There they are – tall, straight, lantern jawed, square shouldered, pin striped suits, perfect smiles – just waiting to wave and smile at you, our counterfeit men and women. Six years ago, they bore these same marks but they were smoother then and we could not determine their authenticity. But now we can; they’re as phony as three dollar bills. Look closely, the veneer of confidence is worn and cannot cover their angst; the surface lines are etched six years more deeply. These are actors struggling to make their exits, hoping you won’t notice that they’re totally inauthentic human beings, mere knock offs of those confident beings who took office on January 20, 2001. The lines they mouth were written for an audience that has long ago soured on this failed and rotten play.
George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice and a half a hundred more – some already gone - simply mouth their lines in what was supposed to be a pleasant melodrama that has turned fatefully calamitous. Now they face tomatoes being tossed from the cheap seats and beg us to listen to their words.
The chorus of loyalists in congress and even in the audience can no longer quiet the cat calls. For six years, they had center stage and played to the crowd with happy words and phrases as the set fell apart about them. Now they’re alone with just their frayed costumes and worn makeup spouting repeated lines that used to inspire but which now are simply comic, tragically comic.
Give ‘em the hook, the Gong Show’s over.
Be gone you phony bums!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Sunday, February 11, 2007
Thursday, February 08, 2007
How the Republicans got Snookered
It’s very sad to see how the party of Ike, Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan, the party of little government, got taken in by the neoconservatives. It’s really poignant because I don’t even blame the likes of Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld or George W. Bush. (I do, but for the purpose of entertaining you, you’ll have to bear with me.)
A couple of postings ago, I talked about the influence of Machiavelli on our founders and how old Nick’s ideas were incorporated into our constitution. Students of republics, like Nick, saw that a major flaw in republican government is that factionalism, even during times of war, prevented such states from acting effectively in their own defense. I opined – and not being a real scholar - can only assume that I wasn’t the first - that our most brilliant founders such as Jefferson, Madison, Jay and Hamilton took the views of the author of The Prince into account when they drafted the role of our chief executive.
Having drifted from the liberalism of my youth to the moderate conservatism of my middle years, I was becoming an advocate of the `that government governs best which governs least’ crowd. Of course, I had to do the requisite mental gymnastics to get past the buying of loyalty by Reagan and Bush 41 as the federal budget became the ATM machine of powerful congressmen and the military industrial complex.
The story of how the neoconservatives - and others not relevant to this posting - bucked up the federal government in the years following the debacle of Vietnam and who found in The Gipper the perfect man to represent their philosophy of over the top hubris and world hegemony has been expressed many times by me and dozens of others.
The neocon philosophy melded perfectly with the deficiencies and weaknesses noted in our system of government by the likes of Rumsfeld and Cheney when they saw power flow from the executive to the legislature when Dick Nixon drowned in the tsunami of 1974. So, as a philosophy of power prescribed by the founders for times of true crisis was seen by those who saw a classic imbalance in the powers of the presidency and the legislative branches, there came a confluence of actors and events that has come to lay low the Grand Old Party.
Until 9/11, Cheney, Rummy and like minded malcontents who failed to recognize that the wisdom of the founders in permitting the likes of Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt and Wilson to assume the great and very awesome and fearful powers of the Machiavellian inspired powerhouse of a chief during only in times of very real crises of near total war had to squirm in their seats as uppity congressional members whipped the men – and women – of Tricky Dick and later presidents like so many whipped dogs.
But – to call upon another member of the permanently disgraced who cannot be asked for assistance in governing – the neoconservatives saw a Rasputin like opening and they drove through it. While the first reaction of most Americans to 9/11 was righteous anger towards al Qaeda, the Taliban in Afghanistan and toward other terrorist organizations, especially of radical Islamic origin, the neocons saw an opportunity to solve a whole host of power imbalances all at once, and they were as quick as a mad monk to whisper into the eager ears of those in power.
It was time to attack Iraq. Look what this could accomplish: teach more powerful members of the Axis of Evil that the U.S. and George W. Bush were not to be trifled with; demonstrate that we could topple any tyrant who threatened us or our allies; demonstrate far better than the rural and mountainous backwater of Afghanistan the fighting ability of U.S. forces; AND MOST IMPORTANT, TO CREATE A FALSE PREMISE FOR SEIZING THE CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS RESERVED FOR PRESIDENTS IN TIMES OF TRUE NATIONAL CRISES.
Thus, sadly, did the dimwits and innocents who called themselves Republicans get caught up in the martial airs of Hail to the Chief and sell out their true beliefs of limited government, avoidance of foreign entanglements, and tightwad spending, and become champions of a hubris that ranks with Rome, Napoleon, and nineteenth century England, with the notion of building bridges to nowhere and to centralizing power that would make our greatest war time leaders blanch.
Now our dear friends – innocent, decent, warm and fuzzy cloth coat Republicans worthy of Cal Coolidge and Ike – face being turned out of power for a generation because they were led down the – dare I say – the primrose path by these neoconservatives. Sad, but their wrath should not be directed solely upon the cynical neocons but rather on Dubya, Dick and Darth who should have known better.
Now the innocents circle like so many retarded musk ox before modern weapons to defend leaders they now see through. If they really believed in Republican and conservative principles, they’d be the ones calling for impeachment instead of avoiding a debate on Iraq.
Never mind, it will all turn out well. They’ll pass this fiasco off to the next crowd and the nation will survive, and they’ll have thirty years to lick their wounds and think about their folly. Well they can say to historians with honest hearts that they impeached a president, the wrong one, but they did it.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
A couple of postings ago, I talked about the influence of Machiavelli on our founders and how old Nick’s ideas were incorporated into our constitution. Students of republics, like Nick, saw that a major flaw in republican government is that factionalism, even during times of war, prevented such states from acting effectively in their own defense. I opined – and not being a real scholar - can only assume that I wasn’t the first - that our most brilliant founders such as Jefferson, Madison, Jay and Hamilton took the views of the author of The Prince into account when they drafted the role of our chief executive.
Having drifted from the liberalism of my youth to the moderate conservatism of my middle years, I was becoming an advocate of the `that government governs best which governs least’ crowd. Of course, I had to do the requisite mental gymnastics to get past the buying of loyalty by Reagan and Bush 41 as the federal budget became the ATM machine of powerful congressmen and the military industrial complex.
The story of how the neoconservatives - and others not relevant to this posting - bucked up the federal government in the years following the debacle of Vietnam and who found in The Gipper the perfect man to represent their philosophy of over the top hubris and world hegemony has been expressed many times by me and dozens of others.
The neocon philosophy melded perfectly with the deficiencies and weaknesses noted in our system of government by the likes of Rumsfeld and Cheney when they saw power flow from the executive to the legislature when Dick Nixon drowned in the tsunami of 1974. So, as a philosophy of power prescribed by the founders for times of true crisis was seen by those who saw a classic imbalance in the powers of the presidency and the legislative branches, there came a confluence of actors and events that has come to lay low the Grand Old Party.
Until 9/11, Cheney, Rummy and like minded malcontents who failed to recognize that the wisdom of the founders in permitting the likes of Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt and Wilson to assume the great and very awesome and fearful powers of the Machiavellian inspired powerhouse of a chief during only in times of very real crises of near total war had to squirm in their seats as uppity congressional members whipped the men – and women – of Tricky Dick and later presidents like so many whipped dogs.
But – to call upon another member of the permanently disgraced who cannot be asked for assistance in governing – the neoconservatives saw a Rasputin like opening and they drove through it. While the first reaction of most Americans to 9/11 was righteous anger towards al Qaeda, the Taliban in Afghanistan and toward other terrorist organizations, especially of radical Islamic origin, the neocons saw an opportunity to solve a whole host of power imbalances all at once, and they were as quick as a mad monk to whisper into the eager ears of those in power.
It was time to attack Iraq. Look what this could accomplish: teach more powerful members of the Axis of Evil that the U.S. and George W. Bush were not to be trifled with; demonstrate that we could topple any tyrant who threatened us or our allies; demonstrate far better than the rural and mountainous backwater of Afghanistan the fighting ability of U.S. forces; AND MOST IMPORTANT, TO CREATE A FALSE PREMISE FOR SEIZING THE CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS RESERVED FOR PRESIDENTS IN TIMES OF TRUE NATIONAL CRISES.
Thus, sadly, did the dimwits and innocents who called themselves Republicans get caught up in the martial airs of Hail to the Chief and sell out their true beliefs of limited government, avoidance of foreign entanglements, and tightwad spending, and become champions of a hubris that ranks with Rome, Napoleon, and nineteenth century England, with the notion of building bridges to nowhere and to centralizing power that would make our greatest war time leaders blanch.
Now our dear friends – innocent, decent, warm and fuzzy cloth coat Republicans worthy of Cal Coolidge and Ike – face being turned out of power for a generation because they were led down the – dare I say – the primrose path by these neoconservatives. Sad, but their wrath should not be directed solely upon the cynical neocons but rather on Dubya, Dick and Darth who should have known better.
Now the innocents circle like so many retarded musk ox before modern weapons to defend leaders they now see through. If they really believed in Republican and conservative principles, they’d be the ones calling for impeachment instead of avoiding a debate on Iraq.
Never mind, it will all turn out well. They’ll pass this fiasco off to the next crowd and the nation will survive, and they’ll have thirty years to lick their wounds and think about their folly. Well they can say to historians with honest hearts that they impeached a president, the wrong one, but they did it.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Sunday, February 04, 2007
A Life
Life is good! Sometimes I fear that people reading this electronic rag think that I’m a pessimist; nothing could be further from the truth. While evil deeds are committed daily and there are truly malevolent people among us and only fools believe that man is perfectible, the species can better itself by degrees and there are members who give lie to the idea that we cannot do good.
Every day, the news is filled with man’s inhumanity to man and we hear the lament that that good news is never reported. That’s not quite true, as once in a while the story of life so extraordinary as to be almost divine comes to our attention and makes us happy to have lived in its time. Such a story was reported yesterday. A person who lives not far from me whom I have never met has done something so extraordinary that I cannot let it pass without comment.
A professor at George Mason University was awarded a one million dollar prize for his life’s work. That’s the least important part of the story. This great person devoted his being and overwhelming gifts to solving a problem that was the bane of the existence of millions of people living in poverty stricken parts of the world.
Abul Hussam, professor of Chemistry at George Mason, devoted his life and extraordinary talent to discovering a cost effective way to remove arsenic from the drinking water available to those living in many parts of the third world. This problem has killed literally millions of human beings before their times. And he did it, really.
I am pleased to be able to incorporate the AP article about this great person in this posting so that you can see that life can be very, very good. Professor Hussam proves that devoting ones life to solving a great problem is far more important than celebrity or in achieving material success. That he has been financially rewarded for this breathtaking breakthrough is simply icing on the cake.
I am pleased to include this article and I hope that you will read it and find it as inspiring as I did:
The Associated Press
Saturday, February 3, 2007; 8:32 AM
FAIRFAX, Va. -- A professor who developed an inexpensive, easy-to-make system for filtering arsenic from well water has won a $1 million engineering prize _ and he plans to use most of the money to distribute the filters to needy communities around the world.
The National Academy of Engineering announced Thursday that the 2007 Grainger Challenge Prize for Sustainability would go to Abul Hussam, a chemistry professor at George Mason University in Fairfax. Hussam's invention is already in use today, preventing serious health problems in residents of the professor's native Bangladesh.
After moving to the United States in 1978, Hussam got his citizenship and received a doctorate in analytical chemistry. The Centreville, Va., resident has spent much of this career trying to devise a solution to the arsenic problem, which was accidentally caused by international aid agencies that had funded a campaign to dig wells in Eastern India and Bangladesh.
The wells brought fresh groundwater to farmers and others who previously had been drinking from bacteria- and virus-laced ponds and mudholes. But the aid agencies were unaware that the groundwater also had naturally high concentrations of poisonous arsenic. As infectious diseases declined, arsenic-related skin ailments and fatal cancers began to increase _ a problem that attracted much attention in the 1990s.
"I myself and all my brothers were drinking this water," said Hussam, who added that his family did not get sick, possibly because they had a good diet, which can help stem the effects of digesting arsenic.
Allan Smith, an epidemiologist at the University of California at Berkeley, said arsenic poisoning affects millions of people worldwide and it has been difficult to convince people that what seems to be good water might be toxic.
"You can't see it or taste or smell it," Smith said. "The idea that crystal-clear drinking water would end up causing lung disease in 20 or 30 years is a little weird. It's unbelievable to people."
Hussam spent years testing hundreds of prototype filtration systems. His final innovation is a simple, maintenance-free system that uses sand, charcoal, bits of brick and shards of a type of cast iron. Each filter has 20 pounds of porous iron, which forms a chemical bond with arsenic.
The filter removes almost every trace of arsenic from well water.
About 200 filtration systems are being made each week in Kushtia, Bangladesh, for about $40 each, Hussam said. More than 30,000 have been distributed.
Hussam said he plans to use 70 percent of his prize so the filters can be distributed to needy communities. He said 25 percent will be used for more research, and 5 percent will be donated to GMU.
The 2007 sustainability prize is funded by the Grainger Foundation of Lake Forest, Ill., and the contest was set up to target the arsenic problem. Among the criteria for winning was an affordable, reliable and environmentally friendly solution to the arsenic problem that did not require electricity.
Hussam's award will be presented Feb. 20 at Union Station in Washington.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Every day, the news is filled with man’s inhumanity to man and we hear the lament that that good news is never reported. That’s not quite true, as once in a while the story of life so extraordinary as to be almost divine comes to our attention and makes us happy to have lived in its time. Such a story was reported yesterday. A person who lives not far from me whom I have never met has done something so extraordinary that I cannot let it pass without comment.
A professor at George Mason University was awarded a one million dollar prize for his life’s work. That’s the least important part of the story. This great person devoted his being and overwhelming gifts to solving a problem that was the bane of the existence of millions of people living in poverty stricken parts of the world.
Abul Hussam, professor of Chemistry at George Mason, devoted his life and extraordinary talent to discovering a cost effective way to remove arsenic from the drinking water available to those living in many parts of the third world. This problem has killed literally millions of human beings before their times. And he did it, really.
I am pleased to be able to incorporate the AP article about this great person in this posting so that you can see that life can be very, very good. Professor Hussam proves that devoting ones life to solving a great problem is far more important than celebrity or in achieving material success. That he has been financially rewarded for this breathtaking breakthrough is simply icing on the cake.
I am pleased to include this article and I hope that you will read it and find it as inspiring as I did:
The Associated Press
Saturday, February 3, 2007; 8:32 AM
FAIRFAX, Va. -- A professor who developed an inexpensive, easy-to-make system for filtering arsenic from well water has won a $1 million engineering prize _ and he plans to use most of the money to distribute the filters to needy communities around the world.
The National Academy of Engineering announced Thursday that the 2007 Grainger Challenge Prize for Sustainability would go to Abul Hussam, a chemistry professor at George Mason University in Fairfax. Hussam's invention is already in use today, preventing serious health problems in residents of the professor's native Bangladesh.
After moving to the United States in 1978, Hussam got his citizenship and received a doctorate in analytical chemistry. The Centreville, Va., resident has spent much of this career trying to devise a solution to the arsenic problem, which was accidentally caused by international aid agencies that had funded a campaign to dig wells in Eastern India and Bangladesh.
The wells brought fresh groundwater to farmers and others who previously had been drinking from bacteria- and virus-laced ponds and mudholes. But the aid agencies were unaware that the groundwater also had naturally high concentrations of poisonous arsenic. As infectious diseases declined, arsenic-related skin ailments and fatal cancers began to increase _ a problem that attracted much attention in the 1990s.
"I myself and all my brothers were drinking this water," said Hussam, who added that his family did not get sick, possibly because they had a good diet, which can help stem the effects of digesting arsenic.
Allan Smith, an epidemiologist at the University of California at Berkeley, said arsenic poisoning affects millions of people worldwide and it has been difficult to convince people that what seems to be good water might be toxic.
"You can't see it or taste or smell it," Smith said. "The idea that crystal-clear drinking water would end up causing lung disease in 20 or 30 years is a little weird. It's unbelievable to people."
Hussam spent years testing hundreds of prototype filtration systems. His final innovation is a simple, maintenance-free system that uses sand, charcoal, bits of brick and shards of a type of cast iron. Each filter has 20 pounds of porous iron, which forms a chemical bond with arsenic.
The filter removes almost every trace of arsenic from well water.
About 200 filtration systems are being made each week in Kushtia, Bangladesh, for about $40 each, Hussam said. More than 30,000 have been distributed.
Hussam said he plans to use 70 percent of his prize so the filters can be distributed to needy communities. He said 25 percent will be used for more research, and 5 percent will be donated to GMU.
The 2007 sustainability prize is funded by the Grainger Foundation of Lake Forest, Ill., and the contest was set up to target the arsenic problem. Among the criteria for winning was an affordable, reliable and environmentally friendly solution to the arsenic problem that did not require electricity.
Hussam's award will be presented Feb. 20 at Union Station in Washington.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
The Shame of Virginia
Shame! Shame! Shame!
Virginia’s House of Delegates has passed a bill that would strip charities of state and local funds if they provide services to illegal aliens. The land of Jeffersonian ideals has become the home of fear driven reaction.
Under this bill, if enacted, when the homeless and hungry ask for food, clothing or shelter, instead of living their lives in imitation of Christ, the volunteers who give of their time and their humanity will, instead of providing succor to the down and out, have to demand valid green cards before providing the most basic of human assistance. By law, they will be forced to choose between providing for the diseased, hungry and homeless or forfeiting the funds essential for assisting the many legitimate and legal among us who are truly needy as well.
The Virginia House of Delegates is intent on turning the most altruistic among us into a reactionary police force. That President Bush and his administration who are charged by law with enforcing the immigration laws of the land have failed so miserably in this task that those challenged by the blind fear of illegal immigrants have turned to their state representatives and these gutless wonders, instead of demanding that the federal government do its sworn duty, turn to churches and other selfless groups and demand that they become the Nazis of the new millennium.
Those guided by the Bible or just simple altruism who would serve as Good Samaritans will be destroyed by representatives of the Commonwealth of Virginia. If they wish to maintain their ability to receive public funds to assist the legal recognized poor, these kind, Christ like people will be required to turn away those pathetic creatures, hungry, homeless, and cold, standing at their doors unless they can document their immigration status.
How cruel! How Pathetic! These delegates, in their cowardice and desire to maintain their offices at the price of their souls and character, would instead of demanding that the federal government enforce or change its immigration laws force the best and kindest among us to act as Fascists.
This bill is the epitome of cruelty. As these fools and charlatans in Richmond play with the lives of the truly needy who are among us only by the wink and nod of President Bush and the Congress of the United States, and, instead of demanding redress by those charged by law with protecting our borders and our citizens from being overwhelmed by illegals from abroad, play to the mob by turning the Salvation Army, Catholic Charities, and other religious and secular charities into the brown shirts of our times.
Shame! Shame! Shame!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Virginia’s House of Delegates has passed a bill that would strip charities of state and local funds if they provide services to illegal aliens. The land of Jeffersonian ideals has become the home of fear driven reaction.
Under this bill, if enacted, when the homeless and hungry ask for food, clothing or shelter, instead of living their lives in imitation of Christ, the volunteers who give of their time and their humanity will, instead of providing succor to the down and out, have to demand valid green cards before providing the most basic of human assistance. By law, they will be forced to choose between providing for the diseased, hungry and homeless or forfeiting the funds essential for assisting the many legitimate and legal among us who are truly needy as well.
The Virginia House of Delegates is intent on turning the most altruistic among us into a reactionary police force. That President Bush and his administration who are charged by law with enforcing the immigration laws of the land have failed so miserably in this task that those challenged by the blind fear of illegal immigrants have turned to their state representatives and these gutless wonders, instead of demanding that the federal government do its sworn duty, turn to churches and other selfless groups and demand that they become the Nazis of the new millennium.
Those guided by the Bible or just simple altruism who would serve as Good Samaritans will be destroyed by representatives of the Commonwealth of Virginia. If they wish to maintain their ability to receive public funds to assist the legal recognized poor, these kind, Christ like people will be required to turn away those pathetic creatures, hungry, homeless, and cold, standing at their doors unless they can document their immigration status.
How cruel! How Pathetic! These delegates, in their cowardice and desire to maintain their offices at the price of their souls and character, would instead of demanding that the federal government enforce or change its immigration laws force the best and kindest among us to act as Fascists.
This bill is the epitome of cruelty. As these fools and charlatans in Richmond play with the lives of the truly needy who are among us only by the wink and nod of President Bush and the Congress of the United States, and, instead of demanding redress by those charged by law with protecting our borders and our citizens from being overwhelmed by illegals from abroad, play to the mob by turning the Salvation Army, Catholic Charities, and other religious and secular charities into the brown shirts of our times.
Shame! Shame! Shame!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Friday, January 26, 2007
Ralphie Rules
As I’ve said many times, the second most disastrous decision ever made by George W. Bush was to choose Dick Cheney as his running mate. That decision led almost directly to the worst blunder ever made in American foreign policy history, the attack on Iraq. Whew! That’s pretty heavy stuff. Maybe I ought to go to the third worst; that’s easy it was putting Dick in charge of finding Dubya’s running mate. And guess what? Only one person in 280 million fit the bill – and we know who that was. As the ship lists from leaks sprung fore, aft, starboard, port, top and bottom, it’s very difficult to see it ending happily for the crew.
Case in point, the trial of Scooter Libby is both horrifying and riveting. Everybody is scrambling to save their butts as the most disciplined administration since that of Tricky Dick Nixon simply implodes and explodes at the same time. (Is that a violation of the laws of physics?)
You’ll remember – those of you old enough anyway – that as Watergate unraveled the same phenomenon was exhibited. Insiders pointed fingers at everyone else to avoid stays at the Graybar Motel, and dimes were dropping on the Justice Department and the FBI like confetti at a ticker tape parade.
Things are so bad that the big bad guy had to come out of hiding and save the turf from the dweebs and geeks in the media and in the prosecutor’s office. For those of us who love to see the Scut Farkuses of the world get their comeuppances. (Note to the very few not familiar with The Christmas Story: Scut was the bully who tormented Ralphie and his buds to the delight of his toady, Grover Dill, until Ralphie turned the tables.)
So Scut, I mean the Vice President, decided to smack down Ralphie, I mean Wolf Blitzer, and show the American public how a real pro handled the media. Sadly for Dick, Wolf Blitzer was in his best Ralphie mode and exposed Cheney for what he is: a bully with nothing to back himself with but bluster.
You’ve all seen the clips of the interview and roared at the cartoons that resulted. Great things are happening in Iraq, and, if it weren’t for Ralphie and his playmates, the American public would see that we’re winning. But Ralphie wouldn’t back down and Scut’s nose got plenty bloodied.
But Cheney’s mistake is far greater than having stumbled on CNN. He’s now a laughing stock and sends no fear into the hearts of prosecutors. He’s going to have to testify in the Libby trial, and, damn, it’s hard to look like a credible bully with a packed nose.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Case in point, the trial of Scooter Libby is both horrifying and riveting. Everybody is scrambling to save their butts as the most disciplined administration since that of Tricky Dick Nixon simply implodes and explodes at the same time. (Is that a violation of the laws of physics?)
You’ll remember – those of you old enough anyway – that as Watergate unraveled the same phenomenon was exhibited. Insiders pointed fingers at everyone else to avoid stays at the Graybar Motel, and dimes were dropping on the Justice Department and the FBI like confetti at a ticker tape parade.
Things are so bad that the big bad guy had to come out of hiding and save the turf from the dweebs and geeks in the media and in the prosecutor’s office. For those of us who love to see the Scut Farkuses of the world get their comeuppances. (Note to the very few not familiar with The Christmas Story: Scut was the bully who tormented Ralphie and his buds to the delight of his toady, Grover Dill, until Ralphie turned the tables.)
So Scut, I mean the Vice President, decided to smack down Ralphie, I mean Wolf Blitzer, and show the American public how a real pro handled the media. Sadly for Dick, Wolf Blitzer was in his best Ralphie mode and exposed Cheney for what he is: a bully with nothing to back himself with but bluster.
You’ve all seen the clips of the interview and roared at the cartoons that resulted. Great things are happening in Iraq, and, if it weren’t for Ralphie and his playmates, the American public would see that we’re winning. But Ralphie wouldn’t back down and Scut’s nose got plenty bloodied.
But Cheney’s mistake is far greater than having stumbled on CNN. He’s now a laughing stock and sends no fear into the hearts of prosecutors. He’s going to have to testify in the Libby trial, and, damn, it’s hard to look like a credible bully with a packed nose.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Saturday, January 20, 2007
Ready, Set, Go!
No matter what time Google says this was posted, I pressed the button at high noon Eastern Standard Time on January 20, 2007. George W. Bush has exactly two years left in his second and final term as President of the United States. Seven hundred and thirty-one days may not seem long to some, but to those of us who feel we’re serving prison sentences, it looks like an eternity.
As I cross off the days one by one from base camp, the mountain of 731 days looks like Everest. My only hope is that in being superannuated, I’ve served such terms and even longer ones in the past. I only hope that my oxygen supply is sufficient to get me to the peak and back.
These six years have not been without ups. I supported John Kerry, and I’m happy that he lost. Had Bush lost, Kerry and the rest of us appalled by the fiasco in Baghdad would be blamed for losing Iraq. Hard as it is to believe in retrospect, George Bush was able to fake out 51% of the voters in 2004 and convince them that he was the answer. Again, what was the question?
Another positive, the neoconservatives are losing credibility as rapidly as the Titanic took on water. John McCain is done as potential president. Joe Lieberman is the president’s leading publicist and is outed for what he really is, a Republican neocon. These people are dangerous to America, and the voters now fully perceive it. Many evangelicals are also awakening and are beginning to understand that separation of church and state may have some good points and are splitting down the middle.
In every era good ideas are carried to illogical extremes. Ronald Reagan was indeed the embodiment of neoconservative and evangelical hopes and dreams after Vietnam. Republicans following him carried out his philosophy far beyond what reasonable and pragmatic politicians should have, and George W. Bush, clearly a messianic zealot, took Reaganism to heights of folly.
Sadly, the downs of this presidency are beyond discussion. The costs of this madness will be with us for decades. Since we’ve been over them hundreds of times, I’ll simply close by saying that I intend not to miss a single opportunity to cross out another day in this horrible term. The decider has been working too hard, and thinking is not his game. Count with me to the day we can send him home where he can ride his bike and cut brush without ever having to strain his brain again.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
As I cross off the days one by one from base camp, the mountain of 731 days looks like Everest. My only hope is that in being superannuated, I’ve served such terms and even longer ones in the past. I only hope that my oxygen supply is sufficient to get me to the peak and back.
These six years have not been without ups. I supported John Kerry, and I’m happy that he lost. Had Bush lost, Kerry and the rest of us appalled by the fiasco in Baghdad would be blamed for losing Iraq. Hard as it is to believe in retrospect, George Bush was able to fake out 51% of the voters in 2004 and convince them that he was the answer. Again, what was the question?
Another positive, the neoconservatives are losing credibility as rapidly as the Titanic took on water. John McCain is done as potential president. Joe Lieberman is the president’s leading publicist and is outed for what he really is, a Republican neocon. These people are dangerous to America, and the voters now fully perceive it. Many evangelicals are also awakening and are beginning to understand that separation of church and state may have some good points and are splitting down the middle.
In every era good ideas are carried to illogical extremes. Ronald Reagan was indeed the embodiment of neoconservative and evangelical hopes and dreams after Vietnam. Republicans following him carried out his philosophy far beyond what reasonable and pragmatic politicians should have, and George W. Bush, clearly a messianic zealot, took Reaganism to heights of folly.
Sadly, the downs of this presidency are beyond discussion. The costs of this madness will be with us for decades. Since we’ve been over them hundreds of times, I’ll simply close by saying that I intend not to miss a single opportunity to cross out another day in this horrible term. The decider has been working too hard, and thinking is not his game. Count with me to the day we can send him home where he can ride his bike and cut brush without ever having to strain his brain again.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Sunday, January 14, 2007
Making it UP
This is the continuation of my series on how you – yes, you - might write the Great American Novel. Those of you who have already made up your stories should ignore this posting and keep on typing. This note is for those stuck staring at a blank document.
I guess we might begin by attempting to figure out what kind of story might make a novel for you. I think the novel must have a plot rather than simply relate a story. Think about it; stories are simply recitations of the facts in sequence while plots are stories that have causes.
A pretty straight forward story might be: `Jack and Jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water. Jack fell down and broke his crown and Jill came tumbling after.' There is no plot here; rather it is a recitation of what happened in time order.
For there to be a plot causation must be added. Even in this little fairy tale the possibilities for cause are almost infinite. Jack might have fallen because he tried to get fresh with Jill and when she reacted badly he stumbled and fell on his head. Conversely, she might have surprised him with attention and he fell down in trying escape. And on and on go the possibilities.
There have been successful novels written without conflict and barely a hint of causation but they’re few and far between, so you might want to add a little conflict. A violation of one or more of the Ten Commandments is always a good starting point when you’re seeking trouble. Murder, adultery, and coveting one’s neighbor’s wife or goods have been the sources of lots of ideas. War is a solid starting point for many great stories, and the battle of the sexes is the fodder of many tales. Coming of age is big so is court room drama. But you get the point; the more rage the better.
As I’ve said, novels may be characterized as belonging to an almost endless number of genres from private eye, Gothic, anti-war, fantasy, to whatever, but, in addition to plot which I discussed above all genres spend time on character development.
I hate to say it, but the process of creating novels gets a little dicey at this point because there’s no clear line of distinction between character and plot. One of my favorite books on writing novels, Oakley Hall’s The Art & Craft of Novel Writing, cites one of the great novelists of the past who was also one of the first and best analysts of the craft, Henry James, whose opinion was that character determined incident and incident was the illustration of character.
Let this very humble novelist try to clarify the difference. Writers who emphasize plot leave character development to a secondary role. Action books such as those written by Tom Clancy stress the intricacies of plot and their heroes demonstrate character by tending to punch, shoot, sweat and bleed a lot. Ian Flemming easily fits into this mode as well, and his James Bond, while memorable, is not a person with whom we can empathize, except in fantasy.
Character driven novels on the other hand stress the impact of events and conflict on the ethical, moral, or psychological aspects of their protagonists. Anna Karenina, David Copperfield, Huckleberry Finn, and Atticus Finch are memorable for their moral courage, ethical dilemmas, or epiphanies rather than for scaling tall buildings in a single bound.
I might pause here to opine that if in this day and age your goal is to become rich from your writing – truly a long shot but there’s no harm in trying – you might stress plot. On the other hand, if you want to try your hand at literary excellence then character driven tales might just be for you. I’ve chosen the latter without great material reward to date. Although the annual pizza parties for the grandkids is a very happy affair even if I have to dip into capital to spring for the tip.
Those of you already well along with your story might wish to take time to make judgments on whether to stress plot or character. Those still working on your opening sentence, how about: “Call me Ishmael.” Or, “It was love at first sight.” Just kidding, these have been taken by people who sat before the blank page too.
I’ll be back.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
I guess we might begin by attempting to figure out what kind of story might make a novel for you. I think the novel must have a plot rather than simply relate a story. Think about it; stories are simply recitations of the facts in sequence while plots are stories that have causes.
A pretty straight forward story might be: `Jack and Jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water. Jack fell down and broke his crown and Jill came tumbling after.' There is no plot here; rather it is a recitation of what happened in time order.
For there to be a plot causation must be added. Even in this little fairy tale the possibilities for cause are almost infinite. Jack might have fallen because he tried to get fresh with Jill and when she reacted badly he stumbled and fell on his head. Conversely, she might have surprised him with attention and he fell down in trying escape. And on and on go the possibilities.
There have been successful novels written without conflict and barely a hint of causation but they’re few and far between, so you might want to add a little conflict. A violation of one or more of the Ten Commandments is always a good starting point when you’re seeking trouble. Murder, adultery, and coveting one’s neighbor’s wife or goods have been the sources of lots of ideas. War is a solid starting point for many great stories, and the battle of the sexes is the fodder of many tales. Coming of age is big so is court room drama. But you get the point; the more rage the better.
As I’ve said, novels may be characterized as belonging to an almost endless number of genres from private eye, Gothic, anti-war, fantasy, to whatever, but, in addition to plot which I discussed above all genres spend time on character development.
I hate to say it, but the process of creating novels gets a little dicey at this point because there’s no clear line of distinction between character and plot. One of my favorite books on writing novels, Oakley Hall’s The Art & Craft of Novel Writing, cites one of the great novelists of the past who was also one of the first and best analysts of the craft, Henry James, whose opinion was that character determined incident and incident was the illustration of character.
Let this very humble novelist try to clarify the difference. Writers who emphasize plot leave character development to a secondary role. Action books such as those written by Tom Clancy stress the intricacies of plot and their heroes demonstrate character by tending to punch, shoot, sweat and bleed a lot. Ian Flemming easily fits into this mode as well, and his James Bond, while memorable, is not a person with whom we can empathize, except in fantasy.
Character driven novels on the other hand stress the impact of events and conflict on the ethical, moral, or psychological aspects of their protagonists. Anna Karenina, David Copperfield, Huckleberry Finn, and Atticus Finch are memorable for their moral courage, ethical dilemmas, or epiphanies rather than for scaling tall buildings in a single bound.
I might pause here to opine that if in this day and age your goal is to become rich from your writing – truly a long shot but there’s no harm in trying – you might stress plot. On the other hand, if you want to try your hand at literary excellence then character driven tales might just be for you. I’ve chosen the latter without great material reward to date. Although the annual pizza parties for the grandkids is a very happy affair even if I have to dip into capital to spring for the tip.
Those of you already well along with your story might wish to take time to make judgments on whether to stress plot or character. Those still working on your opening sentence, how about: “Call me Ishmael.” Or, “It was love at first sight.” Just kidding, these have been taken by people who sat before the blank page too.
I’ll be back.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Friday, January 12, 2007
UP and DOWN
People tell me they could write a book but don’t know how. In my last posting, my bona fides as a novelist were clearly established and, based on this great track record, I’m going to tell you in one sentence the great secret of how to write a novel. MAKE IT UP AND WRITE IT DOWN.
I’ve read more books on how to write novels than anybody I know and probably more than people paid to tell you how to create the great American novel. The answer is always the same: UP and DOWN. For those of you that are among those included in the first sentence of this posting, you should already be at your work station and working right now. You’ve already made it UP so now write it DOWN.
You’re skeptical? Don’t be. If you really want to write a novel you have to have story. It could be a Tom Clancy knock-off, a bodice ripper, a private eye story, or, like mine, a story from history, whatever. Tolstoy went to a coroner’s inquest on the suicide of a young woman. It seems she threw herself under the wheels of a train after an adulterous affair ended badly. Voila: Anna Karenina. Hemingway went off to the Great War as an ambulance driver. Enough blood and gore to turn his stomach and he produced A Farewell to Arms.
I’m not advocating that you have an affair or join the marines and go off to Iraq. My point is that inspiration is all around us. It’s up to you. J.D. Salinger went to a museum and got an idea, and people are still reading about that little snot, Holden. I museumed too and wrote my novel, Au Revoir, L’Acadie, about ethnic tensions during the Great Depression.
How the bodice rippers do it is beyond me, but they do. And so could you.
The experts, those that have written books explaining the process, can’t make it any simpler or say it more clearly than this: MAKE IT UP; WRITE IT DOWN. You got your story from this morning’s newspaper. Eureka!
So now it’s down to business, and, as you write, you just have to figure out what makes it interesting to others. There’s where the experts come in. It really is just technicalities and tricks that great writers like Tolstoy, Austen, Hemingway, Dickens, Alcott, and hundreds of others have discovered and applied, and you can use them too. But not now; for now, just write your story down.
Obviously, the enemy is inertia. Hemingway, when asked how he went about writing a best seller, replied as any honest procrastinator would, “First you clean the refrigerator.” Okay, so you’ve cleaned the fridge, cut the grass, and put the dog to sleep. No more excuses? Go!
It’s as simple as that. UP and DOWN.
Remember your high school English class; write your topic sentence. Done? There, you’re already crawling, and, in future postings, I’ll describe more baby steps you can easily take. Goodness, before you know it you’ll be racing to the climax of that great novel. Your grandkids deserve pizza as much as mine; do it!
Remember: UP and DOWN. Till then,
Blog on!
Wild Bill
I’ve read more books on how to write novels than anybody I know and probably more than people paid to tell you how to create the great American novel. The answer is always the same: UP and DOWN. For those of you that are among those included in the first sentence of this posting, you should already be at your work station and working right now. You’ve already made it UP so now write it DOWN.
You’re skeptical? Don’t be. If you really want to write a novel you have to have story. It could be a Tom Clancy knock-off, a bodice ripper, a private eye story, or, like mine, a story from history, whatever. Tolstoy went to a coroner’s inquest on the suicide of a young woman. It seems she threw herself under the wheels of a train after an adulterous affair ended badly. Voila: Anna Karenina. Hemingway went off to the Great War as an ambulance driver. Enough blood and gore to turn his stomach and he produced A Farewell to Arms.
I’m not advocating that you have an affair or join the marines and go off to Iraq. My point is that inspiration is all around us. It’s up to you. J.D. Salinger went to a museum and got an idea, and people are still reading about that little snot, Holden. I museumed too and wrote my novel, Au Revoir, L’Acadie, about ethnic tensions during the Great Depression.
How the bodice rippers do it is beyond me, but they do. And so could you.
The experts, those that have written books explaining the process, can’t make it any simpler or say it more clearly than this: MAKE IT UP; WRITE IT DOWN. You got your story from this morning’s newspaper. Eureka!
So now it’s down to business, and, as you write, you just have to figure out what makes it interesting to others. There’s where the experts come in. It really is just technicalities and tricks that great writers like Tolstoy, Austen, Hemingway, Dickens, Alcott, and hundreds of others have discovered and applied, and you can use them too. But not now; for now, just write your story down.
Obviously, the enemy is inertia. Hemingway, when asked how he went about writing a best seller, replied as any honest procrastinator would, “First you clean the refrigerator.” Okay, so you’ve cleaned the fridge, cut the grass, and put the dog to sleep. No more excuses? Go!
It’s as simple as that. UP and DOWN.
Remember your high school English class; write your topic sentence. Done? There, you’re already crawling, and, in future postings, I’ll describe more baby steps you can easily take. Goodness, before you know it you’ll be racing to the climax of that great novel. Your grandkids deserve pizza as much as mine; do it!
Remember: UP and DOWN. Till then,
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
You can do it
I’m beyond outrage and have said everything within – and even beyond - the bounds of propriety about George Bush and his war in Iraq. Since my goal is to build and store bile until the 2008 election cycle, I have little to add to my displeasure with the president over the coming months; besides, Ted Kennedy and other Democrats are giving voice to my complaints and there’s little need for me to pile on. But I do want to maintain your interest until the time comes to gear up for the big one that will send the decider back to Crawford and let him settle on what brush must face the machete.
Since I am a professional novelist, I thought you might find some of my experiences and observations about writing interesting. This especially true since I make enough money from my royalties to indulge each of my grandchildren with half of a pizza (medium) and a soft drink (small) every year. I’m actually one of the better sellers among present day American novelists, so don’t give up your day job until you hear me out.
Should every one of my readers give authoring a novel a try? That’s for each of them to decide; George Bush won’t help with this one. You should consider, however, that more than 10,000 novels come on the market each year, and most of them, like mine don’t make much – or even any - money for the owners of their rights. In addition, tens of thousands additional tall tales fail even to make into print every year. Are you clear on my point? This isn’t really something that most people can do to keep the wolf at bay. Do not give notice or describe in detail the talents of your bosses until you have a satisfactory publication advance in hand – make that cashed and in your account.
Let me begin by saying it’s easier to get published today than ever before. You write it; it can be printed. I self published my first book, A Tattered Coat Upon A Stick. I had a fairly high opinion of it but couldn’t get a single agent or publisher or agent to even read it. Had they read and rejected it, I might have given up and there never would have been the market for half pepperoni and half onion and green pepper pizzas that has surged since I plunged. The cost of self publication is small and has never been easier; more on this in a later posting.
My three published novels represent but the tip of the iceberg. I began by attempting to be a commercial novelist and wrote two thrillers. They weren’t bad, but let me tell you the people who successfully write in this genre are very good, very competitive and very well connected. After looking over the products I was seeking to displace, I concluded that I wasn’t up to the task. I’m proud to say that draft copies of these two great books along with hundreds of rejection slips make up a significant part of the highest point on the South Coast of Massachusetts. Methane from these rotters will be lighting homes in the Bay State for decades to come. Those trees did not die completely in vain.
But should you attempt such a work for your personal satisfaction? Why not? The Young and the Restless, the soap opera my wife has been watching for more than thirty years, preaches that everyone has at least one novel in them and there is almost always one author in residence on the set at all times. It appears that a working writer provides the show the necessary gravitas to keep the homebound intellectuals glued to their chairs with minimal guilt.
My friends, after much private laughter, now treat me as if I am a real writer, albeit one who starves. A thick skin and a decade of work will do that for you. I can remember the shame and unworthiness felt when I told the local bookstore owner that I was a writer and wanted to have a signing for my self published masterpiece. She didn’t laugh in my face although there were same strange noises emanating from the back room when she excused herself to get writing material.
I’ll drop it here and pick it up next time. Perhaps Home Depot can provide our motto: “You can do it; we can help.”
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Since I am a professional novelist, I thought you might find some of my experiences and observations about writing interesting. This especially true since I make enough money from my royalties to indulge each of my grandchildren with half of a pizza (medium) and a soft drink (small) every year. I’m actually one of the better sellers among present day American novelists, so don’t give up your day job until you hear me out.
Should every one of my readers give authoring a novel a try? That’s for each of them to decide; George Bush won’t help with this one. You should consider, however, that more than 10,000 novels come on the market each year, and most of them, like mine don’t make much – or even any - money for the owners of their rights. In addition, tens of thousands additional tall tales fail even to make into print every year. Are you clear on my point? This isn’t really something that most people can do to keep the wolf at bay. Do not give notice or describe in detail the talents of your bosses until you have a satisfactory publication advance in hand – make that cashed and in your account.
Let me begin by saying it’s easier to get published today than ever before. You write it; it can be printed. I self published my first book, A Tattered Coat Upon A Stick. I had a fairly high opinion of it but couldn’t get a single agent or publisher or agent to even read it. Had they read and rejected it, I might have given up and there never would have been the market for half pepperoni and half onion and green pepper pizzas that has surged since I plunged. The cost of self publication is small and has never been easier; more on this in a later posting.
My three published novels represent but the tip of the iceberg. I began by attempting to be a commercial novelist and wrote two thrillers. They weren’t bad, but let me tell you the people who successfully write in this genre are very good, very competitive and very well connected. After looking over the products I was seeking to displace, I concluded that I wasn’t up to the task. I’m proud to say that draft copies of these two great books along with hundreds of rejection slips make up a significant part of the highest point on the South Coast of Massachusetts. Methane from these rotters will be lighting homes in the Bay State for decades to come. Those trees did not die completely in vain.
But should you attempt such a work for your personal satisfaction? Why not? The Young and the Restless, the soap opera my wife has been watching for more than thirty years, preaches that everyone has at least one novel in them and there is almost always one author in residence on the set at all times. It appears that a working writer provides the show the necessary gravitas to keep the homebound intellectuals glued to their chairs with minimal guilt.
My friends, after much private laughter, now treat me as if I am a real writer, albeit one who starves. A thick skin and a decade of work will do that for you. I can remember the shame and unworthiness felt when I told the local bookstore owner that I was a writer and wanted to have a signing for my self published masterpiece. She didn’t laugh in my face although there were same strange noises emanating from the back room when she excused herself to get writing material.
I’ll drop it here and pick it up next time. Perhaps Home Depot can provide our motto: “You can do it; we can help.”
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Sunday, January 07, 2007
Congratualtions Connecticut
Congratulations to moderate Democrat, Republican and Independent voters in Connecticut. In polls taken prior to last fall’s election it was clear that while the vast majority of these folks were unhappy with the Iraq War, they were reluctant to vote for the ultra-liberal Ned Lamont who was painted by Joe Lieberman as a Senator likely to call for precipitous withdrawal from the fray.
It is very clear that these voters wanted as rapid an end to the conflict as possible consistent with the best national security interests of the nation so they stuck with tried and true Joe Lieberman for their senator. Joe promised to remain an independent voice in congress and to caucus with the Democrats.
Now that President Bush is in the final stages of planning a major surge in troop levels in Iraq and especially around Baghdad despite what even strictly objective observers such as Wild Bill viewed as a repudiation of the entire misbegotten venture by the electorate last November, he has two major cheerleaders in the Senate, John McCain and JOE LIEBERMAN.
So to you good folks in Connecticut who thought you were voting for a rational phased withdrawal from Iraq, welcome to the new world of building up the troop levels and preparations for allowing the next president to begin the escape from this nightmare with all of its attendant casualties and costs to our troops and to the Pin The Tale on the Donkey Party for the winner of the Who Lost Iraq Contest.
If you’re unhappy with the way things seem to be turning out, tune in to the lamentations emanating from the Senate Democratic Caucus which I guess Joe uses as source of information on Democratic strategy for his Republican cohorts and blame the face in your own looking glass.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
It is very clear that these voters wanted as rapid an end to the conflict as possible consistent with the best national security interests of the nation so they stuck with tried and true Joe Lieberman for their senator. Joe promised to remain an independent voice in congress and to caucus with the Democrats.
Now that President Bush is in the final stages of planning a major surge in troop levels in Iraq and especially around Baghdad despite what even strictly objective observers such as Wild Bill viewed as a repudiation of the entire misbegotten venture by the electorate last November, he has two major cheerleaders in the Senate, John McCain and JOE LIEBERMAN.
So to you good folks in Connecticut who thought you were voting for a rational phased withdrawal from Iraq, welcome to the new world of building up the troop levels and preparations for allowing the next president to begin the escape from this nightmare with all of its attendant casualties and costs to our troops and to the Pin The Tale on the Donkey Party for the winner of the Who Lost Iraq Contest.
If you’re unhappy with the way things seem to be turning out, tune in to the lamentations emanating from the Senate Democratic Caucus which I guess Joe uses as source of information on Democratic strategy for his Republican cohorts and blame the face in your own looking glass.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Monday, January 01, 2007
2007
As the New year begins, we are filled with the need to resolve to make changes in ourselves. The media is filled with the contemplations of wise men and women, and there is little need for Wild Bill to add to your woe.
The following piece from the New York Times is the effort by one very old historian to shed a little light on his passion and our guidepost. As an amateur historian, I felt a real kinship with the assertion.
I hope that you enjoy it as much as I did.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
By ARTHUR M. SCHLESINGER Jr.
Published: January 1, 2007
MANY signs point to a growing historical consciousness among the American people. I trust that this is so. It is useful to remember that history is to the nation as memory is to the individual. As persons deprived of memory become disoriented and lost, not knowing where they have been and where they are going, so a nation denied a conception of the past will be disabled in dealing with its present and its future. “The longer you look back,” said Winston Churchill, “the farther you can look forward.”
But all historians are prisoners of their own experience. We bring to history the preconceptions of our personalities and of our age. We cannot seize on ultimate and absolute truths. So the historian is committed to a doomed enterprise — the quest for an unattainable objectivity.
Conceptions of the past are far from stable. They are perennially revised by the urgencies of the present. When new urgencies arise in our own times and lives, the historian’s spotlight shifts, probing at last into the darkness, throwing into sharp relief things that were always there but that earlier historians had carelessly excised from the collective memory. New voices ring out of the historical dark and demand to be heard.
One has only to note how in the last half-century the movements for women’s rights and civil rights have reformulated and renewed American history. Thus the present incessantly reinvents the past. In this sense, all history, as Benedetto Croce said, is contemporary history. It is these permutations of consciousness that make history so endlessly fascinating an intellectual adventure. “The one duty we owe to history,” said Oscar Wilde, “is to rewrite it.”
We are the world’s dominant military power, and I believe a consciousness of history is a moral necessity for a nation possessed of overweening power. History verifies John F. Kennedy’s proposition, stated in the first year of his thousand days: “We must face the fact that the United States is neither omnipotent or omniscient — that we are only 6 percent of the world’s population; that we cannot impose our will upon the other 94 percent of mankind; that we cannot right every wrong or reverse each adversity; and therefore there cannot be an American solution to every world problem.”
History is the best antidote to delusions of omnipotence and omniscience. Self-knowledge is the indispensable prelude to self-control, for the nation as well as for the individual, and history should forever remind us of the limits of our passing perspectives. It should strengthen us to resist the pressure to convert momentary impulses into moral absolutes. It should lead us to acknowledge our profound and chastening frailty as human beings — to a recognition of the fact, so often and so sadly displayed, that the future outwits all our certitudes and that the possibilities of the future are more various than the human intellect is designed to conceive.
Sometimes, when I am particularly depressed, I ascribe our behavior to stupidity — the stupidity of our leadership, the stupidity of our culture. Three decades ago, we suffered defeat in an unwinnable war against tribalism, the most fanatic of political emotions, fighting against a country about which we knew nothing and in which we had no vital interests. Vietnam was hopeless enough, but to repeat the same arrogant folly 30 years later in Iraq is unforgivable. The Swedish statesman Axel Oxenstierna famously said, “Behold, my son, with how little wisdom the world is governed.”
A nation informed by a vivid understanding of the ironies of history is, I believe, best equipped to manage the tragic temptations of military power. Let us not bully our way through life, but let a growing sensitivity to history temper and civilize our use of power. In the meantime, let a thousand historical flowers bloom. History is never a closed book or a final verdict. It is forever in the making. Let historians never forsake the quest for knowledge in the interests of an ideology, a religion, a race, a nation.
The great strength of history in a free society is its capacity for self-correction. This is the endless excitement of historical writing — the search to reconstruct what went before, a quest illuminated by those ever-changing prisms that continually place old questions in a new light.
History is a doomed enterprise that we happily pursue because of the thrill of the hunt, because exploring the past is such fun, because of the intellectual challenges involved, because a nation needs to know its own history. Or so we historians insist. Because in the end, a nation’s history must be both the guide and the domain not so much of its historians as its citizens.
Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., who has won Pulitzer Prizes for history and biography, is the author, most recently, of “War and the American Presidency.”
The following piece from the New York Times is the effort by one very old historian to shed a little light on his passion and our guidepost. As an amateur historian, I felt a real kinship with the assertion.
I hope that you enjoy it as much as I did.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
By ARTHUR M. SCHLESINGER Jr.
Published: January 1, 2007
MANY signs point to a growing historical consciousness among the American people. I trust that this is so. It is useful to remember that history is to the nation as memory is to the individual. As persons deprived of memory become disoriented and lost, not knowing where they have been and where they are going, so a nation denied a conception of the past will be disabled in dealing with its present and its future. “The longer you look back,” said Winston Churchill, “the farther you can look forward.”
But all historians are prisoners of their own experience. We bring to history the preconceptions of our personalities and of our age. We cannot seize on ultimate and absolute truths. So the historian is committed to a doomed enterprise — the quest for an unattainable objectivity.
Conceptions of the past are far from stable. They are perennially revised by the urgencies of the present. When new urgencies arise in our own times and lives, the historian’s spotlight shifts, probing at last into the darkness, throwing into sharp relief things that were always there but that earlier historians had carelessly excised from the collective memory. New voices ring out of the historical dark and demand to be heard.
One has only to note how in the last half-century the movements for women’s rights and civil rights have reformulated and renewed American history. Thus the present incessantly reinvents the past. In this sense, all history, as Benedetto Croce said, is contemporary history. It is these permutations of consciousness that make history so endlessly fascinating an intellectual adventure. “The one duty we owe to history,” said Oscar Wilde, “is to rewrite it.”
We are the world’s dominant military power, and I believe a consciousness of history is a moral necessity for a nation possessed of overweening power. History verifies John F. Kennedy’s proposition, stated in the first year of his thousand days: “We must face the fact that the United States is neither omnipotent or omniscient — that we are only 6 percent of the world’s population; that we cannot impose our will upon the other 94 percent of mankind; that we cannot right every wrong or reverse each adversity; and therefore there cannot be an American solution to every world problem.”
History is the best antidote to delusions of omnipotence and omniscience. Self-knowledge is the indispensable prelude to self-control, for the nation as well as for the individual, and history should forever remind us of the limits of our passing perspectives. It should strengthen us to resist the pressure to convert momentary impulses into moral absolutes. It should lead us to acknowledge our profound and chastening frailty as human beings — to a recognition of the fact, so often and so sadly displayed, that the future outwits all our certitudes and that the possibilities of the future are more various than the human intellect is designed to conceive.
Sometimes, when I am particularly depressed, I ascribe our behavior to stupidity — the stupidity of our leadership, the stupidity of our culture. Three decades ago, we suffered defeat in an unwinnable war against tribalism, the most fanatic of political emotions, fighting against a country about which we knew nothing and in which we had no vital interests. Vietnam was hopeless enough, but to repeat the same arrogant folly 30 years later in Iraq is unforgivable. The Swedish statesman Axel Oxenstierna famously said, “Behold, my son, with how little wisdom the world is governed.”
A nation informed by a vivid understanding of the ironies of history is, I believe, best equipped to manage the tragic temptations of military power. Let us not bully our way through life, but let a growing sensitivity to history temper and civilize our use of power. In the meantime, let a thousand historical flowers bloom. History is never a closed book or a final verdict. It is forever in the making. Let historians never forsake the quest for knowledge in the interests of an ideology, a religion, a race, a nation.
The great strength of history in a free society is its capacity for self-correction. This is the endless excitement of historical writing — the search to reconstruct what went before, a quest illuminated by those ever-changing prisms that continually place old questions in a new light.
History is a doomed enterprise that we happily pursue because of the thrill of the hunt, because exploring the past is such fun, because of the intellectual challenges involved, because a nation needs to know its own history. Or so we historians insist. Because in the end, a nation’s history must be both the guide and the domain not so much of its historians as its citizens.
Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., who has won Pulitzer Prizes for history and biography, is the author, most recently, of “War and the American Presidency.”
Friday, December 29, 2006
I can see clearly now
It’s so easy to see when it’s happening to us and so hard when we’re doing it to somebody else.
When Hugo Chavez calls George Bush the devil or tells us what to do, Americans are offended and tell Hugo where to go. (That rhymes nicely.) The same goes for the Chinese, Iranians or whatever other bunch of gangsters knows better than we how to run our affairs.
But we’re oh so hurt when Iraqis, Saudis, Palestinians, Israelis, Koreans, Frenchmen, or Germans tell us we shouldn’t be telling them what to do or how to do it.
Why is it so clear one way and not the other?
Blog on!
Wild Bill
When Hugo Chavez calls George Bush the devil or tells us what to do, Americans are offended and tell Hugo where to go. (That rhymes nicely.) The same goes for the Chinese, Iranians or whatever other bunch of gangsters knows better than we how to run our affairs.
But we’re oh so hurt when Iraqis, Saudis, Palestinians, Israelis, Koreans, Frenchmen, or Germans tell us we shouldn’t be telling them what to do or how to do it.
Why is it so clear one way and not the other?
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Wednesday, December 27, 2006
Gerald Ford
Any of you who read this blog with regularity know that Gerald Ford was one of my favorite presidents. One of my close friends and long time colleague, Gordon Vander Till was a close personal associate of the late president, and I asked him to share some of his memories of the man with you and me. Here's Gordon's short take on Mr. Ford:
It was my great pleasure and privilege to serve Mr. Ford as his first full time special assistant in the Grand Rapids office. When he asked me to become his presence in the district, neither of us really knew fully what a position description would look like. I spent two weeks in the Washington office learning their protocols, meeting congressional liaison persons in various department and agencies of the federal government, and learning the personal predilections of the staff located in H-230 of the U.S. Capitol.
On my last day of this accelerated indoctrination, March 19, 1969, Mr. Ford and I had a brief sitdown and review. One of the most enduring admonitions I recall was his explicit direction that there was no political test in his office. "When someone comes in to seek help," he stated, "remember that I was elected to serve ALL the people of the congressional district." He told me that I had his permission to sign his name on correspondence if I felt it was necessary, and he gave me his telephone credit card (at&t) with a dime in the slot -- "call if you need something," was his final direction.
After press notices were sent to local media in the 5th congressional district of Michigan, the office phone rang "off the hook" as we used to say. Local service clubs were anxious to hear about what was transpiring -- and after some initiatory dealings with media, people started showing up on our doorstep. The next five years of my life was spent trying to help constituents resolve their problems with government, especially the federal government.
Along the way I also managed to oversee two re-election campaigns, find time to speak at commencements, and help people resolve "barking dog" complaints. When Ford was dedicating a new section of expressway in the northern end of his district, one of the media types asked him for speculation on the future of Spiro T. Agnew. . . and then asked if Mr. Ford would be interested in becoming vice-president. Ford gave a hearty laugh and said, "We still have a vice president." We left the ceremony and two weeks later Ford was named by Nixon to succeed Agnew.
Sorta like me, you know, son of a trucker to assistant to a President of the U.S. Along the road of life, one never knows the little surprises that may arise.
Gordon
It was my great pleasure and privilege to serve Mr. Ford as his first full time special assistant in the Grand Rapids office. When he asked me to become his presence in the district, neither of us really knew fully what a position description would look like. I spent two weeks in the Washington office learning their protocols, meeting congressional liaison persons in various department and agencies of the federal government, and learning the personal predilections of the staff located in H-230 of the U.S. Capitol.
On my last day of this accelerated indoctrination, March 19, 1969, Mr. Ford and I had a brief sitdown and review. One of the most enduring admonitions I recall was his explicit direction that there was no political test in his office. "When someone comes in to seek help," he stated, "remember that I was elected to serve ALL the people of the congressional district." He told me that I had his permission to sign his name on correspondence if I felt it was necessary, and he gave me his telephone credit card (at&t) with a dime in the slot -- "call if you need something," was his final direction.
After press notices were sent to local media in the 5th congressional district of Michigan, the office phone rang "off the hook" as we used to say. Local service clubs were anxious to hear about what was transpiring -- and after some initiatory dealings with media, people started showing up on our doorstep. The next five years of my life was spent trying to help constituents resolve their problems with government, especially the federal government.
Along the way I also managed to oversee two re-election campaigns, find time to speak at commencements, and help people resolve "barking dog" complaints. When Ford was dedicating a new section of expressway in the northern end of his district, one of the media types asked him for speculation on the future of Spiro T. Agnew. . . and then asked if Mr. Ford would be interested in becoming vice-president. Ford gave a hearty laugh and said, "We still have a vice president." We left the ceremony and two weeks later Ford was named by Nixon to succeed Agnew.
Sorta like me, you know, son of a trucker to assistant to a President of the U.S. Along the road of life, one never knows the little surprises that may arise.
Gordon
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Coming Through!
I’m pulling on the cardigan and getting Andy Rooney angry again, and, as you well know, that’s mad as hell. Today I’m angry with the press – like I’m usually not. Today it’s different because a major news story in two papers that I checked (The Washington Post and the Boston Globe) reported the facts in one of their news stories and offered no editorial balancing. How bad is that?
It seems that the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a non-profit organization that appears to have no axe to grind – right - says that if you buy a small car and you get hit by a big car you’re more likely to be pushing up daisies than if you’d switched sides. Now the people at the Institute didn’t act surprised; in fact, they seemed to understand the laws of physics.
It’s kind of like Wild Bill deciding to play running back for the New York Giants breaking through a hole on the right side and meeting Brian Urlacher, linebacker for the Chicago Bears, coming full speed the other way. Despite wearing the same protective gear, guess who the memorial service will be for?
But don’t the morons buying those mini-movers have a number of motives beyond wanting to have their relatives hit the lottery of a huge insurance settlement after they’ve gone? Could it be that these folks have been told that they shouldn’t be burning up too many hydrocarbons, so they’re trying to save the planet? Couldn’t they also know that putting the feedbag on their magnum SUV is expensive to the point of hurt and that it burns up an ever scarcer natural resource? Some of them may have actually though through the process to the point that they think the manufacturing of these vehicles uses less steel and that they’re are cheaper to build and sell. And there must be other selfish and do good reasons for their stupid decision to drive these rolling coffins.
In the continuing debate on personal safety, selfishness, hubris, and screw the losers in life’s economic lottery on the EIB Broadcasting Network , el Rushbo repeatedly declaims to his brilliant ditto heads that they should run out and buy the biggest heaviest monster they can fit into their mega-garages. Rush knows that Global Warming is nothing but a figment of Al Gore’s overactive imagination and that revving up the Sherman Tank in the back yard is the best way to show your independence and your true blue American patriotism.
It’s all well and good that the Institute should describe the facts that the little guy in a collision is likely to get the worst of it. But don’t you think the papers have at least a little obligation to point out some of the reasons why – beyond the price of gas – people should be conserving natural resources and thinking about the environment?
In a related story, it is reported today that the Navy is going to retire the USS John F. Kennedy next year. This mega-ship, many football fields long and twenty-three stories high is one of the last ships to burn oil. Wouldn’t it be prudent for a rich ditto head to put training wheels on `Big John’ - as the sailors call it – and drive it down the freeway? Nobody on that bad boy is going to get smushed in a head banger with a Toyota.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
It seems that the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a non-profit organization that appears to have no axe to grind – right - says that if you buy a small car and you get hit by a big car you’re more likely to be pushing up daisies than if you’d switched sides. Now the people at the Institute didn’t act surprised; in fact, they seemed to understand the laws of physics.
It’s kind of like Wild Bill deciding to play running back for the New York Giants breaking through a hole on the right side and meeting Brian Urlacher, linebacker for the Chicago Bears, coming full speed the other way. Despite wearing the same protective gear, guess who the memorial service will be for?
But don’t the morons buying those mini-movers have a number of motives beyond wanting to have their relatives hit the lottery of a huge insurance settlement after they’ve gone? Could it be that these folks have been told that they shouldn’t be burning up too many hydrocarbons, so they’re trying to save the planet? Couldn’t they also know that putting the feedbag on their magnum SUV is expensive to the point of hurt and that it burns up an ever scarcer natural resource? Some of them may have actually though through the process to the point that they think the manufacturing of these vehicles uses less steel and that they’re are cheaper to build and sell. And there must be other selfish and do good reasons for their stupid decision to drive these rolling coffins.
In the continuing debate on personal safety, selfishness, hubris, and screw the losers in life’s economic lottery on the EIB Broadcasting Network , el Rushbo repeatedly declaims to his brilliant ditto heads that they should run out and buy the biggest heaviest monster they can fit into their mega-garages. Rush knows that Global Warming is nothing but a figment of Al Gore’s overactive imagination and that revving up the Sherman Tank in the back yard is the best way to show your independence and your true blue American patriotism.
It’s all well and good that the Institute should describe the facts that the little guy in a collision is likely to get the worst of it. But don’t you think the papers have at least a little obligation to point out some of the reasons why – beyond the price of gas – people should be conserving natural resources and thinking about the environment?
In a related story, it is reported today that the Navy is going to retire the USS John F. Kennedy next year. This mega-ship, many football fields long and twenty-three stories high is one of the last ships to burn oil. Wouldn’t it be prudent for a rich ditto head to put training wheels on `Big John’ - as the sailors call it – and drive it down the freeway? Nobody on that bad boy is going to get smushed in a head banger with a Toyota.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Saturday, December 16, 2006
The Only Thing We Have To Fear
Given the U.S.’s difficult position in Iraq, the rest of the Muslim world and the lowly opinion in which the rest of the world holds America, can there be reason for optimism? While conservative talk show hosts and many of their left wing counterparts see the world – and especially the United States - as going to hell in a hand basket, I don’t share that view and am actually quite optimistic about our future.
The end of the Cold War left the United States as the world’s only super power. The Soviet Union, a social, economic and political bankrupt, threw in the towel and became conservative, inward looking, and well liquored old Russia. George H.W. Bush (Bush 41) became the first president of the modern era, and the elites that defined our world view basked in the glory of the last side standing.
Two groups took most credit for this great and largely unexpected turn of events, the neoconservatives and the evangelical Christians. Having read many books on the subject – none better than Andrew Bacevich’s, The New American Militarism: How Americans Are Seduced By War – it appears that the rise in the political standing of these groups as a result of their apparent success in the Cold War and in providing the foreign policy theories for Bush 41’s successors gave them the right to call the opening moves in the twenty-first century.
We are fortunate that the first great foray into the new millennium was a relatively modest one. How the president proposes to get us out of the quagmire that he created will be difficult, costly and cannot yet be fully fathomed. This decision to invade was probably the worst foreign policy blunder in American history, but, while tragic, it is probably not going to be as costly in blood and bullion as Korea and Vietnam.
Bush 43 will be the poster boy for future presidents who are feeling their oats, and it will be a bold chief executive who takes this nation into an optional war in the next thirty years. Our nose bloodied and our hubris exposed, we are looking forward to a new role in the world.
We may wind up being the leaders of a completely new civilization. We seem to be drifting away from Europe and forming a new and vital grouping of states, including perhaps all of North America. Certainly, Europe seems to be looking east as it incorporates the states formerly part of the Soviet orbit. The Europeans seem revitalized as result of their great union and seem inclined to thumb their collective noses at us. Oh, we’re still friends, but they resent us as an overbearing partner and have convenient memories of our contributions to their riches and safety over the last sixty years.
But Europe appears unable to solve an ancient riddle that has vexed our species since we walked out of Africa. Should people be assimilated and have upward mobility based on merit or on their traditional place in society. The present owners of the land are not reproducing themselves sufficiently to assure continuity of the society, yet they are unable to successfully deal with those flowing in to fill the longer rungs on the social and economic ladders.
China’s model, while appearing successful on the surface, is fraught with peril for them. The gangsters in charge have opened the economic valves to the creativity of the population but intend to hold onto the levers of political power. Think about that in futuristic terms. The Indians, however dynamic, are still struggling with problems of caste and an over burdensome system of regulation.
Meanwhile the North American Free Trade Agreement appears to have brought Canada, the U.S. and Mexico into a new and powerful amalgam whose workings seem quite different from our old world parents and major competitors. Our internal arguments are creating dynamism qualitatively different from what Don Rumsfeld termed, `Old Europe.’ Even as we struggle with the problems of race and assimilation of newcomers, it is clear that that those committed to equality and upward mobility based on merit maintain the upper hand. Many new groups - regardless of origin, race, religion, gender, or ethnicity (including many from the Islamic world) – have succeeded as individuals and their groups often exceed the wealth and income of the White majority.
These advances have not been made without social difficulties. No matter, America, for all its problems, faces the age old battle of mobility with political and economic power in the hands of those committed to solving it based on equal opportunity, social justice, and ultimately on merit. That is why despite all of our problems, people are willing to give up everything to move here and prosper intellectually, economically, spiritually, and politically.
As these changes take place domestically, China, Russia, Japan, India, and the Islamic civilizations are setting limits on our power, and we seem to be settling in to a slightly more conservative place on the planet. We’re still the biggest kid around, but we’ve been brought up short with a bloody nose in Iraq. Our days of stealing lunch money and picking on the little kids in the cafeteria line of the world’s resources seem to be behind us, at least for a few decades. This is good; our internal creativity far exceeds that of our competitors.
A lot of neoconservatives and evangelicals find this discombobulating, but is it really that bad that we don’t run the whole world? I don’t find it so, and it’s going to be a lot cheaper than the Cold War and the world reach we’re still trying to project. It isn’t like we’re surrendering; we’re just adjusting to a world in which we remain the biggest and strongest nation in the world but one which the rest of the residents have us checked – but not check mated.
Our thoughts of empire have been inspired by Rome and England. Maybe we should rethink our definition to that of Florence. We are the city on the hill. Our residents can create wealth, power, and civilization without conquering everyone in our way just as the Florentines did in the thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.
We’ve still got the world’s most dynamic economic system. Rugged individualism will provide us with ideas and organizations second to none. Our major competitors such as India, Japan, Russia, China, and Europe have leagues to go in deregulating business and industry to the point of our best.
Our richest and most successful citizens while compensated too greatly are showing signs of emulating Renaissance princes and merchant kings by creating such programs as the MacArthur awards to encourage creativity in all fields, and look at what’s happening to the great wealth of such stars as Bill Gates and Warren Buffet as it is being harnessed to cure the world’s ills. Dozens of fortunes have been converted to foundations and trusts designed to make America better. Things are not all bleak, and despite the conscious efforts of many of our leaders to frighten us, we will prevail against ignorance, disease, and poverty.
And look at what the little folks are doing to keep the mighty on the straight and narrow. Tens of thousands of bloggers daily point out that the emperors are without fig leaves. And they can’t be shushed or shot – not all of them anyway.
No, the world’s not all bad and America is far better than many pessimists think; there are many more positive than negative signs. As we move toward 2007, I see the glass as well over half full, and I hope you do too.
Happy Holidays! Peace, prosperity, good health, and happiness in the New Year!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
The end of the Cold War left the United States as the world’s only super power. The Soviet Union, a social, economic and political bankrupt, threw in the towel and became conservative, inward looking, and well liquored old Russia. George H.W. Bush (Bush 41) became the first president of the modern era, and the elites that defined our world view basked in the glory of the last side standing.
Two groups took most credit for this great and largely unexpected turn of events, the neoconservatives and the evangelical Christians. Having read many books on the subject – none better than Andrew Bacevich’s, The New American Militarism: How Americans Are Seduced By War – it appears that the rise in the political standing of these groups as a result of their apparent success in the Cold War and in providing the foreign policy theories for Bush 41’s successors gave them the right to call the opening moves in the twenty-first century.
We are fortunate that the first great foray into the new millennium was a relatively modest one. How the president proposes to get us out of the quagmire that he created will be difficult, costly and cannot yet be fully fathomed. This decision to invade was probably the worst foreign policy blunder in American history, but, while tragic, it is probably not going to be as costly in blood and bullion as Korea and Vietnam.
Bush 43 will be the poster boy for future presidents who are feeling their oats, and it will be a bold chief executive who takes this nation into an optional war in the next thirty years. Our nose bloodied and our hubris exposed, we are looking forward to a new role in the world.
We may wind up being the leaders of a completely new civilization. We seem to be drifting away from Europe and forming a new and vital grouping of states, including perhaps all of North America. Certainly, Europe seems to be looking east as it incorporates the states formerly part of the Soviet orbit. The Europeans seem revitalized as result of their great union and seem inclined to thumb their collective noses at us. Oh, we’re still friends, but they resent us as an overbearing partner and have convenient memories of our contributions to their riches and safety over the last sixty years.
But Europe appears unable to solve an ancient riddle that has vexed our species since we walked out of Africa. Should people be assimilated and have upward mobility based on merit or on their traditional place in society. The present owners of the land are not reproducing themselves sufficiently to assure continuity of the society, yet they are unable to successfully deal with those flowing in to fill the longer rungs on the social and economic ladders.
China’s model, while appearing successful on the surface, is fraught with peril for them. The gangsters in charge have opened the economic valves to the creativity of the population but intend to hold onto the levers of political power. Think about that in futuristic terms. The Indians, however dynamic, are still struggling with problems of caste and an over burdensome system of regulation.
Meanwhile the North American Free Trade Agreement appears to have brought Canada, the U.S. and Mexico into a new and powerful amalgam whose workings seem quite different from our old world parents and major competitors. Our internal arguments are creating dynamism qualitatively different from what Don Rumsfeld termed, `Old Europe.’ Even as we struggle with the problems of race and assimilation of newcomers, it is clear that that those committed to equality and upward mobility based on merit maintain the upper hand. Many new groups - regardless of origin, race, religion, gender, or ethnicity (including many from the Islamic world) – have succeeded as individuals and their groups often exceed the wealth and income of the White majority.
These advances have not been made without social difficulties. No matter, America, for all its problems, faces the age old battle of mobility with political and economic power in the hands of those committed to solving it based on equal opportunity, social justice, and ultimately on merit. That is why despite all of our problems, people are willing to give up everything to move here and prosper intellectually, economically, spiritually, and politically.
As these changes take place domestically, China, Russia, Japan, India, and the Islamic civilizations are setting limits on our power, and we seem to be settling in to a slightly more conservative place on the planet. We’re still the biggest kid around, but we’ve been brought up short with a bloody nose in Iraq. Our days of stealing lunch money and picking on the little kids in the cafeteria line of the world’s resources seem to be behind us, at least for a few decades. This is good; our internal creativity far exceeds that of our competitors.
A lot of neoconservatives and evangelicals find this discombobulating, but is it really that bad that we don’t run the whole world? I don’t find it so, and it’s going to be a lot cheaper than the Cold War and the world reach we’re still trying to project. It isn’t like we’re surrendering; we’re just adjusting to a world in which we remain the biggest and strongest nation in the world but one which the rest of the residents have us checked – but not check mated.
Our thoughts of empire have been inspired by Rome and England. Maybe we should rethink our definition to that of Florence. We are the city on the hill. Our residents can create wealth, power, and civilization without conquering everyone in our way just as the Florentines did in the thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.
We’ve still got the world’s most dynamic economic system. Rugged individualism will provide us with ideas and organizations second to none. Our major competitors such as India, Japan, Russia, China, and Europe have leagues to go in deregulating business and industry to the point of our best.
Our richest and most successful citizens while compensated too greatly are showing signs of emulating Renaissance princes and merchant kings by creating such programs as the MacArthur awards to encourage creativity in all fields, and look at what’s happening to the great wealth of such stars as Bill Gates and Warren Buffet as it is being harnessed to cure the world’s ills. Dozens of fortunes have been converted to foundations and trusts designed to make America better. Things are not all bleak, and despite the conscious efforts of many of our leaders to frighten us, we will prevail against ignorance, disease, and poverty.
And look at what the little folks are doing to keep the mighty on the straight and narrow. Tens of thousands of bloggers daily point out that the emperors are without fig leaves. And they can’t be shushed or shot – not all of them anyway.
No, the world’s not all bad and America is far better than many pessimists think; there are many more positive than negative signs. As we move toward 2007, I see the glass as well over half full, and I hope you do too.
Happy Holidays! Peace, prosperity, good health, and happiness in the New Year!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
Snow Job
Baby its cold outside. Indeed a fierce blizzard is raging in Washington, and it’s unlikely to end before mid-January.
The White House press corps is spitting mad at Tony Snow for his dodging and pleas of nolo contendere on all questions involving Iraq. “I don’t know,” is the answer de jour by this hubris filled wind bag. Snow came to rescue Bush not to bury him, or so the mouth that roars nothing but ignorance once proclaimed.
The silver tongued hero of the neocons was to provide our ever eloquent president with an English translator. All that was lacking in Washington was a spokesperson who could translate Bushisms into the plain speak of the American people, and the administration would be on its way to winning the war on terror and transforming the Middle East into a land of milk and honey where the lion and the lamb could lie down together in peace and harmony.
But Washington is a land of snow jobs – everything from the Rumsfeldian snow flakes falling gently over the Pentagon to the howling blizzard of `I don’t knows’ roaring from the White House Press Room.
Only now are some – certainly not all – of the neoconservatives beginning to fathom that if things are going right and you’re riding a good horse even Wild Bill would make a great press secretary but if you’re in a tar pit aboard a swayback nag, even Winston Churchill couldn’t bullshit his way out.
Look around Tony; you’re in deep and dark stuff and that horse... And all that slick restating of `I don’t know’ is nothing but a tony snow job.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
The White House press corps is spitting mad at Tony Snow for his dodging and pleas of nolo contendere on all questions involving Iraq. “I don’t know,” is the answer de jour by this hubris filled wind bag. Snow came to rescue Bush not to bury him, or so the mouth that roars nothing but ignorance once proclaimed.
The silver tongued hero of the neocons was to provide our ever eloquent president with an English translator. All that was lacking in Washington was a spokesperson who could translate Bushisms into the plain speak of the American people, and the administration would be on its way to winning the war on terror and transforming the Middle East into a land of milk and honey where the lion and the lamb could lie down together in peace and harmony.
But Washington is a land of snow jobs – everything from the Rumsfeldian snow flakes falling gently over the Pentagon to the howling blizzard of `I don’t knows’ roaring from the White House Press Room.
Only now are some – certainly not all – of the neoconservatives beginning to fathom that if things are going right and you’re riding a good horse even Wild Bill would make a great press secretary but if you’re in a tar pit aboard a swayback nag, even Winston Churchill couldn’t bullshit his way out.
Look around Tony; you’re in deep and dark stuff and that horse... And all that slick restating of `I don’t know’ is nothing but a tony snow job.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Everything's Great - I Quit
I feel particularly optimistic today, so I’m resigning from the Democratic Party. That may seem strange as I worked so hard to defeat the Republicans, but, truly, I’ve held myself out as a person beholden to no party and of the center.
Obviously, at this moment I’m likely to support the Democrat in the ’08 run for the roses, but, if they dive to the left or do anything really crazy in trying to clean up the mess created by Bush and his neoconservative Svengalis, no one should be surprised if there’s a change in my registration.
The Republicans are doing a great job of imploding without any more assistance from me, so I’ll just watch as the self destruction much like the war that caused it accelerates. My fear is that the Democrats will see this administration weakness as the voice of the people telling them to take a left turn; that will be my signal to attempt to bolster the morale of the cloth coat Republicans with whom I parted company when Bush showed he’d lost his way and was listening to the hard right neocons and the evangelicals.
By the way, I’m a big time Democrat who gets `Dear Bill’ emails from all the party big shots. I’m sure that I’m the only one in America who receives such personal notes, but I’m not going to write back and tell them of my likely defection, and, right now, I’m counting on them for some real oversight of these jackasses who’ve taken the country in such dangerous directions.
This is a very antsy time, and I certainly don’t have a clue as to how to get out of Iraq and set the ship of state on the right course. While I was desperate for us not to go into Iraq, I have no idea on how to get us out in a somewhat whole fashion.
But I feel good about the direction of America today. The old bulls of the Republican Party have drawn a line in the sand that stands for no more neocon adventurism. The most serious of our defense and foreign policy intellectuals are thinking of ways to end this fiasco without blowing up the planet, and virtually all serious thinkers are working to curb the mess without further wrecking our standing in the world.
There are only two important people – and they’re both real factors – George W. Bush and John McCain who are still looking for victory in Iraq. Even Joe Lieberman is in a run silent run deep mode.
All in all, I’m looking for a Christmas message from Bush that may include both `mission accomplished’ and a new direction that heads us toward the egress.
Happy holidays to all!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Obviously, at this moment I’m likely to support the Democrat in the ’08 run for the roses, but, if they dive to the left or do anything really crazy in trying to clean up the mess created by Bush and his neoconservative Svengalis, no one should be surprised if there’s a change in my registration.
The Republicans are doing a great job of imploding without any more assistance from me, so I’ll just watch as the self destruction much like the war that caused it accelerates. My fear is that the Democrats will see this administration weakness as the voice of the people telling them to take a left turn; that will be my signal to attempt to bolster the morale of the cloth coat Republicans with whom I parted company when Bush showed he’d lost his way and was listening to the hard right neocons and the evangelicals.
By the way, I’m a big time Democrat who gets `Dear Bill’ emails from all the party big shots. I’m sure that I’m the only one in America who receives such personal notes, but I’m not going to write back and tell them of my likely defection, and, right now, I’m counting on them for some real oversight of these jackasses who’ve taken the country in such dangerous directions.
This is a very antsy time, and I certainly don’t have a clue as to how to get out of Iraq and set the ship of state on the right course. While I was desperate for us not to go into Iraq, I have no idea on how to get us out in a somewhat whole fashion.
But I feel good about the direction of America today. The old bulls of the Republican Party have drawn a line in the sand that stands for no more neocon adventurism. The most serious of our defense and foreign policy intellectuals are thinking of ways to end this fiasco without blowing up the planet, and virtually all serious thinkers are working to curb the mess without further wrecking our standing in the world.
There are only two important people – and they’re both real factors – George W. Bush and John McCain who are still looking for victory in Iraq. Even Joe Lieberman is in a run silent run deep mode.
All in all, I’m looking for a Christmas message from Bush that may include both `mission accomplished’ and a new direction that heads us toward the egress.
Happy holidays to all!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Thursday, December 07, 2006
The Birds Are Singing
The birds are singing, ten of ‘em. Canaries play two roles, they sing and they croak.
As we carelessly drove the ponies down into the deep, deep mine, we paid no attention to the horrible conditions of the walls, ceiling, or air. As we found ourselves facing an endless seam of soft coal that was crumbling about us and as the timbers and bulkheads groaned and creaked, with no other alternatives, we called for the canaries.
Ten old birds to the rescue. “Get the hell out!” is their unanimous refrain.
These birds are scared to death. Sure, Lee Hamilton can work with anybody, and Jim Baker can fake it. Sandra Day O’Connor is a civilized person. Senators Robb and Simpson were never partisan crazies, and the same goes for all but two of the other members. Ed Meese is a real Republican and Leon Panetta is a fire breathing Democrat.
That Meese and Panetta can agree on 79 points and not withhold their approval of a single finding is both wonderful but really, really scary. The air in this mine is bad, really bad, toxic. If these two partisans join hands it’s not for their parties; it’s for America.
Already, the cries that this map to the mine mouth isn’t realistic are being heard from both sides – those that want to stay the course and those that want to cut and run. I admit – and the members do too – the commission has created a corridor of mirrors within the smoky air.
But it’s time to board the carts and whip the crap out of those ponies in the direction being pointed out by the canaries. There’s little time for face saving or for better ways. All aboard! The birds are beginning to cough.
The Congress better damn well start acting like an oversight committee and the partisan sniping better be held to a minimum. This America we’re talking about, not Republican or Democratic platform planks. Both parties better buy in and kick some executive butt.
The air’s bad, and it’s time to face the truth. We’re in way too deep. Our exit strategy is on the table. It ain’t what we’d like – none of us, but the walls are creaking. Get with it or get the hell out of the way; otherwise the next phase will really be like Vietnam.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
As we carelessly drove the ponies down into the deep, deep mine, we paid no attention to the horrible conditions of the walls, ceiling, or air. As we found ourselves facing an endless seam of soft coal that was crumbling about us and as the timbers and bulkheads groaned and creaked, with no other alternatives, we called for the canaries.
Ten old birds to the rescue. “Get the hell out!” is their unanimous refrain.
These birds are scared to death. Sure, Lee Hamilton can work with anybody, and Jim Baker can fake it. Sandra Day O’Connor is a civilized person. Senators Robb and Simpson were never partisan crazies, and the same goes for all but two of the other members. Ed Meese is a real Republican and Leon Panetta is a fire breathing Democrat.
That Meese and Panetta can agree on 79 points and not withhold their approval of a single finding is both wonderful but really, really scary. The air in this mine is bad, really bad, toxic. If these two partisans join hands it’s not for their parties; it’s for America.
Already, the cries that this map to the mine mouth isn’t realistic are being heard from both sides – those that want to stay the course and those that want to cut and run. I admit – and the members do too – the commission has created a corridor of mirrors within the smoky air.
But it’s time to board the carts and whip the crap out of those ponies in the direction being pointed out by the canaries. There’s little time for face saving or for better ways. All aboard! The birds are beginning to cough.
The Congress better damn well start acting like an oversight committee and the partisan sniping better be held to a minimum. This America we’re talking about, not Republican or Democratic platform planks. Both parties better buy in and kick some executive butt.
The air’s bad, and it’s time to face the truth. We’re in way too deep. Our exit strategy is on the table. It ain’t what we’d like – none of us, but the walls are creaking. Get with it or get the hell out of the way; otherwise the next phase will really be like Vietnam.
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Who Cares?
The media abounds with stories about George W. Bush’s place in history. His decision to attack Iraq has historical tongues wagging about whether he is the worst president in American history or perhaps just the worst since Richard Nixon. James Buchanan has been plucked from the dustbin of history, vacuumed off, and held out as the absolute bottom of the barrel – until maybe now. Other commentators have resurrected such presidential luminaries as Herbert Hoover and Andrew Johnson to parade their stuff in the contest for the bottom.
This must be very difficult on Mr. Bush and even more so on Laura and Barney. It can’t be nice to read bout yourself as bracketed with the most incompetent people ever to occupy the White House or to learn that your husband is a total moron – or worse. What does the loyal staff do when they pick up the papers in the morning and find front page comparisons with Bush’s forty-two predecessors – and find him wanting against all of them?
Were I on staff, my reaction would be very swift; let Barney use the Post and Times for whatever he has to do and tell Laura that the paper people skipped the White House this morning. But every day? That would be tough on even the most dedicated of lackeys and sycophants.
In thinking about the problem, I figured out the bottom line; it doesn’t matter. So you’re the worst in history; who cares? Do you really think that Jimmy Buchanan, or Herb Hoover, or Dick Nixon wake up each day on their clouds or – heaven forbid – spits and try to explain themselves to their neighbors? Are you kidding? They’re definitely cool – or hot – with their situations. Although there may be some thoughts of readjustment as they ponder George’s predicament.
And just who cares what so called `presidential experts’ care. They were wrong about Harry Truman and they could be wrong about forty-three, and while I don’t think they are, who cares what a loser like me thinks anyway?
I’ve known and met dozens of people with names like Lincoln, Buchanan, Grant, and I’ve bought vacuum cleaners called Hoover, and I’m sure many of you have too. It has never crossed my mind to ask the Lincoln if he was descended from Abraham. Do you think I’d open up with Buchanan with, “What the hell was that bozo great, great, great uncle of yours doing asleep at the switch when the country was going to hell?”
Would you get in a Lincoln automobile and ask the owner if his vehicle was manufactured by relatives of our late great president? Of course you wouldn’t.
What it really boils down to is that except for a few of the very top guys – maybe Washington, Lincoln and Roosevelt (the second guy) – nobody even knows who was president before Bill Clinton. Golly, our intrepid reporters have dig out obscure Ph. Ds just to get the list of the president’s anyway.
So George and Laura and Barney should relax. Look at it this way; has anyone ever been able to even read through the list of names of Egyptian pharos without falling asleep? And except for Rammer and Tut, whoever heard of even one other of them? And there were some very incompetent people on that list – and good ones too; had to be.
The same goes for the Kings of England or the list of the Popes. Their only use today is as substitutes for counting sheep by these same over educated characters who are saying George is the worst. Maybe George should be asking who these jerks are. Could they be the worst evaluators of presidents? Maybe Barney would like to pee on some of their books. Who knows? Who cares?
So be cool George and all you worry warts in the White House. After we get out the mess you’ve created, you can go off and join Jimmy Buchanan in a pinochle game and never be disturbed until some phony baloney Ph. D comes rummaging around to see who’s winning. Even then, who cares?
Blog on!
Wild Bill
This must be very difficult on Mr. Bush and even more so on Laura and Barney. It can’t be nice to read bout yourself as bracketed with the most incompetent people ever to occupy the White House or to learn that your husband is a total moron – or worse. What does the loyal staff do when they pick up the papers in the morning and find front page comparisons with Bush’s forty-two predecessors – and find him wanting against all of them?
Were I on staff, my reaction would be very swift; let Barney use the Post and Times for whatever he has to do and tell Laura that the paper people skipped the White House this morning. But every day? That would be tough on even the most dedicated of lackeys and sycophants.
In thinking about the problem, I figured out the bottom line; it doesn’t matter. So you’re the worst in history; who cares? Do you really think that Jimmy Buchanan, or Herb Hoover, or Dick Nixon wake up each day on their clouds or – heaven forbid – spits and try to explain themselves to their neighbors? Are you kidding? They’re definitely cool – or hot – with their situations. Although there may be some thoughts of readjustment as they ponder George’s predicament.
And just who cares what so called `presidential experts’ care. They were wrong about Harry Truman and they could be wrong about forty-three, and while I don’t think they are, who cares what a loser like me thinks anyway?
I’ve known and met dozens of people with names like Lincoln, Buchanan, Grant, and I’ve bought vacuum cleaners called Hoover, and I’m sure many of you have too. It has never crossed my mind to ask the Lincoln if he was descended from Abraham. Do you think I’d open up with Buchanan with, “What the hell was that bozo great, great, great uncle of yours doing asleep at the switch when the country was going to hell?”
Would you get in a Lincoln automobile and ask the owner if his vehicle was manufactured by relatives of our late great president? Of course you wouldn’t.
What it really boils down to is that except for a few of the very top guys – maybe Washington, Lincoln and Roosevelt (the second guy) – nobody even knows who was president before Bill Clinton. Golly, our intrepid reporters have dig out obscure Ph. Ds just to get the list of the president’s anyway.
So George and Laura and Barney should relax. Look at it this way; has anyone ever been able to even read through the list of names of Egyptian pharos without falling asleep? And except for Rammer and Tut, whoever heard of even one other of them? And there were some very incompetent people on that list – and good ones too; had to be.
The same goes for the Kings of England or the list of the Popes. Their only use today is as substitutes for counting sheep by these same over educated characters who are saying George is the worst. Maybe George should be asking who these jerks are. Could they be the worst evaluators of presidents? Maybe Barney would like to pee on some of their books. Who knows? Who cares?
So be cool George and all you worry warts in the White House. After we get out the mess you’ve created, you can go off and join Jimmy Buchanan in a pinochle game and never be disturbed until some phony baloney Ph. D comes rummaging around to see who’s winning. Even then, who cares?
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
It's Morning in America
An article (A Virtual Chalkboard For Budding NFL Fans) in today’s Washington Post describes how millions of mostly young males in the U.S. are becoming expert in the Xs and Os of professional football. The number of people who can glance at a defensive set on their TV screens has expanded exponentially as a result of `Madden NFL’ a video game. This phenomenon is worthy of front page coverage by one of the nation’s leading papers.
In my Andy Rooney moments, I wonder if this is a good thing – a really good thing. Millions of kids are spending hundreds of millions of hours to be able to tell at a glance what only John Madden and Bill Belichek used to know. But there’s an obvious upside to this, instead of only dozens of people being able to break down tapes for NFL teams, there is a developing cadre of millions of potential candidates. On the other hand, since this is highly desirable work, the wage rates will soon plummet to minimum wage levels.
It’s a great world we live in. We’ve come a long way since Classical Civilization when the government provided circus for the masses. Today, the private sector in the form of Madden NFL and its thousands of counterparts and the NFL itself and its pro sports and college competitors deliver circus right into the homes of the consumers. Not only that but those who feel compelled to really attend the circus must compete to buy high priced tickets to many sold out venues in order to be part of the show.
There’s an even better side to this situation. Young people can be passionate about things and are willing to toil for long hours and pay big money to learn what used to be the province of an ascetic priesthood of coaches. Bill Belichek apprenticed at his father's knee and honed his skills for years just to get the chance to intern for nothing with other experts. Now his life’s learning and that of other equally qualified clergymen of the Church of the NFL is available to the masses. So instead of just dozens of boys wasting their time in hopes of coaching the Packers, millions can aspire to be fired losing in the great zero sum game. So while they exercise only their thumbs and their noggins and cannot ever hope to play and get hurt running up huge medical bills, they will all be qualified to coach the Cowboys.
Even better, among the millions of youngsters learning Madden NFL there are tens of thousands who otherwise might have gone bad, and these will have no time for mugging old farts like me or working part time to support illicit drug habits. And they’re not driving cars while they play – I hope – and therefore the roads are safer.
And they say there’s a decline in Western Civilization. Give me a break!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
In my Andy Rooney moments, I wonder if this is a good thing – a really good thing. Millions of kids are spending hundreds of millions of hours to be able to tell at a glance what only John Madden and Bill Belichek used to know. But there’s an obvious upside to this, instead of only dozens of people being able to break down tapes for NFL teams, there is a developing cadre of millions of potential candidates. On the other hand, since this is highly desirable work, the wage rates will soon plummet to minimum wage levels.
It’s a great world we live in. We’ve come a long way since Classical Civilization when the government provided circus for the masses. Today, the private sector in the form of Madden NFL and its thousands of counterparts and the NFL itself and its pro sports and college competitors deliver circus right into the homes of the consumers. Not only that but those who feel compelled to really attend the circus must compete to buy high priced tickets to many sold out venues in order to be part of the show.
There’s an even better side to this situation. Young people can be passionate about things and are willing to toil for long hours and pay big money to learn what used to be the province of an ascetic priesthood of coaches. Bill Belichek apprenticed at his father's knee and honed his skills for years just to get the chance to intern for nothing with other experts. Now his life’s learning and that of other equally qualified clergymen of the Church of the NFL is available to the masses. So instead of just dozens of boys wasting their time in hopes of coaching the Packers, millions can aspire to be fired losing in the great zero sum game. So while they exercise only their thumbs and their noggins and cannot ever hope to play and get hurt running up huge medical bills, they will all be qualified to coach the Cowboys.
Even better, among the millions of youngsters learning Madden NFL there are tens of thousands who otherwise might have gone bad, and these will have no time for mugging old farts like me or working part time to support illicit drug habits. And they’re not driving cars while they play – I hope – and therefore the roads are safer.
And they say there’s a decline in Western Civilization. Give me a break!
Blog on!
Wild Bill
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)