Justin Q. Olmstead

I would have liked to have been with Oppenheimer when he detonated the first a-bomb. The excitement of that moment must have been great. At the same time, I would have liked to have been able to stop the development of this technology. Yes, it may have some great potential for energy, but I believe that the costs and the potential danger is too great. Being a rancher as well as a teacher, I would have loved to have participated on one of the early cattle drives, to truely experience the hardships and excitment of the time. But really, as a student of history, there are so many moments that I would have loved to have participated in it's funny.

Depends on the sport. For Baseball I would have to go with DonMattingly, first baseman for the New York Yankees during the '80's and into the early '90's. For Soccer, it is more difficult their are so many players whose skills I admire, Zindane, Beckham, Christiano Ronaldo. I could go on and on. Being a Man United fan and loving the tenacity that Alan Smith approaches his job with he would have to be a favorite of mine.

The fact is most Americans won't become socially active (ie vote) until they are hurt somehow. Until the markets hit bottom and people are out of a job, the economy won't make much of a difference. Does that make it right? No, but that seems to be the trend for most Americans.

There was an interesting article in the NY Times today pointing out that the majority of people that voted for Bush on "moral" issues, don't agree with his policies concerning taxes, the economy, Iraq and social security. Does this mean that Carl Rove's work was successful? Do my fellow Americans really care more about abortion rights, and gay marriage than their own financial safety? More than America's role in the world? If so this begs the question of why.

I would have to agree with those who have posted before me that said that their is a large proportion of my country's citizens that are not well educated. Yes they graduated from high school, some may even have a college degree, but if it does not happen in their neighborhood or affect them directly they will not act on it.

I think that it was Mike Tolliver that made the comment that American Government classes teach about voting being a civic duty. THis is exactly what my collegues and I teach. Most of my students do not see voting as usefull. Part of this comes from living in a "red" state. If I vote for a democrate in Kansas my vote will go unheard. THe question that is being debated in many circles is, do we need to do away with the electoral college?

The idea of strategic bombing must be seperated from the terror bombing that John mentioned earlier. Strategic bombing would have to be considered the bombing of the heavy industry that produced the tanks, armaments, processed the oil, and oil fields themselves. The terror bombings would be the intentional bombing of the civilian sector. The V-1 and V-2 rockets that the Germans made would fall into this category.

Did they terrorize? Absolutely. Was it moral? I suppose that it must depend on your definition of "total war." In a total war, all of the enemy's civilian population is part of the war machine. In order to defeat the enemy you must defeat the people who are working in the factories, providing the military with what it needs to wage a war. In this, one could consider stratigic bombing the same as terror bombing, but I would still keep them seperate.

The strategic bombing was not successful. In fact as allied bombing increased the war production in Germany increased. If anything the allied attacks did more damage to their own air corps than to the German industry. The attacks on ball bearing plants, while grounding the Eighth Air Force for several months afterwords did not even slow the production down. In fact at the end of the war the Germans had enough ball bearings left in production to begin exporting them. To quote John Kenneth Galbraith, the former ambassador to India, " Strategic Bombing was designed to destroy the industrial base of the enemy and the morale of its people. It did neither."

As for Japan, they did not have the same infrastructure as Germany. Factories hit in Japan would likely stay out of production, whereas in German they would be back in production withing a few days at most.

As for the morality issue, most people would agree that the bombing of Dresden is considered a war crime by many. In fact the Former U.S. Secretary of Defence Robert S. McNamara has mentioned that if the U.S. had lost World War II that its leaders, both military and civilian, would have been tried for war crimes for, not only the fire bombings of Dresden and Tokyo, but for their whole air campaign (for more on this watch the film "The Fog of War."

For the on-line course that I am currently developing and teaching (I am teaching it as it is being created--quite stressful), my biggest complaint is that any question function on the course requires the exact response by a student as I have entered into the computer for the answer. Now while this may seem silly, if I require an answer of Soviet Union, and the student answer is "the Soviets", in my mind this answer is close enough, although the computer counts it wrong. Any on-line course needs to be able to fix this problem. Additionally, I feel that to get a true feeling for what the students are are learning, as far as skill, there needs to be plenty of "forum time."

Part of "revolutionising current methodology", in my mind, would be to create what we call "life long learners." These are students that can find the information that they want on the internet. In a history class, it can be used to help answer difficult questions (ask and expert) or to simply find different views that those of the teacher or text book.

I'm not sure that you can condem one General of this war and not all of them. The fact is that tactics had not kept up with technology. Soldiers on both sides were still fighting with the tactics used during the American Civil War. Therefore, if Haig were to be a truely brilliant General he would have devised new tactics that did not follow the order of the day: Shell the hell out of them and then charge ahead.

Bush's win seemed to be in direct contradiction to what the exit polls were indicating. To anyone's knowledge, has this discrepancy ever been this prevalent in past elections?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

From what I know the last time the exit polls were this off was the last time Bush won (2000). I'm not generally a consipracy theorist but could we be on to something here?

Indeed! Let us look at popular society in America. What are the most popular shows: South Park, Jackass, The Man Show, any of the reality shows. What happens during these shows. People are lied too, trying to find love by being placed on an island and "tempted" by beautiful members of the opposite sex. The man show does nothing more than profess the greatness of beer and breasts, and every comercial break the camera focuses on two well endowed women in bakini's jumping on a trampaline. These shows are condemed by few and watched by many that consider themselves "moral". I am neither. Personally, I could care less what someone watches, some of these programs are very funny, others are interesting at best.

Values also vary from town to town. I live in a "dry" city. In Winfield, Kansas we have no liquor stores and can only buy "watered down beer." But the town south of us by 10 miles has fifteen liquor stores. At the same time the County Fair board refuses to allow the sale of beer at the County fair grounds, all because they believe that it is immoral or will lead to the immorality of our youth. All of which is hillarious when you think of the history of Alcholic consumption in the U.S.

While I do not deny that currently Fundamentalist Islam is worse that Christian Fundamentalism, the crux of the problem is fundamentalism. Fundamentalist zealots are no different that any other extremist in history. Right now the Muslim extremists may be physically more violent on a world stage, but the Christian fundamentalists have been bombing abortion clinics and attacking pro-choice people. While I understand that this does not match the level of 9/11, it is still terrorism.

What is also amazing to me, is that everyone that I have heard talk about campaigning complains about the money issue. "Only the rich can afford to run for office." As a former Fundraising Director for a congressional campaign I can tell you they are right. The problem is that no one is willing to put a stop to it. The person that spends the most, generally wins. Why would this person vote for campaign spending limits? Obviously this is not considered a moral issue. Which brings me to another point. Most of the information I have seen tells us that a large portion of Bush supporters voted for him on moral issues. Yet the fact that he lied, did not seem to bother them, or the fact that he has ordered the mistreatment of prisoners, or the fact that he has used cocaine and was caught drinking and driving. The question is what is the number one moral issue in America today. I'll tell you what it is... Abortion. I was in a discussion with another history teacher in my school the day before the election and his position was that as a good catholic he would not vote for any "baby killers." He equated the pro-choice people to those who stood by, watched and said nothing as the nazis drug the Jews to the gas chambers. He felt that Pro-choice leads to euthenasia to doctor assisted suicide, to socialized (government administered) healthcare which gives the government the right to decide how much a persons life is worth. To say the least I was floored, but this is what the fight is about. As long as the Christian fundamentalists are targeting abortion and the democrates are not willing to attempt to make it illegal there will not be very many democrates elected.

As for Nader, the only way he will ever make a positive difference in the political scheme of things is if he follows the path of Ralph Reed and his Christian Coalition. That is he must begin by winning the local elections and building the base support.

[

Apparently I too threw away my vote in Kansas. For the first time I can truely say that I am embarrassed by the majority of Americans. Their short sightedness will have long term effects. The fact that so many Bush supporters are one issue voters. Abortion, Gay marriage, the war in Iraq, the war on terror. Not one Bush supporter talked about social issues. Healthcare, education, you know, the really important issues.

I was reminded today that the good news is that Bush and the Fascists, sorry, Republicans will have to answer for the problems they have caused. My country is in such a mess that the republicans will be held to task for what they have done to not only my country.

I hope that those who voted for Bush will be happy with a poor economy, as the biggest depter nation in the world, and one of the most hated nations in the world. I hope that they understand that as the was in Iraq drags on, and more of our children begin coming back in body bags. I'm sorry if I sound angry but I had hoped that reason and intelligence would prevail.

While reading a list of the Nazi anti-Jewish Legislation, one of my students asked why one of the Nuremburg Laws state that "Jews cannot employ Germans in their home under the age of 45."

I have no good explanation for this. Could someone else please give us some information here.

Thanks,

Justin Olmstead

Like many of you, I think that there has to be a balance between skills and facts. Without the facts the students cannot be expected to learn how to "explore" history's vital themes and narratives. History is not a bunch of facts, it is cause and effect. It is circumstance. In fact, I tell my kids that the names, dates and places that I was taught are not the most important things that they will be learning in my classes. It is the ability to understand why an event happened or why a particular decision was made, or why one country would react as it did that is the most important.

The National Council for History Education, of which I belong, has deemed these skills "History's Habits of Mind." This is a major reason that I belong to this organiztion. The habits of mind are based on six themes of history: (1) Civilization, cultural diffusion,and innovation; (2) Patterns of social and political interaction; (3) Human interaction with the environment; (4) conflict and cooperation; (5) values, beliefs, political ideas, and institutions; (6) comparative history of major developments. Each of these themes is only a focal point and should be overlaped by several of the other themes. For instance, Civilization cannot be fully understood unless geography and technology, balues, ideas and institutions are also covered.

The Habits of Mind are:

1. ...understand the significance of the past to their own lives, both private and public, and to their society.

2. ...Distinguish between the important and the inconsequential, to develoop the "discriminating memory" needed for discerning judgment in public and personal life.

3. ...perceive past events and issues as they were experienced by people at the time, to develop historical empathy as opposed to present-mindedness.

4. ...acquire at one and the same time a comprehension of diverse cultures and of shared humanity.

5. ...understand how things happen and how things change, how human intentions atter, but also how their consequences are shaped by the mens of carrying them out in a tangle between purpose and process.

6. ...comprehend the interplay of change and continuity, and avoid assuming that either is somehow more natural, or more to be expected, than the other.

7. ...prepare to live with uncertainties and exasperating--even perilous--unfinished business, realizing that not all "problems" have solutions.

8. ...grasp the complexity of historical causatioin, respect particularity, and avoid excessively abstract generaizations.

9. ...appreciate the often tentative nature of judgments about the past, and thereby avoid the temptation to sieze upon particular "lessons" of history as cures for present ills.

10. ...recognize the importance of individuals who have made a difference in history, and the significance of persoal character for both good and ill.

11. ...appreciate the force of the nonrational, the irrational, the accidental, in history and human affairs.

12. ...understand the relationship between geography and history as a matrix of time and place, and as context for events.

13. ...read widely and critically in order to recognize the difference between fact and conjecture, betwwen evidence and assertion, and thereby to frrame useful questions.

Because the State and Federal governments have told U.S. educators to guage our students history knowledge by standardized tests, many teachers feel forced to "teach to the test." Meaning to give only the information that students will find on the test. This has two effects. First, it limits the true knowledge that students can possibly gain, while at the same time helping the school look good. In essence if student scores are high it indicates that our teachers are doing a wonderful job (Ha!). Additionaly, Americans tend to place a higher emphasis on math and science as the subjects that really mean something, that will keep on making America great. While I agree that they are very important subjects, I do not hold this view.

One of th many problems that our students face is the fact that in American High Schools many of the teachers are also coaches, and history is seen as the easiest place to put a coach (ie. "Read the chapter and answer the questions and the end."). So our students are hamstrung from the begining. In essence many schools use their history departments as a dumping ground for some of the worst teachers, solely because they place a high emphasis sports. This fram of mind drives me insane.

The "habits of mind" that I listed above are posted in my classroom. I use them as a reminder to both myself and to my students of the process that we should be utilizing to truely understand history. For my purposes I always create a lecture first. Once I have done this, I look at the information and try to figure out a project that my students can create that will get this same information to them without having my "talk at them". My projects encompase skills as well facts. Instead of lecturing to the students about geography and how it affects history and the development of civilization, my students have to create a 3D map and then as a class we discuss how some of the items that they have place on the map could have been obsticals to invading armies or how a particular mountain range may have kept a civilization isolated for many, many years.

Someone earlier had mentioned that they don't like to use primary sourse documents in the high school setting. I could not disagree more. As a history educator it is my job to utilize those documents in a way that the students can understand what life was like during that particular time period, or how people of that time period viewed a certain event. Again, by using the Habits of Mind, my classes are generally able to do such things.

One of my biggest frustrations arises from the fact that we have a very limited amount of time to teach history in. Currently, at the High School level, we cover American History from reconstruction to current times in six months. We do the same with Western Civilization, which we start teaching from the neanderthals. Needless to say Western Civ. rarely makes it past The Great War. The real shame in all of this is the fact that we are not able to go into depth on very many events. The age of the robber barrons is barely touched upon. This is beginging to sound like a rant so I will sign off here and join the discussion later.

I would suggest New World Coming by Nathan Miller. This covers America during the 1920's. The Great Depression by T.H. Watkins also does a great job covering America in the 1930's. In fact the two books overlap just a bit. The Warrior and th Priest by John Milton Cooper, Jr. is also a great book. It compares Teddy Roosevelt with Woodrow Wilson and their carriers in government. The History of the World in the 20th Century, by J. A. S. Grenville is also a great overall history.

While John does a masterful job of answering your questions, I would like to add that one of the reasons that war seemed so inevitable is that there were leaders (particularly military leaders) on both sides that felt that war was inevitable. In fact some believe that the second letter that Krushchev shows a power struggle within the Kremlin. The danger that this represents is that if the Chairman's position was unstable it could produce an even more militaristic Soviet Union that is willing to go to war to defeat the West.

As for Kennedy, it is fairly simple. He did not want to go to war but the politics of the time forces him to have to balance his political needs against what he believed was right. While he was getting pressure to use military force against the Soviets in Cuba (hence the Bay of Pigs), he was attempting to use diplomacy to defuse the situation. Some here call it shotgun diplomacy...either you do as I say or we will shoot you.

Talking to people in the United State who were alive at the time they recall how terrified they were that a war was going to break out. People talk about going to bed not knowing if they would wake up tomorrow. Tornado sirens were not tested because of the fear that people would mistake it for an air raid alert and panic.

As for books, I'd have to say that almost all of Edward Abby's books have had an affect on me. I grew up in the American southwest and most of Abby's books are set there. Some of his titles are, The Monkey Wrench Gang, Hayduke Lives and A Fools Journey. When I was in grade school my sister to a trip to Europe and came back with a book title The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, by Douglas Adams. I would have to count this as a great series because of the humor and his comments on society.

As for other mediums. I would have to say that movies do have an impact on peoples lives. In many cases a movie my cause someone to become interested in a topic and want to learn more. Whether it is a movie about civil rights, the holocaust, war etc. it can play an important part in someones live. As for me, when I was young boy I used to watch "old" movies with my grandmother. Casablanca, The Maltese Falcone, and many, many more. These tended to shape the way I addressed adults and how I treated women. I thought that it was so cool how these guys always opened the door for women, and addressed people with mame and sir. This actually helped alot when I began dating, because all of the girls mothers loved the fact that I said "Yes mame".

Films like Schindler's List can also have a profound affect on people today, I actually show it in my History classes because it allows the students to become involved with the characters and care about what happens to them.

I have a BA in Political Science and a BA in History. I am a member of the National Council for History Education, and currently teach in History and Government at Winfield High School and have created an on-line class in American History. I am also currently working on my masters degree through Emporia State University.

In a general sense, absolutely. Ex slaves were an important part in the battle against the American Indians as Buffalo Soldiers. Buffalo soldiers were also used to build and maintain forts, string telegraph lines and map the southwest.

But there were also exodusters. During the American Civil War the government passed the Homestead Act, which offered 160 acres of land for free if the person or people that settled on it could cultivate it for five years. Thousands of ex slaves used the Homestead Act as a way to try to get away from the horrors of plantation life in reconstruction South. Many of these exodusters traveled to Kansas and Oklahoma (about 6,000 came to Kansas in 1879, while it is believed that over 22,000 came in 1880).

Ex-slaves also played a large role in building the railroads that conneced the east and west coasts. Generally, in American history, it is the Chinese and Irish that get credit for doing this back breaking work.

Many ex-slaves also helped with the cattle drives that so many people associate with the American west. It is believed that a full 25% of the cowboys in the 1880's and 1890's were black. Additionally, Bill Picket was a black cowboy that invented the rodeo sport of bulldoging also known as steer wrestling.

It is important to note that by these ex-slaves making the move to the west, they were changing American society. Before this many people in the west had never experienced black "culture."

I have a BA in history, a BA in Political Science and am currently working on my Masters in American history. I teach American History, U.S. Government/Constitution and Middle East Studies at Winfield High School in Winfield, Kansas USA. I am a member of the National Council for History Education and have recently created an on-line class in American History for Winfield High. Additionally, I am in the process of creating a history website, soon to be found at www.historygeek.org.

I have a BA in History, a BA in Political Science and am currently working on my masters degree in American history. I am a member of the National Council for History Education, Inc., and am in the process of creating a website to be used as a resource and forum, when it is ready it can be found at www.historygeek.org I teach American history at Winfield, Kansas, USA.

I teach American History at Winfield High School in Winfield KS, USA. I am currently working on my Masters degree in American History at Emporia State University, and am a member of the National Council for History Education.

I teach American History and U.S. Government at Winfield High School in Winfield, Kansas, USA. I am a member of the National Council for History Education. I have worked as a Cowboy to pay my way through University and am a third generation rancher. Because of my background I have studied the American West extensively.

I would have to say that JFK's greatest achievment was the avoiding the Cuban Missile Crisis. The tension that Americans felt during that time period cannot be put into words that would do it justice. Tornado siren testing was suspended because they did not want to terrify the public. People were listening to their radios to find out if there was going to be a nuclear war or not.

I do not agree with the 1963 civil rights act. LBJ used the death of a beloved president to pass this bill. LBJ basically said that the best thing that congress could do to remember the slain president was to pass this bill. So I guess that in a round-about way JFK is responsible for it, but not in a way that most people would want to take credit for.

JFK's greatest achievement is certainly one of the 3 listed below; first I will give you 3 choices, and then I will indicate my possibly surprising selection:

(1) avoiding nuclear war with the USSR over the Cuban Missile Crisis;

(2)  coming down firmly on the side of Civil Rights in 1963, including introducing the Civil Rights Act legislation that was later passed after his death;

(3)  proposing and strongly supporting America's Moon landing program---Project Apollo.

My selection is the Apollo program, and here's why:

500 years from now, and perhaps 50 or even 100 years from now, America's Apollo Moon landing program will clearly be the most significant decision and/or act by JFK.  By proposing and "selling" this program in the midst of a Cold War with the USSR, the American President indicated that he took the Cold War very seriously, that he was NOT an appeaser (as many Conservatives feared),  and that he not only didn't mind, but welcomed competition with the USSR, as long as it was NOT on the battlefield.  Although the origins of the Apollo program were 100% in America's Cold War competition with the USSR, its benefits were truly astounding in terms of technology boost, building excitement over Space Exploration, and its positive impact on the human spirit.  It has also remained the quintissential symbol of what Americans---and humans, for that matter---can do if they have the will and dedicate the resources.  In many ways the future of the human species will be determined by space exploration and space travel, and JFK's jumpstart certainly got us to the Moon 50 or 100 years before it would otherwise have happened, at a time when many feared the U.S. had already lost the Space Race, and that competition with the USSR was pointless.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I would agree. Most people still have a more favorable view of JFK than not. Alot of this comes from the mystique of "Camelot" which leads us to Jackie. Let us not forget that she was mysterious, and didn't spend much time in Washington D.C. Additionaly, they were the first really young President and first lady. This gave them an aura of glamor. I really believe that the people put them together and judge them together. We also need to look at the fact that he brought in "the best and the brightest." People saw Harvard professors, the President of Ford Motor Company, and the president of the Rockefeller foundation.

Now, JFK's reputation may be falling because of the Marilyn Monroe affair. However you view it, in America people tend to look down on those in power who have an affair. The conservatives who are still angry about JFK's popularity who are really trying to push the possibility that JFK had Marilyn killed.

Your comment of others following in the Chechen terrorists footsteps, here's some more info. I have a close friend that is a police officer here in the U.S., who recently underwent "terrorism" training. He informed me that the U.S. government believes that terrorists were planning to attack schools, and sporting events were children were present. They are ordering all off duty police officers to carry their guns in order to prevent these types of events from occuring. Looks as if the government was right. The question is, could this type of event have been avoided had the governments told their citizens. I can't believe that these governments would not have shared this information.

I don't think that a vote for Kerry is a vote for war. Do I like the fact that my country has been lied to, by its leaders, in order to get the people to back an imperialist war? I can safely say no. But, unfortunately, we are in Iraq and we can't just pick up and leave, now can we. We must pull out in an orderly fashion. And the sooner the better. Therefore, I believe that a vote for Kerry would be a vote for maintaining or even regaining the liberties that were lost when King George II (Bush) pushed his Patriot Act through congress. Most liberal or left-wing Americans feel that we cannot stand another four years of Bush. His policies are not only dividing our country but they are harming our relations with our allies and making Americans even more hated around the world than we were already.

A colleague of mine spent time in Italy and Greece this summer and came back with stories of anti-American slurs that he and his students had to endure simply because they are associated with Bush. In fact the stories that I have heard from the students are that when they agreed with their assailants the Italians and Greeks were suprised to learn that not all Americans supported Bush.

Additionally, as I recall from an earlier post refering to Americans as insulated from the rest of the world, I would like to bring to people's attention that the exchange students that I have had in class from Europe all claim that their media purports that Americans support Bush almost to a man. This is siimply not true. Our country is deeply divided. The sad fact is that our division is into three camps, active Republicans, active Democrats and those that don't really care because it has not affected them personally, yet.

The point here is that there is so much more at stake than simply voting against the war. A change must be made.