King Kaufman is spot on today. He opened my eyes to just how great a year Ken Griffey Jr is having. He looks like the Griffey you remember from Seattle. Griffey's year is what should be considered a great year but isn't anymore because steroids have made 40 homer seasons seem ordinary.
Also, King documents the rise in ratings for Canadian Football League games now that they don't have announcers. I have to agree that I would love to watch a game without an announcer or all of the stupid gimmicks that are on tv. I especially hate Fox broadcasts with all of their different sounds and images. Just show the damn game and get out of the way please. I like the corner scoreboard and the ticker. You can keep those. Everything else can go.
Wednesday, August 31, 2005
Wednesday, August 24, 2005
You can write in to Senate Democrats and tell them what you would ask John Roberts. I'm guessing they're looking for simpler questions but mine was:
In much of America, structural inequality directly and indirectly frustrates the rights of individuals. For example, in many metropolitan regions, patterns of racial and ethnic segregation create a structural barrier to community development and personal improvement including access to quality education, employment, and government services. These patterns did not appear out of thin air. Individuals and governments shaped these patterns over decades. The federal Fair Housing Act and Amendments of 1988 (as well as the Community Reinvestment Act of 1973 and other federal laws) requires the federal, state, and local governments to affirmatively further fair housing. Yet, governments at all levels do not seriously engage in affirmative measures. One response to this is to bring cases against governments charging them with policies and practices that have disproportionately negative effects on minorities, families, and persons with disabilities. Given that the facts of a case proved a government did have a policy with a disparate impact on protected persons, what is your opinion of whether federal law allows for such a lawsuit where an individual sues a government for structural inequality that leads to restrictions on individual rights?
In much of America, structural inequality directly and indirectly frustrates the rights of individuals. For example, in many metropolitan regions, patterns of racial and ethnic segregation create a structural barrier to community development and personal improvement including access to quality education, employment, and government services. These patterns did not appear out of thin air. Individuals and governments shaped these patterns over decades. The federal Fair Housing Act and Amendments of 1988 (as well as the Community Reinvestment Act of 1973 and other federal laws) requires the federal, state, and local governments to affirmatively further fair housing. Yet, governments at all levels do not seriously engage in affirmative measures. One response to this is to bring cases against governments charging them with policies and practices that have disproportionately negative effects on minorities, families, and persons with disabilities. Given that the facts of a case proved a government did have a policy with a disparate impact on protected persons, what is your opinion of whether federal law allows for such a lawsuit where an individual sues a government for structural inequality that leads to restrictions on individual rights?
Tuesday, August 16, 2005
Well, it's about time someone pays attention. David Brooks urges young minds to enter the field of cultural geography. Too bad his alma matter doesn't take it very seriously. Then again neither do these big Chicago universities.
Oddly, in a city that owes its success almost entirely to its relative geography and that also continuously parades its cultural geographic importance, its major universities all but ignore the subject of cultural geography. It's all sociology, public policy, and social work in the City of Broad Shoulders.
Instead, you have to go to the west coast if you want to join the elite geography schools.
Anyway, back to Brooks. He's almost right. There are a lot of great brains in cultural geography already. But, it is true that there's a lot of room to grow and a lot of topics waiting for a dominant author.
But, Brooks will be disappointed to find that the best schools embrace the neocon-dreaded notions of multiculturalism and poststructuralism. And, that geography is also an important point of critique on Empire and globalization.
Oddly, in a city that owes its success almost entirely to its relative geography and that also continuously parades its cultural geographic importance, its major universities all but ignore the subject of cultural geography. It's all sociology, public policy, and social work in the City of Broad Shoulders.
Instead, you have to go to the west coast if you want to join the elite geography schools.
Anyway, back to Brooks. He's almost right. There are a lot of great brains in cultural geography already. But, it is true that there's a lot of room to grow and a lot of topics waiting for a dominant author.
But, Brooks will be disappointed to find that the best schools embrace the neocon-dreaded notions of multiculturalism and poststructuralism. And, that geography is also an important point of critique on Empire and globalization.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)