Maybe I'm just getting old or maybe I'm just getting really tired of the politics of late...
When I talk to anyone these days about what's going in D.C. I feel almost morally bound to identify myself as either Republican or Democrat (since the rest of the parties carry very little clout right now) and, increasingly, I'm becoming uncomfortable with either label. I always liked most of what the Libertarians believe in but even then there are limits to my adherence. I've searched in vain for the perfect label that tells the world the depth and scope of my political, moral and ethical beliefs. Centrist? Now that's interesting but not very descriptive. Hawk, dove? Nope, doesn't work for me.
How about "Citizen of the Still Greatest Country on the Face of the Earth in Spite of Its Problems"? (Drum roll, please.) Yeah, I like that!
So maybe I should re-title this piece "I Know I Am But What Are You"?
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Friday, January 30, 2009
Health Warning: CPD On The Rise!
Ladies and gentlemen, my fellow Americans, we are facing an epidemic of monumental proportions festering right here in the heartlands of our beloved country. No, I'm not talking about tainted peanut butter (which is also a serious problem) or the germs living on all of those shopping cart handles (which, come on, is not a serious problem) but, rather, I speak of the rapidly spreading problem of Cell Phone Driving (CPD).
This insidious infestation manifests itself in a number of ways. A driver infected by CPD will often appear distracted while driving. Their ability to maintain a constant speed and a consistant forward direction of travel will often be compromised. Often, the cars they're driving will exhibit jerky, erratic behavior (as in, "Oops, there's my turn! I think I can still make it. Oh crap!). The infected individuals will often seem oblivious to cars and pedestrians around them. Their facial expressions sometimes change quickly from blissful happiness (while in the midst of an engaging conversation) to total shock as they realize, belatedly, that they are rapidly carreening toward a stopped vehicle at an inappropriately high rate of speed.
Recently, some communities have enacted laws to curb the infection rate of CPD by mandating the use of blue tooth devices with cell phones but this, dear friends, is only a bandage on a festering wound. It's not the act of holding a cell phone that's dangerous; it's talking on that damn thing that causes the problem. And now, as all too often happens, a mutation of the disease is on the rise. The new, even more deadly infestation called TWD (Texting While Driving) is causing more distraction and loss of driving control for its victims. Now the brain is assaulted not only by extra aural stimulation but is also crippled by visual attacks requiring it to juggle input from the road ahead and tiny little alphabet characters on a teensy little screen which simultaneously demand attention. To make matters worse the stricken operator of the vehicle gives conflicting signals to the brain who knows it should be paying attention to the road but "OMG did u c what she did 2day?".
Where will it all end? Are we doomed to eventual total infection of all drivers? Will accident rates continue to rise as more and more infected drivers succumb to the mind-numbing paralysis of driving skills that results?
No, there is hope! Put down your cell phones. Turn them off while driving. If you must make a call, receive one or (God help us) have to view a text message or create one please, please, please do so off the highway and out of traffic!
Now I know this advice will fall on mostly deaf ears (after all, how can you hear me when you're always on that phone) so if you resist getting a cure for your affliction do me just one favor...
Just stay out of my way, would ya?
This insidious infestation manifests itself in a number of ways. A driver infected by CPD will often appear distracted while driving. Their ability to maintain a constant speed and a consistant forward direction of travel will often be compromised. Often, the cars they're driving will exhibit jerky, erratic behavior (as in, "Oops, there's my turn! I think I can still make it. Oh crap!). The infected individuals will often seem oblivious to cars and pedestrians around them. Their facial expressions sometimes change quickly from blissful happiness (while in the midst of an engaging conversation) to total shock as they realize, belatedly, that they are rapidly carreening toward a stopped vehicle at an inappropriately high rate of speed.
Recently, some communities have enacted laws to curb the infection rate of CPD by mandating the use of blue tooth devices with cell phones but this, dear friends, is only a bandage on a festering wound. It's not the act of holding a cell phone that's dangerous; it's talking on that damn thing that causes the problem. And now, as all too often happens, a mutation of the disease is on the rise. The new, even more deadly infestation called TWD (Texting While Driving) is causing more distraction and loss of driving control for its victims. Now the brain is assaulted not only by extra aural stimulation but is also crippled by visual attacks requiring it to juggle input from the road ahead and tiny little alphabet characters on a teensy little screen which simultaneously demand attention. To make matters worse the stricken operator of the vehicle gives conflicting signals to the brain who knows it should be paying attention to the road but "OMG did u c what she did 2day?".
Where will it all end? Are we doomed to eventual total infection of all drivers? Will accident rates continue to rise as more and more infected drivers succumb to the mind-numbing paralysis of driving skills that results?
No, there is hope! Put down your cell phones. Turn them off while driving. If you must make a call, receive one or (God help us) have to view a text message or create one please, please, please do so off the highway and out of traffic!
Now I know this advice will fall on mostly deaf ears (after all, how can you hear me when you're always on that phone) so if you resist getting a cure for your affliction do me just one favor...
Just stay out of my way, would ya?
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Take A Deep Breath And Count To Ten
Here I am on December 30th. wondering where the whole year went and where we're going from here.
What a year. Oil hit $147 a barrel (with gas topping $4 a gallon) last summer and then the sub-prime mortgage mess hit, rocking the stock market to its roots. People's 401k accounts turned to mush and a hard fought election process concluded with a rout of the Grand Old Party. Mortgage foreclosures started rising at an alarming rate. Congress began throwing money around like drunken sailors and now we talk about spending "trillions" rather than mere "billions". (Speaking of which, I'm so old that I can remember when people thought a "million" was a lot of money.) The Financial Institutions were bailed out (for now) and the American car companies got a "loan" too. One wonders who's next to ask for a hand-out? There are plenty of new petitioners lining up before the gates of Congress but they'll have to wait for our new President to pull the purse strings open.
And I'm sitting here with the unenviable task of looking for a new job. Oh well...
I know a lot of people out there are worried about what's happened and what's to come. Hell, I'm worried too! But in times like these I'm often reminded of something my mother told me as a young child which I've heard many times since, stated in many different ways. To paraphrase, it's simply this:
When confronted with problems,
Change those that you can,
And accept those things that you can't.
I know, it's often easier said than done but try to remember that you, me and everyone else has been through tough times before and guess what? We've survived them. We probably didn't enjoy the ride but hopefully we learned something from the experience and that has made us better people. These are tough times but others have suffered worse. This is no Great Depression and will not become one. If we all keep our heads on straight and keep moving forward (even if very slowly) we'll make it to better times ahead.
Keep the faith; it'll all work out.
What a year. Oil hit $147 a barrel (with gas topping $4 a gallon) last summer and then the sub-prime mortgage mess hit, rocking the stock market to its roots. People's 401k accounts turned to mush and a hard fought election process concluded with a rout of the Grand Old Party. Mortgage foreclosures started rising at an alarming rate. Congress began throwing money around like drunken sailors and now we talk about spending "trillions" rather than mere "billions". (Speaking of which, I'm so old that I can remember when people thought a "million" was a lot of money.) The Financial Institutions were bailed out (for now) and the American car companies got a "loan" too. One wonders who's next to ask for a hand-out? There are plenty of new petitioners lining up before the gates of Congress but they'll have to wait for our new President to pull the purse strings open.
And I'm sitting here with the unenviable task of looking for a new job. Oh well...
I know a lot of people out there are worried about what's happened and what's to come. Hell, I'm worried too! But in times like these I'm often reminded of something my mother told me as a young child which I've heard many times since, stated in many different ways. To paraphrase, it's simply this:
When confronted with problems,
Change those that you can,
And accept those things that you can't.
I know, it's often easier said than done but try to remember that you, me and everyone else has been through tough times before and guess what? We've survived them. We probably didn't enjoy the ride but hopefully we learned something from the experience and that has made us better people. These are tough times but others have suffered worse. This is no Great Depression and will not become one. If we all keep our heads on straight and keep moving forward (even if very slowly) we'll make it to better times ahead.
Keep the faith; it'll all work out.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
What Happened to Journalism in America?
For quite awhile I've been deeply troubled by, what seems to me, the extremely biased attitudes of most media reporters covering this presidential race. I just read an article by Michael Malone, one of the nation's best known technology writers, posted on http://www.abcnews.com/. The beginning of his article states
Oct. 24, 2008 —
"The traditional media are playing a very, very dangerous game -- with their readers, with the Constitution and with their own fates.
The sheer bias in the print and television coverage of this election campaign is not just bewildering, but appalling. And over the last few months I've found myself slowly moving from shaking my head at the obvious one-sided reporting, to actually shouting at the screen of my television and my laptop computer.
But worst of all, for the last couple weeks, I've begun -- for the first time in my adult life -- to be embarrassed to admit what I do for a living. A few days ago, when asked by a new acquaintance what I did for a living, I replied that I was "a writer," because I couldn't bring myself to admit to a stranger that I'm a journalist."
He points out, quite eloquently, that most journalists have lost their way in trying to report objectively and fairly and have instead been drinking the kool-aid of biased, one-sided reporting by promoting the cause of one candidate while ravaging the other. He gives reasons for this spectacle which I won't eloborate on here except to say that this unwarranted and unpardonable behavior is a travesty of American journalist expression. If the media is to remain the watchdog of American life and politics it has to return to its roots of impartial reporting. To do less risks the very freedoms we hold dear...
I encourage you to read Mr. Malone's commentary in its entirety. You can access it at http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=6099188
Oct. 24, 2008 —
"The traditional media are playing a very, very dangerous game -- with their readers, with the Constitution and with their own fates.
The sheer bias in the print and television coverage of this election campaign is not just bewildering, but appalling. And over the last few months I've found myself slowly moving from shaking my head at the obvious one-sided reporting, to actually shouting at the screen of my television and my laptop computer.
But worst of all, for the last couple weeks, I've begun -- for the first time in my adult life -- to be embarrassed to admit what I do for a living. A few days ago, when asked by a new acquaintance what I did for a living, I replied that I was "a writer," because I couldn't bring myself to admit to a stranger that I'm a journalist."
He points out, quite eloquently, that most journalists have lost their way in trying to report objectively and fairly and have instead been drinking the kool-aid of biased, one-sided reporting by promoting the cause of one candidate while ravaging the other. He gives reasons for this spectacle which I won't eloborate on here except to say that this unwarranted and unpardonable behavior is a travesty of American journalist expression. If the media is to remain the watchdog of American life and politics it has to return to its roots of impartial reporting. To do less risks the very freedoms we hold dear...
I encourage you to read Mr. Malone's commentary in its entirety. You can access it at http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=6099188
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Germs? What germs?
Are we becoming phobic about germs? When did we become convinced that we needed antibacterial hand soap? And how about those disinfectant wipes at the grocery store to wipe down your shopping carts handle?
I can tell you, my friends, that I can remember a time, not that long ago, when we weren't so obsessed with this kind of germ warfare. Oh sure, I know all about AIDS and such but really, did you know that some germs are good (and even necessary for our survival) for us?
And about those store wipes for the carts, forget them. As soon as you start touching anything in the store or reach into your pocket or purse you're putting just as many germs within your touch as you took off to begin with (not good grammatically but true).
I can tell you, my friends, that I can remember a time, not that long ago, when we weren't so obsessed with this kind of germ warfare. Oh sure, I know all about AIDS and such but really, did you know that some germs are good (and even necessary for our survival) for us?
And about those store wipes for the carts, forget them. As soon as you start touching anything in the store or reach into your pocket or purse you're putting just as many germs within your touch as you took off to begin with (not good grammatically but true).
Monday, October 6, 2008
And Now A Word From My Sponsors
Oh wait, I don't have any sponsors. Wow, I guess it's up to me to fund my own self-promotions of myself and my beliefs.
Now polititians have a much better deal. Politicians, on both sides of the fence, not only get money (through contributions) from individuals like you and me (i.e., registered voters) but also from PACs (political action committees) and 527 groups. Now I'm sorry, but for the life of me, I can't see how contributions from PACs or 527 groups can ever be considered ethical even for politicians!
Let's look at PACs first. PACs are made up of corporations and/or other special interest groups who have a special interest or cause they want to promote. Can corporations or special interest groups vote and are they affected by the rules of government like you and I? No. But, can they curry favor by contributing to a particular candidate or politician? Yes! Hey, come on now, isn't that what's called "buying a candidate's vote? In my opinion, no entity, except an individual citizen of the United States, should be allowed to contribute to a politician and then only within the $1,000 limit prescribed by federal election law.
To reiterate, current election laws allow for contributions up to $1,000 per individual voter but up to $5,000 for PACs! Hmmm, does this sound fishy to you too?
Now if this wasn't bad enough Congress finagled themselves a new, better deal. The new deal goes by the name of "527 politician","527 committee", "527 political group" or just "527 group". You see, while politicians may accept no contributions of more than $1,000 per election from an individual and $5,000 per election from a PAC they can also set up a politician 527, and now these members of Congress can raise unlimited "soft money" from individuals, corporations and unions. Come on now, isn't this a clear case of the inmates running the asylum!
Does anyone else find this situation detestable? Why isn't everyone up in arms about this? Are we too complacent, too complicit or just too damn lazy to care? My understanding is that the mighty Roman Empire fell under the weight of its own corruption and moral decay. Is that to be our fate as well?
There's still time to act. Get off the couch and make your feelings known, now!
Now polititians have a much better deal. Politicians, on both sides of the fence, not only get money (through contributions) from individuals like you and me (i.e., registered voters) but also from PACs (political action committees) and 527 groups. Now I'm sorry, but for the life of me, I can't see how contributions from PACs or 527 groups can ever be considered ethical even for politicians!
Let's look at PACs first. PACs are made up of corporations and/or other special interest groups who have a special interest or cause they want to promote. Can corporations or special interest groups vote and are they affected by the rules of government like you and I? No. But, can they curry favor by contributing to a particular candidate or politician? Yes! Hey, come on now, isn't that what's called "buying a candidate's vote? In my opinion, no entity, except an individual citizen of the United States, should be allowed to contribute to a politician and then only within the $1,000 limit prescribed by federal election law.
To reiterate, current election laws allow for contributions up to $1,000 per individual voter but up to $5,000 for PACs! Hmmm, does this sound fishy to you too?
Now if this wasn't bad enough Congress finagled themselves a new, better deal. The new deal goes by the name of "527 politician","527 committee", "527 political group" or just "527 group". You see, while politicians may accept no contributions of more than $1,000 per election from an individual and $5,000 per election from a PAC they can also set up a politician 527, and now these members of Congress can raise unlimited "soft money" from individuals, corporations and unions. Come on now, isn't this a clear case of the inmates running the asylum!
Does anyone else find this situation detestable? Why isn't everyone up in arms about this? Are we too complacent, too complicit or just too damn lazy to care? My understanding is that the mighty Roman Empire fell under the weight of its own corruption and moral decay. Is that to be our fate as well?
There's still time to act. Get off the couch and make your feelings known, now!
Friday, October 3, 2008
Do We Need 'Em?
I've been wondering for quite some time about our American political "party" system. Republicans, Democrats, why do we still need them? Is this some artifact of our Founding Fathers that no longer serves a useful purpose? Think about it; do we really need to govern based on an "us versus them" mentality where one side claims victory and the other is vilified?
Can't a politician simply state his or her position on the issues, run for office on that basis and then govern that way if elected?
Partisan politics really came to a head for me over this so-called "Bail-out" bill. I watched with incredulity as Nancy Pelosi (Dem) stood behind the podium this week and railed against Republicans at a time when she should have been asking for bipartisan support. What gives? Why do we need this sort of partisan politicking?
It seems to me that all of the antics I see played out on the Hill by both parties often produce a lot of bad policies that are not only detrimental to the American concepts of freedom and liberty but are also destructive to our basic concepts of capitalism (and for that matter the whole American way of life thing).
I'm beginning to think Joe Lieberman, Democrat turned Independent, has the right idea.
Can't a politician simply state his or her position on the issues, run for office on that basis and then govern that way if elected?
Partisan politics really came to a head for me over this so-called "Bail-out" bill. I watched with incredulity as Nancy Pelosi (Dem) stood behind the podium this week and railed against Republicans at a time when she should have been asking for bipartisan support. What gives? Why do we need this sort of partisan politicking?
It seems to me that all of the antics I see played out on the Hill by both parties often produce a lot of bad policies that are not only detrimental to the American concepts of freedom and liberty but are also destructive to our basic concepts of capitalism (and for that matter the whole American way of life thing).
I'm beginning to think Joe Lieberman, Democrat turned Independent, has the right idea.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)