We're Wrong Either Way.

I keep hearing people say that our government should have stepped in to back the old regime in Egypt, or that we should have spoken up more forcefully for the opposition. I can't figure out why all those people haven't figured out that we should have done neither, which is what we did. First, how do you support a regime that has for decades mistreated it's subjects and been unwilling to allow basic human rights when that's exactly what we keep claiming we want. It's what we enjoy. How do we justify supporting one dictator over another. Either cruel dictators are bad or good. They can't be both. Either freedom should be for everyone or no one. On the other hand,  how do we speak up for and assist an opposition that may be as bad or worse as what's already there, if we don't know. More importantly, our track record for stepping in to straighten out a mess is very poor. Not only that, but people around the world don't want us "stepping in" to their internal problems. This is especially true in the Middle East where we're seen as invaders and occupiers. The only smart move for us, is to keep on the sideline as much as possible, protect our own citizens where possible and provide humanitarian aid where possible. And then once a leadership is confirmed, support it as much as possible. Is the Middle East critical to our national interest? Of course. Is Middle Eastern oil critical to our economy? Of Course. Can't we just dictate what those people will do and how they will interact with us? Of course not. You can't force anyone to be your best buddy. You have to earn that. Even then they may not like you. The same is true with countries. This isn't rocket science. Other countries have the right to go their own way even if that way leads away from us. Again, you have to earn people's respect and friendship. We haven't done so well in that area. We've always used bluster to get our way. That doesn't work well anymore. We can't go to war with everyone. We need to become a little more self reliant. Maybe a lot more.

I Can Whistle Dixie, Can You?

Well, Wisconsin and a few other states are still trying to break down the unions. Fair enough. But before they do that, they should consider whether or not they are being disingenuous. See, they want to destroy the unions based on the reasoning that the unions are at fault for the dire financial straits of the states. Or that Corporate leaders want them destroyed. But they should be fair about it and they're not. I have no problem with asking the unions to take a hit on wages and benefits and I've suggested the Governors and Legislators do the same. But the Governors and Legislators want to eliminate collective bargaining as well. Now how does that square with the Governors and Legislators? Why, they simply vote themselves a raise. They don't have to negotiate with anyone but themselves. Now, to be fair, some states solved that problem by voting a process into being whereby they automatically get pay raises unless they vote not to. A somewhat slippery approach. Again, fair enough. How about passing a new law that states they can not receive any increase unless the people of the state vote to approve by a two thirds majority. Same idea for corporate executives might be a good idea. What are the chances of the Legislators and Governors voting for that kind of a bill? Yep, that's what I think too. But the thing is, if Governors and Legislators are unwilling to take a hit on wages and benefits and are unwilling to give up their own ability to increase their wages and benefits, why should they expect union members to be willing to give up theirs? I suppose it's because we should all be willing to trust Governors and Legislators to be fair and above reproach. After all, they're just humble politicians seeking to do what's best for their constituents and themselves, but mostly themselves and those who put them in office. I speak not of the electorate, but of the corporations and very rich who finance the political machinery necessary to gain prominence and exposure. As to the electorate. Well as a member of the electorate, try getting a face to face with any elected official at that level when a fat cat is in the room. Not even being able to whistle "Dixie" will help.

If You Don't Like Us, It's Your Fault.

Think back a little bit. Remember when people wished that the whole world could be free and democratic? Especially in the Middle-East where we store our future supplies of oil. Well actually we don't store any of our oil there, although some folks think we should just declare all their oil to be our oil. The expectation has always been that if only countries would give up their monarchies and dictatorships, they would automatically become mini-Americas. Also the thinking was that they would all become our closest allies and suddenly support Israel's right to exist. Now all of a sudden some of those countries are gaining their freedom, or at least appear to be doing so, and now we're frightened they won't like us as much as the dictators being replaced. Some folks are demanding that our government intercede to make sure these countries do become or remain our close friends. How do you suppose our government might pull that cat out of the hat? I mean, if we were really to be honest with ourselves, we'd admit that these folks in the middle-east just don't trust us. There are several very good reasons for this. The monarchs we've been dealing with for many decades have, all the while, been telling their people that we're to blame for all their woes. As if that weren't enough, they don't trust us because we are basically European, and Europeans were the ones who invaded their part of the world  during the Crusades. Those folks have long memories. They never forget things like that. And to prove they were right, we've invaded two of their countries during the last decade. Now in our minds, it's been to defeat terrorists and find WMDs. Thing is, we keep trying to fight a shadow enemy with a noontime war effort. There's no shadow at noon. That war requires a whole new set of combat rules. We haven't come up with that set of rules and strategies. So, to the Arabs living there, it looks like another Crusade on our part. How should we expect these folks to see us? As their saviors? Dream on. The longer we stay there, both as combatants and as thieves, steeling their oil wealth (their way of thinking), the less likely we'll be perceived as their friends. Problem is, we don't see ourselves as being wrong about anything. Neither do they.

Never Mind The Teachers, How About The Legislators?

Here's my take on the problems in Wisconsin as well as Ohio, Florida, Texas and even Pennsylvania, along with a whole string of other financially troubled states. As far as requiring teachers and state workers to take a cut in pay and/or benefits, that seems reasonable. Heck, even the teachers and state workers in Wisconsin and elsewhere agree. What I don't understand is the need to effectively disassemble the unions. Something else I don't agree with is the lack of willingness on the part of Governors and state legislators to offer to take a cut in their pay and benefit packages? Now, why is that? I've often heard that the best leaders are those who lead by example. Maybe that isn't true. Or maybe these Governors and state Legislators aren't the best leaders. Maybe there's a little slime oozing around the states capitals these days. I've heard of threats to fire teachers and state workers if they don't accept all the cuts and give up collective bargaining. In education especially, we can ill afford to lose teachers. What with our drooping standings in education amoung other industrialized countries around the world. But we could surely afford to lose some Legislators. Heck, we could probably afford to lose a Governor or two as well. In fact, I think we'd be in a whole lot better shape if we did lose a bunch of these characters. Just imagine the savings if we cut all the state legislative houses in half. Of course, who to cut. That's the question I've been studying for some time. I have some suggestions. How about you?

My Sad Tale Of Woe.

Well. Hello Mr. & Mrs. America, wherever you are. If you've wondered where I've been, I broke my leg a couple of weeks ago and spent nine days in the hospital. Now if you think that's a somewhat long time to be hospitalized for a broken leg, just remember it's me we're talking about. Actually, I have to agree that it was an unnecessarily long stat. Here's what happened; I went to the ER with the break about 5:PM on Wednesday. I was examined a while later, sent to xray to find two breaks and that it would need to be operated on to fix. Next morning the staff Drs. decided I needed a heart catherization. I disagreed. My cardiologist arrived and agreed with me. I was oporated on, on Friday, had pain later in the day with no cooperation, even after I mentioned I was having chest pain. I was transferred to the telemetry floor where they didn't know I had had a broken leg and wanted to drag me into bed by my bad leg. They screwed up my blood sugar levels and arranged for every specialist within a 40 mile radius to call on me. Once home, the home health nurse began contacting my doctors and cardiologist without letting me know trying to set up appointments and ordering equipment I didn't need. I fired her. The long and short of the deal is I have issues with our health-care system. If you don't, I congratulate you on your good health.