J.D. Rhoades's Blog, page 9
August 25, 2015
The Drone Menace, Redux
The Pilot Newspaper: Opinion
OK, this whole drone thing is getting out of hand.
You may recall that, back during the U.S. Open, I wrote with some amusement about the Pinehurst Village Council’s attempts to ban drones from the event. Seems they might have been more prescient than I thought. A recent spate of news stories makes one think that drones are moving from the category of “expensive toy for people with more money than sense” to the category of “menace.”Take, for example, an item from fire-ravaged Southern California. According to NBC Los Angeles, the efforts of firefighters battling the so-called “North Fire” were hampered when planes deployed to dump water and chemicals on it were forced away from the blaze by no fewer than five drones of unknown origin hovering in the area (no doubt to take pictures or videos).“This is serious,” said John Miller of the U.S. Forest Service. “[Aircraft] can strike one of these things and one of our aircraft could go down, killing the firefighters in the air.” One fire captain said the drone-caused delay “definitely contributed” to the fire’s jumping of the 15 Freeway.On a less catastrophic but still disturbing note, there’s the story of William Merideth, from Hillview, Kentucky. Merideth apparently took exception to someone flying a drone over his property (and, according to some accounts, ogling his teenage daughter sunning herself on the deck).“When he came down with a video camera right over my back deck, that’s not going to work,” Merideth said. To illustrate just how much that wasn’t going to work, he blasted the little buzzing nuisance out of the sky with his shotgun. A few minutes later, according to Merideth, a carful of angry men pulled up, with one demanding if he was “the [bad word] who shot my drone.” In traditional Kentucky fashion, Merideth met the group with his Glock on his hip, declaring, “If you cross that sidewalk onto my property, there’s going to be another shooting.”Unfortunately, Merideth ended up being the one arrested, charged with “criminal mischief” and “wanton endangerment.” He’s vowed to fight the charges in court. “What other recourse do we have?” he asks.This is one of those areas in which the law simply hasn’t kept up with issues raised by modern technology. We’ve never really had to deal, for example, with the question of just how high up your property line goes. No one would seriously claim an airliner flying at 10,000 feet over your house is trespassing. But what about a drone hovering over your yard at 50 feet, snapping pictures? Exactly how much force are you allowed to use to keep some jackass from annoying, harassing, or otherwise being a jerk with his new $1,500 quad copter?Not much, it appears, since the National Transportation Safety Board recently ruled that even private drones are considered aircraft, and therefore subject to FAA regulation. As you might imagine, shooting down an aircraft is a pretty serious crime, with penalties of up to 20 years in prison, and the law doesn’t currently seem to make any distinction if said “aircraft” is some dude-bro’s expensive toy.No one’s been prosecuted yet under federal law for dronecide, and an FAA spokesman has opined that that would be more of a “destruction of personal property issue and out of our jurisdiction.” However, we are talking about a federal bureaucracy here, so anything’s possible, especially if it’s stupid. Meanwhile, the California legislature is trying to catch up; they’re considering a bill to allow firefighters to “disable” drones that are getting in their way.In light of the Drone Menace, a variety of companies have jumped in to answer Mr. Merideth’s question, “What recourse do we have?” Idaho’s Snake River Shooting Products has begun marketing a special “Drone Munition” shotgun shell. “Prepare for the Drone Apocalypse!” their advertising blares, alongside pictures of threatening drones hovering nearby with glowing red “eyes.”
A company called Droneshield can sell you a “net gun” to snag drones out of the sky. If you really want to go whole hog, the German company MBDA has tested a “laser effector to acquire, track and defeat a free-flying mini-drone.” It’ll probably only set you back a few million. It should be noted, however, that the FAA also frowns on you turning a flying object into a couple hundred pounds of flaming wreckage over populated areas.As few as five years ago, if you’d told me that clueless goobers flying hopped-up toy helicopters controlled by their cellphones would even be a thing, let alone a societal problem, I’d have laughed in your face. But these are the times we live in. What next?
OK, this whole drone thing is getting out of hand.
You may recall that, back during the U.S. Open, I wrote with some amusement about the Pinehurst Village Council’s attempts to ban drones from the event. Seems they might have been more prescient than I thought. A recent spate of news stories makes one think that drones are moving from the category of “expensive toy for people with more money than sense” to the category of “menace.”Take, for example, an item from fire-ravaged Southern California. According to NBC Los Angeles, the efforts of firefighters battling the so-called “North Fire” were hampered when planes deployed to dump water and chemicals on it were forced away from the blaze by no fewer than five drones of unknown origin hovering in the area (no doubt to take pictures or videos).“This is serious,” said John Miller of the U.S. Forest Service. “[Aircraft] can strike one of these things and one of our aircraft could go down, killing the firefighters in the air.” One fire captain said the drone-caused delay “definitely contributed” to the fire’s jumping of the 15 Freeway.On a less catastrophic but still disturbing note, there’s the story of William Merideth, from Hillview, Kentucky. Merideth apparently took exception to someone flying a drone over his property (and, according to some accounts, ogling his teenage daughter sunning herself on the deck).“When he came down with a video camera right over my back deck, that’s not going to work,” Merideth said. To illustrate just how much that wasn’t going to work, he blasted the little buzzing nuisance out of the sky with his shotgun. A few minutes later, according to Merideth, a carful of angry men pulled up, with one demanding if he was “the [bad word] who shot my drone.” In traditional Kentucky fashion, Merideth met the group with his Glock on his hip, declaring, “If you cross that sidewalk onto my property, there’s going to be another shooting.”Unfortunately, Merideth ended up being the one arrested, charged with “criminal mischief” and “wanton endangerment.” He’s vowed to fight the charges in court. “What other recourse do we have?” he asks.This is one of those areas in which the law simply hasn’t kept up with issues raised by modern technology. We’ve never really had to deal, for example, with the question of just how high up your property line goes. No one would seriously claim an airliner flying at 10,000 feet over your house is trespassing. But what about a drone hovering over your yard at 50 feet, snapping pictures? Exactly how much force are you allowed to use to keep some jackass from annoying, harassing, or otherwise being a jerk with his new $1,500 quad copter?Not much, it appears, since the National Transportation Safety Board recently ruled that even private drones are considered aircraft, and therefore subject to FAA regulation. As you might imagine, shooting down an aircraft is a pretty serious crime, with penalties of up to 20 years in prison, and the law doesn’t currently seem to make any distinction if said “aircraft” is some dude-bro’s expensive toy.No one’s been prosecuted yet under federal law for dronecide, and an FAA spokesman has opined that that would be more of a “destruction of personal property issue and out of our jurisdiction.” However, we are talking about a federal bureaucracy here, so anything’s possible, especially if it’s stupid. Meanwhile, the California legislature is trying to catch up; they’re considering a bill to allow firefighters to “disable” drones that are getting in their way.In light of the Drone Menace, a variety of companies have jumped in to answer Mr. Merideth’s question, “What recourse do we have?” Idaho’s Snake River Shooting Products has begun marketing a special “Drone Munition” shotgun shell. “Prepare for the Drone Apocalypse!” their advertising blares, alongside pictures of threatening drones hovering nearby with glowing red “eyes.”
A company called Droneshield can sell you a “net gun” to snag drones out of the sky. If you really want to go whole hog, the German company MBDA has tested a “laser effector to acquire, track and defeat a free-flying mini-drone.” It’ll probably only set you back a few million. It should be noted, however, that the FAA also frowns on you turning a flying object into a couple hundred pounds of flaming wreckage over populated areas.As few as five years ago, if you’d told me that clueless goobers flying hopped-up toy helicopters controlled by their cellphones would even be a thing, let alone a societal problem, I’d have laughed in your face. But these are the times we live in. What next?
August 16, 2015
Two Sides of the PC Coin
The Pilot Newspaper: Opinion
Republican leader Donald Trump tells us that “the big problem this country has is being politically correct.” Not the deficit, not ISIS, not Iran — being politically correct. So let’s talk about political correctness, what it means, and what its limits are.To begin with, let me just say that when anyone prefaces a statement with “I know it’s not politically correct to say this,” it’s a safe bet that the next words are going to be something racist, misogynistic, or just generally awful.“I’m not politically correct” is basically just code words for, “I am a terrible person who’s going to try and make being a terrible person look edgy and daring.”To that end, fantasy writer Neil Gaiman suggested that you see how it sounds when you replace the words “political correctness” with “treating people with respect.” A bright young New Zealander named Byron Clark responded by creating a web browser extension that does just that. So you get altered headlines like “N.C. Senator Compares Treating People With Respect to Nazi Book Burning”; “Trump Says Treating People With Respect Big Problem”; and “‘Black Lives Matter’ Movement Is Treating People With Respect Run Amok.”Makes you think, doesn’t it?Ah, but then on the other hand …I also read an article recently in The Atlantic describing the process aspiring comedians go through to try and get on the lucrative college circuit. There’s apparently a big convention for the National Association of College Activities (NACA) where representatives of “more than 350 colleges” come to audition various acts — including comics — to play their campuses during the school year.“But the students’ taste in entertainment,” the article notes, “was uniform. ... They wanted comedy that was 100 percent risk-free, comedy that could not trigger or upset or mildly trouble a single student.”Well geez, what fun is that?Not much, as it turns out. The article talks about a prospect named Kevin Yee, “A young gay man with a Broadway background,” who delighted his audience with funny songs, including his closing number about “the close relationship that can develop between a gay man and his ‘sassy black friend.’”According to the article, “The kids roared in delight, and several African American young women in the crowd seemed to be self-identifying as sassy black friends. … But afterward, two white students from an Iowa college shook their heads: No. He was ‘perpetuating stereotypes,’ one of them said, firmly. … ‘That thing about the sassy black friend? That wouldn’t work for us.’”(Notice how it’s two white kids setting themselves up as the guardians of black people’s feelings and sensibilities here? That should raise a bit of a red flag in and of itself, no? But I digress.)So there’s the dilemma. Certainly we want to show respect for people and their feelings. On the other hand, we don’t want to kill comedy. Comedy’s important.And here’s the thing: Comedy is supposed to be disrespectful, and very good comedy may very well make you a little uncomfortable. The best examples I can think of are the late Richard Pryor (who could do a 15-minute story about his own heart attack and leave you rolling on the floor right along with him) and, more recently, female comics like Amy Schumer and Tig Notaro, who take solid aim at uncomfortable topics like sexism and even cancer (in Notaro’s case) and hilariously make then less scary or insurmountable by making them ridiculous.
But where does the line lie? At what point does even comedy turn into just being a jerk? After all, isn’t “Gee, can’t you take a joke?” one of the other verbal warning signs that you’re dealing with a bully or otherwise awful person?There’s no hard and fast answer. But one thing to consider is: In which direction are you punching? Up, down, or sideways?Punching up is making fun of the powerful and pompous, like, say, Donald Trump. Punching down, in contrast, is mocking those less powerful than you, like minorities, women, LGBT people, or the disabled.(And no, white straight male Christians, those people are not more powerful than you are in America, despite whatever claptrap Fox News and other right-wing fear merchants have sold you. Believe me, you’re still on top of the American food chain.)Punching sideways is making fun of yourself or people like you — as when Jeff Foxworthy talks about things that show “you might be a redneck” while members of his audience laughingly point at each other and go, “That’s you, Cousin Bubba! That’s you!”
Punching up or sideways is fine. Punching down doesn’t make you “politically incorrect”; it just makes you a bully and a jerk. That’s true whether you’re trying to be funny or not.
Republican leader Donald Trump tells us that “the big problem this country has is being politically correct.” Not the deficit, not ISIS, not Iran — being politically correct. So let’s talk about political correctness, what it means, and what its limits are.To begin with, let me just say that when anyone prefaces a statement with “I know it’s not politically correct to say this,” it’s a safe bet that the next words are going to be something racist, misogynistic, or just generally awful.“I’m not politically correct” is basically just code words for, “I am a terrible person who’s going to try and make being a terrible person look edgy and daring.”To that end, fantasy writer Neil Gaiman suggested that you see how it sounds when you replace the words “political correctness” with “treating people with respect.” A bright young New Zealander named Byron Clark responded by creating a web browser extension that does just that. So you get altered headlines like “N.C. Senator Compares Treating People With Respect to Nazi Book Burning”; “Trump Says Treating People With Respect Big Problem”; and “‘Black Lives Matter’ Movement Is Treating People With Respect Run Amok.”Makes you think, doesn’t it?Ah, but then on the other hand …I also read an article recently in The Atlantic describing the process aspiring comedians go through to try and get on the lucrative college circuit. There’s apparently a big convention for the National Association of College Activities (NACA) where representatives of “more than 350 colleges” come to audition various acts — including comics — to play their campuses during the school year.“But the students’ taste in entertainment,” the article notes, “was uniform. ... They wanted comedy that was 100 percent risk-free, comedy that could not trigger or upset or mildly trouble a single student.”Well geez, what fun is that?Not much, as it turns out. The article talks about a prospect named Kevin Yee, “A young gay man with a Broadway background,” who delighted his audience with funny songs, including his closing number about “the close relationship that can develop between a gay man and his ‘sassy black friend.’”According to the article, “The kids roared in delight, and several African American young women in the crowd seemed to be self-identifying as sassy black friends. … But afterward, two white students from an Iowa college shook their heads: No. He was ‘perpetuating stereotypes,’ one of them said, firmly. … ‘That thing about the sassy black friend? That wouldn’t work for us.’”(Notice how it’s two white kids setting themselves up as the guardians of black people’s feelings and sensibilities here? That should raise a bit of a red flag in and of itself, no? But I digress.)So there’s the dilemma. Certainly we want to show respect for people and their feelings. On the other hand, we don’t want to kill comedy. Comedy’s important.And here’s the thing: Comedy is supposed to be disrespectful, and very good comedy may very well make you a little uncomfortable. The best examples I can think of are the late Richard Pryor (who could do a 15-minute story about his own heart attack and leave you rolling on the floor right along with him) and, more recently, female comics like Amy Schumer and Tig Notaro, who take solid aim at uncomfortable topics like sexism and even cancer (in Notaro’s case) and hilariously make then less scary or insurmountable by making them ridiculous.
But where does the line lie? At what point does even comedy turn into just being a jerk? After all, isn’t “Gee, can’t you take a joke?” one of the other verbal warning signs that you’re dealing with a bully or otherwise awful person?There’s no hard and fast answer. But one thing to consider is: In which direction are you punching? Up, down, or sideways?Punching up is making fun of the powerful and pompous, like, say, Donald Trump. Punching down, in contrast, is mocking those less powerful than you, like minorities, women, LGBT people, or the disabled.(And no, white straight male Christians, those people are not more powerful than you are in America, despite whatever claptrap Fox News and other right-wing fear merchants have sold you. Believe me, you’re still on top of the American food chain.)Punching sideways is making fun of yourself or people like you — as when Jeff Foxworthy talks about things that show “you might be a redneck” while members of his audience laughingly point at each other and go, “That’s you, Cousin Bubba! That’s you!”
Punching up or sideways is fine. Punching down doesn’t make you “politically incorrect”; it just makes you a bully and a jerk. That’s true whether you’re trying to be funny or not.
August 2, 2015
And When You Lose Control, You'll Reap The Harvest You Have Sown
The Pilot Newspaper: Opinion
You know, you can say what you like about Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Sen. Jim Webb and that dude from Maryland whose name escapes me right now, but at least for the moment they’re campaigning like grownups. In contrast, look at some of the wacky antics of the Republicans:John McCain calls Donald Trump’s supporters “crazies.” Trump shoots back that McCain’s really not a war hero because “he got captured. I like people who didn’t get captured.” Lindsey Graham responds by telling Trump to stop being a “jackass.” Trump turns on Graham and calls him an “idiot” and a “lightweight.”Rick Perry calls “Trumpism” a “mix of demagoguery and nonsense,” whereupon Trump says Rick Perry’s “only wearing glasses to try and look smart.” Ted Cruz calls Mitch McConnell a “liar,” whereupon McConnell tells Cruz his mama’s so ugly they’ve got to tie a pork chop around her neck to get the dog to play with her.OK, I made that last bit up. But it does seem as if the party that at least tried to market itself as serious adult leadership for America during the Reagan years is acting these days like a bunch of poorly socialized 13-year-olds sniping at each other on Twitter.The coarsening of dialogue between the Republican candidates has been described by some pundits as “the Trump effect.” Some candidates see Trump’s poll numbers increase with every bullying sneer and insult and think, “Hey, I need to get me some of that.”But The Donald is merely reaping the harvest that’s been sown over the past 20 years by talk radio and the Internet, where the competition for ears and eyeballs has become so intense that wingnut politicians seem to be straining their brains trying to find something to say more horrible and outrageous than the last thing.It’s what the Internet calls “trolling”: trying to shock and enrage in order to get attention, even if it’s of the negative kind. It’s an environment in which supposed “pundits” like Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin get air time and book contracts because “they make liberals angry.” It’s a climate of drama and hysteria, in which every political defeat simply must be portrayed as the exact same thing as the Holocaust. Or slavery. Or both.Witness, for example, Mike Huckabee’s ridiculous claim that the multilateral Iran nuclear deal is, and I quote, “marching Israel to the door of the oven,” a line which even the Anti-Defamation League called “completely out of line and unacceptable” and the Israeli ambassador said was “inappropriate.” But hey, it got headlines — and, Huckabee is no doubt praying, the same bump in the polls that Trump gets whenever he comes out with something that makes people look at each other and go, “Did he really say that?”For years, the Republican Party has turned a blind eye to, and occasionally even embraced, the crudest attacks on its opponents, from Congressman Dan Burton referring to then-President Bill Clinton as a “scumbag” on the floor of the House to Rush Limbaugh calling Sandra Fluke a “slut” and a “prostitute” and demanding that he be allowed to watch her have sex if the health insurance for which she worked and paid was required to cover birth control.All this time, of course, these same Republicans would fall onto their fainting couches and clutch at their pearls in distress at the mildest harsh language directed at them. It’s more than a little ironic that many of the same people who cry like little girls over “name-calling” now embrace Trump, the candidate who’s made it his campaign strategy.The rhetorical monster the GOP has nurtured is now fully grown and, as monsters do, it’s escaped the lab and is attacking its creators. Add to this the fecklessness of the so-called party leadership as exemplified in the utterly ineffectual Orange John Boehner and the equally helpless Mitch McConnell, and you have the perfect recipe for the current disarray in the GOP.So who will benefit the most from the chaos? Obviously, whoever ends up with the Democratic nomination. Right now, that still looks like Hillary Clinton. On the Republican side, however, you’ve got two candidates — former Ohio governor Jon Kasich and John Ellis Bush, aka JEB! — trying to position themselves as the grownups in the race.Will either emerge to give Mrs. Clinton a serious run, or will they be eaten by the GOP rage monster, leaving the nomination to one of the “crazies” who’ll alienate the general electorate and hand the presidency to the Dem nominee?Stay tuned. But my money’s on the monster.
You know, you can say what you like about Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Sen. Jim Webb and that dude from Maryland whose name escapes me right now, but at least for the moment they’re campaigning like grownups. In contrast, look at some of the wacky antics of the Republicans:John McCain calls Donald Trump’s supporters “crazies.” Trump shoots back that McCain’s really not a war hero because “he got captured. I like people who didn’t get captured.” Lindsey Graham responds by telling Trump to stop being a “jackass.” Trump turns on Graham and calls him an “idiot” and a “lightweight.”Rick Perry calls “Trumpism” a “mix of demagoguery and nonsense,” whereupon Trump says Rick Perry’s “only wearing glasses to try and look smart.” Ted Cruz calls Mitch McConnell a “liar,” whereupon McConnell tells Cruz his mama’s so ugly they’ve got to tie a pork chop around her neck to get the dog to play with her.OK, I made that last bit up. But it does seem as if the party that at least tried to market itself as serious adult leadership for America during the Reagan years is acting these days like a bunch of poorly socialized 13-year-olds sniping at each other on Twitter.The coarsening of dialogue between the Republican candidates has been described by some pundits as “the Trump effect.” Some candidates see Trump’s poll numbers increase with every bullying sneer and insult and think, “Hey, I need to get me some of that.”But The Donald is merely reaping the harvest that’s been sown over the past 20 years by talk radio and the Internet, where the competition for ears and eyeballs has become so intense that wingnut politicians seem to be straining their brains trying to find something to say more horrible and outrageous than the last thing.It’s what the Internet calls “trolling”: trying to shock and enrage in order to get attention, even if it’s of the negative kind. It’s an environment in which supposed “pundits” like Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin get air time and book contracts because “they make liberals angry.” It’s a climate of drama and hysteria, in which every political defeat simply must be portrayed as the exact same thing as the Holocaust. Or slavery. Or both.Witness, for example, Mike Huckabee’s ridiculous claim that the multilateral Iran nuclear deal is, and I quote, “marching Israel to the door of the oven,” a line which even the Anti-Defamation League called “completely out of line and unacceptable” and the Israeli ambassador said was “inappropriate.” But hey, it got headlines — and, Huckabee is no doubt praying, the same bump in the polls that Trump gets whenever he comes out with something that makes people look at each other and go, “Did he really say that?”For years, the Republican Party has turned a blind eye to, and occasionally even embraced, the crudest attacks on its opponents, from Congressman Dan Burton referring to then-President Bill Clinton as a “scumbag” on the floor of the House to Rush Limbaugh calling Sandra Fluke a “slut” and a “prostitute” and demanding that he be allowed to watch her have sex if the health insurance for which she worked and paid was required to cover birth control.All this time, of course, these same Republicans would fall onto their fainting couches and clutch at their pearls in distress at the mildest harsh language directed at them. It’s more than a little ironic that many of the same people who cry like little girls over “name-calling” now embrace Trump, the candidate who’s made it his campaign strategy.The rhetorical monster the GOP has nurtured is now fully grown and, as monsters do, it’s escaped the lab and is attacking its creators. Add to this the fecklessness of the so-called party leadership as exemplified in the utterly ineffectual Orange John Boehner and the equally helpless Mitch McConnell, and you have the perfect recipe for the current disarray in the GOP.So who will benefit the most from the chaos? Obviously, whoever ends up with the Democratic nomination. Right now, that still looks like Hillary Clinton. On the Republican side, however, you’ve got two candidates — former Ohio governor Jon Kasich and John Ellis Bush, aka JEB! — trying to position themselves as the grownups in the race.Will either emerge to give Mrs. Clinton a serious run, or will they be eaten by the GOP rage monster, leaving the nomination to one of the “crazies” who’ll alienate the general electorate and hand the presidency to the Dem nominee?Stay tuned. But my money’s on the monster.
July 19, 2015
Its The End of The World As We Know It (And I Feel Fine)
The Pilot Newspaper: Columns
First, a correction from last week’s column.
In that column, I reported that Donald Trump was polling second in the crowded field of Republican candidates. Between the time of the writing of the column and its publication date on Sunday, Trump became the front-runner.This columnist regrets the error, but probably not as much as the GOP regrets having Trump in the lead for the nomination, since the same poll shows Hillary Clinton beating him by 17 points. Anyway, on with the show.Well, I expected a complete freakout on the right after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision striking down bans on same-sex marriage. But I have to say, the drama queenery, raging paranoia and hysteria exceeded even my wildest expectations.Some of it took the form of dire predictions of what happens next, as if the legal sanction of lifelong monogamy between consenting adults is the key that will inevitably unlock the floodgates to practitioners of every imaginable perversion.This wingnut trope was most bizarrely expressed by former Texas Rep. and “Dancing With the Stars” contestant Tom DeLay. DeLay told Newsmax TV that he’s found a “secret Justice Department memo” that reveals “they’re now going to go after 12 new perversions, things like bestiality, polygamy, having sex with little boys and making that legal. … LGBT is only the beginning.”It should be noted that DeLay only specifically mentioned three out of the 12 “new perversions” the DOJ is preparing to “legalize.” Wonder what the other nine are? On second thought, probably best to just let that go. Imaginations like that are best left unexplored.Not content to torment themselves with fevered dreams of what nasty things others might soon be doing legally, a certain segment of Christians is pretty much convinced that the gays and the liberals are going to treat them pretty much the way they’ve advocated treating LGBT people. Some are even convinced the Christians who don’t back gay marriage are going to be jailed for their beliefs.In fact, Donald and Evelyn Knapp, owners of a for-profit wedding chapel in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, have filed a lawsuit claiming they could face up to 180 years in jail under the town’s anti-discrimination ordinance for refusing to perform a same-sex wedding.Only problem is, no one’s threatened the Knapps with any such penalty, the ordinance in question specifically exempts “religious corporations” like the Knapps’ “Hitching Post Wedding Chapel” from its coverage, and the very Supreme Court decision that legalized gay marriage specifically states that “religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned.”That, however, doesn’t stop people like Republican presidential candidate and Ted Nugent sideman Mike Huckabee from repeating the falsehood that the Knapps are being threatened with almost two centuries of jail time, apparently by the voices in their heads.Finally, there are the people predicting that, because of the action of the Supreme Court in lifting bans on same sex marriage, God himself will either smite our country or allow evildoers to do so, leading to thousands, hundreds of thousands, or even millions, of deaths.“God’s hand of protection will be withdrawn,” said Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas, “as future actions from external and internal forces will soon make clear.” (Texas again. What IS it with these people?) Fox News pundit Todd Starnes even blamed recent heavy rains and flooding in the D.C. area on the Lord’s pique over the Supreme Court decision.“Anyone got an ark?” he quipped.This particular style of “prophecy” has always bugged me, by the way, as it implies that God will indulge his wrath by indiscriminate slaughter of both the just and the unjust, including, one supposes, opponents of gay marriage. I’m glad I don’t follow that God, because I’ve got to tell you, that one’s kind of a psycho.Look, folks, the day Obergefell vs. Hodges, the landmark case legalizing same-sex marriage in all 50 states, was decided, I woke up, kissed my wife, and took her to her doctor’s appointment. Later that day, we took the dog to the vet together. (Everyone’s fine, thanks for asking). The week after, I helped my son move. Nothing that happened at the Supreme Court affected my marriage or my obligations to my family in the slightest. And it doesn’t affect you.If you don’t like same-sex marriage, then don’t do it. If you’re a member of the clergy and you don’t want to perform a same-sex wedding, then don’t. It’s that simple. There’s no need to panic, file lawsuits to prevent things that aren’t going to happen, or flee the country to avoid God’s fiery and indiscriminate wrath.It’s going to be OK, y’all. Really.
First, a correction from last week’s column.
In that column, I reported that Donald Trump was polling second in the crowded field of Republican candidates. Between the time of the writing of the column and its publication date on Sunday, Trump became the front-runner.This columnist regrets the error, but probably not as much as the GOP regrets having Trump in the lead for the nomination, since the same poll shows Hillary Clinton beating him by 17 points. Anyway, on with the show.Well, I expected a complete freakout on the right after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision striking down bans on same-sex marriage. But I have to say, the drama queenery, raging paranoia and hysteria exceeded even my wildest expectations.Some of it took the form of dire predictions of what happens next, as if the legal sanction of lifelong monogamy between consenting adults is the key that will inevitably unlock the floodgates to practitioners of every imaginable perversion.This wingnut trope was most bizarrely expressed by former Texas Rep. and “Dancing With the Stars” contestant Tom DeLay. DeLay told Newsmax TV that he’s found a “secret Justice Department memo” that reveals “they’re now going to go after 12 new perversions, things like bestiality, polygamy, having sex with little boys and making that legal. … LGBT is only the beginning.”It should be noted that DeLay only specifically mentioned three out of the 12 “new perversions” the DOJ is preparing to “legalize.” Wonder what the other nine are? On second thought, probably best to just let that go. Imaginations like that are best left unexplored.Not content to torment themselves with fevered dreams of what nasty things others might soon be doing legally, a certain segment of Christians is pretty much convinced that the gays and the liberals are going to treat them pretty much the way they’ve advocated treating LGBT people. Some are even convinced the Christians who don’t back gay marriage are going to be jailed for their beliefs.In fact, Donald and Evelyn Knapp, owners of a for-profit wedding chapel in Coeur d’Alene, Idaho, have filed a lawsuit claiming they could face up to 180 years in jail under the town’s anti-discrimination ordinance for refusing to perform a same-sex wedding.Only problem is, no one’s threatened the Knapps with any such penalty, the ordinance in question specifically exempts “religious corporations” like the Knapps’ “Hitching Post Wedding Chapel” from its coverage, and the very Supreme Court decision that legalized gay marriage specifically states that “religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned.”That, however, doesn’t stop people like Republican presidential candidate and Ted Nugent sideman Mike Huckabee from repeating the falsehood that the Knapps are being threatened with almost two centuries of jail time, apparently by the voices in their heads.Finally, there are the people predicting that, because of the action of the Supreme Court in lifting bans on same sex marriage, God himself will either smite our country or allow evildoers to do so, leading to thousands, hundreds of thousands, or even millions, of deaths.“God’s hand of protection will be withdrawn,” said Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas, “as future actions from external and internal forces will soon make clear.” (Texas again. What IS it with these people?) Fox News pundit Todd Starnes even blamed recent heavy rains and flooding in the D.C. area on the Lord’s pique over the Supreme Court decision.“Anyone got an ark?” he quipped.This particular style of “prophecy” has always bugged me, by the way, as it implies that God will indulge his wrath by indiscriminate slaughter of both the just and the unjust, including, one supposes, opponents of gay marriage. I’m glad I don’t follow that God, because I’ve got to tell you, that one’s kind of a psycho.Look, folks, the day Obergefell vs. Hodges, the landmark case legalizing same-sex marriage in all 50 states, was decided, I woke up, kissed my wife, and took her to her doctor’s appointment. Later that day, we took the dog to the vet together. (Everyone’s fine, thanks for asking). The week after, I helped my son move. Nothing that happened at the Supreme Court affected my marriage or my obligations to my family in the slightest. And it doesn’t affect you.If you don’t like same-sex marriage, then don’t do it. If you’re a member of the clergy and you don’t want to perform a same-sex wedding, then don’t. It’s that simple. There’s no need to panic, file lawsuits to prevent things that aren’t going to happen, or flee the country to avoid God’s fiery and indiscriminate wrath.It’s going to be OK, y’all. Really.
July 7, 2015
Beware Twitrage
The Pilot Newspaper: Opinion
Happy Sunday, friends, and welcome to “This Week in Twitrage,” where once again we report on people’s propensity to go off half-cocked (sometimes as little as one-quarter or one-eighth cocked) and take to the Internet like Cheeto-stained Paul Reveres to spread the alarm about some outrageous story they’ve heard.
Said story, more often than not, turns out to be a total hoax, fabrication, half-truth or crazy rumor being reported as fact by our incredibly credulous news media.Last week was a fertile one for Twitrage, what with the continued fallout from the Charleston terrorist attack, the controversy over the Confederate battle flag, and the Supreme Court’s bombshell decision upholding the right of same-sex couples to marry.First, there was the picture making the rounds on Twitter and Facebook after Amazon.com, among other retailers, announced that it was pulling Confederate flag merchandise off its site.This latest expression of Neo-Confederate butthurt claimed, and I quote: “You can’t buy a Confederate flag on Amazon, but you can buy this ISIS flag,” followed by a supposed screenshot of an Amazon page offering to sell one of the terrorist group’s amateurishly designed black and white flags. And the thing wasn’t even eligible for Free Amazon Prime shipping. The nerve!
Pretty outrageous, huh? If you can purchase one symbol of a group violently hostile to the United States, why shouldn’t you be able to grab another, right? Well, as it turns out, you can’t buy either on Amazon. I myself did a search for “ISIS Flag,” “ISIL Flag,” “Islamic State Flag” and “Daesh Flag” (hey, I’m already probably on a half-dozen watch lists, so what harm can it do now?)No results. The folks at the urban legends site Snopes.com dug a little deeper and found an archived page for a vendor selling ISIS flags that went up in May — and was quickly taken down. So no, as of right now, you cannot buy either a Confederate flag or an ISIS flag on Amazon.Then there’s Don Stair of Little Rock, Ark., who was mightily offended by the actions of his local TV station when they adorned their logo with what he called the “gay colors” of the Rainbow Flag after the Supreme Court’s historic decision. “Just stay out of it,” Don tweeted furiously.Problem is, the station in question, KARK-TV, is an NBC affiliate, the logo in question is the NBC peacock, and that rainbow color scheme has always been part of it.I recall it as far back as my own childhood, when the network used the Bird (as it called it) to tout that its programming was presented “in living color!”
Hey — who knows? — maybe they were all gayed up back then, too.The left had its own episode of Twitrage over the alleged “coddling” of accused (and admitted) Charleston church shooter Dylann Roof. In particular, people were unhappy with reports that Roof, who’s white, had been “taken to Burger King” on his way to the police station after being apprehended. They point out that a lot of the black suspects we hear about lately have tended to get shot, asphyxiated, slammed around inside of police vans, and otherwise killed. And this murderer gets to “have it his way”?Well, as it turns out, Roof wasn’t exactly taken to the drive-through and given a gift card. Some officer may have gone and gotten Roof a burger while he was locked in a conference room in the Shelby, N.C., Police Department waiting for the feds and the Charleston police to arrive, but you know what? That’s not all that unusual, especially with a subject you’d really like to get a confession from.And let’s face it, you can’t just starve prisoners in your custody, even ones accused of mass murder. So once again, there’s less to this “outrage” than meets the eye.Look, folks, “I saw something on the Internet” is not a reason to automatically get your dander up. I’ve seen pictures of rabbits with antelope horns and a video of a little gray alien peeking in a man’s window on the Internet, too. It doesn’t mean we have to believe in either of those things.The World Wide Web is full of useful information. It’s also full of useless and dangerous lies. Take the time to keep calm, do the research, and learn which is which.
Happy Sunday, friends, and welcome to “This Week in Twitrage,” where once again we report on people’s propensity to go off half-cocked (sometimes as little as one-quarter or one-eighth cocked) and take to the Internet like Cheeto-stained Paul Reveres to spread the alarm about some outrageous story they’ve heard.
Said story, more often than not, turns out to be a total hoax, fabrication, half-truth or crazy rumor being reported as fact by our incredibly credulous news media.Last week was a fertile one for Twitrage, what with the continued fallout from the Charleston terrorist attack, the controversy over the Confederate battle flag, and the Supreme Court’s bombshell decision upholding the right of same-sex couples to marry.First, there was the picture making the rounds on Twitter and Facebook after Amazon.com, among other retailers, announced that it was pulling Confederate flag merchandise off its site.This latest expression of Neo-Confederate butthurt claimed, and I quote: “You can’t buy a Confederate flag on Amazon, but you can buy this ISIS flag,” followed by a supposed screenshot of an Amazon page offering to sell one of the terrorist group’s amateurishly designed black and white flags. And the thing wasn’t even eligible for Free Amazon Prime shipping. The nerve!
Pretty outrageous, huh? If you can purchase one symbol of a group violently hostile to the United States, why shouldn’t you be able to grab another, right? Well, as it turns out, you can’t buy either on Amazon. I myself did a search for “ISIS Flag,” “ISIL Flag,” “Islamic State Flag” and “Daesh Flag” (hey, I’m already probably on a half-dozen watch lists, so what harm can it do now?)No results. The folks at the urban legends site Snopes.com dug a little deeper and found an archived page for a vendor selling ISIS flags that went up in May — and was quickly taken down. So no, as of right now, you cannot buy either a Confederate flag or an ISIS flag on Amazon.Then there’s Don Stair of Little Rock, Ark., who was mightily offended by the actions of his local TV station when they adorned their logo with what he called the “gay colors” of the Rainbow Flag after the Supreme Court’s historic decision. “Just stay out of it,” Don tweeted furiously.Problem is, the station in question, KARK-TV, is an NBC affiliate, the logo in question is the NBC peacock, and that rainbow color scheme has always been part of it.I recall it as far back as my own childhood, when the network used the Bird (as it called it) to tout that its programming was presented “in living color!”
Hey — who knows? — maybe they were all gayed up back then, too.The left had its own episode of Twitrage over the alleged “coddling” of accused (and admitted) Charleston church shooter Dylann Roof. In particular, people were unhappy with reports that Roof, who’s white, had been “taken to Burger King” on his way to the police station after being apprehended. They point out that a lot of the black suspects we hear about lately have tended to get shot, asphyxiated, slammed around inside of police vans, and otherwise killed. And this murderer gets to “have it his way”?Well, as it turns out, Roof wasn’t exactly taken to the drive-through and given a gift card. Some officer may have gone and gotten Roof a burger while he was locked in a conference room in the Shelby, N.C., Police Department waiting for the feds and the Charleston police to arrive, but you know what? That’s not all that unusual, especially with a subject you’d really like to get a confession from.And let’s face it, you can’t just starve prisoners in your custody, even ones accused of mass murder. So once again, there’s less to this “outrage” than meets the eye.Look, folks, “I saw something on the Internet” is not a reason to automatically get your dander up. I’ve seen pictures of rabbits with antelope horns and a video of a little gray alien peeking in a man’s window on the Internet, too. It doesn’t mean we have to believe in either of those things.The World Wide Web is full of useful information. It’s also full of useless and dangerous lies. Take the time to keep calm, do the research, and learn which is which.
June 28, 2015
Taking Down That Flag Is Just a Start
The Pilot Newspaper: Opinion
Last week, an avowed white supremacist walked into the Mother Emanuel Church of Charleston, S.C., spent an hour in prayer with members of the congregation, then pulled out a gun and started shooting, explicitly stating, “I’m here to kill black people.”
This terrorist — there’s really no other word for him — later told police he wanted to start a “race war.” It’s gratifying to see that people don’t seem inclined to oblige him. Even relatives of the victims told the admitted shooter, a wormy-looking little gobshite named Dylann Roof, that they forgave him, thus showing that they’re better people than me.That’s admittedly not a high bar. But still, it’s pretty impressive. In the wake of this terrible tragedy, there are a number of discussions we could be having. Discussions about race, of course. Discussions about the easy availability of guns to people who have so many obvious screws loose that you’re surprised they don’t rattle as they walk down the street.Curiously, however, the issue that people seem to have fixated on is the Confederate battle flag, and whether it’s appropriate for a state government to display it. I get that it’s relevant, because Roof, like many racists, seems to have a particular affinity for the battle flag. Still, I can’t help but wonder if maybe we’re missing a chance to make a larger point.South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley reversed her previous stance on her state government’s display of the flag, which was basically, “Eh, no one really cares.” Now, she’s all for moving the flag off the state Capitol grounds and putting it in a museum with other relics of the past.She’s not alone. Even South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, who last week was insisting that the battle flag is “part of who we are,” suddenly realized he was going to need black votes in the South Carolina presidential primary and thus was standing beside Gov. Haley as she called for its removal.Mississippi is reported to be considering a similar move. [note, after this column was turned in they decided to keep the flag]. I hear that our own Gov. Pat McCrory has even suggested that the battle flag be removed from North Carolina’s special commemorative license plates, and Virginia may be about to follow suit.Corporate America, it seems, is getting on the bandwagon. Amazon.com announced it was pulling all Confederate battle flag merchandise, as did Sears, eBay and even the mighty Walmart.All of which is fine, because like it or not, people do care. The battle flag is a symbol to an awful lot of people of a legacy of slavery and brutal oppression. You may say it’s about “heritage, not hate,” but for African-Americans, particularly in the South, that’s actually the problem. Hate and violence directed against them are inseparable parts of that heritage.By the way, if you’d like to use this topic as a springboard for expounding about how the Civil War wasn’t “really about slavery,” please don’t even try do so until you’ve looked up the Declarations of Causes of the various Southern states, in which those states, explicitly and at great length, tell everyone that they’re leaving the Union because of slavery.Seriously, look them up. They changed my mind on this issue, and if they don’t change yours, there’s no hope for you.Then there’s the whole treason thing. Sorry, but there’s really no way around this: The U.S. Constitution defines “treason” as, among other things, “levying war against the United States.” The Confederate battle flag is a one under which people “levied war” against the U.S. It’s a bit strange to loudly declare your love for your country and your adherence to the Constitution and still fly the flag of the people who committed treason against it as defined in that very document.So, if the battle flag does get taken down from every state house, license plate and Walmart and is relegated to Klan rallies and performances by third-rate Lynyrd Skynyrd tribute bands, I won’t mourn. But it’s not enough.I’m not trying to be Benny Buzzkill here, but I’m wondering if the battle flag is being used as a sacrifice, something no politician really cared about deep down and that they’re now willing to throw under the bus to make it look as if something’s being done about racism.When the last battle flag comes down. racism will still be here, will still be a cancer on our society — but, I fear, will still be unaddressed by the people in power, who’ll be going, “What the heck do those people want!? We stopped flying that flag like they wanted!”The battle flag needs, at last, to come down. But if that’s where the dialogue ends, then the memories of the nine who died at Mother Emanuel Church will not be well-served.
Last week, an avowed white supremacist walked into the Mother Emanuel Church of Charleston, S.C., spent an hour in prayer with members of the congregation, then pulled out a gun and started shooting, explicitly stating, “I’m here to kill black people.”
This terrorist — there’s really no other word for him — later told police he wanted to start a “race war.” It’s gratifying to see that people don’t seem inclined to oblige him. Even relatives of the victims told the admitted shooter, a wormy-looking little gobshite named Dylann Roof, that they forgave him, thus showing that they’re better people than me.That’s admittedly not a high bar. But still, it’s pretty impressive. In the wake of this terrible tragedy, there are a number of discussions we could be having. Discussions about race, of course. Discussions about the easy availability of guns to people who have so many obvious screws loose that you’re surprised they don’t rattle as they walk down the street.Curiously, however, the issue that people seem to have fixated on is the Confederate battle flag, and whether it’s appropriate for a state government to display it. I get that it’s relevant, because Roof, like many racists, seems to have a particular affinity for the battle flag. Still, I can’t help but wonder if maybe we’re missing a chance to make a larger point.South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley reversed her previous stance on her state government’s display of the flag, which was basically, “Eh, no one really cares.” Now, she’s all for moving the flag off the state Capitol grounds and putting it in a museum with other relics of the past.She’s not alone. Even South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, who last week was insisting that the battle flag is “part of who we are,” suddenly realized he was going to need black votes in the South Carolina presidential primary and thus was standing beside Gov. Haley as she called for its removal.Mississippi is reported to be considering a similar move. [note, after this column was turned in they decided to keep the flag]. I hear that our own Gov. Pat McCrory has even suggested that the battle flag be removed from North Carolina’s special commemorative license plates, and Virginia may be about to follow suit.Corporate America, it seems, is getting on the bandwagon. Amazon.com announced it was pulling all Confederate battle flag merchandise, as did Sears, eBay and even the mighty Walmart.All of which is fine, because like it or not, people do care. The battle flag is a symbol to an awful lot of people of a legacy of slavery and brutal oppression. You may say it’s about “heritage, not hate,” but for African-Americans, particularly in the South, that’s actually the problem. Hate and violence directed against them are inseparable parts of that heritage.By the way, if you’d like to use this topic as a springboard for expounding about how the Civil War wasn’t “really about slavery,” please don’t even try do so until you’ve looked up the Declarations of Causes of the various Southern states, in which those states, explicitly and at great length, tell everyone that they’re leaving the Union because of slavery.Seriously, look them up. They changed my mind on this issue, and if they don’t change yours, there’s no hope for you.Then there’s the whole treason thing. Sorry, but there’s really no way around this: The U.S. Constitution defines “treason” as, among other things, “levying war against the United States.” The Confederate battle flag is a one under which people “levied war” against the U.S. It’s a bit strange to loudly declare your love for your country and your adherence to the Constitution and still fly the flag of the people who committed treason against it as defined in that very document.So, if the battle flag does get taken down from every state house, license plate and Walmart and is relegated to Klan rallies and performances by third-rate Lynyrd Skynyrd tribute bands, I won’t mourn. But it’s not enough.I’m not trying to be Benny Buzzkill here, but I’m wondering if the battle flag is being used as a sacrifice, something no politician really cared about deep down and that they’re now willing to throw under the bus to make it look as if something’s being done about racism.When the last battle flag comes down. racism will still be here, will still be a cancer on our society — but, I fear, will still be unaddressed by the people in power, who’ll be going, “What the heck do those people want!? We stopped flying that flag like they wanted!”The battle flag needs, at last, to come down. But if that’s where the dialogue ends, then the memories of the nine who died at Mother Emanuel Church will not be well-served.
June 21, 2015
Give Yours a Hug: Great Fathers Through History
The Pilot Newspaper: Opinion
So here it is, Father’s Day.
As a holiday, it’s always sort of played second fiddle to Mother’s Day. In fact, while Mother’s Day has been a national holiday since Woodrow Wilson officially proclaimed it in 1914, Father’s Day is a relative newcomer. Despite the fact that people have celebrated it for years, it wasn’t really officially permanent until Richard Nixon signed it into law in 1972. Thanks, Tricky Dick!A few years back, I did a column honoring history’s toughest mothers. So now, it seems only fair to talk about some of history’s great fathers:Phillip II of Macedon: From an early age, Phillip wanted his son Alexander to be ready to take over the family business, said business being ruling the kingdom of Macedon and kicking butt up, down and all around the Aegean Sea area.To that end, he got one of his generals, Lysimachus, to tutor the boy when he was just a sprout. Later, recognizing that there was more to being a great ruler than warfare, Ol’ Phil hired one of the greatest minds of his or any other era, Aristotle, to continue his son’s schooling.Good education, however, doesn’t come cheap, and in order to secure Aristotle’s services, Phillip had to give him an entire temple to use as a classroom and rebuild the old man’s hometown of Stageira, which Phillip had sacked. I’ll think of this the next time I want to complain about college tuition.Phillip also knew how to encourage his boy’s dreams. When 10-year-old Alexander realized that the “unridable” horse Dad had brought home was shying away from its own shadow, he tamed the beast by the ruse of riding him while facing the sun (at least at first). An amazed Phillip told him to “find a kingdom big enough, boy, because Macedon is too small for you.”He also bought him the horse, which Alex named Bucephalas (“ox head”) and rode into battle for years. Even when Phillip and Alexander had a falling out (over a new wife Phillip had taken), they eventually patched things up. Alexander succeeded his dad after the old man’s assassination, after which he proceeded to conquer most of the known world and become known as Alexander the Great. That’s what good parental training can do.Charlemagne: The Emperor of the Franks in the late 8th and early 9th centuries had either 18 or 20 children (depending on who you ask), and he insisted that all of them be educated — even the girls, which was unusual for the time.He also declined to engage in the usual practice of marrying his daughters off to various nobles for political gain rather than for love.Finally, Charlie was a very forgiving dad. When his firstborn, the unfortunate Pepin the Hunchback, was discovered to be plotting a revolt to depose his papa, Charlemagne allowed him to shave his head and join a monastery. Not an ideal ending from Pepin’s point of view, to be sure, but certainly better than the creatively nasty fates usually decreed for rebels and traitors in those days.If there’s anything a good father needs, it’s the capacity for forgiveness.Theodore Roosevelt Sr.: The father of the 26th president of the U.S. must have been one extraordinary man.Let Teddy himself tell the tale:“He combined strength and courage with gentleness, tenderness and great unselfishness. He would not tolerate in us children selfishness or cruelty, idleness, cowardice, or untruthfulness. … The same standard of clean living was demanded for the boys as for the girls; that what was wrong in a woman could not be right in a man. …“He was interested in every social reform movement, and he did an immense amount of practical charitable work himself, and his heart filled with gentleness for those who needed help or protection, and with the possibility of much wrath against a bully or an oppressor.” With a dad like that, young Theodore grew up to become a pretty amazing fellow himself: cowboy, police commissioner, governor, war hero, reformer, president — and that was all before he was out of his 40s.Being a father is hard, sometimes scary work. Sometimes even the best dads make mistakes. But the good ones hang in there and keep trying, because that’s what the future demands.
On this day, give your dad a hug if he’s still around and let him know you appreciate that. Trust me, he’ll like it more than a tie or any other material gift you could give him.
So here it is, Father’s Day.
As a holiday, it’s always sort of played second fiddle to Mother’s Day. In fact, while Mother’s Day has been a national holiday since Woodrow Wilson officially proclaimed it in 1914, Father’s Day is a relative newcomer. Despite the fact that people have celebrated it for years, it wasn’t really officially permanent until Richard Nixon signed it into law in 1972. Thanks, Tricky Dick!A few years back, I did a column honoring history’s toughest mothers. So now, it seems only fair to talk about some of history’s great fathers:Phillip II of Macedon: From an early age, Phillip wanted his son Alexander to be ready to take over the family business, said business being ruling the kingdom of Macedon and kicking butt up, down and all around the Aegean Sea area.To that end, he got one of his generals, Lysimachus, to tutor the boy when he was just a sprout. Later, recognizing that there was more to being a great ruler than warfare, Ol’ Phil hired one of the greatest minds of his or any other era, Aristotle, to continue his son’s schooling.Good education, however, doesn’t come cheap, and in order to secure Aristotle’s services, Phillip had to give him an entire temple to use as a classroom and rebuild the old man’s hometown of Stageira, which Phillip had sacked. I’ll think of this the next time I want to complain about college tuition.Phillip also knew how to encourage his boy’s dreams. When 10-year-old Alexander realized that the “unridable” horse Dad had brought home was shying away from its own shadow, he tamed the beast by the ruse of riding him while facing the sun (at least at first). An amazed Phillip told him to “find a kingdom big enough, boy, because Macedon is too small for you.”He also bought him the horse, which Alex named Bucephalas (“ox head”) and rode into battle for years. Even when Phillip and Alexander had a falling out (over a new wife Phillip had taken), they eventually patched things up. Alexander succeeded his dad after the old man’s assassination, after which he proceeded to conquer most of the known world and become known as Alexander the Great. That’s what good parental training can do.Charlemagne: The Emperor of the Franks in the late 8th and early 9th centuries had either 18 or 20 children (depending on who you ask), and he insisted that all of them be educated — even the girls, which was unusual for the time.He also declined to engage in the usual practice of marrying his daughters off to various nobles for political gain rather than for love.Finally, Charlie was a very forgiving dad. When his firstborn, the unfortunate Pepin the Hunchback, was discovered to be plotting a revolt to depose his papa, Charlemagne allowed him to shave his head and join a monastery. Not an ideal ending from Pepin’s point of view, to be sure, but certainly better than the creatively nasty fates usually decreed for rebels and traitors in those days.If there’s anything a good father needs, it’s the capacity for forgiveness.Theodore Roosevelt Sr.: The father of the 26th president of the U.S. must have been one extraordinary man.Let Teddy himself tell the tale:“He combined strength and courage with gentleness, tenderness and great unselfishness. He would not tolerate in us children selfishness or cruelty, idleness, cowardice, or untruthfulness. … The same standard of clean living was demanded for the boys as for the girls; that what was wrong in a woman could not be right in a man. …“He was interested in every social reform movement, and he did an immense amount of practical charitable work himself, and his heart filled with gentleness for those who needed help or protection, and with the possibility of much wrath against a bully or an oppressor.” With a dad like that, young Theodore grew up to become a pretty amazing fellow himself: cowboy, police commissioner, governor, war hero, reformer, president — and that was all before he was out of his 40s.Being a father is hard, sometimes scary work. Sometimes even the best dads make mistakes. But the good ones hang in there and keep trying, because that’s what the future demands.
On this day, give your dad a hug if he’s still around and let him know you appreciate that. Trust me, he’ll like it more than a tie or any other material gift you could give him.
May 31, 2015
Our Fearless Summer Vacation Guide
The Pilot Newspaper: Opinion
Summertime again, and the livin’, as the song tells us, is easy. Let’s just run down the checklist. Fish? Jumping. Cotton? High. And so on.
With summertime comes vacation time, and with vacation time comes our sort-of-annual guide to the wonderful and weird destinations for travelers. Check out some of these attractions:— About 15 years ago, a fellow named Otis Eldridge in Rogersville, Tenn., went to buy an old antique coffee grinder from an old country store. He ended up leaving with two flatbed truckloads of goods and equipment. So what else is a guy like that to do but build a replica of that old country store on his farm? And once you do something like that, why, you need to have a town around it, right?And thus was born “Memory Lane,” a replica of a 1950s-era small Southern town, complete with town hall/police department/jail, car dealership, movie theater, diner, filling station, etc. It’s all authentic, right down to the restored cheesy ’50s-era signage. Think of it as a kind of Colonial Williamsburg for Andy Griffith fans.
Alas, we missed it this year. Memory Lane is open to the public only once a year, on Memorial Day weekend, when Mr. Eldridge hosts a classic car show on the property. So mark your calendar.— Who among us does not love possums? Well, me, for one. But apparently, the little town of Wausau, Fla., self-proclaimed “Possum Capital of the World,” is quite fond of the weird little beasts. They even have a “Possum Monument” right downtown on the edge of the swamp.The true possum fan, however, will want to be there the first Saturday in August, when they hold the annual Possum Festival. The event is widely regarded as a “must-attend” event by Florida politicians and other dignitaries, because, lets’ face it, Florida’s kind of bonkers. Be sure to have a heaping helping of their signature dish, possum hash. Mmmm-mmm-good!— Famously eccentric actor Nicolas Cage may not actually be dead, yet it’s still possible to visit his tomb. It seems that in 2010, Mr. Cage bought the last two unclaimed plots in New Orleans’ famous and crowded St. Louis Cemetery No. 1, final resting place of such historical figures as “Voodoo Queen” Marie Laveau and Etienne de Boré, the city’s first mayor.Cage, apparently not wanting to get caught unprepared for his eventual demise, scandalized New Orleans traditionalists by constructing his mausoleum in the form of a nine-foot cement pyramid bearing the inscription “Omnia ab Uno.” This means, “All From One,” and not, as you might expect, “I Have More Money Than Sense and Soon Will Have Neither If I Keep Up With This Nonsense.”If you want to observe some wretched rich-person excess and don’t have ready access to a Kardashian, check this one out.
— South of the border, down Mexico way, you’ll find the Isla de las Munecas, or “Island of the Dolls,” which has to be, bar none, the creepiest thing that I have ever seen described as a “tourist attraction.”All over the tiny island south of Mexico City, the trees are adorned by dolls and doll parts. Arms. Legs. And of course disembodied doll heads, with those cold dead eyes that seem to follow you as you walk by and oh my God I think I saw that one move, run run run GET TO DA CHOPPAH!
Sorry. But we really are talking El Creepo Grande here. It seems that the old and possibly deranged fellow who once served as the islands caretaker was distraught at finding a young girl drowned on the beach. With the kind of logic that can only be achieved by living alone on a deserted island for many years, he decided to pay a tribute to the dead girl’s spirit by hanging a doll in a tree. Then a few more. Then a lot more. After the old man’s death, locals, then tourists, began bringing their own additions.Did I mention it was creepy? If I ever find myself paying a visit to this place, I am definitely finding a new travel agent.“The world is so full of a number of things,” wrote Robert Louis Stevenson, “I’m sure we should all be as happy as kings.” Whatever things your travels may lead you to see this summer, I hope all your trails are happy ones.
Summertime again, and the livin’, as the song tells us, is easy. Let’s just run down the checklist. Fish? Jumping. Cotton? High. And so on.
With summertime comes vacation time, and with vacation time comes our sort-of-annual guide to the wonderful and weird destinations for travelers. Check out some of these attractions:— About 15 years ago, a fellow named Otis Eldridge in Rogersville, Tenn., went to buy an old antique coffee grinder from an old country store. He ended up leaving with two flatbed truckloads of goods and equipment. So what else is a guy like that to do but build a replica of that old country store on his farm? And once you do something like that, why, you need to have a town around it, right?And thus was born “Memory Lane,” a replica of a 1950s-era small Southern town, complete with town hall/police department/jail, car dealership, movie theater, diner, filling station, etc. It’s all authentic, right down to the restored cheesy ’50s-era signage. Think of it as a kind of Colonial Williamsburg for Andy Griffith fans.
Alas, we missed it this year. Memory Lane is open to the public only once a year, on Memorial Day weekend, when Mr. Eldridge hosts a classic car show on the property. So mark your calendar.— Who among us does not love possums? Well, me, for one. But apparently, the little town of Wausau, Fla., self-proclaimed “Possum Capital of the World,” is quite fond of the weird little beasts. They even have a “Possum Monument” right downtown on the edge of the swamp.The true possum fan, however, will want to be there the first Saturday in August, when they hold the annual Possum Festival. The event is widely regarded as a “must-attend” event by Florida politicians and other dignitaries, because, lets’ face it, Florida’s kind of bonkers. Be sure to have a heaping helping of their signature dish, possum hash. Mmmm-mmm-good!— Famously eccentric actor Nicolas Cage may not actually be dead, yet it’s still possible to visit his tomb. It seems that in 2010, Mr. Cage bought the last two unclaimed plots in New Orleans’ famous and crowded St. Louis Cemetery No. 1, final resting place of such historical figures as “Voodoo Queen” Marie Laveau and Etienne de Boré, the city’s first mayor.Cage, apparently not wanting to get caught unprepared for his eventual demise, scandalized New Orleans traditionalists by constructing his mausoleum in the form of a nine-foot cement pyramid bearing the inscription “Omnia ab Uno.” This means, “All From One,” and not, as you might expect, “I Have More Money Than Sense and Soon Will Have Neither If I Keep Up With This Nonsense.”If you want to observe some wretched rich-person excess and don’t have ready access to a Kardashian, check this one out.
— South of the border, down Mexico way, you’ll find the Isla de las Munecas, or “Island of the Dolls,” which has to be, bar none, the creepiest thing that I have ever seen described as a “tourist attraction.”All over the tiny island south of Mexico City, the trees are adorned by dolls and doll parts. Arms. Legs. And of course disembodied doll heads, with those cold dead eyes that seem to follow you as you walk by and oh my God I think I saw that one move, run run run GET TO DA CHOPPAH!
Sorry. But we really are talking El Creepo Grande here. It seems that the old and possibly deranged fellow who once served as the islands caretaker was distraught at finding a young girl drowned on the beach. With the kind of logic that can only be achieved by living alone on a deserted island for many years, he decided to pay a tribute to the dead girl’s spirit by hanging a doll in a tree. Then a few more. Then a lot more. After the old man’s death, locals, then tourists, began bringing their own additions.Did I mention it was creepy? If I ever find myself paying a visit to this place, I am definitely finding a new travel agent.“The world is so full of a number of things,” wrote Robert Louis Stevenson, “I’m sure we should all be as happy as kings.” Whatever things your travels may lead you to see this summer, I hope all your trails are happy ones.
May 24, 2015
Different Bush, Same Mistakes
The Pilot Newspaper: Opinion
Recently, the man they call JEB! faced off against a 19-year-old college student. It didn’t go well for him.Former Gov. Jeb Bush was at a town hall meeting in Nevada the other day when he was confronted by political science major Ivy Ziedrich, of the University of Nevada at Reno. Ms. Ziedrich reacted to a statement from JEB! claiming that ISIS was created by Barack Obama “retreating” from Iraq.“We had an agreement that the president could have signed,” Bush had stated, “that would have kept 10,000 troops, less than we have in Korea, that could have created the stability that would have allowed for Iraq to progress.”Actually, Ms. Ziedrich argued, the problem goes back farther, to the time when the American-led Coalition Provisional Authority decided to disband the Iraqi military, a time “when 30,000 individuals who were part of the Iraqi military were forced out — they had no employment, they had no income, and they were left with access to all of the same arms and weapons.”She wound up by concluding, “Your brother created ISIS.”It was a scene reminiscent of the time Joe the Plumber, the belligerent bullet-headed dude-bro from Ohio, became a hero to the rubes and ignoramii by getting in candidate Barack Obama’s face and claiming Obama’s policies would make his taxes go up. The difference between Ivy Zierdich and Joe the Plumber is that Ziedrich actually knows what she’s talking about.Disbanding the Iraqi forces and leaving thousands of armed and angry young men with nothing to do but form insurgent groups is now regarded by most historians as the second biggest blunder of Dubbya’s Wacky Iraqi Adventure (the first being starting the bloody thing in the first place).The most compelling evidence that that decision led to disaster is that no one, including Dubbya himself, will now admit to being the one who made it. Colin Powell, who said it was a mistake, denied ever being consulted, as did Gen. Peter Pace, former head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.Condoleezza Rice claims it was a complete surprise. Dubbya told biographer Robert Draper, “The policy was to keep the army intact; didn’t happen,” adding, “I can’t remember; I’m sure I said, ‘This is the policy. What happened?’”Stirring leadership, that.So how did this become an issue now? Probably as a result of JEB!’s first, but almost certainly not last, gaffe of his campaign-that-is-not-yet-a-campaign-except-everyone-totally-knows-it’s-a-campaign. Asked by Fox News if “knowing what we know now,” would he have decided to go to war with Iraq, JEB! said he would — “and so would Hillary Clinton.”On this last part, he may be right, even though Clinton at least admits her vote was a mistake.Sadly, the Fox reporter did not follow up with the obvious questions like, “Would you also have put an entirely unqualified campaign donor in charge of FEMA, and then watched as he massively bungled the relief effort after a major hurricane before telling him he was doing a ‘heckuva job’? Would you have ignored a daily briefing titled ‘Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.’ 36 days before the late Mr. bin Laden did just that?”JEB! later began furiously backpedaling, claiming he thought the question was “knowing what we knew THEN, would you have gone into Iraq?” Only problem with that defense is that those of us who knew what we knew THEN thought it was a terrible idea. And guess what? We were right.Finally, JEB! threw in the towel, sulkily declaring that “knowing what we know now, I would not have engaged. I would not have gone into Iraq.” In other words, JEB! was retroactively for war in Iraq before he was retroactively against it. There’s that Bush leadership again.Oh, and as for that claim that we had an “agreement that would have kept 10,000 troops in Iraq”? Politifact rates that as “mostly false,” adding:“Obama inherited a timeline to exit Iraq from George W. Bush and followed it, but there was no agreement to leave a large force behind. The Obama White House considered 10,000 troops for a short time but ruled it out, suggesting a much smaller force. Negotiations with Iraq broke down, however, and there was no agreement that met conditions Washington wanted.”Those conditions included immunity for American troops from prosecution in Iraqi courts.So let’s review: JEB! said he’d make the same mistake his brother did, then said he wouldn’t, then lied to try to shift the blame for the current disastrous aftermath of the Iraq War away from the president who started it in the first place.
Doggone these liberals! When are they going to stop blaming George Dubbya Bush for the things he actually did?
Recently, the man they call JEB! faced off against a 19-year-old college student. It didn’t go well for him.Former Gov. Jeb Bush was at a town hall meeting in Nevada the other day when he was confronted by political science major Ivy Ziedrich, of the University of Nevada at Reno. Ms. Ziedrich reacted to a statement from JEB! claiming that ISIS was created by Barack Obama “retreating” from Iraq.“We had an agreement that the president could have signed,” Bush had stated, “that would have kept 10,000 troops, less than we have in Korea, that could have created the stability that would have allowed for Iraq to progress.”Actually, Ms. Ziedrich argued, the problem goes back farther, to the time when the American-led Coalition Provisional Authority decided to disband the Iraqi military, a time “when 30,000 individuals who were part of the Iraqi military were forced out — they had no employment, they had no income, and they were left with access to all of the same arms and weapons.”She wound up by concluding, “Your brother created ISIS.”It was a scene reminiscent of the time Joe the Plumber, the belligerent bullet-headed dude-bro from Ohio, became a hero to the rubes and ignoramii by getting in candidate Barack Obama’s face and claiming Obama’s policies would make his taxes go up. The difference between Ivy Zierdich and Joe the Plumber is that Ziedrich actually knows what she’s talking about.Disbanding the Iraqi forces and leaving thousands of armed and angry young men with nothing to do but form insurgent groups is now regarded by most historians as the second biggest blunder of Dubbya’s Wacky Iraqi Adventure (the first being starting the bloody thing in the first place).The most compelling evidence that that decision led to disaster is that no one, including Dubbya himself, will now admit to being the one who made it. Colin Powell, who said it was a mistake, denied ever being consulted, as did Gen. Peter Pace, former head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.Condoleezza Rice claims it was a complete surprise. Dubbya told biographer Robert Draper, “The policy was to keep the army intact; didn’t happen,” adding, “I can’t remember; I’m sure I said, ‘This is the policy. What happened?’”Stirring leadership, that.So how did this become an issue now? Probably as a result of JEB!’s first, but almost certainly not last, gaffe of his campaign-that-is-not-yet-a-campaign-except-everyone-totally-knows-it’s-a-campaign. Asked by Fox News if “knowing what we know now,” would he have decided to go to war with Iraq, JEB! said he would — “and so would Hillary Clinton.”On this last part, he may be right, even though Clinton at least admits her vote was a mistake.Sadly, the Fox reporter did not follow up with the obvious questions like, “Would you also have put an entirely unqualified campaign donor in charge of FEMA, and then watched as he massively bungled the relief effort after a major hurricane before telling him he was doing a ‘heckuva job’? Would you have ignored a daily briefing titled ‘Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.’ 36 days before the late Mr. bin Laden did just that?”JEB! later began furiously backpedaling, claiming he thought the question was “knowing what we knew THEN, would you have gone into Iraq?” Only problem with that defense is that those of us who knew what we knew THEN thought it was a terrible idea. And guess what? We were right.Finally, JEB! threw in the towel, sulkily declaring that “knowing what we know now, I would not have engaged. I would not have gone into Iraq.” In other words, JEB! was retroactively for war in Iraq before he was retroactively against it. There’s that Bush leadership again.Oh, and as for that claim that we had an “agreement that would have kept 10,000 troops in Iraq”? Politifact rates that as “mostly false,” adding:“Obama inherited a timeline to exit Iraq from George W. Bush and followed it, but there was no agreement to leave a large force behind. The Obama White House considered 10,000 troops for a short time but ruled it out, suggesting a much smaller force. Negotiations with Iraq broke down, however, and there was no agreement that met conditions Washington wanted.”Those conditions included immunity for American troops from prosecution in Iraqi courts.So let’s review: JEB! said he’d make the same mistake his brother did, then said he wouldn’t, then lied to try to shift the blame for the current disastrous aftermath of the Iraq War away from the president who started it in the first place.
Doggone these liberals! When are they going to stop blaming George Dubbya Bush for the things he actually did?
May 17, 2015
In Which I Take the Side of Ted Cruz
The Pilot Newspaper: Opinion
By now, I assume most of you have figured out that I’m not a huge fan of Sen. Ted Cruz. I’m even less of a fan, however, of what passes for journalism in this country these days, by which I mean the shallow, image-driven, trivia-obsessed folderol that seeks to find the “gotchas” in the most ridiculous things.
Did Obama ordering orange juice on the campaign trail mean he’s not a “regular guy” who can relate to the kind of simpletons these overpaid celebrity journalists assume we are? Did Hillary Clinton not tipping in a diner mean she’s insensitive to working people, or did her overtipping mean she’s a “limousine liberal” who’s insensitive to working people? And on and on.One of the most obnoxious practitioners of this kind of “celebrity” journalism dressed up as political analysis is Mark Halperin, who goes out of his way to prove that being a “senior political analyst for Time magazine, Time.com, and MSNBC” (according to his Wikipedia entry) does not mean you’re not a shallow, clueless hack.This became painfully clear from viewing Halperin’s latest atrocity, an interview with Sen. Cruz for Bloomberg.com that was so embarrassing (not to mention more than a little racist), it actually made me feel bad for the candidate. Yes, you heard that right. I actually felt bad for the “Green Eggs and Ham” guy. It really was that awful.The interview started off with Halperin asking Cruz, who’s Cuban-American, if he thought Hispanics would vote for him. This was bad enough. It became truly cringe-worthy when Halperin prefaced his next line of questioning with “people are interested in you and your identity.” Oh, dear, I thought, this will not end well.
Halperin asked if Cruz listed himself as “a Hispanic” when he applied to Princeton and to Harvard Law School. Of course, Cruz responded, that’s part of his heritage. Then the wheels really began to come off. Halperin began grilling Cruz about whether he had an “affinity for or connection to, anything part of your Cuban past.”
He asked such hard-hitting questions as: Does Cruz have a favorite Cuban food? Does he like Cuban music? Could he identify his favorite Cuban singer? And then, as I watched in fascinated horror, Halperin hit rock bottom — and started to dig.“I want to give you the opportunity to directly welcome your colleague Sen. Sanders to the race,” he said, “and I’d like you to do it, if you would, en español.”To his credit, Cruz declined to be Halperin’s dancing Cuban pony. “You know,” he said, “I’m going to stick to English, but I appreciate the invitation, Señor.” It may shock you, but I will give the senator mad respect for not saying, as I did while I was watching this train wreck online, “Mr. Halperin, what the [bad word] is wrong with you?”I mean, really. Can you even imagine asking Hillary Clinton, “So, who’s your favorite white musician? Do you like mac and cheese? Say something white to welcome Sen. Bernie Sanders to the race!” Or, for that matter, asking Sanders, “So, how about that Jewish food? Gefilte fish, am I right? Do you have a favorite klezmer band? While we’re at it, can you say something in Yiddish to Hillary Clinton?”One thing is for sure: We need to keep Mark Halperin as far away from Dr. Ben Carson as we can.Look, there’s a lot to criticize when it comes to Ted Cruz. I’ve done it recently, and I’m sure that before this whole long electoral nightmare is over, I’ll do it again. But I really do not give a rat’s wazoo about the music he listens to or whether he eats the food of his forbears. And I don’t think the vast majority of the American people do either, just as they are incredibly uninterested in the dining, tipping or musical inclinations of JEB!, Mike Huckabee, Rand Paul, et. al.Ask them how they’re going to deal with the rapidly growing income gap in this country, if they plan to at all. Ask them about how they’re going to fix our crumbling infrastructure. Ask them about their position on warrantless surveillance, assassination by drone, or nuclear proliferation.In other words, Mr. Halperin and others of your ilk, do your freakin’ jobs for a change.
By now, I assume most of you have figured out that I’m not a huge fan of Sen. Ted Cruz. I’m even less of a fan, however, of what passes for journalism in this country these days, by which I mean the shallow, image-driven, trivia-obsessed folderol that seeks to find the “gotchas” in the most ridiculous things.
Did Obama ordering orange juice on the campaign trail mean he’s not a “regular guy” who can relate to the kind of simpletons these overpaid celebrity journalists assume we are? Did Hillary Clinton not tipping in a diner mean she’s insensitive to working people, or did her overtipping mean she’s a “limousine liberal” who’s insensitive to working people? And on and on.One of the most obnoxious practitioners of this kind of “celebrity” journalism dressed up as political analysis is Mark Halperin, who goes out of his way to prove that being a “senior political analyst for Time magazine, Time.com, and MSNBC” (according to his Wikipedia entry) does not mean you’re not a shallow, clueless hack.This became painfully clear from viewing Halperin’s latest atrocity, an interview with Sen. Cruz for Bloomberg.com that was so embarrassing (not to mention more than a little racist), it actually made me feel bad for the candidate. Yes, you heard that right. I actually felt bad for the “Green Eggs and Ham” guy. It really was that awful.The interview started off with Halperin asking Cruz, who’s Cuban-American, if he thought Hispanics would vote for him. This was bad enough. It became truly cringe-worthy when Halperin prefaced his next line of questioning with “people are interested in you and your identity.” Oh, dear, I thought, this will not end well.
Halperin asked if Cruz listed himself as “a Hispanic” when he applied to Princeton and to Harvard Law School. Of course, Cruz responded, that’s part of his heritage. Then the wheels really began to come off. Halperin began grilling Cruz about whether he had an “affinity for or connection to, anything part of your Cuban past.”
He asked such hard-hitting questions as: Does Cruz have a favorite Cuban food? Does he like Cuban music? Could he identify his favorite Cuban singer? And then, as I watched in fascinated horror, Halperin hit rock bottom — and started to dig.“I want to give you the opportunity to directly welcome your colleague Sen. Sanders to the race,” he said, “and I’d like you to do it, if you would, en español.”To his credit, Cruz declined to be Halperin’s dancing Cuban pony. “You know,” he said, “I’m going to stick to English, but I appreciate the invitation, Señor.” It may shock you, but I will give the senator mad respect for not saying, as I did while I was watching this train wreck online, “Mr. Halperin, what the [bad word] is wrong with you?”I mean, really. Can you even imagine asking Hillary Clinton, “So, who’s your favorite white musician? Do you like mac and cheese? Say something white to welcome Sen. Bernie Sanders to the race!” Or, for that matter, asking Sanders, “So, how about that Jewish food? Gefilte fish, am I right? Do you have a favorite klezmer band? While we’re at it, can you say something in Yiddish to Hillary Clinton?”One thing is for sure: We need to keep Mark Halperin as far away from Dr. Ben Carson as we can.Look, there’s a lot to criticize when it comes to Ted Cruz. I’ve done it recently, and I’m sure that before this whole long electoral nightmare is over, I’ll do it again. But I really do not give a rat’s wazoo about the music he listens to or whether he eats the food of his forbears. And I don’t think the vast majority of the American people do either, just as they are incredibly uninterested in the dining, tipping or musical inclinations of JEB!, Mike Huckabee, Rand Paul, et. al.Ask them how they’re going to deal with the rapidly growing income gap in this country, if they plan to at all. Ask them about how they’re going to fix our crumbling infrastructure. Ask them about their position on warrantless surveillance, assassination by drone, or nuclear proliferation.In other words, Mr. Halperin and others of your ilk, do your freakin’ jobs for a change.
