Bad Boys

I have been watching this show “Jail” on the TruTV network whose slogan is “Not reality… actuality!” Can I just give that a great big WTF? Something horrible has happened. We’ve completely twisted the word “reality” to mean its opposite via the moniker “Reality Television”. Here we go with the destruction of language rant once more. This ties into my analysis of the show “Jail” nicely. If you haven’t seen this show, essentially they put a TV camera crew in a county jail and film the prisoners interact with the corrections officers from when they enter until they (eventually) get placed in their cell.

Disclaimer: I understand that these corrections officers are doing a difficult and often dangerous job, dealing with some of the most beligerant and annoying people in the world. They receive training to deal with situations that most of us have never considered and this training dictates, to a large degree, their actions.

That said, these people are violent pychopathic assholes.

You simply have to watch this program with a critical eye. There is no reason to treat a fellow human being in this manner. They routinely beat the living shit out of these people for doing nothing more than flinching or stumbling. Most of these people are drunk of course and are reacting to how they are being treated. It is the assumption of hostility that leads to this cycle of violence. In other words, it is assumed that everyone there being incarcerated is a deesprate, violent and hostile criminal that needs to be physically thrown to the ground and have their arms and wrists twisted 180 degrees backwards in order to get them to comply with any given order. As it turns out this is usually what it takes. But the reason is that neither party has the ability to effectively communicate with the other.

They are not using language that conveys what they want in a way the other party can understand. When this happens, the guards get mad, start yelling at the prisoners and treating them in a sub-human fashion. Naturally, these already agitated prisoners react with hostility (even just an angry gesture or way of talking is enough) which immedialy leads to three or more guards jumping the guy and practically breaking his arms while tazering him, during which time they are screaming ”Comply--stop resisting!”… meanwhile the prisoners who are now in an immense amount of pain are crying out: “I’m not resisting, you’re breaking my arm!” A calm, intelligent person would be able to deal with 90% of these scenarios without it leading to physical violence against a fellow human being. But who has that kind of patience?

The thing is, it’s easy to dismiss these people as losers, drunks, addicts and criminals and therefore not give a shit about what happens to them. It’s easy to laugh at their pain. But if a society is really to be measured by how it treats its prisoners, then we are in trouble.

Here’s what concerns me. I can only assume that these corrections facilities are allowing cameras to show what they think is perfectly acceptable violence against prisoners. In other words, we are seeing the nice stuff they consider to be reasonable and well within the legal and ethical boundaries of such an environment. What happens when the cameras are off?

This assumption of hostility that invariably creates the hostility in the first place is endemic to government institutions everywhere. From the police to the impound lot to the DMV. This is why people hate government; it’s unnecesarily controlling, mean-spiritied and one-sided. This is why people don’t care, don’t vote and give up being productive members of society. Which is, of course, how they end up featured on the show “Jail”.

Help! I Need This Man to Protect Me! !! !!!! !

So in the spirit of civic involvement, I wrote to my State Representative about this mobile phone usage while driving bill. For some reason this little piece of legislation has gotten me all worked up. I don’t know why, maybe I have just had enough with the unnecessary laws (and unnecessary exclamation points) and random fines and fees and expenses that are foisted upon us for no damn good reason. The bill’s author--Representative Mike Jaros (DFL-Duluth) was quick to reply, so quick in fact that it is clear he didn’t read my letter. If anyone in Duluth is reading this, please… do something about this guy.

In the interest of open and transparent government/citizen interaction, I thought I’d share with you the detailed, measured and intelligent response I received. From the man who brought us the child safety harness for shopping cart legislation, I present the honorable Representative Mike Jaros (DFL):

>>> >>> >>> FROM: "Scott" 2/22/2008 4:58 PM >>>

Representative Paymar,

I am writing to urge you to vote against the pending legislation authored by Representative Mike Jaros that would ban handheld mobile phone usage while driving. The legislation is ill-conceived and unnecessary. As I understand it, it is already illegal to drive recklessly regardless of the cause. Representative Jaros argues that phone usage causes as many auto accidents as drunk driving. I think he may be right, but that sounds more like an argument for changing our draconian DUI laws that it does a justification for criminalizing yet another basic activity. This legislation will have the effect of forcing already struggling families to purchase equipment for their cars or phones they do not need, or pay hefty fines. It is not the guy the driving the new Lexus that this law will hurt, rather poorer people who can least afford this. His statement that going hands-free, with a dashboard device or headset, shouldn't be a difficult transition for drivers--"They're not expensive, much cheaper than the cell phone. You only pay it once, not every month."-- is laughable to someone driving around in 1988 Buick. I just don't think he has thought through the unforeseen consequences of this seemingly harmless legislation.

That aside, what about the other devices or distractions equally or more disruptive? Have you ever tried to use an iPod while driving? It's infinitely more distracting than a cell phone. Do we need a law that makes it illegal to remove a pull-over sweater while driving? He seems to think that if you don't have both hands on the wheel at all times you're a menace to the public. Obviously he drives an automatic and thinks everyone else does as well. The slippery slope is self-evident here. It may not be his intention to create a precedent that leads to more unnecessary laws, but as I am sure you can attest, someone else will use this law as an excuse to ban something else that will serve only to line the pockets of the state coffers or some specific lobbying interest with the hard earned money of those who can least afford it.

If he insists on pursuing this ridiculous legislation, I would encourage you to speak to the merits of the bill and suggest that if phone usage is as an egregious danger to our society as drunk driving it should carry the same punishments. I propose mandatory prison sentences for repeat offenders. I mean after all, doesn't our safety outweigh everything else? Creating this culture of fear and sacrificing personal freedom and liberties in pursuit of our "security" or "safety" is right out of George W. Bush's playbook. I would expect a DFL legislator of Representative Jaros' tenure to understand the inherent flaw with this reasoning and I sincerely hope you do as well.

Thank you.

Regards,

Scott

cc: Representative Mike Jaros


>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>
-----Message-----
From: Mike Jaros [mailto:rep.mike.jaros@house.mn]
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 12:23 PM
To: Scott
Subject: Re: Mobile Phone Legislation

Hi Scott,
My bill would not ban cellphone use while driving. You only have to have "hands free" device to talk!!! MJ


>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>
>>> FROM: "Scott" 2/25/2008 1:18 PM >>>

Representative Jaros,

Thank you for taking the time to reply. I understand the scope of your bill. I think I made that clear in the text of my correspondence. I hope that you took the time to read the entire letter before responding.

Although I can appreciate your desire to rid the world of distracted drivers, this is not the way to do it. Might I suggest doing some research on the real causes of the problem? Using a hands-free device does not markedly reduce the level of impairment. It does however, provide a mechanism for the State to levy additional fines and force consumers to spend money on hands-free devices.

In other words, your bill would not serve to increase public safety; it would merely serve to increase the financial burden on already strapped citizens. I urge you to re-consider.

If, after performing the necessary research on the subject, you still feel this bill has merit above the costs to your constituents, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. But if you should find that perhaps there are some unforeseen consequences of such an unnecessary bill, I would urge you to withdraw it from consideration.

Thank you.

Scott

>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>
-----Message-----From: Mike Jaros [mailto:rep.mike.jaros@house.mn] Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 1:26 PMTo: ScottSubject: RE: Mobile Phone Legislation

Thanks for your letter. I did not think that seat belts would be affective and that people would not use them.
They have been very affective and have prevented injuries and deaths. I believe my bill would do the same. I read recently that there are just as many people killed with cell phone abuse as drunk driving!!Best wishes, MJ

>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>
-----Message-----
From: Scott
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 4:07 PM
To: 'Mike Jaros'Subject: RE: Mobile Phone Legislation

Representative Jaros,

First, let me thank you for your prompt replies. It is refreshing to see a legislator who responds so directly and promptly--particularly with someone outside your district.

That being said, I think you will agree that the jury is still out on the root cause of the distraction, as the research shows most studies seem to conclude that it is the act of the conversation that is distracting not the holding of the device. This is my point. Having a hands-free device does not mitigate the distraction of the conversation. Further, there are much more insidious distractions out there to focus on. Finally, it is clear that you don’t have a lot of experience with mobile technology. There is no "hands-free" set for many phones out there. Some use headphones (like the iPhone) which are already illegal to wear while driving. Many do not support blue tooth devices. Integration of my phone into my car would cost me over $1,500... and that's only because I have a new car. If I had an old beater, I would have no recourse but to not use my phone at all. In other words, if you're rich go ahead and dangerously chat away. If you're poor, it's going to cost you.

So if you're poor and cannot afford a new car or a phone that supports some particular technological solution you can’t use your phone. Which we both know won’t happen. What will happen is that the people who get pulled over for infractions most frequently (minorities and the poor who drive older model cars) are going to have to pay the hefty fine.

I understand that you had proposed a bill banning their use all-together last session. Although I would be hard-pressed to support that, it would at least be consistent with what you are trying to do. I fear that what you wanted to do was to protect people and reduce accidents. Once it became clear that your bill would not pass as originally written, you compromised the usefulness out of your bill.

Now it is just an inconvenient and costly irritant to the poorest among us. Like I said, the guy in the new Lexus already has a "hands free" set built into his car. It's the poor guy in the old beater who can barely pay his rent that is going to get hit with this.

I thank you again for your reply. I do not want to take up any more of valuable time. If you choose to reply or offer your thoughts they are welcome. Otherwise, I appreciate the time you have taken to listen to my concerns.

Respectfully,

Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Jaros [mailto:rep.mike.jaros@house.mn]
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 9:58 AM
To: Scott
Subject: RE: Mobile Phone Legislation

Hi Scott; thanks for the information again. I realize that talking on the phone is a problem, but we have to get something on the books to make people think before they do such distraction while driving. Hopefully we can ban talking entirely some day, but it si tough to pass even this bill. Text messaging is the worst!!! Best.. Mike
-------------------------

Well MJ, I am just about done with this dialogue!!! It's clear that you're not interested in the details or the facts!! I hope you are clean on this. I hope your 401K doesn't own Verizon stock or that you're not an investor in some company that makes hands free devices!!! But mostly, I hope that voters of Duluth will wise up and find someone who actually thinks through the repercussions of the legislation they pass.

Unsafe At Any Speed

Minnesota State Representative Mike Jaros (DFL-Duluth) has been kind enough to put forward a bill designed to protect me from the menace of vehicular mobile phone mayhem. The goal is to ban mobile phones for use while driving--but just the hand-held variety. If you have a hands-free set you’re fine. He tried to ban them entirely last year: "I had it so you couldn't use the cell phone at all," Jaros told KARE 11, "And I changed it to hands-free, you could still use the cell phone but you can not hold on to it."

His argument is that the distracting nature of holding the device causes as many (if not more) car crashes as drunk driving in Minnesota. The statistics bear that out. This is typically the case across the country. So, he’s right about that. But that sounds to me like a case for changing the DUI laws rather than finding new things to criminalize. He went on to say that it may be inconvenient for some people (Jaros himself doesn’t own a cel. phone), but it’s a small sacrifice to ensure our safety.

The language of the bill he proposes is straightforward enough: "No person may use a mobile telephone while operating a motor vehicle that is in motion unless the mobile telephone is equipped and used with a hands-free device."

Well thank fucking God for this guy.

Someone needs to check to find out if this guy owns stock in a company that sells hands-free devices. Since this practice is such a menace, on par with drunk driving, I think it is only fitting that the punishment for talking on your phone while driving be analogous to DUI punishments. I mean, that makes sense right? If they are equally responsible for car crashes and the damage to our society, then let’s treat them as such.

I've seen people get in their cars with their phones after talking all night. They must have had at least 6 conversations before they got behind the wheel. Then they proceed to talk WHILE they drive. I mean, there's simply no excuse.

First offense is a misdemeanor if you are caught talking for more than .08 hours. You'll receive a $500 fine and 48 hours of community service with at least 4 hours of jail time. We should encourage insurance companies to double your rate and you’ll have to hire a lawyer for $3,000 to plead your case. You also need to spend 2 afternoons in a classroom to learn all about the dangers of phone- driving (this only costs another $300—make your check payable to Mothers Against Mobile Mayhem). You will have one year probation with a 3 month suspended sentence. So if you get caught again you will automatically go to prison for 90 days.

Second offense, refusing the phone inspection or talking longer than .12 hours is a gross misdemeanor resulting in all of the above, but with a mandatory 30 day prison term. That’s right, you’re going to prison my friend. It’s like committing aggravated assault except with jail time.

Third offense is a felony. Just like robbing a bank, shooting someone in the arm or setting a school on fire. The punishment for such a heinous crime is up to the judge, but at a minimum you are going to prison for at least a year…. typically three to five.

But why stop there? I mean has Representative Jaros ever used an iPod? Those are some damn engaging devices that not only require you to use your hands, but one must also look directly at it…much more distracting than talking on a phone. What about an iPhone? Holy shit! It’s the mother of all roadway distractions! What about applying make-up? Ladies, you know you shouldn’t do that, I think a little time behind bars might teach you a lesson. I for one, use my electric razor in the car. Yep, I’m one of those guys and I need to be punished. Since the problem seems not to be the conversation, but rather the use of one of your hands, shouldn’t we make it mandatory to keep both hands on the wheel at all times? We need an immediate ban on manual transmissions.

Until these appropriate and reasonable punishments are applied to this menacing problem, I simply won’t feel safe. I encourage you to write your legislators and tell them to enact these penalties for the crime of Phoning & Driving.

A Place Called Hope

I think we all realize there’s something terribly broken with our country. But I question our collective ability to really put our finger on it. We know something is wrong but we’re not quite sure what. Sure there are specific things we all have... a laundry list of our own personal pet issues. But I sometimes think we are losing sight of the big picture. In our zeal to figure out the details I think we’re missing the basics. Hence the almost cult-like draw of Barack Obama.

It’s like America has cancer and this is the guy telling us everything is going to be alright. He’s selling us hope--and we’re buying. Don’t get me wrong… there’s nothing wrong with hope. Ask any cancer survivor and they’ll tell you how important it is. On the other hand, some times what you want is hope, but what you need is a really good oncologist.

There’s no doubt that something is wrong and that we, as a country have lost ground. Maybe cancer is the wrong metaphor. Maybe the best way to describe this is to imagine that the world is a massive multiplayer video game where all the countries are players. The goal is to improve everything about your country… your standing in the world, the economy, your political and military power, your influence and general well-being of your people. The game has goals that are universal to all players (improve the environment, increase peace and quality of life etc.) and one’s score is based on where they start in the game. Let’s say that eight years ago the U.S. had a score of 1,000 points. Further let’s say that another player… we’ll call him “Player 2” is running Iran and he had a starting score of maybe 200.

Do you get the feeling that maybe our score is now around 700 and Player 2 is up to about 400?

That’s the sort of thing I think we lose sight of. It’s the sort of thing I worry about with Barack Obama. There’s just this sense I get from him that he doesn’t recognize the zero-sum nature of a lot of these issues. Thinking we can just chat it up with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and we’ll suddenly have all this good will and everyone will fall in line is naïve at best and dangerous at worst. I don’t know--I like Obama. He seems smart and articulate and open to new ideas and willing to work for people of this country and the world at large. All in all, the opposite of what we have with President Bush.

But could it be that the current President is so bad that we are just instinctively looking for the opposite. Sometimes I think we are getting blinded by our panic about this cancer of an administration we have today and just desperate to find something… anything that distances us from it. Like searching for hope when what we really need is chemotherapy.

I Hate Myself for Loving You.

Valentine’s Day. Mother-Fucking-God-Damned-Valentines-Day. Need I say more? I am so perpetually irritated by this day that I couldn't even muster the internal fortitude to write about it yesterday.

We spend $13 billion dollars on this silliness every year. By “we” I mean everyone else because I simply refuse to participate. I am offended by this day on multiple levels. First it commoditizes the emotion love. Our ability (or our curse) to love being, you know, the one thing that truly sets us apart as a species. So let’s take that precious gift of humanity and make it about greeting cards and chocolate.

Second, it is a socially discriminatory holiday. We all know intellectually that this holiday is presented as one that is about the both of you. And in a way it is. It’s about women and the men who buy them things. “Valentines day is my favorite holiday!” she squeaks. Well of course it is. If I had a day when it was all about me and I got an endless stream of candy, flowers and gifts that I didn’t need for doing absolutely nothing it would be my favorite holiday too.

But the real object of my disdain is the psychic trauma this Hallmark Holiday has caused generations of children. You see, in order to feed this frenzy of unnecessary commerce we need to indoctrinate children with it. Hence the school valentine exchange phenomenon. For some reason, adults think it’s appropriate to force children to give each other “valentines”. It’s just… wrong. These are kids. Valentines are proclamations of love. This is fucked up. Not to mention this is typically a traumatic event for many children. “Will the cool kid give me a valentine?” “My little Valentine box is empty because no one loves me.” “People hate me because I am fat.” This is where all those social stratifications and class wars begin my friends. This is the moment that forges the reality of our society and causes the divisiveness that follows us though our lives. It has infected us ever since that first valentine was slipped into that first, crappy shoebox decorated with glitter and Elmer’s glue. I believe that it is, in fact, Valentines Day which is responsible for the majority of our societal ills. It feeds this innate antipathy we have toward one another which manifests itself in conflict, violence and hatred. It brews and festers in the collective consciousness of us all until at some point all this frustration anxiety and hatred swirls around the universe and ends up in the Middle East. Don’t ask me how. It just does.

I think we should celebrate this day in the historical context of its origins.

“To begin the festival, members of the Luperci, an order of Roman priests, would gather at the sacred cave. The priests would then sacrifice a goat, for fertility, and a dog, for purification. The boys then sliced the goat's hide into strips, dipped them in the sacrificial blood and took to the streets, gently slapping both women and fields of crops with the goathide strips. Far from being fearful, Roman women welcomed being touched with the hides because it was believed the strips would make them more fertile in the coming year. Later in the day, according to legend, all the young women in the city would place their names in a big urn. The city's bachelors would then each choose a name out of the urn and become paired for the year with his chosen woman.”

Now that’s a holiday tradition I can get behind.

This land is your land... this land is my land.

I find myself in an unexpected pickle. I’ve always sort of leaned to the Democratic party. It’s just my way I guess. But this year I find myself having to choose between a woman and black man. What’s the deal with that? As a white, heterosexual male where is the candidate that reflects me? When am I finally going to get a voice? I think it’s high time in this country that people like me elect a leader that reflects MY culture and MY values.

That being said (as I dislodge my tongue from my cheek), I think there are some interesting trends going on. One thing that always sticks in my craw is the media’s seemingly religious devotion to demographic breakdowns. “Who got the Hispanic vote? The Black Vote? The women under 35 but over 25 who have children, but not more than two and own their own home with a combined household income of over $75,000 but less than $100,000 who prefer dogs to cats?

Who the fuck cares?

I’ve always noticed that there is not really a lot of attention paid to the “White Vote”--at least not since I’ve been paying attention. I guess it’s sort of the default setting. The other demographics are the aberration. This has always irked me. It’s as if they don’t want to come out and say “the white vote” for fear of sounding racist, yet pointing out the “black vote” inherently implies the inverse is the “white vote”. It reminds me of people lamenting “black on black crime” as such a tragedy--as if black on white crime would be perfectly acceptable. Regardless, the point is that I have actually heard reporting on the “White Vote”. I feel so empowered. Finally I have a voice!

Here’s some interesting trends:

Blacks are voting for Obama - no surprise there I guess. Nationally 82% of blacks voted for him on Super Tuesday. That’s a lot. Latinos tend to support Clinton – I’m not sure why but 64% voted for her on Super Tuesday. Young people like Obama – He’s all “inspiring” and “hip”. OK I get that. Old people like Clinton. – Makes sense, since whatever the young people like, the old hate. White women like Clinton – they voted 59% for Hillary. No surprise here… sort of. I mean what I find interesting here is that women as block are divided by race now… not just gender. In other words, most black women voted for a black man over a white woman, while the inverse (white men voting for a black man versus a woman) is true. I find that interesting. Finally, white men, or as I like to say “The Man” or "Me". The Man voted based on his economic status. Poor men voted across the board for Clinton and the wealthy for Obama. By that I mean dudes who make $150,000 or more in annual income voted for Obama and people who fall below the poverty line voted for Clinton.

So what have we learned? Well if we are to believe that people really do break along these rigid race, gender and class lines--as the polls seem to suggest--we’ve learned that we have a hell of a lot more work to do in this country on the whole “unity” front.

We’ve learned that black people vote for black candidates to a higher degree than whites vote for white candidates… does that make them more racist than white people?

We’ve learned that white men typically trust a black man more than they do a white woman (or perhaps any woman regardless of color).

We’ve learned that Latinos either distrust black people or really like white chicks.

And finally we learned that rich guys like other rich guys.

What a bunch of bullshit.

Back To The Future

Technology can be a wonderful thing. We’re connected to the world via the Internet, we have mapped the human genome, we have explored beyond the confines of our planet and split the atom. It’s truly amazing. So why, oh why is there a three second delay between the news anchor in the studio and the reporter on the scene? I understand that the news feed needs to go through the satellite and get fed through God only knows how many devices. But still, this shit should be moving at the speed of light. I mean, isn’t that how fast this stuff moves? I can talk to the Emperor of Japan on the phone or have an instant messenger conversation with some dude in Australia or and it’s, you know... instant. But CNN can’t figure out how to beam a signal from New York to Atlanta without some fucking delay that causes the two people talking to start/stop pause, repeat and speak over each other.

Anchor: …and we have Steve Douglas reporting live from New York. Steve, what’s the mood where you’re at?
Steve: [looking into the camera for 3 seconds while he nods] John the mood here is euphoric, it seems
Both: Excuse me Steve – that New Yorkers.. Sorry. – Go Ahead – Go Ahead – Well, as I was saying – Steve? – it seems – Yes John? Go ahead – You say the mood is euphoric?
[both pause for 10 seconds of silence waiting for the other to start talking, they then start talking at the same time again. Rinse. Repeat.]

Jesus Christ that’s annoying.

I was watching the election results the other night and this kept happening. They can have real-time, up to the second polling data displayed on a 200 inch plasma jumbo-tron but they can’t synchronize their audio? Radio waves moves at the speed of light. That’s 299,792,458 miles per second—which is pretty damned fast. So why does it take 3 seconds to go from Ney York to Washington DC? There’s something wrong with that math. I don’t think NY and Washington are actually 900 million miles apart. I don’t buy for a second that CNN hasn’t been able to solve this technical conundrum. I think it’s purposeful. There’s just no way they are that technically incompetent.

In fact I think they are actually somehow manipulating space-time for some nefarious purpose designed to eventually control the Universe. At least that’s the sense I get when I look into Wolf Blitzer’s beady little eyes.

A Show of Hands--A Huge Waste of Fucking Time?

For those of you who didn’t participate in yesterday’s record-breaking political caucus, you missed something. Something bad. I hear a lot about how great it is that so many people participated. “Isn’t it wonderful that so many people came out and contributed the democratic process?”

No.

It was a pain in the ass. Like most things, the more people that participate in something the more fucked up and convoluted it becomes and the lower the bar for the common denominator is set. So much that it becomes a useless endeavor. At my caucus, we didn’t even address resolutions or sub-caucus for delegates. There was no time. People were registering and waiting in lines until 8:00pm. So we essentially got off to a start an hour late for a two hour process. Not to mention the collective wisdom of a bunch of people who don’t really know what they hell they’re doing. So in the end, people voted for a candidate. It was essentially a straw poll since it didn’t necessarily relate the number of delegates going for a given candidate. In other words, it was a sham.

If you’ve never done this before, it works differently for each party and can vary from precinct to precinct. But in a nutshell here’s the process as it’s supposed to work:

6:30–7:00: Doors open to registration
7:00–7:30: Rules of caucus read and precinct captains and other party officials elected. New rules for caucus established and voted on if requested.
7:30–8:30: Sub-caucus selection. Voters disperse into groups by issues and candidates and nominate delegates to represent this caucus in the DFL convention. Determination of viability for delegates is made based on a percentage formula of total participants relative to the number of total delegates allowed for a given caucus (determined by precinct).
8:30–9:30: Party resolutions and platforms debated.

This is a very over-simplified version. Within the delegate selection and sub-caucus process there are a host of rules. Only three members may speak for or against a given issue, no member can speak more than 1 minute on each unless allowed by a vote or if all others wishing to speak on the issue had their chance. Motions are “moved”, seconded” and spoken for or against then voted on. It’s all very… democratic. I’m not doing the complexity of the process justice. On the other hand, when working with a smaller group it’s actually quite engaging and fun... if you’re into that sot of thing. Regardless, it’s supposed to be an empowering engaging process whereby you interact with your neighbors, weigh the issues and set the agenda for your party.

None of that shit happened yesterday. Here’s how mine went:

6:30–7:30: Search for parking spot and walk.
7:30–8:30: Wait in line to register and cast straw poll ballot for president.
8:30–9:00: Debate whether there is time to actually select delegates by sub-caucus and decide who they should be. We decide not and delegates just sign up with no debate or selection process.
9:00–9:15: Debate whether or not there is time to discuss and debate resolutions.
9:15–9:30: We decide not and just send the resolutions on in without even reading or discussing them
9:30–11:00: Sit at home and try to get the icky taste of disenfranchisement out of your mouth.

The end result of all this extra democracy scurrying about is that more people got to experience it less. As a wise man should have once said: “If we sacrifice the quality of the democratic experience at the expense of increased participation, we shall have neither.”

Whoever that guy might have been who should have said that… I agree.

Our Chief Weapon is Fear, Fear and Surprise

There are two kinds of people in this world. Well that’s not true. With over six billion people there must be at least… five. But here in the USA, there’s only two. People who care about the Super Bowl, and people who care about Super Tuesday… and people who care about both. Okay, three. There are three types of people in the USA, people who care about the Super Bowl, Super Tuesday or both… and people who care about themselves, their families and their health. Four. Okay. There are four types of people in the USA.

“I didn’t expect a sort of Spanish Inquisition!”

Nobody does my friend. Nobody does. That bit never gets old. Thank you Monty Python. My point is, that there are two exciting events going down in a short period of time. Between the two, the country has been mobilized. I think it’s fairly safe to say that the vast majority of people, for the first time in a long time, have something to talk about with each other. Whether it’s the Giant’s surprise upset of the undefeated Patriots or Hillary’s surprise upset in New Hampshire. Or the story Eli Manning living in his brother’s shadow early in the season, almost forgotten and then coming back to take the lead in the end… sound familiar John McCain?

These two events have more in common than it may appear at first glance:

Politics: Political debates include a lot of discussion about religion.
Football: Players publicly thank Jesus and practically hold Mass for each and every touchdown.

Politics: Armchair pundits inaccurately predict the outcome.
Football: Armchair quarterbacks do the same.

Politics: People generally confused about the rules of a caucus.
Football: People generally confused about the forward motion rules.

Politics: Most Americans ambivalent about the outcome.
Football: Most Americans care about passionately about the outcome.

Politics & Football: The team with the most money usually wins.

According to all the experts, the Democrats stand poised to win regardless of the nominee. The argument goes that they have too much momentum due to the failure of their rivals… sound familiar Eli Manning?

Every Little Thing, Gonna Be Alright

If I ever write a book, I already know what the dedication will be: “Dedicated in loving memory to my youth, hope and optimism.”

From what I understand people seem to think of me as somewhat of a cynic. I don’t know where they get that idea, but I guess that’s typical isn’t it? Just what I would expect from... “people”. Ever since I can remember, these same people have been extolling the virtues of positivism. As if thinking everything is going to turn out wonderful is sufficient. The theory goes something like this: “If you think positive thoughts and have a positive, optimistic outlook then good, positive things will happen. If you have a pessimistic outlook, bad things will happen.”


It goes without saying that this is utter and complete nonsense.


















“Believe it is possible to solve your problem. Tremendous things happen to the believer. So believe the answer will come. It will.”
- Norman Vincent Peale

Yeah? Okay Norm, I BELIEVE that I won’t die. I am immortal. Wow. That feels great. The burden of mortality has been lifted. I think I’ll just wander into traffic, chain smoke and eat a pound of bacon for every hour I am awake--which is a lot since I’ll be coked up and pointing guns at cop cars all night. Without any negative consequences I can do anything I want. Now that I think about it, that’s actually what’s going on with people who end up featured in the Darwin Awards. They’re not stupid, they’re just very positive people.

Why on earth would anyone plan for success? “I know, let’s spend all our energy focusing on what good things could happen to us and not plan at all for the horrible maelstrom of shit that could happen to us. That way when it does (and it will) we’ll be totally unprepared for it.”

Focusing on the positive is like masturbating without a Kleenex.

Think about it.