It’s official, global warming is finally becoming enough of a pain in right rear pocket that most people don’t consider it worth the predicted personal sacrifice.
An international poll, conducted by a conglomeration of environmental groups and the financial institution HSBC, has determined the majority of people polled do not want to make any personal sacrifice to stem the tide of slightly warmer weather in subarctic regions of the world. The poll was conducted in 11 countries, including: the United States, Canada, Australia, Brazil, China, France, Germany, India, Malaysia, Mexico and the United Kingdom. Only 47 percent of people polled said they were prepared to make personal lifestyle changes to reduce carbon emissions, which is an 11 point drop from last year when 58 percent said they were prepared to make the switch to a cleaner but much more expensive lifestyle (I’m willing to bet very few of the 58 percent considered giving up their Ipods or cappuccino machines when they considered exactly what a lifestyle change would mean).
Of course, when asked, the majority, or 55 percent, still felt the government should do something like increase the cost of energy by investing in unreliable renewable energy resources such as wind, solar or wave power (Which makes sense when you realize most people polled believe little fairies magically create all of the government’s money in little solar powered factories where they eat only organic bean curds and meditate twice-daily to increase the world’s consciousness to the plight of the inability of gay seals and polar bears to get married because they are trapped in oppressive regimes in the Tibetan rainforests).
So what has caused such a dramatic change in just one year? Could it be more people are aware of the fact that glaciers are growing, we have more polar bears than ever, or that the same people who predicted the dramatic effects of climate change are same ones who said September 2008 was the warmest September in recorded history when in fact most of the US was reporting record cold? (They had actually goofed and mixed in August temperatures for a huge part of their sample, a mistake that apparently is not uncommon for NASA’s crack climate change team).
Nope. But give people leading marks for consistency. Just as the facts had little to do with the groundswell of support for climate change policies, they have also had little to do with the shift back toward less personal commitment. The real reason so many people aren’t interested in climate change is simple -- $4 a gallon gasoline.
Finally, the majority of the people have woken up to realize that the only way climate change policy will ever be implemented is on the backs of the consumer.
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Gooseberry on Presidential Flavors
If presidencies could be assigned an ice cream flavor, Reagan would be pralines and cream. He brought us a rich, creamy presidency with a nice hint of sophistication. Other presidents don’t come off as well.
Carter, for better or worse, would be tutti fruiti. Tutti fruiti is a pretentious, micromanaged flavor that leaves a nasty after taste.
Bush 41, the older, more prudent Bush, is tin roof sundae – mainly because of the nuts.
Bush 43 needs a tasty, but misunderstood flavor. Something like chocolate chip cookie dough. Is it a cookie, or is it ice cream? Who knows? Who cares? The Democrats will blame him for everything anyway.
Nixon is pistachio, a flavor too-smart by halves, and one that thinks it can get away with anything.
Washington wouldn’t be an ice cream. He would be a pie, cherry pie, of course. Lincoln would be hot fudge cake. Not much to look at but very rich in flavor.
One would think Obama would be a nice chocolate or mocha almond fudge, but that would be too obvious and would pander to things that don’t really matter. Presidential flavors are more about policy and the way they do things than who their parents were. For that reason Obama would be the remarkably popular but intellectually bland vanilla. So far, in his political life, he has stood for everything and yet delivered nothing. We look for more of the same in the future.
Carter, for better or worse, would be tutti fruiti. Tutti fruiti is a pretentious, micromanaged flavor that leaves a nasty after taste.
Bush 41, the older, more prudent Bush, is tin roof sundae – mainly because of the nuts.
Bush 43 needs a tasty, but misunderstood flavor. Something like chocolate chip cookie dough. Is it a cookie, or is it ice cream? Who knows? Who cares? The Democrats will blame him for everything anyway.
Nixon is pistachio, a flavor too-smart by halves, and one that thinks it can get away with anything.
Washington wouldn’t be an ice cream. He would be a pie, cherry pie, of course. Lincoln would be hot fudge cake. Not much to look at but very rich in flavor.
One would think Obama would be a nice chocolate or mocha almond fudge, but that would be too obvious and would pander to things that don’t really matter. Presidential flavors are more about policy and the way they do things than who their parents were. For that reason Obama would be the remarkably popular but intellectually bland vanilla. So far, in his political life, he has stood for everything and yet delivered nothing. We look for more of the same in the future.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Gooseberry on King Obama
The rain may never fall till after sundown.
By eight, the morning fog must disappear.
In short, there's simply not
A more congenial spot
For happily-ever-aftering than here
In Camelot.
-- Alan Jay Lerner, Camelot
I hate to burst anyone's bubble, but the impending Obama Administration can hardly conjure the image of King Arthur or any of the roundtable knights. For one thing, the glamour, the sparkle and the innocence of the JFK administration is gone, done, caput.
In its place is a partisan sqabble manned by people like Barbara Boxer, Dick Durban and Chuck Schumer. Even Shakespeare couldn't have dreamt up a more convoluted coven.
"By the pricking of my thumb something hardly worth mentioning comes, but we'll muck it about enough to make it look horrible, when in fact it is simply good government."
"I'll get you my pretties and your moderately priced energy plans too."
"I'm going to kill you, George Bush. I'm going to destroy you. After tonight, no one will ever again question my power. After tonight if they speak of you, they'll only speak of how you begged for death. And how I being a merciful Lord... obliged."
No round tables here. Maybe a few pentagrams or even a torure rack. If they need something round, maybe they could use a cauldron. Cauldrons are round.
And while President-elect Obama is not quite cut from the same cloth as the Senate Snipers, he and his wife also are not cut from the same cloth as JFK or Jackie, either. But he is in effect the legal heir to one of the biggest kingdoms the world has ever seen. What kind of king will he be?
Let's see: He is all image. A bit stiff (although nothing like Al Gore). He has a friendly face. And has a plan to distribute things to everyone, kind of like that King guy on the burger commercials.
That's it! He's not Camelot, but he his the BK dude. (If you say BK really fast it kind of sounds like Barak.)
He's even kind of creepy, like the BK dude. (Can you imagine him standing outside your window, handing you a sandwitch, staring at you in that plastic grin while hundreds of birds poop all over?)
I'll even bet that within the first year of his term he will deliver the entire country one big whopper.
By eight, the morning fog must disappear.
In short, there's simply not
A more congenial spot
For happily-ever-aftering than here
In Camelot.
-- Alan Jay Lerner, Camelot
I hate to burst anyone's bubble, but the impending Obama Administration can hardly conjure the image of King Arthur or any of the roundtable knights. For one thing, the glamour, the sparkle and the innocence of the JFK administration is gone, done, caput.
In its place is a partisan sqabble manned by people like Barbara Boxer, Dick Durban and Chuck Schumer. Even Shakespeare couldn't have dreamt up a more convoluted coven.
"By the pricking of my thumb something hardly worth mentioning comes, but we'll muck it about enough to make it look horrible, when in fact it is simply good government."
"I'll get you my pretties and your moderately priced energy plans too."
"I'm going to kill you, George Bush. I'm going to destroy you. After tonight, no one will ever again question my power. After tonight if they speak of you, they'll only speak of how you begged for death. And how I being a merciful Lord... obliged."
No round tables here. Maybe a few pentagrams or even a torure rack. If they need something round, maybe they could use a cauldron. Cauldrons are round.
And while President-elect Obama is not quite cut from the same cloth as the Senate Snipers, he and his wife also are not cut from the same cloth as JFK or Jackie, either. But he is in effect the legal heir to one of the biggest kingdoms the world has ever seen. What kind of king will he be?
Let's see: He is all image. A bit stiff (although nothing like Al Gore). He has a friendly face. And has a plan to distribute things to everyone, kind of like that King guy on the burger commercials.
That's it! He's not Camelot, but he his the BK dude. (If you say BK really fast it kind of sounds like Barak.)
He's even kind of creepy, like the BK dude. (Can you imagine him standing outside your window, handing you a sandwitch, staring at you in that plastic grin while hundreds of birds poop all over?)
I'll even bet that within the first year of his term he will deliver the entire country one big whopper.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Gooseberry getting over it
It is time to confront one of the most important issues of our time.
I know what you are thinking, "surely he is not going to go there?"
To be honest, it is not the sort of thing one likes to think about, or talk about, but ignoring it will not make it go away and letting this sort of thing fester just leaves a heap of oozing puss.
I am of course talking about the extreme use of the word "over" in the English language.
Writers make this mistake all the time.
"Over," just like the word up, is a preposition. It denotes location, a place, a position. When used as a descriptor for increased amounts, however, it often leaves one wondering "how'd they do that hover thing anyway?"
Example: The bill was over four dollars.
Question: Did the author mean someone slid four dollars under the bill, or did the bill total more than four?
Here's a hint on how to avoid this ambiguous situation. Whenever you find yourself using the word "over" and you really meant "more than," please, for my sake, remove "over" and insert "more than" in its place. It will clean up your meaning and will make me feel much betterer about the situation.
This is Gooseberry keeping things real and signing off. Over.
I know what you are thinking, "surely he is not going to go there?"
To be honest, it is not the sort of thing one likes to think about, or talk about, but ignoring it will not make it go away and letting this sort of thing fester just leaves a heap of oozing puss.
I am of course talking about the extreme use of the word "over" in the English language.
Writers make this mistake all the time.
"Over," just like the word up, is a preposition. It denotes location, a place, a position. When used as a descriptor for increased amounts, however, it often leaves one wondering "how'd they do that hover thing anyway?"
Example: The bill was over four dollars.
Question: Did the author mean someone slid four dollars under the bill, or did the bill total more than four?
Here's a hint on how to avoid this ambiguous situation. Whenever you find yourself using the word "over" and you really meant "more than," please, for my sake, remove "over" and insert "more than" in its place. It will clean up your meaning and will make me feel much betterer about the situation.
This is Gooseberry keeping things real and signing off. Over.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Gooseberry on HD 22
With all the close races around the nation it is important that we don't forget the little guys. In Wyoming's House District 22 there is a run off election scheduled for November 25 between Democrat Jim Roscoe of Wilson and Republican Charles Stough of Pinedale. In the first go round, Roscoe won by four votes. It turns out, however, 11 voters got confused and voted where they shouldn't have. But only in Lincoln County. That means the voters in HD 22 that live in Sublette or Teton Counties will not have to worry about showing up at the polls, again.
Unless anyone gets too confused, I would like to point out that Lincoln County, Wyoming is not anything like Florida. For one thing, you'd be hard pressed to find any retirees in Lincoln County running around in shorts this time of year.
Unless anyone gets too confused, I would like to point out that Lincoln County, Wyoming is not anything like Florida. For one thing, you'd be hard pressed to find any retirees in Lincoln County running around in shorts this time of year.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Gooseberry on the next generation
One of my terrific children decided he would be funny by imitating me the other day. He put on one of my coats (which fit him frighteningly well) then he put my bluetooth headset in his ear and commenced to march around making profound statements like, "I'm young and hip. Although, the only time I should ever use the word hip is when I talk about my latest replacement," or the ever famous, "I may not always be bigger than you, but I'm meaner and better looking." The one that got me, however, was when he grabbed a glass of water and sat down on couch only to proclaim, "This place is a mess. Steven, clean it up."
The most eerie part of the whole scene was the striking similarity to what had happened 25 years earlier, when I was 15 and tormented my own father with a similar show.
I am proud of my kids. They do many wonderful things that totally amaze me. Where did they get it from? Not me, I work too hard and am not at home as much as I should be. Not from my wife. She is the sweetest person I ever met and would never do anything that would be considered improper or juvenile. I hate to say it, but no matter how much you try to control their lives, your children will become their own people. It's almost as if they come to this earth with their own unique personalities already programmed in...
On election day this same son wore a Blackwater hat to school and a t-shirt that proudly proclaimed to all the world that he was a Proud Republican. He is also known for his tenacious debate tactics which he is willing to engage at any time, at any place, on any subject.
Once again, I can't for the life of me figure out where he gets it from.
The most eerie part of the whole scene was the striking similarity to what had happened 25 years earlier, when I was 15 and tormented my own father with a similar show.
I am proud of my kids. They do many wonderful things that totally amaze me. Where did they get it from? Not me, I work too hard and am not at home as much as I should be. Not from my wife. She is the sweetest person I ever met and would never do anything that would be considered improper or juvenile. I hate to say it, but no matter how much you try to control their lives, your children will become their own people. It's almost as if they come to this earth with their own unique personalities already programmed in...
On election day this same son wore a Blackwater hat to school and a t-shirt that proudly proclaimed to all the world that he was a Proud Republican. He is also known for his tenacious debate tactics which he is willing to engage at any time, at any place, on any subject.
Once again, I can't for the life of me figure out where he gets it from.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Gooseberry on Veterans Day
Today I sat in on a meeting filled with political types who were meeting for the first time since the election just one week ago (was it really just one week ago? It seems almost like a lifetime). The room was quiet.
"Why is everyone so glum?" somebody asked.
"It's veteran's day," I said.
"Isn't Memorial Day the somber day? Aren't we supposed to be happy and jump around and cheer today?"
"I don't know," I replied. "My dad used to always tell be to be quiet and stop jumping around all the time and he was a veteran."
I have only one thought about veterans day -- my father was the greatest man I ever knew. He served as a forward observer for mortar fire during the Korean War. In his memory I honor and respect any person who has ever worn a uniform in defense of my freedom.
"Why is everyone so glum?" somebody asked.
"It's veteran's day," I said.
"Isn't Memorial Day the somber day? Aren't we supposed to be happy and jump around and cheer today?"
"I don't know," I replied. "My dad used to always tell be to be quiet and stop jumping around all the time and he was a veteran."
I have only one thought about veterans day -- my father was the greatest man I ever knew. He served as a forward observer for mortar fire during the Korean War. In his memory I honor and respect any person who has ever worn a uniform in defense of my freedom.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Gooseberry on Biden and Etheridge
The Clown News Network (CNN) reported Monday morning that Vice-president Elect Joe Biden was booed by the crowd in Philadelphia when his face was shown on the jumbotron during the Eagles-Giants game Sunday. To give the crowd credit, Biden was exposed to the crowd at the very moment the referees announced Giants quarterback Eli Manning wasn’t really over the line when he threw a pass that was caught by his receiver on the three-yard line (this was a reversal of a call that was made on the challenge of Giants Coach Tom Coughlin).
CNN, however, drew the conclusion that Biden was being booed because, well, it’s Philadelphia and they boo everyone.
The comment section of the article included the usual name calling and political hack statements by people on both sides of the fence.
Add to this latest controversy the reaction of gays and lesbians nationwide to California passing proposition 8, a ban on same sex marriage, and you still won’t have a news article worth reading.
This is the second time California voters have said no to same sex marriages. Governor Swarzenegger is already looking for the California courts to overturn this measure and Melissa Etheridge is not going to pay her taxes because she feels she is being denied her rights as a citizen, so we can expect this issue will not be going away anytime soon.
There is just one flaw in Ms. Etheridge’s argument, however, that needs to be pointed out. No one has taken any rights away from her at all. She still has the same right as everyone else in the nation to get married. If she wanted to, tomorrow, she could get married. What she wants, and what every lonely computer addicted male in America wants, is to marry the person he or she wants to no matter what and with no restrictions or limitations. Newsflash: there has always been a limit on with whom and when we can get married. In reality, she is no different than lonely sicko computer guy who falls in love with an online model and wants to marry her but can’t because: 1. she’s already married, 2. he’s already married, 3. she’s a close blood relative, 4. she’s too young, 5. she’s already deceased, or 6. she says no to his proposal.
In summation, Biden heard boos in Philadelphia and Etheridge has the right to get married, she just has decided she doesn’t want to live by the same rules as everyone else.
CNN, however, drew the conclusion that Biden was being booed because, well, it’s Philadelphia and they boo everyone.
The comment section of the article included the usual name calling and political hack statements by people on both sides of the fence.
Add to this latest controversy the reaction of gays and lesbians nationwide to California passing proposition 8, a ban on same sex marriage, and you still won’t have a news article worth reading.
This is the second time California voters have said no to same sex marriages. Governor Swarzenegger is already looking for the California courts to overturn this measure and Melissa Etheridge is not going to pay her taxes because she feels she is being denied her rights as a citizen, so we can expect this issue will not be going away anytime soon.
There is just one flaw in Ms. Etheridge’s argument, however, that needs to be pointed out. No one has taken any rights away from her at all. She still has the same right as everyone else in the nation to get married. If she wanted to, tomorrow, she could get married. What she wants, and what every lonely computer addicted male in America wants, is to marry the person he or she wants to no matter what and with no restrictions or limitations. Newsflash: there has always been a limit on with whom and when we can get married. In reality, she is no different than lonely sicko computer guy who falls in love with an online model and wants to marry her but can’t because: 1. she’s already married, 2. he’s already married, 3. she’s a close blood relative, 4. she’s too young, 5. she’s already deceased, or 6. she says no to his proposal.
In summation, Biden heard boos in Philadelphia and Etheridge has the right to get married, she just has decided she doesn’t want to live by the same rules as everyone else.
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Gooseberry's Other Election Insights
Last week's elections had a few very bright spot that have gone virtually unnoticed by the national press.
One of the brightest came when Loveland Democrat incumbent Bob Bacon soundly defeated his Republican challenger Matt Fries.
You have to wonder why they even took this one to the polls. Any guy worth his cholesterol could have told you Bacon always beats Fries.
Another high point was the election of Cynthia Lummis as the next US Representative from Wyoming. Cynthia replaces Barbara Cubin who is retiring after a long and illustrious career in the US Congress.
US Senator Mike Enzi, also from Wyoming, set a new record by getting 76% of the vote.
Tuesday marked another high point. I was able to confirm that fried pork rinds still go great with chocolate milk (a substance that Runners World magazine reports gives runners even more energy than sports drinks -- that is the chocolate milk not the pork rinds).
One of the brightest came when Loveland Democrat incumbent Bob Bacon soundly defeated his Republican challenger Matt Fries.
You have to wonder why they even took this one to the polls. Any guy worth his cholesterol could have told you Bacon always beats Fries.
Another high point was the election of Cynthia Lummis as the next US Representative from Wyoming. Cynthia replaces Barbara Cubin who is retiring after a long and illustrious career in the US Congress.
US Senator Mike Enzi, also from Wyoming, set a new record by getting 76% of the vote.
Tuesday marked another high point. I was able to confirm that fried pork rinds still go great with chocolate milk (a substance that Runners World magazine reports gives runners even more energy than sports drinks -- that is the chocolate milk not the pork rinds).
Friday, November 7, 2008
Gooseberry on the New West
Hold on to your seat cushions neighbors; you soon may need to use them as a flotation device. News reports say President Obama’s administration will focus on running the Department of Interior in a much greener way and will “emphasize consensus building, tighter restrictions on drilling and funding aimed at conservation priorities.”
Shocking.
The good news is this will only impact the West. The rest of the nation -- you know those places where there are no unexploited natural resources , where all the people who voted for Obama live, and where people don’t dress in plaid shirts and funny hats, will hardly feel the impact of increased fuel or food prices. (Who needs coal, natural gas or cows on the open range anyway? These are modern times. We have electricity and supermarkets.)
There is no question, in the opinion of most Washington insiders the selection of the next Secretary of Interior will have a major impact on the lives of approximately 15 people. The real exciting positions in the next cabinet , such as Secretary of Agriculture (which anymore is really just the secretary of corn,), Secretary of Labor (unions) and the guy who is in the line of succession, the Secretary of State. The fact that more than one-third of the nation’s land mass is under the control of one agency, the Bureau of Land Management, doesn’t mean much in a society more interested in video games, celebrity sobriety and acceptance of global socialism.
Of course, this does not take into account the “New West.” Or in other words a west that does not rely on the development of natural resources to survive. According to New West pundits, we can all live off selling life insurance and self composting toilets. We can live off the grid (as opposed to living off of the grid, which is different, unless you use the internet, then you will be in the grid, but not of it). We can hovel together in ranchettes and raise llamas.
What President Obama will need to learn, and what New Westerners seem to forget, is that somehow, somewhere in the line of commerce everything starts as a raw material. Then those raw materials also need an energy source to be converted into a finished product. And no matter how frustrating it might be for the natural purists of the world, the west is a major source of both raw materials and energy.
Shocking.
The good news is this will only impact the West. The rest of the nation -- you know those places where there are no unexploited natural resources , where all the people who voted for Obama live, and where people don’t dress in plaid shirts and funny hats, will hardly feel the impact of increased fuel or food prices. (Who needs coal, natural gas or cows on the open range anyway? These are modern times. We have electricity and supermarkets.)
There is no question, in the opinion of most Washington insiders the selection of the next Secretary of Interior will have a major impact on the lives of approximately 15 people. The real exciting positions in the next cabinet , such as Secretary of Agriculture (which anymore is really just the secretary of corn,), Secretary of Labor (unions) and the guy who is in the line of succession, the Secretary of State. The fact that more than one-third of the nation’s land mass is under the control of one agency, the Bureau of Land Management, doesn’t mean much in a society more interested in video games, celebrity sobriety and acceptance of global socialism.
Of course, this does not take into account the “New West.” Or in other words a west that does not rely on the development of natural resources to survive. According to New West pundits, we can all live off selling life insurance and self composting toilets. We can live off the grid (as opposed to living off of the grid, which is different, unless you use the internet, then you will be in the grid, but not of it). We can hovel together in ranchettes and raise llamas.
What President Obama will need to learn, and what New Westerners seem to forget, is that somehow, somewhere in the line of commerce everything starts as a raw material. Then those raw materials also need an energy source to be converted into a finished product. And no matter how frustrating it might be for the natural purists of the world, the west is a major source of both raw materials and energy.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Gooseberry’s Rule of Politics # 6: We are always right, but we are never dead right.
I used to think of myself as a good and solid conservative. I thought, “what else could I be? I despise the extreme positions of liberalism.” And while it is true I am by no stretch of the imagination a liberal, I find myself just as baffled and put off by those who push the right side of the conservative envelope.
I find the extreme right a bit too fatalistic for my tastes. They preach doom and gloom without holding out any hope for salvation. To them, we are all going to hell in a hand basket and can only be saved by wearing hair shirts and eating a steady diet of poached salmon and rubber chicken. (I don’t mind the hair shirt. Ever since I turned 30 I’ve found hair is a natural part of my back and shoulders, but I really don’t like all that rubber chicken served at extreme right events.)
Could it be I am a … moderate?
I shudder at the thought. While I am no right wing nut job, and would be struck by lightening should I ever be considered a liberal, I am definitely not a moderate. In my universe, moderates are flaky, noncommittal types with sore crotches from riding the fence all the time.
I ain’t no fence rider.
In my universe, I am a passionate crusader who leaps over fences in a single bound. In my universe I am out there, in the game, running in the offense, hitting hard, driving home my ideals, eating banana pudding and drinking ice cold Diet Pepsi. (In reality I trip now and then at the fence and my wife doesn’t let me eat banana pudding because she has food allergies. I also whimper a lot more in reality than I do in the universe of my own creation.)
If I’m not an extreme conservative, or a liberal, or a moderate, what am I?
I believe in fiscal responsibility. I believe in taking care of widows and the truly destitute. I believe in supporting our troops (which begins by wise deployment then is followed up by sacrifices at home to make sure they have what they need when they have to be out there, defending my freedom). I believe marriage is between one man and one woman. I believe in my right to say whatever I want, but that I must suffer consequences when my speech is patently offensive or vulgar. I believe in my right to approach any one of my elected officials as a citizen and that I should not be penalized because I know what I am doing. I believe any more tinkering with abortion in our legal system will muck things up even worse than they are now and that we need to shift that debate into the social arena where we can work at cutting off the supply by empowering women and supporting both the mother and the child without being forced to choose between the survival of one or the other. I believe that if you can afford to live a green lifestyle you should have the right to spend as much money as you want to limit your own emissions, but that we shouldn’t force people on limited incomes to pay half of their paychecks on gasoline, electricity and heat. I believe in the rights of all liberals to eat tofu, drive hybrid cars, name their children weird-funky names and hope they respect me when I choose to do otherwise. I believe in spaying and neutering my pets. I further believe pets are a great idea, for other people, and would gladly surrender both of my dogs if it wouldn’t break the hearts of my wonderful wife and five great children. I believe immigration is a boon to our nation because we are raising lazy, video-game-playing mooks who will bankrupt us soon if we don’t get someone willing to do the work.
I think I’m going to follow in the footsteps of US Senator Mike Enzi and start a whole new movement called Reasonableness. Senator Enzi votes consistently as one of the most conservative members of Congress, and yet is considered an approachable moderate by those in the opposition party. Why? Because he is not so steeped in his own rhetoric that he can’t reach across the aisle and work on the 80 percent of the issues that he doesn’t view as pure partisan fodder.
Reasonableness is a philosophy designed for independent minds with solid principles. Reasonableness begins with an understanding that you can find common ground if both sides truly believe in the principles they are espousing and that we can reach a solution if we truly care about what we are doing. It is for free thinkers who realize that neither side of the political spectrum owns all truth and who make their decisions based on life experiences without bowing to pedantic political rhetoric.
At least, that's what it means in my universe.
I find the extreme right a bit too fatalistic for my tastes. They preach doom and gloom without holding out any hope for salvation. To them, we are all going to hell in a hand basket and can only be saved by wearing hair shirts and eating a steady diet of poached salmon and rubber chicken. (I don’t mind the hair shirt. Ever since I turned 30 I’ve found hair is a natural part of my back and shoulders, but I really don’t like all that rubber chicken served at extreme right events.)
Could it be I am a … moderate?
I shudder at the thought. While I am no right wing nut job, and would be struck by lightening should I ever be considered a liberal, I am definitely not a moderate. In my universe, moderates are flaky, noncommittal types with sore crotches from riding the fence all the time.
I ain’t no fence rider.
In my universe, I am a passionate crusader who leaps over fences in a single bound. In my universe I am out there, in the game, running in the offense, hitting hard, driving home my ideals, eating banana pudding and drinking ice cold Diet Pepsi. (In reality I trip now and then at the fence and my wife doesn’t let me eat banana pudding because she has food allergies. I also whimper a lot more in reality than I do in the universe of my own creation.)
If I’m not an extreme conservative, or a liberal, or a moderate, what am I?
I believe in fiscal responsibility. I believe in taking care of widows and the truly destitute. I believe in supporting our troops (which begins by wise deployment then is followed up by sacrifices at home to make sure they have what they need when they have to be out there, defending my freedom). I believe marriage is between one man and one woman. I believe in my right to say whatever I want, but that I must suffer consequences when my speech is patently offensive or vulgar. I believe in my right to approach any one of my elected officials as a citizen and that I should not be penalized because I know what I am doing. I believe any more tinkering with abortion in our legal system will muck things up even worse than they are now and that we need to shift that debate into the social arena where we can work at cutting off the supply by empowering women and supporting both the mother and the child without being forced to choose between the survival of one or the other. I believe that if you can afford to live a green lifestyle you should have the right to spend as much money as you want to limit your own emissions, but that we shouldn’t force people on limited incomes to pay half of their paychecks on gasoline, electricity and heat. I believe in the rights of all liberals to eat tofu, drive hybrid cars, name their children weird-funky names and hope they respect me when I choose to do otherwise. I believe in spaying and neutering my pets. I further believe pets are a great idea, for other people, and would gladly surrender both of my dogs if it wouldn’t break the hearts of my wonderful wife and five great children. I believe immigration is a boon to our nation because we are raising lazy, video-game-playing mooks who will bankrupt us soon if we don’t get someone willing to do the work.
I think I’m going to follow in the footsteps of US Senator Mike Enzi and start a whole new movement called Reasonableness. Senator Enzi votes consistently as one of the most conservative members of Congress, and yet is considered an approachable moderate by those in the opposition party. Why? Because he is not so steeped in his own rhetoric that he can’t reach across the aisle and work on the 80 percent of the issues that he doesn’t view as pure partisan fodder.
Reasonableness is a philosophy designed for independent minds with solid principles. Reasonableness begins with an understanding that you can find common ground if both sides truly believe in the principles they are espousing and that we can reach a solution if we truly care about what we are doing. It is for free thinkers who realize that neither side of the political spectrum owns all truth and who make their decisions based on life experiences without bowing to pedantic political rhetoric.
At least, that's what it means in my universe.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Gooseberry’s Thoughts on Policy –v- Politics
Having suffered an ignominious defeat at the hands of the fickle populous, the burgeoning politician would do well to note the age worn adage, this too shall pass. And while seeing a bright tomorrow can be trying given the myopic shortfalls of today, it is highly possible to elicit comfort from the knowledge that, while the opposing party might have won the election, they also have to assume the responsibility of their victory. In other words, sometimes the very worst thing you can wish on your opponent is success.
Good politics is a long-term game. Easy wins lead to easy losses, and while success can provide heady moments, it is important to remember what is really at stake and why you get involved in the first place.
If you are involved in politics simply for fame and fortune – I wish you luck and recommend reality television as a viable alternative. If all you want is your 15 minutes of fame, then, by all means, use the internet, television, newspapers or other forms of media-ostitution to enjoy the limelight while it lasts. But if you really want to make a difference and make the world a better place, step back and don’t worry so much about your own image. Worry more about policy than politics.
Changing the world is more about policy than politics. Policy, while less glamorous, can be much more satisfying than the image game of politics. While politics is about pleasing the crowd in the public arena using light shows and speeches, policy is about actually taking care of the crowd by delivering sewer systems and groceries that the crowd needs to survive.
Policy is hard work. It is never developed or implemented in one day, or week, or even month. Effective policy starts at the grassroots level by finding out what is really important to the constituents you want to serve (Constituents -- you know, the people you are serving, the ones who got you to where you are now). Very few successful legislative efforts ever start from the top down. Sure, there are some bills that get signed into law with flashy ceremonies and public backslapping, but those bills fade, get rewritten, and are amended out of existence. They tend to cause more trouble than they are worth. The laws with real staying power start at the bottom of the food chain, with the people who actually have to implement and live with them after they are finished. They also trickle their way up to execution with very little fanfare.
One of the most satisfying statutes I ever worked on was a simple land use designation change for the city of Powell, Wyoming. The Powell fire department had its station house located in a cramped, busy intersection where rolling out the fire trucks posed a public threat of its own. There was no room to grow and no way to modernize the facility to accommodate the changing needs of the community. By federal law the land under the firehouse was granted to the city by the US Bureau of Reclamation with the express limitation that it be used only for a public purpose and that it never be sold. I worked with the US Senate Environment and Public Works Committee to lift that land use designation to allow the city to sell the property so they could use the revenue to purchase and build a new, bigger and much better fire house in a much more practical location. While I was not the driving force behind the success of the bill, I still feel like I had a direct part in improving the lives of the people in Wyoming.
Compare that success with the last appropriations bill I worked on. You remember it. It was in all the papers. It saved the free world from tyrannical domination. It included energy programs and health care reform and made sure financial dividends were properly taxed. Just four years later every provision in that bill has been superseded by other, later and greater efforts.
Money is a great thing and I have a policy of never turning it down when it is offered to me via legal and appropriate channels, but there is also something tangible about bricks and mortar and a safer community that brings its own unique form of satisfaction.
I think Terry Pratchett said it best. Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day. Set him on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life.
Good politics is a long-term game. Easy wins lead to easy losses, and while success can provide heady moments, it is important to remember what is really at stake and why you get involved in the first place.
If you are involved in politics simply for fame and fortune – I wish you luck and recommend reality television as a viable alternative. If all you want is your 15 minutes of fame, then, by all means, use the internet, television, newspapers or other forms of media-ostitution to enjoy the limelight while it lasts. But if you really want to make a difference and make the world a better place, step back and don’t worry so much about your own image. Worry more about policy than politics.
Changing the world is more about policy than politics. Policy, while less glamorous, can be much more satisfying than the image game of politics. While politics is about pleasing the crowd in the public arena using light shows and speeches, policy is about actually taking care of the crowd by delivering sewer systems and groceries that the crowd needs to survive.
Policy is hard work. It is never developed or implemented in one day, or week, or even month. Effective policy starts at the grassroots level by finding out what is really important to the constituents you want to serve (Constituents -- you know, the people you are serving, the ones who got you to where you are now). Very few successful legislative efforts ever start from the top down. Sure, there are some bills that get signed into law with flashy ceremonies and public backslapping, but those bills fade, get rewritten, and are amended out of existence. They tend to cause more trouble than they are worth. The laws with real staying power start at the bottom of the food chain, with the people who actually have to implement and live with them after they are finished. They also trickle their way up to execution with very little fanfare.
One of the most satisfying statutes I ever worked on was a simple land use designation change for the city of Powell, Wyoming. The Powell fire department had its station house located in a cramped, busy intersection where rolling out the fire trucks posed a public threat of its own. There was no room to grow and no way to modernize the facility to accommodate the changing needs of the community. By federal law the land under the firehouse was granted to the city by the US Bureau of Reclamation with the express limitation that it be used only for a public purpose and that it never be sold. I worked with the US Senate Environment and Public Works Committee to lift that land use designation to allow the city to sell the property so they could use the revenue to purchase and build a new, bigger and much better fire house in a much more practical location. While I was not the driving force behind the success of the bill, I still feel like I had a direct part in improving the lives of the people in Wyoming.
Compare that success with the last appropriations bill I worked on. You remember it. It was in all the papers. It saved the free world from tyrannical domination. It included energy programs and health care reform and made sure financial dividends were properly taxed. Just four years later every provision in that bill has been superseded by other, later and greater efforts.
Money is a great thing and I have a policy of never turning it down when it is offered to me via legal and appropriate channels, but there is also something tangible about bricks and mortar and a safer community that brings its own unique form of satisfaction.
I think Terry Pratchett said it best. Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day. Set him on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life.
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Can you say President Obama?
As hard as it is for my Republican soul to swallow the concept of any Democrat in the White House, I must admit, I am hardly as distraught with the election of Senator Barak Hussein Obama as President of the United States as I was with the election of one William Jefferson Clinton 16 years ago.
In 1992 I was working on a US Congressional Campaign in Provo, Utah. My candidate was taking on a first term incumbent and we lost horribly. But our loss was hardly as public or even noticed when compared to the loss suffered by President George Herbert Walker Bush. At the time we thought all things holy had deserted us. There was talk that surely the Second Coming was not only eminent but probable to occur in the next four years (even then it was rumored that the Clintons would be the end of all moral fortitude in the nation).
What makes 2008 so different from 1992? For one thing Senator Obama is by all appearances a loyal husband and father. For another, I never did buy into the campaign of his opponent like I did in the campaign of Bush 41. To me, McCain will always be that bitter old man who swore at me on the Senate floor. There is no doubt that he was a war hero and deserves all respect for the sacrifices he has made for our country, but that doesn’t mean I would ever have been excited to see him in charge of the country. Bush 41 was different. He was a patriot in his own right and still had some of the mystique of the Great Reagan Administration. Sure he raised taxes, but he also hated broccoli and he never pushed forward an unconstitutional effort to stifle political speech through so called campaign finance reform.
I don’t expect much from an Obama Administration. He has a Democratic controlled House and Senate that, quite frankly, has only defined itself in the past two years by its opposition to Bush 43. Now the lowest rated Congress in the history of the United States will have no more excuses. It will be up to them to develop a positive agenda and deliver on the safety and economic needs of our nation.
Will they be up to the task? Only time will tell, but if past action is any indication of the future, I expect there will be a lot of room for the Republicans to pick up the pieces and pull themselves together .
In 1992 I was working on a US Congressional Campaign in Provo, Utah. My candidate was taking on a first term incumbent and we lost horribly. But our loss was hardly as public or even noticed when compared to the loss suffered by President George Herbert Walker Bush. At the time we thought all things holy had deserted us. There was talk that surely the Second Coming was not only eminent but probable to occur in the next four years (even then it was rumored that the Clintons would be the end of all moral fortitude in the nation).
What makes 2008 so different from 1992? For one thing Senator Obama is by all appearances a loyal husband and father. For another, I never did buy into the campaign of his opponent like I did in the campaign of Bush 41. To me, McCain will always be that bitter old man who swore at me on the Senate floor. There is no doubt that he was a war hero and deserves all respect for the sacrifices he has made for our country, but that doesn’t mean I would ever have been excited to see him in charge of the country. Bush 41 was different. He was a patriot in his own right and still had some of the mystique of the Great Reagan Administration. Sure he raised taxes, but he also hated broccoli and he never pushed forward an unconstitutional effort to stifle political speech through so called campaign finance reform.
I don’t expect much from an Obama Administration. He has a Democratic controlled House and Senate that, quite frankly, has only defined itself in the past two years by its opposition to Bush 43. Now the lowest rated Congress in the history of the United States will have no more excuses. It will be up to them to develop a positive agenda and deliver on the safety and economic needs of our nation.
Will they be up to the task? Only time will tell, but if past action is any indication of the future, I expect there will be a lot of room for the Republicans to pick up the pieces and pull themselves together .
Monday, November 3, 2008
Gooseberry's further rules on politics
Gooseberry's further thoughts on all things political.
3. Any message worth repeating is worth repeating, over and over again, redundantly, always saying the same thing.
Effective message distribution is a lot like flood irrigating a field. The message needs to flow out of the head gate and into the community in a way that allows it to spread out and carefully seep down into the roots. It can be a slow, painful process, but once that message hits home it stays and becomes a permanent part of the political psyche. If you turn the water out too hard and too fast, on the other hand, the message only hits a few people, tends to dig out the field, and leaves large portions of the community untouched. One of the best ways to spread the message is to develop a simple, one sentence concept then repeat it, over and over again until you start hearing that same message coming back to you, hopefully, from key decision makers.
For example: Gillette Community College in Gillette, Wyoming was looking for money to build a technology training center on its campus to accommodate the needs of local industry for trained electricians, welders and diesel mechanics. The plans had been developed, the land was identified and everything was ready to go, except for the $27 million needed to purchase bricks, mortar and pay off the contractors. Since very few community colleges have that kind of money sitting around, the school decided to go to the state government for a one-time appropriation. The first year they tried the full-blast drenching approach. They got nothing. The next year they formed a coalition with other schools, and spread their message out in a steady, regular pace, and they kept their message simple, “We need the school to develop a workforce that can keep the revenues flowing into the state’s coffers.” Half way through the effort, Wyoming Governor Dave Freudenthal took at least one lobbyist aside and delivered the message that we needed to fund the school construction because, “we needed it to develop a workforce that can keep the mineral revenues in Campbell County flowing into the state’s coffers.” The next session Gillette Community College got the money it needed to build the school.
2. It’s too late to make a friend when you need one.
I love peanut butter cups. They are chocolate goodness wrapped around sweet peanut butter heaven. I don’t get them too often because when I do I have to share them with my wonderful wife and amazing five children. If you do the math, one of me versus six of them means the closest I usually get to my two great tastes that taste great together is a faint smell emanating from empty wrappers. The best way I have found to get an adequate amount of peanut butter cups to satiate even my hankering is to make friends with parents whose kids have peanut allergies, then, when Halloween rolls around and all of the little munchkins collect bags and bags of peanut butter cups, the parents carefully collect those allergy bombs and give them to me. Those who don’t know of my interest tend to just tragically throw them away.
Another way to look at this is to break down the elements of political action into four main activities: 1. Agenda development (learning the issues and developing your message), 2. Audience Development (identifying stakeholders and making friends), 3. Application of the Agenda to the Audience (the campaign itself), and 4. Accountability (making sure your constituents know how things are progressing). If you neglect any of these items, you will pay the price in long hours and lost opportunities. The most time consuming of these efforts, and yet the most beneficial, is number two, Audience Development.
3. Never throw away a relationship
Once, when I was a fresh young reporter, I was assigned to attend a reception where a major local company was being given an award for being really swell to work with (obviously the entity granting the award was looking for donations). Being a polite young man, I stood in the reception line with all the other attendees and planned on asking just a couple of questions when I came to the front of the line in an effort to enhance the press release I was given to write the story. As I stood in line behind a nice young family, another man came up behind me and began talking to the head of the family in front of me. It turns out he was an important local political figure who was having a very bad day, mainly because the newspaper I was working for had written a story about him that he did not agree with. As the conversation around me developed the man learned I was reporter, and what paper I was working for. I offered to let him go ahead and be with his friends, but he insisted I stay right where I was. For the next fifteen minutes I was subjected to some of the most rude and backhanded comments about me, my family, my dog and my profession that I have ever heard. I swore that if I ever had the chance, I would get even.
Roll the clock forward three years. I am living and working in Washington, DC and this political big-wig is appointed to a position in the Federal Administration. Mr. Big Wig moves into my community, and through pure coincidence is a member of my same congregation at church. My job at church is to help families and provide service, even to people with whom I may have a grudge. I never mentioned the reception line incident to this man, and surprisingly over time came to know him as a good father and a hard-working civil servant. Had I pushed the issue, I am sure I would never have formed a friendship with him or his family. Even though I had the opportunity, I treated him like a human being and have absolutely no regrets about how everything worked out.
3. Any message worth repeating is worth repeating, over and over again, redundantly, always saying the same thing.
Effective message distribution is a lot like flood irrigating a field. The message needs to flow out of the head gate and into the community in a way that allows it to spread out and carefully seep down into the roots. It can be a slow, painful process, but once that message hits home it stays and becomes a permanent part of the political psyche. If you turn the water out too hard and too fast, on the other hand, the message only hits a few people, tends to dig out the field, and leaves large portions of the community untouched. One of the best ways to spread the message is to develop a simple, one sentence concept then repeat it, over and over again until you start hearing that same message coming back to you, hopefully, from key decision makers.
For example: Gillette Community College in Gillette, Wyoming was looking for money to build a technology training center on its campus to accommodate the needs of local industry for trained electricians, welders and diesel mechanics. The plans had been developed, the land was identified and everything was ready to go, except for the $27 million needed to purchase bricks, mortar and pay off the contractors. Since very few community colleges have that kind of money sitting around, the school decided to go to the state government for a one-time appropriation. The first year they tried the full-blast drenching approach. They got nothing. The next year they formed a coalition with other schools, and spread their message out in a steady, regular pace, and they kept their message simple, “We need the school to develop a workforce that can keep the revenues flowing into the state’s coffers.” Half way through the effort, Wyoming Governor Dave Freudenthal took at least one lobbyist aside and delivered the message that we needed to fund the school construction because, “we needed it to develop a workforce that can keep the mineral revenues in Campbell County flowing into the state’s coffers.” The next session Gillette Community College got the money it needed to build the school.
2. It’s too late to make a friend when you need one.
I love peanut butter cups. They are chocolate goodness wrapped around sweet peanut butter heaven. I don’t get them too often because when I do I have to share them with my wonderful wife and amazing five children. If you do the math, one of me versus six of them means the closest I usually get to my two great tastes that taste great together is a faint smell emanating from empty wrappers. The best way I have found to get an adequate amount of peanut butter cups to satiate even my hankering is to make friends with parents whose kids have peanut allergies, then, when Halloween rolls around and all of the little munchkins collect bags and bags of peanut butter cups, the parents carefully collect those allergy bombs and give them to me. Those who don’t know of my interest tend to just tragically throw them away.
Another way to look at this is to break down the elements of political action into four main activities: 1. Agenda development (learning the issues and developing your message), 2. Audience Development (identifying stakeholders and making friends), 3. Application of the Agenda to the Audience (the campaign itself), and 4. Accountability (making sure your constituents know how things are progressing). If you neglect any of these items, you will pay the price in long hours and lost opportunities. The most time consuming of these efforts, and yet the most beneficial, is number two, Audience Development.
3. Never throw away a relationship
Once, when I was a fresh young reporter, I was assigned to attend a reception where a major local company was being given an award for being really swell to work with (obviously the entity granting the award was looking for donations). Being a polite young man, I stood in the reception line with all the other attendees and planned on asking just a couple of questions when I came to the front of the line in an effort to enhance the press release I was given to write the story. As I stood in line behind a nice young family, another man came up behind me and began talking to the head of the family in front of me. It turns out he was an important local political figure who was having a very bad day, mainly because the newspaper I was working for had written a story about him that he did not agree with. As the conversation around me developed the man learned I was reporter, and what paper I was working for. I offered to let him go ahead and be with his friends, but he insisted I stay right where I was. For the next fifteen minutes I was subjected to some of the most rude and backhanded comments about me, my family, my dog and my profession that I have ever heard. I swore that if I ever had the chance, I would get even.
Roll the clock forward three years. I am living and working in Washington, DC and this political big-wig is appointed to a position in the Federal Administration. Mr. Big Wig moves into my community, and through pure coincidence is a member of my same congregation at church. My job at church is to help families and provide service, even to people with whom I may have a grudge. I never mentioned the reception line incident to this man, and surprisingly over time came to know him as a good father and a hard-working civil servant. Had I pushed the issue, I am sure I would never have formed a friendship with him or his family. Even though I had the opportunity, I treated him like a human being and have absolutely no regrets about how everything worked out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
