As many of you know, I try to regularly write a column for the Toledo Free Press. I attempt to pick the topics for general interest, do any required research, and take great pains of the way the wording of the piece in the hopes of education or inspiration. This was the case with my most recent column, Atlas Shrugs.
Quite frankly this was a much more difficult piece than I normally write. It is a subject that I found of great importance, since I was in fact one of those who considered government employees on the short end of the compensation stick, did feel a modicum of guilt, and was rather dismayed to find out just how wrong I was. It was also challenging in that I quoted a number of facts and figures that must be thoroughly researched for accuracy, fact checked by Lisa Renee Ward at the TFP afterward, and carefully worded in order to make sure that no improper inference is drawn from them.
Imagine then, my consternation when I discovered that rather than commenting on the subject at hand, they were using my work in order to snipe at each other. While I am grateful that anyone is taking the time to read the pieces at all, I have to say that it's a disappointment to find so few of the comments were on topic. It is a further disappointment to find the piece used for personal assaults on each other by those using "screen names" instead of their own. To find my work used in such a way seems to make the effort a waste of the TFP's editorial space.
Tom Pounds and Michael Miller have been very good to me, and I enjoy putting the columns together for the Toledo Free Press and hopefully making an impact on a wider audience than I can in this blog. I have written yet again on a subject that I am likewise passionate about and that I hope will find its way into the pages of the TFP this week. I have to tell you however, that if the the hard work that I put into these columns is to be used as a platform to perpetrate this lack of civility, I may well reconsider such effort.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Grading the President
The president graded himself on his first year in office in December on the Oprah Winfrey show. Though only having completed some eleven of that first twelve months (making this a rather numerically challenged year), the president felt able to properly judge his own job performance (something which is always dangerous to do).
Not surprisingly for a politician of either party or any level of government, President Obama gave himself rather high marks for these first days in office. While not giving himself the highest grade possible, he did however give himself a B+ job performance grade.
Now personally, I believe that politicians on either side of the aisle grading themselves is the height of efforts in creative fiction (excepting of course when they propose 'spending cuts'). Those holding government office, like the corporate tycoons that they so often vilify, are far too often surrounded by buffers, handlers, and spin masters to insure that only the most glowing of reports reaches the chief's ears. Their view of the world therefore, is one viewed through rose colored glasses.
So let us instead take a rather more dispassionate look at this almost first year in the presidency of "hope and change". The president promised to end the bi-partisan wrangling in Congress and bring the two parties together.
FAILED
I hardly think that what we have seen out of the juvenile delinquents in either house could be even elevated to the level of wrangling. Now in the president's defense, attempting to end the nonsense in Congress right now might be akin to a the job of cat wrangling, but the president did not seem to make a serious attempt to bring Republicans into the picture at any time during this first year, and so is far from ready to assume the title of "The Great Mediator".
The president promised more transparency in government during his campaign for the office.
FAILED
This Administration and Congress seem to have become the master of the closed door meeting and the backroom negotiation. Whether we are talking about the budget, the stimulus plan, or health care reform; it is all done out of view.
Speaking of health care reform, the president promised often during his campaign that negotiations for health care reform would be open, with a chance for the American people to listen in on the debate on C-Span.
FAILED
Not only are these negotiations going on through the bypassing of normal conference committee practices, but as a consequence they are going on behind closed doors and without even one representative of the opposition party participating.
The president promised that all legislation would be available for reading for at least 72 hours before a being signed.
FAILED
It seems that the ink on a bill is seldom dry before the president applies his signature to it. Further, legislative language is seldom known until right before the bills are voted on and the bills are so long that even a speed reader couldn't get through them (let alone understand them) in the time between their release and a vote.
On the positive side, the president promised to get a Stimulus Package to get the economy jump started and he did.
SUCCESS
On the other hand, he promised that doing so would keep unemployment under 8.5% and it is now above 10%. Perhaps we ought to call that a FAILED as well then.
The President promised a growth in jobs with the Stimulus Plan and the New Budget and there has indeed been a growth of jobs.
SUCCESS
On the other hand, the majority of the growth in jobs has been in government bureaucratic positions to monitor and regulate the new government controls on the private sectors of the economy. While providing jobs, it likewise provides for an increasing bureaucratic budget burden on the taxpayer and increases the national debt substantially, so perhaps this should get a FAILED as well.
Now President somehow seemed to have felt that the credits listed above rated him a B+ grade for his first year in office (see what I mean about selective information reaching the boss), but I think that even the most cursory examination of these milestones would seem to imply a grade somewhat lower. He went on in that interview to say that if health care reform passed in 2010, he would raise his grade to an A-.
In spite of the fact that I am not a teacher (and have not played one on TV) I would dare to say that even if we count this legislation as an "extra credit question" and it did in fact pass, it would fail to raise his marks to the level of passing, let alone the excellence that such a grade would imply. I believe instead that this first year has been a disappointment to both those who hoped for more change in government and those who feel that far too much change has occurred.
One thing that appears not to have changed however, is the business as usual practices of both Democrats and Republicans. While I think that we have to give the president a lower grade than he gives himself; he should take some solace in the knowledge that he shares inferior marks with members of both parties and both House of Congress. In fact, the only thing that anyone in the federal government might get such a grade for is the Unconstitutional effort on their part.
Not surprisingly for a politician of either party or any level of government, President Obama gave himself rather high marks for these first days in office. While not giving himself the highest grade possible, he did however give himself a B+ job performance grade.
Now personally, I believe that politicians on either side of the aisle grading themselves is the height of efforts in creative fiction (excepting of course when they propose 'spending cuts'). Those holding government office, like the corporate tycoons that they so often vilify, are far too often surrounded by buffers, handlers, and spin masters to insure that only the most glowing of reports reaches the chief's ears. Their view of the world therefore, is one viewed through rose colored glasses.
So let us instead take a rather more dispassionate look at this almost first year in the presidency of "hope and change". The president promised to end the bi-partisan wrangling in Congress and bring the two parties together.
FAILED
I hardly think that what we have seen out of the juvenile delinquents in either house could be even elevated to the level of wrangling. Now in the president's defense, attempting to end the nonsense in Congress right now might be akin to a the job of cat wrangling, but the president did not seem to make a serious attempt to bring Republicans into the picture at any time during this first year, and so is far from ready to assume the title of "The Great Mediator".
The president promised more transparency in government during his campaign for the office.
FAILED
This Administration and Congress seem to have become the master of the closed door meeting and the backroom negotiation. Whether we are talking about the budget, the stimulus plan, or health care reform; it is all done out of view.
Speaking of health care reform, the president promised often during his campaign that negotiations for health care reform would be open, with a chance for the American people to listen in on the debate on C-Span.
FAILED
Not only are these negotiations going on through the bypassing of normal conference committee practices, but as a consequence they are going on behind closed doors and without even one representative of the opposition party participating.
The president promised that all legislation would be available for reading for at least 72 hours before a being signed.
FAILED
It seems that the ink on a bill is seldom dry before the president applies his signature to it. Further, legislative language is seldom known until right before the bills are voted on and the bills are so long that even a speed reader couldn't get through them (let alone understand them) in the time between their release and a vote.
On the positive side, the president promised to get a Stimulus Package to get the economy jump started and he did.
SUCCESS
On the other hand, he promised that doing so would keep unemployment under 8.5% and it is now above 10%. Perhaps we ought to call that a FAILED as well then.
The President promised a growth in jobs with the Stimulus Plan and the New Budget and there has indeed been a growth of jobs.
SUCCESS
On the other hand, the majority of the growth in jobs has been in government bureaucratic positions to monitor and regulate the new government controls on the private sectors of the economy. While providing jobs, it likewise provides for an increasing bureaucratic budget burden on the taxpayer and increases the national debt substantially, so perhaps this should get a FAILED as well.
Now President somehow seemed to have felt that the credits listed above rated him a B+ grade for his first year in office (see what I mean about selective information reaching the boss), but I think that even the most cursory examination of these milestones would seem to imply a grade somewhat lower. He went on in that interview to say that if health care reform passed in 2010, he would raise his grade to an A-.
In spite of the fact that I am not a teacher (and have not played one on TV) I would dare to say that even if we count this legislation as an "extra credit question" and it did in fact pass, it would fail to raise his marks to the level of passing, let alone the excellence that such a grade would imply. I believe instead that this first year has been a disappointment to both those who hoped for more change in government and those who feel that far too much change has occurred.
One thing that appears not to have changed however, is the business as usual practices of both Democrats and Republicans. While I think that we have to give the president a lower grade than he gives himself; he should take some solace in the knowledge that he shares inferior marks with members of both parties and both House of Congress. In fact, the only thing that anyone in the federal government might get such a grade for is the Unconstitutional effort on their part.
Monday, January 11, 2010
Signs of the Apocalypse
I am forced to admit that signs of the dark clouds of doom may be appearing on the horizon, and signs of the Apocalypse are becoming visible. Though I try not to be prone to excess (in spite of the fact that one should take moderation in moderation), one can believe little else when you hear:
I may have to get out the old sandwich board with "The End Is Near" on it.
- Mark McGuire has admitted to using steroids while playing baseball!
- Jay Leno may go back to late night TV and Conan O'Brien may leave NBC!
- SIMON COWELL WILL LEAVE AMERICAN IDOL!
I may have to get out the old sandwich board with "The End Is Near" on it.
Labels:
apocalypse,
baseball,
television
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Repinion
I believe that every form of innovation in this country should receive recognition. Music, literature, and even movies and television have all had their true artists; and far too often these worthies do not receive their just due. So it is with true humility that I recognize the Toledo Blade for expanding the use of, and attempting to perfect the concept of Repinion.
"What in the world", you are probably now asking yourself, "is Repinion?" Quite simply it is a term that I have created to honor the blending of reporting and opinion that the Blade uses in such a way so as to confuse the point where one form of writing ends and the other begins. This practice, in the fast-changing world of the newspaper allows the Blade to extend the editorial process from the first page to the last (I sometimes even wonder about the Obituaries), and advance an agenda on a wide variety of subjects.
"Now wait," you are probably saying, "the Blade certainly did not invent such practices. They have been going on in the newspaper industry for years." This is true indeed. Newspapers in this country have it seems, often been used as a way to advance an agenda. The Founding Fathers were more than once guilty of penning or having published articles in newspapers that were selective in fact and detrimental to their opponents.
The Aaron Burr / Alexander Hamilton duel was a prime example of how, directly or indirectly, such things could lead to political defeat, and ultimately to Hamilton's death. The Spanish American War is yet another classic example of how the editorializing of journalism can seek to move public opinion enough to affect even foreign policy. The competing newspaper publishers William Randolf Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer used just such questionable methods in a purely selfish way to increase their circulation (and profits), and to what many historians agree, succeed in driving this country into war; creating the term "yellow journalism" in the process. (It was named for a character in the comic strip Hogan's Alley at the time.)
The Blade now takes its place in newspaper history by refining the hallowed journalistic practice into a modern art form. It appears these days that the Blade is no longer capable of even recognizing the practice being carried on (or is being disingenuous about its use). Whether they are writing about the United Way constructing a building, the YMCA closing one down, or the Lucas County Republican Party attempting to hold a meeting in one; the Blade now finds itself consistently blending opinionated terminology with inefficient fact checking in order to choose sides in almost every news story that it writes.
Now the writing of editorials is a long-standing and sacred practice in newspapers (in spite of the fact that one of them as debased itself by letting yours truly occasionally write one). No one should have any argument with the right of the owners and editors of the Blade or any other newspaper to exercise the time honored tradition of expressing an opinion, even if they disagree with it. It would be nice however, and more in keeping with current journalistic practice, if they could manage not let them bleed over into what is supposed to be the fact-based reporting sections of the newspaper. (While I'm at it, it would be nice if they could manage to sign such editorials rather than post them like anonymous comments on a blog).
A short time ago, Dave Kushma took over at the Blade as their new editor. He appears to be a professional of good standing in his chosen field, if we can judge him by those he has previously worked for and with. It will be interesting in the light of this new blood, to see if the Blade continues to refine and perfect the art of Repinion, perhaps hoping that a prize named after one of its greatest disciples (the Pulitzer) will once more come its way, or learns once again to separate fact from opinion (if not fiction) in the dwindling circulation of their product.
"What in the world", you are probably now asking yourself, "is Repinion?" Quite simply it is a term that I have created to honor the blending of reporting and opinion that the Blade uses in such a way so as to confuse the point where one form of writing ends and the other begins. This practice, in the fast-changing world of the newspaper allows the Blade to extend the editorial process from the first page to the last (I sometimes even wonder about the Obituaries), and advance an agenda on a wide variety of subjects.
"Now wait," you are probably saying, "the Blade certainly did not invent such practices. They have been going on in the newspaper industry for years." This is true indeed. Newspapers in this country have it seems, often been used as a way to advance an agenda. The Founding Fathers were more than once guilty of penning or having published articles in newspapers that were selective in fact and detrimental to their opponents.
The Aaron Burr / Alexander Hamilton duel was a prime example of how, directly or indirectly, such things could lead to political defeat, and ultimately to Hamilton's death. The Spanish American War is yet another classic example of how the editorializing of journalism can seek to move public opinion enough to affect even foreign policy. The competing newspaper publishers William Randolf Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer used just such questionable methods in a purely selfish way to increase their circulation (and profits), and to what many historians agree, succeed in driving this country into war; creating the term "yellow journalism" in the process. (It was named for a character in the comic strip Hogan's Alley at the time.)
The Blade now takes its place in newspaper history by refining the hallowed journalistic practice into a modern art form. It appears these days that the Blade is no longer capable of even recognizing the practice being carried on (or is being disingenuous about its use). Whether they are writing about the United Way constructing a building, the YMCA closing one down, or the Lucas County Republican Party attempting to hold a meeting in one; the Blade now finds itself consistently blending opinionated terminology with inefficient fact checking in order to choose sides in almost every news story that it writes.
Now the writing of editorials is a long-standing and sacred practice in newspapers (in spite of the fact that one of them as debased itself by letting yours truly occasionally write one). No one should have any argument with the right of the owners and editors of the Blade or any other newspaper to exercise the time honored tradition of expressing an opinion, even if they disagree with it. It would be nice however, and more in keeping with current journalistic practice, if they could manage not let them bleed over into what is supposed to be the fact-based reporting sections of the newspaper. (While I'm at it, it would be nice if they could manage to sign such editorials rather than post them like anonymous comments on a blog).
A short time ago, Dave Kushma took over at the Blade as their new editor. He appears to be a professional of good standing in his chosen field, if we can judge him by those he has previously worked for and with. It will be interesting in the light of this new blood, to see if the Blade continues to refine and perfect the art of Repinion, perhaps hoping that a prize named after one of its greatest disciples (the Pulitzer) will once more come its way, or learns once again to separate fact from opinion (if not fiction) in the dwindling circulation of their product.
Labels:
editorial,
newspapers,
reporting,
toledo blade
Saturday, January 9, 2010
The Confusion of a Open Mind
I find myself troubled once more about the things that I think I know about the world. It seems that every time I think I understand something, I am handed another piece of information that makes me reconsider. This doesn't necessarily mean that I will change my mind, but it does mean that I have to spend the time to wrap my head around this new information and decide if it is enough to change my perspective.
It seems that no matter how much researching or soul searching we do, we are never going to be able know everything on any given subject. There is simply too much information out there and too many ways to access it.
How then can we hope to cope with so many different subjects that require our opinion, if not our support or opposition? Some it seems don't trouble themselves enough to have strong beliefs, being content to be merely a passenger on this journey of life. Others feel the need for passionate beliefs; but are content to absorb them from political leaders, the media in all of its forms, or the talking heads (sometimes me included) that seem to be fully capable of the perpetual spouting of strongly held beliefs (or something resembling natural fertilizer). Some few however, are in continual turmoil over the questions of life, expending constant effort in what sometimes seems a pointless attempt to keep up with the world around us.
I think that I can speak with some authority here, as I have gone through all three stages in my life. Having reached this last one some time back, I find that it's hard not to occasionally long for the bliss of being uncaring and ignorant. It was so much easier to live in that place, heedless of the consequences of doing so. I likewise remember with occasional regret, the ease of accepting the wisdom of 'the experts', strident and persuasive voices spouting sometimes flawed logic that led me down a path like the Pied Pipers that they truly were.
I recognize however that one can never 'unring the bell' and that once the Pandora's Box of curiousity has been opened, it can never fully be closed again. Once we decide to throw off the crutches of such ignorance and follow our own path, we can never return. Difficult as it may sometimes be, we can only hope to remain curious and open to all of the information around us.
Though it may be a arduous endeavor, I believe today that it's a truly amazing place to be. I hope that I will be up to the challenge of maintaining both that curiousity and the open mind necessary to take advantage of it. While writing this piece, a quote from an unlikely source popped into my head that seemed to put it all in perspective. As often happens, it was from a movie; in this case "Men In Black":
"Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow."
How then can we hope to cope with so many different subjects that require our opinion, if not our support or opposition? Some it seems don't trouble themselves enough to have strong beliefs, being content to be merely a passenger on this journey of life. Others feel the need for passionate beliefs; but are content to absorb them from political leaders, the media in all of its forms, or the talking heads (sometimes me included) that seem to be fully capable of the perpetual spouting of strongly held beliefs (or something resembling natural fertilizer). Some few however, are in continual turmoil over the questions of life, expending constant effort in what sometimes seems a pointless attempt to keep up with the world around us.
I think that I can speak with some authority here, as I have gone through all three stages in my life. Having reached this last one some time back, I find that it's hard not to occasionally long for the bliss of being uncaring and ignorant. It was so much easier to live in that place, heedless of the consequences of doing so. I likewise remember with occasional regret, the ease of accepting the wisdom of 'the experts', strident and persuasive voices spouting sometimes flawed logic that led me down a path like the Pied Pipers that they truly were.
I recognize however that one can never 'unring the bell' and that once the Pandora's Box of curiousity has been opened, it can never fully be closed again. Once we decide to throw off the crutches of such ignorance and follow our own path, we can never return. Difficult as it may sometimes be, we can only hope to remain curious and open to all of the information around us.
Though it may be a arduous endeavor, I believe today that it's a truly amazing place to be. I hope that I will be up to the challenge of maintaining both that curiousity and the open mind necessary to take advantage of it. While writing this piece, a quote from an unlikely source popped into my head that seemed to put it all in perspective. As often happens, it was from a movie; in this case "Men In Black":
"Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow."
Labels:
confusion,
culture,
curiousity
Friday, January 8, 2010
TFP Column: Atlas Shrugs
While listening to an interview on Brian Wilson's show on WSPD with Chris Edwards of the CATO Institute, I emailed Brian with a pithy comment. His reply was that it sounded like something worthy of a column. Easily persuaded, I decided to do a little research into the growing burden of the lucrative salary and benefits of government workers on taxpayers. I believe that you will be as shocked as I was to discover what this fastest growing segment of the national workforce is getting, that the rest of us only dream about. The more I read, the more it reminded me of the failure of government portrayed in Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged', hence the homage in the title.
Once again however, there is a lot more going on in Toledo that you will only be able to find in the Toledo Free Press. The snow has been falling since Thursday, and it promises to be a cold weekend. I recommend curling up with the TFP and finding out what's going on.
Labels:
column,
pensions,
Toledo Free Press
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Strange Connections
Sometimes the references of popular culture are simply too good to pass up making fun of. In this case, it was while I was listening to a commercial on the radio (1370 WSPD, no less) today describing a memory training class. The commercial stated that, "memory is a trainable skill ... like riding a bicycle".
The relationship that it described (and the potential humorous ramifications of the statement) struck me, so I thought that I would share it with you under the concept that anything can be taken to ridiculous extremes.
Yep, that clinches it. Things that you least suspect are in fact related.
- Memory is a like riding a bicycle.
- Sex is like riding a bicycle.
- Therefore according the rules of symbolic logic, memory is a lot like sex.
- I have ridden a bicycle and remember sex, therefore I may have already completed memory training (though I don't seem to remember it) .
Yep, that clinches it. Things that you least suspect are in fact related.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Presidential Property
The President met with financial leaders around the country some weeks back in a meeting, according to the White House, to discuss ways to help get the country back on track. It was apparently also to make sure that these executives understood that he was unhappy with the salaries and bonuses being handed out in 2009, for as Obama said on “60 Minutes” just before, "I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of, you know, fat-cat bankers on Wall Street.”
Of course many of these banks took government bailout money, so I suppose they should expect some scolding from this newest investor. As stewards of the people's money, the government says that some of that investment is being wasted on executive salaries (and believe me, the federal government is an expert on waste). For them, this apparently becomes a question of ownership.
The banks, strangely enough, believe that their stockholders own these respective companies; and with their boards are allowed to determine the rate of pay for their employees. They do this in the form of employment contracts at all levels from the janitor to the CEO, which are legally binding agreements for salary, bonus, and benefits.
Now a contract in any form is ultimately a legal agreement to determine the disposition of property, which is why it is so important.
The Rights of Property are a fundamental principle upon which this country was founded. They were so important to the Founding Fathers that the phrase "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" in the Declaration of Independence originally read “Property” instead; with Jefferson only grudgingly changing it to insure that slavery was not justified by the document.
They understood that the Right to Property was a ultimately Right to Liberty. If an individual cannot own his labors, the reimbursement that he receives for them, and the disposition of such as he sees fit; he owns nothing and cannot be free.
While I can understand the concern of the President and Pay Czar with regards to what may be excessive executive compensation, I find no power provided them to interfere with this process that trumps those specified rights.
Do I object to the salaries and bonus that these people are making ... Yes! I object to them however, no more than I object to the high salary of a baseball player who hits .250 after signing the big money contract, than I do the coach who signs a similar agreement and produces repeated losing seasons, than I do to the actor who commands big bucks for a performance in an inferior movie.
I object to anyone who gets paid more than their job performance has earned them, as far too many of us get far less than ours merit. I likewise object to anyone who gets paid a bonus for a failing to perform in a way that enhances the success and profit of their employer.
But my opinion should prove of little consequence when it comes to the rate of compensation for anyone. Neither should this be of any concern to the government. Whether an employee is making too much money is a matter of contract, with the labor of the employee and the level of compensation guaranteed under this legal agreement by both custom and law. The employer has a right (and perhaps even an obligation) to re-negotiate such compensation if it is not justified by the performance of the employee.
They can also likewise terminate said employee if their performance is found to be unsatisfactory.
Under no law existing in this country however, is it the right or obligation of any branch of the government or any member thereof (elected or appointed) to ignore these basic rights of property.
There is no provision in the Constitution to allow the government to step in and cast aside the concept of a legally binding contract simply because it believes that it knows best what people should be paid.
The President apparently believes that government investment trumps all others and makes them the true owners to these companies however. They evidently believe that any use of taxpayer funds creates some form of “higher ownership” of these organizations that must be exercised as compensation control. If this is allowed to continue and the government can dictate compensation for employees after the fact in this country, two things will eventually happen:
- The rule of law and the concepts of contracts, property, and liberty will suffer a serious setback in this country (if they haven't already).
- The companies forced to follow the dictates of the President and the Pay Czar will find themselves part of what will become the only property that will still matter in this country, Presidential Property.
Labels:
constitution,
economy,
pay czar
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Flying Commando
In light of the recent Christmas Day attempt to blow up a US airliner (Northwest Airlines Flight 253 from Amsterdam), it would seem only common sense to look at the attached image and believe that this is the answer. If only we could have the Arnold Schwarzenegger character from the film "Commando" either in the cockpit or flying as an Air Marshall no one would dare attempt to take over a plane (after all, he did take a bad guy out on the plane in the movie). Certainly we would all feel much safer knowing the character of John Matrix is somewhere out there insuring that all airline passengers arrive safely at their final destination, regardless of the threat.Remember the "Good Old Days" (I know I shouldn't use that expression, but I can't think of another that fits.) when the worst that could happen to you on an airplane was a short diversion to Jose Marti International Airport, about nine miles southwest of Havana, Cuba? What could you expect but some dirty bathrooms, bad water, and maybe some good cigars that you weren't allowed to bring home. These days however, the problem is much more serious and much more deadly; not only to the people on the plane, but to those on the ground that they are flying over. The only people who don't seem to understand just how serious and how deadly things are these days are the folks Transportation Security Administration (TSA), whose responsibility it is to keep those very airlines safe here in the US.
I have spoken in the past of these "Barney Fife" characters, often referring to them as the "Wal-Mart greeters" of airline security. I now wish to retract that remark and apologize ... to the Wal-Mart greeters. Nothing could be a greater insult to those who at all times act in a friendly manner to each of the people entering their place of business than to compare them to these hide-bound government rentacops.
Of course I do not limit myself to TSA in handing out such palsied praise for government agencies and bureaucracies. The alphabet soup of NSA, CIA, FBI, USDHS (United States Department of Homeland Security), as well as the minions of the State Department can all take pride once again in proving themselves slightly less able than the "Keystone Kops" in their ability to lose, mishandle, and ignore information vital to performing their function in keeping the citizens of this country safe.
I won't bore you with the details of the story, as many other media sources out there have gone over it ad nauseum by now. I just wanted to talk about the potential evolution of airline travel that lies ahead. If we look back the history of Homeland Security and TSA reaction to terrorist threats, I think that we can at least somewhat accurately deduce what that future will hold.
Terrorists attempted to sneak explosives onto airplanes on laptops, hence laptop computers are required to be run through x-ray machines on their own. They then sought to bring explosive chemicals on, hence the current inability to carry on more than 3 oz of fluid in a given container. The infamous "shoe bomber" attempted to set off an explosive device implanted in the soles of his shoes, hence all shoes must be removed now and run through x-ray machines. Now we are looking at a terrorist who has attempted to smuggle an explosive device in his underwear. Can you imagine the terrifying consequences of this action?
But I have a solution that some of you may now be beginning to see (and perhaps smiling). Yes, as the title of this posting implies, I am suggesting the creation of a security system based on one of the alternate definitions of "Commando" (that of not wearing underwear).
Imagine how much more quickly security lines could move if we just created a special line, or better still an airline, for those who instead of worrying about their mother's advice about wearing clean ones when they traveled simply decided to gamble and forgo potential embarrassment. I move that the only way to get airline travel back on track is to "Fly Commando".
Labels:
airline security,
airlines,
terrorism,
terrorist
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Wisdom For The New Decade
In keeping with a tradition from Just Blowing Smoke, I am attempting to take the easy way out on this first weekend of the year by attempting to foist some of my own collected maxims as some form of wisdom. I hope that you enjoy them, and that they lead you to a path of reason, responsibility, and ridiculousness.
- My only prejudice is against people who choose to be stupid.
- A lack of understanding where the rules are concerned should never prevent a person from playing the game. Take love for example ...
- I usually find it easiest to resolve to eat a healthier diet right after a big meal of junk food.
- Politicians are like the color swatches on paint chips. While many of them look good on initial inspection, most look far less attractive when committed to.
- Anyone who tells you that they "understand" something is trying to sell you a book.
- Any statement purported to be fact that contains the word "always" or "never" can usually be counted on to be wrong.
- Few things in life are best confronted with ones eyes closed. I may be the exception that proves the rule.
- Scientists have a funny way of taking a perfectly reasonable observation and turning it into a completely unreasonable assumption of fact.
- We should find great relief in that fact that our government is normally so bogged down in bureaucracy and ineptitude that ends up accomplishing very little. This functional failure is probably the only thing that keeps it from "saving us to death".
- The advantage of writing over speaking is the ability to endlessly edit before revealing your thoughts. Such a process usually makes one look far more intelligent than they actually are, and prevents any number of hurt feeling. I highly recommend it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)