Testudo's Tales for 2010 Return to the current post x

Vol. 4 No. 55 -- December 22, 2010 A "Dickens" of a Year x In his Tale of Two Cities, Charles Dickens wrote "It was the best of times. It was the worst of times." That, in a nutshell, sums up my 2010. Some very good things happened - the best of which was marrying Maureen (and gaining a wonderful extended family in the process). I am also thrilled that my daughter is happy and healthy. But bad things happened during 2010, some of which were of my own doing. I have taken full accountability for my transgressions. If only that were true of others. I saw the best side of people wanting to share to the joy of living. And I saw the worst side of people too callous and self-absorbed to look beyond their own interests to meet the needs of people they are supposed to serve. It was a year in which my employer, the University of Kansas, was recognized for excellence in teaching and research.  But it was also a year in which the institution's image was tarnished by athletic scandals and disconnected leadership. It was a year in which the American people got fed up with Washington. They voiced their disapproval on election day, demanding that their elected leaders learn to work together. As the lame duck session of the 111th Congress draws to a close, there are some signs that Republicans and Democrats can work together on some - but not all - issues. Nor should we forget the sacrifice - too often, the ultimate sacrifice - made on our behalf by our nation's armed forces and their families.  I am reminded that the world is supposed to end in almost two years - December 21, 2012, to be exact. So, if the Incans, the Mayans, Nostradamus and a bunch of wack-jobs are to be believed, we don't have a lot of time left to get our act together.  As another Christmas approaches, I can speak only for myself: A vow to do better in 2011 and a hope that all of us will be able to achieve a true and lasting peace within ourselves and among the people of this diverse and distracted world.  x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 54 -- December 18, 2010 Repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" x With yesterday's signing of the tax cut compromise, the lame duck session of the 111th Congress is limping toward adjournment. However, there is still important business yet to be concluded. At the top of the list is a Senate vote on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," the U.S. military's Sergeant Schultzian approach to the issue of gays in the military. For me, at least, homosexuality creates difficult public policy dilemmas. On the one hand,  the enshrinement of gay rights into the body of  law creates a series of social, legal, financial and public health complications that should be fully explored before taking precipitous action. However, in a society that values freedom of expression and individual liberties, who am I to pass moral judgment on others? My feelings about homosexuality are not unlike those I have about abortion: I don't personally like it, but recognize that it is a moral decision best left between the individual and his or her vision of God. While I may be a long way from making my mind up about issues such as gay marriages and gay adoptions, there is one issue in which I have found resolution. Any citizen of the United States willing to defend our nation and fully qualified to do so should not be disqualified solely on the question of sexual preference.  Our military should reflect the full diversity of our nation.  If we can respect the ability of heterosexual men and women in our armed forces to interact in a professional manner, why can't we can expect the same of gay servicemen and servicewomen? Just as when heterosexual relationships cross the line, the military code can handle any transgressions that may occur  between gay couples. It is called equal protection under the law. In the history of our nation, the armed forces have led the way in breaking down barriers for underrepresented Americans.  The military allowed blacks and women to serve when it wasn't popular.  Service in the armed forces is now a pathway to citizenship for foreign nationals. It should now become an opportunity for gay men and women to fulfill a heartfelt desire to serve their nation - even if their nation doesn't fully appreciate them.  I urge the Senate to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." NOTE: In a surprise move, the U.S. Senate voted to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" eight hours after this entry was posted. x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 53 -- December 14, 2010 Khrushchev's Prophecy x Nikita Khrushchev, the First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union from 1953 to 1964, once famously proclaimed the ultimate victory of communism over capitalization, saying "We will bury you." Later interpretations of Khrushchev's provocative declaration suggested that he really meant to say that capitalists would bury themselves.  While things have not worked out the way Nikita had hoped - both he and his beloved Soviet Union have been relegated to history's trash heap - his words may ultimately come true. Consider this: Moody's is contemplating a reduction of the United States' bond credit rating because of the nation's burgeoning debt. Neither Republicans nor Democrats have the political will to raise taxes and cut spending - the only way to stop the bleeding.  Meanwhile, there are those within the federal government who want to regulate grade school bake sales in the name of good nutrition. That's right: If you bring brownies to a school, expect a visit from the FBI. Let's forget for one moment that such a move would be history's most egregious example of micromanagement. And let's forget that guns and drugs in school represent a greater threat to America's youth than Twinkies and Hostess Cupcakes. The real issue is whether we have the political will to make hard choices about the things that really matter: Islamic radicals who want to kill us, Chinese pseudo-communists who want to buy us, and single-minded "do-gooders" who want to tell us how we should live our lives. Lacking the backbone to address the real issues of the day, Congress prefers to focus on the things it can control, individual freedoms.  Our political leaders would rather substitute the judgments and prerogatives of the American people with those of nameless, faceless and spineless minions in Washington - the same ones who are rearranging deck furniture while the Titanic sinks. Of course, the American people are not without blame. "Don't cut my (wasteful) program.," they say. "Don't close my (unnecessary and under enrolled) neighborhood school." The truth is that we get the government we deserve. Until we, the people, demonstrate a real willingness to sacrifice personal gain for the greater good,  chances increase that Khrushchev's prophecy will be realized: We will bury ourselves. x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 52 -- December 6, 2010 Compromise or Robin Hood? x It appears as if Republicans and Democrats are moving toward a compromise - extend all of the Bush era tax cuts for two years in exchange for extending unemployment benefits for those whose clock ran out December 1.  As with most political issues, there is more than one side to the story - although, frankly, you rarely hear it.  While extending tax cuts to those making more than $250,000 a year sounds like soaking the rich, that's only half the story. Those are also the people who pay an obscene amount of taxes. As I noted in my August 8 post,  the National Taxpayer's Union said the top 1 percent of U.S. wage earners pay more than 40 percent of all income taxes, while the bottom 50 percent pay only 3 percent and the bottom one-third pay no taxes at all.  Princeton economics professor and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman yesterday bemoaned that maintaining tax breaks to the upper income levels would result in $4 trillion in lost tax receipts over the next 10 years. However, Krugman is operating from false premise, that the money is the federal government's. Talk about entitlement! Since when has the ability to pay trumped fairness as an American value? Am I saying that we shouldn't raise taxes? No. However, we need to come up with a more equitable approach than the Robin Hoodesque system we now have.  Any new taxes should be accompanied by substantial budget cuts. (Yes, I work in the public sector and know exactly what I am saying!) And as hard and uncaring as this may sound, when is there a limit on the length of unemployment benefits?  One only needs to look at the collapsing European economy and its endless web of social handouts to see that this is a reckless path for us to follow.  However, if congressional Democrats and Republicans are willing to compromise - the GOP gets its tax cuts and the Dems get their unemployment extension - its a good thing.  This is how the system works.  Compromise is how democracy is supposed to work.  And remember: If the Lame Duck Democrat Congress didn't have the backbone to pass the Robin Hood tax plan this past weekend, what makes it think something will be done when a boatload of newly elected Republicans take office next month? Is this the ideal solution? No, but it is a lot better than engaging in another round of posturing, chest-thumping and name-calling. And the American people made it clear last month that the status quo is not acceptable.  This tax compromise may be a small step, but at least it is a start.  x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 51 -- November 30, 2010 More Villain Than Hero x Which Julian Assange are we supposed to believe: The WikiLeaks founder who sheds light on the dark deeds of governments or the fugitive wanted by the Swedish government concerning rape and sexual molestation allegations against him? This would-be freedom fighter was behind this past weekend's leak of 250,000 U.S. diplomatic cables, some of which contain candid - and potentially embarrassing - reports about America's friends and foes. Assange, 39 and an Australian, is a convicted computer hacker who appears to be on some sort of power trip.  To hear him talk, Assange's indiscriminate release of secret military and diplomatic communications is a blow for justice and transparency.  Not everyone agrees. In a Time profile of Assange last August, Lucy Dalgish, executive director of the Reporter's Committee for Freedom of the Press said, "It's not journalism. It's data dissemination, and that worries me." It is noteworthy that most of the world's major news organizations appear to have handled the latest WikiLeaks data dump responsibly - consulting with U.S. officials and redacting names and information that could place confidential sources in harm's way.  They have done what journalists do - weigh the validity and newsworthiness of information within an ethical structure. In an interview with Time today, Assange claimed all the documents he has released have been redacted, either by his WikiLeaks team or by newspapers.  Even if we take him at his word, this massive dump of secret communications seriously complicates U.S. relationships around the world at a time when world is already a tinder box. Does anyone really think the Iranians don't already know that the Saudis hate them? Or that even the Chinese have doubts about the nut jobs in North Korea? Putting those tidbits on the front page does more harm than good, removing political cover and making diplomacy impotent. And without diplomacy, there is war.  However, Julian Assange doesn't really care about that.  Nor does he really care about PFC Bradley Manning, the source of the leaks.  Manning is in a heap of trouble - Julius and Ethel Rosenberg in-the-electric-chair kind of trouble.  What does Assange care about? Beating the rap in Sweden, where he is under investigation for sexually assaulting two women in August. A Swedish court has already ordered that he be detained for investigation.  Assange filed an appeal of that order today. Assange would have you believe that he lives in hiding at four undisclosed locations to avoid the CIA, Russian secret police, MI-6 and Mossad. However, his real fear is the Stockholm P.D. Some hero. x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 50 -- November 27, 2010 Fit to be Tied x After a long, voluntary vigil in front of my television set this Thanksgiving weekend, I have developed important insight into the American character. My epiphany comes from the world of sports - specifically the aversion of U.S. sports fans to tie games. It wasn't that long ago that tie outcomes were commonplace in football, hockey and soccer. The rules ensured that games such as basketball, tennis and baseball - with the notable exception of the 2002 MLB All Star Game - could never end in a draw.  (And when that All-Star Game did end in an 11-inning draw, MLB Commissioner Bud Selig had to change the rules and make the game meaningful to mollify upset fans.) However, the rules of football, hockey and soccer have been changed in recent years to force a final resolution. These rule changes were brought about by an American desire - perhaps demand - for a definitive result. Americans like to say ties are like "kissing your sister." When nothing is resolved on the field of competition, an endless debate ensues.  There are still people debating the 10-10 tie between top-ranked Notre Dame and second-ranked Michigan State in 1966.  Irish Coach Ara Parseghian, not wanting to risk a turnover that could hand the game to the Spartans, chose to run the clock out, preserving the tie and Notre Dame's ranking. "True sports fans" thought Paraseghian should have pushed for the victory.  That's also why no one faulted Nebraska's Tom Obsborne in 1984 when the Cornhuskers eschewed a tie and went for a two-point conversation and failed - letting the Orange Bowl and the national championship slip away to Miami. However, tie games don't seem to bother Europeans. In fact, they relish them.  How else can you explain 200,000 people sitting around a soccer - excuse me, football - pitch in miserable weather to watch a 0-0 tie. (Maybe it has something to do with the sizable quantity of beer consumed by the patrons.) These differences in character are manifested in how the folks on both sides of "the pond" approach military conflicts. If the U.S. military can't chalk up an easy victory on the battlefield, there is almost a visceral reaction to cut and run.  That's why we are so enamored with "shock and awe" - something that sounds great on paper but hasn't really worked. If a war lasts more than a week, the specter of Vietnam is raised. Meanwhile various portions of Europe and Asia have been in an almost constant state of conflict; such as the Middle East,  Northern Ireland, the Basque region of Spain, Chechnya and the Windsors. Remember, it was England and France that engaged in the One Hundred Years War.  And World War I was a tie until the Americans stepped in and finished off the Kaiser. It all comes down to American impatience versus European lethargy.  x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 49 -- November 21, 2010 The Misdirection of Senator Piggy x Sen. Claire McCaskill may not be the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree, but she knows how to read the polls.  McCaskill, one of the most ethically challenged politicians out of that cesspool known as Missouri politics, was elected to the Senate in 2006 in a wave of anti-incumbency. Now, with her term ending next year, she realizes  that a similar wave threatens to kick her out of office in 2012.  McCaskill, who has a striking resemblance to Miss Piggy, has served the first five years of her term as the model Obama Democrat. There wasn't a government spending program she didn't love.  She did everything she could to be seen as an F.O.B. - Friend of Barack. But now that voters are taking out their wrath on Washington's reckless tax-and-spend approach to governance, she is singing a new tune. Ironically, Miss Piggy is now against pork.  She has positioned herself as a champion of eliminating congressional earmarks. And in this morning's Kansas City Star, she said she wants to investigate the use of federal dollars to hire public relations consultants.  Never mind that government communication with the people is absolutely essential for a healthy and functioning democracy. And never mind the fact that she uses federal tax dollars to engage in the same public information tactics she now seeks to halt. McCaskill sees this as another wedge issue she can use to stay in the Senate.   I wouldn't be surprised if Senator Piggy doesn't adopt a daughter, name her Bristol and enter her on Dancing with the Stars. Her entire political career has been based on misdirection - telling voters she is not your typical Democrat, but acting like one when she is in office. I'd like to say that voters are too smart to buy into this act - but it is Missouri we are talking about.  x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 48 -- November 18, 2010 Two Steps Forward, One Step Back x As one who deplores radical politics from the right or the left, this has been a week which has seen modest progress toward sanity.  Lisa Murkowski (Did I spell her name correctly?) has claimed victory in her write-in campaign for the U.S. Senate from Alaska. She defeated Tea Party insurgent Joe Miller (Did I spell his name correctly?), who had narrowly defeated the incumbent Murkowski for the republican nomination earlier this year.  Her victory is an apparent "refudiation" of Sarah Palin, who backed Miller as part of an ongoing blood feud with Murkowski. For now, at least, Alaska avoids sharing Arizona's new nickname as the "Reactionary State."  Also this week, there were signs that  Republicans are willing to swear off - at least for now - earmarks.  For the uninitiated, earmarks are a process when legislators tack on specific appropriations measures - usually for projects in their home districts - to completely unrelated bills.  In doing so, they bypass the executive branch's merit-based budgetary process.  An example would be attaching an earmark in support of building a local rifle range to a bill designed to curb gun violence.  Granted, many of these earmarks are for worthy projects. However, in a time of mounting deficits, Congress should be required to vote on each project based on its individual merits. Killing earmarks is not a done deal, yet.  But, at least things seem to be moving in the right direction.  The same can not be said for House Democrats, who yesterday reelected deposed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as the head of their caucus. This, in effect, means she will become the House Minority leader in January.  Doesn't this sound a lot like the classic definition of insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result? Even if you disagree with her critics, that she is a lightning rod is a undeniable. Some commentators on the left say keeping Pelosi and Senator Harry Reid as the face of congressional democrats may deflect criticism from Obama. And just how well did that work this year? (I again refer to the classic definition of insanity.) x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 47 -- November 14, 2010 Research at KU x Recent articles and editorials in the local press have focused on Kansas University's relatively low rankings in research when compared to peer institutions.  They have also noted the determination of the new Provost to boost the university's academic standing. There are a lot of reasons KU faces this crisis in scholarship.  Some of the responsibility rests with university officials whose actions often do not match their words.  And it is not just about the golden parachutes handed out to scandal-ridden athletic officials or managerially challenged administrators.  Once a professor achieves tenure, there is no credible system to ensure continued research productivity.  Within my own school, I have seen professors, for all intents and purposes, "retire" from active research after gaining tenure. To make things worse, there are times this behavior is rewarded, if for no other reason than to keep the unproductive and disruptive happy. However, a bigger barrier to research productivity at the University of Kansas is a legislature that has virtually abdicated its responsibility to provide quality educational opportunities for the people of our state. Kansas Board of Regents Chairman Gary Sherrer earlier this month noted that for the first time, student tuition fees make up a larger percentage of higher education funding than state appropriations.  The joke often heard on Mount Oread is that instead of being a state university, KU has become a state-located university. In their lust to cut taxes, state legislators have forgotten what their real role in Topeka is supposed to be -- to create a social, political and economic environment in which all Kansans can prosper.  It is well documented that persons with a college degree earn on average a million dollars more in their lifetimes than those who do not have a degree. Colleges and universities are also important cogs in the state's economic development machinery.  They are magnets that attract high-salaried companies, highly skilled employees and financial investments to Kansas. If cutting taxes is a higher priority than economic development, then there should be no surprise that it is becoming harder to attract and retain the best students and professors - essential to research productivity. Of course, politicians take their lead from the public.  And if the people really don't care whether the University of Kansas assumes its proper place among the community of scholars, then they should remember the old adage that you get what you pay for. x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 46 -- November 12, 2010 Happy Birthday, Grandma Today is the 135th anniversary of the birth my grandmother, Elizabeth E. Harry. Much of who I am - and, perhaps, more to the point, who I am not - is because of her. She was a sweet, gentle Quaker woman who, when needed, could be hard as nails.  Grandmothers carry a special place of honor in all families.  But my grandmother, just like my family, was very different. She was our protector , who left her home in Hagerstown, Maryland, and came to live with us on the Eastern Shore.  As my parents' marriage disintegrated from alcohol and spousal abuse, she was the calm at the center of the storm. More than 50 years later, I vividly remember her standing up to one of my father's drunken rages and saying, "Carey, not in front of the children."  It is from my father that I inherited an inner anger that still burns within.  However, thanks to Grandma, I am able to control it - at least most of the time. (You cannot imagine how much today I miss her voice of reason.) She also steeled me to avoid the trap of alcohol into which my parents and stepfather fell. I lived with her for a couple of years in a small cottage next to the family home on Goose Neck Road. What memories: Potato pancakes almost every morning, waking up to the sound of the Lord's Prayer playing on the radio, and sleeping in a Murphy bed. One of the great ironies of this gentle, Quaker woman was her love of professional wrestling on television. (Haystacks Calhoun and Bruno Sammartino were household names in the cottage.) During that period, she encouraged me to memorize the 23rd Psalm.  It wasn't until after her death that I realized that 23rd Psalm is a Psalm of David.  Knowing that now makes that memory all that more special. Grandma died in 1972, just a few weeks shy of her 97th birthday.   She never got to meet my first wife, Jan, nor the great granddaughter who bears her name.  She never got to know that, in large part due to her love and guidance, I have had a successful career in journalism, public relations and education. She would be particularly pleased to know that I am a college professor. Her husband, who died before I was born, was a professor at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. While she may have passed from this physical world, she lives in my heart. I cannot let this day pass without saying, "Happy Birthday, Grandma." x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 45 -- November 7, 2010 A "Failure to Communicate?" Our president went on national television tonight and did his best Strother Martin impersonation. Martin, an exceptional character actor, played the part of a sadistic prison guard captain in 1967's Cool Hand Luke.  It was Martin who gave us the movie's most memorable line, "What we have here is a failure to communicate." President Obama said almost the same thing tonight in an interview on 60 Minutes. He said that the reason Democrats took such a "shellacking" - his term, not mine - during the midterm elections was that he hadn't done a very good job of communicating his successes to the American people. "We were so busy and so focused on getting a bunch of stuff done, we stopped paying attention to the fact that leadership isn't just legislation. That it's a matter of persuading people. And giving them them confidence and bringing them together. And setting a tone." In short, Obama said that it wasn't that people rejected his policies -- they just didn't understand. Well, I'm not buying it. Barack Obama is an excellent communicator and has used the White House megaphone as well as any of his predecessors.  Saying the reason he took a shellacking was because he did a poor job of making himself understood sounds suspiciously like blaming the American people for not being smart enough "to get it."  An alternative explanation for last week's electoral thumping is that the people, in fact,  do get it. According to the most recent USA Today/Gallup Poll, only 22 percent of Americans are satisfied with the way things are going. Seventy-five percent said they are dissatisfied.  For example, it is not just Republicans who oppose the President's health care policies. According to a recent Newsweek poll, a plurality of independent voters oppose Obamacare as well. There is even doubt among among Obama's supporters.  During the 2008 campaign, Obama promised to end the "don't ask, don't tell" policy in the military. According to a CBS poll, 69 percent of the country agrees with him. However, at the halfway point of the Obama administration, the President has been more reactive than proactive on the question of gay rights.  To be fair, Obama's opponents on the right - and even some of his friends on the left - haven't made governing an easy exercise. And yes, things were not in tip-top shape when he took office. However, a lot of the trouble Obama has had connecting with voters has been self-inflicted.  Even before he received the Democratic nomination, the knock on Obama was that his confidence in his intellect and values bordered on arrogance. Obama and his minions need to dial back the attitude and dial into the pulse of the American public. As the President moves into the second half of his first -- and perhaps last - term, it would serve Mr. Obama well to spend less time trying the educate the American people on what he believes and spend more time listening to what they believe.  Strother Martin is dead. If Obama doesn't change his attitude soon, so will be the President's prospects for reelection. x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 44 -- November 3, 2010 It is Not 1994 Barack Obama is not Bill Clinton.  John Boehner is not Newt Gingrich. And no, it is not 1994. As I write this, votes are still being counted in the 2010 midterm elections. And while some high profile races are undecided as of midnight (CST), it is clear that the Republicans have taken control of House of Representatives and the Democrats have narrowly held onto the Senate. A lot of the punditry this evening focused on the Republican Revolution of 1994. That was when the voters, unhappy with Bill Clinton's handling of the health care debate, decided to send his administration a message by giving the GOP control of both houses of Congress.  While the dynamics of 1994 appear to parallel the 2010 midterms, there are significant differences.  First, Barack Obama is not Bill Clinton. Clinton came out of the 1994 midterms with a deft divide and conquer strategy - moving to the middle on some issues, while standing firm on certain wedge issues. He proved himself to be a nimble politician - something President Obama has yet to demonstrate.  Second, John Boehner is not Newt Gingrich. Gingrich rose to become Speaker of the House as a bomb-thrower.  By most accounts, Boehner is not that kind man. He can be intensely partisan. But he is not a polarizing figure. That aspect of his character will serve him well, as it may prove to be more difficult to deal with his Tea Party-Republican coalition than to work with the Democrat minority. This brings me to the third and most important point: This is not 1994.  Sixteen years ago, voters expressed dissatisfaction with the Democrats and decided to give the GOP the keys to Congress.  Republicans, having won control of both houses for first time in 40 years,  went on to overreach with an aggressive social agenda that alienated voters and set the stage for Clinton's reelection. This year, voters voiced their disapproval of both parties. Neither is held in high esteem.  I'd like to believe that both Obama and Boehner get it.  I hope they know that they can't win today's wars with yesterday's battle strategies.  If Boehner and the Republicans overreach or if Obama tries to recreate Clinton's divide and conquer strategy, they risk finding out what it feels like to be on the crappy side of Inauguration Day. The winning strategy for both is same - do what the American people want and work together. Perhaps they can learn what the voters already know, that good government is good politics. x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 43 -- November 1, 2010 Elections Do Matter On this day before the 2010 midterm elections, I would like to float a radical notion: Elections do matter. And I not not referring to the traditional line of thinking associated with that phrase, that the people who vote get to choose their leaders and those who stay home don't. When I say the phrase, I mean that, at least until the next election, the majority rules.  That should go without saying. Unfortunately, during the past decade, one group or another has questioned the legitimacy of the election process, itself.  It really started in 2000, when George W. Bush won a razor-thin election in the Electoral College despite Al Gore's victory in the popular vote. As we all painfully remember, it came to dimpled and hanging chads in Florida. After all legal remedies were exhausted, Bush won the election. (An overwhelming majority of independent counts of Florida's votes confirmed that result.) However, for the next four years, a large number of Bush's political opponents questioned the legitimacy of his presidency.  It was like pouring poison in the community's drinking supply. They did it again in 2004, saying Bush "stole" the election in Ohio. Of course, there has been no credible proof presented to support that claim.  As if to exact their own pound of flesh, many conservatives now claim Barack Obama is not a native born U.S. citizen and question his eligibility to be president. I am certain that after tomorrow's balloting, many will question the legitimacy of newly elected (or reelected) leaders because of their ties to loosely organized and philosophically muddled Tea Party movement.  I don't care what your political leanings are. Nor do I care if you have no political leanings at all.  However, when the votes are counted, let's respect the outcomes. This doesn't mean we shouldn't continue to fight for things in which we believe.  But it doesn't mean we should insult the integrity of the candidates or the majority of the voters who elected them just because we didn't get the results we wanted.  Nothing will send American democracy faster down a slippery slope to its demise than if we, the people, do not have faith in that democracy. The casting of doubt on the legitimacy of the process in an effort to score a few debating points is not only counterproductive, it is destructive. Elections do matter. x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 42 -- October 25, 2010 Eight Days To Go There are only eight days left until the contentious 2010 congressional midterm elections are at hand.  With just over a week to go, the conventional wisdom is that Republicans will win enough seats to take control of the House of Representatives and will fall just a few seats short of controlling the Senate.  This is remarkable, given the state of the GOP only two years ago. In Kansas, it will be a big night for Republicans. In the race for governor, Sen. Sam Brownback, with greater name recognition and a two-to-one edge in fund raising, has a 24-point edge in the polls over his Democrat rival, Tom Holland. However, in the U.S. Senate race, that's nothing compared to Rep. Jerry Moran's edge in name recognition, fund raising and polls over Democrat sacrificial lamb Lisa Johnston.  The New York Times political blog "Five-Thirty-Eight" holds out virtually no hope for Democrats in the state's four congressional districts. The most competitive congressional race in Kansas is in the Third District, where Democrat Stephene Moore is trying to fill the seat being vacated by her husband, Dennis Moore.  However, she trails Republican Kevin Yoder by 13 points in the polls and by a two-to-one margin in fund raising. "Five-Thirty-Eight" gives her only a 6 percent chance of holding onto the seat for the Democrats. The Democrats' best hope in Kansas is down the ballot, where Democrat Attorney General Stephen Six is on reasonably equal footing with Republican Derek Schmidt. The race for Secretary of State, usually a ho-hummer, appears to be a referendum on Republican Kris Kobach's controversial stance on immigration issues. Democrat Christopher Biggs' best hope of winning in a decidedly red state is that Kansans also tend to be decidedly Populist. In eight days, we'll see how it all sorts out.  Unfortunately, there will be no rest for the weary.  Campaign 2012 begins in nine days. x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 41 -- October 22, 2010 Chaos Theory Meets Big Bird Chaos theory is based on the idea that small differences at the beginning of an event can influence subsequent events in such a matter that it makes ultimate outcomes impossible to predict. For example: If you stand at the top of a hill and drop a rubber ball, it isn’t likely that it will stop rolling at the same place at the bottom of the hill every time. Small changes in conditions, such as varying winds, temperatures and humidity, will affect the ultimate path of the bouncing ball.  I mention this because we are seeing a form of chaos theory playing out before our eyes.  When Bill O’Reilly made a point on The View about Islamic terrorism, Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar created a scene and stormed off the set. That caused O’Reilly to invite National Public Radio and Fox commentator Juan Williams to The O’Reilly Factor to discuss the controversy. When Williams tried to give the controversy context, National Public Radio fired him for violating one of its policies. When asked why Williams was canned, the NPR CEO further inflamed matters by suggesting that Williams needs a shrink. Williams then gets a multi-million dollar contract, a gazillion dollars worth of publicity, and NPR is targeted by angry conservatives for budget cuts.  What happens next? Does Congress cut off funding to public broadcasting? Will Big Bird become unemployed? Will he perch his embittered self on top of a post office building with a high-powered weapon? After the smoke clears, will Bert and Ernie be sent to Guantanamo as terrorists? And all because Joy and Whoopi had a tizzy-fit? It’s chaos, I tell you. Chaos! Perhaps there is another scientific theory we should ponder: If Joy and Whoopi acted up on television and nobody watched them, would anyone care? Where’s Bill Nye when you need him? x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 40  -- October 18, 2010 David Broder on Civility in Politics Glancing at a picture of Gerald Ford and Bob Dole during the 1976 presidential campaign,  Washington Post political columnist David Broder said, "We  need to get back in the habit of talking with each other and not yelling at each other as those men understood." Broder spoke before an overflow crowd at the Dole Institute of Politics tonight, delivering the fifth annual Muncy Journalism and Politics Lecture. While much of the discussion was on the midterm elections just two weeks away, the focus of the evening was the lack of civility in American politics.  Broder said that in the days of Ford and Dole, most of our elected officials were willing to govern through civil debate and political compromise. "Unfortunately, that is no longer the case," Broder said.  "Today we have politicians measuring themselves against the level of discomfort of other politicians." Broder said that there's plenty of blame to go around, from  Republicans unwilling to work with President Obama on the economic stimulus, to the Democrats' unwillingness to give the GOP input into health care reform, to journalists more interested in  reporting process than substance.  While not optimistic, Broder said there is a chance that Washington politicians will emerge from the midterms more willing to work together.  He said that President Obama and John Boehner (R-Ohio), the man likely to be the new Speaker of the House if the Republicans pick up 39 seats, have a history of being legislators  willing to work across party lines. "Elections make a difference," Broder said. "Politicians out on the campaign trail are getting an earful.  I am hoping it will have some impact when they get back."  In the end, Broder said it is a leadership problem.  "When they (congressional leaders) succumb to the meanest kind of petty partisanship, they set the tone for the membership." x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 39 -- October 2, 2010 Calling out Dolph After reading this morning's Lawrence Journal World, I felt compelled to send the following letter to the editor: According to the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics, journalists should “seek truth and report it.”  However, the SPJ Code goes on to say that reporters should  “identify sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources' reliability. Always question sources’ motives before promising anonymity.” Unfortunately, Dolph Simons, Jr. either doesn’t know or has disregarded the ethical obligations of his profession. A primary characteristic of his “Saturday Column” in the Lawrence Journal-World is the unnamed source. For example, in this week’s rant, Simons quotes “a senior and prominent KU faculty member” as saying the university is “a factory which turns out degrees...not an education.” Funny, as senior and prominent faculty member, I don’t remember saying that.  I also know many colleagues who should be described as senior and prominent faculty members, and I can’t imagine them delivering such a groundless backhanded slap to their colleagues and students.  The facts are clear, Mr. Simons appears to listen only to those voices that share his bitter bias toward the university – one born more out of his business interests than legitimate concerns for the readers his paper serves. That Simons, his source, or both choose to deliver apocryphal quotes under a cowardly cloak of anonymity undermines their credibility.Mr. Simons, as a 20-year veteran of the KU faculty, I demand that you either name your quote’s source and provide specific examples to support its premise or apologize to KU’s hard-working staff, faculty and administrators who have dedicated their life’s work to service on behalf of the people of Kansas. While you are at it, please bone-up on the SPJ Code of Ethics. I had the courage to call out Dolph Simons.  Let's see if he has the courage to print the letter.  UPDATE: Let's give Dolph Simons credit where credit is due. The Lawrence Journal-World published my letter on October 6. Prior to publishing, the LJW asked if I was willing to cut the letter by 30 words to meet the paper's 250-word limit - which I thought was a reasonable request. The basic sentiment of the letter remained untouched. For that, a tip of the hat in respect. x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 38 -- September 30, 2010 Stephene, we hardly know ye Stephene Moore is the democratic nominee to represent the Kansas Third District in Congress.  Her husband, Dennis Moore, announced last November that he would not seek reelection for a seventh term in the House.  The reasons behind Moore's decision to retire have not been satisfactorily explained. In making his announcement, Moore released a statement saying, "It is time for a new generation of leadership to step forward." This raises an interesting question - Does the congressman's wife of 25 years represent that new generation?  For the record, I supported Dennis Moore during his 2008 reelection bid. He is a member of the Blue Dog Democrat coalition, a group of 54 representatives favoring moderate to conservative fiscal policies.  I have no partisan ax to grind against Moore.  However, I want to know more about his decision to retire. He says it isn't a matter of personal health.  The impression is that he is just worn out by a dozen years of political battles on Capitol Hill.  He said being a congressman was "the most exciting and frustrating job I've ever had."  I accept that justification at face value.  But if that is the case, what is the justification for his wife becoming his replacement?  Stephene Moore is a nurse and Dennis Moore's wife. Does that qualify her for public office? Would we be giving this woman a second look if her name were Stephene Jones? Because name recognition is so critical in an election campaign absent an incumbent, I seriously doubt that Mrs. Jones would have won the primary. And what will her husband's role be if she is elected? Do we really expect him to putter around at home while his wife runs the country? According to Politico and other independent sources, Dennis Moore was facing a difficult reelection.  Republicans were targeting him because of his vote for Obamacare.  That fact, along with this being a mid-term election year trending toward republicans, suggests an interesting scenario.  Is it possible that the Moore job swap is a ruse to "launder" the moderate Moore brand in a effort to keep the seat in democrat hands? Are we expected to swallow the argument that if you like Dennis, you'll love Stephene?  I'm sorry, this is not a hereditary democracy.  Being someone's wife (or husband) is not a justification for  election to high office - especially when there are so many unanswered questions. I am not endorsing anyone in this race. Neither am I willing to hand over the keys to a congressional seat on the sole basis of family ties. x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 37 -- September 25, 2010 "For they sow the wind..." It isn't often I quote the Bible. It would be fair to say that I generally don't rate very high on the religiosity index.  But as I watch the polling numbers pour in for the upcoming midterm elections, there's one verse that keeps coming to mind.  If one is to believe the polls, the Democratic party is about to endure a particularly nasty butt whoopin' in November. According to the latest CNN/Opinion Research Corp. generic ballot, 53 percent of American voters say they will likely to vote for a Republican congressional candidate. That compares to only 43 percent voting for the Democrat.  To put that into context, Republicans held a 48-45 percent edge in the fall 1994 generic poll and took control of both houses of Congress for the first time in 40 years.  Why have things gone so sour for the Dems? To put it simply, the "class warfare" they've waged for a half-century no longer works for them.  They routed the Republicans in the 2006 mid-terms and again in the 2008 general election on the promise that they will restore power to the people.  They said they could do things better than the GOP.  However, four years into a Democratic Congress and two years into a Democratic White House, those promises remain unrealized.  As the Government Accountability Office and other budget watchdogs weigh in the true cost of health care reform - the Democrats' sole legislative accomplishment - many are having second thoughts.  As they debate the expiration of the Bush tax cuts, Democrats are coming to the harsh realization that casting the wealthiest Americans as straw dogs in their morality play isn't working like it used to.  One doesn't have to be rich to realize that a tax rate of 40 percent - which is where it will rise in the highest bracket if the Bush tax cuts are not renewed - is fundamentally unfair. As I noted in an earlier post (Vol. 4 No. 36). the National Taxpayer's Union reports that the top 1 percent of U.S. wage earners pay more than 40 percent of all income taxes, while the bottom 50 percent pay only 3 percent and the bottom one-third pay no taxes at all.  The Obama administration has had only one real foreign policy success, the end of combat operations in Iraq.  However, that was achieved as a result of a troop surge and withdrawal timetable established by his predecessor and opposed by candidate Obama. Democrats have hurled invectives at Republicans and false promises to voters for decades. And now it is catching up with them - which takes me the the Bible verse, Hosea 8:7: "For they sow the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind."  And lest you think I am being overly partisan in my analysis, let me remind you that the Republicans committed the same sins and reaped the whirlwind in 2006. They will do so again if they do not stop being obstructionists and, instead, become a positive force for true political reform. x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 36 -- September 16, 2010 Home Home, at least in a metaphysical sense, is a state of mind.  To put it another way - at the risk of bordering upon the tired and trite - home is where the heart is.  For more than 19 years, my residence has been Lawrence, Kansas.  Over the past two decades,  it has earned a place as the home of my heart. It is truly a wonderful community with good, decent and, at times, quirky people.  It is also a community with a deep sense of its own history. Despite the affection I have for this particular corner of Kansas, there is another fire that still burns within my heart.  I am reminded of it every time a goose honks its way across the blue Kansas sky. The sight and sound of those winged wanderers  take me to another place and time. They transport me back to Goose Neck Road, just a couple of miles of secondary road down from Royal Oak on Maryland's Eastern Shore. It's been 40 years since I left Delmarva, first for college and then for a life. As the relentless march of time widens the gap between my youth and my mortality, I often think of the things I once took for granted and now linger as fond memories.  Its more than the sound of the geese and the ducks. It is more than the taste of the oysters and the crabs. It is even more than people and places I knew in my youth.  Despite my many adventures, trials, triumphs and tragedies, I have always identified myself as an Eastern Shoreman. It is who I am and who I will always be.  I did not grow up to be a waterman.  Nor did I till the land.  My talents - that which they may be - rest in other pursuits. And it was those pursuits that lured me and keep me away from the Shore. Yet my soul still lingers along the Chesapeake shoreline. I would like to think that I still carry with me the qualities that distinguish Shoremen - a strong work ethic, a commitment to values, a streak of independence and, yes, an ocassional lapse in good judgment. In my youth, I remember seeing a bumper sticker that proclaimed that there is no intelligent life west of Chesapeake Bay. From the perspective of 40 years of exile, I humbly beg to differ.  You can chalk up the bumper sticker to the ocassional lapse of judgment I mentioned. However, I completely understand the sentiment. There is great pride in hailing from a place where the American nation took root, where people learned to live in harmony with the land and the water. There is joy in remembering the chill of a fall breeze coming over the water and the gentle waves of Tar Creek lapping softly through the reeds along the shoreline. There is comfort in knowing that regardless of time and distance, it is a place I can still fondly think of as home. x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 35 -- September 7, 2010 The Other Shoe Drops The Lew Perkins regime at Kansas Athletics has ended a year earlier than previously announced.  Perkins abruptly resigned today, with Senior Associate Athletics Director Sean Lester appointed as the interim AD.  Perkins had earlier announced that he would be retiring September 4, 2011 - almost four years before his contract ran out and after he qualified for a hefty (or should I say obscene) retention bonus. It shouldn't come as a surprise. Perkins is already facing an ethics investigation involving the personal use of athletic training equipment in his home.  Charges have been handed down in connection with a million-dollar KU ticket selling scandal. Today's announcement came less than 48 hours after the Kansas football team stunk-up Memorial Stadium in front of 48,000 stunned fans by losing 6-3 to a lower division school. Saturday's football farce was a reminder that Perkins  ran off the most successful football coach in KU history last December on the pretext that Mark Mangino abused his players.  (That didn't seem to matter when the Jayhawks were 12-1 and Orange Bowl champions.) As I have stated in this space several times, the real reason for  Mangino's firing was that the Jayhawks picked a bad time to lose games - right when Perkins was trying to raise millions of dollars for the Gridiron Club, a collect of stadium suites for fat-cat donors.  This fund raising occurred in the shadow of the worst economic recession since the 1930s.  And while Lew is being praised today for the "fabulous" job he had done in upgrading KU's athletic facilities over the past seven years, we should keep in mind that many of the fat-cats who have promised to pay for these renovations have not ponied up the money they promised. It will be interesting to see what kind of financial mess Lew leaves behind. The irony is that the economic health of KU Athletics was what led to the forced retirement of popular and competent Athletic Director Bob Frederick in 2001. Chancellor Robert Hemmenway hired Al  "Crushed Like a Dove" Bohl to replace Frederick - a move which proved to be an unmitigated disaster. Perkins was hired in 2003 to pick up the pieces.  However, all we did was replace a wimp with a weasel. While Perkins made necessary moves to modernize KU's "mom and pop" approach to athletic administration, he did so with the tact of an armed bandit.  And like an armed bandit, Perkins will leave with a reported $2 million payout - not bad for a man who should have been fired for cause weeks ago.  If Chancellor Bernadette Gray-Little's hand was the one who pushed Perkins out the door, good for her.  However, don't give her too much credit.  After all, Perkins is laughing all the way to the bank. x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 34 -- September 3, 2010 Obama's "Mission Accomplished" This week marked an ironic convergence of two events, the end of the U.S. combat role in Iraq and the end of what the Obama administration had touted as "recovery summer."  We all remember George W. Bush's "a photo-op too far," the famous "mission accomplished" news conference announcing the end of combat in Iraq.  That was seven years ago, and the continued fighting and dying made a mockery of Bush's premature claim of victory.  On Tuesday of this week, Bush's successor gave a subdued "mission accomplished" speech of his own from the Oval Office.  It coincided with the withdrawal of the last U.S. combat troops from Iraq.  President Obama, rightfully so, said that he had met his campaign promise to end American combat in Iraq.  The irony is that Obama was claiming the fruits of a timetable established by Bush and made possible by a surge Bush engineered and that Obama opposed.  Of course, there are still 50,000 U.S. troops in that troubled country.  It remains to be seen whether they will depart with dignity or we will be faced with a scene reminscient of Saigon 1975.  However, Obama's biggest challenge is on the domestic front, where the economy continues to confound his government's best efforts.  It would be easy to give Obama a pass on the economic mess.  It is easy to lay the blame on Bush.  But here's the rub: The Obama administration took ownership of the economy when it hung a big "mission accomplished" banner of its own by declaring this to be "recovery summer."  Just as Bush was lured into a false sense of accomplishment by early battlefield victories, Obama belatedly learned the danger of drinking his own Kool-Aid.  Certainly "cash for clunkers" and the new-home owners incentive worked for awhile.  However, once the federal funds dried up, so did car and home sales. Unemployment is as as least as bad - and may be worse when you consider the folks no longer eligible for unemployment aid and are not counted - as it was when "recovery summer" began. Obama's problems are also compounded by a realization that he doesn't walk on water. Rather than be the savior so many projected him to be, he is a mortal man with all of the attendant flaws. Obama made the same mistake his predecessor made: Unrealistically claiming victory over forces with which he had no control. As it turns out, hubris is nonpartisan. x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 33 -- August 27, 2010 Boomer and the Skunk Having a dog is a lot like being a parent, except that it is usually the dog that has control over the relationship.  Such is the case with Boomer, my golden retriever and pride-and-joy-boy. His power to control (disrupt) my life was on display last night when he had an unfortunate run-in with a skunk. For all of you who are F-O-P-L-P (Friends of Pepè le Pew), let me make it clear: It was not the skunk's fault.  It is obvious that Boomer provoked the little stinker.  The unfortunate confrontation occurred on Boomer's last potty break before going to bed. The dog charged out the back door of our house - presumably targeting the scent of the aromatic intruder.  As Boomer ran off into the dark, I used my best "master" voice to get him to return. Within 30 seconds, man's best friend scampered back home with blinking eyes,  smacking his lips as if he had eaten the sourest of sour balls and - in the immortal words of Loudon Wainwright III, "stinking to high, high, high, heaven." Boomer immediately - and reluctantly - hit the shower. (Please keep in mind that this happened only eight hours after I had dropped a cool 80 bucks on his grooming.)  While I (unsuccessfully) tried to flush the stink from his fur, my bride checked on the Internet for an emergency treatment. The gods of cybersense suggested that we pour mouthwash over him. The rationale was that the same ingredients used to dampen halitosis should stifle the stink of a skunk. How did it do? Instead of a dog smelling like a skunk, Boomer became a dog that smelled like a skunk with minty-fresh breath. As I write this, I have every fan in the house running in an attempt to air out the place. Boomer is back at the groomer's getting a skunk bath. And I am writing this blog, thinking of buying some air freshener and trying to remember why dogs are called "man's best friend." x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 32 -- August 23, 2010 Year Twenty This morning, for the 20th time, I start a new school year at the University of Kansas. Coincidentally, I will teach in the same room (100 Stauffer-Flint) and the same course (Public Relations) I taught when I first stepped in front of a classroom on August 26, 1991.  I've learned a lot over the years - and need to learn more.  Any teacher who begins a new school year thinking he or she has nothing to learn is hubris.  Times change, people change, and even knowledge, itself, changes. Perhaps the best example of that change is the medium you are using right now, the Internet. This year marks the 20th anniversary of the World Wide Web.  When I stepped in front of a classroom for the first time, there was only one Web site in the world. Today, there are approximately 250 million.  The job - the challenge - of a teacher is to keep up with the changing world of knowledge. One does that by paying attention, reading and conducting research.  One also does that by listening to students and understanding the teacher is not the sole repository of  knowledge in the room. Today's students do not respond well to the "sage on the stage." They want to have a conversation. I try to achieve that in my classes - not always with success. I make no pretense that I am a great teacher.  However, that is something for which I strive. I have been blessed to teach some very smart people - many much smarter than myself. I learn a lot from my students, and there's much more to learn. I am ready to launch into Year 20. Every year, every class is different from the last.  This should be fun.  Come to think of it, it is. x That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 31 -- August 14, 2010 The Value of Core Values On a visceral level, they appear to be outrages against common sense: a mosque in the shadow of Ground Zero and automatic U.S. citizenship for babies of illegal aliens.  The construction of a mosque near the site of the World Trade Center is a provocative act insulting to sacred ground, much like building a WalMart adjacent to Arlington National Cemetery. Then there are illegal aliens who seek to benefit from American law by ignoring it. An automatic birthright appears to be a perverse reward for those unwilling to follow the rules and wait their turn. However, once the chest-thumping and teeth-gnashing have been rendered, we eventually have to come to grips with the reality that Muslims and, yes, even illegal aliens, are granted rights under the world's greatest expression of core values, the U.S. Constitution.  Do I believe there are better sites for the proposed Islamic Center? Yes.  But I also know that as long as they fulfill the zoning and building requirements of New York City, Muslims have a right to build their center wherever they want. As a nation born out a quest for religious freedom, permitting this structure on this site makes a powerful statement about American core values.  And as a nation of immigrants, how can we proclaim ourselves as The Land of the Free while trying to slam the door shut on those seeking that freedom?  I do not favor blanket amnesty for illegal aliens - laws cannot be meaningful if we ignore the acts of those who break them.  However, I support former President George Bush's proposal for limited amnesty with a road map to citizenship.  It is the only practical solution that has been offered. We call them illegals.  Would we feel the same if we thought of them as refugees from Mexico's drug wars?  The push to amend the Constitution to deny automatic citizenship to the offspring of undocumented aliens is little more than an artificial wedge issue introduced by callous politicians seeking votes from a frustrated American public.  The need to adhere to core values is never greater than in times of stress.  This is one of those times.  American strength was not achieved through intolerance and exclusion. If you truly believe that the United States of America is the greatest nation on earth - what Ronald Reagan called "a shining city on the hill" - let's prove it by living what we say are our core values. After call, actions speak louder than words. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 30 -- August 8, 2010 Taxing Questions As we approach this fall's General Elections, a lot of statistics about our nation's tax policy will be thrown around.  And we all know that statistics don't lie, but statisticians do. As our country prepares to discuss whether we should extend some of the Bush-era tax cuts, here's some food for thought. According to the National Taxpayer's Union, the top 1 percent of U.S. wage earners pay more than 40 percent of all income taxes, while the bottom 50 percent pay only 3 percent and the bottom one-third pay no taxes at all. It is easy to dismiss this statistic because most of us - including yours truly - are nowhere near to being in that elite 1 percent income group. However, here's a statistic that may give you pause.  According to the non-partisan Tax Foundation, those with income in the nation's top 25 percent (more than $66,532 a year) earned 68.7 percent of the nation's income, but paid 86.6 percent of the taxes. The Tax Foundation also did an impact analysis of allowing the Bush-era tax cuts to expire. What makes this analysis unique is that the organization examined the impact it would have in each congressional district.  For example, if you live in the Kansas Third (east Lawrence), the average tax liability would jump by $1,919 or 27.7 percent.  If you live in the Kansas Fourth (west Lawrence), the average tax bill would rise $1,466 or 54 percent.  However, before you think that I am about to lead a Tea Party revolt, let me share with you another statistic I recently learned. According to the College Board, the United States has fallen from first to 12th among developed nations in the percentage of young people with colleges degrees.  How can this nation expect to survive - let alone lead - the 21st century global economy if we are not developing the young minds from which future innovations spring?  My point is this: Not all taxes are bad.  Nor do I mind paying taxes.  It is how the money is spent that is my greatest concern.  It is not as simple as a guns for butter proposition.  Even if the U.S. were to miraculously disengage from its two foreign wars, that does not mean that we will suddenly receive a peace dividend.  Perhaps we should cut some taxes - especially those that hinder economic growth. However, at the same time, we should not engage in a tax cutting frenzy that ignores critical national priorities such as education.  I would not mind seeing the Bush-era tax cuts expire if I thought Congress would invest the windfall wisely. As we decide the future of taxes, we need to ask our representatives hard questions.  If the tax cuts are extended, what will government do gather resources necessary to address urgent national priorities?  And if we let the tax cuts expire, how will government take advantage of the tax windfall? To me, these are the questions voters need to ask of our politicians in the coming months. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 29 -- August 4, 2010 A New Chapter in an Old Struggle It is very likely that a lot of people living outside of Kansas think of the Sunflower State as one that is politically conservative. After all, Kansas is about as Republican as any state in the union. However those who perpetuate this stereotype tend to fall in one of two camps: Blue Dog Democrats blinded by their own partisanship or those who have no concept of Kansas politics.  Kansas is a state with three political parties: Democrats,  Republican moderates and the Republican conservatives.  The history of this state pivots on the struggle between the GOP's center and right. The only time Democrats win in Kansas is when the two Republican parties are at war with one another. U.S. Rep. Jerry Moran's narrow victory over U.S. Rep. Todd Tihart in the U.S. Senate primary is a prime example of the double-edged nature of Sunflower politics. Moran, an independent-minded legislator with a willingness to buck his party's leadership, was forced to run to his right to fend off Tihart's ultra-conservative challenge.  It was not a pretty campaign, as the two congressmen engaged in an unflattering mud fight. On the surface, it appeared to be a struggle over who had the more conservative credentials. However, that is an overly simplistic interpretation of the campaign.  It was really a fight to define what it means to be a republican - whether one can ocassionally seek compromise with the democrat opposition or must consistently tow a strict ideological line.  Granted, no one is going to confuse Moran with Eastern Republican moderates like Rudolph Guiliani or the first President Bush. But he didn't always stay in lock-step with the Dick Cheneys or Rush Limbaughs of the right. The fight in Kansas Republican circles has always been between the pragmatic center and the idealogical right. That Moran won the party's nomination is a minor miracle, considering that "true believers" - in this case the ideologues on the right - are the voters most likely to cast ballots in a scorching mid-summer primary election. As Tihart's strong showing and immigration reformer Kris Kobach's convincing victory in the secretary of state primary demonstrated, the republican right remains a force in Sunflower State politics. While Moran will face token Democrat opposition in the general election, Kobach will need to mollify republican moderates lest they abandon him in favor of the Democrat incumbent. And the beat goes on. Yesterday's balloting didn't really resolve the struggle over the soul of the Kansas GOP - it just wrote a new chapter. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 28 -- July 20, 2010 Self-Imposed Tyranny A story broadcast this morning on CNN caught my attention.  Quoting the lead from the online version of the story: "A black Agriculture Department employee who resigned after a video clip showed her talking about a white farmer said Tuesday her remarks were taken out of context. Shirley Sherrod, the department's former state director of rural development for Georgia, told CNN on Tuesday the incident she discusses in the clip took place more than two decades ago -- and she recounted it to an audience to make the point that people should move beyond race." This incident, along with other recent examples in the news, is evidence of a self-imposed tyranny upon American political discourse. In this particular case, a conservative blogger took a soundbite from a speech Ms. Sherrod gave last March and presented it out of context. Without context, her remarks sounded as if she, as a USDA official, had purposely discriminated against a white farmer on the basis of race. However, the incident Ms. Sherrod described occurred 24 years ago - long before she was a federal official - and was presented as a personal learning experience. In fact, the point she was making was exactly the opposite of what  the out-of-context statement suggests: Race should not be a factor.  She was forced to resign and, to add insult to injury, was vilified in statements by the secretary of Agriculture and the president of the NAACP. In a society where we supposedly value free expression and the marketplace of ideas, we should condemn people who maliciously parse statements to distort their true meanings.  In this case, the true villain is conservative website publisher Andrew Breitbart. However, we should also condemn Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and NAACP President Benjamin Todd Jealous for failing to listen to what the woman actually said. For those who think distortion is the sole province of the political right, let me remind you that this is the same sort of nonsense recently suffered upon House Minority Leader John Boehner, who suggested Obama administration financial reforms are overbroad and  "like killing an ant with a nuclear weapon." (Vol. 4 No. 32).  The political left went nuts, took the statement out of context, and distorted Boehner's true meaning.  There's even the case of Dwayne Wade of the NBA's Miami Heat, roundly criticized for making the following statement: "There's going to be times when we might lose one, two games in a row, maybe two games, three games in a row, you never know. It's going to seem like the world is crashed down. You all are going to make it seem like the World Trade has just went down again. But it's not going to be nothing but a couple basketball games lost and we'll have to get back on track." I understand what he was trying to say.  Does anyone really think he was making light of the World Trade Center disaster? If Wade is guilty of anything, it may be that he is guilty of a poor analogy. But was his statement so outrageous and offensive that he had to drop everything he was doing and issue a nationally televised apology? It seems to me that the American people live in a society where everything anyone says, regardless of context, can be twisted into damning lies. We are raising our children to be fearful of what they say to others for fear of the repercussions of rubbing the wrong people the wrong way. Even in the academic world in which I live, I see people afraid to raise valid points in public debate for fear of being branded as racist, sexist, homophobic, zenophobic or, dare I say, republican. Do you know what we call a society in which people live in constant fear of what they say and think? North Korea. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 27 -- July 11, 2010 Summer of Apathy After weeks, months, perhaps even years of unrelenting build-up, the world last week held its collective breath as we learned that "King" LeBron James had decided to apply his trade along South Beach instead of the shores of South Lake Erie.  Guess what? I don't care.  The future of the National Basketball Association - a collection of undereducated and overpaid prima donnas - isn't really a concern of mine. Nor am I interested in the angst of the poor people of Cleveland, a place I have never been and will not feel cheated if I never go. I am not a fan of the Cavaliers, the Indians, Browns or Ohio State. I actually root for teams that often oppose them.  It's not even  that I don't like Cleveland native Drew Carey.  It's just that The Price is Right isn't the same without Bob Barker.  It's not that I don't care about what's going on in the world.  I just don't like the King James version - the news media's focus on the inane and irrelevant.  For example, I don't really care about Lindsay Lohan.  All I really know about her is that she is an attractive young woman who has confused celebrity with maturity. I don't care about Mel Gibson, who apparently needs to split his time between the Betty Ford Clinic and anger management classes. Nor do I care about the illegal aliens along the Gulf of Mexico who feel it is unjust that BP will not compensate them for lost wages because they are undocumented.  Like most people, I am disturbed about the situation in the gulf and I expect BP to make restitution and to follow the rules. But if BP is expected to play by the rules, shouldn't the undocumented workers, too? It's not that I am an uncaring old sot.  But I do have a balanced sense of justice - that's what's good for the goose is good for the gander.  Many of the people and issues we hear about are in the news because of self-selecting circumstances. Whether it be the anguished sports fan of Cleveland who really needs to get a life, the actor-class of Hollywood that really needs to get real jobs that don't involve make-believe, or illegal aliens who demand the right to break the law - I don't care. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 26 -- July 1, 2010 Nuking Ants Is it possible to have a rational political debate in this country?  More and more, the answer appears to be a resounding "no."  The latest example of this irrationality is the limpid left's reaction to a comment made by House Minority Leader John Boehner. In response to a question about the Obama administration's proposed regulatory overhaul of the financial industry, Boehner said he feels the regulations go to far, punishing many who had no role in the Wall Street meltdown of 2008. "This is like killing an ant with a nuclear weapon," Boehner said.   It didn't take long for the limpid left to parse that analogy into something that total misrepresents Boehner's meaning.  Keith Olbermouth of MSNBC immediately launched into his best Chicken Little/Howard Beale impersonation.  He accused Boehner of blindly dismissing the pain and suffering caused by the Great Recession as if it were some minor inconvenience.  Oblermouth used the out-of-context statement to again accuse republicans of being out of touch with reality.  I have grown to expect Olbermouth's irrational diatribes. This morning, I picked up my morning paper, the Kansas City Star, only to find that columnist Yael T. Abouhalkan - "Yabba Daba Doo" as I like to refer to him - joining in this distorted chorus.  Yabba Dabba Doo pretty much echoes Olbermouth, parsing and twisting Boehner's words until they do not remotely resemble their original intent.  Perhaps just as damning, Yabba Dabba Doo's commentary was, itself, presented out of context - a headline tease on the paper's editorial page designed to drive readers to the Star's web site. I do not always agree with the House Minority Leader. (Come to think of it, I rarely agree with the House Minority Leader.) But, come on. Can't he raise legitimate objections over the scope of the Obama administration's financial reforms - objections shared by many economists - without being demonized by the Olbermouths and Yabba Dabba Doos of the limpid left?  Can we have a serious debate in this country without the demagogues of the radical right and limpid left rending it into a meaningless mud fight? In other words, why do these pompous pundits always choose to use nuclear weapons to kill ants? That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. X Vol. 4 No. 25 -- June 27, 2010 I Told You So This old world has spun on it axis seven times since I got married on June 19. Judging by the pile of unread newspapers that accumulated during my honeymoon interlude, the old adage (previously quoted in my post of January 1, 2009, Vol. 3 No. 1) must be true: The more things change, the more they stay the same.  Perhaps the biggest news of the week was that which falls into the category of "I told you so." President Obama's decision to fire General Stanley McChrystal, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, shouldn't have been a surprise to anyone who reads this blog.  I warned General McMouth that he was headed toward a McArthuresque demise in my blog of October 5, 2009 (Vol..3 No. 36). I also read that U.S. Senate Republicans continue to block passage of a bill that would extend unemployment benefits to more than one million Americans.  Once again, this falls into the "I told you so" category. Allow me to refer you to an old blog entry,  February 15 of this year (Vol. 4 No. 8), "They Still Don't Get It." The GOP's rationale is that we can't afford to increase the deficit by extending the benefits.  This ignores the fact that those funds not only help real people with real needs, but directly pump needed dollars back into our sluggish economy.  Let me quote what I said last February: "If the Republicans are seen as do-nothing obstructionists, they threaten to author another season of electoral discontent.  I was right one year ago and am still right today: The public will give its support to whomever is willing abandon partisanship and lead through compromise. And while his numbers are down, it is President Obama who is currently winning that battle." When I left town on my honeymoon, British Petroleum's busted oil well was gushing up to 100,000 barrels of crude into the Gulf of Mexico every day. I'm home and BP still hasn't plugged the leak. Since I'm not an engineer, I am not going to hypocritically suggest that I know the answer to that problem. However, as a public relations educator and practitioner, I can only shake my head in amazement at the clumsiness of BP's response to the oil spill. Granted, even the head of BP deserves a day off after two months of unrelenting crisis. However, someone needs to give the guy a reality check: You don't go flitting around on your million-dollar sailboat enjoying pristine waters and sea breezes while your company treats the Gulf Coast as if it was BP's private privy. One only hopes that there is a special place in hell for people that stupid. However, I am certain that there are "special places" for BP's bozos within the federal prison system. And if justice is done, I will again have a chance to say "I told you so." That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. X Vol. 4 No. 24 -- June 18, 2010 I'm Gettin' Married in the Morning Yes, it is a line from the song "Get me to the Church on Time" from My Fair Lady. It is sung by Alfred Doolittle at the end of a pre-nuptial bar crawl in London. It has been on my mind for the past few days because - as you may know - I'm getting married in the morning, as well. (Technically, 1:00 p.m. CDT. However, if you are reading this in California, it would still work.) My bride-to-be is Maureen Manning Deeds, a warm-hearted and caring woman with an Irish spirit and Midwest sensibilities.  She can make me laugh.  She can also reel me back in when I am so full of myself - as I am often prone to be. She has brought new joy into my life. After three difficult years, I can now open a new chapter. As I write this, people are gathering in Lawrence from around the country to share in our big day.  Not only is getting married a life-affirming experience, so are the expressions of love and support Maureen and I have received from our family and friends.  This is especially true of the Fillmans, my late-wife's family.  I am touched and honored by their presence on what has to be a bittersweet ocassion. I love them dearly and will always consider myself to be a Fillman.  I know I'm supposed to be nervous and all of that.  But I am not. I am happy to be sharing the rest of my life with a wonderful woman and to celebrate our union in the presence of people we love. It is because of those people, especially my bride-to-be and daughter, that I am at peace. So, as old Alfie would say, "Hail and salute me, then haul off and boot me. And get me to the church on time!" That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. X Vol. 4 No. 23 -- June 12, 2010 The Angry World of Dolph Simons Every Saturday morning, the readers of the Lawrence Journal-World are delivered the wisdom of the paper's publisher, Dolph C. Simons, Jr.  In many ways, Simons' World Company is a leader in 21st century journalism.  His media company was among the first to recognize the changes enveloping mass communications and appears to have developed a business model that will help his company thrive while others in the industry fight to survive.  However, while Simons may have mastered the business of journalism, he appears to have little knowledge or respect for the practice of journalism.  Today's "Saturday Column" is a prime example: a series of broad, unattributed statements and opinions that are often unencumbered by evidence. Today's column focuses on the precarious position that the University of Kansas finds itself during this period of athletic conference realignment.  And while Simons raises some valid points, much of his criticism of KU administration ignores the most critical issue in this whole Big Ten - Pac Ten - Big Twelve shuffle: It is all about television markets, of which Kansas City and Topeka are minor or - as in a case of Topeka - nonexistent players. Simons' arguments also presume that KU officials are being reactive and waiting to see what happens next. Perhaps he is right.  However, I'd like to think that KU officials are smarter than their counterparts at Missouri and know better than to negotiate the university's future in the press.  Wouldn't it be smarter to wait and see what these officials do than to condemn before they have a chance to play out their hand? Is the criticism about the officials' inaction or more about the fact that Simons is not - and never will be - on the inside and calling the shots? Today's "Saturday Column" has the tone of so many of Simons' diatribes - one in which he make it is clear that he is angry that the world isn't run in the manner in which he operates his media company, a sometimes benevolent but often malevolent dictatorship in which Simons' opinions, fact-based or not, are all that matter. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. X Vol. 4 No. 22 -- June 10, 2010 Nothing Has Changed The University of Kansas yesterday released the findings of an internal investigation of Athletics Director Lew Perkins' use of loaned athletic equipment. Perkins has been cleared of allegations that he exchanged premium men's basketball tickets for use of the equipment in his personal home.  The allegations come at a time the KUAC is facing a federal investigation into the misappropriation of at least $1.2 million in tickets. Several people have resigned in the wake of the scandal. The investigation, conducted by two capable KU administrators, also cleared Perkins of charges made by the former KU sports medicine director, charges involving alleged irregularities in drug testing and the academic eligibility of student athletes. I have no reason to question the validity of the investigation.  It was conducted by honorable people.  But we should remember that the investigation did not address questions concerning possible violations of state ethics codes, nor does it address Perkins' management of an organization that, at face value, lacks adequate supervision.  That this entire mess has embarrassed the university and damaged its reputation is without dispute. The truth is that the release of the findings of the internal investigation have not changed anything.  Perkins remains an albatross around the university's neck. I continue to hold to my position stated in an earlier post (Vol. 4 No. 26) that Lew Perkins must resign.  At this point, it is the only honorable option he has. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. X Vol. 4 No. 21 -- June 6, 2010 Toxic Sludge and the Challenge of Leadership President Barack Obama and KU Chancellor Bernadette Gray-Little have discovered what their predecessors learned the hard way - that they often pay the price for the actions of others.  Obama has been sharply criticized for the federal government's response to the BP oil spill disaster. It doesn't matter that his administration didn't create the situation.  Nor does it matter that officials are dealing with a crisis of unprecedented scale. According to the most recent USA Today/Gallup Poll, 53 percent of Americans believe the Obama administration's response to the disaster has been "poor" or "very poor." Of course, this situation is rich in irony, as another disaster in the Gulf Coast region, Hurricane Katrina, proved to be George Bush's albatross.  While Bush deserved criticism for problems with the federal government's response, the most serious failures were those of state and local governments, the entities with the legal responsibility for emergency response. But that didn't matter: Bush was president and bad stuff happened on his watch.  Now it's Obama's turn to take the heat.  At KU, the toxic sludge isn't spewing from a busted oil well.  Instead it is emanating from the athletics department. Former Chancellor Robert Hemenway was twice forced to find new leadership for KUAC, cleaning up the popular Bob Frederick's self-inflicted financial train wreck and firing Frederick's replacement, the unpopular Al Bohl, who was on the losing end of a power struggle with then basketball coach Roy "I don't give a [expletive deleted] about Carolina" Williams. Gray-Little faces a far more serious problem, allegations of ethical and criminal violations.  And again, the KUAC's leadership is in focus. The Chancellor has ordered an internal investigation of Athletics Director Lew Perkins. At issue is his personal home use of athletic training equipment from a vendor, an arrangement that allegedly led to an attempt to blackmail Perkins. At the same time, KUAC has acknowledged the misappropriation of more than $1 million in game tickets by athletic department officials. Several people have resigned or been fired, and criminal charges are possible. Gray-Little's challenge is to restore public confidence in KUAC and determine Perkins' fate. For an administrator who has been on the job less than a year, this is a tall order.  It has been made even more difficult by this weekend's published reports of basketball coach Bill Shelf's support  of Perkins. The Chancellor finds herself in a no-win situation. Firing Perkins runs the risk of alienating Self, the most popular man on campus (assuming, of course, that Self's expression of support was more than just lip service).  Retaining Perkins risks the appearance of her allowing the tail - in this case, the KUAC - to wag the dog.  Of course, no one told Obama or Gray-Little that being in charge is a piece of cake. That's why they get the big bucks - and why the buck stops with them. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. X Vol. 4 No. 20 -- May 30, 2010 Lew Perkins Must Go If you are a fan of the University of Kansas athletic teams, these are the times that try your soul. First there was the embarrassment of last fall's fight between the men's football and basketball squads. After winning its first five games, the football team dropped its last seven, including a season-ending loss to arch-rival Missouri. That game was played under a cloud, as coach Mark Mangino was the focus of a probe of alleged player abuse. Mangino was eventually forced to accept a buy-out of his contract. As noted in an earlier post (Vol. 3 No. 47), I believe the Mangino affair had more to do with fund raising for the ill-conceived Gridiron Club than it did with any genuine concern for the welfare of athletes. Jayhawk fans thought the worst had happened when the top-ranked men's basketball team made a premature exit from the NCAA tournament last March. But it wasn't. We have since learned that the KU Athletics Corp. is the focus of a federal investigation into the illegal sale of more than 20,000 tickets worth more than $1 million. While acknowledging that he, as athletic director, is ultimately responsible for KUAC's operations, Lew Perkins also trys to convince us that he is a latter-day Sergeant Schultz and that he knows "nothing, nothing" about the ticket scam. Today we learned that Perkins is allegedly the "victim" of unspecified blackmail scheme.  And he would have us believe that this is something that happens to prominent people like him all of the time. Had enough? I have. I don't know if Perkins is a victim of either disloyal employees, a greedy scam artist or an ethical blind spot. That's not particularly relevant. What is important is that some of the characters implicated in this mess are people Perkins brought to KU.  And while Perkins, himself, may be as honest as the day is long, it is also undeniable that he has created an environment of arrogance and hubris within the KUAC that help breed this sorry state of affairs. In doing so, he has dragged the good name of the University of Kansas through the mud.  Sure, I want the Jayhawks to win - but not at the expense of the university's reputation. It was under Perkins' watch that the football team received NCAA sanctions for what was described as "a loss of institutional control." Does anyone in his or her right mind consider the current sordid state of KU Athletics as having any semblance of institutional control? I do not say this lightly, but it must be said: Perkins has worn out his welcome in Lawrence and should resign. If he doesn't, then the Chancellor needs to demonstrate that she has a backbone and should fire him with cause. She also needs to restructure the KUAC and bring it under tighter university supervision. I don't care what some fat-cat boosters or local sports media apologists think.  Lou Perkins and his slipshod management of KUAC are cancers on the university community that must be eradicated. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 19 -- May 20, 2010 The Gold Dress As I mentioned in a recent post (Vol. 4, No. 23), packing my belongings and preparing to move to a new home is a nostalgic exercise.  As one goes through the transitional triage of deciding whether to pack, toss or donate something, every item has a memory attached. That is especially true when that memory is of a loved one who has passed away. It has been more than three years since my wife Jan died unexpectedly. Over time, I have been able to steel myself against the flood of grief that accompanied her death.  For the most part, the packing process has gone smoothly with little angst. However, there has been one reminder of Jan that caused me to pause and painfully reflect on her untimely passing: a gold formal dress with a glittering golden top. It had never been worn.  The price tags were still on it.  I found it more than a year after her death, carefully hidden in a laundry bag under the bed in the guest room. In the year preceeding her passing, Jan had lost more than 100 pounds through a vigorous combination of diet and exercise. I always thought she was pretty. However, after the weight loss, Jan was sensational. She used to joke that she had become my "trophy wife." I came to realize that the gold dress was meant to be a surprise for me. It isn't hard to imagine how stunningly and incredibly beautiful she would have looked in it. Now, the dress is nothing more than a cruel reminder of a promise unfulfilled - of what might have been. After consulting with my daughter, we decided to donate the dress.  Perhaps it will bring wonderful memories to someone else. As I prepare to move to a new home in five days and get married in 29 days, I direct most of my focus toward the future. However, it is only natural that I occasionally glance back and remember a special love with a heart of gold and a dress to match. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 18 -- May 19, 2010 All Politics are Local It has been amusing to watch the punditry of the past few hours.  Primary elections - and one special election - were held in three states yesterday.  Once results were tabulated, the speculation began as to their meaning.  Despite White House support, Democrat-come-lately Arlen Specter was defeated in his bid for a sixth term in the U.S. Senate by Rep. Joe Sestak.  Did Pennsylvania voters oust Specter in a wave of anti-incumbency -- the main theory among the chattering class? It is more likely that Pennsylvania Democrats decided to vote for a guy who was actually a Democrat, and not for the guy who spent 29 of his 30 years in the Senate as a Republican. Perhaps more significant was the Rand Paul's surprisingly easy win in the Republican U.S. Senate primary in Kentucky.  Paul, the son of maverick Republican Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, rode a Tea Party bandwagon of dissent over Sen. Mitch McConnell's hand-picked candidate. The conventional wisdom is that the Tea Party is becoming a force in Republican party politics.  Maybe that is true.  However, it doesn't take into account that McConnell has fallen out of favor among most Kentuckians, that name recognition for Paul's dad was a big plus, and that Kentucky has a long history of being somewhat schizoid when it comes to red and blue politics. Then there's Arkansas, where incumbent Sen. Blanche Lincoln has been forced into a June 8th Democratic primary runoff by Lt. Governor Bill Halter.  Was this really an anti-incumbent vote - as Halter and the pundits claim? In this case, I'll agree -  to a point.  Sen. Lincoln is far more moderate than most of her Democrat base.  If she can survive the run-off, her moderation will serve her well in November. And then there's the case of the congressional special election in Pennsylvania, where a Democrat held on to the seat vacated by the death of Rep. John Murtha. The White House and Democrats hail this as Tuesday's only meaningful result - the only one where a Democrat faced a Republican. However, this result means absolutely nothing more than that a predominantly Democratic district voted for - surprise - a Democrat. So what's the true meaning of Tuesday's election results? In the words of the late House Speaker Tip O'Neill, all politics are local.  Trying to draw broad conclusions from the actions of voters is three disparate states is ludicrous. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 17 -- May 13, 2010 This Old House In less than two weeks, I will be -- both in symbolism and reality -- moving on to the next phase of my life. On May 25, I move to a brand-spanking new house in Northwest Lawrence. It will become home for me and my bride-to-be. I will be leaving a home I have lived in longer than any other I have known. My wife, daughter, dog and I moved to my current home in January 1992 when it, too, was brand-spanking new. For the 15 years that followed, this was a happy house of Christmas parties, Girl Scout meetings, Easter egg hunts and graduation parties. For my wife Jan, it was Tupperware Central - the hub of a thriving plasticware empire. For my daughter Susan, it was Barbieland in the basement - the home to a tribe of anatomically incorrect dolls. And for me, it has been the "Worldwide Headquarters of Guth Communications," a bedroom converted into an office where I toiled many hours to gain tenure. For Brooksie, our first family dog, it was her last home before she passed one year to the day we moved to Lawrence. For Rusty, whom my sister called a "yodi-doh-doh" dog, it was the only home he knew in his nearly 11 years. And now it the place where my golden retriever, Boomer, is large and in charge. It has been a wonderful place to call home. Of course, everything changed on March 17, 2007, when Jan died. Since then, I have known that my days on Chouteau Court were numbered.  No matter what fond memories - and sad ones - these walls hold, the time has come for me to go. I leave Chouteau Court with great anticipation.  For what lies ahead is Carver Lane, marriage to a woman I love, and the rest of our lives together. When I think back on my 18 years in this old house, I will remember the happy times. I will also remember the good people of Chouteau Court who were there for me and my family in the sad times. But mostly, I will be grateful to have called it my home, and hopeful that its new occupants find happiness here. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 16 -- May 6, 2010 Back in Alderson This is a unique post in Snapping Turtle history. It has been written, edited and uploaded in Alderson Auditorium, Kansas Union, at the University of Kansas. The room is empty now, as I sit patiently awaiting another round of student practice sessions. My JOUR 676 Strategic Communication Campaigns class will present integrated marketing communications plans to their client, the Coalition for Space Exploration, in just a few hours.  I told one of my students in an earlier practice this morning that I always get the jitters on client presentation day.  I always have, dating back to my very first class presentation in this room in November 1991. On that ocassion, the class client was the Ryan Gray Playground for All Children, an accessible recreational area adjacent to the Hillcrest Elementary School in Lawrence. That class developed plans to raise $300,000 to build the playground. Ultimately, the playground was built.  The class is remembered with a memorial brick at the facility. I get nervous on these ocassions because I want my students to do well. I would be less than honest if I didn't acknowledge that I also view their performance and the client's reaction as a reflection on my teaching. However, the main reason for my jittery nature on presentation day is the realization that a sometimes arduous four-month process of discovery and planning is culminating in four 20-minute presentations tonight.  This class is the capstone class in the J-school's strategic communications curriculum - meaning that this is the place where students are supposed to show that they know their stuff and are ready to go out into the "real world." And they are. They always are. That's because despite any flaws and failings their professor may have, I am blessed to teach good, smart people who are willing to produce when it is all of the line. And that, more than anything, is why I love teaching. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 15 -- April 28, 2010 Oh-Dark Thirty Ramblings It has been a couple of weeks since I last posted, and there's a heck of a lot of stuff going down!  Arizona continues to hold on to its cherished title of "State Most Likely to be Boycotted."  MS-NBC apparently stands for "Must Simply Not Belittle Colleagues." (If you don't believe it, ask Donny Deutsch.) Bill Clinton and Rush Limbaugh are blaming each other for everything from the Oklahoma City bombing to the heartbreak of psoriasis.  (Someone please tell those clowns that the 1990s are over.)  George W. Bush is writing a book. (Insert your own joke here.)  Nancy Pelosi believes the American voters will embrace the Democrats in the fall elections. (Insert your own joke here.)   I hear that Tiger Woods and Ben Roethlisberger have been admitted to the George Michael Clinic for the Sexually Stupid.  The Baltimore Orioles and the Kansas City Royals appear to be headed for the World Series - the one they hold in Williamsport, Pennsylvania, every summer.  Congress wants to clamp down on profanity on television -- unless, of course, the viewers are tuned to C-SPAN and watching Senator Carl Levin drop the S-bomb on Goldman Sachs executives 11 times.  I could write more about these and other exciting topics, but it is oh-dark-thirty in the morning, and I have a Carl Levin load of work to do tomorrow, er, I mean later today.  I'll be back in touch soon, once I have some time to surface for some air. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 14 -- April 11, 2010 Forgiveness Doesn't Come With A Debt As one who has researched and written about history, I am often appalled at how some will simplistically apply so-called "lessons of history" to make a strident point in the context of current political debate.  I have seen an example of this today in CNN commentator Roland S. Martin's provocatively titled essay "Were Confederate soldiers terrorists?" This, in response to a public outcry over Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell's decision to sign a meaningless, ceremonial and poorly worded proclamation for Confederate Memorial Day - something that has been done in Southern states for more than a century.  In today's cancerous political environment, political opportunists used the proclamation as a hammer to suggest that McDonnell was defending the Old South's embrace of slavery.  (What probably happened was that some overworked gubernatorial aide failed to place proper historical context into a document that has as much moral authority as a used Kleenex.) Martin has joined the drumbeat of dissent.  He has characterized all Confederate soldiers as "domestic terrorists." Of course, this is political hogwash - the cherry-picking of words and ideas in an attempt to frame an absurd notion.  For the record, most of my family wasn't even in the U.S. at the time of the Civil War.  Those who were fought for the Union.  I have also lived in the South - Georgia and North Carolina - and understand why the people of that region cling to their heritage.  The Confederacy and all that it entails is as much of part of the region's DNA as the Border War of the 1850s is to the people of Kansas and Missouri.  And while most would agree that the people of the North and the people of Kansas were on the side of the angels during those conflicts, an honest examination of history tells us that the motivations of Southerners and Missourians were not limited solely to the issue of slavery. Some were defending their homeland - not a totally absurd notion in the context of 19th century America.  The Civil War was an inevitable conflict to clear the ambiguities of the federal-state relationship left by the nation's Founders. And in both wars, atrocities were committed by both sides.  Should we condemn the Confederacy for what it was, an armed rebellion against the United States in defense of an immoral institution? Absolutely. Should we paint Southerners who fought in that conflict with the broad brush of terrorism? Not unless you are personally willing to wear the mantle of responsibility for My Lai,  Abu Ghraib and other atrocities committed in the name of the United States.  (By the way, that's the same logic used by Fred Phelps, the Minister of Hate.) We are constantly reminded that not all Muslims or Arabs who oppose the West are terrorists.  It has been nearly 150 years since the Civil War. The South has emerged as a culturally diverse and socially progressive region.  Can we not allow Southerners to reflect on their heritage without disingenuous scorn?  Let us remember the words of singer-songwriter Mary Chapin Carpenter who said "forgiveness doesn't come with a debt." That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 13 -- March 28, 2010 Say Goodbye to Joe College With little fanfare, Joe College is shutting its doors this week. For those unfamiliar with Joe College, it is an edgy T-shirt shop in downtown Lawrence that specializes in skirting the boundaries of copyright infringement.  Its major source of business is the sale of  Jayhawk sports T-shirts - although not a one of them has ever used the term "Jayhawk." To do so, Joe College would have to play a hefty licensing fee to KU.  Instead, the company uses generic terms such as "Kansas" and "Hawk" in its T-shirts. Perhaps it would have been left alone if had not gone a step farther by linking the Jayhawks to T-shirts that were sometimes tasteless,  bordering on the obscene and almost always wicked funny. ("Muck Fizzou" was its most popular item.) While the university's efforts to reign in Joe College has been often portrayed as a David versus Goliath confrontation, it is not that simple.  By law, if the university is to protect its copyrighted and trademarked symbols and brand, it has to occupy them. In legal terms, that means actively using them and taking steps to protect their misuse by others. While Joe College may seem a somewhat sympathetic figure in this dime-store drama, it is really little more than a story of two bullies fighting over money.  And while the sudden shutdown of its nemesis may be seen as a victory for KU Athletics, there's little reason to celebrate in the House that Lew Built. This has been a disastrous year of underperforming teams, an ill-conceived Gridiron Club fund-raising scheme, a publicly orchestrated campaign of character assassination against the former football coach, and now a ticket sales probe.  The latter, the ticket sales scandal, is, by far, the most volatile situation facing KU Athletics. The university community can live with losses on the field and on the court.  But when people supposedly acting in our name end up in court, then a line has been crossed. As I said last December 13 in this space (Vol.3 No. 48), there are some things done in the good name of this university that cannot and will not be tolerated. And if Athletic Czar Lew Perkins doesn't get that message and get it quick, then he soon will go the way Joe College - a bad memory relegated to history's trash bin. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 12 -- March 9, 2010 Hard Choices It is America's true national pastime - slamming and dissing incompetent politicians. Mind you, it doesn't really matter whether the politicians are actually incompetent. We just feel better assuming that the only reason they got into politics is to feather their own pockets.  Tell that to the members of your local school board.  Even in the best of times, theirs is a thankless job. And in case you haven't noticed, these are not the best of times.  What has happened locally is a microcosm of education budgetary battles taking place throughout the nation. In the face of a severe budget shortfall, the Lawrence school board tonight announced a plan to cut $5 million from its budget without closing any elementary schools.  This, in the face of public opposition to earlier plans that considered the closing some of the smaller, older schools. Under the banner of "Save Our Schools," a group of latter-day NIMBYs often viciously attacked the motivations of  local school board members. They accused school officials of maintaining a bloated bureaucracy at the expense of neighborhood schools - although they never supported the charge with any facts. They said it was an outrage that anyone would consider closing little Johnny's or little Janie's school - even if current enrollment patterns at those schools do not justify their continued operation. In the face of this storm of criticism, the school board voted to close one of its early childhood centers, eliminate an elementary school principalship, and cut $200,000 in instructional materials. The board also saved another $1.1 million by raising the district's student-teacher ratio by one pupil.  All of this just one night after it sliced another $2.8 million off the school budget. However, a previously announced reduction measure, elimination of sixth-grade band, was rescinded. Although this would have saved the district nearly $300,000, one can only assume that the latter-day NIMBYs would have none of it.  You see, they live by a very simple credo: All government spending is wasteful - unless, of course, it is something they like.  As bad as the current political environment is, it may only get worse. It could be another three or four budget years before the economy is fully back on it feet. And as hard as this year's choices have been for local school officials, next year's could be even harder.  And those decisions will not be made any easier as long as a belligerent public on one hand continues to unfairly question the integrity of public servants who are underpaid and under siege, while on the other hand,  insisting they can have their cake and eat it too. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 11 -- March 1, 2010 Number One Hundred When I began the Snapping Turtle blog on Sept.  28, 2007, I wasn't really sure what I was doing or why I was doing it.  It was only six months after the tragic death of Jan, my wife of nearly 32 years. On one level, the purpose of this blog, as it says in the description above, was "to practice what I teach" - social media.  However, on a deeper level, this blog was a form of outreach to a world that had suddenly seem unmercifully cold and cruel. If you read my earliest posts, you can tell that I was trying the best way I could to cope with the unbearable grief that comes with immeasurable loss.  I bring this up at this time because this post - Vol. 4 No. 11 - marks the 100th entry in the Snapping Turtle saga. It seems appropriate to mark this milestone with a reality check.  Less than a month ago, I had a chance to renew a passing acquaintance with nationally syndicated newspaper columnist Leonard Pitts.  It was during an informal chat with the KU journalism faculty that Pitts said that it took him some time of churning out two columns a week for him to find his "voice." I immediately understood what he meant.  It has only been recently that I felt that I found my voice for this blog. It has evolved from its origins as a digital cathartic release to what I hope is seen as a mostly thoughtful commentary on American life and the human condition. Sometimes I am surprised at your reactions to what I have written. In the first place, I am amazed - and honored - that anyone actually takes time to read Snapping Turtle. However, I get my greatest satisfaction when I confound people who thought they had me pegged at a particular point on the political spectrum. Never was that more evident with the reaction to my Oct. 18, 2008, post in which I - a one-time political appointee of a republican governor's administration - announced my endorsement of Barrack Obama for president.  Talk about shock and awe! Of course, the tone of this blog isn't the only evolution since Snapping Turtle was launched 100 posts ago.  My life has changed for the better. Thanks to my daughter, my family (the Guths and the Fillmans), my friends and a woman who I love and am now engaged to marry, the sun is shining once again. There's no doubt that I will always love Jan and cherish my memories of her.  But I have learned that there is room in my heart for Maureen, a warm-hearted woman who has become my best friend.  Who knows where the journey will have taken me when I reach my 200th Snapping Turtle post?  I invite you to stick around and find out. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 10 -- February 24, 2010 Been There, Done That If, as we have been told at the start of every iteration of the Star Trek saga, that space is "the final frontier," I wonder why Americans have lost their pioneering spirit? Hearings were held on Capitol Hill today to discuss the future of U.S Space exploration in light of 21st century budget realities. Among those testifying was Miles O'Brien, the former CNN space correspondent who is now an online columnist and host of the vodcast This Week in Space. Just 24 hours earlier, O'Brien talked to my Strategic Communication Campaigns students at the University of Kansas. The self-professed space junkie, who is also a member of the NASA Advisory Council, spoke to the students through an Internet television hook-up.  The class produces integrated marketing communications plans for real-world clients. This semester, our client is the Coalition for Space Exploration. So, who better to talk about the possibilities of space exploration than someone with the passion of a Miles O'Brien? He told the class pretty much the same thing he later told Congress, that Americans have lost interest in the space program because, among many things, the loss of a sense of direction.  An example was the recently canceled Constellation  return-to-the-moon program, what O'Brien called "Project Apollo on steroids." He said the attitude of the American people and their elected representatives has been pretty much "been there, done that, have the T-shirt."  As much due to a lack of imagination as it is to a lack of money, NASA and America's exploration of the final frontier are pretty much lost in space. "What is the next great human mission in space? Frankly it isn’t clear," O'Brien told the Senate Committee on Science and Transportation. "And that is a big worry. It is important to have goals. We children of the Space Race love a destination and a deadline. But goals that simply lead to uninspired jobs programs are not what we need. " I couldn't agree with him more.  Look at the 1968 cinema classic 2001: A Space Odyssey. Stanley Kubrick's vision was that of a time where people visited hotels in orbit before traveling to a permanent colony of the moon.  The film was made at a time when American optimism was high and our horizons unlimited. But that was before the disillusionments of Vietnam, Watergate, the Arab oil embargo, Jimmy Carter's malaise, Iran-Contra - and the list goes on. Now, at a time when our nation is positioned as the world's only true superpower, we are suffering from a lack of imagination and vision. O'Brien told my class that America is "coasting" into the 21st century. Again, we are in agreement.  Unless the United States is willing to commit itself to both public and private investment in space exploration, we will be ceding our hard-won leadership in that area to others.  And while that may not seem much of a concern in today's economic climate, it is a decision that could have dramatic economic and national security implications for our nation's future. Christopher Columbus didn't return from the New World and say, "Been there, done that, have the T-shirt." Nor should we. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 9 -- February 19, 2010 Glass Houses Like a lot of people, I stopped what I was doing this morning to listen to Tiger Woods apologize to his wife, children, mother, friends, sponsors and fans for his "irresponsible and selfish" behavior, which he said included infidelity.  It was his first public appearance since his one-car, one-tree Thanksgiving night accident near his home in Florida. The unusual and secretive circumstances surrounding that event led to a chain reaction of rumors about women, the future of his marriage, and the viability of the brand we have come to know as "Tiger." On a personal level, I don't care about Tiger's private life.  He is correct when he says that is solely a matter between him and his wife. But as a public relations educator and a crisis communications professional, I have to admit that I have been stunned at the clumsy manner in which he has handled this entire sordid affair. I commend him for today's remarks.  I think they were remarkably candid and appropriately self-deprecating. However, the statement he made today should have been delivered two months ago. And that he made today's statement in a controlled environment in which he did not have to answer any questions only further delayed the public interrogation he ultimately will face.  In that regard, I can't help but wonder if cowardice is one of the clubs in his bag of serious character flaws.  The future of his marriage is a personal matter in which I have no interest. However, while his personal life may be Tiger's business, he has spent his entire adult life making his image the central focus of his business.  So Tiger, please don't cry crocodile tears about a lack of privacy as you drive your recently repaired Cadillac Escalade to the bank. There's something to be said about people living in glass houses, especially when they make it a  lifestyle choice. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 8 -- February 15, 2010 They Still Don't Get It After two elections in which they took a pounding, the Republicans are feeling pretty good about this year's mid-term congressional elections.  The bloom is off President Obama's rose. His job approval dropped from a high of 69 percent right after the inauguration to just 47 percent one year later. (The current Gallup Poll has President Obama's job approval rating at 53 percent.) In the most recent Washington Post-New York Times  Poll, 48 percent of voters said they would be more likely to vote for the Republican congressional candidate, compared to just 45 percent for the Democrat. Just today, another Democrat, Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), has seen the handwriting on the wall and withdrew from seeking reelection.  I'd like to hearken back to words I wrote in this space a little over a year ago (Vol. 3 No. 5, February 1, 2009), "There's a reason the Republicans are out of power.  That's because they appeared to be uncaring and out of touch with the people.  The people kicked them out. However, it is also important to remember that there was a reason Republicans achieved power in the first place.  That's because the Democrats also appeared to be out of touch with the people." At that time, I said the uninspired leadership of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Speaker Nancy Pelosi was leading Democrats down the path to ruin. That may still come to pass.  But the Republicans, hungry for some red meat, are showing signs of making the same mistakes of the past. Reports out of Washington indicate Republicans see political advantage in obstructing Obama's legislative agenda.  Their reasoning is that the less the President accomplishes, the better Republican chances will be in November.  However, I agree with Washington Post columnist David Broder who wrote this past weekend that the Republicans are in danger of misreading the polls.  While the public may not be wild about Obama's health care proposals, it also wants something to be done. That means civility and compromise on the part of both Republicans and Democrats.  If the Republicans are seen as do-nothing obstructionists, they threaten to author another season of electoral discontent.  I was right one year ago and am still right today: The public will give its support to whomever is willing abandon partisanship and lead through compromise. And while his numbers are down, it is President Obama who is currently winning that battle. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 7 -- February  6, 2010 Good on Paper Leonard Pitts often speaks of the "idiocracy" that is taking over the United States. He is distressed that there is a dumbing down of America, and that we have no one to blame but ourselves. “We have embarked on an era where many of us believe that all facts are created equal,” the Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist told a KU audience yesterday. “Saying it out loud, putting it online makes it true.” Pitts came to Lawrence to accept the 2010 William Allen White Foundation National Citation.  The honor is given annually to an outstanding journalist. Past winners include Walter Cronkite, George Will and Bob Woodward.  Yesterday was the second time I had met Pitts. I helped arrange a Fall 2007 campus visit by the liberal columnist.  In terms of our politics, he and I disagree on a number of issues.  However, as a columnist, I have a great deal of respect for both his writing skills and his integrity. He, like I, believe in the power of truth. In a world of pompous punditry and talking heads, we both believe there is too much being bandied about as "truth" when, in fact, it is at best an opinion or, at worst, an outright lie. I believe he sincerely would like to see the return of civil debate in this country.  However, it should be noted that the columnist's concept of civility does not necessarily carry over to comments made in personal appearances.  He is not unlike a lot of people - there's the public side, and then there is the private side. In the times I have seen him in more private, one-on-one settings, Pitts has been sometimes guilty of using the same pandering, dismissive and inflammatory rhetoric for which he has often chastised the right.  In this regard, Pitts strikes me as somewhat an elitist -  although I am certain he doesn't see himself in that light. However, to Pitts' credit, he is careful of the tone and accuracy of his twice weekly nationally syndicated column. While his private voice often reflects the tone-deaf dialog from which our nation suffers, his public voice - the voice reflected in his books and columns - is a model of reasoned civility.  Pitts is not afraid to make controversial and unpopular points.  But he backs them with solid research and sound logic. Perhaps the best part of Leonard Pitts' nature is that he is willing to listen to anyone - even those who disagree with him - if they are willing to exercise the same level  of respect and critical thinking.  While it can be said that Leonard Pitts is better on paper than he is in person, when one considers the quality of what he puts on paper, that's still pretty darn good. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 6 -- January 27, 2010 The Same Old Same Old Like a lot of red-blooded American citizens, I sat before my television tonight to listen to our President discuss the State-of-the-Union. It is an annual ritual mandated by the Constitution. Actually, the President doesn't have to deliver it in a speech to a joint session of Congress. For example, during the height of the Watergate scandal, President Nixon skipped making a speech and instead sent lawmakers a written statement. (I doubt the envelope in which Nixon sent it was sealed with a kiss.)  It really doesn't matter who the President is, State-of-the-Union addresses usually resemble bad kabuki theater.  It happens every year: The President uses coded words designed to provoke applause from his supporters and stone cold silence from the opposition. On those rare ocassions when the President slips and accidentally says something ironic,  his supporters sit on their hands while the opposition gives a derisive Standing O. Of course, everyone stands and cheers for the military, the First Lady and any suggestion that America is the best by-gum nation in the whole darn universe.  As for tonight's speech, most of it was predictably mundane.  However, the end of the speech was remarkable. President Obama's solemn appeal for bipartisanship - a section of the speech where he refreshingly admitted fault for some of his administration's missteps - struck just the right tone for a nation weary of partisan bickering. As for the Republican response, it, too, was predictable. Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell's speech was much like every opposition SOTU response I have ever heard, one walking the fine line between conciliation and contempt.  Frankly, I wondered why the Republicans choose a guy who had been in office only 11 days to make their big speech.  But then I remembered that was the exact length of time Obama had been in the White House to qualify for the Nobel Peace Prize. I don't know that Governor McDonnell will win a Nobel Prize.  But, if he is lucky, Publisher's Clearing House will be stopping by the mansion real soon. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 5 -- January 19, 2010 The True Message from Massachusetts Just one year ago this week, more than a million people stood in subfreezing temperatures to witness the historic inauguration of Barack Obama. For Democrats, it was a heady time.  In the November 2008 election, the Democrats regained the White House after an eight-year absence and strengthened their majorities to both houses of Congress.  It is now a year later, and the landscape has dramatically shifted. First the Republicans reclaimed governships in Virginia and New Jersey in November off-year elections. As bad as that was for Democrats, the news out of Massachusetts has stunned them.  A Republican tonight claimed the U.S. Senate seat that the late Ted Kennedy had held for 46 years.  There are a lot of reasons for this stunning reversal.  Republican Scott Brown ran a smart, centrist and populist campaign.  Democrat Martha Coakley, who had registered a 30-point lead in the polls last fall, ran a smug, arrogant and incompetent campaign.  Keep in mind that Democrats outnumber Republicans in Massachusetts by a three-to-one margin. Obama won the state in 2008 by a 26-point margin. Republicans will tout Brown's election as a rejection of Obama's health care initiative and excessive spending. Democrats will say it was a "perfect storm," the combination of a weak candidate, the continuing poor economy and frustration over Congressional failure to pass health care reform.  However, the truth be told -- and that's all that's ever delivered in this space -- it is not about Republicans or Democrats.  The largest block of voters in Massachusetts are independents and the overwhelming majority of them voted for Brown.  Independents are worried about continuing gridlock, something they can't understand with the Democrats holding a super majority in Congress. They expected Obama to be a bipartisan leader. However, he is no less partisan than any of his predecessors. And when it comes to Obama's promise to bring sound financial management to government, fuggedaboutit.  I think the message voters are sending is this: After three decades of political warfare between the radical right and the limpid left, the middle is taking charge. Independent-minded voters are saying "enough is enough." They want action and are willing to shake-up the political landscape to do it.  If the President and lawmakers of both parties do not dial back the rhetoric, start rolling up their sleeves and seek a bipartisan consensus on the weighty issues of the day, then the most popular campaign slogan this year will likely be "Re-elect No one." That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 4 -- January 11, 2010 Fiscal Anarchy I listened to democrat Governor Mark Parkinson tonight give his State of the State address to the Kansas General Assembly.  I also listened to republican House Speaker Michael O'Neal's response.  I hope a lot of Kansans listened.  If they did, they would have heard a stark difference between two visions for the state's future.  Parkinson laid out a specific plan for addressing a $400 million state revenue shortfall.  He detailed at great length how this state's schools, universities and community colleges have helped Kansas to prosper during its 150-year history. Saying that massive cuts that have already occurred have hurt Kansans, Parkinson proposed a one-cent increase in the state sales tax that would almost entirely sunset in three years.  He also proposed raising the state tax on cigarettes to the national average. The governor said he was open to other ideas that would raise revenue without crippling already damaged state services. On the other hand, O'Neal delivered Reaganesque platitudes about how it is better to have people spend their own money than have the government spend it for them.  O'Neal would be right if this were 1980.  At that time, federal government spending was out of control and Ronald Reagan was right to reel in overzealous bureaucrats.  But this is 2010, the state is in the midst of a deep recession and facing budget deficits because of decades of legislative adherence to the bogus belief that all taxes are bad and should be cut to spur business growth.  Of course, O'Neal didn't say where he was going to cut the budget. However, he did chastise public school officials threatening to sue the state over inadequate funding. O'Neal also suggested that the state should be operated more like a business.  But even businesses raise their prices to cover increased costs.  Using O'Neal's logic, why should government be any different?  Don't get me wrong - I am a fiscal conservative.  But unlike many Kansas legislators who have an almost Pavlovian adherence to supply-side economics, I am not a fiscal anarchist.  Real leadership means making tough - and at times - unpopular choices.  Recklessly cutting spending to avoid raising taxes may make it easy to win reelection.  However, doing so erodes the economic underpinnings and general welfare of our state - thus eclipsing any short-term gains born of political expediency. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 4 No. 3 -- January 9, 2010 A Cancer on the American Body Politic Oh Lord, how I hate the abortion debate. It is a cancer on the American body politic. I especially dislike how fringe elements on the radical right and the limpid left have hijacked political debate in this country.  Recently, the abortion issue has been forced to the back burner by more legitimate issues such as health care, national security and the economy. People have a right to disagree with one another in a democracy.  And a healthy debate on abortion is fine.  However, thanks to a well-meaning but misguided district court judge, the radicals and the limpids are about to thrust their self-righteous selves back onto center stage.  Sedgwick County District Court Warren Wilbert yesterday ruled that Scott Roeder - the sleaseball who murdered abortion doctor George Tiller in a crowded church last year - can seek a voluntary manslaughter conviction in lieu of one on first-degree murder. Judge Wilbert said he would allow the defense to argue that Roeder acted "upon an unreasonable but honest belief that circumstances existed that justified deadly force."  For the record, I believe that the use of abortion as a means of birth control is immoral.  I also believe in requiring parental consent for abortions involving minors. But I also believe that abortion is a moral - not legal - matter between a woman and her doctor. As for Judge Wilbert's ruling, I have no reason to doubt his motives.  I would like to believe that he did what he thought was right.  However, I also wonder what the ruling might have been if the circumstances were different - if instead of the shooting of a doctor in a church, the gunman had shot a judge in a courtroom? It is a reasonable question to ask when dealing with unreasonable people. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. X Vol. 4 No. 2 -- January 3, 2010 Profiles in Correctness The unsuccessful Christmas bomb attack on a U.S. airline has reawaken the debate over racial and religious profiling.  The radical right would have us strip search anyone who "just doesn't look right." The limpid left believes that any form of profiling is fascism.  A reasonable person believes that under certain circumstances, profiling is not only appropriate, but is preferred.  Should police pull over black people driving expensive cars out of a belief that they couldn't possibly afford such a sweet ride?  Of course not.  However, it is hard to escape the logic of one Israeli official who correctly noted recently that while not all Muslims are terrorists, nearly all terrorists are Muslims. While this rationale should not be an excuse to hassle individuals solely on the basis of their religion, it does provide reasonable cause in matters where there is a clear and present danger.  By that, I mean access to international flights, entrance into the United States and when entering areas of high security.  Because we are a free society, we shouldn't require that every person of Middle Eastern or Islamic heritage wear a "Scarlet T" for terrorist.  However, we can take reasonable precautions in our own self defense. And it is not as if it is America that bears the sole burden in these matters.  As long as the world's Islamic community fails to decisively act against those who pervert their religion by committing dumb-ass murder in the name of God, then living under a cloud of perpetual suspicion is the price they have to pay.  The more we handcuff this nation's security forces, the easier we make it for those who wish us harm. The military, the CIA, the FBI, the NSA and the police are not the bad guys.  I hope some of those on the limpid left will remember that the next time they board an airplane. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. X Vol. 4 No. 1 -- January 1, 2010 Predictions A new year and new decade dawn with hope born of innate optimism.  It's an exercise in which we engage every new year: Hoping that the future will live up to past promises unfilled. The new year 2010 is no different.  It is an election year -- but when is is ever not an election year?  The republicans believe they will make gains in the mid-term congressional elections.  They probably will, but not enough to change the balance of power in Congress. Despite its national success, the democrat party is pretty much DOA in the state of Kansas.  Senator Sam Brownback will be elected our next governor, and a republican will be elected to succeed him in the U.S. Senate. In fact, the democrats' only realistic hopes are in the second and fourth congressional districts.  However, with democrats completely in charge in Washington and George W. Bush back in Texas, the Dems are saddled with the baggage of Washington incumbancy. With democrat Dennis Moore retiring in the fourth district, the only thing that will keep the republicans from reclaiming his seat are the republicans, themselves. The democrats' best hope is that the GOP nominates a right-wing reactionary who splits the party.  In the second district, republican Lynn Jenkins will get a determined democrat challenge. However, without the perfect storm of 2006 which swept democrats into power, the second district will remain a tough place for blue-staters. As for President Obama, the education of the Nobel Prize winner will continue. No doubt he has learned that the presidency isn't as easy as he portrayed it to be on the campaign trail. While he has struck a less aggressive tone on the world stage than his predecessor, his limpid response to the abortive Christmas bomb attack on a U.S. airline has made him appear weaker and less decisive than former President Bush.  The best thing going for President Obama is the void of leadership in the republican ranks. Even with his flaws, Obama will - for the foreseeable future, at least - look better than any alternative on the other side of the aisle. In short, I don't see 2010 being a major turning point in history. Any election year would seem a letdown from the sea change election of 2008. Instead, 2010 will be a year of positioning, prodding and poking. The heavyweights will be testing one another for weaknesses. And the lightweights will continue to drive the political agenda. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. X

 Return to the current post