Damnable July

July has not been a kind month.  Midsummer has always been a lunatic time; awash in mysticism, magical thinking, and weirdness.  2012 has seen fit to add tragedy into the mix.

The lunatic actions of a young man mired within his own dysfunctional thinking took the lives of 12 innocents, and altered the lives of 58 others.

Making this horrific July even worse is the return of the endless conundrum mimicking a discussion on the question: 'How can we deal with gun violence?

I have an answer to that shouting match between NRA/2nd amendment zealots and their equally off-base Zero Gun opponents:  Don't Waste Your Breath - unless both sides are willing to move off their positions, or just sit back and let the reasonable middle deal with it, there will be no solution.  The more each group of diametrically-opposed 'thinkers' rant across the divide, the further from any practical solution we become.

And in the meantime, July 2013 awaits ...

Turning Point 2012

It may be arguable whether any moment in time is truly a 'turning point' - unless you have the luxury of looking back on that time with the perspective of some distant future, but it is my belief we are approaching one of these moments.

And it is NOT the Mayan Apocalypse 2012, but rather something much more alarming because many of us may live to feel the consequences.

Yes, this moment, as some of you already have guessed, is associated with the upcoming Presidential Election, but it is not about who wins.  Really, it isn't.  It's about WHY - or perhaps it should be HOW - they win.

Our future will be shaped by the means used to win this election.  And that is because the winner will likely have spent more money and exercised more undue influence than the loser.

It is true that politics has always involved money and influence, but we are entering an unknown sea of excess brought on by Citizen's United and PAC-mania, and made worse by an aggressive media that has corrupted the News into focused propaganda.

So when the dust clears on the morning after the election this Fall, take a moment to ponder what was done to get (or keep) the winner in the White House.  Consider what promises, alliances, and departures from ethics and conscience were made.  Think about how much more of this will be needed at the next election.

It's my dystopic opinion that We will be lucky to survive with a functioning national democracy.

Poetry Break: At Speed (In A New World)

At Speed, with no particular destination in mind; just the road ahead observed and quickly dispatched, was there, then here, now gone.

Nothing sticks when you are moving fast, and doubly so when that movement is on two wheels.  Maybe it's the wind that makes the difference.

If only this could be a permanent state, a life spent at Speed In A New World.  Perhaps it will when the time comes ...

For now there is a downtime, a return to stasis.  But Souls aren't meant to be still too long (Rev It Up).

The End of The Party?

Do any of you reading this have friends who post political opinions on Facebook?

Sure you do ...

Recently one of my more progressively political friends posted his decision not to vote for Obama.  He's chosen to vote for another candidate who is less prone to compromise. My arguments that unwillingness to compromise is anathema to democracy, and lies at the heart of our governance problem posed by an unrelentingly stubborn Republican House of Representatives, have so far fallen on deaf ears.  He is firm in his belief the only honest option is to (essentially) opt out.

Of course, his alternate liberal candidate has no chance in the election ...

As with every other random perturbation of logic that has floated across my path of late, I have chosen to take this as a sign of impending change.  Potentially negative, possibly the harbinger of Doom ...

And here it is:  the future of the Democratic Party looks grim and dim.  Or grimmer and dimmer, for those of us already sensing a mean twilight approaching.

Before you mention it let me say that I know my friend's opinion is not the majority.  But his views aren't exactly extreme fringe, and are shared by more than a few, even if most aren't ready to abandon Team Donkey for 40 days in the political wilderness just yet.

But the worry lies in the comparison with the Republicans.  Somehow they encapsulate their fringe and incorporate it while neutralizing its worst political (but not social) effects.  Their fringe will definitely vote for Romney come November. The GOP seems to move forward after disasters like a headless chicken that can still find the coop.  

Not so Demos.  We are divided by failure and then divided again by success.  It's crazy, but that's where we seem to be right now - a party with a sitting President with a chance of being beaten by Mitt Romney, who comes with a classically handsome head but with an indiscernible brain.

So it is that I wistfully predict the demise of the Democratic Party, no matter who actually wins in November.  I hope what arises in its wake is truer to my friend's ideals, but I am not optimistic he will ever get what he wants.  After all, politics is compromise and so is democracy; you really can't have the one without accepting the presence of the other.

Personally, I am hoping that on the day after the election, compromise will begin in earnest, and a functioning democracy is restored.

May I ?

May I say a few words about:

Dentists: - It seems they are all over the place these days; scores of 'em.  But finding one I trust is harder than it's ever been.  I'm not sure why this should be, since I doubt Dental schools have lowered their standards for graduation, but you couldn't confirm that through my experiences.  Suffice it to say that when I've not been unnecessarily gouged by dental instruments (of torture), I've been gouged by dental financial shenanigans (also torture).  Now I've got a broken tooth that needs a crown.  Who Do I Trust?

Obama V Romney: -  This will not be an exciting campaign.  We know as much about Mitterson Q. Romnificent the Fourth as most of us care to, and his minions (particularly that cheering section known as Fox News) are obnoxious when they aren't being heartless;  Meanwhile Barack Hussein Obama has become, to many of his formerly ardent admirers, just that guy who inhabits the White House and does more or less a decent job of dealing with world events, and tolerates with substitute-teacher zen the heap of republican excrement that's clogged his court appointments and blocked any real legislation.  No longer the second coming, however.  I predict America will snooze through the campaign, waking up on election day to vote for the guy they feel least uneasy about that morning.

California's Gold: - Where the heck is it?  Good Old 'Govvy Brown has lectured his 39 million surrogate children on our 16 billion dollar fiscal improvidence.  We've been bad and now we'll have to pay - either with taxes or cuts, or preferably for the Gov, both.  Problem is, we can't afford to cut school funding (at the college level at least) more than it already has been cut, without reducing the supply of future qualified graduates to the educational equivalent of a dried up mud puddle in a drought. And with 11% unemployment in the State, raising taxes will hit already reeling families hard.  Reverse Dust-Bowl migration, anyone?  Is there room in Oklahoma for five or six million more?  California needs gold, and that means we need jobs, but so far I've not seen anything from Sacramento except partisanship, polemics,  procrastination, and passing (the buck).  Oklahoma, here we come, right back where we started from (oh, wait ...)

They say April showers bring May flowers.  Well, it rained in California in April, and sure enough there are flowers in May ... but the Summer Heat is here and the blooms are withering folks; withering ...

Crest Fallen

I spend most of my motorcycling time on Highway 2, better known locally as 'Angeles Crest'.  It's a roller-coaster from flatland LA up into the mountains, over the top, and down into the desert.  Something like 60-odd miles or so of the most fun a sporting motorcyclist has any right to expect.

But this road has a bad reputation.  Not entirely justified, and vilified more among the non-riding population than those of us who ride and ought to know... but that reputation is not without reason.

It isn't the most dangerous road I ride.  My commutes by motorcycle through rush-hour LA city traffic pose far more hazards to my safety.  Freeway jaunts at peak traffic times are only slightly less risky.

This is because, for all intents and purposes, motorcyclists are invisible to other motorists.  Even when they aren't distracted by adjusting the radio, checking their GPS, reading (and answering) their email, combing their hair, doing their makeup, or even a phone call, car drivers just don't see bikers much of the time.  When they do see us, they usually don't understand the dynamics of bikes, and as a result do things around us that put us in danger; like tailgating, or cutting in front of us with their brakes hard-on.  (Modern cars with all-wheel ABS brakes can stop much faster than even the most sophisticated motorcycle, even if the bike has ABS.)

This invisibility and lack of empathy among car drivers pose by far the greatest danger to anyone who rides a bike.  Accidents and fatalities due to bike-car collisions are the most common.

The kind of accidents that typically occur on roads like Angeles Crest; however, are single vehicle, bike-only affairs.  This may be why these accidents get the most attention:  they aren't what we've come to think of as daily run-of-the-mill traffic risks;  these are incidents where the riders have put themselves at risk, on purpose, and for recreation.  It's easy for non-riders to see a convenient fix:  ban bikes from those roads and that kind of activity. (Never minding that sports car owners recreate there too - and also crash).

That attitude is a cross and a prejudice all of us who love riding for pleasure are forced to bear in America.  Things are easier for our brethren in Europe;  there are many more bikes per capita on the road there, and people are more comfortable with their presence.  Here, we are still considered by many as an outlaw minority, years after any excuse to believe that cliche has ceased to exist.

But, as I mentioned before, riding the Angeles Crest and roads like it can be dangerous.  Bikes (and cars) can and do crash there on a regular basis, and some of those crashes result in fatal injuries.

I've known people who've crashed - and a few who have died - on that road, but I also know people who've ridden there for decades without any accidents.  Sometimes the difference can be down to simple things:  a deer jumps out in front of you, or it doesn't;  newly fallen rocks have rolled into your path around a tight corner with a steep cliff and empty air your only escape route - or they haven't.  Sometimes the cause might be mechanical; a flat tire, a broken chain, oil spilling onto the rear tire, even braking failure, but these are exceedingly rare.

Usually, single vehicle bike crashes on Angeles Crest are down to rider error.  And even very, very experienced riders can make mistakes.

One rider I knew rode head-on into a metal gate that had been shut to close the road.  In his posthumous defense, that barrier had not been closed for many years, and the concept that it might be shut probably didn't register in his mind, much like the way we sometimes blow through newly-erected stop signs when we first encounter them.

But that accident was a tragic fluke; not down to rider skill apart from human frailty.  Usually, single vehicle accidents have a clear relation to experience.  Experience on a bike, experience with the particular bike the rider is on, and most importantly experience with the road.

For example, another rider who crashed earlier this month took his fall by running wide on a left turn, hitting the dirt, and getting ejected into the hillside. (Street bikes with street tires don't handle or brake well in dirt).  He'll survive, but with a partially-metallic shoulder and future problems with airport scanners.  From all I've heard, the man was an experienced rider, but not on Angeles Crest.

The Crest is not a particularly difficult road to ride, technically, but it does lure you into complacency then throw something unexpected at you:  one turn tightens when you don't think it will; another has an off-camber exit that also makes your bike want to run wide.  There are also lots and lots of otherwise easy turns that bother the inexperienced because they involve changing elevation uphill or downhill.  The uninitiated brake too much or too little, throttle too much or too little.

Just yesterday I witnessed the aftermath of a simple, non-injury low-side fall (where the bike falls over on it's closest side to the pavement, a bit like someone sliding into home base - only without the joy).  The drop took place in a set of two turns that are tighter than you'd think they'd be after the wide-open turns that precede them.  They also feature a significant change in elevation.  These are easy turns for those who have ridden them, but complicated to even experienced riders who haven't seen them before (and made more complicated recently courtesy of slippery tar 'snakes' laid down to seal cracks in the road surface).

Sadly for that faller, his bike was a very expensive Ducati Desmosedici - sort of a high-end Ferrari of the biking world.  Although it ran and he rode it away, I expect that learning experience will be costly.

SUMMING UP

Looking back over this post, it's clear I've been rambling a bit; my brain free-running and not as well-controlled as I'd like.  But that is appropriate in a sense, because my main point in this blog post is that accidents on roads like Angeles Crest are mostly avoidable through experience.  With experience comes control - of your bike and of yourself.  We may be vulnerable and reliant on others for our safety on city streets and highways, but on those mountain, canyon, or back-country roads we motorcyclists love best, it's really up to us.

Ride Well and Ride Safe ...

Crusader Duck

What would your ideal be for the leader of this nation?

My thoughts immediately turn to the portrayal of John F. Kennedy by William Devane in the original 'Missiles of October'.  Intelligent, with a fiery personality, but cautious in making decisions.  Someone who, in a crisis, tries to get expert opinion from across the spectrum, but finally makes his own decision, based on the firm belief that less is often more, and respectful is better than vengeful.  A moral person, taking the most humane path possible.

Only in movies?  Probably so.

But it's not a bad model to shoot for.

Our leader should be firmly committed to a form of Hippocratic oath;  first do no harm. The only way to make that so is to hold your fire until you are sure of the path and the action.  A chess game, as it were, where you must think many moves out, and look for the path to your goal that costs both you and your opponent the least.

Passing the two contestants of this Fall's Election through this filter, gives neither a scare nor a smile.  Neither fit the mold exactly, but both do far better than the alternatives that have fallen by the wayside.

You could say we're ahead of the game, but the final outcome is in limbo.

Mitt Romney does not bring to mind JFK or even William Devane's fictional portrayal of him.  When I think of Mr. Romney in that movie I see him caving to the military and bombing the crap out of Cuba, with the likely result we would have received a nuke along our Eastern Seaboard in reply.  Maybe even WWIII.  We could all be living in a dystopian, post-apocalyptic future right now, which, among other interesting possibilities, would have saved Hollywood the cost of countless box office bombs about the subject.

Barrack Obama isn't tons better.  He'd be more thoughtful and he'd push back at the military, but maybe too hard and too brusquely.  They'd be pissed, stage a coup, and bomb Cuba anyway.  Or perhaps he'd dither too long and those missiles would have been activated and, well, game over.

But of these two, I'd rather have the current President Obama in office for the next four years.  He's been a bit of an unsteady Crusader his first term, alternately tilting at windmills and breaking bread with windmill makers, but that hasn't been entirely unproductive.  And at least he's been active, not passive, as I suspect a Romney Presidency would be.

Of course, Obama comes with one deficit.  His next term would be his last, meaning he'll be a Lame Duck.  There's a benefit there, in that he'd be able to focus on issues and not worry about re-election.  Trouble is, there is also no reason anyone will have to work with him, since he'll be out of power before too long, and they can certainly wait out the time, even if the country can't.

There's an antidote to that problem:  have an electable Vice President who is ready and willing to assume the office after Obama's second term ends.  Sadly, that isn't the case with Joe Biden.  Smart, dedicated, and a talented public servant he may be, but he's not electable.  Not by a long shot.

Which leaves the Nation with a tough decision:  do we want our leader to be milquetoast Romney or Obama the Crusader Duck?

I'll take the Duck, and continue to Hope ...