Month: March 2015

A friend directed me to a recent article about school suspensions and their effectiveness. The author, Ashley Nicole Black, began as follows:

“When I was in high school, I was almost suspended twice. Bad to the bone trouble maker that I was, the first time was for being late to ‘zero period”’(the optional early morning class for honors students) more than five times in one semester (I literally lived on the wrong side of the tracks and would get stuck behind long trains on my way to school). And the second time was for a stash of “drugs” that fell out of my backpack in front of a teacher. I carry pain pills on me at all times because I’ve always gotten debilitating migraines. So when a bottle fell out of my bag a teacher took pity on me and didn’t report me… doing me a big favor because I went to a zero-tolerance school where I would have been expelled for a bottle of aspirin.”

So today’s students are disciplined for tardiness and Tylenol. I get it. I get that schools need standards. I simply question how we measure.

One of the trends of the past decade, for example, is to eradicate bullying. Bullying is bad — no more celebration of “bad, bad, Leroy Brown.”

Campaigns have existed. Many have stood and cheered at their onset… The Bully Project… The National Bullying Prevention Center… Stop bullying now! I agree. I have cheered as well; there is no place for the aggressive, intimidating behavior that is intended to make another person feel lesser because of who they are. There’s just one, small, but still huge problem…

In the evolving, litigious society in which we live — in a culture that rarely, willingly cedes vengeance to the divine — we like to take things into our own hands (… stop it now, remember?). Please hear me; bullying should not be allowed in any form. But we are challenged in authentic discernment of the bullying, because we are not always fully capable of discerning the heart of another. We often examine only the external factors or behaviors, making judgments and decisions completely from them — because measuring the heart is hard… measuring motive might be errant. And so we arrogantly justify making judgments solely on the external. I think that’s dangerous. I think that’s also a gaping pitfall for even the seemingly most intelligent.

Several years ago, one of my three sons was suspended from school for two days. He had said something inappropriate to another and then shoved the elementary student strongly. My son was the agitator and completely in the wrong. (Tangent note: it’s ok to admit when our kids are wrong.) Because my son’s physical behavior was (1) a repeated offense, (2) accompanied by a verbal threat, and (3) because he aggressively attempted to dominate another student, suspension under the school’s bullying policy was considered. All incidents which meet such criteria are treated the same way.

I’ll say it again: I get it. There’s just one problem; this was my son with Down syndrome.

Now let me briefly offer two relevant side notes. Just because my son is deemed by society as “special” does not qualify him for sainthood; he, like every other thriving young man does some things well and some things not. He is just as in need of discipline as you and me. That means when he makes a mistake in my absence at school, the teachers and administrators will have my full support; we’re in this together.

My frustration, though, was not with the suspension — Josh deserved it. My frustration was the suspension possibly falling under the bullying policy. Bullying implies an internal intent — yet we as a society aren’t good at measuring the internal. We think we are; we make judgments off of the external instead because it’s far easier. The challenge is that man cannot fully judge the heart. We have blindly lost sight of that reality.

We live in a society which likes to think we know it all. In my opinion, that equates to failing to recognize that only a one, true God has the omniscience we subtly proclaim. If we recognized that reality — that judging the internal is not something of which we are fully capable — we’d be more comfortable with the subjective, less judging of the external, and be ok with tardiness and Tylenol.

Respectfully…

AR

For years many encouraged this former HR director to be a graphic designer. I could see things and draw them with ease, often adding that clever, artistic touch. Despite the consistent encouragement, I instead pursued a management career.

Later there was one of those “seasons in life” when I thought, “I could do that… I could be a graphic designer, too…” I even set up my own design company — working with multiple clients — corporate and individual — designing logos, storyboards, even complete marketing campaigns. It was fulfilling and fun, and many even raved at my work. There was one problem: it was never quite my actual “gift.” It wasn’t my deepest passion. While I could do it, I wasn’t certain that I should.

Yes, I could accomplish the tasks and do the job. I was able to create some fascinating designs, but there was something more — something deeper within me… something laborious… something that just didn’t flow as naturally… something that was more work than talent… more strain than strength, and more burdensome than actual brilliance.

Then it dawned on me. As much I was able to fulfill the role of a graphic designer, it wasn’t my “gift”; it wasn’t something where all flowed naturally…

• … like the highly intelligent doctor with a rude bedside manner…
• … like the articulate preacher who can’t selflessly relate to the persons in the pew…
• … or like the salesman for whom cold calling is especially uncomfortable.

Maybe they want to be a doctor, preacher, or salesman, but the necessary skill set may not be completely compatible with their actual gifts.

It’s part of what I observe in Hillary Clinton — a person who seemingly, strongly desires to be President, but yet seems so calculated and uncomfortable handling conflict. It’s what I saw evolving in former VP candidate, Sarah Palin — just a repeated awkwardness in moments of significant limelight. It’s the same awkwardness I’ve observed manifest in varied forms within Al Gore, Rick Perry, and Ron Paul, for example. While each possesses a credible resume (even from varied parties), there’s something within them that makes me question whether they also possess the actual “gifting” necessary for the job.

One of the Intramuralist’s long habits has been reading varied biographies. From athletes to politicians — from Ronald Reagan and Zell Miller to George Stephanopolous and Louie Zamperini. One of my favorite biographical reads in recent years, no less, is that of Condoleezza Rice.

Condi Rice has an incredibly impressive resume. She became the first black, female and youngest provost of Stanford University at the age of 38. She later became the National Security Advisor and then Secretary of State. She is considered an expert on Soviet and Eastern European affairs. Prior to each of those accomplishments, however, Rice had long planned on pursuing a professional music career; she is an exceptional pianist — even playing Mozart with the Denver Symphony at age 15. But Rice realized something fairly early on.

As shared by the New York Times: “At 17, she attended the prestigious summer school at the Aspen Music Festival in Colorado and came to believe that though she was a very good pianist, she was ‘not great,’ she said. ‘That was really the revelation,’ she added. ‘And it wasn’t just that experience. You start noticing prodigies, and you realize that I’m never going to play that way.’ There is ‘just some intangible’ in music, she said. Whatever it was, she said she felt she didn’t have it. She decided to major in international relations instead…”

There is just some intangible. I call that a gift… something that comes more naturally — less laborious… more talent than work… more strength than strain… an obvious, innate ability.

Just because we can do something, doesn’t mean we should. Just because we are good at something, doesn’t mean we’re gifted. My sense is we each function best when using our gifts.

Respectfully…

AR

So today it’s exceptionally tempting to talk about the plethora of games currently being played. Lest I be unclear, “games” such as…

1. Hillary’s uncanny defense of a private email account.
2. The rhetorical ping pong between the Executive and Legislative branches on who has the constitutional authority to negotiate foreign treaties. Or…
3. How (un)pleased the administration is with Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu winning a 4th term…

Oh, the games people play.

Sometimes, it seems, with all due respect, intelligence doesn’t extinguish the game-playing; it only makes us use bigger words when we play. Hence, let’s instead focus on the onset of this year’s “madness” — moving from the hardheartedness of Washington to the hardwood of NCAA basketball. After all, there are so many diverse entities and aspects to focus on…

From the perennial Tigers and Bears to multiple Bruins and Bulldogs… From the Utes, Rams, and Ducks — while I continue to ponder the ease of a duck playing basketball…

I wonder, too, what exactly a Hoosier is — although perhaps others would wonder about my precious, beloved Boilermakers (… Boiler up… always… wait… aren’t Boilermakers actually still Hoosiers?)

From Cavaliers to Chanticleers, excellent names abound, as arguably evident in those intimidating Anteaters out of UC Irvine.

Shockers will shock. Lumberjacks will lumber. Tell me: what does the color Crimson do?

We’d be amiss not to mention the Great Danes from Albany or Xavier’s far more than three Musketeers. There are also Friars and Flyers and Mustangs and Mountaineers.

For the record, Terrapins are turtles, and the Irish are one of the seemingly few allowed to keep “Fighting” in their name.

Too bad, though, that Manhattan’s Jaspers were ousted in “The First Four,” the NCAA’s catchy play-in game system (note: see “NCAA Attempt to Make More Money”). We still, though, have North Florida’s Ospreys to root for. Go Ospreys, go.

 (Oh, wait… they lost in that money making attempt, too… dang it…)

Of course, we have our more familiar Buckeyes and Badgers, Cardinals and Cowboys, along with those Sooners and Spartans. Don’t forget the Bearcats and Blue Devils, Colonials and Crusaders, in addition to the Razorbacks and Red Storm. Perhaps neither will be bested by any Terrier or Tarheel — or even Aztec or Aggie (… uh… what really is an “Aggie”?).

So there’s no Dasher or Dancer but still Panthers and Pirates… Eagles and Rebels… also, on Cyclones, Huskies, and Leopards — not to omit the blossoming Beta fraternity, represented by the Bulls, Bison, Blazers, and Broncos. 

Don’t forget the birds — the Hawkeyes and Jayhawks — nor the wilder Cougars, Longhorns, or Valvano-less Wolfpack. It’s inspiring how NC State legend, Jim Valvano, still makes so many of us smile.

Wait… did I neglect the Wildcats? Far more eyes than super fan Ashely Judd are on those ‘Cats from Kentucky, although Wildcats also freely roam from Arizona, Davidson, and Villanova. Go ‘Cats, go (… good thing they’re not playing the Ospreys…).

Oh, the games people play.

Respectfully…

AR

The Intramuralist posted last week that they don’t care if Hillary Clinton used only a private, personal email server during her entire tenure as Secretary of State.

But I do. Here’s why….

I want to know what happened during Benghazi.

Four American diplomats lost their lives on September 11, 2012. They had requested additional security measures, and those requests were denied. Then the President and the Secretary of State advanced a cockamamie story about this being about some YouTube video rather than a preplanned assault by a group affiliated with al-Qaeda. The Secretary even made reference to “an awful Internet video” at the victims’ funeral. And we are to believe that the Secretary never sent any emails during this incident?

I want to know about foreign donations.

The Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation accepted millions of dollars in donations from seven foreign governments while Hillary was in charge of United States foreign policy as Secretary of State. The countries are Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Algeria and Brunei. Sure, the foundation does some good work. But these countries have never heard of the Red Cross? I’ll bet emails from these countries were deemed “personal Foundation business” and not subject to State Department retention.

No one should be their own judge and jury.

In allegedly coming clean, two years later than the law required her to do so, allowing Hillary herself to delete who knows how many emails, she still didn’t turn them all over. There were 62,320 emails on her personal server. She only turned over 30,490, and she says she deleted the rest. Who decided which emails were State Department business? She did. Or her closest inner circle of staff and lawyers. No independent verification. “I fully complied with every rule I was governed by,” simply by her own declaration.

Are we really to believe that more than half of the Secretary of State’s email was personal?

She insults our intelligence.

Her alleged reason for keeping her email system off the grid as Secretary of State was “for convenience…. I thought it would be easier just to carry one device.”

Except I only carry one device, and I have separate work and personal email accounts on that one device. That sure was a whole lot more “convenient” than setting up my own personal server to run all of my email.

And just last month, when asked in an interview if she prefers iPhone or Android, Hillary responded, “I have an iPad, a mini iPad, an iPhone, and a Blackberry.”

Hmmm. More than one device.

There has to be more to the story.

Hillary could easily have made this whole story go away. Walk into that press conference carrying the physical server itself. Tell everyone she made a mistake in setting up her own email server, but she doesn’t have any secrets. Hand over the server and ask an independent third party to review it in its entirety to make sure the State Department obtained everything the law requires and that national security has not been compromised.

Except she didn’t do that. She deemed riding out this controversy as preferable to coming 100% clean.

She must be hiding something.

And it must be big.

– Guest Contributor