« October 2007 |
Main
| December 2007 »
November 2007 archives
Call your local G-man, dear readers, alert the media, hide your women and children. I have a confession to make: I’m a domestic terrorist.
The evidence against me is clear and I just can’t run from the facts anymore. I stand accused of wanting to see federal buildings blown up while filled with innocent people. If someone asked me I’m likely to volunteer to drive a rental truck stuffed with fertilizer up to the front door of the nearest government facility. At least that’s what talk host Glenn Beck would have you believe. Why? Because I support Ron Paul’s run for the GOP presidential nomination.
I’m sorry, you don’t get the connection? I’m not all that clear on it myself, so I’ll let the affable Mr. Beck explain it to you in his own words. (And look as hard as you dare at this clip, but you won’t find a representative of the Ron Paul campaign to respond. A craven setup, to be sure.)
Apparently, according to Beck’s mangled logic, because the Ron Paul campaign launched a one-day fundraising effort on November 5 -- Guy Fawkes Day -- that’s incriminating evidence in support of the fact that Ron Paul and his supporters are enemies of the state. Of course, old Guy's been dead and in the ground - English ground - for more than 400 years, but no matter; I should be ashamed of myself! I should be locked up for the good of the nation and the safety of its fine citizens because I think Dr. Paul and his subversive beliefs might be worth considering!
Let’s take a look at some of these dangerous political positions:
- Constitutional Fidelity and Limited Government
- Border Security and Enforced Immigration Standards
- Lower Taxes and Fiscal Restraint
- Local/Parental Control of Education
- Ending the War in Iraq
Yeah, I guess I can see Beck’s point. Those are some threatening ideas. They may not rank up there with “no taxation without representation” or “don’t tread on me” in terms of inciting monarchs to fits of rage, but they seem to have gotten under Beck’s skin. Of course, Ron Paul's managed to raise a lot of money - nearly $5 million in one day - for a campaign dismissed as "fringe" (translation: not a prayer) by most established media outlets even before it's really gotten started .
As for the Ron Paul Revolution and Guy Fawkes, I’m not so sure what the big deal is. Beck likens Fawkes’ attempt to blow up Parliament on November 5, 1605 with Timothy McVeigh’s attack on the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma on April 19, 1995. While the superficial details may bear some resemblance, Beck conveniently forgets that just fifteen years after the Gunpowder Plot, a group of people, similarly fed up with their treatment under the crown, left England and settled in what is now Plymouth, Massachusetts, and that 150 years later guys with names like Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin led their own little rebellion against British rule.
The event was called the American Revolution in the history books I read in school, if that rings any bells. And, it gave guys like Glenn Beck the right to complete freedom of speech.
That fracas also resulted in American independence and the drafting of a document known as the Constitution of the United States of America. At the time, the ideas put forth in the Constitution were radical, but they set a fledgling nation on a course to greatness. More than 230 years after the American revolutionaries declared their independence and 220 years after the Constitution was drafted, that document still evokes fear on the part of those who would seek to wield the power and institutions of government as a weapon. Sadly, many of those who fear the ideas contained within the Constitution are found in Washington, D.C. and among lackeys who find more comfort in the trappings of political establishment than in personal liberty.
Ron Paul’s campaign has blossomed into something of a touchstone for voters like me who have grown frustrated with Washington’s tin ear. We want to believe that "We the People" are still the ones to whom our government answers, but that faith is waning. We want to believe that our elected representatives look out from their offices and see more than simply lobbyists and people looking for a handout. We want to believe in the concept of public servitude, and we believe we’ve found in Ron Paul a candidate who shares those beliefs and is willing to take that ideal back to the Capitol.
If that is what Beck and his followers find so threatening about the Ron Paul Revolution then we're all in a world of trouble. For all the sanctimony Paul's critics summon, they fail to see he is the one presidential candidate who truly seems to reflect the principles guys like Beck so righteously avow when the microphone and cameras are turned on. That they would lash out at those of us who support Ron Paul tells me there's an empty hollowness behind the chests they beat so boldly.
It's Thanksgiving. Time to take my life into my own hands.
The Spinney family has recently grown fond of cooking the holiday bird in one of those Cajun deep fryers and, as I learned last year, you can’t be too careful when working with boiling oil.
We had an early snow in North Central Massachusetts last November, a sort of deke by Old Man Winter who rarely showed his bewhiskered face the rest of the year. A coating of snow on the ground made for a festive atmosphere and we had a number of friends and family over for the feast.
After I set up the pot and got it roiling I took the turkey outside for a plunge into the oil. My friend John Sullivan was with me and we chatted about nothing in particular. How hard can this be? I set the turkey down in the snow to make some adjustments, and then began to lower it into the pot. Some snow had stuck to the bird and as soon as it came in contact with the oil the cauldron turned violent. I quickly backed off and looked over at John. We both laughed nervously at the reaction and contemplated what to do next.
I decided that the best move would be to proceed with the operation, but with speed and awareness. I suggested to John that he move back a few feet and, screwing up my courage, I swiftly dropped the turkey into the pot.
Backing quickly away from the scene, the combination of moist bird, cold snow, and an overfull pot of super hot oil erupted into a fireball that rose fifteen feet into the air and instantly melted the snow around the cooker to a steaming diameter of about six feet.
It was spectacular. It was frightening. It was a valuable lesson. It was a close call.
I had set everything up far enough away from the house and cars so that there was no immediate danger of showing up on the evening news, and - thankfully - it was over as quickly as it happened. Maybe the adrenal rush had something to do with it, but an hour later we were all tucking in to a Thanksgiving turkey that was more succulent than others in memory. Nothing like a fireball in your backyard to put the emphasis on "thanks" in the holiday.
I’ll do it again this year - wiser for the experience. Oil and water don't mix, particularly at high temperatures - and when I gather around the table with family I’ll give thanks to God for health, safety, His blessings and provision, and for the privilege of living in a country where I have a reasonable chance of improving my lot during the coming year.
Happy Thanksgiving to you all.
My daughter’s braces came off today. Unfortunately for her, she inherited my narrow jaw and crowded mouth and so had to endure the common rite of teenage passage known as orthodontia. Another trait inherited from dear old dad is her reluctance to wear her emotions on her sleeve. As a result, outwardly she doesn’t seem nearly as excited about losing her grillwork as her mother and me, but I suspect she’s happier than she lets on.
At times that habit can drive a father up the wall. I know my daughter well enough after more than 14 years that I can make fairly accurate judgments about her intentions and her state of mind, but she refuses to give me the satisfaction of acknowledgment. When I see that her stubbornness is leading to an effective object lesson, I’ll stand by and let events play themselves out, ready to step in at the opportune moment and deliver a self-righteous “I told you so.” Fourteen years, after all, doesn’t add up to a great deal of life experience.
Hillary Clinton has been wearing braces of her own for the last seven years – half of her life on the national stage – making political adjustments to her public image since being elected as New York’s junior senator in 2000. Introduced to us when husband Bill ran for president in 1992, we’ve seen Mrs. Clinton grow from a feminist with a disdain for cookie baking to a first lady with a propensity for skullduggery to a senator whose brief career has been spent with calculated purpose for the very moment America finds itself facing: a collective presidential choice. Oh, and she also managed to write a couple books, one of which strongly suggests that government should take a larger role in raising America’s children.
Somewhere along the way public opinion shifted in Hillary’s favor to the point where she has become, one year from election day, the presumptive favorite to win right to represent the Democrats when we go to the polls in November of 2008. How did that happen? No state has held a primary or caucused the party faithful, yet there are few voices from among the punditry who even question the prevailing wisdom. No one with an influential voice is asking aloud the most basic of questions: why? Why is Hillary Clinton regarded as a serious candidate for the nation’s highest political office? What has she done to distinguish herself above the others vying for the party’s nomination? Why is Hillary the odds on favorite to receive her party’s nomination at a time when America finds itself foundering amid international turmoil?
Hillary’s ascendancy to front-runner status is symptomatic of a flawed election process that fails to produce the best qualified candidates for the job. More about style than substance, about selling the sizzle instead of the steak; sound bites accomplish more than thoughtful dialog because the public’s attention span is too short to accommodate anything more than partisan rhetoric. While her rhetoric is deep, Clinton’s record on foreign policy is shallow. Apart from campaign photo-op junkets to Iraq and Afghanistan she’s done nothing to demonstrate any skill in international diplomacy. Meanwhile, there’s barely an acknowledgement of the long history of foreign policy work accumulated by Senator Joseph Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee where he’s served for three decades, and respected on both sides of the aisle for his deep knowledge of the major and minor players on the global chess board. Nor is there much mention of Governor Bill Richardson’s service as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations under President Clinton.
And speaking of Bill Richardson, at a time of growing economic uncertainty and budgetary bloat, no one is willing to give the Governor the time of day, even though his record as chief executive of the State of New Mexico is generally positive, both from the perspective of fiscal restraint as well as managing the state’s economic growth, where he touts New Mexico’s expanding job rolls since being elected in 2002.
Hillary, on the other hand, is so weak on economic issues even the spin doctors responsible for her web site copy can’t make it sound good. “As senator, Hillary introduced a plan…” “Hillary has consistently supported…” “Hillary has also proposed…” “She also helped launch economic initiatives…” If the Democrats have resigned themselves to putting forth a candidate whose sum total of economic accomplishment consists of introducing, supporting, proposing, and helping with plans and initiatives, we’re in worse shape than I thought.
Even though I have no intention of voting for any of the party's nominees next November, I very much want to see the Democrats offer a candidate who doesn’t frighten me. And the same goes for the Republicans, by the way. I want to avoid another 2004 where we had a choice between an incumbent president who had gotten us into a Middle Eastern quagmire and an uninspiring challenger who failed to convince enough people that he could get us out. I’m losing hope that, next year things will be different and that I’ll be able to take some comfort in knowing that either of the two individuals with a chance to win the election isn’t going to drive the country further into chaos.
I sense a growing unease that we don’t really know the candidates well enough to make an informed decision as we approach 2008. We bought the George W. Bush sales pitch twice, but it turned out to be a pig in a poke. When I saw my daughter after school today without braces for the first time in two years, I couldn’t help but think that, while her outward appearance has changed slightly as a result of the orthodontist’s work, inside she’s still the same kid I know and love. There’s a big difference in watching someone you know, and knowing someone you watch.
With Hillary, in spite of some subtle shifting and image polishing over the last seven years or so, not much else has changed. Apart from a belief that there’s no problem more government can’t fix, there’s not much behind the pantsuits. We’re watching her, but have we thought about what we know?
