The Curmudgeon Speaks

DeVos is in. I guess I am not surprised, but I am disappointed. Of the various candidates, some of whom I thought were poor choices based on past performance or ethics issues, I thought Betsy DeVos was clearly the weakest. Not only does she have no credentials relevant to the field, she has views on vouchers and how school finance works that are a danger to K12 education. The Department of Education has long been disparaged by those who see it as having no meaningful purpose, but at least this lack of respect did not translate into a position that could do damage to such an important field. I just can’t see politicians making a choice of this type for a position they regard as important.

I tend to view political issues from my own perspective. I live in Minnesota and the two Senators from Minnesota both opposed the nominee making comment on the same issues I find to be relevant. I spent most of my working life in North Dakota. This state is strongly republican and while the state claims to value education it has very little experience with the kind of issues that are important in populated and diverse states. Sen. Hoeven must know DeVos is a weak, but rich candidate. I am guessing he decided the extreme positions she holds can do limited damage in his state because of the small population and saved his political chips for another day. Weak, but understandable. I know he was under pressure even in North Dakota. He had very little to say to explain his vote. He claimed he was a friend of education (hard to know what that means) and said he had spoken with DeVos who said she would respect the decisions of states. Taking such a narrow position allowed some cover and might have been acceptable to the citizens of a state who simply do not get out much.

Rewarding unqualified, big contributors with party favors makes a mockery of draining the swamp, but did anyone really think that slogan carried any weight.

Evidently, Anheuser-Busch decided to ditch the horses and go with a Super Bowl ad focused on the story of their immigrant founder Adolphus Busch. Republicans interpreted the ad as a  Trump slight (they are pretty thin skinned) and decided to fight back. Their idea was to include a hashtag in tweets discouraging the purchase of Anheuser-Busch beers. Fortunately, the Republican geniuses responsible for the hashtag campaign were unable to master the spelling of Budweiser raising more questions about the voting patterns in the past election.

So, for all my republican friends out there in need of a spelling tutor – this BUDWEISER is for you.

Remember when it was called the R/W web. This was the time that got me excited about social media. R/W implied a read/write or participatory web and seemed to offer an alternative to the consumption-oriented approach of television, radio and newspapers or magazines. There was an optimism implying that ordinary citizens could express themselves and have a more direct influence on politics and other areas to which the integration of opinions is supposed to matter. This was a time when you could go to the setup page for your Mac and turn your own machine into a server (or at least I could).

The W of R/W began to fade. There were fewer and fewer of us with personal web sites and a shift to services such as MySpace, FaceBook and Twitter. Even these services make it easier for individuals to express themselves, most folks found it far easier to forward rather than write. I think this also led to the extremism we now see online – radical Facebook extremism. To gain attention without forwarding everything you might encounter, the tendency is to “share” things that are more likely to gain attention – the cutest, funniest, or more radical content. I admit I do a little of this on Twitter. I don’t really take Twitter too seriously. It takes so little thought to dash of something in 140 characters or less. [Insert your impression of Trump’s tweets here.]

I am starting to have hopes that the 60s is making a comeback online. The potential is there. However, you have to actually sit down and write something yourself. I do have a suggestion. Fire up YouTube or whatever music service you use and see if you can locate Express yourself (Charles Wright and the Watts). Should give you a little energy – Do it to it!

More inappropriate behavior from an elected official too impulsive to be a leader. I suppose there are some encouraged by the “bare knuckles’ style, but bullying behavior is easy to spot and reflects a thin skin not conducive to thoughtful leadership. Far too easy to provoke. This immature style may rally a 35% base of support, but will constantly motivate an opposition. Hope we do not encounter a crisis requiring the country rally behind such a dividing figure. Trump would be far better off keeping his ignorant thoughts to himself. A good start would be to forget Twitter.

Donald Trump’s most bone-chilling tweet – CNN

I take my photography fairly seriously. I own a couple of nice cameras with some nice lenses and I know the basics of their use and of composition.

I tend to get one complaint from relatives. They like the photos but criticize me for my lack of people pictures. This has happened several times. Just to self-check, I went to the photos I have uploaded to Flickr from this trip. I can see some truth in what they claim. There are a couple of pictures of Cindy (taking pictures). This is a tradition. Other than that, no pictures of people. It turns out I have far more pictures of chickens and avocados. I could speculate on my photographic preferences, but that would likely get me in trouble.

The Verge reports that Mr Trump has placed a gag order on scientists from the EPA and Department of Agriculture. Evidently, scientists cannot speak with the public or journalists but can continue to publish their research in peer-reviewed journals because the public would need to pay to read the results. This is really pretty strange.

Mr Trump appears not to understand science. There is no party line in science. You ask a question. You design a methodology to collect data to answer your question. Then, you communicate your results. You do try to publish, but informing the public is the final goal. Those of us who teach in science-based fields read this research to teach students.

Government scientists work for the public. They are not doing research to provide businesses an advantage. STEM teachers – this is not how it is supposed to work. To control access is unethical.

Different observations may have come to different conclusions regarding the most meaningful lessons from the Trump presidency, but here is mine. I have learned that some of those who will play the most prominent roles in the administration (Trump, Conway, Spicer) are both thin-skinned and prone to alternative facts (i.e., lies). More troubling, these are willing to spend away their credibility on trivial challenges. My reference here is to the dispute regarding how many fans showed up to the Trump parade. Why, why, why make an issue of this situation. The aerial photography and public transit data make obvious the error of your claims. The administration’s willingness to claim that no one cares about the release of Trump’s tax returns and then assume the public cares about how many watched your parade is not even plausible.

Why care? I agree with others who have observed that if we cannot rely on the truthfulness of facts that we can check how can we trust an administration to tell us the truth regarding events the details of which must be kept secret. Credibility is easy to lose.

I think Trump is using an approach something similar to what he did during his campaign. He would try out different things with a live crowd to see what worked and that would become a mantra (e.g., lock her up) or approach. As President, he has now tried ignoring the facts (removal of content from government web sites) and according to Conway using alternate facts. Time for another strategy.

I admire problem-solving, but I prefer experimentation be applied in a more ethical way.

The march of technology is relentless and likely has more to do with changes in the job market than China or Mexico. Politicians failing to describe the scope of such changes are scapegoating other countries and failing to deal with what is happening. If you order goods from Amazon, you should already know where many of these jobs are going. You should already understand the reduction in book stores and the announcements of job cuts at Macys, Sears and other department stores. Your local store may have already closed. You and I are the problem. We pay for a Prime account and then have the UPS man deliver the goods we used to purchase at the mall.

We prefer inexpensive goods (often produced elsewhere) and we prefer convenience (online purchases). Companies, if they survive, have found they need fewer employees because of greater use of technology. You can blame technology or free enterprise, but we are not going back. The present isolationism promoted by the new administration is the last gasp of an outdated system. There are many new opportunities here, but there are also new challenges. This is why education is becoming more and more important and will not be something that is ever finished for those willing to adapt.