It's a Lost Cause?

I heard a guy the other day saying how Paul Ryan's economic plan is going to take away Social Security and Medicare from retirees and senior citizens--right away if implemented.  It would do no such thing, not as he devised it.  It's easily checked at Ryan's Web site.  SS and M wouldn't be touched, if his plan were ever enacted, until 2023 at the earliest.  That means those currently in their early to mid-50s have about a dozen years to make their own plans.  And Ryan's plan also has a gov't catchall; that is, SS and M are not eliminated.

I received some mail from the NEA which completely distorts Romney's record and words.  There are reasons to criticize Romney--and I do--but these distortions (does that mean "lies?") are not among them.

And, to play fair, I received an e-mail about Obama and the flag and national anthem that is inaccurate and, mostly, fabricated.  He may or may not believe, personally, what this e-mail alleges.  But he never articulated, on television or anywhere else publicly, this.

The point is, can we ever stop the dishonesty?  Has our system of education produced so many ignorant and gullible people?  Do people willfully believe everything their side says?  Have the sides no sense of shame, that winning at all cost trumps basic principles of honesty?  (The way politicians from both parties have acted over the past few decades would seem to suggest there is no sense of shame among them.)  Is dishonesty the key to winning elections?  (Where are the media on all of this?  One would think there are lots of sales, not to mention Pulitzers?, for exposing all the dishonesty, perhaps one piece at a time.)

No, I won't give up....

Boycotts?

Apparently, the actor Jeff Daniels was on Frank Beckmann's local radio show this week.  Talk, naturally, turned to the new HBO show on which Daniels stars.  I haven't seen the show and don't plan on it--largely because I don't watch much television (other than Nick Jr!).

Questions finally focused on the show's one-sided attacks on conservatives and Republicans (although, nowadays, the two aren't necessarily synonymous).  Daniels, who claims to be a moderate, said the show targest the Tea Partiers, "that's where the craziness is coming from...."  Whoa!  Wait just a minute!  To his credit (and I think Beckmann is a very good host, better than any of the locals and at least the equal of most if not all the national hosts), Beckmann challenged this accusation.  Isn't it crazy what the federal gov't is doing, its spending, intrusions, unilateral grabs and usurpations of power, etc.?  What about the Occupiers?  Aren't they "crazy?"  Beckmann exposed Daniels for what is seems to really be--a typical Hollywood-type.  I thought better of him, what with some of his projects. 

I do part with Beckmann on his assertion in today's column in the Det News.  He is critical of callers who said they would boycott Daniels' movies, television shows, play, etc.  Why be critical of those poeple?  Beckmann asserts that they "confirm" Daniels' view/"complaint" against the "crazies," I guess.  Boycotts, he holds, represents "unwillingness to acknowledge that reasonable people can differe in political philosophy" and an unwillingness to engage in dialogue.  Au contraire, mon frere!
Nope.  Boycotts are legitimate.  Dialogue can still be open.  Why would anyone want to watch such a television show, for instance, that denigrates their own political views?  Why would anyone want to boost ratings, hence, advertising dollars for such a show?  No, No, No!  The HBO folks can run any shows they want to run--I just don't have to support them, philosophically or, indirectly, financially.

And who is it that rarely engages in dialogue?  Who regularly calls names?  (An example:  A left-leaning guy I know once called Beckmann "a bigot."  I asked why he would make that claim.  What evidence do you have?  His evidence?  "He just is....")  Who constantly points out the flaws, even the most minor ones, while ignoring or rationalizing their own?  C'mon, that guy Akin, McCotter, et al deserve everything coming their ways.  But how have the Kennedies, Clintons, and more been given free passes?  Not to excuse Akin, but wasn't Clinton's behavior much worse than Akin's words, dumb as they were? 

Just Wondering

Here's a great comment from David McCulloch, who's written some terrific history over the years:

“'Any nation that expects to be ignorant and free,' Jefferson said, 'expects what never was and never will be.' And if the gap between the educated and the uneducated in America continues to grow as it is in our time, as fast as or faster than the gap between the rich and the poor, the gap between the educated and the uneducated is going to be of greater consequence and the more serious threat to our way of life. We must not, by any means, misunderstand that.”

I fear most people have never considered this.  After all, our schools gave us all good grades, didn't they?  Education is all messed up, from the meddling of politicians of both parties.  Those leading the schools shouldn't be leading--and shouldn't have been for the past forty years.  Everything's wrong, from the destructive testing craze to reliance more on self-concept than knowledge to overemphasis on technology.  I once said that education would never really improve and prepare people for the future until it imploded.  I'm more convinced of that now than ever.

A few weeks ago a Wayne State professor (physics?) wrote an op-ed piece critical of the inflated grades accompanied by diminished performance at his school.  It sparked, as expected, a flood of letters.  "I worked hard for my degree" was typical.  Yeah, right....  OK, my BA is legitimate and when I tell people what I had to do to get it, well, I'm sure many of them (unfamiliar with Amherst) think I'm fabricating.  But two of my three graduate degrees are, frankly, jokes.  I got them to satisfy state requirements.  They aren't real degrees, which I readily admit.  That's the primary reason why I went back to get a real Masters degree; I wanted a legitimate degree.  But, like so many high school diplomas, far too many college degrees aren't worth the paper on which they are printed.  Who will admit that, other than the WSU professor?

Are some politicans innately stupid or willfully so?  Who's that Missouri Congressman (Akin?) who made that ignorant comment about "legitimate rape?"  How could that even have been "I misspoke" or whatever it is that politicians use to cover up their lies?  How could such a thing, "legitimate rape" even be on the guy's mind?  Does he also have "legitimate pedophilia" or "legitimate murder" somewhere in there?  How could anyone want someone with this kind of thinking representing him or her?  What if he wins?  After all, he's running against someone who also shouldn't be representing us.

Is it true (I'm not sure, but the numbers seem to add up) that any federal monies gained by the expiration of the "Bush tax cuts" (passed by a Congress dominated by what party?) wouldn't match the federal money lost with Solyndra or the auto bailouts (now standing at $26 billion and rising)?  Again, it's not a revenue problem, but a spending problem. 

I can't quite put my finger on why it's the unions that are causing all this economic malaise in this country and, esp, Michigan.  We hear that the unions are keeping jobs, industry, etc. from Michigan, causing outsourcing to other nations, etc.  Wait a minute!  Aren't fewer than 15% of all jobs in this country "union jobs?"  And, of that, aren't about 30% of them public sector union jobs?  So, 85% of the jobs in the US are not "union jobs.?"  And, that number is about the same for Michigan.  So how is that the biggest problem facing industry, job creation, etc.?  It seems to me that it's not!

I know there are union problems, esp in industries like automobiles.  Still, work rules, paying for not working, etc. are still there.  Bad workers are protected.  Yet, I can't help but think there's an important role to be played by unions.  See the above, but have there been many articles, many radio talk show interviews, etc. aiming at the poor administrative decisions made by corporate leadership?  The auto companies are purportedly on the road back, but have the prices of cars declined significantly?  If not, why are people buying cars?  Can it be the quality of them has improved?  And whose fault was the lousy quality of years passed--the same guys operating the same machines then as now or those who designed and marketed the cars?  The latter aren't union workers....

The union (UAW) benefit from the auto bailout was about $27 billion, just about the loss the US taxpayers took on the bailout.  Stock- and bondholders were robbed of their money.  White collar, that is, nonunion workers, were robbed of their pensions.  Supplier employees lost their retirement investments.  Dealerships were forced to close, not by market conditions, but by gov't orders (the terms of the buyout), costing how many jobs of mechanics, salesmen, clerical workers, etc.?

Gee, I'm of two minds about unions!

"Unacceptable?"

A few weeks ago, after yet another murder in Detroit, the police chief made a statement that these murders are "unacceptable."  Well, yes, of course they are.  Or, are they?

First, what took so long to announce this?  After how many murders and other shootings?  Second, if they are "unacceptable," why do they continue, seemingly unabated?  Just in the past week's newspapers there were accounts of two kids, a 5-year old and a 3-year old, who were shot.  Apparently, to far too many people, shooting another person is acceptable.  It's not just the shooters, but those who stand by and watch, those who provide the weapons, those who harbor and cover for the shooters.  When will Detroit and Detroiters get serious about stopping this inhuman behavior?  I know the police cannot end this themselves, but perhaps a message can be sent to shooters and potential shooters, something more than words.

And, in today's newspaper (I think it was today) was an article asking if it is "worthwhile" for seniors to skip out on their bills.  I'd think, then, that "worthwhile" then makes not paying "acceptable."  What kind of morality is that??????  In a somewhat different context, Herbert Hoover once said, "They hired the money, didn't they?"  He meant borrowers (other countries) had to repay their loans.  I guess it's become all right to run up bills and then run out on them, not paying.  (This isn't meant for those who've run into legitimate hardships.)  When did the shame of doing this disappear?  "Shame?"  Is there still any shame out there?

Perfect!

I don't know, but is there anything more exciting than a perfect game in baseball?  I just watched the final inning of some Seattle pitcher's perfect game (I guess he's well-known, but I don't know his name) and was rooting hard for the guy.  I was all pumped up.  When he got it, I cheered, too.  How cool!

All those years and all those games, had to be well over a thousand, likely many more, I think I was really involved in only one no-hitter, not even a perfect game.  (OK, I tossed a perfect game as a kid, 9 or 10 years old, but it only went three innings and 9 outs--that doesn't count.)  My college teammate Rick Murphy tossed one against, get this, our biggest rival, Williams.  Yep, we were excited.  And, imagine a kid who didn't pitch but a couple of innings all year, who started the second game of the DH against Williams, Dave McCarthy, throwing a 1-hitter!  Yes, true story.

Canoeing

After a bike to the state park, a nice run on the trails, and a bike ride home, it was time for some real exercise.  We took the kids canoeing.  Karen and I took Ashley and the Code in a canoe, while Matt and Bopper were in kayaks.  We paddled upstream, about 2 to 2 1/2 miles (according to the guide at the rental place), to the dam.  It was pretty tough in spots, esp with Ash and Code dragging their paddles in the river--but they were helping!  K was enjoying the free ride.

We stopped at the dam for a break, the kids running a bit and having some Scoobie Snacks.  Then, it was time to head back.  With the current, the paddling was considerably easier--and K decided to join in a bit more.  Matt and Bopp took off.  We made it back in an hour and 45 minutes; the guide was surprised in that about 2 hours or more are allotted for the trip.  I think we were aided by the high water, the river way up from last week's torrents.

I was surprised, with the temps in the 70s, that I was sweating so much.  In fact, this AM, before 7:00, with the temp at 61, my run was punctuated by a solid flow of "schweat."  My tee shirt was sopping wet.

I'm not sore at all, although I thought my shoulders might be.  We'll see about them tomorrow.  My back doesn't hurt, but tightens up a bit if I sit for a while. 

All in all, a fun trip!

BTW, all of you who know of the Huron River, I'll wager you didn't know that, at one time, it flowed westward all the way to its mouth--at Lake Michigan!!!!!!  Later, it cut a new path to the River Raisin before finally cutting yet another channel, its current one, to Lake Erie.

The Times They Are A-Changin'

An aside to start, I saw two lists of "greatest musical artists" and Bob Dylan was in the top five of each.  I immediately dismissed the lists.  (My blog heading today reminded me of that.)

More to the point, here is a great, but sad column on changing times.  Walter Williams knocks it out of the park again. 

http://townhall.com/columnists/walterewilliams/2012/08/01/how_times_have_changed/page/full/#

It's a very poignant column.  I can identify with much of what Williams writes.  Things like he notes kept me on the straight and narrow.  Neighbors were surrogate parents, watching what we did.  If I strayd, all the assistant principal at my junior high had to do was ask me, "Marinucci, do I have to call your old man?"  (He could call him my "old man" because he was my dad's former coach.  That made whatever report he might sent to my "old man" even more devastating.)  

I like what Williams writes, too, about students calling teachers by their first names.  Some teachers think that makes them "relevant" or something.  Not me, not at all.  I still, 40 years later, in writing and face-to-face call my Amherst professors, "Professor."  Some of my students now call me "Professor" (which I take as the ultimate compliment, "Professor" connoting my AC teachers) or "Dr.," but "Mr." is just fine.  (OK, I did let one student call me "Ron."  He was in his 80s--seriously--and was taking my classes for the third or fourth time.)

Note, too, the reference to "Jerry Springer" and "Maury" (whatever his last name is).  Talk about people having no sense of shame!

Have you tried to tell some people, even kids, to tone down their language, esp in front of women and children?  (If you haven't if the opportunity arose, shame.)  Usually, just a dirty look from me works.  Oh, the kids, esp, don't stop--but they do move away.

And with all the talk in this country about "greed," exactly what is it when people, as Williams notes, accumulate all sorts of debt and then "seek to avoid payment of it?"  I know some people are legitimately hurting--and need help--but how many plan to charge, roll up credit bills, and then just walk away?  I know it happens--I have several, more than several, examples I have personally witnessed--and likely far more often than anyone will admit.  College loans are examples.  Karen kids me that I'm the only person in the country who paid his college loans, all of them.  That's not true, of course, but how many are looking for legislation to "forgive" those loans?  All that is "morally corrupt and reprehensible."  If college costs are too high, look to the sources of the outrageous costs. We shouldn't borrow money and then skip out on repayment. 

One last thing, in a related article, in the Det Free Press, no less, it was claimed that each foreclosed home cost taxpayers $80,000.  Wait a minute!  Where did all that bailout money go?  Wouldn't it have been wiser to give the $80,000 to each struggling homeowner--if the struggle could be demonstrated as legit--than to wherever it went?  At least people would have been able to make mortgage payments for another 5 or 6 years, maybe until they got back on their feet!  (See, I'm not heartless!)  Driving through a Waterford subdvision two weeks ago, there were at least six homes in foreclosure--and we weren't specifically looking for them.  Over in Lake Sherwood, the high-rent district--there are more foreclosures than anyone might guess.  Where did those hundreds of billions of dollars go, if not to help people keep their homes??????  Is this yet another example of do-gooders perhaps meaning well (maybe I'm being overly judicious here?), but not accomplishing a whole lot other than making things worse?  I don't know, but it's what I suspect.

The Greatest Athletes?

With the Olympics, this question has been going around:  Who is the world's greatest athlete?  Beats me, but it's a good question.  Is it the 100- and 200-meter champion, who finishes his races by not really trying, pointing and talking?  That's pretty impressive.  But, although he's got some muscle on him, all he does is run fast in a straight line, although pretty darn fast.  Is it the decathlon champion, the gold medalist?  He, I guess, stated that he's not the greatest.  But he runs fast, both short and long.  He jumps and vaults.  And he throws, even some heavy stuff.

Of course, there are always those who point to NFL and NBA players.  It'd be hard to argue against someone like Michael Jordan or Calvin Johnson, among others.  And there are a host of others for which claims could be made.

I guess when athletes get that good, what difference does it make?  Does it really make any difference if you are Warren Buffett or Bill Gates?  I suppose to some it does, but such athletic skills are impressive to me.

I'd be curious to find out, though, if any of these "greatest" adhered to the 10,000-hour rule postulated in The Outliers by Malcom Gladwell.  This "rule" suggests that to be truly great at something, to become truly great, a minimum of 10,000 hours of practice is necessary.  He uses as examples some athletes, but also some computer wizards.  He traces their youths and how much time they spent with basketball or computers or whatnot.

But, I chuckle out loud when I think of my rather meager athletic accomplishments.  Could anyone have played more sports than I did as a kid?  How rare was the day I didn't play baseball or basketball or football or hockey!  If it wasn't a real or pick-up game, it was bouncing the ball off the steps of the front porch (and how many times did I have to sneak the window to the hardware to be repaired before my father arrived home from work?????), shooting baskets alone, playing street hockey, throwing the football through the tire, etc.  10,000 hours?  If I didn't spend that much time, I can't imagine how it was done.  I guess some innate ability is required, too?

Oh, let me get this one out, too.  Am I the only one who preferred the old college football bowl system to the BS, er, BCS?  I don't need "a national champion."  How much more fun to have heated discussions if this undefeated team or that undefeated team was better--all spring and summer long!  I liked the traditions of certain conferences sending their champions to the same bowl each year.  I guess I'm big on tradition.  I was talking the other day with a guy and we lamented, that in basketball, due to the new league make-up, the two local district high schools only play each other once a year.  What a loss that is.  And I don't care for interleague play.  Esp now with so much television, the argument that the AL cities can now see the NL stars and vice versa doesn't carry as much weight.

I still haven't checked if it's true or not, but I heard the Tigers now charge fans to come watch BP.  I wonder if that's so.  If it is, talk about greed!  It's enough that it's almost 10 minutes between half innings to get all the TV commercials in.  Still, I think I'd pay to see Miguel Cabrera take BP.  He's an incredible hitter.  His hip action is better than anyone I've ever seen.  I sometimes think that if he doesn't hit a frozen rope, he wasn't trying to hit one.  Oh, after seeing him hit three clothes lines in his first three at-bats, the fourth time wasn't a screamer--it was a 430 fly ball over the centerfield fence!  Yeow!

And I still think that Ted Simmons deserves to be in the baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, esp when he is compared with some others already there.  He compares quite favorably, with other catchers and other position players, too.

Disappointment!

The election results are in and, as usual, I'm quite disappointed.  Even though there were distinct and viable alternate candidates, from both parties, the incumbents won far too often.

Conyers, Peters, Dingell, Hoekstra (OK, not an incumbent, but a Washington insider), Levin, and others didn't have many challenges.  Nothing changes if nothing changes.

I guess people are happy with the crappy direction in which we're headed?????? 

As a side note, it took all of one sentence to get in that Kerry Bentivolio is "a reindeer rancher."  And, again, I didn't see any other candidate labeled, "career politician."

Monday, Monday

In the wake of the Sikh shootings in Wis, there was a shooting in Detroit that didn't make this AM's newspaper.  Seven people were shot on a Detroit River Dinner Boat.  Perhaps the incident occurred too late to make this AM's editions; I don't know.  Perhaps it's another instance of "What's new in Detroit?  Nothing...." 

Still, both shootings illustrate something I thought about last week.  They are the extreme culmination of our "I, Me, Mine" society.  "Somebody dissed me.  I want to get even.  If others get hurt, too bad.  It's all about me and what I want.  The value/worth of others' lives is nothing compared to what I want."

And here's a good editorial about Presidential abuse of power, this time Obama's.  http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120806/OPINION01/208060305/1007/OPINION/Editorial-Obama-s-power-grab-flouts-Constitution

Of course other Presidents have abused power.  Where do we want to start?  With Lincoln?  FDR?  Bush?  But I would submit Lincoln's abuse was, in light of the little crisis he faced, justified.  I don't subscribe to it, but others make a similar claim with FDR.  Obama's are much more egregious, usurping authority he isn't supposed to possess or ignoring duties he is supposed to perform.  Meanwhile, Congress and the media sleep.  The victims are the Constitution and, eventually, freedom.

I know the response of many people to my plaints.  When I hear them, I just recall the lament of Pastor Martin Niemoeller: 

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.

Tell me again that I'm being paranoid.

Columnists and More

Forgive any misspellings--I am not wearing my glasses and can hardly see the screen.


Pitts had his best column in a long, long time. It was outstanding, which I wrote and told him. He stayed away from the victim angle he's adopted in the past couple of years. It's well worth reading. http://www.omaha.com/article/20120728/NEWS0802/707289937/1677


Walter Williams was also great, as usual, but not always. He, again, takes on "diversity," what he calls "the stupid notion." And he uses concrete examples to shoot it down again and again. But the diversity folks never let logic or facts get in the way of their "stupid notion." Note the schools--and the people they put in charge of "diversity." Note how these folks don't permit a diversity of ideas. Of course, in this day of budget problems, there can't be any cuts to any diversity programs or positions--no, no, no. This column is also well worth reading. http://townhall.com/columnists/walterewilliams/2012/07/25/stubborn_ignorance/page/full/


Why do we spend so much gov't money on wasteful things, things that often encourage bad behavior (single parenthood, killing babies, etc.)? Yet, things we should be encouraging, such as physical exercise, get the short end of the budgetary stick? Now, I'm not in favor of more gov't spending, not at all. But if we are going to spend taxpayers' money, why do we choose the lousiest of targets? What brings this up is my bike rides of the past few days. Why don't communities or even the state spend money for bike paths, even alongside the roads? Nothing but good can come from encouraging bike riding. But, no....


I'm still considering the guy's claim last week that many of today's problems are caused by the crack cocaine epidemic of the '70s and '80s. Hmmm...... There are other things to consider, too, but maybe the guy has a point.


I see Harry Reid claims illegal doings with Romney because Romney will only release one year's tax returns. Is Reid an idiot? (Well, I think I've made my position on that one well known.) What's more important--how Romney earned and spent his own money (has there been any hint of illegality except from Reid?) or where Obama was born (you know, the little Constitutional issue of "natural-born")? I'm not a birther, but there seems to be a disconnect in what Reid and other Democrats are arguing. Romney should call the bluff--"I'll release any and all of my tax forms if Obama shows a valid US birth certificate, none of this forgery stuff." It should be easy to turn the tables on people who aren't very bright.


Again, why aren't soccer (the most popular game in the world?) and baseball (the best game in the world!) in the Olympics, but beach volleyball is? I'm not saying the VBers aren't skilled, but.... And Maria Sharapova might have been only the 2nd best in tennis, but she is easily number one in looks! Ouch!


Out to finish my yardwork before the storms that are predicted.

Chic-fil-A

...or however it's spelled.  There are none around here of which I know.  I've never been to one or eaten its fare.  I know nothing about it other than it sponsors some football bowl game.  Until now....

Apparently, the owner of Chic was interviewed and, in keeping with his traditional Christian beliefs, explained he opposed gay marriages.  OK, isn't that what traditional Chris believe?  I'm not arguing right or wrong of those beliefs here.  It's the reaction, namely by some elected officials, that is very troubling.  The mayors of large cities such as Chicago, Boston, and San Francisco have indicated they want to run this legal business "out of town."

From what I've read, Chic doesn't discrimate against gays--they are hired and they are served in the restaurants.  No questions are asked.  It's just the owner doesn't believe in gay marriages--he doesn't take any action(s).  So, these loud-mouthed, close-minded mayors (I'm not dealing with the owner of Chic here; I have not made up my mind yet.  There are lots of questions to which I haven't answers.) have decided they don't want Chic in their cities.  Wow!  Where to start?

First, I'll be the citizens of those cities who customers would be happy with getting rid of Chic. Second, those folks who are employed by Chic would probably be happier.  And, no doubt, these mayors would provide new jobs for those who lost them--yeah, right!

Most disturbing is the mayors' attack on freedoms of thought and expression--those First Amendment rights guaranteeing freedoms of religion and speech.  It's one thing for these mayors to say, "I don't like what the owner of Chic said or his beliefs and I will personally boycott Chic."  Yeah, that's one thing.  It's far another to try to use the offices to which they have been elected to close businesses because of the owner's beliefs.  What's next?  You name it...if you disagree with those in power.

If gays and others who support gay marriage want to boycott Chic on their own, fine.  I have no problem with that.  That's their right to do so.  If those who oppose gay marriage want to have Chic feed days to show their support of the owner's beliefs, that's fine, too.  This is America. 

The mayors have tipped their cards.  They are power-hungry and if the Constitution gets in their way, ignore it.  If anything comes of this, that is, Chic is close in these cities, I wonder if a civil rights lawsuit could be filed. 

BTW, yet another story--not front-page headlines--of a shooting in Detroit that resulted in a murder.  Human life, to far too many people, has become worthless.  Killing someone over shoes or a girl or a lousier seat at a baby shower is not big deal.  Just shoot the other one; if he or she or even an innocent party dies, so be it. 

In this regard, there was an interesting letter in this AM's newspaper.  The guy claim the culprit for this is crack cocaine.  He claims the crack babies of 20 and 30 years ago are now the adults who are either doing the shooting because of their own mental derangement or the parents of children who are so mentally disheveled that they have no concept of human decency, the children doing the shootings.  Hmmm....  It bears some consideration.

But let's not forget other factors which are largely overlooked--sex and violence that has permeated society in movies, television, music, etc.  Again I ask, why are guns always targeted, but rarely the media which can have such deleterious effects.  (If we doubt the efficacy of the message of violence and sex, consider the success of advertising/mass marketing.)