I've just come off a really difficult week.  I am involved in IEP meetings, which is where children who may require special education services are discussed by parents, teachers, and administrators.  People like a school psychologist, speech therapist, occupational therapist, adapted physical education teacher, vision specialist, school nurse, etc., evaluate a child, write a report, and then present it to the child's parents and the school's administrators at the I(ndividualized) E(ducation) P(lanning) meeting.  There, decisions about the best placement for educating a child (e.g., special ed classroom, inclusion, general ed.), as well as related services (e.g., speech therapy), are discussed and agreed upon.

These meetings are often characterized by mutual suspicion and hostility.  What I'm wondering is, Does this have to be the case?

If you have an interest in this topic, please follow me....

I ordered the "Outfoxed" DVD through MoveOn, agreeing to have a house party.  It's a private affair, scheduled for Sunday as recommended by MoveOn.

This morning I emailed a Salon article about Fox News and "Outfoxed" to my winger step-brother.  Here's the email I got in return:

The White House says they don't lie about science.  They have changed websites to reflect political agendas -- e.g., emphasizing condom failure to push their abstinence-only agenda.  They have forced the EPA to lie about the air quality in New York following 9/11.  They suppressed information about the dangerous levels of mercury in fish.  And of course, they have a tenuous relationship to the reality of global climate change.  

When you have to come out with a statement saying you don't distort government-funded science for political gain, one can only think thou dost protest too much.

This is not a joke -- a journalist from a small town paper has said he is sorry for repeating administration talking points without fact-checking.  He goes on to say the New York Times and WaPo are the ones that should apologize since he's a small-town guy.  I agree.  But, it's a start.

He's gonna be smeared from here to forever.  We know it's coming.  But we can help!  Let's each pledge to send a letter or an email, or make a phone call, for every "accusation that [Bush] can't back up during a Presidential campaign" wrt Clarke.  He is the man; it's the least we can do.  

Type and call for Clarke.  If they know we're out here, maybe they'll actually fact-check before publishing some of the smears.

Today's Washington Post has an article about the Justice department seeking increased powers to tap internet use.  Who knew that, even without a gallbladder, they could be so full of gall?

Could this be a direct aim at those pesky bloggers?

See the article here.