Testudo's Tales from 2011

Vol. 5 No. 54 -- December 28, 2011 Fire Bill Maher As one who spent a decade as a journalist, I remember newsrooms being a fairly raucous and coarse place.  Some of the jokes one heard could make a longshoreman blush. An example: "Question: What was Marvin Gaye's last hit record? Answer: I Heard It Through the Carbine." (Gaye was shot to death by his father in 1984.) That is an example of dark humor. Some believe its use is a coping mechanism that gets us through difficult times. However, by its nature, dark humor is also private humor.  Those of us in the newsroom knew better than to use that kind of humor in public. These are the kinds of jokes one tells only to family and close friends - not out of fear or shame, but because the listener knows the joke teller and will not be inclined to be judgmental. Using dark humor in a public forum is risky and usually reserved for comedians.  But even they face danger when they cross that invisible "line" between good and bad taste.  Just ask Gilbert Gottfried.  AFLAC axed him as the voice of its duck after he tweeted a joke about the Japanese tsunami. That takes us to Bill Maher, a comedian and HBO social commentator whose humor often straddles - and ocassionally crosses - that line. This past weekend, Maher gleefully attacked Denver's born-again quarterback Tim Tebow's loss to the Buffalo Bills by tweeting, "Wow, Jesus just [expletive] #TimTebow bad! And on Xmas Eve! Somewhere ... Satan is tebowing, saying to Hitler "Hey, Buffalo's killing them." Maher, an avowed atheist, has a constitutional right to question religion.  But does this criticism have to be personal?  As I stated earlier this year (Vol. 5 No. 48), Tebow's decision to wear his religious beliefs on his sleeve are controversial and, to some people, threatening. Some people believe that this Maher went too far and should be fired.  I agree with them.  This is not a First Amendment issue: The government wouldn't be firing Maher. He would be fired by the Time-Warner owned HBO. If AFLAC can fire Gottfried for being insensitive to a struggling nation's plight, surely Maher should be axed for offending the world's 2.1 billion Christians during their holiest observance.  Intolerance should not be condoned, whether the offender is conversative or liberal. Of course, neither Maher nor I will have the final word in this matter. That will be decided by a higher power. And won't Bill Maher be surprised to learn that the "higher power" to whom I refer is not Time-Warner? That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 53 -- December 21, 2011 The End of the World (As We Know It) In case you haven't heard, we are about to be "Skeetered."  That's a term of art I have created for the end of the world (as we know it). It is also an homage to the late Skeeter Davis and her best-known song, The End of the World, released in 1963. According to the Mayan calendar, we are on the eve of destruction. Just one year from today, we reach the end of the final countdown. The Mayans, Nostradamus and a bunch of other folks featured on the History Channel say the world is supposed blow-up on December 21, 2012. It has something to do with the alignment of the sun, the moon and the stars.  Maybe, the planet won't disappear, but humanity's supremacy over it surely will.  And who knows who will rule the earth after we are all gone?  It surely would mark the end of a wonderful world. So, as we await our fate, there's a kind of hush all over the world.  Some of us may sink into a deep well of self-pity, but not me. The end of the world isn't necessarily the worst that could happen. After all, Rick Perry could be elected president.  However, I am an optimist.  Perhaps someone - or something - will come to save the day. Perhaps you will save yourself.  So, don't worry, be happy. Everything's alright. Don't be paralyzed by predictions of doom and gloom.  Go ahead, Mayans, hit us with your best shot! You don't scare me! As I have told you, there is only thing you should fear. Fear the turtle. No matter what happens to our crazy world, our hearts will go on and on - even if time, itself, reaches its big finish. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 52 -- December 11, 2011 Spare Us "The Donald" According to our friends at Wikipedia - the (sometimes, but not always) authoritative source of everything - Donald Trump "is an American business magnate, television personality and author. He is the chairman and president of The Trump Organization and the founder of Trump Entertainment Resorts. Trump's extravagant lifestyle, outspoken manner and role on the NBC reality show The Apprentice have made him a well-known celebrity who was No. 17 on the 2011 Forbes Celebrity 100 list." What Wikipedia doesn't tell you is that "The Donald" is a blow hole and a charlatan who continues to skate on the legal and ethical edge of his financial dealings.  Several of the companies he has led have filed for bankruptcy over the years and, in 2002, he settled a complaint brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission for misrepresenting the earnings of one of his holdings in 1999. In settling the matter, he did not admit his guilt. Nor did he assert his innocence, either. Now "The Donald" wants to be a king maker in the race for the Republican Presidential nomination. He wants to "moderate" -- a word never used in connection with Trump before -- a debate between Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney.  Romney is too smart (I think) to fall into this trap.  I love what the blog NJ.com had to say about a Gingrich-Trump event: "If the Donald Trump-moderated debate featuring Newt Gingrich doesn’t collapse from indifference, a question occurs: How are they going to find a venue big enough to accommodate those two overblown, egomaniacal gasbags?"  Of course, there's speculation that this entire fiasco is just an excuse for "The Donald" to position himself as king. (One would think the White House would be much too small for a man of his self-proclaimed stature.) And any candidate, especially a former Speaker of the House, should have the common sense to stay away from this particular dog-and-pony show.  But, then again, common sense hasn't always been Gingrich's strong suit. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 51 -- December 1, 2011 Looking for a Cure The federal government and private corporations pour billions of dollars each year to solve the many diseases that ail us. But there's one disease that causes more societal damage than any other. Ironically, finding a cure won't cost us a plug nickel - and would probably save of us billions of them.  This disease is known as Brett Favre Syndrome, named after the former Green Bay Packers, New York Jets and Minnesota Vikings quarterback and social media expert. Even casual sports fans know his tragic story: The man who stayed too long.  He refused to acknowledge the laws of nature: Despite years of greatness, everyone reaches his or her peak. After that, it's downhill all the way. Favre couldn't understand that his time had passed. And now he will be as much remembered for his pathetic lean years as for his seasons of greatness. Unfortunately, this affliction is not limited to male athletes.  Politicians are notorious for failing to understand when their time has come and gone.  Take Nancy Pelosi, for example.  Despite the fact that she became the focal point of a successful Republican effort to seize control of the U.S. House of Representatives, she continues to hang on as House Minority Leader.  She doesn't realize that as long as she insists on leading Democrats in the House, they will never regain control. If she is really interested in the future of her party, she would step down knowing that her place in history as the first female Speaker of the House has been assured.  Of course, Brett Favre Syndrome reaches into almost every field of endeavor.  I've seen it in academia.  There's nothing sadder than tenured professors past their prime. Instead of stepping away with their dignity, they become disruptive defenders of "the way things have always been done." They are miserable and, by God, they are going to make their colleagues and students miserable, too.  When they finally stop trying to be the "sage on the stage," they are less remembered for their moments of greatness than for the turmoil they caused. Next year, I will turn 60. Brett Favre Syndrome is more than an idle intellectual exercise for me. It is my hope that when I retire, my colleagues will say they are sorry to see me go.  However, if I don't have the common sense to go when my time comes, my ultimate departure will become the refrain of an old Roy Clark song: "Thank God and Greyhound he's gone." That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 50 -- November 27, 2011 Number Two Hundred This is the 200th post since I launched Snapping Turtle on September 28, 2007. It took me two years, five months and two days to reach my 100th post. It took another year, eight months and 26 days to move from 100 to 200.  I am not certain what the increased pace of posting means: Either I have more to say, am more confident in what I say, or am just plain full of myself.  It is probably a bit of all three. If one looks back to the 100th post on March 1, 2010, you will find a note of optimism. That's not surprising. By then I had moved away from the depression and grief of my wife's passing to a period of increased contentment. My mood at post 200 is a combination of self-reliance and restrained cynicism. I have learned the hard way not to confuse friendly with friendship, ideas with vision, and authority with leadership. Perhaps it is an artifact of advancing age - I will be 60 next year. But I am now entering a period of what Abraham Maslow called "self-actualization," a desire to "be all that you can be."  I am much more content to focus on my research and writing than I am in addressing the drum and strang of work and government.  Despite themselves, the great institutions known as the University of Kansas and the United States of America will be here long after I am gone. As selfish as it may sound, it is my inner-circle of family, friends, students and ideas that motivate me.  We are all faced with the reality that our clock is ticking and we don't know when the alarm will sound.  All we can really hope for is to be true to ourselves and, in my case, to be around to report on the state of affairs in my 300th post. EDITOR'S NOTE: Oops! As a result of an editing error in early 2009, it turns out that is was only the 193rd post. The 200th post did not come until January 6, 2012. As I said, oops! That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 49 -- November 20, 2011 American Apartheid The United States Congress is headed toward another train wreck.  If the so-called Supercommittee does not reach a compromise on cutting the budget deficit by Tuesday, some fairly Draconian measures will take effect that will severely harm both the U.S. military and federal government safety net programs. Republicans will blame the Democrats and the Democrats will blame the Republicans. And the people will suffer.  I respect the philosophical differences between the parties and I believe the debate is healthy. Both sides have merit.  But what I don't understand are Senate rules that render resolution of this and other matters impossible.  Under Senate rules, it takes 60 votes to impose cloture on debate -- in other words, put a time limit upon it.  Without 60 votes to limit debate, a minority of senators can filibuster as long as they wish. In recent years, senators on both sides of aisle have abused this rule. In effect, nothing can happen in the U.S. Senate without a supermajority of 60 votes.  I not only believe this is immoral, it is also unconstitutional.  By its rules, the U.S. Senate has ignored the doctrine of one-person, one vote.  It has given a minority of senators -- and, by extension, a minority of voters -- an inordinant amount of power over the majority.  Elections are supposed to have consequences. And when we are not happy with the direction our elected representatives take, we are free to replace them.  Someone with the legal resources to do so -- the American Civil Liberties Union comes to mind -- should challenge this perverse version of American apartheid.  Debate, and then vote. That's all a gridlock weary nation asks. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 48 -- November 13, 2011 Tim Tebow People love to hate Tim Tebow.  It is almost a national obsession. Football players ridicule him by kneeling in a faux-prayer position that has come to be known as "Tebowing." Others dismiss him for his beliefs, which include opposition to abortion. And still others want to believe he is a phony.  It has occurred to me that people's reaction to Tim Tebow is symbolic of what is destroying the fabric of American society, intolerance. The American promise, or at least the one I was taught, is that we are a nation that embraces and respects differences among people.  Unfortunately, that is simply not true.  Tim Tebow is not the subject of derision because he believes in God. He is despised because, for some twisted reason, we believe his faith somehow diminishes ourselves.  If he is "holy," then we must be "sinners." Consider some of the issues that bring conflict among people of faith: abortion, gay marriage and gay rights, alcohol, tobacco, school prayer, certain dress codes and even dancing. Reasonable people of faith can have differing beliefs and coexist peacefully. But intolerant people see those differences as threats and insults - as if they are being labeled as ungodly. Unfortunately, sometimes they are. The result is a society in which trust and respect are thrown out the window and insult-hurling passes for public debate. Unfortunately, this intolerance knows no geographic or political boundaries. The community in which live, Lawrence, Kansas, views itself as a learned and tolerant community. However, it is as intolerant as Americus, Georgia, a community in which I lived in the mid-1970s.  The only differences between Americus of the 1970s and Lawrence of 2011 are the targets of intolerance.  Americus of the 1970s hated blacks, liberals and Catholics. Lawrence of 2011 hates conservatives, fundamentalist Christians and any Catholic who actually follows the tenants of the church.  People hate Tim Tebow out of a fear that he might actually be a better human being than we are.  So we place him under scrutiny, hoping to find a flaw that will allow us to dismiss him entirely.  Perhaps our energies would be better spent turning that glaze upon ourselves, looking to eliminate any flaws we see, and embracing with confidence - and respect - those qualities and values that define us. Maybe, just maybe, we will find that we have more in common with Tim Tebow than we knew. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 47 -- November 9, 2011 Going, Going, Gone. Every time I turn on the news these days, it seems as if I have tuned into a rerun of "Men Behaving Badly." Herman Cain, the pizza man who would be president, is engulfed in allegations of sexual harassment. Silvio Berlusconi, the pizza man who did become president (actually prime minister) may finally be on his way out because of his handling of the Italian economy.  And then there's Joe Paterno, the venerable Penn State football coach who announced today that he will retire at the end of this season because of things he didn't do, were not required to do, but maybe should have done anyway. I don't feel a lot for Cain.  I am not sure which bothers me the most: The growing list of allegations against him, his arrogant and bumbling handling of the controversy, or the fact that the man who would be president didn't know that China has been a nuclear power since 1964. Then there's Berlusconi, the sleazy media mogul who appears to have turned his office into the best little whore house in Rome. Heck, that man could make Bill Clinton blush! I sure won't be sorry to see him go. As for JoePa, its a different story.  I don't know enough about the case to know the degree to which his hands may have been tied in the Sandusky child abuse scandal. How often do you go outside of your chain of command? Paterno probably could have done things differently - and better. Even he admits that. But I find it offensive that so many people - especially the ethically challenged cabal of sports writers - have chosen to pontificate on what the coach should have done. Ethical clarity is always better when seen through a rear view mirror. And, before I go, a special shout-out to that other group of men (and women) behaving badly: the University of Missouri. Tiger Tech announced last weekend that it was leaving its historic roots in the Midwest-based Big 12 Conference to join its Confederate Band of Brothers in the Southeastern Conference. And what was the excuse Mizzou's president gave? He cited instability in the Big 12. He didn't mention that he created it when he started shopping his university to the Big 10, which, in turn, didn't want to have anything to do with Mizzou.  So the Border War is over. The Kansas Jayhawks won. And Mizzou is about to learn it is true when they say "Be careful what you ask for. You may get it." EDITOR'S NOTE: Three hours after this commentary was posted, Coach Paterno and PSU's president were fired, effective immediately, by the school's Board of Trustees. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 46 -- November 2, 2011 Echoes of the Bonus March I am having a hard time coming to grips with the "Occupy Wall Street" movement.  On the one hand, I am sympathetic to its message that the tax breaks and executive compensation received by the top 1 percent of U.S. wage earners are obscene and unjust to the remaining 99 percent.  I get it. However, on the other hand, these erstwhile activists come across as rebels without a clue.  Their message is often incoherent and their leadership is non-existent.  They like to compare themselves as an alternative to the Tea Party folks who they mock. However, the Tea Party, like it or not, has had a tangible effect on American political debate.  Remember last November? Right now, the only tangible impact the "occupiers" have had is the trashing of public parks and the draining of city budgets at a time they can least afford it.  However, this movement could prove very dangerous for Barack Obama and the Democrats.  Some high-profile Democrats have openly embraced the movement.  In doing so, they run the same risk of being "guilty-by-association" that the Republicans have faced with the Tea Party.  The spectacle of so-called "ordinary" Americans camping out in public parks reminds me of Herbert Hoover's albatross, the Bonus March of 1932.  The image of the military burning the shantytown homes of unemployed World War I veterans camped in Washington destroyed any hope of Hoover's reelection. If these protests turn violent - and they already have in Oakland - Barack Obama will get the blame. Americans voted for change in 2008. If they see rock-throwing confrontations with police, rampant vandalism and burning cars in the street, Americans will vote for change again in 2012.  I believe every American has the right to peaceful protest. But I also believe in meaningful protest. Leaning out a window and shouting "I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!" doesn't accomplish anything. My advice to the "occupiers," go home and vote. And if you can't articulate your beliefs, then just go home. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 45 -- October 22, 2011 Mizzou and the Ghosts of 1861 What is it with Missouri? One hundred-fifty years ago, most of its people wanted to bolt the United States to join the Confederacy.  History has shown us what a smart idea that would have been.  Now the University of Missouri is flirting with the idea of joining its crimson-naped brethren - that's red-neck brothers for the Mizzou fans having this read to them - and switching its athletic programs to the Southeastern Conference.  To that, I say - go.  The only parties who will regret that transaction will be the Southeastern Conference and Missouri.  Here's the essential math: If Mizzou leaves, the Big 12 will pick up one to three stronger athletic programs and new television markets.  And while it may lose the St. Louis market, it won't be that big a loss.  St. Louis is a professional sports town where Mizzou is more of a diversion than a passion.  In the SEC, Mizzou will be be unable to compete in football (as was the case in the Big 12) and will be overshadowed by some of basketball's elite programs (as was the case in the Big 12). Mizzou fans will have much farther to travel to see their teams lose than if it stays in the Big 12. And, in the coup de grace -- death blow for the intellectually challenged Mizzou fans -- you won't have Kansas.  Missouri officials have whimsically suggested that the 119-year rivalry with the Jayhawks would continue no matter what conference the Tigers make their home. But to their credit, KU athletics officials have sent a pretty strong message that if Mizzou bolts, the Border War is over with KU victorious.  This will gall the Tiger nation (if such a thing really exists), but MU needs KU a lot more than KU needs MU.  KU already has a rival to take the Tigers' place - a Kansas State program that has overachieved. (For you MU fans who don't know what overachieve means, it is the opposite of how your program has historically performed.) KU has a storied athletic history while Mizzou is remembered as "the best basketball school to never make it to the Final Four."  And KU will have no problem recruiting athletes and students - with or without the 119-year rivalry with MU. (Face it, Columbia isn't Lawrence.) And let's keep in mind that Mizzou's lust to join the Big 10 ended in embarrassment -- the Big 10 wanted nothing to do with Mizzou.  That could happen again with the SEC -- especially since certain moronic MU officials have openly said the SEC is a "fall back" position. The bottom line is that the University of Missouri is about to make a huge mistake that could damage the university for years to come.  Would I like to see MU stay in the Big 12? Yes. Do I really care if MU stays? No.  If Mizzou is to achieve the athletic success and stability it says it wants to achieve, it needs to conger up the ghosts of 1861 and decide to remain in the Union. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 44 -- October 15, 2011 The Land of ROZ I have spent a lot of time driving in Western Kansas and visiting with its people in recent weeks. My travels were prompted by this semester's project in my Strategic Communication Campaigns class.  Our client is the Kansas Department of Commerce and our challenge is to promote the Rural Opportunities Zone initiative. ROZ uses tax incentives and tuition reimbursements to lure people into Kansas counties, mostly located in the western part of the state, that have experienced a population decline.  The program officially began on July 1 - making it too early to judge its effectiveness. For many, ROZ may sound overly ambitious. Perhaps it is.  However, having visited with the movers and shakers of four rural Kansas communities, I am convinced it is worth a shot. I believe many outside these communities think that residents of ROZ counties are downtrodden and living in despair. Actually, the opposite it true. These are proud people who love where they live and the people with whom they live.  These are close-knit communities that, for the most part, share common values and vision. While it is certainly true that they lack many of the opportunities that may be afforded to them in urban areas, they are quick to point out that it cuts both ways. People living in rural areas share a lifestyle and cohesion non-existent in the big cities.  They don't lock their doors.  They don't have to worry about where their children are going.  They come to each other's aid in times of need. And at night, they can look up and gaze upon the stars.  Yes, they face challenges.  One of those will be the assimilation of a growing Hispanic/Latino presence. Something tells me that because of their values, these rural Kansans will likely handle that challenge much better than their big city cousins have.  I admit that I have a bias -- I grew up in the country on Maryland's Eastern Shore.  However, everyone can't be as lucky.  I don't know if the ROZ initiative - or anything, for that matter - will reverse the population decline in rural Kansas. However, the one thing I know for certain is that those who choose to live in rural Kansas will not only survive well into the 21st century, they will prosper.  We all should be so lucky. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 43 -- October 5, 2011 Sounds Familiar The United States of America has expressed its official diplomatic outrage at two of its fellow permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China. Their offense -- and believe me, it was offensive -- was to veto a resolution condemning the Syrian government for its unconscionable repression of its people. The Syrian people want to be freed from the yoke of dictatorial oppression. Their struggle is heroic and it is right that we support them.  Of course, Russia and China say their veto is not about supporting the Syrian regime's campaign of terror against its people. Instead, they say it is about forcing the two sides together in negotiations.  Here's the rub: The United States is about to use its Security Council veto of a resolution seeking an independent Palestinian state along Israel's borders.  Take the Syrian scenario I just described, but substitute Israel for the Syrian regime and the Palestinians for the Syrian resistance. Sound familiar?  The U.S. says it favors creation of a Palestinian state, but only through negotiation.  That should sound familiar, as well. For 60 years, the unqualified defense of Israel's right to exist has been the cornerstone of America's Middle Eastern policy.  That's a blank check Israelis continue to cash without regard for the banker. And for that, the United States has paid a high price.  In the eyes of much of the world, the U.S. is the protector of an expansionist, repressive regime that has ignored the human and civil rights of people who, by the Israel's own claims, should be under its protection. Unfortunately, that sounds familiar too. Until we hold Israel to a higher standard -- the very standard which justified its creation -- American Middle Eastern policy is morally bankrupt. If the U.S wants to send the world -- especially the Israelis -- a powerful message, when the Palestinian resolution comes before the Security Council, it should vote in the affirmative. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 42 -- September 26, 2011 All Aboard I left town on a rail Friday - and returned on the same rail Sunday.  No, I wasn't force-marched out of town by an angry mob - although that day may yet come.  Instead of driving to St. Louis for five hours in Missouri's miserable highways, I took the train instead. My wife and I drove to Kansas City's Union Station, where we boarded the Missouri Zephyr. Roughly five and-one half hours later, we reached our destination, Kirkwood, which is only a 15-minute drive from the "kids and the grandkids."  My wife read a book and slept - or at least tried to sleep - while I graded papers. While the ride is bumpier than a typical plane ride, at least I didn't have to get poked and prodded by the TSA police wannabes. It isn't as noisy as a plane, which is a mixed blessing.  At least on the plane you can't hear the woman behind you explain to her companion over a two-hour period the many fascinating variations on a recipe for rum cake. While my journey on European rails through the Austrian Alps was far more scenic than rolling through Missouri - and frankly, what isn't? - at least I didn't have to put up with bitchy Europeans who feel it is their moral responsibility to explain what is wrong with the United States to every American they encounter. (Maybe the next time Europe needs saving, we should keep the doughboys home.) The "dining car" was more of a snack bar. That's OK for a morning run, but a bit tough during the evening dinner hour. In terms of cost, the train to St. Louis is comparable to buying three tanks of gas.  And the restrooms are a heck of a lot cleaner.  Of course, taking the train means you don't get to stop in Kingdom City and visit the tackiest souvenir shop in America. A small sacrifice, indeed. Based on this experience, it's something I may do again - if the "kids and grandkids" let me. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 41 -- September 18, 2011 It's Just Business These are unsettling times in college athletics.  Even casual fans are being caught up in the conference realignment frenzy that is engulfing sports.  Every hour of every day there seems to be a new rumor about which conference is planning on poaching schools from some other conference.  Already we have seen three teams in the Big 12 (in name only) Conference head off to new horizons - Nebraska to the Big 10 (in name only) Conference, Colorado to the Pacific 12 Conference and Texas A&M to the Southeastern Conference (maybe - if Baylor doesn't sue the Aggies).  This weekend, the Atlantic Coast Conference took two bold steps to bolster its future. The ACC schools admitted Syracuse and Pittsburgh of the Big East into their fold and unanimously doubled the buyout price for leaving the ACC to $20 million, virtually assuring that no one is going anywhere.  As early as tomorrow, Texas and Oklahoma may bolt the Big 12 for God knows where.  However, it is also possible that they will stay right where they are: in the Big 12 (in name only), where they already have a financial and competitive advantage. It could be that the Big 12 may choose to become hunters instead of being the hunted and look to poach Big East schools such as Louisville and Cincinnati, recently independent Brigham Young University or Big 12 wannbe Texas Christian University.  Geography doesn't seem to many any sense -- maybe Hawaii to the ACC?  It's all about money, television and football.  When you work as I do at a school like the University of Kansas, an elite basketball school with a strong academic tradition (not that any of that matters in this equation), this whole mess seems to be a cruel mix of commodities trading and the TV show Survivor. The athletic directors will tell you "It's nothing personal.  It's just business."  And that is at the root of this chaos.  Colleges and universities are not businesses. And even if college athletics programs are businesses, they should not be run as if they were illegal cartels peddling the flesh of student athletes. Can you image Kansas going to the ACC and having to send its volleyball team to Boston or Miami for a midweek match?  And should other schools -- the ever-greedy Texas and Notre Dame come to mind -- be allowed to dictate the financial security of literally dozens of athletic programs?  Should football trump academics? This is insanity.  More than that, it is BCS without the C. If the college presidents aren't willing to put a stop to this chaos, maybe Congress should. (Of course, asking Congress to put an end to chaos is like asking Rick Perry to put his trust in Social Security.) Admit it, traditions, academic excellence and loyalties don't matter anymore. It's just business. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 40 -- September 9, 2011 The Fine Print President Barack Obama was in fine voice tonight, telling a joint session of Congress that it had no choice but to pass his $447 billion American Jobs Act.  He challenged the Congress - Republicans specifically - to "stop the political circus and actually do something to help the economy" by quickly passing a package that includes payroll tax cuts, an extension of unemployment benefits, infrastructure improvements, tax incentives and foreign trade agreements. The president said it is a package cobbled together from bipartisan proposals for jump starting the economy. In rhetoric that was part inspirational, part partisan and ocassionally condescending, Obama challenged the Congress - the Republicans - when he said, "Everything in here is the kind of proposal that's been supported by both Democrats and Republicans -- including many who sit here tonight. And everything in this bill will be paid for. Everything." However, that's the rub.  The president didn't say how he was going to do it. According to CNN: "Obama said he will ask Congress to increase the $1.5 trillion target in deficit reduction being pursued by a special joint congressional committee to cover the cost of the American Jobs Act. He said he will propose his own deficit-reduction plan on September 19 that would reform entitlement programs such as Medicare while changing the tax system to end loopholes, lower the corporate tax rate and increase taxes for the wealthy." As much as I want to embrace the president's American Job Acts, I find it somewhat offensive that he would dangle a carrot for 11 days before showing us the stick.  The strategy is obvious: He wants people to fall in love with his rhetoric before they know the cost. It is very likely that the limpid left will hate his budget cut proposals as much as the radical right will despise his tax increases. Instead of clarifying the situation, President Obama has muddled it.  Bottom line: I am not going to dismiss the president's proposals out of hand.  However, I am not going to endorse them, either.  This is one time the American people should refuse to sign on until President Obama shows us the fine print. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 39 -- September 8, 2011 Perry - All Hat and No Cattle America got its first real look at Texas Governor Rick Perry last night - and it wasn't impressed. Perry participated in a Republican presidential debate at the Reagan Presidential Library - his first debate since throwing his hat into the ring.  It was the first opportunity to size up Perry side-by-side against the other candidates.  He did not fare well.  If the measure of a president is bluster, Perry won hands down.  Unfortunately, we want a president who is more than a rhetorical bomb-thrower.  Calling Social Security a Ponzi scheme was stupid. Suggesting that President Obama may be a liar was insulting. And taking credit for a "Texas Miracle" that, upon closer examination, falls short of the miraculous, smacks of parochialism. As it turned out, two other candidates on the stage helped themselves in the debate. Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney didn't give Perry an inch of ground and provided much more depth in his answers to moderator questions. (Come to think of it, Perry never gave a direct answer to any question during the debate.)  The other "winner" - if scoring points in the debate four months before the first delegates are picked constitutes a "win" - was former Ambassador Jon Huntsman.  He came across as the reasonable man in the room.  However, judging from the post-speech punditry, it appears no one is paying any attention to him. That's a shame - he's one guy I'd have no trouble supporting. Newt Gingrich reminded us that he may be the smartest guy in the room, but one who also is a better historian and author than politician. And since when did Ron Paul morph into Admiral Stockdale?  As for Michele Bachman, Rick Santorum and Herman Cain, the time has come to gracefully bow out.  My two overriding impressions from last night's debate are that the Republicans' best bet against President Obama is either Romney or Huntsman and that Rick Perry, in Texas parlance, is all hat and no cattle. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 38 -- September 5, 2011 Kansas City Irish Festival For the fourth consecutive Labor Day weekend, I traveled to Kansas City's Crown Center to take part in an annual ritual known as the Kansas City Irish Festival.  It is an amazing celebration of the culture, food, music and everything Irish. Yesterday, on arguably one of the most beautiful weather days we have enjoyed in years, tens of thousands of people came to the streets of Kansas City to revel in being Irish or, for many (if not most) Irish wannabes. Coincidentally, yesterday was the start of a week of commemorations leading up to the tenth anniversary of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.  This convergences of events caused me to wonder if Islamic radicals could ever enjoy an equivalent to an Irish festival in their own communities. Probably not, I concluded, because an Irish festival represents everything they hate.  The Irish Festival is a celebration of diversity and heritage.  It is all about the things that make us different.  However, it is also about the ties that bind.  If you were to ask the tens of thousands of people milling around the Crown Center area this weekend whether they would rather live in Ireland than here in the United States, the almost unanimous answer would be that they are happy to be here.  It isn't a knock on Ireland, which by all accounts is a lovely land and is on my bucket list of places to go before I die. It is because that in America we allow people to embrace their differences while sharing common values, such as freedom of religion, expression and association. For all of its lofty rhetoric about the moral purity of its followers, Al Qaeda does not tolerate diversity.  It does not tolerate individualism. Frankly, it does not tolerate many of the principles outlined in the Koran from which it demands strict adherence.  The Kansas City Irish Festival is more than just a celebration of humanity.  In the war on terror and intolerance, the Kansas City Irish Festival is a reminder of why we are right, why they are wrong, and why we must win. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 37 -- September 1, 2011 Really? Really? That was my reaction to President Obama's latest political blunder.  Our president wants to speak to a joint session of Congress to unveil a jobs program to stimulate the economy. Really? Hasn't this been a pressing problem plaguing the Obama Administration from its outset?  And after the nation's voters made it clear that they were displeased with the president's handling of the economy last November, why did he wait until now to roll out his jobs program? The White House says it has nothing to do with politics. Really? The president's supporters say the fact that Obama's job approval rating has been recently dropped like a rock really doesn't have any bearing on the timing of his speech. Really? And that the timing of the president's speech directly conflicts with a long-scheduled debate of Republican presidential candidates is really a mere coincidence? Really? Now the White House is saying that it is the Republicans who are playing politics by forcing him move his speech to the next day, September 8. OK, that may really be true, but really - if this speech were so really important why not go on national television from the Oval Office Tuesday night? And if this speech were so really important, why is the White House concerned about preempting a National Football League game on Thursday night?  If enemy missiles were bearing down on us, would the president really wait until halftime to tell us? Really? Obama is a really smart guy who usually has really good political instincts.  However, they really failed him this time. Obama is really acting like a man whose job is really on the line and is really desperate to keep it. Really. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 36 -- August 25, 2011 The Fragility of Life Within the past 48 hours, I have received several reminders of the fragility of life.  I first learned that Pat Summit, the winningest coach in the history of men's or women's college basketball, has been diagnosed with early onset dementia, Alzheimer’s type. This is stunning news, considering the woman's incredible energy and lust for life. It also hits close to home when one realizes that Summitt and I are about the same age - she is just a year older. Her response is admirable: She plans to forge ahead and coach the Tennessee Lady Volunteers with the help of her able assistants.  The news turned darker last night when Steve Jobs, the genius behind Apple - the computer I am using to write this blog - resigned as Apple's CEO. Jobs is apparently losing his long battle with cancer and says he is no longer up to the task of running the world's most innovative company.  "I have always said if there ever came a day when I could no longer meet my duties and expectations as Apple's CEO, I would be the first to let you know," Jobs, 56, said in his resignation letter. "Unfortunately, that day has come." One hoped that the man who gave the world user-friendly computer and digital products would somehow figure out had to beat "the big C." But now we know that Steve Jobs is a mere mortal like the rest of us.  Then, in this morning's newspaper, came confirmation that bad news comes in threes.  Mike Flanagan, a former star pitcher, announcer and current front office executive for the Baltimore Orioles, was found dead at his home outside of Baltimore yesterday. The cause of death for Flanagan - who is also about my age - has not been announced at the time of this writing. This one strikes particularly hard because of the force of Flanagan's personality.  Because of his high-profile roles, Flanny (as he is known by his friends - and we were all his friends) was able to show what a smart, funny and compassionate guy he really was. Today, I do not mourn the death of a great ballplayer. Instead, I am saddened by the premature passing of a real good guy - something this world needs more of. Summitt, Jobs and Flanagan, very different people who share (or shared) three things in common: Excellence in their chosen vocations, an incredible zest for all life offers, and now reminders of the fragile hold we have on our mortal existence. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 35 -- August 18, 2011 Sympathy for the Devil It's hard these days not to feel victimized by college athletics. This occurred to me last Sunday while I patiently waited in line to select my seats for the upcoming men's college basketball season at Allen Field House.  It's not that I felt animus toward the people running the event. All things considered, it is a fair and orderly process. Faculty and staff seating priority is based on years of service to the university. That seems fair. What struck me was the absurdity of the degree toward this service was measured. In my case, years of service were listed as 19.994520548 years.  Really, it requires the precision of carrying out my service to one-billionth of a year? Aren't these the same people who lost track of $2 million worth of tickets? Within hours of my Allen Field House pilgrimage, news surfaced out of the University of Miami of significant NCAA violations involving illegal payments to players in several sports with the knowledge of coaches and administrators.  Implicated in this mess is former Miami basketball coach Frank Haith, hired by the University of Missouri's program last April.  Specifically, Yahoo Sports reported that Haith had knowledge of a $10,000 payment to secure the signing of a player at Miami. Haith, in a news release, said much of the reporting by Yahoo Sports was in error but did not explicitly address the allegations against him. Haith wasn't exactly welcomed to Mizzou with open arms, especially considering his 43-69 conference record at Miami. According to a report in the Kansas City Star, Missouri officials did their due diligence before hiring Haith - even asking the NCAA for its opinion. Despite the fact that it was investigating the most serious violations of its rules since the SMU football program received the death penalty in 1987, the NCAA didn't have the courage or decency to give the school a heads up. Now, the harsh light of recriminations fall upon Mizzou, its players and athletic department.  While no one at Missouri - other than Haith - has been linked to the Miami allegations, the specter of the Hurricane Hustle leaves a cloud over the program. It is enough to make a Kansas Jayhawk fan feel sorry for the Tigers.  It is also enough to make one's blood boil. I agree with something ESPN college football analyst Mark May said this morning - even if one-third of the allegations against the University of Miami prove true, the Hurricane athletic department deserves the so-called death penalty. Let justice be done. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 34 -- August 4, 2011 Don and Carol and Ken and Barbie The Cable News Network went on the air June 1, 1980, with a noble purpose, to provide comprehensive coverage of the news and help create a better informed civil society.  By those standards, CNN has failed in its mission.  Yes, there are those moments during the broadcast day that it provides live coverage or a summary of issues that are - or should be - important to its viewers.  But CNN doesn't provide us very much news. During a typical hour, it will give us approximately 10 minutes of news, 20 minutes of commercials, and 30 minutes of punditry.  Many of these pundits, such as David Gergen, have substantial resumes.  However, others are just political mouthpieces who seldom stray from their same ideologically driven song sheet. And then there are CNN's anchors, many of whom have no credentials beyond looking and sounding good on television. For example, there's the hopelessly clueless Carol Costello, who is one of the morning anchors and appears throughout the midday. After some success in small-market Ohio television, she spent some time as a reporter/anchor for a Washington, D.C. station.  All of this suggests that she is probably a capable reporter. But that's not what she does at CNN. Instead, she is a "personality" who openly inflicts the viewer with her biases. This bias not only comes with the way she introduces topics and frames questions, it also comes with thinly disguised body language and blatant editorial asides. Don Lemon, a seemingly talented anchor most often seen on the weekends, is of the same mold. I watched him for several hours this past weekend feign disgust with Congress as it debated the debt ceiling. Don and Carol are not Ken and Barbie - they appear to be qualified reporters.  But there's nothing in their resumes that suggest they are intellectually prepared to expose their opinions on a range of subjects, from politics and economics to religion and morality.  Yet they do with the apparent blessings of their bosses. Don and Carol - and those of their ilk - should not expose viewers with unfiltered opinions on issues with which they have established absolutely no authority.  Their ignorance most recently was exposed by the debt ceiling debate which they repeatedly ridiculed Congress and the White House.  In the real world, difficult decisions are made through an often long process of give-and-take, proposal-counter proposal - in other words, politics. And contrary to popular belief, most of our elected representatives are not amoral morons who will sell their mothers for a vote. Instead, like Gabby Giffords, they entered politics to make a difference.  However, as the debt negotiations dragged on and Don and Carol had nothing to report, they repeatedly inserted their opinions about the "system being broken" and that Congress was only interested in scoring political points.  At one point, CNN had the gall to punctuate this anti-government bias with the graphic command "Get it done!" (Since when does Larry the Cable Guy do the news?) With this level of insightful commentary, I believe that Don, Carol and their colleagues have done more to undermine confidence in government than the government, itself.  And if you don't believe that, ask yourself this question: What good could have possibly come out of polling voters this past weekend on whether Congress is acting like spoiled children? Any reputable social scientist could have predicted that three in four respondents would say yes. It is a leading question - the kind we don't allow in court.  Nor should we allow it in the court of public opinion - especially when asked by those whose only established expertise involves hair and make-up. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 33 -- August 1, 2011 Beaten at Their Own Game As the debt ceiling crisis recedes into history, congressional democrats are licking their wounds. The hallmark of democratic political strategy for the past 80 years has been class warfare.  You know the narrative: Republicans are for the rich and democrats are for people like you and me. And for many years, the GOP played into that game by playing into the stereotype.  By firing up their special interests, the democrats were able to create an invincible voting block. Sure, there were times their friends caused headaches - Louis Farrakhan, anyone? However, with the combination of voting discipline and class-tinged rhetoric, the democrats held sway. Enter the tea party, which has changed the narrative and broken the democratic block. Using the same class warfare tactics perfected by democrats, tea party republicans changed the debate. The narrative now is that republicans want to cut taxes for hard-working people while democrats want to redistribute wealth. The democrats say this is hogwash. They should know: They perfected the formula. The fact is that when it comes to demagogery, the tea party learned from the best. And it doesn't matter that the tea party message is as bogus as that of the morally bankrupt democratic party. For now, at least, theirs is the message resonating among the masses.  I've heard several commentators declare that there are no winners in this debt ceiling debate. Au contraire, mon frère. The tea party is clearly a winner.  It said it wouldn't raise taxes - and it didn't.  And don't think that the people who elected tea party republicans won't remember that. John Boehner is a winner - he navigated the dangerous shoals of in-party fighting and engineered a much-needed compromise. Senator Mitch McConnell also deserves credit for brokering the deal. And who are the losers? President Obama, for one. At one point, he had Speaker Boehner agreeing to $800 million in increased tax revenues.  However, the President got greedy, tried to tacked on another $400 million and blew up the deal. And now he has nothing to show for it. That's because he listened to the other big loser, Nancy Pelosi. If house democrats are to have any hope of regaining the majority, they need to jettison her.  That Pelosi remained minority leader after being the architect of last November's electoral debacle was an amazing stroke of good fortune - for the republicans. If the events of the last few weeks have shown us anything, Nancy Pelosi is out of touch, out of luck and out of time. And the democrats are in trouble. The republicans have beaten them at their own game. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 32 -- July 24, 2011 Is Obama Up To the Job? It is hard to find any heroes in Washington these days.  The republicans and the democrats are currently deadlocked in a game of "chicken" over raising the federal budget debt ceiling.  Some give and take is expected in a democracy.  The republicans are within their rights to demand a reduction in bloated federal spending.  And the democrats are within their rights to seek so-called revenue enhancements (plain English, taxes) on the wealthy and  corporations that have used tax loopholes to avoid paying their fair share.  However, this entire specter of a global economic disaster because of congressional inaction is nothing short of bad theater. The only reason August 2 is a meaningful deadline is because our elected leaders have artificially chosen to make it so.  The republicans drew a line in the sand and said they would not raise the debt ceiling unless the government cut spending. The democrats have shown a willingness to do so.  However, the republicans are willing to let the government default because of a campaign pledge to not raise taxes - a pledge they shouldn't have made in the first place. Only morons choose to paint themselves into that kind of corner.  (Anyone remember "Read my lips....") Speaking of morons, the democrats are hardly blameless in this matter.  Even if Congress does not act before August 2, the federal government doesn't have to default on its loans. There's nothing that prevents it from shifting funds from other sources to cover debt payments.  But that would involve hard decisions about cutting entitlement programs - the gravy train of democratic electoral politics for 80 years. Democrats don't have the backbone to do the right thing - readjust these 20th century entitlements to reflect 21st century actuary tables. And for the record, the only folks on Capitol Hill who have even submitted a budget at this point in the debate are the republicans.  The democrats need to either lead, follow or get out of the way. However, I am most disappointed in President Obama - my choice in the last election. If the country had a dollar for every time he promised to "change the tone in Washington" during the 2008 campaign, the deficit would be considerably smaller.  However, if you read his recent statements about the budget negotiations, you cannot avoid the President's strident partisanship.  Frankly, he has behaved as the "Snake-Oil-Salesman-in-Chief," presenting himself as the neutral mediator while making angry, incendiary comments from his bully pulpit. The White House spin doctors want to position Obama as the "adult-in-the-room."  Frankly, adults don't storm out of negotiating meetings in the manner Obama did earlier this month.   Our president certainly isn't the transcendental post-racial, post-partisan leader he and his cheerleaders in the news media led many to believe during the last campaign.  In reality, he's just another hack politician from Chicago who has lost sight of why he wanted to be president. For the first time in his presidency I am confronted with this serious question: Is he up to the job? This coming week may well answer that question. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 31 -- July 17, 2011 The Futility of Futile Gestures I'm not a big fan of the futile gesture. However, that has become a favorite pastime for Lawrence's liberal community.  According to this morning's newspaper, hundreds of people congregated in a Lawrence park yesterday to protest Governor Sam Brownback's decision to close the Lawrence Social Rehabilitation Services office.  It was the second such gathering this week, the first being in a downtown church. On both ocassions, local democratic elected officials took to the bully pulpit to deride what they see as Brownback's radical republican agenda.  They claim the decision to close the Lawrence office is political retribution against the only blue island in a political sea of red. There may be some truth to that.  However, the Brownback administration gave plausible reasons for the closure: the proximity of other offices and a nearly half-million dollars in savings. My friends on the limpid left would tell you that it is callous to expect some people to drive 30 miles to another office. Point taken.  But it makes more sense than closing an office in western Kansas where people may have to drive 150 miles for services.  They also challenge the premise of cutting programs to balance the state budget.  They believe the state should raise taxes. It is here where they miss the point. To the dismay of many here in Lawrence, elections have consequences. By their votes, Kansans have said they disagree with raising taxes. If I were to make an educated guess, I think you would find overwhelming support for the governor's decision. Someone needs to remind my friends on the limpid left that feeling morally superior, calling Governor Brownback a tyrant or standing in a park and spitting into the wind won't change that. The truth is that the last election exposed the Kansas Democrat Party's impotence. And until the party gets down off of its high horse and stops labeling those with differing views as radicals, neanderthals and morons, democrats will continue to find themselves on the crappy side of election day. If the democrats can't change the people, they need to change their message.  Until then, the people of Kansas are smart enough to see these futile gestures for what they are: political rhetoric full of sound and fury; signifying nothing. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 30 -- July 14, 2011 The New NIMBY There is a strange land that lies somewhere between our desire to do that which is good for all and our lust to do that which is best for ourselves. It is the Land of NIMBY, a place where the residents speak earnestly about the public good - just as long as the application of that public good doesn't infringe upon our personal space.  NIMBY is an acronym for "not in my back yard." In its conventional use, NIMBYs say things like "don't put that prison in my back yard," or "don't build that road in my back yard." However, in this age of austerity, we are confronted by what I call the "new NIMBY." Everyone in American political life says this nation needs to address its burgeoning debt.  They also earnestly express concern that America may go into default August 2.  They look into the camera and say "We have to act." However, our leaders are quick to add "we should not act at the expense of my favorite programs."  Many republicans want to protect tax cuts and tax loopholes for corporate interests.  Many democrats want "hands off" entitlement programs created in the 1930s and 1960s that have since had more add-ons than the White House Christmas tree.  And no one in Washington is suggesting that we should cut pork barrel projects, those local projects favored by politicians of both parties. To put it another way, our elected officials are saying "We favor doing everything we can to fix the budget - just as long as my ox is not gored."  This is the new NIMBY. And it is cancer destroying our republic.  There are no easy answers to this affliction. However, I humbly suggest a place to start.  When our political leaders stop treating elective office as a career path and starts to think of it as a public trust, perhaps - just perhaps - they can ratchett down the rhetoric. Instead of fixating on their next election, they should focus on our future. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 29 -- July 4, 2011 We Have Met the Enemy As the United States of America celebrates its 235th year of independence, there is a prevailing sense of anxiety.  The two sides are far apart. No one is willing to compromise. The deadline is looming.  What will happen next?  No, I am not referring to the very real crisis over whether the U.S. government is going to raise the federal debt ceiling before August 2.  As sad as it may be to admit, this incredibly important issue is not on most people's radar.  Unfortunately, they are more worried about the NFL and NBA labor lockouts. OMG! The exhibition season may not start on time! What are we expected to do if there's no pro football or basketball -- read books?  The great irony is that there isn't a lot of difference between the sports leagues' labor disputes and the mess on Capitol Hill.  It all about millionaires versus billionaires. In the sports world, that translates into the athletes versus the owners.  In Congress, its wealthy lawmakers versus big business, big labor, the Koch brothers and George Soros.  You know, there isn't really a lot we can do about the NFL and NBA.  That's somebody else's business.  However, when it comes to the government, that's a different story - We are the owners. And there is another sad truth: We are lousy owners. Do you think Congress would actually let the government go into default if the people made it clear that is unacceptable?  No, it wouldn't.  But that's not the message we are sending our elected representatives. We are telling them if you don't do exactly what I want you to do, you will lose my vote and/or campaign contribution.  Just take a hard look at the things your fellow citizens are saying about "the other party"on Facebook or the Twitterverse. Regardless of whether they are republicans or democrats, the voice of the people these days is not one of moderation. So who is it that is really unwilling to compromise on taxes, spending, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and that sweet little pork barrel project that brings money to our community. To quote the most famous line from the comic strip Pogo, "We have met the enemy and it is us."  Personally, I don't want to see tax rates for the highest earners rise. They already pay a disproportionate share of the taxes.  Justifying this because "they can afford to" makes as much sense as Holly Hunter and Nicolas Cage kidnapping one of Nathan Arizona's five quintuplets in the comedy Raising Arizona - "You go up there Ed and get me a baby. They've got more than they can handle." My preference is that we start closing lucrative corporate tax loopholes, eliminate wasteful farm subsidies and have a serious discussion about how New Deal and Great Society social programs have to be adjusted for the life expectancy of Americans in the 21st century. But even with that being said, even I realize we have to raise some taxes.  Spending cuts, alone, won't do it. And that means giving our elected representatives enough elbow room to reach a meaningful compromise. Barack Obama, Harry Reid, John Boehner and Mitch McConnell are not the bad guys in this drama.  We have met the enemy and it is us. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 28 -- June 26, 2011 Charles G. Guth II (1941-2011) "What once was seven is now five," was my sister's status on Facebook last night after learning of the passing of our brother Charles, 70, in Colorado Springs. Charles Godfrey Guth II was the second-oldest of the seven children of Jane and Evan Carey Guth. He was preceded in death by my oldest brother, Evan Carey Jr., in 1969. Charles' passing was not unexpected.  He had been in poor health for some time. Charles followed his own path in life, one that led him away from his roots and his family.  Although I had not seen him in 15 years, we maintain an ongoing telephone relationship. I last spoke to him three days before his death. As odd as it may seem, I did not really know Charles that well. He left the family home when he was 16 and I was only four. I initiated our telephone relationship in the 1985 at the request of my late mother.  She was recently widowed at the time and emotionally unable to deal with what had been a painfully stressful relationship with her second son. My role was to be her buffer. My on-again, off-again telephone relationship with Charles continued after my mother's death in 1987. For much of that time, I was the only family contact he had. And now he is gone. The story of my family is not unlike that of many other families, a patchwork quilt comprised of many disparate parts, interlaced with triumph and tragedy, hope and despair, high drama and low comedy. Not everyone can be the Waltons.  Then again, I seem to remember that John Boy and company were far from perfect, too. Families are what they are and, in the case of siblings, you have no say in the membership. It is with that understanding that I receive news of my brother's passing. I meet it with a mixture of sorrow, regret and reflection. He led a turbulent life. Now he is at peace. And what once was seven is now five. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 27 -- June 21, 2011 The High Road The campaign song for former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman may well be "I'll take the high road and you'll take the low road, and I'll be in Tampa before you."  In announcing his bid for the republican presidential nomination today, Huntsman said he wants to run a civil campaign that does not "run down" his fellow republican contenders or even President Obama.  He plans to win the GOP nomination at its August 2012 convention in Tampa by being a serious candidate who focuses on issues, not personalities. I believe he means it. Unfortunately, it won't be long before someone accuses him of breaking that promise.  Here's the hard reality: Whenever any candidate, republican or democrat, makes a comparison of his or her record to that of an opponent's,  the candidate is immediately accused of  "going negative." In today's poisoned politics, parsing the words of political opponents is a full-time blood sport. The airwaves are crowded with talking heads - O'Reilly, Limbaugh and Coulter on the right and Olbermann, Maddow and Schultz on the left - who are just waiting to parse Huntsman's words, twist their meaning, and pounce on his perceived inconsistencies. For example, a lead story on several liberal blogs this evening is that some unfortunate staffer added an unnecessary "H" and misspelled Huntsman's first name as John instead of Jon. Already, these pontificating pundits  are writing off the Huntsman campaign as incompetent.  Come, on - how long did it take Americans to learn how to spell Barack? Unfortunately for Jon (or is it John?), this is just the beginning. He is going to be clobbered by ideologues on the right who will question his conservative orthodoxy and by zealots on the left who are afraid that he might actually win the nomination. Frankly, he may have to break his "high road" promise and play political hardball in the mud if he is going to work his way through the crowded Republican field. Of course, he wouldn't be the first candidate to break a promise. Barack Obama swore that he would limit his 2008 fund raising and accept federal campaign financing. When Obama's campaign began to build steam and collect boatloads of cash, he broke that promise on the way to raising an obscene $750 million dollars. (And, oh, yes, winning the presidency.)  I am not endorsing anyone for president at this point - its way too early. Nor am I certain that Obama, my choice in 2008, still isn't the best option.  But it would be nice to see a civil, serious presidential campaign rather than the Trumped-up nonsense we have had thus far. And if Huntsman is able to raise the level of political discourse in America, he will certainly be deserving of everyone's honest attention. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 26 -- June 10, 2011 Men Behaving Badly When I heard on NPR this morning that today is the birthday of both Elliot Spitzer and John Edwards, I knew that there was no time better than now to comment on the recent rash of men in power behaving badly. As you may recall, Spitzer and Edwards were once rising political stars who have crashed to earth because of remarkably reckless and stupid sex scandals.  This is a very serious matter and I don't want to treat it like some sort of late-night punch line - hard to do when the most recent incident focuses on a guy named Weiner. Nor is it a partisan issue - for every Spitzer, Edwards and Weiner on the democratic side, there's a Schwarzenegger, Vitter and Craig for the republicans. Nor is it just about politicians, Brett Favre. Nor it is just an American issue - just ask International Monetary Fund ex-president Dominique Strauss-Kahn or the Vatican.  I do not claim to be an expert on sexual abuse and harassment, but have had occasion through the years to talk with several folks who are. They tend to agree that the sleazy behavior of these so-called men is more about power than it is about sex. I don't wish to sound sanctimonious; I am as flawed a human being as the next guy.  But I also believe in adhering to certain values.  Real men don't abuse women. Real men don't cheat on their wives.  Real men don't hire hookers. And they certainly don't tweet their junk.  During President Clinton's impeachment trial, Clinton apologists said that "everyone lies about sex." I beg to differ.  His acquittal sent a bad message to the rest of the world: In America, is alright to have sexual relations with a subordinate in the workplace. This kind of behavior is not acceptable anywhere - especially when it involves elected officials. After all, is this the way we wish to be represented in the halls of government? Fortunately, most politicians caught with their pants down are astute enough to resign their offices and slink away in deserved shame. Unfortunately, junk-tweeting Representative Anthony "Twitty Bird" Weiner and hooker-buying Senator David "Just call me John" Vitter are still on the job.  Gentleman - and I use the term reluctantly - it is time to perform a great service for your country: Resign. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 25 -- May 30, 2011 Bass Mastered Suckers. Slip Bobbers. Spinners. Fishing has a language all its own. And a lot of people speak this strange language - an estimated 40 million Americans. According to the American Sportfishing Association, there are more anglers in the U.S. than golfers or tennis players combined. After a 45-year hiatus - if 45 years can be called a hiatus - I returned to the sport this past Memorial Day weekend during a visit to Mound Lake near Grey Eagle, Minnesota. Under the patient and watchful tutelage of my brother-in-law, I engaged in a three-day battle with the underwater residents of the lake. It got off to, shall I say, a slow start.  I learned two new fishing terms that first day: Tree Bass (what one catches when you hook a tree on the shoreline with an errant cast) and Slap Fish (what happens when you don't release the line during a cast and wind-up slapping the water with the lure). Needless to say, I got shut out that first day. Fortified by a good night's rest, the encouragement of family and a lot of liquid courage, I rejoined the fish wars the next day with decidedly different results. This time using live bait, I went on the prowl for tasty croppies - many call them crappies. Either way, the fishing definitely wasn't crappy. On this day, I caught 11 fish, keeping four and releasing the others. Think about it: In one day I increased my lifetime fishing success by 1100 percent!  Feeling good about myself, I went after the elusive bass on my final day of fishing. The early signs were good.  My brother-in-law caught a bass on his very first cast of the day.  I got a few nibbles, but was unsuccessful in setting the hook.  Finally, the big moment seemed at hand.  I settled a long looping cast under a tree limb protruding from the bank - a favorite bass hang-out. I felt the tug, set the hook and started to reel in my prize.  As much resistance as I was getting, I was certain I had caught nothing short of Moby Dick.  At first, my far-more experienced brother-in-law seemed impressed - that is, until we realized that I hadn't hooked a fish after all. Instead, I performed a public service by removing a large submerged chunk of tree bark. In doing so, I learned another fishing term: Bark Bass.  In the 1981 Academy Award-winning movie On Golden Pond, Henry Fonda's character was on a Melvillian quest for a fish he named Norman.  My Norman is still in Mound Lake and I am going to get him - or his brother, sister, cousin. At this point, I don't care.  And then the fish of Mound Lake will learn an important lesson: Revenge is a dish best served pan-fried. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 24 -- May 22, 2011 Is College Worth It? Throughout Lawrence, Kansas, on this beautiful Sunday evening, families and friends are celebrating the graduation of a loved one. The University of Kansas this morning celebrated its 139th commencement in a solemn, yet joyous, ceremony. However, the dark clouds on the horizon had nothing to do with the tornadic storms that passed through the area hours earlier. A debate is raging across America: Is college worth it? The killjoys in this season of celebration are Richard Arum of New York University and Josipa Roska of the University of Virginia. They authored Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses. In the New York Times earlier this month, Arum and Roska wrote "We found that large numbers of students were making their way through college with minimal exposure to rigorous coursework, only a modest investment of effort and little or no meaningful improvement in skills like writing and reasoning." For example, they reported that the average student spent only 12-13 hours per week studying - half the time of a full-time student 50 years ago. Of course, this doesn't take into account that more students are paying for their own education and incurring more debt than their grandparents did in 1960. Arum and Roska also noted that, using the Collegiate Learning Assessment, "45 percent of the students would not have demonstrated gains of even one point over the first two years of college, and 36 percent would not have shown gains over four years of college." However, another interpretation is that 55 percent demonstrated gains in the first two years and 64 percent showed gains over four years.  Frankly, either set of statistics is useless without a meaningful benchmark with which to compare. Ask college graduates whether their college education was worth it, they respond with a resounding "maybe." According to a Pew Research Center study,  "a majority of Americans (57 percent) say the higher education system in the United States fails to provide students with good value for the money." However, 86 percent of the Pew survey respondents say, personally, college has been a good investment. One fact is not in doubt: According to the 2010 U.S. Census, the median gap in annual earning between a high school and college graduate is $19,550.  That, my friends, is real money. As one who has spent the past 20 years toiling in the halls of the academy, I welcome this debate. But I am also suspicious: Is it about making the best use of our education dollars or a callous attempt to justify cutting costs to avoid raising taxes? As I noted last November (Vol. 4 No. 53), then-Kansas Board of Regents Chairman Gary Sherrer noted that for the first time, student tuition fees make up a larger percentage of higher education funding than state appropriations.  At that time I said that "the joke often heard on Mount Oread is that instead of being a state-supported university, KU has become a state-located university."  Perhaps the current controversy over the value of college education - coming at a time our lawmakers have abdicated wisdom in the name of political expediency -  is a less a matter of debate than being a self-fulfilling prophecy. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 23 -- May 17, 2011 To Sleep, Perchance to Dream I have been on the brink of sleep several times this evening, only to be yanked back into full consciousness by random thoughts. Something is gnawing away at me, but is afraid to rear its ugly head. Instead, it lurks on the periphery of my mind, nibbling away much like that itch just out of one's reach.  We all have nights like this - or, at least, I'd like to think that's the case. After all, people don't really talk very much about their sleep habits. Those are very personal, I assume. Or perhaps they seem too mundane to share.  However, when you are like me, pounding away at a keyboard at oh-dark-thirty waiting for signs of that sweet surrender, a good night's sleep seems anything but ordinary. Because I tend to be an introspective person, I lie awake trying to identify that night's demon depriving me of my rest.  Of course, introspection may be the very culprit for my sleep deprivation.  On this particular evening, my mind is racing back and forth about things I have done, things I wish I had done, things I need to do and the things I wish I did not have to do. It is a nightly cerebral waltz that constantly spins until the dancer tires and fades. Some nights, it is anticipation that keeps me awake. Other nights, it is regret. Occasionally,  it is my dog Boomer, who has no problem with putting his need for constant affection ahead of my desire for rest. And, not to be fatalistic, when you get to be my age, the thought of the Big Sleep can be enough to keep you awake at night.  However, on this particular evening, the most likely cause of my inability to sleep is the failure of the Orioles bullpen to protect a 6-0 lead at Fenway Park. Can you think of a more moronic reason for insomnia than that? That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 22 -- May 10, 2011 My Media Blackout I had the pleasure of attending a family wedding in the Kansas City area last weekend.  It was held at the gorgeous home of one my wife's siblings. Like most family weddings, it was a joyous event and a reaffirmation of life. But this event had an unintended consequence - a media blackout.  I am not sure if it was the sturdy brick construction of the home or the section of town. Whatever the case, my i-Phone signal disappeared. Nothing was coming in or going out.  It was like living in a Land Before Time. (And even before Life and Newsweek!) I was amazed by the level of anxiety I felt at being unable to access the rest of the world through my electronic umbilical. Of course, the silliness of this whole episode is that there was a land line into the home, along with cable television and every other medium imaginable. Heck, even during the wedding reception there were 50 people in the basement watching a boxing match on Showtime pay-per-view. However, without the services of my little pocket pal, I wondered if all of civilization was doomed. The great irony of my non-connected plight was that the home I visited - a place where no cellular or 3G signal dare penetrate - once had been owned by a founder of Sprint. And then, as if to add insult to injury, when I got back to my home in Lawrence I found my dog sitting on the bed watching Jimmy Fallon.  Somehow, the ever-amazing Boomer managed to step on the channel remote and tune in late-night television. While I was trapped in a media vacuum, my Golden Retriever had all the media he needed at his finger, I mean paw, tips.  At long last, it had happened - the media had gone to the dogs. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 21 -- May 1, 2011 Roosevelt's Four Freedoms  in the 21st Century - Final Thoughts When I began this series of blog posts on FDR's "Four Freedoms" speech, I had a rough idea of where I was going.  Now that the series is ending, I realize that it has taken me on a personally beneficial journey of self-exploration.  There's nothing quite like laying out one's values for all to see that forces a writer to look into his soul. For example, defending freedom of speech seems to be a no-brainer - especially for a journalist and writer.  But as I wrote my April 5 post, I couldn't help but wonder whether I was putting myself at risk in doing so.  After all, it is not known as free popular speech or free politically correct speech. Speech is speech, no matter how it may ruffle one's feathers. I came to realize that any essay advocating free speech is really an attack on those who would stifle or criminalize it. And in their eyes, that act, alone, constitutes hate speech. A week later, I exposed myself to the anger of zealots - and perhaps even the wrath of God - by declaring that freedom of religion includes freedom from religion.  For me, the most surprising personal turn came writing about freedom from want. When FDR spoke of want, he was really speaking of need. After conducting an internal dialectic, I came to the conclusion that greed - the evil twin of want - is the real issue in 21st  Century America.  Almost as surprising was how easy it was for me to write about freedom from fear.  At first, I wasn't sure what I wanted to say.  But once I put my fingers to the keyboard, the words flowed effortlessly. The post reflects my personality: I refuse to be intimidated by bullies or those who pervert the truth.  It's not an easy path to follow, but makes the final destination all that more worthy of reaching. When Franklin Roosevelt articulated his Four Freedoms seven decades ago, he was challenging a nation facing difficult choices to reexamine its basic values.  For me, an examination of my beliefs about free expression, religion, want and fear served the same purpose. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 20 -- April 26, 2011 Roosevelt's Four Freedoms  in the 21st Century - Freedom from Fear The fear never seems to go away. Seventy years ago, FDR's Four Freedoms speech was made against the backdrop of a darkening world situation. Germany, Italy and Japan were on the march to world conquest.  Britain was on the ropes. Democracy - at least in Europe - appeared to be at its tipping point.  And FDR knew that the turn of the United States would soon be at hand.  In the 21st century, we face new fears.  We don't fear nations as much as we do nameless, stateless religious zealots with suitcases filled with uranium or anthrax. And while the 20th century was humanity's most violent on record, its successor appears to be well-prime to claim that mantle. As recent events in Japan have taught us, even the most technologically advanced societies are helpless against the unpredictable forces of nature. Many say we are poisoning our planet. And lest we forget, we are also confronted by a boatload of prophecies that tell us that the world is going to end in December 2012.  In the face of these mounting threats, what are we supposed to do? In a word: Nothing. At least nothing that we are not doing already. We are taking steps to defend our nation against enemies foreign and domestic. While more needs to be done, greater attention is being paid the environmental health of Mother Earth than just a generation ago.  Earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanoes, hurricanes, tornadoes - we can't predict them, but can still prepare for them. And if the Mayans were right - and have you ever met a Mayan you trusted? (That's a trick question) - there probably isn't much we can do about a preordained end of the world. Fear is not a bad thing.  It is a defense mechanism that tells us to use caution.  It is only dangerous when we are paralyzed by fear and we let it dictate our thinking above all logic. Every generation has had its own challenges.  Somehow, we are still here.  I was seven-years-old when my schoolmates and I practiced "duck-and-cover" exercises in the event of a Russian nuclear attack - as if a wooden school desk provided any measure of shelter.  I can still remember the nightmares of my youth - a living color vision of watching my house being destroyed by an A-bomb. In a youthful moment contemplating my own mortality, I remember wondering if anyone was going to be around to see the new millennium. Guess what?  We are still here.  Perhaps despite ourselves, we keep on keeping on. I think FDR knew we would. Eight years before his Four Freedoms address, he reminded the American people that we have always overcome adversity.  We are resilient. We are resourceful. We may never be totally free from fear. But it doesn't have to rule us. The words from Roosevelt's first inaugural address still echo true today: "We have nothing to fear but fear itself." That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 19 -- April 19 , 2011 Roosevelt's Four Freedoms  in the 21st Century - Freedom from Want The concept of freedom from want had a much different meaning during the Roosevelt era than it does in contemporary times.  When FDR identified it as one of his Four Freedoms in January 1941, it was done against the backdrop of the Great Depression with millions wanting for food, shelter and jobs, and the darkening clouds of what soon would become a global war. These, too, are trying times of economic distress and military conflict. One might argue that today's recession is less severe than the Great Depression - unless, of course, you are hungry, homeless and unemployed. However, I see the major distinction between then and now being the difference between need and want. When you need something, it is essential you have it.  Considering the dire circumstances of the Great Depression, Roosevelt's meaning may have been better served if he had spoken of a Freedom from Need. Today's financial stress has been a product of want - the condition where something is desirable, but not necessary.  Our troubles have been further fueled by want's evil twin, greed. Many Americans find themselves in difficult circumstances because they took on financial obligations beyond their means and were allowed to do so by the investor class seeking its own gilded Babbittesque lifestyle. Meanwhile, the federal government continues to spend money like a drunken sailor on shore leave. And like the short-on-cash sailor who finds himself beholden to a loan shark, the U.S. is finding itself the mercy of a real shark hording tons of American greenbacks, China.  Now more than ever, we need Freedom from Want - a freedom from those who recklessly believe that we - as individuals and as a nation - can spend our way to prosperity and that the bills will never come due. Depression-era humorist Will Rodgers once observed that the United States was the only country in the world where people drove themselves to the poorhouse.  In this area of want, those words still ring true - except we can no longer afford the gas. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 18 -- April 12 , 2011 Roosevelt's Four Freedoms  in the 21st Century - Freedom of Religion Throughout its history, humanity has had a love-hate relationship with religion. It has brought us comfort and conflict, morality and immorality, life and death. It defines us for who we are and who we are not. It brings out our best and our worst.  When President Franklin Roosevelt included religion among his "Four Freedoms" 70 years ago, it was a time of religious persecution punctuated by perverse ideology.  Adolph Hitler's warped view of a new world order served as a justification for genocide.  Sadly, little has changed. We are still killing people in the name of God, Allah, Budda or whatever one wants to call the Divine Being.  In this context, it is easy to focus on Islamic extremists who, for reasons both real and imagined, hate people who do not think the way they think and use that hatred as an excuse to commit atrocities against humanity.  However, it is not just Muslims who practice religious intolerance.  It may be cynical, but I often wonder if there are more religiously intolerant people on this planet than those who are not. I know that many of us in the United States would like to think that mixing church and state is fairly recent development - perhaps a product of the Reagan presidency. However, religion and politics have always been inseparable in American life.   However, we can thank God - if you are so inclined - for constitutional protections that at least rein in those who would dictate how we lead our lives.  We are not Iran, a nation being led down a dangerous and potentially self-destructive path by misguided mullahs. Nor are we Israel, a nation that has evolved from being a haven for the persecuted to a persecutor of Palestinians.  And we certainly are not the Vatican nation-state, which has historically placed its self-preservation ahead of the tenets of Jesus Christ. Even with the religious tensions always present in American life, the separation of church and state is a true blessing. It is important to remember that the First Amendment does not only give Americans freedom of religion. It also grants us freedom from religion. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 17 -- April 5 , 2011 Roosevelt's Four Freedoms  in the 21st Century - Freedom of Speech and Expression When President Franklin Roosevelt declared that freedom of speech and expression was one of humanity's inherent "Four Freedoms" in January 1941, the future of freedom was in doubt.  The forces of fascism that faced FDR have since been extinguished. However, 70 years later, the danger still lingers.  And I am not just referring to Islamic extremists who strap bombs to themselves and commit dumb ass murder in the name of Allah.  When it comes to the preservation of free speech and expression, we are our own worst enemies.  Some recent examples are illustrative. Gilbert Godfried, known for his bawdy and sometimes tasteless humor, was fired as the voice of the Aflac duck because of  insensitive jokes he tweeted about the Japanese tsunami.  Should he have been fired? Perhaps. But didn't Aflac know what it was getting when they hired him in the first place? Even Psychology Today has said sick jokes like those Godfried told helps people cope "in the face of overwhelming stress." Then there's the case of five California high school students sent home because they refused to remove their American flag T-shirts on Cinco de Mayo.  The students were told that the shirts would be appropriate any other day, but not on May 5 (Mexican Independence Day) because it was "insensitive" to Mexican students and that it was "their holiday." (Note to self: Don't wear flag shirt on St. Patrick's Day, Bastille Day or St. Lucia's Day. It's "their" holiday.) Sometimes, the effects of this political correctness are deadly, as was the case at Fort Hood in November 2009. Nidal Malik Hasan's erratic behavior sent up red flags throughout the Texas army base.  Hasan was openly conflicted about his role as a Muslim and as an army officer.  However, no responsible authority intervened out of a fear of being accused of profiling. Lacking intervention, Hasan killed 13 people at the post in the name of Allah. The great irony of our age is that we are in the midst of a remarkable communications revolution empowering humanity as never before. Access to a global conversation is only a tweet away. Repressive regimes are fighting a losing battle to silence their critics. Here, in the United States, the Supreme Court continues to be a staunch defender of free speech - even when that speech is uttered by the contemptible Minister of Hate Fred Phelps. Despite this global embrace of free expression - a universal human right as defined by the United Nations charter - American society is descending into an Orwellian reality where self-appointed "thought police" demand conformity with the beliefs and values of others. We have lost our way. Free speech should be self-regulating, not socially stifled. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 16 -- March 30, 2011 Roosevelt's Four Freedoms  in the 21st Century - First Thoughts Franklin Roosevelt called December 7, 1941, the day of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, "a day of infamy." FDR's address seeking a declaration of war is, perhaps, the best known speech from one of this nation's greatest orators.  Less well-known, but equal in its power, was his State of the Union address to Congress eleven months earlier. It has become known as the Four Freedoms speech. In it, President Roosevelt articulated four essential human freedoms: freedom of speech and expression, freedom of worship, freedom from want and freedom from fear. The first two freedoms were in line with traditional U.S. Constitutional values.  However, the last two, freedom from want and fear,  embraced a broader view of human rights that would become tenants of American foreign policy in the post-war era. FDR's declaration came as Europe and Asia were under siege by oppressive fascist regimes.  Roosevelt understood that it was only a matter of time before the United States would be embroiled in the widening world war. By staking out a high moral ground, FDR laid claim to U.S leadership in the battle for human rights, a role to which we still - sometimes tenuously - claim today. Now, 70 years later, we live in equally dangerous times. The freedom-loving people of this planet face threats everywhere they look, from religious zealots, amoral capitalists, those who abuse the environment,  intolerant humanists -- and from even the darkest fears that lie within our souls. That is why this is an ideal time to reexamine Roosevelt's Four Freedoms and view them from a 21st century perspective. In the coming weeks, I plan to examine each of the four freedoms and the degree to which I believe Roosevelt's dream has been realized.  In doing so, I will also be challenging my own values and questioning the strength of my own convictions.  I hope you will join me on this journey. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 15 -- March 24, 2011 The Chance for Peace In his song Leningrad, singer-composer Billy Joel wrote, "Cold war kids were hard to kill under their desks in an air raid drill. Haven't they heard we won the war? What do they keep on fighting for?" I am one of those cold war kids, born seven years after the Second World War and during a time when the threat of thermonuclear war was very real. However, it is a different world in the 21st century. The Soviet Union has been relegated to history's trash bin and its successor, the Russian Federation, is more interested in oil profits than world conquest. Yet, I still possess that cold war mentality: Mess with the forces of freedom and the United Stated will kick your butt. However, this past weekend, I had an epiphany. It came right after the United States fired 105 cruises missiles into Libya to keep Muammar Gaddafi - however you spell the bastard's name - from slaughtering his own people.  Was this the right thing to do? It made sense from both humanitarian and freedom-loving  perspectives. However, when I heard that cruise missiles cost about $1 million each and that President Obama had engaged the nation in another military conflict without the semblance of constitutionally required congressional approval, it gave me reason to pause.  Yes, I am a cold war kid.  But these are hard times when our nation, already burdened by war and debt, is talking about cutting back on the educational and social services that have defined our greatness. Is one afternoon's orgy of violence worth the annual salaries of nearly two thousand teachers? And I remember a cold war president who, perhaps better than any American leader since, understood that the real tragedy of war was not one of the present, but of the future.  Less than three months into his first term of office, President Dwight D. Eisenhower told newspaper editors in his "Chance for Peace" speech,  "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children." Perhaps I have finally got it - America doesn't have to look out for those who will not look out for themselves.  Not every fight has to be our fight.  Yes, cold war kids are hard to kill.  But eventually they grow up.  What do we keep on fighting for? That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 14 -- March 16, 2011 Twenty-Six Daughters It was four years ago this week that lost Jan, my wife of nearly 32 years. She suffered a catastrophic cerebral hemorrhage. And in a blink of an eye, my life and that of our daughter, had changed forever. I suppose it is natural to approach this anniversary with a sense of melancholy. However, the pain from that worst of days has mostly subsided because of  family, friends and the love of a woman who since June has been my wife.  Even in the darkest days following Jan's passing, I was uplifted by acts of kindness and compassion for which I will always be grateful. One of my strongest memories from that period was the love and support of my students. For the first and only time in my teaching career, I had a class comprised exclusively of women. At the beginning of the semester, this enrollment oddity was a source of some amusement.  Jan said the women had flocked to my class because (in her words) "I'm cute." To that, I countered, "Cute ain't what it used to be."  For whatever reason, I had the honor - and blessing - of teaching 26 women who, as it turned out, taught me about goodness within the human heart. When my students learned during Spring Break that I had lost my wife, they immediately rallied to my side. During the remaining eight weeks of that sad semester, they lifted my spirit with repeated acts of kindness: flowers for the funeral, ocassional offerings of baked goodies, and constant gentle expressions of support. However, the biggest surprise came on the last night of the semester. The ladies were enrolled in Strategic Communication Campaigns, a class which culminates with a semester-ending presentation of an integrated marketing communications plan.  In many ways, the so-called Client Presentation is the students' senior recital. In the days before the presentation, I told the ladies that it was going to be "their night," and that I planned no references to the events of early spring.  At evening's end, I stood at the lectern preparing to adjourn the proceedings when one of the ladies interrupted me. She said the evening - the semester - could not pass without a proper tribute to my late wife. On behalf of her fellow students, she presented me with a sizable check - a donation to the journalism school in the name of Jan Marie Guth.  They then formed a single-file line to wish me well.  As each shook my hand, each touched my heart. I had started the semester with a class of 26 women. In the end, for me, they had become 26 daughters. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 13 -- March 10, 2011 A Defense of Public Broadcasting When our nation is running a gazillion-dollar deficit, it only makes sense that Congress should take a hard look cutting spending. As I noted in this space earlier this year (Vol. 5 No. 6), "We can not address our nation's economic challenges solely through new spending or budget cuts. We have to do both, even if it means increasing specific taxes." When it comes to cutting federal spending, I happen to think it will be a healthy thing when everything is on the table. As I said before - "no sacred cows."  That includes some sacred cows that I favor - most notably funding for public broadcasting.  If PBS, NPR and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting have to take a hit so that we can get our financial house in order, so be it. But here's the rub - Not everything is on the block.  While Congress focuses on the margins of the budget, the leaders of both parties are ignoring the three two-ton gorillas sitting in the corner: Social Security, Medicare and the military.  There are no tax-and/or-cut solutions that will seriously address the nation's budget deficit without Congress taking on the Big Three.  Equally disturbing is that public broadcasting is the cross-hairs for political reasons.  There are many, with some justification, who are concerned about liberal bias at NPR, PBS and CPB.  Recent actions and statements by public broadcasting officials have reinforced those concerns. And yes, even I feel my blood pressure rise when I see Bill Moyers, the man who beat Lyndon Johnson's war drum, pontificating about ethics.  However, I believe NPR's and PBS's news programs - not to be confused with other kinds of programming - play it straight down the middle and in greater depth than their commercial counterparts. Before our elected officials make some sort of symbolic/political statement about public broadcasting, they should first show some backbone and tackle the real drags on the American economy. In the meantime, I am going to continue to give money and volunteer for my local public radio station. And if you are someone who makes public broadcasting a part of your daily lives, you should too. Don't be a part of the problem.  Be a part of the solution. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 12 -- March 6, 2011 Heidi Revisited The Kansas Jayhawks yesterday defeated their fiercest rival, the Missouri Tigers, 70-66 to win their seventh straight Big XII conference title.  In this area, however, much of the discussion after the game focused on the final three minutes of the game -- which most of the television viewers in Kansas City, Jefferson City and Columbia did not see. With little notice and with the outcome very much in doubt, CBS switched from the Jayhawks and the Tigers to the Michigan-Michigan State game.  The local CBS affiliate and the network blamed the problem on sunspot activity. Skeptics on the Internet suggested that the sunspots must have been standing on the grassy knoll.  I might have bought the sunspot excuse, but somethings just don't add up.  The CBS affiliates in Topeka and St. Louis didn't lose the game. Nor was there a sign of signal interference at the moment of the switch.  And then there was the fact that the network had just announced that viewers expecting the Wolverines and the Spartans were about to be switched to that game.  As a former broadcaster, I think it all adds up to one conclusion: human error. Whether it be sunspots or some fat-fingered technician in New York, the incident is reminiscent  of the infamous 1968 Heidi game, when NBC-TV decided to cut its broadcast of the Jets-Raiders AFL game with New York leading 32-29 with 1:05 remaining. The network had heavily promoted the family-friendly broadcast of Heidi.  As 7:00 p.m. approached in the East, the network dropped its game coverage. While most of America watched the little Swiss Miss romp through the Alps, the Raiders scored two late touchdowns to win 43-32.  Oops. But let's have some perspective, folks. While newspapers love to rail at the apparent ineptitude of broadcasters, let's remember that it's an empty gloat. Despite the occasional technical malfunction, television trumps the print media in bringing people timely information.  And it has done so for 60 years.  Under normal circumstances, the game is old news before the newspapers hit the streets. And when newspapers make mistakes - as they often do - they last forever on microfilm and digital databases.  (Remember "Dewey Defeats Truman?") It is important to remember that while the folks at CBS and their local affiliates may take their lumps in the coming days,  people will still be lining bird cages with newspapers long after today's blunder is forgotten. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 11 -- February26, 2011 A State of Madness Lewis Caroll wrote of a strange and  illogical land in 1865. When Alice accidentally fell down a rabbit hole, she landed in Wonderland. There she met a remarkable character, the Cheshire Cat, who summed up Alice's experience with the memorable quote, "We're all mad here." Fast forward to 2011, when the people of Wisconsin - perhaps giddy over their beloved Packers' Super Bowl victory - fell down some sort of badger hole and descended into a state of madness. If Alice were around to witness recent events in Wisconsin, she might echo a sentiment she expressed in Wonderland, "It would be so nice if something made sense for a change." How else can you explain lawmakers who flee the state to avoid meeting their legal and moral responsibilities being hailed as heroes. How else can you explain public employees - mostly teachers - engaging in raucous public and abusive behavior that they, themselves, would not tolerate in their classrooms? And there there's the liberal reporter who violated practically every existing journalism ethics code by engaging in a sordid deception supposedly in the name of the truth. If Alice hated Wonderland, she would loathe Wisconsin. I will admit my own bias here: I do not believe public employees should have the right to collective bargaining.  In accepting public employment, they receive protections under state and federal employee classification systems not available to people working in the private sector. And, by definition, they fill essential jobs that serve a vital public interest. In general, public school teaching jobs are far more stable than those in the private sector. Tenure is a fair trade off for the absence of bargaining rights. Of course, using Wonderland logic, many of these protesting hooky-playing teachers said, "It's not about the money, it's about the education of our children." The irony is that while they were saying this, several Wisconsin school districts had to close because of a shortage of teachers. And then there's the 14 cowardly senators who violated their oath of office and fled the state to avoid showing up for work. You would have hoped that these so-called Democrats had enough respect for democracy to understand that elections have consequences and that in the legislative process, the majority rules. If the people of Wisconsin do not approve of the majority's actions, they have the power to change things in the next election. That's how it has worked for more than two centuries. However, the  Badger State has become a Wonderlandesque State of Madness. As the Duchess told Alice, "If everybody minded their own business, the world would go around a great deal faster than it does." That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 10 -- February17, 2011 Battling over the Margins In Topeka, Washington and any town or village where elected officials are expected to dole out dwindling tax dollars to meet increasing demands, there is a disturbing debate. Faced with voters demanding lower taxes without the loss of any services, these politicos are battling over the margins.  For example, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback has received a lot of flack over his decision to privatize the Kansas Arts Commission in an effort to save $600,000 - a microscopic portion of the $13.9 billion state budget. The challenge in Topeka - in all states, frankly - is the push back against cutting education. According to the Wichita Eagle, federal stimulus funds, coupled with state tax revenues,  amount to $6.18 billion in state spending — 88 percent of it in education and social services. The state will lose $492 million in fiscal 2012 when federal stimulus funds disappear.  Meanwhile in the nation's capital, President Obama has introduced his $3.7 trillion budget, one that proposes $400 million in non-defense spending cuts. Obama, like the governors, has his own budget albatross, entitlement spending.  But just as the governors are under tremendous pressure to keep their hands off education budgets, the President is going to have a hard time touching Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.  With all the big-ticket items off the table, public officials are now battling over the margins.  To put it another way, they are fighting over crumbs. We are witnessing blood-letting over cuts that won't really make much of a difference in the burgeoning federal and state government budget deficits. Do I like the prospect of raising taxes, cutting education spending and trimming social services?  In a word, the answer is "no." However, until the pols are willing to have a real debate over real cuts by putting everything on the table,  it's the same old same old. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 9 -- February11, 2011 Credit Where Credit is Due Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has left the house.  Hotfoot Hosni resigned the Egyptian presidency and fled Cairo today, less than 24 hours after telling his people that he would do nothing of the sort.  A remarkable people's revolution - fueled by pent-up rage, orchestrated by the Internet and tacitly supported by the Egyptian army - sounded the death knell for Mubarak's 30-year dictatorship.  While it is fashionable to give social media the credit for the events unfolding in the Middle East, that view is, frankly, too simplistic.  While we should never shoot the messengers, we should never deify them, either. This was not a McLuhanian case of the media being the message. The message, that the people have the power to free themselves, was formulated by others.  The peaceful revolution in Tunisia, combined with anger over the murder of a dissident, fueled the people's passion. A longstanding relationship between the U.S. military and its Egyptian counterparts contributed to the latter's crucial role as the people's defenders.  Had the army not stepped into the breach, there may have been a much different - and bloodier - outcome.  Ironically, several officials, including Clinton-era Democrats, have noted that the Obama administration is now bearing the fruits of his predecessor's dogged pursuit of democratic reforms in the Middle East - something Senator Obama dismissed as being too idealistic. That Twitter and Facebook were important channels of communication in this process is unquestionable.  But "new" media have always played a role in political revolutions -- from the first digital pictures smuggled out of China during the Tienanmen Square Massacre of 1989 back to the pamphlets that spread revolution through the American colonies in 1776. Before we award a Nobel Prize to Mark Zuckerberg for his role in the Facebook Revolution, let's reserve the place of honor to the real heroes of this drama, the Egyptian people. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 8 -- February 6, 2011 The Mayor of the Shining City on a Hill Although 100+ million Americans will take a few hours of their schedules today to watch Super Bowl XLV, it would be more fitting if all Americans took a moment or two to remember Ronald Wilson Reagan on the 100th anniversary of his birth.  For many, the 40th President of the United States was a hero who led the Free World to its victory over communist oppression.  For others,  Reagan was at the helm of the United States when the gap between rich and poor widened and civility in American politics began to evaporate. For me, the view of the Gipper lies somewhere in between.  I began his presidency as a republican, switched my registration to democrat, and ultimately realized the error of way ways and returned to the GOP.  I never voted for Ronald Reagan - primary because I never forgave him for undermining the reelection chances of Gerald Ford.  I still consider Ford one of our most decent - and underrated - presidents. But with the passage of time, I have grown to appreciate Reagan.  Liberals have a nasty habit of portraying all conservatives as simpletons. But anyone who has read Reagan's biography or any of the hundreds of personal letters he wrote during his presidency understands that "the Gipper" was a man of substance and intellect. He was also a man of vision with the skill to communicate and persuade. If you don't believe that, consider these two points: Bill Clinton's greatest successes as president came when he embraced the Reagan Revolution and Barack Obama is now trying to kick-start his presidency by evoking the memory of Reagan. Sure, Reagan's presidency wasn't a complete success - Beruit and Iran-Conta come to mind. However, Reagan combined his Midwestern values with skills he learned in Hollywood - both communication and political - to channel a vision of America that most found appealing.  He was a leader when the the United States and the world needed a leader. And while the country still feels the effects of his administration's deficit spending, let us not forget that it was Reagan's commitment to rearm the United States that ultimately forced the Soviet Union and communism into the dust bin of history. Like all presidents, Reagan may not have achieved all he would have wished.  But by any standard, his was a successful and transformative presidency that established a new American trajectory for the next generation. Reagan was the mayor of that "shining city on a hill" - the metaphor he used to describe how the world looks at America. And while some may argue that the nation has a way to go to match Reagan's rhetoric, it is nevertheless fitting that we today remember that rhetoric - and the man - who helped a war and scandal weary nation to once again believe in itself. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 7 -- February 1, 2011 Much Ado About Nothing While there is breaking news out of Egypt, where people are protesting against real social ills, there is broken news out of Kansas, where an elected official and his opponents debate mundane solutions to a problem that doesn't exist.  Newly minted Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach is waging a campaign to crack down on election fraud in the Sunflower State. Kobach says its a huge problem, and yesterday released a report to support his claims. His study said that there have been 59 instances of voting fraud  involving at least 211 ballots since 1997. To put it another way, that's an average of 4.5 reports involving 17 ballots a year. With 1.7 million registered voters in Kansas, that calculates into a .0009 percent error rate.  Does that really constitute a voting fraud problem?  Is it possible Kobach has mistaken the dust bunnies under his bed for the boogie man?  However, Kris the Krusader is not the only actor in this theater of the absurd. Many of the state's Democrats are up in arms over the procedures Kobach proposes to secure our elections.  And just what are those Draconian measures the Democrats fear? Kobach's legislation would require voters to show photo ID at the polls and proof of citizenship when people first register to vote. What's wrong with that? That's no more onerous than getting a driver's license, using a debit card or cashing a check.  Even Redbox wants its users to provide proof of identification. If anything, you'd think the Democrats would embrace these reforms -- if for no other reason than that they would lay bare Kobach's claims of widespread voting fraud. To sum up: Kobach wants to solve a problem that doesn't exist by installing simple safeguards that should already be in place.  And the Democrats oppose Kobach's bill because, well,  its Kobach's bill.  This is Kansas state government at work: All heat. No light. Much ado about nothing. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 6 -- January 25, 2011 Winning the Future President Barack Obama delivered a 62-minute State of the Union address tonight, one long on imagery and short on specifics.  The President's goal was to position himself for the coming policy battles ahead. He spoke of "winning the future" through investments in clean energy technology, education and infrastructure.  In his post-speech analysis, CNN's John King said the President used the speech to position himself as "the reasonable man in the middle," cementing his reputation as a politician willing to cross the aisle to get things done.  Of course, Obama also knows that commanding the political center is how politicians win most national elections. It was hard to find fault with the President's remarks. Of course, the real challenge is in the details. As House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan noted in his Republican response, our nation is facing a "mounting burden of debt." And while investment is a word that sounds real good, it is just another word for spending.  Representative Ryan's solution, predictably, is to cut spending and limit the scope of government.  The truth of the matter is that both Obama and Ryan are right.  If this country is to remain competitive in the global marketplace - "to win the future" as the President said -  we can not address our nation's economic challenges solely through new spending or budget cuts. We have to do both, even if it means increasing specific taxes.  Our elected leaders must realize that the days of treating the federal budget as if it were a Christmas tree and that they have an unending supply of ornaments are over. They have to establish strategic budget priorities - even if it means some programs are cut. Nor can there be any sacred cows. For example, while education and national defense must command considerable resources,  they also have two of the most administratively top-heavy bureaucracies in all of government. They should not be excluded from the line-by-line budgetary review that agencies with so-called "lesser" priorities face.  The President is right - America is a nation that secured its preeminence by "doing big things." One-dimensional approaches to economic reform are too small-minded to win the future we all hope to achieve. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 5 -- January 19, 2011 "Spot" News of the Future Here's a (make-believe) "spot" news item from the future: Congress opened debate today on the controversial Canine Toilet Training Act of 2019.  If adopted, all dogs in the United States would have to "do their business" inside their owner's residence.  The proposed law would also require the installation of special doggy toilets in all new homes and apartments.  Capitol Hill Democrats support the legislation, which was proposed by the Federation of Laborers United for Sanitation and Health (FLUSH). They believe that the bill will unleash a much-needed boost for the plumbing industry. Fern Grinchslab of People Opposed to Ordinary Pollutants (POOP) said, "If cats can be trained to use a litter box, dogs should be required to use a pet potty."  Not everyone agrees. Trickle-down economists have discharged a steady stream of criticism against the measure. And in an effort to get a leg-up in this contentious debate, a coalition of conservative Republicans and Yellow Dog Democrats say the legislation could dump an undue burden on home builders and cause a heap of trouble for the nation's carpet-cleaning industry. Another controversial provision of the so-called CaTT Act involves the creation of new federal agency to monitor compliance.  Officers from the Canine Refuse Agency Police would patrol public sidewalks and parks to sniff out offenders. The CRAP officers would not be armed, per se.  However, they would be authorized to carry rolled-up newspapers. Perhaps the most vocal opponent of the law is Beth Chapman, the fifth wife of Duane Chapman, TV's Dog, The Bounty Hunter. "Ain't no amount of house trainin' gonna help that man," she said. "If they think he's gonna  roll-over and play dead, they are just chasing their own tails." It seems that everyone has a bone to pick in this dog fight. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 4 -- January 16, 2011 Sitov's Question In the week since the tragic shootings outside of a Tuscon supermarket, there has been a healthy debate on the tone of American political discourse.  Commentators, including this one, have expressed a desire for more light and less heat in our public debates (Vol. 5 No. 3). That having been said, I am concerned how quickly people are willing to punish - even criminalize - free expression for the sake of comity. For example, take the case of Andrei Sitov, White House correspondent for the Russian-government run ITAR-Tass news agency. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs and the members of the White House press corps were angered last week when Sitov had the temerity to suggest that the Tuscon shooting rampage was a byproduct of a society that places few limits on free expression. "It's the reverse side of freedom," Sitov said. Much of the anger directed at Sitov is justified. Being lectured on free expression by someone working for a government that absolutely does not permit it is ludicrous. Additionally, the timing of Sitov's question, coinciding with the burial of one of the Arizona victims, was callous.  However, his question was also instructive.  I have had the privilege of traveling to the former Soviet Union on five ocassions. One of the strongest impressions I have from that experience is how much people reared in societies without a democratic tradition fear free expression.  When communism collapsed and the iron grip of the government was loosened, the Russian people were thrilled.  However, it wasn't long before they realized that rights come with responsibilities and accountability. They are not comfortable with the idea that people, not the government, have the responsibility to regulate speech. It is not a surprise that Vladimir Putin has so easily perverted democratic reform. The Russian people prefer less freedom in exchange for less personal accountability. For Americans, the Russian experience should be cautionary. Much of the debate in America targets - if I can use that verb without being labeled an extremist - the hyperbole of political debate. For example, many on the left have been quick to drudge up Sarah Palin's past statements made in an entirely different context as poof of her complicity in the Tuscon attacks.  In an effort to change the tone of public debate, the governor of Rhode Island has gone so far as to ban appearances by that state's employees on talk radio. The governor has long been a target of conservative talk radio.  The Tuscon tragedy has given him  an opportunity to strike back at his critics in the name of civility. If one adopts this twisted line of logic, then we should all blame Democrats for the attempted assassination of President Ronald Reagan in 1981 and bar public employees from appearing on MSNBC. That notion, of course, is ludicrous. But as our nation comes to grip with the weighty issues associated with free expression, let's embrace the notion that the greatest risk to free expression is not from those who abuse it with irresponsible rhetoric.  The greatest risk to free speech comes from those who would choose to protect us from it for our own good.  Before you know it, they may start rewriting the works of great authors like Mark Twain to appease the sensibilities of the contemporary audience. Of course, it would never go that far. Would it? That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 3 -- January 9, 2011 Tragic Irony in Arizona I'll have to admit that I didn't know very much about Gabrielle Giffords until yesterday afternoon.  However, she sounds a lot like someone who would get my vote: moderate, fiscally responsible, practical and compassionate.  Of course, everyone knows who she is now because of yesterday's unspeakable assault on democracy outside of a grocery store in Tuscon, Arizona. A troubled young man with mayhem on his mind and hate in his heart opened fire with an automatic weapon at what was to be an informal meet-and-greet with Giffords' constituents. Six people, including a nine-year-old child and a federal judge who happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time, are dead. Another 12 people, including the congresswoman, were wounded. At this point, we don't know much about the shooter other than some YouTube rants he posted. That it happened in Arizona, a place that has become a political flashpoint in recent years, doesn't seem to be coincidental.  But maybe it is.  Who really knows? It didn't take long for some to use the tragedy to point fingers of blame at those on the left or right.  They say the vitriolic tone of the nation's political discourse is to blame for the incident.  Perhaps it is.  But even if it isn't, wouldn't this be a good time to honor Giffords' voice of moderation by dialing back some of our own political rhetoric? I am struck by the irony that last week, when the House of Representatives performed a ceremonial reading of the U.S. Constitution, Giffords read the First Amendment - the one that guarantees freedom of expression and the right to petition the government. Perhaps we, as a nation, should have taken Giffords and the First Amendment more to heart. Freedom to speak one's mind and to petition our leaders should be considered an invitation to reasoned debate - and not a blood sport. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 2 -- January 5, 2011 Ch-ch-ch-changes By definition, the start of a new year is also a time of change.  Not only do we turn the page on a calendar, many of us make resolutions about how we will improve our lives in the new year. (Five days in, how's it going?) Big changes are also underway in Washington and Topeka - the consequences of last November's elections. Ohio Republican John Boehner becomes the new Speaker of House, replacing the reviled, but resilient Nancy Peolosi.  Whether the GOP's seizure of half of the Hill will result is meaningful change is problematic. Boehner's leadership will be tested by the Tea Party on his right and the Democrats to his left.  And if none of them are willing to compromise in much the same manner they did during the dearly departed Lame Duck Congress, gridlock will continue.  Changes are also happening at the White House, where President Obama is making a series of staff changes.  Is the President making the changes to more effectively administer his government or is he shifting into reelection mode? The most likely answer is "yes." In Topeka, Sam Brownback heads up a Republican clean sweep of Kansas State offices.  He will take the oath of office on Monday. Brownback, an established and able politician,  has the potential to be the most effective and powerful Kansas governor in a generation. Brownback's success will largely depend on his vision of the office. Will he see it as the crown jewel in a long career of public service or as a stepping stone for another run for the White House?  The early signs are good - his proposal for ending the so-called "marriage penalty" for welfare recipients has received favorable reviews from both conservatives and liberals. However, that may change when he unveils how he plans to pay for it. And then there's Secretary of State-elect Kris Kobach, who appears hell-bent to solve a problem that apparently doesn't exist: immigrant voter fraud. And he's proposing, with Brownback's support, a law requiring the use of photo ID at the polls.  I do not have any serious problem with that - after all, I have to show a photo ID to cash a check at Hy Vee. But after demagoguing the immigration issue during the campaign, what's next after the ID law passes? Kobach is a guy over whom we will definitely have to keep a watchful eye. And let's not forget the big change in Lawrence: A new athletic director with a name few are sure they know how to pronounce.  The early indications are that Sheahon Zenger will provide a much-needed breath of fresh air to the scandal-ridden KU Athletics Department. Here's hoping that Salina-native Zenger will bring some Kansas sensibilities to an office environment smothered by his predecessor's cult of personality.  So, as David Bowie once noted, "Turn and face the ch-ch-changes." That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x Vol. 5 No. 1 -- January 1, 2011 Crystal Ball Time Exactly one year ago, I made a series of bold predictions about what would happen in 2010. As it turned out, I did a credible job - at least when it comes to predicting what happens to other people.  Prognosticating one's own future is another thing. It is a lot harder to make predictions as a participant than it is in the role of a neutral observer.  In that role, I predicted significant Republican gains in the mid-term election.  However, I was wrong when I said those gains wouldn't be enough to change the balance of power. I clearly underestimated the strength of the Tea Party movement. I was absolutely on target when I said that Democrats are DOA in Kansas. For them, election night resembled a wake.  I was also on target when it came to President Obama.  I said his "education" will continue and that his limpid leadership would spell trouble. Both predictions came to pass.  He took a remarkable shellacking on election day, only to apply the lessons learned during a successful lame duck session of  Congress. As for my prediction that lightweights will continue to drive the political agenda, let me mention two names: Sarah Palin and Christine O'Donnell. Need I say more?  Was 2010 a pivotal year in history?  I said it wouldn't be - but we really won't know for sure about that for years to come. Nor do we know whether anyone will mount a serious challenge to President Obama. The coming year should provide clarity on that point. One year ago, I expressed doubt that anyone could beat Obama in 2012.  I still feel that way.  As I now see it, Obama's biggest threat will not come from the right.  If he is challenged from his left, it may weaken him enough to make Campaign 2012 competitive.   As for the coming year, there are only three things that I am absolutely positively certain will happen: Oprah's 25-year syndicated talk show will end, she will launch her OWN network, and that I will not give a tinker's damn about either. That's it for now. Fear the Turtle. x

 

Return to the most recent post