Look at Me

When children want attention — and they want it — often and presumably need it too — since they want it so earnestly much — one notes that they do not fiddle-faddle around.  Important needs require urgent responses.  Look at me!  And, the effectiveness of childish claims can be demonstrated about how strong children are able to get their wish.  Look at me!  And we look, even if sometimes we only frown-out our adult disapproval.

Happily though, not all glances are frowns and — in any case children are often adept — at changing one’s frown into whimsy and in transporting us to moods of wise joy.  Children can often cheer a sour adult mood, which is one reason I enjoy their companionship. 

Children have so much to learn.  And they learn rapidly.  They also love learning with all the whole depths of their strong young minds — and they will persist in enjoying new ideas even when schools put innumerable obstacles and objections in their path.  Children naturally turn all important learning into play — and with their games, they run headlong toward experience in sharp contrast to schools which prize regimentation and stigmatize change. 

A bright inquisitive child seeing a barrier simply goes around it, under it, over it, through it — or pretends not to see it or hear it (“I can’t see you!”  “I can’t hear you!”).  Irrepressible childish love for the new cannot be stopped anymore than Niagara Falls can be dammed.  And, really, what kind of stern parent wants to stop children from their play?  Even a very rule-bound parent will eventually bend and yield to the childish infatuation with life.

One must accept childish glee.  Children are relentless.  They are born with urgency inside them.  That’s why — having just come from Nature’s lap — they live life so vigorously now — in the present tense.  And they are Nature’s cheerleaders in their prattling constant chorus of “now,” “look,” and “come and see.”

Whatever stern heartedness sometimes stops our seeing, one needs this urgent reminder to rejoin the game, to play, to learn, and to delight in the present, where life is lived inside a strange, complex, marvelous, continual now.

For the Birds

Some of my reader-critics have fabulous websites.  May I recommend Dan’s site “Migrations” on the topic of biological science. 

While Dan takes exception to my political views, we have discovered that we are both at least pro-bird.

And I enjoin all my readers, regardless of your political beliefs, to care about birds and to be pro-bird like me.

I say this as a quip, but I mean it from my heart.  Nature is a doorway into understanding ourselves — for we are part of nature.

Been Visiting, Leaving Comments

Addressing comments by this wordpress blogger, polymath who said:

You see, Republicans are the ultimate salesmen. They can’t do very much properly, but when it comes to winning elections they are masterful. And, frankly, they have launched a brilliant public relations and marketing campaign. I don’t think it is ethical, or even truthful. But they are pandering to an intellectually lacking American public, and their goal is to win an election. So, they will use everything in their arsenal to win:

[1] Mocking community organizing

[2] Denying involvement in the Republican party (even though they are the Republican party); It’s brilliant really

[3] Deny agreeing with or helping the incumbents (even though McCain voted with the Bush 90+ percent of the time)

Yes, Republicans are manipulative, sociopathic, liars.

I replyed:

1) No one is mocking “community organizer” except as it’s being offered as a qualification for president. It’s sure one very thin qualification.
2) Don’t know what convention you watched.  I saw the GOP delegates being very proud to be Republicans.
3)Backing away from incumbents? Senator McCain thanked George Bush (who is the incumbent, by the way) for having “kept America safe” during his watch.  I don’t interpret that as “backing away.”

As to “pandering to an intellectually lacking American public” I don’t see it that way at all.  The GOP has not “pandered” to Democrats.  I have no idea what you’re talking about. 

Anyway, if you don’t like American “education,” the blame falls upon your own party.  Dems own the schools.  So don’t go crying to Republicans about American intellect.  Tell it to your darling teachers’ unions.

I was looking for reactions to Palin and of course Polymath’s is more general, but it’s illuminating anyway as what passes for persuasion in the Lib camp.  If Polymath (or anyone else) thinks that Americans lack intellect, they might begin by offering information rather than hysteria.  But it’s also revealing to note that some Democrats seem to take a dim view of voters’ intelligence.  And I’m not just picking on Polymath, I’ve seen other Dem supporters say similar things today.  Could it be among the “talking points” making the rounds of blogs now?

I don’t know.  All I know is that Republicans have rather a lot of respect for voters, enough to wish to  earn their respect as well as their votes.  Listening to McCain’s convention speech last night, I didn’t notice any pandering.  I heard him outline his political philosophy in fairly unmistakable terms. It wasn’t sugar coated.

Meanwhile, for whoever wants real information about Sarah Palin and her views, here’s one site to use to begin your research On the Issues.  I found some quotes about Palin’s views on education here.  I found anti-Palin bloggers saying that she favors teaching creationism in schools, a claim that sounded wrong.  And indeed, it is a crude parsing of some comments she made: “Teach both. [Creationism and evolution] You know, don’t be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it’s so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both.”  When pressed, however, she elaborated on this comment thusly: “I don’t think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn’t have to be part of the curriculum.”   It might be more accurate to say she defends freedom of speech or free inquiry in the classroom than to describe her as a proponent of creationism in school.

These nuances seem to be lost on her critics.  Meanwhile I’m not sure if her own views about evolution and biological science are even on record — not that they would matter since Palin isn’t a scientist.

UPDATE:  Just found this essay on Palin at Pajamas Media: “Why the Palin Pick was Brilliant,” by Michael Weiss.  He takes Palin to task for having any sympathy with creationist views, saying, “The Book of Genesis is not “information” on par with the theory of evolution, as the daughter of any science teacher should know and as a conservative, Bush-appointed judge in Dover, Pennsylvania had the good sense to point out in 2005. “  And he is somewhat uncomfortable with Palin’s defense of free speech: “The New York Times reports that when she was mayor of Wasilla, she recommended the banning of certain books from the public library — a recommendation that she thankfully never made good on but that nonetheless raises questions about her commitment to free speech. Perhaps after young Bristol enters her final trimester, someone will ask her mother what books she had in mind, and why she found them so unreadable.”

As a mom with some qualms about what schools require kids to read, I’d like some clarification about whether that was a public library or a school library — or a juvenile section of the library or the adult section.