Eye on the Watcher’s Council

As you may know the members of the Watcher’s Council each nominate one of his or her own posts and one non-Council post for consideration by the whole Council. The complete list of this week’s Council nominations is here.

Blog-friend Marc Schulman of American Future has decided to vacate his Council Seat. What with maintaining the excellent work he does consistently at AF, posting at centrist üuber-blog The Moderate Voice, and, well, having a life, I can see how his plate is pretty full but he will be sorely missed. If you have a blog, consider joining the Council. The current rules are here.

The Glittering Eye, “Who Were the Etruscans?”

In my submission for this week I consider the ancient and modern evidence for the origins of the Etruscans.

Rhymes With Right, “An Idea I Can Get Behind”

Greg endorses the replacement of the TAKS achievement test with end-of-course tests as better for actually examining what the students have learned.

The Colossus of Rhodey, “Essence of a Problem”

Hube notes the role of expulsion in preserving discipline in the schools and comments on the relative importance of teachers and parents in education. IMO a critical role that parents play is in establishing a framework for education, a basis. If the parents don’t value either education or the teacher, neither will the student. Once upon a time parents and teachers operated collaboratively—students could be confident that in disputes between student and teacher the parent would always support the teacher. Now, too often, parents and teachers have an adversarial relationship.

Bookworm Room, “You Ain’t Never Had a Friend Like Me”

I don’t think that it’s the rush to go to press, innumeracy, or poorly-informed journalists that’s causing the crisis in the media that’s going on these days. As far as I’m concerned all those are effects rather than causes.

Journalism has been in a crisis for at least a century; it may be a permanent condition that’s always been there for all that I know. The business model for print journalism, in particular, is collapsing and I don’t see any way that will be reversed. The publisher of the NYT, Pinch Sulzberger, acknowledged not long ago that in a few years there may be no print version of the New York Times. Competition for eyes and the dollars those eyes mean drives the rush to press.

I blame innumeracy and the low level of general knowledge among today’s crop of journalists on the J-schools. Journalism was, is, and always will be a craft. It will never be a profession and anyone who thinks it is is kidding him or herself. The path to journalism shouldn’t be through the specialist journalism school. It should be through life and experience and knowledge of something else other than journalism.

Does the blogosphere provide a balance? Possibly, particularly as the blogosphere becomes productive rather than reactive. Bill Roggio, Michael Yon, and other bloggers are doing better reporting on the war in Iraq than anybody in the conventional media. They have the skills. Inevitably, the conventional media will take notice and I expect a more give-and-take relationship to emerge rather than the adversarial one the news outlets seem to be cultivating.

Eternity Road, “Acceptances and Severances Part 3: Association by Exclusion and Its Consequences”

Francis Porretto continues his reflections on relationships and society, in this installment examining the hazards of relationships defined by who is excluded.

Done With Mirrors, “Classical Fraud”

I’m surprised that the recently-revealed Joyce Hatto frauds haven’t received more attention in the blogosphere.  If you’re not familiar with the scandal, here’s the quick summary:  elderly invalid woman/recording studio owner husband/virtuoso piano recordings/woman dies/breathless adulation by critics/recordings determined to be of other people playing (lots of other people).  Callimachus considers this fraud along with other famous frauds including the Desiderata, the Ossianic cycle, etc.

Soccer Dad, “Green Thinking from the Red Planet”

I blame the problem of climate change on Mars which, oddly, seems to parallel that on our own planet on SUV’s.

Right Wing Nut House, “Death of a Titan”

Rick Moran celebrates the life, work, and contributions of the late historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.  Liberalism ain’t what it used to be.

Joshuapundit, “Between Iraq and a Hard Place—Why We Went, How It Got so Screwed Up and Where It’s Going—Part 2”

Freedom Fighter’s series on the past, present, and future of the war in Iraq is certainly thought-provoking.  I disagree on any number of his premises and conclusions.  For example, I don’t believe that the war in Iraq “got so screwed up” (the implication being that it could have been anything else).  I think that the mess in Iraq was inevitable.  Better execution might have helped but not much.

And I’d be willing to bet a shiny new dime that he’s wrong in his prediction that, by the end of 2007, we won’t have an appreciable military presence in Iraq.

The Education Wonks, “Student Sex Scandal Rocks Indiana School District”

All I can say about this story of two sixth-grade students having sexual intercourse during a lab class is that school has changed a lot since I attended.

The Sundries Shack, “The Separation Hypocrisy”

I’ve made this comment before on other people’s blogs but I don’t think that there’s any hypocrisy involved in, on the one hand, John Edwards basing his political campaign on there being two Americas, a rich, privileged one and a poor one and, on the other, his building himself a large mansion.  John Edwards is a European-style Social Democrat:  when he says there are two Americas he means either that the government should be ameliorating the condition of the less-advantaged America or that the government should be acting to make one America.  It has nothing whatever to do with his own personal behavior or expenditures—he believes the government should be acting not him.

Well, I’ve decided which  posts I’ll vote for.  Which would get your votes?

3 comments… add one
  • Hi Dave!
    Hey, I’ll take that bet and raise you a nickel..though, I have to be honest and say it’s a suckers bet since `appreciable military presence’ is a real elastic term.

    One thing: as I mention in part one, the problem with Iraq was not the EXECUTION,(a brilliant victory) but the aftermath.

    The execution of the Iraq war was almost flawless, except ( as I mentioned) that it took place after 19 months of political psychodrama, thus giving Saddam all the time he needed to sell, hide or dispose of any WMD’s he might have had.

    As for the aftermath..had we not dissolved the Sunni security forces, had we secured the borders, had we used Iraq as a base against Iran and Syria ( the only context for invading Iraq that made any sense ) and especially, had we not rushed the Iraqis into an election they weren’t prepared for and paved the way for an Iran friendly Shiite government and the formation of the Iran backed Shiite militias in the name of President Bush’s `Arab democracy’ fetish, things would be very different.

    Likewise, even after these errors, had we allied with the Kurds as they repeatedly begged us to, redeployed our bases there, and helped them build a strong and independent Kurdistan while providing our troops with a secure base to fight the jihadis things would be very different now..but I realize you disagree with me on that one.

    Our failure to utilize the only major allies we had in Iraq simply underlines what I’ve said in the piece…that this was a war for the Saudis, who were dead set against our empowering a non-Arab entity in the region.

    I know, hindsight’s 20-20..except, as you know, I’ve been saying this for some time.

    All Good Things,

    ff

    ps: Killer piece on the Etruscans this week.

  • Thanks.

    Here’s a definition for “appreciable military presence”: 80,000. I’m betting $.15 that we’ll have 80,000 or more troops in Iraq on December 31, 2007 (basically, that’s what we have now less the National Guard).

    One of the reasons that I opposed the invasion (although not the only one) is that I’ve taken the word of the Bush Administration at face value. Including what they didn’t say.

    When they didn’t say that they planned to use Iraq as a base for further invasions, I believed it and, as you note, at least that might have made tactical sense. As to holding the borders even if we deployed our entire military and the Iraqi military that didn’t disband itself it still wouldn’t have been enough to secure the borders. That the borders would be porous was a foregone conclusion.

    Fostering an Arab democracy in Iraq always made strategic sense. Too bad it was impossible, particularly politically impossible in the United States.

  • I see your fifteen cents, partner! We’ll settle up on 12/31/07 G-d willing.

    BTW,thanks for the tip on General Asquari..I put it on site, and agree that it could end up being a major development.

    I was in favor of the invasion because I believed that the Bush Administration WOULD use Iraq as a base against Syria and Iran. It made sense in no other context.

    As for securing the borders, I don’t think deploying our troops there was necessary. I think a stern warning from Day One, followed by aReagan-esque social call on Damascus courtesy of the USAF would have done the trick in Syria as far as policing those borders…and probably more.

    For the Mullahs, I think Operation Mullah Stomp would have worked just fine then, as it will now..especially if we had turned Falujah into a greasy spot when it first erupted, destroyed the Shiite militias and sent Moqtada al-Sadr to say hello to Allah.

    Again, the President’s fetish for `Arab democracy’…*sigh*

    All Best,
    FF

Leave a Comment