A Tale of Three Pities

'Tis yet another year worthy of reflection.
The 2012 elections will not change very much
in the U.S.'s current policies. Many of the
better politicians have retired, died, or
were redistricted out of reelection's realm.
("Better" would equal integrity, intelligence,
concern and effort.)

Human nature (reality) really doesn't often
change:
there are the brave, they are few;
there are the needy, they are many;
there are the greedy, they are too many....

Thereby hangs the tale.

U.S. President or Pastor in Chief?

--Is that the question? To hear various aspirants
for the presidency, one can only wonder. Vying for
votes by appealing to our heartstrings' spiritual
longings is a morally bereft tactic for many reasons:

(1) None of the candidates on either side of the aisle
is an expert theologian, even if they're acquainted with
The Bible and are church attendees. Fame, power and
ambition are their more readily understood motives/expertise.

(2) We have presently REAL, tangible problems right here,
right now, which are the proper province of the elected.
It's obviously much easier to rile up emotions than to
knuckle down and fix this nation's ills. --Red herring,
anyone?

(3) The hubris of (1) added to the bait and switch politics
derided in (2) don't describe devout or moral public
figures--figure they'll ever find that out about themselves?

But we will. We want to cast our votes for an intelligent,
informed, concerned candidate for U.S. President,
not a Pastor in Chief.

Limbaugh Sponsors Rush Away!

Here's to you, AOL! Apparently, Rush Limbaugh's
over the top trouncing attack attempt on Ms. Fluke
only redounded back on him. Even if he had a legitimate
point buried under all that hostility, all that one
remembers is the name calling delivered by vitriol.

Several sponsors are leaving Rush out on a limb, sort
of. Why is anyone surprised? He's always been quite
the little hater, but this last volley was just too
much; even those who might agree in principle had
to back away, some publicly.

The Pill IS mostly about preventing contraception
(-thank goodness!). But it also has been prescribed
for other medical reasons to promote women's health.
Rush doesn't care about that or very much else. Maybe
he will lose (at last) some of his following, 'tis a
consummation devoutly to be wished, as Shakespeare
said.

Civility may yet have a chance. Here's hoping that's
no fluke!

Here at Home: Sorrow and Sympathy

More than 35 souls have lost their lives in this
week's pre-Spring harrowing of multiple, multi-state
tornadoes. Heartening, though, are the many stories
of strangers and family helping however they
can, the finding of loved ones and things.

Let's all rejoice in the "Remains of the Day", in
that we remain. Let's take good care of ourselves,
and each other, and keep on deriding every evil and
stupid thing we discover or recall.

My best to you all.

Inspiration: Aspiring vs. Acquiring

In Chicagoland's "Sib of the Trib", the Red Eye,
a feature called "Smoking Rogue" interviewed some
local under 35 folks who've taken up cigar smoking.
One man, observing Michael Jordan's cigar-chomping
cachet, declared he "aspired" to that--cigars, that is,
not free-throw excellence. A young woman claimed,
"You know full well what you're doing, and if you're
a responsible adult you should be able to make that
choice".... Hmmn. Lip cancer, mouth cancer, tongue
cancer, other cancers, anyone? (And she said she
wasn't a baby.) -!

Acquiring a famous person's (even notorious) habits
doesn't equal aspiring, actions which may well take
one to a higher skill set level, possibly a higher
plane of existence.

If I'm inspired to acquire, that is a merely pedestrian
motivation. Inspiration leading to aspiring to a better
character or exploring and developing talents and skills,
now, that's a far worthier "dream".

Aspiring vs. acquiring: What's the motivation, what's the
inspiration? All good questions to ask.

On Being a Person: These Can't Qualify

Anthropomorphizing: Scientific American, one of my
two or three favorite publications for decades,
does it too: one full page ad's airline is referred
to as "you" (you're) by the airline itself.
(Correcting just one letter, from "you're" to "you've"
would be significant improvement.)

Corporations are winning lawsuits by claiming they are/
are not persons, depending on which status confers the
greatest benefit. But before this society ends up at
rock bottom, we'd all do better to insist, "only humans
are persons". ("All humans are persons" shouldn't
require restatement, but it DOES. Lately, Letterman
and Santorum forgot that and themselves.)

On being a person: organizations and objects
can't qualify, any legal legerdemain to the contrary.

Pan Panetta Time

What is Leon Panetta's background, really? Is he
qualified for his current post? I ask because he
stirred up quite the little hornet's nest last week
talking about Israel vis-a-vis a little First Strike
action against Iran. There's more than sufficient
suffering, tension, destruction and death right now
in the Middle East--Are Bebe Netanyahu and Leon
Panetta going for setting the entire region aflame?

Mr. Panetta has an impressive record as a loyal
Democrat, having served several presidents in important
capacities. But his stint at CIA, his public policy
professorial credentials notwithstanding, nevertheless
leave a great deal to be desired. Now our Defense Secretary,
he has become, in my opinion, offensive. I have to wonder
exactly why Mr. Obama selects so many generalist policy
wonks without specific, appropriate portfolio for his inner
governmental circle. Many of them have been
embarrassments; here we have yet another.

Time to starting panning Panetta, because I'm not expecting
to mine much gold.