The Great Depression

Every day or so I hear another statistic which someone says is the highest or the lowest or the worst since the Great Depression. Each time I hear some such "truth", I am reminded of the famous, if not accurately attributed quotation, "Lies, damned lies and statistics."

Then I remember President Ronald Reagan's quote about the definition of recession, depression and recovery. "The Gipper" said, "If your brother-in-law loses his job it is a recession; if you lose your job it is a depression; if Jimmy Carter loses his job it is a recovery." In other words, President Reagan understood that statistics never describe reality.

I once had a friend who invented statistics, just for fun. Usually ridiculous numbers. I was always amazed at how many people accepted his numbers as truth. Today I am amazed at how people react to statistics from The Great Depression. Also, I am amazed that so many people who were not born until decades after the depression ended, are now telling us these "facts" about the 1930s depression.

Respectfully (always) I submit that if you are younger than 75 years of age, you cannot possibly understand the Depression. Those statistics the youngsters quote may as well be labeled damned lies. They are meaningless.

Consider unemployment numbers. Today, "unemployment" means you do not have a "good" job, paying a high salary, while providing health insurance, unemployment insurance, guaranteed vacations, sick leave, etc., etc., etc.

Flipping hamburgers? That is not a "real" job.

In the 1930s, "unemployment" meant you had nothing to feed your family this day. It meant you could not find even an hour's work, of any description. A job flipping burgers? What a blessing... you might fill your stomach with a few scraps and earn a couple of dollars to purchase a sack of beans to feed your family..

Imagine living in a house with no electricity, no running water, no kitchen sink, no indoor bathroom. Imagine eating only beans, or greens, or some other persons leftover food, and being thankful that you are not hungry. Now, in that scenario, imagine someone trying to describe your life with  statistics. What a waste of breath.

Elect Me President.

I'll solve the nation's problems. Fast. Guaranteed!

Ever since humans first developed a written language and invented the tools for writing: clay tablets, papyrus, paper; chisels, quill pens, word processors, people have observed and recorded events of their lives. So much so that there are tens of thousands of libraries with millions of books. Books that sit on shelves, collecting dust, unread, while governments make the same mistakes over and over.

Forget partisan politics. I wouldn't care who carried water for the elephant, hay for the donkey. My administration would be packed with people who didn't give a damn about politics, but were passionate about history.

In the relatively short two and one-third centuries of our government's existence, we've seen it all. Boom and bust, recession, depression, inflation, war and peace. Civil unrest and periods of tranquility. Natural disasters. Katrina, yes, but how about the Chicago fire, the San Francisco earthquake, the Johnstown flood, the dust bowl. The administrations of our 44 presidents have faced these events in different ways. Sometimes with spectacular success. Often with painful failure.

My administration would study, learn from and follow those successes while avoiding repeat of the failures.

We already have an example of such a form of administration, It is the United states military. At West Point, Annapolis and Colorado Springs, the military academies don't dwell on social welfare BS or on PC fantasies, they teach the facts - the facts of history.

What happened at the battle of Waterloo? How did Washington's rag tag army of volunteers defeat the highly trained, well organized British? Why did Rommel lose in North Africa? Lee at Gettysburg?

The result? The most successful, most powerful military in the history of the world.

All the events have occurred. All the solutions have been tried. It is all written... the big picture "The Rise And Fall Of The Roman Empire", "The Rise And Fall Of The Third Reich"...the minute details of every Parliament, every Congress, every dictator. All we have to do is read it.

Sadly, we are governed by politicians, theorists who imagine that their idea is the big one.

I would change that. You like Marxism? How has it worked in the past? You are a fan on Keynesian economics? How has it played out? Big on environmentalism? How many humans have suffered for the welfare of the brown pelican or the spotted owl. How many die annually for an imaginary theory that DDT was wiping out all birds?

I don't need a donation. Just your vote!

Ronald Reagan Said It:

Government IS the problem!

Hasn't that always been true? True of any people, of any era?

Think about the Russian people. Have you ever heard of any reason to fear or to hate a Russian? But the governments there - from the Czars to Stalin to Putin, are another story.

The German people. A highly advanced people in every way. World leaders and innovators. Then there came
Bismarck, Kaiser, Hitler. Bad memories.

Japanese. Remarkable people with much to be admired. Except when Tojo held influence.

Venezuela. Cuba. What's not to love about these beautiful, tropical nations on the Caribbean? Can you say  Hugo Chavez? Fidel Castro?

The vast majority of the world's people want the same thing, a happy, peaceful life. Perhaps because they are concentrated on this goal, evil people muscle there way into power.

The United States has one advantage over other nations. Constitutionally mandated elections. Every two years we have the choice to throw out a Congressman. Every four years, the president. Every six years, a senator.

Happily, in the case of the president, the choice is made for us at the end of eight years. Now, if we can just add term limits to members of Congress, we will have created Utopia!

Worst President

Lately many are saying Jimmy Carter was our worst president, but that Barack Obama is about to steal that title. I disagree.

Forty four men have been President of the United States. Twenty eight served before I was born. I can't honestly speak about those 28. All I know of them is what the history books say, and I do not totally trust the history books. So let's just talk about some presidents who have served in my lifetime.

Jimmy Carter was a bumbling fool. He gave us The Department of Energy, to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. That department has been an abject failure, yet we continue to spend some $27 billion annually to sustain it.

Jimmy also gave us the Department of Education which now costs between $64 and $77 billion annually, but by every accepted yardstick, our schools have just gotten worse.

Pretty bad performance! But nothing compared to F.D.R. Here is the product of his first term:


Agricultural Adjustment Act    AAA  
Civil Works Administration    CWA  
Civilian Conservation Corps    CCC  
Federal Emergency Relief Act    FERA  
Glass-Steagall Act        FDIC  
National Industrial Recovery Act    NIRA  
National Youth Administration    NYA  
Public Works Administration    PWA  
Rural Electrification Administration    REA  
Securities and Exchange Commission    SEC  
Social Security Act        FICA
Tennessee Valley Authority    TVA  
Wagner Act            NLRB  
Works Progress Administration    WPA
  
Granted, some of these programs were discontinued, but some have lived on to bleed America for over 75 years.

Franklin Roosevelt was the worst president. But he ground on until he died in his fourth term. Obama cannot overtake Roosevelt, but he will surely occupy second place. Jimmy Carter should rank number three.

Good Language

Essentially all birds and all mammals communicate with some sort of sound. A shrill cry of alarm to warn of imminent danger; a signal to scare off a competitor; a signal to declare a territory; a call to attract a mate. Each of these events, in numerous species, has been documented by researchers.

Humans, with their ability to utter a wide variety of sounds, developed language. These languages often consist of thousands of words. Steven Pinker, in his book The Language Instinct, suggests that speaking a language is done instinctively. He counts up the number of words understood and used by the average college age student and feels it would be impossible to learn and remember that many words in their short lifetime... so people must have an instinct to speak a language.While some academics disagree with Pinker's conclusions, his arguments are persuasive.

Early European explorers, who first visited remote regions of the earth, were surprised to find that inhabitants there spoke well-developed languages. Pinker even found that in many languages, common items, such as milk, were often referenced by similar sounding words.

The ancient Romans developed a marvelous language we call Latin. Over distance and time, that language nuanced into what we today know as Italian, Spanish, French and Portuguese. Some native speakers, notably the French, try to maintain the "purity" of the language by discouraging the "bastardization" of traditional French words. The Spanish language, spoken by native speakers in America, is rife with such variations. While the Spanish word for truck may more properly be camion, many American Latinos prefer to use trucka.

English speakers, on the other hand, show no such tendencies toward purity. If another language has a word that fits well, English speakers will happily adopt it.

A French journalist was quoted as having said he wished he wrote for an English language publication because he could then express himself more precisely. But, could he? Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, one of the world's best speakers of the English language, once had a problem explaining her anger at some government for acting unilaterally. She simply dropped the use of unilateral and started saying their behavior was "one-sided". Everyone understood.

If you are writing for a scientific journal about a discipline that employs very specific language, you may require complex, even foreign words to make your point. But if you are making a speech to a general audience, remember that they cannot turn back the page and re-read your last comments. In that setting, it is wise to avoid using words or terms that require even a moment of careful thought to absorb your meaning.

Again paraphrasing Steven Pinker, If I orally express a thought and a listener fully understands my thought, that is good language!

Insults Reversed

Years ago, in southern New Mexico, there was a State Senator named Burton Roach. Sen. Roach was a robust man with a huge paunch. In one campaign, an opponent said the last thing needed in the State Senate was another "pot-bellied politician". Everyone, including Roach, recognized this as an insult to Roach. But, Roach was the smarter politician. He turned the insult around had a large button made with the letters PBP emblazoned, and as if to brag about his big belly, wore the button everywhere he went.

I have no recollection of Roach's ideology, but his general good humor and refusal to engage in name calling appealed to voters, and he was re-elected.

Andrew Jackson so infuriated his opposition that one speaker openly called him a jackass. Jackson apparently liked the comparison to a hard headed donkey and adopted the nickname. The donkey - jackass, if you will - remains the symbol of the Democratic Party to this day.

Margaret Thatcher angered Communists worldwide. Even before she became Great Britains Prime Minister, one called her an "iron lady"... meaning a stubborn, uncompromising person. But Maggie Thatcher liked the label and today, if anyone mentions The Iron Lady, everyone knows they mean former British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher!

Politicians and political consultants should think before they write campaign commercials insulting their opponents... you may just be creating a buzz word certain to get him, not you, elected!

What do they mean?

When I was an announcer I was taught the importance of correct pronunciation in the interest of clear communications. We were cautioned against the perils of placing the em-FOSS-us on the wrong syl-LOBB-uhl.

Today, when I hear a spokesman read copy on a well crafted TV commercial while seemingly placing emphasis on the wrong syllable - or word - I wonder if it is on purpose or just a mistake.

On a commercial for Legal Zoom, an outfit that provides self-help for preparing legal documents, the spokesman promises "We put the law on your side", without emphasis on any word, or syllable. Okay, no one wants the law on their back... but, why on your side? Shouldn't he be saying "We put the law on YOUR side"?

Maybe there is a reason. Amazingly, there are all sorts of legal requirements placed on advertising. You have heard an announcer identified as  "a non-attorney spokesman". Really? Who cares if the spokesman is a non-attorney? Or, you have seen commercials for some medical product labeled as a "dramatization". Is that so we won't think someone with a hidden camera is filming in a doctor's office? Only a lawyer would dream up a need for those disclaimers.

I once wrote a commercial in which I said something could be completed in "a few short weeks". I was forced to re-write it by a regulator who demanded "What is a short week?".

Is there a reason why Legal Zoom cannot say "We put the law on YOUR side"? Or is that spokesman, who is a well-known attorney and NOT a well-trained-non-attorney-announcer, just doing a poor job of reading his copy?

Don't face the IRS Alone!

If, that is,  you are a tax cheat!

An outfit called Tax Masters is running a TV commercial in which spokesman Patrick Cox warns, "The IRS will pursue you relentlessly...", to which I say, "They damned well better!" Pursuing tax cheats is what they are paid to do and I find it refreshing that someone in the Federal Government is doing their job... relentlessly, no less!

As politicians are wont to say... let me be perfectly clear:  I deplore the 16th amendment to the Constitution, I hate income tax. But as long as it is the law and millions of us law-abiding citizens are forced to obey, I want everyone to pay up just as we do.

As for the IRS being in relentless pursuit, I will share my personal experience. Having been self-employed most of my adult life, I have paid estimated taxes. There have been a couple of instances when we underestimated and suddenly found we owed more income tax than we could immediately pay. We asked the IRS for help. They worked with us to develop a payment plan we could handle. We followed the plan, paid our taxes and that was that.

And again, I have seen a couple of instances where an individual IRS agent appeared to be a bit unreasonable but, by and large, my IRS experience has been okay.

Repeal the 16th amendment. But until you do, enforce the law evenly and pursue tax cheats, law breakers, relentlessly.

My opinion is that you can save money and time by working directly with the IRS. Let Mr. Cox make his money off someone else.

Foolish Questions

I loved the old country music song titled Foolish Questions. It referenced situations as when a person rushes into the house, literally dripping wet and someone asks "Is it raining?".

At the August debate for Republican presidential candidates, TV host Bret Baier asked candidates to raise their hand if they would reject a Democrat proposal to offer $10 in spending cuts for $1 in tax increases. What a foolish question. Given the track record of Congressional Democrats, the $1 in tax would be taken - the $10 in spending cuts never given. How would you answer such a question?

But, I heard of a worse question: A group was asked to raise their hands if they believe in evolution. In both instances, the question was posed for a "gesture" answer... no explanations requested... no clarifications permitted.

Any sane person would have to answer yes, that they believe in "evolution". We all know that cross breeding and adaptations caused by climate, food or other influences, have caused a species of animal or plant to evolve into some different form. Consider the old "wolf to chihuahua" example. Or, how about the many kinds of roses developed by cross pollination (even patented).

However, the word "evolution" in modern conversation almost always refers to the origin of man. No one can
absolutely answer that question. Many learned people have sought the answer to the origin of man. Many others have speculated. Historic prophets have advanced "truths", sometimes mutually exclusive truths, but each with legends of believers.

Across America there are frequent confrontations between people who want schools to teach one or another explanation for the origin of  man. How can you teach anything when it is impossible to know the answer? But some persist, as if it would truly affect the life of a fifth grader to know what happened thousands or perhaps millions of years ago.

It would be very nice if we could just teach the truth, or at minimum, common sense: "We really cannot explain the origins of man but there are several possibilities. Why don't you discuss it with your parents?" Immediately that would enrage people of all beliefs  - who hold their personal belief to be inviolate. Better to ask foolish (unanswerable) questions. 

Clarification please.

I have always been a little perplexed as to why we show such deference to the President of the United States.


The person is not a king (or queen) or God. They are a politician, in the office because of a skilled and perhaps devious campaign and the donations of hundreds of millions of dollars from people who hope to rake in millions more in political favors; and from people who (often mistakenly) just admire them. They enjoy unimaginable perks and immense powers, and  (in modern times) always become multi-millionaires from their time in office.

But we are always expected to say "Mr. President"! When Barack Obama stood before Congress and told a bald-faced lie, Congressman Joe Wilson shouted, "You lie". Wilson was chastised for that retort, and forced to apologize, even though he was correct - Obama was lying. No punishment for - no apology from the liar.

While I fault the British for their adoration of their royalty, I believe their conduct in Parliament is much more realistic! If their PM makes a statement perceived to be false, a chorus of members voice their feelings.


While I was not a fan of Harry Truman, he was, at least, realistic about the Oval Office job. When he left office, he was offered one or more high salary jobs, which he refused. Harry said, "You don't want me. You want the office of the president and that is not for sale." Harry never became rich.

Fifteen different men have held the office of president in my lifetime. Some have led wisely with great benefit to my country. I appreciate and applaud them. Others have been lousy leaders and have inflicted harm on our nation and our people. I have no regard, no respect for them.

So, until I am persuaded otherwise, I shall continue to regard Barack Obama for what he is doing with his time in office. I think he is a bum... a great detriment to America. I do not wish him any physical harm, I just want him (and all of his cronies) out of office, out of power and influence.

The Big Picture

When I was studying broadcast electronics in my youth, I once encountered an exam question that asked for the probable cause of a malfunction in a described electrical circuit. I looked at the circuit, quickly identified a possible cause and wrote it as my answer.

When the exam was graded, I had answered every question correctly except that one about the malfunction. Disappointed at missing a perfect score, and certain my answer was correct, I challenged the examiner. He advised I reexamine the circuit for a more likely cause of the malfunction... the probable cause, which the question had sought. He was right, of course, there was a much more likely cause for the problem.

I never forgot that experience and through the decades since, have tried to look for The Big Picture. I haven't always succeeded, but frequently enough to know that first impressions are not always correct. How I wish everyone would discover that truth.

Environmentalists are, in my opinion, the worst offenders. They zero in on one conclusion and refuse to accept that they may be causing greater problems than the one they wish to solve. The most horrible example, of course, was Rachel Carson's attack on the pesticide DDT. Based on the belief that DDT would wipe out all bird populations, Carson's book Silent Spring sparked a movement that created a worldwide ban on DDT.

Carson and her adherents truly missed The Big Picture. DDT had almost eliminated the anopheles mosquito, which spreads malaria. Discontinuing the use of DDT allowed this mosquito to flourish and malaria to spread. The British newspaper, The Daily Mail, published this graphic to show the human price paid to satisfy the environmentalists posit that DDT must be banned:

Today, in political rhetoric, in discussions of the economy, in just about every phase of public discourse, we see examples of a refusal to look at The Big Picture. Even when results are indisputable, some still believe their original, narrow view was correct.

Each time someone makes an assertion about anything and asks for your concurrence, pause and look for The Big Picture. In so doing, you could be making a huge contribution to the general welfare.

Theater goers and sports fans are killing us!

Theater ticket prices go up another couple of bucks... but, Gee! You've gotta see the new Harry Potter movie!

Tickets to the ball game are $50! But, Wow! You may not even have another chance to buy tickets to see the team this season!

So the grocer says, "If they'll pay $12 to see a movie, they sure can pay $4 for a gallon of milk!"

The plumber says, "If they can pay $50 to see a ball game, they sure can pay me $100 to come fix their leak."

There was a time when prices were determined by cost to provide the goods or services purchased, plus a reasonable profit for the effort. No longer. The rule today is, What will the market bear?

Fair, honest. reasonable are no longer the language of enterprise. Today we pull a price out of the air. If people pay it, we raise it a little. If they will not pay it, we have a sale, lowering the price temporarily. If they pay the sale price, we take another shot at charging the full price. If they now pay the full price, we again raise it a little.

Every time you smile and agree to pay "a little bit more" for something, you are signaling to someone that raising prices is okay. Only when people begin to walk away from a ticket booth saying they will not pay that much; only when people stop buying something, anything because of price, will someone sit down and seriously search for ways to offer the goods or service for less.

Unintended Consequences

The problems of violence by Mexican drug cartels and the growing resentment against illegal immigration along the U.S. southern border, has led to the dislike of the entire population of Mexico and their thoroughly American descendants in the eyes of many Americans. That is a tragedy.

I live in a city located about 50 miles from Mexico, where persons of ethic Mexican descent are the majority. Having visited Mexico many times, I can attest to the fact that the Mexican people and their progeny, in general, are the kind of people you would like as your neighbors. They have deeply held religious faith and strong family ties. Are there some big cultural differences? Yes. But these differences are not universally apparent.

Last night my wife and I had dinner in one of our city's numerous independently owned "Mexican" restaurants. Actually, that is a misnomer. the cuisine we call Mexican is rarely found in Mexico once you leave the proximity of the U.S. border. In fact, it is probably more common in U.S. restaurants than in their Mexican counterparts.

During dinner, a local group of mariachi musicians came into the restaurant and played for the patrons. They were dressed in what has become traditional mariachi attire... black trousers with silver decorations nicely attached down the outside of each leg, white shirts with a white, satin bow, and black vests.

While the group were not great musicians, they were not bad, and I fully enjoyed their performance. One fellow had obviously acquired his attire at a younger age and had decidedly outgrown the fit. But since they played only for tips, one can understand his inability to afford a new outfit.

I requested a popular Mexican song, made famous by Mexican superstars Juan Gabriel and the late Rosío Dúrcal, but they did not know the song, a testament to the fact that the group were decidedly more American than Mexican.

The musicians played three or four songs and left the restaurant. We finished our dinner with a most warm feeling of affection and appreciation for these friendly people; along with a touch of sadness in the knowledge that many Americans will never learn to appreciate the goodness in so many of our southern neighbors.

Good old folks!

Sometimes when watching the news, I wonder what my father and my grandfather would think if they saw the same newscast. Usually I imagine they would fall off the sofa laughing!

My grandfather was born in 1862 (died in 1937), my father was born in 1893 (died in 1968). No need to explain that these men survived drought and floods, heat and cold, times of prosperity and times of financial hardship; they saw recessions, depressions, booms and busts and numerous wars.

Yesterday a news report covered the hot July weather that is sweeping the nation. One reporter told the sad story of hardship suffered by someone who had no air conditioning.

My grandfather, who had never heard of air conditioning, would have seemed puzzled and asked "Had no what?"

My father (who, late in his life had a window air conditioning unit) would have explained that air conditioning is a machine that makes your house cooler. Both men would have laughed.

We have become a nation of ninnies who agonize over the loss of some modern convenience which our ancestors did very well without for their entire lives.

Were those times the good old days? Of course not. But those were the good old people. They certainly appreciated the benefits of modern conveniences, but they saw those things as conveniences... not essentials for life.

The Casey Anthony Verdict - A Great Day For America

I have always deplored the fact that much of our American Culture is a popularity contest. Many years ago a friend suggested that in America no one could be elected to political office who parted his hair in the middle or who wore a mustache. That may not have been true then or now, but it is a fact that appearances weigh heavily on public opinion.

I also deplore the fact that we defer to a person with a visibly perceptible disability, but often vilify someone with an unseen affliction. We show sympathy for any person with a missing limb, but scoff at a mentally ill person who behaves in an uncharacteristic way.

Like many people, I must struggle to hide my disapproval of a obese person or one who is slovenly. In fact, I usually resent the guy who comes into an eatery wearing a soiled baseball cap and sits across from me, wearing the hat throughout his meal. Those appearances are things I very much dislike, but they are hardly punishable offenses.

I was but 3 1/2 years old when the infant son of hero aviator Charles Lindberg was kidnapped in March of 1932. Like the body of little Caylee Anthony, Lindberg's son was later found, decomposed. A small boy myself, I found that event frightening.

That tragic story and the ensuing trial dragged on for three years before a man named Bruno Richard Hauptman was convicted in March of 1935, and executed a year later in April, 1936, when I was seven years old.

Hauptmann was convicted on circumstantial evidence and, while there was no TV and scant radio coverage available in my farm home, I never believed Hauptmann was proven guilty of that crime. That trial and its outcome, in fact, has haunted me.

Now comes the case of Caylee Anthony. Having been blessed with four sisters, three daughters and seven granddaughters, everyone who knows me knows that I adore little girls. As I have blogged before, I believe little girls to be our most precious and fragile asset. They are, after all, the mothers of our next generation. To see a little girl die so young is the saddest of all tragedies.

If that death was because of a deliberate act by an adult, that person should be found and punished to the full extent of the law... but not beyond. They should not be lynched. Not shot like a dog. Their punishment should be inflicted only after there is solid, unshakable proof of their guilt.

As with the Lindberg trial, I did not follow the proceedings of the Anthony trial. That was the job of the jury, not mine. I had no interest in watching the emotional suffering of others, as did millions of TV viewers.

Casey Anthony has acted in an unusual, largely inexplicable manner. But this was not a popularity contest. The jury, rightfully, did not consider anything but the charges filed against Casey Anthony by the State of Florida. Unquestionably, she lied to authorities - for which she has been convicted. But lying is not a capitol crime. The state of Florida did not prove that she killed her daughter, and I am so grateful for the jury that reached that conclusion.

Having enjoyed a career in the news reporting business, I know we are not permitted to declare someone guilty of a crime unless they are convicted by a court of law. Once that conviction is affirmed, however, we may then legally call them a criminal. Conversely, when a person is acquitted, they are legally innocent. If we are to remain a nation of laws, we must cling to that principle. Agree or not, we must accept the verdict in the Anthony trial.

Casey Anthony did not kill her daughter. We may never know who did, or if it was truly an accidental death, or why Casey behaved as she did. Was she emotionally disturbed, as the defense seemed to infer? We cannot see that disability, if it existed. We can never know beyond the best assessment of medical experts.

She lied to the cops. She has been punished. Now she should be regarded the innocent citizen the court has declared her to be, and allowed, if she so wills, to attempt to put her life back together.

Regulations

There are so many people living on this crowded planet, there must be regulations. Traffic lanes, "No Swimming" signs near dangerous waters, etc.

Some folks, however, want more regulations and government bureaucrats are quick to accommodate.

Some years ago I had an advertising client who operated a small meat packing operation. In the meat-cutting room, there were, unavoidably, scraps of meat that hit the floor. The Dept. of Agriculture arbitrarily determined that this floor be cleaned up and mopped every two hours.

An OSHA inspector checked the plant soon after one mopping and decided it was unsafe for the butchers to work with their sharp knives while standing on a wet concrete floor. He ordered that the butchers be forbidden to work until the floor was dry.

Obeying both orders would essentially shut down the operation.

Shortly after I heard this news, I attended a marketing meeting. Something was said about government regulations and I immediately started grousing. One attendee, Chairman of a large Chicago direct marketing advertising agency challenged me, demanding "Are you suggesting there be no regulations?". I began to criticize Michael Pertschuk, then Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, and immediately became invisible. The others just turned away from me and proceeded to discuss another subject.

Okay, as a teen may have said, "My bad." In a discussion with any liberal - or even a sane person - never lead with your emotions.

No, I do not believe there should be no regulations. I do insist, however, that regulations which serve to control the behavior of others, whether in business or personal life, are a serious matter. They should never be taken lightly or imposed without adequate scrutiny.

Given the government's abject failure at managing almost anything, I believe no government should be empowered to formulate regulations without public input.

It is a fact that some government agencies do offer proposed new regulations for public comment before final enactment. Even this, however, has shortcomings.

About fifty years ago, the Federal Communications Commission proposed new rule making governing the way broadcasters maintain program logs. At the time, broadcasters were required to maintain a log, recording the beginning and ending time of every program, the time every commercial was broadcast, etc.

The proposed rules included a requirement that a station log every time the station's call letter was announced. In those days of analog electronics, dial position was difficult to determine on radio sets, so stations promoted their call letter. Most disk jockeys announced their call letters several times during every break. It would be impossible to record every time.

I proposed that the new rules require that station ID announcements be logged on the hour and half hour... but not every time in between. While I was at it, I proposed several other changes.

I couldn't imagine that the mighty FCC would incorporate my suggestions. When the new rules were finally published, they did, to my amazement, include every one of my proposals.

Conclusions? 1. The bureaucrats who originally wrote the new rules had no idea what they were writing. 2. People in the industry are too busy trying to do their jobs to read and respond to proposed rule-making.

Maybe we should just adopt only regulations warning of an immediate matter of public safety. The only permissible punishment for breaking the rule would be to suffer the consequences of the unsafe situation, and no one could file a lawsuit.

Things that irk!

George Mason University's Distinguished Professor Walter Williams recently wrote: "There are a lot of things, large and small, that irk me. One of them is our tendency to evaluate a presidential candidate based on his intelligence or academic credentials."

Well.. that started me thinking... what was Dr. Williams talking about? So I decided to look up the formal education credentials of the presidents.

First, a few of the "good" presidents:

No. 1: George Washington has long been described as First in War, First in Peace, First in the hearts of his countrymen. His education was rudimentary, probably being obtained from tutors but possibly also from private schools, and he learned surveying.

No. 2: Abraham Lincoln gained what education he could along the way. While reading law, he worked in a store, managed a mill, surveyed, and split rails.

No. 3: Thomas Jefferson attended the College of William and Mary and read law (1762-1767) with George Wythe, the greatest law teacher of his generation in Virginia.

No. 4: Ronald Wilson Reagan earned a BA degree in 1932 from Eureka (Ill.) College.

No. 5: Harry S. Truman attended the public schools in Independence, Mo.

And, a few "stinkers":

No. 1: (Thomas) Woodrow Wilson. A Princeton graduate, he turned from law practice to post-graduate work in political science at Johns Hopkins University, receiving his Ph.D. in 1886. He taught at Bryn Mawr, Wesleyan, and Princeton, and in 1902 was made president of Princeton.

No. 2: Franklin Delano Roosevelt. A Harvard graduate, he also attended Columbia Law School.

No. 3. Theodore Roosevelt. A Harvard graduate.

No. 4: William Howard Taft. A Yale graduate.

No. 5: James Earl Carter, Jr. Graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy at Annapolis

And, we must not forget:

No. 6: Barack Hussein Obama obtained early education in Jakarta, Indonesia, and Hawaii; continued education at Occidental College, Los Angeles, Calif.; received a B.A. in 1983 from Columbia University, New York City; studied law at Harvard University, where he received J.D. in 1991

I could go on, but no need... I now think I see what Dr. Williams was talking about!

Memories From My Youth - III

Clang, clang, clang went the trolley. Those were the opening words of a song about street cars. Amusing to me, that noise was the thing most remembered about those old electric-powered rail cars that once clattered through the streets of America's large cities. They were not all noisy, of course, especially the latter ones, and I loved them.

When I was young, street cars were reasonably fast, they were clean (no exhaust), comfortable and convenient. They were frequent - you never had to wait more than a few minutes - they stopped at almost every other corner, and were very low cost. Fare was 10¢, or you could buy three tokens (for three rides) for a quarter.

By using transfers, you could jump from one line to another, and transfers were free. You could ride all over the city for a dime.

In my home town of Kansas City, the geography is defined by two rivers - the Kansas River (known as the Kaw) flowing east across Kansas and the Missouri River flowing south from Montana. Reaching higher ground at Kansas City, the Missouri takes a hard left turn, just where it is joined by the Kaw, and heads east across the state toward St. Louis to mix with the Mississippi.

Downtown Kansas City, Missouri is on high ground, but a west bound street car line had to transport passengers across the West Bottoms, through Kansas City's famous Stock yards and packing house districts, into Kansas City, Kansas.

The drop from Kansas City, MO into the West Bottoms was essentially a cliff. To make the descent, the transit company dug a tunnel, starting several blocks short of the cliff's edge, then making a gentle drop to the lower ground. I frequently rode that line and loved entering the tunnel on a hot summer day to glide through the cool darkness and emerge into the sunlight on the lower side.

One street car memory was from August 15, 1945. Radio news had informed that the Japanese government was about to sign General MacArthur's unconditional surrender documents and a large crowd began to gather on 12th Street. When the announcement of the surrender came, the huge crowd burst into joyous song, and all the boys started kissing the girls. I was soon smeared in lipstick from ear to ear.

A street car operator, on his assigned route down 12th street, edged into the crowd. Someone went to the back of the car, grabbed the rope to the trolley and pulled it down, disengaging the car's source of power. Throughout the evening that street car sat there in the middle of 12th Street, the operator in his seat watching the celebration.

My wife also remembers street cars. when she was a small girl her father worked for a time as a street car operator. Sometimes at night, when passenger traffic was light, he would let her ride along to the end of his line and return. Truth be known, he even let her operate the car at times. No cause for alarm here... street cars rode on tracks - no steering required.

Most street cars have disappeared from cities across the country. Happily the city of San Francisco has restored a few of the cars which now ply Market Street. You'll even see one with Kansas City Public Transit Company lettered on its bright yellow side. If that old car could talk, it might remember cool summer nights in Kansas City when a small girl sat at its controls on Troost Avenue.

Blagojevich is found guilty!

Well, the jury has found former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich guilty on 17 of 20 counts levied against him!

It isn't over, of course. There will be appeals until there is no higher court to which to appeal, and someone will then decide how he is to be punished.

Here is how I see it: They went into a forest teeming with skunks. One was a little noisy and unlike the others, failed to slink away in the shadows. The skunk police grabbed him by the tail and dragged him out of the forest. "You are stinking up the forest", they declared, "and you must be punished!".

Rod Blagojevich has been punished. Ignoring the decision of the electorate, he was thrown out of office and dragged into court. "He must be punished more!", vowed the skunk police.

Surely he will be punished more - perhaps not until after the November, 2012 elections, and after Rahm Emanuel is well established in his office as Chicago mayor -

Rod Blagojevicjh will be punished more... and, the forest will still stink.

DÉJÀ VU all over again!

So said Yogi Berra - to the consternation of both French and English language police and many others. But we common people knew exactly what Yogi meant... "more of the same old crap"! Today, when it comes to politics, we add "...and again and again!"
 
I was only five years old when President Franklin Roosevelt gave us the AAA. It had nothing to do with automobiles - it was the Agriculture Adjustment Act, intended to protect farmers from price drops. (It lives on in today's Dept. of Agriculture subsidies. Wasn't that smart???). 

Before I was eight years old, FDR also gave us the CWA, CCC, FERA, FDIC, NIRA, NYA, PWA, REA, SEC, Social Security (for pensions, unemployment insurance, and aid to blind, deaf, disabled, and dependent children!) TVA, NLRB and WPA.
 
Obviously, as a small farm boy, I was not aware of the significance of all these misguided acts, but I saw adults shake their heads and agonize over their implementation... I knew there was something bad about what FDR was doing.
 
But, at the same time, we often sat in front of our old Atwater-Kent radio set, listening to the rantings (in German) of someone called Adolph Hitler. That was more ominous, and Americans accepted living with The New Deal.
 
We are still suffering from Roosevelt's stupidity (ask Boeing about the NLRB), yet, our current president is trying to do it all over again... just let us manage things and we will recover from this recession we inherited!

FDR stayed in office because World War Two had caused Americans to crave stability. Thus, the 1930 economic slowdown (which the Dems labeled a recession they had inherited from Herbert Hoover) turned into a depression that lasted well into the 1940s.

Please, please, America... we cannot let this conclusion occur "all over again"!

Memories From My Youth II

The other day I heard again Roger Miller's old recording "King Of The Road", wherein two hours of pushin' broom bought the guy a place to sleep. About the same time I heard mention of some event from 1945. My mind blended the two scraps of information and came up with a memory.

In April, 1945, I was 16 years old. Proving that a 16-year-old boy is near the top of the list of the most stupid of creatures, I loaded onto a Greyhound bus in Kansas City and headed for San Diego, CA.

My billfold was about as empty as my head. A friend, newly out of U.S. Navy boot camp and now stationed in San Diego had written me about the wonders of San Diego and the incredible employment opportunities there.

Arriving in San Diego, the first thing I learned was that in 1945 California, a 16-year-old youth had to attend high school. Forget about getting a job! In a few days I was almost out of cash and totally out of a place to live. Turns out my friend had an uncle in Azusa, CA who would pretend to be my guardian and help me get a job - if I came to Azusa.

I could take a bus the next morning... but where would I sleep tonight? I wandered into a YMCA and sat through some sort of religious service in an auditorium equipped with church-like benches. Today I have no recollection of what I watched there, my mind was hung up on the idea of going back onto the street when it ended.

When the service was over, everyone else filed out the door. I walked up to someone who appeared to be in charge and asked if I could lie down on the bench and spend the night. The person thought for a moment and decided I could earn the privilege. He produced a push broom and said if I cleaned up the place I could sleep on a bench.

I don't remember how long the sweeping took, only that I did the best job I could then stretched out on a bench. When I awoke the next morning, there was a guy sleeping on every bench in the auditorium. I headed for the bus depot.

Roger Miller's "King Of The Road" had fared better... he at least got an eight by twelve four-bit room!

U.S.P.S.

Further proof that the Federal government today does nothing very well. The U.S. Postal Service has been around since, when??? Ben Franklin's days? Is that not time enough to learn how?

Our town of Las Cruces, New Mexico (population 100,000) is only about 45 miles from El Paso, Texas. Now the U.S.P.S. is considering shutting down the mail sorting operation here in favor of doing all the sorting for our area in El Paso. The sorting facility in Las Cruces currently serves all of the zip code 880 sectional center, which is much of southern NM.

Okay, I am a strong advocate of the government saving money, but El Paso is in another state, and our postal service is already lousy. Will their service be worth keeping if they make that change?

We receive a lot of invoices from a number of vendors. Most have now switched to copying their invoices to a Adobe PDF and sending them by e-mail. Saves them postage - we receive their invoices immediately, in perfect condition, we can easily print all the copies we need and the PDFs are easy to store on a hard drive or on a CD.

Among our clients, one, who is not entirely up-to-date in computer usage, still wants our invoice in paper copies. We recently mailed our May invoice (which included many pages) to that client, in a U.S.P.S. Priority-mail envelope. He just phoned to report that he received the U.S.P.S. Priority Mail envelope from us... mangled and empty! Yes, we have copies, will reprint them and mail them again.

When we called the Post Office to complain, they shrugged... the contents of our mailing are just lost! If we wanted to recover our $4.75 postage, the client would have to contact the post office in his town, produce the empty Priority Mail envelope and file a claim. So advised, the client said to forget the refund.

So, thanks to the folks currently running our U.S.P.S., postal service is now lousy, and they want to reduce it even more. It would cost a little more to send our invoice to this client via Fedex, but it appears it would be worth it. The Federal government just manages to mess up everything it touches! Does anyone actually believe they will improve health care costs?

Congressman Weiner

should resign. On Fox news, June 6, columnist Juan Williams said Weiner should NOT resign... that his occupying a seat in congress is the business of voters in his district.

That would be fine, Juan, if Weiner's (or any Congressman's) decisions affected only the voters in his district. But that is not the case. A congressman represents those voters in his/her district. His votes, on the other hand, affect all Americans along with our children and grandchildren. Indeed, America herself and her allies may be affected.

Another columnist, Dr. Thomas Sowell, wrote yesterday:

"In the course of any given year, Congress votes on taxes, medical care, military spending, foreign aid, agriculture, labor, international trade, airlines, housing, insurance, courts, natural resources, and much more.

There are professionals who have spent their entire adult lives specializing in just one of these fields. The idea that Congress can be competent in all these areas simultaneously is staggering. Yet, far from pulling back-- as banks or other private enterprises must, if they don't want to be ruined financially by operating beyond the range of their competence-- Congress is constantly expanding further into more fields."

One may argue that while members of congress may lack competence in these fields, they hear from expert witnesses and serve as something like a jury to reach a reasonable conclusion of the facts.

But, would you accept a juror who is a deliberate, aggressive liar, as Weiner has admitted to being? Much less being some sort of narcissistic pervert?

Anthony Weiner is patently unfit to participate in any deliberation, the outcome of which is important to America, Americans or our allies. If he does not resign, he should be thrown out of office and prohibited from ever seeking political office again.

The dressing down of America

Do you remember the 1944 hit song "The Trolley Song"? It was the story of a young woman who went out to ride the trolley for fun and found a new love.

She boarded the old street car in her "high starched collar and her high top shoes with her hair piled high upon her head." The young man, "in his light brown derby and his bright green tie was quite the handsomest of men".

I remember riding street cars and public transit buses as a youth when the vehicle and the passengers were clean and courteous. I remember when flight on an airliner was occasion for shirt and tie, and a sport coat, which you could fold neatly and lay in the overhead bin to keep it from becoming wrinkled during the trip.

Today, two or three other passeners would cram their backpacks on top of your jacket. The last time I rode a city bus in a big city, a disheveled drunk had vomited on the floor in front of his seat. And we all know of stories of passengers stabbed or beaten on public transit vehicles.

There was a time when ladies would not go out without their gloves. Today... well, you know what some wear.

What has happened? What has become of pride in personal appearance? What is the cause of such widespread slovenliness?

For some time I was very critical of rock music stars for their weird apparel and makeup - then I realized they had simply discovered a new way to make a living. But, are they setting the standards for appearance?

Does it begin in the home? As a small boy, I remember my mother grabbing me by the ear and dragging me back into the house if I headed out for school looking dirty or unkempt. Where are the mothers of boys who can best be described as unwashed slobs?

Are there no longer standards at school? I will always believe that one of the best tools in the hands of my early teachers was the paddle. Misbehave in any unreasonable way and you were marched to the cloak room where the teacher ordered you to grab your ankles while she swatted your bottom with the dreaded paddle.

Whatever the cause, I believe that a major problem with the use of public transit is the natural aversion to being seated next to a smelly, unpleasant person... something almost certain to happen if anyone else is riding!

Memories from my youth.

In he 1940s, and before, refrigerated air conditioning was rare. The compact, efficient compressors that provide A/C for cars and private homes, had not yet been developed. A/C was available only in theaters and some retail store. Certainly not in churches.

Thus, most every church provided hand-held fans you could wave in front of your face for a little relief. On hot summer nights, however, many congregations opted to hold their services outdoors. Many churches put up a large tent in a nearby vacant lot, spread the ground with sawdust, lined up folding chairs, and called it church.

In Kansas City, Kansas, where I lived, there were a number of churches with all black congregants. When they had their summer evening services outside, everyone off the street was welcome to walk in and join them, which I did several times.

One thing I found in common with all these groups: worship service was a time of joyous celebration. The service always began with a "song service", and it was wonderful. People singing at the top of their voices, "Isn't it grand to be a Christian", and meaning every word of it. I especially loved joining in as a congregation sang : "Won't you have a little talk with Jesus... "

When the service began, the Pastor was actually listened to, verified by a chorus of Amens from the congregation when he admonished them against the ways of the world. If there were not enough Amens, the pastor would repeat his admonition until he received the desired response.

Recently I attended a memorial service for a deceased friend. A formalized, scripted event with hymns recited in a wooden sort of way. I wished I could have brought in one of those old black pastors. He would have ended the spirit of gloom, assuring us that our departed friend was now in the loving arms of his Savior, for a joyous reunion with his long departed parents, grandparents and friends who have gone before. Then the chorus would sing and the congregation would join in a celebration of the life of our friend.

Is it a surprise that church attendance has waned? There is little joy left inside those sacred doors.

Brain Power

The human brain is the most incredible thing in all of the universe. How can this lump of meat accomplish things no computer can equal? As with Donald Rumsfeld's reference to "things we don't know we don't know", it would take more education than most of us will ever acquire to even comprehend what the human brain can do.

Still, I find it curiously interesting that the wonderful brain can sometimes be easily tripped up. The rising or setting moon appears much larger than the moon seen high in the sky overhead. The answer, I am told, is reference. At moonrise or moonset, we can compare the apparent size of the moon to terrestrial objects, which makes it look larger.

Reference. Our brains seem incapable of comprehending things far outside the range of familiarity. Empty space in the universe is infinite. It has no boundaries. Incomprehensible. To our wondrous brain, everything has boundaries.

The speed of light. 186,000 miles per second. Incomprehensible. We can't even comprehend the speed of a jet aircraft. Recent reports tell of tornadoes with wind speeds of 200 miles per hour snapping large trees like matchsticks. Imagine sticking your head out the window of a plane moving at 500 miles per hour. It might be snapped off like those tree trunks.

But at 35,000 feet we have no reference for gauging terrestrial speed. If we were flying close to the ground, watching fields and towns swish by at the rate of about 2 1/2 football fields per second, we would not calmly consider our choice from the flight attendant's beverage cart... we would be clutching the seat in front of us in white-knuckle panic!

At my advancing age, I have discovered another incident of brain shortcoming - again related to reference. Once we reach the age of about two years, standing upright requires no thought, no conscious effort. The brain sends just the right signal to each of those many muscles in our feet, legs, thighs and back that keep our bodies erect... even on a surfboard or on skis (once we get the hang of using those devices!).

But now, after decades of practice, my brain at times can no longer figure out which way is up - can't decide what signals to send to which muscles, until I give it a reference point. Standing in the shower with a head full of shampoo and eyes closed, I must touch the shower wall and determine which way is up, or all those muscles will just go limp and I will fall.

I laugh to myself when I imagine being given a roadside sobriety test by a police officer. Asked to walk a straight line, placing one foot in front of the other helps to indicate if you are impaired. I can no longer do that when stone cold sober.

In fact, I cannot walk any straight line - I just tend to stagger to one side or the other. I know, a cane will largely solve that problem. Reference! But, walk with a cane? Like some old man? I suppose I will have to fall a couple of times before I accept that inevitability!

Angie's List

Most Americans believe in equal justice under the law. Or do they? Consider Angie's List.

Angie's list TV advertising shows one painter, employed by a painting contractor, performing badly. The ad advises not to call these guys! Hey... do we get to hear the painting contractor's side of the story?

Another ad shows a plumber staying on the job after his work is done so he could walk the customer's dog. "The only plumber I'll ever call", asserts the ad copy. What are they saying? That a plumber should donate his valuable time to accommodate a customer too irresponsible to care for their pet? Should we not even consider the dog-walking plumber's ability as a plumber?

If I understand Angie's List, we are supposed to accept the "verdict" of one satisfied or dissatisfied customer without ever knowing the credibility of that customer.

I have spent decades working with dozens of remodeling contractors, plumbers, painters, roofers, etc. across the country. In those years I have met one or two remodelers whom I believed were capable of being dishonest if it suited their purpose. I have met a few who were incompetent in one way or another. Most frequently it was a failure in communications that led to a misunderstanding. The vast, vast majority were both honest and capable.

In those same years I have seen many, many customers of remodelers who were flat out dishonest and were hell bent on cheating and scamming the remodeling contractor. I have seen customers complain that the work done was not satisfactory while steadfastly refusing to let the contractor fix the problem. I've seen these cases go to court, only to have a judge side with the dishonest customer and punish the contractor.

The Better Business Bureau franchisees, like Angie's list a private enterprise, does it a bit differently. If a customer complains, the BBB office calls the contractor and attempts to resolve the complaint. The BBB files then retain the results of that effort. Call for a reference and they will give you the full details of any unresolved complaints.

My opinion is that Angie's list is neither fair nor just.

Before accepting the finding of Angie's List, I hope you will favor justice and insist upon hearing the full story.

Does Time Really Fly?

Or does it only crawl?

If you are looking ahead, time seems to stand still. Looking back? Whew! It flies!

Consider presidential politics. A child of the depression, I remember my father's disappointment when Roosevelt was re-elected in 1936. His disbelief when Roosevelt was again re-elected in 1940. His dejection when Roosevelt won again in 1944! Was this man going to be president forever? It seemed that way. At the time, The American Tobacco Company's Lucky Strike brand was the biggest selling cigarette in the world. Their marketing slogan was Lucky Strike Means Fine Tobacco, and they emblazoned every advertising endeavor with LS/MFT! Some smart mouth started saying "Let's Start Mentioning Fifth Term". But, natural forces intervened and FDR died early in his fourth term.

In November, 1948, just about everyone thought the long Democrat hold on the White House would end, but it didn't turn out that way. Harry Truman, who had inherited the presidency upon Roosevelt's death, was re-elected.

Then came 1952! Boy, did I like Ike... as did a majority of Americans! When Dwight Eisenhower took office, we thought we were in secure possession of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, but Ike's eight years passed in a blink.

And, so it went. Some say Kennedy stole the 1960 election, but Nixon didn't want to be seen as a sore loser and quietly stepped aside. Upon JFK's tragic assassination, Lyndon Johnson became president. Everyone sort of felt sorry for LBJ and so gave him his own term in 1964. Then, the Viet Nam war exploded.

Nixon came back and won big in 1968, then again in a landslide in 1972. Some of Nixon's campaign staff foolishly tried to plant a listening device in Democrat National Headquarters and were caught in the act. The press relentlessly pushed the issue until Nixon was forced to resign and a former Congressman named Gerald Ford became president. Because the media hated Nixon, they demonized Ford and we got Carter in 1976. Oh, my!

Carter's four years were just a blink, then came Reagan. Again, we said "Finally"! Double blink and Bush One won in 1988. Then, flash... it was Clinton; blink: Bush Two; blink: Obama.

Be it in 2012 or 2016, Obama, too, will be replaced and we will exhilarate or agonize over the new president. But, don't get too exercised over the winner. Before you know it, they, too, will go the way of all earlier presidents... into the history books.

Flying or crawling... time marches on.

What's gold worth?

I don't think anyone knows!

In the U.S., they may say, about 1500 Dollars per ounce. In Europe, 360 Euros an ounce; In Japan, 123,000 Yen; In the U.K., 930 Pounds Sterling.

But actually that is only saying what their currency is worth. Currencies fluctuate in value. Gold, not so much.

Gold is a precious metal, hard to find, useful for many things. You could set its value by the amount of effort it takes to get it out of the ground and refine it to a standard of purity. Or, you may just say what a one-time mentor told me about the value of a piece of real estate: It is worth what one man is willing to pay for it.

But. gold is not real estate. A building lot in Boston is priced differently than is the same size lot in Beaumont, TX. An ounce of 24 carat gold is the same the world over. It is the standard of value. Instead of saying an ounce of gold is worth $1500, we should say one dollar is worth 1/1500 of an ounce of gold. In a year from now, the dollar may be worth 1/2000, or 1/1000. That will depend on the action of the government.

You can make a ring out of a piece of gold. A dollar bill can be traded for some amount of some commodity, but has no value in itself. Currencies are a representation of value. Gold has actual value. Like the current flock of TV commercials say... gold has never been worth zero!

Hell phones...

I walked into a public restroom and immediately heard a man's voice, loud and animated. But there was no one else in the room. That puzzled me until I realized some guy was sitting on one of the johns, door closed, having a conversation on his cell phone! Please! Is there no situation in human behavior that can take priority to a telephone conversation? If the guy's friend were there with him, would he have him stand inside the stall so their conversation could continue uninterrupted?

Standing on the sidewalk a woman walked close to me and started talking. Not understanding the relevance of what she said, I responded, "I beg your pardon." There was no response from her... then I realized she had one of those cell phones attached to the side of her head. It was covered by her hair, almost invisible. How do they dial a number on those things?

I was in an examining room at the doctor's office, explaining something or other to the doctor. He suddenly stood up, removed his (apparently vibrating) cell phone from his pocket, and left the room, talking to some unseen caller. Had that call been to an old-fashioned wired phone, a receptionist would have answered, explained that the doctor was with a patient and taken a message.

I hate cell phones. Some years ago I signed up for cell phones for my wife and I, realizing the advantage of instant communication from wherever we may be. But when we were far out on the desert or in a mountain forest where emergency communication could be lifesaving, my cell had no service.

Due to impaired hearing, when I did receive a call I had trouble understanding the caller. Then I started receiving text messages relative to my horoscope (pure nonsense in my opinion), which I had to pay for! I called the cell provider and arranged to ban text messages to my number.

Finally I realized I was neither sending or receiving calls with my cell phone, so I was paying a monthly fee for the privilege of remembering to keep the thing's battery charged! I cancelled my service.

Enough of my stories of rude cell phone behavior - you can fill in your own experiences!

I believe cell phones are the worst piece of technology ever invented. I hope I live long enough to see the day when everyone agrees and the use of cell phones in public goes the way of CB radio. Can I hear a 10-4, good buddy?

Most overrated thing in America

For some time, I have wanted to express my opinion that a college degree - especially a degree from a liberal arts institution - is the most overrated thing in our society.

But today, Dr. Thomas Sowell expressed the truth of the subject better than an opinion formed from my limited experience could hope to match.

Check his column here. Or, here.

Any family with a high school graduate thinking of entering college next year, should read and heed what Dr. Sowell has to say.

Not only the United States, but the world is awash with educated but unskilled young people. As Dr. Sowell so clearly articulates, these people sometimes do more harm then good.

Sadly, however, the world still uses the college degree as positive proof of ability. Nothing could be more foolish. Early in my career, I was passed over for a couple of jobs which I could have done well. I had excellent, well placed references but I lacked the requisite degree and was dropped from consideration. As an employer in broadcasting and in advertising for many years, I hired young people who held degrees in Journalism, only to discover they had zero qualifications for the job.

Neither I, nor Dr. Sowell, disregard an education in the sciences. Or graduate degrees. Still, it would do well to repeat the old riddle: "What do you call the guy who graduated last in his class at medical school?" Answer: "Doctor."

The First Debate

I do not mean the Nixon-Kennedy debacle a half century ago. I mean the one that happened on May5, 2011... missed by many who were celebrating the pretend-Mexican holiday Cinco de Mayo.

The Nixon-Kennedy event was won by the make-up artists, or the studio lighting technicians, or some combination thereof.

In those early days of TV, not many realized that a person looked a lot different on the black & white TV screen than they did in the studio. And, in those primitive times, no men wore long hair, few wore earrings and fewer still would wear makeup. Nixon declined makeup and the old kinescope emphasized dark circles under his eyes, making him look ghoul-like.

Is there much difference in the way presidential debate winners are chosen today?

Understanding that TV people are interested only in audience ratings makes it a little easier to understand why they call these sideshows a "debate". They are a question and answer session intended primarily to try to trip someone up and hope they will say something stupid - or, by accident, brilliant. That, my friends, produces sound bytes to last through election day - and which can be revived for years in election campaigns to come.

Think, for a moment, how helpful it would be if first, the host would engage each of the candidates in a little pleasant conversation to help them relax. Having spent 25 years in broadcasting, I can assure you that a broadcaster becomes very comfortable in his job. A political candidate, knowing that one mis-statement could crash his campaign, is anything but comfortable. To march the candidates out in front of a large studio audience and make them stand there, at attention, until you hit them with a question, on a subject that may well be the last thing on their mind, is unlikely to produce anything meaningful. (Like asking former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson what he would call his TV show - if he ever had a TV show!)

When everyone has had a chance to relax, the host addresses the first candidate: "Candidate one... lately the news media has described you as (whatever is being said). Can you speak to that charge?

Candidate One: Speaks to the subject. (Long enough to clarify his position.)

Host, to other candidates: "Candidate Two, do you have a response to that?"

And, down the line, each candidate has an opportunity to debate what Candidate One has said.

Then the host addresses the next candidate, asking him/her to speak to whatever is being said of them. Following, each remaining candidate is permitted to challenge.

They could then discuss current events or other topics of general interest, with the host simply introducing the topic - not asking specific questions.

We are not hoping to elect the next TV pundit or commentator. We want to elect a chief executive who will keep informed on current events and make thoughtful decisions. How do we benefit from the current format they are calling a debate?

I personally believe the American news media is obstructing the presidential election process. They stage these phony events and if a candidate fails to participate or dares to be critical, he has to wonder if the news people will then disparage everything he says in the remainder of the campaign.

And remember, I am not a media-basher. My career was broadcasting.

The Wrong Message
from Michelle Obama and other food Nazis!

Demonizing fast food and other menu items is as wrong as it is foolish and ineffective. I had a friend who operated a chain of roast beef sandwich shops. He once laughed when he heard a TV commercial demonizing the hamburger and urging people to "think outside the bun." The hamburger has frequently shown to be America's favorite sandwich. He questioned what can be gained by attacking the favorite? Resentment from all who hear?

That is the ineffective part. The wrong part of demonizing fast food is that it serves no useful purpose. There is nothing inherently unhealthy about beef, buns, lettuce, pickle or mustard. Or even French Fries. The problem is overeating!

So, the food Nazis attack restaurants for oversizing portions! Wrong again. What is wrong with giving customers more for their money? Just don't eat it all!

My wife and I go into a burger place, order one hamburger and one order of fries. We split both the burger and the fries. We satisfy our hunger and neither are overweight.

There are only two correct rules for diet. First, learn to enjoy all kinds of foods. The more variety in your diet, the healthier your diet. Second, eat to satisfy your stomach... not your palate! Sure, I could eat a quart of ice cream at one sitting. My palate would love it. The rest of my body would not. And the surprising part is that once you form the habit of eating for your stomach, your palate learns to go along and is satisfied with the smaller portions. Let your brain, not your taste buds, tell you how much to eat

I believe that menu variety must be taught early. Parents of small children should learn from depression-era parents who, constricted by poverty, served the family no wide choice of menu items. They served what they had - what they could afford - and the choices were "take it or leave it". Hunger taught the children to "take it", and they learned to enjoy all those different things mom cooked.

There was an old song that sang of "cornbread and buttermilk and good old turnip greens." Yes, that was the menu at many a dinner I enjoyed as a kid on the farm. Especially if the turnip greens were cooked with a little piece of ham hock, or even salt pork.

Two things parents should know. Tastes do differ and some children will never learn to like certain foods, no matter how much you like those foods. Encourage them. Do not force. And, remember that children are easily influenced by the comments of others. I once sat down to Thanksgiving dinner with a large family group. Several kinds of salad dressing were placed on the table. The container of blue cheese dressing was almost empty and I wanted it. So did a couple of small boys who wanted it because there was so little. I reasoned that they had probably never eaten blue cheese and had no idea how it tasted, but I encouraged them to take it... It's good, I informed, made with sour goat's milk! That's all it took. They wouldn't touch it.

Serve your children a variety of food and talk about how good it all tastes. Control portions. Don't serve their food in such a way that they can fill their stomachs with mashed potatoes and never touch the vegetables or meat.

As an adult, ignore Michelle and the other food Nazis. Eat whatever you like. Remember your last meal and have something different for the next. Not had a salad today? Be sure to have one for dinner. During hard times, we used to say "Take all you want - eat all you take." Learn to say "Take anything you like - eat less of everything."

What About Our Daughters?

The Greatest Achievement of Western civilization has been the elevation in the status of women. During my lifetime, the free world has benefited greatly from the contributions of intelligent, courageous women. But we still have a way to go.

From birth until they start school, little girls are treated as what they are, precious but fragile assets of the human race. As adults, women are given more opportunities than at most any other time in recorded history. Once relegated to become nurses or school teachers, women are now accepted, and they excel, in almost every profession.

But, about the time little girls start school, something happens. Their TV fare turns from Teletubbies, Big Bird and other gentle fare to an onslaught of material, purposely intended to turn them into tramps. And not just TV: movies and magazines join the cry to become sexy. Dress sexy. Act sexy. Talk sexy. Be sexy. TV is usually the most watched medium and TV has become the leader in the barrage of sex. Can you say Lindsay Lohan, Britney Spears, or Miley Cyrus... beautiful, talented little girls that TV producers have instilled with the wrong set of values.

It is as though the medium has decided to test little girls to the extreme: if they can survive this, they may grow up to be successful adults.

I am all for teaching little girls to care about their appearance, their bodies, their behavior. Obesity is an ugly and an unhealthy trait. Little girls should be taught to seek an attractive appearance and good manners, valuable assets in the pursuit of a career.

But, sexy? Should female children be reared for the primary purpose of enhancing the sexual fantasies of men? Have we not yet risen above the standards of Solomon, the supposedly wise king who used his wealth and power to capture and hold a harem beyond counting?

Aren't a clean healthy appearance and gracious manners appealing? Or have we become so desensitized by pornography that we cannot appreciate a young woman unless she bares her body in public?

Parents often fear the prospect of their sons joining the military and going off to battle. I fear the prospect of sending my granddaughters off to school.

We have a way to go.

The Saddest Words,
Of Six or Ten...

There are a lot of sad words on TV news these days... earthquakes and tsunamis; riots, protests, civilians killed by their own governments. Today's news was no exception. The death and destruction from tornadoes was sad, indeed.

But another terribly sad story today was the news that Scotland Yard is planning unprecedented security during Prince Williams wedding. Unprecedented security? For a wedding? What has this world come to? In London, long a center of civility - can a couple not be married without real and imminent danger to their lives? Even a Royal couple?

Something is terribly wrong. And it seems to be getting worse. Earlier this year crowds attacked two members of British Royalty passing by in their car. That crowd shouted, "Off with their heads." Does Scotland Yard fear that the shouting will transform into action this time?

We once saw the Russian Royal family dragged into the woods and summarily executed. We said that should never happen again... but will it be attempted?

This past weekend, in Portland, OR and in at least two other cities, we witnessed the most horrible displays by crowds who disagreed with groups of people exercising their Constitutionally protected right to peaceably assemble. These assembled groups were expressing their dissatisfaction with government policies. Why were they being harassed?

In America, the Tea Party protesters (myself included) have displayed respect for law and order; for the rights of others, including property rights; and for principles of decency. But, what should we do if physically attacked by those who disagree with us?

History has proven that, today, the Christian attitude of turning the other cheek may well result in your getting a broken jaw - or worse. History has also taught that remaining silent in the face of wrongs by a runaway government will always make the problem worse - not better.

Are we reaching the point where we cannot peaceably protest - but cannot decline to protest?

Can outbreaks of violence be far off?

Dumb & Dumber

It is universally agreed that Jimmy Carter was the worst president in U.S. history. Why, then, do we continue to spend billions to sustain one of the dumbest of his dumb ideas?

I well remember his campaign rhetoric: "...we do not have a national energy policy. That is a disgrace...".

President Jimmy was going to end our dependence on foreign oil. So, when he became president, he formed the Department of Energy. That deformed appendage to the government is the biggest failure of my lifetime (our dependence on foreign oil has multiplied) yet we are set to spend another $30 billion in the next budget to sustain it. $30 billion! That is 30,000 times one million dollars!

When do sensible people say... "Ooops! That was a mistake! Stop doing that!" Apparently never.

Remembering 1959

1959 was a very busy year in my broadcast career, working on an application for a radio station license. As a result, I was frequently out of touch with the news.

The part I am now remembering, is the part about Cuba. For some years (over two separated terms) Cuba was run by Fulgencio Batista. Batista was reputed to be a bad guy - I was never in Cuba, so I can only go by what others said. The U.S. backed Batista and he kept the island wide open to the pleasure business - gambling, partying, prostitution. Reportedly with connections to U.S. mafia crime families.

But, then came "The Cuban Revolution", somewhat headed by a one-time Cuban political activist named Fidel Castro, his younger brother Raul, and the mass murderer Che Guevera. Castro had been kicked out of Cuba, but returned from exile to take on the Batista forces. This was supposedly a people's revolution, an uprising for freedom and democracy. Castro found help in the U.S., but maybe only from Cuban exiles. Eisenhower was the U.S. President and Ike was not one to jump into a fray with his eyes closed.

After The Revolution became successful, freedom loving democrat Fidel announced that he was really a Marxist. Boy, did we feel snookered! We had cheered for someone we knew nothing about.

So, you will forgive this old man if, today, as we again support "rebel" forces we do not know (this time in the Middle East), I wonder if we're about to be snookered again.

That last mistake caused us grief that has stretched 52 years, and still counting! Off the top of my head, I'd say we are slow learners.

A diet that works.

America is overweight. Scores of people have offered a solution... a diet of some sort which they guarantee will reduce your weight. Nearly everyone has tried one or more of these diets. Most people fail to lose weight.

For years, I weighed about 175 pounds. In recent years, thanks to reduced physical activity and the pleasure of eating, my weight increased to 190 pounds. Most of my trousers became too tight to wear. I longed to again see 175 when I stepped on the scale.

One month ago, both my wife and I contracted some sort of stomach disorder which affected our appetites. We almost quit eating for several days. If we forced some food down, our stomachs objected rather decisively. I lost 14 pounds. Wow! The scale said 176! (My petite wife, always a light eater, lost 4 pounds).

When my affliction had passed, I wondered if I could keep the weight off. That, I reasoned would require some adjustment in my eating habits and some increase in physical activity.

I have always believed in a balanced diet and enjoy meats of all kinds, vegetables raw and cooked, along with fruits, bread, etc. My wife knows that if she puts it on my plate, I will eat it. Being a child of the depression, long taught "waste not, want not", I always cleaned my plate.

I decided to begin with smaller portions. Much smaller portions. My wife served a salad, grilled boneless pork chops, baked potato and green beans. I took about one half the amount of salad I would normally eat and added a very small amount of dressing; I cut about one-third of a pork chop; likewise, about one-third of a baked potato with a small amount of butter and no added salt; took a spoon of green beans and ate very slowly. To my surprise, I was satisfied with that meal.

I usually have a glass of wine or a snifter of brandy after dinner. I wondered it I was becoming "hooked" on that daily drink and if I could be happy without it. I stopped drinking daily, just to prove I could. Yes, I'll still drink a beer with pizza or Mexican food - happily I do not miss the daily drink.

Out for a drive last week, we stopped at a hamburger place, ordered a #1... a small burger, small fries and a drink. My wife took the drink, I had water. She cut the little burger in half and we also split the fries. Our appetites were satisfied.

Do I get hungry? A little. But I am not in agony. And now, when I eat with others, I gasp at the way they pile their plates with food!

This morning, one month after this all began, the scale still said 176.

So, here is the secret... quit eating so much!

Every day I find it takes less and less food to satisfy my appetite.

Can I keep this up? We shall see. My "diet" requires that I stay aware - totally aware - of what I am eating (every meal - no more between meal snacks), until my eating habits become more firmly fixed. I once read where some guy said that if he had been diagnosed as color blind and tone deaf, he would have become a painter and a musician out of pure cussedness. Like he, I hope to do it through pure cussedness!

Words.

Once a friend and I were discussing the definition of certain words. He reminded me that a dictionary is more a history book than a rule book. Definitions given are based on how words are being used, so definitions will change.

Sometimes I find those changes amusing.

The German company Bayer is currently airing a TV commercial for their aspirin. In this commercial an airline passenger asks an attendant if she has anything to relieve back pain. She gives him Bayer aspirin. He explains that he is not having a heart attack... he has back pain. She replies that aspirin works for pain.

I am an old man. All my life I have used aspirin as a pain reliever or to reduce fever.

But, some researcher pointed out that aspirin also slows the clotting of blood. Under certain conditions, this fact can help prevent a blood clot from forming and moving into the heart muscle - which event could cause a heart attack. This power of aspirin has been widely promoted of late: "an aspirin regimen can help prevent a heart attack". Why not? an "aspirin regimen" means taking an Aspirin daily... sells a lot of Aspirin!

Does Bayer now actually believe people no longer know that aspirin's first use has always been as a pain reliever?

Gives me a headache. Anyone have an aspirin?

This Day In History...

Today is the anniversary of an event you probably won't hear mentioned today, but one you surely will remember... even if you didn't know or remember the date.

It was on March 23, 1775, in the House of Burgesses. The debate had turned to the rising movement of Independence from the oppressive King of England. One can imagine that some of the members were indecisive and reluctant to declare a position in what would amount to a war against their homeland.

Finally one member grew impatient with the uncertainty and demanded of his colleagues, "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty god! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death."

Patrick Henry, 236 years ago, today.

Henry's actions matched his words, he left politics to become a Colonel in the 1st Virginia Regiment. Perhaps it was his fiery rhetoric which inspired my own Revolutionary War ancestor to also join a Virginia regiment. Though not Henry's 1st Regiment, my ancestor must have known of the Colonel as they served in General Washington's Army at Valley Forge and beyond.

After the war, Patrick Henry again entered politics and became Virginia's Governor.

I have a special affinity for Patrick Henry's unabashed patriotism. It was with a burst of patriotic fervor that I, 65 years ago, as a seventeen year old private in the United States Army, had the words "Death Before Dishonor" tattooed on my arm.

Never too old to learn!

I re-learned that old lesson once again! It came about when my wife, daughter, son-in-law and I enjoyed an outing in our beautiful desert. We drove our old Jeep Cherokee to a spot along the Rio Grande and found ourselves on very soft, loose, dry sand. As always, my wife shifted into four-wheel-drive and easily moved out of the sand onto firm soil.

When she shifted back to two-wheel drive, the "sound" from the transfer case did not change. The 4WD did not disengage. We drove the 30-odd miles to home, and smoke began to boil from the bottom of the vehicle.

The lesson I learned?

We have all been taught the importance of regularly lubricating our cars, on a specific schedule. This has spawned an industry... "The Fast & Easy Lube & Oil Change Joints". Competition has led them to ever lower prices.

I recently took another car to a Pep Boys outlet in response to an advertised low price of something like a $19.95 lube, oil and filter special. I agreed to an extra $5 for high mileage oil for my high mileage vehicle. I think $24.95 was to be the total price. When I picked up my car, the tab was $37.95, plus tax, about double the $19.95 that drew me in. I objected and was shown that my receipt contained a certificate for a $13 rebate! Wow! All I had to do was package up all the "proof of purchase" information and mail it to a distant address, wait six weeks or so, and I would get the $13 rebate by mail.

Understand, the purpose of a rebate is two-fold. First, a given percent of customers will lose their proof-of-purchase material, or procrastinate past the deadline to apply. At best, the seller will get to use your money for a few weeks. The rebate deal was not revealed up front or I would have walked. Only when I objected to the price did they explain the rebate. Had it not been for this, I doubt I would have examined the receipt to learn of the rebate. If Pep Boys ripped me on price, what other corners may they have cut?

The cut rate instant lube joints cut every possible cost. We may believe that they actually do lubricate every grease fitting... but we can never know how many, if any, they skip.

They do drain your oil, replace the oil filter and refill the crankcase. Do they use the full amount of oil necessary? Better check your oil to find out. Do they check any other fluids? Maybe. Maybe not. Did you verify? Probably not. Did they replace those fluids with quality brands?

Now, the lesson learned. I took the smoking Jeep to a full service garage, run by honest people. You can imagine I was faced with a huge cost to rebuild the transfer case. But, no... the only problem? The transfer case had not been checked for a long, long time and had completely dried up. They just re-filled the thing with the correct transmission fluid and it worked perfectly again. They asked me to drive it for a short time, then bring it back so they could check for leaks.

Okay! Here is my advice! The cheapest thing you can do for a car is to keep it properly lubed on the manufacturer's schedule. That is savings enough. Don't look for a quick and cheap lube job. Find a good, honest operator of a full-service garage. Ask them to specify that they check all fluids, and lube everything properly. When you pick up your car, you may ask some questions, like, "How was the water level in the battery?" "Was the transmission fluid low?".

Don't worry about the price. Whatever they charge will be less than a new transmission.