Texas legislator apologizes for creationism letter, but . . .

February 15, 2007

Texas State Rep. Warren Chisum said he’s sorry if anyone took offense over his circulating a letter from a Georgia legislator, Ben Bridges, railing at science, and promoting creationism.  He’s right to apologize, but the apology stops short of where it needs to go.

This morning’s Dallas Morning News followed up on yesterday’s report of the letter (see preceding post).  The letter referred to a bizarre website that argues that the Earth is fixed in space, and other crazy things, including offensive material about Jewish kabals.  The Anti-Defamation League complained.

The stuff that causes conflicts between religious beliefs, you know, I’d never be a party to that,” Mr. Chisum said. “I’m willing to apologize if I’ve offended anyone.”

Mr. Chisum’s comments came after he learned that the Anti-Defamation League, which works against anti-Semitism and other forms of hate, was demanding “a repudiation and apology” in a letter to his office. He said he hadn’t seen the letter late Wednesday.

The wild rants against science, knowledge, civilization and bizarre twisting of Christianity?  He doesn’t apologize for that stuff.

One might think that Chisum believes stupid and mean is fine, so long as a powerful lobby group does not complain.

The greater danger in the letter is the appeal to ignorance and crank science.  Chisum needs to do a lot more apologizing, starting with several million Texas students, and tens of thousands of science teachers.

As if to answer some of Chisum’s religious questions, there is no comment from Molly Ivins.  Whoever names the successor to Molly needs to do it fast.  The Texas Lege is running wild.

2 Comments | Accuracy, Charles Darwin, Creationism, Darwin, Education, Ethics, Evolution, Intelligent Design, Public education, Texas Lege, Voodoo science | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Dissent effective: Stimson resigns from detainee post

February 4, 2007

Charles Stimson resigned Friday. Stimson is the attorney who was deputy secretary of defense for detainee affairs. You may recall he was the person who suggested in a radio interview that business clients of lawyers who provide legal counsel to detainees should pressure the attorneys not to represent the detainees, a suggestion that is contrary to the ethical canons of attorneys.

According to the New York Times:

Stimson drew outrage from the legal community — and a disavowal from the Defense Department — for his Jan. 11 comments, in which he also suggested some attorneys were being untruthful about doing the work free of charge and instead were ”receiving moneys from who knows where.”

He also said companies might want to consider taking their legal business to other firms that do not represent suspected terrorists.

The Defense Department disavowed the suggestion. Attorney General Albert Gonzalez also disavowed Stimson’s remarks. But Stimson said that the controversy hampered his effectiveness on the job. The NY Times said:

Stimson publicly apologized several days after the radio interview, saying his comments did not reflect his values and that he firmly believes in the principles of the U.S. legal system.

But it didn’t completely quiet critics.

The Bar Association of San Francisco last week asked the California State Bar to investigate whether Stimson violated legal ethics by suggesting a boycott of law firms that represent Guantanamo Bay detainees.

Earlier posts:

2 Comments | 6th Amendment, Democracy, Dissent, Ethics, Iraq, Jurisprudence, Justice, War | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Molly Ivins

January 31, 2007

Molly Ivins died tonight. It’s really quite unbelievable, to me.

Here’s the Austin American-Statesman story, “Molly Ivins, queen of liberal commentary, dies.”

Here’s a tribute from Editor & Publisher.  And a recent interview with E&P.

Molly Ivins graphic, copyright Tim Porter 2001

Graphic by Tim Porter, copyright 2001

4 Comments | Accuracy, Ethics, First Amendment, Journalism | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Pentagon official calls for assault on Constitution

January 13, 2007

I used to marvel at the irony of attending Republican conventions in states and counties across the nation, where ceremonies would open with the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. flag, and the nation, ideals and government it stands for, and where speaker after speaker would then assault every aspect of that same nation and government. In the Vietnam era and a decade afterward, frequently these speeches would include rhetorical questions like, “Do we really need a First Amendment?” in reference to protestors, or the speech of anyone that the speaker found disagreeable.

This is a new height: The New York Times reports this morning that a top Pentagon official is bothered that lawyers defend prisoners in the U.S., especially prisoners at Guantanamo Bay — somehow forgetting that lawyers are obligated to do such things by their ethical canons, their state laws and state licensing rules, and by the Constitution. Then he urges corporations who use those same lawyers to stop paying them.

Is this a joke, or can someone who has sworn to uphold the Constitution actually be so clueless?

The senior Pentagon official in charge of military detainees suspected of terrorism said in an interview this week that he was dismayed that lawyers at many of the nation’s top firms were representing prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and that the firms’ corporate clients should consider ending their business ties.

The comments by Charles D. Stimson, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for detainee affairs, produced an instant torrent of anger from lawyers, legal ethics specialists and bar association officials, who said Friday that his comments were repellent and displayed an ignorance of the duties of lawyers to represent people in legal trouble.

The Wall Street Journal joined in the assault on the Constitution in an editorial, according to the news story.

Stanley Kubrick is dead, or I’d think that this was just a review of a Stanley Kubrick follow-up to Dr. Strangelove, or: How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love the Bomb.

Any corporation official who fires the company’s attorneys for representing Guantanamo Bay detainees should be fired himself — he’s acting contrary to the interests of his stockholders in getting rid of the best legal team he could hire.

How do such barbarians an anti-American people get to be officials in the Pentagon, and editorial writers at the Wall Street Journal?

More information:

Blog reactions:

2 Comments | Civil Rights, Current History, Democracy, Dissent, Ethics, Iraq, Jurisprudence, Justice, Law, Patriotism, U.S. Constitution | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

For the record: Pearceys’ slam at Judge Jones unwarranted

December 30, 2006

Rick and Nancy Pearcey — she the author of Christian best-seller Total Truth — have a blog called Pro-Existence. A few days ago I stumbled across the blog because they quoted me :

Praise: “University of Chicago geophysicist Raymond Pierrehumbert called Jones’ ruling a ‘masterpiece of wit, scholarship and clear thinking’ while lawyer Ed Darrell said the judge ‘wrote a masterful decision, a model for law students on how to decide a case based on the evidence presented.’ Time magazine said the ruling made Jones one of ‘the world’s most influential people’ in the category of ‘scientists and thinkers.'”

Well, they didn’t quote me directly: They borrowed the quote from a Discovery Institute paper. That’s only significant because such copying is, by their definition, the academic sin of “plagiarizing,” judging from the way they attempt to accuse a federal judge of not doing his duty. (And, if I had to guess, I’d guess they didn’t read the report, but instead copied their stuff from a report in WorldNet Daily — plagiarism of a copy! At least they linked, even if they didn’t attribute, to that publication.)

They borrowed the DI’s criticism of Judge John E. Johns, of the Federal District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, in his decision against a school board’s requiring intelligent design be inserted to the curriculum of the local schools. DI clumsily, and erroneously, labeled the decision a piece of plagiarism.

I wrote a response. The Pearceys have not seen fit to publish it (it’s a closely moderated blog, and apparently anything that they don’t like, or that calls them to Christian task for their errors, doesn’t make it). I post my response to the Pearcey’s below the fold. If they respond here, I won’t censor them.

Read the rest of this entry »

1 Comment | Accuracy, Creationism, Ethics, Evolution, Intelligent Design, Journalism, Jurisprudence, Plagiarism | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Trouble in California teacher training system

November 25, 2006

Scandal in education?  Perhaps not so directly — certainly my education-issue alarm bells didn’t go off when I first heard of the controversy about pay and spending in the California State University system (see San Francisco Chronicle story here).

Matthew Davidson, a philosopher at Cal State San Bernardino, makes exactly that claim, however, in a letter to Brian Leiter.  CSU trains about half the teachers in California.  If that system is broken, it will indeed have national ripples.

Leave a Comment » | Education, Education blogs, Ethics, Public education, Teacher Pay | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

A different view of Chile and Milton Friedman

November 25, 2006

Especially the last couple of paragraphs may give you a sobering double-take on what has been going on in the U.S. economically and politically — go read this commentary in the on-line Counterpunch. Author Greg Grandin has a different view of Friedman’s role in Chile’s economics than you will read almost anywhere else.

It especially contrasts with the view in Daniel Yergin’s television production, Commanding Heights (go to the site, click on Friedman’s name, go for the video on “Chicago Boys and Pinochet”).

Tip of the old scrub brush to Leiter Reports.

Leave a Comment » | Business Ethics, Economics, Ethics, Freedom - Economic, Freedom - Political, History | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Condemned to repeat history

October 29, 2006

There is a moral in this story. On Thursday, October 26, U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald faced a woman proposed as an expert witness in the defense of Lewis “Scooter” Libby, the former aide to Vice President Dick Cheney accused of obstruction of justice.

The woman forgot history. Literally. She could not recall exactly what she had written in the past, and in a dramatic confrontation, she appeared to have forgotten that she had been cross examined by Mr. Fitzgerald in a trial before. Details from the Washington Post. How does her credibility stack up for the judge, do you think?

There were several moments when Loftus was completely caught off guard by Fitzgerald, creating some very awkward silences in the courtroom.

One of those moments came when Loftus insisted that she had never met Fitzgerald. He then reminded her that he had cross-examined her before, when she was an expert defense witness and he was a prosecutor in the U.S. attorney’s office in New York.

Libby’s defense team declined to comment.

Santayana’s ghost isn’t exactly smiling, but did take note.

2 Comments | Accuracy, Ethics, History, Law | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Ken Lay conviction vacated; average joes pay penalty

October 22, 2006

Oh, the Justice Department promises to use civil cases to try to get back from Ken Lay’s estate some of the money he pirated, in order to compensate the little fishes who lost their retirement funds, college funds, houses and more in the Enron collapse.

But Ken Lay is still dead, and it is still true that he stole from the poor to pay the wealthy.  Quite apart from revenge, those who suffered most from Enron’s collapse wish Lay had lived.

Please note that, among many other things the current Republican Do-Nothing Congress left undone, Congress adjourned without passing a change in the law that would have allowed Lay’s victims to get compensation.  Congress’s adjournment let Ken Lay’s crimes go unpunished:

Prosecutors offered no counter-argument in the case, but had asked Lake to hold off on a ruling until next week so Congress could consider legislation from the Justice Department that changes federal law regarding the abatement of criminal convictions. Congress recessed for the elections without considering the proposal.

Arrgh, as Charlie Brown might say.

2 Comments | Business, Business Ethics, Economics, Ethics | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Radical right-wing bias in the press

October 13, 2006

Liberal press? You must be kidding.

Apart from the fact that media owners are all very conservative types, there is the tendency to stifle reporting with a left- or moderate-bias, while promoting right-biased news. Evidence?

A Reuters reporter wrote a book about Ann Coulter, after getting permission from Reuters. They fired him when he showed them the galleys. It’s circumstantial evidence, sure, but still, it’s convincing to some.

More comment at Majikthise.

Leave a Comment » | Accuracy, Bogus history, Ethics | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Two Nobels in economics? Grameen Bank wins peace prize

October 13, 2006

Muhammad Yunus, photo by P. Rahman/Scanpix

MuhammadYunus and Grameen Bank share the Nobel Prize for Peace.

Wow. Just wow.

The Nobel Peace Prize for 2006

The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2006, divided into two equal parts, to Muhammad Yunus and Grameen Bank for their efforts to create economic and social development from below. Lasting peace can not be achieved unless large population groups find ways in which to break out of poverty. Micro-credit is one such means. Development from below also serves to advance democracy and human rights.

Muhammad Yunus has shown himself to be a leader who has managed to translate visions into practical action for the benefit of millions of people, not only in Bangladesh, but also in many other countries. Loans to poor people without any financial security had appeared to be an impossible idea. From modest beginnings three decades ago, Yunus has, first and foremost through Grameen Bank, developed micro-credit into an ever more important instrument in the struggle against poverty. Grameen Bank has been a source of ideas and models for the many institutions in the field of micro-credit that have sprung up around the world.

Every single individual on earth has both the potential and the right to live a decent life. Across cultures and civilizations, Yunus and Grameen Bank have shown that even the poorest of the poor can work to bring about their own development.

Micro-credit has proved to be an important liberating force in societies where women in particular have to struggle against repressive social and economic conditions. Economic growth and political democracy can not achieve their full potential unless the female half of humanity participates on an equal footing with the male.

Yunus’s long-term vision is to eliminate poverty in the world. That vision can not be realised by means of micro-credit alone. But Muhammad Yunus and Grameen Bank have shown that, in the continuing efforts to achieve it, micro-credit must play a major part.

Oslo, 13 October 2006

It’s one thing to talk economics, another to go do it. Here’s to hoping this award will encourage others to act effectively to end poverty.

More coverage:

3 Comments | Current History, Economics, Ethics, Freedom - Economic | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Turning Point Presentations: Nixon’s “Checkers” speech

October 7, 2006

During one of my phase-shift transitions between universities and public schools yesterday, I caught a snippet of a commentary that I thought was on Richard Nixon’s 1952 speech that kept him on the ticket with Dwight Eisenhower. Public reaction was reported to be overwhelmingly warm, the Eisenhower-Nixon ticket won the 1952 election, won again in 1956, and Nixon eventually took the presidency for his own in 1968.

Shouldn’t that speech be considered one of the greater presentations of the 20th century, at least? It probably should, especially when we consider what history might have looked like had Nixon left the ticket — no Nixon nomination in 1960 against John Kennedy, no later Nixon presidency, Nixon continuing in the Senate . . . gee, which path is more gloomy?

The Checkers speech does not wear well, I think. Reading it today, I see the origins of smear campaign tactics and diversionary tactics that mar so much of today’s election campaigns and policy discussions.

This all comes up because the transcripts of the famous 1977 interview series newsman/comedian David Frost did with Nixon is the basis for a new play in London, “Frost/Nixon” by Peter Morgan, with Frank Langella playing Nixon and Michael Sheen as Frost — a play that is already being made into a movie for Universal Pictures by Academy Award winning director Ron Howard, but after a Broadway run in 2007.

Nixon’s mea culpa answer to Frost on the entirety of the Watergate scandal — “I made so many mistakes” — in the NPR piece voiced by Langella, sounded exactly like Nixon. I mistakenly thought it a recording of the Checkers speech, hearing just a snippet. The Frost/Nixon interviews would probably never have been necessary, had the Checkers speech not been a success. Surely there is a direct line from the Checkers speech to Nixon’s attempt to revive his reputation in the Frost interviews.

Watergate on Broadway, with a movie in the works, should offer good opportunities especially for high school history teachers to bring Watergate to a new generation. Too many people today fail to understand the depth of the damage done to Constitutional institutions in that crisis, and how lucky our nation was to have survived it. There are many lessons there for us in our current Constitutional crisis.

A lesson awaits, also, in the career of David Frost, who crossed from news to comedy and back. Many kids today use comedians as their chief source of political news. We should not be surprised — but let us hope that today’s comedians have as much a sense of public duty as David Frost did in 1977, even while using his public service interview to revive his own career.

Sometimes free markets work spectacularly, don’t they?

4 Comments | Ethics, Famous quotes, History, Lesson plans, Movies, Presentations, Presidents, Quotes, Turning Points, Watergate scandal | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Hard Work (and cheating)

October 7, 2006

Good and careful consideration of cheating in school, especially with regard to different disciplines in college, in a post at Aude Sapere*. That post is well written, very thought provoking, and well worth the time one might spend on it. The figures are depressing, generally, but reflect a general view we hear from students too often — in an era when top government officials cheat to get what they want (think: why did we invade Iraq?), students often test to see whether we can detect their cheating, and to see what we’ll do about it.

The grand mystery to me is this: It’s generally more time consuming, and more difficult, to try to cheat, than it would be to learn the material well enough to pass my exams; why bother to cheat? The day that light dawns on a student is always a good day.

I am hopeful that part of the rise in confessed cheating is due to an increased sense of just what cheating is. Borrowing quote cards from a debate colleague is considered required sharing; using those same quote cards to put together a paper for another class — is that over the line? (I don’t regard it as cheating, but I’d be interested in hearing if you do.) Do today’s students consider that forbidden? Are today’s students more moral?

Short essays are a good way to get around most cheating, but short essays create grading nightmares that grow exponentially with the number of students.

What’s the solution?

Another blog takes a look at Florida legislation which, to me, is part of the cheating problem. Tony Whitson at AAACS Matters! calls for action against the Florida law which aims to avoid “interpretation” in teaching history, but which also dabbles in changing the facts of nature for biology study, and generally tends to politicize public school curriculum.

It seems to me that the Florida legislature is doing the same thing high school cheaters hope to do — when the facts are difficult or troubling, change them. High school kids can’t change certain facts of history that they do not want to bother to learn, but legislatures, with a great finger in the eye of history, learning and democracy, can try.

And, if presidents and state legislators can play fast and loose with the facts, why shouldn’t a high school student at least try to do the same? If our kids watch what we do, and not what we say, we may be in for several years of increased cheating.

    . .

* Aude sapere is Latin, a line from Kant; it means “dare to know.” I posted it over my classroom door for three years; only a few students ever asked about it. Each of them subsequently took up Kant’s challenge, either continuing their quest for knowledge in history or economics, or more often, taking up such a quest for the first time.

3 Comments | Accuracy, Current History, Curricula, Education, Ethics, Pedagogy, Plagiarism | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

Point of personal pique: Mitch Rasansky, stay away from my kids

October 4, 2006

This morning’s Dallas Morning News carries a sad story. Dallas City Councilman Mitchell Rasansky’s campaign against an Eagle Scout project finally bore fruit for Rasansky — he persuaded the city’s parks department to remove three bat houses which had been installed in a city park.

Rasansky first complained last spring. Irrationally, against all evidence, he said he thought the bat houses were a menace. When a storm of public opinion overwhelmed him, he backed off. The 70,000 or so Scouts and Scouters of Circle 10 Council relaxed, happy to know that the Eagle’s project was at work, reducing mosquitoes and, thereby, reducing the risks of West Nile virus.

Is it unfair to suggest Rasansky hates Boy Scouts? Probably. Is it unfair to suggest he’s mean and doesn’t let rationality get in the way of good public policy? I doubt it. Consider: 11 North Texans have died from West Nile virus already this year — 16 24 people have died across Texas — and Rasansky’s evidence of danger from the bats is a story of a rabid bat in Houston. One bat? One of the deaths from West Nile virus was an otherwise healthy young man who lived within a few hundred yards of my son at the University of Texas at Dallas. West Nile is not a minor problem around here.

Worse, Rasansky kept his actions secret this time. He got the bat houses removed without notice to the Scout who put them up, nor notice to anyone else concerned.
Some people told me Mitch Rasansky is really a nice guy, when this flap first arose last spring. I gave him the benefit of the doubt then. Not now.

Any man who favors West Nile virus over the public service project of an Eagle Scout has his priorities wrong at best, and is a menace to public health at worst. I don’t want a person running my town who can’t figure out that West Nile virus is a greater health hazard than bats.

Who is running against Rasansky? Arm that woman (or man) with some facts, and let the race begin, even though we’re months away from the election.

More information: See the Organization for Bat Conservation for more information about bats and their benefits.

Leave a Comment » | Accuracy, Ethics, Hoaxes, Politics | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

More on lack of integrity in creationism

September 28, 2006

Still buried in work, I have a couple of items that really should get note.

First up is a new eruption of creationist propaganda, attempting to cast recent research findings as some sort of challenge to evolution theory. Dr. P. Z. Myers at Pharyngula has the essential comments so far.

That was quick! Now, can I find time to talk about Texas textbooks, too?

Update, September 29, 2006:  Carl Zimmer notes that the research the creationists complain about, rather than demonstrating a problem with evolution theory, demonstrate the ways in which evolution theory guides researchers.  Zimmer’s posts at The Loom frequently dazzle — he’s an understated, extremely accurate writer whom you may recognize from his articles in the New York Times’ weekly science section (on Tuesdays).

1 Comment | Accuracy, Creationism, Darwin, Ethics, Intelligent Design | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »