Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Q Tips

Q Tips is an open thread where NPR related comments are always welcomed.


Anonymous said...

On Morning Edition today: "Goal For Libya Is Have Gadhafi To Step Down," with John Negroponte

Secondary headline: "Steve Inkeep Deploys Clichés to Libya Interview"


informedveteran said...

More commentary about how great NPR is. Blaaaggghhh!

Patrick Lynch said...

I read the Conason piece was appalled. He must be one of those people who have NPR on in the background all the time but never really listens or even questions what they're spewing.

On ME, the way John Negroponte was introduced was mindboggling.

"Negroponte is a former career ambassador, and is currently a lecturer in international affairs at Yale University."

You're kidding right?

Wiki entry on Negroponte

Source Watch profile on Negroponte

The man is the walking personification of what is wrong with American foreign policy of the last 40 years and he's on to talk about Libya?

After hearing the interview,my fiancee muttered, "Where did they find this apologist?" My response was "how much time do you have?". Of course NPR would reanimate another corpse from the Reagan administration. I'm imagine Reagan is doing a little happy dance in his grave.

geoff said...

Negroponte is Inskeep's butt-budy. I got a personal note from Inky once after attacking him for giving Negroponte credibility like that. He dismissed all that Wiki/SourceWatch stuff as "unproved allegations."

Patrick Lynch said...

Also on ME, Renee Monfeign invoked that classic style pet peeve of mine during that story on texting bloopers right after the Negroponte surrealism. Monfeign on the probably the lightest, fluffiest piece of nothing since the last Barbie story invoked that tone of voice the NPR crew use when they think asking The Big Questions that are so Insightful and Hard Hitting. It never fails to annoy.

the word verification is: humsore.

gDog said...

Don't you love the way it's always referred to in the vague phrase, "The Financial Crisis?" Like it's some kind of natural disaster and not a gigantic theft of epic proportions whose perpetrators have made off with trillions? I can just see Lord Blankfein's people being sent to the NPR zoo with little packets of peanuts: "Good reporter says "financial crisis," good reporter!" "Num num," mumbles Scott Simon, moving his camelide lips back and forth. "ooooh oohhh aaaah aaahhhh," cries Kestenbaum in agitated excitement.

Anonymous said...

NPR sold out women first and worst.

I remember them having someone on -back in the 1980's- referring to women's equality as a lost prize, get over it girls, in NPR's first disingenuous attempts at "balanced" programming.

It was OK with most liberals, though, as was NPR's selling out on issues of male-ruled religions vs. women's rights, because the "larger" "more important" issues hadn't been touched yet.

Two decades later, and the same disregard for rights finally reaches mainstream progressives.

Do tell.

Anonymous said...

Tom Bowman has a boner on Morning Edition today.


FYI, fellow Checkteers:

Media Matter, points out the obvious, NPR let's itself get bullied by the Right Wing noise machine:

Postscript: Did NPR Learn Anything From O’Keefe Attack?

Here's an earlier story that also worthwhile:

How NPR Helped Empower James O'Keefe

Anonymous said...

Regarding Grumpy Demo's MM link...
NPR: Six Degrees from Information

Anonymous said...

Geoff -- Your comment about Negroponte and Inskreep being bum-chums might just hold water. This morning 3/23/11 -- while interviewing Haas (who actually had some vaguely sane things to say -- like why not jaw instead of war -- to Inskeeps apparent "you can talk to this guy????" amazement) Inskreep went out of his way to *replay* / voice over / repeat the comments of the odious and extremely nasty Negroponte in response to something Haas said. Rarely, if ever have I heard that technique be used on ME.
Inskreep really should keep his bum in better company.

Miranda said...

Negroponte, Venetian to English: "The Black Bridge."

geoff said...

Recalling this picture of Negroponte at the Washington Metropolitan Opera Gala, or whatever, I get this weird overtone of the Overlook Hotel in the Shining. I think Negroponte wants Inskeep to come play with him for ever, and ever and ever.

Mytwords said...

I've got to weigh in and say that though I despise the warm love-in that Insqueak and NPR continue to offer to torture-lovin' Negroponte - the use of anal-sex slurs makes me cringe. Seems homophobic to me. And seems to me that butt buddies can range from really sweet comrades to ultra fascists... ok, so there.

gDog said...

Point well taken, mtw. I suppose you could say "they're in bed together," but that's well...just another trite cliche. How about "They're in the same incestuous amplification echo chamber out-cackling one another with whopping lies?" These guys are cringe-worthy, so it's a hazard of critique.

Mytwords said...

Yeah, I didn't want to come off as holier-than-thou. Our wonderful old English language does sometimes seem to head right toward the genitals or scatalogical for angry insults and putdowns...alas...

Anonymous said...

Lapdog doesn't possess the caché it once did. Perhaps because there are so many of them, and because of that, it's become a term of endearment?

Anonymous said...

On Saturday a really close friend of mine took off from the Dutch WonderLand for DC and since we were feelin alright we talked. He started to rant about how Congress was so wrong in denying funding for NPR. He happened to mention that he thought the Congress was just trying to "keep Americans stupid". I let a lot of things slide because some people get a pass due to their overall POV. But . . . I couldn't let that slide. So I started chapter and verse and told him this wasn't just me (I admit my POV is informed by my belief in the validity of Marx's view of social change) and he should visit this site. But he doesn't really "listen" to the radio. I told him he should and maybe he'd find out who is and isn't being "stupified". And why, in my opinion, NPR will not lose funding. Maybe a token cut just to let them know who is running the show and keep 'em scared.

And just as an aside I saw people being taken away in cuffs after refusing to disperse but no mention anywhere. In fact I don't even think I saw any media other than truly independant outfits.


Anonymous said...

anybody listen to this? asking only conservatives to keep a diary where they can point out NPR liberal bias shows me these people just want to gather even more scorpions.


and i'm sure ira glass will have a wonderful show on Sunday when his sleep inducing show will carry on the debate.


informedveteran said...


NPR's "comprehensive" coverage of the 3/19 protests consists of a few AP stories. (until NPR disappears them anyway).


gDog said...

Here's what I learned from the NPR this ME:
1. Japanese are not afraid of radiation.
2. Anybody who tells you SS is anywhere near solvent is lying.
3. Los Angeles Unified School District may have to go bankrupt.
4. Barbara Boxer is grandstanding when she says the removal of housing vouchers for veterans will make veterans homeless.

frannied said...

Bad, biased story on school choice/charters schools in the 'burbs on ATC yesterday (3/23). http://www.npr.org/2011/03/23/134769349/suburban-parents-blocked-in-try-for-charter-schools

The gist of the piece was look how these stubborn school boards in rich suburban areas are blocking critical school reform. Way to go with the subtle message, NPR!

Lots of support for charter schools, from parents who are pushing to get charter schools approved in two states, Maryland and NJ, plus a voice of authority from the charter-supporting group The Center for Education Reform. There was no comment or input from any other educational experts, or any commentary on the actual success of Charter schools, or the implications of funding Charter schools at the expense of the public schools.

It might have been nice to ask Diane Ravitch, who recently published an excellent book on No Child Left Behind, to comment.

Anonymous said...

Inscreep in the news:

Anonymous said...

More NPR news in the news:

Anonymous said...

NPR continues to shamelessly downplay the risks from radiation released by the Fukushima reactors.

Radioactive Milk Only A Danger After 58,000 Glasses is a perfect example.

The NPR piece CLAIMS that
"one lot of milk sampled from the town of Kawamata, 29 miles from the power plant, reportedly contained 1,510 becquerels of radiation per kilogram."

"To reach the radiation dose limit for a power plant worker [50 milliSievert per year], you'd need to drink 2,922 eight-ounce glasses of milk. To raise your lifetime cancer risk by 4 percent [1 sievert], you'd have to drain more than 58,000 glasses of milk. That would take you 160 years, if you drank one 8-ounce glass a day."

The numbers given in the article are total unmitigated bullshit.

It's actually easy to see this, but first one needs to be aware of a few conversions.

1 becquerel (Bq) = 27 pico-Curies (pCi)

1 rem = 10 milli-Sievert

1510 Bq per kg of milk is about 1560 Bq per liter of milk.

Or about 42,118 pico-Curies per liter of milk.

That's activity. We need to convert it to effective dose and the concern in this case is for INFANTS.

For that we use
This fact sheet from the Nuclear Energy Institute(a nuclear industry group which is definitely not high-balling the impact!) notes that

"Infant consumption of 1,000 picocuries per liter concentration for 30 days will result in a
radiation dose of 331 millirem."

So, that means that 1,000 picocuries per liter concentration for 1 day will result in a
radiation dose of about 11 millirem.

If 1,000 picocuries per liter yields a dose of 11 millirem, 42,118 pico-Curies per liter will give an effective dose of about 463 millirem.

Converting that to Sievert gives 4.6 milli-Sievert.

1 liter of milk is about 34 oz, so one 8 oz glass will give a dose of about (8/34) (4.6) = 1.1 milliSievert.

That's 1.1 milli-Sievert per glass.

So, in other words, rather than taking 2,922 eight-ounce glasses of milk to reach the radiation dose limit for a power plant worker [50 milliSievert per year], as NPR claims, it takes only about 45 eight-ounce glasses!

And NPR's talk of the 1 sievert dose to increase lifetime cancer risk by 4% is a red herring.

see, for example Facts and Information About radiation Exposure

"If a significant quantity of radioactive particulate stays in parts of the body, such as radioactive iodine in the thyroid or radioactive polonium (in cigarette smoke) in the lungs, it may cause DNA damage that leads to:

- tumors (thyroid, ovaries, breasts, prostate, lungs, etc.) that may become cancerous

- leukemia, i.e., cancer of the blood and bone marrow

- birth defects

- neurological defects that may hinder future mental development

0.1 mSv/yr: increased risk of death from radiation induced cancer about 1 in 1,000,000; i.e., one millimort

100 mSv/yr: death of radiation induced cancer increased by 0.8%, two 100 mSv doses 1.6%, etc."

///end of quotes

We are talking about infants in this case who are much more susceptible than adults to radiation.

That is precisely why the YEARLY recommended dose limit for young children is 1 milliSievert.

And in that one town in Japan, they are exceeding that limit in a single day!

In Tokyo, the level is not quite as high (the activity is about 200 Bq/liter or about 1/7 the above), but NPR's numbers are still way off.

This is a perfect example of what bugs me most about NPR.

They give you this endless stream of what looks like "science" from supposed experts.

But it's all just total crap.


Anonymous said...

Once again, economist Dean Baker singles out NPR for its "flood of nonsense".

the imaginary world in which washington [and NPR] lives

Dean Baker"The correct response of a reporter to [blatantly false] assertions would be to say something like: “Senator, you know that the United States does not have nearly enough oil to be energy independent or to substantially reduce the price of gas.”

"However, you won’t hear this response from outlets like National Public Radio...

"...when a politician whines about Social Security or the country going broke, the correct response from a reporter should be “Congressman, you know that the program is fine for more than a quarter century into the future,” or “Congressman, you know that our children and grandchildren will on average be far richer than we are today.”

Unfortunately, you won’t hear reporters making these corrections either."

Anonymous said...

It's nice to see that Congress has finally figured out how to play the "NPR (de)Funding Game".

Ie, they have figured out that NPR gets a significant chunk of its operating budget from publicly funded member stations who use those public funds to pay NPR member dues and purchase NPR programming.

And the House just voted to ban the practice.

The Senate and Obama will undoubtedly vote to kill the house bill (probably have to wait for a Republican sweep in 2012 for passage), but the writing is on the wall for NPR.

If I were little old Stevie Inskeep and Michelle Norris and Don Begoneaway and Terry Gross etc, I'd be looking for another public teat to suck.

The NPR mamma pig is leaving the farm.

Patrick Lynch said...

There is an appalling defence of NPR by Bill Moyers on Salon. I wrote a rather lengthy response to it that I'm sure will get skewered. Here is the link:

Bill Moyers defends NPR on Salon

Patrick Lynch said...

This is what I said at Salon:

Friday, March 25, 2011 04:20 PM ET
If the Right really listened to NPR, they'd boost their funding for all the pro-Repub propaganda you can hear there every day.

I feel like I'm beating a dead horse here but I have to wonder is anyone really truly listening to NPR? I wish they were the liberal bastion everyone thinks they are. They are more like National Propaganda Radio. Don't just look at they cover but also what they don't cover.

NPR has been leaning heavily right for years especially since they hopped in the sack with the Pentagon during the Iraq invasion. Their coverage these days strikes me as anti union, anti teacher, pro corporate, pro military, pro Republican/neo-con, pro Wall Street. Listen to who their sponsors are when Frank Tavare cuts loose with another one of his reedy and gushy "Support for NPR is by..." It's a rogue's gallery of the worst corporate bastards America has to offer. State Farm doesn't like Katrina coverage? Get a sponsorship. Smith Glaxo Kine, Archer Daniels Midland doesn't like their coverage either? Too much heat on Toyota for their problems? Get a sponsorship.

Need some fear mongering? Dina Temple-Raston and Tom Gjelten stand at the ready to do the Pentagon's bidding. Need apologists for the financial sector? Marketplace and Planet Money is ready to go. Need condescending insider Beltway cluelessness on any given topic, trot out Cokie Roberts. I won't even get started on Mara Liasson, Steve Inskeep, Scott Simon, Melissa Block, Renee Montaigne but you can count on them to put out the right wing party line.

NPR hasn't been liberal in years. This has been well documented at the following places:

http://nprcheck.blogspot.com/ The NPR Check blog has documented pro corporate, pro military and right wing bias in NPR's news coverage for the last five years.

http://www.fair.org/index.php Put NPR or for that matter PBS in their search box and you'll find at least 57 articles on NPR alone stretching back to 2001.

Even Salon's Glenn Greenwald has documented some of this.

Here is what Noam Chomsky had to say about NPR:


Again, I really wish NPR was the liberal bastion so many people think it is. I gave up on them during the second Bush administration. I still hear periodically bits of Morning Edition or All Things Considered if anyone else has a radio on and it is dismaying to listen to what comes out of the speaker compared to what their news department was like 25-30 years ago.

Listen to NPR and then listen to Democracy Now on the same subject. There is a huge difference. I gave up on NPR for the facts a long time ago.
—Native Kentuckian

Patrick Lynch said...

To us, I said nothing new. To others I'm probably tilting at windmills.

gDog said...

Nice encapsulation, Patrick. Of course, the tactic is to move the Overton Window further to the right by branding what is right as left. I don't like speaking in such broad terms as left/right liberal/conservative. I prefer truth/lies or social/antisocial or liberty/repression. NPR is an outlet that targets the self-professed slightly left of center (those who go for the kind of books and music they promote) for the purpose of repression through legitimizing antisocial lies. What we need is a radio network/mass media which tells the truth to promote liberty and the social good.

Anonymous said...

I look at NPR through the lens of thesis (dominant culture) and antithesis in a constant struggle to maintain the dominance and the forces which represent "change" (not necessarily good or bad change but change). Viewed that way NPR is simply a propaganda organ of the dominant culture. This has three main legs of support: American exceptionalism, Capitalism, and American military/state security needs. And NPR will not call into question any of those legs in any meaningful way.

I heard an "interesting" thing yesterday. Col Tom Bowman was discussing Libya with Wertheimer and she asked about the previous days Pentagon "briefing". Bowman said that the spokesperson told Libyan troops not to "drive their tanks home" (cause we'll kill you just like we did the Iraqis on the Road of Death in '91). Wertheimer chortled and almost laughed at the funny ha-ha these Pentagon jokesters came up with. And I recalled the previous talk about how these people really have no clue as to what war "is". I did not get to turn off the radio when the 8am repeat came on (like I usually do) and I heard the same segment but .. . Wertheimer's response was shortened considerably. Basically was left with a short snort rather than the near-glee she had expressed a little earlier. I have caught some editing between the 6am and 8am broardcast before but this was noticeable. Can I "prove" this? Not unless I'm willing to tape everything and parse it from the tapes. And I got a life so . . . I am thinking about taping the Ira Glass BS tomorrow. Maybe I should before they try to sell it to me on a pledge drive as an example of why you should give money to your local station.


Mytwords said...

re: (Anon) edk - I also heard that gleeful chuckle about not driving home in their tanks...ha! ha!

BTW, I emailed On the Media and let them know that I beat them to their challenge to "diary" NPR news...by 5 years. Needless to say I haven't heard back from them...

Anonymous said...


i also offered to keep a diary but can't even post there anymore.


Anonymous said...

Moyers continues with the "NPR is great" garbage

I tell ya.

Before this I had a pretty good opinion of Moyers (especially after his interview of Bill Black), but I can only take so much of this grovelling PR crap from Moyers.

Loyalty is one thing, but what he is doing is disgusting.

He's beginning to sound like a used car salesman who knows the transmission is shot, the engine blown and the U joint about to fall off but nonethless tells you the car is "like new".

Makes you wonder if maybe Moyers is getting paid for it.

Oh, I forgot, he already WAS paid for it (for 40 years, by PBS)...and now he's just giving them a kind of kickback.

Anonymous said...

The NPR way: When reality does not jibe with the official line, change the "reality" (or at least the reporting of it) to fit the official line.

The reality: Fukushima radioactive fallout nears Chernobyl levels

"Austrian researchers have used a worldwide network of radiation detectors – designed to spot clandestine nuclear bomb tests – to show that iodine-131 is being released at daily levels 73 per cent of those seen after the 1986 disaster. The daily amount of caesium-137 released from Fukushima Daiichi is around 60 per cent of the amount released from Chernobyl."

end quote from New Scientist

The NPR Line: "The only thing the Japanese have to fear is fear (of radiation) itself"

SIMON: Do you contain the fear of radiation or does that spread all over the country?

HAMILTON: Well, the fear of radiation seems to have spread pretty rapidly. Here in Tokyo this past week, there was a report from the local government that the levels of radiation in the tap water were a little bit high [try at least 2X the safe level for infants -- see analysis above]. And that was all it took to have this amazing run on bottled water. It just disappeared off of store shelves.

end NPR quote

yes, that amazing run!

It's just amazing that Japanse mothers and fathers would be concerned about their infants drinking water contaminated with radioactive iodine above what have been determined to be safe levels.

Not only is Hamilton's statement idiotic, it is RACIST.

The above Simon/Hamilton peice is so full of crap that I don't know where to begin.

It starts out bad and just gets worse:

"HAMILTON: Well, I'll start with the good news, which is that there hasn't been any major release of radiation in actually quite a few days now.

No "major" release, unless you happen to be among the "fear mongers" who consider the ongoing releases of radioactive iodine and radioactive cesium that are on par with the daily release from Chernobyl "major".

NPR's low-balling of the gravity of the situation is Japan is CRIMINAL.

Anonymous said...

By the way.

For anyone who did not follow the conversions above to figure the radiation dose from 1510 becquerels per kilogram of milk from I-131 radiation activity , the age related dose coefficients are provided in Table 3 of this FDA document (taken from ICRP publication 56)

Note that the I-131 dose coefficient for "thyroid" (which is most relevant because the thyroid is most susceptible to I-131) for an infant up to age 1 year is 0.0036 millisievert per becquerel.

So, based on the NPR report that

"one lot of milk sampled from the town of Kawamata, 29 miles from the power plant, reportedly contained 1,510 becquerels of radiation per kilogram."

we can calculate that one liter of this milk gives a radiation dose of 1560 x 0.0036 = 5.6 millisievert.

What that means is that one 8 oz glass of this milk gives a radiation dose of (8/34) (5.6) = 1.3 millisievert, which is basically the same result I calculated above (1.1 millisievert).

Different source for the dose data yields the same result (but a result wildly different from what NPR claims. How about that?

What I found is that only some 40 odd glasses are required to give a 50 millisievert dose, as opposed to NPR's (certainly bogus) claim that 2,922 eight oz glasses are required to give that dose.

Note that even if you use the I-131 thyroid dose coefficent for ADULTS (0.00044 mSv/Bq) from that same Table 3, an I-131 activity of 1510 Bq/kg milk translates to a radiation dose of 0.7 milliSieverts per liter of milk (for adults)

That would mean that, instead of the 40 glasses (for infants), about 310 eight oz glasses would yield the 50 millisievert dose (for adults) that NPR claims would require 2,922 glasses.

In other words, even if you assume that NPR is talking about adults (when japan's primary concern has been infants) NPR's claim is STILL off by an a full order of magnitude (factor of 10).

A factor of ten can literally mean the difference between someone getting cancer and not so it is no small potatoes.

This is just a verification that NPR's claim is just plain wrong any way you look at it.

PS Anyone who simply take NPR's claims from their so-called "technical experts" (in this case someone from RPI) at face value without verifying them is a fool.

But I know lots of very well-educated people (several of them in my own immediate family, with Ivy league degrees even!) who do just that.

geoff said...

Yeah, Liane opened the broadcast today with something to effect that "One expert says that concerns about the Fukushima plant are overblown." This was shortly followed by a report that TEPCO was monitoring an big spike in the radiation levels. That was followed by a report an hour later that these reports were wrong. Looks like the NPR weather vane is experiencing some cross-currents.

Anonymous said...

Nasty wikileaks has this:


a Japanese MP has said this company is rotten to the core.

and i have to wonder when those guys went into the basement of a damaged nuclear facility to lay electric cable weren't they aware that the water was highly (10000 times "normal") contaminated? Did they not carry some sort of detection gear?

I said from jump Fukishima was Japanese for DeepWater Horizon, Louisianna. Same corporate/government collusion, same mis-leading/false reports and same gullible reporting. Even down to plumes, one of oil the other of radioactivity. I expect anytime to hear about the radioactive microbes busily eating up the contamination.


Anonymous said...

"One expert says that concerns about the Fukushima plant are overblown."

Like Chernobyl was overblown?

Fukushima radioactive fallout nears Chernobyl levels

They should send these m....rf...ing "experts" (and the NPR reporters who are quoting them) over there and have THEM do what the "Fukishima 50" have been doing (risking -- and undoubtedly seriously shortening -- their lives) hour after hour day after day for two weeks now.

Make the folks at NPR drink the water and milk that their 'experts" claim is nothing to worry about.

"Nothing to worry about"...as long as it's someone else's child (especially a Japanese one) getting exposed to the radiation

I was sick of NPR before this, but the despicable way they have reported on the nuclear crisis ("Don't worry, our experts say it's all overblown -- and they have advanced degrees") is enough to make me write letters to every member of Congress urging them to shut that slimy organization down.

Anonymous said...

More BS from an AP report NPR has posted on their website:

"Officials acknowledged there was radioactive water in all four of the Fukushima Dai-ichi complex's most troubled reactors, and that airborne radiation in Unit 2 measured 1,000 millisieverts per hour, four times the limit deemed safe by the government."

Only 4X?

Bear in mind that the recommended limit for nuclear power plant workers (above background) is 50 millisieverts PER YEAR and the recommended limit for the public is 1 millisievert PER YEAR.

So, we are talking about a level that is giving a dose 1000 times the latter in a SINGLE HOUR.

Only 4X the safe limit my a**.

A SINGLE DOSE of 1000 millisievert (one sievert) causes radiation sickness like nausea, vomiting, hair loss, hemorrhaging. A single dose of 4 sieverts: possible death within 2 months.

See EPA document Radiation protection: Health Effects

Multiply the exposure in rem by 10 to get the exposure in millisievert (or divide exposure in rem by 100 to get exposure in sievert)

From the EPA:

Exposure (rem)
5-10 changes in blood chemistry
50 nausea hours
55 fatigue
70 vomiting
75 hair loss 2-3 weeks
90 diarrhea
100 hemorrhage
400 possible death within 2 months
1,000 destruction of intestinal lining
internal bleeding
and death 1-2 weeks
2,000 damage to central nervous system
loss of consciousness; minutes
and death hours to days

What the Japanese are reporting is a dose of (1,000 millisieverts = 1 sievert = 100 rem) EVERY HOUR to anyone exposed to it -- eg, workers on the site like those who stepped in the contaminated water.

The folks at NPR are either being exceedingly stupid/inept or exceedingly dishonest.

These folks are not journalists.

They are a cruel joke.

Their entire organization should be shut down.

Patrick Lynch said...

Damn blogger all to cyberhell. It eats more of my posts than it saves.

Try it again:

Auntie Lianne provokes much anger at the breakfast table when she trots out "NPR's Senior Business Editor" to spew the most naked anti-homeowner propaganda on the subject I've heard in awhile. As a former renter, I call bullshit on this for multiple reasons.

First, a nation of renters doesn't have much incentive to have any kind of investment in helping solve the problems of their communities when they are constantly moving from place to place looking for their next job as the migrant workers they've now become.

Second, in all the time I was a renter, I saw very little sense of community on streets where the majority of people rented. They all knew they were going somewhere else soon so who cares what happens there or how tumbledown the places look because it's not their problem.

Third, children of renters have little stability in their education as they move around from place to place. My fiancee teaches middle school kids and she frequently laments the turnover of kids in her classes who move from place to place and they are hopelessly behind and their grades suffer. Of course, NPR gets to do their other favourite thing and bash the teachers for every ill of society.

Interestingly, my fiancee was an army brat and she said that when her parents got moved around from base to base, the education system the Army used back then was set that if you left base A to go to base B, you didn't miss a beat because the curriculum was the same everywhere and on schedule.

The anti homeowner meme that is in the media everywhere today was never as blatant as it was yesterday.