Wednesday, June 29, 2011

A LETTER TO THE PRESIDENT

Dear President Obama…

It's time we wipe our hands of the insanity of our former Administration and bring our troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm not suggesting a mere draw down. I'm talking about a complete withdraw. The Bush policies have proven to be a complete failure, and there's no sense in your sacrificing more lives and money trying to salvage a sinking ship that belongs to somebody else.

Since September 11th, 2001, American has spent $3.7 trillion dollars on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and for what, to satisfy our lust for revenge? Were the deaths of Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein really worth the lives we sacrificed? I was going to add the word 'money' to that list, but the truth is, we didn't sacrifice any money. Oh yes, we spent, $3.7 trillion on our warring escapades, but that was all money we borrowed from China, and not a dime of it has been paid back. That's because the old Administration didn't want to ask the American people to sacrifice to conduct warfare. Just because their fiscal policies were bankrupt doesn't mean you have to follow suit. Bring our troops home and focus on putting our own house in order.

I watched the news yesterday about the eight Taliban terrorists who attacked the Intercontinental Hotel in Kabul, Afghanistan. Eleven innocent people died in the attack and scores were injured. I saw that all the terrorists in that attack were eventually killed, but you and I both know there are more like them waiting in the Taliban wings. Yes, it's maddening. Yes, it's tragic. It's senseless too. It's also time to let the people and tribes of Afghanistan handle their own problems. The same goes for Iraq.

Your Loyal Countryman,

Steve

Tuesday, June 28, 2011

CHANNEL SURFING NUNS AND PUNISHING THE POOR

Half of this article is fact. Half is fiction. Hopefully, you'll be able to separate the fact from the fiction.

Three Catholic nuns, Sisters Peter, Paul and Mary were sitting in their convent parlor last night searching for something entertaining to watch on TV. Sister Peter controlled the remote. Because she had taken the name of the first Pope, it was an unwritten convent rule that she went first when it came to choosing the programming. Unfortunately, for the other two nuns, that meant putting up with Sister Peter's endless channel surfing.

Sister Paul is an avid Philadelphia Phillies fan; the convent fanatic if you will, but the Phillies were idle last night. Her second choice - the L.A. Angels were playing at home against the Nationals, but the 10:15 p.m. start on the west coast ruled out that game as a possible option, so she had already resigned herself to the fact that baseball would not be on the evening's menu.

Sister Mary is a Mother Angelica fan. For those of you who, like Sister Peter, are channel surfers, Mother Angelica is that elderly nun whose face momentarily pops onto your TV screen somewhere between channel 25 and channel 35. She's usually saying the rosary, but every now and then she's hawking statues of the Virgin Mary or the newest "must-have" necklace with a cross. Mother Angelica is the Catholic version of the late Billy Mays. She can sell anything!

When Sister Peter's channel surfing approached the Eternal World (ETW) Network, a Catholic television network that hosts Mother Angelica's programming, Sister Mary got kind of excited at the prospect of seeing her favorite nun in action, but those hopes were immediately dashed when the plastered-smile face of Raymond Arroyo lit up the screen. Mr. Arroyo is the ETW network's news director, and he hosts an evening news (I use that term loosely) show called, "The World Over". The show is more like propaganda than news, because Arroyo usually spends the entire show interviewing one person to get their take on world events, but I'm sure the nuns would disagree with my assessment, so let's just agree to disagree over that characterization.

Last night, Arroyo was interviewing a Catholic Republican Congressman on his show when my own channel surfing habit of pressing multiple buttons at once, paused my TV at the ETW channel. Like Sister Paul, I was hoping for baseball, but as I said earlier, it was a slow night. I didn't catch the Congressman's name, but when my TV locked onto The World Over program, Arroyo was in the midst of asking the Republican Congressman about how Republicans would answer critics who say that proposed Republican budget cut would hurt the poor. Because Arroyo seldom addresses Christ's social gospel, choosing instead to spend his time ranting about abortion, birth control and getting Republicans elected, I froze my fingers for a moment thinking that I would be treated to a rare occasion where Arroyo might actually advocate for the poor and take his Republican guest to task. Boy was I wrong!

The Congressman started off his response by stating that during our recent economic downturn, the poor have been hurt just as bad as the middle class had, which was really a sleight-of-hand in my opinion because the Congressman's underlying premise was that the poor were no worse off than the middle class. It doesn't take a degree in rocket science to understand the flaw in that argument, but Arroyo nodded his head, smiled, and said, "You're right", as if that made the statement Gospel truth, and the camera panned back to the Congressman.

The Congressman continued his response by stating that by cutting social programs and cutting taxes on wealthy individuals, the poor would actually be much better off because the wealthy would use their increased wealth to create jobs that would help lift the poor out of poverty. That's the standard Republican Party line, which isn't a new concept or anything like that, but what was [fascinating, disturbing, maddening or outrageous – you choose] was that a guy like Arroyo, a professed devout Catholic, could sit there and agree with the Congressman's views, hook, line and sinker!

I'm not sure what Gospel Arroyo reads, but I can't recall in the ones I've read any occasion where Christ informed his Apostles to stop helping the poor and favoring the rich as a pathway leading to anyplace good. I hope the nuns kept channel surfing. I know I did.

Monday, June 27, 2011

BLAGOJEVICH FOUND GUILTY

Former Illinois governor, Rod Blagojevich, reported turned to his defense attorney after jurors in his corruption trial returned seventeen guilty verdicts and asked, "What happened?" I don't know what the defense attorney said in reply, but here's what happened.

The governor tried to bribe his way into the Illinois U.S. Senate seat vacated when Barack Obama became President of the United States. Then, the governor got caught and lied about his activities to the F.B.I. and tried to obstruct the government investigation into what he'd done. Finally, after 2 years of the public having to tolerate his idiotic boasting and professions of innocence, a jury of his peers (12 to be exact) said they'd had enough of his BS and found him guilty as charged. Prison is the next stop. That's what happened.

Justice was done...and not a moment too soon.

A CASE OF 'FAIR AND BALANCED' THAT IS ANYTHING BUT

FOX.com is running a story today under the headline, U.S. Veteran Faces Legal Action for Flying American Flag. The story is a about a 77 year old retired Army chaplain named Fred Quigley who lives in Macedonia, Ohio. Quigley bought a condominium in a development governed by a homeowners association, and after he erected a flagpole in his front yard, the homeowner's association sent him a letter demanding that the flagpole be removed. The letter threatened Quigley with legal action for violating the rules of the property association if the flagpole is not removed.

The FOX story on Quigley is a simple story, artfully drafted to tug at the heartstrings of any patriotic citizen or veteran as Independence Day nears, but it doesn't tell the whole story, which means that the article on Quigley is anything but fair and balanced.

Here's the whole story. Quigley bought into a condominium development governed by a set of homeowner association rules. The developer who built the condominiums established the rules of the development and filed them in the local land records office so that the rules were a matter of public record. One of the rules of Quigley's condominium development is that no homeowner can erect a pole or sign in their front yard. The rule stems from the fact that many folks who purchase condominiums don't like realtor, yard sale and political election signs dotting lawns in their neighborhood, and they pay a certain premium to live in a "sign-free" development.

Quigley knew about the condominium's "no flagpole" rule before he purchased his unit. He was provided with a complete set of the condominium rules before he forked over any money for his condo and signed on a dotted line saying that he read and understood the rules of the development and agreed to abide by them. Quigley could have told the developer to shove the condo rules and gone elsewhere. Instead, he chose to buy and then violate the rules.

Here's another thing. As a condominium owner in his development, Quigley has a vote in the development's homeowner association. The homeowner's association has the power, under the previously mentioned condominium rules, to change any rule of the condominium development with the concurrence of a set percentage of condominium owners in that development. That means that Quigley and his neighbors have the power, if they so desire, to change the development rules to permit flagpoles. All Quigley has to do is to convince enough of his neighbors to bring the matter to a vote and he could have his flagpole. You won't read that in the FOX story, because FOX is more interested in painting Quigley as a persecuted old patriotic veteran instead of an elderly curmudgeon who thinks the rules don't apply to him.

Personally, I think Quigley's condominium 'no flagpole' rule is a stupid rule. Then again, perhaps that's why condominiums don't interest me. I value freedom of speech more highly than I do a pristine lawn, and I've got election signs and dandelions to prove it.

I also value the rule of law and the ability of the governed to changes the rules when the rules don't work. I always thought that was one of the things the American flag was supposed to represent. Maybe I'm wrong, but at least I'm fair and balanced in admitting so, which is more than I can say about the FOX story.

Sunday, June 26, 2011

SACRIFICE AND THE PUBLIC DEBT

Our local newspaper asked whether we should raise the national debt ceiling to allow the government to continue paying it's obligation. I said, "Yes." I was also in the decided minority.

I think Congress should raise the debt ceiling, but unless our Congressional representatives are willing to call for shared sacrifice from every corner of our nation, I see no point in attaching conditions for doing so. After all, what's the point?

The debt ceiling must be increased. Failure to do so would prevent soldiers and government workers from being paid and would signal our national unwillingness to make good on our fiscal obligations. In addition to roiling international money markets, a national default would also cost our nation billions more in terms of interest paid on the money we borrow. That's because defaulters are considered a higher financial risk and are forced to pay a higher interest rate. We as a nation have a moral duty to pay individuals in our employ or who have rendered a public service. Political ideology provides no justification for failure to pay our debts, and politicians who are currently holding soldiers, government workers and taxpayers hostage for political gain are engaging in political terrorism of the most despicable sort.

I am not suggesting we ignore our crippling national debt. Wealthy individuals, corporations, business owners, middle class workers, retirees and the poor all benefited from the spending that comprised our national debt. All should share in the pain of its payment too. Anyone who wants to place a condition on raising the debt ceiling should look in the mirror first. If you're not willing to make your own sacrifice as a condition, don't ask your neighbor to do so.

Thursday, June 23, 2011

NATIONAL CHOCOLATE ECLAIR DAY

Today is National Chocolate Eclair Day, a day that eclair lovers like myself take time out from our normal daily routines to savor the decadent taste of that sumptuous pastry. Enjoy!

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

HEALTH CARE HOLD-UP

What does it say about a society that a downtrodden member of it has to resort to bank robbery to get medical care? Sound crazy? Well, it's true, but there was method in that North Carolina bank robber's madness and the rest of us should be ashamed because of it.

The man's name is James Richard Verone. He's 59 years old and he desperately needs medical care. He suffers from debilitating arthritis in his back and he walks with a noticeable limp, exacerbated by a problem with his left foot. He's also in constant pain from a wrist besot with carpal tunnel syndrome, but that and the arthritis in his back and the foot problem are the least of his worries. He's also sporting a lump jutting out from his abdomen that pushes the limits of his tolerance for pain.

Unfortunately, there was nothing Mr. Verone could do about his medical difficulties because he didn't have health care insurance coverage and wouldn't qualify until 2014, when the President's "Affordable Care Act" would provide health insurance to folks who, like Verone, can't afford coverage of their own because of their financial circumstances. If Republicans get their way and succeed in repealing "Obamacare", Verone and people like him would be waiting a whole lot longer. Those realities, and the fact that he could no longer withstand the pain, forced Verone's hand.

Famed bank robber, Willie Sutton notoriously declared that he robbed banks because that's where the money is. James Verone decided to rob a bank because that's where the health care was. On Monday, June 9th, Verone coolly entered a branch of the RBC bank in Gaston, North Carolina and handed a teller a robber's note. In the note, he demanded one dollar and medical care. After getting his loot - $1.00, he calmly took a seat in the bank and waited for the police to arrive. They hauled him off to jail, where he finally got the medical care he required.

Mr. Verone is not the stereotypical deadbeat those who moan about such things like to hold up as an example. Before the economy tanked, he'd been a 17-year employee of Coca Cola with a job that included health insurance benefits. After Coke laid him off due to the economic downturn, he tried his hand at truck driving and later took a job in a convenience store. His medical condition washed him out of those positions, and Verone found himself without access to the health care he needed to have any chance at being productive again. It's not that Verone didn't want to work. He's always worked. His body wouldn't let me. Neither would society.

I listened to the GOP presidential candidate debate a few weeks ago, and to a person, every one of those candidates solemnly pledged to do away with President Obama's health care initiative. Those GOP candidates who've joined the race since then have made the same pledge. The shame of it is that not a single one of those candidates have put forth a plan to make sure the James Verone's of the world aren't placed in a position where they have to rob a bank to get medical care. Then again, the GOP candidates don't see that as any of their concern. They don't work in a bank!

Tuesday, June 21, 2011

VOYEURISM TRUMPS INTELLECTUALISM (pardon the pun)

I'm having a hard time seeing why the escapades of eighty-five year old Hugh Hefner and his bimbo-of-the-month are considered front-page newsworthy items, but something tells me it has to do with America's affinity for voyeurism. It may also be why supermarkets are making a mint selling tabloid magazines.

I don't care whether Angelina Jolie's marriage to Brad Pitt is on the rocks or whether Brad is being secretly stalked by Jennifer Aniston. They've got their problems. I've got mine. Does it really matter who Kim Kardashian is cozying up with, or what fashion faux-pas Paris Hilton has been spotted wearing? Isn't having 60 million Americans living in poverty a matter of greater importance? Terrorists around the world are blowing up mosques, churches, temples and attacking funeral processions to increase their body counts, while many Americans are apparently more preoccupied with Princess Kate's purported blow-up with Prince William.

Worldwide, droughts are spreading. The ice caps are melting. Greece is on the verge of bankruptcy. Flooding in Asia has destroyed 5% of China's grain crop this year. Middle Eastern dictatorial regimes are killings scores of protesting citizens every day. Volcanic eruptions are interrupting international air travel and some island nations in the Pacific are being threatened with extinction by rising ocean levels caused by global warming.

Why are many in America so wrapped-up in the silliness of celebrities at a time when so many of the world's problems demand their attention? It boggles the mind. It might also explain why Hefner has over 8 million followers on his website, and I only have 8 on mine.

Monday, June 20, 2011

DEVALUING AN HOUR'S WORTH OF WORK

Newsweek magazine just released the results of a very interesting experiment it conducted to determine how low of a wage workers in various countries would take in order to secure employment. The prospective free-lancers were not told who they'd be working for, so the results were not heavily skewed by individuals who would accept low wages in hopes of getting higher wages later at a prominent magazine.

Reportedly, no prospective workers in Egypt, the Netherlands or Italy were willing to take employment for less than five dollars per hour. German workers wouldn't accept less than three dollars per hour and British laborers wouldn't go lower than two dollars. In the United States, however, free-lancers were willing to accept as low as twenty-five (25¢) cents per hour for labor.

One can say that it's a sign of the bad economic times that some Americans are willing to work for a quarter an hour, and there's no doubt in my mind that millions of Americans have reached that stage where they're desperate for anything, but desperation is not the only conclusion one can take from the Newsweek experiment. An equally valid conclusion is that Americans have devalued the worth of their own labor.

I find it ironic that American laborers are the most productive laborers in the entire world, and have increased productivity levels year after year without fail, and yet, over the past ten years, have placed less and less value on the worth of a job. I can only surmise that labor and the value of labor have been undermined by forces many workers do not understand, and unless steps are taken to oppose those forces, the value of American labor will continue to erode.

The military tactic called "divide and conquer" has many applications beyond the battlefield, and for years, American workers have been subjected to this tactic by American businesses, the Republican Party and by the worker's own greed. It's time to start recognizing how those interests are pitting worker against worker, and thus, devaluing the worth of all American labor.

It's become quite popular in our political arena to vilify teacher unions, unions in general and public sector employees. What are the goals of this vilification? The first goal is to place more teachers, union workers and public sector employees on unemployment. The second goal is to lower the salaries of those workers who remain employed. The final goal is to prevent workers from exercising a collective voice, a right incidentally guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, to demand better wages and working conditions.

Americans should understand that when they seek to devalue the work performed by their neighbor they are, in effect, devaluing their own work. When Americans seek to lay off their neighbor from employment, they weaken the economy and make it more likely that they too will be laid off. When Americans seek to silence and hamstring fellow workers in their right to collectively bargain with employers, their ability to demand a fair wage and fair work is also weakened in the process.

Powerful business interests and the GOP have been urging American workers to fight one another in hopes that the American worker will be too weak to demand fair pay and fair working conditions. Their tactic appears to be working, so much so that some folks are willing to work for twenty-five cents per hour. Can slave labor be too far behind?

Sunday, June 19, 2011

FATHER'S DAY THOUGHTS

Several years ago, I received an early Father’s Day present, but it wasn’t the type of gift I was expecting at the time. At the dinner table, my then eighteen year-old daughter, Abby asked a rather challenging question: “How do you decide which party to join when registering to vote?

Being a life-long Democrat I launched into a passionate discourse on the fundamental principles of the Democratic Party and why I thought she’d be better suited registering as a Democrat. The only things missing from my presentation was the Star Spangled Banner playing in the background and red, white and blue balloons falling from the ceiling. F.D.R. would’ve been proud!

My wife, Susan, our resident Republican gave an equally impressive presentation on the fundamental platform of the Republican Party and I worried for a moment that she had my daughter converted when I saw Abby wipe a tear from her eye. Then, I realized the salad had too many onions.

What followed next was a lively discussion wherein Abby challenged our respective parties’ principles with some rather pointed and thought-provoking questions. More than once she pointed out that our espoused party principles were self-serving and questioned whether we were more motivated by the desire for personal satisfaction than by actual concern for public good. Abby had a good grasp of public issues and a determination to make up her own mind on each matter. It was pretty obvious that she wasn’t going to be duped by petty rhetoric.

Abby didn’t indicate how she was leaning on party affiliation, but I knew the political dinner discussion was over when she motioned toward the platter of chicken on the table and complimented me [the chef] with a request for a second helping.

“This is good chicken”, she noted. “How did you make it?”

When you’ve raised a daughter who’s not afraid to ask questions, not afraid to challenge the premises underlying the statements of the authority figures in her life and confident in her own ability to judge what’s right and what’s not, you know you’ve done a good job as a dad. That realization is the best Father’s Day gift a guy could ever receive!

Saturday, June 18, 2011

TAX CUTS DON'T CREATE JOBS

For millions of Americans the road to self-sufficiency is paved with a job. Jobs provide a roof over their heads, food on the table, a shirt on their back and a source of satisfaction at having accomplished something meaningful by the end of the day. A job also allows for interpersonal communications, intellectual growth and the opportunity to meet and succeed at challenges that spark human creativity. Very often jobs are the spark plugs of life. They keep engines running. They keep people moving ahead.

The value of a job is not measured in the amount of tax dollars it provides the government or the amount of unemployment compensation it saves the treasury. The true value of employment rests in the benefits it provides to the individual engaged in that labor and the families who depend on its fruits. As a society the preservation of jobs and the maintenance of job opportunities for everyone able and willing must be our highest priority. Without work, not only will Americans not grow, they will not survive.

During the eight years of the last Bush Administration massive tax reductions for the wealthy were instituted with the false claim that money in the hands of the rich would stimulate jobs and put Americans back to work. Instead, over 13 million American jobs were eliminated or shipped overseas by the very companies the wealthy invested in, millions of other American workers were idled in the economic recession and the faucet of new job creation was turned off.

Nonetheless, today's Republicans continue to call for making the wealthy tax cuts permanent with the same claim that such a move would finally produce jobs. Instead of advocating that the government create jobs, the GOP demands that the government eliminate jobs and place more workers in unemployment lines. Herbert Hoover tried that strategy, and it ushered in the great depression. Who’s the fool here? How would cutting taxes for the wealthy and eliminating government jobs suddenly turn the ship around? The answer is obvious: it won’t!

DARWINISM vs. CREATIONISM, et al.

In 1616, the renowned astronomer, mathematician and physicist, Galileo was busy teaching to anyone who would listen the Copernican theory that the world was round. Unfortunately, the Roman Catholic Church didn’t take kindly to Galileo’s scientific challenge to religious dogma. It denounced him as a heretic before the Inquisition when Galileo attempted to argue that the Bible should be read as an allegory when its text differed from physical and scientific evidence. Ultimately, Galileo was spared the death penalty for his “blasphemy,” but he was sentenced to house arrest where he remained for twenty-six years until his death in 1642.

In Galileo’s day, public opinion largely adhered to the flat-earth view taught by the Catholic Church and few were willing to risk death by openly challenging Biblical writings with scientific analysis. We now know the public’s view in Galileo's time was all wrong, but public opinion is often susceptible to error, especially when religious authority suppress reason, freedom of thought and critical analysis.

Over the past 400 years some things haven’t changed.

Several years ago, a local school board instituted the teaching of “Biblical Creationism” as part of their high school’s biology curriculum. Despite U.S. Supreme Court rulings that creationism is not science and thus, teaching it in a public school science curriculum violates the constitutional separation of Church and State, the creationism proponents on that school board wanted it taught anyway alongside the Darwinian theory of evolution.

Taking that step of including creationism within the framework of teaching biology in a public school classroom ended up costing that school district dearly when the federal court's held their actions unconstitutional, but those who initially championed the idea were not the ones who ended up footing the bill. Taxpayers paid it.

If school board officials really want to teach biblical creationism as an alternative scientific theory, they should also include over 500 other creation theories that gained acceptance by one group or another. Let students examine and subjected to reason, questioning and critical scientific analysis all the different theories that exist. If school boards are going to dispel the notion that they’re only interested in spreading religion and not advancing scientific knowledge, nothing less will do.

Here are just a few of the other creation theories school boards could consider teaching:

The Ancient Astronaut theory has had a wide following in one form or another dating as far back a 600 B.C. The current version is that aliens happened upon the earth & mixed their genetic make-up with the sub-humans, presumably apes to form modern humans.

Ancient Babylonians believed there was a god named “Marduk” who cut the “Great Mother” in half. Babylonian theory held that Marduk made one half of the great mother into the sky and the other half into the earth.

Various tribesmen in northeastern Siberia believe that the first humans were created by a female raven. The first humans were twin males. The raven’s mate created the land by defecating and the oceans by urinating. According to their creation theory a spider woman created the first human female.

There are multiple Hindu views of creation. One view is that the universe began as the body of a single male named Purusa. Purusa was sacrificed and part of his body became the earth and part, the heavens. Castes of humans were created from Purusa’s arms, legs and feet.

Many Native-American Navajo Indians believe creation to have started with insects that inhabited 6 lower worlds in the earth. As the insects were forced by the gods towards the upper worlds they created men and women and eventually led them to the outer world they now occupy.

The ancient Mayan civilization believed in a feathered serpent that created the earth by talking it into being. Animals refused to pay homage to the gods forcing the serpent to experiment with humans. The first humans were made of clay but they proved too brittle and broke apart. A second attempt was made with wood but the wooden people lacked flexibility and caused a multitude of problems. A great flood washed away the second group but a few managed to escape and live today as monkeys. A third attempt at creating humans produced the peoples of the Mayan civilization.

The Aztecs in Mexico believed in a “five sun” theory. The suns created the universe and all its inhabitants.

In Mali, Africa a group known as the Dogon believe that humans evolved from horrible looking beings known as “Nommos”. The “Nommos” were mermaids and mermen that lived comfortably in and out of water. When the “Nommos” arrived on the earth they created oceans on earth in which to live. A few “Nommos” chose to stay exclusively on the land and evolved into modern humans.

The ancient Egyptians had a creation theory involving a god named Khepri who created less powerful gods and humans from his own body fluids. It involved actions that the writer of Leviticus would have deemed forbidden.

It’s hard for me to envision high school students out on an archeological dig searching for “Nommos”, feathered serpents or pieces of “Marduk”. Then again, it’s hard to believe a majority once thought the earth was flat! Who knows, maybe in parts of the United States, it still is!

Friday, June 17, 2011

FREEDOM IS THE TRUE PRICE OF SAFETY

Whenever I see the bumper sticker, “Freedom isn’t Free”, I wonder what price the driver of the vehicle is willing to pay. Very often, I think the answer is much less than the driver would admit.

The individuals who lost their lives on 9/11 paid the ultimate price for freedom. They roamed freely about their daily lives and died because a group of religious fanatics exploited that freedom in a despicable act of murder and mayhem. For the victims of 9/11 freedom was not free!

But what of we Americans who lived through that horrific morning? Have we cherished freedom just as dearly as those who died? Have we steadfastly maintained the same level of freedom knowing we might pay for that freedom with our very lives? Or have we sacrificed freedom in the name of safety and self-protection?

I believe many Americans have regrettably decided that a safe society is better than a free society and they’re willing to sacrifice cherished rights and freedoms to secure a sense of personal safety. Their bumper sticker should read, “Freedom is the Price of Safety”.

This coming July 4th, ask yourself whether you are celebrating freedom or security. There’s a big difference!

LAMENTING THE BEER BELLY

If one morning you open up the newspaper and see my obituary, this is how my demise probably took place. I got out of the shower and dried myself with a towel. Then, I got dressed and sat down in a chair to put on my shoes. As I bent over to tie my shoes, my over-sized beer gut cut off the air supply to my lungs and I fainted. As I tumbled off the chair, my head struck the edge of a dresser resulting in massive bleeding that the paramedics did not arrive in time to stop. Of course, at my funeral my family will say I died a hero, trying to save some dog or cat from a burning house, but you’ll know the real story. This beer gut killed me!

I thought I might avoid that scenario by buying loafers at the shoe store, and believe me when I say it crossed my mind, but the tie shoes I liked were on sale and I couldn’t resist saving twenty bucks, even if it meant enduring the beer gut until this new pair wears out.

I must confess that my beer gut ruined my best shirt. Oh sure, the shirt is still usable, but my belly button would be seeing sunshine…thanks to the beer gut. I wonder why they don’t make shirts with a bit of extra fabric in the front to cover an extended belly? They can put a man on the moon. You’d think they could figure out how to neatly cover a beer gut too!

You know what else is not fair? I don’t drink beer! I’ve had two in my whole existence. Imagine what I’d look like if I drank one a week!

Oh well, so much for the beer gut. I’m hungry. What's for lunch?

Thursday, June 16, 2011

FROM THE ASHES

The charred ruins of thousands of burned acres in Arizona and New Mexico and the loss of hundreds of homes in those states - the unfortunate result of numerous wildfires - prompted me to reflect upon the destructive forces of nature and all that stands in its path. We do our best to harness nature for the good of mankind, but nature has its own rules and reasserts dominance over man whenever it pleases.

We are only stewards on this ‘blue marble’, and should never forget the consequences of our actions or how we affect our earth – lest nature should remind us with all its fury!

When Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans, many outsiders criticized its citizens for building in a flood plane; oddly enough, it was the US government who first encouraged them to do so, and when hurricanes struck the eastern seaboard, those same critics mocked folks who built along the beaches. No doubt, voices will be raised critical of those who chose to live among the sage brush of Arizona and New Mexico too.

If not among the sage brush, or the trees, or near the beaches, or in the flood plains along our vast rivers, then where?

Shall we fault mid-western farmers for plowing fields or building barns on plains routinely ravaged by tornadoes? Should we disparage all who build near rivers, creeks or streams since flooding of even the smallest of tributaries can kill? Is it right to criticize Floridians for choosing to live in a hurricane highway?

We put down roots where we think we can prosper, and hope that by the grace of God we can weather all that happens to come our way. Sometimes we do – sometimes we don’t.

Thousand of people in Arizona and New Mexico are confronting hopes and dreams today that resemble little more than piles of ash. Prayers will comfort. Criticism won’t.

Nature marches forward…and from the ashes, life is renewed.

A SERIES OF RANDOM THOUGHTS

A couple of weeks ago, my youngest daughter and I watched the movie “Amazing Grace”, for the hundredth time. It’s the story of the English abolitionist, William Wilburforce, who led the anti-slave trade movement in Colonial Great Britain. The movie is a good reminder that the winds of change take time and doing what is right is seldom easy.

~~~*~~~

In 1991, my grandmother died at the ripe old age of 98, a victim of cancer, but partly due to her inability to enjoy a nice cold beer and a cucumber sandwich. She used to say that when you couldn’t have either, it was time to go. In those last few months, when I partnered with two aunts in taking turns spending the night with her, my grandma would occasionally lament that she put up with my one aunt’s moaning and groaning for years, and her only regret was that she didn’t put her foot down sooner. She’d chuckle and say to me, “Steve, life’s too short to take shit”. That was a 98 year old woman talking.

~~~*~~~

I’m not big on the chain of command; then again, I never served in the military so I recognize there are benefits in that structure that I’ll never begin to appreciate. However, I did grow up in a chain of command household…and by that I mean, you didn’t take your problems outside the house. I did that once, at age 12, but the social worker didn’t believe my complaints and sent me home. The marks from the so-called "discipline" I received afterward didn’t disappear for three weeks, but I never talked out of line again. There are benefits to the chain of command to be sure – but my personal experience has always been that it protected the guy upstairs, not the guy below.

~~~*~~~

The feds have a whistle blower statute, which you’d think would be universally supported since nobody wants fraud to exist in government, at least that’s what the politicians say, but the truth is the current statute barely squeaked by being enacted, and only then because it was so watered down that some question whether it has any teeth. The reason the whistle blower statute is so unpopular and ineffective is that nobody in charge wants to worry about having the whistle blown on them.

~~~*~~~

One of the things I learned during my years doing criminal defense work was the importance of listening to folks. I spent thousands of hours listening to criminals and victims, police officers and everyday folks on the street. Along the way, I learned that a person could decipher the truth a lot better the more they listened to what others had to say. I often think I know the truth, and then find out that the more I listen, the more I realize I’m often flying blind. So, I listen to anybody who wants to talk to me.

~~~*~~~

I’ve also learned that few decisions we make in life are made in a vacuum. We make them in light of our life experiences and the system we’ve developed over the years for making judgments. Some would say it’s a personal set of biases and prejudices; and there’s truth in that charge, but as long as a person can recognize why they do what they do and take responsibility for their decisions, and remain true to their conscience, I can live with the results.

Wednesday, June 15, 2011

THE WEATHER ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM

Officials at the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) announced today that April was a record-breaking month in terms of the overall number of tornadoes, floods, wildfires and drought. If you had any contact with the media during that month you know that the stream of news regarding natural disasters in the United States was a constant and the effects of that weather onslaught will be felt for years to come.

Because of the caustic political climate that exists these days, nobody at the (NCDC) wants to go on record linking the sheer volume of those catastrophic weather events to global warming or its new moniker, "climate change", but scientists at the EPA have continued to push for more strident carbon emission regulations because they assert that greenhouse gasses are triggering changes in climate patterns that mankind cannot control.

Of course, scientists who warn of global warming and climate change are facing stiff opposition from politicians and industries with a vested interest in continuing the use and sale of fossil fuels, and the recent batch of unduly harsh weather does nothing to change those critic's minds. The earth could bake at 200 degrees and some folks would still scoff at the notion of global warming. That's just the nature of ignorance and sticking one's head in the sand.

There's no disputing the fact that the polar ice caps are melting. So are glaciers and mountain ice around the world. Droughts over the past two decades have lasted significantly longer than at any time during recorded history, and flooding has tripled in the past five years. All that melting ice has to flow somewhere!

As a society, we can continue denying the effects of global warming and climate change, but eventually, every one of us will experience a tornado, a drought, a flood or a wildfire. Hopefully, we'll survive that calamity and have the good sense to wake up and address the root causes of the weather we face. Our future and the future of our children depend on it.

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

A CLEAR CHOICE: PROTECT CHILDREN OR OUR POLITICIANS' ASSES

Commonwealth revenue officials have reported that contrary to expectations, Pennsylvania is actually running a budget surplus as the end of the 2010-2011 fiscal year approaches. That means that there will be money left over to transfer to the 2011-2012 budget. Pennsylvania's governor and the state legislature are considering what to do with the surplus and one suggestion under consideration is to sock the money away in a rainy day fund.

Rain is falling in a torrential downpour outside my house as I type this entry, and our governor and Pennsylvania legislature are poised to make draconian cuts in 2011-2012 educational spending that will negatively affect our children for the rest of their lives. Today is exactly the kind of day that rainy day funds are meant to address, so if Pennsylvania suddenly finds itself running a budget surplus, our elected officials had better plow every dime of that surplus back into preparing our children for their future and not into a fund meant to protect politicians’ rear ends at some date down the road.

In robust economic times budget surpluses should be set aside to avoid catastrophic cuts in spending during the worst of economic times. That's what I call prudent fiscal policy. We are now living in the midst of bad economic times. If our Commonwealth does not use Pennsylvania’s budget surplus to avoid catastrophic cuts in education today, our elected officials will have failed in their duty to properly educate our children for no other reason than pure selfishness. If that’s the kind of failure and selfish attitude we want to pass onto our children, God help them all!

Monday, June 13, 2011

PRAYING FOR A NON-GOVERNMENT OPTION

Some folks are criticizing Texas governor Rick Perry for inviting fellow governors to a day of prayer and fasting that he is hosting in August, but don’t count me among that group of criticizers – yet! Many of Perry’s critics claim that his event is simply an attempt to bolster his presidential ambitions. We’ll see. Others complain that the meeting violates the principle of church/state separation. I understand their worry. It’s a valid concern. For now, I’m reserving judgment on both issues.

Perry stated that his event, which he calls an “apolitical Christian prayer service”, is meant to achieve “spiritual solutions to the many challenges we face in our communities, states and nation.” That’s fine with me, as long as the “spiritual solution” Perry references is not just a prayer request to God to perform a miracle so the rest of us don’t have to lift a finger. If Perry is ready, through prayer, song or whatever, to dump Republican political ideology in favor of using any and all means available to meet Christ’s demand that we feed, shelter and care for the poor, I’ll be the first in line to endorse his efforts. I have my doubts that he’ll have such an epiphany, but he deserves the chance to repent and reform his ways, just as any Republican soul does. If he wants to convert a few of his GOP colleagues along the way, I’m for that too.

Perry is also drawing criticism because his event is being paid for by the American Family Association (AFA), an evangelical group of conservatives based in the neighboring state of Mississippi. The (AFA) likes to call themselves Christian - based, but the group has a “hate list” longer than the late Osama bin Laden, so it’s hard to take their Christian claim seriously, especially since Christ demanded that his followers love their enemies. That’s not something you’ll find championed in(AFA) literature. Still, if Perry wants to take advantage of an offer of assistance to do the work Christ demanded we Christians do, I’m for that too.

I did get a chuckle over the fact that several non-Christian religious groups have registered complaints about Perry’s planned event, claiming that they’re being excluded from an official state event. Seriously folks, that’s like a black person moaning about not being invited to a Ku Klux Klan gathering. Don’t they understand that an (AFA) event hosted by an ambitious so-called evangelical Christian conservative politician is probably going to be hostile territory for non-believers? (That’s my jaded side speaking)

I’m taking a guarded wait-and-see attitude about Perry’s prayer event. In the meantime, I’m praying for a miracle. With Perry and the (AFA) joining forces, that’s probably what it’s going to take.

Sunday, June 12, 2011

PROFITS OVER PROPHETS

At a recent church conference I attended, an insurance agent smiled with cheerful expectation as he surveyed a gathering of eager pastors who had signed up to hear his presentation. No doubt this agent was hopeful of the prospect of collecting sizable commissions by selling insurance to the churches whose leaders were sitting before him. The agent represented a company that specialized in providing church liability coverage and he was ready for the opportunity to impress the congregation of ministers with his expertise on the subject. As one would expect, the agent was well-versed in the field of liability coverage.

During the agent's presentation, he explained the reasons why many churches have begun conducting criminal background checks on individuals who work with children in their congregation. The practice helps insure that children they shepherd are protected from known sexual predators or individual with a history of hurting others. Developing policies designed to protect children in church congregations has been a welcomed outgrowth of the string of sexual abuse by clergy scandals that have rocked Christian churches over the past ten years, and those efforts have been welcomed by the insurance industry too. After all, better policies lead to fewer claims and that means greater insurance company profits. It appears as if it's a win-win situation for everybody.

Unfortunately, it's not. The insurance agent I mentioned went on to explain that congregations could limit their exposure to liability, and hopefully lower their insurance premiums, by conducting criminal background checks on all prospective members of their congregation to insure that seedier elements were excluded from membership. From an insurance standpoint, that makes absolute sense. From a Christian standpoint, that's about as far from Christ-like behavior as one can get. It's a perfect example of where religious interests and business interests diverge.

When a Christian church decides to exclude sinners from it's membership, that's the day that church is no longer a Christian congregation.

Saturday, June 11, 2011

CONGRESSSMAN WEINER IS NOT ALONE

I’ve been struggling to find my voice when it comes to commenting on the recent scandal involving Anthony Weiner, the New York Congressman whose lurid sexual activities are occupying a large swath of national political news these days, because there are too many aspects of this scandal that feels like a story I’ve read countless times before. Maybe that’s part of the problem. This scandal is nothing more than old news. Only the names have changed; and not to protect the innocent.

Anthropologists tell us that people have been known to engage in lurid sexual behavior since the dawn of time, so it shouldn’t come as any surprise that politicians today would be following suit in similar numbers. In fact, a case could be made that politicians are more apt to engage in deviant behavior because their position of power frequently provides the opportunity to do so with less prospect of getting caught. I guess my point is that it’s disingenuous for anybody to suggest that there’s something novel about Congressman Weiner’s behavior. Any serious student of American political history can list U.S. Presidents, from Washington to Clinton, and attach the name of an illicit consort of some form or another. In times long past, that stuff didn’t garner front page headlines on every newspaper in the country like it does today, but that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. It did. It just wasn’t considered newsworthy and seldom hindered a politician from advancing in the political arena.

In my mind, that raises some interesting questions. Why are the salacious details of a politician’s sexual escapades newsworthy today when they were not one hundred fifty years ago? Why do such stories hold the public’s rapt attention? Why do we expect our politicians to adhere to a higher standard of moral conduct than the average citizen, and then respond with contempt when they prove they’re no holier than the rest of us? Who exactly do we want our leaders to be?

People across the political spectrum are calling for Congressman Weiner to resign his position, and it’s hard for me to think he can focus on the work his constituents elected him to do with this lurid cloud hanging over his head. I can understand why certain folks (especially a voter in his district) might want him to pack his bags and leave Washington. Still, I can’t help asking why a guy like Weiner should leave town with his head bowed low when many of his colleagues were just as immersed in immorality as he was? That’s probably where the big disconnect occurs. Many of them don’t see their behavior as immoral, and if they do, they tend to view their misdeeds as not as low as Weiner’s.

For example, the drive to end government financial assistance to the poor is a political cause in vogue today, and many a politician is garnering accolades and voter support for advocating what is, in essence, an attempt to starve a significant number of children who comprise the majority of America’s poor. Ironically, that’s not considered immoral behavior and few voices are calling for those politicians to resign. By contrast, a man who sent a bunch of lewd photographs is labeled a pervert and characterized as wholly unsuitable for public office because of his immoral behavior. No wonder it’s a perplexing subject.

Friday, June 10, 2011

BLOGGER ANNOUNCES TAKE BACK AMERICA TOUR

Left-wing progressive blogger, Steve Zorbaugh today announced plans to embark on a 9-day "TAKE BACK AMERICA" tour of the state of Wyoming next month to spread his progressive political message to the good citizens of that state and any visitors who may be found therein. Zorbaugh has yet to release his full itinerary for the trip through the cowboy state, but sources close to the blogger guarantee that a good time will be had by everybody who attends his events.

"It's time we progressives take the battle for the hearts of true Americans to the GOP's back door," Zorbaugh thundered at a hastily-called press conference this morning. "There's a whole lot more to America than the 2nd Amendment, and I aim to prove it!"

MUTINY ON THE GINGRICH

Don't abandon ship, Newt! Despite my liberal, left-wing bent, I'm hoping that the mutiny of your campaign crew doesn't take the wind from your sails. After all, you're the only straight shooter among the entire sea of GOP presidential candidates (declared or otherwise) and if you jump ship, the likelihood that the GOP will nominate somebody with an intellect to oppose Obama in 2012 is something close to zilch. A panderer? You bet! A candidate with substantive intelligence and the ability to explain policy with something more than a sound bite? Not in a million years.

Don't get me wrong. I don't subscribe to your political ideology. I don't champion the notion that 350 million Americans can prosper and live harmoniously by each following their own agenda without pulling resources or having a government that advocates for the common good. I don't buy your view that without government, individuals and corporations operate on a level playing field. I grew up poor and I know those pronouncements are a load of crap.

But I will say this – you're honest and up-front with your beliefs. You don't sugar-coat the policies you advocate or pretend those policies are something different than they are. I admire that in a politician. You may not have my vote, but you do have my respect.