As much as I have been impressed with Governor Richardson’s ablites to resolve international conflicts, and move people into agreeable discussions, I have been shocked at the educational level in New Mexico, and have heard about the problems at UMN. I have not checked the Chronicle of Higher Education, but that situation has gone on too long to escape the Chronicle’s attention, and the Governor’s office. Interesting how the candidates’ home-turfs eventually reveal their actual values, abilities, and intentions. Anyone know more on this? I’m checking the Chronicle, but again, where is the AG in this shocking mess?

Lorraine, the sentence is “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…” People came to this new land because of incredible religious persecution, stemming way back from the Crusaders, heaven forbid, and the establishment of Christianity. I even learned that in Sunday School. Thomas Jefferson wrote of the necessity for spearation of, and it’s patently obvious there must be a separation if people are to be free. At the time of the Constitutional Convention it was de’ rigueur to always declare or reference the almighty, as the conventional manner of speech; thus it was inserted into the wording. We are not that nation, now, nor have we been for centuries — we very willingly invited settlers, indeed, paid them to come and work in the new world, as 3 new bills in Congress are now doing (under 3 Republicans, and 1 Democrat split), and those immigrants brought their religions with them. A melting pot will boil if there is a constant fire under it. People in politics may have their own religious beliefs, but they man not attempt to impress them upon others, nor create policy for the populace based on a personal religious belief. Policy-making is dependent on a democratic process. Anything other is facism, which we’re blistering from in the US, right now. I appreciate your candor, and you are correct, but the “separation” came down to us from the U.S. Supreme Court, as well, and has been tested. Religion has no place in politics; the ramifications of such on one’s ethics does have a place in politics.

I’m with the group that doesn’t know enough about Silda Prizer’s situation, or his, in their marriage. Certainly, they’ve born the brunt of gossip before, had to stand together before in the face of public pressure, so with this present sitaution it may have been a very short time (when she apparently “found out [if that was true]) and shock prevailed. If I’ve learned one thing about life, it’s that I cannot predict how I will act in any given situation; believe me, I’ve tried, and failed in front of the NYC police, my spouse, and children — a most embarrasing experience. And, I still believe, in my little girl heart, that I know myself. I don’t, when the adrenalin is pumping me into hell. So I believe, for now at least, Silda Pitzer deserve our empathy, for where she is emotionally at any given time; it’s really not our business, nor should we rake her over the coals for something about which we know nothing at all. As I stated before, I am not impressed with that Dr. Laura, well, wasn’t the first and last time I was exposed to her incipid remarks, and abusive comments to her callers; she apparently hasn’t changed — does she wave the Bible in her listeners ears, too?

PS: well, I’d have gone for sunglasses, too - I wear Noir’s because I prefer triple filters (to protect my very precious skin!! *smile*), but it’s nice to think no one can see things that I don’t, with the shades on. ;-))

Good Gravy, I don’t need either; never did. But, if you included Olive Oil I’d have gasped. Can’t live without the stuff, in or out. I might have chosen cream or liquid eye liner if it was included, but I can fake it with a shadow ad lib. Fun quiz, though a “None of the above” may have made me feel better.

Joyce, you’ve opened an ant hill with this recollection. In grad school in Cambridge, we used to segment our expenses in envelopes, and always saved a $ or two for a night out. One night in our favorite restaurant, in Chinatown, we found the recipe for real Sweet & Sour Pork in a book by the cashier. Unable to afford it, we each memorized half the recipe, and made a mad dash for the MTA back to Cambrige, repeating our portion to ourselves all the way - we didn’t even have pen and paper. Once home, we recorded this infamous recipe, and delighted in our find. Sunday’s Boston Herald carried a front page story about “our” restaurant being raided during the night by the health department. They found felines hanging in the deep freeze room; owners swore they were “piglets,” but the health official was quoted as stating he’d never seen piglets with long, straight tails, and the reply was they come uncoiled when they die. Needless to say, my estwhile spouse was very ill and virtually staggered back to his research lab where he was undertaking a 2nd PhD. Go figure.

Where was the SPAM…did I miss something again? I don’t think this Reply thing works.

IF you see this Reply, db, kudos for your entry. I agree with you, for the most part, to a point, and honor your stance. Far too many Americans are loathe to be open, honest, and read sufficiently to be prepared to speak OUT. We’re a young nation in it’s expected decline (ala history), and this inability, or unwillingness to learn and speak up is destroying us further; indeed, it may be the root of the problems. It’s fine to take refuge amonst our peers, but we certainly do not want to “go down” with them for the sake of mutual moments of comfort. I was blessed, if you will, to have been born into a highly diverse community, and didn’t realize it for decades, but viewing others actions, due to lack of “exposure,” brought me to my senses. One caveat that must be kept in mind, each person views America’s needs differently. Only factual reasoning, and discourse can bring us to a more solid foundation of realism for the future of our nation; otherwise, our grandchildren will be prepared to emigrate and think nothing of it. This election, in particular, reminds me of many strategic planning “progressives (my term vs. “retreats”) that I’ve facilitated in my career — not one candidate has first held a basic, correct type of strategic planning, or none of this would happen.

It’s far too early to decide on anyone to vote for, IMHO. There are too many glaring variables in this race to even begin to imagine the outcome. Discourse is critically important to flush out the weak, marginal, unqualified, and in order to be better informed about the strength of any and all candidates. We may no longer look at their local experience — take a gander at an accurate map of the world; the U.S. is glaringly minute — so whomever is elected better have a track record internationally, or we are going to be sunk. Favoritism won’t hack it in international relations; such tide changes re far greater than all the seas. “Whomever” must be able to not only think “out of the box,” but openly address the malignant aspects within the “box,” right now, one by one. So far, not one candidate has addressed such issues — well, Ralph Nader has openly done so, recently, and in a CSPAN appearance. I must say, that man is intelligent, and educated; not something I’m seeing in anyone else so far, in spite of my personal prejudices for … No one should leave this discourse. That is what “free speech” is about - basically, anyone may say what they want to say, or communicate, but they must leave an open for others to have equal input. This goes back to our very dissappointing White House Secretary’s actions of late, plus she is letting herself “down.” So, no one leave, just click OFF for a while, and let things go. Lastly (aren’t you relieved), I don’t think anyone in WOWOWOW has to apologize for anything and certainly not typing! This is a forum that attracts IWs (Incredible Women), and those who respect us. ;0)) (first, I spelled “attacks…” Hmmmmmmm)

Rose, “genuine” does not a president make! There are thousands of highly genuine people in our nation, but that isn’t what we need at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Corruption has once again totally infiltrated this election, and we’re letting it happen. May I suggest that everyone read Susan Jacoby’s new book, The Age of American Unreason, to gleen a more macro view of the causes of our entropic decline in America. Bill Moyer’s interview with her on another book may be found at this link. http://www.pbs.org/now/society/jacoby.html May you all have a wonderful, spring weekend. Truly, you all amaze me. I’m delighted with WOWOWOW — I feel that I’ve come home, at times (good home!).

Yes, I do, Monica…it cuts me to the core sometimes. Those on the telly are outrageous, and they keep going on and on, and on. I once wrote a prospective on the ORU group, and knew it would come down to the 2nd generation, at least, and it finally did; IRS is very lax in this regard. I personally witnessed Oral, himself, verbally abuse an expectant mother who was repeatedly beaten by one of his favored faculty members, and nothing stopped me from doing everything humanely possible to stop him, in that protective milieu of Tulsa, and ORU. Americans are a very young society, and still “sitting ducks.”

I was wondering that, too, Alice. ;-)) I don’t see any “Replies,” or very few; however, I don’t see well, but … my “screen reader” catches most stuff I don’t.

re: includes an opportunity to redeem yourself in another’s eyes. I think I’ll not answer the phone, this week, and I certainly will sub-file incoming e-mail. I’m through with opportunites to redeem myself. I’m a simple, flawed person, who deserves this wondrous time in my life. ;-)) Thank you for the head’s up, though.

It does seem that in the U.S., where the standards of ethical conduct are ruminated in every hall of congress, the moral and ethical requirements for protecting the public trust are competely out the window once someone is “sworn in.” There are expected standards in every professional field, and for all elected officials, and government employees in the USA. They do not extend to private, “in-home” activities, unless such may violate another’s privacy, or cause harm to anyone else, including any institution. As holders of the public trust, a great deal is expected; it’s an honor as well. That includes anyone involved in any aspect of philanthropy. It is increasingly apparent we permit our elected to sink to a far too low level of expectations — it has nothing to do with “us,” the public — those we elect are expected to perform in a high conduct level. We pay them, in advance if you please, and we must expect far more from them. They were not appointed, they requested and volunteered to serve, via a competitive forum. One year, NY ousted many of its elected shortely after they were sworn into office; a grand action by the voters. They must not be eligible for a golden parachute, ad infinitum, when they do not honor the public trust, nor serve appropriatiely. The White House Press Secretary made a horrendous guffaw last week in stating that the president knew the voters did not want such and such, but he was going to act on his convictions—we haven’t a clue where his convictions originated, nor by whom. That is not sufficient. Perhaps she was mistaken, but worse, she would not give equal time to those present for a discussion.

Just check out their voting records on www.congress.org