Tuesday, November 04, 2008
Poll Watching on Historic Day
This is an historic night as the United States ends the Bush era in a big way and just as significantly, demonstrates that while racism still exists, it's significance is reduced to the point where a majority of Americans can vote for an African-American candidate. Things haven't been officially called for Obama, but enough key states have gone his way that I can't see how Obama could lose. I'll save other comments on this incredible change in the United States' ability to go beyond race and the potential we know have to regain our status as a country the rest of the world looks up to. Meanwhile I'll tell you about my day as a poll watcher.
I was at the 'staging area' (someone's basement) at 6:40am and at the polling place at 6:50am in time for the starting of voting at 7am. It was dark when I got there and it wasn't clear where the polling place was. This picture on the left I took when I was leaving at 4:30pm and they had put up some signs. Still, it was hard to see. There was also a sign up on the street by the time I left(see bottom picture).
I had several jobs:
1. Keep track of the likely Democratic voters. I had a list of voters who were expected to vote Democratic and my job was to mark them off on three identical lists. The first list was to be picked up at 9:30am, the second one at 1:30pm, and the third one at 4:30pm. The lists, as I understood it, were to be used to call people who hadn't voted yet.
2. Report problems with voting - people turned down, overly long lines, machine problems, etc.
When I got there, about 30 people were in line, waiting for the polls to officially open at 7am. Once that initial crowd got handled, there were never more than four or five in line and most of the time there was no wait. But most of the time things were moving along briskly and the voting booths were busy all day.
The election workers were great. They were very friendly, made things as easy for me as possible, and were on top of any problems before I even knew about them.
No one came to pick up the 9:30am list. Nor did anyone come at 1:30pm, including my replacement. So I stayed. One problem came up with the voting machine about 4pm. Apparently, someone had dropped a ballot on the floor and it picked up a chunk of de-icing salt which got caught in the shute and so the ballots couldn't go in. They started putting them into the side box to be counted after they closed the polls. But Richard who was monitoring the machine was able to get the salt chunk cleared out and voters could put their ballots through the shute again and they could get counted.
The voting at our polling place was running much lower than one might have expected. By the time I left - my replacement came about 4:30pm - only about 25% had voted. (That doesn't count people who had voted early or absentee or had questioned ballots.) Of those who voted, about 40% were on my list which seemed like a good sign. There was no Republican poll watcher.
I'd left a message on our home phone to let J know I was still there and not sure when or if I'd get relieved. She showed up with a bag of goodies about 3:30. Do I have a great wife? And we left at 4:30, when I took the two outdoor pictures. And since we were across the street from the Thai Kitchen and they were about to open, we stopped there for dinner.
I was at the 'staging area' (someone's basement) at 6:40am and at the polling place at 6:50am in time for the starting of voting at 7am. It was dark when I got there and it wasn't clear where the polling place was. This picture on the left I took when I was leaving at 4:30pm and they had put up some signs. Still, it was hard to see. There was also a sign up on the street by the time I left(see bottom picture). I had several jobs:
1. Keep track of the likely Democratic voters. I had a list of voters who were expected to vote Democratic and my job was to mark them off on three identical lists. The first list was to be picked up at 9:30am, the second one at 1:30pm, and the third one at 4:30pm. The lists, as I understood it, were to be used to call people who hadn't voted yet.
2. Report problems with voting - people turned down, overly long lines, machine problems, etc.
When I got there, about 30 people were in line, waiting for the polls to officially open at 7am. Once that initial crowd got handled, there were never more than four or five in line and most of the time there was no wait. But most of the time things were moving along briskly and the voting booths were busy all day.
The election workers were great. They were very friendly, made things as easy for me as possible, and were on top of any problems before I even knew about them. No one came to pick up the 9:30am list. Nor did anyone come at 1:30pm, including my replacement. So I stayed. One problem came up with the voting machine about 4pm. Apparently, someone had dropped a ballot on the floor and it picked up a chunk of de-icing salt which got caught in the shute and so the ballots couldn't go in. They started putting them into the side box to be counted after they closed the polls. But Richard who was monitoring the machine was able to get the salt chunk cleared out and voters could put their ballots through the shute again and they could get counted.
The voting at our polling place was running much lower than one might have expected. By the time I left - my replacement came about 4:30pm - only about 25% had voted. (That doesn't count people who had voted early or absentee or had questioned ballots.) Of those who voted, about 40% were on my list which seemed like a good sign. There was no Republican poll watcher.
I'd left a message on our home phone to let J know I was still there and not sure when or if I'd get relieved. She showed up with a bag of goodies about 3:30. Do I have a great wife? And we left at 4:30, when I took the two outdoor pictures. And since we were across the street from the Thai Kitchen and they were about to open, we stopped there for dinner.
Monday, November 03, 2008
Obama Overkill?
"Hello, my name is Steve. I'm part of a crazy horde of Obama supporters and our goal is to call every home in America at least 26 times."
Sometimes when you know how to do something well, there comes a point where doing it no longer pays off. I don't know if the Obama campaign's phone banks are still serving a useful purpose or if they've reached the point of diminishing returns. I spent two and a half hours this afternoon calling people in Las Vegas. I had five or six pages of names - about 20 to a page. Where they got the numbers I have no idea, but they were in numerical order all in area code 702. Most people were not home or the phone was not in order. I left a few messages, talked to a few people. Other people there had been calling Iowa and some were actually calling people in Anchorage. If you got a call, this is what it looked like where I was calling from. I should have brought an earplug for my other ear.
But overall, it didn't feel right.
Was my time usefully spent? I know, we're just the foot soldiers who are supposed to do as we're told because we don't understand the big picture. Someone said that McCain couldn't do this using real people. Their calls are all robocalls. I hope that the cumulative effect of all this phoning will actually pick up some Obama voters. The best option would be that they don't matter because the Obama lead will be enough without our effort. But who knows, so we were calling.
The script we had was really stilted and I started modifying once I got the hang of things. Humor did seem to get past the anger. I told some people who complained about the calls that I felt the same way so I decided to get out of the house and make calls so I didn't need to answer any more.
Tomorrow I experience something I haven't experienced for a while - being awake before 6am. I have to get to the polling place where I'll be a poll watcher by 6:45 after picking up my badge and lists at a gathering point.
Sometimes when you know how to do something well, there comes a point where doing it no longer pays off. I don't know if the Obama campaign's phone banks are still serving a useful purpose or if they've reached the point of diminishing returns. I spent two and a half hours this afternoon calling people in Las Vegas. I had five or six pages of names - about 20 to a page. Where they got the numbers I have no idea, but they were in numerical order all in area code 702. Most people were not home or the phone was not in order. I left a few messages, talked to a few people. Other people there had been calling Iowa and some were actually calling people in Anchorage. If you got a call, this is what it looked like where I was calling from. I should have brought an earplug for my other ear.
But overall, it didn't feel right.
- I couldn't help but think about all the people being bothered by the phone calls. One caller near me said the people had been leaning for Obama but were so disgusted by the phone calls that they were now voting for McCain. Obviously the point is to make sure Obama supporters vote. But our list was orphan numbers - they didn't know what the people were planning on doing.
- I couldn't help but wonder what the enormous amount of volunteer time might be better used for. Non-profits always need volunteers. Can this organization now be used to redirect the volunteers to some of those organizations or is this just about Obama?
Was my time usefully spent? I know, we're just the foot soldiers who are supposed to do as we're told because we don't understand the big picture. Someone said that McCain couldn't do this using real people. Their calls are all robocalls. I hope that the cumulative effect of all this phoning will actually pick up some Obama voters. The best option would be that they don't matter because the Obama lead will be enough without our effort. But who knows, so we were calling.
The script we had was really stilted and I started modifying once I got the hang of things. Humor did seem to get past the anger. I told some people who complained about the calls that I felt the same way so I decided to get out of the house and make calls so I didn't need to answer any more.
Tomorrow I experience something I haven't experienced for a while - being awake before 6am. I have to get to the polling place where I'll be a poll watcher by 6:45 after picking up my badge and lists at a gathering point.
Slow Cool Run
I haven't run since I got back from the LA-Portland trip. It took a while to adjust from 90˚+ to 20˚ (32˚C to -6˚C) and I found a lot of reasons why I couldn't run. But then I read Theresa's post on her -10˚ (-23˚C)run in Fairbanks and I decided that I couldn't hold out any longer. It may be 70˚ colder than it was in LA, but it's still 30˚ warmer than Fairbanks. So today I took a slow lazy run (3 3/4 miles) in the light snow dust. It feels good now that I'm back. Part of the way I thought about being close to the waves at Venice Beach and that warmed my hands a bit.
Sunday, November 02, 2008
The Last Minute Sleaze Arrives - Don Young Flyer Lies About VECO Influence
[Jamglue, the site I've been using to host audio, has gotten rid of the embed code for some reason. The audio I have embedded below was the first one I did and I set it for play automatically. But now I can't turn that off. TO TURN OFF THE AUDIO, HIT THE YELLOW BUTTON TO THE LEFT OF FLOOREXCHANGE. ]
We forgot to check our mail yesterday, so I looked in our mailbox when I got home from poll watcher training tonight. In with the mail was this flyer (see below.) To suggest that Ethan Berkowitz is a VECO supporter is a totally outrageous and deceptive accusation. For the Don Young campaign to do is unbelievable. (The flyer says "Paid for by Alaskans for Clean Elections." Clearly this is NOT from the group that sponsored the clean election amendment in the primary. Only Don Young supporters would have an interest in something like this.)
1. VECO regularly hosted the pig roasts and raised tons of money for Don Young. At the three political trials last year, VECO President Bill Allen (whose picture is on the flyer) and VECO Vice President Rick Smith talked about the pig roasts, about golf tournaments, and other events where Don Young was the recipient of VECO largesse.
2. VECO doesn't exist. They were sold to CH2M Hill over a year ago. So VECO made no campaign contributions for this year's campaign. Checking the website link on the flyer, looking up contributors to Ethan Berkowitz, there is a $500 contribution from Bill Allen and one from Rick Smith for the year 2000. That is 8 years ago! Apparently that was their last contribution to Berkowitz. Since 2000, Don Young has received $116,000 from VECO!!!
3. Ethan Berkowitz is the state representative who stood up on the floor of the House and protested that VECO officers were giving instructions to Republican legislators during the House debate in June 2006. You can hear that his comments at the link below. (Click on the Yellow button with the black arrow.)(First you hear Rep. Weyhrauch explaining why he was changing his vote. The Berkowitz comes on and argues forcefully against the VECO team telling legislators like Weyhrauch how to vote.)
[Nov. 5: I've cut the audio of Berkowitz because it is so annoying to have it come on automatically and Jamglue where it's hosted has messed with the embeds so I can't change it to NOT play automatically. You can still listen to it here.]
We forgot to check our mail yesterday, so I looked in our mailbox when I got home from poll watcher training tonight. In with the mail was this flyer (see below.) To suggest that Ethan Berkowitz is a VECO supporter is a totally outrageous and deceptive accusation. For the Don Young campaign to do is unbelievable. (The flyer says "Paid for by Alaskans for Clean Elections." Clearly this is NOT from the group that sponsored the clean election amendment in the primary. Only Don Young supporters would have an interest in something like this.)
1. VECO regularly hosted the pig roasts and raised tons of money for Don Young. At the three political trials last year, VECO President Bill Allen (whose picture is on the flyer) and VECO Vice President Rick Smith talked about the pig roasts, about golf tournaments, and other events where Don Young was the recipient of VECO largesse.
2. VECO doesn't exist. They were sold to CH2M Hill over a year ago. So VECO made no campaign contributions for this year's campaign. Checking the website link on the flyer, looking up contributors to Ethan Berkowitz, there is a $500 contribution from Bill Allen and one from Rick Smith for the year 2000. That is 8 years ago! Apparently that was their last contribution to Berkowitz. Since 2000, Don Young has received $116,000 from VECO!!!
(Click on picture to enlarge)
3. Ethan Berkowitz is the state representative who stood up on the floor of the House and protested that VECO officers were giving instructions to Republican legislators during the House debate in June 2006. You can hear that his comments at the link below. (Click on the Yellow button with the black arrow.)(First you hear Rep. Weyhrauch explaining why he was changing his vote. The Berkowitz comes on and argues forcefully against the VECO team telling legislators like Weyhrauch how to vote.)
[Nov. 5: I've cut the audio of Berkowitz because it is so annoying to have it come on automatically and Jamglue where it's hosted has messed with the embeds so I can't change it to NOT play automatically. You can still listen to it here.]
Sometimes Just One Side is Right
Our mainstream media often like to tout their impartiality by equally reporting 'both sides' of the story. Sometimes they even search out the single person in favor of something (who more likely than not stands to profit from his position) to have a 'balanced' story. We're told that there are always two sides to a story. Often there are three or four or more. When I was a grievance coordinator, it was always important to keep this in mind when a union member was telling me his tale of woe. I always had to think about what facts were being unintentionally left out, or what the person being grieved against would say.
But sometimes there is a right side and a wrong side. One person was the aggressor and did something wrong and the other person is totally in the right. Or one solution is clearly much better than the other. ("You need to take a cab home, you are way too drunk." "No, no, I can drive home.")
So as we get ready to vote on Tuesday (for those of you who haven't voted early), try as I might, weighing everything from ideology to personality, I can't help but conclude that the Obama-Biden team is so clearly the right choice compared to the McCain-Palin team.
Let's look at this from a couple of sides.
1. Ideology - The McCain-Palin ticket picks up from where the Bush-Cheney administration left off. The war. The faith in unregulated capitalism. The anti-government sentiment. The mixing of religion and politics. The McCain people I hear on the radio saying, "Obama scares me" leave me shaking my head. How could Obama scare you more than a continuation of George W. Bush? (I know you can argue McCain's not Bush, but his policies are pretty damn close.)
It just seems to me that Obama's world view is closer to how things actually are, so that he's just more likely to take a cab home when he needs to, and to drive home when he can. McCain was wrong about getting into Iraq. He admits (generally a good sign, except when you're running for president) he doesn't know that much about economics.
Obama has a well educated grasp on the economy and basically on a way of thinking about problems and coming up with solutions. He also has a white and black parent. He is truly bi-racial and can see the world from both the perspectives of a black man and a white man. This makes him much better connected to the current and growing diversity of the United States population. He's not into denial about racism in America, but through his white mother and grandparents, he understands their perspective too. He went to school for a while in Indonesia! That means he probably knows where it and other Southeast Asian countries are on the map, not to mention he probably has some understanding that the people there are just as real and just as human as the people of the United States. Meanwhile Sarah Palin even makes distinctions between real and unreal Americans.
We can debate how we get out of Iraq, how we negotiate with Iran, about how to ensure the most people possible get decent health coverage and educations. But I can't help but feel that Obama's much less blinded by ideology and much more connected to reasoned and practical action. And that he can adapt as conditions change.
And we're seeing a number of high level Conservatives and Republicans, like Colin Powell, who despite their ideological alliance with the Republican Party, who are endorsing Obama. Reasoning Republicans are starting to realize how bad the McCain-Palin ticket could be.
2. Personality
Obama is a black man who grew up in the United States. As I've said before, to get where he is today, he had to learn how to control his anger. Angry black men don't survive, and certainly do not thrive in the white world. We saw, time and time again, how Obama answered attacks and challenges coolly, rationally, in measured tones. In contrast we've seen McCain lurch impulsively through this campaign. His choice of Palin was, we have found out, not preceded by the kind of thorough vetting most presidential candidates use. It was a gut decision based on superficial view of her strengths, but no awareness of the weaknesses. His decision to postpone the first debate so he could solve the financial crisis and then his change of mind all show his unsteadiness. We see him and much more his running mate foment unfounded fear about Obama's loyalty, race, and religion. This is not the way I want to see America go.
As I listen to people opposed to Obama, I hear platitudes - "he's inexperienced" followed by numerical proof that Palin's years as governor and mayor make her more qualified than Obama. Yes, that makes logical sense out of context of all the other factors. It ignores the embarrassing point that George W. had even more executive experience than Palin. Logically, perhaps that means that Obama is better qualified. We heard the ridiculous attempts to justify Palin's foreign policy experience by citing the fact that Alaska is near Russia. These are arguments are so absurd that I can't take seriously the reasoning or rationality of the people making them. These are the kinds of silliness people get into when they are trying to defend the undefendable. There aren't two sides here.
And then there are the people who won't vote for Obama because his middle name is Hussein or because they believe, or want to believe, he's a Muslim, or because he's 'not a Christian,' and because he's, well, you know, um, black. And I forgot a socialist and communist. I was always waiting for someone to ask Palin exactly what socialist means and how that fits in with the "owner state" concept and the government giving out checks to its citizens.
If the only thing you care about is overturning Roe v. Wade, then, well, probably you should vote for McCain. His next Supreme Court choice will probably swing the court. Unless he chooses the way he chose Palin.
If you have more money than you could ever spend in your lifetime and you take pleasure in knowing that most people are comparatively poorer and will never be as rich as you, then McCain might be your better choice. But remember, the current financial crisis has cost most investors way, way more than any capital gains tax ever envisioned would have.
If Obama is elected, the US will finally walk back onto the world stage as a respected world power. There is a chance that we can take on the challenges of the 21st Century, with models of the world that match the new conditions of the world. That doesn't mean an Obama administration will glide through those challenges. In some cases there will be choices that force us to compromise one value to advance another, and we'll fight over which one gets advanced and which doesn't. Obama's team will make mistakes. Some will be corrupted by power. But, overall, the Obama ticket seems so much more ready to take on this task than does the McCain ticket.
Sometimes there is only one right side. This, in my (some would say not so) humble opinion, is one of them.
But sometimes there is a right side and a wrong side. One person was the aggressor and did something wrong and the other person is totally in the right. Or one solution is clearly much better than the other. ("You need to take a cab home, you are way too drunk." "No, no, I can drive home.")
So as we get ready to vote on Tuesday (for those of you who haven't voted early), try as I might, weighing everything from ideology to personality, I can't help but conclude that the Obama-Biden team is so clearly the right choice compared to the McCain-Palin team.
Let's look at this from a couple of sides.
1. Ideology - The McCain-Palin ticket picks up from where the Bush-Cheney administration left off. The war. The faith in unregulated capitalism. The anti-government sentiment. The mixing of religion and politics. The McCain people I hear on the radio saying, "Obama scares me" leave me shaking my head. How could Obama scare you more than a continuation of George W. Bush? (I know you can argue McCain's not Bush, but his policies are pretty damn close.)
It just seems to me that Obama's world view is closer to how things actually are, so that he's just more likely to take a cab home when he needs to, and to drive home when he can. McCain was wrong about getting into Iraq. He admits (generally a good sign, except when you're running for president) he doesn't know that much about economics.
Obama has a well educated grasp on the economy and basically on a way of thinking about problems and coming up with solutions. He also has a white and black parent. He is truly bi-racial and can see the world from both the perspectives of a black man and a white man. This makes him much better connected to the current and growing diversity of the United States population. He's not into denial about racism in America, but through his white mother and grandparents, he understands their perspective too. He went to school for a while in Indonesia! That means he probably knows where it and other Southeast Asian countries are on the map, not to mention he probably has some understanding that the people there are just as real and just as human as the people of the United States. Meanwhile Sarah Palin even makes distinctions between real and unreal Americans.
We can debate how we get out of Iraq, how we negotiate with Iran, about how to ensure the most people possible get decent health coverage and educations. But I can't help but feel that Obama's much less blinded by ideology and much more connected to reasoned and practical action. And that he can adapt as conditions change.
And we're seeing a number of high level Conservatives and Republicans, like Colin Powell, who despite their ideological alliance with the Republican Party, who are endorsing Obama. Reasoning Republicans are starting to realize how bad the McCain-Palin ticket could be.
2. Personality
Obama is a black man who grew up in the United States. As I've said before, to get where he is today, he had to learn how to control his anger. Angry black men don't survive, and certainly do not thrive in the white world. We saw, time and time again, how Obama answered attacks and challenges coolly, rationally, in measured tones. In contrast we've seen McCain lurch impulsively through this campaign. His choice of Palin was, we have found out, not preceded by the kind of thorough vetting most presidential candidates use. It was a gut decision based on superficial view of her strengths, but no awareness of the weaknesses. His decision to postpone the first debate so he could solve the financial crisis and then his change of mind all show his unsteadiness. We see him and much more his running mate foment unfounded fear about Obama's loyalty, race, and religion. This is not the way I want to see America go.
As I listen to people opposed to Obama, I hear platitudes - "he's inexperienced" followed by numerical proof that Palin's years as governor and mayor make her more qualified than Obama. Yes, that makes logical sense out of context of all the other factors. It ignores the embarrassing point that George W. had even more executive experience than Palin. Logically, perhaps that means that Obama is better qualified. We heard the ridiculous attempts to justify Palin's foreign policy experience by citing the fact that Alaska is near Russia. These are arguments are so absurd that I can't take seriously the reasoning or rationality of the people making them. These are the kinds of silliness people get into when they are trying to defend the undefendable. There aren't two sides here.
And then there are the people who won't vote for Obama because his middle name is Hussein or because they believe, or want to believe, he's a Muslim, or because he's 'not a Christian,' and because he's, well, you know, um, black. And I forgot a socialist and communist. I was always waiting for someone to ask Palin exactly what socialist means and how that fits in with the "owner state" concept and the government giving out checks to its citizens.
If the only thing you care about is overturning Roe v. Wade, then, well, probably you should vote for McCain. His next Supreme Court choice will probably swing the court. Unless he chooses the way he chose Palin.
If you have more money than you could ever spend in your lifetime and you take pleasure in knowing that most people are comparatively poorer and will never be as rich as you, then McCain might be your better choice. But remember, the current financial crisis has cost most investors way, way more than any capital gains tax ever envisioned would have.
If Obama is elected, the US will finally walk back onto the world stage as a respected world power. There is a chance that we can take on the challenges of the 21st Century, with models of the world that match the new conditions of the world. That doesn't mean an Obama administration will glide through those challenges. In some cases there will be choices that force us to compromise one value to advance another, and we'll fight over which one gets advanced and which doesn't. Obama's team will make mistakes. Some will be corrupted by power. But, overall, the Obama ticket seems so much more ready to take on this task than does the McCain ticket.
Sometimes there is only one right side. This, in my (some would say not so) humble opinion, is one of them.
Maggie Anniversary Party Webcam [updated - Maggie has died]
[UPDATE August 5, 2021 - The ADN reports today that Maggie has died at age 41]
For those who cannot celebrate Maggie's special day, in-person, the webcam will be focused on her from 11:00am - 1:00pm. To view the webcam, on Sunday, please click here or go to www.pawsweb.org and select "webcams" from the Quick links menu, located on the right side of the PAWS home page. At 12:00pm Maggie will devour her anniversary cake on the webcam. PAWS? Co-founder, Pat Derby, will bake Maggie?s cake. It will be made of bran and molasses, and will be adorned with raisins, Jolly Ranchers, and a carrot candle. As an added treat to honor Maggie's first year at ARK2000, Dr. Mel Richardson, PAWS Veterinarian, will give Maggie a very special pedicure. He will then save and package Maggie's foot trims to share with her human friends (after they are cleaned and polished of course). There will only be 10 packages available.There's something about all this that bothers me. I'm not sure if it is making such a fuss over an elephant when there are starving people - especially children - around the world. But another part of my brain says that we can't individually take care of all the problems in the world so we should do the things we can. We don't have to bring everyone down to the lowest level, but those of us who live relatively well, should make sure that we are helping to dismantle the obstacles for others to do the same.Bidding will begin at $10 each. If you would like to bid on Maggie's foot trims please click here . PAWS? plans to create a unique line of elephant foot trims jewelry. The designs are in the development phase.
Elephant toenail jewelery? Well, if Alaskan tourist shops can sell moose poop jewelery, why not?
Saturday, November 01, 2008
Ropi, Nowhere Can You Escape History
Ropi [the 18 year old Budapest high school student blogger) left a comment today on my very first or second post more than two years ago. He wrote:
So I decided that, in case he was still bored and avoiding prepping for this history contest by checking out other blogs, I would put up some Roman history. This is, of course, risky since he is the expert in this area. So I went looking. The first part below is mostly interpretive discussion - a little difficult to find 'facts' for Ropi, but the more I read, the more familiar the story sounded. But I did take a snippet that had some hard data in it to test Ropi. OK now, Ropi, here are your questions:
1. In 151 BC, [Roman] citizens went as far as refusing the call up for another levy [of soldiers] to be sent to what country?
2. In 153 BC, who was the young tribune, who staked his reputation on a treaty with the [Country in Question 1] in order to save the trapped army of Mancinus from certain destruction?
The answers are in the section at the end. But I think people will find reading the first part rather eerie in the similarities with . . . well, I don't want to prejudice you.
From the Roman Empire Net:
Hmm, I have too much time on my hands despite the history contest so I was curious about your 1st post.
So I decided that, in case he was still bored and avoiding prepping for this history contest by checking out other blogs, I would put up some Roman history. This is, of course, risky since he is the expert in this area. So I went looking. The first part below is mostly interpretive discussion - a little difficult to find 'facts' for Ropi, but the more I read, the more familiar the story sounded. But I did take a snippet that had some hard data in it to test Ropi. OK now, Ropi, here are your questions:
1. In 151 BC, [Roman] citizens went as far as refusing the call up for another levy [of soldiers] to be sent to what country?
2. In 153 BC, who was the young tribune, who staked his reputation on a treaty with the [Country in Question 1] in order to save the trapped army of Mancinus from certain destruction?
The answers are in the section at the end. But I think people will find reading the first part rather eerie in the similarities with . . . well, I don't want to prejudice you.
From the Roman Empire Net:
The story of the late Roman republic is essentially a tragic one.
Yet the various causes for the demise of the republic are far from clear cut. One can not point to one single person or act which led to the fall.Looking back one feels that most of all the Roman constitution was never designed with the conquest of wealthy overseas territories in mind. With the addition of ever more provinces, especially that of Asia (Pergamene), the delicately balanced Roman political constitution began to collapse from within.
For individual politicians, especially for those with a talent for military command, the prize of power became ever more extraordinary as the empire expanded. Meanwhile, on the streets of Rome the will of the Roman electorate was of ever greater consequence, as their favour granted a politician ever greater powers.
In turn the electorate was flagrantly bribed and cajoled by populists and demagogues who knew that, on achieving power, they could recoup any costs simply by exploiting their offices overseas.
Had in the earlier days of Cincinnatus high office been sought for status and fame within Roman society, then the latter days of the Roman republic saw commanders win vast fortunes in loot and governors make millions in perks and bribes in the provinces.
The key to such riches was the Roman electorate and the city of Rome. Therefore who controlled the Roman mob and who held the pivotal positions of tribunes of the people was now of immense importance.
The fate of the ancient world was now decided in the miniature world of one city. Her town councillors and magistrates suddenly were of importance to Greek trade, Egyptian grain, or wars in Spain.
What had once been a political system developed to deal with a regional city state in central Italy now bore the weight of the world.
The very virtue of Roman unchanging stoicism now became Rome’s undoing. For without change a catastrophe was inevitable. Yet adaptable as the Roman mind was to matters of warfare, it was resistant to any sudden change in political rule.
So, as the Roman elite did, what it was bred to do, as they competed ruthlessly with one another for the highest positions and honours, they unwittingly tore apart the very structure they were sworn to protect.
More so, those who possessed extraordinary talents and succeeded only reaped the suspicion of their contemporaries who at once suspected their seeking the powers of tyranny. Had previously Rome handed extraordinary commands to great talents when a crisis required it, then towards the end of the republic the senate was loath to grant anyone commissions, no matter how urgent the situation became.
Soon it therefore became a contest between those of genius and those of mediocrity, of aspiration and vested interests, between men of action and men of intransigence.
The descent was gradual, unperceivable at times. Its final acts, however, proved truly spectacular. It is little wonder that this period of Roman history has proved a rich source of material for dramatic fiction.
- Much more material has survived regarding this period of Roman history. Hence we are provided with much greater insight of the events of this era. Thus, this text can elaborate on the problems in much greater detail.
The Brothers Gracchus
Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus
But more so, the scandalous Roman conduct in Spain most likely directly contributed to the eventual break with the nobility by the brothers Gracchus.
Tiberius Gracchus
For it was at Numantia (153 BC) that a young tribune, Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus, staked his reputation on a treaty with the Spaniards in order to save the trapped army of Mancinus from certain destruction. [for the rest]
Art for Art's Sake
What with the trip to LA and all, I didn't get to post the project I turned in for my computer art class. I wrote about the instructions earlier and showed what the professor demonstrated. Since I was headed out of town, I did a number of different projects and then turned in the one that I did in the required 30 minute time limit.
This is the display with all the student products. (Like usual, you can double click to enlarge the pictures.) Mine's in there somewhere.
It really is pretty amazing what the computer can do for you. A lot of what comes out is 'accidental' as you explore the different filters that can cause all sorts of interesting effects. But we did all stick within the guidelines. And the similarity shows. Even though they are all very different. Below are some practice eggs I did. These didn't get done under the time limit, not even close. But I got better using the Photoshop tools as I did them.
All the horizons in the original examples were at the top, so of course I had to do one with the horizon at the bottom. There's even an underwater filter which helps give it the watery sense. I tried the shafts of light because Mariano had done that in one of his demonstrations. His looked a lot better than mine.
Based on the three practice eggs, can you figure out which one is mine in the group display? If you figure three rows A, B, C, you can identify your guess as say A1 for the top left egg, or C6 for the bottom right egg.
The new project is to take four pictures and combine them all in one "fantasy" picture. I'll try to post mine on Tuesday if it's ready.
This is the display with all the student products. (Like usual, you can double click to enlarge the pictures.) Mine's in there somewhere.It really is pretty amazing what the computer can do for you. A lot of what comes out is 'accidental' as you explore the different filters that can cause all sorts of interesting effects. But we did all stick within the guidelines. And the similarity shows. Even though they are all very different. Below are some practice eggs I did. These didn't get done under the time limit, not even close. But I got better using the Photoshop tools as I did them.
All the horizons in the original examples were at the top, so of course I had to do one with the horizon at the bottom. There's even an underwater filter which helps give it the watery sense. I tried the shafts of light because Mariano had done that in one of his demonstrations. His looked a lot better than mine.
Based on the three practice eggs, can you figure out which one is mine in the group display? If you figure three rows A, B, C, you can identify your guess as say A1 for the top left egg, or C6 for the bottom right egg.The new project is to take four pictures and combine them all in one "fantasy" picture. I'll try to post mine on Tuesday if it's ready.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Guest Blogger Michele: Maggie's First Year in California Anniversary [UPDATED]
[UPDATE August 5, 2021 - The ADN reports today that Maggie has died at age 41]
Sunday, November 2 will mark the 1st Anniversary of Maggie the elephant's trip from Alaska to her new home in California. Making decisions is not always easy. But the decision to send Maggie out of Alaska so she could have more open space, better weather, and most important, the company of other elephants, seemed pretty easy. But for various reasons, never clearly articulated, the zoo took forever to finally agree.
[Picture of Maggie from PAWS]
A former Alaskan friend was visiting recently and started telling me about how Maggie was doing and so I asked her if she'd do a guest post. She agreed. So first I'm going to give some background on the decision the zoo made to send Maggie south. Then we can look at the results of the decision in Michele's guest post.
A May 2007 ADN article reported:
Sunday, November 2 will mark the 1st Anniversary of Maggie the elephant's trip from Alaska to her new home in California. Making decisions is not always easy. But the decision to send Maggie out of Alaska so she could have more open space, better weather, and most important, the company of other elephants, seemed pretty easy. But for various reasons, never clearly articulated, the zoo took forever to finally agree.
[Picture of Maggie from PAWS]
A former Alaskan friend was visiting recently and started telling me about how Maggie was doing and so I asked her if she'd do a guest post. She agreed. So first I'm going to give some background on the decision the zoo made to send Maggie south. Then we can look at the results of the decision in Michele's guest post.
A May 2007 ADN article reported:
Thwaites and other board members have said Maggie is a dominating elephant that may not adjust well to living with other elephants or to a change in her lifestyle. "Maggie's not your typical elephant. She hasn't been used to this. You just don't know (what could happen to her)." Thwaites said the board is asking experts, including some of the same ones consulted in 2004, for their advice...
The 2004 report was written by a five-member committee formed to advise the board on what to do with Maggie. In it, elephant experts from around the U.S. and Canada said Maggie would be better off elsewhere. The lone dissenter, Dr. Jim Oosterhuis of the San Diego Wild Animal Park, said the animal could stay in Alaska if she was provided proper exercise, softer flooring in her enclosure and more interaction with her handlers. The zoo has spent $900,000 to improve Maggie's living conditions, Thwaites said. It has not, however, met all of the goals, including the soft flooring, which is estimated to cost another $100,000, he said. The Alaska Zoo's elephant committee, composed of zoo staff, a board member and others closely connected to the zoo, three years ago split on the question of moving Maggie
The committee was made up of the then-president of the board, Mike Barker; then-senior zoo staff members Tex Edwards and Pat Lampi; Maggie's local vet, Dr. Riley Wilson; and a founder of the zoo, John Seawell. Edwards and Seawell thought Maggie should stay in Anchorage. Barker and Lampi voted to send her to the North Carolina Zoological Park, which scored highest among several Outside zoos that had indicated an interest. Wilson, the fifth committee member, was undecided.***************** How Maggie the elephant is doing in her retirement at the Performing Animal Welfare Society (PAWS) in Galt, California. Maggie arrived at the PAWS ARK 2000 sanctuary on November 2, 2007 via a celebrated airlift commanded by the late Brig. Gen. Thomas L. Tinsley, commander of the 3rd Wing at Elmendorf Air Force Base. After arriving at Travis Air Base, Maggie, in her crate, was trucked to the 75-acre sanctuary. She walked unaided out of her crate into the African elephant barn and into her private sleeping stall, was given a bath, examined by vets, and plied with treats. After exploring the African barn, she was led to the introductory yard where she met the four female African elephant residents, 71 (the leader), Mara, Lulu and Ruby. Maggie is very vocal and trumpets to them. She makes a honking sound when she is begging for treats (our Maggie loves to eat!). Maggie remained separated from the others physically by a fence until the PAWS staff was sure that she was strong enough not to be knocked over by them. They could nuzzle and touch trunks from Day 1 and slept in the same barn in separate stalls. She never appeared frightened of the other elephants and roared to show her spunk. Maggie was kept close but separate from the others until February 13, 2008 [video of Maggie joining other elephants] when the staff was confident she was strong enough to hike up and down the hills, and then she was introduced into the full elephant pasture with the others. She seems to have particularly bonded with Ruby. On August 17, 2008, PAWS celebrated Maggie’s 27th birthday with carrot cake and all her new California friends. She was not willing to share her cake with the other elephants and they had to be distracted with goody bags of their own! There was so much interest in Maggie when she arrived that the PAWS webcam crashed from sheer volume of hits. It is currently down and in the process of being upgraded but check back periodically for new videos. I, for one, am very grateful to the Board of the Alaska Zoo for allowing Maggie to be re-located to PAWS and to the sanctuary and Bob Barker for financial support. I think your readers will be happy to see how well she is doing. PAWS posts regular updates on Maggie on their website under “News and Alerts” Here are some nice videos of Maggie so you can see how she’s doing. Best regards, Michele
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)