. If I were principal I would have said, with no regrets, "You will not allow that child to sit there longer than 5 minutes. If we need to discuss this further, we'll do it back at school after the children leave." If the teacher did need to meet, I would have called in the school counselor and highly recommended counseling for the teacher.

Well, it became obvious that this is not how the system works. We are growing children, not teachers, in the current system. That could explain why there are so many poor teachers today? I don't really want to say that - most teachers are excellent at what they do, and I have no complaints; but we all know there are a few that are okay teachers who need help to become excellent. I thought that was the principals job. To me, one poor teacher is one poor teacher too many - but I also feel a poor teacher can become a great teacher with training. Now I'm learning that the principal is not a leadership position; but more of a politically-correct position. In this and similar instances I've been told that the teacher is the "queen of her classroom". It doesn't matter if the children are learning - what matters is if the teacher feels she has control of her class.

So then, my anger is at my misguided notion of entering administration after teaching in the public schools for a dozen years. I can see that my style of management is not one that would be accepted. This should be a relief - and I will try to make it one - I will resign myself to staying the course and trying my best year by year to become an excellent teacher, and not worry about helping the schools administratively. I guess that's best left for the politician type of personality - being able to make the majority happy instead of being able to make the majority reflect.

Finished Rendevous with Rama last night. Read The City and The Stars just before that. Read both books as a teenager - 30+ years ago! Still good reads. It's interesting what I see now in the stories. City was first published in 1955, and Rama in 1973. The connecting thread is his most famous work, 2001, A Space Oddyssey. I may read that again someday, but am not inclined now. The link between these three books is the famous rectangle without an opening. What that means, only Clarke knows. The role of the rectangle is a bit different in each; yet has the same power to fascinate the characters in the books, however briefly.

The first book, City, took place in the far distant future. Religion was mentioned in a way that it ws obvious at that point in his life Clarke saw all religion as myth. In Rama the character who was a follower of a space Christ was at least of high moral character, and brave, etc even though he was still an oddball. The rhetoric against him wasn't as harsh in this book, although in the end his eschatology was wrong (he thought that Rama was a spaceship sent by god to save the remnant).

On a pure entertainment level both books were loads of fun. City is actually quite a journey when I think back on it. It centers on one character, with a changing series of sidekicks, but the amount of convincing storytelling that goes on in 212 pages is something to be admired. There are many ideas and philosophies kicked around - lots to mull over and consider. I'd easily recommend this to a teenager - never hurts one to think. One of the many intriguing questions worth mulling over as medical science allows us to live longer and longer lives - is it better to live forever and not have children hanging around - as the city grew into, or is it better to procreate, know love, and die? The book, wisely, doesn't answer this or any of the other questions it brings up. I can't remember which side I was on as a teenager; but my bet would be the city. Now that my body is falling apart, and I've had some knowledge of love, I side on the country - willing to die happily.

That's what is kind of cool of nostalgically re-reading books I read 30 years ago - to see how much my thinking has grown, if at all. The difficult thing is remembering how I felt or thought 30 years ago. Some things remain clear, others are a complete mystery.

Read today that Deep Throat announced himself. A hero of the sort that Clarke writes about - a lone man needing to explore the truth in a public manner using his mental abilities to think through issues without needing the public accolades.

Not sure what to read next. I picked up a hardcover copy of Leaves of Grass. Another book I read through many times - many years ago. I haven't picked it up in quite a long time - the paperback I had got lost somewhere along the way. Never had a hardback edition before. Something tells me that's what I'll be ripping into the next few weeks =:-)

Just got a note that school lunch fees will be going up next year. The good news is hardly anyone will have to pay for the increase, because most children in rural areas and inner city schools qualify for free lunch.

What saddens me as an educator is that my children qualify for free school lunch. The amount school teachers are paid falls below the federal poverty level, thus my children qualify for the free lunch program. That's a sad statement about our society and where it's priorities lie. Of course, I guess in an abstract manner that could be considered a "perk". Work for us and your children will get a free lunch!

The San Antonio newspaper today had a headline decrying the terrorists in Iraq that are shooting at the US military. How lopsided propoganda always is.

I do believe there are terrorists in this world. The Saudi Arabians who flew airplanes into buildings on September 11 were, no question in my mind, terrorists. They attacked a foreign country with the aim of spreading terror among the population.

In many ways it worked, with the propoganda machine set up by the Bush administration. Very few people I speak with remember that the terrorists who used airplanes as bombs - a mechanism that our government was well aware of several years before (see Oliver North circa 1998) - were, in truth, Saudi Arabian. Saudi Arabia is our "ally", so we sure as heck couldn't attack them. So, utilizing a well-oiled propoganda machine, Americans were led to believe, almost en-masse, that it was Afghanistan attacking the US.

When that ploy was shown not to work too well, Saddam Hussein, who had been previously demonized, became an easy target . Now, people I talk with, from a highly educated school principal, to a doctor, to an unemployed school crossing guard, believe that Iraq was the country that attcked the US on September 11. Even when Bush was forced to admit he had no evidence, his tongue was so deep in his cheek that watchers believed he was trying to tell us he knew something we didn't. All part of the propoganda game.

The point is, there were terrorists, and as long as there is oppression in the world, there will be terrorists. But we should not use that word as lightly as it's being used today in The San Antonio newspaper. The people of Iraq who are fighting the incursion of American troops into their country can by no means be defined as terrorists. If one were to apply the term that loosely, then the only terrorists in Iraq today would be the American troops. We need to be careful not to water-down terms that have specific meanings or it will come back to slap us in the future.

 Saudi king to undergo more tests. . .

Saw this headline & had this flash that the Saudi King must have enrolled himself in an American Public School because he couldn't wait to see the reality of the no child left behind act.

Still so angry about something that happened at work last week to think clearly enough to write. Will sit down and type out those feelings soon so I can move on into summer with a clear head.

Woke up this morning to get even angrier. With Mr Bush constantly saying out loud that things are "better off in Iraq" without Hussein I wake up every morning with just the opposite truth being printed and broadcast. There's been many many cases of Americans murdering the patriots in Iraq, and the movement to murder any man, woman, or child who dares to carry a weapon has been obvious to all observers since the beginning of these atrocities. However, never has is been as blatant as this mornings headline, which have me in an uproar again:
 
More than 40,000 Iraqi soldiers are to be deployed in Baghdad in a massive operation to hunt down insurgents, the Iraqi defence minister has announced.

Using the word "insurgent" is the propaganda tool our government has used, but in Iraqui history - when this mess is over - those that are defending their culture against the attackers will be known as patriots, just as George Washington is called a patriot today in our history. We never remeber our own history, and the fact that to the British, George Washington and his troops were called "insurgents".  It saddens me the way the press is siding so easily with the attackers of a defenseless nation.

Gotta get off to work - had to get this off my chest so I wouldn't blow up needlessly at someone today.

Woke up, shut off the alarm, let the radio blare, and fell asleep. Forget what was playing, but woke 20 minutes later to the words: "they say I'm lazy but it takes all my time . . . life is good to me so far" and the song ended. Then I woke up, jumped out of bed, dragged a comb across my head.

Spent 4 hours in the Texas sun today. 3 hours with the kinder olympics - no good quotes from them. Had a coupla kids break down & cry because they "lost". In reality no one lost - they all got ribbons; but they seem to inherently know the difference between a blue ribbon and a yellow ribbon. The last hour, as always, was an hour as coach for the kinders. Let them have a free day since they worked so hard all morning.

My meanderings were on the differences of California, where I have taught, and Texas, where I teach now. In California, at the elementary level, the classroom teacher was responsible for the children to receive PE. There's a lot of wisdom there - it's much easier to control 30 kids than 90. That illusion of control allowed children to hear a bit more, and thus learn the rules of the game quicker. Most of us taught the rules in the classroom, then we went out to play PE. The acoustics were the same as when I taught math concepts, or language concepts - the kids could hear, and it never took long to learn the rules.

In Texas we stick them all in a large, empty room, a bit larger than the size of a regulation basketball court. With painted cinder block walls, and a ceiling some 20 feet high, with lots and lots of echoes. It takes one kid moaning quietly to completely disrupt a lesson so 1/2 the kids never hear the instructions. General chaos usually happens, and we try to make the best of it by keeping the kids moving and generally having a good time. What they don't learn is teamwork or individual responsibility. It doesn't take long each day to teach these concepts to a 5 year old - but if they are to learn, it is imperative that they hear. A large gymnasium with a coaches voice bouncing back from 5 directions is not a good acoustical situation for hearing.

So why do it? Well, the teachers get a break called "work time" to prepare lessons. That's actually a cool idea - in theory the teachers get paid for preparing lessons. I will attest that I didn't get prep time in California, and spent at least two hours after school preparing the next days activities and grading papers. I never complained, because that was a given when I took the job. 

Reality? Well, now I get paid about 30% of what I got in California. The local excuse is the cost of living is higher in California. That's a bald-faced lie, but they won't believe it. My taxes are 300% higher in Texas, food costs exactly the same, gas prices are 15% cheaper here for some reason; but gas is not an issue for me either here or in California. The phone costs are higher here, as are gas and electric. Housing costs are very similar - a tiny house sells here for $180,000. So, they are lying to themselves about the "cost of living" as an excuse for why they pay teachers 70% less. I don't care myself simply because I enjoy teaching, and the money is secondary - but I see teachers struggling financially here a lot more than I did in California. I choose to live simply, so finances are not a struggle for me wherever I am.

One thing is very true in Texas - almost all the teachers are female. I am the only male teacher in my school, and at the next level there are no male teachers. That's not as true in California. As a result, teachers are not unionized here - even worse, it is illegal for them to unionize. That's difficult for me to believe - that a state can make it illegal for a specialized group to form a union. I had heard stories about the south - now I'm living it. When you grow up somewhere else, you think it's all exaggeration. The other thing that's very subtle, but obvious when looking in with an outsiders view; the teachers are "only women", and therefore do not deserve a living wage. I went to a board meeting and noticed the Superintendent, the Assistant Superintendent, and the entire School board is male. Women are not going to receive a living wage in a state that won't allow them to unionize or be members of the school board. However, it's okay to educate women because then they can teach.

My own personal belief is that there are no teachers anywhere getting paid what they are worth, so the entire point is useless to discuss. A simple example is a home day care center funded by the state can have 12 children, and charges $6 an hour for them, with no other obligation than to give them a snack and a lunch - the state pays the day care center what the parent cannot pay. Most children are left there for 10 hours - the parent drops them off on the way to work and picks them up on the way back. That's $72 an hour, or $720 a day. A teacher nets around $2000 a month after taxes and insurance, or $500 a week. And that includes the obligation of teaching the kids how to read, manipulate numbers, and write. Not 12, but 20+ kids. It has always been this way, and I don't expect it will change soon; but it does show how the government systematically teaches falsehoods in order to keep the status quo moving in the direction they choose (ie, the cost of living is cheaper; women aren't worth as much as men, etc).

Meandered far astray, as usual; but despite my sadness at the way people have decided to treat to the ones they have chosen to teach their children, I can still feel good enough to sing along with Joe Walsh: Life Is Good To Me, and today I was able to spend 4 hours in the Texas sunshine. Maybe he even said Life's Been Good, but I've been singing Life Is Good all day because that's what I heard when I dragged my consciousness out of the dream state I was entranced in.

I have my alarm set to play the radio. Cameblasting in today during the "noise" section of the Beatles & an orchestra performing A Day In The Life. Couldn't recognize it coming out of the dream state - was just blown away by all the noise. But I had to chuckle when the noise stopped momentarily, and the voice started chanting: "woke up, got out of bed, dragged a comb across myhead". Fun way to wake up.

Non-eventful day, which is always good.

At Bible study tonight we went through Genesis 22, the chapter that still continues to thrill me - the specific ways words are used proves to me that there is far more to a spiritual walk than is commonly taught in buildings with a public speaker known as a "preacher". Abraham goes to "worship" on his way to sacrifice his son. That alone tells me that worship is something other than singing songs in a public gathering. When I asked the question before the study tonight, I got various answers like singing, praising, etc. I've never been able t osee Abraham as praising God for this act. I can see him as obeying God;but my mental picture is similar to Christ in the garden praying three times: "take this cup from me". Yet, "not my will, but thine be done". My spiritual gut tells me this is true worship - in the spiritual sense; not in the culturally acceptable sense.

At the end of tonight's study I left with the tease: Who went down the mountain - according to the written word? It's easy to assume that Isaac went down with Abraham - heck, Abraham even promised the two witnesses that they would both return. Yet, verse 19 does not even mention Isaac. In my mind there's a reason for every given detail in the Bible, and there's a reason for every missing detail. Will be fun to see if anyone in the group comes up with the same conclusion I have- Isaac does not re-appear in the written record until the Holy Spirit (unnamed servant) arrives with the Bride!

Music I listened to mostly today was a mix set on my flash mp3 player of several artists including Iron & Wine. I'm liking the set more and more each time I hear it. First heard Iron & Wine on the Garden State movie soundtrack. I've been able to track down most of the official recordings, and am enjoying them very much when mixed in with other newer releases. Gets to be a bit much listening to the group by itself for 2 hours; but mixed in every 3rd or 4th song, it is truly a joyful experience. http://ironandwine.com

this is my first posting, so I welcome myself to the idea of dreaming my thoughts out loud and allowing others to openly criticize my meanderings in order to help me to look criticaly at myself and hopefully grow even more thoughtful and understanding of myself and others. As I think about my purpose I realize there is nothing I have to add to the human race except another opinion. That is a bit sad, but I hope to be able to analyze where I am and how I got here by being able to glance over my time here. I'm kinda thinking of it as a personal diary/guide/place to plunge into things that make me angry/sad/enthusiatic/gleeeful/or just plain silly.

I say a headline from a newspaper today that said writing blogs can cost you your job. That saddens me tremendously - especially in a country where we should not have any reason to fear self-expression.

I teach at a public school here in the USA - specifically working with special ed kids who are my life-blood - the ones who keep me alive.

My favorite quote this week is from one of my eight year old students who was running in the olympics and said "I was winning, and I would have won if everybody didn't try so hard to run faster than me." Started me thinking of the little ifs we all face in life.

Yesterday I spent my entire day thinking. Woulda been a good time to start a long-winded blog. A 6 year old student came up to me when I was sitting outside watching a few classes at recess. She asked me why I went to her aunties birthday party. I told her her auntie was one of my best friends, and her eyes got huge. I told her how much I respected her auntie, and I'm always happy to celebrate with people I love and respect. After I finished talking she looked at me for awhile, and I asked - is something the matter? She said, "but, you're white!" I laughed and said, "well, I'm sorry, honey, I just happened to be born that way - I hope it doesn't bother you."

I am bothered a lot by the fact that this student is so observant about little things like that. There were probably 120 people at that party (auntie turned 50, so it was a 'big one'), and it's true that my family and I were the only 'white' people there. In fact, we were teased because at one part during the party we hung out together as a family, and our dog was sitting near us. Our dog happens to be truly all white, and someone a few tables over who we all love made a silly comment thatw ere were the 'all white table'. We all took it for fun, and laughed.

But looking back at it through a six year old child's eyes - it really bothers me. What happened to the dream? The schools still teach it - nowadays even more than it was taught 20 years ago, and King died almost 20 years before that even - he definitely made the speech over 40 years ago. Yet, nothing has really changed. It's still a dream that we will judge each other by the content of our character and not the color of our skin. 40 years, and there are plenty of "words", but where is there a reality? I know I have made the mistake of not even seeing this reality - because I believe so much in the dream - until a six year old child points out to me just how blind I am to reality, and how much I am living in a dream world.