Two Posts in One

Some book I didn't get for Xmas (Because there's a war on Christmas)

You Say Tomato, I Say Shut Up, by Annabelle Gurwich

The Joy of X: A Guided Tour of Math from One to Infinity, by Steven Strogatz

Why Be Happy When You Could Be Normal?, by Jeanette Winterson

The Clothes Have No Emperor, by Paul Slansky (1989 book about Reagan)

Not So Sweet Mystery of Life in Brasil

One of the mysteries of Brasil for me has to do with firecrackers. Loud explosions are the way everything is celebrated here. Your favorite team just scored a goal? Set off a 30-second string of firecrackers. You just had a shot of cachaça? The light turned green? Blow something up.  The virgin Mary just went into labor? It's Monday? A little more noise seems appropriate. You happen to be across the street from a hospital? Who gives a shit?

The sound of mini bombs going off  is so ubiquitous that our two cats, who used to run and hide, don´t even move anymore. And please remember the way in which the concrete canyons of a city can exaggerate the sound effects.

Okay, the mystery I mentioned. To the best of my knowledge, I have never in four years been in a store where I saw fireworks or firecrackers for sale. I've asked Heitor where people purchase these things and he says he has no idea; he's never bought firecrackers in his life. Needless to say, he is my kind of Brazilian.

Any other Brasileiros know? And, yes, if you're reading this, you are also my kind of Brazilian.

Guns Don´t Kill People

I remember a sarcasm from the 1960s or 1970s: "Guns don´t kill people; Bullets kill people." This was in reaction to the gun lobby´s slogan of the time: "Guns don´t kill people; People kill people."  We´ll see  your absurdity and raise you one.

Now I do believe the best way to approach the issue of our out-of-control gun culture is to recognize the truth of that sarcasm. Even if the sale of guns were outlawed tomorrow, the country and culture are permeated with guns that would still be there. There have been some successful buy-back programs, but that is never going to really go anywhere.

I think there are a number of promising things we can do in the realm of controlling access to ammunition. As things are now you can go on line and purchase any ammo, any type of clip with nothing more than a credit card. I saw that you (or your teenager using your credit card) can buy a clip  with 30 rounds for $8.99.  Don´t ask me what calibre etc.  It´s not germane. That needs to stop; ammunition should be difficult to buy. And it should be expensive as hell.

Supposedly there are gun clubs and places where gun owners can practice. These places could have access to ammunition at today´s cheap prices for sale to their members/customers. BUT these organizations would be responsible, with very severe penalties, for ensuring that all of the ammo they sell is used on their premises. In other words, gun owners can practice or shoot for sport at a minimum cost.

Gun owners say they believe guns make their lives and property more safe and secure. I don´t believe it, but let it be. If they want to have weapons on hand for defense of their castle and person, they shouldn´t mind paying an extremely high price for the bullets that make that possible.

I understand that bullets, as opposed to guns, actually have a shelf life, so castle defenders would periodically have to buy new ammunition. Perhaps we could let them have it at a lesser price as long as they turned in their unused, but out-of-date rounds.

Perhaps we could even require that manufacturers make shell casings be identifiable and traceable. Without a doubt, it is possible. How much it would add to the cost, I have no idea.

At any rate, I think the future of gun control is really ammunition control, because the guns themselves are already out of control and there is nothing much we can do about it.

The sarcastic hipsters had it right. It´s bullets that kill people and we can do something about that.

All I Want for Christmas....

Again, Just Saying

 

This may be a little hard to read, but the numbers on the vertical axis are in increments of 10. The U.S. has 90 guns for every 100 people. Considering that some of those people are minors, that is more than one gun per adult.

Just Saying

The Tipping Point

In his book, The Tipping Point, Malcolm Gladwell tells the story of suicides in the Micronesian island group. 

In the early 1960s, suicide on the islands of Micronesia was almost unknown. But for reasons no one quite understands, it then began to rise, steeply and dramatically, by leaps and bounds every year, until by the end of the 1980s there were more suicides per capita in Micronesia than anywhere else in the world. For males between fifteen and twenty four, the suicide rate in the United States is about 22 per 100,000. In the islands of Micronesia the rate is about 160 per 100,000—more than seven times higher.

 For some reason not understood, suicide among young boys has become trivialized. One teenager committed suicide because his parents had refused to buy him a graduation gown. Another because his older brother had rebuked him for making too much noise. And dozens and dozens of similarly illogical reasons.

Thus as suicide grows more frequent in these communities the idea itself acquires a certain familiarity if not fascination to young men, and the lethality of the act seems to be trivialized. Especially among some younger boys, the suicide acts appear to have acquired an experimental almost recreational element.

The reason for this may not be understood, but it fits the pattern that Gladwell describes as a tipping point, in which something rare becomes commonplace.  

Looked at in this light, the rash of school shootings is even more frightening, if that is possible.

A Rational Brazilean Perspective

Ever since the school shooting on Friday, it has been the lead story for the NY Times on line as well as the LA Times.

Heitor's reaction this morning was something along the lines of "either do something about the gun violence in the U.S. or quit featuring the story.  If you're serious about regretting these tragedies, then do something about your gun laws. As it is, I think Americans just like mourning."

And of course he's right. It's true neither of these newspapers can do anything about the gun laws except editorialize. Still, to the extent that newspapers reflect the culture, one has to conclude we just like beating our breasts and lamenting.

McConnell Filibusters Himself

Perhaps, stuck out here away from the 24-hour news cycle, I'm the last person to hear about this story, because I had to read it.

You may remember that during the last crisis over the raising the debt ceiling, Mitch McConnell introduced a bill allowing the president to raise the debt ceiling on his own. Never mind that there were many people arguing that the president already has that authority, McConnell's idea was to embarrass the president by making him alone responsible for the inevitable raising of the ceiling. Obama had already indicated that he would not raise the debt ceiling on his own.

Last Thursday, McConnell tried to introduce this same bill as an amendment to another totally unrelated bill, and Harry Reid did not allow it.

But there is a difference this time around, because Obama has said he wants the authority to raise the debt ceiling on his own when the issue comes back again in a few weeks. I don't know if he is claiming to have that authority already, as some constitutional scholars insist he does, or if he wants congressional authority,but I am assuming the latter. Reid, after rejecting McConnell's amendment attempt, did a headcount and realized he had 51 votes to pass the measure, so he brought it back up as a separate bill.

And McConnell filibustered it. His attempt at gamesmanship failed and he filibustered his  own bill....for the 385th+ filibuster of the current Senate.

There is another story here because the Republicans are constantly complaining that the Democratic majority will not allow amendments to bills. As if that were something new. I recall that Democrats had the same complaint when the House was controlled by Dick Armey and Tom DeLay.

And then there is the need for filibuster reform. Since majorities today will be minorities tomorrow, one has to be careful what changes one makes. But one thing that seems basic to me is that filibusters should require Senators to actually get on the floor and talk...and talk and talk, as opposed to the procedure nowadays where they just have to "announce" it. It would be used a lot less regularly, to state the obvious, if they not only had to speak, but tie up all other Senate business in the process.

Just saying.

Just To Be Fair

While I do not retract a single thing I ever said or wrote about the Trayvon Martin case, I think the defendant, George Zimmerman, has a very good case in a lawsuit he has filed against NBC News for defamation, at least based on a story in the NY Times.

NBC, on three separate occasions and on three separate shows between March 20 and March 27, aired a 911 tape in which Zimmerman is quoted as saying, in his first words to the operator:

This guy looks like he’s up to no good or he’s on drugs or something. He looks black.

 In fact, Zimmerman told the operator: “This guy looks like he’s up to no good or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.” When the dispatcher said, “O.K., and this guy — is he white, black or Hispanic?” Zimmerman then said, “He looks black.”

Alternative Holiday Gifts

Sometimes I wonder if I´m truly a hermit, as for example just  happened when I read Nicholas Kristof´s column today and was reminded that Christmas really is almost upon us. But I know it´s not that I´m physically isolated; it is just that I have become so adept at  tuning out all of that xmas bullshit/noise over these many years that when it suddenly does register in my mind, it seems like a revelation. Sometimes I am amazed at my own powers.

I think Kristof is one of the most truly altruistic people who I don´t know but would like to. If you´re tired of the usual commercial xmas routine, here are some good alternative ideas.

And now I´m  going back into my cocoon.

When It Rains....

When it rains in São Paulo, it seems like the water all runs down our street.  A couple of months ago, the city finished putting in huge new storm sewers on both sides of the street. It was a noisy project that disrupted our lives in a minor way for 3-4 months.  And at the first big rain, this is what we get. Actually today´s rain wasn´t that heavy. Heitor was getting ready to leave the house and he had just said "I guess I´d better take an umbrella," and then he opened the door and saw this. I guess this qualifies as my first flash flood.

Unfortunately, I don´t know how to stop shooting a video with our camera, so it ends awkwardly.

Meanwhile, on the street in the back of the house, all was very serene and normal.

Opening Our Aperture

An article on the Military Times website yesterday appears to be saying that children are now legitimate military targets in Afghanistan.


Where is the moral high ground if our justification for targeting children is that the Taliban is using and hiding behind them? They started it!

  “It kind of opens our aperture,” said Army Lt. Col. Marion “Ced” Carrington, whose unit, 1st Battalion, 508th Parachute Infantry Regiment, was assisting the Afghan police. “In addition to looking for military-age males, it’s looking for children with potential hostile intent.”

It's a complicated and dangerous situation that highlights for me the fact that we're out of our league. George W. Bush, the candidate, was correct when he said we shouldn't get into the business of nation building.

I don't know what Obama's timetable is for getting us out of Afghanistan, but it isn't soon enough. As scholars of the region and historians said at the time of the original invasion, Afghanistan is the graveyard of empires (or some such phrase). We're just one more.

Eisenhower, Part 2

One of the thoughts that occurred to me from reading the Eisenhower book by Jim Newton is that the conservative wing of the Republican party has, at its foundation, been reactive ever since FDR. Robert Taft, who possibly would have been the Republican nominee had Eisenhower chosen not to run, and who was the head of the Republican right wing, made a career, in large part, by being in opposition to New Deal programs. Even his most enduring legacy, the Taft-Hartley act of 1947 was a reaction to the Wagner Act of 1935.

I think there is a zig zag line that runs through Taft, Goldwater, Reagan and today's Republican party that would still love to privatize social security and eviscerate Medicare and Medicaid.  It isn't a straight line, primarily because of the shifting positions on foreign policy. Taft was an isolationist who distrusted international involvements, and we've now reached a position where the only acceptable Republican stance is hawkishness.

An interesting alternative history assignment could center around what would have happened in 1952 if Eisenhower had chosen not to run. If Taft had won the nomination and the presidency, his vice-presidential selection would have been all-important, because Taft died in July 1952, just months after Ike's inauguration.. 

Some other tidbits I picked up:

The Republicans chose Douglas MacArthur as their keynote speaker for their 1952 convention. This was a year and a half after Truman asserted his constitutional authority and fired MacArthur for making public statements at variance with administration policy. It was an arrogant choice, it seems to me.  Apparently Mac went over about as well as Clint Eastwood talking to an empty chair. "The Democratic Party has become captive......to set the national course unerringly toward the socialist regimentation of a totalitarian state."

Apparently this Republican penchant for slinging the S word is a venerable old tradition. Eisenhower's two older brothers both accused Ike of following socialistic policies. One of his brothers was quoted as saying he, Edgar, was "the only real Republican in the family."

Eisenhower, in addition to having a considerable temper, also had a bit of a sense of humor. At the time of MacArthur's firing in 1951, Eisenhower was not yet an official candidate for the nomination, but Lucius Clay, busy trying to organize support for a presidential run, advised him to keep quiet. Ike supposedly replied, "I am going to maintain silence in every language known to man."

Writing of the Senate Republican leader, William Knowland, Ike said "In his case, there seems to be no final answer to the question 'How stupid can you get?'"

When meeting his bald headed Secretary of the Treasury for the first time, Ike said "I see you part your hair the same way I do."

Finally, Churchill's comment about Eisenhower's Secretary of State: "Dull, Duller, Dulles"

Eisenhower, Part 1

I wonder what it says about contemporary America that there are suddenly so many scholarly reassessments of Eisenhower. At least part of it must be a nostalgia for an era when the terms "liberal Republican" or "moderate Republican" were not nonsense decriptions.

Rather than start with Jean Edward Smith's Eisenhower in War and Peace, I opted for the Jim Newton book, Eisenhower: The White House Years. About a month ago, Evan Thomas brought out yet another book, Ike's Bluff: President Eisenhower's Battle to Save the World.  I think, since I'd been sitting on the Newton book for a few months, intending to read it but never doing so, it was the publication of the Thomas book that spurred me to finally just do it. I didn't want to get even further behind the curve in the Eisenhower revival.  I chose not to start with the Smith book, because I really have no interest in reading about war.

Newton, is clearly an Eisenhower admirer, but he does recognize that Eisenhower had something of a blind spot (my words, I think) when it came to Civil Rights. He did implement the integration of the armed forces, which had been declared by Truman but not put into effect, and he did end segregation in Washington DC, something the Democrats had neglected to do for strictly political reasons (you will remember that their used to be a very powerful animal called a Southern Democrat).

One of Eisenhower's strengths was his ability to always search for middle ground between conflicting policies and personalities. I gather, from just now reading his obituary in the NY Times, that was (no surprise) also an aspect of his personality that featured prominently as a commander in WWII, but that part of Eisenhower's career doesn't figure very much in the Newton book.  In the area of Civil Rights, that strength became a weakness. As Newton wrote:

Seeking his "middle way," Eisenhower routinely deplored "foolish extremists on both sides of the question," suggesting moral equivalence between those who sought equality and those who denied it.

He even threatened to boycott the 1956 Republican convention if the platform committee insisted on stating that the Eisenhower Administration supported the Court's ruling in Brown v. Board of Education. A compromise was proposed, suggesting that the platform should say the administration and party "concurred" in the Brown ruling. But, even that wasn't good enough for Eisenhower, who eventually signed off on the phrase that the administration "accepts" Brown.

This is a good reminder that the middle ground doesn't always represent the high ground.

It doesn't diminish Eisenhower's strengths to recognize his shortcomings. And, whether his heart was in it or not, doesn't really matter I guess. When push arrived at shove, he was still the first (and only) president since Lincoln to send federal troops into the south (Little Rock) to enforce the law of the land.  Juan Williams, in a biography of Thurgood Marshall, analyzes the events in Little Rock almost hour by hour, and argues that Eisenhower should have acted sooner. I don't know where the truth lies, but it would not be inconsistent with someone always trying to find the reasonable compromise, someone considering both sides to be extremists, to wait a little to long to act.

One other Eisenhower tidbit. He was the first president to start his second term as a lame duck. The amendment limiting presidents to two terms had only been enacted in 1951. Truman could have chosen to run in 1952, but opted not to do it. Eisenhower was the first president whose second term was known by all to be his last.

Like it or not, more about Eisenhower to follow.

Go Over Grover

Finally we are reading about isolated Republican office holders who are willing to defy Grover Norquist. That is certainly hopeful.

I read somewhere recently that the current Houuse of Representatives only has 13 Republican members who have not taken "the pledge." The good news is that is up from 6 in the last Congress.

I'm still not sure it is time to celebrate, as the LA Times headline does, that "Grover Norquist, ayatollah, is losing his grip on the party."

More From Emily Litella

Nick Kristof's  column yesterday really does capture the way in which the shift of wealth upward has created a vicious cycle of national failure, in terms of infrastructure and basic public services.

According to Kristof, the World Economic Forum now ranks US infrastructure 25th, down from 8th in 2003-4.  In 2009, the American Society of Civil Engineers gave our national electric grid a grade of just D+.

But, as Kristof, points out, if you have enough money, you don't have to give a shit. The electrical grid is a disaster? The hottest new must-have items after hurricane Sandy for home owners who have the money are $10,000 backup generators. Companies can't produce them fast enough.

Bothered by crime? Move into a gated community.

Public schools are failing? Send your kid to a private school; you can afford it.

Public library budgets and hours are being cut? Public libraries are for losers who can't afford their own books.

Cuts to our National Park System as well as city parks have forced a cutback in hours and services? Get a 2nd or 3rd home in the country and make your own park. Join a private club.

Unfortunately, poverty, income inequality, and failing infrastructure were not of much interest to either candidate in the election we just suffered through. Yes, the Democrats talked about income inequality, but only insofar as it affected the nebulous, and shrinking, middle class. The only mention of poverty was the Republican assertion that Obama was trying to buy the votes of poor people with food stamps, and their division of the country into makers and takers. Neither candidate dealt with poverty as a growing problem that needs to be addressed as a national issue.

I know, there have always been private schools and some people have always been able to afford 2nd or 3rd homes. But that's not the point. It is the magnitude, the scale of inequality that is so extreme, and getting worse. According to Kristof, the latest census data shows that a full 1% of people in Los Angeles and New York City work as private security guards. That 1% is a really large number if you think about it. (The 1% protecting the assets of that other notorious 1%.)

Kristof titled his article "A Failed Experiment." I think he was referring to the half-century process of redistributing wealth upward, reducing taxes and cutting back on the most basic of public services.  For those more pessimistic of us, it might as well refer to the whole U.S. political-economic experiment.

I don't think the obstructionist Republicans are the only ones at fault. I haven't heard much talk about it lately, but I still believe Obama squandered an opportunity at the beginning of his administration (the supposedly crucial first 100 days, I guess) to bring the country behind him in a commitment to some real fundamental change, ala FDR.

It probably wasn´t original with him, but Rahm Emmanuel is supposed to have observed that a crisis is a terrible think to waste; despite his many accomplishments in the face of rigid obstructionism, I think Obama didn´t take full advantage of the crisis that Bush handed him, at least in the sense of rallying the people behind some significant changes/programs.

Because...LEADERSHIP

I Love Tom Tomorrow

Brasil Is a Land of Many Rules

I am going to have my annual checkup on Monday morning. Here are the rules for preparation in the order in which they are printed:

No alcohol for 72 hours
No ejaculations for 48 hours
No bicycle riding for 48 hours (stationary or otherwise)
No riding on a motorcycle for 48 hours
No horseback riding for 48 hours
No use of suppositories for 72 hours
No urethral probes or digital rectal exams for 72 hours
No cystoscopy for the last 5 days
No transrectal ultrasounds in the last 7 days (not sure of that translation)
No colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy in the last 15 days
No urodynamic exams (again with the translation) in the last 21 days
No prostate biopsies in the last 30 days
No urination for 2 hours

Along with the usual fasting.

Now I definitely don´t want to cross over that line of too much information, but I will just say I have no intention of following all of these rules.

Here is the amazing part. Along with all of the normal bloodwork, and a few tests I don´t recognize, this exam will involve a full abdominal and prostate ultrasound, as well as an electrocardiogram.

It will cost me a little less than $150. This is not through the public health system, but with Brazilian insurance that Heitor and I recently purchased. It will cost me another $30 to meet with the doctor to discuss the results.

Steamed (about) Rice

Let me see if I understand this.

Condoleezza Rice, in her first crucial months as National Security Adviser ignored all of the CIA's warnings about counter-terrorism as well of those of Richard Clarke, the NSC's counter-terrorism director, and instead remained absorbed with her own comfort zone specialties as an expert on  the USSR (a bit outdated even then) and ballistic missile defense. Four years after arguably the second most fatal security lapse in our history, she was promoted to Secretary of State.

Now, Susan Rice, who spoke on Sunday morning talk shows about the Benghazi attack on the basis of information provided by the intelligence agencies is under assault by Republicans like McCain and Graham in the Senate, who threaten to hold up her confirmation if Obama names her as the next Secretary of Defense.

These guys are loony tunes....not to say crazy motherfuckers.

By the way: All of the Brazilians who wanted to talk to me about the election results, to a person, were for Obama, even my two entrepreneurial friends. Two different people, whose English is pretty limited, still were able to appreciate my description of Republicans as crazy motherfuckers. I chose to share that bit of hyperbole because they had each already volunteered to me that they saw the Republicans as "greedy" and "selfish." Both of these guys were men I know at the gym. One is about 70 and the other about 19.

Miraculous Images

Every time I see this face on the  building, which appears crisper and more precise in this photo than it does in life, I think about the French Toast Virgin. At least she doesn't have any graffiti...just a missing bite.

Black Friday

I  think it is very funny that the big retailers in São Paulo are getting ready for their Black Friday sales with newspaper promos and pop up ads on the internet, even though today is not a holiday.  Heitor asked me this morning if I knew the significance of the term Black Friday. Perhaps I´m wrong, but I would imagine most Brazilians don´t have any idea. Why would they?

By the way, it is the only instance I can think of in which the word "black" is used in a positive sense.

Nobody Listened to Emily Litella Either

Bill Keller has a good opinion piece today, called "Honey, I Shrunk the Pentagon." It should be clear by now that much of what we spend on defense is really a combination of corporate welfare and a joint public/private jobs program. It has long been curious to me when conservatives defend defense spending because cutting it would cost jobs in their districts, but will turn right around and vote against a stimulus bill with the argument that the government has never created a single job. We have Defense Department Socialism.

Has everyone by now seen the report on the tank refurbishing program that the Army told Congress it did not want, because it wasn't needed, but which Congress refused to cut?  Why, if the Army said it was a waste of money? Because key committee congressmen get a lot of money from General Dynamics, the holder of the contract, and because of the jobs that would be lost if the refurbishing didn't continue.  Oh yeah, and because it's cheaper to spend the hundreds of millions now rather than shut down the plants and have to get them up and running in a hurry because of some future emergency that called for refurbished tanks. Anyone remember how fast American industry redirected its production from civilian to military ends after Pearl Harbor? Ok, me neither; I'm not that freaking old. But I've read about it.

There are 2 or 3000 tanks sitting in a lot in the California desert that were functioning perfectly at the time they were shut down and parked there because they weren't needed. No doubt General Dynamics is counting on them all needing another half billion dollars worth of work by the time they have finished the first refurbishing cycle and sent the tanks back out to bake in the Mojave desert sun.

If the the money we waste on these kinds of pork-barrel defense contracts were spent on public infrastructure projects, we would at least have something to show for it at the end of the day besides a ludicrous number of expensive and unneeded tanks waiting for the day when we finally admit that they're just scrap metal.

This is a good example of the point made in Eugene Jarecki's 2005 documentary, "Why We Fight." It is virtually impossible to kill defense projects, as we have seen time and time again, because they are deliberately designed by those with a vested interest in them to be spread across the widest possible geographical area, in as many states and congressional districts as is possible.  Too many people have an interest in the projects for them to be evaluated honestly on the basis of need or cost effectiveness. We are living the reality that Einsenhower warned against in his final address, and which is the starting point for Jarecki's documentary.

Yes, I know that cutting "defense" spending to a sensible level (instead of more than the next 14 countries combined...and that doesn't include what the Energy Dept spends on nuclear weapons) is not in itself an answer to the long-term debt questions. But if Romney can talk about Big Bird, I can talk about General Dynamics, General Electric, McDonnell, Grumman, Lockheed, Raytheon ad infinitum, and ad nauseam too.

Petraeus's Ego

I knew I read it somewhere. It was Maureen Dowd's column from 4 days ago.

Even when he was the C.I.A. director, Petraeus’s ego was so wrapped up in being a shiny military idol that, according to The Washington Post, he recently surprised guests at a D.C. dinner when he arrived to speak wearing his medals on the lapel of his suit jacket.

It must have been a hell of a big lapel.  Maybe under the lapel? Or half under?

While searching for this story, that I knew I'd read somewhere, I found another one about how one of Petraeus's supposed areas of special focus as CIA director was China. Whenever anyone talks about threats to our cyber security, the first country mentioned is China. And yet this guy thought his gmail account was secure. As I said a few days ago..INTELLIGENCE!

A Phony General for a Phony War

The title of this post is from opinion piece by Lucian K. Truscott IV in the New York Times. If you're a fan of WWII history, you may have already recognized that name. I admit that I did not.

 It looks beyond the popular story of the brilliant general brought down by a tawdry affair and a series of unfortunate accidents, and it looks at the man and the myth that was built up around him over the past several years.

 

Truscott's Petaeus is/was an image-conscious "self-constructed hologram emitting an aura of preening heroism for the ever eager cameras."

I read recently, but will have to hunt for the source, that Petraeus recently appeared at a party in Washington DC in civilian dress with this array of medals on his suit!! Can you imagine? 

As Truscott says, "I would propose that every moment a general spends on his uniform jacket is a moment he’s not doing his job..."

Truscott's essay reminded me of a book just out that I'm not going to read, and which I only know about because it was mentioned to me by a friend, called The Generals: American Military Command from World War II to Today, by Thomas E. Ricks. As the Amazon review says, it is about an army leadership culture that no longer punishes mediocrity, and which is strategically obtuse. One quote I like, from a Colonel (envious?) is "a private who loses a rifle suffers far greater consequences than a general who loses a war."

Actually, you'll have a hard time convincing me we have had any winnable wars since WWII, whether the generals have been incompetent or not, but I like the quote.

The Illusion of Justice

My first reaction on reading that BP has agreed to pay $4.5 billion in fines and penalties and to plead guilty to 14 criminal charges related to the gulf disaster, was one of satisfaction. After all, this is a sizable figure, the largest fine ever, and there are still other charges pending against the company and criminal charges will be filed against the three top people on board the drilling rig. Criminal charges will also filed against one former VP for obstruction of Congress because of his false testimony.

I wouldn't like to be in that VP's position since BP, as part of its settlement, admitted using him to mislead Congress.

It is all less satisfactory on a closer look, and basically that has to do with the fact that the criminal charges were filed against the corporation and not against the top executives. For me the heart of the matter is summed up in the fact that the corporation has admitted using the VP to mislead Congress. They're not saying he acted on his own. No, he was carrying out the policy agreed upon by the leaders of the company. And those leaders are the ones responsible, not just for lying to Congress, but for the whole culture that existed for years of sacrificing safety to profit.

If this were any other type of criminal investigation, the justice department would be using the three people on the drilling rig to get at the king pins. But that apparently applies to the drug business and not to corporations.

Robert Reich, in the Christian Science Monitor makes a strong case why this settlement is merely the illusion of justice, and that the free pass to BP's top executives does absolutely nothing to deter this type of criminal behavior.

He also explains how going after the corporations not only lets the guilty executives off the hook, but punishes lots of innocent people. He gives the example of Arthur Anderson which was convicted of obstruction of justice in the Enron debacle and went out of business when its clients abandoned it en masse.
The vast majority of the employees who ended up losing their jobs had nothing to do with Enron. But the executives who were responsible all moved on very smoothly to the next rung on their career ladder.

Perhaps the most offensive thing in the NYT story about the settlement was a quote from an investment analyst in London. Of course the only thing equity analysts and investment managers want is for things to get back to normal. But this particular analyst admitted regretfully that there is still uncertainty hanging over BP's future and concern about pending claims and the fact that "lawyers might yet have their day at court."

That's right. It's all about lawyers having their day at court. Screw him!

Not Too Bright

The more I think about the Petraeus story, the more I think it is right that he resigned. After all, he was the head of the Central INTELLIGENCE Agency, which should be on top of the cyber threats we supposedly face, and yet he was so naive as to think his gmail account was private.

Prosecute Bad Prosecutors

I've written before about the need for prosecutors who abuse their offices to be prosecuted.

Joe Nocera wrote today about Ken Anderson, a district judge in Texas who faces prosecution for actions he took as a prosecuting attorney in the late 1980s which sent Michael Morton, an innocent man, to prison for life. Put simply, Anderson suppressed evidence that would have exonerated Morton...who was released a year ago after serving 25 years for a crime he didn't commit.

But Anderson's prosecution is still not certain. He will go before a Court of Inquiry (an institution unique to Texas among the states), which has the power, as I understand it, to pass the case along to a prosecutor, who could then take it before a grand jury etc.

Anderson's attorneys argue that the statute of limitations expired three years after the alleged withholding of evidence. The attorneys for Michael Morton argue that Anderson's crime never ended until Morton's release from prison in October 2011, that the statute of limitations begins then. I like the logic of that argument. Every day Morton was in prison, Anderson was committing a crime.

I'd like to see Anderson go to jail for 25 years. But I believe the maximum he could get is 10 years. Even that would be a measure of justice.

Equally reprehensible were the actions of Anderson's successor as prosecutor, John Bradley. Bradley fought for years to prevent DNA testing on a bloody rag, which testing was finally done and exonerated Morton and proved guilty a second man who later went on to commit and be convicted for another murder. So the prosecutor's misconduct not only convicted an innocent man, but helped allow the guilty man to remain free to commit another murder.

Bradley's actions in fighting the DNA testing, as incomprehensible and indefensible as they are, don't rise to the level of a crime because it was all done openly and he was within his rights to do it. The only justice for him is that the primary voters rejected his bid for reelection by a large margin a few months after Morton was released from prison.

This Is All So Unnecessary

Stuck out here so far away from Sarah Palin's Lame Stream Media (or at least the television version of it, which is what she must mean, because we all know she doesn't read), I don't know what is being discussed. Thanks to my friend Fred for sending this link suggesting voter fraud in Cuyahoga County (Cleveland). I have since found that the internet is full of charges about voter fraud, not only in Ohio but in Philadelphia and spots of Florida. Unfortunately, they tend to be on websites which have zero credibility because of their obvious partisan bias.  It is clear that there are some people on the right who simply will not admit that their guy lost, or more importantly, that Obama won. 

But it is also clear that there never needs to be a question about the counting of votes. Sure, we like to sit up (until 5 in the morning in Brasil!!) and see the results start coming in seconds after the polls close, flipping among the channels to see how they compare. But I would gladly wait until the next day or even later to guarantee certainty and avoid these allegations of impropriety.  I know there are Federal election laws, but one of the problems is still our fucked up system that leaves the states in charge of their own processes. Remember Katherine Harris's rush to certify Bush the winner of Florida in 2000? The same Katherine Harris who was the Florida chair of Bush's campaign.

There are allegations, again on websites whose partisanship is showing, that Republican poll watchers were forced out of certain Philadelphia precincts. I have no idea what happened, or if that is true or false. But I do know it is 100% ridiculous that we have these uncertainies.

We should automatically know that people who question the validity of the elections are as loony as the mofos who are signing petitions in states around the country to secede from the Union. According to one of the same crazy websites which says Obama was reelected fraudulently, these petitions have now been filed in 34 states.

As an alternative, I recommend another petition called "Deport Everyone Who Signed A Petition  To Withdraw Their State From The United States Of America."

Who Won the Election Again?

It is not negotiation when one side has preconditions that are set in stone. It is blackmail, while holding the country hostage.

There is still time for reasonableness, but it´s hard to be hopeful with all the little Republican Ayatollahs in the House who think they´re on a mission from Gawd to reduce the size of government.

Another Gem from Car Talk Plaza

The I Word

In New York City, police would stop and frisk him. If he lipped off, they'd run him in.
 


In San Franciso, he is one of the stars of the Giants' World Series victory parade, closer Sergio Romo.

From Our Friends at Car Talk Plaza

The Nine

If this book, The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court, by Jeffrey Toobin (2008) were nothing more than what the subtitle asserts, I wouldn't bother recommending it. But, in telling the story of the Supreme Court from the Reagan years through the first couple of years of Roberts and Alito, it highlights how much is at stake in the election next week. It also highlights how much smarter "movement" Republicans are about the importance of the Supreme Court than are Democrats.

And, although I put the word in quotations, Toobin, who writes about the Supreme Court for The New Yorker, gives a glimpse into the history of the right wing movement and its process of taking control of the Republican party beginning with the Reagan years. (The process began earlier, but Toobin's book begins with the Court during the Reagan presidency.) As an example of this right wing awareness of the importance of the Supremes, before the Court intervened in the Florida certification process and handed the election to G. W., there was already an official committee at work to prepare a list of acceptable Supreme Court nominees for Bush to choose from...before there were any retirements or even hints of retirements. Eventually Roberts and Alito both came from that list.

The right wing were very smart during their years in the desert, as they planned for their eventual victory.  They knew the importance of controlling not just the Supreme Court but all of the layers of the judicial process. The Federalist Society, which now dominates right wing judicial thinking on the courts and in the universities was only formed as recently as the 1980s by Ed Meese, Robert Bork, Ted Olson and others. Now a Republican president would not dare nominate anyone for any court at any level who wasn't a member.

There is a right-wing concept of the Constitution in Exile, a term first used by Federal Appeals Court justice Douglas Ginsburg to define the period before FDR's New Deal. The belief is that the growth of the Federal Government is unconstitutional and needs to be rolled back to that earlier time. You may not remember (I jussssst barely did.) that Ginsburg was nominated by Reagan to replace Lewis Powell on the Supreme Court in 1987, and he would be on the court today (instead of Anthony Kennedy) if not for the fact that his regular marijuana use became public. This extreme Federalist belief, which would expand Executive power almost without limit, decimate all affirmative action programs, all civil rights programs, all distinctions between church and state, all court rulings based on the Commerce Clause, not to mention Roe v. Wade is gospel to the people who now control the Republican Party. (Douglas Ginsburg, by the way, is no relation to Ruth Bader Ginsburg.)

Toobin, and I suspect he is right, points out that there will not be any more surprises, like Earl Warren was to Eisenhower, Byron White was to Kennedy (or would have been if Kennedy were around to see him in action) and Souter was to Bush Sr. The focus that the movement conservatives have put on the records of Supreme Court nominees virtually ensures against it, because the left now finally gets it as well. Unfortunately, it almost surely guarantees that future nominees will all come from the appeals courts, and with a written record that can be examined before confirmation.  That's too bad.

Toobin's book suffers from the fact that it is based on interviews with Justices and clerks who cannot be identified, but the Supreme Court is the most secret of government institutions, and there isn't any other way to get around the fact that nobody is going to talk for attribution. It is easy enough to guess which Justices talked to him; at least we can know for a certainty that O'Connor did, and probably Breyer. Toobin's profiles of the various Justices are illuminating and insightful, and his writing style is very accessible. The book, despite what I have chosen to focus on above, is very balanced and is something of a page-turner.

My favortie gossipy story:  One summer, after the end of the session, David Souter was driving alone back to his home in New Hampshire and he stopped along the way to eat. A couple came up to him and the guy said "Aren't you on the Supreme Court?" He said, yes, he was. "You're Justice Breyer!" Not wanting to embarrass the guy, the shy, reclusive, just barely social Souter said, yes, he was Justice Breyer. The conversation continued for a while and the guy asked, "Justice Breyer, what is the best thing about being on the Supreme Court?" Souter grew pensive and eventually replied, "I'd have to say it is the honor of serving along side Justice David Souter."

One last thing. Many commentators were so foolish as to interpret Chief Justice Roberts' vote upholding the Affordable Care Act as a liberal position.  But remember, he did not find the ACA constitutional on the basis of the Commerce Clause, but on the basis of Congress's power to levy taxes.  Roberts is smart enough to know that he needs to move slowly with his agenda so as to "preserve the integrity of the institution." But he and the people who think like him abhor the Commerce Clause and that will yet come back to bite us in the ass. Roberts is not a liberal.

Human Nature and Stereotypes

I wrote once before about the time I lost a coin purse at SESC, the cultural organization where I use the gym, eat lunch, sit and read etc., and then finding that it had been turned in to lost and found with money intact.

I had similar experiences there recently on two consecutive days. First I left my back back, with my kindle inside, in a locker that I forgot to lock. I have become so confident in how things work here that, when I was finished in the gym and realized what I had done, I showered leisurely before going down to lost and found, where it had been turned in, just as I expected. The very next day, I left my ipod in a locker and didn't realize what I had done until I got home. I took the bus back, and went to lost and found. There it was. Now in these cases, I knew that the articles were found by security personnel who regularly patrol the locker rooms. But these are people who are probably paid a bare minimum, and yet I have no doubts about their honesty.

My latest experience, in the same vein, although somewhat different, was yesterday. I stopped at a small store in our area to buy another fan, so we don't have to keep moving the ones we have around the house with us.  When I entered the store, the young guy who greeted me was wearing sandals, a long white ankle-length tunic and a white skull cap. He sported a long, thick black beard. A regular bin Laden. He was very friendly and, after listening to a few of my fractured sentences said, "You're Dutch?" No. "German?" No. American. "Ah, America. New York!" No, Los Angeles. Close. "Ah...only thing I know about Los Angeles is Lakers." And Hollywood, right? "Yes. Hollywood." He said "Everything we sell is from China. It's junk. In America you can buy better quality things." Yes, but they're probably still made in China.

So I picked one of his junk (but cheap) fans and went to the register to pay with my credit card. Alas, the system was down and it might be for a few hours. He had called half an hour earlier and had been told he would hear something within five hours. I didn't have enough cash, and said it was ok, I'd come back tomorrow. The young man said "no, take the fan and pay me later." I wasn't even sure I trusted my portuguese to believe what I had heard. But I had. I took out my Brazilian national i.d. card and told him he should write down the number. He said, no, it's not necessary. Gesturing upward, and clearly knowing he was making another American allusion, he said "Hey...in God we trust, no?" Only later did I wish I had told him, yeah, but in the U.S. all others pay cash.

Today when I went back to pay, I told him that I had told a friend (one of my students) what he had done, giving me the fan without payment, and that my friend had said "no, that's impossible, no Brazilian would do that." He laughed and said, "but I am Brazilian." He explained that his father was born in "the Levant" (I didn't ask which country) and his mother was born in Spain, but that he was born and raised in Brasil. "What English I know, I learned in Brasil too."

I had met his mother the first time, but today I also met his father. It is interesting to me that both parents, probably in their sixties, were dressed in regular western style, but the son was the one who adopted the traditional Arab garb that is so scary to us Americans.

The store is one of the ubiquitous stores that sell cheap shit from China. Heitor and I just refer to them as Chinese stores, and we don't very often buy things at them, but we will both make a point of patronizing this one when we can. In fact today, I bought a second fan at the same time as I was paying for the first one, because I think his brand of trust needs to be rewarded.

As I was getting ready to leave, the father said "Obama!" And I said "Yes, but I'm worried." He said, using a particular Brazilian slang I had never heard before, "no problem, he's a batata (potato)," which Heitor tells me means something like "he's superior." Amen to that.

This Isn´t Much of a Limb I´m Going Out On

Allow me to make a prediction here. No matter how the election turns out, but especially if Obama wins, New Jersey Governor Christie will be anathematized by Republicans for his completely non-partisan efforts to cooperate with the President in dealing with the results of the hurricane...or put another way, for caring more for the citizens of his state than he hates Obama.

Emergency Management

Guess what! Mitt Romney no longer wants to abolish FEMA....but he still thinks the states can do a better job.

I guess people no longer have to take responsibility for their bad choices, like living on the East Coast.

National Popular Vote Interstate Project

Shirley, I'm not the only one to whom it has occurred that this could once again be an election in which the winner of the popular vote is not the winner of the electoral college. And I can see about an equal chance for each candidate to be in either position.

Ok, so we all know that the electoral college is a ridiculous, out-dated institution (as if it were ever in-dated). But our fathers and grandfathers and great grandfathers knew that too, and it is never going to be changed. That's another thing that everybody knows.

I am surprised by the lack of coverage of the National Popular Vote Interstate Project, at least as I see coverage from my vantage point in Brasil. I apologize if everyone else is way ahead of me on this. In essence, this project involves a legislative measure which has been, and is being, introduced in state legislatures around the country. The measure is a compact among the states which says that when the measure has been enacted and signed into law in enough states (when enough states have joined the compact) to represent a majority in the electoral college, then the participating states will cast their electoral votes for the popular vote winner in the country overall, irrespective of who won the popular vote in their state. Until enough states to represent a majority in the electoral college have joined the compact, participating states would continue to allocate their electoral votes as they do currently.

The measure has already been passed in nine states which represent 132 electoral votes, 49% of the 270 needed to elect a president.  It has been introduced in several other states, and no doubt will continue to be introduced session after session for as long as it takes.

Of course there are arguments for and against from both a policy and a constitutional perspective, which arguments you can read for yourself, but I think the measure has the best on all counts. All of the policy arguments against it eventually run up against the fact that all the measure does is promote an equality of value among voters. It is hard to oppose that forever, just as equal rights for all seems pretty basic in other policy areas. To be fair, there are some valid arguments against it, but I don't think they should prevail.

One of the strongest arguments in favor of this bill, after the obvious one that it would prevent the election of a president who didn't win the popular vote, is that is would bring all fifty states back into the presidential campaign process. I suppose some people might be happy to live in a state which is not "in play," thereby escaping the barrage of media ads and telephone calls etc. Just as I feel fortunate to be out of reach of U.S. television here in Brasil. But if you're a blue voter in a red state, or vice versa, it must be pretty discouraging to go to the polls knowing your vote for president is worthless.

It is interesting to me that I first became aware of this measure a few months ago when I read a story about a false charge on an important DC blog, "The Hill," that "Al Gore Calls For an End to Electoral College." Actually, he did nothing of the sort; he said in an interview that he supports this measure which does not change the electoral college at all. Apparently the media's tendency to misreport Gore's statements didn't end with the bogus quote about creating the internet.

Although the measure itself is clearly non-partisan, has no clear long-term benefit to either party, and is backed by members of both parties, it is curious to me that the principle opposition seems to be coming from Republicans. Their current party platform includes a plank opposing this measure. Republican governors in California and Hawaii vetoed the measure, only to have it passed again by the legislatues and subsequently signed by their Democratic successors.

There really is no reason this should be a partisan issue.

I Hope This Pessimism Is Just Some Bad Feijoada I Ate

How about this? The Salt Lake City Tribune has endorsed Obama. Thanks to Fred Schultz for sending this to me.

Not that it means anything. In our screwed up electoral system, Utah isn't even "in play," and I doubt that newspaper endorsements actually sway voters anyway, even if it were.

The scary news is that, while all the other polls are showing a neck and neck race, the Gallup poll shows Romney with a 6% lead.  If we were all to take a page from the opposing playbook, we would accuse the Gallup poll of having a bias toward Republican candidates. Instead I will just scratch my head and hope to hell Gallup (which has a record of 16-3 in presidential elections, going back to 1936) has got it wrong.

Hey, the Yankees got swept in four straight; it can happen.

This comes on top of a NY Times headline that asks the question, "After Romney Gains, Should Obama Concede Florida?"

We've always known it was going to be a close election but, frankly, I'm more worried at the moment than I have ever been. It is nearly impossible for me to believe that people would vote for the same ideological outlook that got us into this mess, but apparently they might.  I can't believe that people haven't realized en masse that the Republicans always have the same program of cutting taxes on the wealthiest and cutting services to the neediest regardless of what is happening, whether we are in good economic times or bad. Whatever the problem, they have the same solution. And if they haven't realized it, the Democrats deserve the blame for not pointing it out more forcefully.

For now, at least, I can take two Johnnie Walkers and feel better in the morning, with hope springing eternally. If Romney wins, my body can't tolerate the amount of Johnnie Walker it would take to make me hopeful.

"And The Dishes I Washed Weren't Even Dirty"

More on Chris Klewe

A few weeks ago I posted a story about the Minnesota Vikings punter, Chris Kluwe's, vocal support for gay marriage, along with a link to the inspired letter he wrote to a Maryland legislator. He has since, at the urging of his wife, posed shirtless for Out Magazine, and it's a photo spread that will sell a few issues.

 

When I read that letter of his to the legislator, I knew this was not anybody's average dumb jock. It should not come as a surprise that he is a truly fascinating character. The NY Times has a profile of him, if you want to know more.

 There are gay marriage (or ban gay marriage) initiatives on a few state ballots this year, and I've read that human rights supporters have the most reason to be optimistic in Maine. It might well become the first state to legalize same-sex marriage by a vote of the people. I believe that the initiatives on the ballot in Maryland and Minnesota are both written so as to ban gay marriage. According to the NY Times article, the polls in Minnesota show the voters to be evenly decided, with only 4% undecided. If we win in Minnesota, and the ballot issue is defeated, it will almost certainly be because of Klewe's influence.

Unfortunate Promotional Placement

I Say, "Let's Mix It Up."

The "Mix It Up at Lunch Day" was an initiative the Southern Poverty Law Center began promoting 11 years ago as a way to break up cliques and stop bullying in schools. It promotes such radical actions for students as hanging out with someone they might not normally speak to.

Thanks to the conservative evangelical group, the American Family Association, this program has been exposed for what it really is, "a nationwide push to promote the homosexual lifestyle in public schools." They are urging parents with children in the 2500 schools nationwide that participate in the program to keep their children at home on that day.

There is a back story:

The SPLC recently added the American Family Association to its national list of active hate groups, which also includes neo-Nazis, black separatists and Holocaust deniers.

In response, the AFA has charged that the law center is a hate group "for oppressing Christian students and claiming its aim is to shut down groups that oppose homosexuality."

Now, anyone who is familiar with the history of the Southern Poverty Law Center, one of the most admirable non-profit organizations in the country, will find it absurd to go to the AFA website and find that the SPLC is described as "a homosexual activist group."

The purpose of the SPLC is accurately described in their on-line mission statement:

The Southern Poverty Law Center is dedicated to fighting hate and bigotry, and to seeking justice for the most vulnerable members of our society. Using litigation, education and other forms of advocacy, we work toward the day when the ideals of equal justice and equal opportunity will be a reality. 

We employ a three-pronged strategy to battle racial and social injustice:

• We track the activities of hate groups and domestic terrorists across America, and we launch innovative lawsuits that seek to destroy networks of radical extremists.

• We use the courts and other forms of advocacy to win systemic reforms on behalf of victims of bigotry and discrimination.

• We provide educators with free resources that teach school children to reject hate, embrace diversity and respect differences.

It would be generous to consider the American Family Association (and similar groups) as well-meaning but misguided. Still, it is hard not to see the people at their head as completely unprincipled opportunists who have found an easy way to earn money from ignorant true believers.

To paraphrase Barry Goldwater, who quite literally became something of a gay rights activist in his last years, I don't understand why these so-called Christian groups get so worked up over homosexuality, when there are so many other sins that don't seem to bother them at all.

Just Trying to Make a Buck Any Way We Can

For everyone who thinks the housing bubble and subsequent crash was caused by irresponsible borrowers, and not predatory lenders, here's another similar story that shows responsible lenders just doing what they do, this time with reverse mortgages, which are a perfectly valid and useful transaction for senior in certain situations.

To be fair, in this case the big players like Wells Fargo, Bank of America and MetLife have got out of the reverse mortgage business, and let's say they all got out for the valid reasons cited by Wells Fargo, i.e. "falling housing prices and difficulty assessing borrowers' ability to repay the loans.". But there is never a shortage of small sleaze bag operators ready to step in and fill the void with misleading and outright false representation of their services, sort of the reverse mortgage equivalent of Countrywide Finance.

A few states on their own are taking action, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (fought tooth and nail by congressional Republicans, it should be pointed out, even to the point of trying to prevent the confirmation of its director) is playing catch up. In the meanwhile elderly people are being screwed out of their homes because of unconscionable predators, who will get away with it, we can be almost certain.

The Countless People He is Annoying Includes Me

I fell behind in these postings, and people (I just know) are disappointed.



The joke "Don't you want to get back with your god?....No, I want to get back with my mistress" reminds me (thank you Bob Peterson) of the Woody Allen line, "I don't want to live on in the hearts of my countrymen; I want to live on in my apartment."

Day 4

We're getting further off the topic of proselytizing. But Mittens is such a good foil. This reminds me of his praise while in Israel about that country's government-dominated universal healthcare system.

Day Three of Keeping My Promises

We´ve gotten a little bit off the topic of proselytizing, but Republican hawks who avoided the military is always a good theme too.

There is also the matter of Romney's 31-months of deferment to serve as a "minister of religion" in France, so it's all of a piece.

The Democrats are such wusses. If the situation was reversed, imagine the Republican approach.

The Past is Also the Present

Day two.

The question has been raised as to the fairness of this. How much of a candidate's past, and how much related to his moral compass is legitimate fodder for consideration?

That is a much bigger topic than what this week's Doonesbury is dealing with.

I think all religions are bogus. If Romney wants to believe Gawd lives on Planet Kolob and overlook the fact that his religion was founded by a convicted con artist, that's not much crazier than what most people believe. I don't know Gary Trudeau's reasons for running this particular series of strips, but my reason for posting them is my detestation of proselytizing religions, proselytizers, and people who support them. And  this isn't just part of Romney's past; his support for a proselytizing religion is part of who is is today.

If my português were better, I´d have lots of opportunities (at home and on the street) to tell some Mormons and others exactly what I think. Actually I am quite capable of telling them that they clearly don´t understand the difference between the verbs "to think" and "to know," but we all know the discussion wouldn't end there, with my having helped clarify their entire belief structure, so I don't even start.

, 

Hugo Chavez and Mitt Romney

Despite all of the U.S. politicians who have allowed themselves to become pointlessly exercised over Hugo Chavez, I have read no suggestion, not even from the opposition candidate, that the elections in Venezuela yesterday were not conducted fairly and honestly.  Whether the U.S., officially or unofficially, thinks he deserved to be re-elected, 54% of Venezuelans thought that he did.

Chavez has one problem of his own making, however. He has to deal with the fact that the people he belittled as "squalid good-for-nothings, little Yankees and fascists," turned out to represent 45% of the electorate. 

Remind anyone of Romney's 47%? Yes, I know he has now said his remarks were "completely wrong," but it is odd how he didn't realize they were completely wrong weeks ago when he merely thought they were "inelegantly" stated. As with so many things, one wonders what he really believes.

FAUX News

There is so much wisdom in cartoons. I assume this has to do with the claim that Obama, or his minions, are faking the employment numbers. The sequence "He shoots his mouth off. We report. You decide." does seem to be the nature of what passes for much of news nowadays...as in "report the controversy."

"Chicago Guys" do seem to be the new bogeymen.

Religious Activism

I hope (and assume) this is the beginning of a week-long series. We have allowed our belief in religious tolerance to be so all inclusive that we can't mention a candidate and his religion in the same breath. However religions that proselytize deserve to be discussed. As Trudeau points out here, the very concept of proselytizing runs counter to the concept of tolerance for the views of others.

So Elder/Bishop/Governor Romney's activities as a missionary (religious activist) in the past need to be considered as part of the present person.

If you're looking for something to read, allow me to suggest this really engrossing book. It tells the story of the assassination of James Garfield and how he would have survived but for the ineptitude of the doctor(s) attending him who didn't accept the idea of invisible germs flying around in the air and of the the antiseptic procedures advocated by the British doctor Joseph Lister. This was obviously before the US had the best healthcare system in the world for anybody who could afford it.

It is also the story of the completely deranged man who shot him (and who was hanged despite the fact that nobody doubted his insanity). His self delusion was so extreme as to make him a fascinating character in his own right.

The cast of characters also includes the Emperor of Brasil, Dom Pedro II (about whom I knew nothing more than his name, which is a subway stop between our house and downtown), Alexander Graham Bell, and some of the other important US political figures of the day.

It is almost surreal to realize that it was an age when the telephone already had been invented, and certain people were dreading the ring of the phone to hear that the President had died, and yet the doctors themselves were still so ignorant as to be responsible for the infection that killed him. The author makes the point that, had Garfield been a derelict in the Bowery who had gone unattended, he probably would have survived. He would have become one more of the many thousands of people after the civil war walking around with a lead ball embedded in some harmless part of their body.

The other principle pleasure of the book was the discovery of what an interesting person Garfield was. I definitely want to read more about him.

Another tidbit that I had read before but forgotten. Robert Todd Lincoln was with Garfield at the time he was shot. Twenty years later he was with McKinley when he was shot.

A few other things I've encountered recently that I appreciated:

Book titles: 

Didn't I Feed You Yesterday?: A Mother's Guide to Sanity in Stilettos.
Oh Lord, Help Me Keep My Panties On

From Barry Commoner's obituary in the NY Times, regarding his quixotic presidential campaign in 1980:

He later said his favorite moment from the campaign was when a reporter in Albuquerque asked him "Dr. Commoner, are you a serious candidate, or are you just running on the issues?"

 "There is nothing farther away from Washington than the entire world." ...Arthur Miller

Pulling Out The Big Guns

I think Romney already has a lock on the old white farts in Ohio. He should have tried to find a younger celeb.

Just look at the love in those eyes. Nicklaus's affection for Romney must be all political principal because, if it was about golf, he'd probably be supporting Obama. I hear from Republicans that Obama is getting to play a pretty fair game because of all the practice he gets. I've never heard that about Romeny.



My favorite Nicklaus quotes:

“When I was competing, I didn’t lean on someone else in tough times....I know what I had to do on the golf course to succeed, and when I won I certainly didn’t apologize for my success.”

You'd think he'd be able to conjugate the verb "to know" correctly. My Brazilian students do. 

What Are Those Things?

I´d guess that about 20-25% of the trucks and buses in Brasil have these things installed. I saw them on my first visit to Brasil way back in 2005 from the window of a moving bus.  I asked people off and on what they were, or what their purpose was and, effete snobs that all of my Brazilian friends are, nobody ever knew.

Then I´d forget about them until, once again, I´d be on a bus on the highway and I´d see them  again, and wonder all over again.

It took almost 5 years before I saw them closely enough to know what they were, and then I realized that I should have been able to figure it out almost immediately, if I´d only thought about it for a bit.

Can I assume that everyone else knows their purpose?

The Perils of a White Buidling In a Gray City

If I were ever to be taken by the entrepreneurial spirit, I think I'd start a building-cleaning business in São Paulo.

I could make an entire blog from a series of filthy building shots.

My Quote For the Day

From the opening fly leaf of a book I haven't yet read called How the Homosexuals Saved Civilization:

If you removed all of the homos and homo influence from what is generally regarded as American culture, you would be pretty much left with Let's Make a Deal.
---Fran Lebowitz

Just Because the Elephant Is In The Room

Some headlines and catchy phrases lifted from three different sources today:

It Was an Honest Mittstake.

Does Romney Even Want to be President?

When Bad Things Happen to Mitt Romney

As Nicholas Kristof, who lives and writes on a plane that usually stays above partisan politics noted:

Romney has proved himself right: We manifestly do have a problem with people who see themselves as victims even as they benefit from loopholes in the tax code.

One is running for president.

Some Other Kinky Quotes I Overlooked

“If you elect me the first Jewish justice of the peace, I'll reduce the speed limits to 54.95!”
.
"I'd felt that a man without a woman was like a neck without a pain." 

" I've also said a journey of a thousand miles begins with a cash advance. This spiritual journey to the Governor's mansion is a long one, and we are going to need some help.”

Kinky Friedman

I encountered the first quote below (way below) tonight in the forward to a book, and was reminded of how much I like Kinky Friedman. I think the first time I heard of him was in the late 1970s when I was living in Topeka. He and his band, "Kinky Friedman and the Texas Jewboys" were a fixture at the Lone Star Cafe in NYC. I didn't know anything about his music, but who couldn't love a guy who fronted a band with a name like that?

Then he surfaced again in my life as an author of humorous mystery novels in which the main character was a Texan musician in NYC named Kinky Friedman, living in the Village.

Greenwich Killing Time, A Case of Lone Star, When the Cat's Away, The Prisoner of Vandam Street, Musical Chairs and The Mile High Club are a few of the titles I recommend that you go to Amazon and buy.

I think I've read all of the mysteries listed above, but I confess that I haven't read any of the other books listed below, but how can you not be drawn to titles like this? And this is just a sample. The guy is prolific.

Kinky Friedman's Guide to Texas Etiquette: Or How to Get to Heaven or Hell Without Going Through Dallas-Fort Worth

Elvis, Jesus and Coca-Cola

'Scuse Me While I Whip This Out : Reflections on Country Singers, Presidents, and Other Troublemakers

Armadillos & Old Lace

 Drinker With A Writing Problem

 

Kill Two Birds & Get Stoned

 You Can Lead a Politician to Water, But You Can't Make Him Think: Ten Commandments for Texas Politics

 The Love Song of J. Edgar Hoover, A Novel

 Then he surfaced again as a candidate for governor of Texas in 2006. Many of the quotes below appear to be from that period.  (He finished fourth in a six-man race with 12.6% of the vote.)

And now, those promised quotes:

It's all very well going around thinking you're a cowboy, until you run into someone who thinks he's an Indian.

I support gay marriage. I believe they have a right to be as miserable as the rest of us.

Remember: Y'all is singular. All y'all is plural. All y'all's is plural possessive.

A happy childhood... is the worst possible preparation for life.

Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.

I see an issue I like, and I support it.

Musicians can run this state better than politicians. We won't get a lot done in the mornings, but we'll work late and be honest.

I've always said money may buy you a fine dog, but only love can make it wag its tail.

May the God of your choice bless and keep you. I respect Him as long as He does not circumcise me anymore.

And I think musicians can better run this state than politicians. And, hell, beauticians can better run the state than politicians.

Well, I just said that Jesus and I were both Jewish and that neither of us ever had a job, we never had a home, we never married and we traveled around the countryside irritating people.

We've got to clear some of the room out of the prisons so we can put the bad guys in there, like the pedophiles and the politicians.

Yes, I'm a Judeo-Christian. Jesus and Moses are in my heart, and... both of them were independents, by the way.

The Democrats and Republicans are the same guy admiring themself in the mirror.

These days, there are many people around the world who listen to the songs that made me infamous and read the books that made me respectable.

How can you look at the Texas legislature and still believe in intelligent design?

Money can buy you a fine dog, but only love can make him wag his tail.

You have to pretend that your life is a financial pleasure even when your autographs are bouncing.

I even went so far as to become a Southern Baptist for a while, until I realized that they didn't hold 'em under long enough.

If Willie Nelson had been Rosa Parks, there never would have been a civil rights movement in this country, because he refuses to leave the back of the bus.

I just want Texas to be number one in something other than executions, toll roads and property taxes.

When I'm governor... I'll be the first governor with a listed telephone number.

The teachers are getting screwed, blued, and tattooed by the system.

We're first on executions. We're 49th in funding public education. We're in a race with Mississippi for the bottom, and we're winning.

Politics is the only field in which the more experience you have, the worse you get.

I'll sign anything except bad legislation.

I'll keep us out of war with Oklahoma!

I have a better head of hair than Rick Perry; it's just not in a place I can show you.

I'm too young for Medicare and too old for women to care.

I'll tell you right now. I'm for prayer in school.

I don't remember the first half of my life. All I say is a happy childhood is the worst possible preparation for life.

The only currency I value is the coin of the spirit. That's very important in my life.

We were a country band with a social conscience.

William Bennett is my patron saint, one of them. Redd Foxx is another.

No, nothing has changed in my life at all, and nothing would change if I had millions.

The first thing I'll do if elected is demand a recount.   (NOTE: I think he stole this from William F. Buckley)

 

I admit I was drinking a Guinness... but I did not swallow.

Students don't know who Mark Twain was because he wasn't on the test.

The folks in Mississippi are saying, 'Thank God for Texas.'