The Pint: A battle EU metric importers couldn't win

A blurb from last month, that I'll hope to refer back to next semester when we teach about the European Union and its struggles when its bureaucratic rules, backed up by legislation from the European Parliament challenge national sovereignty, sparks fly. What's a sovereign nation to do?

In this, the latest example involving the EU and its members, the EU bureaucrats, using their wide range of discretion, seem to have backed down. The defenders of pints, miles, and pounds (as weight, not money) are not entirely satisfied. By the way, those of us not in the UK (or the Republic o Ireland) might not understand that the pint is the most important of these traditional measures.

EU gives up on 'metric Britain'

The European Union is set to confirm it has abandoned what became one of its most unpopular policies among many British people."

It is proposing to allow the UK to continue using pounds, miles and pints as units of measurement indefinitely..."Under the plans which have now been scrapped, even displaying the price of fruit and vegetables in pounds and ounces would have become grounds for a criminal prosecution."The decision to back down was made by Industry Commissioner Guenter Verheugen... 'I want to bring to an end a bitter, bitter battle that has lasted for decades and which in my view is completely pointless. We're bringing this battle to an end.'..."John Gardner, director of the pro-imperial British Weights and Measures Association, said: 'If a trader tries to conduct his business in just imperial measurements that will be illegal.'"

The UK Metric Association said the statement does not mean that traders can go back to weighing and pricing in imperial measures, and it will be 'business as usual'..."

Ken Wedding on his blog, Teaching Comparative Govenment and Politics, http://compgovpol.blogspot.com goes back on some Minnesota history when metric rationalists seemed to have been gained the upper hand and even in the US people saw km/hr speed limit signs, learned that a dime (part of a metric system) weighed about a gram, and that a meter was about a yard long.

In 1977, the NCAA sanctioned a Division III metric football game between Carleton and St. Olaf Colleges here in Northfield, Minnesota. But the enthusiasm for imposing metric (even in Europe)uniformity may be waning.

Yet another victim on nationalistic pride. The Brits and Irish will raise a pint to that.

Romney in Heaven? No, Just Iowa

Latest national presiential polls have Hillary Clinton with a double-digit lead over her Democratic rivals, and Rudy Giuliani ahead of his GOP competition. But as we should know by now, presidential races -- and nominatons are done by state-by state and two of the state's that have a huge early impact are New Hampshire (home of the nation's first primary) and Iowa, which hosts its nominating caucus in the cornfields on Jan. 14, 2008. Iowa now promotes its "Firt in the Nation," nominating contest.

One has to look back to just 2004 to prove that "All Politics is Local," but with a national significance. Democratic also-ran John Kerry, who was buried in national polls won the Iowa Caucus -- the word coming from the Algonquin origin meaning "gathering of ruling tribal chiefs." Reportedly, he focused on meeting Democrats throughout Iowa's 99 counties. Meanwhile, Howard Dean, who had an apparently large blogosphere, finished a distant third. Then was YouTubed out of the campaign by his post-Caucus Scream Speech.

http://www.marriedadults.com/howarddeanscream.php

For more on the Iowa Caucus, link here: http://www.iowacaucus.org/iacaucus.html

Iowa and New Hampshire may be demographically than the rest of the nation, that's why some have suggested that we go to nation-wide primary. But there is no doubt that are state-centeed electoral process can throw are curve ball to the media scorekeepers that have Hillary and Rudy ahead of the field of presidential contenders.

This week, a Newsweek poll shows Hillary locked in a tight three-way race with Barack Obama and John Edwards and Mitt Romney hold a sizable lead over Rudy and others in the GOP race among likely Iowa caucus goers. See the political cartoon above, Rudy and John McCain may be hurting in Iowa because they blew off the Iowa Straw Poll in August, while Romney has been stumping among the Hawkeye Huskers all nearly all summer.

The headline, "Romney in Heaven? No, just Iowa," comes from the line in the classic baseball film Field of Dreams. Romney's religion (Mormon) and its importance may be a blog for another day.

For now, consider the presidential nominating process in the United States. Does it work for you that suffrage is a state issue and Iowa and New Hampshire get the prime time early spotlight?

Loser pays?

Last week, the United Auto Workers staged its first national strike against the world's largest auto maker, General Motors, since 1970. The UAW walkout lasted just two days. But the troubles for the auto maker -- and the auto workers -- remain. As does the health care crisis in this country, where the largest number of bankruptcy claims have been made by sick people who have weak, or non-existent medical insurance.

The once healthy American auto industry, claims to be unfairly burdened by health care costs. Part of the compromise settlement that GM and the UAW met was pushing a good portion of health care costs for employees and retirees off to the union, in exchange for a promise to protect American jobs -- although GM has over the last 20 years moved much of production to foreign countries like Mexico.

In 2005, in an OP-ED column written for the Wall Street Journal, GM CEO Rick Wagoner, said that GM planned to: "Trim $1 billion in net material costs in 2006; and, in cooperation with the United Automobile Workers, reduce GM's retiree health-care liabilities by $15 billion, or about 25%, for an annualized expense reduction of $3 billion. "

The chaiman went on to say health care costs were a fundamental problem cutting into GM's profits:

"So what are the fundamental challenges facing American manufacturing? One is the spiraling cost of health care in the United States. Last year, GM spent $5.2 billion on health care for its U.S. employees, retirees and dependents--a staggering $1,525 for every car and truck we produced. And the figure is going up again this year. Foreign auto makers have just a fraction of these costs, because they have few, if any, U.S. retirees, and in their home countries their governments fund a much greater portion of employee and retiree health-care costs. "

Meanwhile our government, with millions of uninsured Americans -- including children -- is being pushed by many on the left to finally do something to avoid this healthcare crisis. A bill to provide coverage to children who get caught in the middle has passed Congress but is likely to be vetoed by President Bush. Here's why according to Stephen Colbert:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/09/28/the-wørd-on-health-care/

House bill H.R. 676, sponsored by Rep. John Coyners (D-MI) , "To provide for comprehensive health insurance coverage for all United States residents, and for other purposes," has been sitting in committee since Feburary.

Documentary filmaker Michael Moore, in his film SICKo, calls for a socialized medical coverage for all Americans. His proposal is linked here: http://www.michaelmoore.com/sicko/health-care-proposal/. It is obviously politically controversial. While Moore will not feel sorry for GM -- see Roger & Me -- he might have a supporter in Wagoner, who would like to shift the burden to the government.

http://slate.com/id/2169131/

The GM CEO, and the liberal activist who once took the company's chairman to task. A health care crisis can make strange bedfellows.

What does all this mean? Simply put, we all are facing a social security crisis in this country. And millions are facing a health care train wreck. For years, if it cared to look, our government has seen it coming. What should they do? What should We the People demand?

Share your thoughts. Have you seen SICKo? If you have, tell us what you think.

Protecting the thoughts we hate

"If there is any principle of the Constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment than any other it is the principle of free thought -- not free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate." -- Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes

Justice Holmes, in his opinion in the 1919 landmark Supreme Court case, Schenck v. United States, set the "clear and present danger" precendent as the only time that the government has the constitutional right to surpress the right to free speech and thought. In Schenck v. United States, Holmes announced this doctrine for a unanimous Court, famously declaring that the First Amendment would not protect a person "falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic."

Today, the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is in New York, speaking at Columbia University. Earlier, in a prelude to the UN General Assembly meeting, Ahmadinejad said he had wanted to go and lay a wreath "to show his respects" at Ground Zero. He was rejected by New York authorities. He will run a gauntlet of protesters at Columbia decrying his outrageous views, including his denial of the Holocaust, his call for Israel to be wiped from the face of the earth, his country's development of nuclear weapons and its sponsorship of terrorism.

A USA Today editorial states: "The public display of Ahmadinejad getting to taste two fundamental pillars of democracy — free speech and the right to protest — should speak volumes about what the United States stands for, and what he and Iran don't. "
http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2007/09/our-view-on-ahm.html

But others have an oposing view. And even a satirical view, including this report of the Irania president getting Tasered.
http://www.ridiculopathy.com/news_detail.php?id=1929

Ultimately, Ahmadinejad and his views will get more media coverage then the top agenda item on the UN General Assembly docket: the Global Climate Crisis. My questions for your are: 1)Is the Iranian president Infotainment, or his he the real story? And, 2) Should the Ahmadinejad and his hateful rhetoric be welcomed here?

Media and Government Rather Close for Comfort?

In the midst of our Unit: Political Parties, Campaigning, Elections, the Media and Linkage organizations; we have a signficant statement in the way of a $70 million lawsuit filed by Dan Rather against his former employer, CBS and its parent company media conglomerate, Viacom, Inc.

We will teach that the media has three traditional roles: Gatekeeper, Scorekeeper and Watchdog. We have also said that the media in the U.S. has played the role an adversarial press since Watergate and the Vietnam War.

If the media plays those roles, then they "are supposed to be a pain in the ass,'' as the late David Halberstam said. But Rather's suit says, well, these days the media is linked rather close to the government.

He claims he was used as a "scapegoat" (not the racehorse, or watchdog animals journalists are used to playing) and CBS intentionally botched the aftermath of a discredited story about President Bush's military service to curry favor with the White House. He was removed from his "CBS Evening News" post in March 2005.

"Somebody, sometime has got to take a stand and say democracy cannot survive, much less thrive with the level of big corporate and big government interference and intimidation in news," he said on CNN's "Larry King Live."

"They sacrificed support for independent journalism for corporate financial gain, and in so doing, I think they undermined a lot at CBS News," he told King.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hUVO6cyEPAt-CaWVsvqXELJ0_DCw

An article in your packet suggests similar linkages. Read the packet article on the corporate connections to media outlets in this country. Then link your thoughts on whether or not we still have a free press in the U.S. Or is it rather to closely linked with corporate interests and the government itself.

What would Ghandi Do?

Sarah V. poses for a picture with Rajmohan Gandhi after the professor's talk during last week's Celebration of Peace.

During last week's talk reflecting on the life of his grandfather, Mahatma Gandhi, Professor Rajmohan Gandhi used this story to look for the purpose of people and government in time of "War on Terror" that is in conflict with "Peace and Ahimsa (the Sanskrit word for non-violence)."

"A little girl asked here parents how wars start,'' professor Ghandi started.

"Wars start over land,'' her mother said.

"No, wars start over economics,'' the father said.

"They are fights over land,'' the mother countered, only to be stopped by the father's exclamation of "ECONOMICS!"

The little girl, sighed. "Now I really know how wars start,"

Professor Gandhi's talk to students of Waubonsie, Neuqua Valley, Naperville North and Naperville Central centered around the themes that propaganda in the "so-called" Muslim vs. the so-called "Western World" are standing in the way of the prospect of potential of peaceful global world.

"Today, there is a belief, or propaganda that America is the enemy,'' Ghandi said. "Likewise, in america and the West there is the thought that there is something wrong with the Muslim world as a whole."

The grandson, who at 72 years of age, said he is still honored to be referred to as the grandson of Ghandi. He said Ghandi's relevance was as much about bringing Hindus and Muslims together as much as it was achieving (non-violently) India's independence. He later went on to say,

"Those who commit acts of violence in the name of justice are ordering the public to pay the price.''

The professor went on to push you guys to to get involved, and maybe change the world. "An individual has conscience, government doesn't have consceince . Institutions don't have conscience. Government needs opposition, disent, often to provide the role of a conscience."

Interesting. But what if individuals have opposing coscienciousness, and being linked to governments both locally and nationally, they are enganged in a tug of war that often uses labeling dialog and sometimes violence.

I could not help be think of the "What would Jesus Do?" catch phrase. Substituting, "What would Ghandi Do?" when thinking of the crosscutting cleavage that has become national news right from our own backyard. The debate/protest/delayed opening/and lawsuit over the Planned Parenthood clinic is a complex one to find "Ahimsa" in our pluralistic, polarized society.

I am a Catholic, anti-abortion, but pro-choice. Does that make me a flip-flopper? I guess I wish I could turn to Ghandi for guidance.

What do you think Ghandi would do, or advise on the two side of the local clinic conflict. Linked here is Time magazine's story on the local controversy and the national grassroots lobbying so-called pro-life movement.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1662487,00.html

Military Mission: Democratization

During yesterday's Senate testimony, General David Petraeus took tough questions from five potential new bosses. Senators Biden (D), Clinton (D), Dodd (D) , Obama (D) and McCain (R) all put the commander of troops in Iraq through questioning. They are all hoping to be the next Commander in Chief

But maybe the hardest question came when the senior Republican Senator on the Armed Servies committee, John Warner (who is not running for President) asked the question we asked in our classroom on 9/11.

Warner asked Gen. whether the current strategy in Iraq "will make America safer."

Petraeus replied, "I believe that this is indeed the best course of action to achieve our objectives in Iraq."

Warner repeated his unanswered question: "Does that make America safer?"

Petraeus said, "I don't know, actually. … I have not stepped back. … I have tried to focus on what I think a commander is supposed to do, which is to determine the best recommendations to achieve the objectives of the policy for which his mission is desired."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/12/washington/12scene.html

The General's answer may be politcally embarassing. But maybe that's because his job can only be part of the answer in the complex equation in the first trend in comparing political systems: Democratization. Remembering our foundations, Gen. George Washington had much help from political thinkers.

According to political scientist Samuel Huntington, the modern world is now in a "third wave of democratization" that began during the 1970s. the first wave developed gradually over time; the second wave occured after the allied victory in World War II, and continued until the early 1960s. The second wave was characterized by de-colonization around the globe. The third wave is characterized by the defeat of dictorial or totalitarian rulers from South america to Eastern Europe to some parts of Africa. Recent political turnover in Mexico may be interpreted as part of this "third wave" of democratization.

Huntington outlines some factors on why democratization has occured:

• The loss of legitimacy of both right and left wing authoritarian regimes
• The expansion of an urban middle class in developing countries
• A new emphaasis on "human rights" by the United States and the EU
• The snowball effect: When one country becomes democratic, it influences others to do so. An example is Poland's influence on other nationas of Eastern Europe during the 1980s. It is also George W. Bush's hope for his legacy.

If we plug in the factors, we and should ask ourselves, can the military man on the cover Newsweek possibly save Iraq by accomplishing all these goals?