SamSaid!

LIARS AND JUSTICE

     The last few weeks have been very troubling for me. I feel betrayed.

     I am a very strong supporter of  –  and believer in  –our American Economic System, whether it is called capitalism, free enterprise, economic freedom, or whatever. It is undoubtedly the best eco-socio system in the history of mankind. It provides more opportunity and benefits to individuals than any other system, and in my view there is nothing else in second place. As far as I can see, all socialism does is provide employment for left wing academicians who have never met a payroll and are content to contaminate universities by hogging up on the benefits of free enterprise as parasites while bad mouthing the system that allows them to do it.

     Maybe I am hopelessly biased because I am one of the millions who have benefited from our economic system. From a modest backgroud I was able to fashion a rewarding career in industry, put 4 kids through college, and retire with dignity. Along the way, I had the privilege to work with, and for, many outstanding, high quality, high integrity people. Were there some scoundrels?  Sure, there always are. But overwhelmingly, it was the quality people who moved ahead as leaders.  As it turned out, the Company for which I worked for 33 years has disappeared from the corporate scene  –  but not because of theft or fraud. It failed because of the ego, greed and avarice of 2-3 men. And there is no way we can legislate our way around that.

     But the ongoing revelations of big time corporate theft, greed and fraud are disheartening indeed. And it starts and ends at the top. Whether Enron, Adelphia, Global Crossing, Tyco, Worldcom, or Arthur Andersen, it is just a handful of very powerful men (and maybe an occasional woman) who knew exactly what they were doing. This business of finger-pointing, “don't know”, “can't recall” or taking the fifth is so much hogwash. They knew exactly what they were doing  –  every step of the way. They just got caught. All of corporate American surveys the bottom line numbers and relates them to the stock price. Every day!

     True enough, a million dollars isn't what it used to be. But it still is a big chunk of change. Most Americans simply can't relate to the enormity of a net worth of $50 million, much less hundreds of millions or billions. How many toys can you accumulate? Why do people of immense wealth have to evade taxes, cheat and steal? But even beyond in the quest for super wealth, these guys just didn't sink the ship, they took the crew down with it. It was all so simple  –  just manipulate the numbers and tell no one. And now they sit in a hearing  taking the fifth.

     Why shouldn't Americans be leery of the stock market when funny numbers are so prevalent? Now Congress is on the attack for stronger laws to punish the trangressors. All we can hope is that they don't throw out the baby  with the bath water. As an aside, considering the spending proclivities of Congress and some of the creative accounting now being used (see Social Security) inside the Beltway, Congress and its leaders may not be in the best position to be outraged at financial deception. To many of them, a mirror might be helpful. No matter what, we cannot pass laws to guarantee honesty, integrity and trust. It is difficult indeed to put those qualities in place, and very easy to lose them. But without them, our system surely will fail.

     The current top level thieves have done a great disservice to this country. We no longer have vigilante justice, and maybe that is unfortunate. I personally think we should commandeer all of their assets, lock them up, and throw away the keys.

     Come to think of it those seeking harsh extreme penalties for the corporate transgressors are indulging in just another form of greed  –  greedy for revenge. Certainly, the corporate leaders now facing justice can't quarrel with greed, can they?

FREE SPEECH

     Back in college days, my majot was Political Science, regarded  in those days as pre-law. After getting my undergarduate degree, I chose the path of business instead of law and, considering the events of the past year, I am proud to say that I am neither a lawyer nor an accountant. How lucky can I get?

     A major element of PolySci study was the US Constitution, very much including the 1st Amendment. Good old free speech. But over the past 40+ years, the whole notion of free speech has been stretched way beyond what was contempleted by our forefathers. Now we have obscene filth at art exhibits, and a veritable tidal wave of coarseness, vulgarity, oscenity and pornography beamed at us by the media purveyors of garbage  –  printed material, movies, and the internet. And what does our Court system say?  –  “OK, 1st amendment”  –  and the ACLU stands back and cheers. In all of this stuff  mailed to me or beamed into my living room there isn't much I can do about it whether or not I am offended or my sensitivities have been violated. When you hear the defenders say “control your channels or monitor the PC –  keep this stuff away from your kids” it's nothing short of laughable. If I am offended, too bad: if I find it insensitive to my values, too bad. Those who create this garbage just point to the 1st amendment, chuckle, and hide behind it.

     But in the great world of academe  –  on our prestigious campuses, it is a different story. Here we have speech codes to ban the use of terms that may be offensive or insensitive to others. We can't use words like “fat, broads, rag-heads, slant-eyes, hunkies, krauts, nigs, spics, queers, fags, wops, or even Indians (since real Indians aren't really Indians). So now the criterion isn't free speech, it's terms that are offensive or insensitive. The terms cited above are not gentle, kind or considerate. And indeed they may offend some. But why are some offensive terms accepted but others are not. If I am at home with my family and become offended by obscenities or pornography coming from a Federally approved media broadcast, why is that to be ignored or sanctioned under the 1st Amendment while non-flattering terms –  pejorative or not  — are verboten on our campuses? And some of the student penalties are severe. So some people are offended. So what. We either have a 1st Amendment or we don't.

     After 3 years in the military and 4 years on a college campus, I am no prude when it comes to language. But the very idea that a charge of insensitivity by someone trumps the 1st Amendment is flat out ridiculous.

     Harry Truman had it right, “If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen”. I frankly think the 1st has been stretched way too far and a cooperative judiciary has contibuted to having the moral fiber ripped out of our culture. But if we are going to say (via the courts), “anything goes”, then we should get rid of asinine college speech codes that make a joke out of the 1st Amendment. Just tell the students on the first day, “if you are offended, tough; if you find comments insensitive, tough”. After a couple of bumps, life will go on.

TWENTY MILES

     After a pleasant round of golf, my companions and I stopped at the Grill to enjoy a cup of New England chowder laced with Taco sauce. Good zesty taste. As we settled in, we couldn't help but overhear a couple of guys at the next table really tearing up Big Oil. Unscrupulous, money grubbers, price gougers, rip-offs — these were the more polite terms  –  all because gasoline prices had risen to $1.70 per gallon for Regular. Granted, gasoline proces in California are higher than in most places, but I began to wonder if all of the condemnation was justified. I thought about it driving home.

     Gasoline is black slimy stuff found in pockets under the surface of the earth, often in very inaccessible places. It takes some smart cookies to find it, bring it to the surface and control it so that it doesn't splash all over the landscape. Then it has to be transported to a good location for storage until it can be transported by railcar, pipeline, or huge ship to still another storage point often thousands and thousands of miles away. All of this doesn't come cheaply. After the latest storage stage, it has to be transported again to a refinery (a very expensive complex facility) in order to be converted into a form suitable for consumer use. Different octanes, diesel fuel, etc., etc., etc. Then as a last step, it is transported again to locations all over the country  –  all over the world. And in our case, to the local neighborhood gasoline station where we can buy it for $1.70 a gallon  –  enough to drive our cars about twenty miles. Just imagine the huge costs to get this far in the process. Rip-off??  Sounds more like a miracle to me considering where the whole process started

     I hate to hear reasonably smart (assumption?) people bitch and moan about about trivial matters. With a buck-seventy in your pocket you can't buy a hot dog at the ball park or a draft beer at the local pub. And you can forget about a movie, a rental V-tape or a sandwich. In my view the best solution would be to take these kinds of folks out front and have them walk twenty miles. After 19 miles, ask them if they want to walk back or get a ride back for a buck-seventy. Either that or let them try to buy a gallon in Europe or Japan. That might restore a degree of perspective. Maybe. But in any event, don't try this exercise on left-leaning liberals who frimly believe that Big is Bad. Got that??

CAN'T WINN'EM ALL

     James Q. Wilson is a savvy editorialist/columnist and whenever I see his by line I make it a point to read the article. In a recent issue of the WSJ, he authored “The enemy will always surprise us”.

     The point of the article was the virtual impossibility of our investigative agencies in discovering the nuggets of information in the “clutter”  –  the intelligence term for useless trivia. With hundreds of thousands or millions of bits of information received every day from do-gooders, off-the-wall wackos, disgruntled spouses, double agents, misguided academics, those desiring to mislead, foreign agents, etc., etc., there is no way that the brightest guys in the world can consistently or reliably sift thru all the clutter and come up with good hard data  –  particularly in a finite period of time. And add to this the fact that lots of data comes in umpteen foreign languages where translation is required. Now that is not to say that the FBI and CIA can't do a better job. Sure they can. But under the best of circumstamnces, they might spot 3 out of 5 terrorist plots  –  maybe 4 out of five  –  but not all five. We may as well live with that harsh reality.

     Nowadays the media and congressional committees are in a feeding frenzy over blame fixing and “connecting the dots”, the current buzzword that is surely best suited for 20:20 hindsight. Easy to connect the dots when the game is over. But, we are going down a predictable path. To wit:

     Nazism could have been prevented……..if..

     The holocaust could have been prevented….if..

     Pearl Harbor could have been prevented…….if..

     Princess Diana could have survived…….if..

              and now,

     The 9/11 tragedy could have bee prevented….if..

     And what does all this accomplish?  Ashcroft is a good man. Let's let him do his job. And the FBI and CIA will do better. They were never founded to be cuddly buddies exchanging information. Each protected their own turf  –  and Congress planned it that way. Now that is changed. Now, let's see how well they do.

     Wilson was right. We can't winn'em all, but we just changed the odds. That's a positive step.

TOLERANCE

     It was a bit unnerving to hear our Veep and FBI chief say that it is only a matter of time until a terrorist suicide bomber strikes in the US. With that prospect in mind, it is understandable that we all pay closer attention to others, i.e., strangers, while going about our daily lives  –  particularly if they wear different apparel, speak a different language, hold to different beliefs, eat different foods, etc., etc.

     Even after 9/11 there have been very few incidents of attacks on middle-easterners. Under the circumstances, Americans have shown remarkable restraint and tolerance. And of course, we are regularly bombarded from the usual sources about judging ethnic or religious groups on the basis of the actions of a few who are conveniently called “extremists”. That's a no-no.

     But something tells me that if a middle eastern terrorist detonates a suicide bomb among Americans somehwhere on US soil, that tolerance will wear thin or disappear very quickly. It is at this point when the argument shifts from intellectual reasoning to gut feeling. The academicians may continue to live in their dream worlds of ideas, since most of them wouldn't fight for anything. A few dead Americans certainly wouldn't dissuade them from bashing America. But the man in the street is something else. I think Joe Citizen is far more concerned over life and survival than ACLU preoccupation of “rights”. Most people are not concerned about expanded investigatory rights of the FBI and CIA; they are more concerned about the threat posed by hostile aliens running loose around the country.

     Conceding their legal “blinders”, the ACLU and others may be “right”; but if they guess wrong a whole lot of us may be “dead right”. That is scant consolation

     Thus far, the middle eastern ethnics in the US have been relatively quiet in supporting the war on terrorism which, after all, is being waged against some of their countrymen. After the first suicide bomber, I think that the tolerance level toward middle easterners will drop from 8 down to about 2 on the scale of ten. It doesn't matter whether the attitude change is right or wrong; that's just the way it will be.

ANGER

     Late afternoon is a nice time of day at our house. Sitting in my favorite chair, I scan the newspapers, idly watch the news on TV and enjoy a cocktail while anticpating still another super meal being prepared by my wife who is an excellent cook. It can't get much better than that.

     Then my tranquillity was broken by three telephone calls from tele-marketers. One was to re-finance my home, the second was to give me a special vacation deal in the Caribbean and the third was to manage my IRAs. I know I can stop these calls by Caller ID, but I really hate to isolate myself from the rest of the world. What really irritated me about these three unwelcome calls was that the callers had heavy accents and I had a hard time  understanding what they were pitching. It's a helluva note to sit in your own home and be hustled for something you don't want by someone whom you can't understand. I don't know whether the accents were Swahili, Urdu, Cambodian, Guatamalan, or Farsi  –  and it doesn't matter. For the life of me, I can't understand why someone desiring to sell something would hire sales people who can even speak english clearly. The chances of me showing any interest in that type of sales approach are about the same as Castro embracing capitalism and apologizing to George Bush. As a kid, I remember the words of our neighborhood baker, Andy Pasquini, who said, “I didn't come to this country to be an Italian; I came to be an American”. If people come to this country, the least they can do is learn the language.

     The calls didn't ruin my evening, and the salmon dinner quickly changed my perspective. I know these callers can barely speak english  –  but I wonder if they understand four letter words. 

JUNK, AND NOSTALGIA

     My wife and I are in the process oif selling a nice home that had been our primary residence for well over a decade  –  12+ years. The whole process falls into a series of very logical –  and typical  –  steps. First there is the threshhold decision to sell. Sometimes, that can be a bit traumatic. The very thought of someone else living in OUR house. Once getting past that hurdle, the rest sort of falls into place. We get a realtor, decide on the asking price, wait for a offer, dicker on a settlement price, reach agreement, get the pre-requisite inspection approvals, sign the papers  –  and then move out. It is at this point when things get more difficult.

     It is truly amazing how much “stuff” can be accumulated in 14 years. Little stuff, bigger stuff, inconsequential stuff, valuable stuff, duplicate stuff, etc., etc., etc. Confronted by this massive amount of “stuff”, or “junk” as it is termed by some, there are several ways to dispose of it. First, ask the kids what they would like; then have a “moving “or “garage ” sale; then look to local charities, and then look for ways in which to just give it away to someone who will agree to take it. The problem is that all of this “stuff” has a special value. There is a story or experience attached to every bit of it . And that makes pitching it a tough call.

    We know we can't keep it, and there is no place in which to put it, so it has to go. But in consigning these various  items to the scrap heap, I feel like I am throwing away a little bit of my life. Sure, I'll be accumulating new stuff starting tomorrow, but nostalgia applies to the past, not the future. So, I guess I'll take a deep breath and gulp a time or two and then say bon voyage. The items will be gone, but the memories will stay  –  at least for a while.

     Moving can be a very exciting experience, but pitching the little treasures doesn't come easy. At least, for me.

VICTIMHOOD  

   I wonder if anytone else is getting a little bit fed up with the black victimhood that is being incessantly beamed our way by the media and various spokesmen with individual agendas to pursue. I, for one, am.

     Without a doubt, slavery was the darkest chapter in the 225 year history of our country. It was awful, and nowadays, most people simply cannot envision or comprehend our countrymen buying and selling human beings. But they did. History is a fascinating story of the evolution of mankind over 3000 years. In many ways, it is indeed a fertile ground for intellectual study; however it is not a particularly rich and warming tale. Viewed from the 21st Century, most people can't really appreciate the evils that marked the past 20-30 centuries. Stripped to its essentials, history is a long long continuum of power contests in which winners had slaves, and losers were slaves. It didn't matter whether the slaves were yellow, black, brown, white, red or polka-dot.Slaves were slaves. Most certainly, slavery is not a black/white phenomenon peculiar to 100 years in the Southeast USA. As a matter of fact, slavery continues right now in parts of black Africa (US blacks prefer not to talk about that). The tough part about history is that you can't re-live it, can't re-write it, and can't change it. It stands as it happened. We all can look back  –  and then move on.  

     The Civil War ended 140 years ago, and by its end, hundreds of thousands of white American men died to bring slavery to an end in the US. In the current 21st Century dialogue, that fact seems to escape recognition. Did the abolition of slavery mean that the blacks had an easy road to travel?  Not so. For the next 100 years social progress was very slow. There were the Jackie Robinson exceptions, but full citizenship was still an illusion.  Then came the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and since that time the changes have been genuinely remarkable. Now we are being fed the pablum of affirmative action and diversity, both of which can be spelled Q_U_O_T_A_S. That's where I draw the line.

     My ancestors were not slave owners. To the contrary. some of them came to this country as indentured servants  –  just another term for slavery. And some also had to suffer the privations of child labor enroute to adulthood. Who should I sue for reparations –  King George III, Louis XIV, or maybe the Continental Congress? The whole notion of reparations for one segment of our population is enough to light off a firestorm  –  and properly so.

     I don't think I'm a racist. Not now. But there are two guys who could easily turn me into one  — Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Here are two guys who have agendas solidly based on fanning the flames of racism. I think most Americans are willing to accept each other and given the choice would dampen racial or ethnic differences. But these two guys are dead in the water unless they can foment racial conflict. When I watch an NFL or NBA game, should I assume that this is just another example of white guys exploiting black biological accidents, or should I assume that this is the result of talent meeting opportunity? I see black weather guys and newscasters on TV and see nothing wrong with that. But then I see the diversity buffs crying more, more, more  –  without regard to merit. Just cry “racism” and then settle out of court for the equivalent of legal expenses. Just a freebie $500K.

     I enjoy reading the publications of guys like Thomas Sowell and Ward Conerly.  Keep it equal, no more crutches, and dump the notions of affirmative action and diversity (whatever that is).  Conerly now backs a privacy initiative that will soon be on the Califonia ballot. It would forbid the State or agencies in the State from demanding racial or ethnic categorizations of citizens, i.e., Black, Hispanic, Jewish, Aleut, native American, Pacific Islander, Oriental, Caucasian, etc etc etc. We all just become citizens. Naturally, the intellectual elites of academ vigorously oppose it, as do the various interest groups.

     Not this guy  –  I think Ward Conerly  is right and he has my vote right now!!

THE MUSLIMS

     Recently, a prominent magazine featured a story about muslims in the USA and estimated the total population to be between 2million and 7 million. That's a pretty wide range for an estimate. Somwhat unnerving when we think about the millions of people in the US who are invisible. Who are they and where are they? Just imagine the outcry if a demographic study estimated the total population of the USA at 200 million to 700 million  (at last count).

    The aforementioned article also said that the two fastest growing religions in America are the Mormons and the Muslims. Personally, I don't have any doubts about the Mormons  –  I think they are as patriotic and maybe moreso than most Americans. But I don't have the same feeling of comfort about the Muslims. I guess they fall into 2 categories  –  Americans who follow the Muslim faith, and Muslims who happen to be living in America. Big difference. Certainly all Muslims cannot be categorized into the same camp as the Palestinian flag burners or the “Murder for Allah” extremists, but regarding the War on Terrorism I don't see much evidence of them coming forward saying “We're with you George, let's go get 'em”.

      For the older generation, the experiences of WWII are instructive. Before and during the war, the Japanese, Blacks and Indians were shabbily treated (maybe an understatement), but that didn't prevent legions of them from serving with distinction in the US Armed Forces.      NOTE:  I don't have much use for the term Native American. Nonsense, we all came from somewhere else  –  just a matter of when.

      Nowdays, the biggest thing coming from the US Muslims is silence. It is almost as though they are saying (whispering?) “Hey guys, this is your war, not ours. We'd like to sit this one out”. Not a good sign.

RELIGION

     Religion is always a touchy subject. Years back, folks indulging in social dialogue were admonished to stay clear of (or be discreet in commenting about) sex, religion, and politics. Nowadays you have to wade through all three just to get to sports and the weather. Religion is is the forefront now, and it is indicative that the troubles of the US Roman Catholic Church have pushed the “Murder for Allah” guys off the front page.

     The American RC church has major problems  –  bigger that most can appreciate. Now is the time when cries for “reform” might be heard, but not from the current Pope. He is aged, seriously enfeebled and solidly inflexible when it comes to significant reform. That will have to wait for the next guy.

     Priests, Ministers and Rabbis are the recipients of an enormous amount of trust from the members of the flock. For priests to betray that trust and commit such unspeakable acts defies comprehension. It is one thing for such acts to occur, but it is even worse to learn that the incidents were known, the facts covered up, and the victims paid off under a cloak of secretive non-disclosure. That says that several layers of the heirarchy “knew”. So now the high clergy are talking about “one strike and you are out”. In cases of pedophilia, or predatory sexual abuse, that kind of decision is a no-brainer. It isn't a metter of church discipline  –  it's a matter of the law. And withholding or concealing information is also against the law. But it all depends upon how individual acts are “labeled”. What if the odious actions are described as “improper conduct” or “unacceptable behavior” or “actions in violation of church rules”.  Is it “three strikes” or “ball four”  –  a free pass. You would think that the church would understand that the proper treatment of chocoholics is not transferring them to the candy store acoss the street.  Anyway, legal obligations and garish publicity will compel actions on the most serious trangressors.

     But when the RC leaders convene in Texas in June, they will face an even more imposing challenge  — what to do about homosexuality. The Church is four square in opposition to homosexuality  –  since it does not accept, condone or support it in any way. Yet it is there  –  pervasively. Does the church change its stance on homosexuality?  Does it purge its ranks? Does it deny entry? Or does it maintain an official stance and then wink at it? As one former priest has said, “When you are behind the wall of the RC Church, it's like being in the biggest “closet” in the world, and there is no need to “come out of the closet”. Deciding whether there is a link between homosexuality, pedophilia, or predatory sexual abuse begs the question. This is a religious decision of major magnitude for the RCs.

      And that leads to the $64,000 question  –  celibacy. Almost five hundred years ago, Martin Luther tacked his 95 theses on the church door and lit off the Reformation. Maybe this time it will only take someone tacking a short comment onto one Church door, “Celibacy doesn't work”. Consider that over the past 15 years there have been a large number of priests who have given up “the cloth”. The reason cited by 95% of them was “to get married”. I think there is a message there  –  one that should be heeded by the RCs. Change comes about for various reasons, but change occurs. The Church is not immune.