How Far We've Come in Caring for Babies

I'm a bit confused. I understand breast milk. I understand organic. Frankly, I understand commercial food production and distribution. I grok Wal-Mart, I grok Target. Marks and Spencer. Ahold. Whatever the global equivalents are.

Food is food. When my parents grew up in Poland in the 20's and 30's, they did not worry about the kashrut (allowed to be eaten by religious Jews) rules. Wheat contained... wheat. Bread had none of the current ingredients. Here's a list of the ingredients in the challah my mother made when I was a child:

• Wheat, water, eggs, yeast, sugar, corn oil

To my left what is in the Hawaiian bread that I use now when I make my Friday night blessings (this is from their web site, so pardon the image instead of text).

Please note that this is a much longer set of ingredients than what any normal baker (and I am one, so no lip, please).

We are getting so inured to ingredients that when the FDA assigns a maximum amount of melanine to food, we are expected to take that as a normal ingredient. Rat hairs I understand. Even impurities like dust, dirt, or even rocks (yes, we all find them in our dried beans from time to time) are acceptable.

What is not acceptable is this list, to my left, of ingredients deemed necessary to make my food somehow more palatable. Since when are dough conditioners necessary for me to taste good bread? And exactly why do I need ammonium sulphate in my food?

The issue of melanine is painful, certainly. The more there is, the more kidneys are compromised. Enough, and the kidneys fail, and the person shortly thereafter.

So why, given the obvious toxicity of this chemical, and its entirely inappropriate existence in the food supply (other than to raise the level of perceived (but unavailable) protein in a sample of food. So why would the FDA feel the need to determine a maximum level of melanine, other than to appease either the Chinese or the local American manufacturers of food.

I object. As a person who pays good money for food, I want to eat food. Not furniture composites, not ammonia derivatives, not any crap that I should not be eating. Yes, I know, there are alternatives. I could spend 2x, 3x, whatever to pay for organic foods.  And I would like to be local, organic foods, except that not all of us have the luxury of paying top price for food. Those of us not working (and our ranks grow larger by the day, unfortunately) can't afford the "luxury" of eating healthy.

There should be no minimum or maximum limit for melanine. For that matter, if it's made in a test tube, it should not be there. America is poisoning its own people, and we are complicit in that poisoning if we do not protest to our limits against these insane acquiescences.

Citi Bunk and Recess Appointments

Bush did it before, and he (and his administration) are doing it again. It seems that weekends and any time not burdened by the weight of the free market are excellent times for the government, and specific companies, to do their dirty work.

Citigroup is a great company. They gave me a break in 1979 that no one ever gave me, and convinced me then that they are an effervescent agent of change. Seriously. Citibank was doing things in 1979 that I see startups doing today. Sure, they've become a behemoth. Sure, some of their tentacles are probably doing good.

But the bottom line is that a company (in which I was considering investing) is in really terrible, and possible terminal, difficulty.

And my response, in this coldly capitalist society, is that Citibank, like every other banking organization, deserves the same consideration for a bailout as General Motors, Ford, and even (despite their non-public status) Chrysler.

Look: if we're looking for a good ROI, then I am personally a much more likely prospect for a postiive ROI than any of these companies. Put $1,000,000 into my life, and I will ensure that I will be cash positive for the rest of my life. Give the car companies, and Citi Group, several tens of billions of dollars, and we will get... um... I don't know? from them. And that will provide the American Public with how much money?

I would be more than a little confused if I didn't have questions. Certainly, as a taxpayer/stockholder, I definitely have questions about the way in which my tax dollars are being redeployed as investment dollars.

The American Treasury, as a taxpayer and voter, does not have the right to take my hard-earned an ill-transferred tax dollars, and turn them into investments in private companies. I would much rather have those funds (to the 1/10th or 1/000th), invested in ways for me to earn a decent, tax-positive living in the new economy.

Postscript: In the space of my writing this post and going to sleep, Citi Bank has garnered $300 billion dollars in loan guarantees for toxic funds (which had heretofore been rejected as a viable path for spending dollars) from the government. I am angry and ashamed.

Embarrassment = Murder

Watch more ET videos on AOL Video

There is a strong Jewish prohibition against embarrassing someone in public: public humiliation is equated with murder.

Character assassination is almost unknown, except in cases when it is unexpected. Reality television has leapt into the breech. Sad, slightly whacky, purposefully unknown and truly sick people have been enouraged to apply to compete in singing, dancing, and knowledge feats. If, for no other reason, to be ridiculed by people who are in little to no way qualified to judge their peers.

In Jewish theology, someone saving a life is thought to have saved an entire world. Would those who aided or abetted Paula Goodspeed's rush to fame -- and public humiliation -- be guilty of having destroyed a world? Certainly, Ms. Goodspeed's world has disappeared.

I fault not the specifics, but the general: Paula Abdul is culpable of trying to save her "career," along with her showmates, by lending her name and aura to the "American Idol" contest. But she bears, as do her showmates and anyone associated with the show, responsibility for bringing the concept of "Idol" from the theoretical to the real idolatry of a cult of personality, of a cult of fame, of a cult of despair.

Shame on you, Ms. Abdul. And shame on the system, and the viewers, for participating in this particularly cruel Bread and Circus pageant.

Stupid People with Top Hats

One of the most irritating things about President-Elect Obama's win is the number of entirely insane people with whom I must interact or read about.

Whacko nutjobs in Kenntucky (is anyone keeping track of their sanity, let alone literacy, statistics) planned on killing multiple minorities, capping things off by driving at Senator Obama dressed in tuxedos and top hats, firing fully automatic weapons. These 18 and 20-year old folks would be total idiots in my book -- except they had access to the requisite weapons and had made plans. (Can anyone say: "neuter the idiots so they don't breed?")

A friend of mine talked about "cowboys" snatching white sheets off the shelves of local department stores. We're here in Central Texas, see: land of the semi-rational and home of the 'do what you want so long as we can't bust you' brigade.

Same friend talks about how terrible it'll be "when" Obama gets shot.

I don't know how to push love, trust and calm out past folks like this, but if we don't, the Secret Service will certainly be chasing a legion of village idiots before things calm down. And acting uber-paranoid with the President Elect until we get all the easy nut jobs out of the way.

This friend -- and a few others with similar views, talk about the race war and terror that would follow Obama's assassination (g-d forbid!).

My question is this: is their fear, their hatred, their small-minded vision so pervasive so powerful that the next President of the United States  must worry about these lunatics? Or can be take a deep breath, concentrate on the realities of global warming, magnetoshphereic dissipation, and drive these false dybbuks of our generation aside long enough for truth to ring free?

I'd like to think we can rise above these idocies. But the Cheney/Bush regime has created early warning monsters that we would ignore at our own peril.

I Have Been Blessed to See This Day Come

It's a peculiarly Jewish custom to recite a blessing when encountering an incredible moment in one's personal history. We have a blessing on seeing rainbows, awesome sights, and living to see yet another year's holidays.

Today is a day of blessing. Blessing that we have seen the defeat of racism by truth. The defeat of fear and hate by trust and hope. Like coming upon a bridge over the Grand Canyon, ringed by double arcs of rainbows, this is a day for the United States to see a way through the darkness and weakness that have cloaked our country for the last many years.

Baruch Ata Adonai, Eloheinu Melech Ha'olam, asher kiddishanu ve'ki'imanu ve'higi'anu laz'man hazeh.

Blessed are you our master, god and king of the world, who has blessed us, sustained us and brought us to these times.

Palin's America: A Nation of Small People

There are different forms of evil. My post earlier today, in the form of official misinformation, was one. The picture to your left is another, more primitive one.

Sarah Palin talks the "pro-America parts of the country." Her America (although her quote sources say a lot about her pedigree) is far different from mine. The problem with her rhetoric is that it spawns the kind of Balkan 'stanism' creating the splits we've worked for decades to heal. And in tearing at our nation's scars, she, and the other fanatics of the right, are weakening the entire body politic, at a time it needs unity, not divisiveness.

Here's another example of race and allegience in the radical Republican mind. Check out the image to the left, and then please click on the image to visit Cagle's site and read the full story.

It's been a disturbing day in terms of news. AndI hope, unfortunately, it disturbs you at least as much.

Voter Fraud: Who Wanted, and Who's Wanted?

The voter fraud issues raised in Ohio have existed since, well, since well before the famous Chicago line: "vote early and often!" Ballot stuffing, flyers distributed in poor areas telling people that "their voting day" was the day after the elections, and other voting-day trickery, have been around for decades, if not centuries.

As I'm writing this, an example of voter fraud (IMHO) is apparently being perpetrated by folks in the Williamson County Elections office itself (a Republican county under "attack" by Democrats):

Falsehoods:

1. "...to make sure voting goes smoothly. Straight party voters, especially Democrats and Libertarian, will need to check all races. Some races do not have candidates from the Libertarian and Democratic parties."
   
2. "A voter can vote Straight Party and have all of their votes count. They can also vote straight party and then select every Democrat again, if they so choose. What WILL cancel a Democratic selection is if they cast a vote for Republican in a contest, but it will only cancel their Democratic selection for that race and that race only."
   

Truth:

If you do not wish to vote a straight party vote, you must mark each individual candidate for whom you wish to vote, and then cast your ballot. If you select straight party line, and thne check individual candidates, this could cancel your vote for those candidates [assumedly because this would be "two votes" for the candidate?]"

(Paraphrased from an email sent today by the Jaime Lynn campaign to all registered Democrats in the candidate's area.)

Misinformations are frequently characterized as innocent mistakes, but the mistakes frequently come from the incumbent party defending its turf.

On the other hand, registration fraud issues are more an expression of overzealous or ignorant voters and voracious, paid voter registration workers. Both are problems, but not as bad as they are made out to be by the parties.

An enthusiastic but uninformed voter might, for example, register to vote at the mall, then register again if approached by a campaign's volunteer in their neighborhood, for example. Or they might think that if they register twice, they can vote twice. A registration worker, paid per completed registration, might 'fudge the data' for the sake of a few (or many) extra bucks. These folks should be prosecuted for their offences.

The registration process, to be clear, is separate from the actual voting verification. For example, if I register multiple times, when I get to my polling place, the printouts (or screens, depending on the state), my voter registration card is checked against the list. If I've registered several times, duplicates are apparent. The harder to check ones are underaged or dead people who are registered, but their ability to impact an election, especially a national election, would require vast numbers of conspirators operating in very large areas.

So: punish the greedy, watch local government election officials that might try and rig elections through misinformation or purges of voter lists against erroneous felon or other lists, and ultimately focus on the voting day safeguards, and not on the registration process. Focus is important these days.

Last Anecdote and Observations

This evening I spoke with the owner of a wine store. He said that my sales are actually up compared to the last three months of last year. I'm getting a lot more customers buying by the glass, as opposed to people coming in to buy bottles and take them home. I get a better profit on the per-glass sales.

Sure, this isn't anything as scientific as something Angelo Angelou could put together in Central Texas. Or what the big marketing firms could query and sort on. But it is, I think, a fair snapshot of life in this new economy. People are spending about the same, but smarter, or in different ways, or more tactically. That bottle at home is better spent as three glasses at the bar, with friends. Topping off the gas tank feels less like a fill-up, even if the cost is the same (or greater, factoring the time to drive to the station).

The next hit will come when the retail credit dries up, and that, I think is part of why the government today focused its energy on unfreezing the credit markets. Because 80% of retail sales happen between October 15 and January 15, and what happens in the next three months will permanently impact who is in business, and how they will sell, in nine months. And without ready credit for retailers to purchase goods to sell, or factors to handle the accounts receivable from credit card sales, this will probably be the first true "Black" holiday period in a very long time.

More Anecdotes from the Texas Main Street

I had the opportunity to talk with three folks representing what I think are interesting data points regarding the economic situation and its effects over the last three weeks. Again, comments are paraphrases, not quotes:

From a car repair place: Business is about the same... but folks are being more careful about what they're repairing. And they're holding off on repairs, especially if they have high deductibles.

Top Line Liquor From a liquor store owner: I'm still selling. But people (gestures toward single malt scotches), are buying the cheaper stuff, not the expensive. (Points at the bargain, economy priced bourbons and scotches.) More like these, and less (waves hand upward to the $70 bottles) like those. But hey, things will get better eventually. I'm downgrading this guy from owner to manager... clearly he hasn't looked at credit terms lately.

What's interesting is that I'm getting a fairly homogenous set of responses (this post and the last) in terms of the economic impact. Everyone seems to be getting hedgy with their investments. Everyone seems to be acting, if not executing, on a more conservative, less confident, track.

I think this is how the 1929 crash started, except they didn't have folks like me making connections quite as fast. (No, that's not a reason to self-sensor!) I predict we'll get to the 8,000 range well before the winter holidays. Unless Obama gets elected, in which case all bets, unfortunately, are off. At least with McCain/Sarah [mammoth hunter] Palin we know where we're headed. [Okay, that was partisan, but if you've been reading this blog... you know where I stand.]

Anecdotal Observations from Main Street

I've been collecting comments from people running or managing retail businesses, to see what changes consumers have been made.

From a gas station manager: People are pumping differently. They're not filling up, but I see them around more often. They're topping off, like on their way home and stuff.

From a hair stylist: Business is down. Not during the weekends, then we're real busy. But people aren't coming around during the day. Like now (gestured at the empty store): between like one and five in the afternoon it's totally dead.


From a supermarket manager: Overall receipts hasn't changed. But people are buying less each time, and coming more often instead. And they're coming in more with shopping lists; they're not shopping casually.

People are talking about Main Street, and the reality of the economic impact on plain folks. These observations, to me, mirror more the crisis of confidence precipitating the Great Depression rather than technical credit crisis. 401(k)s, pension plans and the credit markets will eventually recover, with or without a government bailout (and yes, I still think it's a bailout, no matter what the pundits might opine). The crisis that has to be overcome now is the one of consumer confidence, and there are several relatively inexpensive, non-pork ways to ameliorate consumer fears:

• Eliminate short stock purchases. Period.
• Extend unemployment benefits to a full year.
• Freeze all foreclosures for the next eighteen months, and have local bankers, a representative from the mortgage company and the homeowners sit down and try and figure out how not to foreclose on the property. The feds should give local banks (not parent companies, or at a national level) funds relative to the mortgage stresses in that area to help underwrite these new loans. Only after there's no agreement, or it's clear the homeowner would be unable to pay even a reworked mortgage, would the foreclosure continue.
  
• Underwrite 'pay for play' programs, where unemployed people who successfully complete training and certification courses have a free ride -- but are personally liable for the courses if they do not complete them (this cuts the ITT Tech student loan scam out of the loop).

There are other ideas, ones that we'd need to think about, ideas that might not be right for every region of the country, but workable in some. But what we really need is time. Time not to rush, time not to act hastily. And if that results, as President Bush said last week, in the loss of $1.4 trillion in "value" to the country, in the form of a loss of stock value, then so be it.

Calm, thoughtful action is economically more prudent than rash, panicky and doom-driven action.

Quick Funny from a Friend's Neighbor

The Veep debate will be quite the hoot. For you Dems, here's a drinking game. If any Republicans have a matching game for Biden, please forward it to me and I'll put it up alongside this one!

P.S. I made one fix: she had Gov. Palin's son's name as "Track," so the line didn't work. Mine's snarkier.

SARAH PALIN DEBATE DRINKING GAME

1. Every time Sarah Palin refers to John McCain as a "maverick,” chug a Red Bull while lassoing an unbranded calf.
   
2. Every time Sarah Palin cites her executive experience, fix yourself a Bloody Mary.
   
3. Anytime Sarah Palin gets lost in her “verbiage” (see Hannity interview), throw a lifesaver towards the TV to rescue Palin from drowning in her half-baked thoughts and unfinished sentences.
   
4. If Sarah Palin mentions lipstick, apply enough lipstick to leave an imprint on your drinking glass.
   
5. Every time “bailout” is mentioned, finish your drink, pour yourself an even stronger one and apply an icepack to your head.
   
6. Every time Sarah Palin alludes to Alaska’s proximity to Russia, mix a Black Russian for your neighbor. If she includes a mention of “Putin rearing his head,” add cream to make it a White Russian the color of Putin’s skin.
   
7. Whenever Sarah Palin mentions “not blinking,” toast your neighbor with “Here’s mud in your eye.” If “not blinking” is brought up when discussing how she would handle Russia, put on sunglasses that will help prevent blindness when the nuclear bombs start going off.
   
8. If Sarah Plain mentions her recent speed-dating outing with world leaders, mix yourself a Cosmopolitan. Add an extra shot of vodka if this is when she mentions Russia.
   
9. Every time Sarah Palin cites her record as a reformer, open a bottle of Sam Adams. If Palin describes John McCain as a reformer, try to think of something other than campaign finance that McCain has successfully pushed through Congress while downing your Sam Adams.
   
10. If Sarah Palin denies that Global Warming is man-made, combine ice cream, sponge cake and meringue to make a Baked Alaska. Serve to all Debate Party guests.
    
11. If Sarah Palin mentions her pregnant daughter Bristol, take of sip of Harvey’s Bristol Cream. If she mentions her son Trig, calculate the size of the (remaining) Arctic Ice Cap and pop open a cold one.
    
12. If Sarah Palin mentions that she played high school basketball, dribble into your glass. If she adds that playing sports will give women economic empowerment (yep, she’s stated this), find the recipe to and then mix a Harvey Wallbanger.
    
13. If Sarah Palin accuses the media, Joe Biden or Barack Obama of a cheap shot, down a shot of your own choosing.
    
14. If Sarah Palin mentions Cindy McCain, knock back a Bud.
    
15. Every time Sarah Palin does something that will be mocked by Tina Fey on the next Saturday Night Live, put on a pair of glasses to enjoy a good ol’ “Live From New York…” libation, be it a Manhattan or a Long Island Iced Tea.
    
16. If Sarah Palin refers to her husband as “First Dude,” gag and spit out your drink.
    
17. Clink glasses whenever you remember that Joe Biden is participating in this debate, too.
    
18. If you are a teetotaler, the prospect of a Palin Presidency should make you start drinking copious amounts of alcohol during Thursday’s debate.

I'd love to see the Republican view of this: Please, bring 'em on!

Not to waste your time, but...

A video worth seeing!

Shifting to as Serious a Topic

The hanging of an effigy of Barack Obama at a Christian university brings into sharp focus one of the odder issues in this election. Obama is a self-confessed Christian, no less one than McCain.

Both are struggling with their actions as opposed to their alligences. Obama, with anti-abortion and other 'leftist' stances (even silly, made up ones). McCain has similar problems. Southern Baptists, the folks who evilly brought you Messianic Judaism [1] [2] [3] [4], aren't quite happy with his less than Evangelical attitudes, although he's been their best candidate even throughout the Republican primaries: even Mormon Mitt has a looser attitude than McCain, who has opposed same-sex marriage, civil unions, or even live-in partner rights to medical insurance.

Prejudice against a Black American, against a suspiciously non-Anglo Christian, are deep-rooted. The KKK is only one of the ugly cancers that have erupted from the skin of the American psyche. Much more common, and more subtle, are the Muslim insinuation against Obama, even going to the push-poll questions that mangle his name on purpose to slip suspicion and doubt into the vapid White American voter.

Nooses, effigies and other "subtle" signs don't work in their stagers' favor: Americans have had fifty years experience with understanding the real meaning behind these formerly powerful symbols. Unfortunately for the beleaguered McCain operation, these idiots play into Obamas, not his, hands. And the best thing McCain can do is either ignore them, or revile them: both of which strengthen the hand of the left.

As usual, the lunatic right, with its symbols bereft of contextual reality, come out the losers. I'd much prefer an articulate lunatic like David Duke than these fringe nutters: David, at least, made for good and focused press. These idiots are shades of the 1950's. And we all know how that played out in the end.

Instant Feedback on Bush Speech

Everything listed by the President may happen even with a massive bailout. Given the amount at risk, I suggest the following alternative plan:

1. Wait until after the elections to do anything other than take the time to analyze the models and consequences of economic programs
   
2. Ignore the bad loans: let the institutions that took the risk take the consequences
3. Take the $700B and invest it in new loans to small- to medium-sized businesses, and to ensure the continued operation of student loans
4. Have the SEC, FBI and any other federal agency investigate every decision-maker in companies responsible for getting us into this debacle. Engage in a 'De-Baathification' process, keeping the guilty from ever working in the financial industry again.

One last comment.The President called our capitalism the best economic ever devised. For once, I agree with him. But that means that the profits of capitalistic endeavours must be matched by taking responsibilities for losses incurred when engaging in free market activities.

The Money Shot

A quick post: expect follow-ups on this. I've been watching the (selective) bailouts by the government, with my money, to "save" investment companies that have knowingly thrown themselves over the cliff. They've created the same derivative monster that shook the market back in 2001-2002, only this time with real dollars at risk. Taxpayer dollars. Now the current administration, knowing full well that whatever they come up with will fall to the next administration to execute, is preparing a gazillion-dollar bailout package, details, implications and oversight all to be determined. Some simple questions (which I'll drill down on in the coming days):

1. So... what if we let the chips fall where they may? Will I still be able to buy a loaf of bread?
2. If they're using taxpayer funds to purchase taxpayer assets, can't the government just issue us stock certificates in the corporation that will have to own those securities?
3. If I rip someone off, I get prosecuted. Wall Street execs, money managers, hedge fund gurus and their ilk in many cases knowingly 'sold short,' or packaged and hid bad debt in complex, multi-corporate moves (anyone remember Enron?). Where are the indictments? Where's the FBI? I wanna see handcuffs! Lots of them!
4. Even fiscal conservatives and free market freaks are talking regulation. Let's start by doing what Bush did (badly) in Iraq: de-Baathification trials for all involved. Every executive with fiduciary responsibility for cleaning up this mess has to first prove that she or he was not part of making the mess. And furthermore, that they will not profit, other than salary, in cleaning things up. And not own stock in any company (except through double-blind trusts) during their work and for five years after completing helping with the bailout.

That would be a good start.

Hah! Palin, Obama, Lipstick, and fast boats

Funny commentary on how lipstick, pigs, pitbulls and donkeys are part of the political mash. Gotta love the deft hand of Rove in the campaign!

Who's Next?

Iran continues to build its nuclear capacity, while North Korea has apparently returned to its evil machinations and is putting back together what little it agreed to dismantle.

This is the poisoned fruit of the Bush administration's tree. Remember phrase "punish the innocent and reward the guilty?" Sure, Saddam's government was guilty of many things. But not WMD. And certainly not of 9/11. But better to show strength, flog a perceived threat (and clean up daddy's unfinished business and snag a little oil), than actually tackle a serious enemy.

By serious enemy I am referring to the two "Axis of Evil" countries that would entail serious military operations to subdue, and even greater resources to control over the long term. Our military has chewed through billions of pork barrel project dollars, including absurd amounts on 'Star Wars' technology, at the expense of better pay and benefits to recruit more soldiers to the ranks, or practical technologies to protect the troops in the field.

As America's coin in the world declines, other countries will slip into the resulting vacuum. China, with its economic buying power. Russia, with it's kleptocratic power. It's a dark gloom into which we slide, even with a changing of the guard expected in Washington. And the spirit of change, while an instantiatable ideal in America, will in now way auger for a sea change in the threats to America and the world from fanatics who care more about their power than their people.

Maybe we'll need those nuclear space lasers and Star Wars technology after all...

Palin Revisionism

I edited my previous post, "The Palin Paradox," after seeing that (a) I was getting a lot of hits from a right-wing blog called "Eagle Forum Alaska," and (b) said blog pulled their post. That post championed Governor Palin's embracing abstinence-only education. My comment (now redacted because of the broken link) pointed out that Governor Palin wholeheartedly embraced the Bush policies on not teaching any sex education other than not having any (my definition, not theirs).

We all know the best way to do quiet people is through denial, right? C'mon, stand up for your values! The Big Lie won't work, since the Eagle's posting data is found in many other places. And the Big Distraction didn't work, as Gustav fizzled out.

The brave thing to do, the moral thing to do, is to honestly champion what you, and your governor, believe in. So put the page back up, where we can all read it!

The Palin Paradox

The conundrum of Bristol Palin's pregnancy is a great snapshot of modern American views on sex education:

1. "Good girls" do. (Are there "bad girls?")
2. Lust trumps sex ed
3. Parents, even governors, can't stop kids from having sex
4. And, of course, pregnancy is a rational consequence of sex!

I'm pleased that Bristol's parents are behind her. And that the father has (a) stepped forward and (b) will do the "right" thing and marry her. It's a great lesson for parents that would otherwise distance themselves from the little trollop (their POV, not mine), or do some other non-linear thing.

I'd like conservative or religious readers to think for a moment, and then comment on the following question: how can sex education and/or policy be changed so as to decrease the chances that other daughters of religious families get pregnant? At what point is it a better choice to explain prophylactics (physical or chemical) over the chance of an unplanned pregnancy?.

The Anti-Christ is Here (Thank God!)

Wow. I didn't know I was rooting for the antichrist. I mean, as a Jew with a sharp tongue, I certainly _hope_ I'm rooting for the other guy. Just not that one. Whatever he stands for. Our people have no connection to 'The Rapture,' a construct of 19th century umm, passionate people. I disingenuously paused, because, again, as a Jew, the whole thing is hooey to me. We didn't have a 1st coming, so the second one makes no sense. We have no hell, only the absence of being part of God. There's no purgatory. No wacky 'what SHALL we do with all these unbelievers.' No fire, no brimstone. [Full disclosure: while Christianity is fully Thanotic (death- and afterlife-focused), Judaism does refer to this life as the 'prosdor' (literally: the hallway) and the next life as the room. But we Jews get do-overs in the form of reincarnation, and a chance for our souls to make right what we failed in previous lives.]

The Obama = Nicholae Carpathia idea is hideous. It's hateful, paranoid, and smacks of all the things for which the KKK was and is reviled. The Nazis used fear of the Jew, the unknown, the other to kill my family. And the hateful, prejudiced, zealots aligned with the McCain campaign are using the exact same tactics now, in 2008.

Debate is great. McCain certainly presents a different set of options to Obama. I welcome discussions of substance, of the priorities, strategies and even tactics of the two candidates in solving our upcoming problems. But bringing religion into this is a wedge designed to scare the Evangelical, the dim-witted, or those that bought the last lie: that Obama is actually a Muslim. Not that that is wrong in any way! (I'd love to see a Muslim President! He'd be just as fair as Kennedy was, as a Catholic, in a majority Protestant country.)

Perversions and Perverts

The perversions of Amerikans frustrates me. Today there was a story on CNN (see link) referring to a "swinger" group that coerced children into having sex.

Rampant sexuality scares people; definitions are definitely in order!

• Swinging is between consenting adults. Pedophilia is adults on children.
• Swinging involves consenting adults. Children, by definition, cannot consent.
• Swinging is between singles and couples. Pedophilia is sexual assault on a child.

Please, don't anyone think I approve of swinging personally. IMHO, marriage is between consenting adults, for the purpose of entering into a long-term relationship with a loved one. Or several. And "swinging" is for fornication with (sometimes randomly selected) people with whom there isn't such a relationship. Morally, ethically (and, if there are kids involved, as a parent) I object.

But swinging is not pedophilia. And trying to mix the two together perverts, a very basic level, grownup decisions, however misguided, with violent sexual assault on children.

The case is before the courts is about the rape, pedophilia and illegal acts committed by the Mineola Swinger's Club, which clearly consists not of consenting adults, but sick child rapists. But the media, not making the distinction between 'swingers' and 'pedophiles,' commits a grave sin of omission. It's the media's sacred responsibility to tell the truth, even if it's not socially or conventionally convenient. Swingers, open marriages, gays, lesbians, polyamous couples and others all exist in the real world. We might not all agree or believe in their legitimacy, but it's a cruel punishment to besmirth a societally unpopular label with the grotesque tar of rape.

Shame, shame, shame!

May His Name be Blessed

I generally regard 'News Fleas' as being replaceable and generally irrelevant, but Tim Russert's untimely death has thrown a wrench into my asinine assumption.

Each generation has its cadre of honest, blunt, frank and otherwise weatherbeaten tellers of truth. Tim was one of them, and, especially in this charged election year, he will be missed. Perhaps more than in decades past, where the differences between candidates were accented, rather than blurred, Mr. Russert was a speaker to power, and an honest reflection of the vaunted and villified 'man on the street.' He asked the questions we would never be able to phrase, given candidate management systems and infrastrutures build specifically to keep their lauded 'chosen one' from having to respond to the direct spear thrust of the honest question.

Tim spoke truth to power, and, like the Jewish "Ethics of the Fathers," was the one who asked the blatant questions where others feared to go. We need more like him, even more now that he is gone.

Baruch Dayan Emet. And may God help us see the truth from the lies this fall.

2B, or not 2B: Work permits are the question

H-1B visas, which permit foreign professionals of various ilks to work legally in the US, were all issued by late winter. H-2B visas, essentially created for migrant farm laborers, were sunset when Congress let a key provision lapse.

Let's consider the implications:

• We have national shortages of doctors, nurses and all manner of technical professionals. For example, HMOs have squashed the profitability out of these careers. $60,000 is a lot of money, but for the work a nurse must do for years to reach that lofty number, it's almost better to get into sales, or something equally less messy and regimented. $60k for someone from the Philipines or Pakistan is a huge boon: for people with a work ethic, this means they can support entire extended families back home. That's not a slam: even accounting for the weak dollar, the standard of living in these countries is much lower than for the United States.
  
• Picking grapes or tomatoes is back-breaking work. For the extremely low pay proffered, only people who can't flip burgers, greet people at Wal*Mart, or wrangle carts at the grocery story would apply. To say nothing of the gas bill they'd incur just getting to and from the farms.

Americans are supposed to have choices, and our alleged free market system currently gives more choices to people in hedge funds, finance and arcane niche careers. For the millions worried about their chances of enjoying their old age, the current economic climate does not, to say the least, bode well.

Refunds and Recipients

Let's do a little math, shall we? Uncle Sam, in the name of "economic stimulation," is giving each of us $600, plus $300 per child, of our own money back, to help pull our economy back from the brink.

Let's see where that goes...

Eighteen months ago gas prices in, oh, say Baltimore, were low. about $2.12 a gallon. That's about the time agribusiness started spooling up for the great ethanol ripoff.

Price now: $3.55. So, assuming 12,000 miles a year, that's 18,000 miles times. At an average of 21.9 MPG, that's $1,060.27 more for the next 18 months, assuming (LOL) that the price of gas won't rise any more.

That's the big gorilla. For those of you not afflicted with a car, here's a small one:

Got Milk? Got Money? According to a NY Daily News article in January, milk prices are up 36% year-to-year. So what was $3.18 is now $4.41. I guess it's a good thing we're using less of it, since cows are eating corn that would otherwise be used for ethanol.

Makes a great case for breastfeeding and leaving it at that, only the cost of soybeans has also risen, due to the diversion of acreage to growing corn for ethanol instead of food. But these are trivial rises.

Bottom line: the $1,800 a family of four (with two cars) would receive from the government's economic stimulus package melts, just opposite the $2,120 in additional cost just from gas increases, not to mention all the other food and essential goods increases.

So if someone wants to stimulate the economy, I have the following suggestions:

1. Stop making ethanol from corn. It's increasing food prices all over the world, and competing with feed corn for livestock and milk production.
2. Put negative price pressure on the cost of a barrel of oil. Price increases are a function of purchase of oil on the spot market; refineries and distributors peg their increases to them.
3. Oil companies are engaging in profiteering. While Libertarians might rejoice in this exercise of the free market at work, it puts an incredible burden on those of us who depend on this liquid for our lives. Trucks, trains, planes, automobiles, generators... you know, civilization as Americans like it? If an electric trading company decided it wanted to play with the cost of electricity... oh, wait: Enron! Anyone seeing this? ExxonMobil's excessive profits are at the cost of the entire US economy, and if the government really wants to loosen the pressure on it's citizenry, getting prices audited and under control is a big deal. (And before anyone talks about price control, realize that cutting Strategic Reserves oil stocks loose is a direct form of price control as well.)
   

Well? What are you doing sitting around? Go and tell people!

Teen Sex Here!

The blogosphere and the press, even the former Grey Lady, are atwitter with pictures of Hannah Montana's naked back on Vanity Fair. And references to her wearing a green bra that was visible under her shirt. Compare this to the ability for the public -- anyone in the public -- to see girls or women with backs naked but for a single strand of fabric for the back of a bikini top. This isn't even about sexy -- except in the way in which visual innuendo inflames minds.

I'm not sure what disturbs me more: parents that give their children up to be sexualized and prostituted by the mass media, or the corporations that pimp out underaged children and then, mortified by their sexualization, make even more money on the rebound.

The Spears' clan? Multiple children.

Compare this to the way the Jackson Five were "exploited." Or the Partridge Family. How did the child cast of "Sound of Music" work their teenage lives?

Sure, kids in the spotlight have been around since well before Mickey Rooney and Judy Garland. And child actors have self-destructed because of the glare of the limelight -- or the demons lurking in the shadows. But the machinery and money around children, along with the dual fascination for sexy tweens and concurrent prurience around sex, make for a toxic environment for children with the lethal combination of talent and good -- or at least well marketed -- looks.