An Open Letter to Fake Florida Fans

Dear Fake Florida Fans (FFF's),

Let me preface my letter to you by extending my most heartfelt condolences for your loss of Urban Meyer as head coach. While he has not actually passed away - despite your mourning him as if he has - you have lost a coach who is highly skilled in the intricacies of the deeply flawed BCS system. Urban really knows how to play the computer, running up the scores on hapless nobodies whose athletic directors send their teams to certain doom in the vain hope of boosting their unknown universities' reputations for a split second while America watched them get picked apart in The Swamp. As such, Urban had his pick of the best players in the country and, in so doing, has turned the SEC Championship into Florida's coronation each year.

But, now that he's gone and Florida's descent back into the reality of having to again compete for - gasp! - the SEC East is imminent, my question for you is what are you going to do? Actually, the more apt question for you is to whom are you going to hitch your wagon now? Because, after all, the only reason you were drawn to Florida in the first place was their brutal dominance of college football. You don't have a connection to the school, but you have invested in enough gear since their national championship in 2006 to make anyone think you and generations before you have gone there. Now that they are merely going to be another contender, who is going to get your loyalty now? Your Florida shwag will get thrown in the back of the closet like many a Florida State, Miami, and USC doo-dad before it.

You might think I'm being too harsh or that I'm just relishing in your struggle because I am a Tennessee fan. And I am a little. But, not totally because I am loyal to a team that has been at the receiving end of your pummeling for the last few years. It is because I am loyal to a team, period. A true fan sticks with their team no matter what. Ask any Notre Dame, Penn State, or New York Jets fan. Your lack of loyalty is an insult to any true Florida fan.

Furthermore, your forthcoming abandonment of Florida is even worse because of the ridiculous sense of moral superiority you have been carrying around with you in your swagger. Your adulation of Tim Tebow is absurd. You heap upon him messianic praise because he won the Heisman trophy as a sophomore and does "God's work". You sit around, smelling each other's farts, gloating to anyone you think is listening that he makes Peyton Manning look like he has achieved nothing. Maybe so, but Peyton Manning has never blubbered like an overstimulated third-grade girl on a sugar crash. At least, not in front of a national audience.

So, Godspeed, my fake fan friends. I would like to see the looks on your faces when, demoralized, you come to Knoxville next year for your overdue comeuppance. But, by then, you will probably be totally invested in another team. It just goes to show life is really easy when you lack a long-term memory - or a sense of loyalty - and ride the coattails of greatness, regardless of who is great.

Lessons Learned, Volume 1

So, I thought it would be beneficial to start jotting down lessons I have learned early in this parenthood game. Maybe it will help somebody out down the road. By somebody, I mean me, as my memory vaporizes a little more each day. Here goes:

1. Night time is a scary time. It's seriously like "I Am Legend". Your sweet child by day becomes and inconsolable she-devil by night. I have taken to calling my daughter, Gracie, "Horace" at night. This is partly because instead of crying she mostly grunts. And they are distinctive grunts. One in particular starts with a "N". It's really quite fascinating.

2. Diaper duty is sometimes an ambush. The second time I changed Gracie's diaper, she projectile pooped all over the changing table. My wife suggested that I have a diaper covering her whenever I'm not wiping or applying ointment. Fine. So, nine or ten more diaper changes occur without a hitch. So, of course, on that tenth or eleventh I don't have a diaper under her and she starts peeing like a mall fountain. This has happened several times. And every time, I start yelling "Oh God, she's pooping/peeing! Oh God, it's all over her onesie!" My wife, God bless her, tells me it's not a big deal and we quickly resolve the issue. Of course, the other night Gracie grunted and ambushed her with a flying poop. I'm beginning to think the hospital sent me home with an Improvised Explosive Device.

3. Learn quickly how your little one goes to sleep. Gracie has two ways, one laying on your chest, bunched up like a koala bear, and the other cradled in your left arm. But, both usually involve the application of a pacifier and definitely require 10 minutes of uninterrupted closed eyes. That is the most difficult part, especially when she's fighting sleep, she moves and loses her pacifier, or the dog barks. When confronted with these occurrences, I have tried to put her down before 10 minutes from when her eyes were last open, but deviating by even one minute will require you to start all over again. It's like Chutes and Ladders. Or defusing a bomb.

4. That for all the lack of sleep, screaming in your face, and spitting up on your clothes, it's all forgotten due to the one minute she will spend staring at me, fascinated. Whether wedged between my knees, on her changing table, or looking up at me before she falls asleep, it is the best feeling in the world exchanging unconditional love with your child.

I think Lesson 4 is the most pertinent. At some point soon, she's going to start laughing, scooting, and making noises that are the precursors to speech. The fascinating stares she gives us now are possibly more rewarding than all of these benchmarks. Because in this ocean of insanity, the brief moments of unconditional love are our lifeboats. Everyone keeps saying it's only going to get better, but I'd have to say that, for now, it's already pretty damn good.

Why I Like Joe Libermann

I haven't been paying much attention to this telenovela called "Health Care Reform" (I've been otherwise occupied, you know), but I have noticed a large amount of venom and vitriol being hurled at one man: Senator Joseph Liebermann (I-CT). Despite my mind being elsewhere these days, I have to say I'm pretty surprised by this and a tad dismayed.

I think, as a Senator, Joe is a rather pragmatic legislator; a principle-driven Centrist. I can dig that. Ultimately, I think this is why the liberal shock-troops and "Caviar Commies" have made him Public Enemy Numero Uno in their salons. Now that they have a sympathetic darling in the White House and control at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, this is their time to shine and health care reform has become their raison d'être. And now Joe and his Centrism is going to spoil it for them.

From what I understand, Joe's skepticism about the health care reform is derived from the fact that he's afraid there are no viable ways to pay for it. Personally, I have similar concerns, as I can't figure out how a liberal Christmas-come-early that is the health care bill is not going to add to our budget woes when the only ways the bill's authors are willing to suggest it will be paid for is soaking the rich and future Medicare entitlement cuts. The former is populist and unsustainable and the latter is like an alcoholic opening a bottle of Jack Daniels and saying he will save half of it for later.

So now the left has its sights set on Joe as he's going to be the one person to check their unchecked power. Several explanations for his misbehavior have been posited. The most prevalent is that this is his sweet revenge for their being turncoats in 2006. I think there is something to this, but it's not revenge. Rather, being dumped by the party liberated Joe to be able to think for himself and not constantly espouse the textbook liberal agenda. I guarantee that if he were still a Democratic Senator, he would be arm-twisting for the passage of this bill. At least, he would be more susceptible to having his arm twisted. But, as an Independent no longer locked in the the Democratic talking points, he can be outspoken with his criticism, whether or not it happens to be correct.

Another argument for his lack of support of the health-care bill is because he's getting paid hand over fist by the insurance companies. This is preposterous, as health insurers are not even in the top five of his contributors from 2005-2010. As expected in a state like Connecticut where half the state is a bedroom community for New York City, his largest contributing industry is the securities and investment industry. But, even if he was receiving money from health insurers to vote down reform, he's not doing anything Senators don't already do - ad nauseam. Where is the venom from these same liberals when Chuck Schumer is hammering out sweet deals for Wall Street or Tom Harkin is voting for pie-in-the-sky farm subsidies? These guys are all getting bundles of cash for their support (or lack of support) for certain things. I agree that it sucks. I think it's sanctioned bribery. But it's the system. Don't hate the player, hate the game.

I don't like everything about Joe. I question his judgement in unequivocally supporting Israel and the war in Iraq. But, in my opinion, we need more legislators like him. Being an independent in a state like Connecticut is perfect: it gives him the ability to work for both the white collar and blue collar constituencies that define this state. I think he's done a hell of a job for this state since 1988 and, given the chance, I will gladly support him in the future. But, I'm a sucker for a Centrist.

The Unbridled Joy and Irrational Lunacy of Early Fatherhood

GRACIE GIRL

First and foremost, I am delighted to announce that our daughter, Grace Ivy, was born Thanksgiving Day, November 26, 2009! We are beyond ecstatic and completely smitten, as my wife so eloquently put it. It gives you a whole new answer for the age-old "What are you most thankful for?" question.

At the risk of being a cliche, this child has been the best thing that has ever happened to me. While the joy that I had at her arrival was the most profound I had ever experienced, that same joy keeps growing more each day. I don't know how I have the capacity to have such intense emotion; but I do. In addition, a new love for my wife has developed, for which I was not prepared. I am so immensely proud of her. I have never seen anything as beautiful as her being a mother. This child really has brought us closer and I can't wait to go on with this adventure with her.

ACTIVE VOLCANOES

As I mentioned above, before you are a parent, you have no idea that you are capable of having such potent emotions. I find now that I am an "emotional volcano" in a very active state. While the vast majority of these emotions are positive (joy, love, excitement), there are a very few which temper these, namely fear and the feeling of being overwhelmed.

As you can imagine, you're also very tired, so you end up feeling like you're on a roller coaster all the time. You also do very stupid, and sometimes crazy, things. For example, yesterday at breakfast, I picked up the dog and started burping him. My wife laughed heartily and then cried. The thing is, her response totally made sense to me.

But, yesterday, Mount St. Matt LePage had a tremendous, earth-shattering eruption, the dust-cloud of which I think has made its way to Lake Michigan. This was the kind of outburst you had no idea was in you; it exhilarates you, then promptly frightens you. It's not hard to imagine that such an eruption occurred at a Walmart in the midst of holiday hell.

My daughter, God bless her, doesn't like cold tushie wipes. She has already learned that when the diaper comes off to start screaming like an inmate in an Egyptian prison. So, to indulge her, I purchased a diaper-wipes-warmer from Walmart, not knowing, however, that the unit I procured was missing a vital part. Also unknowingly, my wife shredded the receipt, but I figured since we were not returning the unit, but merely replacing it for one that is complete, Walmart might oblige me. Below is my conversation with a Walmart Returns Troglodyte (WRT):

WRT: (surly) NEXT!

MSL: Hi. I, uh, bought this wipes warmer yesterday and it doesn't have a piece, so I, uh, was wondering...

WRT: Do you have a receipt?

MSL: See, that's the thing. We actually...

WRT: Well, you can't return it without a receipt.

MSL: Oh, no. I'm sorry. I don't want to return it. I only want to exchange it for one that has all the pieces. See, the one I bought doesn't have all the...

WRT: I can't do that.

MSL: I understand that this is an odd request considering I don't have a receipt, but...

(WRT begins to take the unit away)

MSL: Excuse me, uh, what are you doing?

WRT: You don't have a receipt! You probably just [sic] trying to steal this and come up with this story so you can get it for free.

MSL: Are you (expletive) kidding me?

(opening box)

MSL: Look! (throwing parts everywhere)

WRT: You can't..

MSL: Look at this! It doesn't have all the pieces! (continuing to throw parts everywhere)

WRT: Sir, I don't care. You can't...

MSL: (repacking box) You think I made this up? You're right! This is exactly what I do. I go to Walmarts and take wipes warmers! I think up these elaborate scams to pull fast ones over on people like you...

WRT: WHAT DO YOU MEAN "PEOPLE LIKE ME"?

MSL: RETURNS PEOPLE! I have a wipes warmers Ponzi scheme! I AM THE BERNIE (expletive) MADOFF OF WIPES WARMERS! Now, gimme this! (snatch)

And scene. I thought that I was going to get bum-rushed by security. Or that someone had called the cops. But, I just kept walking. I didn't look back. I started to laugh. At first a chuckle and then something boisterous. And then I cried. And then I went to Stop 'n Shop. It turns out there wasn't an APB on my car for taking the wipes warmer I had bought the day before. Just a lot of confused people at Walmart, a mad black woman in returns, and a semi-insane man whose wife had just had a baby.

When I composed myself, I called my wife and told her not only was our operation a miserable failure, but that I also had started a mini-war at Walmart. She laughed like I had never heard her laugh before. At that moment, I knew everything was going to be fine.

I suppose I should get used to this. I imagine that for the rest of my life, my children are going to always have this effect on me. I assume it's completely normal to feel pride, love, anger, and joy all within 10 second window. There are going to be lots of skinned knees, broken windows, and broken hearts. I'll regard the Walmart affair of 2009 as boot camp.

They Were Both in the Same Room; Where was the Meteor?

At the risk of violating our social lèse-majesté laws, I will just put this out there: I despise Oprah Winfrey. I think she is a narcissistic and shameless self-promoter who would wrap her own children in raw meat and feed them to a bear if she thought it would garner media attention. If one stops and thinks about, she has added very little value to the world and the areas where she has have been surrounded the pomp and circumstance of a Roman Emperor.

I haven’t always had such a loathing of Ms. Winfrey, however. It’s just her fairly recent validation of three repugnant characters: Jenny McCarthy, Suzanne Somers, and, just this week, Sarah Palin.Giving appearances to the first two is just irresponsible. Ms. McCarthy, whose claim to fame is spreading her legs for Hugh Hefner’s cameras, is a recent anti-vaccine crusader who blames her son’s autism on the Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR) vaccine. It is important to note that the assertion of a connection between the MMR vaccine and autism has been debunked several times over by reputable studies and that Ms. McCarthy’s son’s brain damage is more likely due to her prolonged inaction when he was experiencing febrile seizures. A fever can follow the receipt of this vaccine, as any pediatrician will tell you, but proper management of a fever probably could have avoided Ms. McCarthy’s son’s seizures and subsequent condition.

Being that it is much more convenient for Ms. McCarthy to blame someone else for her son’s condition rather than herself, Ms. McCarthy has embarked on her crusade and opportunistic figures like Ms. Winfrey have wasted no time in providing her an outlet. Ms. Winfrey has further insulted rationality by appeasing Ms. McCarthy’s absurd and intellectually lazy demand that no doctor (or anyone who would question her ridiculous assertions) appear with her when she pontificates. What a way to debate!

Ms. Winfrey’s confirmation of Suzanne Somers is just as short-sighted and dangerous. Ms. Somers’ latest offering to the masses is the idea that a positive attitude will cure breast cancer and that chemotherapy actually makes cancer worse. Nobody has to tell me how excruciating chemotherapy is and that in some cases its effects are, momentarily, worse than the cancer itself. But, to assert chemotherapy is nothing but a negative and that your attitude and diet (Suzanne Somers sells a suite of snake oil masqueraded as diet food) will be what cures your cancerous ails is stupid, if not disingenuous. Ms. Winfrey knows better and knows that perhaps thousands of women will follow this lemming off the cliff in denying themselves potentially life-saving treatment because they “saw on Oprah that it’s bad.”

The straw that broke the camel’s back for me was Monday’s appearance of Sarah Palin. Unlike the aforementioned who offer something (albeit something stupid), Mrs. Palin offers absolutely nothing. Oh wait, that’s not right, she offers a book which highlights the ultra-moral life she has chosen to live alongside blithering, yet stinging, insults of everyone who has given her anything short of glowing praise. This might be the best testament of Ms. Winfrey’s opportunism, as she is validating the self-proclaimed nemesis of all things Barack Obama, whom she supposes she anointed with her golden endorsement.

It’s hardly a surprise that an egoist and self-seeker like Oprah Winfrey would be able to resist someone like Sarah Palin. Every time she crawls out from under her rock to mouth-fart, she creates a media firestorm. Each new publicity stunt demonstrates that she is afraid of becoming irrelevant which, deep down, Ms. Winfrey fears, as well. While (God willing) it is possible that Sarah Palin may soon fade away permanently to obscurity, I doubt seriously this phobia will come true for Ms. Winfrey. It is a shame.

All Quiet on the Baby Front

As someone with a significant interest in military history, I have been wondering a lot lately about how it feels to be on the cusp of battle. As my wife is now full-term in the pregnancy of our daughter, I liken my current position to that of a general who is preparing for an epic battle. My opponent has mobilized his resources. I can only rely on patchy scouts' reports, but it appears as though he has positioned his heavy guns (head is down) and his troops are strategically amassed along the front (50% effaced). Once engaged, it's gonna be one helluva a firestorm.

Despite the relative calm and quality time I am spending with my co-commander, my adrenaline has been charged for about a week and remains so. Every call I get from my wife doesn't make it through the first ring and the one time I missed a call last week, in frantically dialing the "9-1-917" to call out to her cell phone, I accidentally called 911. Oops.

But, while his adrenaline is also at an all-time high, a good general, a seasoned general, remains the epitome of calm. He cannot let his troops see that his nerves are as shaky as theirs. As my wife is about to push a watermelon through a...you get the point...I must be the rock. When she looks me in the eye, I need to be able to tell her she will be alright and she needs to believe me. My calm and confidence will inspire her. A good general does the same for his troops.

More fundamentally, a good general has been spoiling for this fight. Every single moment of his life has contributed to this moment. Now-tangible fatherhood is no different. Despite never having seen her (with the exception of grainy ultrasound images) the love I have for this child is the most profound love I have ever had for anything. Gut-wrenching love. Love to which I am doing a disservice by trying to explain it. I owe it to this kid, my wife, and myself to be the best I can be. This is my time to shine.

This is my epic battle. I can't wait to hear the burst of the first cannons.

Everybody Gets A Trophy

One very large component of the legacy Baby Boomers are leaving is a phobia of accountability and a facility with "passing the buck". As the child of Boomer parents, I have frequently passed the buck throughout my life, with varying degrees of success. Now that I am about to become a father, however, I have noticed that this trait which we all exhibit from time to time has become a central tenet of our parenting philosophy. What's worse is that it has combined with our parental instincts to protect our children and has subsequently blinded us to our children's fallibility.

It has become a societal norm to blame our kids' mistakes and failures on someone else. When my neighbors' child was kicked out of day care, it was the day care center that was dysfunctional. Not that the only time their child engaged the other children was when she was biting them.

But, it doesn’t stop with looking for someone else to blame for your child’s poor behavior. We want to raise our children in a vacuum of positive affirmation. Doing this, however, sets them up for a world of disappointment - but only when they become adults.

Because by the time they are old enough to do anything competitive, they will be shielded from losing. The contest doesn't matter; everyone gets a trophy at the end of the season. When I was a kid, my lack of athletic ability put me on the Bad News Bears every season. As such, I never got a trophy. Not one. Today, however, it apparently isn't good for kids to lose. Neither is telling some kids they are gifted and some kids they are remedial. This social egalitarianism is going to come back and bite us when our kids grow up.

By shielding our children from criticism, accountability, and (dare I say it) failure, we are stymieing their competitive instincts and doing them a tremendous disservice. Because when you make it to the real world, only the very best get the job, promotion, or account. There is no trophy for coming in second (or third, fourth, fifth, or sixth). We are teaching our children that they are entitled to success even when they don't succeed. It is contrary to this country’s foundation and will only further dilute our global prowess.

Where is JFK?

"We do these things not because they are easy, but because they are hard."

Thus are President John Fitzgerald Kennedy's immortal words in reference to the notion that in 1961 we, the United States, would put a man on the moon within the decade. At the time, it seemed foolish. Eight years later in 1969, the American people watched the moon landing.

But, the above statement references more than just a desire to put people on the moon. It is a brilliant reflection of American-ness: resolve with humility; manifest destiny; a simultaneous cognizance of the rewards of success and risks of failure. For 200 years, this singular mindset drove this country to be the best in the world.

This mindset, however, has fallen on deaf Baby Boomer and subsequent generations' ears. We now choose to do only the easy things and ignore the hard ones. For the past 30 years, the driving mindset has become "Do whatever you want - someone else will pay for it."

Last year when the economy started to crumble, I thought it might have been an impetus for sea change. We had a Democratic presidential candidate telling us change needed to start with us; he was subsequently elected. Maybe people started to understand that they needed to make sacrifices; banks maybe learned that they should actually hold on to some of the money people trustingly deposit with them; Congress might actually be filled with people who are proactive.

What a disappointment all of it has been. The President now tells us that we can have a totally reformed and more "proportionate" health-care system that we don't have to pay for - unless you make $350,000 a year; then you're paying more for it. On NPR this morning, I heard the results of a poll that Americans overwhelmingly want a better health-care system and overwhelmingly don't want to pay for it. Great.

The President also tells us that if we had too many credit cards and bought things we could never have bought with cash or obtained a mortgage we could never pay on, we will be relieved of our burdens. No, that's not going to encourage people to make the same mistakes they made which got them into this mess.

And California, the Golden State, symbol of 20th Century American prosperity, is ready to jump feet first into the abyss. Despite the threat (and now reality) of having to pay bills with IOUs, the people overwhelmingly rejected tax increases that would have kept the economy there on life support. In the words of The Economist this week: "California thus seems to be doing its level best to come to ruin and, as the nation's largest economy, to drag the country's hopes for a recovery down with it."

As a country, we have decided we like reward so much better than risk that we have cut risk completely out of the equation. And sacrifice, to boot. Banks can behave as recklessly as they would like; someone will bail them out (pun intended) when things get dicey. Sure, GM can go into bankruptcy - but the rest of the country has to shoulder the over-generous burdens they promised their unions. And someone (the other 49 states, probably) will buy California's bonds, despite the very credible risk they will default on some, if not all, of them.

Bottom line: if people want reformed health-care, they're going to have make sacrifices - and not just 1% of people. GM needs to go into bankruptcy the proper way, with unions agreeing to cuts in enormously generous benefits their members now receive. Banks that screwed up need to go; the ones left standing can get some money from the government that they have to hold on to (NOT leverage) until they can repay it. And California NEEDS TO RAISE ITS TAXES!

When I voted for Obama, I voted for resolve with humility. I also voted for road repairs, bridge repairs (Minneapolis anyone?), investsments in new energy technology, and infrastructure investments, in general. I'm afraid I might have Buyer's Remorse.

The Italian Job

Lately, I have taken to listening to NPR on my short drive to work in the morning. Like I have with other news sources, I have conditioned myself to get past its blatant bias (in this case, to tha left, to tha left!) and pick out the news - all while mostly learning something of which I had had no knowledge previously.

Today was no exception, as one of the exposes was on a row between the United Nations' Refugee Agency (UNHCR) and Silvio Berlusconi's borderline-comic Italian government. Fundamentally, it concerned the steps Italy is taking to crack down on illegal migration - something which we Americans, as we grasp to control the spigot of illegal migration coming across our southern border, are wrestling with, as well.

As a peninsula, Italy's coast is very porous in terms its capacity to physically absorb migrants from Africa. Mentally, however, is another story. Italy's current government makes the Bush Administration look like tree-hugging pinkos. It espouses the same, if not more, conservative values as the Bushies and is unabashedly xenophobic. Berlusconi's words about immigration: "The leftist opposition envisions and multi-ethnic, multi-cultural Italy. We do not". This is also a reflection of the Italian population, not only because they voted the current "Forza Italia" government in; but also, because Italians themselves are pretty xenophobic.

Despite its constant chiding of the cold, conservative Anglo-Saxons, most Europeans are much more racist, xenophobic, and anti-Semitic than Britons or Americans. But, relative to their European compatriots, Italians exhibit sometimes shocking xenophobia. The treatment of gypsies in Italy is merely a thread away from apartheid; who can forget the image of two drowned gypsy girls' corpses covered by beach towels as Italian beachgoers went merrily about their days. While I personally find gypsies to be dirty and annoying - the human equivalent of rats - if I saw one drowning, I would jump in and save him or her, or at least call for help. And it doesn't stop with Italians' treatment of gypsies. There have been sporadic pogrom-like episodes directed toward African immigrants, as well.

But, I digress. What are the actual steps being taken these days by the Italian government to address this issue? Are they reverting back to fascism? Hardly. Recently, the Italian navy has been intercepting ships with refugees launched from Libya - a huge staging ground for illegal migration into Europe - and towing those ships back to Libya. Seems pretty reasonable to me; we do the same thing with ships, rafts, and floating doors from Haiti and even sometimes Cuba. However, the UN Refugee Agency - itself an oxymoron - is crying foul, as it complains these refugees' rights and protections are not properly guaranteed when the Italians are boomeranging them back to Libya. Libya is not a party to the UN Refugee convention, it says.

So, who is right? Italy is crying foul, as it feels its judgement to protect its borders is being usurped by a quasi-Communist global talking shop. This is a valid point. Furthermore, how can someone's "rights and protections" be guaranteed when they are illegally coming into a country? It is my opinion that a constitution only awards you rights if you abide by its laws; the modern social contract. It is the same thing as interest groups in the US crying about the rights of illegal immigrants; they don't have any. And on top of all of this is the economic argument; Italy is already a poor performer relative to it's European peers. If scores of no-skilled immigrants join the fray looking for jobs that don't exist, it could make an already poor country even poorer.

On the other side of this, as an American, I love immigration and feel that everyone should have a shot to make a better life for himself. It's what made this country great. I do feel that if these people take the proper avenues to legally come into Italy - or any other EU member state, for that matter - they should eventually be awarded with full citizenship. Italy's, and the EU's, current obstacle course for citizenship is already appallingly absurd. Both of them, despite the current economic environment and their populations' subconcious xenophobia, should make their processes more streamlined and welcoming to immigrants.

Until such time, however, laws should not be broken. Italy needs to do what it needs to do. Thoughts?

A Special Place in Hell

I thought that when the cluster%$&# that was the Bush Administration came to an end, its major players (save for Karl Rove, who would continue to be a mouthpiece) would fade into obscurity, enjoying the twilight of their careers. Memoirs written here, "Meet the Press" appearances there, but for the most part, they would have gone away.

I especially thought this would apply to Richard Cheney, whose ominous influence hung over the Administration from the beginning and who is largely responsible for driving the country into the ditch we are now in. Cheney had an anti-Midas touch. WMD in Iraq "a certainty"? Discredited. A definite link between al-Qaeda and Saddam? Nope. And my personal favorite: "Deficits don't matter" (sic). Despite these ludicrous assertions, Cheney mostly operated in the shadows; it's like God cast him to be an evil genious.

Totally against character, however, Cheney has recently been out in full force, trying to vindicate in any way he can his legacy that never was. Apparently in an appearance on "Face the Nation" on Sunday, Cheney basically said he hopes the President fails from a national security perspective and even said he thinks Rush Limbaugh is who the model Republican should be. To put this latter bit in context, he said this to snub Colin Powell, a man whose reputation was severely tarnished by steadfastly trying to sell Cheney's WMD argument in the run-up to the Iraq War.

Throughout the 2004 campaign - and even in 2008 - Cheney and Rove consorted to neuter the opposition by subtly suggesting if you voted Democrat, you were making the country less safe. It was cynical in 2004, cynical in 2008, and selfish in 2009. At least in the run-up to the elections in 2004 and 2008, you could make the flimsy assumption that this argument was used simply to get votes; it could be made because the one making it truly believes his national security plan is superior to his opponents'. It's morally dispiccable, but that's par for the course in American electoral politics (Obama's class-baiting in 2008 was no less admirable).

However, by not only saying the country is less safe, but openly wishing your opponent to fail (which, of course, would be at the expense of the people you swore you were protecting from 2001-2009), it's pretty clear all you care about is your own vindication - even if that means harm for innocent people in this country. "So what if the ends do not justify the means? I was right!" I think this really does reserve a special place in Hell for Dick Cheney.

Congress Should Support Military Aid to Pakistan

So, it seems as though the Obama Administration has decided to wisely call a spade a spade and address the whole "Pakistan thing" with more than just rhetoric. It seems to be a pattern lately that the Administration will think with their head and Congress will think with their...you know where I'm going.

You see, Congressional Democrats are once again losing sight of the forest for the trees. They seem to be falling into the same cookie-cutter, ideological, one-size-fits-all trap that led to the recent demise and subsequent marginalization of the Republicans. This approach is foolish and dangerous, especially when it is executed vis-a-vis a resurgent Taliban operating in a country with apparent impunity. The challenge they present is just one of the new 21st Century gray areas that Congress apparently has trouble adapting to.

So what is it they are doing? Bob Gates (with the enthusiastic blessing of his boss) is pushing Congress to give our military the same capacity to back the military in Pakistan that they have Iraq and Afghanistan. This would probably translate to better kit, better training, more armed personnel, etc. In essence, it would help to untie the one hand both we and the Pakistani military have in executing combat operations against the Taliban in Pakistan.

Seems reasonable enough. But, Democratic members of the House Appropriations and Armed Services committees are questioning "the appropriateness of providing foreign assistance for Pakistan under the jurisdiction of the Department of Defense" and saying that "the responsibility for training Pakistani police and military forces resides with the Department of State." To me, the smacks of liberal, Boomer-esque aversion to military force. The resources and expertise of State are most efficient after DoD has done it's work. Left to the bureaucratic juggernaut that State is, Pakistan's army would be trained to plant flowers with plastic knives and forks, not mop up a guerrilla insurgency.

In my opinion, the challenges we face in the 21st Century call for the coordination of Defense and State. The Bush Administration didn't see this; they operated in the 20th Century vacuum of absolutes, preferring a one-sided military approach to everything. Now, it seems Congress is approaching things in the same vacuum, albeit on the other end of the spectrum.

For the sake of not just Americans, but Pakistanis, Indians, Afghans, you name it, we need to adapt to the challenges laid out before us, not quixotically hope they will adapt to how we would like to handle them. If Congress is not up to the task, we need to vote them out and replace them with people who are.

Good call, Mr. President

I am impressed by the way Obama has rebuffed the leftist nagging to set up a "Truth" commission to investigate the enhanced interrogation techniques and the people who signed off on/employed them during the Bush Administration. To reject such a farce of a committee is not synonymous with condoning torture and the folks on the left fringe of the Democratic party need to stop making this dubious connection.

For Pelosi and company, this sort of commission is simply a way to rub Bush Administration lackeys' noses in the piss they left on the good name of this country. It's the most juvenile form of retribution; it's something that happens in a banana republic when one dictatorship overthrows another one. It's not something a democracy does, period. In the words of my father, "it's time for the Democrats to take their own advice and 'moveon.org'".

However, I don't think Obama's rejection of the panel completely comes down to clairvoyance; I think he understands that we have very pressing issues to deal with and a circus like Congressional Democrats are proposing is just that, a circus; a sideshow; a distraction. With so many "grey" issues (ie complicated), Congressional Democrats finally had something that was absolute. They cynically think they can sell this to their "dumb" constituents by getting in front of every television camera and spouting off against the transgressions of the evil Bush-Cheney empire. It's merely populist comfort food.

The fact of the matter is, this issue is not as clear-cut as Congressional Democrats think. Forget the conservatives out there who think God and Jesus give Amuricans the right to draw and quarter any Nazi-Commie-Jew-Abortion-loving tur'rist (ie anyone who doesn't like George Bush or Rush Limbaugh). But, many people out there who are ambivalent about politics are also ambivalent about "enhanced interrogation techniques". They rationalize that the people who are being interrogated want to kill as many people as they can so they can be Allah's rock star, so what's wrong with pressing them a little harder, so that maybe some innocent lives will be spared. They also rationalize with facts, like enhanced interrogation sometimes brings out "false" confessions, given in haste by the recipient so the pain will stop. They waver between thoughts like this, never really taking a side.

Obama and Emmanuel recognize this fence-sitting and wisely have not gotten wrapped up in the hysteria of this non-issue. After all, we've all pretty much known about this and pretty much gotten over it. Closing Guantanamo was a great step; making an announcement at the CIA was another and, in my opinion, a sufficient way to close the book on this dark chapter in our national history.

In taking both of these steps, the Administration is trying to take the spotlight off of this issue and direct it somewhere else. Because the bottom line is, we might not be taking as extreme an approach to interrogating suspects, but anyone who thinks we stopped all enhanced techniques is fooling themselves. In trying to let our interrogators fade back into the shadows, Obama is better enabling them to do what it is they are supposed to do and keep us safe. Please, let's moveon.org.

OUTRAGE!

Sorry it's been so long. You would think with everything going on these past few months, I would have plenty to post about, but between the holidays, my new job, vacation, and other good news (;-)), I just haven't had the time. I have let you down and I am sorry. At least I am apologizing and admitting accountability, which is beyond most people's abilities these days.

Which is a perfect segue for today's post. So, according to yesterday's Washington Post, these same bankers who destroyed the international financial system with their leverage fetishes have been spending millions of the taxpayers' money (read "ours", as in "yours and mine") on lobbying Congress to stymie regulations on executive pay and "tougher financial regulations" (ie regulations which make it difficult for them to screw up the system in the future). The fact that these scumbags are using our money against us has made me reached my boiling point.

Despite my penchant for judgement and rage, I have to say that I have been pretty calm throughout this debacle. When the stock market tanked in late 2008, I said it would rebound; when the Marie-Antoinettes at AIG audaciously defended their ill-gotten bonuses, I thought they were stupid and beyond greedy, but I never joined the mob. But, now that Wall Street - the same Wall Street that screwed us all and never admitted any responsibility - is actively trying to screw us in the future, what else can I say rather than I...am...pissed.

That said, I will calm myself by thinking this through analytically. Unfortunately, my thought process arrives at some pretty somber conclusions. Number one, this is going to make it REALLY difficult for the Obama Administration to sell future bail-outs, as they will most likely have to, once the results of the "stress tests" come back. Furthermore, it severely jeopardizes the credibility of an Administration that was going to "end corporate lobbyists' stranglehold on doing business in Washington."

Which leads to number two, which concerns the already-diminished credibility on the US Congress. Based on a variety of root-causes, Congress is already highly mistrusted among the American people. Add to that stories about legislators like Chris Dodd - chair of the Senate Banking Committee - getting "VIP" treatment from problem-children like Countrywide, and people start connecting the dots: was Congress in on this when the "bon temps" were "rouler-ing"? The answer is unequivocally yes, and that is made all the more clear by the fact that our so-called representatives are now shaking a fist at these Wall Street types with one hand, and continuing to take money from them with the other. Add that to the already lengthy list of Congressional hypocrisy.

I am certain this is only the tip of the iceberg. Lobbyists are never going to go away, as long as Congress continues using them as ATM's.