Mier's Withdraws?

Harriet Mier has now withdrawn from consideration for the position of Associate Justice. The issue as to whether or not she would have been a "good" justice is now moot. The POD never saw enough to make a fair judgment (in contrast, the POD saw and heard enough of Roberts to be convinced that he may well prove to be not only "not bad" but in fact "good" to extraordinary). What is interesting is the letter that she sent and the reasons that she cited for pulling out. This letter appears to be very carefully crafted and had a single individual as its target -- Former White House Counsel and Current Attorney General Gonzalez. Mier (or her political Ghost writer -- perhaps the last gasp of a Karl Rove) stated that no White House Counsel could ever be approved by the current Senate as the papers being demanded could never be turned over without permanently crippling the Presidency and the White House Counsel's function as an advisor. Whether or not this is true (and whether or not she characterized the demand from the Senate correctly) is ultimately irrelevant. A position has now been set out and a basis for her pulling out has been established. If Gonzalez, subject to the same problem as a Former White House Counsel to the current Administration, were now submitted as a nominee, at least some commentators would (correctly) note this conflict and suggest that the Bush Administration was being, at best, inconsistent in its approach. The Bush Administration could not afford this further damage to its credibility.

Why do I suspect that someone is behind this (other than Bush)? Its pretty clear that Bush tends to pick people for high positions that have had significant prior relations with him. Some awfully average to below average people have had high positions in this administration solely because of their prior social relationships with the President. Gonzalez, in addition to having a moderate degree of competence, also has the strong prior social relationship. He is an obvious choice for Bush -- particularly as he has recently gone through a confirmation process and has few skeletons that matter. But he is a moderate and very clearly the ultra conservatives do not want him. They are afraid that he will not toe the ideological line. And thus, when they lost their stealth conservative nominee (Mier), they wanted to make sure that she was not replaced with someone more liberal.

Cowards of Cabin John

The Washington Post recently reported on the Cowards of Cabin John (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/19/AR2005101902364.html). Specifically, the Cabin John Middle School created a list of "controversial" books and assigned every 8th grader IN CONJUNCTION WITH THEIR PARENTS to select one of these books to read. And yet, even though no specific controversial book was assigned, some people objected to their children even being presented with the titles of these books. (And yet, somehow, I suspect that they have TV guide in their house and may even let their children watch TV and go to the Movies). And then the Cowards of Cabin John backed down and "replaced" the assignment. I have a couple of problems with this.

The first is the "list of controversial books". Remember this is a list for 8th graders... not third graders. It includes:

Simple Books. Books which are too simple to be on the reading list. This includes:

In the Night kitchen by Maurice Sendak -- Controversial? What in the world is controversial about this book the only thing "controversial" should be why a book which I have read to my 2.5 year old and which she can recite by heart and which can be read with ease by virtually any first grader, should be on a reading list for 8th graders. This is perhaps the most egregious example on the list, but there are others.

Where's Waldo? Why is this book on any 8th grade reading list, let alone a "Controversial" reading list. Its not a book that requires any reading skill. Its a book for 1st graders or less. (Again, my 2.5 year old is familiar with and get a great deal out of this book).

A Wrinkle in Time (in fact almost anything by L'Engle) The Witches, James and the Giant Peach (in fact almost anything by Dahl) are all wonderful books but they are all appropriate for the 4-6th grade. By 8th grade, more complex books need to be assigned.

Numerous "Classics" of literature. This includes:

I know why the Caged Bird Sings, the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, Of Mice and Men, Catcher in the Rye, Go Ask Alice, To Kill A Mockingbird, Flowers for Algeron, Brave New World (interestingly enough the far less accurate, but far more controversial 1984 is not on the list), The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, Slaugherhouse Five, Lord of the Flies, The House of the Spirits, and Native Son. Yes, many of these require one to think, but none of these should be "controversial" quite to the contrary, all of them should be required reading before one finishes 9th grade.

(Sidetracking personal statement. Between 7th and 8th grade I went to Summer School. One of the classes was an English class. I needed to work on my writing. A booklist was handed out. It had about 500 books on it. Apparently we were supposed to read one book from it and write a report. I misunderstood and thought we had to read them all. At the end of the first week of class (having basically done nothing but read and write) I went to the teacher with 16 book reports. I had been doing 4 a day. I explained that I was reading 12 hours a day and did not see how I could read all 500. Once the laughing stopped, and my lack of comprehension was realized, my teacher said they were all important books, but I didn't need to read them all. Well over the next year I managed to read all 500. And she was right. They were all important. And I still read about 3-6 books a week for pleasure.)

Junk. These are books that Youths can read for fun, but which serve no real purpose except for encouraging more reading. They should not be assigned nor should they be an "option" for any real work. This includes:

Harry Potter books, Carrie, the Dead Zone, Private Parts, and the like.

Manuals. A number of "how-to" manuals are provided. They aren't needed either because they are not literature or because they are manuals explaining how to do things that 8th graders should not be doing. They have no place on this list because, with the exception of these books, the rest of the books are literature. If you are going to include non-literature, then you need to include lots of history and current event books, such as All The President's Men, any of the David Halberstam Books (Start with "The Powers That Be") which would be considered to be "controversial" because they provoke thought.

These include:
The New Joy of Gay Sex, Asking about Sex and Growing Up, the Anarchist Cookbook, Boys and Sex, What's happening to my body.

The second is that once you have made a "list' of controversial books AND ONLY ASSIGNED ONE TO BE READ AND IT IS TO BE SELECTED WITH THE ADVICE OF PARENTS then you should not back down. If Sid's parents think that they can protect him from "dangerous ideas" by keeping him away from "banned" books, then they should pick a book on the list that does not offend their views. Unless you are dealing with a Intolerant, Right Wing, Pentecostal Christian, Homophobic, Bigoted, Self-Hating Prude (all rolled into one) some book on the list is going to be okay. (And if you are a IRWPCHBSHP you likely send your Children to Private School, Work in the Bush White House, and may have been nominated to the Supreme Court.... so this list is really irrelevant.

What the Cowards in Cabin John SHOULD have done is to tell the parents to tell them, in writing why each and every book on the list is unacceptable, and if they can do so, then they can name another book for their child to read. And, oh yes, their "essay" should be graded and posted on-line so that their neighbors can see who is an IRWPCHBSHP.