One of the hardest things about free speech is having to protect and defend the right of someone to say something that you find either stupid, needlessly inflammatory, or just plain idiotic. Which brings me to today's thoughts on the newest, latest ongoing exercise in democracy, the tea party brigade.
I read with muted interest an article on CNN.com earlier this evening about ongoing discourse in the tea party "movement". Apparently, having enjoyed their first taste of notoriety, various tea baggers are interested in becoming an official ongoing political entity (insert your own comical reference here: i.e., "tea baggers enjoy the hot water"; or "tea baggers take their politics with one lump or two"). The difficulties, as with any other organization that suddenly gets famous, whether it be a rock band or similar collective group, is that when people are put on TV or asked their opinion, inevitable discontent rears up, since the normal human reaction is to believe that you are the person who should be the one getting the attention.
It appears that the fault lines causing pressure on the baggers (not unlike when you open your very fine packet of Bigelow tea, extricate the tea bag itself from the pouch, and then, horrifically, pull too hard, suddenly amputating the string from the staple, thus destroying the carefully constructed tea delivery system) come from the usual sources. The people who have risen up to misguidedly complain about big government and its' perceived evils are now receiving funding from places like Dick Armey's political organization, FreedomWorks, who's name belies that it is yet another run-of-the-mill political action committee, led by someone who presided over big government. Oh, the delicious irony of populists being led by ultimate political insiders. Right this way over the cliff, my lemming friends.
The last real uprising amongst the common folk was probably in opposition to the Vietnam War some 35 - 40 years ago. I am old enough to remember the "establishment" railing against people who did not support their country, their troops, their government. Now, we have the hilarious reverse of the organizations and political parties who hated the hippies encouraging revolt against the powers that be, carrying their own signs in the streets, dressing themselves up in offensive guises, and frighteningly aligning with scary, fringe separatist groups advocating armed rebellion.
It seems we might have found a new wonderland for you to explore Alice.
Monday, December 7, 2009
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
On Politics 12/2/09: Performance At The Point
I'm back with a short review of the President's speech from last evening.
In summary, I thought it was quite somber, which I believe is appropriate when you are standing in front of those soon to be tasked with your direction on winning Afghanistan. I dare to imagine that all Presidents and Congress may be less hasty to send our sons and daughters off to die in distant lands if this were a matter of course rather than a unique exception to the process.
The President tried to strike a delicate balance between the what is required to prosecute the war versus the political entanglement that comes with any conflict escalation. Polls continue to show Americans hovering around the 50% mark for supporting ongoing hostilities in Afghanistan. The number strikes me as curious in the respect that, even more so than WW I or WW II, we were witness to an attack on the actual mainland of our country, not some distant not-yet-state or territory, yet the waning of popular support for the resulting military mission continues. As an aside on that subject, I played golf over the weekend with a gentleman who was in a relationship with a non-U.S. citizen, and told us that he had asked his paramour why people in Europe hated America. Her reply was not about our lifestyle or other such dribble, but rather that we had become a nation who quit the battlefield, in Vietnam, in the first Iraq war, and now again in Afghanistan. She stated that we led other countries into the fight, yet did not stay until the fight was completely won, as we did in the great wars of the previous century. Interesting.
I am in agreement with Sen. McCain and others that I do find it odd when we as a country, through our leadership, make a statement outlining or defining a date for leaving the battlefield. Some may argue that it is arbitrary and subject to change, that it removes the training wheels from the new democracies we are propping up, but there has to be a tactical advantage provided to the enemy when it knows you're leaving on a pre-announced date. I'll check, but I do not seem to recall Sun Tzu stating that as a tenant of success in "The Art of War".
In the end, it was a quiet speech, that although forceful, lacked specificity on details, reflecting that while the President may know what he wants to do, no one knows exactly how we'll get there.
In summary, I thought it was quite somber, which I believe is appropriate when you are standing in front of those soon to be tasked with your direction on winning Afghanistan. I dare to imagine that all Presidents and Congress may be less hasty to send our sons and daughters off to die in distant lands if this were a matter of course rather than a unique exception to the process.
The President tried to strike a delicate balance between the what is required to prosecute the war versus the political entanglement that comes with any conflict escalation. Polls continue to show Americans hovering around the 50% mark for supporting ongoing hostilities in Afghanistan. The number strikes me as curious in the respect that, even more so than WW I or WW II, we were witness to an attack on the actual mainland of our country, not some distant not-yet-state or territory, yet the waning of popular support for the resulting military mission continues. As an aside on that subject, I played golf over the weekend with a gentleman who was in a relationship with a non-U.S. citizen, and told us that he had asked his paramour why people in Europe hated America. Her reply was not about our lifestyle or other such dribble, but rather that we had become a nation who quit the battlefield, in Vietnam, in the first Iraq war, and now again in Afghanistan. She stated that we led other countries into the fight, yet did not stay until the fight was completely won, as we did in the great wars of the previous century. Interesting.
I am in agreement with Sen. McCain and others that I do find it odd when we as a country, through our leadership, make a statement outlining or defining a date for leaving the battlefield. Some may argue that it is arbitrary and subject to change, that it removes the training wheels from the new democracies we are propping up, but there has to be a tactical advantage provided to the enemy when it knows you're leaving on a pre-announced date. I'll check, but I do not seem to recall Sun Tzu stating that as a tenant of success in "The Art of War".
In the end, it was a quiet speech, that although forceful, lacked specificity on details, reflecting that while the President may know what he wants to do, no one knows exactly how we'll get there.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
On Politics 12/1/09: Anticipation
Like others, I am eagerly anticipating the President's speech on Afghanistan this evening. It's rare enough that we have one of our country's leaders make an appearance in the Mid Hudson Valley, unless you count the slaughter of the farm-raised pheasant visit we endured from Shotgun Dick Cheney. Thankfully, my fellow residents and I escaped that atrocity unscathed, unlike previous Cheney killing excursion partners.
I'm very curious to hear what the President says tonight. I think it's an interesting choice in coming to West Point, calculated (like every other Presidential move by every other occupant of the Oval Office) in the regard that, facing the Corps of Cadets as Commander In Chief, he's assured applause for each sentence. From another viewpoint, it's somewhat brave. The previous position holder showed up on a carrier when he thought the war was over to declare "mission accomplished"; happy news for all, if it had only been true, Mr. Obama is going to deliver his plan for success facing the same men and women who have to deliver on his promises at the risk of their own personal safety. Delivering the outline of action that may result in the future deaths of your audience takes some gumption.
Let's see how it goes tonight - a review to be posted later.
I'm very curious to hear what the President says tonight. I think it's an interesting choice in coming to West Point, calculated (like every other Presidential move by every other occupant of the Oval Office) in the regard that, facing the Corps of Cadets as Commander In Chief, he's assured applause for each sentence. From another viewpoint, it's somewhat brave. The previous position holder showed up on a carrier when he thought the war was over to declare "mission accomplished"; happy news for all, if it had only been true, Mr. Obama is going to deliver his plan for success facing the same men and women who have to deliver on his promises at the risk of their own personal safety. Delivering the outline of action that may result in the future deaths of your audience takes some gumption.
Let's see how it goes tonight - a review to be posted later.
Monday, November 30, 2009
On Politics 11/30/09: Insatiable Fascination
One of the most alarming trends in modern American life is the ongoing unhealthy, insatiable fascination that people have with celebrity or public figures, or in making themselves a part of those groups.
Years ago, it used to be limited to the idiotic tabloids blocking your safe, unencumbered passage through the supermarket checkout lanes. From claims of aliens impregnation to lies about movie star relationships to doctored photographs, these high-gloss, color-photo covered publications would intrigue the intelligent for long enough to engender a furious shaking of the head in disgust. For others, their misguided innate desire to learn more and more about those different from themselves would cause a capitulation of common sense and portend a parting of their monies for a copy of the crap.
Modern technology now allows the further evolution of this concept. With Internet gossip sites, blogs, Facebook, and Twitter, people can post their homemade version of innuendo instantaneously. The applications are now such that, whereas in the past you would have to go to the URL to read about whomever, the push capabilities of the social networks allow you to receive the information wherever you are. How unnecessary.
Now, we have the logical extrapolation of this nonsensical obsession with fame. A couple, bent on making themselves instant celebrities, apparently snuck into the White House state dinner last week. Not just a lark or ridiculous gambit or double-dare, but rather a planned crashing (I say invasion), complete with camera crew in tow. Somewhere, there is a television executive who will green light them for a pilot regardless of how much time they spend in prison (and let's hope it's significant time).
Perhaps the animal kingdom has an example befitting all of this. While sitting outside the other night, fine cigar in one hand, Bailey's on the rocks in the other, and the fire pit fully ablaze, I watched a moth get attracted to the leaping flames, and experience spontaneous combustion upon getting too close. One can only hope a similar fate awaits those so compulsive about the TV lights.
Years ago, it used to be limited to the idiotic tabloids blocking your safe, unencumbered passage through the supermarket checkout lanes. From claims of aliens impregnation to lies about movie star relationships to doctored photographs, these high-gloss, color-photo covered publications would intrigue the intelligent for long enough to engender a furious shaking of the head in disgust. For others, their misguided innate desire to learn more and more about those different from themselves would cause a capitulation of common sense and portend a parting of their monies for a copy of the crap.
Modern technology now allows the further evolution of this concept. With Internet gossip sites, blogs, Facebook, and Twitter, people can post their homemade version of innuendo instantaneously. The applications are now such that, whereas in the past you would have to go to the URL to read about whomever, the push capabilities of the social networks allow you to receive the information wherever you are. How unnecessary.
Now, we have the logical extrapolation of this nonsensical obsession with fame. A couple, bent on making themselves instant celebrities, apparently snuck into the White House state dinner last week. Not just a lark or ridiculous gambit or double-dare, but rather a planned crashing (I say invasion), complete with camera crew in tow. Somewhere, there is a television executive who will green light them for a pilot regardless of how much time they spend in prison (and let's hope it's significant time).
Perhaps the animal kingdom has an example befitting all of this. While sitting outside the other night, fine cigar in one hand, Bailey's on the rocks in the other, and the fire pit fully ablaze, I watched a moth get attracted to the leaping flames, and experience spontaneous combustion upon getting too close. One can only hope a similar fate awaits those so compulsive about the TV lights.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
On Politics 11/25/09: In Thanksgiving...
On this most American of holidays, it's again time to publicly announce what I am most thankful for.
- I give thanks for the ongoing, neverending blog material inexhaustibly, overwhelmingly supplied by the government of New York State. Between the Governor and the Legislature, the lesson, as always my dear readers, is that truth is stranger than fiction. Nowhere is that more evident than in this state. One of these days someone is going to make a citizens' arrest of the politicians in this state.
- I give thanks for the being able to put food on our table for another Thanksgiving. More and more of our friends & neighbors are enduring the affects of the economic depression. On this day that we find ourselves fortunate enough to share a feast with family it's prudent to give pause to remember that when you think it can never happen to you is when you are most vulnerable to it occurring. Taking one's place, possessions, and privileges for granted is a sure recipe for a future fall.
- I continue to give thanks for the Poughkeepsie Journal linking to my blog and giving it visibility. As always, thanks to those of you who take the time to read it. I always enjoy the vicious feedback and commentary I receive from those who disagree with me, along with the kind words from those who do. The blog continues to also serve as a conversation source for my beloved father and I, however hideously erroneous his opinions may be (just kidding Dad- LOL).
- I give thanks that we celebrated a year without the loss of another family member. After enduring the loss of my father-in-law and our godson last year, we needed the year to recover. Our memories will never fade, which helped heal our hearts.
- I am thankful for making a few of the Springsteen shows on the current tour, which has now unfortunately ended. As often noted here, it's one of the few consistently pleasurable experiences in life. However, there will be a time, in the not too distant future, when the touring will stop, probably because of Clarence Clemons' health issues. The lesson, as always, is too savor the good while you can, as there is no guarantee it will perpetuate through your lifetime.
- I offer up thanks for all of those who make life better for others as volunteers. I can state, from my own experience, that doing for people less fortunate than yourself is perhaps life's greatest reward. What you do to assist those in need is returned a hundred-fold in how it makes you feel. Kudos to the people working the soup kitchen, coaching the children, transporting the elderly, and a ten thousand other acts of kindness.
- Finally, the greatest of thanks to my entire family, the Lovely Kathy, Vicki, Tommy, and all others I'm so fortunate to have in my life. My undeserved ongoing reward is having them to call my own.
- I give thanks for the ongoing, neverending blog material inexhaustibly, overwhelmingly supplied by the government of New York State. Between the Governor and the Legislature, the lesson, as always my dear readers, is that truth is stranger than fiction. Nowhere is that more evident than in this state. One of these days someone is going to make a citizens' arrest of the politicians in this state.
- I give thanks for the being able to put food on our table for another Thanksgiving. More and more of our friends & neighbors are enduring the affects of the economic depression. On this day that we find ourselves fortunate enough to share a feast with family it's prudent to give pause to remember that when you think it can never happen to you is when you are most vulnerable to it occurring. Taking one's place, possessions, and privileges for granted is a sure recipe for a future fall.
- I continue to give thanks for the Poughkeepsie Journal linking to my blog and giving it visibility. As always, thanks to those of you who take the time to read it. I always enjoy the vicious feedback and commentary I receive from those who disagree with me, along with the kind words from those who do. The blog continues to also serve as a conversation source for my beloved father and I, however hideously erroneous his opinions may be (just kidding Dad- LOL).
- I give thanks that we celebrated a year without the loss of another family member. After enduring the loss of my father-in-law and our godson last year, we needed the year to recover. Our memories will never fade, which helped heal our hearts.
- I am thankful for making a few of the Springsteen shows on the current tour, which has now unfortunately ended. As often noted here, it's one of the few consistently pleasurable experiences in life. However, there will be a time, in the not too distant future, when the touring will stop, probably because of Clarence Clemons' health issues. The lesson, as always, is too savor the good while you can, as there is no guarantee it will perpetuate through your lifetime.
- I offer up thanks for all of those who make life better for others as volunteers. I can state, from my own experience, that doing for people less fortunate than yourself is perhaps life's greatest reward. What you do to assist those in need is returned a hundred-fold in how it makes you feel. Kudos to the people working the soup kitchen, coaching the children, transporting the elderly, and a ten thousand other acts of kindness.
- Finally, the greatest of thanks to my entire family, the Lovely Kathy, Vicki, Tommy, and all others I'm so fortunate to have in my life. My undeserved ongoing reward is having them to call my own.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
On Politics 11/24/09: Back To The Facts
As others have noted, it is now the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin publishing "The Origins Of The Species". Perhaps no other book, except for the one that people routinely say it contradicts, the Bible, is as well known or just as controversial.
Yes, I said controversial. Many people of differing Christian sects take the Bible at a literal interpretation, hard as that is to believe for some. These "believers" think that the Bible, written by mere mortals over 2,000 years ago, contains the actual word of God. The creation of the Earth in six days, the Garden of Eden, the virgin birth, the Revelation (and would that part of the Biblical story ever get picked up if it were proposed by some screenwriter in Hollywood - Not) and the Ark (all aboard!) comprise just some of the more difficult "facts" to rationalize in the brain. Faith can only take you so far folks.
In contrast, Darwin's book, a collection of his observations and deductions based on actual scientific experience in the field, stands as one of the profound writings in the human canon. However, to those who either fail to understand evolution (judging by the poor performance regarding American scientific scholastic efforts over the last 25 years, the number is growing), or, more sinfully (pun intended), choose to ignore it, the book is just as controversial. With the denial of evolution still being pushed forward in various places under thinly-veiled guises (intelligent design, etc.), accredited scientific evidence remains under challenge. Owing perhaps to the Bush administration's lack of support for academics, or failure to agree with documented evidence (global warming, destruction of national parks, etc.) because it did not fit with their sponsors' business interests, we are in desperate need of a "reversal to reality" when it comes to learning. Even more frighteningly, we now have the arrival of the Palin book, "Going Rogue", the apparent story of someone who thinks they are among the chosen few based on a Hail Mary political gambit rescuing her from the outreaches of a place some Americans cannot find on a map, but from where you just might be able to see Russia if you look hard enough, according to Ms. Palin.
Yes, I said controversial. Many people of differing Christian sects take the Bible at a literal interpretation, hard as that is to believe for some. These "believers" think that the Bible, written by mere mortals over 2,000 years ago, contains the actual word of God. The creation of the Earth in six days, the Garden of Eden, the virgin birth, the Revelation (and would that part of the Biblical story ever get picked up if it were proposed by some screenwriter in Hollywood - Not) and the Ark (all aboard!) comprise just some of the more difficult "facts" to rationalize in the brain. Faith can only take you so far folks.
In contrast, Darwin's book, a collection of his observations and deductions based on actual scientific experience in the field, stands as one of the profound writings in the human canon. However, to those who either fail to understand evolution (judging by the poor performance regarding American scientific scholastic efforts over the last 25 years, the number is growing), or, more sinfully (pun intended), choose to ignore it, the book is just as controversial. With the denial of evolution still being pushed forward in various places under thinly-veiled guises (intelligent design, etc.), accredited scientific evidence remains under challenge. Owing perhaps to the Bush administration's lack of support for academics, or failure to agree with documented evidence (global warming, destruction of national parks, etc.) because it did not fit with their sponsors' business interests, we are in desperate need of a "reversal to reality" when it comes to learning. Even more frighteningly, we now have the arrival of the Palin book, "Going Rogue", the apparent story of someone who thinks they are among the chosen few based on a Hail Mary political gambit rescuing her from the outreaches of a place some Americans cannot find on a map, but from where you just might be able to see Russia if you look hard enough, according to Ms. Palin.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
On Politics 11/21/09: Random Thoughts, Vol. XVI
Time for yet another trip through the cerebrum and cerebellum to discover a myriad of musings on a variety of subjects. I'm accompanied by a small snifter of the new, very fine, NY created Tuthilltown Hudson Baby Bourbon, the first of its' ilk since Prohibition. And away we go...
- Albany sanity check: We have the Governor fighting with the Senate (same old song & dance...cue the Aerosmith) about where to cut, what to cut, how much to cut, blah blah blah. Would any of you trust these people to run the local bodega or 7 Eleven? Of course you wouldn't, but here they are, continuing to pour down the throats of its' citizens an evil brew of poverty + chaos spiced with ineffective leadership. It's almost akin to ipecac syrup; you just want to throw up.
- One additional ongoing NY State fiasco while I'm on the subject. I have now become another sufferer of the what-the-hell-is-the-matter-with-my-inspection-sticker nightmare. Apparently, the state-selected vendor used an inferior glue so that drivers afflicted with the failing stickers repeatedly perform the awkward press down the corner motion, wait, then do it all over again. Yet another fine quality control item from our state government.
- Book You Should Be Reading Now: "The Snowball" by Alice Schroeder. Excellent biography of Warren Buffet.
- Ridiculously Exorbitant Item Of The Week: The Pacquiao - Cotto fight was terrific. However, the latest scam in the boxing PP world is that this contest was $54.95, BUT, to see it in HD, it was $64.95. Always good to know Bob Arum ("Yesterday I was lying; today I'm telling you the truth") is involved.
- It's that time of year again, when the morning slumber is jarred away with the sound of gunshots far too close to our home. Bad for us, worse for the deer. Hard to believe that the law still allows the discharge of guns within 500 feet of a home, in an era where the killing range of these weapons far exceeds that paltry distance. While I still wonder what the joy received is for those pulling the trigger to kill something, we now have to worry about our children and our pet outside in their own backyard. There is something incredibly wrong with that last sentence.
- Innocuous Question Of The Week: Why does toast always taste better at the diner than when you make it at home?
- Unfortunate Rooting Realization Of The Week: The Rangers do not have enough scorers to win the Cup, and the Cowboys still do not have a coach that can win a playoff game.
- Great Song Finally On iTunes: "Sun City" by Artists United Against Apartheid. People forget that this effort, circa 1985, was one of the first creations involving rock and rap, preceding the "Walk This Way" summit between Aerosmith and Run-DMC. In the 20-odd years since the release, South Africa is now integrated, and Nelson Mandela an icon of freedom to the world. Good to have it available for all.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
On Politics 11/14/09: A Time To Remember
I love movies; I always have. In my house growing up, favorite movies were joyously watched again and again whenever they appeared, long before the cable TV cycle of 4-5 times a week became prevalent. I was weaned on my father's personal favorite, the submarine film "Run Silent, Run Deep" with Lancaster & Gable, which caused him to become affixed to the couch whenever it appeared, shortly followed by my mother's exclamation that "you've seen this 39 times already" (Note to Mom: I think it's closer to 100 viewings by now). Other war movies comprise my father's favorites, along with the entire John Wayne catalog.
So, ingrained as I was with this history, I veered in a similar direction. The first television show I can ever remember being appointment viewing in our home was "Hogan's Heroes", which, to the best of my childish recollection, appeared on CBS every Sunday night. This was easily the best part of that day, even during football season, since being New Jersey suburbanites we were horrifically saddled with having to watch the Giants and Jets every weekend. One of the forgotten impacts of the advent of Monday Night Football was that it gave local viewers the chance to see all of the teams we were not fortunate enough to witness, having been sentenced to watch the metropolitan misfortunes in blue or green. Having absorbed the boys of Stalag 13, I then moved onto Saturday mornings (I think) with "Combat", which moved somewhat closer to reality, although it remained television.
Growing older, I soon progressed through varying stories of war, from fanciful ("The Dirty Dozen") to different ("Where Eagles Dare") to quasi-documentary ("The Longest Day") to semi-humorous ("Kelly's Heroes") to historical pomp ("Gettysburg"). In my adult years, I have seen what I consider the two greatest war stories produced, "Saving Private Ryan" and "Band of Brothers". If you haven't seen them, please do, and bear in mind all that horror that engulfed your fathers and grandfathers.
Another Veteran's Day has now come and gone. Thanks to those who have served and who do so today, movies are the closest thing we civilians will ever experience about war. Our gratitude is what we have to give, but it's a desperately insufficient one-sided exchange.
So, ingrained as I was with this history, I veered in a similar direction. The first television show I can ever remember being appointment viewing in our home was "Hogan's Heroes", which, to the best of my childish recollection, appeared on CBS every Sunday night. This was easily the best part of that day, even during football season, since being New Jersey suburbanites we were horrifically saddled with having to watch the Giants and Jets every weekend. One of the forgotten impacts of the advent of Monday Night Football was that it gave local viewers the chance to see all of the teams we were not fortunate enough to witness, having been sentenced to watch the metropolitan misfortunes in blue or green. Having absorbed the boys of Stalag 13, I then moved onto Saturday mornings (I think) with "Combat", which moved somewhat closer to reality, although it remained television.
Growing older, I soon progressed through varying stories of war, from fanciful ("The Dirty Dozen") to different ("Where Eagles Dare") to quasi-documentary ("The Longest Day") to semi-humorous ("Kelly's Heroes") to historical pomp ("Gettysburg"). In my adult years, I have seen what I consider the two greatest war stories produced, "Saving Private Ryan" and "Band of Brothers". If you haven't seen them, please do, and bear in mind all that horror that engulfed your fathers and grandfathers.
Another Veteran's Day has now come and gone. Thanks to those who have served and who do so today, movies are the closest thing we civilians will ever experience about war. Our gratitude is what we have to give, but it's a desperately insufficient one-sided exchange.
Saturday, November 7, 2009
On Politics 11/7/09: Watching the Margins
Now that the post-election dust has almost completely settled, it's time to make an attempt to assess what's happened.
On the national level, much fuss has been made over the Republicans unseating the Democratic governors in Virginia and beloved New Jersey. Those with a national interest in such things proclaim that this is a referendum on the Obama presidency, which seems debatable. Mindful of the old refrain that all politics is local, it's stretching the synapses to declare that voters in two of the original colonies were casting their choice based on their opinion of the President. Having never lived in Virginia, I can't hazard a further guess into the voter mindset for their selection. However, having been born, raised, lived, and worked in the Garden State, I can tell you that any candidate running for election that promises to lower property taxes (current #1 NJ complaint) or insurance rates (historical #1 NJ complaint) will be elected. Conversely, the incumbent in office when the tsunami of concern over an item reaches a truly only-in-Jersey-crescendo has no chance of getting returned to his/her position.
Returning within the borders of NY State, I, like many others, watched with curiosity to see the outcome of the upstate 23rd Congressional district special election. Some may recall that this is the race where the self-proclaimed moderate Republican running for office was assailed by the right-most of the right as not being conservative enough for their liking. Yes, you are already correctly imagining who those names must be: Limbaugh, Palin, etc. As with any other mob scene, rational thought and level-headed direction surrendered to those thundering the loudest, as they inevitably drowned out the sane. Out went the candidate, the Republican hierarchy threw their support behind the Conservative, the shunned moderate stumped for the Democrat, and voila - the Democrat won. It's happened before, with both sides of the aisle: local electorates seem to resent the big, bad party leaders telling them who they should cast their vote for.
More frighteningly, in this particular case, we are seeing the middle of the Republican party being marginalized. As oft-stated here, the majority of Americans occupy the center ground in their politics. We like some things the Democrats advance, while also supporting certain Republicans initiatives. Extremes of either party frighten most of us, myself included, because those who occupy the margins are found to be absent the logic of recognition of the validity of other points, or resistant to the art of compromise. Whether it be family arguments, neighborhood disputes, or political issues, most realize that the meeting on some common solution or position is what normally carries the day. Those who scream that it can only be there way, or that someone differing from their viewpoint cannot be encompassed under the party umbrella, are misguided at best, and delusional at worst.
Locally, we await the final disposition of some 70 write-in votes for the town board elections in Beekman. I have a very difficult time understanding this. (I offer an apology in advance for the rest of this diatribe if the process has changed). From what I recall of having cast an absentee ballot before, it must be submitted well in advance of the date of election. Thus, the ballots are in hand prior to the actual voting commencing, and are obviously capable of being counted as soon as the deadline for submission of them passes. Yet what we endure on a yearly basis is the drama of counting the these votes after the regular voting is concluded, when it becomes a sideshow of review, inspection, and complaints / counter-complaints over validity of the ballots. This process leaves the impression that absentee ballots matter less than regular votes, when the reality is that these individuals have gone to greater lengths to exercise their right than the average voter. Basically, what one can fairly derive from this ludicrous routine is that your votes matter if there's a close vote, but if the margins are wide enough, we don't need to bother. It's completely backwards - count these votes first, end the drama, and know your winners when Tuesday's results are announced.
Voters and candidates deserve better.
On the national level, much fuss has been made over the Republicans unseating the Democratic governors in Virginia and beloved New Jersey. Those with a national interest in such things proclaim that this is a referendum on the Obama presidency, which seems debatable. Mindful of the old refrain that all politics is local, it's stretching the synapses to declare that voters in two of the original colonies were casting their choice based on their opinion of the President. Having never lived in Virginia, I can't hazard a further guess into the voter mindset for their selection. However, having been born, raised, lived, and worked in the Garden State, I can tell you that any candidate running for election that promises to lower property taxes (current #1 NJ complaint) or insurance rates (historical #1 NJ complaint) will be elected. Conversely, the incumbent in office when the tsunami of concern over an item reaches a truly only-in-Jersey-crescendo has no chance of getting returned to his/her position.
Returning within the borders of NY State, I, like many others, watched with curiosity to see the outcome of the upstate 23rd Congressional district special election. Some may recall that this is the race where the self-proclaimed moderate Republican running for office was assailed by the right-most of the right as not being conservative enough for their liking. Yes, you are already correctly imagining who those names must be: Limbaugh, Palin, etc. As with any other mob scene, rational thought and level-headed direction surrendered to those thundering the loudest, as they inevitably drowned out the sane. Out went the candidate, the Republican hierarchy threw their support behind the Conservative, the shunned moderate stumped for the Democrat, and voila - the Democrat won. It's happened before, with both sides of the aisle: local electorates seem to resent the big, bad party leaders telling them who they should cast their vote for.
More frighteningly, in this particular case, we are seeing the middle of the Republican party being marginalized. As oft-stated here, the majority of Americans occupy the center ground in their politics. We like some things the Democrats advance, while also supporting certain Republicans initiatives. Extremes of either party frighten most of us, myself included, because those who occupy the margins are found to be absent the logic of recognition of the validity of other points, or resistant to the art of compromise. Whether it be family arguments, neighborhood disputes, or political issues, most realize that the meeting on some common solution or position is what normally carries the day. Those who scream that it can only be there way, or that someone differing from their viewpoint cannot be encompassed under the party umbrella, are misguided at best, and delusional at worst.
Locally, we await the final disposition of some 70 write-in votes for the town board elections in Beekman. I have a very difficult time understanding this. (I offer an apology in advance for the rest of this diatribe if the process has changed). From what I recall of having cast an absentee ballot before, it must be submitted well in advance of the date of election. Thus, the ballots are in hand prior to the actual voting commencing, and are obviously capable of being counted as soon as the deadline for submission of them passes. Yet what we endure on a yearly basis is the drama of counting the these votes after the regular voting is concluded, when it becomes a sideshow of review, inspection, and complaints / counter-complaints over validity of the ballots. This process leaves the impression that absentee ballots matter less than regular votes, when the reality is that these individuals have gone to greater lengths to exercise their right than the average voter. Basically, what one can fairly derive from this ludicrous routine is that your votes matter if there's a close vote, but if the margins are wide enough, we don't need to bother. It's completely backwards - count these votes first, end the drama, and know your winners when Tuesday's results are announced.
Voters and candidates deserve better.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
Monday, November 2, 2009
On Politics 11/2/09: Robo Annoyance
We're less than 24 hours away from our civic duty, but were hours and days into our civic annoyance. Yes, there is yet another item besides those colorful signs that reminds us it's election time.
For years, I've wrestled with the Catholic concept of what Hell must be like. It seems odd that it would be just heat and fire, since some people actually like that everyday (see the citizens of Phoenix, Arizona as an example). Over time, I've settled on the thought that Hell must be an amalgamation of your worst dislikes or fears every second you're staying in God's basement. For example, if you've got arachnophobia, you're time below is full of creepy crawly things going back and forth on your flesh. If you're someone who despises waiting on lines (this would be me), life in Hades would be consumed by standing on a line that never moves, with no escaping it yourself. If you're a liberal, you'd be sentenced to a neverending loop of Glenn Beck crying and spewing nonsense. Conversely, if you're a Conservative, you're forever plugged into Satan's iPod, which carries only clips from Air America radio.
Perhaps there is something that would be true punishment for people of all kinds....hmmm...let me think....what could be so infuriating that it would cut across socio-economic levels, political preferences, and racial divides? What could be this powerful, this annoying, this aggravating to all of mankind?
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the political robo call.
Beginning in earnest this past week, and now into full-blown, desperation overdrive as of today, it's ring ring ring, as The Kinks once sang "All day, and all of the night". I used to keep track of which person called the most, either themselves, their staff, or via proxy (more on that in a moment), and then vote for the other person. In this day and age of the collection agency bums who interrupt people's dinner and evenings, we have now added the recorded political exhortations to our meatloaf & potatoes. Not exactly my idea of the cherry on my sundae.
Now, about those proxies calling for others. In perhaps the most frightening occurrence to date, news agencies reported that Sarah Palin's voice has been heard throughout the state of Virginia, asking voters to vote for "Sarah's values" in the forthcoming election, although never mentioning the Republican candidate by name (Bob McDonnell), since he is admittedly fearful (rightfully so) of having independent and center-of-the-political-road voters associating Palin with him. Even more humorous than that is the meditation on what "Sarah's values" must be. Obviously, the most prominent of all these must be the core value of exploiting your children, especially the pregnant teenager and her teenage boyfriend, being "encouraged" to get engaged officially, in time for the primaries, so that we wouldn't have a unwed teenage mother on the platform stage, all this while you keep shouting about abstinence being the proper path for all. Thanks, but no thanks.
Let the hanging up begin.
For years, I've wrestled with the Catholic concept of what Hell must be like. It seems odd that it would be just heat and fire, since some people actually like that everyday (see the citizens of Phoenix, Arizona as an example). Over time, I've settled on the thought that Hell must be an amalgamation of your worst dislikes or fears every second you're staying in God's basement. For example, if you've got arachnophobia, you're time below is full of creepy crawly things going back and forth on your flesh. If you're someone who despises waiting on lines (this would be me), life in Hades would be consumed by standing on a line that never moves, with no escaping it yourself. If you're a liberal, you'd be sentenced to a neverending loop of Glenn Beck crying and spewing nonsense. Conversely, if you're a Conservative, you're forever plugged into Satan's iPod, which carries only clips from Air America radio.
Perhaps there is something that would be true punishment for people of all kinds....hmmm...let me think....what could be so infuriating that it would cut across socio-economic levels, political preferences, and racial divides? What could be this powerful, this annoying, this aggravating to all of mankind?
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the political robo call.
Beginning in earnest this past week, and now into full-blown, desperation overdrive as of today, it's ring ring ring, as The Kinks once sang "All day, and all of the night". I used to keep track of which person called the most, either themselves, their staff, or via proxy (more on that in a moment), and then vote for the other person. In this day and age of the collection agency bums who interrupt people's dinner and evenings, we have now added the recorded political exhortations to our meatloaf & potatoes. Not exactly my idea of the cherry on my sundae.
Now, about those proxies calling for others. In perhaps the most frightening occurrence to date, news agencies reported that Sarah Palin's voice has been heard throughout the state of Virginia, asking voters to vote for "Sarah's values" in the forthcoming election, although never mentioning the Republican candidate by name (Bob McDonnell), since he is admittedly fearful (rightfully so) of having independent and center-of-the-political-road voters associating Palin with him. Even more humorous than that is the meditation on what "Sarah's values" must be. Obviously, the most prominent of all these must be the core value of exploiting your children, especially the pregnant teenager and her teenage boyfriend, being "encouraged" to get engaged officially, in time for the primaries, so that we wouldn't have a unwed teenage mother on the platform stage, all this while you keep shouting about abstinence being the proper path for all. Thanks, but no thanks.
Let the hanging up begin.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
On Politics 11/1/09: Candidate Origins
With two more days left before the voters march en masse (more realistically, a modest gathering; hopefully, at least a little more than a slow trickle) to the polls, I found myself wondering just exactly where do politicians come from. Now, please resist the temptation to utter some sort of colorful profanity and/or descriptive locale in response to reading that previous sentence. Let's delve into it a little bit further.
The Founding Fathers envisioned the farmer or the shopkeeper serving a limited time in the political process, and then returning to their primary walk of life. As the country has evolved, we now have encountered people who are nothing more than full-time political professionals, having never worked at anything but being a politician. Those that take this path are invariably from rich families, as, unlike the vast majority of us, they've never had the concern or worry about having to provide sustenance for their own. Perhaps this gives additional weight to the urban legend quote often attributed to Albert Einstein; that the most powerful thing in the universe is compound interest. It must be a lovely thing to never touch the principal of your monies. Interestingly enough, people of this ilk sometimes envision themselves as "legacies", no different than if they were requesting entrance to the same fraternities enjoyed by their fathers, as if this identification through birth somehow imbued them with political, intelligent DNA.
Those scions of the wealthy seem typically to start at the state-wide level, appearing to consciously skip the lowest local rungs of the electoral ladder. Aspirants to the town and county positions are more usually drawn from the working class; although a life of prominence is yet again helpful. This brings to mind the question most Americans are never asked: Why would you vote for the rich person? Do you think they are smarter thank you because they have more money? About the only logical explanation I can think of is that voters believe the wealthy are less likely to be bribed, since they are rich already. Seriously faulty logic I'm afraid. Voters should emulate the rationale once bellowed by Martin Sheen at his son Charlie Sheen in the epic "Wall Street": "What you see is a guy who never measured a man's success by the size of his WALLET! " We should understand that they're just not smarter than we are.
No, the closest to the origins of our country are our local candidates: The fireman, the attorney, the teacher's aide, the county worker. People who work in the community and surrounding areas for which they seek office. In a rare in-blog response to a comment posted on a previous item, I'd like to remind the anonymous commentator that whatever job one has does not disqualify them from elective office, and should not be disparagingly looked down upon, regardless of personal thought on the position. These days, any job is a good one.
Let's all hope that we, the public at large, will always have good choices to choose from. That we will be fortunate to have candidates who make us want to show up every first Tuesday of November, wait on line, sign the registrant book, close the curtain behind us, take that deep breath, read the choices before us, pull the chosen levers down, and then slide the curtains back open to exit, our exercise of citizenship complete.
Let it always be so.
The Founding Fathers envisioned the farmer or the shopkeeper serving a limited time in the political process, and then returning to their primary walk of life. As the country has evolved, we now have encountered people who are nothing more than full-time political professionals, having never worked at anything but being a politician. Those that take this path are invariably from rich families, as, unlike the vast majority of us, they've never had the concern or worry about having to provide sustenance for their own. Perhaps this gives additional weight to the urban legend quote often attributed to Albert Einstein; that the most powerful thing in the universe is compound interest. It must be a lovely thing to never touch the principal of your monies. Interestingly enough, people of this ilk sometimes envision themselves as "legacies", no different than if they were requesting entrance to the same fraternities enjoyed by their fathers, as if this identification through birth somehow imbued them with political, intelligent DNA.
Those scions of the wealthy seem typically to start at the state-wide level, appearing to consciously skip the lowest local rungs of the electoral ladder. Aspirants to the town and county positions are more usually drawn from the working class; although a life of prominence is yet again helpful. This brings to mind the question most Americans are never asked: Why would you vote for the rich person? Do you think they are smarter thank you because they have more money? About the only logical explanation I can think of is that voters believe the wealthy are less likely to be bribed, since they are rich already. Seriously faulty logic I'm afraid. Voters should emulate the rationale once bellowed by Martin Sheen at his son Charlie Sheen in the epic "Wall Street": "What you see is a guy who never measured a man's success by the size of his WALLET! " We should understand that they're just not smarter than we are.
No, the closest to the origins of our country are our local candidates: The fireman, the attorney, the teacher's aide, the county worker. People who work in the community and surrounding areas for which they seek office. In a rare in-blog response to a comment posted on a previous item, I'd like to remind the anonymous commentator that whatever job one has does not disqualify them from elective office, and should not be disparagingly looked down upon, regardless of personal thought on the position. These days, any job is a good one.
Let's all hope that we, the public at large, will always have good choices to choose from. That we will be fortunate to have candidates who make us want to show up every first Tuesday of November, wait on line, sign the registrant book, close the curtain behind us, take that deep breath, read the choices before us, pull the chosen levers down, and then slide the curtains back open to exit, our exercise of citizenship complete.
Let it always be so.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
On Politics 10/27/09: One Week To Go
We now have one week left in our current political election season. Seven days and six nights (people really aren't campaigning in the evening of election day) of frantic robotic phone calls, daily mailbox stuffing, last-minute signage, radio ads, and pressing the flesh wherever possible.
Turning our gaze south towards the isle of Manhattan for a moment, we have the spectacle one of the world's richest men trying to return as mayor of an impossible place to manage. This attempted continuation of the Bloomberg era required some nifty persuasion of the City Council, rewriting the rules to allow Mr. Mike to stage his run for a 3rd term, as well as the sacrifice of a currently estimated $85M of his wealth to fund his ego trip. The only reason I can think that is driving Mayor Bloomberg to go through all of this is best enunciated by The Boss:
"Poor man wanna be rich
Rich man wanna be king
And the king ain't satisfied until he rules everything"
- "Badlands", Bruce Springsteen
Locally, who's to know what will occur in good ol' Beekman. I will say this: As a political junkie, I'm disappointed that the two candidates for Supervisor have not held any debates. I think the public deserves to literally hear their candidates argue about the issues, take their respective turns in trying to convince we the voters of their positions and qualifications in order to garner our support. In short, I'd enjoy them exercising the due political course to earn my / our vote. Having the candidates who desire to lead our town compete in the same setting, queried by the public on the issues, allowing for an appraisal of their knowledge coupled with an evaluation of their poise and polish, is something that truly would benefit the voters.
It's a missed opportunity for them, for us, and for the process.
Turning our gaze south towards the isle of Manhattan for a moment, we have the spectacle one of the world's richest men trying to return as mayor of an impossible place to manage. This attempted continuation of the Bloomberg era required some nifty persuasion of the City Council, rewriting the rules to allow Mr. Mike to stage his run for a 3rd term, as well as the sacrifice of a currently estimated $85M of his wealth to fund his ego trip. The only reason I can think that is driving Mayor Bloomberg to go through all of this is best enunciated by The Boss:
"Poor man wanna be rich
Rich man wanna be king
And the king ain't satisfied until he rules everything"
- "Badlands", Bruce Springsteen
Locally, who's to know what will occur in good ol' Beekman. I will say this: As a political junkie, I'm disappointed that the two candidates for Supervisor have not held any debates. I think the public deserves to literally hear their candidates argue about the issues, take their respective turns in trying to convince we the voters of their positions and qualifications in order to garner our support. In short, I'd enjoy them exercising the due political course to earn my / our vote. Having the candidates who desire to lead our town compete in the same setting, queried by the public on the issues, allowing for an appraisal of their knowledge coupled with an evaluation of their poise and polish, is something that truly would benefit the voters.
It's a missed opportunity for them, for us, and for the process.
Friday, October 23, 2009
On Politics 10/23/09: Momma Said There'd Be Days Like This
Being a candidate for political office, at whatever level, is a unique thing. By default, you begin to cede access to your business and personal life through your candidacy. A proper candidate is also sacrificing their free time, away from family and friends, in order to appear at gatherings, press the flesh at fund-raisers, as well as the time-consuming efforts of carrying out the political process. You may also find yourself in the position of having to explain past comments, actions, or events, as well as negotiating the enormously difficult task of self-editing whenever you speak. Many people, myself included, struggle with the thoughts of these concepts, which is why I have thus far refused the invitations to enter the arena.
Along with all of the above, the candidate must act as the default project manager for his or her candidacy. Yes, there are political operatives or volunteers, depending on the election level, that are designated as the campaign manager, but the reality is that you as the candidate are responsible, fairly or not, for everything that happens within your campaign. Voters react poorly to candidates who attempt to assign fault to underlings, usually recognizing the human sacrifice being made on behalf of the candidate.
All of this leads to our micro-local look from the Center at a tough political day for a candidate in Beekman. Dan French, running for the Supervisor's office in Beekman, had to come forward with an apology for a mailing that appeared to too closely mirror the text and image of the Poughkeepsie Journal. The paper, rightly concerned that the mailing conveyed an official endorsement of his candidacy, requested that French address the issue, which he did, stating that there was no premeditated intent to do so.
People who produce original content, whether they be writers, musicians, or even lowly bloggers, remain overtly sensitive to their output being associated to political concerns without their direct consent. Perhaps the most famous gaffe in this regard was Ronald Reagan's incredibly incoherent use of Bruce Springsteen's "Born In The USA" at a campaign rally in New Jersey, thinking it a song about American greatness, when it was, as an even cursory examination would have revealed, a passionate commentary about a Vietnam veteran returning home from war with no prospects for a better life. Entities such as newspapers or news magazines are extraordinarily sensitive to this, given their position in the public consciousness.
Unfortunately for candidate French, the 24 hour rotation of the Earth contained a further disappointment, perhaps more impactful than the mailing issue. In less-than-fortuitous timing, the Journal, in the same edition of the paper as the apology, endorsed the rival candidate, Barbara Zulauf, for the Supervisor's position. Bill Simmons, the much beloved ESPN Sports Guy, has a scale that he refers to as the "Levels of Losing". One of the entries on that scale is the "Stomach Punch Game". For anyone ever struck in the general area of the solar plexus, you know that as the extremely uncomfortable 2-3 minute period of time as you await the return of air back into your body.
I suspect that would be an apropos description of what occurred for Mr. French yesterday. Many a campaign goes through similar trials and tribulations. It will be interesting to watch what transpires moving forward.
Along with all of the above, the candidate must act as the default project manager for his or her candidacy. Yes, there are political operatives or volunteers, depending on the election level, that are designated as the campaign manager, but the reality is that you as the candidate are responsible, fairly or not, for everything that happens within your campaign. Voters react poorly to candidates who attempt to assign fault to underlings, usually recognizing the human sacrifice being made on behalf of the candidate.
All of this leads to our micro-local look from the Center at a tough political day for a candidate in Beekman. Dan French, running for the Supervisor's office in Beekman, had to come forward with an apology for a mailing that appeared to too closely mirror the text and image of the Poughkeepsie Journal. The paper, rightly concerned that the mailing conveyed an official endorsement of his candidacy, requested that French address the issue, which he did, stating that there was no premeditated intent to do so.
People who produce original content, whether they be writers, musicians, or even lowly bloggers, remain overtly sensitive to their output being associated to political concerns without their direct consent. Perhaps the most famous gaffe in this regard was Ronald Reagan's incredibly incoherent use of Bruce Springsteen's "Born In The USA" at a campaign rally in New Jersey, thinking it a song about American greatness, when it was, as an even cursory examination would have revealed, a passionate commentary about a Vietnam veteran returning home from war with no prospects for a better life. Entities such as newspapers or news magazines are extraordinarily sensitive to this, given their position in the public consciousness.
Unfortunately for candidate French, the 24 hour rotation of the Earth contained a further disappointment, perhaps more impactful than the mailing issue. In less-than-fortuitous timing, the Journal, in the same edition of the paper as the apology, endorsed the rival candidate, Barbara Zulauf, for the Supervisor's position. Bill Simmons, the much beloved ESPN Sports Guy, has a scale that he refers to as the "Levels of Losing". One of the entries on that scale is the "Stomach Punch Game". For anyone ever struck in the general area of the solar plexus, you know that as the extremely uncomfortable 2-3 minute period of time as you await the return of air back into your body.
I suspect that would be an apropos description of what occurred for Mr. French yesterday. Many a campaign goes through similar trials and tribulations. It will be interesting to watch what transpires moving forward.
Monday, October 19, 2009
On Politics 10/19/09: Random Thoughts, Vol. XV
Time once again to collect, corral, and collate various ruminations of the mind. Today, I'm ably assisted by hot chocolate and raisin buns from McKinney & Doyle's Fine Foods Cafe in Pawling, a place you need to go if you haven't been. And away we go...
- Roman Polanski wants us all to believe he has suffered enough for the drugging and rape of a 13 year old girl. He believe that the passage of time should insulate him from further legal jeopardy for his actions. He fled the country after he agreed to to a plea, fearing his jail term would be too severe. Now, he's outraged that the long arm of the law has ensnared him overseas. Various actors, actresses, and directors have signed petitions or announced their support of his release. Tough. This wasn't smoking pot or driving while intoxicated or failure to pay your income tax. I'll repeat - this was the drugging and raping of a 13 year old girl. In the 70's or the 00's that's still wrong. Roman, you did the crime, now do the time.
- We should have immediately known it was a scam when we found out the kid's name was Falcon. Really; Mr. & Mrs. Henne named the balloon boy Falcon. Always nice to bestow the moniker of a bird of prey on your child. Good grief. What's next, Chicken Hawk Henne? So, there you were last week, watching the God-forbid story of a boy trapped in his idiot father's homemade flying contraption either freezing to death in altitude, falling to his demise from it while floating over the countryside, or being terminated when it crashed into the ground when the helium finally gave out. Thankfully none of those dreadful possibilities came to fruition. Instead, we had police, National Guard, camera crews, and a host of others, along with a nationwide television audience, holding its' collective breath waiting for resolution. Here's the resolution I came up with: Charge those parents for every last dime spent by every last agency that had to react to this hoax, if the sheriff's suspicions are true. Make an example of Mr Jiffy-Pop balloon maker.
- Can the NY Rangers really be this good? Please, let it be so.
- Three people have now perished in the Arizona sweatbox fiasco, as part of a course run by yet another "self-help" guru, in this case, James Arthur Ray. If it's self-help, why do you need someone else?
- Did you ever wonder how it is that a curveball or slider in baseball "knows" exactly to go 58-59 feet before it breaks over the plate. Fascinating that it works out that way, with the occasional one bounced into the dirt.
- Why is it that boxes of Funny Bones have only 10 cakes in it, while Yankee Doodles and others have 12. I'd like some consistency in my packaging from the good people at Drake's. Of course, we want more per box, not less.
- Next, we have the case of a justice of the peace in Louisiana who refused to grant a marriage license to an interracial couple. He swears he's not a racist, and but blithely offered up a defense of "these marriages don't last", along with "I was worried about the kids". Here's a fun fact for the clueless justice - worry about your own children figuring out you really are a racist. I'd hazard a guess that it's not a surprise to them. Of course, he wants to remain on the job and thinks nothing wrong of his refusal to honor the request. Well, according to Louisiana law, you do not get to decide whom to give a license to or not. Much like the pharmacists who cite personal religious beliefs in not providing contraception to customers, this is decidedly simple: If your beliefs interfere with your ability to do the job as it is called for and legally required, get another job. Case closed.
- Roman Polanski wants us all to believe he has suffered enough for the drugging and rape of a 13 year old girl. He believe that the passage of time should insulate him from further legal jeopardy for his actions. He fled the country after he agreed to to a plea, fearing his jail term would be too severe. Now, he's outraged that the long arm of the law has ensnared him overseas. Various actors, actresses, and directors have signed petitions or announced their support of his release. Tough. This wasn't smoking pot or driving while intoxicated or failure to pay your income tax. I'll repeat - this was the drugging and raping of a 13 year old girl. In the 70's or the 00's that's still wrong. Roman, you did the crime, now do the time.
- We should have immediately known it was a scam when we found out the kid's name was Falcon. Really; Mr. & Mrs. Henne named the balloon boy Falcon. Always nice to bestow the moniker of a bird of prey on your child. Good grief. What's next, Chicken Hawk Henne? So, there you were last week, watching the God-forbid story of a boy trapped in his idiot father's homemade flying contraption either freezing to death in altitude, falling to his demise from it while floating over the countryside, or being terminated when it crashed into the ground when the helium finally gave out. Thankfully none of those dreadful possibilities came to fruition. Instead, we had police, National Guard, camera crews, and a host of others, along with a nationwide television audience, holding its' collective breath waiting for resolution. Here's the resolution I came up with: Charge those parents for every last dime spent by every last agency that had to react to this hoax, if the sheriff's suspicions are true. Make an example of Mr Jiffy-Pop balloon maker.
- Can the NY Rangers really be this good? Please, let it be so.
- Three people have now perished in the Arizona sweatbox fiasco, as part of a course run by yet another "self-help" guru, in this case, James Arthur Ray. If it's self-help, why do you need someone else?
- Did you ever wonder how it is that a curveball or slider in baseball "knows" exactly to go 58-59 feet before it breaks over the plate. Fascinating that it works out that way, with the occasional one bounced into the dirt.
- Why is it that boxes of Funny Bones have only 10 cakes in it, while Yankee Doodles and others have 12. I'd like some consistency in my packaging from the good people at Drake's. Of course, we want more per box, not less.
- Next, we have the case of a justice of the peace in Louisiana who refused to grant a marriage license to an interracial couple. He swears he's not a racist, and but blithely offered up a defense of "these marriages don't last", along with "I was worried about the kids". Here's a fun fact for the clueless justice - worry about your own children figuring out you really are a racist. I'd hazard a guess that it's not a surprise to them. Of course, he wants to remain on the job and thinks nothing wrong of his refusal to honor the request. Well, according to Louisiana law, you do not get to decide whom to give a license to or not. Much like the pharmacists who cite personal religious beliefs in not providing contraception to customers, this is decidedly simple: If your beliefs interfere with your ability to do the job as it is called for and legally required, get another job. Case closed.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
On Politics 10/15/09: The Ricochet Of Words
In attempting to embody the dream of many a football fan, Rush Limbaugh, the conservative radio host, firebrand, and self-appointed demagogue, was part of a consortium attempting to bid on purchasing the St. Louis Rams of the National Football League. By all accounts, Rush is an avid sportsfan, who enjoys football as his favorite pastime, and was eager to join what is one of America's more private clubs, that of the thirty-two owners on NFL franchises.
However, Rush's participation in the ownership group became extremely tenuous almost immediately, after the recollection by various players of the comments he has previously has made regarding certain players and teams. In 2003, ESPN decided that they wanted a little controversy, some additional outlandishness on it's pregame program, so they brought Limbaugh on board. Well folks, you get what you pay for. Shortly into his tenure, Rush criticized the media for, in his opinion, glorifying the exploits of Eagles QB Donovan McNabb, for no other reason than to elevate a black quarterback as successful. After his affiliation with ESPN had ended, Limbaugh went on to state that a game between the Patriots & Chargers looked like a game between the Bloods and Crips without the weapons (for the uninitiated out there, these are rival gangs originally from California who have migrated across the country, identified by the colors red & blue).
In this day and age of media overexposure, Rush became fatally wounded by the ricochet of his words. Players began to speak publicly of their vows never to play a game for any team that Limbaugh was an owner of. I think it fair to state that if some players were willing to state this on the record, in print and on TV, that the actual clamor in the locker room was even move voluble.
Predictably, Limbaugh has gone on to proclaim himself a victim of reverse racism, left-wing haters, and so on & so forth. I believe Rush has every right to spew whatever hatred he has dreamed up for his daily broadcast to the Dittoheads. It's certainly his misguided right (pun not intended). It's akin to the lesson I am continually trying to teach the beloved children: When you do something wrong, you have no idea when, where, or how it will come back to haunt you, or what else in your life it will affect.
It appears Mr. Limbaugh just found out one way that it does.
However, Rush's participation in the ownership group became extremely tenuous almost immediately, after the recollection by various players of the comments he has previously has made regarding certain players and teams. In 2003, ESPN decided that they wanted a little controversy, some additional outlandishness on it's pregame program, so they brought Limbaugh on board. Well folks, you get what you pay for. Shortly into his tenure, Rush criticized the media for, in his opinion, glorifying the exploits of Eagles QB Donovan McNabb, for no other reason than to elevate a black quarterback as successful. After his affiliation with ESPN had ended, Limbaugh went on to state that a game between the Patriots & Chargers looked like a game between the Bloods and Crips without the weapons (for the uninitiated out there, these are rival gangs originally from California who have migrated across the country, identified by the colors red & blue).
In this day and age of media overexposure, Rush became fatally wounded by the ricochet of his words. Players began to speak publicly of their vows never to play a game for any team that Limbaugh was an owner of. I think it fair to state that if some players were willing to state this on the record, in print and on TV, that the actual clamor in the locker room was even move voluble.
Predictably, Limbaugh has gone on to proclaim himself a victim of reverse racism, left-wing haters, and so on & so forth. I believe Rush has every right to spew whatever hatred he has dreamed up for his daily broadcast to the Dittoheads. It's certainly his misguided right (pun not intended). It's akin to the lesson I am continually trying to teach the beloved children: When you do something wrong, you have no idea when, where, or how it will come back to haunt you, or what else in your life it will affect.
It appears Mr. Limbaugh just found out one way that it does.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
On Politics 10/13/09: Scary Numbers
It's October; or "Rocktober", depending on your radio station of choice. Ghouls and goblins abound, and costumes and masks are the order of the season. The month where scary is king, and frightening people is usually perfectly acceptable. Except for this: The Town of Beekman has announced a preliminary budget which includes a possible tax increase of 26.5%.
Quite possibly, the scariest and most frightening thing I've ever heard of.
Now, preliminary does not equate to to final, but the fear of large numbers remain. Nevermind the dreaded double-digit tax increase, that causes the bravest of citizens to quake. In this proposal we have a full quarter of the current tax levy as an increase, plus an additional 1.5% on top of that, your very own costly cherry on the tax bill sundae if you will.
There's a public meeting this evening at Beekman Town Hall, which I'm sure will be well attended. Perhaps we'll be able to convert the misguided tea party attendees into extras from the old Frankenstein movies, complete with the torches and shouting chasing after the tax monster. We have that single, unifying, cuts-across-all-party-lines event, a we-shall-fight-them-on-the-beaches-and-in-the-streets-moment, the I'm-just-as-mad-as-hell-as-you-are scenario, the imminent threat of more money leaving our pockets.
Truly, a great equalizer.
Quite possibly, the scariest and most frightening thing I've ever heard of.
Now, preliminary does not equate to to final, but the fear of large numbers remain. Nevermind the dreaded double-digit tax increase, that causes the bravest of citizens to quake. In this proposal we have a full quarter of the current tax levy as an increase, plus an additional 1.5% on top of that, your very own costly cherry on the tax bill sundae if you will.
There's a public meeting this evening at Beekman Town Hall, which I'm sure will be well attended. Perhaps we'll be able to convert the misguided tea party attendees into extras from the old Frankenstein movies, complete with the torches and shouting chasing after the tax monster. We have that single, unifying, cuts-across-all-party-lines event, a we-shall-fight-them-on-the-beaches-and-in-the-streets-moment, the I'm-just-as-mad-as-hell-as-you-are scenario, the imminent threat of more money leaving our pockets.
Truly, a great equalizer.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
On Politics 10/7/09: Fall Planting Has Begun
Yes, it's that time of year, again. In golf, they refer to this period of time, each October through January, as the "silly season". For me, that's not what makes October and November part of the silly season. Rather, it's the appearance of that most unusual fungi of all, the political candidate sign.
Now, as I've previously written on this subject, it's bad enough that my mailbox becomes inundated with the various postcards, flyers, leaflets, etc. that are mass produced in some dungeon or factory, who's proprietor must gleefully watch the machines turning out the same identical frozen smile of the candidate, usually with perfect white teeth and expertly coiffed hair, nary a strand out of place. Just today, I received such a missive from "Team Beekman", who were lovingly and glossily captured in a group photo at town hall and transferred onto a thick, heavy postcard for residents to receive. While resisting the urge to immediately place it in the "circular file", I wondered to myself how long will it be before they place those mocking words from the old computer punch cards: Do not fold, spindle, or mutilate. That won't stop me, after completing the review of the material. Come to think of it, does anything other document have a shorter lifespan once it's in the hands of the intended audience?
Yet, in addition to that, we now have the modern-day equivalent of the Biblical plagues, the campaign sign on the corners. I live on a block where it's hard enough to peek around the foliage to see if someone is speeding down the hill in their car, threatening to decapitate the remaining Kraft bloodline. In the silly season, we'll now have to negotiate signage that encumbers our view as well. It's not as if they even bother to ask my neighbors if they can put up the signs before they do so. In the political version of the miracle of Christ's birth, we will now witness these wood and cardboard creations appear, fully grown, without a seed from which to have been sprung from. I only wish our yearly effort at tomato plants were so instantly fulfilled.
I think we should tag along with the approach some municipalities are doing with holiday season decorations. Pick out a public piece of land, put all of the signs there, make them uniform in height and size (they're already all red, white, and blue in color - yes, we get the point you're all patriotic), and stick them there. Perhaps the "sign garden" will become a pleasing visual to those who pass; perhaps not.
What I do know is that it's a far better thing than to see it on every corner.
Now, as I've previously written on this subject, it's bad enough that my mailbox becomes inundated with the various postcards, flyers, leaflets, etc. that are mass produced in some dungeon or factory, who's proprietor must gleefully watch the machines turning out the same identical frozen smile of the candidate, usually with perfect white teeth and expertly coiffed hair, nary a strand out of place. Just today, I received such a missive from "Team Beekman", who were lovingly and glossily captured in a group photo at town hall and transferred onto a thick, heavy postcard for residents to receive. While resisting the urge to immediately place it in the "circular file", I wondered to myself how long will it be before they place those mocking words from the old computer punch cards: Do not fold, spindle, or mutilate. That won't stop me, after completing the review of the material. Come to think of it, does anything other document have a shorter lifespan once it's in the hands of the intended audience?
Yet, in addition to that, we now have the modern-day equivalent of the Biblical plagues, the campaign sign on the corners. I live on a block where it's hard enough to peek around the foliage to see if someone is speeding down the hill in their car, threatening to decapitate the remaining Kraft bloodline. In the silly season, we'll now have to negotiate signage that encumbers our view as well. It's not as if they even bother to ask my neighbors if they can put up the signs before they do so. In the political version of the miracle of Christ's birth, we will now witness these wood and cardboard creations appear, fully grown, without a seed from which to have been sprung from. I only wish our yearly effort at tomato plants were so instantly fulfilled.
I think we should tag along with the approach some municipalities are doing with holiday season decorations. Pick out a public piece of land, put all of the signs there, make them uniform in height and size (they're already all red, white, and blue in color - yes, we get the point you're all patriotic), and stick them there. Perhaps the "sign garden" will become a pleasing visual to those who pass; perhaps not.
What I do know is that it's a far better thing than to see it on every corner.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
On Politics 10/4/09: Tenor & Tone
In the movie "Top Gun", Tom Cruise's character Maverick reacts when his fire-control system locks onto a target by exclaiming "I've got tone!" He then proceeds to launch an air-to-air missile which explodes his target into a fiery ball. The lovely Kathy occasionally looks at me when I am speaking at our beloved children to remind me that I am acquiring a "tone" in my discussion with the kids. Just another number in my legion of faults :-).
Recently, there has been much discussion regarding the current tenor and tone of our political debate. From multi-Pulitzer Prize winner Tom Friedman's piece on comparing the current political climate to the one that preceded the assassination of Yithzak Rabin in Israel in the 90's to the incessant chatter of various talking heads on cable news, it's become the latest flashpoint of argument for American citizens. I've broached it a couple of times myself in previous blog entries.
The vitriol does seem to be the most strident I can remember. Growing up, my first recollections with televised memories were the daily body count figures on the national evening news (we were always a NYC channel 7 family; interesting, isn't it, that families followed one channel for the news, and weren't you always surprised when you went to someone else's house and they didn't follow the same one?), I was not young enough to understand why the protesters were in the street, other than to ask my conservative parents who they were, with the expected disclaimer as to the protesters support of America as their response. As I grew older, I remember learning more on my own about what was happening. We then moved through the laissez faire of the 70's, then into the resurgent 80's, where the most common insult was if Reagan was really acting or did he think really understand he was the President. The 80's begat the 90's, television became cable or satellite TV, "Crossfire" and "The Morton Downey Show" became a thousand other shouting matches, and things got more heated. However, never once did I see armed people attending a President's speech, or the President's face become Hitler-ized.
I do believe it's worse, and surely not for the better. Bitter births anger, resentment delivers hate, and dreams of violence construct attacks in reality. Would you be surprised if something egregious were to happen now?
How could you be?
Recently, there has been much discussion regarding the current tenor and tone of our political debate. From multi-Pulitzer Prize winner Tom Friedman's piece on comparing the current political climate to the one that preceded the assassination of Yithzak Rabin in Israel in the 90's to the incessant chatter of various talking heads on cable news, it's become the latest flashpoint of argument for American citizens. I've broached it a couple of times myself in previous blog entries.
The vitriol does seem to be the most strident I can remember. Growing up, my first recollections with televised memories were the daily body count figures on the national evening news (we were always a NYC channel 7 family; interesting, isn't it, that families followed one channel for the news, and weren't you always surprised when you went to someone else's house and they didn't follow the same one?), I was not young enough to understand why the protesters were in the street, other than to ask my conservative parents who they were, with the expected disclaimer as to the protesters support of America as their response. As I grew older, I remember learning more on my own about what was happening. We then moved through the laissez faire of the 70's, then into the resurgent 80's, where the most common insult was if Reagan was really acting or did he think really understand he was the President. The 80's begat the 90's, television became cable or satellite TV, "Crossfire" and "The Morton Downey Show" became a thousand other shouting matches, and things got more heated. However, never once did I see armed people attending a President's speech, or the President's face become Hitler-ized.
I do believe it's worse, and surely not for the better. Bitter births anger, resentment delivers hate, and dreams of violence construct attacks in reality. Would you be surprised if something egregious were to happen now?
How could you be?
Friday, October 2, 2009
On Politics 10/2/09: Painful Yes, But Necessary
I am, on principle and action, loathe to enforce voluntary decisions as mandatory onto individuals. I hate being told what to do, even if it is correct, since I am somehow imbued with a fiercely stubborn I-am-smarter-than-you streak, however typically erroneous that may prove to be. No, I am not blaming you for this Mom and Dad, so please hold the angry e-mails from Florida.
However, a recent ongoing crisis in the area of the don't-tell-me-what-to-do-with-my-body arena has caught my attention. Some local health care workers are refusing the directives from our area hospitals that these employees receive a flu shot for the forthcoming influenza season. Mild protests have risen up, but not all of the staff members are resisting this request, and are not joining their disagreeing brethren in this revolt.
On the surface, this would seem to be rather straightforward - you work for an entity that gives you a business mandate; comply or risk losing your job. On one hand, the issue becomes murkier because of the lack of available resources for hospitals and medical establishments, while on the other hand it's disconcertingly illuminating that some professionals in the field are leery of inoculation (they just have that same stubborn gene as me).
In this particular scenario, I do think the hospitals and healthcare centers are in the right. Beyond the civil liberties aspect of this protest, why wouldn't someone who will be in direct, physical contact with people ill with a disease be resisting a safeguard against it? As our first line of defense against the spread of the "normal" flu and the omnipresent, looming specter of the more dangerous swine flu, the public health aspect of this issue takes precedence. We cannot have people refusing the orders of their employers designed to keep themselves, and all of us, safer during a health crisis.
It's painful, but necessary.
However, a recent ongoing crisis in the area of the don't-tell-me-what-to-do-with-my-body arena has caught my attention. Some local health care workers are refusing the directives from our area hospitals that these employees receive a flu shot for the forthcoming influenza season. Mild protests have risen up, but not all of the staff members are resisting this request, and are not joining their disagreeing brethren in this revolt.
On the surface, this would seem to be rather straightforward - you work for an entity that gives you a business mandate; comply or risk losing your job. On one hand, the issue becomes murkier because of the lack of available resources for hospitals and medical establishments, while on the other hand it's disconcertingly illuminating that some professionals in the field are leery of inoculation (they just have that same stubborn gene as me).
In this particular scenario, I do think the hospitals and healthcare centers are in the right. Beyond the civil liberties aspect of this protest, why wouldn't someone who will be in direct, physical contact with people ill with a disease be resisting a safeguard against it? As our first line of defense against the spread of the "normal" flu and the omnipresent, looming specter of the more dangerous swine flu, the public health aspect of this issue takes precedence. We cannot have people refusing the orders of their employers designed to keep themselves, and all of us, safer during a health crisis.
It's painful, but necessary.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
