Monthly Archives: August 2006

War on Terror, War on Tactic

War on Poverty. War on Drugs. War on Hunger. War on Disease. War on Illiteracy. War on Prejudice. War on Violence. War on War. What in the world is the matter with a war on terror? The answer is nothing, as long as all we are doing is proclaiming our abhorrence of a particular human condition and pledging to undertake an effort to eradicate it. Politicians have been employing rhetorical devices forever and declaring war is simply another instance, if one of the more overused and pedestrian. Continue reading →

Proposed Senatorial Announcement Speech to African-American Church

Leave a reply

Here is the speech that would have kicked off my candidacy in 2007 or so.

Everyone has the right to wonder what I am doing here. The leaders of this community have given me an opportunity to speak. They know that I have begun a journey. They know that I am driven to make that journey because of who I am, and what I believe, and the way I was raised. I am unable to rest. I am pushed and prodded and provoked and propelled to act, and I know that you will give me a fair hearing. Continue reading →

Chomsky Vs. Will

Leave a reply

Chomsky vs. Will

I don’t know if Noam Chomsky can catch a baseball. It is not what he is known for. Actually, I don’t know if George Will can catch a baseball, but he knows baseball; has written at least one worthwhile book about baseball, and I have sat behind him at a baseball game. That is where I got the idea. Continue reading →

Crop Circles and the New York Times

Leave a reply

Crop Circles

There are times when I am astounded by the openness of my mind. I dismiss almost nothing outright. There are those who say this is what qualifies me for certain labels. According to them there needs to be a border around the conceivable. Apparently an acknowledgement of that border is a prerequisite to normal social interaction. Failure to give it its due is to beg for silent derision. Continue reading →

The Bonds Rule

Leave a reply

The Bonds Rule

Baseball is an opportunity to share in Americana. When I walk into a ball park, no matter its size or location, the level of play, the age of participant, I feel better. I often wondered why. It is certainly, for enthusiasts and former practitioners, no matter how unskilled, a delight to watch a baseball game, where tension and excitement can be found or ignored at the spectator’s choice. But I have come to believe that finding one’s seat, or even before that, at the first glimpse of the infield, bestows upon such as I, a sense of good fortune unavailable any place else. Has it to do with the rest of the world’s state of disarray, or the impermanency of life, or the crumbling form of our nation’s institutions? It is not the buildings to which I refer, but the values that, it was thought, drove the public discourse and protected our historic trajectory as the world’s leading democracy. Continue reading →

Senator Dianne Feinstein, a critic’s appraisal

Leave a reply

I guess if I have a target in this hypothetical quest, it is Senator Dianne Feinstein. The following is a catalogue, of sorts, of the reasons why I believe she has disserved the citizens of this state and country:

1. At the very best, Senator Feinstein did not make an effort to get to the bottom of the crimes of 9/11. If she had doubts about the handling of the investigation or the fact that the administration did its best to prevent an investigation, she did not make them public. If she was shocked or dismayed by the dispatch with which the evidence of the World Trade Center collapses was hauled away, she did not share that reaction with the public. Continue reading →

Reagan Democrats and Revolutionary Strategy

Leave a reply

Reagan Democrats and Revolutionary Strategy

It has been proposed that the only way for the Democratic Party to achieve an electoral majority in this country is to attract the Reagan Democrat back into the fold. Allow me to disagree. The Democratic Party has had an electoral majority since November 2000 when the strategy of James Baker and the misguided tactics of Al Gore joined to enable the Supreme Court to bestow upon George Bush, brazenly and mendaciously, a tainted presidency. The strategist in 2004 was probably the same. The result was a stolen election, and, if anything, the Democratic majority had grown a point or two. These being the facts, Reagan Democrats, if they voted or voted republican, are apparently not essential to the stated goal. Continue reading →

Class Warfare

Leave a reply

Class Warfare

I come from a long line of warriors on both sides of my family, including two ancestors who won the highest military honor in the country for which they fought, the United States and Cuba. My father and three uncles were officers in the Second World War, and one died with the 82nd Airborne in Italy. The heroism and service of these men has always been a source of tremendous pride in my family. Continue reading →

Death Squad

Leave a reply

Death Squad

I don’t recall learning about death squads at my fancy prep school; the term probably hadn’t been coined yet. Just as there has always been political assassination, there have always been death squads, though that isn’t what they were called. The term, “death squad” is a product of the sixties. They grew up as a part of, if not the essence of, Kennedy’s counter-insurgency strategy against communism. I didn’t hear about it at the University of Virginia which could have been my fault, but I doubt it. Foreign policy was my major, and though there was surely reading that didn’t get done, I never missed a class. It may have been before the ugly fact had clawed its way into a college text book. I don’t remember the term in law school at the time of the war in Vietnam. That leaves my working life, and there was one particular moment that hasn’t left me. Continue reading →

Pulitzer Prize for 9/11

Leave a reply

Pulitzer Prize for 9/11

Let’s begin with a couple of assumptions. First, let’s assume that excellence in journalism is often found in the ranks of Pulitzer Prize winners. Second, let’s assume that the stories that contribute to the winning of that prize are ones documenting significant struggle in the society whether on a local or national scale. Third, let’s assume that any journalist covets a Pulitzer. Fourth, let’s assume that there are demonstrable, provable facts concerning a moment of national crisis about which several books have been published that challenge conventional wisdom concerning that crisis. Why is there no reporting on the subject? Is it because no one sees a Pulitzer in it, because the facts were published in another forum by someone else? Continue reading →