UPDATED: My Pledge

There is so much that I feel tempted to write about this morning, but I hope this post reflects a little of what is going on in the world these days.

On Sunday, I posted what follows on my Facebook page. It was something I wasn't especially keen to do, as the post makes clear, but I felt it important to make it 'public' as a means of giving me additional commitment to take an action that entails a personal cost. I hope you like it, and after you read it you might want to read this article which, rather serendipitously, appeared online last night.

Here Is My Pledge

It is coming up to a year since my son took us to Southern California. It was a trip of a lifetime for me, given that I have had a lifelong obsession with the state but somehow never managed to visit before. With its philosophical and environmental orientations, California continues to exert a very strong pull on my heart and in my imagination and, to be honest, I had hoped to make another visit sometime this year.

But as the saying goes, “Man plans and God laughs.” I have come to the difficult conclusion that I cannot in good conscience lend any legitimacy to the current American president and his racist, divisive and hate-filled policies by visiting and spending tourist dollars in his country. The final catalyst for this painful decision was the executive order forbidding citizens and dual-citizenship holders from Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen from travelling to the United Sates, a thinly-disguised attack on 218 million predominately Muslim people. If such vast numbers are to be excluded, who am I to simply ignore this fact, pretend I have no moral responsibility here, and merily indulge my own wants and travel inclinations.

It is easy to sign petitions and to write tweets saying that one stands with Muslims, but I have concluded it is time to put, if you will forgive the colloquialism, my money where my mouth is.

Why am I posting this? Contrary to what some might think, it is not to hold myself up as some kind of exemplar of rectitude and principle; rather, in all candour, it is to keep me strong in this undertaking, because if I break this pledge, everyone will be quite justified in dismissing me as a hypocrite who cannot be taken seriously. Because I do not believe in miracles, I assume that things are only going to get worse under the crazed administration of Donald Trump, so I also assume that my self-imposed travel ban will be for at least the next four years.

UPDATE: I see that writer Linwood Barclay has made a difficult decision to cancel his U.S. book tour:

I have no illusions about what the impact of my withdrawal will be. I don’t imagine Steve Bannon will say, “Whoa, Barclay’s not coming, we better rethink this.” As one Twitter follower said to me, “Your call, but we’ll get along fine without you.” I’ve no doubt. But this really wasn’t about trying to send a message. I just have to be able to look myself in the mirror.

We each must take the measures we most deem fit in these extraordinary times.

Out Of Respect

Out of respect for those lives tragically cut short or otherwise affected by hatred in Quebec last night, I don't feel it is appropriate to post on another topic today, so I shall simply add my voice here to the horror and outrage felt by all sane Canadians today. I can offer no words of comfort except to say we must all face this together and be strong.

What Do Other Republicans Think Of Team Trump?

My wife suggested I take a look at a 'mainstream' Republican site, and this is what I found:

Appearing on Fox News Sunday, Conway railed against those who had pointed out her “alternative facts” comment, as she defended White House press secretary, Sean Spicer.

Said Conway:

“Who is cleaning house? Which one is going to be the first network to get rid of these people, the people who think things were just not true?” Conway asked on “Fox News Sunday.”

It’s as if Conway’s sole purpose, these days, is to put out fires and make sure somebody within the Trump camp is attacking the media, at all times.

“Not one network person has been let go. Not one silly political analyst and pundit who talked smack all day long about Donald Trump has been let go,” she added. “I’m too polite to mention their names, but they know who they are, and they are all wondering who will be the first to go. The election was three months ago. None of them have been let go.”

What is she talking about?

Is it her position that only those who have praised Trump should be allowed to speak?

It’s been an ongoing thing with Trump and his people versus the media.

I’ve said it here before, and I will continue to say it: When you have a leader who wants to be the source and sole voice the people hear from, you should worry.

And perhaps Team Trump might find it has underestimated some of its fellow Republicans, at least just a little bit.

Is Trumpland Prepared To Pay?

As the crazed Orange Ogre continues bringing his campaign screeds to fruition, his most ardent supporters will have to be prepared to put their money where their mouths are, both literally and figuratively. And although we are quickly moving into a euphemistically phrased 'post-fact' era, the Trump apparatchik, in their current anti-Mexico incarnation, will face real challenges in attempting to spin away some cold economic facts that go well beyond merely paying more for products of Mexican origin, if a 20% tariff is imposed:

A Proud Moment

Despite my frequent criticisms of the Trudeau government, this move by the Prime Minister makes me proud to be a Canadian:

Revisionism Run Amok

I have written ten previous posts about Chris Spence. the disgraced former Director of the Toronto District School Board, whose fall from professional grace was caused by his serial plagiarism. I hope readers will indulge me for my eleventh post, this one in response to a risible attempt at resurrecting his career.

When I taught, plagiarism was considered the worst academic crime one could commit. It still is. But according to Spence apologist Bruce Davis, former Chair of the Toronto District School Board and a trustee from 2000-2010, it is really much ado about nothing, and that the recent revocation of Spence's teaching certificate was an egregious injustice that must be rectified.

Davis writes:

I was gob-smacked last week when I learned of the Ontario College of Teachers’ decision to revoke Chris Spence’s teaching qualifications. Dumbfounded. Confused. Irritated. Angry.

I thought I was witnessing a professional lynching.

After launching into a protracted encomium that suggests Spence is a living saint, Davis makes this remarkable and quite inaccurate assertion:

Spence paid dearly for his acts of plagiarism first revealed by the Toronto Star, resulting in the loss of his professional stature, his salary, and his reputation in the community. But he took responsibility and owned up to his mistakes.

He neglects to add that Spence's 'owing up' took place only after he was caught, and in a desperate bid to salvage his job. But that matters not to Davis:

In the context of Spence’s clear remorse for his acts, I saw an opportunity for Spence to talk to kids about academic ethics, about putting in the hard work and not taking short-cuts, and about taking responsibility when you mess-up. I believe Spence’s fall from grace remains a teachable moment.

In a clever bit of misdirection, Davis looks at sanctions meted out to others who have run afoul of professional ethics, and suggests that Spence's punishment is disproportionate; Spece's personal apologist is apparently either oblivious to, or willfully ignorant of, the grave nature of the former educator's misdeeds. And he offers two very suspect conclusions:

In my view, to a reasonable person taking away Spence’s certification to teach is not proportional to the magnitude of his mistakes. On the contrary – it is patently unfair and heavy-handed.

I stand by Chris Spence. If the opportunity had been presented, I would have advocated on his behalf at his discipline hearing. I would have told the panel without equivocation or doubt: this man should still be teaching children and leading teachers.

This article was all too much for me, so I penned a letter of rebuttal to the Toronto Star, which I hope they print:

I must take strong issue with Bruce Davis's stout defence of Chris Spence, the disgraced former Director of Education for the Toronto District School Board. It would seem that his friendship with Spence has led him to minimize the gravity of the latter's misdeeds.

By all accounts a serial plagiarist whose ignoble acts go back at least as far as his PhD thesis, Spence has shown a consistent disregard for academic honesty, the sine qua non for all educators. The fact that his teaching licence has been revoked is simple justice, neither “patently unfair and heavy-handed,” nor a ”professional lynching” as described by Davis.

During my career as a high school teacher, there could be no greater betrayal than a student's theft of another's ideas or words. To have that same academic crime committed by someone purporting to be an educational leader and exemplar compounds the betrayal; by showing flagrant, egregious and repeated contempt for the staff, students and parents he was supposedly leading, Spence did not make 'mistakes' but rather revealed himself to be one who felt the rules were made for others, not him, to follow, and thus did grievous harm not only to public morale but also to the students under his leadership.

If that doesn't warrant the revocation of a teaching certificate, what does?

A Very Timely Reminder

In 1984, the Enemy of the State was the elusive Emmanuel Goldstein, likely a contrived figure upon whom the masses could hurl their hatred, while Big Brother, the real enemy, surveilled and controlled the same masses. In the noir world of Trumpland, it appears the first of what will likely be many official enemies of the state has been revealed. Probably to no one's surprise, it is the media.

Just days after President Trump spoke of a “running war’’ with the media, his chief White House strategist, Stephen K. Bannon, ratcheted up the attacks, arguing that news organizations had been “humiliated” by the election outcome and repeatedly describing the media as “the opposition party” of the current administration.

“The media should be embarrassed and humiliated and keep its mouth shut and just listen for a while,” Mr. Bannon said in an interview on Wednesday.

“I want you to quote this,” Mr. Bannon added. “The media here is the opposition party.

The fraught times in which we live demand constant vigilance. Now would seem to be a good time for some crucial reminders via the ever-pertinent George Orwell. Special thanks to my friend and former colleague, Mary Ann, for bringing the following to my attention: