As I stated in a previous blog, I am a strong opponent of censorship in almost every situation. It is hard for me to imagine a situation in which I approve of it. There are many reasons for my objection to it, not the least of which is that it tends to be counterproductive and results in more strongly felt anger and resentment. All we can do is hope that people will be concerned about the feelings of others and know that as they don't want to have "stuff" tossed around about them, those on the receiving end of their words have feelings too. Hurt often ends up causing hurt and, in the end, two people are hurt. That is about all that is "accomplished" and that is an accomplishment that I can do without.

 Dale

Tuesday, May 13, 2008 12:24:56 PM (Atlantic Standard Time, UTC-04:00)    Comments [1] | 

I do not know the content of the blog that was censored. Generally, I am strongly opposed to censoring material. I do know that I have heard on a number of occasions over the past couple of weeks an accusation involving conduct in the recent student government election. I also know that some are upset that in their view nothing, or not enough, was done in response to the charges made. NOTHING can be done in response to accusations that are not documented. No one came forward with any evidence other than "I heard that......" and that is not evidence. Blogs are not evidence. Those of us involved with looking into the charges asked those making the charges for written documentation from those in classes in which the alleged misconduct occurred. Nothing to my knowledge was presented. If there was something done along the lines of that charged then certainly serious investigation was warranted. But, constant, continuous informal chatting about alleged misdoings accomplishes nothing and eventually becomes counterproductive, at best, and destructive, at worst.

 I would hope that all involved would trust those of us who have been consistently supportive to act prudently, fairly and justly. We can only act based on what is presented to us in an appropriate manner. I would hope that all involved would understand that and that anger and disappointment will not result in a never-ending campaign of stinging words and accusations.

Once again, if there is evidence of misconduct, document it and present it in a professional, well written manner. If done, I know that I will view it in an unbiased, objective manner. However, if that is not done, I will look upon the continued talk as little more than idle griping which will result in nothing productive and which, to be completely frank, will be ignored by people who have a lot of other things to focus their attention on. If misconduct occurred, it is important that we get to the bottom of it. However, the current course of action will more than likely result in this ending up in the bottom of a trash can. 

Dale

Tuesday, May 13, 2008 11:24:48 AM (Atlantic Standard Time, UTC-04:00)    Comments [1] | 

Here is the way an interview with Chris Matthews would really go:

Chris: Welcome to the show. I am THE Chris Matthews. Let's play Hardball - That is I throw the fastball and you get hit.

Matthews: Professor Lanigan, welcome to MY show

Lanigan: Thank You. I am...

Chris: Now, wait a minute. Why do you you professors always start out a sentence with I ? It's as though you think that the world really cares about you and what you have to say. Now, who are you supporting for President?

Lanigan: I am supporting Senator Obama. I..

Matthews: Now, wait just a minute. Do you really think that you, as a professor, should be indicating who you are supporting for president? Are you one of those professors who tries to shove his beliefs down the collective throats of students who have paid a lot of money to sit in your classes? Anyway, why do you support Obama?

Lanigan: I believe that his vision for...

Matthews: HOLD ON. There is that word vision again. That means nothing. People aren't interested in vision. Vision doesn't put food on the table or pay the electric bill.  Anyway, do you believe that Hillary Clinton should drop out of the race at this point?

Lanigan: It would probably be good for the party if she....

Matthews: Come on. There you go again. It sounds as though that is your party. Are all professors Democrats? That is what is wrong with this country today. There is no unbiased objective commentary out there, except , of course, on MY show. Now, calling upon the enormous amount of collective wisdom that you and other professors think, unjustly so, that they possess, please inform those of us who aren't as brilliant as you are, who will win the presidential election that the country will be experiencing come this November, and keep in mind that the election will not be until November so all that you say at this point is really meaningless.

Lanigan: Regardless of who gets the nomination of the Democratic Party, the general election will be close....

Matthews: Stop now. You are not saying anything that I don't already know. Have some substance to what you say. I could have brought on someone from the Fixed News Channel for that brilliant analysis. Why do you professors always hedge your bet? Come out and take a stance. But, I am afraid that we will have to wait until your next appearance on the show, which will occur when the Cleveland Indians win the World Series, to learn what nobody really wants to know anyway and that is who you think will win the election, which by the way I would like to inform those in the largely uninformed public will be held next November. Now, of course, if they tuned in every other hour to MY show, they would not be as uneducated as they are. I have found this to be very enlightening but then again everything that I say is enlightening. Now, I hesitate to say this because I know that professors have a tendency to talk too much, but do you have any final word to say to the public that is on the edge of their seats waiting for you to actually say something that will be of some value as they try hard to make it in an economy that is frankly in horrendous shape thanks to politicians who have no understanding of what is happening in the lives of ordinary people and to television commentators who are afraid and unwilliing to ask the tough questions of their elected officials?

Lanigan: Yes, thank you for having me on Mr. Biden. Now you can go.....

Matthews: See, I knew that you couldn't end this spectacular interview with just one word.

Saturday, March 29, 2008 12:09:44 PM (Atlantic Standard Time, UTC-04:00)    Comments [1] | 

Random thoughts and questions:

- In a previous blog, I said that nothing can be gained from the long, bitter battle between Clinton and Obama. I take that back. One good thing could result- perhaps we can use the next few months to get some of the burning issues of the day resolved so that during the fall we can focus on minor things such as health care and the economy. Just think - if we didn't find out now what Obama's pastor thinks about the state of America and how Geraldine Ferraro feels about the qualifications of Obama we would have to deal with those vital concerns in October.

- Just got back from a conference in Cincinnati. That city's population is not much greater than that of Toledo but the downtown has the feel of a much larger city.

- It takes me longer to get the wrapper off a CD than it does to play the CD.

- The Lourdes College Student Government has really developed into a strong organization over the last several years. Congratulations to the student leaders.

- Does anyone know what the words to the song "Take on Me" are?

- Did Marshall Matt Dillon own a pair of dark jeans?

- Can't our governmental leaders find something better to do than worry about whether professional athletes are using steroids? Maybe they are worried about how athletes are not being good role models. Like Eliot Spitzer?

- Isn't it funny how these politicians at committee hearings ask four minute and fifty second questions and leave the respondents ten seconds in which to answer?

- The resignation of Bob Turek as V-P of Student Services leaves a huge vacuum at Lourdes. A super person, Bob has done so much for the school and will truly be greatly missed. Best wishes for good health and a happy retirement to Bob.

Monday, March 17, 2008 4:07:29 PM (Atlantic Standard Time, UTC-04:00)    Comments [5] | 

More on the primaries:

    As I write this, Clinton has won Ohio and it looks like she will win Texas. What we know now is that after tonight Clinton will be able to say that she has stopped Obama's momentum and that she is well positioned to go on. We also know that despite the wins, she will pick up few, if any delegates on Obama because of the way that delegates are distributed in Texas. Obama will maintain a lead of over 100 delegates.

   We can also make be quite sure that even after the rest of the primaries are concluded, Obama will have a delegate lead over Clinton. It will be very difficult, if not close to impossible, for her to overtake him. We do not know who will have the popular vote margin. It looks like Obama will hold on to the lead that he has there. My guess is that Clinton is well aware that she can not catch up but wants to go to the convention and then argue that because she won the big states that the superdelegates (unpledged) should go to her. Obama will argue that they should support him because he has more pledged delegates. Who wins then? It could be really messy unless someone wises up. As I indicated in the last blog, that should be Clinton. Obama has the better argument and if things don't go his way, he walks and with him probably goes a large segment of the black vote and the Democrats are toast. If Obama gets the nomination,he is more likely to be able to get the Clinton supporters than Clinton would be to get the Obama supporters. The key then would be the Latino vote and white male conservative democratic vote. He would have a tough choice to make for V.P. Does he choose Senator Webb from Virginia or former Senator Nunn from Georgia to get the latter or Governor Bill Richardson from New Mexico to try to help with the Latino vote. If Clinton gets the nomination, she has only one choice and that is to beg Obama to be her running mate.

   Right now, Obama would like to be focusing on McCain and, in fact, has been trying to do so. But, Clinton won't go away and she is providing McCain with a lot of material that he is sure to use against Obama should he become the nominee. Obama will have to begin to focus again on Clinton and may have to do what he has been trying to avoid doing and that is going on the attack. He has really been trying to stay away from that kind of junk but she is forcing his hand. While some pundits think that this fight between Clinton and Obama is democracy at work and is good for the party, I say that is a bunch of hogwash. Nothing good strategically comes from this for the Democrats. One could argue that it gets people enthused but it also gets them angry and that does not go away. One wouild think that the Democrats would learn from history, i.e  the Carter-Kennedy squabble in 1980, but the Democrats prefer a fight rather than a display of common sense.

Wednesday, March 05, 2008 2:05:49 AM (Atlantic Standard Time, UTC-04:00)    Comments [3] | 

Thoughts that come to mind as I watch the primary election results:

     Do the Democrats have a clue? This is a year in which everything is falling together for Democrats. They should win the presidency in a cakewalk. McCain is certainly not a particularly strong candidate. The Democrats should increase their margin in the House and Senate. The economy is in the tubes and an unpopular war drags on. People are concerned about health care and education and the Republicans dredge up their old and tired solutions to all problems: lower taxes and spend, spend, spend, spend on the military. Yup, this should be the year for the Democrats. Only one way they can lose and that is to destroy themselves and, of course, that is just what they are on the way to doing.

    Instead of uniting, they are dividing. Hillary Clinton insists on continuing on. I can only assume that her ego is so large that she believes that she is the only one capable of bringing about the "change" that so many want. Or maybe she just believes that the Clintons deserve to reside on Pennsylvania Avenue (will Chelsea be ready in eight years?).Well, if she gets the nomination, good luck in November. The party will be so fractured. I just spoke to a black friend of mine in Cleveland who came to support Obama after being for Clinton. I asked him if blacks would be likely to throw their support to Clinton in November if she gets the nomination. Andre is rather moderate and not prone to rash, emotional statements made in the heat of the moment. His response was a resounding NO. That, I would suggest, will be especially true if Obama wins the popular vote in the primaries, even if only by a slight margin, and has a lead in the delegate count after the primaries are conluded, only to lose out on the nomination because Clinton gets the nod from the superdelegates who are the Democratic party establishment types. Without the black vote, the Democrats have no chance at the White House and will suffer a number of defeats in congressional elections as blacks stay home on election day. Their only hope would be for Clinton to beg Obama to be the vice-presidential nominee and I would not be surprised if he told her to stuff it.

    It is time to knock it off. Nothing is to be gained by a long, drawn out nomination fight. It is time to put this on the backburner for a while. Baseball will soon be starting. Vacation time will soon be near. Already I am saving up money so that I will be able to afford a scenic drive at $4/gallon to beautiful Youngstown. Time to quit Hillary. Tom will like this military reference - Time to stop trying to win this battle, so that the war is not lost.

Wednesday, March 05, 2008 12:18:23 AM (Atlantic Standard Time, UTC-04:00)    Comments [1] | 

Memo to Hillary Clinton,

    Did you really think that the "experience" argument was going to win the nomination for you? If so, please share your wisdom with John McCain. Perhaps you should have been advised that voters are not that terribly enamored with the "experience" argument.  Bill Clinton was hardly the most experienced Democrat and yet won the Democratic nomination for president. Ditto for John Kennedy. Double ditto for Jimmy Carter.

How about general elections? Ford was much more experienced than Carter in 1976. In 1980, Carter was more experienced than Reagan. In 1992, Bush I was more experienced than Clinton. Dole was around Washington forever and he was trounced in 1996. Gore's considerable experience didn't help him much in 2000. John Kerry's resume was a lot longer in 2004 than was that of Bush II, even though there is a rumor going around that Bush was president for the first several years of this century. Actually, I thought he was an English professor. Enough of the experience thing already. Experience means only two things for sure as far as politicians are concerned. One, they are old and/or two, they can't get a real job.

What is it that people are looking for in a president? Ask Barack - as soon as you are done scolding him.

Wednesday, February 27, 2008 9:23:16 PM (Atlantic Standard Time, UTC-04:00)    Comments [1] | 

Hi,

For my first entry, I have some questions which come to mind as I take a break from grading papers:

  -  What kind of mind comes up with some of these ads? Really, a squirrel jumps in a car and sings with the driver, a wolf also enters the scene  and swallows a bird and spits it out and all sing together. Does anybody remember what the commercial was for?

  -  Does anybody know what time it is? Does anybody really care?

  -  If I lost my one and only - would the birds in the sky be sad and lonely?

  -  Wouldn't it be nice to elect a president who is a working mom who is a college student? Could she deal with foreign leaders? Can George Bush?

  -  How much does my dog Milo know? How much does George Bush know?

  -  Is it really hard for a student to find a stapler?

  -  Could there be a worse actor than Steven Seagal? Why do I like Steven Seagal movies?

  -  What do students want from, and expect from, professors?

Tuesday, February 26, 2008 5:46:40 PM (Atlantic Standard Time, UTC-04:00)    Comments [3] |