Just the other day I had occasion to reflect on all the sadness I’ve ever seen
I never want to have to do that again, but the truest fact there was happens
to be that I certainly will
So then it comes down to how we face up to the gathering storm
The supplies we lay in and to which gods we pray
Tell those stories, those long tall tales
Where in the end you feel a little better
because you learned something, the value of friendship
Or some other blue fairy tale
Spun so deep it’s woven into every invented persona
Every variation on the self we can throw into action
There still lies that one solid core
Me who can only speak to you –
Speak only to you
They say there’s a way of telling the truth
So it comes out like a lie
The distinct and raw red untruth
The one we never really want to tell…
Until the next fit of pique lays melancholy on our back doorstep,
The one where the sun gonna shine one day.
End. Rev2 12.14 p.m.
© David Mark Speer 23 February 2012 Brooklyn, New York
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Thursday, January 26, 2012
State of the Union... between Marty & Me
I haven't been active here for a long while, so I thought it's time to throw out a few ideas that have been percolating, mainly on politics and some talk of baseball --but the stove for the GOP nomination is hotter than MLB's, and I guess the stakes are a little higher.
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 11:42:24 -0800
From: Marty Waxman
Subject: 2012
To: David Mark Speer
What a shitty year so far....I had the flu for a week and I've had a flock of giant geese around my house that I can't get rid of. I can't wait until this year is over!
2012 Mets...is there anything to talk about? 70-92 on the horizon.
With the Tea Party avalanche in 2010, you have to wonder why no Tea Party candidate is still in the race. Romney is a jerkoff (and I don't care is he made $1 Billion, so what?), Newt wants illegals to stay (a major no-no here), and Santorum wears sweater vests that I threw out in 1990. Ron Paul mixes up great ideas with idiocy. There's no hope, Dave.
Most people here are Oakland Raider/SF 49er fans, so I couldn't be happier that Big Blue stuck it to them yesterday. I hope they knock Tom Brady on his butt all game long.
Did you folks happen to hear about the big fire out here? We got a call from the fire department on Friday evening to be on the alert to evacuate, but the fire didn't come within 15 miles of the house, so no harm, no foul. We were pretty much stranded afterward because FEMA closed all the highways and roads until the crews inspected everything within a 40 mile radius, and the aftermath was everything smelling like it came out of a chimney. Grrr!!!!
I heard you folks got a few inches of snow. Since November 20th, we've had only half an inch....last year at this time, we had 93 inches. As long as the resorts are pumping out all the manmade stuff they need, I'm doing a victory dance - - I've hated snow my whole life!
From: david speer
To: marty waxman
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 12:24 PM
Subject: RE: 2012
Things are tough all over, Marty. At least you have geese. You might recall that after the "bird strike" that made Capt. Sully a national, nay, galactic hero NYC started up with a policy of killing geese en masse near airports, but then got heat for using the meat (tender goose meat) as donations to the homeless, etc because no one could tell what those bastards had been eating, blah, blah... bureaucracy at its best, once again.
The GOP is unfortunately for them, two parties or maybe three. The national party seems to want to go the normal route (let the guy next in line have the nomination, swing hard on the incumbent), while the rank-and-file and over-polled voters just want a reality show food fight and the most conservative wing is just lost in the sauce of having finally caught a fire truck and trying to figure out what to do with it. At this rate, some third party candidate will show up, steal votes from Romney and give Mr. Obama another term by default. Not saying that's a good or even tenable option, but it just seems likely.
The lousy snow has washed away already, but I'm glad your house didn't get burned down. That would just plain suck, to put it mildly.
MLB, NFL: The Mets are in a goddamn pitiful shape. Payroll shrinking (if the checks don't bounce) and no direction home on responsible, sane, sober ownership. And Brady may be on his butt, but Eli will probably be looking at a lot of Indiana sky if the Giants’ offensive line protects him the way they did yesterday. Should be a good Stupid Bowl, nonetheless.
Keep the faith, whatever faith sustains you...
DMSpeer
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 13:21:35 -0800
From: Marty
Subject: Re: 2012
To: dmspeer
Dave, the geese out here are like pteryodactyls with a 7 foot wing span. How would you like to fight off a flock of them to get out of your driveway? Those things don't move...they hiss and give stare-downs, and there's a $10,000 fine for every one you're caught killing/harming. Pretty expensive pate dish, methinks!
Times have changed since John Anderson (and even Ross Perot) ran as 3rd party candidates. The electorate knows any 3rd party will win only 10-20% of a vote and will split a party, so I don't think one will ever emerge again. Ron Paul might have thought about it until the GOP threatened to strip his son of everything in the Senate, especially if they take over next year...don't think it didn't happen. Plus, if it's all about $$$, what 3rd party can raise enough to compete? Perot put up $60 Million of his own, which was considered to be a lot. Now, $60 Million might buy a week's worth of advertising.
It's hard to believe the Democratic Party is totally united. It was only 5 years ago when Bernie Sanders was an outcast. But now, Bernie speaks as if he's mainstream....are all Democrats really on the same page as he?
With all the discussion about Government programs, something is missing. Yes, many of them have a beneficial effect (the VA, Unemployment insurance, SS, Medicare, and 100 others), but think about what they cause, and what adding more of them does...to wit:
Government programs wind up holding recipients captive. When politicians can say, "You depend on X program, and you can lose it, so vote for me or else," politicians become tyrants. Let's say you depend on a program and a politician says that to you....are you really "free?" Nope.
Right now, 47% of Americans receive some sort of Government benefit. That's 47% held captive by the threat of losing something they're dependent on. And, the more the Government offers people, the more that percentage grows. Is this what the Founders had in mind...receiving a Government benefit so politicians could use it as a football to control people? I think not.
From: david speer
To: marty waxman
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 7:34 AM
Subject: RE: 2012
Taking the last part first, I see where you're going with this, because as a practical matter the government should "live within its means," as the current saying goes, but I guess it comes down to what are "its means". By that I mean, rather than looking at benefits to the elderly, the infirm, the veteran and the like as a handout and source of dependency, why don't we see the benefits as our obligation to society as a whole? My point is, the Founders are not here with us to guide and direct. It is our responsibility to foster a living, evolving democracy and they way things are now, without economic growth that spreads across all sectors and income ranges, the government can't possibly be expected to fund all the initiatives and entitlements we have come to expect (or depend upon) so the answer is make the pie bigger, higher (as Dubya once said).
Also, we're going to have to make some hard choices about who is deserving and who ain't; a retiree with 5 or 6 million in the bank isn't a Medicare recipient in my book, and shouldn't be. Get rid of the pigs at the trough (for real, really) and the trough won't go empty so fast.
Anyway, as to the 3rd party thing, I wasn't saying it'll happen this year, but it has to happen eventually. These two parties have calcified into proxies for interest groups whose stranglehold over the economy is tight and tightening, so we'd better get busy re-aligning the system along more parliamentary lines so that representation means something more than having a mouthpiece in D.C. who was bought by the right (or Left, in the case of Mr. Soros and his bunch) oligarch.
Chew on that for a bit. Gotta pretend I'm working, and I can't type while doing that.
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 09:35:42 -0800
From: Marty
Subject: Re: 2012
To: dmspeer
It's a tough call, Dave. To play Devil's Advocate, suppose I'm a 62 year old guy with $10 Million in the bank, and have paid into SS since the age of 21. Am I entitled to nothing from SS?
In actuality, raising taxes on the "rich" won't solve our problems, or even come close to it. If you tax the $1+ Million earners a rate of 100%, you'll put $870 Billion into the coffers. The deficit is 50% higher than that. It's getting tiresome, and history should teach us something about it.
In 1932, FDR banged the "tax the rich" drum and passed the 1932 Revenue Act. The idea behind it was to use the money to fund Government projects (TVA, etc...) while balancing the budget. Here's what happened:
The Marginal Tax Rate went from 25% to 78%, and the Capital Gains Tax went from 12.5% to 39.5%. Also added were various excise taxes.
Now...did that dig us out of the Depression, or simply prolong it? By 1940 (eight years after the increases were passed), the national unemployment rate was still 14.2%. Hmmmmm......
Turning to politics:
The problem with trying to "change the system" is that the only ones who can change the rules are the people in power benefiting from the rules. We're not ruled by national referendums, and elections, for all the hooting and hollering, change nothing. Politicians know this, bang the drum about "change," and as soon as the election is over, all's forgotten until the next election cycle, and it starts all over again. What can a powerless 3rd party do about it? Not a heck of a lot.
Obama says he stands by the 99%ers, but he makes no bones about raising $1 Billion and speaking at $30,000/plate functions. Nancy Pelosi said, "God bless the Occupiers," but she calls her stock broker as soon as she finds out what's coming out of a Committee (before anyone else does). These are "Agents of change?"
Fuck 'em all, Dave. Even the freshmen Tea Party Congressmen caved....they finally went along with everything. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
From: david speer
To: marty waxman
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:33 AM
Subject: RE: 2012
It isn't fair for someone to not get back what they paid into Social Security, but that's just one of the many flaws in the way the program was designed. It was promoted as your fair share coming back to you when you retire, but that was never the case, even if the public didn't know it. Maybe what we need is some oversight that says, hey, this guy is making a lot of money and maybe we shouldn't take Social Security tax out for him, since he's not really going to need the benefit later on, or some such.
There is probably some kind of diminishing returns thing at work with try to erase a deficit on the backs of the 1% alone, I realize that, but in a targeted and measured way, skewing the tax collection toward the upper end of the income scale might be helpful, if only to keep the masses from lighting their torches.
My whole point about a 3rd party is that we need maybe 5 of 6, not just the two. Under a parliamentary system with many competing parties, the governance may be messier but it's more representative and the results of power shared could (possibly) lead to a real change in the way we do all our business. An economic model based not on predation but on cooperation. Maybe. Oh, who am I kidding? Greed wins and they're all eaten up with it, from Obama to Boehner to Cantor to Reid.
We can't throw the bathwater out, but these babies need to be left on the doorstep of the nearest orphanage. Right next door to the dustbin of history, so to speak.
With this next set of exchanges, the subject line has changed, but the overall topics are the same.
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 10:37:26 -0800
From: marty
Subject: The Tigers have lost their minds
To: dmspeer
Prince Fielder for NINE years???
OK, they'll miss Victor Martinez this year, but why try to replace him with another Mo Vaughn? I'm glad the Mets are bankrupt...it stops them from doing ridiculous things like this.
Why even talk about Social Security when everyone in Washington wants to lower the payroll tax (which funds Social Security)?
The original model for Social Security was 15 contributors for every recipient. Now, the ratio is close to 2 contributors for every recipient. If you think this system can be sustained at that rate, consider:
For the next 19 years, 10,000 people a DAY will be entering Social Security. Simple math says 10,000 people X 30 days = 300,000 new recipients a month. Now, with a ratio of 2:1 contributors/recipients, that means we'll have to add 600,000 contributors a month just to pay the 300,000 new recipients every month. Does that sound doable?
The idea of multiple parties in Washington (5 or 6, as you opine) sounds wonderful...lots of different voices, lots of different opinions and ideas, and because there is no majority rule, they all sing a consensus Kumbaya. I hasten to remind (and don't get the idea I use the word "hasten" often) that the world once had only Adam, Eve, and two sons. Could just four people get along? Nope...one brother killed the other.
As things stand, I'm actually a believer that only the rich should be in Washington. A Supreme Court appointment is lifetime, and that's to keep a judge free of outside influence. Well, if we're to keep judges influence-free, why not our politicians, as well? Unfortunately, the only way to do that is to elect financially independent people whom can't be bribed with campaign contributions. Can you buy John Kerry's vote with $50,000? Or Rockefeller's? Or a guy like Corzine? I'd dare to say no, but consider the flip side: a Washington full of Rod Blagojeviches. $50,000 could buy his vote for anything and everything. That's the problem with electing an everyday guy whom supposedly relates to the average Joe Shmoe.
This is where the Tea Party has a valid point. With a Government as corrupt as the one we have, the less of it, the better.
Interesting point of fact: Remember the rants against Halliburton's no-bid contracts? Well, since Obama was inaugurated, Halliburton's no-bid contracts have been renewed twice and the stock price has gone from $17.23 to $36.20. Change we can believe in, eh?
From: david speer
To: marty waxman
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 11:46 AM
Subject: RE: The Tigers have lost their minds
You know, I was thinking the same thing. If Ike Davis can come back decently from injury, he should be a pretty good addition to the lineup. The boy can hit and he can certainly save you a few errors, which we'll need with Wright's inaccuracy and no Reyes at short. As to the Tigers, I don't get it, but if they feel like that extra bit of thump in the lineup (I'm minimizing sarcastically, of course) can make the difference, then fine. But I seem to recall V-Mart being pretty big for them in the playoffs, making like Kirk Gibson at the plate even though he pulled his oblique on a HR. That kind of A-1 tough guy stuff isn't easy to replace, even with a latter day Mo Vaughn (had to laugh when I read that).
I won't even get into the State of the Union -- strong and getter stronger from what I've heard every year I can remember. Except for that time Carter sent in an essay rather than standing at the podium.
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:22:11 -0800
From: marty
Subject: Re: The Tigers have lost their minds
To: dmspeer
I totally agree....while Victor Martinez was a Godsend in the playoffs, Prince Fielder was a busted blimp. You can't replace primetime players overnight.
Oh, c'mon, let's bandy a bit about the speech. Some things struck me:
1. If Obamacare and the Stimulus are the two signature "accomplishments" of this administration, why was there NO mention of either one?
2. So Obama, you don't like filibusters over appointments, eh? Bush had 200 Federal judge and ambassador nominees filibustered in the Senate and you didn't seem to mind. But you did vote against raising the debt ceiling in 2006, and you now admonish those who do. For better or worse, be consistent!
3. Not a SINGLE word about Europe and the possible ramifications this year? The Greek deal was just called off and they're back at the drawing board, while Euro bond rates are skyrocketing and Governments there won't be able to afford the interest. Do you have ANY contingency plan if the Euro winds up six feet under, which is becoming more and more likely?
4. Why is it that as Government has expanded, more and more people feel "disenfranchised?" Sure, in 2008, plenty of folks felt that way, but Government now has its tentacles in everything and "disenfranchisement" is now a rallying cry.
5. Student tuitions: College tuitions have skyrocketed ever since student loans became easier to attain. Once the Government gets involved with paying student loans, tuitions will triple overnight - and you and I will be stuck for it! If you (Obama) have it in the back of your mind that the Government will repay the loans on behalf of the students, can we at least add a couple of requirements, such as "If you want to the mating habits of Aborigines for six years and think the Government is going to pay for it, think again...study something that will get you a job one day!"
Those are five points out of 100....your turn.
From: david mark speer
To: marty waxman
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 1:32 PM
Subject: RE: The Tigers have lost their minds
1 -- Healthcare reform, as it has been accomplished, was a overreach (not in the sense of the role of government in our lives, but the design and mandate element) and the stimulus was nowhere near as big or targeted as it should have been. Every reputable economist I follow (Stieglitz, Krugman) would tell you if you're going to blow a hole in the deficit, blow it sky high so that any short-term activity benefits with their attendant multipliers will have the most impact. Instead, we got a bunch of talk about "shovel-ready projects" and the roads are still crumbling. So why bring that stuff up?
2 -- The politicization of executive appointments is part and parcel of why every Congress is a do nothing, unless you get your hands washed in the process, and a goddamn travesty. This speaks back to Mr. Obama's nature as a political creature hiding behind an activist's fervor and an academic's robes. I know this is mixing the points, but did you catch that part about how "some" green energy companies will fail, but that's okay because the benefits aren't always apparent right away? Well the benefits of Solyndra will never come to light, and he went there anyway.
3 -- According to the CEO of Tri-Tabs (a hedge fund in Miami) Europe looks worse today than six months ago, but the saving grace might be in streamlining the debt relief process for individuals over there or some kind of entitlement reform for the worst of the PIIGS (something I just heard on Jeopardy! of all places). My guess is that the Germans are going to have to suck up some new taxes and make some cuts domestically to somehow subsidize their neighbors -- those same neighbors they gladly leased Mercedes-Benzes to on suddenly cheap money back in the early days of the new euro, knowing damn well those Greeks couldn't and wouldn't pay off. If it takes the system down, chalk it up to something very German-sounding called "creative destruction".
4 -- I think the word disenfranchisement is being used incorrectly, because what we're seeing more and more is a sense of anomie, that socially we're disconnected and increasingly removed from the arcane forces that shape our lives and run the world. People feel they have no say in the processes by which things get done, and it's just another symptom of a world spinning out of our control. If the voters of Wisconsin get it right this time, they'll have their franchise in spades; whether it gets them the government they really want and deserve is another, yet untold and unfinished story.
5 -- Personally I never had any student loan debt to worry about, so I don't care. In fact, the whole idea of a college education (as currently constituted) being essential to earning a living is more and more outdated. What we need is more of a certification system that allows a graduate to say at least they've covered a core curriculum that we all accept as a standard for an educated person, and on the state and local level, colleges should be empowered to do the very things Mr. Obama referred to when talking about that lady with the glasses and her re-training experiences.
Now my boss is wondering who the hell I'm e-mailing, so I'm going to sign off... do you mind if I go ahead and use this exchange and others of the last few days on the blog? It may spark some interesting debate among my even more lefty friends here in Brooklyn.
Later,
DMSpeer
Marty: 01/25/12
Dave, nothing I write or say can't be shared. Since all Emails are viewed/screened by the Government (don't be naive and think they're not), why not?
Excellent point about college education in 2012. I don't understand why trade schools aren't springing up like when I was college age...remember the guy from Apex Tech who used to say in ads, "I can't call you, you'll need to call me?" We will ALWAYS need plumbers, carpenters, roofers, car mechanics, and so on....why stress to a kid that a four year degree is so necessary? Trade schools are/were comparatively inexpensive, and graduates are/were in demand. Being a $75,000/year plumber sure beats being an unemployed college graduate with a mountain of debt.
Don't know if you read Bernanke's comments today, but he's following Japan's model that has sunk the place into a recession for the last 15 years. He's extending his 0% interest rate, QE programs through 2014 (originally, through 2013). He's claiming that inflation is in check, but maybe he hasn't seen commodities skyrocketing since January 1st. Kick the can is a fun game, isn't it?
Joe Biden said something interesting on Monday about the massive new wave of foreclosures about to hit the fan. All the economists agree that the housing market needs to bottom out before there will be any improvement. Biden said, "All the economists are right, we need to let the market bottom out. Unfortunately, we can't do that." Well, if we can't do what's necessary, what's the answer? I agree that throwing 3 or 4 million people out of their homes isn't "what Jesus would have done," but the Government can't keep putting Band-Aids on a leaking balloon without it exploding one day soon. Constant refinancing programs haven't worked, and they'll continue not to work. And we certainly can't afford to forgive mortgage debt. Housing booms have always dug us out of prior recessions, but no such luck this time around. So Joe Biden...what do you suggest?
OK, get back when you can. I almost forgot its lunchtime, anyway.
And with that, the campaign season is on. Another leg in the ongoing quest for a more perfect union and the all the rest gets underway.
© David Mark Speer, Marty Waxman
January 2012
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 11:42:24 -0800
From: Marty Waxman
Subject: 2012
To: David Mark Speer
What a shitty year so far....I had the flu for a week and I've had a flock of giant geese around my house that I can't get rid of. I can't wait until this year is over!
2012 Mets...is there anything to talk about? 70-92 on the horizon.
With the Tea Party avalanche in 2010, you have to wonder why no Tea Party candidate is still in the race. Romney is a jerkoff (and I don't care is he made $1 Billion, so what?), Newt wants illegals to stay (a major no-no here), and Santorum wears sweater vests that I threw out in 1990. Ron Paul mixes up great ideas with idiocy. There's no hope, Dave.
Most people here are Oakland Raider/SF 49er fans, so I couldn't be happier that Big Blue stuck it to them yesterday. I hope they knock Tom Brady on his butt all game long.
Did you folks happen to hear about the big fire out here? We got a call from the fire department on Friday evening to be on the alert to evacuate, but the fire didn't come within 15 miles of the house, so no harm, no foul. We were pretty much stranded afterward because FEMA closed all the highways and roads until the crews inspected everything within a 40 mile radius, and the aftermath was everything smelling like it came out of a chimney. Grrr!!!!
I heard you folks got a few inches of snow. Since November 20th, we've had only half an inch....last year at this time, we had 93 inches. As long as the resorts are pumping out all the manmade stuff they need, I'm doing a victory dance - - I've hated snow my whole life!
From: david speer
To: marty waxman
Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 12:24 PM
Subject: RE: 2012
Things are tough all over, Marty. At least you have geese. You might recall that after the "bird strike" that made Capt. Sully a national, nay, galactic hero NYC started up with a policy of killing geese en masse near airports, but then got heat for using the meat (tender goose meat) as donations to the homeless, etc because no one could tell what those bastards had been eating, blah, blah... bureaucracy at its best, once again.
The GOP is unfortunately for them, two parties or maybe three. The national party seems to want to go the normal route (let the guy next in line have the nomination, swing hard on the incumbent), while the rank-and-file and over-polled voters just want a reality show food fight and the most conservative wing is just lost in the sauce of having finally caught a fire truck and trying to figure out what to do with it. At this rate, some third party candidate will show up, steal votes from Romney and give Mr. Obama another term by default. Not saying that's a good or even tenable option, but it just seems likely.
The lousy snow has washed away already, but I'm glad your house didn't get burned down. That would just plain suck, to put it mildly.
MLB, NFL: The Mets are in a goddamn pitiful shape. Payroll shrinking (if the checks don't bounce) and no direction home on responsible, sane, sober ownership. And Brady may be on his butt, but Eli will probably be looking at a lot of Indiana sky if the Giants’ offensive line protects him the way they did yesterday. Should be a good Stupid Bowl, nonetheless.
Keep the faith, whatever faith sustains you...
DMSpeer
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 13:21:35 -0800
From: Marty
Subject: Re: 2012
To: dmspeer
Dave, the geese out here are like pteryodactyls with a 7 foot wing span. How would you like to fight off a flock of them to get out of your driveway? Those things don't move...they hiss and give stare-downs, and there's a $10,000 fine for every one you're caught killing/harming. Pretty expensive pate dish, methinks!
Times have changed since John Anderson (and even Ross Perot) ran as 3rd party candidates. The electorate knows any 3rd party will win only 10-20% of a vote and will split a party, so I don't think one will ever emerge again. Ron Paul might have thought about it until the GOP threatened to strip his son of everything in the Senate, especially if they take over next year...don't think it didn't happen. Plus, if it's all about $$$, what 3rd party can raise enough to compete? Perot put up $60 Million of his own, which was considered to be a lot. Now, $60 Million might buy a week's worth of advertising.
It's hard to believe the Democratic Party is totally united. It was only 5 years ago when Bernie Sanders was an outcast. But now, Bernie speaks as if he's mainstream....are all Democrats really on the same page as he?
With all the discussion about Government programs, something is missing. Yes, many of them have a beneficial effect (the VA, Unemployment insurance, SS, Medicare, and 100 others), but think about what they cause, and what adding more of them does...to wit:
Government programs wind up holding recipients captive. When politicians can say, "You depend on X program, and you can lose it, so vote for me or else," politicians become tyrants. Let's say you depend on a program and a politician says that to you....are you really "free?" Nope.
Right now, 47% of Americans receive some sort of Government benefit. That's 47% held captive by the threat of losing something they're dependent on. And, the more the Government offers people, the more that percentage grows. Is this what the Founders had in mind...receiving a Government benefit so politicians could use it as a football to control people? I think not.
From: david speer
To: marty waxman
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 7:34 AM
Subject: RE: 2012
Taking the last part first, I see where you're going with this, because as a practical matter the government should "live within its means," as the current saying goes, but I guess it comes down to what are "its means". By that I mean, rather than looking at benefits to the elderly, the infirm, the veteran and the like as a handout and source of dependency, why don't we see the benefits as our obligation to society as a whole? My point is, the Founders are not here with us to guide and direct. It is our responsibility to foster a living, evolving democracy and they way things are now, without economic growth that spreads across all sectors and income ranges, the government can't possibly be expected to fund all the initiatives and entitlements we have come to expect (or depend upon) so the answer is make the pie bigger, higher (as Dubya once said).
Also, we're going to have to make some hard choices about who is deserving and who ain't; a retiree with 5 or 6 million in the bank isn't a Medicare recipient in my book, and shouldn't be. Get rid of the pigs at the trough (for real, really) and the trough won't go empty so fast.
Anyway, as to the 3rd party thing, I wasn't saying it'll happen this year, but it has to happen eventually. These two parties have calcified into proxies for interest groups whose stranglehold over the economy is tight and tightening, so we'd better get busy re-aligning the system along more parliamentary lines so that representation means something more than having a mouthpiece in D.C. who was bought by the right (or Left, in the case of Mr. Soros and his bunch) oligarch.
Chew on that for a bit. Gotta pretend I'm working, and I can't type while doing that.
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 09:35:42 -0800
From: Marty
Subject: Re: 2012
To: dmspeer
It's a tough call, Dave. To play Devil's Advocate, suppose I'm a 62 year old guy with $10 Million in the bank, and have paid into SS since the age of 21. Am I entitled to nothing from SS?
In actuality, raising taxes on the "rich" won't solve our problems, or even come close to it. If you tax the $1+ Million earners a rate of 100%, you'll put $870 Billion into the coffers. The deficit is 50% higher than that. It's getting tiresome, and history should teach us something about it.
In 1932, FDR banged the "tax the rich" drum and passed the 1932 Revenue Act. The idea behind it was to use the money to fund Government projects (TVA, etc...) while balancing the budget. Here's what happened:
The Marginal Tax Rate went from 25% to 78%, and the Capital Gains Tax went from 12.5% to 39.5%. Also added were various excise taxes.
Now...did that dig us out of the Depression, or simply prolong it? By 1940 (eight years after the increases were passed), the national unemployment rate was still 14.2%. Hmmmmm......
Turning to politics:
The problem with trying to "change the system" is that the only ones who can change the rules are the people in power benefiting from the rules. We're not ruled by national referendums, and elections, for all the hooting and hollering, change nothing. Politicians know this, bang the drum about "change," and as soon as the election is over, all's forgotten until the next election cycle, and it starts all over again. What can a powerless 3rd party do about it? Not a heck of a lot.
Obama says he stands by the 99%ers, but he makes no bones about raising $1 Billion and speaking at $30,000/plate functions. Nancy Pelosi said, "God bless the Occupiers," but she calls her stock broker as soon as she finds out what's coming out of a Committee (before anyone else does). These are "Agents of change?"
Fuck 'em all, Dave. Even the freshmen Tea Party Congressmen caved....they finally went along with everything. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
From: david speer
To: marty waxman
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:33 AM
Subject: RE: 2012
It isn't fair for someone to not get back what they paid into Social Security, but that's just one of the many flaws in the way the program was designed. It was promoted as your fair share coming back to you when you retire, but that was never the case, even if the public didn't know it. Maybe what we need is some oversight that says, hey, this guy is making a lot of money and maybe we shouldn't take Social Security tax out for him, since he's not really going to need the benefit later on, or some such.
There is probably some kind of diminishing returns thing at work with try to erase a deficit on the backs of the 1% alone, I realize that, but in a targeted and measured way, skewing the tax collection toward the upper end of the income scale might be helpful, if only to keep the masses from lighting their torches.
My whole point about a 3rd party is that we need maybe 5 of 6, not just the two. Under a parliamentary system with many competing parties, the governance may be messier but it's more representative and the results of power shared could (possibly) lead to a real change in the way we do all our business. An economic model based not on predation but on cooperation. Maybe. Oh, who am I kidding? Greed wins and they're all eaten up with it, from Obama to Boehner to Cantor to Reid.
We can't throw the bathwater out, but these babies need to be left on the doorstep of the nearest orphanage. Right next door to the dustbin of history, so to speak.
With this next set of exchanges, the subject line has changed, but the overall topics are the same.
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 10:37:26 -0800
From: marty
Subject: The Tigers have lost their minds
To: dmspeer
Prince Fielder for NINE years???
OK, they'll miss Victor Martinez this year, but why try to replace him with another Mo Vaughn? I'm glad the Mets are bankrupt...it stops them from doing ridiculous things like this.
Why even talk about Social Security when everyone in Washington wants to lower the payroll tax (which funds Social Security)?
The original model for Social Security was 15 contributors for every recipient. Now, the ratio is close to 2 contributors for every recipient. If you think this system can be sustained at that rate, consider:
For the next 19 years, 10,000 people a DAY will be entering Social Security. Simple math says 10,000 people X 30 days = 300,000 new recipients a month. Now, with a ratio of 2:1 contributors/recipients, that means we'll have to add 600,000 contributors a month just to pay the 300,000 new recipients every month. Does that sound doable?
The idea of multiple parties in Washington (5 or 6, as you opine) sounds wonderful...lots of different voices, lots of different opinions and ideas, and because there is no majority rule, they all sing a consensus Kumbaya. I hasten to remind (and don't get the idea I use the word "hasten" often) that the world once had only Adam, Eve, and two sons. Could just four people get along? Nope...one brother killed the other.
As things stand, I'm actually a believer that only the rich should be in Washington. A Supreme Court appointment is lifetime, and that's to keep a judge free of outside influence. Well, if we're to keep judges influence-free, why not our politicians, as well? Unfortunately, the only way to do that is to elect financially independent people whom can't be bribed with campaign contributions. Can you buy John Kerry's vote with $50,000? Or Rockefeller's? Or a guy like Corzine? I'd dare to say no, but consider the flip side: a Washington full of Rod Blagojeviches. $50,000 could buy his vote for anything and everything. That's the problem with electing an everyday guy whom supposedly relates to the average Joe Shmoe.
This is where the Tea Party has a valid point. With a Government as corrupt as the one we have, the less of it, the better.
Interesting point of fact: Remember the rants against Halliburton's no-bid contracts? Well, since Obama was inaugurated, Halliburton's no-bid contracts have been renewed twice and the stock price has gone from $17.23 to $36.20. Change we can believe in, eh?
From: david speer
To: marty waxman
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 11:46 AM
Subject: RE: The Tigers have lost their minds
You know, I was thinking the same thing. If Ike Davis can come back decently from injury, he should be a pretty good addition to the lineup. The boy can hit and he can certainly save you a few errors, which we'll need with Wright's inaccuracy and no Reyes at short. As to the Tigers, I don't get it, but if they feel like that extra bit of thump in the lineup (I'm minimizing sarcastically, of course) can make the difference, then fine. But I seem to recall V-Mart being pretty big for them in the playoffs, making like Kirk Gibson at the plate even though he pulled his oblique on a HR. That kind of A-1 tough guy stuff isn't easy to replace, even with a latter day Mo Vaughn (had to laugh when I read that).
I won't even get into the State of the Union -- strong and getter stronger from what I've heard every year I can remember. Except for that time Carter sent in an essay rather than standing at the podium.
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:22:11 -0800
From: marty
Subject: Re: The Tigers have lost their minds
To: dmspeer
I totally agree....while Victor Martinez was a Godsend in the playoffs, Prince Fielder was a busted blimp. You can't replace primetime players overnight.
Oh, c'mon, let's bandy a bit about the speech. Some things struck me:
1. If Obamacare and the Stimulus are the two signature "accomplishments" of this administration, why was there NO mention of either one?
2. So Obama, you don't like filibusters over appointments, eh? Bush had 200 Federal judge and ambassador nominees filibustered in the Senate and you didn't seem to mind. But you did vote against raising the debt ceiling in 2006, and you now admonish those who do. For better or worse, be consistent!
3. Not a SINGLE word about Europe and the possible ramifications this year? The Greek deal was just called off and they're back at the drawing board, while Euro bond rates are skyrocketing and Governments there won't be able to afford the interest. Do you have ANY contingency plan if the Euro winds up six feet under, which is becoming more and more likely?
4. Why is it that as Government has expanded, more and more people feel "disenfranchised?" Sure, in 2008, plenty of folks felt that way, but Government now has its tentacles in everything and "disenfranchisement" is now a rallying cry.
5. Student tuitions: College tuitions have skyrocketed ever since student loans became easier to attain. Once the Government gets involved with paying student loans, tuitions will triple overnight - and you and I will be stuck for it! If you (Obama) have it in the back of your mind that the Government will repay the loans on behalf of the students, can we at least add a couple of requirements, such as "If you want to the mating habits of Aborigines for six years and think the Government is going to pay for it, think again...study something that will get you a job one day!"
Those are five points out of 100....your turn.
From: david mark speer
To: marty waxman
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 1:32 PM
Subject: RE: The Tigers have lost their minds
1 -- Healthcare reform, as it has been accomplished, was a overreach (not in the sense of the role of government in our lives, but the design and mandate element) and the stimulus was nowhere near as big or targeted as it should have been. Every reputable economist I follow (Stieglitz, Krugman) would tell you if you're going to blow a hole in the deficit, blow it sky high so that any short-term activity benefits with their attendant multipliers will have the most impact. Instead, we got a bunch of talk about "shovel-ready projects" and the roads are still crumbling. So why bring that stuff up?
2 -- The politicization of executive appointments is part and parcel of why every Congress is a do nothing, unless you get your hands washed in the process, and a goddamn travesty. This speaks back to Mr. Obama's nature as a political creature hiding behind an activist's fervor and an academic's robes. I know this is mixing the points, but did you catch that part about how "some" green energy companies will fail, but that's okay because the benefits aren't always apparent right away? Well the benefits of Solyndra will never come to light, and he went there anyway.
3 -- According to the CEO of Tri-Tabs (a hedge fund in Miami) Europe looks worse today than six months ago, but the saving grace might be in streamlining the debt relief process for individuals over there or some kind of entitlement reform for the worst of the PIIGS (something I just heard on Jeopardy! of all places). My guess is that the Germans are going to have to suck up some new taxes and make some cuts domestically to somehow subsidize their neighbors -- those same neighbors they gladly leased Mercedes-Benzes to on suddenly cheap money back in the early days of the new euro, knowing damn well those Greeks couldn't and wouldn't pay off. If it takes the system down, chalk it up to something very German-sounding called "creative destruction".
4 -- I think the word disenfranchisement is being used incorrectly, because what we're seeing more and more is a sense of anomie, that socially we're disconnected and increasingly removed from the arcane forces that shape our lives and run the world. People feel they have no say in the processes by which things get done, and it's just another symptom of a world spinning out of our control. If the voters of Wisconsin get it right this time, they'll have their franchise in spades; whether it gets them the government they really want and deserve is another, yet untold and unfinished story.
5 -- Personally I never had any student loan debt to worry about, so I don't care. In fact, the whole idea of a college education (as currently constituted) being essential to earning a living is more and more outdated. What we need is more of a certification system that allows a graduate to say at least they've covered a core curriculum that we all accept as a standard for an educated person, and on the state and local level, colleges should be empowered to do the very things Mr. Obama referred to when talking about that lady with the glasses and her re-training experiences.
Now my boss is wondering who the hell I'm e-mailing, so I'm going to sign off... do you mind if I go ahead and use this exchange and others of the last few days on the blog? It may spark some interesting debate among my even more lefty friends here in Brooklyn.
Later,
DMSpeer
Marty: 01/25/12
Dave, nothing I write or say can't be shared. Since all Emails are viewed/screened by the Government (don't be naive and think they're not), why not?
Excellent point about college education in 2012. I don't understand why trade schools aren't springing up like when I was college age...remember the guy from Apex Tech who used to say in ads, "I can't call you, you'll need to call me?" We will ALWAYS need plumbers, carpenters, roofers, car mechanics, and so on....why stress to a kid that a four year degree is so necessary? Trade schools are/were comparatively inexpensive, and graduates are/were in demand. Being a $75,000/year plumber sure beats being an unemployed college graduate with a mountain of debt.
Don't know if you read Bernanke's comments today, but he's following Japan's model that has sunk the place into a recession for the last 15 years. He's extending his 0% interest rate, QE programs through 2014 (originally, through 2013). He's claiming that inflation is in check, but maybe he hasn't seen commodities skyrocketing since January 1st. Kick the can is a fun game, isn't it?
Joe Biden said something interesting on Monday about the massive new wave of foreclosures about to hit the fan. All the economists agree that the housing market needs to bottom out before there will be any improvement. Biden said, "All the economists are right, we need to let the market bottom out. Unfortunately, we can't do that." Well, if we can't do what's necessary, what's the answer? I agree that throwing 3 or 4 million people out of their homes isn't "what Jesus would have done," but the Government can't keep putting Band-Aids on a leaking balloon without it exploding one day soon. Constant refinancing programs haven't worked, and they'll continue not to work. And we certainly can't afford to forgive mortgage debt. Housing booms have always dug us out of prior recessions, but no such luck this time around. So Joe Biden...what do you suggest?
OK, get back when you can. I almost forgot its lunchtime, anyway.
And with that, the campaign season is on. Another leg in the ongoing quest for a more perfect union and the all the rest gets underway.
© David Mark Speer, Marty Waxman
January 2012
Thursday, June 30, 2011
What I’ve Always Wanted
To wake up with your hair tangled in my face,
Warm water in the bathtub,
Golden light falling in sun flecked streaks on the lake,
Birds of every kind singing in the trees,
Your smile at midnight,
An all-day pass on all the rides,
One more inning,
Before the sun goes down,
And that last half-awake dream before I have to go to bed.
Rev1. 12.23 p.m.
© David Mark Speer, 01 July 2011, Brooklyn.
Warm water in the bathtub,
Golden light falling in sun flecked streaks on the lake,
Birds of every kind singing in the trees,
Your smile at midnight,
An all-day pass on all the rides,
One more inning,
Before the sun goes down,
And that last half-awake dream before I have to go to bed.
Rev1. 12.23 p.m.
© David Mark Speer, 01 July 2011, Brooklyn.
Saturday, May 14, 2011
Epistolary II: From Both Sides of the Aisle
The great thing about conversation is that you never know where it’s going to take you. Again the subject here is ostensibly baseball, but that gets its due in time. The real topic goes back to the Federalist Papers and the way we live today – how democracy as preached differs ever so slightly from the way the Clown College of Washington, D.C. actually works. Commentary welcome.
Marty: Mon, 9 May 2011 20:37:10 -0700
Tonight was truly awful!
DMS: Wed, 5/11/11
Sometimes the pitchers have to do the hitting. At any rate, the visit to Colorado is an even series now, so I'm okay with that.
I was out of circulation the last couple of days, but I did think a little about your idea of strict constructionism as it relates to the Constitution. The point is clear, but unfortunately, your reading doesn't stack up to years of practical experience with this kind of democratic experiment. Government power has expanded over time, true, but not only and always because people are whining babies who can't stand to live with the consequences of their actions. If there hadn't been room for interpretation, we wouldn't have a workable system of interstate commerce, highways, railroads and the rest of it.
And when it comes to strict readings of old documents, take a look at the 3/5 clause and the stuff the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments were designed to rectify. I think we'd all agree those are situations where re-writing the Founders intentions was not only right, but necessary.
The term limit idea is a good one and I would support it, mainly because it would refresh the tree of liberty with new fertilizer more frequently. I guess the manure metaphor isn't such a good one, but it'll serve for a lot of the talk we hear out of Washington. Debt limits, budget cuts, you guys wanna kill old folks on one side, you guys have no fiscal discipline on the other ... on and on it goes.
Marty: Wed, 11 May 2011 09:00:35 -0700
The Constitution does allow for changing with the times. Those changes are called Amendments. However, until an Amendment is added, the rules of the game weren't meant to be interpreted.
What if the Constitution of baseball, "The Rule Book," were open to interpretation? Could players not have to touch 3rd base on their way home, depending on circumstance? Could a fly ball caught on a bounce still be called an out, depending on the situation? See how baseball would collapse without strict interpretation of the rules? No room for agendas, is there?
The 14th Amendment is a favorite argument for me. It was written right after the Civil War and it rightly gave the children of slaves born in American natural citizenship. Compare its purpose in 1867 and what an agenda is morphing it into.
In 1867, the Congress agreed that slaves didn't come here on their own free will, so their kids shouldn't have to bear another wrong...not being citizens where they're born. Today, whether illegals climb a fence with a machinegun, hide in a truck, or whatever, they are NOT coming here against their free will. They want to come here to work, sell drugs, or 100 reasons in between, but the point is...they come here on their own. Thus, the status of illegal immigrant children TODAY has NOTHING to do with the status of the children of slaves. Why is the 14th Amendment even a talking point with the children of illegal immigrants?
Ask yourself...did the Congress in 1867 write the 14th Amendment to make kids of illegals eligible for Social Security, Medicare, and the right to vote? No...they wrote it to right a wrong done against slaves so their kids wouldn't be stigmatized as foreigners. Period!
Consider the Founders didn't want women to vote. Was it because they were Chauvinistic bastards, or did they foresee something...namely Prohibition?
In 1920, women were given the right to vote. They hated their husbands drinking, so in 1929 (only 9 years after the right was granted), Congress passed Prohibition because the politicians had to now play to an entirely new base. But, only a few years later, people realized what a stupid Amendment it was and it was repealed. Was the Constitution meant to be a document in need of white-out? THAT's where agendas lead us.
Leave the Constitution alone...it's not perfect, but neither are the people who try to change it.
So there!
Let's hope for .500 soon, just to say we're .500!
DMS: Wednesday, May 11, 2011, 1:31 PM
Marty --
In the grand old game, even the rules have changed. Not the fundies you speak of, but in the era of instant replay (which may soon expand) there's a few rules that aren't as hard and fast. How we interpret some rules and the use of unwritten rules affects the way it's played at the major league level and in some small ways, all the way down. To continue the analogy a bit, the basic rulebook is the same, but ground rules are always there to create a bit of uniqueness, a bit of local flavor. Kind of like how an amendment works. If thoughtful and passed by 2/3 of the states, we can finally start getting stuff done. Like a Balanced Budget Amendment, maybe.
Okay, so equal protection shouldn't apply to illegals, as you term them. How about creating a path to citizenship? If we're not going to stop relying on cheap immigrant labor and we can't build a fence to the stars, why not admit we're licked and start honestly allowing all those yearning to breathe free a better shot at it. Yes, back of the line, prove you're not a psycho, etc., but don't continue on this path.
Your interpretation of the Volstead Act is novel, but I'm a little loathe to buy into that one all the way. In that kind of world, women are rolling-pin swinging maniacs out to destroy all vestiges of fun, not people who deserve to exercise the franchise as fully as you and me. Just a thought.
Marty: Wed, 11 May 2011 12:31:13 -0700
Dave --
Baseball hasn't changed, save the DH. There are still nine players, three outs, three strikes, etc....instant replay didn't change baseball. It helps it to enforce the rules with a correct call.
A national balanced budget amendment? Hmm...Paul Ryan looked to shave $400 Billion off the deficit (leaving us a Trillion in the hole every year) and it caused a riot (figuratively). How in the world do you ever foresee a balanced budget? Hasn't Obamacare alone made sure we never have one?
Something nobody is considering, Dave...to wit:
Yes, those greedy businessmen love hiring "undocumenteds" (since you dislike the term, "illegals") and that's why there are now so many of them. But, what if they become citizens...earning equal pay, equal benefits, and all that jazz? Would businessmen still hire them, or simply hire Americans at the same going rate? In other words, if businessmen no longer have a cost-effective reason to hire undocumenteds/new citizens, why would they continue to hire any? And then what?
I also have difficulty with the DREAM Act. The Act states if an undocumented fella joins the service for two years, he can then attend college as a citizen. Sounds good, but what if that fella has crummy grades and no college will accept him? Does he then have to turn in his Dream Act citizenship?
Dave, the whole "path to citizenship" is nothing more than a ruse to get Hispanics to the polls. Obama had two years with a Dem Congress to pass anything (even if it required a bribe or two from Harry), and nothing about citizenship made it to the floor. Only after the Tea Party win in November did we get a pointless vote on the Dream Act ... why, you might ask? Simply put:
As long as this remains an issue, it will get Hispanics to the polls. It's the "We're the nice guy Dems vs. the evil, hateful GOP" game, and the Hispanics are being used as pawns. Keep promising something and the people being promised will continue to vote in hopes of receiving that promise. Face it...the Dems NEED the Hispanic vote, and that's why Obama was in Texas yesterday talking to them.
Once "undocumented" Hispanics do get to vote, they'll probably get just as disgusted as the rest of us and not turn out strongly. That's the DNC's biggest nightmare...so as long as they dangle the carrot, they can count on a strong turnout from those eligible to vote.
The Volstead Act was just the tip of the iceberg. When the Founders said "No way, Josephine," to voting, they knew politicians would stick only to issues important to the betterment of states/the nation. What's happened since?
Politicians get $400 haircuts... politicians play the sax... politicians care about how many donuts we eat... politicians wear designer clothes... is this what the Founders wanted when it came to campaigning? NOOO! It appeals to women, and it wins their votes. If guys like George Washington had to win over women voters, would he have worn that stupid powder wig and costume, or would he have learned to play the drums, hummed stanzas from music of the day, and all those things attractive to women back then?
Cynicism is an aphrodisiac to me, Dave. In case you didn't figure that out by now.
DMS: Wednesday, May 11, 2011, 3:56 PM
Marty –
If cynicism turns you on, you must remain sitting and walk hunched over a lot.
Anyway, the basics of baseball are the same, but I think you see what I mean about how ground rules create all these different little "states of play" that are all governed by one set of rules.
The DREAM Act is a political ploy. Absolutely. But it is also a political ploy that happens to speak to the same impulse the disenfranchised have always expressed when it comes to becoming an American. Example: the Tuskegee Airmen joined up to prove their worth, and were willing to jump through such hoops because of the promise (albeit implied) of fuller citizenship after serving. If an immigrant somehow didn't qualify for college or had lousy grades, then maybe the naturalization should be delayed, but not that dream deferred, again. That's in the worst traditions of xenophobia and nativism, and I think you know that.
To dismiss Mr. Obama's current try at immigration reform as just politics begs the question; it's at least a comprehensive approach that begins to look at the problem honestly, and remains within our tradition of welcome, not a barred door.
Also, your whole point about whether "Americans" would get hired under a new paradigm or not places an artificial barrier between us & them. If the path to citizenship was more fair, more open and in line with the needs and cultural norms of the states admitting the immigrant, the whole question would be settled by the invisible hand of the market. That's an idea you can believe in, hmmm?
I'm not even gonna touch the appeal to women voters thing; that's as radioactive as Japanese spinach.
On baseball: .500 is .500, but we gotta get there first.
Marty: Mon, 9 May 2011 20:37:10 -0700
Tonight was truly awful!
DMS: Wed, 5/11/11
Sometimes the pitchers have to do the hitting. At any rate, the visit to Colorado is an even series now, so I'm okay with that.
I was out of circulation the last couple of days, but I did think a little about your idea of strict constructionism as it relates to the Constitution. The point is clear, but unfortunately, your reading doesn't stack up to years of practical experience with this kind of democratic experiment. Government power has expanded over time, true, but not only and always because people are whining babies who can't stand to live with the consequences of their actions. If there hadn't been room for interpretation, we wouldn't have a workable system of interstate commerce, highways, railroads and the rest of it.
And when it comes to strict readings of old documents, take a look at the 3/5 clause and the stuff the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments were designed to rectify. I think we'd all agree those are situations where re-writing the Founders intentions was not only right, but necessary.
The term limit idea is a good one and I would support it, mainly because it would refresh the tree of liberty with new fertilizer more frequently. I guess the manure metaphor isn't such a good one, but it'll serve for a lot of the talk we hear out of Washington. Debt limits, budget cuts, you guys wanna kill old folks on one side, you guys have no fiscal discipline on the other ... on and on it goes.
Marty: Wed, 11 May 2011 09:00:35 -0700
The Constitution does allow for changing with the times. Those changes are called Amendments. However, until an Amendment is added, the rules of the game weren't meant to be interpreted.
What if the Constitution of baseball, "The Rule Book," were open to interpretation? Could players not have to touch 3rd base on their way home, depending on circumstance? Could a fly ball caught on a bounce still be called an out, depending on the situation? See how baseball would collapse without strict interpretation of the rules? No room for agendas, is there?
The 14th Amendment is a favorite argument for me. It was written right after the Civil War and it rightly gave the children of slaves born in American natural citizenship. Compare its purpose in 1867 and what an agenda is morphing it into.
In 1867, the Congress agreed that slaves didn't come here on their own free will, so their kids shouldn't have to bear another wrong...not being citizens where they're born. Today, whether illegals climb a fence with a machinegun, hide in a truck, or whatever, they are NOT coming here against their free will. They want to come here to work, sell drugs, or 100 reasons in between, but the point is...they come here on their own. Thus, the status of illegal immigrant children TODAY has NOTHING to do with the status of the children of slaves. Why is the 14th Amendment even a talking point with the children of illegal immigrants?
Ask yourself...did the Congress in 1867 write the 14th Amendment to make kids of illegals eligible for Social Security, Medicare, and the right to vote? No...they wrote it to right a wrong done against slaves so their kids wouldn't be stigmatized as foreigners. Period!
Consider the Founders didn't want women to vote. Was it because they were Chauvinistic bastards, or did they foresee something...namely Prohibition?
In 1920, women were given the right to vote. They hated their husbands drinking, so in 1929 (only 9 years after the right was granted), Congress passed Prohibition because the politicians had to now play to an entirely new base. But, only a few years later, people realized what a stupid Amendment it was and it was repealed. Was the Constitution meant to be a document in need of white-out? THAT's where agendas lead us.
Leave the Constitution alone...it's not perfect, but neither are the people who try to change it.
So there!
Let's hope for .500 soon, just to say we're .500!
DMS: Wednesday, May 11, 2011, 1:31 PM
Marty --
In the grand old game, even the rules have changed. Not the fundies you speak of, but in the era of instant replay (which may soon expand) there's a few rules that aren't as hard and fast. How we interpret some rules and the use of unwritten rules affects the way it's played at the major league level and in some small ways, all the way down. To continue the analogy a bit, the basic rulebook is the same, but ground rules are always there to create a bit of uniqueness, a bit of local flavor. Kind of like how an amendment works. If thoughtful and passed by 2/3 of the states, we can finally start getting stuff done. Like a Balanced Budget Amendment, maybe.
Okay, so equal protection shouldn't apply to illegals, as you term them. How about creating a path to citizenship? If we're not going to stop relying on cheap immigrant labor and we can't build a fence to the stars, why not admit we're licked and start honestly allowing all those yearning to breathe free a better shot at it. Yes, back of the line, prove you're not a psycho, etc., but don't continue on this path.
Your interpretation of the Volstead Act is novel, but I'm a little loathe to buy into that one all the way. In that kind of world, women are rolling-pin swinging maniacs out to destroy all vestiges of fun, not people who deserve to exercise the franchise as fully as you and me. Just a thought.
Marty: Wed, 11 May 2011 12:31:13 -0700
Dave --
Baseball hasn't changed, save the DH. There are still nine players, three outs, three strikes, etc....instant replay didn't change baseball. It helps it to enforce the rules with a correct call.
A national balanced budget amendment? Hmm...Paul Ryan looked to shave $400 Billion off the deficit (leaving us a Trillion in the hole every year) and it caused a riot (figuratively). How in the world do you ever foresee a balanced budget? Hasn't Obamacare alone made sure we never have one?
Something nobody is considering, Dave...to wit:
Yes, those greedy businessmen love hiring "undocumenteds" (since you dislike the term, "illegals") and that's why there are now so many of them. But, what if they become citizens...earning equal pay, equal benefits, and all that jazz? Would businessmen still hire them, or simply hire Americans at the same going rate? In other words, if businessmen no longer have a cost-effective reason to hire undocumenteds/new citizens, why would they continue to hire any? And then what?
I also have difficulty with the DREAM Act. The Act states if an undocumented fella joins the service for two years, he can then attend college as a citizen. Sounds good, but what if that fella has crummy grades and no college will accept him? Does he then have to turn in his Dream Act citizenship?
Dave, the whole "path to citizenship" is nothing more than a ruse to get Hispanics to the polls. Obama had two years with a Dem Congress to pass anything (even if it required a bribe or two from Harry), and nothing about citizenship made it to the floor. Only after the Tea Party win in November did we get a pointless vote on the Dream Act ... why, you might ask? Simply put:
As long as this remains an issue, it will get Hispanics to the polls. It's the "We're the nice guy Dems vs. the evil, hateful GOP" game, and the Hispanics are being used as pawns. Keep promising something and the people being promised will continue to vote in hopes of receiving that promise. Face it...the Dems NEED the Hispanic vote, and that's why Obama was in Texas yesterday talking to them.
Once "undocumented" Hispanics do get to vote, they'll probably get just as disgusted as the rest of us and not turn out strongly. That's the DNC's biggest nightmare...so as long as they dangle the carrot, they can count on a strong turnout from those eligible to vote.
The Volstead Act was just the tip of the iceberg. When the Founders said "No way, Josephine," to voting, they knew politicians would stick only to issues important to the betterment of states/the nation. What's happened since?
Politicians get $400 haircuts... politicians play the sax... politicians care about how many donuts we eat... politicians wear designer clothes... is this what the Founders wanted when it came to campaigning? NOOO! It appeals to women, and it wins their votes. If guys like George Washington had to win over women voters, would he have worn that stupid powder wig and costume, or would he have learned to play the drums, hummed stanzas from music of the day, and all those things attractive to women back then?
Cynicism is an aphrodisiac to me, Dave. In case you didn't figure that out by now.
DMS: Wednesday, May 11, 2011, 3:56 PM
Marty –
If cynicism turns you on, you must remain sitting and walk hunched over a lot.
Anyway, the basics of baseball are the same, but I think you see what I mean about how ground rules create all these different little "states of play" that are all governed by one set of rules.
The DREAM Act is a political ploy. Absolutely. But it is also a political ploy that happens to speak to the same impulse the disenfranchised have always expressed when it comes to becoming an American. Example: the Tuskegee Airmen joined up to prove their worth, and were willing to jump through such hoops because of the promise (albeit implied) of fuller citizenship after serving. If an immigrant somehow didn't qualify for college or had lousy grades, then maybe the naturalization should be delayed, but not that dream deferred, again. That's in the worst traditions of xenophobia and nativism, and I think you know that.
To dismiss Mr. Obama's current try at immigration reform as just politics begs the question; it's at least a comprehensive approach that begins to look at the problem honestly, and remains within our tradition of welcome, not a barred door.
Also, your whole point about whether "Americans" would get hired under a new paradigm or not places an artificial barrier between us & them. If the path to citizenship was more fair, more open and in line with the needs and cultural norms of the states admitting the immigrant, the whole question would be settled by the invisible hand of the market. That's an idea you can believe in, hmmm?
I'm not even gonna touch the appeal to women voters thing; that's as radioactive as Japanese spinach.
On baseball: .500 is .500, but we gotta get there first.
Saturday, May 7, 2011
Epistolary
Some ancient forms of communication still attract adherents because of their power to engage the mind, heart and hands in service of sharing experience and observation. Good letters between people who care about the subjects deeply can certainly make for interesting reading. With that mind, I’ve edited the exchange that follows between me and my friend Marty who lives in Nevada. He checks in with me about the Mets and a few other little topics.
Marty: 29 Apr 20
It wasn't pretty tonight.
DMS: Sunday, May 1, 2011, 12:00 PM
That was a whippin'. Saturday wasn't a win, but they only lost by one run... sigh.
Marty: Mon, 2 May 2011 12:15:47 -0700
I never knew a win could be so painful. The Mets blew every opportunity they were given.
DMS: Monday, May 2, 2011, 5:00 PM
Painful for who, the fans or bin Laden?Ha, ha. Anyway... yes, they left a lot of men on base, but sometime you have to play those extra inning affairs in order to... awww, who am I kidding? They just fucking suck with RISP and it's been that way for the last five, six seasons. At least they're off a day and starting a homestand.
Marty: Mon, 2 May 2011 15:08:07 -0700
We need a clutch hitter on this team, Dave. Ike can't carry the load by himself.So, you think OBL is really dead, eh? No pictures, no video, no body...just a quick dump in the sea at an unknown place. If they have the DNA of 9 or 10 family members, do you think they were matched to OBL's DNA or someone else in the family?That's the problem with Washington these days...what do we believe and what don't we? Too many things are accepted at face value with no evidence. And, no, this isn't recent...how long has the Pentagon be around?We need people in Washington who are honest enough to admit they will lie.
DMS: Tuesday, May 3, 2011, 9:24 AM
The NY Times dropped the honorific for bin Laden, no "Mr." Not the only thing that's been left out of the story, as far as I can see. Quick and clean kill shot, body disposed of in less than 24 hours. Jack Bauer is still on the payroll, it seems. At any rate, this is a new chapter and it’s a nice set up for the 2012 election season. I can see it now, "Listen Mr. President, its simple. Focus on competency, achievements. And you got averting a depression (so we says) and you got bin Laden. None of them GOP jerks can say that." And none of them will. On the Mets: gotta get some thunder in the middle of the lineup. Beltran and Wright just ain't doin' it, but it'll come around. Believe.
Marty: Wed, 4 May 2011 00:23:43 -0700
PAINFUL!!!Something is bugging me, maybe you have an answer.
Supposedly, we got the "tip" on OBL about nine days ago. At that point, we sent in SEALs, Special Ops, you name it. Isn't it odd that right after we started this supposed mission, Robert Gates called it a day? Why the heck wouldn't he resign AFTER this mission, and say something like, "I stuck around to get OBL, I'm now passing the baton."? There are 100 things that don't really add up (IMO), but that kinda bothers me. Why would a guy be a party pooper before the party?I guess OBL being unarmed while reportedly having a 40 minute shootout with SEALs makes sense...don't ya think?Friggin’ Mets...what are we gonna do?
DMS: Wednesday, May 4, 2011, 9:23 AM
Lousy loss, that one. Went over to my neighbor's house for his homemade pizzas (delicious) and a few beers, and thought we looking at a nice start to a homestand. Too many LOB. Too many. And poor bullpen work by Buchholz. Garbage. Anyway, Gates had announced his retirement already and the Cabinet shuffle was underway as well. That's not necessarily the suspicious bit of this, timing-wise. What bothers me is the neat, tight storyline we're getting. The 40 minutes, yet unarmed (except for his favorite wife, Human Shield), is rather problematic, but I guess we'll be going over this like the Zapruder film for a while so it's best just to let it wash over you and sing "We Are The Champions".The SEALs probably encountered his Pakistani helpers and they put up a fight, until they realized it was best just to lead him out and give them a clean shot. What a world.
Marty: Wed, 4 May 2011 10:34:58 -0700
Hey Dave, I guess the solution isn't scoring six runs...if ya give up seven runs.
Good points. For what is a tremendous worldwide event, the secrecy behind it is pretty confusing. To wit --
1. We supposedly have OBL's wife in custody. What's her name, what’s she look like, no pictures...?
2. The SEALs who supposedly performed this mission are being given a secret ceremony. Why secret? Doesn't the entire world want to know who these heroes are, and watch them get rewarded?
3. The ship carrying OBL's body was full of sailors....yet none of them sent a text to anyone about OBL being on board, none took pics of anything and sent them to friends, nothing.
4. Where did this ship find a Muslim cleric so quickly to perform the supposed ritual? Who is he? I could go on for pages...you get my point. If the WH supposedly OK'd this mission 10 days ago, didn't they have ample time to figure out what to do when OBL was killed? Couldn't they decide in time what to do about releasing photos? They're acting like this was a total shock and they have to wing it, Here's a theory: OBL was found dead in a cave, let's say from natural causes. When the White House was notified, it said, "Don't tell anyone, we can make like our troops got the guy!" Can such a theory be disproved?
Do I dare watch the Mets tonight?
DMS: Wed, 5/4/11
Marty --Point 1 -- Damn good question. First she was a human shield, now she's uninjured. I don't know what gives.
#2 -- Secret ceremony? That's a good one. The only reason to keep it secret is to keep the SEALs identity safe from fatwa and jihad (the guys with the tailor shop down on 36th & 7th). Then again, you'd think they've already signed away their rights to consult on books, movies and the rest of it.
#3 -- Credit the good sense and stalwart nature of sailors (see: Capt. of U.S.S. Enterprise, the guy who made the homophobic videos) never to ever say anything about a secret mission. During WWII, maybe, but not now. It stinks more as time goes on.
#4 -- Standard issue for navy ships nowadays. Pick-a-chaplain, any chaplain. Sure. Sure. And as for telling the story to the public, it's in line with everything about the Obama Administration. Like the dog that chased the fire truck, didn't have a clue what to do with it when he caught it.
Marty: 4 May 2011 12:29:10
Dave,
You know by now that no pictures will be released. Interesting question:We're not releasing pics because the images would enrage our enemies. Yet....killing the guy won't? It's kinda hard to believe the strongest nation on Earth is bitch-scared of nuts with boxcutters, wouldn't you agree?
We could debate this for months...let's move on to what's important --A .251 team batting average and a 4.43 TEAM era isn't a recipe for success.
DMS: Thu, 5/5/11
No pictures and no words from Mr. Obama at Ground Zero, on today, his first visit at President. So that's that.
Agreed. We could chew it over for a while, but it does make me think of the Kennedy assassination: Oswald gets killed by Ruby, Ruby gets whacked and well, there's your story. Too simple, too pat. As for the Mets: no hitting + no pitching = no joy in Metville. The free agent solution is out, and blockbuster (read: Reyes) trading may be the only way to get the thumper and hurler we're looking for. And then there's Johan to look forward to. Like a trade in the midseason, without giving anybody up. Keep hope alive!
Marty: Thu, 5 May 2011 10:28:25 -0700
Dave,
Last night was horrible. The people in the seats caught a draft from the Mets bats whiffing all night long.Notice what's NOT in the headlines anymore? Slower than expected growth, job numbers coming in lousy, nothing about Libya, nothing about Syria and/or Iran, nothing about gas prices....kinda makes ya think something was planned just in time, don't ya think?In one regard, this White House is no different than the Bush one. They love to point to growing corporate earnings and gloat about them. Didn't the Dems crucify the big companies during the Bush years for ripping us off? Now, they rip us off and all's well with the Dems. What gives?There's very little difference between the two parties...one (GOP) will admit they'll screw ya; the other (Dems) will play the song and dance and still screw ya. $$$ knows no party affiliations, it's up for grabs by all.That's why I stand with the kooks who wear George Washington costumes at Tea rallies. They wave "Don't tread on me" flags, they denounce Socialism, they want drones guarding the borders, but more importantly....if not for them, would ANYONE in Washington be talking about how this country is the Titanic and the water filling the ship is the deficits and the debt? The Dems never cut anything, the GOP never cut anything, so who's the party that's trying to save this country? Both the GOP and the Dems have kicked the can to get us to where we are now...how can anyone still support either one of them?Even Ryan's "massive cuts" leave us with a $1 Trillion deficit next year. I don't know why it's praised by anyone...is that any kind of answer?Higher taxes can be absorbed in a good economy but they can't be absorbed in a bad one. Does anyone want higher taxes with $5 gas and 10% inflation on the way?There's only one solution: If the OBL pics are real, put them on pay-per-view...the whole country will pay to see them. Think of the revenue generated!
That's my sermon from the abyss.
DMS: Thursday, May 5, 2011, 4:14 PM
Marty: The headlines reflect the hottest, most visceral thing the reporters can grab hold of at the moment. That's always been true and will continue to be so until it doesn't lead if it ain't bleeding. White Houses are very much alike mainly because of the pressures of the job, the authority held within. W was excoriated for expanding presidential power with "enhanced interrogation" and the Patriot Act, John Yu's memos and the rest of it, but Obama has made no real moves to scale that power back or hand it over to an ombudsman or anything of the kind. That's because presidential power is like crack -- one hit is too many, a million will never be enough. My analysis isn't as narrow as that, though. The rip-offs you speak of will continue as long as the corporation is considered a person (except when they do something horribly wrong like spill a kajillion gallons of oil into the Gulf) who doesn't have to pay taxes and can influence elections through donations and thoroughly dominate our lives. They, the corporations, own this government and until somebody takes it back, we'll all be preaching from the same lip of the abyss. Of course, that doesn't mean I'm advocating your Tea Party-type foolishness, because deficit reduction of the magnitude Ryan has proposed and even the Bowles commission's recommendation isn't a real priority for our future growth. When there are more markets open around the world and demand ginned up to fill, we'll start getting back to fiscal solvency. Reducing a man's (or a nation's) debt means nothing until income actually grows again. So you're right, higher taxes on the public aren't the way out of this (right now). Taxes going up on the people who bring good things to life (nukes, "The Celebrity Apprentice", light bulbs we can't buy anymore) might help to do the trick, but that's only a suggestion based on my own view of fairness. The rest of the Tea Party stuff, in my view, is so tinged with xenophobia, lack of historical insight and outright bigotry that it's been discredited except on MSNBC and Fox News. As on general principle, I'd never pay-per-view anything. No cable. But especially not a hanging or an execution, even of the worst scumbag in the world. Okay, well maybe for the Philly Phanatic.
Marty: 5 May 2011 14:15:08 -0700
Thoughtful as ever, you sly fox! A couple of points, if I may:
1) The Tea Party is laced with racism? If that's true, please point to a speech by any Tea Party member where race is an issue. Booting illegals out and keeping them out is an issue...but do we have anything against keeping legal Mexicans (or anyone else legal) here? I'm Tea Party, and you're my friend, Dave....you could be purple with spots, I don't give a shit (as long as you like boobs, drink beer, and root for the Mets!)
1a) When we claim we want to being America back to the 1950s, we don't mean segregation, sexism, and all that jazz. In the 1950s, what was America? A manufacturing powerhouse with a booming economy and respected around the world. Kids could play outside, Americans weren't groped at airports, and other countries didn't dictate our policies. If those things are bad, than so be it!
2) Consider that the US now pays almost $600 Billion a year in interest payments. What could be done with that $600 Billion? In 10 years, the amount will double, leading to over $1 Trillion a year in interest payments. I doubt we'll ever see a balanced budget again, but wouldn't one be nice....to keep the total from reaching over $1 Trillion a year paid out?I remember the 2006 Dem rallying cry how deficits were going to hurt our kids and grandkids. Now, the rallying cry is if you cut deficits, it'll hurt granny and grandpa. But think about what deficits are doing to everyone....the Dollar Index is down 8% in 2011, commodities are soaring, inflation is soaring (if you include the things we use everyday like bread and milk), and nobody seems to be too concerned about it. That's a real danger!A point about corporate taxes:OK, GE and several others pay little or no tax for many reasons. Everyone wants that revenue taxed, right?Let's suppose the Government said, "OK big companies, you now have to pay 33% tax on all revenue." I picked 33% because it makes my example mathematically simple:Let's suppose right now a company sells a $1,000 product that's in high demand, and it's profit margin in 10% ($100). It pays little or no tax.Now comes a 33% tax on that profit margin....You think the companies would pay $33 for every $100 earned on an item? Consider this....The price of the item goes from $1,000 to $1,050. Then with a 15% profit margin (now $150, up from $100), the company pays the 33% tax....or, the $50 increase in sales price. The company still winds up with its 10% profit ($100 on the item), so who winds up paying the tax for the company? You got it...the consumer!
Aren't shell games fun?
Marty: 29 Apr 20
It wasn't pretty tonight.
DMS: Sunday, May 1, 2011, 12:00 PM
That was a whippin'. Saturday wasn't a win, but they only lost by one run... sigh.
Marty: Mon, 2 May 2011 12:15:47 -0700
I never knew a win could be so painful. The Mets blew every opportunity they were given.
DMS: Monday, May 2, 2011, 5:00 PM
Painful for who, the fans or bin Laden?Ha, ha. Anyway... yes, they left a lot of men on base, but sometime you have to play those extra inning affairs in order to... awww, who am I kidding? They just fucking suck with RISP and it's been that way for the last five, six seasons. At least they're off a day and starting a homestand.
Marty: Mon, 2 May 2011 15:08:07 -0700
We need a clutch hitter on this team, Dave. Ike can't carry the load by himself.So, you think OBL is really dead, eh? No pictures, no video, no body...just a quick dump in the sea at an unknown place. If they have the DNA of 9 or 10 family members, do you think they were matched to OBL's DNA or someone else in the family?That's the problem with Washington these days...what do we believe and what don't we? Too many things are accepted at face value with no evidence. And, no, this isn't recent...how long has the Pentagon be around?We need people in Washington who are honest enough to admit they will lie.
DMS: Tuesday, May 3, 2011, 9:24 AM
The NY Times dropped the honorific for bin Laden, no "Mr." Not the only thing that's been left out of the story, as far as I can see. Quick and clean kill shot, body disposed of in less than 24 hours. Jack Bauer is still on the payroll, it seems. At any rate, this is a new chapter and it’s a nice set up for the 2012 election season. I can see it now, "Listen Mr. President, its simple. Focus on competency, achievements. And you got averting a depression (so we says) and you got bin Laden. None of them GOP jerks can say that." And none of them will. On the Mets: gotta get some thunder in the middle of the lineup. Beltran and Wright just ain't doin' it, but it'll come around. Believe.
Marty: Wed, 4 May 2011 00:23:43 -0700
PAINFUL!!!Something is bugging me, maybe you have an answer.
Supposedly, we got the "tip" on OBL about nine days ago. At that point, we sent in SEALs, Special Ops, you name it. Isn't it odd that right after we started this supposed mission, Robert Gates called it a day? Why the heck wouldn't he resign AFTER this mission, and say something like, "I stuck around to get OBL, I'm now passing the baton."? There are 100 things that don't really add up (IMO), but that kinda bothers me. Why would a guy be a party pooper before the party?I guess OBL being unarmed while reportedly having a 40 minute shootout with SEALs makes sense...don't ya think?Friggin’ Mets...what are we gonna do?
DMS: Wednesday, May 4, 2011, 9:23 AM
Lousy loss, that one. Went over to my neighbor's house for his homemade pizzas (delicious) and a few beers, and thought we looking at a nice start to a homestand. Too many LOB. Too many. And poor bullpen work by Buchholz. Garbage. Anyway, Gates had announced his retirement already and the Cabinet shuffle was underway as well. That's not necessarily the suspicious bit of this, timing-wise. What bothers me is the neat, tight storyline we're getting. The 40 minutes, yet unarmed (except for his favorite wife, Human Shield), is rather problematic, but I guess we'll be going over this like the Zapruder film for a while so it's best just to let it wash over you and sing "We Are The Champions".The SEALs probably encountered his Pakistani helpers and they put up a fight, until they realized it was best just to lead him out and give them a clean shot. What a world.
Marty: Wed, 4 May 2011 10:34:58 -0700
Hey Dave, I guess the solution isn't scoring six runs...if ya give up seven runs.
Good points. For what is a tremendous worldwide event, the secrecy behind it is pretty confusing. To wit --
1. We supposedly have OBL's wife in custody. What's her name, what’s she look like, no pictures...?
2. The SEALs who supposedly performed this mission are being given a secret ceremony. Why secret? Doesn't the entire world want to know who these heroes are, and watch them get rewarded?
3. The ship carrying OBL's body was full of sailors....yet none of them sent a text to anyone about OBL being on board, none took pics of anything and sent them to friends, nothing.
4. Where did this ship find a Muslim cleric so quickly to perform the supposed ritual? Who is he? I could go on for pages...you get my point. If the WH supposedly OK'd this mission 10 days ago, didn't they have ample time to figure out what to do when OBL was killed? Couldn't they decide in time what to do about releasing photos? They're acting like this was a total shock and they have to wing it, Here's a theory: OBL was found dead in a cave, let's say from natural causes. When the White House was notified, it said, "Don't tell anyone, we can make like our troops got the guy!" Can such a theory be disproved?
Do I dare watch the Mets tonight?
DMS: Wed, 5/4/11
Marty --Point 1 -- Damn good question. First she was a human shield, now she's uninjured. I don't know what gives.
#2 -- Secret ceremony? That's a good one. The only reason to keep it secret is to keep the SEALs identity safe from fatwa and jihad (the guys with the tailor shop down on 36th & 7th). Then again, you'd think they've already signed away their rights to consult on books, movies and the rest of it.
#3 -- Credit the good sense and stalwart nature of sailors (see: Capt. of U.S.S. Enterprise, the guy who made the homophobic videos) never to ever say anything about a secret mission. During WWII, maybe, but not now. It stinks more as time goes on.
#4 -- Standard issue for navy ships nowadays. Pick-a-chaplain, any chaplain. Sure. Sure. And as for telling the story to the public, it's in line with everything about the Obama Administration. Like the dog that chased the fire truck, didn't have a clue what to do with it when he caught it.
Marty: 4 May 2011 12:29:10
Dave,
You know by now that no pictures will be released. Interesting question:We're not releasing pics because the images would enrage our enemies. Yet....killing the guy won't? It's kinda hard to believe the strongest nation on Earth is bitch-scared of nuts with boxcutters, wouldn't you agree?
We could debate this for months...let's move on to what's important --A .251 team batting average and a 4.43 TEAM era isn't a recipe for success.
DMS: Thu, 5/5/11
No pictures and no words from Mr. Obama at Ground Zero, on today, his first visit at President. So that's that.
Agreed. We could chew it over for a while, but it does make me think of the Kennedy assassination: Oswald gets killed by Ruby, Ruby gets whacked and well, there's your story. Too simple, too pat. As for the Mets: no hitting + no pitching = no joy in Metville. The free agent solution is out, and blockbuster (read: Reyes) trading may be the only way to get the thumper and hurler we're looking for. And then there's Johan to look forward to. Like a trade in the midseason, without giving anybody up. Keep hope alive!
Marty: Thu, 5 May 2011 10:28:25 -0700
Dave,
Last night was horrible. The people in the seats caught a draft from the Mets bats whiffing all night long.Notice what's NOT in the headlines anymore? Slower than expected growth, job numbers coming in lousy, nothing about Libya, nothing about Syria and/or Iran, nothing about gas prices....kinda makes ya think something was planned just in time, don't ya think?In one regard, this White House is no different than the Bush one. They love to point to growing corporate earnings and gloat about them. Didn't the Dems crucify the big companies during the Bush years for ripping us off? Now, they rip us off and all's well with the Dems. What gives?There's very little difference between the two parties...one (GOP) will admit they'll screw ya; the other (Dems) will play the song and dance and still screw ya. $$$ knows no party affiliations, it's up for grabs by all.That's why I stand with the kooks who wear George Washington costumes at Tea rallies. They wave "Don't tread on me" flags, they denounce Socialism, they want drones guarding the borders, but more importantly....if not for them, would ANYONE in Washington be talking about how this country is the Titanic and the water filling the ship is the deficits and the debt? The Dems never cut anything, the GOP never cut anything, so who's the party that's trying to save this country? Both the GOP and the Dems have kicked the can to get us to where we are now...how can anyone still support either one of them?Even Ryan's "massive cuts" leave us with a $1 Trillion deficit next year. I don't know why it's praised by anyone...is that any kind of answer?Higher taxes can be absorbed in a good economy but they can't be absorbed in a bad one. Does anyone want higher taxes with $5 gas and 10% inflation on the way?There's only one solution: If the OBL pics are real, put them on pay-per-view...the whole country will pay to see them. Think of the revenue generated!
That's my sermon from the abyss.
DMS: Thursday, May 5, 2011, 4:14 PM
Marty: The headlines reflect the hottest, most visceral thing the reporters can grab hold of at the moment. That's always been true and will continue to be so until it doesn't lead if it ain't bleeding. White Houses are very much alike mainly because of the pressures of the job, the authority held within. W was excoriated for expanding presidential power with "enhanced interrogation" and the Patriot Act, John Yu's memos and the rest of it, but Obama has made no real moves to scale that power back or hand it over to an ombudsman or anything of the kind. That's because presidential power is like crack -- one hit is too many, a million will never be enough. My analysis isn't as narrow as that, though. The rip-offs you speak of will continue as long as the corporation is considered a person (except when they do something horribly wrong like spill a kajillion gallons of oil into the Gulf) who doesn't have to pay taxes and can influence elections through donations and thoroughly dominate our lives. They, the corporations, own this government and until somebody takes it back, we'll all be preaching from the same lip of the abyss. Of course, that doesn't mean I'm advocating your Tea Party-type foolishness, because deficit reduction of the magnitude Ryan has proposed and even the Bowles commission's recommendation isn't a real priority for our future growth. When there are more markets open around the world and demand ginned up to fill, we'll start getting back to fiscal solvency. Reducing a man's (or a nation's) debt means nothing until income actually grows again. So you're right, higher taxes on the public aren't the way out of this (right now). Taxes going up on the people who bring good things to life (nukes, "The Celebrity Apprentice", light bulbs we can't buy anymore) might help to do the trick, but that's only a suggestion based on my own view of fairness. The rest of the Tea Party stuff, in my view, is so tinged with xenophobia, lack of historical insight and outright bigotry that it's been discredited except on MSNBC and Fox News. As on general principle, I'd never pay-per-view anything. No cable. But especially not a hanging or an execution, even of the worst scumbag in the world. Okay, well maybe for the Philly Phanatic.
Marty: 5 May 2011 14:15:08 -0700
Thoughtful as ever, you sly fox! A couple of points, if I may:
1) The Tea Party is laced with racism? If that's true, please point to a speech by any Tea Party member where race is an issue. Booting illegals out and keeping them out is an issue...but do we have anything against keeping legal Mexicans (or anyone else legal) here? I'm Tea Party, and you're my friend, Dave....you could be purple with spots, I don't give a shit (as long as you like boobs, drink beer, and root for the Mets!)
1a) When we claim we want to being America back to the 1950s, we don't mean segregation, sexism, and all that jazz. In the 1950s, what was America? A manufacturing powerhouse with a booming economy and respected around the world. Kids could play outside, Americans weren't groped at airports, and other countries didn't dictate our policies. If those things are bad, than so be it!
2) Consider that the US now pays almost $600 Billion a year in interest payments. What could be done with that $600 Billion? In 10 years, the amount will double, leading to over $1 Trillion a year in interest payments. I doubt we'll ever see a balanced budget again, but wouldn't one be nice....to keep the total from reaching over $1 Trillion a year paid out?I remember the 2006 Dem rallying cry how deficits were going to hurt our kids and grandkids. Now, the rallying cry is if you cut deficits, it'll hurt granny and grandpa. But think about what deficits are doing to everyone....the Dollar Index is down 8% in 2011, commodities are soaring, inflation is soaring (if you include the things we use everyday like bread and milk), and nobody seems to be too concerned about it. That's a real danger!A point about corporate taxes:OK, GE and several others pay little or no tax for many reasons. Everyone wants that revenue taxed, right?Let's suppose the Government said, "OK big companies, you now have to pay 33% tax on all revenue." I picked 33% because it makes my example mathematically simple:Let's suppose right now a company sells a $1,000 product that's in high demand, and it's profit margin in 10% ($100). It pays little or no tax.Now comes a 33% tax on that profit margin....You think the companies would pay $33 for every $100 earned on an item? Consider this....The price of the item goes from $1,000 to $1,050. Then with a 15% profit margin (now $150, up from $100), the company pays the 33% tax....or, the $50 increase in sales price. The company still winds up with its 10% profit ($100 on the item), so who winds up paying the tax for the company? You got it...the consumer!
Aren't shell games fun?
Monday, May 2, 2011
On The Clearest Day God Ever Sent
Off a distance a valley runs easily back uphill…
This valley in the mind, just a memory – if that,
Is watered down by distance,
The years gone by pull you too easily away from remembering,
Reliving,
What if felt like to breathe deep honeysuckle air in the evening,
The western skyline gleaming and gold,
The blue and easy night oozing across the sky…
In holy moments,
Those thunderstruck few seconds that only come your way every so often,
The strains of some old song can throw you straight back there,
Spy glasses and games of one-hop,
The school bus and the candy lady,
Staying inside and keeping quiet,
Killer prowling the back streets and all of it laying side by side…
In equal measure hornet’s stings mix with first kisses,
Sensations you’ll never forget,
And it makes you come to know,
All of a sudden, but with perfect clarity –
In the morning of our lives, all is new,
Each day all we have ever known,
And since there’s no clouds overhead right now,
It’s always going to be true,
Today,
Might as well be the clearest day god ever sent.
End.rev2, 12.28 a.m.
© David Mark Speer, 3 May 2011, Brooklyn.
This valley in the mind, just a memory – if that,
Is watered down by distance,
The years gone by pull you too easily away from remembering,
Reliving,
What if felt like to breathe deep honeysuckle air in the evening,
The western skyline gleaming and gold,
The blue and easy night oozing across the sky…
In holy moments,
Those thunderstruck few seconds that only come your way every so often,
The strains of some old song can throw you straight back there,
Spy glasses and games of one-hop,
The school bus and the candy lady,
Staying inside and keeping quiet,
Killer prowling the back streets and all of it laying side by side…
In equal measure hornet’s stings mix with first kisses,
Sensations you’ll never forget,
And it makes you come to know,
All of a sudden, but with perfect clarity –
In the morning of our lives, all is new,
Each day all we have ever known,
And since there’s no clouds overhead right now,
It’s always going to be true,
Today,
Might as well be the clearest day god ever sent.
End.rev2, 12.28 a.m.
© David Mark Speer, 3 May 2011, Brooklyn.
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
My Head’s on Fire and Frogs Are Singing
The other night I dreamed I was sitting on a porch overlooking a rocky coastline, pen in hand as the sun melted into an expanding pool of rippling burnished life itself – the water crashing against the land, reshaping it and reclaiming it all at once. I started writing about a character who wrote musical comedies with a particularly arch sensibility. In my piece, the piece I’m writing in the dream, the character is being interviewed by Heller Harrington, theater critic for the New York Clarion. The excerpt, in part, reads as follows:
HH: “Many of your works have been called exceedingly somber. How do you feel about being pigeonholed by some who don’t know the fullness of your oeuvre?
Playwright: “That’s true, I guess. I do some of my best work on the sad side, but I’m really proud of the fantasies and lighter stuff we’ve been able to produce. In one of my more comic operas, I set a young man forth on a quest to end a miserable affliction that severely hampers his social and moral growth.”
HH: “This would be “My Head’s on Fire and Frogs are Singing,” of course…
P: “Sure, it’s one of my favorites, and I think it stands apart from more downbeat, overtly psychological stuff. The hero, Criscaldo as he’s called, lived in a small fishing village on the Maltese coast with his family of itinerant fishmongers. They were a happy lot, enjoying their backbreaking labors with the good humor usually found among the trash of European peasantry living in medieval conditions.”
HH: “This was a rather difficult show to mount, due to the involved prop work, yes?”
P: “All in service of the story. Criscaldo’s alarming ailment was that he would periodically combust, sending a tower of white flame ten feet straight up, much to the delight of local toughs and dismay of the clergy.”
So now that I've written this, in my dream, I continue dreaming more adventures for this guy whose head is on fire. Criscaldo’s quest begins when he finds a message in a bottle directing him to take a long sea voyage, at the end of which he will find the cure for his disorder. This would be the best scene in the playwright’s show, where Criscaldo sings a tearful goodbye to his family who wave to him from their doorstep until the plume of flame shooting from the top of his head is only a twinkling on the horizon.
Criscaldo’s voyage ends when he encounters the magic frog that lives on an island of magic frogs. The king of the mystical amphibians sings a spirited welcome to Criscaldo, their long-lost flame-headed god on earth. Criscaldo’s destiny is to be worshipped by the magic frogs and he retires to spend the rest of his days basking in their adulation.
Tingling all over, sitting bolt upright in bed, I know I’m awake but I still feel the sear and scar of my hair on silver fire and just can’t get the ringing out of my ears from the voices of the frogs that encircle me, singing.
End.rev3, 1.23 a.m.
© David Mark Speer, 27 April 2011, Brooklyn.
HH: “Many of your works have been called exceedingly somber. How do you feel about being pigeonholed by some who don’t know the fullness of your oeuvre?
Playwright: “That’s true, I guess. I do some of my best work on the sad side, but I’m really proud of the fantasies and lighter stuff we’ve been able to produce. In one of my more comic operas, I set a young man forth on a quest to end a miserable affliction that severely hampers his social and moral growth.”
HH: “This would be “My Head’s on Fire and Frogs are Singing,” of course…
P: “Sure, it’s one of my favorites, and I think it stands apart from more downbeat, overtly psychological stuff. The hero, Criscaldo as he’s called, lived in a small fishing village on the Maltese coast with his family of itinerant fishmongers. They were a happy lot, enjoying their backbreaking labors with the good humor usually found among the trash of European peasantry living in medieval conditions.”
HH: “This was a rather difficult show to mount, due to the involved prop work, yes?”
P: “All in service of the story. Criscaldo’s alarming ailment was that he would periodically combust, sending a tower of white flame ten feet straight up, much to the delight of local toughs and dismay of the clergy.”
So now that I've written this, in my dream, I continue dreaming more adventures for this guy whose head is on fire. Criscaldo’s quest begins when he finds a message in a bottle directing him to take a long sea voyage, at the end of which he will find the cure for his disorder. This would be the best scene in the playwright’s show, where Criscaldo sings a tearful goodbye to his family who wave to him from their doorstep until the plume of flame shooting from the top of his head is only a twinkling on the horizon.
Criscaldo’s voyage ends when he encounters the magic frog that lives on an island of magic frogs. The king of the mystical amphibians sings a spirited welcome to Criscaldo, their long-lost flame-headed god on earth. Criscaldo’s destiny is to be worshipped by the magic frogs and he retires to spend the rest of his days basking in their adulation.
Tingling all over, sitting bolt upright in bed, I know I’m awake but I still feel the sear and scar of my hair on silver fire and just can’t get the ringing out of my ears from the voices of the frogs that encircle me, singing.
End.rev3, 1.23 a.m.
© David Mark Speer, 27 April 2011, Brooklyn.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)