Predict THIS!!

I was looking through the Wall Street Journal today and saw these headlines:

"U.S. Manufacturing Growth Slows Dramatically", "Housing Imperils Recovery" and "Private Sector Added Few Jobs in May".

All of these developments seemed to catch the economic experts off guard, who were expecting improved job growth and housing starts.  One week the economists are expecting a turn around for 2011, the next week a double dip recession.

And where were the financial experts when the devastating stock market crash of 1929 hit banks and businesses?  Or the Black Friday Crash of 1987 when the market lost more than 22% in one single day?  How many of us were ready for the latest stock market decline beginning in 2008?

How can these people win Noble prizes for economics? My basic predictions-- based on talking to a few clients, basketball junkies and family -- come closer to the truth than these guys.  I'm convinced economists (preferably liberal) are idiots, trust them at your own risk.

Hardly a week passes when some "expert" predicts something that is later proved false.

A few weeks ago, Family Radio Network founder, Harold Camping, was predicting the end of the world. The "rapture," as it was known, was scheduled for May 21, 2011, would signal the day when Christ would come back to earth to take his believers to heaven.  A 14-year-old Russian teenager committed suicide when she heard the prediction, because she didn't want to be one of those left behind to suffer on earth.  Others quit their jobs and sold possessions in anticipation of not needing them anymore.

When it didn't happen, Mr. Camping laughingly said, "I miscalculated the date, it should have been October 21st."  How convenient for someone who has been wrong before.  His miscalculation of the impending rapture hasn't stopped new followers from saying, "when I heard he had the wrong day, I went out and thanked the Lord for another beautiful day." OOOOOOkay!

Speaking of wiping egg off your face, wasn't global warming supposed to melt the polar ice cap and raise sea levels over 25 feet and flood coastal cities?  How about David Viner, a researcher at the University of East Anglia in the UK,  who claimed that within a few years children "wouldn't know what snow was" and that "snowfall would be a very rare and exciting event."

In Al Gore's documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth," he confidently stated that "within the decade, there will be no more snows of Kilimanjaro" due to warming temperatures.   Global warming believers fail to acknowledge that the cap has been shrinking since 1912 long before greenhouse gas emissions started to rise.  To date, the famed snow cap -- a poster child of global warming --  remains a fixture on the mountaintop.

Why are people so eager to predict things, and why are we so quick to buy into their predictions?

The answer is one or all of the following:  money, power and/or politics.  The people making these predictions are typically trying to change behaviors (driving a car), sway voters to accept legislation (giving up our freedoms) or organizations in need of money to keep their jobs and continue their lies.  For me, the reasons are easier to understand than the willingness of people to believe them.  Common sense should eliminate 90% of the outrageous claims being made, but there persists a willingness to believe the people telling us these fabrications.

So there must be a desire by a lot of people who want to accept responsibility for their own bad behavior and to find redemption.  A asinine example of this are carbon credits which supposedly offset the global warming activities of big business and individuals.  The Sierra Club, Green Peace and the Environmental Defense Fund are some of the biggest hypocrites when it comes to telling us to give up something and then doing the very thing they tell us to stop (buying credits -- then flying everywhere in private jets or driving SUVs).  Their arrogance is unbearable.

The remaining ten percent must believe these predictions because they are simple-minded people, or lack the confidence in American enterprise to create the next Apple or Apollo spacecraft.  My suspicions are that you could track the people that voted for Obama and find them on the same list.  Or just look in his Administration.  I have more sympathy for them, but not much.

For fun, here are a few predictions from the past:

"It will be years -- not in my lifetime -- before a woman becomes Prime Minister,"  Margaret Thatcher, October 26, 1969.

"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers," Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.

"That virus -- HIV -- is a pussycat," Dr. Peter Duesberg, U.C. Berkeley, 1988.

"A rocket will never be able to leave the Earth's atmosphere,"  New York Times, 1936.

"The singer (Mick Jagger) will have to go.  The BBC won't like him,"  first Rolling Stones' manager, Eric Easton, to his partner after watching them perform.

"Rail travel at high speed will not be possible because passengers, unable to breathe, would die of asphyxia," Dr. David Larder, (1793-1859).

"There will never be a bigger plane built," a Boeing engineer, after the first flight of the 247.

"640K ought to be enough for anyone." Bill gates, founder of Microsoft, in 1981.

                                                 *           *           *

My prediction for the Super Bowl?  Packers

Bar Time For Big Spenders

Having a good time yet?

There is a political cartoon that shows Republicans and Democrats sitting at a tavern celebrating and toasting each other for working hard on this year's bloated Federal budget.  The celebratory mood is in stark contrast to a taxpayer who stands outside the Big Spender's Tavern with empty pockets and growing impatience.

As I've mentioned in earlier posts, the United States is currently running a Federal deficit of $14.3 trillion dollars. Just what does that mean?  In simple terms, it means that we owe a lot of money to creditors (individuals, businesses, governments and other organizations) who own U.S. government treasuries.  We are in this predicament because we have spent more than we take in.  And since we continue spending more,  selling more treasury bonds and increasing the deficit even further.  It's a never-ending cycle that feeds on itself.

This is important because Congress is about to debate raising the country's debt limit again (allowing us to borrow more).

Big Spenders

As you would expect, the political party currently in the White House (led by President Obama) will be voting to raise the limit, while Republicans will likely fight against it.  Not ironically, when Bush was in the White House, Republicans voted for raising it, and the Democrats against it -- with Senator Obama calling it a "failure of leadership."

In an early indication of the fight looming, House Speaker John Boehner said "It's true that allowing America to default would be irresponsible.  But it would be more irresponsible to raise the debt ceiling without simultaneously taking dramatic steps to reduce spending and reform the budget process."  The Speaker added, "Without significant spending cuts and reforms to reduce our debt, there will be no debt limit increase.  And the cuts should be greater than the accompanying increase in debt authority the President is given."

In simple terms, the Speaker is saying that he wants cuts in spending equal to the increase in the debt limit.  Is this even remotely feasible for the GOP?  They struggled mightily to pass a simple cut of $38 million a few weeks ago.  If the debt limit is raised $2 trillion dollars as Obama has asked, how are they possibly going to find the cojones to cut $2 trillion?

The response to Boehner's speech was predictable:  "Economic Armageddon!" as stated by the Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, allies on Wall Street and the mainstream media.  And Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said, "... failure by Congress to raise the debt ceiling is a risky approach that could result in an increase in interest rates that would worsen the nation's economy.  The worst outcome" he added, "would be that the nation's financial system becomes destabilized again."

So, like it has for the past five decades of debt raising, (the debt ceiling has been raised 78 times since 1960) one political party is preaching fiscal responsibility and the other is predicting catastrophic economic consequences.  When are these people going to stop putting their own re-election first and do something about Washington's out of control spending?

First off, this much I know.  Not raising the debt ceiling wouldn't necessarily lead to defaulting on U.S. obligations.  It would require Washington to use the money it's getting to pay toward that debt, but by itself wouldn't lead to defaulting on those loans.  The difficulty would be in paying for other things that are currently on the docket -- like defense, social programs and payrolls.

My hope is that a compromise (I know an ugly word these days) will be reached where Republicans force through significant spending cuts and raise the debt ceiling, but only to pay for existing obligations.  It would be like paying off debt before adding to it --no new furniture until the kitchen appliances are paid for.

Our U.S. Constitution (the 14th Amendment) prohibits us from defaulting on our country's financial obligations.  In particular, it must continue to make payments, interest and principal to countries like China and other holders of U. S. treasury bonds.  But this requirement doesn't mean we need to add new debt, and that's where necessary spending cuts could be made.

It is too early to say if Boehner and the House Republicans will be able to muster the courage to cut the $2 trillion mentioned earlier -- alright, it's not going to happen -- but I'd be happy with a smaller amount that could be reviewed periodically.  At least through the next year and a half until the 2012 elections are in the books, putting pressure on President Obama to stop his "change you can all believe in."  It would also remind the American people -- 60% who oppose raising the debt ceiling -- to demand more spending control from whoever wins the White House, Senate and House of Representatives.

It was recently announced by the government that Social Security and Medicare are running out of money sooner than the government had projected (shocking!).  When was the last time they were ever correct about anything?  Unemployment numbers?  Jobs?  Economy?

Medicare won't have enough money to pay full benefits starting in 2024, five years earlier than last year's estimate.  Social Security's cash to pay full benefits will run short in 2036, a year sooner than the 2010 projection.  Why not tie raising the debt ceiling to changes in both programs, forcing change to these entitlement programs that have been "off limits" for so many years?

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, Republican from Wisconsin, has proposed serious budget cuts and changes to the way Washington spends our money.  The response from Democrats, with help from the liberal mainstream media, has been to mock, denigrate and dismiss such proposals as a budget "that rips apart the safety net" for the poor and elderly.  Their answer?  Raise taxes, a non-issue with Republicans.  The longer we wait to address this elephant in the room -- entitlement programs, the more painful it is going to be for us, our children and their children.

A great president, Thomas Jefferson, once said, "no generation can contract debts greater than may be paid in the course of its own existence."  Let's hope that future presidents (and enough in Congress) feel the same way.

Always There

I was ten years old when my appendix needed to be removed.

I am always able to remember the day we landed on the moon because I was in the hospital for surgery when Neil Armstrong climbed down the Apollo Lunar Module's ladder and took "one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind."  The date was July 20, 1969.

I am also able to remember how scared I was to be spending time in the hospital, alone in an uncomfortable bed, connected to strange-looking medical equipment that kept beeping and clicking throughout the night.  I'm not too proud to admit that I cried for my mother and wanted desperately to go home.  My combination of emotions proved too much for the hospital's night nurse who stuck her head into the darkened room and said to me in no uncertain terms "THAT'S ENOUGH!"  Needless to say, I stopped my crying and feel asleep.

Sometimes you need to be held -- and other times told to get a hold of yourself.


The week of May 6 through May 12 is National Nurses Week, when those who are blessed with such memories can give thanks to the men and women who provide compassion, respect and care in healthcare settings.  Whether it's the birth of a new baby, battlefield triage or end-of-life hospice care, nurses are a critical component to providing the care we need most in times of need.

 

Every nurse takes a Hippocratic oath of sorts called the Florence Nightingale Pledge as a token of esteem for the founder of modern nursing.  It reads,

"I solemnly pledge myself before God and in the presence of this assembly, to pass my life in purity and to practice my profession faithfully.  I will abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous, and will not take or knowingly administer any harmful drug.  I will do all in my power to maintain and elevate the standard of my profession, and will hold in confidence all personal matters committed to my keeping and all family affairs coming to my knowledge in the practice of my calling.  With loyalty, will I endeavor to aid the physician in his work, and devote myself to the welfare of those committed to my care."

As the husband of a nurse, I can say that after more than 25 years, my wife still takes those words to heart.  While nursing has changed over the years (the white caps, capes and skirts have been replaced by multi-colored scrubs), the philosophy of patient care (using eyes, mind and intuition) hasn't.  Modern technology has made it easier to measure vital signs, record information efficiently, and to administer medications.   It has not however, replaced the need for nurses to perform diagnostics that cannot be managed by a computer or machine.

The word nursing derives its meaning from the Latin word nutricius which means nourishing.  Whether it is the mother of a newborn child needing instructions on how to nurse, or an older patient needing someone to talk to about missing his deceased wife -- nursing tends to matters of the heart.  Our fears, our sorrows and our physical limitations require special attention, and it is often given by nurses.

It's fitting that on the weekend we honor mothers for all they do for their families, we also honor nurses who serve a similar position in clinics, hospitals, schools and the home.  In recent years, nurses have moved beyond simply "following doctor's orders" to using advanced degrees for management positions at health care facilities and universities.  Today, nursing includes advanced practice nursing -- nurse anesthetists, nurse practitioners,  nurse midwives, and clinical nurse specialists.

It's been said that nursing is not a job, but a calling.  My wife seemed to know what she wanted to do much earlier in life than I did.  That's not to say that she's had it easy.  Early in our marriage, I would spend parts of Christmas and Thanksgiving at the hospital since she had the holiday shift.  Working weekends and nights was hard on raising our two boys and at times on our marriage.  But never to the point where I wasn't glad that she was a nurse.

My healing skills go as far as some soap and hot water, or an occasional band aid for cuts and scraps.  Once, when our youngest boy needed stitches for a deep cut to his finger, I was so nervous that I drove to the wrong clinic before realizing my mistake.  Cool under pressure?  Not me.

It's nice to know that if anything should happen to me or our boys, she will be there to help us through it.  Whether its a skinned knee, a persistent fever, fainting spell or something more serious like an appendix, she knows what to do.   She's always there when needed.

I, for one, am glad.

Your Majesty, King Barack

I can't help thinking about the Royal Wedding of Prince William and  Kate Middleton -- maybe it has something to do with the non-stop coverage on every channel from FOX, CBS, ABC and NBC, as well as a few mentions on ESPN and  PBS.

I've also been thinking about the relationship that exists between the Monarchy of the United Kingdom and the general public (commoners) who overwhelmingly support them in their elevated role. Legislative, executive and judicial powers are given to other parties, but the Queen of England and her lawful successors are given the "Royal Prerogative" to regulate civil service, declare war, make peace, direct actions of the military and negotiate international agreements and alliances.  Great Britain's Parliament, however, can override any power the Monarch holds by passing legislation.

It's a relationship (however symbolic) that I can't fully understand, because our first president, George Washington, made it clear he did not want to be king.  He believed the United States would be a stronger Republic if led by its free and independent citizens.  It was a controversial position taken by our commander in chief, who resisted the masses and military might who deeply desired a sovereign ruler.

Our First President

Over the years, his way of thinking has been diminished by the power elite in Washington and a welfare state needing more and more assistance (tax payer money).

George Washington said in his first inaugural address in New York City:  "The magnitude and difficulty of the trust to which the voice of my country called me... could overwhelm with despondence one who... ought to be peculiarly conscious of his own deficiencies."

His modesty and abhorrence of power set a standard for American presidents that lasted for more than 150 years.

We need government's help

The fierce independence and self-reliance that George Washington envisioned for the United States eventually succumbed to the political scheming of powerful leaders who took advantage of an economically-weakened American populace.

With the "Great Depression" of the 1930's and presidency of Franklin D Roosevelt, the United States was introduced to our first organized system of welfare, joining the ranks of Germany, Great Britain, and the rest of Europe.  Roosevelt's power grab led to The New Deal, which meant a drastically new and intrusive role for government.

"I pledge you," he said at the 1932 Democratic National Convention, "and I pledge myself to a new deal for the American people."  Roosevelt and his "brain trust" of political advisers -- arrogant and opportunistic -- convinced millions of U.S. citizens that he was their savior in their time of need, or as the New York Times editorialized on June 18, 1933, "the heaven-sent man of the hour."

President Roosevelt

In truth, President Roosevelt was nothing more than an opportunistic politician who succeeded in revolutionizing the institutions of American political and economic life -- and as a result, diminished our economic and individual liberties.

In the 1950's President Lyndon B Johnson's desire to create the Great Society took the New Deal policies to even greater heights through public broadcasting, Medicare, Medicaid and federal education spending.  The power and arrogance that Johnson seized was made possible by the assassination of President Kennedy, who had had his own initiatives known as the New Frontier.

President Johnson took advantage of Kennedy's assassination and the idealistic 1960's to push his utopian views on poverty and discrimination.  Instead of ending "the war on poverty" Johnson led the country into further dependency and political/racial/military unrest.

The Great Society's programs expanded further under Presidents Nixon and Ford.  With President's Bush Clinton, and now Obama, welfare has continued its spread into the lives of children, seniors and even working class citizens.

While the goals of these social programs was originally honorable -- ending poverty and racial injustice -- the result has been much less:  a loss of  freedom and a growing dependency on our country's leaders to provide everything from food, childcare and healthcare.

The New Deal

The Man Who Would Be King

As Barack Obama ascended to the presidency in 2008, our country was once again reeling from the aftermath of a severe recession.  Once again, America mistakenly looked to Washington and its political royalty to find salvation.

Obama's historic victory caused some people to view him as a messiah, as this quote from Rep Jesse Jackson Jr shows:  "I cried all night.  I'm going to be crying for the next four years.  What Barack Obama has accomplished is the single most extraordinary event that has occurred in the 232 years of the nation's political history... The event itself is so extraordinary, that another chapter should be added to the Bible to chronicle its significance."

And with this view firmly entrenched, Obama has proceeded to launch one of the greatest assaults to our freedoms in modern times:  passing Obamacare despite the objections of the American people and lower courts who have called the bill unconstitutional, attempting to change the Second Amendment (gun control), and bypassing Congress to name czar positions overseeing healthcare, climate change, the auto industry and urban affairs.  President Obama has also passed two massive economic stimulus programs that are bankrupting our economy.   And let's not forget how quickly he nationalized auto companies, financial institutions and banks.

The results?  A country with over $14 trillion of debt, over 9% unemployment, one in seven on food stamps, a three year low for the dollar, gasoline prices over $4 per gallon, and more than 50% of our population receiving some type of income from the government.

Based on his first two years in office, I'm convinced our Lord and Majesty, King Barack would be at home in Persia, Alexander's Greek Empire, Rome, Egypt, the Inca and Maya empires, and the Soviet Union.  They were all pyramid-building empires made up of welfare-like programs commanded from the top.

Let's hope that with the election of last fall's conservative agenda, America sees the error of their ways.  In less than one-hundred years, we have seen the rise of government that would shock our founding fathers to the core.  Unless we are willing to stop our dependency on government welfare -- and restore the presidency to the time of George Washington -- the United States of America is doomed to go the way of prior empires.

God save the president.

The Hollow Men

Say what you will about Donald Trump as a candidate for president, but you must admit that he speaks his mind.  Unlike other candidates, he isn't afraid to give you his opinion and get something done.

If only all politicians could be so endowed.

President Obama was recently overheard on an open microphone taunting Republicans by saying "You want to repeal healthcare?  Go at it.  We'll have that debate.  You're not going to do that by nickel-and-diming me in the budget.  You think we're stupid?"

Reporters also heard him privately rip Wisconsin's very own Paul Ryan, the GOP's Budget Committee chairman who had proposed cutting federal spending.  "Paul Ryan says his priority is to make sure he's just being America's accountant, "Obama said.  "This is the same guy that voted for two wars that were unpaid for, voted for the Bush tax cuts that were unpaid for, voted for the prescription drug bill that cost as much as my healthcare bill, but wasn't paid for.... So he's not on the level."

Lincoln
A man of action

Every so often you get a chance to hear what these politicians really think about each other -- and it's no surprise that they can't get anything done.

The lovable persona that is staged on television (shaking hands and holding babies while the U.S. flag flies in the background) or on Sunday morning talk shows (my good friend, Senator McCain) is one of a concerned politician who is "working hard" for the American people.

Unfortunately, that translates into the American voter, since so many politicians are mostly concerned about being re-elected.  So concerned that Democrats (and for the most part Republicans) will 1) do nothing, 2) say nothing and 3) propose nothing that gives the slightest hint of substance.

Isn't it time we get more out of these fraudulent wind bags?

Take our country's national debt -- estimated at 14.2 trillion.  President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Reid and Speaker of the House Boehner made daily headlines trying to avoid a government shutdown over the federal budget.  Each participant let it be known that they had a moral responsibility to reign in out-of-control spending while maintaining critical programs needed by the elderly, disabled and children.

In reality, they were fighting for their constituents who demanded that no action be taken on Planned Parenthood and new Obamacare spending (Democrats), raising taxes (Republicans) and almost anything to do with Social Security and Medicare.  Bottom line, with 2011 spending at $3.87 trillion, our fearless representatives are having orgasms over a measly $28 billion in cuts.  Sounds like business as usual in Washington, where every year since 1969 politicians have spent more than they have taken in.

I'm beginning to think every politician in Washington is nothing but an empty suit filled with nausea-inducing sound bites -- like this one from Mr. Boehner, "The biggest accomplishment of the first 100 days is that the spending debate ...  has turned 180 degrees."  How about that?  It's now a major victory to say that "talk" has changed in Washington.  All politicians DO is talk - how is that an accomplishment?

Truth be told, this country is in big trouble unless we can get politicians to do MORE than talk.

Another example of the "meaningless babble" we get from Washington has to do with the high cost of gasoline.  Everyone is feeling pain at the pumps these days -- from commuters and truckers to anyone heating their homes or buying groceries.  Since 2008, the price of a gallon of gasoline has increased from $1.84 to almost $4.00 in most parts of the county.

Naturally this ties in nicely with the country's overall energy strategy, which since the mid-1970's has produced no new oil refineries, and no new nuclear power plants since Three Mile Island in 1970.  Is doing nothing really a strategy, or is it just cowardice on the part of these politicians to avoid taking a stand against environmentalists who would like to see America riding bicycles and heating their homes with ear wax?

So let's play the blame game -- something else politicians are good at.

Who's responsible?  Local and national media would have you believe one of the following:  1) Obama, whose restrictions on drilling for new oil in the United States means we can't even take advantage of our own resources; 2) Congressional Republicans who refuse to support alternative fuels which would reduce our dependency on foreign oil; 3) market speculators who have bid up the price of oil in order to make a killing; 4) freedom fighters in the Middle East and North Africa who have destabilized major oil producing areas; and 5) supply and demand with the recovering economy and recovering demand.

President Obama -- completing the final trifecta of all good politicians -- calls for an investigation into the high price of oil, thinking this will somehow provide an answer (but not lower prices since he has stated numerous times that he wants higher oil costs to support his alternative energy agenda).  Investigations are like catnip to politicians who would rather discuss the problem, rather than a solution.  Remember the arrogant and condescending Senate hearings into auto companies in 2008, which included testimony from the CEOs of Ford, Chrysler and General Motors?  What ever came from that charade?  Government Motors and electric cars?

Nonetheless, not to be outdone, the following congressional committees are gearing up to investigate the situation:

May 8th:  House Energy and Commerce Committee
May 9th:  House Select Committee on Energy Independence & Global Warming
May 10th:  House Science and Technology Committee
May 15th: Senate Energy and Natural Resource Committee
May 16: House Judiciary Committee
May 22nd:  House Oversight Subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Can you believe we actually have that many committees?  And that's just energy.

Imagine the political theatre that will follow when politicians -- on television, of course-- tell oil executives to stop price gouging (oh, no!) while taxing those profits to expand wind and solar energy.   And then pass the cost for their political ineptitude onto us through even higher gas prices.

Politicians will continue to play the part of hollow men as long as we allow them to play it.  It's time we put some people with substance in Washington to take care of business.

On the Wings of Mercury

I must be dreaming.


The Suzuki motorcycle appears out of the darkness, racing past indistinguishable shapes and strangely colored lights.  As I look out the window of the car I am riding in, I see that the driver of the motorcycle isn't wearing a helmet, his head bobbing slightly with the rushing air.  Within seconds, I can see that his eyes are closed and his breathing measured as if in a deep sleep.  Miraculously, the motorcycle stays true, picking up speed as if shot from a cannon -- when suddenly a car materializes in the lane before him.  I look again and see that the cycle driver's eyes are still shut and now I can hear the driver snoring despite the rushing wind coming from my open window.


"Wake up!"  I shout at the cycle, as the car ahead appears closer.  As if distracted, the driver's head turns toward me, with eyes still shut.   I shout again, "Wake up!  Wake up!"


    


Suddenly, I open my eyes and find the alarm clock flashing 5:59 AM.  Within seconds the alarm goes off, reminding me that it's time to get out of bed and continue my training for a 5K run, which is part of the La Crosse Fitness Festival being held later this month.

 

As I slide my legs from bed, I rub my face and ask myself why I am doing this.  I am not a runner -- and to prove that point, my feet send a sharp jolt up to my knees before it retreats to a dull ache by the time it reaches my lower back.  At my current age of fifty-two, my dad was already suffering from his battle with Parkinson's Disease, so I am not able to draw on any rational memory of him getting up to run or ride a bike.  His early morning departures had more to do with fishing and hunting, a pastime I didn't share with my brother and sister.  I was always interested in basketball, football and maybe tennis, although the later was a pathetic attempt to keep up with my high school friends.

After dressing and eating a bite or two of a banana, I head out the back door and walk toward my destination, the football field at Central High School.  At 6:20, there isn't much traffic, but the occasional light in the windows of the houses I pass tells me that I'm not the only body stirring this morning.   And there's something new in the air today -- snow flakes, swirling around my head.

As I pass the tennis courts , I am trying to convince myself that this will all be over in 35 minutes -- long enough to run 6 laps (twice) around the track.  Today's snow is accompanied by a gusting wind that is blowing fairly hard from the Northeast.  As is usually the case, I have the whole track to myself.

As I start my first lap, my thoughts wander to a call I received four weeks ago from my good friend, Paul Mundinger, a fellow pentathalete (that's someone over 50 trying to be active), who convinced me to try running in this event, as a way to shake off winter and lose a few pounds.  "It will be fun and it's not too far to run.  5K is only three miles," he continued, "and we can run it together."

To understand the irony of that moment requires listening to him say "we can run it together" last fall when we were planning to run a 10K during Oktoberfest.   At the time, neither of us had run any distance for probably 25 years, during which we had gained quite a few pounds and a measurable amount of gray hair.  At best, Paul had probably run no further than to the bathroom after finishing another beer during a Badger football  game.  I -- at least -- could run up and down a basketball court.

By the time I am nearing the end of my first lap, my breathing has become labored, and I am tempted to use the excuse of stretching just to catch my breath.  But as I cross the first lap marker, I gain a level of confidence that feels like a glowing ember rising from the warmth burning inside me.  "Let's make it another lap, " I tell myself, as a sky full of wet snowflakes continue to drop.

 

Running a 10K during Oktoberfest was a challenge that required more than opening my wallet for a new pair of running shoes (with sure lace and dual density collar) and a light-weight shirt (with a moisture transfer system).  It required an amazing amount of effort despite heat, humidity and early morning darkness.  It required a way to convince myself that I could complete 20 laps with minimal downtime, while ignoring pain from my ankles, calves, hamstrings and lower back.  And much to my dismay, --running the race alone, when Paul unexpectedly backed out because of a leg injury...

Fifteen minutes later, and one and a half miles later, I slow to a walk to catch my breath, which quickly blows away in the swirling wind.  As usual, by the time I take my first break from running, I am feeling pretty good -- my muscles having stretched enough to respond to the turns and pushes of the track.  The high you get from running was kicking in.  "You're half way there," I say as I begin my second round of six laps.

My mind wanders back to Paul's phone call to try a shorter race.  This time the challenge was not the 5 week commitment that I knew would be needed, but finding a way to overcome the effects of winter and five months of little activity.  For last fall's Oktoberfest race, I had been doing some core training and riding my bicycle.  This time, the early spring weather was cold, wet and dark -- obstacles which were proving difficult and highly unpredictable.  And less than three weeks into training, Paul strained his knee, putting him -- again -- out of the race and with his wife and my wife (who would be walking the 5K race).  I remind myself that the next time Paul asks me to run a race with him that I hang up before accepting the challenge.

As I was finding out for the second time within 6 months, the challenge of running is not something physical, but something mental -- overcoming the unexpected weather, and not depending on anyone to get you out of bed, to run and to finish.

With snow covering the black asphalt to my left, I continue to pound out the laps.  Sweat is dripping down my face and flakes of frozen water flutter into my eyes, which are staring straight ahead.  Plumes of frost escape my mouth as I place one foot in front of the other.

My twelfth and final lap is always my favorite quarter mile -- with nothing to stop me, I feel strong, fast and ahead of time.   I laugh at myself and shout, "I am unstoppable!"  Imagining wings sprouting from my ankles like the Roman god Mercury, I sprint around the last bend, feeling the possibilities of a new day.  Straight ahead is the finish -- and an end to heavy legs, the physical pain to my back, and to the fear that I can't finish the race.  As I cross the final lap -- in less than 33 minutes --  the relief of finishing is quickly pushed aside as I ponder another morning just like today.

And another 5:59 A.M. showing from my alarm clock.

Every Vote Counts

I don't think my son could have picked a better time to cast his first vote.

November 2, 2010 was a memorable night, when America turned from Democrat to Republican, and Wisconsin elected a new governor, stopped the re-election of Senator Russ Feingold, and put conservative majorities in the State Senate and Assembly.  It was a night which would resonate loudly for every citizen in the Badger state and throughout the country, sick of Obamacare and out-of-control spending.

It was early evening that he walked into the small school gym where we vote -- and registered for the first time.  (I'm too old to remember the first time I voted, but I'm guessing it was in college, when I was swept up in the 1980 election fervor between Ronald Reagan, President Carter and John Anderson.  That was almost three years AFTER being eligible to vote.)

Sean in Washington D.C.

I don't know how he voted last November, but I have an idea.  As a loyal watcher of Fox News, devoted listener of NPR, avid reader of Ayn Rand's Fountainhead and owner of a copy of the religious Qur'an, he is interested in many divergent points of view.  I would expect no less from someone who is looking forward to college and a brave new world.

I say his "timing" is great because the last 5 month's have been unbelievable in ways that he will remember for the rest of his life.  In just the 157 days since he cast his ballot, he has seen --

. thousands of protesters -- including teachers, students, big union representatives, Hollywood actors, director Michael Moore, and the Rev Jesse Jackson -- gather on the steps of Wisconsin's state capitol building.  Regardless of their misguided reasons, you have to admit that residents of Wisconsin know how to throw a protest party.

. an attempt to remove collective bargaining rights for state public employees.  Back in 1959, Wisconsin was the first state in the US to provide these "rights" to public employees, and unions are not going to let it go without a fight.

. the flight of 14 Democrat senators from the state, leaving 19 Republican senators one vote short of a quorum needed to pass the state spending bill.  State police were dispatched to retrieve the senators, but because they had slipped into nearby Illinois, they were unable to bring them back.

. a "sick day" in schools throughout the state to allow teachers to protest in Madison.  Weeks later, these same teachers held a make-up day of school, but since students weren't required to attend, the school day for those students who showed up consisted of movies, music and free time on the computer.

. the creation of a Facebook page that lists companies that contributed at least $5,000 to Scott Walker's campaign, with the intention of "bringing woe to companies that support him, and therefore his anti-worker, anti-education and anti-progress politics."

. recall efforts to remove 16 state senators from both parties for their support or opposition to the bill curtailing public employee unions.  One of these, Senator Kapanke of La Crosse, has received death threats, suffered vandalism to his car and discovered nails scattered on his driveway.

. the temporary passage of Walker's bill when the State Senate removed all budgetary measures.  Eight days later, (union-friendly) Judge Maryann Sumi issued a stay on the bill saying it had been passed without the required 24-hour notice to inform the public of the meeting.  It remains in court (never a good omen) as I write this post.

.  an election for a Wisconsin Supreme Court justice, viewed as a referendum on Governor Walker's budget battles.  On the morning following the election, results showed Democrat Kloppenburg leading Republican Prosser by a minuscular 204 votes, or 50.1% to 49.9%.  It was the most expensive state Supreme Court race in Wisconsin history, with $3.58 million spent by outside political support groups.

. a reversal of fortunes, when it was reported that a Waukesha county clerk announced that she had forgotten to report to the AP an additional 14,000 votes, giving the election lead back to incumbent Prosser.  Democrats and conspiracy theory advocates have cried foul.

. an eleventh-hour budget deal that prevented the U.S. Government from shutting down.  Budget shortfalls and party programs will continue to force battles between liberal and conservative ideologies until the next presidential election in 2012.

Who knows what the remainder of this year will bring?  In all likelihood, some of the senators being recalled will lose in their special election, and the union-busting bill will eventually wind up in the Wisconsin Supreme Court.  So the future will be anything but boring.

Every morning -- while the smell of coffee brings my household to life --my son snatches the frost-covered newspaper from outside our door.  Like a spy coming in from the cold, the Tribune leads with headache-inducing headlines that speak of open law violations, constitutional crises, trillion dollar deficits, government shut-downs and bankrupt social security/Medicare futures.  Local talk radio is flooded with ads that misrepresent candidates and their positions, and callers -- with too little information and too little time -- blast local events and developments.  Evening news reports are vidid with video of thousands of protesters surrounding the capitol building in Madison.  Teachers, well known throughout the community (and who "teach" our children Monday through Friday) hold signs attacking Governor Walker for being another Hitler or Darth Vader.  And fellow students stand and scream on street corners asking for signatures that will recall a local businessman/owner of a successful summer league baseball team.

What's an impressionable teenager to think?  Or do?

In my son's case, vote.

Obama's Lack of Leadership

You might find this hard to believe, but there is a word in the dictionary that is appropriate for what's happening in our intervention into Libya's festering civil war.  The word is OBAMBULATE, which means to "wander or walk about aimlessly."  You can check it out if you don't believe me.

It's a fitting word for the lack of leadership coming from President Obama on the majority of issues he has faced in his two years of office.

Starting with Libya, yesterday during a press briefing, we were treated with this hilarious exchange between Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications Ben Rhodes and a journalist who asked:  "If it's not a war, what's the right way to characterize this operation?"

Leader of the Pack
Vince Lombardi

Mr. Rhodes said:  "I think what we've said is that this is a military operation that will be limited in both duration and scope.  Our contribution to this military operation that is enforcing a U.N. Security Council resolution is going to be limited to the from end, and then we'll shift to a support role..."

Question:  "But it's not going to war then?"

Mr Rhodes answered:  "Well, again, I think what we are doing is enforcing a resolution that has a very clear set of goals, which is protecting the Libyan people, averting a humanitarian crisis and setting up a no fly-zone.  Obviously that involves "kinetic military action", particularly on the front end..."

In response to the earlier question, it's clear that President Obama has no interest in exhibiting any leadership on the Libyan conflict.  Not only won't he call it a war, but he talks about providing humanitarian aid, to enforcing the no fly zone to providing naval and air support, with little or no clarity to our mission.  His dependency on NATO (who's origins date back to creating a North Atlantic Alliance to support member countries -- of which Libya IS NOT ONE) eliminates the United States and President Obama from taking the lead in what is understandably a difficult situation.

Can you imagine President George Washington, Ulysses Grant,  Prime Minister Winston Churchill or better yet, General George Patton using "kinetic military action" to describe our activities?  For President Obama, not only is war hell -- but apparently -- so is just saying it.

President Obama has shown NO leadership in the handling of one of the biggest problems our country is facing -- illegal immigration.  Instead of showing support for tough new immigration reform -- designed to identify, prosecute and deport illegal immigrants -- President Obama filed a lawsuit against Arizona saying that the state was taking matters into its own hands.  That's our job, the U.S. Justice Department argued.

Apparently their job is to oppose Arizona's new immigration law.  Speaking at a naturalization ceremony last year, President Obama call for an overhaul of immigration laws to avoid "irresponsibility by others." He later added that the Arizona law threatened "to undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as Americans...".  Huh?  Since when does identifying ILLEGAL immigrants and deporting them undermine American fairness?  Maybe breaking the law is an acceptable way of doing business in Chicago, but not for the rest of the country.

I understand that President Obama, being a democrat, was likely to oppose the new law.  What I don't understand is why he decided to interject himself into this debate at all.  States across the country have proposed or enacted hundreds of bills addressing immigration since 2007 (some 222 laws and 131 resolutions in 48 states) because the federal government won't enforce the laws that will make these states safe.  If he wants to exhibit leadership on this issue, he should stop micromanaging immigration reform and just tell the Justice Department to "do their job."

For too many years, politicians have put votes and their survival before the safety of their constituents and the rights of states to protect their borders.  President Obama's no different.

If Obama takes the lead on anything these days, it's getting out there and apologizing for occasions when America has been " arrogant, dismissive and derisive" toward Europe.  Rather than being a statesman for a strong America, Obama has claimed that America has "a moral responsibility to act" on arms control because only the U.S. has "used a nuclear weapon."  In Latin America, he said the U.S. had not "pursued and sustained engagement with our neighbors" because we "failed to see that our own progress is tied directly to progress throughout the Americas."

Why the criticism?  As Nicolle Wallace explained in a Daily Beast article last year "Why is Obama Apologizing for America?" it's not because Obama is anti-American.  It's because he views America as needing to BE SAVED from its past (bombing Hiroshima, the Bay of Pigs and Pershing and cruise missiles in Europe and the Middle East).  And as it's savior, Obama must tear it down before he can save it.

By all accounts, President Obama does not see American exceptionalism.  Lacking in his definition is a belief in America's special accomplishments and a history of unrivaled freedom, generosity, productivity, innovation, militaristic and diplomatic strength and record as liberators, protectors, and defenders.

Finding fault in America has never had a seat in the Oval Office quite like it does with Obama.

My last post talked about how people are feeling like things have never been worse.  Throughout the history of this great country -- through depressions, wars and unemployment -- citizens have looked to our president for confidence, a great vision, and hope.  It is also important that our leaders hold an optimistic view of the world, so that they can inspire others to achieve better things and overcome obstacles to freedom and choice.

Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, in her eulogy of former president Ronald Reagan, stated the following:  "In his lifetime, Ronald Reagan was such a cheerful and invigorating presence that it was easy to forget what daunting historic tasks he set for himself.  He sought to mend America's wounded spirit, to restore the strength of the free world and to free the slaves of Communism."

Is it too much to expect the same from Obama?

Flash! It's the End of the World! --- Again

JAPAN FACING 20,000 DEAD, POTENTIAL NUCLEAR MELTDOWNS,ECONOMIC COLLAPSE!

MASS DEPOPULATION.  GENOCIDE.  WWIII?

ECONOMIC ARMAGEDDON.  HERE WE COME!

IS THIS THE END OF LABOR IN AMERICA?

ALEXANDER McQUEEN CHOSEN TO DESIGN KATE MIDDLETON'S WEDDING DRESS! 

All of these headlines indicate doom, gloom and the end of life as we know it -- except for the last one, which makes me want to end it all.  As a writer -- proudly inculcated at the University of Wisconsin-Madison's journalism school -- I know a lot about getting people to read the news.

At the least, I can write a good headline when I need to.

As a result, I feel like I'm qualified to view today's news with a skeptical eye, especially when it uses a certain brand of "armageddon journalism."

I have talked to more people lately that wonder if things have ever been as bad as they are today.  And if you cut up your local rag into just headlines, you might agree.  News editors will always say that bad news sells papers.

Even my 82-year-old mother lamented the other day that she feels things have never been worse. This from a lady who lived through the Great Depression, Pearl Harbor and the advent of WWII, the historic bombing of Hiroshima, Japan, the assassination of John Kennedy, the horrors of the Vietnam War and finally 9/11.  Even the advent of Elvis Presley and his pelvic gyrations from the 50's and 60's don't depress her as much as the protests occurring in Madison, Wisconsin and their recall efforts to undo the 2010 elections.

Are things really worse today than the soup lines during the Great Depression?  Sending a nation of young men into World War II?  Or storming the beaches of Normandy?

Maybe it's the immediacy of today's news.  No more waiting for next week's Time Magazine or tomorrow's newspaper.  You can't turn on the radio or cable news without being reminded of how terrible things are in the world today (TROUBLE IN MICHIGAN:  DETROIT POPULATION SHRINKS BY 25%!).  There's no escaping the hostility and vitriol coming from the mouths of politicians, cable news talking heads and newspaper opinion/editorial pages (WHOOPIE GOLDBERG IS HACKED OFF AT DONALD TRUMP, THINKS HE'S A RACIST!).  Or visit a gas station without being reminded of recall efforts.

Today's mainstream media have developed a style of reporting that I call Armageddon journalism which means that they report facts as quickly as possible and in the most dramatic way to garner the most coverage and influence opinion.  Three examples come to mind:  1) the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, 2) the global warming scare and 3) the earthquake/tsunami coverage in Japan.

If you didn't know better, last year's British Petroleum oil spill caused irreparable damage to the coast area bordering Louisiana.  Daily viewing of oil slick beaches and marshes (2,000 SQUARE MILES OF WETLANDS LOST FOREVER!), dead wildlife (DOLPHIN CARCASS FOUND IN THE GULF BLEEDING FROM MOUTH AND BLOW HOLE!) and unemployed fisherman  (ONE MILLION JOBS PERMANENTLY LOST IN GULF DISASTER!) created an image of immense destruction, with the only solution being a complete moratorium on oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.  Damn the later evidence which pointed to a situation that was much less destructive than previously predicted.

Since Al Gore presented his infamous "An Inconvenient Truth" there have been numerous doomsday predictions claiming that global warming is real, potentially catastrophic and caused by humans.  Don't let Al Gore's political agenda -- including carbon taxes (HOLLYWOOD EARNS PUBLIC PRAISE THROUGH CARBON CREDITS!), redistribution of wealth (WHERE DID MIDDLE CLASS GO?) and green energy business (GARBAGE TRUCK CUTS HARMFUL EMISSIONS, BUT STILL STINKS!)  -- muddy the real truth which includes record low temperatures, an increasing ice mass around the poles and naturally occurring carbon dioxide in everything from trees to flatulent dairy cows.

Japan has been severely hurt by the the recent earthquake and tsunami as evidenced by the death of thousands and the destruction of towns, crops and infrastructure.  However, there has been quite a bit of hysteria (RISKY BUSINESS: NUCLEAR CATASTROPHE IN JAPAN!) by every news outlet claiming the dangers of nuclear energy to human life.  Greenpeace and every other uber-liberal group has been shouting at the top of their lungs that we must put an end to nuclear power because it's just TOO DANGEROUS.  "More windmills and solar panels," they shout.  Yes, the nuclear accident in Fukushima Daiichi is terrible.  But, just like the oil spill and global warming threat, the potential dangers of nuclear power plants have to be put into perspective.  It's so easy to predict disaster when the potential for disaster exists.  Hysterically reporting a nuclear meltdown in Japan is not only armageddon journalism at its finest, but also has the long term effects of limiting the energy options needed by our society for years to come (as does misreporting the BP oil damage in the Gulf of Mexico).

[As an aside, the Caithness Windfarm Information Forum reported that there were 35 fatalities associated with wind turbines in the United States from 1970 to 2010.  Nuclear energy, by contrast, did not kill a single American in that time.  So you tell me which has been the deadlier alternative in the United States?]

I think the internet has changed everything, beginning with social networking.   There's never been an easier way to make your opinion known than Facebook, My Space, Twitter or any other networking site.  These opinions -- (WALKER DESTROYING WORKING CLASS IN WISCONSIN!) -- drive a wedge between friends and enemies, men and women, sports fans and high school classmates.  Don't like how the latest election went?  Get on line and broadcast your political views so everyone, including casual friends, family and coworkers who support a different view, can think less of you than before.  And be sure to sign off with a something along the lines of "can't we all just get along?"

All this bad news is affecting how we get along with people, including complaining about young girls or boys who sell girl scout cookies or lemonade to people in the neighborhood or at fairs and festivals.  What has happened to society when they can't put their own, unhappy lives aside for a little old-fashioned entrepreneurship?

We need a night at the drive in movies to remind us of the better things in life.  Or maybe a night of dancing the foxtrot, rhumba and swing.  How about we try "spades, alone." in a game of euchre?  

I always feel better after a vacation (MAMA MIA!  ITALIAN VACATIONS FOR 65% LESS!) when I don't watch the news or read the daily news.  Vacations are excellent for creativity, stress-reduction and for relieving job burnout.  As much as any of those, I think the fact that you can sit in an Irish pub drinking a pint of Harp, Guinness or Beamish instead of watching BBC America (IS THE TEA PARTY THE END OF AMERICA?) , lends itself to feeling better after seven days in Galway, Ireland.  Get away from it all and it's amazing what you think you can accomplish.

People need to unplug themselves from their cell phones and daily diet of news, cable tv, reality shows and social networks if they want to return to a less stressful life.   Wouldn't it be nice if network news, national public radio and big city newspapers could put aside their political leanings and just report the news?  Isn't it time for society to find its soul again, and feel good about their jobs, country, family and future?

If not --  it's the end of life as we know it (THE BORG ARE COMING!).  Again.

Two of a Kind

I can still see my wife's face as she asked me the question.  She was lying on the living room couch, fear in her eyes and uncertainty in her voice as she said, "How are we ever going to do this?"

She might have been talking about choosing the right dress to go with her peep toe shoes or drapes for the bedroom windows (things that bring tears to my eyes), but no, she was wondering how we were going to find the money, time and energy to bring a new child into this world.

Back in 1986, we were living in Grand Rapids, Michigan having been married for a little over a year.  She was a nurse at Butterworth Hospital and I was a communications specialist for a small engineering firm called Rapid Engineering.  We were in love and focused on our careers like many newlyweds in their mid 20's.

 

I really envy people who are able to pick the time and place to have children.  They must either be really organized or able to control their sexual urges, or both, because we WERE NOT trying to bring another thumb sucker into this world.  We had plans for fixing up the house, taking vacations and planning ways to save for a cabin by the lake (still trying to do that one).  And yet, here we were discussing the impact of paying for diapers, formula and daycare on two paychecks worth about $500 a week, pre-tax.  Needless to say, we had little choice in the matter, and our first son was born about eight months later to two very excited parents.

Fast forward to 1992, and suddenly I was faced with the likelihood that my wife's visit to the obstetrician was about to confirm another bout of uncertainty and worry (insert graphic image of stomach ulcer).  I had recently taken a job with Beadle-Ewing Insurance in La Crosse, Wisconsin.  We were renting a small duplex while we adjusted to new jobs, friends and timezone.  I had recently been through the highs and lows of job searching and had decided to return home to try my hand at insurance sales.  Liz, always the steady one, was working in cardio-testing at Gundersen Clinic.

I should have known that the combination of a difficult job market, the attacks on Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas, and the completion of Bret Favre's first year in Green Bay, would forewarn the coming of our second son.

I can't say that the experience of our first child birth prepared me -- or my wife, since she had a role in it -- any better for the second time.  A full moon on the night of his birth is a standing joke with both of us every time I think about his arrival.  Needless to say, before the delivery was done, I learned how to combine "ass," "pretzel" and "head" thanks to my wife's suddenly expansive vocabulary.

I 'm sharing these moments of joy and perturbation because in a few months, this house will once again belong to just my wife and me.  It's an experience neither of us gave much thought to as my wife's belly -- and our food, clothing and school bills -- began to grow 25 and 18 years ago.

Our youngest boy (Sean) will be going away to college, joining his brother (Matt) in the pursuit of world knowledge, girls, coffee shop guitar jams, Miles Davis -- and if lucky -- the answer to why out-of-state colleges are so much more expensive than in-state ones.  Our house will no longer be filled with the sounds of cell phone alarm clocks, tables covered by homework, and entryways blocked by tennis shoes, backpacks or trumpet cases.  Images of our kids playing after a big snowfall or monopolizing the Mac will be replaced by empty place mats at the kitchen table and two toothbrushes in the upstairs bathroom.

It's too bad that their grandfathers didn't get to know our boys better before passing away.  In so many ways they are completely different.  Early on, Matt found success in his studies and tae kwon do, while Sean seemed to be a natural in sports, whether it was baseball, skiing or tennis.  Matt was more comfortable sleeping on a boat, while Sean couldn't wait to bait a hook and go fishing.  Both expressed an interest in all things musical, including playing trumpet in jazz band, wind ensemble and show choir.  The combined best band trophies between them could fill a small room.

As their father, I got to know them by being a scout parent, helping them advance through  the Tiger, Wolf, Bear and Webelos ranks.  Scout camping was never a favorite of mine, but the night spent in the car with Matt because of his fear of spiders will never be forgotten. If there was a flicker of enjoyment remaining to sleeping in a small tent, it was quickly extinguished on a trip to the Sangre De Cristo Mountains in Colorado with a church youth group.  I'm convinced the combination of 1) lack of sleep 2) high altitude flatulence and 3) instant breakfast burritos contributed to the hallucination of trail horses wearing cowboy hats and party dresses.

Matt has chosen Architecture as his field of study, with two and a half years to go before earning his Master's degree.  His focus and ability to get by on 3 hours of sleep served him well at the University of Minnesota and now at Washington University in St. Louis.  Sean, who will be attending the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire is looking at the medical field or engineering.  After serious consideration of private school, community college and public school, he is ready to leave high school (and all its immature trappings) behind.


I think the uncertainty of bringing children into this world is much easier than letting them go.

So much energy, money and time was spent on them while growing up, that the void left by their exit will be daunting.  Their mother has spend years assembling memories of their time with us in scrap books that reflect on their time and talents in elementary, middle and high school.

Life is a journey, whether you're lucky enough to have children or not.  Our journey has been one of tremendous joy and appreciation.  Our boys could not have turned out better.  Rest assured, we will be watching their continued success with worry and trepidation but with the realization that -- while they may go their own ways, work at different jobs and live in different cities -- they will always represent a piece of ourselves.  Our lives.  Our values.

Our boys -- two of a kind.

Whad'Ya Know? Time for Big Bird to Stand on His Own

I've been a follower of National Public Radio for many years.  I'm not a supporter, although I enjoy their Saturday morning shows, "Whad'Ya Know" and "Wait Wait, Don't Tell Me!", usually while traveling back and forth to Minnesota, Iowa or Illinois.  Both of my sons have National Public Radio as their home pages on their laptops and listen to their various programs throughout the week.  Occasionally, I'll even listen to "Prairie Home Companion" even though I can't stand Garrison Keillor.  So it's safe to say that there's enough NPR voices coming through the radio to give me a good idea of what they are all about.

This week those voices are about two of their very own:  NPR's president and CEO, Vivian Schiller and NPR senior vice president, Ron Schiller.

On Tuesday, Ron Schiller resigned following controversial statements about Tea Party people, conservatives and the need for taxpayer-funding. Within hours, Vivian Schiller resigned after the Board of News for NPR threatened to oust her after losing confidence in her leadership.  To summarize, Ron Schiller, a major fundraiser for NPR, was caught on tape saying that the GOP had been "hijacked" by groups hostile to Muslims.  He later added that the Tea Party is a "... sort of white, middle-America, gun toting.  I mean, .... they're seriously racist people."  If that wasn't bad enough, Mr. Schiller condescendingly said "there is a real anti-intellectual move on the part of a significant part of the Republican Party..."  Perhaps most damning, however, was his comment on being "better off without government money", which accounts for about 10% of its yearly budget.

His last statement is bad news for the Corporation of Public Broadcasting, which funds PBS and NPR.  Since the 1970's with Nixon and more recently in 1994, when the Republican-controlled Congress began pushing for the draw down of public funding for PBS and NPR, there has been heated debate about the need for taxpayer money to keep Big Bird and company afloat.  Mr. Schiller's comments puts renewed doubt on the subject, especially now that that Republicans control the nation's spending and are looking for ways to cut fat from Washington's budget.

NPR's and PBS's main argument for continued funding comes from an "elite ideal" that they are too important and too valuable to people who rely on their foreign and domestic departments for news.  An example of this was given by Mark Shield's of PBS who said recently, "There are 934 public radio stations.  A lot of them are in very remote and rural areas and their only source of the kind of information we are talking about.  I mean, really, that factual, worldwide, great reporting...."  Another argument made is that they are the only source of good reporting in an era when newspapers are failing and most cable news channels ( FOX among them) are covering stories like Charlie Sheen.  NPR's Nina Totenberg, of Inside Washington, said the following: "In an era when newspapers are disappearing in droves... and where commercial forces, both in television and radio, have driven out -- you know.  There's a reason that a big story like BP actually broke on NPR.  The Obama Administration was not telling us the truth about the amount of the leak.  I mean -- there, we do the job that news organizations used to do, and really don't anymore..."

It's bad enough that NPR and PBS think so highly of themselves.  It's worse that they think so little of the rest of us.  At least, a large segment of us living somewhere other than the left or east coasts of America.  In a 2004 FAIR study, NPR's target audience was documented to be 1) highly educated, 2) white and 3) liberal.  Their elitist perspective of "the rest of us" falls firmly in line with that of President Obama when he said, " they are bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."  To NPR and PBS, we are the unwashed masses that need to be enlightened to the ways of green environmentalism, gay marriage/adoptions and native American/Black reparations, to name a few.

NPR thrives in liberal college enclaves like Madison, Wisconsin -- which continues to make news by fighting Governor Walker's attempt to neuter public service unions.  I wonder how unbiased their reporting of the situation has been in light of a their usual guest list:  academia, journalists, think tanks, and students?  As I mentioned at the beginning of this post, I'm not a big listener of NPR -- but I do wonder how many non-public union employees were interviewed.  Business owners who are able to make payroll by limiting the amount of money going into their own retirement plans?  Employees who pay 75%-100% of their health care benefits , including deductibles and co pays?  The average worker, who is too busy working to spend time in Madison protesting work benefits that are the best in the country?  Maybe their voices were heard, but I suspect it was drowned out by those shouting "Shame!  Shame!"

I'm not saying that I want NPR or PBS to go away.  On the contrary, I want to hear opposing views and opinions.  And as I've said, I like some of the their programs, which are intelligent, musical, humorous and interesting.  Give me more of "Whad'a Know" and "This Old House" and less "Morning Sickness" and "Real Housewives of Atlanta."

If Mr. Ron Schiller and Ms. Vivian Schiller think so highly of their one-of-a-kind product -- tailored to an educated, white,  and democratic base -- they need to pay for it by selling it the same way other radio stations do.  NPR and PBS claim they are growing.  If so, then it's time for Big Bird, Elmo and Ernie to stand on their own.

Without this Wisconsin taxpayer's money.



Update:  This past Thursday, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to stop funding NPR for all public sources, including the Corporation of Public Broadcasting by a vote of 228-192.  The bill cuts off all federal taxpayer money from being used to support NPR,  as well as the Department of Education, the Department of Commerce and the national Endowment for the Arts.  Not a single Democrat voted in favor of this bill.