Uncategorized

Down With the S.H.I.T.

in

"I am not afraid of execution," said S.H.I.T. (Saddam Hussein in Trial). That's probably a good thing because I think it's coming to him.

S.H.I.T. and his council, which includes former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, have argued that he cannot get a fair trial while Iraq is occupied by the U.S. I don't think the guy and get a fair trial anywhere and he shouldn't expect to. It's amazing that he can even stand trial. I don't recall any fair trials under his regime. I only seem to recall genocide.

There have been many critics, including myself, who have been quick to hold the U.S. accountable for its actions in war (see previous post). However, it is amazing (and honorable) that the U.S. let the guy live to stand trial - and now S.H.I.T. is complaining about it. Look at these quotes, courtesy of the AP:

"I am not afraid of execution," said Saddam, who then addressed the judge, saying, "I realize there is pressure on you and I regret that I have to confront one of my sons. But I'm not doing it for myself. I'm doing it for Iraq. I'm not defending myself. But I am defending you."

"When the revolution of the heroic arrives, you will be held accountable."

"This game must not continue, if you want Saddam Hussein's neck, you can have it! I have exercised my constitutional prerogatives after I had been the target of an armed attack."

What is up with S.H.I.T referring to himself in third-person in that last quote? I thought only rappers did that. Anyway, I'm quite sick of the guy complaining. He's lucky to be alive, and, regardless of when or where he stands trial, the verdict will be the same. His Michael Jackson-esque courtroom antics won't change the fact that justice will be served sooner than later.

Welcome Rocco, Cosmo, Whatever Your Name Is

in

Mom got a new pet. Apparently it's a dog, but I'm waiting on some test results to confirm that. The name of the animal is Rocco.

The "dog" is allegedly a Schnoodle, which is a cross between a Poodle and Schnauzer. Schnoodles can get their asses kicked by cats easily. Sam, our cat, is reportedly sharpening his claws and planning an attack.

UPDATE (and a parody from Cider House Rules):

Dr. Larch: Rocco was adopted by a family today. We should all be happy for him. Let us all say goodnight to Rocco.

All: Goodnight, Rocco.

Dr. Larch: Good night, you kings of Maine, you princes of New England.

End Scene. (Interpret: Mom had to return the puppy.)

UPDATE: The dog, renamed Cosmo Kramer, has returned a happier, healthier puppy. Mom is happy.

Leave Them Kids Alone

in

The censorship of a Tennessee high school newspaper has brought a First Amendment question back to the chalkboard: When do we limit First Amendment principles in schools?

Earlier this week, Oak Ridge High School principal Becky Ervin recalled 1,800 copied of the student newspaper because it contained an article about birth control methods and an article about tattoos and body piercings. Superintendent Tom Bailey defended the principal’s decision, telling the AP, "We have a responsibility to the public to do the right thing. We've got 14-year-olds that read the newspaper."

Oak Ridge students have reportedly attended school board meetings with hand-written protest shirts that read “censor,” but school administrators do have legal justification for their actions.

The Supreme Court ruled in “Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District” (1969) that the First Amendment does apply to public schools. However, a later decision, “Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier” (1988), seriously limited First Amendment freedoms, citing that administrators can censor non-forum student newspapers.

While Oak Ridge High School educators have the legal ability to censor their student newspaper, they should shelve personal bias and seek a higher standard for supporting First Amendment-entitled freedoms.

Ervin and Bailey are right to take responsibility for the content exposed to students at the school. However, they ought to recognize that an article about effectiveness of contraceptives or an alternative article about abstinence is relevant to a high school audience. Even freshmen are curious about sex, at the very least.

More importantly, they should uphold the First Amendment principles taught in their classrooms.

High school, the last academic endeavor for most Americans, is where American values are taught. Civil rights achievements are glorified in history classrooms. Democratic elections are analyzed and explained in political science classrooms. Yet, at the same institution where we celebrate our freedoms, we limit them, too. High school educators should be aware that they are preparing their students for real world challenges and they should provide them with a real world environment - where First Amendment rights are honored.