The End of '10

Sitting in the quiet late night at a downtown LA hotel, surrounded above and below by Rosy Bowlers getting their beauty sleep, I can't help but reflect on The End Of 2010.

Has there been another year in living memory that so spiked bad news with worse, and provided too few good omens to sooth a rattled psyche? Not in my memory, which still lives an active sort of life between uninformed youth and the fracturing of age.

Of course, as you contrarians out there will remind me, there were some good things in 2010. That is true, but I would reply that most were canceled by equal and opposite badness, like antimatter seeking out its matter clone.

You only need look at the economy for an example; when banks flourished again, and the stock market rose with corporate profits while jobs continued to disappear. Lack of gainful employment for far too many is the 800 pound antimatter Gorilla in the room, threatening to annihilate everything.

I've wracked my brain for something unequivocally positive to say about 2010. The best I can come up with is to note it was the year that scientists managed to create antihydrogen in the CERN Hadron collider, a long-desired feat. But whether that's positive or negative in the long run, depends on your perspective. For all of us made up of matter, it might not turn out so good ...

So, cherish your matter while it's intact and non-annihilated. And greet 2011 with hope and persistence.

Poetry Break: New York Riffs

New York City, in December:

Is as cold as I care to be

Is an amazing mix of grime and majesty

Is civilized, with a metal core

Would be a bad place for a wealthy alcoholic

Leaking

By now we've all heard about WikiLeaks, ad nauseum, but I feel the urge to comment. I know, I know, but I just can't help myself.

I can't see what all the fuss is about. From what's been discussed in the press, the information leaking is simply embarrassing to our diplomats, not damaging to national security. What one of our ambassadors thinks about Medvedev, or Berlusconi isn't that newsworthy. Nothing in the WikiLeaks pile released so far is anything like the 'Pentagon Papers', and certainly is not a diplomatic 9/11, as some beaurocrat in Spain ( I think) commented.

And the solution is simple, don't talk dirt about foreign dignitaries behind their backs if you are going to use vulnerable means to dish the dirt. Stick to verifiable facts in written communication (or cables - whatever that term means these days) and only speak opinion in face to face meetings, or via secure media. Haven't our state department folks heard of video chat over secure VPN connections?

We should use this WikiLeaks barrage as a wake-up to improve our security. Because you know if a former hacker like Julian Assange can dredge up these 'secrets', so can the intelligence operatives of other countries.

Lag Time

Remember when you've seen a trailer for a movie that got you all excited to see the flick, only to read that bad news bit at the end: 'coming Summer 20XX', where 'XX' is at least a year away?

Now what if you saw that trailer nearly every time you entered a theater, until the thing was finally released? Are you even more excited to see it?

Ok, so suppose when this film is eventually released, it's shown first somewhere in the world where you are not. The reviews flood in. You do your best to avoid them. And you avoid listening to the opinions of your friends, who somehow saw the movie while traveling in Outer Wozbekistan, or somewhere.

Eventually, and inevitably, as the days drag by, you give in to curiosity and read. And listen. Within no time at all you've learned everything, good or bad, about the film, except (hopefully) the exact script lines.

And then the fateful day comes - the showing of the film in your local bijou. Still care to see it? Perhaps, you tell yourself, you'll just wait and catch it on DVD, or better still HBO / Cinemax / Showtime / Starz/ etc, when it will be free (or seem so).

So there it is: Lag Time is bad news for box office. Which, I guess, isn't a surprise to most people - although it escapes the grasp of some movie marketers, apparently.

But it occurs to me this statement applies to other fields as well. Motorcycles, for example.

It's not been uncommon for a manufacturer to announce a new model to the press a year (or more) in advance of release to the showrooms. Then release the model everywhere BUT in the US market for another year (or more).

During all that time prospective American buyers are inundated with review after review. Eventually, the motorcycle is released into our local showrooms and we can actually buy one. Trouble is, that bike will likely be parked next to other bikes that have just been released. Ones we've only heard about for a few months.

And, by this time, the press has largely quieted when it comes to that long-delayed bike, which, when first revealed was touted as THE bike to own. Now the reviewers are all jazzed about something else.

So, when the dealer tells you the long awaited bike costs as much (if not more) than the newer models, do you plunk down your cash? Or do you tell yourself to wait and catch it on the used market?

Lag Time is a killer ...

Doing Dishes

In some respects I surf the curl of modern technology, in others I lag behind the wave's crest. And, I must admit, in a few others I am still on the beach.

An example of the latter is my family's failure to adopt automatic dishwashing technology that's been around, oh, since Eisenhower. We do the dishes the old (really old) fashioned way, by hand.

Now, I am sure that 90% of the people in the world do dishes by hand, some of them possibly trekking long distances to riverbanks and ponds for the task. At least I have hot and cold running water piped right into my house, a technology that dates to the Minoans of 1500 BC. So I am not totally behind the times.

But in the US of A, I expect my family is in a distinct minority, dishwashing-wise. So, every time there is a feast of significant proportions, like the Thanksgiving just past, there follows a dishwashing chore commensurate in scale.

If I was wise I would follow behind the cooks in our family and clean whatever they dirtied as soon as they were through with it. But no, I am not that wise. Which inevitably leaves an enormous pile of pots, pans, plates, glasses, and cutlery in need of scrubbing. So many, in fact, after we've hosted a gathering of friends for Thanksgiving, that one look at the pile induces shock. I am rendered helpless and am only cheered by more turkey, stuffing, and wine.

The turkey, stuffing, and especially the wine leave me immobile but reflective. This year it occurred to me that our economic meltdown has much in common to that enormous pile of mouldering dishes in my kitchen. In that it got there by failure to clean as you go. We ignored the accumulating mess and kept on gorging at the table. Inevitably the party ended and we found ourselves with a titanic clean-up task. And a national state of shock.

My point of reflection this Thanksgiving was: are we cleaning up, or in shock/avoidance mode still? Are we immersing our hands in hot water and soap, or numbly sipping wine as the dishes marinate?

Making Music

One of my many lapsed enthusiasms is music - specifically guitar music. Preferably electric, loud, and as bluesy as possible while still 'rockin'. But acoustic is good too, more accessible, and arguably less irritating to the neighbors.

Once upon a time I played a lot, and dabbled with home recording. I had big plans, inspired by the Grunge movement of the early 90's.

There were only two flies in the ointment: first, I didn't really have the time, given a growing family and a demanding job; second, and arguably more important, I had/have no talent. Zero, nada, zilch. I can strum a passable 'D', 'C', and 'G' progression, and run a few blues-rock scales, but there it ends.

My lack of persistence saved the world (or at least my family and friends) from an aural disaster of biblical proportions.

I am not alone. There are literally millions of misguided souls who think they can make good music (or at least be rock stars) playing guitar in a band. If there weren't Guitar Center would go bust overnight. Visit any of that chain's locations on a weekend afternoon and listen to the cacophony of jammin' wannabes, if you need (painful) physical proof.

But, luckily for all of us who truly love music and the guitar, there are a few talented souls out there we can live vicariously through.

One of these talented types is an LA guy named Jim Vitale. For a young gent he's been around for what seems like ages. I first met him when he was a doorman at the late, lamented Highland Grounds, where he would occasionally sit in on open mic nights. His music was rough, a bit raw, but powerful and played with conviction.

For reasons known only to Jim, though, he stopped playing at HG, and I didn't hear him play a note on stage for years. I say on stage because he would always oblige with a tasty riff played on someone else's axe, out in HGs spacious patio.

That's how it went for a few years until Jim, out of the blue, released a CD of music titled 'Echo Waiting' featuring the tune 'Aztec Garage' by his band called the 'New Vistas'. I say band, but Jim sang and played most of the instruments, including some amazing guitar. I guess he must have been off in the woodshed, ala Clapton, or maybe he visited the crossroads, I don't know, but his playing had improved amazingly.

Jim also began playing with a local band called 'With a Bible and a Gun', playing Johnny Cash covers. I am not a huge fan of all the Man in Black's hits, but Jim's telecaster playing was spot-on and made it all worth hearing.

Not long after that, Jim did me the favor of giving my son some guitar lessons. Jim's not a teacher by trade, but my son learned a great deal and something in those lessons must have inspired because my son is now a 'real' guitarist. He's even playing out at open mics now, making his Dad proud (and not a little bit green with envy).

Which brings us to the present. Jim Vitale is working on a new CD project, and he's using KickStart to fund it. If you haven't heard about KickStart, it's a site that allows you to take pledges from supporters. If you reach a certain goal, the project gets funded, if not, it doesn't. Jim's just a little past halfway there, with only 4 days to go.

I've contributed, and if any of you who might be reading this like music made on an electric guitar, check out Jim's kickstart site and see if you want to help. If you can't, then get out and support your local live music scene. At least remember to tip that busker playing Hendrix through a worn-out pignose next time you pass him on the street, OK?

Bike Addiction

Sometimes the right decision is trumped by emotion. Maybe most of the time. Depending on your political bent, that may or may not have happened in the elections just past.

It seems to happen all the time when I attempt to make rational decisions on buying motorcycles.

Just now I am blessed with an abundance of goodness when it comes to two-wheeled powered machinery, owning (1) a very pleasing and powerful retro-standard Kawasaki ZRX1200R bought new in 2001; (2) a very fast and nimble Ducati S4RS bought new in 2006; and (3) an extremely usable, accessible 2004 Triumph Bonneville T100, bought used. There is no reason on this earth I need anything else.

If I want to tour on a bike, the ZRX can be pressed into reasonable service. For commuting, the Bonnie is an obvious choice. For a track day, the Ducati won't disappoint. There really is nothing else I need.

But, Oh, do I ever want something else!

I browse the ranks of new bikes at my local dealers with a desire to own most of what I see. It's a disease, treated only by lack of funds and some remnant of responsibility.

A small, evil voice from within tells me I'm getting older and time is wasting if I want to experience all that the world of motorcycling has to offer. There's no time to stick with what you've got for years if you expect to broaden your experience. You want to KNOW, then you have to BUY.

A saving rational voice chimes in counterpoint, telling me to stop being silly and look at what I've got. If you want to buy something new, it says, you have to sell something. Can you do that, it asks ruefully.

Right now, the answer is 'No'. I am the victim of having chosen wisely - or luckily, and every bike I own is 'precious' to me. And I have run out of garage space, money, and time in the week to own/ride more than three.

So, the rational voice wins at the moment, and my addiction is held in check. I have no intellectual doubt this is the right, reasonable condition. But emotion is a strange thing. 'The Heart Wants What It Wants', according to the eminent failed rationalist Woody Allen.

How long I can hold out depends on the economy, my family responsibilities, and how much extra room I can wrest in the garage through careful reorganization.

Tea and Crumpets

Ah, the morning after the election, and instead of coffee and donuts, millions are enjoying the sharp taste of tea and crumpets.

Well, maybe not crumpets.

But certainly tea, even if tea is not everyone's, uh, cup of tea.

Still sipping tea instead of guzzling coffee is very sophisticated. And a nice Earl Grey (hot) is recommended for enabling rational command decisions.

And there will be decisions to make, today and every day for the next two years.

Election Day

I did my civic duty and voted. It was easy, since the polling place was nearly empty - at noon.

My fellow Angelenos may be waiting till the last minute to vote, but I have to wonder - are the ballot choices we have here too much to understand or care about? It's not like we have great options this election.

Take Senator for instance: do we keep the one who's been part and parcel of the government of the past 20 years, and who has let the democratic faithful down more than once? Or do we replace her with a corporate hack who thinks because she was a pampered CEO she knows how to represent a state in Congress? Picking the lesser of two evils, or put another way, choosing the devil you know...etc, is never an enticing proposition.

What about propositions? The only truly interesting one, one that isn't repealing something or amending the constitution in some useless way, is Prop 19, the one which would 'legalize' marijuana. Interesting yes, but hard to decide what to do about. Do you vote yes and set up a potential conflict between state and federal law enforcement that could see DEA agents swooping in and arresting California citizens for growing their 'legal' 25 square feet of weed? Or do you vote no and perpetuate the damaging drug war status quo?

I tell you, it's one unappealing set of choices. But vote we must, so if you haven't yet, get out there and give it your best shot (figuratively speaking)

A Fork in The Road

The road seemed straight and sure. We made a big course correction in 2008 but we've been motoring along since. Slowly, but surely.

There have been a few potholes to trouble us, and a couple of detours along the way. And once or twice the road has been closed due to a collision of wills. But mostly we've been moving ahead, toward a destination just out of sight over the hill. When we get there the road will ease, and we can rest a while.

But now we are staring at a fork in the road. We are being told by two different groups that only one path (theirs) will get us to the desired destination. The other path (not theirs) will either lead to ruin or will loop back on our previous path and cost us in time and money.

Luckily, it's not too hard to pick a path. One of those groups had control of our direction in the past, and they had us routed over a cliff. Hence that course correction. It would be plain stupid to take direction from them again. At least not until they give us a look at their map.

The Rally: We Are Still Here

I wasn't sure what I was hoping for from today's 'Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear', hosted by Jon Stewart (with assistance from Stephen Colbert), but I think I got more AND less than I expected.

Let me explain ...

Part of me was hoping Stewart would say some of the things the politicos in the Democratic party, including the President, were afraid to say about the conservatives running for (or are already in) office in this country. I was hoping he could just blurt out exactly what destructive political games they are playing - humorously, of course. The President either won't, or can't spell it out, he just beats around the bush on the subject. And it's never funny.

But no, The Rally was mostly apolitical. And that was the Less.

I was also hoping for a bit more from the stellar cast of his show, but his crew were used sparingly, though fairly effectively, including a cute bit with Jon Oliver as 'Peter Pan'.

Stewart surprised though, with his address late in the event, in which he squarely blamed the media (mostly cable news) for inflaming passions and magnifying differences out of their real proportions. It was an effective speech, and anyone hearing it had to believe afterward that we aren't so far apart after all. Stewart said the only people in America not working together were in Washington, DC and in the media, and that statement rang true.

I hadn't expected him to make such a thoughtful speech. And that was the More.

Also adding to the experience were the performances (brief though they were) of Cat Stevens (aka Yusuf Islam) and Tony Bennett. Sounding as good as ever, and looking healthier than he ever did back in the day, Stevens sang 'Peace Train' as part of a comic battle with a rusty Ozzy Osbourne, who sang 'Crazy Train'. Bennett belted out an abbreviated 'America the Beautiful' more powerfully than anyone his age should be able to. Truly good stuff.

In the end, will the thousands who showed up at the Mall in DC - estimated at anywhere from 70,000 to 250,000 (can't anybody count at these rallies) go home transformed in some meaningful way? Will the millions more who watched on TV?

Probably not. Those who made their way to DC were almost certainly all Daily Show and Colbert Report fans already. As were most of the viewers at home. Those conservatives who tuned in or turned up will probably wait to hear what their leaders say about the event, before they make up their minds to despise and ridicule it.

But the Rally did let those in power - and those trying very hard to get back into power, know that there exists a very large group of Americans who hate the nastiness of current politics and government. A group who, when aroused, can make things happen - things like the election of the nation's first african-american President, and the bench-clearing of the Republicans who steered us into War and economic distress.

We may be disenchanted with Mr. Obama, just as Jon Stewart, once a strong supporter, clearly has become, but we are still here. The Rally to Restore Sanity was just a reminder.

Demoralized in DC

The news is grim and getting grimmer all the time. It seems the Democrats are set to lose the House and possibly the Senate.

That may be happy news for conservative-types and fans of Glenn Beck, but it bodes ill for those of us who suffered mightily under George The Younger.

It wouldn't be so bad if this judgement was being rendered at the end of a full four years. By then, if a light couldn't be clearly seen at the end of the tunnel, you could safely say they'd got it wrong. But just 2 years? How impatient are we as a society?

Of course, even supporters must admit the Democrats haven't run the show as well as they should have and we hoped they would. And that realization has come at great cost to the Dems. Even if their disheartened fans won't vote for Republicans or Tea-Partiers, they may not vote for Dems either. In politics, apathy among your base is fatal.

And to add insult to injury, the press seems to have lost all sense of journalistic integrity in reporting the run-up to the midterms. They are making wild statements, like 'President Obama's policies are widely unpopular'. That's just not true.

Obama's policies may be unpopular and widely-so among Republicans, Tea-Partiers, and conservatives in general, but not among the great mass of the populace that voted Obama into office in 2008. That group is merely demoralized that more couldn't be done. That Obama was not able to get the Republicans to work cooperatively to solve our nation's problems. That bipartisanship didn't work (and was scrapped as a lost cause early on).

Right now, it looks as if the conservatives who stonewalled every effort by Obama at governing this nation have achieved their goal: to energize their followers and demoralize the Democrats'.

Let us hope that the reversal isn't too extreme, and that a relatively balanced Congress results. Perhaps with neither side having a 'super-majority' more compromise might be necessary, despite political enmity.

California Vs Eric Holder?

If you were visiting California from just about any other state (Oregon and parts of Colorado excepted), you'd be forgiven for believing marijuana was already legal. After all, you can get it from a plethora of 'medical' vendors, and there seems no shortage of 'doctors' who will write you a note.

But you'd be wrong. Marijuana is still most definitely illegal in the Golden State. Voters will be given a chance to change that on November 2.

I won't go into the arguments for and against the proposition (#19) that proposes legalization. I am more interested in what will happen if the measure is passed. US Attorney General Eric Holder has stated the DEA will not recognize the state law and will aggressively enforce the federal statutes.

This potential conflict will give the thoughtful among us a reason to reflect on the old question of State's Rights in a Democratic Republic. Some will come to the conclusion that California has no business passing laws that contradict federal law. Others will conclude that drug laws shouldn't be national, but should be decided at the state level.

I have no strong opinion one way or the other, except for this: I dislike laws that make a substantial portion of our otherwise law-abiding population into criminals. And I dislike the crime and violence that follows illegal drugs.

I'm not sure legalizing marijuana is the right solution, but cracking down on the kids that smoke it sure isn't.

It will be interesting to see how things play out on November 2, and in the aftermath if the proposition passes. It has the makings of an interesting legal drama ...

Bilge

I don't think I am overstating when I describe politics today as 'bilge'. The campaigns for Governor and US Senator in California are particularly 'bilgey'.

I don't know whether I've ever seen another set of elections where the negative adds outnumbered the platform presentations by such a large margin. My fellow Californians and I barely know what these candidates stand for and plan to do if elected. We just know how horrible they feel our fates will be if we elect their opponents.

We hear, for instance, courtesy of Meg Whitman's campaign, that Jerry Brown would raise our taxes to the point of impoverishing us all, without blinking an eye. And we also know he represents politics as usual - albeit the 'usual' circa the early eighties, whatever that was.

We hear, from Brown's campaign, that Meg Whitman is a non-voter, a hypocrite on immigration, and possibly a criminal racketeer. Plus she's rich, and that can't be good.

On the Senatorial front, we have 'Carly' vs The Boxer. Carly paints the boxer as a demagog who spends senselessly from her imperious throne in Washington. The Boxer paints Carly as a heartless boss who tosses workers aside in the name of profit, and who'd outsource the whole economy if given half a chance.

I say it's all 'Bilge'. I get no freaking idea from any of their campaigns what these folks would really do if elected.

Wait - I take that back. I'm forgetting the little bit of 'positive' adds there have been. Let me see ...

Brown: he's experienced. Older, wiser, level-headed. Pragmatic. In other words he won't be the same old Brown who dated Linda Rondstadt. Shame, really.

Whitman: she knows how to run a business. Now if only governing were like running a business. Clueless.

Boxer: she's improved things for returning vets. What else, oh - she voted to give Bush the power to engage in war in the first place, putting all these vets at risk. Tough sell, Babs.

Carly: Hmm ... she ran HP? And she off-shored thousands of jobs? She has a haircut that reminds me of Jane Lynch's character's coif in 'Best in Show'? What the heck else is there?

Like I said, 'Bilge'. May as well close your eyes and randomly choose. May the better 'Bilge' win !

All About Banks

What is a bank?

Is it a place to keep your money safe?

Is it a place to get a loan when you need money NOW but don't have enough under the mattress?

Just what is a bank?

I heard once that a bank was supposed to be a place where you put your money so it won't get stolen, or so you won't lose it, where it will be harder to spend it unwisely.

And,

While your money is sitting around in the bank, the good folks there will put it to productive use by lending some of it to others who need to buy something big, like a car, or a house, or a kidney transplant. They'll charge those needy people a goodly but fair vigorish to earn a profit, and give some of it back to you in the form of earned interest on your money.

Seems like a nice place. Good for your money. Good for others. Good for you.

But are there banks like that today? Post-Eco-Meltdown, I am not so sure.

In those institutions still called 'banks', your money seems at risk of being whittled away by service fees which overmatch the pitiful interest the bank pays (o.5% anyone?). And that's before your account gets siphoned by skimmers and identity thieves.

In 'banks' today, you have to earn practically the equivalent of TOP TOP SECRET clearance in order to be squeaky clean enough to get a loan. And even then that loan may not be as much as you really need or come with terms you can really manage.

So, what is a bank?

Right now mine seems like just a database that tracks the numbers that define my economic existence. It's a middle-'man' and a spreadsheet for my purchases and my income, taking a little off the top for its trouble.

That's useful, but not really a 'bank', it seems to me.

Give me a loan and prove me wrong ...

Whitman's World

I imagine our world would appear differently, when viewed by richer, more privileged eyes than I can muster.

It certainly seems that way, given the unfolding saga of Meg Whitman's undocumented 'alien' housekeeper. Ms Whitman seems not to understand exactly why this revelation is a problem to her.

Whitman is running for governor of California, and has lived (if not voted) in the state, so she should be well aware of the true nature of undocumented workers - and most especially those who care for our homes and children. In the Golden State there's an unofficial, and largely unspoken policy on the subject: 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell', i.e., don't ask whether your domestic service provider is illegal, and they won't tell you.

To most Californians, whether Meg Whitman paid an illegal to take care of her house is immaterial. It's no big deal. Hypocrisy is. And so is the apparent abandonment of someone who was 'like family' when their illegal status became a hurdle to the governorship.

In Ms Whitman's World, it seems people are expendable to expediency. In the end, the effect on Whitman's campaign will depend on how much this incident defines her ethics and morality to the voters, not whether she used an undocumented worker in a state where that is the norm rather than the exception.

Baked & Broiled: Misery in LA

Turn me over, I'm done. The temperature today hit a record high of 113 degrees in LA (that's 45 C for the rest of the world). According to an LA Times online article, there has never been a higher reading since record keeping began in 1877. And where I sit, in a non-air conditioned home office located in the hotter spaces closer to Pasadena, I am sure it's 115. Pure misery.

What did we Angelenos due to deserve this? Wasn't last years Station Fire punishment enough for our indiscretions? Isn't the prospect of being governed by Jerry Brown or Meg Whitman?

Perhaps this is payback for our gentler, cooler than usual summer. If so, couldn't payback be given on the installment plan, with a warmer than usual winter? We could handle that. But to hit us with every degree missed over the summer all in one week? That's cruel and unusual.

If anyone reading this is a practicing shaman or rainmaker, please conjure up some relief for dear old Greater Los Angeles. We'd pay you back if we could ...

Edge Grip

I'd been up that road before, and I knew its twistings well. So I don't know what it was that threw me off my game that day, when I found myself blasting along on my Kawasaki and entering an uphill left too quickly. Perhaps it was the time of day, with shadows from the hillside and the trees obscuring my usual visual cues. Maybe the too-heavy lunch I'd just eaten clouded my brain.

Whatever the cause, I found myself in the corner and beyond my usual turn-in point, facing an unpleasant date with a ditch, or perhaps a tree.

Years of riding, however, have equipped me with unconscious reflexes that take over when my heart's in my throat and I'm puckered so hard when I come off the bike the seat's coming with me.

In what was probably only a moment but felt like a glacial age, I leaned the bike over on it's side, keeping just a touch of throttle (it was an uphill left), and held it there until physics worked as we all hope it does and I sailed out of the turn, accelerating uphill, slightly stunned but unscathed and happy.

Later, at a stop for gas, I looked at my tires and noticed the left side rear showed wear to the very edge, which almost never happens to me, and the front was there too, which never happens. That wear was testament to the marvels of modern rubber compounding and tire construction, which had just saved my ass from an unpleasant wilderness journey/ life flight helicopter ride.

When I leaned my bike over, the tiny strip of rubber on the edge of my tires kept about 800 lbs of bike and rider glued firmly (enough) to the road. Edge grip the racers call it. Without it, those daredevils can't run the lap times required to win, losing a tenth of a second every lap. Without it, I'd be a Christmas ornament, hanging in the Angeles National Forest.

Edge grip may be a racer's friend and fresh tires my best insurance policy, but it occurs to me the concept extends ...

Perhaps our President is suffering from a lack of political 'edge grip'. He's missing that tenth a lap he needs to reach the finish line. If so, it would be nice if his 'pit crew' slipped on a new set of grippy 'tires' and found him that extra confidence he needs to ride through the tighter twists and turns of governing.

Number 299

It seems only a short while since I began to place a few notes in this space. That was back in October of 2008. But today's is the 299th.

Somehow, 299 sounds more significant to me than 300. Maybe because '300' has been overused recently, or maybe it's just a feeling of impending change, like reaching age 29 felt more significant than 30.

Anyone reading this now, and who may have dropped by from time to time to see what I was up to, might have noticed that the rate of postings here has dropped. Travel and paying work have intervened. But the reason might also be that 300 posts across nearly two years is more than enough, and reaching 299 has raised the question.

What is there left to say? Readers will know (or think they know) my politics. And that is what occupies my free time most these days - agonizing or commiserating over the political foibles of my generation.

When I do turn off politics or the economy, it's possible my musings over other subjects reach no audience at all. Does anyone out there care what I think about 'The Directions of Time'?

In the end, this process is just entertainment and a form of therapy. If after I post number 300, sometime in the next few days or so, I still find pleasure and intellectual engagement in it, and if there is possibly another 300 in the tank, then this blog will continue.

But don't be surprised if number 300 leads to only a few more, and then none at all, if the spirit isn't there. Time is increasingly precious in my life, and I have little of it to waste.

Readers may come and go, but the Writer must always be there ...

Of Mice and Ms. O'Donnell

I was taking my usual anti-hypocrisy therapy - watching 'The Colbert Report', that is, when up comes this bit on how Fox News (and O'Reilly specifically) was declining to air an embarrassing appearance of Christine O'Donnell on Fox News circa 2007. Of course, Mr. Colbert aired the piece O'Reilly wouldn't, and it was a doozy. It depicted Ms. O'Donnell, then a chairperson for some watchdog group or other, claiming that scientists had genetically engineered mice with human brains.

Colbert turned it into a laugh, of course, but I must say the piece left me feeling dread - a deep and anxious dread. Can a substantial minority of people in these United States really want to elect someone with idiotic opinions? Ms. O'Donnell's comments were at best uninformed, at worse gullible and stupid. Does energy, youthful enthusiasm, and looking good on camera trump intelligence, thoughtfulness, and competence in the people we seek to lead us?

The dark night of the soul I spent pondering these questions left me wishing Ms. O'Donnell's observation was correct, and we had some viable murine candidates to choose from ...

Tea and Simplicity

I don't consider myself a nuanced political thinker. In discourse about anything political I can be rated on the subtle thinking scale somewhere between Plato and Fox News. Closer to the Fox News end, really, but sadly not close enough. I am too agile a thinker to truly grasp one of the major recent developments on the political scene ...

But then not even Plato would understand the current 'Tea Party' movement.

No amount of erudite political acumen could fully explain the phenomenon. It helps to just blank your mind, go with the flow, and become a receptive receiver. (Hey, it works for Fox!)

For, you see, this Party is not about 'Tea', as in 'let's all have some nice tea and crumpets', which sounds a very constructive act - rather it's about tearing down and throwing out. Cleaning out the governmental closet, as it were, and maybe throwing out the baby with the bath water too.

My original concept of the 'Tea Party' was as a political umbrella for people who were upset with the growing national debt, and all the bad things that make it grow. With a few people added who were disaffected with the partisan shout-fest in Washington.

Partly true, no doubt, but not true enough ...

In reality, or so it seems to me, the Party of the Tea is about über-libertarianism and constitutional absolutism, the latter concept something I thought abandoned after Burr shot Hamilton. To the Tea Partiers, the Constitution is carved in stone, like the 'Ten Commandments', and largely by the same Author. To them, there is no room for interpretation or logical expansion in the language of the Document. What it says it says, and how it was first interpreted is what it means.

To those Tea-ers, their fundamentalistic interpretation of the Constitution leaves many modern governmental functions without basis or reason for existence. Goodbye Medicare, Goodbye Social Security. Neither are in the original mandate. Ditto the Federal Reserve. Supreme Court? Only if it's not 'activist'. Space Program? There will be no 'Right Stuff' unless it's for common defense.

About all that would be left the federal government is to provide for the national defense, build some roads, and levy a few taxes.

But wouldn't that leave a lot of gaps in our society's safety net? What about caring for the elderly, the disabled, or the impoverished sick? The Tea Partiers will tell you that is up to the individual States to implement, if they really think it necessary. No matter this was tried back in the Confederation experiment, post-Revolution but pre-Constitution, and found not to work very well at all.

I guess the Partiers just want to be able to have somewhere to go if the State they live in decides to pass a law they don't like. The more those hated laws are made at the state level the more options the Partiers have to move and still stay in the US. Slick, especially if you own your own U-haul.

As I said, though, I may have this all wrong. I may be figuring in too much complexity in my analysis, when it's really utterly simple. And I don't own a U-haul.

How to Gain Weight

We have a family friend who lately has taken to exclaiming she can't gain weight, no matter how hard she tries.

I've offered to be her 'weight-gain' coach, but she is skeptical. Needlessly so, since, Dr. Nick from the Simpsons aside, I am perhaps the foremost expert in adding pounds quickly.

I will reserve an exhaustive list of helpful tips for paying clients, but for those of you with a taste (ahem) for building flab DIY, I can provide a little guidance:

Exercise - don't do any. Period. When getting out of bed in the morning, don't jump up, roll slowly onto the floor. Never walk when you can get a ride. Sit. Sit. Sit. Never leave your bed or sofa on weekends, except for emergencies, or to buy smoothies.

Eating - do it constantly. Always have candy handy between major meals - preferably candy containing peanuts or peanut butter, but any nuts will do when embedded in the right chocolate. Speaking of PB, try peanut butter and cheese sandwiches (good on Rye) for a snack. They pack a powerful caloric punch and tend not to rot easily, so you can carry a spare wherever you go. [Warning: better have some full-fat milk available to wash it down, since a gob full of cheese and PB on Rye can be a choking hazard.]

Drinking - read the labels. Some popular drinks can be ridiculously devoid of useable calories. If you are old enough, don't plan to be driving anywhere, and aren't in danger of addictive behavior, go with some alcohol. Typically very high in calories, especially those thick, 'heady', imported beers, it's just the sort of thing for those long sofa-bound weekends. If you are a teetotaler, then run (scratch that ... drive) to your nearest smoothie vendor and get whatever is on the menu with 500 calories or more. They'll have plenty of options, and you can eat one of your spare PB and Cheese on Ryes while you drink, to enhance the bloat.

And remember the one ingredient in every successful weight gain program: Ice Cream. No other foodstuff gives you so much fat per bite, except, well ... fat.

With these pearls of wisdom, can you believe our friend refuses to take me seriously?

Happy Eating!

Lead Balloons and Hot Air

When listening to Newt Gingrich, or just about any other conservative talking head, I am reminded of the physical contradiction they personify: they produce a lot of hot air, but nothing rises.

Not a single constructive word comes from their mouths, at least while in front of the cameras, though they say they have answers to all our problems. Of course, the answers they most often give are 'dump the current administration', and 'start over - with us'.

But what, you should ask of them, will you do when you are back in power? What miracles will you work to save us?

So far, I haven't heard an answer from any conservative pundit or politician interviewed on TV, in the print, or on the web. Nothing except the usual talking points, dumbed down to provide no detail: Cut spending, Cut taxes, Keep America Strong, Save the Family. Ok, but please tell us: Where, For Whom, How Will We Pay For It, and Whose Family?

Their words are just pumping Hot Air into Lead Balloons, with the hope those blunt and heavy objects will roll over enough Democrats to get the Job Done in the midterm elections.

To be brutally fair, there's been an excess of heated air escaping from a few liberal pundits too, but they get less TV exposure, so have a far weaker physical impact: a limpid wind furling cardboard sails.

But two wrongs don't make a Right, my mother always told me, and I'll bet two wrongs don't make a decent Left, either. In the end, nothing rises ...

Babbleocity 36: Dive! Ride!

You mustn't neglect your therapy ...

Dive! Dive! - Spend more than a few months away from salt water and SCUBA skills begin, perversely, to rust. Getting back in the drink takes equal amounts of cautious preparation and 'damn the torpedoes' charging ahead. But it's worth it, when you find the gear going on as smoothly as you remember - even the makeshift fix to your dive knife sheath is still holding strong. The regulator still regulates and the computers compute, and down you go, ear-popping your way to the bottom. Blowing bubbles among your friends the calico bass, the kelpfish, the sheepshead, and, of course, the garrulous garibaldi. There's not much better a way of spending a summer day ... unless ...

Ride! Ride! - A motorcycle is a living thing. No, really. A bike will mechanically sadden if left alone. It's true, I swear. You can tell by how absolutely thrilled the machine feels when lit up and roaring you along your favorite back roads after too long silent in a darkened garage. Or, maybe, that's just an impression that comes from your own spirit flaring into light when reunited with your two-wheeled partner after too long a separation. But don't think about it, just let the engine sing and the tires read you the story of the road. Dance your way along twisting ribbons the designers must have made just for moments like this. As close to nirvana as you are likely to get (above water) ...

Therapy is easy, when it's this much fun ...

Iran, Iraq, and a Very Hard Place

Tonight President Obama declared the 'war' in Iraq over (sort of ... mostly). Our combat troops are coming home.

Well, not quite home, not all of them. There's still Afghanistan - and the 'good' battle against Al Qaeda and the Taliban. Quite a few will be heading east to the inhabited rubble of Kabul or Kandahar.

A lot of people who helped vote Mr. Obama into office are wondering why we are still fighting anywhere in that part of the world. They are wondering why the President is so adamant and intent about steering the course entered by George W. Bush. I'd wondered too, until I glanced at a world map, where the answer was obvious ...

And the answer has little to do with Afghanistan, or Iraq, but everything to do with what lies between them - Iran. Once an ally of the West, a Persian bulwark against a semi-cohesive Arab Union, Iran then moved through revolution to become our strident enemy, eventually morphing again during the first Gulf War to inhabit the uncomfortable dual role of our enemy and erstwhile friend-in-arms against Saddam. Now, despite the cooperation required to calm the Shiite extremists in post-invasion Iraq, Iran is largely just an avowed enemy. More accurately the government is, through President-by-decree Ahmadinejad and his theocratic handlers.

And our enemy Iran is rushing to build 'peaceful' nuclear capacity that could also give them the 'bomb'. And the thought of a fundamentalist Shia Iran unleashing its own genie from the atomic bottle is unthinkable to most countries, but especially so for Israel, Turkey, and also the Sunni led Arab nations we call our 'friends' in the region.

That's why Afghanistan remains a battlefied. The powers-that-be want a sympathetic government in firm control there, to serve as a friendly bookend to a firmly-controlled and friendly Iraq.

To use a groan-worthy cliché/metaphor, we want Iran to be caught between 'Iraq and a Hard Place'. Afghanistan is a very hard place, indeed.

Live Long ... and Prosper?

How would you like to live to be 500, perhaps celebrate a millennium?

Silly question, right? Nuts really, because no one, biblically famous forefathers aside, lives much beyond that famous three score and ten, do they?

The good folks behind 'Life Extended', as seen on the Documentary Channel, beg to differ. They feel we might be able to live essentially forever. One day we will figure out how to stop aging in it's tracks, and then it will be just a matter of avoiding accidents and violence, and we can each be a modern day Methuselah. A span of a million years was mentioned, and not in jest. (At least I think not in jest. The film is Swedish and I can't detect Swedish humor. Are there Swedish comedians? But I digress ..)

The show did reveal a few downsides to life extension, the main one being overpopulation. After all, if no one is dying, then we'd better not have too many being born or else - disaster.

Another worry is worry itself. If we lick aging, and control disease, leaving only accident and violent attacks to fear, won't we become a bunch of paranoid shut-ins? The show's writers seem to believe we will become adept at avoiding mayhem, but it seems all too likely we will avoid it by just not getting out of bed.

One the documentary didn't mention, but comes readily to mind is - boredom. Will there be anything on TV 1000 years from now? And will we immortals even care? What will excite us after even a piddling 200 years of life? And if a smidgeon of interest is still left by then, how about when we reach 5oo? It's hard to imagine being surprised, interested, pleased, or moved by anything after 1000 years, and impossible after a million.

Of course, one thing bored people do to pass the time is have sex. Which will make solving overpopulation more difficult. Unless after 1000 years even sex is boring. (Nah ...)

And there's another problem: living forever means living with yourself forever - with how you look, how smart you are, how talented (or talentless) - you get the drift. What if you aren't really your cup of tea? Will body remodeling and genetic re-jiggering become an essential part of life? If so, will we all become homogenized and boring? One thing for sure - there's no way I want to spend a million years as Me. (A couple hundred, maybe ...)

Luckily, science moves too slowly for me to ever face the problem of immortality. From what the documentary insinuates, though, our grandchildren might lead active lives into their mid-100's, and their grandchildren just might make the double-century.

Will they be happy with their long lives? Or will they be miserable, self-loathing, agoraphobics, living in mirror-less houses and playing endless games of solitaire; surprised by nothing, moved by nothing?

The folks behind 'Life Extended' harbor no real fears. They - or rather the characters they introduce to us, believe we will make it. And we'll all be better off with an end to the scourge of aging.

On the off-chance they are right, maybe I'll have myself frozen. Spend a few hundred years head down in a vat of liquid nitrogen, until the methuselah technology is perfected. Then they will thaw me out, fix me up, and off to a thousand years of motorcycle rides and scuba dives I'll go.

Wait, that's risky stuff. An immortal could die doing those things.

Better stay in and do something less dangerous: Maybe they'll have surrogates by then, or at least some really cool video games...

Retrogression Blues

'One step forward, Two steps back', is a familiar cliche of complaint. I'd say it was apropos of our political leaders, except it's too mild to apply. Our guys and gals in Washington appear to live by 'One step forward, Two steps back, and while we're at it, let's take another Two backward.'

How does this manifest itself in our lives? Figuring out the labyrinthian processes in Washington are beyond me, but I can hazard a guess, and here it goes:

A bill gets passed - say one that will allow stem cell research to move forward, benefiting throngs of victims to a sadly wide and expanding menu of afflictions. Let's postulate this bill has been opposed by a certain segment of the population on some grounds or other - in this case we can posit fundamentalist religious beliefs as the motivating factor.

The opposition organizes successfully enough to pay for legal challenges to the new rule. They achieve an injunction against implementation of the rule. That will give them time to twist the arms (figuratively speaking) of vulnerable politicians(included elected judges) and build support for overturning, or drastically modifying the rule.

Now, faced with this opposition, what do the originators of the bill do? They compromise. In addition to the compromises already made in the passing of the bill. This is done through the process of mapping out how the rule will be administered. Rest assured by the time they are done, stem cells will only be available under circumstances that are rare at best.

What's worse, during this process of tinkering and 'tweaking', measures may be introduced through legal action that weren't even there in the first place. New interpretations of general passages that will now be refined into legal action. This may be taken so far that the bill will now allow less research into stem cells than before the bill was even passed. The modified rule may actually prohibit actions that weren't specifically prohibited before.

So, here's what we have: as far as the general voting public is aware, they have approved a bill that will stimulate stem cell research, ultimately benefitting the health and welfare of all citizens. But what they actually get is a bill that does very little, or at worse, undermines the whole concept.

Voters may never know until they see another bill up for a vote which does the same thing the old bill was supposed to do. They may wonder why another rule was needed. After all, isn't this fixed already?

Then again, given the persistence of voter memory in this country, they may never notice. Sort of a national, political, Alzheimer's. The kind of disease that no amount of stem cell research will ever solve ...

Flight of the Doh-Dohs

I know I've been flying too much when I begin to expect people to behave intelligently on a plane. Maybe it's the millionth hearing of those pre-flight instructions that makes me so sure others have heard them and understand too.

I couldn't be more deluded.

On both legs of my flight today, my fellow denizens of the air shoved bulging bags plus every other personal item they were carting into the overheard, despite the attendants' repeated instructions to put the smaller items UNDER THEIR SEATS.

While bag-stuffing, my aerial compatriots plugged up the aisles in exactly the way the crew were saying fervently not to.

Then, getting comfortable, they reclined their seat backs and dropped their tray tables. Some began furiously texting as if their lives depended on it. Maybe they did.

The obviously experienced (and borderline exasperated) crew were savvy and persistent enough to clean up the mess and button us up for takeoff, but the going was tough. As the wheels left the ground I reflected on what it must be like to repeat the same instructions, and witness the same acts of misunderstanding, obliviousness, or rebellion, time and again.

I had time enough to appreciate the lot of the attendant before the first Doh-Dohs got up from their seats in a beeline for the toilet, and my reverie was broken by the loudspeaker refrain, "the Captain has not turned off the seat-belt sign - please remain in your seats ..."

I guess I can understand why one of the crew might grab a beer and slide away from the mess, from time to time ...

Inerttainment

There may be a reason why the economy is in the doldrums. We are just passing MidSummer, a time historically known for doldrums, economic or otherwise.

This time of year, whenever I am not working, I tend to sit and watch. It's not that I don't enjoy active hobbies, I just seem to have less energy to devote to them, so sitting seems the best option.

And today's technology makes it easy. The world of news and entertainment comes to your TV, your computer, or your smart phone (aka 'mobile personal media center'). You can get shows and movies that aren't currently running through direct internet streams. If all else fails you can browse You Tube.

If you miss someone, there's no need to actually walk, drive, or fly to meet them, just adjust the scenery and lighting to best effect and engage Skype or video iChat. If your someone isn't living in the dark ages (i.e., the 1990s), they can engage too and it will be just like being there. Mostly.

In fact, there are very few activities you can't do, or wants and desires you can't fill, by just staying at home and texting, emailing, channeling, chatting, or browsing.

And maybe that's what modern Big Corporate wants: when we are not working, we should be browsing and ordering, or at least noticing the adds and banners blinking and sliding on the periphery of our internet lives. That may be the strategy to fill their coffers.

But I feel I must rebel against this impulse to sit.

After all, movement has its own pleasures, and much of our local economies depend on us getting out and shopping in physically-real stores, eating at restaurants not run by screaming megalomaniacs, and seeing movies, plays, and musical performances in local venues.

I would add 'attending sporting events', and this may be true where you live, but MidSummer heat can be cruel in Los Angeles, if the event is inland and outdoors. In which case, watching the event on TV is an acceptable option and no penalties will be accrued.

Yes, the webs of economic and social life that are our communities depend on us getting up and getting out and about. But man, the doldrums are tough, and I have the entire original 'Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy' BBC TV series queued up on Netflix, ready to stream to my living room at the touch of a button.

Maybe I'll rebel tomorrow ...

Car on Mars, Revisited

Once upon a time, I likened attempts to 'fix' our economy to 'driving a car on Mars'. Every input has a delayed reaction, so you must be careful not to give it too much 'gas' (read: 'stimulus') too quickly, and you'd better be ready with the 'brakes' (read:'the Fed raising interest rates') if the pace gets too hot.

What was I thinking? If our leaders are to be believed, we've shot so much fuel into that car on Mars that it ought to be ricocheting between the frozen carbon dioxide drenched poles. Yet the reality seems the car is stuck in the Martian dust, and if it's moving, we can't see it from here.

Perhaps the economy isn't like a car on Mars but like a car sunk to the bottom of the ocean. Giving it gas just moves it around the bottom, but it'll never reach the surface and see the sun, no matter how fast it goes.

Or maybe it IS like that car on Mars, but the fuel hasn't been getting to it. We've been madly pumping it in, but there's a leak, maybe a blow-out, and the fuel has never reached our stranded car.

Or it could be the people we've hired to control the car and get the fuel to it just don't know what they are doing.

I do hope we can recover that car someday, don't you?

Ringing the (Money) Bell

By now we are all inured to the outrageous salaries of corporate executives. From Enron to BP we've long since ceased to be surprised with the kingly fortunes handed over to other humans, who presumably just like us, put their pants on one leg at a time and drool in their sleep. Except, of course, these folks can afford custom tailored pants and personal drool-wiping attendants, if so desired.

But what are we to make of the salaries paid to run-of-the-mill public servants in the City of Bell, California, a metropolis of 40,000 mostly working class souls nestled in the sprawl of greater Los Angeles? It seems they managed to pull a fast one on their citizens by giving themselves paydays that, while not quite reaching corporate fat-cattiness levels, nonetheless boggle the brain.

Actually, now that I contemplate it, given the low incomes of most of their citizens, the compensation these folks gave themselves may be worse than anything in the corporate overlordship. Almost Bernie Madoff unethical - by which I mean criminal.

You have to ask yourself how such a small municipality could afford to pay its city manager nearly $800,000 a year, or pay their police chief more than the leader of Los Angeles' much larger force.

This news came along in time to remind us, just when we might have been looking down our noses at 'third world' countries and tsk-tsking about their rampant corruption, that we can compete with anyone when it comes to greed.

When it comes to lining their pockets at the expense of their citizens, no one has done it much better than the city leaders of Bell. They may be fleecing a small town, but they are doing it with world class skills.

Fast Friends

It's striking how travel affects us. Mentally. When at home, I would never read a USA Today, yet on the road, reading one brings on the same feeling of comfort and reassurance conversation with a good friend might. Go Figure.

On a recent trip, that paper featured an article about how social media outlets were eroding the depth and meaning of personal friendships. In short, people today may have many more 'friends', in the internet sense of the word, yet have few if any close, personal friendships. This, the piece says, is not good for us, and will have damaging effects on individuals and society going forward.

I couldn't help but contrast this with elements of the movie 'Up in the Air' - the one starring George Clooney, not the animated thing featuring Ed Asner's voice and a house suspended by balloons.

At one point Clooney's character reassures us that his life isn't a lonely one. He is constantly surrounded by people in airports, hotels, even city streets. At another he mentions how he sometimes engages in enjoyable conversation with airplane seatmates, sharing personal histories, jokes, and dreams. Even the inevitable parting at flight's end didn't seem to blunt his pleasure with that sort of friendship.

And how different is that from the internet sort? For one, I suppose talking in person with someone on a plane is more intense and immediate than anything you could get from the internet. Not even video chat would provide the full physical presence - the body language, ability to see nuances in facial expressions, etc., you get with speaking with someone totally new to you on a plane.

For another, there's the time factor. Internet interactions are mostly brief and choppy, with conversations carried on like chess games, move by move, over hours, days perhaps. The expectation of continuance is always there. On a plane you may spend hours in deep and varied conversation, but then it's over, likely never to continue.

Still, both types of friendships miss the mark - neither are the sort of deep and close interactions USA Today says we need most.

By the end of 'Up in the Air', the director wants us to believe that Clooney's frequent traveler has realized the error of his shallow ways, made painfully aware by seeing himself reflected in the similar behavior of a woman he wants to settle down with. But he doesn't really look that much happier than he did before, and if you've seen the movie you know what ultimately befalls him. For the rest of you, I won't spoil it - see the film.

All of which leads me to believe that USA Today got it half-wrong, and so did 'Up in the Air'. Surely we should all desire deep and meaningful relationships with other people. But we can enjoy life with nothing but remote internet friendships, spiced with the occasional brief but more personal meetings.

We humans are a sociable lot, and we'll take whatever we can get, or as Woody Allen has posited, 'Whatever Works'. Fast Friends can work, at least until something better comes along.

Middling America

Just when I was beginning to feel slightly better about the economy - probably because I had been avoiding reading anything about it, my attention was caught by a post on Yahoo News, concerning the vanishing Middle Class. And now I am depressed again.

The picture painted is bleak, but the main piece of ill news was this little factoid: "... the bottom 50 percent of income earners in the United States now collectively own less than 1 percent of the nation’s wealth."

Now, if there's one thing we don't imagine when we think of America and the 'American Dream', it's a country where so much is owned by so few, and the 'have-nots' make up perhaps the majority of the population.

The article places much of the blame on globalism, and I can see the point. How CAN someone living in America compete with someone living in, say, India, who is willing to do the same work for several times less? The only advantage a local worker would have seems to be proximity. If your job can be done remotely, you are basically screwed.

The article also blames excessive government regulation, making it more likely for businesses to go outside the US, which I can also see, even if the logic is murkier.

But I think the article missed an important point, once which I believe to be the main reason the middle class has begun to disappear: the wonderful buying engine that was the American Middle Class Consumer is no longer viewed as indispensable to the world economy. Now there's the emerging Chinese middle class to take up our slack, and then some.

Who needs an increasingly poorer bunch of Americans to buy your goods, when there are perhaps ten times as many increasingly richer Chinese to do the same? As businesses world-wide focus more on this emerging Asian consumer engine, they care less and less about what becomes of us.

Still, we aren't down and out just yet. There is still a lot of potential buying power in what's left of the Middle Class, and, if we can only get the credit markets lending again, the working poor can once again buy like they are Middle Class.

In the meantime, there are a couple of things I think might help slow the decline:

We can all try to make conscious decisions to buy products and services from companies that employ workers living in America, and who are being paid reasonable American wages. This may be hard to discern, but if you can, do it.

Also, buy local whenever possible. The more local the company, the more likely the money you spend gets recycled right back into your local economy, which helps you and your neighbors have a better quality of life. So at least you'll think you are Middle Class.

There are probably many other ways to help, but I am not savvy enough to know them. I am happiest when I don't think too much about the economy, which is either a survival strategy or a sure-fire way to be doomed to that poor 50%.

Schorr Leave

It was with real regret that I learned of veteran reporter Daniel Schorr's passing today at age 93.

Yes, 93 is a ripe old age and not many people knew who Mr. Schorr was anymore, but I am still saddened by his death. After all, he was a prominent figure in the Watergate drama and its aftermath - arguably the biggest political upheaval of my lifetime.

For those of you too young to remember, or too old to remember for that matter, here's a brief recap: Daniel Schorr was a correspondent for CBS, covering the White House, and subsequently the Watergate Break-In. At one point in the unfolding drama, he came into possession of Nixon's 'Enemies List', which Mr. Schorr read on-air. When he got to number 17 on the list, there was his name.

Whether or not Daniel Schorr posed any real threat to Richard M. Nixon's presidency, the inclusion of his name on that list made him a reportorial superstar, almost as anointed as Woodward and Bernstein.

Sadly, the Schorr reality never quite lived up to that superstardom. Although he was an extremely experienced reporter, especially on foreign affairs, he could never again recover his Watergate limelight. But that didn't make him any different than Woodward and Bernstein, both of whom have done other things of note that I can't for the life of me remember. The same is true of many of the congressional standouts in Watergate - if remembered by general posterity at all they will always be remembered for those hearings, and not much else. So Mr. Schorr was in good company.

If Daniel Schorr's movement into relative PBS and NPR obscurity was inexorable, so was his impact on televised journalism. He remained one of the most admirable yet inscrutable, and somewhat insufferable, reporters of the televised era. A pattern exaggerated with some of today's cable news figures.

Personally, I always stopped what I was doing and listened when he was on, even while disagreeing increasingly with what he said, and understanding increasingly less of it. Come to think of it, that's also a pattern exaggerated with some of today's cable news figures.

One thing's for sure, he was talented and unique (unlike today's cable news figures), and therefore will be missed.

Inertial Misguidance

Did we really expect miracles?

Barack Obama began his Presidency with the two major pluses of making history and providing a nice counterpoint to George W. Bush. His momentum was huge. The inertia represented by that momentum looked hard to counter, especially by the Republicans, seemingly powerless in their defeat and humiliation.

All this was good news to those of us who consider ourselves Democrats. Who have waited for some true progression towards a more equitable society. One where the rich don't ride through wretched mobs in blacked-out limousines, or retreat in lofty boardrooms or behind securely gated communities.

After all, the formula is an old one, tried and true: Democrats favor wage workers who do the vast majority of the jobs needing done, but individually are powerless; Republicans favor those who have the power and the money. Of course, it's historically not been such a clear distinction - except during Shrub Bush's reign, when the extremes became polarized.

During GWB's time in office, the rich did very well indeed, and the rest just kept on keeping on. The jobless recovery of the 2000-2001 recession never gave the working class what they needed - enough good paying jobs (read: union jobs). Lucky for them the housing boom gave them paper wealth that made life seem equitable. Let the rich get richer, the house is worth three times what I paid for it, so I don't care. But by the end of Bush's second term those houses had begun to shrink in value catastrophically, and the discrepancy that had grown between the rich and connected and the now-jobless workers was painfully clear.

Into that gap stepped Mr. Obama. Educated, erudite, and - we all hoped - fervently Democratic. He spoke inspiringly about ending damaging and wasteful wars, closing Guantanamo, fixing the banking system and health care, and addressing the Big Recession by boosting spending on public infrastructure projects. Relief was in sight.

One and a half years later though, and where are we? Guantanamo is still there. The 9/11 planners whose trials the President and his Attorney General can't find a place for, are there. Conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan are on-going, and look unlikely to end for years, maybe decades. There is no peace in the Middle East - not even the remotest restarting of the Clinton era negotiations ignored by Bush during his years in office.

And the Recession looks more like a Depression all the time.

Yes, we do have a health care bill, but it's horribly flawed, weak, and no positive effect will be seen from it by most Americans for years, if ever. And it's still in the process of legal challenges that may eviscerate it further.

George Bush mangled the relief efforts for Hurricane Katrina, to the country's everlasting shame. But Barack Obama has hardly faired better with the BP Oil Spill.

We keep looking to see evidence of his intelligence and leadership, but it's just not materializing.

But maybe it can't, and never could. Perhaps the mechanisms of national politics and bureaucracy are too complex and entrenched for anyone to change. Or, maybe the system breeds leaders who support the system and don't really desire it to change.

In any event, President Obama now finds himself with inertia of a different kind. Rather than the inertia of unstoppable momentum, his now is the kind of the resting object that tends to remain in place. There's no more 'Big Mo', and it's 'All Stop' with seemingly no where to go. The administration's announcement today that it's likely the Republicans will re-take the House in the midterm elections, was a tacit acknowledgment their time as thought leaders was up. They'll be running a defensive strategy from now on. Get re-elected for a second term, no matter what it takes. Not unlike Bill Clinton did after his health care disaster and Democrat losses in the midterm elections of his era.

In the end all we can hope for is that at least a few of the promises our leaders make to us are kept, and that some good comes of them. Whether those leaders are Republicans or Democrats, or some other party.

What did we expect, miracles?

Contemplating Competence

Does cynicism increase with wisdom, or just with experience? I'd say it's with experience, and that even geniuses can be horribly gullible, but then I'm just being cynical.

Of course, cynicism is easy to come by these days, no matter your experience or IQ. All you need do is read the news in print or on the net, listen to it on the radio, or watch it on TV. Almost nothing you will come across will inspire pride, faith, trust, or any other positive emotion in those who govern us, or in those who report their governing.

We seem to be a nation run by incompetents, chronicled by idiots.

Ask yourself, when was the last time anything was done by our government that turned out well, and had lasting positive results? Hard exercise, isn't it?

The best I can come up with seem to be results that can't easily be tied to discrete actions, but are the results of long-term policy. Like the ending of the Soviet Union and the reunification of Germany. Many feel that result could be linked to Ronald Reagan's aggressive spending on defense, but I'm not so sure that was the only factor, and maybe not even the critical one. And even this desirable event may have a few negative results in tow to spoil the glow. Like the vulnerability of the former USSR's nuclear stockpile.

And the fall of Lenin's Lads was a long time ago now, with most college kids barely toddlers or not yet born. What competent act has happened since then?

Don't say 'The First Gulf War', because I won't accept that answer. Daddy Bush may have orchestrated a successful military campaign, and showed admirable (if ultimately unwise) restraint in not pushing into Baghdad, but he and his advisors completely missed the point that leaving foreign (read, 'Western') troops permanently stationed on hallowed Muslim soil would have decidedly non-positive consequences. Like giving Bin Laden all the motivating PR he needed to recruit his suicidal terrorists.

And don't say the 90's economic boom. At best that was a collection of events that resulted in a flood of money that floated a lot of boats, but not all boats. And there's really no one person or administration to credit for that boom, certainly not Bill Clinton, nor either bracketing Bush.

And what has happened in the new millennium that is unabashedly positive and can be traced to enlightened or intelligent leadership? Well, the new era didn't have long to develop before 9/11 came along and left us with a table run of demoralizing failures.

Many of us hoped the tide would turn with the obviously intelligent, erudite, Barack Obama taking our lead, but that doesn't seem to be happening. You can't always judge a book by it's cover, sometimes competence may be only superficial.

So what are we good at? We can't run the country, report the news, or manufacture anything. We can't get an oil company to plug it's leaking well. We can't build levees that won't fail.

I guess we are good at comedy, and satire, and just plain laughing at everyone and everything. Jon Stewart, Colbert, that's what we do well.

Or maybe I'm just not being cynical enough, expecting competence to manifest in success. Maybe competence doesn't guarantee success, and it's all down to dumb luck.

In which case all of our past leaders may have actually been competent, but unlucky.

Not the press, though, they are still idiots.

Lovely Weather

It's not nice to kick people when they are down and suffering, but when it comes to the weather woes of my east coast brothers and sisters, I can't help myself.

For the great majority of my life, transpiring as it has after a strategic relocation to the West Coast, east coasters (especially bitter relatives) have constantly bragged to me about their 'Four Seasons'. They can barely restrain themselves with glee when my region is battered by drought and wilting under dry, hot, winds. When it's 80 degrees in LA on Christmas, they are condescendingly sympathetic.

Now, thanks to crazy meteorological swings, perhaps traceable (or perhaps not) to global warming, it's my turn to gloat.

Morning fog, burning off by noon(ish) to reveal a pleasant sunny day in the 70s, while the east coast sweats and simmers under triple digits and hellish humidity.

Lovely Weather ...

Big Planes, Big Plans

The 4th of July has always meant a get-together with family and friends. For the past 5 years or so, this has meant our family has joined a larger gathering at a friend's well-situated hilltop house. Good food, conversation, beer and wine (to aid the conversation), and a front row seat to distant official fireworks, and a grand view of the local unofficial pyrotechnics that light up the neighborhood. Good fun, with only the slightest hint of law-flaunting rebellion to remind us what Independence Day is all about.

This year, due to a confluence of events things were quite different: our children, both firmly into their teenage years, vanished to spend the 4th with their friends, and our friend decided that hosting the 4th was too much this year, the energy budget being largely expended on other events (the financial budget a bit weakened too).

So my wife and I spent the day mostly alone, which once upon a time would have meant together and engaging in activities best done with just the two of us on the premises. Time and circumstance have ways of warping events and best-laid plans, however, so we found ourselves on separate (but spatially collocated) tracks this 4th.

After all, we had the dogs to deal with, one of whom demands more attention than both kids together on Christmas morning. We also had our separate hobbies: my wife a good book and an addiction to iPhone solitaire; me watching motorcycles race halfway around the world (in my defense - there were Americans involved).

Somehow, the self-involvement of the day didn't bother me too much (I can't vouch for the wife who still hasn't really surfaced from the book). After all, I had just returned from most of two weeks spent in Canada. A lovely country with great people but one which nevertheless reminds me how fortunate I am to live in the USA. There's just something about a place that looks so similar but is actually so foreign that will make you reflect on your country and culture. So, relaxing into the day and not trying too hard to celebrate seemed natural enough.

Until the whole house began to shake and vibrate like the 'Big One' was on the way. Shattering our cones of silence, the wife and I merged at the back door in shared concern. A step out and a look up revealed the largest plane I'd seen since, well, since I'd last seen that type of plane at an air show 20 years before. This was a military cargo jet, probably a C-17, one of the largest planes to ever fly (I won't say 'grace the skies', because nothing that large and noisy can ever be said to 'grace' anything).

With the assurance that the 'Big One' (earthquake, that is) was not happening, my wife returned to her recreation. Airplanes are only necessary travel devices to her, and hold no other significance or joy. Loving planes myself, I watched as the 'Big One' (plane, that is) disappeared into the distance, but with my inner smile reflex stifled by reflection on the absurdity of the fly-over:

Why do we always celebrate our independence, which was won by a rebel mob over an organized military superpower, by displaying evidence that we are an organized military superpower?

Do we celebrate the 4th in memory of those ragged recruits who risked everything for a chance at freedom? Or out of fear, and a need for reassurance?

It's my hope the day holds at least an element of remembering our long-ago heroes, and isn't just a thumping of spears against shields.

Maybe next year our friend will be up to hosting the party again. A touch of rebelliousness will be welcome.

Bye Bye Byrdie

One of Jon Stewart's rare miscues came recently when he essentially turned the death of Senator Robert Byrd into a joke.

Sure, Senator Byrd started out his career on rocky footing, campaigning against the Civil Rights Act and for the Vietnam War, but you have to give him props for spending most of the rest of his career making amends.

Unlike Mr. Stewart, I remember distinctly that Senator Byrd was one of a handful in Congress who voted 'No' to allowing George W. Bush the power to initiate war in Iraq. That took courage, when even the most liberal Democrats around had succumbed to Bush scare tactics and were falling over themselves to vote 'Yes', out of fear doing otherwise would make them look 'unpatriotic' or worse yet sympathetic to the terrorists.

That was one of those times when standing up for what you truly believed was fraught with consequences, yet Senator Byrd and a few others (Maxine Waters also comes to mind) had the 'right stuff' to do so.

So Jon Stewart riffs on how the Senator's passing was no surprise, seeing he was '92'. Which may be true, but overlooked how important the man had been to preserving what was left of our liberties under Bush, and how much help, despite his age, he was likely still giving us.

I wonder if there are any conservative rapscallions out there now, who may right their ways and become beacons of honesty and justice, ala Senator Byrd, in some distant future? It looks bleak, but you never know ...

The Canadian Connection

There must be something about the Canadian immigration service, or social service, that makes getting there legally from other countries easier than getting to the United States - or Uruguay, even.

Once ensconced up North, it appears the easiest path to becoming a US naturalized citizen is to assume some deceased Canadian's identity and cross the border. A few years later and - Boom - citizen!

This seems to be the path chosen by those recently unveiled as 'Russian Spies' masquerading as Canadian-cum-Americans.

This is embarrassing on multiple levels: It puts red on our faces since we didn't catch on for a long time. It makes the Russians look bad for spying on their erstwhile allies - Us. And it makes the Canadians look sorely-used and a bit pathetic.

There is a solution, at least in part. Test everyone claiming to be from Canada, and who are seeking US permanent residency or citizenship, on their facility with the French language. Those who score well and claim to hail from anywhere other than Quebec are spies. If they score well and are from Quebec, they are probably spies too. No native French-speaking Quebecois wants to leave Quebec - especially not to become a US citizen.

You might say 'Hold on a minute! This will exclude anyone who speaks French well from immigrating from Canada to the US.'

That may be. C'est la Vie!

Babble-On 35: Balderdash and Deflation

When in Toronto, read the Globe and Mail. As far as I can tell, it's NOT owned by Rupert Murdoch ...

Deflating all Balloons! - According to the G&M, some financial experts believe we are all doomed. Because we are saving too much and not spending. And because the world governments, most particularly the US, Japan, and China, are slowing or stopping their stimulus incentives, which were the only things apparently prying open our wallets. I say 'Balderdash!' A little deflation means no inflation, right? And the fear of inflation is the main reason governments don't want to 'over-stimulate' the economy. With deflation nicely canceling inflation, governments can print all the money required to bring us back to prosperity. I'll take $5 million in twenties, please.

Justice Deflated - Toronto has had its long, dark, night of the soul, with the recent G20 protests and subsequent police action. Anywhere else, it might be time to internalize the lesson and move on, but not here. The printed press (and even more the televised news) will not let go, and seem intent on wallowing in every worrying detail. I say 'Balderdash!' Is there nothing else to do in Canada? It's summer! Go outside and play. But don't protest anything when you're out there (except, see below) or we'll never hear the end of it ...

Deflating Expectations - As if it was not enough to scare us into worries of an economic version of the 'Incredible Shrinking Man' (or Woman, if you are a Lily Tomlin fan), the G&M this morning also contained a cautionary tale to lower expectations for those seeking jobs in this collapsing universe. It seems hirers are in such a catbird seat they can afford to ignore applicants, or string them out as long as they care to after interviews, before finally telling them 'thanks but no thanks'. Or they can simply send their coldly brutal message of rejection through complete and utter silence. The article in the G&M decries this practice, but just the mention of it deflates the egos and expectations of many out there, who are expectantly waiting by their phone, computer, or blackberry for that call. The G&M blurb goes on to lay out a plan of action, involving well-timed follow-up emails, with a limit of three attempts. I say 'Balderdash!' If a company is so rude as to string you along for weeks after an interview with no contact, set up a robo-mail to bombard them with queries. This may be a particularly effective addition to your resume if the company in question is tech-related. If that doesn't work, protest. Perhaps you can recruit a few of the G20 folks - it's a while before the next summit, isn't it?

Finally, remember the only good deflation is the deflation of ignorance. Read The Globe and Mail, the Star, The London Observer, The Guardian, The New York Times - even the LA Times. But Read!

Poetry Break: D'oh! Canada

D'Oh! Canada

Your G20 news was grim,

With protesters making a mess,

Acting on violent whim

Wearing Black not Green,

And disrupting, disrupting

Just before QE II - Your Queen too, it seems

Was Due in Toronto,

Prince Philip in tow

D'Oh! Canada,

Better wipe off the graffiti, and let the last of the disruptors go,

Smile to the Queen, and bow very low...

But - don't feel too down,

Your worst was not so bad a sin

In LA we damaged far more,

Just celebrating the Laker's win.

(I suppose if the Leafs ever win the Cup again,

The Queen (or heir) should stay in the UK

Or swing south of the border, or north of Hudson's Bay ...)

Dancing With Oil-Soaked Pelicans

I won't say that Kevin Costner's career has sunk beneath the waves, but it certainly has settled lower in the water than in his high sailing pre-Waterworld days.

Not that Waterworld was all bad. I actually liked it after a couple of viewings on VHS enabled me to catch more of the nuances, like those gills. And who could ever really hate a movie with the late Dennis Hopper in it?

Plus, something about playing around with a rusted-out Exxon Valdez as a prop must have triggered some environmental thinking on Mr. Costner's part. About the time he was shooting the film (it was released in 1995, but took years to make), his brother came up with a clever way to clear oil from seawater. Kevin became an investor and supporter in his brother's technology.

From the story posted on Yahoo News, it appears that Mr. Costner made valiant efforts to sell the cleaner to oil companies and governments around the world, but with no takers. Aside from making him a natural for a remake of 'Glengarry Glen Ross', the experience must have tainted his faith in the ultimate victory of what's right.

But the idealism evidenced in his stand-out 'Dancing With Wolves' seems to have kept him going, and now fate, in the form of an undersea oil volcano spawned by corporate carelessness, has given him - and his brother's invention - the spotlight.

Sadly, Mr. Costner's device only cleans the water, and isn't designed to help stop the leak. But we should take every bit of good news and every little victory we can get right now. We should be happy that his career slack has given him the time to bring us this help.

Now if only his Elliot Ness can return, with Sean Connery as his sidekick, to clean up the bad guys ...