President Bush's conduct of the war in Iraq has convinced me that the unilateral responsibility for direction of our strategic military decisions cannot be housed in the presidency. As I write, Bush is again speaking as the "decider" and the "Commander in Chief", thumbing his nose to congress and the American people. He speaks of consulting with congress, but his idea of consulting is to tell them what to do. He bashes congress for wishing to "micromanage" the war, when that is exactly what they are not involved in.
Congress needs to have much more power regarding the strategic direction of our military, and not simply power emanating from their control of the nation's purse. The republicans in congress have been able, so far, to avoid accountability for the lack of Bush's success by deferring to his constitutional role as Commander in Chief. If their congressional leadership during the 2003-2006 period had also been accountable for support of Bush's strategy, I believe the direction of the war would now be different because different strategic choices would have been made.
The initiation of the Iraq war was made possible by a congressional vote allowing the president to take military action. It makes no sense that the congress should not review this authority on an ongoing basis, and adjust it as necessary from a strategic standpoint. We need to have more control over an executive who, by virtue of his position, can pursue military adventures without constant oversight.
This concept makes a lot of sense if we look at our government as a corporation, the largest corporation in the world. The chief executive has tremendous power in a corporation, but he or she also is accountable to the board of directors. When the chief executive errs significantly in determining the corporation's strategy, the board can intervene and either force strategy changes or fire the executive. Unfortunately, our governmental structure does not include a body like a board of directors. Congress can impeach (fire) a president, and it can de-fund a president's initiatives, but it does not have an adequate role in determining military strategy. Time for a change.
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Another Bush "Success", And the Aftermath
This week President Bush described his forecasted 2007 deficit of roughly $230 billion as a victory, since it bested his earlier 2007 forecast of the deficit. This was another great example of what Bush considers a "victory" - a result just a bit less ugly than a previously ugly expectation.
In 2000, Bush predicted a 2007 surplus exceeding $500 billion. This means that his latest forecast for 2007 is about $750 billion worse than his original prediction. That's a victory? No, it's a tragedy.
Can he blame 9/11 for this failure? No. We have had years to recover, and the economy has rebounded with stock market indexes at high levels. The blame lies with his combination of excessive tax cuts and overspending by his administration and the republican congressional majority of the past six years.
The truth is that Bush has had virtually no successes during his tenure, a fact that the public has come to understand very well - his 30% approval rating is solid proof that the American people have run out of patience with his leadership and with the credibility of those in congress who continue to support him. It's hard to believe that the 2008 elections will result in anything other than major gains by the democratic party.
The bad news about the impending change in government leadership is that the democrats will inherit giant problems left over from Bush - overspending, Iraq, immigration, energy independence, entitlements, and education, to name a few. They will be unable to escape dealing with those problems simply because they were inherited, and they will have to make some very painful choices if the issues are to be resolved. Will the democrats be able to explain these issues to Americans and get their support? The new president's communication skills will be tested to the utmost as he or she attempts to get this nation united behind a package of projects that will rival the New Deal in scope and complexity.
In 2000, Bush predicted a 2007 surplus exceeding $500 billion. This means that his latest forecast for 2007 is about $750 billion worse than his original prediction. That's a victory? No, it's a tragedy.
Can he blame 9/11 for this failure? No. We have had years to recover, and the economy has rebounded with stock market indexes at high levels. The blame lies with his combination of excessive tax cuts and overspending by his administration and the republican congressional majority of the past six years.
The truth is that Bush has had virtually no successes during his tenure, a fact that the public has come to understand very well - his 30% approval rating is solid proof that the American people have run out of patience with his leadership and with the credibility of those in congress who continue to support him. It's hard to believe that the 2008 elections will result in anything other than major gains by the democratic party.
The bad news about the impending change in government leadership is that the democrats will inherit giant problems left over from Bush - overspending, Iraq, immigration, energy independence, entitlements, and education, to name a few. They will be unable to escape dealing with those problems simply because they were inherited, and they will have to make some very painful choices if the issues are to be resolved. Will the democrats be able to explain these issues to Americans and get their support? The new president's communication skills will be tested to the utmost as he or she attempts to get this nation united behind a package of projects that will rival the New Deal in scope and complexity.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Einstein - Brash, Brainy and Busy
There's a new biography of Albert Einstein, written by Walter Issacson and titled "Einstein - His Life and Universe". I'm on page 129, where I'm learning about Einstein's concept of "special relativity", which shows that there are no such things as absolutely simultaneous events or "real" or "absolute" time. It's a complicated idea, but Einstein proved it and I can understand his explanation. So far, the book is a winner.
Three of Einstein's major characteristics stand out in what I've read to this point: he had little respect for authority, he loved knowledge of all kinds, and he worked his butt off on his own time. He was not "just a scientist", but also a philosophy student and a practical engineer. He rebelled against academic institutionalists who confused knowledge with authority, who resisted new ideas because their prestige was connected to the old. Einstein was fortunate to be turned down for academic positions, since the "patent examiner" job he later worked at gave him much more freedom to think creatively. He may have been a genius, but he put more hard work (thinking) into solving problems than almost anyone, and he stuck with it. He was an intellectual entrepreneur, and he invented ideas that have changed our world.
I'd hope that bright young people would read some biographies of people like Einstein, people who changed our world. They might get a better appreciation of how to maximize on their talents and understand how much sacrifice is required to accomplish great things.
Three of Einstein's major characteristics stand out in what I've read to this point: he had little respect for authority, he loved knowledge of all kinds, and he worked his butt off on his own time. He was not "just a scientist", but also a philosophy student and a practical engineer. He rebelled against academic institutionalists who confused knowledge with authority, who resisted new ideas because their prestige was connected to the old. Einstein was fortunate to be turned down for academic positions, since the "patent examiner" job he later worked at gave him much more freedom to think creatively. He may have been a genius, but he put more hard work (thinking) into solving problems than almost anyone, and he stuck with it. He was an intellectual entrepreneur, and he invented ideas that have changed our world.
I'd hope that bright young people would read some biographies of people like Einstein, people who changed our world. They might get a better appreciation of how to maximize on their talents and understand how much sacrifice is required to accomplish great things.
Monday, July 09, 2007
Our Government is Our Own Worst Enemy
Pretty provocative title, isn't it? You may be thinking I'm going to rant about the Presidentidiot, or maybe about one or more of the boneheads in his executive branch, or the Supreme Clowns, or those people who probably searched my wife as she traveled by air today - but I'm not. I'm going to slam the republicans, the democrats, the bureaucrats, the governors, the think tanks - everybody who has a hand in guiding our nation. They are all complicit in a vast conspiracy that has a good probability of reducing our country to a weak shell of its current state. It's the conspiracy of ignoring the financial mismanagement of our nation, and the accusation is made by none other than David Walker, Comptroller General of the United States.
I quote from David Walker's interview on "60 Minutes" last night. "I would argue that the most serious threat to the United States is not someone hiding in a cave in Afghanistan or Pakistan but our own fiscal irresponsibility," Walker tells Kroft (the "60 Minutes" staffer).
What is the problem? Simply stated, the United States has about $30 trillion - that's right, $30 trillion - in unfunded liabilities. The largest of these is Medicare, where the recent prescription drug benefit alone contributed $8 trillion of unfunded obligations. Walker says that our government is spending, borrowing, and undertaxing to a scandalous degree - that we cannot possibly afford the national lifestyle that our elected officials are providing us. Our children and grandchildren will be left with this gigantic bill, one that they cannot pay under any forseeable circumstances. And Walker says that "this is the best kept secret in Washington". Everyone in power understands this, but nobody wants to talk about it, including all the announced presidential candidates. What a crock of shit!
It's kind of humorous that congress would enact the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation to require corporate reporting and control - to prevent another Enron - when the government itself is on a course that will make Enron seem like a triviality. Think of it...we have 300 million citizens in the U.S., and $30 trillion in unfunded liabilities...that's $100,000 in "unfunded" liability for every man, woman, and child in the U.S. And this number does not include the "funded" liability, which is, for example, the part of future Social Security payments that will be covered by future payroll taxes. If our country was a corporation, "bankrupt" would be a kind word for our status.
Walker's prescription for averting disaster is increased taxes, lower government spending, and reductions in our entitlements. That's why politicians don't want to deal with this issue - the solutions will be difficult and unpopular. Moreover, both parties participated in building the bloated government that has got us into this untenable state. "Handshakes all around" occurred when Bush and the democrats agreed on the $8 trillion unfunded prescription drug benefit. They are all guilty.
My very smart partner on the ambulance today predicted that the U.S. will ultimately try to inflate our currency to the degree that these obligations will be met in cheap money. Of course, U.S. interest rates would go sky-high and our credit rating would go down the drain. Retirement funds would provide far less security than people are expecting, since the dollar would buy much less. He suggested it would be foolish for anyone to be in long term bonds at this point in our history, given this huge risk. Hopefully this blog will be preserved long enough for Dick to get due credit for his prediction. You might want to think about this as you make investment decisions - I am.
So, forget about terrorists. The Comptroller General says they are a minor threat compared to what our own government has in store for us. Think about asking your congressperson, senator, or governor about what Walker is saying. What is their plan for coming up with the $30 trillion? If they have no answer, tell your children and grandchildren to pile up hard assets like gold or stock in Chinese companies,or to consider moving to Canada. (If you think I'm bullshitting you, answer why a Canadian dollar is worth $1 U.S today when it was worth $0.55 not so long ago.) All the world knows our economy is tettering over the abyss, but we have no clue because our politicians don't want to deal with it.
Oh! I almost forgot to mention that every dollar Bush is spending on the Iraq debacle is going into the unfunded liability. My grandson Ryder will curse his sorry ass!
I quote from David Walker's interview on "60 Minutes" last night. "I would argue that the most serious threat to the United States is not someone hiding in a cave in Afghanistan or Pakistan but our own fiscal irresponsibility," Walker tells Kroft (the "60 Minutes" staffer).
What is the problem? Simply stated, the United States has about $30 trillion - that's right, $30 trillion - in unfunded liabilities. The largest of these is Medicare, where the recent prescription drug benefit alone contributed $8 trillion of unfunded obligations. Walker says that our government is spending, borrowing, and undertaxing to a scandalous degree - that we cannot possibly afford the national lifestyle that our elected officials are providing us. Our children and grandchildren will be left with this gigantic bill, one that they cannot pay under any forseeable circumstances. And Walker says that "this is the best kept secret in Washington". Everyone in power understands this, but nobody wants to talk about it, including all the announced presidential candidates. What a crock of shit!
It's kind of humorous that congress would enact the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation to require corporate reporting and control - to prevent another Enron - when the government itself is on a course that will make Enron seem like a triviality. Think of it...we have 300 million citizens in the U.S., and $30 trillion in unfunded liabilities...that's $100,000 in "unfunded" liability for every man, woman, and child in the U.S. And this number does not include the "funded" liability, which is, for example, the part of future Social Security payments that will be covered by future payroll taxes. If our country was a corporation, "bankrupt" would be a kind word for our status.
Walker's prescription for averting disaster is increased taxes, lower government spending, and reductions in our entitlements. That's why politicians don't want to deal with this issue - the solutions will be difficult and unpopular. Moreover, both parties participated in building the bloated government that has got us into this untenable state. "Handshakes all around" occurred when Bush and the democrats agreed on the $8 trillion unfunded prescription drug benefit. They are all guilty.
My very smart partner on the ambulance today predicted that the U.S. will ultimately try to inflate our currency to the degree that these obligations will be met in cheap money. Of course, U.S. interest rates would go sky-high and our credit rating would go down the drain. Retirement funds would provide far less security than people are expecting, since the dollar would buy much less. He suggested it would be foolish for anyone to be in long term bonds at this point in our history, given this huge risk. Hopefully this blog will be preserved long enough for Dick to get due credit for his prediction. You might want to think about this as you make investment decisions - I am.
So, forget about terrorists. The Comptroller General says they are a minor threat compared to what our own government has in store for us. Think about asking your congressperson, senator, or governor about what Walker is saying. What is their plan for coming up with the $30 trillion? If they have no answer, tell your children and grandchildren to pile up hard assets like gold or stock in Chinese companies,or to consider moving to Canada. (If you think I'm bullshitting you, answer why a Canadian dollar is worth $1 U.S today when it was worth $0.55 not so long ago.) All the world knows our economy is tettering over the abyss, but we have no clue because our politicians don't want to deal with it.
Oh! I almost forgot to mention that every dollar Bush is spending on the Iraq debacle is going into the unfunded liability. My grandson Ryder will curse his sorry ass!
Tuesday, July 03, 2007
Bush Commutes Accountability
"Scooter" Libby will not go to jail, but his felony conviction stands - for now. He'll pay a fine and go on probation pending an eventual late-term pardon by the president. This is simply the latest example of the Bush administration's refusal to accept accountability for major mistakes, some of which are likely crimes.
Libby was convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice because he lied in court about the events surrounding the "outing" of Valerie Plame, a former covert CIA agent. When a person is convicted of perjury, the facts must support the contention that they knowingly misstated the truth when under oath. I would argue that Libby,as an attorney, had a heightened obligation to tell the truth, and that his punishment for not doing so should be severe. President Bush, by commuting Libby's sentence, is declaring that lying in support of his administration's objectives is no big deal.
Most Americans have no idea of the extent to which the activities of senior administration figures are managed and documented. Time and specificity are precious when the issues being addressed affect the interests of the United States and all its citizens, so appointment calendars, phone logs, meeting minutes,and email copies are essential to the smooth operation of the White House. "I don't remember" is an unacceptable answer to any question about activities that have occurred there, but Libby made this claim over and over again. He flat lied. Why? Because the truth would have been more embarassing to the administration than the spectacle of Libby's trial and conviction. Now his loyalty has been rewarded.
This sad episode points out an inconvenient truth about our government, one that,once again, most Americans do not understand: that integrity is not a prime prerequisite for those in politics. We tend to assume that those who are elected or appointed to high office are honorable, when in fact they are only as honorable as those who manage to place them in these positions. When government is operated on the premise that "the ends justify the means", honor is subordinated to expediency. In Libby's case, the objective of justifying going to war with Iraq was worth breaking the law about safeguarding clandestine agents and then lying about it. Bush's commutation of Libby's sentence confirms this. Honor was expendable.
This administration has been characterized by obfuscation and untruth. Powell, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Michael Brown ("Great job, Brownie"), the sucession of press secretaries, and Alberto Gonzales have each uttered, regarding major issues, boldfaced statements that that unbiased citizens would consider false. Libby is simply the latest to be trapped by his own words. Consequently, I would argue that President Bush believes lying is appropriate if it's deemed necessary to implement his policies or justify his actions. As my own boss once said, "You are who you hire." History will show that this president had a mighty disregard for truth.
Libby was convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice because he lied in court about the events surrounding the "outing" of Valerie Plame, a former covert CIA agent. When a person is convicted of perjury, the facts must support the contention that they knowingly misstated the truth when under oath. I would argue that Libby,as an attorney, had a heightened obligation to tell the truth, and that his punishment for not doing so should be severe. President Bush, by commuting Libby's sentence, is declaring that lying in support of his administration's objectives is no big deal.
Most Americans have no idea of the extent to which the activities of senior administration figures are managed and documented. Time and specificity are precious when the issues being addressed affect the interests of the United States and all its citizens, so appointment calendars, phone logs, meeting minutes,and email copies are essential to the smooth operation of the White House. "I don't remember" is an unacceptable answer to any question about activities that have occurred there, but Libby made this claim over and over again. He flat lied. Why? Because the truth would have been more embarassing to the administration than the spectacle of Libby's trial and conviction. Now his loyalty has been rewarded.
This sad episode points out an inconvenient truth about our government, one that,once again, most Americans do not understand: that integrity is not a prime prerequisite for those in politics. We tend to assume that those who are elected or appointed to high office are honorable, when in fact they are only as honorable as those who manage to place them in these positions. When government is operated on the premise that "the ends justify the means", honor is subordinated to expediency. In Libby's case, the objective of justifying going to war with Iraq was worth breaking the law about safeguarding clandestine agents and then lying about it. Bush's commutation of Libby's sentence confirms this. Honor was expendable.
This administration has been characterized by obfuscation and untruth. Powell, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Michael Brown ("Great job, Brownie"), the sucession of press secretaries, and Alberto Gonzales have each uttered, regarding major issues, boldfaced statements that that unbiased citizens would consider false. Libby is simply the latest to be trapped by his own words. Consequently, I would argue that President Bush believes lying is appropriate if it's deemed necessary to implement his policies or justify his actions. As my own boss once said, "You are who you hire." History will show that this president had a mighty disregard for truth.
Sunday, July 01, 2007
Bush - The Quintessential Loser
Our illustrious president, George W. Bush, is attempting to have a summit meeting this week in Kennebunkport with Russia's Putin. Given Bush's 30% approval rating, Putin must be thinking mostly of having a little vacation on the shore because Bush has no status in his own country. This is the latest in Little George's string of incompetencies, which would be laughable except for the fact that he happens to be President of the United States of America. His failures discredit us all.
By the time GWB leaves the White House he will have two major accomplishments as his legacy: an unnecessary and incredibly costly war, and a Supreme Court tilted to the right for the forseeable future. The first he accomplished through deception, the second he accomplished through a retirement not under his control. His batting average on the stated major priorities of his administration, with a congress of his own party for six years, is verging on .000. He's the quintessential loser, but he's dragged all the rest of us down with him.
It's obvious now that he was nominated in 2000 because the kingmakers in the Republican party knew he would be a patsy for them. They nominated him as strong leader while knowing all along he was a wuss. And they got their reward: lower tax rates on the wealthy, and no change (conservatives stand for no change). The recent failure of the immigration bill was the latest big victory for the "no change" crowd who love Mexicans for their cheap labor and think the status quo is just fine. Anyone with a brain, however, knows that the rest of the right wing propaganda about "law-breaking immigrants" was simply pap for the masses to digest. Bush's pet project to legitimize the immigrants was quashed by his two-faced pals who tossed him into the political garbage can for a lot more than 20 pieces of silver.
Since we're already at the end of this administration for all intents and purposes, it's a good time to summarize President Bush's legacy beyond the war and the Supreme Court.
1. The worst cabinet in a long time, dominated by people who left in ignominy or who have been non-entities (can you name any of them?). Innumerable sub-cabinet posts filled with the likes of Monica Goodling and other incompetents.
2. A Vice President who appeared to be unaware that he had a boss, and who set new standards for surliness, secrecy, and un-Constitutional leanings.
3. An unblemished record of presidential appearances in front of hand-picked friendly or military audiences, guaranteeing that he could recite his talking points without the inevitable embarassments that would ensue from having unscripted appearances before average citizens.
4. Responsible for negative progress on the big threats to our country - entitlements, energy independence, global warming, and overspending/overborrowing. We will suffer severe consequences in all these areas where his leadership was essential yet non-existent.
5. Responsible for severely wounding the American scientific community by backing religious Luddites on stem cell research, climate change, and creationist nonsense.
6. Self-destructed his most passionate pre-election claim: "I'm a uniter, not a divider." Given his rhetorical deficit, he may have just gotten the two words transposed in a momentary lapse of concentration. Ditto with "I'm not a nation-builder". Is it possible that GWB is what we used to call "retarded", or should we blame substance abuse?
I suppose this list is long enough to support the title "quintessential loser", although it is clearly incomplete at this point. Unfortunately, with 1.5 more years left in his administration, there is plenty of time for him to further earn the title. No doubt he will provide us with plenty more of his sad-sack moments before he's gone.
Do I hate the president? No. It's not nice to hate. Do I pity him? Yes. He's like the cute, uncoordinated puppy we brought home, only to find that the dog snarls when anyone looks at him but then cowers and craps on the floor when they don't flee. The guys at the Republican dog pound knew about this dog when they handed him across the counter to us, and it's them that deserve a long stay in purgatory. They've been more than satisfied with the quintessential loser who has made them all winners at our expense, and it's them that the next administration needs to go after with a vengeance. I'll be ready to join in that manhunt, and let the truth fall where it may!
By the time GWB leaves the White House he will have two major accomplishments as his legacy: an unnecessary and incredibly costly war, and a Supreme Court tilted to the right for the forseeable future. The first he accomplished through deception, the second he accomplished through a retirement not under his control. His batting average on the stated major priorities of his administration, with a congress of his own party for six years, is verging on .000. He's the quintessential loser, but he's dragged all the rest of us down with him.
It's obvious now that he was nominated in 2000 because the kingmakers in the Republican party knew he would be a patsy for them. They nominated him as strong leader while knowing all along he was a wuss. And they got their reward: lower tax rates on the wealthy, and no change (conservatives stand for no change). The recent failure of the immigration bill was the latest big victory for the "no change" crowd who love Mexicans for their cheap labor and think the status quo is just fine. Anyone with a brain, however, knows that the rest of the right wing propaganda about "law-breaking immigrants" was simply pap for the masses to digest. Bush's pet project to legitimize the immigrants was quashed by his two-faced pals who tossed him into the political garbage can for a lot more than 20 pieces of silver.
Since we're already at the end of this administration for all intents and purposes, it's a good time to summarize President Bush's legacy beyond the war and the Supreme Court.
1. The worst cabinet in a long time, dominated by people who left in ignominy or who have been non-entities (can you name any of them?). Innumerable sub-cabinet posts filled with the likes of Monica Goodling and other incompetents.
2. A Vice President who appeared to be unaware that he had a boss, and who set new standards for surliness, secrecy, and un-Constitutional leanings.
3. An unblemished record of presidential appearances in front of hand-picked friendly or military audiences, guaranteeing that he could recite his talking points without the inevitable embarassments that would ensue from having unscripted appearances before average citizens.
4. Responsible for negative progress on the big threats to our country - entitlements, energy independence, global warming, and overspending/overborrowing. We will suffer severe consequences in all these areas where his leadership was essential yet non-existent.
5. Responsible for severely wounding the American scientific community by backing religious Luddites on stem cell research, climate change, and creationist nonsense.
6. Self-destructed his most passionate pre-election claim: "I'm a uniter, not a divider." Given his rhetorical deficit, he may have just gotten the two words transposed in a momentary lapse of concentration. Ditto with "I'm not a nation-builder". Is it possible that GWB is what we used to call "retarded", or should we blame substance abuse?
I suppose this list is long enough to support the title "quintessential loser", although it is clearly incomplete at this point. Unfortunately, with 1.5 more years left in his administration, there is plenty of time for him to further earn the title. No doubt he will provide us with plenty more of his sad-sack moments before he's gone.
Do I hate the president? No. It's not nice to hate. Do I pity him? Yes. He's like the cute, uncoordinated puppy we brought home, only to find that the dog snarls when anyone looks at him but then cowers and craps on the floor when they don't flee. The guys at the Republican dog pound knew about this dog when they handed him across the counter to us, and it's them that deserve a long stay in purgatory. They've been more than satisfied with the quintessential loser who has made them all winners at our expense, and it's them that the next administration needs to go after with a vengeance. I'll be ready to join in that manhunt, and let the truth fall where it may!
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Educational Update
Several months ago I mentioned that Glenda and I had started taking the course "History of Western Civilization - Part 1", which I purchased from The Learning Company on-line. The course, on DVD, consisted of 48 30-minute lectures by Professor Thomas F.X. Noble of the University of Notre Dame. We have now completed the series, which covered the period 10,000 B.C. to about 1,600 A.D.
I was completely satisfied with the course material and the professor. Although I had read a fair number of quality histories, Professor Noble brought the many civilizations and cultures to life in a way that books just can't do. Books, of course, contain much more detail, but they generally don't summarize the essense of a topic the way an expert can, nor do they often make the great leaps of comparison ("remember when, a few sessions ago, we talked about....") that can be accomplished verbally. Moreover, Professor Noble was equally capable of discussing virtually all the characteristics of a culture - government, literature, science, religion, economics, politics, and family life.
The Learning Company advertises that course as follows: "This broad and panoramic series will help you pull an enormous sweep of history together into one coherent - though by no means closed - framework." This is not an exaggeration.
So, based on our good experience with this course, we have started another - "How to Listen to and Understand Great Music, 3rd Edition", by Professor Robert Greenberg, a noted composer and professor with wide-ranging credentials who is currently music historian-in-residence with San Francisco Performances. After completing the first two of 48 45-minute lectures we look forward to each night's meeting with Professor Greenberg, a dynamic and obviously brillant man. We love "concert" music, but we have never been exposed to a more formal explanation of where and why it came from and how it is structured. By fall, we will be a lot smarter about this.
Greenberg states very early that "this is not a music appreciation course". By that, he means that he intends to give us insights about why certain music was written in certain times, and to educate us about the underlying harmonic, rhythmic and other musical structures inside the compositions. So far, excellent!
This non-compensated commercial for The Learning Company was brought to you in the hope that you might find as much satisfaction as we have from one of their great products. The subject areas are amazingly wide-ranging. Check them out at thelearningcompany.com.
I was completely satisfied with the course material and the professor. Although I had read a fair number of quality histories, Professor Noble brought the many civilizations and cultures to life in a way that books just can't do. Books, of course, contain much more detail, but they generally don't summarize the essense of a topic the way an expert can, nor do they often make the great leaps of comparison ("remember when, a few sessions ago, we talked about....") that can be accomplished verbally. Moreover, Professor Noble was equally capable of discussing virtually all the characteristics of a culture - government, literature, science, religion, economics, politics, and family life.
The Learning Company advertises that course as follows: "This broad and panoramic series will help you pull an enormous sweep of history together into one coherent - though by no means closed - framework." This is not an exaggeration.
So, based on our good experience with this course, we have started another - "How to Listen to and Understand Great Music, 3rd Edition", by Professor Robert Greenberg, a noted composer and professor with wide-ranging credentials who is currently music historian-in-residence with San Francisco Performances. After completing the first two of 48 45-minute lectures we look forward to each night's meeting with Professor Greenberg, a dynamic and obviously brillant man. We love "concert" music, but we have never been exposed to a more formal explanation of where and why it came from and how it is structured. By fall, we will be a lot smarter about this.
Greenberg states very early that "this is not a music appreciation course". By that, he means that he intends to give us insights about why certain music was written in certain times, and to educate us about the underlying harmonic, rhythmic and other musical structures inside the compositions. So far, excellent!
This non-compensated commercial for The Learning Company was brought to you in the hope that you might find as much satisfaction as we have from one of their great products. The subject areas are amazingly wide-ranging. Check them out at thelearningcompany.com.
Monday, June 25, 2007
Calligraphy Above My Computer
After several years of exiling myself to my upstairs office to use my computer, I bought a laptop & wireless to put on a small desk in the family room. Now I can work downstairs while my wife is nearby - as she is right now, ironing.
On the wall above my desk are two framed calligraphies that give me some peace when I look at them.
The first is a beautiful oriental picture of a low mountain peak, surrounded by forest, with a small man standing near the top, facing out. The calligraphy reads, "Heaven is my father and earth is my mother and even such a small creature as I find a place in their midst. Therefore that which fills the universe I regard as my body and that which directs the universe I consider as my nature." Chang Tsai, 1020-1077.
The second has a vague blue-tinged background, somewhat like the thin clouds that sometimes obscure the view from a plane window. Hidden in the clouds and barely readable are 11 last names of families that had my wife as their faithful deacon for three years. The calligraphy overwriting the cloud background reads "It is a good thing to give THANKS unto the Lord and to sing praises unto your name, O Most High: To show your lovingkindness in the morning and your faithfulness every night." Psalm 92, 1-2.
God is a mystery, for sure. But for me, a comforting mystery that I have faith will someday be revealed, to my great amazement. To me, death is a doorway, not a black hole, and I will step through it with courage.
On the wall above my desk are two framed calligraphies that give me some peace when I look at them.
The first is a beautiful oriental picture of a low mountain peak, surrounded by forest, with a small man standing near the top, facing out. The calligraphy reads, "Heaven is my father and earth is my mother and even such a small creature as I find a place in their midst. Therefore that which fills the universe I regard as my body and that which directs the universe I consider as my nature." Chang Tsai, 1020-1077.
The second has a vague blue-tinged background, somewhat like the thin clouds that sometimes obscure the view from a plane window. Hidden in the clouds and barely readable are 11 last names of families that had my wife as their faithful deacon for three years. The calligraphy overwriting the cloud background reads "It is a good thing to give THANKS unto the Lord and to sing praises unto your name, O Most High: To show your lovingkindness in the morning and your faithfulness every night." Psalm 92, 1-2.
God is a mystery, for sure. But for me, a comforting mystery that I have faith will someday be revealed, to my great amazement. To me, death is a doorway, not a black hole, and I will step through it with courage.
Sunday, June 24, 2007
Bicycle Races - The Good and the Bad
Europeans have long been enamored of bicyle races, chief among them the Tour de France, but bicycle racing is only in its infancy here in the states. Yesterday, I attended a series of races called the Rochester Criterium, which were held on a one-mile irregular circuit around downtown Rochester.
About 30,000 people showed up to view the spectacle which included four different races and lasted 6.5 hours. The afternoon races were for licensed amateurs, and the evening races were for women and men professionals. Around and around they went, flashing down the straights at up to 45 miles per hour, then slowing to a crazy fast pace to weave around the corners. Just as in the Tour de France, there was a pack and there were breakaways from time to time. The athletes, especially the professionals, were lean as greyhounds and pumped their pedals like brightly colored machines riding on top of machines. Interesting.
I attended the Criterium because my oldest son, now in his mid-forties, has become a bicycle nut. He trains and he races at the lowest level, but he's become engrossed in the fine points of bicycles, training, and racing strategy. Like any sport, cycling has complexities that boggle (or bore)the average person, and now I'm familiar with a few of them. But Kevin was in heaven as the various levels of racers went by us, so fast that they were a blur in my vision. Fortunately there was only one crash, and the fellow walked away with only abrasions, bruises, loose teeth, and $1,500 in damage to his bike. (One piece of trivia is that these carbon fiber bikes can cost up to $20,000.)
So, to sum up. Bicycle racing on a closed course resembles a rock concert with loud music and constant announcing - bring earplugs. The athletes are as conditioned as any I've ever seen, and the skill and strategy is apparent even to the uninitiated. The only downside is that most riding is done in tight packs, since "drafting" reduces effort by about 30% - anyone who takes off on his own is nuts. Hence, the race is won or lost in the last, final sprint as riders break from the pack and race pell-mell to the finish. It's all decided in a few long heartbeats, even though the race may have lasted two hours. Somehow this leaves me unfulfilled; it is much different than watching the drama of a two-hour marathon where individuals struggle and triumph or fade on their own in plain sight. But cycling is a different sport.
No, I didn't take my bike off the rack and take a little spin today. I'm saving my energy for the golf course, where I walk and incidentally, won my first round match play match on Thursday morning. Hooray! Old competitors never die.
About 30,000 people showed up to view the spectacle which included four different races and lasted 6.5 hours. The afternoon races were for licensed amateurs, and the evening races were for women and men professionals. Around and around they went, flashing down the straights at up to 45 miles per hour, then slowing to a crazy fast pace to weave around the corners. Just as in the Tour de France, there was a pack and there were breakaways from time to time. The athletes, especially the professionals, were lean as greyhounds and pumped their pedals like brightly colored machines riding on top of machines. Interesting.
I attended the Criterium because my oldest son, now in his mid-forties, has become a bicycle nut. He trains and he races at the lowest level, but he's become engrossed in the fine points of bicycles, training, and racing strategy. Like any sport, cycling has complexities that boggle (or bore)the average person, and now I'm familiar with a few of them. But Kevin was in heaven as the various levels of racers went by us, so fast that they were a blur in my vision. Fortunately there was only one crash, and the fellow walked away with only abrasions, bruises, loose teeth, and $1,500 in damage to his bike. (One piece of trivia is that these carbon fiber bikes can cost up to $20,000.)
So, to sum up. Bicycle racing on a closed course resembles a rock concert with loud music and constant announcing - bring earplugs. The athletes are as conditioned as any I've ever seen, and the skill and strategy is apparent even to the uninitiated. The only downside is that most riding is done in tight packs, since "drafting" reduces effort by about 30% - anyone who takes off on his own is nuts. Hence, the race is won or lost in the last, final sprint as riders break from the pack and race pell-mell to the finish. It's all decided in a few long heartbeats, even though the race may have lasted two hours. Somehow this leaves me unfulfilled; it is much different than watching the drama of a two-hour marathon where individuals struggle and triumph or fade on their own in plain sight. But cycling is a different sport.
No, I didn't take my bike off the rack and take a little spin today. I'm saving my energy for the golf course, where I walk and incidentally, won my first round match play match on Thursday morning. Hooray! Old competitors never die.
Friday, June 22, 2007
Doing the Sunday Sermon
It's almost summer, and now is the time when preachers, finished with Easter and Pentecost and Sunday School teacher recognition, decide to take off a week. As they say, "When the cat's away, the mice will play." In the case of this mouse, that means I got to preach a sermon at someone else's church - a Methodist Church , no less! And this Sunday there will be an encore at my own church, since our minister is on vacation as well.
The Methodist invite was a "reciprocal". Our pastor took off the first Sunday of the year, January 7th, and after striking out with many potential substitutes, we chose to ask a friend of mine who is a "Certified Methodist Lay Preacher". He did a good job. Now his pastor took a day off, and payback time arrived. I don't have the official credential - just a lifetime of study and contemplation - and I've preached maybe ten sermons before this one. Not a very scary thing for me, and the response of the Methodists was positive. In fact, there was a Baptist minister in attendance (another preacher on vacation) and he gave me the "thumbs up."
I follow two rules when I preach: keep it simple, and keep it short. I remember that the Gettysburg Address took about two minutes for Abe Lincoln - and I'm no Abe Lincoln. So my sermon is titled "Simple Christianity", and it lasted 15 minutes. The text comes from the end of Matthew 22, where Jesus is asked "What is the greatest commandment?" Jesus answers (in short), "Love God, and your neighbor as yourself". Can't go wrong with this one!
Here is the conclusion of my sermon. "I’d like to conclude this morning by reminding myself and each of you that God has given us the freedom to choose – to choose to notice Him or ignore Him, to choose whether we will love our neighbor or only ourselves. God is right here and everywhere, in every moment, hidden in plain sight, waiting for us to take notice. Let’s choose to notice Him, to say “Thank you, God” all through the day. When we do, the Spirit will fill us, Jesus will walk beside us, and we will be joyful when we meet a neighbor who needs us. We will be a Simple Christian."
I've been studying religion my whole life, only to decide that most of what passes for religion is either legalistic speculation, organization/tradition justification, or money-grubbing avarice. Garry Wills, in his excellent book "What Jesus Meant", resonates with me when he writes:
"The most striking, resented, and dangerous of Jesus' activities was his opposition to religion as that was understood in his time. This is what led to his death. Religion killed him. He opposed all formalisms in worship - ritual purifications, sacrifice, external prayer and fasting norms, the Sabbath and eating codes, priesthoods, the Temple, and the rules of Sadducees, Pharisees, and Scribes. He called authentic only the religion of the heart, the inner purity and union with the Father that he had achieved and was able to share with his followers."
In the end, it seems to me that a person either believes in a creative and benevolent god who wishes to be noticed by creation - or in no opinion, no god or some flavor of that. I believe, simply because my senses tell me that my life and the universe around me is no accident. And people like Jesus and so many others have illuminated this idea far better than I, while rejecting the man-made baloney that masquerades as God-centered while actually being all about power.
Rodney King asked "Why can't we all just get along?" Well, we would if we truly could "Love God, and our neighbor as ourself". Some of my favorite blogger friends seem to be trying to live in this way! Thank you, God, for them.
The Methodist invite was a "reciprocal". Our pastor took off the first Sunday of the year, January 7th, and after striking out with many potential substitutes, we chose to ask a friend of mine who is a "Certified Methodist Lay Preacher". He did a good job. Now his pastor took a day off, and payback time arrived. I don't have the official credential - just a lifetime of study and contemplation - and I've preached maybe ten sermons before this one. Not a very scary thing for me, and the response of the Methodists was positive. In fact, there was a Baptist minister in attendance (another preacher on vacation) and he gave me the "thumbs up."
I follow two rules when I preach: keep it simple, and keep it short. I remember that the Gettysburg Address took about two minutes for Abe Lincoln - and I'm no Abe Lincoln. So my sermon is titled "Simple Christianity", and it lasted 15 minutes. The text comes from the end of Matthew 22, where Jesus is asked "What is the greatest commandment?" Jesus answers (in short), "Love God, and your neighbor as yourself". Can't go wrong with this one!
Here is the conclusion of my sermon. "I’d like to conclude this morning by reminding myself and each of you that God has given us the freedom to choose – to choose to notice Him or ignore Him, to choose whether we will love our neighbor or only ourselves. God is right here and everywhere, in every moment, hidden in plain sight, waiting for us to take notice. Let’s choose to notice Him, to say “Thank you, God” all through the day. When we do, the Spirit will fill us, Jesus will walk beside us, and we will be joyful when we meet a neighbor who needs us. We will be a Simple Christian."
I've been studying religion my whole life, only to decide that most of what passes for religion is either legalistic speculation, organization/tradition justification, or money-grubbing avarice. Garry Wills, in his excellent book "What Jesus Meant", resonates with me when he writes:
"The most striking, resented, and dangerous of Jesus' activities was his opposition to religion as that was understood in his time. This is what led to his death. Religion killed him. He opposed all formalisms in worship - ritual purifications, sacrifice, external prayer and fasting norms, the Sabbath and eating codes, priesthoods, the Temple, and the rules of Sadducees, Pharisees, and Scribes. He called authentic only the religion of the heart, the inner purity and union with the Father that he had achieved and was able to share with his followers."
In the end, it seems to me that a person either believes in a creative and benevolent god who wishes to be noticed by creation - or in no opinion, no god or some flavor of that. I believe, simply because my senses tell me that my life and the universe around me is no accident. And people like Jesus and so many others have illuminated this idea far better than I, while rejecting the man-made baloney that masquerades as God-centered while actually being all about power.
Rodney King asked "Why can't we all just get along?" Well, we would if we truly could "Love God, and our neighbor as ourself". Some of my favorite blogger friends seem to be trying to live in this way! Thank you, God, for them.
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Bush Should be Impeached
Today I came across a letter of mine to the editor of Rochester's Times-Union newspaper dated July 21, 2003, four months after the March 19, 2003, invasion of Iraq. It was titled "Find Weapons Soon or Investigate Leaders". I had reluctantly support the invasion, convinced by Colin Powell - the only one in the government that I trusted - that Iraq was a real threat to the world. But by July, it was becoming evident that our government probably lied to us. Hence, I wrote this letter.
"As one who was convinced by the president of the United States, and his staff, that war with Iraq was necessary due to the "immanent threat" posed by Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, I am deeply concerned by the failure of our forces to find these weapons.
The absence of these weapons, if confirmed, invalidates President Bush's rationale for starting this war. The international standing of the United States will be substantially diminished if they are not found, and the cost to the United States in lives lost and billions spent will be judged not to be worth the benefits to our country's security or national interest.
It is therefore essential that these weapons, if they exist, be found. The overthrow of Saddam Hussein, as despicable as he is, does not in itself justify our invasion of Iraq.
Our government must prove that Iraq posed an "immanent threat." If the weapons of mass destruction are not found in the near future, the American people's trust will have been violated.
At that point, an investigation should be initiated by congress to determine why our leaders led us into a war that should not have been fought."
We did not find the weapons of mass destruction. Our government lied to us. "Poor intelligence" is no excuse for what they did, because the president is in charge of intelligence and responsible for the errors. The cost to our country in international standing, lives, and money has been horrific and and will persist for many years.
If there has ever been, in the history of our country, an open and shut case for impeachment of a president, the lies leading to the invasion of Iraq is it. They should not be talking about building the "Bush Library". They should be talking about building the Bush Memorial Prison, where he and Cheney, Powell, Tenet, and Rice should spend most of their remaining lives considering their crimes against the United States.
If the democrats win total control of congress in 2008, the first order of business should be to put all these people on trial. The world must know that we are ashamed of what we did.
"As one who was convinced by the president of the United States, and his staff, that war with Iraq was necessary due to the "immanent threat" posed by Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, I am deeply concerned by the failure of our forces to find these weapons.
The absence of these weapons, if confirmed, invalidates President Bush's rationale for starting this war. The international standing of the United States will be substantially diminished if they are not found, and the cost to the United States in lives lost and billions spent will be judged not to be worth the benefits to our country's security or national interest.
It is therefore essential that these weapons, if they exist, be found. The overthrow of Saddam Hussein, as despicable as he is, does not in itself justify our invasion of Iraq.
Our government must prove that Iraq posed an "immanent threat." If the weapons of mass destruction are not found in the near future, the American people's trust will have been violated.
At that point, an investigation should be initiated by congress to determine why our leaders led us into a war that should not have been fought."
We did not find the weapons of mass destruction. Our government lied to us. "Poor intelligence" is no excuse for what they did, because the president is in charge of intelligence and responsible for the errors. The cost to our country in international standing, lives, and money has been horrific and and will persist for many years.
If there has ever been, in the history of our country, an open and shut case for impeachment of a president, the lies leading to the invasion of Iraq is it. They should not be talking about building the "Bush Library". They should be talking about building the Bush Memorial Prison, where he and Cheney, Powell, Tenet, and Rice should spend most of their remaining lives considering their crimes against the United States.
If the democrats win total control of congress in 2008, the first order of business should be to put all these people on trial. The world must know that we are ashamed of what we did.
Sunday, June 10, 2007
My Mommy Trip
It's a beautiful day in Hendersonville, North Carolina. The flag is rippling gently in the wind, the sky is a deep hazy blue, and the overnight guests are trooping in and out of the Comfort Inn breakfast area, past the park bench where I sit writing my blog. I've begun another "Mommy Trip".
My mom is 86 and in great health, pretty and active. She and her 81 year old fourth husband (three have died) live in a single family home nestled in a retirement community that makes life pretty easy for them. She's busy taking care of her husband, painting pretty good watercolors (she's paints "people" very well), volunteering a bit, reading quality fiction, and staying in touch with her five children and their families. She has a good life that's likely to go on for quite a while. Yesterday she chatted with a 107 year old woman as one of her volunteer activities, and she thinks that person is old!
My primary purpose here is to get her husband on the golf course for five straight days so she can paint in peace. He's a golfaholic, and he thinks I'm his coach, which is probably right since he plays much better when I talk him through his shots. Nothing makes him happier than to put nice drive down the middle or get a par. I've had to convince him it's time to use the "senior" tees in order to make the course fair for a person of his age, and now he feels competitive again.
Soon I will leave for their home in order to accompany them to church. Then, after a quick lunch and a change of clothes, we'll head off to play nine holes. Later comes happy hour, then a quiet dinner, and I'll return to the Comfort Inn which seems more and more like home after many trips down here from Rochester. This is a relaxing time for me, a time when my overloaded life goes on hold for a few days.
My experience is typical of many baby boomers whose parents retired years ago and are now reaping the benefits of their many years of hard work in a booming economy. We watch over them like they once watched over us. We encourage them to stay active, to get their rest, and to monitor their health. We often see them get more inward-oriented as their interest in the world wanes - after all, they know their future here is rather limited. We hope they don't get a chronic condition that makes their last years or months a time of pain and worry.
I'm one generation away from my mom and step-dad, and probably from a life much like theirs. We are the fortunate ones, born into an affuent society at good time in history and insulated from much of the world where poverty and uncertainty reign. The big question is, did we use our good fortune wisely enough for posterity? Will our grandchildren and the grandchildren of others all around the world say that our generations built the future, or will they complain that we squandered their inheritance in wasteful, self-indulgent living?
My mom is 86 and in great health, pretty and active. She and her 81 year old fourth husband (three have died) live in a single family home nestled in a retirement community that makes life pretty easy for them. She's busy taking care of her husband, painting pretty good watercolors (she's paints "people" very well), volunteering a bit, reading quality fiction, and staying in touch with her five children and their families. She has a good life that's likely to go on for quite a while. Yesterday she chatted with a 107 year old woman as one of her volunteer activities, and she thinks that person is old!
My primary purpose here is to get her husband on the golf course for five straight days so she can paint in peace. He's a golfaholic, and he thinks I'm his coach, which is probably right since he plays much better when I talk him through his shots. Nothing makes him happier than to put nice drive down the middle or get a par. I've had to convince him it's time to use the "senior" tees in order to make the course fair for a person of his age, and now he feels competitive again.
Soon I will leave for their home in order to accompany them to church. Then, after a quick lunch and a change of clothes, we'll head off to play nine holes. Later comes happy hour, then a quiet dinner, and I'll return to the Comfort Inn which seems more and more like home after many trips down here from Rochester. This is a relaxing time for me, a time when my overloaded life goes on hold for a few days.
My experience is typical of many baby boomers whose parents retired years ago and are now reaping the benefits of their many years of hard work in a booming economy. We watch over them like they once watched over us. We encourage them to stay active, to get their rest, and to monitor their health. We often see them get more inward-oriented as their interest in the world wanes - after all, they know their future here is rather limited. We hope they don't get a chronic condition that makes their last years or months a time of pain and worry.
I'm one generation away from my mom and step-dad, and probably from a life much like theirs. We are the fortunate ones, born into an affuent society at good time in history and insulated from much of the world where poverty and uncertainty reign. The big question is, did we use our good fortune wisely enough for posterity? Will our grandchildren and the grandchildren of others all around the world say that our generations built the future, or will they complain that we squandered their inheritance in wasteful, self-indulgent living?
Tuesday, June 05, 2007
Energy Bonanza, Not Crisis!
I mentioned in my last post that I'm reading Kim Stanley Robinson's "60 Days and Counting". It's about a fellow who is deeply involved in the U.S. government's attempt to counter the global climate change created by our excessive use of fossil fuels since the industrial revolution. Robinson is clearly a Renaissance Man who understands science, politics, human nature and the craft of writing, and it's a pleasure to turn the pages.
One of Robinson's points of view is that the oil interests have little incentive to promote alternative energy sources. He notes that oil, even at current high prices, appears to be a highly economical source of energy. Yet this apparent efficiency does not include the costs of mitigating the climate change effects of burning it, nor does it include the political costs of defending or maintaining its sources.
If burning oil raises the sea level by just one or two meters, the cost of lost property will be measured in the trillions of dollars. If we look at the cost of the Iraq war, we get a sense of how much money we spend to ensure influence over the oil producing countries in the Middle East. When these costs are added to the $3.00 or more we pay for a gallon of gasoline, the economy of oil decreases dramatically. However, the oil industry is indifferent to these externalities because the costs never hit its bottom line and its profits are addictively high. Those involved in it can't help but look the other way as their bank balances skyrocket.
This logic helps explain why our government is doing so little to promote alternative energy sources and energy conservation. It's been a mystery to me that, since 1979 when Jimmy Carter raised the alert about oil import risks, our government has not flexed its immense technological and political muscle to deal with the problem. Even today the action comes nowhere near the level of tepid rhetoric emanating from the White House. There is just too much money involved in maintaining the status quo. We should probably be amending Eisenhower's famous warning about the "military-industrial complex" by adding "fossil fuel" to it.
I have to admit that I've made quite a lot of money this year by investing in several U.S. coal mining companies. My economics background tells me that if I hadn't made that coin, someone else would have. Now I'm looking to invest some of those profits in companies that will hopefully make fossil fuel much less important to our economy, but it may be too late for us to avoid tragic outcomes due to climate changes already too far down the road to halt.
One investment sector that Robinson's novel would lead you to avoid is insurance companies, especially reinsurance companies. If climate change comes on with a vengeance, those companies will be wiped out unless they re-write their coverage to exclude their biggest risks. If they can do this, it's the coastal property holders who will see their investments melt like the arctic ice cap. Not a pleasant scenario either way, is it?
One of Robinson's points of view is that the oil interests have little incentive to promote alternative energy sources. He notes that oil, even at current high prices, appears to be a highly economical source of energy. Yet this apparent efficiency does not include the costs of mitigating the climate change effects of burning it, nor does it include the political costs of defending or maintaining its sources.
If burning oil raises the sea level by just one or two meters, the cost of lost property will be measured in the trillions of dollars. If we look at the cost of the Iraq war, we get a sense of how much money we spend to ensure influence over the oil producing countries in the Middle East. When these costs are added to the $3.00 or more we pay for a gallon of gasoline, the economy of oil decreases dramatically. However, the oil industry is indifferent to these externalities because the costs never hit its bottom line and its profits are addictively high. Those involved in it can't help but look the other way as their bank balances skyrocket.
This logic helps explain why our government is doing so little to promote alternative energy sources and energy conservation. It's been a mystery to me that, since 1979 when Jimmy Carter raised the alert about oil import risks, our government has not flexed its immense technological and political muscle to deal with the problem. Even today the action comes nowhere near the level of tepid rhetoric emanating from the White House. There is just too much money involved in maintaining the status quo. We should probably be amending Eisenhower's famous warning about the "military-industrial complex" by adding "fossil fuel" to it.
I have to admit that I've made quite a lot of money this year by investing in several U.S. coal mining companies. My economics background tells me that if I hadn't made that coin, someone else would have. Now I'm looking to invest some of those profits in companies that will hopefully make fossil fuel much less important to our economy, but it may be too late for us to avoid tragic outcomes due to climate changes already too far down the road to halt.
One investment sector that Robinson's novel would lead you to avoid is insurance companies, especially reinsurance companies. If climate change comes on with a vengeance, those companies will be wiped out unless they re-write their coverage to exclude their biggest risks. If they can do this, it's the coastal property holders who will see their investments melt like the arctic ice cap. Not a pleasant scenario either way, is it?
Friday, June 01, 2007
Reducing Me to Eight
I've been going through a dry spell lately. Personally, good things have been happening so it's not been my mood. However, I'm damn fed up with the war and just about everything about the Bush mal-administration makes me want to throw up - and I'm sick of writing about it. So I'm going to follow my friends RWorld and ThomasLB and do the eight things.
1. I've smoked cigarettes for 40 of the past 45 years, and I still do.
2. Last week I did 25 perfect military push-ups on a dare at the ambulance base.
3. My oldest son's birth certificate says that I was 16 years old and a university student when he was born. That's because I adopted him when he was seven and I was 23 and in school after the Army. Tennessee has some strange adoption conventions.
4. I sucessfully managed a very large systems organization without being able to write a single line of code.
5. I'm currently reading "Sixty Days and Counting", by Kim Stanley Robinson, who I really enjoy and heartily recommend to my readers.
6. Years ago I put a loaded shotgun into my mouth and my finger on the trigger. Then I thought about it for awhile and put it down. I became a different person.
7. One reason I believe in a God is that I think life would be pointless without one.
8. I've been there at the death of about 35 people in my ambulance work, so I have no illusions of immortality and I treasure every day.
That's all, folks!
1. I've smoked cigarettes for 40 of the past 45 years, and I still do.
2. Last week I did 25 perfect military push-ups on a dare at the ambulance base.
3. My oldest son's birth certificate says that I was 16 years old and a university student when he was born. That's because I adopted him when he was seven and I was 23 and in school after the Army. Tennessee has some strange adoption conventions.
4. I sucessfully managed a very large systems organization without being able to write a single line of code.
5. I'm currently reading "Sixty Days and Counting", by Kim Stanley Robinson, who I really enjoy and heartily recommend to my readers.
6. Years ago I put a loaded shotgun into my mouth and my finger on the trigger. Then I thought about it for awhile and put it down. I became a different person.
7. One reason I believe in a God is that I think life would be pointless without one.
8. I've been there at the death of about 35 people in my ambulance work, so I have no illusions of immortality and I treasure every day.
That's all, folks!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
