Last Friday of the Semester…

Workout Notes 4100 yards of swimming; 5 x 100 (alt fist/free) warm up, 5 x 100 (3g/f/5g/f), 1000 in 16:23 (so-so); 8:11/8:12, 100 easy, 10 x 100 (fly/free/back/free) 1:47-1:50, 10 x 100 on the 2 (1:40-42).

On a down note, there was a time when I was sandwiched between two fat dog-paddling guys (I got kicked a time or two, but not hard). But toward the end, my friend Steve Foster took a lane (and looked good in the water) and afterward, as I was walking out, I got to chat with a runner who is going to do the Indy 500 half marathon tomorrow. Seeing a fit lady in skin-tight shiny spandex tights always lifts my spirits up!

Politics

Democrats are learning to play politcs: from thereisnospoon at the Daily Kos:

I have to say that Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) is a genius. He has created an extraordinary wedge to use against the Administration and its gun-crazy Republican allies with S. 1237, introduced on May 1st, officially (and brilliantly) titled the “Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2007“. The bill essentially gives the Attorney General the direct authority (above and beyond the Brady Bill) to prevent those on terrorist watch lists from purchasing firearms. Gonzales and the Administration, in their quest for ever-increasing power, have offered no objection to the bill’s contents.

This leads to a double-bind for the GOP–if they support the bill, they do the following:

1. betray their rabidly pro-gun base in favor of federal power to prevent gun ownership, and

2. give the Democrats a legislative anti-gun victory in the wake of the shootings at Virginia Tech;

If they oppose the bill, they:

1. Deny the Executive authority in an issue of national security; and

2. Put themselves on record as saying that dangerous firearms should be in the hands of known terrorists.

And firearms in the hands of known terrorists is what is at issue here. From Frank Lautenberg’s website:

Under the federal Brady Act, a licensed firearms dealer must request a background check through the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) before an unlicensed individual may purchase a weapon. However, even if a NICS check reveals that the prospective purchaser is a known or suspected terrorist, nothing in current law prevents that person from purchasing a gun unless he or she meets one of the other disqualifying factors, including felony or domestic abuse convictions.

In January 2005, the GAO produced a report to Sens. Lautenberg and Biden (D-DE) that found that from February 3 to June 30, 2004, a total of 44 firearm purchase attempts were made by individuals designated as known or suspected terrorists by the federal government. In 35 cases, the FBI authorized the transactions to proceed because FBI field agents were unable to find any disqualifying information (such as felony convictions or illegal immigrant status) within the federally prescribed three business days. (emphasis added)

Finally! We’ve gotten our teeth kicked in because we have all-too-often tried to “take the high road” and remain “above the fray”. It is about time someone showed some political savy.

Obama: not an enabler.

Barack Obama is certainly no oreo. But he is no enabler either, as ademption at the Daily Kos points out:

In today’s Washington Post, Senator Obama remarks upon the internal discussion that African Americans are having within our community about the negative influences within our culture:

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is delivering pointed critiques of the African American community as he campaigns for its votes, lamenting that many of his generation are “disenfranchising” themselves because they don’t vote, taking rappers to task for their language, and decrying “anti-intellectualism” in the black community, including black children telling peers who get good grades that they are “acting white.”

[...]

Ademption goes on to talk about his own experiences:

In this diary, I’m going to focus on Obama’s anti-intellectualism remarks because that really resonated with me. I grew up in a middle class neighborhood in suburban Maryland. I would often attend honors or AP classes as the only African American or one of two (three at the most) in a class of 30 students. At times, I would get teased about acting too white etc. My parents instilled in me the self-confidence so that I could withstand the hurtful things said about me by my peers. It’s very difficult to feel rejected by people who you think should be on your side. It can take a toll, which is why students who are trying to achieve need that extra support from their parents, surrounding community to overcome that feeling of rejection.

I see the same thing happening to my nephews which happened to me when I was their age. They are bright kids. They are enrolled in Honors and AP classes. But unlike me, they are failing their classes. My nephews are middle class. They are not poor. They reside in a two parent household. When my relatives or I try to confront them about their grades, there’s just this apathy and sense of helplessness and defeat, which I just don’t understand. They are not alone.

My father substitute teaches several middle and high schools in the same suburban Maryland community where I grew up. He’s 66 years old and grew up in the segregated south. Like Bill Cosby, he just is flabbergasted at the disrepect that his black students show him and other teachers, the constant fights, talking in the middle of class, failure to do their homework, their use of the “n” word etc. He just does not understand how these kids aren’t taking the opportunities that are so easily at their grasp, when he had to struggle just to attend school. He couldn’t attend school full time when he was a child, because he had to help his family earn a living. He attended segregated schools in North Carolina in the 1940s and 1950s. At best, he went to schools under substandard condition. That’s not an issue in the schools that he teaches now. These kids come from middle class communities in nice neighborhoods. They live in houses that range from $500,000-$750,000. Their schools are not falling apart like in the inner city. They have all the opportunities that one could think of and they’re just not stepping up.

I don’t know what the solution is. [...]

I recommend reading his whole entry; it is quite good.

Religion and State
This nonsense comes up again and again:

The Bush administration represents an insidious, dangerous sea change in how this nation views its own history. Right wing attempts to rewrite our history are insidious and Orwellian. The US, it must be repeated, is not a theocracy. The founders have cited no other authority for their work but the people themselves. God does not get even a footnote.

The US Constitution is not a “Ten Commandants” believed handed down by God. The US Constitution is the work of men, a convention of elected delegates to Philadelphia in 1787. If the Constitution should prove faulty, unworkable, or, in any other way, impractical, the people themselves bear the responsibility.

It is no use blaming God. The US Constitution is an existentialist document, a matter of deliberate choice by a people facing up to the facts of their founding, a people willing to take responsibility for the future they believed they could create. If God is to be summoned, it is done by individuals acting alone and within the dictates of their consciences. It is not done by a theocracy; it is not done by an act of Congress; it is not done by a single article or phrase in the new charter.

What the US Constitution does not do is significant. It does not cite a transcendent being as its source of authority. It does not cite or reference the works of theologians, saints, or prophets. It does not anoint a “King” who, in turn, cites a “divine right” to rule. It does not endorse the Christian religion. Nor “Muslim”, nor “Buddhist”, “nor “Hindu”. It does not mandate worship. It does not mandate a liturgy. It does not mandate a day of worship. The names of deities, religions or sects are not mentioned. It does not use the word “Christian”.

The word “myth” is too kind for latter day ideologues who persist in re-writing our nation’s history. Assertions that our legal system is founded on the Christian Bible is more than a “myth; it is a deliberate lie manufactured and perpetrated by American fundamentalists like Pat Robertson.

Len Hart (the author of the article) quotes some of the the founding fathers and other sources:

Then, of course, there is the opinion of the man who was and is called the Father of his Country, George Washington:

“The United States is in no sense founded upon the Christian doctrine.” – George Washington

This sentiment would be echoed in the Treaty of Tripoli of 1797:

Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries. – 1797 Treaty of Tripoli

About that, Tom Peters writes:

Does the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli say that “The Government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion?” YES!
…
More generally, we can’t imagine how the absence of Article 11 in the Arabic version effects [sic] the separationist argument. It was the English version of the treaty that was approved by President Adams and Secretary Pickering, and this version unquestionably contained Article 11. Similarly, when the Senate ratified the treaty, they did so knowing full well that the English version declared that the United States was not a Christian nation. The separationist implications of the treaty can’t be escaped by arguing that the Arabic version may not have contained Article 11; the President, Secretary of State, and Senate thought it did, but approved the treaty anyway.

…
–Tom Peters, 1797 Treaty with Tripoli

You know, I really don’t care which superstitions people believe in. But why do they want to make these superstitions national?

Interesting Website
I’ve been getting e-mails from this website which is run by a former Congressman John Konop (a Republican). It’s mission:

Control Congress is a multi-partisan, issue-oriented political forum that brings together the Left, Right, and everyone in between.
About

The U.S. Congress’s approval ratings could hardly be lower. ControlCongress.com is here to help straighten them out. It’s a non-partisan forum where people from all over the political spectrum can decide how our government ought to be run. Have at it…

Some of the articles look interesting; I might spend some of my blog-watching time there.

Creationism

The Republican candidates get asked if they believe in evolution. Three did NOT. idiots.