Sorry for the delay in posts everyone; it was the week from Hell at work. You always hope the shortened Holiday work week will be slow, but it was just not meant to be. However, now I have a few free minutes to offload the variety of thoughts bouncing around the ol' cranium. So, without further ado, and ably aided by some fresh Yankee Doodles & milk, away we go...
- I heard an advertisement of the radio today for something called the iTalk talking alarm clock. Apparently, it has voice recognition capabilities, so you can tell it to turn the alarm on/off, snooze, set the time correctly, etc. My only question for this fine piece of new technology would be what will it do when it goes off at the appointed hour and you reply with your standard, I-don't-want-to-get up response of @#$)$*#$#*)#$*)#$*#)*%)~*%#@~!!!!!. Will it self-destruct if cursed?
- President Obama has now been provided his first opportunity for selection of a Supreme Court nominee, and not for the seat he thought most likely to become vacant (Judge Stevens), but instead that of Judge Souter. The President has decided on Federal Magistrate Sonia Sotomayor, and the confirmation process will begin in earnest shortly. Already, the various factions have staked out their pro/con positions, and the judge's record has been scrutinized for every decisions, debate, and declarative sentence ever spoken. As it has since the time of Robert Bork, the debate will invariably center on one sentence, either written or spoken, out of literally thousands of such utterances. After that, we'll be treated to the sight of Judge Sotomayor testifying in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, where she, like all recent nominees, will speak but take no positions on hot button issues. Enjoy the tea leaves reading everyone.
- The Arlington Central School District is reporting it's first case of swine flu, and, most importantly, that the student afflicted is making a full recovery. However, the ACSD leadership is choosing not to make the student's name public, nor the school the pupil attends. I agree with the former, but not the latter. Privacy for the child is understandable, but not informing district parents of the school where the H1N1 was present is far less so. Given the public health crisis surrounding H1N1, it would be prudent to inform parents in order to facilitate discretionary actions by family, including keeping children at home. Why is it that every bureaucracy, local or otherwise, treats in constituents like idiots? Give people the information that you yourself would want to know Mr. Pepe. If it means you have to close a school for a few days to make absolutely sure all is well, then bite the bullet and do it.
- On Friday, a single share of General Motors common stock could be purchased for $0.75 . That's seventy-five cents for one share of what was once considered to be the bellwether of American business might, and the company that was always thought of as too big to ever fail. Well, so much for the stability of a business that makes things that move. Tough to watch it happen, tougher still to see the current UAW workers sell out their retirement brethren, by making concessions on various health care benefits for the retired folks. Instead of honoring those who came before you and built GM into what it once was, let's screw the old-timers by by sacrificing their benefits so we can keep our job at a company that will now be a subsidiary of the U.S. government with lowered wages. A Faustian bargain, at best.
- It's become desperately bad on TV when Billy Mays, annoying pitchman extraordinaire, now has his own reality show. We get to see inventors and inventions of various stripes come forward, while Billy decides which ones he will scream in favor of on those incessant ads of his. Who ever thought we'd see Billy worry about which gadget would be proper for his persona to be involved with. Yikes.
- Took the family to Citi Field to watch the beloved Mets play Friday night. If you get the chance, go. It's hard to believe a place that nice, with all those things for kids to do (whiffle ball field, video games, dunk tank), with all those places to eat ( Shake Shack, Blue Smoke, Catch of the Day, etc.), with all those roomy seats angled towards home plate, with all the workers being so friendly, is now the Mets home. It's about damn time.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Sunday, May 24, 2009
On Politics 5/24/09: An Unfair Fight
On this Memorial Day eve, we are witness to a full-fledged battle brewing right before our very eyes. Not Iraq, not Afghanistan, not some recreation of some historical combat, but a rather peculiar domestic conflict, live on television and radio. Of what do I write?
Why, it's none other than the heavyweight fight for control of the Republican Party. On one side we have the retired four-star General, previous Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, former Secretary of State, Colin Powell. On the other side, we have a tag team that only the immortal Professor Taru Tanaka & Mr. Fuji of WWF fame could like, the "Doomsday Duo" themselves, Dick Cheney and Rush Limbaugh. Let's take a closer look at the participants, shall we?
Why, it's none other than the heavyweight fight for control of the Republican Party. On one side we have the retired four-star General, previous Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, former Secretary of State, Colin Powell. On the other side, we have a tag team that only the immortal Professor Taru Tanaka & Mr. Fuji of WWF fame could like, the "Doomsday Duo" themselves, Dick Cheney and Rush Limbaugh. Let's take a closer look at the participants, shall we?
- Colin Powell, the man who should be President, universally well-regarded as soldier and statesman, a most reasoned voice amidst the current cannibalism engulfing the party of Reagan.
- Dick Cheney, finally emerged from his eight long years in the secure undisclosed location, a.k.a the basement of the VP's residence (thanks Joe Biden), the man who would not speak who now can't stop talking, owner of the world's most famous and irritating smirk, and leading all elected officials in draft deferments.
- Rush Limbaugh, the self-proclaimed most important man in radio, the one who sits in judgement of all that is deemed to be "right" (pun heavily intended), and owner/operator of the EIB, the "Ego In Broadcasting" operation.
The current conflagration is a result of Mr. Powell declaring that the Elephant team has become too narrow, a party of extremists, a group of exclusion rather than inclusion. Judging by the recent election results, you would think that this is fairly obvious. However, the Doomsday Duo's response is to declare Powell a sinner of the worst sort for them, a Democrat!
From afar and here in the center, I get the feeling that the Duo would rather be the big fish in a little pond, instead of the smaller fish in a bigger pond. That approach is surely fine, as long as you fully understand the ramifications of that existence. Following their logic would ensure being the minority party for years to come, but Dick can smirk and Russ can puff his cigars all the while.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
On Politics 5/19/09: Just Vote No, Again
It's a different year, with the same storyline. Another faulty budget, another recommendation from one taxpayer to all the others to reject it.
As discussed and written about it the past, the Arlington Central School District continues to move forward, year after year, with repetitive budget increases. I cannot begin to fathom how Mr. Pepe, et al, sit in their meetings, debate the situation, and arrive at the conclusion that an increase in taxes for the communities they exist in is a proper solution for the forthcoming school year. Worse yet, the so-called contingency budget in the event of appropriate action by the overtaxed voting public is barely less than the regular budget.
Herein lies the most grievous judgemental error that I find. Unless you're leftover from the 1950s and you've just crawled out of your backyard bomb shelter (cue the bad Brendan Fraser movie), one must realize that there is a terrific potential for the recession-beaten men and women of the ASCD taxpaying community to reject anything that adds a single dollar to their current government subtraction. Yet, the ACSD has chosen to slyly make the contingency a few mere percentage points in differential from it's approved one. Now, you can call that ignorance, which I would hope is not the case for such learned people. You could call it a mathematical equation error, but out of all the people who look at the budget figures, I suspect someone can add and subtract correctly. You can call it, as I do, unfettered arrogance, i.e. "they'll approve it, they always do".
In times of difficulty and challenges, leaders succeed understanding the situation the people they represent, sympathizing with their plight, and offering hope for an improved future. What they don't do is help to make a bad situation worse.
P.S. You can start saving money for your budget increase by repaying the material and labor involved in the creation of those little yellow school buses I've seen sprout up in various intersections across the district. Bad enough you badger the kids to tell their parents to vote yes; now you've expanded your advertising campaign by having these items made, I suspect, somewhere in a ACSD-sponsored activity. Perhaps these buses are self-creating and magically appearing; somehow, I doubt it.
As discussed and written about it the past, the Arlington Central School District continues to move forward, year after year, with repetitive budget increases. I cannot begin to fathom how Mr. Pepe, et al, sit in their meetings, debate the situation, and arrive at the conclusion that an increase in taxes for the communities they exist in is a proper solution for the forthcoming school year. Worse yet, the so-called contingency budget in the event of appropriate action by the overtaxed voting public is barely less than the regular budget.
Herein lies the most grievous judgemental error that I find. Unless you're leftover from the 1950s and you've just crawled out of your backyard bomb shelter (cue the bad Brendan Fraser movie), one must realize that there is a terrific potential for the recession-beaten men and women of the ASCD taxpaying community to reject anything that adds a single dollar to their current government subtraction. Yet, the ACSD has chosen to slyly make the contingency a few mere percentage points in differential from it's approved one. Now, you can call that ignorance, which I would hope is not the case for such learned people. You could call it a mathematical equation error, but out of all the people who look at the budget figures, I suspect someone can add and subtract correctly. You can call it, as I do, unfettered arrogance, i.e. "they'll approve it, they always do".
In times of difficulty and challenges, leaders succeed understanding the situation the people they represent, sympathizing with their plight, and offering hope for an improved future. What they don't do is help to make a bad situation worse.
P.S. You can start saving money for your budget increase by repaying the material and labor involved in the creation of those little yellow school buses I've seen sprout up in various intersections across the district. Bad enough you badger the kids to tell their parents to vote yes; now you've expanded your advertising campaign by having these items made, I suspect, somewhere in a ACSD-sponsored activity. Perhaps these buses are self-creating and magically appearing; somehow, I doubt it.
Saturday, May 16, 2009
On Politics 5/16/09: Cheer, Cheer For Old Notre Dame
I've known most of the words since I was a child. It comes from being reared on watching every football game possible (still, to this day), then the now arcane condensed game replays, repeated over the weekend and into the following week, narrated with the voice of the great Lindsay Nelson, who would solemnly note that "we now move ahead to further action later in the quarter".
Ah, those words, that music...
"Cheer, cheer for Old Notre Dame, Wake up the echoes cheering her name, Send a volley cheer on high, Shake down the thunder from the sky!"
I offer that excerpt from America's greatest college fight song (sorry Michigan fans, it's true) in praise today not of an athletic achievement, but one of academic integrity. The administration of America's premier Catholic university has, as part of an ongoing tradition of political speakers, invited President Obama to give the commencement address tomorrow, causing the wholly expected instantly flammable reaction from various people and groups, all shouting to be the loudest voice heard, in their supposed defense of the religion. The argument from all is the same: How can a Catholic University allow a pro-choice supporter speak at the graduation ceremony? The invective unleashed by the Messianic hordes range from blasphemy to school-sponsored sin being committed live, in front of all the graduates. Kudos to Father Jenkins, leader of Notre Dame, for not caving into the whines and protestations of his brethren priests & bishops, nor the shrill voices in the wilderness, like the oft-annoying, self-appointed arbiter Bill Donohue of the Catholic League.
Perhaps the shouters fail to recognize that the school, in its long and distinguished educational history, has hosted other political figures not perfectly in tune with the university's faith based value system, including, famously, Mario Cuomo in 1984, who gave what is considered to be the finest speech of his gifted oratorical career. Cuomo, the man who could never seem to summon the courage to be President, walked into the lion's den of American Catholicism (overt historical reference/pun) as a free choice supporting politician and delivered the goods, a speech still recognized today after 25 years as the preeminent one of his life.
It is the duty of educational institutions in the United States to offer conflicting views and positions, even for those founded on the particulars of a certain religion. Some may not know this, but students of many different faiths and political views, including pro-choice positions, attend Notre Dame, simply because it is rightly recognized as one of the country's foremost academic institutions. Thus, a variety of instructors and speakers should match the diversity of the student body. Any school's integrity would be ruined, not to mention impugning the quality of its' curriculum, by taking a stance otherwise.
As I prepare for an angry e-mail from my beloved father on this position, I'm trying to find out if this is being broadcast anywhere. I'm most curious to see how this goes.
Ah, those words, that music...
"Cheer, cheer for Old Notre Dame, Wake up the echoes cheering her name, Send a volley cheer on high, Shake down the thunder from the sky!"
I offer that excerpt from America's greatest college fight song (sorry Michigan fans, it's true) in praise today not of an athletic achievement, but one of academic integrity. The administration of America's premier Catholic university has, as part of an ongoing tradition of political speakers, invited President Obama to give the commencement address tomorrow, causing the wholly expected instantly flammable reaction from various people and groups, all shouting to be the loudest voice heard, in their supposed defense of the religion. The argument from all is the same: How can a Catholic University allow a pro-choice supporter speak at the graduation ceremony? The invective unleashed by the Messianic hordes range from blasphemy to school-sponsored sin being committed live, in front of all the graduates. Kudos to Father Jenkins, leader of Notre Dame, for not caving into the whines and protestations of his brethren priests & bishops, nor the shrill voices in the wilderness, like the oft-annoying, self-appointed arbiter Bill Donohue of the Catholic League.
Perhaps the shouters fail to recognize that the school, in its long and distinguished educational history, has hosted other political figures not perfectly in tune with the university's faith based value system, including, famously, Mario Cuomo in 1984, who gave what is considered to be the finest speech of his gifted oratorical career. Cuomo, the man who could never seem to summon the courage to be President, walked into the lion's den of American Catholicism (overt historical reference/pun) as a free choice supporting politician and delivered the goods, a speech still recognized today after 25 years as the preeminent one of his life.
It is the duty of educational institutions in the United States to offer conflicting views and positions, even for those founded on the particulars of a certain religion. Some may not know this, but students of many different faiths and political views, including pro-choice positions, attend Notre Dame, simply because it is rightly recognized as one of the country's foremost academic institutions. Thus, a variety of instructors and speakers should match the diversity of the student body. Any school's integrity would be ruined, not to mention impugning the quality of its' curriculum, by taking a stance otherwise.
As I prepare for an angry e-mail from my beloved father on this position, I'm trying to find out if this is being broadcast anywhere. I'm most curious to see how this goes.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
On Politics 5/14/09: Magic, 350 Miles Up
It may seem an odd juxtaposition here in the blog; combining our space program and politics. However, like most things in life, some commonality and linkage does exist.
Over the past two days, I've watched with a combination of awe, fascination, and a slight degree of fear as our astronauts have flown the space shuttle in rescue of the Hubble Space Telescope on the NASA TV channel, successfully grabbed it ("grapple", in the weird vocabulary of NASA missions), and tethered it to the shuttle's bay for repair. You probably have the NASA channel on your local cable or satellite provider, lost in the hundreds (literally) of other channels that you never watch and routinely bypass. Is there anyone who watches more than 10-15 of their channels on a regular basis? But, I digress.
It is immediately evident, listening and watching yesterday's precision shuttle approach, acquisition of the HST (the telescope), and today's careful execution of the step-by-step plan for the astronauts first "EVA" (that's spacewalk to you and me) the amount of planning and rehearsal that has gone into this effort. In installing the replacement camera today, their protocol even calls for how many full turns of the wrench tool they should be doing to secure it. Very, very impressive stuff. All of this, while traveling about 17,500 miles per hour around the Earth. It brings a whole new meaning to "don't look down".
The political piece of all this is the ongoing funding requirements for NASA. In our current economic difficulties, much is made how we need to fix what is wrong with our country first, whether it be the banking system, our ending of poverty and hunger in the most prosperous country in the world, or curing any number of diseases that endanger us. All are valid positions and arguments, passionately espoused by ardent activists for their respective causes.
My answer is this: Space exploration is one of those rare things that advances all of mankind, not just our country. The now standard everyday items that have been developed and implemented as a result of previous space exploration are too numerous to mention (Dolby sound reduction technology is a biggie for me). Besides that, is there a time, other than the darkest days of the Middle Ages, where human advancements stopped? I believe that it is more important in the most difficult of times to continue to move forward with technological improvements or humankind adventures. Progress inexorably moves on, taking the rest of us, willingly or not, along with it.
If nothing else, this is just way cool stuff :-).
Over the past two days, I've watched with a combination of awe, fascination, and a slight degree of fear as our astronauts have flown the space shuttle in rescue of the Hubble Space Telescope on the NASA TV channel, successfully grabbed it ("grapple", in the weird vocabulary of NASA missions), and tethered it to the shuttle's bay for repair. You probably have the NASA channel on your local cable or satellite provider, lost in the hundreds (literally) of other channels that you never watch and routinely bypass. Is there anyone who watches more than 10-15 of their channels on a regular basis? But, I digress.
It is immediately evident, listening and watching yesterday's precision shuttle approach, acquisition of the HST (the telescope), and today's careful execution of the step-by-step plan for the astronauts first "EVA" (that's spacewalk to you and me) the amount of planning and rehearsal that has gone into this effort. In installing the replacement camera today, their protocol even calls for how many full turns of the wrench tool they should be doing to secure it. Very, very impressive stuff. All of this, while traveling about 17,500 miles per hour around the Earth. It brings a whole new meaning to "don't look down".
The political piece of all this is the ongoing funding requirements for NASA. In our current economic difficulties, much is made how we need to fix what is wrong with our country first, whether it be the banking system, our ending of poverty and hunger in the most prosperous country in the world, or curing any number of diseases that endanger us. All are valid positions and arguments, passionately espoused by ardent activists for their respective causes.
My answer is this: Space exploration is one of those rare things that advances all of mankind, not just our country. The now standard everyday items that have been developed and implemented as a result of previous space exploration are too numerous to mention (Dolby sound reduction technology is a biggie for me). Besides that, is there a time, other than the darkest days of the Middle Ages, where human advancements stopped? I believe that it is more important in the most difficult of times to continue to move forward with technological improvements or humankind adventures. Progress inexorably moves on, taking the rest of us, willingly or not, along with it.
If nothing else, this is just way cool stuff :-).
Sunday, May 10, 2009
On Politics 5/10/09: The Sinful Politics Of the Church
The Mother's Day Mass at St. Denis Church was delightfully well done. The homily regarding what Mother's Day meant to the priest was insightful, personal, and poignant. The cantor was terrific, especially so during a post-Communion rendering of "Ave Maria", utilizing her amazing voice to entrance the attendees through the sheer power of the instrument. The blessing of all the mothers, asked to stand for identification and acknowledgement, then each presented with a single red rose from the parish, was a perfect ending to the event. All in all, one of the better hours recently spent in the pews. Even the typically horrific children's choir was almost endurable; almost.
Surprisingly, we were asked to all remain seated at the conclusion of the rose dispersal. The priest said he had another brief announcement that had to be given. What, after this all-to-rare enjoyable service, could this be? Some other recognition or moment in praise of mothers?
Not in this lifetime.
We were subsequently treated to a series of instructions / requests / directions, loosely referred to as something for our awareness as Catholics, about the Church's opposition to the so-called Markey law being proposed in New York State . For those who do not know, this piece of legislation is about extending the current statue of limitations for those victimized by clergy and other members of non-profit organizations to seek financial redress. Fr. Tom, the weekend associate celebrating the Mass, gave us the nuts and bolts about how wrong touching the altar servers was, and that we should know this would be unfair to all organizations, including the Church, so all good communicants should be outraged at this possibility. Why, the Church has even made it easier for you to protest, by simply clicking on an icon on the web site, where you will be able to fill in a form and send it on. It's so easy; even the evil legislator's address information is done for you. I'm not sure if they include emoticons with horns and a tail to attach to her picture, but it wouldn't surprise me.
As once famously stated, when they tell you it's not about the money, it's ALWAYS about the money. Is there anyone out there who cannot see through the fog of incense or shower of holy water that this isn't about the money? What has the Church quaking in its' collective vestments is that their former patron saint of sacrilege in Albany, Mr. Bruno, is now out of power, where he cannot serve as the holy human roadblock against passage of this bill. Therefore, bereft of his assistance in denying the opportunity of compensation for the victims of pedophilia, the Church has chosen to strong-arm its' parishioners into a pseudo political action committee to stop the law from becoming a reality. Forget the speaking-in- tongues explanation being promoted from the pulpit about creating unfair precedent or the potential hardships if the bill is passed; the simple short unspoken reasoning was plain to hear. If this gets through, more people sue the Church, and more money will have to be paid out.
Reminder #1: IF THE PRIESTS HADN'T MOLESTED THE KIDS, THIS WOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM.
Reminder #2: IF YOU CAN'T DO THE TIME OR PAY FOR THE LAWSUITS, DON'T DO THE CRIME OR HIDE THE PEDOPHILES.
A beautiful Mass, a wondrous feeling in the building bought on by song and collective awareness of all that our mothers mean to us, for everything they do or have done, was tarnished, ruined, and horrifically dissipated by a plea to protect the Church from paying any more monies in lost lawsuits. How someone of leadership in the Archdiocese of New York (guilty until proven innocent, for this smacked of an official instruction) thought that it was appropriate to put this forth on Mother's Day showed an almost impossible to believe lack of sensitivity, or perhaps, more accurately, a blatant disregard for all else that was occurring in their parishes today, with the fear of further financial fallout being the overriding concern.
I believe the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother to us all, would herself have been appalled at this.
Surprisingly, we were asked to all remain seated at the conclusion of the rose dispersal. The priest said he had another brief announcement that had to be given. What, after this all-to-rare enjoyable service, could this be? Some other recognition or moment in praise of mothers?
Not in this lifetime.
We were subsequently treated to a series of instructions / requests / directions, loosely referred to as something for our awareness as Catholics, about the Church's opposition to the so-called Markey law being proposed in New York State . For those who do not know, this piece of legislation is about extending the current statue of limitations for those victimized by clergy and other members of non-profit organizations to seek financial redress. Fr. Tom, the weekend associate celebrating the Mass, gave us the nuts and bolts about how wrong touching the altar servers was, and that we should know this would be unfair to all organizations, including the Church, so all good communicants should be outraged at this possibility. Why, the Church has even made it easier for you to protest, by simply clicking on an icon on the web site, where you will be able to fill in a form and send it on. It's so easy; even the evil legislator's address information is done for you. I'm not sure if they include emoticons with horns and a tail to attach to her picture, but it wouldn't surprise me.
As once famously stated, when they tell you it's not about the money, it's ALWAYS about the money. Is there anyone out there who cannot see through the fog of incense or shower of holy water that this isn't about the money? What has the Church quaking in its' collective vestments is that their former patron saint of sacrilege in Albany, Mr. Bruno, is now out of power, where he cannot serve as the holy human roadblock against passage of this bill. Therefore, bereft of his assistance in denying the opportunity of compensation for the victims of pedophilia, the Church has chosen to strong-arm its' parishioners into a pseudo political action committee to stop the law from becoming a reality. Forget the speaking-in- tongues explanation being promoted from the pulpit about creating unfair precedent or the potential hardships if the bill is passed; the simple short unspoken reasoning was plain to hear. If this gets through, more people sue the Church, and more money will have to be paid out.
Reminder #1: IF THE PRIESTS HADN'T MOLESTED THE KIDS, THIS WOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM.
Reminder #2: IF YOU CAN'T DO THE TIME OR PAY FOR THE LAWSUITS, DON'T DO THE CRIME OR HIDE THE PEDOPHILES.
A beautiful Mass, a wondrous feeling in the building bought on by song and collective awareness of all that our mothers mean to us, for everything they do or have done, was tarnished, ruined, and horrifically dissipated by a plea to protect the Church from paying any more monies in lost lawsuits. How someone of leadership in the Archdiocese of New York (guilty until proven innocent, for this smacked of an official instruction) thought that it was appropriate to put this forth on Mother's Day showed an almost impossible to believe lack of sensitivity, or perhaps, more accurately, a blatant disregard for all else that was occurring in their parishes today, with the fear of further financial fallout being the overriding concern.
I believe the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother to us all, would herself have been appalled at this.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
On Politics 5/7/09: An Albany Abomination
When I moved from beloved New Jersey to New York in the fall of 1988 due to work, I did so having heard from my friends that NY was the land of taxes. I thought to myself, how bad could it be?
Unfortunately, I soon found out. More unfortunately, I keep finding out more, even 21 years later.
It's rare for me to point others to another source of opinion or argument (one the many difficulties of egomania). However, on the occasion of the rancid MTA bailout announcement, a.k.a. the "Save The Trains, Screw The People of Dutchess County" agreement struck by our supposed leaders in Albany, I heartily encourage all of you to read the Thursday editorial in the Poughkeepsie Journal. The angry tone, salient points, and pertinent examples of the blatantly imbalanced deal to help the MTA out of its' latest drunken stupor of spending is summarized perfectly. It 's hard to put an adequate level of outrage on this event into words, but whomever is responsible for composing the Journal's reaction deserves kudos.
The simple reality is this: We, the people of Dutchess County, are being saddled with a vastly unfair amount of new tax and fees to rescue the MTA, again, from their profound inability to properly run their business. read the editorial, get the facts, share in the outrage. This financial miscarriage will impact all of us.
Do yourselves a favor and look it over. As they say, read it and weep, for all of us.
Unfortunately, I soon found out. More unfortunately, I keep finding out more, even 21 years later.
It's rare for me to point others to another source of opinion or argument (one the many difficulties of egomania). However, on the occasion of the rancid MTA bailout announcement, a.k.a. the "Save The Trains, Screw The People of Dutchess County" agreement struck by our supposed leaders in Albany, I heartily encourage all of you to read the Thursday editorial in the Poughkeepsie Journal. The angry tone, salient points, and pertinent examples of the blatantly imbalanced deal to help the MTA out of its' latest drunken stupor of spending is summarized perfectly. It 's hard to put an adequate level of outrage on this event into words, but whomever is responsible for composing the Journal's reaction deserves kudos.
The simple reality is this: We, the people of Dutchess County, are being saddled with a vastly unfair amount of new tax and fees to rescue the MTA, again, from their profound inability to properly run their business. read the editorial, get the facts, share in the outrage. This financial miscarriage will impact all of us.
Do yourselves a favor and look it over. As they say, read it and weep, for all of us.
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
On Politics 5/5/09: Two Political Protest Anniversaries
Over the past few days, there have been two different, but somewhat interconnected anniversaries, both of a political stripe. On Sunday evening, there was a gala 90th birthday concert held for Pete Seeger at Madison Square Garden in New York City. Yesterday, centered halfway across the country, there were reflections on the 39th anniversary of the slaughter of protesting students at Kent State.
From a personal perspective, I can recall reactions to the Kent State event. As a 9 year old boy, I distinctly remember seeing the news reports that evening of the Ohio National Guard firing on the students, and the follow-on iconic photo of the teenage girl hunched over the lifeless body of one the people killed. As was customary in my home growing up, the event was dutifully discussed, and I remember being somewhat taken aback by the reactions of my parents. Growing up in a household led by perhaps the only two educational professionals in the state of New Jersey who were, and most vociferously still are, registered Republicans, I was taken aback at the reaction of my folks, which was along the lines of "if they were not out protesting against our government they would not have been shot". At that point in my abbreviated life, I had only learned of one similar incident, the Boston Massacre, where uniformed soldiers had fired on civilians, which my youthful mind related the Kent State shooting to. My parents assured me that this was an isolated incident, provoked by the actions of the students (throwing rocks, hurling tear gas canisters at the National Guard, failing to disperse as ordered, etc.), so I grew up thinking it was their fault. Looking back through the prism of history, one can properly adjudicate the actions and response as being multi-dimensional in error: proper protesting turns aggressive, the over-reacting Guardsmen make a horrific mistake in utilizing deadly force. The lesson, learned in blood time & time again, is that expected behavior from crowds and authorities disappears in the emotion of the primal behavior of fight or flight reactions.
The tall, gangly nonagenarian Seeger is a somewhat different tale. Traveling the country in his early years in support of various political and workers' causes, later lambasted and targeted by his own government for supposed Communist sympathies during the 1950s version of the Salem Witch Trials, he's managed to outlive those who sought to persecute him. The cliche is that living well is the best revenge on those who sought to do you harm, so perhaps ol' Pete smiles to himself in private when considering the outcome of it all. It's not everyone who goes from being labeled as un-American to performing at a Presidential inaugural to having his birthday party at Madison Square Garden with 18,000 of your closest friends.
For me, the common theme here is political protest. Over the years of my lifetime, I've heard these democratic actions labeled as "wrong", or "anti-American", or, prompting a declarative statement, as in the famous bumper stickers I saw as a kid during the late 60s - early 70s, that it's "my country, love it or leave it". I suspect it is no coincidence that anti-protest fervor is always greatest during times of wars being fought. The fraying of emotions experienced by those who desperately do not want to see our soldiers die for something they do not believe in, versus those who desperately do not want to see our soldiers die for something they do believe in, interjects itself with so much emotional fervor as to blind the participants. Blindness inevitably does lead to failing, and falling.
It is best that we all recall how we were founded on the principal of proper political protest, by men who understood that flexibility was required in our structure, since they knew we could not possibly always be right in our thinking.
From a personal perspective, I can recall reactions to the Kent State event. As a 9 year old boy, I distinctly remember seeing the news reports that evening of the Ohio National Guard firing on the students, and the follow-on iconic photo of the teenage girl hunched over the lifeless body of one the people killed. As was customary in my home growing up, the event was dutifully discussed, and I remember being somewhat taken aback by the reactions of my parents. Growing up in a household led by perhaps the only two educational professionals in the state of New Jersey who were, and most vociferously still are, registered Republicans, I was taken aback at the reaction of my folks, which was along the lines of "if they were not out protesting against our government they would not have been shot". At that point in my abbreviated life, I had only learned of one similar incident, the Boston Massacre, where uniformed soldiers had fired on civilians, which my youthful mind related the Kent State shooting to. My parents assured me that this was an isolated incident, provoked by the actions of the students (throwing rocks, hurling tear gas canisters at the National Guard, failing to disperse as ordered, etc.), so I grew up thinking it was their fault. Looking back through the prism of history, one can properly adjudicate the actions and response as being multi-dimensional in error: proper protesting turns aggressive, the over-reacting Guardsmen make a horrific mistake in utilizing deadly force. The lesson, learned in blood time & time again, is that expected behavior from crowds and authorities disappears in the emotion of the primal behavior of fight or flight reactions.
The tall, gangly nonagenarian Seeger is a somewhat different tale. Traveling the country in his early years in support of various political and workers' causes, later lambasted and targeted by his own government for supposed Communist sympathies during the 1950s version of the Salem Witch Trials, he's managed to outlive those who sought to persecute him. The cliche is that living well is the best revenge on those who sought to do you harm, so perhaps ol' Pete smiles to himself in private when considering the outcome of it all. It's not everyone who goes from being labeled as un-American to performing at a Presidential inaugural to having his birthday party at Madison Square Garden with 18,000 of your closest friends.
For me, the common theme here is political protest. Over the years of my lifetime, I've heard these democratic actions labeled as "wrong", or "anti-American", or, prompting a declarative statement, as in the famous bumper stickers I saw as a kid during the late 60s - early 70s, that it's "my country, love it or leave it". I suspect it is no coincidence that anti-protest fervor is always greatest during times of wars being fought. The fraying of emotions experienced by those who desperately do not want to see our soldiers die for something they do not believe in, versus those who desperately do not want to see our soldiers die for something they do believe in, interjects itself with so much emotional fervor as to blind the participants. Blindness inevitably does lead to failing, and falling.
It is best that we all recall how we were founded on the principal of proper political protest, by men who understood that flexibility was required in our structure, since they knew we could not possibly always be right in our thinking.
Friday, May 1, 2009
On Politics 5/1/09: A Justice Curiosity
In a rare occurrence, Justice David Souter announced today that he would retire from the U.S. Supreme Court at the end of the term in June. Why is this an unusual circumstance? Because, apparently, Justice Souter is leaving in good health, and at the "young" age of 69. The recent history of our leading jurists is to hold on to the chair, literally and figuratively, until, much like a marriage, death does part you from your seat on the bench.
I have long been a proponent of independent judicial excellence. As stated in previous columns, I do not like justices being elected, given all the potential issues of party loyalty and political payback coming before the practice of jurisprudence. Yet some states, New York included, allow for the elections of various levels of justices to occur. It's difficult to understand why others would fail to see the potential pratfalls of such a custom, but let's leave that alone for today. With our highest court, we have a process of Presidential appointment and subsequent Senatorial confirmation to place someone on the Supreme Court.
Let's take a look at the curious case of Mr. Souter (why do we have to keep calling him "Judge" even after he retires? It's another oddity of life. I was once chess champion of my grammar school; should I wait to be addressed as "Champ" before responding to someone?). A relatively unknown gentleman, thought to be conservative, put forth by a Republican President becomes a consistent liberal block voter on most of the important social legislative issues (insert your own witty comment about how siding with the left made him smarter here.....go ahead, I know you want to). After the Bork debacle (oh the horrors of having too many written opinions), the right was determined to put forth someone that even they themselves knew nothing about, and had no trail of opinions, arguments, or decisions from which to learn about the individual. Well, guess what happened; he turned out to be completely different than what they erroneously expected, and now he'd like to leave the Capital lifestyle behind to return to isolation in his native New Hampshire.
Sometimes you have to turn the clean slate over to find out what's written on the back.
I have long been a proponent of independent judicial excellence. As stated in previous columns, I do not like justices being elected, given all the potential issues of party loyalty and political payback coming before the practice of jurisprudence. Yet some states, New York included, allow for the elections of various levels of justices to occur. It's difficult to understand why others would fail to see the potential pratfalls of such a custom, but let's leave that alone for today. With our highest court, we have a process of Presidential appointment and subsequent Senatorial confirmation to place someone on the Supreme Court.
Let's take a look at the curious case of Mr. Souter (why do we have to keep calling him "Judge" even after he retires? It's another oddity of life. I was once chess champion of my grammar school; should I wait to be addressed as "Champ" before responding to someone?). A relatively unknown gentleman, thought to be conservative, put forth by a Republican President becomes a consistent liberal block voter on most of the important social legislative issues (insert your own witty comment about how siding with the left made him smarter here.....go ahead, I know you want to). After the Bork debacle (oh the horrors of having too many written opinions), the right was determined to put forth someone that even they themselves knew nothing about, and had no trail of opinions, arguments, or decisions from which to learn about the individual. Well, guess what happened; he turned out to be completely different than what they erroneously expected, and now he'd like to leave the Capital lifestyle behind to return to isolation in his native New Hampshire.
Sometimes you have to turn the clean slate over to find out what's written on the back.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
