Haiwee: politics, environment and the outdoors

Baby Einstein Snake Oil

2009-10-27T07:03:00.000-07:00

So it turns out all those Baby Einstein videos we parents have been showing our infants aren't the panacea we thought them to be. New studies show that children under the age of two should not be watching any video at all, and certainly not those inane puppets set to Mozart and brought to us by the fine folks at Disney. Turns out the videos might even lead to a worsened attention span as children reach school age. Doh!

Threatened by the possibility of a class action lawsuit brought by a group called Campaign For a Commercial-free Childhood, Disney is now offering refunds to parents who have purchased these videos in droves. Parents must be apoplectic, wondering if they have ruined their child's life by force-feeding to them sock puppets set to classical music. What's next? Will studies show that those mechanical mobiles we hung over their crib gives them vertigo? Does allowing them to have a binky make them overly dependent? What is a parent to do?

All I can say is that the one person laughing all the way to the bank is the lady who first thought up the Baby Einstein idea and then sold it to Disney for millions. And for all the parents out there wringing their hands, all I can say is if it's too good to be true, it probably is.

NFL To Rush: No Thanks

2009-10-15T10:36:00.000-07:00

I wrote the other day about Rush Limbaugh's bid to become part owner of my beloved Rams. The next day Dave Checketts, owner of the St. Louis Blues hockey franchise and head of the prospective ownership group, unceremoniously dropped Limbaugh from the group. The hue and cry from fans, active players, NFL Commissioner Goodell, and other owners about Limbaugh's involvement had risen to a fever pitch, and Checketts really had no choice.

What I find interesting about the whole matter is Rush's predictable response. He seems to think this is another example of the "liberal media" and liberals attacking the conservative movement. He thinks some sort of liberal miasma is somehow seeping into the NFL.

On his radio show yesterday, Limbaugh called the NFL "a collection of unhappy, angry, agitated people." He went further, saying "Obama's America is quite possibly going to include the National Football League, and pressure from Obama, the Congressional Black Caucus and other places might be brought to bear on the owners."

Sorry to be the one to point this out Rush, but NFL owners are quite possibly the most conservative collection of men in America. They broadcast their games on Fox Sports, for crying out loud, not exactly a shining example of American liberalism, if you catch my drift.

No, Rush, I don't think the NFL is rife with liberals. In fact, the very reason NFL owners dumped you is their extreme conservatism. They are straight-laced and careful by nature. They don't want anybody rocking the boat. Commentators joke that NFL stands for "No Fun League."

Indeed, Rush, I think most of us see this entire episode for what it is: a shameless attempt to boost your ratings during October sweeps nothing more, nothing less. Go back to your radio show, preaching your vile, racist rants to the converted.

Rush Limbaugh Is a Big Fat . . . NFL Owner?

2009-10-11T08:30:00.000-07:00

As a card-carrying self-avowed liberal as well as long standing Rams fan, I was naturally aghast at the news noted fat blowhard (and Hillbilly Heroin addict) Rush Limbaugh is heading a prospective ownership group trying to buy the Rams.

Good God. Haven't we Rams fans suffered enough? The Rams this year, quite possibly, are fielding the worst NFL team in history. We have no hope of winning, our players merely trying to get out of the stadium each Sunday with a modicum of dignity still intact. The Vikings, whom we play today, are averaging more points per game than we've scored all season. Moreover, other than that short, glorious period when we were known as The Greatest Show On Turf, the Rams have been the laughingstock of the league for over two decades.

Much of that ineptitude, of course, sprang from the wretched ownership of one Georgia Frontiere. Through her penny-pinching ways and inability -- or unwillingness -- to hire good football people to run the team she oversaw a franchise truly remarkable in its ineptitude. Indeed, the Rams are just 5 - 31 since the beginning of the 2007 season. I doubt we could beat USC.

But Frontiere died in January 2008, thereby giving the Ram's legion of long-suffering fans reason for hope. Her children, Chip Rosenbloom and Lucia Rodriguez, inherited controlling interest in the team. They proceeded to shock Ram's fans everywhere by actually hiring experienced football people to remake the front office. Then they lured respected defensive coordinator Steve Spagnuolo away from the Giants to run the team. Spagnuolo cut a lot of dead weight and came up with a respectable first college draft. Yeah, we're still awful, but we're one of the youngest teams in the league, and the guys are playing hard; for the first time in years there seems to be light at the end of the tunnel.

Alas, it appears that light is an oncoming train in the form of Mr. Limbaugh, a fat, reactionary racist who has been paid far too much money to spew his mindless venom over the airwaves all these years. We have a tough time attracting free agents as it is, yet dozens of players have already said they would never consider playing for a team with Limbaugh as owner.

And what of the fans? Could I in good conscience continue to support a team with Mr. Hillbilly Heroin as its titular leader? Politically, I am diametrically opposed to everything for which this soulless man stands. The thought of rooting for this Neanderthal to succeed in anything fills me with a self-loathing that makes my physically ill. Please Mr. Commissioner Goodell, tell me it's not so. Tell me you won't let this happen. Is it too late for me to become a Charger's fan?

2009-09-24T15:16:00.000-07:00

So I went to my thirtieth high school reunion last Saturday. The good news is that I got to laugh at all the guys with whom I went to school who got fat. The bad news is that they got to laugh at me for losing my hair.

In all seriousness, I had a great time. Facebook may be great for reconnecting with old friends and flames, but nothing beats personal contact. The only problem was that the music was too damned loud. I could hardly converse with anyone, and because the shindig was in the low desert near Palm Springs it was too damned hot (even at 10:00 P.M.), to go outside to talk.

I've aged so much the only people who recognized me were friends with whom I've stayed close and people who know me on Facebook (in fact, even a couple of Facebook friends couldn't figure out who I was without reading my name-tag). I found that a tad disconcerting -- after all, I recognized almost everybody, but then I'm a salesman by trade and have learned to read and recognize people.

I think a total of fourteen of my classmates had died (their names and photos on an "In Memoriam" board at the front of the ballroom). I suspect quite a few more of us will be on that board in ten years -- hopefully I won't be one of them.

We Have a New Dove Hunter Among Us

2009-09-11T08:42:00.000-07:00

So I just got back from my annual Arizona dove hunt. My eight-year old son joined us for the first time, and, I must say, the apple certainly hasn't fallen far from the tree.

I was a bit worried about taking him. No other children would be there, so he'd have nobody with whom to play. It usually takes us about an hour or so to get our limits; the remainder of our days are filled with naps, beer drinking and lounging around the pool, not exactly fun and games to a tow-headed energetic young man. I waited with a sense of dread for the three words every parent hates to hear: Daddy, I'm bored.

The words were never uttered. Turns out he enjoyed every aspect of the hunt. The first morning he squealed with glee when I knocked down my first bird. He marveled at the dog's amazing ability to locate birds, and was awed when she tracked down a fluttering cripple. He liked helping us clean the doves, and was surprised by the kick of the old 20 gauge single-shot Stevens we let him shoot. He swam for hours, played cards and Yahtzee, and just hung out with us. He seemed pleased we accepted him as one of us, an equal, one of the guys.

I had him call his Mom Monday afternoon. He told her his favorite part was cleaning the doves. "I could see their intestines and heart and lungs, and got blood all over my hands," he said (probably a little more information than his Mom needed). He told her about the beer cans he obliterated with the 20 gauge (his Mom was not pleased, thinking him too young to be handling a gun). He said he really liked eating the deep-fried dove nuggets we had made the night before. He told her how he dispatched cripples by pulling off their heads. I have never been so proud. My ex-wife told me, again, how happy she is we are divorced.

So I've recruited another hunter. My son can't wait to go duck hunting with me in November, and wants to walk the fields with me when we chase peasants and quail this fall. I feel I've passed the torch to the next generation. I didn't think it possible, but my ex-wife is even more unhappy with me than before. All in all, a very successful outing.

Some Football Predictions

2009-09-02T04:39:00.000-07:00

Another football season is upon us, so it's time for some predictions:

Brett Favre will fail miserably. The Vikings not only will fail to make the Super Bowl, they will fail to make the playoffs. Countless articles will be written detailing the tarnishing of Farvre's legacy, but most of us won't care, because -- if he wants to -- it's his legacy to tarnish.

The Raiders will be better. They may even make the playoffs, despite Al Davis and his dementia.

The Broncos will be a laughingstock. They may have the worst defense in league history, they have no quarterback, and their best wide receiver is a head case.

The Chargers are the biggest shoo-in for a divisional championship ever. If they don't make the playoffs, Norv Turner will get fired and be hung in effigy at Qualcom Stadium.

If Tom Brady stays healthy (and it pains me to write this), the Patriots are a lock to win the Super Bowl.

The Cardinals will repeat as NFC West champions. Kurt Warner is not a fluke; he's going to the Hall of Fame. Look it up: he's won two MVP's, and he's taken three teams to the Super Bowl. They may well go again this year. The Cardinal's defense is underrated, and Larry Fitzgerald is a freak of nature.

The Rams won't make the playoffs, but they will no longer be the weak sisters of the NFC. They have a revamped offensive line, a monster of a tailback, a serviceable defensive backfield, and a new coach who means business. Look for them to win seven or eight games, and become perennial playoff contenders by next season.

The Giants won't make the playoffs, either. Eli Manning winning the Super Bowl a couple of years ago was the biggest fluke in the history of the league.

Seven different punters will hit the scoreboard in Jerry Jones' new stadium, forcing the league to institute the "Jerry Jones rule," mandating a minimum height for Jumbotrons. The Cowboys will again fail to make the postseason, and Tony Romo will start dating Jessica Alba.

I will continue to despise the San Francisco 49'rs, despite the fact they are aweful, are of no consequence and mean nothing at all to the league.

The Great American Dove Hunt

2009-09-01T16:13:00.000-07:00

It's that time of year, when all thoughts (for me) turn to hunting. Come Saturday afternoon I'll again be making the trek to beautiful Dateland Arizona for our annual dove hunt.

In a new twist, I'll be dragging my eight-year old along for his first experience at a hunting camp. He seems to be excited, and looking forward to finding out what this "hunting" thing is all about. Of course, he doesn't yet realize it entails waking at crazy-thirty and venturing out in the dark to reach the dove fields. He doesn't yet understand that, despite unseasonably "cool" weather, the low for this weekend's forecast is 80, and that we'll spend every waking moment we're not in the field in a swimming pool so warm it feels like a bath. He certainly doesn't yet comprehend his days could well be filled with interminable boredom. I don't care. I want to hunt, so I'm taking him anyway.

I'm guessing he'll find the actual hunt exciting. The staccato of the shotgun blasts, the dogs racing for the retrieves, my friend Chris swearing as he misses another crossing shot at the zig-zagging, dive-bombing doves. That part will be fine. It's the hours afterward about which I worry.

I'm bringing his bow and his BB gun, and we'll let him shoot Chris' Remington 1100 20 gauge (I sure hope my son's Mom hasn't found this blog), a sweet-shooting, forgiving gun. He'll have his video game to play, and I'm sure we'll have some spirited card games and some Yahtzee tournaments. I hope he likes the flavor of dove; some find it gamey after a life-long diet of the pablum most supermarkets pass off as meat.

I do know I've never looked forward to a dove camp so much. I hope my son has a good time, and a good remembrance. I hope he doesn't tell his Mom his Dad drinks too much beer. And I hope he doesn't melt in the heat.

More Random Thoughts

2009-09-01T08:23:00.000-07:00

Well, turns out Michael Jackson may have been murdered, but the knuckleheads at LAPD may have butchered the prosecution because they failed to secure the crime scene. Why am I not surprised? And for the love of God, will they please plant this guy in the ground.

I don't know if the rest of the world realizes this, but Southern California is on fire again. The so-called "Station Fire" has burned over 120,000 acres and fifty structures. That's almost 200 square miles. There are fires burning in Azusa Canyon, Yucaipa and in the San Jacinto Mountains. And it's not even fire season yet; the notorious Santa Ana winds haven't yet reared their ugly head. I fear things are going to get even nastier than usual this year. This is supposed to be an El Nino year -- mudslides are sure to follow. And we're over-due for a quake on the San Andreas. The four horsemen are at our door.

Why are hot dogs sold in packs of ten, but hot dog buns in packs of eight? You have to buy four packs of hot dogs and five packs of buns to make it work. And then some eight-year old eats a hot dog without a bun and ruins the whole dichotomy.

Why do people feel they have to come to a complete stop to make a right turn? And why do they have to do it from the middle of the street? Why can't any one figure out how a four-way stop works? Driving is not rocket science, people.

Orange County just spent six months putting in a right turn lane at the intersection of Rose and Imperial Highway. A month later they've torn up Imperial to resurface. Couldn't they have done all this at once? Our taxpayer dollars at work.

While I'm at it, the City of La Habra spent eight months putting in a bus stop and fancy crosswalks at the intersection of La Habra and Harbor. The fancy crosswalks are about six inches above the roadway -- they "improved" things by putting speed bumps in a perfectly good intersection. If I'm ever elected God I'll immediately put an end to such "civic improvements."

Former beauty queen Carrie Prejean has sued Miss California officials for libel. Seems she won't be able to testify at the trial because her foot is so firmly planted in her mouth. Will somebody please make this woman go away?

Happiness

2009-08-27T13:16:00.000-07:00

I guess I'm lucky; I hit what I consider to have been my "mid-life crisis" when I was still in my thirties. It was then that I figured out what is, for me, the key to happiness: figure out what it is you really like to do, and do it as often as humanly possible. When you can't, then spend as much time as possible dreaming of and planning for what it is you really like to do.

For me, this means spending time outdoors. I'm never as happy as when I'm outside; hunting, fishing, backpacking, even just sitting on a stream bank watching the water flow or watching the dog swim in a back-country lake. It relaxes me and makes me feel whole. It is when I approach and experience almost total satisfaction in body and mind.

Don't get me wrong -- I have a career and I work hard. Fortunately, as an outside sales person I have lots of down time driving from town to town to see my customers, so I have a lot of time to dream and plan my next backpacking or hunting or fishing adventure. When I'm at home I spend most of my spare time pouring over maps, reading guidebooks, checking out outdoor-related web sites, reloading shotgun shells or tying flies.

Of course, my ex-wife though me a bit obsessive, which may explain why I'm not married any more. But I'm happy -- at least most of the time -- and to me that's what is most important.

More Random Thoughts On the Day's News

2009-07-28T16:22:00.000-07:00

So six of seven Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee voted against recommending Sonia Sotomayor to the full Senate for confirmation, with poor Lindsay Graham the only consenting senator. Then Michael Steele, erstwhile Republican National Committee Chairman, begged off from attending a National Council of La Raza meeting (the largest Latino advocacy group in the country), because he was attending some RNC get-together in California. Moreover, he couldn't even be bothered to find a Republican governor from some backwater state to fill in.

Is it just me, or are the Republicans purposely pissing-off the Latinos? The Latino vote has become increasingly important, as they register in larger numbers and continue to slide towards the Democrats. I swear, I almost suspect the powers that be in the Republican Party are intent on burning their house down just to start over.

Today's news has it the Blue Dog Democrats are starting to side with Republicans in an attempt to derail President Obama's health care initiative. At this point, Nancy Pelosi needs to earn her keep, and herd these yahoos into line. Grow some brass ones, Nancy. Threaten them. Promise to pull plumb committee assignments. Tell them we'll yank their campaign funding and run progressives in the primaries. These DINO's (Democrats In Name Only) are going to have to be purged eventually, anyway. Let them scurry to the Republican side and find out what it's like to be in the wilderness.

The Governator just signed a budget that will close at least 100 of California's 279 state parks. We don't have the final list yet, but rumoured to be on the chopping block is one of may favorite places, Picacho State Park on the Colorado River. According to the California State Parks Foundation, our state parks return some $4.2 billion in economic benefits, through ripple effects, to the state's local economies. Even before the recent cuts, just 1/10th of one percent of the entire state budget funded our state parks, and for every dollar spent, $2.35 was returned to the general fund from taxes generated by consumer spending. Talk about being penny wise and pound foolish.

My questions: since the parks are public property, are they really closed? What's to stop me from showing up at Picacho and going fishing or hunting anyway? If it's closed, I assume that means there won't be a ranger there to tell me it's closed. They'll just post some sign saying the park is no longer in operation. Can't I just go anyway? Can I bring my dog now, or is that still against the rules? I'm confused.

Finally, am I the only person who's sick of the Chase Bank commercial featuring a butchered version of John Lennon's "Instant Karma?" The poor guy has to be spinning in his grave. If Yoko is behind this -- and I suspect she is -- I hope she rots in purgatory for an eternity. I've worn out the mute button on my remote.

Adventure In the High Uintas Wilderness

2009-07-26T09:23:00.000-07:00

When we arrived, we thought it somewhat odd there were only two other cars parked at the Uinta River Trailhead last Sunday. About a half-hour into our hike, we encountered a day-hiker on her way out. She was to be the last human being we would see for six days.

Indeed, if one is seeking a combination of solitude and grandeur, the High Uintas Wilderness of Northeast Utah may be one of the finest destinations in the contiguous United States. Add the outstanding angling and abundant wildlife viewing and this was to be one of my favorite backpacking experiences.

Only two drawbacks: first, we live in Southern California, so it's a thirteen hour drive to the trailhead. Second, the trails are brutal. I'm used to the well-worn tracks of the High Sierra. The Uinta River trails, however, are faint, often difficult to follow and -- my God -- they are rocky! We walked for miles through rock-strewn paths: ankle-breakers to boulders the size of my dog, debris fields hundreds of yards wide, rocky and treacherous stream crossings. Never have I so had to concentrate on each step, and never have my feet so ached at the end of the day.

On day one, we aimed for the aptly-named Rock Canyon Creek, hustling to make it ahead of an impending afternoon thunderstorm. We were five minutes too late. The rain was intermixed with pea-sized hail, and I soon discovered my five-year old Gore Tex jacket was no longer waterproof (haven't worn it in the rain in three years). On the bright side, the weather only lasted thirty minutes, and we were able to collect enough hail from our tents to make iced cocktails before dinner.

The Uinta River gorge is deep and spectacular. The river was high and busy with snow melt, and the confluences with side creeks were violent and awe-inspiring. Particularly impressive is the view from the lip of the canyon where Atwood Creek pours in from the opposite side.

Day two brought us a brutal ten-mile climb to our base camp, a spot just east of North Fork Park. We spent three nights camped there, taking day trips up and down the North Fork Uinta and up to the twin Kidney Lakes. Angling in the river was outstanding for pan-sized brookies, and the Kidney's yielded one nice cutthroat and some huge brook trout. I caught my biggest back country brookie from South Kidney, a fourteen-inch monster that was a challenge on my two-pound test spinning outfit. Alas, I lugged my fly rig up the mountain for no apparent reason, having left my leaders at home. Sometimes I'm such a dimwit.

North Fork Park (out here on the West Coast we would call it a meadow) was pristine and beautiful. The river flows busily through it, but with enough pockets of slack water to provide good angling. Small side creeks flow into the main river from both sides of the valley in frequent intervals.

The camp site we chose was apparently a prime feeding location for mule deer, because we had visitors often. The deer would stroll right into camp, feeding quietly. They seemed almost tame. If the dogs were asleep (which was often) we could sit and watch them for as much as five minutes before they moved on. If the dogs were awake and barked at them, the deer never showed alarm. Instead, they simply shrugged and sauntered off, as if to say "fine, we'll eat elsewhere."

The hike out on Friday was noteworthy only because we finally ran into another hiker, at the Shale Creek Bridge. He told us he had been hiking throughout the Uintas for years and rarely did he see other backpackers. (An aside: my map of the High Uintas has a bunch of shaded areas labeled "Areas of Concentrated Use." As an experienced High Sierra backpacker used to dealing with herds of humanity, I can only conclude this term must be relative to location.)

The hoards of early-season mosquitoes we were promised never materialized, and after the first day the weather cooperated. We had the solitude we so crave. In all, I'd say my first foray into the High Uintas Wilderness was an unqualified success. I think I'll try it again next summer. Maybe two weeks this time.

Republicans Smear Sotomayor For Being Liberal

2009-07-16T14:26:00.000-07:00

They can't seem to nail her on this Ricci thing. Even Lindsay Graham admits her past judicial decisions have been largely "in the mainstream." They can't call her inexperienced; she has over seven-teen years on the bench. So in the end, Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee have resorted to a tried and true approach in attacking Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama's first appointment to the Supreme Court: they say she's too liberal.

Let's leave aside for a moment that the Republicans have been routed the past two elections by liberal Democrats elected by an increasingly liberal electorate. Let's forget conservative dogma has been repudiated by thirty years of failed Reaganomics and eight years of the most absurd and bungled presidency in our history. Let's instead focus on the real story here, a truth so dark and frightening for congressional Republicans they dare not speak it aloud: the word "liberal" is no longer a pejorative.

For fifty years now Republicans have used the word "liberal" to portray Democrats as out-of-touch elitists. They succeeded in making the word synonymous with "un-American." Frustrated Democrats began describing themselves as "progressives" or even as "moderates" rather than admit their liberal-ness.

Sucks for you, conservative Republicans, but the word "liberal" is back in vogue, and I don't mean as an insult. Bleeding hearts like Bernie Sanders (a socialist), Barney Frank (a gay man) and Dennis Kucinich (to the left of FDR) wear the word like a badge of honor. In California, Diane Feinstein has been pilloried for not being liberal enough, and the Governator has lost his Republican base by tacking ever more strongly to the left -- because the electorate demanded it.

In this political environment, hammering Sonia Sotomayor for being too liberal is like punishing Kobe Bryant for being too athletic, a tactic as ridiculous as it is pointless. That Republicans have to resort to name-calling at this stage merely accentuates how powerless and inconsequential they have become. Welcome to the wilderness, Republicans.

News Of the Week In Review

2009-07-12T06:18:00.000-07:00

We found out this week that, in death, Michael Jackson was an even bigger ratings boost for the networks than when he was being tried as an alleged pedophile.

We learned the city of Los Angeles forked over as much as $3 million to host the funeral of a private citizen. This must be heart warming to all those laid-off municipal employees and school teachers, not to mention the citizens whose services have been cut and whose children's class sizes have swelled to unmanageable levels.

We learned that, as of Friday, a web site asking for donations to reimburse L.A. for the funeral had collected a paltry $35,000. Would that some of you self-professed M. Jackson lovers put your money where your mouth is.

We have our latest member in the "Yes, I'm a Stinking Hypocrite" club: meet John Ensign, Republican Senator from Nevada, another in a long line of "Family Values" Republicans who just can't seem to keep it in their pants. This one is even more sordid than usual; seems Ensign's parents gave his mistress some $100,000 in hush money as Ensign sought to keep the affair secret. She sang anyway, leaving Ensign looking both stupid and hypocritical. Somewhere a certain ex-President is laughing his ass off.

Scientists say we may be headed for a "major" El Nino event this winter. This means that in addition to the annual fall conflagrations and random earthquakes, California can look forward to torrential rainstorms and the inevitable mudslides and wanton destruction of which we are so fond. On the bright side, should be some nice wildflower displays next spring.

Seriously, at some point a major California politician needs to grow a pair and state the obvious: quit building homes in places where we know for certain they will eventually either burn or get washed off the mountain. Us low-landers are getting tired of footing the bill for rich folks who knowingly put their homes in harm's way. If you want a nice view, climb Mt. Baldy.

Selling Ice Cubes To Eskimos

2009-07-11T06:11:00.000-07:00

My Pop Warner Football Fund Raising Adventure

I should have known something was up the moment I walked into the meeting room that morning. It was our first team meeting for the Yorba Linda Colts, my son's Junior Mighty Mite Pop Warner Football team, and I was met by an unholy stench; it was an odd mixture of a florist shop, the cosmetics counter at Macy's and my ex-wife's bathroom.

The head coach began speaking. "I know we usually sell candy or frozen pizza as our team fund raising program, but we're trying something new this year. Let me introduce the team Mom."

The team Mom walked to the front of the room, proudly displaying her wares. "This year we'll be selling these beautiful scented candles. They feature double wicks, non-dripping wax, and come in over a dozen tantalizing aromas . . ." At this point, most of the men in the room were groaning, and at least three appeared to be visibly sick. Me, I remained stoic. It was a composure born of a stubborn belief I can sell almost anything to almost anybody. Either that or I was in abject shock.

I've peddled all sorts of crap to help fund my son's various sporting and scholastic endeavors. Frozen cardboard (I mean pizza), cookie dough (Salmonella, anyone?), and wrapping paper are a few of the items I've foisted on unsuspecting family and friends over the years. But scented candles? I had the feeling this wasn't going to be the slam-dunk the team mom might have thought it was.

My ex-wife was going to have it easy; all she had to do was parade my son door-to-door around the neighborhood, cornering other moms and the occasional blue-haired retiree. These people, of course, are the target customers for such a product. What woman can resist the overtures of a tow-headed eight year-old trying to raise money for his football team, particularly when the product smells nice?

I didn't have that luxury. I only get to see my son about four days a month, and I was unwilling to waste any of that precious time hawking scented candles to innocent neighbors, even if it is a good cause. This left me just one place to go if I was going to meet my candle quota, the one place in America where the victim is always captive, where they can't slam the door and they can't run away: the workplace.

So I spent the week suffering the indignity of pitching scented candles to my co-workers. The women, thank God, were easy marks -- I was selling a product they actually found interesting. Unfortunately, we only have four females at my office, and one was on vacation. This was going to leave me far short of my quota. I was left with no choice but to target my male co-workers.

I don't think I'll ever get out of my mind the somewhat disturbing image of a forty-two year old man scratching and sniffing a page labeled "Strawberry Delight." Nor will I soon escape the stigma and shame of asking grown men to fork over twenty-four bucks for a scented candle, a product that -- should it not end up in the trash -- will at the very least cover their furniture with the stench of a cheap bordello.

But let's leave that aside for a moment and ponder the obvious questions: Scented candles? For a football fund raiser? Talk about your non sequiter. Could they possibly have picked a less manly product for such a venture? I might have understood had the candles come in aromas such as "Eau du Jock Strap" or "Unwashed Socks," but "Kiwi Surprise" and "Pineapple Sunrise?" How un-football like. Do I even need to mention it was a woman who thought up this hare-brained scheme? Will I be expected to sell Vermont Teddy Bears and Harlequin romance novels next season?

I had to guilt the poor bastards at my office into buying the things. I felt dirty when I left at night.

Anyway, I did my part. I finally hit my quota by forcing my sister to purchase a "Very Berry" and an "Outrageous Orange." Our seven and eight year old football players will proudly wear matching socks when they take the field this fall, and every boy will get his "esteem building" trophy at the season's conclusion. But at what cost? Now, my co-workers scurry like roaches when they see me coming. I'm concerned my brother in-law will try to poison me the next time I'm invited for dinner. My pride may be damaged beyond repair, and my reputation at work is irreparably soiled. All things considered, I think I'd rather sell cardboard pizza.

Random Thoughts on the Day's News

2009-07-07T07:44:00.000-07:00

or, Michael Jackson Is Still Dead

For the love of all that is holy, please bury the man. Have your multi-million dollar "celebration." Hell, have a parade if you want. Just please get him off my T.V. It's All Jackson All the Time, and I just can't stand it any more. Dead is dead.

There are so many more compelling stories out there. Sarah Palin just resigned from office. Isn't this a more interesting story line than the death of an alleged pedophile and so-called pop icon? Sarah fancies herself the front-runner for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, yet if she can't stand the heat of an Alaskan kitchen, what makes anyone think she can survive the crucible of national presidential politics? If she's still considered the favorite, the Republicans are in even worse shape than we hoped.

Al Franken was just admitted to the Senate. Which is more improbable, that a former "B" grade movie star could become president, or that a Saturday Night Live comedy writer could rise to represent the good people of Minnesota in the U.S. Senate? Bill O'Rilley was absolutely apoplectic; he cites the Franken election as proof the country is in really sorry shape. Of course, Bill and his ilk have conveniently forgotten who got us into this mess.

Finally, if the Lakers and their benefactors can pay for a parade and celebration, saving the cash-strapped city of Los Angeles millions, why can't all those rich Hollywood celebrities find a way to pay for this Jackson fiasco? If I lived in L.A. County, I'd be pissed. If I were a layed-off city employee, I'd be really pissed. Moreover, in these economic times, such an ostentatious display should be an affront to the sensibilities of every Angeleno. Please make Michael Jackson go away. Now. Forever.

My Weekend In the Southern Sierra

2009-07-06T08:42:00.000-07:00

Just returned from a solo, three-day backpacking trip in the Golden Trout Wilderness in the Southern Sierra Nevada Mountains. Took a walk from Lewis Camp Trail head down to the Little Kern, looking for the elusive Little Kern Golden Trout (oncorhynchus aguabonita whitei), a subspecies of our State Fish.

In one of my dumbest moves ever, as I set up camp I realized I had somehow forgotten to pack my sleeping bag. (When I packed at home Friday morning, I remember thinking: "Seems I have a lot more room for my gear than usual.") I had to sleep in my jacket and down pants, yet awoke both mornings at three A.M., shivering. Ended up pacing around the campsite for two hours each morning praying the sun would rise earlier than usual. I tend to forget one or two items each trip, despite my obsession with lists, but never have I neglected to bring one of the "big three." Sheesh, next time I'll probably forget to bring my pack.

Despite my lack of sleep, I managed to get in some fishing Saturday. Access to the Little Kern in this area is, to say the least, difficult. The gorge is narrow and steep, and defined by huge expanses of granite that are impossible to traverse. Reaching the pools and runs that harbor the golden trout requires considerable (and dangerous) effort. As I scrambled down a steep pitch south of my camp, I remember thinking "if I break an ankle here, I'm probably a goner, because nobody knows where I am and nobody would think to look in such an inhospitable place."

Anyway, I managed to make it to the river without incident. I hooked and landed nine of the little yellow buggers (including an eleven-inch, my biggest golden yet from a stream) before the dog's barking and whining convinced me to let her take a swim, ruining the fishing.

Sadie is the least fishing-friendly dog I've ever known. When bass fishing she's constantly "falling" in the water (falling in parenthesis because I'm pretty sure she's doing it on purpose at least half the time). When stream fishing I have to tie her to a tree to keep her from thrashing into the water, chasing my lure like the knucklehead she is. But when tied up she whines and barks incessantly, not exactly the serene and peaceful fishing experience to which I usually aspire.

After another almost sleepless night, I awoke at three-thirty to find no stars in the eastern sky. It took me several moments before I realized the stars were obscured not by clouds, but by smoke. By daylight, the lightening-caused fire (which I later found was near the confluence of Shotgun Creek and the Little Kern, about ten miles from my camp) had spread a pallor of smoke and ash over the lower Little Kern. My subsequent hike back to the trail head, five miles and about two thousand feet of elevation gain, was not fun. By the time I reached my truck, my eyes burned, my throat was sore and my lungs felt as if I'd chain-smoked five packs of Winstons. But I did catch those yellow fish, so count my long weekend a success.

Did Michael Jackson Die Yesterday?

2009-06-26T11:40:00.000-07:00

Did Michael Jackson die yesterday? Holy Toledo, the death of Jesus Christ wouldn't receive this much coverage. I know he was a pop icon. I know "Thriller" was the best-selling non-greatest hits album of all time. I know his death came as a shock, that he was only fifty. Still, isn't the wall-to-wall, non-stop coverage a bit over the top?

And what of the knuckleheads seen traipsing around Hollywood Boulevard, placing flowers on Michael Jackson's star? The wrong Michael Jackson. You know, radio personality Michael Jackson. Why am I not surprised?

Of course, the one person truly happy to hear of Jackson's passing was South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford, the sanctimonious and hypocritical former Senator who famously called upon Bill Clinton to resign from office for having an affair. The Jackson death -- coupled with the passing of Farrah Fawcett -- served to take Sanford off the front pages, where he has been deservedly lampooned for his own marital indiscretions involving an Argentinian senorita.

Anyway, in a city of freaks Michael Jackson was king. He made Phil Spector and Dennis Rodman seem normal by comparison. He set the weirdness bar at a heretofore unattainable height. Suffice it to say we'll never see another like him -- and that's probably a good thing.

Rush Limbaugh Is A Double Agent

2009-03-08T10:00:00.000-07:00

Of course, everyone by now knows Rush Limbaugh has famously said he "hopes Obama fails." Let's leave aside for a moment the unpatriotic treason apparent in such a statement (who in America truly hopes our country fails?). The fact Rush is in effect the titular head of his party, isn't such a statement destined to drive mainstream Americans to the other side? If the vast majority of voters hope Obama's policies get us out of this economic malaise, won't they tend to disavow those who would hope those policies fail?

Then there's the unappealing spectacle of Republican leaders criticizing Rush for these outrageous statements and then turning around, apologizing and kissing Rush's ring in abject deference because they fear Rush will skewar them on his radio show. Not only is this behavior disgraceful, but it only goes to further marginalize an already powerless Republican leadership.

I say Rush has been conning us all along. I say he's a double agent bent on destroying the Republican Party once and for all. Just my two cents.

Lapel Pin?

2008-04-17T15:32:00.000-07:00

Let me get this straight. Last night was probably the last chance to get Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton together for one of their "debates," the last chance to try to get them to differentiate their policy proposals. The country is mired in recession, with full-blown depression on the horizon. We're still in Iraq, an untenable occupation that is draining the public treasure and killing and maiming our soldiers. Our schools are failing, millions of people have no health insurance, the middle class is disappearing, we still don't have a coherent immigration policy, gas is almost four dollars a gallon, and almost none of the 9-11 commission's recommendations have been adopted.

There are any number of pressing issues upon which the voting public is clamoring for the opinions of both Obama and Clinton, yet the best the finest minds at ABC news can come up with is to focus on Barack Obama's fashion sense? Are you kidding me?

Let's leave aside the fact that flag etiquette suggests that "the flag should not be used as part of a costume or athletic uniform, except that a flag patch may be used on the uniform of military personnel, firemen, policemen and members of patriotic organizations." Instead, let's focus on the specious claim here: that, somehow, not wearing a flag on his lapel means Barack Obama isn't patriotic. All I can say is that if this is the best his opposition can come up with, Obama can go ahead and book his room at the White House.

Indeed, Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos -- pin-heads that they are -- wasted a good fifty minutes trying to play "gotcha" with Obama while a giddy Hillary grinned like the village idiot as she played spectator. It was last night, as I watched a once-proud network sink to the dark depths of tabloid journalism, I finally realized that what many pundits have been saying for years is really true: broadcast journalism (with the exception of Keith Olberman), is officially dead. Thank God for the internet.

Will Defection of Hillary Voters Hurt Obama?

2008-04-13T07:19:00.000-07:00

I'm on record as saying that whining Hillary supporters who vow never to vote for Barack Obama are guilty of cutting off their noses to spite their faces. Indeed, many have gone so far as to say they'd vote for John McCain if their "inevitable candidate" is denied the nomination. I've tried to convince these people that such sentiments amount to lunacy, that to prefer a third Bush term to Obama is the height of hubris and self-flogging.

I've worried that, should enough Hillary supporters jump ship, Obama could conceivably be denied in the general election, an historical disaster that could possibly foreshadow the eventual demise of our once great nation.

After some reflection, however, I'm not so worried anymore. My guess is that the percentage of self-avowed "Evangelical Christians" and "Core Conservatives" who stay at home rather than vote for McCain will far outstrip the percentage of stubborn Hillary supporters who defect to McCain. Republicans appear to be apathetic and lethargic this time around, and, as I have noted before, turnout will be the real story of the general election.

And why shouldn't Republicans be dispirited? The era of Republican rule has reached an ignominious and inglorious end: the economy in shambles, a result of "free market economics" run amok; an unpopular and disastrous war and occupation, based upon lies and with no end in sight; no real action on their "core" issues of gays, guns and abortion; the mortgage meltdown as a direct result of Republican-supported deregulation. The Republicans have had their chance, and it has been empirically proven their way doesn't work. Republicans are depressed, as well they should be. They've been repudiated by history, and they'll stay home in droves this time.

Obama and Hillary, on the other hand, have inspired record numbers of voters, including the elusive "younger voters," to vote during this primary season. Independents and even Republicans have crossed over to vote for both of them in large numbers. Despite the internecine battle between the two candidates, the Democrats remain inspired and invigorated.

So when you read these polls about Hillary supporters voting for McCain, or McCain gaining an advantage over "likely voters" in a contest against Obama, remember these polls are merely snapshots in time. Most of the Hillary supporters will come to their senses, and many of these so-called "likely Republican voters" won't be seen at the ballot box. Come November, folks will be thronging to the polls to vote for Democrats in numbers never seen before, while countless numbers of core Republican voters will be sitting this one out in shame.

Ho, Hum, Lakers Qualify For Postseason

2008-04-05T07:07:00.000-07:00

Has any professional sports franchise matched the L.A. Lakers record of success? In downing the Mavericks last night, the Lakers have now qualified for post season play a remarkable 55 times in 60 years. Including their Minnesota years they have won 16 league championships (better than once every four years) and 33 division championships (more than half).

I know, it seems as if every team in the NBA gets a playoff invite every year. But try telling that to the Clippers, the sad-sack co-tenant at the Staples Center. The Clippers only make it to the playoffs once in a blue moon, or when pigs fly, or whatever hackneyed cliche you want to use. Around here, however, the Lakers not making the playoffs qualifies as a "Man Bites Dog" story.

A couple of years ago, when Mitch Kupchak unceremoniously dumped Big Shaq for some blankets and trinkets, the locals were ready to go after Mitch with torches and pitchforks. Turns out Mitch actually knew what he was doing. Now the Lakers have the best player in the game -- still in his prime -- a smart, young big man in Pau Gasol and one of the best up-and-coming stars in the league in Andrew Bynum. Can you believe that, when Bynum finally gets back, Lamar Odom will be the third option on this team?

Yes, for Lakers fans, the salad days aren't just here again -- they've never left.

Hillary More Prepared to Be Commander in Chief

2008-03-25T18:19:00.000-07:00

Just look at some of the statements of past presidents:
Richard Nixon: "I am not a crook."
Ronald Reagan: "To the best of my knowledge, our government was not involved in this Iran-Contra business."
George H.W. Bush: "Read my lips: no new taxes."
Bill Clinton: "I did not have sex with that woman."
George W. Bush: err, time and space doesn't permit me to list all the half-truths, disseminations and flat-out lies emanating from the mouth of our most esteemed leader.

Presidents lying through their teeth to the American people has been so commonplace the last thirty years it almost seems a prerequisite for the job. In this light, Hillary's claims about being under sniper fire during her visit to Bosnia several years ago take on new meaning: she's merely a president in training, and a better trained and more believable liar than Obama, for sure.

McCain Says Sunni, Shiia "Best Friends"

2008-03-20T09:41:00.000-07:00

During his fact-finding mission to Iraq, John McCain was quoted that it was "common knowledge" that Sunni members of Al Qaeda routinely travel to Shiia Iran for training.

In a related story, scientists announced the stunning discovery that insects in fact like windshields and that elephant seals are secretly in love with killer whales.

Meanwhile, historians of ancient Rome have unearthed conclusive evidence that the Christians in fact loved the lions.

Five Years Later

2008-03-19T17:54:00.000-07:00

So today marks the fifth anniversary of our invasion of Iraq. Five years after we invaded -- for no apparent reason -- a sovereign nation that posed no threat to us whatsoever, we still find ourselves mired in the midst of a civil war of our own making. Five years later, and Iraq is no closer to any sort of political solution than it was the day we took down Saddam Hussein, the day our incompetent president declared "mission accomplished."

During those five years, nearly 4,000 American men and women have lost their lives in this futile, unnecessary war. Almost 300,000 of our citizens have applied for medical benefits as a result of injuries, both physical and mental, incurred during this war and occupation. As many as a million Iraqi citizens have lost their lives, and many millions more have become refugees as a result of our actions. Far from making the world "safe from terrorism" (in the words of George W. Bush), our occupation instead functions as a prime recruitment tool for those who would most like to do us harm.

As staggering as have been the human costs of this monumental foreign policy blunder, the economic costs to our nation are just as harmful. Because of this war, we have squandered the future of our children and grandchildren. Indeed, the national debt rung up -- by a self-described "conservative" administration -- is larger that the accumulated debt of all previous administrations combined. Seven years ago our nation's government operated with a surplus and boasted of a booming economy that was the envy of the world. Today, be are mired in a severe recession that threatens to become a full-blown depression, while our overwhelming and untenable national debt leaves us with few options.

So this is the legacy of George W. Bush and his war: we are now a broken country. Our military is broken, our economy is broken, the dollar is in the dumpster, and the Middle East is in shambles. And yet he and his minions have the audacity to declare this disaster, even today, was the right thing to do. That his policies have somehow made us safer, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. That the costs, both human and monetary, are worth the price. On this fifth anniversary of the worst foreign policy disaster in our nation's history, in the end I can only offer this: shame on you, George Bush. Shame on those who would continue to enable you. And shame on us for allowing you to do this to our nation.

An Inspiring Politician

2008-03-18T18:24:00.000-07:00

I was seven years old when Bobby Kennedy ran for president, back in 1968. I can remember, to this day, my Mom listening to Kennedy speak, and weeping. When I asked her why she was crying, why she was sad, she said "I'm not sad, I'm happy. This man is going to be a great president. He inspires me. He inspires us all. He makes me believe we not only can, but will be a greater America."

Until today, I've never truly understood her feelings that day. I wasn't old enough to have comprehended the hope and promise inherent in Bobby Kennedy's speeches. I wasn't old enough to have heard Martin Luther King tell us "I have a dream," nor did I get to hear John F. Kennedy tell us "Ask not what your country do for you, ask what you can do for your country," other than as quaint sound bytes that only reminded me of an America that at one time was not only inspiring, but boasted of inspiring leaders.

Today, in this time, we again have a leader who inspires, whose words today actually had me weeping in my car as I was on my way to work. Barack Obama is that man, and this, I believe, is his time.

And it wasn't just his message today, however powerful it was. It was his manner. This man, so capable of delivering powerful, soaring oratory, was somber and humble this morning, befitting his subject manner.

Barack Obama is the man of the moment, who again fills us with the promise of a greater America, an America that, in his words, is a "more perfect union." He is an inspiration to me. And those are words I would never have thought I could write.

More Random Thoughts On the Day's News

2008-03-12T10:09:00.000-07:00

Eliot Spitzer knew the Republicans were out to get him. He knew he had a target on his back. Anyone who even remotely knows of the attorney firing scandal knows the Bush administration has thoroughly and utterly politicized the Department of Justice, and that DOJ officials would do anything to get any prominent Democrat they could. Given these facts, one is left with one simple question: what the hell was Eliot Spitzer thinking?

So the Fed moved yesterday to bolster financial markets by agreeing to swap mortgage-backed securities for Treasury Notes to the tune of $200 billion, a move most experts agree will only stave of a full-fledged recession for a few months. Maybe I'm just cynical, but doesn't this just seem like an expensive election-year ploy to protect Republicans?

Some Democratic party officials have begun clamoring to have the disputed Michigan and Florida delegations seated at the party convention after all. What kind of message would this send? That playing by the rules is optional? Seating these delegations would effectively neuter the Democratic Party's ability to set a fair and sane primary season next time around. If Florida and Michigan get seated, I expect California to move its next presidential primary up to, say, December. That's December 2009.

Memo to advertisers: quit trying to ruin Easter for my little boy. The past week has seen my wife and I scrambling for the remote whenever an ad comes on extolling Target or Walmart as the best place to get goodies for my son's Easter Basket. Listen, jerks, at my house that's the Easter Bunny's job. What's next, an ad at Christmastime telling me to get my Santa presents at Toys 'r' Us? They only get to enjoy the magic of Easter and Christmas for a few years as it is -- don't blow it for them with your crass commercialism.

Hillary Rove Clinton

2008-03-07T17:22:00.000-08:00

When Clinton falsely accuses Obama of cozying up to the Canadians and implying his anti-NAFTA rhetoric is just posturing, that's unfair. When it's subsequently found out she herself is guilty of the act with which she has falsely charged Obama, that's Karl Rove territory.

When a Clinton candidate equates Obama's calls for Hillary to disclose her income tax returns with persecution on the scale of Ken Starr, that's Rove territory.

When Clinton hems and haws when asked if Obama is a Christian, that's unfair. When it's subsequently found out a Clinton staffer likely was the source of that Email making the rounds that accuses Obama of being a Muslim who will swear on the Koran and who doesn't even know the pledge of allegiance, that's Rove territory.

And when Hillary says the only two candidates still running qualified enough to run the country are herself and a Republican, that's Rove territory.

The Clintons appear to have graduated valedictorian from the Rove school of politics. Her scorched-earth campaign could possibly cripple Obama's general campaign this fall, and she apparently thinks that is alright.

All I can say is that Howard Dean better find a way to throw this detestable woman under the bus, and fast, or we could be looking at four more years of the Bush presidency. Shame on her, and shame on her husband.

An Open Letter To Hillary Clinton

2008-03-04T21:35:00.000-08:00

Dearest Hillary:
For the love of God and country, please call this off. I know you won three of the four contests tonight, but even the most deluded of your advisers can't possibly contend you actually won anything of substance tonight. At the end of the day (or week, in the case of Texas), you will probably have fallen further behind in the elected delegate count. Barack Obama has an insurmountable lead. Regardless of what you do, he will arrive at the convention with more elected delegates, more of the popular vote, and probably more pledged super delegates than you. He will be the nominee, no matter what happens from here on out.

The problem, Hillary, is that your "kitchen sink" negative campaign might very well sabotage Obama's chances for election come November. If you truly care about your country and your party, you must cease and desist now. To persist only reinforces the idea you are purposely hurting Obama so you can defeat McCain -- or whomever is the Republican candidate -- in 2012. This stinks of pure political opportunism of the worst sort: that you are more hungry for power than you are hungry for patriotism.

Hillary, the country may not be able to withstand another four years of the failed Bush presidency; and make no mistake, another four years of Bush is exactly what McCain promises. We must not squander this opportunity to take back our nation. Please stop attacking Barack Obama. Please stop comparing your "experience" with McCain's, a thinly veiled swipe at your erstwhile opponent. Bow out gracefully, while you still can, and save whatever dignity you still have. Do it for us. Please.

Is Racism Dying?

2008-03-02T12:01:00.001-08:00

In an opinion piece published in today's Los Angeles Times, Abigail and Stephan Thernstrom bring up an interesting yet rarely discussed aspect of this year's presidential race: the stunning support of white voters garnered by Barack Obama. I am on record as suggesting the Democrats would have been wise to nominate John Edwards because I feared too much institutional racism still existed to allow Obama to win the general election. This year's primary results show that, so far, I was wrong.

In state after state Obama has won large amounts of the white vote, remarkable considering he's running against a female candidate who has attracted large numbers of voters based solely upon gender. He's won over 40% of the white male vote in "blue" states such as New York and California as well as in "red" states such as Utah and Georgia. Were he running against a white man as opposed to a white women, it seems reasonable to assume he would be winning like amounts of white female voters as well.

What is at work here, I believe, is that the sheer passage of time is slowly erasing institutional racism in our country. Beginning with Brown v. Board of Education, the ruling that ended segregation in our schools, and continuing with the civil rights movement of the 60's, most young people today have grown up in schools and neighborhoods that are far more diverse than their mother's and father's.

Indeed, in my neighborhood are homeowners of African American, Hispanic, Asian and Middle Eastern decent. My son's school is similarly diverse. Many of his playmates are people of color. He wouldn't even comprehend racism, much less practice it, because he has grown up in an environment in which all races are both present and equal.

And it these younger, racially unpretentious people -- of all races -- who are flocking to the Obama candidacy in unprecedented numbers, tipping the scales in his direction. Today, I not only think Obama can win the general election, I believe he will. His rise is another positive sign that racism is slowly being bred out of our country -- and a sign that, however slowly, the civil rights movement worked.

More Random Thoughts On the Day's News

2008-02-18T19:27:00.000-08:00

Good God, the Clintons must be at rock bottom to accuse Barack Obama of plagiarism for using his signature line "Yes We Can" in his stump speech. This is such a mundane and familiar line in normal, everyday conversation that claiming someone should attribute it to someone else is just nonsensical. What, was Mr. Obama supposed to have referenced "The Little Engine Who Could?"

Meanwhile, here in Southern California, mistreatment of animals, including slaughtering for human consumption so-called "downed cows," has sparked the recall of millions of pounds of beef, most of it apparently already consumed by unsuspecting customers. These injured and/or diseased animals were stabbed by forklift tongs, kicked, had their eyes poked and were even water-boarded in an effort to get them to walk to the slaughterhouse, since FDA regulations prohibit adding meat from these "downed cows" to the human food supply.

There is a special place in hell reserved for the degenerates who perpetrated these atrocities. Cows may be among the dumbest creatures on this green earth, but no animal deserves to be treated like that.

This is just another, mind-numbing example of runaway corporatism fostered by decades of conservative, do-nothing government. In this case, the company was trying to squeeze every last dollar out of these cows; you see, dead meat is worth more if it's turned into hamburger rather than dog food or pig slop, which is what's supposed to happen to downed cows. And they've been able to get away with it because the FDA has been effectively neutered by Bush and Co. May a conservative Republican be the first person in this country to contract Mad Cow disease because downed cows have entered the food supply.

So the Lakers stole Pao Gasol and the Mavericks finally made the Jason Kidd deal work, but the best the Suns could do was acquire a fat, geriatric center, with a huge, guaranteed contract and who is year's past his prime? What, Wes Unseld was unavailable? In one, fell swoop the Shaq deal turns the Suns from the most exciting team in the NBA into another plodding, grind-it-out collection of underachievers.

Why Are There Libs Who Hate Clinton or Obama?

2008-02-13T13:25:00.000-08:00

If I hear one more "progressive" say they won't vote for Obama because of this, or Hillary because of that, I'm going to go screaming into the night. What planet are these yo-yo's living on, that they'd rather have another four years of Republican rule than one of the remaining Democrats because of what they perceive as some flaw in one or both of them?

Listen, people, we are almost done suffering through eight years of the worst presidential rule in our nation's history, and the Republican candidate is actually running on a platform of continuing that sad legacy. At this point, any Democrat is preferable to Grandpa McCain and his "straight off the cliff express."

Sure, there were at least four other Democrats running this year I'd prefer over what we've got left. But I got over it, and so should you. I've never particularly cared for Hillary, and considered her the least palatable of the entire bunch at the start. But you know what, if she wins the nomination -- even if she steals it at the convention -- she's got my vote, because I firmly believe another four years of this crap sends the country irreparably down the toilet.

Sure, Obama lacks "experience," whatever that lame term is supposed to mean. Hell, Bush had plenty of "experience," and look what that got us. And who says experience is necessary for this job anyway? Some of our best presidents (see Lincoln or Kennedy) came to the job with little practical experience. Besides, I think Obama is smart enough to do something Bush never quite mastered -- probably because he never attempted it: learn on the job.

And sure, Hillary voted for the war and won't apologize. So what. It's not her fault we were all lied into this mess, and hindsight is 20-20, as they say. The point is that she vows to get us out in short order, while McCain says we'll be there for another 100 years. (Which, of course, is impossible, because another five or ten years of this, much less 100, and we'll be a bankrupted hulk of a former super-power unable to finance a war with Guam, much less Iraq or Iran.)

The point, people, is get over yourselves. We've got to elect either Obama or Clinton, because if McCain wins this thing future historians will assuredly refer to the United States as "the shortest-reigning imperial power in world history," and your grandchildren will hate your guts. Do you want that to be your legacy?

Stick a Fork In Hillary -- She's Done

2008-02-12T20:19:00.000-08:00

Hillary Clinton's campaign is making a great show of being optimistic, of pointing towards March primaries in Texas and Ohio they think she can win, but it's time to face the music. Obama rolled over her tonight, winning by double-digit margins, and he'll roll over her again next week in Wisconsin. By the time Texas and Ohio come around, she'll need to win with sixty or sixty-five percent of the vote just to get back into the race, and that's not going to happen. The music has ended; this dance is over.

Personally, I think this is a good thing. By the time George W. Bush leaves office we will have had twenty years of rule by either a Bush or a Clinton. All the anguished Hillary supporters need to get over it and realize something about America: this is not a monarchy, people. It's time for some new blood.

The real question now is, does McCain stand a chance against Obama in November? The smart money is saying: when pigs fly. With McCain running as Bush-lite during this primary season in order to win the nomination, he can't possibly distance himself enough from the worst and most reviled president in history to win the general election. Unless Obama commits an unpardonable sin between now and November, we're going to make history by electing the first African-American president in history.

More Random Thoughts On the Day's News

2008-02-02T08:48:00.000-08:00

In just three years, Britney Spears has gone from pop star to laughing-stock to sympathetic figure worthy of our empathy. Has anyone not named Orenthal James ever fallen so far, so fast?

I'm guessing Celtics fans are pissed this morning. How, they must be wondering, could David Stern allow the Lakers to steal Pao Gasol and turn themselves into instant title favorites, what with a front line featuring three seven-footers and a back-court featuring the best player on the planet? Think anyone'd ever write this line: Lamar Odom is the fourth option on the Lakers?

Now that John Edwards is officially out, many of us are confronted with a frightening thought: the dude at the State of the Union uttering the phrase "Madam Speaker, I now introduce President of the United States, Hillary Clinton." Pray for Obama, people.

Tomorrow is Super Bowl Sunday, the unofficial national holiday for most of us. I'm telling you, any presidential contender who campaigns on a platform of "I'll make the Monday after Super Sunday a national day-off" gets my vote.

Can Obama Win?

2008-01-27T07:51:00.000-08:00

I'm on record as saying the Democrats would be wise to nominate John Edwards as their presidential candidate, for two simple reasons: I believe racism and sexism are alive and well in this country.

However, after witnessing Barack Obama's inspirational speech upon winning in South Carolina last night, I no longer think it impossible for him to overcome the latent racism running through our body politic like a bad strain of an STD. The reason for my change of heart is simple: Obama's sheer magnetism generates such a wellspring of support, particularly among young people, that an immense turnout in the general election could well trump the institutional racism in our country.

Let's look at the turnout in New Hampshire and South Carolina. One (New Hampshire) is a sometimes swing state that usually trends red. The other (South Carolina) is a solid red state that hasn't voted for the Democrats since Jimmy Carter won there in 1976.

John McCain won New Hampshire with 88,466 votes out of 233,381 cast for Republicans. Hillary Clinton won the Democratic side with 112,251 votes out of 284,104 cast. McCain won again in South Carolina with 147,283 out of 443,203 votes cast, while Obama ran away in the Democratic primary with 295,214 votes out of 532,468 cast.

While the vote totals of both Clinton and Obama are impressive, the numbers that stand out to me are the respective turnouts for all Republicans and all Democrats. In New Hampshire, 50,000 more people voted Democratic than Republican. In solidly red South Carolina, the Democrat's edge was even more pronounced, with almost 90,000 more votes than their Republican counterparts.

I think several factors are affecting turnout this year, and those factors will be even more evident in November.

First, Bush fatigue has energized Democrats to participate at levels not seen since the 60's. The feeling that our long national nightmare may finally be over is propelling people to the polls to vote Democrat, regardless who the nominee will be.

Second, the Republican base is depressed. The Bush Era has not gone well, the economy is in the dumpster, the war has been a disaster. Republicans are likely to stay home in droves come November, just like they have during the primary season -- particularly if McCain is the nominee.

Finally, Obama seems to be the "X" factor fueling Democratic turnout. His speeches are inspiring, and he seems to be giving younger voters reason for optimism. His message of "change" resonates among the populous.

If Obama is the nominee, these factors could well coalesce into a "perfect storm" of Democratic turnout that will overcome the latent racism I once feared would derail an Obama candidacy. So while I continue to support John Edwards, I am now cautiously optimistic about Obama's chances. How about John Edwards for Attorney General in a Barack Obama cabinet?

A Brokered Convention?

2008-01-16T12:51:00.000-08:00

With Mitt Romney pulling out a win yesterday in Michigan and Rudy poised to make off with Florida, it looks like we might still have a crowded field by Mega Tuesday, or Super Tuesday, or whatever lame name the media has come up with for the weirdness that passes for our system of nominating presidential candidates. It looks like no fewer than four Republican primary winners will still be standing on February 5th, the day umpteen states go to the polls to try and sort out this mess.

On the Democratic side, if John Edwards wins in Nevada and shows well in South Carolina we will have three viable candidates still in play on Whopper Mega Super Crazy Tuesday.

I used to feel the condensed primary season was an unholy mess. Conventional wisdom has it that it leaves the candidates little time to do the "hand-shaking" and "door to door" salesmanship the populous deserves. Moreover, the process doesn't properly "vett" the candidates the way it did in the old days, when the primary season was spread over several months.

Hogwash. A contracted primary schedule makes it more likely that lots of candidates will grab lots of delegates, but none of them enough to form a majority. That means brokered conventions, and that is manna from heaven to a political junkie like me.

I fully expect both conventions to feature illogical back-room deals, delicious backstabbing, heated floor arguments resulting in fisticuffs between Betty from St. Louis and Marge from Nashville, and interminable votes on into the night. Then, at the end of the day, the Dems will come out of left field with a Gore-Hillary ticket and the Repubs will come out of right with Jeb Bush teamed with Giuliani. Best of all, none of the media talking heads will be able to tell us exactly what happened, or why.

Then a Bloomberg-McCain ticket can jump into the fray and we'll have us a good, old-fashioned brawl of a general election. I can hardly wait. This could be the most entertaining election season of my lifetime. Remember, you read it here first.

Does the Governator Want to Shut Down

2008-01-13T10:30:00.000-08:00

California's State Park System?

After a long hiatus due to personal reasons, I'm back to blogging. I hope my old readers will return, and I hope any new readers will stay for my (hopefully) unique perspectives on politics, the environment and outdoor recreation.

Arnie "The Governator" Schwarzenegger, in a budget cutting move, recently announced the closure of 48 California state parks. Ostensibly, he is doing this because he can't bear to raise taxes on his Republican constituency. This illustrates a classic example of the prime difference between Republicans and Democrats: Republicans think only of themselves (and their pocket books) rather than the commons, while Democrats believe we're all in this together and should act accordingly.

Let's take a brief look at a representative example of the commons, from north to south, in which The Governator would shut out the good people of California:

Del Norte Redwoods State Park: One of the older units of the state park system, this park boasts of 50% native old-growth coastal redwood trees.

Clear Lake State Park: Clear Lake is the largest natural fresh-water lake in California and sports some of the best bass fishing in the entire United States. While closing the state park would by no means close the lake to public recreation, the state park does offer an inexpensive alternative to private facilities for Californians to enjoy this outstanding resource.

Armstrong Redwoods State Park: Protected from development since the 1870's and a state park since 1936, this park features the 310 foot Parson Jones tree as well as the 1400 year-old Colonel Armstrong tree.

Sutter's Fort State Park: Site of gold discovery in California that led to the great gold rush, this park's museum features exhibits of artifacts belonging to John Sutter, James Marshall and the Donner Party. The park is used extensively for educational purposes by students all over Central California; indeed, many schools base their entire State History curriculum around field trips to Sutter's Fort.

Tomales Bay State Park: Established in 1952 to protect what little beach-front property north of the Golden Gate that had yet to be developed, this park features the finest remaining virgin grove of native Bishop Pine in California.

Candlestick Point State Park: This popular urban San Francisco park features a fitness trail, two fishing piers and a community garden.

Portola Redwoods State Park: One of the tallest coastal redwoods (300 feet tall) in the Santa Cruz Mountains can be found here.

Great Valley Grasslands State Park: This park boasts on of the few intact samples of the Great Central Valley grasslands that once covered what is now the nation's breadbasket. The park is part of the Grasslands Ecological Area (GEA) that encompasses the largest block of contiguous wetlands left in California. Grasslands is home to several endangered endemic plant species and the site of spectacular springtime wildflower blooms.

Henry Coe State Park: This one is particularly irksome to me because it features the best hike-in bass fishing in the entire country. Hundreds of miles of trails and roads criss-cross this coastal range park, leading to old stock ponds miles from trail heads. These ponds are full of northern-strain largemouth bass. In a week-long hike there last spring my buddy John and I caught and released over 100 fish each, and in the entire week we saw only five other people, and one of them was a park ranger. This park is one of the most popular in the Bay Area; closing it would be unconscionable.

Fremont Peak State Park: This park offers outstanding views of nearby Monterey Bay and features an astronomical observatory with a 30-inch telescope that is open to the public on selected evenings.

Fort Ord Dunes State Park: This one is almost as bad as losing Coe. Closing Ord Dunes would short circuit plans to rehabilitate the former Army base, encompassing four miles of shoreline along over-developed Monterey Bay. Ord Dunes shows great promise as an outstanding example of native dunes near Monterey, one of the destination capitals of California.

Los Osos Oaks State Reserve: This park features centuries-old coast live oaks and five distinct plant communities. Most of the surrounding area was cleared of oak woodlands during the days of Mexican land grants.

Topanga State Park: Widely acknowledged as the largest wildlands in the world within the boundaries of a major city, this enclave in the Santa Monica Mountains north of downtown Los Angeles receives over 450,000 visitors per year. Neighboring Will Rogers State Park, which is also slated for closure, gets almost 250,000 visitors each year.

Picacho State Recreation Area: This park protects eight miles of the Lower Colorado River near Yuma and is home to bighorn sheep, wild burros and thousands of wintering waterfowl. Long a favorite of anglers and hunters, Picacho is a recreational oasis in the middle of the harsh Colorado Desert.

I could go on. Suffice it to say the California state park system has long been the envy of every other state. Crippling it to save a few dollars for rich Republicans is not only short-sighted, it's bad public policy. Our state parks generate millions of dollars in tax revenues by visitors not only from California, but by visitors from across the country. Once again our Governator is being penny wise but pound foolish.

Time To Go Hunt the Blue-headed Chickens

2007-11-05T13:49:00.000-08:00

Well, pheasant season is almost upon us here in California (the season opens this Saturday), so once again I'll find myself slogging through muddy alfalfa fields chasing the cursed blue-headed chickens this weekend.

It's sort of an annual trip for our group, trudging mile after mile in wet boots, made twice as heavy by the clay clinging to them, as we hope to get a shot or two at the wily creatures. And we'll have to explain to our dogs -- for the umpteenth time -- why we don't shoot at the hens they work so hard to flush.

Ah, but we'll have some extra entertainment along on this trip. One of my buddies is bringing a couple of "pheasant rookies" along. We'll spend Friday night around the campfire trying to explain it all to them. Then the next morning we'll laugh like fools when the exploding racket and the blur of a red and blue and brown rocket turns them to jello. There is just no way to describe to a man how unnerving it is to have a pheasant flush from beneath his feet. Good times, for sure.

Ebay Still Hates Guns . . . Kind Of

2007-11-02T16:39:00.000-07:00

A while back Ebay, in response to the carnage at Virginia Tech, made the boneheaded decision to cease the acceptance of any gun parts for auction on their site. Included were bullets and even empty shotgun hulls for reloading, torpedoing a little cottage industry of mine, as I was making a small fortune auctioning off, at obscene prices, the empty 28 gauge hulls I picked up for free at the local shooting range.

I recently sold my only 20 gauge shotgun, and in going through all the junk in my garage, found I had managed to accumulate a surprising amount of 20 gauge reloading materials. I began to wonder how I would dispose of them. At one time, I would have automatically thought: Ebay!, but with the ban I figured I'd have to put them on Craig's List or maybe Gunbroker.com.

What the hay, I decided to check out Ebay to see if maybe their ban had been reversed. What did I find? Empty hulls are, indeed, still banned. Much to my surprise, however, I found that shotshell wads are still being listed. So are bags of shot. Hell, even shotshell reloading presses are still being listed.

If guns are so immoral to the muckety mucks at Ebay, why do they allow the auction of wads, shot and even the machines used to make shotshells, but the empty hulls to finish the job are forbidden? Is this any way for them to take a moral stand, by only forbidding one component (a component that is perfectly legal to own and sell, by the way) out of the many needed to produce shotshells? Are they confused or just stupid? Or are they, maybe, really dumb like a fox?

Seems to me they have climbed on their soapbox to proclaim "We are anti gun," when what they really mean is they are only anti-gun when it can serve both their political and business purposes at once. After all, to be consistent they would have to prohibit all reloading components, but it would shave off some of their profits to do so. What hypocrites. Oh well, if anybody here reloads 20 gauge, there are some good deals right now on some discontinued Winchester wads over there right now.

Glenn Beck Is Right

2007-10-24T08:59:00.000-07:00

Or: The People of San Diego County Must Hate America -- They Still Support George Bush

By now most everybody has heard the quote from right-wing radio and TV host Glenn Beck: "I think there is a handful of people who hate America. Unfortunately for them, a lot of them are losing their homes in a forest fire today." Let's leave aside, for a moment, that only an asinine knucklehead would say something so hurtful and spiteful.

Instead, let's focus on Mr. Beck's ignorance of California's political road map. A vast majority of the homes lost in Southern California this week were in North San Diego County, a reliable bastion of Republicanism in this otherwise solidly blue state. Mr. Beck is, in effect, calling out his own people.

I would contend Beck has committed the grand-daddy of Freudian slips: It is Republicans who must hate America, because they continue to blindly support a president bent on destroying both the very civil liberties we have held sacred for over 200 years and the idea we should have a burgeoning middle class in America.

Moreover, it is the "we hate taxes" mindset of those Republicans that may have turned what should have been a mere disaster into an utter catastrophe. In their desire to keep taxes low, the good people of San Diego have succeeded in choking their government to the point it can't protect them. As Steve Lopez points out in his column today in the Los Angeles Times, the city of San Diego has just 975 firefighters for 330 square miles and 1.3 million residents. Contrast that with "liberal" San Francisco, which boasts 1,600 firefighters for 60 square miles and 850,000 residents.

Most firefighting analysts say these fires could have been mitigated had there simply been more manpower on hand at the outset. The people of San Diego may have done this to themselves. And the worst thing is that it will be folks like Glenn Beck who will shout loudest that, in this catastrophe, "the government has failed us," when in actuality it is the people who have failed their government.

Still, it is a testament to the good people of California that this is no Katrina. At the height of the wildfires over one million people had been evacuated from their homes. The evacuation was, in large part, orderly and calm, and the evacuees have been well taken care of. I'm no big fan of the Governator, but his leadership during this trying time has been exemplary. And my thoughts are with the good people who have lost their homes and businesses.

Iggygate Heats Up

2007-10-18T19:42:00.000-07:00

Or: Ellen DeGeneres Torpedoes Would-be Dog Savers' Careers

By now, almost everybody knows about the strange case of Iggy, the dog that comedian and talk show host Ellen DeGeneres adopted and then passed along to her hair dresser's family. My only question about the whole affair is this: what did Marina Batkis and Vanessa Chekroun, proprietors of Mutts and Moms (the animal rescue operation that originally gave the dog to DeGeneres) hope to gain by yanking the dog away from an eleven year-old girl and her family?

One assumes they meant to flip the figurative finger at DeGeneres, apparently for being a "celebrity" who could "always get her way" because of her status. Yet one also can't escape the feeling that Batkis and Chekroun aren't the sharpest tools in the shed. After all, DeGeneres has a considerable soap-box on which to stand. Had they thought this through, Batkis and Chekroun surely should have understood that taking on DeGeneres in this manner could only result in career suicide.

Yet take on DeGeneres they did, and in an unthinking and unfeeling manner. Following this story I'm reminded of the classic T-shirt; you know, the one with the caption "The Last Great Act of Defiance." In this case Batkis and Chekroun are the mice, and Ellen DeGeneres is the eagle.

Mutts and Moms is dead. Batkis and Chekroun may as well pick up the want-ads and begin looking for new occupations. Ladies, Ellen just stuck a fork in you, and you are done. You look like jerks, and Ellen looks like a sympathetic figure who just tallied another notch in her belt. Nice work, Mutts and Moms.

Randon Thoughts On the Day's News

2007-10-12T09:28:00.000-07:00

All across the country today Neo-con heads are spinning -- a la Linda Blair in The Exorcist -- upon the news of Al Gore winning the Nobel Peace Prize. Is now a good time to ask Mr. Gore to save us from the clutches of hell by, pretty please, running for president? I know this may seem a bit selfish, but, at this point Mr. Gore, your country needs you more than does the world.

There seems to be a lot of angst among the liberal blogosphere about the possibility of an "October Surprise" next year, perhaps another terrorist attack, in an effort to elect Republicans. Why would it occur to anyone that another attack will result in continued Republican rule? The Democrats need to repeat this mantra, early and often: It happened on their watch. It happened on their watch.

The Republicans were in control on 9-11, and they completely ignored the intelligence that we were about to be attacked. Call me crazy, but I think another attack will result in an immense Democratic landslide in 2008. Remember: it happened on their watch.

My vegetarian friends are feeling smug nowadays, what with the recent report that methane from the world's livestock are a major contributor to global warming. Personally, I don't think this report in any way validates the vegetarian lifestyle. After all, we as a species evolved largely as a result of our change from being an herbivore to an omnivore. Instead, I think the report merely validates a far more insidious fact: the world is dangerously over-populated, and we are rapidly beginning to exceed the earth's carrying capacity.

A Weekend In L.A.

2007-10-10T15:26:00.000-07:00

My son's flag football team had an 8:00 A.M. game last Saturday in Pasadena. Reasoning that waking him up at 5:00 to make it to the game on time probably wasn't a good idea (much less waking my wife at such a god-forsaken hour), we decided to spend the weekend at my father-in-law's condo in L.A.'s Westside District, which would shorten our drive to the game by at least a half hour.

My son's team lost on a last-second touchdown by Pasadena, ruining our hopes for an undefeated season. After the game, we drove back to the condo to unwind, and then made our way to Westwood Village to take in the shops. I remembered the Village from my younger days as a wonderfully eclectic mix of quirky and unique shops. Today, the Village has been completely corporatized. Instead of the one-of-a-kind eateries that once populated the area, you now have Quizno's and Subway and the ubiquitous Starbucks. About the only unique shop left in the Village is film director Kevin Smith's comic book shop, and it's about to close because Smith can't find someone to run it for him.

As an aside, my wife and I noticed a difference between the homeless people we saw in Westwood and those we see elsewhere: they are electronically outfitted better than we are. We saw one guy sporting a brand-new Ipod Nano, and another with a Blackberry. It begs the questions: how does a homeless person go about downloading music to his Ipod? Where does Verizon send his bill for his PDA? Also, every homeless person we saw was pushing his cans and bottles in identical black carts. Are these government issue? Does West L.A. have some sort of program to make sure its homeless are homogeneous?

Anyway, after our disappointing shopping experience we decided to take our son to see The Rock's new film, Game Plan, at the historic El Capitan Theatre on Hollywood Boulevard. What should have been a twenty minute trip from Westwood took an hour and fifteen minutes, thanks to an immense traffic jam on the Golden State Freeway.

As an outside salesman I drive for a living. I deal with Southern California traffic on a daily basis, so I'm largely immune to traffic rage. I accept traffic for what it is: a pain in the rear about which I really can't do anything. My wife, on the other hand, has a ten-minute commute along surface streets to an office building. She doesn't do traffic. About five minutes in she started with the "hurrumpfs," then the heavy sighs, and then proceeded to have a near melt-down as we inched along. It was not the most enjoyable trip I've ever endured.

Anyway, we finally made it to Hollywood, and all I can say is that, despite the creeping corporatization of the area, it is just as delightfully weird as ever. A couple hundred people were in front of the Kodak Theater, protesting the plight of the Burmese people. Interspersed with them were Spiderman, Cinderella, Darth Vader, an Imperial stormtrooper, Davy Jones, Willy Wonka, Edward Scissorhands, and no fewer than three Captain Jack Sparrows. Indeed, only a drunken, drug-addled Hunter S. Thompson was needed to complete the entire Johnny Depp filmography.

Here's a short review of Game Plan: If you have a six or seven year-old boy or girl, go see it. There's enough slapstick to keep the boys laughing, and it's cute enough to keep the girls smiling. In fact (and I never thought I would write this about any vehicle starring The Rock), it was not an altogether painful way to waste two hours on a Saturday afternoon.

Sunday, we made our way to the La Brea tar pits. My son's at an age that skeletons fascinate him, so the walk through the museum was enjoyable for all of us. We got to see the paleontologists pull a real sloth femur from Pit 91. Then, as we walked past one of the pits no longer being explored, we caught a bit of realism: a small sparrow vainly struggling to extricate itself from the bubbling asphalt. This was a bit much for the wife, who didn't exactly come here to see the tar pits in action. My son, on the other hand, was enthralled, and declared we needed to come back in a couple of weeks to "see if we can find the bird's skull." I told you, skeletons fascinate him.

So all in all, it was a successful excursion for the family, although by the end of the weekend my wife had had enough of L.A. We want to go back to take in the Natural History museum, but I think she needs a bit of L.A. detox before again venturing into the City of Angels.

Bush Vetoes S-CHIP Expansion

2007-10-03T13:39:00.000-07:00

So today President Bush vetoed the expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP) recently passed by Congress. "I believe in private medicine," he said, "not the federal government running the health care system."

Great, he believes in a health care system that has caused millions of children to lose their coverage in the six-plus years he's been in power. He believes in a health care system in which insurance companies gobble up from twenty to forty percent of all revenues, as opposed to government-run health care that boasts less than five percent in administrative costs. He believes in a health care system in which even insured individuals are routinely denied needed treatments by their for-profit insurers.

Moreover, he believes the trillion dollars it will end up costing us for his disastrous and unnecessary foray into Iraq is just fine, but spending seven billion per year the next five years to ensure the health of the nation's children is somehow "reckless spending."

So much for "compassionate conservatism." Hell, so much for conservatism. After all, study after study has shown the costs to society for having so many children uninsured -- from increased emergency room visits to missed school days to declining productivity once they reach adulthood -- far outweigh the additional costs of providing them health care. Talk about being penny wise and pound foolish.

We can only hope the House finds the needed votes to override this mean-spirited veto. If not, look for this to be another in the long litany of issues in which Bush has effectively hoisted his party on its own petard. 2008 can't come soon enough.

Wow, Football Really Sucks This Year (For me)

2007-09-23T19:56:00.000-07:00

I'm a big-time football fan. Always have been, since I was seven or eight. I love the game, love the pageantry, love the controlled violence. Football is the ultimate team game -- one player misses an assignment and the efforts of his ten teammates is wasted. A single player can carry a basketball team or a baseball team or a soccer team, but a single outstanding football player surrounded by mediocre ones is destined for failure.

Let me tell you, I'm not liking football very much this season. You see, my rooting interests are stinking up the joint. At the college level, my beloved Nebraska got creamed last week by USC, and on Saturday needed a last minute touchdown followed by a missed field goal to squeak by Ball State. At home. Ball State. We gave up 40 points. To Ball State. At home.

During the Devaney/Osborne years my Huskers would have rolled Ball State for six-hundred yards and a 53-6 pasting. Today, the vaunted "Blackshirts" (Nebraska's once-proud defense) are leaving holes so large that even I could probably go for 153 and four TD's, and I'm 47 years old.

Sunday was even worse, as my St. Louis Rams continued their free fall into the nether regions of the NFL. The Rams lost 24-3 to Tampa Bay, a team that won only four games last season, and the final score was in no way indicative of how bad it was. Down just 3-0 at the half, at no time did one have the sense the Rams were ever in the game. The Rams are now missing -- due to either injury or suspension -- four offensive linemen, a defensive lineman, a starting linebacker and their two starting cornerbacks. The Rams have guys now starting who were in street clothes just two weeks ago. 0-16 is starting to look realistic for this bunch this year, and the coach is a dead man walking.

If it weren't for my son's Pop Warner flag football team, 4-0 and coming off a big win versus our biggest rival, this football season would be a total loss. Maybe I should become a soccer fan.

Quit Blaming the Democrats

2007-09-21T20:57:00.000-07:00

Again, there seems to be much angst among the blogosphere and liberal talk radio against the Democrats on capital hill for the Senate's failure to pass measures pushing back against the President's failed policies. This week alone, the Senate failed to pass a bill rescinding the abolishing of Habeus Corpus for so-called "enemy combatants," failed to pass the Jim Webb amendment that would have mandated more leave time for our soldiers, and failed to pass a measure mandating a time-line for troop withdrawal in Iraq. Much of the chatter amongst liberals is that these failures are but a growing symptom of Democrat's unwillingness to actually do something about Bush's executive power-grab.

It's time for a little civic's lesson here, folks. In the Senate, no bill may be brought to the floor for an "up or down" majority vote until debate is closed. It takes 60 votes to close debate. The vote to close debate is called a "cloture vote." The Democrats have 50 members in the Senate, plus an independent, who used to call himself a Democrat and who caucuses with the Democrats, but who usually votes with the Republicans.

O.K., repeat after me: we don't have the votes in the Senate to close debate.

Once again, a little differently: the Senate Democrats can't get past a cloture vote. The Republicans are free to obstruct anything they want. Yes, the same Republicans who, not too long ago, threatened the "nuclear option" of scrapping Senate rules that today allow them to hang on to a thread of seeming power. The Democrats can't pass any bill unless at least nine Republicans go along with it, and that's assuming Joe Lieberman would actually toe the line.

Quit blaming the Democrats for not stopping the occupation (I refuse to call Bush's Folly a "war" any longer). If anything, blame yourselves for allowing so many Republicans to remain in their senate posts for so long. And pray that nine more Republicans are thrown from their Senate seats in 2008, so Democrats can affect some real change, regardless of who holds the White House.

More Random Thoughts On the Day's News

2007-09-19T13:27:00.000-07:00

A new study finds that Southern California commuters waste, on average, seventy hours per year stuck in traffic. Seventy hours per year? Are you kidding me? All I can say is, from my perspective, there are a whole lot of folks out here not doing their fair share of traffic time.

Other than George W. Bush, is there a dumber man ever to grace this great nation than O.J. Simpson?

Speaking of Bush, now he says he wants Congress to make his illegal domestic wiretap program permanently legal. The next time I have the urge to call Bush a lazy slacker, I'm going to remember his grand legacy, his one shining accomplishment: first president to burn the Constitution in effigy.

Iraqi leaders want to shove Blackwater out of their country for shooting a bunch of innocent civilians. If they come up with the gumption to throw out the other 100,000-plus hired mercenaries, er, "contractors" we have fighting there it could be a real turning point in this mess. Take away the mercenaries, er, "contractors" and there's no way our over-stretched and broken military can avoid being run over by the burgeoning civil war, er, "sectarian violence." Bush will have to make one of two choices: either reinstate the draft or get us the hell out.

As you can see from the previous paragraph, I've pretty much had it with the misleading labels the righties have come up with for explaining this "war." In fact, we're not waging a "war," we're conducting an occupation. We're not dealing with "sectarian violence," we're conducting our occupation in the middle of a civil war. These are not "contractors" out killing innocent people, they are hired mercenaries. We are not "building Democracy," we're protecting our oil interests. And, for the love of God, we're not "fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here," we're fighting them over there because that's the best venue for Haliburton to make the most money possible from the blood and guts of our brave men and women. Note to Republicans: quit trying to tell us the sky is green and water is dry. We know better.

More Random Thoughts On the Day's News

2007-09-17T13:06:00.000-07:00

Producers of the EMMY's telecast last night bleeped out Sally Field when she exclaimed "If mothers ruled the world there wouldn't be any God damned wars in the first place!" Let me see if I've got this straight: a program based upon the Mob and featuring murder and mayhem is worthy of countless EMMY awards, but taking God's name in vain is a no no.

I have no idea, other than what I've read in the paper, who this Mukasey guy is. I just know he can't possibly be a worse Attorney General than Gonzo. On the other hand, if he maintains even a semblance of independence from the president and promises to faithfully execute his office -- even if it leads to evidence of Republican malfeasance -- he may not be confirmable, because the Republicans will filibuster rather than run the risk of more indictments before the 2008 elections.

I heard on the radio of a poll of some 2000 plus Iraqi citizens in Anbar Province, a place the president insists is a beacon of light made safe by his "surge." The poll reported that 100% -- that's everyone, folks -- agreed that attacking "coalition forces" was O.K. I don't know what's more disconcerting: that every citizen in Anbar thinks it's a good idea to attack our troops, or that the administration is still trying to peddle this whole mess as a "coalition." 140,000 U.S. troops and one guy each from Poland, Argentina and Albania does not a coalition make. Even the Brits have pulled out. Can we please stop the charade and quit calling this thing a "coalition of the willing," and instead call it what it is: A "mistake of the stupid."

California has passed a law mandating hands-free kits when using a cellular phone in the car. The law doesn't take effect until July 2008, which isn't nearly soon enough for me. Just today I saw a woman driving erratically in the fast lane at fifty miles an hour in a 65 zone. Sure enough, when I passed her she was driving with her knees, talking on the phone and applying lipstick at the same time. Listen up people! A car is not the proper environment to perfect your multi-tasking skills. Hang up and drive.

Cheating Patriots Get Off Easy

2007-09-14T10:12:00.000-07:00

So the NFL has found the New England Patriots guilty of cheating in a most nefarious way. Seems Bill Belichick and company have been video-taping the opposing team's defensive coaches as they signal in their plays. No wonder the common lament of Patriots opponents -- "it was almost like they were in our huddle" -- now rings so true: in effect, they were.

Yet the penalties handed down by the league -- a measly $750,000 in fines and a lost number one draft pick -- seem benign given the gravity of the offense. After all, league history might read differently had the Patriots not cheated.

Take, for example, their Super Bowl victory over the Rams following the 2001 season. They didn't exactly roll to victory in that game. Indeed, despite the referee's unwillingness to call illegal contact against Patriots players who mugged St. Louis receivers all game long, the Patriots only won with a last-second drive aided by a blown non-call when Tom Brady intentionally grounded the ball.

Who knows how that game -- and league history -- might have turned out had the Patriots not known the Ram's defensive signals before each play? St. Louis might have been the town with an NFL dynasty, Kurt Warner might be on the way to the Hall of Fame, and Mike Martz might still be a head coach. The Patriots, with their despicable actions, have inexorably altered the lives and careers of those associated with every team they've played.

What the Patriots have done tears at the very fabric of a game that depends upon a perception of fairness to thrive. This turns the NFL into an enterprise no more real and legitimate than pro wrestling. The NFL blew this one. At the very least, Belichick should have been drummed out of the league forever and the Patriots should have forfeited last week's game. I would have preferred the league confiscate all those ill-gotten and unearned Lombardi trophies. Shame on you, Bill Belichick, and shame on the Patriots.

A final aside: you New England Patriots fans must now hang your head in shame, knowing that none of the team's successes over the past several years were in any way legitimate. Your team won by cheating, your victories are hollow.

Doublespeak

2007-09-13T19:34:00.000-07:00

So President Bush breathlessly reports he plans to reduce our Iraq contingent by about 30,000 troops by next summer, hoping to quell the rising chorus demanding we begin bringing our boys and girls home now. Never mind this troop reduction was already planned, based upon standard troop rotations -- rotations that have been expanded from the standard twelve month's duty to eighteen. Never mind that this "redeployment" only brings troop levels back to the numbers in Iraq before Bush's "surge."

Only about thirty percent of Americans trust this man anymore anyways. Why does he continue to throw this garbage in our faces? Is it some aimless effort at maintaining that thirty percent? Why is he still wasting our time with this claptrap? Does he hope the mindless dolts running the mainstream media will report his misconstructions as fact and that the rest of us will meekly accept it on faith?

The wheels fell off this one a long time ago, George. The people at large no longer believe a single word emanating from your pie-hole, and with good reason. And your lackeys in your failed administration and your hobbled military are now no more believable than you.

A Generation of Weenies, or

2007-09-07T21:12:00.000-07:00

Enhancing Self Esteem At the Expense of Excellence Is a Bad Idea

My son just started his first season of Pop Warner flag football. It just so happens his team is pretty good. It's a good group of kids, they have a great coaching staff that seems to have somehow melded a bunch of six-year olds into a cohesive, disciplined unit, and the parents are largely supportive. They are so good there is really no drop-off from the first to second string. As a result, we're rolling over the other teams on our schedule. And our head coach may be running the risk of getting in trouble for it.

You see, Pop Warner has this rule preventing teams from running up the score. You know, we don't want little Johnny to think he's inferior because his team is getting its butt whipped. If a coach doesn't take drastic measures to prevent his team from running it up (in our case, telling his kids to quit trying, since the second string is almost as effective as the first) he can face disciplinary measures, including suspension.

But I happen to think the alternative -- telling kids to quit trying because they might embarrass the other guys -- might be just as damaging. When you teach a kid that it's wrong to try to win, and win big, you're teaching him that winning somehow doesn't really matter all that much. You're fooling him into thinking that life is somehow "fair."

Life is not fair. Some people lose, some win. Some win big while others lose big. Maybe that's a harsh lesson for six-year olds to come to grips with, but it's reality. And I really don't think those six-year olds getting their butts whipped need this extra enhancement of their self esteem at the expense of penalizing the excellence of their opponents. I worry that this type of hand-holding will not in fact result in a more self-actualized esteem, but instead will only create a generation of weenies who can't understand why life has treated them so badly. Just my two cents.

Bush's Weapons Of Mass Deception

2007-09-07T14:17:00.000-07:00

Sidney Blumenthal reports in his latest Salon article that CIA Chief George Tenet told George W. Bush in a briefing in September of 2002 that the agency had solid information Iraq and Saddam Hussein harbored no weapons of mass destruction. This briefing was described to Blumenthal by two former high-ranking officials at the CIA. Blumenthal further notes that not only did Bush ignore this information, he also forbid this information from being disseminated to then-Secretary of State Colin Powell or to the members of Congress who thereafter voted to authorize his use of force in Iraq.

So the short story is this: Bush knew there were no weapons in Iraq, but he wanted his war so bad he lied to Powell, Congress and the American people to get it. He played the "politics of fear" card so loud for so long (and, we now know for certain, so disingenuously) that in the end he got what he wanted: to be known as a "war time" president.

Where does this leave us? It seems obvious now he is guilty of "high crimes and misdemeanors" and should be impeached Constitutionally, yet we know we don't have the votes in the Senate to convict and remove.

A lot of people on the left are kind of mad at the Democratic Congress right now for not showing the courage to end the war or impeach Bush. However, I lay this right at the feet of the Republicans. Where are the Republican statesmen who put principle over party? The Republicans who voted to impeach Clinton for getting a hummer but give Bush a free ride for lying us into a horrible and unwinable war that has cost thousands of American lives and maybe a million Iraqi ones?

What a sorry state of affairs this is.

Arizona Is Melting; Dove Hunting Report

2007-09-03T16:57:00.000-07:00

Just got back from beautiful Dateland, Arizona, where I partook in our annual Labor Day Weekend dove hunt, and all I can say is: "Good God it was hot!" Of course, one expects a bit of heat when venturing into the Arizona desert on the first of September.

(Saner minds, such as my wife's, might question the wisdom of being outdoors in 117 degree heat just to fire our shotguns, in a largely futile manner, at speeding little gray missiles. To that I say: hogwash. Any day firing the lightening stick is a good day, even if it's hot enough to melt glass. Besides, as my Dad put it, "at least it was a wet heat.")

Well, we got our birds, although it was a challenge because Arizona has this arcane and indefensible rule that a hunter may only shoot six white-wing doves per day, reserving the rest of his or her ten-dove limit for the usually more populous mourning dove. Except that the place we shot was populated almost entirely by white-wings. So hunts that might have ended after forty-five minutes were extended to two hours -- in the searing heat -- as we let bird after bird fly by, looking for the lone mourning doves who had "integrated" themselves into the heretofore exclusive white-wing family.

This annoying habit of letting perfectly shootable birds pass produced much consternation in the dogs. I'm used to the look; I've seen the same facial expression on my dog when I fail to shoot at the hen pheasants she's so fond of flushing.

But, as I said, we got our birds and then immediately repaired to the swimming pool, surrounded by beer coolers, where we waited out the afternoon heat, sunk up to our necks in warm water. By the time the bright orb in the sky finally sank, the young ones among us were so shriveled they looked to be fifty, and the older ones looked like corpses. Just another three days in paradise.

Republican Sexual Hypocrisy

2007-08-29T14:31:00.000-07:00

So Senator Larry Craig (R-ID) has admitted to pleading guilty to misdemeanor charges resulting from his "lewd homosexual conduct" in a men's room. This comes on the heels of Senator David Vitter (R-LA) explaining why his phone number was found with prostitutes, which came on the heels of mega-church pastor Ted Haggard being forced to resign his ministry over some tawdry homosexual and drug escapades, which came on the heels of the Mark Foley (R-FL) page scandal.

And just what do all these prominent men have in common? Why, all of them are "pro-family" conservatives who claim homosexuality is a sin. All are on record as opposing gay marriage. All of them excoriated Bill Clinton for his infidelities. All of them are stinking hypocrites. Although they're human hypocrites, with all their foibles and closet skeletons, and that at least makes them a bit less unlikeable in my book.

These men are great late-night fodder for Letterman and Leno, who must look upon the GOP as a veritable "gift that keeps on giving." But then it's hard not to pile on men who denounce in public what they keep doing in private. Well, at least sometimes it's in private.

Maybe Republicans will eventually figure this out, and just say what those of us on the left have long known: there is nothing wrong with homosexuality, gays aren't a threat to heterosexuals or their quaint customs of marriage, and it was wrong to roast Bill Clinton over a spit for cheating on his wife.

Nephew's Second Time In Dove Camp

2007-08-28T13:59:00.000-07:00

sister <> wrote:

Hey Sid,
I should know the answer to this already, but what kind of shells does my son need, and how boxes should he bring? Could you send us directions to Dateland and to where he needs to go to get his license?
--Sis

Sis,
He needs 12 gauge 2 3/4" shells, field or target load, 7 1/2 shot or 8 shot. The way my nephew shoots, I would count on ten or twelve boxes per day.

Take I10 east all the way through Indio to Highway 86S. Take 86S all the way to Westmorland.

In Wesmorland, turn right (south) on Center Street. Center Street turns into Forrester Road. Take Forrester Road south to I8 east. This will save him about 45 minutes by bypassing Brawley and El Centro. I know, Brawley is the "garden spot" of the Imperial Valley, but he can see it another time.

Take I8 east to Dateland exit, about 66 miles east of Yuma. Turn right (south) off of the freeway, go past trailer park on right, and turn left (east) at dead end. In a couple of miles he'll see the trailer park on the right, over the railroad tracks. I don't remember what it's called, but he can't miss it. There's nothing else out there except cactus and meth labs.

For his license: they've opened a new Walmart in the east side of Yuma. Take I8 all the way through Yuma and exit at 32nd St. (this exit may be signed as East County 11th Street South, which immediately turns into 32nd Street. Arizona's road names are more messed-up than any other state's except California and Utah. In any case, it's the last exit before Fortuna Road). The Walmart is on 32nd Street (or maybe 11th Street South, the geniuses at Walmart weren't sure), on the south side of the freeway. You can see it from the Interstate.

A non-resident year-long license costs $151.25; a three-day is $61.25. For either he needs to buy the $4.50 migratory bird stamp. Make sure he fills out a Harvest Information Survey and gets the free Harvest Information stamp. He's got to have the license and both stamps to be legal. At those prices he might want to consider the new alternatives offered by Arizona for purchasing his non-resident license: a pound of flesh or his first male-born child.

Tell him not to assume the idiots working the counter at Walmart know what they're doing. It took me four phone calls to find somebody who could give me directions to the store, and even then they weren't sure if the exit was signed "32nd St." or "East County 11th." I'm assuming they all have bunks in the warehouse, since nobody who works there knows how to get there.

Tell my nephew we're gonna' eat doves on Saturday and spaghetti on Sunday. Dad's gonna' bring the sausage, but I made sure he got half hot and half sweet -- another batch of that hot sauce we choked down at Rock Creek probably wouldn't go down so well at 112 degrees in the shade.

I don't know what Dad has planned for Monday -- if my nephew can stay -- but I'm sure he'll get fed. I've got plenty of hot dogs and chili for chili/cheese dogs by the pool. He needs to bring his own munchies, drinks and beer.

Yes, I said beer. I know he's only eighteen, but he needs to learn the ways, and I'm tired of him bumming beers off me. Besides he doesn't seem to approve of my taste. Just what's wrong with Pabst Blue Ribbon, anyways?

Give me a call if you have any questions. Tell my nephew I'll see him in Arizona.

Your brother,
Sid

Gonzo Resigns

2007-08-27T08:19:00.000-07:00

It would be easy this morning to pick on Alberto Gonzalez, George Bush's embattled now ex-Attorney General. Notwithstanding his bumbling perjury before Congress when discussing the burgeoning prosecutor firing scandal and his knowledge (or seeming lack thereof) of his president's illegal wiretapping program, Gonzo seemed way in over his head from the get go.

His Bush-like smirk couldn't hide his base incompetence. Morale at justice had sunk to new lows, and the entire department had become dis-functional. At some point he had to go, and better late than never.

Still, the fact that a boob like Gonzo got the job in the first place only illustrates a disturbing characterization of this administration: George Bush's seeming inability to choose people with any discernible talents beyond blind loyalty.

Bush ran as the first "CEO" president, promising to run the government more like a real business. Of course, based upon his stumbling forays in the real business world, the voters might have hired a more competent CEO. George has run the nation like a business all right: he's hired people unfit for their jobs and has watched idly by as they've run the company into bankruptcy. He's borrowed more money from foreign entities than all previous "CEO's" combined. He turned a profitable company (we had a surplus when he became "CEO") into a company bleeding red ink. For God's sake, he's turned Toyota into Chrysler. Good going, George.

And he'll end up with a golden parachute at the end of his term in the form of a sizable public-paid pension, a lifetime of medical benefits and some stock options in Haliburton.

Terrorist Anglers

2007-08-26T14:59:00.000-07:00

Citing terrorist threats to Los Angeles’ water supply, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (DWP) has permanently closed the Eastern Sierra’s Haiwee Reservoirs to fishing. Los Angeles aqueduct manager Gene Coufal was quoted in the Los Angeles Times as saying, "If contamination occurred at Haiwee, it would be a matter of hours before it got to L.A.”

Apparently, this means we can soon expect water officials to announce plans to close Lakes Powell, Mead and Havasu. The San Diego City lakes can’t be too far behind. And God forbid if terrorists hit the many dozens of miles of the L.A. Aqueduct above Haiwee that are still accessible. (Of course, DWP thinks it has that problem figured out: they covered up all the signs along Highway 395 that used to read "Los Angeles Aqueduct" because, hey, terrorists apparently can't read maps.)

Seriously, does the DWP truly believe the city’s water supply is in danger of attack by terrorists disguised as anglers? Will the closure of two reservoirs to fishing really make our lives any safer? Or is there perhaps some ulterior motive at work here?

First, a little background. The twin Haiwee Reservoirs, twenty miles south of the town of Lone Pine and part of the Los Angeles Aqueduct system, were closed to fishing from 1950 until April of 1994. During those years DWP personnel, backed by posted “No Trespassing” signs, routinely drove surreptitious anglers from the lakes under threat of arrest.

In 1991, members of a group called the Owens Valley Warm Water Fishing Association (OVWWFA) began openly flaunting the closure. Citing the California State Constitution, they refused to leave when told they were trespassing. (I'm proud to admit that, although I was never a member of OVWWFA, I, too, made a habit of sneaking in to Haiwee before it was "legal.") Local law enforcement officials, apparently on to something, refused to cite the anglers despite pleas from DWP personnel.

Article 1, Section 25 of the California State Constitution reads: “The people shall have the right to fish upon and from the public lands of the State and in the waters thereof . . . and no land owned by the State shall ever be sold or transferred without reserving in the people the absolute right to fish thereupon . . .” In effect, anglers had been illegally excluded from a legal fishing destination for nearly fifty years.

The right to fish at Haiwee was also a condition made by Inyo County when an agreement transferred land from the Bureau of Land Management to the DWP in 1983.

Still, the DWP dragged its feet for four years, ostensibly because of concerns over water quality, despite the fact they allow cattle to graze at the reservoirs, right to the water’s edge. Apparently cows are cleaner than people. They also cited nesting bald eagles as a reason for concern, though anglers and eagles coexist at dozens of lakes in the state. Many people felt (and continue to feel) the DWP’s real motive was preserving their own private fishing hole.

Finally, in 1994 the DWP relented to pressure from fishing organizations. Parking lots were constructed, toilets installed, trash cans provided and gates opened. Strict guidelines restricting body contact with water were established, and catch and release fishing was encouraged.

Now, just thirteen years later, the DWP has closed Haiwee to protect the city from terrorists, as if the exclusion of anglers will magically make any plausible threat of terrorism disappear. Yet no such announcement seems to be forthcoming regarding Lake Crowley, which the DWP also owns and is a popular fishing destination upstream from Haiwee. Are the Haiwee Reservoirs truly the one weak spot in the city’s water system? Or is the DWP only trying to get people out of a place they never wanted them to be in the first place?

In any case, time to sell those personal watercraft, skiing sleds and fishing boats while you still can. Diamond Valley Reservoir is sure to be next on the list, followed by Silverwood, Puddingstone, and Skinner. Those reservoirs in the Sierra foothills and the California Aqueduct surely must be at risk -- we've got to close them too. And if you’re out there, be sure to report any suspicious looking anglers.

More Random Thoughts On the Day's News

2007-08-24T08:14:00.001-07:00

Wow, this is sure news. Our intelligence agencies are reporting that Iraq Prime Minister Maliki is, to quote the L.A. Times, "unable to govern his country effectively and the political situation is likely to become even more precarious in the next six to twelve months."

You think?

And George Bush's reaction is to compare Iraq to Vietnam, another country that was "unable to govern itself," at least until we had the wisdom to leave it.

The Times is also reporting that Southern California is in the midst of an earthquake "lull" that has lasted as much as 1000 years, and that when the lull ends we could experience quakes fifteen times larger than the Northridge earthquake of 1994. Gee, that's comforting. I guess it's time to again consider purchasing that beachfront property in Yuma.

A former Army Corps of Engineers employee has pled guilty to helping rig the bids to repair levees in New Orleans. There is no truth to the rumor the man is related to Dick Cheney.

The big story, of course, (as far as the mainstream media are concerned) is that Nicolle Richie only served 82 minutes of her four-day jail sentence for driving the wrong way on the Ventura Freeway. I'm guessing that won't do much to teach her not to be a talentless, treacherous menace to society.

Bush Compares Iraq To Vietnam

2007-08-22T14:59:00.000-07:00

So now President Bush is comparing Iraq to Vietnam, and says it's the reason why we should continue the insanity of occupying a nation we never should have invaded. "Whatever your position is on (the Vietnam) debate, one unmistakable legacy of Vietnam is that the price of America's withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent victims whose agony would add to our vocabulary new terms like 'boat people,' re-education camps' and killing fields,' " he said.

Well, Mr. Bush seems to be guilty of a bit of revisionist history. Most historians believe the U.S. military killed between two and three million civilians during the Vietnam conflict, far more than died in the post-withdrawal meltdown. Moreover, by the time one year had passed after the fall of Saigon, the killing in Vietnam had largely ceased, and the country had largely returned to some kind of normalcy.

Today Vietnam is a stable, unified country, albeit a communist one. No more "dominoes" fell, and Vietnam is both a trading partner of the U.S. and a vacation destination of our citizens. Things seem to have turned out O.K. Indeed, I think most Vietnamese citizens would agree the best thing that ever happened to their country was us getting out.

No, Mr. Bush, the parallel with Iraq and Vietnam is this: we were lured into both illegal wars by deception and outright lying at the highest levels of our government. Both conflicts quickly devolved into quagmires of civil war that our very presence only made worse.

And the lesson of Vietnam, Mr. President, is this: get out. Get out now. Don't waste the life of one more American or one more innocent Iraqi civilian. Don't burn through any more of our treasury on a doomed and unnecessary occupation. Don't continue to serve as a recruiting poster for terrorist membership drives. Just leave.

Jesus Was a Democrat

2007-08-21T15:54:00.000-07:00

What is it about the so-called "religious conservatives" that allows them to pick and choose which teachings of the Bible are the important ones? I mean, abortion is sin because it's murder but war is virtuous because . . . well, I can't quite figure it out.

Indeed, it seems religious conservatives tend to focus on two issues in particular -- abortion and gay rights -- to the exclusion of a whole host of other issues I think would have interested Jesus, were he alive today. Jesus most certainly wouldn't have approved of George Bush's unjust and unnecessary war. Jesus was big on providing for the poor, a political dead end with the Republican party. I think Jesus would be appalled that a whole segment of society has no access to health care benefits. He probably wouldn't think much of giving tax breaks to corporations that pollute his Father's creation, nor of giving tax breaks to the richest in society while the working class gets snubbed. And don't get me started on the Republican response to Katrina; let's just say Jesus would have been mortified.

I guess what I'm saying is that, during the next election cycle, Democrats would do well by again claiming, forcefully, the moral high-ground that is rightly theirs. The Democrats are the party of the common folk, the poor, the disenfranchised, the people Jesus championed in His time.

Moreover, I think people of religion who support the Republican Party should be ashamed that their politicians pay lip service to morality but tend not to follow through. And for all you folks out there with their WWJD T-shirts and bumper-stickers, why I'll tell you: He'd vote Democrat.

Michael Vick Pleads Guilty

2007-08-20T14:35:00.001-07:00

I usually try to refrain from commenting on sports. Not because I don't like sports -- I'm actually a big fan of the Rams, Cornhusker's football and the Anaheim Ducks -- but because at heart I believe sports are merely a diversion, and certainly not matters of any real consequence. With ESPN One through Ocho, Fox Sports Net, Jim Rome, countless blogs and even its own section of the local paper, I think sports gets pretty well-covered in this country, so I don't usually see the point of adding my two cents.

But this Michael Vick thing has me properly steamed. I see today where he agreed to plead guilty to running that dog fighting ring, despite his weeks-long protestations of innocence. I have two questions for Mr. Vick. First, how can you or your co-defendants, by any twisted sense of morality, come to the conclusion that fighting dogs to the death is a good thing? And second, what the hell were you thinking?

That second question is as old as sports, particularly since idiots like Steve Howe began throwing away their careers for drugs. But at least those guys had a semi-rational explanation: they're diseased. It's called addiction for a reason -- they can't stop, even though they know it could, and probably will, derail their professions and their lives.

But I have yet to see some talking head on the T.V. try to stake out the position that the desire to see dogs cleaving the flesh off of other dogs is some sort of addiction. Vick made a conscious decision here: I'm going to participate in a sadistic exercise, rightly abhorred by nearly everyone. And If I'm caught at it, this will almost certainly end my multi-million dollar career and any hope at ever endorsing any product ever again.

Maybe Michael Vick should have plead insanity, because from my point of view only a mad-man would have made his choices.

Owens Valley - An Environmental Irony

2007-08-20T13:41:00.000-07:00

California's Owens Valley sits as a largely untrammeled outdoor paradise close by the towering eastern flank of the Sierra Nevada mountains. Several smallish towns dot Highway 395 as it makes its way up the valley, providing gateways into the unspoiled Eastern Sierra back country and the Bristlecone Pine forest of the White Mountains. Yet other than these few slumbering bergs -- Lone Pine, Independence, Big Pine and Bishop, as one heads north -- the larger part of the Owens Valley looks much as it did five-hundred years ago.

The valley is home to dozens of fauna species, including the largest herd of endemic tule elk in the state, as well as dozens of endemic species of flora. As a transition zone between the Mojave and Great Basin deserts, the valley floor and the foothills of the Sierra, Inyo and White Mountains provide an amazing diversity of life not often found in such a harsh desert environment.

It's ironic, then, that had the City of Los Angeles not stolen the valley's water near the beginning of the last century -- an act thought of at the time as an unmitigated environmental and economic catastrophe -- the Owens Valley today might look a lot like Van Nuys. And sorry, Van Nuys, I don't mean that in a complementary way.

When he took over the L.A. City Water Department, William Mulholland saw that the key to continuing economic prosperity was water. With no reliable supply of water, the city's growth had become stunted. A man by the name of Fred Eaton thought he had the answer. During a family outing to the Sierras in 1904 he had travelled the length of the Owens Valley. The valley's major river, the Owens, tracked south through the valley towards Southern California before coming to an end at Owens Lake. He believed a canal could be built to bring that water to the San Fernando Valley, and would provide the answer to Mulholland's conundrum.

Just one little problem: the good people of the Owens Valley thought they had an agreement with the Federal Reclamation Service to build a project in their valley for their benefit. The project would transform the Owens into a verdant paradise of agriculture, commerce and economic prosperity. As he travelled through the area, buying any water rights along the valley floor not already belonging to the Reclamation Service, the citizens of the valley had no inkling Eaton planned all along to then sell those rights to the city of Los Angeles rather than Reclamation for use in the local project.

Construction on the Los Angeles Aqueduct began in 1908, and by 1913 the sweet water of the Owens River began to quench the thirst of the people of L.A. During the ensuing years the city purchased additional water rights in Long Valley north of Bishop and in the Mono Lake area, thereby in effect monopolizing water development in the Eastern Sierra.

And there sat the Owens Valley, all these years. With little water for local development or agriculture, the valley has largely remained as it was when the aqueduct first flowed in 1913, albeit with a dead river bed through which flowed only sand. But no more. After years of litigation the city of Los Angeles is again beginning to allow water to flow through the entire length of the Owens to its end at land-locked Owens Lake. Fish have begun repopulating the revitalized lower sections of river, and stream side vegetation has begun to take hold, providing wildlife habitat for elk, deer, rabbits and quail.

So tonight I will raise a toast to old Fred Eaton and William Mulholland, the men who stole the Owens River. Without them, a drive to Bishop Creek would take me through a concrete jungle and not the sage-covered raw beauty of a valley saved from ultimate environmental destruction: the development of the commons. Saved by the pure happenstance of an environmental irony.

Poor Tony Snow Is Out of Cash

2007-08-17T16:34:00.000-07:00

One is almost tempted to feel a bit sorry for the president's spokes-liar, Tony Snow. After all, he is in a fight for his life, suffering from recurring cancer, and no one deserves that. Still when he says he's not going to stay with the Bush Administration to the end of Bush's term because of financial reasons, it's hard to feel a whole lot of sympathy for him.

For Pete's sake, Tony, you pull down $168K per year, with a sweet benefits package that I'm guessing completely covers your cancer treatments. Most Americans would jump at a deal like that, but you're crying "poor." It's unbecoming and in bad taste, particularly since real wages for most Americans have fallen dramatically during your boss's reign.

For sure, Snow made a lot more money when he did his lying over at Faux News, and tons of cash await him on the rubber chicken circuit, but it stinks of elitism for a man in his position by be playing the poverty card. Kind of goes to show just out of touch with every-day Americans this bunch is.

Good Bye, Karl Rove

2007-08-15T08:55:00.000-07:00

While I was holed up in the mountains, far from any news source, I see our good friend Karl Rove has announced his resignation. So this seems as good a time as any to reflect on his legacy, such as it is.

No political operative in recent memory was as reviled by the opposition party as was Karl Rove. Still, give the man his due: it's hard to argue with his electoral successes. After all, he managed to get a certified moron "elected" to the nation's highest office not once, but twice. His "divide and conquer" technique of solidifying the Republican base while refusing compromise with the Democrats forged a solid Republican majority for much of Bush's reign.

Yet, in the end, that tried and true technique failed him and his party. Despite the caging lists, the rigged voting machines and the general electoral chicanery designed to foster a "permanent Republican majority," the public soundly repudiated him and his ilk last November. If not for the rigged system, many of us believe the Republicans would have been completely routed instead of just removed from the majority.

It must have been a tough pill for old Karl to swallow. Now his party is shattered, his "permanent majority" gone, his president has Nixonian approval ratings, his war has gone south and his dream of dismantling the New Deal and the Great Society is finished. What he didn't understand is this: ignoring a large percentage of the electorate just to placate the base only works in the short term. True leaders must at least attempt to engage the oppostition, or face the wrath of the center. By ignoring that reality, Karl Rove has unwittingly doomed the Republicans to the electoral wilderness for at least a generation.

The barbarians are getting ready to storm the gates, Karl, and for the Republicans you so ably got elected -- despite the failed politics of their neo-conservatism -- there will be hell to pay. And in an ultimate irony, Karl, the unitary powers you helped George Bush accumulate are about to be handed to a liberal Democratic president. The joke's on you, Karl. Good bye, and good riddance.

Rock Creek Trip Report

2007-08-15T08:15:00.000-07:00

Or, My God Teenagers Can Eat!

Just got back from another "family oriented" mini-vacation made necessary by our unwillingness (some would say our cheapness) to send our son to camp the entire summer. This time a camping trip up Rock Creek in the Eastern Sierra, sans the wife, who gets the son next week when I go back to work.

We stayed at one of the numerous Forest Service campgrounds that line the road up to Rock Creek Lake. Anybody who knows me knows this isn't exactly my kind of camping. For one thing, I don't particularly like people, and the average Forest Service campground is practically teeming with them; bunches of inconsiderate, self-centered locusts doing their unconscious best to ruin the outdoor experiences of their fellow campers. But with my six year-old, my sister's family (including her two teenage kids and their two friends) and my Dad in attendance, developed camping was our only practical alternative.

I must say I was pleasantly surprised by the experience. Rock Creek is the only east side drainage of the Sierras I'd never been to, and I wonder why it took me so long. The area is gorgeous, the creek lively and accessible, the lake picturesque and the hiking opportunities limitless. The campsites are spaced far enough apart to impart some sort of "solitude," if that's the right word. We caught some fish at Rock Creek Lake, my son had a great time floating his toy boat down the creek, and in general a good time was had by all.

I also caught a glimpse of what the wife and I are in for when my son reaches his teenage years. Good God, those kids can eat! Following is a list of what was consumed by four adults, four teenagers and a six year-old in just four days:

Nine rib-eye steaks, sixteen hamburgers, twenty-four hot dogs, three pounds of Italian sausage, two pounds of spaghetti, three pounds of stew meat, two large cans of Ranch Style beans, four cans of chili, three loaves of bread, three pounds of lunch meat, a pound of cheddar cheese, two large packages of American cheese, a loaf of French bread, three packages of English muffins, two pounds of bacon, two pounds of chorizo, 72 flour tortillas, ten pounds of potatoes, nine ears of corn, six bell peppers, twelve onions, a package of cherry tomatoes, several bottles of assorted condiments, enough Some-ores to wire an army with a week-long sugar rush, assorted crackers, cookies and candy, and an astounding 72 eggs. Oh, and two fresh-caught trout and four jars of canned lake trout my Dad brought back with him from Wyoming.

And we had zero leftovers. My nephew and his friend, in particular, reminded me of the old joke about Samoans: they didn't eat until they were full -- they ate until their jaws got tired.

So, as the camp cook, I spent much of my vacation standing over my old Coleman stove and the three grills required to cook that much food. Still, it was a fine four days, and the best proof was every one's attitude when it came time to pack up and leave: nobody wanted to go home.

Where Do Libertarians Go From Here?

2007-08-08T11:14:00.000-07:00

When George W. Bush ran for president in 2000 as a "compassionate conservative" most people assumed that meant he would somewhat soften the hard edges of libertarianism. Libertarians believe the federal government long ago entered into areas that rightly should be left to the states. They cite such programs as Social Security, federal funding of education, Medicare and Medicaid, and the Environmental Protection Agency as examples of the feds treading on rights that should be left to the states and the market economy.

While many pundits have attributed Bush's victory to the rise of evangelical conservatism, I believe the libertarians have been given short shrift. I believe hard-core, Barry Goldwater, principled libertarians provided the very foundation upon which modern conservatism rose to power. And I believe George Bush has taken them for a ride.

Let us count the ways in which George Bush has been anything but a libertarian conservative:

Libertarians, above all, believe in fiscal responsibility. When George Bush entered office, the federal government was enjoying a rare budget surplus. Today, Bush presides over the greatest expansion of budget deficits in U.S. history. Bush's government has borrowed more money from foreign sources than the combined governments of every U.S. president in our nation's brief life.

Libertarians believe in a strong national defense combined with an unwillingness to use it unless provoked. Bush gave us an enormously expensive preemptive war against an "enemy" that posed us no threat -- a war with no apparent plan, no apparent purpose and no end in sight.

Libertarians believe in liberty, that the Bill of Rights is sacrosanct. Bush has trampled the bill of rights, suspending Habeas Corpus -- keeping so-called "enemy combatants" locked up with no due process -- and he's spied on citizens without the necessary warrants in place.

Libertarians believe the federal government should stay out of such arenas as education, health care and the market economy. Bush signed the "No Child Left Behind" bill that bullies state's educational systems and is largely unfunded. He also signed into law a prescription drug benefit for seniors costing us billions of dollars per year. This in particular must irk libertarians because they see "entitlements" as one of the most insidious forms of governmental intrusion. Government hand-outs like the millions in subsidies provided to the oil industry must be likewise abhorrent to libertarians.

Libertarians believe in smaller government. With his Homeland Security Agency Bush has overseen the largest increase in the federal bureaucracy since the EPA was formed.

Libertarians believe in the separation of powers. With his bid to form a "unitary executive," Bush has centralized power to an extent not foreseen by the framers of the Constitution and has appropriated numerous powers that were to be left with other branches of government.

On issue after issue Bush has pushed away libertarianism. That he still maintains a 28% approval rating stems from much of his base either not facing reality or not paying attention.

The question, then, is where do libertarians go from here? Do they splinter off and try to push back against the egregious actions of Bush and his ilk? Do they stay with the Republican Party and try to reclaim true libertarian conservatism from the Neo-conservative usurpers, hoping, against all odds, that the current crop of presidential candidates might turn out to be a true believer? Or do they just give up and go home? Only time will tell. I do know one thing: Barry Goldwater must be doing back-flips in his grave.

O.K., Ebay, We Got It: You Hate Guns

2007-08-07T13:21:00.000-07:00

So Ebay has just published new rules about what can and cannot be sold on their site:

They said they would no longer allow the listing of any firearm parts required in the firing of a gun. This will include bullet tips (their words), brass, shells (hulls), barrels, slides, cylinders, magazines, trigger assemblies, etc.

This change is apparently in response to the deadly shootings at Virginia Tech University. I suppose on some level it makes sense. After all, everybody knows that depraved mad-men buy all their reloading supplies on Ebay.

First off, this affects me personally, because there seemed to be an endless supply of suckers on Ebay willing to pay me 20 cents apiece for 28 gauge shotgun hulls I picked up for free at the local range. Now I'll have to go back to collecting aluminum cans for spending money I can hide from the wife.

Seriously, we all know those in power over at Ebay despise guns, but what good is it to exclude for sale legal products that don't require hazardous materials handling? Do they really think they can somehow prevent people from shooting their guns by restricting the sale of empty shotgun hulls?

And where does this stop? Is Ebay anti-hunting, too? Can I expect my Paypal account to be frozen if I try to sell some duck decoys on line? I notice there's lots of archery gear there. Is that next? After all, I imagine some kook with a compound bow could do some serious harm at the shopping mall were he so inclined.

What about all the other stuff sold on Ebay that could be turned into a weapon? Are they going to ban baseball bats the next time an enraged parent pummels his son's little-league coach with a Louisville Slugger because Junior didn't get enough playing time?

On a serious level I find this action by Ebay to be extremely counterproductive, because it just reinforces in every NRA member's mind that "those slime-balls on the left want to take away our guns." I've already noticed it at the many gun nut sites I frequent, and at least one is circulating a petition aimed at convincing Ebay to reverse the policy. This is another example of why most gun owners don't trust those of us on the left.

Which is unfortunate, because I've been arguing for years that, of those who own guns, hunters in particular really ought to be our natural allies. Both hunters and lefties want to protect the commons, lefties for its own sake and hunters so they will continue to have game to shoot. But every time the Sierra Club announces a hunter outreach program or Audubon Magazine publishes an ode to hunters some morons like Ebay come along and rip out the seedling alliance that has been sown. Good going, Ebay. Now I'm going to trip over to Gunbroker and see if anybody wants to buy some of these 28 gauge hulls I've got stored in my garage.

President Bush Is Classless

2007-08-02T14:25:00.000-07:00

Either That, Or He Just Doesn't Care

In his statement this morning, President Bush segued directly from his heart-felt message to the people of Minneapolis to political hackery, whacking the Democrats for not completing the appropriations bills and including $22 billion of "extra" spending he said would cause us to "raise your taxes."

The bodies aren't even out of the water yet, but Bush can't pass up a chance to try and take the Democrats to the political woodshed. My first inclination is to think it's just another example of Mr. Bush's classlessness. But then I remember his Mom's comments during the Katrina fiasco about all the refugees trapped at the Superdome and how it was "working out well for them." Bush's comments about the Democrats on the heels of his words about the Minnesota tragedy stinks of the same inappropriateness.

So it seems more likely the Bush clan simply are missing the "compassion" gene. I don't think they care about the plight of other people, particularly those who are beneath their socioeconomic class. It explains his willingness to continue sacrificing our brave soldiers on the alter of an unnecessary and failed war. He doesn't really care about them, or their pain and suffering.

And incidentally, Mr. Bush, that extra $22 billion the Democrats want to spend is a drop in the bucket compared to the $1 trillion this war is going to cost us. I think we might have fixed quite a few bridges with that kind of money, don't you?

The Hualapai Nation Is Not Yet Ready for Prime Time

2007-08-01T14:43:00.000-07:00

Or, My Vacation From Hell, Part Two

After braving the hoards of humanity at Grand Canyon National Park for the better part of two days, we headed back west for our visit to Grand Canyon West, better known as the Hualapai Indian Reservation. It is here the Hualapai have constructed the Grand Canyon Skywalk, a horseshoe shaped abomination of steel and Plexiglas that juts out over the canyon rim, allowing visitors to think they're walking on air. Although the Skywalk is asthetically unpleasing, I'm as much a sucker for cheap thrills as the next guy, so I was looking forward to checking it out. As this story shall show, the Hualapai might have done better to stick with the more traditional manner of relieving the white man of his money: steal it in Indian Casinos.

For starters, the road to Skywalk isn't yet paved. Now had I been driving my 4x4 Dodge Dakota instead of my wife's Charger this wouldn't have presented a problem. The Charger isn't exactly designed for off-roading, and my wife cringed noticeably every time a stray rock would strike the undercarriage. At that point, of course, she had no idea of how bad it would get.

When we pulled up at what passes for a visitor's center, my first impression was "this must be what Hanoi was like during the evacuation." A helipad with four or five idling helicopters sat right across from the center, and a landing strip featuring a constant drone of single-engine planes taking off and landing was just to the north. The Hualapai are apparently unaware of the invention of electrical transmission lines because the roar and stench of generators providing an interesting back-drop to the incessant racket and aroma of the aircraft.

Inside the visitors center there was what can only be described as chaos. There was no discernible line; just people, lots of them, wandering around with looks of either confusion or disgust. When I reached the ticket counter and asked about our room reservations I was met with a blank look that could only have meant "I have no idea what you're talking about." After talking with five or six of his co-workers I finally figured out why: the genius on the phone when I made the reservations had booked us into the Hualapai lodge in Peach Springs, a wide spot in the road two hours by jeep trail from Grand Canyon West. When they tried to hook me up with a phone to call the lodge and cancel our reservations, the phone went dead and couldn't be resuscitated.

Finally, we grabbed our tickets and prepared to get on the bus out to the Skywalk, only to be told by one of the flunkies they had closed it because of an impending electrical storm. We asked for a refund for the Skywalk portion of our tickets (twenty-five bucks a head), and were told to see the supervisor.

When we finally found the supervisor, he told us that no, the Skywalk was still open and we should catch the next bus out there. He told us that if the Skywalk did close we would indeed be reimbursed for that portion of the ticket.

When we arrived, we found that, indeed, the Skywalk was definitely closed, and probably would be for the rest of the day. We soon found out why. As we wandered around a bit, letting the kids play in the "authentic" tee-pees the tribe has constructed, it began to rain. Anybody who's ever lived in the Southwest will know what I'm talking about when I say it was a "gully-washer." We ran back to the bus, where the driver told us that "anybody with a low-clearance vehicle better get out of here, because the road is gonna' wash out."

When we got back to Baghdad -- I mean the visitor's center -- we tried in vain to find the supervisor who had misled us about the Skywalk being open. We later found out he was holed up in his office, afraid to brave the angry hoard of maltreated guests.

(I should probably stop here and explain the Hualapai Nation isn't exactly running things out there. They have hired some sort of "management team" and much of the staffing is in the from of folks who, shall we say, are not Native Americans. The various "managers" we spoke to are among the most incompetent individuals with whom I have ever had the displeasure of speaking. We never got the same answer twice, and they seemed completely unprepared for the types of eventualities that befall an enterprise such as this.)

After about half and hour we were finally able to find another supervisor. When she heard our story she said "I've lived here for years, and that road never washes out. Besides, the Skywalk has re-opened, so I can't give you a refund."

We explained we had just been there, it was raining, with thunder and lightening, and the Skywalk most assuredly had been closed. Moreover, we asked, why would her bus driver warn us to leave if the roads were fine? She remarked that they had "hired lots of new people, and some of them don't know what they're doing." "And just why should that be our problem?" retorted my co-traveler.

Anyway, they finally agreed, after another half hour, to give us our refund, but then they couldn't figure out how to credit my VISA card. So they gave us our paperwork and a phone number to call and sent us on our merry way . . .

. . . when we promptly saw a line of brake lights: cars stopped on the road because the gully-washer had washed out the dirt track. It was as if the supervisor felt obliged to tell us one more lie for the road. By the time the rain stopped and the rainwater had dropped enough for me to pilot my wife's Charger through the mud, a one-hour drive back to Kingman had taken us over three hours.

We managed to find a room in Kingman, where we collapsed on our beds, spent. (I do have to say I highly recommend the Kingman Hampton Inn Suites. The hired help was competent and cheerful. Of course, after our experience, maybe it was just the comparison that made them seem extra nice.)

Suffice it to say we won't be going back to Grand Canyon West to walk on the Skywalk anytime soon. I can only say in conclusion that the Hualapai Nation is definitely not yet ready for prime time.

Thank God Hunting Season Is Almost Here

2007-08-01T14:16:00.000-07:00

My wife figured out hunting season was coming soon when she found me in the garage the other day reloading shotgun shells. "I guess this means that for the next five months we'll only see you on weeknights," she observed.

September first brings us the opening of dove season here in the southwest. And no, not the white, "symbol of peace" doves, but the drab-gray mourning doves and white wing doves. They are an extremely challenging bird to shoot on the wing, and they are quite tasty, particularly when stuffed into a jalepeno with a slice of cheese and smoked on the BBQ.

So the first of next month me and my buddies will again make the trek across the desert to a little Arizona burg known as Dateland. We'll get up before the crack of dawn, brave the chill of the morning (it's usually around 90 degrees by 6:00 A.M.) and stumble out to our fields where we'll only get to hunt for about twenty minutes because that's about how long it takes to get a limit. Then we'll spend the rest of the day lounging around the swimming pool at the trailer park while imbibing our favorite adult beverages.

(As an aside, what genius decided to schedule my son's first Pop Warner game on the dove opener? I am actually going to miss my first opening day in thirty-five years to watch a bunch of six-year-olds running amuck, pretending to play football.)

I chase lots of bird species that require physical fitness, endurance and skill if I am to hunt them successfully. I'll be after chukar partridge later this fall, an insidious bird about which it's been said one hunts the first time for sport, and thereafter for revenge. In November I'll be slogging through wet alfalfa fields on the unlikely notion I'll get an opportunity to shoot a rooster pheasant. December and January will find me in the duck blind, where I will have hauled sixty pounds of decoys and my eight-pound 12 gauge through the mud for a chance to shiver in the sleet as the ducks largely ignore my spread.

So yeah, most bird species present a formidable challence. Doves aren't one of them. My wife seems to have caught on to this. The other day she told me she knows "dove hunting is just an excuse for you to go drink." That pretty much sums it up.

200,000 Weapons Lost In Iraq

2007-08-01T14:01:00.000-07:00

So the General Accounting Office is reporting our military has lost almost 200,000 weapons in Iraq since the start of the war and occupation. Presumably these are weapons given to Iraqi military and police personnel as we train them. These personnel then leave the military or the police, join their local militia, and use the training and weapons they got from us to kill and maim our soldiers.

Apparently this is part of Bush's plan to "fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here." After all, what better way to dissuade Iraqis from taking an American vacation than to train them, equip them and then paint bull's-eyes on the backs of our boys and girls?

Seriously, this is just another example of the old Republican mantra -- that government is incompetent -- becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy. They claim government is the problem and then go about proving it by their bad governing, time and again. Why the American public continues to elect leaders who seem intent on screwing things up is beyond me. Oh yeah, I forgot: we didn't really elect Bush, he was appointed King by the Supreme Court. My bad.

More Random Thoughts On the Day's News

2007-07-27T08:31:00.000-07:00

Alberto Gonzales lies to Congress. Bolton and Meirs refuse to even acknowledge their subpeonas to appear before Congress, and are on the verge of being hit with contempt. Karl Rove is hit with a subpeona, and most certainly will likewise defy Congress. Congress asks for a special prosecutor in the attorney-gate scandel, but faces a stonewall by the Attorney General, the same guy who just proved himself a congenital lier.

Looks like we're heading towards a full-blown Constitutional crisis, folks!

Meanwhile, Aviation Week magazine reports on their website that on at least two occasions Space Shuttle pilots flew missions while so inebriated they posed a threat to shuttle safety. Why not? Airplane pilots do it, and so do bus drivers, taxi drivers, Lindsay Lohan and Nicolle Richey. At least we don't have to worry about a shuttle pilot driving his ship the wrong way down the Ventura Freeway at five in the morning.

I used to lobby for NASA to move the launch and recovery site permanantly out here to Edwards Air Force Base because we almost never suffer from the weather problems that always seem to plague the site in South Florida. I have now rethought that position. I don't want drunken shuttle pilots flying through my skies. We have enough to worry about -- what with earthquakes, fires, mudslides, global warming and drunken celebrities -- without having to fear a drunk driving incident involving tons of rocket fuel.

Finally, in case you missed it, Lindsay Lohan is back in rehab. And the national media has apparently decided that's a much more important story than the impending Constitutional crisis. Where are we going, and why are we in this handbasket?

My Vacation From Hell -- Part One

2007-07-26T18:35:00.000-07:00

Or: Why I Avoid National Parks Like the Plague

It seemed like a good idea at the time. My wife came to me about eight months ago and said, "for vacation this year, why don't we go the the Grand Canyon?" "Well," I countered, "I don't think our son is anywhere near old enough to backpack there yet. The hike into and out of the canyon is horribly strenuous, and I just don't think . . ." She cut me off. "Not a hiking trip, silly. We're going to take the Grand Canyon Railroad out of Williams and stay in a lodge at the canyon rim."

And so began my vacation from hell. First, I should explain why I avoid our wonderful National Park system like I would a root canal with no Novocain. In a word: people. There are too many of them. And in our most popular national parks, during vacation season, there are really too many of them. They all act like tourists, and most of them have no business being in the outdoors, even in a pampered setting like the South Rim of the Grand Canyon. After this trip I have made a solemn vow: I will never again set foot in a National Park, unless it's Yosemite and I immediately head off into the back country, away from the over-weight, sun burnt, fast food-addled yahoos one usually finds in these places.

The trip started out well enough. We headed out last Friday. The drive to Williams was uneventful. We checked in at the Grand Canyon Railway Hotel and found the folks helpful and courteous. Our buffet dinner was somewhat bland, but edible. The rooms were not large but they were comfortable. And Williams is a delightful little town with an eclectic main drag largely devoid of the nondescript corporate-owned businesses that are increasingly making every main street in America look the same.

We caught the train to the canyon the next morning, after a fun wild-west shootout at the hotel that the young ones thoroughly enjoyed. The train ride was uneventful, if a bit long, but they served liquor in our first-class section, which made things at least bearable.

The fun started once we disembarked at the canyon rim, at about 11:00 A.M. Check-out time for the previous night's guests was 10:00 A.M., but we were informed that check-in time for us was not until 4:00 P.M. It takes six hours to vacuum a room and put on fresh linens and shelve some clean towels?

It was at that moment we discovered an immutable fact about tourists who stay in the lodges at the Grand Canyon, particularly those who take the train: we were their prisoners. We were trapped, completely at their mercy. They could house us when they wanted too, feed us what they wanted to, force us to walk through their interminable gift shops, and make us leave when they wanted to. At the Grand Canyon, the old saw that "the customer is always right" has been thrown out the window. The hired help was surly almost without exception, the food expensive and below mediocre, and the service was almost uniformly atrocious. And we couldn't do a damn thing about it.

The entire commercial operation at the South Rim is controlled by a company called Xanterra South Rim, L.L.C. This company has taken commercialism to an almost Disney-esque level. Almost every sight-seeing opportunity in the Grand Canyon Village requires one to walk through one of the ubiquitous gift shops along the rim. This trip certainly reinforced for me one of my main complaints about the privatization of our public areas: that doing so emphasizes profits over aesthetics.

(I should probably stop here and say the exception was the wonderful restaurant at the Bright Angel Lodge. I ate there twice, and both times the greeters, servers and busboys were uniformly cheerful, helpful and competent. I can only think that, for whatever reason, every good private employee at the South Rim must have somehow gravitated to the Bright Angel Lodge. Nor will I say anything bad about the park employees and rangers. These public servants are underpaid and overworked yet always seem to do their jobs with aplomb, even in the face of what must be some of the dumbest questions ever asked by human beings.)

And just as I feared, there were people everywhere. One couldn't walk ten feet without having to veer around some group of idiots who decided the best place to stop and reposition juniors hat or apply some sunscreen to little Sally was right in the middle of the trail. Almost everybody I came across was unconcerned about any other human being. It was as if every group of tourists was in its own plastic bubble, completely unaware of how their actions might be affecting the hoards around them.

When we were finally allowed to check onto our rooms at the Kachina Lodge, the first thing we noticed was that the "king sized" beds were smaller that the queen size that sits in our bedroom at home. The second was that the entire room was scarcely larger that a shoe box. Indeed, after fitting in the roll-away bed for my son we couldn't walk around in the room -- we actually had to crawl across the beds to traverse the tiny space.

That evening, I wandered down to the snack bar at the Bright Angel to get my son and his friend hot dogs for dinner, while the adults congregated at the El Tovar Lodge for dinner and drinks. Only the fact I had yet to imbibe much prevented what ensued from becoming an ugly scene.

When we got to the lodge and sat down with our hot dogs, we were informed we couldn't bring food from another establishment into the lodge. "Let me get this straight," I said to the surly waiter. "We have four adults here, ordering drinks and dinner -- we're spending plenty of money here. You don't offer a children's menu. Yet you're not going to let our two kids eat their hot dogs with their parents?"

Yep, I was banished to an outdoor bench with two kids because I had the gall to bring them to the El Tovar with hot dogs.

The next morning, Sunday, I awoke at 5:00 and was finally able to enjoy some peace. I walked along the South Rim Trail from our lodge up to Hermit's Rest. The seasonal monsoon system deprived me of the usual spectacular sunrise, but my early rise allowed me to walk alone -- the entire morning I only met five other people. Upon reaching Hermit's Rest I found only two folks who had taken an early bus shuttle and the operator at the obligatory gift shop. And the helicopters.

Why the National Park Service allows this practice is beyond me. The Grand Canyon, a place that should be among the most peaceful in the world, is shattered every day by the clop-clop-clop of choppers taking people with way too much disposable income over the canyons to sight-see the lazy-man's way. What was my one good day at the canyon was sullied by the constant buzz of helicopter engines.

We boarded the train at 4:00 for our journey back to the sanctity of the hotel back in Williams. Little did I know that this painful vacation was about to get even worse.

Next: Grand Canyon West -- or, The Hualapai Nation is Not Yet Ready For Prime Time.

Is Gonzo Gone-zo?

2007-07-26T18:07:00.000-07:00

It's one thing to lie and obstruct over arcane matters of law. It's also one thing to exhibit the memory of a six-year old. It's entirely another thing, however, to perjure oneself over an issue so thoroughly vetted as Alberto Gonzales' bedside visit to then Attorney General John Ashcroft's hospital room. No fewer than three Congress-people and the director of the FBI have directly refuted Gonzo's testimony: that the visit didn't involve the Bush administration's illegal domestic wiretap program.

Yet there he was, before Congress, lying as if to lie comes to him as naturally as breathing. I know the concept of loyalty is of tantamount importance to this bunch (indeed, this obsession with loyalty is almost Mafia-like), but what did Gonzales hope to gain by repeatedly lying through his teeth? Is he just trying to stall Congress? Is there any real purpose for such an obvious legal transgression by the person who is supposed to be the nation's first arbiter of its laws?

I do know this: every minute this man stays in office just allows the Democrats to stick another needle in their George Bush voodoo doll, and Bush, despite his insane vow of loyalty to this toady, has to be squealing in pain at this point. Look for Gonzo to take a hike sometime before Congress comes back in September. Then he'll just hope we all forget about the sorry spectacle of the nation's leading law enforcement official behaving like an unrepentant, arrogant scofflaw. If not, Gonzo could be doing time at a minimum-security country club in the not-too-distant future, at least until Bush pardons him.

Executive Order Allows White House to Sieze Anyone's Assets

2007-07-18T16:31:00.000-07:00

Or, Is George Bush After My Stuff?

George Bush yesterday signed an executive order entitled Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts In Iraq. This entire order should be required reading of any freedom-loving citizen, but I'll excerpt the most alarming portions:

"Any person determined by the Secretary of Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense,

(i) to have committed, or to pose a significant risk of committing, an act or acts of violence that have the purpose of:
(A) threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the government of Iraq; or
(B) undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq or to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people." (Emphasis added)

Can basically have all their assets seized by the government.

In other words, if the White House determines that any U.S. resident might somehow pose a risk, however benign, to the stability of the Iraqi government or its economic reconstruction efforts, that person's house, bank account and other assets can be grabbed, due process be damned.

If I write in this blog that I think the Malaki government is corrupt to the core and has no chance in hell of ever forging a political solution in Iraq, I could wake up in the morning with a Mayflower van outside my door. If my wife writes a letter to the editor saying she thinks it's immoral to give no-bid contracts to Haliburton (which is, unfortunately, involved in "promoting economic reconstruction in Iraq") she might find a zero balance in her bank account the next day.

Just another day in paradise. The Bush Administration is basically trying to quell all dissent, using the hammer of economic reprisal, and it's tired of the Constitution getting in the way.

I have been on record for quite some time saying impeachment would be a waste of time because the votes clearly are not there in the Senate for conviction and removal. I now have rethought my position.

At this point, we at least have to try. Bush is systematically destroying our Constitutional form of government, one right at a time, and even if we can't get rid of him and his cabal, we need at least to get into the record his sorry history of malfeasance. We owe at least that much to future generations of repressed Americans who will wonder how we lost so much in so little time.

None Of the Above Leads Crowded GOP Field

2007-07-17T09:26:00.000-07:00

In a stunning development, the latest AP-Ipsos 2008 presidential poll shows that None Of the Above has moved into the lead for the GOP nomination. Mr. Above received almost 23% of the vote, up from just 14% in June, to outpace Rudy Giuliani (21%) for the first time. Filling out the field are Fred Thompson (19%), John McCain (15%) and Mitt Romney (11%).

"This shows my message is resonating with the electorate," said Mr. Above in an exclusive interview with Haiwee.blogspot.com. "The American people are ready for change. They want a return to the traditional conservatism of Goldwater instead of the corporatism disguised as conservatism of George W. Bush and being peddled by the other GOP candidates."

Sounding much like a conservative Democrat, Mr. Above insists his views are in the mainstream. "I am, of course, opposed to abortion because I think it's immoral," he says. "However, I believe Roe Vs. Wade is settled law. Moreover, I would never deign to think any man should have a say in how a woman controls her own body."

Mr. Above is also moderate on the issue of gay marriage. "I don't necessarily think gays should be able to marry, but I do think they should be afforded the same rights and privileges as heterosexuals. Gay people don't choose to be gay any more than I chose to be a man. Denying them the rights we all hold dear is both unfair and immoral."

Mr. Above had some harsh words for the President. "I believe we should return to a foreign policy that emphasizes diplomacy and rejects preemptive war," he said. "This president has violated the principles upon which this country was founded," he continued. "He got us into an unnecessary and unjust war for no apparent reason, and it's time we got out."

None Of the Above also differed with Mr. Bush in his approach to the environment. "Since when is it considered 'conservative' to rape the commons?," he railed. "We conservatives should be conserving nature, not selling it out to the highest bidder. We also have an obligation to future generations to begin doing something about global warming. The jury is no longer out: we are systematically destroying our planet, and George Bush has done nothing to stop it."

To close the interview, Mr. Above quoted from his campaign stump speech: "A vote for None Of the Above is a vote for change in America. Any good, thinking, patriotic Republican can take one look at the GOP field and easily see their only rational choice is to vote None Of the Above."

Iran Next?

2007-07-16T14:26:00.000-07:00

George Bush seems determined to strike another blow against Muslim fundamentalists, and it looks more and more like that blow will be against Iran. Look for Bush to "manufacture" a Gulf of Tonkin-like incident sometime in the next few months to give him his "justification" for attacking the Iranians.

My question is: why all the blather about Iran? What have they done that has such blowhards as Joe Lieberman all in a lather?

After all, the army's own intelligence suggests that Saudi nationals make up a majority of the foreign fighters in Iraq killing and maiming our soldiers. Of course, we can't attack Saudi Arabia -- George has too many friends there, and the oil companies would go apoplectic if we were to interrupt their supply of crude.

So Iran it is. The American people won't stand for it, but then we really don't have a say in the matter. Bush doesn't care what we want -- he knows he is a lame duck who can't be removed from office because Senate Republicans remain completely cowed by him. Why, I don't know. Apparently they are content to watch from the sidelines as their respective careers go down in flames along with the most wretched presidency of our time -- or any time, for that matter.

More Random Thoughts On the Day's News

2007-07-13T14:57:00.000-07:00

So the arrival of some new soccer player was splashed across the front page of the L.A. Times today, just beneath the fold, but Harriet Miers openly defying a subpoena to appear before Congress was buried on the last page.

And we wonder how George Bush has managed to get away with so much malfeasance for so long. The mainstream news media have been utterly complicit in our long national nightmare, refusing to cover Mr. Bush's many transgressions because, hey, Paris Hilton gets better ratings, and besides, most people can't follow all that other stuff anyway. It's too complicated.

Democrats have been taking a flogging in the blogosphere, almost since taking control of Congress in January, because they haven't been howling loud enough about the many misdeeds of our incompetent-in-chief. I have a theory about this: I think the Dems have been howling, loud and clear --it's the media that have failed us, because they have steadfastly refused to report it.

It's the old "tree falling in the forest" thing: If Harry Reid says Bush is a miscreant, a liar and a reprobate, and nobody prints it or plays the footage on the nightly news, did he really say it?

Anyway, back to Harriet Miers. How could she just not show up? Worse, how could Bush be so brazen as to tell her to not show up? George Bush just mooned the Congress of the United States. At some point even his Republican lackeys on Capitol Hill are going to get the message that this guy is not only criminally incompetent, but dangerous as well. I look forward to the day Miers is frog-walked into a waiting police cruiser for showing so much contempt for what used to be a co-equal branch of government.

Meanwhile, here in Los Angeles, the county sheriff is in hot water for supposedly offering "special treatment" to the nation's most famous outlaw, Paris Hilton. Seems she was given a cordless phone to use (so as to not have to wait in line for the pay phone) and a brand-new orange jumpsuit (so as to not have to soil her body with previously-worn garments).

Now I like to poke fun at Ms. Hilton as much as the next guy, and I guess the phone thing does stink, at least a little, of "special treatment." But the jumpsuit? Those things do wear out, don't they? I mean, eventually someone is going to get a new one, right? Isn't that why they have the new ones in the jail linen closet, to replace the worn out ones?

But then that's our corporate news media, manufacturing outrage where there is none, all the while ignoring the true outrage right under their noses.

The President Thinks We're Stupid

2007-07-12T08:44:00.000-07:00

An Open Letter to President Bush:

At your press conference today, President Bush, you said the insurgents attacking U.S. troops in Iraq "are the same one's who attacked us on September 11th."

The time has come for the media, the Democrats and any Republican with a brain to come out and label you for what you are: a bald-faced liar.

Time and again you and your administration have tried to link the September 11th terrorist attacks with Iraq when you full well know there is absolutely no evidence to that effect.

Mr. Bush, the American people may be apathetic, but we are not stupid -- we are on to you. We know you lied us into an unnecessary and unjust war. We know you are personally responsible for thousands of dead and maimed U.S. troops and hundreds of thousands of dead, innocent Iraqi civilians. We know we only went to Iraq to avenge your daddy and enrich your buddies. The blood is on your hands, sir.

And now this outrageous lie, this lie you have tried to sell us again and again: that Iraq had something to do with what was the most emotional and horrifying event in the U.S. since Pearl Harbor. To tell this lie the day after a report that the real perpetrators of that event, Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, are now as strong as they were on September 10th 2001, is unconscionable.

You have utterly failed us, sir. You failed to bring the real criminals to justice, and you failed us by invading a country that had nothing to do with our national day of infamy. And then you lie to the American people to try to cover your failures. Have you no shame?

More Random Thoughts On the Day's News

2007-07-11T12:51:00.000-07:00

President Bush will announce today that this year's budget deficit will be about $200 billion, or almost $50 billion less than was thought. "We kept your taxes low, which cause the economy to grow, which yielded more tax revenues. And because we set priorities, the deficit is shrinking," he said.

There's so much material here I hardly know where to begin.

First of all, seven years ago we were running a surplus. Crowing about a 200 billion dollar deficit seems, well, unseemly. What are we supposed to tell our children? Gee, son, I'm sorry our generation saddled yours with this humongous pile of I.O.U.'s, but heck, Republicans kept stealing elections from us.

Second, the Iraq occupation is completely off the books. That's about $150 billion -- give or take a Haliburton contract -- that should be added to the bottom line. Plus they keep borrowing every red cent from the Social Security Trust Fund surplus and counting it as revenue. If my company's comptroller ran the books like this bunch, she'd be wearing a fancy new orange jump-suit.

Finally, this causal effect Republicans constantly try to claim -- that tax cuts miraculously create a growing economy and therefore more tax receipts -- just defies logic. Repeat after me, supply-siders: you can't cut taxes to raise more taxes. Particularly when almost all the tax cuts go to the richest 5% of Americans. Sorry, but these people don't consume enough goods and services to make that much of a difference. Did I miss something, or has there been a big run on Hummers and second vacation homes this year?

Senator Jim Webb's amendment to make sure troops are properly trained and to allow the them to spend more time at home was denied cloture by forty Republicans and our indomitable Joe Lieberman. The Dems need to bring this amendment up for vote every day until enough Republicans jump ship to pass it. Then let Bush veto it while claiming he "supports the troops."

Food for thought: more people know Nicolle Richey is pregnant than know Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9-11.

More Random Thoughts On the Day's News

2007-07-10T08:18:00.000-07:00

Surely I'm not the only one who's amused by the fact Fred Thompson has risen to the top of the polls as the GOP's latest, greatest hope to win the presidential nomination. This is how bad it is for the Republicans: the best they can do is a former Senator and current mediocre actor, out of politics for years, about whom it has been said lacks the "fire in the belly" required of anybody who hopes to endure a hard and draining campaign. And he was a member of Scooter Libby's legal defense team. Those are some solid credentials. The Republican field is so bad Hillary might actually win.

And what is it about the GOP and bad, old actors? Can't they at least find a bad actor who's younger? Is Tom Cruise too liberal, too whacky, or not a bad enough actor? I guess they can't tap Arnold the "Governator" because he's not a natural born citizen. What about Bruce Willis? I hear he's available.

So Giuliani's director of Southern States used to frequent hookers. His South Carolina campaign manager is under indictment for cocaine possession. Methinks Rudy has some judgement issues.

Did everybody catch Michael Moore's act on CNN yesterday with Wolf Blitzer? The guy came completely unhinged, although watching Blitzer squirm as he got broadsided by Moore was priceless. It's no wonder Moore doesn't get more live interviews -- you never know what wierd tangent he's going to veer into. Seriously, Blitzer, among many in the mainstream media, should feel ashamed at the way they cheerleaded the Bush administration in its run-up to war. The 'fourth branch" failed us big time.

10 Steps to Fix America -- #2: Medicare For All

2007-07-09T12:49:00.000-07:00

Almost every other industrialized nation has it. 43 million uninsured Americans wish they had it. Our businesses are less competative because we don't have it.

The time has come for Congress and the President to initiate legislation making Medicare available to all citizens, young and old. Known as "single-payer health insurance," Medicare For All would instantly solve one of the worst problems our country faces: an almost unworkable health care system with spiralling costs that now sees over 43 million Americans with no health insurance at all.

This will be a two-part article. Part one rebuts the arguments made by pharmaceutical companies, health insurance companies and libertarians against Medicare For All. Part two rebuts anecdotal attacks against single-payer health plans in other nations.

Since Lyndon Johnson signed it into law in 1965, our nation's senior citizens have been covered by a phenomenally successful single-payer health plan called Medicare. Before then, only about 50% of citizens over age 65 were covered by health insurance; today about 97% of our older citizens have insurance. Almost from its inception Medicare has been efficient and reliable. Medicare represents the best our government can do, and the program is almost universally respected among the populace.

If Medicare works so well and almost everyone enrolled is happy with it, doesn't it make sense to make the program available to all citizens? After all, everyone agrees that having almost one-sixth of the citizenry uncovered by any health plan at all is a travesty.

Well, the health insurance industry and Big Pharma don't quite see it that way. The current system serves them just fine, thank you; health care is big business in this country, and business is good. Top health care executives garner multi-million dollar salaries and millions more in stock options. They fly in private jets and own multiple vacation homes. To say they have a vested interest in the status quo is a vast understatement.

Their arguments against Medicare For All almost always boil down to three issues: first, they claim Medicare isn't really more efficient than the current system. Second, that Medicare For All would result in fewer choices and a substandard health care system. Finally, they argue Medicare For All would be too expensive.

In 2006 the Council For Affordable Health Insurance (CAHI), an advocacy group comprised of most of the nation's health insurance providers, published a white paper by Dr. Merrill Mathews entitled Medicare's Hidden Administrative Costs (pdf. file here). This paper is based in part on a study published by Mark Litow of Milliman, Incorporated, a consulting firm that delivers health insurance plans, investing plans and employee benefits plans for businesses.

Leaving aside the fact that, given their financial interests, neither CAHI nor Milliman, Inc. can be expected to be impartial in their analysis, let's look at the claims in Dr. Mathews' white paper. One of the arguments often put forth by advocates of Medicare For All is the program's legendary efficiency; most claim that just two or three percent of all Medicare outlays are administrative, whereas for-profit insurance firms typically spend 20 to 30 percent for administration. Mr. Litow says that, contrary to popular belief, Medicare's legendary efficiency is overstated (he says it's 5.2%), and for-profit inefficiency is overstated (he says it's 16.7%). We'll come back to those numbers in a moment.

Dr. Mathews further claims that Medicare should appear more efficient because the average yearly claim amount for a Medicare recipient is $6,600, while a private insurance recipient receives just $2,700 per year. Thus the administrative costs per dollar paid should be lower for Medicare.

Dr. Mathews then goes on to make the bizarre claim that private insurance administrative costs actually add value for the consumer, because much of those costs involve a closer scrutinizing of claims and a subsequent denial of coverage (about how this helps health care consumers I haven't the foggiest notion).

Therein lies the rub: much of the higher administrative costs associated with for-profit health insurance involve the one thing most people hate about private health insurance: in their drive for profits, insurance companies consistently deny coverage to people that their own doctors think they need.

In addition, private insurance companies further enhance their profits by excluding patients with pre-existing conditions, shunting them to far more expensive plans, or off the rolls altogether. No wonder their administrative costs are higher: they reduce claims by only taking healthy people, and when those healthy people do happen to get sick, they deny them coverage.

O.K., let's get back to the numbers. The insurance industry's advocacy group claims the current system works just fine, even though, by their own numbers, administration of Medicare is 11.5% more efficient. In other words, if we had Medicare For All, we'd immediately save 11.5%. Maybe I'm crazy, that sounds like a compelling argument to throw out the entire for-profit system and make Medicare available to everyone.

The second argument, that consumers won't have any choice under Medicare For All, is patently ridiculous on its face.

Private schools didn't disappear with the advent of public education. People who can afford it and choose to do so still send their children to private school. But they also understand why it's important to contribute tax dollars towards public education: an educated and productive citizenry is advantageous for society as a whole.

Likewise, Medicare For All would neither destroy the private health insurance industry nor lead to fewer choices for consumers. People who can afford it and choose to do so could buy private plans. But people would come to realize funding Medicare For All benefits society for the same reason they support public education: a healthy and productive citizenry is also advantageous for society as a whole.

Finally, the cost issue. Most estimates are that it would cost about $1.86 trillion dollars per year, at least initially, to begin offering Medicare For All. Of this, the federal government already spends about %852 billion on Medicaid, Medicare and a host of other health care programs, so we need to find about a trillion dollars per year to institute Medicare For All. Eventually those costs would come down somewhat, provided the Federal Government was given the power to negotiate drug prices with the big pharmaceutical companies.

Also, the 43 million uninsured cost us proportionally more than they should because they often don't seek preventative treatment and, when they are treated, it's usually in an emergency room, which costs more. Still, most experts say premiums will be in the $90 to $120 per month range -- far less than most people currently pay for their private plans.

The group Physicians For a National Health Plan (PNHP) have come up with this plan to raise the money for Medicare For All. It involves employee contributions and employer contributions (albeit at a far lesser level than most employees and employers currently contribute under our for-profit system), and a variety of taxes, mostly on the top 5% of wage earners.

Having said this, I think I've come up with an alternative funding plan -- not just for Medicare For All but for a host of other programs I think we need to Fix America. I will detail that funding plan in Step 10 of my 10 Steps, but I'll give a hint: in also involves asking the rich to accept a much more progressive tax program than is currently in place. After all, the rich got rich primarily because of the vast infrastructure that is the American economy; it seems only fair they contribute proportionally greater sums back to that infrastructure.

Medicare For All is, above all, a moral imperative. Basic health care services should be a universal human right. The time has come for the most powerful economy on the face of the earth to cover the health care of its citizens.

Next: Exploding the anecdotal myths about single-payer in other industrialized nations.

California's Burning

2007-07-08T09:22:00.000-07:00

The fire season has just started here in California, and it seems as if half the state is already burning.

Most distressing to me is a series of fires in the Eastern Sierra known as the Inyo Complex fires. These fires are burning up my favorite stomping grounds, the places I go to hunt quail, hike into the High Sierra backcountry and just generally hang out in relative peace.

One, the Sage Fire, us burning up Big Pine Canyon, which just happens to be one of the most stunningly beautiful canyons in the Sierra. Another, known as the Seven Oaks fire, is burning on both sides of historic Highway 395 north and west of the quaint little town of Independence, consuming acres and acres of prime quail and tule elk habitat.

Altogether there are five major fire complexes burning in the state, with over 61,000 acres burned (although the Goldledge Fire north of Kernville is 96% contained). And that's not including the disastrous Angora Fire in South Lake Tahoe that burned over 3,100 acres and destroyed over 200 homes. Among the fires still out of control is the Zaca Fire in the Los Padres National Forest, which has consumed 7,800 acres in the Figueroa Mountain area, lands known for having some of the best spring wildflower viewing in the entire state.

California suffered through its driest rainy season in history last year, so things will probably only get worse. I fear that as I take to the field this summer and fall many of my favorite places will no longer be recognizable.

2007-07-07T10:40:00.000-07:00

"That's some catch, that Catch-22"
-- Joseph Heller, Catch-22

With a bit of circular logic that would have even Joseph Heller cringing, the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals said yesterday, in a two to one decision, that plaintiffs who had challenged the Bush administration's domestic spying program did not have legal standing to do so because they could not prove the program had harmed them.

In other words, the group couldn't prove a secret program had affected them because, well, it's secret. As long as the Bush cabal maintains in secret any program it wants to operate, there's nothing anybody can do about it.

Needless to say, the two judges who ruled in favor of the administration, Alice M. Batcheider and Julia Smith Gibbons, were appointed by Republicans. Several days ago I called for the impeachment of Supreme Court justices Roberts and Alito. Perhaps I should amend my opinion to include the impeachment of any Republican-appointed federal judge since the Nixon administration.

Indeed, Richard Nixon, in whatever hell he inhabits, must today be slapping himself upside the head and exclaiming "why didn't I think of that?"

More Random Thoughts On the Day's News

2007-07-05T10:04:00.000-07:00

Spent the night of July 4th at the in laws. This morning, when I woke up, they informed me another celebrity had been busted for speeding and drugs, this time in Southern Orange County. My first impulse was to think: Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan or Nicolle Richey, but then that unholy triumvirate usually does its damage in L.A. County.

When told it was Al Gore's son, clocked at 100 miles per hour in his Toyota Prius, with marijuana and illegal prescription drugs in the car, my first response was: damn! I didn't know a Prius would go that fast! Seriously, anyone driving that fast at that time in the morning with illegal drugs in his car can't be too bright. Let's just say Al Gore's apple tree appears to be planted on a very, very steep incline.

The latest CBS poll puts George Bush's approval rating at 27%. At this point, Mr. Bush is plumbing truly Nixonian levels. Moreover, and pollsters differ on this, but most say that between 10% and 20% of poll respondents will always say "yes" to the approval question because, well, he is the president and we should always support him (think Britney Spears). This means that, at best, only 17% of the people in this country who possess a brain still support this guy.

My informal research indicates the 17% is comprised entirely of: A) managers and executives of the fifty largest multi-national corporations in the country, including Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Banking and Walmart; and B) extremely rich people who own significant shares in the fifty largest multi-national corporations in the country, including Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Banking and Walmart. For everyone else Bush has pretty much been a disaster.

Lost in the celebration of removing the bald eagle from the endangered species list is this: according to the L.A. Times, the Bush administration has added just 58 species to the endangered species list, and 54 of them were in response to litigation by various environmental groups. By contrast, Bush's father, in just four years, added 231 species to the list. And there is no truth to the rumor the Bush administration favors adding "fiscal conservatives" to the endangered species list because, in the words of a Bush spokesman, "it's too late, they're already extinct."

Praying For Al Gore, or Where Do We Go From Here?

2007-07-03T09:34:00.000-07:00

With the commutation of Scooter Libby's sentence, there is much angst on the liberal blogosphere and liberal message boards about why the Democrats need to impeach President Bush. I want to go on record as suggesting that yes, I believe Bush has committed high crimes and misdemeanors. Still, I would suggest that to impeach would be both futile and a waste of time. There is simply no way we can get the 66 votes in the Senate to convict and remove. Independent voters would see it as political grandstanding with no hope of succeeding, hurting Democratic candidates in 2008. So what should be do? O.K., here's my suggestion on how we should proceed from here.

First, we need to understand that sometime next spring Bush will declare victory and bring our boys and girls home, hoping to take away our strongest issue. There is no way the Republicans will allow Iraq to dominate the 2008 elections. Democrats need to start focusing now on other issues, particularly the issues that most citizens really care about.

So we need to pass bill after bill on real issues: health care, energy independence, repeal NAFTA, repeal tax breaks for big oil, repeal Bush's tax breaks for the rich, repeal the bankruptcy bill, repeal the Medicaid scam, make illegal the use of electronic voting machines. Sure, he'll veto every one, and we don't yet have the votes to override, but it will put both the Democrats and the Republicans on record. It will give our candidates in 2008 something to run for -- we can't just be against Republicans, we need to be for a better America.

We also need to investigate, investigate, investigate. Continue to investigate the prosecutor firings. Continue to investigate the Plame scandal. Continue to investigate war profiteering and privatization. Continue to investigate the administration's handling of Katrina. Continue to hammer on the Libby commutation. Continue to investigate illegal wiretapping. Expose the Bush cabal for what it really is: an affront not only to average Americans but to the Constitution as well. Then, in 2008, any Republican who continued to support this bunch can be roasted over the fire-pit of public revulsion.

We have to win the presidency in 2008, people. If we don't we may be doomed as a free nation. I can't stress enough how important this next election will be. If we lose, the Supreme Court will be lost for at least a generation. An election process already rigged to elect Republicans will be so ingrained in the system we won't be able to dig out. Corporations will be further enriched at the expense of an ever shrinking middle class. We have to focus on this election, because it may be our last chance to save the nation. Concentrating on a futile effort to impeach only takes our eyes off the ball.

The reason Republicans have been so successful the past two decades is because all they care about is winning. We have to have a strategy to win first -- then we can go about the business of actually governing the country out of this mess the Republicans have made.

And that is why I am beseeching Al Gore to throw his hat in the ring. As sad as it is to write today, in the year 2007, both racism and sexism are alive and well in America. Quite simply, I don't believe either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton are electable. Sure, the polls and focus groups suggest we, as a nation, are ready for a black man or a woman to be president. And I would like to believe the people responding to these polls are not lying; I just think, in their heart of hearts, many of these people, in the privacy of the voting booth, won't be able to pull the lever for a black man or a white woman.

That is why I think Al Gore must be our nominee. Failing that, we must support John Edwards, who I believe is the only other candidate running on the Democratic side who is electable. Because winning is of such paramount importance this time around, in 2008 ideology must wait.

Corrupt To the Core

2007-07-02T16:31:00.000-07:00

I just had the pleasure of hearing an interview with Ambassador Joe Wilson on the local radio station, KTLK AM1150, on this day President Bush commuted the sentence of one Lewis "Scooter" Libby. Wilson said, more than once, that he believes the Bush administration is "corrupt to the core." Today's decision is indeed more proof of that, if we needed it.

The president and his minions obviously are not interested in the American people finding out the ultimate truth in this matter, because the only leverage to force Libby to talk was jail time. Even more obvious is the president pointedly didn't want Libby singing, fearful of what might come to light. Now Libby can remain quiet, like the good mobster he is, and make millions on the speaking and book circuits.

The president also plainly doesn't care if the American people approve of this commutation; he's a lame duck and he knows it, and doesn't care if his approval ratings plummet into the teens. He knows there aren't the votes to convict in the Senate, regardless of what comes to light in the coming months, and that he's destined to serve out his term.

Anybody who's paying attention knows this bunch is the most corrupt and vile in our nation's history. I suspect even most Republicans know it, but are still more interested in pure power than in what would be best for the country. These are sad times indeed.

More Random Thoughts On the Day's News

2007-07-02T13:45:00.000-07:00

The London "bomb scare" is looking more and more like amateur hour. These were not car bombs, but more like giant Molotov cocktails. This isn't Hollywood people; cars do not explode, even if filled with barrels of gasoline with nails in them.

Yet the blowhards on the right are on the T.V., breathlessly telling us there could have been "significant loss of life, blah blah blah." At this point I think most Americans realize they're just trying to scare us.

Giuliani was on the T.V. last week telling us 9/11 was Clinton's fault (isn't everything?) and that liberals are weak on terrorism because they want to treat it like a police action instead of a "war." Note to Republicans: this doesn't work anymore. Find something new to lie about.

Now that Lewis "Scooter" Libby has exhausted his appeals, expect the Republican noise machine to go into overdrive as Limbaugh et al decry that Libby is going to prison for "a minor offense for which no underlying crime was found." Funny, they didn't think Bill Clinton's perjury and obstruction were so minor.

Of course, look at the "underlying crime" in each case. Clinton was lying to cover up the fact he was getting a hummer from someone not his wife. Libby was lying to cover up the outing of a CIA operative who worked on nuclear nonproliferation. Yeah, now I think I see the difference.

Mark my words: by next spring Bush will declare victory and bring our boys and girls home, depriving the Democratic nominee of his or her best issue. The Dems better get busy talking about energy independence, health care and the environment or they'll be seen as out of touch.

Is it just me, or is Paris Hilton on the cover of every magazine in existence? If she shows up on the cover of The Nation I'm going to run screaming into the night -- right after I cancel my subscription.

Hunting and the Environmental Movement

2007-06-28T09:12:00.000-07:00

Go to just about any web forum on guns or hunting and you'll likely find a screed by a hunter or gun owner about those "liberal tree-huggers trying to abolish hunting or take our guns." The vitriol directed at groups such as the Sierra Club or the Nature Conservancy is heated in its tone and almost nonstop. In particular, most hunters seem to equate the Sierra Club with PETA (People For the Ethical Treatment of Animals), a group with an avowed anti-hunting bias.

The problem with this perception is that it's not true. The Sierra Club fully supports hunting and counts 20% of its membership, including several high-ranking officials, as hunters and anglers. The Club is a full supporting member of the Outdoor Writers Association of America (a collection of writers for the so-called Cast and Blast magazines such as Field & Stream).

The National Audubon Society, another frequent target of hunters and gun owners, also actively supports hunting, and has frequently published articles in its magazine promoting more cooperation between hunters and environmentalists. One of its most respected conservation writers, Ted Williams, is an avid hunter and angler.

The Nature Conservancy, often pilloried by hunters for "taking hunting lands out of the public domain," actually allows hunting on most of its lands and actively promotes hunting on them as a wildlife management tool. The Izaak Walton League of America was started by hunters and continues to be a strong advocate of hunting. Most environmental groups that don't actively promote hunting, such as Defenders of Wildlife, choose to offer no stance on hunting, either for or against.

The tragedy of this antipathy hunters seem to feel for the mainstream environmental movement is this: a coalition of 35 million hunters and anglers with the 60% of Americans who describe themselves as environmentalists would be an unstoppable political force for change in environmental policy. After all, both groups have the same end goal: protect and preserve wildlife and wildlife habitat -- environmentalists for its intrinsic beauty, and hunters and anglers so they may continue to have game to hunt and fish.

Why do hunters and gun owners in particular distrust the mainstream environmental movement? I believe this distrust is born of fear-mongering by pro-gun groups, in particular the National Rifle Association. The NRA, a champion of the 2nd Amendment, has for years equated the environmental movement with liberalism, and liberalism with gun control. In short, the NRA has managed to convince its constituency that, against all logic, the environmental movement is both anti-gun and anti-hunting.

But hunters need to look at who the NRA supports. In the last two election cycles, here are just a few candidates to whom the NRA has donated money: Senator Mel Martinez (0% rating by the League of Conservation Voters), Senator Jim DeMint (14% rating), Senator John Thune (14% rating) and ex-Senator Rick Santorum (14% rating). According to the Center For Responsive Politics pro-gun lobbies (primarily the NRA) have, since 1990, donated almost 19 million in campaign cash, with 85% of it going to Republicans -- most of whom it can be said have a decided anti-wildlife bias.

In effect, hunters who support the NRA in a misguided belief it is protecting their gun rights are harming the very wildlife on which they depend to ply their pastime. They are filling in wetlands, denuding forests and developing wilderness. They are killing the animals they by logic should be protecting.

To be fair, a lot of the blame can be laid at the feet of the environmental movement. Kudos are due to the Sierra Club for its outreach movement, but more can be done. Mainstream environmentalists need to forcefully reassure gun owners they have no intention of joining the anti-gun movement. Democratic politicians can more intently explain they have no designs on sporting arms or target weapons.

Hunters, too, need to realize the error of their ways. After all, what good is it to have the right to bear arms if there is nothing left to shoot? There is much to be gained and too much to lose by this illogical schism between hunters and environmentalists.

10 Steps to Fix America -- #1: Immigration

2007-06-26T13:30:00.000-07:00

This is the first in a series of articles about the steps we need to fix our nation. I'd actually planned to make immigration 7 or 8 on the list, but with the Senate again considering immigration reform this seems to be the hot-button issue right now, so here goes:

With the Senate poised to pass what the president calls "a path to citizenship" but most would call amnesty for illegal immigrants, there seems to be a lot of hand-wringing over the immigration issue. Americans seem to be all over the board on this, from those who would round up all the undocumented workers, deport them and build a huge wall on the southern border, manned by thousands of soldiers, to those who would do nothing and keep the status quo.

First, let's look at what won't work. Current estimates are there are at least 12 million undocumented workers and as many as 20 million. We can't round them up a deport them. For one thing, it's logistically impossible. For another, it would be prohibitively expensive; to find and deport one illegal immigrant costs thousands of dollars. To round up 12 million would cost billions of dollars and take at least a decade. Finally, deporting them all would be morally reprehensible; we almost certainly would end up ripping families apart.

At first glance, better border security would seem to be a good place to start. Yet as long as there are jobs for immigrants they will find a way around any measures we incorporate -- the border is just too long. Even if we were to somehow completely seal the border -- again at prohibitive cost -- coyotes would boat them in.

So what do we do? Here is my two-point illegal immigration solution:

1) Call it a "path to citizenship," call it amnesty, call it whatever you want, but give each undocumented worker a tamper-proof and impossible-to-counterfeit card that allows them to legally get a job. Then get them a Social Security card so they can start paying their fair share of taxes. Finally, give them a long, hard, difficult (but not impossible) path to citizenship that involves learning English and staying out of jail.

2) Hit the employers. Hit them hard. Make hiring a worker who isn't a citizen and doesn't hold a tamper-proof card a misdemeanor offense, liable for fines of $20,000 for each person in management at the company, right on up to the CEO. Make hiring illegal immigrants so unpalatable for corporations they simply choose not to do it anymore. When Mr. Agribusiness-owner knows that not only he but all his foremen will have to pay twenty large for each undocumented worker he will change his hiring practices in a hurry.

Despite the rhetoric on the right, people enter this country illegally for only one reason: to work. Dry up the supply of low-paying jobs available to undocumented workers and you stop the influx of illegal immigrants. This will have the desired effect of forcing employers to increase wages for their workers as the labor pool begins to dry up. We should all expect to pay a bit more for that head of lettuce or a hotel room or for our general contractor when we remodel the house. That is the price we pay to see that the guy who picked that lettuce can feed his family. It's the Henry Ford philosophy: pay the workers enough so they can afford to buy what they produce.

The other rhetoric often heard is "illegals do the work Americans won't do." This is pure hogwash. Americans don't want to pick lettuce because Mr. Agribusiness-owner wants to maximize his profits by paying undocumented workers $5.00 under the table, rather than what should be the prevailing wage.

Moreover, let's look at some statistics about employment of undocumented workers. According to Dr. Steven Camarota of the Center For Immigration Studies (page down a ways; table #8) immigrants (both legal and illegal) make up 43.7% of the workforce in farming, fishing and forestry, 34.0% of cleaning and maintenance workers, 25.9% of construction workers and 22.0% of food preparation workers.

Look at those numbers carefully. This means that 56.3% of farming jobs, 66.0% of cleaning and maintenance jobs, 74.1% of construction jobs and 78.0% of food preparation jobs are held by native born Americans. If illegal immigrants do the jobs Americans don't want, why are so many Americans still doing them anyway?

Unfortunately, as things stand my two-point program has little chance of becoming law. That's because Congress is in the pockets of big business, and immigration has always been about big business: a steady supply of low-wage workers to maximize profits. Point number one they could live with, but they'll fight point two to the death. We, as voters, need to ask our representatives if they will support strong sanctions against employers who hire undocumented workers. If they won't, they shouldn't get our vote.

Next in this series: National Health Care

Random Thoughts on the Day's News

2007-06-26T08:02:00.000-07:00

In a new poll conducted by Newsweek, 41% of Americans still believe Saddam Hussein and Iraq were responsible for 9/11. A majority of Americans don't know most of the hijackers came from Saudia Arabia; 20% thought they came from Iraq, and 14% thought they originated from Iran.

In an unrelated poll, 96.7% of Americans know Paris Hilton was released from jail last night.

A survey revealed that only 2.2% of Americans (comprised of the Amish and a few scattered survivalists in Idaho) don't own a television set.

I did the math: that means 1.9% of Americans with televisions didn't know Paris Hilton had been released from jail. I call these people "Media Slackers."

When asked about Paris Hilton, 47% of Swedish citizens said they preferred the Rome Hilton. Another 28% said the hired help at the Paris Hilton were rude, and that they now preferred to vacation in Rio.

Enough. Now back to our regularly scheduled blog . . .

The Politics of Hunting

2007-06-25T17:04:00.000-07:00

Gun owners (and, by extension, hunters) have been a reliable Republican voting bloc for decades. Many have surmised this is because most hunters tend to be conservative in nature, that a large majority of hunters reside in so-called "Red States" and merely reflect the characteristics of the general populace in these areas.

I believe most hunters vote Republican for a simple reason: gun owners in this country have been conditioned (I don't think brainwashed is too harsh a word) to believe the Democratic Party is anti-gun. Moreover, these gun owners -- mistakenly I think -- are convinced the Democrats long-term vision is to rid the United States of guns and revoke the 2nd Amendment.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) has long been the nation's foremost advocate for gun rights. To its credit, the NRA has traditionally been at the forefront for improved gun training and safety and is a tireless advocate for hunters. Unfortunately, the NRA's incessant drumbeat that "liberal politicians" are out to get our guns has become an accepted mantra among gun owners and hunters.

Yet there is virtually no evidence this is the case. As far as I can tell, not a single elected Democrat in the last two decades has called for making sporting arms illegal. Other than the assault weapons ban of the Clinton era and the recently-passed legislation making it more difficult for persons with a history of mental illness to buy a gun, no significant anti-gun legislation has passed in over twenty years -- and the NRA itself supported the mental illness exception.

Yet hunters continue to believe their right to own their shotgun, rifle or hunting handgun is in jeopardy. And that has caused hunters to, in a "What's the Matter With Kansas" vein, repeatedly vote against their own best interests.

Since the resignation of Richard Nixon, who left an outstanding environmental legacy including the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act, every Republican administration has not just had a spotty environmental record, they have been downright anti- wildlife. From Reagan's disastrous decision to appoint James Watt as head of Interior to Bush Junior's attempts to eviscerate Nixon's legacy and roll back Bill Clinton's National Forest roadless initiative, the Republican Party's record on wildlife protection has been nothing short of abominable. And the party has been particularly ostrich-like on what will ultimately be the seminal issue of our time, not just for this nation's wildlife but the world's: global warming.

This record begs the obvious question: what good is it for hunters to have the right to bear arms if there's nothing left to hunt? Hunters would do better to shelve their concerns about imaginary attacks on the 2nd Amendment and instead look for candidates who support both sport hunting and strong protections for the environment and wildlife.

Finally: Hunting and the Environmental Movement

Should Roberts and Alito Be Impeached?

2007-06-25T10:07:00.000-07:00

During their hearings for confirmation to the Supreme Court, both John Roberts and Samuel Alito were asked repeatedly about the docrine of Stare Decisis, to "stand by things decided." Both answered forcefully, under oath, that they would indeed respect the past precedent of the court.

With a series of 5-4 decisions handed down today, both Roberts and Alito have demonstrated that they in fact were lying under oath. First, they helped overrule a 2003 decision by striking down portions of a campaign finance law restricting so-called "issues ads" in the weeks preceeding federal elections. Then they ignored a 1968 ruling to deny taxpayers the right to sue the federal government over its Faith-Based Initiatives. Finally, they took on the 1st Amendment in the Bong Hits 4 Jesus case, restricting a student's right to stage protests on school grounds, ignoring a Vietnam era ruling.

Both Roberts and Alito have no intention of following the Stare Decisis doctrine. They instead have demonstrated they have every intention of rewriting the law to conform to their conservative dogma. They lied to the Senate under oath and should be impeached, tried and removed from their positions.

The Economics of Hunting

2007-06-24T14:37:00.000-07:00

There's a reason a group such as the Sierra Club, perceived as a "liberal bunch of tree-huggers" by most, would have a hunting and fishing page on their website. It's because most mainstream environmental organizations -- among them Sierra, The Audubon Society and the Izaak Walton League -- recognize hunters and anglers were the first conservationists, advocating the preservation of wilderness and wildlife long before there was something called the "environmental movement." Moreover, most mainstream environmentalists understand wildlife conservation in this country would collapse without the support of hunters and anglers.

In 1937 a group of concerned sportsmen -- among them former president Theodore Roosevelt, Aldo Leopold, George Bird Grinnel and J.N. Darling -- managed to push through congress a measure called Federal Aid In Wildlife Restoration, also known as the Pittman-Robertson Act. This measure established a set of excise taxes on firearms, ammunition and archery supplies with the moneys to be used exclusively for wildlife conservation. That's right: for one of the few times in this nation's history a special interest group actually advocated a tax against themselves.

Pittman-Robertson has been quite successful: 68 million acres of wildlife habitat has been purchased and over 350 million acres of wildlife habitat is maintained and operated by this tax on hunters. Since 1937 about $5.3 billion has been raised, with another $1.3 billion in state's matching funds. In 1950 congress passed the Dingell-Johnson Act, which established a similar excise tax on fishing products. Thanks to several amendments passed in the ensuing years (including the Wallop-Breaux Amendment of 1985 and an extension signed by George W. Bush in 2005) anglers have donated another $5.4 billion since 1950. Together, hunters and anglers have contributed almost $11 billion for wildlife conservation since the late '30's through these excise taxes.

And that doesn't include the millions of dollars contributed each year through license fees, special use fees and stamps, including the wildly successful duck stamp program. The National Refuge System, partly funded through the duck stamp, now totals some 95 million acres -- 11 million more than in the National Park System. Because of hunters and anglers dozens of species -- both game species and non-game animals -- have recovered or are recovering. Among them are wild turkeys, white-tailed deer, pronghorn antelope, wood ducks, desert bighorn sheep and many predatory birds including bald eagles and peregrine falcons. Anti-hunters are fond of pointing out that hunters preserve wildlife habitat so they may have more prey to shoot, yet fail to understand that the pelican and the red-tailed hawk don't know the preserved marsh in which they live was saved by hunters to help ducks.

The original conservationists do quite a good job in the general economy also. According to the Fish and Wildlife's National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife Associated Recreation, 13 million hunters and 34 million anglers spend almost $58 billion per year to hunt and fish. Entire industries thrive on the money sportsmen pump into the economy, and many small towns in rural America would simply dry up and blow away without the economic might of the nation's hunters and anglers.

Simply put: hunters and anglers are an economic force both for wildlife conservation and in the general economy. Fringe groups who would advocate the abolition of either hunting or fishing would do great harm to our shared wildlife and our economy were they to be successful.

Next: The Politics of Hunting

Why We Hunt

2007-06-22T15:10:00.000-07:00

Cultural man has existed for about two-million years. It was just in the past 40,000 years of our existence as a species, however, that we learned agriculture and animal husbandry. In other words, for 98% of our existence we survived by hunting and gathering. For men, hunting is in effect a biological imperative; the hunting genes are hard-wired into our brains at birth. (For women it is the gathering gene, hence -- and this is not a joke but is in fact a theory advanced by many anthropologists -- a woman's proclivity for shopping.)

The short answer for why we hunt is because we're supposed to. As we evolved, the men who had the best set of hunting skills -- speed, endurance, strength, wisdom and problem solving, among others -- were the men who survived to breed and pass their genes to future generations. Indeed, many anthropologists believe mankind's advances in hunting techniques, which allowed him to kill animals much larger than himself, played a large roll in our continuing evolution as a species. Killing large animals upon which the tribe could feed for longer amounts of time left man with a luxury not enjoyed by other species: leisure time, leading to advances in language, culture and tool making that continue to this day.

Beyond being a biological imperative, hunting provides one with a far different perspective on the commons. The great conservationist Aldo Leopold wrote, in his Sand County Almanac (I'm paraphrasing here because I don't have the book in front of me) that "The deer hunter always watches the horizon; the duck hunter always watches the sky; the bird hunter always watches the dog; the non-hunter does not watch."

Leopold did not mean to denigrate non-hunting lovers of the outdoors. Instead, he was trying to show that hunters (and, to large extent, anglers) enter the commons as active participants rather than casual observers. Successful hunters are more finely attuned to their environment. Their senses are more fully developed, their anticipation keener, their powers of observation at their highest. The hunter is more alive than is someone merely on a stroll through the forest.

Some would impugn the morality of hunters, asserting that killing another living creature is somehow abhorrant. This argument fails on two levels. First, know that hunters understand that the logical end game of any hunt results in death. The hunters does not kill with joy, but with a curious combination of pride and melancholy. Pride in the accomplishment of a task that requires skill and cunning, a task that is certainly not easy. (Most non-hunters are either unwilling or unable to understand that the task of successfully hunting any prey animal, regardless of the tool we choose to use, is an extremely difficult one.) Melancholy at the taking of another life. Hunters are not automotons who kill without feeling.

The morality argument also fails because in the end it stinks of hypocracy. We all kill, every day. Who can argue they hold the moral high ground because they let the butcher do their killing for them? Even the vegetarian and the vegan kill -- we all do; we kill with our automobiles, spewing pollution into the commons; we kill with our conspicuous consumption, a system of manufacturing that pollutes and uses natural resources upon which wildlife depend; we kill with our system of shipping goods; we kill with our giant agribusinesses that occupy what once was wildlife habitat. No, I can argue the hunter is indeed the moral one, because he takes at least a portion of his food consumption by his own hands, taking and eating what is, after all, a renewable resource.

In the end, we hunt because it feels right. We enjoy working with the dog, walking with old friends, telling the same stories over and over. We enjoy the pride of passing our knowledge and skills on to our children. We hunt because it's in our bones. As always, comments are welcome.

Next: The Economic Elements of Hunting

Haiwee -- June 22, 2007

Welcome

2007-06-21T09:18:00.000-07:00

This is my first post to a blog of any kind. First, a word about the name of my blog. Haiwee is my moniker in the many forums and chat groups I frequent. The first forum I joined, many years ago, was a backpacking group. Little-known Haiwee Pass has always been my favorite east-side entry into the High Sierra backcountry. In the dozens of backpacking trips over Haiwee Pass to the South Fork Kern River I've yet to meet another hiker. Above all, I value solitude during my sojurns into the wilderness, frequently hiking alone into little-used areas.

I am an avid bird hunter and angler, yet I am also a self-avowed flaming liberal. I don't think these traits are in any way mutually exclusive. Look for me to, in future posts, explain this. Also look for riffs on why we need campaign finance reform (including public financing), national single-payer health insurance, an Apollo-like program for energy independence, a significant tax increase on the wealthiest Americans and on corporations alike, a more progressive environmental policy and a return to a foreign policy that does not include pre-emptive war. Finally, look for many posts regarding my love of outdoor recreation, including one in the near future entitled "Why We Hunt."

Coments and suggestions are not only welcome, but encouraged. Thanks for reading.