Sidewalk chalk art at Irvine Valley College

I do believe that this work was done under the direction of art instructor Julie Kirk, an internationally recognized street painter and professional artist.
Those in the know: pass on any information you'd care to share about this exhibit.

I overheard someone talking about "chalk art" this afternoon, and so, at about 7:00, after hanging out with friends over at Waters, I dropped by IVC to find it. Someone was still working there. I left them alone.
Naturally, I had the wrong lens, and so I couldn't take any wide shots. I did the best I could. Plus the light was fading fast.
* * * * *
The chalk art can be found at Irvine Valley College, just past the Student Services Building and in front of the PE gym.
Check it out. Don't know how long it will last.
This stuff is ephemeral. Very cool.

LATE NEWS:
Two probable swine flu cases found in Irvine

RANDOM SHOTS FROM MY CAR, ON THE WAY HOME:

Along Live Oak Canyon Road

Approaching Cook's Corner

Live Oak Canyon Road

Try not to run amok

SWINE FLU NEWS. Daffodil J. Altan over at the OC Weekly reports (here)—or maybe just opines—that those surgical masks that everybody’s dying for are useless.

My sister Annie told me that she was at Home Depot yesterday and some lady was literally running through the building crying that she could find no surgical masks! “There’s a pandemic!” she yelped, said sis. Annie claimed to be standing right there where they keep those mask that workers wear when they’re, like, blowin’ leaves around and disturbing the peace. For some reason Annie didn’t clue the lady in about that.

So, anyway, Daffodil reports that

After essentially quarantining a CSULB student who has received a "probable positive test" (um, is it or isn't it?) for piggy flu, health officials on the Long Beach campus handed out surgical face masks to students on campus who have "been paranoid," according to a Press Telegram report.

That’s pretty funny, I guess. But don’t be surprised if, one day soon, you open your door and see a scene from Invasion of the Body Snatchers. If people can vote for George W. Bush twice, they can run amok looking for useless leaf-blower masks.


FIRE. Did you notice the fire at the IVC library a few days ago? Yeah, right there at the “grand entrance hall,” about twenty-five feet up and to the right, a light bulb in one of those ritzy Art Deco fixtures caught fire. I’m told that the first sign of trouble was a smell of melting or burning plastic. Sensing trouble, students started running out of the building—just like Kevin McCarthy in, well, Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Then that light bulb caught fire. Flames, smoke, screaming.

I guess they (whoever “they” were) took care of it tout de suite. (Sorry, I meant “lickety-split.” What was I thinkin’?) All you can see now is some black soot up and around the fixture.

A friend said, “Hey, what if this happened on the weekend?” I said, “Yeah. The contractor must’ve bought some cheap econo-bulbs from China.”

“Yeah,” he said. We grunted unpleasantly.


ZODIAC. Did you hear about that OC woman who, yesterday, held a press conference—up in San Francisco—to declare that her father was the Zodiac Killer? It’s probably BS, but you can read all about it here.

DAVIES. The OC Reg’s Science Dude (Paul Davies) reports that

Paul Davies, a theoretical physicist widely known for helping explain the origins of the universe and for his eloquence in discussing the nature of science and religion to the public, will give the undergraduate commencement address at Chapman University in Orange on May 23.

SWINE 2. Inside Higher Ed reports this morning on cases of swine flu at college campuses, including a suspected case at San Diego State University.

Have a nice day. Try not to run amok.

Notes on last night's board meeting, part 2

Eventually, the trustees got to item 6.1, the faculty contract. The trustees made an effort to thank all parties, including members of the faculty negotiating team. Tom Fuentes suggested that the board “divide the question.” The problem with the new contract, he said, was specifically the “raises, some of them retroactive.” In “this economy,” he said, he couldn’t in good conscience support the raise, for he has an “obligation to taxpayers.” He harrumphed. In the end, the contract passed unanimously, except for the raises, which naturally lost Fuentes’ vote. The fellow sighed and then flicked a piece of raw meat into the camera. Splat! Item 6.2 was the renewal of printing and mailing class schedules for Fall 2009, and that was approved. This time, the bill was a mere $75K. Here’s what they approved, evidently:

At the March…meeting the Board instructed the colleges to investigate a more cost effective way to distribute the class schedules, perhaps totally through online. Both Colleges looked at the option to mail out a postcard and found that due to post office requirements…there would be little savings over continuing to mail the class schedules. IVC has determined that it could save approx. $32K by decreasing the number of Fall class schedules…from 314K to 30K (campus copies only) and printing a trifold mailer that will be sent to 284K residents…. The college will use the same approach for Spring 2010…. Saddleback College staff is planning to reduce the number of pages for the Fall schedules from 116 to 110 and will convert to an online schedule of classes in the Spring of 2010. In addition, SC will have some campus copies available for sale in its bookstore for a minimal cost of one or two dollars each. …Campuses are preparing to move toward totally online schedule of classes by Spring 2010….

This sounds pretty dicey to me. Is anyone paying attention to this? I sure hope so. I try to keep people informed, but sometimes I think I oughta just shut down and go home. Fuentes nastily intoned that item 6.2, a cost decrease, is “fitting,” given that the faculty contract represents a cost increase. Item 6.4 was the latest curriculum revisions at IVC. This, too, worried Mr. Fuentes, who asked that he be walked through the process. He seemed stunned to learn that about one thousand curriculum changes occur per year. His eyes grew large. How can this be? It was explained to the fellow. IVC Senate Prez Gabriella chimed in to clarify matters. Some of the changes are minor and technical, she said. But, yeah, we do lots of work in this department buster. Item 6.7 concerned board policy revisions, including BP4016, “Drug-free environment and drug prevention program.” Fuentes got excited. Wait-a-minute, he seemed to say. Don’t we now have a “zero tolerance” policy? For some reason, those in the room who attempted to explain our existing and proposed policies re drugs failed to employ the buzzword “zero tolerance,” and that fact caused in Fuentes palpable and noisy pain. “Zero tolerance, zero tolerance!” he shouted. Yeah, sure, zero tolerance, I guess, said everybody else. We don’t use that phrase, but that’s our policy I suppose. Fuentes suddenly stopped the show, asking if any colleague disagreed with zero tolerance on drugs? He scanned the panel ominously. Finally, some poor soul in the audience squawked, “um…just say no!” Actually, that just happened in my mind. What’s with all the red meat? I can only assume that, for some reason, the expected TV audience for this meeting is going to be big. Maybe there’s an AARP convention in town. Who knows. Item 6.8 was academic personnel actions, including a recommendation for a new administrative position: a Dean of Academic Programs, Student Learning, and Research. Glenn Roquemore explained that, with changes that have occurred in recent years, the burdens on the VPI have grown, yadda yadda. What this boils down to is that the Presidents of the colleges are supposed to be allowed to make their own decisions concerning where money should be spent in maintaining an effective administration, and Glenn really wants, and says he can afford, this new position. But, owing to “this new economy,” some trustees resisted the idea. Somebody failed to get their ducks in a row. Chancellor Mathur stated that he supported the proposal. Oddly, he even seemed to say that, if the position is approved and Glenn sends up a candidate, he’ll support that recommendation too! (I think I got that right.) Sounds like Raghu has been in the woodshed. No wonder he looked so glum and his fanny looked so red. Marcia used the “m” word (micromanagement). We oughta back off and let Glenn do this, she said. But, in the end, 5 of the seven trustees voted to table the item (Marcia and Don dissented). Fuentes used item 7.3 (“basic aid information”) to talk up his boy Chriss Street, OC’s corrupt Treasurer. Yadda yadda yadda.

Bye, you guys

Nothing of great importance occurred at tonight's meeting of the SOCCCD board of trustees. The faculty contract was formally approved—as expected—but not without a bit of the ol' ultra-conservatism from trustee Tom Fuentes, who divided the question so that he could vote down the faculty raise. But the contract—and the raise—passed anyway.

The President of IVC, Glenn Roquemore, has pursued adding another administrator—much needed, it turns out. The matter came up for approval tonight, and Glenn advocated strongly and clearly for the position. He even got the support of the Chancellor. Imagine that!

But some trustees were wary of this move. —It's this economy, doncha know? So, despite powerful arguments from anybody who knows anything and the support even of Mr Goo, the best these clowns could do was to table the matter. (Milchicker and Wagner voted against that, hoping to pass the recommendation.) The item will come up again next month.

Board Prez Don Wagner got all peevish and unpleasant when Karla W, inveterate foe of trustee prayers, sought to read comments from two people who could not attend.

Plus Don won an "ugly face" contest. See pic.

Student Trustee Hannah Lee said her goodbyes. The board gave her a plaque or something.

I'll really miss her routine references to the board as "you guys." I really will.

I'll have lots more tomorrow, I guess.

April board meeting: Notes, part 1

     I arrived at about 6:05, and the meeting had not yet started. Oddly, Trustees Dave Lang and Marcia Milchiker were sitting in their places over on the left, Trustee Bill Jay was in his chair way over to the right, and Chancellor Raghu Mathur was sitting alone and forlorn, somewhere in the middle. Somehow, the scene was grim, a partial and perverse Last Supper. Usually, the seven trustees emerge from their super secret buffet/lounge all at once, but not last night. After about ten minutes, Trustees Don Wagner, Tom Fuentes, and John Williams emerged very much in lockstep--like Cary Grant and Katherine Hepburn in that restaurant scene in Bringing Up Baby--and took their seats. (I lost track of Trustee Nancy Padberg.)

    

     The real fun starts about 4 minutes in. More grimness. I really don’t know what it meant. Maybe these people were at each other’s throats during the closed session. Maybe nothin’. Dunno. Our trustees love to do “resolutions,” and there were lots of ‘em last night. A middle-aged lady got a Rez for picking up a bag with $3,000 in it (at Saddleback) and turning it in. It was money raised in some charity. I guess these trustees are the kind who'd take the money and run, so they were stunned that anybody'd return it. They didn't seem to know what to make of her. Well, the woman got all teary-eyed and introduced her kids. Looking at them, she wimpered something like, “This is how I feel about you kids when you do the right thing.” More tears. Wailing. During “public comments,” Karla Westphal offered her usual objections to trustee prayers. She then held up prepared statements from two faculty who could not attend the meeting, and Board Prez Don Wagner said something like, “If they wanna speak, they can show up.” Karla explained that at least one of these instructors teaches on Monday nights. Wagner sniffed and then let her read for a bit, but when she got to the second letter, he just shut her down and sent her packing. Karla stalked off. I think she was steamed. When will Don learn that his petty and hot-headed ways are counter-productive? Never, it seems. Well, let's face it. That he acts like such a punk kid is his charm. Trustee reports were unremarkable. I don’t recall a thing that Bill Jay said. Padberg literally said nothing. Fuentes yammered like he does about his boy Mathur’s leadership on some task force. There was a “breakfast” at IVC on April 17, and lots of Republican pols showed up for that. A food fight broke out, evidently.

     Williams announced that he has discovered that textbooks are expensive. Milchiker reported that she has seen yet another version of “A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum”—this one at IVC. Didn’t she see this very play at Saddleback last month? Yup. Marcia seems to live in Wacky World. It was student Trustee Hannah Lee’s last night, and the board gave her some prizes for being pretty and causing no trouble, I think. Her replacement was in the audience, and she seemed to be the equal of Hannah in perkiness and cuddliness. Maybe she can think and speak, too, but that would appear to be unlikely. During his report, a subdued Chancellor Mathur said some obvious things about our “basic aid” gravy train being under threat. He seemed to be in a state of shock. Dunno why. Evidently, some education bills are likely to fail in the upcoming election, and that will make the budget situation even worse for education. Mathur quoted someone who said that “now is the time to clean up the barn.” Most just stared at him, uncomprehending. John Williams commenced yammering about textbook costs. I do believe he said that “we are moving to a virtual society.” I looked around. Nobody was laughing. Not even me.John has some ideas, he said. Instructors could scrape up stuff from the “public domain” and post that somewhere. Instant textbook. Free. Or, he said, we could get instructors together to write a textbook, which the district would own. Use that. Again, I looked around the room. Nothing. I saw a guy studying lint that he had found in his pocket. Next came a report about “Early College Program/K-12 Outreach.” There were three speakers, and they were brief. That's the way Don Wagner likes it. Marcia heard one of ‘em talking about Tiger Woods, and she was all over that. Somebody used the word “viral,” and Marcia didn’t understand that. She said she thought that “viral” things were “bad,” not “good.” She sported a quizzical expression. Suddenly, Tom Fuentes roared forth, “How about Home Schoolers!?” “From what I've seen,” he said, they are “excellent.” How odd to have a man who hates public education on the board of a community college district. IVC Prez Glenn Roquemore had spoken about some early college classes at local high schools, and that got Fuentes worried. How come these kids aren’t just taking online courses? he asked. Some are, said Glenn, but they’ve gotta get the principal’s permission. Yadda yadda. I stopped listening. Then: “Boundaries!” roared Fuentes. “We’ve got to keep boundaries!” He was referring to poaching done by some districts in other districts’ territories.

   

     Kumquats! There was a report concerning “opportunity for growth.” If we wanted to, said Gary P, we could grow 15%, but that would mean offering more courses, and it would be costly and deplete our Basic Aid bucks. We don’t receive any money from the state for growth, since, unlike everybody else, we’re on Basic Aid. Gary noted that the board, in its infinite wisdom, has decided not to pursue public bonds. That’s good, he seemed to say, ‘cause, owing to Basic Aid, we actually spend more per student than other districts do. I studied Fuentes’ face for tics or twitches. I studied the horizon for storm clouds. Gary said that the colleges want direction from the board concerning how to deal with this tension between building and maintaining good facilities (on the one hand) and offering more courses (on the other). The trustees started discussing the ongoing threats to our Basic Aid funding, which, up to now, has made us filthy freakin' rich. “Maybe we should circle the wagons,” said Fuentes, chewing on a hayseed. I’m not real sharp on fiscal issues, but I gather that the state might get out its six-shooters and plug our Basic Aid with led. Then they might pull a switcheroo on us and throw our local property tax money on a stagecoach for Sacramento. So our little SOCCCD posse was figuring out ways to thwart these varmints and head 'em off at the pass. I fell into a coma. Then Fuentes started yammering about how, maybe, we could have a summit of OC community college districts, and they could divvy-up online instruction. That is, Coast could do math, NOCCCD could do, say, underwater basket-weaving, and SOCCCD could do, like, writing and chemistry. “There’s no need for duplication,” declared Mr. Fuentes.He was staunch. Lang chimed in largely in agreement with Fuentes’ points about varmints and such. He noted that we’re about to spend shitloads of money on ATEP, and we gotta worry about that. And if we expand courses, what if we hit hard times? Can we sustain the level we’ve expanded to? It was right about then that Bill Jay woke up and started reminiscing about the old days, when, if a student in our area bolted for OCC, we’d have to send money up there for ‘im! I do believe that Nancy Padberg then rolled her eyes as though she were hearing the infernal bleatings of a dying mule. …to be continued.

Carona sunset?

IT COULD BE 5 TO 6 YEARS IN PRISON, $125,000 FINE FOR CARONA

Over at the OC Weekly website, Matt Coker reports that

R. Scott Moxley, reporting from the Santa Ana courthouse during an afternoon break, says the judge and lawyers for the defense and prosecution in Mike Carona's sentencing hearing on a felony corruption count, are talking about 63 to 78 months behind bars and a $125,000 fine for the man once dubbed "America's Sheriff."….

UPDATE:

• MAYBE THIS WILL WIPE SMUG LOOK OFF CARONA'S FACE: 5.5 YEARS, $125,000 FINE, THE SHAME OF AN ENTIRE COUNTY
• Carona gets 66 months in prison, $125,000 fine

Tonight's board meeting

The closed session commences at 5:00 p.m. and the open session is set to start at 6:00. (At Saddleback College: the Ronald Reagan room.)

The discussion items for tonight are (1) “Saddleback College and IVC and ATEP: Early College Program/K-12 Outreach” and (2) “Effect of Enrollment Growth on Basic Aid Funds.”

Mr. Sprite, Saturday night

The first general action item is “Faculty Association Academic Employee Master Agreement,” aka the faculty contract.

Oddly, given the discussion at last month’s meeting, another item offered for approval is “Award Printing of Class Schedules.”

It seems likely that, in the end, we will cease mailing out class schedules to all residents, opting to send small, cheap postcard reminders instead. (I’m just guessing, based on the buzz since the last board meeting.)

Pictured: the Tige, last night.

This grotesque past, this troubled present

• Sometimes I wonder whether common sense is worth a damn. My (alleged) common sense tells me to worry some about recent earthquake swarms to the north. See "Perilous fault might be causing quake swarm near O.C."

All this concentrated shakin’ tells me to hunker down. The OC Reg’s Science Dude says there’s no use worrying about earthquakes, though he also says that we'd better prepare for the Big One.

• In an odd spasm of, um, common sense, the leadership of some local churches has been preparing for the Big One: "O.C. churches team up."

Yeah, on Friday, the OC Reg reported that “more than 30 people” gathered to learn about preparedness.

30 people. (Closet agnostics, all of ‘em, I bet.)

• The Dude ("UCI finds racial bias in Internet dating") also reports on a UCI study about, well racial bias in Internet dating.

The two sociologists that conducted the study are quoted as saying,

“We argue that exclusion related to racialized images of masculinity and femininity, and shapes dating and marriage outcomes, and thus minority groups’ possibilities for full social incorporation.”

Please tell me that that sentence makes no sense. (A missing “is”?)

The missing verb is likely the Dude’s fault. But what about the hideous jargon? “Dating and marriage outcomes”? These outcomes are “shaped” by “exclusion,” I guess.

Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit (as Harry Truman used to say).

On the other hand, the female sociologist is photogenic.

• These sociologists’ shitty way of speaking reminds me that I’m still pissed off about Friday’s de facto slam of Strunk and White’s Elements of Style in the New York Times ("Happy Birthday, Strunk and White!").

Happy birthday? More like, “FU.”

• The OC Reg’s Rachanee Srisavasdi reports ("Carona") that former OC Sheriff Mike Carona “will be sentenced at 1:30 p.m. Monday by U.S. District Judge Andrew Guilford.”

Evidently, Judge Guilford can give "America's Sheriff" anything from probation to twenty years.

As you know, Carona believes in the Lord bigtime. When not making out with Russian bimbos or passing out deputy badges to morons, he does a lot of public praying and flag-pledging. He’s a typical right-wing OC politician: he’s pious and patriotic and corrupt, like his good pal and supporter SOCCCD trustee (and former OC GOP chair) Tom Fuentes, who, no doubt, will be at tomorrow night’s meeting of the SOCCCD board of trustees, praying and pledging and scheming and cheating. I can’t wait.

• Did you read Frank Rich’s column yesterday? (See "The Banality of Bush White House Evil.") Naturally, it's about torture, and it responds to new info about the Bushies' motives for their disastrous and dismal embrace of it.

It ends with:

Five years after the Abu Ghraib revelations, we must acknowledge that our government methodically authorized torture and lied about it. But we also must contemplate the possibility that it did so not just out of a sincere, if criminally misguided, desire to “protect” us but also to promote an unnecessary and catastrophic war. Instead of saving us from “another 9/11,” torture was a tool in the campaign to falsify and exploit 9/11 so that fearful Americans would be bamboozled into a mission that had nothing to do with Al Qaeda. The lying about Iraq remains the original sin from which flows much of the Bush White House’s illegality.

[Senate Armed Services Committee report chairman Carl] Levin suggests … that as additional fact-finding plays out, it’s time for the Justice Department to enlist a panel of two or three apolitical outsiders, perhaps retired federal judges, “to review the mass of material” we already have. The fundamental truth is there, as it long has been. The panel can recommend a legal path that will insure accountability for this wholesale betrayal of American values.

President Obama can talk all he wants about not looking back, but this grotesque past is bigger than even he is. It won’t vanish into a memory hole any more than Andersonville, World War II internment camps or My Lai. The White House, Congress and politicians of both parties should get out of the way. We don’t need another commission. We don’t need any Capitol Hill witch hunts. What we must have are fair trials that at long last uphold and reclaim our nation’s commitment to the rule of law.

• Meanwhile, Nick Kristof, a fellow well to Rich’s right, urges the institution of “an independent commission to investigate harsh treatment and tally its costs and benefits.” ("Time to Come Clean") He offers three reasons:

First, it could help forge a consensus against torture, for almost everyone in the national security world believes that the result would be a ringing affirmation that we should not torture….
…
Second, a commission could help restore America’s standing by distancing ourselves from past abuses. Alberto Mora, a former general counsel for the Navy, has said that some flag-rank officers believe that Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo constitute “the first and second identifiable causes of U.S. combat deaths in Iraq,” because they galvanized jihadis. An Air Force major and interrogator of prisoners who goes by the pseudonym Matthew Alexander told Harper’s Magazine that “hundreds but more likely thousands of American lives” were lost because of “the policy decision to introduce the torture and abuse of prisoners.”

Third, a commission could help counterterrorism efforts. Foreign governments have been wary of cooperating with us for fear of being tarnished by scandal. At home, Arab-American and Somali-American communities have been leery of reporting tips because they see the authorities as unjust and hostile to Muslims.

• I do hope our new President gets out of the way of our doing the right thing!

Republicans need to explain themselves

It’s odd, isn’t it? We are a people who believe in rights. We say that it is “self-evident” that all men are “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights".

But something's changed. Republicans, or most of 'em you hear from these days, seem to take the view that some of these rights are alienated in the case of humans who are also alleged terrorists.

Could you Republicans please explain to me how this works, logically? In particular, how does your position on torture square with how we, as a nation, have tended to approach torture in the last century or so?

About five months ago, Evan Wallach, a judge and a former JAG wrote a piece for the Washington Post entitled “Waterboarding Used to Be a Crime." There, he notes that the media usually describe waterboarding as “simulated drowning.” According to Wallach,

That's incorrect. To be effective, waterboarding is usually real drowning that simulates death. That is,

the victim experiences the sensations of drowning: struggle, panic, breath-holding, swallowing, vomiting, taking water into the lungs and, eventually, the same feeling of not being able to breathe that one experiences after being punched in the gut. The main difference is that the drowning process is halted. According to those who have studied waterboarding's effects, it can cause severe psychological trauma, such as panic attacks, for years.

Wallach notes that the U.S. convicted several Japanese soldiers for using this technique on prisoners of war. Evidently, it was called the “water cure”:

After Japan surrendered, the United States organized and participated in the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, generally called the Tokyo War Crimes Trials. Leading members of Japan's military and government elite were charged, among their many other crimes, with torturing Allied military personnel and civilians. The principal proof upon which their torture convictions were based was conduct that we would now call waterboarding.
…
As a result of such accounts, a number of Japanese prison-camp officers and guards were convicted of torture that clearly violated the laws of war. They were not the only defendants convicted in such cases. As far back as the U.S. occupation of the Philippines after the 1898 Spanish-American War, U.S. soldiers were court-martialed for using the "water cure" to question Filipino guerrillas.

Wallach describes more recent judicial events in the U.S., including a civil action

brought by several Filipinos seeking damages against the estate of former Philippine president Ferdinand Marcos. The plaintiffs claimed they had been subjected to torture, including water torture. The court awarded $766 million in damages, noting in its findings that "the plaintiffs experienced human rights violations including, but not limited to . . . the water cure, where a cloth was placed over the detainee's mouth and nose, and water producing a drowning sensation."

Then there’s this case:

In 1983, federal prosecutors charged a Texas sheriff and three of his deputies with violating prisoners' civil rights…. The complaint alleged that the officers conspired to "subject prisoners to a suffocating water torture ordeal in order to coerce confessions. This generally included the placement of a towel over the nose and mouth of the prisoner and the pouring of water in the towel until the prisoner began to move, jerk, or otherwise indicate that he was suffocating and/or drowning."

Wallach notes that the “four defendants were convicted, and the sheriff was sentenced to 10 years in prison.”

OK, Mr. and Mrs. Republican. Were we wrong in embracing this series of judgments? Were we wrong to suppose that waterboarding is torture and that it is a violation of human or natural rights? Were we wrong in embracing a regard for persons, all persons, such that there are things that should not be done to them, including torture?

If not, please explain how this all works.

There is a fascinating discussion of torture in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: The Moral Justification for Legalised and Institutionalised Torture . It ends with:

So torture warrants are highly undesirable, indeed a threat to liberal democratic institutions. Moreover, torture warrants are unnecessary. As has been argued above, there may well be one-off emergencies in which the use of torture is morally justifiable. In those cases, the relevant public officials must bite the bullet and do what is morally required, e.g. torture the terrorist to save thousands of innocent people. In such an emergency, the military or police officers involved will need to break the law on this one occasion. But in itself this is a small price to pay; and a price the police, the military and the politicians have shown themselves only too willing to pay in situations that are far from emergencies.

One final matter. What should be done to the military officer, police officer, or other public official who tortures the terrorist if — after saving the city — their crime is discovered? Quite clearly he (or she) should resign or be dismissed from their position; public institutions cannot suffer among their ranks those who commit serious crimes. Further, the public official in question must be tried, convicted, and sentenced for committing the crime of torture. Obviously, there are (to say the least) mitigating circumstances, and the sentence should be commuted to, say, one day in prison. Would public officials be prepared to act to save thousands of innocent lives, if they knew they might lose their job and/or suffer some minor punishment? Presumably many would. But if not, is it desirable to set up a legalised torture chamber and put these people in charge of it?

This kind of position will be familiar to philosophers who have long discussed the so-called problem of "dirty hands." It focuses on extraordinary situations in which an indecent act seems in some sense to become morally necessary. To suppose that such events can occur and that, when they occur, persons in authority should do the indecent thing--with appropriate regret--is interesting and plausible.

Is this what Republicans are talking about in the case of torture in our "war on terror"? That would at least make some kind of sense. It could bring coherence where, prima facie, there is none.

But it means that the people who ordered the torture must be convicted and punished. They must accept this as necessary.

Right?

Please explain.

For an enlightening discussion of the (complex and controversial) concept of rights, see the article in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Shep ain't so bad, I guess

Of all the "personalities" on Fox, the only one I just can't figure out is Shepherd Smith. I dunno. He just seems like a nice guy.

But he's on Fox, and so I don't often watch him.

And now he turns up droppin' the F-bomb while condemning the use of torture! (Click below.)

Hey, maybe he is a good guy after all. Go Shep!



Here's the Huffington Post's story:

Shepard Smith Uncensored: "We Are America, We Do Not F**king Torture!"

Fox News viewers witnessed a rather incredible scene on Wednesday as anchor Shepard Smith and Fox contributor Judith Miller (of CIA leak infamy) repeatedly and passionately condemned torture, with Smith declaring at one point, "We are America, we don't torture! And the moment that is not the case, I want off the train! This government is of, by, and for the people -- that means it's mine. That means -- I'm not saying what is torture, and what is not torture, but I'm saying, whatever it is, you don't do it for me! I want off the train when the government starts -- I want off, next stop, now!"

The full segment is worth a watch. And Smith felt strongly enough about the issue to speak out about it again as he was heading into commercial break.

"They better not do it," he said. "If we are going to be Ronald Reagan's Shining City on the Hill, we don't get to torture. We don't do it." Fade to black.

Professions for Women

That time has arrived in the semester when Rebel Girl commences to meditate upon the most canonical texts in her pedagogical repertory – Dr. Martin Luther King, Thomas Jefferson, Malcolm X and Virginia Woolf. She loves this quartet and has a giggle imagining them applying to teach at the little college in the orange groves.

Students, for the most part, recognize all these figures, though in a kind of cartoony way: Martin "I Have a Dream" King; Thomas "All Men are Created Equal" Jefferson; Malcolm "By Any Means Necessary" X and lately, Virginia "That Crazy Woman Played by Nicole Kidman" Woolf.

As these students work through the texts, Rebel Girl is consistently stunned at their optimism. So much has changed, the students assure her. It's all better now. King's dream has been realized. We are all equal. Malcolm was a movie and a hip-hop message. The angel in the house which so haunted Virginia Woolf has been defeated.

Rebel Girl is not so sure.

She hears things. Voices. Those stories which come to her. Like Woolf, the birds outside Reb's office window chirp in Greek. Reb studied Greek for one summer but found the Aegean and romance more attractive. Still, she can pick out some phrases here and there. The little college birds are urgent. When they speak, she listens, pulls out her dictionary and begins to translate.

What she has learned from her feathered friends prompts her to pose some questions:

Should membership in organizations disqualify one from employment as an instructor in public institutions of higher education?

Should one list those memberships on one's resume when applying for employment as an instructor?

Should the administrators who interview applicants for such a position ask after such affiliations and allow such affiliations to be part of their judgment?

Say, for example, if Virginia Woolf applied for a such a position and listed among her professional affiliations the Women's Service League or, say, the National Organization for Women, should that be reason for the administrators who sit in judgment upon her to disqualify her?

Little birds and students. The ghosts of writers who most likely would never, ever be hired as teachers at the community college in the orange groves.

Imagine the political affiliations of say, a Dr. King or a Thomas Jefferson or a Malcolm X. Those fellas belonged to some pretty radical organizations.

And Virginia Woolf? Well. Wasn't she married to a Jew who helped found the League of Nations? And she herself, a feminist? Can't have one of those. No. Not here.

"Even when the path is nominally open—when there is nothing to prevent a woman from being a doctor, a lawyer, a civil servant—there are many phantoms and obstacles, as I believe, looming in her way," declared Virginia Woolf in 1931 to the members of The Women's Service League.

She was right.

Rebel Girl's Poetry Corner: "its morning finding the first time"

Earlier this week, the poet W.S. Merwin was awarded his second Pulitzer Prize for the collection, The Shadow of Sirius —some 38 years after he won his first Pulitzer for The Carrier of Ladders.


Here's a poem from his 2007 collection, Present Company. It seems just right for today even if it is still April, not quite May.


To This May

They know so much more now about
the heart we are told but the world
still seems to come one at a time
one day one year one season and here
it is spring once more with its birds
nesting in the holes in the walls
its morning finding the first time
its light pretending not to move
always beginning as it goes

Former Abu Ghraib commander is seriously pissed

...and no wonder.

Remember those “Jesus glasses”?

In today's OC Register: Anti-Christian teacher lawsuit to be decided soon

A federal judge is expected to rule any day now on whether a high school history teacher accused of disparaging Christians in class violated the First Amendment and should be disciplined.

Capistrano Valley High School teacher James Corbett, a 36-year educator, was sued in December 2007 by sophomore Chad Farnan for purportedly promoting hostility toward Christians and advocating "irreligion over religion" in violation of the First Amendment's establishment clause.
…
The case now centers on just two statements attributed to Corbett in his college-level Advanced Placement European history course – one in which he may have referred to Creationism as "superstitious, religious nonsense" and another in which he may have characterized religion as being "invented when the first con man met the first fool."
…
[I]n an April 3 tentative ruling, [U.S. District Judge James] Selna dismissed all but two of the statements as either not directly referring to religion or as being appropriate in the context of a class lecture, including the headline-grabbing "When you put on your Jesus glasses, you can't see the truth."….

IVC: "earth day" miscellany

It was "Earth Day" at Irvine Valley College.

Pretty festive, I guess.

The kid at right didn't think much of the vegan cookies, and he hadn't even tried 'em!

These kids seemed to be sellin' grumpiness.

Well, no, they were nice. And their signs were colorful.

There was some kind of "travel abroad" program at one table. I looked at the pricey brochures. I told the girl that I'd like to visit New Zealand. Someday.

The IVC library is photogenic, inside and out.

Fancy-schmancy, I say. I wanted to slide down that banister.

I didn't.

On the toll road interchange, lookin' south. This image captures the Zeitgeist. I want to set up a lemon-aide stand on this spot, tempting Hummer drivers with the refreshing beverage.

Workers in the fields, just down the road from the college. I wonder what they think of Earth Day?

I snuck up on these two in the library. "Click."

Today is a big day for the district's ambitious ATEP initiative because the five-year period that started in 2004 is at long last over.

Now we wait to see if the City of Tustin will give our efforts their official okey-dokey. Or not.

Does anybody remember what happened on April 28th, 1997? Hint: a day that will live in infamy.

(Of course, if nobody remembers, then I guess the day failed to live in infamy.)

The spirit of the clock tower

Irvine Valley College once had a clock tower. It was a good clock tower, as clock towers go. But some of its timber was rotten.

So they tore it down.

We managed to rescue the clock’s hands. That’s all that’s left. Plus our memories.

The clock tower is gone. But the spirit of the clock tower survives.

Here are some pictures that the Reb and I took today around campus and inside the new BSTIC building.

The A-quad: somebody told us that they put this slab of concrete "right on top of the bricks."

"So the bricks are OK," he said.

"Oh."

SEE

• The replacement clock tower adventure
• How to replace a landmark
• His vision

(Just a little humor mostly.)

LATE NEWS:

• JOHN YOO STARS IN A MOST CIVILIZED DEBATE ON TORTURE: The big debate today at Chapman University. (Matt Coker gives us the blow-by-blow in OC Weekly.)
• Bush lawyer defends waterboarding in local debate: John Yoo, whose memos justified controversial interrogation tactics, defends the practices during a Chapman University debate. (Martin Wisckol in the Reg.)

Outdoor sculpture invitational