A Minor Musing On Governor Daugaard's Declaration Of Christian Heritage Week

Dakota Free Press points to Governor Daugaard's declaration of Christian Heritage Week. I have no problem with Christian Heritage Week as a principle, probably because today is National Relaxation Day. Also, the week doesn't conflict with Fountain Pen Day which is observed on November 2

That said, the proclamation's list of faith practitioners is heavily male and protestant. It includes only one woman, Abigail Adams. It contains no African Americans or Native Americans. One would hope that a religion predicated on the belief that ". . . God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" would not be practiced mostly by males of European descent.

There are a few other oddities. Given that Native Americans are approximately 10% of the South Dakota's population, including Andrew Jackson on the list seems particularly tone deaf. Jackson's treatment of Native Americans was nothing short of barbaric.

This is apparently the 24th celebration of the Christian Heritage Week. It might be time to add people from the 1970s and 1980s to the list of names. As it stands now, the last notable practicing Christians held office in the 1950s.

On a more entertaining note, including Harry S. Truman, a man well known for using salty language is a refreshing reminder that Christians retain their foibles. Dwight Eisenhower may well be my favorite member of this list. When a pastor began bragging that Eisenhower was a member of his church, the President told his press secretary, "You go tell that goddamn minister that if he gives out one more story about my religious faith I won't join his goddamn church."

That sentiment might be the best summation of the United States's combination of Christianity and individualism, but I doubt it's what Governor Daugaard was thinking of when he signed the proclamation.

Stolen from Dakota Free Press because downloading is faster than screenshoting

Governor Daugaard Is Probably Glad She Didn't Mention Philosophy

It's about time for South Dakota's Governor Daugaard to issue one of his regular insults to philosophy majors. Because I believe there's always a place for philosophy and the humanities, I was pleased to listen to this WNAX report featuring University of South Dakota President Sheila Gestring defending the liberal arts.

Gestring makes several important points about the inherent value of the liberal arts. First, she rightfully points out that "there are jobs today we didn't even contemplate ten years ago." and "that will be true five years from now." She points out that a liberal arts education uniquely teaches students to meet the needs of jobs that don't exist now because the liberal arts teaches "students how to be problem solvers and how to think critically."

More importantly, she asserts that the creative thinking prompted by the liberal arts helps one "interpret what this job is evolving from and to" and gives employees an advantage in a world that changes quickly because of technology.

Finally, she points out that "communication skills are . . .very, very important and that's at the foundation of the liberal arts as well."

It's unfortunate that university heads have to defend the liberal arts from political leaders, but it's refreshing when they do so cogently.

Governor Daugaard Studies At The Judge Soggy Sweat School Of Rhetoric

Via Madville, I see that Governor Daugaard has taken a strong stand issued some words that mean nothing about uranium mining in the Hills.

If you feel strongly about Powertech, I hope you’ll consider attending future hearings. They are a good way to learn more about the proposal.

I am occasionally asked if I “support” or “oppose” this project. This question misunderstands that our state and nation have very sound, comprehensive processes to consider proposals like this one. Through these processes the merits and impacts of the project must be evaluated. Under this system I am confident the important questions will be discussed and addressed, and the right decision will be reached.

I'm not a student of political rhetoric, but I thought I recognized the phrasing and cadence of Daugaard's pronouncement. It didn't take long to remember that I was this speech that I first heard John Grisham deliver on C-SPAN a year or two ago. It was originally delivered by Judge Soggy Sweat, a Mississippi politician, on  the subject of prohibition within that state.

My friends, I had not intended to discuss this controversial subject at this particular time. However, I want you to know that I do not shun controversy. On the contrary, I will take a stand on any issue at any time, regardless of how fraught with controversy it might be. You have asked me how I feel about whiskey. All right, here is how I feel about whiskey:

If when you say whiskey you mean the devil's brew, the poison scourge, the bloody monster, that defiles innocence, dethrones reason, destroys the home, creates misery and poverty, yea, literally takes the bread from the mouths of little children; if you mean the evil drink that topples the Christian man and woman from the pinnacle of righteous, gracious living into the bottomless pit of degradation, and despair, and shame and helplessness, and hopelessness, then certainly I am against it.

But, if when you say whiskey you mean the oil of conversation, the philosophic wine, the ale that is consumed when good fellows get together, that puts a song in their hearts and laughter on their lips, and the warm glow of contentment in their eyes; if you mean Christmas cheer; if you mean the stimulating drink that puts the spring in the old gentleman's step on a frosty, crispy morning; if you mean the drink which enables a man to magnify his joy, and his happiness, and to forget, if only for a little while, life's great tragedies, and heartaches, and sorrows; if you mean that drink, the sale of which pours into our treasuries untold millions of dollars, which are used to provide tender care for our little crippled children, our blind, our deaf, our dumb, our pitiful aged and infirm; to build highways and hospitals and schools, then certainly I am for it.

This is my stand. I will not retreat from it. I will not compromise.

Grisham's rendering is here, but I prefer this one delivered with a more pronounced drawl.



I think I will pour a few fingers of Templeton Rye to better contemplate Daugaard's language.

Denny And The Prince*

Yesterday, the ever concise Bob Mercer analyzed Governor Daugaard's claim to have created "a culture of fiscal restraint."

Those seven words began the latest weekly column issued from Gov. Dennis Daugaard, in which he talks about state agencies returning $13 million of unspent funds from their 2012 budgets, which closed June 30. He also talked about tax revenues and other general collections being up 7.3 percent through the first 11 months of the 2012 fiscal year. Those seven words are fascinating as a political statement, because they reflect directly upon the previous management under the Rounds administration, in which Daugaard was lieutenant governor. The full sentence says, “Under a new culture of fiscal restraint, our state agencies are not spending every dollar they were allocated."

Cory adds a broader analysis here.

Less than a month ago, Daugaard inserted himself into some legislative primaries to support establishment candidates over tea party types.  Now he's criticizing his predecessor.  Something about this situation reminded me of Machiavelli's The Prince. Machiavelli famously tells leaders to merge the primary qualities of both the lion and the fox:

A prince, therefore, being compelled knowingly to adopt the beast, ought to choose the fox and the lion; because the lion cannot defend himself against snares and the fox cannot defend himself against wolves. Therefore, it is necessary to be a fox to discover the snares and a lion to terrify the wolves.

The Governor acted the role of the lion in the primaries; those results were mixed.   Now, he's copying the sly fox.

For his sake, I hope the Governor reads the entire book; Machiavelli warns leaders to avoid being hated. The Governor seems to be picking fights that may make it impossible to avoid hatred.  Machiavelli has a solution:

. . . princes cannot help being hated by someone, they ought, in the first place, to avoid being hated by every one, and when they cannot compass this, they ought to endeavour with the utmost diligence to avoid the hatred of the most powerful.

I don't know whether Rounds or the tea party represents the "most powerful." so I suggest the Governor follow one last bit of Machiavelli's advice:

I say that a prince may be seen happy to-day and ruined to-morrow without having shown any change of disposition or character. This, I believe, arises firstly from causes that have already been discussed at length, namely, that the prince who relies entirely upon fortune is lost when it changes. I believe also that he will be successful who directs his actions according to the spirit of the times, and that he whose actions do not accord with the times will not be successful. Because men are seen, in affairs that lead to the end which every man has before him, namely, glory and riches, to get there by various methods; one with caution, another with haste; one by force, another by skill; one by patience, another by its opposite; and each one succeeds in reaching the goal by a different method. One can also see of two cautious men the one attain his end, the other fail; and similarly, two men by different observances are equally successful, the one being cautious, the other impetuous; all this arises from nothing else than whether or not they conform in their methods to the spirit of the times.

In short, the Governor seems to be trying to keep up with the spirit of the times and avoid relying on luck to keep the party behind him.  Of course, Machiavelli never held power, so it's not clear that following his advice will work, but the Governor seems to be doing his best to apply Machiavelli's principles.

*I should show the Governor a bit more respect, but when the title of the post can also be a band name for either a 1950s fold duo or a pair of 21st century hip hop artists, I just can't resist

Plains Pops: Evil And Happiness And Irony Edition

Google, who along with Apple and Microsoft may be the true "Axis of Evil," has a chief happiness officer.  Chade-Meng Tan, helped develop "a course called 'Search Inside Yourself,' designed to help Googlers improve their emotional intelligence and mindfulness, making them happier and more productive employees, and better bosses. Ultimately, his goal is to make the world in general a happier place for everyone."

Second, two of myfavorite supervillains were supposed to be "one-offs."  First, Captain America's nemesis Red Skull:

Though Red Skull is one of Captain America's earliest and most well-known enemies, he originally wasn't supposed to show up again after his first appearance. But as the fan base grew, the character was brought back into the story. Later issues revealed that the original Red Skull was a fake, and introduced the true villain, eventually shown to be Johann Schmidt. According to Marvel's page on the character, the modern version of Red Skull didn't show up until Tales of Suspense #66 in 1965. 

The most shocking character on IO9's list is the Joker:

The mad archvillain we all know and love was originally going to be killed off shortly after his debut=. At the end of the Joker's second appearance in Batman #2, he would have died after accidentally stabbing himself. Whitney Ellsworth, a DC editor, thought the Joker was too good a character to let die, so he had another panel drawn to show that the villain was still alive.

Thiid, I'll grant that Governor Daugaard may not be evil, but the testing über alles regime that he will usher in if HB 1234 stands will destroy student happiness and obliterate what's left of the state's teachers' morale.  The good Governor is also acting like a supervillain in his efforts to consolidate his power by endorsing legislative candidates in the primary election, an act that Joel Rosenthal, a former chairman of the South Dakota Republican Party, said . . .is unusual  . . . ."  One of the candidates that Daugaard endorsed sees himself as part of a “big team.”  Is it a coincidence that the Red Skull and the Joker also had teams of minions to help them enact their plans for conquest?

Let's review.  The conglomerate that violates users' privacy hired a person who seeks to make everyone happy.  Supervillains who were supposed to exist for only an issue or two have survived for decades, and a governor who has a reputation for being a good guy is recruiting people to help him enact a plan that will harm students worse than Google or the Joker would ever dream of.

Why Would A Wise Forest Animal Eat A Talking Pineapple?

Or why I don't want any part of my pay based on a standardized test.

The New York Daily News covers a New York State test developed by Pearson PLC.  Students were asked to respond to questions from a story about a race between a talking pineapple and a hare.

In the story, an apparent take-off on Aesop’s fable about the tortoise and the hare, a talking pineapple challenges a hare to a race.  The other animals wager on the immobile pineapple winning — and ponder whether it’s tricking them.

When the pineapple fails to move at all and the rabbit wins, the animals dine on the pineapple.

Students were asked two perplexing questions: why did the animals eat the talking fruit, and which animal was wisest?

Let's be clear, none of the animals were named Socrates and none claimed to be the wisest animal because it knew nothing.  Apparently the unanswerable questions had been tested elsewhere.

The new exams have higher stakes for principals and teachers statewide, whose evaluations will be based in part on student scores beginning as soon as this year.

Scarsdale Middle School Principal Michael McDermott said the question has been used before and “confused students in six or seven different states.”

If Governor Daugaard or Education Secretary Schopp want read the story and take a stab at answering the questions, they can do so here.  I'm sure that they will claim that South Dakota checks its tests more carefully.  That claim may be true, but the difference between South Dakota's inane questions and New York's inane questions is difference of degree not of kind.  South Dakota's tests have their fair share of inane questions.

I have my own slightly less inane multiple guess question:

After hearing about the pineapple and the hare, Governor Daugaard and Secretary Schopp will

a. stubbornly insist that standardized testing is a great way to evaluate teachers.
b. claim that paying math and science teachers more than English, history, art or music teachers will help students answer the question about why the animals ate the pineapple.
c. offer Pearson a 10 year contract to write Dakota STEP tests.
d. all of the above.