Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Off to the Northwest Territory

Sadly, the SPLOGGERS are back. Attached to my last blog posting is an ad for those in need of erectile boosts, so, for a while anyway, I must restrict comments on the articles. That’s too bad, as insightful analyses were beginning to be posted by readers after I opened it after the last SPLOG attack.

What do great writers do when they go to Ohio to visit the good folks of the Northwest Territory? I have no idea, but I do know what mediocre ones do: they baby sit. Barb and I are off to Columbus where we’ll aid our forlorn son whose spouse is visiting her folks in her native Peru for a week. I’m also going to speak to a number of middle and high school classes about writing. Much as I’d like, I suppose I shouldn’t turn these into rants about George Bush.

Since we have to rise early for our drive, I won’t be able to watch the State of the Union Speech. Woe is me. A wag in the New York Times cited Jefferson as seeing the speech was beginning to become what it has in our time started a hundred year tradition of mailing it in. Tom has been suffering hard times in recent decades, and news of his principled stand on not boring Congress and the people just might give him a boost of a point or two in the polls.

Navel gazing is being raised to an art form in my native Massachusetts. The Democrats are trying to figure out why in the most liberal dominated state in the nation they can’t elect a governor. With great instincts, many if not most of the party faithful, despite ample evidence that they’re losing centrist members because of their leftist leanings, are demanding that the party take a hard left turn. Sounds like a sure way to help lose not only that state’s chief executive job again but a fine start to undermining the national comeback. Way to go!

Today, The Boston Globe had an excellent story on how the national Democrats are making headway in their appeal to one of their traditional constituencies, Roman Catholics, that Republicans have cut into in recent elections. The social justice issues brought to national attention by events such as Hurricane Katrina and the need for healthcare among the nation’s children seems to cut into GOP strength here. My recent posting about the Church’s teachings not being conflict with science is probably at work as well.

I know that I’m making great progress as a novelist. My first book, A Tattered Coat Upon A Stick, garnered either no replies from publishers and agents or - at best - a badly scrawled `No’. My second book received answers from almost half of those queried, and some of the answers were civil and encouraging. That book, Au Revoir, L’Acadie, found a real publisher. My latest effort, Murphy’s War, is about the internment of Japanese ethnics during WW II, and, while there have been no takers yet, the rejection letters are uniformly supportive. By the time I’m eighty, it looks as if major publishing houses will be lined up to buy my stuff. I wonder if they know there might be mortality problems on the horizon if they continue to wait?

If the muse cooperates and time permits, I’ll try to post something from the heartland. Ohio, as you will recall, was the single most important battleground in the 2004 presidential race. Had the Buckeye State been won by the Democrats, I might actually have tuned in tonight’s address.

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Saturday, January 28, 2006

Unintelligent Designs on Power

Intelligent design is splitting the Christian right. The Catholic Church. with millions of members world wide who would love to proclaim intelligent design to be even more than a counter theory to evolution are stuck with more than a few problems. They’ve got scholars, priests, bishops, and other faithful millions of lay people who remember Galileo and the fuss created by him

You remember that poor Galileo made astronomical observations that confirmed the Copernican theory that it was the earth that orbited the sun and not the other way around. That and a lot of other things got our astronomer friend in trouble with the Church and he was forced to recant. It is reported but probably didn’t happen that after his public confession of error he uttered about the heavenly bodies, “But they do move.”

Some three hundred years later during the Pontificate of John Paul II, the Church got around to pardoning the poor bloke. The pardon was based on centuries of reflection on the obvious and irrefutable fact that there are observable scientific results that conflict with various documents of revelation. Many a good theologian in interacting with equally good scientists endowed with equal Christian faith came to the conclusion that neither astronomy nor evolution necessarily conflict with the core beliefs of the Church.

Obviously, Catholics, lay and clerical, believe in the sanctity of life and have found common cause with right wing Protestant Evangelical churches in this. The problem for Catholics is that they pay a heavy price for this alliance and among the heaviest is the relationship of the Church to science. Since the Renaissance, Rome has come to terms with the nature of science and has concluded that, except for certain biological fields including stem cell research and birth control, scientists are pretty much free to go their own way.

Conservative Catholics have been successful in making common cause with their Protestant cousins on evolution, but as scientists, including many Catholic ones, and secularists push back against Creationism and its Teflon coated offspring, Intelligent Design, Rome and leading theologians have found it necessary to retreat from the front lines of the battle.

This has created a fault line in the solid Evangelical front. Add to this intellectual gulf the possibility of a split over illegal immigration and you have the possibility of great Democrat gains in the ’06 Congressional election and in the next presidential race two years later.

Still more strain is placed on the right by the obvious human problems discovered in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Main line Protestants, Catholics, and many Evangelicals simply cannot support hard right attitudes toward parsimonious federal spending to aid the battered victims of that powerful storm

Victories in the next two elections are by no means certain, and the Dems must reach out to the center for support. If they come at all of these problems with their left wing bona fides on their lapels, they could lose again.

But the Bush administration, perhaps the most incompetent in the lifetime of virtually all of our citizens, is doing its damnedest to help the outs. Terri Schiavo, presidential call for Intelligent Design in the science classroom, Hurricane Katrina, The Iraq War, the bungling of Social Security reform, gigantic and growing trade and budget deficits, a no win position on illegal immigration, the Republican led race to the lobbying trough, the bumbling explanations of the illegal spying on American citizens, the awkward grasps at greater presidential power, the election victory of Hamas in Palestine, and God knows how many more goof ups gives the Democrats a golden chance.

The less than stellar performance by the Democrats in dealing with a unified position on Iraq and their goofy attempts to derail Sam Alito must give even their dearest friends and most ardent supporters pause.

Oh well, they’ve got to know that if they fail to move to the middle and back centrist candidates it will mean another four years before they get another chance to grab the brass ring. Think about it and organize and win.

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Thursday, January 26, 2006

The Madness of Wild Bill, Continued

There is a hoary tale concerning two Beacon Hill matrons meeting in front of one’s elegant brownstone on Boston’s Commonwealth Avenue, the axle of the Hub of the Universe. As they chatted about the fine spring weather and the latest Brahmin gossip, the front door of the lady’s elegant townhouse burst open and four burly Irishmen bearing the woman’s son on a litter emerged and hustled him into the family Packard parked in front as the uniformed chauffer held the door.

“Oh, my God, can’t he walk?” asked the alarmed neighbor in an hysterical burst.

The retort was swift and sure, “Of course he can but thank Heaven he doesn’t have to.”

Fast forward to my own youth shortly after W.W. II in the great shoe manufacturing center of Brockton, Massachusetts, only twenty miles but an infinite social distance from where those matrons met and where my family and neighbors walked the several miles to their jobs in the local factories. Prosperity was coming even to Tipperary, our little Irish ghetto on the east side of town, and the more successful denizens were beginning to acquire cars. The message was loud and clear, “Thank Heaven, we don’t have to walk any more."

My parents’ generation broke a tradition of walking that went back to antiquity, and they wouldn’t dream of walking across the street if they could possibly drive. Only after I became an adult did the gurus of preventive medicine come up with the notion that we could walk and jog our way to health and longevity. I feel terrible about my relatives and friends who missed this education; they went to premature graves in their eighties.

But our generation has no excuses and we tramp like infantry troopers marching to Pretoria, good health and long lives assured. As I type these words, exhausted from my daily forced march in the Piedmont of Virginia, between gasps I press the keys barely able to reach each one but rich in the knowledge that I’m doing great good for my exhausted heart and aching muscles.

Each day in triumph I pass the ten thousand step milestone demanded by the medical savants and as measured by my electronic pedometer and, completely spent, drop to the curb to rest before beginning the long trek back home where I can crawl into my bed, if I’m up to it. Struggling the last mile, I watch the poor fools in their cars pass. They smile and wave happily oblivious to their fate of early graves for failing to walk to work.

Lucky me!

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Wednesday, January 25, 2006

Nullification - Army Style

Nullification is nothing new. In the Middle Ages people caught stealing a loaves of bread were subject to capital punishment. Judges and juries dealt with the obvious injustice by refusing to convict those caught. And obviously nullification happens regularly in our own time.

The United States Army is now in rebellion against what is seen as unfair treatment of its members accused of mistreating prisoners. In Colorado yesterday, the army warrant officer convicted of killing an Iraqi general was sentenced to confinement in his quarters for sixty days and a modest fine. The possible sentence for his offense was more than three years in prison, a dishonorable discharge from the service, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances, including pension benefits.

Army witnesses flew into Ft. Carson from great distances to testify on behalf of the accused. He was grateful for all of the support and thanked everyone in the army `family’ for recognizing his situation and for supporting him.

Over the past several years, punishment for the enlisted personnel convicted of mistreating prisoners in Baghdad’s Abu Ghraib Prison was far more severe than this latest atrocity for which the warrant officer was found guilty. It is clear that the officers and enlisted personnel of the army no longer see the atrocities committed by its members as the work of renegade individuals. Rather they believe that the mistreatment of prisoners was done with the encouragement of people high up in the command structure of the military.

The deciding officers nullified the appropriate punishment for a horrendous felony given the testimony. They saw that the convicted member was being hung out to dry for something that may have been beyond his control. He was given a slap on the wrist, and the courtroom audience of military personnel cheered.

But the family of the dead man knows that a grave injustice has been committed and they are powerless to deal with it. The whole situation reeks with the corruption that is going on in Washington. The direction being given our troops with regard to treatment of those in custody is on the official level to abide by all of the legal requirements, but there is clearly another level of communication that demands information from the prisoners and that a wink and a nod system of ignoring methods is in place.

The army is signaling that it will no longer play by the game of extracting information from prisoners by any means necessary if its low ranking members caught in the act are to be left hanging to twist in the wind. Clearly, the army is telling it’s hierarchy that either they will toe the mark or those truly responsible will have step up and take the blame and the shame.

The Congress and the press must pursue this situation case aggressively. Our troops deserve to be protected from those demanding that they act improperly while hiding behind mounds of paper saying they deplore the actions of these rogue troopers. There may be no cover up, but the force members themselves suspect one. We must get to the bottom of this or another cancer will be eating away at our armed forces, this time from the bottom up.

We should compensate the family of the Iraqi general. The court found that he was negligently killed. The Congress must stir itself from its own corruption and do its duty to investigate this situation and that doesn’t mean just asking DOD to tattle on itself. This is the first sign of a diseased military that is reacting to a terrible environment from above, and the Congress must not let this case pass unnoticed. It is also clear that the sentences of those others convicted earlier should be reviewed to assure that true justice has been served. That privates break rocks while generals and high ranking civilians dine on caviar is dishonorable. And the court is telling us just that.

The press should also pursue this case to its conclusion. Our standing in Iraq, the Middle East, the Muslim World, and in all civilized society depends on it. This case is a disgrace to the armed forces and to the country. It cannot be swept under the rug.

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Tuesday, January 24, 2006

The NAZIS Are Coming - NOT

Tyranny comes in many forms. Unfortunately, National Socialism was so terrible and is still close enough to our time that when we refer to anything approaching a centralized power grab the model that pops to many minds is NAZI Germany. Even sixty years after the crushing defeat inflicted upon the Axis, the first example that comes to mind in almost everyone who senses a diminution of personal liberty in the United States is a comparison with the German experience of the last century.

In all democracies, there is a constant swing in the power relationships between the executive and the legislative branches. As the pendulum swings away from it, the weakened branch cries foul. Again given the nearness in time and the horrendous nature of the Hitler government, those afraid of the executive in Western countries see the specter of storm troopers in the streets. This is particularly sad since it is very possible that the president or prime minister is indeed seeking more power than many citizens and politicians find comfortable and we should be alarmed. We should be calling them to task but many overreact and call their efforts Gestapo like and a legitimate argument is blown apart.

In this country there is a constant struggle among the branches of government, especially between the executive and legislative. When the power of the president wanes, his party and citizens seeking executive support openly lament the obvious weakness and he or his successors begin the long road back to a stronger chief.

Clearly, Richard Nixon was a very aggressive president and, I might add, a very talented chief executive. His efforts at reorganization of the executive departments and his efforts to control the behavior of his agency heads and their regional office heads were very creative attempts to both manage the government and strengthen his hold on the government.

As we recall, his efforts to cover up criminal behavior that he did not authorize proved to be his undoing. But, for all his faults, Richard Nixon was neither a crook nor a NAZI. In the aftermath of Vietnam and Watergate, Nixon’s Waterloo, the Congress assumed more power than usual and ever since presidents have felt weak in the knees.

George W. Bush came to the office with a view of the presidency that may have been distorted by the familial experience of his father’s term and with baggage brought along by key advisors who were themselves caught up in both the Vietnam and Watergate traumas. For example, both Vice President Cheney and DOD Secretary Rumsfeld were key players during and after Nixon’s fall and their later exile from Washington gave them time to lament the state of the executive.

When they, people like them, and those influenced by them were returned to office it is hardly surprising that they were intent on restoring the presidency to something akin to that they knew in the early seventies. I’m not keen on these political operatives, and I don’t like what they’ve done in Iraq, the NSA, and Homeland Security in general, but I have no doubt that they are acting within the historical processes that have become normal through the last two hundred plus years. Unfortunately, the powers granted under the Patriot Act which they have virtually demanded be renewed and in the illegal wire taps performed by NSA on Americans has raised the old fears once again.

My personal view is that they’ve done a terrible job in office and their reaction to 9/11 of going to war in Iraq was a huge mistake that we’ll pay for a generation or longer. To me, we are worse off for having attacked Iraq and that we are in the beginning of an isolationist trend because of it. But the president and his administration have attempted to turn their mistakes into a plus by saying that engaging the enemy in Iraq is the way to protect us all from terrorists here at home. The argument goes that the first task of the president is to defend the people. This less than subtle distortion has led to a vigorous defense of the illegal wire taps and has bought the charge of fascism back to the fore.

In the arts and humanities over the past five years we see that artists, performers, writers and their audiences have gone over the top and accused the federal government of acting like NAZIS. This does the officials no good but it is far more damaging to the accusers. Philip Roth’s The Plot Against America: A Novel explores an alternate history in which NAZIS took over the country in the late 1930s. Roth has repeatedly denied that this was an exploration of the tendencies of the present administration but thousands of his readers saw it otherwise. In the last several days Harry Belafonte made outrageous statements in the same damaging vein. This does not make those who make such charges look good, and, in any event, I think they’re completely off base. Meanwhile, the administration circles the wagons and cries, “Slander!” and moves to gather more authority than the citizenry wishes for them.

I think Mr. Bush is grabbing for far too much power for his office, but I believe that his efforts are within historic patterns. I do my little best each day to undermine the grab, but I never go to bed in fear that the leaders of the nation are trying to organize a corps of brown shirts to lead the way to a fascist state. Those paranoid souls who do not have enough faith in the checks and balances in our system – that admittedly are constantly being tested - damage themselves when they compare our time to the darkest days of Western Civilization.

Every day, I work to help divide power in Washington by defeating the Republican Party in the upcoming off year Congressional election. But I sure do feel comfortable enough with the controlling incumbents to not worry about being sent off to reeducation camp for my awful behavior.

Work to defeat these people at the polls. Be cool.

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Monday, January 23, 2006

Shame

On Saturday, a General Court Martial convened in Colorado Springs found a U.S. warrant officer guilty of negligent homicide and negligent dereliction of duty in the death of an Iraqi general.

According to the Washington Post, his superior officer, a major, approved the use of completely enclosing the general in a sleeping bag as a means inciting claustrophobia designed to break the prisoner but did not approve of the convicted officer binding the POW or jumping on his chest.

As should be the case, the warrant officer likely will serve many years in prison and be discharged with dishonor from the Army.

This month, a major general in the U.S. Army invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination in a hearing on procedures used to elicit information from alleged insurgents in Iraq. That is a fundamental Constitutional right for each of us.

Military prisons in the U.S. are gaining more and more inmates for the torture or other maltreatment of prisoners in American custody in Iraq and elsewhere. It is the position of the armed forces that anyone who mistreats prisoners in custody should be subject to the punishment prescribed for the offenses for which they are convicted. How could anyone disagree?

But as these Americans serve their sentences, how can we not see cracks in our national façade that these acts are the exclusive works of rogue military personnel.

In recent weeks, the U.S. Congress overwhelmingly passed a law that prohibits our forces from engaging in torture or other violations of international norms. The President of the United States signed that law.

But at the very signing ceremony, the president stated that he reserved rights inherent in the presidency to ignore the new law if it abrogates his Constitutional powers.

Americans hate the idea that we would mistreat prisoners recognizing clearly that our own men and women might themselves be treated outside these same norms, especially if we are seen to be a nation that fails to abide by norms of human rights.

Yet even at a signing ceremony that highlights our moral superiority over inhumane and brutish behavior, the president felt compelled to state that he – and his forces – were placed above that law by our own cherished Constitution.

Are there no dots to be connected between those serving time and those others who will soon join them in spending years in penitentiaries for acts abhorrent to us all and to those above them in the chain of command?

I do not believe for a single minute that many of these people convicted of these terrible acts acted without tacit approval from above – far, far above. Sending the pawns to prison for evil acts does not wipe away the stain of shame if they were acting with the approval of their superiors.

Shame on the United States of America! Shame on the perpetrators! Shame on us! Shame on me!

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Friday, January 20, 2006

The Church and Illegal Immigrants

I have never before created a posting about anything close to mystical, but last night while watching Lou Dobbs on CNN I was overcome by the need to support the Catholic Church on one point. I was raised in that Church but never for a single instant was fortunate enough to have attained the gift of faith and, thus, could not be expected to keep it, but as Lou castigated the Church for its stand on illegal immigration I had what could almost be described as an epiphany.

I’ve written a number of novels – God knows how many, as I’ve chucked quite a few into landfills from Virginia to Massachusetts. One of the major themes in these books has been religion, especially Catholicism. I have explored it from the perspective of one without faith but who still respects it and its members who were granted the gift and as both friend and foe of individual clergymen.

Lou Dobbs has been a foe of illegal immigration for many years and his constancy has been instrumental in raising the subject to the level of a national issue. Because of family connections, I’ve been generally - but mildly - in the corner of those not opposed to illegals. But this position has never been certain as others I care for have been damaged economically by the influx of such persons. In my daily life, I interact with people I assume to be in the country illegally, and I treat them as kindly as possible and accept that at the micro level, at least, they serve a useful and necessary function in the economy.

Last night, however, I had to rethink a major portion of my position. Lou took the Church to task for failing to be on the side of those opposed to illegals. His position as nearly and fairly as I can represent it is that as an American institution the Church should oppose illegal immigration as it hurts American working men and women and undermines the economy. While I generally agree with him or at least put up with him through dinner each night, I was angered by this demand that the Church line up on the side of the law in this case.

It was instantly obvious to me that the Church had no choice in this matter but to be on the side of the illegals. That the Church and all believing Christians as well as others, including me, who believe at some level in the Golden Rule, have no choice but to comfort the immigrants and to grant them whatever support and protection they can. While I can see the other side very clearly and have no trouble with Dobbs and others who believe in the need to defend our borders and protect our citizens from economic destruction, I was dismayed that he attacked the Church and by extension all who believe in the Golden Rule and who live lives in as close imitation to the life of Christ as possible and demand that they close their eyes and hearts to the agony standing before them.

I believe that the Church has no choice but to support those in need no matter the cost to it from its more rabid members or from problems with political alliances created at great cost over many years. Failure to do so would be a failure of their faith in the teachings of Christ.

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Thursday, January 19, 2006

Open It Up

In an effort to keep my New Year’s resolution of not driving my readers berserk with relentless diatribes about George W. Bush’s misbegotten Iraq War and his insensitive approach to Social Security, this will be the first in a series of postings on energy and the environment. I consider myself an environmentalist in good standing as, I’m certain, do most of those who temporarily perch on this site. With that guarantee on the table, I’m going to slam both the federal government and the environmentalists.

As for the federal government, I’ve been doing little but calling the president such well earned appellations as the Used Car Salesman in Chief and Bubble Boy for the past year and a half mostly for his failed adventure in Iraq which had its genesis in our profligate national demand for oil. With my anti administration bona fides established, I’m going to begin by goring the goody goodies. As many of my friends will find this an uncomfortable detour from my usual way, I hope that you will read to the end where I will attempt to tie it all together in a rational and moderate fashion.

I’m for opening up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) for drilling. There are environmental risks to drilling in the refuge, but, as has been shown virtually next door in the Prudhoe Bay oil field, it is possible for oil exploration, drilling, and extraction to take place without the sky falling. Given the backgrounds of many of my readers, it is certain they have been bombarded with the horror tomes created by the many environmental groups. These publications are uniformly doomsday documents showing every possible disastrous possibility as a near certainty and labeling anyone who would consider opening up the refuge as an eco criminal. Dear reader, you have every right to be concerned.

The arguments against drilling fall into a few narrow categories: it will irreparably damage the fragile environment and the resident and visiting wildlife; it will not help the treasury of the federal government but will enrich the rapacious oil companies; and it won’t improve our precarious energy situation as the total production amounts to but a drop in the bucket of our usage. These are difficult arguments to refute since proving negatives and determining whether glasses are half full or empty lies in the eyes of those beholding the vessels.

It is possible that despite the technological advances made since Prudhoe Bay was opened that spills could occur. In fact, spills occur on a daily basis in the field. What is never reported by these doom sayers is that the spills are almost all very small, that they are cleaned up quickly with almost no damage to the environment, and that systematic efforts are undertaken to learn from each event to assure that recurrence is minimized. Rarely, if ever, stated by opponents of Arctic drilling is the fact that all these Alaskan fields were discovered when natural oil seepage was observed by early explorers.

I’ll stipulate right at the top that the refuge is fragile and its wildlife is sensitive. But the arguments being raised are the same as those used by opponents of Prudhoe Bay next door to the ANWR which has very similar geography and wildlife. We were warned that the caribou were sure to be adversely affected in that ecosystem, but the animals have thrived despite the horrible warnings by these same environmental groups. And it is likely that opening up the refuge will produce a similar result.

The gravest danger to the ANWR environment has to do with energy consumption by the modern world and the shift away from oil may be too late as it is. But to turn the environmentalists’ favorite argument back on them, extracting ANWR deposits, which they claim are so small, will do little additional harm to the flora and fauna. They beat us about the head and shoulders saying that the recoverable crude oil and gas in the refuge is but a drop in the bucket of America’s humongous demand, they must believe that even if I don’t.

While I’m no great believer in the truthfulness of federal agencies, two groups, The U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) and the Energy Information Agency (EIA) have always met my standard of organizations that put out useful and truthful information and data.

The best and latest estimate of the USGS is that at $24.00 per barrel, about market price in 2000, there was a 95% chance of finding 1.9 billion barrels of recoverable oil. Since the Iraq War, as you rediscover every time you fill up your gas tank, the price of oil has skyrocketed. In addition with the emergence of major new consumers such as China and India, it is inconceivable that the price of extraction will fall back to anywhere near the inflation adjusted price of $24.00. In the 2000 assessment, USGS estimated a 50% chance of finding 5.3 billion barrels. I won’t bore you with further upward estimates, but will settle for this argument on not less than 3 billion barrels of recoverable oil which has been making the rounds in popular print. The media has also settled on this being something above six months of total usage by the country. This has been seized upon by opponents of opening up the refuge as simply a drop in the bucket.

Looking at the refuge as supplying our total petroleum needs for something over half a year is not the way to proceed. No single source can be evaluated in those terms. The better way is state that the refuge could produce more than 6% of daily – and, of course, annual – petroleum consumption as specified by the EIA and this would go on for several decades. This in itself would be no justification for going ahead with the program, but we as a people are beginning to see what geologists and economists have been telling us for many years and what American presidents – with the exception of the present incumbent - have been aware of since 1973 when the Arab Oil Embargo was thrust upon us.

The size of the ANWR oil footprint on the reserve is about 2,000 acres, a sizeable chunk of land, but the size of the ANWR itself is almost nine million acres. The oil would be shipped the few miles west to the existing pipeline that carries Alaskan oil from Prudhoe Bay, thus minimizing the physical impact still further.

It is now known to thinking Americans and becoming apparent to millions of ordinary people who have never considered the underlying basis for our modern society that we are now transitioning to an economy and society that will be based primarily on forms of energy other than petroleum (and natural gas). The cost of putting the feedbag on old Paint, our trusty SUV, and for heating out 5,000 sq ft. home forty miles from the general store is staggering to us. Naturally, we can shoot – or scrap – old Paint in the short term from today until it stops on its own in about a decade, but it’s not going to be easy to deal with the tens of thousands of McMansions we’ve built in the exurbs over the past quarter century.

We are at the early stages of conserving energy with a dedication unknown since W.W.II. Soon we’ll be driving smaller more energy efficient vehicles and we’ll insulate like we’ve never done, but that will help only slightly. We have to have additional sources of energy, but even this isn’t easy. My friends in Massachusetts are biting their nails over the need for more and cheaper energy and the environmental degradation likely to be caused by a proposed wind farm for the middle of Nantucket Sound.

NIMBY, not in my backyard, is very real. Every new source of energy from solar and wind farms to nuclear plants or liquefied natural gas ports provides hope and fear. It isn’t easy to site a major energy facility. I know; I spent years working on siting the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository in Nevada. I’ve been retired for well over a decade, and the last I heard, Senator Reid isn’t planning on turning the first symbolic shovel in the project any time soon.

What does all this have to do with the ANWR? We are suffering from the dramatic increase in the price of oil, and we are merely in the first stages of making the extraordinarily painful transition to heavy duty energy conservation and to alternative forms of energy. This will be among the most economically agonizing processes ever undertaken by the American people, and, as is always the case, the most suffering will be by those least able to defend themselves, the poor and those on fixed incomes.

If we open the reserve to oil extraction, the world price of petroleum will be impacted, even if only slightly. While this price will not be enough to slow conservation and the shift to other forms of energy it will assist the government in aiding the helpless.

There are two more canards about this project that must be addressed. First, only the oil companies will be enriched while the government gets a pittance from the leases. The leases can be written in a manner than reflects market conditions. The oil companies will be the organizations taking the great risks and they should be rewarded accordingly, especially if we want to feed old Paint until we can afford a battery driven car. The government can defend the rights of the nation by assuring that the contracts cover contingencies such as even sharper rises in the world price of oil.

Second, an even more important argument thrown around by the opponents of opening up the ANWR is that the oil may even be sold to other nations and not kept in the United States. This is truly a bit of flimflam. Oil is fungible and flows to price. If oil from the ANWR is sold on the open market it will flow to where it can be sold and used most economically. If it is cheaper for the oil in the reserve to flow to China, New York’s supply will flow from Saudi Arabia or wherever it is most effective.

Naturally, if there is a crisis brought on by war or political crisis, the leases can be written to assure that the oil from the ANWR is reserved for this country.

If you’re still with me, I still claim to be a moderate and I hope that you believe it. Soon I’ll write about the Bush administration which I consider the least sensitive ever in terms of energy and the environment. Right now, I’m in need of Happy Hour.

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Tuesday, January 17, 2006

Walk On

Despite the usual two trips to the store, our journey to good health, great longevity and a dementia free future continues. Two trips? Surely you know the Wild Bill two trip rule? ` Anything bought in a store requires two trips to straighten out the situation.’ That one of our pedometers was defective should surprise no one outside of the Bush family which still marvels at discovering such up to date technology as scanners at the check out station.

I’ll begin with a story of failure. Last Sunday (1/15/06) was a terribly blustery day with wind gusts whipping at up to forty miles per hour. It was also the day that our gridiron heroes would be tested. Barbara and I are very fortunate for having lived in the home territories of two of the most successful franchises of the National Football League, the Washington Redskins and the New England Patriots. Even more fortuitous, the teams are in opposite conferences so we can root for them with almost no fear of a conflict of interest until the very end.

So Sunday was a day of great anticipation in this house as both of our favorites would be appearing in the post season playoffs on the same day. Naturally anticipation trumped realization and both teams are resting comfortably after being dispatched to their home TVs for the rest of the championship round.

The Redskins played courageously and well and most of the breaks went their way. Unfortunately for the local fanatics, the team was simply not good enough to defeat a very fine Seattle team. On the other hand, the Patriots appeared to us to be the superior outfit but lost to Denver at Mile High Stadium in a complete meltdown in the fourth quarter. The pre game hype was designed to show that playing at altitude would not hinder the New England contingent. Even the vaunted Boston medical community shared almost believable expertise saying that the thin air would not be a factor.

Back to the scrub line you overeducated morons! The altitude caused the slaughter. The play through three quarters was fairly even, but the lack of oxygen showed up in the final stanza and the wheels fell off the Patriot’s chariot.

In the army shortly after the Korean War, I was stationed at near sea level and was sent to Colorado for extremely physically demanding training. For several days while in very fine condition and near my prime, I found the training to be extraordinarily taxing and performed nowhere near my best. There is no way that a visiting team can perform anywhere near its best in Denver. That home field provides the greatest advantage in the nation.

That said, you can see why we were couch potatoes for the day. The goal of ten thousand steps was failed by more than half, and, of course, our consumption of junk food and alcohol must be excused as factors beyond the control of mortals.

Now for the facts for the rest of you; taking ten thousand steps a day, five days a week is very difficult. We are both very active in our ordinary daily routines, and, without a concerted daily walk, we fall short by two or three thousand steps. Pity the poor devils trapped in car pools that extrude them directly into cubicles where they face computer screens all day.

We are very fortunate in being physically able to walk long distances and put in about three miles a day over and above just living. This gets us well over the health professionals recommended total. But office dwellers, those housed with small children, and most elderly folks are in a terrible fix when it comes to attaining the requisite strides each day.

But it’s not to worry; we all end up in the same eternal resting field, and postponing it is not necessarily the best way to get there. I’m reminded of the old Milton Berle quip, “They say jogging adds years to your life. I began today and feel ten years older already.” Uncle Miltie lasted until he was ninety-three without his 10K steps; to top that he was sharp till the end.

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Thursday, January 12, 2006

Amend the Constitution

Accountants, actuaries, economists, mathematicians, engineers, statisticians, physicists, finance specialists, budget examiners, cashiers, but especially MBAs should be disqualified from running for President of the United States. This blog posting is my opening salvo in calling for a Constitutional Amendment prohibiting anyone able to pass an eighth grade test on four function arithmetic from becoming our chief executive.

Let’s get right to it; Jimmy Carter and Herbert Hoover demonstrated beyond any doubt that they knew the price of everything and the value of nothing. They could add, subtract, multiply and divide better than any other incumbents of the Oval Office. But Hoover has yet to deliver that chicken for every pot, and poor Jimmy is still wondering why the American people are suffering from a malaise over the price gas when it went over a buck.

But George W. Bush takes the cake. His MBA from Harvard renders him able to see that the Iraq War will cost no more than $70 billion, that a defined contributions Social Security program will make all Americans rich, that Brownie’s doing a heck of a job, that tax reductions for the rich are the best thing that ever happened to the poor in New Orleans, that oil revenue will pay for the war and reconstruction in Iraq, that he is the best interpreter of the Constitution, that budget and trade deficits stretching from here to your great grandchildren are good for us, and he has a gazillion more answers to policy questions yet to be asked.

Much as we denigrate lawyers, actors and philosophers, at least we have to acknowledge they never try make things add up. George Washington kept his mouth shut by munching on wooden teeth. Thomas Jefferson concluded that it was unconstitutional to make the Louisiana Purchase until Napoleon was in need of a quick financial fix. Abe Lincoln went to about the fourth grade. FDR was labeled a second rate intellect, and Ronald Reagan – well you know that he couldn’t add up anything. But all these guys did great.

So it’s clear, if you can do anything higher than algebra I, you shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near the nuclear button. Got it?

You heard it here first.

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Wednesday, January 11, 2006

That's a "T" - two of 'em

That’s two with a “T” trillion dollars. A Columbia University Nobel Prize Laureate in economics and a Harvard professor have done an analysis of the long term costs of the Iraq War and come up with a figure of close to two trillion dollars for this misbegotten experiment of imposing democracy on a tribal nation far, far away. Even conservative thinkers are piling on Bush for this one. Just think, this tab will have to be paid by our children and grandchildren. Now there's the great legacy of the Bush administration.

Before even one soldier or marine stepped onto the beach, Larry Lindsey was banished to the world beyond the White House for even hinting the effort might cost up to two hundred billion dollars, that’s billion with a “B”. The maximum amount that administration officials could talk about prior to the invasion without having to face the world from a cubicle in the private sector was seventy billion dollars. Each month, the military chews up 4.5 billion in direct costs alone and that adds up to a quarter of a trillion spent and we're nowhere near getting out.

Going on three years into the conflict, we’re still unable to assure soldiers and marines patrolling bomb laden streets that they are wearing the latest in body armor which costs the princely sum of $285 per combatant. As a result of this and a lot more, the indirect costs of the war in terms of disability and death benefits for those killed and wounded continues to skyrocket without even considering the human cost.

All of the pre invasion baloney about Iraq’s oil covering the cost of the conflict smells as bad as if we’d hung that processed meat out to rot in the hot desert sun. Iraqi oil production stands at about half of pre war levels, and, even if it didn’t, it couldn’t come close to covering the cost of even the direct costs of the war.

But the Iraqis should be grateful. We’ve delivered them a democratic government. In 230 years, they’ll be thanking Allah that America came and made them a free and united country.

We’re staying till we win! Damn it, we won! Let’s get the hell out of Dodge!

Blog on,

Wild Bill

Monday, January 09, 2006

The Madness of Wild Bill

Every journey begins with a single step, but this morning it began with the touch of a button. All I’ve been reading about for months is the need for us to take ten thousand steps each day in order to keep the old bod functioning properly. As I’ve been tearing calendar pages for longer than I care to remember and, feeling quite chipper, thank you very much, since I find that task quite pleasant, I decided to live forever and take my first ten thousand steps per day starting on rising this morning.

To digress, I have been into cardio vascular exercise for many years, so this is not quite as outrageous as it sounds. I took up jogging and later running when in my late forties and backed down to purposeful walking when I passed sixty. The task was twofold: to be able to walk the full eighteen holes of my once a week spoiled walk at the local golf course and to maintain what remained of my CV fitness level. They say that walking a round of golf amounts to about six miles. In my case, that’s quite conservative as `spraying the ball about’ is a kind way to describe my game. So I had little doubt that on Mondays making 10K steps was assured.

Most other days of the week I walk with purpose through my neighborhood for some two and a half to three and a half miles and was content with the effort. But no, the health mavens never let it go at that; it’s no longer thirty (or, later, forty) minutes of strong steady walking to assure the bankruptcy of the Social Security Trust Fund, it’s ten thousand steps.

What’s a senile old man to do? Why head for Radio Shack and buy an electronic pedometer, that’s what. Of course, I spent three hours completely glued to my seat reading the instructions and must have missed three or four thousand opportunities to degrade my hips and knees and add to my CV fitness. Notwithstanding the difficulties associated with comprehending instructions originally written in Chinese and translated into English in a galaxy far, far away, I was ready to embark on my journey at the point of dawn.

On arising, I quickly concluded that I had already shorted myself by maybe fifty steps taken between bed, bath and beyond before successfully attaching the horrible little appendage to my belt. Ten thousand steps would be easily achieved but I’d have to be alert to the need to add steps for such obvious errors against my total.

But on the way to my first cup of coffee, I made a horrible discovery. On moving between cupboard, refrigerator, stove, and breakfast table, I was getting credit for all kinds of mini steps. Reach for napkin – one step; back to the right for sugar, another. Surely the mavens don’t mean the 10 thousand pity pats which are adding up so quickly before I even injected my first cc of caffeine or read the headlines?

Naturally, I’m in crisis, and a deep angst has settled about the house. Really, I should have gotten credit for about fifty steps before the official count began. But what about the couple of hundred I was granted for hardly stepping at all while reaching for the margarine and sugar?

I won’t tell what I paid for the device that is already giving me chest pains – or for the one I bought the wife since she too seems intent on super longevity. By the way, within minutes of arriving in the kitchen, she was howling about the inaccuracy of her new medical marvel. This, of course, has doubled my need for nitroglycerin under the tongue.

I’ve decided to add a hundred steps for various omissions and to subtract a thousand for pity pat steps and for unmentionable bathroom activities. But at the end of the day, I fully expect to be able a certify to those in the public health sector carefully watching over me that I made my ten thousand steps and that I need my angina medicine prescription renewed.

Are you sure that you’re taking ten thousand steps each day? I see no alternative to purchasing a pedometer to be sure. Oh, and pick one up for the spouse while you’re at it.

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Saturday, January 07, 2006

Wake Up, Plutocrats

IBM is the latest major American company to cease its defined benefits pension program i.e., a pension that pays so much per year based on so much income and a certain amount of service. Based on clear evidence that has come forward over the past several decades, corporations no matter how rich understand that greater life spans of recipients, economic uncertainty, a changed tax and accounting situation, and competition from abroad mandate pension reform. And that means reform now and even more so in the years ahead. The end of defined benefits pensions in favor of defined contributions programs – those in which the employee and the employer put aside tax deferred income for the employees benefit during retirement - is upon us. This is a good thing for the national economy and for the American worker, as without such reforms, more jobs than ever will be shipped abroad. The trend is clear; the end of American pension programs as we know them is at hand.

Even government programs must be adjusted. The federal government bit the bullet and beginning in 1981, all new employees began work with a significantly scaled back defined benefits program and began a defined contributions program very much akin to those being offered in the private sector. I never cared much for Jimmy Carter, but that’s one he can take credit for.

State and local pension programs are creating fantastic problems for the governments and their citizens, and only lately have politicians begun to look realistically at them. Reforms much like that of the federal government or the private sector are inevitable if states, cities, and towns are to avoid bankruptcy. This is, however, the third rail of our federal system, but it must be faced by the politicians and the citizens despite the outcry from powerful public employee unions or disaster will overwhelm us all.

With that setup, what’s my point? Simple, Social Security must be saved as a defined benefit program and funding reform must occur soon. President Bush did us both a great favor and a disservice with his effort to reform the system last year. By highlighting the need for reform, the voters were made aware of the problem, but by demanding that reform be in the form of a defined contribution system he frightened both old and young and by being unwilling to consider how the defined benefit program might be funded, he assured that the problem would be more difficult to solve when Americans realize what we’re facing in terms of far more recipients and fewer contributing workers.

But The United States is much better off than many of its modern industrial competitors. Our population is younger than those of the European countries and Japan and is growing older far more slowly. Say what you will, but immigration gives us time to deal with the problems of our aging workforce and we must seize the opportunity.

I hope I’m wrong, but next to nothing is likely to be done to deal with the problems of Social Security and Medicare during the next three years. This will be one of the lasting legacies of this terrible presidency. Mr. Bush’s hubris in what he was demanding for Social Security reform is almost equal to that of his misbegotten Iraq War and we will all pay for it.

Despite living in the largest and most dynamic economy in the history of man, we cannot afford everything. That conservatism has highlighted this `there is no free lunch’ situation for more than a generation, many of those able to defend themselves have done so, but huge numbers – and a high percentage - of our population have been unable to assure any kind of economic security for themselves as they approach old age, and they live in utter fear that the one great benefit coming out of the New Deal, Social Security, will not be there for them when they can no longer work.

The Republican plutocracy simply cannot fathom this fear and their proposal for Social Security reform demonstrates how out of touch with the masses they really are. The GOP is fortunate, however, that millions of good people with deep religious convictions and of high moral values have been gulled into supporting many of their worst programs because they cannot abide what the Evangelical leaders have labeled as evil. The eyes of these people are opening, however, and the Democrats, too, are beginning to heed their message and to court these nice folks.

Millions of our citizens cannot face a future in which they are dependent on a Dickensonian system of private handouts and a dole. That paying into a Social Security system for a lifetime could result in poor choices leading to a dotage of impoverishment is simply too much for them to contemplate. With each passing day another corporation throws in the sponge on its pension program and even upper middle income workers fear that there will be no floor under their benefits.

Democrats, independents and moderate Republicans must understand that Social Security must be saved in its present form and the rising costs must be addressed soon. Accountants, actuaries, economists, and plutocrats can proclaim the benefits of compounding till the cows come home and can demonstrate in black and white that the country would be better off under the system proposed by President Bush; it doesn’t matter, a society is held together by a social compact that is greater than sheer logic. There is a great fear of failure out there and the one shining light in the window for all to home in on is Social Security. “Let them eat cake,” is the obvious answer for those who fail. It isn’t a satisfactory response, and the Republicans better get with the program.

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Friday, January 06, 2006

Happy Days Are Here Again

A proposed and credible solution to the New Orleans problem that is worthy of Franklin Roosevelt has been offered. Congressman Richard Baker, a Republican from Baton Rouge, has proposed a scheme for overcoming the damage inflicted upon his state that is equal to any that could be conjured up by Harry Hopkins or Harold Ickes in their heyday, and I like it.

The New York Times reports that the solution involves spending up to eighty billion dollars of your hard earned tax money to pay off mortgages on destroyed property, to restore all of the infrastructure damaged and otherwise put out of commission by Hurricane Katrina, to buy up the land littered with refuse, to clean it all up, and to sell it all to developers for renewing the city. How cool is that?

Mr. Baker is one of the foremost critics of big government in the Congress, but it’s sure nice to know that when the chips are really down he knows where to turn and what to do. Step one: stop calling the Democrats big government spenders. Step two: forget everything bad you ever said about big government. Step three: write a multi-billion dollar proposal. And step four: just to show you haven’t gone soft, call for a tax cut for the rich. (Wait, maybe the last item hasn’t been formulated yet.)

When things are really bad, it’s government that must fill the void. No other entity can step into the midst of a calamity of this magnitude and simply make the crucial things happen. We need New Orleans and the nearby ports and infrastructure, and if the feds don’t make it happen, it won’t, at least to the level required for commerce on the Mississippi and to support the people in the countryside. I really am for it all.

But I hark back not to my first public hero, FDR, but to a Republican, William Cohen of Maine, who really saw the situation with a clear eye. “Government is the enemy until you need a friend.” Mr. Baker, after a lifetime of criticism, has seen the light; he needs a friend, one with deep pockets and lots of muscle. Hallelujah! Better late than never.

Now Mr. Baker has a serious problem; he has to convince all those free market buddies of his on the right side of the aisle in both houses to support this bailout. Lord Almighty, what a chore. Well maybe it’s not quite that bad; maybe three fourths of the Democrats will support his bill and he’ll only have to convince half the majority to join him and his new allies.

It’s an ill wind that blows no good. Congressman Baker is now a supporter of big `govment’ as his hero the Gipper called it, and I suppose that he’ll be switching parties over the next few months. My goodness, these pols will do almost anything to get re-elected? I guess all his big money backers – at least those who’ll profit from the venture - will have to get that old time `Solid South’ religion too.

Don’t say the leopard can’t change his spots. For a humongous federal windfall, down there in the land of Huey they’ll paint that sucker chartreuse and make him say he likes it.

And it’s catching, Ahnold’s unveiled an almost equally ambitious New Deal program of renewal in California. The ghost of FDR is smiling.

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Thursday, January 05, 2006

El Rushbo

While running errands for the queen yesterday, I turned to my copilot in such situations, El Rushbo. He was rampaging over the mainstream media’s (MSM) efforts to undermine Bush as a result of the mine disaster in West Virginia. He was lobbing grenades in all directions and asserting that the MSM has lost all credibility and that all they think about any issue was how it might be brought to bear in ruining the president.

In trying to fashion some sort of reaction to Limbaugh’s diatribe, my only conclusion was that he was simply full of baloney.

The Federal Government has a responsibility for assuring good practices and for enforcing rules and regulations assuring compliance with safety standards. The old Bureau of Mines was responsible for this activity until it was abolished in 1996 and the safety functions were transferred from the Bureau in the U.S. Department of the Interior to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, NIOSH.

The institute’s web site is full of self promotion on how great it is in promoting mine safety. “We have a long and rich history of advancing mine worker safety and health.” On and on it goes in this vein. Hey, bozos, take it down at least till this blows over!

Published reports indicate that the mine involved in the tragedy has a long history of safety violations and of rejecting the findings of the feds. And of course mine safety laws and regs have been watered down to the absolute minimum. After all, what’s K Street for?

But all of the facts and findings will come out in the media and in civil and criminal court proceedings. The purpose of this posting is just to Take Rush to task for his vein popping outburst against the media and nothing more.

This terrible event is not one that I’d drop at the president’s doorstep were I a member of the MSM media, but, to pursue Rush’s point, why isn’t this Bush’s responsibility? He’s the president and by extension is charged with enforcing federal laws. Mine safety comes directly under the Secretary of Health and Human Services a Bush political appointee. The NIOSH chief, in turn, is an employee of the Executive Branch and, therefore, any dereliction or misfeasance by NIOSH runs directly to where the buck stops.

I’m not after Mr. Bush on this issue. Rather I’m just pointing out that Rush was simply blowing smoke. He does it all the time on a hundred issues. I listen to him for entertainment while I’m running errands for the wife. I make a point of listening to who is sponsoring the program to be sure to withhold my custom from them – unless, of course, it’s a pharmaceutical company keeping me going. But the ranter has a daily audience in the millions who froth along with him. My question is why does he have a following? He warps everything. He attacks the mainstream media who are leagues ahead of him in truth and honor. Nobody’s perfect, but Rush is not only not close to being accurate, he doesn’t even try.

Of course Rush is not the worst; he’s mean spirited but at least he’s funny. The rest of the right wing bomb throwers are far worse; they have no humor. My excuse for listening is that it’s ten minutes every other day while driving and I want to hear what the yahoos are being fed. If you’re getting more than that, isn’t it time for a review? Are you really that angry?

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Wednesday, January 04, 2006

Happy New Year

Okay, alright already, I didn’t last a week into the new year. So who said I was strong? Besides, this isn’t really about Iraq – not all about it anyway.

Many have opined that there are three major schools for jihadists in operation today, the Caucuses, Afghanistan, and Iraq, with the last being the largest, most advanced, and of our own making. It is clear that President Bush is preparing to withdraw most of our forces from Iraq and to permit the government in Baghdad sink or swim, and we’re getting set to turn over only partially completed infrastructure to the Iraqis all the while declaring that the police and army look better to us each day.

This must be killing the neocons and Bush’s other core supporters of the war. All they talk about is how well things are really going over there and how the media isn’t telling the real story. When we walk away, they’re really fearful that they were the ones dreaming.

Even more cynical than I, some, including Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post, speculate that our troops will pour out of Iraq until after the ’06 Congressional elections and then – after a close but positive outcome for the Republicans - be reinserted based on new dangers on the ground. “Who could have known?” being the innocent reaction from the White House.

The Republicans are having a hard time. Their scandal – yes it’s theirs; it’s their government lock, stock, and barrel or should I say executive, legislative, and court – exposes once again that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Their shenanigans on K Street show that politicians must be checked at every turn. I’m truly an admirer of pols, but you have to remember two things about them: they are the cleverest among us and they’re still just human beings. If you understand those two points, you can see why they must be held in check by every means possible, with divided government being the most effective tool in the citizens’ kit.

The GOP is petrified. Their values coalition crumbled in the face of the Terri Schiavo horror show. Deficits are killing those few in the party who label themselves true conservatives. Libertarians are going bonkers over civil liberties. Iraq has isolated the neocons within the coalition. And the defense contractors see their hard bought dollars flying into the desert having bought old fashioned bullets instead of high priced weapons systems. Brownie and the FEMA crowd have jeopardized the outcome in all those scarlet Gulf States. And now the K Street crowd has got the values tongues wagging all over again. There are flu symptoms everywhere Republicans gather.

So, in addition to perp walks for those caught and Medals of Freedom ceremonies for all who avoid indictment, the boys – and girls - have to come marching home so that the Republicans can get through 2006. That’s too cynical? Don’t bet on it.

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Tuesday, January 03, 2006

Johnny Still Can't Read

In keeping with my 2006 resolution to stay as far away from the Iraq War as possible, I’m going to try to focus on other things as long as I can - maybe a week.

College graduates can’t read. Whew, who’d ‘a thunk it?

Our economy demands more and more skilled people and we’re turning out a greater number and higher percentage of college graduates than any generation preceding this one. Meanwhile, our newly discovered high power competitors, China and India, are cranking out high quality engineers, scientists, and English majors by the carload, what’s happening?

I surely don’t know, but one politically incorrect notion keeps creeping into my Busch addled brain; maybe the people we’re attempting to push through the higher education system aren’t up to it. We’re extruding a higher percentage of our kids through high school and on to the next level at an ever higher level. Hey, when the gene pool isn’t improving and the labor market calls for an ever increasing numbers of educated – or at least trained – entrants – or at least time servers - what happens? Could it be that the input quality goes down so far they can’t be trained to do those jobs?

With three or four times our population each, China and India have more – many more - smart people – in gross numbers - than we do. If they educate only those folks on the second, third, or even greater standard deviation above the norm in intelligence, they’re still educating a whole heck of a lot more folks than we are when we start dropping down to the first standard deviation below the bell. Look at it this way, when they educate twenty or thirty million of their best and brightest each year and we keep up in sheer numbers, we just can’t keep up when it comes to the overall quality of the output.

Remember when Johnny couldn’t read? Well we got the kinks out of that problem and most of those capable of reading could. Now Johnny’s grown kids can’t hack it. Give them a break, they used to get jobs down at the local plant; now they’re in the front office and they can’t read.

I don’t know the answer, but it’s not just pumping more money into the system or even injecting accountability into our schools. Maybe we’re getting down to the bottom of the barrel. Maybe we’ll just have to educate the educable and deal with the results. Kurt Vonnegut novels toyed with these problems half a century ago. The answers then weren’t very pretty either.

Wow, I’ll be getting a lot of email on this one. “Stick to Iraq, you don’t anything about that either but at least you’re only insulting George Bush.”

Blog on!

Wild Bill

Sunday, January 01, 2006

The Producers

Do you love great drama? Timeless soliloquies? Great love affairs? Forget The Producers.

Do you adore silly schmaltz? Over the top acting? Hokum and Bunkum? Laughing till you cry? Have I got a flick for you! Mel Brooks has been absent from the silver screen for far too long, but he bursts forth brilliantly with his rewritten musical comedy.

The wife and I ventured forth on a foul Saturday afternoon and joined a movie house full of aging laugher wannabes in a suburban mall for a couple of hours of escapism. We got it in full measure.

The story line is worn and has been recycled many times, but the sheer audacity of the dialogue and the brilliance of the cast made this an afternoon to remember. Nathan Lane and Mathew Broderick are well known commodities, and their counterpoint playing was wonderful but fully expected. But Will Farrell as the demented playwright injects a madness reminiscent of the old time Brooks movies that was – I think – missing from the first movie made from this material.

Lane really is equal to Zero and Broderick misses not a step in keeping up with Mel, but Farrell steals their wallets every time he appears.

The minor players are also wonderful. None of the songs seems destined for immortality, but some of the production numbers are as well done as in any musical play turned to film. Farrell’s auditioning number is a howler, and the dance of the aging widow play backers draws tears from the assembled.

When it ended, the audience broke out into spontaneous applause. This is a harmless, silly movie and audiences simply don’t do this.

Spend the money!

Blog on!

Wild Bill