Tag Archives: politics

What annoys Jeff this week?

Posted on by

Since I’ve been sitting here on the couch for two days now, there hasn’t been all that much opportunity for things to rub me the wrong way me this week… other than the enforced requirement to just sit around, of course. Don’t worry, though, that doesn’t mean the week is going to get off scott free. There are still a few things that annoy me.

1. Good, thoughtful people on both sides of an issue can disagree without necessarily becoming total douche bags. Just because we hold different beliefs and values doesn’t mean we have to scream past one another rather than discussing events and the way ahead using at least some small modicum of rational thought. Nothing turns me off faster than a politician or talking head insisting that theirs is the only possible right solution to whatever the problem happens to be. In math and physics there might only be one right answer… in the humanities, we’re blessed with many different paths to the same result, but that requires everyone to shut their filthy pie holes for a few minutes and listenen to someone else. I’m not holding my breath on that happening.

2. When it comes to getting your hands on the latest and greatest electronic toys, timing is everything. That’s why I got immediately disgruntled when I looked at the likely launch of the new iPhone and discovered that I was going to be stuck in class when consensus says the window for pre-orders is going to open. Sure, it’s a first world problem and all, but I want my shiny new piece of kit, damnit. I may just have to be more creative than usual at getting my order in before ship-by dates slip out to a month or more.

3. Ace bandages suck. No matter how I try to wrap one around my ankle it always ends up with a lump under my foot, or not being tight enough around the ankle, or cutting off circulation to my toes. Honest to God, I looked up a “how to” demonstration video on YouTube and still can’t get it more than halfassed done. If I’m every Secretary of Education, I’m going to insist that schools teach basic first aid and injury care, in the hopes that the 30-somethings of the future have a clue what they’re doing when their body starts falling apart at the margins.

Capacity…

Posted on by

I’m not much of a philosopher, but I know this isn’t the time for politics or posturing. It’s the time to come together, however briefly, and recognize that our country has been made the victim of a violent and bloody act of domestic terrorism. It’s made all the more tragic because the mass violence was delivered up at the hands of a fellow citizen. A West Wing episode titled “20 Hours in America” aired almost a decade ago, but it’s one of those hours of television that kind of sticks with you once you’ve seen it. Responding to a domestic terror attack on the campus of fictitious Kennison State University, President Bartlet offered what, for my money, is one of the best monologs in ever put on film. Given the events of the day, I found it more appropriate than any and words I could come up with on my own.

So without further introduction, I give you President Bartlet:

More than any time in recent history, America’s destiny is not of our own choosing. We did not seek, nor did we provoke an assault on our freedom and our way of life. We did not expect nor did we invite a confrontation with evil. Yet the true measure of a people’s strength is how they rise to master that moment when it does arrive… Every time we think we have measured our capacity to meet a challenge, we look up and we’re reminded that that capacity may well be limitless. This is a time for American heroes. We will do what is hard. We will achieve what is great. This is a time for American heroes and we reach for the stars. God bless their memory. God bless you. And God bless the United States of America.

A clip of the entire scene is available on YouTube. If you’ve got two minutes, I highly suggest you give it a look. The image/sound quality isn’t great, but I think it serves the purpose.

Playing what if…

Posted on by

Note: This started as a response to an old friend who poked me with a pointy stick in response to last night’s post. Because I often can’t resist poking back, you get what we have here, which is a far longer response than is strictly necessary, but one that I think was worth the effort to write down all in one place.

Two years ago I decided a change was in order. To make the change a reality, I papered the countryside from southern New Jersey to the Carolinas with just shy of 600 resumes. So when someone tells me that I don’t know what the job market is like out there, I’m not quite sure how to respond. Out of that pool of 600 jobs, I got maybe 12 interviews, six follow-up interviews, and one firm offer of employment. It took the better part of a year, but I was still able to get from Point A to Point B. Trust me, I know the job market ain’t what it used to be.

Given the impending draconian cuts in defense spending that will be enacted in January if Congress fails (once again) to do its job, there’s the outside chance that my gig will be on the chopping block just like everyone else’s. Yep, that sucks, but it’s reality. Uncle Sam promised the opportunity to work. He didn’t make any promises of a job for life. If the budget ax falls and I’m on the wrong side of it, well, that means I’ll be looking for work (again, just like everyone else). I like to think that my unique set of knowledge, skills, abilities, education, and training make me marketable across a respectably wide swath of potential employers… but I don’t think any combination of those things is a guarantee that I’ll be able to land exactly the job I want, when I want it, with the pay that I’d like to earn. That, of course leads to the inevitable question, “What happens if you don’t get anything close to the job you want or are qualified for?”

The best answer is I’d do whatever I needed to do to make ends meet. First the non-essential spending goes away – cable TV, booze, eating out, movies, horse racing, the things that are fun, but don’t do anything other than take money away from the bottom line. In a pinch, I sell the truck in favor of something more fuel efficient, take on a roommate to help balance the cost of rent and utilities. None of these are things I want to do, but they’re the things that need done when funds have to be prioritized.

I spent five years flipping burgers at a time when minimum wage was a hellofa lot less than it is now. I did it before and I’m not too proud to do it again if needs be. When the chips are really down common sense tells me that having some money coming in is better than no money coming in at all. When I wasn’t asking if someone wanted fries with that I worked sporadically as a valet. That job paid tips and a hot meal at the end of the night. In the summer I baled hay on a local farm and shoveled shit when it needed shoveling. Lord knows that wasn’t glamorous or high paying. For a while I was even directed traffic and took admission tickets at the county fairgrounds. I spent days most summers cutting grass for anyone who would throw a $20 my way. More often than not, I was working one or more of those jobs on the same day. And if all of those things weren’t a sufficient lesson in thrift and humility, I taught civics to high school freshmen. Anyone who does that job deserves some kind of medal.

I’m not here to tell anyone they suck or that they’re not working hard enough and I rarely espouse any political belief other than my own. Lord knows there’s no major (or minor) party that’s perfectly aligned with my way of thinking. I make observations based on my own experience and adjust my thoughts accordingly. I see plenty of problems with the world and how it’s operating, but I still don’t see a system that’s hopelessly broken. No one promises that life is going to be fair. The Declaration itself calls for the pursuit of happiness, not the guarantee of happiness. Life isn’t fair and sometimes that just sucks. I’d love to have the body of a young Brad Pitt and the voice of a Pavarotti, but those weren’t the gifts I got… yet I still go to the movies and enjoy listening to a tenor sing. Somehow I don’t see any benefit of shuttering the theaters and concert halls just because I can’t have what they have.

Come at me with concrete, realistic ideas about what can be better and how to achieve it and I’m all ears, but don’t expect me to join a crusade just to burn down what we have now. For all its warts, I dare say our system is still a far better operation than what our friends in Syria, Iran, Egypt, and dozens of other countries enjoy at the moment. I’m not willing to throw it over because hey maybe the next thing we try will be better.

Selective enforcement…

Posted on by

I’ve got a real issue with any administration that selectively enforces the law. Either an action is illegal or it isn’t, otherwise what’s the purpose of describing yourself as being a nation of laws. By effectively granting amnesty to illegal immigrants under the age of 30, President Obama decreed that both the letter and the intent of current US law regarding immigration is irrelevant. Of course the current president isn’t the first to decide that the law is whatever he says it happens to be at the time. Once safely out of office, I seem to recall Nixon saying something about “When the president does it, that means it’s not illegal.” Nixon was wrong then just as much as President Obama is wrong now.

I’m not going to drag this blog into a discussion of whether current immigration policy is right or wrong (for the record, I think it needs to be overhauled and then actually enforced, not necessarily in that order). This isn’t a discussion of right and wrong or good and bad, it’s a simple discussion about whether the President of the United States should “take care that the laws be faithfully executed” or just make it up as he goes along. Here’s a hint, one of those two courses of action is spelled out word for word in the Constitution. In cases there’s any confusion, it’s always a good rule of thumb to consult the national user’s manual for guidance.

The president finds the idea of deporting illegal immigrants unethical and unpleasant (not to mention bad for reelection). Fine. I understand that. I find the federal income tax laws unethical and unpleasant. Does that mean I can go ahead and just not pay those this year, or is ignoring the law solely the preserve of the Executive Office of the President? Where does it end? Should companies ignore clean air and water laws or regulations because they’re inconvenient? Maybe it’s ok if soldiers don’t follow lawful orders on the battlefield. After all, the Commander-in-Chief set the precedent that it’s ok just to do whatever it is you happen to agree with.

Even taking away the political implications that will certainly prevent this country from discussing the issue in any rational way, this is bad governance. It’s another step on our race to the bottom. Shame on you, Mr. President. Shame on you for sneaking in the side door what you don’t have the capital or popular support to get done the right way. Shame on you for putting expediency and political considerations ahead of your sworn duty.

Habemus nominee…

Posted on by

Yes ladies and gentlemen, the Republican Party finally has a nominee for president. Thanks for that, Texas. Sure, we’ve all known where it was headed for a couple of months now, but making it official seems like sort of a big deal to the media anyway. It means we can all now all get on board with the serious business of beating the other side to a bloody pulp and proclaiming the last man standing our king for the next four years. What’s not to like about that, right?

I wish I could vote for half of Mitt Romney. The half that says he wants to control spending and keep taxes at something close to a manageable level. The half that wants to use the federal government to regulate our personal lives I’d like to disavow and never speak of again. Once again, it appears I’ll be going to the voting booth, holding my nose, and voting for the least sucky of a hugely sucky pair of contenders… Unless he picks some ridiculous crackpot running mate. Then I’ll probably just stay home and weep for my country.

You’re doing it wrong…

Posted on by

I’ve been reading a lot of articles over the last few months about people protesting the high price of this product or that product, general “corporate greed,” and any number of other economic issues. I’m a little surprised that no one has come forward to propose the simple solution yet. If you’re somebody who thinks the oil companies make too much money go ahead and scrape up the coin to buy a few shares of Exxon or BP. Convince 5 or 10 million of your closes friends to buy ten shares each and suddenly you’re a loud voice in the next shareholder meeting instead of just being a bunch of rabble standing on the sidewalk.

You know in your heart we’re not “getting off oil” until we absolutely have to, so why not take advantage of the increasing prices to put some coin in your pocket along with those nasty corporate big wigs. The minute you take on an ownership stake in one of these companies, I suspect your attitude towards profits and “social justice” will change… Unless you think capitalism itself is the problem and the oil companies are just your whipping boy of choice this year. Just remember that the free market has been at work in every culture since two cave men agreed to trade six deer hides for one shiny flat rock. It flourished in the black markets of the Soviet Union and moved China from agrarian backwater to workshop of the world in two or three generations. It was here before us and it will be here long after we’ve shuffled off this mortal coil.

Look, it’s a simple concept. There are only about 4 million dues paying members of the National Rifle Association. If the anti-gun people signed up 4,000,001 people and had them vote at the next annual meeting to change the corporate charter. Poof. Just like that the NRA becomes the nation’s leading advocate for gun control. People go about this protesting business all wrong. Tag board signs and marching in the street looks like amateur hour and the mob makes Mr. and Mrs. John Q. Public vaguely nervous. If you want to see real changes, put on a suit and tie and find a way into the boardroom. That’s where change happens in the grown up world.

NATO…

Posted on by

The logic behind protesting against the one international institution that has actually accomplished anything since its inception is sort of beyond me. The UN, that loveable gaggle of windbags created in San Francisco and headquartered in New York, never seems to be able to find its ass with both hands and a map. On their watch North Korea got the bomb and Iran seems to be right behind them, the Middle East is as much a hotbed now as it was fifty years ago, and a dozen genocides and failed peacekeeping missions dot its less than impressive resume. Since 1945, the UN has been the preeminent forum for talking about the world’s problems and promptly doing nothing about them.

By way of comparison, the signatories of the North Atlantic Treaty have spent the last 60-odd years deterring communist aggression, policing Bosnia and Yugoslavia, raising arms against the common foe when the United States was attacked in 2001, and more recently using air power and special forces troops to knock over a two bit dictatorship in Libya. It seems to me, all of those are good and commendable things to do.

So yeah, when it comes to understanding why the streets of Chicago are full of protestors, all I can do is scratch my head. Godspeed Chicago PD, knock heads and take names… and try to get a few licks in for those of us who can’t be there in person to help out.

Pots and kettles…

Posted on by

The fine men and women of the United States Congress have taken up GSA’s spendthrift ways as their cause du jour. Am I the only one who rolled their eyes about Congress calling out anyone for making bad decisions about how to spend taxpayer money? This is the same group of people who have failed to pass a budget for the government for the last three years and yet still managed to spend the country right up to the edge of oblivion.

If I were going to introduce the Government Oversight Committee to the GSA Administrator before their hearing, it would go something like this: Hello Pot, I’d like to introduce you to my good friend, Kettle. I think you’re going to get along nicely. You have so much in common.

Look, GSA screwed the pooch. They know it. You know it. I know it. Everyone and their brother knows it. But before we run of half cocked thinking how great it is that Congress is going to get to the root of the problem, let’s remember the bigger picture… that Congress is basically the Grandaddy of making piss poor spending decisions and the $800,000 conference in Las Vegas isn’t even a blip on the radar in terms of the volume of cash Congress can throw away in the blink of an eye.

As much as they’d love for GSA’s problems and the Secret Service hooker fiasco to deflect attention from their raging incompetence, let’s keep our eye on the ball out there, ok?

Primary colors…

Posted on by

When I voted for the first time, I was so excited that I could hardly contain myself. Low, this decade and a half later, I’m beginning to notice a slightly disturbing trend. Not only do I get less enthused about every passing election, but for as long as I can remember, my Primary track record has been adorned exclusively by losers. That’s not a personal attack or a judgment statement. I’ve voted for an eventual loser of the Republican nomination in every primary election since 1996. Don’t try to figure out if that says more about me or the party. It says plenty about both of us.

Still, out of some misbegotten sense of having a voice in the process, I schlepped to the polling place today after work, stood in line for a few minutes, and then cast my vote for a guy who’s sure to be well out of the race by the end of the month. It’s my own little tradition… Like fireworks on the 4th of July or dreams of a white Christmas… If it’s primary day, I’m off to go vote for a guy who will probably never be on another ballot in either of our lifetimes. On the bright side, at least the ballot is full of people for state and local office that I’ve never heard of before. With me, anything below the POTUS nominee race is pretty much a role of the dice based on what information I can scavenge up a day or so before walking into the booth. It’s the only part of primary day that’s even remotely interesting (and I use “interesting” in a very general kind of way).

We’ve been doing this for more or less 226 years. You’d think by now we’d have come up with a better process. Quaint as it is, it’s probably time for our election system to wander out of the 18th century and in the general direction of the 21st. Seriously, why isn’t there an app for this?

Playing the numbers…

Posted on by

With the collapse of deficit reduction “supercommittee”, once again the inestimable Congress of the United States has failed to do, well, anything at all. Since their collective approval rating hovers around 9%, you’d think that almost every member of the House and 1/3 of the members of the Senate would be looking for work after the next election. The fact is that over the last twenty years, House members seeking reelection are victorious well over 90% of the time. For their re-electable colleagues in the Senate, that number is closer to 80%. Still better odds than you’ll ever get in Vegas (unless you’re the house, of course). Using some roughly accurate statistics, that’s a long way of saying that unless something dramatic changes between now and the election, the Congress we have now is largely going to be the Congress we have after the election. If that doesn’t make you queasy, you’re probably not paying much attention.

Partisans on the left and the right will tell you that this is the perfect reason we need term limits imposed on elected officials. I submit that it’s not so much an issue of term limits being needed as it is a clear message about how engaged electorate is. Cycle after cycle, a small percentage of eligible voters go to the polls and select the guy whose name they’ve heard before, or the one who has the prettiest yard signs, or the one who had the nicest looking piece of direct mail. In doing that, the voters just don’t stop to ask if their particular senator or representative is part of the problem. If that person is currently serving, here’s a hint: He or she is the problem and needs to be replaced. Two years from now, if that new individual has become part of the problem, they need to be replaced. And again until voters stumble on someone responsive to the needs of the country and who’s putting national priorities above regional benefits or party politics.

Until that happens, we’re going to continue to get the kind of government we deserve. That is to say a government that is hopelessly dysfunctional. Elections are won based on who shows up. If all most people do is bitch and complain and let the same 20% who always show up to vote have their way, well, we’ll get the same level dysfunction we’ve all come to know and loathe. If you’re pissed off, if you want something different then it’s on you to get educated, make smart decisions, and actually go to your polling place. If you can’t be bothered to do even that much, then you’re a bigger part of the problem then the asshats we keep electing.