« December 2007 | Main | February 2008 »
I received word late Friday that my application to the Ph.D. program in Geography had been accepted. It's good news, though not completely unexpected. This is where the real waiting game begins though. Within the next month or two, I'll hear back on various fellowship applications, and that will probably make or break the decision. It's a question of how much debt is too much, which we'll just have to figure out...
This NH paper highlights Hillary's pledge to not participate in Michigan or Florida's primaries. While she kept mostly silent in Michigan, she's campaigning actively in Florida. In addition, she's actively trying to get delegates from both primaries recognized, even though she was basically the only option for voters in both states and other candidates actually stood by their word. I never took Republican objections to the Clinton's integrity all that seriously in the 90s. But this election has not demonstrated the better angels of their nature. For them, it's win at any price. It may be politics, but it ain't pretty.
Sarah and I are now halfway through the final season of HBO's The Wire. It's not their best one, at least at this point--seasons 2 and 4 both seemed more plausable than some of the antics this time around. But it's still worth the time. Reading other blogs about the show (such as What's Alan Watching and Heaven and Here) I ran across this NY Times article about the "real" Omar Little--one of the Wire's long running characters. It's an interesting story about redemption, and Donnie Andrews actually had a role this season alongside his fictional namesake.
No, I'm not writing about Bob the Builder. It was a surprisingly lopsided victory tonight for Barack Obama. While Hillary still has the upper hand, this gives me some hope. I think criticisms of Obama being policy lite are off mark--he can talk policy fairly well, though it's not particularly inspiring. He really needs to work on his debating skills. But the man can give a speech! A couple of favorite lines from tonight's victory oratory:
We're up against decades of bitter partisanship that cause politicians to demonize their opponents instead of coming together to make college affordable or energy cleaner. It's the kind of partisanship where you're not even allowed to say that a Republican had an idea, even if it's one you never agreed with.
Take that, Billary!
Yes, we can heal this nation. Yes, we can seize our future. And as we leave this great state with a new wind at our backs and we take this journey across this great country, a country we love, with the message we carry from the plains of Iowa to the hills of New Hampshire, from the Nevada desert to the South Carolina coast, the same message we had when we were up and when we were down, that out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we will hope.
Despite the talk about race, the hope of the Obama campaign is it's message of unity. I told Sarah that the difference between these two is that Hillary talks about what she can do, but Obama talks about what we can do. Their policies may not differ significantly, but to me, Obama has the potential to create the kind of grassroots empowerment that spurs more significant reform. Government programs alone won't do it. The state ain't the church, but Barack has me believing nonetheless. Politics doesn't have to be the toxic power struggle of the last fifteen years. We can focus more on problems that partisanship. Sure, I'll be disillusioned someday, but a little bit of hope never hurt anyone.
Sometime in the next couple of weeks, Sarah and I are going to have to decide on where we want Micah to go to school. I'm happy that it's a choice--Minnesota seems unique in that you can send your kid pretty much anywhere if you're willing to drive them, and there's about 10 options with busing for us. We're pretty settled on our first choice, Loring School (school's web site and state report card here), which isn't very far from us, has busing, and seems decent. It's got drastically higher test scores than most area schools*, even though demographically it shouldn't (high percentage of Free and Reduced Price lunch students, meaning poor). Makes me a little worried about teaching to the test/skills based learning, but we observed the Kindergarten briefly and it didn't seem too bad. It's small, diverse, and also local so he can have some friends near his house. They even have a garden and an after school cooking program. Micah liked that the Kindergarten room had legos--it was his first choice.
The problem is the second choice. On the one hand, there's Bryn Mawr (website and report card). It's south of us and is actually where our church meets, but still has busing. Friends from small group send their kid there, so Micah would have a friend on the bus and daycare after school. Though the demographics are similar to Loring, test scores aren't nearly as good. Our friend liked the kindergarten classroom but hasn't been as impressed with first grade. And they start at 7:30, meaning Micah would have to be at the bus stop before 7 and would be home around 2:30. There's other schools he could go to, but this is really the best of the lot. Some, including one five minutes walk from our house, would mean real social isolation for Micah when comparing kids' demographic backgrounds.
The other option is Marcy Open School (website and report card). It's close to the university, but doesn't have busing. I'd probably drive him or ride the city bus over (about 30-40 minutes) on my way to school. It's still diverse, though almost half white, has a cool arts program (including a rock band) as well as partnerships with downtown organizations. Like Loring, it starts at 8:40. Test scores are similar to Loring. On the other hand, it's further away, meaning Micah wouldn't have friends from the neighborhood. It's a K-8 school, so it's bigger. Micah seemed overwhelmed when we visited. Transportation would be a real hassle.
It's probably a moot choice--I'm fairly sure Micah would get into Loring. But it feels important to me for some reason. I lean toward Marcy at this point, just because I want Micah to have a good experience (and don't want to get him up at 6:15-30 every weekday). But there's some real drawbacks with either option. Tough choices.
*Despite my generally negative feelings about No Child Left Behind as an educator, those scores are a helpful reference for how students are doing as a parent. I don't think they're a great measure of the school's academics as much as an indicator of the overall school population and atmosphere. North High, where my service learning class has been involved, has a 9% proficiency rating in math. Nine percent!!!! Tests may not be the best measure of achievement, but there's problems there--far beyond what the school has control over.
That's the way I felt last night watching the Democratic debate. Obama, Edwards, and Clinton in that order. I managed to watch about 75% of it, sparks and all. I have to say, despite my support for him, I don't think debating is Obama's forte. He's a measured, thoughtful speaker, and he too often comes across as flat, equivocating, and long-winded to me. Especially when someone like John Edwards, who was seemingly made to debate, is standing next to him, it's hard for Obama to shine.
That said, I have to say I felt some pleasure at the audible boos for Hillary a couple of times during the debate. While I've never been a supporter of her, the blatant disinformation and politicking by her and Bill have really made me question if I'd even vote for her in the general election. It's clear they'll use every tool in their arsenal to get power. Maybe that's just the reality of politics, which is arguably all about power in the end anyway. But following a story like Obama's correct but not well timed statements on Reagan and the Republicans makes it clear how Hillary twists the facts to suit her purposes. The recent debates on race seem to say that her campaign has effectively written off the African-American vote for the sake of whites and Hispanics. And Bill's just angry. Eugene Robinson's recent editorial gets at some of the animus behind the Clintons' anger, and it's really not very pretty.
Leading in both California and New York, the safe bet seems to be it's Hillary's race to lose. Edwards may still have a chance to play kingmaker
We took advantage of winter break to take in another matinee, Juno. It's the story of a high school junior who gets pregnant and decides to give the baby up for adoption. It's got the hallmarks of an indie film: quirky soundtrack and several characters have rather odd traits (a dog fetish, popping red tic tacs). It's quite funny at times, and certainly doesn't give teen pregnancy the stigma it often has in teen films. Jennifer Garner of all people stood out as an interesting character to me. Still, it wasn't without flaws. Sarah found the parenting a little unrealistically good, and thre relationship between the mother and father to be wasn't developed all that much. It's written by Diablo Cody, a Twin Cities narrative, and there's several Minnesota references throughout. Definitely worth a look. (4/5)
Sarah and I watched Once last night. She was a little skeptical, since it's technically a musical, but both of us loved it. It's a story set in Dublin about an Irish street musician who develops a friendship with a Czech woman. They've both got checkered romantic pasts, and the real tension of the movie is their vulnerabilities being revealed and wondering where this relationship is going. It's an adult film in the sense that it's about two people with pasts and complicated lives working out what it means in the present. Great music (though the songs do start to sound the same toward the end) and a really compelling story--the chemistry between the two leads is strong. The main actor is the lead singer from the Frames, an Irish band which looks like a big deal, but which I in my ignorance hadn't heard of. It's a musical that isn't a musical--no spontaneous bursting into song. Highly recommended.
5/5
I created a post on our family website asking for name suggestions for Shannon boy #2. Just list your thoughts by commenting on that post. We look forward to hearing your ideas!
It's rare that I agree with George Will on anything, but his column today does a good job of stating my reservations with John Edwards. His performance in last night's debate was strong, but there's something about his populism that doesn't sit right with me. You can read Will's whole column here, but here's the closing line that I think articulates the point well, though the main point is about Obama:
Barack Obama, who might be mercifully closing the Clinton parenthesis in presidential history, is refreshingly cerebral amid this recrudescence of the paranoid style in American politics. He is the un-Edwards and un-Huckabee -- an adult aiming to reform the real world rather than an adolescent fantasizing mock-heroic "fights" against fictitious villains in a left-wing cartoon version of this country.
It's been awhile since I've backed a winning candidate. It sure feels good. Obama had a convincing victory tonight. It wasn't very pronounced, but I heard a little of MLK at the beginning of his victory speech--the intonation as much of the words. I still have problems with some of his policies--it's not simply cutting tax cuts for multinationals that's the real problem here--but the overall vision is still compelling. A more engaged relationship with the world and a politics of hope rather than fear. It's rhetoric, sure, but that's what the presidency is about to some extent.
Obama is an interesting contrast with Huckabee. He lacks the folksiness and approachability--he uses humor much less and is a much more dignified figure. But to me, that's part of what makes him inspirational--his gravitas offsets his lack of experience. Say what you will about his lack of experience, I haven't heard Obama come across as uninformed (or even bumbling) in the same way that Huckabee has in the last week. On Huckabee, I'm of two minds. I differ with some basic assumptions: he maintains that conservative vision of individual self-determination that honestly just doesn't match reality for me. We don't live and make choices in isolation. Yet I'm glad that he represents that changing face of American Evangelicalism, one increasingly concerned with poverty and the environment as well as with social issues. I wouldn't be upset with a Huckabee-Obama matchup (though I think Obama is clearly the more capable candidate at this point). I'd probably put my chips on McCain on the Republican side at this point (I'd be severely disappointed with either Romney or Guiliani). That would be the toughest race for the Democrats to win.
With the coming months not holding much promise on the sports front (the Bears are done and the Bulls don't merit much attention), this will be an interesting horse-race to follow.
Well, with the break in full swing, I spent an hour or so today creating a Facebook account. For those outside the college realm, Facebook (like MySpace) is a massive social networking tool that is pretty much universally used by my students. You create your own "profile" and then add friends who have their own profiles. You can post messages to one another, share pictures, and basically do all manner of social interactions online. Most interesting were some of the friends I found from high school--still deciding whether or not to make a "friend" request to them. Since so many of my students use it and I've had a few of them request me as a friend, I decided to set something up.
One of the main ways you identify yourself on this (and similar) tools is to list things you're into--interests, books, music, movies, etc. I've always found this a difficult task, but I'm not sure why. On one level, it's interesting that we identify ourselves by the things we consume or how we spend our time. In some measure, it's probably because I feel a little uncomfortable with the picture those things paint. I'm not particularly into music at this stage of life, and bands I would list aren't particularly trendy, or even much related to my real interests. It's interesting there's no "radio program" preferences, which would probably say more than anything about me. Or favorite theologians. After a semester of political economic geography, there's an element of what Foucault called governmentality here--users' identities are constructed in particular ways--I'm supposed to be really interested in books, movies, and music. I'm chafing against that. Of course, there is a generic "About Me" section, but who knows what that's supposed to be.