Thankful...

We all have a lot to be worried about this Thanksgiving. Family and friends out of work, wars, terrorism, myriad crises, economic uncertainty.

But we will have one more, very important thing to be thankful for at our house this year. My wife’s sister (who lives with us) went into the hospital two weeks ago. We didn’t know whether she would live through the night.

Two weeks in intensive care, and many times things did not look good. More than once we discussed funeral plans.

Her problems multiplied and cascaded into nerve-wracking days for all of us – my sons and me, but even more so my wife, who has spent copious amounts of time at the hospital.

But now, my sister-in-law has been transferred out of the hospital into a long-term, acute care facility. And although it is still a long road, there is light ahead.

And this Thanksgiving, when we sit down to give thanks, we will all have something special to be thankful about.

NRO: Criticism Just for the Hell of It

Arthur Herman is the latest example of the once-mighty National Review Online’s fall from intellectual powerhouse to "National Enquirer" status. His article on the NRO website criticizes President Obama for – get this – pissing off Europe by not offering Airbus the chance to compete for new air-refueling tankers for the US Air Force.

NRO has gone to the dregs in its ‘criticism just for the hell of criticism’ meme. I can see the article if the multi-billion dollar contract award had been made to Airbus over Boeing: “Obama Abandons US Industry!”

Truly, their masquerade as intellectual elite is well past the expiration date. And their true agenda is showing…

Conservatives & Science: “Choosing” Which “Facts” to Believe

Global warming is now on trial in the conservative community—actually, I should be more precise in saying climate scientists are now on trial in the conservative community. And the kangaroo court of conservative opinion, from the lowliest unscientific hicks like Sarah Palin to no less than George Will, has found them guilty before the trial even starts.

The key fact to remember here is their motivation: global warming is an inconvenient fact which will necessitate Americans change their decades-old energy-guzzling ways.

It will also change which businesses are profitable. Like the Pony Express, the coal and oil companies will become obsolete. Unlike the owners of the Pony Express, however, they can see alternative energy companies coming, and are doing everything in their power to discredit climate science.

Such groups as Information Council for the Environment, the Heartland Institute, and The Advancement of Sound Science Center, with high-sounding names but which are fronts for Exxon, the Western Fuels Association, National Coal Association and Edison Electric Institute, have done their best to make suspect the science.

It hasn’t worked, so they're trying a new tactic: if you can’t find a way to discredit the science, find a way to discredit the scientists. By any means necessary.

The larger question here is what conservatives think of science. What it comes down to is they believe science, but only when convenient or it supports their worldview. The “hard” sciences, like physics, engineering, chemistry and astronomy, are no problem. But others, like biology, psychology, and especially climatology, are open to scorn and ridicule.

Why? Because they discover things conservatives don’t like, like homosexuality is a genetic rather than a learned trait. Like evolution. And, like climate science.

By picking and choosing what they acknowledge as fact, conservatives are rapidly destroying the value of science in our culture.

Maybe some people are okay with that. I’m not. Only believing what you agree with is intellectually dishonest, and will irreparably damage our society.

the mud god is my new god

the mud god is my new god,
because it never expects adoration
never demands virgin crimson
nor a glorious edifice

the mud god is my new god,
because it never clutches at gold
never crusades against the infidel
nor sends souls beneath it

the mud god is my new god
because it only wants rain



© Joseph E. Arechavala 10/5/09

What’s For Dinner

I read recently that Natalie Portman, the actress, decided to change from vegetarian to vegan.

I find the worldview of vegans to be quite interesting. Only in the late 20th and early 21st century we live in would this view now even be considered, let alone put forward as a moral choice.

Vegans ignore the basic, fundamental fact of life on this planet: everything alive - except plants - consumes something else, also alive, in order to live itself. So, we have grass eaten by gazelles, who are then eaten in turn by predators like lions, cheetahs and hyenas. We have ants who survive on various foods, which are in turn eaten by frogs, who in turn are eaten by snakes, who are then in turn eaten by birds like hawks.

In nature, mice function pretty much solely as food for other animals: snakes, owls, coyotes, foxes, lizards, etc. To claim that mice serve any other function than food other animals isn't really looking at reality. That’s why they breed so fast and have so many baby mice in each litter. In fact, this strategy applies to most of the animal world. Produce many young because most of them will get eaten.

I could go on, but you get the point. And while I’ll agree with vegans we should do our best to treat animals humanely and minimize their suffering, it’s more than a little ludicrous to claim that humans shouldn’t be eating meat and eggs, drinking milk or wearing leather on some moral ground when every other creature on this planet lives that way. Nor have I noticed predators being particularly 'humane' to their prey; in fact, some animals eat while their victim is still alive.

Argue your case on environmental grounds. Argue your case on health grounds. But arguing your case on moral grounds is inherently stupid.

A Short November for Yankees? Or Maybe a Very Long One...

It’s positively revolting to watch the national sports press slobber all over the Yankees like a dog greeting his long lost master. They do the same thing with the Cowboys and Lakers.

They anointed the Yanks champs before the first pitch was thrown.

And you could tell, even though none of the Phillies said anything about it, they were pretty angry about being dissed.

Last night’s game one was their statement to the Bronx Bombers (and please excuse the paraphrase): “You can have this trophy when you pry it from our cold, dead hands.”

The Yankees couldn’t hit Lee, Sabathia couldn’t find his spots and the Phils waited him out. The NY relievers were anything but. And Chase Utley put an exclamation point on the proceedings with two homers.

Tonight we’ll see how Pedro pitches. And how the Yanks respond. They’ll have to if they want to stay in this, or they're done. But I have a feeling the Phils are coming back to Citizens’ up 2-0.

Brought to You by the Letter L

I’ve noted in the last few years the growing intensity and shrillness of conservative voices. In the media, on the net, and in newspapers. People like Michele Malkin, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck have become louder and more piercing, the volume knob turning higher and higher with each infraction of the left they perceive.

Here’s why: they're losing.

The country voted for a liberal Democratic president. Society is ever so gradually loosening restrictions for gay marriage (it’s legal in six states now). Abortion is still legal after over 30 years of struggle to outlaw it. The struggle for religious tolerance continues, but it has become more widely spread. Our society is becoming more secular and less dependent on religious leaders.

They're losing in every sphere of the culture war they declared.

All of this bodes ill for the screechers. So they screech all the more loudly. But apparently, fewer and fewer are left to listen.

Baseball in October

“The agony was so real it was beautiful.” *
Their faces painted the picture perfect, textbook definition

Last out made, they walked, slowly, heads down,
pondered a November changed now –

on a cold day, but no colder than normal
for this ambition, started in March chill

ended in a darkened sports cathedral,
where the faithful left more dispirited

than after Sunday services with sins revealed.
“There’s no crying in baseball.” **

But, in private darkness, there was in the cars
on the way home.

* Mark Kizla, Denver Post, 10/13/09

** Jimmy Dugan (Tom Hanks) “A League of Their Own”

© Joseph E. Arechavala 10/13/09

Gajillions of Dittoheads Vow to Never Watch Another NFL Game. Yeah, Right…

“Tonight, we are all Rush Limbaugh” will go down as one of the most hyperbolic and silly assertions ever written. Redstate.com has outdone itself in idiocy.

Where to even begin?

How about this? Rush Limbaugh can afford to buy an NFL team. Can you? Didn’t think so.

Second, the NFL will go to any length, breadth or depth to protect its most valuable asset: its antitrust exemption.

If you want to buy into the game, don’t go into the room labeled ‘controversy’ and hope to be able to pass into the room marked ‘NFL Owner.’ They don’t like it, they stay away from it, and the very last thing the NFL would like to be doing next season is reacting to Rush’s latest controversial statement.

You know, like “The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well” - I guess he doesn't remember Superbowl winner Doug Williams - and “Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream” and “The difference between Los Angeles and yogurt is that yogurt comes with less fruit”.

So Rush, your bid was doomed from the start. And it’s nobody’s fault but yours.

And no, just record, maybe the folks at redstate.com think they're Limbaugh, but I’m not.

Dow Reaches 10000! Unemployed Millions Rejoice!

It’s interesting. We bailed out Wall St. just about a year ago. They're doing fine, aren't they?

Goldman-Sachs, the glad-handed recipient of hundreds of millions in government money, announced their latest earnings yesterday. And a robust $16 billion in payouts for employee bonuses (see marketplace.org). I’m sure the announcement gladdened the hearts of those millions of unemployed, grateful that the big boys are doing so well. Their CEO says they need so much to keep talented people at their firm. These would be the same 'talented people' who put the economy in the mess it's in now.

But, hey, the conservatives tell us ‘capitalism benefits everyone.’




At least, in theory…

Deja Vu With A Twist

In the mini-series “V” (the original back in the ‘80s), earth scientists start to suspect the aliens aren't as benevolent as they're letting on, and start speaking out against them. The aliens’ response is to go about discrediting the scientists with the public, and it works.

Life imitates art.

Republicans, beholden more than Democrats to big, polluting corporations are busily following this script. And corporations, who fear loss of profits far more than loss of jobs or increased costs they will just pass on to the consumer if climate change legislation passes – despite the fact that environmental laws they opposed in the past haven't had this effect – have been busily pulling their strings.

Look back a ways and you'll see a pattern. Just in case you don’t remember, this is a repeat from the 1970s when the Clean Water Act and Clean air Act were being debated. It’s a repeat of the 1990s when acid rain legislation was being debated. But it’s being done with a new twist. Don’t just attack the science, attack the scientists. They have an agenda. They’re really leftists bent on destroying capitalism.

Look on the websites of these ‘concerned citizens’ groups’ (with deliberately misleading names like the American Council on Science and Health) and see who’s really backing them. And understand you’re seeing a dog and pony show.

Captain Planet and the Planeteers Redux

I’ve observed an interesting phenomenon. Unless you have a child in their late teens or twenties, you likely don’t remember the TV show ‘Captain Planet’. Well, my now 19 year-old son watched it when he was young.

And now, my 8 year-old has suddenly discovered it on the Boomerang Channel. Watching the episode – no, I didn’t remember this one – I did suddenly remember how controversial the show was when it came on the air in 1990, how conservatives described it as propaganda for environmentalist tree-huggers.

Yet here we are in the 21st century, and conservatives talk about environmental responsibility as though they never opposed it.

Now, we’re talking about global warming. And the conservatives (mostly) refuse to believe it even exists.

Interesting how times change. Interesting how things stay the same.

Let’s All Support the Pedophile!!

I am stunned and outraged beyond belief at what I’ve read on the Washington Post and Huffington Post regarding the arrest of Roman Polanski on a 30 year old sexual assault case. That anyone would support Polanski – an admitted child molester – is beyond my capacity to understand.

It’s not like these are allegations. He pled guilty to a crime and fled the US, to live a life of luxury in Europe for decades, consciously avoiding the United States and Britain to stay of out of the hands of law enforcement.

What is it with this liberal defense of criminals?

Ira Einhorn and Mumia Abu Jamal immediately spring to mind. To defend people who have committed such heinous crimes is indefensible.

Perhaps it’s liberals need to defend those accused. Perhaps it’s the underdog mentality. Newsflash for you folks – sometimes, in fact most times – they're guilty.

And sometimes, the person just isn't worth defending.

The absolute worst defense I’ve heard is that he should be excused because of some ‘artistic greatness’. Excuse me, but ‘artistic merit’ isn't an excuse for moral depravity.

It doesn’t remotely approach a defensible argument.

I wonder, had been done to one of their daughters, if Joan Shore, Ariana Huffington and their like would be so quick to defend him.

I Remember When Newspapers Used to Cost Money…

I’ve been reading some on newspapers and their troubles lately.

First, new technology makes old technology obsolete: the Pony Express was replaced by the telegraph, typewriters by computers, etc. Newspapers are suffering the same fate – they're being replaced by the net. Unfortunately for them, the newspapers are the old technology.

Going to the Wawa everyday (for those of you not from the Northeast, think of 7-11), I see very few people buying them, and those that do are always over 30, a really bad demographic for the newspaper industry.

And with instantaneous access and the 24-hour news cycle we now enjoy (Or don’t. That’s your call.), a printed sheet of paper is out of date by the time it hits the newsstand.

Third, people have grown to expect their news for free, from the networks, from CNN and Fox News (whatever you think of them), from the radio. So, for newspapers to charge for their content is an uphill proposition at best, especially if CNN.com, FoxNews.com, and others are still offering their content for free.

It’s really hard to see most newspapers surviving this, other than the major national papers – which will still struggle but will have a chance, at least – and those that serve small towns.

Other than that, newspapers are doomed. Progress – if you want to call it that – is inevitable.

leaf

flashing silhouettes of trees swaying; press
a fallen leaf between pages of an unopened book
cloak your words so they won’t have to listen
begin the dance and if they follow twirl and twirl again
till dizziness overtakes and posy-ashes all fall

mitigate

perform penance

claim visions in this empty space

dissonant moments on fogged mornings
can’t hide the sound of surf breaching the sand
butterflies aren't the only casualties on the beach
pick a seashell up and you'll hear the radio
an old-time opera for the discriminating listener

wounded

mortal sin

bleeding fingers from pruning limbs

flip through the diary to find that leaf
pressed to a heart so many decades ago
comfort us in heavens milky with mystery
protect the candle from the breeze with bandaged hands
lest darkness overwhelm glow of radio waves

revive

tattered pages

walled in upon tree-lined canopies

© Joseph E. Arechavala 7/26/07

Conservatives Invoke Reagan, But…

One thing I’ve noticed about conservatives, especially ultra-conservatives, is they like to invoke Ronald Reagan. Oh, they love to invoke him, as though he is their long lost messiah.

The problem is that the conservative movement, especially on the far right, is absolutely nothing like Reagan’s conservatism.

The first major difference between Reagan and today’s conservatives was he was a pragmatic over an idealist. Modern conservatives are exactly the opposite. They will die before conceding, believing even 80% is no conservative victory – it’s all or nothing. Look at last year’s election and the vilification of John McCain – a Senator who voted their way over 80% of the time.

Ron knew better. Reagan thought it necessary to defeat the Soviet Union and had no problem running up big deficits in order to do so, despite proclaiming himself a fiscal conservative.

The next thing about him was he carefully honed a public persona of likeability. Whether it was an act or not, I can only relate what I’ve read from others who met him; they invariably say what a great guy he was. I don’t know of anyone, even those opposed to all of his policies, who hated him as a person.

Nowadays conservatives go out of their way to not only be as unpleasant as possible, but literally revel in their opponents hating their guts.

Were he alive, I’m not sure if he’d approve. In fact, I can almost see him shaking his head and saying, “There you go again…”

I Got No Strings To Hold Me Down--Oh, Wait...

Well, it seems the conservative nutjob crowd hasn’t been able to kill Obama’s hate-spewing, social-engineering, homosexuality-accepting, conservative-value-hating speech to school kids.

Good.

For the first time, school kids won’t be listening to some old white guy as President standing before them making a speech.

But conservative remain unhappy, because they know Obama is a closet socialist/communist/terrorist/racist/whatever, who they think will somehow use his super mesmerizing powers to entrance school children into performing little socialist/communist/terrorist/racist/whatever puppets.

Actually, they are the puppets. It’s an interesting phenomenon.

Ultra-liberal Democrats do it too, by the way.

Whenever their party wants a good protest, all they have to do is get some party loyalist to incite it with some outlandish remark, and good little marionettes that they are, the trained puppets of the Republicans or the trained puppets of the Democrats, perform flawlessly.

Both parties can count on their well-trained lapdogs. Whenever they blow their whistles, these folks dance like the sad marionettes they are.

Celina

Tuesday will be the 2nd anniversay of my niece's death. This poem is for her:

Spherical
For Celina

A
baby
is born



In 9 seconds,
Or 3 or 7, another

Male
female

Into spheres of life


Dotted with distasteful stars
And periodic comets to doom
Life on this bubble



A
baby
dies



In 9 seconds—or 4, or 2—another

Male
female

Replaces her


Usurper lent a ladder
Like Jacob’s

To fall and give way




To another baby

© Joseph E. Arechavala 11/5/07

Sports Builds Character – I Mean, Characters

Michael Vick is now a member of my beloved Philadelphia Eagles. I’m still trying to digest this. Yeah, yeah, second chances and all. Still, I really wish he’d gone somewhere else.

Sports – successful programs and teams, anyway – seems to build young men – and coaches – who think they can do whatever the hell they want and get away with it. Events seem to bear that out.

Here are a few names:

Rick Pitino
Alex Rodriguez
Kobe Bryant
David Ortiz
Ray Lewis
Allen Iverson
Michael Phelps
Steve McNair

Rape, adultery, theft, drugs, steroids, homicide.

We tell our children sports builds character. What we really mean is losing builds character.

The real message seems to be “Screw ethics – just win, baby!”

Now, can anybody tell me what I should tell my eight-year-old son?

It’s About Time for Obama to Put Up or Shut Up

We’ve been hearing it for months now, this health care debate. And what I’ve yet to see is our President offering anything other than vague generalities which amount to “trust us”, “we’ll take care of you”, and “we need to fix health care now”.

People are unnerved when you go and change something so fundamental in their lives. That is one reason why 9/11 was such a trauma to the country. The American mainland had not been directly attacked in centuries, and here we were suddenly facing the deaths of thousands in our largest city. It shook our fundamental sense of security to the core.

Health care something we also regard as an integral component of our society. We get sick, we go to the doctor. We get hurt, we go to the hospital. Our child becomes ill, we take them to the pediatrician. If something really bad happens, like cancer, we have reasonable assurances our health insurance will cover treatment. If you're going to change that, you’d better be prepared to offer specifics.

Now along come the Democrats, who want to not only change that, but radically change it. The radical nature of this change is scaring the hell out of everyone. And what is Obama doing to reassure us? To outline what the changes actually are? Not much. Innuendo, rumor and outright lies have been flying all over the internet and networks.

It’s time, Mr. President, for the vague generalities to be replaced by concrete proposals. For fuzzy assertions this really won’t bankrupt the country to be replaced by hard numbers. For ultra-right falsehoods to be repudiated with specific truths.

Stop telling us everything’s going to be all right, Mr. President, and start showing us. You're supposed to be our leader.

Lead.