The trees at Auburn

In or around 1877 some oak trees were planted at the intersection of College Street and Magnolia Avenue in Auburn.

This Auburn University picture of Toomer's Corner was taken in 1890.

Over time the trees grew and became the welcome to the campus of Alabama Polytechnic Institute.

More time passed and a tradition of rolling the trees with toilet paper after big football wins by Auburn University began.

This is Toomer's Corner after Auburn won the BCS Championship this year.

The weekend after the Iron Bowl some jerk head poured a strong poison around the trees with the intent to kill them, and then bragged about it on the Paul Finebaum radio show. Listen.



I am so glad that most, and I emphasize most, Alabama fans view this as a cowardly despicable act. But then there are some that are downplaying the incident on Facebook and elsewhere, with comments about them being "just trees" and worse.

Although I realize that this is an act by an individual, and that an individual in any state can do something stupid, this just goes to show you how hatred dominates our state.

When a football fan can brag about something like this, and respond with "Do you think I care," when asked if it is against the law to poison a tree, what are we to think. His hatred goes beyond the law. And over a game.

Oh I know he claims he is retaliating after something that happened 28 years ago, but still, its about a game.

And even if I were not an Auburn fan I would feel the same way. You don't go around destroying century old trees that are part of a tradition regardless of how you feel.

And, Mr. tree killer, you just gave the people in the other 49 states another reason to believe that the people of our state are backward uneducated rednecks.

Let me just say this. You can kill the trees at Toomer's Corner, but you can not kill the Auburn spirit. War Damn Eagle, Mr. tree killer.

THE AUBURN CREED

I believe that this is a practical world and that I can count only on what I earn. Therefore, I believe in work, hard work.

I believe in education, which gives me the knowledge to work wisely and trains my mind and my hands to work skillfully.

I believe in honesty and truthfulness, without which I cannot win the respect and confidence of my fellow men.

I believe in a sound mind, in a sound body and a spirit that is not afraid, and in clean sports that develop these qualities.

I believe in obedience to law because it protects the rights of all.

I believe in the human touch, which cultivates sympathy with my fellow men and mutual helpfulness and brings happiness for all.

I believe in my Country, because it is a land of freedom and because it is my own home, and that I can best serve that country by "doing justly, loving mercy, and walking humbly with my God."

And because Auburn men and women believe in these things, I believe in Auburn and love it.
-George Petrie (1945)

Bessemer City Council antics

The members of the Bessemer City Council selected a new municipal judge today.

See Update at end of post.

The method they used was bizarre, or unconventional, to say the least.


Here is what happened. the clerk read the item: Appointment of Municipal Judges. Council vote necessary.

Three or four council members simultaneously shouted, "Mr. President."

The president then chose one of them and allowed them to make a motion. That person nominated one of the candidates. It was seconded. the council voted 3 - 2, for this candidate, with 2 abstentions.

The council proclaimed that candidate did not win, stating that a majority of the members present needed to vote yes for the candidate to win.

Let me quote from Robert's Rules of Order (9th edition) right here.

Chapter XIII
*43. BASES FOR DETERMINING A VOTING RESULT

Majority Vote - the Basic Requirement

As stated on page 4, the basic requirement for approval of an action or choice by a deliberative assembly...is a majority vote. The word majority means "more than half"; and when the term majority vote is used without qualification - as in the case of the basic requirement - it means more than half of the votes cast by persons legally entitled to vote, excluding blanks or abstentions, at a regular or properly called meeting at which a quorum is present.

So, the first candidate that was voted on did win.

But the council then entertained another nomination, under the assumption that the first nominee had not won the appointment.

This candidate received 4 votes, so she also won.

The council had appointed 2 persons to the Municipal Judge 1 place.

To further complicate the matter the method of voting was wrong.

According to Robert's Rules of Order, when multiple candidates are being voted on, all the candidates should be put into nomination and the council vote.

Then if no candidate gets a majority of the votes, then they vote again, with all candidates names still on the ballot, to see if the results will be different. The lowest vote getter name is never removed from the ballot unless required by law or unless he or she drops out.

Using the method that the council used, there was no requirement that a council member who voted yes for one candidate could not vote yes on another candidate. So even though the second candidate got 4 votes, who's to say that the third candidate, whose name was never mentioned, would not also have gotten 4 or maybe more votes? We will never know, will we.

I recommend that the council revisit this matter at the next meeting, and re-vote using proper procedures.

Update: I was told by the city attorney that by Alabama Law, election of municipal judges by city council requires a majority of the council. It does not specify anything about abstentions. Alas, this is Alabama. We have so many faults in our constitution and laws that it is not even funny. Oh well.



The new municipal judge is Lynneice Washington. Scott Roebuck retains the other position.

Creation Museum antics

Not long ago I posted a Facebook status about "science" textbook I had come across that mentioned the earth being about 4000 years old.

There is nothing remotely related to science in that belief.

But I was going to let it pass, with hopes that the Mennonite children that might read it would become better educated later in life. I realize that I have no control and no voice in what a private religious organizations teaches its kids.

In and around that time I was involved in a discussion about the replica of Noah's ark being built. This is being done at the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky. This is to be a full scale replica, big enough to carry specimens of every species, including extinct dinosaurs, I presume, since they believe dinosaurs roamed along with Fred Flintstone and every Australopithecus species and other early human examples.


Photo from exhibit in Creation Museum

I'm not really writing about how ludicrous it is to think that one man could (or would) capture every microscopic species on the earth, and every species of disease carrying mosquito and every species of bedbug and keep those living, even though they might require different environments and micro-climates to sustain them. Remember, some parasites require multiple hosts to complete their life cycle, and for Noah to understand this and be able work out the logistics is just not believable.

No, I am writing about an event the Creation Museum sponsored, a "Date Night" where loving couples were supposed to have a $71 a person dinner and a lecture about what makes a relationship work.

But a gay couple was denied admittance.

They explained to us that the Creation Museum Date Night was a "Christian environment", therefore the presence of two men eating dinner together would not be allowed. The very sight of this would "add an un-Christian element to the event" and "disrupt the evening for everyone"

.

I assume the organizers of the event have never seen the famous picture of Jesus and his 12 disciples eating together, but I digress.

The gay couple's tickets were actually purchased by a straight couple. Here is the straight guy's account of the evening.

Let me just comment that my relationship with my partner is as strong as any straight couple's relationship that I know, and we can do without the ramblings of any prejudiced instructor on how to make it better.

But still, the gay couple should have been allowed to attend with their straight friends, it seems.

Notice in this photo of an exhibit from the museum that Adam was created as a totally (hot) white guy from that time long ago, the 1960's.

Maybe he was just ahead of his time...a foretelling of a future Republican congressman wanting to post his profile on Craig's list.

OK, I'm getting off subject and the Grammy's just came on so I'll stop there.

A confused gay republican

I've never understood gay Republicans. Actually, I've never understood Republicans, but let's stick to the gays.

GOProud is a group of Gay conservatives that have split the CPAC group wide open, and for that I commend them.

But they seem to be self loathing, or hypocritical, or something, as one of their members revealed at CPAC this weekend.

Matt Hissey, in an interview with Ebone Bell of Metro Weekly (at 1:39 in the video):

"I don't really like gay people that much. Gay people frustrate me, the stereotypical gay people, it frustrates me...someone who puts on a total act. I understand that some guys are feminine, which is fine. But some guys, at some point, are normal, straight-acting, whatever and the next minute they're jumping up and down. It just frustrates me. The whole conservative thing is just be yourself, be an individual and just don't be someone you're not. If someone does or does not accept you, that's fine but don't change who you are to look different to others."

A quick question, are you being yourself Matt when you highlight your hair like that, are you changing who you are to look different to others?



Now, let's dig a little deeper.

"Some guys...are normal, straight-acting, whatever and the next minute they're jumping up and down...."

So, he wants people to "be individual and just don't be someone you're not," but he wants them to act straight (whatever that means) while being yourself.

So is it OK for straight guys to jump up and down? He says, speaking of his fellow gays "But some guys, at some point, are normal, straight-acting, whatever and the next minute they're jumping up and down."

These are straight Green Bay Packer fans. Acting straight one minute, jumping up and down the next.



I don't know. Again, I can understand being conservative. I might disagree with their policies, but I understand that some people have conservative beliefs.

But to be gay, and support the party that wants to keep you from joining the military, keep you from legalizing your relationships, and wants you to be subject to discrimination in housing and employment, just does not make sense.

Iowa

How embarrassing for the people of Iowa.




I'm sure there are Republicans in Alabama who are just as uneducated, but at least (so far) we haven't seen them on national TV making fools of themselves.

No, we can leave that up to homophobic law enforcement officials and Gardendale lawmakers and the elitist Vestavia Hills City Council and racist college students in Tuscaloosa.

But I have two questions for the people of Iowa in this video.

What if I said I believed you were Muslim? You would respond, I'm sure, "No I'm not, I'm Christian."

But I wouldn't believe you. Because, according to this video, there is no reason to believe what one says about their religious beliefs.

My other question is, so what? What if a president or a senator or a teacher or a doctor is a Muslim? Who cares?

Remember, this is America. We value diversity. We value religious freedom. We value our other freedoms.

I don't know what kind of America these people want. But we are in the 21st century. They can stay in the 20th or 19th century if they want, but they are not going to drag me or the rest of America back with them.

Ronald Reagan - 100 years of shame

I'm tired of celebrating Ronald Reagan.

If he were still alive, he would be turning 100 years old. That's 100 years of shame.

During his term as president the rich got richer, and the poor got poorer.

From Mother Jones



As the rich get richer, the rest of us didn't fare too well, and the poor actually got poorer.

But here is what really gets me.

The first case of AIDS was reported June 5, 1981, in Los Angeles. A year and a half later, the White House was asked about the epidemic, and in a press conference, the mention of people dying of AIDS brought laughter.


In 2004 Larry Kramer wrote an article for the Advocate, and it was republished this week.

Our murderer is dead. The man who murdered more gay people than anyone in the entire history of the world, is dead. More people than Hitler even. In all the tributes to his passing, as I write this two days after his death, not one that I have seen has mentioned this. The hateful New York Times (“all the news that’s fit to print”) of course said nothing about this. We still are not fit to write about with total honesty in their pages. Not really. Just as we were not fit for Ronald Reagan to talk about us. What kind of president is that?

His article ends this way.

Just as Jews are asked to never forget their Holocaust, I implore all gay people never to forget our holocaust and who caused it and why. Ronald Reagan did not even say the word “AIDS” out loud for the first seven years of his reign. Because of this, some 70 million people, so far, have become infected with HIV/AIDS. I wonder what it feels like to be the son and the wife of a man responsible for over 70 million people so far becoming infected with a virus that has killed over half of us so far. I wonder what it felt like while he was alive to ponder this. For surely he must have thought about it. How could he not? He has been called the consummate actor who came to believe all his lines. Does this not make his legacy even more grotesque? It should.

Hitler knew what he was doing. How could Ronald Reagan not have known what he was doing?

But of course, no one is writing about this. Reagan too is one of history's gods.

So far he has gotten away with murder.

Here is a short video, made by the son of a 1980's lesbian activist.

I don't know how anyone could celebrate his 100th birthday. Or why he is held up as an American hero.

2011: A Judicial Odyssey

The Bessemer city council was to choose a new municipal judge last night to fill an empty seat. Judge Scott Roebuck is assuming all the duties for two judges right now, but he didn't look too drawn down at the council meeting. He was to be re-appointed to his position as well.

Was to.

I used that phrase twice in the lead paragraph. I guess you have figured out by now that no judges were appointed.

The council has been working on this for nine weeks. It's a no-brainer who the most qualified candidate is.

The council surprised the audience when one member made a motion to table the decision and another quickly seconded. After some brief discussion, which indicated to me that some members were in the know, and others were in the dark, the council voted to table the vote for two weeks.

It seems that there was some question as to the duties of the two judges and some financial issues. It also seems to me that there is now some question as to why this did not come up during the nine weeks that this has been going on?

I'm all for getting things right, and avoiding sausage making during council, but nine weeks is plenty of time.

A dog can become pregnant, and nine weeks later, her puppies will be born.



Isn't that neat.

But I'm not going to be too critical of the council. They are still doing a good job, have not embarrassed us, are not wasting (too much of) the citizen's time.

See you on February 15, when a new municipal judge (might) be chosen. That will be a morning meeting.

Here's the opening of 2001 A Space Odyssey, one of the greatest movies of all time.