Sep 25 2008
The decision of John McCain to suspend his campaign temporarily in order to concentrate on the financial crisis was reckless behavior that calls his judgment seriously into question.
By McCain's own admission, the economy is not his strong suit and his allegedly country-first, non-partisan gesture reeked of politics - it tried to put him in the role of great statesman without whose leadership at this critical hour the republic will fail. If the voters buy that, there are old encyclopedia salesmen who wish to make their acquaintance.
The obligation of John McCain - and Barack Obama - is to walk and chew gum at the same time, in other words, prep for the presidential debate on Friday night and also work to solve the financial crisis. If a candidate can't do that, he should quit now. An election was held in this country during the Civil War; it can he held while Republican and Democratic leaders figure out what Masters of the Universe to bail out.
As it is, the latest news is that Republicans and Democrats in Washington have worked out a deal. The likelihood of an agreement underscores the point that Friday night's debate must go on - and no excuses.
Anything to keep George W. Bush off our television screens. There he was last night, spreading gloom in millions of homes during prime time - as if we haven't suffered enough.
I thought it was a dreadful speech, delivered with the clueless air of a security guard explaining why the burglars had broken into the house during his watch but asking the residents to trust him some more.
Sep 24 2008
The problem with being a conservative is that your philosophy is heavily invested in the past. It is the belief that social behavior must conform to the traditional values observed in another time.
There is some sense to this - there are eternal verities, after all. Stealing and dishonesty, for example, are as wrong in one age as they are in the next.
But it gets complicated for conservative minds who conceive of an unchanging black and white world when, in fact, it is a constantly changing world often painted in shades of gray. Inevitably, some of the principles conservatives hold fast to are erected on shifting ground. Even some of the great truths they believe in turn out over time to be not much more than the accumulated prejudices of the past.
There comes a moment when even they must acknowledge this social evolution and so they stake out new ground to defend as the benchmark to be protected from the inroads of further progress. When the world turns some more, they are forced to shift that position too.
Conservatives, in short, are like a family at the beach who must periodically move their belongings in advance of the incoming tide.
We have seen this happen on many social issues resisted at first by conservatives then embraced by them because they had no choice. We have seen it in the last week in reference to the federal bailout of Wall Street. Within the Bush administration, conservative thought has gone from the government is our enemy to the government is our savior.
But the issue I am thinking of today is the equality of women. The conservatives of their day were against women voting, they were against equal pay for women (in fact, they looked down their noses at women working at all, especially married women) and they believed women should not wear make-up or short dresses. They generally thought of women as "the weaker sex" to be patronized, ignored or spoken for by men. All of this in the living memory of our oldest citizens.
Today we have Sarah Palin. Conservatives, heirs to the old-fashioned tut-tutting, gender-biased tradition, are oblivious to irony when they hail her as "the hottest governor of the coldest state." Yet without the liberals and progressives who went before, Sarah Palin would still be a hockey mom in Wasilla.
These resentments against working mothers are very fresh. Consider what Sen. Rick Santorum wrote in his 2005 book: "It Takes a Family: Conservatives and the Common Good."
"In far too many families with young children, both parents are working, when, if they really took an honest look at the budget, they might find they don't both need to."
Santorum was then alarmed because women had told him that it was more "socially affirming to work outside the home than to give up their careers to take care of their children."
"What happened in America so that mothers and fathers who leave their children in the care of someone else - or worse yet, home alone after school between three and six in the afternoon - find themselves more affirmed by society? Here, we can thank the influence of radical feminism."
Just three years later, of course, he has moved his belongings farther up the beach, as all conservatives are doomed to do, and has been quoted in blogs as defending the McCain-Palin ticket against its critics. In the whole conservative camp, there are apparently no misgivings now about working mothers and the working fathers who stand by their side. They are affirmed - and radical feminism has nothing to do with it.
Sep 22 2008
Today is the first day of fall. Right on cue, a warm and brilliant weekend, the essence of summer compressed into two days, gave way to a misty morning with a touch of coolness to it.
Summer is the quickest season. No sooner does it start than it seems half over, then soon enough it really is over.
Winter is the longest season. It drags on and on and then March and April come sulkily to prolong the agony.
Autumn may be the most beautiful season but to me it is the undertaker of summer, attending to its duties with a gloomy air. It buries us in leaves before winter comes to bury us in sleet and snow.
Meanwhile ...
I see that the Republicans have successfully held out for a more formal, less free-wheeling vice presidential debate that will favor the chances of Sarah Palin not making so much of a fool of herself. Apparently she can face down a charging moose but she can't be trusted to shoot down an impromptu question or two.
I wonder if those who think she is so qualified for high office wonder why she can't be trusted to face any questioner not inclined to play softball with her? Does it occur to them why she is not a guest on the Sunday morning public affairs shows?
Well, of course not. Answering hostile questions all by yourself is what elitists do.
Don't know which is worse. Sarah Palin regurgitating her well-coached talking points all the way to the White House or the coming of winter. Either way, we get snowed.
Sep 19 2008
I have decided I want to be an elitist. I realize I may have to get a snotty attitude and perhaps wear better clothes, not the spotty ones I normally put on, and even drive a superior car, not the fume-trailing 10-year-old crate of loose bolts that currently gets me around.
I want to be an elitist so I can ignore subpoenas like Todd Palin can. As a hunting, fishing, snow-mobiling kind of guy, Todd Palin might seem an unlikely kind of elitist but Republicans in their attacks on Democrats have opened up the field to anyone who wants to feel superior.
And I think there's nothing more superior and elitist than ignoring a subpoena because you no longer think that the investigation at the heart of it is legitimate. There are guys riding around in the back of Rolls Royce limousines who would like to look down their noses at investigations but aren't elitist enough to get away with it.
Whatever else comes out of the Troopergate investigation up there in Alaska, Todd Palin has certainly given me a glimpse of the high life. No more man-of-the people stuff for me. While I have never been subpoenaed, I want to run with the above-the-law crowd in case it should ever happen. Excuse me while I ignore you.
Sep 18 2008
Last night I had something of an epiphany.
It was 11.30 p.m. and I was thinking about my mother and father, both deceased for a number of years. Suddenly, out of nowhere, a thought came into my head: Shouldn't the 10th anniversary of my father's passing be about now? I couldn't have told you the date. Even the idea it was 10 years ago was vague and would have required some checking.
Curiosity took me downstairs to where I keep various files, one on them devoted to Dad. I found the program from the funeral service held in his local Anglican church in Brisbane, Australia. The date was on the cover: Sept, 18, 1998. Here I was just half an hour away from the anniversary date, which had already dawned Down Under. I had been summoned to remember in a wonderfully weird way.
As much as I loved my mother, who had died in 1996, my father was the great influence on my professional life. He had been a journalist and helped me get my first job. He lived just long enough to see me get my own regular column, which began (in the Magazine section) on June 30, 1998.
This accomplishment had made him immensely proud, although he had undoubtedly an inflated idea of its importance. In turn, I felt good because I had given him some cause for pleasure in the twilight of his years. I had written dozens of Saturday Diaries before I was finally given the chance.
Dad was always a funny, jolly man - a student of humor in his own way - and had encouraged all my efforts to write light, humorous pieces, which he thought I had a talent for. (Many critics have since disagreed but for me his opinion still trumps all of them.)
So, called by heaven or fate to remember this date, what can I do to honor him now? The best I can think to do is reprint the column I wrote at the time. It is corny, sentimental and 100 percent sincere. Do not read it if you are looking for a laugh. It tries to be funny - I always try to be funny - but it fails to rise above my then-fresh sorrow.
One PS to the column: My field hockey-playing daughter, Allison, then a student at Sewickley Academy, went on to graduate from Hobart and William Colleges in upstate New York, and went to live in New York City, where she got a master's degree in education at Bank Street college. She now teaches 2nd grade at a private school in Manhattan and still has fond memories of her eccentric grandfather.
THE PRIDE OF FATHERS AND CHILDREN
Date: Tuesday, September 22, 1998
A wise and all-knowing providence gives each of us gifts to enrich our lives. Some of these gifts are big and some are small.
For my part, all that I ever wanted was to be a great athlete. To be able to move with grace and power down the field, with the roar of the crowd in my ears, this was my only ambition.
But instead of becoming an athlete, I proceeded from the earliest age to give new definition to the word uncoordinated. No crowd was ever attracted to see me drop catches and fumble balls. As I stumbled about, only one man could ever be depended upon to come out and see me.
My old man would come. I remember him standing faithfully on a little hill above the field. What a despair I must have been to him.
He had been a great athlete in his own youth, which was spent in China in the grand era of the European concession ports. A fine horseman, swimmer and tennis player, he was particularly proud of having represented Hong Kong at men's field hockey - an impressively esoteric achievement by any measure.
So it was only natural that when I had children, I would inherit the love of going to their games. One always harbors the desperate hope as a parent that your own children will excel in things that you were hopeless at.
And let us be frank: Nothing is more satisfying than watching your offspring outperform other people's.
Now, I fully realize that the purity of children's sports can be ruined by aggressive parents who think they can vicariously make amends for their own pathetic sports failures by yelling "Hey, you guys couldn't go slower if you worked for the government" or "Hey, ref, that kid was so far off-sides he needed a visa to get back into the game."
Not that I would yell such things, of course.
It's not for lack of opportunity. Just as my father did for me, I go to all the games I can. As it happens, my daughter, a high school senior, plays field hockey.
As much as I love to watch her play, I have to say that girls' field hockey is somewhat frustrating. As far as I can tell, it is a whistle-blowing competition among referees. Sheep dog trials have fewer whistles blown in them.
Actually, the referees are not to blame for this. They are fairly enforcing the rules, which, by the way, are generally incomprehensible. The only rule that I know for certain is the one that says, "When exciting, free-flowing action threatens to break out, play must be stopped with a whistle."
It has been my habit to fax the scores of my daughter's games to my father in his nursing home in faraway Australia.
Then, Thursday night, came the after-midnight call that everybody who has an aged parent dreads. It was my brother: Fly home, he is fading fast. Then, four hours later, another call: He is gone.
James Edward Henry, sportsman, father, newspaper man, war correspondent on the staff of Gen. Douglas MacArthur's headquarters, Reuters chief in the Far East, irrepressibly witty charmer, dead at 96.
At the breakfast table that morning, we struggled to cope. My daughter was very upset and so I struggled to make a joke. As always.
She had a game later that day, so I told her that she had to pull herself together and score for Granddad. This would be the first game he had the opportunity to watch.
"What, Dad?"
"Don't you believe that the dead can see us? I know he'll be watching from a cloud."
To this hopelessly sentimental "win one for the Gipper" remark, she gave an uncertain look as if to say "I'm directly related to an insane person."
How ridiculous and corny. What crazed, grief-stricken sentimentality. Yes, all of that.
But that afternoon, between the whistles blowing like a heavenly chorus, she nevertheless did score a goal for the old man on the distant hill. And in my grief I smiled.
Sep 17 2008
The purpose of my blog is not to get into arguments with Post-Gazette letter writers (although I would just like to say to that woman who wrote a nasty letter about me yesterday - I am not disgruntled. I am one of the most gruntled people in this region).
But a letter in this morning's paper requires a response (not an argument). It is a tough letter but it makes a point.
Titled "Stop Whining About Mere Inconvenience," it concerns the power outages brought to the region by the remnants of Hurricane Ike. Arguing that we got off easy when compared with the citizens of Texas (and no dispute there), it takes aim at Allegheny County Councilman Matt Drozd. "That he would whine about minimal power outages and the lack of Duquesne Light phone operators is appalling."
With the greatest respect, no it isn't. It is appropriate. Tens of thousands of people lost their power in this storm. As I write this, the PG Web site reports that 60,000 in the region were still without power this morning and, as of 10 a.m., they included 14,500 Duquesne Light customers. Some won't get their power back until late Friday. Minimal power outages? I don't think so.
I was one of those who lost power for two nights, forcing us to throw away many items of food from the fridge. I did not whine. I sat stoically in the dark with Sooner the dog and it wasn't much fun. I have nothing against Duquesne Light and have only admiration for their crews who go out at all hours to repair the lines.
But I am also glad Councilman Drozd was on the case. That is his job. It is a comfort to darkened dog companions everywhere that a tribune of the people is keeping the utility's feet to the fire.
Yes, people need to keep a sense of proportion - those were winds from a hurricane, after all. But this don't-whine mantra goes only so far. (We were told not to whine after the 2000 Florida presidential election as the lawyers and judges and party hacks stole democracy away). Sometimes whining is the American character expressing its justifiable feelings.
In America, we expect customer service. When the customers are not being served quickly or efficiently enough, it is perfectly fine for a representative of the people to go to bat for them. I don't see a problem. I'd be whining if some public official didn't do it.
Sep 16 2008
I think the presidential election campaign just moved beyond lipstick on animals. The economic troubles of Wall Street are a pig too far for trivial cosmetic diversions.
I want to believe George Bush when he says that all will be well. But who knows? He has spoken nonsense for much of the last eight years. Millions of voters are surely feeling a new unease in their pocketbooks as the campaign enters the final stretch. Logically, that should benefit the Democrats but lately logic has had nothing to do with it.
Just as a precaution, in case the economy goes completely south, I am preparing my Will Blog for Food sign.
Sep 15 2008
The portrait that emerged of Sarah Palin in the front-page story in Sunday's New York Times was a real eye-opener.
After becoming governor, she "surrounded herself with people she has known since grade school and members of her church."
She has a penchant for "attacking critics - she sometimes calls local opponents ‘haters.' "
She puts "a premium on loyalty and secrecy."
She is "often missing in action." The report says that since taking office in 2007, "she has spent 312 nights at her Wasilla home, some 600 miles to the north of the governor's mansion in Juneau."
Vindictive. Loyal. Cronyism-minded. Obsessively secret. Away from the office often - that's no lipstick on a pit bull, that's Dick Cheney with lipstick.
The chronically conservative are programmed not to believe anything in The Times but many of these assertions could be challenged on a factual basis if they wanted to make the effort.
Has she hired five school mates, "often at salaries far exceeding their private sector wages"? Did her pick (a high school classmate) for the top job in the State Division of Agriculture cite her "childhood love of cows" as a qualification for running the $2 million agency?
I look forward to seeing the factual rebuttal.
Sep 12 2008
The letters page of The New York Times today has a half dozen letters praising Bob Herbert, whose Sept. 9 column recounted the many accomplishments of liberals and took aim at the conservative use of the word as a political slur.
I join Bob Herbert in proudly defending the term liberal. No one should ever be ashamed to call himself (or herself) a liberal. If there is one thing that I would like to achieve with my column, other than to make people laugh and think at the same time, it would be to make the word liberal respectable again by plucking it from the foul mouths of the wingnuts.
One of the letter writers to The Times says the terms liberal and conservative have become meaningless, which I agree with only up to a point. There are liberals who are illiberal and conservatives who are unconservative but in the middle belt of sanity and reason both terms still apply - and both are honorable. As a general rule, the further left you go and the further right you go, the crazier you become.
Almost every country in the world that is screwed up could be helped by being less rigid, more open-minded and tolerant, in short, more liberal - Saudi Arabia, Iran, North Korea, you name it. I can't think of a single liberal country that is a threat to world peace.
Meanwhile, here in America to be a liberal is seen as a terrible thing by some people. Yet as Bob Herbert pointed out, the candidacies of Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin would be impossible but for the liberal-minded pioneers who pushed the causes of civil rights and gender equality against stubborn conservative resistance.
Hurrah for liberals, I say. Where would we be without them?
Sep 11 2008
I see that Hillary Clinton will appear on the campaign trail in Pennsylvania to stump for Barack Obama. He certainly needs her help to blunt the enthusiasm generated for the Republican ticket by John McCain's choice of Sarah Palin for VP. The question is why Hillary is doing this.
The perhaps naive answer is that she is first and foremost a loyal Democrat. The cynical answer - the one I favor - is that she has recalculated her chances of becoming president, the thing she wants most in life, now that Palin is on the Republican ticket.
Before Palin, Hillary needed to do only so much for Obama that appearances demanded, then sit back and watch him fail in the hope that she can pick up the pieces in four years. He could fail two ways. He could lose the election, which seems a real possibility now, or he could win and under-perform, which would conform to her own opinion of him as expressed in the primary season. Either way, she's in the catbird seat.
Now, after Palin, the odds have changed. Now, if Obama loses, the downside is worse for Hillary's chances. After four years at President McCain's side, Sarah Palin could be the next presidential nominee given his age (he will be 76 then).
And come 2012, Palin could no longer be faulted for having little or no foreign policy experience. She will still be relatively young (48) and probably just as exciting to many people while Hillary Clinton will be 65 and seem more like yesterday's leader.
I have no special information but I do know that the Clintons are the canniest politicians in America. They have to have thought of this.
Those Americans who supported Hillary Clinton and now intend to vote for John McCain should think about it too.
More Posts
Next page »