Yesterday, I came to an agreement with Publish America to publish my latest novel, Murphy's War. The contract is being finalized and will be signed within two weeks. The book must, by contract, be out within a year but I expect it to be ready within a few months.
I will inform my loyal readers when the book is ready for market, but in the meanwhile, I will do what I can to amuse, enlighten and motivate you to vote for divided government in Washington.
As a polemicist -virtually a poor man's Tom Paine, I take rabid sides on issues. As a novelist, I support only my characters as they face their destinies.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Tuesday, February 28, 2006
Monday, February 27, 2006
We're Number Forty-Two
The failed attack on the Saudi Arabian oil facility last week has analysts shouting that we must move quickly to find alternatives to our massive dependence on petroleum. They’re absolutely correct in this, of course, but President Bush’s band aid program looks very piddling.
No longer as important, since we’re stuck with the decision, is the national twenty-twenty hindsight view – although in my own defense I foresaw it and said so to all my family and friends – that we took our eye off the ball of hunting down al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden and diverted our military and fiscal resources to Iraq, a nation that had nothing to due with the precipitous cause of our rage, 9/11.
We are now caught in the middle of a family squabble between tribes in Iraq from which it appears we cannot easily or quickly extricate ourselves. Our military deaths in that country are closing in on the number killed in New York, Pennsylvania and Virginia, and our wounded and seriously disabled are in the tens of thousands. Treasure is harder to calculate, but it is likely that Iraq is likely to cost us in excess of a trillion dollars before we can stop the tally.
Let me recapitulate, al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations continue to plot against us and our allies in the Islamic world. Our military is stretched thin in Iraq. Our casualties mount. Our treasure disappears in the desert sand. And our economy is endangered by the terrorists who are training daily to disrupt our oil supplies.
But not to worry, the energy plan on the table will make it possible for us to withstand such a terrorist success in only fifteen years. But, of course, that plan doesn’t even hint at the price spike likely to result – and to persist - from any major failure in the world petroleum market – now or then.
Even Republicans are waking up to the calamitous policies and inept responses of this administration. But, it’s too late for them. We must fire them in the bi-election and then elect a Democrat president in ’08. Sadly, the Dems are likely to read this as a mandate to turn both leftward and inward.
Both members of the Herbert Hoover fan club are ecstatic with their hero’s prospects for moving up to next to last in all time presidential rankings. Thanks, George!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
No longer as important, since we’re stuck with the decision, is the national twenty-twenty hindsight view – although in my own defense I foresaw it and said so to all my family and friends – that we took our eye off the ball of hunting down al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden and diverted our military and fiscal resources to Iraq, a nation that had nothing to due with the precipitous cause of our rage, 9/11.
We are now caught in the middle of a family squabble between tribes in Iraq from which it appears we cannot easily or quickly extricate ourselves. Our military deaths in that country are closing in on the number killed in New York, Pennsylvania and Virginia, and our wounded and seriously disabled are in the tens of thousands. Treasure is harder to calculate, but it is likely that Iraq is likely to cost us in excess of a trillion dollars before we can stop the tally.
Let me recapitulate, al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations continue to plot against us and our allies in the Islamic world. Our military is stretched thin in Iraq. Our casualties mount. Our treasure disappears in the desert sand. And our economy is endangered by the terrorists who are training daily to disrupt our oil supplies.
But not to worry, the energy plan on the table will make it possible for us to withstand such a terrorist success in only fifteen years. But, of course, that plan doesn’t even hint at the price spike likely to result – and to persist - from any major failure in the world petroleum market – now or then.
Even Republicans are waking up to the calamitous policies and inept responses of this administration. But, it’s too late for them. We must fire them in the bi-election and then elect a Democrat president in ’08. Sadly, the Dems are likely to read this as a mandate to turn both leftward and inward.
Both members of the Herbert Hoover fan club are ecstatic with their hero’s prospects for moving up to next to last in all time presidential rankings. Thanks, George!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Sunday, February 26, 2006
Motivation for Blogging
The Web Watch Column in the Washington Post invited bloggers to tell what motivates them to blog. I sent in the following:
"Dear Web Watch,
I am an old blogger, in my seventies, and believe passionately in moderate and centrist politics and policies, areas often ignored as bloggers dive for the extremes or into their navels.
George Bush and his neoconservative and Evangelical supporters have taken the nation down extreme and even lawless roads. It is my mission to discredit them and to fight for divided government.
With the White House, both chambers of Congress, and, mostly, the federal judiciary in the hands of a single party that has been hijacked by a narrow spectrum of the body politic, it is incumbent on citizens to stand up for what they believe.
By writing on a broad range of subjects with humor, irony, sarcasm, sadness, and, only occasionally, anger, over the course of less than two years, more than 600 regular readers have acquired a taste for my blog. It is gratifying to represent something important and to be joined by people from around the globe who would have never known of my existence or views.
Blogging has liberated individuals everywhere and, in the long term, doomed those who would govern in secret and for the few. My blog, Bill’s Blog on Western Civilization and Other Trivial Matters, can be viewed at www.wildbill944.blogspot.com. I post several times each week.
Blog on!
Wild Bill"
I want to thank so many of you for checking in on a regular basis.
Wild Bill
"Dear Web Watch,
I am an old blogger, in my seventies, and believe passionately in moderate and centrist politics and policies, areas often ignored as bloggers dive for the extremes or into their navels.
George Bush and his neoconservative and Evangelical supporters have taken the nation down extreme and even lawless roads. It is my mission to discredit them and to fight for divided government.
With the White House, both chambers of Congress, and, mostly, the federal judiciary in the hands of a single party that has been hijacked by a narrow spectrum of the body politic, it is incumbent on citizens to stand up for what they believe.
By writing on a broad range of subjects with humor, irony, sarcasm, sadness, and, only occasionally, anger, over the course of less than two years, more than 600 regular readers have acquired a taste for my blog. It is gratifying to represent something important and to be joined by people from around the globe who would have never known of my existence or views.
Blogging has liberated individuals everywhere and, in the long term, doomed those who would govern in secret and for the few. My blog, Bill’s Blog on Western Civilization and Other Trivial Matters, can be viewed at www.wildbill944.blogspot.com. I post several times each week.
Blog on!
Wild Bill"
I want to thank so many of you for checking in on a regular basis.
Wild Bill
Saturday, February 25, 2006
Crisis in Iraq
President Bush deplored the bombing of the Al-Askariya mosque in Samara as a senseless act. Sadly, the act was far from senseless as the intent of the bombers was almost certainly to foment civil war between Sunni and Shiite Arabs in Iraq. While the jury remains out whether the destruction of the holy site has succeeded in its terrible goal, there can be no doubt that that the issue is in doubt as this is being written.
That the president and his advisors, especially those labeled as neoconservative, were so naïve, gullible and ignorant of human relations and sociology as to believe that we could intervene in another civilization, Islam, and a nation cobbled together by power, Iraq, and impose our will and organization patterns without serious repercussions boggles the mind.
Even had we brought the hundreds of thousands of troops recommended by the army chief of staff as necessary to occupy the country there would be no easy way to disengage our forces and assure the survival of the government that we install. Despite all the trappings of democracy, most of them legitimate, how we could expect those forces opposed to us to accept that government makes us appear to be simpletons.
Islam is at war with itself across the region. Secular and religious forces are at odds in many parts of the civilization. Huge numbers of people with great resources are operating on both sides, and there are few signs that either side is willing to compromise. Yet President Bush was willing to attack a sovereign nation that posed no threat to us or allies, except as imagined by those stirring a witches’ brew of poor and outdated intelligence, to topple its regime and to impose from the outside a system of government unacceptable to major power centers within the country and the civilization.
Even as we appear to make progress in our quest, we create enemies. It is calamitous that both Shiite and Sunni communities point the finger of blame for their problems straight at us and our coalition. And even if this crisis passes, there can be no doubt that others will occur. The government that comes to pass during America’s stay in Iraq will be tested for legitimacy by the various factions far into the future. Whether it will meet these tests cannot now be known, but it has to be seen that the enemies of the state do not ascribe legitimacy to it.
Mr. Bush compares the travails presently being endured by the Iraqis to those which tested the colonists in the late eighteenth century in America. That equation is sheer hog wash. We were testing to determine if men could best live relatively freely as a colony of nation far away or as an independent country. The relative rights, freedom, and obligations of the citizens under either organization were generally agreed upon by both sides.
In Iraq, the citizens do not agree on whether they should be governed by a secular system with agreed upon rights and responsibilities for all citizens or by a theocratic system of government. Whichever form prevails, the proponents of the other will be unlikely to be satisfied and are likely to resist. Throw in the wild card of international terrorists who do not recognize as legitimate many of the governments friendly to us in the region and you have the potential for instability in Islam for decades to come.
Millions of thoughtful people around the globe, including a huge number in the United States, foresaw these problems of the intervention in Iraq. Sadly, they did not have the ear of the one man who counted, George W. Bush.
Even if this crisis passes without failure, it is likely that the new government will have enemies on all sides. Now Mr. Bush deplores what he sees as a new form of isolationism arising in the United States and rails against it. Sadly, it has come about because of his adventurist policies across the globe. Clearly, he is reaping what he sowed. Unfortunately, the nation will be undoing this neoconservative Wilsonian foolishness for many years.
Sad!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
That the president and his advisors, especially those labeled as neoconservative, were so naïve, gullible and ignorant of human relations and sociology as to believe that we could intervene in another civilization, Islam, and a nation cobbled together by power, Iraq, and impose our will and organization patterns without serious repercussions boggles the mind.
Even had we brought the hundreds of thousands of troops recommended by the army chief of staff as necessary to occupy the country there would be no easy way to disengage our forces and assure the survival of the government that we install. Despite all the trappings of democracy, most of them legitimate, how we could expect those forces opposed to us to accept that government makes us appear to be simpletons.
Islam is at war with itself across the region. Secular and religious forces are at odds in many parts of the civilization. Huge numbers of people with great resources are operating on both sides, and there are few signs that either side is willing to compromise. Yet President Bush was willing to attack a sovereign nation that posed no threat to us or allies, except as imagined by those stirring a witches’ brew of poor and outdated intelligence, to topple its regime and to impose from the outside a system of government unacceptable to major power centers within the country and the civilization.
Even as we appear to make progress in our quest, we create enemies. It is calamitous that both Shiite and Sunni communities point the finger of blame for their problems straight at us and our coalition. And even if this crisis passes, there can be no doubt that others will occur. The government that comes to pass during America’s stay in Iraq will be tested for legitimacy by the various factions far into the future. Whether it will meet these tests cannot now be known, but it has to be seen that the enemies of the state do not ascribe legitimacy to it.
Mr. Bush compares the travails presently being endured by the Iraqis to those which tested the colonists in the late eighteenth century in America. That equation is sheer hog wash. We were testing to determine if men could best live relatively freely as a colony of nation far away or as an independent country. The relative rights, freedom, and obligations of the citizens under either organization were generally agreed upon by both sides.
In Iraq, the citizens do not agree on whether they should be governed by a secular system with agreed upon rights and responsibilities for all citizens or by a theocratic system of government. Whichever form prevails, the proponents of the other will be unlikely to be satisfied and are likely to resist. Throw in the wild card of international terrorists who do not recognize as legitimate many of the governments friendly to us in the region and you have the potential for instability in Islam for decades to come.
Millions of thoughtful people around the globe, including a huge number in the United States, foresaw these problems of the intervention in Iraq. Sadly, they did not have the ear of the one man who counted, George W. Bush.
Even if this crisis passes without failure, it is likely that the new government will have enemies on all sides. Now Mr. Bush deplores what he sees as a new form of isolationism arising in the United States and rails against it. Sadly, it has come about because of his adventurist policies across the globe. Clearly, he is reaping what he sowed. Unfortunately, the nation will be undoing this neoconservative Wilsonian foolishness for many years.
Sad!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
The Olympic Downhill
The Winter Olympics in Turin leave me cold; it appears that the same can be said for other many other Americans and apparently for most Chinese and Australians as well. When I was a kid and went to the movies, figure skating champ Sonja Henie was rewarded for her Olympian accomplishments with leading parts in heavy Hollywood dramas. To see the petite blond compete with fellow Scandinavian vixen Ingrid Bergman for the attention of leading men was well…cool – and her in skates yet. Today TV ratings pale from the days of Torvill and Deane and spunky Dorothy Hamill and her pet camel. Times change, the best Dorothy could do for her supper was push arthritis pain killers.
From Sonja to Dorothy to the attempt to break a knee in Boston and on to the pouting of a pair of Italian ice dancers and further to two American speed skaters glowering at each other for alleged slights; how did the big show get so very low? From the ancient Greeks running naked toward olive crown glory to Baron Pierre de Coubertin’s brilliant recreation, we’ve come on games dominated by over privileged white kids flashing sponsored snow boards for free commercials on NBC.
The winter games are actually better examples of what’s wrong with the movement then their summer counterparts. The summer sports of running faster, jumping higher, and hoisting more clearly involve the world while ice dancing, mogul skiing, snow boarding, and the alpine events reek of money and privilege, not that summer equestrian events don’t. You’re not going to try to tell me that those medal winners in trick skiing could actually hold off kids from the ghetto if they were really given an even chance to compete?
And of course they don’t compete head to head in most sports. “She’s only two hundredths of a second behind at the second check point, but she took on too much air at the fourth rise. I think all is lost.” Deathless prose, eh?
Despite the snarling between speed skaters, nobody’s doing this for God and country anymore. Adolph Hitler made the games a test of Aryan supremacy, and for decades those commie pigs drugged and doped their way to medals while our darling innocent little free market capitalists toiled only for red, white and blue. The Nazis spent a fortune and the commies several of them to show that their bulked up super heroes were more than a match for any decadent Golden boys and girls from California. But we had corporate sponsors just as determined to demonstrate the benefits of money for breakfast. And we won!
George Bush should take it on as personal challenge to turn the Olympics into a contest between freedom lovers and al Qaeda. As Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Reagan et al turned the battle of world hegemony from one of atomic bombs to toe loops, so it is the George to tame Osama and to see if we can handle his troops in Greco-Roman wrestling.
The real problem lies with the Gipper. Reagan is given credit for ending the Cold War by outspending the commies on Ace support bandages. In so doing he undermined the Olympics. It’s up to Bush to restore the games; he’s certainly showed that he can outspend even old Ron. Take it on, Mr. President!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
From Sonja to Dorothy to the attempt to break a knee in Boston and on to the pouting of a pair of Italian ice dancers and further to two American speed skaters glowering at each other for alleged slights; how did the big show get so very low? From the ancient Greeks running naked toward olive crown glory to Baron Pierre de Coubertin’s brilliant recreation, we’ve come on games dominated by over privileged white kids flashing sponsored snow boards for free commercials on NBC.
The winter games are actually better examples of what’s wrong with the movement then their summer counterparts. The summer sports of running faster, jumping higher, and hoisting more clearly involve the world while ice dancing, mogul skiing, snow boarding, and the alpine events reek of money and privilege, not that summer equestrian events don’t. You’re not going to try to tell me that those medal winners in trick skiing could actually hold off kids from the ghetto if they were really given an even chance to compete?
And of course they don’t compete head to head in most sports. “She’s only two hundredths of a second behind at the second check point, but she took on too much air at the fourth rise. I think all is lost.” Deathless prose, eh?
Despite the snarling between speed skaters, nobody’s doing this for God and country anymore. Adolph Hitler made the games a test of Aryan supremacy, and for decades those commie pigs drugged and doped their way to medals while our darling innocent little free market capitalists toiled only for red, white and blue. The Nazis spent a fortune and the commies several of them to show that their bulked up super heroes were more than a match for any decadent Golden boys and girls from California. But we had corporate sponsors just as determined to demonstrate the benefits of money for breakfast. And we won!
George Bush should take it on as personal challenge to turn the Olympics into a contest between freedom lovers and al Qaeda. As Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Reagan et al turned the battle of world hegemony from one of atomic bombs to toe loops, so it is the George to tame Osama and to see if we can handle his troops in Greco-Roman wrestling.
The real problem lies with the Gipper. Reagan is given credit for ending the Cold War by outspending the commies on Ace support bandages. In so doing he undermined the Olympics. It’s up to Bush to restore the games; he’s certainly showed that he can outspend even old Ron. Take it on, Mr. President!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Whig Revival in 2012
The brouhaha over the contract for a United Arab Emirates state owned firm to manage shipping operations in some of the largest and most strategic ports in the United States demonstrates clearly that George W. Bush is a lame duck and that he has been corrupted by his own power. He has handed the Democrats still another golden opportunity to win at least one of the houses of Congress later this year and the presidency in 2008.
The main Republican charge that Democrats are weak on national security issues has blown up in the faces of the president's loyalists on Capitol Hill. The Democrats can stand by innocently as the GOP coalition once again is shown to be torn and tattered. Neoconservatives simply cannot understand what the fuss is about while classic Republicans are going bonkers in public against the president who has led them so disastrously down the path of elective destruction.
The president alleges that the shipping firm should be treated like a company from any allied nation and can’t understand why an outfit from an Arab state is not treated with the same level of trust as one from The United Kingdom. Surely, the man is tone deaf. His own rhetoric about nations that have been associated with international terrorism rises from the background; citizens of the UAE were among those who attacked the U.S. on 9/11.
That he is satisfied that national security will not be jeopardized by the change from a British firm to one from the UAE is not really the question. What is important is that the country is frightened – largely by the overblown rhetoric of the president and Dead Eye Dick Cheney. This pair has scared the bejesus out of the country, implying that Arab terrorists are working everywhere to blow us up. But in the case of old cronies, not to worry, we can be assured that they’ll be perfectly trustworthy and would never blow up a container ship in New York or Miami.
Mr. Bush is killing his supporters on the Hill. Peter King of New York pleaded with the president to stop the fiasco, but Bush told him to go fly a kite. King lamented to CNN that he had supported the president on the Iraq war and the Patriot Act – clearly implying that his heart had never been with either. (This will be seized upon for gain by Democrats later.) The president has not had to work in a hostile political environment in Washington. With control of both Houses of Congress as well as the White House (and, if truth be told, the courts too) Mr. Bush has when the chips were down almost always had his way, particularly with the Republicans in Washington.
His reaction to what he perceived to be simply a little political hay making by GOP members was completely tone deaf. He’s been too used to willing what he wants and flogging the Republicans until they knuckle under to understand that their constituents really believe that this is a major issue for both parties and for residents of more than enough Red and Blue states to assure that it will not go away without tender loving political stroking which he denied them absolutely.
Last night, the president threatened to exercise the first veto of his presidency on this matter, thus painting himself and his party leaders into separate and far distant corners. With both the president and his congressional loyalists threatening to go down and dirty, what’s the opposition to do? This situation is so good that even the Democrats in their limitless incompetence appear unable to self destruct on this gift from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Since no matter what they do from crying crocodile tears to supporting their colleagues in a fit of bipartisan comity to simply pulling out of the limelight as the GOP flames out, the win-win lamp is lit for the Democrats. Of course, we haven’t heard the final position from the liberal wing of the party.
If the Dems can’t pull at least one House and the presidency out of this hat, we ought to be seriously looking to the Whigs to make a comeback in 2012. Can the Democrats self destruct once again? Stay tuned.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
The main Republican charge that Democrats are weak on national security issues has blown up in the faces of the president's loyalists on Capitol Hill. The Democrats can stand by innocently as the GOP coalition once again is shown to be torn and tattered. Neoconservatives simply cannot understand what the fuss is about while classic Republicans are going bonkers in public against the president who has led them so disastrously down the path of elective destruction.
The president alleges that the shipping firm should be treated like a company from any allied nation and can’t understand why an outfit from an Arab state is not treated with the same level of trust as one from The United Kingdom. Surely, the man is tone deaf. His own rhetoric about nations that have been associated with international terrorism rises from the background; citizens of the UAE were among those who attacked the U.S. on 9/11.
That he is satisfied that national security will not be jeopardized by the change from a British firm to one from the UAE is not really the question. What is important is that the country is frightened – largely by the overblown rhetoric of the president and Dead Eye Dick Cheney. This pair has scared the bejesus out of the country, implying that Arab terrorists are working everywhere to blow us up. But in the case of old cronies, not to worry, we can be assured that they’ll be perfectly trustworthy and would never blow up a container ship in New York or Miami.
Mr. Bush is killing his supporters on the Hill. Peter King of New York pleaded with the president to stop the fiasco, but Bush told him to go fly a kite. King lamented to CNN that he had supported the president on the Iraq war and the Patriot Act – clearly implying that his heart had never been with either. (This will be seized upon for gain by Democrats later.) The president has not had to work in a hostile political environment in Washington. With control of both Houses of Congress as well as the White House (and, if truth be told, the courts too) Mr. Bush has when the chips were down almost always had his way, particularly with the Republicans in Washington.
His reaction to what he perceived to be simply a little political hay making by GOP members was completely tone deaf. He’s been too used to willing what he wants and flogging the Republicans until they knuckle under to understand that their constituents really believe that this is a major issue for both parties and for residents of more than enough Red and Blue states to assure that it will not go away without tender loving political stroking which he denied them absolutely.
Last night, the president threatened to exercise the first veto of his presidency on this matter, thus painting himself and his party leaders into separate and far distant corners. With both the president and his congressional loyalists threatening to go down and dirty, what’s the opposition to do? This situation is so good that even the Democrats in their limitless incompetence appear unable to self destruct on this gift from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Since no matter what they do from crying crocodile tears to supporting their colleagues in a fit of bipartisan comity to simply pulling out of the limelight as the GOP flames out, the win-win lamp is lit for the Democrats. Of course, we haven’t heard the final position from the liberal wing of the party.
If the Dems can’t pull at least one House and the presidency out of this hat, we ought to be seriously looking to the Whigs to make a comeback in 2012. Can the Democrats self destruct once again? Stay tuned.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Get With The Program
What is to become of the elderly? How will we address the needs of humanity, the nation, and the old themselves? The United States is desperately seeking answers to these questions, as are Japan and the European nations. In reality, these are questions that have been asked since people began to survive past the age of usefulness to their communities in primitive groups and which until very recently have been dealt with rather elaborately by all societies.
With the coming of birth and population control, health care advances, modern sewage and septic treatment, a host of other healthier practices, and all of the entitlements discussed above, a far greater portion of the population is surviving to the age of retirement. Prosperous modern states, including our own, have instituted programs to assist the elderly and relieve the burdens on the young.
Today, Americans are in a mad race to become entitled. Company pensions and health care, 401k accounts, government annuities, Medicare and a host of other private and public benefits lay before us, and we scramble crazily to qualify, so that we may… May what? Largely pass time from the date of entitlement until we die. Only the very young seem immune to this thought syndrome, but almost as quickly as they become part of the adult world of work they jump on the gerbil wheel and race toward qualification.
Despite protestations to the contrary, it matters not whether we are rich or poor, entrepreneurial or worker in outlook, we all scramble to become entitled; the only differences seeming to be the quality and size of the houses we will live in, the cars we drive, the brand of our toys, and where we shop. While the badges of success differ in quality and quantity, we are consumed by becoming eligible to wear them.
Sadly, we qualify for being put out to pasture in much better condition physically, mentally, and psychologically than members of previous generations and most of us can look forward to far more years of doing what we wish to do – shopping, playing, dining, basking or even contributing. For decades economists and actuaries have observed that a greater portion of the population is becoming entitled than is healthy for the economy, and last year President Bush touched the third rail of American politics by suggesting a major overhaul of Social Security. His changes were derided and, sadly, because of his maladroit approach, we have as a society stuck our heads back into the sand.
Mr. Bush was right in working toward reform and his timing was spot on. We simply cannot continue present trends forever. Disaster is looming. But it is far more than simply a disaster of not being able to afford to care the old, it is a question of how we view old age. If all that we expect of our old is for them to shop or play until they drop, I think we’re missing out on a great resource. Despite the fact that there are more of us than ever, I wonder if the percentage actively engaged in passing on the civilization has grown?
My grandparents lived in our household, and I count myself blessed to have had long discussions with a very bright and thoughtful old man before he died. Today, he would be living in Florida, Texas, or Arizona doing `his thing’. How much is being lost as lives of great experience are frittered away without rounding out the education of another generation?
On January 7, 2006, I made what I thought was a strong plea for maintaining the Social Security benefits program as a defined benefits rather than a defined contributions system as proposed by Mr. Bush; see Wake Up, Plutocrats. I stick by that notion but today my plea is for better utilization of the great resource that is represented by our older citizens.
Last week, I had the good fortune to visit the John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art in Sarasota, FL. Aside from spending an extraordinarily pleasant day with friends, I was taken by the quality of the volunteers in the museum whom as you might expect in the Sunshine State tended to be older Americans. One docent in particular comes to mind, a vivacious woman fully competent in her subject doing her very best – and it was very good indeed – to pass on the art treasury of Western Civilization to visitors of all ages. She appeared to be entitled but was far more intent on making a contribution rather than simply existing. The woman was transmitting her knowledge, but she was not working; she was joyfully contributing and in a big way.
In addition to reforming the economics of old age by asking people to participate longer in the work force and by contributing more toward the cost of their retirement, I think society should be asking more of the elderly in the form of volunteerism. Obviously, President George H. W. Bush (Bush 41) was on the right track with his `Thousand Points of Light’ volunteer program. My view is slightly different. I would like to have government and non-government programs designed to tap the wasted resources in our midst. Volunteer activities abound right now but little is done to recruit other than advertising. I would like to see counseling programs that could help - that’s HELP – evaluate strengths of the population and encourage them and the institutions tap these resources. The idea would be to help people discover their strengths so that they might contribute
The biggest loss is for the individual offspring – and theirs – of the elderly. We should not let our elders pass without making a contribution to the family. Government and private programs may have freed all partners in the work of life from being dependent on each other economically and physically, but there is a cultural bleeding that must be stanched.
It’s not the money, but there is gold in them thar hills.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
With the coming of birth and population control, health care advances, modern sewage and septic treatment, a host of other healthier practices, and all of the entitlements discussed above, a far greater portion of the population is surviving to the age of retirement. Prosperous modern states, including our own, have instituted programs to assist the elderly and relieve the burdens on the young.
Today, Americans are in a mad race to become entitled. Company pensions and health care, 401k accounts, government annuities, Medicare and a host of other private and public benefits lay before us, and we scramble crazily to qualify, so that we may… May what? Largely pass time from the date of entitlement until we die. Only the very young seem immune to this thought syndrome, but almost as quickly as they become part of the adult world of work they jump on the gerbil wheel and race toward qualification.
Despite protestations to the contrary, it matters not whether we are rich or poor, entrepreneurial or worker in outlook, we all scramble to become entitled; the only differences seeming to be the quality and size of the houses we will live in, the cars we drive, the brand of our toys, and where we shop. While the badges of success differ in quality and quantity, we are consumed by becoming eligible to wear them.
Sadly, we qualify for being put out to pasture in much better condition physically, mentally, and psychologically than members of previous generations and most of us can look forward to far more years of doing what we wish to do – shopping, playing, dining, basking or even contributing. For decades economists and actuaries have observed that a greater portion of the population is becoming entitled than is healthy for the economy, and last year President Bush touched the third rail of American politics by suggesting a major overhaul of Social Security. His changes were derided and, sadly, because of his maladroit approach, we have as a society stuck our heads back into the sand.
Mr. Bush was right in working toward reform and his timing was spot on. We simply cannot continue present trends forever. Disaster is looming. But it is far more than simply a disaster of not being able to afford to care the old, it is a question of how we view old age. If all that we expect of our old is for them to shop or play until they drop, I think we’re missing out on a great resource. Despite the fact that there are more of us than ever, I wonder if the percentage actively engaged in passing on the civilization has grown?
My grandparents lived in our household, and I count myself blessed to have had long discussions with a very bright and thoughtful old man before he died. Today, he would be living in Florida, Texas, or Arizona doing `his thing’. How much is being lost as lives of great experience are frittered away without rounding out the education of another generation?
On January 7, 2006, I made what I thought was a strong plea for maintaining the Social Security benefits program as a defined benefits rather than a defined contributions system as proposed by Mr. Bush; see Wake Up, Plutocrats. I stick by that notion but today my plea is for better utilization of the great resource that is represented by our older citizens.
Last week, I had the good fortune to visit the John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art in Sarasota, FL. Aside from spending an extraordinarily pleasant day with friends, I was taken by the quality of the volunteers in the museum whom as you might expect in the Sunshine State tended to be older Americans. One docent in particular comes to mind, a vivacious woman fully competent in her subject doing her very best – and it was very good indeed – to pass on the art treasury of Western Civilization to visitors of all ages. She appeared to be entitled but was far more intent on making a contribution rather than simply existing. The woman was transmitting her knowledge, but she was not working; she was joyfully contributing and in a big way.
In addition to reforming the economics of old age by asking people to participate longer in the work force and by contributing more toward the cost of their retirement, I think society should be asking more of the elderly in the form of volunteerism. Obviously, President George H. W. Bush (Bush 41) was on the right track with his `Thousand Points of Light’ volunteer program. My view is slightly different. I would like to have government and non-government programs designed to tap the wasted resources in our midst. Volunteer activities abound right now but little is done to recruit other than advertising. I would like to see counseling programs that could help - that’s HELP – evaluate strengths of the population and encourage them and the institutions tap these resources. The idea would be to help people discover their strengths so that they might contribute
The biggest loss is for the individual offspring – and theirs – of the elderly. We should not let our elders pass without making a contribution to the family. Government and private programs may have freed all partners in the work of life from being dependent on each other economically and physically, but there is a cultural bleeding that must be stanched.
It’s not the money, but there is gold in them thar hills.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Monday, February 20, 2006
Fatter, Slower, Dumber, Older
The army’s fine. According to the president and any number of official DOD spokespersons, the Iraq War has done little damage to the army other than making it battle hardened and to even suggest that it is overstretched is simply wrong. But today’s Boston Globe carries a major story that shows that line to be an absolute sham and falsehood. (Sadly, I’m unable to include a link to the article, Struggling for recruits, Army relaxes its rules.)
The author, Douglas Belkin, demonstrates beyond a shadow of a doubt that aside from the human (more than 2,000 dead and 16,000 wounded) and financial cost (a quarter of a trillion dollars and only beginning to count) of the misadventure in Iraq that we will be saddled with an army that is less capable and more expensive than would have ever been dreamed before the nightmare that is Iraq began.
Fitness, education and age requirements for recruits are being reduced even as you read this in order to meet the quotas needed to maintain troop strength. If you don’t think that overweight and less fit troops are less effective soldiers, you obviously haven’t served in the military, played high school football, or gone on long volksmarches. If you think that the technological marvel that is the modern military will be as well off by reducing its intelligence test scores and educational requirements for recruits, you weren’t paying attention to army recruiting ads prior to the war. And if you think that by permitting accepting recruits into basic training up until the day before their fortieth birthday will permit the maintenance of just as fit a fighting machine, you… well you’re lot younger than Wild Bill.
Since WW II, the United States has been dependent on armed forces – including the army – that are lighter, more mobile, and more technically advanced than its potential adversaries. You cannot reduce standards for recruits without sacrificing something – many somethings; greater medical costs for active duty personnel, long term health impacts such as diabetes, less proficient users of technical equipment, loss of mobility without more vehicles are among the things that come quickly to mind.
The army is rapidly expanding its centers to test recruits that would have been automatic rejects in the past. There can be little doubt that by such tactics that the army can continue to meet its recruiting numbers, but it is very clear that the quality of the human input is on a downward spiral. I urge you to go to boston.com and read the article.
Oh well, Fortunes of war!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
The author, Douglas Belkin, demonstrates beyond a shadow of a doubt that aside from the human (more than 2,000 dead and 16,000 wounded) and financial cost (a quarter of a trillion dollars and only beginning to count) of the misadventure in Iraq that we will be saddled with an army that is less capable and more expensive than would have ever been dreamed before the nightmare that is Iraq began.
Fitness, education and age requirements for recruits are being reduced even as you read this in order to meet the quotas needed to maintain troop strength. If you don’t think that overweight and less fit troops are less effective soldiers, you obviously haven’t served in the military, played high school football, or gone on long volksmarches. If you think that the technological marvel that is the modern military will be as well off by reducing its intelligence test scores and educational requirements for recruits, you weren’t paying attention to army recruiting ads prior to the war. And if you think that by permitting accepting recruits into basic training up until the day before their fortieth birthday will permit the maintenance of just as fit a fighting machine, you… well you’re lot younger than Wild Bill.
Since WW II, the United States has been dependent on armed forces – including the army – that are lighter, more mobile, and more technically advanced than its potential adversaries. You cannot reduce standards for recruits without sacrificing something – many somethings; greater medical costs for active duty personnel, long term health impacts such as diabetes, less proficient users of technical equipment, loss of mobility without more vehicles are among the things that come quickly to mind.
The army is rapidly expanding its centers to test recruits that would have been automatic rejects in the past. There can be little doubt that by such tactics that the army can continue to meet its recruiting numbers, but it is very clear that the quality of the human input is on a downward spiral. I urge you to go to boston.com and read the article.
Oh well, Fortunes of war!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Sunday, February 19, 2006
Charley
In August 2004, category IV Hurricane Charley struck Charlotte Harbor and roared into Punta Gorda,FL with a top recorded wind speed of 180 mph.
Last week, we vacationed in the area impacted by Charley and I looked around for signs of both damage and recovery. They’re there in spades. It isn’t difficult to envision the terror that must have occupied the minds of those who decided to ride out the blast. There are literally dozens of commercial buildings in Punta Gorda that stand – if you call it standing – unoccupied a year a half after the storm raged through. Structures with window blown out, roofs gone, and signs twisted and blown out will be part of the local landscape for what appears to be many more months in the future.
The same can be said for residences, but there are ample signs that optimism reigns. While there are still roofs to be tiled and windows to be re-glazed, most of the houses have been repaired and look nearly as good as new. But among the buildings and the fields there are scars that will not be wiped away for many years. Trees stand as skeletons; all vegetation was blown away and they died without falling.
As we drove north from Ft. Myers, we came upon a huge number of trailers, `FEMA City’, where thousands rendered homeless still live in what appear to be horrible conditions. Our friends told us that there are far fewer such dwellings as there were in the months directly after Charley, but the sight remains depressing.
North of Punta Gorda where we stayed, signs of storm damage is not so evident and redevelopment and recovery is proceeding at a rapid pace. Optimism seems to abound in Englewood and Venice, and there is little indication that government, federal or state, is being held accountable for long term problems associated with Hurricane Charley. One very depressing sight was a massive open space filled with hundreds of empty trailers owned by FEMA that were going unutilized despite great damage across the entire Gulf Coast.
There are signs of a real estate slow down, but it hasn’t seemed to impact much. Apparently, houses stay on the market longer, but there are no signs of a collapse. While there is concern, no one is panicking. Our interaction with people was mostly limited to old friends who suffered almost no damage from storms and who exhibited the same sense of optimism we noted almost everywhere we stopped. Things seem good in the Sunshine State.
One topic of discussion that does not auger well for the Bush administration is the Medicare prescription drug program. Our friends are mostly intelligent, educated, prosperous and determined people, but they all have horror stories when it comes to figuring out which plan is best for them. I can only speculate how difficult the situation must be for folks without such characteristics. If there is an opening for the Democrats in Florida it will be in entitlements.
My experience was time, place, and people limited, so I can only suggest that you compare this posting with the experiences of others traveling to Florida and other areas impacted by hurricanes over the past couple of years. My guess is that the Democrats have great openings, but they better not assume that they’re shoo ins.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Last week, we vacationed in the area impacted by Charley and I looked around for signs of both damage and recovery. They’re there in spades. It isn’t difficult to envision the terror that must have occupied the minds of those who decided to ride out the blast. There are literally dozens of commercial buildings in Punta Gorda that stand – if you call it standing – unoccupied a year a half after the storm raged through. Structures with window blown out, roofs gone, and signs twisted and blown out will be part of the local landscape for what appears to be many more months in the future.
The same can be said for residences, but there are ample signs that optimism reigns. While there are still roofs to be tiled and windows to be re-glazed, most of the houses have been repaired and look nearly as good as new. But among the buildings and the fields there are scars that will not be wiped away for many years. Trees stand as skeletons; all vegetation was blown away and they died without falling.
As we drove north from Ft. Myers, we came upon a huge number of trailers, `FEMA City’, where thousands rendered homeless still live in what appear to be horrible conditions. Our friends told us that there are far fewer such dwellings as there were in the months directly after Charley, but the sight remains depressing.
North of Punta Gorda where we stayed, signs of storm damage is not so evident and redevelopment and recovery is proceeding at a rapid pace. Optimism seems to abound in Englewood and Venice, and there is little indication that government, federal or state, is being held accountable for long term problems associated with Hurricane Charley. One very depressing sight was a massive open space filled with hundreds of empty trailers owned by FEMA that were going unutilized despite great damage across the entire Gulf Coast.
There are signs of a real estate slow down, but it hasn’t seemed to impact much. Apparently, houses stay on the market longer, but there are no signs of a collapse. While there is concern, no one is panicking. Our interaction with people was mostly limited to old friends who suffered almost no damage from storms and who exhibited the same sense of optimism we noted almost everywhere we stopped. Things seem good in the Sunshine State.
One topic of discussion that does not auger well for the Bush administration is the Medicare prescription drug program. Our friends are mostly intelligent, educated, prosperous and determined people, but they all have horror stories when it comes to figuring out which plan is best for them. I can only speculate how difficult the situation must be for folks without such characteristics. If there is an opening for the Democrats in Florida it will be in entitlements.
My experience was time, place, and people limited, so I can only suggest that you compare this posting with the experiences of others traveling to Florida and other areas impacted by hurricanes over the past couple of years. My guess is that the Democrats have great openings, but they better not assume that they’re shoo ins.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Monday, February 13, 2006
Back in a Bit
I’m signing off for a few days so that Barbara and I can visit old friends from our days in Marion, MA who now winter on Florida's west coast. It happens that we will be staying near the center of damage from one the hurricanes from years past, Englewood and if we get a chance to see how rebuilding is progressing, I’ll post something about it when we return.
I’m attaching a link to a Bloomberg article that I found very interesting. We are all caught up in the No Child Left Behind program; that’s not to say we all support it, but we have a great stake in it. It seems that California is being sued by some students who did not pass the assessment tests and who are being denied a full fledged state diploma as a result. The suit alleges that poor Latino and African American student are at a great disadvantage in the program since many of the failed students are being taught by teachers who are not certified in the subject tested.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=email_us&refer=us&sid=aanUfFKRHyqU
The newest thing that the president is eyeing is a test to measure the nation’s colleges and universities. I can’t wait for scores of the brainiacs at MIT and Cal Tech on the music appreciation test and for the calculus and astrophysics results from the fine arts majors across the country. We’ll have to mandate unfunded remediation programs everywhere. This is another clear example of the federal government being on your side with a regulation that you absolutely crave.
Several things arise from the accidental shooting in Texas on Saturday. First, it’s not healthy to stand in the way of what Dick Cheney is aiming at, and, second, if you have to get shot, it’s good to be in the party of high government officials and their entourage of medical support people and transportation equipment. Not everyone – even rich guys – travel with a posse of SUVs, ambulances, and helicopters in case you happen to have heart palpitations or get filled with bird shot. And, third, a question, are we in the hands of the gang that can’t shoot straight?
Those of us the Washington area dug our way out from under a very big snow storm yesterday. When it ended, we had about fourteen inches in the back yard – about average for the region. It was a wet heavy snow that brought down trees and limbs everywhere and caused power outages throughout the area. I was thoroughly beat when I finished shoveling.
But in talking with friends and relatives in Southern Massachusetts, the worst part of the storm and our stomping grounds for nine years before moving back to Virginia, there was some disappointment in the observations. “We only got about fourteen inches.” “We thought is was going to be a real storm.” “Can’t compare with ’78.” I guess the New Englanders are just tougher than we are and that we’ve gone soft since returning to the Sunny South.
Back in a few!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
I’m attaching a link to a Bloomberg article that I found very interesting. We are all caught up in the No Child Left Behind program; that’s not to say we all support it, but we have a great stake in it. It seems that California is being sued by some students who did not pass the assessment tests and who are being denied a full fledged state diploma as a result. The suit alleges that poor Latino and African American student are at a great disadvantage in the program since many of the failed students are being taught by teachers who are not certified in the subject tested.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=email_us&refer=us&sid=aanUfFKRHyqU
The newest thing that the president is eyeing is a test to measure the nation’s colleges and universities. I can’t wait for scores of the brainiacs at MIT and Cal Tech on the music appreciation test and for the calculus and astrophysics results from the fine arts majors across the country. We’ll have to mandate unfunded remediation programs everywhere. This is another clear example of the federal government being on your side with a regulation that you absolutely crave.
Several things arise from the accidental shooting in Texas on Saturday. First, it’s not healthy to stand in the way of what Dick Cheney is aiming at, and, second, if you have to get shot, it’s good to be in the party of high government officials and their entourage of medical support people and transportation equipment. Not everyone – even rich guys – travel with a posse of SUVs, ambulances, and helicopters in case you happen to have heart palpitations or get filled with bird shot. And, third, a question, are we in the hands of the gang that can’t shoot straight?
Those of us the Washington area dug our way out from under a very big snow storm yesterday. When it ended, we had about fourteen inches in the back yard – about average for the region. It was a wet heavy snow that brought down trees and limbs everywhere and caused power outages throughout the area. I was thoroughly beat when I finished shoveling.
But in talking with friends and relatives in Southern Massachusetts, the worst part of the storm and our stomping grounds for nine years before moving back to Virginia, there was some disappointment in the observations. “We only got about fourteen inches.” “We thought is was going to be a real storm.” “Can’t compare with ’78.” I guess the New Englanders are just tougher than we are and that we’ve gone soft since returning to the Sunny South.
Back in a few!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Sunday, February 12, 2006
DOA? Don't Count On It!
The president’s budget is dead on arrival. That’s the annual opinion of the media when the budget is sent to the Congress. This year’s document appears little different from those of the past two decades, and the New York Times, the Washington Post, and most of the other major players took its pulse and pronounced the obvious: DOA. Obviously from their perspective it’s too heavy on bombs and too light on margarine.
But I’m not sure that this year is intended to be a clone of its predecessors. My paranoia is greater this year than ever, and I see the budget as a tool for the administration to trap the Democrats and to keep their losses at a minimum in the’06 Congressional elections and to possibly sublet the White House to somebody more friendly than say, Hillary.
Obviously, Don Rumsfeld has taken some mighty hits over the past several years; he’s the guy charged with deciding we had enough troops in Iraq to assure a successful occupation. How’s that for a resume builder?
The Washington Post smirked at Don this week for losing out in his struggle to cut out the big ticket systems designed to wallop the Soviets and crush the Chinese and for his failure to streamline the army and marines into the new style fighting elements he’s touted since coming back to Washington. The Times isn’t far from grinning on these points as well, but my radar screen is flashing. Maybe I’m wrong, but I think the defense budget is as dangerous to political opponents of the administration as an Iraqi roadside bomb.
Last Thursday (2/9/06) while heading for softball practice, (Surely long time readers know I’m the world’s oldest softball coach. I assist my son with his daughter’s under ten team.) I tuned in to Sean Hannity’s radio rant. While I can usually listen to Rush without gagging, Sean is simply too much for me to take and I almost had to pull over to wretch, but my job is to keep you guys informed – at least from my weird perspective – so I hung in. The bottom line is that the Republicans are pedal to the metal on the Democrats being too weak on defense to be trusted with power.
Clearly, as one my latest postings indicates, a number of Democrats are flexing their biceps, but Hannity and the Republicans are blasting past those ninety-eight pound weaklings posing in the Congressional gym mirrors and saying that the Dems are not worthy of election. This has been coming ever since 9/11, but now the Republicans are desperate. They charge anybody with reservations about such things as the Patriot Act is simply too wimpy to be trusted.
What’s Bill’s point? Fair enough. Here it is; the defense budget is as ridiculous as ever – maybe even more so. Naturally Iraq – you remember Iraq? We were fighting a war there until we won – and Afghanistan are off budget – somewhere between 70 and 120 billion big ones next year – and we are dealing with a strategic document. There are enough landmines in that document to keep the Democrats from winning the House and Senate in ’06 and to keep the White House in solid Republican bed sheets for four more years.
We all know that the Times, Post and virtually all of the rest of the mainstream media is correct in opining that we shouldn’t be wasting billions on fighter planes designed to keep us ahead of planes that will never reach the drawing board in China or that other place that used to be run by commie pinkos but who have all switched over to being neo-mafia head bangers. And we know that wasting money on ships that are decades ahead of the competition while we do not have sufficiently robust ground forces to deal with the war on terrorism, is not the way to go – unless you happen to be a major defense contractor that builds such systems. So what?
When the Democrats get out their long knives to carve up the turkey that is the DOD budget, they may well be falling into the trap that is well set for them. Cut the F-22 fighter and you’re weak on defense. Cut that destroyer and you’re afraid of China.
The Republicans are doing a masterful job of setting up the Democrats to look weak and left handed. Entitlements for the shiftless while lowering our guard; can these weak kneed liberals be entrusted with the defense of your grandchildren? Great plan, but if the Dems keep to the middle of the road, they can send some of these cretins on to glorious careers on K Street.
The smear is already underway and the swift boating of Democrats for ’06 is operating at flank speed. Don’t be fooled and don’t be cruel; send a Republican to riches on K Street. Vote straight Democrat in ’06 and ’08. Of course if they all win, we’ll have to turn on them in ’12.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Divided government must ever be the goal – long and short term.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
But I’m not sure that this year is intended to be a clone of its predecessors. My paranoia is greater this year than ever, and I see the budget as a tool for the administration to trap the Democrats and to keep their losses at a minimum in the’06 Congressional elections and to possibly sublet the White House to somebody more friendly than say, Hillary.
Obviously, Don Rumsfeld has taken some mighty hits over the past several years; he’s the guy charged with deciding we had enough troops in Iraq to assure a successful occupation. How’s that for a resume builder?
The Washington Post smirked at Don this week for losing out in his struggle to cut out the big ticket systems designed to wallop the Soviets and crush the Chinese and for his failure to streamline the army and marines into the new style fighting elements he’s touted since coming back to Washington. The Times isn’t far from grinning on these points as well, but my radar screen is flashing. Maybe I’m wrong, but I think the defense budget is as dangerous to political opponents of the administration as an Iraqi roadside bomb.
Last Thursday (2/9/06) while heading for softball practice, (Surely long time readers know I’m the world’s oldest softball coach. I assist my son with his daughter’s under ten team.) I tuned in to Sean Hannity’s radio rant. While I can usually listen to Rush without gagging, Sean is simply too much for me to take and I almost had to pull over to wretch, but my job is to keep you guys informed – at least from my weird perspective – so I hung in. The bottom line is that the Republicans are pedal to the metal on the Democrats being too weak on defense to be trusted with power.
Clearly, as one my latest postings indicates, a number of Democrats are flexing their biceps, but Hannity and the Republicans are blasting past those ninety-eight pound weaklings posing in the Congressional gym mirrors and saying that the Dems are not worthy of election. This has been coming ever since 9/11, but now the Republicans are desperate. They charge anybody with reservations about such things as the Patriot Act is simply too wimpy to be trusted.
What’s Bill’s point? Fair enough. Here it is; the defense budget is as ridiculous as ever – maybe even more so. Naturally Iraq – you remember Iraq? We were fighting a war there until we won – and Afghanistan are off budget – somewhere between 70 and 120 billion big ones next year – and we are dealing with a strategic document. There are enough landmines in that document to keep the Democrats from winning the House and Senate in ’06 and to keep the White House in solid Republican bed sheets for four more years.
We all know that the Times, Post and virtually all of the rest of the mainstream media is correct in opining that we shouldn’t be wasting billions on fighter planes designed to keep us ahead of planes that will never reach the drawing board in China or that other place that used to be run by commie pinkos but who have all switched over to being neo-mafia head bangers. And we know that wasting money on ships that are decades ahead of the competition while we do not have sufficiently robust ground forces to deal with the war on terrorism, is not the way to go – unless you happen to be a major defense contractor that builds such systems. So what?
When the Democrats get out their long knives to carve up the turkey that is the DOD budget, they may well be falling into the trap that is well set for them. Cut the F-22 fighter and you’re weak on defense. Cut that destroyer and you’re afraid of China.
The Republicans are doing a masterful job of setting up the Democrats to look weak and left handed. Entitlements for the shiftless while lowering our guard; can these weak kneed liberals be entrusted with the defense of your grandchildren? Great plan, but if the Dems keep to the middle of the road, they can send some of these cretins on to glorious careers on K Street.
The smear is already underway and the swift boating of Democrats for ’06 is operating at flank speed. Don’t be fooled and don’t be cruel; send a Republican to riches on K Street. Vote straight Democrat in ’06 and ’08. Of course if they all win, we’ll have to turn on them in ’12.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Divided government must ever be the goal – long and short term.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Friday, February 10, 2006
The Future of Freedom
I just finished Fareed Zakaria’s The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad. It’s unfortunate that President Bush isn’t a reader, or I would recommend it to him as it is a terrific and simply written little book. Had he read it before attacking Iraq and prior to making the spreading of democracy into every Muslim village and town his life's work, he might well be the most popular man in the country instead of…well you know.
The author, highly qualified academically and well respected as a journalist and TV commentator, writes so clearly, directly and simply that it’s hard to realize that he’s delving into highly technical questions of government and political philosophy, but he is - and brilliantly.
My friend, Frank Lewis, called me up from wherever over the edge of the flat earth it is that he resides and insisted I read this book immediately. While I always question authority and am skeptical of virtually everything that my buddies profess, the tone of the poor man’s voice was such that I went to the library and checked it out. Amazingly, I went through the book in only a couple of sessions; it’s that intriguing.
The most basic point of the book is that most people, including rather sophisticated members of society and practitioners of government confuse democracy with liberty. Democracy is far more complex than simply a very wide franchise in selecting who will run a government but that nearly universal suffrage is the most widely recognized element of the term. As we look about, the flaws in this view are obvious; many totalitarian states, including until very recently, Iraq, were run by elected strong men, hardly the stuff of our views on democracy. On the other hand, some notoriously undemocratic nations provide their citizens with significant freedom or `liberty’ to pursue their interests; China permits almost unfettered economic opportunity to business operators, and if they keep their noses out of politics, they can prosper greatly.
A second theme is that certain environments are better incubators for democracy and liberty than others. Mr. Zakaria makes a strong case that a minimum per capita income level is indicative of the potential for a middle class which will work for liberty as perhaps the most important element. But he makes an exception for nations whose wealth tends to result from commodities. These nations, such as Saudi Arabia, are not dependent on their citizens for taxes, and the middle class – usually small and weak – has little incentive for calling the government on bad decisions since they’re not paying their hard earned money to fund them.
The author goes on to analyze the great exception to his thesis, Islam. His point is that much of the Muslim world – and most especially the Arab corner of it that has the world’s great commodity, oil – poses the most difficult nut for liberty and democracy to crack. Among his points quite naturally are that Islam has not had anything like the renaissance, enlightenment or reformation that provided the residents of Christian nations with the opportunity to begin the process of pushing back against their clergy and to begin the building of capitalism and liberty.
You can see where this is heading; Iraq would make a very poor candidate for the creation of a liberty laden democracy. Sadly, this brilliant analysis was written before the invasion of Iraq, and anyone who read prior to the war would have been very nervous about the likely outcome of such an adventure. My guess is that the president didn’t have this on his reading list.
This book provides one of the easiest explanations of the widening problems of democracy, including here at home, and it provides an open window into the thinking of the founders, especially Madison and Hamilton, that would be very useful to those not into the Federalist Papers.
Since Mr. Zakaria makes his most important point about me – well maybe not personally but I’m sure that he had me in mind – I highly recommend this book to my readers. He writes that initially blogs were…"hailed as the killer of the traditional media. In fact (they have) become something quite different. Far from replacing newspapers and magazines, the best blogs – and the best are very clever – have become guides to them, pointing out unusual sources and commenting on familiar ones. They have become new mediators for the informed public. Although the creators of blogs think of themselves as radical democrats, they are in fact a new Tocquesvillean elite.” Thanks Fareed; I knew that and now my readers can see how valuable I am to them.
All kidding aside, this is a great read, and I give my highest recommendation.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
The author, highly qualified academically and well respected as a journalist and TV commentator, writes so clearly, directly and simply that it’s hard to realize that he’s delving into highly technical questions of government and political philosophy, but he is - and brilliantly.
My friend, Frank Lewis, called me up from wherever over the edge of the flat earth it is that he resides and insisted I read this book immediately. While I always question authority and am skeptical of virtually everything that my buddies profess, the tone of the poor man’s voice was such that I went to the library and checked it out. Amazingly, I went through the book in only a couple of sessions; it’s that intriguing.
The most basic point of the book is that most people, including rather sophisticated members of society and practitioners of government confuse democracy with liberty. Democracy is far more complex than simply a very wide franchise in selecting who will run a government but that nearly universal suffrage is the most widely recognized element of the term. As we look about, the flaws in this view are obvious; many totalitarian states, including until very recently, Iraq, were run by elected strong men, hardly the stuff of our views on democracy. On the other hand, some notoriously undemocratic nations provide their citizens with significant freedom or `liberty’ to pursue their interests; China permits almost unfettered economic opportunity to business operators, and if they keep their noses out of politics, they can prosper greatly.
A second theme is that certain environments are better incubators for democracy and liberty than others. Mr. Zakaria makes a strong case that a minimum per capita income level is indicative of the potential for a middle class which will work for liberty as perhaps the most important element. But he makes an exception for nations whose wealth tends to result from commodities. These nations, such as Saudi Arabia, are not dependent on their citizens for taxes, and the middle class – usually small and weak – has little incentive for calling the government on bad decisions since they’re not paying their hard earned money to fund them.
The author goes on to analyze the great exception to his thesis, Islam. His point is that much of the Muslim world – and most especially the Arab corner of it that has the world’s great commodity, oil – poses the most difficult nut for liberty and democracy to crack. Among his points quite naturally are that Islam has not had anything like the renaissance, enlightenment or reformation that provided the residents of Christian nations with the opportunity to begin the process of pushing back against their clergy and to begin the building of capitalism and liberty.
You can see where this is heading; Iraq would make a very poor candidate for the creation of a liberty laden democracy. Sadly, this brilliant analysis was written before the invasion of Iraq, and anyone who read prior to the war would have been very nervous about the likely outcome of such an adventure. My guess is that the president didn’t have this on his reading list.
This book provides one of the easiest explanations of the widening problems of democracy, including here at home, and it provides an open window into the thinking of the founders, especially Madison and Hamilton, that would be very useful to those not into the Federalist Papers.
Since Mr. Zakaria makes his most important point about me – well maybe not personally but I’m sure that he had me in mind – I highly recommend this book to my readers. He writes that initially blogs were…"hailed as the killer of the traditional media. In fact (they have) become something quite different. Far from replacing newspapers and magazines, the best blogs – and the best are very clever – have become guides to them, pointing out unusual sources and commenting on familiar ones. They have become new mediators for the informed public. Although the creators of blogs think of themselves as radical democrats, they are in fact a new Tocquesvillean elite.” Thanks Fareed; I knew that and now my readers can see how valuable I am to them.
All kidding aside, this is a great read, and I give my highest recommendation.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Wednesday, February 08, 2006
Fear
Sorry about that; I took a week long coffee break to visit the Northwest Territory and only now am able to resume my pontifications.
It is obvious, that George Bush is expanding his powers by using fear to scare the populace and to intimidate the Congress. From my short and non-scientific foray into Ohio, I came away with the sinking feeling that Bubble Boy is a lot tougher and smarter character than his opponents have ever been willing to concede.
Having grown up in the time when leaders even in the darkest of times called upon the people to forget their fears and to sacrifice for the common good, it is sad to see a leader tell the nation that there is no need to sacrifice in the war on terror and to go about their daily lives secure in the knowledge that he is protecting them from the great fear. All they have to do is trust him in assuring that the terrorists are held at bay far across the sea.
That Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, or George H. W. Bush would resort to assuring the people that all would be well as long as they trusted in them and went on with their little lives is beyond my comprehension. These leaders described the fear clearly and said that only by sacrificing could we overcome the furies of Nazism or Bolshevism. We were not to fear alone in our homes while the government took care of us and protected us from the evil all about. We were called to step up and participate.
Today, we are called upon to sacrifice nothing for the war on terror save our individual liberties. Our grandchildren will pay for the shattered lives and the bill for munitions for the Iraq War. All we have to do is cut taxes, cut entitlements, and leave the worrying to George.
In Ohio, I heard the repeated canards of the right. The Democrats have no ideas, no alternatives to the Bush plan and doctrine. But I heard other voices expressing concerns about an Attorney General refusing to spell out for our representatives just what the administration is doing or why in looking into the activities of American citizens. Can it be that the government is reading the communications of our countrymen simply because they oppose the war in Iraq? You’ll never find out by asking Mr. Gonzales.
There are a number of parts of the Republican coalition that are suffering greatly from this expansion of presidential powers, but they too are being intimidated by the fear that Bubble Boy will charge them with dereliction should a major terrorist attack take place in the U.S. While the moderates, fiscal conservatives and civil libertarians deplore the way things are going in the war, the internal spying, and with the ever expanding deficits, they are constantly reminded that if anything goes awry in a subway explosion in an American city, they will be held accountable for failing to hand over more power to the president.
By having their media lackeys firing away on all of these fronts, America is becoming a land of the intimidated. The reality is that the president and his sycophants are the ones without ideas for the nation. In the war on terror, their answer was to attack Iraq. On Social Security, the answer was to turn it into a defined contributions program. On deficits, the answer was to cut taxes to bring prosperity and eliminate the deficits. All these great plans were simply pipe dreams.
The Democrats have a great chance. There are millions of independent and disaffected Republicans ready to vote for them providing the jackasses are willing to govern from the center. Should they turn hard left, however, all their ideas of social justice and to return us to a nation of civil liberties will be endangered for another four years.
Mark Warner of Virginia, Hillary Clinton of New York, Evan Bayh of Indiana and many others seem to be getting the message and are fighting the Republicans for the center. Sadly, the hard left as demonstrated by the failed filibuster for Sam Alito is not yet able to see that compromise is the only possible way to drive these people who ruining the country from power.
The choice is clear, the Democrats better get it pretty quickly or Bubble Boy will pass the baton to one of his clones who will protect us from everything but ourselves.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
It is obvious, that George Bush is expanding his powers by using fear to scare the populace and to intimidate the Congress. From my short and non-scientific foray into Ohio, I came away with the sinking feeling that Bubble Boy is a lot tougher and smarter character than his opponents have ever been willing to concede.
Having grown up in the time when leaders even in the darkest of times called upon the people to forget their fears and to sacrifice for the common good, it is sad to see a leader tell the nation that there is no need to sacrifice in the war on terror and to go about their daily lives secure in the knowledge that he is protecting them from the great fear. All they have to do is trust him in assuring that the terrorists are held at bay far across the sea.
That Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, or George H. W. Bush would resort to assuring the people that all would be well as long as they trusted in them and went on with their little lives is beyond my comprehension. These leaders described the fear clearly and said that only by sacrificing could we overcome the furies of Nazism or Bolshevism. We were not to fear alone in our homes while the government took care of us and protected us from the evil all about. We were called to step up and participate.
Today, we are called upon to sacrifice nothing for the war on terror save our individual liberties. Our grandchildren will pay for the shattered lives and the bill for munitions for the Iraq War. All we have to do is cut taxes, cut entitlements, and leave the worrying to George.
In Ohio, I heard the repeated canards of the right. The Democrats have no ideas, no alternatives to the Bush plan and doctrine. But I heard other voices expressing concerns about an Attorney General refusing to spell out for our representatives just what the administration is doing or why in looking into the activities of American citizens. Can it be that the government is reading the communications of our countrymen simply because they oppose the war in Iraq? You’ll never find out by asking Mr. Gonzales.
There are a number of parts of the Republican coalition that are suffering greatly from this expansion of presidential powers, but they too are being intimidated by the fear that Bubble Boy will charge them with dereliction should a major terrorist attack take place in the U.S. While the moderates, fiscal conservatives and civil libertarians deplore the way things are going in the war, the internal spying, and with the ever expanding deficits, they are constantly reminded that if anything goes awry in a subway explosion in an American city, they will be held accountable for failing to hand over more power to the president.
By having their media lackeys firing away on all of these fronts, America is becoming a land of the intimidated. The reality is that the president and his sycophants are the ones without ideas for the nation. In the war on terror, their answer was to attack Iraq. On Social Security, the answer was to turn it into a defined contributions program. On deficits, the answer was to cut taxes to bring prosperity and eliminate the deficits. All these great plans were simply pipe dreams.
The Democrats have a great chance. There are millions of independent and disaffected Republicans ready to vote for them providing the jackasses are willing to govern from the center. Should they turn hard left, however, all their ideas of social justice and to return us to a nation of civil liberties will be endangered for another four years.
Mark Warner of Virginia, Hillary Clinton of New York, Evan Bayh of Indiana and many others seem to be getting the message and are fighting the Republicans for the center. Sadly, the hard left as demonstrated by the failed filibuster for Sam Alito is not yet able to see that compromise is the only possible way to drive these people who ruining the country from power.
The choice is clear, the Democrats better get it pretty quickly or Bubble Boy will pass the baton to one of his clones who will protect us from everything but ourselves.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)