Saturday, May 23, 2009

Weekend Tids and Bits

 

 

NO SEX PLEASE, WE’RE CHINESE – Authorities in China demolished an under-construction sex-themed amusement park called Love Land near Chongqing, after widespread (ahem!)  coverage in the world media about giant genital sculptures. Seems the leaders of the world’s most populous nation would rather not focus on how, exactly, all those new little workers are gaining admission to the Workers Paradise. Sex in China is still mostly an unmentionable, a leftover from the Puritan Sayings of Chairman Mao-driven cultural revolution, when “I admire your devotion to the triumph of the proletariat” was a hot pickup line.

 

--

 

FIRST ROUGH DRAFT OF HISTORY’S FATE – Journalists facing the axe from the soul-sucked ghouls who now run most of America’s newspapers have often comforted themselves that their noble, underpaid, overworked calling was revered as the “first rough draft of history.” Rough indeed, because William Rathje, a professor of archeology at the University of Arizona, studied the contents of landfills and found newspapers were the top ingredient by volume and weight. Newspaper management should consider reaching out to landfill operators, seeking common cause in the utility of daily print journalism.

 

--

 

TOWARDS SOCIALISM,  NOT DEMOCRAT SOCIALIST PARTY – is the resolution on a resolution (got that?)  by the Republican National Committee that wanted to label the Dems “Democrat Socialist Party.”  They damped it down to “stop pushing our country toward socialism” when RNC Chairman Michael Steele, suggested that even if it feels good, the GOP should stop shooting itself in the foot. Nothing leaked to the press, but don’t be surprised if the Limbaugh/Cheney Faithfull’s response is that Steele’s request means he’s pro gun-control.

 

--

 

THE BEST LITTLE WHOREHOUSES IN TEXAS – may be unfertile ground for Republican primary votes for Governor Rick Perry after a consultant told the Dallas Morning News that the party needs new voters but “that doesn't mean you take your principles and throw them out the door and become a whorehouse and let anybody in who wants to come in, regardless." No word yet on whether the consultant’s remark is sparking a Whorehouses For Hutchison movement to back Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Perry’s primary opponent.

 

--

 

HEY DIDDLE-DIDDLE, STRAIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE – is the “centrist” way voters are going, according to an AP report on a Pew Research Center Survey. Independents now make up the largest proportion of voters in 70 years, the report says. Independent voters may be defined as those who vote for the  candidate they deem less likely to screw up than others.  Pew, which researches more things than your nosy maiden aunt, is found at: http://www.pewtrusts.org/.

 

 

--

 

BANG BANG BAMBI – The credit card legislation President Obama signed also allowed carrying concealed loaded weapons in national parks in states that permit concealed carry otherwise. Thirty-nine states allow concealed carry. Anti-gun folks are aghast. Pro-gun folks are delighted. Common-sense folks probably carried a weapon when that made sense in any event and are bemused.

 

--

 

HAPPY MEMORIAL DAY TO ALL – and please remember the men and women who paid with their lives so we could listen to a few patriotic speeches and then go off to a start-of-the-summer barbecue. Never mind the flags on cemeteries, although that’s nice. A better way to celebrate is to buy the next on-liberty soldier, sailor, airman or Marine you meet a drink or a meal, whether in person or as a contribution to the USO and other armed services support efforts.

###

Bookmark and Share

 

 

Friday, May 22, 2009

Stock Market Reporting Explained

 

Stock market indicators go up and down, economies quiver and governments rise and fall, as journalists tell us what “the market” was feeling and why that made the numbers come out the way they did.

 

Since the New York Stock Exchange alone has 2,000-odd traders, not to mention those in other exchanges, many have been puzzled at how journalists take the emotional pulse of so many, or even a big sample. If an intrepid journalist talks to a different NYSE stock trader every two minutes for the entire trading day, that’s still a shade less than ten percent of those trading.

 

Which doesn’t even take into account all the other good folk who are busy buying and selling shares elsewhere.

 

Yet, one trusted source can report that there are “worries that the market may have moved too high, too quickly over the past two and a half months.” And another journalism leader can tell us that worries about the Brits and “…less positive economic signals from the United States dented investor hopes Thursday that the world’s largest economies will show much vigor in the near term.”

Still another maven says  “optimism about a global economic recovery was tempered,”  and warns that “The tone on Wall Street turned bleak…,”  plus “The gloom was exacerbated” at the news that Standard & Poor’s may cut the United Kingdom’s  rating because of debt levels.

A different oracle says that the Brit’s potentially downgraded “credit ratings stoked fears about the state of the global economy.”

These and other market journalists are clearly very closely in touch with the psyches of stock traders and other market players. They not only know what they’re feeling, but why.

And these traders feel a lot. Most of us over the age of 20 don’t lurch between optimism and gloom in the course of a week as we drive our dented hopes to get our fears stoked. Yet stock traders must be so in touch with their feelings that their feelings have filed class-action harassment suits.

 

But there’s an alternate explanation. Go watch a group of kindergarten kids at play. They talk constantly to each other, as they both direct and act out parts in their make-believe epics.

 

“I’m gonna be the sheriff, and Joey’s gonna be the bad guy,” Billy says, to which Susie adds “and I’m going to be sad that Joey’s bad, because he’s my boyfriend,” while Joey declaims “I’m not gonna be no girl’s boyfriend! Let’s play something else!”

 

Market journalists overhearing that exchange would write “Prospects were mixed today in spite of strong planning statements from two key players as a third of the action vowed to sit things out until the situation changed.”

 

And if the little kids continue their squabble until an adult intervenes and asks what this is all about, the little kids will all say “I dunno.”

 

Market journalists, alas, will not.

###

Bookmark and Share

 

 

 

 

Thursday, May 21, 2009

Drink Now, Vote Later

 

 

As President Obama strolls in meditation on the Potomac, he can relish some victories early in his administration, including a recession that may show signs of easing, much better emission and mileage standards for cars, credit cards that no longer bite the hand that holds them, and healthcare reform up for serious discussion at last.

 

But before he trips on a fish or something, he should consider this bit of Americana that needs fixing – we vote too early and drink too late.

 

When an American reaches 18, he or she can vote, buy and sell real property, marry without parental consent, stand for many public offices, and do just about everything other adults can do, including donning the country’s uniform to kill foreigners the government finds inconvenient.

 

All of that, especially killing foreigners before they kill you, could certainly prompt many of us to pour a stiff one, but the 20-year-old back from a tour in Iraq better not – the legal drinking age in the United States is 21.

 

Which is silly.

 

In Europe, the legal drinking age varies by country when they bother with it at all. It’s generally 18 and under, sometimes as low as 12. Legal purchase age runs between 16 and 18. Except countries where booze in any form is banned for everyone, the rest of the world pretty much follows suit.

 

But most of the world joins the U.S. in allowing persons 18 years old to vote.

 

That’s also silly.

 

Most 18-year-olds have difficulty making an informed choice beyond what music to buy and what clothes to wear, and seldom pay for the choices in any event. Mommy and Daddy are still picking up the tab, often well into their little darlings’ early 20s.

 

Voting at 18 is a departure from the long-established traditional age of majority, 21, but even that figure is too low in today’s society.

 

When the United States declared independence from Great Britain, the average life expectancy was 35, meaning a voting man had the benefit of more than half a lifetime’s experience when deciding public questions. True, suffrage wasn’t universal, and those who did vote tended to be wealthier and lived longer, but the notion of dependent children voting would have been laughed out of Independence Hall.

 

By 1900, average life expectancy was 47, and 21-year-olds casting their first vote had already spent around 45 percent of their living days.  Suffrage was universal, at least for white males.

 

Today, life expectancy for women is 79 and for 72 men. And we give the vote to those without even a quarter of their lifetime accumulation of wisdom and experience -- less for most if you count the wisdom of being self-supporting.

 

With both the drinking age and the voting age out of whack, there’s a clear solution – make the voting age 1.5 times a realistic drinking age. So you could belly up to the bar legally when you turned 18, but not cast your vote until 27, when you would have at least a third of your life experience to guide you.

 

One exception: if you served in the Armed Forces of the United States, you would earn a right to vote as soon as you cleared boot camp. Any young person claiming that to be unfair would be directed to the nearest enlistment center.

 

It’s not known whether President Obama has considered these things, or if he has, whether or not he thinks they can be accomplished. With respect, Mr. President, yes we can.

 

And be careful of those fish!

###

Bookmark and Share

 

 

 

Wednesday, May 20, 2009

Right On Republicans – An Update

 

Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele said yesterday that the “corner has been turned” for the GOP and that his party is in resurgence mode.

 

Naturally it was a right turn around the corner, and according to sources in the Republican leadership who demanded anonymity lest their neighbors find out, the plan is to continue to make right turns. Asked if this plan might not find them right back where they started, the sources said that was the idea.

 

That seemed to contradict Steele as quoted by Politico telling Republicans in Maryland that “The Republican Party is again going to emerge as the party of new ideas.”  Asked to explain the apparent contradiction, sources pointed to the rest of the Steele quote as reported by Politico: “It will take some time, for sure, but it is beginning now.”

 

Asked how much time Steele might have had in mind, all three sources declined to answer, except to say that the core Republican leadership had a rendezvous with Destiny.

 

Destiny, reached at her usual DC street corner, cited client privilege and declined comment except to refer to Steele as quoted recently in The Huffington Post: “But a lot of people have passions and the beauty of the Republican Party is you get to express those passions in various ways."

 

The quote was in response to an effort by some members of the Republican National Committee to label the Democrats as “the Democrat Socialist Party.” Debate among experts over whether that was the height of passion for a Republican was pretty evenly divided, with some blushing in agreement while others backed more traditional Republican passions, standing in tight circles to chant “Tax Cut!” at each other.

 

Even Destiny dodged the question, saying the most important thing was “no rough stuff.”

 

That seemed to echo remarks by Steele, who promised to take on President Obama “with dignity,” in contrast to what he called the “shabby and classless way” that Democrats and leftists disagreed with President Bush. Steele has praised the “Tea Bag” anti-tax protests that happened in several cities, saying “This change comes in a tea bag.”

 

Steele did not clarify whether it was a nickel bag or a dime bag that Republicans were using to foster their vision of change with dignity.

 

Still, change is clearly the watchword for Republicans. On Friday, the blog site of GOP.com cautioned us 5/15/09 Update: What you see here is a placeholder between what was and what is to come for GOP.com. Don't get too used to this page--the complete rebuild is around the corner. Soon we'll have a new look and a more enjoyable, modern, open and participatory way to share our ideals with the Country.

 

It wasn’t clear whether the GOP blog site was referring to Steele’s corner or its own independent corner or Destiny’s corner. Questioned on the issue of a “complete rebuild," Destiny said “Yeah, I tried that once, but it sags after a while, you know?”

 

It does indeed.

###

Bookmark and Share

 

 

 

Tuesday, May 19, 2009

A Fine State Of Affairs

 

President Obama was expected to announce new, tougher nationwide rules for auto emissions and mileage standards today, ending years of wrangling over competing state standards, which is a good thing.

 

Of course, that leaves countless opportunities for wrangling and delay caused by different state standards in other areas. We may recite a pledge claiming ourselves “One Nation, Under God, indivisible,” but anyone who has tried to accomplish anything across state lines must have their doubts.

 

It shows up in many ways. I live in New Jersey, so I don’t pump my own gas – except when I visit some other state, where I must. And here the speed limit is 65 miles per hour, but elsewhere in the country it is also 65 -- unless it’s 60, 70, 75 or 80.

 

Same-sex couples can marry in five states, soon to be six with the expected addition of New Hampshire. But those marriages won’t be recognized in other states except New Mexico, New York and Rhode Island. It’s enough to drive you to distraction, but the license and insurance requirements to do so in a motor vehicle vary from state to state.

 

Gun laws differ dramatically from state to state. New Jersey practically requires Saint Peter giving testimony while the Heavenly Chorus sings your praise for a permit, and woe betide the person striding down the street with a rifle on their shoulder. But Virginia’s state police say the state “does not require firearm registration nor is it necessary to obtain a permit before carrying a firearm or other such weapon openly about the person except where prohibited by statute.” And you can walk into a Virginia Wal-Mart, present two IDs, answer a few easy questions for a computerized background check and walk out armed.

 

The point here isn’t whether or not any of these conflicting rules is better than the other; the point is that it’s nuts to have so many, covering almost every aspect of life. Medicaid has different rules by state. So does buying and selling a home, opening a back account, getting a divorce, filing a lawsuit, not to forget committing, prosecuting and punishing crime.

 

Even in disaster response, different states have different skills and degrees of preparedness, under different chains of command and control, often with the only commonality being victims who shouldn’t have died.

 

And don’t even start about direct election of the president instead of the current electoral college that makes it possible to win the nation’s highest office without a majority of the popular vote.

 

Not to mention the tax structures that finance all of this mess and themselves differ dramatically from state to state.

 

From time to time, folks have advocated replacing the hodge-podge of state policies on most issues with national policies, so the law would be the same everywhere in the United States, instead of changing every time you moved anywhere from a few feet to many miles.

 

Critics immediately respond that such a move would make state governments pointless, and leave them as nothing more than symbols.

 

Well, yes.

 

It’s time.

###

Bookmark and Share

Monday, May 18, 2009

By Their Rules Shall Ye Know Them

 

Man is the tool-making animal, and that distinguishes mankind from all others, anthropologist said.

 

But then birds and primates and other critters were observed using tools, letting the gas out of that scientific bag. Here’s a different idea:

 

Man is the rule-making animal. An absolute desire to regulate someone else’s conduct distinguishes mankind from all other animals.

 

Animals may fight for territory, status or to protect their young, but not because one animal likes to eat rabbits while the other prefers squirrels and insists eating rabbit is a sin. Nor would one who ate tobacco try to keep another from eating marijuana.

 

Forbidden fruit and immoral conduct are human inventions. Animals wouldn’t be so dumb. Prohibition forbade almost all alcoholic beverages in the United States for 13 years beginning in 1920 because drinking alcohol was morally wrong.

 

But Prohibition’s chief moral accomplishment was creating a bonanza for organized crime. The mob clearly and profitably understood every rule maker’s core assumption—rules are needed to guide  other people. Or as gangster Al Capone observed “When I sell liquor, it's called bootlegging; when my patrons serve it on Lake Shore Drive, it's called hospitality.” 

 

The rule-making impulse is what drives our current prohibition of recreational drugs, particularly marijuana. Many a glass of good – and highly taxed --  booze has been raised in a haze of tobacco  smoke as elders sagely agree to keep others from abusing their bodies with dangerous and addictive stuff.

 

Now the issue of legalizing drugs, especially marijuana, is gaining some momentum, with polls consistently showing around half of the public is ready to consider the idea. The impetus isn’t a sudden groundswell of Live-and-Let-Live libertarian thought.

 

Governments zapped by the recession are looking for cash, and citizens are becoming uncomfortable with daily corpses sprouting from drug gang wars.

 

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, whose cash-starved state already makes $18 million from legalized medical marijuana, thinks it’s time to debate the issue. An estimated $1.3 billion in new state tax revenue from legalized pot may have whetted his debating appetite.

 

And don’t forget the money to be saved if we stop arresting folks for marijuana violations. FBI stats say there were more than 870,000 marijuana arrests in 2007, the last full-year records available. Besides the cost of arresting and prosecuting these folk, most under age 30, any conviction with prison time costs around $25,000 a year. Nationally, we spend about $1.3 billion a year on drug-offense prisoners. Heck, even a supervised probation conviction costs taxpayers between $3,000 and $4,000 yearly.

 

And spending all this money and effort has hardly reduced marijuana use. According to a 2006 Department of Justice report published last year, 14.8 million Americans had used marijuana in the past month. Law enforcement officers freed from chasing those citizens might have more time to spend preventing murder, theft, extortion, fraud and other American hobbies.

 

Still, opponents of legalization say we have a moral obligation to prevent folks from even experimenting with marijuana because of the horrible effect it will have on their lives, preventing them from reaching their fullest potential.

 

They can, after all, point to the last three U.S. presidents and rest their case.

###

Bookmark and Share