The Republican Charade

I spent far too many precious minutes on October 1st listening to the Republican spin on the government shutdown.  According to their current storyline, it's the fault of the Democrats and most specifically Harry Reid (Senate Majority Leader) for not wanting to 'discuss the merits of Obamacare'.

That Republican spin is complete and utter nonsense.  Do they think the public has no memory of events at all?

The Affordable Health Care Act was debated in Congress for months.  There was plenty of opportunity for Republicans to offer their own version which would achieve the same goals in a manner they prefer, but they declined to present any such plan.  Their focus was entirely on killing the Act, not replacing it with something that might be better.

When that failed to derail the Act, they filed lawsuits.  These ended up in the Supreme Court which ruled the contested provisions of the Act as constitutional.  End of Story.

When legislative debate and Supreme court decisions failed to go their way, did the Republicans accept reality and buckle down and work with the Dems to fix any unintended consequences or issues with the Act?

No, they instead drew a line in the sand and voted 41 (or 42) times to defund the Health Care Act.  Does that sound like people interested in 'discussing the merits of Obamacare'?

These Republicans are hell-bent on killing the Act and leaving millions of Americans with no healthcare options, and even worse, these Republicans are willing to do this with no solutions of their own that would give these people the care they need.

Meanwhile, the Health Care Act is off an running and looks to be getting the kind of buy-in from the public the system needs to succeed.  What do the Republicans want to do, cancel all the desperately-needed insurance the public in now buying?

The Republicans as a group can't hide behind the excuse that the 'Tea Party' conservatives made them do it.  Each and every Republican who voted for the spending bill that included defunding for Obamacare is as guilty as sin.

Third Party, Please

There is nothing in the Constitution that says we should only have two parties, the Democrats and Republicans; the present bi-party system just evolved  - or I guess 'devolved' may be the most currently-apt expression, from the primordial political soup. Although two may be the status quo, three or more is not out of the question, and might be useful these days.

Third parties have given it a try from time to time.  Most not very seriously, but every now and then they pick up an interesting (if quirky) leader and get some traction.  Think Ross Perot.  Ultimately, these efforts fail because for whatever reason these parties tend to pick up fringe and very vocal adherents. These folks drive the party platform to the extreme and so turn off potential recruits to their cause.  They just don't end up seeming like serious, grown-up parties.

But we just might need them (or at least one of them) now, whether behaving maturely or not.

You see, our government is locked in what can't be called anything other than a stalemate.  The House, controlled by the Republicans, passes bills that the Senate, controlled by the Democrats, can't accept; and the bills the Senate sends to the House hit a brick wall of denial.  Same goes for just about every aspect of government, except defense, where at least some level of practical agreement is usually reached. (Is it that much easier to agree to military action than it is to come to agreement on health care?)

So what we might now need is a tie-breaking force.  Opportunities for coalitions and alliances that can find the votes to break the stalemate.

Of course we'd have to hope that we only get one, or at most two, additional parties that are successful enough to be attractive as coalition partners.  Any more than that and you could end up with very shaky coalitions with governments forming, failing, and reforming ad nauseum.

At this point, I think the Nation could stand a little third party craziness and whatever upset stomach that may potentially cause, just to get the government off the dime and doing something.  

Slight of Hand

Misdirection is the key to the illusionist's art.  It's a nifty addition to the politician's toolbox, too.

And, for politicos, so is the outright, bald-faced, 'flip-flop'.

When is a coup not a coup?  When it suits our purposes, that's when.

Our government has decided that the military overthrow of a democratically-elected leader in Egypt is not a coup.  If it was a 'coup' then we'd need to stop throwing money at Egypt as a bribe to maintain the peace with Israel.  Then what would happen?  Nobody wants that answer, so there is no coup, just a coup-like 'course correction' to reset the Egyptian road to democracy.  No matter that it looks and smells just like a military dictatorship, same as it always was.

When is the actual use of a weapon of mass destruction not as bad as the suspicion of having one?  When it suits our purposes, of course.

President Obama and UK PM David Cameron are having trouble convincing their respective legislatures that military action is needed in the wake of (both men say) incontrovertible evidence the Syrian government used Sarin gas on their citizens.  This could be a case of 'fool me once ...', with the 'where did they go' WMDs in Iraq featuring in people's minds.  It could also be understandable reluctance to get involved - again - with groups of people who's mindsets we can't seem to fathom completely, and who's ideas of democracy and freedom seem stuck in a parallel universe outside of reality, and with a very short half-life.  It could also be Russia's (Mr. Putin's really) reluctance to give up on his sidekick Assad that's holding things up.  Whatever the reason, failing to do something here, not unlike our failing to do something when Iraq used chemical weapons against its people after the first Gulf War, can only lead to worse situations ahead.  Chemical Bashir, anyone?

It would be a refreshing change of pace if we the people were told exactly the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.  And that timely and humane actions took place exactly when needed. But in the absence of that openness and altruism, we should all be taking notes and studying them carefully before the next elections.

Rough Roads

Sometimes the Road goes on forever, smooth as silk, taking you to your destination of fortune, fate, or dreams.  Sometimes it gets rough, the pavement broken, slowing you down or breaking you down.

If you are lucky, the road gets rough only for a little while, then it gets fixed or smooths out around the next bend and you are good to go.  When you are out of luck you can be out of Good Road for a very long time.

One of my favorite Motorcycling Roads serves as a case study here.  Whether it's a metaphor for other things and the canary-in-the-coal mine for the prospects of the 21st Century as we must live it here in Southern California; or just a local blip on the infrastructure lifeline, I can't say for sure.  But I take it seriously.

The Road in question is the Angeles Crest Highway (aka Highway 2), which runs from the foothills of northeastern Los Angeles over the San Bernardino Mountains to the desert beyond.  It's long been a weekend pathway to nature, silence, and relative seclusion from the maddening crowds of the Big City.  Camping, hiking, day-tripping, bicycling, and motorcycling are all part of the appeal.

The Road has been knocked around a lot in the past 10 years, being resurfaced beautifully once only to be damaged almost immediately by the Station Fire; fixed - again relatively nicely, only to be damaged once more by landslides after the Station Fire's deforestation.  In the last couple of years the road has deteriorated and been fixed by uncaring and uncareful applications of 'tar snakes' - drizzled seams of oozy tar drooled into the alligator cracks in the pavement. When new these babies are semi-dangerous to motorcycles, and they are ugly at any time.

But they were preferable to what's just been done:  in the past month or so, the entire Crest has been chip-sealed with large size aggregate from Wrightwood all the way to La Crescenta.  It's the cheapest way to 'fix' a deteriorating road surface, and in this time of tight budgets, the method appeals; however, it is not nice to two-wheeled traffic.  Not only is it rough and noisy (but there are only the bears and deer to bother, I hear you say), it makes for hard going and shaky steering for bicyclists, and tears up the tires of motorcycles while cutting back on braking stability and traction (counterintuitive though it may seem - it's true).  And- whether pedaling or twisting the throttle, falling on that stuff would be like sliding over a street paved with shark's teeth.

If there is enough car traffic to grind down the sharp gravel, or the surface breaks up and forces the roads department to cover it with hot mix, the Crest may live again for all its travelers; but for now its a Lost Road, a Rough Road, and I mourn it.

And here's where the metaphor gets exercised:

There are other Rough Roads we may be forced to take.  The economy- after a smooth(ish) run of some miles looks to be showing a few potholes ahead; maybe even a sinkhole or two.  The repaving job doesn't appear to be a long-term fix and we may all need to consider whatever strategy equates to the likes of a 1970s-era LandCruiser.

The Arab Spring seemed like a shining new road but that's turned into a pothole-strewn mess.  And our attempts (some say halfhearted) at a fix have given that road a dangerous new surface, abrasive and potentially deadly.

And, last I looked, the never really smooth but often passable roads that are our Legislative and Executive branches (that's Congress and the White House for those of you too long out of grade school government class) have become lined with the nastiest, most tire-eating aggregate imaginable.  Paving the Crest with the real road equivalent of that topping would be like sticking anti-backup spikes along the whole way.

So, while I consider my options on how best to still enjoy the Angeles Crest despite it's anti-social resurfacing, we must all ponder what to do with those other Rough Roads we must face.  Monster Trucks, anyone?

Oliver's Twist

Fans of the Daily Show are going through a strange and conflicting experience this summer of 2013.  We've lost our beloved host Jon Stewart for a few months, while we've gained greater exposure to one of our favorite supporting characters, John Oliver.

Both are funny men and their medium is satirical wordplay, but both bring us to laughter with different styles. Stewart is the devilish boy-in-a-man's-body wiseacre, while Oliver plays the disdainfully-witty intellectual with a bit of a chip on his shoulder (or maybe it's just the British accent).

While there hasn't been a noticeable lag in the funny business with Oliver at the helm, the change does emphasize what Stewart brings to the party.  His easy-going, casual, delivery works better in setting up the punch lines and getting the interview guests to relax and open up.  That Oliver's style is more acutely acerbic and therefore not quite as effective as a host doesn't count so much against him as it highlights why Stewart has been so successful at his job.

However, while Oliver may not be the equal of Stewart as a host, if you are a fan of the British style of comic delivery, a la Norman Wisdom by way of Monty Python, you can't help but be pleased by John Oliver's performance.  A little more support from the recurring cast and a few more shots-in-the-arm from Lewis Black won't hurt, but Oliver is capably steering the ship while Stewart is out finding himself.

The Quality Of Justice Is Not Free

As I write this, many Americans are reconsidering their idea of what 'Justice' means as a result of the Zimmerman verdict.

Depending on your point of view with regard to the facts of the case, 'Justice' might mean sustaining the use of deadly force whenever someone feels threatened, no matter the circumstances; while for others it might be that 'Justice' means revenge for a particular and egregious wrong, or of righting the larger societies' wrongs in a single verdict.

We all have our expectations of what 'Justice' means, and they are usually very personal and specific.  Our expectations are based very much on what we 'feel' in our deepest being is 'right' and fair, and these feelings are based on our life experiences and those of others we trust and admire.

But the cold truth is 'Justice' is not a feeling or an ideal; it is a formal process of civil and criminal law that often results in verdicts that don't meet our expectations - and that often don't seen fair or 'Just' at all.

Call it the price of freedom, because that is exactly what it is.

So, if the outcome of the Zimmerman case has left you feeling like there is no Justice, let me assure you that you are experiencing a common feeling when dealing with laws and courts and human frailty.  It's a feeling that will always be with us, since Perfect Justice is known only to the minds of individuals and is unknown to a society as a whole.  And it is society as a whole that our 'Justice' system serves.

Time Keeps On Slippin'

Whether it's from the Steve Miller song, or the Futurama episode, we keep on hearing that time is slippin', slippin', slippin', into the future.

We've also heard that 'Time Waits For No Man' (although it might be more patient with Women.)

Then again, we've heard that 'Time Is On My Side', and also on 'Your Side', so maybe we aren't in such dire temporal straights. Only Time Will Tell.

Whether Time isn't Waiting or is On Our Side, we can all agree that it is slipping away, although exactly what is meant by 'away' is debatable by some scientists and all Freshman Physics majors.

For me personally, Time has sped up to the point I am constantly surprised by where I am NOW as opposed to where I just was WHEN.  My NOWs are becoming extremely short-lived, to the point I feel I'm in that scene in Mel Brook's 'Spaceballs' (watch it for yourself, I'm not telling ...). I barely have any time to savor my SOONs before they become NOWs and then WHENs.  Sheesh!

But perhaps that is a function of age.  Maybe all you kids out there think your NOWs are plenty long enough to savor and your SOONs over the horizon far enough to enjoy the anticipation.  Time may not be slippin' for you as much as, well, unfolding.  Time may indeed be On Your Side.

If so, I am here to remind you that this is just an illusion.  Time is passing, no matter the apparent speed, and with it we see crucial actions not taken, critical needs unmet, and opportunities ignored and lost.  Maybe with us 'elder generationals' the faster perceived slippage of Time makes us more acutely sensitive to its wastage.

High Time, then,  for everyone to take Time and its passing more seriously - and I'm speaking to YOU Mr. President and Your Congressional Sparring Partners.  You are all old enough to sense that Time truly is slippin', slippin', slippin' ...