The VP As Spouse!

When 24/7 news coverage is running thin it never ceases to amaze me what they'll do to fill air time. Yesterday began the parade of relationship experts guesting with the talking heads and expounding about what sort of chemistry the President and VP should have to be a successful team. Not unlike that of a marriage. Never mind the thought that the most qualified person to take over the job of President if need be might be a prime consideration. For this news cycle it is secondary.

Here's my take. McCain/Lieberman are the best match - a couple of old folks well past their prime, comfortable with one another and equally out of touch with the thinking of the current generation. A couple that knows one another so well, one can touch the sleeve of the other and correct egregious lapses of memory. Had McCain remained married to his first wife they might share such a relationship.

More in keeping with his current spouse I'd pick Romney. Younger and prettier with unknown substance.

As for Obama, I'd have to go with Joe Biden. His personality most closely matches Michelle's. Feisty. Though he sometimes puts his foot in his mouth from a political point of view, with careful listening to the substance he would be found to be right on the money. Well grounded with a strong personality.

From the looks of the photo he also has that terrorist fist bump down pat!

Who knows who the final picks will be or what they will or will not bring to the tickets or our collective peace of mind? I just hope both candidates have considered what concerns me most. Again, who is most able to run the country if need be. Not who is likely to generate the most votes in the key states.

Time will tell.

Meanwhile, Back In Iraq...

In our world of Presidential politics, we have John McCain speaking in platitudes about how all his "experience", like being a prisoner of war for five years in lieu of being in combat, has better prepared him for the role of commander-in-chief than the thoughtful Barack Obama. He has bragged incessantly that he had proposed the "surge" strategy long before it was adopted and in essence is taking credit for its success.

Right. Now that the Georgian/Russian situation is rambling on to who knows what conclusion and our ally, if a somewhat shaky one, Musharraf of Pakistan has been sent packing, it's time to return to the scenes of yesteryear! The war in Iraq!

Yep. It's still going on, so I decided to revisit the "surge" strategy to see if it's still holding. An AP article gave me a good start. First, though, we need to remember the reason for the surge. It was to quell the violence enough so the government had time to make some headway on goals we had set for them, including rebuilding their military to the point they can begin standing on their own.

We found this was easier said than done so we embarked on what I always felt was an ill conceived strategy. The Sunni portion of the population were getting tired of al-Quida, the out of country mischief makers, interrupting their efforts to regain their place from the Shiia who control the government. So they joined forces with the U.S. to defeat al-Quida Iraq. For a price; some $200 million total! We paid them and trained them and armed them. We made them mercenaries and because we were, essentially the highest bidder, they did our bidding. Not for just the money, mind you. As in any good drama, they had an ulterior motive. Get rid of al-Quida so they could get back to trying to vanquish the Shiia. They succeeded, to a point. Al-Quida Iraq has been pretty well decimated.

But, uh oh! A glitch! Now the Shiia are flexing their muscles against the Sunni fighters, our allies in the surge. They want no part of the Sunnis regaining any sort of foothold. One Shiia official said, "The continuation of the Awakening Councils as they are now is unacceptable."

From the opposing side, this,"We fought the Americans for four years and we fought al-Quida too. We are an experienced armed group. We are fully capable of bringing the house down." "An experienced armed group." Yep $200 million worht!

And from the American side, our guys in the middle, this, "It has put money in the local economy and reduced attacks on coalition forces. You can see where the money is going - an irrigation pump here, a renovated house there."

Do we need a reality check or what? They are lucky if they have electricity in Baghdad four hours a day!

The Sunni tribesmen who joined with U.S. forces were named the Awakening Councils. Yeah. They were wide awake to the multitude of benefits they might derive.

This is what the "surge" has wrought. We have helped rearm a contingent of the population bent on destroying those currently holding the cards. We are right smack dab in the middle. Does a re"surge"nt possibility of civil war ring a bell?

If this is the measure of success of which McCain boasts of being the mastermind, I'll take my chances with a more thoughtful Obama in a New York minute!

Saddleback Forum

I wasn't going to post on this subject but one thing that came out of it sticks in my craw and I'll feel better getting it out of my system.

I watched bits and pieces of it. I was not comfortable that one specific religious movement, the Evangelicals, were allowed such a forum. It is perilously close to violating the precept I have of division of church and state. In a country that prides itself on "freedom" of religion, this appears as a special dispensation for one group to put forth a litmus test.

That aside, I found the questions to be far less hard hitting than the hype suggested they would be. Each candidate answered as they have been campaigning. In the wrap up, talking heads accused Obama of being "nuanced". I took it as thoughtful.

McCain relied on his status as a prisoner of war and spoke in the generalities his audience wanted to hear. I found little value in any of it. Except when, as he has before, John McCain gave his stump speech promise that he will follow Bin Laden to "the gates of hell" to bring him to justice and that he knows how to do it.

If this is so, the "I know how to do it" bit, has he not an obligation to share such insight with the current administration and the rest of the world? I think, of course, it's more of his war hero and commander in chief rhetoric. If it's not just a boast, and he knows something others do not it is a betrayal of the American people.

Which ever it is, it is ill conceived.

In The "Swim" Of Things!

Congratulations Michael Phelps and hooray for the USA! It's enough to put politics aside for at least one post!

A new generation of champion is emerging, breaking long held records with the aid of modern technology along with good old American fortitude. I hope a new attitude is part of the equation.

Yesterday there was commentary by Steve Politi of the Newark Star Ledger suggesting that Mark Spitz should have been there to congratulate the young man who broke the record he, Spitz, held for 36 years. He was not.

Mr. Spitz, to those of us who remember him, may have held the record but certainly not the Olympic spirit. He was arrogant when he won and apparently his ego is no less today. He'd have made a good modern day politician. It was always about him. When he didn't get what he felt was his due, he pouted.

He'd do well to remember that but for a quirk of physiology, he may have never have held the record. His knees hyper-extended, giving him incredible depth and leverage and a physical advantage over his competition.

Not being a follower of the swimming world, I lost track of Mark Spitz about the time his Wheaties box disappeared from the super market shelves. So I did a Google search to see what he's been doing with his life since. There wasn't much there other than reiterating his record in light of the likelihood of it being surpassed.

What was there was his web page . His biography gave this information. "Mark is a highly requested public speaker throughout the World. He has also executed endorsements for Xerox, Kodak, Bausch & Lomb, John Hancock Financial Services, General Motors, General Mills, Swatch and many others. Mark will continue to be a very hot commodity as long as there is an Olympic Games somewhere in the world or the desire by a group to hear from one of the greatest living legends of all-time in sports."

It sounds like he's done little other than hype products he probably never used and lived on speaking fees generated by an accomplishment long past.

As Mr. Politi's article stated, Mr. Phelps will learn that his role as ambassador for his sport will be nearly as important as his accomplishments. There are many world class athletes from whom he can learn this lesson and these skills. It is a shame it won't be from Mr. Spitz.

"Judging" Dogs As Livestock?

Why do bureaucrats have to make things so difficult? So some people built a dog kennel for breeding purposes in a U.S. Forest Service easement that permits "livestock" farming" which precludes a dog kennel. A federal judge ruled dogs can't be defined as livestock. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals over turned that ruling.

So, it boils down to what the definition of livestock is and apparently there is more than one. Here is the definition in the dictionary on my computer:

livestock |ˈlīvˌstäk|
noun
farm animals regarded as an asset : markets for the trading of livestock.

Well, that's pretty ambiguous! This controversy can open up a whole spate on unintended conclusions! Okay. I have a dog. This time of year it would be a stretch to call him "live" anything. This is usually where and how you will find him. I must admit, though, on occasion people seeing me walking him have mistaken him for a calf. What can I say?

Being diligent, however, the justices looked at several definitions. They found that by some, fish, guinea pigs, ants and bees could also fall under the definition. I won't even try to figure out how they came to that conclusion!

Herein lies the problem. Most towns, cities, counties - even neighborhoods, have rules regarding livestock on one's property. I know there is a limit to how many dogs you can have in our county. Our neighborhood also has limits, again somewhat ambiguous. Some regulation goes by size. You can have a finite number of horses and cows, usually considered livestock. Yet due to size differences, sheep, Alpacas, goats , pigs and such come under a different criteria. It's all so confusing!

I'm concerned that the livestock police are going to have their on me now. One dog is okay, but we have a pond full of fish. There are at least 40 and 50 in there. I don't even want to think about ants and bees! They're hard to count since they all look alike but there are lots of them.

Do you think we could get livestock credits? We'd be okay then. After all, we don't have any guinea pigs!

Is There Something To Be Said For The Death Penalty?

For those of you who don't live in this area, the biggest ongoing news story is the sentencing phase of the Joseph Duncan murder trial taking place in Boise. Murder seems to be in the air around here and it's leaving an unpleasant, to say the least, stench. Recently a young couple was found murdered in a remote area know best to Huckleberry hunters. They've left behind an infant son. So far four people have been arrested in conjunction with the crime. Why? What motivate such actions? What will ultimately happen?

Duncan has admitted to the slaying of a mother and her teenage son, her male friend with whom they were living, and kidnapping two younger children, one of whom was also murdered. It rocked the community then and the sentencing phase is rocking it now.

I started blogging just about the time the murders happened. The somewhat ghoulish reason was that I learned Duncan had a blog. It sent me scurrying to blogspot to see just what the craze was all about. What I found was a lot of stuff of little interest and a lot of stuff that was extremely disturbing.

When I decided to see if I could attract readers as one of those with little of interest, I found I needed to generate some kind of exposure. That's when I contacted Dave Oliveria, master mind behind the Spokesman Review's Huckleberries Online. He asked me a lot of questions which I was reluctant to answer. The reason was obvious. I didn't want to reveal too much of myself on the web. Boy, have I thrown that caution to the wind!

The local blogosphere covered the Duncan crime from far more angles than the press. People were glued to the story. The same holds true now. To the point of maintaining a Twitter site for instant updates. People want to see this man gone. These weren't the only kids that suffered from his depravity, but they were the locals!

I have chosen not to read any of it even though it hits me in the face at every turn. The recollection of the previous coverage hasn't faded enough and I haven't the prurient interest for the blow by blow details. To me that belongs in the court room. The lawyers, the judge and the jury have to watch and listen to it. I do not.

Will the final verdict be death or life in prison? I've always had a struggle with it. It brought to mind, however, a Washington state case from the early '90s where another child molester was sentenced to death. Wesley Allen Dodd. There is a certain similarity to their faces. Especially the eyes. I think it must be some version of self-loathing.

During the sentencing phase of Dodd's trial, he was asked if he thought, given the opportunity, he would ever commit such crimes in the future. He said that he couldn't and wouldn't guarantee that he wouldn't repeat his crimes if he got the chance. Furthermore, he stated that if he were ever to get out of prison, he considered it highly likely that he would once again rape and kill other young boys. And he would enjoy it just as he had before.

Not so very different than the spread sheets Duncan had made listing the pros and cons of his crimes.

In discussing my battle with anxiety, I've had more than one doctor tell me it's just the way I'm wired. These men, it would seem, have a wiring problem too. I can help my short circuits with medication. They've chosen a different path. Of course there is a huge difference between my problem and theirs. The similarity, though, is we both know we have it. I prefer to treat mine. The pleasure they derive from theirs outweighs, no, obliterates rational thought.

In an odd sense, perhaps it's a blessing to them to put them out of their misery. It must be a horrible way to live, constantly fighting such vile demons and always losing.

I don't know. It's still taking a life. Yet, on the other hand...

What Does His Humor Say About This Man?

My Republican past keeps me looking at John McCain to find something to like. It is still within the realm of possibility he will be President. So far nothing registers.

Not only do I have no idea what he stands for other than what is politically expedient at the moment, I find his mean spirited negative campaigning totally tasteless. As is his humor as witnessed in his ape/rape joke and his bomb, bomb bomb Iran ditty.

Now I find he is tacitly endorsing Jerome Corsi's smear of Obama. How so? By having "no comment". To make matters worse, a Huffington Post piece even reveals that Republican stalwart, Mary Matalin, published the book and defended doing so by saying it "was not designed to be, and does not set out to be, a political book," but rather, "a piece of scholarship, and a good one at that." What am I missing here?

Many groups are now beginning to ask McCain to condemn the book. When asked for a comment McCain smilingly responded, "gotta keep your sense of humor". Is any of this funny?

McCain has accused his opponent of preferring to lose a war rather than the election. That statement is about as accurate as the assumptions made in Corsi's book.

I see it a bit differently. I see his opponent as a man who promised the American people a different type of campaign. Disregarding tons of encouragement to change his tactics along with a tremendous show of restraint and self-discipline, he has thus far refused to sink to McCain's level. To me that's to be admired, not scorned.

What did I find out about McCain? I think he's a man who has lost his grip on reality and would rather destroy a good man than lose the election.

If he does lose, it will be interesting to see if he has the ability to take it in good humor. Any bets?