Nearly a week of mourning, this time with less cynicism simply because the public figure was a politician of note from one of the most publicly tragic families in the nation. Guess it helps that Kennedy died from disease rather than drug overdose...
Still, the official media mourning is done and they're back to sensational news stories. What is wrong with these people? Granted, sensationalism sells and garners ratings, but must they be so enthusiastic in their coverage?
Wait - I know the answer to this one...
Monday, August 31, 2009
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Has It Been Since Tuesday?
The news has been replete with coverage of the passing of Senator Edward M. Kennedy, youngest of the nine offspring of Joseph and Rose Kennedy of Massachusetts. The youngest and least promising of four sons and five daughters, Kennedy required nearly half a century to achieve the acclaimed stature of his older male siblings. Still, folk are quick to point out that while the elder brothers were all about promises cut short, the youngest, least promising of the brood has proven to be the most productive, if only because he has achieved the greatest longevity. Give a fellow enough time, anything can happen - and has. Good for him.
All the potential in the world is for naught without fulfillment; all an individual's flaws can be overlooked if they prove to be stepping stones to insight, maturity, greatness.
GW was an indifferent scholar whose presidency was of like tenor; Teddy, expelled from Harvard for cheating, does not seem ever to have demonstrated indifference - with the result that he has a lifetime of achievements in legislation to which people now point as the only sensible way to view reality.
(Just look at all the things Claire, Bree, & Roger take for granted, despite having departed prior to most of the youngest Kennedy's notable achievements.) ;->
All the potential in the world is for naught without fulfillment; all an individual's flaws can be overlooked if they prove to be stepping stones to insight, maturity, greatness.
GW was an indifferent scholar whose presidency was of like tenor; Teddy, expelled from Harvard for cheating, does not seem ever to have demonstrated indifference - with the result that he has a lifetime of achievements in legislation to which people now point as the only sensible way to view reality.
(Just look at all the things Claire, Bree, & Roger take for granted, despite having departed prior to most of the youngest Kennedy's notable achievements.) ;->
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Gotta Love ‘Em
Listening to political news these days is reminiscent of watching Saturday morning cartoons as a child: there’s a real need for suspension of disbelief in order to be able to follow the various stories without finding oneself persistently distracted by conflicting details and improbabilities.
Take, for instance, the primary argument for putting health care reform on hold: the cost is deemed to be prohibitive in the current economic climate. Okay, so let’s wait until there is more widespread prosperity. Meanwhile, those who cannot afford healthcare because of pre-existing conditions, unemployment, or underemployment will, like chaff, blow away, thus naturally easing the strain on the current health care system. Once that occurs, surely health care will be more affordable for the survivors, yes?
Likewise, those who recently threatened senior citizens with the now debunked notion of Death Panels, are staunch in their defense of the current system, calling it free choice. Have they somehow missed the spate of movies last decade and the news stories this decade, all about how insurance agencies have been playing a disturbing waiting game, denying coverage for the desperately ill until the claims stop because the claimants are deceased? Why, yes, surely it must be better to be ripped off and left to die by private enterprise rather than non-starting government dictates.
Am I missing something?
Probably.
I’ve always been a little light on attention to details, or so I’ve been informed, reliably or otherwise…
Take, for instance, the primary argument for putting health care reform on hold: the cost is deemed to be prohibitive in the current economic climate. Okay, so let’s wait until there is more widespread prosperity. Meanwhile, those who cannot afford healthcare because of pre-existing conditions, unemployment, or underemployment will, like chaff, blow away, thus naturally easing the strain on the current health care system. Once that occurs, surely health care will be more affordable for the survivors, yes?
Likewise, those who recently threatened senior citizens with the now debunked notion of Death Panels, are staunch in their defense of the current system, calling it free choice. Have they somehow missed the spate of movies last decade and the news stories this decade, all about how insurance agencies have been playing a disturbing waiting game, denying coverage for the desperately ill until the claims stop because the claimants are deceased? Why, yes, surely it must be better to be ripped off and left to die by private enterprise rather than non-starting government dictates.
Am I missing something?
Probably.
I’ve always been a little light on attention to details, or so I’ve been informed, reliably or otherwise…
Monday, August 24, 2009
Noise in the News
The truth of the matter is that legal change is and always has been intentionally slow, ponderous even. That's the way the Founding Fathers set things up, precisely so that this nation would not be so susceptible to the willful capriciousness of individuals briefly holding power (elected officials), nor readily vulnerable to the wiles of self-serving lobbyists. At least, that's what I think I was taught in my tender formative years (high school Civics and Government classes).
Of course, that doesn't sit at all well with those born of the Instant Gratification era, i.e., everyone not yet eligible for an Aricept prescription...
Add to the mix short speak, short attention spans, large egos, and voracious corporate appetites for ratings and profits - and you get muddy thinking, intemperate speech, and short fuses. And yet we need to be grateful that we are also guaranteed free speech, foolish though we may deem much of it.
The protection of free speech, of course, is predicated on the theory that those who actually participate in the political process are possessed of effective critical thinking skills, while those who lack such gifts also lack the wherewithall to act, effectively or otherwise. This, of course, is where the old adage, "A little knowledge is dangerous," enters the picture...
We live in an era wherein individuals are able to surf the Net and post indiscriminately, without the necessity of actually being able to think clearly. Worse, we live in a time when those who can think clearly do not necessarily share one standard of moral behavior. The results are self-evident.
So we have individuals speaking for the mass media as a whole, or at least being given credit for doing so. We have a growing assumption that Michael Jackson was murdered, that someone will have to pay, and that it is the business of the public to care. We have public personalities making rash, inflammatory pronouncements and well-funded lobbyists launching inflammatory ad campaigns, and it doesn't even matter which perspective they represent - the target audiences are buying the swill in sufficient quantities that public opinion, never a homogenous thing anyway, is becoming so polarized that nation's representatives are becoming paralyzed, more fearful of political fallout than failure to effect civic reform.
Funny thing is that everyone proposing solutions is right: private sectors need to step up already existing efforts to help out, new private efforts need leadership and initiative, government needs to intervene where private enterprise refuses to police and/or reform itself, and the flower power of legislators' youth needs to be implemented as reality, not merely nostalgia available for crass commercial exploitation.
No, no, I'm not advocating a hippy state; but the idealism of the 60s should have had sufficient time to mull and mature into useful, functional applications by now. There should be something more than sappy music and faded memories to show for all that energy and brainpower that was on display, that changed the way the whole world looks and functions. What's more, that gifted generation has had time to produce eager offspring who have produced ever more gifted offspring - so where's the new Bounce?
Why so much white noise?
Where's the pudding proof?
Not just all the poop...
Of course, that doesn't sit at all well with those born of the Instant Gratification era, i.e., everyone not yet eligible for an Aricept prescription...
Add to the mix short speak, short attention spans, large egos, and voracious corporate appetites for ratings and profits - and you get muddy thinking, intemperate speech, and short fuses. And yet we need to be grateful that we are also guaranteed free speech, foolish though we may deem much of it.
The protection of free speech, of course, is predicated on the theory that those who actually participate in the political process are possessed of effective critical thinking skills, while those who lack such gifts also lack the wherewithall to act, effectively or otherwise. This, of course, is where the old adage, "A little knowledge is dangerous," enters the picture...
We live in an era wherein individuals are able to surf the Net and post indiscriminately, without the necessity of actually being able to think clearly. Worse, we live in a time when those who can think clearly do not necessarily share one standard of moral behavior. The results are self-evident.
So we have individuals speaking for the mass media as a whole, or at least being given credit for doing so. We have a growing assumption that Michael Jackson was murdered, that someone will have to pay, and that it is the business of the public to care. We have public personalities making rash, inflammatory pronouncements and well-funded lobbyists launching inflammatory ad campaigns, and it doesn't even matter which perspective they represent - the target audiences are buying the swill in sufficient quantities that public opinion, never a homogenous thing anyway, is becoming so polarized that nation's representatives are becoming paralyzed, more fearful of political fallout than failure to effect civic reform.
Funny thing is that everyone proposing solutions is right: private sectors need to step up already existing efforts to help out, new private efforts need leadership and initiative, government needs to intervene where private enterprise refuses to police and/or reform itself, and the flower power of legislators' youth needs to be implemented as reality, not merely nostalgia available for crass commercial exploitation.
No, no, I'm not advocating a hippy state; but the idealism of the 60s should have had sufficient time to mull and mature into useful, functional applications by now. There should be something more than sappy music and faded memories to show for all that energy and brainpower that was on display, that changed the way the whole world looks and functions. What's more, that gifted generation has had time to produce eager offspring who have produced ever more gifted offspring - so where's the new Bounce?
Why so much white noise?
Where's the pudding proof?
Not just all the poop...
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Losing Touch
A friend on a multiple city business trip shares a widespread disaffection for interminably oppressive heat. Seriously, is this not less expensive than a spa membership, this indoor outdoor sauna sensation?
Still, I am troubled by the revelation that so many downtown cities evidently have sliding sidewalks encased in clear tubes that allow connectivity between buildings regardless of meteorological conditions outside. Why troubled, you may well ask. It does seem a fine sign of progress that civilization is able to provide comfort and ease even in the most inclement of weather, be it too hot and dry or too cold and wet. True, one can travel with ease and keep paperwork unblemished... still, there seems something sad in the loss of connection with something as simple as fresh air. Granted, downtown air tends not to be quite so fresh nor so enjoyable as one might reasonably expect of the great outdoors. Still, there is a sad surrender, much like the ways in which we city dwellers have lost touch with food sources and thus with the natural cycles of life death and renewal.
Think I've been reading too much Gabaldon lately...
Still, I am troubled by the revelation that so many downtown cities evidently have sliding sidewalks encased in clear tubes that allow connectivity between buildings regardless of meteorological conditions outside. Why troubled, you may well ask. It does seem a fine sign of progress that civilization is able to provide comfort and ease even in the most inclement of weather, be it too hot and dry or too cold and wet. True, one can travel with ease and keep paperwork unblemished... still, there seems something sad in the loss of connection with something as simple as fresh air. Granted, downtown air tends not to be quite so fresh nor so enjoyable as one might reasonably expect of the great outdoors. Still, there is a sad surrender, much like the ways in which we city dwellers have lost touch with food sources and thus with the natural cycles of life death and renewal.
Think I've been reading too much Gabaldon lately...
Rambling Thru
So many famous people dying these days, regular folk too, though with far less hoopla... People arguing over whether or not the American healthcare system is in need of reform, let alone how any reform might practically be managed... Media eagerly egging on opposition voices to take umbrage that Obama has invoked "Biblical language" to make his point - how, I ask, is contemplating providing for those who are incapable of providing for themselves not a topic for "Biblical" language? Isn't social assistance all about being one's brother's keeper, about extending a loving hand to those less fortunate, those in need? How is such language out of order? How is the concept of caring for others not fundamentally Christian? Eh...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
