“Imperium,” “Brethren,” and “Crusade”

Imperium is written by Robert Harris, who gave us Fatherland, Pompeii, and Archangel.  I’ve not read his book Enigma.  All could be described as historical novels, thrillers with an historical setting except that Fatherland  like Len Deighton’s SS-GB and  Phillip K. Dick’s Man in the High Castle  (both great favorites of mine) deals with an alternate future.

Robert Harris is not to be confused with Thomas Harris, who wrote Black Sunday, Red Dragon and the novels better known as the “Silence of the Lambs” movies.  That Harris delves into human aberration in contemporary times.  Robert Harris looks to history as a framework for suspense and involvement.

Imperium is the tightest, most historically rigorous novel I’ve read recently.  As historical biography, with only a few factual liberties taken, it is right up there with Irving Stone’s books.  It is purportedly a lost book written by Cicero’s slave about his master in the last days of the Roman Republic.  Ciceros’ own words as they have come down to us echo from the chapters of this book.    Highest recommendation.

Brethren and Crusade are first novels by a new author, Robyn Young, centered around the Knights Templar in the middle to late 1200s.    They are not in any sense historical romances, but are well-researched and adhere to a historical framework the limits of which the author carefully explains in the notes.  Characterization is deeply rendered, each character being to an extent a product of a twisted past.  These books are not pure entertainment, but have a message for the present.  The author invents a secret movement within the Templars working for peace and multiculturalism, and makes it seem plausible.    These are far superior to the Forever Amber type of historical novel, and remind me a little of The Thornbirds removed to the Templar preceptories of France and Acre.  These books do contain some sex and much violence, and are not for children.  Recommended.

To me, it is a legitimate concern of government to see to the health and welfare of its citizens.  Most conservatives don’t think that way, but prefer to see mega-billions paid to defense contractors, and preferences and subsidies to American big business, than for dollars to assist the poor or uninsured.

We saw that in 2001.  3,000 people died in the WTC.  Lot of people died and mutilated and a lot of bucks spent in reaction to 9/11.  Each year though, 100,000 Americans die from medical malpractice.  You’d think that figure would have pushed Dubya’s buttons, but instead, he went on a crusade to limit lawsuits against doctors.  Is the life of a patient worth less than the life of somebody working in the WTC on 9/11/01?  Seems so.

Shouldn’t there be something in the Constitution about the value of human lives being equal?

I share the concerns of conservatives that welfare programs have to work and to put an end to generational poverty.  But to do that well, means family planning, and family planning that includes the “A” option is anathema to conservatives.

Taxes.  Taxes are going higher.

Whoever is elected, there will be more taxes.  Too many things are broken or worn out and need fixing or replacement.  We have a record budget deficit, depleted military stocks, disabled veterans, a lot of citizens who are going to be on the streets, a lot of financial institutions and companies that will have to be bailed out.

Besides which, we are supposed to play wet-nurse to a bevy of alternate energy technologies.  Well, alternate energy costs money, in tax breaks if not subsidies.  If companies get a tax-break, then YOUR taxes need to make up the shortfall.

Much of the economic activity in this country for the past 25 years has been in financial manipulation, and too much of our increases in wealth were on paper only.

Too many economic troubles are coming home to roost all at once.

Inflation is back, and that effectively increases taxation.  How to deal with inflation?  Killer-high interest rates, which are like chemotherapy–it kills the cancer and nearly kills you!   And if we reduce unemployment, then inflation tends to rise!  Danmed if we do;  damned if we don’t.

And we as American citizens are not as resilient as we used to be.  Our kids are coddled and cosseted and unused to starting at the bottom of the ladder, and they are going to be competing head-to-head- with Asians and hispanics who are harder-working and smarter and far better motivated than they are.   Sometimes I think we set out to crate a new economic underclass.

This will be a numbingly difficult challenge for the next president.  Do these guys know the truth?  Surely if they did they would high tail it back into the safety of the senate, but who knows?–ambition is a powerful drive.    Certainly if they tell the truth they can’t get elected.

[Reply to Engineer’s post:]

One:
I don’t think anybody wants welfare programs that foster dependency on the program, except the people administering the program.  That is how it goes;  set up a department and it is suddenly a fiefdom to be guarded and fought for.  We don’t need departments like that, and need tough oversite to fight this tendency.  A tough set of standards to follow, and if the program fails, it gets the axe.

Here is what I mean by generational dependency.  A mother is on welfare.  Her kid has a baby at 16 and goes on welfare.  There is a lot of that.  I think some kids intentionally choose the early baby/welfare track.  Hate school, not interested in going to W-O-R-K and joining the rat race?  Get knocked up, sign up for benefits and drop out. 

The old saw: don’t give away fish; teach a person to fish.   Easily said;  harder to do.

Honestly though, some people are helpless, with the mind of a turnip and the get up and go of a radish.   I see a lot of folks like that;  don’t know how they get or keep a job.  What do you do?   Stand by and let their kids starve until they are old enough to pop their own brood?

I would suggest compulsory abortion and sterilization, but that is not permissable under the present constitution, and amendment, especially on something like that is an impossible struggle.

Two: 
Take the “socialized” out of socialized medicine.  You’d be surprised how much better it seems.  And as for socialized medicine, we are already there; have been for years. Medicare, medicaid, insurance.  HMOs are mini socialized medicine.

It has already happened, so quit using the “S” word and get over it.

Three:
Social security is a form of welfare.  I know the mumbo-jumbo about getting back what you paid in.  Sometimes that happens; mostly it doesn’t.  Social security is not a savings account; stop pretending it is, stop the government lying about it; what was withheld is a tax, pure and simple.  Social security is WELFARE!  And therefore ought to have a means test.

Four:
Companies do not, in general, flee the USA to escape regulation per se.  They flee because of capitalist competition.  They are in business to make a profit; if they pay workers less and don’t have to pay workers’ comp or worry about OSHA or lawsuits when they kill off or poison a few workers or lay off workers who were injured or too old and slow, they make more money.  If there is a strike, fire everybody and hire new people; there are always more warm bodies in a poor country.

In a capitalist universe, profit is god.

For companies to go offshore for cheaper labor is a natural process.  The only way to stop the flow is to interfere with laissez faire capitalism.

It is also a process that in the long run is part of the evolution of a third world country into a second world country.  When workers get rich enough to unionize and start getting uppity, it is time to move on, Africa maybe.  Plenty of poor people in Africa. 

We saw this with Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, and Mexico.  Labor is much higher in all those countries than it used to be.  So companies move out of those places and go to Honduras or Bangladesh.  The maquilladoras south of the  provided cheap labor for a while, and when costs rose, zap, close the plant,  we’re outta here.   Capitalism knows no loyalties except to profit.

 

Olympic Greatness?

     What are your standards of Olympic greatness?

1.  Number of medals?

2.  Number of gold medals?

3.  Number of competitions attempted?

4.  Margin of dominance over competitors?

5.  Athletic versatility?

6.  Sportsmanship?

7.  Loyalty to the Olympic ideal?

8.  Other?

     I’ve stood on this soapbox before.  Back a few years ago, the Olympic philosophy claimed to chase the will o’ the wisp of amateurism.  Olympic competitors were, it was said, unpaid amateurs, participating for the love of sport rather than for material gain.

     Certainly by the 1950s, that ideal was shown to be a load of bull.  Most athletes from iron curtain countries were professionals, paid by the state to train and compete.  Those and other countries offered bonuses to reward a competitor who pulled down a medal.  Even so, many athletes supported their training, paid for their transportation to the games, and even granting a good finish, would not be selling their likeness for cereal boxes.  (Some sports were, then and now, not exactly high profile.  You won’t see many curling champions in beer commercials.)

     How things have changed.  Now many Olympic athletes from tennis players to basketball players are paid professionals going into the games.  Some that were not, will be if they are successful, and already have agents.

     The New Olympics are less hypocritical, but to this oldster, it seems they have lost something.

     My standard of Olympic greatness has to do with economic sacrifice for training and competing as much as athletic skill.  A great Olympian is one who cuts working hours and lives off credit cards and savings to finance training, and then, after the hoopla is over and back at home, bemedaled or not, goes back to the regular day job.

Of Bigfeet and Cattywampuses

It is sad when the planet gets so choked with human beans that everything has been seen and cataloged.  (Yes, I know that new species are identified all the time. It’s hard to get excited over a new beetle or nematode.)

Maybe one reason for the ET claims is that our planet ceases to surprise us.  We crave excitement and newness, and the natural world doesn’t provide.  You go to Everest or McKinley and find piles of junk and human feces.  At base camp, you go into your tent and zip the flap for privacy and put on earphones to block out the clamor.

So, we invent miracles or alien visitations.  Somebody spots the Virgin Mary in their cotton candy or ice cream, and the story makes the evening news.

Once, religion catered to the sense of wonder.  Now, miracle mongering appeals only to the most gullible or deluded.  Or stubbornly intransigent.

Cryptozoology always fascinates.  Sure nobody ever found those humans with faces in their stomachs, but other strange creatures did exist.  (Not that animals come any stranger than octopi, giraffes, or elephants; jaded us, when those become old hat.)

I first heard of cryptozoology in an article by Willy Ley written back in the 1950s.  Now, there is a ton of crypto stuff on the internet.  For example, http://www.cryptozoology.com/

Olympics, Etc., Etc.

Olympic sports coverage is a little like a Top-40 radio station.  You get to see what the TV execs deem popular.  Which leaves out many many interesting sports which we could only get to see during an olympics, and then only if the network would show them, which they don’t.

It’s a catch-22.  A sport has to be widely popular to make prime time TV.  Unless they make prime time, they will not become popular. 

It helps also for a sport to have equipment manufacturers able to sponsor coverage, which is especially the case with motorsports and golf.  Nike of course spends so much on promotion that it is surprising you can buy their products for less than $500 a pair, which is one reason I boycott Nike.

(Some manufacturers tout their having escaped the superexpensive promotion/sponsorship game.  New Balance shoes and Power-Bilt golf clubs, for example.  But if you want to sell kool stuff to kids, you have to stick it under their noses with a barrage of sports heroes and TV ads and make them “want to be like Mike.” Mike Jordan and Tiger Woods are worth it if you sell a big volume of high priced stuff.)

Some sports are so fast you can see what is happening only in slow motion.  Which makes them viewer unfriendly for TV.  Fencing and badminton, for example.  We prefer the slower, easier-to-follow-with-the-naked-eye sports of boxing and tennis.  For me, electronic scoring in fencing detracted from the sport, even more than the bulky protective gear they use now; I don’t like cords coming out of things; if judges can’t see touches, then we need to sharpen the blades so there will be cuts and blood.

Good spectator sports should not be too fast or too complicated.  They should be practiced by Beautiful People, preferably young BPs.  Gymnastics works.  Swimming works.  Golf works now that the PGA has screened out the older fatties by relegating them to the Senior Tour and the LPGA has gone sexy with slim players, short skirts, and tight pants.  (Look out Meg and Laura: the commissioner is looking for an excuse to kick you off the tour!) (There is a rumor, which may have been started by me, that Michelle Wie’s agent wants her to have plastic surgery to make her nose look more caucasian to broaden her appeal.  Hey, why not?  Plastic surgery can pay literal dividends, just ask actresses and TV newscasters–hell, breast augmentation is a business expense on their income tax returns.)

Some sports we SHOULD like because we can practice them ourselves over much of our lives.  Racewalking, running, golf, tennis, badminton, table tennis, cycling, swimming, shooting.

Last time I got enthusiastic over tennis, though, Rod Laver was playing Kenny Rosewall.  Swimming is tiresome for me to watch because I can’t swim.  Golf is too durn expensive–not clubs and shoes, you can get those for cheap at garage sales–but course and driving range fees.  Racquet sports are out for me because I can’t get anyone to play with.  Walking, running, cycling you can do solo, without a big expenditure.  (But the cost of fair quality used bicycles has gone way up lately.)

More on Gitmo

It is a surreal world where the visions of Franz Kafka and George Orwell are made flesh, where traditional American values are parodied and twisted into new forms.  It is Guantanamo.

More on Guantanamo and the trial:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/10/washington/10gitmo.html?hp

For the New York Times, William Glaberson writes:

“…It was quintessential Guantánamo, where things are rarely what they seem. The Pentagon’s spokesmen, for example, repeat like a mantra that the detention camp delivers “safe and humane” care. But military investigators have documented a history that includes treatment of one detainee who was isolated, deprived of sleep and forced to perform dog tricks.

“Another military mantra is that the tribunal is open and transparent. But no one can go to this remote naval station to attend the sessions without military orders. At the tribunal itself, where many seats are empty, journalists are accompanied at all times by military escorts, who stand guard even outside the latrine.

“So it was in keeping with the contradictions of Guantánamo that the Hamdan trial in many ways looked like an American trial and in many ways did not.

“There were secret filings. There were closed sessions. There were unexplained mysteries. After a session was cut short because a participant was said to be ill, a military spokeswoman said it was not Mr. Hamdan. The next day, a different spokeswoman disclosed that it had indeed been Mr. Hamdan, who had, she said, been seen at a hospital for flulike symptoms.

“There were unknowns. A Pentagon official, Susan J. Crawford, has broad power over the entire tribunal process, including naming the military officers eligible to hear the case. Her title, convening authority, has no civilian equivalent. Her decisions to grant or deny financing for items like the defense’s expert witness fees or defense lawyers’ transportation were not explained during the trial. She has never granted an interview to a reporter.

“The defense was permitted to call witnesses. But, the defense lawyers said, remoteness and lack of cooperation from the government meant that was sometimes impossible. One witness who might have been powerful in the courtroom, Mr. Hamdan’s wife, could not make it to the trial. She appeared instead in a muffled videotape….”

End quote.

John Edwards

Yeah, I’m disappointed and as a one time supporter, feel a little betrayed.  Which betrayal is nothing compared to that of his family.  But…

1. What is the real problem here?  That Edwards had an extramarital affair?  In that, he is no different from Clinton, the two Bushes, most every male Kennedy who ever drew breath, and almost all of our other presidents.  (As I said earlier, probably Truman and Carter excepted.  Don’t have a clue about Nixon, who was one peculiar fellow.  In the matter of marital fidelity, I have to disagree with 2b and declare that “great men” merely have greater opportunities, for affairs and for secrecy.

2. To me, what Edwards really did wrong was to lie and cover up.  Not that it was any of our business, even if he were a nominee.  He could have just said, “None of your damn business.” Which I find a manner of confessing quite superior to these gushy self-analyzing clean-breast-of-it revelations that political figures are prone to make when caught with their fingers in the cookie jar.  Spare us the pop psychologizing and excuse-making. 

3.  There is a certain amount of media and voter hypocrisy and selective memory here.  I mean, how many times is a candidate asked flatly, “Are you engaged in an extramarital affair?  Have you been?” It’s generally not cricket to ask these quetions, unless you are Baba Wawa or want to be reassigned to interviewing centenarians at the golden age home.

There is typically a media conspiracy to cover these things up.  Unless the candidate is already brought down by the pack of wild dogs.  In which case, the rules are thrown out and it is okay to print the “A” word.   Everybody is free to pile on the hamstrung prey.

An example of the media conspiracy of silence is their reticence about tackling the elder Bush.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Fitzgerald Or FDR.

An example of the media piling on hamstrung and gutted prey is what happened with Bill Clinton.

4.  Despite what I post from time to time, I have to echo Thirsty’s comment about untested fidelity.  It’s not something I deserve to take any credit for.  If Julia Ormond or Milla Jovovich were to sidle up and whisper in my ear, who knows? But they are far more likely to whisper in John Edward’s ear than mine.   Sigh.

Class Act

I apologize for the statements I’ve made about U.S. military personnel as jurors and judges in the Guantanamo trials.  Hamdan’s sentence demonstrates I was wrong.

Hamdan received a 66 month sentence, with credit for 61 months served.  In 5 months, he should, inshallah, be a free man.    (Hamdan being a driver who was once hired at the rate of $200 per month to drive Osama Bin Laden around.)

Granting the conviction on one count, which may have been mandatory if Hamdan declared he was aware Osama bin Laden was plotting terroristic attacks as one source (the Washington Post) reported, an additional 5 months is not terribly unfair.

From the Detroit Free Press, quote:
‘Allred [the judge] still was considering a motion for greater credit [for time served] Thursday even as the sentence was handed down.

‘After the jury’s verdict, the judge turned to the convicted terrorist and said:

‘“I wish you godspeed, Mr. Hamdan. I hope the day comes when you return to your wife and your daughters and your country.”

‘“God willing,” the man in traditional Yemeni robe and head scarf replied in Arabic, interrupting.

‘The judge continued: “And I hope that you are able to be a father, and a provider, and a husband in the best sense of the word.”

‘Then Hamdan said it again: “Inshallah.”

‘Allred replied in Arabic. “Inshallah.”

End quote.  From  http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080808/NEWS07/808080348&imw=Y

Classy.

Dr. Basil Moss, An Appreciation

Over the years I have known Dr.  Basil Moss as the writer of crafted letters to the editor of the Avalanche-Journal newspaper, that showed a nuanced appreciation for different points of view.

This evening, I read a book written by Dr. Moss entitles “Tales of the Wichitas”  published by Texas Tech University Press.   Pleasant read.  Part of the enjoyment came from my knowledge of the places described, from  Ojinaga, Mexico, to our Yellowhouse Canyon to Medicine Mound to the Wichitas and Ft. Sill and Lawton.  (My mother was born almost within sight of the Red River and of Medicine Mound, in about 1911, right smack in the geographic area Moss writes about.) 

One more thing.  A few years ago at the Friends of the Library used book sale I bought a medical book printed about 1846, written by a Dr. Thomason.  Basil Moss had apparently contributed the book to the sale, because he wrote in the inside cover a paragraph about Dr. Thomason, pointing out that Thomason Hospital in El Paso is named for that doctor.   I am going to contact Thomason and see if they are willing to accept the book as a donation from Dr. Moss and myself and give it display space somewhere at the hospital.   If not, then I’m going to find a small town museum that will display it.

There are many books and bric a brac ranging from my grandparents’ school books (they taught school just after the turn of the century at one room schoolhouses in the Jacksboro-Newport-Postoak area not far from the places described in Dr. Moss’ book) to saddles (a McClellan that may date from around the Civil War, and my grandfather’s Phoeniz-made big saddle) to clothing owned by my grandmother prior to her death in 1911.  One never knows how much time is left, and it is fit that I begin to plan the distribution of these things.   I have no children who will understand or value these things, and I don’t plan to give the items to Goodwill or sell them on Ebay.

My favorite museum is the Panhandle Plains Museum in Canyon, but they have so many items.  The TTU museum displays only a tiny percentage of what they have.   I was thinking about the Paducah museum, or one in Vernon.

“Detainee Convicted by Military Panel”

So declares the New York Times at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/06/washington/07gitmo.html?hp.  Why am I not surprised?

It’s a stacked deck. 

Anonymous U.S. military judges, military prosecutors, evidence kept secret, that includes hearsay and results obtained by duress and torture.

Let me ask you…  What would happen to one of those “military judges” if he or she went against the grain and voted to acquit?  Wouldn’t that be a career ending move? 

There are so many influences acting upon those judges, including not least their training and orientation as U.S. military personnel who are nothing if not loyal to their commander in chief and totally hostile to any alleged enemy of the United States. 

Have you ever talked with the average person serving in the military?  Believe me; open-mindedness and doubt as to the correctness of their superior’s decisions are not characteristics of the successful military man or woman.

It is like reasoning with Hitler Youth.

Poetic justice would be if the instigators of these Guantanamo kangaroo courts would face their own judgement–in trial in Iran, for example, where the tables would be precisely turned around.

Edit:  5 1/2 years is not a bad sentence.  I admire the judges for that.  Any longer time would be manifestly unfair.  I hope he receives crdedit for time already served.  Interesting to note that the Washing Post reported today that the defendant admitted knowing that Osama was plotting terrorist incidents, while later news reports say the defendant maintained he did not know that Osama was a terrorist.  This is one of the problems with a closed courtroom.