Not Taking Yes for an Answer

It only took fours and a half years and no one knows how many millions of dollars, but it has finally been decided that Zacarias Moussaoui is eligible to be executed. I wouldn’t take the over on any kind of life expectancy wager; the same people who decided he can fry will be deciding if he will fry. Kind of like having your estranged wife acting as your divorce judge. You might not get hosed, but that’s the way the smart money will bet.

It’s not like Moussaoui doesn’t deserve it. The primary reason he’s still around to be tried instead of having become dog food at the White House seems to be his own malfeasance. He’s done nothing to distance himself from the 9/11 attacks, everything to embrace them. He’s a confessed co-conspirator, which entitles him to all the benefits of those who actually killed someone.

The issue is the unseemly lengths the United States Government has gone to get him executed. I can’t think of too many felons who plead guilty and still get lengthy trials. The Bush Administration wants this guy dead so badly, they spent money and other resources like they were infinite commodities while risking the exposure of classified data and intelligence methods to try a guy who said from Day One, “Yeah, you’re right. I did it.” All the government has accomplished during this trial is to give this towel-headed sand monkey a forum. (I trust my pen pal Anonymous will grant that Moussaoui deserves any insults hurled in his direction.)

Felons have been pleading guilty in this country forever. The sentence of life without parole was made to order for Moussaoui. Send him to the worst place the Bureau of Prisons can find, somewhere he’ll never see natural sunlight again, or feel a warm spring breeze on his face, and let him rot there, to be forgotten with then rest of the refuse.

No, that would make too much sense. What we’ll do is give him his forum, then make him a martyr so some other troglodyte can blow himself up along with God knows how many others in Moussaoui’s name. The Bush Administration can’t be bothered to think of consequences or outcomes beyond gratifying their own impulses. It’s government as a form of masturbation, leaving the sticky mess to be cleaned up by someone else.

The Man With No Name Rides Again

Anonymous has entered another sad chapter in his ongoing saga of learning to read for comprehension. I don’t want to keep him away from his normal reading material of “Highlights” and “Jack and Jill,” but he raised a couple of points that I’d hate for anyone to think were an accurate description of what I wrote.

I’ll begin with kudos. At least this time Anonymous addressed something I actually said, instead of riffing on his own inaccurate inferences. His opening paragraph deserves close examination.

He begins:
No, what's "chickenshit" is calling people you don't even know, or have even taken the time to understand, "towel-headed, camel-driving sand monkeys". Have you even considered how many millions of individual people you might have insulted and degraded with such a blanket comment?

Sure I have: none. The people distinctly referred to as “towel-headed, camel-driving sand monkeys” were those who threaten or carry out extreme violence over a cartoon. No one else was implied. If anything, my comments gave such troglodytes the benefit of the doubt. Nothing I say could possibly degrade them more than their own actions.

Anonymous continues:
I am quite sure you don't even know enough about the Muslim faith to write a paragraph, much less justify this denegration [sic] of millions of people that you've never even met.

I doubt too many would say it takes a religious scholar to identify this spade as a spade. We’re not talking about religion; we’re talking about violence and the denial of freedoms (speech, religion, etc.) to others.

He then goes on about my suggestion to the overwhelming majority of law-abiding, tolerant, and peaceful Muslims to cut these extremists loose as “plain lunacy,” saying Muslims have no more control over these extremists than Christians have over theirs, and that if ending the madness was that easy I should just contact any number of “Christian” organizations and tell them to “knock it off.”

This blog is my forum for doing that. If anything, I have even more scorn for the Aryan Nation, KKK, and the other human impersonators he mentions because I don’t want anyone to think their actions represent me in any way. It’s possible the media underreports the denunciation of extreme Muslims by mainstream Muslims. I can only go by what I know.

Anonymous, do us all a favor. Instead of attacking the messenger, why don’t you apply your righteous indignation to telling us what you think of the medieval morons who carried their “Death to Freedom” signs and pledged violence against blameless individuals living in countries who have done no one any harm? You’ve responded as though this was all about me expressing my opinion. It’s not. It’s about those who would deny others the right to express theirs.

So, what do you think about the cartoon violence, Anonymous?

Keep Those Cards and Letters Coming In

The recent blog post (over)exercising my right of free speech at Mohammed’s expense sure got Anonymous’ shorts in a knot. (See below, “I See Your Intolerance and Raise You,” and the comment that follows.) Getting trashed by a reader is almost as much fun as an appreciation, because no matter what sets them off, the reply is often an amalgam of arguments only tangentially related to the original sentiments, if at all. Anonymous did not disappoint.

Let’s begin with his choice of screen name: Anonymous. He must have sat up all night thinking of that. Granted, the Internet grants even me a fair measure of anonymity; at least have the courage to use a name that could be recognized later so people would have some sense of who you are. What does “Anonymous” tell anyone? “Pussy” was already taken?

As for his argument, his logic is tenuous, at best. (I have too much respect for women to deduce this writer is anything but a male.) He begins with “Ah, so Muslims have a monopoly on terrorist acts, torture, and abuse of those beholden?” Does that appear in my post, or in anything else I’ve ever written? I’ll guarantee it doesn’t, because I don’t believe it. More heinous acts have been justified, and continue to be justified, in the name of religion than for all other reasons put together. Just because Muslims didn’t invent religious evil and don’t hold the franchise doesn’t mean they can’t be taken to task for it.

The rest of his diatribe is a rant against Catholicism. I don’t know where he got his hard-on for the Catholic Church; maybe his last payoff check from the archdiocese didn’t clear. It doesn’t matter. I don’t have a whole lot good to say about that church, either. Everything he said is true. So what? The piece that set him off wasn’t about Catholics. They’ll get their day in the barrel. In fact, they have already, as some of you who received my pre-blog rants may remember.

He doesn’t talk about Muslims much, but infers some comparisons by introducing Catholics into a reply to a piece about Islam. It doesn’t take a major leap of faith (sorry, couldn’t help myself) to see him falling into a logic fallacy perfected by Republicans: I don’t like what you said, but can’t defend my position, so I’ll say your guy is just as bad, everyone does it, therefore what you accused me of can’t be that terrible. Lowering the bar for intelligent argument by too easily accepting that line of thinking could someday lead to Danny DeVito playing center for the Celtics, so we won’t go there.

There’s a lot more to pick on in his reply; I’m moving to a new home and pressed for time, so I’ll stick to two distinct items. Most of his comments are geared toward the pedophilia scandals that have shamed Catholics in recent years, and the money spent buying silence while those responsible were shuttled from parish to parish to prey on other unsuspecting children. There are not words strong enough to condemn the priests who abused those children, or the church officials who allowed this to continue.

That being said, I can’t remember a single instance of any Catholic clergyman, priest, monsignor, bishop, cardinal, you name it, advocating pederasty. I dare anyone reading this to name me one example of any ordained Catholic getting up in front of a crowd and inciting them to bugger little boys in the name of Jesus. Blowing yourself up as a way to kill innocent children is touted as the way to martyrdom and seventy-two virgins by certain Muslim clerics. Not mainstream, true, but how long do you think a priest could remain frocked if Sunday’s homily extolled the benefits of polishing Father Dick’s special chalice?

At least Anonymous has a sense of humor. Toward the end he attacks the Catholic Church’s record toward women by documenting its (admittedly true) abysmal record on the treatment of women, concluding with, “women have it made within this church, sign me up!” Given the choice between being a Catholic woman and a Muslim woman seems pretty clear; he had to be kidding, right?

I know, he never said Muslims were better, or even as good. He sure implied the hell out of it, though. Coupling his arguments to mine leaves him at least as open as me to a verbal bludgeoning, if only to get him to pay attention and read what’s written, not what isn’t. No essay is intended to be a comprehensive listing of what irritates me; I wouldn’t have time to do anything else. Criticism of what I wrote is welcome; I’m always happy to learn something new. Anonymous sniping of what I didn’t write because I didn’t write it is chickenshit.

I See Your Intolerance and Raise You

The surrealism of Twenty-First Century life has been ratcheted up another notch by the recent wave of violence surrounding the publication of some Danish cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad in what some of his more zealous followers consider to be a less than flattering light. There have been demonstrations, violence, stuff blown up; you know, the usual.

The Home Office has scrupulously avoided overtly criticizing religious beliefs; I say overtly because you never know what fringe group might be mortally offended and willing to condemn me to eternal damnation because I put gum in a car lock or don’t believe homosexuals will burn in hell. With that in mind, keeping to our devoutly-held philosophy of religious tolerance, I have a simple bit of advice for those Muslims currently acting out their indignity over these cartoons.

Kiss my ass, you towel-headed, camel-driving sand monkeys.

Who the hell do these people think they are? Pledging themselves to an eradication of another religion with a far longer (and greater) history of accomplishment and wisdom, they disdain the principles of freedom and tolerance we cherish while demanding respect for their own barbaric customs of genital mutilation, female servitude, and “honor” killings. Mayhem is their standard response to anything they disagree with, which is anything that doesn’t comply fully with their own paranoid, vengeance-driven vision of how life ought to be.

I’m no Koran scholar, but is this what the prophet Mohammad taught? (Yes, I know today’s accepted spelling is Qu’ran, or some other arbitrary arrangement of letters. Who’s to say which is right? Their alphabet looks like squid shit on the side of an aquarium; let’s stay hooked on phonics and spell it in some manner we can pronounce.) If intolerance and violence are the primary tenets of his “religion,” then the Danish cartoons in question were too tame. If the radicals storming European embassies recently are truly devout and accurate followers of Mohammed’s teachings, then it’s well past time for outing him as the deranged, xenophobic, closet-living incestuous pedophilic fudge packer that he was. Is that derogatory enough for you? Bring it on, asshole.

It should go without saying (but doesn’t) that these comments are intended for a small minority of Muslims. I have known, worked with, and been friends with Muslims, and find them not to be any different than Christians, Jews, Buddhists, and any other religion you can name in how they treat others, and would like to be treated themselves. Even to them, I must say it’s time you cut these alleged zealots loose; they are the face of your religion to much of the world, and it’s not flattering.

Be Careful What You Ask For

I was kidding when I quoted Shakespeare a few weeks ago and wrote, “First, let’s kill all the lawyers.” How was I to know Dick Cheney reads this blog?

Somewhat buried amid the media wailing about the delay by Cheney’s people to notify them after he shot Harry Whittington is the fact that a law enforcement officer was turned away from speaking to anyone about the incident on Saturday night. The local law had an appointment for Sunday morning; common sense implies the police to you at their convenience after you shoot someone, not yours. Not to imply that shooting Whittington was anything but an accident, but overnight is plenty of time for someone to “get their story straight.” If anyone reading this sincerely believes he or she could just tell a cop to come back tomorrow after you shot someone, let me know. I think my Inbox can handle the traffic.

Granting it was an accident, stonewalling the police makes no sense. How tough was that interrogation going to be? “Uh, good evening, Mr. Vice President Cheney, sir, your honor. Um, did you—sorry, what I mean to say is you didn’t shoot that old gentleman on purpose there, did you? No? I sure am glad to hear that. I didn’t think you would, but it bein’ my job and all, you know how it is. I think that’s enough for tonight. I’ll just mosey back on down to the office and not talk to any of them al-Qaedas on the phone.” They had to get their story straight for that?

Speaking to the press on Wednesday, Cheney said he thought it was better for his host to notify the press because it would be important to get “as accurate a story as possible from somebody who knew and understood hunting.” Where was Cheney when it happened, having a few laughs over the newest round of Abu Ghraib photos? Cheney didn’t have anything to say because, “The accuracy was enormously important. I had no press person with me.” The man a heartbeat away from being president needed a media adviser to tell him what he just did, which, by the way, happened to be shooting someone?

The White House press office, which hadn’t been caught this unprepared since the last time anything newsworthy happened, uses the word “shooting” in conjunction with this about as often as Dubya uses “perspicacity” in conjunction with anything other than sweat. “Accident” is the spin du jour. It’s accurate, as far as it goes, which is about as far as you can throw Bill Bennett. It was an accidental shooting, which is different from garden variety accidents like falling off a ladder or slipping on the ice or getting love ick on some fat chick’s dress. It’s an accident when you throw a baseball to someone who isn’t paying attention and hit him in the face; it’s a shooting when you use a shotgun.

A headline earlier this week quoted a gun safety expert as saying Cheney violated the first precept of gun safety. I didn’t read the article, but I could guess that rule might be “Don’t shoot your partner.” Maybe Cheney’s gun safety skills would be better if his other priorities hadn’t gotten in the way of his military experience.

A Retraction

On September 17, 2005, From The Home Office wrote about the flap revolving around using the word "refugee" to described those displaced by Hurricane Katrina. At the time some had declared the word to have racist overtones in this application, and was inaccurate. From The Home Office stuck to a dictionary definition without political overtones and opined that the word was appropriate in this context.

Recent events have shown the United States government to have paid as much os $438 a night to house these displaced persons in New York hotels. Not even George W. Bush is dumb enough to pay that kind of money housing refugees. They must be something else.

From The Home Office apologizes for any confusion our erroneous conclusion may have caused.

Catch 43

Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez appeared in front of a Senate committee to take his lumps over the Bush Administration’s policy of warrantless surveillance this week. (Don’t you just know that at the first meeting to fill this job, Bush looked at Gonzalez and said, “Hey, Alberto-rama, your initials are A.G., just like this job. That must be like, you know, kismet or something. Let’s dump the rest of these resumes and grill us up some felons.”) The Senate seems to have it in for Gonzalez. First they made him renounce torture to get confirmed in the first place. This week they forced him into defending the Administration’s position that a Congressional authorization of force trumps the Fourth Amendment.

Gonzalez did the best he could, considering he had to talk while Dick Cheney drank a glass of milk. According to Alberto the force authorization passed in the aftermath of 9/11 gives the President the authority to do virtually anything he wants, superseding even Constitutional restrictions.

Ignored by this inventive line of reasoning is the fundamental precept of our government: the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. A procedure for amending it was created for times when the original document becomes outdated in some way. Strange that a president who claims to be a strict constructionist ignores the parts of the Constitution that address anyone’s rights but his own.

Presidents have often assumed extra-Constitutional power during time of war. Gonzo cited Wilson during World War I and Roosevelt in World War II; Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus during the Civil War probably springs to mind. There’s a difference. Those were honest-to-Thomas Jefferson wars, where Congress asserted its Constitutional authority to declare war. That has not been done in the present case, for good reason. Who would the war be declared against? A bunch of towel-headed cartoon critics living in caves?

When will these extraordinary wartime powers end? There will never be a peace treaty. One day al-Qaeda will be gone and we’ll still be primed for action. Whoever threatens to blow something up because Daffy Duck looks like a caricature of their god will feel the full wrath of Halliburton descend upon them.

Gonzalez is essentially promoting a variation of Joseph Heller’s Catch-22. Where’s the authority to perform warrantless searches? There’s a war on. Who says there’s a war on? There must be; we’re conducting warrantless searches, aren’t we?

How odd that a president who values privacy so dearly in his personal and administrative dealings is so quick to arbitrarily deny it to others. Then again, maybe “odd” isn’t the right word. “Scary” comes to mind.

Not a Tough Call

The Home Office is in the throes of relocating, with closing on the new and improved Home Office scheduled to take place on February 22. Toward that end, my current landlord requires written notice of my intent not to renew my lease. What follows is that notice, to be hand delivered this Saturday.

Community Manager
The Lighthouse at Twin Lakes
Beltsville MD 20705


Dear Ms. _____,

What follows is a brief chronology of my tenure at The Lighthouse at Twin Lakes:

March, 2003 – Moved in.

November, 2003 – Leak in kitchen ceiling requires all food and most pots and pans to reside in living room for over three weeks.

March, 2004 – Renewed lease; rent increase.

November, 2004 – Leak in half-bath ceiling requires ripping holes in two walls and ceiling, leaving infrastructure exposed for almost a month.

March, 2005 – Renewed lease; rent increase, plus additional trash fee.

August, 2005 – Returned from vacation to find up to two weeks’ worth of dirty water on floor of full bath. Almost five weeks goes by, with two walls and ceiling of full bath and three walls and ceiling of half bath torn open.

December 2005 – Receive notice that I am welcome to stay as a Lighthouse tenant, but my rent will be increased for the privilege of getting to pay for my heating gas, which will make for a hefty housing cost increase to absorb while waiting for the annual leak. I am also offered the option of a “free” full cleaning (to remove the drywall dust I still find in unexpected places), a “free” carpet cleaning (to remove the traces of drywall ground into the carpets), or a “free” accent wall (hopefully not one you’d have to rip out to find the annual leak).

January 2, 2006 – Kitchen ceiling springs leak during Rose Parade, requiring relocation of food and utensils to the living room.

February 7, 2006 – Running the garbage disposal, George Foreman Grill, and computer simultaneously is too much for the wiring. Breaker trips, halting meal preparation and crashing computer. The drain from the kitchen sink also backed up into the half bath before the crash, leaving half an inch of garbage-laden water on the bathroom floor. I swear to God this is a true story.

Future events at 11920 Twin Lakes, Apartment 1:

March 15, 2006 – The keys will be returned. I have decided not to take you up on your generous offer to stay here for another year. I just hope I can get out before the entire dump falls apart around me, like the Blues Brothers’ car in the movie.

Sincerely,

Yours Truly.

I wasn't expecting much of my deposit back, anyway.

A Burgh Thing

The Pittsburgh Steelers play in Super Bowl Extra Large later today. It’s their first trip there since 1996, but there was a time when seeing the Steelers playing in, and winning, the Super Bowl was almost as common as seeing a Baltimore Raven taking a perp walk is nowadays. Four times in six years the Steelers took home the big silver football during the 1970s, the high school and college years for yours truly. “Coming of age” years in many ways.

This isn’t going to be some trivial rant about how the Steelers will kick Seattle’s ass this evening. Today’s game is just a reminder about how many people can grow up in or near Pittsburgh, live away for a long time, (twenty-six years and counting in my case), but always be Pittsburghers, even if they have no desire to live there again.

Evidence of this can be found in the oft-cited fact that the Steelers “travel well.” In football-speak, that means that no matter where they play, a large contingent of Terrible Towel-waving Burgh-heads will be there; tailgating, singing, generally making the home team wonder where all this black and gold came from. Does anyone really think Steelers fans by the busload took the week off work to drive to Detroit so they could revel in the Super Bowl experience? Half the people in the Pittsburgh area are either un- or under-employed, or too old for that shit. Where did they come from?

The answer is easy: most of them live in Detroit now. Or Denver. The coaches and mayors of Cincinnati and Indianapolis felt compelled to make public requests to the local fandom not to sell their tickets to anyone from Pittsburgh, lest it seem as though the Bengals and Colts were the visiting team. Several years ago the Washington Capitals hockey team wouldn’t take online orders for playoff tickets for their series against the Penguins unless the order was sent to a local zip code. This was solely to keep Pens fans from packing the MCI Center as they did during the regular season match-ups. I live locally, bought a pair, and still sat in a section full of black and gold.

Pittsburgh’s three teams maintain post-Burgh fandom in proportion to how easy they are to root for. The Pirates were almost as successful as the Steelers in the 70s. Drug scandals and a series of lackluster owners have led to a decade of losing with no real light at the end of the rainbow. Pirate fans don’t hitch their wagons too closely to the team, or any one player. They know as soon as he gets good enough to make real money, they’ll trade him for ten cents on the dollar.

The Pens have struggled of late, but the presence of Mario Lemieux in his adopted city kept the team afloat for over twenty years. Mario wasn’t sure he wanted to come when he was drafted; now he lives there full-time. The affection of even transplanted Burghers is so strong it’s felt by those who had already left before Mario got there.

It’s still the Steelers that have the strongest hold. The Rooney family has owned the team since its inception. They don’t pay the most money, never have, but they keep a core of people together that allows a depth of commitment and personnel rarely seen. The Steelers absorb as many injuries as other teams; they just always have someone ready to step in. No star makes a disproportionate salary, and certain types of conduct aren’t tolerated; responsibilities go along with the perks of being a professional football player in Pittsburgh.

Notice I said “core of people.” Not just players. Sure, Joey Porter runs his mouth and they may have to open the vaults one day to keep Ben Roethlisberger. The Steelers have a certain type of individual they look for, besides being an excellent player. The media focuses on the number of former quarterbacks they keep around, helpful for flexibility and trick plays. The caliber of people they keep around shows even more.

The 1995 Super Bowl team had Carnell Lake, who was willing to sacrifice a perennial Pro Bowl berth (and accompanying bonus) as a safety to play cornerback while Rod Woodson rehabbed his seriously injured knee. (Woodson missed the entire season except for the Super Bowl; the Steelers kept him on the roster, just in case. Pro Bowl voters appreciated Lake’s selflessness enough to send him to Hawaii, anyway.) Jerome Bettis took less money to stay in Pittsburgh. Hines Ward cut short his holdout without a contract because he wanted to stay, and Bill Cowher said they’d take care of him. Duce Staley took less money to come to Pittsburgh; he was injured early this year and lost his job to second-year back Willie Parker, yet not a game goes by you where you won’t see Staley on the sidelines with Parker and Bettis, encouraging, making suggestions. A reporter found Ward crying after losing last year’s AFC Championship game. When asked why, Ward said it was because they’d blown their last opportunity to get Bettis to the Super Bowl.

Bettis gave them another chance. The Steelers will have the majority of the crowd with them today. In addition to traveling well, Detroit is Bettis’ home town. I’ll be with a small group of native and adopted Burghers, eating kolbassi (no one spelled it kielbasa when I was a kid), pierogies, Clark bars and Klondikes, waving our towels and wearing black and gold. Part of me will be a little homesick, but another part will realize that I never left.

Sports holds disproportionate sway in our society. But for a Pittsburgh native, the phrase “you can’t go home again” only applies until the next Steelers game. It doesn’t matter where you are when you see the Terrible Towels, you’re home again.

Hell on Earth

What’s your worst nightmare? The thing so bad you can’t even truly imagine it? Turn on all the lights and sit with your back to a corner and we’ll examine it. Everything you’re about to read really happened. Just be glad it didn’t happen to you.

Say you’re a musician. A trumpet player. You graduate from one of the best music schools in the world, then spend ten years playing with the orchestras in Boston, New York, Vienna. Never quite able to grab the hot gig, but always working.

The lack of steady income gets old after a while and you end up far away from the madding crowd of musical high society. Just to pick a city at random, let’s say Portland, Oregon. There you’re stuck as the assistant behind a man more acclaimed as a douche bag than a trumpet player for ten years, putting up with his attitude and whining and sorry playing because the job’s yours when he’s gone. Somewhere along the line the music director changes, but the signals don’t.

Then the douche bag retires.

The orchestra has auditions. No big deal, they have to replace someone, and the auditions can be for an associate if the principal job is filled from within. (Nudge, nudge.) People come in from all over and play. You play. And finish second. The winner is the single person in all recorded history you’d like to spend your career sitting next to less than the douche bag who just retired.

Up until today you thought the worst thing that had ever happened to you was losing a coin toss for a ticket to see the Boston Celtics win Game 6 and clinch the 1986 NBA Championship. That was a nude beach during Carnival compared to this. What have you done to deserve this?

You think a minute. Remember the time you ran off to get married? All the male friends you had reduced to the subjects of burlesque were good sports about it because they knew some day your bachelor party would come, and all debts would be settled. Remember the wedding announcements you sent? After the fact?

Life’s a bitch, and karma is its agent on earth.

Shakespeare was Right

The Home Office is about to relocate to wholly-owned digs to provide you, dear reader, with the service you deserve. There will be the inevitable fits and starts along the way; this is only to be expected at my advanced age. As in any real estate transaction, lawyers will enter into it. As in any real estate transaction so close to Our Nation’s Capital, (aka the Bend Over and Spread Your Legs Capital of the World), lawyers will enter into it where you least expect them.

The property in question is a townhouse, part of a Homeowners Association. This association isn’t so bad: the Master Deed and By-Laws run a mere 31 pages. The original Home Office resided in an association which by-laws were sent over in a heavy-duty binder. Why the Andover Heights Condominium needs 31 pages while the Constitution of the United States can get by with three is a question for greater minds than mine, and there is no shortage of those.

People around the country sometimes wonder why housing prices escalate so much in the DC area. The only local industry is government, and we’re in the midst of a presidential administration originally elected in large part due to its devotion to reducing the size and expense of government.

Reading my condo documents has explained a lot. I thought I was just buying a house; just last night I found out that what I’m buying “is basically a rectilinearly shaped parallelepiped.” Damn right that’s worth more money than just a house.

And it’s not just the physical parallelepiped; we get air—front and back—too. The front of our humble rectilinearly shaped parallelepiped “is a vertical plane through the forwardmost point of the roof, so as to include all of the wall and air space directly under overhangs, if any.” (Emphasis added.) Thank God we got that squared away.

I understand this level of detail is designed to avoid confusion about who has to fix what should the excrement hit the thermantidote. That being said, maybe even more confusion could be avoided if the terms were easily understandable by someone with a Masters degree. (Granted, it’s in music, but still.)

What possible reason could there be for this paroxysm of obfuscation? Wouldn’t everyone benefit if the terms could be discussed without a background in surveying or geometry? Why must every circumstantiality be formulated in such recondite argot? Wait, though this be madness, there is method in’t.

Who might benefit from such elutriated phraseology? Among all the people potentially involved in a real estate transaction, who might possess the expertise to procure and perpetuate such atypical cognition? Could it be someone who can choose to look it up every time it crosses his desk and bill you for rectifying his alleged ignorance?

A lawyer, perhaps?

Don’t get me wrong, I believe in delayed gratification. I’ve waited fifty years to become the principal trumpet of a major orchestra, and I’m willing to wait another fifty. It will be worth it. Aside from the house hunting and the mortgage company’s anal probes, buying the domain of which you will be the master should be a joyful experience. How secure can anyone feel in their domicile if they aren’t sure they have an understanding of the rules to which they will be subjected? Why should anyone have to go hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt, then have to pay some pettifogger to explain to them that their rectilinearly shaped parallelepiped is as defined, “notwithstanding the definition of general common elements presently set forth in Article 21, Section 117A(g) of the Annotated Code of Maryland (1957 edition as amended).” Just so they don’t confuse it with Article 21, Section 117A(h)?

In Shakespeare’s Henry VI, Part II, Cade promises a utopian society, should he ever become king. Seven half-penny loaves will cost a penny; three-hooped pots will have ten hoops; it will be a crime to drink small beer. (I have no idea what any of that means. It still makes as much sense as my condo documents.) His friend, Dick, sees an obstacle, and offers a simple, effective solution.

“The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.”

To which Cade replies, “Nay, that I mean to do. Is not this a lamentablething, that of the skin of an innocent lamb should be made parchment? that parchment, being scribbled o'er, should undo a man? Some say the bee stings:but I say, 'tis the bee's wax; for I did but seal once to a thing, and I was never mine own man since.”

I’d trade the pleonasm of my association docs for that loquacity any day. I’d vote for Cade for king, too. I’m not sure what he means by that small beer and ten-hooping stuff, but I’ll bet he doesn’t say nuke-ular.

The Big Five-Oh

Well, today’s the day. The Big Five-Oh. A lot of things happen in 18,264 days, and I like to think I’ve learned something from them. That doesn’t mean I have. You be the judge; I’m not as impartial as I should be.

Several things stick out. The first memory I can positively situate in place and time is sitting in the back seat of the family car driving up the hill toward our new house on October 13, 1960, listening to Jim Woods describe Bill Mazeroski’s home run to win the World Series. That a baseball game is my earliest memory probably says a lot about how some things have worked out since then.

I was in Mrs. Trulson’s third grade class on November 22, 1963, when I learned that President Kennedy had been killed. I wasn’t sure what the big deal was, but by the end of the weekend I knew something major had happened.

On July 20, 1969, I sat cross-legged on our living room floor and watched Neil Armstrong take a small step that everyone remembers everything about, except how to do it again. A different living room in Norwood, Massachusetts held me on January 28, 1986. Within a year I sat in a car and listened to Richard Feynman describe how O-rings lose their resiliency in cold and knew I would never feel the same way about NASA again.

A nurse said, “Would you like to see your daughter?” and I peeked over the curtain separating my wife from her Caesarian incision and saw the Sole Heir for the first time. On March 1, 1991, I became a better son, and understood that nothing was as simple, or as easy, as we’d like it to be.

Two strangers in a San Diego elevator looked at me like I had no clue about life in general after my perky morning greeting, and told me there was something different about September 11, 2001.

I stood with a hand resting on my dining room table on April 22, 2003 when Bill Ray’s son told me his father had died. Not being a surprise didn’t make it any easier to take.

Graduations, weddings, jobs, all have strong memories. The specifics have a tendency to blur, mixing in the Cuisinart of experience to create lessons you hope to get something worthwhile out of. Season with some common sense and a healthy bullshit detector, and you get the Top Ten Things I Think I Know at Fifty. (Anyone worthy of reaching fifty should know you don’t know you know anything.)

In no particular order:
· Intelligence without introspection is like sex without orgasm. It’s nice, and it’s better than not having any, but what’s the point?
· If the worth of a man is measured by the friends he keeps, then Bill Gates has a ways to go to catch me. That doesn’t mean specific friends should be kept at all costs. People are your friends through their actions, not their words. You have not lost a friend if you cut loose someone who misuses your friendship; he has.
· I make every effort to treat people as they would like to be treated. I pay everyone I meet the compliment of assuming the same about them. This is why some think I am an SOB.
· My favorite age for The Sole Heir is whatever age she is when you ask me.
· There is a great difference between being a good guy and being a good man. Just because my brother makes it look easy doesn’t mean it is.
· It is unconscionable that any child should go sick or hungry in a nation wealthy enough to spend over a trillion dollars to redraw org charts and call it Homeland Security. Security is built from within, not enforced through edict.
· The primary difference between most politicians and most whores is wardrobe, as well as when, how, and what it costs for them to show you what’s under it.
· Humans as a species are neither inherently good or bad. Americans are not nearly as good as we like to think we are relative to the rest of the world, even France.
· Those who proclaim their Christianity too vocally seem to want New Testament tolerance and forgiveness for themselves and their friends, Old Testament fire and brimstone for everyone else, choosing their own standards for casting the first stone. Christianity does not own the franchise on hypocrisy; it does employ many of the store managers.
· Life is too short to hold grudges. It’s way too short to tolerate injustice.

Any reasonable fifty year-old must assume most of the sand has run out of the hourglass. The trick is to savor every grain as it falls through the neck. The good years are always with us, if we keep realistically adjusting our definition of good to mesh with what’s important. In the timeless words of Senator John Blutarsky, “Nothing’s over until we say it is.” I can’t even hear the fat lady singing yet. That may be because my hearing’s no better than my eyesight or my feet. I prefer to think it’s because there’s no better place for me to go just yet, and, at the rate things are going, there won’t be for quite a while. Things are fine in the place I’m at now.

Because His Lips are Moving Again

Earlier this week, Vice President Dick “Darth Vader” Cheney said the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 could have been averted if the president had the power to secretly monitor the conversations of two of the hijackers without first getting a court order. This is a prime example of how the Bush Administration has run the country into the ground using smoke and mirrors, arguing “oranges” every time someone criticizes them by saying “apples.”

First, the easy answers. There are lots of ways those hijackings could have been averted without violating the Fourth Amendment. The FAA could have banned potentially dangerous sharp objects like box cutters. They reacted by banning everything from scissors to nail clippers, which amounted to locking, bolting, and nailing shut the barn door after the horse has been flown into a building.

Faulty administrative procedures played quite a role. Instead of spending what’s approaching a trillion dollars on the Department of Homeland Security and excising large chunks of the Bill of Rights in the name of this alleged security, why weren’t the heads of the FBI, CIA, and other relevant organizations told in no uncertain terms to find ways to share their information, or we’ll find someone who will? The government had enough information to stop the attacks if anyone had bothered to make sure it got into the right hands.

These issues have been debated before. The primary approach utilized in Cheney’s remarks is another Administration standby: only address part of the argument. Never mind that leaving out the salient features of the criticism invalidates your argument; who’s going to look that deeply into it?

Hardly anyone is criticizing the surveillance itself; it’s warrantless surveillance that has people’s drawers in a knot. The special courts for secret warrants existed prior to 9/11. These warrants can be issued retroactively for up to 72 hours if speed is an issue. If the government was so sure monitoring the phone calls of these two guys could have stopped an attack, then why didn’t they get a couple of warrants? Cheney’s comments imply more than ample probable cause.

To take Cheney’s disingenuousness one step further, the Bush Administration has never shied away from assuming the broadest interpretation of presidential power, especially as it relates to the other branches of government and the public. Does anyone really think they would have hesitated to take extra-Constitutional means before they got the war powers resolution, which they are essentially interpreting as the granting of dictatorial powers?

Think “dictatorial” is too strong a word? Bush and Cheney continually stress the safeguards and good judgment used to ensure no innocent Americans have their rights trampled on. Whose good judgment are we depending on? George W. Bush. Let’s look at his history of good judgment, just since he’s been president. Cutting taxes in time of war to create record deficits. Invading Iraq in the name of 9/11, knowing full well Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with it. Getting us stuck there, with over two thousand Americans killed since Bush’s Priapic exhibition on the USS Abraham Lincoln, when he announced “mission accomplished.” The repeated assurances that the insurgents were a small cadre of “dead enders” that were forever in their “last throes,” so they should “bring it on,” we can handle it. Is that who you want making the decision about whose rights are observed and whose aren’t?

And for you Bush supporters out there, what about when he’s gone? The next president gets the same powers. Do you want Hillary Clinton making those decisions? John Kerry?

The terrorists can do no worse than kill a few of us. These power grabs have the potential to destroy us. Once you start down the slippery slope, each incremental diminution of rights seems less significant than the last, until one day you look around and nothing’s left. Simon Bolivar is known as the George Washington of South America. Let’s hope no one ever has to be referred to as the Oskar Schlindler of the United States.

Don't Believe Everything You Read

The following item, with accompanying photographs, has been circulating the Internet via email. It refers to an event that took place in December of 2004. It’s a good story, and Denzel Washington’s a good guy, but it’s also a good object lesson for the old saw, “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.”

Don't know whether you heard about this but Denzel Washington and his family visited
the troops at Brook (sic) Army Medical Center, in San Antonio,Texas (BAMC) the other day.

This is where soldiers who have been evacuated from Germany come to be hospitalized in the United States, especially burn victims. There are some buildings there called Fisher Houses. The Fisher House is a Hotel where soldiers' families can stay, for little or no charge, while their soldier is staying in the Hospital. BAMC has quite a few of these houses on base, but as you can imagine, they are almost filled most of the time.

While Denzel Washington was visiting BAMC, they gave him a tour of one of the Fisher Houses. He asked how much one of them would cost to build. He took his check book out and wrote a check for the full amount right there on the spot.
The soldiers overseas were amazed to hear this story and want to get the word out to the American public, because it warmed their hearts to hear it.

The question I have is why does (sic):

Alec Baldwin, Madonna, Sean Penn and other Hollywood types make front page news with their anti-everything America crap and Denzel Washington's Patriotism doesn't even make page 3 in the Metro section of any newspaper except the Local newspaper in San Antonio?

Here ends the piece that has been circulating on the Internet. The reason no other papers picked up the story of Denzel’s spontaneous check writing is because it didn’t happen.

No criticism of Denzel Washington is intended or implied. He did come through in “a big way,” to quote a Brooke Army Medical Center spokesperson, and now serves on the Board of Directors of Fisher Houses. See this link for verification : http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/d/denzel-brooke.htm

It’s still a great story, and hats off to Denzel Washington for stepping up like he did. Let’s just remember not to be too quick to tar too many people with the same brush. Alec Baldwin, Madonna, and Sean Penn are loudmouths whose opinions get a lot more credence than they deserve because they’re celebrities. That’s not a media issue, that’s a media business issue.

It’s not just television and radio entertainment programming that looks at ratings anymore. Newspapers, magazines, TV and radio news, all are focused on getting maximum readers or viewers. This places the emphasis on reporting the news most people want to hear. Do you really think any reporters worth their salt thought the Michael Jackson trial was the most important thing going on in the world last June? Name two stories that received more coverage. That’s because the average mouth-breathing Joe Six-pack was interested. The media reports what Baldwin, Madonna, and Penn say because it’s easy (and therefore cheap, saving even more on the bottom line), and because people are a lot more likely to read or listen to what they say instead of someone who has made a career of studying such issues, but we never heard of.

Again, kudos to Denzel. The sad truth is, his generosity should not have been needed. We sent these people off to fight our war without anything like the support services they, and their families, need. How many of the same Joe Six-packs who teared up over this story are far more willing to bash a celebrity for being anti-war than they’re willing to insist their elected representative do anything about the situation Denzel took action on? This isn’t something on which we should be depending on charity. People acting in our name spent our tax dollars to put the troops in harm’s way; why aren’t we as vociferous about demanding those tax dollars get spent to ensure they get what they need after the inevitable consequences have taken place?

The next time anyone gets in a lather distinguishing “patriots” who support the war and those who don’t, let’s not forget that not supporting the war doesn’t mean not supporting those who fight it. Conversely, supporting the war doesn’t mean supporting the troops, or they wouldn’t have been sent there with inadequate equipment and insufficient Stateside facilities in the first place.

Ringing out the Old

It’s customary as any year draws to a close to recount its major events. “From the Home Office” celebrates its first anniversary by beginning its own year-end tradition.

JANUARY – George W. Bush is inaugurated as President, claims his election victory gives him a mandate to act as he sees fit. When an aide points out the dictionary definition of “mandate” implies getting more than 50.000000001% of the votes, Bush replies, “The dictionary’s just a goddamned book. I’m the president, that Constitution thing says words mean what I want them to mean.”

In a related event, the Christian Coalition and Moral Majority remove their endorsements of Bush, stating they’re uncomfortable with the idea of the president having a “man date.”

FEBRUARY – North Korea announces it has nuclear weapons. Former Director George Tenet returns to the CIA to unveil the complicated mechanism through which Saddam Hussein transferred all his nuclear weapons to North Korea hours before the war began in 2003. Tenet also reveals the existence of surveillance photographs of Mohammed Atta meeting with Kim Jong Il in Prague several days before 9/11.

When asked why he didn’t invade North Korea, President Bush says he didn’t want to fool with that International Date Line thing and not know if any news took place yesterday, or was going to happen tomorrow.

MARCH – Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist attempts to prove Terry Schiavo is not in a persistent vegetative state by having her flown to New York to appear “live” in the Broadway musical “Spamalot,” as part of the “I’m Not Dead Yet” number.

APRIL – Pope John Paul II dies, is replaced by Pope Benedict XVI. Vatican announces that in an attempt to appeal to a wider base of Catholics, all Masses will now begin with the Who’s refrain, “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.”

French Catholics surrender in droves to altar boys wearing new “brown shirt” vestments.

MAY – Mark Felt admits to being Watergate’s Deep Throat. Democrats laud him as a man of conscience; Republicans condemn him as a traitor. Bob Woodward pays tribute to the man who made his career by hiding under the bed when the feds come to ask what he knows about the Valerie Plame case.

JUNE – Michael Jackson is acquitted of child molestation charges. Jury members say they think he did it, but so little of Michael Jackson’s original equipment remains, they weren’t sure who it was they were voting on.

JULY – I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby and Karl Rove are implicated in the Valerie Plame leak scandal. President Bush backtracks from his original pledge of “anyone involved in leaking will no longer work in this administration,” to “anyone found guilty of a crime will not longer work for this administration.” Future fallback positions include “anyone caught red-handed on videotape,” and “anyone caught red-handed on videotape actually shooting Valerie Plame” will no longer work in his administration.

AUGUST – Hurrican Katrina destroys New Orleans. CIA reveals evidence of Katrina having lunch with Saddam Hussein in the days before 9/11. FEMA Director Mike Brown embarrasses Arabian horse enthusiasts by shopping at Nordstrom’s when he should have been watching CNN for updates.

SEPTEMBER – Dennis Kozlowski sentenced to 8 ½ years in prison for bilking Tyco shareholders out of $600 million. Supreme Court decrees this to be the standard for dollars stolen per years sentenced, releases every other thief currently in prison.

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay indicted by a Texas grand jury and has his name legally changed to Tom DeNy.

OCTOBER – Chicago White Sox end 87 years of frustration by winning World Series. Harriet Miers nominated for Supreme Court to show Cubs fans the true meaning of “hopeless.”

NOVEMBER – Senate Minority “Leader” Harry Reid invokes a rarely-used Senate rule to demand a closed session when Ted Kennedy is too drunk to tell the difference between “yea” and “nay.” Majority Leader Frist takes advantage of no gallery or reporters to kick Reid’s ass in cloak room, saying, “I used to take Daschle’s lunch money every day. Now I’m going to eat your lunch.”

DECEMBER – President Bush admits to ordering the National Security Agency to perform warrantless surveillance on American citizens inside the United States. Bush condemns the New York Times for breaking the story, claims to have classified photos of Times’ editorial board having lunch with Mohammed Atta and Saddam Hussein shortly before 9/11.

Happy New Year, folks. If the seeds planted in 2005 ripen as expected, 2006 should be a blast.

Great, Not Perfect

No disparagement of the accomplishments of Tom Brokaw’s “Greatest Generation” will ever be found here. They grew up amid the deprivations of mankind’s greatest economic cataclysm, too young to understand why. That sense of deferred satisfaction served them well during the war, and a profound desire never to do without again probably fueled the duration of the subsequent economic rebound.

They decided their children should not, would not, suffer these hardships. Therein lies the rub, as Shakespeare would say. The Greatest Generation’s greatest strength, their willingness to sacrifice, spawned the subsequent Baby Boomer generation’s greatest weakness, their demand for instant gratification without consequence.

Politics has given us two men to personify this thesis: George Herbert Walker Bush, forty-first president of the United States; and his son, George Walker Bush, President Forty-Three.

George H.W. Bush was a child of privilege in an era when the credo “to whom much is given, much is expected,” held sway, especially in the Puritan-influenced New England of his childhood. Bush was one of the first carrier-based fighter pilots of World War II, a war when the families of privilege considered it a matter of honor for their children to serve. He continued his national service in a number of roles, including Congress, Chairman of the Republican National Committee, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Vice President, and President.

Regardless of one’s opinion of his politics and policies, all can agree George H.W. Bush served his country well and faithfully. The only breath of scandal to touch him was Iran-Contra, when he claimed to be “out of the loop;” no scandal for personal gain or advantage was ever associated with his name. He lost his bid for re-election as president when he did what he thought was right for the country, reneging on his “read my lips” pledge to raise taxes. This probably cost him the presidency, and may well have led to the period of sustained economic growth shepherded by Bill Clinton.

George Walker Bush grew up in post-war boom times, in an era when privilege meant shielding your children from the burdens of your youth. The younger Bush will not (cannot?) account for his first forty years, except for selected excepts beyond his ability to shield. He went to Yale as a legacy, and was given choice duty in the National Guard while his less-fortunate peers were humping mortar plates and body bags through the rice paddies of Vietnam. As some point, even that may have become too onerous for him; the service records of the second half of his hitch are essentially unverifiable.

He firmly believes that finding God at age forty granted him a clean slate. He failed at everything he tried before politics, using his family connections to finally be elected governor of Texas as a “compassionate conservative.” The record shows little record of his compassion; Texas executions rose as quickly as its educational standards declined. He continues to show no tendency to conserve anything except what is his, or that of his friends.

He wants what he wants when he wants it, leaving the bills for future generations to pay. His “conservatism” does not extend to the environment, where today’s children will have to contend with the damage of his policies, enacted with an eye to keeping his backers happy today; later is someone else’s problem. He regularly attacks the liberties his father spent his life defending, because he gets to do what he wants. Others are either for him, or against him; there is no “loyal opposition” in his eyes. Disagreement is disloyalty.

This is not meant as an attack on Bush the Younger. The Bushes were only used here as examples of the sad state we currently inhabit, where primacy is assumed, and no sacrifice is too small to accept if it delays what we want. The Baby Boomer Generation stands on the shoulders of those who came before them and dishonors their sacrifices. Hundreds of thousands of Americans have died to defend the liberty they assume as their birthright. The lack of outrage over the current violations of the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Fourteenth, and who knows how many other amendments, all in the name of “protecting the homeland,” show the heirs of the Greatest Generation believe only others should sacrifice.

The greatest accomplishment of the Greatest Generation was to reshape the world they inherited and hand their children a far better place. Their greatest failure was in not passing down the values that made those accomplishments possible. It would be a sad legacy it this was the longer-lasting bequest.

A Christmas Miracle

There are more Christmas miracle stories than Liza Minelli has prescriptions. How often to you actually see one? Or have one happen to someone you know? Even rarer, have it happen to you? I have, just yesterday. Don’t believe me? Just look at all the things that had to go exactly as they did for this true, and truly heartwarming, story to occur.

I had one last errand to run at the local mall. I usually spend as much time at malls on Christmas week as George W. Bush spends at Mensa meetings. This year I had to get one special gift for a special someone. My heart was so overwhelmed with the spirit of the season that I took advantage of a rare weekday off work to brave the mall.

I had someplace to be later, so I was in a bit of a hurry. Lacking time to brush my teeth after a quick snack in the car coming home from grocery shopping, I grabbed two sticks of gum from the kitchen counter and popped them in my mouth. The gum had been sitting there at least six months, as I chew maybe a pack of gum a year.

Parking at the mall was at a premium, as you’d expect on December 23. It took ten minutes of looking until I found a spot only a few rows from the entrance. Something looked unusual a lane over from me and, good Samaritan that I am, I went that little bit out of my way to see if anything was wrong.

Imagine my surprise and dismay when I saw a big, honking Dodge Durango parked to occupy three spaces! Pulled in at an angle, the nose filling what might have been a pull-through space, the rest of the Durango parked across two spaces on the side from which the driver pulled in.

You can imagine my concern. What looming catastrophe could cause a driver to park in such a haphazard manner so close to the mall entrance on a day when everyone knew parking would be at a premium? Imminent childbirth? Dire illness? Needing to get to the last X-Box at Electronics Boutique? Whatever had happened, surely this person was in need of everyone’s understanding and sympathy.

I noticed a piece of lined notebook paper under the back window wiper. Thinking it might be a clue to provide more information, possibly allowing me to be of some assistance, I moved closer to read what it said. Three simple words: You are rude.

My heart went out to the poor parker. Surely he or she must have faced a daunting hardship, or the Durango would not have been parked in such a seemingly thoughtless manner. Based on personal experience, owners of enormous SUVs are renowned for their consideration of others, as well as calm and passive driving habits. How would this innocent feel if, bearing parcels of Christmas joy, he or she returned to the vehicle only to find such a snarky insult clipped to it?

I thought of removing the note but stopped with my hand in mid-reach. Who was I to deny the First Amendment rights of the note writer, no matter how distasteful the opinions expressed? Especially at this most sacred season, would not such a gross violation run contrary to everything we hold dear as Americans? I knew in my heart that if I removed the note, the terrorists would have won.

But what to do? The Durango person had to be shown there were those among us who felt his (or her) pain, and were appalled by the fascistic antics of the intemperate note writer. I pondered for only a few seconds before the true meaning of the season brought me an epiphany. A gift! What better way to express disapproval with the nasty note than to celebrate the true meaning of Christmas (Hanukkah) by leaving a small token of our shared humanity?

Now the question of what to leave was thrust upon me. Money seemed too impersonal, and would blow away in the breezy weather. I had little else of even sentimental value on me, as I was on my way into the mall, not laden with gifts as I would be when exiting. I stood pensively, chomping on my now-flavorless gum, until my second, and even more miraculous, epiphany of the day struck me.

I vowed to leave something of myself. Unfortunately, almost all physical aspects of humans are firmly attached. Hair would be blown away by the same avaricious breezes lurking to steal the previously considered cash. Yet there was one item with which I had become so intimately acquainted that it bore my very DNA. What more profound and sincere gesture could be given?

All that remained was to find a suitable location for this simple token. The cool, breezy day would dry it up if left anyplace exposed. It was easy to roll my gum into a properly-sized ball and park it in the driver side door lock with considerably more accuracy than the driver had used to park the Durango.

Brings a tear to your eye, doesn’t it?

Merry Christmas. Happy Hanukkah.

Johnny, We Hardly Knew Ye

Fear not, Red Sox Nation. Examine how this fall has gone with a clear eye:

Sure, Johnny Damon and his rag arm have left to join The Evil Empire; Corey Patterson and his US trade deficit-like walk-to-strikeout ratio are available.

They traded their primo shortstop prospect for a starting pitcher with enormous potential (cool) and a third baseman in his mid-thirties coming off a season even worse than the year he had testicular cancer (not so cool); immediately turned around and traded the shortstop to whom they gave a 4-year, $40 million contract just last year, leaving the position in the capable(?) hands of Alex “I’m not even Joey” Cora.

They traded Doug Mirabelli, the only man with the Zen-like concentration to catch Tim Wakefield, leaving Jason Varitek to lay awake nights with the sweats over the prospect of having to catch Wake every fifth day. They got a good second baseman in return, but he’s changing leagues and has played 120 or more games only twice in the last seven years.

Things look gloomy in Beantown. Schilling and Foulke are still unproven, most of the guys who made their weird chemistry work are gone, and the only team older than the Sox is the Supreme Court.

Despair not, Chowderheads. It’s early in the off-season and Larry Lucchino’s on the job. Remember the great job he did with the Orioles? How about with the Padres? Lucchino’s greatest accomplishment was hiring Theo Epstein, who spent $100 million a year and did for the Carmines what Kenny Williams did for the Pale Hose for maybe two-thirds as much.

The new boss (same as the old boss) has performed a daring daylight raid, strengthening the Sox while potentially crippling the Yankees with the recent signing of backup catcher John Flaherty. Who has Posada’s back now, Big Stein?

I wonder if Scott Adams is a Red Sox fan. This has Dilbertian overtones all through it.

On a baseball-related note, the United States government has prohibited Cuba from playing in March’s World Baseball Classic. When I first saw the headline on the Internet, I thought it said Cubs Couldn’t play. That I could understand.

Why Didn't He Ask Congress?

My opinions are rarely confused with those of George W. Will. That doesn't mean he's always wrong. Witness this column from the December 20 edition of The Washington Post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/19/AR2005121900975.html?referrer=emailarticle

Our Protector

What is al-Qaeda’s primary goal? Effectively destroying America’s infidel way of life. Killing and causing mayhem are only means toward this end. We hear regular talk of sleeper cells undermining our society, and of agents who will stop at nothing to destroy all we hold dear. This week exposed the most dangerous terrorist agent working in the United States, the single man who has done the most to destroy our values and system of government: George W. Bush.

Congress passed the Patriot Act in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks. Liberals decried it as a serious erosion of Constitutional rights; Conservatives hailed it as providing sorely-needed powers in the alleged “war on terror.” The Bush White House said all the right things, which was easy for them. They had no intention of being bound by it.

We learned this week that our intelligence agencies have been spying on American citizens within the borders of the United States. These extraordinary actions have been, Bush says, “critical to saving American lives.” He went on to say that only those with “a clear link” to al-Qaeda or other terrorist organizations have been targets.

According to who? If the link is so clear, then probable cause should be easy to establish. Special courts for private hearings were created by the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Even those secret tribunals are considered too restrictive by Bush. The ultimate criterion for who gets spied on is Bush’s personal judgment, which has already given us the Iraqi quagmire, record deficits, and demonstrated his regard for true homeland security matters by his administration’s “response” to Hurricane Katrina.

“The American people expect me to do everything in my power under our laws and Constitution to protect them and their civil liberties,” Bush said in his weekly radio address. Since he invoked the Constitution himself, let’s see what it says on the matter, specifically the Fourth Amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Bush has yet to give a categorical explanation of how his recently exposed actions fit in here.

Caught with his hand in your cookie jar, Bush took the usual refuge of scoundrels and blamed the messenger. The recent New York Times article that exposed him “puts our citizens at risk,” he said, because “our enemies have learned information they should not have.” No methods have been revealed, and no agents’ covers have been blown. (Insert your personal Valerie Plame comment here.) Not just laws, but our most cherished Constitutional values are being flaunted at the highest levels of government. The American people who (barely) elected Bush have a right to know that the protections we have been told to assume since birth only extend as far as a spoiled kid with a messianic complex says they do.

Look at the example we’re setting for Iraq in the way of democracy. We have secret prisons, where people who may (or may not) be terrorists are tortured by our agents. (Bush’s best defense there is to say at least we’ve kept the deficit down by using existing Iraqi prisons.) We plant and pay for stories in the Iraqi press to make the situation on the ground look better than it is. Given some of the existing characteristics of the Iraqi population, how long will it be before Saddam v 2.0 takes over, using our actions as a template for “democracy?” (See this blog’s entry for December 11, titled “What We’re Fighting For.”) The updated Saddam might well be associated with terrorists. Given the religious demographics, he could be assumed to be willing to partner with Iran. We’ll be a lot safer then.

Bill Clinton was impeached for lying under oath about personal matters. He shouldn’t have done it, and may have deserved his impeachment solely for his hubris and disregard of the country’s business by refusing to come clean. On January 20, 2005, George W. Bush raised his right hand and swore an oath in front of millions of people to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Hell of a job he’s doing.

Just Desserts

Natalee Holloway made the cover of the National Enquirer the last two weeks in a row. Once was to report a phone call her parents allegedly received from her; the other was about evidence the Aruban government was covering up.

Is there a lower form of life in America today (other than any visiting Saudi princes) than the employees of supermarket tabloids? We could discuss the merits of those who buy these rags (if they have any), but saying these rodents are just giving the public what it wants is like excusing FEMA for butchering the Katrina emergency by saying other people made mistakes, too. (Not that the Bush Administration hasn’t tried.)

Haven’t the Holloways suffered enough? They aren’t the first to be subjected to this treatment, but it seems more severe for a couple of reasons. The most obvious is that Natalee is presumably dead. As a parent, my greatest fear, and one never far from my mind, is that something terrible will happen to my daughter. She’s fourteen; I’m almost fifty, and I suspect my parents still feel that way.

What worse is the Holloways never asked for this. They’re not Michael Jackson dangling his baby over a parapet, or Britney Spears getting married for fifteen minutes and making sure the whole world knows about it. As much as celebrities have to put up with, they at least get some (indirect) benefit: all publicity is good publicity today. Whatever keeps the buzz alive will sell your product, especially if your product is you. At what other time could (alleged) child pornographer R. Kelly sing the national anthem at a fight? Madonna kept her career going through lean singing years by being professionally scandalous.

Ever wonder what you’d do if you won the lottery, one of those hundreds of millions of dollars jobs? High on my list would be starting a my own supermarket tabloid. My rag’s only topics would be the lives of the reporters, photographers, and publishers who make their living from the anguish or embarrassment of others.

Ever wonder if the Enquirer’s publisher likes to get liquored up and paw his secretary? Maybe do more than that? How about the underage orgy that went on at his house while he and the wife were driving drunk through a day care parking lot? How do you think their Holloway reporter would like being interviewed about our pictures of him, Dennis Rodman, and a gerbil? Dirty pictures of Grandma from when she was a struggling starlet? Might be fun to find out.

We’d would lose money; the public is much more interested in seeing people with supposedly perfect lives knocked down a peg. It’s part of the love-hate relationship we have with celebrities. Everyone knows my targets are crudballs, so where’s the fun? That’s okay. I just won three hundred million dollars; I can absorb some losses. Besides, I can probably finance the paper by accepting the occasional “honorarium” for something I could print, but am willing to reconsider. Crudballs like this must have some fully-articulated skeletons hanging in their family closets.

What We're Fighting For

The White House would have you believe over 2,000 Americans have died in Iraq because creating democracy in Iraq will make us safer. Here’s a look at some of the folks who are supposed to do this for us.

It’s not politicians, or closet Ba’athists, or even the insurgents who won’t have blown themselves to tiny bits by then. I’m talking about grass roots, average Joes and Janes who make up the bulk of any electorate, what Nixon would have called the Silent Majority.

The valley of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers is allegedly the birthplace of civilization; since then local civilization has suffered from what is, at best, arrested development, if not profound retardation. Witness the quaint local custom of honor killings.

Honor is important to Iraqis, and is provided by men doing manly (to them) things. Women can dishonor the family a million ways, even though almost all of them requires a man, who may not leave the woman any choice. Women who don’t measure up, regardless of the circumstances, have dishonored the family, and must make amends. We’re not talking about washing dishes for a month, or being banished; they have to die, and a family member has to do it.

National Public Radio recently interviewed an Iraqi family whose sixteen year-old daughter was kidnapped in an extortion plot. The daughter was returned, but since no one could prove she hadn’t been raped, she had to go. Her cousin, a policeman, shot her with his service weapon because, in his words, her father and brother lacked the courage. He made it sound like he did her a favor. She could never have shown her face again. She didn’t go to school, or have a job, so no one there will wonder about her. The only people who know she’s gone are her family and her tribe, and they know why. No charges will be brought because no one sees anything wrong with this.

I’m rarely accused of being politically correct, yet I try not to be too harsh on the customs of others, knowing many of ours can seem pretty strange to someone looking in from the outside. Honor killings are easy: these people are animals. Not “animal,” as in having disgusting personal habits; “animal” as in “sub-human,” or even better, “not human.” George W. Bush thinks it’s worth thousands of young American lives and billions of dollars he won’t spend to ensure Americans’ health care to turn Iraq over to vermin like this. He thinks it will make the world a better place.

Bush and I finally agree: give them the country. Quickly. The elections are December 15. Sit down with the winners on January 1 and give them the timetable by which they’re going to get their army and police in gear, and get our people out of there by Christmas 2006. Then the Iraqis can live in their little cesspool without infidel intervention. The United States has done more than enough wrong in Iraq over the last decade; at least we didn’t create Iraqis.

A Rose by any Other Name

The following is a word-for-word transcript of a portion of Charles Gibson’s interview with CIA Director Porter Goss, which aired on November 29, 2005. You may check its accuracy by going to http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=1353449.

CHARLES GIBSON: Let me ask you about torture. You said the other day the CIA does not do torture, correct?

PORTER GOSS: That is correct.

GIBSON: How do you define it?

GOSS: Well, I define torture probably the way most people would — in the eye of the beholder. What we do does not come close because torture in terms of inflicting pain or something like that, physical pain or causing a disability, those kinds of things that probably would be a common definition for most Americans, sort of you know it when you see it, we don't do that because it doesn't get what you want. We do debriefings because debriefings are the nature of our business, is to get information. We want accurate information and we want to make sure that we have professional people doing that work, and we do all that, and we do it in a way that does not involve torture because torture is counterproductive.

GIBSON: We [ABC News] reported in the past two weeks about having talked to a number of people who have worked and did work in this agency, about six progressive techniques, each one harsher than the last, to get terrorists to talk, including things like long-term standing up, sleep deprivation, exposure for long periods of time to cold rooms or something called "water-boarding," which involves cellophane over the face and water being poured on an individual. Do those things take place?

GOSS: I've got to say there is a huge amount of disinformation out there on this whole subject because probably there's not very much accurate information available. And the reason there's not very much accurate information available about how we do debriefings and how we deal with people who are in detention is very simply, if we told you how we do that, we would be telling them, and that would lose the edge.

GIBSON: You know what water-boarding is though, right?

GOSS: I know what a lot of things are, but I'm not going to comment.

GIBSON: Would that come under the heading? Would that come under the heading of torture?

GOSS: I don't know. I have—

GIBSON: Well, under your definition that you just gave to me of inflicting pain?

GOSS: Let me put it this way, I'm not going to comment on any individual techniques that anybody has brought forward as an allegation, or dreamed up or anything like that. What we do, as I said many times, is professional, it's lawful, it yields good results and it is not torture.

The English translation of Goss’ comments can be distilled into a three-word statement:
We torture people.

Webster defines torture as:
1 a : anguish of body or mind : AGONY b : something that causes agony or pain2 : the infliction of intense pain (as from burning, crushing, or wounding) to punish, coerce, or afford sadistic pleasure.

Goss defines torture as “in the eye of the beholder.” Coincidentally, that’s a traditional definition of beauty. Goss can’t tell the difference.

Remember when we were the good guys? How do you spin this sow’s ear into a silk purse for the rest of the world when you’re telling them about us staking out the moral high ground?

How these guys can stand to look in a mirror is beyond me. Except for Cheney, who I’m pretty sure casts no reflection.

You Can't Make This Stuff Up

The following item appeared in Friday’s edition of the Washington Post:

Former FEMA Director Michael Brown, heavily criticized for his agency's slow response to Hurricane Katrina, is starting a disaster preparedness consulting firm to help clients avoid the sort of errors that cost him his job.

We all know Bush appointees have no shame; this proves they have no sense of irony.

I haven’t seen any video of Brown statement; I can’t imagine him saying the following with a straight face. "If I can help people focus on preparedness, how to be better prepared in their homes and better prepared in their businesses -- because that goes straight to the bottom line -- then I hope I can help the country in some way,” he told the Rocky Mountain News.

What’s he going to do, show people his press conferences and emails and say, “Don’t do this?” Consulting Michael Brown on disaster procedures is like asking the captain of the Exxon Valdez about safe navigation practices. It’s like Linda Tripp giving makeover advice. Bill Clinton teaching impulse control. Ike Turner as a domestic abuse counselor. Tom DeLay as an ethics instructor. Ozzy Osbourne discoursing about family values. Dick Cheney explaining the value of military service. Madonna praising chastity. George W. Bush teaching grammar.

Brown’s first suggestion is to hire a couple of interns to watch CNN and MSNBC 24 hours a day, so someone knows what’s going on. Next is to leave no record, written or electronic, of any suggestions, orders, or replies. When you have Mike Brown’s skills, deniability trumps all other considerations.

Someone will hire Brown, if only to show they’re True Believers. This essay is intended for anyone living in a jurisdiction that considers engaging Brownie, lest he do another “heckuva job” for you: sell now, before word gets out and property values drop faster than Bush’s approval ratings.

Is the Pendulum Swinging Back?

Political tides ebb and flow with a momentum not nearly as well understood as the seas’. Turning points are reached, often through the action, inaction, hubris, or desperation of one faction or another. We may just have witnessed a rare triple turning point last week, when political thought caught up with reality, and business as usual was a grave miscalculation.

On Thursday Pennsylvania Representative John Murtha opined that the conquest and occupation of Iraq had proven to be a failure, and it was time to start bringing the troops home. Murtha’s no bleeding heart; he was a strong hawk when Dubya requested war powers, with a resume to match: two Purple Hearts, a Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry, Bronze Star with Combat V, and a Distinguished Service Medal after thirty-seven years in the Marine Corps.

It’s not his style to seek the spotlight; it’s doubtful if he’s ever been on a Sunday talk show before this weekend. Speaking out like this indicates a serious crisis of conscience for a man who has proven his devotion and willingness to sacrifice for his country many times over.

Republicans responded in their tried and true method: they vilified him. White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan said Murtha endorsed “the policy positions of Michael Moore and the extreme liberal wing of the Democratic party.” Rep. Kay Granger of Texas, said Murtha's call for withdrawal was “reprehensible and irresponsible,” and showed “a policy of retreat and defeatism.”

The House’s most junior member, Rep. Jean Schmidt of Ohio, showed that while she may be new, she understands contemporary Republican politics. Schmidt told Congress about a call she received from Marine Colonel Danny Buhp, who asked her to tell the House to stay the course, because “only cowards cut and run; Marines never do.”

That almost started a fist fight. Democrats immediately called for Schmidt to retract her statement. When order was restored, Schmidt requested her words be “taken down,” and said her comments weren’t directed at any member of the chamber.

She left unsaid that Colonel Buhp, self-appointed determiner of all things Marine, is a Republican member of the Ohio legislature. He’s also a career reservist who has never seen combat. There’s no shame in that; I’m sure he’s done everything that has been asked of him. For Schmidt to use his comment in that context could not be construed as anything but a direct slap at Murtha by someone of purportedly equal military credentials. (Buhp has since distanced himself from what Schmidt said he told her.)

This is classic Republican 21st Century strategy. No matter who opposes you (John McCain in South Carolina, Max Cleland in Georgia, John Kerry everywhere), no matter how his record compares to yours, malign and degrade him until counterarguments are moot, then make a smarmy disclaimer when it doesn’t matter anymore.

It didn’t work this time. Public sentiment toward Schmidt’s transparent attempt to defame Murtha was quick and hostile, even in her own district. The White House has run away from McClellan’s initial comments faster than France can clear the road to Dunkirk.

Possible Turning Point One: Will Murtha’s comments be as significant as Walter Cronkite’s were about Vietnam? Marginalizing the anti-war forces was easy until America’s most-trusted newsman said it was a lost cause. Murtha’s not as well-known as Cronkite was, but his bona fides are better. McClellan’s linking of Murtha to liberal wing-nut Michael Moore was a clear attempt to marginalize him; it lasted even less time than anyone took Moore seriously.

Possible Turning Point Two: Have Americans finally had enough of lowest common denominator politics? It’s a rough business, but I’m old enough to remember when political argument stopped short of demonizing the opponent, or maliciously spinning a superior record against him. Is it becoming passé for a Republican to praise the military, then in the next breath slur those whose valor and sacrifice made it possible for the chickenhawk to avoid service in the first place? We can only hope.

Possible Turning Point Three: Have the Democrats finally found some onions? After years of being afraid to insult or offend anyone, are they actually going to stand for something, even if it means an occasional intemperate word? Murtha took point again when told of comments Bush and Cheney made immediately after his statement. “I like guys who got five deferments and [have] never been there and send people to war, and then don't like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done.” When’s the last time a politician with some street cred laid it on the line like that?

Not having served is no disqualification for leadership, but it’s not too much to expect leaders to be willing to learn from those whose experience trumps their own, and to consider opposing viewpoints. Bush and Cheney routinely flog anyone who voted in favor of war powers for even hinting they’ve changed their mind. No congressional vote gives any president a blank check to do as he wishes in perpetuity. Bush won election last year, in part, by criticizing Kerry for changing his positions over a thirty-year career. Bush apparently has never changed his mind. Of course, for him, life truly began at forty; anything before that is off-limits, probably because he can’t remember himself. Never changing one’s mind is a sign of not learning anything, and rarely has any public figure needed to learn as much as George W. Bush.

Ralph Waldo Emerson once said, “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.” A great nation has rarely been ruled by such a large collection of little minds as our selfishness has inflicted upon us now. John Murtha may be right, he may be wrong; he may be remembered as a hero, or become a forgotten historical footnote. For now, he represents what is best about us, right or wrong: a man who has seen his duty, and consistently done it. Even if that contradicts something he’s done before.

The Mistake by the Lake

Children growing up in Pittsburgh are taught never to complain. No matter how bad the weather or the economy, it could be worse. You could be in Cleveland.

The Pittsburgh Steelers rolled to another glorious victory last night, trouncing the hated Cleveland Browns 34–21. The game wasn’t that close; Cleveland scored by returning a blocked field goal for a score with 4:23 left in the game; they picked up another garbage touchdown with 21 seconds left, when the Steelers had Joe Greene, Jack Lambert, and Bill Cowher’s kids in the game on defense.

I’d feel sorry for the folks from Cleveland, but, they live in Cleveland. This was such a thorough whipping that Steeler wide receiver Hines Ward not only broke the all-time Steeler record for passes caught in a career; on one play he juggled a pass, caught it while falling out of bounds in the end zone with a Cleveland player grabbing Ward’s face mask, and still put the Cleveland player in the hospital. He was called out of bounds on review, but catching the ball and kicking the defensive back’s ass at the same time is highlight reel stuff.

What’s that? You think it’s terrible to make light of a man being injured so badly he came off the field strapped to a board? He lucked out; the game was in Pittsburgh. Do you know what they call people who go to emergency rooms in Cleveland? Corpses.

Why do Burghers feel so strongly about Cleveland? Easy. Pennsylvania let them use our lake, and they built a Cleveland on it. (Yes, it’s Pennsylvania’s lake; you ever hear of Erie, Ohio?) Besides, no matter how bad Pittsburgh’s pollution was in the days of high steel production and noon streetlights, none of our rivers ever caught fire.

It’s nice to go to sleep at night knowing all is right with the world, even though George W. Bush’s direct line to God doesn’t seem to help much with hurricane prevention, finding weapons of mass destruction, or ethical behavior by anyone who works for him. Next up, the official football team of the anti-Christ (aka Art Modell): Baltimore.

Veterans Day (Plus 1)

The Burgh Correspondent asked me yesterday if I was going to say anything about Veterans Day. I took a pass; it was late to work up anything new, and I didn’t have anything old that either hadn’t been seen before, or was worthy of another airing. Plus, hard as this may be to believe, at times even I get tired of hearing myself rant. My Veterans Day contribution to the Internet’s Tower of Babel was a brief respite. You’re welcome.

Veterans Day is over, and something has come to mind. What follows isn’t anything new, we’ve all seen it before; thanks are due the Dialog Correspondent for refreshing my memory. Watching Dick “It’s Only Torture if the Other Guys Do It” Cheney place the wreath at Arlington Cemetery reminded me of this list, and of the sterling military careers of those who used whatever pretence to place, and keep, today’s future veterans in harm’s way.

My military “career” is hardly worth mentioning: three years in a band in Georgia, 1980–1983. Let it be noted that this was during a period of tension with the original Evil Empire™, Ronald Reagan’s Soviet Union. During my tenure at Fort McPherson, not a single Soviet military musical unit even got as far as Savannah, and I’m damn proud of that.

Silly, right? I’ll stack my record of military service up against any number of our current “leaders.” Look at a few prominent names on the list below. I can at least account for my years of service; George W. Bush can’t. That didn’t prevent him from allowing other to defame John McCain to Bush’s advantage in South Carolina in 2000. (The general gist of the comments was that McCain’s years in the Hanoi Hilton may have rendered him too unstable for the presidency.) Bush showed the same heroic spirit that kept him thousands of miles from Vietnam by his tepid condemnation of their actions, well after it made any difference.

Cheney? Paul Wolfowitz? Bill Frist? Rick Santorum? I’m Audie Murphy compared to these clowns. It’s an unfunny laugh to see those who found the time to serve celebrated by these “leaders,” who leveraged the service and sacrifice of others into the positions of power they have now.

Here’s the list. I make no representations for the complete accuracy, but nothing I could find in either Snopes or truthorfiction says it isn’t accurate. Remember, not serving is no dishonor. Profiting, financially or career-wise, by sending others into service you may have chosen to avoid, is. There’s a word for it. Cowardice. To paraphrase R. Lee Ermey in Full Metal Jacket, next time you decide who’s a real patriot, remember who was listening to Mick Jagger records and screwing college girls when some others were putting their asses on the line.

Democrats:
Richard Gephardt: Air National Guard, 1965-71.
David Bonior: Staff Sgt., Air Force 1968-72.
Tom Daschle: 1st Lt., Air Force SAC 1969-72.
Al Gore: enlisted Aug. 1969; sent to Vietnam Jan. 1971 as an army
journalist in 20th Engineer Brigade.
Bob Kerrey: Lt. j.g. Navy 1966-69; Medal of Honor, Vietnam.
Daniel Inouye: Army 1943-47; Medal of Honor, WWII.
John Kerry: Lt., Navy 1966-70; Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat
V, Purple Hearts.
Charles Rangel: Staff Sgt., Army 1948-52; Bronze Star, Korea.
Max Cleland: Captain, Army 1965-68; Silver Star & Bronze Star,
Vietnam. Paraplegic from war injuries. Served in Congress.
Ted Kennedy: Army, 1951-53.
Tom Harkin: Lt., Navy, 1962-67; Naval Reserve, 1968-74.
Jack Reed: Army Ranger, 1971-1979; Captain, Army Reserve 1979-91.
Fritz Hollings: Army officer in WWII; Bronze Star and seven campaign
ribbons.
Leonard Boswell: Lt. Col., Army 1956-76; Vietnam, DFCs, Bronze
Stars,and Soldier's Medal.
Pete Peterson: Air Force Captain, POW. Purple Heart, Silver Star and
Legion of Merit.
Mike Thompson: Staff sergeant, 173rd Airborne, Purple Heart.
Bill McBride: Candidate for Fla. Governor. Marine in Vietnam; Bronze
Star with Combat V.
Gray Davis: Army Captain in Vietnam, Bronze Star.
Pete Stark: Air Force 1955-57
Chuck Robb: Vietnam
Howell Heflin: Silver Star
George McGovern: Silver Star & DFC during WWII.
Bill Clinton: Did not serve. Student deferments. Entered draft but
received #311.
Jimmy Carter: Seven years in the Navy.
Walter Mondale: Army 1951-1953
John Glenn: WWII and Korea; six DFCs and AirMedal with 18 Clusters.
Tom Lantos: Served in Hungarian underground in WWII. Saved by Raoul
Wallenberg.

Republicans -- and these are the guys sending people to war:
Dick Cheney: did not serve. Several deferments, the last by marriage.
Dennis Hastert: did not serve.
Tom Delay: did not serve.
Roy Blunt: did not serve.
Bill Frist: did not serve.
Mitch McConnell: did not serve.
Rick Santorum: did not serve.
Trent Lott: did not serve.
John Ashcroft: did not serve. Seven deferments to teach business.
Jeb Bush: did not serve.
Karl Rove: did not serve.
Saxby Chambliss: did not serve. "Bad knee." The man who attacked Max
Cleland's patriotism.
Paul Wolfowitz: did not serve.
Vin Weber: did not serve.
Richard Perle: did not serve.
Douglas Feith: did not serve.
Eliot Abrams: did not serve.
Richard Shelby: did not serve.
Jon! Kyl: did not serve.
Tim Hutchison: did not serve.
Christopher Cox: did not serve.
Newt Gingrich: did not serve.
Don Rumsfeld: served in Navy (1954-57) as flight instructor.
George W. Bush: failed to complete his six-year National Guard; got
assigned to Alabama so he could campaign for family friend running for
U.S. Senate; failed to show up for required medical exam, disappeared from
duty.
Ronald Reagan: due to poor eyesight, served in a non- combat role
making movies.
B-1 Bob Dornan: Consciously enlisted after fighting was over in
Korea.
Phil Gramm: did not serve.
John McCain: Vietnam POW, Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit,
Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross.
Dana Rohrabacher: did not serve.
John M. McHugh: did not serve.
JC Watts: did not serve.
Jack Kemp: did not serve. "Knee problem, " although continued in NFL
for 8 years as quarterback.
Dan Quayle: Journalism unit of the Indiana National Guard.
Rudy Giuliani: did not serve.
George Pataki: did not serve.
Spencer Abraham: did not serve.
John Engler: did not serve.
Lindsey Graham: National Guard lawyer.
Arnold Schwarzenegger: AWOL from Austrian army base.

Pundits & Preachers
Sean Hannity: did not serve.
Rush Limbaugh: did not serve (4-F with a 'pilonidal cyst.')
Bill O'Reilly: did not serve.
Michael Savage: did not serve.
George Will: did not serve.
Chris Matthews: did not serve.
Paul Gigot: did not serve.
Bill Bennett: did not serve.
Pat Buchanan: did not serve.
John Wayne: did not serve.
Bill Kristol: did not serve.
Kenneth Starr: did not serve.
Antonin Scalia: did not serve.
Clarence Thomas: did not serve.
Ralph Reed: did not serve.
Michael Medved: did not serve.
Charlie Daniels: did not serve.
Ted Nugent: did not serve. (He only shoots at things that don't shoot
back.)

Scooting into Court

The political right may not be as blind as I thought. Scooter Libby has been indicted on five felony counts, all roughly equating to obstruction of justice or perjury, depending on how strictly you interpret the indictment. The conservative media has been more restrained than usual in their comments so far, exhibiting at least a rudimentary understanding of the “glass houses” principle.

The Wall Street Journal had an interesting approach. The WSJ made it crystal clear that lying under oath is wrong, and should never be condoned. Bu-u-u-u-t, they quibbled, prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has shown no motive for the Scooter to perjure himself, so they remain skeptical.

This is disingenuous on two levels. This isn’t a murder case, where who did what first might be an issue and the best witness is dead. Perjury is a lot easier to prove. If he said A when he knew B to be true and Fitzgerald can prove it, Libby scoots off to jail. Motive is immaterial if the reasonable doubt threshold is met, much like no one really cares why Sam robbed the liquor store when they catch him red-handed. Libby may well have been caught in the act.

Another flaw in the Journal’s thinking hinges on their childlike innocence. They have no idea why their good friend Scooter would lie. To protect Dick Cheney, maybe. Telling Libby that Valerie Plame was an undercover operative probably isn’t a crime. Cheney may not have known how undercover she was, or had been; telling Libby isn’t the same as releasing the news to the media. It’s still embarrassing as hell for Dr. Strangelove, and Libby didn’t get his job by showing disloyalty to the people who could make or break him. Someone had to take this bullet for Cheney, and Scooter was in the right place at the right time.

Libby’s defense appears to be another insult to America’s collective intelligence: “I forgot.” Another example of naivety, similar to every child’s answer to such probing questions as “Why didn’t you brush your teeth?” or “Why isn’t this room clean?” Summon up an angelic face (a stray lock of hair across the forehead is always a nice touch), scratch your toe around in the dirt a few times, shove your hands into your pockets, and say, “I forgot.”

It’s not like Fitzgerald bumped into Libby on the White House elevator and said, “Hey, Scoot-man, where’d you hear about Valerie Plame?” thus catching Libby unaware. He was sent a formal invitation (doesn’t that sound much friendlier than “subpoena?”) and given plenty of time to prepare. These guys log everything, if only to defend against libel suits when their inevitable book comes out. What’s he going to say now, “Russert, Cheney, don’t you think they look like they were separated at birth?”

An article by two former Reagan staffers in Saturday’s Washington Post said Fitzgerald was a prime example of why special prosecutors are a bad idea. Their reasoning is based on him going back to his master and requesting permission to expand his investigative mandate to include possible perjury and obstruction charges. Well, duh! No one can run an investigation if the subjects or other “persons of interest” don’t have to tell the truth. That’s what investigations are supposed to do: find the truth, or as close as our system lets them get.

Libby did his job well. The old Reaganites also whined about how long Fitzgerald took on his investigation, conveniently forgetting Ken Starr kept his job longer than some Supreme Court justices. Fitzgerald said in his press conference that had it not been for the obstruction and delays by Libby (and possibly others as yet unnamed), the indictments could have come out a year earlier. For those keeping score at home, that would have been before the election. Maybe it would have made a difference, maybe not. As close as the election was, I think “maybe” is a good bet.

The editors of the Wall Street Journal are intelligent men; we can assume they’re too smart to believe half the crap they tried to pass off as valid points in their editorial. The problem is that truth is such a rare commodity in today’s political atmosphere it has almost become like the mysterious quark particles of physics, that can never be seen and must be assumed based on measurements and actions of the particles that contain them. Like a quark, truth cannot exist on its own in Washington; its mass is solely dependent on the spin exerted by outside forces.

Scooter Libby is entitled to a presumption of innocence. Given the state of politics in what passes for the world’s greatest democracy, maybe he should just get a presumption of “not guilty.” No one working in Washington today is innocent of the mess we’ve made.