This is my favorite season.  Bar none.  I do enjoy summer, mostly because of the extended daylight hours in the evenings, and vacations, and that sort of thing, but I am almost always more than ready for autumn to arrive.

    I enjoy the first hint of crisp coolness in the evenings; the clear bright mornings; the color changes in the leaves.  A few weeks ago, my wife and I went to the high country in eastern Amador County and western Alpine County known as the Hope Valley.  It is one of the most everlastingly beautiful places I have ever seen.  Among its chief attractions this time of year are the numerous aspen groves, which were ablaze in yellow and gold leaves.  Not the red and orange leaves one sees in New England and other parts of the country, but beautiful nonetheless.  I had both a video camera and my still camera, and got some good shots, but they don’t begin to do the colors justice.

    Fall is a time when the urgency of being prepared for winter cold is apparent.  The annual ritual (for me) of gathering, cutting, and splitting firewood, which is our main source of heat in the winter, is something I relish.  There is something elemental about going out cutting and splitting firewood.  I suppose the best time to do it is in the summer, so that the split wood can have a chance to dry out, but I like to do it in the early fall, after the oppressive heat of summer is largely past, but there are still some warm days to allow the wood to dry before winter arrives.  This year, I have a large supply of cedar wood, which is excellent starter wood and kindling, which burns hot, but quickly.  I would really like to have more hardwood, such as oak or madrone, to feel completely ready.  I’ll get there, though.

    I enjoy fall for itself alone.  Not as a gateway to Thanksgiving or Christmas.  It is a wondrous time of year.  It is no wonder that the ancients held harvest festivals as an annual autumn ritual, celebrating the close of another productive cycle of the land.  Even though I’m not directly involved with the land in the way my ancestors were, as farmers, or farther back, as hunters or gatherers, I share their love and appreciation for autumn – the time of the harvest, of the hunt.

    There are signs of autumn in the night sky as well.  A couple of weeks ago, some friends and I, and two of my kids embarked on an attempt to climb Mt. Whitney.  Only one of our party made it to the top, because impending darkness before we could be sure to be down caused me to call off a summit attempt.  But that night, camped at 10,000', beside Lone Pine Lake, I saw the constellation of Orion the hunter rise over the sheer white wall of rock looming over our campsite.  For some reason, Orion has always been my favorite constellation.  I have learned some of the neighboring constellations, which play a part in the theme of the ancients who named the constellations: Taurus, the bull, which is in front of Orion, the hunter; and Canis major, the faithful dog at the hunter’s heel.  These aren’t visible until fall.  For longer than I can remember Orion is a night reminder to me of autumn’s arrival.

    It seems that autumn arrives and leaves quickly.  Too quickly, if you ask me.  But you can bet that I will enjoy it while it lasts.

---

PRESIDENT CLINTON, IMPEACHMENT, AND THE BETTER ANGELS OF OUR NATURE

I have been thinking quite a bit about the doings of the House Judiciary Committee, which has now recommended that President Clinton be impeached, primarily as a result of his indiscretions with Monica Lewinsky and his lying about it. I have addressed before how I am personally disgusted with the President's conduct with Lewinsky, to start with, and to a much greater degree the weasely way he lied about it.

That said, I share the view of the overwhelming majority of Americans who don't feel that President Clinton's behavior, taken as a whole, warrants his impeachment and removal from office.

I felt differently in 1973 and 1974 about President Nixon. I remember watching the Watergate Senate hearings in rapt attention, as the web of lies and deceit in the Nixon Administration was brought to light. But Watergate was, as former White House Counsel John Dean put it, a "cancer on the Presidency." The actions taken there cut to the heart of the American political system: an attempt, through burglary, to spy on the opposition party, and when caught, to attempt to use the power of the Justice Department, the FBI, and ultimately the Presidency to cover it up. At the point of endgame in Watergate, there was an overwhelming, and bipartisan, sense that the impeachment and removal of President Nixon was necessary.

There simply is no comparison with the present situation. President Clinton's peccadillos, serious though they are, don't involve the national interest. There would be no paralysis of the national government as a result of an impeachment proceeding, as was thought to be the case in 1974. (Indeed, that was President Nixon's pretext for resigning.)

Impeachment of federal officials, as provided for in the Constitution, is reserved for cases of "treason, bribery, and high crimes and misdemeanors." There is no definition of "high crimes and misdemeanors" in the Constitution, and the process has so seldom been applied that we remain in want of a good definition of the term. My reading of the phrase, however, is that the "crimes and misdemeanors" sufficient to justify removal of a sitting president should be of such magnitude that they are as heinous as treason or bribery, and as dangerous to the interests of the nation as to compel the removal of the president. The present circumstance is not of such magnitude.

To my knowledge, no federal official has ever been removed from office for marital infidelity and lying about it. If it were a basis for removal, I can think of a great number of Congressmen and senators who would have been removed for that reason (were they subject to impeachment, which they aren't). Such history as there is compels a conclusion that President Clinton's behavior, reprehensible as it has been, should not be a basis for his impeachment and removal.

This isn't to say that the President will not have to some day answer for his conduct. He may, after this is over, face the loss of his marriage. He may well be prosecuted for perjury as a private citizen. And at the very least, history will, in all probability, judge him not in light of the accomplishments of his administration, but more from the image projected from his self-serving, evasive, and downright untruthful performance that many of us watched in his grand jury testimony.

But we, as a nation, do not demand, and do not need this pointless impeachment proceeding. I think the voters in the recent Congressional elections indicated that, when unlike past election trends, the Democratic Party, which how holds the White House, rather than suffering substantial losses, actually made gains in the House and held its own in the Senate. What is the message being sent? It's that the issues matter more than this game being played by Starr, and now Henry Hyde. If you don't think so, just ask Newt Gingrich.

I quote below perhaps the most famous Republican in history, long before he assumed the office that his modern-day party members would strip from the present incumbent:

"No, Sir, it is the politician who is the first to sound the alarm, (which, by the way, is a false one.) It is he, who, by these unholy means, is endeavoring to blow up a storm that he may ride upon and direct. It is he, and he alone, that here proposes to spend thousands of the people's public treasure, for no other advantage to them, than to make valueless in their pockets the reward of their industry. Mr. Chairman, this work is exclusively the work of politicians; a set of men who have interests aside from the interests of the people, and who, to say the most of them, are, taken as a mass, at least one long step removed from honest men. I say this with the greater freedom, because, being a politician myself, none can regard it as personal." [Speech in the Illinois Legislature, 11 Jan 1837]

The author is Abraham Lincoln. The source of this quote didn't indicate the context from which it was taken, but as applied to the present "crisis," Lincoln has, as so often he did, hit the nail right on the head. This wholly partisan endeavor of the Republicans has wasted millions of dollars of the "people's public treasure," and to what end? To bring down the twice-elected president, who cannot ever be again elected to the office? A fate that a substantial majority of the citizens of this country oppose? It's the politics of vendetta, pure and simple, from Kenneth Starr, to Newt Gingrich, and now to Henry Hyde. If these leaders of the Republican Party don't come to realize that they have an obligation to follow the will of the people, they may find out that they do -- painfully - at the next election in 2000.

There's no constitutional crisis here.

I would like to leave with another quote from Mr. Lincoln, taken from his first inaugural address upon assuming office. He had, in that portion of the address preceding this ending portion, implored those who would tear the Union apart over the issue of slavery to reconsider their position. I would like the Republicans now seeking the scalp of President Clinton to think about this:

"We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature." [From Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1861]

We are better than this. Let's act like it.

---

DOES CHARACTER MATTER?

In the aftermath of the release of the Starr grand jury report, and the showing of President Clinton’s grand jury testimony, one intriguing fact has emerged: all this information showing that the highest officer in this country is not only a philanderer but a resolute liar has had little, if any, detrimental effect on his overall popularity, as reflected in polls taken after this information came out.

To me, the infidelity is the lesser of the two evils.  Certainly, if we were to apply this standard (in retrospect) to past presidents, there would be quite a number who would fail the marital fidelity test.  No, what is of greater concern to me are the President's words “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” echoing in my ears, contrasted with the weaselly language that the President used in his grand jury testimony to evade, time and again, answering questions, because to answer them truthfully would  have been an outright admission that he had repeatedly lied to his family, his staff, and his country for over half a year now.

Better to say nothing and let people think what they will than to lie, in my opinion.  But the President not only lied, he repeatedly did so.  And from all appearances, he lied to his wife about it, judging from the way she has acted toward him in public since all this came out.  Seems that frost can come in September as well as in winter.  Mrs. Clinton is undoubtedly aware that her husband has not been faithful to her throughout the marriage.  But it did seem that she believed his denials of a Lewinsky affair to her, and to the country, and undoubtedly felt betrayed when the truth came out.

The President’s confessions and mea culpas don’t move me very much.  Compare the tone and tenor of his strident denials of improper conduct which were given when he was confident that Monica would keep mum with his abject apologies which occurred only after it became a foregone conclusion that the facts about his sordid conduct would come out.

And for all this, the public continues to approve of the President’s job performance.  I wonder if the approval rating would be as high if there were a Vietnam war going on, if inflation were again in double digits, or if unemployment were rampant.  Have values in this country reached such a low point that as long as we have a relatively comfortable living, and there is no war in which we are involved, that values such as honesty just don’t figure in the approval equation?

I hate to think so, but it appears that is the case.  Character does matter to me, however.  To paraphrase a Biblical passage, if a man is untrustworthy in small matters, you can reasonably assume that he will be similarly untrustworthy in great ones.  There is a comparable jury instruction to that effect about witnesses, that if a witness is willfully untruthful in one matter, the jury should regard the remainder of the testimony with suspicion, and may disregard it entirely.

It is critically important, in my view, that the American people be able to implicitly trust their leader.  I’m not asking that the President be held to a standard of perfection, but the President, who has asked for the trust of the people of this country by being elected, should reciprocate by trusting us in turn with the truth.

In light of the approval ratings, however, I have this ominous feeling that reflects my “sine wave” theory of civilizations.  If you are familiar with a mathematical sine curve plotted on a graph, it is like a wave, that rises for awhile, crests, then descends into the depths, and eventually begins to rise again.  History indicates to us that all great civilizations have had their rise, peak, and inevitably fall.

And the fall has in almost all past cases been preceded by a time of indifference to moral values, leading to a general weakness in the collective character of the civilization.  That led to a vulnerability to attack from outside that would have never been successful but for the general decline in values and standards in that society.  It happened to ancient Greece, to the Roman Empire, and to all the subsequent European world powers.

Maybe the end of American pre-eminence in the world is nearing.  If so, as I see it, we have primarily to blame complacency (of which one small example is reflected in the polls about President Clinton) as a major cause of this.  That’s why I feel a greater significance about the issue of Presidential honesty and credibility than others might.  I hope that I’m wrong, but I don’t think so.

Character does matter.  So do moral standards of honesty and integrity.  If we as a society devalue these, or let go of them entirely, we should not be surprised by the consequences which result.

---

CLINTON

    This is the obvious topic, at least for the moment.  I, along with most Americans, watched to see what “spin” President Clinton would put on his sexual involvement with Monica Lewinsky, after having vehemently denied for the last seven months that any such involvement existed.  I’d have to say that I was alternately agreeing with what he said, yet disappointed at the transparency of his attempt to curry favor with the country by a mea culpa speech.

    Part of me is insulted that my President thought that he could maintain a lie – which is exactly what he has done – by saying that he had not had a sexual relationship with Lewinsky.  What does he take us for – idiots?  The fact that he has had an affair of some sort in the White House concerns me slightly; but the fact that he, and his army of legal advisors and spin doctors has steadfastly lied about it until they determined that Americans were more sick of the dragging out of the Starr inquisition than they were with their president being a philanderer causes me greater concern.  It’s not about a burning desire that the truth come out; the truth (such as is being told) is coming out only because the polls indicate that it is in Clinton’s interest that he come clean (well, sort of).

    And yet there is something about the presidency that should, it seems, remain unspoiled by base, common behavior as exhibited by President Clinton.  I think it important that he set an example, not only by the speeches he gives, but by the way he lives.  And by the way he tells the truth (or doesn’t).  He certainly isn’t the first in the line of presidents to have strayed, and there may be others to come.  I would like a higher standard to be upheld, though. 

    Although I’m not sure that it was appropriate in the context of the President’s “confessional” speech, I do agree with him that the Starr investigation long ago turned into the modern-day equivalent of a “witch hunt,” with the sexual misconduct allegations being looked into after the original focus of the investigation led nowhere, apparently.  When you look at the totality of the investigation, which as I understand it has cost some $140 million, for all that money spent, there isn’t much to show for it.  And apparently nothing linking either President or Mrs. Clinton to alleged criminal conduct that was the original subject of the investigation – the Whitewater savings and loan scandal.  Seems to me that the whole thing has turned into a vendetta, along ideological and political lines.

    I’d like to think that we as a country are collectively tired of this – from both sides.  We’re tired of the lying from Clinton, and we’re tired of the political gamesmanship from Starr and the Republicans.

    Let’s leave this kind of subject where it belongs from now on – on Oprah or Jerry Springer’s shows.

---

    I am in a “different” mood tonight.  I’ve been here before; often, perhaps.

    What brought this feeling on happened to be an episode of Ally McBeal.  One of the central themes of the show was how one can feel hollow when possessed by the feeling that, at the essence of things, we really are alone.  And that can be an awesome feeling – it has its negative aspects, but it isn’t entirely negative.  There can be something comforting about sadness, particularly about the loss of a relationship, or the absence of one for people who haven’t had a close relationship.

    Melancholy isn’t just a sad feeling; for me, it’s often coupled with remembrances of a past that was good, and part of the sorrow is missing that good feeling.  At the same time, that feeling is leavened with a sense of wrong turns, misunderstandings, anger and bitterness at the loss of what once was good.

    Maybe it’s my Irish heritage.  It’s commonly thought that melancholy is an integral part of the Irish psyche.  I don’t know if that’s true, but it seems that there are quite a number of us of that ancestry who share this tendency to melancholy.  But it is almost never entirely bitter – there’s always at least a little sweet mixed in.

    I am a musician of sorts; I fool around on the guitar, and in my more bold moments, fancy myself a singer.  Sometimes I do my best performing in my own bedroom, with my wife trying to sleep.  And often, I am drawn to sad songs; songs like Late for the Sky, by Jackson Browne.  If you’ve heard the song, no further explanation is necessary.  And if you haven’t, I suggest that you check it out.  The song was written about Jackson’s declining relationship with his wife, who wound up taking her life with sleeping pills less than a year after the song was released.  In that context, it’s even more haunting.

    And for all this, I don’t consider myself a person who dwells on the “dark side,” but I do go there sometimes.  And it’s OK.  It works for me.  I think there’s something to be said for balance in one’s outlook.  I like to look for the best in people, but somehow, I am not as disappointed at people’s failure to meet my expectations, because I don’t have this inherent belief that things are just supposed to turn out right.  They often don’t.  And it’s all right.

    A lot of the way I look at things now has to do with learning.  One of my best friends refers to experiences which have negative overtones as “AFGEs”.  That’s an acronym for “another f___ing growth experience.”  For me, that hits it right on the head.  If I can’t learn at least something significant from an experience that has caused me pain, then I just wasn’t paying attention.  And for me (and I imagine, most of us), one AFGE on each subject is quite enough, thank you.

    In retrospect, I  have learned from most, if not all, of the deeply painful experiences I’ve had.  In recent years, the most painful of these was the loss of my relationship with my kids after I left their mother.  My children and I have for the most part repaired the relationship, but there is still a feeling of loss, of a bond that could have been deeper.  I have tried to learn from this experience, that, as St. Paul said, love is patient; love is not self-seeking; it seeks the highest good for the other, not for ourselves.  Oh, that I could live up to that!  But at least I can see more of the wisdom in it, having gone through the pain of separation from my children, particularly resulting as it did from my choice.

    But I don’t bemoan my choice; it worked for me then, and does now.  There might have been a few details I might now change about how I handled the situation, but not the overall decision to leave.  As much as I can recall the depth of melancholy at leaving, I am in a better place (for me) now.  And I hope that the others affected by my choice are better off as well.

    There’s something cathartic about writing this.  I feel better than when I started.  Melancholy is a place that I go sometimes, but I don’t stay there indefinitely.  I am grateful for the things it has taught me; but there are times I wonder if the lesson could somehow hurt less at the time.

    I appreciate that I have been given feelings – even if they hurt from time to time.  It lets me know I’m alive.

---

JUSTICE

A good friend and web-page critic of mine suggested that I write on the subject of justice.  The subject came up in a discussion we were having on an ongoing trial involving a friend of hers in which she had testified as a witness.

Her experience with the judicial system (called the “justice system,” which is sometimes a misnomer) left her with mixed feelings.  She expressed frustration at not being able to tell her story, and pass along to the jury all information she thought was relevant.  She was only allowed to answer the questions that were asked by the lawyers.  And she couldn’t, on her own, pose the questions she should have been asked, but wasn’t.  That’s just the way the system works.

Litigation is rarely a search for truth.  It is a contest between attorneys of varying degrees of intellect and preparation.  I know.  I’ve been there a number of times.  The simple reality is that a lawyer who is better prepared, who has a penchant for finding the weakness in the opposing side’s witnesses and exploiting it, may well win the case.  Yet many observing the process, including sometimes the jury, leave feeling that whatever happened, it wasn’t really just.

Take the criminal law, for example.  Many people are outraged when the news reports a story of a suspect caught red-handed, who goes free because of a minor flaw in the way evidence was taken or handled by the authorities.  The most common example of this is what is called the “Exclusionary Rule.”  Simply stated, the Exclusionary Rule, which has its roots in the 5th and 14th Amendments to the federal Constitution, holds that evidence which is obtained through a search that wasn’t conducted by the police in accordance with basic constitutional rules can’t be used against the defendant.  It doesn’t matter whether the evidence is a crop of marijuana, a warm, smoking pistol used in a homicide, or other evidence which would otherwise be compelling against the defendant.  Is this justice?

As usual, a fair answer to this question is not simple.  Those on the Supreme Court who interpreted the Constitution to include the Exclusionary Rule were involved in a balancing exercise.  On one side of the balance is a desire to see the guilty punished, regardless of the process by which the evidence of guilt was obtained (e.g., confessions obtained by beatings, threats, or deprivation, or evidence seized in a Nazi stormtrooper-style invasion of a home).  No one can reasonably argue against wanting a person who is actually guilty being justly punished.

    But those Supreme Court justices were considering another question as well.  That question is: who will police the police?  If law enforcement can trample on what we in this society consider basic human rights to privacy, home security, and peace of mind, is there any way to discourage this?  In their wisdom, the justices determined that the only sure way to make sure that the police follow the rules of law in doing their jobs is to refuse to punish even the guilty if the police wilfully break the rules.  However, the Exclusionary Rule has been recently modified so that if police act in good faith and are found to have reasonably believed they were acting within the law in obtaining evidence, a small technical defect will not allow a guilty person to walk.

    Law is a balance.  It balances the rights of individuals to act freely as their desires move them, but only to the point where their desires, or their physical expression of those desires, don’t conflict or interfere with another’s enjoyment of life.  We don’t need to be watchdogging each other, or sniping at each other, and using the law as a means to “even the score.”  At its best, the justice system should be a finely tuned balance, weighing the good of all, not just those participating in the particular litigation.

But maybe I’m dreaming. . .

---

RELATIONSHIPS

Relationships – the one-on-one, long-term commitment type, whether marriage is involved or not, are at once the most necessary and the most confusing involvements people are capable of having.

I remember the Woody Allen allegory at the end of Annie Hall, in which he compared relationships with a guy who was so nutty he thought he was a chicken.  Someone asked him why they didn’t turn the guy into the looney bin, and was told that “We’d like to, but we need the eggs.”  Well put.

There are a legion of reasons why two people happen to get together.  I think there is a deep-seated need we all share to bond with someone else in a profound way.  For some people this need is so strong (or appears to them to be) that they bond with the first person who gives them a second look, because they need to be connected to someone, or think that something’s wrong with them if they aren’t.  Obviously, this is a terrible reason for people to connect.  Relationships like this last sometimes, but more often than not, they don’t.  Insecurity, or lack of your own self-esteem, is a problem that needs to be addressed by yourself, not by clinging to someone else whom you hope will “complete you”.

The most important thing one can do before embarking on a relationship with someone else is to take internal stock of oneself, because it is a waste of time and energy to try to find your “soul mate” when you barely know yourself.  Figure yourself out first.  This entails a risk of self-deception, because we all have illusions of who we think we are.  To look at oneself honestly, warts and all, is a necessary first step toward forming a relationship with another that can last.  This is critical because the most important elements of success in a relationship are common interests and goals, personality traits, and emotional and physical energy levels, to mention just a few.

With that firmly in mind, you are in better shape to determine the kind of person you are (or should be) looking for.  The best fit is if both of you enjoy doing the same things – outdoorsy, active people generally don’t have a lot in common with “couch potatoes.”  People of widely differing religious or political views may have a hard time forging a lasting relationship (James Carville and Mary Matalin notwithstanding). 

Another important point to recognize is that you are complete in and of yourself.  You don’t need another to “complete” you.  While the need for a close and intimate relationship is strong for almost all of us, it doesn’t make sense to commit to a relationship with someone out of desperation, because who knows how you’ll feel once the desperation fades?  Better to be alone for awhile rather than hopping on the first ship that comes along, simply because it happens by.

So keep your eyes open and your heart clear.  The best relationships are those formed first as friendship.  When the initial lust fades and the stars recede from your eyes, have you found a person who, at root, is your best friend?  If you can say “yes” to that, you are lucky indeed.

---

    We go around once.  That’s a saying, and probably expresses the general feeling of most.  That may or may not be true (and this isn’t about reincarnation), but one thing that is absolutely true is that nothing is more ephemeral than opportunity.  Often, if you blink, it’s gone.

    So that means we must seize opportunity, in whatever form it takes, when it appears – not when we think we will be ready for it.  That entails several things: flexibility, awareness, and self-starting ability.  We have to have the flexibility to change our course when an opportunity arises, whether or not it is expected.  It is critical that we be aware of what’s going on around us so that we actually notice an opportunity upon its arrival (and before its departure).  And we must be able to act on the opportunity – to propel ourselves toward taking that “great leap forward.”

    Part of the impetus for my writing this was receipt of a friend’s e-mail, which was a forwarded copy of a newspaper article.  The article, which originally appeared in the Los Angeles Times, dealt with the sad subject of preparing for a sister’s funeral after her sudden and unexpected death.  In preparing the clothes in which the sister was to be dressed, her husband found in her chest of drawers an expensive, and never-worn, piece of lingerie, bought by the sister for a “special occasion.”  The article conveyed a profound sense of sadness about the missed opportunity that the unworn slip represented, and how every single day represents a “special occasion.”

    That brought to mind a similar example in my own past.  In June, 1991, I bought a Father’s Day card for my Dad in southern California.  I bought it on the Monday before Father’s Day, but things being busy at work, or one thing or another, it became the Monday after Father’s Day, with the card sitting, unwritten and unsent, on my desk.  Oh, well, I thought, I’ll save it for next year.

    My Dad died on July 11, 1991.  His death wasn’t unexpected; he’d been very ill for about a year before his death.  But, you know, for a couple of years I kept that card in a prominent place on my desk, in front of me.  The message, to me, was crystal clear: never postpone a chance to do a thoughtful or loving thing for someone you care about.  I feel very strongly that this was a personal message from my Dad to me.  It hurt for a long time – a sense of guilt, of failure to follow through.

    Now I think it was a reminder to me; not intended as a judgment against me, but as a clear example of the cost of a missed opportunity.  I don’t always live up to that example, but it has become for me far more than a remembrance of past failure, but more of a challenge to seize each opportunity for good that comes my way.

    Carpe diem – seize the day.  Grab hold of that sucker, and take it for all that I’m worth, and do something good with it.  That is the real challenge of my unsent Father’s Day card.  Not to dwell on past failures and neglected opportunities, but to energize and empower me to take on as many as I can.

    I know I was put here for a reason.  Hopefully, numerous reasons.  Otherwise, why have I been given so many opportunities?

    I intend to make the most of them.

---

RESOLUTIONS

Another new year.  The second-to-last of this millennium.  (No, the new millennium doesn’t start until January 1, 2001.)  Traditionally, a time for resolutions, easily made, and soon more easily abandoned.

I prefer to think of the new year as a time to take stock in myself – to review my expectations of me, and how I’m doing.  Life is, to some degree, a big “to-do” list.  If you don’t have one, it’s like you’re floating down a river in a boat without paddles (there’s a crude metaphor somewhere there, but I’m not going to use it).  One’s self-expectations, or “to-do” list, are the paddles.

Unless, however, I periodically review my life’s progress; the things I want to see, do, and participate in.  (Sorry, Mom, about ending a sentence with a preposition.)  My list includes seeing that my children have a good start toward a meaningful future, principally through education; planning for our retirement; keeping myself in reasonably good physical shape; to improve my guitar playing; to continue backpacking and climbing mountains; and to see more of the wild places here in the American west.  Oh, yes, and for the Cubs to win a World Series.  Preferably while I’m still here to enjoy it.

This isn’t an all-inclusive list.  It’s just what occurred to me this moment. 

I happen now to be listening to the CD of A Chorus Line, which has one of my all-time favorite songs on it: “What I Did for Love.”  I remember hearing snippets of that song playing on commercials when the show was playing in LA over 20 years ago, but I didn’t see the show for another ten years or so.  I can see why the show has done so well – it connects deeply on a variety of levels, and is generally about life.  But the song “What I Did for Love” is about a dancer thinking about when she physically won’t be able to dance anymore, reflecting on how much she has loved dancing.  I find it hard to listen without getting tears in my eyes.  The real reason for that is the first time I really heard the song was at a woman’s funeral.  She specifically asked that it be played.  The woman had died slowly of cancer, and had a long time to think about her passing, and it was important to her that this song, which had meant so much to her, be heard by her friends and family after she was gone.  Powerful stuff, indeed.

That song fits well into what I’m thinking about, though.  I don’t want to have to be looking at my own impending mortality to be able to review my life. 

---

TOLERANCE

For some time now, I’ve thought about what to discuss next.  I like to keep things on a positive note, generally (although there are times when I’m like the cartoon character who always has a black cloud, raining on his head).  But out of the many fleeting ideas I’ve had recently, I continue to return to thinking about tolerance.

This seems to be a lost virtue these days.  We are so quick to judge others, to leap to negative conclusions about them.  No matter what happens to us, the first instinct is to mentally affix blame for any less than perfect consequences, and then try to pin responsibility, preferably in the form of dollars, upon the target of our ire.

Seems to me that responsibility ought to begin at home.  In Biblical terms, let him who is without sin cast the first stone.  A difficult, but usually true, statement is that when negative things befall us, the responsibility is usually in large part ours.  But nobody wants to think that way anymore.

We live in a society of victims, real and perceived.  If even half of the energy expended in attempting to affix blame or responsibility for something were instead focused on “How did I contribute to this occurring?”, we would be much farther along toward avoiding future “victimization”.

This isn’t to say that there aren’t good reasons for holding people responsible for their actions.  I’m not suggesting that.  What I am suggesting is the avoidance of the first reaction of putting the blame elsewhere for one’s problems.

If we viewed all of those around us as human, as prone to error as we are, and simply allowed them that, much of the tension which exists in this world would decrease.  In many instances, the hostility we display toward others is a result of a knee-jerk response of one or more groups of which we consider ourselves part.  It could be our race, our religion, our sexual preference, or a hundred other categories by which we define ourselves.

Let’s give each other a break.  Allow for imperfection, or differences in the way each of us sees things.  One thing that we would do well to do is to acknowledge that none of us is guaranteed to be right about anything.  What is one person’s gospel is another’s blasphemy.  How arrogant of us to think that we have the inside track to enlightenment (Nirvana, or heaven, if you will).  Mark Twain put it quite eloquently: “Man is the only animal with the true religion.  Several of them.”

By recognizing and defending our right to be different from each other, we lessen tensions, and make for a more peaceful, and I think better, world.  I’d like to think that we owe that to each other, and to the generations to whom we pass the proverbial torch.

Let’s accept the world, and those in it, as the Creator gave it to us.  Not as we would have made it, but as one with far greater wisdom and insight than we did.  Think about it.

---

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

    In one of my earlier ramblings, I related how I bought a Father’s Day card for my Dad in 1991, well in advance, and then as Father’s Day came and went, I said to myself, “Oh, well, I’ll send it to him next year.”  As it happened, Dad died in July of 1991, so there was no next year.  I still have the unsent card somewhere.

    But that thought has expanded in my mind.  The idea of how inspired we can be at the beginning of an undertaking, whether big or small, with boundless energy.  Yet how many times do these projects drag on, unfinished?  I have heard an old saying that “Well begun is halfway done.”  I beg to differ, however, because nobody remembers the name of the driver who leads a race for 150 laps, and blows an engine, when the race is 200 laps.

    In golf, baseball, and throwing a football, one of the critical elements is the “follow-through.”  So it is with tasks.  There are all kinds of reasons why things well started don’t get finished.  For me one of the most common hangups is the “critical path” hangup, because a task is often a sequence of events, some of which have to be done before others can be.  If for some reason one of the “foundation” steps can’t be done, the project is, for the time being, dead in its tracks.  I HATE that!!

    Often the reason is failure to properly prepare.  For that you have only yourself to blame.  It is maddening, though, when you are depending upon someone else for an element of a project, and can’t go any further with it until the other person comes through.  For that reason, whenever I can, to the extent possible, I try to be a “one-man band” about multi-step projects, but that isn’t always possible.  I guess the key when working with other people on projects is to communicate with each other, and not just when a deadline is approaching (or past).  If you are relying on someone for a key part of your endeavor, let them know up front what you expect, and when, and don’t be shy about reminding your team member in mid-stream of your need for his/her contribution.

    For me personally, though, the most common problem is failure to maintain focus on the task at hand.  I have a “multi-tasking” kind of mind, in that I can juggle several things at once.  This is good in some respects, but it tends to work against staying focused on one task through to completion.  The answer to that, I guess, is simple self-discipline.

    An area where this applies to me particularly is song composition.  I am a sometime composer of “new age” instrumental songs on guitar, usually in non-standard tunings.  I have found that just by “noodling” or fooling around with a given fingering or chord pattern a song will start to emerge.  A lot of my best “noodles” come late at night, and are forgotten in the morning.  Part of my answer to this is to get out a tape recorder when I am noodling when a nice new musical phrase or pattern occurs to me.  Sometimes I repeat the phrase or portion over and over without recording it so that it is “recorded” in my head.  Again, the tendency not to work through a composition to completion is something with which I have to deal.  The reward of a completed new song has been sufficient motivation to me to finish songs.  At present I have about 14 or so of them.

    For most of my thirties, I pretty much drifted along through life, without any particular sense of objective.  As a consequence, I can’t remember much of anything significant that I accomplished during that period of time.  Since then, in the last seven years or so, I have accomplished many things that I wouldn’t have dreamed of earlier, such as climbing mountains (Mts. Shasta and Whitney, and White Mountain – several times); visiting places I had always dreamed of exploring (the Little Bighorn Battlefield in Montana, and for that matter, the whole darned state of Montana); working on music composition; and getting myself in good physical shape at the advanced age of 47.

    It’s just a matter of finishing what you start.

---

WHERE IS THE MORAL OUTRAGE?

We live, apparently in an age of tolerance, in some respects.  Tolerance of record oil company profits, when those same oil companies contributed millions of dollars to ensure that their chosen candidate, President Bush, was elected; multi-million dollar contracts for the "rebuilding" of Iraq awarded without competitive bidding to the company which, coincidentally, our current Vice President ran before assuming his current office; political fundraising in violation of applicable laws (DeLay), or in ways which are lawful, but reek of conflict of interest (northern California Congressman John Doolittle); of violations by the president of laws relating to wiretapping and surveillance without warrants; violations of federal secrecy laws by high staff members of the vice president's staff ("Scooter" (what an appropriate nickname) Libby), and on and on.

It has been written that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.  The present administration would seem to bear that maxim out.  During the time that the Republican Party has obtained control of both the White House and both houses of Congress, that party has taken on the mantle of arrogance that it for years attributed to the Democratic Party when it held a similar position of power during the FDR tenure of office and later the Kennedy and Johnson Administrations some 40 years ago.  It has taken the Republicans less than a decade to reach the level of arrogant disregard they attributed (rightly, in many respects) to the Democrats.

I mentioned the situation involving Congressman Doolittle, which many of you may not be aware of.  His wife owns a company whose purpose is fundraising, and of the millions of dollars raised by that company, she personally made over $125,000.00 last year in commissions from such fundraising.  And since California is a community property state, half of that income is the property of Congressman Doolittle.  If you don't think that money will in any respect influence how Congressman Doolittle thinks about issues involving those contributors, much less how he votes, hey, I have a bridge between Sausalito and San Francisco that I'd like to sell you.

Bob Dylan once wrote that "Money doesn't talk, it swears."  Amen.  And it seems that the only voice of any national significance on that issue is, ironically, a Republican:  Arizona Senator John McCain.  The same Senator who, after initial success in a 2000 Republican primary, was thereafter swamped by the vastly greater campaign war chest of George W. Bush, coupled with a shameless allegation by the Bush campaign that Senator McCain had fathered an illegitimate black child.  Senator McCain has long fought (unsuccessfully) for real campaign finance reform, as he knows what any thinking person knows:  that without limits on what candidates or parties can raise and spend, elections will virtually always turn on which candidate or party has more money, and not on the quality of character or ideas possessed by the candidates.

And yet it seems that the unwashed masses in this country don't have a problem with the issues mentioned above.  At least, not enough of a problem to refrain from electing candidates like President Bush whose main attribute is a willingness to accept unlimited funds from campaign donors, then make sure that the donors' interests are well served.  If you need another example, consider the eagerness of the Administration to open up the pristine Alaskan wilderness to oil drilling, instead of moving toward conservation of fuel through increased vehicle gas mileage requirements, as occurred during the last oil crisis in the '70's.

It has often been said that in order to figure out the rhyme and reason of political decisions, follow the money.  That has never been more true than it is now.

---

DARK PLACES

Every now and again, not often, but occasionally, was no control whatsoever for my part, I seek out the dark places in the corners of my psyche.  I wrote one of my essays on this previously (On Being Melancholy), which is shown on the archived portion of my editorials.  For better or for worse, I have arrived again at that place this evening.

There's a part of me that is upbeat, optimistic, and expects the world to be all that it can be.  There is another part of me that is not surprised when it all goes to hell, and wonders why it doesn't do that on a regular basis -- which maybe it does.  Looking at the world as it is, the latter view is more realistic.  It seems to me that the view of the majority of people who vote in this country at this time possess a fearful, pessimistic view of the world in which we live, with suspicion, if not downright hatred, of virtually everyone who is not exactly like who they perceive themselves to be.

I look at the world, and I see a place where altruism generally does not prevail, where intelligent thinking is regularly overridden by fear and ignorance, and where it seems that everyone in a position of power thinks of a long-range plan for the future as one which covers the next two or three months, as gauged by the all-seeing and all-knowing opinion polls.

I see a world where people who profess to be Christian seem to have read only the Old Testament, with its "eye for an eye" mentality, and fail to recognize or even acknowledge the teachings of Christ, whom they pretend to worship and hold up as the highest example of good behavior, and forget that Jesus' dying words on the cross were "Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do."  Jesus spoke of the world of brotherhood, of selfless giving, and pouring oneself out for others, without regard for reward.  I can't say as where I have seen that attitude represented anywhere lately; not in the media, certainly not in the opinion polls, and not in the behavior of anyone who holds himself or herself out as a leader in the world.

And, unfortunately, I don't see things getting any better.  On the contrary, it appears to me that we live in the world were our leaders would have us use up the last of our fossil fuels, without regard to anything other than the profit made by those who provide these fuels, where the time-honored response to violence is more violence, and where we repeat the same response to social issues that have not worked in the past, with the expectation that somehow we are doing good.  Einstein, I am told, defined insanity as doing the same futile thing again and again and somehow expecting different results.

For a long time, I have had a personal theory that the rise and fall of civilizations follows a sine wave.  For those of you not familiar with mathematical theory, a sine wave is a line which rises in a curved pattern above and below a straight line.  My reading of history is that civilizations have gradually increased in their importance and contribution to the world until they reach a peak point, and then decline and eventually disappear.  Unfortunately, it appears to me that, given the path our country is now following, we have indeed peaked, and are in a period of the inevitable decline.

I sincerely hope that I'm wrong about this.  90% of the time, I do feel differently, and generally try to approach that portion of the world over which I have control with a positive, optimistic attitude.  For reasons as I stated above that I have no control over, I just don't feel that way tonight.  I hope tomorrow is different.

---

NEO-CONS v. THE FOUNDING FATHERS

It is interesting to consider the irony of modern conservatives saying they are for a "strict construction" of the Constitution, and to follow the intent of the Founding Fathers of this country.

Those early Americans who embarked on a course that led to war with the "mother country," England, in the American Revolution didn't pursue a course which would have led to security for Americans.  They, at great risk to themselves, pursued freedom.  Which, strangely, is the word we hear over and over again from the President, at the same time he is doing his damndest on many fronts to methodically deprive Americans of their freedoms.  The overriding concerns of the Constitutional convention, at the end of the Revolutionary War, were to protect the people from excesses of unlimited government, both in the original Constitution and in the Bill of Rights adopted shortly thereafter.  With much debate, the framers of the Constitution opted for liberty and limited government as opposed to the type of oppressive government by the British against which they successfully rebelled.

One of the most noted framers, Benjamin Franklin, stated that "Those who would give up essential liberty to gain a little temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security."  Amen.

The de facto leader of these modern conservatives is the President, who has embarked on a course of secretiveness, patently illegal spying on its citizens, ignoring clearly drafted laws (FISA) which (1) prohibit such behavior and (2) provide a simple, secret manner in which to obtain warrants to conduct surveillance upon a proper showing.

Another example of the divergence between the founding fathers' principles and those of the "neo-cons" is President Bush's attitude toward torture of prisoners taken in the war on terror (or whatever euphemism the Administration now wishes us to call it).  For a long time, the president was adamantly opposed to any limitations on the use of torture against "enemy combatants," and only in the face of clearly expressed national sentiment against torture, action of Congress prohibiting its use, and finally the urging of Senator John McCain, who of course knows all about torture from personal experience, did he relent and sign the anti-torture bill.  All the while saying that he didn't believe he was bound by it.

This isn't to say that we shouldn't be vigilant against those who would do us violence, but within the bounds of our own laws and international treaties and conventions.  I would be equally concerned about this attitude by the president if he were a Democrat.  We as a country have got to decide whether we wish to follow the path of freedom ourselves, upon which principle our country was founded, or head down the road toward totalitarianism.

Isn't that what we fought World War II against?

---

LITERARY SPECIAL

To the Person Sitting in Darkness

By Mark Twain
(New York: Anti-Imperialist League of New York, 1901).

Extending the Blessings of Civilization to our Brother who Sits in Darkness has been a good trade and has paid well, on the whole; and there is money in it yet, if carefully worked -- but not enough, in my judgement, to make any considerable risk advisable. The People that Sit in Darkness are getting to be too scarce -- too scarce and too shy. And such darkness as is now left is really of but an indifferent quality, and not dark enough for the game. The most of those People that Sit in Darkness have been furnished with more light than was good for them or profitable for us. We have been injudicious.

The Blessings-of-Civilization Trust, wisely and cautiously administered, is a Daisy. There is more money in it, more territory, more sovereignty, and other kinds of emolument, than there is in any other game that is played. But Christendom has been playing it badly of late years, and must certainly suffer by it, in my opinion. She has been so eager to get every stake that appeared on the green cloth, that the People who Sit in Darkness have noticed it -- they have noticed it, and have begun to show alarm. They have become suspicious of the Blessings of Civilization. More -- they have begun to examine them. This is not well. The Blessings of Civilization are all right, and a good commercial property; there could not be a better, in a dim light. In the right kind of a light, and at a proper distance, with the goods a little out of focus, they furnish this desirable exhibit to the Gentlemen who Sit in Darkness:

LOVE, LAW AND ORDER,
JUSTICE, LIBERTY,
GENTLENESS, EQUALITY,
CHRISTIANITY, HONORABLE DEALING,
PROTECTION TO THE WEAK, MERCY,
TEMPERANCE, EDUCATION,
-- and so on.

There. Is it good? Sir, it is pie. It will bring into camp any idiot that sits in darkness anywhere. But not if we adulterate it. It is proper to be emphatic upon that point. This brand is strictly for Export -- apparently. Apparently. Privately and confidentially, it is nothing of the kind. Privately and confidentially, it is merely an outside cover, gay and pretty and attractive, displaying the special patterns of our Civilization which we reserve for Home Consumption, while inside the bale is the Actual Thing that the Customer Sitting in Darkness buys with his blood and tears and land and liberty. That Actual Thing is, indeed, Civilization, but it is only for Export. Is there a difference between the two brands? In some of the details, yes.

We all know that the Business is being ruined. The reason is not far to seek. It is because our Mr. McKinley, and Mr. Chamberlain, and the Kaiser, and the Czar and the French have been exporting the Actual Thing with the outside cover left off. This is bad for the Game. It shows that these new players of it are not sufficiently acquainted with it.

It is a distress to look on and note the mismoves, they are so strange and so awkward. Mr. Chamberlain manufactures a war out of materials so inadequate and so fanciful that they make the boxes grieve and the gallery laugh, and he tries hard to persuade himself that it isn't purely a private raid for cash, but has a sort of dim, vague respectability about it somewhere, if he could only find the spot; and that, by and by, he can scour the flag clean again after he has finished dragging it through the mud, and make it shine and flash in the vault of heaven once more as it had shone and flashed there a thousand years in the world's respect until he laid his unfaithful hand upon it. It is bad play -- bad. For it exposes the Actual Thing to Them that Sit in Darkness, and they say: "What! Christian against Christian? And only for money? Is this a case of magnanimity, forbearance, love, gentleness, mercy, protection of the weak -- this strange and over-showy onslaught of an elephant upon a nest of field-mice, on the pretext that the mice had squeaked an insolence at him -- conduct which 'no self-respecting government could allow to pass unavenged?' as Mr. Chamberlain said. Was that a good pretext in a small case, when it had not been a good pretext in a large one? -- for only recently Russia had affronted the elephant three times and survived alive and unsmitten. Is this Civilization and Progress? Is it something better than we already possess? These harryings and burnings and desert-makings in the Transvaal -- is this an improvement on our darkness? Is it, perhaps, possible that there are two kinds of Civilization -- one for home consumption and one for the heathen market?"

Then They that Sit in Darkness are troubled, and shake their heads; and they read this extract from a letter of a British private, recounting his exploits in one of Methuen's victories, some days before the affair of Magersfontein, and they are troubled again:

"We tore up the hill and into the intrenchments, and the Boers saw we had them; so they dropped their guns and went down on their knees and put up their hands clasped, and begged for mercy. And we gave it them -- with the long spoon."

The long spoon is the bayonet. See Lloyd's Weekly, London, of those days. The same number -- and the same column -- contains some quite unconscious satire in the form of shocked and bitter upbraidings of the Boers for their brutalities and inhumanities!

Next, to our heavy damage, the Kaiser went to playing the game without first mastering it. He lost a couple of missionaries in a riot in Shantung, and in his account he made an overcharge for them. China had to pay a hundred thousand dollars apiece for them, in money; twelve miles of territory, containing several millions of inhabitants and worth twenty million dollars; and to build a monument, and also a Christian church; whereas the people of China could have been depended upon to remember the missionaries without the help of these expensive memorials. This was all bad play. Bad, because it would not, and could not, and will not now or ever, deceive the Person Sitting in Darkness. He knows that it was an overcharge. He knows that a missionary is like any other man: he is worth merely what you can supply his place for, and no more. He is useful, but so is a doctor, so is a sheriff, so is an editor; but a just Emperor does not charge war-prices for such. A diligent, intelligent, but obscure missionary, and a diligent, intelligent country editor are worth much, and we know it; but they are not worth the earth. We esteem such an editor, and we are sorry to see him go; but, when he goes, we should consider twelve miles of territory, and a church, and a fortune, over-compensation for his loss. I mean, if he was a Chinese editor, and we had to settle for him. It is no proper figure for an editor or a missionary; one can get shop-worn kings for less. It was bad play on the Kaiser's part. It got this property, true; but it produced the Chinese revolt, the indignant uprising of China's traduced patriots, the Boxers. The results have been expensive to Germany, and to the other Disseminators of Progress and the Blessings of Civilization.

The Kaiser's claim was paid, yet it was bad play, for it could not fail to have an evil effect upon Persons Sitting in Darkness in China. They would muse upon the event, and be likely to say: "Civilization is gracious and beautiful, for such is its reputation; but can we afford it? There are rich Chinamen, perhaps they could afford it; but this tax is not laid upon them, it is laid upon the peasants of Shantung; it is they that must pay this mighty sum, and their wages are but four cents a day. Is this a better civilization than ours, and holier and higher and nobler? Is not this rapacity? Is not this extortion? Would Germany charge America two hundred thousand dollars for two missionaries, and shake the mailed fist in her face, and send warships, and send soldiers, and say: 'Seize twelve miles of territory, worth twenty millions of dollars, as additional pay for the missionaries; and make those peasants build a monument to the missionaries, and a costly Christian church to remember them by?' And later would Germany say to her soldiers: 'March through America and slay, giving no quarter; make the German face there, as has been our Hun-face here, a terror for a thousand years; march through the Great Republic and slay, slay, slay, carving a road for our offended religion through its heart and bowels?' Would Germany do like this to America, to England, to France, to Russia? Or only to China the helpless -- imitating the elephant's assault upon the field-mice? Had we better invest in this Civilization -- this Civilization which called Napoleon a buccaneer for carrying off Venice's bronze horses, but which steals our ancient astronomical instruments from our walls, and goes looting like common bandits -- that is, all the alien soldiers except America's; and (Americans again excepted) storms frightened villages and cables the result to glad journals at home every day: 'Chinese losses, 450 killed; ours, one officer and two men wounded. Shall proceed against neighboring village to-morrow, where a massacre is reported.' Can we afford Civilization?"

And, next, Russia must go and play the game injudiciously. She affronts England once or twice -- with the Person Sitting in Darkness observing and noting; by moral assistance of France and Germany, she robs Japan of her hard-earned spoil, all swimming in Chinese blood -- Port Arthur -- with the Person again observing and noting; then she seizes Manchuria, raids its villages, and chokes its great river with the swollen corpses of countless massacred peasants -- that astonished Person still observing and noting. And perhaps he is saying to himself: "It is yet another Civilized Power, with its banner of the Prince of Peace in one hand and its loot-basket and its butcher-knife in the other. Is there no salvation for us but to adopt Civilization and lift ourselves down to its level?"

And by and by comes America, and our Master of the Game plays it badly -- plays it as Mr. Chamberlain was playing it in South Africa. It was a mistake to do that; also, it was one which was quite unlooked for in a Master who was playing it so well in Cuba. In Cuba, he was playing the usual and regular American game, and it was winning, for there is no way to beat it. The Master, contemplating Cuba, said: "Here is an oppressed and friendless little nation which is willing to fight to be free; we go partners, and put up the strength of seventy million sympathizers and the resources of the United States: play!" Nothing but Europe combined could call that hand: and Europe cannot combine on anything. There, in Cuba, he was following our great traditions in a way which made us very proud of him, and proud of the deep dissatisfaction which his play was provoking in Continental Europe. Moved by a high inspiration, he threw out those stirring words which proclaimed that forcible annexation would be "criminal aggression;" and in that utterance fired another "shot heard round the world." The memory of that fine saying will be outlived by the remembrance of no act of his but one -- that he forgot it within the twelvemonth, and its honorable gospel along with it.

For, presently, came the Philippine temptation. It was strong; it was too strong, and he made that bad mistake: he played the European game, the Chamberlain game. It was a pity; it was a great pity, that error; that one grievous error, that irrevocable error. For it was the very place and time to play the American game again. And at no cost. Rich winnings to be gathered in, too; rich and permanent; indestructible; a fortune transmissible forever to the children of the flag. Not land, not money, not dominion -- no, something worth many times more than that dross: our share, the spectacle of a nation of long harassed and persecuted slaves set free through our influence; our posterity's share, the golden memory of that fair deed. The game was in our hands. If it had been played according to the American rules, Dewey would have sailed away from Manila as soon as he had destroyed the Spanish fleet -- after putting up a sign on shore guaranteeing foreign property and life against damage by the Filipinos, and warning the Powers that interference with the emancipated patriots would be regarded as an act unfriendly to the United States. The Powers cannot combine, in even a bad cause, and the sign would not have been molested.

Dewey could have gone about his affairs elsewhere, and left the competent Filipino army to starve out the little Spanish garrison and send it home, and the Filipino citizens to set up the form of government they might prefer, and deal with the friars and their doubtful acquisitions according to Filipino ideas of fairness and justice -- ideas which have since been tested and found to be of as high an order as any that prevail in Europe or America.

But we played the Chamberlain game, and lost the chance to add another Cuba and another honorable deed to our good record.

The more we examine the mistake, the more clearly we perceive that it is going to be bad for the Business. The Person Sitting in Darkness is almost sure to say: "There is something curious about this -- curious and unaccountable. There must be two Americas: one that sets the captive free, and one that takes a once-captive's new freedom away from him, and picks a quarrel with him with nothing to found it on; then kills him to get his land."

The truth is, the Person Sitting in Darkness is saying things like that; and for the sake of the Business we must persuade him to look at the Philippine matter in another and healthier way. We must arrange his opinions for him. I believe it can be done; for Mr. Chamberlain has arranged England's opinion of the South African matter, and done it most cleverly and successfully. He presented the facts -- some of the facts -- and showed those confiding people what the facts meant. He did it statistically, which is a good way. He used the formula: "Twice 2 are 14, and 2 from 9 leaves 35." Figures are effective; figures will convince the elect.

Now, my plan is a still bolder one than Mr. Chamberlain's, though apparently a copy of it. Let us be franker than Mr. Chamberlain; let us audaciously present the whole of the facts, shirking none, then explain them according to Mr. Chamberlain's formula. This daring truthfulness will astonish and dazzle the Person Sitting in Darkness, and he will take the Explanation down before his mental vision has had time to get back into focus. Let us say to him:

"Our case is simple. On the 1st of May, Dewey destroyed the Spanish fleet. This left the Archipelago in the hands of its proper and rightful owners, the Filipino nation. Their army numbered 30,000 men, and they were competent to whip out or starve out the little Spanish garrison; then the people could set up a government of their own devising. Our traditions required that Dewey should now set up his warning sign, and go away. But the Master of the Game happened to think of another plan -- the European plan. He acted upon it. This was, to send out an army -- ostensibly to help the native patriots put the finishing touch upon their long and plucky struggle for independence, but really to take their land away from them and keep it. That is, in the interest of Progress and Civilization. The plan developed, stage by stage, and quite satisfactorily. We entered into a military alliance with the trusting Filipinos, and they hemmed in Manila on the land side, and by their valuable help the place, with its garrison of 8,000 or 10,000 Spaniards, was captured -- a thing which we could not have accomplished unaided at that time. We got their help by -- by ingenuity. We knew they were fighting for their independence, and that they had been at it for two years. We knew they supposed that we also were fighting in their worthy cause -- just as we had helped the Cubans fight for Cuban independence -- and we allowed them to go on thinking so. Until Manila was ours and we could get along without them. Then we showed our hand. Of course, they were surprised -- that was natural; surprised and disappointed; disappointed and grieved. To them it looked un-American; uncharacteristic; foreign to our established traditions. And this was natural, too; for we were only playing the American Game in public -- in private it was the European. It was neatly done, very neatly, and it bewildered them. They could not understand it; for we had been so friendly -- so affectionate, even -- with those simple-minded patriots! We, our own selves, had brought back out of exile their leader, their hero, their hope, their Washington -- Aguinaldo; brought him in a warship, in high honor, under the sacred shelter and hospitality of the flag; brought him back and restored him to his people, and got their moving and eloquent gratitude for it. Yes, we had been so friendly to them, and had heartened them up in so many ways! We had lent them guns and ammunition; advised with them; exchanged pleasant courtesies with them; placed our sick and wounded in their kindly care; entrusted our Spanish prisoners to their humane and honest hands; fought shoulder to shoulder with them against "the common enemy" (our own phrase); praised their courage, praised their gallantry, praised their mercifulness, praised their fine and honorable conduct; borrowed their trenches, borrowed strong positions which they had previously captured from the Spaniard; petted them, lied to them -- officially proclaiming that our land and naval forces came to give them their freedom and displace the bad Spanish Government -- fooled them, used them until we needed them no longer; then derided the sucked orange and threw it away. We kept the positions which we had beguiled them of; by and by, we moved a force forward and overlapped patriot ground -- a clever thought, for we needed trouble, and this would produce it. A Filipino soldier, crossing the ground, where no one had a right to forbid him, was shot by our sentry. The badgered patriots resented this with arms, without waiting to know whether Aguinaldo, who was absent, would approve or not. Aguinaldo did not approve; but that availed nothing. What we wanted, in the interest of Progress and Civilization, was the Archipelago, unencumbered by patriots struggling for independence; and the War was what we needed. We clinched our opportunity. It is Mr. Chamberlain's case over again -- at least in its motive and intention; and we played the game as adroitly as he played it himself."

At this point in our frank statement of fact to the Person Sitting in Darkness, we should throw in a little trade-taffy about the Blessings of Civilization -- for a change, and for the refreshment of his spirit -- then go on with our tale:

"We and the patriots having captured Manila, Spain's ownership of the Archipelago and her sovereignty over it were at an end -- obliterated -- annihilated -- not a rag or shred of either remaining behind. It was then that we conceived the divinely humorous idea of buying both of these spectres from Spain! [It is quite safe to confess this to the Person Sitting in Darkness, since neither he nor any other sane person will believe it.] In buying those ghosts for twenty millions, we also contracted to take care of the friars and their accumulations. I think we also agreed to propagate leprosy and smallpox, but as to this there is doubt. But it is not important; persons afflicted with the friars do not mind the other diseases.

"With our Treaty ratified, Manila subdued, and our Ghosts secured, we had no further use for Aguinaldo and the owners of the Archipelago. We forced a war, and we have been hunting America's guest and ally through the woods and swamps ever since."

At this point in the tale, it will be well to boast a little of our war-work and our heroisms in the field, so as to make our performance look as fine as England's in South Africa; but I believe it will not be best to emphasize this too much. We must be cautious. Of course, we must read the war-telegrams to the Person, in order to keep up our frankness; but we can throw an air of humorousness over them, and that will modify their grim eloquence a little, and their rather indiscreet exhibitions of gory exultation. Before reading to him the following display heads of the dispatches of November 18, 1900, it will be well to practice on them in private first, so as to get the right tang of lightness and gaiety into them:

"ADMINISTRATION WEARY OF PROTRACTED HOSTILITIES!"
"REAL WAR AHEAD FOR FILIPINO REBELS!"*
"WILL SHOW NO MERCY!"
"KITCHENER'S PLAN ADOPTED!"

Kitchener knows how to handle disagreeable people who are fighting for their homes and their liberties, and we must let on that we are merely imitating Kitchener, and have no national interest in the matter, further than to get ourselves admired by the Great Family of Nations, in which august company our Master of the Game has bought a place for us in the back row.

Of course, we must not venture to ignore our General MacArthur's reports -- oh, why do they keep on printing those embarrassing things? -- we must drop them trippingly from the tongue and take the chances:

"During the last ten months our losses have been 268 killed and 750 wounded; Filipino loss, three thousand two hundred and twenty-seven killed, and 694 wounded."

We must stand ready to grab the Person Sitting in Darkness, for he will swoon away at this confession, saying: "Good God, those 'niggers' spare their wounded, and the Americans massacre theirs!"

We must bring him to, and coax him and coddle him, and assure him that the ways of Providence are best, and that it would not become us to find fault with them; and then, to show him that we are only imitators, not originators, we must read the following passage from the letter of an American soldier-lad in the Philippines to his mother, published in Public Opinion, of Decorah, Iowa, describing the finish of a victorious battle:

"WE NEVER LEFT ONE ALIVE. IF ONE WAS WOUNDED, WE WOULD RUN OUR BAYONETS THROUGH HIM."

Having now laid all the historical facts before the Person Sitting in Darkness, we should bring him to again, and explain them to him. We should say to him:

"They look doubtful, but in reality they are not. There have been lies; yes, but they were told in a good cause. We have been treacherous; but that was only in order that real good might come out of apparent evil. True, we have crushed a deceived and confiding people; we have turned against the weak and the friendless who trusted us; we have stamped out a just and intelligent and well-ordered republic; we have stabbed an ally in the back and slapped the face of a guest; we have bought a Shadow from an enemy that hadn't it to sell; we have robbed a trusting friend of his land and his liberty; we have invited our clean young men to shoulder a discredited musket and do bandit's work under a flag which bandits have been accustomed to fear, not to follow; we have debauched America's honor and blackened her face before the world; but each detail was for the best. We know this. The Head of every State and Sovereignty in Christendom and ninety per cent. of every legislative body in Christendom, including our Congress and our fifty State Legislatures, are members not only of the church, but also of the Blessings-of-Civilization Trust. This world-girdling accumulation of trained morals, high principles, and justice, cannot do an unright thing, an unfair thing, an ungenerous thing, an unclean thing. It knows what it is about. Give yourself no uneasiness; it is all right."

Now then, that will convince the Person. You will see. It will restore the Business. Also, it will elect the Master of the Game to the vacant place in the Trinity of our national gods; and there on their high thrones the Three will sit, age after age, in the people's sight, each bearing the Emblem of his service: Washington, the Sword of the Liberator; Lincoln, the Slave's Broken Chains; the Master, the Chains Repaired.

It will give the Business a splendid new start. You will see.

Everything is prosperous, now; everything is just as we should wish it. We have got the Archipelago, and we shall never give it up. Also, we have every reason to hope that we shall have an opportunity before very long to slip out of our Congressional contract with Cuba and give her something better in the place of it. It is a rich country, and many of us are already beginning to see that the contract was a sentimental mistake. But now -- right now -- is the best time to do some profitable rehabilitating work -- work that will set us up and make us comfortable, and discourage gossip. We cannot conceal from ourselves that, privately, we are a little troubled about our uniform. It is one of our prides; it is acquainted with honor; it is familiar with great deeds and noble; we love it, we revere it; and so this errand it is on makes us uneasy. And our flag -- another pride of ours, our chiefest! We have worshipped it so; and when we have seen it in far lands -- glimpsing it unexpectedly in that strange sky, waving its welcome and benediction to us -- we have caught our breath, and uncovered our heads, and couldn't speak, for a moment, for the thought of what it was to us and the great ideals it stood for. Indeed, we must do something about these things; we must not have the flag out there, and the uniform. They are not needed there; we can manage in some other way. England manages, as regards the uniform, and so can we. We have to send soldiers -- we can't get out of that -- but we can disguise them. It is the way England does in South Africa. Even Mr. Chamberlain himself takes pride in England's honorable uniform, and makes the army down there wear an ugly and odious and appropriate disguise, of yellow stuff such as quarantine flags are made of, and which are hoisted to warn the healthy away from unclean disease and repulsive death. This cloth is called khaki. We could adopt it. It is light, comfortable, grotesque, and deceives the enemy, for he cannot conceive of a soldier being concealed in it.

And as for a flag for the Philippine Province, it is easily managed. We can have a special one -- our States do it: we can have just our usual flag, with the white stripes painted black and the stars replaced by the skull and cross-bones.

And we do not need that Civil Commission out there. Having no powers, it has to invent them, and that kind of work cannot be effectively done by just anybody; an expert is required. Mr. Croker can be spared. We do not want the United States represented there, but only the Game.

By help of these suggested amendments, Progress and Civilization in that country can have a boom, and it will take in the Persons who are Sitting in Darkness, and we can resume Business at the old stand.

Mark Twain.

* "Rebels!" Mumble that funny word -- Don't let the Person catch it distinctly.

---

SOME MARK TWAIN QUOTES

I "borrowed" these from another website.  Which of course borrowed them from Mark himself.  Hope he won't mind . . .

1. Do not put off till tomorrow what can be put off till day-after-tomorrow just as well.

2. I was young and foolish then; now I am old and foolisher.

3. An uneasy conscience is a hair in the mouth.

4. The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but that the lightning ain't distributed right.

5. Life would be infinitely happier if we could only be born at the age of eighty and gradually approach eighteen.

6. The lack of money is the root of all evil.

7. By and by when each nation has 20,000 battleships and 5,000,000 soldiers we shall all be safe and the wisdom of statesmanship will stand confirmed.

8. Do not tell fish stories where the people know you; but particularly, don't tell them where they know the fish.

9. At 50 a man can be an ass without being an optimist but not an optimist without being as ass.

10. Necessity is the mother of "taking chances".

11. Civilization is a limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessaries.

12. Honesty: The best of all the lost arts.

13. The low level which commercial morality has reached in America is deplorable. We have humble God fearing Christian men among us who will stoop to do things for a million dollars that they ought not to be willing to do for less than 2 millions.

14. Prophecy: Two bull's eyes out of a possible million.

15. A baby is an inestimable blessing and bother.

16. Always acknowledge a fault frankly. This will throw those in authority off their guard and give you opportunity to commit more.

17. Senator: Person who makes laws in Washington when not doing time.

18. Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence in society.

19. But we are fearfully and wonderfully made, and we glorious Americans will occasionally astonish the God that created us when we get a fair start.

20. None but an ass pays a compliment and asks a favor at the same time. There are many asses.

21. All the talk used to be about doing people good, now it is about doing people.

22. I like the truth sometimes, but I don't care enough for it to hanker after it.

23. The average American may not know who his grandfather was. But the American was, however, one degree better off than the average Frenchman who, as a rule, was in considerable doubt as to who his father was.

24. Difference between savage and civilized man: one is painted, the other gilded.

25. If we had less statesmanship we could get along with fewer battleships.

26. Some of us cannot be optimists, but all of us can be bigamists.

27. It is better to take what does not belong to you than to let it lie around neglected.

28. Do your duty today and repent tomorrow.

29. A banker is a fellow who lends you his umbrella when the sun is shining and wants it back the minute it begins to rain.

30. What is the difference between a taxidermist and a tax collector? The taxidermist takes only your skin.

31. It is the foreign element that commits our crimes. There is no native criminal class except Congress

32. We all live in the protection of certain cowardices which we call our principles.

33. Everybody's private motto: It's better to be popular than right.

34. It is better to give than receive- especially advice.

35. You should never do anything wicked and lay it on your brother, when it is just as convenient to lay it on some other boy.

36. Twain on the afterlife: I am silent on the subject because of necessity. I have friends in both places.

37. Patriot: The person who can holler the loudest without knowing what he is hollering about.

38. When a man arrives at great prosperity God did it: when he falls into disaster he did it himself.

39. Morals consist of political morals, commercial morals, ecclesiastical morals, and morals.

40. Never tell the truth to people who are not worthy of it.

41. It is best to read the weather forecast before we pray for rain.

42. Sufficient unto the day is one baby. As long as you are in your right mind don't you ever pray for twins. Twins amount to a permanent riot; and there ain't any real difference between triplets and a insurrection.

43. There are three things which I consider excellent advice. First, don't smoke to access. Second, don't drink to excess. Third, don't marry to excess.

44. It is just like man's vanity and impertinence to call an animal dumb because it is dumb to his dull perceptions.

45. Work and play are words used to describe the same thing under differing conditions.

46. Many a small thing has been made large by the right kind of advertising.

47. All things change except barbers, the ways of barbers, and the surroundings of barbers. These never change.

48. One is apt to overestimate beauty when it is rare.

49. What is human life? The first third a good time; the rest remembering about it.

50. You ought never to "sass" old people- unless they "sass" you first.

51. When one reads Bibles, one is less surprised at what the Deity knows than at what He doesn't know.

52. Why is it that we rejoice at a birth and grieve at a funeral? It is because we are not the person involved.

53. Be respectful to your superiors, if you have any.

54. Classic- a book which people praise and don't read.

55. Noise proves nothing. Often a hen who has merely laid an egg cackles as if she had laid an asteroid.

56. You can straighten a worm, but the crook is in him and only waiting.

57. All modern American literature comes from one book by Mark Twain called Huckleberry Finn.
- Ernest Hemingway

58. Concerning the difference between man and the jackass: some observers hold that there isn't any. But this wrongs the jackass.

59. We all live in the protection of certain cowardices which we call our principles.

60. I was gratified to be able to answer promptly, and I did. I said I didn't know.

61. It all began with Adam. He was the first man to tell a joke- or a lie.  How lucky Adam was. He knew when he said a good thing, nobody had said it before. Adam was not alone in the Garden of Eden, however, and does not deserve all the credit; much is due to Eve, the first woman, and Satan, the first consultant.

62. It's noble to be good. It's nobler to teach others to be good, and less trouble.

63. We can't reach old age by another man's road. My habits protect my life but they would assassinate you.

64. It is very wearing to be good.

65. Most people are bothered by those passages of Scripture they do not understand, but the passages that bother me are those I do understand.

66. No man is straitly honest to any but himself and God.

67. When I am king, they shall not have bread and shelter only, but also teachings out of books, for a full belly is little worth where the mind is starved.

68. The timid man yearns for full value and demands a tenth. The bold man strikes for double value and compromises on par.

69. Between believing a thing and thinking you know is only a small step and quickly taken.

70. If I had been helping the Almighty when he created man, I would have had him begin at the other end, and start human beings with old age. How much better to start old and have all the bitterness and blindness of age in the beginning!

71. The blunting effects of slavery upon the slaveholder's moral perceptions are known and conceded the world over; and a priveleged class, an aristocracy, is but a band of slaveholders under another name.

72. We think boys are rude, unsensitive animals but it is not so in all cases. Each boy has one or two sensitive spots, and if you can find out where they are located you have only to touch them and you can scorch him as with fire.

73. To believe yourself brave is to be brave; it is the one only essential thing.

74. Let your sympathies and your compassion be always with the under dog in the fight- this is magnanimity; but bet on the other one- this is business.

75. The universal brotherhood of man is our most precious possession- what there is of it.

76. Ignorant people think it's the noise which fighting cats make that is so aggravating, but it ain't so; it's the sickening grammar they use.

77. Twain on Cain: ...it was his misfortune to live in a dark age that knew not the beneficent Insanity Plea.

78. The best way to cheer yourself up is to try to cheer somebody else up.

79. Familiarity breeds contempt -- and children.

80. Chastity- you can carry it too far.

81. ...great books are weighed and measured by their style and matter and not by the trimmings and shadings of their grammer.

82. There has been only one Christian. They caught him and crucified him - early.

83. Circumstance -- which moves by laws of its own, regardless of parties and policies, and whose decrees are final and must be obeyed by all -- and will be.

84. My idea of our civilization is that it is a shoddy, poor thing and full of cruelties, vanities, arrogances, meannesses and hypocrisies.

85. My experience with Providence has not been of a nature to give me great confidence in his judgment, and I consider that my wife crept in while his attention was occupied elsewhere.

86. There are two times in a man's life when he should not speculate: when he can't afford it, and when he can.

87. The church is always trying to get other people to reform; it might not be a bad idea to reform itself a little, by way of example.

88. When one's character begins to fall under suspicion and disfavor, how swift, then, is the work of disintegration and destruction.

89. It is your human environment that makes climate.

90. For years my pet aversion had been the cuckoo clock...Some sounds are hatefuller than others, but no sound is quite so inane, and silly, and aggravating as the "hoo'hoo" of a cuckoo clock, I think. I bought one, and am carrying it home to a certain person; for I have always said that if the opportunity ever happened, I would do that man an ill turn.

91. Modesty died when clothes were born.

92. Of the 417 commandments, only a single one of the 417 has found ministerial obedience; multiply and replenish the earth. To it sinner & saint, scholar & ignoramus, Christian & savage are alike loyal.

93. Communism is idiocy. They want to divide up the property. Suppose they did it - it requires brains to keep money as well as make it. In a precious little while the money would be back in the former owner's hands and the communist would be poor again.

94. I have been complimented many times and they always embarrass me; I always feel that they have not said enough.

95. There is nothing that saps one's confidence as the knowing how to do a thing.

96. There comes a time in every rightly constructed boy's life when he has a raging desire to go somewhere and dig for hidden treasure.

97. If Christ were here there is one thing he would not be- a Christian.

98. Children have but little charity for one another's defects.

99. Blasphemy? No, it is not blasphemy. If God is as vast as that, he is above blasphemy; if He is as little as that, He is beneath it.

100. I am an old man and have known a great many troubles, but most of them never happened.

For more quotes, and much more Twain, please visit Mark Twain Quotes from Hannibal.net.

---

CHALLENGE TO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY

An ancient Chinese curse is "May you live in interesting times."  Well, regardless of  your political persuasion, these are interesting times.  The current ruling Republican Party controls the White House and both houses of Congress, yet is bedeviled by fundraising scandals, gradually evaporating public support for the war in Iraq and Administration foreign policy in general, a record budget deficit that shows no sign of shrinking, and  increasing public anger over energy costs growing at record pace along with profits for energy companies (which provided huge contributions to the election of the President), coupled with wholesale abandonment of the environment.

It would seem that this is an absolute Godsend to the Democratic Party.  Yet I have no great confidence that the Democrats will seize the opportunity that people such as Bush, Cheney, Libby, Abramoff, etc. have handed to them on a platter.  If all they do is keep up with the same old litany that "we're against what they're for," I don't see any serious chance for the Democrats taking control of either house of Congress.

Here are some thoughts that I have on issues where I think the Democratic Party should take positions:

(1)   It should advocate radical campaign finance reform, extending the efforts of Senators McCain and Feingold and the Common Cause public interest group. 

(2)   It should introduce and support legislation to mandate much higher mileage standards for vehicles, reimpose windfall profit taxes on energy companies, and push and fund efforts to promote the rapid development of new automotive technologies, such as hybrid, hydrogen-powered, and alternative fuel vehicles (biodiesel, for example).  Explore and expand mass transit as a real alternative to one person in each car.  America's love affair with the private automobile as the only means of travel needs to be re-thought.

(3)   Present a well-reasoned plan to balance the budget.  That may include restoring the tax structure to what it was during the Clinton Administration (a time of extended prosperity, as you may recall).  It should also address a reordering of budget priorities to increase funding for education and the environment and cut back on the corporate welfare that has been sponsored by the current Administration.

(4)   Set out a foreign policy that actually considers the root causes of the 9/11 attack, rather than continue to fight a knee-jerk neo-Crusade against the entire Muslim world that the current Administration essentially characterizes as terrorists.  This is a war with no defined enemy, no end in sight, and no clear vision of what we are trying to accomplish in Iraq and elsewhere.  And what about Iran?

And quit being afraid of worrying what Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly or Rush Limbaugh will say about it.  Those aware of American political history know that in the election of 1948, it was generally known that President Harry Truman had no chance whatsoever of beating Republican New York Governor Thomas Dewey.  Truman, however, didn't pay any attention to the polls nor did he cower.  He "gave 'em hell," won the election, and is now generally considered as one of the best presidents of the 20th century.

But it takes courage, and leadership.  We shall see if the Democratic Party can muster these qualities.

---

LIFE IS TOO DARN BUSY

OK, so you don't get a political rant this time.  I was thinking about what to put in this irregular publication, and it occurred to me that many times, when I sit down at the keyboard, I feel like a deer in the headlights -- frozen because I don't know which way to go.  When I think of my life these days, the number of choices I have as to how to spend my time are limitless, and that is more of a problem than a blessing.  One of my immediate life goals is to record and put out on a CD instrumental "new-age" compositions that have come to me over the years.  It used to be much simpler five to ten years ago:  I had a stereo mike and a digital tape recorder, and just sat down with my guitar (I had two of them then) and play each tune the best I could.  And I now have a DAT tape of most of those songs, but no, I wanted to make a fancier production, so I bought a complex multi-channel recorder.  And having had the thing for a couple of years now, I still don't fully know how to use the damned thing.  And I still haven't finished the album.

That, in microcosm, is a major dilemma in my life today.  I have most of the toys and things that I dreamed of while growing up, raising a family, and going through the economic and personal desert of divorce, and yet I find myself wishing for simplicity rather than options.  Don't get me wrong, I'm not wanting to become Amish or anything.  But it seems that the more tools I have to accomplish the things I need to do in my day-to-day life, the fewer important things I am actually getting done.  I get the feeling that I'm not alone in this boat, either.  If anyone has any thoughts or brilliant ideas on this subject, or just other stories to share, I'd love to hear them.

Come to think of it, the most enjoyment I've had lately is sitting down, usually late at night, with a good book, and devouring it.  Sometimes quickly, sometimes slowly.  Or just sitting with a guitar (my oldest one, which is still one of my best friends), unplugged, and unrecorded, and just playing it.  Hell, that's how most of the songs I have written have happened.

Wow.  What a concept.

---

A RESPONSE TO THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION POSITION ON IRAQ

I question the Bush Administration's assumption that if we simply leave Iraq, it is a foregone conclusion that the Islamic radicals will invade the U. S. and take the battle to this country.  My opinion is based on a variety of reasons.  First, and perhaps most importantly, if we were asleep before 9/11, we aren't now (notwithstanding the fact that the port security is presently woefully inadequate).  Second, the Islamic radicals lack the virtually unlimited budget that the U. S. military has for both weapons development and delivery.

And third, I think it a complete mistake for our government to assume that Islamic radicals are a cohesive, unitary body capable of acting militarily as some in the Administration fear they will.  To restate the obvious, Iraq as a state had virtually nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks, a fact that has been conclusively established (after this war was initiated).  We have created a hotbed of terrorism where one didn't exist before.  The al Qaeda terrorists are not and never have been tied to any particular country; they are stateless, nomadic individuals, and to proceed with a war against Iraq, and perhaps next Iran, we are not solving the al Qaeda problem; we are exacerbating it.

Another neo-con scenario is that if we leave Iraq, Iran will move in, effectively take over in Iraq, and have the ability to turn off the oil "faucet" from us.  There are a number of errors in this thinking.  First, Iraq and Iran are not the sole sources of Middle East oil.  Second, if all Arabs were able to act as one, they could have cut off our oil supply long ago.  In fact, they did so, in 1973, and although things were tight for awhile, some good actually came out of that, because conservation and vehicle fuel economy came to the forefront.  That situation, unfortunately, doesn't exist today because, in large part, of "oil" people running our country like Bush and Cheney, whose election was made possible in no small part by the oil companies who heavily contributed to their campaign, and who have profited to an unprecedented degree as a result of the oil squeeze that started last year.

The fact is that regardless whether the Arabs cut entirely or slow down the flow of oil to the U. S., in a relatively short time, say 50 years at the outside, given current demand, we will use up all of the known petroleum reserves.  It's high time that the U. S., on its own initiative, started moving this country toward a post-petroleum footing.

I don't buy the pious words in Bush's State of the Union speech about America being "addicted to oil" for a moment.  Hell, his people have been the pushers of that addictive product, and the hypocrisy of his statement to that effect is staggering.  The fact that the statement is correct does not diminish his hypocrisy.

So maybe we have to cut down a few more trees (which have been my sole source of house heat for the 27 years I've lived up here), or look into solar, wind energy, or, as a last resort, more nuclear power.  The sooner we do that, the better.  This country has led the world in technology for as long as I can remember, and it's about time that technology was turned loose on the new paradigm of a post-petroleum economy and society.

Getting back to the Muslim situation, if our esteemed leadership had for a moment paused to consider the reasons behind the hatred of the U. S. embodied by al Qaeda, instead of a knee-jerk response to "kick their ass," we might be in a better position to defuse the situation to a degree that we would minimize the chance of another 9/11.  As things stand now, every day that we spend in Iraq we spawn, intentionally or not, a new crop of Jihadists eager to immolate themselves, in order to take out a few Americans (or Brits, or members of the so-called "coalition of the willing").

Had Bush finished the job by hunting down bin Laden and the known, concentrated al Qaeda operatives in the mountains of Afghanistan, instead of  his turning his wrath on Iraq, we might indeed be safer.  But we aren't, and most of this country rightly (IMHO) blames the Bush administration for unwise decision making in their response to the 9/11 attacks.  If there were more of an effort on the part of our government to understand and attempt to relate to the Muslim world rather than thumb our nose at it, much of the perceived danger from that world would be reduced.

---

READING THE TEA LEAVES: THE 2006 ELECTION

    It’s now Wednesday night after the 2006 election, and we apparently know that both houses of Congress will be changing control to the Democratic party.  What is of interest is to understand why it happened, what it is likely to mean, and what we can reasonably expect in the next two years.

    It’s easy to say, “It’s Iraq, stupid!”  But that is a substantial oversimplification.  What I believe to be the prime impetus to the turning out of the Republican party, which has controlled both the House and the Senate for 12 years, is a classic case of hubris, in the Greek tragedy sense.  Hubris is what happens to those who, knowingly or not, exceed the limits the Greeks believed were established by the gods, and are accordingly punished.

    The Republicans were punished, by and large, by the electorate for more than just their unquestioning support of the war in Iraq and the manner in which it was conducted.  I believe that the institutional arrogance displayed by the leadership of the Republican party, in the persons of President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, and House Speaker Dennis Hastert, in various ways and capacities is what galvanized American voters.

    There are many manifestations of that arrogance: the intransigence on Iraq; the Foley scandal in Florida and the fact that the Republican House leadership either ignored the obvious warnings it had received about his conduct or brazenly assumed it would never be revealed; the Terri Schiavo debacle; the rampant spending coupled with tax cuts (primarily for high income earners) which turned a record budget surplus into a record deficit in short order; and last but definitely not least, the bribery scandals which for the most part involved Republicans (Abramoff, Cunningham, Ney, etc.).

    I have long believed that our government works most effectively when there is a real balance; either divergent control of the legislative and executive branches, or relatively close division of the parties in the legislature so that no one party (it generally doesn’t matter which one) assumes perpetual control of the federal government.  Balance also has a positive effect on ethics, because, human nature being what it is, people tend to behave more ethically when they know they’re being watched.

    Iraq may be the primary issue which voters had on their minds in this election.  Indeed, dissatisfaction with an unpopular war was the primary impetus for the election of President Nixon in 1968.  Nixon had hinted during the campaign that he had a “secret plan” for ending the Vietnam war.  As events transpired, what he did was to escalate the war, and resulting American troop deaths, before (four years later), we effectively “cut and ran,” declaring victory and bailing out.

    As history eventually showed, the loss of the Vietnam war did not result in the disaster in Southeast Asia that the war-hawks had predicted.  That said, Vietnam is not Iraq, and I don’t have any easy answers.  I remain convinced that it was incredibly stupid to have even started the war, but at this point that isn’t the issue.  There are many voices who have raised the same spectre of disaster as the “domino theory” advocates about Vietnam, who feel that if we leave Iraq without victory (whatever that means), the radical Islamists will be on the next boat to the U. S.  Where, at present, they’d probably be able to get through the poorly defended ports better than they could if they came by aircraft.

    I don’t buy that theory either.  What is now required in our foreign policy is to talk to and listen to our traditional allies: Germany, France, and the U. K.  Work toward building a truly international consensus for dealing both with Iraq and the problem of radical terrorism.  And do something I believe this Administration has not done: take a long, hard look at the reasons why much of the Islamic world (not just the terrorists) feel that we (the West) are their enemy, and address those issues in a balanced fashion.

    As far as issues that the new Congress needs to address, I would suggest that these are the primary ones, in order of importance:

•    Adopt new and strict laws and regulations on ethics, particularly related to political fundraising.

•    Work on returning to a balanced budget as soon as possible, and adhere to the reality that you can’t spend more than you take in, and that if you are going to war, you have to have a realistic plan for paying for it rather than foisting the cost off on future taxpayers.

•    Establish as a national priority the development of alternative technologies for energy that will within a reasonable time eliminate our dependence on foreign sources for energy.  This will also have a beneficial effect on national security, because it will eliminate the link between foreign policy and resource (oil) dependence.

•    Most importantly, make an active effort to abandon the combative, take-no-prisoners attitude the Republican party has had toward the Democratic party since 1994, when the Republicans assumed control of both houses of Congress.

    It is unreasonable to assume that these things will occur in any short order.  But, in the words of President Kennedy, “Let us begin.”