Hamill vs Bisping Pre-Fight UFC Videos - Captioned!

Get ready to watch the UFC rumble between Matt Hamill and Michael Bisping tomorrow on Saturday at 9 PM Eastern Time. The show titled "UFC 75: Champion vs. Champion" will be free to watch on SpikeTV channel. Don't miss the fight!

Here are two pre-fight videos about Michael Bisping and Matt Hamill by SpikeTV. Mike McConnell produced the captioned text in the first video seen below for your viewing pleasure. Stop by and pass along a thank you to Mike for his effort on producing a captioned video portion of Matt Hamill and Michael Bisping.

The captioned video of Hamill and Bisping starts at 6 minutes and 38 seconds into the video. You'll have to fast foward to the time stamp at 6:38.




The second video with subtitles produced by SpikeTV called "Matt Hamill's Unfinished Business."

Heavyweight Matt Hamill talks about his upcoming fight with TUF 3 winner Michael Bisping at UFC® 75. Where does Hamill plan to take the fight and how important is it to him? You can see Hamill vs. Bisping free on Spike TV Saturday September 8th @ 9PM.

Now, in the second video "Unfinished Business" Matt Hamill was using his voice to talk to reporters rather than signing. Should Matt have signed instead of talking? Or that doesn't matter to you? Choose your answer in the poll below.

In the second video Matt Hamill was talking and using his voice but not signing, is that acceptable?
	Yes
	No.
	I'm not sure.
	It doesn't matter since I'm not the overly sensitive type about deaf people talking.
pollcode.com free polls

Here's a poll for you UFC fans.

Who do you think will win? Matt Hamill or Michael Bisping?

Who do you think will win at the UFC 75 fight?
	Matt Hamill
	Michael Bisping
pollcode.com free polls

To see all blogs and interviews of Matt Hamill in my Kokonut Pundit blogsite please go here and you'll find a Google list of Matt Hamill related blogs.


Check out all of Kokonut Pundit's blogs on Matt Hamill. Including exclusive interviews with him by Mike McConnell.

UPDATE: There were unconfirmed reports that several Deaf people purposely voted "No" in one question ("In the second video Matt Hamill was talking and using his voice but not signing, is that acceptable?") with the claim it was done to "rile" me up and make this into a "controversy." If this is true then we have several very dishonest Deaf people who managed only to hurt themselves and perhaps the Deaf community. Currently 28 (out of 116 votes currently) voted "No" which makes up 24% of the total votes. If several Deaf people voted "No" on purpose (when they really would've voted "doesn't matter") it would bring down the percentage to only about 20% or so. Which means 20% of the 116 votes, currently. It does not mean 20% (or 30% in this case previously) of the Deaf community that voted "No." Please understand the differences, folks. We're talking about the current 116 votes and not the whole Deaf community population.

For those who voted honestly I would question them if they are actually being closed minded about Hamill's right to use his voice at the MMA fights (both pre-fight and post-fight examples). Hamill already apologized to those who felt upset when he choose to use his voice to talk. Hamill was the bigger man to apologize to those who disagreed with him using his voice (and even to guys who believed in playing the dishonesty game in the poll vote). The statistical percentages will still stand and evolve while people continue to vote. And, if this is true, then those Deaf yahoos who played around in that poll vote will now see the consequences of their action knowing that the public will see that 24% result when it could have been only 15% or even 10% of those who participated voted "No."

Nice going them guys. If this actually happened then they certainly deserve the Darwin award. I expect people to be honest with themselves rather than play games of dishonesty when it comes to these things.

Democrats Stunned by Accuracy in Deaf Repblicans Website

I couldn't help but chuckle when I came across "Into Dean's Cyberspace," a Democrat blogsite, about how they were "stunned" by Deaf Republicans accurate claims on what Republicans have accomplished for deaf and hard of hearing people, and people with disability.

I got this e-mail from a friend of mine. I read them very carefully, and the list those accomplishments on disability issues were passed by all Republicans really stunned me. I always have been a democrat. I never realized they are all Republicans who passed them. I wonder of those accomplisments are accurate information? Have any Democrats passed any disability issues? Anyway, I thought I would want to post to let the readers read about this…

And I scrolled down to see if anybody made any comments on the accuracy of Deaf Republicans' claims...... none replied.

Enough said.

UPDATE: Correction about the blogsite. I was informed by the owner that the blogsite that he isn't a Democrat. Not sure what party affiliation he's with but certainly nobody expressed any interest on discussing the details.

Any Deaf Black Republicans Out There?

I'm sure there are some deaf black Republicans out there somewhere since there are in fact many black Republican bloggers such as here, here and here which is just a short list of names. There are even black Republican organizations such as the "National Black Republican Association". And recently there's a new national magazine called "Black Republican" where you can download and read the first and second edition online magazine. And read articles with titles like,

• Seven Keys to Financial Independence for Black Americans
• Prominent African Americans Break from the Pack
• Black Politicians Are Switching to the Republican Party Across the Country
• Hillary’s Plantation: Democrats Trap Urban Blacks in Poverty
• Democrats:“By Their Fruits,Ye Shall Know Them
• Rev. Wayne Perryman Sues Democratic Party for Reparations: [Democrats Admit Racist Past in Court]
• CONDOLEEZZA RICE:Most Powerful Woman in the World.

In the National Black Republican Association website they have articles, video or radio ads that discusses,

• Republicans Promote Prosperity - Democrats Promote Dependency
• MLK was a Republican
• The KKK: The Democrats' Terrorist Arm
• Democrats Demean Blacks
• Democrats Take Black Votes For Granted
• Democrats Owe Blacks An Apology
• Democrats - Apologize NOW!

Now, again, I'm sure there are many deaf black Republicans out there somewhere. Yet I wonder if any deaf/Deaf black Democrat/Libertarian/Independent know about these magazines, black Republican organizations and some of the racist history (e.g. Democrats murdered black Republicans) of the Democratic party and its people in the past (and even into today)?

Now, what will people say about Republicans who happen to be black or African American? That they're a bunch of Uncle Toms? What if they're deaf/Deaf black Republicans? That they all are nothing more than "token" people? If you believe that then you better start reading "Black Republican" magazine before you open your mouth the next time. They are just as capable as any white, purple, yellow, green, or blue people out there to do what they want and succeed in life. We're no better than they are but as equals.

A Poll: Deaf Owned P0rn Company be Allowed at Deaf Expo?

Here's the question: Should a Deaf owned Deaf p0rn company be allowed at Deaf Expo as long as nudity and offensive language are not used? Yesterday, I ran a blog piece about my discovery of a Deaf owned p0rn company that I accidentally came across on YouTube after I punched in the key search word "deaf". And because of my blog piece I was recently informed via email about how a different Deaf owed p0rn company called "Polecat Pictures" was promptly thrown out of the Deaf Expo despite, from what I could read in the old Deaf Weekly newsletter, the agreement they had with Deaf Expo officials that no nudity and language were to be used at the Deaf Expo booth. Although this happened about three years ago.

The exhibit booth of a deaf-owned company promoting its new porn flick "Sexy Sign Language" was shut down by Deaf Expo officials last Saturday. PoleCat Pictures said in a press release that it paid its booth fee and had been welcomed for its diversity to the Nov. 12-13 event in Anaheim, Calif. The company agreed in advance to exclude nudity and profanity from its booth, yet show officials ordered the removal of all flyers and signs in the booth, and finally told PoleCat to "pack up and leave" at noon Saturday, the press release claims. Deaf Expo director David Rosenbaum told Deafweekly he worked hard with PoleCat reps to address the "unfavorable comments and grave concerns" of attendees, exhibitors and sponsors, but was not successful. "As a result and by mutual agreement, the exhibitor vacated his exhibit," he said.

Interesting story. The agreement was made on no language and nudity (I'm guessing for the sake of minors who would be among the attendees at Deaf Expo), the booth already paid for but it was the people who attended the Deaf Expo had these "concerns" which prompted officials to ask this porn vendor to leave. I wonder, did the porn vendor get his/her money back?

And so this leaves me thinking by setting this poll up.

Should a Deaf owned Deaf p0rn company be allowed at Deaf Expos or conventions as long as nudity and offensive language are not used?
	Yes!
	No!
	Yes but with more restrictions.
	I am not sure right now.
pollcode.com free polls

If yes but with restrictions you choose, what would those restrictions be? Being the only adult (ie p0rn) vendor in a mostly family-oriented (ie kids are there, too) type Deaf Expo, how would this "diversity" of Deaf owned companies be allowed to show their wares and services to the deaf and hard of hearing public? Would this be any different from religious "zealots" (for a lack of a better word) at these booths who are hocking their wares or information that some/many attendees would find such a booth a bit offensive, too?

A Deaf P0rn Company?

Went to YouTube and punched in a keyword "deaf" to see what's up and then I saw a recent video that was put up 11 hours ago by a new porn company called "Deaf Bunny Productions." Now, it's not a surprise that it'd be a matter of time until we see the first ever Deaf p0rn company complete with signing "actors." I'm sure there's a market for this kind of thing since when sex doesn't sell? But doesn't this bode bad news and more trappings for Deaf people? What are the pros and cons on having a Deaf p0rn company? Acceptable or not? A need for Deaf smut? Although I do wonder, does the bunny symbol used by this Deaf company infringes on Playboy's famous bunny trademark since it has the "look and feel" like the famous Playboy's bunny image? And are those "actors" really Deaf or hearing?

Hands and Voices

Karen Putz did a story on me for Hands and Voices a few months back that appeared in the printed version. The article is now available on their website titled, " 'Renaissance Man' in Pursuit of
Personal Goals." A good little read on what I have done and the goals I continue to pursue. Although I am not currently trying to raise money for a new piano via my blogsite, as reported in Hands and Voices. I advertised my donation request via buying my Ragtime products was done as a lark just to see what kind of reaction I'd get from people reading my blogsite. I'll get my piano of choice in due time and get back into practicing 2 to 3 hour everyday once again honing my ragtime piano skills. How many deaf/hh Ragtime pianists do you know anyway?

A New Kokonut Pundit 's Milestone

As I make my way thru the blogosphere I noticed that sometime today or last night my blogsite hit a new milestone of 200,000 hits. Not bad considering that I cover a wide variety of topics of interest to both hearing and deaf readers and with special thanks to many political blogs that linked to my breaking political blog topics. Over the past year has been my best! My recent first 100,000th hit occurred last year some 10 months ago. Many thanks to those who continue to read my blogs while I continue to be a positive and contributing member of the blogosphere, politics and everything else.

Deaf, Illegal Alien Charged With Murder

There's a big illegal immigration problem here in the United States. Anyone who enters the United States without proper documentations (or none at all) is breaking U.S. laws. They are in essence serious law breakers. These includes deaf illegal aliens as well and all illegal immigrants should be reported and deported back to where they came from.

Now, with this story we have Oswaldo Martinez, 36, who is charged with capital murder, rape, robbery and forcible sodomy in connection with the murder of a 16 year old girl, Brittany Binger, in January 2005.

Martinez, a deaf-mute illegal immigrant, has been learning American sign language at Western State since late 2005.

Experts have said that at the time Martinez was arrested in February 2005, he could not read, write or use sign language.

During a competency hearing in May, it was revealed that after a year and a half of instruction, Martinez could effectively communicate with doctors and staff at Western State.

Williamsburg-James City Circuit Judge Samuel Powell III ruled that during the next six months, Martinez's attorneys, Tim Clancy and Beau Webb, begin meeting with him in an effort to determine his ability to aid in his own defense. The move to the regional jail will make those meetings possible.

What makes this so unique is that Martinez lacked any effective communication to offer his own defense after investigations found his DNA in the form of scraped skin under Brittany's fingernails when she tried to fight him off. The culpability is there with the DNA evidence to charge Martinez with murder and more.

These things shouldn't happen. There are millions of legal immigrants who came to America using proper and legal means to enter and eventually become American citizens in Newark, NJ. Americans deserved to be protected from illegal aliens who break laws or committ murder against American citizens.

So, how many deaf illegal immigrants are out there in the United States? If there are an estimated 20 million illegal immigrants in the United States, I'd say the number of illegal deaf immigrants may be around 60,000 based on my own earlier population study. It could be much more than that since there are no real credible studies in this area as far as I know determining the number of deaf illegal immigrants in the U.S. Yet we do hear stories from time to time on how illegal deaf immigrants were captured like the ones reported here, here and especially here.

Regardless of how they got there, illegal immigrants simply need to be deported back where they came from. From the countries where these deaf illegal immigrants came from it is that country's responsibility to address the plight of these deaf individuals rather than have them foisted upon American soils because they don't want to address the problem. There are ways where countries can collaborate to help fund or offer expertise to help make lives better in the country from which those deaf illegal immigrants came from.

As a side note, Michelle Malkin is active in this area reporting on our illegal immigrants problem in the United States and how they have murdered and killed American citizens. Her latest story is about an illegal immigrant in connection with the triple slayings of three young people.

Cure Found to Help Deaf Babies Regain Complete Hearing

News!! "A biological cure has been found to help deaf babies regain their complete hearing by those who have nerve deafness, according to scientists who have made this miraculous discovery last year but now have put it to practical use."

Suppose ten years from now you will see that headline, seen above, blare across the front page of every major newspaper across the United States and even the world, what would your reaction be? With that discovery of a cure for nerve deafness (ie sensorineural deafess) for babies, kids, teens and adults, I'm sure parents would show a collective sigh of relief as they stampede toward the nearest audiologist or doctor office to get this newly available yet easy to use biological cure for their deaf babies. Should hearing parents go ahead and use this cure to help restore 100% of their baby's hearing loss and become that hearing person? Click on the poll survey below. There is only a "yes" or "no" answer. There is no "maybe" to choose from for obvious reasons.

Suppose ten years from now a cure has been found to restore nerve deafness completely, should parents go ahead and cure their baby's deafness?
	Yes!
	No!
pollcode.com free polls

UPDATE: Remember, this vote is about hearing parents of deaf babies. But by voting "No!" when a cure is readily available for deaf infants would that be construed as "child abuse" by limiting/denying that deaf baby that option to hear? In other words, are you suggesting to hearing parents that their deaf baby should, under no circumstances, be allowed to hear like any other hearing children when he/she grows up?

Hurricane Readiness Video in ASL now Available

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have just made several Hurricane Public Service Announcements available in American Sign Language. You can also get copies of the scripts of all the videos at this website if you can't understand the audio. All video files are available for Windows Media Player.

ASL Videos include:
Preparing for a Hurricane
Preparing for a Hurricane: Prescription Medications
Evacuating the Area of a Hurricane
Staying Save in Your Home During a Hurricane
Keeping Children Safe from Drowning in Flooded Areas
Avoiding Carbon Monoxide Poisoning During a Power Outage
Preventing Mold After a Disaster
Handwashing After a Disaster

See these videos and more at: http://www.bt.cdc.gov/disasters/hurricanes/psa.asp

Greg Gunderson Throws First Pitch For Pro Baseball Team

Greg Gunderson was invited to throw the first pitch at the Sioux Falls Canaries minor league baseball game. The game's theme was NASCAR day. And so Greg Gunderson took place of NASCAR driver Ryan Newman who couldn't make it to the game but his Alltel #12 race car was there for all to see and feel.









Stay tuned to Kokonut Pundit for breaking news on Greg Gunderson while Greg pushes forward to become the first ever Deaf professional driver on the NASCAR circuit.

By the way, have you looked at UbiDuo lately?


UPDATE: Check out this first historical event ever to take place in the ARCA/NASCAR industry to bring the first deaf racing driver to the racing scene. See photos of this historic news.

Deaf Parents Allow Deaf Kids Read Deaf Blogs?

I am just wondering here but would Deaf parents allow their Deaf kids read blogsites laced with profanities and/or lewdness? Which of the deaf/hh blogs out there are "family friendly" and which ones are more appropriate for adults? Which blogs would be more appropriately rated as a "rated R" blogsite? Or how many of these deaf/hh blogs are the more family friendly type or "PG" rated and does not have those foul language clearly?

Who is responsible to ensure that their deaf kids not be exposed to these foul language?

Below are some examples of which words that were used often in Deaf/Hoh blogsites.

Example #1, the use of the "F" word one time too many.

Example #2, the use of the "F" word with "You" just because it's "OK" to say it.

Example #3, when people like to use the stinky excrement word much too often.

Example #4, a word used often to describe a person as the puckered hole of a rear end.

Example #5, another word for intercourse in the active sense.

Example #6, another word of a person who doing the intercourse.

Example #7, using the "G" word in vain.

And so on. And so forth. And so on. Well, you get the idea.

And these blogs are supposed to be "family friendly" enough? Those profanities do appear in Deafread from time to time. Would you want your deaf kids read those blogs knowing it may contain foul words not suitable for them anyway? Would you even say the same foul words in a vlog?

Do Deaf parents of Deaf kids allow them to read such foul use of a word on other deaf/hh people's blogsite.

When Sensibilities and Senses are Challenged

Now, I applaud any deaf or hard of hearing people for their skills when it comes to using their hearing or speech. Or even their bodies as their own "hearing" instrument like some of the guys of Beethoven's Nightmare or Evelyn Glennie as a professional solo percussionist. These skills may be in the form of being able to play a musical instrument(s) using whatever sound they have and play the right pitch or note correctly. Or be able to enjoy and hear the full range of musical notes across the entire piano keyboard hearing each note from low to high just as I can as well as many others who can. Then there are those who can use the phone pretty good or even quite easily, like me and many others. All this really goes against the grain of the famous motto, "Deaf people can do anything except hear." Well, I like to challenge that motto which carries a sort of a defeatist attitude for all people with hearing loss from mild to profound. The very first time I heard that phrase that came from Mr. I.K. Jordan, I sort of shook my head.

Frankly, there are many deaf and hoh people who are proud and thankful of the fact that they can hear and understand spoken words or be able to play a musical instrument properly and for their own enjoyment. Others are not afraid to test their hearing senses like the time a piano tuner came over to tune my neighbor's piano and I asked the tuner fellow if I could try tuning the piano with his tuning forks. He showed me how and I gave it a shot, confidently so. With some concentration I was able to tune a few strings a few octaves apart adjusting the pitch of one piano string and harmonize that pitch to that of a tuning fork much to his satisfaction, and surprise. I am certainly not tone nor pitch deaf. Though doing so did present a challenge to my own hearing senses. I am sure there are many others out there who can do these things just as a hearing person can, even tuning a piano. Hearing loss does not equate as total loss of frequency. These things can be done and have been done. I have shown many examples of such stories throughout my blogs.

Bloggers should not be afraid to ask questions, set up polls, provide their own insights, do stories, talk about theirs and other people's skills and abilities or their experiences involving the hearing senses. Bloggers should not be afraid that they might offend some deaf readers' delicate sensibilities. Just like what Allison Kaftan did in DeafDC. There are many reasons why readers get offended, sometimes all too easily, about a blog entry. It could even be as simple as a picture like the one I have above because it supposedly "promotes" oralism. I laugh at such a thought when people just simply go to far with their imaginations running wild accusing me of such inanities when it was the impressive graphic that got my attention. Let's leave those conspiracy theories at the door shall we?

Still, these responses could range from legitimate concerns to outright petty jealousy. Or perhaps some lash out because subconsciously they are bothered by it because of their inability to exhibit that same skill or ability. I don't know. Calling names along with personal derisions in the commenting page directed at the blogger, guest bloggers or other commenters are by no means equivalent to a well thought out argument. If people believe that a blogger must try and please every readers' satisfaction then they certainly have rocks in their heads. It is just not humanely possible to do that. People have different viewpoints, opinions and perspectives just as bloggers do. What makes blogging great is that you get a variety of views, opinions, experiences, and perspectives to choose from the many bloggers out there. Just like television shows, if you don't like what you see, don't watch it. Flip it to another channel if your prefer the more sensational or the more mundane shows.

Profoundly or Severely Deaf: How Well Can You Use the Phone?

Profoundly or Severely Deaf: How Well Can You Use the Phone?

Did you ever wonder what it would be like to work at a pizza joint like, for example, Dominos Pizza? Ever wonder if you think you could do the job working the phone line taking orders on a busy Friday night while some 120 pizzas are cooked every hour? The constant but loud ringing of the phones while order takers answer the calls when accuracy of orders are essential for a business to survive. Do you think you can do the job working the phone line? Have you ever worked as one or something similar?

Well, I worked both as a Dominos Pizza driver and phone order taker when I was 19 years old in a town called Duluth, Georgia. Worked there for about a year or so until I found a better paying job. About when I was 27 years old in 1992 I worked as a manager for Dominos Pizza in the Maryland area like Edgewater, New Carrollton, and Bowie whose pizza stores were owned by one owner. I ran the stores, manned the phones, hired/fired people, ordered food and sodas for the store's walk in refrigerator, did my daily accounting, made the pizzas, cut the pizzas during peak periods (120 to 140 pizzas per hour), barked out orders to drivers, helped new drivers with the map on where to take the pizza. I even made a few trips to unsatisfied customers when I would deliver the pizzas myself while the asst manager ran the store. And so on. My hearing loss is between moderate and severe. Though all that work was an iteresting experience that went on for almost two years until finally I got accepted into graduate school at University of Idaho to get my M.S. degree in Geophysics. It was time to move on and move up.

Do you think you could do that job? Handle phone calls from many different strangers?

Now, what got me thinking is what would be a good litmus test to rate how well one can converse over the phone and with who. I figured I'd use the Pizza Joint Litmus Test. If you say you can use the phone would it be only with voices you'd recognized. Or with certain members of family only? Or it can be with anybody, even strangers and even those with a heavy foreign accent? Would you be that confident enough to take orders through the phone knowing that the pizza joint depends on accurate orders for their business survival, would you be able to do it?

Below are two polls. If you are profoundly deaf (anything greater than 90 dB loss) and wears a hearing aid, please answer the poll.

The other poll under the "Severely Deaf" caption are for those who have severe hearing loss (70 to 90 dB) and wears a hearing aid then please answer the poll there.

Profoundly Deaf: How well can you use the phone?
	I could easily take phone orders while working at a pizza joint.
	I may be able to take phone orders but only under limited conditions while working.
	I could take a few pizza orders but only if my family calls or voice I recognize.
	I would unable to do such a job.
pollcode.com free polls

Severely Deaf: How well can you use the phone?
	I could easily take phone orders while working at a pizza joint.
	I may be able to take phone orders but only under limited conditions while working.
	I could take a few pizza orders but only if my family calls or voice I recognize.
	I would unable to do such a job.
pollcode.com free polls

UPDATE: For those who are in the profoundly deaf category and clicked on "I could easily take phone orders while working at a pizza joint" or "I may be able to take phone orders but only under limited conditions while working," I would very much like for you to contact me, via email (see address at top of blogpage) so we can exchange cell phone numbers and talk this over the phone. Thanks.

A Deaf Judge, Deaf Defendants, and ASL

Just when a few Deaf people actually believed that there'll never be a time to see a deaf judge signing in ASL to deaf defendants in his own court room.

During his time as a municipal judge, Carson has come across at least three defendants who were deaf. In those cases, the deaf judge and deaf defendants communicated in sign language.

"The deaf defendants seem pretty surprised the judge could use ASL (American Sign Language) and, of course, there was nothing for the captioner to type because there were no words spoken," Carson said, adding that his municipal court is not a court of record where transcripts are required.

Miguel Matos has been Cibolo city prosecutor for about a year and wasn't sure what to think when told he would be working with a deaf judge.

"I was a little apprehensive about that and because I am a pretty new attorney," Matos said. "But from the moment I met Judge Carson I found him to be warm and pleasant, and I am incredibly impressed with his ability to read lips in court and he uses the coolest technology to help him.

It wasn't too long ago I reported on the rising number of deaf judges and deaf attorneys but amazingly so there are some Deaf people who actually believe that (even bluntly to little Deaf girls who want to become a Deaf judge someday) having a Deaf judge just wouldn't be possible.

Oh, really?

I suppose my blog piece about this deaf judge wouldn't count because he's not "Deaf enough"?

No?

Try explaining that to this little Deaf girl, whose dream was probably crushed horribly, that there is in fact a deaf judge who knows ASL and have signed to Deaf defendents in his own courtroom! In fact, this deaf judge is so remarkable many look to him to study how he runs his own courtroom.

"Judge Carson is one of the best judges you will find because he is so professional, and other cities in our area are studying the way he runs his court to look for ways to improve their courts," Parton said.

Now, it doesn't matter whether these judges are culturally deaf or not. What matters is that we have the communication technology to make this evidentally possible for all judges (and attorneys) from mild to profound hearing loss to function just as well as any hearing judges sitting at the bench.

Now, who will fetch this little Deaf girl and introduce her to this remarkable deaf judge and help reset her path to her dream of becoming a Deaf judge someday? I hope somebody would be smart enough to do something about it.

Hattip: Chuck McCollough from Express-News contacted me about this story he wrote a few days ago.

UPDATE: I guess I was right. According to some people it's all about whether one is "Deaf enough" or not. Thereby disqualifying the judge even though he knows sign language proficiently well despite becoming deaf later in his adult life. Nice to know there are still militant Deaf people out there who don't mind squashing little Deaf girls' dream of becoming a Deaf judge someday. I thought that was the job of hearing people to squash dreams. I guess I was wrong, folks.

UPDATE II: Read Frumious Bandersnatch's comment in DeafDC in response about deaf judges. an excellent response to those who must insist on using the "not Deaf enough" route when it comes to deaf judges. Scroll down about 2/3rd of the way to get to the deaf judge part.

To be a successful deaf lawyer, above all, you do need to be proficient in English. You need strong communication skills, which means, frequently, being able to speak comprehensible English with your clients. You also need to be able to parse complex transactions and events and reduce them to readable English for your clients as well as for the court.

In addition, if you want to be a judge, then you need to show some record of public service, legal and professional qualifications, such as bar membership and pro bono activities. You also have to interact with a lot of politicians and brown-nose them for appointment to judicial office. This all requires a good sense of English and good verbal skills (and most definitely, good people skills!), which probably (I don’t say that it’s impossible) rules out a “pure” ASL user. I would venture to guess that the powers that be that appoint judges will not give a second (or even first) glance at someone who uses ASL only and uses an interpreter to voice only to communicate.

So, in order to become that Deaf judge he or she must have a solid grasp and skill in the English language. After all, you have to go to college and take bar exams before you step foot into the area of law. And for anyone who believe differently then their "expectations with respect to deaf judges are rather grandiose and unrealistic."

North Pole Getting Warm; Seals Vanish and Icebergs Melt

More global warming screamers seen in the Washington Post newspaper:

"...great masses of ice have now been replaced by moraines of earth and stones," and "at many points well-known glaciers have entirely disappeared."

Oh, forgot to tell you. That was from the November 2, 1992 edition of Washington Post newspaper. But interesting to read what the Washington Times had to say about this.

This was one of several such articles I have found at the Library of Congress for the 1920s and 1930s," says Mr. Lockwood. "I had read of the just-released NASA estimates, that four of the 10 hottest years in the U.S. were actually in the 1930s, with 1934 the hottest of all."

So, whether you believe in global warming as caused by human beings or that oil came from dinosaurs, you're certainly on the wrong side of things. People have been saying about the great warm ups using the same old gloom and doom scenarios back during in the 1920s and 1930s, even before after those decades, and then we had the global cooling gloom and doom of the 1970s fearing the return of the ice age and massive ice sheets covering parts of North America. And now again in the 2000s we have another round of global warming gloom and doom.

Make up your mind you journalist idiots. Or concede that all this is the natural dynamic changes caused by Earth with the help of the Sun's energy fluctuations. And none from the help of mankind.

The Magic Pill – to see again

In DeafDC there was a discussion in the comments page over whether a deaf or Deaf person would take a “magic pill” that can restore hearing loss would that person take it? But another commenter tried to use the old “jelly bean” analogy and that by eating it has the power to turn one non-Caucasian person into a “white, college-educated, upper-middle-class, handsome, successful male” with the “would-you-take-it” question.

I think using the color-of-your-skin “cure” analogy is flawed on so many levels because hearing loss range from mild to profound and people have a variety of experiences regarding sound and how they deal with it makes this particular pill analogy more problematic than it is not. Even from a Deaf culture point of view. The color of your skin is not the disability in question but rather it’s about discrimination, bias and even acceptance. Disability affects all people regardless of skin color.

Let’s take this a bit further by saying that there is a “magic” vision pill that can help restore your vision to 20/20 perfect vision would you take it if your vision is 120/20? 80/20? 40/20? Would you take it if you have Usher Syndrome and get the full peripheral vision back again? What if you were blind for awhile would you take it to have your vision restored again? Honestly now, would you take that pill? How many of you wear glasses wished your vision was 20/20 and not wear glasses or contacts anymore? And so I ask this question, how would this “magic” vision pill be any different from a “magic” hearing pill that can restore hearing loss for people with mild, moderate, severe or profound hearing loss?

I can imagine that most Deaf people would very well likely not take the “magic” hearing pill for a variety of reasons with one of them being the cultural and identity connection. This is completely understandable. After all, taking one would indeed put that deaf person into a brave new world not yet experienced. But that doesn’t mean a Deaf person would not take it. And if one does take it, would he still be considered as part of the Deaf culture or Deaf world even if he continues to sign in ASL?

Now, you’re probably wondering if I would take that pill.

I certainly would. Why should I not given the fact that I have the gift of being able to hear and enjoy a variety of sound, music and people talking?

Why would people even have a problem with that?

Ok.

What about if hearing parents gave that “magic” hearing pill to their deaf baby? What about if deaf parents gave that “magic” pill to their deaf baby? Would you have a problem with that? Why should any of that be a concern to you at all?

Now, many people have their reasons on why they would want their hearing loss restored just as the many reasons why people would want their vision restored. Some would say it’s because of music. Others would take the pill in order to finally hear all the small and enjoyable sounds in the great outdoors. Or be able to converse more freely and without any impediment.

Today, we’re already progressing in the field of hearing loss where we have powerful digital hearing aids with built-in Artificial Intelligence programming, cochlear implants that continue to improve and get smaller to neural hearing implants that’s better than cochlear implant that may likely be available in about 5 years after FDA review. This is not to mention the growing field interest in the use of stem cells to treat and cure nerve deafness such as sensorineural hearing loss. And that one might be about 10 years away before it is finally applied. Those are amazing technological and biological developments. What they have done and are doing is almost like magic itself.

The “magic” hearing pill. Would you take it?

Profoundly Deaf and Can Use the Phone Easily?

Now, this sounds like a big fish story but I was in a board discussion with one hearing mother who claimed that her profoundly deaf son, who is an adult and already college bound, wears his hearing aid and can have conversations over the phone easily. I asked for a few more details asking the dB loss, type of hearing loss (ie sensorineural, meniere, etc..) and the kind of conversation that takes place. I'm still waiting for that answer. I even offered to give him (through his mother) my email address so we can exchange cell phone numbers.

Now, I don't know what the mother's definition of what constitutes a normal phone coversation but it certainly does not entail repeating everything constantly or even loudly. Or even avoiding conversations with other strangers over the phone whose voices are not familiar to begin with. But color me skeptical on believing a person with profound hearing loss who wears a hearing aid can have normal conversations over the phone. Certainly those with moderate to severe hearing loss have a better chance on having normal phone conversations while wearing a hearing aid than those who have profound hearing loss. If one can converse normally over the phone also means he/she has a high word discrimination ability and that would generally be into the 90s percentile range.

Does anybody who knows someone who is profoundly deaf, wears a HA, coverses easily over the phone and understands clearly the other person's voice?

Anyone?

And if so, send him or her my way and I'll call that person up myself.

New Law Requires Captioning for Political TV ads

For those who live out in Rhode Island:

A new law requires candidates who use public matching funds to provide captioning for their televised campaign ads. The law is designed to help those who are deaf and hard of hearing to participate in the political process.

Besides captioning on TV ads, candidates will have to provide a written or text format for radio ads -- if requested by the listener. The law, which was signed by Governor Carcieri, goes into effect on January First.

It's a start.

Videophones to be Installed at Chicago Airport

If you're deaf and known sign language and you're flying into or out of Chicago O'Hare's airport, then be sure to look for the newly installed videopones over there.

Chicago O'Hare and Midway airports plan to install 11 videopohones for the deaf and hard of hearing. Through a live sign-language translator, users can request airport services and receive tourist information. They can also call friends and relatives who have videophones.

The first kiosk will be installed later this month at O'Hare in Terminal 3 near gate K-1. Eight
more kiosks will be installed at O'Hare in the upper and lower levels of the
terminals and at the shuttle center. Midway will have two kiosks

Now, that takes care of one segment of the deaf and hard of hearing society, we still have the other 29 million people with hearing loss to deal with who don't know sign language. I'm sure that'll change quickly someday soon.

So Easy, a Deaf Caveman Can Do It - Part II

We all know about the famous Koko the gorilla who knows how sign to communicate with her hearing caretakers. Even though Koko is a hearing gorilla rather than a deaf one. Yet I still see stories in deaf forums saying that Koko is deaf. Hardly. Still I wonder why hasn't the The Gorilla Foundation take in a deaf gorilla and see whether or not a deaf gorilla can learn from Koko or Michael?

Michael the gorilla(the late signing silverback companion of Koko's) signs in one video about his memory of his mother being killed by poachers in Africa. Startling to even watch and see how he relates his story for humans to hear.

Anway, there's a recent study about orangutans to see if these primates have the ability to use gestures and play a type of a charade game in the hope that caretakers would understand any requests by these primates. It was successful to a degree that orangutans were able to communicate their intentions or wants with the researchers. The article ends with,

The researchers conclude that further studies of communication among apes could provide insight into the pre-linguistic devices that helped construct the earliest forms of language.

Which brings me to my first blog, "So Easy, A Deaf Cavement Can Do It," where I asked the question whether early cave people had the tendency to use gestures over crude vocal responses to communicate. Seems likely that this would be the case since these particular primates could be seen as the de-evolved human form, even the Cromagnum people, when it came to on communicating with other members.

Next, we get around to the question about deaf cave people. Did they even exist? Did they even survive on their own? I would probably agree that they did exist way back several hundreds of thousands of years ago. Even a million years ago. Thinking about my questions I seriously doubt they even survived long enough due to the fact that the ability to hear played a huge crucial role on improving odds for surviving outdoor. I think that sooner or later the ability to survive would have already have been well spent by the time a cave person reaches past puberty. I would even be so bold to say that among those hearing cave people once they figured out that one of their own is deaf they would either abandon that deaf caveboy/girl or even kill him/her knowing that they didn't want unproductive clan members to begin with who cannot even hear to even save his own hide which would put the rest of the clan members in greater perile on trying to survive and hunt outdoors.

Or were these cave people much more caring when it came to taking care of their own disabled cave people? But then again we're talking about a time when surviving was paramount for the safety of the whole clan. I could suppose they wouldn't want to waste their time or valuable resources just to take care of a deaf cave person. I believe they would have been somehow killed off a long ago time ago by their own members once they figured out they had a deaf member among their pack.

Survival of the fittest?

Wall of Sound

Here's a good article that came out yesterday in the New York Times newspaper website. It's called "Wall of Sound." A short story about a book author's life (“The Unheard: A Memoir of Deafness and Africa,” due out next month) as a boy who was born deaf, obtained his hearing aid at age 4 who quickly caught up on his language development and later on in his life received his cochlear implant.

So Easy, a Deaf Caveman Can Do It

You know that famous and well known Geico TV commercial featuring cavemen dressed in yuppie clothes who are proud clansmen for their hairy bodies and brutish looks who get easily offended for trying to be those uppity cultural urban sophisticates? On October 2, 2007 the ABC show 'Cavemen' will be the date for this new and, hopefully, funny show. I'm looking forward to watching it. I think it's a riot whenever I watch those cavemen on those Gieco TV commercials.

Now, with all the latest seizures over the s0-called lack of bonafide Deaf actors in television shows perhaps these people ought to write to ABC and suggest that they also include a deaf caveman character into the script somehow. I could only imagine what this deaf caveman may turn out into. Perhaps desperately trying to be just as sophisticated as his hearing cavemen while trying to sign but probably end up doing a lot of pointing anyway. You know how those hearing producers are like anyways on what they think is right.

While I'm on the topic of cavemen how did those cavemen communicate some "one million years" ago?

Linguistic Change

Both sign and speech communication have certain advantages and disadvan­tages for the general population; therefore, linguists theorize that vocaliza­tions came into free variation with signs (meaning you could grunt or point, whichever worked best at the moment). For a time, man used two different modes of communication: sign and speech.

As the millenniums went by, man moved from the open plains to the woods. Once there, sign communication no longer had the advantage over spoken communication. At that point in time, linguists believe that spoken lan­guages became the "prestige" languages -- simply and solely because they were more efficient "tools" for the majority of the population.

However, in spite of the diminishing popularity for sign languages, sign communication continued to exist ... as movements in ritualized ceremonies, or covert forms of communication, or simply because there was a segment of the population which couldn't -- or wouldn't -- access spoken lan­guages.

Did they sign more often than use their vocal cords to communicate? Did they really grunt alot or did a lot of pointing instead which may have been the first ever universal sign language by a hearing caveman? Did deaf cavemen even exist back then or were they left to die or fend on their own grunting unknowingly in silence? Or did those deaf cavemen even develope their own archaic and weird signs in the effort to and communicate? Or were they actually a bunch of mute cavemen who didn't do much but used their hands and maybe a few grunts to communicate? Or was it the "language gene" that catapulted those primitive cavemen in their ability to use their vocal cords to communicate more effectively?

Something to think about.

But before you reply, note the rules first.

UPDATE: Like I said, don't read too much into what I wrote just like when people read way too much into the upcoming 'Cavemen' show.

New Rules for Commenters - Whiners Need Not Apply

One line of rules at the top of my Haloscan comment page simply doesn't do any justice seeing how some commenters insist on throwing temper tantrums of sort, especially among some of the deaf people who think name calling or ad hominem attack has the equivalent of a great argument. How little do they know. I have now added several more rules, which can be seen below, in order to expand and further my clarification on the expectation from people who comment while on my blogsite. These are real simple rules that even a deaf caveman can understand. I am sure most people will agree with my new policy. If not, well, then they are a lot dumber than I thought. The "rules" link is seen at the top of my Haloscan comment page and the link is a recent addition placed approximately 2 weeks ago.

UPDATE: I am putting the rules here because people with cell phones may not be able to link to my .png image that describes my rules. The "rules" link in Haloscan will be linked to here from now on.


A very, very simple guide to posting comments on Kokonut Pundit

Kokonut Pundit welcomes all points of view but unlike some sites this blogsite does not permit people to greet those who disagree with by way of personal attacks, name-calling, or profanity. So, if you want to avoid having your comments edited or deleted, or getting yourself banned (either for a short time or longer, take your chance) then please follow these simple guidelines:

No profanity. There is no reason to resort to foul language, regardless of how badly your arguments have been shredded or that you are befuddled by your own stupidty you'd resort to profanity thinking it replaces well thought out arguments.

No personal attacks. If you want to call names, you know where you will be welcomed. But here, please conduct all discussions with at least a modicum of intelligence and respectability. Personal attacks on other posters will not be tolerated. This goes double for personal or ad hominem attacks on the people who post blogs on Kokonut Pundit.

No off-topic ramblings. If you think a comments thread is meant to be a free-for-all smorgasbord for anything that comes into your head, you are in the wrong place. Try to maintain at least a tenuous connection to the subject matter at hand.

No abuse. Post the same message over and over, especially in multiple off-topic threads, is not a good way to ingratiate yourself.

No spamming. No advertising and whatnot about product or services. Nobody like getting spames. If you do like spam then certainly there must be something wrong with you.

No juvenilia. In case you didn't understand the word "juvenilia" it means acting like a child. Kokonut Pundit had its fill of the occasional insipid insult phrases that pervade the cybersphere, and they will not be permitted here.

And most importantly of all, comments are to be made in English only. Anything other than English will means automatic deletion.

If you disagree with my policy then you are certainly a lot dumber than I thought. This is a place where all can present arguments, facts, ideas, and opinions about the subject matter at hand. This is so that we can learn about certain topics and other people's perspectives.

Fred vs Hillary

In the latest Rassmussen poll report both Fred Thompson and Mrs. Clinton are nearly tied although the poll shows 46% for Fred Thompson and Mrs. Clinton at 45%. Even Guiliani has a 46% showing. But in June, Clinton was a point ahead of Giuliani and even with Thompson. Now, she is behind them both. Again, polls aren't guarantees of a win in the White House if you ever remember the 2000 election (Bush vs Gore) and the classic Truman (Dem) vs Dewey (Rep) election in 1948.

Fred Thompson's Campaign Manager

In the world of mainstream media it is easy to take certain news at face value and make a run for it before the facts can settle out first. In this case it was about the supposed hiring of Spencer Abraham as the campaign manager for Fred Thompson's campaign. Not so.

That job will be in the hands of Randy Enwright, a veteran Florida Republican who is widely respected and also once ran the GOP in Iowa.

Newsbusters has details why this isn't the case about Fred Thompson supposed hiring of Spencer Abraham as the campaign manager.

People, both deaf and hearing alike, need to remember that it's open season on presidential candidates (and soon to be announced candidates) and that the MSM are all too willing to go after the most visible candidates. Even if it means putting out disinformation.

Deaf Voters Not 2 Million Strong

Lauren Ridloff on i711.com did an ASL video called “Deaf Voting – 2 Million Strong” about the importance of voting. This is an important public announcement of sort to all Deaf people watching that they ought to think about upcoming 2008 election. This is all good stuff however the "2 million strong" number just didn't sound right.

The problem is the use of “2 Million Strong” in the video title as if it were a fact. I question Lauren’s use of that figure in the attempt to make the Deaf population sound bigger when it is not. The claim of “2 million ASL users” or Deaf people in the United State came from Harlan Lane and Ben Bahan:

“ASL is the language of a sizeable minority. Estimates range from 500,000 to two million speakers in the U.S. alone. There are also many speakers in Canada. Compared to data from the (U.S.) Census Bureau, which counts other language minorities, ASL is the leading minority language in the U.S. after the "big four": Spanish, Italian, German, and French.” (Harlan Lane, Robert Hoffmeister, and Ben Bahan in A Journey into the Deaf World. San Diego, Calif.: Dawn Sign Press, 1996, p.42)

Although Lane mentioned “speakers,” this was not clarified exactly on the status of what constitute as ASL “speakers” in the United States. Was it to mean Deaf people who are native ASL signers? The range of 500,000 to 2,000,000 speakers is a sizeable jump in numbers - an order in magnitude jump. We can easily choose to discount the possibility of having 2,000,000 ASL (fluent and Deaf) speakers in the United States. Or we can blindly accept this large range without further questions, however. The existence of 2,000,000 “speakers” is highly doubtful and most likely an overblown (way, way overblown) one according to Thomas E. Allen in his 1994 Gallaudet Research Institute website on the number of native ASL signers in the United States as well as my own 14 page research into this population question I did a few years ago which I will put some of it in my blog here.

Now, if we take a look at what the current Deaf population in the United States might be like in a more pragmatic approach one could see how the 2 million Deaf population figure used is likely to be an overblown one. If the 50 largest cities in the United States have an average of 40,000 Deaf people in each city (not including surrounding suburban areas), noting the fact that the top 50 largest populated cities have over 1,000,000 people (2000 U.S. Census Bureau population estimates), this would come out to 2,000,000 Deaf people exactly. Now, name a single city in the United States of over 1 million people that have the potential to have 40,000 Deaf people. If you already figured it out you may have realized that there are only a few possible places that may have a Deaf population close to that size. Some of the largest concentrations of Deaf people are in some of the largest cities such as New York City, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, Atlanta, Miami, and so on rather than in some city with barely a million or so people. To make matters worse, there are very little data from each state on Deaf population counts.

Most states have a deaf and hard of hearing population count with very little references concerning the Deaf (ie culturally deaf) population. In the city of Chicago, for example, there is an estimated number of 26,000 Deaf people out of 2,900,000 persons according to the State of Illinois Deaf and Hard of Hearing Commission. This Deaf population represents 8.9% of the total population in the city of Chicago. Even for the city of Chicago, it could not even come with a 40,000 Deaf population count.
(see http://www.idhhc.state.il.us/familyInfo/demographics.htm )

Then we have the Pennsylvania census. According to the 2000 U.S. Census count for Pennsylvania, the state had a population of 12,281,000 persons. Statistics on people with hearing losses taken in 2002 conducted by the SHHH chapter in Pennsylvania are as follows:

Total number of people with hearing loss in state = 1,221,914 (9.9%)
Number of people who are prelingually or culturally deaf = 21,820 (0.2%)
Number of people who are hard of hearing = 1,134,634 (9.2%)
Number of people who are late deafened = 65,460 (0.5%)
Number of people who are deaf/blind ~ 800 ±

The number of culturally deaf people or Deaf people in the state of Pennsylvania is believed to be about 21,820. That is a ratio of 1 Deaf person for every 560 hearing people for the state of Pennsylvania. This figure or ratio should not be extrapolated to other states since population and the concentration of Deaf people can vary enormously from state to state, and from city to city. (see http://www.pa-shhh.org/profile/demog.html )

A more accurate figure on the Deaf population number in the United States could be estimated using figures found in the “McGill Study of Deaf Children in Canada” (MacDougall, 1990). In the study a ratio number was established on the prevalence of deafness in the 0-21 year range. The generally accepted number “rule of thumb” for the prevalence of deafness which precludes the use of speech and hearing without special intervention, aside from sign language, is 1/1000 (MacDougall, 1990; MacDougall, 1999).

In applying this “general rule of thumb” using the 1/1000 ratio (or 0.001) to the United States population figure of 280,000,000 people produces a comparative number of people, ratio-wise, with hearing losses to that of Canada’s (2000 U.S. population census at 280 million versus Canada’s population of 28 million). This ratio produces a Deaf population result of 280,000 (or 280,000,000 * 0.001) Deaf people for the 0 to 21 year old age group in the United States. Using the McGill study in Canada “rule of thumb” to help estimate the 0 – 21 age group Deaf population count in the United States should make no difference statistically. The large population gap between the two countries ought to be statistically insignificant when already there was a large enough sample population to begin with in Canada in the McGill Study.

The United States population is significantly larger than Canada with the population ratio being 10 to 1. We now have a reliable Deaf population figure of 280,000 for the United States in the 0 – 21 age group only. This still leave the older Deaf population greater than age 21 to be added into the equation. With the help of the U.S. Census 2000 population result we can use those data to help infer on what the actual Deaf population number is likely to be.

According to the U.S. Census 2000 total population study the ratio of people by age group starting with people in the 0 to 18 year old age group is 73 million or 26 percent of the U.S. population (or approximately 30 percent for the 0 to 21 year old age group). The total population figure for the 18 to 64 year old group is 174 million or 62 percent of the population in the United States. This leaves 35 million, or 12 percent of the U.S. population, for people aged 65 and over. Using the same age groups seen in the 2000 U.S. Census figures to that of the Deaf population should make no statistical differences (i.e. age group 0 – 21, 22- 64, and 65 years and over) in estimating on getting the total Deaf population number in the United States.

Total U.S. population by age group according to 2000 U.S. Census figures:
Age Group.........Population Count.........% Total Population
0 – 18(21) ......73,000,000 (84,000,000)....................26%(30%)
18 – 64....................174,000,000....................................62%
65 and over...............35,000,000...................................12%

The Deaf population number for the 0 – 21 year age group should account for nearly 30 percent of the total Deaf population in the United States. That is if 280,000 Deaf people aged 0 – 21 years old represent 30 percent of the U.S. Deaf population then it means that 70 percent of the older Deaf population is over the age of 21 years old should account for another 650,000 Deaf people. This leaves a total Deaf population of about 930,000 in the United States for year 2000. The 930,000 figure comes startlingly close to the 973,000 figure given by the 1994 National Center for Health Statistics (Data from the National Health Interview Survey). This would relate to about a ratio between 20 to 1 and 30 to 1 on the number of deaf and hard of hearing people (mild to profound) to that of Deaf people in the United States.

The Deaf population figure of 930,000 in the United States is believed to be a valid but upper range figure according to my 14 page research I did a few years back. A more conservative number of 600,000 Deaf persons population figure would probably the most realistic figure to date. However, the boisterous claim of 2 million Deaf persons in the United States is certainly less believable and quite invalid without any supporting facts to show otherwise. Even if Lane and Bahan said it without any real supporting evidences it would be a bit reckless to say that there are 2 million strong Deaf voters. I have provided some of my figures and resources that I extracted from my 14 page Deaf population study showing why 2 million Deaf people in the United States cannot be the case except for those who want to use nice big round number with the word “millions” attached to it for posterity sake.

So, let’s not go down that road proclaiming that the voting Deaf population is 2 million strong because it is not.

UPDATE: An addendum. If you want to apply the number of Deaf voters who are of voting age, 18 years and up, then the actual number of Deaf voters would be much smaller than my estimate of 930,000 Deaf people of all ages. We're looking at about 300,000 to 600,000 Deaf voters (18 and up) and not the "2 Million Strong" which is just a bogus number.


Deaf Population Study by Mike McConnell – © 2007

Waiting for the World to Change - Deaf Music Video

Check out a video of the Deaf Performing Artists Network performing "Waiting for the World to Change". The video, on the website of Detroit's Channel 4, shows various individuals signing the song mixed with graphics from the history of people who are deaf. You might recognize some people in the video piece. Instead of protesting, this is a very creative way of getting their points across.

When Helen Keller Honors AGB

Anybody who is deaf or blind is bound to come across the story about the famous Helen Keller who became blind and deaf at age 19 months. And up until she was a young girl she had no real way of communicating. That is until the day Miss Sullivan famously finger spelled the word w-a-t-e-r to Helen at the water pump which was, ironically so, a symbol of the breaking of the floodgate opening up a whole new world for Helen that she so craved for.

In a world of no sound or vision is a world where a deaf and blind person would absolutely crave for any new information. Information keeps the mind busy while prodding for more with greater and greater curiosity. With the mastery of the manual alphabet Helen was able to communicate to the outside world learning everything about it. Not only did Helen mastered the manual alphabet she also mastered Braille and eventually the English language. So much so she wrote a book using the manual typewriter (no Braille!) called "Story of My Life." You can read her book for free over the internet which includes accounts written by Miss Sullivan about Helen Keller's life as well.

She used every faculties in her body and mind to learn about the world around her. She wasn't clueless to the fact that hearing people talked and even wondered if deaf people could talk. Here is what Miss Sullivan said of that day when Helen Keller asked her about speaking.

It was three years from the time when Helen began to communicate by means of the manual alphabet that she received her first lesson in the more natural and universal medium of human intercourse--oral language. She had become very proficient in the use of the manual alphabet, which was her only means of communication with the outside world; through it she had acquired a vocabulary which enabled her to converse freely, read intelligently, and write with comparative ease and correctness. Nevertheless, the impulse to utter audible sounds was strong within her, and the constant efforts which I made to repress this instinctive tendency, which I feared in time would become unpleasant, were of no avail. I made no effort to teach her to speak, because I regarded her inability to watch the lips of others as an insurmountable obstacle. But she gradually became conscious that her way of communicating was different from that used by those around her, and one day her thoughts found expression. "How do the blind girls know what to say with their mouths? Why do you not teach me to talk like them? Do deaf children ever learn to speak?" I explained to her that some deaf children were taught to speak, but that they could see their teachers' mouths, and that that was a very great assistance to them. But she interrupted me to say she was very sure she could feel my mouth very well. Soon after this conversation, a lady came to see her and told her about the deaf and blind Norwegian child, Ragnhild Kaata, who had been taught to speak and understand what her teacher said to her by touching his lips with her fingers. She at once resolved to learn to speak, and from that day to this she has never wavered in that resolution. She began immediately to make sounds which she called speaking, and I saw the necessity of correct instruction, since her heart was set upon learning to talk; and, feeling my own incompetence to teach her, never having given the subject of articulation serious study, I went with my pupil for advice and assistance, to Miss Sarah Fuller. Miss Fuller was delighted with Helen's earnestness and enthusiasm, and at once began to teach her. In a few lessons she learned nearly all of the English sounds, and in less than a month she was able to articulate a great many words distinctly. From the first she was not content to be drilled in single sounds, but was impatient to pronounce words and sentences. The length of the word or the difficulty of the arrangement of the elements never seemed to discourage her. But, with all her eagerness and intelligence, learning to speak taxed her powers to the utmost. But there was satisfaction in seeing from day to day the evidence of growing mastery and the possibility of final success. And Helen's success has been more complete and inspiring than any of her friends expected, and the child's delight in being able to utter her thoughts in living and distinct speech is shared by all who witness her pleasure when strangers tell her that they understand her.

I have been asked a great many times whether I think Helen will ever speak naturally; that is, as other people speak. I am hardly prepared to decide that question, or even give an opinion regarding it. I believe that I have hardly begun yet to know what is possible. Teachers of the deaf often express surprise that Helen's speech is so good when she has not received any regular instruction in speech since the first few lessons given her by Miss Fuller. I can only say in reply, "This is due to habitual imitation and practice! practice! practice!" Nature has determined how the child shall learn to speak, and all we can do is to aid him in the simplest, easiest way possible, by encouraging him to observe and imitate the vibrations in the voice.

What was amazing is that Helen Keller actually taught herself to speak several words by herself before Miss Sullivan began teaching her how to speak.

She was pleased with anything which made a noise. She liked to feel the cat purr; and if by chance she felt a dog in the act of barking, she showed great pleasure. She always liked to stand by the piano when some one was playing and singing. She kept one hand on the singer's mouth, while the other rested on the piano, and she stood in this position as long as any one would sing to her, and afterward she would make a continuous sound which she called singing. The only words she had learned to pronounce with any degree of distinctness previous to March, 1890, were PAPA, MAMMA, BABY, SISTER. These words she had caught without instruction from the lips of friends. It will be seen that they contain three vowel and six consonant elements, and these formed the foundation for her first real lesson in speaking.

The thing is that Helen Keller had no prior bias or prejudice indicative of anything to suggest that speaking or talking would be a total waste of time. No one told her that. The initiative she took was entirely on her own in a world of dark silence where information of any kind is what she craved for. Her senses were so highly attuned she could even feel the vibration in Miss Sullivan's body whenever talked while signing the manual alphabet to her.

From the beginning of my education Miss Sullivan made it a practice to speak to me as she would speak to any hearing child; the only difference was that she spelled the sentences into my hand instead of speaking them. If I did not know the words and idioms necessary to express my thoughts she supplied them, even suggesting conversation when I was unable to keep up my end of the dialogue.

This process was continued for several years; for the deaf child does not learn in a month, or even in two or three years, the numberless idioms and expressions used in the simplest daily intercourse. The little hearing child learns these from constant repetition and imitation. The conversation he hears in his home stimulates his mind and suggests topics and calls forth the spontaneous expression of his own thoughts. This natural exchange of ideas is denied to the deaf child. My teacher, realizing this, determined to supply the kinds of stimulus I lacked. This she did by repeating to me as far as possible, verbatim, what she heard, and by showing me how I could take part in the conversation. But it was a long time before I ventured to take the initiative, and still longer before I could find something appropriate to say at the right time.

The deaf and the blind find it very difficult to acquire the amenities of conversation. How much more this difficulty must be augmented in the case of those who are both deaf and blind! They cannot distinguish the tone of the voice or, without assistance, go up and down the gamut of tones that give significance to words; nor can they watch the expression of the speaker's face, and a look is often the very soul of what one says.

Vibrations emanating from another person or even the purring of a cat is information that she took delight in which caused her wanting to learn more about the world around her and communicate to people who have access to the world of sight and sound. Helen Keller was voracious in learning and she strove to master the bridging of any communication gap whether its through manual alphabet, the English language, Braille, a regular manual typewriter, and finally her speaking in the effort to rid herself as a mute person.

But it must not be supposed that I could really talk in this short time. I had learned only the elements of speech. Miss Fuller and Miss Sullivan could understand me, but most people would not have understood one word in a hundred. Nor is it true that, after I had learned these elements, I did the rest of the work myself. But for Miss Sullivan's genius, untiring perseverance and devotion, I could not have progressed as far as I have toward natural speech. In the first place, I laboured night and day before I could be understood even by my most intimate friends; in the second place, I needed Miss Sullivan's assistance constantly in my efforts to articulate each sound clearly and to combine all sounds in a thousand ways. Even now she calls my attention every day to mispronounced words.

All teachers of the deaf know what this means, and only they can at all appreciate the peculiar difficulties with which I had to contend. In reading my teacher's lips I was wholly dependent on my fingers: I had to use the sense of touch in catching the vibrations of the throat, the movements of the mouth and the expression of the face; and often this sense was at fault. In such cases I was forced to repeat the words or sentences, sometimes for hours, until I felt the proper ring in my own voice. My work was practice, practice, practice. Discouragement and weariness cast me down frequently; but the next moment the thought that I should soon be at home and show my loved ones what I had accomplished, spurred me on, and I eagerly looked forward to their pleasure in my achievement.

"My little sister will understand me now," was a thought stronger than all obstacles. I used to repeat ecstatically, "I am not dumb now." I could not be despondent while I anticipated the delight of talking to my mother and reading her responses from her lips. It astonished me to find how much easier it is to talk than to spell with the fingers, and I discarded the manual alphabet as a medium of communication on my part; but Miss Sullivan and a few friends still use it in speaking to me, for it is more convenient and more rapid than lip-reading.

The mastery of what Helen accomplished could be seen even in her letters from 1887 to 1901 where her written style and intelligence went from from simple and clear to elegant and thorough in thought. Many of her letters were written to Alexander Graham Bell whom she had grown to love and respect. So much so she dedicated her book to Alexander Graham Bell.

To Alexander Graham Bell

Who has taught the deaf to speak
and enabled the listening ear to hear speech
from the Atlantic to the Rockies,
I dedicate
this Story of My Life.

Helen Keller's life was fraught with frustration, challenges and many rewards. Even without sight and sound a deaf and blind person can still master the world around him. The story about Helen Keller is truly a testament that nothing is ever impossible when obstacles stand in our way. Nor are the choices we are given in life be seen as obstacles but challenges. It's what we make of it and what our determinations are enabling us to conquer our own limitations in life.

Now, folks, don't jump to conclusion, misread or misinterpret about my blog title or what I have written here today in conjunction with the on going AGB protest. The whole idea is that each individual has the capacity to overcome many obstacles thrown at him/her in life. How it is successfully done lies within only the human spirit and of mind. Helen Keller is the perfect example of that human spirit.