Gov't 101

For many years, we have been told that if we didn't like the way the government operated, we should run for office. Many people who felt they could do better than the incumbents did get elected. It turns out it wasn't always the best idea. We didn't fully understand the seductive nature of public service which the morally weak cannot resist.

Too many people come to office with idealistic ideas which may or may not reflect the will of their constituents. Because they have achieved an exalted position, they begin to feel their ideas are superior to those of the people they represent. This feeling is bolstered by their generous salaries and perks, both legal and questionable. In the end, their parties give them an agenda, and they begin to assimilate.

These formerly idealistic civil servants then set their eyes on the next goal: re-election. To this end, they promote projects in their states that will appeal to various entities who hold sway over large bodies of voters. Your prejudices will tell you who these groups are, and they are not so much evil as looking after their own interests. When they coincide with your interests, you consider them lofty.

So, we have come full circle. People who get elected to change the system become the system, which, then, other people want to change. Will it only be perfect when everyone agrees? We must always be free to disagree, but in an informed and respectful manner. Don't attack the thinker, challenge the thought.

Neighbors

In my local newspaper, a man with the unlikely name of Jorge Smirnoff (Have I mentioned him before?) occasionally sends a letter to the editor. It is invariably mean-spirited and often misinformed. On Sunday, after describing those who disagree with him in various childish barnyard terms, he made the statement, "Don't mess with your neighbors and odds are they won't mess with you." My first reaction was that with that attitude, he couldn't have many friends, and that's sad. Then I thought of the obvious question, "Which neighbors should we 'not mess with?' Would it be those who first attacked the World Trade Center, the ones who attacked the USS Cole, the ones who bombed two of our embassies in Africa, or the ones who killed 3,000 Americans on 9/11?"

In my response, I also commended Smirnoff for the unexpected restraint he showed by merely calling the U.S. government corrupt instead, as he had said in the past, the personification of evil. I suggested he may have embraced someone else's counsel, but because the government is neither corrupt nor evil, I suppose he needs even more education.

The UN

I've chaired a few meetings in my day, and if one member of the group had personally vilified another, like Hugo Chavez calling President Bush "Satan," I would have ruled him out of order, and told him to stop. If he refused, I would have adjourned the meeting. Of course, I was presiding over civilized people who respect each other and the presiding authority, unlike the UN.

The UN has one option which was not available to me. They no doubt have some kind of security force which could have ejected Chavez. But the UN leadership is completely powerless, and I don't understand why the U.S. hasn't long since withdrawn. If not earlier, why not now? How many more tinhorn dictators do we have to endure? (I'm sorry if someone is offended.)

The Non-apology

The Age of Over-reaction has spawned the Non-apology. Men of character only say and do things they intend. If these actions are studied, moral and deliberate, human freedoms give them legitimacy. Polite men have been known to say they regret that someone may have been offended, which says, "What I said was true and reasonable, and you should rethink your position." This Non-apology is embraced by the rational and confounds the ignorant.

CALIFORNIA LAWS UPDATE

Local schools are run by a School Board elected by the people. The Board hires a superintendent, the finest educational expert the community can afford. The superintendent, with the approval of the Board, staffs the schools with teachers and support personnel. If the people are unhappy with the progress of the schools, they should elect a new School Board.

The State of California has passed a law allowing the Mayor of Los Angeles to inject himself into this process in his city. This is wrong. The authority of school boards everywhere is potentially diminished and, of course, the Los Angeles Board is rightfully challenging this ill-advised law.

Football

This must be the Decade of the Over-reaction. First, many have embraced political correctness, and every perceived insult, whether in humor or inadvertent, is leapt upon by the over-sensitive. Then, we have Muslims and Jews, in their imagined superiority, who take offense at some things which other people, who have also been subjected to insults, have written off as error or ignorance. (I wouldn't care if Mel Gibson insulted me, or the Pope called me names.)

Now, we have football. Recently, an assistant coach ran onto the field and flattened a teen-age opponent who had fouled his son, and on Saturday, a college game was decided in the last 72 seconds, when one team scored two touchdowns. There were two mistakes made by the officials, because they are human. Nevertheless. some idiot sent one official a death threat. It's only a game.

Cell

California [Governor Schwarzenegger has signed into law a measure that prohibits the use of hand-held cell phones while driving. It goes into effect on July 1, 2008. If this is so important and life-saving, why shouldn't it take effect tomorrow?] If it were an increase in compensation for government officials or a "bridge to nowhere," do you think it would languish for almost two years? [Right is right, and if you can justify it, why not do it now?] Could there be some question about the severity of the danger posed by this behavior?

Alright, I hear you saying, "People must have time to adapt and buy new equipment to facilitate hands-free operation." Well, what if you've recently moved to, say, New York, where the law is already in effect? Do you think that Governor Pataki will give you a two year grace period?

[As seen on TV.]

Intro/TV

To oversimplify, there are two basic forms of Islam, the good and the bad. Those of the bad type we call extremists, jihadists, Islamo-fascists, Hezbollah, and several other names. Although the "bad" are only a small minority, they are like the proverbial bad apple, and have incited even the "good" ones to over-react to the words of the Pope. The Pope is a man of love and peace. If the "bad" guys start to hold sway over all of Islam, we're in BIG trouble.

As seen on TV: Suggest a question for the California gubernatorial debate.

How much would you allocate to the public schools for the teaching of Arabic and Farsi in preparation for the possible conquest of the world by the Islamic extremists, with the help of the appeasers in Congress and the ineffective UN?

Film 2

I don't like historical disaster movies when I know beforehand how they will end - "Titanic," "Pearl Harbor," "The Last Days of Pompeii," and now, "Path to 9/11." I was expecting controversial revelations, but in the second half, particularly, all I saw was realistically portrayed death and destruction. ABC proclaimed it was not a documentary, so as entertainment, it fell short. And it was probably overlooked by the appeasers, who didn't want to be reminded of the viscous. . .uh, viciousness and resolve of the enemy.

I have it on tape in the unlikely event that I need to be reminded of the nature and severity of the threat.

(Whitney Houston is divorcing Bobby Brown. Hey, Osama, she's available again.)

Chicago Update and TV

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley has vetoed the City Council's proposed ordinance that AP says,"would have required mega-retailers to pay their workers more than other employers." Daley rejected this epitome of unfairness with the words, "[It] would drive business from the city." At the very least.

In a related action, California Governor Schwarzenegger has signed into law an increase in the minimum wage. This could also drive out business, and will certainly cost jobs.

As seen on TV. Responding to the Democrat's criticism that the President's speech was political, I said:

Is your life a political issue? Is your family's security a political issue? Neither is the war on terror. When President Bush exhorts us all to help him to seek out and defeat the enemy, he's not talking politics; he's talking survival.

Film

I know you're all anxiously awaiting my take on ABC's "Path to 9/11" Part I. What I found to be most shocking was the cinematography. Most of it was done in a herky-jerky manner by a hand-held camera. What some people think is exciting, I frequently find annoying.

The plot showed the well-documented petty fight between federal agencies and the disastrous inactivity which ensued. I was surprised by the prominent role played by Sandy Berger, the Security Chief, who later was completely discredited when he was caught stuffing sensitive documents down his pants and in his socks and claiming it was an accident. Tonight, we should see the film's take on that, and I'll probably be reporting again. Happy viewing.

Electoral College

On the surface, direct election of the President sounds good. In the past two elections, there were challenges in Florida and Ohio. (Losers frequently find defeat difficult to accept.) Under the Electoral College system recounts were primarily limited to one state in each election. Without the Electoral College, the call for recounts could go nationwide. This could prompt the kind of chaos that may presently be impending in Mexico. With all its flaws, the Electoral College system may still be the best way to manage almost 100 million votes.

EXTRA

You know how I love a good turn of phrase. In today's "Click & Clack" the following gives a chuckle: "I have a 1992 GMC van with a fiberglass roof. The problem is that the roof has two rather large holes in it due to a LOWER-THAN-PERCEIVED concrete support beam in my local shopping mall's parking garage."

Local Follies

The editing (or lack thereof) in my local newspaper frequently provides a source of amusement. Today, in the section where readers, frequently angry and misinformed ones, phone in and vent, I read, "[Residents' comments] about the fact that they won't be downtown because the animals are back and then they say I mean the [college] students. What is the purpose of {the paper's} publishing this. . . only to inspire inflammatory remarks and rebuttal of a VISCOUS nature?"

Don't you just hate those thick and sticky rebuttals? I don't believe that even this offended student, drunk or sober and barely literate, meant "viscous."

Misc.

As seen on TV: Q: Which was a more historic event - Pearl Harbor or 9-11?

A: Neither Pearl Harbor nor 9-11 were historic events. They were sneak attacks by craven enemies who invited retribution. [We gave the Axis theirs, and] now is the time to kill, imprison, or force the unconditional surrender of all terorists, and bring about peace. Now, that would be an historic event.

As not yet seen on TV: Q: Do you favor banning the use of cell phones in cars?

A: Why are we letting the government intrude in every facet of our lives? Is it that someday we expect it to reciprocate by supporting us completely while we sit on our butts and drink beer? What's happened to common sense and personal responsibility?

News brief: In response to the UN's "resolution" telling Iran to stop enriching uranium, President Ahmadinejad said, "Fuck you." Secretary-General Kofi Annan is exploring the most graceful way to bend over.