:mj07: :mj07: :mj07: :mj07: :mj07:
You've gone way behind the lines of sanity and this posts just proves it even more.
Don't take popular opinion for fact.
a quick poll--need some input
- Thread starter pt1gard
- Start date
:mj07: :mj07: :mj07: :mj07: :mj07:
You've gone way behind the lines of sanity and this posts just proves it even more.
Don't take popular opinion for fact.
rusty,
it's hard to get a read on exactly what pt1gard is. He falls into a few different categories.
But I think "flaming dumbass" would probably be the best label to put on him.
marine,
so you wanted a debate but you run from the simple questions every single time, the ultimate p*ussy is all you aspire to be:mj07: :shrug:
so you wanted a debate but you run from the simple questions every single time, the ultimate p*ussy is all you aspire to be:mj07: :shrug:
rusty,
yes you are naive but thats ok .. check out the dates that waco and okc took place on ... use that as a starting point and start to piece the puzzle ... gl if you have an open mind
yes you are naive but thats ok .. check out the dates that waco and okc took place on ... use that as a starting point and start to piece the puzzle ... gl if you have an open mind
Tom & Jerry - A Jewish Conspiracy
Prof. Hasan Bolkhari, a cultural advisor to the Iranian Education Ministry, claimed during a televised seminar that "Tom and Jerry" was created by the Jewish Walt Disney company to irradicate the association between mice and Jews created in the minds of Europeans by Hitler.
What I find amusing is how he calls it the Jewish Walt Disney Company. Firstly, Tom & Jerry was an MGM creation and secondly, Walt Disney was no Jewish sympathizer apparently and possibly quite the opposite. If this is how people are educated in Iran, I can see why they have so many problems.
I just hate it when people try to ruin my childhood memories especially cartoons like Tom & Jerry.
Prof. Hasan Bolkhari, a cultural advisor to the Iranian Education Ministry, claimed during a televised seminar that "Tom and Jerry" was created by the Jewish Walt Disney company to irradicate the association between mice and Jews created in the minds of Europeans by Hitler.
What I find amusing is how he calls it the Jewish Walt Disney Company. Firstly, Tom & Jerry was an MGM creation and secondly, Walt Disney was no Jewish sympathizer apparently and possibly quite the opposite. If this is how people are educated in Iran, I can see why they have so many problems.
I just hate it when people try to ruin my childhood memories especially cartoons like Tom & Jerry.
Crede seeing progress at the plate
Third baseman picks up two hits against Padres
By Scott Merkin / MLB.com
TUCSON, Ariz. -- Leading off the fifth inning of Tuesday's Cactus League contest against the Padres, Joe Crede pushed a spinning grounder up the middle of the Tucson Electric Park infield.
Second baseman Tadahito Iguchi, Crede's infield mate on the White Sox 2005 World Series championship team, roamed to his right, got a glove on the ball but couldn't make the play cleanly on what was an infield single. Two innings later, with A.J. Pierzynski on first, Crede shot a hard grounder toward the mound, which deflected off pitcher Enrique Gonzalez's right hand for his second infield safety of the game.
Those hits marked the fourth and fifth for Crede this spring, covering 37 at-bats, so they look like line drives to the third baseman. But just as Crede wasn't panicked by his low average when asked one week ago, he still realizes the present .135 mark is part of the ongoing on-field recovery process stemming from being away from baseball for eight months.
"Yeah, I can tell I was laid off since June, just the timing out there and stuff," said Crede, before his two-hit effort on Tuesday. "It doesn't quite feel there, but I can definitely feel it's coming along.
"It's definitely getting up to speed, but the biggest thing is finding that comfort level back at the plate and on defense. When you get to that comfort level, you can start working from there."
Crede didn't believe a plan such as the one employed by Jim Thome was needed to help find that comfort zone -- at least, not at this point. Thome stayed back in Minor League camp Monday and led off every inning of a Triple-A contest with Arizona, finishing 4-for-8, with three doubles, a walk and a mammoth home run. Thome will follow the same method while the White Sox are in the Phoenix area Thursday through Saturday.
But the most important factor for Crede continues to be his back feeling strong, following surgery on it last June. He realized
News and features:
? Healthy, Crede seeing progress at the plate
? White Sox bats silent against Padres
? Roster makeup shifting daily for White Sox
? Bauman: Guillen always speaks his mind
? White Sox need complete effort from Danks
? Swisher: Good player, better person
Multimedia:
? White Sox, Foster Care Foundation 400K
? Floyd on spring success 400K
? Make-A-Wish recipient on Dye meet 400K
? Stone breaks down White Sox roster 400K
? Bourgeois on making impression 400K
? White Sox pitcher Egbert on first camp 400K
Spring Training info:
? MLB.com coverage | Schedule | Ballpark | Tickets
from the outset of Spring Training that the bad was going to come before the good where his offense was concerned.
"Coming in, I knew I would have to be patient with it," Crede said. "You know you are going to fail, but it's just a matter of how fast you are able to adjust and bounce back from it."
"Our hope was to get Crede out in the field every day," White Sox manager Ozzie Guillen added. "That's what he's been doing without complaint."
As far as this sort of offensive funk carrying over into the regular season, Crede again doesn't seem overly worried. Putting in the required work will help Crede move toward the Silver Slugger status he produced during his last full season in 2006.
"I'm making a lot of progress, even from last week to this week," Crede said. "The biggest thing is going out there and having good at-bats and being aggressive and swinging at good pitches and recognizing pitches early. That's the biggest thing right now, pitch [recognition] and good aggressive at-bats."
Third baseman picks up two hits against Padres
By Scott Merkin / MLB.com
TUCSON, Ariz. -- Leading off the fifth inning of Tuesday's Cactus League contest against the Padres, Joe Crede pushed a spinning grounder up the middle of the Tucson Electric Park infield.
Second baseman Tadahito Iguchi, Crede's infield mate on the White Sox 2005 World Series championship team, roamed to his right, got a glove on the ball but couldn't make the play cleanly on what was an infield single. Two innings later, with A.J. Pierzynski on first, Crede shot a hard grounder toward the mound, which deflected off pitcher Enrique Gonzalez's right hand for his second infield safety of the game.
Those hits marked the fourth and fifth for Crede this spring, covering 37 at-bats, so they look like line drives to the third baseman. But just as Crede wasn't panicked by his low average when asked one week ago, he still realizes the present .135 mark is part of the ongoing on-field recovery process stemming from being away from baseball for eight months.
"Yeah, I can tell I was laid off since June, just the timing out there and stuff," said Crede, before his two-hit effort on Tuesday. "It doesn't quite feel there, but I can definitely feel it's coming along.
"It's definitely getting up to speed, but the biggest thing is finding that comfort level back at the plate and on defense. When you get to that comfort level, you can start working from there."
Crede didn't believe a plan such as the one employed by Jim Thome was needed to help find that comfort zone -- at least, not at this point. Thome stayed back in Minor League camp Monday and led off every inning of a Triple-A contest with Arizona, finishing 4-for-8, with three doubles, a walk and a mammoth home run. Thome will follow the same method while the White Sox are in the Phoenix area Thursday through Saturday.
But the most important factor for Crede continues to be his back feeling strong, following surgery on it last June. He realized
News and features:
? Healthy, Crede seeing progress at the plate
? White Sox bats silent against Padres
? Roster makeup shifting daily for White Sox
? Bauman: Guillen always speaks his mind
? White Sox need complete effort from Danks
? Swisher: Good player, better person
Multimedia:
? White Sox, Foster Care Foundation 400K
? Floyd on spring success 400K
? Make-A-Wish recipient on Dye meet 400K
? Stone breaks down White Sox roster 400K
? Bourgeois on making impression 400K
? White Sox pitcher Egbert on first camp 400K
Spring Training info:
? MLB.com coverage | Schedule | Ballpark | Tickets
from the outset of Spring Training that the bad was going to come before the good where his offense was concerned.
"Coming in, I knew I would have to be patient with it," Crede said. "You know you are going to fail, but it's just a matter of how fast you are able to adjust and bounce back from it."
"Our hope was to get Crede out in the field every day," White Sox manager Ozzie Guillen added. "That's what he's been doing without complaint."
As far as this sort of offensive funk carrying over into the regular season, Crede again doesn't seem overly worried. Putting in the required work will help Crede move toward the Silver Slugger status he produced during his last full season in 2006.
"I'm making a lot of progress, even from last week to this week," Crede said. "The biggest thing is going out there and having good at-bats and being aggressive and swinging at good pitches and recognizing pitches early. That's the biggest thing right now, pitch [recognition] and good aggressive at-bats."
Dropping Gas Prices
THIS IS NOT THE 'DON'T BUY' GAS FOR ONE DAY, BUT IT WILL SHOW YOU HOW WE CAN GET GAS BACK DOWN TO $1.30 PER GALLON.
This was sent by a retired Coca Cola executive. It came from one of his engineer buddies who retired from Halliburton. If you are tired of the gas prices going up AND they will continue to rise this summer, take time to read this please.
Phillip Hollsworth offered this good idea.
This makes MUCH MORE SENSE than the "don't buy gas on a certain day" campaign that was going around last April or May!
It's worth your consideration. Join the resistance!!!!
I hear we are going to hit close to $ 4.00 a gallon by next summer, and it might go higher!! Want gasoline prices to come down?
We need to take some intelligent, united action. The oil companies just laughed at that because they knew we wouldn't continue to "hurt" ourselves by refusing to buy gas.
It was more of an inconvenience to us than it was a problem for them.
BUT, whoever thought of this idea has come up with a plan that can really work. Please read on and join with us!
By now you're probably thinking gasoline priced at about $2.00 is super cheap. Me too! It is currently $3.19 for regular unleaded in my town.
Now that the oil companies and the OPEC nations have conditioned us to think that the cost of a gallon of gas is CHEAP at $1.50 - $1.75, we need to take aggressive action to teach them that BUYERS control the marketplace..not sellers.
With the price of gasoline going up more each day, we consumers need to take action.
The only way we are going to see the price of gas come down is if we hit someone in the pocketbook by not purchasing their gas! And, we can do that WITHOUT hurting ourselves.
How? Since we all rely on our cars, we can't just stop buying gas.
But we CAN have an impact on gas prices if we all act together to force a price war.
Here's the idea: For the rest of this year, DON'T purchase ANY gasoline from the two biggest companies (which now are one), EXXON and MOBIL.
If they are not selling any gas, they will be inclined to reduce their prices.
If they reduce their prices, the other companies will have to follow suit.
But to have an impact, we need to reach literally millions of Exxon and Mobil gas buyers. It's really simple to do! Now, don't wimp out on me at this point...keep reading and I'll explain how simple it is to reach millions of people!!
I am sending this note to 30 people. If each of us send it to at least ten more (30 x 10 = 300) ... and those 300 send it to at least ten more (300 x10 = 3,000)...and so on, by the time the message reaches the sixth group of people, we will have reached over THREE MILLION consumers.
If those three million get excited and pass this on to ten friends each, then 30 million people will have been contacted!
If it goes one level further, you guessed it..... THREE HUNDRED MILLION PEOPLE!!!
Again, all you have to do is send this to 10 people. That's all!
(If you don't understand how we can reach 300 million and all you have to do is send this to 10 people.... Well, let's face it, you just aren't a mathematician. But I am . so trust me on this one.
How long would all that take? If each of us sends this e-mail out to ten more people within one day of receipt, all 300 MILLION people could conceivably be contacted within the next 8 days !!!
I'll bet you didn't think you and I had that much potential, did you!
Acting together we can make a difference.
If this makes sense to you, please pass this message on. I suggest that we not buy from EXXON/MOBIL UNTIL THEY LOWER THEIR PRICES TO THE $2.00 RANGE AND KEEP THEM DOWN. THIS CAN REALLY WORK.
Keep it going!!!
THIS IS NOT THE 'DON'T BUY' GAS FOR ONE DAY, BUT IT WILL SHOW YOU HOW WE CAN GET GAS BACK DOWN TO $1.30 PER GALLON.
This was sent by a retired Coca Cola executive. It came from one of his engineer buddies who retired from Halliburton. If you are tired of the gas prices going up AND they will continue to rise this summer, take time to read this please.
Phillip Hollsworth offered this good idea.
This makes MUCH MORE SENSE than the "don't buy gas on a certain day" campaign that was going around last April or May!
It's worth your consideration. Join the resistance!!!!
I hear we are going to hit close to $ 4.00 a gallon by next summer, and it might go higher!! Want gasoline prices to come down?
We need to take some intelligent, united action. The oil companies just laughed at that because they knew we wouldn't continue to "hurt" ourselves by refusing to buy gas.
It was more of an inconvenience to us than it was a problem for them.
BUT, whoever thought of this idea has come up with a plan that can really work. Please read on and join with us!
By now you're probably thinking gasoline priced at about $2.00 is super cheap. Me too! It is currently $3.19 for regular unleaded in my town.
Now that the oil companies and the OPEC nations have conditioned us to think that the cost of a gallon of gas is CHEAP at $1.50 - $1.75, we need to take aggressive action to teach them that BUYERS control the marketplace..not sellers.
With the price of gasoline going up more each day, we consumers need to take action.
The only way we are going to see the price of gas come down is if we hit someone in the pocketbook by not purchasing their gas! And, we can do that WITHOUT hurting ourselves.
How? Since we all rely on our cars, we can't just stop buying gas.
But we CAN have an impact on gas prices if we all act together to force a price war.
Here's the idea: For the rest of this year, DON'T purchase ANY gasoline from the two biggest companies (which now are one), EXXON and MOBIL.
If they are not selling any gas, they will be inclined to reduce their prices.
If they reduce their prices, the other companies will have to follow suit.
But to have an impact, we need to reach literally millions of Exxon and Mobil gas buyers. It's really simple to do! Now, don't wimp out on me at this point...keep reading and I'll explain how simple it is to reach millions of people!!
I am sending this note to 30 people. If each of us send it to at least ten more (30 x 10 = 300) ... and those 300 send it to at least ten more (300 x10 = 3,000)...and so on, by the time the message reaches the sixth group of people, we will have reached over THREE MILLION consumers.
If those three million get excited and pass this on to ten friends each, then 30 million people will have been contacted!
If it goes one level further, you guessed it..... THREE HUNDRED MILLION PEOPLE!!!
Again, all you have to do is send this to 10 people. That's all!
(If you don't understand how we can reach 300 million and all you have to do is send this to 10 people.... Well, let's face it, you just aren't a mathematician. But I am . so trust me on this one.
How long would all that take? If each of us sends this e-mail out to ten more people within one day of receipt, all 300 MILLION people could conceivably be contacted within the next 8 days !!!
I'll bet you didn't think you and I had that much potential, did you!
Acting together we can make a difference.
If this makes sense to you, please pass this message on. I suggest that we not buy from EXXON/MOBIL UNTIL THEY LOWER THEIR PRICES TO THE $2.00 RANGE AND KEEP THEM DOWN. THIS CAN REALLY WORK.
Keep it going!!!
Dear sandra,
Thank you so much for standing with us in our fight to save baby seals. Our efforts are making an impact and your continued actions bring us one step closer to ending the annual commercial seal hunt in Canada.
But today the news from Canada remains bleak. The Canadian government has ignored findings from independent scientists and veterinarians and set the kill quota even higher than last year -- an astonishing 275,000 seals, almost all babies just days or weeks of age, will be clubbed and shot over the next few months. Scientists warn that the seal hunt poses a threat to the survival of seal populations, particularly as harp seals now face the added threat of global warming. And veterinary panels have concluded that the slaughter results in "considerable and unacceptable suffering," noting that sealers often fail to comply with anti-cruelty laws. That's why I'm asking for your help to send a strong message to the Canadian government to end the seal slaughter.
Contact the Canadian Minister of International Trade, David Emerson, and urge him to end the seal hunt.
The hunt is opposed by the overwhelming majority of people in Canada and around the world, and the Minister of International Trade, Mr. Emerson is in a unique position to stop it. But he must be convinced that the seal hunt damages Canada's economy and international reputation.
Click here now to tell Mr. Emerson that the seal hunt is bad for the Canadian economy, bad for tourism, and bad for Canada -- and that it is time to end the commercial seal hunt for good.
Thank you for everything you've already done to help save the seals. Together, I am confident that we can end Canada's cruel seal hunt forever.
Sincerely,
Wayne Pacelle
President & CEO
The Humane Society of the United States
Thank you so much for standing with us in our fight to save baby seals. Our efforts are making an impact and your continued actions bring us one step closer to ending the annual commercial seal hunt in Canada.
But today the news from Canada remains bleak. The Canadian government has ignored findings from independent scientists and veterinarians and set the kill quota even higher than last year -- an astonishing 275,000 seals, almost all babies just days or weeks of age, will be clubbed and shot over the next few months. Scientists warn that the seal hunt poses a threat to the survival of seal populations, particularly as harp seals now face the added threat of global warming. And veterinary panels have concluded that the slaughter results in "considerable and unacceptable suffering," noting that sealers often fail to comply with anti-cruelty laws. That's why I'm asking for your help to send a strong message to the Canadian government to end the seal slaughter.
Contact the Canadian Minister of International Trade, David Emerson, and urge him to end the seal hunt.
The hunt is opposed by the overwhelming majority of people in Canada and around the world, and the Minister of International Trade, Mr. Emerson is in a unique position to stop it. But he must be convinced that the seal hunt damages Canada's economy and international reputation.
Click here now to tell Mr. Emerson that the seal hunt is bad for the Canadian economy, bad for tourism, and bad for Canada -- and that it is time to end the commercial seal hunt for good.
Thank you for everything you've already done to help save the seals. Together, I am confident that we can end Canada's cruel seal hunt forever.
Sincerely,
Wayne Pacelle
President & CEO
The Humane Society of the United States
IE2002
Administrator
Sportsbook of the Month
Join Date: Mar 1999
Posts: 30,445
BoSox threaten to boycott Japan trip
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FORT MYERS, Fla. (AP) -- The Boston Red Sox refused to take the field for their final spring training game in Florida on Wednesday and threatened to boycott their flight to Japan for their season openers unless their coaches and other staff are paid for the trip.
Fans filled the stadium, the national anthems were sung and the Boston and Toronto lineups were announced, but the game did not begin at its 12:07 p.m. scheduled start.
Manager Terry Francona and his players were upset after learning staff members are not going to get a $40,000 stipend. The Boston Herald reported players insisted part of their agreement to make the trip included the fee -- for them and the coaches.
"I did not have an off day yesterday. I had the phone glued to my ear because I was promised some answers and I haven't even received a phone call," Francona said Wednesday. "So I'm a little bit stuck. What I want to do this morning is get excited to play a baseball game and what I ended up doing is apologizing to the coaches and being humiliated."
Third baseman Mike Lowell told The Boston Globe the team voted unanimously earlier in the day not to play Wednesday or to board the plane to Japan later Wednesday.
Shortly before the game, Coco Crisp and Dustin Pedroia stretched for a few minutes on the outfield grass before returning to the clubhouse. Blue Jay players took batting practice as usual, but the Red Sox did not.
The Red Sox clubhouse was closed to reporters before the game because of the dispute.
The World Series champions are scheduled to begin their season against Oakland with two games in Tokyo.
IE2002
View Public Profile
Find all posts by IE2002
Add IE2002 to Your Buddy List
#2 Today, 12:26 PM
IE2002
Administrator
Sportsbook of the Month
Join Date: Mar 1999
Posts: 30,445
Red Sox Return to Field After Dispute
The Boston Red Sox are playing their final spring training game in Florida, which started over an hour late amid a pay dispute for their trip to Japan.
The Red Sox have confirmed that the pay dispute over compensation for coaches on the Japan trip has been resolved and the team will board the plane to Japan later Wednesday.
The players had refused to play the final spring training game in Florida and threatened to boycott their flight to Japan for their season openers unless their coaches and other staff are paid for the trip.
Before noon, fans filled the stadium, the national anthems were sung and Boston and Toronto lineups were announced, but the game did not begin at its 12:07 p.m. scheduled start.
Baseball spokesman Rich Levin said the sport's lawyers were dealing with the situation.
"We're trying to work it out," he said.
Manager Terry Francona and his players were upset after learning staff members are not going to get a $40,000 stipend. The Boston Herald reported players insisted part of their agreement to make the trip included the fee - for them and the coaches.
"I did not have an off day yesterday. I had the phone glued to my ear because I was promised some answers and I haven't even received a phone call," Francona said Wednesday. "So I'm a little bit stuck. What I want to do this morning is get excited to play a baseball game and what I ended up doing is apologizing to the coaches and being humiliated."
Daisuke Matsuzaka, who had been scheduled to pitch, left the stadium to pitch at a game against Minnesota's Triple A affiliate. He is scheduled to be the opening day starter in Tokyo next week against Oakland.
The team voted unanimously earlier in the day not to play its final spring training game or to board the plane to Japan later Wednesday.
Catcher Jason Varitek said the players thought it was necessary to take a stand on behalf of the coaches and staff.
"They're the basis of what takes care of us," he said.
Oakland pitcher Alan Embree said he supported Boston's stance.
"I think we'll get together and talk about it. I was under the impression that everybody was taken care of," Embree said. "I don't care how they split it up, who's at fault, they just need to fix it."
He said a Boston player contacted him Wednesday morning. Oakland players planned to meet to discuss the situation before their exhibition game against a Chicago Cubs' split squad.
"For those guys to take that stance - they're veterans. They feel strongly about it, and they brought it to the attention of higher-ups," Embree said. "We have to fix it one way or the other. ... Coaches deserved compensation. They're going over there, too, and every little bit counts."
Boston pitcher Curt Schilling said they learned Tuesday the deal was not what the players and coaches thought they'd agreed to with Major League Baseball.
"I think everyone was kind of caught off guard," he said.
Red Sox batting coach Dave Magadan said he appreciated the players' support.
"It means as much as the money itself," he told ESPN.
Administrator
Sportsbook of the Month
Join Date: Mar 1999
Posts: 30,445
BoSox threaten to boycott Japan trip
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FORT MYERS, Fla. (AP) -- The Boston Red Sox refused to take the field for their final spring training game in Florida on Wednesday and threatened to boycott their flight to Japan for their season openers unless their coaches and other staff are paid for the trip.
Fans filled the stadium, the national anthems were sung and the Boston and Toronto lineups were announced, but the game did not begin at its 12:07 p.m. scheduled start.
Manager Terry Francona and his players were upset after learning staff members are not going to get a $40,000 stipend. The Boston Herald reported players insisted part of their agreement to make the trip included the fee -- for them and the coaches.
"I did not have an off day yesterday. I had the phone glued to my ear because I was promised some answers and I haven't even received a phone call," Francona said Wednesday. "So I'm a little bit stuck. What I want to do this morning is get excited to play a baseball game and what I ended up doing is apologizing to the coaches and being humiliated."
Third baseman Mike Lowell told The Boston Globe the team voted unanimously earlier in the day not to play Wednesday or to board the plane to Japan later Wednesday.
Shortly before the game, Coco Crisp and Dustin Pedroia stretched for a few minutes on the outfield grass before returning to the clubhouse. Blue Jay players took batting practice as usual, but the Red Sox did not.
The Red Sox clubhouse was closed to reporters before the game because of the dispute.
The World Series champions are scheduled to begin their season against Oakland with two games in Tokyo.
IE2002
View Public Profile
Find all posts by IE2002
Add IE2002 to Your Buddy List
#2 Today, 12:26 PM
IE2002
Administrator
Sportsbook of the Month
Join Date: Mar 1999
Posts: 30,445
Red Sox Return to Field After Dispute
The Boston Red Sox are playing their final spring training game in Florida, which started over an hour late amid a pay dispute for their trip to Japan.
The Red Sox have confirmed that the pay dispute over compensation for coaches on the Japan trip has been resolved and the team will board the plane to Japan later Wednesday.
The players had refused to play the final spring training game in Florida and threatened to boycott their flight to Japan for their season openers unless their coaches and other staff are paid for the trip.
Before noon, fans filled the stadium, the national anthems were sung and Boston and Toronto lineups were announced, but the game did not begin at its 12:07 p.m. scheduled start.
Baseball spokesman Rich Levin said the sport's lawyers were dealing with the situation.
"We're trying to work it out," he said.
Manager Terry Francona and his players were upset after learning staff members are not going to get a $40,000 stipend. The Boston Herald reported players insisted part of their agreement to make the trip included the fee - for them and the coaches.
"I did not have an off day yesterday. I had the phone glued to my ear because I was promised some answers and I haven't even received a phone call," Francona said Wednesday. "So I'm a little bit stuck. What I want to do this morning is get excited to play a baseball game and what I ended up doing is apologizing to the coaches and being humiliated."
Daisuke Matsuzaka, who had been scheduled to pitch, left the stadium to pitch at a game against Minnesota's Triple A affiliate. He is scheduled to be the opening day starter in Tokyo next week against Oakland.
The team voted unanimously earlier in the day not to play its final spring training game or to board the plane to Japan later Wednesday.
Catcher Jason Varitek said the players thought it was necessary to take a stand on behalf of the coaches and staff.
"They're the basis of what takes care of us," he said.
Oakland pitcher Alan Embree said he supported Boston's stance.
"I think we'll get together and talk about it. I was under the impression that everybody was taken care of," Embree said. "I don't care how they split it up, who's at fault, they just need to fix it."
He said a Boston player contacted him Wednesday morning. Oakland players planned to meet to discuss the situation before their exhibition game against a Chicago Cubs' split squad.
"For those guys to take that stance - they're veterans. They feel strongly about it, and they brought it to the attention of higher-ups," Embree said. "We have to fix it one way or the other. ... Coaches deserved compensation. They're going over there, too, and every little bit counts."
Boston pitcher Curt Schilling said they learned Tuesday the deal was not what the players and coaches thought they'd agreed to with Major League Baseball.
"I think everyone was kind of caught off guard," he said.
Red Sox batting coach Dave Magadan said he appreciated the players' support.
"It means as much as the money itself," he told ESPN.
:mj07: :mj07: :mj07:
If you Don't Play These You Must Hate $$$$$
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posting record 17-9
I have been posting these at another forum (****** and this is my record there) and I havve decided to post them at a few other forums in an attempt to help some others. There are some pretty good cappers here that I look at in some sports. Below is a little background on how I make my selections. By education I am a damn rocket scientist and I analyze data very well. I think this program has huge potential.
I worked with Baker from this forum on an NBA totals program sharing ideas last year. I thought it had great possibilities. I had some other ideas I wanted to try to verify but unfortunately Baker has disappeared and the results and the program went with him. So I hired someone else to start a new program and it is still a work in progress but I believe I have enough data that makes it valid. I still have some other things I want to implement into the program to see if I can continue to test my theories and improve my results. The baseline of the program is what was started with Baker and now improved and modified (at least I hope improved). So this thread is in honor of Baker and lets see if we can make the dough rise!!!
My program will give selections on every game with a couple of games just too close to call. I will typically give just one selection. I am going to track both my selections posted here along with the overall record (the overall record is just for you to watch and you can believe it or not).
Today's selections:
NJ Under 198
SA Over 181
As Always Good Luck
Northern Star
If you Don't Play These You Must Hate $$$$$
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posting record 17-9
I have been posting these at another forum (****** and this is my record there) and I havve decided to post them at a few other forums in an attempt to help some others. There are some pretty good cappers here that I look at in some sports. Below is a little background on how I make my selections. By education I am a damn rocket scientist and I analyze data very well. I think this program has huge potential.
I worked with Baker from this forum on an NBA totals program sharing ideas last year. I thought it had great possibilities. I had some other ideas I wanted to try to verify but unfortunately Baker has disappeared and the results and the program went with him. So I hired someone else to start a new program and it is still a work in progress but I believe I have enough data that makes it valid. I still have some other things I want to implement into the program to see if I can continue to test my theories and improve my results. The baseline of the program is what was started with Baker and now improved and modified (at least I hope improved). So this thread is in honor of Baker and lets see if we can make the dough rise!!!
My program will give selections on every game with a couple of games just too close to call. I will typically give just one selection. I am going to track both my selections posted here along with the overall record (the overall record is just for you to watch and you can believe it or not).
Today's selections:
NJ Under 198
SA Over 181
As Always Good Luck
Northern Star
there ya go IO just like 6'5 but he posted 3 pages of this drivel, it amuses me, it doesnt bother me, keep it up, you zemmi ... just proves how much your ignorant ass knows about 9/11:mj07:
Last edited:
Let Our Children Roam Free
Fear of traffic risks and ?stranger danger? are holding our children captive indoors. For the sake of their health and development, and for the environment they will one day need to protect, we have to fi nd ways of getting them into the wild.
Here's an unusal request from a feature writer: I?d like you to stopreading this article right now. Takea few seconds to remember your favourite place to play as a child.Where was that special place? What did it look like? How did it smell? Don?t carry on reading until you have this place clearly pictured in your mind?s eye. Ready to read on? Good. Here are some predictions. Your favourite childhood place to play was out of doors. It was away from adults. And it was a ?wild? place ? not truly wild perhaps, but unkempt, dirty, and quite possibly a little bit dangerous. How can I be so sure? Because over the years I?ve asked lots of grown-ups this question ? parish clerks, senior civil servants, nursery workers, landscape architecture undergraduates, council officials, foresters, politicians, teachers ? and they all say the same thing. If you doubt me, just raise the subject at your next coffee break or party and see what comes up.
Now some more memories: what did you do there, in that magical, mysterious spot? Maybe you played tag and hide-and-seek, made mud pies or built dens. You defi nitely hung out with your best friends, and perhaps you spent time there on your own as well. Your preferences are probably typical not just of your culture, class or generation, but of children across the world and throughout history.
It seems that, given the chance, human beings in their middle years of childhood love nothing more than a secret hideaway they can make their own: usually a spot carefully chosen to be just out of earshot of a shouting parent.
Yes, even the UK?s current breed of batteryreared, celebrity-fed, techno-kids would, given the chance, rather be outside meeting their mates and mucking about than stuck indoors surfing the net.
And parents too say that they want their children to be able to play out more. Yet children are disappearing from the outdoors at a rate that would make them top of any conservationist?s list of endangered species if they were any other member of the animal kingdom. So does it matter that kids aren?t playing outside as much these days?
Let?s start with health, and specifi cally with childhood obesity. Here, everyone agrees: playing out keeps kids thinner. Even the Government?s own recent public health white paper accepts that the loss of opportunities for spontaneous outdoor play is one of the main causes of childhood obesity. Dr William Deitz, the leading US Federal Government expert on nutrition and physical activity, claims that play may be the ?magic bullet? experts have been searching for, saying in a British Medical Journal editorial, that ?opportunities for spontaneous play may be the only requirement that young children need to increase their physical activity.?
The physical benefits of outdoor play should come as no surprise. What?s more remarkable is the growing evidence that children?s mental health and emotional well-being is enhanced by contact with the outdoors, and that the restorative effect appears to be strongest in natural settings.
Studies at the University of Illinois? Human-Environment Research Laboratory on children with Attention-Hyperactivity Defi cit Disorder (ADHD) have shown that green outdoor spaces not only foster creative play and improve interactions with adults, they also relieve the symptoms of the disorder. Although research on the developmental signifi cance of childhood engagement with nature is in its infancy, the researchers are convinced of the depth of the connection between children?s well-being and the environment, claiming that contact with nature may be ?as important to children as good nutrition and adequate sleep?.
The great thing about many natural places is that they are ideal environments for children to explore, giving them the chance to expand their horizons and build their confi dence while learning about and managing the risks for themselves. These places are unpredictable, ever changing, and prone to the randomness of nature and the vagaries of the weather. But far from being a problem, the uncertainty and variation inherent in natural settings is part of what attracts us to them in the fi rst place. Indeed in evolutionary terms, it is the unsurpassed ability of Homo sapiens to adjust to changes in our habitat that has, for better or worse,led us to be the dominant species on the planet.
Which means that a bit of danger and uncertainty is actually good for you. Bringing it back to children?s play, the Danish landscape architect Helle Nebelong ? creator of some wonderful natural public spaces in Copenhagen ? puts it like this:
?I am convinced that standardised play equipment is dangerous. When the distance between all the rungs on the climbing net or the ladder is exactly the same, the child has no need to concentrate on where he puts his feet. This lesson cannot be carried over into all the knobbly and asymmetrical forms with which one is confronted throughout life.?
But there?s more to outdoor play than learning and health. Den-building, bug-hunting and ponddipping make visible the intensity of children?s relationship with nature. These primal activities not only show how closely attuned are our senses to the workings of the natural world, but also speak to a deeper spiritual bond with landscapes and living things that leaves impoverished those who, whether by choice or compulsion, lead their lives indoors. In his recent book Last Child in the Woods: Saving our kids from nature-defi cit disorder, American journalist and parenting expert Richard Louv argues that it is the immediacy, depth and unboundedness of unstructured outdoor play that gives the nature-child encounter most meaning, and that adult-led educational activities are a poor second-best ? and in the case of television or the internet, third or fourth best.
Culture of fear
Just why is the decline in children?s outdoor experiences happening? The root causes of the dramatic loss of children?s freedoms lie in changes to the very fabric of their lives over the last 30 years or so. An exponential growth in road traffic, alongside poor town planning and shifts in the make-up and daily rhythms of families and communities, have left children with fewer outdoor places to go and fewer friendly faces looking out for them if they needed a bit of help, a cuddle or simply a pee and a glass of water. These changes coincided with ? some would say fed into ? the growth of what sociologist Frank Furedi calls the ?culture of fear?: a generalised anxiety about all manner of threats that found fertile ground in turn-of-the-millennium families, even though children are statistically safer from harm now than at any point in human history. In a textbook demonstration of the mechanisms of the market, these physical, economic and social changes and fears have been exploited by manufacturers and advertisers, whose products and messages both reinforce the logic of keeping children virtual prisoners, and compel us to compensate them in the only way our cash-rich, time-poor society seems to know: by spending money on them.
Successive governments must bear some of the blame for children?s captivity, through their promotion of planning policies that relentlessly favour cars over communities and profit over people. But when looking for evidence of political guilt, do not pay too much attention to the much-bemoaned fate of playing fi elds. Ironically, they are now more protected than any other type of land use. In any case, they have always been more important to the sport-playing men who monopolise them than to children, for whom they are way down the list of most-loved outdoor spaces. Studies have shown that, given the chance, children spend more time playing in the bushes, trees and ditches around the edges of playing fi elds than on the fl at green monocultures that are their raison d?etre. Again, reawaken those childhood memories. For most of us, playing fi elds were where we took part in the ritual humiliation known as school sport or where, if we ever had the temerity to pay a visit in our free time, belligerent adults would chase us off, determined not to let our impromptu kick-about ruin their sacred pitch.No, the real planning crimes lie elsewhere: in racetrack streets, in estates devoid of attractive parks and green spaces, and in town plans that wed families to their cars forever. There?s no doubt that traffi c danger, unlike stranger danger, is a real threat to children and a legitimate worry for parents. Around 100 child pedestrians are killed every year, a fi gure that puts the UK near the bottom of Europe?s child road safety league. It?s no surprise that Government fi gures show a steady fall in children walking or cycling over the last twenty years or more, to the extent that while over 90 per cent of kids own a bike, just two per cent cycle to school.
The upshot of these policies, which never gave children a second thought, is to trap them in their increasingly well-appointed cells, utterly dependent on the parental taxi service and make them captive consumers of whatever indoor diversions they and their parents can conjure up. Health experts have even coined a new word, obesogenic, to describe those aspects of our lives that make us fat, and top of the list is the design of streets, towns and cities.
Time is surely running out for those who want to reengage children with the outdoors. Offi cial Government fi gures say that over 30 per cent of children aged eight to 10 never play outside without an adult watching over them. And research by Mayer Hillman and colleagues at the Policy Studies Institute suggests that, in a single generation, the ?home habitat? of a typical eightyear- old ? the area in which children are able to travel on their own ? has shrunk to one-ninth of its former size. Actually, that was between 1971 and 1990, but do you think things have improved for children since then? Neither do I. We face the prospect of a generation of children growing up at best indifferent to, or at worst terrifi ed of, the world outside their homes, and who will then, as adults, pass on their fear of the outdoors to their own children, as Richard Louv starkly evokes in the title of his book.
Natural play
How can this dismal future be avoided? It may be unrealistic to think that we can ever fully restore to children the free-range childhoods enjoyed by my generation. But we can take steps to loosen their cages and extend their territory. My action plan for outdoor play would start with the spaces and places children fi nd themselves in every day: playgrounds, parks, schools and streets. If what best feeds children?s bodies, minds and spirits is frequent, free-spirited, playful engagement with nature, we need to go with the grain of their play instincts and put our efforts into creating neighbourhood spaces where they can get down and dirty in natural outdoor settings, free of charge and on a daily basis.
That?s exactly what the authorities are doing in Freiburg, a German city with strong green credentials situated on the edge of the Black Forest. For over a decade now Freiburg?s parks department has stopped installing the sterile playgrounds full of tubular steel, primary coloured plastic and expensive rubber surfacing, and instead has been creating ?nature playgrounds? that are a bit more, well, earthy. The resulting landscapes are diverse spaces with mounds, ditches, logs, fallen trees, boulders, bushes, wild fl owers and dirt. Full of secret corners and shady spots, they are just like the wild spaces of our childhood memories. Yet they meet the same Europe-wide safety standards as UK playgrounds. As Freiburg?s existing public play areas wear out, the parks department works with local children and adults to create these new-style nature playgrounds. Over 40 have been built so far, and they are designed with a lifetime in mind. Trees, bushes and fl owering plants are carefully chosen to create playful nooks and crannies, to attract insects and birds, and to mature and spread, adding mystery and richness to the site as the years go by.
The construction methods of Freiburg?s nature play areas are a model of sustainability compared to the raw materials, heavy industrial processes and carbon emissions that go into building conventional playgrounds. And if the aesthetic and environmental arguments are not enough to win you over, perhaps the price tag will. Freiburg?s nature play spaces are typically half the capital cost of a conventional fi xed equipment play area of the same size, simply due to the high costs of tubular steel, coloured plastic and unnecessary hi-tech rubber surfacing. The approach was introduced after research by the city?s university showed that simply having good green space near children?s homes encouraged them out of doors and away from the TV. The playgrounds have attracted international interest. Not surprisingly, children love them too.
The UK is light-years behind Freiburg and Copenhagen ? and for that matter much of Northern Europe. But even here, what might be called a ?movement for real play? is beginning to spread. In Newcastle, local residents involved in improving Exhibition Park organised a ?den day? to introduce children to the joys of shelter building. Asked what they thought about the day, one boy said: ?I love this, getting really fi lthy dirty!? while a girl responded: ?If I could rewind back to this day every day I would. This is a mint day!? In Scotland, Stirling Council has been inspired by Helle Nebelong to create natural play spaces across the authority. While one site was still being built, children started wrestling in the mud created by the construction works, and their mums persuaded the council to keep the muddy areas for good.
In the South West of England ?Wild About Play?, an environmental play project, is supporting hundreds of playworkers and environmental educators by sharing playful ideas for outdoor activities. Children have told the project that what they most want to do in the great outdoors is to make fi res and cook on them, and to collect and eat wild foods. Another environmental project, Greenstart, aims to show the benefi ts of contact with green spaces for younger children through running activity programmes in local outdoor spaces in Northumberland. One five-year-old boy involved in a family tree planting event said: ?I can?t wait to go back and see my tree.? In Cambridge, Bath and Haringey, that near-extinct species the park keeper is appearing in a new guise. Called ?play rangers? they are specially trained and run playful activities at set times, helping to build up usage, familiarity and ultimately ownership of these spaces. Forest schools ? where teachers regularly spend whole days in the woods with their classes ? are starting up in many woodland areas, supported nationally by an alliance of conservation charities, the Timber Trade Federation and the Forestry Commission. The charity Learning through Landscapes is helping schools across the country create some fi ne natural playgrounds.
Not content with just forest schools and traditional playgrounds, the Forestry Commission in England has been working with me to look at other ways we can attract and engage children and young people in woodlands. We recently visited Freiburg?s nature playgrounds and were inspired by what we saw. Realising that adventure is an essential feature of any woodland visit, we have started thinking about ways to give children ? and their parents ? the confi dence to enjoy more intimate, unregulated contact with the wildlife and landscapes of the woods. At some sites, we are looking at literally pulling down the fences between the play areas and the forest beyond. At others, we want to give children the message that they are not just allowed to build dens and dam streams, they are positively encouraged to do so. If you think this sounds reckless, remember: children are better at managing the risks in natural settings than we give them credit for. After all on a beach, the sea is anything but safe, but have you ever seen a fence between you and the shoreline?
Exciting outdoor environments are all very well, but children have to be able to get to them. Of course, streets are the starting point for so many children?s independent outdoor adventures, and with traffi c rising every year, the prospects for reclaiming them may look bleak. But green shoots of hope are springing up amidst the gloom.
Contrary to what car-loving journalists might say, many communities are crying out for safer streets with lower speed limits and less traffi c. A growing alliance of environmental, road safety and children?s agencies has signed up to ?20?s plenty?, the call for a standard speed limit of 20 mph in residential areas. Some communities have gone even further and worked with local councils to create ?home zones?: people-friendly streets based on continental designs, where the streetspace is transformed from a car corridor to a shared social space in which people can meet, children can play and the car driver is a guest. Having been part of the original campaign to introduce home zones to the UK a decade ago, I recently surveyed some 40 schemes to fi nd out their impact. Over half reported more children walking, cycling and playing in the street. Intriguingly, some schemes have also seen falling crime rates and rising levels of community activity in the form of litter collections, festivals and street parties.
Parental guidance
We parents also have the power to resist the seductions of consumerism and play our part in restoring to children some of the freedoms we took for granted when we were young. We can say no a little more, switch off the screens and direct our children?s curious eyes to some altogether more expansive vistas. In doing so, we need to face up to our fears and chip away at the free-fl oating anxiety that can so easily beset us. Some threats ? traffi c, for instance ? are real, and can ultimately only be tackled by governments in response to political pressure. But others need to be seen for what they are: a social neurosis stemming from a collective loss of nerve.
For instance, in the UK we have become completely paranoid about the threat to children from strangers. Fewer than one child in a million is killed by a stranger each year. The numbers have if anything declined since the Second World War. Over ten times as many children are killed by cars, and around fi ve times as many by their own parents or relatives. Yet on the mercifully rare occasions when the worst does happen, the headline that greets us is ?no child is safe?. As a parent, I believe it?s about time we rose up en masse and showed this fear for what it is: scare mongering. The media has to shoulder much of the blame. Their hyper-emotive stories appear cruelly crafted to scare us witless, undermining any attempt by readers and viewers to balance a reasonable interest in human tragedy with a realistic assessment of the risks. The real tragedy is that parents? anxieties and restrictions feed the very fear of the outdoors that gets so readily translated into ?stranger danger?.
Criminologists have long known that in streets, parks and playgrounds there is safety in numbers. Turn that around and you get deserted streets, underused parks and empty playgrounds leading to a vicious circle of fear, vandalism, misuse and decay. So I say to every parent, wake up and smell the fresh air: take your child to your local park and help save the planet. Better still, why not arrange some outdoor play dates with fellow parents?
You?ll help spread that outdoor vibe, your child will have twice the fun and who knows, you might even enjoy yourself.
You may think that risk aversion, together with its legal offspring the compensation culture, are everywhere. Barely a week goes by without the media reporting some or other nonsensical health and safety diktat allegedly handed down from on high. Conkers, pet corners, egg boxes, even daisy chains have been deemed a danger too far for our children.
My response once again is: use your common sense and don?t believe the hype. The safety Nazis and the compensation culture are, if not quite myths, then certainly paper tigers. Here?s a quote: ?An essential part of the process of a child becoming an adult is the need, and desire, to explore limits and to try new experiences.? Read that quote again and think about it. Its source may surprise you. It is not from the youth wing of the Dangerous Sports Club. It is from CEN, Europe?s leading safety standards agency. As a statement about what children deserve, you could not wish for anything clearer. What would most help parents cure themselves of risk anxiety is more of these reassuring, supportive messages: more voices that say: ?You can be a good parent and still give your children a taste of freedom.?
Turning to the courts, the reality is that they are no more likely today to hand down daft judgements than they were 10, 20 or a hundred years ago. To take just one example, a recent ruling actually forced the Corporation of London to allow swimmers access to Highgate Ponds even when lifeguards are not present. Janet Paraskeva, chief executive of the Law Society, says: ?In recent years accident claims, far from rising, have remained static and then fell last year by 9.5 per cent.? Again, it is down to each of us to challenge the myth of the compensation culture and to restore some balance.
Too many children spend far too much time stuck in front of screens, not so much couch potatoes as couch prisoners. Too many of the streets where children live have become the sole domain of the car. For too long children?s outdoor play has been overly haunted by the spectre of the predatory paedophile and the health and safety zealot. Too many parents forget their own childhoods and switch off their common sense, excessively infl uenced by sensationalist media coverage on the one hand and seductive advertising on the other.
It is also likely that ?battery-reared? children will lack confi dence as they grow up and be more vulnerable to bullying. Researchers have found a link between children who become victims of bullying and the protectiveness of their parents. And in 1999 the report Bright Futures: Promoting Children and Young People?s Mental Health from the Mental Health Foundation warned of the dangers of overprotecting children and stopping them from developing their own coping mechanisms. All this is a disaster for anyone who wants to bring freedom, adventure and nature back into the daily rhythms of children?s lives. Surely it?s about time we all recognised the value of allowing children to truly get to grips with the knobbly and asymmetrical forms of the natural world. Just as we all did when we were young.
WE NEED A CAMPAIGN
To stand a chance of restoring the outdoors as childhood?s rightful domain, a movement for real play needs to do more than just create projects on the ground, however inspiring these may be. We need a high-profi le campaign with clear objectives, powerful advocates and at its heart a vision of children once again claiming their rightful place out of doors and immersing themselves in nature.
We need
- A national programme to upgrade the thousands of parks and public play areas that many councils will otherwise leave to rust and rot.
- housing developers to be required by law to create attractive, playful green spaces within easy reach of every child and family, and to ensure that streets are designed as home zones.
- politicians to get the message that a speed limit of ?20? really is ?plenty? in streets where children live.
- to tell Government that it?s not acceptable to build schools with postage stamp-sized playgrounds devoid of greenery, or to warehouse children in nurseries with no outdoor space.
- to involve children themselves in creating and maintaining play spaces, so that their views can be taken into account and they feel ownership of the results.
All this may sound ambitious, but public campaigns can still make a difference. No one in Government gave school meals a second thought until Jamie Oliver switched on his food processor and showed us the truth about the ?food? we were offering the nation?s children. Imagine the waves that J K Rowling, say, would make if she declared that, when it comes to stretching a child?s spirit, the nation?s playgrounds offer a diet of adventure unworthy of any aspiring Harry Potter. Picture the impact that David Attenborough would have if he argued that children out of doors are just as good an indicator of the quality of their habitats as wild salmon are of theirs, and deserved just as much protection.
Copyright Tim Gill, Writer and consultant
Fear of traffic risks and ?stranger danger? are holding our children captive indoors. For the sake of their health and development, and for the environment they will one day need to protect, we have to fi nd ways of getting them into the wild.
Here's an unusal request from a feature writer: I?d like you to stopreading this article right now. Takea few seconds to remember your favourite place to play as a child.Where was that special place? What did it look like? How did it smell? Don?t carry on reading until you have this place clearly pictured in your mind?s eye. Ready to read on? Good. Here are some predictions. Your favourite childhood place to play was out of doors. It was away from adults. And it was a ?wild? place ? not truly wild perhaps, but unkempt, dirty, and quite possibly a little bit dangerous. How can I be so sure? Because over the years I?ve asked lots of grown-ups this question ? parish clerks, senior civil servants, nursery workers, landscape architecture undergraduates, council officials, foresters, politicians, teachers ? and they all say the same thing. If you doubt me, just raise the subject at your next coffee break or party and see what comes up.
Now some more memories: what did you do there, in that magical, mysterious spot? Maybe you played tag and hide-and-seek, made mud pies or built dens. You defi nitely hung out with your best friends, and perhaps you spent time there on your own as well. Your preferences are probably typical not just of your culture, class or generation, but of children across the world and throughout history.
It seems that, given the chance, human beings in their middle years of childhood love nothing more than a secret hideaway they can make their own: usually a spot carefully chosen to be just out of earshot of a shouting parent.
Yes, even the UK?s current breed of batteryreared, celebrity-fed, techno-kids would, given the chance, rather be outside meeting their mates and mucking about than stuck indoors surfing the net.
And parents too say that they want their children to be able to play out more. Yet children are disappearing from the outdoors at a rate that would make them top of any conservationist?s list of endangered species if they were any other member of the animal kingdom. So does it matter that kids aren?t playing outside as much these days?
Let?s start with health, and specifi cally with childhood obesity. Here, everyone agrees: playing out keeps kids thinner. Even the Government?s own recent public health white paper accepts that the loss of opportunities for spontaneous outdoor play is one of the main causes of childhood obesity. Dr William Deitz, the leading US Federal Government expert on nutrition and physical activity, claims that play may be the ?magic bullet? experts have been searching for, saying in a British Medical Journal editorial, that ?opportunities for spontaneous play may be the only requirement that young children need to increase their physical activity.?
The physical benefits of outdoor play should come as no surprise. What?s more remarkable is the growing evidence that children?s mental health and emotional well-being is enhanced by contact with the outdoors, and that the restorative effect appears to be strongest in natural settings.
Studies at the University of Illinois? Human-Environment Research Laboratory on children with Attention-Hyperactivity Defi cit Disorder (ADHD) have shown that green outdoor spaces not only foster creative play and improve interactions with adults, they also relieve the symptoms of the disorder. Although research on the developmental signifi cance of childhood engagement with nature is in its infancy, the researchers are convinced of the depth of the connection between children?s well-being and the environment, claiming that contact with nature may be ?as important to children as good nutrition and adequate sleep?.
The great thing about many natural places is that they are ideal environments for children to explore, giving them the chance to expand their horizons and build their confi dence while learning about and managing the risks for themselves. These places are unpredictable, ever changing, and prone to the randomness of nature and the vagaries of the weather. But far from being a problem, the uncertainty and variation inherent in natural settings is part of what attracts us to them in the fi rst place. Indeed in evolutionary terms, it is the unsurpassed ability of Homo sapiens to adjust to changes in our habitat that has, for better or worse,led us to be the dominant species on the planet.
Which means that a bit of danger and uncertainty is actually good for you. Bringing it back to children?s play, the Danish landscape architect Helle Nebelong ? creator of some wonderful natural public spaces in Copenhagen ? puts it like this:
?I am convinced that standardised play equipment is dangerous. When the distance between all the rungs on the climbing net or the ladder is exactly the same, the child has no need to concentrate on where he puts his feet. This lesson cannot be carried over into all the knobbly and asymmetrical forms with which one is confronted throughout life.?
But there?s more to outdoor play than learning and health. Den-building, bug-hunting and ponddipping make visible the intensity of children?s relationship with nature. These primal activities not only show how closely attuned are our senses to the workings of the natural world, but also speak to a deeper spiritual bond with landscapes and living things that leaves impoverished those who, whether by choice or compulsion, lead their lives indoors. In his recent book Last Child in the Woods: Saving our kids from nature-defi cit disorder, American journalist and parenting expert Richard Louv argues that it is the immediacy, depth and unboundedness of unstructured outdoor play that gives the nature-child encounter most meaning, and that adult-led educational activities are a poor second-best ? and in the case of television or the internet, third or fourth best.
Culture of fear
Just why is the decline in children?s outdoor experiences happening? The root causes of the dramatic loss of children?s freedoms lie in changes to the very fabric of their lives over the last 30 years or so. An exponential growth in road traffic, alongside poor town planning and shifts in the make-up and daily rhythms of families and communities, have left children with fewer outdoor places to go and fewer friendly faces looking out for them if they needed a bit of help, a cuddle or simply a pee and a glass of water. These changes coincided with ? some would say fed into ? the growth of what sociologist Frank Furedi calls the ?culture of fear?: a generalised anxiety about all manner of threats that found fertile ground in turn-of-the-millennium families, even though children are statistically safer from harm now than at any point in human history. In a textbook demonstration of the mechanisms of the market, these physical, economic and social changes and fears have been exploited by manufacturers and advertisers, whose products and messages both reinforce the logic of keeping children virtual prisoners, and compel us to compensate them in the only way our cash-rich, time-poor society seems to know: by spending money on them.
Successive governments must bear some of the blame for children?s captivity, through their promotion of planning policies that relentlessly favour cars over communities and profit over people. But when looking for evidence of political guilt, do not pay too much attention to the much-bemoaned fate of playing fi elds. Ironically, they are now more protected than any other type of land use. In any case, they have always been more important to the sport-playing men who monopolise them than to children, for whom they are way down the list of most-loved outdoor spaces. Studies have shown that, given the chance, children spend more time playing in the bushes, trees and ditches around the edges of playing fi elds than on the fl at green monocultures that are their raison d?etre. Again, reawaken those childhood memories. For most of us, playing fi elds were where we took part in the ritual humiliation known as school sport or where, if we ever had the temerity to pay a visit in our free time, belligerent adults would chase us off, determined not to let our impromptu kick-about ruin their sacred pitch.No, the real planning crimes lie elsewhere: in racetrack streets, in estates devoid of attractive parks and green spaces, and in town plans that wed families to their cars forever. There?s no doubt that traffi c danger, unlike stranger danger, is a real threat to children and a legitimate worry for parents. Around 100 child pedestrians are killed every year, a fi gure that puts the UK near the bottom of Europe?s child road safety league. It?s no surprise that Government fi gures show a steady fall in children walking or cycling over the last twenty years or more, to the extent that while over 90 per cent of kids own a bike, just two per cent cycle to school.
The upshot of these policies, which never gave children a second thought, is to trap them in their increasingly well-appointed cells, utterly dependent on the parental taxi service and make them captive consumers of whatever indoor diversions they and their parents can conjure up. Health experts have even coined a new word, obesogenic, to describe those aspects of our lives that make us fat, and top of the list is the design of streets, towns and cities.
Time is surely running out for those who want to reengage children with the outdoors. Offi cial Government fi gures say that over 30 per cent of children aged eight to 10 never play outside without an adult watching over them. And research by Mayer Hillman and colleagues at the Policy Studies Institute suggests that, in a single generation, the ?home habitat? of a typical eightyear- old ? the area in which children are able to travel on their own ? has shrunk to one-ninth of its former size. Actually, that was between 1971 and 1990, but do you think things have improved for children since then? Neither do I. We face the prospect of a generation of children growing up at best indifferent to, or at worst terrifi ed of, the world outside their homes, and who will then, as adults, pass on their fear of the outdoors to their own children, as Richard Louv starkly evokes in the title of his book.
Natural play
How can this dismal future be avoided? It may be unrealistic to think that we can ever fully restore to children the free-range childhoods enjoyed by my generation. But we can take steps to loosen their cages and extend their territory. My action plan for outdoor play would start with the spaces and places children fi nd themselves in every day: playgrounds, parks, schools and streets. If what best feeds children?s bodies, minds and spirits is frequent, free-spirited, playful engagement with nature, we need to go with the grain of their play instincts and put our efforts into creating neighbourhood spaces where they can get down and dirty in natural outdoor settings, free of charge and on a daily basis.
That?s exactly what the authorities are doing in Freiburg, a German city with strong green credentials situated on the edge of the Black Forest. For over a decade now Freiburg?s parks department has stopped installing the sterile playgrounds full of tubular steel, primary coloured plastic and expensive rubber surfacing, and instead has been creating ?nature playgrounds? that are a bit more, well, earthy. The resulting landscapes are diverse spaces with mounds, ditches, logs, fallen trees, boulders, bushes, wild fl owers and dirt. Full of secret corners and shady spots, they are just like the wild spaces of our childhood memories. Yet they meet the same Europe-wide safety standards as UK playgrounds. As Freiburg?s existing public play areas wear out, the parks department works with local children and adults to create these new-style nature playgrounds. Over 40 have been built so far, and they are designed with a lifetime in mind. Trees, bushes and fl owering plants are carefully chosen to create playful nooks and crannies, to attract insects and birds, and to mature and spread, adding mystery and richness to the site as the years go by.
The construction methods of Freiburg?s nature play areas are a model of sustainability compared to the raw materials, heavy industrial processes and carbon emissions that go into building conventional playgrounds. And if the aesthetic and environmental arguments are not enough to win you over, perhaps the price tag will. Freiburg?s nature play spaces are typically half the capital cost of a conventional fi xed equipment play area of the same size, simply due to the high costs of tubular steel, coloured plastic and unnecessary hi-tech rubber surfacing. The approach was introduced after research by the city?s university showed that simply having good green space near children?s homes encouraged them out of doors and away from the TV. The playgrounds have attracted international interest. Not surprisingly, children love them too.
The UK is light-years behind Freiburg and Copenhagen ? and for that matter much of Northern Europe. But even here, what might be called a ?movement for real play? is beginning to spread. In Newcastle, local residents involved in improving Exhibition Park organised a ?den day? to introduce children to the joys of shelter building. Asked what they thought about the day, one boy said: ?I love this, getting really fi lthy dirty!? while a girl responded: ?If I could rewind back to this day every day I would. This is a mint day!? In Scotland, Stirling Council has been inspired by Helle Nebelong to create natural play spaces across the authority. While one site was still being built, children started wrestling in the mud created by the construction works, and their mums persuaded the council to keep the muddy areas for good.
In the South West of England ?Wild About Play?, an environmental play project, is supporting hundreds of playworkers and environmental educators by sharing playful ideas for outdoor activities. Children have told the project that what they most want to do in the great outdoors is to make fi res and cook on them, and to collect and eat wild foods. Another environmental project, Greenstart, aims to show the benefi ts of contact with green spaces for younger children through running activity programmes in local outdoor spaces in Northumberland. One five-year-old boy involved in a family tree planting event said: ?I can?t wait to go back and see my tree.? In Cambridge, Bath and Haringey, that near-extinct species the park keeper is appearing in a new guise. Called ?play rangers? they are specially trained and run playful activities at set times, helping to build up usage, familiarity and ultimately ownership of these spaces. Forest schools ? where teachers regularly spend whole days in the woods with their classes ? are starting up in many woodland areas, supported nationally by an alliance of conservation charities, the Timber Trade Federation and the Forestry Commission. The charity Learning through Landscapes is helping schools across the country create some fi ne natural playgrounds.
Not content with just forest schools and traditional playgrounds, the Forestry Commission in England has been working with me to look at other ways we can attract and engage children and young people in woodlands. We recently visited Freiburg?s nature playgrounds and were inspired by what we saw. Realising that adventure is an essential feature of any woodland visit, we have started thinking about ways to give children ? and their parents ? the confi dence to enjoy more intimate, unregulated contact with the wildlife and landscapes of the woods. At some sites, we are looking at literally pulling down the fences between the play areas and the forest beyond. At others, we want to give children the message that they are not just allowed to build dens and dam streams, they are positively encouraged to do so. If you think this sounds reckless, remember: children are better at managing the risks in natural settings than we give them credit for. After all on a beach, the sea is anything but safe, but have you ever seen a fence between you and the shoreline?
Exciting outdoor environments are all very well, but children have to be able to get to them. Of course, streets are the starting point for so many children?s independent outdoor adventures, and with traffi c rising every year, the prospects for reclaiming them may look bleak. But green shoots of hope are springing up amidst the gloom.
Contrary to what car-loving journalists might say, many communities are crying out for safer streets with lower speed limits and less traffi c. A growing alliance of environmental, road safety and children?s agencies has signed up to ?20?s plenty?, the call for a standard speed limit of 20 mph in residential areas. Some communities have gone even further and worked with local councils to create ?home zones?: people-friendly streets based on continental designs, where the streetspace is transformed from a car corridor to a shared social space in which people can meet, children can play and the car driver is a guest. Having been part of the original campaign to introduce home zones to the UK a decade ago, I recently surveyed some 40 schemes to fi nd out their impact. Over half reported more children walking, cycling and playing in the street. Intriguingly, some schemes have also seen falling crime rates and rising levels of community activity in the form of litter collections, festivals and street parties.
Parental guidance
We parents also have the power to resist the seductions of consumerism and play our part in restoring to children some of the freedoms we took for granted when we were young. We can say no a little more, switch off the screens and direct our children?s curious eyes to some altogether more expansive vistas. In doing so, we need to face up to our fears and chip away at the free-fl oating anxiety that can so easily beset us. Some threats ? traffi c, for instance ? are real, and can ultimately only be tackled by governments in response to political pressure. But others need to be seen for what they are: a social neurosis stemming from a collective loss of nerve.
For instance, in the UK we have become completely paranoid about the threat to children from strangers. Fewer than one child in a million is killed by a stranger each year. The numbers have if anything declined since the Second World War. Over ten times as many children are killed by cars, and around fi ve times as many by their own parents or relatives. Yet on the mercifully rare occasions when the worst does happen, the headline that greets us is ?no child is safe?. As a parent, I believe it?s about time we rose up en masse and showed this fear for what it is: scare mongering. The media has to shoulder much of the blame. Their hyper-emotive stories appear cruelly crafted to scare us witless, undermining any attempt by readers and viewers to balance a reasonable interest in human tragedy with a realistic assessment of the risks. The real tragedy is that parents? anxieties and restrictions feed the very fear of the outdoors that gets so readily translated into ?stranger danger?.
Criminologists have long known that in streets, parks and playgrounds there is safety in numbers. Turn that around and you get deserted streets, underused parks and empty playgrounds leading to a vicious circle of fear, vandalism, misuse and decay. So I say to every parent, wake up and smell the fresh air: take your child to your local park and help save the planet. Better still, why not arrange some outdoor play dates with fellow parents?
You?ll help spread that outdoor vibe, your child will have twice the fun and who knows, you might even enjoy yourself.
You may think that risk aversion, together with its legal offspring the compensation culture, are everywhere. Barely a week goes by without the media reporting some or other nonsensical health and safety diktat allegedly handed down from on high. Conkers, pet corners, egg boxes, even daisy chains have been deemed a danger too far for our children.
My response once again is: use your common sense and don?t believe the hype. The safety Nazis and the compensation culture are, if not quite myths, then certainly paper tigers. Here?s a quote: ?An essential part of the process of a child becoming an adult is the need, and desire, to explore limits and to try new experiences.? Read that quote again and think about it. Its source may surprise you. It is not from the youth wing of the Dangerous Sports Club. It is from CEN, Europe?s leading safety standards agency. As a statement about what children deserve, you could not wish for anything clearer. What would most help parents cure themselves of risk anxiety is more of these reassuring, supportive messages: more voices that say: ?You can be a good parent and still give your children a taste of freedom.?
Turning to the courts, the reality is that they are no more likely today to hand down daft judgements than they were 10, 20 or a hundred years ago. To take just one example, a recent ruling actually forced the Corporation of London to allow swimmers access to Highgate Ponds even when lifeguards are not present. Janet Paraskeva, chief executive of the Law Society, says: ?In recent years accident claims, far from rising, have remained static and then fell last year by 9.5 per cent.? Again, it is down to each of us to challenge the myth of the compensation culture and to restore some balance.
Too many children spend far too much time stuck in front of screens, not so much couch potatoes as couch prisoners. Too many of the streets where children live have become the sole domain of the car. For too long children?s outdoor play has been overly haunted by the spectre of the predatory paedophile and the health and safety zealot. Too many parents forget their own childhoods and switch off their common sense, excessively infl uenced by sensationalist media coverage on the one hand and seductive advertising on the other.
It is also likely that ?battery-reared? children will lack confi dence as they grow up and be more vulnerable to bullying. Researchers have found a link between children who become victims of bullying and the protectiveness of their parents. And in 1999 the report Bright Futures: Promoting Children and Young People?s Mental Health from the Mental Health Foundation warned of the dangers of overprotecting children and stopping them from developing their own coping mechanisms. All this is a disaster for anyone who wants to bring freedom, adventure and nature back into the daily rhythms of children?s lives. Surely it?s about time we all recognised the value of allowing children to truly get to grips with the knobbly and asymmetrical forms of the natural world. Just as we all did when we were young.
WE NEED A CAMPAIGN
To stand a chance of restoring the outdoors as childhood?s rightful domain, a movement for real play needs to do more than just create projects on the ground, however inspiring these may be. We need a high-profi le campaign with clear objectives, powerful advocates and at its heart a vision of children once again claiming their rightful place out of doors and immersing themselves in nature.
We need
- A national programme to upgrade the thousands of parks and public play areas that many councils will otherwise leave to rust and rot.
- housing developers to be required by law to create attractive, playful green spaces within easy reach of every child and family, and to ensure that streets are designed as home zones.
- politicians to get the message that a speed limit of ?20? really is ?plenty? in streets where children live.
- to tell Government that it?s not acceptable to build schools with postage stamp-sized playgrounds devoid of greenery, or to warehouse children in nurseries with no outdoor space.
- to involve children themselves in creating and maintaining play spaces, so that their views can be taken into account and they feel ownership of the results.
All this may sound ambitious, but public campaigns can still make a difference. No one in Government gave school meals a second thought until Jamie Oliver switched on his food processor and showed us the truth about the ?food? we were offering the nation?s children. Imagine the waves that J K Rowling, say, would make if she declared that, when it comes to stretching a child?s spirit, the nation?s playgrounds offer a diet of adventure unworthy of any aspiring Harry Potter. Picture the impact that David Attenborough would have if he argued that children out of doors are just as good an indicator of the quality of their habitats as wild salmon are of theirs, and deserved just as much protection.
Copyright Tim Gill, Writer and consultant
2007 DMN Texan of the Year: The Illegal Immigrant
He is at the heart of a great culture war in Texas ? and the nation, credited with bringing us prosperity and blamed for abusing our resources. How should we deal with this stranger among us?
07:44 PM CST on Sunday, December 30, 2007
He breaks the law by his very presence. He hustles to do hard work many Americans won't, at least not at the low wages he accepts. The American consumer economy depends on him. America as we have known it for generations may not survive him.
COURTNEY PERRY / DMN
We can't seem to live with him and his family, and if we can live without him, nobody's figured out how. He's the Illegal Immigrant, and he's the 2007 Dallas Morning News Texan of the Year ? for better or for worse. We can't seem to live with him and his family, and if we can live without him, nobody's figured out how.
He's the Illegal Immigrant, and he's the 2007 Dallas Morning News Texan of the Year ? for better or for worse. Given the public mood, there seems to be little middle ground in debate over illegal immigrants. Spectacular fights over their presence broke out across Texas this year, adding to the national pressure cooker as only Texas can.
To their champions, illegal immigrants are decent, hardworking people who, like generations of European immigrants before them, just want to do better for their families and who contribute to America's prosperity. They must endure hatred and abuse by those of us who want the benefits of cheap labor but not the presence of illegal immigrants.
2007 Dallas Morning News Texan of the Year
The Illegal Immigrant
Ask the Editor
Voices on illegal immigration
Nominations from our readers
Finalists
Previous winners
Photos
Opinion blog: Share your thoughts with us
More Texan of the Year
Especially here in Texas, his strong back and willing heart help form the cornerstone of our daily lives, in ways that many of us do not, or will not, see. The illegal immigrant is the waiter serving margaritas at our restaurant table, the cook preparing our enchiladas. He works grueling hours at a meatpacking plant, carving up carcasses of cattle for our barbecue (he also picks the lettuce for our burgers). He builds our houses and cuts our grass. She cleans our homes and takes care of our children.
Yet to those who want them sent home, illegal immigrants are essentially lawbreakers who violate the nation's borders. They use public resources ? schools, hospitals ? to which they aren't entitled and expect to be served in a foreign language. They're rapidly changing Texas neighborhoods, cities and culture, and not always for the better. Those who object get tagged as racists.
Whatever and whoever else the illegal immigrant is, everybody has felt the tidal wave of his presence. According to an analysis of government data by the Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies, Texas' immigrant population has jumped a whopping 32.7 percent since 2000, a period in which immigration to the United States has exceeded, in sheer numbers, all previous historical eras. Half the immigrants in the state ? 7 percent of all Texans ? are estimated to be here illegally.
Though many would agree that the status quo cannot be sustained ? more illegal immigrants arrive each year than legal ones, a sure sign that the system is a joke ? neither Texas nor the nation seemed nearer in 2007 to resolving this complex crisis. We can't deport 12 million people who already live here, but we can't leave our back door open indefinitely. Compromise comes hard because the issue is tangled up with the most basic aspects of everyday life, down to the core of what it means to be American.
This essay cannot put a name or a face to an illegal immigrant, because that would subject him to possible deportation. Because he lives underground, the illegal immigrant becomes, in our rancorous debate, less a complex human being and more a blank screen upon which both sides can project their hopes and fears.
If illegal immigration were an easy problem to fix, the nation wouldn't be at an impasse. In the current atmosphere, it seems, reason doesn't stand a chance of digging us out. Ask Irving Mayor Herb Gears, a man once denounced by anti-immigration activists for running what they called a "sanctuary city." He then found himself targeted by Hispanics because of the city's participation in a federal deportation program.
"One week I'm a traitor, the next week I'm a patriot," laments Mr. Gears.
The mayor says he just wants to respect both people, and the law. His exasperated manner seems to ask, Why can't you do both? Good question.
The economy
If there are jobs in America, Latino immigrants will come, no matter the risk. And why not? They may be at the bottom of the economic ladder here, but they're making about four times, on average, what they could back home.
Antonio, a waiter at a North Texas restaurant, was an accountant in Mexico. He and his wife thought they could make more money in Texas, so they came illegally.
"In the time I've been here, this country has been very good to me. I am a responsible person. I pay my taxes. I pay my bills on time ? utilities, mortgage. I pay federal taxes, too," he says.
COURTNEY PERRY / DMN
American prosperity is built in part on the backs of illegal-immigrant labor, such as these workers picking onions on a farm in South Texas. Antonio resented any suggestion that he should consider returning home or that illegal immigrants don't belong here. He seemed to regard his presence here as exercising a right.
Workers like him find support among business owners ? especially in Texas industries dependent on unskilled immigrants, like agriculture and construction. They say that without those workers, they couldn't survive.
Marty owns a North Texas construction company. He has come to view American workers as undependable, lazy and arrogant, while he finds illegal immigrants motivated and reliable.
"I'd rather employ them than Americans," he confides. "In my line of work, I need the Mexicans, and I am for them being here. I need them because I can't find anybody else to do the work."
(Both Antonio and Marty asked that their last names not be disclosed to prevent repercussions.)
The importance of immigrant labor to Texas was underscored this year with formation of a new political alliance ? big business and the Legislature's Mexican-American caucus. They threatened to cripple the lawmaking machinery if legislative leaders allowed a slate of "anti-immigrant" bills to advance. The tactic worked.
It's unclear from the data whether illegal immigration is a plus or minus for the nation's economy overall. Harvard economist George Borjas reports that it's more or less a wash. On close inspection, Dr. Borjas, a leading expert in the field, found that immigration's financial benefits accrue to those at the upper end of the economic scale, who can buy labor and its fruits at a lower cost, at the expense of those Americans at the lower end, whose wages go down.
"There is no such thing as a job that natives won't do," Dr. Borjas, an immigrant from Cuba, wrote last year. "Instead, there are jobs that natives aren't willing to do at the going wage."
The state comptroller's office had a different take on Texas, reporting in 2005 that illegal immigrants provided a net economic boost of nearly $18 billion that year. While state government took in more taxes from illegal immigrants than it paid out in services for them, the comptroller said, the opposite was true for Texas' local governments.
Nationally, a Congressional Budget Office report released this month said illegal immigrants cost more in tax dollars than they provide, especially in the areas of education, law enforcement and health. Indeed, 70 percent of babies born in Dallas' Parkland Hospital in the first three months of 2006 were to illegal immigrant mothers. Taxpayers spend tens of millions of dollars annually subsidizing births in that one hospital.
Texas schools are filling up with students classified as of limited-English proficiency, many of whose parents came here illegally. The number has reached more than 30 percent of Dallas students, 36 percent in Irving and 16 percent statewide.
Hispanic immigrants are more likely to be poor, but they don't stay that way. The Hispanic poverty rate has dropped 30 percent since 1994, census data show. At 20.6 percent, that's significantly above the national average of 12.8 percent. But Latinos are undeniably upwardly mobile. Besides, if you want to see what happens when Latinos leave, look at the business losses in Irving since the city's role in the federal deportation program sent a chill through the Hispanic community.
Politics
Earlier this year, U.S. Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Dallas, when asked what his constituents were talking about, said, "Immigration, immigration, immigration." GOP presidential contender Mike Huckabee, born again as an immigration hard-liner, told The New Yorker this month that wherever he campaigns, immigration is the first thing voters ask about. "It's just red hot," he says, "and I don't fully understand it."
John McCain does. Voters are worried, he told the magazine, that illegal immigrants make a mockery of law and the idea of sovereign borders, as well as upset social norms.
"They see this as an assault on their culture, what they view as an impact on what have been their traditions," Mr. McCain says. "It's become larger than just the fact that we need to enforce our borders."
Once the GOP favorite to win the nomination, the Arizona senator set back his campaign this summer by supporting President Bush's call for comprehensive immigration reform. A revolt at the grassroots scuttled that plan in Congress.
Democrats have felt the political whiplash, too. Hillary Clinton, for one, abandoned her support of a New York proposal to issue driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. Most other Democratic presidential candidates fell in line with her.
The political tap dance is trickier in Texas, owing to the 1,300-mile border with Mexico and community ties across the divide. Many local officials bitterly objected to Congress' plan to fence off long stretches of the Rio Grande. Gov. Rick Perry ultimately said "boots on the ground" and not a hard barrier was the answer to keeping out illegal immigrants. Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn put forth a measure to ease up on mandatory double fencing if locals have better options.
At the local level, Farmers Branch voters this year approved a local ban on renting to illegal aliens, a move later blocked in court. Despite accusations of racism ("They are so prejudiced, but they don't want to face it," local business owner Elizabeth Villafranca says), and despite the judge's order, City Council member Tim O'Hare was defiant at year's end. Says Mr. O'Hare, "I only wish we had done this earlier."
Culture
It's easy to say, as many immigrant advocates do, that opposition to illegal immigration derives from racist sentiment, because that's undeniably part of the mix. But the culture clash is a lot more complicated.
Illegal Hispanic immigrants are usually Third World peasants who have moved to the First World. They go from a country with sharp class divisions to a middle-class society.
In earlier waves of immigrants, millions of new arrivals left processing at New York's Ellis Island with the expectation that they would adapt fully and deliberately to American norms ? the melting pot, rather than the salad bowl. The post-1960s movement toward multiculturalism has made the nation more tolerant of ethnic and cultural differences, but it has also lessened the impetus for immigrants to conform.
"Mexico is radically, substantively, ferociously different from the United States," Jorge Casta?eda, formerly Mexico's foreign minister, observed in 1995. It was a period of turmoil, with NAFTA newly inaugurated, a rural uprising in Chiapas and a growing gulf between social classes.
He described Mexicans trying to embrace an American-style work ethic, while others remained glued to a "ma?ana" view of life, reinforced by low pay, low self-esteem and an inability to penetrate Mexico's rigid class system. Many Mexicans lost hope and sought a better life in America.
Rural Mexicans have dominated the migrant wave, bringing a country-style sense of time and priorities. For Americans, a transfer of Mexican rural culture to our neighborhoods leaves many feeling overwhelmed. The fear of cultural overload is manifested in sights like Spanish-language billboards or large quincea?era parties in public parks. Schoolteachers find it incomprehensible that, for some reason, immigrant students often disappear for days and suddenly return with the expectation that the teacher should catch them up.
"Certain Mexicans can subscribe to a series of rules, from traffic regulations to work discipline and punctuality; others can decide, consciously or otherwise, that they prefer not to," Dr. Casta?eda wrote.
Illegal immigration exacerbates the natural tension in American society by injecting more change than can be absorbed ? and by defying laws designed to control the rate of change. When immigration restrictionists protest defiance of "law and order," they reveal anger at the cultural revolution Latino immigrants bring ? a revolution many U.S. citizens feel powerless to stop.
Identity
Harvard's Samuel Huntington, one of America's most eminent political scientists ? and a liberal one ? has argued that the immigration wave stands as "the single most immediate and most serious challenge to America's traditional identity."
In his 2004 book Who Are We?, Dr. Huntington identified several factors that set current Hispanic immigration apart from previous episodes in U.S. history.
Most immigrants are Latino and come over a border, not an ocean. Roughly half of these are illegal. Assimilation is slower, writes Dr. Huntington, because the immigrants "remain in intimate contact with their families, friends and home localities in Mexico as no other immigrants have been able to do."
The scale is unmatched, he argues. Since 2000, more immigrants (10.3 million) have arrived in America than in any other seven-year period, according to the Center for Immigration Studies' recent analysis of census data. And in contrast to previous waves of immigration, this one shows no signs of letting up, according to Dr. Huntington.
Not everyone agrees with this assessment. Some of Dr. Huntington's critics point out that the rate of immigration (as distinct from sheer numbers) is not as high now as in previous eras, which ended with successful assimilation of foreign-born populations. Besides, though the current immigration flow shows no signs of abating, the Mexican GDP is growing and the national fertility rate has plummeted by almost two-thirds since 1970. That birth rate is nearing the level at which Mexico would need to retain workers for its own economy, thereby shutting off the spigot of immigration into the U.S.
As for assimilation, Roberto Suro, director of the Pew Hispanic Center, points to social-science data indicating that Hispanic immigrants are, in fact, assimilating as fast as immigrants of previous generations. They learn English quickly, and, once they acquire proficiency, they adopt American cultural attitudes.
One other observation of Dr. Huntington's has particular resonance in Texas: The current wave of immigrants has had disproportionate impact on the Southwest. And as the majority of them are from Mexico, they are now settled in areas that used to belong to their ancestors.
Attempts to draw a sharp line between mainstream "Anglo" (for lack of a better term) culture and Hispanic culture is a distortion of the reality we live with in much of Texas, and always have. The border between the two Texan cultures is as porous as the border between Texas and Mexico, which is one reason why our experience with immigration differs from much of America's.
Texas culture reflects the long list of towns with Spanish names. What's more, in a great swath along the border, most cities are run by those with Spanish surnames, too. Today's immigration wave has carried a different version of Hispanic culture to Dallas and other major population centers. And in this increasingly urbanized state, the dominant Anglo culture has felt a rub like never before.
Though towns and cities nationwide have felt the rub, too, it hasn't been on the Texas scale. Leaders in Farmers Branch and Irving were reacting to complaints of runaway community transformation brought on by illegal arrivals.
As 2007 began, the isolated Texas Panhandle town of Cactus was still reeling from the arrests of nearly 300 people at the local Swift & Co. meat-processing plant, the community's economic lifeblood. Dozens of Mexicans and Guatemalans were prosecuted this year for using stolen Social Security numbers to work at the plant.
The town had come to resemble a kind of renegade outpost of illegal immigrants that wouldn't exist in non-border states.
The future
Everything's bigger in Texas, and history and geography guarantee that the immigration problem is no different. And many issues are flaring sooner here. What Cactus, Irving and Farmers Branch are dealing with today, the rest of America may be dealing with tomorrow. Texas, which will be majority Hispanic by 2020, and the nation face an unprecedented challenge that we can't dismiss with gauzy platitudes, nor defer meeting indefinitely.
How Texas ? and, by extension, the rest of America ? reacts will be unlike how previous generations handled immigration, given how the nation has changed since the 1960s. Fair or not, core American culture and values have become a popular punching bag. Some have cheered that as refining the American character by embracing diversity, inclusiveness and empowerment of ethnic and other minorities. Others worry that America risks losing itself in the process, especially if it gives up on securing the borders.
Historians say that the distinctly American democratic and middle-class ideals grew out of a specific cultural tradition ? the Anglo-Protestant. Changed slowly over time by immigrants from the world over, it's now challenged by a strong competing culture.
If critics are correct, we could be seeing the advent of the kind of fractiousness that bedevils public life in Canada and other nations where peoples who speak different languages, and come from different cultural backgrounds, live together only with mutual suspicion and unease.
On the other hand, perhaps the alarmists are wrong. Maybe these ambitious, hard-working immigrants, whatever their documentation, will write the next great chapter of a story that's still deeply American, though with a different accent. If the optimists are right, much work remains to be done to incorporate all immigrants fully into new cultural traditions.
We end 2007 no closer to compromise on the issue than when the year began. People waging a culture war ? and that's what the struggle over illegal immigration is ? don't give up easily. What you think of the illegal immigrant says a lot about what you think of America, and what vision of her you are willing to defend. How we deal with the stranger among us says not only who we Americans are today but determines who we will become tomorrow.
He is at the heart of a great culture war in Texas ? and the nation, credited with bringing us prosperity and blamed for abusing our resources. How should we deal with this stranger among us?
07:44 PM CST on Sunday, December 30, 2007
He breaks the law by his very presence. He hustles to do hard work many Americans won't, at least not at the low wages he accepts. The American consumer economy depends on him. America as we have known it for generations may not survive him.
COURTNEY PERRY / DMN
We can't seem to live with him and his family, and if we can live without him, nobody's figured out how. He's the Illegal Immigrant, and he's the 2007 Dallas Morning News Texan of the Year ? for better or for worse. We can't seem to live with him and his family, and if we can live without him, nobody's figured out how.
He's the Illegal Immigrant, and he's the 2007 Dallas Morning News Texan of the Year ? for better or for worse. Given the public mood, there seems to be little middle ground in debate over illegal immigrants. Spectacular fights over their presence broke out across Texas this year, adding to the national pressure cooker as only Texas can.
To their champions, illegal immigrants are decent, hardworking people who, like generations of European immigrants before them, just want to do better for their families and who contribute to America's prosperity. They must endure hatred and abuse by those of us who want the benefits of cheap labor but not the presence of illegal immigrants.
2007 Dallas Morning News Texan of the Year
The Illegal Immigrant
Ask the Editor
Voices on illegal immigration
Nominations from our readers
Finalists
Previous winners
Photos
Opinion blog: Share your thoughts with us
More Texan of the Year
Especially here in Texas, his strong back and willing heart help form the cornerstone of our daily lives, in ways that many of us do not, or will not, see. The illegal immigrant is the waiter serving margaritas at our restaurant table, the cook preparing our enchiladas. He works grueling hours at a meatpacking plant, carving up carcasses of cattle for our barbecue (he also picks the lettuce for our burgers). He builds our houses and cuts our grass. She cleans our homes and takes care of our children.
Yet to those who want them sent home, illegal immigrants are essentially lawbreakers who violate the nation's borders. They use public resources ? schools, hospitals ? to which they aren't entitled and expect to be served in a foreign language. They're rapidly changing Texas neighborhoods, cities and culture, and not always for the better. Those who object get tagged as racists.
Whatever and whoever else the illegal immigrant is, everybody has felt the tidal wave of his presence. According to an analysis of government data by the Washington-based Center for Immigration Studies, Texas' immigrant population has jumped a whopping 32.7 percent since 2000, a period in which immigration to the United States has exceeded, in sheer numbers, all previous historical eras. Half the immigrants in the state ? 7 percent of all Texans ? are estimated to be here illegally.
Though many would agree that the status quo cannot be sustained ? more illegal immigrants arrive each year than legal ones, a sure sign that the system is a joke ? neither Texas nor the nation seemed nearer in 2007 to resolving this complex crisis. We can't deport 12 million people who already live here, but we can't leave our back door open indefinitely. Compromise comes hard because the issue is tangled up with the most basic aspects of everyday life, down to the core of what it means to be American.
This essay cannot put a name or a face to an illegal immigrant, because that would subject him to possible deportation. Because he lives underground, the illegal immigrant becomes, in our rancorous debate, less a complex human being and more a blank screen upon which both sides can project their hopes and fears.
If illegal immigration were an easy problem to fix, the nation wouldn't be at an impasse. In the current atmosphere, it seems, reason doesn't stand a chance of digging us out. Ask Irving Mayor Herb Gears, a man once denounced by anti-immigration activists for running what they called a "sanctuary city." He then found himself targeted by Hispanics because of the city's participation in a federal deportation program.
"One week I'm a traitor, the next week I'm a patriot," laments Mr. Gears.
The mayor says he just wants to respect both people, and the law. His exasperated manner seems to ask, Why can't you do both? Good question.
The economy
If there are jobs in America, Latino immigrants will come, no matter the risk. And why not? They may be at the bottom of the economic ladder here, but they're making about four times, on average, what they could back home.
Antonio, a waiter at a North Texas restaurant, was an accountant in Mexico. He and his wife thought they could make more money in Texas, so they came illegally.
"In the time I've been here, this country has been very good to me. I am a responsible person. I pay my taxes. I pay my bills on time ? utilities, mortgage. I pay federal taxes, too," he says.
COURTNEY PERRY / DMN
American prosperity is built in part on the backs of illegal-immigrant labor, such as these workers picking onions on a farm in South Texas. Antonio resented any suggestion that he should consider returning home or that illegal immigrants don't belong here. He seemed to regard his presence here as exercising a right.
Workers like him find support among business owners ? especially in Texas industries dependent on unskilled immigrants, like agriculture and construction. They say that without those workers, they couldn't survive.
Marty owns a North Texas construction company. He has come to view American workers as undependable, lazy and arrogant, while he finds illegal immigrants motivated and reliable.
"I'd rather employ them than Americans," he confides. "In my line of work, I need the Mexicans, and I am for them being here. I need them because I can't find anybody else to do the work."
(Both Antonio and Marty asked that their last names not be disclosed to prevent repercussions.)
The importance of immigrant labor to Texas was underscored this year with formation of a new political alliance ? big business and the Legislature's Mexican-American caucus. They threatened to cripple the lawmaking machinery if legislative leaders allowed a slate of "anti-immigrant" bills to advance. The tactic worked.
It's unclear from the data whether illegal immigration is a plus or minus for the nation's economy overall. Harvard economist George Borjas reports that it's more or less a wash. On close inspection, Dr. Borjas, a leading expert in the field, found that immigration's financial benefits accrue to those at the upper end of the economic scale, who can buy labor and its fruits at a lower cost, at the expense of those Americans at the lower end, whose wages go down.
"There is no such thing as a job that natives won't do," Dr. Borjas, an immigrant from Cuba, wrote last year. "Instead, there are jobs that natives aren't willing to do at the going wage."
The state comptroller's office had a different take on Texas, reporting in 2005 that illegal immigrants provided a net economic boost of nearly $18 billion that year. While state government took in more taxes from illegal immigrants than it paid out in services for them, the comptroller said, the opposite was true for Texas' local governments.
Nationally, a Congressional Budget Office report released this month said illegal immigrants cost more in tax dollars than they provide, especially in the areas of education, law enforcement and health. Indeed, 70 percent of babies born in Dallas' Parkland Hospital in the first three months of 2006 were to illegal immigrant mothers. Taxpayers spend tens of millions of dollars annually subsidizing births in that one hospital.
Texas schools are filling up with students classified as of limited-English proficiency, many of whose parents came here illegally. The number has reached more than 30 percent of Dallas students, 36 percent in Irving and 16 percent statewide.
Hispanic immigrants are more likely to be poor, but they don't stay that way. The Hispanic poverty rate has dropped 30 percent since 1994, census data show. At 20.6 percent, that's significantly above the national average of 12.8 percent. But Latinos are undeniably upwardly mobile. Besides, if you want to see what happens when Latinos leave, look at the business losses in Irving since the city's role in the federal deportation program sent a chill through the Hispanic community.
Politics
Earlier this year, U.S. Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Dallas, when asked what his constituents were talking about, said, "Immigration, immigration, immigration." GOP presidential contender Mike Huckabee, born again as an immigration hard-liner, told The New Yorker this month that wherever he campaigns, immigration is the first thing voters ask about. "It's just red hot," he says, "and I don't fully understand it."
John McCain does. Voters are worried, he told the magazine, that illegal immigrants make a mockery of law and the idea of sovereign borders, as well as upset social norms.
"They see this as an assault on their culture, what they view as an impact on what have been their traditions," Mr. McCain says. "It's become larger than just the fact that we need to enforce our borders."
Once the GOP favorite to win the nomination, the Arizona senator set back his campaign this summer by supporting President Bush's call for comprehensive immigration reform. A revolt at the grassroots scuttled that plan in Congress.
Democrats have felt the political whiplash, too. Hillary Clinton, for one, abandoned her support of a New York proposal to issue driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. Most other Democratic presidential candidates fell in line with her.
The political tap dance is trickier in Texas, owing to the 1,300-mile border with Mexico and community ties across the divide. Many local officials bitterly objected to Congress' plan to fence off long stretches of the Rio Grande. Gov. Rick Perry ultimately said "boots on the ground" and not a hard barrier was the answer to keeping out illegal immigrants. Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn put forth a measure to ease up on mandatory double fencing if locals have better options.
At the local level, Farmers Branch voters this year approved a local ban on renting to illegal aliens, a move later blocked in court. Despite accusations of racism ("They are so prejudiced, but they don't want to face it," local business owner Elizabeth Villafranca says), and despite the judge's order, City Council member Tim O'Hare was defiant at year's end. Says Mr. O'Hare, "I only wish we had done this earlier."
Culture
It's easy to say, as many immigrant advocates do, that opposition to illegal immigration derives from racist sentiment, because that's undeniably part of the mix. But the culture clash is a lot more complicated.
Illegal Hispanic immigrants are usually Third World peasants who have moved to the First World. They go from a country with sharp class divisions to a middle-class society.
In earlier waves of immigrants, millions of new arrivals left processing at New York's Ellis Island with the expectation that they would adapt fully and deliberately to American norms ? the melting pot, rather than the salad bowl. The post-1960s movement toward multiculturalism has made the nation more tolerant of ethnic and cultural differences, but it has also lessened the impetus for immigrants to conform.
"Mexico is radically, substantively, ferociously different from the United States," Jorge Casta?eda, formerly Mexico's foreign minister, observed in 1995. It was a period of turmoil, with NAFTA newly inaugurated, a rural uprising in Chiapas and a growing gulf between social classes.
He described Mexicans trying to embrace an American-style work ethic, while others remained glued to a "ma?ana" view of life, reinforced by low pay, low self-esteem and an inability to penetrate Mexico's rigid class system. Many Mexicans lost hope and sought a better life in America.
Rural Mexicans have dominated the migrant wave, bringing a country-style sense of time and priorities. For Americans, a transfer of Mexican rural culture to our neighborhoods leaves many feeling overwhelmed. The fear of cultural overload is manifested in sights like Spanish-language billboards or large quincea?era parties in public parks. Schoolteachers find it incomprehensible that, for some reason, immigrant students often disappear for days and suddenly return with the expectation that the teacher should catch them up.
"Certain Mexicans can subscribe to a series of rules, from traffic regulations to work discipline and punctuality; others can decide, consciously or otherwise, that they prefer not to," Dr. Casta?eda wrote.
Illegal immigration exacerbates the natural tension in American society by injecting more change than can be absorbed ? and by defying laws designed to control the rate of change. When immigration restrictionists protest defiance of "law and order," they reveal anger at the cultural revolution Latino immigrants bring ? a revolution many U.S. citizens feel powerless to stop.
Identity
Harvard's Samuel Huntington, one of America's most eminent political scientists ? and a liberal one ? has argued that the immigration wave stands as "the single most immediate and most serious challenge to America's traditional identity."
In his 2004 book Who Are We?, Dr. Huntington identified several factors that set current Hispanic immigration apart from previous episodes in U.S. history.
Most immigrants are Latino and come over a border, not an ocean. Roughly half of these are illegal. Assimilation is slower, writes Dr. Huntington, because the immigrants "remain in intimate contact with their families, friends and home localities in Mexico as no other immigrants have been able to do."
The scale is unmatched, he argues. Since 2000, more immigrants (10.3 million) have arrived in America than in any other seven-year period, according to the Center for Immigration Studies' recent analysis of census data. And in contrast to previous waves of immigration, this one shows no signs of letting up, according to Dr. Huntington.
Not everyone agrees with this assessment. Some of Dr. Huntington's critics point out that the rate of immigration (as distinct from sheer numbers) is not as high now as in previous eras, which ended with successful assimilation of foreign-born populations. Besides, though the current immigration flow shows no signs of abating, the Mexican GDP is growing and the national fertility rate has plummeted by almost two-thirds since 1970. That birth rate is nearing the level at which Mexico would need to retain workers for its own economy, thereby shutting off the spigot of immigration into the U.S.
As for assimilation, Roberto Suro, director of the Pew Hispanic Center, points to social-science data indicating that Hispanic immigrants are, in fact, assimilating as fast as immigrants of previous generations. They learn English quickly, and, once they acquire proficiency, they adopt American cultural attitudes.
One other observation of Dr. Huntington's has particular resonance in Texas: The current wave of immigrants has had disproportionate impact on the Southwest. And as the majority of them are from Mexico, they are now settled in areas that used to belong to their ancestors.
Attempts to draw a sharp line between mainstream "Anglo" (for lack of a better term) culture and Hispanic culture is a distortion of the reality we live with in much of Texas, and always have. The border between the two Texan cultures is as porous as the border between Texas and Mexico, which is one reason why our experience with immigration differs from much of America's.
Texas culture reflects the long list of towns with Spanish names. What's more, in a great swath along the border, most cities are run by those with Spanish surnames, too. Today's immigration wave has carried a different version of Hispanic culture to Dallas and other major population centers. And in this increasingly urbanized state, the dominant Anglo culture has felt a rub like never before.
Though towns and cities nationwide have felt the rub, too, it hasn't been on the Texas scale. Leaders in Farmers Branch and Irving were reacting to complaints of runaway community transformation brought on by illegal arrivals.
As 2007 began, the isolated Texas Panhandle town of Cactus was still reeling from the arrests of nearly 300 people at the local Swift & Co. meat-processing plant, the community's economic lifeblood. Dozens of Mexicans and Guatemalans were prosecuted this year for using stolen Social Security numbers to work at the plant.
The town had come to resemble a kind of renegade outpost of illegal immigrants that wouldn't exist in non-border states.
The future
Everything's bigger in Texas, and history and geography guarantee that the immigration problem is no different. And many issues are flaring sooner here. What Cactus, Irving and Farmers Branch are dealing with today, the rest of America may be dealing with tomorrow. Texas, which will be majority Hispanic by 2020, and the nation face an unprecedented challenge that we can't dismiss with gauzy platitudes, nor defer meeting indefinitely.
How Texas ? and, by extension, the rest of America ? reacts will be unlike how previous generations handled immigration, given how the nation has changed since the 1960s. Fair or not, core American culture and values have become a popular punching bag. Some have cheered that as refining the American character by embracing diversity, inclusiveness and empowerment of ethnic and other minorities. Others worry that America risks losing itself in the process, especially if it gives up on securing the borders.
Historians say that the distinctly American democratic and middle-class ideals grew out of a specific cultural tradition ? the Anglo-Protestant. Changed slowly over time by immigrants from the world over, it's now challenged by a strong competing culture.
If critics are correct, we could be seeing the advent of the kind of fractiousness that bedevils public life in Canada and other nations where peoples who speak different languages, and come from different cultural backgrounds, live together only with mutual suspicion and unease.
On the other hand, perhaps the alarmists are wrong. Maybe these ambitious, hard-working immigrants, whatever their documentation, will write the next great chapter of a story that's still deeply American, though with a different accent. If the optimists are right, much work remains to be done to incorporate all immigrants fully into new cultural traditions.
We end 2007 no closer to compromise on the issue than when the year began. People waging a culture war ? and that's what the struggle over illegal immigration is ? don't give up easily. What you think of the illegal immigrant says a lot about what you think of America, and what vision of her you are willing to defend. How we deal with the stranger among us says not only who we Americans are today but determines who we will become tomorrow.
