[Changleen]

So 66-odd percent of you still have some kind of grasp on reality in one way at least:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-sell15jan15,0,4757974.story?coll=la-headlines-world

Skepticism at Home Threatens Bush's Vision
Americans like the idea of spreading democracy; they just don't believe it will work, polls show.

By Tyler Marshall, Times Staff Writer

WASHINGTON — Nearly a year after President Bush declared that America had to push the boundaries of democracy in the Middle East and elsewhere to assure the survival of its own freedom, his initiative has met with stiff resistance abroad.

But the real Achilles' heel of Bush's grand vision may lie in a lack of support at home.

A task that Bush has called "the concentrated work of generations" requires enough backing both in Congress and in the general population to carry the idea beyond Bush's own presidency, U.S. foreign policy specialists argue.

To succeed, Bush needs the kind of solid, unchallenged backing the nation gave over four decades to the strategy of containing the Soviet Union and its allies, said Steven A. Cook, a leading expert on democracy in the Middle East who directed a recent study for the New York city-based Council on Foreign Relations.

"There needs to be the same agreement on political change in the Middle East," Cook said.

By most accounts, Bush has a long way to go.

Bush said last January in his second inaugural address that U.S. policy was "to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture."

Opinion polls indicate Americans are not averse to Bush's idea. They just don't think it can work. Only one-third of Americans believe expanding democracy in the Middle East is a good idea that can succeed, according to a survey published in November by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press in Washington. The rest either consider it a bad idea or think it stands no chance of success.

"There's almost no evidence the public, even Bush's strongest supporters, have embraced or are enthusiastic about spreading democracy," said Andrew Kohut, Pew center executive director.

Kohut described public support among Americans for the idea as about the same today as it was a decade ago. It's not hard to understand why.

In a world awash in anti-American sentiment, the administration's push to promote democracy abroad has brought new electoral influence to Islamist parties in the Middle East and to other groups elsewhere holding anti-U.S. views.

Just as problematic for Bush are the hurdles at home. He has been so focused on halting the erosion of public support for the Iraq war that once-frequent promotion of democratic advances, including references to countries such as Ukraine, Georgia, Lebanon and Egypt, have been omitted from his recent speeches.

And with Washington sharply divided on partisan lines, promotion of democracy remains closely associated with Bush personally in the public mind.

"When he goes, it will go," predicted a senior administration official who declined to be quoted by name because of the sensitivity of the issue. "We haven't sold the policy as well as we should have."

Bush's initiative faces other hurdles, such as possible failure in Iraq and a growing public resistance to extending the United States' global commitments beyond Iraq.

Despite all this, some moderate Republicans and Democrats in Congress are eager to embrace the core of Bush's view that greater political freedom enhances stability and thus reduces the potential dangers to the nation.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Rep. Tom Lantos (D-San Mateo), the senior Democrat on the House International Relations Committee, last year introduced a bill that would make promoting democracy a fundamental component of U.S. foreign policy. The bill was passed by the House in August and is awaiting action by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, where its chances are viewed as good.

"On a bipartisan basis, there are enough of us in Congress to keep this idea going," Lantos said in an interview.

Lantos added, however, that expectations must be reduced.

"The use of the term 'democracy' must undergo a dramatic transformation in dealing with countries like Iraq, Afghanistan or many other countries in the world," he said. "No one who is rational would expect to see Jeffersonian democracy in the short run.

"When you define the goal in more realistic terms — less brutality, fewer killings, fewer gulags, a society that's somewhat more open and tolerant — that's not just a plausible long-term policy, but the only long-term policy for the United States."

Still, Bush's ability to build a lasting consensus for his democracy initiative remains unclear. In the recent congressional fight over renewing the Patriot Act and a debate over electronic surveillance, Bush's political instincts have been more to push back than reach out.

"He needs to reach out more to Democrats to actively solicit and foster the kind of bipartisanship that we had in the Cold War," said Larry Diamond, an expert on democracy development at Stanford University's Hoover Institution who served as a senior advisor in the now-defunct Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq. "If he tries to involve Democrats, gives them a sense of ownership with what we are doing on these kinds of policies, I think he'll have success."

Diamond and other specialists also believe Bush must do more to involve allies. Americans tend to be more supportive of U.S. involvement overseas when traditional partners are involved.

The European Union runs a parallel democracy promotion program for the Middle East, and many Europeans resent pressure to join the U.S.-sponsored counterpart.

"We're doing the same thing, working in the same areas, so don't ask us to use our checkbook twice," said a Washington-based European diplomat who declined to be identified by name or nationality because of the subject's sensitivity.

Tamara Wittes, a research fellow at the Brookings Institution's Saban Center for Middle East Policy in Washington, faults Bush for trying to sell democracy more as a tool for moderating extremist behavior than for stabilizing nations.

"By emphasizing the argument that this changes the way people think, that people won't want to blow up Americans, you could envision support for the democracy agenda collapsing in another terrorist attack," she said. "When you're talking about making a generational effort vulnerable to one attack, I don't think it can work."

 

[narlus]

57% of american adults can't name a single current Supreme Court justice.

 

[JRogers]

Imagine how dumb the average American is.....half are dumber than that....

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

Imagine how dumb the average American is.....half are dumber than that....

that´d be the median american, sir.

 

[ohio]

that´d be the median american, sir.

average is a generic term that can mean median or mean.

 

[MudGrrl]

57% of american adults can't name a single current Supreme Court justice.

but on a positive note, they know when American Idol is on!



yes, these are the people who are shaping the future...

 

[fluff]

average is a generic term that can mean median or mean.

I think there's at least one more kind of average, but whilst we're being pedantic Alex has correctly indentified the correct average.

 

[greg447]

I like the way Europe handles education, you take a test in 7th grade which determines what kind of school you go to,tech, college e.t.c i believe we need to do something liek that here in the U.S rather then wasting time on kids that dont apreciate or put effort into school.

 

[fluff]

I like the way Europe handles education, you take a test in 7th grade which determines what kind of school you go to,tech, college e.t.c i believe we need to do something liek that here in the U.S rather then wasting time on kids that dont apreciate or put effort into school.

That's a bit of a sweeping generalisation of the 'European' school system. In the UK most children remain in the 'comprehensive' (non-selective) school system.

 

[greg447]

Thats true also

 

[Tenchiro]

57% of american adults can't name a single current Supreme Court justice.

Judge Judy is one, right?

 

[fluff]

Judge Judy is one, right?

And Judge Dredd?

 

[sanjuro]

I would think 51% of Americans are idiots...

... the ones that voted Bush into office.

 

[ohio]

I think there's at least one more kind of average, but whilst we're being pedantic Alex has correctly indentified the correct average.

Come on, no one uses mode.

Anyway, to the point about the European (or at leat the UK) school system. What makes it effective is NOT weeding out the low-aptitude/unmotivated ones; in fact, I'd argue that process cuts too much talent out of the pool. What is extremely effective is having selective schools and programs available at non-fee-based schools. Similar to Bronx Science and Stuyvesant in New York, these schools make top-notch education/opportunity available to the brightest students in the public system. I spent a year of highschool at Dartford Grammar School (a selective but free school) in England, and can say the quality and rigor of the program rivals or exceeds that of the best colleges and universities in the US.

 

[fluff]

Come on, no one uses mode.

Anyway, to the point about the European (or at leat the UK) school system. What makes it effective is NOT weeding out the low-aptitude/unmotivated ones; in fact, I'd argue that process cuts too much talent out of the pool. What is extremely effective is having selective schools and programs available at non-fee-based schools. Similar to Bronx Science and Stuyvesant in New York, these schools make top-notch education/opportunity available to the brightest students in the public system. I spent a year of highschool at Dartford Grammar School (a selective but free school) in England, and can say the quality and rigor of the program rivals or exceeds that of the best colleges and universities in the US.

I use mode....

It's a odd mix at present in the UK. Where I live you get the choice of selective or comprehensive. The comprehensive runs an academic stream which is probably a better bet for many than scraping into the Grammar. Bit of a tough decision for some parents.

 

[Changleen]

I went to Grammar school.

 

[fluff]

I went to Grammar school.

Nicking stuff in the evenings doesn't count.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

Come on, no one uses mode.

Anyway, to the point about the European (or at leat the UK) school system. What makes it effective is NOT weeding out the low-aptitude/unmotivated ones; in fact, I'd argue that process cuts too much talent out of the pool. What is extremely effective is having selective schools and programs available at non-fee-based schools. Similar to Bronx Science and Stuyvesant in New York, these schools make top-notch education/opportunity available to the brightest students in the public system. I spent a year of highschool at Dartford Grammar School (a selective but free school) in England, and can say the quality and rigor of the program rivals or exceeds that of the best colleges and universities in the US.

i dont think the issue is the "Uk model" being more effective than the american because it allows for smarter kids to learn more.

but that the american system gives too much freedom too soon, which makes the lazy ones, and the ones without much parental tutoring go for easy classes, skip whatever might drop their gpa...
if you allow kids that young, dodge sciences and other important stuff based on convenience/lazyness, good things cannot happen from that.

 

[Changleen]

I agree. You shouldn't be allowed to drop any of the sciences, geography, English, or Maths until at least 16.

 

[I Are Baboon]

Judge Judy is one, right?

And Judge Dredd?

Plus there's that dude who killed a guy with a Coke bottle.

 

[fluff]

Plus there's that dude who killed a guy with a Coke bottle.

Judge Rheinhold?

 

[fluff]

I agree. You shouldn't be allowed to drop any of the sciences, geography, English, or Maths until at least 16.

I dropped geography at fourteen. I think that's why I had to find myself in my thirties.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

I dropped geography at fourteen. I think that's why I had to find myself in my thirties.

hmm, i didnt know you were that fat....

 

[fluff]

hmm, i didnt know you were that fat....

Personal growth. There's a lot of it about.

 

[I Are Baboon]

Judge Rheinhold?

No. Mike Judge.

 

[ohio]

but that the american system gives too much freedom too soon, which makes the lazy ones, and the ones without much parental tutoring go for easy classes, skip whatever might drop their gpa...
if you allow kids that young, dodge sciences and other important stuff based on convenience/lazyness, good things cannot happen from that.

I don't know what you're talking about. There's mandatory curriculum in all public school systems I know of straight through middle school (i.e. until age 14).

There are numberous ways to slip through the cracks, and lots of things wrong with the US school system, but that is not one of them.

 

[Radarr]

I would think 51% of Americans are idiots...

... the ones that voted Bush into office.

You have to count the other 48% that voted for Kerry, too. I think that brings the total to somewhere around 99%...

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

I don't know what you're talking about. There's mandatory curriculum in all public school systems I know of straight through middle school (i.e. until age 14).

There are numberous ways to slip through the cracks, and lots of things wrong with the US school system, but that is not one of them.

am talking about high school. the last 4 years of school.

anything you learn before 14 is pretty shallow and extremely basic. i dont think the liberties allowed in HS allow for moderate understanding of things beyond the very basic middle school... HS is where a lot of stuff that should be taught, is not required. what you learn in elementary and middle school is really not enough to have an educated general population. so i think that is out of question.

take for example, OK HS requirements.. 3 units of science. thats like 1 science class for 3 semesters... 3 maths? 3 social sciences??? thats very little..

my hs was a british one, i had (equivalent into semesters, mine were in years) 4 mandatory units of physics alone. all the way up to pre-cal was mandatory, i ended up speaking english fluently (at least enough to go to college in the US) . while the requirements i had are not average around here, nor i think they should be extended..
a lot of that i wouldnt have been exposed if i had been in an american school with few "hard" classes required.

i think the american high school system allows for too much freedom that allows kids 14-18 dodge stuff that should be mandatory.

3 mandatory units of science (in the case of OK) is just too little.

on the other hand, am not saying that it should be expected that every kid shoulld grasp cal based physics in high school.. but i think they all should be at least exposed to knowledge deeper than 3 (combined!) science classes.

 

[Changleen]

At 15 (pre GCSE), to get a good grade at my school I had to know:

Maths: Integration and differentation of quadratic functions, multiplication of matrices, functions of Logs.

French: Written technical and spoken conversational French with actual french people including basic slang.

Physics: Advanced atomic and basic sub-atomic particle physics.

Biology: The complete structure and workings of most common plant and animal cells

Chemistry: Can't really remember, I remember doing a bunch of organic chemistry that was frickin hard.

Technology: Use of lathes, 3D CNC, forges, etc.

My school expected everyone to get As in national qualifications. We mostly did.

Granted my school was pretty good, but I am still shocked at the amount of nothing younger kids seem to know. I have direct experience of this in the UK, an it seems from what you are saying here that a similar problem exists in the US.

 

[pterodactyl]

Who cares about Europe...they suck, they can't even figure out how to clean their own teeth in England.

Intelligence has nothing to do with geography.

There used to be a guy named Mike Judge that also used to sing for a straight edge NYC hardcore band in the 80's called Judge.

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

At 15 (pre GCSE), to get a good grade at my school I had to know:

Maths: Integration and differentation of quadratic functions, multiplication of matrices, functions of Logs.

French: Written technical and spoken conversational French with actual french people including basic slang.

Physics: Advanced atomic and basic sub-atomic particle physics.

Biology: The complete structure and workings of most common plant and animal cells

Chemistry: Can't really remember, I remember doing a bunch of organic chemistry that was frickin hard.

Technology: Use of lathes, 3D CNC, forges, etc.

My school expected everyone to get As in national qualifications. We mostly did.

Granted my school was pretty good, but I am still shocked at the amount of nothing younger kids seem to know. I have direct experience of this in the UK, an it seems from what you are saying here that a similar problem exists in the US.

holy chit!
most of those things i didnt know until i was a junior in college...

 

[Changleen]

Like I said it was a good school, and I also did 16-18 there, equally demanding, so I also coasted through my first and second year of Uni, waiting for people to 'catch up'. By that time I was so drunk and stoned most of the time the 3rd year was a real shock to the system. Being far ahead has up and downsides. I can really not remeber **** about the maths, but I seem to remember more of the French these days for some reason.

Edit: On the down side for the school, I had to wear a royal purple blazer and tie.

 

[fluff]

Guess this woman is part of the other third:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/23/phone_throat/

Quote:

We've all been there. Your spouse or loved one drives you to the breaking point, and you have no other choice than to swallow his cell phone.

A Blue Springs, Missouri woman was the latest victim of cell phone rage. She swallowed her boyfriend's mobile in mid-argument because "she didn't want the boyfriend to have it," according to a report in The Kansas City Star. The phone became lodged in the lady's throat, and she was rushed to the emergency room.

"Police responded to a call about a non-breathing person about 4:50 a.m. in the 3000 block of Southwest U.S. 40," the paper reported. "Police arrived and found that the 24-year-old woman was having trouble breathing. Her identity was not released."

The poor lass still had the phone wedged in her throat when she got to the hospital.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Guess this woman is part of the other third:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/23/phone_throat/

Quote:

We've all been there. Your spouse or loved one drives you to the breaking point, and you have no other choice than to swallow his cell phone.

A Blue Springs, Missouri woman was the latest victim of cell phone rage. She swallowed her boyfriend's mobile in mid-argument because "she didn't want the boyfriend to have it," according to a report in The Kansas City Star. The phone became lodged in the lady's throat, and she was rushed to the emergency room.

"Police responded to a call about a non-breathing person about 4:50 a.m. in the 3000 block of Southwest U.S. 40," the paper reported. "Police arrived and found that the 24-year-old woman was having trouble breathing. Her identity was not released."

The poor lass still had the phone wedged in her throat when she got to the hospital.

I'll bet she gives good head.

 

[fluff]

I'll bet she gives good head.

Specially if the vibrating alert is on...

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Specially if the vibrating alert is on...

I'd be dialing that number all night long!

 

[fluff]

I'd be dialing that number all night long!

There's some joke about ringing that's in my head, or the the tip of my tongue, but it just won't come.