Time to Shop

The annual shopping season has arrived. Time to hit the malls, listen to the endless piping of seasonal songs, dodge sharp-edged packages wielded by other consumers and frantically attempt to find the perfect gift for everyone on the list.

My husband immediately will get distracted in the men's department, the electronics department and the novelty stores. "But we have a long list we have to buy first," I will plead. He will shrug off my protests until he is ready, then push me to "hurry up" as he suggests totally inappropriate items for those in-laws of in-laws that we dare not overlook. "But she has to watch her salt," I will say as he pauses over a selection of gourmet nuts for one. "He has a sugar issue," as he picks up a gigantic box of chocolates for someone else.

"They can re-gift them," he rationalizes.

About three-quarters of the way through our list (and seven trips back to the car to unload packages), we will end up in the bookstore. He heads for the CD/DVD section, I go straight to the Sci-Fi section. About 40 minutes later we meet in the children's section. Weighed down by our latest choices we stop at the coffee shop for something outrageously caloric and some of that coffee that has been tantalizing my senses for the past hour.

Refueled we quickly complete the balance of our purchases and head for the car. My feet are killing me. If we are lucky we find the wait at Olive Garden is reasonable. Then home where I realize as we unload our booty from the car - all that stuff still has to be wrapped!

Ho, Ho, Ho.

Loss of Personhood = Loss of Citizenship?

Many years ago in the early 1980s my father had triple bypass surgery at Peter Bent Brigham Hospital in Boston. At that time "Peter Bent" was considered one of the top hospitals in the country.

After Dad came out of recovery and was sent to the Cardiac Care ICU, we were allowed to visit him two at a time for no more than 15 minutes. While my younger brother and I were sitting with him, we saw a stretcher bearing an obviously just operated upon patient being conveyed to the unit by a group of young persons we assumed were either interns or medical students. The group was boisterous, loudly talking and laughing. One of its members jumped up to take a ride on the stretcher bearing the patient. Joe and I looked at each other in horror, then back at the group, which had by then seen us. The hitchhiker quickly jumped off and the group quieted down until it was out of our line of vision, whereupon we could hear whispered giggling and shushing. Fortunately Dad was pretty much out of it and unaware of the episode.

We reported the incident to whoever was in charge of the unit, but did not sign a formal complaint because we did not want our father to suffer retribution. When Dad finally was released from the hospital, he was sent home with not one but two staf infections that slowed his recovery for many weeks and resulted in a prolonged stay in his local hospital.

The response of the TSA and administration officials to the public's complaints about the new airport security measures, including their response to the humiliation of a man with an ostemy bag that was dislodged during a "pat down," reminds me of that incident. Officials react with abysmal indifference, reiterating the public has no choice, this is the way it must and shall be. Like those young hospital interns, to the TSA, the bloated bureaucracy of Homeland Security and our government officials, we are not proud citizens of the United States of America, once the greatest democracy on earth, we are faceless nonentities.

This is NOT a Democrat vs. Republican or Liberal vs. Conservative issue. It is about sacrificing our freedom for the illusion of safety. The same institutions that permit powerful corporations to gamble our pension funds on esoteric financial instruments, that reward wealthy companies that ship our jobs overseas, that raid the Social Security trust fund to conceal their irresponsible fiscal policies, that leave our energy, transportation, military and water supply infrastructures vulnerable to physical and cyber attacks and refuse to screen the freight imported into the country because it is "too hard," have no scruples about blatantly disrespecting our persons and taking umbrage at our protests.

I have heard many, many liberal voices supporting the new TSA protocols. Why are both the left and the right so damn selective about the constitutional rights that matter to them?

Note: This is NOT an attack on TSA security personnel at the gate, most of these folks have treated me courteously in my encounters with them. It is about the post 9/11 attitude of this country's institutions, which have increasingly seen American citizens as part of the problem rather than the key to the solution.

Arms Treaty with Russia

Once again, I am simply posting a link. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/21/opinion/21dowd.html?_r=1&hp

Maureen Dowd's op ed piece in today's New York Times is worth reading because:

1. The topic, renewing the nuclear arms treaty with Russia, is an important one.


2. Her writing is vivid, acerbic and witty.


3. She listens to her own drummer.

Caught in the Middle

Facebook gives me the ability to keep up with friends and family easily and, for the most part, enjoyably. It occasionally offers me a platform for my political opinions. But yesterday one of those expressions devolved into an angry fight between two of my FB "friends" and I became the "monkey in the middle."

I have enjoyed spirited, not completely friendly exchanges, on FB before, sometimes on the pages of my friends. On one occasion I fully expected the host friend, who was absent from the discourse, to tell me and my opponent to "get a room." Another FB friend announced in a post that he would "unfriend" anyone who used his posts for side arguments or who violated the rules of common civility.

The problem is NOT disagreement or opposing viewpoints. The problem is the TONE used to express disagreement. Perhaps strong language is inevitable when strong emotions and beliefs are involved. Playing the overused "Hitler" card guarantees escalation of the war with words. The return shot fulfilled that expectation. As the friend "in common" I faced the choice of offending one or both but pleasing neither. If I have lost a friend over this, that was an awful price to pay.

No wonder my wiser "friends" often step aside when their posts become virulent. I considered deleting the entire thread, but there were ideas expressed there (mixed in with the personal attacks) that I felt deserved to stand.

I intentionally keep the number of my FB friends small - I want to be able to keep up with them. For security reasons I limit all contact to "friends." I am going to have to rethink how I use the social network. Evidently I am too liberal for the right and too conservative for the left yet somehow don't fit comfortably into the middle either!

Time to go out in the garden and eat worms... .

Airport Security - Necessary Sacrifice of Rights or Gratuitous Violation of the Fourth Amendment?

See a related article in the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/12/AR2010111206580.html?tid=wp_featuredstories&sid=ST2010111206598

Bad, bad passengers resenting good, good TSA. Take off your shoes. Surrender your personal belongings for inspection. Pose for the machine that images your naked body through your clothing for inspection by anonymous security personnel in another room or submit to a "full body" pat-down that includes your most private parts. If you are asked to remove your bra or wig, just DO IT. Protest or refuse and face removal from the area and the potential of serious fines.

Just wondering - are cavity searches next?

Every time passengers submit they are permitting the NSA to violate their Fourth Amendment rights: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Airport security personnel effectively have been granted a blanket warrant that covers every person who travels by common air carrier.

For some, perhaps most of us, the sacrifice is worth the added security of airline travel. For others, it is a security travesty the sole aim of which is to make us ever more fearful, ever more obedient to the institutions that control our lives.

Parents are forced to stand by without protest as their children are either photographed naked or patted down in a way guaranteed to traumatize them. Business people can be forced to permit the confiscation of computers and cell phones which might or might not be returned to them. Persons who value their personal dignity are forced to surrender it.

Do the TSA protocols make air travel more secure? Questionable. The 2009 Christmas underwear bomber probably would have passed through the imaging machine without protest, his nasty cargo undetected. The famous shoe bomber would have checked his shoes, then picked them up at the other side of security and continued on his nefariously intentioned way.

Both these individuals, like the 9/11 terrorists, would have been picked up with efficient, adequate intelligence screening and vigilant security checks. But that is HARD. Sooo... while we spend billions on a Homeland Security Department that spins out tentacles into ever greater aspects of American life, the genuine bad guys just think up new ways to elude the net.

Could it be that the thing the "powers that be" fear most is an American populace that is not "dumb, docile and dependent?"

How did we get to the place where corporations have more access to Constitutional Rights than individual citizens?

God help us all.

Where will they (we) go?

Throughout history overpopulation, drought, famine and economic transition resulted in mass migrations. Migrations swamped the Roman Empire, the greatest the world has known. When British landowners ejected the Scottish crofters from their farms in a great land consolidation movement, many of the crofters migrated to the United States and Canada. The rise of the industrial United States drew displaced workers and impoverished farmers from across Europe. When the potato famine threatened national starvation in Ireland, victims also made their way west across the Atlantic Ocean.

Over the past five centuries, the new worlds found in the Age of Discovery provided an avenue of escape and hope. But the new worlds now have been widely exploited from Canada to Tierra del Fuego, from North America to Australia. Where will the millions displaced by the transition to the information age or global climate change or environmental degradation go? Where are the new frontiers they will seek? Or will their struggle for survival force the choice to displace less strong populations in neighboring countries as the world grows hotter, more crowded and more polluted?

If we continue to kick the can down the road...

If we continue to kick the can down the road, this generation will have subscribed to the philosophy: apres nous, le deluge.

The following linked article in the Brisbane Times is frightening because it is so straightforward and logical. It does not feel biased, it feels like the observations of a neutral, well-informed bystander.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/business/decline-of-the-us-empire-will-reshape-our-world-20101109-17m78.html

I believe there is still time to save the greatness of the United States - home of self sufficient, "can do" innovators, melting pot of diverse races and cultures. But I agree time is running out. All great societies rise and fall, but 200 years is but a blink of an eye in world history. Surely we can do better than that?

As I see my state forced to make deeper and deeper cuts in education and other public services, as I watch Washington planning to cut taxes that inevitably will increase our deficits at the same time there is talk of shaving Social Security and Medicare while the wealthiest corporations give obscene bonuses to those who speculate with our nation's assets, I become disheartened.

My friend Bob has issued a clarion call "...from D. C. to city halls across America. Statesmen wanted. No audition required--just performance."

Courage and integrity are hard to come by in the face of the furious media attacks that inevitably rain down on anyone who dares to support real solutions to our very real problems. And yet they are quite desperately needed.

A Bitter Pill - Simpson and Bowles Unveil Deficit Reduction Plan

Click on the post title for my source material - a New York Times article.

Former Senator Alan K. Simpson and Erskine B. Bowles, who was President Clinton's White House Chief of Staff, sent a shot across the bow of Washington policy makers November 10 when they revealed an austere deficit reduction plan composed of deep spending cuts and significant tax increases.

The proposal has something guaranteed to offend every side of the political spectrum:

1. Sharp tax increases, including a 15-cent a gallon federal gasoline tax increase, the elimination of the mortgage interest deduction, tax credits targeting low income wage earners and federal tax deductions for state and local tax payments.
2. Across the board cuts in federal spending, including military spending, Medicare and Social Security.

The proposal projects a roughly $4 trillion reduction in the federal deficit by 2020. It recommends a 2-1 ratio of spending cuts to revenue increases.

This plan deserves serious study and consideration. One of my greatest concerns is whether it, or any ultimate plan, weighs more heavily on the lower economic sectors and more lightly on the wealthiest sectors.

The bleak truth is that meaningful deficit reduction will be painful, unpopular and extremely difficult to implement. Unless it is evenly spread across the economic landscape, it will be disastrous.

The Internet as Public Domain - Plagiarism be Damned

This past week a furor occurred over a cooking magazine that was discovered to have lifted pieces from Internet sites and published them without permission or paying royalties. The site also edited the pieces to fit its "standards." (such as they were!)

The good news was the original writers were credited. The very, very bad news was the editor believed she had a pass to reproduce anything she found on the Internet without permission and TO EDIT IT.

Let me be perfectly clear here. I do not consider anything I have written on these pages or elsewhere to be the property of anyone but myself. I don't care what disclaimers the sites I use make (including Facebook, Blogger and Google). I am the author for better or worse. I am absolutely delighted to have the opportunity to speak to an Internet audience. I absolutely LOVE it when someone publishes a "link" to my page. But I deny anyone's right to use or edit my writing without my specific permission. I take full responsibility for any grammatical or spelling shortcomings, for any awkwardness of phrase, for the (often intentional) use of slang.

I do not consider this a legal matter. Lawyers can argue any side of a dispute with equal skill. I consider it a moral one.

In my opinion, those who can't copy and paste. I am VERY careful to link to any materials I have used as sources. I expect others to do the same.

Can the Fed save the economy?

I am posting the following link because I believe Reich's analysis of the Fed's attempts to improve the economy is spot on: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/the-republican-recipe-for_b_779121.html

1. Lower the value of the dollar against other currencies: theoretically this action will decrease the cost of our debt and make our exports more competitive. Unintended consequences: other countries respond with attempts to devalue their currencies and neutralize the impact of the Fed's action on their imports and exports; the real cost of our debt is camouflaged by artificially maintained low interest rates.

2. Increase the money supply so banks will lend to business and individuals. Unintended consequence: inflation first of bond prices as investors seek a "safe haven" and then of stock prices as investors seek decent returns on their dollars no longer available in the over-bought bond market. Businesses won't borrow if their revenues are stagnant. Individuals cannot borrow when their incomes have decreased and their debt loads are high.

Evidently I am not the only investor that has opted back into stocks, particularly those with attractive dividends, as bond prices have risen and bond interest rates become anemic. When bond prices finally pull back (and they will) and their interest rates rise, debtor nations like ours are in for a very unpleasant surprise. The cost of debt will soar.

One peculiar side effect of the Fed's recent currency policies is we appear to be teetering on a tightrope between runaway inflation and devastating deflation - a neat trick that does not imply equilibrium.

At this point, the attempts of the Fed to "tweak" the economy back to solid growth could well be doing more harm than good.

Disclaimer: It is far easier to see problems than to provide their solutions. That is one reason I want policy makers and elected officials to be smarter than I am.

Cut Taxes Again?

Sooo, the plan is to cut taxes, cut discretionary spending and return the U. S. Government to solvency?

Cut taxes again? At a time when the country's debt soars into the stratosphere? Oh yes, the spending cuts will keep our balance sheet healthy.

What is included in discretionary spending?
Education? Transportation (what about all those structurally unsound bridges)? Disaster relief (FEMA)? Food and Drug Administration? Security and Exchange Commission? The Interior (perhaps we can sell off our national parks)? Agriculture? Commerce? Justice? Treasury? Environmental Protection Agency? Housing and Urban Development? Nuclear Regulatory Agency? State Department? Minerals and Mines Management? Forestry? Student loans? Foreign Aid to places like Pakistan? Veterans' Affairs? The repeal of Health Care?

According to one just elected representative last night, discretionary does NOT include Defense or Homeland Security. What about Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security? What about Congressional staffs?

Without revenue, it will be moot. Without revenue every last item in the budget will be on the table.

Death and Taxes

Someone (Ben Franklin?) once said "Nothing in life is certain but death and taxes."

Taxes again, I know. No one wants to pay them. But David Stockman, who advised Ronald Reagan in the early 1980s, has some strong reasoning behind his position we need to raise them. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504803_162-20021193-10391709.html

When the medicine comes in the form of a VERY bitter pill, that is NOT a good reason not to take it.

It could well be that only by cutting core programs (the military and entitlements) and raising taxes, will the U. S. economy be able to drag, pull and shove its way back to economic health.

Percentage wise, the wealthiest will have to pay the most. The poorest the least. Why? Because it is a very bad idea to tax citizens into starvation and homelessness. The middle class will probably suffer the most. They are dwindling in numbers, but still have some disposable income.

None of the choices are easy or pleasant. But Keynesian economics calls for increased spending in times of economic hardship, you argue? True, but Keynes also said spending and debt should be trimmed in times of prosperity. This we did NOT do. The unhappy result is staring us in the face - massive public debt, massive public need for stimulus and far less than nothing in the piggy bank.

Across this country states are facing bankruptcy. Most of the current job losses are in the public sector as teachers, firemen, policemen, highway workers, water and sewage workers, trash collectors, regulators are being laid off. These cuts are slicing through the heart of our infrastructure, whether we acknowledge that or not. Public assets are being sold for one-time cash boosts. Any old Yankee would tell you, NEVER unload your capital, but that is what state and local governments across the country are doing.

If someone out there has a better idea, one that actually has a solid chance of working, now is the time to express it.

The money has to come from somewhere. Of course, we could emulate the Roman Empire and try conquer our way back to wealth. Not sure how well that would work.