|
Vol. 8 No. 61 -- Lessons from Nelson Mandela
December 26, 2014
x
As
we enter the last week of the year, we would all be served well to
remember the lessons of Nelson Mandela's life. But let's not
cherry-pick those we choose to follow. It is not enough to fight
for justice and equality. It is important to remember that once
he won that fight, he turned his attention toward reconciliation and
forgiveness. That is why the man stood with moral authority: Despite
decades of imprisonment at the hands of his oppressors, he came to
understand them and to pardon them for their sins. He knew that
the people and nation of South Africa would not be able to progress
from its dark past without empowering people to leave that baggage
behind. It sounds much simpler than it actually is to accomplish.
However, if the United States of America is the nation it says it is --
a nation of fearless, forwarding-leaning pioneers who see the future as
a welcoming place of endless opportunities -- then why can't we follow
Nelson Mandela's example? Congress and the White House may have
real differences over the how to move forward, but they may be
surprised to learn that they want to move in the same direction toward
peace, prosperity and opportunity. The police and the minority people
of their communities seek the same goals. But they aren't going to get
there if one side lets fear drive its militarization and the other
side wallows in victimization both real and imagined. As Mandela
himself learned and later taught the world, constructive engagement can
be more powerful than destructive confrontation. Everyone -
politicians, business leaders, union reps, the police, social advocates
and even high school and college administrators - must remember that
they live under a social contract in which they are bound to
subordinate their self-interests for the great good. Their
first instincts can't always be "what's in it for me" or the pathetic
"CYA" response. Nelson Mandela wasn't a perfect leader. But he learned
through experience - including his own prejudices and mistakes - to
because a great leader. Moving forward to 2015, my new year's
wish is first that I learn to follow my own high-minded words penned
here, and then that others will embrace and live by the values they
claim to believe. And may we all remember that forgiveness doesn't come
with a debt.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 60 -- An Appeal For Clarity and Reason
December 21, 2014
x
I
am not without bias when it comes to police officers. Several
members of my family are working or have worked in law enforcement.
When I was a reporter, I developed strong personal relationships with
dozens of officers, deputies and troopers. I served as a public
information officer for the North Carolina Department of Correction, a
law enforcement agency, and as a member of that state's emergency
response team, which coordinates the actions of law enforcement
agencies during emergencies. I know how hard their jobs are. I
also know that they are human. Sometimes they make mistakes that have
terrible consequences. And when they do, I know that they have to be
held accountable. But nothing some police officers may or may not have done justifies the vilification of all
officers. And absolutely nothing justifies what happened in New York
City last night - the murder of two policemen as an act of revenge for
the recent deaths of two unarmed black men in confrontations with
police. You can argue the merits of the cases involving the deaths of
Eric Gardner in New York or Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri.
However, I can guarantee you that Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos - the
two NYPD officers shot to death at point blank range yesterday
afternoon while sitting in their police cruiser - had nothing to do
with either the Gardner or Brown matters. I will not go as far as
some to suggest that the murder of these two officers is a product of
the months of protests and debate over the use of force by
police. This is a democracy and that is a debate that must take
place. But I will say that there are those using this debate to
further their own political agenda and do not care whether their fiery
rhetoric generates heat or light. This includes those who accuse
and those who defend police. We should mourn all victims of injustice
-- especially these two police officers who were guilty of nothing more
than wearing badges and trying to serve and protect their fellow
citizens. As we move forward from this tragic cycle of violence, I pray
that cooler heads will prevail so that all engaged in this intense
debate can can bring clarity and reason while maintaining their moral
standing.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 59 -- This is War
December 18, 2014
x
North
Korea's cyber-attack on the Sony Corporation may not seem as dramatic
as Al Qeda's attack on the World Trade Center in 2001 or, for that
matter, the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941. But make no
mistake about it, the hacking of a major corporation and thinly veiled
threats of violence against theater-goers on Christmas Day present a
clear and present danger to the U.S. economy and to our national
security. We can talk about the wisdom of Sony producing a movie about
the assassination of a sitting world leader. But let's make a couple of
things absolutely clear. First, Sony has an unquestionable First
Amendment right to produce any film it wants. And people have the same
right to ignore or criticize it. But when the line of threats and
violence is crossed, they lose those constitutional protections. It
is instructive to remember that a British film company produced a 2006
mockumentary Death of a President in
which then President George W. Bush is murdered in Chicago. Despite the
fact that the movie won several international awards, the America movie
goers recognized it for the piece of crap it was and largely ignored it.
(Before the limpid left starts joking about the desirability of making an
unpopular republican president disappear, they should ask themselves
how they would feel if the film were about the murder of Bill Clinton
or Jimmy Carter?) When countries such as Russia and Iraq behave badly,
we have imposed economic sanctions that have severely hurt those outlaw
nations. The problem with North Korea is that there have been so many
sanctions for so long that there seems little within that realm with
which we can respond. However, we do have options. We can launch a
devastating cyber-counter attack that hits these bastards where they
live. Scramble their computers. Shut down their power grid
We even have the capability to militarily target installations
responsible using conventional and nuclear weapons. (Yes, I would not
take the nuclear option off the table. They wouldn't.) However, empty
words from the White House about bringing the culprits to justice are
not enough. This was a direct attack on the people and Constitution of
the United States. If the President is not willing to respond soon in a
forceful, unambiguous manner, then it is time for him to resign and let
someone else do the right thing. Bill Clinton's well documented lack-of-backbone in dealing with Osama Bin Laden help lead to 9/11. President Obama, the red lights are flashing. Do something.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 58 -- Mind the Gap
December 12, 2014
x
It
is a phrase familiar to anyone who has traveled on London's subway
system. As the train rolls into the station, an authoritarian voice
booms out from the public address system to remind one and all to "mind
the gap." Translated into American, the phrase means that it would be a
really bad thing for those leaving and boarding the subway to get a
foot caught in the opening between the rail car and the platform. Or,
to put it another way, "pay attention and be safe." Recently, I
have been minding other kinds of gap - the increasing distance between
the ideal and the reality. Just this week, I have been given pause to
reflect on the gap between the American sense of justice and the acts
of torture that have been done in our name for the sake of national
security. There's the ever-widening gap between the dangerous and
necessary duties our police face and the even more dangerous and
unnecessary dangers one faces by merely being a black man in America.
There's the constant reminder that we established a Constitution to
form a "more perfect union," only to be reminded every day that the
American government is dysfunctional and growing in its imperfections.
And when we think the gap between the ideal and the reality can't get
any wider, there's Bill Cosby. If you are a passionate, conscientious
person who pays attention to the plight of our planet and its often
irrational inhabitants, one can easily become depressed. However, if
you see yourself as a realist and choose to ignore the gap as being
irrelevant, you run the danger of becoming cynical -- and, of course,
being run over by our metaphorical train. So it seems ironic that the
only realistic option we have is to straddle the gap for as long as we
can until we are forced to choose between the ideal of the stable
platform or the realism of the moving train. We may feel safe and
self-confident on the platform. But we don't get anywhere until we
board the train, ride its noisy and unsettling path, and arrive at a
new platform - which often represents a new vision of what is ideal.
Can we, as a society, progress - and, perhaps, survive - by adhering to
fixed, time-tested values? Or is the nature of progress that we mind
the gap between the ideal and reality by testing its limits and
adjusting our expectations? To me, there is no more important question
facing the United States of America as we move deeper into the 21st
century.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 57 -- Danger Santa
December 3, 2014
x
During
the week since we celebrated Thanksgiving, a Jolly Old Elf has
reappeared across the global landscape with great fanfare. He arrives
in every town and settles in for the next month to meet and greet his
admirers, usually in a shopping venue, each with a list of Christmas
demands. In some towns, Santa arrives on a sleigh at the end of a
parade. In other places, he has been known to bring his jolly old self
to town in fire trucks, flatbed trucks, on horseback and even on the
strings of a parachute. In Lawrence, Kansas, the traditional entrance
for Santa involves the local fire department deploying a truck and
ladder and "rescuing" him from the roof of a downtown department store.
(Which begs the question, how come a man who delivers toys to billions
of children around the world in one night can't get off of a department
store roof without calling the fire department?) Every time I see Santa
Claus come to town, I revisit a nightmare. I was news director of a
radio station in Rocky Mount, North Carolina, in 1978. The local
tradition has Santa arrive in town via a fire truck. The truck carries
him from the edge of town -- I suppose Rocky Mount has a reindeer
no-fly zone ordinance -- to the local mall. Each year, the town's three
radio stations would pool their resources and simulcast this joyous
event. During this particular Kringle Caper, I got to ride in the fire
truck and conduct a live interview with Mr. Claus - who surprisingly
had a decidedly Southern drawl and a hint of bourbon on his breath.
However, to perform my duties, I would have to wait for a verbal cue
from the radio station, cross an open bay in the fire truck, turn
on the remote transmitter and grab the microphone. (I couldn't just
leave the transmitter on - its signal jammed the radio from which I
received my cues.) At one point in this broadcast, I got my cue and
turned on the transmitter -- just as the fire truck made a sharp left
turn. In a nod to basic physics, when the truck went left, I went right
toward the open side of the truck and toward the street. Live on the
air, I held the microphone in one hand and hung onto a side railing for
dear life with the other while half of my body dangled perilously above
the street. Fortunately, I quickly regained my balance and hauled
myself back into the truck without the radio audience ever having
become aware of the high drama that played out before their
Santa-loving ears. That was the last time I ever volunteered to
broadcast the Santa arrival. And any lingering childhood dreams of
becoming a fireman were forever dashed.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 56 -- What Do We Stand For?
November 22, 2014
x
President
Obama this week took a series of executive actions designed to address
the lingering question of illegal immigration. On the surface,
they seem modest and realistic. They are also temporary, lasting
until either Congress passes superseding legislation or the next
President decides to change them. At first blush, this president seems
to be taking a bold stance against Congressional inaction. However,
thanks to excellent reporting
by CNN's Jake Tapper, one begins to see Obama's hypocrisy. It has
often been noted that Obama's predecessor, George W. Bush, had been a
strong advocate for realistic immigration reform. President Obama even
evoked President Bush's name during his nationwide television address
Thursday night. But as Tapper notes, it was Senator
Obama who helped derail a bipartisan effort at immigration reform in
2007. According to Tapper, "Obama had signed on to be part of a
bipartisan coalition of senators pushing a comprehensive immigration
package, and yet he kept straying from the group's agreements." In a
scathing rebuke of the President, Tapper wrote, "To those who were part
of the effort to pass a bill in 2007, Obama's incredulity at
legislative inaction rings a bit false. To them -- many of whom did not
want to be identified because of the sensitivity of criticizing a
president publicly -- President Obama sees the immigration effort
strictly through a political lens. He is for it when it helps him
politically, and when it was politically more problematic to be part of
a bipartisan effort, he did what was good for him." President Obama
said he was a leader who wanted to change Washington and make a
difference in people's lives. Yet his crocodile tears over
Congressional inaction on immigration do not hide the fact that the
only thing this President stands for is his own election. While it is
true that the Republican leadership - if one can call it that - has
cynically blocked immigration reform that would prove to be a net gain
for America, the same can be said for the Democrats and President
Obama. Lost somewhere in this political gamesmanship is the true
question of the day: Does America really stand for what it proclaims to
be its values? Do we really welcome
"Your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free?"
Is it still true that the United States embaces "the wretched refuse of
your teeming shore?" The lady in New York harbor proclaims "Send these,
the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden
door!" If we no longer believe that, then let's tear down the Statue of
Liberty and erect a huge stop sign in her place. That would seem more
appropriate.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 55 -- My Media Moment
November 15, 2014
x
What was your most memorable/impactful media experience? That question served as the basis of an assignment this semester in my Journalism and Mass Communications History
class. Students were required to interview someone at least 25 years
older than than they are and write a profile of that person's media
habits when their subject was in their age. In addition to gathering
information about each subject's media usage, students were instructed
to ask their interview subjects if a particular moment
of media interaction stands out more than others. It could be something in the news such
as JFK's death, something cultural such as hearing the Beatles for the
first time, or something technological such as purchasing one's first
computer. This weekend, I am beginning to read the fruits of my
students' research and I am not disappointed. Most students interviewed
their parents and grandparents. Others spoke with professors or family
friends. As one might imagine, the answers to the question about the
most memorable/impactful media moment were varied and dependent on each
individual's unique perspective. As I read these reports, I couldn't
help but think back to my own "media moment." People my age
instinctively think back to the television coverage of the Kennedy
assassination. But as indelible in memory as that event was, there was
another media encounter for me that proved even more significant. I
dare say that few remember it. It happened during a Sunday night
broadcast of the Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour,
in either late 1967 or early 1968. The war in Vietnam was raging with
no end in sight. The American people were deeply divided - and some of
that division had spilled into the streets. Dick Smothers - who played
to the straight man to his older brother Tommy - asked a seemingly
innocent question, "Is there something President Johnson could do to
bring the people together?" Without missing a beat, Tommy said, "He
could quit." The studio audience erupted in laughter and
sustained applause. The reaction caught me by surprise. I agreed with
the brothers - and now I realized that I was not alone. It was the first
time I had seen someone use the platform of a prime time television
show to directly challenge the President of the United States - and get
away with it. Dissent, it seems, had gone mainstream. Of course, this
wasn't the first time this sort of thing had happened -- Edward R.
Murrow destroyed Joe McCarthy on live television in 1954. However, for
a 15-year-old who was reared in a decidedly conservative Republican
family, the Smothers Brothers' challenge to authority was a political
awakening. And it is a fire that still burns. I haven't thought about that
media moment for years. I remember it now because of a homework
assignment. Ironically, trying to teach my students about the ways
media influence other people's lives brought me to a better
understanding of the trajectory of my own life.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 54 -- That Was Then, This Is Now
November 5, 2014
x
Just
six years ago, one million people stood in Chicago's Grant Park
celebrating Barack Obama's historic election. But that was then and
this is now. President Obama may not have been on this year's General
Election ballot, but he was definitely on voters' minds. You can spin
the results anyway you want, but the facts are irrefutable.
Republicans, who largely ran on Obama's unpopularity, took control of
the United States Senate and increased their majority in the House of
Representatives. Even more shocking were Democratic defeats in
gubernatorial races in decidedly blue Maryland, Illinois and in the
bluest of blue states, Massachusetts. The anti-Obama wave was felt here
in Kansas, where Democrats fell short of what they thought would be a
historic victory. Obama's supporters will say with much justification
that the Republicans created the gridlock that they successfully
campaigned against. However, the Democrats - specifically Senator Harry
Reid and the President - deserve to share in that criticism. Both sides
spent most of the past two years advancing proposals they knew the
other side wouldn't accept. Both sides made a political calculation
that the other side would get the blame. The election results
show us that they both were right - and they both were wrong. Exit
polls say Americans were angry at both sides. However, because
the Democrats were the party in power, they suffered the consequences.
Ironically, the Republicans now find themselves in the same position as
their freshly vanquished foes. Barack Obama is a lame duck and the GOP
will be perceived by voters as the party in power. If Republicans do
not do as they have promised, to end gridlock and to work with the
President on areas of common concern, then they will find themselves on
the wrong side of Election Day 2016. As for the President, he needs to
swallow his considerable pride and make an honest effort to reach out
to Capitol Hill. He may have seemed to have been in a commanding
position as he accepted the accolades of his admirers in Grant Park in
2008, but that was then and this is now.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 53 -- Please Make It Stop
October 30, 2014
x
I
have always been a political junky. I enjoy a good public policy
dialectic. Campaign strategy fascinates me. I love vibrant expressions
of democracy. That's why I have grown to hate Campaign 2014. The
Republicans, the Democrats and the occasional Independents have not
discussed issues that matter to the American people. Instead, this
campaign has boiled down to who you most dislike. If you are a
Republican, accuse your opponent of being a Barack Obama groupie. If
you are a Democrat, say your opponent is a pal of the Koch Brothers,
former Vice President Darth Vader and Mr. Monopoly. And if you are an
Independent, you distrust everybody and have never, ever left your
house. Here in Kansas, we find ourselves in the unusual position
of having nationally relevant races for the U.S. Senate, Governor and
even for Secretary of State. Because of the competitive nature of
Tuesday's election, Sunflower State residents find themselves bombarded
with a barrage of political ads, robo-calls and campaign mailers. The
telephone calls - usually coming at inappropriate times - have been the
worst. Mitt Romney - actually a recorded message featuring Mitt - has
called me twice. I got a message from Pat Boone - a real surprise
because I forgot that he was still alive. And if Pat Roberts' tape
recorder calls me one more time, I swear I am going to get a
restraining order against him for stalking. What makes this even more
infuriating is that I HAVE ALREADY VOTED!!!! This isn't Chicago. I only
get to vote once. And I had to hold my nose while casting my ballot.
There wasn't one candidate that left me with a "Gee, I feel really good
about voting for you" feeling. After months of mud-slinging and
character assassinations, I am ready for this steaming-heap of a
political season to end. Oh Lord, please make it stop! And it will on
Tuesday - just in time for Campaign 2016 to begin on Wednesday.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
|
Vol. 8 No. 52 -- The Geezer versus the Ghost
October 23, 2014
x
This week's Time
hit the nail right on the head: This year's U.S. Senate race in Kansas
is about the Geezer versus the Ghost. The geezer is 78-year-old
incumbent Republican Pat Roberts. He is in the fight of his political
life against a ghost, self-proclaimed independent Greg Orman. That
Roberts is called a geezer is easy to understand -- just look down the
page at my post of October 18. That pretty much says it all and I see
no need to pile on any further. However, it is the characterization of
Orman as a ghost that I find both fascinating and appropriate. After
all, who is Greg Orman? What does he really stand for? He has spent
most of this campaign and a considerable amount of his personal fortune
telling us what -- or to be more precise, whom -- he is against. He
claims to be an independent. That is a convenient position, since he
has not had to go through the fires of a primary campaign to claim a
spot on the November ballot. (Even Roberts had to do that.) Instead, he
used his fortune to generate enough voter petitions to get his name on
the ballot. Judging by the polls, Orman has a very good chance of
beating Roberts next month. That is remarkable, considering that most
Kansans have no clue as to where he really stands on most vital issues
of our day. All we know is that he is not Pat Roberts and, as an
independent, claims none of the baggage of the Democratic and
Republican parties. Of course, Roberts has been trying to define Orman
as another vote for Barrack Obama -- a strategy that may save the
incumbent on Election Day. However, not being Pat Roberts may prove to
be all that Orman needs to prevail. That is a pretty sad statement on
the state of democracy in the state of Kansas. Even sadder is the
impotence of the Kansas Democratic Party, whose nominee for the U.S.
Senate -- someone people actually voted for -- withdrew from the race to make it easier for the guy no one voted
for to win. It all comes down to this: The people of Kansas are about
hand a six-year lease on a Senate office to either a geezer who doesn't
really live in Kansas or to a ghost who resides under a cloud of
obfuscation and mystery. This is the best we can do?
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 51 -- The Desperation of Sam Brownback
October 22, 2014
x
"Sam
Brownback, an established and able politician, has the potential to be
the most effective and powerful Kansas governor in a generation," I
wrote in this space in January 2011 (Vol.5, No.2).
"Brownback's success will largely depend on his vision of the office."
It is now four years later and the Governor's vision is clearly
defined. As I speculated at the time, the former U.S. Senator used his
seat in the governor's office to try and establish a conservative track
record that could serve a springboard to a second bid for the
presidency. Instead, his four years of slash-and-burn conservative
orthodoxy has damaged the state's economy, weakened the state's primary
and secondary education systems, and widened the schism between the
moderates and conservatives within his own party. Brownback has gone
from being the most powerful politician in the state of Kansas to a
desperate man appearing on the brink of defeat for reelection. I had
been heartened that Brownback, a man whom I genuinely believe to be a man
of faith and character, had run a fairly issues-oriented campaign - one
that has avoided the kind of mudslinging that has characterized Senator
Pat Robert's staggering campaign. However, the Governor disabused me of
that notion last night when in his final campaign debate, he accused
Democratic challenger Paul Davis as a liberal who would appoint Kansas
Supreme Court justices overly sympathetic to violent criminals, and
then attempted to exploit a high-profile Wichita murder case to boost
his re-election chances. That the Governor would try to link Davis to
the convicted perpetrators -- especially since Davis was an
acquaintance of one the murder victims -- was a reprehensible act of
political desperation. It is the functional equivalent of
accusing Brownback of being a pedophile because he is Catholic.
Brownback may still prevail on Election Day. Kansas is, after all, the
reddest of Red States and President Obama's popularity numbers look at
lot like those of his predecessor. However, Kansas has earned a
reputation as a somewhat populist state willing to go against national
trends. Kansans may not like liberals, but they like name-calling
ideologs even less - which should give Governor Sam Brownback reason to
pause.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 50 -- Pat Roberts
October 18, 2014
x
When
Pat Roberts was first elected to the U.S. House of Representatives as
part of the 1980 Reagan landslide, he was seen as being of the mold of
typical Kansas politicians - Republican, pragmatic and willing to cross
the aisle if doing so was in the best interests for his
constituents. However, the 78-year-old three-term senator seeking
reelection is a much different man than when he was elected to Congress 33
years ago. He now seems more interested in winning political points
against Democrats and President Obama than he does working for the
people who elected him. How can you explain Robert's decisions to vote
against the Farm Bill, the United Nations Treaty for the Rights of the
Disabled (which former Senator Bob Dole implored him to support), and
the National Bio- and Agro-Defense Facility in Manhattan (which he had
earlier said he supported.) He was among the first to call for the
resignation of former Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen
Sebilius - a former Kansas governor - despite the fact that he was
given his start in politics by her father-in-law, Congressman Keith
Sebilius. Roberts stands in lock-step with business interests in
favor of the Keystone Pipeline and for preserving the controversial Citizens United court
decision -- despite the environmental and social harm they may do to
his constituents. During 33 years in Congress, only eight of the 466
pieces of legislation he has proposed have been enacted into law. And
the place that he has sworn in legal documents as his "primary place of
residence" isn't even in Kansas. While the people of the
Sunflower State may not care much for independent Greg Orman's
fence-straddling ads that say nothing of his vision for leadership, the
consensus appears to be that they do not like Roberts' constant barrage
of negative ads that try to paint his challenger as a Democrat in an
Independent's clothing. Roberts, too, has said nothing about his vision
for leadership or his record in Congress. It leads one to the
inevitable conclusion that when it comes to vision, leadership and his
voting record, there's little that Pat Roberts is proud to share with
the voters of Kansas.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 49 -- Bogus History
October 11, 2014
x
There is a widely debunked view of history known as the Great Man Theory. Scottish writer Thomas Carlyle
wrote in the 1840s that history can be explained through exploits of
great leaders who influenced events through their power, charisma,
wisdom and gile. However, English philosopher Herbert Spencer
challenge Carlyle's theory in 1860, saying that these so-called "great
men" are the products of the societies in which they lived and were
influenced by the social conditions of their times. It is Spencer's
view that prevails everywhere today -- except on the History Channel.
The popular cable television network premiered a six-hour special
earlier this year, The World Wars.
It is based on a plauisble premise, that World War II was a
continuation of World War I and was led by individuals influenced by
their experiences in the earlier conflict. The program focuses on
a handful of leaders, Roosevelt, Churchill, Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini
and Togo. It also focuses on the actions of two generals, Patton and
McArthur. Amazingly, in the six hours of docudrama, Dwight D.
Eisenhower is never mentioned. Neither is George P. Marshall, Chester
Nimitz or Bernard Montgomery. Instead, we are given to believe that
this handful of "great men" singularly created the great strategies and
personally commanded the great battles. To make these thesis
work, the docudrama plays fast and loose with facts. For example, The World Wars
would have you believe that Hitler abandoned his drive on Moscow at the
very brink of victory so he could humiliate Stalin at Stalingrad. This
makes for a good story, but it is not true. It was the Russian winter
and not a lack of focus that stopped the Germans within sight of the
Kremlin. As for Stalingrad, its oil resources were real reason
behind the German offensive. The program is also littered with a
slew of factual errors. For example, American planes sank three
Japanese aircraft carriers within a six minute period at the Battle of
Midway, not four as the docudrama says. For the record, we sank the
fourth carrier later in the day. That may seem like a minor
point. However, to a historian like myself, any error in fact
undermines credibility. And the six hours of programming are littered
with these kind of errors. (Again, how can you talk about World War II
for six hours without mentioning Eisenhower's name once?) Instead of an insightful analysis of one of history's greatest turning points, the History Channel has given us a Cliffnotes
version that tells us how the story ended, but any resemblance the
plotline has with what actually happened is only a matter of
convenience.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 48 -- Pudge
October 7, 2014
x
When
he moved his family from Fort Madison, Iowa, to Hawesville, Kentucky,
in 1967, Francis Dean Fillman knew that big changes were in store for
his family. At 40 years of age, uprooting his family to take a job
at a brand new paper mill along the Ohio River might have seemed a gutsy
move. But, as it worked out, it proved to be fortuitous - and not
just for his family. Along with his wife Rita and their four children,
he became a fixture in the rural Hancock County community. Proof of his
impact is the fact that he was widely known by the nickname given him
as an infant, "Pudge." Many people got to know Pudge as a Deputy
Sheriff. Pudge may have endured countless Barney Fife jokes, but
he knew what he was doing. Many more people got to know him as
Santa Claus -- he would don his Kris Kringle gear every December to the
delight of generations of children. Pudge, was also a "go-to" guy for
any kind of challenge. He could fix almost anything and would help you
find someone who could when he couldn't. There has never been a more
generous man than Pudge Fillman. In a world where too many people focus
on their own little corner of the world, he was a man who would go out
of his way to make sure that others -- sometimes people he didn't even
know -- had his helping hand when they were in need. To the outside
world, he may have seemed an "just an ordinary man." (Knowing Pudge, he
would be pleased that description.) However, he was anything but
ordinary. Judging by the large number of mourners who paid their last
respects this past weekend, Pudge Fillman was seen as gentle giant who
touched the lives of a countless number of people during his 87 years
of life. For many, Pudge and Rita, who passed away in 2006, defined
Hawesville and Hancock County. They are certainly in the hearts of a
wonderful family; one that now extends from sea to shining sea. Their
greatest legacies are their children, grandchildren and great
grandchildren. And the greatest honor of my life is to have become a
member of the Fillman family through marriage. Pudge Fillman was a big
man with an even bigger heart. While he will be missed, Pudge Fillman
can never be forgotten.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 47 -- Hail to the Redskins?
September 26, 2014
x
For
42 years, the Stanford University athletic teams called themselves the
Indians. The school's football team, led by Native American quarterback
Jim Plunkett, played its first Rose Bowl game in 18 years in 1970,
upseting heavily favored Ohio State 27-17. As I recall, there was a lot
of "sportschat" at that time about the irony of the Indians being led
by "an Indian." Perhaps the success of Jim Plunkett served as a
catalyst for change. For whatever reason, the university decided to
change its name to "Cardinals" in 1972 and then to "Cardinal" (for the
color, not the bird) in 1981. As far as I can tell, Stanford
University's athletic program not only survived the rebranding, but has
flourished. In fact, it has been cited as the nation's most successful
athletic program in each of the past 20 years. Today, in the second
decade of the 21st century, a clamour is rising for the professional
football team based in the nation's capitol to change its name. It has
been known as the Washington Redskins since the franchise moved from
Boston in 1937. The Boston Braves changed the team's name to Redskins
in 1932 to avoid confusion with baseball's National League Boston
Braves (which later moved to Milwaukee and Atlanta). Daniel Snyder, the
current football team owner, says the "Redskins" name is an honorific.
A large number of Native Americans say it is a slur. And they have been
saying this for decades. The irony that a team with a racially
questionable nickname represents our nation's capital in our most
popular team sport is palatable. And there are now open legal
challenges to the use of the name - most notably from the U.S. Patent
and Trademark Office. This all begs the question: Is this a battle
worth fighting, Mr. Snyder? Even if you see it as a free speech
issue, it seems to be a lousy marketing decision. The argument is not
going to "just go away," and the NFL's already damaged reputation will
continue to erode. Why not change the name and - oh, by the way - sell
millions of dollars of team gear with the new logo and nickname? That
seems to be a classic "win-win" situation. Stanford University didn't
suffer from its act of conscience. Now is a good time for Dan Snyder to
show that he has one.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 46 -- The Candidates Revealed
September 20, 2014
x
Those
casually familiar with Kansas politics will be surprised to learn that
one of the reddest of the Red States may be turning blue on election
day. Several polls from several sources show democratic
challengers leading republican incumbents in the races for governor and
state secretary of state. They also show an independent leading a
republican incumbent in the race for the U.S. Senate. Because the
Sunflower State is suddenly politically competitive, it is garnering a
lot of national attention. When Rachel Maddow and Chuck Todd start
talking at length about the battle for Kansas, you know that the final
two months of Campaign 2014 are going to be heated. The people of
Kansas have already seen a plethora of campaign spots and it is not
even October. Most of the ads we've seen have been negative -
although there's nothing wrong with accurately pointing out the
opposition's record. However, there's been a distinct difference
in the gubernatorial and senatorial contests. Governor Sam Brownback
and state Senator Paul Davis have run negative ads in their battle for
the state house. But to the credit of both campaigns, they also have
run positive ads focusing on their own qualities and proposals. Most of
the ads in the governor's race have focused on funding for state
education. Contrast that with the race for the U.S. Senate, where the
attacks have been personal and without serious policy discussion.
Independent challenger Greg Orman's campaign has metaphorically focused
on gridlock in Congress while incumbent Pat Roberts wants to paint his
challenger as an Obama liberal. Of the four campaigns mentioned,
Senator Roberts' has had, far and away, the most negative tone. I
believe that has worked to the challenger's advantage. Pat Roberts is
coming across as your mean Uncle Pat, the one who never forgave your
mom for marrying your father. On the other hand, Orman's job is simpler
- letting mean Uncle Pat remind us why we don't like him. And Orman's
campaign has yet to hit Roberts where it is really going to hurt him
most, his miserable record as chairman of the Senate Intelligence
Committee. As for Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, neither he
nor democratic challenger Jean Schodorf have to run a meaningful
ad schedule to date. However, television ads will not define the
secretary of state race. Kobach, himself, is the issue that defines it.
He has spent state tax dollars in pursuit of an ideological agenda that
polls have shown most Kansans don't share. And he has been tone deaf
when it comes to the controversy over whether a democrat has the right
to remove his name from the U.S. Senate ballot, making it a
head-to-head race between Roberts and Orman. Kobah said Chad Taylor,
who won the democratic nomination in the primary but has since
withdrawn, must stay on the ballot. The Kansas Supreme Court, in a
unanimous bipartisan vote, disagreed. Now Kobach demands that the
democrats name a ballot replacement - something he has absolutely no
power to do. Kobach envisions himself as a modern Don Quixote, tilting
at evil windmills blowing in a Kansas gale. However, to many, he comes
across as another fictional character: Don Juan, as in the people of
Kansas Don Jaun to have anything to do with him.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 45 -- No Escape
September 13, 2014
x
Like
a lot of people, I enjoy following the world of sports because it
provides a temporary escape from a world which, at times, seems to have
gone mad. Unfortunately, this past week has been one in which real
world issues have intruded into the realm of fun and games. On
Monday, the Baltimore Ravens terminated the contract running back Ray
Rice when a new video emerged of his infamous assault on his
then-fiance (now-wife) in an Atlantic City casino elevator. The former
Rutgers star had faced a ridiculous two-week suspension based on a
video showing him dragging the unconscious woman from the
elevator. But it wasn't until news giant TMZ
released an inside-the-elevator video of Rice clocking his girlfriend
with a face punch that the Ravens and the NFL were forced to take more
realistic sanctions against the woman-beater. NFL Commissioner Roger
Goodell told CBS News that no one in his office had seen the video
until this week and that once confronted with it, it was new evidence
that required tougher actions. There are three problems with that
explanation. First, you didn't need to see the video to know what had
happened in the elevator - Rice already had told the commissioner the
whole story in testimony at the league offices. Second, even without
the video, how could the fact that a woman entered an elevator
conscious and left bloodied and unconscious have been interpreted as
anything other than a vicious assault? Talk about a failure of
imagination. And third - and perhaps most damning - are allegations
that the NFL had been in the possession of the infamous video for
months and that Goodell was either blissfully ignorant or a full-out
liar. Right now, most of America believes the latter. And in the
public's eye, officials ignoring domestic violence and sexual assault
is as much a crime as that committed by the perpetrator. Of course,
there were other atrocities this week in the world of sports. Former
Olympian Oscar Pistorius was convicted of negligent killing in the 2013
death of his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp and declared not guilty of
murder by a South African judge. Of course, if he had shot her in
Florida, he'd have been proclaimed a hero for standing his ground
against a presumed 98-pound burglar cowering her for life in a locked
bathroom. On Friday, Baltimore Oriole slugger Chris Davis -- who last
year proclaimed he wanted show the world that you can hit home runs
without the use of banned chemicals -- was suspended for 25 games after
testing positive a second time for the use an amphetamine. That would
have been the sad story of the day had not Minnesota Vikings running
back Adrian Peterson been indicted by a Texas grand jury for what is
essentially child abuse. He apparently punished his child by flogging
him with a tree branch. (One wonders if there is any video of the
incident that Roger Goodell can pretend not to see?) To top it off,
another NBA team owner is selling his team and a front-office executive
is taking a leave of absence because of particularly stupid, racist
remarks. Between mad men in
the Middle East who want to kill anyone who doesn't agree with them
(especially Americans), to the senseless murder of a Topeka policeman,
it has been a bad week. And to make it worse, the sports world has
provided no escape from this twisted and deranged world.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 44 -- The Cotton Candy Caucas
September 7, 2014
x
At
about the same time the University of Kansas Jayhawks kicked off their
2014 football season, thousands of Kansans gathered at the State Fair
in Hutchinson for a different kind of kick-off. In what is a
long-standing Sunflower State tradition, the candidates for major
offices -- in this case the governorship and a seat in the U.S. Senate
-- held their first major debate. This year's debates drew
special attention because the two republican incumbents in the race,
Governor Sam Brownback and U.S. Senator Pat Roberts, are in
surprisingly difficult battles for reelection. Brownback is
trailing State Senator Paul Davis in the polls and Roberts, coming off
a bruising primary battle, is facing a formidable challenge from
independent Greg Orman. Press accounts of yesterday's events suggest
that the embattled republicans took a page from the play book of the
most famous Kansas republican, Bob Dole. Facing a potential loss in the
Watergate year of 1974, Dole went on the attack during his State Fair
debate, barely winning that election, but -- according to contemporary
accounts of the event -- losing the respect of some of his supporters,
who booed him on stage. The accounts of yesterday's debates in
Hutchinson showed the incumbent republicans were more aggressive, much
in the manner of wounded animals. However, the challengers also
got in their fair share of licks. Perhaps the best came from
Davis, who called out the Governor for claiming the state had only
$876.05 in the state coffers when he took the oath of office in 2011.
Davis noted that figure represented the state's general balance on July
31, 2010, six months before Brownback took office. By the time
Brownback was sworn-in, the budget coffers had swelled to more than
$200 million. And, according to the Kansas City Star,
the state’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, or CAFR, actually
shows an all-funds ending balance of $163.4 million in Kansas
government as of June 30, 2010. In the Senate debate, Orman suggested
he had been to
Dodge City -- Robert's proported residence -- more often this year than
the incumbent. Roberts challenged Orman and they compared numbers.
Turns out Orman was wrong. Roberts claimed to have been in Dodge City
seven times this year compared to Orman's four. That might have scored
a minor debating point, but also pointed out the Senator's most
challenging problem this year -- he may pick up his mail in Dodge City,
but his real home -- the place where all his personal stuff resides --
is in Washington, D.C. Amidst the funnel cakes, cotton candy and
popcorn of the Kansas State Fair, four men joined their electoral
battles in earnest. Two of them are fighting hard to win, while
the other two are fighting hard to survive. It's going to be a long two
months until Election Day.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 43 -- The Tyranny of Silence
September 5, 2014
x
As
a teacher of history during these troubled times, it is not uncommon
for me to look to our past for expressions of wisdom that can guide my
thoughts today. In the wake of recent events locally and
internationally, I find myself turning to the words of an 18th century
Irish statesman, author and philosopher. It was Edmund Burke who
said “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men
to do nothing.” Burke, who served many years in the House of Commons of
Great Britain, is remembered for his support of the American Revolution
and his opposition to the French Revolution. At various times since his
death, conservatives and liberals have praised Burke’s wisdom. It is
similar to the way U.S. Democrats and Republicans cherry-pick various
aspects of Ronald Reagan’s life when it best suits their purposes.
However, some of Burke’s wisdom defies political characterization.
“Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could
only do a little,” Burke once said. It calls into question those who
choose caution over “doing the right thing” in matters involving
justice, equality and compassion. And when some choose to sit on the
sidelines out of fear of retribution, Burke reminded us that “all
tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to
remain silent.” While it may be sad to have to look back three
centuries for guidance, it would be sadder to have looked back and
ignored such wisdom.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 42 -- Lackluster Leadership Legacy
August 24, 2014
x
Barack
Obama was elected President of the United States in November 2008 out
of the electorate's strong belief that the nation should go in a new
direction. The narrative of the time was that President George W. Bush
had led us into an unnecessary war in Iraq and had brought the economy
to the brink of ruin. While the timing of the war and the pretense may
have been questionable, I have always thought that armed conflict with
Iraq was inevitable. And as for the economy, Democrats have
conveniently forgotten that the foundations for the Great Recession of
2008 were laid by the laissez-faire banking and housing policies of the
Clinton administration the 1990s. (Yes, the Republicans had control of the Congress at the time. But President Clinton claimed them as his
policy successes.) Now, with roughly 29 months remaining in the Obama
presidency, it is time for the president -- and us -- to begin thinking
about his legacy. Despite the ongoing controversy, I think the
Affordable Care Act will leave a positive legacy. It's not that the ACA
couldn't use some tweaking. However, the point of it is that it
provides health care protections for people who previously fell through
the cracks and were unserved. That's a good thing. However, the biggest
threat to the president's legacy lies in the Middle East. Sure, we got
Osama Bin Laden on his watch. We pulled out of Iraq and are disengaging
from Afghanistan. (It is important to remind you that our ability to
leave Iraq was made possible by President Bush's surge strategy - the
same one opposed by Senator Obama.) But now there is a new and even
more dangerous threat to the peace of the region (and the world), ISIS
- the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. ISIS has been born out
of the stalemate and chaos of the Syrian civil war. And while Obama
apologists will deny it, the President bears some responsibility for
the ISIS threat. Obama famously declared in August 2012 - in the midst
of his reelection campaign - that a "red line" would be crossed if
Syrian dictator Assad used chemical weapons against his people. One
year later, he did -- and we did nothing. The Obama administration
would tell you that its pressure led to Syria's surrender of its
chemical weapons cache. However, there are many who doubt that is true.
Most important, his failure to bomb Syria did not weaken Assad,
weakened those who were on a precipice of toppling him, and emboldened
what had been a weak ISIS movement. Just this past week, the spokesman
for the Joint Chiefs of Staff said that ISIS had significantly grown in
strength during the past six months. Could that have happened if the
Obama administration had followed through on its threats and aided
Syrian rebels in the removal of Assad? No one really knows. But we do
know this: The Obama administration is reengaging the United States in
Iraq, largely for humanitarian reasons. However, the same conditions
exist on the Syrian side of the border and we appear reluctant to do
anything. This level of spineless presidential leadership is not only
making ISIS stronger, but it is threatening Israel, emboldening
Vladimir Putin to swallow up the Ukraine, and telling the Chinese that
they can continue their cyber and economic warfare against the United
States with impunity. The world is waiting for presidential leadership.
And it can't afford to wait until January 20, 2017.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 41 -- Eyewitness News versus I Witness News
August 21, 2014
x
The
recent events in Ferguson, Missouri, have vividly demonstrated the
strengths and weaknesses of American journalism. Reporters serve a
vital role as eyewitnesses to the actions of government -- including
the actions of police. Most people, including most reporters I
have known, are generally supportive of the members of the law
enforcement community. However, when police cross an often fuzzy
line and engage in reckless and potentially illegal behavior, it is the
job of the media to document that behavior and share it with their
fellow citizens. For the most part, this is what has been done in
Ferguson. Of course, this works both ways. Police and, more
importantly, the people who who consume media get to monitor and judge
the quality of the reporting they are seeing, hearing and reading. From
my vantage point, I feel too many of the reporters have gotten caught
up in the drama of the story and have lost perspective. I expect
hysterical and biased rantings of MSNBC and Fox News because that's
their brand. That's what they do. But I am extremely disappointed
when I hear seasoned political reporter Jake Tapper of CNN making
broad, unsubstantiated and, at times, hysterical pronouncements about
the appropriateness of police tactics. Before he makes a judgment
on live television that there are too many armored police units on the
street, he should do what reporters are supposed to do: Ask someone in
charge for the rationale behind these tactics. Having worked with and
for law enforcement during my career, it is my professional opinion
that Ferguson's law enforcement officers were ill-trained and not
emotionally prepared to confront angry and, at times, violent
protesters. But I also have the sense that outside law
enforcement more correctly assessed the situation and imposed more
proper tactics. At this point, I only question how long it took the
Governor of Missouri to response to the initial violence and how long
it took the State Police to take operational control once they were
summoned. I don't know if the shooting of Michael Brown was
justified or an illegal act committed in the people's name by a
frightened police officer. That's not my job. Nor is it the job of the
goons in the street or the buffoons pointing cameras at them.
This is the kind of situation for which our criminal courts are designed.
Nonviolent legitimate street protests are free speech that should both
be protected and considered. Based on the state and federal responses,
one can say that has been the case. Outsiders stepped in because
the locals lost credibility. But giving voice and a platform to the
violent and hysterical -- including the Jake Tappers of the journalism
world -- creates more heat than light and does a disservice to the
profession and the community it serves.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 40 -- Biden vs. Romney?
August 10, 2014
x
Ever since Barack Obama was reelected to a second term - about the same time Karl Rove had his meltdown
on Fox News - there has been rampant speculation as to who will win the
presidency in 2016. Yes, this speculation is annoying. But is
also is as American as apple pie - albeit stale apple pie. Most
of the speculation centers on whether Hillary Clinton will throw her
hat into the ring. She may be positioning herself for a run -- or she
may be pulling a Sarah Palin by coyly amassing a considerable campaign
war chest that can be easily converted into a finely feathered nest.
During the past week, I read two commentaries that mentioned unlikely
Obama successors, Joe Biden and Mitt Romney. Few seem to take Biden
seriously because Vice Presidents are rarely treated as little more
than a punch line -- with the exception of Dick Cheney who just scares people. And Joey from Scranton contributes to this low image with a record of malapropisms. However, Biden is a seasoned political veteran with substantial resume. Even GQ
has said the Veep is worthy of second look. Another person mentioned in
the "second-look category" is 2012 Republican standard bearer Mitt
Romney. Recent polls have indicated that if the 2012 election were a
do-over, Romney would beat Obama. (The same poll says Hillary would beat Mitt.) As one British commentator
has noted, many of the former Massachusetts governor's statements
during the campaign were prescient. The fact that I have
mentioned Joe and Mitt does not mean that I either support them or
predict they will win their party's nomination. Frankly, if you
ask me who I think will win the presidency in 2016, I will tell that I
haven't mentioned his or her name in this column. I haven't settled on
a particular individual yet, but I think America is looking for a new
face. (Sorry Jeb Bush, you hardly qualify as a new face.) I also think
America is thirsty for a leader
-- and one has not yet emerged from what will likely be a crowded
field. Besides, there's that little matter of the mid-term election in
a couple of months.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 39 -- Don't Drink The Water
August 4, 2014
x
After
a weekend of worry, the people of Toledo, Ohio, have been told that it
is once again safe to drink and bathe in the city's tap water.
Residents were told to avoid using their tap water all weekend after
the state and federal Environmental Protection Agency showed high
levels of an algae-related toxin in two neighborhoods. The city's
drink water comes from the appropriately named Lake Erie.
Environmentalists say the source of the contamination was likely algae
blooms fed by nutrients that wash into
waterways from farm fields. According to CNN, "ingestion of the toxin
can affect the liver and cause nausea, diarrhea, vomiting and acute
liver failure." This is exactly the kind of situation the people living
the six-state Chesapeake Bay Watershed want to avoid. That's why they
agreed to an interstate compact that allows
the EPA to impose detailed agricultural
chemical nutrient runoff standards in the region. However, farm
interests and 21 state attorneys general (including the one in Kansas)
have gone to federal court to block the arrangement. Simply said,
they fear they may be held to higher standards themselves (Vol. 8 No. 20).
To be certain, this is not a black or white issue. If there's one thing
America does better than anyone else, it is producing food. A strong
agricultural economy is not only good for this country, but it is a
global necessity. However, the agriculture vs. the environment
debate is often reduced to the simplistic agricentric argument that
"everyone has to eat." That's true. But everyone needs water,
too. Based on my recent conversations with people in the region once
known as the Dust Bowl, I think farmers have a much better
understanding of that reality than those in corporate agriculture and
politics. Last weekend's water crisis in Toledo should serve as a
cautionary tale. Instead of suing states that are trying to fend off
disaster, the business folks and the politicians need to engage the
problem of wastewater runoff in a meaningful and constructive manner.
It's better to become a part of the solution now than to face the
inevitable legal and financial consequences of doing nothing - plus it
has the added benefit of being the right thing to do.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 38 -- Not-So Super Tuesday
August 1, 2014
x
Next
Tuesday is Primary Election Day in Kansas. And if you are not filled
with a sense of excitement or anticipation, you are not alone. Kansas
Secretary of State Kris Kobach says he expects only a 22 percent voter
turnout. (He didn't say how many illegal aliens he expected to cast
their ballots.) There isn't a lot of excitement in this round of
voting, as few of the incumbents have serious challengers. The race
that has gotten the most attention is the republican U.S. Senate
primary pitting incumbent Pat Roberts, who gets his mail in Dodge City,
and Miles Wolf, who apparently thinks X-rays are a new level of
"selfie." Baring a big upset, Roberts should win this in a cakewalk. It
is actually Kobach's race that may provide some drama. He is being
challenged by Scott Morgan of Lawrence. Morgan has criticized Kobach
for associating with nut case Ted Nugent, focusing too much on national
immigration issues and for continuing to practice law while in office.
For his part, Kobach has criticized Morgan for being from Lawrence -
which in Kansas politics implies that you are much too liberal to be
running in the republican primary. The only other race generating
attention is in the Kansas Fourth Congressional District, where former
Congressman Todd Tiahrt seeks to reclaim his seat from the man who
succeeded him two years ago, Mike Pompeo. Tiahrt became the odd man out
when he and eventual winner Jerry Moran vied to replace Senator Sam
Brownback, who went on to become governor. The race appears to center
on who will do the best job ensuring that nothing is accomplished in
Washington. Of course, all of this drumbeat is preliminary to the big
show in November. By all accounts, this could be a republican year
nationwide. However, Kansas is a different story. Governor Sam
Brownback, the man who many thought would be running for president in
2016, is currently trailing Democrat Paul Davis in both the polls and
fund raising. That makes the Kansas gubernatorial race the most
interesting race to watch this fall.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 37 -- A Looney Fish Story
July 27, 2014
x
I have previously written about my prowess - or more accurately the lack thereof - as a fisherman (Vol. 5 No. 25).
Last week, I returned to the scene of the crime (so to speak), Mound
Lake in west-central Minnesota. The occasion was a weeklong vacation
with my wife and her son's family. Fishing was only a sidebar to the
main storyline - a lot of quality family time. It is amazing how
sitting next to a body of water with your grandchildren can make you
forget all of the world's troubles. That's not a bad thing when one
considers how screwed up the world is that this particular time.
However, it is the act of fishing that takes one back to reality. On
the one hand, you feel omnipotent when you reel in three-pound bass
and, in an act of practical compassion, you spare its life and let it
go. However, there is also the realization that your five-year-old
grandson and three-year-old granddaughter are catching a lot more fish
than you are. As a grandparent, you are proud. As a fisherman, it is
humbling. It may come as a surprise to remind you that some people
occasionally embellish stories about the "ones that got away." My fish
story on this trip is the one I let
get away. I had just cast into the lake when I saw a loon swim
underwater past me on a beeline to my baited hook. I immediately
recognized that nothing good would happen if I hooked the bird and
quickly yanked my lure from the water out of the loon's way. Perhaps I
overreacted. Maybe the bird would have ignored my silver and purple
rubbery worm. Maybe I wouldn't have gone to prison for killing a
beloved and protected species. More likely, maybe I wouldn't have been
mauled by a foul-tempered fowl. But why take the chance? That would
have been looney.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 36 -- Not Knowing What To Say
July 16, 2014
x
It
is something that happens in virtually every family - in my case, a
brother. You react to news that the health of someone you care about
has taken a bad turn, and has left him or her in a diminished,
uncertain and unhappy state. The person does not appear to be on the
brink of death, but the long-term prognosis isn't promising. Some people die suddenly. Others have enough warning to
gracefully orchestrate their own final exit. It is those who find themselves somewhere
in between -- never to be well again, but with no real sense of how or
when things will play out - who suffer most.
When the time comes to show your love and support, you don't know what
to say. There's a certain cruelty in offering false hope of a
miraculous recovery -- and the person can usually see through
that. If anything, this is a time for personal honesty. But
telling the afflicted of your personal fears for their future seems
both self-centered and ill-advised. So you do the only thing you can do
and try to remain positive and empathetic. You tell your loved ones
that they are, in fact, loved. You say that you are thinking of them
and pulling or praying for them - which ever best fits you spiritual
lifestyle. You want to be positive, but not Pollyanna. You want
them to feel better mentally, if not physically. And you have to remind
yourself that the conversation you are having with someone who, by no
choice of their own, has been placed into a debilitating, painful and
depressing existence is for his or her benefit - not your own. Yes, you
will feel better later when you know you had a chance to reach out at a
time your presence was most welcomed. But you also know that it is also
a hollow victory, one in which you probably did very little to change
the cruel reality. And you say a silent prayer that neither you or
other loved ones find themselves in the same sad situation.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 35 -- Dear Chancellor Merkel
July 14, 2014
x
Dear
Chancellor Merkel - may I call you Angela? Congratulations on
Germany winning the World Cup yesterday over Argentina. I am sure
it is a source of great pride for all Germans - with the exception of
those who migrated to Argentina. I hear that you are unhappy to learn
that your ally the United States has been listening in on your cellphone
and trying to gather intelligence about your government's intentions.
You say that's not the sort of thing allies do to one another.
However, I feel compelled to point out that this is an assymmetric
relationship and that our two countries are not really on an equal
footing. After we sent millions of our sons and daughters to Europe in
the early 1940s to liberate the German people from the clutches of a
murderous tyrant, we then spent hundred of billions of dollars over the
next 70 years rebuilding your country and protecting it from yet
another murderous tyrant in the east. While you have had the luxury of
focusing your economy on building consumer goods that you can sell to
us, we have had to invest a large portion of our economy on maintaining
a military that protects you as well as ourselves. So when you act like
a wilting daisy in the face of threatened Russian aggression in the
Ukraine, did it ever occur to you that the United States might want to
know your true intentions? Did you ever consider that with a
history of two wars of aggression under your country's belt during the
past century, we might not entirely trust you? We mean you no
harm -- and just want to make certain that the opposite holds true. As
long as our nation is expected to carry the bulk of responsibily for
your safety, I am going to ask that you forgive our ocassional
indiscretions. Otherwise, we should take our American soldiers and
money and go home, leaving you and your rubbery spined European friends
to fend for themselves. If you forgive us for our intellience
gathering, we can forgive you for beating us in soccer, er, futbol.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 34 -- The Real Meaning of Freedom
July 4, 2014
x
On
this Fourth of July, most Americans will engage in traditional
celebrations of our independence. Some will go to parties, others
to ballgames, and still others will take in the evening fireworks
display in their local communities. However, along the U.S. -
Mexican border, still others will be exercising their freedom of speech
in protest against illegal immigrants who are being processed in their
area by the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Yes, these people
have a right to lawful protest against their government. But the
image of white, middle-class Americans illegally blocking highways to
prevent three bus loads of women and children seeking to escape poverty
and oppression is, well, unAmerican. It is a sure bet that
everyone blocking that highway has immigrant ancestry. I also
believe that everyone on that highway loves his or her country and
professes to share its values. And there's the rub -- for freedom is
not something we possess. It is something we share. And we
certainly don't show a love of freedom by acting as if we are the same
as the people from those areas these refugees are fleeing. Should
we have a completely open border? No, we should not. There are
legitimate national security concerns. Should we deport the millions of
the people who have made it to America without proper documentation?
No, we should not. We can't treat everyone as if they are a
terrorist. We should do what President George W. Bush first proposed
and President Barack Obama has since endorsed - provide these people a
pathway to citizenship. The people who seek to come to America are not
trying to take anything away from anyone. Freedom is not a
limited resource - giving someone else a better life doesn't diminish
your own. These immigrants want to share in the opportunity to make
something of their lives without fear -- the same motivation our
Founding Father and Mothers shared when they came to these shores four
centuries ago. As we celebrate this Independence Day, let's rejoice
that this is a nation to which people aspire, not flee. And let us
remember that freedom is a gift our ancestors gave us and that we
should pass on to others.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 33 -- No Rubber Stamp
June 29, 2014
x
No
matter how much the nation's punditocracy professes to be all-knowing,
the fact remains that no one really understands politics. At best,
pundits try to place a rational spin on an irrational science.
Observers will always tell you that politicians act in their
self-interest. But if that were the case, can anyone explain what is
happening in Kansas? If the polls are to be believed, Governor
Sam Brownback, generally seen as the most powerful Republican in one of
the nation's reddest of red states, is facing an uphill battle for
reelection. Not only has democrat Paul Davis successfully matched
Brownback's poll numbers, he is also competitive in his fund raising efforts.
Brownback's troubles have been evident for months. One would have
thought that the Republican-controlled legislature would have tried
help the governor during its most recent session by passing bills that
would bolster Brownback's electoral chances. Instead, in the final
hours of the session, conservative lawmakers slipped in legislation
targeting teachers. As John Milburn of the Associated Press reported in
today's Topeka Capital-Journal,
"After seeing laws enacted restricting paycheck contributions for
political activities, eliminating administrative due process and easing
the requirements for obtaining a teaching license, educators say they
are fighting back." One can only wonder why Kansas conservatives
chose to pick this fight. Perhaps they see it as targeting teachers
unions in state that is not friendly to organized labor. The
problem they now face is that there are a lot moderate Republicans,
Democrats and independent voters that view this not as a battle against
unions, but as an assault on one of the state's most revered institutions
- the local school teacher. You just can't make a second grade
teacher appear to others as a union goon. The legislature's
actions make as much sense as picking a fight with Santa Claus. Going
back to my original assertion: I do not pretend to know what is going
to happen in the August legislative primaries and the fall General
Elections. However, I feel confident in saying that this will not
be a rubber-stamp election for Republicans. More and more this is
feeling like a year when no incumbent will be safe.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 32 -- Last Week's Other Electoral Upset
June 20, 2014
x
While
much of the nation's attention was focused last week on the primary
election defeat of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va), there was
another surprising election outcome for people in Kansas who like to
drink water. The water rights holders in Groundwater Management
District 1 - Wichita, Scott, Lane, Greeley and Wallace counties - voted
against the establishment of what would have been the state's second
Local Enhanced Management Area (LEMA). That leaves portions of the
Sheridan and Thomas counties (Sheridan-6 LEMA) with the only LEMA in
the state. The consensus of the farmers, editors and elected officials
I spoke with during my recent dust bowl tour was that the proposal
would pass. But it lost 173-158 with the majority of opposition coming
from Wallace County. LEMAs are an attempt to slow the decline of the
Ogallala Aquifer through a five-year program of voluntary conservation.
The goal was to reduce the drain on the underground water supply by 20
percent. Speculation as to the reason behind the failure was reported
in the Scott County Record.
It pitted younger farmers worried about their long-term prospects
against older farmers who have been pumping water for 30-50 years and
have no desire to change their practices. The vote came after an
18-month education effort designed to showcase the benefits of
collective water conservation. However, it didn't allay the fears of
those who saw the LEMA as a threat to their bottom line and to their
way of life. It didn't help that the state Division of Water Resources
recently granted permission to dig a new well south of Scott City over
the objections of the GWMD board. The Scott City Record
said some thought is being given to establishing a LEMA in a smaller
area where voters were receptive. Meanwhile, the drought continues,
corn producers continue to pump water from the aquifer, and another
opportunity to address the region's most pressing problem evaporates
into the blue Kansas sky.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 31 -- Exits 53 and 54
June 17, 2014
x
After
more than 15-hundred often dusty highways, I returned to Lawrence last
Saturday from my four-state Dust Bowl Tour. My last stop was Colby,
Kansas, a place known to many as a stop along Interstate 70 when
traveling to and from Denver. Although it wasn't my first visit to
Colby, I hadn't spent any time there since December 1991. The
purpose of that visit was to meet with the board of the Citizens
Medical Center about a class project. On this occasion, I talked with
the local newspaper editor, the education director of the Prairie
Museum of Art and History and Katherine Wilkins-Wells, the manager of
the Northeast Kansas Groundwater Management District. Wilkins-Wells
gave me one of the best quotes of my two-week journey: "There are two
kinds of towns in western Kansas, those on the interstate and those
that aren't." There is a lot of wisdom in that statement. There are
towns like Colby that have their economies boosted by a steady stream
of revenues from gas stations, hotels, restaurants and other needs of
the weary traveler. Non-interstate towns are solely reliant upon
agriculture and as any farmer will tell you, farming is a lot like
gambling. This year, in particular, stands to be a losing proposition
if there isn't a break in the drought before the winter wheat planting.
While Colby benefits from its fortunate relationship with the highway,
there is a down side. According to Sharon Friedlander, editor of the Colby Free Press,
much of the community's commercial activity once was located downtown
near the railroad tracks. Today, Colby's downtown is fairly sparse as a
majority of the town's commercial enterprises have moved in close
proximity to the interstate. Most of eateries in town are chain
restaurants, literally leaving Colby without a local flavor. Those
things notwithstanding, Colby is holding its own as a regional center
with beautiful tree-lined neighborhoods, strong schools and
well-maintained public facilities. Colby isn't a bad place to be from.
Nor would it be a bad place to return to, either.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 30 -- Lamar Laments
June 13, 2014
x
As
I travel on my two-week trek through the 1930's Dust Bowl region, this
week's visit to Lamar, Colorado, presented me the appearance of a
prosperous community. Located in the southeastern corner of the
state, the town makes a good first impression on visitors. Perhaps I
was influenced by my recent visit to Boise City, Oklahoma. In
comparison, Lamar seemed vibrant and bustling. The schools, the parks
and the public buildings appeared to be in good shape. The town
has converted its railroad depot into a visitors center and office for
the local chamber of commerce - something I wish we had done here in
Lawrence with our own depot. The residential neighborhoods are
attractive and the streets are in great shape and tree-lined. The
people say they love their town. However, looks can be deceiving. As I
arrived in town, the Arkansas River Power Authority (ARPA) was seeking
public comments on the future of the Lamar Repowering Project. Several
years ago, the community partnered with a half-dozen or so nearby
communities on a $150 million project to convert the Lamar Power and
Light plant from a natural gas-fueled generator into a coal-fired
facility. It was going to save consumers money. The project even won
industry design awards. Unfortunately, the plant has yet to generate
nary a kilowatt. It seems that the boilers failed to meet federal
air quality standards and they were shut down before the plant began
operations. A Colorado-based environmental group eventually won a
settlement in which ARPA agreed to not run the plant before February
2022. This has left Lamar with bonded indebtedness for a $150 white
elephant and forcefeeding business and citizens some of the
highest utility bills in the state. If that were bad enough, the town
is struggling to meet the demands of its residents for water. For the
past decade, it has been in the grips of the worst drought since the
Dirty Thirties. To hear local officials tell it, Lamar is getting
squeezed by thirsty Metro Denver's water demands upstream and the
requirement to provide sufficient water to downstream Kansans under an
interstate water compact. One official was chaffed at the thought of
Prowers County barely pumping enough water to get by while farmers just
across the state line in Kansas were running their irrigation wells
full bore. And as if to add insult to injury, there's the false hope of
wind energy. If you drive into town from the south, you'd think the
town was prospering from one of the largest wind farms in the nation.
However, that, too, is an illusion. Most of the benefits come during
the windmill construction phase. While there is room to build plenty
more, there is inadequate transmission line capacity to add more power
to the grid. One county commissioner told me that the citizens are
getting frustrated, but they don't know whom they should yell at. The
people who made the decisions ten years ago are no longer in office to
be help accountable for what were well-intentioned, but ultimately
flawed reasons. So, they are frustrated. Some are leaving town - the
county population dropped 13 percent in the 2000s. Those who remain are
trying to make the best of a bad situation -- one that is not of their
doing and over which they have little control.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 29 -- An Ill Wind
June 9, 2014
x
There's
dust in the air today in Boise City, Oklahoma. A storm front roared
through this panhandle town last night and was followed by roaring,
howling and unrelenting 50+ mile-and-hour winds. That speck of dust in
your eye probably blew in from New Mexico or Colorado. The gathering
clouds on the horizon have a brown hue. However, folks are grateful
that it rained in Cimarron County the last two weekends.
Otherwise, Boise City (pronounced Boyce City) would today look like it
did in the Dust Bowl days of the 1930s. In recent years, the High
Plains have suffered through a drought comparable to the one that
created the Dirty Thirties. During a visit to the Cimarron Heritage
Center, I was shown a photo taken last April - before the rain - of a
massive wall cloud of dust descending on the town. Fortunately, dust
storms are now more the exception than the rule. However, there's
always the fear that Dust Bowl conditions could return. Boise City was
its epicenter - it was here that a New York Times
reporter coined the phrase "Dust Bowl." Truth be told, this town has
never recovered from that experience. The county's population briefly
rose in the late 1940s, but began its steady decline when another
devastating drought hit in the mid-1950s. Today, the county's
population has fallen to 2,335 - with most of the people living within
the town limits. This county is agriculture dependent, and in case you
haven't noticed, it takes fewer and fewer people on big mechanized
corporate farms to produce the food we consume. Wheat, a product of dry
farming, is held hostage to radical climatic changes. Corn, a product
of irrigation, is the farmer's double-edged sword. A lot of money
can be made growing corn, but it also takes a lot of water. Around
here, that's Ogallala Aquifer water and it is growing scarce. There is
no local industry to take up the slack if the agricultural economy goes
south. If the wells run dry and the fields turn to dust, it is likely
another ill wind will blow through Boise City.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 28 -- Exciting Garden City
June 6, 2014
x
An
item in this morning's newspaper may have taken some by surprise --
Garden City has been ranked among the five most-exciting places in
Kansas. The blog Motovo rated the state's cities with more than 10,000
population for their culinary, recreational and cultural opportunities.
If Garden City's high ranking surprises you, it may be that you haven't
visited the Finney County seat recently. I have spent the better
part of the last three days in Garden (as the local residents call it)
conducting research interviews of civic leaders. As I mentioned
briefly in my last post, my first impressions were good -- and nothing
has since changed that assessment. The city has tree-lined streets,
beautiful homes, well maintained public buildings, parks, public arts,
a new high school, a zoo and the largest public swimming pool you'll
ever see. But more than that, Garden City has a cultural diversity
unlike anywhere else in Kansas. While its transformation into a
"majority minority" community wasn't always easy, the city now embraces
that diversity as a badge of honor. Garden has always had a significant
Hispanic/Latino community. In the 1980's, the demographic mix
shifted with an influx of Pacific Rim immigrants - many of them
Vietnamese refugees - lured to jobs in the meat packing industry. They
came looking to start a new life and found it in western Kansas.
Lately, the refugees have been coming to Garden from places like
Somalia and Myanmar. Mayor Roy Cessna, also the public information
officer for the Garden City School District, told me that students
speaking more than two dozen languages are enrolled in the school
system. A majority of Garden City students are in the federal school
lunch program - suggesting that cultural richness does not always
translate into financial wealth. And to be certain, Garden is not the
Garden of Eden. It faces a variety of issues common to any dynamic and
diverse community. And common with the rest of western Kansas, the
long-term availability of Ogallala Aquifer water is a looming concern.
But as has been the case with other challenges, the people of Garden
City are not afraid to tackle adversity. Everyone I interviewed left me
with the same message: Garden City prospers because it turns challenges
into opportunities. And that attitude is what makes Garden City
exciting.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 27 -- Scott City's High Expectations
June 4, 2014
x
I
am posting from a hotel room in Garden City, Kansas - my base of
operations for the next three days of my two-week tour of the southern
High Plains. I can't say much about Garden City except that a brief car
tour of the community left me with a good first impression. However, before
I focus on this diverse and complex community, I'd like to share some
thoughts about the town I just left, Scott City. I believe it is
an exceptional small town with forward-thinking residents. In
recent years, the citizens have bucked the "no more taxes" trend and
supported a renovation of the county courthouse, renovation of the
local high school, and they have just opened one of the finest
hospitals in the region - and maybe in the state. Scott County's
economic development efforts are aggressive, highly sophisticated and,
most importantly, successful. This is not to say that the community
isn't facing serious challenges, not the least of which is water. This
region is in the third year of a devastating drought. Local
agricultural extension agent John Beckman told me that this summer's
wheat harvest "is very bad" and that if there is not rain very soon "we
aren't going to have a fall crop, either." Water, specifically the
scarcity of it, cropped up several times during Tuesday's three and
one-half hour county commissioners meeting. James Minnix, the
longest-serving member of the commission said, "Rainfall affects a lot
of things around here." Another concern is succession - who takes over
community leadership when the current leadership retires? After the
meeting, Minnix told me that he filed for reelection this week only
because he couldn't find anyone willing to fill the third
commissioner's spot. To address this problem, Scott County businesses
and officials are planning a community leadership development program,
much like the Leadership Lawrence program, designed to prepare the next
generation to take stewardship of the community. I've come to
believe that Scott City isn't just "surviving." It's moving ahead
with an ambitious vision for its future. As several people told me
during my two days of interviews, "The people of Scott City have high
expectations."
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 26 -- And So It Begins
June 1, 2014
x
After
months of delays and a 365-mile drive through wind-swept Kansas, I am
finally out in the High Plains conducting my sabbatical field research.
I am posting tonight from Scott City, Kansas - the first stop on a
two-week swing through one of the most rural areas in the lower 48
states. Most of the counties in this region have seen a steady decline
in population. In some places, it peaked in the 19th century. My
research is focusing on rural media, their survival and their role in
maintaining community cohesion. My original plan was to conduct
interviews with journalists, business leaders, farmers and government
officials during the winter months. However, life and its many
complications conspired against me. I had to content myself with
doing archival research and interviews with folks living within short
driving distance of my Lawrence home. Don't get me wrong - I
accomplished a ton of stuff during the last five months. My
research files are overflowing. But I have been itching to get here and
have "quality face time" with the subjects of my research. And now I am
here. I am starting with a couple of days of interviews in Scott City,
which is typical of the region. Scott City's population has risen
slightly since 2000, while the overall population of Scott County has
declined. Also typical of the region is the growth of the county's
Hispanic/Latino population - up 133 percent since 2000. Granted, that
represents only 15 percent of the local population. However, it is the
only demographic growth group during that period. Missing from the
census tabulations are the Native Americans, who comprise only one-half
of one percent of the local population. That is ironic, because it is
believed that offshoots of the Dismal River Culture lived in this area
long before recorded history. That's just one of this region's many
contradictions. To a lot of folks, the High Plains is little more than
wide open spaces. But my research tells me that there is a lot more to
the story - and that's why I am here. Finally.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 25 -- This One's On You
May 30, 2014
x
It
has taken awhile - some would argue too long - for President Obama to
make a change at the top of the Veteran's Administration. He
today accepted the resignation of VA Secretary Eric Shinseki in the
wake of the growing scandal over veterans health care delivery.
Administrators at VA hospitals across the country have been gaming the
system to gain performance bonuses while covering up unconscionable
delays in veterans health care delivery. Dozens of deserving vets have
died waiting for health care they earned with courage and valor.
Today's resignation is a sad end to Shinseki's outstanding half-century
career of public service. He doesn't deserve the all of blame.
However, he has lost all credibility as being the one to lead the
scandal-ridden agency through needed reforms. Nor is this mess
entirely President Obama's fault. Some of these issues go back as far
as the Bush Administration - the George H.W. Bush administration. The
VA has never had a reputation for administrative efficiency. However, I
am bothered by President Obama's claims that he didn't know of the
problems at the VA until recently. He may not have known the
specifics of the "wait-time" scams being pulled off by greedy VA
administrators, but he did know of the systemic bureaucratic problems
in the agency. As early as 2007, when Senator Obama was running for the
presidency, he said that addressing the needs of veterans was going to
be a high priority within his administration. As for the "wait-time
scam" itself, the George W. Bush administration specifically noted the
problem in the documents it gave to Obama's transition team after the
2008 election. And now that we are in the sixth year of the Obama
administration, this president can no longer make a credible claim that
it was George W. Bush's fault. Nor can he blame the republicans
in Congress. These are not budget issues. They are management
issues - the one area over which the executive branch of government has
complete control and responsibility. I am hoping that some good will
come out of this mess and that both republicans and democrats will
finally honor the moral contract we have made with our service men and
women. However, the first step in this healing process is for the
president to take ownership of a problem that he may not have created,
but largely ignored for six years. If Obama wants to leave office with
a legacy of leadership, that would be a good start.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 24 -- Going West
May 17, 2014
x
I
will embark June 1 on a path that many of our ancestors took on their
way to what had been called the Great American Desert. There will be
obvious differences – I’m pretty sure they didn’t follow an Interstate
highway and stay in air-conditioned motels. However, it will still be a
voyage of discovery. I will be exploring communities in the High Plains
and interviewing residents in connection with my research into areas of
declining population. I have been to western Kansas only a handful of
times during 23 years in the Sunflower State. This journey will
take me into places I’ve never been, including a stretch in the
Oklahoma panhandle that is known as “No Man’s Land.” I am especially
looking forward to meeting the people of the region, who have earned a
reputation as being friendly, independent and fiercely loyal. It has
been my experience that people living outside the region can’t
understand why anyone would want to live there while those who do
wonder why anybody wouldn’t. As a journalist and a researcher, I know
there is only so much one can gather by reading books and academic
journals. The real education comes through talking to people and
seeing things with one’s own eyes. I am looking forward to being
schooled on life in the southern High Plains.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 23 -- What's In A Name?
May 13, 2014
x
In
Act II, Scene 2 of William Shakespeare's most famous play, Juliet asks
Romeo "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name
would still smell as sweet." Impeccable logic - for everything but
politics, that is. It seems that two Shakespearean dramas played out
yesterday involving Kansas politicians. The part of Romeo was played of
U.S. Senator Pat Roberts. With apologies to another Shakespearean
drama, some of Roberts' constituents feel as if something is rotten in
Dodge City. The Senator claims Dodge City as his legal residence,
although he doesn't actually live there. He rents that home and lives
in a house in the town where he is employed, Washington, D.C.
Supporters of Roberts' Tea Party primary challenger Milton Wolf claim
that Roberts can't represent Kansas if he doesn't live in Kansas.
But the Kansas Board of Elections
yesterday said that the fact that Roberts pays Kansas property taxes
and has a Kansas drivers license is good enough to establish residency.
While the usual practice for lawmakers has been to rent a place in D.C.
and have a real home in their home state, apparently the rules don't
say Roberts can't flip tradition on its head. As for Juliet, a/k/a
Congresswoman Lynn Jenkins, The Kansas Board of Accountancy
its allowing her to keep using her designation as a Certified Public
Accountant even though she let her state CPA permit lapse two years
ago. In essence, the board said it was OK for her to call herself a CPA
just as long as she didn't actually perform the duties of a CPA. It
seems Representative Jenkins was too busy to acquire the required
continuing education hours for recertification and the board wasn't
willing to buy her claims that her work on the federal budget and tax
code should be considered suitable substitutes. I don't necessary
object to either Roberts' or Jenkins' circumstances given the financial
and time demands on our elected representatives. But that reminds
me of another Shakespearean quote: "What a tangled web we weave when
first we practice to deceive." Oh, wait - that's not a Shakespeare
quote. It is a quote from Marmion written by Sir Walter Scott. But no mind. After all, what's in a name?
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 22 -- Eighteen Months Out
May 2, 2014
x
In
just under 18 months, a successor to Barack Obama will be chosen. And
it won't be long before the excruciating process of whittling down the
contenders becomes serious blood sport. Some - count Chris Christie and
Hillary Rodham Clinton among their numbers - are already targeted. In
the case of the New Jersey governor, he's been under siege for taking
political pettiness literally a bridge too far. The moderately
conservative (or is it conservatively moderate?) governor may have
thrown up a large - more likely a 4XL - roadblock to what was already
considered a difficult path to the Republican nomination. As for the
former First Lady, Senator and Secretary of State, the sniping has
begun. She is facing a gauntlet of Benghazi investigations, Monica
Lewinsky's book tour and, perhaps most dangerous, the release of
previously classified Clinton presidential documents. Frankly, I am not
all that convinced that she will run. Nasty politics aside, her age and
her health may finally catch up with her ambition. My
"18-months-out" guess is that neither Christie or Clinton will be on
the November 2016 ballot. The political environment right now is so
volatile that Americans may be looking for a fresh face, a sort of
latter-day Jimmy Carter. That person could well come from either the
left or the right. A lot depends on what happens with this November's
mid-term and state elections. If this week's Republican Senate primary
in North Carolina is any indication, the Tea Party movement may be
running out of steam. However, with virtually no campaign
spending limits in place, it is possible those fading fires can be
stoked. Who's going to win the presidency in 2016? I have no earthly
idea. There's a lot of time - and a lot of mud throwing - between now
and November. And then it may get really ugly.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 21 -- Boomer (2003-2014)
April 28, 2014
x
He
was his mother's dog. When we went to the Lawrence-Douglas County
Humane Shelter in November 2004, I was under strict instruction to look
at only "small, short-hair" dogs. And, as any dutiful husband does, I
said, "Yes, ma'am." That is why I was shocked when Jan told me that she
wanted a hyperactive golden retriever who had to weigh at least 90
pounds. "I want this guy," she proclaimed. I asked, "What
happened to looking at only small, short-hair dogs?" Her
response/command, was "I want this guy." And so it was that Boomer came
into and took over our lives for the next 11 years. His name was a
compromise of sorts: My daughter was attending the University of
Oklahoma at the time (Boomer Sooner), and I wanted him named after a
former University of Maryland quarterback, Boomer Esiason. He calmed
down and became Jan's constant companion. My wife was telecommuting to
work, which meant she spent most of her workdays in her basement office
with Boomer by her side. When Jan unexpectedly and suddenly passed away
in March 2007, it became obvious that he understood what had happened
and went into a period of mourning. As silly as it may sound to some,
Boomer and I helped each other work through our collective grief in the
weeks and months that followed. He was my constant companion - except
when any female came to the house. On those occasions, he'd dump his
old man and make new friends. This was especially true when my daughter
Susan was around. However, he gravitated toward every female, be it a
daughter, neighbor, friend or delivery person. Boomer was a ladies
man. And when I married Maureen in June 2010, he embraced her as
his new mommy and pretty much ignored me - except when he wanted
something. But that was OK, because it was quintessential Boomer. Last
week, we lost this man's best friend to lymphoma. Maureen, Susan and I
made the difficult decision to spare him additional suffering. He
remained the same, bright-eyed happy dog we all loved so dearly right
up until the time he closed his eyes, went to sleep for the last time,
and left for heaven to live with his mommy.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 20 -- Whose States Rights?
April 22, 2014
x
Just
a generation ago, a confederacy of southern states joined together in a
"states rights" chorus in an effort to block black residents their
basic human rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. They
claimed that oppressive state laws had legal precedence of federal
civil rights and voting rights legislation. Fortunately, that issue was
settled 50 years ago. Or was it? Today, the issue is whether 21
states - including the state of Kansas - can stop six states and the
District of Columbia from agreeing to a compact designed to help
clean-up Chesapeake Bay, one of the nation's most significant
waterways. The Chesapeake Bay Watershed stretches across more
than 64,000 square miles. It encompasses parts of six states –
Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia
– and the entire District of Columbia. More than 17 million people live
in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. Under this compact, the Environmental
Protection Agency would be allowed to impose detailed agricultural
chemical nutrient runoff standards in the region. Farm interests and
the attorneys general of 21 states, including Kansas, have gone to
federal court to block this from happening. It is not so much
that they care about what happens to the drinking water of 17 million
people back east as it is about a fear that they may eventually be
forced to clean up their act, as well. "Congress deliberately
structured the Clean Water Act to involve states in the Mississippi
River basin and the EPA over management of nutrients that wash into
waterways from farm fields and suburban lawns," said Kansas Attorney
General Derek Schmidt in a February 3, 2014, news release. "That's
because runoff regulation inevitably implicates land use decisions and
private property rights, and Congress did not intend to centralize
those decisions in Washington, D.C." A federal judge in Pennsylvania
has already rejected that argument. The case is now in the Third U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals. In a "friend of the court" brief filed last
week, Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring said that the compact in
question is a product of negotiation among the Chesapeake Watershed
states. "Claiming this case involves federal commandeering of the type
disapproved by the Supreme Court misunderstands the record and
overlooks the history of the Bay States' cooperative efforts," wrote
Herring. In essence, Herring questions whose states rights are
involved. Don't the states within the Chesapeake Watershed have at
least as much right to work with the EPA to clean up their water as
Kansas has to turn its water supplies into open sewers? Do the
rights of agricultural companies to make big profits at the expense of
human health trump the right of people to ask their government to
ensure a clean environment? That may be true in the mind of Derek
Schmidt and 20 other farm state attorneys general, but 17 million
people in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed disagree.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 19 -- Newman's Third Law of Emotion
April 17, 2014
x
If
you hearken back to the days of your high school physics class, you may
remember Newton's Third Law of Motion: For every action there is an
equal and opposite reaction. When it comes to physical laws, Sir Isaac
nailed that one. For example, when a fish swims, its tail pushes on the
water, and the water pushes back and propels the fish forward.
However, when it comes to 21st century social sensibilities, I believe
another set of laws come into play, Newman's Third Law of Emotion. (The
law is named for Alfred E. "What, Me Worry?" Newman of Mad
magazine fame.) Under Newman's Third Law of Emotion, every action has
the potential to provoke a disproportionate and irrational reaction.
We've seen it at work all around us. There have been tragic shootings
and stabbings in public places committed by perpetrators reacting to
perceived offenses that only they know. Nevada cattle ranchers who have
routinely ignored the law now threaten to make war when the government
has the audacity to enforce those laws. There's the irrational fear of
immigrants who come to this country for the same reasons most of our
own ancestors came to these shores, freedom and prosperity. Today we
hear of a college professor censored because he posted a picture of his
son wearing a T-shirt with a quotation from the Game of Thrones television
series. (I've long suspected that there is a disconnect between college
administrators and popular culture.) Some organizations, most
notably the Westboro Baptist Church, have evoked Newman's Third Law of
Emotion to its extremes. Others, who are less sinister in their intent
but still overwhelmingly passionate, are willing to intimidate and
threaten anyone with a view other than their own. In effect, they
overwhelm an individual's free expression with a tsunami of vitriolic
rhetoric of their own. And like a cancer destroying healthy cells
around it, these organized malevolent and irrational outbursts eat away
at the fabric of democracy.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 18 -- The Numbers Game
April 9, 2014
x
There
are more people living in Kansas today than there were in 2010. That's
what the U.S. Census Bureau says. However, America's head
counters also say that more people left the Sunflower State in the last
three years than have come here to live. It sounds contradictory, but it
isn't. The Census Bureau estimates that the state's population rose by
1.4 percent to 2,893,957 between April 1, 2010, and July 1, 2013.
However, an estimated 16,752 people moved to Kansas while another
26,949 moved to other states. The overall increase in the state's
population comes from 129,453 births during that period, compared to
78,479 deaths. To some, these are just numbers. But to others,
they are clues as to future of the state and how best to allocate
resources. And to still others, these numbers provide political
ammunition for coming electoral battles. However, to really appreciate
these numbers, you have to dig deeper. For example, Douglas County,
where I live, has grown by 3.2 percent to 114,322 - faster than the
state average. Neighboring Johnson County, in the Kansas City
metropolitan area, has grown at an even faster 4.2 percentage
rate. In western Kansas, it is a much different story. For
example, Meade County in southwest Kansas has 4,343 people, 5.1 percent
fewer than three years ago. That is typical of most western counties.
The exceptions are those with population - and job - centers such as
Dodge City, Garden City or Scott City which are adding some of the
people moving away from rural areas. Growing counties demand resources
to cope with the influx of people. Counties experiencing population
decline want resources that will help them survive, if not grow. If you
need proof, just look at the state's ongoing struggle to finance public
education. Schools in the west want to be the equal of those in the
east, but lack the people and tax base to achieve that end. One
thing the Census Bureau figures do not tell us is why
more people are leaving Kansas than moving here. That is the subject of
analysis and speculation - and has already reared its head in the
state's gubernatorial campaign. Kansans are going to be exposed to this
numbers game a lot in coming months. It is important to remember that
while the numbers don't lie, they don't tell us the whole story,
either. It will be up to us as informed voters and citizens to
fill in the blanks.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 17 -- Is Money Speech?
April 3, 2014
x
The
U.S. Supreme Court yesterday stoked the fires of the hottest
constitutional debate of the 21st century. In a 5-4 vote split on
ideological and party lines, the justices ruled that caps on the total
amount campaign contributions an individual can give to individual
candidates, PACS and political parties are unconstitutional. While
there are still limits on how much one can give to each candidate, PAC
or party, McCutcheon v. Federal Elections Commission
removes aggregate limits - meaning is is OK to give to as many
different candidates one may want. Some see this as a good thing,
bringing more campaign money back to the political parties after four
years of record spending by outside - and often uncontrollable -
groups. In the 2008 presidential election cycle - before the
groundbreaking Citizens United v. FEC decision
opened the door to unfettered spending by third-party independent
organizations - independent expenditures totaled $359,366,910.
While that was more money than the campaign of Republican nominee John
McCain spent, it was still just half of what the campaign of eventual
winner Barack Obama spent. Four years later, after Citizens United,
independent non-candidate committees spent $1,250,572,291 -
approximately the same amount of money spent by the Romney and Obama
campaigns combined. "This Court has identified only one legitimate
governmental interest for restricting campaign finances: preventing
corruption or the appearance of corruption,” Chief Justice John Roberts
wrote for the majority. “We have consistently rejected attempts to
suppress campaign speech based on other legislative objectives. No
matter how desirable it may seem, it is not an acceptable governmental
objective to ‘level the playing field,’ or to ‘level electoral
opportunities,’ or to ‘equalize the financial resources of candidates…’
The First Amendment prohibits such legislative attempts to ‘fine-tune’
the electoral process, no matter how well intentioned.” Writing for the
dissenters, Justice Stephen Breyer wrote that the majority decision
“creates a loophole that will allow a single individual to contribute
millions of dollars to a political party or to a candidate’s campaign.
Taken together with Citizens United…today’s
decision eviscerates our Nation’s campaign finance laws, leaving a
remnant incapable of dealing with the grave problems of democratic
legitimacy that those laws were intended to resolve.” (These quotations
are courtesy of Politico. Click here
for the full article.) The immediate effect of the SCOTUS ruling is
that even bigger money will pour into the electoral process. It especially will
be felt in this year's mid-term elections, where Republicans appear to
have a serious chance of retaining control of the U.S. Senate. It all
comes down to the the central question: Is giving money to a political
cause an act of expression covered by the First Amendment of the U.S.
Constitution and, if so, are there limits? The reality of the situation
is that free speech is whatever the SCOTUS says it is and, at this
moment in time, a majority of the court sees it as speech with few
limits.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 16 -- True Value
March 27, 2014
x
The
Chicago District of the National Labor Relations Board ruled yesterday
that football players at Northwestern University are university
employees and can unionize. The time commitment of the football players
was cited as the reason for the ruling. Northwestern University plans
to appeal - and well it should. There is no question about the amount
of time and physical commitment football players give to their sport.
However, the NRLB ruling minimizes the value that comes with accepting
a football scholarship. First of all, they get to play a sport
they love on a higher level. They are given an opportunity to
earn a college degree which means they will earn an average of a
million dollars more in a lifetime than those who do not have a
degree. Some of the players, those good enough to play
professionally, will earn even more. However, most will not, making
that degree more impactful on their lives. As college athletes, they
receive benefits other students do not in terms of the quality of
housing, tutoring, food, health care and travel. And, most important of
all, they knew about the expectations facing student athletes from the
beginning. It can not be called exploitation when one not only
voluntarily seeks out this lifestyle, but is overjoyed when the
opportunity is realized. If we want to place a true value on the
college experience, then athletes should be at the very bottom of the
ladder of perks. If people were really paid according to their value to
the greater society, athletes and actors would be be at the bottom and
teachers and nurses would be at the top. What about other scholarship
students at the same university - the ones engaged in meaningful
research that enhances society's quality of life? Doesn't a
potential cancer researcher or the next Bill Gates deserve at least the
same treatment as a potential Cleveland Brown? Imagine how insulting
this ruling is to the young men and women who work harder and often
spend their own fortunes to take on the rigors of medical school.
(I know from the testimony of doctors within my own family that the
mental and physical commitment of a medical school education makes
football practice look like playtime.) The complaint from these
two Northwestern University football players should be seen for what it
is, a union-inspired money grab. And if they feel they are being
mistreated, they have other choices. They could go out and get a real
job.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 15 -- Media Speculation
March 23, 2014
x
Speculation,
by definition, is the presentation of an array of reactions to
questions where there is not enough information available to achieve a
definitive answer. It is also the first step in a process of
determining a plausible explanation. Physical and social scientists do
it all of the time: After an initial fact-gathering process (the
literature review), the scientists speculate on why things happen the
way they do (hypothesis), and then they gather more information, often
following a systematic process (testing the hypothesis) and,
ultimately, then they render an educated judgment based on their
observations (reaching conclusions). While I have heard and read
criticism of the media's - particularly CNN's - excessive coverage of
missing Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, I'd suggest that we all take a
step back and chill out. What journalists are doing with this
story is really no different than what scientists do -- except the
media have an audience watching them do it in real time. Yes, some of
the media speculation has been silly and easily dismissed. The same
thing happens to scientists - except that embarrassment usually happens
in private. The complaint that the coverage has been over the top and
dominates too much airtime seems to ignore the reality of how we
consume media. Do we pick up an academic journal (or a newspaper
or magazine) and stare at it all day? (Some are so poorly written it
just seems like its all day.)
Of course we don't. We read what we are looking for and then move
on. It is the same with television news - we check out what we are
looking for and them eventually move on. Those who criticize cable news
coverage ignore a critical dynamic of the medium: The audience is
constantly turning over. With viewers coming and going, there is a real
need for repetition. And unlike your local newspaper, which has no
direct competition, and your local television station, which rarely
provides news of substance, cable news operates in a highly competitive
environment. There's plenty to criticize about cable news, but this is
not one of those times. Continuing to ask questions about the
disappearance of 239 souls - especially when Malaysian officials have
been less than transparent - is absolutely appropriate. And to hold the
nature and volume of coverage in one medium to the standards and
dynamics of another is disingenuous.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 14 -- Afghanistanism
March 19, 2014
x
When I took my first journalism class during the summer of 1972, I learned a new term: afghanistanism.
It is defined as the practice of journalists to concentrate on distant,
less-relevant issues while ignoring those close to home. Of course, one
can immediately see the irony: With American soldiers fighting and
dying in Afghanistan since 2001, that country is no longer distant or
less-relevant. However, the concept of afghanistanism is alive and well
in American newsrooms. It is far easier to write about Vladamir Putin's
theft of the Crimea and the mystery of the missing Malaysian airliner
than it is to cast a critical eye on the things happening in our
neighborhoods. For one thing, reporting on distant issues usually
involves information developed through someone else's resources, such
as a TV network's news feed or a newspaper's wire service. Local
investigative journalism, when done well, takes time and money -
something of which local news organizations have precious little. I am
not talking about the so-called investigative report where a landlord
hasn't fixed a faulty rental-unit toilet. It's an important story to
the person involved, but to one else. Instead, I'd like to see
reporters take the time to explore the nuances of stories that affect
us all. However, that often involves risk - something media
business managers, station owners and publishers don't like. They
often put the safety of their bottom line ahead of the mission they
purportedly hold. There are good stories all around us. For example,
how are our legislators voting on particular
issues, what is their rationale and to what effect are their votes
influenced by campaign contributions? How is it possible for someone to
be a state legislator and a state employee without a conflict of
interest? Does anyone find it interesting that one Kansas state
representative's campaign contributions nearly tripled upon election to
a leadership post? And why is it that in Lawrence, a community
notorious for its anti-development policies, certain hotel projects are
green-lighted from the outset? These are legitimate issues that have
nothing to do with partisan politics and everything to do with the
health of our democratic institutions. The term afghanistanism may be
outdated. Unfortunately, its practice is not.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 13 -- What A Great Teacher Does
March 11, 2014
x
Just a few weeks past, I posted a somewhat whimsical piece on stargazing (Vol. 8, No. 5). At that time I wrote, "It
is in this moment of crystal clarity that looking into the midnight sky
becomes a journey to a distant past. The sparkling tapestry before us
likely began its illuminating voyage thousands, maybe millions of years
ago - long before there was anyone on Earth to appreciate it." Those words were inspired by the late Carl Sagan,
who has been described as the best science communicator of the 20th
century. Like many, I was mesmerized in 1980 when Sagan hosted a
nine-part PBS series Cosmos: A Personal Voyage.
In his magical and metaphorical Spaceship of the Imagination, Sagan
told the story of our universe and of our place within it. Last Sunday,
Fox TV and the National Geographic Channel broadcast the first of a
13-part reprise of the Sagan series, Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey. It is hosted by Neil deGrasse Tyson, himself a formidable and personable scientist/communicator. Like its predecessor, the new Cosmos
combines clear, concise and compelling writing with stunning visual
effects to tell us who we are and where we came from. As Dr. Tyson
said, "We are star stuff," created from the Big Bang more than 13
billion years ago. As exciting and engaging as Tyson's story of the
universe was, it was the story he told at the end of the episode that,
literally, gave me chills. He produced a personal calendar that had
belonged to Dr. Sagan, and displayed a page on which Sagan had written
Tyson's name. As a 17-year-old, Tyson spent a day with Dr. Sagan at
Cornell University. In an effort to recruit the teenager, Sagan gave
Tyson a very personal tour of the university's laboratory facilities.
Sagan also gave him an autographed copy of one of his books with the
inscription "To a future astrophysicist." Tyson eventually opted for
Harvard over Cornell, but he never forgot the kindness and passion of
Carl Sagan. He was inspired to follow in Sagan's footsteps and
through the magic of television, he has. And that is what a great
teacher does: Inspire us to believe that we are, in fact, star stuff.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 12 -- New York Times v. Sullivan
March 9, 2014
x
Americans
often take their freedoms for granted until they are threatened. And
when they are threatened, they often look to the nation's courts to
protect them. In the American system of checks and balances, the
courts are often the forum of last resort - an institution we turn to
when other governmental entities fail us. So it was 50 years ago today,
when the U.S. Supreme Court issued one of its most significant rulings
in American history. At issue was press coverage of the civil rights
movement. The New York Times
published an advertisement in 1960 critical of what was termed "an
unprecedented wave of terror" by officials in Montgomery, Alabama,
against civil rights advocates and local black residents. While the
gist of the ad was accurate, it also contained a number of minor,
factual errors. Southern segregationists saw the ad as an opportunity
to strike back at liberal Northern media and hit them where it hurts
most, in their pocketbooks. Montgomery City Commissioner L.B.
Sullivan sued the newspaper for libel, and a state court awarded him
$500,000. The case eventually worked its way to the Supreme Court
and, 50 years ago today, the libel verdict was overturned. In
doing so, the court said that public officials have a higher burden of
proof in libel cases. The court said it was no longer enough for public
officials to show that communications made within the context of robust
public debate contain factual errors. In a unanimous ruling, the court
said these officials must show actual malice,
defined as "knowing falsehood or reckless disregard for the truth." And
why did the court do this? Simply put, the justices saw the threat of
libel suits by public officials over minor inaccuracies as having a
"chilling effect" on public debate. "Erroneous statement is inevitable
in free debate," Justice William Brennan wrote. He added that even
erroneous public debate "must be protected if the freedoms of
expression are to have the breathing space that they need to
survive." In an editorial today marking the occasion, The New York Times
said, "The ruling was revolutionary, because the court for the first
time rejected virtually any attempt to squelch criticism of public
officials - even if false - as antithetical to the central meaning of
the First Amendment." As important as the Sullivan case was in
1964, it is even more vital in today's social media climate. While I do
not join those who cynically see government as an instrument of evil, I
also understand that its institutions are administered by people who,
at times, will exceed their authority to preserve their
self-interests. In a democracy, free speech - exercised by
individuals and the media who serve them - is the best defense against
government excess. That is why New York Times v. Sullivan is so significant and should be celebrated.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 11 -- Putin's Sudetenland
March 2, 2014
x
In
a claim that ethnic Germans were being persecuted, Adolf Hitler seized
the northern and western regions of Czechoslovakia in 1938. To be
more accurate, the region of the country known as the Sudetenland was
willfully ceded to Hitler by British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain
and other western European leaders in an attempt to avoid armed
conflict with Germany. After the Munich Agreement was signed - with a
gun to the head of Czechoslovakia - Chamberlain proclaimed "Peace in
Our Time" and Hitler said he had "no further territorial claims in
Europe." (And how well did that work out?) If this sounds vaguely
familiar, it is because a similar drama is being played out this
weekend in the Ukraine. Russian troops -- and let's be clear on this
point: With or without insignia on their uniforms, these are clearly
Russian troops -- have violated the sovereignty of the Ukrainian people
and sent troops, tanks and helicopters into the Crimea. Putin's excuse
for invading his neighbor is to protect ethnic Russians living in the
region. There is no evidence to suggest that any danger to these people
existed. However, they are Russians, which also means they are
naturally paranoid. These Russo-Ukrainians were upset by the recent
popular revolt which resulted in the ouster of the nation's pro-Russian
President. It doesn't seem to bother them that this Quisling had
enriched himself to a Trump-like level at the people's expense. The
final straw came when President Viktor Yanukovych rejected a trade
agreement with Western Europe that would have benefited his people and,
instead, accepted a three billion dollar bribe from Russian Czar
Wannabe Vladimir Putin. We have now reached the point where the players
in this remake of Munich 1938 drama are being cast. Putin has taken the
role of Hitler - an odd choice for the leader of the nation that lost
20 million of its citizens because of Der Fuehrer's madness.
Let's hope that President Obama doesn't jump into the Chamberlain
role. It is clear that the United States and NATO are not in a
position to intervene militarily. But we have very potent
economic weapons at our disposal that can make Vladimir the Terrible
pay for his empirical folly. A strong, unambiguous message should be
sent to the leader and the people of the Russian Federation: If you
want the benefits that come with global economic and cultural
exchanges, stop trying to revive the rotting corpse of the Soviet Union
and start making nice to your neighbors.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 10 -- Finite Possibilities
February 21, 2014
x
A
central tenet of American philosophy is that the United States is a
land of infinite possibilities. We believe that we can overcome
any hardship through our resourcefulness, grit, determination, inherent
fairness and decency. As an aspirational quality, this
aspect of of the American character is laudable. However, there is a
dark side to our optimistic streak, one that doesn't allow us to
recognize that some some possibilities are limited by the laws of
nature and finite resources. This reality was on display for the world
to see yesterday at the University of Kansas Law School. It
hosted a symposium with the provocative title "Preventing the Ghost Town: What Rural Communities Need to Do to Survive in the Modern Economy."
I attended the day-long session because the symposium's subject
dovetails nicely with the sabbatical research I am conducting this
semester. I am looking into areas of declining population - mostly
western Kansas - and the role media play in maintaining community
cohesion. To place this issue into perspective, Kansas Director of USDA
Rural Development Patty Clark noted that there are 44 Kansas counties
where the population peaked by 1900 and have been in steady decline
since 1900. Because of their low population density, some of these
areas are technically classified as frontier. It's a hard place
to live, farm and ranch. Yet everyone I've met from that region loves
it - in part a manifestation of that belief in "infinite
possibilities." Yes, they are optimistic people. But they are also
realistic. They know that their future in the frontier depends on
the availability of the most basic element necessary for life - water -
and that it is running out. There are many visions for the future of
western Kansas. Some suggest abandoning the area for farming and
letting it develop into a "Buffalo Commons," a vast grasslands nature reserve. Still others believe technology in the form of a multi-billion dollar aqueduct
that would bring Missouri River water uphill and across the state of
Kansas to the state's parched southwest. For what it is worth, my
sense is that neither approach is politically or economically viable.
Earlier this week, I interviewed Don Worster, a distinguished KU
professor who has written extensively about western Kansas and the Dust
Bowl of the 1930s. He is not one to sugarcoat the challenges western
Kansans will face. At the end of the interview, I joked - and he agreed
- that he had a "Dirty Harry" philosophy about the future of the High Plains: "A man has got to know his limitations."
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 9 -- A Primer on Stalemate
February 15, 2014
x
Based
on the historically low approval ratings garnered by the United States
Congress, there's little doubt as to why the American electorate is fed
up with its elected leaders. However, when one looks inside the
numbers, one cannot escape the reality that we, the people, are a large
part of the problem. President Obama won 51 percent of the popular vote
(65.9 million) and 61 percent (332) of the Electoral Votes in defeating
former Governor Romney in the 2012 general election. As convincing as
that may seem, Obama's actual vote total was down 4.5 million votes
from 2008. His percentage of the popular vote and Electoral Vote also
dropped. Those facts, in and of themselves, do not mean that Obama
wasn't the people's choice in 2012. To the contrary, he was a clear
winner. But here is where it gets fuzzy: According to a Politidata
analysis completed last year, Obama in 2012 became the first winner of
the presidential election to lose a majority of the congressional
districts since John F. Kennedy in 1960. When votes are counted by
congressional districts, Romney won 234 and Obama won 201. Republican
congressional candidates won in 17 districts which voted for Obama,
Obama won nine Romney leaning districts. Even when President Bush lost
the popular to Vice President Gore in 2000, Bush carried 20 more
electoral districts than Gore. According to OpenSecrets.com,
90 percent of House incumbents and 91 percent of Senate incumbents were
reelected in 2012. Baring cataclysmic events, Democrats will have very
little chance of taking back the House in this year's mid-term
elections. Because of retirements, Republicans have a better
chance of seizing control of the Senate. Even if the Democrats were to
pull off a major upset and win both the House and the Senate, we would
still be confronted by a deeply divided legislative branch and a lame
duck President who every day reminds us that he will never measure up
to our expectations. That's why I say that we, the people, are part of
the problem. We create this mess every time we go to
the polls and split our ballots between the two parties. I used to take
it as a point of pride that I always split my ballot - "voting for the
best man or woman." I am no longer certain that's the best way to
vote. However, I remain uncomfortable voting for party labels --
especially when they mean so little anymore. Unless there is a major sea change in the 2016 election - much
like Roosevelt's election in 1932 or Reagan's election in 1980 -
gridlock remains in the long-range forecast.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 8 -- Olympic Fever
February 11, 2014
x
The
Winter Olympic Games in Sochi, Russia, are not even a week old and
already I am counting the minutes until they extinguish the
torch. Simply put, Vladimir Putin has found the cure for Olympic
Fever. First, let's look at the venue. Up until a few years ago,
Sochi was a sleepy, run-down summer resort for Russia's aparatchnic
elite with toilets that won't flush. A few billion rubles later,
the town has been transformed into glittering, yet still sleepy,
spruced-up winter resort for Russia's aparatchnic elite with toilets
that still won't flush. It's the equivalent of the United States being
awarded the winter games and deciding to hold them Bisbee, Arizona.
(For those of you unfamiliar with Bisbee, its most recognizable feature
is a big hole in the ground.) Then there's the excitement of amateur
athletic competition. Unfortunately, no such thing exists in the Winter
Olympics. These are all professional athletes - even the
absolutely adorable Jamaican bobsled team. The Olympic Committee still
maintains that it is a competition featuring the world's best amateurs
- despite the fact that the only amateurs in Sochi are the Russian
Organizing Committee. Then there's the quality of the competition,
itself. The reason people like to watch sporting events is their
unpredictable nature. But how can anything be termed
"unpredictable" if we don't know anything about it in the first place?
Really? Who was the last winner of the ski, squat and shoot
competition? Just sayin'. The only real drama in these games is whether
Bob Costas will succumb to an eye infection. And finally, there's the
overwhelming presence of the man would would be Czar, Vladimir
Putin. His facial expression - that of a man who just stepped in
a pile of yak dung - never changes. Perhaps I'd be more impressed if he
performed a shirtless ice dancing routine. No, better yet, perhaps he
could stop providing arms and military support to the murderous Syrian
regime. Then, I would be impressed. Until then, the Faux Fabio can take
his winter games and stick them where the sun don't shine. Oh, I
forgot. He already has.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 7 -- The Supremacy Clause
February 5, 2014
x
When
elected officials in the state of Kansas take their oaths of office,
they do so with wording prescribed by state law. Under Kansas Statutes, Chapter 54, Article 1, Subsection 106,
each public official must swear or affirm that he or she "will support
the Constitution of the United States." This language is common to the
oaths of office in every state in the Union. In taking this oath, these
public officials are pledging to support Article VI, Section 2
of the Constitution: "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United
States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made,
or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall
be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be
bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the
contrary notwithstanding." This section of the Constitution is known as
the Supremacy Clause. In the Federalist Papers,
James Madison defended the Supremacy Clause as vital to the functioning
of a nation. To paraphrase his argument, Madison said the clause was
necessary to avoid the chaos that would come with individual states
overturning federal laws and spiraling off in separate directions.
Madison wrote that without the Supremacy Clause, "It would have seen
the authority of the whole society everywhere subordinate to the
authority of the parts; it would have seen a monster, in which the head
was under the direction of the members." I mention this because many
state legislatures, include the one in Kansas, have or are seeking to
pass state laws that would nullify existing federal laws on a variety
of issues, including immigration, gun control and health care.
These laws, in essence, claim that certain federal laws do not apply
within the states that adopt them. Knowing that the federal courts have
repeatedly ruled these nullification laws to be unconstitutional, I
suspect most legislators who vote for them do so more for the symbolism
than the substance. To me, such an action begs a critical question:
What part of the oath you took "to support the Constitution of the
United States" do you not understand? By the way, the fight over
Nullification Theory was decided 150 years ago in something we know
today as the Civil War.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 6 -- Grandiose to Granular
January 29, 2014
x
Nora
Roberts of CBS News had the best take on last night's State of the
Union Address by President Obama. In her post-speech analysis,
she said that the President's legislative agenda had gone from
"grandiose to granular." Bob Schieffer, another veteran CBS News
correspondent, said the speech was really about the limits of
presidential power. The truth of the matter is that President Obama's
words sounded a lot bolder and decisive than they really were.
His threat (or promise) to use Executive Orders (depending on your
point-of-view) was more symbolic than effective. For example, how
serious can we take his "My RA" proposal for personal retirement
accounts when no one within his administration is capable of providing
any meaningful details as to how it would work? It reminded me of
President Gerald Ford's well-meaning but flimsy "Whip Inflation Now"
effort in 1974. Representative Paul Ryan aside, the President doesn't
need Congress to remind him that the constitutional power to make new
laws and determine the budget rests with the legislative branch. As
well meaning and inspirational as his words are, the President can get
very little done as long as the Congress remains at war with itself. I
will give the President credit for toning down his rhetoric on the
immigration issue. There appears to be a bipartisan compromise in
the works that may not provide illegal aliens an automatic path to
citizenship, but will at least give them legal status. Strident
presidential rhetoric could have derailed that effort. I also give the
President credit for calling out the Republicans on Obamacare -- unless
they have constructive alternatives to offer, shut up and move on.
Frankly, whether or not the President's "Year of Action" comes to
fruition is in the hands of House Speaker John Boehner. He has recently
shown hopeful signs of annoyance with the uncompromising Tea Party wing
of the GOP. If the Republican Party is truly "the big tent" he
and others have claimed it is, he should end his practice of
withholding legislation from consideration until he has a "majority of
the majority." In other words, he should end the practice of letting a
minority of the House of Representatives dictate public policy for the
entire United States government. Not only do I think that is the right
thing to do, I also believe it is the smart political play.
Continuing to cow-tow to the Tea Party - a group of self-proclaimed
patriots who have rejected the most basic American principle of
governing by popular consensus - will lead to an electoral disaster for
the Republican Party.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 5 -- Stargazing
January 26, 2014
x
On
a cloudless and moonless night, stars brightly shine within a black
velvet cloak. You feel as if you can reach out to touch the heavens. It
is in this moment of crystal clarity that looking into the midnight sky
becomes a journey to a distant past. The sparkling tapestry before us
likely began its illuminating voyage thousands, maybe millions of years
ago - long before there was anyone on Earth to appreciate it. In a
sense, this blanket of stars is a time machine, but not the kind H.G.
Wells envisioned. He wrote of a contraption that could transport us to
a time and place, allowing us to alter events in the hope of achieving
a better outcome. However, humanity should be thankful we can't tinker
with time. Just because we may think we have learned from our mistakes
doesn't mean we really have. History is and will always be defined by
unintended consequences. For example, the printing press made it
possible for the Catholic Church to propagate the faith. But it
ultimately weakened the power of the church and gave more to the
masses. Nor does this celestial time machine help us see our past
clearly. Our individual and collective memories are under constant
revision and refinement. How often have you been told told things are
not the way you remember them? Some people redefine the past for
living: We call them historians. Others do it simply because they can.
We call them family. No, the night sky is not that kind of time
machine. It doesn't alter the present. However, the stars can inspire
your future - if you let them. Human history is driven by stargazers
who see the world as it is and dream of what it can become. The stars
do not provide light to navigate the hazards of the night as much as
they illuminate the soul to a universe of possibilities. The
heavens may not tell us very much about distant galaxies. However, if
we let them, they can serve as a catalyst for solemn introspection that
leads to a greater understanding of this world.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 4 -- You Reap What You Sow
January 23, 2014
x
With
new legislative sessions underway in both Washington and Topeka, we see
the same battle lines forming over the same tired issues. In our
Nation's Capitol, the fight is over government spending and health
care, In the Kansas Capitol, lawmakers have drawn lines over tax cuts
and education. This, in and of itself, is neither new nor negative. The
essence of a successful democratic progress is a healthy debate over
the allocation of resources and the establishment of priorities.
However, missing from the debates in Washington and Topeka is a mutual
trust that each side, despite different approaches, fundamentally
believes in the same overarching goals aimed at bettering the lives of
their constituents. Making this dance all the more difficult is a
deepening antipathy among the governed toward those they elected to
govern. Some of this mistrust is deserved. Some of it is also the
ingrained fear of centralized power that has permeated the American DNA
since the birth of the nation. Frankly, what is needed is for
politicians - democrat and republican - to start treating their
elective offices more as a temporary obligation and less as a
birthright. Our elected officials should approach their roles as
limited public service - not as a career option. Public servants
more readily seek common ground among one another to do what is best
for the people than do career politicians who are always thinking ahead
to the next election cycle. One way to accomplish such a sea change in
attitudes would be term limits. However, those same limits come
with their own drawbacks; most notably the constant loss of
institutional memory and the inability to retain truly gifted leaders.
So, what is the answer? How can we ensure that we will have the kind of
government we want and deserve? I humbly suggest you do what I
try to do: pay attention to what they are doing and hold them
accountable for their actions. Read the newspaper and listen to the
news every day. Don't wait until your local paper publishes a
shallow "voters guide" a few days before balloting. If you like
what your elected representative is doing, let him or her know.
If not, take time to write him or her about your views and direction
what you would like to see them take. The more you make your voice
heard, the more they will listen. You can reach your member of
the Kansas House of Representatives here. As for the Kansas Senate, click here. As for the members of the Sunflower State's Congressional delegation, click here.
Our elected leaders are not evil, uncaring people. To the contrary, the
overwhelming majority of them want to do what is right. Without
your voice to guide them, you leave them to organized interests to show
them the way. It is like planting a crop of Kansas wheat - you reap
what you sow.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 3 -- People of the South Wind
January 15, 2014
x
I
can't imagine anyone living in the United States this winter who hasn't
learned a new-found respect for Mother Nature. Whether it be
cold, wind, rain or snow, the current winter season can reasonably be
classified as brutal. This comes to mind as I am in the early stages of
a semester-long sabbatical studying and spending time in Western
Kansas. Other than the Wizard of Oz, most people know Kansas as a
flat and windy prairie. Much of Kansas is flat, but not the part
where I live. There are serious hills in Lawrence, Kansas that
especially come into play when the roads are icy. But everywhere in
Kansas is windy. The state is named after the Kansa (a/k/a Kanza or Kaw) Indians - the
People of the South Wind. During the early stages of my research, I am
exploring the Dust Bowl that engulfed the Southern Plains in the 1930s.
Specifically, I have been listening to recordings of the survivors of
the ordeal, perhaps the worst man-made environmental disaster in
history. What has impressed me about these interviews is the
almost matter-of-fact heroics common throughout. The things
people did to survive - and many people didn't survive - are
remarkable. It's hard to image an environment where a sunny, calm day
could suddenly be transformed into a rolling, pitch-black cloak of
horror. Try as they may, the new People of the South Wind
couldn't escape the dust. It seeped into every crevice through
which air could pass and into their homes and lungs. People had to
cover their faces with wet cloths to avoid breathing in the dust.
Still, hundreds - mostly children - died from what was called "black
pneumonia." Many people fled the region. But more stayed, stuck
it out, and became stronger and more prosperous for their
experience. Every time I hear the wind blow in Kansas - which is
practically every day - I think of the People of the South Wind, the
settlers who followed, and the quiet courage that is instilled into the
people of Western Kansas.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 2-- Let's Do the Math
January 8, 2014
x
According
recently published news accounts, Kansas business owners say both taxes
and the amount of money spent on school administration are too high.
The poll was conducted by the Kansas Chamber of Commerce in early
December of last year and has a margin of error of 5.6 percent. To be
more precise, 73 percent said they would favor increasing the funds
available for the classroom while reducing non-instructional costs. I
am not an accountant, but I can read, write and do basic arithmetic. I
looked at the online budget figures of the local school system
(Lawrence) for the past seven years - roughly the period since the
onset of the "Great Recession"- and guess what? Instructional funding
has risen approximately 30 percent. However, during that same period,
funding for general and school administration has dropped 12
percent. What about administrative costs at the University of
Kansas? It's a far more complicated budget, but I looked at the line
items for the Chancellor's office, the Public Affairs Office and the
Provost's office. Those budgets have dropped 28 percent during
that same period. Just in case you are wondering, the Kansas Division
of the Budget says that the cost of operating the Kansas legislature
during that same time frame increased 11 percent. But let's get back to
that Chamber of Commerce survey. Sixty-five percent said they
thought the quality of the Kansas workforce is "very satisfactory" or
"somewhat satisfactory." (Thirty percent said the workforce was
somewhat or very unsatisfactory.) That makes you wonder whether they
are really dissatisfied with the cost of school administration or its
just that the DNA of the respondents created an automatic revulsion to
anything that smells of government spending and taxes. Even more
curious - and alarming - is that only 1 percent of
Kansas business owners indicated that education was among the important
issues facing them today. (Remember, that's with a margin of error of
5.6 percent). Who do they think prepares that work force, the
Wonderful Wizard of Oz? Let's hope that our state's public policy
officials check their math before making critical decisions on the
future of education in Kansas.
x
That's it for now. Fear the Turtle.
x |
Vol. 8 No. 1-- Restless America
January 1, 2014
x
On
this first day of the new year, the American people are restless.
According to the latest figures from the Gallup Poll, 76 percent of
U.S. adults are dissatisfied with the direction of the country. An
anemic 12 percent approve of the job that Congress is doing. (Perhaps
the remaining 88 percent are asking themselves "Are they doing
anything?") President Obama's job approval rating has dropped 10 points
in the last year to 43 percent. Amazingly, more people have a favorable
opinion of George W. Bush than of his successor. (I get the feeling
that Obama will be be widely admired after
he leaves office.) Part of Obama's problem is the botched
roll-out of the Affordable Care Act a/k/a Obamacare. What makes this
curious is that 69 percent of American adults say they are unaffected
by the health care law. However, ACA approval may increase -
marijuana sales are legal as of today in Colorado. More
significantly, Gallup says 58 percent of American adults now favor the
legalization of marijuana. More than half of Americans, 53 percent, say
they now favor same-sex marriage. Folks in higher education start the
year concerned about competition from online degree programs. The
bad news for the brick and mortar folks: Americans rate online degrees
better than traditional schools for value and options. However,
Americans also say that online schools are less rigorous, with less
qualified instructors and with less credibility among employers. 2014
is a political year, and Republicans are surprisingly doing better than
Democrats in generic ballots. Although mid-term elections tend to
favor the party out of the White House, these Republicans have shown an
amazing ability to shoot themselves in the foot. (Ask President
Romney.) As of now, Hillary Clinton and Chris Christie appear to be the
favorites to win their party's presidential nomination in 2016.
My opinion: Neither one will be on the November 2016 ballot. As for me,
I am starting a sabbatical that will eventually take me into western
Kansas and throughout the High Plains. As one who was reared in a rural
setting, I have always been interested in the fate of small town
America. I plan to visit communities which are facing a historic
population decline and will be studying the role media play in maintaining
community cohesion. It is likely some future posts will come from these
communities. A restless America starts a new year -- and I am getting
out of town.
x
That's it for now. Happy New Year. Fear the Turtle.
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|