"Never Share"

I’ll write about you 

Until I’m thin air 

But this poem 

I’ll never share   

I’ll talk about 

Our first stare 

With which no other 

I’ll ever share   

My fingertips locked 

In her curly hair 

Hers to keep ‘cause 

I’ll never share   

Face so delicate 

Figure so fair 

Angels can’t hope 

To ever share   

Mind of a compass 

Morals of a square 

Only God 

Seems to share   

Pleasant and lovely 

And strong and rare 

Traits only she 

May ever share     

And world around her 

She seems to wear 

Only to hope

She’ll ever share   

But it’s our separate worlds

That seemingly chair 

For with any one else 

Distance be no bear

And all the miles 

From here to there 

Keep us from 

Completing our pair 

In a moment which 

In dreams we’d share   

But I’ll write of you 

Until I’m thin air 

But this poem 

I’ll never share

(December 2006)

"Defending the Position"

It’s the second winter day, 2003

And I sit in a dugout left empty

To watch the grass hold on to the field it’ll lose

As a dog tows his owner to a poop spot he chose

And the wintery winds, still warm, make the siding flap

Grows green the grass, and I watch it adapt

It’s held the fort strong, no patches dead

While all around its allies have fled:

The leaves blown off, the birds fly in scuttles,

The sun bows out early, the dirt cries in puddles.

Through their retreat, while scared of Frost’s ploy,

This beautiful day is a gift for the grass to enjoy.

(December 2003)

"Break in Case of Glass"

You talk of glass ceilings

That limit the size 

Of the salary you’ll earn 

Or portend your demise 

Like being a woman’s a crime 

A cast where there’s no mold 

To form fit the fight to

Break the glass ceilings.  

You talk of glass ceilings 

Like it’s a tease at the top 

A place you’ve been promised 

But will never live up. 

Still, if inside you erupt 

No wall, no roof, no controls 

Can hinder you and your goals 

As you break the glass ceilings.   

Deep down I know you’re feeling 

It’s exoteric, the power, wielding 

And it might be a haul 

No submitting, no yielding 

To this terrible glass ceiling 

And soon enough you’ll start seeing 

There’s no glass ceiling at all.

(December 2005)

A Christmas Missed

Soon television will be flooded with some of your favorite Christmas classics, such as Miracle on 34^th St., A Wonderful Life, The Santa Clause, National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation, and A Christmas Story. The child in me always preferred the animated favorites: How the Grinch Stole Christmas, A Charlie Brown Christmas, A Muppet Christmas, and my favorite, Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer. Each one of these movies are great in their own unique way, but the moral to all is the selflessness of the Christmas Spirit can trump any problem and bring warmth to any life.

 After witnessing some of the atrocities that occurred this Black Friday, one cannot help but wonder how amiss we are with the meaning of Christmas.

In a California Toys 'R' Us, two men fired their sidearms after their female companions entered a bloodied fight. The event culminated in the loss of both mens’ lives and also a sense of shopping safety. To quote bystander Joan Barrick, “All I was thinking was… I don’t want to die today.” Not wanting to compromise next year’s shopping, Toys 'R' Us dismissed the shooting as a “personal dispute” and therefore “inaccurate to associate [it] with Black Friday.”

Black Friday was worse for Jdimytai Damour, a part-time Wal-Mart employee who wiped the dust out of his eyes to report to his job early that morning. According to police reports and the New York Daily News, Damour was assigned crowd control at the store entrance – an arduous task overseeing an unruly collection of 2,000 people eagerly waiting for the 5:00 am opening. Shoppers to the rear of the crowd started chanting “Push the doors in!” and within moments, the doors barricaded off the hinges, followed by a mob that “bum rushed” a group of employees who tried to form a human chain to keep the shoppers at bay.

 Their yielding approach was in vain as several people were pummeled over, Damour included. Fellow Wal-Mart staff members scrambled and leaped “on top of vending machines” to avoid the mayhem of shoppers (who “yelled like savages”) until they could eventually reach Damour. The thirty-four-year-old died almost instantly of a heart attack.

 In turn, the raucous toppled four shoppers, including a pregnant woman who, after being stepped on, lost her 8-month-old fetus.

 All this for Guitar Hero World Tour for $59 or a 50” Samsung LCD TV for $798?

This might be a series of rhetorical questions, but what has happened to humanity during a season of giving? With behavior like this, is it difficult to imagine ourselves in A Wonderful Life where angels receive their wings? Is Black Friday nothing more than the search for this year’s fashionable “Red-Ryder BB Gun?” How would the Santa from Miracle on 34^th Street come back to judge us – as naughty or nice? Or better yet, what of the judgment the (oft-forgot) namesake of the holiday, Jesus Christ?

 We don’t need Jack Skellington or Tim Burton to identify with a Nightmare Before Christmas. It’s a Grinch that lies within, and for many of us, emerges on an appropriately named Black Friday.

Presidential Election Trivia

The Harrisburg Patriot-News Election Special

November 4, 2008

With the election only a few days away, every media source is going to be pounded by poignant opinions, haberdashery, endorsements, and threats. In a change of pace, let’s do a bit of presidential trivia. Can you name the: 

1. Last time a Republican ticket won an election without a Bush or a Nixon on the ticket?
2. Year and candidates that brought out the highest percentage of Americans to the polls?
3. Number of consecutive elections had taken place with a sitting President or Vice President on the ballot (2008 excluded)?
4. Territory of land purchased by the first Republican administration (and was dubbed “Seward’s Folley”) but is now represented on the Republican ticket.
5. Only President elected to two non-consecutive terms was who?
6. President who was never elected as a president or vice president by the American people?
7. First President to lose in a bid for re-election?
8. Party who had more Presidents, Democrats or Republicans?
9. Last President elected that was neither a Republican nor a Democrat?
10. Future President collected the most electoral votes and most popular votes in 1824, yet still lost the election (in the Corrupt Bargain)?
11. How many of the 55 presidential elections did the winner NOT receive a majority of the national vote?
12. Answer: True or False – young Barack Obama was legally old enough to consume alcohol when John McCain was first elected to Congress?
13. Dominant religious domination of the 43 elected presidents?
14. University that has produced the most presidents?
15. Amount of children Sen. McCain has?
16. Preferred game of admitted gamblers Sen. McCain and Sen. Obama?
17. Number of Presidents from the 11 since the end of World War II that have been left-handed?
18. Answer: True or False – A majority of the Presidents were Freemasons?
19. Year that, adjusted for inflation, the President made more money – 1908 or 2008?
20. How many Presidents have a military background?

  

1a. 1928 – Pres. Herbert Hoover

2a. 1876, when Pres. Rutherford Hayes lost the popular vote to Samuel J. Tilden, but won the Electoral College. The turnout has stymied since.

3a. Thirteen straight elections, from 1956 until 2004.

4a. Alaska

5a. Pres. Grover Cleveland, in 1884 and 1892. He also won the popular vote (but lost the election) in 1888.

6a. Pres. Gerald Ford

7a. Pres. John Adams lost to his political rival, Pres. Thomas Jefferson

8a. The Republicans have elected 19 Presidents, while the Democrats have fielded 13.

9a. Pres. Zach Taylor, a Whig, was elected in 1848 but died just 16 months into office.

10a. Future Pres. Andrew Jackson lost to Pres. John Q. Adams.

11a. Sixteen.

12a. True – but Sen. Obama was a mere 11 years old when his running mate, Sen. Joe Biden was first elected to the Senate.

13a. Twelve Presidents have at one time or another identified themselves as Episcopalian (Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, W. Harrison, Tyler, Taylor, Pierce, Arthur, F. Roosevelt, Ford, G.H.W. Bush). If Sen. McCain is elected, he would become the thirteenth.

14a. Harvard had a hand in educating six presidents (both Adams, both Roosevelts, Kennedy, and Pres. G.W. Bush (MBA)). Sen. Obama would become the seventh.

15a. Sen. McCain has seven children (Sydney, Doug, Andy, Meghan, Jack, James, Bridget)

16a. Sen. Obama prefers five-card stud, while Sen. McCain enjoys craps.

17a. Five (Truman, Ford, Reagan, G.H.W. Bush, Clinton; both McCain and Obama are left-handed, making ½ of the most recent presidents left-handed even though only 1 in 10 Americans are a “southpaw”)

18a. False. Only fourteen (Washington, Monroe, Jackson, Polk, Buchanan, A. Johnson, Garfield, McKinley, both Roosevelts, Taft, Harding, Truman, and Ford) of the 43 were Freemasons.

19a. 1908. In 2008, Pres. Bush was paid $400,000. In 1908, Pres. Theodore Roosevelt, made $75,000, which would have been $1.7 million in today’s figures.

20a. Thirty-one presidents have had a military background. All of them, sans Pres. Buchanan, served as an officer. Sen. McCain would become the thirty-second.

 Sources: PresidentialElection.com, The Page at Time Magazine, Wikipedia, Funtrivia.com, Worldmaps.com, PeopleQuiz.com, Quizland.com

The Founders Flip-Flopped, Too

The Harrisburg Patriot-News

August 31, 2008

On March 14, 2004, presidential candidate and current Senator John Kerry claimed that he “voted for [a soldier funding proposal in Iraq] before I voted against it.” This boondoggle quickly painted Kerry into a corner, and framed him with the disparaging political term – the “flip-flopper.”

In the 2008 election, the term has become even more pervasive and commonplace. Sen. John McCain has been accused of changing his stance on a laundry list of measures: from his stance on immigration, supporting Pres. Bush’s tax cuts, or encouraging off-shore drilling. Sen. Barack Obama has also been accused of banking a few U-turns, sharing McCain’s off-shore drilling stance, while now supporting FISA and neglecting public financing.

The media’s fascination with tracking these changes of position led me to wonder – were the Founding Fathers flip-floppers?

Unquestionably.

Pres. George Washington was elected to office as a nonpartisan. He in fact promised to avoid partisanship. Yet it was Washington who became the adulation of the Federalist Party and a strong national government. He created a rift with Democratic-Republicans by expelling the French diplomat “Citizen Genet,” who roused Jeffersonian supporters to aid France in their war with Britain. Washington ironically should remain the only president elected without a party because of the partisanship of his own administration.

Thomas Jefferson also belongs to this list. The 18^th century libertarian and a one of the most vocal opponents of nationalized government didn’t hesitate to use his presidential influence to conduct the Louisiana Purchase. This $23 million transaction (approximately 1/3 of the GDP at the time) was a major government expenditure. Many argued that if Federalist John Adams had proposed this measure, Jefferson would have surely opposed it.

Pres. Adams himself turned on his own Federalist Party as they grew hungry for war with France. His administration, creators of the first FISA-like Alien & Sedition Acts, was bent on curbing foreign espionage. They later used this as a vehicle to level the Democratic-Republican Party; yet when Adams stepped in and overturned the Acts as well as the French “Quasi-War,” ironically the only things leveled were his own party and his chances of re-election.

The biggest flip-flopper of all was James Madison. He was the author of more than 1/3 of the Federalist Papers, a 1788 compendium with the sole intention of convincing America to support Federalist policies and to rally around a strong central government. Madison created the binding document that gave birth to such a government. But three years later, the “Father of The Constitution” switched parties and systemically fought for a Bill of Rights to give more power to the individual states and Americans themselves.

Though John Kerry wouldn’t know it, flip-flopping is as American as apple pie. In fact, voters should fear candidates who remain inflexible and rigid on some issues. As our nation grows and we unearth technological, military, and economic shifts in our culture and world, we shouldn’t be measuring the quality of a candidate by merely their first opinions and moral standards but also on their ability to do what’s best for America at any and all times. 

Economics 101 - For the High School Graduate

Published in the Allentown Morning Call and the Lehighton Times News, June 2008

One of the most peculiar things about teaching is when students ask, “What is something good I can do with my life?”

 For those students in need of a compass, I advise you to use simple economic principles as your guide:

 ·        Supply & Demand: The most basic principle of economics revolves around this term. Job markets that are in huge demand – health services, mathematics, accounting, engineering, scientific research, etc. – all pay well because there aren’t enough people to supply the markets.

 ·        Trades make every one better off: Too many high school students enroll in college because it seems like a good idea. However, some people should not be sitting in more classes – and accruing an average debt of $22,000 – when they could be learning a trade or pursuing a quick, hands-on degree such as dental hygienist.

 ·        Elasticity: People who are flexible tend to roll with the market well. If you decide to pursue a college degree, make yourself well-rounded. A friend of mine recently graduated with degrees in both special and elementary education. That doesn’t just double his chances of getting a job, it quadruples them.

 ·        Maximize resources: Prior to the 1990s, as butchers spilt up parts of the chicken they tossed the chicken wings. But with a little entrepreneurialism, that same chicken wing that was once garbage quickly became valuable. The world around us is in desperate need of people who can turn ordinary resources into extraordinary investments.

 ·        There is no such thing as a free lunch: If you think you’re in for an easy way to make money – many often point to law on this one – you couldn’t be more wrong. The LSAT is the most difficult standardized test in the world, and the three years you might spend in law school will be the most intense you will ever experience.

 ·        Risk & rewards: If you’re planning on making millions, you’re going to put yourself out there in the face of failure. Under Armour founder Kevin Plank maxed out every credit card he had to make his water-wicking material, but was rewarded big because he risked big. More young Americans need to make big – and intelligent – risks. Imagine if you’re the entrepreneur to replace oil.

 ·        All choices involve opportunity costs: If you invest $2,000 annually into a mutual loan with 10% returns for 20 years, you’ll be a millionaire by the time you retire. Think about that the next time you ask for the sticker price on a Mustang.

 ·        Pay attention to the bottom line: Sure, you need to find a career that will make you happy, but you don’t want to be living paycheck-to-paycheck. Look for jobs that pay well, and pursue at least one of them.

 Class of 2008, I wish you much success. May the torch of simple economics be your guide to unearthing it.

Dollars & Democracy: The 2008 Election Highlights American Excess

Like a credit card bill from hell, first quarter fundraising reports showed an excessive amount of dollars collected for the 2008 presidential candidates. Senator Hillary Clinton leads the soon-to-be spending spree, having raised $36 million through the first three months of her campaign, quadrupling the record amount collected by Al Gore in 1999. Even John Edwards – the third place finisher in the Democratic primary – has eclipsed Gore’s numbers, raising a cool $13 million for his campaign; America still awaits for Barack Obama’s and Republican figures to be disclosed.

It has become safe to assume the 2008 presidential election will be costlier than any election in the history of our world. Spending will, undoubtedly, eclipse the $1 billion mark in this decisive race. Seems like an excessive amount of zeroes for a job that pays $400,000 per year, but it becomes even more extreme when one realizes $1 billion is a higher dollar amount than the entire GDP of 28 nations.

But people like Jonah Goldberg would have you think that this price tag is by no means intolerable. According to his March 28^th article in the Washington Post, “More money means more communication, more debate, more education. In other words, more democracy.”

More money does not mean more communication. More money means more bought votes, more you scratch my back while I throw dollars at yours. Money is to political campaigns what PowerBait is to the first day of fishing – you just have to continuously apply until you get every fish to bite, because they are all hungry. Plus more money usually means more painful, slanderous and repetitive advertisements; not what the Framers would consider a two-way communicative conduit.

Neither does more money mean more debate; it eliminates it. Today we hardly elect the candidate with the best ideas. We elect the candidate who gets our attention, and that usually comes at a price and with many purse strings. According to OpenSecrets.org, we elect the candidate with the biggest checkbook 97% of the time. This causes many deserving candidates to drop out of the race early simply because they cannot keep up with the fundraising. More money means less candidates and less debate.

And to believe that more money equals more education? Considering that 5% of voters elected Bill Clinton in 1992 because he played the saxophone or that 6.25% of voters placed George Bush in office in 2000 because he was a guy they could “sit down and have a beer with,” if we really wanted to educate the voters, we could do it in a much more effective and efficient manner than making signs and barraging them with tasteless, purchased propaganda.

Instead, political races should have a level political playing field. This nation was founded upon equal opportunity, and the current price tag of elections virtually eliminates any hopes of average citizens with great ideas to play in the same arena as the millionaires and billionaires that run the system and the corporations that sponsor them. Watch Bullworth or Man of the Year if you want to laugh at that biting but honest audacity.

Money has not enhanced our democracy, it has squandered it. The only way to solve this is to slowly take it back from campaign donors and pork-barrel spending projects and for every voter to look at their politician like they would their teenager with our national credit card. Call it "American Excess," because that is what money has done to our political system. If we neglect to watch it, recover it, and reinvent it, the great democratic system that was fine-tuned in this country and replicated around the world will not be every where we want it to be.

Rendell Brings Shovel to a Snowball Fight

KeystonePolitics.com, February 12, 2008

As Pennsylvania was blanketed by snow on Tuesday, the thickest “white stuff” was recorded by Tony Norman of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:

“You’ve got conservative whites [in Pennsylvania],” said Governor Ed Rendell, “who are probably not ready to vote for an African-American candidate.” Rendell continues his charade, saying, while “looking at the returns in my election, that had Lynn Swann been the identical candidate that he was – well-spoken, charismatic, good-looking – but white instead of black, instead of winning by 22 points, I would have won by 17 or so.”

Wow. Did Pennsylvania really elect a man so insensitive, so egotistical, and so naïve?
I have three questions for you, Mr. Rendell:

Don’t you believe you won in the 2006 general election because you were the stronger candidate?

The 2006 Swann campaign was infantile: Swann had political party (our state is slightly Democrat) and fundraising disadvantages (Rendell out-raised Swann 2:1). He was also a non-native Pennsylvanian that had no political experience running against the incumbent governor, who walloped him in every debate because Swann had the policy-handling skills of Humpty Dumpty. Why he lost the election had nothing to do with his skin color. It had to do with Rendell’s ability to work a shovel and Swann’s lack of it.

Second, since you relied upon black and suburbanite voters, never conservative whites, what gives you the right to speak on their behalf?

When gun control and abortion became major wedge issues in the 2002 primary race, Rendell lost every middle county to current Sen. Bob Casey, Jr. In 2006 he lost these counties again, sans a handful. Rendell’s comments not only unearthed James Carville’s description of Pennsylvania (“Pittsburgh to the west, Philadelphia to the east, and Alabama in between”), it attempted to recast the areas (he never carried) as culturally backward, as if the Little Rock Nine, Brown v. Board, and Martin Luther King, Jr. did little to change the mindset of its residents. And as a resident of these areas, it’s offensive.

Lastly, since conservative whites are opposed to label candidates such as the “black” one, why would they support the “woman candidate” – especially one with the last name of Clinton? Or why should they support any candidate you endorse?

Based on profiling, most voters who will disregard Obama will also not vote for Clinton, just as they disregarded Rendell. By pitting the two candidates against each other – and reinforcing the “conservative whites’” distaste for him – our governor is reducing the slight Democratic lead for either winner, whether it’s Obama or Clinton. Instead, the scales tilt toward the moderate and toward the Republican. Advantage: McCain.

At this time next month, the presidential primary will move to Pennsylvania. And, just like cinders spoil a fresh, uncontaminated snowfall, insensitive comments issued by our own governor may have tarnished one of the greatest moments in our state’s electoral history. But then again, the next comment could be even more outrageous, too.

Teaching to the Test Extinguishes Fire of Learning

KeystonePolitics.com, January 22nd 2008

Allentown Morning Call, January 24th 2008

Lehighton Times News, January 26th 2008

“Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire.”

While a student at Bloomsburg University, I remember stumbling across this banner, and being floored by its message. These words, which I later learned was a quote by Irish poet William Bulter Yeats, have served as the flag to my classroom.

I am a firm believer that students learn by doing, but more importantly by wanting to do. Give them a torch and a sense of guidance, and they will find their way. But give them a pail, and you’ll find how much they hat being compared to other students on assessments such as the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA).

After learning about the PA Board of Education’s decision to make PSSAs standard as a graduation requirement, I gave them the torch of my classroom to discuss the proposals. Here’s what I learned:

A mere mention of the acronym PSSA automatically conjured an array of emotions. Some students were filled with revile. They hate the PSSA. But they detest our school’s 4SIGHT remedial test, its evil step-brother, even more. Just yesterday one of my “problematic” 9th grade students was pulled from my class during a test review – which he was fully participative and thoroughly enjoying – to fulfill his 4sight requirement. He pleaded to stay, but I explained the state supercedes me as boss. His response? “Mr. Miller, I’m going to finish in 5 minutes.” He was back in four.

There are many students like this young man who have learned to be apathetic about tests. After years of taking tests with no review of their answers, they do not know how to improve themselves and achieve the coveted “Advanced” or “Proficient” rankings. So they’ve learned to be unconcerned.

Others are entirely consumed by them. One student told me that when he was in 3rd grade he “used to get nauseous the day before the PSSA because he had been brainwashed to succeed.” Instead of finding success, some unearth stress. Approximately 49% of students suffer from test anxiety; giving them more tests shows how little their apprehension matters.

Special education students are also a concern. One of my students explained to the class, “if we have these standardized tests, a student like me might be forced to drop out.” Her face turned sour as explained, “I need teachers’ help on tests, and I feel lost when I take the PSSA.”

What about vocational-technical students? “I’m not going to college,” professed one of my very blatant students. “I just want to learn a trade. But with this proposal, I’ll be forced out of something I love to do into college prep courses. That is crap.”

“Imagine that your son or daughter has problems the year they are to take one of the two English PSSAs (language arts and reading/writing, which must both be passed),” said another student. “It doesn’t matter the problem – whether a bad teacher, a teacher on maternity leave, or the student has personal issues. They’ll be forced to take a test they need to pass but are doomed to fail.”

I love feeling floored by statements like that.

But if teachers are forced to teach to tests, conversations – like this one where students discuss and solve problems – will be replaced by the memorization of answers. In effect, we will force a continual extinguishing of the fire by examining the filling the pail that is standardized testing. It’s a light we cannot afford to lose.