-
Where Jill Will Talk Like She Writes
-
The White House Project
Print This Post
Sep
30
The brains are not in Ohio: more evidence, this time from The Atlantic Monthly
Filed Under Politics | 6 Comments
You can’t make this stuff up, but then again, the article goes too hard on Cleveland, when you actually pause to think about the numbers.
From the article:
[In 1970], nationally, 11 percent of the population over twenty-five years old had a college degree, and that figure ranged between 9 percent and 13 percent in fully half of America’s 318 metropolitan regions. In Washington, D.C., 18 percent of the residents had finished college; in Cleveland, only 4 percent had finished.
Over the past three decades, the percentage of Americans holding a college degree has more than doubled, reaching 27 percent by 2004, but as the maps show, those gains have not been evenly spread. For instance, about half of the residents of Washington, D.C., and San Francisco now have college degrees - versus 14 percent and 11 percent in Cleveland and Detroit respectively.
Well, excuse me, but that would make it seem that Cleveland in fact has exceeded the national increase, no? Because that number was 4% in 1970 and 14% in 2004, a three and a half-fold increase. Wash, DC’s increase is less than three-fold (from 18% to 50%).
So I don’t quite get the point, beyond saying that there is a bigger concentration in fewer places. It sounds dramatic to point that out, but the numbers, proportionately, seem to be better for Cleveland. Sure, 14% still stinks - it’s certainly not 50%. But I don’t know - do we have to keep getting slammed, even when we are in fact making gains, faster than the country on average, and maybe better than some of the other metro regions?
I don’t actually understand completely this graphic display, but only Cincy is on it, not Cleveland. And, again, when it’s after 5pm, well - I wonder where my brain’s gone too.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 10:45 pm September 30th, 2006 in Politics | 6 Comments
Print This Post
Sep
30
The brains are not in Ohio: more evidence, this time from The Atlantic Monthly
Filed Under Politics | Leave a Comment
You can’t make this stuff up, but then again, the article goes too hard on Cleveland, when you actually pause to think about the numbers.
From the article:
[In 1970], nationally, 11 percent of the population over twenty-five years old had a college degree, and that figure ranged between 9 percent and 13 percent in fully half of America’s 318 metropolitan regions. In Washington, D.C., 18 percent of the residents had finished college; in Cleveland, only 4 percent had finished.
Over the past three decades, the percentage of Americans holding a college degree has more than doubled, reaching 27 percent by 2004, but as the maps show, those gains have not been evenly spread. For instance, about half of the residents of Washington, D.C., and San Francisco now have college degrees - versus 14 percent and 11 percent in Cleveland and Detroit respectively.
Well, excuse me, but that would make it seem that Cleveland in fact has exceeded the national increase, no? Because that number was 4% in 1970 and 14% in 2004, a three and a half-fold increase. Wash, DC’s increase is less than three-fold (from 18% to 50%).
So I don’t quite get the point, beyond saying that there is a bigger concentration in fewer places. It sounds dramatic to point that out, but the numbers, proportionately, seem to be better for Cleveland. Sure, 14% still stinks - it’s certainly not 50%. But I don’t know - do we have to keep getting slammed, even when we are in fact making gains, faster than the country on average, and maybe better than some of the other metro regions?
I don’t actually understand completely this graphic display, but only Cincy is on it, not Cleveland. And, again, when it’s after 5pm, well - I wonder where my brain’s gone too.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 7:45 pm September 30th, 2006 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Sep
30
Reason #39 to VOTE NO on ISSUE 3
Filed Under Politics | 5 Comments
Just because something is legal doesn’t make it right to do.
There are two ways to think about behavior here. First, there are behaviors made legal in which you shouldn’t engage anyway. Just because the law allows you to discriminate in certain circumstances, or get through campaign finance law loopholes or not pay people for overtime, doesn’t make any of those behaviors ethical, moral or even just okay - should you decide that you don’t really adhere to any particular moral or ethical code even of your own (though really, everyone has one, even if they don’t admit it or consciously refer to it).
Then, there are behaviors that we don’t make illegal that you shouldn’t do anyway: some states don’t require kids or adults to wear helmets in certain circumstances, not all states have laws about host responsibility in drunk driving situations, parents often are not held accountable for the acts of their minor children but is there much argument that the buck should stop with them?
The law is just that - a law, a statute, developed by humans based on human behavior we either want to encourage or discourage. By the time it comes around to be discussed by lawmakers, it’s probably well-entrenched enough that, ha, it’s gotten around to being discussed by lawmakers. Because, on the whole, most lawmakers, regardless of whether they’re in California or South Dakota, aren’t the most cutting edge folks when it comes to what’s going on re: risky behavior to be discouraged or philanthropic behavior that should be encouraged.
Bottom line: law, as a mechanism to control behavior, fails. If you don’t already know that something is right or wrong, providing a sanction for doing it through our legal system is unlikely to change your mind, with only a few exceptions. Think Michael Milken. He’s a very nice example of change. But look what he’s had to go through. Would you wish that on your worst enemy?
And so, with gambling, with slots, with convincing yourself that it’s all just entertainment even if you never come out ahead - even if it were 150% legal in all its forms with absolutely no restraints? Guess what? It would still be wrong to engage in because of the havoc and turbulence and devastation it can cause, beyond the six degrees of separation between the one making the wagers and everyone else in that individual’s life. That won’t change just by making it legal.
Same with prostitution, drugs, even numerous torts made by corporations and determined solely by case law. The problems those behaviors cause won’t evaporate through the messy magic of legislating or amending the constitution.
You teach your kids not to do something because it’s wrong, not because they’ll get caught or have some punishment levied against them.
Likewise with gambling: people should not engage in it because it is not good for people in general as an endeavor. Not because it’s legal or illegal.
Why then do I argue that it should remain out of the constitution and the law books as a legal activity - if I’m saying people should just be taught that it’s not a good thing to do?
Because, as I wrote above, the law stinks as a mechanism for giving that lesson. The law is too reactive and doesn’t serve well as a deterrent. To wit, all the types of gambling that does in fact exist, legally and illegally, in Ohio right now. I don’t want anymore, thank you.
Previous reasons to vote no on Issue 3:
Reason 40
Reason 41
Reason 42
Reason 43
Reason 44
Reason 45
Reason 46
Reason 47
Reason 48
Reason 49
Reason 50
Reason 51
Reason 52
Reason 53
Reason 54
Reason 55
Reason 56
Reason 57
Vote no on Issue 3.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 12:50 pm September 30th, 2006 in Politics | 5 Comments
Print This Post
Sep
30
Reason #39 to VOTE NO on ISSUE 3
Filed Under Politics | 5 Comments
Just because something is legal doesn’t make it right to do.
There are two ways to think about behavior here. First, there are behaviors made legal in which you shouldn’t engage anyway. Just because the law allows you to discriminate in certain circumstances, or get through campaign finance law loopholes or not pay people for overtime, doesn’t make any of those behaviors ethical, moral or even just okay - should you decide that you don’t really adhere to any particular moral or ethical code even of your own (though really, everyone has one, even if they don’t admit it or consciously refer to it).
Then, there are behaviors that we don’t make illegal that you shouldn’t do anyway: some states don’t require kids or adults to wear helmets in certain circumstances, not all states have laws about host responsibility in drunk driving situations, parents often are not held accountable for the acts of their minor children but is there much argument that the buck should stop with them?
The law is just that - a law, a statute, developed by humans based on human behavior we either want to encourage or discourage. By the time it comes around to be discussed by lawmakers, it’s probably well-entrenched enough that, ha, it’s gotten around to being discussed by lawmakers. Because, on the whole, most lawmakers, regardless of whether they’re in California or South Dakota, aren’t the most cutting edge folks when it comes to what’s going on re: risky behavior to be discouraged or philanthropic behavior that should be encouraged.
Bottom line: law, as a mechanism to control behavior, fails. If you don’t already know that something is right or wrong, providing a sanction for doing it through our legal system is unlikely to change your mind, with only a few exceptions. Think Michael Milken. He’s a very nice example of change. But look what he’s had to go through. Would you wish that on your worst enemy?
And so, with gambling, with slots, with convincing yourself that it’s all just entertainment even if you never come out ahead - even if it were 150% legal in all its forms with absolutely no restraints? Guess what? It would still be wrong to engage in because of the havoc and turbulence and devastation it can cause, beyond the six degrees of separation between the one making the wagers and everyone else in that individual’s life. That won’t change just by making it legal.
Same with prostitution, drugs, even numerous torts made by corporations and determined solely by case law. The problems those behaviors cause won’t evaporate through the messy magic of legislating or amending the constitution.
You teach your kids not to do something because it’s wrong, not because they’ll get caught or have some punishment levied against them.
Likewise with gambling: people should not engage in it because it is not good for people in general as an endeavor. Not because it’s legal or illegal.
Why then do I argue that it should remain out of the constitution and the law books as a legal activity - if I’m saying people should just be taught that it’s not a good thing to do?
Because, as I wrote above, the law stinks as a mechanism for giving that lesson. The law is too reactive and doesn’t serve well as a deterrent. To wit, all the types of gambling that does in fact exist, legally and illegally, in Ohio right now. I don’t want anymore, thank you.
Previous reasons to vote no on Issue 3:
Reason 40
Reason 41
Reason 42
Reason 43
Reason 44
Reason 45
Reason 46
Reason 47
Reason 48
Reason 49
Reason 50
Reason 51
Reason 52
Reason 53
Reason 54
Reason 55
Reason 56
Reason 57
Vote no on Issue 3.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 8:50 am September 30th, 2006 in Politics | 5 Comments
Print This Post
Sep
30
Reason #39 to VOTE NO on ISSUE 3
Filed Under Politics | Leave a Comment
Just because something is legal doesn’t make it right to do.
There are two ways to think about behavior here. First, there are behaviors made legal in which you shouldn’t engage anyway. Just because the law allows you to discriminate in certain circumstances, or get through campaign finance law loopholes or not pay people for overtime, doesn’t make any of those behaviors ethical, moral or even just okay - should you decide that you don’t really adhere to any particular moral or ethical code even of your own (though really, everyone has one, even if they don’t admit it or consciously refer to it).
Then, there are behaviors that we don’t make illegal that you shouldn’t do anyway: some states don’t require kids or adults to wear helmets in certain circumstances, not all states have laws about host responsibility in drunk driving situations, parents often are not held accountable for the acts of their minor children but is there much argument that the buck should stop with them?
The law is just that - a law, a statute, developed by humans based on human behavior we either want to encourage or discourage. By the time it comes around to be discussed by lawmakers, it’s probably well-entrenched enough that, ha, it’s gotten around to being discussed by lawmakers. Because, on the whole, most lawmakers, regardless of whether they’re in California or South Dakota, aren’t the most cutting edge folks when it comes to what’s going on re: risky behavior to be discouraged or philanthropic behavior that should be encouraged.
Bottom line: law, as a mechanism to control behavior, fails. If you don’t already know that something is right or wrong, providing a sanction for doing it through our legal system is unlikely to change your mind, with only a few exceptions. Think Michael Milken. He’s a very nice example of change. But look what he’s had to go through. Would you wish that on your worst enemy?
And so, with gambling, with slots, with convincing yourself that it’s all just entertainment even if you never come out ahead - even if it were 150% legal in all its forms with absolutely no restraints? Guess what? It would still be wrong to engage in because of the havoc and turbulence and devastation it can cause, beyond the six degrees of separation between the one making the wagers and everyone else in that individual’s life. That won’t change just by making it legal.
Same with prostitution, drugs, even numerous torts made by corporations and determined solely by case law. The problems those behaviors cause won’t evaporate through the messy magic of legislating or amending the constitution.
You teach your kids not to do something because it’s wrong, not because they’ll get caught or have some punishment levied against them.
Likewise with gambling: people should not engage in it because it is not good for people in general as an endeavor. Not because it’s legal or illegal.
Why then do I argue that it should remain out of the constitution and the law books as a legal activity - if I’m saying people should just be taught that it’s not a good thing to do?
Because, as I wrote above, the law stinks as a mechanism for giving that lesson. The law is too reactive and doesn’t serve well as a deterrent. To wit, all the types of gambling that does in fact exist, legally and illegally, in Ohio right now. I don’t want anymore, thank you.
Previous reasons to vote no on Issue 3:
Reason 40
Reason 41
Reason 42
Reason 43
Reason 44
Reason 45
Reason 46
Reason 47
Reason 48
Reason 49
Reason 50
Reason 51
Reason 52
Reason 53
Reason 54
Reason 55
Reason 56
Reason 57
Vote no on Issue 3.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 5:50 am September 30th, 2006 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Sep
29
Anyone ’round here brave enough to point them out to JD Lasica?
I wonder if we can submit anecdotes on behalf of others…anonymously…
See evil grin emoticon.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 10:50 pm September 29th, 2006 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Sep
29
Anyone ’round here brave enough to point them out to JD Lasica?
I wonder if we can submit anecdotes on behalf of others…anonymously…
See evil grin emoticon.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 6:50 pm September 29th, 2006 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Sep
29
OMG - Yom Kippur Fasting Guide
Filed Under Politics | 2 Comments
From the senior Rabbi at my synagogue.
Wow. Maybe I do wish I was pregnant again and could justify skipping this part of paying penance.
Yom Kippur Fasting Guide
Dear friends,
As Yom Kippur approaches, I thought you might find the very practical guide below helpful to you in ensuring that your fast is safe and meaningful.
Rav Kook writes that “When one forgets the essence of one’s own soul, when one distracts his mind from attending to the innermost content of his own personal life, everything becomes confused and uncertain. The primary role of change, which at once sheds light on the darkened zone, is for the person to return to himself, to the root of his soul. . . . If one should envision that they sought to return to God, without setting themselves in order, this would be a deceptive change, through which God’s name will be taken in vain.” My prayer for all of us as we enter the fast is that we succeed in getting in touch with our innermost self, allowing the light within to break forth and guide us toward reaching our true potential for good.
Fasting For Yom Kippur (from a Medical Perspective) Michael M. Segal, MD, PhD
http://segal.org/kippur/
Each year on Yom Kippur, Jews wish each other a khatima tova (a good seal in the Book of Life) and tolerable fast. The route to a khatima tova is beyond the scope of this article; the route to an easy fast is simpler to describe. The following are the essentials of human physiology that will help you have a tolerable fast on Yom Kippur:
Don’t get thirsty:
Most people think the difficulty about fasting is feeling “hungry”. However, avoiding thirst is much more important for how you feel. Not only do you avoid the discomfort of thirst but you are also well hydrated and swallow frequently, so your stomach does not feel as empty.
One important way to remain well hydrated is to avoid drinks or foods that cause your body to get rid of water. Such foods and drinks include alcohol, tea, caffeinated coffee and chocolate. Another important rule is to avoid consuming much salt. Salt causes a person to feel thirsty despite having a “normal” amount of water, because extra water is needed for the extra salt. For this reason you should avoid processed foods containing lots of salt such as pickles, cold cuts, or cheese. Most tomato sauces, canned fish and smoked fish have a lot of added salt. Since Kosher meat has a high salt content it may be best to choose a main course such as fresh fish, canned no-salt tuna fish or a de-salted meat such as boiled chicken.
By avoiding these types of foods and drinks in the several hours before a fast, you can avoid either losing water or needing extra water. Other actions that cause the body to lose water, such as perspiring in warm clothing, should also be avoided during the fast.
Don’t start the pre-fast meal on a full stomach:
The pre-fast meal often begins at 5 PM, so a large lunch could prevent you from eating enough immediately before the fast. It is best to have a small lunch, or no lunch at all. A large breakfast early in the day based on cereals, breads and fruits can provide the energy you need during the day, yet these high-fiber foods will be far downstream by the time of the pre-fast meal and will not keep you from eating enough food at the pre-fast meal. A large breakfast is also helpful because it stretches the stomach. After eating breakfast, it is best to consume beverages during the day. This will not fill you up, since liquids are absorbed quickly, and this will ensure that you have absorbed enough fluids during the day to start the pre-fast meal being well hydrated. Be sure to avoid beverages with alcohol or caffeine. You should also drink at least a glass or two of fluids with the pre-fast meal because many foods need extra water to be digested properly.
Eat foods that are digested slowly:
Include some foods high in oils and fats in the pre-fast meal, since such foods delay emptying of the stomach and effectively prolong your meal. However, beware of fatty meats or salted potato chips that could load you up with too much salt. Salads and other high fiber foods that are so important in one’s normal diet should be de- emphasized for the pre-fast meal since they travel quickly through the digestive system. Fruit, despite its high fiber content, is worthwhile since it carries a lot of water in a “time-release” form.
Don’t get a headache:
Withdrawing from caffeine produces a headache in people who drink several cups of coffee a day. If you consume this much caffeine in coffee or other foods or drinks you should prepare yourself for the caffeine- free period by reducing or eliminating caffeine from your diet in the days or weeks before Yom Kippur. Don’t try to get through the fast by drinking coffee right before Kol Nidre, since this will cause you to lose a lot of water.
Make the meal tasty enough so people will eat:
The pre-fast meal doesn’t have be bland. Spices such as lemon or herbs are fine for fasting, but salt and monosodium glutamate should be reduced as much as possible.
Don’t do a complete fast if you have certain medical problems:
People with medical conditions such as diabetes should consult their doctors and rabbis before fasting. Certain medications need to be taken during Yom Kippur, and it is important to swallow them with enough water to avoid pills getting stuck on the way to the stomach and damaging the esophagus. Fasting by women who are pregnant or breast feeding can also be dangerous. If a young person who has not fasted much before has unusual difficulty fasting you should discuss this with your doctor since this happens in some serious metabolic problems in which fasting can be very dangerous.
Don’t eat improperly after Neila:
Even people who have prepared well for fasting will be hungry after Neila. Be sure not to eat food too quickly at the post-fast meal. Begin the break-fast meal with several glasses of milk or juice: these put sugar into the bloodstream and occupy space in the stomach, discouraging you from eating too rapidly. Also be careful about eating high salt foods such as lox, since you will still be a little dehydrated and will need to drink a lot of fluids to avoid waking up extremely thirsty in the early morning hours. If you take vitamin C, be sure that you are fully re-hydrated beforehand, because one of the vitamin’s breakdown products can precipitate out in your urine if you are dehydrated, causing kidney stones, which are painful and dangerous.
These preparations for the fast of Yom Kippur will be different from your normal routine, but they can serve as a concrete reminder of the approaching Day of Atonement.
Gemar chatimah tovah - may you and your loved ones be sealed in the Book of Life for health, happiness, prosperity and blessing!
By Jill Miller Zimon at 4:26 pm September 29th, 2006 in Politics | 2 Comments
Print This Post
Sep
29
Anyone ’round here brave enough to point them out to JD Lasica?
I wonder if we can submit anecdotes on behalf of others…anonymously…
See evil grin emoticon.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 3:50 pm September 29th, 2006 in Politics | Please comment
Print This Post
Sep
29
I don’t like the mind games played by the proponents of Issue 3, and I don’t like the mind games played by anyone else.
I didn’t have many dates in high school because I hated mind games.
I stay indoors on April Fool’s Day because I hate mind games.
And, as a voter, I despise mind games even more, because candidates who use them, especially in a state where election fraud is rampant and comes in so many forms - even legalized ones - are preying on desperate people - yeah, that would be all of us Ohioans.
If you saw this campaign literature,
and didn’t know anything else about Josh Mandel, to which party would you think he belonged? And would you vote for him?
Now, what if he told you that he’s worked with and for and as a Republican for most of his voting life?
How would it make you feel to know this information if your answer to the first question was, the Democratic Party?
Now, regardless of your answer to the first question, what do you think about someone who omits information regarding their party affiliation and specifically uses semantics commonly employed by the party to which the candidate does not belong?
Me? I don’t like it. I don’t care about how smart it is as a political strategy.
The ends - getting elected so he can make changes that reflect his moderate Republican position - do not justify these semantically-oriented and deceptive means.
Has he lied? Of course not. I don’t think Josh Mandel will lie.
But he’s educated as a lawyer and trained as a military man.
He will do what he must to succeed.
But in life, sometimes, the ends do not justify the means.
And his case is one of them, because our political system is crumbling under the weight of those who may not lie, but certainly don’t reveal the truth.