All Over the Place

I can't get this out of my head, for a few weeks now.  It's that Free Press op-ed that questioned how "two pathological liars" could still be the front-runners in the Presidential campaign.  I agree.  But it's understandable that the FP would write this about Trump, but as overtly liberal as it is, it is a surprise to see this also applied to Clinton.  Hmmm......  It will also be interesting to recall, later this summer or fall, when the FP endorses Clinton, how she was id'd as a "pathological liar" by it.  I guess, as old Blowhard Limbaugh suggested about his guy, it's OK to lie if it's your guy who lies.

Can this be true?  Another little girl was shot and killed in retaliation for a 3-year old who was murdered on Easter?  And, this is about some gang-related incidents?  What is wrong with us?  And we're worried about men going into women's bathrooms (and vice versa, I suppose), which I don't think is right, regardless.  Do the lives of these two little black girls matter?  Where are the visible protests, like in Ferguson, Baltimore, etc.?

Maybe I missed the boat on this one and am far off base, but why do the rest of us have to pay, to the tune of $265 million, to combat blight in our cities?  I understand the idea that values will increase, that attraction will be enhanced, but who created this blight?  Why don't they have to pay for it?

It looks like the little guys are going to bear the brunt of the Flint water crisis.  Oh, one state official was quoted that this "is just the beginning."  Who believes that?  How high will this go?  Does anybody think these little guys were acting on their own, without orders from above?  How far "above" will further charges reach?

I had to apologize this week.  I had written to the local school board, all the members, about an issue that is quite controversial around here and one that affects the Marinucci household directly.  Among other things, many other things, I suggested that this school board is just like all of them in my 45 years living and working in the district.  One member called me on that, "completely disagreeing."  I replied that "the proof is in the pudding" and that how the board acted this week would be "the proof."  Well, the board acted against the advice of the administration/superintendent and, at least temporarily, acted in the interests of the community.  It wants to further examine the financial claims of both the community and the administration (whose claims were pretty solidly refuted by great research, facts, and logic by some diligent parents).  So far, so good.  After the proposal by the board, I wrote to the board member and apologized (and thanked him).  He was right and I was wrong and, I added, it felt very good to be wrong!

I had a terrible thought the next day.  What if--and it is almost like I was hallucinating!--the school board asks me to be on the committee examining ways to cut spending in the district?  Nah, I know, that will never happen.  But what if.....?  I would have to be very up front and say my contributions won't start until we examine the district's administration--too many administrators making far too much money doing mostly useless or even detrimental things.  I'd admit I wouldn't consider any proposals until administrators' jobs were cut and salaries were cut.  My guess that such a hallucination would end right there.