commentary on the passing parade

Agree? Disagree? Tell me

My Other Blog

 
ANOTHER YEAR IN WHICH THEY DIDN’T COME

It’s coming down to the end of another Gregorian calendar year - just a matter of hours before people will be raising their champagne glasses to greet the arrival of 2012. And of course pundits and news people and philosophers and bloggers will be looking back and recording their thoughts and making their observations about the major events of the year. As I sit and write these words, I too am looking back over the past year, but unlike the ruminations of others, I am looking at a NON event. Once again, a full 365 days have passed and they have not come. "They" being superior beings from some other world. And despite my claim of alien origin for myself and Rod Blagojevich (just Google "IKSKOBAR) - no other aliens made their presence known this year.

Readers of this blog know this has been a recurring theme, beginning in 2003 - asking, every once in a while, why "they" don’t come Of course we have no direct evidence that "they" exist, but it’s hard to believe that in this vast universe with its billions of suns and unfathomable numbers of planets - that intelligent life exists only on earth. So if they do exist, where are they and why don’t they come? The first part of that question can’t be answered, at least not yet - but there is more than one answer to the "why" that I’ve asked many times here.

Distance of course is an obvious problem. Even if the nearest inhabited planet is next door in galactic terms - say one or two thousand light years away - it would take that many years to get here , assuming that our alien visitors could travel at the speed of light. On the other hand, it may be that superior beings have found a way to make quantum leaps through space - to get from point a to point be faster than light rays can travel - much faster. And perhaps they are as capable of getting from their planet to ours as easily as our astronauts have traveled from the earth to the moon. But weather or not they’ve discovered the secrets of faster than light travel - the other reason why they don’t come here and introduce themselves is a lot easier to understand.

Back in 2003. When I first posed the question, I asked if space travelers from earth would be anxious to reveal themselves to a planetary population of 191 different nation states speaking 6800 different languages, of which 2261 had written systems, and with a history of people within those states murdering each other by the thousands annually, internally and through armed conflict with other states. I know the thought of such a planet would scare the pants off of me. But that’s where you and I live - heaven help us.

The world that existed when I started this blog in 2003 is not that much different from that of today. There are still millions of us living in abject poverty while others enjoy lives of luxury. There are still millions of us living under systems of primitive laws rooted in past centuries while millions of others live under rationally devised laws. . There are still billions of us who believe in a deity, but divided in those beliefs about the nature of that deity and often killing each other because of those differences in beliefs .

I know if I was an extraterrestrial from a world where such things as war, hunger, homelessness or hatred of others because of there religion, race or sexual orientation did not exist, observing this planet from a safe distance, monitoring our broadcast signals, able to tap into our Internet and telephonic communication devices and watching the crazed things that go on here, I don’t think it would take much time to conclude that this is a world in chaos and far from ready to be introduced to other, civilized planetary societies. I wouldn’t even have to make observations beyond this world’s leading democratic nation state - particularly if I was observing at a time when the selection process for its leaders was underway. What other evidence of the insanity of this planets inhabitants would I need?

There are people who believe that extra terrestrials have already visited this planet - that many ancient myths and religious beliefs sprang from such visits. There are even those who believe that modern man descended from such visitors - or that we were moved along in our evolutionary progress through their intervention. If that’s true, they did a lousy job and maybe are ashamed to come back and show their faces.

But whether they’ve been here before or not, it surprises me not one bit that another year has passed without a visit from another race of beings - beings that evolved perhaps billions of years before our earth was even formed. Sometimes I think that only intervention from a superior race of beings can save us from ourselves. But if you were a galactic explorer from a planet of superior beings populated by one people, speaking one language and ruled by a single panel of wise men in white flowing robes, would you want to pay a visit to the third planet from our sun in its present state - or give it a pass, maybe making a note to come back in a few thousand years to see if any order has arisen out of chaos?

I think the latter. Which is why another year has passed without them coming, other than - as I observed back in 2003 - the obligatory stop off to visit with Billy Joe Bob on the river banks of the Okefenokee river in Arkantexolina of course…..

But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t keep looking up at the night sky. As the line says in "Send in the Clowns" - maybe next year.
posted by Jeff Smith at 12/31/2011 07:59:00 PM

 
I’M MAD AS HELL AT FOREIGN BASED CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVES- AND I’M NOT GOING TO TALK TO THEM ANYMORE

I don’t normally make new year’s resolutions and this year is no exception - but a few weeks ago I made a decision that in the future, I would make every possible effort to buy products and services only from companies that do not have their customer service or technical help departments in the Philippines or the Caribbean or anywhere in India. I would like to have made the decision to only buy American made products - but at the moment, it would be next to impossible to avoid buying a needed product that was made somewhere else. In this global economy, it may be next to impossible to find companies that don’t have their customer service people ensconced in some foreign location, but if I can find any, they will be the people I’ll be doing business with from now on.

A few words of explanation. I’ve been putting up with bad phone connections and difficult to understand accents for years when trying to get information about products I own or services I use. It has after all become the "American way." And like millions of my fellow Americans I’ve learned, reluctantly, to live with it. But two recent incidents prodded me to make this non resolution. One was an attempt to get information from Hewlett Packard when my HP laptop decided it didn’t want to work anymore. As I recall, there was a message on the screen that said, in effect, I have died let me lie in peace. It simply wouldn’t start. But upon seeking help and advice from HP’s customer service department as to the meaning of the strange message of death, someone in a remote corner of this globe assured me that he had the ability to remotely resurrect my deceased machine as soon as I signed up and agreed to pay the cost of a continuing warrantee or guarantee or whatever they call " no money, no information" - a variation of the old "no tickee, no washie" phrase with the same meaning. Fortunately, after I had hung up in anger on this broken English speaking "technical advisor" - the laptop mysteriously resurrected itself, going through a series of on screen machinations that I had never seen before.

That event alone probably wouldn’t have pushed me over the edge. Annoying and frustrating as it was, It was little different from many I’d experienced in the past. But shortly after, along came the Tribune. As in the Chicago Tribune, my home town newspaper. Without notice, they raised the rates for home delivery. Seeing a strange sum while checking my credit card account on line, I first asked what it represented by email and getting a strangely worded unsatisfactory answer, followed up with a phone call , making the mistake of using the customer service 800 number. The call was answered but the responses to my questions were as unsatisfactory as the e-mail response - and after a few moments of conversation, the horror of why dawned on me. . I wasn’t talking to someone in the Tribune Tower in downtown Chicago. It was someone somewhere in the Caribbean. Here I was thinking that the Tribune was conducting itself as a truly equal opportunity employer by employing new arrivals to the USA , not yet fluent in English - but instead I was dealing with yet another company that had exported jobs overseas. The Chicago Tribune!! An all American institution - hiring people in third world countries at slave labor wages to talk to a subscriber just a few miles north of their Chicago headquarters. The implication of the situation boggles the mind - at least my mind.

If the Chicago Tribune has people in the Caribbean answering telephone calls from subscribers in Chicago and surrounding towns and villages - what else is going on or could be going on in the future? Are there phone banks in New Delhi answering calls from New York Times subscribers or a switchboard in Manila handling calls from people who read Time or Newsweek ? And how about the electronic media? Will callers to radio talk shows be talking to screeners or producers sitting in a closet in some third world country who’ll decide whether or not to put them on the air? Or are they already doing that? The only clues we have that we are talking to someone not locally based when we call one of these numbers is the less than perfect English of the responder or an unfamiliar patois.

As I’ve indicated, millions of us have learned to live with the knowledge that the people providing us with telephonic "customer service" are not U.S. based - but typically our inquiries have been about products and services that could never be thought of as having anything to do with American media. We are used to and put up with having to talk to foreigners about problems with our PC’s and Laptops - or our dishwashers and refrigerators. But our Newspapers? Maybe our radio and television stations? If that is indeed the case then I say enough is enough. Time for resolve if not for resolutions.

I can’t drop the Tribune because of their hiring practices. It’s the paper that I’ve read for years and want to continue to read. But I can do little things. I can refuse to deal with their overseas hires which I am now doing by calling their local switchboard number and only talking to people at the Tribune Tower on Michigan Avenue. But the Tribune is an exception. As of now, I am resolved to only buy goods or services from companies that provide customer support by people whose native language is English and who are working in a location that is somewhere in the United States of America. I don’t expect it to be easy. In fact, I expect it to be tedious, tracking down names and email or snail mail addresses for the people who can tell me where their customer service people are housed and who will be willing to confirm to me in writing that I can rely on being helped with problems and questions be people working in the United States if I buy their products or services.

It’s not as dramatic an effort as vowing to buy only wholly American made goods. That I know would be more difficult than what I’m going to try to do. But absent some emergency, I can take my time finding the manufacturer of my next PC or car or refrigerator or other product that does not outsource its customer service work to people in remote corners of third world countries. I know we are engaged in a world economy directed by multinational companies and I applaud every sale an American company makes abroad - even if they make the product abroad. But from now on, when I buy a product or service here, I plan - wherever possible - to buy only from companies that have their customer service people living - if not a few miles south of my house in Evanston, Illinois - at least in the same country
posted by Jeff Smith at 12/22/2011 08:08:00 PM

 
SILLY FUSS OVER A BET THAT NEVER WAS

I must admit that I haven’t watched any of the Republican debates but from reading newspaper coverage and watching and hearing snippets on news and comedy programs, I am aware that they have been replete with a high degree of silliness. Certainly, Mitt Romney’s ten grand challenge to Rick Perry qualifies as a moment of silliness. It’s the sort of thing you do when you’re arguing with someone who won’t shut up - and more importantly is saying something that you know isn’t true. In such a case, the bet could be a million dollars - as Romney himself pointed out in a post debate damage control session. The fact that he had to do it at all is ridiculous and says more about political pundits than it does about the candidate.

I’m no fan of Romney. I agree with those who have dubbed him a serial flip-flopper But to say that he is "out of touch" with average Americans and to spend time on television with elaborate graphics showing what ten grand means to different people to make the point that Mitt is out of touch, simply misses the point. Not for a moment did I think that Romney was throwing his dollar weight around. It was a joke more than a real offer to bet.. It was meant to call Rick Perry’s bluff - to shut him up. And from the clip that I saw of the incident, it worked. Perry’s weak response that he wasn’t in the betting business confirmed that he had been making a false accusation - whether his bank account could cover such a bet or not. If he knew that he was right, he would have called Romney’s bluff and maybe suggested raising the wager to a hundred grand or more. . It was a moment of theater and while neither of the players earned a curtain call or even a bow, from this critic’s point of view, Romney’s performance was better than Perry’s.

Romney needs to be taken to task for his pandering to the interests of different voter groups and for other faults, but carping on and on ad nauseum on television and radio and in newspaper columns about how he’s so "out of touch" because he made a ten thousand dollar "bet" that was never a bet, makes the pundits look more "out of touch" than the candidate. I’d be willing to bet - there’s that word again - that some of the critics have, at one time or another, engaged in an argument where they’ve said something along the lines of "I’ll bet you a million bucks that you’re wrong." I know I have. It’s a way of telling someone to put up or shut up, which is what I wish the pundits and the comedians would do and move on to something more serious and funnier.

.
posted by Jeff Smith at 12/14/2011 02:16:00 PM

 
DID BLAGO PROVE ME WRONG?

I just heard that Blago spoke for twenty minutes today and actually confessed to committing crimes and apologized - more than once. Maybe the 14 years that he got was less that Zabel had in mind because he humbled himself as the system demands of a convicted felon seeking mercy. 14 years of which 12 must be served. What a merciful judge!!
posted by Jeff Smith at 12/07/2011 03:04:00 PM

 
BYE BYE BLAGO

Tomorrow, Judge James Zabel will begin a TWO DAY sentencing "hearing" as the final chapter of ex Governor Rob Blagojevich’s two trials and multiple convictions for a variety of crimes that I won’t bother to try to list here. Anyone interested can find them easily on line. Why there has to be a "hearing" and why it should take two days to sentence Blago to a lengthy jail term is beyond me. I would bet what I have left of my eye teeth that Zabel has long since decided how much time he is going to dish out and that his sentencing speech has long been written with all of the "i’s" dotted and all the "t’s" crossed. From what I’ve heard about the procedure, it’s going to be a two day circus because Blago has decided to make a statement.

Since the conviction, Blago’s lawyers have filed appeals - among other things accusing Zabel of being prejudiced against their client - in effect acting like an extension of the prosecuting team. I got the same impression of the judge just reading about his rulings. But the appeal was presented to the same judge who was being accused of being less than fair - and surprise, surprise, Mr. Zabel disagreed . He gave Blago every possible chance to prove his innocence. Like allowing his lawyers to ask some questions but not ones that I, as a layman, might have asked. Like letting the prosecution play as many taped phone conversations as they wanted to but not allowing Blago to play any that might have made him look good - or at least not criminal. Not relevant said the judge And now Blago wants to make a statement - presumably to try to persuade Zabel to give him a break - to sentence him to something less that a multiple of the ten years that Blago and Obama’s friend and supporter Tony Rezko got from another judge just days ago. But having watched the ex-Governor perform in public since his indictment and on the stand at his second trial, there is no way that he is going to stand before Zabel and admit guilt and accept responsibility - which the pundits are telling us would be the only way he could hope to get a year or two knocked off what Zabel has decided to give him. It’s not in his nature. But there is something that he could say that might help him without admitting guilt. His lawyers may not be advising him to say what I think he could say - but if they had more common sense that they have displayed so far in their defense of Blago, they’d follow my idea of what to say. Something along the lines of the following.

"Your honor, I stand here convicted of 18 criminal counts for which I take full responsibility. No one else was responsible for my actions as Governor of the State of Illinois. But your honor, I want you and all who may hear or read what I say here today that in my mind and in my heart, I am not a criminal. A jury of my peers has determined that I committed crimes while in office, but I say to you and to those good jurors that never did I believe that the activities alleged as crimes in my indictment were criminal activities. I am guilty of being vane - of being overly ambitious - of trying to cut corners to obtain political advantages - of indulging in flights of fancy about what I might be able to achieve - and above all for talking too much about too many things. But never did I believe that I was committing crimes, whether it was in the area of fund raising or in discussing - again too much - the appointment of someone to fill President Obama’s Senate seat for the unfinished portion of his term. I guess I was schooled in the rough and tumble of what is now looked upon as "old time" politics and it was my mistake not to recognize that that time has passed.

Because of that lack of understanding, I stand here today a ruined man. I have been disgraced before my colleagues, the people of this state and this country. I acquired no wealth from the matters for which I was convicted. I am virtually penniless. I have lost my license to practice law. My wife and small children are about to lose our home and if I am incarcerated, they will have no visible means of support. I implore you take these matters into consideration in your sentence and to show mercy."

Short and to the point. I would be shocked beyond belief if Blago would take so little time to say whatever he plans to say. Again, it’s not in his nature. But today he will likely suffer because of a ridiculous concept that a convicted felon must admit guilt and express contrition in order to be considered for a lesser sentence or for parole from a jail term. There are people serving time who are innocent. There are people who, rightly or wrongly are convicted but who believe they did nothing wrong. But under out system of justice, none of this matters. Guilty or innocent or belief of innocence - none of it matters. To be shown any mercy, admission of guilt and expression of remorse is required of the applicant. There is no way that Blagho will admit guilt and express remorse. The closest he might come would be to say something like what I’ve written above. But as I’ve said, it’s not in his nature.

Bye bye Blago.
posted by Jeff Smith at 12/05/2011 03:36:00 PM

 
VICTORIES IN OHIO AND MISSISSIPPI BUT STILL WORRISOME

I was listening to Bill Press on the radio the other morning and learning about the great "victories" in Ohio and Mississippi a few days ago. In Ohio, the anti union legislation championed by Governor John Kasich was "roundly defeated" 61 to 39 percent. Had it prevailed, the rights of public employees to belong to a union and to be able to negotiate the conditions of their employment would have been close to non-existent.

In Mississippi, it was apparently a surprise when voters rejected the notion that human life, with all of its rights guaranteed by the Constitution and by State law, exists at the moment of conception. Being a southern State where it was assumed that religious beliefs and mores would prevail over logic and reason, the 58 to 42 percent defeat of the State’s "Personhood" amendment was also considered "resounding."

There’s a whole barrel of celebration going on in liberal circles around the country. They consider those two votes as "victories" - and major victories at that. You’ll pardon me if I don’t join in the festivities. Not that I’m in favor of turning public employees into indentured servants or of criminalizing the use of the "morning after" pill. My absence of joy can be attributed to the very numbers that have aroused it in others. They are celebrating 58 and 61 percent. I am concerned about the 39 percent that voted to hell with unions in Ohio and the 42 percent that voted to award the successful meeting of egg and sperm in a woman’s fallopian tube with the same rights that they enjoy as human beings.

As winning and losing percentages in an ordinary race for political office - local, State or national, they would not be considered to be unusual. It’s not unusual for incumbents to be reelected by much larger margins -70 to 30, 75 to 25. But those are votes to elect an individual to a political office. Sure, voters may be swayed by the positions taken by the political opponents, but still they’re electing men and women, not voting yea or nay on a specific topic. And for that reason, I am not encouraged by the losing percentages of 42 in Mississippi and 39 in Ohio.

Ohio is probably not as worrisome as the folks in Mississippi who want to extend the Constitution of the United States to the Fallopian tubes of the female American population. There’s probably no way of knowing how many of Ohio’s 31% would be considered or consider themselves "workers." Workers as opposed to "suits." Presumably, they are not union workers. Voters I know can sometimes exhibit an incredible depth of stupidity but I can’t imagine many of them voting to eliminate themselves. So what we have in Ohio is an unknown number of workers voting to do away with or severely restrict the bargaining power of a surviving segment of a movement whose determination and sacrifices over a period of decades, were responsible for "rights" that they take for granted. A reasonable number of hours that they are required to work in a week and an additional wage for time worked in excess of those reasonable number of hours, Two days a week off!! Paid vacations. A health insurance program. Reasonably safe working conditions. No locked doors preventing them from leaving the work place in case of fire.

There are those who voted to curtail the union rights of public employees because their work situation is not as good. They earn less money. Their pension isn’t as good or perhaps they don’t have one. And they feel that since public employees are being paid from the taxes they pay, they have a right to complain, not stopping to think that public employees pay the same taxes. These are people who vote from their gut instead of their head. They don’t realize that if the efforts to kill the union movement succeeds, many of the "rights" that they now enjoy in the workplace would likely also disappear. Along, very likely, with the middle class to which many of them belong. Fortunately, there were enough people who stopped to think and didn’t vote from their gut after eating a dozen hot dogs swilled down with four pints of beer. But the fact that 39 percent of all the people who came out to vote didn’t understand which side of the question was in their best interest is worrisome.

The "Personhood" defeat was much more worrying, particularly when I read that the Mississippi effort was just one of what may be several more to follow. It sometimes makes you wonder if the idea of "sovereign" states is the best idea for a "united" nation. I’ve touched on this before with regard to the varying penalties for murder. Now we have people in some states who want to have their own version of when life begins and to extend whatever penalty they have for murder to the zygote inside a woman’s body - and I would imagine that death would be the penalty for murder in such states.

What truly shocked me about Mississippi was that the measure was expected to pass because it is a "Red" State - as if a "Red State" was some sort of foreign country where people live under laws that would be totally unacceptable to Americans. It is such a natural order of things among our divided States that when the measure was defeated 58 to 42, it was reported as a "surprise" - not as a shock that it wasn’t defeated 99 to 1 or that sane people were dismayed that such a measure could even get to the point where it would be voted on. There is no doubt in my mind that the people behind the effort to afford constitutional protection to zygotes think of themselves as conservatives and decry any attempted intrusion into their private lives by any level of government. Yet how different is what they want from the measure of control that some other nations that I’ve alluded to have over their female population? It’s not an answer to say that control isn’t being sought over the woman but only over her fetus. It’s insanity.

So while some may celebrate these "victories" I am saddened that at this stage of our "work in progress" democracy, there are still a sizable number of Americans who want to undo pieces of the progress we have made and turn the clock back to a darker time.
posted by Jeff Smith at 11/12/2011 04:12:00 PM

 
THERE’S GOTTA BE A BETTER WAY TO PICK A CANDIDATE

It’s more than a little hard to reconcile the notion of the United States being the leader of the free word with the traveling circus being presented to the nation and to the world as the best way to select a candidate from the Republican Party to challenge Barack Obama for the presidency in November next year. One thing is abundantly clear, no matter which party is trying to select a candidate, our primary system is not the best way to find the best possible person for the job. If it was, we wouldn’t have the current circus atmosphere of one candidate after another being the favorite to win the nomination according to virtually daily opinion polls.

Watching "Question Time in the House" the other night, it occurred to me that if the founding fathers had been able to peer into the future, they probably would have hung onto the non-royal segment of British governance and eschewed the concept of divided government in favor of a parliamentary system. As it is, they’re probably writhing in their graves at the spectacle of presidential primaries masquerading as an intelligent and logical way to select the person who might become the nation’s next chief executive. .

We are being besieged by daily poll numbers to inform us which of the various candidates has surged into the "lead" - as though the search for a candidate was a kind of horse race - or a political version of "Dancing With the Stars." Which candidate will be sent home this week? And this year, early primary states have joined the madness by vying with each other to be the first to produce a caucus or individual vote total to determine who will be the front runner as the actual primary season gets underway. Hopefully, after that first contest, the jetsam of the group will have forcefully been cast aside or voluntarily reduced down to the flotsam of serious candidates - that is, one of the two, perhaps three presidential wannabes that Republicans will hold their noses and anoint as their savior-in-waiting.

It’s interestingly ironic that the unelected head of the Republican party spent months mocking Barack Obama as "The Messiah" - and now it’s Limbaugh’s minions who seem to be searching for someone to lead them to the promised land. Michelle Bachman has played the dual role of pace horse and comedy relief while the true believers waited for the anti-Romney. They found him in the form of Rick Perry, evoking cheers and applause for his stellar record as execution approver nonpareil. But sadly - put to the test of fire, he failed and the search continued. For a while it was clear that the true Messiah was the large one from New Jersey - but again there was gnashing of teeth and rending of garments when he revealed that he had not heard the command from on high. Now he who sings the praises of Pizza - I must admit with a fair to middling baritone - has assumed the role of comic relief and the search goes on.

It’s unlikely that any new contestants will join the fray. For one thing, there probably wouldn’t be enough room for another body in the ridiculous charades that are presented as "debates." Frankly, I’m surprised that the Oxford Union hasn’t filed suit to prevent the use of the word by whoever stages these shows. Certainly you can’t call what goes on at these gabfests debating when the contestants do little more than hurl insults at each other - in between accusing President Obama of being he who opened Pandora’s Box and swallowed the key.

What amuses and at the same time appalls me about such gatherings - and it applies equally to Republicans and Democrats - is that it allows characters to join the battle who would be unlikely to be selected as a standard bearer, even if he or she had no opposition. The Republicans may not all be rocket scientists, but there is no way they would allow a Michelle Bachman or a Ron Paul or Herman Cain to be their candidate. Oh sure, one or the other may win the odd straw poll or even a primary - remember, Republican voters are not rocket scientists - but when push comes to shove or at the end of the day or whatever trite phrase one might apply to such situations, voters and those who do their thinking for them, make sure that a candidate for the presidency is someone who might just stand a chance of being elected.

A final word about the non issues that always creep into Republican contests for a Presidential candidate - and to my mind renders the whole process an insult to the intelligence of thoughtful and knowledgeable Republican voters. You know what they are. Religion and Abortion. There are others, but those are the two that always get the leading candidates involved in one upping each other in who is the more devoted to the true religion or to the sanctity of life in the womb. In a rational world, introducing such topics as relevant to the weighty task of governance should be grounds for instant dismissal from the primary races. Unfortunately, when it comes to such topics, we in this great democracy are as irrational as any dictatorship or theocracy. Sure we don’t stone women to death for adultery or turn a blind eye to "honor" killings - but our candidates for the highest office of the land have to convince "evangelical voters" that they believe as they do and that life begins at conception and that maybe evolution is only a theory and maybe the world isn’t billions of years old and that dinosaurs and humans coexisted just a few thousand years ago.

As I said in my opening thoughts, it’s the sort of thing that sometimes makes you wish we had adopted the English parliamentary system. Not that the leader who would emerge from such a system would be relieved of having to state his beliefs on a variety of topics - but - as in the case of David Cameron, Britain’s current Prime Minister, he’d only have to do it to the 22,765 people of Witney, Oxfordshire. But we have the system that evolved over time from the dream of the founding fathers where history may one day record that the greatest country on earth elected a president who, during his campaign for the office, in one one way or another told voters that he believed that an invisible deity spoke to him and told him what to do and that life begins from the moment a young man’s fancy turns to thoughts of love and eyes a likely recipient of that emotion.

And all I can say about such a possibility is Lord have mercy upon us. And that plea from this aging atheist will give you an idea of how worried I am that such a thing could happen arising out of our convoluted system for selecting candidates for the office of leader of the free world.
posted by Jeff Smith at 10/23/2011 08:28:00 PM

 
THE PRICE WE PAY FOR INNOVATION

I admit to being somewhat surprised at the outpouring of grief and accolades in response to the news that Steve Jobs had died. No doubt that was because I am not one who has participated in the use of all of the communication and information devices that he and others have created over the years . I do use a computer - obviously - a P.C. - and I own and minimally use a basic cell phone with virtually no bells and whistles. And that is just about the extent of my relationship to the world created by Jobs and his fellow geniuses, whoever they may be.

From all I’ve heard about the man, it seems clear that he was indeed a technically creative genius who died too young - and I agree with those who have been saying that his creations have changed the world we live in. But since I don’t use any of those creations other than the aforementioned computer and phone, I am not really qualified nor do I feel any strong compulsion to join in the world wide chorus of praise for the man and his life’s work. Instead, I thought I would look at his passing from a somewhat different perspective.

There’s no question that technology has changed the world we live in and mostly for the better But there is a price that we pay for each technological step forward and it seems to me that sometimes that price is high enough to make the advances seem a little less worth while.

Today the U.S. Post office is struggling to stay afloat, in some measure due to the severe drop in volume of personal mail. Today, many of us, taking advantage of a convenient technological innovation, use e-mail to keep in touch with family and friends and computers to receive and pay bills. We send "virtual" birthday and other greetings cards without having to shop for the items in a store or putting pen to paper. These are wonderful conveniences and they are eco-friendly, but we pay for them by losing the joy of anticipating the daily arrival of the mail man and opening letters and cards from friends and relatives and reading the written messages on paper that we often could recognize by color and design and sometimes even odor. Those days aren’t completely gone but they are fading fast and I for one cannot nor do I wish to imagine a world without stamps and envelopes and the anticipation of opening and exploring their contents.

Over the years, local book stores began to be squeezed out by the chains - not able to compete with price or advertising. And now the chains are gone or going, one by one, squeezed out by other life changing innovations - books "on line" or on electronic devices where the words of authors can be found and read - a convenience for many - but again at what price? Can one really enjoy sitting in front of a computer or with one of those cold to the touch electronic devices in hand - clicking away or whatever one does to "turn" a page, to the joy of opening the cover of a newly purchased book - glancing through the chapters - maybe even sniffing the cover and the pages - and settling back in a comfortable chair and appropriate light to enter the world of someone’s imagination or expertise without ever having to click? Perhaps one day the world that Steve Jobs and his fellow geniuses have created will have eliminated the need for books that are printed on paper and kept on shelves in homes and libraries. It won’t happen in my lifetime but I have to wonder where generations that follow mine will go to find a signed, first edition of some future classical work of fiction?

Today’s children are growing up more familiar with computers and the various pods and pads they use than with the basics that we old folk learned in our school days. They cannot imagine a time or a life without the innovations that were gifted to them by Jobs and his contemporaries. But I wonder how many of them will master cursive writing or will be capable of writing or want to write with anything other than a keyboard and whether they will ever understand or agree that they have paid a price for the gifts and that that price is the potential loss of something beautiful that may soon be little more than a memory.

I’m sure you’ve been delayed at the check out counter in a supermarket because a UPC code was missing on an item or couldn’t be scanned. You had to wait and the checker had to hold up the line behind you while someone went to find the aisle where the item was shelved and read the price posted there. Most check out clerks at supermarkets couldn’t tell you the price of most items sold in the store. It isn’t a job requirement. It’s replaced by the innovation of the scanner. Who needs to look at and learn the prices of what you’re selling when you can just scan them? Perhaps not that much has been lost by replacing the knowledgeable retail clerk with the check out scanner - but its another example of the increasing substitution of an electronic aid for personal knowledge and ability. I know it’s not directly appropriate since we’re talking about clerks who aren’t personally familiar with prices - but it brings to mind the description of a cynic - one who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. Maybe we’re moving toward a world where our supermarket clerks will know neither.

There is no way that these thoughts should be interpreted as being disrespectful or unmindful of the creative genius of Steve Jobs. I am as grateful as anyone for the innovations that have made life easier and easier from generation to generation. . Our ancestors may have snorted at our reliance on some of our modern day conveniences but while the ancient outhouse might have added a rustic look to grandpa’s house, I will forever be grateful for indoor plumbing on a thirty below snowy day in December.

Absent a cataclysmic atomic war, the invasion of a predatory alien race or our sun going nova, mankind’s future will be filled with one innovation after another - each obviating the need for some of the things succeeding generations will not be able to believe they could or would want to live without. And that will be the price they will pay for the innovations. The abandonment of those things and perhaps even the memory of what they were.

So as the world celebrates and gives thanks for the life of Steve Jobs, it would serve us well to offer thanks for and celebrate those things that we will be leaving behind and perhaps one day forgotten as the price we pay for the gifts he gave us and for those who follow him will give us.
posted by Jeff Smith at 10/10/2011 03:15:00 PM

 
"RETIREMENT" PONZI SCHEMES - EXPOSED AND SOLVED

Exclusive breaking news. Interpol this morning confirmed to this blogger the rumor that has been floating around the halls of Congress and monkey cages in world wide zoos. A full fledged investigation has been launched into Ponzi schemes that have been running for years in just about every so called industrial nation. These schemes were launched under the guise of being "retirement programs" for working people after they reached retirement age and were no longer working. The retirement age varies slightly from country to country but the scheme is essentially the same. Retirement income is paid to those no longer working out of taxes collected from people who are working. Before they retired - while they were still working, retirees in these countries also unknowingly contributed to the scheme by having taxes deducted from their paychecks.

The scheme came to light after the announcement by the Mammy Yokum Gland company that their FDA approved Methuselah Gland had been proved effective in several triple almost blind studies conducted over the past 100 years and that ingestion of the gland four times a day every other Thursday in months that have more than 30 days can extend the life of ordinary humans to at least 120 years - 150 years for Dogpatch residents . The Mammy Yokum Methuselah gland, which may be combined with the well known "Goodness Gland" in order to counteract the expected increased orneryness that is expected to manifest itself somewhere in the middle of the tenth decade of life, will be available as an OTC product around four o’clock next Wednesday.

While Interpol is confident that it will be able to prove that most, if not all national retirement programs are Ponzi schemes, it has cautioned that it may not be able to bring the perpetrators to justice. Initial attempts to bring the case to the International Court in The Hague have run into an unexpected roadblock in the form of a well entrenched Ponzi scheme in the Netherlands. The Justices were willing to proceed with the case if their own Ponzi scheme could be given immunity from prosecution. Interpol officials are considering this request, but any decision they make may be too late to prevent the catastrophe that it is predicted will result from the release of the Mammy Yokum longevity product.

Mathematicians and Zoo Keepers have determined that in less than 30 years from four o’clock next Wednesday, there will be more people retired than working. The ratio of retirees to workers is estimated to be approximately five to one three decades from now and will increase annually thereafter until everyone will be retired and no one will be working.

In order to avoid this catastrophe, Interpol has turned to the leadership of the U.S. House of Representatives, who have devised a cunning rescue plan. Let the schemes continue, they recommend, but to offset the predicted unsustainable ratio of retirees to workers that will be reached 30 years from next Wednesday, cut taxes on all citizens of all industrial nations earning in excess of a half million dollars or its equivalent annually. Cut those taxes to ZERO!! That will ensure that the world’s wealthy will be able to create more jobs than have ever existed. Many of these jobs will be filled by members of the animal kingdom who previously performed for nothing for our amusement. By putting them on payrolls and taxing their pay, we will have a virtually limitless supply of taxpayers to support all existing Ponzi schemes and those that may be created in the future.

Reached at his sumptuous summer (spring, fall, winter) residence, noted financial wizard Bernie Madoff commented that he wished he’d thought of that solution. ‘Why, just the squirrels in Central Park could have kept me going indefinitely because they would never have expected any return," said the world renowned Ponzi practitioner. Reached at the Dogpatch Hilton, Pappy Yokum hiccuped and said "I knew there was more than corn in that brew."

Attempts to reach Governor Perry of Texas for comment were unsuccessful. It was later learned that the Governor himself was under investigation by Interpol, the Securities and Exchange Commission and several Societies for the Protection of Animals for insider trading of Mammy Yokum Gland futures.

Stay tuned. Further reports of this story of the century will appear here, exclusively, as soon as they have been dreamed up by this tired old blogger.
posted by Jeff Smith at 9/19/2011 08:18:00 PM

 
A JOBS SPEECH PREVIEW

I will probably watch the President’s "jobs" speech tonight but I don’t expect much will come of it. As I fantasized the other day, whatever he says will be criticized by Republicans and he has given them an extra opportunity to criticize by upping the ante from suggesting a new kind if stimulus plan - and I’m pretty certain that that is all it’s going to be - to a major speech before a joint session of Congress. I can almost agree with Republicans who are criticizing the venue to present his job creation ideas, calling it more of a political speech than anything else. Why he would choose the pomp and ceremony of a joint session to propose nuts and bolts ideas is beyond me. I’m not sure if it needs to be presented in a speech at all - but if it does, talking to us from the Oval Office would make more sense. No big announcements of his arrival. No one having the high privilege and distinct honor of introducing him. No interruptions with standing applause. No obligatory shots of Senators and Representatives - some showing or feigning interest and some scowling or shaking their heads.

I keep hearing pleas from the left for the President to "go big" - presumably to ask for Congressional approval of a larger spending plan than the amount we’ve been hearing in leaks. What I’d prefer to hear is the President telling the American people some plain truths. The first - that Presidents don’t have a magic wand that they can wave and create jobs. That all the political jargon about Presidents gaining or losing jobs is just that - political jargon. That presidents have some influence over employment numbers by way of economic policies - but for the most part, it’s a matter beyond their control.

The second thing I’d like him to say - and he probably won’t - is that the history of the industrial world is replete with periods of booms and busts and that when one of these extremes occurs in the shape of a recession or depression, societies have to step back, re-adjust and find new ways forward. And those new ways usually take time to take hold and that no instant solutions should be expected. But also yes, in such times as we are experiencing today, Government needs to step in and provide a bridge to fill the employment gap - we hope the temporary gap - left by the private sector - and that is why he is proposing whatever it is he will propose.

If he was giving the speech from some place other than in a joint session venue, he might be able to say it is time for Republicans to put their major agenda on hold - which, as Mitch McConnell has made crystal clear, not just with words, but with the greatest number of filibusters in the history of the Senate - is to prevent him from winning a second term. He’ll say something about the need for bi-partisanship and putting country before party - but at a joint sessions, he won’t say what I’ve written above. If he does, I’ll be impressed and swift to say how I’ve misjudged him.

Regrettably, his re-election or defeat will likely depend on the unemployment numbers in November next year. American voters have little patience and many will be fooled into believing that their fortunes can be improved by a simple change in the occupant of the White House. I thought Bill Clinton was a pretty good president but that his campaign them of "It’s the Economy Stupid" was a tip of the hat to the stupidity of voters - on which many political candidates rely - indeed hope for. And Obama is in further trouble because of his campaign of "Change is Coming to America" and "Yes We Can" - which attracted many young voters who didn’t understand the power of a single Senator to say "No You Can’t" - and the conservative Supreme Court to allow corporations to exercise almost as much veto power - and who still don’t understand why the President isn’t or can’t be the champion they voted for.

P.M. I watched. I listened. Pretty much what he’s said before. The reactions in the chamber were exactly as I described. Republicans may find a way to O.K. the proposed tax cuts but otherwise I expect the post-reaction to also be as I described.
posted by Jeff Smith at 9/08/2011 04:17:00 PM

 
LABOR DAY WISDOM FROM THE RIGHT

Republican Presidential candidate hopefuls are busy this Labor Day criticizing the President’s jobs speech before a joint session of Congress. From coast to coast and border to border, they’ve spread out to assure the American public that the President’s plans are hogwash, won’t work and in fact will likely increase the numbers of unemployed.

Mitt Romney, speaking from an off shore tax haven, accused the President of being out of touch with ordinary working people who shower after work instead of before. What they want, said the perennial presidential wannabe is to have their capital gains taxes cut by half. Then they’d be able to buy the kind of yachts, luxury automobiles, caviar and champagne that would boost employment. When it was pointed out that most after work shower type people don’t have much if anything in the way of capital gains on their IRS returns, Romney insisted that the President failed in his speech by not recommending incentives to open new factories in China and Indonesia, so that workers could be hired to unload the goods that would be made in them as they arrive at our ports of entry.

Rick Perry scoffed at the idea that anything the President said in his speech would do anything for the unemployed. Oh yes - he conceded that at the end of his phony baloney speech, Obama had asked God to bless the United States of America - but that was the only appeal to God - and there was no way of knowing which God he was talking to. It sure sounded like Allah to the Texas Governor. But apart from that dubious mention - there was simply no mention of him asking God to find work for the unemployed. In fact, he gave the very strong impression that he listens to his advisors - his HUMAN advisors for ideas on how to do anything , rather than praying for guidance from above. For that reason alone, his speech was a dud…

Michelle Bachmann said that since Obama advanced no plan to reduce the price of gas to two dollars a gallon - the price she guaranteed would be at the pump the day after she is inaugurated, there was nothing that he suggested that would create a single job. He also didn’t mention the Un-American members of Congress or any plan to investigate them which would have called for an increase in the staff of the House Committee on Un-American activities. When it was pointed out that no such committee exists, she in turn pointed to its absence as proof positive of the failure of Obama’s Presidency - and of course of his jobs speech.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said that frankly, he didn’t give a damn about what the President said, frankly. Besides, frankly, he’s not really running for President. Any idiot could see that. And Obama didn’t say a damned thing about the price of diamonds at Tiffany’s, which is a matter of great concern to the unemployed who are reduced to buying paste jewelry for former spouses - and in some cases, even for current spouses. Frankly.

Ron Paul said the President’s speech was just as he expected. Not a single word about the real problem . GOVERNMENT and all that goes with it. For heaven’s sake, if we didn’t have the government getting in the way, we’d have millions of people busy helping the millions of unemployed - and they’d be able to do it because there’d be NO TAXES - and that’s what you’d get with a Ron Paul administration. But all Obama talked about was bi-partisan yada yada yada and Congress cooperating with him. Cooperating? With HIM? I always thought the guy was a little off - but after that speech - I think he’s lost it altogether.

Herman Cain said speech? What speech? Was he talking about two pizzas in every pot? I could support that. Not much else though. Is he really black?

Sarah Palin asked how much was being offered for her analysis of the President’s job speech, and when told "nothing" responded "You’ve got to be kidding. You think I gave up being Governor of Alaska to give away freebees on matters of great import? You’re nuts. O.K. This one time only. The speech was a dud. Off the wall. Crazy ideas that won’t work. Probably written by that terrorist he used to hang around with."

Later, all the candidates and non-candidates were asked why they weren’t waiting to hear the speech on September 7 before offering criticism and how they were able to criticize a speech that had not yet been delivered.

Mitt Romney said he had a poker game scheduled that night and because of his experience in buying companies, breaking them up and shipping work overseas, he is familiar with time zones on earth and beyond and Obama’s Thursday was his Monday and he was able to pre-record the speech and listen to it after returning from dinner at El Grand Véfour in Paris…..

Rick Perry said he had two executions scheduled for the announced date of the speech and thus would have been too busy denying last minute appeals to listen to any goddamned speech by anyone named Obama. And since he absolutely knew what anyone named Obama would say in any speech on any given day - he didn’t have to hear it to criticize it.

Michelle Bachmann said that her celestial calculator indicated that the scheduled day of the speech might well be the end of days, so she wouldn’t be here to criticize it next Thursday - and besides, if her criticism was going to make any news cycle that would do her any good, she had to blast the speech in advance whether she knew what was in it or not.

Ron Paul said that he and "My Son the Senator" each had arranged to read from Atlas Shrugged to school children in their respective State and district on that day and that all possible political speeches and how useless they were, including the one Obama will deliver next Thursday, are revealed in the works of Ayn Rand, who would be a great president if it wasn’t for the stupid rule about having to be born in this country and the fact that she’s dead.

Herman Cain asked what speech? Are you still talking about the same speech? The one about hiring people to deliver pizzas to members of Congress? I know about that one. Goddamned stupid idea. Congress doesn’t pay for anything. My delivery boys would be left holding the bag. Damned sure I’M not paying for anything that phony black man orders.

Sarah Palin said there was no way she was going to let the lame stream media explain what Obama said after he said it when it would be too late to explain what he really said that was so Un-American. She also said she would be on a helicopter caribou hunt that day and she knew what was going to be in the speech from the entrails of the caribou she helicopter shot last Thanksgiving.

Newt Gingrich was too busy working on his September Tiffany’s statement to comment.

Jon Huntsman had a quiet day with his family and said he was looking forward to hearing the President’s ideas on jobs and hoped it would get bi-partisan support from Congress. Like Gingrich, he’s not really vying for the Republican nomination.
posted by Jeff Smith at 9/05/2011 06:36:00 PM

 
REPORT FROM THE WAR ZONE

September 2101 - we’ve lost count of the day….

You’ve all heard the news by now I’m sure. Some of you of course are part of the news - the terrible, terrible news. The Chinoranians have now captured Philadelphia and are relentlessly pressing westward. We in Chicago have been alerted to barricade our homes, gather all the weapons we can find and prepare to fight to the last civilian. The army of course has already retreated and those with enough gas to propel their ancient vehicles have gathered in the Denver area to await the outcome of the latest debate in Congress.

It’s hard to believe that it was only six months ago when Chinarania declared war on the United States for daring to suggest that it had violated the basic rights of its citizens. In their declaration, they made it clear that Chinaranian citizens have no rights, basic or otherwise and it was therefore impossible for them to have been violated. When we refused to apologize, they of course announced that their invasion fleet would be leaving immediately and we should prepare for the worst.

As everyone knew- or has at least discovered in the last six months, because of decades of the absence of war, our military equipment was in a state of disrepair and our armed forces decimated by retirements, better futures and jazzier uniforms offered by the MacDonalds service corps - and forced eviction of gay personnel despite the revocation of "Don’t Ask Don’t Tell" which had been expected to go into effect in 2070 but had been delayed by a Republican filibuster, now in its 75th year. But still, with the declaration of war by those wrong Godded heathens, millions of us were ready to stand and die for our country. All we needed was the call to arms and the necessary equipment to repel and defeat the enemy. You’d think that no one - not even the most dedicated pacifist - would have objected to that response. But of course we were wrong. We had forgotten about Speaker of the House , Congressman Micky Cantor, great grandson of the infamous Eric Cantor , who spent his last years in an asylum for the criminally insane after shooting a first responder carrying food and medicine to families trapped in their homes in his district following the devastation of hurricane Zelda in 2038. Apparently the good Samaritan hadn’t been able to explain what Federal program had been cut to pay for the lifesaving supplies and paid for it with his life.

And now we have history repeating itself with Cantor’s great grandson Micky insisting that GG was right - that the do gooder deserved to be shot and that there was no way the House was going to appropriate money for things like tanks and planes and ammunition and paychecks for military personnel without offsetting savings from other Federal programs. The Chinaranian army is expected to reach Cleveland by Wednesday and Speaker Canton has announced that the bi-partisan deficit reduction committee appointed by President Jon Jon Stewart, great grandson of the renowned newsman of the early two thousands , will have a partial report ready by that day and that if sufficient savings have been identified, as many as 700 reconstructed blunderbusses could be approved for immediate shipment to the front lines..

Stay tuned for updates - if we are able to continue to provide them. We have learned that one of the cost savings proposal involves shutting down oxygen supply equipment to all underground news services not identified as registered Republicans. Pray for us…….
posted by Jeff Smith at 9/01/2011 02:01:00 PM

 
TWO WORDS AND A PHRASE THAT SHOULD BE BANISHED

Not entirely. I wouldn’t want to suggest that all uses of perfectly ordinary English words and phrases be declared illegal and that users be subjected to punishment on the level of forced listening to the rantings of Glenn Beck for seven hours a day for 30 days. Just that certain uses be banned for the sake of something that may not be achievable but for which noble warriors like myself continue to strive to accomplish for the benefit of all mankind - truth in advertising.

The words of course are not misleading or disingenuous in and of themselves - but their use in a certain context can render them pure evil. Like the first of two such words designed to mislead and misdirect - the word ON. It’s a perfectly harmless - often useful word when attached to something like a switch of some kind . On/Off. Understandable instructions. Or to describe a situation - On Vacation, On Board. It’s really a good word, not to be maligned most of the time. Except when used by the fictional character I’ve described here in the past, hunched over a desk in an office deep below the corner of Broad and Wall Streets in New York, dreaming up "reasons" why "the market" went up or down - to be dispatched to newspapers and radio and television stations where those "reasons" are dutifully reported as though they were the analysis of financial experts at those media outlets.

And of course the "reasons" - often as fictional as the person dispatching them from the bowels of New York’s financial district, can only carry weight with the use of the word "ON." "The market gained or lost umpteen points today ON good/bad unemployment numbers, housing starts or non starts good or bad earnings etc., etc, - you name it . It really doesn’t matter because if it’s not utter nonsense then we are living in a bizzaro world whose rules I do not understand. Indeed I sometimes think that may be the case because I keep reading and hearing the word "Kardashian" as though it is some sort of code that everyone should understand and I haven’t the faintest idea what it means.

But if the world that I DO understand still exists, I hope that some thoughtful Congress person will submit a bill banning the use of the word "ON’ in all stock market reporting. If successful and if an appeal to the Supreme Court fails, we may finally get to read and hear actual reasons why "the market" went up or down. Programmed buying and selling - generated by computers . Manipulation by specialists - as Richard Ney maintained for years in HIS stock market reports. Rumors - and of course Lemming syndrome. There are likely many other reasons for market movement and I would suspect that much of it is random movement for which no "ON" explanation is needed or makes sense.

Of course the word isn’t going to go away. That little old guy beneath the NYSE needs the work - and besides, in what era did the combination of the words "thoughtful" and "Congress" ever make sense?

Word number two - often the opposite of "ON" is "OFF" - but my desire for its banishment is not because of its use in that context . It’s because of it’s interminable use in advertising "good deals" in products and services - as they apply to prices. 10% off. 20% off. HUGE bargain day - 70% off. Which of course begs the question -10, 20 or 70 % off of WHAT?? We are never presented with a proven regular price to see how much we could actually save - just that the product or service or whatever is available at a discount of some kind. It’s misleading. It’s disingenuous. It should banned from use in advertising when associated with any percentage figure. Otherwise it’s O.K. to use - as in "get OFF your butt and down to our store for great bargains. Up to 70% discount on most items.." See - you can lie to people without using the word OFF. Maybe that unlikely Congress person can add OFF to that proposed ON bill.

And finally the disingenuous phrase "shipping and handling" as in you ONLY pay shipping and handling. I think I wrote about this once before, pointing out that what may seem like a wonderful opportunity - getting something at "no cost" just to introduce you to a product or as a bonus for something you’ve ordered - a second one absolutely FREE - just pay shipping and handling - is not in the least bit free. That’s because the shipping and handling "cost" often cover’s the item’s manufacture, the required postage and leaves enough for a profit!! I think I once provided an example of a cassette recording, the shipping and handling cost of which provided a handsome profit. But I have now come upon the granddaddy of all shipping and handling scams and most persuasive argument that could be mustered for a law to ban the use of the phrase in all kinds of advertising. It’s the case of the cookie scam.

The offer was in one of those advertising only magazines, offering products and services at allegedly discount prices. There are a number of versions of these kinds of mailings that come to our house, some in the form of magazines, others in envelopes stuffed with individual cards and paper ads. The cookie ad had a picture of some tasty looking cookies alongside a fancy looking box. I could identify chocolate chip and maybe raisin bran among the few in the picture - and what they were offering was to try half a dozen of their cookies at absolutely no cost. Just pay shipping and handling of $6.95 and they’ll send you six whole cookies. They’ll also include a $10 coupon that you can use if you decide to buy any cookies - but those first six - I repeat SIX sample cookies were absolutely free. Just pay shipping and handling of $6.95.

Just out of curiosity, I took six raison bran cookies from our cookie jar - it’s one of my favorite cookies - and weighed them on a sensitive scale. Just about four ounces. Presumably they would be packaged on some kind of container that would protect them from breaking. Let’s say the package would bring the total weight to seven ounces. They couldn’t be mailed in an envelope. They have to be mailed as a small package for which the trusty, neither rain nor snow not gloom of night US Postal Service says would be delivered at a cost $2.39. Let’s say the packaging would cost a buck. Believe me it wouldn’t but for the sake of argument we’ll call it a buck, making the total mailing cost $3.39. I don’t know how much "handling" could cost a cookie company. Putting six cookies in a box, sealing it up and maybe even applying the postage. Fifty cents maybe? A generous amount I would think. So we’re up to $3.59 for the cost of sending you those free cookies - leaving $2.96 for what? The cookies are supposed to be free but the cookie company is getting $2.96 more than it costs to send them to you. What do you think it costs to manufacture SIX cookies? Cookies are manufactured by the thousands , not by half dozen quantities, so the cost of manufacturing an individual cookie is likely a fractional amount - not the virtually 60 cents a cookie that you’d be paying if you accepted this company’s offer of FREE (just pay shipping and handling) cookies.

There may be companies that will send some product in the hope of pulling you in as a customer and that will charge you a shipping and handling cost that is actually less than the value of whatever it is they are sending you. But that would be a rare case. An exception. Most such offers are disingenuous at best. What they charge for shipping and handling covers all of their cost in sending you the "free" product. So if we can find that rare Congress person to create a law banning ON and OFF from being used disingenuously - maybe he or she can add the infamous "shipping and handling phrase" to banned if associated with the word FREE - in the same sentence, paragraph or page - and that would cover its use "continued on the next page.

Incidentally, the Dow was down a total of 593 points last Thursday and Friday and up 503 points from Monday through today. Pick your own "ONS"


posted by Jeff Smith at 8/24/2011 09:48:00 PM

 
RIOTS IN LONDON AND BEYOND - ENGLAND’S NEW REALITY

If I believed in the notion of life after death, I could imagine that somewhere in the great beyond, Enoch Powell is looking down, shaking his head sadly and saying "I told you so." And I, from an ocean away from the riots which have beset the country of my birth, am shaking my head and asking what has become of the England I once knew.

It’s difficult to express my feelings about what has been happening for the past week without sounding at least somewhat bigoted. I cannot imagine mindless rioting in the days of my youth. Indeed, no such thing ever happened in the years I lived there. But those were also the years before the influx of immigrants from Africa, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, the Caribbean and Lord knows where else. Those were the days before the Human Rights Act - a result of membership in the European Union. And those were the days when it would have been unthinkable for Bobbies to wear turbans or to be armed with anything more deadly than a truncheon - more often not even that. A London policeman was someone to respect and his air of confidence and authority was enough to maintain order . That’s not to say that there was no crime in the days of my youth - just not the kind of street crime of late that has shamed the image of a proud nation.

A lot of people have a lot of ideas about the causes of the rioting, including many pundits on this side of the pond who think they know England - particularly if they’ve visited at one time or another. Poverty has been mentioned. Mistrust or fear of police. Unemployment - and a few other reasons. Tottenham - the section of London where it started has been described as a mixed ethnic neighborhood suffering from the ills mentioned. I haven't been in Tottenham in decades, but still, what happened there affected me in a personal way. When I was maybe six or seven, my father had a store on Tottenaham High Road and we lived behind and above the store. My memories of the area are vague - but I know it was a safe place to live. London's East End is another area where the hooligans roamed. My paternal grandfather lived in a row house there. His toilet was outside his back door - not too pleasant at the height of a cold winter. There was no bathroom. He went to the public baths once a week a few blocks away - as did I for a short time when I lived with him. There was plenty of poverty in the East End of London in those days - but people didn’t really know they were poor. They handled their lot in life with as much dignity as they could muster. The thought of rioting in the streets - looting and burning and attacking innocent people because they were poor or for any other reason would have been considered madness.

Those were the days before the waves of immigrants that gradually changed the look and feel of much of the country. It became more and more noticeable on my visits back to the old country - the multiple languages being spoken and on street and store signs - the strange (to my eyes) clothing. And of course the mosques. England is a Christian nation. An official Christian nation. Yet when I lived there as a child, minority religionists felt reasonably comfortable. I should know, I was one of them. The Christian church didn’t try to oppress them and they in turn didn’t make any special demands on the state. I’m not saying that it was Edenic but there was no clash of cultures. There was just the one majority culture, little affected by what minority cultures existed.

Enoch Powell was looked on as a bigot after his "Rivers of Blood" speech and removed from a position he held in the Conservative Party. But underlying his views was a reality that no doubt has contributed to the conditions that exist today. Unlike the United States, England was never "a nation of immigrants." It wasn’t the kind of closed society that one finds in Japan - but it wasn’t set up for nor ready to become a nation of immigrants. Numerically it absorbed the waves of newcomers that arrived from Powell’s time on, but there wasn’t the kind of cultural blending between them and the native population that was needed to prevent what some view as the balkanization of many English cities and the creation of cultural ghettos in others. In a sense, England is now facing the kind of problems of racial and religious differences that we have had to deal with in our past and are still trying to put behind us.

The differences between the "English" English and the "new" English are only part of the problem. There were young and old criminals rioting who were neither black nor Muslim nor any other kind of "different" Englishmen. But those differences contributed in no small way to the "us against them" thinking of the roaming bands that burned, looted and killed over a three horror filled nights last week.

Besides prosecuting the criminals and sending some of them to jail - for life if those who murdered can be found and convicted, something will have to be done to bring the disaffected segments of the population into the mainstream - to replace hopelessness with hope - to instill in them the belief that England is their country, not their gang or their neighborhood or their religion or the country of their ancestors. It will be a difficult task, finding ways for government to help to improve their lot without creating the impression of pandering in response to violence. The governmental authorities are way behind in recognizing and dealing with the scope of problems that have been growing in plain sight for years. There will likely be more incidents as they struggle to find the right ways to bring peace to a troubled populace. They will first have to deal with the pain of accepting that the England that they - and I once knew, no longer exists.

posted by Jeff Smith at 8/15/2011 03:46:00 PM

 
U.S. SUPREME COURT - SAY HELLO TO STANDARD AND POORS

You are after all, birds of a feather - all six of you. The five Supremes who decided that corporations were people and the "person" that is Standard and Poors who in turn has decided in his or her wisdom that US Government securities are no longer the safest of all investments It boggles the mind. The founders of this nation had the idea of creating a divided government of checks and balances so that no one person or one branch of government could ride roughshod over the rest of us. Yet here we are in an era where the Supreme Court does indeed reign supreme - think about it - and a private corporation/person can turn the nation’s - maybe even the world’s finances upside down.

My first reaction when I heard the news of S&P’s action was - who the hell is Standard and Poors to decide what the U.S. credit rating should be? Who or what gives them that power? And why have they chosen this moment to issue their downgrading proclamation- the first such in U.S. history? The answer to the first part of that question can be easily found in various descriptions of the company and its history such as this Wikipedia description. The second is open to all kinds of speculation - colored in no small part by what might be found in researching the answer to the first part. Seventy Eight years ago, at an economic time not that far removed from today’s economic conditions, newly elected President Franklin Delano Roosevelt needed to project calm and confidence and he did so in his inaugural address by saying that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. Today, Standard and Poors is telling the world that it needs to fear the creditworthiness of the United States.

You have to wonder what thought went into the S&P proclamation. No other rating service has made such a determination. Undoubtedly the people at Moody’s and Fitch came to the same conclusion as the people at S&P - and just about everyone else in the country - that our governing bodies are in disarray. Or as any rational observer might put it - we have a bunch of spoiled children who have gotten themselves elected to Congress and if they don’t get their way, they’ll just shut the country down and say - so there!! And if that wasn’t bad enough, we have another group of politicians who are so determined to wound the president and assure his defeat in next year’s election that they too are willing to bring the nation to the brink of disaster to accomplish that end.

The S&P person is defending his/her/its decision, much in the same way that the so called tea party members of Congress revel in the consciousness of their own rectitude, oblivious to the damage they have caused. This is the same S&P that gave its blessing to Enron and to the bundled mortgage "securities" that were at the heart of the last near financial disaster. Yet for some reason, their pronouncements still carry great weight and one would think that with that knowledge and with the knowledge that they screwed up royally with the aforementioned stamps of approval, they would think long and hard before making a pronouncement about the creditworthiness of a nation. During times of great danger - war for example - the press has almost always been careful not to publish information that could be harmful to the nation - particularly to people already in harms way. When the government asks for restraint, they show it. They are no less a free press for complying but when called for, they put the country’s interest ahead of the right of the people to know. And to my mind, what S&P has done is the equivalent of a free press publishing information that could put service personnel at great risk at a time of war. They, he/she, it knew what the reaction would be in the world markets and how that would hurt countless individuals - but they went ahead anyway. Adding an unwanted legacy to the nation's first black president - and you have to wonder if they thought about that.

A word about that knee jerk reaction - the Dow down 600 plus points following 500 plus loss on Friday - and similar chaos around the world. It’s utter madness for which there was and almost never is a logical reason. That the stock of Companies X,Yand Z are worth considerably less today than they were a week or two ago because the tea party idiots came close to causing a default in US securities and S&P decided to give those securities a lower rating, makes no sense. Of course the worth represented by the prices of those stocks often makes little sense - but for them to be suddenly worth less for the reasons stated is beyond reason. I suppose those who would agree with me in that regard also knew they had no hope of reason prevailing and had no option but to join in the self fulfilling prophesy of a negative reaction to the downgrading or out creditworthiness. Of course some shrewd traders are making a bundle as the market drops - just as they do when it rises. But the rest of us are caught in the middle - even those who didn’t sell - wondering if anything will be left of our retirement accounts when we need them.

The fear of this market collapse, coming at a time when horrifying news is coming out of Afghanistan, is that blame will fall on the President’s shoulders - and if he isn’t able to shake it off and if the unemployment numbers don’t improve and the markets stay in the doldrums in the months ahead, he could lose his bid to be re-elected, which could be a greater disaster than everything that has happened to the country in the past year or two because of what is written in the title to these comments. If there is anything more dangerous than a company or person whose views can turn the world’s financial markets on their collective heads, it is a United States Supreme Court with a greater conservative membership than the five currently in the majority. Two or three justices could retire during the next five and a half years and if they are replaced by a Republican president- their rulings could change the very nature of this country for decades to come. And if that were to happen, the S&P pronouncement and the world wide reaction it caused, would bear a great portion of the blame. To their everlasting shame.


posted by Jeff Smith at 8/09/2011 10:58:00 AM

 
IT’S A MAD MAD WORLD

There are times when I am grateful that I don’t have to write about "The Passing Parade" for a living - that is to say - to have to write two or three columns a week. There is so much madness in the world at the moment - even trying to select a topic becomes burdensome - which is one of the reasons I haven’t written much here lately. That and the fact that I’ve been too busy with other things. But I don’t want to let the parade pass me by without at least an occasional observation on some of the crazy things that have been happening, so here are a few on a variety of topics which I’ll probably spread over a couple of days - not necessarily in any particular order - certainly not in order of importance. I will have some observations on the madness that has been Washington for the past few weeks and the madness that is the stock market this week. But first, a couple of bits of other kinds of madness.

Starting with a scandal that was THE lead "news" topic for days a couple of months ago - I have nothing but disgust for Newsweek and the ABC network for allowing themselves to be used by the alleged victim of sexual assault by the former head of the International Monetary Fund. I don’t know what happened in a New York hotel room in May - nor does anyone else but Dominique Strauss-Kahn and Nafissatou Diallo , the maid who accused him of sexual assault. I do know that within a day of the alleged incident, she was being represented by a PI attorney - a lawyer who sues for damages on a contingency basis - around 40% of anything awarded by the court. I do know it’s been reported that she was recorded telling a jailed boyfriend that "This guy is rich. I know what I’m doing." I do know that it’s been reported that thousands of dollars have been deposited in her bank account from various sources while she worked as a maid. And I do know that it’s been reported that an attorney plans to file a civil suit against the rich guy at any moment..

All of this while rumors abound that the prosecutors may drop the case because of her lack of credibility. I must admit that she sounds credible while expressing anger and shedding tears as she insists that she is telling the truth and that she wants Strauss-Kahn to go to jail. But "going public" at a time when the prosecutors are about to decide whether or not to proceed with the case smacks more of someone being "handled" in support of a PI case rather than a victim seeking justice. And print and electronic media presenting her making her case in public before it has even been decided whether it will proceed to trial smacks of the kind of journalism practiced by the News of the World.
--------------------------

FOOTBALL MILLIONAIRES

I don’t care one way or another about the end of the football strike or lockout or whatever it was that was threatening this year’s football season but I am intrigued at what the two sides were arguing about, essentially how to split the total revenues earned by the game. In other words, the players - as a union - were not negotiating salaries for their members but how much of the game’s total revenues - ticket sales, television and the rest - the owners can keep and how much will be split among the players.

I have been a union member in the past and I am pro-union today - but this is a labor - management deal beyond belief. I would have expected there to be some comment from the union busting Republican politicians about such a deal - but not a word from Wisconsin Governor Walker or Ohio Governor Kasich. I think football is played in both their states, so you’d think they’d have something to say about the agreement, considering how much they’ve had to say about the public service unions that they deal with. After all, what kind of a country would we be if other organized individuals followed the football players approach to employment and other employers agreed to discuss their requests? I think those anti-union folk would call it socialistic.

I once worked for ABC television in Chicago as a member of the Director’s Guild of America. My pay was based on a rate negotiated by the DGA and it was a fair amount for the times. But just think what it might have been if the broadcast unions had been able to follow the NFL model. I would love to have been the negotiating union member who sits down with ABC management - the company’s financial documents in hand and opens negotiations with "O.K. - you made X gazillions last year and the estimates for this year are 20% better. How about a 60/40 split? 60% for us and 40% for you." I wouldn’t be as intimidating as a six foot six inch 300 pound offensive tackle - but I’d be holding the power of a total TV blackout in my hands if they didn’t least agree to 50/50.

Of course there are no unions holding anything close to the power the football players union wields. Relatively speaking there are only a handful of players and if they don’t show up for work - there’d be no professional football, which for some people would be an event close to the end of the world. As for me, I couldn’t care less. I know that professional football players have a relatively short career - Bret Favre notwithstanding - but the amounts they are paid border on the insane. Most if not all have been given free college educations that should have prepared them for some secondary career beyond exerting themselves for 30 second bursts on a football field for as few as five and maybe as many as a dozen or more sixteen game seasons. But at the rate they are paid for those games, they probably won’t need a secondary career. They should have enough to retire when they no longer can perform those 30 second bursts of physical exertion and live in luxury into their old age.

But you can’t fault those NFL negotiators. Their job was to get the best deal they could for their members and they sure seem to have accomplished that goal. Maybe we should hire them to negotiate on our behalf with those members of Congress who are trying to figure a way for us to pay all our bills and cut back on what we owe. That might result in a better outcome than those we elected to represent OUR Union - The United States of America - are likely achieve.
posted by Jeff Smith at 8/05/2011 03:17:00 PM

 
THE END OF AN ERA - SUNDAYS IN LONDON WITHOUT THE NEWS OF THE WORLD

That today is the final edition of the News Of The World probably doesn’t mean too much to most American consumers of news. They’ve heard of the scandals which apparently compelled Rupert Murdoch to pull the plug on this wide circulation tabloid - and perhaps if they’ve heard that it’s a paper that’s been published since 1843, they might take a moment to think about what that means. But newspapers have been dying in the United States like summer flies, so I doubt if too many will give it that much thought. But to this American who spent most of his formative years in England, the death of the News Of The World marks the end of an era - an event that seems to be occurring with some degree of regularity in the old country.

I don’t know what Murdoch hopes to gain - or to avoid - by shutting down the paper that is at the center of a scandal that has rocked the British public like none than I can recall in recent history,but what he has done is kill off a piece of the British Isles. He has committed Tabloidicide and there needs to be an appropriate punishment dreamed up for this Australian news muckraker.

England has been the home of tabloids for as long as I can remember. We have a few here, but none are considered to be "real" newspapers the way so many Englishmen were persuaded to believe they were reading when they opened the pages of the Daily Mirror or one of the three evening papers that were around when I was a kid - the Star, News and Standard. And on Sunday of course there was the News Of The World - or as we used to call it - the Sunday Scandal. Before Murdoch got his grubby hands on this venerable tabloid it was a different kind of newspaper. It didn’t have the power to elect or bring down politicians. It didn’t have a team of reporters hacking people’s phones in order to get juicy stories - no matter who the stories might harm. In the days I’m talking about, there were no computers to hack or cell phones to track. It was a sleepier time.

What we looked forward to - if you can think of that expression as how we readers of News Of The World felt as we picked up our copy on a Sunday morning, was who got nabbed for what and what happened to them. The paper was filled with the kind of "news" that you didn’t read during the week in the Telegraph or the Guardian - newspapers that also began their lives in the eighteen hundreds. It was "news" of - mostly - petty crime. Theft. Burglary. Domestic dispute. Prostitution. I can’t remember all the topics that were covered. I haven’t seen a copy of that paper in decades. But they were all that kind of reporting - with what defendants said and what judges said and who got off and who didn’t. And yes, there was other stuff in the paper but it was known for its round-up of crime stories. All pre-Murdoch of course. He acquired the paper and promptly began to turn it into something un-British. It took him years, but his particular brand of poison finally grew powerful enough to be fatal.

Things change of course. One can’t expect everything to stay the same decade after decade. But what is sickening is the kind of change that tends to alter the very character of a nation. I’ve noticed those changes in England as I’ve visited the old country over the years. and I’ve written about them here. The influx of immigrants who didn’t adapt to society but expected society to adapt to them. The tea shops that no longer served TEA! English Bobbies wearing TURBANS! But one thing that seemed to continue to be as traditional as the British stiff upper lip was the availability of the British tabloids. The old Daily Mirror was there every time I looked for it. Of course it’s on line now like most other newspapers - but the print version continues - the same today as it was when I was a kid going to school at Haberdasher’s Aske’s Hampstead Public School. And so it was with the News Of The World. It’s mission and its content had been poisoned by Murdoch - but there was always hope that it would one day break free and once again perform the necessary service of keeping the British public aware of who did what to whom and what the Right Honorable Justice Whatsisname said about it all. And now it’s gone forever and there is no forgiveness possible for Rupert Murdoch.

The latest news reports have Murdoch arriving in England where his son might be arrested for whatever responsibility he might have had for the actions of the editors and reporters of the News Of The World. To my mind, his presence there provides an opportunity for Scotland Yard to exact what measure of vengeance may be possible from this devil in news sheet clothing. Arrest HIM The senior Murdoch. . Stick him in the Tower of London in a cell with radio and television sets that can’t be turned off, playing endless recordings of Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh. No trial of course. That would be a waste of Crown money. But offer him a deal. He can get out any time. All he has to do is order the death of one of his other properties. Shut down Fox "News." It’s not a fair exchange for what he’s done to the News Of The World but we’ll take it as a down payment.
posted by Jeff Smith at 7/10/2011 03:51:00 PM

 
A FAREWELL TO BLAGO

Since I have written about the trials and tribulations of Rod Blagojevich on at least a half dozen occasions - sometimes humorously - sometimes with serious advice - I feel obligated to make some comments about his conviction on seventeen of the alleged criminal acts contained in his indictment. If you have read any of my previous comments about the man and his two trials, you will not be surprised to learn that I disagree with the verdict. Meaning no disrespect to the members of the jury who convicted him, I think they were bamboozled into their decision - not so much by the evidence but by the weight of the accusations and the conduct of Judge Zagel. I wasn’t at the trial and I haven’t read transcripts of the proceedings - but I pretty much know the nature of the charges and I have read news accounts of some of the Judge’s rulings - such as telling the defendant what he can and can’t say in his own defense - a ruling that I find mind boggling.

The problem facing the jury, one that was extremely difficult for them to overcome, was the assertion that many of the activities described in the indictment were criminal in nature. What for decades was known and accepted as the down and dirty business of politics has in recent times been endowed with the label of criminality - and without someone in the jury room questioning that kind of interpretation, the outcome was inevitable. I’ve said it before an d I’ll say it once again - I’ve been where Blagojevich was. I was once indicted on multiple allegedly "criminal" counts. Nothing alleged in the indictment was true and nothing alleged was criminal - but had the judge before whom the indictment was presented allowed it to proceed to trial, a jury might well have accepted the assertion that perfectly normal business activity was in fact "criminal.". Blago was about as unsophisticated as one could be in his pursuit of a political career - and he probably crossed the line of acceptable political discourse and behavior on multiple occasions, but in the end no individual was harmed and no actual damage was done to the business of the State.

The assertion of the prosecution and of the judge was that the mere stated desire to accomplish something, the accomplishment of which would be illegal, is in itself a crime - but sifting through all the recordings and live renditions of Blago’s unfortunate affliction of Diarrhea of the Mouth secondary to Flights of Nonsensical Fancy - who could really tell at what point he may have crossed what I would think of as an imaginary line between the ramblings of a fool and the cunning plans of an arch criminal? But even if his looking to be rewarded for naming a desired candidate fill the President’s unfinished Senate term and even if his efforts to squeeze campaign contributions from those needing or entitled to some help from the state had the smell of freshly manufactured sleaze - was that enough reason to expose him to the possibility of a jail term of ten years or more - which will certainly be the result of those seventeen guilty verdicts?

I’m no fan of Blagojevich. I agree with Chicago Tribune columnist Eric Zorn that he had no business being Illinois’ chief executive. He was totally the wrong person for the job - and that was almost bound to get him in trouble. But I also agree with Zorn about the argument that Blago and his lawyers couldn’t raise at his trial. The "Oh Come On." argument. It’s an argument that I would have advanced had I been sitting in that jury room. He’s a clown who didn’t know any better. He’s been disgraced, kicked out of office, broke and in debt with his political career over. with no sure way of making a living and there are no dead or broken bodies in his wake. Enough already. Not guilty of being an arch criminal who deserves to rot in jail for the next ten or more years. But I wasn’t on the jury, nor was there anyone skeptical of the prosecution’s theories or the neutrality of the judge. So it’s farewell to Blago. And look out Governor Quinn. Nice guy? Honest? Maybe, but can he spell Patrick Fitzgerald?
posted by Jeff Smith at 6/29/2011 02:46:00 PM

 
A DIFFERENT WAY TO LOOK AT PALESTINIAN "REFUGEES"

A few weeks ago I read a news item in the Chicago Tribune about Palestinians clashing with each other in a Lebanese based "refugee camp." Those facts were revealed in the opening sentence of the piece. Casually. Total acceptance. Sixty three years after the Arab world tried to destroy Israel, Palestinian "refugees" are part of the world landscape - that claimed status almost never questioned when reporters write stories such as the one mentioned here. I thought it was tine once again for me to question this astonishing status quo and since I didn’t remember the date of the story or the headline, I tried to find it by querying Google with "Palestinians clash in Lebanese refugee camp." I got 4,400,000 hits. Most of them probably had little to do with the information I was looking for, but on the first page there was story after story of such clashes over a period of years. I would have proceeded with comments on these stories except for the fact that while in the Google site I checked on current news stories and found a Wall Street editorial titled "WHAT IF JEWS HAD FOLLOWED THE PALESTINIAN PATH’ by Warren Kozak. I would like to have written as clever a look the true nature of the Palestinian "refugee problem as Mt. Kozak has penned in his editorial - but since I didn’t and he did, here it is with my admiration and endorsement.

It is doubtful that there has ever been a more miserable human refuse than Jewish survivors after World War II. Starving, emaciated, stateless—they were not welcomed back by countries where they had lived for generations as assimilated and educated citizens. Germany was no place to return to and in Kielce, Poland, 40 Jews who survived the Holocaust were killed in a pogrom one year after the war ended. The European Jew, circa 1945, quickly went from victim to international refugee disaster. Yet within a very brief time, this epic calamity disappeared, so much so that few people today even remember the period. How did this happen in an era when Palestinian refugees have continued to be stateless for generations?

In 1945, there were hundreds of thousands of Jewish survivors living in DP Camps (displaced persons) across Europe. They were fed and clothed by Jewish and international relief organizations. Had the world's Jewish population played this situation as the Arabs and Palestinians have, everything would look very different today. To begin with, the Jews would all still be living in these DP camps, only now the camps would have become squalid ghettos throughout Europe. The refugees would continue to be fed and clothed by a committee similar to UNRWA—the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (paid for mostly by the United States since 1948). Blessed with one of the world's highest birth rates, they would now number in the many millions. And 66 years later, new generations, fed on a mixture of hate and lies against the Europeans, would now seethe with anger.

Golda Meir pondered what would have become of the Jews had they been destroyed by the Arab armies.
Sometime in the early 1960s, the Jewish leadership of these refugee camps, having been trained in Moscow to wreak havoc on the West (as Yasser Arafat was) would have started to employ terrorism to shake down governments. Airplane hijackings in the 1970s would have been followed by passenger killings. There would have been attacks on high-profile targets as well—say, the German or Polish Olympic teams.
By the 1990s, the real mayhem would have begun. Raised on victimhood and used as cannon fodder by corrupt leaders, a generation of younger Jews would be blowing up buses, restaurants and themselves. The billions of dollars extorted from various governments would not have gone to the inhabitants of the camps. The money would be in the Swiss bank accounts of the refugees' famous and flamboyant leaders and their lackies.

So now it's the present, generations past the end of World War II, and the festering Jewish refugee problem throughout Europe has absolutely no end in sight. The worst part of this story would be the wasted lives of millions of human beings in the camps—inventions not invented, illnesses not cured, high-tech startups not started up, symphonies and books not written—a real cultural and spiritual desert.

None of this happened, of course. Instead, the Jewish refugees returned to their ancestral homeland. They left everything they had in Europe and turned their backs on the Continent—no "right of return" requested. They were welcomed by the 650,000 Jewish residents of Israel. An additional 700,000 Jewish refugees flooded into the new state from Arab lands after they were summarily kicked out. Again losing everything after generations in one place; again welcomed in their new home. In Israel, they did it all the hard way. They built a new country from scratch with roads, housing and schools. They created agricultural collectives to feed their people. They created a successful economy without domestic oil, and they built one of the world's most vibrant democracies in a region sadly devoid of free thought.

Yes, the Israelis did all this with the financial assistance of Jews around the world and others who helped get them on their feet so they could take care of themselves. These outsiders did not ignore them, or demean them, or use them as pawns in their own political schemes—as the Arab nations have done with the Palestinians. I imagine the argument will be made that while the Jews may have achieved all this, they did not have their land stolen from them. This is, of course, a canard, another convenient lie. They did lose property all over Europe and the Mideast. And there was never an independent Palestine run by Palestinian Arabs. Ever. Jews and Arabs lived in this area controlled first by the Turks and then by the British. The U.N. offered the two-state solution that we hear so much about in 1947. The problem then, and now, is that it was accepted by only one party, Israel. No doubt, the situation of Arab residents of the Middle East back then may have been difficult, but it is incomprehensible that their lot was worse than that of the Jews at the end of World War II.

We don't hear about any of this because giving human beings hope and purpose doesn't make great copy. Squalor, victimhood and terror are always more exciting. Perhaps in the end, the greatest crime of the Jews was that they quietly created something from nothing. And in the process, they transformed themselves.
Golda Meir is credited with having said that if the Jews had not fought back against the Arab armies and had been destroyed in 1948, they would have received the most beautiful eulogies throughout the world. Instead, they chose to stand their ground and defend themselves. And in winning, they received the world's condemnation. Meir said she would take the condemnation over the eulogies

. No doubt there will be pro-Palestinian responses to this interesting way of looking at why there have been Palestinian "refugees" for the last 63 years - and if I find any, I might reproduce and comment on them here - but I can’t imagine any of them making the kind of sense Mr, Kosal has fashioned.
posted by Jeff Smith at 6/21/2011 08:26:00 PM