Blogito Ergo Sum

Literary Traditiions Have To Begin Somewhere

2012-01-17T15:18:00.000-08:00

-
When one thinks of traditions & observances, one typically thinks of religion based holidays; Christmas, Hanukkah, Ramadan, Easter, etc...; or a national observance; Independence Day, Veterans' Day, Thanksgiving, and so on. One usually doesn't think of the literary realm as a source of inspiration for annual traditions. Yet, there are many traditions centered around honoring significant authors and their works.

Readers of The Bard flock to the Annual Shakespeare Birthday Celebrations in Stratford-upon-Avon each April. Mark Twain enthusiasts from around the world congregate at the Mark Twain Saloon, in Comstock, every 30th of November to celebrate the birthday of the classic American author. Inspired by the novel Ulysses, Joyceans in Dublin, and many other cities, celebrate Bloomsday every June 16th. The Old Man and The Sea inspired the formation of the Hemingway Fishing Tournament, which has been held at Marina Hemingway, 9 miles west of Havana, for over 60 years.

For the last few years, I've observed my own tradition in memory of my favorite mystery writer, Robert B. Parker. On January 18th, 2010, Parker and his wife, Joan, had breakfast together. She went out to do her running and when she came back, about an hour later, he was dead at his desk.

I didn't have the means to travel to Boston to attend his funeral. Since many fans call his books "Beer & Bullets Books," I spent the day of his funeral drinking beer and enjoying one of his novels. I spent the first anniversary of his death the same way, and plan on repeating the tradition on the upcoming second anniversary.

Some, who consider "genre fiction" to be a lesser literary form, may find it odd to center a tradition around the memory of a mystery writer. I'd remind such scoffers that he wasn't just any mystery writer. I'd remind them that in 1973, Robert B. Parker’s first Spenser novel, The Godwulf Manuscript, breathed new life into the hard-boiled mystery genre, which had essentially been dead for a number of years. I'd remind them that his career spanned over 50 novels, some of which were the first such books to feature gays, blacks, and other minorities as heroic characters.

Even the Novmber 17 issue of Publisher's Weekly recognized Robert B. Parker's work as having influenced many current writers of detective fiction. In fact, the article by Lenny Picker begins, "Thriller author Harlan Coben, who read Robert B. Parker’s Spenser novels in college, once observed, 'When it comes to detective novels, 90% of us admit he’s an influence, and the rest of us lie about it.'"

I don't know if my particular tradition will catch on, on any kind of larger scale. I tend to doubt it. Nevertheless, out of respect for the enjoyment his works have given me, and out of gratitude for inspiring me as writer, I plan to honor the tradition for years to come.
-

'Tis The Season

2011-12-19T12:02:00.000-08:00

-
Unemployment is at 8.8% nationally, and is at a sadly higher 9.5% here in Oregon, according to Google's latest statistics. This is hardly news in a day when reports of evictions, robo-signing scandals, and protests against the struggling economic state of the union run rampant across our TV screens. As families struggle to keep their fiscal heads above water, donations to many charities, including food banks, have dropped sharply this year, enabling them to help fewer people, as requests for help have hit record highs. Many of us, who are too old and creaky to camp in the park, have thrown up our hands in frustrated gestures of helplessness in response to the newest accounts of families being expelled from their homes, while bank executives rake in multi-million dollar bonuses.

As we cluck our collective tongues and agree. "It sure is a shame the way things are these days," there are those among us who have been moved, by the spirit of the season, to help others. Outside the Macy's store, in downtown Portland, someone dropped a rare gold coin, worth $1,600, into the shiny red Salvation Army kettle.

Similarly, a $2,000 wedding ring was found in the Salvation Army kettle outside the Pinecrest, FL Kmart. The ring was wrapped in a $50 bill and a touching note, which read, "They need it more than I. Do good!" and was signed "A friend."

Meanwhile, "layaway angels" have been paying off layaway bills for childrens' holiday presents at stores across the country. These angels have paid bills ranging from $50 to $1,000, and have made it possible for multiple struggling families to put presents under trees this year.

When I first heard about the layaway angels, I assumed some eccentric billionaire had sent "agents" across America to execute the program of generosity. This doesn't appear to be the case. Apparently, average citizens have been inspired; by a trend, which reportedly began in Michigan; to perpetuate the charitable practice. Perhaps the most emotive aspect to this fad of good-will is the fact that everything is given anonymously. There's no motive to improve one's status by appearing generous, no tripping over one's tongue to try to thank someone, it's simply about giving during the holidays.

A bit less holiday oriented, but impressive nonetheless, local 13 year old, Julien Leitner, has begun the Archimedes Alliance. The goal of the alliance is to use social media to encourage one million people to contribute $2 each toward making the world a better place. Before you roll your eyes and mutter, "Pfft," you should understand this kid has arranged for the the Charitable Partnership Fund to hold the money until all one million contributors have voted on where to send the full $2,000,000. As I write this, $6,321 have been raised, and Outreach International is winning with 108 votes.

Forget the fact that he has a long row to hoe to reach $2,000,000. Putting that aside fr a moment, the investment in time and dedication, Julien has made, is inspiring. When I was thirteen, I was thinking about; girls, comic books, and pro wrestling; and this kid's actively trying to improve4the world.

Finally, NBC Nightly News has reported that in Pine Bluff, Arkansas, Miss Anette Dove left a lucrative job and used her own money to begin a non-profit organization. TOPPS (Targeting Our People’s Priorities With Service) is dedicated to feeding the hungry children in Jefferson County. If feeding countless children since 2002 wasn't note worthy enough, this year, at the request of an over committed branch of the Salvation Army, Miss Dove networked with a local church to provide Christmas packages (meals & toys) to 167 families who would have otherwise gone without this year.

Say what you will about banking, the economy, politics, foreign relations, etc... Yes, we have problems to overcome and battles to fight. Be that as it may, this time of year seems to spark the generosity of the human spirit to life. Some acts of kindness flood the media, while others, such as cookies left on doorsteps, go unnoticed by all but the recipient. Some givers are well known, while others perform their deed and disappear into the shadows, never to be thanked. In all cases, these doers of good serve as examples to society, reminding us of what the world could be all year.
-
Below are links to charities you can donate to this holiday season.

| The Salvation Army | Goodwill |
| Meals On Wheels | Loaves & Fishes | Portland's Sunshine Division |
| Archimedes Alliance | TOPPS (Targeting Our People’s Priorities With Service) |

A Yo-Yo In A Hurricane

2011-12-15T14:01:00.000-08:00

-
I haven't blogged about the Occupy Portland Movement for quite a while. It's not that I haven't been watching it intently, I have two entire Tweetdeck columns devoted to movement related Tweets and I've been religiously following breaking news via Portland Mercury's Blogtown PDX. The problem is, my opinion keeps changing. The movement will make a gain, I'll feel good about their direction, then they'll do something bone headed, which will make it hard to justify backing them.

Occupiers staged a City Hall sit in to protest the eviction of a family, and I was excited to see the movement taking positive action on a solid issue. Next thing I knew, $3,000.00 of the movement's money was wasted on 500 ugly T-shirts, from an out of state manufacturer, and I found myself questioning their fiscal savvy.

Occupiers shut down the docks to stick it to the 1%, but in doing so they cost a day's pay to hard working members of the 99% just before Christmas. They also failed to make allowances for shipments of donated food on their way to feed the pour, which are the people the movement's theoretically fighting for.

I feel like a yo-yo. Only instead of merely moving up & down the opinion spectrum, the rapidity of events pummels me like a gale force wind, sending my opinion of the movement in every conceivable direction. I can't find a comfortable stance to take for any length of time. Well, that's not quite true.

I DO BELIEVE the core of the movement is made up of dedicated people who genuinely want to make the world a better place. That much is worthy of respect, and I'll rip the proverbial lips off anyone who classifies occupiers, as a whole, as a group of ignorant pot heads. I think a few such people have signed on board after the fact, but the movement's core have their hearts in the right place.

Their problems are a result of their extreme idealism. They want to keep the movement a leaderless organization while maintaining a policy of 100% inclusion. Yet, if anyone can join a group with no designated leader, or spokesperson, then anyone can speak/act on behalf of the group. Thus, you get: members trashing corporate America on the news, while holding Starbuck's coffee cups to stay warm; random members ordering shirts on behalf of the movement, nobody to make exceptions for charitable deliveries to barricaded docks, and nobody to deliver a consistent message to the media.

I understand the concept behind a total democracy and an all inclusive form of participatory decision making. I really do. But, unless the occupation forms some kind of clear and stable hierarchy, they'll continue to make mistakes and trip over themselves. Thus, their message, noble though it is, will be lost.
-

J. Edgar: Review

2011-12-04T14:45:00.001-08:00

-
In “J. Edgar,” we see an aging Hoover, played by Leonardo DiCaprio, dictating a memoir of his early career, beginning with the bombing of 1919 and progressing through the Lindbergh Baby Trial. Between depictions of dictated chapters, the audience watches a weathered version of Hoover try to hold onto power and polish his legacy during the; Kennedy, Johnson, and early Nixon; administrations.

This film humanized the historic power monger, by showing him at his most vulnerable. While Hoover was commandingly dominant in the professional realm, DiCaprio played him as being submissive toward his domineering mother, played by Judi Dench. We also see him as being awkward around women, as he constantly wrestles with his sexuality.

What I found interesting, were the plot points Director Clint Eastwood chose to gloss over. While much was made of the homosexual relationship with Agent Clyde Tolson, played by Arnie Hammer, almost no mention of Hoover’s propensity to cross-dress was made, except for a scene which was more about him saying goodbye to his mother than his sexual proclivities. Likewise, while the movie documented the prosecution’s physical evidence in the Lindbergh case, the film failed to mention the fact that Charles Lindbergh was an Eugenicist and Nazi sympathizer who may have killed his own birth defected child.

All in all, this was a balanced, superbly acted, look at J. Edgar Hoover’s life, which neither glorified or vilified the founder of the F.B.I. I give “J. Edgar” 4 out of 5 stars.
-

Well Rounded Readers and Watchers

2011-11-19T14:44:00.000-08:00

-
I was partaking of my New York Times last Friday, when I came across the op-ed "The Inequality Map" by, op-ed columnist, David Brooks. The column attempted to define which types of inequality people can legitimately feel superior about (fitness, Ivy League education, technological prowess, etc...) and types which are unacceptable to brag about (religious differences, ancestors' accomplishments, mass spending...).

About half way through the piece, I came across the passage, "Cultural inequality is unacceptable. If you are the sort of person who attends opera or enjoys Ibsen plays, it is not acceptable to believe that you have a more refined sensibility than people who like Lady Gaga, Ke$ha or graffiti."

The simply stated idea gave me pause, because it's an issue I find myself wrestling with, not so much with music as with movies and books. When it comes to movies, I sometimes find myself frustrated by friends who seek out, what I consider to be, high school caliber comedies such as Superbad and The School of Rock, but who are bored by The Godfather, The Bridge Over The River Kwai, and Casablanca. I snobbishly look at these people and think, "when will you grow up?"

Yet, I find I'm exactly the opposite when it comes to books. This year, I gave myself the goal to read one book from an "important author" each month. I've done so, because I feel it's important to expose myself to schools of thought which have shaped our world. While I've enjoyed; A Tale of Two Cities, In The Garden of Beasts, and a few others; I must confess that I'd rather read an exciting genre piece from Robert B. Parker than a story about the religious feast of Epiphany, at the home of Julia and Kate Morkan (James Joyce's "The Dead").

According to, literary critic, Maureen Corrigan, the newest notable literary work, Leaving the Atocha Station by Ben Lerner, is a work of "spinning-one's-wheels-in-the-sand fiction," without a plot and, "too ironic and intellectual to be the kind of novel that really moves readers." While she was able to appreciate, "the fluidity of Lerner's words and the wit of his musings," I need a plot to hold my interest.

Truth be told, just as I favor genre novels to serious literature, I have to admit to a level of hypocrisy regarding my movie snobbery. While I got a lot out of The Weather Man, and I really want to see J. Edgar, I also own every 007 movie and I'm the first one in the theater when a new comic book or Star Trek movie comes out.

I think Brooks' original statement holds up, but only partially. There's nothing particularly low-brow about enjoying genre fiction or seeing blockbusters. However, limiting yourself to ONLY those offerings is analogous to limiting oneself to a diet of desserts. For example, Parker's most frequently penned hero, Spenser, often spouts the quote, "Death is the mother of beauty." Unless a reader is motivated to partake of offerings other than the currently popular ones, the reader isn't going to know the quote comes from Wallace Stevens' "Sunday Morning, and won't understand what's being said.

Of course, limiting oneself to ONLY "important works," is also a form of limiting oneself. Personally, I don't find much value in watching a ninety minute depiction of teeny boppers trying to score beer and get laid. Nevertheless, I find people who can discuss Shakespeare, and who know the origin of, "Live long and prosper," to be much more well rounded than those are well versed in ONLY one style of fiction OR the other.
-

Occupy Stand Off - Micro Blog

2011-11-13T16:36:00.001-08:00

-
As I watch the stand off between occupiers & police, on 3rd & Main, I can hear the following West Side Story-esc back & forth going on in my head.
-
Occupiers: The occupiers are gonna have their day, Tonight. The occupiers are gonna have their way, Tonight. The city officials grumble, 'obey us,' but if they start to move in, we'll put up a fuss.

Cops: We're gonna hand'em a surprise, Tonight. We're gonna cut'em down to size, Tonight. We said 'OK no rumpus, no tricks,' but just in case they jump us, we're ready to mix, Tonight.

Occupiers: We're gonna rock it tonight. We're gonna jazz it up, and have us a ball.

Cops: They're gonna get it tonight. The more they turn it on, the harder they'll fall.

Occupiers: Well they began it.

Cops: Well they began it.

Occupiers & Cops: And we're the ones to stop'em once and for all, Tonight.
-
Whether, or not, the movement will disband peacefully, remains to be seen.

The End Approaches

2011-11-09T20:42:00.000-08:00

-
First of all, it's nice to be back home and back online. Living in a motel, which reeked of tobacco smoke and Lord knows what else, as part of my house was being remodeled, was an exhausting experience. Returning home, after a week of; fast food take-out, nukable meals, mystery odors from Hell, limited TV, nausea, and no internet (I use a desktop PC); only to discover 1/3 of my computer's keys no longer functioned was positively disheartening. Two weeks after the slay ride began, I'm pleased to say I have a new bathroom, complete with a heated floor; I'm adjusting to a new keyboard, I'm consistently holding food down, and I'm ready to write again.
-
If you've ever stayed in a motel, you've found the laminated card which tells the occupant which TV channels are received and where they are on the "dial." I found the card quickly enough, but it in no way reflected reality. As I spent the week hunting and pecking, with a remote that had no battery cover, I found 4 local channels, TBS, and Encore. That's it, pbbbth... Thus, I watched more than my usual helping of local news. Of course, local broadcasts were ripe with stories of Occupy Portland.

I didn't mind the domination in coverage, since I find the movement to be of major interest and significance. Think about it. In the beginning, tens of thousands of average people put their lives on hold to try to change society for the better. The fact that change didn't occur is sad, but in my mind it's largely irrelevant. What's significant is the fact that so many people made an attempt beyond merely clicking to sign an online petition.

The beginning of the inevitable end occurred as I watched reports on the motel's low-definition TV. A police officer being pushed against a moving bus during an unruly march over Hawthorne Bridge inspired original movement organizers, AKA “The Real Occupy Portland and the 99%” to distance themselves from the actions of current campers, many of whom don't share the non-violent values the movement was originally based on. Founding members distanced themselves even further from occupiers after a branch of Chase Bank was vandalized on Saturday.

In light of the founders' statement, it became clear that Occupy Portland had become a homeless camp, and had ceased being a legitimate protest demonstration. This realization, coupled with threats made the park's maintenance workers, led Mayor Adams to order the park's restrooms to be locked on Monday. Yet, he didn't set a deadline for the camp's removal until David J. Hodson threw a Molotov cocktail at the Portland Trade Center on Tuesday.

The deadline for occupiers to be out of the park has been set for 12:01 AM Sunday morning. Police Chief Mike Reese has promised to enforce the mayor's order and arrest anyone who remains after the deadline. While some protesters have packed their bags, a determined core has vowed stay past the deadline. As promos for the stage production of West Side Story are being broadcast on Portland's airwaves, both occupiers and police are practically singing a countdown to a confrontation nobody wants, but which neither side seems willing to back away from.

For a little over a month, Occupy Portland existed as a micro-society right smack in the middle of the city. During that time, we got to see people come together, form a self governing body, write and post laws, create an infrastructure in the form of; a medical center, a soup line, a library, an economic system (via PayPal),and a website; thrive briefly, become corrupt, and now we're seeing its collapse.
-

The Occupations Continue

2011-10-28T17:05:00.000-07:00

-
I'm sure that a few Vegas odds makers have taken it in the shorts lately. A few weeks ago, good money said The Occupation Movement would be history by now. With only a few days before Halloween, many people, including me, expected America's parks and city blocks to be back to normal. I thought former occupiers would be back at their customary espresso bars sipping lattes and blogging about their most recent stand against "the man" and his corporate system. WHOOPS, I called that about as wrong as the newspaper man who wrote the headline, "Dewey Defeats Truman," in 1948. I got it wrong, partly because I under estimated the frustration level of the masses.

Background:
Of course they're frustrated. According to the latest U.S. Census Data:

The official poverty rate in 2010 was 15.1 percent — up from 14.3 percent in 2009. This was the third consecutive annual increase in the poverty rate. Since 2007, the poverty rate has increased by 2.6 percentage points, from 12.5 percent to 15.1 percent.
In 2010, 46.2 million people were in poverty, up from 43.6 million in 2009—the fourth consecutive annual increase in the number of people in poverty.
Between 2009 and 2010, the poverty rate increased for non-Hispanic Whites (from 9.4 percent to 9.9 percent), for Blacks (from 25.8 percent to 27.4 percent), and for Hispanics (from 25.3 percent to 26.6 percent).
The poverty rate in 2010 (15.1 percent) was the highest poverty rate since 1993.
The number of people in poverty in 2010 (46.2 million) is the largest number in the 52 years for which poverty estimates have been published.
Between 2009 and 2010, the poverty rate increased for children under age 18 (from 20.7 percent to 22.0 percent) and people aged 18 to 64 (from 12.9 percent to 13.7 percent).

Meanwhile, banks & insurance companies, including Bank of America Corporation, Bank of New York Mellon Corporation, Citigroup Inc., The Goldman Sachs Group, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Morgan Stanley, State Street Corporation, Wells Fargo & Company........, were bailed out by The Troubled Asset Relief Program or "TARP" to the tune of 700 billion tax payer dollars. Theoretically, once the financial companies used the public funds to stabilize their books, money was supposed to "trickle down" in the form of an increased number of refinancing plans and small business loans, which would be used to prevent foreclosures and create jobs. However, loan activity has declined and foreclosure rates have sharply increased, since the bailouts occurred. Yet, bailout recipients are still awarding multimillion dollar bonuses to top executives. The increase in poverty and lost homes while such bonuses are being handed out, is reminiscent of people filling their bowls with wine from a broken cask in the street as Marquis Evrémonde attends lavish parties.

When the top 1 percent of earners in the United States saw their average household incomes grow a whopping 279 percent from 1979 to 2007, as the number of working poor rose dramatically, it's easy to see how, "I am part of the 99%," has become such a battle cry. When that same 1% owns 38% of the nation's wealth, and that wealth fails to "trickle down" in the form of an increased number of refinancing plans and small business loans, which could be used to prevent foreclosures and create jobs, it's easy to see why thousands of people are crying for change in our economic and banking system.

The Movement's Message:
What began as a rally for change in our economic and banking system, has become a bully pulpit for everyone with a liberal cause. In my blog, The Occupation Of America, I outlined the 13 demands listed on OWS' website, some of which contradict each other. One can't claim to be advocating for the working poor of America while demanding that borders be opened to foreign workers. Can anyone say, "cognitive dissonance?"

Since that posting, a number of other causes from veterans rights to Democratic campaigns have attached their banners to the Occupy Movement. Just today, I was listening to Anne Saxelby's "Cutting the Curd" Podcast, and her guests were arguing the Occupy Movement should also be rallying, on behalf of small dairy farmers, against "Big Food."

This, "everybody's welcome, bring your issues with you & hop aboard," attitude has its benefits. A policy of inclusion makes it difficult for critics to paint occupiers as "bad guys." Occupiers will welcome and accept anyone who wants to support the movement, regardless of; age, race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or national origin; which is a value many Americans struggle to instill within their children. The policy also makes it easier to boost its numbers. Since its inception, we've not only seen the movement spring into being in multiple cities across the country, but we've seen the movement grow within each city. An estimated 10,000 people occupy Portland alone, giving the impression that the populace at large supports the cause. 10,000 Oregonians can't be wrong, can they?

The policy of inclusion has its drawbacks too though. The policy necessarily excludes the possibility of weeding out undesirables. Since the formation of Portland's camp, reports of vandalism, drug dealing, and hindering traffic have been rampant. According to KPTV, "Portland police released crime statistics for the area of downtown Portland that includes the Occupy Portland encampment and the numbers showed an 81 percent spike in crime compared to the two weeks before the protest started." Plus, with 10,000 people camped in one tight knit area, provisions must be made for food distribution, medical care, and waste disposal. To their credit, Portland's occupiers have formed governing bodies, which have established and maintained a soup line, founded a camp library, dealt with local businesses to secure the use of toilet facilities, and scheduled a number of protests & events. Of course, there's some conjecture as to whether the camp's governing body has "misplaced" 20,000 donated dollars.

Aside from management & law enforcement issues, there exists the more fundamental problem of the movement's message and goals being blurred. As the core members rally for banking reform, individual protesters are making their way in front of news crews to advocate for the causes they've brought to the party. When such a wide variety of liberal causes is being fought for, a clear vision of a victory becomes impossible. Even if movement organizers obtain their picture perfect idea of banking reform, odds are that many newcomers to the movement won't see their issues addressed.

Reactions To The Movement:
As confusion over a single unified message plagues the movement, confusion about how to react to the movement plagues government officials and law enforcement. Many mayors and town councils want their parks and streets back, but don't want to compared to Governor Rhodes during the Kent State protests, which saw 13 protesters shot by the Ohio National Guard. In order to avoid such comparisons, many mayors have remained lenient with protesters by allowing their camps to exist. At one point Mayor Bloomberg, of New York City, announced that Zuccotti Park would be cleared of protesters on the morning of October 14th to facilitate maintenance. Yet, when it became clear that protesters wouldn't leave without being physically forced to do so, Mayor Bloomberg allowed the deadline to expire without a confrontation.

Similarly, while Portland's Commissioner of Parks, Nick Fish, wants to evict occupiers in order to address the $19,000 worth of damage which has already been done to Chapman and Lownsdale Squares, Mayor Adams has adopted a "day by day" approach to dealing with the occupation. Even though, Adams is content to allow occupiers remain, as long as they behave, he's made it clear they won't be allowed to expand into the trendy Pearl District.

Not all officials have been as congenial as Adams & Bloomberg however. Police in Oakland have fired tear gas and beanbag rounds to clear camps, going so far as to hit 24 year old war veteran, Scott Olsen, in the head with a mortar propelled gas grenade. Likewise, police in Atlanta, supported by hovering choppers, have arrested dozens of camping protesters.

Federally speaking, President Obama has expressed acknowledgement of the goals of the movement. Yet, as far as I can tell, little has been done to address the movement's issues. The President HAS unveiled a plan to reduce the debt burden of student loan borrowers. Yet, the plan only addresses the debt of future borrowers of federal loans without relieving the debt of current graduates or reforming the structure of the overall student loan system.

Predictably, the private sector has responded to protesters with an array of merchandise. Amazon's shoppers can order an inventory of; T-shirts, posters, decals, phone covers, bumper stickers, and books; which all celebrate the protests against corporate America. Someone is even marketing an "Occupy Wall Street: I'm Getting Arrested" app for the Android phone, which has sold over 9,000 copies.

Closing Thoughts:
I don't know how this will all end. I do know that children in history class will be reading about the fall of 2011 sixty years from now. Whether those lessons will be about the months that changed society, or a historically long venting of mass frustration, remains to be seen. The romantic in me hopes they'll be learning about the former. It would be nice to think they'll be learning about the catalyst which led to the equalization of wealth in America. The skeptic in me though, reminds me that the primary function of "the system" is the perpetuation of itself; when the tents are finally gone, and headlines broadcast the newest celebrity tryst, the rich will still be rich and the working poor will still be poorer.
-

I Don't Care If He's Mormon

2011-10-14T17:19:00.000-07:00

-
Recently, Dr. Robert Jeffress publicly made the statement. "Mitt Romney's a good moral person but he's not a Christian. Mormonism is not Christianity. It has always been considered a cult by the mainstream of Christianity. So it's the difference between a Christian and a non-Christian." The implication being that "mainstream Christians" should vote for, fellow Christian, Rick Perry simply because Romney's a Mormon. While I'm no fan of Mitt, this type of reasoning bothers me for the simple reason that it shouldn't matter.

Before I dismiss the statement, it's important to address the basic premise, "Mormonism is not Christianity." Most "mainstream Christians" believe that God The Father, Christ, and The Holy Spirit are three parts of one collective being, God. Mormons, or members The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, believe The Holy Trinity is made up of three separate beings, God The Father, his only begotten son Christ, and The Holy Spirit. If you accept the idea that being a Christian means accepting the definition of God as the three in one being, then Dr. Jeffress's statement holds water. Yet, both groups believe that coming to Christ is the only way to be absolved of sin. Once you factor in the belief in Christ's payment for sin, it becomes hard, at least for me, not to see Mormons as Christians. One doesn't have to buy in to all their beliefs to respect them as an honestly devout sect who are trying to live wholesome lives.

All that being said, it shouldn't matter one way or the other where a candidate does, or doesn't, go to church. Keep in mind, fifty-one years ago people were equally freaked about Kennedy's Catholicism. Opponents were positive that if Kennedy was elected, the Pope would be running the White House. It didn't happen, largely because JFK recognized the fact that he'd been elected to serve Americans, not just Catholics. What matters are a candidate's character and ideas. With that in mind, there's NO WAY I'D VOTE FOR MITT ROMNEY FOR PRESIDENT.

According to his own site's "issues" section, at http://www.mittromney.com/issues, if elected he would:

Repeal Obamacare and replace it with market-based reforms (Which means nixing universal health care and letting the insurance industry regulate itself),
Reduce corporate taxes to create jobs (Does anyone in post bail-out America really believe that corporations which receive tax cuts will invest the savings in job creation?),
Reduce spending on government programs (This sounds good unless you depend on such programs to buy food, pay rent, or cover prescription costs)

While his positions on gay marriage and a woman's right to choose aren't listed on his site, for obvious reasons, his stances on those issues are well known and deplorable.

I won't not vote for him, because he's Mormon. I'm going to not vote him, because he's bass ackwards wrong on every conceivable issue. Well, there's that plus the fact the I can't vote in the GOP's primary. Nevertheless, my point still stands. In fact, if conservative voters can look past their religious intolerance during the primaries, I think they'll discover Romney to be kind of narrow thinking candidate they're often eager to embrace.

-

The Occupation Of America

2011-10-08T14:14:00.000-07:00

-
On September 17th, 1,000 people gathered to "occupy Wall Street" in order to protest perceived political and corporate corruption. Soon, people began to flock to Wall Street to add to the growing collective voice. One week later, a second occupation arose in Chicago. A week after that, OWS inspired protests were active in Washington, D.C., and L.A., soon to be followed by Boston, Memphis, Minneapolis, St. Louis, Hawaii, and Portland, Maine. Most recently, such movements have formed in Houston, Austin, Tampa, San Francisco, and here in Portland, OR.

I'm a diehard liberal, to be sure. 999 out 1,000 times though, I see such protests as a grouping of hippie wannabes looking for an excuse to mimic the 60s and smoke some pot. That being said, this string of urban occupations is different. We're seeing tens of thousands of citizens, from multiple backgrounds, crying, "WE'VE HAD ENOUGH!" They're frustrated by a 9.1% rate of nationwide unemployment, which keeps growing. They're frustrated by banks, which accepted tax payer funded bailouts, curtailing the number of loans they approve. They're frustrated by candidates for president who claim, "Corporations are people, because all the money a corporation makes goes into the pockets of people." They're frustrated by a staggering number of residential foreclosures; in August of this year alone, 1 out every 570 household received foreclosure filings. Essentially, they're frustrated by the perceived domination of America by the corporate elite, and the grossly unequal distribution of wealth.

The issues they are raising ARE definitely overdue to be addressed, there's no doubt about it. The question is, will these protests spawn change? I doubt it. Don't get me wrong, for the most part these are determined people advocating for noble ideals. The problem is, they're advocating for too many noble ideals at once.

Organizers have published the following list of demands on the OWS website:

Demand one: Restoration of the living wage. This demand can only be met by ending "Freetrade" by re-imposing trade tariffs on all imported goods entering the American market to level the playing field for domestic family farming and domestic manufacturing as most nations that are dumping cheap products onto the American market have radical wage and environmental regulation advantages. Another policy that must be instituted is raise the minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr.

Demand two: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system. To do this all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market as their only effect on the health of patients is to take money away from doctors, nurses and hospitals preventing them from doing their jobs and hand that money to wall st. investors.

Demand three: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.

Demand four: Free college education.

Demand five: Begin a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy economy up to energy demand.

Demand six: One trillion dollars in infrastructure (Water, Sewer, Rail, Roads and Bridges and Electrical Grid) spending now.

Demand seven: One trillion dollars in ecological restoration planting forests, reestablishing wetlands and the natural flow of river systems and decommissioning of all of America's nuclear power plants.

Demand eight: Racial and gender equal rights amendment.

Demand nine: Open borders migration. anyone can travel anywhere to work and live.

Demand ten: Bring American elections up to international standards of a paper ballot precinct counted and recounted in front of an independent and party observers system.

Demand eleven: Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all. Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages, home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans now! All debt must be stricken from the "Books." World Bank Loans to all Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin Call Debt in the stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65 trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the "Books." And I don't mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet period.

Demand twelve: Outlaw all credit reporting agencies.

Demand thirteen: Allow all workers to sign a ballot at any time during a union organizing campaign or at any time that represents their yeah or nay to having a union represent them in collective bargaining or to form a union.

It's a case of over reaching. Granted, most of these are fantastic goals; some are so fantastic though that they are unrealistically Utopian. Free college education is a great idea if those making $18,218.00 and below want to pay a 33.45% income tax, like they do in Holland, to pay for it. 100% debt forgiveness is a nice idea, unless Sallie Mae wants to pay her employees. I'm all for a guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment, if we can still motivate recipients to contribute to society. Plus, I must admit to being foggy on how opening our borders to migrants is going to help unemployed Americans.

During any session of bargaining, there is a wisdom to demanding more than you'll settle for, to give yourself room to maneuver. Yet, with so many protesters involved, I'm not sure there's a consensus on what a win looks like. I'm also not clear what protesters are willing to do if the powers that be don't choose to come to the negotiating table. Is,"Do it our way, or we'll stay out here and suffer a frigid winter," the only bargaining chip they have? As long as they're willing to allow marathons, and other events, to proceed as planned, I can see officials growing accustom to their presence.
-

Deborah Lawrenson's "The Lantern" and Other Reviews

2011-10-03T16:01:00.000-07:00

-
For the past month, I've been promising to review Deborah Lawrenson's The Lantern. Before you read my review though, you should be made aware of the existence of a casual online friendship between Deborah Lawrenson and myself. We'll never share feelings over cups of coffee at two in the morning, or anything like that. However, I read her blog, she reads mine, and we've given each other words of encouragement from time to time. With that in mind, this is what I thought of her book. Following, my review of The Lantern, you'll find some of my other opinions on recent movies and TV.
-
The Lantern, is a book which tells two stories at the same time. In what most readers will consider to be the main story, we see Eve, as an adult, fall in love with an older man named Dom. It's not until they buy home together in the south of France, that Eve begins to realize how extremely secretive Dom is about his past, most notably regarding his former, not necessarily ex, wife. Her curiosity prompts Eve to investigate Dom's past while trying not to ignite his volatile temper. The second story shows us Eve's childhood and the lengths she'd go to to placate her sadistic brother.

As much as I love & admire Deborah, I have to say, the Godfather Part II style back and forth between the two stories makes each story a bit hard to get into. Once the reader DOES get into the narrative though, the purpose for the alternating chapters becomes clear. Like James Fenimore Cooper's The Leatherstocking Tales, The Lantern is as much about sensory descriptions of the setting as it is about the plot or characters. Deborah Lawrenson does a brilliant job of describing the floral hills, ripening fruits, and cloud dotted skies of the French countryside as they are perceived by all five human senses. As each story unfolds, Eve is repeatedly exposed to the same mysterious scent, which ties the stories together in an interesting way.

This wasn't a casual afternoon read for me,The Lantern requires some work to get through. Yet, Henry David Thoreau once said, "Books must be read as deliberately and reservedly as they were written." Thus, if a reader puts in the time & effort, they'll find themselves amply rewarded by the beauty of The Lantern. 4 out of 5 stars

-

Recent Movies:
If To Live & Die In LA met one of Sergio Leone's spaghetti westerns at a bar, and they hit it off, the product of their union would be Drive. Even though it's set in modern times, a horde of "me" oriented characters, the gritty downtown style of story telling, hip but dark background music, and neon style lettering in the credits, work together to produce the feel of an 80s crime drama, reminding movie goers of when Agent Richard Chance avenged the death of his partner and Crockett and Tubbs fought to stem the flow of drugs in Miami. Yet, almost channeling Clint Eastwood, Ryan Gosling plays The Driver as a quiet man with no name who's guided by a quasi-moral code. He's willing to drive getaway for a heist, but he'll risk his life to right a wrong and protect those he perceives to be innocent. 4.5 out of 5 stars
-
What happens when a lie becomes not only a matter of record, but a piece of history? How far would you go to protect that lie and perpetuate widely accepted illusions? These are the questions Director John Madden asks in this gritty gripping espionage thriller, The Debt.

Like The Lantern, crucial parts of this story are revealed as a series of flashbacks, first showing us the accepted myth, then the truth behind the reported events. As we witness both versions, as well as the aftermath of the lie, we begin to sympathize with the liers, played by Helen Mirren, Rome's Ciarán Hinds, and Tom Wilkinson. With knowledge of the harm the truth could do, if made public, audience members find themselves routing for the continuation of the cover up. 5 out of 5 stars.
-
After a 27 year absence from the big screen, Robert E. Howard's mythic hero has found his way back into theaters. This version of Conan the Barbarian had way more action and colorful villains than Arnie's version. While the fight scenes were amazing, including a swash buckling sword fight aboard a pirate ship, the Conan character had been substantially altered. This version was never raised as a slave, nor did he worship the warrior God, Crom, stating several times that he worshiped no God. If Arnie's version was based on Robert E. Howard's novels, this movie felt more like an adaptation of one of the comic book versions. 2.5 out of 5 stars.

-

The New Fall TV Season:
Initially, I was excited about this year's new TV line-up. I, of course, haven't seen every offering this year, nor do I intend to make the effort. However, I've seen enough to be really disappointed.
-
In the original British version of Prime Suspect Detective Chief Inspector (DCI) Jane Tennison, played by Helen Mirren, lead a major case unit of the Metropolitan Police. The show was centered around the character trying to solve murders while confronting DS Bill Otley (Tom Bell) and other sexist officers on her squad who attempted to have her replaced as team leader. In NBC's version of the series, Maria Bello plays Detective Jane Timoney, a younger, more action oriented sleuth with a mentoring ex-cop for a father.

While Bello's character still faces a staggeringly blatant brand of sexism from her co-workers, especially Detective Reg Duffy played by Brían F. O'Byrne, that's where the similarities end. Timoney is more masculine, and in some ways less seasoned, than her English counterpart, Tennison. While her increased willingness to draw her gun, or participate in a fist fight, makes for a more visually exciting program, it takes Prime Suspect from the realm of thought provoking mysteries such as Perry Mason and Inspector Morse, and plops it into a category along side Charlies Angels and Hunter.
-
"Up All Night" and "Whitney" whetted our appetites all summer with outrageously funny clips about raising babies and dating. Unfortunately, Up All Night proved to revolve around the quest to be 30-something and cool, rather than a comedy about embarking upon the adventure of parenting. Likewise, Whitney has proved to be just another "boy likes girl" sitcom with mediocre jokes, maybe one big laugh per show, and tender Cunningham-esc moments to end each episode.
-
The one new show I think has potential is, oddly enough Pan-Am. In order to enjoy the show, viewers need to suspend disbelief, more than usual, and accept the ideas that in 1963 stewardesses were actually CIA agents and commercial airliners were sent on missions to rescue Cuban refugees. If you can put reality to one side though, the unique formula makes a wide variety of stories possible. If ABC utilizes what they have, audiences may be treated to love stories, inflight murder mysteries, spy thrillers, and other tales of intrigue, danger, and romance.
-
As a final note, I must confess to being majorly disappointed by the return of a show I loved last year. In January of 2011, viewers were introduced to Harriot Korn, played by Kathy Bates. She was a recently fired lawyer who did things her way. Harry's Law was a fun show about Harriot's shoe store front law office. Featuring a different quirky case each week, we were treated to her display of off the cuff antics as she dealt with her colorful staff, gang members, and downtown neighbors.

This year however, her practice is part of a larger contemporary law office, and she's been involved in a single ongoing murder trial. OK, I get that NBC may have been contractually obligated to give Alfred Molina a certain number of episodes to round out his Law & Order. L.A. contract, but the case they have him involved with is just plain boring. It's gone from being a uniquely fun show, to being a hum-drum clone of Ally McBeal or Boston Legal. If not for the overly Machiavellian prosecutor, played by Jean Smart, and the occasional screwball remark from Tommy "Big Boy" Jefferson, played by Christopher McDonald, Harry's Law wouldn't have ANY energy at all this year.

To paraphrase the wives of Dogpatch, "Put it back, the way it wuz. Oh, put it back the way it wuz. It was smart, it was funny, she helped with clients with no money. So whatever else you does, put it back the way it wuz! Put it back [put em back] the way it wuz [the way it wuz] oh, put it back the way it wuz!"
-

What's The Point?

2011-09-27T19:56:00.000-07:00

-
Debbie shuffled from one envelope to the next, making mental notes as she made her way back to her house from the mailbox. "Water bill, Visa, Danbury Mint catalog," she mumbled. Suddenly her brow furrowed when a familiar, yet unfamiliar, red envelope caught her attention. "Honey," she said, making her way into the kitchen, "Did you sign us up for a new DVD service?"

"Huh?" David grunted from behind his newspaper.

"A new DVD service," she repeated, and held out the envelope. "It looks like a Netflix envelope, but it says Qwickster."

David folded his paper and said, "Oh, that," while giving a pleasant chuckle. "Netflix is Qwickster now."

"They changed their name? Why?"

"Because they raised their prices," he said.

"I don't follow," Debbie said. "What does one have to do with the other?"

David released a long sigh and motioned for Debbie to seat herself on the breakfast stool next to his. "As you know, people have been able to rent disks AND watch videos online from Netflix under a single price package."

"Right," Debbie said with an attentive nod.

"Well, at the end of August, Netflix announced they were going to sell the services separately. Each service would cost less than what people were currently paying, but ordering the two services together would cost more. People were outraged; blogs flamed the plan, Twitter was all atweet with disgruntled customers. It was a PR nightmare."

"Where does Qwickster fit in?" Debbie asked with a cocked head.

"I'm getting to that," David reassured her. "On September 19th, around 2am, CEO Reed Hastings sent what initially looked like an apology email all the customers of Netflix. Once, customers read the message though, they discovered a plan to split Netflix into two companies. Netflix would stream video online, and Qwickster would mail the DVDs."

"Wait," Debbie said. "Didn't Netflix start as a DVD mailing service and add the streaming video later?"

"Yup," David said.

"So, the new company will provide the original service, and the original company will provide the additional streaming service?"

"Yup," David said.

"And, the prices will go back down to their original levels?"

"Nope," David said. "The newly announced prices still stand, only now they'll appear as two line items on people's bank statements instead of a single total."

"Billing people twice won't increase overhead and their costs?"

"Probably will," David said.

"Will people's queues still be tied together?"

"Don't know," David said.

"What makes the separation of companies worth the higher prices and increased book keeping?"

"Qwickster will rent video games as well as movies."

"They couldn't have offered games as an additional paid service under Netflix, and kept the rest of the prices the same?"

"Probably could've," David said.

"Why are they increasing prices, bureaucracy, and over head simply to add a new service to their product line."

"Don't know," David said.

"Then, what made CEO Reed Hastings think the announcement of the split would put people's minds at ease over the price bump?"

"Don't know," David said.
-
Epilogue:

On October 10th, 2011 the following letter was sent to all Netflix users.

Dear David,

It is clear that for many of our members two websites would make things more difficult, so we are going to keep Netflix as one place to go for streaming and DVDs.

This means no change: one website, one account, one password…in other words, no Qwikster.

While the July price change was necessary, we are now done with price changes.

We're constantly improving our streaming selection. We've recently added hundreds of movies from Paramount, Sony, Universal, Fox, Warner Bros., Lionsgate, MGM and Miramax. Plus, in the last couple of weeks alone, we've added over 3,500 TV episodes from ABC, NBC, FOX, CBS, USA, E!, Nickelodeon, Disney Channel, ABC Family, Discovery Channel, TLC, SyFy, A&E, History, and PBS.

We value you as a member, and we are committed to making Netflix the best place to get your movies & TV shows.

Respectfully,

The Netflix Team
-

Summer's End

2011-09-15T16:08:00.000-07:00

-
Last year I posted a poem about the coming of autumn. Today I'm posting a poem of mine about the end of summer.

Summer's End

A fluffy white blanket covers the familiar blue,
Of hot lazy days spent trading comic books and sliding into home plate.
Sporadic spits of rain slowly erase streets of chalk,
Which once carried busy bicycles racing to and from make believe shops.

Naked sticks of brittle wood are all that remain of,
Fruity frozen confections of sticky juice which decorated small lips.
School books replace tales of heroic adventures in heavy
Nap sacks of students trying to find their way from home room their next class.

Sweaters hand on bodies once adorned in light tank tops,
As boots incase previously sandaled feet sprinkled in cool beach sand.
Thoughts of clear nights spent star gazing as bug zappers snap,
Morph into aspirations of full meals and rich holiday suppers.

Colored leaves smother previously soft green grass blades,
As we prepare for the cold short days and long nights which lie just ahead.

Lest We Forget

2011-09-10T17:08:00.000-07:00

-
I love ordering pizza to be delivered. One evening, I ordered an anchovy & onion pizza with extra cheese. Unfortunately, I didn't open the box until the delivery guy left, and I found a pepperoni & jalapeno pizza. Foolishly, I tried to eat the thing, but I realized it was to spicy to choke down, without having my nose run and my eyes water. Thus, I called the restaurant to inform them of their error, but they wouldn't exchange it because I'd eaten a few bites. I fumed all night. I was going to write to corporate headquarters, that manager was NEVER going to work in this town again; I was going to make sure of it. The next morning, my brother rushed into my room and switched my TV on, just in time for me to see the second tower collapse.

Suddenly, the pizza seemed absurdly trivial.

2,977 innocent people, and 19 hijackers, died as America watched. Among the 2,977 victims were the 246 passengers and crew of the four planes, from which there were no survivors, the 2,606 people who'd been going about their business in the towers and on the ground below, and the 125 people who were killed at the Pentagon.

Approximately 200 people fell or jumped to their deaths from the burning towers, landing on the streets, and rooftops of adjacent buildings, hundreds of feet below. Some victims, desperate to live, tried to make their way upward toward the roof in the hope of a helicopter rescue, but the roof's access doors were locked. 411 emergency workers; 341 firefighters, 37 Port Authority officers, 23 police officers, 8 privately paid EMTs, and 2 paramedics; died as they tried to rescue people and fight the fires.

Everything else became secondary in importance, as Americans reeled in horror at the events of that day. A nation, which hadn't suffered a foreign attack upon its shores, was suddenly vulnerable. We were vulnerable.

We were vulnerable, we were scared, and WE WERE ANGRY! In a way I've never seen before or since, that vulnerability, fear, and anger morphed into a sense of hyper-patriotism. For six months we wore images of flags and eagles with pride. We weren't Democrats and Republicans divided by party lines, WE WERE AMERICANS. As Americans, we roared with a collective rage; we were going to get "them."

This Sunday is the 10th anniversary of that fatefully tragic day. Many TV & Cable networks are planning special programming to mark the occasion and cartoonists are planning September 11th anniversary tributes in Sunday's funnies, as rumors of a "credible but unconfirmed" terrorist threat to New York and Washington, D.C. dominate the media. Nobody knows quite what to expect on Sunday. We wait with baited breath to see if it will be a day of reverent remembrance honoring those who were lost, a day of speeches and political posturing, or a bloody catalyst to another period of hysteria and increased violence.

Many Americans plan to use Sunday as an opportunity to reflect upon the tragedy and the resulting decade of war. Personally, I plan to watch my copy of "A Tribute To Heroes," the televised all-star concert which raised money for victims' families, and do some reflecting of my own. In fact, I can't help but reflect as I write this, and a question occurs to me. On 9/12, if we'd known our collective rage would lead to ten years of war, and arguably the passage of the constitutionally devastating Patriot Act, would we have reigned in our anger during the 6 months which followed?

What do you think?

9/11 MEMORIAL VIDEO

The Value Of Literature In An Education

2011-08-17T14:59:00.000-07:00

-
"How will a class in English Literature help me land a job?" is a question I've heard time and time again, from friends attending university. My answer is always the same, "It's not, nor is it supposed to."

The point of literature, in education is to expose readers to new ideas, and new ways of thinking about something. Those merely seeking training for a job can attend an inexpensive trade school. One attends a university to obtain a well rounded education, and improve one's mind and understanding of the world.

I've believed this since I graduated, with a degree in psychology, back in '94. Even though I majored in a "soft science," I made a point to take as much philosophy, history, literature, and creative writing as I could. At the time, and for years afterward, I patted myself on the back for having obtained such a well rounded education. Yet, recently it's become clear to me just how many gaps there are in my literary repertoire.

Somehow, I maintained honor roll worthy grades through high school, and graduated from university with a B average, without having to read A Tale Of Two Cities, Les Misérables, As I Lay Dying, The Jungle, The Dead, A Moveable Feast, and a number of other important works. Before you shrug and say, "They're just stories," rest assured they're more than that. Some of these, though fictional, are glimpses into the customs and beliefs of people in the midst of history. Others are inspections of segments of life, which can aid the reader in putting personal and social issues into perspective.

Jarvis Lorry and Madame Defarge are, of course, fictional characters. However, as A Tale Of Two Cities unfolds, we come to understand the level of hypocrisy and legalized barbarity which sparked the French Revolution. Likewise, the hounding of Victor Hugo's Jean Valjean, by Inspector Javert, over a loaf of bread allows readers to understand the necessity of waging the June Rebellion in order to thwart such a grotesque level of institutionalized cruelty. While key events, such as battles and shifts in power, were sufficiently documented, it's only through works of literature that these moments in history are given human faces.

Not all good books are about understanding historical big pictures though. Faulkner shows us the events surrounding Addie Bundren's death in order to examine the various reactions people have to the death of someone close. Rather than focusing on life's emotional issues, Sinclair used The Jungle to call attention to health and safety issues within the meat packing industry, which had largely been ignored before the book's release. In both cases, readers are challenged to reassess matters, which many people typically avoid thinking about, because they're too unpleasant to look at directly.

Frankly, I'm more than a bit irked to have taken as much literature and history as I have, without having been exposed to such works. It's never too late though. This year, I've made a point to devour such classics. Whether or not the endeavor will improve my writing remains to be seen. Nevertheless, I strongly suspect it will improve my mind and fill a few of the gaps in my catalog of knowledge.

-

Those of you who read this entry between 08/17/11 & 08/19/11 will notice some major editing has taken place. It just goes to show, I should NEVER post a first draft.

Empty Shelves

2011-07-25T19:27:00.000-07:00

-
All pros have their home court or field. The Blazers have the Rose Garden, the Cubs have Wrigley Field, and the Bears call Soldier Field home. Writers are no different. The bar at The Ritz in Paris was where Papa Hemmingway spent many an hour imbibing and seeking inspiration, decades before it was named in his honor. J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis hung their hats in Oxford's Rabbit Room at the Eagle and Child. Norman Mailer called New York City's White Horse Tavern home.

For the last dozen plus years, my literary HQ has been a single branch of a chain of bookstore cafes. I'm speaking of the Beaverton branch of Borders. Many of my afternoons have been spent within those walls sipping espresso, observing publishing trends, discussing a variety of topics, and receiving bits of inspiration. It was literally the place where everybody knew my name.

I've attended book release parties there, bought my holiday gifts and had them wrapped there (those who know me know how important it is for me to have gifts wrapped for me), held business meetings there, and generally used it as my home base away from home. I've even fantasized about having my first book signing there, once I get published.

This afternoon, I strolled its showroom floor for the last time. Although the liquidation is only in its forth day, the cafe is already dark and stacked with boxes. Garishly bright discount signs hang above rapidly emptying shelves of alphabetically jumbled volumes, as a multitude of shoppers take advantage of bargain prices.

I could write about how the trend toward buying E-readers, rather than physical books, has severely damaged the book publishing and retail industry. I could write about the tragedy of losing 10,000 American jobs as our country heads into default. For me, the closing of Borders is more personal than those stories though. It's about saying goodbye to friends losing a security blanket of brick and mortar.

In a few short weeks, the shelves will be bare, the windows will be void of weekly specials, and the doors will be locked. Ghosts of avid readers and caffeine seekers, will be the only vestiges of life occupying the lonely stone walls, as former employees, some being special friends of mine, will be forced to seek their next source of income.
-

Tautologies Can Be Big Huge Annoying Annoyances

2011-07-16T18:33:00.000-07:00

-
I have to start this entry with a brief side note, and declare Costco to be as magical a place as the fabled Hogwarts. I can make this claim with a high level of certainty, for the simple reason that I turn invisible every time I go there. It's true. I can be completely still, looking at prices, and people will walk smack into me. And, they'll be shocked to learn I'd been in their path to begin with.

I only bring up the big-box store, because I was on the way home from Costco when this blog began to take shape in my mind. At the store, a young man had been passing out samples of laundry soap. Upon giving me my sample, he promised me it would, "clean a whole entire load of clothes." I wanted to ask him if that was opposed to a partial entire load, or a whole fraction of a load. I wanted to explain that the phrase "whole entire" is a tautology, and that using one word, or the other, would convey the same idea, without sounding redundant. Unfortunately, the lady behind me, with two toddlers in tow, wanted her sample, and an educational opportunity slipped from my grasp.

Websters Learners' Dictionary defines a tautology as, "a statement in which you repeat a word, idea, etc., in a way that is not necessary▪ 'A beginner who has just started,' is a tautology."

Examples of tautologies include:free gift,
big huge _______,
new innovation,

lonely isolation.

I thought about the linguistic habit during the trip home. At first, I took the position that using such terms demonstrates an obvious lack of education. Surely, an argument can be made, especially given the rampant habit of abbreviated texting, that people have become linguistically lazy. Thus, lazy speech is thought of as being the norm. It's hardly a stretch, at that point, to attribute frequent use of redundant words to the idea that sloppy speech is "normal speech."

While it was tempting to write the habit off as being solely the product of poor tutelage, I found myself stuck having to account for poetic and literary examples of the practice.

If you ever think of dying
and you fear to wake tomorrow
Plant a garden! It will cure you
of your melancholy sorrow
Once you’ve learned to know peonies,
petunias, and roses,
You will find every morning
some new happiness discloses.
In the final stanza of Edgar Guest's Plant a Garden, the tautology "melancholy sorrow" is used to induce a particular emotion, the way a painter might use shades of gray and black. Likewise, in Shakespeare's Othello, Emilia spoke of, "...some most villainous knave, some base notorious knave, some scurvy fellow," to drive home the fact the Moore (Othello) is being lied to by the lowest form of life Emilia can imagine. In these cases, the use of tautologies is a conscious choice, rather than a stumbling of the tongue or pen.

If tautologies have legitimate places within poetry and literature, is it fair to think of them as products of lowbrow speech and writing? In my firm opinion, yes and no. The answer, in each case, depends on the intent of the speaker/writer. Certainly, a columnist writing about the "sick twisted crazy pervert" accused of killing a lone eight year old boy, in New York, may use tautologies to communicate a monstrously grotesque level of depravity. On the flip side, if your buddy's describing the "big huge burrito" he bought from the food cart, the word "huge" is probably a good enough to describe his lunch.
-

Sacrificing Future Innovation And Discovery

2011-07-08T14:49:00.000-07:00

-
"There are a lot of hungry people in the world, Mal, and none of them are hungry 'cause we went to the moon. None of them are colder and certainly none of them are dumber 'cause we went to the moon.... 'Cause it's next. 'Cause we came out of the cave, and we looked over the hill and we saw fire; and we crossed the ocean and we pioneered the west, and we took to the sky. The history of man is hung on a timeline of exploration and this is what's next." ~ The West Wing: Galileo, written by Aaron Sorkin & Kevin Falls

Today, the 135th shuttle launch marked the end of the United States' manned space program. I, for one, am saddened by this crippling blow to the realm of scientific discovery. Medical science, alone, has benefited tremendously from the space program. The list of medical inventions spawned from the space program includes, but is not limited to:

Digital imaging breast biopsy system
Tiny transmitters to monitor the fetus inside the womb
Laser angioplasty, using fiber-optic catheters
Forceps with fiber optics that let doctors measure the pressure applied to a baby's head during delivery
Cool suits to lower body temperature in treatment of various conditions
Voice-controlled wheelchairs
Light-emitting diodes (LED) for help in brain cancer surgery
Foam, originally designed to insulate space shuttle external tanks, is being used for less expensive better molds of artificial arms and legs
Programmable pacemakers
Scratch resistant lenses for eye glasses
CAT Scans & MRIs...

The list doesn't scratch the surface regarding the number of space spawned medical innovations, nor does it include the vast array of non-medical advancements which rose out of space technology, such as Velcro, ATM technology, freeze-dried food, water purification filters, cordless power tools, Teflon-coated fiberglass for roofing, Tang, and a number of other products which make modern everyday life possible as we know it. Yet, the loss of future innovation isn't the most tragic result of ending the space program.

In January of 2004, the Hubble Telescope took a series of pictures of very small section of space, equal to roughly one thirteen-millionth of the total area of the sky. Upon examining the pictures, researchers found 10,000 galaxies existing billions of light-years away. Not only does the number of galaxies, within a single miniscule field, give us a revised concept of the vastness of the Universe, but their distance necessarily means we're viewing events which occurred billions of years ago. There's no telling what such observations could potentially reveal about our own origins.

Yes, the telescope is unmanned. Yet, once we forfeit the ability to send operatives into space, we'll lose the ability to do maintenance on what is arguably the most important piece of scientific equipment ever built. Granted, we're in the middle of a severe economic crunch, and the space program is enormously expensive to maintain. Yet, I can't help but think that saving money by sacrificing future innovation and discovery is remarkably short sighted.
-

Review: Bossypants, by Tina Fey

2011-07-06T14:44:00.000-07:00

-
During the mainstream TV season, one show I never miss is 30 Rock. Not typically a fan of sitcoms, most of which treat their audiences like morons, Tina Fey's brain child makes my must watch list by poking fun at actual issues. It doesn't hurt either, that the jokes are obviously skewed to reflect a liberal bias, which I personally identify with. Much like The Simpsons, 30 Rock uses over the top caricatures of cultural stereotypes to lampoon politics, business, pop culture, and social traditions, while treating viewers like intelligent well informed people. Thus, when the show's creator/head writer/star, Tina Fey, wrote a humorous memoir about her life, I didn't have to think twice before snatching up a copy.

Like most memoirs, Bossypants begins with Tina's childhood. It then chronicles her early acting years, continues on to her tenure at Saturday Night Live, and includes her time at 30 Rock. She uses the last few chapters to answer letters from supposed belligerent fans, and to speculate on her final five minutes of fame.

The story of her life is filled with humorous observations regarding her adolescent discovery of womanhood, her first experiences with gay people, her time working at the YMCA, the behavior of male writers, breast feeding mothers, and other parts of her life. We even see her express a moderate amount of respect for the motherly side of Sarah Palin. These chapters are sharp funny and a pleasure to read.

On the flip side, while the last few chapters are funny, the come across as forced filler, written to extend the book to a desired length. Perhaps it's just me, but I can't fathom of a person who'd write to her asking why she's so ugly. First of all, she's not ugly, and secondly, the question of aesthetics isn't typically expressed as a why-type question.

Even with the latter deficits, Bossypants is a witty entertaining fun read. I give it 4 out 5 stars.
-

Sky Rockets In Flight

2011-07-03T17:11:00.000-07:00

-
A year ago I wrote a blog about my 4th of July holiday in Seaside. In the blog I pointed out the fact that police were advertising zero tolerance for illegal fireworks, then turning a blind eye to sky rockets being launched along the crowded beach. I was floored by the blatant lack of enforcement, as well as the obvious waste of money spent on posters and radio spots warning would-be offenders.

A few days ago, I was talking to my friend, Sonya, about the number of buffoons who seem to have no qualms about igniting incendiary devices around kids, dogs, homes, or anything else which happens to be around. The conversation inspired me to look up some numbers.

As you'll see from the Oregon State Police's table, over the last 5 years the number of reported illegal incidents has decreased while the number of injuries and monetary value of damaged property has gone up. One would be tempted to explain the increase in fiscal losses by writing them off to inflation and the bad economy. Yet, while property damage due to fireworks rose 48.3% between July of 2006 & July of 2010, the rate of inflation only rose 7.13% over the same period.

If I had to explain the numbers, I'd theorize that fewer people are, in fact, breaking the law, but the ones who are, are doing so around larger crowds. Thus, the gross number of idiots breaking the law has decreased, but the idiots who still are breaking the law are doing significantly more damage.

I'll be celebrating the founding of our nation, at Portland's waterfront this year. If for no other reason than to keep the thick smoke from torturing my eyes, I hope Portland's police do a better job enforcing a real zero tolerance policy than Seaside's police did last year.
-

Who Writes This Stuff?

2011-06-10T16:18:00.000-07:00

-
When writing fiction, writers need to create characters, and convey their traits to the reader relatively quickly. One vehicle writers, usually lazy writers, use, is the character defining name. The names Dudley Do-Right, Dirk Strongjaw, Tess Trueheart, and B.O. Plenty instantly tell readers what those characters are about. The technique is hardly limited to comic books though. The mystery genre has Mike Hammer, Peter Gunn, Sam Spade, and Hawk (just Hawk) who are all obviously tough guys. The romance genre is full of characters such as Chesapeake Divine or Rod Remington, who's names bring to mind pictures of purity erotic perfection.

There are also the stereotypical names for stock characters. Not only will a character with the name Jeeves be a butler, he'll be a specific kind of butler. Jeeves will be a very formal butler who has an appreciation for "the finer things," and who looks down on that new music the kids like. In the same vein, Bubba will be hulking and somewhat slow witted, Waldo will be the standard four eyed nerd, and Bertha's usually your larger than average female character. Of course, these characters can bare other names, Wooster, Moose, or Hershel. However, when you come across the names Jeeves, Bubba, and Waldo in fiction, they'll be tied to those stereotypes.

Such names cause many readers to roll their eyes and groan, at least until the writer establishes some level of complexity within the character in question. Science fiction, fantasy, and 007 stories are forgiven for these types of cheesy names; we accept the presence of Luke Skywalker, Wormtail, or Pussy Galore simply because we know, going in, these stories aren't meant to reflect reality. Plug the shapely Dr. Goodhead into an otherwise serious novel though, and readers will write the story off as being unrealistic and stupid. However, this reaction may not be entirely justified.

In 2001, a U.S. reconnaissance plane collided with a Chinese fighter sent to intercept it. According to survivors, the collision was caused when the Chinese pilot flew aggressively too close to the spy plane. The Chinese pilot then bailed out and was permanently lost. The Chinese pilot, who flew to close and then became lost, was Lt. Cdr. Wang Wei (Wong Way). Yes, Wang Wei went the wrong way. True Story.

Locally, Portland's mayor was revealed to have been in a sexual relationship with a young intern. That intern's name was, no kidding, Beau Breedlove. Of course, equally notable is the fact that Portland, a city known for its beer, has a mayor named Sam Adams. True Story.

Most recently, New York's U.S. Representative publicly lied about an erotic photo of himself sent over Twitter to a college student in Seattle. The scandal has revealed the congressman's longtime habit of cyber-sexual relationships. The congressman with this sexual propensity is none other than Representative Anthony Weiner (Weener). True Story.

If I'd written any of these stories, as fiction, I'd have been laughed out of the room for being a cornball. With tongue half way in cheek, I sometimes wonder if reality isn't, in fact, someone's really bad novel. Or, it could be that God peppers events with a bit of irony and humor to keep us from taking ourselves too seriously. I'm not sure. In any case, I will definitely be less judgmental, from now on, when deciding whether a character is truly cheese ball, or not, since truth really is stranger, and cheesier, than fiction.

Review: Sixkill - Robert B. Parker's Last Hoorah

2011-06-01T16:19:00.000-07:00

-

I love, but don't typically review, Spenser novels. They're generally tough guy mysteries which depend more testosterone filled scenes of violence and the frequent appearance of favorite characters than on eloquent prose. Witty banter between Spenser and his sidekick Hawk, frequent, if begrudging, cooperation from state and city detectives; Quirk, Belson, and Healey; regular alliances with the underworld, an array of colorful culturally diverse muscle men, and the psychoanalyzation of players in his current case by his love interest Susan Silverman are comfortable story elements to avid readers of the series.

Sixkill however, deserves special attention, since it's the last book Robert B. Parker completed before his death in January of 2010. This is the 39th or 40th Spenser book, depending on whether or not one counts 2009's Chasing the Bear, which tells a story from our hero's teen years. Yet, when you include his Jesse Stone series, Sunny Randall series, Virgil Cole series, and some non-series stragglers, it's his 69th novel altogether.

To briefly summarize the book, without revealing spoilers:
"On location in Boston, bad-boy actor Jumbo Nelson is accused of the rape and murder of a young woman. Not wanting the star to be railroaded by police brass and the press, BPD Captain Martin Quirk asks Spenser to look into the matter. In the course of the investigation, Spenser encounters Jumbo's bodyguard: a young, former football-playing Native American named Zebulon Sixkill. Sixkill acts tough, but Spenser sees something more within the young man. Despite the odd circumstances, the two forge an unlikely alliance, with Spenser serving as mentor for Sixkill." *

Except for the absence of Hawk, this book delivers everything fans want from a Spenser mystery. Frustrating roadblocks to the truth, thugs warning him off the case, hard hitting fisticuffs, and gun fights are all part of this latest case. I will admit to being personally disappointed by the solution to the case. Yet, there was still enough danger thrown Spenser's way, once he'd solved the mystery, to keep me entertained.

While the mystery is an exciting one, the story focuses more on the title character's evolution into a Hawk-like sidekick for Spenser. The middle of the book is even peppered with sub-chapters, which tell the story of Sixkill's life up until the time he went to work for Jumbo. These sub-chapters, coupled with the frequent mention of Hawk being in Asia, gave me the feeling that Parker was laying the ground work for future books.

Were Spenser and Sixkill destined to rescue Hawk from Asia, or perhaps avenge his death. Sadly, we'll never know. True, Ace Atkins has been slated to write future Spenser books, but they'll be products of Atkins' imagination, and probably won't be canonized by hard core fans.

*=Modified from official summary

Rains of May

2011-05-30T15:41:00.000-07:00

-
Portland is gearing up for Rose Festival, the annual city-wide celebration. The Royal Court has been selected, the carnival has been erected along the waterfront, and eager treasure hunters are testing their wits as they search for the medallion. There's just one problem; roses aren't blooming because it's been too wet this year.

Portland is used to rain, and is even known for it. Iron statues decorating downtown sidewalks have been sculpted with umbrellas in their hands, raincoats are sold year 'round, and locals know it traditionally rains on the day of the Rose Parade. Yet by the end of a typical May, Portland has enjoyed at least a few weeks of dry and sunny 70°+ weather. This May, we've only had eight days without rain, and only half of those have seen clear blue skies and seasonally warm temperatures.

By now, meals should have been grilled on the back patio, produce should've been purchased from Farmers' Markets, and sunny days should've bee spent roaming city streets, with a cup of coffee in hand, shopping and watching chess hustlers pluck their pigeons in Pioneer Square. None of this has been done yet, at least by me, simply because gray skies and rain have chosen to dominate Portland's existence at this point in time.

Some have looked at the cloud laden skies and seen proof of man made climate change. Others point to they grayish back purveyors of precipitation and see a sign of an ending foretold of long ago. While I've briefly entertained both these explanations, I can't say I've embraced either theory with abandon. For all I know, this happens every 10,000 years, or so.

I will admit the gloom and sogginess carry with them a few positives. I can sit by my window and read a book as rain pats against the glass, which is a luxury typically reserved for autumn and winter. Plus, being trapped indoors gives me more time to write.

Yet, even though my time at the keyboard has increased, the quality of the work suffers. Being out among people inspires and fuels my writing in a way no book can. Just watching people, other than those in my immediate circle, interact with one another on the train, or a mall bench, helps supply me with clothing ideas and dialogue for a variety of characters.

Until this weather lets up, I'll be cut off from my academy of creativity and muse, soups and casseroles must still stand in for the grilled meats of summer, and the produce and cheeses of the outdoor markets will simply need to patiently wait for me to purchase them.

Finally, let's end with a poem, I wrote today, simply called Rains of May.

Gray clouds mask the traditional blue of spring,
Sending icy droplets pounding down on a soggy reality,
And force pedals to remain huddled for warmth.
Muddy diamonds sit abandoned,
As droplets splash up from their padded corners.
Children’s noses remain pressed against panes of glass,
Waiting for a few hours of liberty,
From a prison of water and wind and muck.

Uh, I Had Plans For Next Week

2011-05-19T15:25:00.000-07:00

-
Seriously, I have tickets to River Dance next week. I'd never have bought them if I'd known the world was going to end this weekend. At least, it's all coming to an end according to Harold Camping, 89 year old Bible scholar, and president of the religious non-profit Family Radio based in Oakland, California.

Camping, claims to have decoded Biblical clues which point to May 21, 2011 as the scheduled date of The Holy Rapture, when believers will be taken bodily into Heaven and the rest of us will be subjected to an Apocalyptic nightmare. While the abundance of reality TV programs lends credence to Apocalyptic nightmare prediction, I'm not going to put my tickets on Ebay just yet for the simple reason that global doom has been divined many times before.

Early Christians expected Jesus to return, and final judgement to occur, within a generation of his death. Montanus, was sure all Christians would gather in Turkey, for The Rapture, in the 5th century. Minister William Miller, convinced his Millerites the second coming would take place sometime between March 21, 1843 and March 21, 1844. More recently, Pat Robertson bought a Middle Eastern TV station so he could broadcast the second coming in the year 2000. Camping himself, originally predicted the second coming would occur in 1994, but has since admitted that forecast had been based on incomplete research.

None of the aforementioned end of days predictions have come true, and I don't expect this one to be any different. Yes, we've seen an admittedly long string of natural disasters recently. Plus, we've witnessed increased turmoil in The Middle East recently. Granted. However, every generation has suffered its share of calamities.

The Black Death of 1348, the Smallpox epidemic of the 15th century, and the Dust Bowl of the 1930s must have all felt like God's hand exacting final retribution upon the Earth. Similarly, mankind has always been plagued by wars and rumors of wars. Thus, scholars and theologians have been able to apply apocalyptic revelations to whatever era they were living in, but mankind endured.

I may have to eat a ton of crow on Saturday, but I believe humanity will continue to survive and progress beyond this week, this month, this year, this decade, this century, and even this millennium. There will be disasters, diseases, oppression, massacres, and wars. We'll deal with them, learn from them, and eventually overcome each hardship, just as we always have.

At least, that's my prediction.

It's Been Awhile

2011-05-13T20:28:00.000-07:00

-
If you're thinking that it's been awhile since I've posted anything on this blog, you're right. On April 26th I posted a blog on the legality of image use on blogs. Once it was finished, I hit a severe lull in inspiration. Part of the lull was caused by the news being dominated by stories I just couldn't get worked up about. In addition to my apathy toward the headlines, I've been struggling my way through a novel, which everyone else seems to love.

To begin with, even as my previous entry was being written, every single media outlet and TV channel was actively hyping the royal wedding. For two solid weeks, viewers could preview the wedding gown, download the recipe for the wedding cake, watch a story about the guy who polishes the prince's boot, and buy a genuine synthetic replica of the wedding ring, whatever that means.

In response to this media blitz, millions of people, who probably couldn't name four members of the royal family last year, suddenly became hardcore anglophiles over night. Souvenirs were purchased, late night/early morning parties were held, and royal fever swept the air waves. People, middle-class American people, even sent wedding presents to the royal couple.

Don't misunderstand me, I think young love is a grand thing, I really do. I don't know the royal couple though, nor had I been invited to the reception for cake and Champagne. Thus, I just didn't care.

Almost immediately following the best man's toast, Osama Bin Laden was killed by Navy Seals in Pakistan. This triumph of intelligence and covert ops sparked two opposing reactions. One portion of the public began celebrating as if it was V-J Day; I half expected a sailor to be photographed kissing a dame in Time Square. Another portion of society began crying the killing had been illegal and unjustified.

First of all, I'm of the opinion that the murder of 2,977 victims on 9/11/01 justifies the action all by itself. That being said, I couldn't jump for joy either. It wasn't that I thought it was tacky to celebrate the death of a human being. I respect people who couldn't celebrate for that reason, but for me it felt silly to celebrate something I'd considered to be inevitable. Practically every intelligence agency in the world, with the possible exception of Pakistan's, was looking for Bin Laden. Celebrating his death was like celebrating rain in Portland; no one knew exactly when it would happen, but everyone knew it would happen eventually.

I couldn't blog about the book I was reading either, because it's taking me a painfully long time to plod through. Multiple friends have told me how great The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo is. So far, I'm not seeing it people. Perhaps I'm too used to mysteries which feature glimpses of the detective's personal life, but basically focus on the case. I don't mind flashbacks, the book I'm writing features several of them, but "Girl" devotes so much time talking about how Armansky hired Salander and who's not attracted to whom, that the flow of the case is lost. Hopefully, the story will settle down and I'll be able to get into it.

Like I said, it's been a blah few weeks as far as blogging is concerned. I'm back now though, and I have some interesting blogs planned, including a review of Robert B. Parker's final novel and the catch 22 of publishing. Stay tuned.

I Wasn't Trying To Rip Anybody Off - Honest

2011-04-26T14:55:00.000-07:00

-
I've sited podcasts as inspiration for blogs before. Not only did Saturday's episode of On The Media inspire this blog, it ignited 3 days worth of panic driven research and work. One of the show's features told the story of Righthaven, a law firm which is buying copy rights from newspapers, then suing bloggers who use the copy written material without citing its source.

I wasn't worried initially. Many of the people being sued, were posting major portions of, or entire, news articles on their blogs. I DO quote news articles, and other sources, in my blogs. However, I ALWAYS cite specific sources, and provide a link to the full article/site. When using the information, I either use quotation marks around short direct quotes, or I write my own prose to convey what I've learned.

I was feeling pretty secure in the knowledge that I wasn't committing plagiarism, until little bird, or The Holy Ghost, or something whispered the word, "images," into my ear. It suddenly struck me that I use images, from around the internet, in my blogs. Thus, I decided to research the topic of image use in blogs. What I found scared me.

I spent Sunday reading multiple articles on the subject, hoping to find one that said using images on blogs fell under the terms of "fair use." I found the opposite. Google lists multiple stories of bloggers & artists being sued over image use. Remember the HOPE poster from Obama's 2008 campaign? Apparently, the artist, Shepard Fairey, used an AP photo of Obama to design the poster. Even though Fairey worked for the subject of the photo, Obama, AP owned the photo and was able to force Fairey into a legal settlement.

Legal sites such as Aaronhall.com agree the rights to a photo lie with the photographer. I had no idea who the photographers were for all the pictures I'd used. I'd made sure not to steel text, which I saw as the meat of a blog, but I'd treated images as garnish, and tossed them in willy nilly. Plus, the background on my food blog was a collage of pictures I'd collected from all across the internet. Panicked, I did more research to figure out how to legally use images.

1. First of all, I can use any image I take with my camera. With this in mind, I'm going to try hard to carry my camera with me, where ever I go.

2. Next, sites such as The Stock Exchange host licensed pictures on their site. I can use pictures displaying the following license, for free.

"You may use the Image

*In digital format on websites, multimedia presentations, broadcast film and video, cell phones.
*In printed promotional materials, magazines, newspapers, books, brochures, flyers, CD/DVD covers, etc.
*Along with your corporate identity on business cards, letterhead, etc.
*To decorate your home, your office or any public place."

Or, I can buy the right to use "Rights Managed" pictures from these sites. I replaced the background collage on my food blog with a new $4.00 collage.

3. Few users realize it, but people who post pictures on Photbucket sacrifice their copyright to such pictures, unless they mark their photo album as private.

"By displaying or publishing (“posting”) any Content on or through the Photobucket Services, you hereby grant to Photobucket and other users a non-exclusive, fully paid and royalty-free, worldwide, limited license to use, modify, delete from, add to, publicly perform, publicly display, reproduce and translate such Content, including without limitation distributing part or all of the Site in any media formats through any media channels, except Content marked “private” will not be distributed outside the Photobucket Services."

I couldn't use a picture someone posted of Captain Kirk, because the poster can't waive Paramount's copyright. However, if someone posts a picture of a grilled cheese sandwich it's fair game.

4. The same widget which allows me to sell items through Amazon, allows me to post images of Amazon's merchandise within my blogs. Thus, I can use in image of a book I'm reviewing as long as I get the image from the widget.

5. Public domains such as CIA Factbook and The Smithsonian Institute are paid for with public money, making their photos free to use.

I wasn't merely upset by the thought of potentially being sued. When it comes to the law, I'm about as conservative as Joe Friday, so the idea I'd been breaking the law bothered me greatly. Therefore, I've deleted my blogs' pictures, and replaced them with legal images when I could. From now on, I'll ONLY use legal images, but when I can't my prose will have to paint my pictures for me.

Will Robot Journalists Eventually Replace Human Writers?

2011-04-22T14:07:00.000-07:00

-
Recently, the internet has been abuzz with the tale of a robot journalist which supposedly wrote a better story than a sports reporter at GWU's paper. In a nutshell, a reporter at George Washington University wrote up a baseball game, and didn't mention the opposing pitcher's perfect game until the second to last paragraph. Someone remarked that the article under emphasized the significance of the perfect game because it had probably been written by the computers of Narrative Science. The programmers at Narrative Science spouted a collective, "Oh yeah?" entered the facts of the game into their computer, and the computer spit out a superior article, which highlighted the remarkable feat.

Some have suggested that Narrative Science's sports report marked the genesis of the automation of journalism and the writing profession. To determine whether or not flesh and blood writers are destined to go the way of John Henry's axe, we first have to understand what robots are, and are not.

In 1920, Czech writer Karel Čapek penned the term "robot" in his play about a class of artificial people, which had been built to serve humans. Since the play's debut, robots have captured the imagination of millions. Literature, TV, and movies have depicted robots as being happy house servants, military officers, linguistic interpreters, superheroes, and "terminating" soldiers. In fact, through such fiction, the term "robot" has become such a common part of our vocabulary that almost any man, woman, or child can supply at least a partial definition of what a robot is.

I'm not sure if industry was inspired by such stories, or the stories predicted what was to come. In any case, the field of robotics has changed the way we live and work. Most robots are little more than pre-programmed machines, some resembling body parts, which have been built to perform a single specific function. Robot arms weld parts on automobiles along an assembly line. Other robots assemble parts, load and unload trucks, and even vacuum our floors. Remote controlled models are used to explore hazardous environments, detonate or defuse explosives, and perform delicate surgery when the doctor is miles away. Unlike their fictional counterparts though, these are tools without thoughts, feelings, values, or goals of their own.

I know what some of you are thinking right about now. "But, we just saw an intelligent robot win on Jeopardy." No, you didn't, not really. Like its literary counterpart at Narrative Science, Watson is referred to as a robot because it seems to perform a human function. However, when you break down what Watson actually did, you'll find a super fast search engine. Watson's program latched on to key words and phrases within each question, searched its data banks at lightening fast speeds for the most probable response, and sent an electrical impulse to the buzzer faster than Ken Jennings could move his thumb. Watson is unquestionably an impressive data storage and retrieval tool, but it can't combine imagination with its stored set of facts to make a decision beyond its programming. Thus, it can't be considered to be truly intelligent.

Put enough facts into a computer, and the computer can regurgitate those facts in a series of perfectly polished paragraphs. It can even compute the odds of a particular event occurring, and obey its programming by mentioning the most improbable events first.

A computer can definitely relay the facts of a ballgame. It can list scores, RBIs, and errors. Yet, it can't tell you about the tension of the crowd during the eternally long second the umpire took to decide if number 33 was safe or out as he slid into home plate, surrounded by a cloud of dust. Nor, can it describe the scent of hotdogs and beer being gently carried on the cool breeze as the setting sun paints the sky a shade of deep orange just beyond the outfield.

Likewise, a computer can relay a death toll of a battle, tell you who gained or lost ground, and it can probably compute the number of rounds fired. Yet, it can't tell you about the little girl looking, through rubble adorned streets after the battle, for a mother she'll probably never find. It can't convey the wrenching heartbreak of the battle's aftermath.

Just as cooking, good cooking, is more than putting ingredients into a pot and applying heat, good writing is about more than recording a string of raw facts. Both disciplines need to be executed with imagination, passion, and attention to detail in order to be done well. Computers and robots are extraordinary tools, which allow us to perform a variety of tasks. However, they will never possess the zeal, heart, or drive of a writer.

Sun Tzu’s The Art of War

2011-04-15T14:55:00.000-07:00

-
A few months ago, I was shopping for books when I came across an unabridged edition of The Art of War by Sun Tzu. I'd just made a New Year's resolution to read work from, at least, one classic author every month. When I made the resolution, I had authors such as Dickens, Faulkner, O'Henry, and Hemingway in mind. I thought about it though, and decided the term "classic author" didn't necessarily need to mean "western author," so I bought the book.
Sun Tzu’s The Art of War is an ancient Chinese military guide to victory, written in the late-sixth century BC. Comprised of 13 chapters, each of which is devoted to one aspect of warfare, it is said to be the definitive work on military strategies and tactics of its era.

Unlike more contemporary literature, Sun Tzu’s The Art of War is written in a very straight forward no frills style. Each chapter begins with a statement of a group of precepts. Then each precept is explained in detail, and the consequences for following or not following each precept are spelled out. At least in my copy, each piece of advice was repeated, in it's entirety, at some later point in the book, perhaps to facilitate comprehension.

The bulk of advice itself, is what most modern people would consider to be common sense today. Treating one's soldiers humanely to foster loyalty, preparing one's self before battle, gathering as much information as possible, and paying attention to one's surroundings are all ideas most kids learn in scouts growing up. Yet, there are a few surprising pieces of advice in this book including, the idea that a general should be willing to disobey his Lord, and a general should hold some facts from his men as a way to manipulate them, which initially seem to be counterintuitive.

It's not the writing style, or the military application of the text, which makes Sun Tzu’s The Art of War a classic. What makes this a classic worth reading, is the fact that it's precepts can be applied to most aspects of life. Granted, we don't want to be burning supply trains, but preparing before a major task, collecting as much information as possible before entering a situation, and treating underlings humanely are all sound rules to live by.

The Way of the Champion: Lessons from Sun Tzu’s The Art of War and other Tao Wisdom for Sports & Life, applies Sun Tzu’s principles to the field of sports coaching. Likewise, The Art of War for Executives and Sun Tze The Art of Business apply these rules to the corporate arena. And, while I couldn't find it, I have no doubt there's a book somewhere which applies these ideas to the realm of poker.

Any book which can be applied to so many different disciplines, definitely deserves to be read by any serious reader.

-
Side Note:
I've added 2 new Links Of Interest lately, which are worth checking out.
*British Novelist Deborah Lawrenson's Blog - is a blog about books, art, food, and all things inspired by the South of France.
*Blog Spot Geek - is a blog about how to blog successfully.

Writing Amidst Distractions

2011-04-06T14:54:00.000-07:00

-
The computer is a marvelous tool for a writer. With a standard desktop or laptop, a writer can rely on spell check to proof their typing as they go, paste sentences from one paragraph to another, reorder paragraphs and chapters, and delete a whole passage, which in retrospect is far cheesier than the writer thought it would be before they typed it. None of this, by the way, requires anything more than a basic word processor.

Hook up the internet to a writer’s computer, and that writer has the equivalent of a massive library on their desk/kitchen table. Said writer can access scientific articles and papers on a range of topics from the mating customs of dung beetles to Hubble’s discovery of 3,000 galaxies in just one Ultra Deep Field of space. The writer can access news from around the world, and read about history and events from a variety of perspective from thought provoking to ludicrous. He/she can view maps, satellite photos, and directories of any city in the world, so their character can eat at a sandwich shop which is favorited by locals half a world away. With enough imagination, internet savvy, and time there’s nothing a determined writer can not write about.

Unfortunately, this desktop toolbox for wordsmiths also comes with an extensive set of distractions and diversions. The writer begins the day checking his/her email, and finds they have messages on both the social media sites they belong to in order to promote their work. The writer responds to the messages, updates their status and tweets, then reads and sorts the rest of their email.

Any good writer has to read the work of other writers in order to fuel their inspirational nexus. Thus, he/she subscribes to a series of well written blogs. One of the blogs has an interesting widget in its sidebar, which the writer thinks will spruce up their own blog. So, they find the site offering the widget, sync it with appropriate material for their specific blog, copy the html code, rewrite the code to match their blog's color scheme, and add it to their blog.

The writer finally opens their word processor, or new post page for their blog, when a fellow blogger posts a recipe for low calorie pasta. The next night’s dinner is up in the air, so the writer prints the recipe. Of course, that recipe reminds them of a recipe for lasagna which Alton Brown recently made on TV. The writer decides to print that recipe too, only when they find it they remember they didn’t print it last week because it underutilized cheese, which is the best part of lasagna.

By this time, the writer feels like he/she has done a lot, even though not a lick has been written yet. Thus, the writer takes a 20 minute break to play some online poker. However, the player in position 4 keeps talking smack, so the writer can’t leave until they’ve thoroughly spanked and broken the putz, and 20 minutes has become almost 2 hours. The writer gets away from the cyber-table, and decides, finally, to write. I could go on, factoring in YouTube, Netflix, and a collection of daily, can’t miss, podcasts, but I think the picture’s been adequately painted.

Sometimes, the romantic in me relishes the idea of a good pen, a case of spiral notebooks, and a solitary mountain cabin where I can write uninterrupted. Those who know me, understand why the concept of me living alone, or physically holding a fountain pen for that matter, could never work in reality. Beyond the physical reality though, lies the fact that it probably wouldn’t increase my productivity. Good money says, after a few weeks I’d have names for every squirrel, raccoon, and chickadee in a two mile radius of my cabin, and a kickin’ recipe for beans, but very little work done without my aforementioned research tools at my disposal.

The trick isn’t to shelve technology, as tempting as the notion may sometimes be, but to learn to use it effectively. Good writers need the ability to utilize technology and the discipline to focus past the distractions technology delivers. Such discipline can be drawn from the desire to convey a particular message to readers. Fear of dying before recording everything residing within a writer’s mind, is what inevitably keeps many of us on task and writing.

James O'Keefe & Journalistic/Blogging Ethics?

2011-03-21T17:53:00.000-07:00

-
In May of last year, I wrote a blog called Common Sense, in which I argued the First Amendment has to apply to bloggers as well as to professional journalists, but bloggers, in return, have certain ethical responsibilities. Recently, the question of bloggers' ethics has been put to the test. Blogger, James O'Keefe, the same blogger who taped Planned Parenthood supposedly counseling an under aged teen about abortion, apparently caught NPR executive, Ron Schiller, disparaging conservatives in general, and tea party members in particular.

Schiller, thought he was meeting with Muslim donors to NPR. The supposed donors were, in reality, being played by actors working for O'Keefe. In the frequently viewed 11 minute 38 second viral video, Ron Schiller is seen reacting to the sound bite, “spread the acceptance of Sharia across the world,” with the phrase, "Really? That’s what they said?" followed by a laugh. Another clip shows Schiller saying, "...the current Republican Party is not really the Republican Party. It’s been hijacked by this group that is the radical, racist, Islamophobic Tea Party people?"

These quotes seem to show Schiller ripping on the Republican Party, and have been used to justify the defunding of Public Broadcasting. The problem is that the quotes were taken out of context and spliced together in a way which changed their meaning.

The phrase, "Really? That’s what they said?" followed by the laugh, was actually response to a restaurant employee’s remark about their reservation 6 minutes 30 seconds into the uncut version of the video.

The second remark, "...the current Republican Party is not really the Republican Party. It’s been hijacked by this group that is the radical, racist, Islamophobic Tea Party people?" was the tale end of a much longer statement, in which Schiller is quoting members of the Republican Party.

Schiller actually said, "I, I won't break a confidence, but a person who was an ambassador, so a very highly placed Republican, another person, who was one of the top donors to the Republican Party, they both told me they voted for Obama, which they never believed they could ever do in their lives, that they could ever vote for a Democrat, ever. And they did because they believe that the current Republican Party is not really the Republican Party. It’s been hijacked by this group that is the radical, racist, Islamophobic Tea Party people?" 33 minutes 40 seconds into the uncut version of the video.

At one point in the conversation, Schiller even stressed the fact that NPR strives not to deliver conservative opinion like FOX, OR liberal opinion like MSNBC, but instead deliver straight middle of the road news 32 minutes 30 seconds into the uncut version of the video. However, this statement doesn't appear anywhere within the frequently viewed final cut. The statement immediately following the comparison to FOX & MSNBC did make the final cut, but was spliced into a conversation about Jews & Muslims.

I have to say this much for O'Keefe, he acts according to his beliefs. I can't fault him for that. Anyone who starts a site and works, within the bounds of the law, to make the world a better place, according to their definition of "better," has my respect.

Critics, chastise him for using hidden cameras & covert tactics to gather his material. I can't fault him for that either. He had the means to get a perceived enemy on tape, and he utilized those means. I can respect a man for taking action, rather than wishing someone else would do it

Yet, I can't respect him for editing sound bites together to make them mean what he wants them to mean. Yes, he published the unedited film for all to see, but did so with the understanding that the majority of the short attention spanned public weren't going to dedicate the 2 hours necessary to watch the full version. Sure enough, as of 03/21/11 4:35 PM PST, 22,700 people have viewed the unedited version on O'Keefe's site, but 996,314 have seen the skewed 11 minute version on YouTube, which doesn't carry the two hour version.

According to O'Keefe, such splicing is a widely accepted technique among professional journalists. No, it's not. Granted, examples of such skewed editing can easily be found in the media. Yet, defending the technique as being acceptable, because it's frequently executed, is like say crime is acceptable, because crimes occur everyday. It doesn't work as a logical argument.

I also take issue with O'Keefe calling himself a journalist. Journalists, genuine journalists, report news without promoting a particular point of view. I'm not a journalist either, by the way. I'm a blogger, who analyzes stories which are already in the news. Likewise, O'Keefe is a blogger, a well funded video blogger, but a blogger nonetheless who puts a lop sided conservative spin on his body of work.

Given that he is a blogger, one could conceivably ask if he should be held to the same ethical standards as a journalist? The short answer is, yes. As I said in my May piece, if bloggers want the protection of the First Amendment and want to be taken seriously, we must adhere to a code of ethics by refraining from committing liable, twisting facts to meet our needs, and selling unsubstantiated rumor as truth.

We In America Have An Appetite For Excellence

2011-03-14T15:40:00.000-07:00

-
"Today our problem is not making miracles--but managing miracles. We might well ponder a different question: What hath man wrought--and how will man use his inventions?

The law that I will sign shortly offers one answer to that question.

It announces to the world that our Nation wants more than just material wealth; our Nation wants more than a 'chicken in every pot.' We in America have an appetite for excellence, too.

While we work every day to produce new goods and to create new wealth, we want most of all to enrich man's spirit.

That is the purpose of this act.

It will give a wider and, I think, stronger voice to educational radio and television by providing new funds for broadcast facilities.

It will launch a major study of television's use in the Nation's classrooms and their potential use throughout the world.

Finally--and most important--it builds a new institution: the Corporation for Public Broadcasting."

President Lyndon B. Johnson delivered these comments on November 7, 1967, as he signed the Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 into law. The goal was to create TV & Radio broadcasts which could entertain, enlighten, and inform an American audience without depending on corporate sponsorship.

Over the years, Public Broadcasting has been labeled as a liberal news source. This label motivated House Republicans to eliminate public funding for NPR & PBS, in a proposed version of the Federal budget. Such an elimination, if passed, would cost Public Broadcasting $445,000,000 by 2013 and effectively cripple small rural affiliates.

First of all, I have to question the perception of a liberal bias. OK, if all you hear on Public Broadcasting are politically themed episode of Fresh Air with Terry Gross, the perception of liberal bias is impossible to ignore. She's had conservative guests storm off her show, after being befuddled. Yet, political segments make up only a fraction of the show's content. Gross, interviews musicians, actors/asctresses, directors, writers, and other celebrities from all genres of music, TV, movies, and books.

Likewise, Public Broadcasting delivers more than news. Boasting shows such as Sesame Street, The Electric Company, Masterpiece Mystery, Boston Pops Concerts, The Splendid Table, The Writer's Almanac, Prairie Home Companion, Science Friday, and multiple other shows which educate and entertain while treating the audience as intelligent. Most of these shows don't lean politically one way or the other. I've never heard Lynne Rossetto Kasper push a political agenda; both sides of the aisle eat the same cookies, after all. If anything, it could easily be said that, Prairie Home Companion contains multiple conservative Christian undertones.

Fortunately, the Senate defeated the budget proposal this week, leaving hope alive for the future of NPR & PBS. While I'm happy Senators have done the right thing, for the moment, I have to wonder if our elected representatives will eventually be able to acknowledge the value of intelligent programming, beyond its monetary cost to produce? Isn't exposing citizens to information, arts, and ideas part of "providing for the general welfare?" Finally, I have to ask, would conservative lawmakers be considering taking Big Bird away from little Timmy & Suzie if Louis Rukeyser, a hardcore conservative and long time PBS fixture, was still alive to do his show?

The Value Of Reading Books We May Not Agree With

2011-02-26T16:39:00.000-08:00

-
In C.S. Lewis' The Screwtape Letters, Screwtape, a high ranking agent of Hell, is coaching his nephew on how to lead an Englishman away from God. Through his instructional letters, we see what Lewis believed about humanity, God, Christianity, contemporary values, and morality.

Lewis & I are miles apart when it comes to doctrine. According to the book, God wants us to focus on the here & now while Satan wants us to think about the future, pacifists are essentially cowards, and progressive/liberal thought is the product of Hell's trickery. Given that the story was written as Germany was continually bombing Great Britain, I can sympathize with his views toward pacifists, who were seen as not doing their part against the Nazis. Yet, I believe responsible people DO plan for the future, and progressive/liberal thought has lead to civil rights being granted to minorities.

While I personally believe his ideas to be misguided, and even offensive, I thought the vehicle he used to communicate his views was well written, cleaver, and entertaining. This lead me to wonder why we like the books we like. Do we have to agree with an author to enjoy their work? I'd answer, not necessarily.

While I disagree with many of his beliefs, I can appreciate his creativity, word usage, and the flow of the story.

“We have done this through the poets and novelists by persuading he humans that a curious, and usually short-lived, experience which they call "being in love" is the only respectable ground for marriage; that marriage can, and ought to, render this excitement permanent; and that a marriage which does not do so is no longer binding. This idea is our parody of an idea that came from the Enemy. ”

Here Lewis is saying, Hell has tricked man into believing love & romance shouldn't expire from a marriage, and if love does leave a marriage, the couple may divorce. In other words, leaving a loveless marriage is a sin. I may personally believe that a healthy marriage should be filled with a sense of love and romance from beginning to end. Yet, I can respect Lewis' use of vocabulary and sentence structure to reflect a seriously reasoned thought. I can even concede the underlining point that a bump in the road isn't necessarily grounds for divorce, without forfeiting the view that some couples do irreconcilably grow apart and sometimes should separate.

I think readers, in general, can appreciate the craftsmanship of a well written carefully reasoned book, without necessarily being swayed by its message. I'd even argue that it's important to read the work of writers with opposing points of view; reading opposing, but intelligently written, viewpoints, can help a reader define and refine their view of the world.

The Voice Of Public Workers

2011-02-24T14:00:00.000-08:00

-
During any given week, millions of people will watch the news to see what’s happening in Washington D.C., New York, Hollywood, and The Middle East. However, for the past week, we’ve been watching, with great interest, the goings on in Wisconsin. Wisconsin? The place with the cheese hats? Yes, that’s the place, and what happens there may very well set a precedent for the rest of America.

To quickly recap, Wisconsin’s, Koch brothers backed, governor, Scott Walker, announced last week that in order to close a $137 million budget gap, he would make cuts to public employees’ pay and benefits, and limit the rights of collective bargaining, essentially breaking up the public employee unions in Wisconsin. In response to this proposal, thousands of angry public employees stormed the capitol, and began a ‘round the clock protest. When it was clear that Republicans had the votes to pass the proposal, Democrat lawmakers fled to prevent a legal quorum from being convened. Then, as if deploying an army of Pinkerton agents, Governor Walker sent the state police to drag the Democrats back to the capitol, forcing the legislators to hide in an undisclosed location in Illinois.

This mess is only the most visible by-product of a nation wide effort to curtail the bargaining rights of public employees, and has little, if anything, to do with balancing budgets. Keep in mind, union leaders in Wisconsin have acknowledged budgetary short-falls, and have agreed to the proposed cuts in pay and benefits. The only sticking point left is the issue of bargaining rights. While the unions have offered a two year moratorium on bargaining, Governor Walker refuses to negotiate.

While the stand off drags on in Wisconsin’s capitol, Hillsboro’s teachers are trying to negotiate their contract as well. The district has proposed the elimination of step pay raises until further notice, and initially proposed the addition of an unpaid day of work to the school year. In response, the Hillsboro Education Association added up the number of hours teachers contribute to their jobs (correcting papers, writing lesson plans, etc…) off the clock. They found that teachers already collectively contribute 10,878 unpaid hours to Hillsboro’s schools each year.

If people such as Governor Walker have their way, and public employees are stripped of their voice, teachers and other professionals will have no recourse when agencies and school districts, such as Hillsboro, try to require more work for equal or less pay. The only safeguard these employees have is the collective bargaining power of their unions. If that safeguard is removed, highly qualified people will have no incentive to hold public sector jobs.

Do we want the best trained and qualified people we can find to be teaching are children and providing essential services, or do we want our teachers and civil servants to be the people who couldn’t find a job anywhere else? If we want top notch people in those jobs, the jobs have to be desirable.

Why I Can't Blog About The Riots In Egypt

2011-02-06T17:21:00.000-08:00

-
Lately, the news has been dominated by reports of the protests/riots in Egypt. Just about every serious blogger has published their take on these events. Typically, I’d be in there too, writing, “This should happen,” or, “America should back X.” I haven’t done so yet, for the simple fact that I just don’t know which side we should back, or if we should back anyone at all.

I do know a bit of background. In September of 1978, President Carter helped Egypt’s President Sadat and Israel’s Prime Minister Begin negotiate a treaty, which gave control of the Sinai back to Egypt. As a result, relations between Egypt and the U.S. were friendly for the next few years. When Sadat was killed in 1981, and Hosni Mubarak took power, the United States wanted to maintain friendly relations with Egypt. Thus, when Mubarak held single candidate elections, every six years, imprisoned and tortured political opposition, and curtailed his people’s freedom of speech, American officials gave a collective shrug, figuring, “Eh, there are worse dictators out there.”

Inspired by the Tunisian uprising, the Egyptian people took to the streets on January 25th of this year, with the intent of ousting Mubarak from power. Mubarak first responded by ordering the police and military to quell the riots. However, with so many young men who’ve been pressed into mandatory military service, the majority of the soldiers sided with the public.

Next, Mubarak named Omar Suleiman, his Intelligence Chief, as his new Vice President. He hoped the change in governmental hierarchy would be enough of a change to appease his people. Unfortunately for Mubarak, protesters saw the symbolic title change as a reshuffling of old blood rather an attempt at substantive reform. Since then, he’s offered to not run for office in September‘s election, but has waffled on whether or not his son will run or not. All this, we know.

Beyond this point, things become foggy. Many news organizations have implied that the protesters are doing the bidding of Islamic extremists looking to make Egypt a haven for the likes of the Muslim Brotherhood, Taliban, and Al Qaeda. On the flip side, former CBS Middle East correspondent Lawrence Pintak claims American news is skewing the truth, and what we’re seeing are Islamic moderates seeking legitimate independence from oppression.

Are we seeing the dawn of a revolution being fueled by people hungry for freedom? While it’s clear that Mubarak is a dictator and despot, is he the only thing standing in the way of a Islamic fundamentalist regime in Egypt? Would such a regime necessarily ally itself with extremist terrorist organizations? I’m not there, I don’t know. Not knowing, I can’t, and won’t, blog an opinion one way or the other.

My New Food Blog

2011-02-01T13:48:00.000-08:00

-
I love good food, and over the last three years wine’s become a quasi-hobby of mine. Thus when I started blogging seriously, I began recording my culinary thoughts on my main blog, Blogito Ergo Sum. I looked at my blog last weekend, and some of my food entries didn't really seem to fit anymore. Therefore, I created a culinary blog.

I spent yesterday pimping it; selecting backgrounds & fonts, adding links, monetizing it with Amazon ads; and moved my food entries to the new blog, “On My Plate.” I kept any food entries which had been commented on on Blogito, but deleted the rest as I copied them to the new blog. My epicurean musings can be found at http://onjamesplate.blogspot.com/ from now on.

Truth Resists Simplicity

2011-01-21T15:32:00.000-08:00

-
"You’re going to have to shoot them in the head," Beck said of Democratic leaders.

One advantage of being an independent blogger, is that there are no deadlines. Thus, I have time to research issues and really think about them, before I commit my proverbial pen to paper. On January 8th, Representative Giffords, and 18 other people, were the victims of a senseless shooting at a Safeway in Tucson. Almost as soon as it happened, Sheriff Dupnik, and others, linked the tragedy to provocative speech, often spouted by right wing political correspondents.

The first to be linked to the event was Sarah Palin, who’d published a graphic displaying a gun sight’s crosshairs targeting congressional seats, currently held by Democrats. Further inflammatory remarks have been attributed to Rush Limbaugh, Roy Warden, Glenn Beck, and other extreme conservative on air personalities. Warden has been quoted calling Isabel Garcia, a well-known Arizona-based immigrant rights advocate, a communist and a terrorist, and compared her to a member of Al-Qaeda. He then threatened "Left Wing activists" that he will "draw my weapon and blow your freaking heads off." In a similar vein, Beck posed, for promotional pictures, as an action hero on the hunt to shoot liberal trouble makers, as well as making the statement, which I used to kick-off this piece.

Surely such statements can, at best, be considered provocative, and most people would classify them as being grossly irresponsible examples of hate speech. It was these kinds of quotes and messages which motivated Sheriff Dupnik to refer to extreme conservative broadcasts as a "Mecca for prejudice and bigotry." Being the liberal that I am, I was ready to jump on the bandwagon and advocate for a crackdown on conservative shock jocks. I ran into a problem though.

I stopped and asked myself, “Doesn’t the First Amendment get in the way of such a crackdown?”

Annoyed by the question, I replied, "But, the First Amendment doesn’t protect violent speech,” thinking I was clever.

I wasn’t going to let myself off that easily though. “Ah,” I said, “But, it does protect metaphor. Surely, any sane person would’ve recognized Palin’s crosshairs as being a metaphor for votes.”

“There’s no guarantee that all readers/listeners of such material ARE sane. Doesn’t society have a responsibility to monitor messages being broadcast to its citizens, to ensure such messages don’t incite violence?”

I rolled my eyes and replied, “OK, you need to read 1984 again, because George Orwell just rolled over in his grave. Seriously, you really want the government to police what people can say?”

“But, what’s being said is hurtful and offensive,” I shot back.

“And conservatives are offended by talk of gay rights. Do we silence those speakers too, so nothing offensive is being said.”

“But, advocates for gay rights aren’t calling for violence and encouraging listeners to shoot others.”

“So, we eliminate violent speech?”

“Right,” I said.

“So, a boxing manager can’t say, ’My boy is going to knock the other guy’s head off?’ A sports blogger shouldn’t write, ‘team A will kill team B in the Super Bowl?’ We shouldn’t allow stations to broadcast the A-Team because some nut might get the idea that armoring his car with sheet metal and shooting up a taxi garage is an acceptable way to solve his problems.”

I shook my head, disgusted at myself for missing the point. “Those are bogus examples,” I said. “One can’t compare sports & entertainment content to political rhetoric, the purpose of which is to influence behavior. Warden and Beck, came right out and talked about shooting liberals, whereas the sports statements are metaphors, which no one takes literally.”

“Ah ha!” I exclaimed. “You already said, there’s no way to guarantee the sanity of the audience when presented with a metaphor. If we crackdown on violent metaphors and imagery in one form of media, don’t we have to do so across the board? Can a football team vow to crush, but not kill, an opponent? Where do we draw the line?”

That’s the question America’s been left with. There’s no question that statements, which call for harming those who disagree with the speaker, are inappropriate expressions of ignorance and intolerance. One thing which makes this country great, is the fact that its citizens can oust the government every four years, if they choose to, with a ballot instead of a gun. To call for violent responses to political issues, is to miss the point of what our country is about. The saddest part is, conservative pundits don’t have to rely on such language. Louis Rukeyser, perhaps the most successful conservative commentator of the late 20th century, consciously steered clear of low brow incendiary language, and argued from an intellectual point of view.

While such juvenile rants are objectionable, I’m still not convinced they should be regulated. Like them, or not, such statements reflect what a portion of America IS thinking. Silencing ANY minority, because we don’t like their message, flies in the face of what we’re supposed to be about.

I’ll admit, I’m torn on the issue. Author, and fellow blogger, John Green has been quoted as writing the phrase, “Truth resists simplicity.” He was referring to matters of quantum physics, higher mathematics, and global economics, but I think the idea applies to questions of legality and morality as well. Should we safeguard free speech, even when such speech provokes the mentally pliable to commit violent acts. Should we regulate speech, and risk creating a Big Brother? I don’t know.

The House's Tantrum

2011-01-19T19:37:00.000-08:00

-
"THE Republican-controlled US House of Representatives voted 245-189 today to repeal the health care bill signed into law by President Barack Obama last year."

Yeah.... So...? It'll never pass the Senate. Even if the repeal did pass the Senate, Obama would veto it. Neither the House, nor the Senate, let alone both of them, would be able to obtain a 2/3 majority to override such a veto. It's a purely symbolic vote. The most it says, is that if these Representatives had held power, during the last session, the health care bill wouldn't have become law. OK, that's interesting, but not very. Pffft...

Given that this repeal can never become law, they may as well come right out and call it a non-binding resolution. Just to put this in perspective, other non-binding resolutions include:

H.R.247 - To provide for the retention of the name of Mount McKinley.

H.CON.RES.214 - Recognizing the contributions of the cities of Bristol, Tennessee, and Bristol, Virginia, and their people to the origins and development of Country Music, and for other purposes.

H.CON.RES.172 - Expressing the sense of Congress in support of efforts to foster friendship and cooperation between the United States and Mongolia, and for other purposes.

H.CON.RES.417 - Commemorating the 20th anniversary of the capture of Zachary Baumel, a United States citizen serving in the Israeli Defense Forces.

H.CON.RES.151 - Expressing the sense of Congress that China release democratic activist Liu Xiaobo from imprisonment.

You get the idea. Votes, such as today's, are the congressional equivalent of picketing. They state their position, but nothing really comes of it.

Watering Down A Twain Classic

2011-01-11T15:51:00.000-08:00

-
In December of 1884, a book about life along the Mississippi was published in England. Having been a success with British readers, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn was published in the U.S. two months later, and quickly earned inclusion on the list of great American novels. The story itself features a friendship between Huck, Tom Sawyer, and Slave Jim, and was meant to be a satire of racism and other social foibles. To make his point, Mark Twain used the word “nigger” 219 times in the dialogue of the book.

126 years later, Alan Gribben and NewSouth Books have come to the conclusion that schools aren’t teaching the book, because it features politically incorrect language. To solve this perceived problem, Gribben and NewSouth have decided to republish the classic, substituting “nigger” with “slave.”

Don’t misunderstand, I am, by no means, defending the conversational use of the offensively ignorant word. Standard use of the word, when spoken to refer to a member of a particular racial minority, instantly paints the speaker as being low class and loutish. This, in fact, was one of the points of the book. The use of the word was intended, by Twain, to label its speaker as ignorant, racist, or too naive to understand the hurtful nature of the word. Changing the word, changes the essence of the character speaking the word, and thus changes the message of the piece.

Imagine if Dorothy’s house had landed on the wicked lady of the east, or if Vito Corleone hadn’t agreed to only sell narcotics only to “the colored” in order to keep the peace among the families. The stories would have been different. No matter how you feel about Wicca and Mother Nature, Dorothy’s antagonist WAS a witch. We may very well sympathize with the Corleone Family, to some degree, but they WERE racist. Changing those facts, in order to appeal to a politically sensitive audience, changes the nature of the stories.

A writer, a good writer, chooses each word carefully in order to produce a certain effect, the same way a painter chooses specific colors to create a mood. Yes, some words are “bad,” there’s no denying it. However, a character using a “bad” word, doesn’t make it a bad book, or a book to be avoided. The fact that the word “nigger” makes people uncomfortable, isn’t a bad thing. In a day when hate speech is so prevalent that it drives people to shoot Congresswomen, I’m all for having teachers teach the original version of Twain’s classic, and having a class discussion about why the word is unacceptable today. Serving as a catalyst for such discussions, is one of the key purposes of good literature.

New Year's Resolutions

2011-01-04T17:00:00.000-08:00

-
"The past tempts us, the present confuses us, and the future frightens us. And our lives slip away, moment by moment, lost in that vast, terrible in-between. But there is still time to seize that one last, fragile moment. To choose something better, to make a difference. And I intend to do just that." ~ J. Michael Straczynski

In 153 BCE Janus, a mythical king of early Rome was placed at the head of the Roman calendar by the Roman Senate. In legend Janus had two faces which he used to look to the future and the past. Since it was believed that Janus could forgive transgressions, many Romans would give gifts and make promises at the beginning of the new calendar year. Over time, the gifts became associated with Christmas, but the tradition of making promises, or "resolutions," at the beginning of each year has remained.

I wasn’t going to make any resolutions this year. I wittily said to myself, “Why mess with perfection?” and gave myself two Fonzie-esc thumbs up. I spend a lot of time alone though, and I tend to mull things over in my mind, even after I’ve made a decision. I finally came to the conclusion that there is room for improvement in my life, so I made the following resolutions.

1. I need to double, triple, even quadruple my efforts to get published.

2. Due to carelessness, or what have you, I’m writing my second Nick Ferrous book and a book of White Star short stories at the same time. I need to buckle down, focus, and finish at least one of them, THEN work on the other.

3. If I’m going to be a “serious writer,” I need to read the work of, at least, one literary master a month, in addition to the popular literature I currently enjoy.

4. I need to figure out how to better generate income from my blog.

2010: The Year That Was

2010-12-30T18:00:00.000-08:00

-
Well, 2010 is about over. Like most bloggers, I see this as a superb time to stop reflect on the year gone by. I'm not a gap toothed late night host though, and I can't rattle off a bunch of top 10 lists. Instead, I'll list some significant events, from my point of view, within the realms of movies, TV, books, and news. I have absolutely no doubt that experts, critics, and a good portion of the public, will disagree with some of the following inclusions and opinions. That's OK. This is simply how I saw 2010.
-
Movies

I saw my share of movies in theatres this year. Yet, out of everything I saw, I only gave 5 stars to two new releases. And before you ask, no I didn't see either animated feature, being hailed as contenders for movie of the year. As much as I like Steve Carell & Tom Hanks, I simply couldn't bring myself to shell out $9.50, or more, for a cartoon. Nor, could I get excited enough to pay to watch the remake of a John Wayne classic, or a movie chronicling the founding of Facebook. It's not that I thought they'd be bad movies, I simply didn't care. Rooster Cogburn will always be John Wayne to me, and as much as I use Facebook, I'm not interested in its nuts and bolts.

My first 5 star pick is The American. If you've ever seen Get Carter with Michael Caine, this is the same kind of quiet tough guy movie. George Clooney plays Jack, an assassin, who's seeking a respite from violence in a small Italian country town. When his vacation's cut short by an assignment, he struggles to keep his newly found romantic interest, played by Violante Placido, away from the brutality of his profession.

We never learn if Jack's working for our side, or not. Yet, thanks to his relationship with the local priest, we see that he believes his role as a killer allows him to make a positive contribution to the world, even though the acts themselves are evil. This duality defines the character, and makes for a very entertaining film.

Then we have my other 5 star pick, Black Swan. Natalie Portman deserves an Academy Award for her powerful portrayal of Nina Sayers, a dancer, who becomes obsessed with the lead role in Swan Lake. The way they blurred the line between reality and her psychotic delusions was brilliant. Complicating matters, was the jealous madness of Nina's mother, played by Barbara Hershey. The mother's fits made Nina seem almost normal by comparison. Once the mother is off the screen, the audience is lulled into relaxing, only to JUMP at just the right moment of surprise.

On an interesting note, while the story was about dance, and embraced major sexual themes, feet were never shown in an erotic, or sexy, way. They were always shown to be stiff aching cracking tools of the trade. Not being privy to the inner workings of director Darren Aronofsky's mind, I can't be sure, but I'd wager he chose to depict feet as he did in order to add to the dark ambiance of the movie.

While I couldn't give it 5 stars, what may very well be Michael Douglas' farewell performance definitely deserves a nod here. Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps is a decent sequel to its 1987 counterpart, but isn't quite as focused as the original. There was too much emphasis on trying to redeem Gordon Gekko, the same way Terminator 2 brought the T-500 back as a hero. However, they did a great job in explaining what caused the current fiscal crisis.

I remember a guest on Fresh Air describing the middle of the night board meeting which resulted in the sale of Bear Stearns for pennies on the dollar. Even though the bank's name was different in the movie, it was crystal clear that they were portraying the same events the radio guest had reported on in real life. It's this believable retelling of recent history which earns the film 4 out of 5 stars from me.

Inception is the mind bending tale of corporate espionage performed within the dreamscape of the target. The film featured excellent special effects, making it The Matrix of 2010. The fun of the film comes in trying to keep track of a dream within a dream within a dream and trying to remember which level of dreaming you're watching. 4 out of 5 stars.

Other movies of note include The A-Team and The Expendables. Neither of these will ever be nominated for awards, and rightly so. However, they're both fun good vs. evil combat pictures, which feature high speed car chases, generous doses of gun use, and explosive action scenes. The end results of these movies are never in question; we know from the moment we buy our tickets that the good guys will win. However, the movies deliver the promised two hours of pyrotechnic thrills, which is the point.
-
TV

I'm a TV junkie, denying such would be pointless. 2010 seemed somewhat uneventful in the TV realm though, unless you got wrapped up in the late night saga. Frankly, I think too much was made of the Conan vs. Leno conflict, and the whole debacle became a bad joke. In other news, we saw the cancellation of the long running Law & Order. Chuck jumped the shark when the CIA bought the Buy More. Plus, new shows such as Chase, Undercovers, and The Event (NBC's answer to LOST) proved to be mediocre at best.

Arguably the biggest TV milestone this year was the finale of LOST. On September 22, 2004, Oceanic flight 815 crashed on a mysterious island. Since then, die hard fans have followed the metaphysical adventures of the plane’s LOST survivors. With a heavy dose of foreshadowing, the story took viewers on a wild ride through time, and even into the afterlife itself. Fans were promised an ending which would answer all their questions. The writers of the show definitely broke that promise. The ending was an exciting tale of heroes over villains. However, a number of questions still remain annoyingly unanswered.

The biggest let down of the year was NBC's outlandishly bad Outlaw. Forget the fact that a bed hopping casino dwelling gambler could never have passed the vetting process and been appointed to the Supreme Court to begin with. The real problem with the show was its rushed pace. In the first 10 minutes, we saw his honor, Jimmy Smits, being presented with a capitol case, wrestling with it, ruling, and resigning. Those 10 minutes, could’ve easily been an entire episode, in which he wrestled with the idea of truth vs. procedure, argued with the other justices, and explored the issue. The time could’ve been used to really create the character and make the audience think. However, they had to gloss over that part to make time for the sexy P.I. to sexually tease the ultra-conservative law clerk.

If this year had a TV high point, it was unquestionably the premiere of HBO's Boardwalk Empire. Based on the nonfiction book of the same name, this show follows the exploits of Atlantic City's Treasurer, Nucky Thompson, a fictional version of Enoch Johnson, during prohibition. Even though Thompson is a political boss, bootlegger, and racketeer, Buscemi gives him a human side. We see a man who wants to do good, but who's willing to employ any means to stay in power and line his pockets. In contrast to the lead character, Michael Shannon plays a Bible driven federal agent who's willing to use similar methods in order to do what he sees as God's work, even at the expense of his and his wife's happiness.

People have compared this series to The Sopranos for obvious reasons. In my mind, the key difference between the series lies in the attitudes of the leading ladies. Carmela Soprano, Edie Falco, was content to live in denial of her husband's criminal dealings, as long as money was coming in. On the other hand, Margaret Schroeder, Kelly MacDonald, finds herself drawn to Nucky, partly out of a single mother's need for financial security, but she constantly wants to know what kind of enterprises Nucky's involved in. Her penchant for nosiness, and attempts at investigation, have created some dramatically tense moments. Viewers don't want her to get caught rifling through Nucky's desk, but they don't want Nucky to get nailed either.
-
Books

This is perhaps the most subjective category. With movies & TV shows, even if one doesn't care for the subject matter, the person can still acknowledge the quality of the acting, effects, set design, etc... Conversely, even if the prose are expertly crafted, if a reader doesn't identify with a particular book's subject, they won't buy it. I'm the same way. I partake of thirty to forty books a year, but few of them are new releases. The December 10th New York Times' Book Review Podcast lists the best books of 2010, none of which I've read. Yet, some things have occurred within the literary world, which have caught my attention this year.

A few months ago, I did a review of Medium Raw: A Bloody Valentine to the World of Food and the People Who Cook. It's worth mentioning here too, if only because I am such a fan of Anthony Bourdain's epicurean musings. This book was written ten years after its mate Kitchen Confidential: Adventures in the Culinary Underbelly. Unlike its forerunner, which was written from the point of view of an insider struggling to find his place within the epicurean realm, this book was written from the perspective of a well known and respected culinary commentator with a virtual backstage pass to the world of cuisine. Even with the various tales of shoulder rubbing, and shots at people who’ve irked him over the years, there are quite a few morsels of gastronomic wisdom for the eager foodie to devour. Thus, even though Medium Raw: A Bloody Valentine to the World of Food and the People Who Cook pales in comparison to its predecessor, it’s still definitely worth reading.

Anyone who's known me for any length of time knows I'm a big fan of Robert B. Parker's hard boiled fiction. Sadly, we lost him on January 18th of this year. Yes, I know we lost J.D. Salinger the same month, but Parker was in the prime of his career when he died at his desk. In fact, with more than a book a year to his name, since 1973, three of his last works, Split Image, Blue-Eyed Devil, and Painted Ladies were released after his death. His final novel Sixkill is due out in early 2011. While it can be successfully argued that Parker's writing style had become somewhat formulaic in recent years, most readers would agree that the stories themselves remained fresh and consistently entertaining. Mystery fans around the world will definitely miss the annual contributions of this prolific talent.

2010 saw another notable author published post posthumously. I'm, of course, referring to Samuel L. Clemens A.K.A. Mark Twain. As legend has it, Clemens spent the last part of his life writing his autobiography, but stipulated it was not be published for 100 years, so he wouldn't face the repercussions of writing about his peers. His request was honored, and Volume 1 of 3 was published this last November.

The book sold more than a quarter of a million copies in its first few weeks in stores. I was eager to get my copy, and was less than 24 hours from doing so, when I ran across Garrison Keillor's review of the book. Keillor came right out and called the book a fraud. According to his review, "sandwiched between a 58-page barrage of an introduction and 180 pages of footnotes, is a ragbag of scraps, some of interest, most of them not: travel notes, the dictated reminiscences of an old man in a dithery voice..." While I tend to trust the word of Lake Wobegon's favorite native Lutheran, I can't help but be amazed that Clemens can top the best seller list, 100 years after his death, solely on the merits of his past work.
-
News

Of course, one could write for weeks and not document every significant event of 2010. For 69 days, millions of people around the world watched in hopeful anticipation as rescue workers struggled to free 33 Chilean miners from a cave in. The world spent the summer in soccer fever as The World Cup played out, and everybody learned what a Vuvuzela, or stadium horn, was. The term "robo-signer" was added to our vocabulary when it was discovered that some banks were illegally foreclosing on properties. While not to down play any of these stories, or others, there were a few key items which defined 2010, at least for me.

In 2010, the New York City Daily News listed WikiLeaks first among websites "that could totally change the news", and Julian Assange made a name for himself in the realm of political activism. Unfortunately, or fortunately, depending on your point of view, he did so by publicly releasing hundreds of thousands of classified documents pertaining to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The release lead to him being criticized for compromising international diplomacy, jeopardizing national security, and failing to safeguard civilians by excluding their names from the releases. However, when certain companies severed ties with his site, supporters launched cyber-attacks to crash the sites of those companies.

Some see Julian Assange as an activists who's making information accessible to the masses. Others see him as a reckless criminal who's willing to endanger the lives of soldiers for personal gain. What's undeniable though, is that the legal upheaval he's created will eventually lead a clearer border between what will be considered legitimate journalism and what can be classified as treason.

By the last week in October, most of us had become sick to death of commercials trying to solicit our votes in November's midterm election. This was the first national election to be held since the Supreme Court softened restrictions on campaign contributions. While corporations still couldn't give money directly to candidates, they were free to produce their own political ads with no cap on spending. Under some circumstances, they were even allowed to produce such ads without disclosing funding sources. This last little loop hole had the unintended result of allowing foreign interests to produce political ads, influencing our election, without the public realizing it.

As a result the election itself, the GOP took control of the House of Representatives. While Democrats held control of the Senate, Republicans made enough sufficient gains to be able to hinder President Obama's agenda for the next two years. In my home state, while Democrats traditionally rule the roost, Oregonians voted in a gubernatorial nail-biter, which lead to Democrat John Kitzhaber narrowly winning over, relative political new comer, Chris Dudley. While some may argue that these results are a consequence of the aforementioned Supreme Court ruling, the inescapable conclusion remains that public sentiment has shifted hard to the right in just two years.

This is not to say that lefties have not made substantial strides in their right, however. Two such victories come to mind. First, and perhaps most importantly, was the passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act which became law on March 23. The Act, when fully activated over the next four years, will expand Medicaid eligibility for people making up to 133% of the federal poverty level (FPL), subsidize insurance premiums for people making up to 400% of the FPL, and ban insurance providers from denying coverage to applicants with preexisting conditions. To safeguard insurers from patients buying policies at the eleventh hour, the Act was going to make health insurance mandatory for all Americans, but this portion of the act has been deemed unconstitutional by the courts.

The second landmark victory took place just a few weeks ago, when the U.S. Senate voted to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell. The 65-31 vote means gays and lesbians will be able to serve openly in the military, and will increase our credibility when we advocate for human rights around the world.
-

Wow, what a year!

To Promote The General Welfare

2010-12-15T14:02:00.000-08:00

-
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." ~ Preamble to the Constitution of the United States of America

According to a survey released in June, by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 46.3 million Americans, or about 15.4%, did not have health insurance coverage in 2009.* Worsened, in part, by the fiscal crisis, this number rose to an estimated 49.9 million uninsured this year.** Until recently, these numbers were just dry statistics, spouted by Brian William, as I watched the evening news and had my supper. I’d cluck my tongue, agree it was a shame, and turn my attention to my salad.

This winter, I was rudely reminded that the American health care deficit is about more than theoretical numbers; people are suffering. My friend, Dani, works hard at her job seven days a week. Aided by food stamps, she provides for herself and her two kids of 12 and 14 years. Unfortunately, she’s not covered by health insurance, and has broken a tooth which has become impacted.

With half her face swollen, and in a great deal of pain, she made her way to the public urgency care clinic. The doctor politely explained the tooth causing her so much pain is a dental problem, rather than a medical problem. While he couldn’t remove the tooth, he did give her a prescription for an antibiotic/pain killer combo. Her heart sank when her pharmacist told her the combo is $60, but the straight antibiotic is only $6. She chose the $6 option, and controlled the pain, as best she could, with over the counter ibuprofen.

That’s when I stepped in and helped her find an emergency dentist. In big red letters the website advertised the availability of payment plans. Below this statement is another stating they, “see all patients.” Encouraged by the claims and the photos of friendly dental professionals smiling at her from cyber-space, she called the number on the screen. After a quick two minute conversation, the friendly voice on the other end determined she didn’t qualify for one of THEIR payment plans.

The voice did give Dani three web addresses for sites which offer medical and dental loans though. The minimum loan one can apply for is $5000. Desperate, she completed the online forms, only to discover she doesn’t make enough to qualify for even the minimum loan on a 48 month plan. Dani has since resigned herself to waiting for her tax refund, next April, to have her tooth fixed or pulled.

OK, forget the fact she wouldn’t need the loan if she made more money, because she’d probably be able to afford insurance. That part’s bizarre to me, but is pretty standard in the business world. What blows my mind is that there’s no mechanism in place to address basic pain relief and dental care of citizens of this country. I’m not talking about complex heart transplants, although those shouldn’t be cost prohibitive either, or elective cosmetic surgery. We can’t grant access to prescription pain relievers or simple curative procedures.

Four years from now, unless conservative nay sayers have their way, we’ll be able to alleviate the suffering of many American citizens who fall through the cracks today. It’s a long time for people to have to wait, but it’s a step in the right direction. In the meantime, we need to do more to give people access to basic health care, and thus promote the general welfare.
-
Sources
*(http://www.emaxhealth.com/1506/cdc-number-americans-without-health-insurance-coverage-increases)
**(http://www.healthcarefinancenews.com/news/number-uninsured-americans-could-grow-10m-five-years)

On the Road: The Original Scroll

2010-12-10T19:39:00.000-08:00

-
The following is not a review of On the Road: The Original Scroll. After 50 years, such a review would be pointless. Instead, this is simply my reaction to the book.
-
In 1947, Jack Kerouac embarked on the first of a series of journeys, which would take him back and forth across the U.S., and eventually deep into Mexico. Four years later, Jack chronicled his trek in one incredibly long paragraph, typed on eight sheets of tracing paper. The eight sheets were then taped together to form a 120 foot long scroll. After editing and rewriting multiple drafts, On the Road was finally published in 1957.

I’ve heard many people remark that On the Road is a life changing book which “opened the eyes” of many readers. Lately, I’ve had a desire to read “more serious fiction,” so I decided to begin by finally reading the book I’ve heard so much about.

When I bought it, I was given a choice between an abridged version or a printing of the original scroll. I had no idea that the original scroll used the real names of Neal Cassady, Allen Ginsberg, and other characters, as opposed to the fictional names found within the 1957 printing. Nor, was I aware that the scroll contained erotic scenes and an ending which were cut from the traditionally read version. I simply chose the original scroll version, because I don’t like abridged works.

Gee, maybe the life changing part is in the traditionally printed ending, or perhaps you need to be in a particular frame of mind to see it. I don’t know. I mean, I understand the concept of traveling to find yourself. However, such journeys of self discovery usually involve the embracing of some meaningful philosophy or truth. However, it seemed to me that Jack, Neal, and Allen weren’t embracing a solid philosophy as much as they were fleeing from responsibility. Whether it was steady employment, a sexual relationship, or parental duty, such trappings had to eventually be shed to make way for their next kick, lay, or high.

It’s hard for me to respect on ongoing quest for kicks at the expense of conscientiousness and common sense. Kerouac would have ten dollars to his name, spend eight of them on booze, then fret about where he was going to sleep that night because he couldn’t afford a room. He’d hitchhike broke and be mad when the guy who picked him up wouldn’t pop for a meal. Personally, I’d be ashamed to harbor such attitudes, let alone print them for the world to read.

Nevertheless, On the Road: The Original Scroll is a great example of descriptive, if undisciplined, writing. Via his words, readers can vividly picture a truck bed full of hobos traveling down the highway, a mean harbor cop roughing up prisoners, a limousine careening out of control, and Jack getting stoned silly off a huge marijuana cigar made from a paper bag. Whether one approves of the depicted activities, or not, the depictions themselves skillfully paint a detailed portrait settings, characters, and events. Plus, since it’s written as a single stream of consciousness, events flow effortlessly from one to another.

Besides being a writer who digs jazz, I don’t have much in common with Kerouac, as he depicts himself in the book. Still, I recognize On the Road: The Original Scroll as being a passionately written piece of literature, which vibrantly illustrates a particular attitude during a specific time in our history.

"I realized these were all the snapshots which our children would look at someday with wonder, thinking their parents had lived smooth, well-ordered lives and got up in the morning to walk proudly on the sidewalks of life, never dreaming the raggedy madness and riot of our actual lives, our actual night, the hell of it, the senseless emptiness." ~ Jack Kerouac, On the Road: The Original Scroll

Public Christmas

2010-12-01T17:26:00.000-08:00

-
The turkey’s been picked clean, only crumbs are left to remind us of pumpkin pies, and a chill hangs in the air, bringing with it thoughts of Christmas. For most of us, this is a time for family, and for joy. It’s a time to reflect on another year gone by, and to give back to those who’ve given to us. Yet, there are those among us who’d see all mention of the holiday removed from the public tongue. A good friend of mine, has recently expressed outrage at those who object to public recognition of the tradition.

I'm hardly religious, but Christmas is somewhat sacred, for lack of a better word, to me too. Some of my fondest childhood memories involve laying in bed on Christmas Eve in anticipation of the following day, then awaking to see hordes of brightly wrapped packages nestled beneath the twinkling tree. Later in life, the joy of the season came in the form of writing that year's cards, in finding just the right thing for each person on my list, and in gathering the family together. I, for one, don't want anyone raining on my Yule Tide parade. Do the nay sayers have a point though?

Most of the people who object to public recognition of Christmas, see Christians trying to legally define marriage and propose other laws based on biblical teaching, so they counter such attempts by trying to remove ALL mention of religion from public policy. The problem with that is, our forefathers never meant for separation of church and state to be a denial of the existence of church or religious tradition.

Our money says, "In God We Trust." Our pledge of allegiance recognizes us as being, “one nation under God." Even our Supreme Court attends a Red Mass at the Cathedral of St. Matthew the Apostle in Washington, D.C. before opening their annual term in October. Jefferson and the gang didn't want laws to be based on any single concept of God, but there's nothing inherently offensive or un-American about public recognition of religious traditions.

If it were up to me, the right would shut up about gay marriage, the left would shut up about Christmas, and we'd all respect each other.

A Fool and His Pleasure

2010-11-11T17:27:00.000-08:00

-
Jake left the poker table of the Big Star Tavern, sat himself at the bar, and unsnapped his black leather motorcycle vest, revealing his muscular sweat drenched chest. Jake fancied himself as a tough guy and everyone was going to know it, so he kept himself clad in leather regalia whenever he left the house. Nobody in town could recall ever seeing him without his dark glasses, black vest, black chaps over tapered blue jeans, boots, and leather tourniquet-like arm bands above his biceps.

Jim, the bartender, set a glass of beer in front of him. “Fierce competition tonight,” he said.

Jake nodded and sipped his beer.

“Having fun?” Jim asked, attempting to make conversation until the next libation was ordered.

Jake stared inquisitively at the barkeep, as if he’d just asked how the weather was on Mars. “I don’t get what you’re asking,” Jake finally said.

“It’s a fairly straight forward question. Are you having fun tonight?”

Jake shook his head, mimicking the clearing of cobwebs, and shot Jim an even more perplexed glare. “Of course I’m not having fun, I’m still here.”

“I don’t follow,” Jim said. “Playing cards and drinking isn’t fun for you?”

“Only one thing’s fun for me,” Jake said, gleefully bobbing his eyebrows up and down.

“Really? Only one thing? What’s that?”

“You know.”

“No, I’m fairly certain I have no idea,” Jim said.

Jake gave a frustrated sigh, stood, and pantomimed pulling something toward his groin several times while repeatedly thrusting his hips. Then, he sat back down and took another pull of his beer.

“You mean sex?”

“Orgasm,” Jake said with a look of immense pride, “and boy have I had a lot of fun over the years, I tell you what.”

“That’s the only thing that’s fun for you?”

“Yup,” Jake confirmed with a satisfied nod.

Jim scratched his bald head, which was cocked in confusion. “If sex, or orgasm, is your only source of fun, why play poker? Why sit at the bar and drink, for that matter?”

Jake shrugged. “They’re ways to meet people,” he said. “Social interaction increases my chances of landing a gal to screw.”

“And, you have no other goal in mind beyond finding a partner for sex. Is that right?”

“Poker has the potential to make me money, which in turn increases my desirability to a perspective companion, but yeah, sex is always the goal.

Jim rested his hand compassionately on Jake’s. “I’m sorry,” he said.

Jake pulled his hand away briskly and released a vulgar sexual suggestion. “What do you mean you’re sorry?” he said.

“It sounds like you live only for your next orgasm. That’s sad.”

“Sad!? Don’t talk to me about sad. You had to go without it for six years, while you were in prison. Now that’s sad.”

“That WAS sad,” Jim agreed. “I mean, I was strong enough that I could’ve had it if I’d chosen to.”

“A cell bitch, you mean.”

“Sure, but I looked at my fellow inmates, who chose to go that route, and it never seemed to give them any pleasure.”

“Because it was with a guy you mean?”

Jim shook his head. “Because, there was nothing behind it. It was a superbly executed act, followed by a moment of physical rapture, but there was nothing behind the act. It wasn’t conveying tenderness, love, or even compassion. It was a base animal-like activity void of joy, or, in your words, fun.”

“OK,” Jake said. “You refrained in prison, so I bet you missed it.”

“Sure,” Jim said with a shrug. “To tell you the truth though, there were things I missed far more.”

“More than sex?” Jake said wide-eyed. “What could you have missed more than sex?”

“Lots of things,” Jim said. “I missed eating what I wanted, when I wanted, and cooking it exactly the way I wanted. I missed seasoning a steak on the grill as it sears until it’s just pink in the middle. I missed washing the first bite down with a nice glass of wine.

I missed watching an old movie late at night, with a bowl of popcorn in my lap. Hell, I missed deciding what to watch. The basic pleasure of controlling the remote was a fond and distant memory.

I missed Christmas shopping. I’d almost forgotten what it was like to stroll through crowded shops looking for just the right book for Sal, or cologne for Steve, while kids told Santa what they wanted for Christmas. I missed drinking a steaming hot mug of spiced cider while I wrapped my purchases that night.

Even the ability to walk to the lake, and take in the scenery, on a summer afternoon was a luxury I’d have given anything to enjoy one more time. I missed spending the day fishing off the banks with a thermos of coffee and a couple of salami sandwiches beside my hip.

I missed sitting in my window and watching the rain pour from the sky with the power of God’s fury. I missed watching snow blanket the town.

I missed gorging myself of sweet corn at the harvest festival, then cutting a mean rug that night to work off the calories as the sounds of Merle Haggard blared from the juke box.

Sex is good, great with the right person, but little things like that, moments of fun and joy, are what I missed. They’re what makes life worth living.”

An order for whiskey, from the far end of the bar, abruptly interrupted Jim’s train of thought. He sighed, picked up the bottle of J&B, and proceeded to fill the order; leaving Jake to drink his beer, with only himself for company.

Blogging Is A Two Sided Coin

2010-11-02T15:53:00.000-07:00

-
"The man who graduates today and stops learning tomorrow is uneducated the day after." ~ Newton D. Baker

Writing blogs can be a freeing experience. Not being a public speaker, or even a dynamic conversationalist, blogs allow me to express my ideas/views without having to depend on a publisher. I can take my time, compose & polish my thoughts, and instantly make those thoughts available to anyone who’s interested.

Just like everything else though, there’s a flip side to blogging. Bloggers run the risk of taking themselves too seriously, and looking down on those who disagree with them as being uninformed knuckleheads. This danger is magnified ten fold when the blogger in question does über amounts of research for each piece. We set ourselves up as noble purveyors of truth rather than scribblers of opinion.

I’ve fallen into this trap concerning many issues of late. Perhaps the most ridiculous of these die hard stances concerned the issue of duck liver pâté or foie gras. The few times I’ve had it, I loved it. Thus, I was quick to believe industry insiders such as Anthony Bourdain and Mario Batali when they’ve said the reports of animal abuse are falsely overblown by anti-meat activists who spend so much time protesting foie gras that they ignore the real abuse of chickens by KFC. I was fervent in my belief the epicurean insiders were right, and I was arguing passionately with those who disagreed.

Truth be told, while I tend to believe the experts, I have no more idea than the man on the moon about what goes on at those farms. I can have MY OPINION based on research, but selling that opinion as TRUTH is crossing the line of sanity and reason. My stance took on even more ludicrous dimensions when you stop to consider the fact that I can’t even afford the stuff. It makes NO difference in my world whether it’s ethical or not, because it’s never going to appear on my grocery list anyway. I have to check newspaper ads for sales on Cheetos for crying out loud. What am I doing defending foie gras?

Blogs, when written well, can be thought provoking pieces which challenge readers to think about an issue in a new way, or an entertaining peak into the mind and heart of the blogger. The trick is to produce an informative entertaining piece, without standing on top of too tall of a soap box. Of course, I’m still going to have my opinions, and my readers will still know what those opinions are. Nevertheless, I will endeavor, from now on, to treat those opinions as opinions rather than as pieces of truth which are carved in stone.

Five For Fall

2010-10-24T14:02:00.000-07:00

-
On Friday, one of my blogging friends, known only as Folly, asked her blog readers to list their five favorite things about autumn. I clicked reply and began to list foliage, macaroni & cheese, etc… I stopped, looked at what I was writing, and realized I was delivering a cliché string of pat answers which could easily be regurgitated by ANY high functioning second grader. Folly’s my friend, and I’m a writer, so I told myself I could do better.

I thought about it most of that night and the next morning, but still had nothing of consequence to report. All else having failed, I did one of the things I do best. I went shopping.

The sky was completely gray with thick ominous looking clouds. While rain only fell in sporadic trickles, gusts of crisp cool wind promised a more vigorous weather system would hit before the day’s end. Heading down Baseline Road, the foliage displayed intense yellows, oranges, and reds so fiery one might have suspected they were spray painted.

Cinnamon scented pine cones, which are perfuming my desk as I write this, were the first items to be purchased. Also on the list were veggies for roasting with fresh rosemary; carrots, potatoes, and cippolini onions; hard apple cider, pork cutlets; cranberry beans, bacon, kale, and mini pasta for a rich soup; candy corns, and an array of other less interesting items. Going from the car to the store and back, allowed the brisk wind to slap my face and rejuvenate me, and made me grateful for my thick hunting socks and winter coat.

That evening, as I enjoyed roast beef in a savory brown gravy and listened to the hard rain pound the shingles of the roof, I realized why the list had previously eluded me. Until my shopping trip, I hadn’t really experienced fall yet this year. I’d read and bookmarked fall recipes, changed my desktop’s wallpaper to display autumn foliage, and performed other seasonal tasks, but none of it was the same as being out in the weather of the season.

My List

1. Fall Foliage - As cliché as it sounds, the vibrant colors of the leaves dispense a beauty and a drama virtually unmatched by man-made art.

2. Fall Clothes - Thick warm socks, big coats, and sweaters hug us in a warm and cozy embrace.

3. Comfort Foods - As wool, denim, canvas, and leather warm our outer selves aromatic meats, roasted root vegetables, gravies, soups, stews, and bubbly hot concoctions featuring cheese keep our innards toasty warm and happy.

4. Hard Cider - While I’m typically a wine person, the crisp bite and tang of apples and pears is a pleasant treat of the season.

5. The Weather - In addition to giving us ample cause to dig out those fall clothes and to allow that soup to simmer, the weather arouses us with brisk breezes, and awakens gratitude within in us as we listen to the pitter patter of drops from inside our comfortable homes.

Honorary Mention - Cinnamon Scented Pine Cones, Candy Corn, Trick or Treaters on Halloween, and Thanksgiving.

Pet Peeves

2010-10-05T15:52:00.000-07:00

-
Those who know me, will tell you, I’m often ruled by my passions. Being a passionate man, I have a number of pet peeves. I discussed my linguistic peeves back in a February piece. However, things, other than the misuse of language, annoy the crap out of me too.

Let me start by saying, I’m a liberal agnostic. This means, I have no idea what to call God, but I believe you get to call God whatever you want: Yahweh, Jehovah, Christ, Allāh, etc… So, it irks me to see “Muslim” being used as a dirty word. These days, to turn the masses against someone, all you have to do is accuse them of being a Muslim. Somehow, it’s become equivalent to calling someone a terrorist or Nazi. Now this trend has extended to labeling the building of a Muslim community center in New York as being un-American.

It is a little gratifying to see the protesters calling the place a Mosque, proving beyond a shadow of a doubt they don’t know what they’re actually protesting. Even if it was a Mosque though, when has the concept of religious freedom been an un-American value?

Keep in mind, “Muslims” didn’t bring The Twin Towers down, Al-Qaeda did. Al-Qaeda is to Islam what Nazis are to Christianity, an extreme faction which perverts scripture in order to justify a distorted world view. Protesting a, perceived, Mosque over 9/11 makes about as much sense as picketing a Lutheran Church over the genocidal misdeeds at Auschwitz.

Moving on, harassment over sexual orientation has lead to five suicides over the last three weeks. Excuse me? How has 21st century America not evolved beyond persecuting people for being different? Whether you believe being gay is an affront to scripture, or not, you have to believe emotional terrorism violates the spirit of ANY well-founded moral code. The idea that we all need to be the same to be accepted, stands in direct opposition to what it means to be American, or humane for that matter.

Now that I am writing this, I realize these first two aren’t separate pet peeves, but are products of the single pet peeve I have for intolerance.

I have other peeves which irk me though.

*The protesting of certain foods, when the realities of modern production have eliminated the problem being protested,

*The idea that banning gay marriage is any less immoral than banning interracial marriage, or African Americans from lunch counters,

*Hollywood using the same basic story, and changing names and locations to churn out cookie cutter movies,

*Parents letting children scream in restaurants instead of taking them out,

*Dishonest political commercials (OK, I’m sick of all political adds at this point, but the ones that lie and assume viewers are too stupid to look up public records on the internet are especially irksome.),

*Etc…

My Election Woes

2010-09-30T13:36:00.000-07:00

-
Sometimes I start out to write one thing, but end up writing something completely different. My friend, Sonya, blogs weekly and Tweets daily about Oregon’s race for Governor. She digs through public records and old newspapers, and highlights every misstep Chris Dudley makes. She even called Anne Yeager, of KGW News, to the mat for misleadingly editing campaign footage and bungling a story.

Inspired by her tenaciousness, I was going to do the same thing. I was going to point out the fact that every economic short fall Dudley attributes to Kitzhaber’s term in office happened after 9/11, when all 50 states took an economic nose dive. I was going to explain why cutting capital gains taxes won’t create jobs. I even dug through SEC filings for Filigree Advisors, where Dudley claims to be a "Wealth Strategist." I was going to make a big deal of the fact the his title status has been, “Leave of Absence,” since 2008 and the fact there are no job duties listed for him.

I began writing the piece six times, and I couldn’t get through it. I logged off last night, and asked myself why I couldn’t write it. After much soul searching, I realized I was politically gun shy. Two years ago, I was on-fire for Obama. He was the man. He was going to put liberalism back in the Democratic party, and unite the country. Riiiiiiiiiiight……….

OK, he delivered a health plan which will insure millions of Americans. Kudos to him for that. Really, that was a huge step forward for this country. However, he’s not even proposing what’s necessary to fix the economy, and he’s bumfuzzled on education.

We’ve seen temporary influxes of stimulus money pumped into the economy. However, I haven’t heard anyone in authority propose anything but stop gap measures. On education, Obama’s promising money to states which will link teacher pay to test scores, even though the most extensive study to date concluded that such programs are ineffective. Before you say, “there are no clear answers,” let me lay a couple on you, just for shits and giggles.

Instead of giving tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas, let’s end those tax breaks and give them to companies that open factories and plants in the U.S. Doing so will create jobs and establish a wider base of consumers who will fuel the economy by buying goods and services. Seems pretty straight forward to me, but I haven’t seen Obama even flirt with the idea.

As for education, unless teachers have the right to exclude low functioning kids from their class rooms, tying teacher pay to test scores is blatantly unfair. Eliminating teacher tenure won’t help either. It will simply let districts save money by firing experienced educators before they qualify for their pensions, leaving districts with young inexperienced teachers. No, to raise test scores, we need to incentivize students.

As it stands now, students move to second grade whether they’ve passed first grade, or not. No… Wait… Sorry… My bad. They don’t pass anymore, they “meet benchmarks.” Whether a first grader meets benchmarks, or not, they’ll be promoted to second grade, and they know it. This policy of social promotion follows students through school. The problem is, without the ability to fail students have no incentive to succeed, at least not one a six year old can understand. They don’t understand having to do well in order to qualify for a good job in fifteen to twenty years, but they can grasp the idea that if they don’t do well they won’t move to second grade with their friends. Yet, I don’t see Obama, or any other Democrat for that matter, trying to discourage social promotion.

I’m going to vote for Kitzhaber, of course. I simply can’t get excited about it, because I feel like I’ll be voting against Republican induced disaster, rather than for inspired Democratic change. I’m just not willing to get my hopes up again.

The Recession's Over, Yay! Oh, Wait. What?

2010-09-21T13:41:00.000-07:00

-
The National Board for Economic Research has declared that the economy hit rock bottom in June of 09, and has been steadily improving ever since. In other words, the recession ended fifteen months ago. Excited by the report, President Obama delivered the good news in a town hall like forum on MSNBC yesterday. However, once the members of the forum pointed out that they have yet to benefit from the so-called recovery, he back pedaled and went into his, “we still have much work to do, but we’re Americans,” mode.

As near as I can tell, unemployment statistics seem to back up the crowd’s assertion that we’re still in a recession. Nationally, unemployment was at 9.6% in June of 09, when the economy began its upswing. However, unemployment didn’t peak at 10.6% until January of 2010. The latest numbers, from June of 2010, list unemployment 9.6% and rising. So, unemployment peaked seven months after the recession supposedly ended, it’s only a tenth of a point lower than when the declared upswing began, and experts are really trying to sell the idea that the recession’s been over for more than a year? It’s a head scratcher, to be sure.

I’ll admit, I was slightly baffled by the inconsistency. Then I found an article in the L.A. Times. In the piece, Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, explained that June of 09 was sited as the recession’s end because that month saw the greatest number of stimulus dollars, from the Recovery Act, being spent. Well sure, that makes perfect… I mean, that’s a perfectly reasonable…

Wait, the government pumped a one time influx of money into the economy, people bought TVs and sweaters, jobs weren’t created, and THAT signals the end of the recession? The one time boost may have offered a temporary respite to wholesalers and retailers, but they socked the profits away, instead of using the money to employ more people and create an additional base of consumers. Until we create jobs, and enable people to buy goods & services, we won’t be out of the woods.

As for Obama trying to sell the nation a bill of goods on MSNBC, I gotta say, I’m irked by the spectacle. Watching him tell people the recession is over, induced flash blacks of a bomber jacket clad George W. Bush declaring victory in Iraq in 2003. Nobody was dumb enough to swallow that one either.

Outlaw Is Outlandish

2010-09-17T13:58:00.000-07:00

-
Jimmy Smits has a long history of doing smart TV roles. Victor Sifuentes, was a young idealistic lawyer, on L.A. Law, who eloquently fought for his clients. Bobby Simone, offered a sense of level headed balance to his gruff rule bending partner in NYPD Blue. Matt Santos, was an idealistic Congressman, of minority birth, who was groomed to succeed Jed Bartlet as President in The West Wing. Each of these characters were intelligent and believable, challenging viewers to think about ideas and issues. Thus, I was really looking forward to Outlaw, the story of a resigned Supreme Court Justice who practices law to fight for the little guy.

When Elena Kagan was being considered for the U.S. Supreme Court, she had to fill out a 202 page questionnaire, covering everything from her legal background to her finances. All Supreme Court Nominees go through a rigorous vetting process, which explores every nook and cranny of their lives. Yet, Outlaw gives us a Justice who owes a huge some to Doc, the bookie, and who, “doesn’t know the last name of the last three women he slept with.” Thank God his secretary, who pulled him out of a casino to make a legal ruling, knew their names.

Forget the fact that such a person could never have been appointed to the court to begin with, half of writing fiction involves the application of the creative license. The real problem with the show is its rushed pace. In the first 10 minutes, we see his honor be presented with a capitol case, wrestle with it, rule, and resign. Those 10 minutes, could’ve easily been an entire episode, in which he could’ve wrestled with the idea of truth vs. procedure. He could’ve argued with the other justices, explored the issue, and the time could’ve been used to really create the character. However, they had to gloss over that part to make time for the sexy P.I. to sexually tease the ultra-conservative law clerk.

My disappointment is really my own fault though. I let Smits’ past association with the works of Aaron Sorkin and Steven Bochco color my expectations and get my hopes up. Rather than being a well written thought provoking drama for adults, Outlaw is an average TV show on a par with Desperate Housewives.

I Just Assumed

2010-09-11T12:21:00.000-07:00

-
This morning, my friend’s mother had her purse stolen. The police came, took the report, yada yada yada. Then, as they were finishing, they reminded her not to drive, because she doesn’t have her license.

Call me naive, but I always just assumed that when a person had their purse or wallet stolen, the police would give the victim some kind of dated note, good for one week, saying something like, “This person’s license was stolen, but they’re on the state’s computer as being a licensed driver.” Then, during that week, the victim would go to the DMV for their new license. Do the police really not do this?

Really though, you've been robbed, you're going to need to visit the bank, the DMV, and go to work. Only, now you can't drive, even though the state's computer says you're a valid driver, because you're physical license was one of the things which was stolen. Does this make sense on any level?

A Manifestation Of Boyhood Dreams

2010-09-06T13:42:00.000-07:00

-
I’ve started a new writing project. I wasn’t going to talk about it for a while yet, but I was just telling (emailing) one of my best friends about it, and thought part of the email would make a good blog. Truth be told, several of my blogs have been the result of messages to friends.

The project is a collection of short stories about a small town, in Eastern Oregon, called White Star. The gist is, a group of retiring lawmen founded a town a hundred some years ago, which was away from everything. Over time, the town evolved into an isolated community of artists, writers, and free thinkers. The mechanism behind the evolution is spelled out, in a way that makes sense, in the introduction. Some of the stories will be mysteries, some will be funny, some will be town emergencies, etc... I've also written in an ongoing mystery concerning the founding days of the town.

I say it’s a new project, but I’ve actually been drawing the townspeople for seven years, and defining the relationships between the characters. The roots of the stories, even go further back than that, since the Marshal, who lead the other lawmen to found the town, was an imaginary playmate from my childhood. Back when a toy cowboy pistol served as the primary outlet for my imagination, Marshal Duke Elling and I defended the early citizens of White Star from countless forms of villainy. Today, the progeny of those boyhood adventures will finally make it to paper.

Stephen Hawking: Physics Leaves No Room For God. Really?

2010-09-03T14:05:00.000-07:00

-
“Faith certainly tells us what the senses do not, but not the contrary of what they see; it is above, not against them.” ~ Blaise Pascal

Stephen Hawking is, arguably, the smartest man in the world. He was explaining the science behind black holes, while I was preparing to enter Junior High School. In his new book, "The Grand Design," he claims that M Theory, a variation of String Theory, explains the Universe to such a degree, that a conscious creator, or God, is no longer part of the equation. (Watch Video Below)

I've read about M Theory, a time or two, as a hobby. As I understand it, the theory states that anything that can happen will happen in some parallel version of our Universe. In other words, there's a Universe in which I quarterback for the Bears, a Universe in which I write a best seller every four months, and a Universe in which I died as a child. You get the idea.

Hawking has applied this theory to the creation of the Universe, concluding that because anything that can happen will happen, the creation of the Universe was inevitable, therefore God wasn't necessary. I'm not sure his reasoning entirely works.

A Multiverse theory can explain why your socks disappear in the dryer, and why some people survive seemingly unsurvivable accidents. Such events had to happen in some Universe, they just happened to happen in this Universe. Even if we accept the existence of a Multiverse though, there's nothing to say that God didn't set the whole ball of wax into motion to begin with.

Science is very good at explaining how things work. The Earth spins and creates gravity which hold us down. Sunlight converts carbon dioxide into organic compounds to nourish plants. To every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction. However, there are many questions science can't answer.

We know synapses in the brain create electrical impulses in the brain, making thought and motor function possible. We have no idea what thought is though, or what combination of simple electrical impulses make up memory, intellect, imagination, inspiration, passion, and personality. Science can't define the human spirit. Only faith, in something greater than ourselves, can begin to explain what we are.

To paraphrase Hamlet, there are more things in heaven and earth, Stephen, than are dreamt of in your science.

The End of the Combat Mission in Iraq?

2010-09-01T11:51:00.000-07:00

-

Last night, President Obama announced that we’d defeated the Iraqi regime and the combat mission was over. He went on to explain, that while 100,000 troops have been called home, 50,000 troops will remain to complete a new mission; advising and assisting Iraq's security forces, supporting Iraqi troops in targeted counter-terrorism missions, and protecting our civilians.

I applaud the sentiment, but “supporting Iraqi troops in targeted counter-terrorism missions” still sounds like combat to me. Keep in mind, they won’t be going from a front line to doing a series of raid and grab missions. This was never a war of trenches on either end of a battle field with lateral movement back and forth. “Taking the hill in sector Bravo,” was never a part of this war. The majority of combat has been in the form of raid and grab missions based on intel, and responses to terrorist violence. It sounds to me as if our 50,000 remaining troops are being asked to do more of the same, only with Iraqi security taking the lead.

In 2003, our last president declared victory in Iraq, then used it as an excuse to deny imminent danger pay and family separation pay to 157,000 soldiers and their families. I realize our economy’s in the toilet and we need to make cuts, but I hope last night’s speech isn’t the opening act of a rerun of 2003. If this is truly the final phase of a ten year war, great. However, I fear it may simply be a relabeling of duties which have been performed for the last decade.

Literary Theory & Conjecture

2010-08-26T16:15:00.000-07:00

-
Every academic discipline has its share of debatable theories, to keep scholars on their proverbial toes. Physics has dark matter, which is theorized to exist in order to make gravitational models make sense. Historians talk about a theoretical Siberian/Alaskan land-bridge, which may have allowed ancient Asians to have settled the Americas and spawn, what we know as, Native American cultures. Mathematicians have Number Theory, which I can’t begin to summarize. Likewise, the realm of literature and writing owns its share of theories and debatable ideas.

I remember sitting in my creative writing class, at OSU, as our gray ponytail wearing professor explained that westerns are actually homo-erotic fantasies in disguise, the horse supposedly being a literary substitute for a male sexual lover. He was earnest in his conviction too, this is how things were. He was a professor, and he was professing the truth to us. He’s not alone in this belief, which was recently energized by a certain Heath Ledger film. Such theorists have pointed at the film and said, “Told ya so,” as if Annie Proulx had somehow let the cat out of the bag.

Equally steadfast in their convictions are the Oxfordians, Baconians, Marlovians, and Derbyites, who insist that William Shakespeare lacked the education necessary to produce the body of work which has been attributed to him. Not only will they tell you that Edward de Vere (17th Earl of Oxford), Sir Francis Bacon, dramatist Christopher Marlowe, and/or William Stanley (6th Earl of Derby) wrote the works, they’ll tell you that mainstream literary minds ONLY dispute the claim because they have a financial interest in promoting the collection as a single body of work.

Both theories have their fervent supporters and nay sayers. I have no doubt that some frustrated homosexual authors wrote westerns in order to express themselves without being lynched. Literature has a long tradition of metaphor and allegory, which could only be recognized by “those in the know.” Gulliver’s Travels and Animal Farm are superb, if obvious, examples of writers saying something without actually saying it.

Surely an oppressed population, such as 19th & 20th century gays, needed such a vehicle to express themselves. However, it doesn’t logically follow that westerns, across the board, are a form of gay literature. Louie L’Amour’s Sackett saga, was comprised of straight forward tales of settling the west. True Dime Novels and Story Papers were pretty one dimensional publications, written to whet people’s appetite for the west. A good portion of westerns are little more than good versus evil morality plays, with little, if any, room for hidden meaning.

As for the Shakespeare theory, Oxfordians, and others, maintain that without a formal education, William Shakespeare wouldn’t have known about the customs and habits of the aristocracy. I don’t find his lack of a documented formal education to be a compelling argument though. Setting aside the fact that home schooling has been around forever, the fact is that he was an actor. As such, his troop would’ve been invited into a variety of estates, where he would have been able to observe the upper class first had. Remember, these weren’t high brow plays when they were written. These were tales of violence, murder, and sexual intrigue which were written to appeal to a broad audience. They were the 90210 of their day.

Keep in mind as well, most of these plays painted royalty and the upper class as being jealous, selfish, and conniving. Lady Macbeth killed anyone she perceived to be a threat to her husband’s power. Claudius, Hamlet’s uncle, killed his own brother to steal his wife and throne. Othello couldn’t trust his wife enough to believe her claims of fidelity. Richard III was a tyrant pure and simple. Such a dark portrait of the ruling class is hardly a picture an Earl, or other member of the aristocracy, would wish to paint. Such a view would have been more likely to come from a disgruntled commoner.

Unless we find a cache of diaries, most literary questions will never be resolved. That’s OK though. Whether or not one man wrote all of “Shakespeare’s works” doesn’t really matter. It’s still a single body of work, which has inspired multiple writers over the years. As for what’s in a writer’s mind when they write a piece, we’ll never really know that either. Again, it doesn’t matter. Art is subjective. Once a writer publishes a piece, it belongs to the reader. The reader will attribute meaning to it, based on their own set of beliefs, thoughts, and experiences, which is as it should be.

The Horn Blower

2010-08-24T15:41:00.000-07:00

-
Josh shoved his hands into the pockets of his caramel colored slacks, once the button to the lobby had been pressed. He didn’t typically walk around that way, but he was afraid he might belt someone if his hands were free of his pockets.

“Happy place, indeed,” Josh thought to himself in disgust, as he stormed from the elevator. Asking him to close his eyes and visit his happy place, was like asking a quadriplegic to perform somersaults. Every time Josh shut his eyes, he relived the single most terrifying moment of his life.

He could clearly see himself leaving the Thrifty-Mart, with his bag full of frozen dinners and discount beer. He recalled mentally debating whether to nuke the Mexican Trio or the Turkey Feast for supper that night, when he heard the first loud crack. Two more cracks followed in rapid succession, chased by a searing pain in his back. He remembered the pavement racing toward his face an instant before everything went black.

Three years had past, and the memory was still as vivid as if it had happened a week ago. Now, the only psychiatrist who’d accept Medicare, was telling him to picture bikini strewn beaches in his head. He stormed from the skyscraper’s glass doors, fit to spit acid into the eyes of passers by.

At first, his rage hid the music from his consciousness. A trumpet, playing Serenade In Blue, served as soft background music to a tapestry of angry musings. As Josh approached the sidewalk of Market Street, the music began to tickle the fringes of his awareness. Each note drew him closer to their master, until he found himself staring directly down at the source of music.

The black man’s legs were folded into yoga’s bound angel pose, as he leaned his back against the cement dividing wall, and blew expertly into his shiny brass instrument. A set of dark, almost black, fingers protruded from a pair fair raggedy fingerless wool gloves and operated the sparkling keys with precision. His cheeks puffed into replicas of plump ripe tomatoes smudged with garden soil. The glistening horn made the blower’s long musty coat and hole ridden trousers seem all the more dull by comparison. Yet, as the horn blower manipulated the instrument, which almost seemed to be a part of the blower’s body, Josh could sense a contentment emanating from the man.

With his hands still firmly in his pockets, Josh leaned his shoulder against the wall and closed is eyes, really closed his eyes. As the music filled his pores, he allowed himself to rest in the moment.

Now Is Not Forever

2010-08-24T13:52:00.000-07:00

-
I’m living in my own future,
I’m living in my own past.
I’m trapped in this painful moment,
But I know that it won’t last.

There’s a me looking back at this,
Proud that I broke free.
There’s a me waiting for this moment,
Unsure of what’s to be.

I see only this painful moment,
Full of woes and frights.
Yet the moments exist together,
As a web of lefts and rights.

My future, past, a present,
Exist together as parallel streams.
Although what I see as now,
Is an eternity it seems.

I need a way to rise above this pain,
And quench this hurt somehow.
I need to shift my focus,
And look back on the now.

I’m living in my own future,
I’m living in my own past.
I’m trapped in this painful moment,
But I know that it won’t last.

An Appreciation Of Literature

2010-08-17T17:02:00.000-07:00

-
In an attempt to increase my positive revenue stream, this week I added an Amazon book store to my blog. I figured that since I blog as often as I do, I may as well make some money at it. Along the top of the blog, readers can search for, and purchase, any book Amazon has to offer. In addition to this ability, readers can buy one of my favorite books with one click along the left side. Finally, each entry will feature a selection of topic related materials, which readers can purchase.

It was as I was choosing my favorite books, that I began thinking about books. More precisely, I began thinking about the books I choose to read. Since I write crime fiction, my list is, of course, heavily weighted with crime fiction. Scattered among my favorite mysteries, one will find cookbooks, the culinary musings of Anthony Bourdain, and a few non-genre offerings which have spoken to me over the years, including Young’s ”The Shack,” and Cather’s “My Åntonia.” I read the blogs of “serious” writers though, and they tout Hemingway’s “The Old Man and the Sea,” Salinger’s “The Catcher in the Rye,” Fitzgerald’s “The Great Gatsby, and the works of Shakespeare as “must reads“.

Since Shakespeare’s plays were meant to be watched, rather than read, I’ve made it a point to partake of as many of the plays as possible. However I must confess, most of the other “serious” works simply don’t do it for me.

When I go to buy a book, I ask myself why I should care about this character? I have to be able to identify with a protagonist, on some level, to enjoy a book. Are they saving lives, solving crimes, dedicating themselves to a cause greater than themselves, or educating the reader in some way? Am I at least going to read about a strong intelligent character with some kind of moral fiber? If the answers are no, I’m probably not going to spend time or money on that particular book.

OK, Cather’s Jim Burden lacks a certain degree of self esteem, and comes across as wimpy, making the reader want to slap him and scream, “Tell her how you feel!” We’ve all loved unrequitedly at some point in our lives though, and therefore can feel Jim’s pain.

On the flip side, while “The Great Gatsby” oozes with imagery and metaphor, it leaves me flat. Yes, I get the whole eye of god in the billboard thing, but when the characters are oblivious of reality, I can’t find anyone to care about. Likewise, while I can appreciate Hemingway’s take on man versus nature, at the end of the day we have Santiago killing a marvelous creature to prove he’s still a man, without anything tangible to show for his effort. As for Salinger’s piece, I may have simply discovered this coming of age tale too late in life to get much out of it.

Thus, I’m forced to ask myself if my lukewarm reception of such classics prevents me from being a serious writer? It’s a question which I’ve wrestled with. In the end though, I think an appreciation of literature is merely a matter of finding subject matter that speaks to you. I’m hardly a religious zealot, yet “The Shack” challenged me to reexamine my beliefs, and thus became one of my favorite books.

I may, or may not, be a serious writer, whatever that really means. Nevertheless, I don’t think the question hinges on a specific reading list, or an understanding of certain key works. Readers, and writers, should focus on books they enjoy. If the “classics” truly excite and enthrall you, that’s great. If not, that’s OK too, as long as you’re reading something.

1,000,000 "Frenchmen" CAN Be Wrong

2010-08-04T17:22:00.000-07:00

-
Today California’s Courts overturned the people’s ban on same-sex marriage. I posted a link to the news on Facebook, hailing the decision as a victory for liberty and human rights. Yet, my cousin commented that the decision signaled an erosion of voters’ power to govern.

In 2008, Proposition 8, banning same-sex marriage, was passed by 52.24% of California’s voters. Some would argue that the courts have no business overturning “the will of the people.” I thought about this, it sounds like a valid point. After all, Democracy is supposed to be based on “the will of the people,” isn’t it?

No, I'm sorry, as much as I love my cousin, this argument doesn't hold water. "The will of the people" was never intended to be able to circumvent the country's founding principles of freedom and personal liberty. If mere elections had such an unchecked power, the ban on interracial marriage would've been kept in place in southern states by southern voters of the time. Human rights are not commodities to be granted and revoked according to the whim of the populace.

In the words of Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, "The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections."

I Ask Unanimous Consent To Revise And Extend My Remarks

2010-07-07T13:28:00.000-07:00

-
"Knowledge is, in every country, the surest basis of public happiness." ~ George Washington, First Annual Message, 1790

In my last blog, I questioned the patriotism of those who would break our nation's laws on her birthday. While I stand by the assertion that criminal behavior is inherently unpatriotic, I hope I didn't give the impression that most of the spectators fell into such a category.

Out of the thousands who were in attendance, I'd estimate only 5% of them were flaunting authority via illegal incendiary devices. The majority of the people were occupied with picnics, games of Frisbee, cook outs, and other acceptable forms of recreation. The trouble makers simply stood out more.

Isn't that always the way though? We tend to have a global reputation for being polluters, war mongers, and "ugly Americans." Yet, I'd argue our good works far outweigh our misdeeds & mistakes.

The following was written by an Australian Dentist, and arrived in my Inbox this morning. It does a superb job illustrating my point.

-

"To Kill an American

You probably missed this in the rush of news, but there was actually a report that someone in Pakistan had published in a newspaper, an offer of a reward to anyone who killed an American, any American.

So an Australian dentist wrote an editorial the following day to let everyone know what an American is . So they would know when they found one. (Good one, mate!!!!)

'An American is English, or French, or Italian, Irish, German, Spanish , Polish, Russian or Greek. An American may also be Canadian, Mexican, African, Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Australian, Iranian, Asian, or Arab, or Pakistani or Afghan.

An American may also be a Comanche, Cherokee, Osage, Blackfoot, Navajo, Apache, Seminole or one of the many other tribes known as native Americans.

An American is Christian , or he could be Jewish, or Buddhist, or Muslim.. In fact, there are more Muslims in America than in Afghanistan . The only difference is that in America they are free to worship as each of them chooses.

An American is also free to believe in no religion.... For that he will answer only to God, not to the government, or to armed thugs claiming to speak for the government and for God.

An American lives in the most prosperous land in the history of the world.
The root of that prosperity can be found in the Declaration of Independence, which recognizes the God given right of each person to the pursuit of happiness.

An American is generous. Americans have helped out just about every other nation in the world in their time of need, never asking a thing in return......

When Afghanistan was over-run by the Soviet army 20 years ago, Americans came with arms and supplies to enable the people to win back their country!

As of the morning of September 11, Americans had given more than any other nation to the poor in Afghanistan.

The national symbol of America, The Statue of Liberty, welcomes your tired and your poor, the wretched refuse of your teeming shores, the homeless, tempest tossed. These in fact are the people who built America

Some of them were working in the Twin Towers the morning of September 11 , 2001 earning a better life for their families. It's been told that the World Trade Center victims were from at least 30 different countries, cultures, and first languages, including those that aided and abetted the terrorists.

So you can try to kill an American if you must.. Hitler did. So did General Tojo , and Stalin , and Mao Tse-Tung, and other blood-thirsty tyrants in the world.. But, in doing so you would just be killing yourself . Because Americans are not a particular people from a particular place. They are the embodiment of the human spirit of freedom. Everyone who holds to that spirit, everywhere, is an American."

Our Nation's Birthday

2010-07-06T12:59:00.000-07:00

-
"The government is the potent omnipresent teacher. For good or ill it teaches the whole people by its example." ~ Justice Louis D. Brandeis

Seaside, Oregon is a coastal town to built, primarily, on tourism. Broadway, its version of The Strip, leads from downtown to the sea front boardwalk, and is packed with shops, restaurants, and amusements. Every day, a pudgy good natured candy man stands on the corner of Broadway & Columbia, singing his jingle and handing out samples of salt water taffy to passers by.

We spent our 4th of July weekend in Seaside. Walking along the boardwalk, one couldn’t help but notice signs stating that no illegal fireworks would be tolerated. Thus, during a late night stroll, on the 3rd, I was surprised to see the beach being illuminated by unsanctioned explosions of color. Figuring the police were on their way, I shrugged and continued the stroll. However, upon reaching the main staircase to beach, I witnessed a Hispanic family, mom, dad, and two little kids, being frisked by officers as they were leaving the beach. To make sure I was seeing things correctly, I asked a man, with his two kids, if he’d seen the family being searched as explosions continued to erupt on the beach. He said, “Yes, my kids and I were just talking about that.”

Let me pause to say that I’m a huge fan of law enforcement. I spent years volunteering for my local department, and will always give them the benefit of every doubt. I don’t know what the Hispanic family’s behavior was like before I arrived on the scene. There may very well have been probable cause to search them. It was simply the choice to do it as others were blatantly breaking the law which threw me for a loop.

The next night, the beach was crowded with tents, lawn chairs, and blankets as citizens waited for the pyrotechnic extravaganza to come. We claimed our spot at 5pm along the dividing wall between the boardwalk and the beach. Rain spit from the cloud covered sky periodically, forcing us to huddle under blankets. Music from local radio station 94.9, which had set up speakers along the beach, entertained the crowd.

Between music sets, a recording of Police Chief Robert Gross stated, in no uncertain terms, that illegal fireworks would definitely not be tolerated. As this public service announcement filled the airwaves, unsanctioned fireworks were booming on both ends of the beach, decorating the gray clouds, and a group of four young officers nonchalantly made their way into the alley between the Shiloh Inn and the next motel. The smoke from the illegal incendiary devices was eventually thick enough to burn my eyes, forcing them shut.

I’m not against people having fun. I’m not even against allowing illegal fireworks in designated areas, as long as kids and alcohol are kept from those areas. What bothers me is stating something won’t be allowed, then allowing it. There’s no better way to breed contempt for the law than failing to enforce laws which you’ve stated will be upheld. Children witness such contradictions and grow up thinking that laws are merely suggestions which can be disregarded on a whim.

To my knowledge, no physical harm was done that night, other than the junk being left on the beach, by the thoughtless. Broken chairs, beer bottles, and spent rockets gathered sand and laid forgotten, and the candy man assumed his customary post on Broadway & Columbia as visitors headed home. Yet, I can’t help but wonder what it means when people celebrate our nation’s birthday by ignoring her laws?

On a final note, remember the man who witnessed the search with his kids on the 3rd? That witness was none other than Congressman David Wu. I hope he walked away asking the same questions that I have.

Sometimes I'm Slow, But I Get Things Eventually

2010-06-16T16:40:00.000-07:00

-
A month ago, I briefly wrote about the BP oil spill. I said, in a nutshell, the spill had been written about to death, and the higher seafood prices really irked me. Basically, I blew it off as something which was being over hyped by the media. Typically, I’m a pretty bright chap, but I was stupidly ignorant at the time. I just didn’t grasp the scope of the disaster.

Part of my problem was that I was used to oil spills being one time events, which can be cleaned up once they end. I honestly thought the worst was over. I was wrong.

To put things in perspective, let's look at the numbers. To date, this spill has been pumping 2.5 million gallons of oil, per day, into the Gulf of Mexico for fifty-eight days. That’s 145 million gallons of oil so far, covering 580 square miles, with no end in site. According to TREEHUGGER.COM;

14 - The approximate number of Exxon Valdez spills it would take to equal the BP spill.

783 - Number of birds killed by the oil spill so far, according to the Fish & Wildlife Dept.

1% - Percentage of birds that survive long-term after being covered in oil, according to some studies.

353 - Endangered sea turtles killed.

41 - Dolphins and other marine mammals killed.

86 - Number of oil cleanup workers who have gotten sick, as reported by BP.

109 - Number of oil cleanup workers who have gotten sick, as reported by state records.

As for the the 86 sick clean up workers, acknowledged by BP so far. In a report by NBC News, a BP spokesman has been quoted as saying, "the company has tested air quality and has deemed that respirators are not needed under government guidelines." This is interesting, considering cleanup workers can only work for 30 minutes at a time before being overcome by fumes. Some believe that even the 109 figure is an incomplete total.

Last night, President Obama addressed the disaster with an 18 minute speech from the Oval Office.

I think making BP clean up the spill is a great idea. I think making BP set aside enough money to compensate every single person effected by the spill is a great idea. I think designating a third party to determine liability on a case by case basis is a great idea. Now let's see if ANY of it actually happens.

Among liberals, such as myself, Obama has a reputation for talking a good game, but being toothless when it comes to execution. The question now is, will the government being actively implementing these ideas a year from now, or will people be left to fend for themselves, once the news trucks pull away, just like the victims of Katrina? It does no good for a quarterback to call great plays if he keeps dropping the ball.

Mumbo Jumbo Updated

2010-06-15T15:42:00.000-07:00

-
The following is a song from a 60s play, "Stop The World - I Want To Get Off." The song is sung by Littlechap, who's running for the House of Commons, and is meant to mock political speeches which use key phrases amidst the "mumbo jumbo," but actually say nothing. I simply updated it for today's American elections.

Mumbo Jumbo Updated
Littlechap begins to campaign, as the Chorus sings:

Vote for Littlechap! Vote for Littlechap!
Vote for Littlechap! Vote for Littlechap!
For Littlechap!

Girl: Fellow citizens, our speaker for tonight is the Opportunist candidate for this constituency, Mr. Littlechap.

Littlechap sings:

Mumbo Jumbo, rhubarb rhubarb,
Tickety bubarb yak yak yak.
Mumbo jum red white and bluebarb,
Goldman Sach's on it's back.

Mumbo Jumbo, rhubarb rhubarb,
Nothing newbarb cha cha cha.
Mumbo Jumbo BP's spillbarb.
I think someone's gone too far!

Mumbo Jumbo, rhubarb rhubarb,
Voulez-vousbarb avec moi?
Mumbo Jumbo entrez-nousbarb,
Paris Hilton ooh la la!

Girl: Ladies of the Book of the Month Guild, it is my pleasure to introduce the Opportunist candidate for this constituency, Mr. Littlechap!

Mumbo Jumbo, rhubarb rhubarb,
Has Pakistan got the bomb?
Holy cowbarb if it's truebarb,
We'll be blown to kingdom come.

Chorus: You've got a bomb, We've got a bomb, All God's children got bombs.

Mumbo Jumbo, rhubarb rhubarb,
Give Bear Stearns more free cash.
Helps the nation, stops inflation.
How's your mortgage? Wall Street crash.

Chorus: We wanna be rich with money to burn.

Mumbo Jumbo, rhubarb rhubarb,
Housing Market can't go wrong.
APR's sky rocket,
In plans four score long.

Mumbo Jumbo, rhubarb rhubarb,
Here everybody's free.
Give the homobarbs their rights,
Just don't tell the G.O.P!

Mumbo Jumbo, rhubarb rhubarb,
Up your flubarb, City Hall.
And, dear friends, if I'm elected,
I'm all right, Jack--screw you all!

Littlechap wins the election by a landslide.

Health/Medical Fads

2010-06-03T15:26:00.000-07:00

-
Last week, my mother was on the phone with a nurse from her HMO, trying to describe lights she was seeing in one eye. About every forty-five seconds, I’d hear her sigh and say, “No, my eyes are not dry.” The nurse seemed to be eager to recommend drops for Chronic Dry Eye. You’ve undoubtedly seen commercials for these miracle drops, featuring the optometrist with the body of a Bond girl. While the nurse’s stubbornness was annoying, she’s not alone. The tendency to succumb to the latest health/medical fad is hardly a new phenomenon.

Typically, when we talk about fads, we’re talking about fashion, music, movies, books, TV, or the culinary realm. However, medical history is heavily peppered with fads which have dominated the “medical wisdom” of a particular era. I, of course, can’t name them all, but there are a choice few which stick out like sign posts along a desert road.

In the late nineteenth century, companies, such as Bayer, were pumping out concoctions of opium, cocaine, and alcohol to treat pain, sleeplessness, consumption, PMS, menopause, and other ailments of the body. In fact, ladies of means had their daily tonic to help get them through the day. Of course, they needed it to get through the day, they were addicted without realizing it.

The nineteen sixties came along, and overweight people were told that a motorized belt could shake the fat from their bodies. These machines were more silly than harmful, merely jiggling skin and fat around.

Before we pat ourselves on the back for not giving in to such nonsense, we must sadly acknowledge that while this device has disappeared from the market, it's been replaced by two other products. The first is a belt which shocks abdominal muscles in sequence, forcing them to contract. I’m sure that once it’s no longer marketed as a health product, this puppy will have future within the S&M community. The second gem is The Shake Weight, which users are supposed to hold as it vibrates to reduce upper arm flab.

In 1976, the President of Tuft University, Jean Mayer, vilified salt by calling it, “the most dangerous food additive of all.” Doctors made money, for thirty years, by telling people to reduce salt intake in order to avoid high blood pressure and heart attack. Everybody jumped on the bandwagon, marketing low-sodium this and salt free that.

We know now that salt isn’t harmful, unless a person is already hypertensive. In fact, doctors today, even recommend iodized salt be part of one’s diet in order to combat iodine deficiencies resulting in thyroid problems, and to promote circulatory health.

Then came oat bran, which was supposed to lower cholesterol. Food companies were tripping over each other to come up with new oat bran products, add oat bran to existing products, and hype products which already contained oat bran, “Cheerios is the only leading cold cereal clinically proven to lower cholesterol.”

Most of this hype died down once The New England Journal of Medicine funded its own clinical trials and concluded, “oat bran has no special cholesterol lowering benefit.” Yes, if you eat Cheerios/oatmeal and fruit for breakfast instead of bacon and eggs, your cholesterol will, most likely, drop, but it has nothing to do with the properties of the oat bran.

There are way too many fad diets to talk about. It seems like just about anyone can publish a diet book these days. The one that most sticks out as a pop cultural milestone in my mind though, is the low carb craze of early this decade. Everyone was talking about The Atkins Diet and necessity of minimizing dietary carbohydrates in order to lose weight. Low carb products filled grocery stores and restaurants developed Atkins approved menus. Low carb was the weight loss catch phrase of the day.

People found themselves slightly disillusioned however, when Dr. Atkins was purported to be obese (6ft, 258lbs) at the time of his death. Making matters worse, George Stella, host of Food Network’s “Low Carb and Lovin’ It,” kept gaining visible weight from episode to episode, until the show was finally canceled.

Most recently, we’ve been in the midst of a slightly different kind of fad, which isn't a product or lifestyle recommendation, but a marketing strategy. In 1999, the FDA made it legal for pharmaceutical companies to advertise prescription medications directly to consumers. We’ve all seen Bob, the perpetually smiling Enzyte guy, and the aforementioned sexy optometrist peddling Restasis. They’re part of pop culture, along side Tony the Tiger and Ronald McDonald.

Information’s empowering, right? Thanks to these ads, those of us suffering from hair loss, chronic dry eye, incontinence, irritable bowel syndrome, and erectile dysfunction know there’s hope, and that one day we can watch the sunset with our lover from the bathtub on the beach, if only we can get our doctors to prescribe the right drug.

Ah, there’s the rub. These commercials are designed to create consumer desire for particular medications. Thus, patients are going to their doctor, asking for specific prescriptions, based on what they’ve seen on TV. The really scary part comes when a doctor refuses to prescribe a particular drug, for solid medical reasons, so the patient begins “doctor shopping” in order to fill their, commercially created, desire. If we’ve learned anything from the deaths of Elvis and Michael Jackson, it’s the sad fact that eventually anyone, with enough money, can find a doctor who’s willing to prescribe anything a patient wants.

I don’t want people thinking that every recommendation coming from the health/medical community is necessarily a passing fad, which will one day be disproved as goofy. This anti-smoking kick, doctors are on, seems pretty solid, as does the roughage thing, the sun block thing, etc… Lots of good solid pieces of advice and procedures result from medical research. The trick is to remember that the health/medical industry is driven by money, just like any other market. If advice is coming from someone who’s trying to sell a book or product, you may want to take it with a grain of salt.

Writing 24/7

2010-05-29T14:00:00.000-07:00

-
Whether a writer is published or not, people will ask a writer two things over & over again.

1. How does one write?

2. When do you write?

There are multiple classes one can take, and books one can buy, to answer the first question. However the short answer is, know your basic story before you type the first page. Know the beginning, the end, and outline what it’s going to take to get from the beginning to the end. You’ll change the details umpteen times, don’t worry about that. Just know where you’re going and have fun paving the path along the way.

As for things such as voice, point of view, word usage, story flow, chapter structure, and punctuation, make novels, well written blogs, and magazines your text books. Yes, enjoy the works, of course. While you’re enjoying the writing though, pay attention to how chapters begin and end, pay attention to the descriptive words being used to paint mental pictures, pay attention to punctuation, and pay attention to the way the writing flows from one idea/scene to another.

Now, when do writers write? The answer is, we’re writing 24/7. Sitting at the computer/typewriter/pad & pen is merely the last step in the writing process. A good writer is constantly observing life, making mental notes, and refining ideas.

When you’re riding the bus and the lady, who’s telling you the CIA has put Jesus’ brain inside a robot, inspires a character, you’re writing.

When you’re strolling through the mall, while mentally reconstructing paragraphs, you’re writing.

When you’re reading the work of another author, and learning the craft, you’re writing.

When you’re lying awake at three in the morning, trying to figure out what will motivate your character to open the closet door and find the body, you’re writing.

When you’re talking to your mother about a nurse, who was intent on diagnosing her with the newest medical fad, and you say, “Medical fads would make an interesting blog,” you’re writing. (Side note: Once I do some research, medical fads will probably be my next blog.)

Some of my best poems were mentally composed during long strolls around town, and were typed when I got home. While the act of typing recorded the works, the strolls themselves were integral parts of the writing process. Even nocturnal dreams can serve as key pieces of inspiration.

Of course, one eventually has to stop strolling through the mall, sit at a desk, an record the mental compositions of the day.

Odds & Ends

2010-05-19T16:08:00.000-07:00

-
When one gets sick, motivation to do anything, except watch TV & Youtube, pretty much abandons a person. I'm just beginning to feel like myself again, so I thought I'd write a blog in order to get my writing juices flowing again. However, the topics on my mind have either been done to death by the media already, or wouldn't be enough fill a page. Thus, I'm taking a page from my friend, Alizabeth's, playbook by touching on a few unrelated topics.
-
We all know, of course, about the run away oil gusher of the coast of New Orleans. Whether or not BP is liable, or the government failed to inspect things before issuing licenses are topics I'll gladly leave to CNN & MSNBC. It's the opportunistic gouging that bothers me. Yes, the polluted environment thing bothers me too, but it's the price gouging that will effect the greatest number of Americans. While seafood from the Gulf region makes up 2 percent of seafood on the American market, prices are predicted to sky rocket over the next year in response to the oil disaster. A 2 percent loss does not a shortage make.
-
I could regurgitate a thousand other editorials, and express my outrage over Arizona's migration law. Why bother though? I mean really, the first time a Hispanic citizen is hauled in for jogging without carrying I.D., the courts are going to strike this thing down. It can't last.

Keep in mind though, people don't go overboard while trying to solve nonexistent problems. Illegal immigration is a criminal act, which needs to be curtailed. We simply have to find a way to address the problem without infringing on the rights of legal citizens of any race.
-
Obama's administration has come out in support of legislation which would make it legal to arrest & question "terror suspects" without reading them their rights. I'm a huge supporter of law enforcement, but come on people. Really? If I rob Safeway with a shot gun and scare, or terrorize, everyone in the store, does the newly proposed law apply to me? No? Are you sure? OK, what if the suspect of the robbery is from Pakistan and his third cousin belongs to Al-Qaeda? What then?
-
Finally, on a note closer to home, I must confess to being somewhat lazy. Portland is a food Mecca, boasting more chefs per capita than any other American city. Yet, when I eat out, I go to The Olive Garden and Red Robin. I need to hit some quality places as long as I'm living here. Thus, I've added the following list to my bucket list.

Restaurants I Want To Try
Hillsboro:
Helvetia Tavern - 10275 NW Helvetia Rd.
Portland:
Ringside - 2165 W Burnside
Voodoo Donuts - 22 SW 3rd Ave.
Salvador Molly’s - 1523 SW Sunset Blvd.
Ringside - 2165 W Burnside
Blueplate - 308 SW Washington
Bunk Sandwiches - 621 SE Morrison
Pause Kitchen & Bar - 5101 North Interstate Ave.
Russell Street BBQ - 325 NE Russell St.
Seattle:
Mike’s Chile Parlor - 1447 North Ballard Way
Salumi Artisan Cured Meats - 309 3rd Ave S (butcher shop)

You'll notice none of these are 5 star dining places, but rather are places I've heard of which supposedly have exceptionally good every day food. In fact, I'm ashamed to admit, I wouldn't know about a few of these places if not for Food Network, and I've lived here for 40 years.

Common Sense

2010-05-02T13:57:00.000-07:00

-
I often tell people, with tongue in cheek, “I blog therefore I am.” While I’m jokingly paraphrasing Descartes, there is some truth to the statement. Being someone who thinks about a variety of issues, and not being an ideal public speaker, blogging is my best way of expressing such thoughts without having to sell a publisher on each idea. Lately, people have debated whether freedom of the press applies to blogs.

According to The Criminal Justice Program at Lincoln University, "The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, says that ‘Congress shall make no law....abridging (limiting) the freedom of speech, or of the press…’ Freedom of speech is the liberty to speak openly without fear of government restraint. It is closely linked to freedom of the press because this freedom includes both the right to speak and the right to be heard. In the United States, both the freedom of speech and freedom of press are commonly called freedom of expression.

The First Amendment's protection of speech and expression is central to the concept of American democracy. The core purpose of the freedom of speech is self-governance: enabling people to obtain information from a diversity of sources, make decisions, and communicate those decisions to the government. Beyond the political purpose of free speech, the First Amendment provides American people with a ‘marketplace of ideas.’ Rather than having the government establish and dictate the truth, freedom of speech enables the truth to emerge from diverse opinions."

In other words, the amendment is designed to protect the free flow of thoughts, ideas, and information. Surely, this has to apply to the digital flow as well as the printed flow. Critics argue, freedom of the press doesn’t apply to blogs because bloggers aren’t professional journalists.

I’d remind such critics, Physician John Locke’s “Two Treaties of Government” outlined, for the first time, the natural rights of man, which laid the ground work for the American revolution eighty-some years later. Thomas Paine, failed tobacconist turned journalist, wrote “Common Sense,” an independently published pamphlet calling for revolution. New York farmer, J. Hector St. John de Crèvecœur, wrote a series of “letters” to the inhabitants of Europe, describing American life and defining American ideals.

What is a blog, if not a letter to a mass audience? If I print the blog and distribute copies, isn’t that a pamphlet? It’s not hard at all to imagine that if computers had existed back then, that such works would have been blogs. Paine, Locke, and Crèvecœur were the bloggers of their day. These were thinkers writing works which challenged standard schools of thought. Unfortunately, Paine and Locke were forced to write their works anonymously to keep from being arrested. It was exactly these kinds of writers which the freedom of the press was designed to protect.

Of course, there were no computers back then, the abacus aside, nor could they have possibly conceived of, what amounts to, a printing press in every home. However, they also had no vision of TV or radio news, both of which are considered legitimate sources of journalism.

The best argument against bloggers being considered as members of the press is that a blogger can write anything regardless of the facts. I agree, there’s a heap of misinformation out there posing as fact. Bloggers, if they are to be taken seriously, must adhere to standards by refraining from committing liable and spreading unsubstantiated rumor as fact. However, one only needs to watch Fox News to see that a willingness to skew the truth, in itself, does not disqualify a source from being a member of the press.

The difference between Glen Beck and most bloggers is the fact that most bloggers don’t have a corporation to answer to. I submit, it was independent sources of news, commentary, and ideas which the founding fathers most intended to protect with the first amendment. Thus, they must be considered as members of the press. It's just common sense.

Keep The Wine Flowing

2010-04-28T13:53:00.000-07:00

-
Crafted by the National Beer Wholesalers' Association, H.R. 5034 was introduced April 15th by of representatives from Massachusetts, North Carolina, Illinois and Utah. The law, if passed, would make direct online sales of wine & spirits illegal. Thus, buyers would be limited to whatever wholesalers provide to local wine shops. The justification for the proposed legislation is the idea that the law would make it harder for minors to buy alcohol. (See the bill's text here.)

Please! Anyone who thinks this is an attempt to curb teen drinking needs to be neutered before they lower the average IQ of the gene pool. When alcohol is ordered online, the UPS guy (mail man, FedEx guy, etc…) must take it to the door and hand it to somebody displaying I.D. which proves they are of legal drinking age. These legal safe guards are already in place.

The sole purpose of this bill is to give wholesalers a virtual monopoly on wine sales. That’s it. This means, if a consumer wants a particular wine they’ll have to ask their local retailer to order it through his/her wholesaler. If that wholesaler can’t get the particular wine the consumer will simply be out of luck. Wine clubs, which ship wines of the month to members, will be gone as well.

Personally, I enjoy going to a wine shop, sampling a few selections, and taking my prize home without paying for shipping. While I don’t buy wines online, shoppers such as myself will be hurt by the proposed law as well in two very key ways. First, without having to compete with direct sales, wholesalers, and thus retailers, will be able to raise prices across the board. Secondly, and far more disastrously, this law WILL limit variety in the market place.

Small artisan wineries, make as much as 40% of their income from direct online sales. If that market closes, many wineries will be forced out of business. Buyers will be left with a selection of big name corporate wines to choose from, but many hand crafted mom & pop labels will simply disappear from shelves.

Write your lawmakers and urge them to vote against the wholesalers’ monopoly of wine sales. Concerned citizens can also join the Facebook group "Stop HR5034."

The Internet

2010-04-07T14:41:00.000-07:00

-
A few people I know, or know of, have written pieces lately about the internet and internet culture. First, John Green talked about the fact his line, “What is the point of being alive if you don't at least try to do something remarkable?” from his novel, “An Abundance Of Katherines,” has been tweeted more than ten thousand times. While tweeters use it as an inspirational idea, in the book it was supposed to be a concept the protagonist learned was flawed over the course of the story. John attributes quotes being taken out of context to a “twittery world.” In other words, Twitter, and other micro-blogs such as Facebook status statements, have lead to readers quoting material in ways it wasn’t intended by the author.

A short time later, my good friend, Colleen Lacey, wrote a blog addressing the fact that people keep blaming the internet for their own stupidity. She wrote, “I hear all the time, ‘Facebook caused this and FB caused that, and Facebook gets people into trouble, etc etc…’ It has nothing to do with the site itself, it is the people who use it, that don't know how to use it properly. If you post pictures of the night before, which you didn't want people to see, then you should not have posted any at all (or mark them private or friends only...sometimes that doesn't help, but still).”

I thought about these two pieces, and I came to a few conclusions of my own. First of all, while I agree with 85% of what John Green says over all, Twitter has nothing to do with the cause of quoting literary material out of context. Twitter may be another forum for such misquotes, but we’ve been doing it for hundreds, even thousands, of years.

When kids are first learning about money and the value of money, parents often site the quote from Hamlet, “Neither a borrower nor a lender be.” They’re using the line as a time honored piece of good advice, warning their kids not to go into debt or loan money to their friends. However, Shakespeare never intended this advice to be taken to heart by the audience/readers. He gave the line to Polonius, who was essentially the first literary version of Cliff Clavin, a guy who spouted half baked advice to make himself feel smart and draw attention to himself.

This brings me back to Colleen’s point. If we can’t blame Twitter for such literary misunderstandings, surely we can’t blame the internet for acts of stupidity or the unfortunate results of those acts. Think of the internet as a single huge city. You have stores, clubs, news outlets, public forums, and even a huge red light district. Now think of social sites as the city’s bars and nightclubs. If a woman enters a bar and leaves with a guy she just met, something bad is probably going to happen. Likewise, if such a lady meets a guy online and agrees to meet him right away, the same bad thing can happen. One can’t blame the site anymore than one can blame the bar.

Of course, just as in a physical city, a person can use common sense and still get snake bit. I ordered flowers for my mother for Easter from FTD, normally a reputable site, and got a bunch of wilted flowers and a vase which couldn't possibly hold them. However, people get ripped off in the real world too. In fact, because I spoke up right after they were delivered, I got my money back, just as if I’d caught the problem on the way out of the flower shop’s door. Thus, my point stands. The internet is no more or less safe than the physical world, it’s simply a different medium for us to do what we’ve been doing since time began. The trick is to be as careful online as you would be downtown.

Private Information, Yeah Right, Tell Me Another One Bub

2010-03-29T14:29:00.000-07:00

-
Recently, I wrote about the inaccuracy of websites which fail to update outdated data. I found such laziness to be annoying. Little did I realize, just how big, or how frightening, the problem actually was. A few days ago, my friend, Sarah, alerted me to a site called spokeo.com, where surfers can look up stats on other people. For free, users can view a person’s postal address, marital status, hobbies and interests, income level, neighborhood stats, and a picture of their home. Plus, for $2.95 a month, surfers can access even more detailed data about a person including their financial credibility.

If that’s not enough to give somebody the screaming willies, making matters worse is the fact that much of the information is wrong. I looked my name up to find I have “some college,” implying I didn't graduate, I've only lived in my current home for 12 years, and that I play baseball as a hobby. Even if you only count the time I’ve lived in my current home since graduating from Oregon State University, I’ve lived in my current home since 1994. Of course, people who know me, know the idea of me playing baseball is downright laughable.

The site also claims that my brother, Jeff, has kids, and my friend, Sarah, lives at her office. OK, a case can be made for saying Sarah lives in her office. Still, I think Jeff would be dismayed to see offspring being attributed to his loins.

Fortunately, there is a way to delete one’s info, by going to http://www.spokeo.com/privacy and following the directions. The deletion is instantaneous. I was just feeling relieved about having deleted my info, when my friend, Leasa, directed me to a similar site, pipl.com. It was then I realized just how wide spread this thing is.

I went to Google, typed “people search,” and found 370,000,000 results. While many of these sites probably aren’t as detailed as the sites I’ve mentioned, numerous sites boast the ability to list unlisted phone numbers, access court records, and/or run credit checks on anyone. With so many sites offering such services, it’s impossible for a person to remove themselves from every single site, even if said person kept at it 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, year ‘round.

Forget Big Brother. Now, any brother, sister, cousin twice removed, or complete stranger with an internet connection can learn practically anything about anyone. I don’t know what’s creepier, the fact that personal information can be accessed with a click of a mouse, or the fact that there seems to be no system in place to fact check said information.

Not Everything On The Internet Is Accurate

2010-03-24T10:53:00.000-07:00

-
Yes, it’s true, not everything on the internet is accurate. I know, I can hear the collective, “WELL DUH,” I just got in response to that statement. However, before you write me off as a John Madden-esc conveyor of the stupidly obvious, I’m not referring to online rumors which question Obama’s citizenship, warn us of death panels, or outline alien conspiracies lead by Hillary Clinton who’s actually an extraterrestrial reptile in disguise. Intelligent people can shrug off such nonsense as being the ravings of lunatics who thought The X-Files was a wonderful series of docudramas. No, I’m talking about businesses/organizations which don’t update their websites.

Anyone who knows me, and even some folks who don’t, knows I’m sending out proposals, hoping to get my book published. It’s, more or less, the defining fact of my existence, other than being a remarkably virile specimen of manhood that is. Anyway, when approaching publishers with new work, writers go to The Writer’s Market online, compile a list of publishers who accept a particular kind of work, visit each publisher’s site to obtain their submission packet guidelines, and begin mailing out packets. So far, I’ve received half my packets back, marked return to sender, from publishers who’ve gone out of business without mentioning it on their sites.

If the waste of postage isn’t irksome enough, my nurse & friend, Dani, just drove downtown to visit an abandoned museum/church. She’s a huge Elvis fan, and I had heard of The 24 Hour Church Of Elvis, so I looked it up and found http://www.24hourchurchofelvis.com/. On the very top of webpage it says, “408 N.W. Couch The new location for the 24 Hour Church of Elvis!!” in big blue letters. The site advertises movies visitors can watch, souvenirs one can buy, etc… So she packed her family in the car, drove downtown, paid six bucks to park, and found a single window displaying a cardboard cutout of Elvis surrounded by Barbie dolls. Next to the window is a coin slot and a hole in the wall, where visitors can watch a minute long movie for $.50. That’s it, no museum of Elvis memorabilia, no experts to answer questions about his life or the church’s defining philosophy, no gift shop, just a window of disturbing imagery and a hole in a wall.

It’s not the wasted postage or the six bucks blown on parking that bothers me most, although those things do irk me. What really bothers me is the laziness and sloppiness which contributes to outdated information being left for people to find and act upon. These are tough economic times, businesses fold, I get it. However, it takes five minutes to update a website to keep people from wasting their time. Get it together people.

Taking Personal Responsibility

2010-03-21T12:27:00.000-07:00

-
Psychologist Sarah Allen Benton, has written a blog attacking the availability and perception of wine, because alcoholics feel forced to drink. In response, Steve Heimoff has written a blog arguing that self control is the real issue. Yes, Like Steve, I agree with Benton that some people suffer under the mistaken impression that wine is less of an alcoholic substance than beer or liquor. Of course, that's wrong. One can get blitzed on wine, just like one can get blitzed on scotch, gin, or beer.

What bothers me, and what Steve failed to address, is the trend of trying to regulate things, simply because those things may cause problems for some people. We've banned the importation of unpasteurized cheese, many states have banned gambling & public smoking, New York City has even banned trans fats in restaurant food. Where does it end?

Sadly, there ARE alcoholics in the world, and tempting alcoholics with wine is just plain immoral. Personally, I have a hard time picturing adults trying to pressure alcoholic friends and family members to drink at social events. If such behavior is in fact happening, beyond the ninth grade level, as Benton claims, such behavior belongs high up in the @$$hole category along with teasing drug addicts with crack. Yet, the taunting of alcoholics, by moral cripples, is still no reason to legislate access to wine for the rest us. I want to be free to play poker at my local bar while downing a triple cheeseburger, fries, onion rings, and a hunk of French Brie. I want to be free to wash it all down with a good bottle of wine as thick smoke hangs over the table like a cloud.

Not every harmful substance/activity should be banned, and not every bad idea should be illegal. Trying to legislate morality, or even common sense, is not only futile, it's counter productive. Half your population is going to turn to organized crime to get their fix of whatever it was you banned, and the other half will be molded into high fiber eating conformist robots who can no longer think for themselves. Instead of making laws, how about pumping money into education, so folks can make informed decisions about how to spend their Saturday nights and what to put into their bodies?

Better yet, how about taking personal responsibility for our actions, and accepting the consequences, instead of having big brother dictate every little piece of the puzzle? And, if you do have a problem with, alcohol, gambling, or cholesterol, how about surrounding yourself with people who are going to encourage you to do the right thing, instead of tempting you with the substance/activity you’re trying to avoid?

Being Well Watched

2010-03-09T16:20:00.000-08:00

-
The 82nd Annual Academy Awards were held last Sunday. Among the winners were:

Best Motion Picture of the Year
Winner: The Hurt Locker - Kathryn Bigelow, Mark Boal, Nicolas Chartier, Greg Shapiro

Best Achievement in Directing
Winner: Kathryn Bigelow for The Hurt Locker

Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role
Winner: Sandra Bullock for The Blind Side

Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role
Winner: Jeff Bridges for Crazy Heart

Best Foreign Language Film of the Year
Winner: El secreto de sus ojos (Argentina)

Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role
Winner: Christoph Waltz for Inglourious Basterds

Best Animated Feature Film of the Year
Winner: Up - Pete Docter

Best Achievement in Music Written for Motion Pictures, Original [^] Song
Winner: Crazy Heart - T-Bone Burnett, Ryan Bingham(“The Weary Kind”)

Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen
Winner: The Hurt Locker - Mark Boal

Best Short Film, Animated
Winner: Logorama – Nicolas Schmerkin

Best Documentary, Short Subjects
Winner: Music by Prudence – Roger Ross Williams, Elinor Burkett

Best Documentary, Features
Winner: The Cove (2009) – Louie Psihoyos, Fisher Stevens

Best Short Film, Live Action
Winner: The New Tenants – Joachim Back, Tivi Magnusson

Best Achievement in Makeup
Winner: Star Trek – Barney Burman, Mindy Hall, Joel Harlow

Best Writing, Screenplay Based on Material Previously Produced or Published
Winner: Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire – Geoffrey Fletcher

Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role
Winner: Mo’Nique for Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire

Best Achievement in Art Direction
Winner: Avatar – Rick Carter, Robert Stromberg, Kim Sinclair

I’d seen Avatar, Up, Inglourious Basterds, and Star Trek, plus I kinda knew what The Blind Side was, but that’s it. I was embarrassed not to have been more familiar with films which were being touted as the best. I can’t feel too bad about not being familiar with the short films, documentaries, and foreign offerings. Unless, one lives in New York, or a college town, it’s pretty hard to be exposed to such fair. Still, I must admit that Hank Green, a video blogger whom I follow, recommended The Cove months ago, and I pretty much shrugged it off.

So what? After all, the academy has praised some real stinkers in the past. I still can’t watch Harvey Keitel in a movie without having flashbacks of his free willy from 1993’s, multiple Oscar winner, The Piano. And, don’t even get me started on American Beauty. Yet, for a guy who listens to Fresh Air & Writers’ Almanac, keeps up on the news, a prides himself on his academic prowess, it feels weird to have to admit that films such as The Hurt Locker, Crazy Heart, and Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire weren’t even on my RADAR, man.

I consider myself to be a pretty well read guy. OK, I could stand to brush up on my Melville and Hemingway, but, for the most part, I’m familiar with many of the classics and a good share of contemporary fiction. However, in a day of multiplexes, straight to DVD releases, independent films, and original web content, perhaps being well watched is as important as being well read. To that end, I’ve added the Oscar winners, including 2007's Juno, to my Netflix queue, and I plan to see such movies as The Green Zone and The Ghost Writer when they hit theaters. Will such an endeavor help make me more well rounded as a writer and a person? Hell, I don’t know, but it’s a question worth exploring.

The Marriage Ref Penalizes Intelligent Viewers

2010-03-06T14:48:00.000-08:00

-
I must begin by confessing to a general bias against, what has come to be known as, reality TV. Most of it is centered around seeing who can back stab whom in order to further their own interest. If back stabbing people to achieve one’s goals is a reflection some people’s reality, those people probably aren’t living a healthy life style. There are reality shows though, which focus on finding talented individuals, which is a laudable goal. However, in addition to seeing top notch talent, viewers tune in to see untalented buffoons make asses of themselves, and the interplay between the nice judges and rude judges.

Like everyone else, I heard Jerry Seinfeld was creating and producing a new reality series. Being a big Jerry Seinfeld fan, I decided to put aside my general distaste for reality TV and give The Marriage Ref a shot. The premise of the show involves real life couples who have been having an on-going fight for a long time. A video clip is shown to the three-member celebrity panel, showing both sides of the argument. The celebrity panel, made up of comedians, actors, and pop stars, then make jokes under the guise of, "discussing the merits of each side of the argument." Then the panel votes on who they think is right. While the Marriage Ref, Tom Papa, may take their advice, he is free to make up his own mind about who is right, and he announces a winner of the argument.

The first, regularly scheduled, episode began with Paula's gripe about her husband, Joe, a retired Passaic County cop, spending so much time grooming himself that she has to do all the yard work and take the kids to their games, which he won't attend anyway because there are bugs. The panel of Tina Fey, Jerry Seinfeld, and some Desperate Housewives actress made Jr. High School level jokes for a few minutes, then advised The Marriage Ref that cleanliness is good, so the husband was justified in practically living at the salon, at the expense of his family. The Marriage Ref agreed.

I couldn't bear to watch another minute of this shallow minded tripe. OK, Joe’s propensities for getting manicures, pedicures, waxings, hair stylings, and tanning touched on the feminine side of the behavioral spectrum. In fact, he referred to himself as a metro sexual. Thus, I can kinda see celebs leaning his way out of fear of being labeled as homophobic. I get that. However, the core issue wasn’t feminine versus masculine leanings. It wasn’t even about cleanliness. The issue boiled down to selfishness. Primping to the extreme extent he did took it from being about grooming to being a hobby. Joe, putting his hobby before the needs of his family, demonstrated a gross level of selfishness on his part. The fact that nobody on the show was smart enough to recognize the fundamental issue, only proves how unqualified they are to be diagnosing people’s problems.

Now let’s be fair, The Marriage Ref is a comedy show, first and foremost. If you want to gawk at losers so you can talk about them around the water cooler at work, you’ll get a few sophomoric chuckles from this show. However, if your sense of humor, intellect, and moral sensibilities have evolved beyond those of a fifteen year old, I strongly suspect you’ll be offended at the reduction of people’s problems into a string of juvenile one liners topped off with a helping of super shallow advice.

The Evolution Of Language

2010-02-24T15:39:00.000-08:00

-
One of the many podcasts I listen to is Fresh Air, for its insightful spins on current events and the arts. Today’s podcast ended with Geoff Nunberg's commentary on linguistic pet peeves, mostly stemming from a relaxation grammatical rules and definitions.

Nunberg's piece states, "…Kingsley Amis held that it was incorrect to use 'pristine' to mean pure rather than 'original,' and that you shouldn't say, 'I was oblivious to the noise,' since 'oblivious' can only mean 'forgetful.' And in a usage book he published a few years ago, Bill Bryson contended that it was wrong to use 'expectorate' as a synonym for spit, since it really means to cough up phlegm from the chest. The word did originally mean that, but it's been used to mean spit since Dickens' day. And Bryson knows perfectly well that it would be unreasonable to insist on the original meaning..."

Essentially, he's saying that, through common usage, words are being used to mean things which they originally didn't mean, but because the misuses are so common, they're accepted as correct parts of language. I must confess, there are two such misuses which drive me batty, to the point that my friends and family, having been subjected to these particular rants much too often, change the subject whenever I bring them up.

The first of these involves people asking if a particular fruit or vegetable is, "organic." The word organic means a thing is carbon based and was alive at some point. Thus, asking, "Is that apple organic?" is the same as asking if the apple is real or made of plastic. What such people are trying to ask is whether or not the apple was grown using the chemical free organic method. However, since that's a mouth full, they've shortened the question, and have bestowed a second meaning onto what once was a scientifically precise term.

The second peeve of mine is much more baffling to me. The word, "decadent," originally referred to something or someone which was physically or morally decayed and rotten. Somehow, we've begun to use the term to refer to rich delicious foods and other luxuries. The only thing I can figure is that deep down we believe such luxuries are sinful, and thus we're being somehow evil, or decadent, by partaking in such things. If so, this is disturbing on more levels than I'm qualified to identify or address.

When someone asks if an apple is organic, unless it is plastic, I'm always tempted to say yes. When someone offers me a decadent dessert, I'm always tempted to ask for something fresh instead. I'd be a jerk for doing either though, because common usage has expanded the meanings of both words. In fact, common usage is constantly changing grammatical rules and patterns.

Very few, if any, of us know how to correctly alternate between "who" and "whom." Even writers who know how to use "whom" correctly, can no longer write dialogue using the word without having their characters come across as phony, or overly highbrow, simply because it has been all but expunged from our vocabulary.

As a whole, we’ve pretty well accepted the notion that punctuation is, for some reason, unnecessary within emails, text messages, and tweets. We don’t even need to be able to spell, when using these types of communication, since most phrases are abbreviated. A “bff” is a best friend forever. When a texter has to use the bathroom, they type “brb” to let fellow texters know they’ll be right back.

With these forms of communication becoming ever more common place, I’m forced to wonder how our language will evolve in the future. Will such things as commas, apostrophes, and capital letters at the beginning of sentences fall by the same wayside as “thee,” “thou,” and “whom?” Someday, will there be a best selling novel in which the protagonist’s bff will brb? Personally, I hope not, but we’ll see.

The Accountibility Of An Athlete

2010-02-19T10:33:00.000-08:00

-
A few weeks ago, I wrote about Greg Oden's apology over nude pictures he sent to his girlfriend. I maintained that, while what he did was kinky, he hadn't really done anything which required him to apologize to the public. A few hours ago, Tiger Woods delivered a 14 minute apology to the public (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs8nseNP4s0).

HE did do something wrong by cheating on his wife. However, while he owes an apology to his wife and family, probably a series of groveling apologies actually, I'm not completely convinced he owed one to the public. I think he was brave for doing it, and I applaud him for doing so. Yet, we need to over come this idea that sports figures OWE us a certain standard of moral behavior.

When we buy a ticket to a sporting event, we have a right to expect the athletes involved to play the game in question to the best of their ability in order to entertain us. That's it, that's what our ticket gets us. It doesn't give us a license to police their bedrooms.

Before you say, "Well, the old time athletes held themselves to a higher standard," think again. Babe Ruth ran naked through a train chasing a naked lover. Reporters who were on the train never mentioned it, because it had nothing to do with the game.

Some claim athletes are held to a higher standard because they endorse products. Are people really buying energy drinks and shoes based on the sexual/moral habits of the athlete in the commercial? It's more likely, not necessarily more reasonable, that people buy certain shoes and energy drinks with the hope of mimicking the athletic prowess of the particular athlete.

Let me stop a minute to qualify what I'm saying. If an athlete's caught breaking criminal laws such as participating in animal fights, brandishing guns in the locker room, dealing drugs, etc... such players need to be held criminally liable and possibly be banned from their sport. If a player is caught taking performance enhancing drugs or making book on sports such players should be banned from their sport. I simply don't see why athletes need to be held publicly accountable for personal choices.

End Note - I just want to make a quick comment regarding the way some people have labeled Tiger's apology as "insincere," simply because he read a written statement. Of course, he pre-wrote his statement, of course he did. This was an incredibly emotional issue for him to address, and he didn't want to be up there fumbling through his thoughts like some drooling idiot. Having written his statement before hand isn't a sign of insincerity, it's a sign that he's smart.

Autumn Afternoon

2010-02-16T11:58:00.000-08:00

-
I wrote this poem 2 or 3 years ago, was reading it again today, and felt like posting it.

Autumn Afternoon

My window frames a melancholy portrait of nature’s slumber,
Reminiscent more of Hollywood’s Halloween than of an impending Thanksgiving.
Stark gray clouds bleakly decorate the early afternoon sky,
Which hangs ominously above skeletons of dark and sleeping trees.
Their lonely naked perches extend sharply in every possible direction,
Stabbing and jabbing at the frigid air embracing them.
Leaves, once rich reds and golds, now shades of auburn,
Dart furiously within wintry wind, as if late for their final resting place.
Thickly stuffed coats are pulled up over hunkering earlobes,
Protecting pedestrians from the heavens’ promise of liquid bombardment.
Warm in my window, I soak in the drama and reflect.
Does the squirrel, foraging for deposits of acorns and filberts,
Know the sun will one day re-warm the earth beneath him?
Or, does he simply accept what comes,
Free of giddy expectation and bitter disappointment?