One might argue that the above blog caption is a true oxymoron - not unlike the funny ones recently referenced.
There are many hurts - some real/some imagined - that cause us to repond to a person or a situation with considerable vitriol. ( think scathing rebuke).
Sometimes it's absolutely on the money, but oft times it's like sports talk shows. Just a lot of people carping about this team or that, some ballplayer with whom they find fault - or a coach/manager who the talk show participant is convinced made a boneheaded decision.
Politics is a lot like that as well. Much had been written about Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan. A good bit of the communicaation had to do with a decision she made about army recruiting at Harvard when she was Dean of the law school.
From what was written and quoted it was difficult to determine whether the criticism was about Kagan or more about a certain philosophy held by the critic.
Two things I read in The Washington Post ( a source recommended by brother Jim) were written by people with whom there has been much disagreement from this quarter. However, they seemed to coalesce at just the right time for this old timer.
The first was by columnist David Broder. The second by Lindsey Graham, Republican Senator from South Carolina.(Don't you wish some time the media would eliminate the political affiliation
of the subject just so you could see if you guessed correctly?)
Broder wrote about Kagan's presumed elevation to The Supreme Court - thus assuring that for the present - the Court would have a 1/3 female representation. He likened it to the difference he observed in newsrooms since 1961 with the introduction of more and more female reporters.
In brief, he saw the latter as a positive. He felt it brought a different philosophy and a more comprehensive interview result. They asked in-depth questions men feared to ask.
I could support Broder. It never made much sense to me that while the Freshman college enrollees were mostly male, it appeared the 1950's high schools females comprised most of the valedictorians and salutatorians . (When I looked up my misspelling on the latter I was referred to "better food choices in school cafeterias".)
Why weren't they better represented as Freshmen? Just a re-reading of that sentence should have resolved the conundrum. It was only slightly more than 30 years before (1920) women were allowed to vote. I found the ones who "squeezed" through college enrollment were not just bright - but, funny as well. The two traits often seem to go hand in hand.
Elena Kagan has a great sense of humor as was demonstrated by her response to her whereabouts on Christmas when the "mad bomber" was attempting his own celebration.
Lindsay Graham, on the other hand may be a true "oxymoron". How can this (supposed) Republican have endorsed not only Kagan but Sotomayer - another Obama nominee? I mean, "Lord, what was the man thinking?".
The answer is in the question. He was "thinking". He was not a lemming jumping off cliffs. He was also not any other animal whose herd mentality have been often preserved in print to the point that the myth becomes the reality in which we believe.
Unfortunately, many in his party cannot see the difference and claim that Grahams upstart tendencies are in direct correlation with the fact he is not running for office in November.
While, I often found myself "honorably" disagreeing with Graham's views when he appeared on the Sunday interview shows - what he said to the Senate Judiciary Committee who voted in favor of Kagan's nomination made sense.
He wondered aloud what it was that the 21% of members of Congress were doing right that earned them a positive approval rating. He spoke of the criteria of "being smart" as one that was important for any Supreme Court nominee. He saw the wisdom of an independent judiciary.
Graham appeared to understand why Kagan would be foolhardy to respond to baited questions on subjects such as "same-sex marriage" an issue upon which she may be required to take a position in the very near future.
He made one comment that has been the keystone of many opinions written in this blog: "Are we taking the language of the Constitution that stood the test of time and basically putting a political standard in the place of a constitutional standard? That's for each senator to ask and answer themselves."
Finally, he stated, "What's in Elena Kagan's heart is that of a good person who adopts a philosophy I disagree with."
I'm convinced if we can do that in both our business and personal lives, we can look over any cliff and not feel a irresistable urge to jump off.
The Amish have a saying that covers that quite well: "We get too soon old - and too late smart."
Of course, you may "honorably disagree".
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Sunday, July 18, 2010
A CENTURY OF POSTING
Blogspot just announced there have been 99 posts to date on this site. One assumes that figure include the ones I posted and then yanked back . My re-reading of them didn't make any sense to me either.
Some were pulled because there was a lack of any cohesive logic. Others were apparently written out of anger and suggested all people in the world are either crooks, perverts, or con artists.
For #100 we're going to go with what could well be called "The Product Of Purloin". None of the words that follow are mine.
They come from Cory Giger, (Giger Counters) a newspaper reporter with the Altoona Mirror who went to a ballgame and filed this report :
"One 13 year-old boy's random and simple act of kindness Friday night at PNC Park proved that some kids still understand the importance of helping others and not being selfish all the time.
My wife and I were eating chicken nachos on the concourse during the Pirates game against the Astros when a neat little scene played out in front of us.
A middle-aged gentleman in a wheelchair asked a kid wearing a red Jason Bay jersey sitting nearby if he would get him a cup of ice on the sweltering, muggy evening. He then told the young boy, Travis Wolfe, of Steubenville, Ohio, that he would give him a dollar for his trouble.
Travis shook his head and declined to take the money, then went and got the cup of ice.
When he returned with the ice, the man in the wheelchair, Matt Stumm, again offered to give the boy some money for his efforts.
Again Travis declined, even as Stumm tried several times to get him to take the money. It appeared reading Travis' lips that he said, 'It's OK.'
'He wouldn't take the money,' Stumm, who was visiting Pittsburgh from Hartford, Conn., said with a big smile.'That impressed me even more [ than going to get the ice.]'
Stumm went on for a minute talking about how nice it was to see Travis be so helpful. He also mentioned that if he could find the boy's parents he would say, 'Here's $10, put it toward his college fund.'
Travis wasn't seeking any attention for his act of kindness. He had no clue anyone was watching, especially a newspaper reporter who just so happened to be standing nearby.
There are, unfortunately, many kids in this world who think only of themselves and wouldn't have bothered to help Stumm, or wouldn't have thought twice about taking the money, albeit a small amount.
It was very impressive to see Travis be so gracious in his own small way on both accounts.
The young lad and his friend, Nick Ivkovich, 13, were stunned when I came up to talk to them and mentioned that I wanted to write about what happened. They looked at each other with big smiles on their faces, posed for a picture and then took me to talk to Travis's mom.
'You try to raise your kid the right way,' said Lori Wolfe, who wore a proud smile when told of her son's subtle generosity.
It wasn't some grand gesture that will be remembered forever by many people. But life is all about little things, and kids need to learn that the little things they do -- or don't do -- have an impact on other people's lives.
Simply by turning down $1, Travis Wolfe gave a stranger from Connecticut a priceless memory that will last a long time.
Good job, young man."
Some were pulled because there was a lack of any cohesive logic. Others were apparently written out of anger and suggested all people in the world are either crooks, perverts, or con artists.
For #100 we're going to go with what could well be called "The Product Of Purloin". None of the words that follow are mine.
They come from Cory Giger, (Giger Counters) a newspaper reporter with the Altoona Mirror who went to a ballgame and filed this report :
"One 13 year-old boy's random and simple act of kindness Friday night at PNC Park proved that some kids still understand the importance of helping others and not being selfish all the time.
My wife and I were eating chicken nachos on the concourse during the Pirates game against the Astros when a neat little scene played out in front of us.
A middle-aged gentleman in a wheelchair asked a kid wearing a red Jason Bay jersey sitting nearby if he would get him a cup of ice on the sweltering, muggy evening. He then told the young boy, Travis Wolfe, of Steubenville, Ohio, that he would give him a dollar for his trouble.
Travis shook his head and declined to take the money, then went and got the cup of ice.
When he returned with the ice, the man in the wheelchair, Matt Stumm, again offered to give the boy some money for his efforts.
Again Travis declined, even as Stumm tried several times to get him to take the money. It appeared reading Travis' lips that he said, 'It's OK.'
'He wouldn't take the money,' Stumm, who was visiting Pittsburgh from Hartford, Conn., said with a big smile.'That impressed me even more [ than going to get the ice.]'
Stumm went on for a minute talking about how nice it was to see Travis be so helpful. He also mentioned that if he could find the boy's parents he would say, 'Here's $10, put it toward his college fund.'
Travis wasn't seeking any attention for his act of kindness. He had no clue anyone was watching, especially a newspaper reporter who just so happened to be standing nearby.
There are, unfortunately, many kids in this world who think only of themselves and wouldn't have bothered to help Stumm, or wouldn't have thought twice about taking the money, albeit a small amount.
It was very impressive to see Travis be so gracious in his own small way on both accounts.
The young lad and his friend, Nick Ivkovich, 13, were stunned when I came up to talk to them and mentioned that I wanted to write about what happened. They looked at each other with big smiles on their faces, posed for a picture and then took me to talk to Travis's mom.
'You try to raise your kid the right way,' said Lori Wolfe, who wore a proud smile when told of her son's subtle generosity.
It wasn't some grand gesture that will be remembered forever by many people. But life is all about little things, and kids need to learn that the little things they do -- or don't do -- have an impact on other people's lives.
Simply by turning down $1, Travis Wolfe gave a stranger from Connecticut a priceless memory that will last a long time.
Good job, young man."
Friday, July 16, 2010
OXYMORON'S et al
One of my favorite E-mails is that called "Oxymorons" and was recently sent to me by my brother and sister-in-law in Nebraska.
Today's blog will attempt to capture some of their more bizarre examples. We will also examine similar lifestyle examples in this Mad, Mad World of ours.
First, the funny stuff:
{1} WHY DO DO TUG BOATS PUSH THEIR BARGES?
{2} WHY DOES SLIM CHANCE AND FAT CHANCE MEAN THE SAME?
{3} If webster wrote the first dictionary - where did he find the words?
{4} DOESN'T "EXPECTING THE UNEXPECTED" MAKE THE UNEXPECTED EXPECTED?
{5} Why do we wash bath towels? Aren't we clean when we use em?
Those are some funny examples, but, there are other things in life more puzzling to this old guy:
Why do we continue to believe in many circles that if we just leave people alone they will do the right thing?
(1) I thought Greenspan was doing the right thing. Then he responded when questioned after the revelations of the worst financial fraud in history (on his watch) something that sounded like:"I really never thought they would do those things? "
Why? Did he forget the Savings & Loan disaster?
(2) A more recent example? A Federal appeals court decision ruled against the FCC regulations as to what constituted "expletives" on the airways, stating their definition of "indecency" was too vague.
Hopefully, the Court of Appeals included a less vague definition in their decision.
One brainiac who appeared to be supportive of the decision wrote in a Denver newspaper editorial: "We believe viewers will vote with their remote controls -- a message that revenue- hungry networks will get loud and clear - an approach focusing on individual control makes far more sense."
Ah yes, that's always worked before.
(3) A shrine to British killer Raoul Moat has sprung up on the riverside in the north English town of Rothbury where Bloat killed himself by shotgun after a 6 hour standoff with police.
So what is Moat's claim to fame? Well, he triggered Britain's largest manhunt after he injured his ex-girlfriend, executed her new boyfriend - and blasted an unarmed cop in the face.
The reason for the floral bouquets on the riverbank as well as the "gushing tributes"? Moat's supporters claim he should be celebrated for his "defiance of authority" and for taking revenge on the woman who left him for another man?
Who would want to argue? The woman must have been nuts to leave an arduous swain like this!
More Oxymorons:
WHY DO YOU PRESS HARDER ON A REMOTE CONTROL WHEN YOU KNOW THE BATTERIES ARE DEAD?
IF WORK IS SO TERRIFIC - WHY DO THEY HAVE TO PAY YOU TO DO IT?
HOW COME ABBREVIATED IS SUCH A LONG WORD?
(4) A 26 year old Oakland, California resident gunned down four police officers after being pulled over for a traffic violation in March 2009. (Read on, Tampa citizens)
According to a news release, he was eventually killed by a SWAT team. The man had been connected to several rape cases - including that of a 12 year old girl - and had been in jail for assault and robbery.
Some 60 people attended a march in his honor - where he was hailed as a fighter against "police terror".
Yeah folks, that sound you just heard was all the remotes turning off the TV's at Goldman Sachs in a massive protest against indecency.
Finally:
CHRISTMAS - WHAT OTHER TIME OF THE YEAR DO YOU SIT IN FRONT OF A DEAD TREE AND EAT CANDY OUT OF YOUR SOCKS?
Have a great weekend.
Today's blog will attempt to capture some of their more bizarre examples. We will also examine similar lifestyle examples in this Mad, Mad World of ours.
First, the funny stuff:
{1} WHY DO DO TUG BOATS PUSH THEIR BARGES?
{2} WHY DOES SLIM CHANCE AND FAT CHANCE MEAN THE SAME?
{3} If webster wrote the first dictionary - where did he find the words?
{4} DOESN'T "EXPECTING THE UNEXPECTED" MAKE THE UNEXPECTED EXPECTED?
{5} Why do we wash bath towels? Aren't we clean when we use em?
Those are some funny examples, but, there are other things in life more puzzling to this old guy:
Why do we continue to believe in many circles that if we just leave people alone they will do the right thing?
(1) I thought Greenspan was doing the right thing. Then he responded when questioned after the revelations of the worst financial fraud in history (on his watch) something that sounded like:"I really never thought they would do those things? "
Why? Did he forget the Savings & Loan disaster?
(2) A more recent example? A Federal appeals court decision ruled against the FCC regulations as to what constituted "expletives" on the airways, stating their definition of "indecency" was too vague.
Hopefully, the Court of Appeals included a less vague definition in their decision.
One brainiac who appeared to be supportive of the decision wrote in a Denver newspaper editorial: "We believe viewers will vote with their remote controls -- a message that revenue- hungry networks will get loud and clear - an approach focusing on individual control makes far more sense."
Ah yes, that's always worked before.
(3) A shrine to British killer Raoul Moat has sprung up on the riverside in the north English town of Rothbury where Bloat killed himself by shotgun after a 6 hour standoff with police.
So what is Moat's claim to fame? Well, he triggered Britain's largest manhunt after he injured his ex-girlfriend, executed her new boyfriend - and blasted an unarmed cop in the face.
The reason for the floral bouquets on the riverbank as well as the "gushing tributes"? Moat's supporters claim he should be celebrated for his "defiance of authority" and for taking revenge on the woman who left him for another man?
Who would want to argue? The woman must have been nuts to leave an arduous swain like this!
More Oxymorons:
WHY DO YOU PRESS HARDER ON A REMOTE CONTROL WHEN YOU KNOW THE BATTERIES ARE DEAD?
IF WORK IS SO TERRIFIC - WHY DO THEY HAVE TO PAY YOU TO DO IT?
HOW COME ABBREVIATED IS SUCH A LONG WORD?
(4) A 26 year old Oakland, California resident gunned down four police officers after being pulled over for a traffic violation in March 2009. (Read on, Tampa citizens)
According to a news release, he was eventually killed by a SWAT team. The man had been connected to several rape cases - including that of a 12 year old girl - and had been in jail for assault and robbery.
Some 60 people attended a march in his honor - where he was hailed as a fighter against "police terror".
Yeah folks, that sound you just heard was all the remotes turning off the TV's at Goldman Sachs in a massive protest against indecency.
Finally:
CHRISTMAS - WHAT OTHER TIME OF THE YEAR DO YOU SIT IN FRONT OF A DEAD TREE AND EAT CANDY OUT OF YOUR SOCKS?
Have a great weekend.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
THE TALE OF THE OX
There's an old saying that goes something like this: "It all depends on whose OX was gored."
I'm sure there are variations. Some claim the "OX" reference started in Exodus, the second book of the Old Testament. Others also claim a religious association with the saying.
They give this example: A preacher can condemn sin from the pulpit and he will be praised for his fine teachings with all the Elders loudly pronouncing a resounding "Amen!"
However, should the sin he later condemns be unknowingly that which is being committed by The Head Elder, his actions will surely beget a job change for "Da Preach." He gored the wrong OX.
The application in this humble blog is in regard to the death of people whose life style was villified while alive but praised following their death.
The first person that comes to mind is Senator Ted Kennedy. The second is George Steinbrenner, CEO of the Yankees, who passed away today. I'll skip Michael Jackson, if you don't mind.
There is one caveat regarding my Steinbrenner analysis. I must remind any readers out there of my blind love for The Pittsburgh Pirates and will forever be grateful for them beating the hated Yankees in the 1960 World Series. Yeah, I had the winning OX back in the day.
Now my Buccos have had dibs on the worst losing record in all of sports history and a payroll that could be paid out of the receipts of one home stand at Yankee Stadium.
So, what is my real problem here?
I grew to abhor the personalities of both Kennedy and Steinbrenner. Their actions were against everything I was taught as a child regarding modesty and fighting fair. It's a shame these guys never had to take on "The Duke" in a fight. "Right" would surely have won out over "Might".
The political largesse Kennedy gave his constituents could easily make almost any resident a Ted Kennedy fan. He was a powerful man and regardless of whether or not you embraced the Kennedy mythology; according to the epitaphs he was a caring and charitable man during his time on earth.
I not only did not live in Massachusetts - I had no desire to do so. Okay, maybe with the exception that suggests I could have enjoyed ancient resident status .
This might have enabled me to personally confirm the allegations that what Paul Revere really said that famous night was: "One if by land. Two if by sea and Three if the Widow Brown is home alone tonight."
Similarly, if you were a true Yankee fan - as is one friend - a very honorable man - it is possible that some of the off the field antics committed by Steinbrenner could also be overlooked or at least shoved back to hind status in the memory bank.
George truly took any Yankee fan on a magical ride and provided them with a lot of great memories.
You guys got Steinbrenner, a shipping magnate and a brillant scouting staff. We got McClatchey and Nutting two newspaper men with a scout team that only excelled in the sport of "Blind Mans Bluff."
Yep, "It all depends on whose OX was gored."
In the coming days I have no doubt that Steinbrenner will be mentioned in various periodicals as "the second coming". I really struggle with that assessment, and resent the beatification of unworthy men upon their death.
Many obit writers may forget that George was a bully and a felon who served no jail time and was kicked out of baseball for two years.
History suggests George will enjoy the same death expungement that Ted enjoyed - although surely there were some minor protests from members of Mary Jo Kopechne's family.
However, I can't worry that if I had been born in Massachusetts - lived there most of my life - receiving political bon-bons from Ted and his brothers- but later became a huge Yankee fan after moving to the Bronx- I also may have somehow found myself wanting to be on that "Glory Road" with both men.
Most of us want to be associated with "winners" and prefer to ignore examining the accuracy of the evaluation of the character of these people upon death. It's human nature. Lot's of former Mafia don were big church donors and received a great send off as they headed on their next journey.
May you always have the winning OX.
I'm sure there are variations. Some claim the "OX" reference started in Exodus, the second book of the Old Testament. Others also claim a religious association with the saying.
They give this example: A preacher can condemn sin from the pulpit and he will be praised for his fine teachings with all the Elders loudly pronouncing a resounding "Amen!"
However, should the sin he later condemns be unknowingly that which is being committed by The Head Elder, his actions will surely beget a job change for "Da Preach." He gored the wrong OX.
The application in this humble blog is in regard to the death of people whose life style was villified while alive but praised following their death.
The first person that comes to mind is Senator Ted Kennedy. The second is George Steinbrenner, CEO of the Yankees, who passed away today. I'll skip Michael Jackson, if you don't mind.
There is one caveat regarding my Steinbrenner analysis. I must remind any readers out there of my blind love for The Pittsburgh Pirates and will forever be grateful for them beating the hated Yankees in the 1960 World Series. Yeah, I had the winning OX back in the day.
Now my Buccos have had dibs on the worst losing record in all of sports history and a payroll that could be paid out of the receipts of one home stand at Yankee Stadium.
So, what is my real problem here?
I grew to abhor the personalities of both Kennedy and Steinbrenner. Their actions were against everything I was taught as a child regarding modesty and fighting fair. It's a shame these guys never had to take on "The Duke" in a fight. "Right" would surely have won out over "Might".
The political largesse Kennedy gave his constituents could easily make almost any resident a Ted Kennedy fan. He was a powerful man and regardless of whether or not you embraced the Kennedy mythology; according to the epitaphs he was a caring and charitable man during his time on earth.
I not only did not live in Massachusetts - I had no desire to do so. Okay, maybe with the exception that suggests I could have enjoyed ancient resident status .
This might have enabled me to personally confirm the allegations that what Paul Revere really said that famous night was: "One if by land. Two if by sea and Three if the Widow Brown is home alone tonight."
Similarly, if you were a true Yankee fan - as is one friend - a very honorable man - it is possible that some of the off the field antics committed by Steinbrenner could also be overlooked or at least shoved back to hind status in the memory bank.
George truly took any Yankee fan on a magical ride and provided them with a lot of great memories.
You guys got Steinbrenner, a shipping magnate and a brillant scouting staff. We got McClatchey and Nutting two newspaper men with a scout team that only excelled in the sport of "Blind Mans Bluff."
Yep, "It all depends on whose OX was gored."
In the coming days I have no doubt that Steinbrenner will be mentioned in various periodicals as "the second coming". I really struggle with that assessment, and resent the beatification of unworthy men upon their death.
Many obit writers may forget that George was a bully and a felon who served no jail time and was kicked out of baseball for two years.
History suggests George will enjoy the same death expungement that Ted enjoyed - although surely there were some minor protests from members of Mary Jo Kopechne's family.
However, I can't worry that if I had been born in Massachusetts - lived there most of my life - receiving political bon-bons from Ted and his brothers- but later became a huge Yankee fan after moving to the Bronx- I also may have somehow found myself wanting to be on that "Glory Road" with both men.
Most of us want to be associated with "winners" and prefer to ignore examining the accuracy of the evaluation of the character of these people upon death. It's human nature. Lot's of former Mafia don were big church donors and received a great send off as they headed on their next journey.
May you always have the winning OX.
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
SO NOT FAIR!
Writer's block? Just read the newspapers or "PopEater"
In was in the latter on-line site that we were the first to hear Mother Of The Year candidate Dinal Lohan's response to her daughter Lindsay being sentenced to 90 days in jail by Judge Marsha Revel, the only one of the two women who may deserve to be invited to "The Mother's Ball."
The Judge demonstrated incredibly good judgment. The other, Dina, in response to the news about her daughter allegedly commented EXCLUSIVELY to PopEater, "This is so not fair to do this to my child."
Now, let's examine her comment for less than the minute it deserves attention. Incredibly, she has adopted the syntax of her daughter's generation . She also places herself first in her response as to their order of importance by her reference to "my child."
So, was Mother Dina upset that the just punishment was levied on this remarkably stupid young actress or was she miffed that vicariously they were "so not fair" to her, the mother?
Perhaps Judge Revel can find a cell big enough to fit both Lindsay and Dina along with their Louis Vuitton bags - or better yet - allow Dina to serve the sentence in her daughter's stead.
Why not - it is only a matter of time before Lindsay will probably be sentenced again because she doesn't have the benefit of the parental wisdom you and I bestowed on our kids.
And all those hanger-ons who feel sorry for Lindsay and are determined for her to see the right path? What? Give up the opportunity to sit in the VIP section?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, to the more serious standard of justice. On Tuesday, Attorney General Eric Holder filed a lawsuit against Arizona for actually doing something about illegal -oops there's that word again - I mean "undocumented" workers. (please reference, "If it walks like a duck, etc etc.")
You'll all remember "Even Handed Eric." He's the one who gave us the idea of providing terrorists the Miranda Rights before trying them in our court system, as opposed to that of the military. There are people in The Hague who are still shaking their heads.
But, then again if we're going to build a Mosque near the site of the worst internal attack this country has ever experienced, why not help New York's tourism industry by trying them there?
You must have heard of Holder. He was also the guy who allegedly recommended to President Clinton that fugitive and Democratic contributor Mark Rich should be pardoned and advised his attorney, jack Quinn, how to go about it. Rich was subsequently pardoned.
Holder was also allegedly involved with Clinton's decision to reduce the criminal sentences of 16 members of what the FBI then labelled a terrorist organization. They were not required as a condition of sentence reduction to indentify the hiding place of Manuel Gerena, a co-conspirator and one of the FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives. Nor, were they required to reveal anything about the millions of dollars the group stole in a 1983 robbery of Wells Fargo
Needless-to-say, the clemency granted was opposed by the FBI, the federal prosecutor and the victims.
Later, when the A.G. was questioned about the Rich matter he stated, "I wish I had done some things differently." (Hey, Eric you still have time to reconsider that thinking on the Arizona law).
As one who has considerable influence as Attorney General, both in this country and abroad. he Holder also wields a heavy stick over his government attorneys who were quoted as saying on the Arizona matter, "The (Arizona) law would cause harassment and possible detention of legal immigrants and harm diplomatic relations with Mexico."
Oh yeah! The "diplomatic relations" rationale got my attention bu somehow failed to ameliorate any concerns about Big Government overstepping States Rights one more time.
The only argument that suggested one iota of possible rationale for debate was a fear that should the Federal Government allow Arizona to usurp their authority we could end up with a "patchwork of state and local immigration policies throughout the country."
So, be it. Then maybe we'd find somebody with the guts to step up and announce just exactly what this country's policy is on "illegal immigration."
The President has been silent. Congress has been silent. Even the guy whose company is selling all that fencing hasn't had a lot to say.
If you truly want to understand our diplomatic relations with Mexico - try sneaking in there some time.
The Justice Department's decision in this matter was, "so not fair."
In was in the latter on-line site that we were the first to hear Mother Of The Year candidate Dinal Lohan's response to her daughter Lindsay being sentenced to 90 days in jail by Judge Marsha Revel, the only one of the two women who may deserve to be invited to "The Mother's Ball."
The Judge demonstrated incredibly good judgment. The other, Dina, in response to the news about her daughter allegedly commented EXCLUSIVELY to PopEater, "This is so not fair to do this to my child."
Now, let's examine her comment for less than the minute it deserves attention. Incredibly, she has adopted the syntax of her daughter's generation . She also places herself first in her response as to their order of importance by her reference to "my child."
So, was Mother Dina upset that the just punishment was levied on this remarkably stupid young actress or was she miffed that vicariously they were "so not fair" to her, the mother?
Perhaps Judge Revel can find a cell big enough to fit both Lindsay and Dina along with their Louis Vuitton bags - or better yet - allow Dina to serve the sentence in her daughter's stead.
Why not - it is only a matter of time before Lindsay will probably be sentenced again because she doesn't have the benefit of the parental wisdom you and I bestowed on our kids.
And all those hanger-ons who feel sorry for Lindsay and are determined for her to see the right path? What? Give up the opportunity to sit in the VIP section?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, to the more serious standard of justice. On Tuesday, Attorney General Eric Holder filed a lawsuit against Arizona for actually doing something about illegal -oops there's that word again - I mean "undocumented" workers. (please reference, "If it walks like a duck, etc etc.")
You'll all remember "Even Handed Eric." He's the one who gave us the idea of providing terrorists the Miranda Rights before trying them in our court system, as opposed to that of the military. There are people in The Hague who are still shaking their heads.
But, then again if we're going to build a Mosque near the site of the worst internal attack this country has ever experienced, why not help New York's tourism industry by trying them there?
You must have heard of Holder. He was also the guy who allegedly recommended to President Clinton that fugitive and Democratic contributor Mark Rich should be pardoned and advised his attorney, jack Quinn, how to go about it. Rich was subsequently pardoned.
Holder was also allegedly involved with Clinton's decision to reduce the criminal sentences of 16 members of what the FBI then labelled a terrorist organization. They were not required as a condition of sentence reduction to indentify the hiding place of Manuel Gerena, a co-conspirator and one of the FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives. Nor, were they required to reveal anything about the millions of dollars the group stole in a 1983 robbery of Wells Fargo
Needless-to-say, the clemency granted was opposed by the FBI, the federal prosecutor and the victims.
Later, when the A.G. was questioned about the Rich matter he stated, "I wish I had done some things differently." (Hey, Eric you still have time to reconsider that thinking on the Arizona law).
As one who has considerable influence as Attorney General, both in this country and abroad. he Holder also wields a heavy stick over his government attorneys who were quoted as saying on the Arizona matter, "The (Arizona) law would cause harassment and possible detention of legal immigrants and harm diplomatic relations with Mexico."
Oh yeah! The "diplomatic relations" rationale got my attention bu somehow failed to ameliorate any concerns about Big Government overstepping States Rights one more time.
The only argument that suggested one iota of possible rationale for debate was a fear that should the Federal Government allow Arizona to usurp their authority we could end up with a "patchwork of state and local immigration policies throughout the country."
So, be it. Then maybe we'd find somebody with the guts to step up and announce just exactly what this country's policy is on "illegal immigration."
The President has been silent. Congress has been silent. Even the guy whose company is selling all that fencing hasn't had a lot to say.
If you truly want to understand our diplomatic relations with Mexico - try sneaking in there some time.
The Justice Department's decision in this matter was, "so not fair."
Sunday, July 4, 2010
Learning From The Past - or not.
Reading is fundamental - so is experience.
Recently, this blog outlined the various periodicals that come to our house. As we get older we've noticed a departure of past reading practices.
Where we used to start our reading choices with the sports page we now seem to concentrate on the News section of USA Today. Now, it being baseball season - not football - may be one reason for this turnabout proclivity. Reading about the Pirates suggests a real affinity for the writings of Victor Hugo. The peasants are still losing.
But, win or lose, the state of the Pirates is receiving less daily attention from me than the state of the union. As age creeps up on me my philosophy on much of today's current events reveals more of a shrug of the shoulders than it once did. But, the interest remains.
One of the many life lessons that having kids taught me is that it's not always bad to leave a baby cry once you determine that there appears to be no physical reason for the crying. Granted all of this must be done in small, well considered increments - particularly as a first time parent.
Another lesson as we go through life is that employees- just like children- need to know what your expectations are and what are the likely consequences of failing to act within those rules. I am not suggesting that employees should be treated like children - no matter how often their actions might suggest otherwise.
The premise is rather that both groups not only need to be told the extent of the restrictions placed on them. They also share a a desire to be told. So many parents as well as coaches have failed due to their inability to understand and practice this simple truism.
With a child it is important to emphasize where they can and cannot go - do - or say. With the employees it depends more on the management style of you and your company. But, the bottom line is that we all need rules so that we can develop a framework for our individual talents.
If we have a small child who insists on crawling up the steps it is important to explain what the consequences will be should they fail to acknowledge and act upon our direction. They need to not only understand the harm from falling down the stairs but the actions from us they can rightfully expect for their failure to obey us as their parent.
This axiom is not without the need for parents to apply same in increments similar to the crying baby. The action must fit the situation.
Simply put, if you tell the kids that some sort of punishment will occur should they continue to disobey your admonition not to continue climbing - you need to reinforce that disobeyance with appropriate follow up.
Not suggested here is that you remove the spindle from the railing and clobber them over the head. However, consistency is a byword here. The only way to truly establish the parameters for both us adults and children is prompt and fair reprisal. It is NOT child abuse.
Yeah, it's a pain to be a parent - or even a new member of management . One of the great motivations that drives us all is a desire to be liked. As we grow older it turns from the verb form "liked" to one called "respected." If we want to be liked - get a dog.
Having been once blessed with a daughter, I understand that the recognition of a need for good and consistent parenting results in a positive reward in your relationship with that progeny down the road. We used to take turns hanging up on each other out of anger and frustration.
Now, I watch with admiration as my daughter practices the parenting model with her own 4 children. Quite frankly, she's a much better practitioner than her old man.
Now, to the state of the union thing.
If you, as a country, establish rules for crossing your borders ( or parameters) and fail to follow up, it's not only your leadership that will be accurately questioned. It is also the perceived veracity of your regulations and enforcement. Why are we so surprised that illegal (excuse me ," undocumented" workers) continue to flaunt what they feel is their right?
Too many people seem to confuse what is going down in Arizona with bigotry.
Perhaps, on reflection, it's nothing more than just acting on the rules that are in existance with appropriate reinforcement.
And yeah, a lot of people are going to fight against the planned action - just like your kids did.
Maybe it's time for some long overdue strong leadership and parenting skills. Why not start with the executive and legislative branches. Again, if we're going to "vote them out" - let's make sure that we keep track of and respond appropriately to the promises made by their replacements.
Experience suggests to me that's called "good parenting" too.
Recently, this blog outlined the various periodicals that come to our house. As we get older we've noticed a departure of past reading practices.
Where we used to start our reading choices with the sports page we now seem to concentrate on the News section of USA Today. Now, it being baseball season - not football - may be one reason for this turnabout proclivity. Reading about the Pirates suggests a real affinity for the writings of Victor Hugo. The peasants are still losing.
But, win or lose, the state of the Pirates is receiving less daily attention from me than the state of the union. As age creeps up on me my philosophy on much of today's current events reveals more of a shrug of the shoulders than it once did. But, the interest remains.
One of the many life lessons that having kids taught me is that it's not always bad to leave a baby cry once you determine that there appears to be no physical reason for the crying. Granted all of this must be done in small, well considered increments - particularly as a first time parent.
Another lesson as we go through life is that employees- just like children- need to know what your expectations are and what are the likely consequences of failing to act within those rules. I am not suggesting that employees should be treated like children - no matter how often their actions might suggest otherwise.
The premise is rather that both groups not only need to be told the extent of the restrictions placed on them. They also share a a desire to be told. So many parents as well as coaches have failed due to their inability to understand and practice this simple truism.
With a child it is important to emphasize where they can and cannot go - do - or say. With the employees it depends more on the management style of you and your company. But, the bottom line is that we all need rules so that we can develop a framework for our individual talents.
If we have a small child who insists on crawling up the steps it is important to explain what the consequences will be should they fail to acknowledge and act upon our direction. They need to not only understand the harm from falling down the stairs but the actions from us they can rightfully expect for their failure to obey us as their parent.
This axiom is not without the need for parents to apply same in increments similar to the crying baby. The action must fit the situation.
Simply put, if you tell the kids that some sort of punishment will occur should they continue to disobey your admonition not to continue climbing - you need to reinforce that disobeyance with appropriate follow up.
Not suggested here is that you remove the spindle from the railing and clobber them over the head. However, consistency is a byword here. The only way to truly establish the parameters for both us adults and children is prompt and fair reprisal. It is NOT child abuse.
Yeah, it's a pain to be a parent - or even a new member of management . One of the great motivations that drives us all is a desire to be liked. As we grow older it turns from the verb form "liked" to one called "respected." If we want to be liked - get a dog.
Having been once blessed with a daughter, I understand that the recognition of a need for good and consistent parenting results in a positive reward in your relationship with that progeny down the road. We used to take turns hanging up on each other out of anger and frustration.
Now, I watch with admiration as my daughter practices the parenting model with her own 4 children. Quite frankly, she's a much better practitioner than her old man.
Now, to the state of the union thing.
If you, as a country, establish rules for crossing your borders ( or parameters) and fail to follow up, it's not only your leadership that will be accurately questioned. It is also the perceived veracity of your regulations and enforcement. Why are we so surprised that illegal (excuse me ," undocumented" workers) continue to flaunt what they feel is their right?
Too many people seem to confuse what is going down in Arizona with bigotry.
Perhaps, on reflection, it's nothing more than just acting on the rules that are in existance with appropriate reinforcement.
And yeah, a lot of people are going to fight against the planned action - just like your kids did.
Maybe it's time for some long overdue strong leadership and parenting skills. Why not start with the executive and legislative branches. Again, if we're going to "vote them out" - let's make sure that we keep track of and respond appropriately to the promises made by their replacements.
Experience suggests to me that's called "good parenting" too.
Friday, July 2, 2010
THOUGHTS FOR A RAINY FRIDAY
As long as Time, Inc continues to publish Sports Illustrated, I will not fully appreciate the loss of my Dad's aggressive parenting style.
The circulation department of S.I., one of their publications, has opted to replace him now.
A recent blog decried the fact that a newly elected Representative to the House's discovers their first duty is not to the electorate but, to see how they can be re-elected.
The S.I. circulation has apparently adopted their zeal. Maybe it's just me, but, it appears that very soon after yours truly "reups" his magazine subscription duty the notices start coming from S.I. telling me that it's time to renew.
When this first started, my immediate reaction was , "they must have made a mistake and haven't received my payment". A quick check of this possibility revealed that was not the case.
This Circulation aggregation is the most aggressive group to come along since Ghengis Khan.'s staff. Unfortunately, it is an aggregation that promotes aggravation for this meager blogster.
In our household during the period of a year we receive: a couple of travel magazines assuring us we can indeed afford to vacation in Bora-Bora. We also subscribe to People Magazine that used to include adults in their intended reading audience.
We get an AARP magazine that carefully explains why they chose to align themselves with one political party or another over an age related piece of legislation (as opposed to sponsoring one as they once did in the past).
The post office also delivers AAA magazine that promises us bargain discounts for things we would never consider purchasing but refuses to relate how their (unsolicited) lobbying efforts have impacted (or not) the price of gas.
Finally, every 5 days a week (or less) we receive delivery of The USA Today which each Friday via former Publisher Al Neuharth's column tells us more about senility than we ever wanted to know. Despite these faint criticisms they all provide a welcome diversion at times.,
The non- dues related publications like AAA and AARP do not have to hustle us to renew our subscriptions. Unfortunately, that's not the case for the other periodicals who, like S.I., also like to get a jump on my subscription buck, but are not quite as aggressive.
S.I's technique becomes clear after comparing two successful but opposite counselling protocols originating with Carl Rogers and Fritz Perls, among others.
The first counselling style, called Rogerian, is non-aggressive and works on the theory that a curative result can be found to be within the ability of the client. It is non-directive and focuses much on past activities and choices. About 95% of Rogerian counselling consists of supplying few answers to the person who seeks therapy. Are you familiar with the technique of, "So how do you feel about that?"
Gestalt, on the other hand, emphasizes the here and now. I once watched what appeared to be a homemade film made with a hand held camera and whose purpose was to capture Perls "counselling" a client.
It was too long ago to remember specifics but a sample response from Perls to the client expressing a feeling of inadequacy might well be, "You say you feel indadequate and that's because YOU ARE INADEQUATE!" I often described it as the "rubber hose" approach,
Unfortunately something else that the folks at SI appear to have adopted is it's own lack of sensitivity.
Their renewal technique starts out Rogerian but ends up Gestalt- like. The frequent letters seeking your money become more and more aggressive way before your expiration date approaches. If you're lucky, in true "Where's Elmo" style, you can find the actual renewal date of your last contribution somewhere in the correspondence.
At some point toward the end of this battle for your renewal money you receive mail suggesting that they MUST have a response and you better open the envelope lickety-split if you know what's good for you. (Go get em, Fritz!)
Visions of two ex-NFL linebackers breaking down your door in the middle of the night does not suggest any deep REM sleep patterns are coming your way very soon.
Now, I truly appreciate a magazine that has the ability in both pictures and words to capture the brutality of our favorite sports. You almost have to wipe the testosterone off the cover.
I embrace their literary accomplishments as I no longer can afford to renew my membership in the "Lions and the Christians" publications nor attend their annual meetings in Detroit.
But, this old f--t would prefer a more congenial approach in their fund raising technique. I would be very appreciative if Time, Inc would curb S.I.'s "early practice" activities as successfully as the NCAA has done with it's member schools. It is the the NCAA et al ,without whom Time, Inc. would find their customers wrapping their fish entrails in S.I - BEFORE reading it.
Gotta run. I've got to find a way to remove the Sports Illustrated label off their hooded sweatshirt so I can give it to my wife for her birthday. It's in the closet with several others, two stadium blankets and half a dozen monogrammed S.I. windbreakers.
Hey, no broken front doors for this guy.
The circulation department of S.I., one of their publications, has opted to replace him now.
A recent blog decried the fact that a newly elected Representative to the House's discovers their first duty is not to the electorate but, to see how they can be re-elected.
The S.I. circulation has apparently adopted their zeal. Maybe it's just me, but, it appears that very soon after yours truly "reups" his magazine subscription duty the notices start coming from S.I. telling me that it's time to renew.
When this first started, my immediate reaction was , "they must have made a mistake and haven't received my payment". A quick check of this possibility revealed that was not the case.
This Circulation aggregation is the most aggressive group to come along since Ghengis Khan.'s staff. Unfortunately, it is an aggregation that promotes aggravation for this meager blogster.
In our household during the period of a year we receive: a couple of travel magazines assuring us we can indeed afford to vacation in Bora-Bora. We also subscribe to People Magazine that used to include adults in their intended reading audience.
We get an AARP magazine that carefully explains why they chose to align themselves with one political party or another over an age related piece of legislation (as opposed to sponsoring one as they once did in the past).
The post office also delivers AAA magazine that promises us bargain discounts for things we would never consider purchasing but refuses to relate how their (unsolicited) lobbying efforts have impacted (or not) the price of gas.
Finally, every 5 days a week (or less) we receive delivery of The USA Today which each Friday via former Publisher Al Neuharth's column tells us more about senility than we ever wanted to know. Despite these faint criticisms they all provide a welcome diversion at times.,
The non- dues related publications like AAA and AARP do not have to hustle us to renew our subscriptions. Unfortunately, that's not the case for the other periodicals who, like S.I., also like to get a jump on my subscription buck, but are not quite as aggressive.
S.I's technique becomes clear after comparing two successful but opposite counselling protocols originating with Carl Rogers and Fritz Perls, among others.
The first counselling style, called Rogerian, is non-aggressive and works on the theory that a curative result can be found to be within the ability of the client. It is non-directive and focuses much on past activities and choices. About 95% of Rogerian counselling consists of supplying few answers to the person who seeks therapy. Are you familiar with the technique of, "So how do you feel about that?"
Gestalt, on the other hand, emphasizes the here and now. I once watched what appeared to be a homemade film made with a hand held camera and whose purpose was to capture Perls "counselling" a client.
It was too long ago to remember specifics but a sample response from Perls to the client expressing a feeling of inadequacy might well be, "You say you feel indadequate and that's because YOU ARE INADEQUATE!" I often described it as the "rubber hose" approach,
Unfortunately something else that the folks at SI appear to have adopted is it's own lack of sensitivity.
Their renewal technique starts out Rogerian but ends up Gestalt- like. The frequent letters seeking your money become more and more aggressive way before your expiration date approaches. If you're lucky, in true "Where's Elmo" style, you can find the actual renewal date of your last contribution somewhere in the correspondence.
At some point toward the end of this battle for your renewal money you receive mail suggesting that they MUST have a response and you better open the envelope lickety-split if you know what's good for you. (Go get em, Fritz!)
Visions of two ex-NFL linebackers breaking down your door in the middle of the night does not suggest any deep REM sleep patterns are coming your way very soon.
Now, I truly appreciate a magazine that has the ability in both pictures and words to capture the brutality of our favorite sports. You almost have to wipe the testosterone off the cover.
I embrace their literary accomplishments as I no longer can afford to renew my membership in the "Lions and the Christians" publications nor attend their annual meetings in Detroit.
But, this old f--t would prefer a more congenial approach in their fund raising technique. I would be very appreciative if Time, Inc would curb S.I.'s "early practice" activities as successfully as the NCAA has done with it's member schools. It is the the NCAA et al ,without whom Time, Inc. would find their customers wrapping their fish entrails in S.I - BEFORE reading it.
Gotta run. I've got to find a way to remove the Sports Illustrated label off their hooded sweatshirt so I can give it to my wife for her birthday. It's in the closet with several others, two stadium blankets and half a dozen monogrammed S.I. windbreakers.
Hey, no broken front doors for this guy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)