I got a weird little story about my friend Blitz Krieger to bring to you today.
He's had a crazy car problem, he has, and over the past few months he thought he had found a solution - in fact, he thought he had found the solution of his dreams - but in the end, he's discovered that the things you dream about often don't go according to plan.
The way it's worked out for him so far, it's been a lot of anticipation followed by a sudden wave of frustration, but I feel like he's a lot better off having his particular problem with his car...because if he'd had cancer instead, he'd surely be dead by now.
After doing a bit of mountain hiking a few days back, I had a chance to get involved in a great afternoon conversation with the Alliance for American Manufacturing's Mike Wessel, who also serves as a Commissioner with the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission; the conversation was about how we're doing when it comes to our relationship with China.
As it turns out, the two events went well together, because what I'm hearing from these guys is that we have a great big ol' mountain to climb if we hope to get back to a level playing field in our interactions with this most important country.
There's news to report across a variety of issues; that's why today we'll be talking about trade, human rights, cybersecurity, poverty and development, and the methods by which you can apply "soft power" to achieve hard results.
The entirely unanticipated result: all of this will reveal the naïveté of Ron Paul when it comes to foreign policy; we'll discuss that at the end.
It was just a couple of nights ago that Keith Olbermann was challenging us, in one of his "Special Comments", to rise up in the streets and take back this country.
He pointed out that the only way those on the left were going to be able to fight against those who are looking to get all "Tea Party" is to be as angry and as organized and as aggressive as the Tea Party community, and if we're smart, we'll take him up on that challenge.
But if you really want to push "professional" Democrats to the left, most especially this President, and you want to do it in time to impact the '12 cycle, the only way to do it is to run a candidate in primary contests that either moves the conversation your way...or leaves you with a surprising new Candidate.
And right here, right now, we actually have a chance to do exactly that - and that's why, in today's discussion, I'm going to challenge Olbermann right back.
I have not been talking about the insanity around the debt ceiling and debt and deficit and the efforts of Republicans to drive us all off the cliff, but I am today – and I’m going to do it by allowing you to grab ahold of this problem and see for yourself just how unbelievably bad this manufactured crisis is going to be.
You will hear a lot of conversation about the consequences from others; today, however, you are going to get the chance to be both the President and the Secretary of the Treasury, and you will get to decide for yourself exactly what bills the Federal Government should and should not pay as the cash runs out if a deal is not made by the time borrowing authority runs out.
At that point you’ll be able to see what’s coming for yourself – and once you do, you won’t need me to tell you what ugly is going to look like.
So I disappeared for a full week, right in the middle of what should have been a busy writing schedule, and I have to claim some "personal days" to cover the time we missed here at the blog - but it won't be time entirely wasted.
Instead, I'm going to jump into my own personal life for today's story, and I'm going to do it so that we can stimulate some thinking about where we really need to go to if we ever hope to make some sense out of the crazy way we deliver health care in this country.
Since this appears to be the weekend that a lot of decisions are either going to be made about the future of our "social safety net"...or they wont; we're entirely unsure...let's talk about how it actually works for a lot of us - and how it could work a lot better.
So I thought I was going to have another Jay Inslee story for y'all today, but it turns out that I'm going to have to do more research before we can "come to press" with that one.
But that's OK, because the world's been busy doing a lot of other things - and while many of them get media coverage, some don't get a lot of notice at all.
And of course, there are also those stories that look one way at first glance...but look a lot different when you dig a bit deeper.
We'll hit a few of those today, have a bit of fun doing it, and get ready for what promises to be another busy week of strategically not doing things in Washington.
To make things even better, some of the stories will be real, and some won't.
Just about 40 seconds after (Yes, He's Actually The) President Barack Obama brought forth his Certificate of Live Birth unto the world Donald Trump was accusing Obama of somehow sneaking his way into some University or another.
If Trump's to be believed, Obama was a terrible student at a College, and then he somehow snuck his way into a University; after that he basically grifted his way into becoming the President of the Harvard Law Review.
Trump would tell you that he's a hustler, that Obama is, and we've got to do whatever it takes to figure out what kind of semi-illegal shenanigans Obama's University experience was all about.
But here's the thing: Donald Trump has his own history of semi-illegal University shenanigans-and it appears that some of his semi-illegal shenanigans continue to this very day.
We are continuing a recent theme here today in which two of my favorite topics are going to converge: Social Security and in-your-face political activism.
I have been encouraging folks to take advantage of the recent Congressional recess to have a few words with your CongressCritter about the proposed Death Of Medicare and all the proposed cuts to Social Security...and you have, as we'll discuss...and now we have an opportunity to do something on a national scale, just as we did a few weeks ago in support of Social Security.
This time, we're going to concentrate on fighting the idea that retirement ages should go up before we become eligible for Social Security and Medicare (and elements of Medicaid, as well), and that Americans should just keep right on working until the age of 67 or so-which isn't going to be any big problem...really...trust us.
Now that just makes no sense, and to help make the point we have a really cool video that you can pass around to all your friends-and your enemies, for that matter, since they'll also have to worry about what happens to them if they should ever make it to old age.
There are lots of big tough words coming out of our friends in the Tea Party these days, especially when it comes to the permissible functions of the Federal Government.
"If it's not specifically enumerated in the Constitution," they say, "It must be a function of the States-and the 10th Amendment says so!"
None are tougher in their language than those living in the States located below the old Mason-Dixon line-and by an amazing coincidence, just this weekend pretty much all of those States got a bit of a "gut check" in the form of dozens of tornados that slammed into the area.
So we're going to put the Tea Party philosophy to the test today, and see just what exactly the Federal Government should-and should not-be doing to fulfill the Tea Party vision and to help those folks who were hit by this particular natural disaster.
If your view of politics is filtered by a lens marked "Progressive" or "Liberal", there's a pretty good chance that you've been gnashing your teeth and pulling your hair in frustration over the "give away the store, then negotiate" approach professional Democrats have used when facing the challenges from the Tea Party last year, and all that's come after.
Over and over and over people like me have written stories wondering why Democrats, starting with this President, don't get out in a very public way and slam Republican policies, over and over and over-especially when most Americans hate the things Republicans seem to love to support.
Turning over Government to the highest bidder?
Not so popular.
Going back to a heathcare system run by, for, and of the insurance industry?
Again, not so much.
Jacking up taxes and healthcare costs for you and me in order to provide another trillion in tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires?
So unpopular pollsters hardly believe it.
But there is another way, and today's story is in two parts: we're going to talk about how hard it is to get Democrats, as a group, to get loud and get aggressive-and then we're going to talk about Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer, who is out there showing any reluctant Democrat just exactly how you can "grow the brand".
So Arizona Senator Jon Kyl went and did a stupid thing the other day by claiming on the floor of the Senate that 90% of what Planned Parenthood does is related to abortions, and that, by God, we need to cut that Federal funding for abortions, and we need to cut all Federal funding for Planned Parenthood-and we need to do it today.
Of course, that 90% claim was total hooey; it turns out that only 3% of Planned Parenthood's work relates to abortions. (The Federal funding for abortions part is, too; the Hyde Amendment made such funding illegal decades ago.)
When confronted, Kyl's office released a statement claiming the Senator's comments were "not intended to be a factual statement".
Sir Rev. Dr. Stephen T. Colbert, DFA, decided to have a bit of fun with Kyl, and he challenged his audience to Tweet their own "Not Intended To Be A Factual Statement" about Kyl.
I decided to compose a Tweet of my own...and then another...and before I knew it I had an entire story's worth; that's why, today, we'll be taking a taking a short break from the daily grind to have a bit of fun with a man who truly deserves it: Jon Kyl.
So it's been about three weeks since we last had this conversation, but once again we have to take action to try to keep Social Security from being the victim of "deficit fever".
I know that doesn't make a lot of sense, considering the disconnect between Social Security and the deficit-but once again it's "Continuing Resolution" time on Capitol Hill, where some use the threat of an impending shutdown of the Federal Government to extract concessions from the other side...and some on the other side try to make points with the voters by out-conceding their opponents.
So Tuesday and Wednesday of next week, there's a national push on to get voters to call their Senators and remind them to vote for an Amendment that is a big ol' "I'm not willing to cut Social Security just because other people philosophically want to cut Government any way they can" kind of reassurance to the voters, and I'm here to encourage you, once again, to make a couple phone calls and do some pushing of your own.
I've also been storing up a couple somewhat facetious random thoughts which will be the "garnish" for today's dish; you'll see them pop up as we go along.
In our efforts to form a more perfect Union we look to the Constitution for guidance for how we might shape the form and function of Government; many who seek to interpret that document try to do so by following what they believe is The Original Intent Of The Founders.
Some among us have managed to turn their certainty into something that approaches a reverential calling, and you need look no further than the Supreme Court to find such notables as Cardinals Samuel Alito and Antonin Scalia providing "liturgical foundation" to the adherents of the point of view that the Constitution is like The Bible: that it's somehow immutable, set in stone, and, if we would only listen to the right experts, easily interpreted.
But what if that absolutist point of view is absolutely wrong?
What if the Original Intent Of The Founders, that summer in Philadelphia...was simply to get something passed out of the Constitutional Convention, and the only way that could happen was to leave a lot of the really tough decisions to the future?
What if The Real Original Intent...was that we work it out for ourselves as we go along?
News is suddenly moving so fast that it's becoming hard for me to keep up; that's why we're not finishing the story today that we just began Tuesday. You know, the one about Titan Cement suing two North Carolina residents who appear to be doing nothing more than speaking the truth.
Unfortunately, other important news has forced itself to the front of the line, and it's going to demand that we break schedule, whether we like it or not.
That's why today we're going to be talking about Wisconsin, and how workers there are fighting back against the State's Republican legislators and Governor, who seem to have gone out of their way this past three weeks to govern without the consent of the governed.
It's kind of chilly today in Wisconsin...but I can assure you, things are heating up fast-and it ain't because of spring.
Got a simple little story for you today of a multinational corporation that wants to build a great big cement plant in North Carolina really, really, bad, and the local opposition to what appears to be a corrupt and distorted decision process.
Two local activists in particular have drawn the ire of Titan Cement, the Grecian corporation who seeks to build the plant-and because the Company doesn't like what the activists have been saying about what the impact of that plant will likely be or how the deal's going down...they're suing Kayne Darrell and Dr. David Hill, residents of North Carolina's New Hanover County, and the two folks who are doing the complaining the Company dislike the most.
The Company further claims that they were slandered and defamed by the damaging statements that were uttered by the two at a county commissioners' meeting and that they have lost goodwill and the chance to do business with certain parties as a result of these statements.
But what if everything the Defendants said was not only true...but provably so-and the Company was, maybe...just looking to shut people up by sending teams of lawyers after them?
As I said, it's a simple story today-but it's a good one.
What with all the attacks on Labor in states like Indiana, Ohio, New Jersey, and Wisconsin, there has been just so much misunderstanding out there these past couple weeks about what things are actually like for State workers.
Are the conditions decent?
Is there excessive pay?
Is there even a need for State workers?
Well, I can't answer every question, but I can sure tell you what it's like in our house...and the reason my words carry the "voice of authority" is because The Girlfriend has been working for the State of Washington for the past 16 years.
Bona fides established, let's get to telling the story:
There's a lot of ways to be petty and cheap and stupid, and a lot of ways to stick it to a program you don't like, and by extension, the clients of that program...and this week the House Republicans have embarked on an effort to combine the two into one petty, cheap, and stupid way to stick it to the clients of Social Security and the workers who administer the program.
They're going to sell it to you, if they can, as a way to "lower the deficit", or words similar...but what this is really about is making the actual Social Security program work less well-because, after all, if a program is popular today, the best way to make it less so is to apply a bit of "treat 'em like their cars were impounded" to every interaction customers have with the system.
And what better way to make sure that happens...then to aggressively demoralize everyone who works down at the ol' Social Security office?
Just what is America's favorite pastime? Is it baseball or politics? The past few years offered interesting contrasts. On one hand, we went from a full-blown presidential campaign right into a major political controversy of how to "stimulate" the economy. Certainly in the past year, politics has become a major spectator sport both in Louisiana and throughout the rest of the country.
But don't sell baseball short. Not only has baseball been around longer than any of America's professional team sports, the game's highs and lows have been injected in national politics almost from the sport's inception.
Now I'm a diehard baseball fan. I grew up in St. Louis, and lived next door to the general manager of the St. Louis Cardinals, the great former Cardinals shortstop Marty Marion. I was in his box on a Sunday afternoon back on May 2, 1954, when "Stan the Man" Musial hit five home runs on the same day in a doubleheader. All this week, I'm in Tampa, Florida for spring training and will watch five major league ballgames, including a trip to the home stadium of my perennial favorite, the New York Yankees.
The problems of major league baseball have often served as a mirror image of the problems facing America. Its history is both a reflection of this country's fears and ignorance, and its hopes and promises. Like almost any other cultural phenomenon of such prominence, baseball has served as solace and as a poke to our conscience.
In 1948, the major leagues faced the problem of segregation earlier than the politicians in Washington DC did. Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier playing for the Brooklyn Dodgers, and won the rookie of the year award in his first season. It took court cases and sit-ins to get our political representatives to follow suit. Today, steroid use by baseball players has become an issue, and in some cases, undermined the image of the ball player as a wholesome example for American youth. And the use of performance-enhancing drugs has become a major focus of congressional investigations and possible legislation in the nation's capital.
Baseball played a role in the last presidential campaign. Senator John McCain accused Barack Obama of baseball rooting malfeasance for the way he used baseball analogies at the start of the World Series as he traveled campaigning the country. The Republican nominee charged repeatedly: "When he (Obama) is campaigning in Philadelphia, he roots for the Phillies, and when he's campaigning in Tampa Bay, he shows love to the Rays. It's kind of like the way he campaigns on tax cuts, then votes for tax increases after he is elected." Obama shrugged off the criticism by saying that McCain did not have the courage to take a stance: "I guess these are the kinds of attacks you make when you're campaign has conceded that if you talk about the economy, you will lose."
At recent press conferences, the new President continues to get questions about steroid use in baseball, and whether or not the federal government should get involved in closer monitoring. Even though the country is facing an economic recession, multiple wars abroad, a large elephant in the room, and a major energy crisis, he still can't get away from baseball. By the way, the President answers the steroid question by saying he is certainly disappointed and talks about its negative impact on children.
And don't forget that our last President came from a baseball background. In 1989, George Bush headed up an ownership group that bought the Texas Rangers, but the former President didn't get a lot done in that job either. The Rangers had zero World Series appearances, and hired a cast of characters right in the middle of the steroid mess, including José Canseco, Rafael Palmeiro, Sammy Sosa, Juan Gonzalez, and Ivan Rodriguez. The former President's swings and misses as a baseball man should have given voters an indication of the kind of president he was going to be.
You can even find a number of political analogies just by studying the baseball teams themselves. Two years ago, the Tampa Bay Rays were the Cinderella team that went from "worst to first," finishing in last place a year earlier, but winning the American League pennant the following year. Maybe it has something to do with their name. They used to be called the "Devil Rays" and their record was terrible. As soon as they dropped the word "Devil," they became victorious overnight. Is it baseball pure and simple, or is the Religious Right involved?
It's impossible to get away from campaigns and politics by focusing on spring training in baseball, but I'm going to give it a shot. Many major league games this season will be carried by the Fox network. You know -- as in "Fox News." In the National League, everyone, even the pitchers, gets an equal chance to bat. Will Fox say that the National Leaguers are "socialists?" Will their commentators argue they should call some home runs out if they are "too far to the left? " And I guess you can't blame the Democrats for bemoaning that every time someone "steals" a base, they get reminded of the 2000 presidential election.
There is also a lesson to be learned from Babe Ruth as congress considers limiting executive pay and bonuses of corporations who receive bailout money. When the Babe was asked how he could justify making more money than the President, he shrugged off the question by answering: "I had a better year."
I suppose one of the biggest differences between these two spectator sports is the sense of optimism that baseball brings every spring. The crack of the bat, a pop fly against a blue sky, and the green grass seem to offer a sense of renewal. It almost harkens back to the essence of youth and heroes of the past, and you feel that almost anything is possible in the coming baseball season. But in today's political climate, there is little thought of great statesmen and the principled political figures of the past. Political courage today is too often defined by poll watching and sticking a wet finger to the wind.
So when the TV clicker stops with a choice of politics or baseball, I've chosen the great American pastime. It's baseball hands down.
See you next week back in Louisiana.
********
"The difference between politics and baseball is that in baseball, when you are caught stealing, you're out." Ron Dentinger
Peace and Justice
Jim Brown
Jim Brown's syndicated column appears each week in numerous newspapers and websites throughout the South. You can read all his past columns and see continuing updates at www.jimbrownusa.com. You can also hear Jim's nationally syndicated radio show each Sunday morning from 9 am till 11:00 am, central time, on the Genesis Radio Network, with a live stream at http://www.jimbrownusa.com.
So it's Day 3 of my fake campaign for Congress, and we've run into our first obstacle
The Fake Campaign, as you may recall, is fake headed for Wisconsin, to show solidarity, and we've fake hitched a ride on a delivery truck headed for Rush Limbaugh's Florida broadcasting studios-but we fake found ourselves caught up in the all-too-real Giant Grip Of Winter that has seized the Midwest over the past week.
We're back on the road now, but we were stuck for darn near a half-day there at Wall...and if you know anything about South Dakota, you know there are really only two things to do in the City of Wall: you can shuffle back and forth between Gold Diggers and the Badlands Bar, partaking of numerous intoxicating liquors along the way...or you can head on into Wall Drug (the same one that's on all those bumper stickers and signs) and partake of the finest display of Giant Jackalopia on the planet.
The Campaign, naturally, chose Jackalopia-and that's why today's Manifesto is all about the fake impromptu 5-cent-coffee-fueled Social Security Town Hall that we held in the Wall Drug Mall for several hours while we waited for I-90 to reopen.
So when we were <a href="http://fakeconsultant.blogspot.com/2011/02/campaign-manifesto-1-in-world-of.html">last together</a>, as you all know, I announced that I’m fake running for Congress in Washington State’s 8th District—and that I’m doing it because, so far as I know, the best way to get a candidate to truly “come out Liberal” is to be a fake candidate…and to make good and sure The Campaign isn’t out chasing money when it’s being done.
Having made the announcement, we’re already making our first campaign trip—and oddly enough, our first trip as a Congressional candidate will take us to Madison, Wisconsin, where we’ll link up with a few folks who, apparently inspired by me, have taken to the streets in a very big way.
When we get there I’ll need a parka, a nice hat, a thermos of coffee, and a big fat Sharpie—so let me go get it all together, and then we’ll be on our way.
