My most recent blog, "The Year of the Women" was my second foray into satire. It brought down on me a torrent of criticism. That is OK with me. It is more rewarding to a writer to be read and criticised, than to be ignored. I may try it again if a suitable topic presents itself.
For now I'll try some pathos.
This midterm election will determine if America is to reverse its economic and political decline, or continue its slide into second world status. If we are to make a sensible vote, and have it count, I suggest voters ask themselves some questions:
At what point in time did we begin to change from a creditor to a debtor nation?
What policies led to the change?
Who were the politicians in control of the government when those policies were implemented?
Are any supporters of those policies running for election or reelection? Should they
be rewarded for their failures?
Which issues are more vital to our national survival: Abortion, Gays in the military,
immigration reform, jobs and economic revitalization? Which candidates are likely to
competently address the most vital?
How many of us will consider those questions instead of appeals to emotion, when we
cast our ballot?
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Monday, October 18, 2010
Year of the Women
This mid term election marks a milestone in American political life that is as
significant as the extension of the right to vote to women. The crop of leading
candidates now includes many more women than any election I can remember.
A significant percentage of the crop consists of kooks who would never have made
it to the ballot if Obama had not been elected to shatter the President stereotype.
If a "black, non citizen Muslim" can be president, why not a witch who believes that
masturbation makes hair grow on the palm of the hand--the hand that once could
aspire to little more than rocking the cradle.
It has been a cherished truism that if women ran the governments of the world,
war as an instrument of policy would disappear. But seeing this field of distaff
candidates I am led to believe they would see war as a means of eliminating pesky male opponents, thus casting mankind into unremmiting conflict until men completely
surrender and accept an inferior standing in human hierarchy. The lady candidate who kicked a male referee in the groin is running for office on a platform that balls are misplaced on males. She is very testy about testes. Next the ladies will work on
conception without male representation. I wouldn't be surprised if they pull it off.
significant as the extension of the right to vote to women. The crop of leading
candidates now includes many more women than any election I can remember.
A significant percentage of the crop consists of kooks who would never have made
it to the ballot if Obama had not been elected to shatter the President stereotype.
If a "black, non citizen Muslim" can be president, why not a witch who believes that
masturbation makes hair grow on the palm of the hand--the hand that once could
aspire to little more than rocking the cradle.
It has been a cherished truism that if women ran the governments of the world,
war as an instrument of policy would disappear. But seeing this field of distaff
candidates I am led to believe they would see war as a means of eliminating pesky male opponents, thus casting mankind into unremmiting conflict until men completely
surrender and accept an inferior standing in human hierarchy. The lady candidate who kicked a male referee in the groin is running for office on a platform that balls are misplaced on males. She is very testy about testes. Next the ladies will work on
conception without male representation. I wouldn't be surprised if they pull it off.
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Hitting bottom.
Having reached a ripe age I assumed I had seen all the forms of politicking
that money can buy, and couldn't be surprised. How wrong I was. It is to be expected that in a two party system campaigns will be spirited, even heated, and some excesses may occur. It was equally expected that after an election the
parties will come together for common purpose---to provide for the welfare of the citizens of all persuasions, and the efficient use of public resources. The past decade has witnessed a breakdown in the comity among our national legislators,
particularly in the Senate. Politics there has become a blood sport. The divide
between "liberals" and "conservatives" has become an unbridgeable chasm. Compromise
has disappeared from the lexicon of political process. As a result the nation's problems can no longer be dealt with, as the lingering recession clearly demonstrates.
This failure at the national level has created real economic pain and insecurity
in the vast middle class and turned them from their usual middle of the road conservatism, to angry and unreasoned radicalism.
The anger has manifested itself in the support of nut cases as candidates.
Many of these nut cases have no concepts of the economic and political interrelationships among nations, or even sectors within our country. They have narrow,
often bigoted views of persons different from themselves. They tend to blame
unknown "others" for their troubles and look for scapegoats, not solutions based
on knowledge and experience which they may lack. They are very good at rabble rousing. They may also win election. There is the danger. When resentment and anger
take control of the engine of government it can lead to conflict among nations
as has often occurred. Germany's resentment after the consequences of its defeat in WWI led to WWII.
Our founders created a superb government structure. The quality of the politicians
that must function within that structure has declined. They have sold out. Therein lies the difficulty. The current crop of candidates appear to me to be the worst in my memory. That the public is buying their nihilism and ignorance is sad, and dangerous.
that money can buy, and couldn't be surprised. How wrong I was. It is to be expected that in a two party system campaigns will be spirited, even heated, and some excesses may occur. It was equally expected that after an election the
parties will come together for common purpose---to provide for the welfare of the citizens of all persuasions, and the efficient use of public resources. The past decade has witnessed a breakdown in the comity among our national legislators,
particularly in the Senate. Politics there has become a blood sport. The divide
between "liberals" and "conservatives" has become an unbridgeable chasm. Compromise
has disappeared from the lexicon of political process. As a result the nation's problems can no longer be dealt with, as the lingering recession clearly demonstrates.
This failure at the national level has created real economic pain and insecurity
in the vast middle class and turned them from their usual middle of the road conservatism, to angry and unreasoned radicalism.
The anger has manifested itself in the support of nut cases as candidates.
Many of these nut cases have no concepts of the economic and political interrelationships among nations, or even sectors within our country. They have narrow,
often bigoted views of persons different from themselves. They tend to blame
unknown "others" for their troubles and look for scapegoats, not solutions based
on knowledge and experience which they may lack. They are very good at rabble rousing. They may also win election. There is the danger. When resentment and anger
take control of the engine of government it can lead to conflict among nations
as has often occurred. Germany's resentment after the consequences of its defeat in WWI led to WWII.
Our founders created a superb government structure. The quality of the politicians
that must function within that structure has declined. They have sold out. Therein lies the difficulty. The current crop of candidates appear to me to be the worst in my memory. That the public is buying their nihilism and ignorance is sad, and dangerous.
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Triumph of the human spirit
Only hours ago the last of the trapped Chilean miners emerged into the sunlight to
cap a survival and rescue epic of historic proportions. The event was a triumph of the human spirit on several fronts:
The miners were able to stay emotionally stable and united under unimaginable
confinment in a tomb-like environment.
Their families and loved ones remained on the site non-stop, praying and joined
in common fear, concern and hope.
The technological resources of Chile were brought to bear, joined by assistance from
other nations, in a feat of engineering of a scale never before attempted.
The attention of the entire civilized world was held captive in real time by
what was happening in Chile.
A depressed world had something exalting to cheer. We needed that.
Our species has capabilities which no other can approach. We have just witnessed how to apply them for noble purposes. Rejoice, there is hope.
cap a survival and rescue epic of historic proportions. The event was a triumph of the human spirit on several fronts:
The miners were able to stay emotionally stable and united under unimaginable
confinment in a tomb-like environment.
Their families and loved ones remained on the site non-stop, praying and joined
in common fear, concern and hope.
The technological resources of Chile were brought to bear, joined by assistance from
other nations, in a feat of engineering of a scale never before attempted.
The attention of the entire civilized world was held captive in real time by
what was happening in Chile.
A depressed world had something exalting to cheer. We needed that.
Our species has capabilities which no other can approach. We have just witnessed how to apply them for noble purposes. Rejoice, there is hope.
Friday, October 8, 2010
Fiscal obesity
During the Clinton presidency we were fiscally trim, consuming revenue at a rate lower than it was created. We were able to store a surplus, to be used to reduce the national debt. The 8 years that followed Clinton were years of national economic
disaster. We undertook a two front war in distant theatres, financed off-budget,
while at the same time cutting taxes. That converted our budget process from "pay
as you go" to "pass the bills to the next generation". We embarked on a borrowing binge of incalculable dimension at a time when our outlays were increasing at a geometric rate. The military build-up to sustain the wars, plus the cost of caring for the veterans, plus the costs of nation building and rebuilding of the countries we were breaking, plus the fraud and waste that are endemic in wars, were
not offset by the growth of the military-industrial complex. Military expenditures are not investments in long term economic expansion. They are the least
productive use of national resources.
Now, in recession, the costs for Medicare and Medicaid are growing at an unsustainable rate. Yet the congress is unwilling to deal with one of the major cost centers---the built-in expense in the private insurance market.
With multiple vendors, each
with expense loads of 30% or more on top of the benefits payed out, it is almost
impossible to get control of those costs.
Changing the players in the election game of musical chairs will not solve our
problems. Changing the mind set of the politicians to put the interests of the nation before the interests of party, should be the priority. They can then change the public attitudes. That is the essential effort we need to make in this election.
disaster. We undertook a two front war in distant theatres, financed off-budget,
while at the same time cutting taxes. That converted our budget process from "pay
as you go" to "pass the bills to the next generation". We embarked on a borrowing binge of incalculable dimension at a time when our outlays were increasing at a geometric rate. The military build-up to sustain the wars, plus the cost of caring for the veterans, plus the costs of nation building and rebuilding of the countries we were breaking, plus the fraud and waste that are endemic in wars, were
not offset by the growth of the military-industrial complex. Military expenditures are not investments in long term economic expansion. They are the least
productive use of national resources.
Now, in recession, the costs for Medicare and Medicaid are growing at an unsustainable rate. Yet the congress is unwilling to deal with one of the major cost centers---the built-in expense in the private insurance market.
With multiple vendors, each
with expense loads of 30% or more on top of the benefits payed out, it is almost
impossible to get control of those costs.
Changing the players in the election game of musical chairs will not solve our
problems. Changing the mind set of the politicians to put the interests of the nation before the interests of party, should be the priority. They can then change the public attitudes. That is the essential effort we need to make in this election.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
"Change of Ownership" Sale
The ongoing mid-term political campaigns are shaping up to be the most expensive in history--obscenely so. Some candidates are spending 50, 100 million dollars or more
to buy the office. WHY?
The motive is POWER. With power come the keys to the public treasury. But most of all, with power comes a big eraser with which the power holder can erase laws and regulations of infinite variety which tend to limit the ability to profit by whatever means; requirements that products and services sold be safe and benign, made under fair labor standards; that financial products and services be fraud free and offer fair treatment to customers. And significantly the eraser can be used in
changing tax and inheritance laws to favor the wealthy power brokers, at the expense of everyone else.
Only a few can run for office. But multitudes of power seekers can purchase politicians to achieve the same results. If I outbid the competition and get a proxy
who will do my bidding, it isn't necessary for me to have the inconvenience of pretending to serve the public.
The road to power is paved with deceptions. Voters are manipulated by media campaigns characterized by blatant lies and distortions about the opponents and
concealment or exaggerations of the candidates actual record. As IBM preaches,
GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT. The public often buys it, and gets what it doesn't deserve.
The Florida Governor's race is an example. One candidate headed a company which stole $1.7 billion from the taxpayers, was rewarded with a reported $300 million severance bonus, and used millions of that to buy the Republican nomination for Governor. Point made!
to buy the office. WHY?
The motive is POWER. With power come the keys to the public treasury. But most of all, with power comes a big eraser with which the power holder can erase laws and regulations of infinite variety which tend to limit the ability to profit by whatever means; requirements that products and services sold be safe and benign, made under fair labor standards; that financial products and services be fraud free and offer fair treatment to customers. And significantly the eraser can be used in
changing tax and inheritance laws to favor the wealthy power brokers, at the expense of everyone else.
Only a few can run for office. But multitudes of power seekers can purchase politicians to achieve the same results. If I outbid the competition and get a proxy
who will do my bidding, it isn't necessary for me to have the inconvenience of pretending to serve the public.
The road to power is paved with deceptions. Voters are manipulated by media campaigns characterized by blatant lies and distortions about the opponents and
concealment or exaggerations of the candidates actual record. As IBM preaches,
GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT. The public often buys it, and gets what it doesn't deserve.
The Florida Governor's race is an example. One candidate headed a company which stole $1.7 billion from the taxpayers, was rewarded with a reported $300 million severance bonus, and used millions of that to buy the Republican nomination for Governor. Point made!
Friday, October 1, 2010
Hey diddle diddle, who's in the middle?
As a metaphor:
Imagine the American political scene as a playground teeter-totter. On each end of
the board sits a political party. And the board rests on a fulcrum, which represents
the middle ground---independents and moderates whose support usually determines which end of the board carries the most weight. If the party numbers would be exactly equal the board would be in equilibrium, exactly horizontal. Moving the fulcrum closer to one end would make the other end heavier. That is the principal of levers and underscores the importance of the center, the fulcrum. On the end that is nearest the ground it is easier for new voters to mount. It is harder for people to join the party up in the air. When the numbers are essentially equal, money can be
the grease for moving the fulcrum and can also be a step ladder to either end.
The elemental question is why is the teeter-totter there? Is it for the enjoyment of the entire voter community, or for a favored few? If for the few it is possible to
mount the board in a permanent location on the fulcrum so there is a built-in
favored end. The wealthiest neighbors have put the playground managers on payroll to assure their end will always be favored. So cooperation among neighbors that would lead to common enjoyment has been replaced by gridlock in the playground. This will lead to neglect of maintainance, and decline in the communal spirit that sustains
a society. The playground deterioration mirrors the deterioration of the society.
Eventually the neighborhood will turn into a slum.
Such an outcome is not inevitable. There is time to restore American vigor, entreprenour spirit and vision for the future. To make that happen our politicians
must return to their true mission---working for the general welfare instead of their's alone. We voters must make that happen by our activism and determination.
We can do it, starting now. This is a fork in the road election. Do not fear embarking on a new direction. The old has led us astray.
Imagine the American political scene as a playground teeter-totter. On each end of
the board sits a political party. And the board rests on a fulcrum, which represents
the middle ground---independents and moderates whose support usually determines which end of the board carries the most weight. If the party numbers would be exactly equal the board would be in equilibrium, exactly horizontal. Moving the fulcrum closer to one end would make the other end heavier. That is the principal of levers and underscores the importance of the center, the fulcrum. On the end that is nearest the ground it is easier for new voters to mount. It is harder for people to join the party up in the air. When the numbers are essentially equal, money can be
the grease for moving the fulcrum and can also be a step ladder to either end.
The elemental question is why is the teeter-totter there? Is it for the enjoyment of the entire voter community, or for a favored few? If for the few it is possible to
mount the board in a permanent location on the fulcrum so there is a built-in
favored end. The wealthiest neighbors have put the playground managers on payroll to assure their end will always be favored. So cooperation among neighbors that would lead to common enjoyment has been replaced by gridlock in the playground. This will lead to neglect of maintainance, and decline in the communal spirit that sustains
a society. The playground deterioration mirrors the deterioration of the society.
Eventually the neighborhood will turn into a slum.
Such an outcome is not inevitable. There is time to restore American vigor, entreprenour spirit and vision for the future. To make that happen our politicians
must return to their true mission---working for the general welfare instead of their's alone. We voters must make that happen by our activism and determination.
We can do it, starting now. This is a fork in the road election. Do not fear embarking on a new direction. The old has led us astray.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
