Balancing Freedom and Liberty with Safety and Security Today

I posted the following thoughts today (6/8/13), regarding the balancing of Americans’ freedom/lberty with their safety/security, on several blogs of the Atlant Journal-Constitution

“In today’s world, informed Americans must decide how much freedom/liberty they are willing to give up for their safety/security. It is a balancing act. We need to have Congressional hearings, informing citizens in great detail (without releasing classified information) as to why this type of surveillance is necessary today.

President Obama says that we need this data for our security in fighting those who would harm us. I trust President Obama. I do not think that malice has been intended against Americans, and I believe this president has the far-reaching vision to well understand what this surveillance will mean to Americans in the future, after he no longer is president, in terms of Americans’ long-ranged civil liberties balanced appropriately against their safety.

As a result, I am willing to wait until I become more informed, which may be weeks in coming, before I make a decision regarding how much surveillance of American citizens will be necessary to secure their ‘life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness,’ into the coming decades and centuries, as the world continues to change.

The wisdom and insight of our Founding Fathers, especially that of Thomas Jefferson, allowed for Americans to change the nature of their government, as the times themselves changed. However, Americans must be wary of giving up too many of their civil liberties for their safety without long-ranged safeguards in place which will secure that their government, itself, cannot become too intrusive into their daily lives in the off-chance that malice could be used, in the future, by those of power in government against some of the American people. America’s leaders must act, in this matter, only to protect the people’s ‘lives,’ sustain their ‘liberty’ against those outside forces, such as terrorists, who would take their liberties from them, and create an environment in which Americans are able to ‘pursue their personal happiness,’ free from terrorists’ attacks against them.

We must think in terms not only of the present, but also of the future, as we choose to make any adjustments necessary to balance our freedom with our security in today’s world, and we must ensure that safeguards are set in place, as we do so, which will insure that the government, itself, cannot overstep its place while it works for its citizens best interests, well into the future.”

===========================================================================

From Dr. Saul K. Padover’s book, published in 1942, entitled, “Jefferson,” page 379:

Words of Thomas Jefferson:

“Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence and deem them like the arc of the covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment. . . .I know. . . that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. . . .As. . . new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors. . . .Each generation. . . has. . .a right to choose for itself the form of government it believes most promotive of its own happiness. . . .a solemn opportunity of doing this every nineteen or twenty years should be provided by the constitution.”
——————————————————————————

Narrative from Padover’s book:

“His (Jefferson’s) conclusion in the matter of laws and institutions was that they were perpetually subject to change for the benefit of humanity. ‘Nothing then,’ he told Major John Cartwright in 1824, ‘is unchangeable but the inherent and unalienable rights of man.’ “

(Note: The above information from Padover’s book was footnoted to reference, ‘Notices, Letters, etc. Respecting the Library Manuscripts of Thomas Jefferson,’ typescript, Library of Congress, 1898, vol. 7, page 359.)

From Actress, to Teacher, to Corporate Visionary

On June 1, 2013, I posted the following comments on the “Get Schooled” blog of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution in response to the article posted by a Drama Major graduate of the University of Georgia, who does not share the same point-of-view as the Chancellor of that university. The link to her article is provided here:

http://www.ajc.com/weblogs/get-schooled/2013/jun/01/chancellor-students-choosing-wrong-areas-study-inc/

=============================================================================

My response:

“Brava to Emily Paige Ballou, who learned to think for herself along the way, perhaps even because she earned a college degree in Drama.

I was a Drama major, turned English major, in the 1960s. As an honor graduate in my south Georgia high school, I was offered a full college scholarship in my late teens, if I agreed to become a teacher in Georgia. I declared that there was ‘no way’ that I would end up being a provincial high school English teacher. I was going to study Theatre – which I did for two years in a private college in Georgia – before I headed to New York City with my young husband whom I had met two years earlier while we were working as apprentices/actors in Summer Stock in Connecticut (with Alan Alda as the star, btw).

Eventually, in NYC I figured out that that educator who had offered me a full college scholarship if I agreed study education in a Georgia college, knew my talents better than I had. As much as I loved – and still love – the theatre, I realized in NYC that I did not want to pursue the lifestyle of the actor. I wanted a more stable life. I wanted to help others grow to become who they were uniquely meant to be. I wanted to share my talents in English with young people. So, I switched from being a Drama major to becoming an English major in a university in NYC, where I earned my B.A. in English in 1970.

I came back to Georgia (Atlanta area) to spend the next 35 years of my life as a teacher and I loved every minute of my career. However, I was not the same provincial English teacher, whom I might have become, had I not journeyed to Connecticut and then to NYC, interacting with actors, writers, and various artists from many places throughout the world.

The worst thing that we could do to our nation would be to produce only that type of person who thinks in terms of economics and business. I can visualize that type of America with those at the top echelon of the economic and corporate world who would become the new aristocrats of society, in terms of their status and wealth, counterpositioned against those much poorer Americans at the bottom of the corporate ladder, who would have become the mindless “worker bees,” not even aware that they are being used (similar to low-paid economic slaves) throughout their entire impoverished lives, to make the economic aristocrats even wealthier. That would be an America based on a hierarchial vision of humankind, not the egalitarian vision of humankind upon which America was founded.

That would not be the America envisiond by Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, John Adams, James Madison, even Alexander Hamilton, and then later by Abraham LIncoln who dedicated himself to sustaining the union envisioned by America’s founding fathers. The artists in society will reject being told how to think. They will see into the machinations of some of those Americans of high wealth and power, who will often use poorer workers for their own benefit. The artists will be free to state injustice as they see it, forthrightly, whenever it is being made manifest upon society. Creative artists in every society help to make their societies more equitable and more free.

‘Google’ the 1988 series of interviews with journalist Bill Moyers and professor Joseph Campbell, authority on myths who coined the phrase, ‘Follow your bliss,’ for greater insight into dimensions of human consciousness and experience beyond a two-dimensional monetary, business ken.

Also, listen to the following video, produced April 12, 2013 by Bill Moyers, entitled ‘The United States of Inequality.’

http://billmoyers.com/segment/bill-moyers-essay-the-united-states-of-inequality/

Finally, please read the last stanza of Rudyard Kipling’s poem, ‘L’Envoi,’ below:

‘And only the Master shall praise us, and only the
Master shall blame;
And no one shall work for money, and no one shall
work for fame;
But each for the joy of the working, and each, in his
separate star,
Shall draw the Thing as he sees It for the God of
Things as They Are!’”
—————————————————–

Addendum: “Here are ‘real life’ examples of corporations which have today, as corporations had in generations past, adopted a public service dimension as well as a focus upon profit. This more elevated vision within the corporate world will make for a better America for all citizens. Read and listen to the video in the link, below, for more detailed information.”

http://billmoyers.com/content/what-is-a-benefit-b-corporation/

=================================================================================

Another poster: “I read the chancellor’s remarks as kindly advice to students and prospective students to earn degrees that will enhance their likelihood of being self-sufficient. . . .”
______________________________________________________________________________

My response: “That very well may have been Chancellor Huckaby’s intent; however, his unfortunate use of a stereotypical image of drama majors was neither current nor accurate. Georgia has become the ‘Hollywood of the South’ in recent years. Please read the link below for the facts regarding Georgia’s flourishing film industry.

http://movies.yahoo.com/news/big-growth-likely-georgias-film-industry-150552810.html

Moreover, and perhaps more importantly, a college education must never become limited simply to job placement. One of the saddest life experiences is to witness a person functioning in a career which he/she hates, simply for money. That poor choice can even foster one’s early death. We each have differing gifts and aptitudes. The wise student will train for that job which will give him/her joy, as well as a living. Notice in the excerpt below, taken from the link, above, of the article about Chancellor Huckaby in the Athens Banner-Herald, that the Chancellor’s work experience and, probably, his particular ken is of business, budgets, and administration. Others have other visions.

‘. . . as Huckaby, whose long career in public administration included stints as the state’s chief budget writer and as vice president for finance and administration at the University of Georgia . . .’

Thomas Jefferson’s education was not limited to farming, the means by which he earned a living. Jefferson’s education mainly involved learning and weighing the ideas of many Enlightenment thinkers, and those thoughts, which germinated in Jefferson’s mind, and in the minds of other founding fathers, have changed the course of human events, for the better, for centuries.”

America’s Obsession with Guns

On May 19, 2013, I posted the following comments concerning America’s obsession with guns on the “Atlanta Forward” blog of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. I am reposting my remarks here for the readers of “Mary Elizabeth Sings.” See below:

=========================================

“The people of our nation are on the wrong track and, sadly, cannot see it.

The people of our nation should be thinking in terms of how to eliminate hatred, prejudice, and fear in our nation and world, and of how to use their lives for the betterment of humankind, instead of how to arm themselves with guns.

The present obsession with gun ownership is fostering an emotional/mental unbalance in our nation. Americans can transcend this unhealthy state of consciousness, but first we must see that what fosters life lies deep within each of us. Love is the way, not fear, to build a more perfect union, a beloved union, that will find peace and security not through guns, but from deep within.”

 

 

The Tragedy of Benghazi

On May 10, 2013, I posted the following comments regarding the tragedy of Benghazi on the blog of a columnist for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

“The tragedy that happened in Benghazi is being turned into political expediency by Republican power players, imo.

Ambassador Christopher Stevens and the three other American diplomats, who were killed in the attack on America’s Embassy in Benghazi, were seeking a more just world by risking their lives in their humanitarian service there. A more just world will not be created, in their memory, through tearing this nation apart for petty partisan purposes. Those four American patriots were not able to be rescued because of the time limitations in reaching them successfully by our military  – regardless of whatever talking points were stated by UN Ambassador Susan Rice on the Sunday political television broadcasts, after the fact of the attack.

To insure a more just world, we should try to come together to heal as Americans in order to make our democratic republic work in harmony so that America will continue to be a beacon for liberty, justice, humanity, and reason throughout the world for which millions of Americans, including President Abraham Lincoln, have given their lives to make that America, and that world, possible for future generations.

The focus should be on the substantive tasks, first, of ascertaining more fully why greater security was not built into a prearranged plan to ensure the safety of these four American diplomats, well in advance of the Benghazi attack, and, then, of building that safety plan, now, so that, in the future, no other American Embassy, and its diplomats, will incur this type of tragedy. Americans must be willing to put monetary resources into ensuring the safety of their fellow Americans who are willing to work throughout the world to build a more just world for all.”

 

 

In response to a question addressed to me by another poster on the same AJC blog, I wrote the following:
“From the official report, the reason that no U.S. airplanes were sent to Benghazi in support of the diplomats was because, given the time limitations, that rescue mission would not have succeeded, regardless of how much we all might wish for that hard fact to be otherwise.

It has been suggested that, perhaps, more military officers should be interviewed in this regard, and I would have no objection to delving into that time limitation in greater detail for the full understanding by the public. I am in support of an honest exploration of the truth, but so far I have neither read nor seen anything which indicates that any more could reasonably have been done to have saved the lives of the four diplomats other than putting more monetary resources into building a safety plan well in advance of the attack’s occurrence. I believe Congress was asked for additional money for this safety plan purpose in Benghazi, but that those resources were denied by Congress. Why Congress denied those monetary resources for the Embassy at Benghazi should be looked into, also, in greater detai for the public’s knowledge, imo.

You may want to read the article by Jay Bookman, in the link below, which deals very effectively with the time limitations of the military. From that link to Bookman’s article are these words:

‘In fact, by 7:40 a.m. the surviving Americans in Benghazi and the first rescue team were already at the Benghazi airport and were being airlifted out. By the time the second team could have deployed, the crisis would have been long over, which is presumably why military superiors decided not to send them.’

http://www.ajc.com/weblogs/jay-bookman/2013/may/06/was-special-ops-team-barred-benghazi-rescue/

=========================================================================
Another poster on that same AJC blog, posted the following words on the same thread, which I felt were worthy of being copied to my blog. See below:

“. . .(H)ere’s a few questions that should have been asked by Issa. . .

If there was an active threat on 9/11 in Libya, why wasn’t Stevens at the much heavier fortified CIA compound to begin with?

What was the CIA doing there that required them to have a compound that could withstand a mortar attack while the State Dept personnel had no such protection?

How did the attackers know the CIA location to conduct the 2nd attack? Did they follow the Americans when they left the first area or did they already know where they would be?

Why hasn’t any of the top CIA brass been implicated as Clinton and the State Dept has? They were both equally involved as seen in the fight over the talking points release.

I could keep going on and on, but I’ll let y’all keep on whacking off on Clinton and the ‘cover up.’ Nevermind the fact that the laser-like focus on Clinton and Obama helps cover up the CIA’s involvement. It’s basically a fools search to try to ‘get to the bottom’ of this incident as that will never happen because of CIA involvement.”

For Tom – About Abortion

Uncanny coincidences.  Earlier today I had visited the gravesite of my infant son, and I realized, while I was reflecting over my son’s grave, that I must correct my words about abortion which I had written during the past week on a local journalist’s blog. I knew that, when the timing was right, I would correct my words about abortion on that same journalist’s blog. Then, out of the blue this evening, the evening of the day I had visited my son’s grave, another poster on that journalist’s blog posted comments not totally related to the topic of the blog, which seem to say to me, “Now.  Now is the time for you to amend your words about abortion. Below are that other poster’s comments, as well as my own comments in response to his words.

======================================================

Other poster:  ”jay since you and your ilk love regulations why don’t you support regulating the abortion industry? Seems unfettered abortion is one the lefts pet projects…”

———————————————————————————–

My response: “Your remarks are well taken. Today, I visited the gravesite of my second husband of 27 years and beside him, the gravesite of my first child of my first marriage of 6 years. My son was born a week shy of 6 months and weighed 2 lbs. and 4 ozs. at birth in 1965. He died 24 hours later in March of 1965 because he was too premature to live. His not fully developed lungs probably were the reason. When I visited his grave today, I knew that I needed to alter my remarks regarding abortion that I had posted here several days ago.

I had written that the physician of the pregnant woman should determine when the fetus was not able to live separated from the womb, and I had also stated that abortions should not be performed once the fetus was able to live independently separated from the womb. Yet, my first child, my infant son, was born too early to live for more than 24 hours after he was born. I saw him immediately after his birth, and I can still see his unique face in my mind today. The idea that a baby of his size in the womb could be aborted is wrong to me, whether the child is able to live indefinitely outside the womb or not. The doctor had told me that if my son could remain in my body for just two more weeks that he would have had a chance to live. She had tried valiantly to keep him inside me, but my body would not respond to the drugs so my baby was born too premature to live for more than 24 hours. But live he did, with much fortitude, for 24 hours. Today, with intervention he might have been able to have had a long life.

Now, on reflection, I realize that the ‘cut off’ point for abortion must be before 5 1/2 months – except in rare cases of unusual circumstances. This is a tough, hard issue. A woman cannot find out if she is giving birth to a Downs Syndrome child until the fetus is 4 and 1/2 months in utero.  Some women, myself included, would have found it very difficult to have raised a Downs Syndrome child. Government regulations regarding abortion should not make choices that are so private and personal for every woman and her partner. Yet, there is a point in which abortion is morally wrong because the fetus has become a child in the womb, as had my infant son. We buried him with a priest in NYC in 1965. My first husband and lifelong friend died in 2006. My second husband died in 2007, three weeks after I had started pursuing having my infant son exhumed and reburied in Georgia. His father’s ashes had been spread in Washington state. My second husband had graciously said to me that he would drive me to NYC to bring my first born to Georgia once I had worked out the legalities of my son’s reinterrment in Georgia. Then, my husband unexpectantly died of a stroke 3 weeks later. Two months after my second husband had died, my first child was reinterred in another funeral service and laid to rest permanently beside his step-father, with a place between the two of them for me. This would have pleased my first husband and friend. My son is as much a child to me as if he had lived a full life. In fact, I believe that in the spiritual realm of existence, my infant son has been my second child’s, his half-sibling’s, guardian angel for decades.

When I visited my infant son’s grave today, I promised him that I would correct my statement of the last week regarding the “cut off” time for performing abortion related, then, simplistically to viability to live outside the womb. I now believe that that “cut off” time must be before 5 1/2 months except in rare, unusual circumstances, and as early in the pregnancy as is possible. There must be further debate on this issue which is so complex. But here for this evening is my promise to you, my son. You did live for 24 hours, courageously. That will never be forgotten.

Rest in Peace, Tom.”

 

 

About Michelle Rhee

The topic on the “Get Schooled” blog of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution on April 12, 2013, was, “Did Michelle Rhee ignore her own cheating scandal? A new memo suggests clear evidence was discounted.” That excellent article, by AJC columnist Maureen Downey, can be found at the following link. I urge readers of “MaryElizabethSings” to read Downey’s article in full. Link follows:

http://blogs.ajc.com/get-schooled-blog/2013/04/12/did-michelle-rhee-ignore-her-own-cheating-scandal-a-new-memo-suggests-clear-evidence-was-discounted/?cp=2

================================================

From the article on the “Get Schooled” blog regarding Michelle Rhee:

“He notes that Rhee met one-on-one with each principal and demanded a signed guarantee of exactly how many points their test scores would increase.”

—————————————————————————————

My Response:

“Michelle Rhee’s approach to educating students is not consistent with principles of child development. Her approach, as was the educational approach of former APS Superintendent Beverly Hall, reflects a business model to educating human beings. I am more concerned with Rhee’s use of an intimidating and highly tension-inducing business model in the education of children than I am concerned about what Rhee was aware of, at what point in time, concerning cheating in the DC schools. In my opinion, Michelle Rhee’s educational influence with state legislators, who for the most part are not trained in educational principles, can result in statewide educational policies that will not be productive, and sometimes may even be harmful, to students. 

From my 35 years functioning in instructional leadership in Georgia’s schools, grades 1 – 12, I believe that a business model, used in educational arenas, is not only hurtful to students, and to teachers, but that this model is also, ultimately, ineffective because it is not consistent with natural child development, nor is it consistent with mastery learning of individual students, and their individual rates of learning, within a curriculum continuum. An educational model is needed for educating children effectively – and with ongoing success – which will, ironically, in the long-run, also be reflected in improved standardized test scores.

For those readers who may want to read more of my thoughts on this subject, I am posting a link to an entry on my blog, entitled, ‘Use an Educational Model, Not a Business Model, for Public Education.’ I, also, encourage interested readers to read the astute question asked on my blog by a commentator by the name of ‘Ernest,’ as well my response to ‘Ernest’s,’ question – both of which appear at the end of the entry in the link, below:”

http://maryelizabethsings.wordpress.com/2013/04/01/use-an-educational-model-not-a-business-model-for-public-education/

Also, please read the following article posted on May 7, 2013 on “Get Schooled,” the AJC educational blog, regarding Michelle Rhee’s comments about Gov. Nathan Deal’s signing of a teacher evaluation bill into law. Please, also, read my comments below that article which run counter to Ms. Rhee’s thinking. See link below:

http://www.ajc.com/weblogs/get-schooled/2013/may/07/governor-signs-bill-linking-teacher-evaluations-st/

About Hillary Rodham Clinton

Hillary Rodham Clinton

I posted the following thoughts, regarding Hillary Clinton on April 4, 2013, on the blog of Atlanta Journal-Constitution columnist, Jay Bookman.

From Bookman’s article: “But regardless of what happens, her political trajectory — over the years she’s been cast as the archvillain of HillaryCare, as an American Lucretia Borgia, as a reluctant Tammy Wynette, as a modern-day George Marshall — provides remarkable testament to the power of intelligence, diligence and a very, very thick skin.”
===========================================

My Response: “As well as a ‘remarkable testament’ to her internal fortitude and mental strength in forging on, well beyond the various, one-dimensional labels which others have tried to assign to her. She is a woman who knows herself well, and who, no doubt, also knows that she is a woman who has the rare opportunity to merge who she is with history’s ongoing evolution. A woman of her time – with a woman’s sensibilities capable of altering, further, the trajectory of humankind’s destination for the betterment of all.”

I recommend that readers of “MaryElizabethSings” also read the excellent column about Hillary Clinton, written by New York Times’ columnist, Maureen Dowd, in the link provided, below. Maureen Dowd analyzes Clinton’s many facets well, juxtaposing some of those facets, in the process.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/07/opinion/sunday/dowd-can-we-get-hillary-without-the-foolery.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0