Music Hath Charms

"Music hath charms to soothe the savage breast, to soften rocks, or bend a knotted oak." from 'The Mourning Bride' by William Congreve 


One would hardly gather from looking at me today that I was a long distance runner in my youth, and a pretty decent one. I particularly enjoyed the fact that the competition was as much about beating yourself as it was about beating the other competitors (something that I also enjoyed about golf at one point in my life). 


These days it would probably take someone chasing me with a weapon that could do me significant harm before I would run three blocks, let alone three miles. And while I don't think that I was a particularly gifted runner, especially by today's standards, but I did have a trick that I used to get through me the shortness of breath, the heavy legs and feet, and the occasional bout of shin splints that I still use today. 


Long before the Walkman or Mp3 player was invented, I was able to carry music in my head while doing something else. This was beyond the condition of having a commercial jingle in my head that I couldn't shake, though I am as guilty as anyone of suffering from this as anyone else. It was an ability instead that allowed me to carry a song in my head as a distraction from what is going on to me and around me and let it go while hearing nothing but the music. In the day, two Blind Faith tunes were particularly effective, "Sea of Joy" and "Can't Find My Way Back Home". Add in the earlier song by Cream "Sunshine of Your Love", and the three miles was behind me before I knew it. 


The music has changed over the years, but the process has remained the same. Even now when I have access to the latest technology, I find myself falling back on this in moments when wearing ear buds seems inappropriate. Using music inside my head allows me to get outside of it, and outside of the often contentious situations that surround me. 


By now you are probably thinking, "interesting Tim, but what does this have to do with anything?" The connection was one that I made today when reading the newspaper (I am evidently one of the few remaining dinosaurs that does so) while listening distractedly to some political punditry being spouted on cable TV (you know, multitasking). It seems that within but a week of the preponderance of election results being announced, that the two bullies in Washington (D's and R's) have one again returned to angry rhetoric. R's: "You just wait! Now that we'll be taking power in January, we're going to show those D's what they did was wrong. Not only we will enforce our will for the next two years, but we'll get even bigger and stronger by winning in 2012." D's: "You just wait! With the R's taking power in January we're going to show everybody just how bad things were before we came along. We're not going to give back anything we gained in the last few years, and when 2012 comes around, we'll get the power we just lost back." 


Little of the rhetoric being spouted is about really fixing any of the problems confronting this country. Oh, they may try and nibble around the edges a bit; but no party, and no individual representing either party now seems to want to step up and push forward with real solutions. Meanwhile, bureaucracy will continue to grow, though perhaps at a slightly slower rate. Government spending will continue at its out of control pace and debt will be run up at a clip that would leave a shopaholic dizzy. Taxes will continue to increase and to be piled upon fees and licenses, in a confusing and confiscatory pattern designed to do little more that feed the bureaucratic Frankenstein that has been created (and cannot apparently be killed). Regulation will be piled upon legislation in a continuing effort to keep citizens cowed, knowing that with all of the rules out there, the likelihood that they are in violation of one or more is almost certain. 


Government 'as usual' is already back in Washington, because or in spite of the voters having recently spoken. What I am proposing is that we pipe a little music in to help these bureaucrats and lawmakers to get outside of their heads and back into the real business at hand. Perhaps if we could get them to forget the pain that they feel when looking at their opponents, they would find it easier to do their real jobs. Perhaps if we could get them to stop feeling the pain of raising money and running for office again, legislators could find the time to read the legislation that they're voting on before they have to do it. Perhaps if we could get them to stop worrying about competing with each other and simply run the course, they could actually remember why we sent them to DC in the first place. Perhaps if we could lighten the mood of bureaucrats wading through 78,000 pages of Federal Register regulations they could use a little common sense in dealing with people rather than rules. 


I would therefore like to install speakers in Congress and all of the bureaucratic offices in Washington, in the hopes that we could use music to soothe the savage breast and help to distract these folks from their non-stop encroachment on what's left of freedom and liberty in this country. (Besides, they can justify the whole thing as part of the economic stimulus.) If that doesn't work, with the technology already in place we can pipe in some Enya to put them to sleep and keep them out of trouble, or some Bjork tunes to drive them screaming from their respective buildings. 


If we can't provide them with some peace and sanity through the use of music, perhaps we can provide ourselves some by keeping them out of trouble for at least a brief period. (I apologize for the lateness of today's posting, but the piece I originally wrote ended up going to the Kansas City Star as an op-ed submission ... with no guarantee of publication, I might add. If it doesn't get used however, you will probably find it updated and here soon.)

Happy Birthday Marine Corp

Originally formed as two battalions of Continental Marines on this date back in 1775, the United States Marine Corps has continuously and honorably served this country for the last 235 years. 


Rather than regale you with information that I have previously detailed in this blog, I will refer to some previous postings that I have done on the subject of the Corp as I continue. They include one on the recently opened Marine Corp Museum in Quantico, VA that I was able to visit while being privileged to attend a reunion of WWII Marine veterans that was held at that base. 


Another stop during that memorable trip was to the original Marine Barracks (first used in 1801, and one of the few structures in Washington not damaged during the British occupation of Washington in the War of 1812). On this occasion, I was equally lucky to be able to listen to the President's own Marine Corp Drum and Bugle Corp and watch a truly intelligent, gifted, and talented group of soldiers as they performed the silent cadence of the Evening Parade. Almost all of the musician / soldiers have advanced college degrees, and they compete constantly for the honor of serving. 


Many of those that we talked to in the Silent Drill Platoon had recently returned from front line service overseas. Without fail however, every one of the Marines we talked to that evening was happy to share the history of the barracks, the ceremony, and the Marine Corp with each and every one of us; and to impart some part of the dedication that they had to those of us who had never served. 


As the bugler played 'Taps' at the end of the performance, anyone who was not moved by the especially emotional nature of that ceremony in that place simply had no heart. Of course no history of the Corp would be complete without a mention of the very special, and to me very personal story of "Lost Battalion", Company A of the 10th Amphibious Tractor Battalion (in which my father served during WWII). The story of their rather remarkable days in the Pacific is well worth remembering as part of the history of service of the Marines. So to all those jar heads (for the high and tight haircut), devil dogs (for the Marine Corp bulldog mascot) and leathernecks (for the leather collar that was part of their Revolutionary War uniform) out there; let me send out a proper birthday greeting:

Oorah!

Will Republicans Be Good Winners?

"There's nothing to winning really. That is, if you happen to be blessed with a keen eye, and agile mind, and no scruples whatsoever." 
- Alfred Hitchcock 


I thought about this on the day after the election, as Republicans and Conservatives (they are overlapping, but not congruent terms) were celebrating their electoral victory. Don't get me wrong, I was happy that they won (Conservatives, not necessarily Republicans). Unlike the president and most of the 'slipstream media' (so named because they appear to be dropping further and further behind in the wake as a legitimate news source), I did in fact take this victory as a repudiation of the policies (not necessarily the people) of the last two years. 


It certainly appeared that the American people in general and the Tea Party Movement members in particular were fed up with a government interested in passing sweeping omnibus legislation without knowledge of its contents and against the strong objections of voters. Since this is a representative republic, those voters appeared more than willing to reject representatives who don't represent, and turned out elected officials who chose party solidarity over meeting their job description. I was also pleased with the humble tone that at least that prospective Speaker of the House John Boehner took in speaking about the victory. It actually appeared that he understood the limited license that had just been granted, for this was not as much an endorsement of the Republicans as it was a repudiation of the Democratic agenda of the last two years. While many of the Democrats do not appear to be good losers in this contest, I wonder how many Republicans will be good winners. 


This is not about turning out more Democrats (including the president) in two years as the current minority leader in the Senate Mitch McConnell, seems to believe. Neither is this about running up a score in either the House or the Senate. Mr McConnell seems to be confusing elections with some form of athletic contest where the concern of those on the sidelines is nothing more than which team wins. While I am sure that there are some in the country who may believe that way, recent elections have shown them to be the minority. How else do you explain the regular turn over of Congress in recent years? The American people by and large are not fanatics for one side or another in the game (and are increasingly looking for a 3rd alternative), but instead want government to serve their needs. 


True, there is certainly some debate and confusion as to what those needs are, how they should be served, and what role government should play; but that's what's really being contested in recent elections. Republicans, after years of laboring in the minority, got their chance to set the agenda in 1994 when after writing their "Contract For America" they took control of the House and Senate and proceeded to squander it. 


After a few months of grandiose speeches and token efforts, things went back to business as usual and government continued to grow in scope, scale, and level of personal encroachment. Republicans sent to Washington not only stood by and watched it happen, they often caused it. They got the White House back as well in 2000, which you think would have allowed them to do what voters actually sent them to do, but the budget and government continued to grow and become ever more intrusive. 


Little surprise then that by 2006 voters had gotten fed up with more of the same and turned them out, and by 2008 had repudiated their lack of principles decisively. Now only two years later, they find themselves returning to control of at least one House of Congress. What will they do and how long will they do it for? 


Will Republicans stand on the principles that they espoused in campaign speeches while seeking office and gaining the favor of Conservative and Independent voters, or return the the parasitic policies that both they and the Democrats seem to favor; regardless of the increasing damage that it does to the taxpayer host? Will they attempt to walk back some of the over-reaching of government that both parties are responsible for over recent years or make merely token efforts that can be noted by the media and pointed to in their next re-election campaign? 


As they consider these questions, as well as their duties and responsibilities, Republicans (and Democrats as well) might do well to remember the words of long-time Alabama football coach, Paul "Bear" Bryant: 


"When you make a mistake, there are only three things you should ever do about it: admit it, learn from it, and don't repeat it."

Dancing With An American Idol On The Jersey Shore

It's always a relief to see an election cycle end, not because of who wins or loses the races; but because we don't have to watch and listen to the "half-truths, mis-truths, and outright lies" of political candidate ads any longer. Of course, then I remember about what's left on television, and my relief is short-lived. Actually, I found a number of curious comparisons here when looking at politics and popular culture:

• Many of those eligible to vote know who is on 'American Idol', 'Dancing with the Stars', 'Jersey Shore', and the flood of 'wives' programs from New Jersey, the South, and Orange County. Far fewer knew the cast of characters on their local ballots.
• Many Americans know the names and life stories of the judges on Idol and 'America's Got Talent', but far fewer can come up with even the names of an equal number of Supreme Court Justices.
• Far too many people believe that the level of civil political discourse in this country is defined by 'The View', 'The O'Reilly Factor', and 'The Sean Hannity Show'. They believe that shouting down ones opponents, refusing to let people complete the answers to questions, and walking off of the set qualify as good interview techniques.
• People are often disillusioned and disappointed when public political debate does not turn into a bad episode of 'The Jerry Springer Show'.
• Candidates and TV shows are both defined, not by the quality of the characters or the level of the writing; but on how outrageous, controversial, and manipulative they are.
• Far more people seem to get their news perspective from parody shows like 'The Daily Show' and 'The Colbert Report' on The Comedy Channel than do from network news.

I have nothing against any of the shows or networks listed above, but I have to say that I am grateful for the variety of programming on cable that allows me to avoid such programming. 


Quite frankly, I have never seen television as a medium that did well at providing information. Entertainment sure, but information ... not so much. And even the entertainment value of television has taken a nose-dive in recent years. Information and entertainment are now chopped into discreetly defined segments that can be fit between the advertising that pays for it. Any news story or part of the plot that doesn't fit in these visual slices ends up being left out of the story, even if it makes things more difficult to understand. 


To add to the mixed metaphors here, imagine television as a sports league. When there were only a few franchises, only the best of the best rose to prominence in their game and got their chance. When the league discovers that there is a lot of money to be made out there however and add teams at a frightening rate in an attempt to cash in while they can (like any other evil corporation), it inevitably leads to a dilution of the limited talent pool available. 


Eventually, such attenuation means that we end up with what most professional sports leagues like to call 'parity', but which we know really means a level of mediocrity that most of us watching find more than a little objectionable. Cable has now given us hundreds of franchises attempting to dip into the limited talent pool of writers, directors, and actors that exist. When they reach the shallow end of that pool (which they appear to have done some time back), they are forced create celebrities out of people whose only real talent was convincing someone to put them on TV in the first place to fill the void. There are no plots, no scripts, and no performances worthy of note; only bad behavior, worse hygiene, and faux tragedy to entertain the masses. 


Owners of the Roman Empire's coliseums would be proud of the circuses and bloodsport that we have turned cable into, reveling in these thinly veiled and badly acted gladiatorial contests (and that's before I get started on wrestling). Politics has begun to show the same decided lack of talent when seeking its principal performers. While there are some legitimate artists remaining in the field (for which we should be truly grateful), the sheer scope and scale of government at every level has begun to dilute the talent pool. 


In truth, many of those with any real talent have simply abandoned the auditions; finding what the process has become too intrusive, personally abusive, and to ungraciously fickle to make it worth bothering with. While some with a real gift or an overwhelming desire to participate remain, many of them simply find other ways to express their genius, and abandon the political venue to the more venial and power hungry of the inferior players. 


These elections and shows are now often filled with flawed individuals who do not deserve the limelight or the applause. Their lack of ability is exceeded only by their demands for diva status; and once illuminated on these public stages, they prove themselves mostly talentless and particularly unattractive. Yet we continue watch, helplessly staring, often without any care or understanding of the plot or the meaning of the drama unfolding before us. 


Perhaps like watching a traffic accident, we are simply shocked or fascinated by the appalling spectacle and simply cannot take our eyes away. On the other hand, like many other times when sitting on the couch at home, perhaps we've simply been unable to reach the remote yet to change the channel.

TFP Column: Guilty As Charged

I always try to read the comments about my columns in the Toledo Free Press (even when they are not exactly about my column). Last week's reference to the Island of Misfit Toys from "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer" earned me one that stuck with me however, and forced me to evaluate the pieces that I do for the TFP. This in turn lead to this week's guilty admission. 


My column was posted early this week (which means it will probably only be in the electronic edition), so I can't tell you what will be in the rest of the edition; but I would bet on a recap of all of the local elections and some insight by many as to what it will all mean to NW Ohio. It's getting colder out there, and the leaves are falling; so I would ignore the weather and the yard work and curl up with Toledo's largest Sunday circulation newspaper, the Toledo Free Press.

How Much Hope For Change Is There Now?

Just so you understand the question, I will let you in on the fact that I actually wrote this in the days leading up to the election, not after its results were published. You see, regardless of whether the Republicans gain control of one House of Congress or both, of whether the Democrats retain control of the Senate and the White House, and if Libertarians or traditional two party candidates are swept in on the tide of the Tea Party movement; I believe that little will change in Washington.

• Will the EPA be barred from regulating the emission of carbon byproducts by everything from power plants and automobiles to animals?
• Will the National Education Association be prohibited from pushing national education standards on local school districts?
• Will the IRS be prohibited from imposing penalties and interest rates that if perpetrated by a private sector business would be considered illegal and usury?
• Will Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) continue to be allowed to pick and choose which laws on the books that it will enforce?
• Will health care reform (which does not reform health care, only health care insurance) itself be reformed?
• Will the government turn off the printing presses (even briefly) cranking out money to stave off the inflation that has to come if they don't?
• Will financial reform, which has done little to control the abuses of Wall Street firms creating our next generation of Cabinet secretaries and does nothing to correct the abuses of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; but has provided banks with opportunities to impose new fees and charges, be allowed to stand as is?
• Will Congress stop passing laws more complex than the design of a nuclear weapon and with more pages than the Bible?
• Will any Congress pass legislation to determine the Constitutional authority for a law before voting on it?
• Will members of Congress (new or incumbent) even read the Constitution that they swear to protect and defend?

You see, though we live in a representative republic (not a democracy as so many believe), in fact most of the voters in this country choose not to pick those who will represent them. Even if we use the numbers of presidential election years, the percentage of eligible voters exercising their voting rights rarely rises above 35%. Even if a candidate were to gain 60% of those votes, they would only be elected by some 21% of eligible voters, hardly a mandate to rule.


Other countries using the democratic voting process have in the past mandated that the entire population vote (Australia fines those who fail to), but such a philosophy tells us that the only way to protect our freedom through government is to take away the freedom of whether to choose its members or not. Totalitarian governments solve this problem much more simply by making sure that the selection of candidates is limited to those the government has already chosen and making the vote is a foregone conclusion. 


As some of the above questions point to however, regardless of the party in power, the bureaucracy that actually rules remains the same. Unelected bureaucratic moles responsible to no voter and given little oversight by our elected officials, will still be making and enforcing rules that all will be told to follow regardless of the 'laws' that are passed. If you doubt me, ask yourself what you have come into contact with on the day that you read this that is not regulated by our government. The air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we eat and the clothes we wear all fall under federal guidelines. Everything from the cars we drive and the roads we drive on, to the people we get to vote on are controlled and regulated. 


Tell me that government does not control all, prayer for example, and I will ask you to try and pray publicly in a government building and discover the result. Tell me that capitalism still provides us a free-market economy, and I will ask you what part of the economy is not regulated or mandated by a faceless government agency. 


Even elections that we use as a shining example of our freedom are regulated. In many states only members of the two parties can be on the ballot without special petition initiatives; except through the difficult process of write-in candidacy. Primaries for those parties are held and regulated by the government (and paid for by the taxpayers); which mandates who gets what ballot and which candidates you get to vote for. And while some of the restrictions of campaign financing have been relaxed or removed, there are still a great many more in place to control how the game is played. 


I hate to appear any more cynical than I am (difficult, I know), but even the most naive of us who has done any study on this knows that the odds of the game are more than a little crooked and that the odds always favor the house winning. 


The good news however, is that we have managed to make it through yet another election cycle without violence breaking out in the streets. Intimidation is still only limited to subtle coercion, selective inattention where the truth is concerned, and that while freedom of speech politically is still a closely monitored 'right', the economy was aided by the vast sums of money spent in advertising and promoting candidates. (Could this be considered the real economic stimulus of 2010?) Regardless of what we end up with, we will all have gotten one thing; the illusion that the process works and the "will of the people" has been done. 


We also have a hope, that this time perhaps one or two good people will survive the process, will not be corrupted by the power that they are about to assume in Washington DC, and will at least attempt to make some change to the growing encroachment of government on the few remaining freedoms left to individuals in this country. How much change they will actually be able to make is yet to be seen.

Stormy Weather

"Don't know why there's no sun up in the sky ... Stormy weather"

Sure, it's the opening line from a 1933 song by Harold Arlen and Ted Koehler, but it's also a pretty apt description of the furor surrounding a recent column by Toledo Free Press editor-in-chief Michael Miller. It seems that Michael took umbrage with District 9 Republican candidate for the House Rich Iott's wearing of a Waffen SS uniform while participating in his hobby of war re-enactment and how it might impact his ability to serve as a NW Ohio representative in Congress.

I can't and won't say that I agree with all of Michael's reasoning in his offering, and in fact I wrote a piece in the same edition espousing a different point of view (an effort which seemed to go largely unnoticed in the furor to tar and feather both Michael and the TFP).

I am not exposed to the same sources of information that Michael is exposed to both locally or nationally however, nor do I travel in the same circles in NW Ohio that he does; so I recognize that there may be facts in evidence that he may be aware of that I am not. This hasn't changed my opinion of Mr Iott, who I believe would be much better for the future of NW Ohio than incumbent Rep Marcy Kaptur; nor has it changed my opinion of Michael Miller, someone I believe likewise serves the best interests of Toledo and NW Ohio.

There have been many well-documented efforts on the part of Mr Miller and the TFP to support worthy causes, worthy candidates, and worthy values in the area; efforts that have earned both due respect and praise. I would venture to say as well, that while he and the TFP now find themselves under fire from the right, that they found themselves under equal pressure from other directions when supporting the United Way's right to tear down their own building, or when shining a less than flattering light on the 'business as usual' politics in both the mayor's office and city council in Toledo.

According to the response that I read in some of the local blogs, the comments to the column, and the subsequent letters-to-the-editor sent to the Free Press itself, I appear to find myself in the minority (something that I have grown used to over the years). Apparently the TFP was so evil and close-minded that it even allowed follow up pieces by others (people that I also respect) in the following edition. It does seem strange to me however, that so many apparent long-time friends and fans are ready to throw the baby out with the bathwater in the case of Mr Miller and the TFP because he has written something that they disagree with. It also seems strange to me that some are now attempting to define all of Michael's efforts by this one piece, condemning him with faint praise and vowing to end their relationship with him and the paper.

As my own efforts going forward will show (including one this weekend), I have not. And while I understand that strong feelings can often come in the days leading up to an election, the decision of so many to make so abrupt a break with a such positive force in a city that needs all that it can get is something of a disappointment to me. I know that I have any number of friends and family that disagree with my opinions, and some rather strongly. I share many spirited debates with those loved ones and colleagues whose opinions I value and likewise totally disagree with. So I was forced to ask myself:

• Would these same people sever ties with a family member for expressing a view that they don't agree with?
• Would these same people abandon a friendship with someone because they voiced an opinion or voted for a candidate that they opposed?
• Would they judge either friend or family on the basis of 1% of the views that they espouse, when they agree with the other 99%?

If any of this is the case, perhaps the relationship was not all that can or should be expected of what I at least would define as friendship.

Perhaps this outpouring of well-intentioned and strongly-held opinion is exactly what so many are saying is wrong with politics today. Perhaps some are so concerned with winning the game that they will abandon both a friend and the willingness to concede that someone else might have a valid point of view in trying to do so.

Let me say once again and for the record, I will not.

I waited this long to write anything on the subject in the hopes that somehow the apparent frenzy and furor would subside, that the clouds would part and the sun would begin to shine once again on Toledo and The Free Press. We may need to wait to see the results of the election however, before the dust settles on yet another cycle of campaign rhetoric amped up to the volume of 'fighting words' and cooler heads can prevail. Meanwhile, as recent climatic disturbances have shown us, this is indeed the season for both real and political stormy weather.

TFP Column: The Island of Misfit Legislators

Halloween is this weekend, Thanksgiving is less than a month away, and it seems that Christmas is around the corner. On top of all this, the election is next week. So it's of little surprise that my thoughts have managed to connect completely disparate subjects into a commentary on what might happen to incumbent politicians after the results are announced. 


Such was the inspiration for "The Island of Misfit Legislators", a curious connection between an stop-animation classic, "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer", and next week's electoral results. 


This being the weekend before the election, I'm sure that there is more than enough information for even the most undecided of voters to come to some conclusions before going off to the polls, including a number of voices speaking out on Issue 5 in Toledo. (You are going to the polls aren't you? Come on people! Those intelligent enough to read this blog and the TFP have to be responsible enough to exercise their franchise.) 


So enjoy the cooler weather, curl up with Toledo's largest Sunday circulation newspaper, and find out what's going on while you're waiting for that annoying bunch with their hands out (not those cute little Trick or Treaters, I mean politicians running for office).

Halloween Costumes 2010

Halloween is once more almost upon us, and in the final days leading up to it I have been asked once again (well,kind of asked anyway) to submit my suggestions for timely, effective, and often inexpensive Halloween costumes for this year's celebrations. Like political commercials designed to influence the undecided (and generally annoy the hell out of people), hopefully the ideas here will indeed infuriate, while helping those who remain yet uncommitted to a final disguise decision.

• (Women) Dress in an orange jumpsuit, get passing out drunk, and tell everyone that you're Lindsay Lohan and have just escaped from rehab again.
• (Men - not to be left out of the fun) Put on a Scottish kilt, a leather jacket, and an army helmet; get stinking drunk, and tell them that you're Mel Gibson and that they are all assholes.
• Dress up as President Obama and tell all of the kids Trick or Treating that the lousy candy that they're getting this year is the fault of George Bush and the Republicans.
• Dress up in a flannel shirt, jeans, and a Canadian Tuque (knit cap). When asked, tell them you are Randy Quaid and that someone's trying to kill you.
• Knock on every door and insist that every person participate in the Halloween festivities whether they want to or not. When they ask, tell them you are Congress and you just passed a law mandating it.
• If you are a senior citizen, dress up in a football uniform with a #4 jersey (Packers, Jets, and Vikings uniforms will all do). When anyone asks, tell them you are Brett Favre, cry a little, and say that you are never going to quit Trick or Treating, ever ... then ask to borrow a cell phone.
• Dress in your Sunday finest and wear the plastic smiling mask from a theater on your face. When asked, tell them you are one of the many Republicans running for office expecting to be swept in on the tidal wave of voter support.
• Women can use the alternative of also using their Sunday best, but adding the plastic frown face masque from any theater. When asked, tell them that you're current Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, and just realized that next year you're going to have to go back to flying coach cross-country to get home.
• Wear anything that you like, and Trick or Treat houses in the Toledo area; but refuse all offers of candy, asking for cash instead. If asked (and you will be) simply tell them that you are TARTA (the local bus system) or TPS (the local school system), and once again in financial straits.
• Dress up in an inflatable sumo suit, then cover that with the largest and most hideous suit and tie that you can find (to keep anyone from thinking that you're going as Jabba the Hutt). When anyone asks, you can answer Michael Moore or Dick Morris, depending which side of the political spectrum you find more whorish and detestable. (In Dick's case, perhaps both.)
• For those of you who plan to stay home to greet your costumed guests, I recommend putting on a suit and tie and after greeting your tiny guests, ask them who they are dressed as. When they try to answer, interrupt them before they can finish. When asked about your own costume, you can pick from Fox News analysts Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity.
• If you're Congressional candidate in NW Ohio Rich Iott, don't dress up at all. If you've learned anything in recent days, it's that you shouldn't be playing dress up if you want to run for political office.

I know it's been a bad year this year, but you can still do your part to help the dismal retail numbers out there by buying far more candy than you need for the weekend's festivities. Not only will you be helping the economy by your efforts, but few things can make a person feel better about themselves than the endorphins (chemicals your brain produces) released when you're gorging on huge quantities of chocolate. This method of personal satisfaction will also likely keep you from attempting to steal the required mood swing treats from your childrens' bags.

Have a great Halloween!

Where The Money Is

There are a lot of people wondering why so many seek elected office. They wonder about the time, the effort, and the expense that any candidate is willing to incur for the sake of becoming a 'servant of the people'. Why are so many willing to spend millions of their personal fortunes in fact, to get a job that cannot possibly pay back such financial investment? 


Many are similarly asking these days why so many elected officials seem to find themselves involved with scandal at some point during their tenure in office. How could it be that so many who seek public service seem to find themselves with their hands in the public cookie jar or accepting things that they shouldn't?  


While I certainly wouldn't claim to have all of the answers, I cannot help but wonder if the two might be related. It calls to mind in fact, the quote that the famous bank robber of the 1930's gave to reporter Mitch Ohnstad during an interview. When asked why he robbed banks, Sutton is supposed to have said, "because that's where the money is". (This quote is purported to have been erroneously attributed to Sutton, but may fall under the category of: 'If it's not true, it should be'.) 


I'm not making accusations here, but if you were someone who wanted to (as Sutton described) be where the money is, one could certainly do worse than the federal government. In very few other places can one throw around millions of dollars with such apparent casualness. Few places indeed would allow someone to manipulate billions of dollars with a mere vote. Almost nowhere else on the planet can one even discuss the use of trillions of dollars, than when talking about the largess of the federal government. 


In fact, I would venture that in only two other ventures could one manipulate such vast sums of money ... Major Corporations and Wall Street. Now some have been known to throw around accusations that power brokers in such fields have manipulated these immense funds with almost criminal intent, and largely for their own gain. 


Could it be that there is a connection between the supposed nefarious labors with such funds in the private sector, and the efforts of those seeking to do what appears to be much the same in the public sector? Could it be that this is in fact the reason that so many with careers in either effort in the private sector often end up in government service at some point in their careers? (Assuming of course, that they haven't been caught and charged with a crime earlier.) 


One cannot help but speculate on such subjects in the days leading up to another election. Neither can one help but speculate on the almost desperate efforts that incumbent politicians on both sides of the aisle make in order to keep jobs that we are told are difficult and not particularly well paying.