I’d like to make a suggestion for those of you wishing to honor all veterans - regardless of when they served, where they served, if you agreed or disagreed with with their reason for serving, or even for what country they served:

Treat Veteran’s Day as the day of rememberance it’s intended to be.

There is a reason we create national holidays: to remind us not to forget! To remind us there are people, events and actions more important than ourselves, who have, in some small or large way, contributed to our having if not a better life then at least having the opportunity for a better life than those who came before us. We’re supposed to spend that time with our loved ones, many of whom are undoubtedly veterans, enjoying their company, thanking them for what they’ve done, hearing the stories of their time in service (and that just never gets old), laughing with them and sometimes crying with them, going to the parades and parks and beaches having events that do honor them - not showing up at Macy’s at 5am for another holiday sale.

And yet, every year, I see fewer and fewer businesses honor Veteran’s Day by closing their offices. Yes, banks close (most of them, anyway), the post office closes, state and federal offices close - but few others do. Personally, it angers me no end. It angers me all the more considering WE’RE AT WAR! Could we possibly show less thanks, admiration and respect for our troops right now than by not even being able to take one day out of our lives for them? After all, they’ve taken several years, and in far too many cases - all their years - out of their life for us.

Thanks for listening.

Please call your Senators & Congresspeople - tell them you want renewable
energy & green jobs! 

Tell them you want the ethanol blend limit raised to E15!

Dear eTeam Members, Thanks for your help in spreading the word about Growth Energy’s national campaign that is asking the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to allow ethanol blends of up to 15%. Because of your support, the EPA has been receiving positive comments from across the country, urging the government to support job creation and energy independence. We would encourage you to ask your friends and family to submit their comments and help us increase the amount of supportive comments the EPA is receiving.                                       There is less than 1 week left to spread the message, the comment period ends on July 20th! Now, we’re asking for your help one more time. We need you to ask your U.S. Senators to stand with us and support E15 and Growth Energy’s Green Jobs Waiver. The EPA’s comment period will come to a close on July 20, so your assistance in calling on your Senators to come on board with E15 needs your immediate attention. Call your U.S. Senators from your state TODAY and let them know that: • You support creating jobs in America and reducing our             dependence on foreign oil. • You want them to stand with you in asking for the EPA to approve a higher percentage of ethanol blended into gasoline. • You urge them to sign the E15 support letter being circulated by Senators Harkin and Thune. If you don’t know your Senators, locate them and their contact information at the link below: Click here to get contact information for your U.S. Senators. For additional talking points or more information about Growth Energy’s Green Jobs Waiver, please visit www.GoE15.com.Congress needs to hear from us in a loud and clear voice. Your support of homegrown ethanol is needed now more than ever. Let’s go E15! Thank you, Tom Buis CEO, Growth Energy

 

and we seem to be reveling in it.  How horribly sad…and revolting. The blogs, news comment sections, tv pundits, and water-cooler conversations have lit up with gleeful disdain of yet another public figure being ‘caught’ in an affair.  I won’t even get into the Republican vs. Democrat - based glee; it’s more disgusting than I want to know.

First of all - his private life is not the public’s business.  Yeah, yeah, I know…he’s a public figure.  And?!!  We have been beating the crap out of people with that excuse for-ev-er, and mostly to satisfy our own perverse voyeurism and/or so we can feel superior in some bizarre manner.  Enough already - time for the (American) public to grow up a little, stop demanding politicians live their lives on the pedestals on which we place them, so we can throw stones at them until they invariably fall off…at which point we vilify them for not being agile enough to dodge said stones and stay on our pedestals.  I think I just made my head hurt!

We elect people to do a job - not be saints.  At least, that’s what we should be doing.  Now, while everyone might not  agree on how well he’s done that job, obviously a lot of people in South Carolina thought he did them (Congress, as well as Gov) pretty well, since he was re-elected several times, not to mention pushed for a presidential run in 2012. 

It would be such a nice change of pace (snark) if we could manage not to make candidates/politicians feel they had to become some creation of flawless morality in order to get elected.  We have fostered this demand that our public servants must have none of the foibles we possess, and they keep trying to fulfill it…often with personally disasterous consequenses.  How about we knock it off?  Hmm? Few, if any, can live like that, and maintain their sanity for very long.

What happend to Governor Sanford can, and has, happened to millions, and will likely happen to millions more every day.  And too many are ready to crucify him, or demand he resign, or make him the punchline to a bad joke, for what?  For falling in love?  Or for not living up to something others wanted him to be, or decided he should be, in their own definition of what a leader, what a public servant, must be.  Let’s be fair for a second, there’s a big difference between stepping outside of one’s marriage to get laid, and falling in love, and all the gradations inbetween.

There are all sorts of things about what transpired, what caused the affair, who was involved, who was to blame, etc., the public will never know - I hope.  It’s none of our business.  It’s between him, his estranged wife, and his lover.  Period. 

The only part of this that belongs in the public eye, is relative to how Governor Sanford handled the details and procedures of leaving the state - not why he left town, not where he was, and not with whom he spent time. If he was derelict in his responsibility to the safety of the state and its people (and I seriously question the idea no one could get hold of him - obviously they could leave him phone messages, and did.  His not returning a message doesn’t mean he didn’t get it. That’s why we all have voicemail!) then punish him for that, if you feel it’s warranted - but not because he had the effrontery to be human. 

As for my part - I can only say this:

Governor Sanford - 

While I admire your willingness to take full responsibility for the actions of not only yourself, but of everyone remotely involved, I deeply regret the public demand you (or any other public figure) fall on your sword for something that was never the public’s right, nor need, to know in the first place.

I have seen few human beings look so utterly lost and desolate as you did today.  You have some difficult choices and decisions ahead of you.  Remember, life is all too short.  Choose to be the man you want to be, not what others demand.  Choose the life you think will bring you happiness and joy - as this will likely bring the same to those you love - not the life others want you to have or think you should, or must, pursue to fulfill a dream that may not be your own.

I wish you a long and happy life.

Here’s a hint:  Rove lost

General Wesley Clark, Karl Rove faceoff at Univ. of Buffalo (Video)

Debate date: September 26, 2008 | Transcript by RegNYC

Article excerpts from The Buffalo News | Jay Rey | NEWS STAFF REPORTER

It wasn’t Obama-McCain, but Western New York had a pretty good debate of its own Friday night at the University at Buffalo. On one side was Karl Rove, Republican strategist and former White House deputy chief of staff.

On the other side was retired Army Gen. Wesley K. Clark, who had sought the Democratic Party’s nomination in 2004.

The two launched this year’s Distinguished Speakers Series in Alumni Arena with a bang, by debating some of the same contentious issues the presidential candidates faced, such as the economy, a $700 billion government bailout, health care and the war in Iraq.

Each started with five minutes for opening comments on his party’s slant.

“We are blessed to be citizens of this country,” Rove said. “There is something called the American Dream and people around the world want to share in it. Never lose sight this is the greatest country in the history of the world.”

“We’re a nation in trouble,” Clark said. “We need new ideas, and we need new leadership for America.”

For Links to the Video of the Debate click the “read more” link below, then scroll to the bottom of that page.  Well worth watching!

read more

General Clark DID NOT impune Senator McCain’s service in any way, shape, or form. In fact - he said Mccain was one of his heros, as well as a hero to millions, for his service. What he did say was simple logic - that McCain’s specific military service does not make him automatically qualified to be commander-in-chief anymore than being able to drive a car qualifies one to race at NASCAR.Furthermore - I ‘ve no doubt he would have made his comments no matter who the presumptive Dem nominee was. The comments have nothing to do with Obama.  And - considering they have nothing to do with Obama, I’m saddened and, frankly, disgusted, that an Obama campaign spokesman would denounce General Clark’s remarks.

There is nothing to denounce. Doing so smacks of political cowardice on the part of the Obama spoksman who issued the statement, at the very least.”

(am officially a fan of cell ophones thatt type!)

April 18^th, 2008  

Dear Super Delegates,

In a few months, you will be asked to make a final and immensely difficult choice that will likely decide the Democratic nominee for president.  Unfortunately, that choice is not between Senator Obama or Senator Clinton – for everyone’s sake, I wish it were that simple.   The choice you must make is really much more personal – it’s the type of choice all of us must make at some point in our lives, and it’s never easy.   It’s the choice between what we personally want and hope will work vs. what we know is probably the greater good and best for others.  OK, that’s the kindest way I can put it.   The more blunt way is this: it’s the choice between doing what is best for yourself vs. doing what is best for everyone else, even and especially when it isn’t  what you personally want.

Over the last several months, and right up until the day of the national convention, you will continue to be wooed from all sides; the candidates want you to do what’s best for them, the party wants you to do what’s best for it, and the voters of your area want your vote to reflect their preference.  The pressure will only get worse, and no matter which way you go, you’re probably going to make someone unhappy.  That’s OK.   I’m guessing no where in the “Super Delegate Handbook” does it say one of your responsibilities is to make people happy. Hang on to that thought.  It’s one of two you’re going to need to remember most when you make your final decision on the convention floor. 

So – how are you to make this decision?   Let’s be honest – many of you will never have so much power to shape history, nor your own personal future, as you will have with this vote.  And it’s that last bit – the personal future part – where this starts to get complicated.   At some point in this process, don’t be surprised if someone suggests to you something along the lines of “if you play your cards right and vote for so-and-so, you can write your own ticket,” or “stick with me and I’ll make sure you have a seat at the table”’ or “so-and-so is who we want, and you don’t want to be on the wrong side of this when the day’s over”’ or, my personal favorite, the short and sweet, “you owe me”’ or some other version of a carrot or stick arm twist.   The less power you currently enjoy, the greater the pressure you’re likely to feel to do what someone with more power wants you to do.   This isn’t meant to be an indictment or condemnation of anyone.   It’s just what happens, so there’s no point in telling ourselves it doesn’t.

I’m not sending this out in order to tell you who I think you should vote for.   My state had its say on Super Tuesday.  I’m here to give you slightly different advice – presumptuous of me, I know – but it’s advice I don’t hear anyone else out there giving you.   So here goes…

Because you will cast the last votes in this contest, you have an incredible advantage over the general public voters; the advantage of time.  You will have had at least two months’ more time to examine each candidate than every other voter – for the nearly half of the country who voted by Super Tuesday, that’s six and a half months’ more information you’ve gained than we had when we voted.  That’s huge!  Consider how much more we’ve learned about the candidates in the last few months than in the previous year.  What more will we learn in the coming months?  I don’t know, but the longer the battle goes on, the better the odds we’ll get a clearer picture of the true mettle of these two people and the more informed your vote can be. 

A second advantage you have is that you’re party insiders.  You are privy to information, gossip, rumor, history and facts most of us will never know.  Those of you who are sitting politicians especially – you know how the game is played – you know the difference between sponsoring bills, co-sponsoring bills, and writing bills and what kind of leadership and talent is evidenced by each.  You know the difference between sitting on committees and working on them.  You know why these candidates have cast their senate votes as they have in detail we  will never hear, which of the hundreds of votes were critical, which weren’t and who showed up for each.  You know the kind of stress and pressure you and your colleagues face every day – and how much more intense it is for a president – and you’ve likely witnessed how each of these two candidates bears up under those stresses and pressures.  You know, better than any of the rest of us, the full breadth and depth of the problems the next president will have to face.   Rip through this information without mercy, but with every ounce of objectivity you can muster.   Close your ears to the charismatic cadence of campaign speeches and promises.  Ignore the polls – you know most of them are bullshit.  Forget who you like or hate.   Remember who gets the jobs done and who gets problems solved.  Those of us general public voters have the luxury of ‘falling in love’ with a candidate – you don’t.  You have to be smarter than us.  And don’t seek the counsel of others in the party – you’re on your own this time and you’ve got to suck it up and trust your own instincts and brains.   Let me repeat that: trust only your own instinct and brains.  This time our future really does depend on your ability to do just that.

It is because of these two advantages, your votes carry the power to essentially save us from ourselves.   In all likelihood, that’s precisely what you may have to do.   You must not falter.  Earlier, I told you it wasn’t your responsibility to make people happy, and to hold on to that thought as it was one of two you would most need to remember.   Here’s the second one: in this vote, your responsibility isn’t to choose the best person for the party – but to choose the best, strongest, most capable person to lead the country.  They may not be one and the same, and this is why Party must never come before Country.  Forgetting this dooms us all.

I know what I’m asking of each of you is far from easy, and I’m sorry for that.   I do understand the political risks you face should your choice go against the wishes of allies and friends. 

Good luck, God speed, and thank you,

K.A. Flinn

 What was that phrase again?? Something about repeating the same actions in hopes of getting a different result…now, tell me again…was that the definition of insanity, or stupidity?

If you haven’t had the opportunity to read this bill, which uselessly passed the House last night by a vote of 218 to 203, and will either fail to pass the Senate entirely, or fail to pass it in a veto-proof manner, here it is: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bills&docid=f:h4156ih.txt.pdf

Why do Congressional Dems keep doing this? Haven’t they figured out yet that as long as Bush is in office, no bill using troop withdrawl as a condition will get passed? Or, gee, are they more interested in looking like they really tried to hold the Bush admin’s feet to the fire come election day? It’s beginning to look a lot like the latter rather than the former. How sad for the institution. How disgusting, unethical and reprehensible for the harm it causes everyone - including them - and especially the military!

In my unqualified opinion - this is a badly conceived bill. If it had been the first such bill the House Dem majority had floated, it would only be a less lousy bill. Unfortunately, this is just the latest in a series of failed efforts to force this administration to end the war and bring the troops home before the end of the Bush term. This particular leverage doesn’t work. Stop using it. You are wasting time, and quite probably, lives, dear Congress.

Why not try writing a bill that will actually accomplish much of what we want, and that actually has a snowball’s chance in Hell of getting passed by both houses and not vetoed for a change? Baby steps…

For instance - give him the $50 Billion, with three provisions: one tied to the last provision in the bill…

(g) Not later than February 15, 2008, the President shall submit to the Congress in classified and unclassified form a comprehensive regional stability plan for the Middle East, which shall include a military, diplomatic, political and economic strategy that provides for the national security interests of the United States in the region and for the engagement of targeted counterterrorism oper ations. The plan shall include a detailed description of the projected United States military force presence in and around the Middle East region for the 5-year period beginning on October 1, 2008.

one tied to diplomacy: Bush has to form and send, by March 1st, 2008, a bi-partisan diplomatic team to work the region, including Iran, along the lines of the Dayton Accord group,

one tied to some specific, significant, goals the Iraqi Parliament must complete, by, say, October 31st, 2008. If either fails to complete their end of the bargain, no more money.

This possibly accomplishes a few of things :

In the interest of full disclosure, yes, I will be voting for Senator Clinton, but not because I’m a Hillary fan or because I dislike Republicans or even because someone I respect as much as Wes Clark endorsed her. If you’d asked me a year ago, and some of you did, could I imagine any circumstance under which I would vote for Hillary Clinton for president, I would have, and did, say no.  Then I remembered what’s best for my country is a hell of a lot more important than what I want, and wrote this comment June 30th:

Well - since then I’ve been paying more attention to her, and the others, and no longer distrust her just as a matter of course. But more on that in a moment. Let me put this issue another way…

This is not the time for amateurs. Considering the particular circumstances in which we find ourselves now and for the foreseeable future, this is not the time for on the job training either.

What’s best for the country is to have a team of pros in the White House on the first day of the new administration come January 2009, who know where the light switches are and how to find the bathrooms without an escort.  That includes the president and vice president. Given the possibility that the state of the Union, by 2009, may well include us being at war in three separate countries simultaneously, we don’t have time for any administration to spend reading “How To Run The Country For Dummies.” Currently, there is only one campaign that satisfies that criteria and that’s the Clinton campaign.  But let me explain myself by reposting the pertinent part of the comment I mentioned above…

If forced to be dispassionate about her, one might consider the following:

• she lived in the White House for eight years - odds are she probably absorbed a bit while there
• she is far from stupid
• she doesn’t fall apart when things don’t go her way, or when she makes a mistake and gets her ass kicked by the public. There is at least something resembling a backbone there, even if voters don’t always like what she did
• she possibly has a far better grasp of foreign policy and national security and the real value of diplomacy now, and because of those eight years in the White House, than perhaps any other current candidate
• she comes with a spouse who has eight years of experience running the country during one of it’s most successful periods, and one who is well liked by most of the rest of the world and this country…and is brilliant.
• she is the only current candidate who has been a First Lady of a southern state, a senator of a northern state, and the First Lady of the nation - in fact, if you take out the word “lady” she’s still the only one who has represented a northern state for the Senate, a southern state via the Governor’s mansion, and the nation via the White House. Demographically - that’s a home run.
  
• (New) along with the spouse with eight years of experience, comes an enormous pool of talent who also have the experience of being part of one of the most successful administrations in recent history - people like Wes Clark and Richard Holbrook and Madelaine Albright, for a start. Many of them, some of whom may be be in contention for cabinet posts in her administration, have already been vetted through the Senate conformation process at least once - so it should go pretty quickly if they have to do it again.  At least in theory.

In recent posts and comments (all over the blogosphere), I’ve seen several people refer - quite negatively - to the practice of “triangulation”.  It seems to bother people more that Hillary may do it than when Bill did it.  Maybe because it was a seemingly newer practice when Bill did it.  Well, it isn’t new, and it isn’t bad.  It’s actually quite smart…unless you happen to be a someone who thinks it’s a bad idea to listen to what constituents think and try to find a way to do as they wish. Yep…that’s bad.  Why would anyone want to have a politician listen to and consider the views of all of their constituents, including, God forbid, non-Democratic ones!

For all the yelling we voters do about our representatives not standing up for what they want, we seem to have a bad habit of forgetting they are supposed to stand up for what we want. I’ll take a little more of that triangulation, thanks.  Consequently, I am less concerned with whether or not I can trust her personal positions, so long as I can trust she will not further violate the positions of the country.

I’m less concerned she be the smartest person in the room, so long as she is wise enough to surround herself with the smartest people available - even if, and especially if, they are smarter than her.  So far, she has demonstrated that wisdom.

I also appreciate that, unlike both Senator Obama and former Senator Edwards, she has paid her political dues by at least completing a full senatorial term before running for the presidency. That demonstrates, at least, that she has some patience. Senators Obama and Edwards haven’t seemed to consider that important.  To my thinking, deciding to run for president before one has even completed half of one’s first senatorial term, demonstrates not patience, not loyalty, not a commitment to obligation, not a desire to restore hope, and certainly not wisdom, but rather a childish egotism.

I’m sorry but I’ve had enough of a childishly egotistical president in the last seven years to last me a lifetime.  I’d like an adult with a modicum of wisdom to be the next president, please. While Sentors Biden and Dodd both qualify as such adults too - they can’t win the nomination.  She can.  And, contrary to my previous opinion of her, and while it will by no means be a cakewalk, she can also win the general election.

But…and I say this to all Democrats, with the greatest respect for your individuality and your opinions, there is a time to push your pet candidate or issue/single issue/”my” issue importance - it’s when you have a veto-proof majority in both houses.  When you don’t have that majority, then it’s time to suck it up, look at the big picture and pull together.  If your party cannot do that, especially when it matters most to the survival of what we want to believe we are as a people and as a country, then you doom us all to wondering what could have been…again.

“Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.”

Gen. Omar Bradley

And have we progressed since Gen. Bradley made this statement?   Not so much.

What is the matter with all of you? Have you completely lost it? You’re letting the tail wag the dog and paying an obscene amount of money to look like fools who can’t handle employees while you do it. And, sadly, you’ve been doing it for years. You’re supposed to be fairly bright - haven’t you figured out who’s supposed to be running things yet? here’s a hint: not the athletes and actors/singers/other celeb-types!

Had you not created the problems in the first place, I might feel a little sorry for you. But…Michael Vick, Brittany Spears, Lindsay Lohan…just the latest in the passing parade of children you pay ridiculous amounts of money, then sit on the sidelines and watch as these accidents looking for a place to happen, keep happening all over the place.

You know? For all the things the old Hollywood studio system did wrong, one of the things they got right was understanding that, for better or worse, the performers under contract to them were looked up to as role models by the public and they had a responsibility (there’s that word again!) to live up to that job, as part of the price of fame and fortune. Consequently, and with enlightened self-interest, the studios spent a great deal of time and money to make sure their performers became role models - by teaching them to look and act like ladies and gentlemen, if not all the time then at least whenever in public. In fact, part of many a contract included the penalties for misbehaving in public.

Where are the David Nivens, William Powells, and Myrna Loys? Or John Waynes, Sophia Lorens and Audrey Hepburns? They all had their flaws and foibles, no doubt, but they also understood the meaning of the word ‘discretion’. Sophia Loren has more grace and style covered in mud than Brittany Spears could posses if dressed by Edith Head!

We used to teach the same sort of idea in sports, whether it was learned in community athletic associations, junior high and high schools or college; it was called ‘good sportsmanship’. A big part of ‘good sportsmanship’ was behaving as ladies and gentlemen and understanding your behavior reflected not only on yourself, but on your coaches, team mates, schools and communities. It wasn’t long ago that the thought of bringing dishonor to one’s teammates, coach or school, by behaving like a jackass in public, was unthinkable (unless, of course, you were defending the honor of said school, lol).

When I was in the 8th grade, playing volleyball for my school, our team was the top in the league, unbeaten for that season. However, during one away game, after our match was over, the JV coach told all of us to stay on the sidelines and support the JV girls. Well, a few of my teammates decided they’d rather watch the boys play football. They were suspended from playing the next game. As it happened, that game was against our toughest rival. With three of our A-string players suspended, we lost, and with that loss we had to share the championship title and trophy with those same tough rivals. It was a bitter pill to swallow. I remember being furious with that coach at the time, while trying to argue my teammates’ case. But, as angry as I was, and as short-sighted as I thought that coach (who wasn’t even our coach - but ours agreed with him and rightly so) was being - he was right. I was wrong. Part of his job, and the job of all the coaches, was teaching us to respect all of our team mates, including and especially the younger ones, by watching their games and showing them our support, helping to build their confidence, rather than by demonstrating how cool we thought we were.

Well, fast forward to the last decade or so and, along with enormous salaries for athletes - especially basketball - has come equally enormous egos and all the problems that go with them, including felonies.

Someone please tell my why you owners and studio heads continue to put up with this crap? Do you think most of the public really wants to emulate, and have their children grow up to emulate the Michael Vicks, Brittany Spears and gangsta-rap flavor of the months? Do you think it’s more cost effective? It isn’t, and if you think it is then you deserve to go bankrupt.

However, I’d rather not see you go bankrupt at some point down the road - I’d rather see you consider some sensible (for everyone) changes:

Instead of giving that basketball phenom a $10 mil signing bonus, how about spending that $10 mil to teach your players to be ladies and gentlemen, teach them how to manage their finances, teach them how to give back to their communities and that that is an admirable thing to do - in short, teach them to actually be the role models people might admire and respect - and respect for something beyond their athletic skill only.

Maybe if you stop treating athletes and performers like high-priced, prima donnas  who can do no wrong, who’s displays of ill temper, poor taste, petulance, narcissism, bad manners, and over-whelming self-involvement and sense of entitlement should not only be excused but lauded - they’ll stop behaving that way.

Maybe they’ll even grow up a little, and maybe we, the public, will too. No, we don’t get a free pass for all of this either.

Now the problem with all of this is that it requires you team owners and studio heads to have some character yourselves, before you can teach it to others.  Bill Walsh had it.  Bear Bryant had it. So did others, who hopefully, are still alive, and still willing to teach the rest of us.  One of the youngest athletes who has it is Tiger Woods - his is a public persona to be admired as a good role model .  And one of the few sports left whose players still seem to understand the concept of ‘good sportsmanship’ is golf… and I don’t even play it!

DM