Federal Gas Tax Holiday - Boon or Boondoggle?

Senator Clinton jumped on the bandwagon with Senator McCain by proposing a Federal gas tax holiday for the summer. Both feel this 18.3 cent a gallon decrease will give this huge benefit to the American driving public. But what would it do to the theory of "there is strength in numbers" where that puny 18.3 cents adds up to a 10 b-b-billion dollar hit to the transportation fund. Our road and bridge infrastructure is already failing and now the candidates propose this humongous decrease in the funds to make the repairs.

I understand that Hillary's proposal does not take the money from the transportation fund, but rather she is suggesting that we put some sort of windfall profits tax on the oil companies. Like that is going to happen quick enough to make a difference this summer. This is simply convenient political rhetoric (from both of them, frankly) and in my opinion, a bit of pandering to the masses.

I certainly would like a 18 cent per gallon break in gas prices. After all, I have two cars and own a motor home. But really....what will I save? Let's assume one tank a week (20 gallons) per car, and assume that most families have two cars. This tax break would generate about $3.68 per tankful, or $7.36 per week for the family. That might almost buy lunch... for one. In four months it might generate about $118 for the two car family, a princely sum, but that wouldn't even pay my cable bill for a month. On the other hand, the collective tax of 10 billion dollars might actually make a difference. And if the gas prices keep going up as they have, they will effectively wipe out much of the "savings", and psychologically at least, it will seem that the "quick fix" break went away.

And then on September 2, we all get hit with a 18.3 cent per gallon increase. Seems like a good deal, right?

Sean Bell New York Shooting - Justifable or Over the Top?

The tongues were wagging in police squad rooms around the country when they first heard of the unarmed bridegroom taken down by NYPD detectives with a 50 shot barrage. Most would back their brothers in blue; however, some would at least think, if not openly express, that something must have gone horribly wrong if 50 bullets had to be fired where it was later found that there were no weapons.

Now the verdict has come down from the bench trial where one judge, rather than a jury of twelve citizens, decided that the cops had done nothing criminal. And I agree. Not necessarily because I was a cop for 28 years, but because, no matter how unfortunate this case was, the police must be afforded every accommodation after a thorough review. In my humble career, I can recall only one time where I substantially feared for my life (and had my gun drawn) so I can only remotely imagine what the level of daily concern is for the officers of the NYPD.

Officer safety is drilled into every cop, not only in the recruit academy, but in every daily roll call and range training session. This means that if you, the cop, do not keep yourself safe you cannot protect others from the same threats. Officers insist on seeing the hands of people they confront, insist that no one move without permission, and watch intensely for furtive movements or other non-compliance. Too many cops have questioned their "shoot or don't shoot" decision for a millisecond too long and their names are now carved into granite. Unfortunately, in this case, they were wrong in their assessment but made that assessment using the standard of what any reasonable officer would do in this situation. Based on the public information and the court's subsequent decision, despite the tragic ending, the cops did as they were trained.

Fewer than one-percent of all U.S. police officers fire their guns in the line of duty, and even in New York their numbers are unbelievably (and thankfully) low. Because it does not occur often enough to become routine, when it does occur and the shooting starts it is not all that unusual for the officers to keep firing until the threat is removed or until they have emptied their clips, whichever occurs first. In a multiple officer shootout, it is likely that when the shooting starts the other officers begin and keep shooting. Hence, the 50 rounds here and the 41 rounds in the Amadou Diallo case. And in the heat of the gun battle, even the best marksmen can throw most of their rounds. It cannot be the same as shooting the paper target on the range.

Now that the judge has found no criminal culpability, the NYPD must review every aspect of this incident to work toward diminishing the chance for future incidents. Nothing will completely stop future incidents, but there may be lessons that can be taken away that just might save the next officers and those who they must contact from a lifetime of pain and anguish. Or far worse.

Pledge of Allegiance in Spanish Unpatriotic?

It wasn't the first time the issue has been raised, but when the Spanish class at Edgerton, Wisconsin High School recited the Pledge in Spanish over the intercom last month, you'd have thought they said "Heil Hitler!". The school principal and others have come under fire from residents and veterans who say that doing this is unpatriotic and it "dishonors our troops".

Well, I wonder if our over 100,000 Hispanic soldiers, marines, and sailors would agree? It seems to me that it would be an honor for Spanish speakers to recite the Pledge in any fashion. After all, it is a pledge to the flag of the United States of America no matter what language it is in. The Wisconsin Constitution was published in English, German, and Norwegian so that ALL of its citizens at the time could read it comfortably. Come on folks, in Edgerton or any other U.S. city; this is not the same as opposing illegal immigration - a much weightier topic. This is simply showing respect for each other, both ways. The Spanish speakers get to recite the pledge that is important to most Americans, and the Americans get to hear them honoring that pledge.

What would these people think if Roman Catholics in the United States started to say the liturgy and the Lord's Prayer in English? Would that also be disrespectful to the Romans?

Economic Recovery - Could It Be Closer Than We Think?

The housing market will take a while longer for sure, but we now hear that Ford actually posted a profit as did a few other companies who were expected to have lackluster results. Oil prices are high (duh) but there are signs they may retreat if we can get the speculators to pick on some other commodity. They maybe should try tea in China, or aluminum in Venezuela.

The U.S. dollar is wobbly but some leading economists looking out at the near horizon see it stabilizing some. Unfortunately not in time for our upcoming trip to Great Britain. I just had to pay $206 for 100 pounds of the Queen's currency. Yet, I will forego the upside down exchange rate now on the hope that some things may be righting themselves quicker than expected.

I realize that the economists I have read lately are still outnumbered by the doomsayers, but I wonder about the power of positive thinking. If enough of us (and that would be about, oh, ...200,000,000 of us in America), would start to think and behave like we are already on the way to recovery, then maybe we can have an effect. Look how quickly the tide has turned (to repeat a phrase) for Hillary. It's not over for sure, but the mood has changed - just the mood - and that has made Obama scramble and Hillary's bank account refill a bit. So the power of positive thinking (credit to Dr. Peale) may really work. If we read more good news, we feel better, and if we feel better, we work harder, drive a little less, and maybe spend a little more even if it is on groceries.

I can't wait to get our Bush rebate check so I can spend our $113 and boost the economy. The other $1087 was wiped out because we apparently made too much in 2007. So those of you with either $600 or $1200 coming soon, get our there and spend it for America. You know, it might actually help.

Political Pet Peeves

I am one of "those" persons who has a few pet peeves for the world in general. I am usually a nice person so I don't blast people too often, but those who write or say "Me and her went shopping", or "irregardless" grate on me nevertheless.

For today, I will pick on the three current presidential candidates. Nothing big, just irritants that their handlers should have brought up and corrected.

For Hillary the list is long. The woman just rubs me the wrong way. It is more my issue, I guess, than hers. Of course, she would be totally unaware of what I thought, and would care even less. So to be fair, I will only list E pluribus unum (likely only my brother will get the reference).

I don't know if she can help it but the poor lady's voice was not meant to be used above 65 decibels. When she hits 80 dB it is more of a screech and is not becoming of a lady. She should just wait to speak until the roar of the crowd subsides. Or talk at 65 dB so everyone can wonder what she is saying. Remember the Howard Dean shreik didn't win him many votes.

Senator Obama, the great speaker du jour, has this very annoying habit of injecting "you know", when he is stretching for the right words. Actually it is more like "a no" but then most of us slur some of our words. His people should certainly have coached that out of him by now. To me it is like the word "like" in the current teen vernacular. Unnecessary and, like, distracting. I also happen to think he should let his waffle get cold to answer questions in a public setting, but that is just me.

John McCain, as far as I can tell, took my advice and quit using "trancendent" in every other sentence. Dr. M.L. King was a "transcendent figure in American history...", and our need to "confront the transcendent challenge of our time...", and so on, are just a few of Mac's lines. My freshman English teacher, Miss Zirian Blish, always told us, "Use a word three times and its yours". OK, Mr. McCain, I will cede the word to you, just quit letting it trip off your tongue so frequently.

My real peeve about Mr. McCain, great gentleman that he is, is that someone doesn't get him to the dentist to file his offending teeth to stop that shrill whistle when he talks. It wouldn't take but a quick flick of the emery and he would stop alerting the neighborhood dogs. Listen to him next time and it will begin to irritate you as well. And then you can thank me for pointing it out.

Say Something Good About America

Say something good about America! That was on a bumper sticker I spotted on the rear of a Toyota yesterday. What an idea - to actually speak about the country we love in postive terms. I know that lately it is hard not to complain. The economy is faltering, gas prices are almost higher than Evian bottled water, the presidential candidates are not acting very presidential with their nitpicking and parsing of every word uttered.



We are spending $12,000,000,000 a month on the Iraq war, which could go to prop up Social Security or Medicare, could build and repair more roads, and could fund the repair of most of deteriorating bridge infrastructure.

Yet, the reality is that the cost of our two wars, as a percentage of GDP, is at near historical lows. In other words, we seem to be able to afford it despite how counter-intuitive that may seem. So despite all our woes, and they are real, we have been in worse shape many times before. We just cannot give up hope for our great country and must do what we can, however small, to help our economy recover, our wars end, and our flag again fly with pride and respect around the world. It'll take some doing, but we might already be working toward that goal.


We are a resilient and optimistic people. We are survivors and compared to most countries of the world, our suffering is miniscule compared to most in the Third World. And despite our own woes, we are often the first to help others around the world when calamity strikes. We ARE the world.

The Movie "21" - Guess what? The Book is Better

Kevin Spacey does a fair job portraying the smooth, slightly greasy college professor who was the leader of the pack of M.I.T. math whizzes who think they can beat the odds in Las Vegas. Because my wife and I visit Las Vegas as often as we need to, we usually opt to see most movies set in that American La Ville lumière. So we ooh and aah over places we've been, people we've seen, and games we've played, yet this movie was a little slow for us.

Maybe it was that we have been to Las Vegas so often that the brilliance is a little dimmer. Or more likely it was that we both read the 2003 book on which the film was based a few years ago, Bringing Down the House, by Ben Mezrich. It was promoted as non-fiction; however, the author took excess license with many of the characters and facts. Oprah would never let him get away with that today. Nevertheless, the premise was the same and the book, as is often the case, had the depth that a 2 hour movie just cannot achieve.

Jim Sturgess, the apparently rising Brit star, was the protagonist who does a good job in the role of real-life Jeff Ma. As with most criminals, the greed and the lure of the chase is what eventually trips them up. How many bank robbers stop after one successful bank job? Sturgess personifies the greediness that humans are capable of. And you can bet that a high percentage of movie watchers were pulling for him. Hmm...

Funding Iraq - The Spigot is Wide Open

Listening to some of General Petraeus' testimony to Congress this week, one could hear between the sentences that all was not well with the war. The seeming success of the "surge" over the past months has now been tempered by the flareups lately. One word from al-Sadr and the whole region could return to pre-surge warfare with daily IED (roadside bombs) slaughters returning. That is indeed troubling and disheartening.

Another discouraging and irritating piece of news is that, contrary to original intentions, the U.S. taxpayer is still paying for the reconstruction of Iraq. This comes as no surprise until we hear that Iraq has over 30 billion dollars sitting in U.S. banks. Thirty billion dollars from their oil revenue now greatly enhanced by the windfall soaring oil prices.

And then to hear our own Ambassador to Iraq tell the panel that the reason for this is complicated. And to hear him lie and say that the U.S. is no longer paying for reconstruction. Are we not yet paying the salaries of 80,000 Iraqis holding government jobs?

They have to be nuts and deluded to think that our taxpayers will stand for that. We have so many needs in this country for those billions flowing so easily from our treasury. The Ambassador seems to be an apologist for the disorganized Iraqi government. They still have not made the benchmarks set for them. Their success at achieving those benchmarks was then to drive our commitment to troops and money and other support. They have failed miserably yet we continue to coddle them, send our overtaxed troops into battle zones, endure the mass desertion of U.S. trained Iraqis, and write the checks for the bills as they come due.

When will we stop this insanity? When we will begin to pay to rebuild our own eroding infrastructure like roads, bridges, schools, power grids, and so much more?

Wars are expensive and maybe we have to finish what we start, but do we have to be hoodwinked into paying for rebuilding Iraq's roads, bridges, schools, and power grids while they invest their $30,000,000,000 and make even more money?

Entitlement - Nice While It Lasts...Maybe

I don't mean to pick on wide receiver Chris Henry, late of the Cincinnati Bengals. He just happens to be the last (today) of those who can't understand there are societal laws to follow. But doesn't it stick in your craw to see those who feel that the rules do not apply to them? They actually appear shocked when they are caught at some violation, social error, or simple crime.

Henry, now fired, has given up a potentially great career and the money that goes with it because he just couldn't seem to stay above the line. He had apparently fallen below the line one too many times for the team's bosses.

The hubris of people like Eliot Spitzer, Bill Clinton, and many others who cannot think ahead and ask the question, "What if..?" What if I am discovered? What would this do for me and my family? What would my Mother think?

It is often said that your behavior should be such that you could comfortably read about it above the fold in the New York Times. Now, no one is so squeaky clean that there might be some indiscretion that would not play well on the news, but for the life of me I cannot fathom the bad boy-bad girl behaviors of some of the glitterati who know that the spotlight often illuminates the far corners of the room.

We know that some of the entitled few are able to skirt the rules, and some have even managed to have laws seemingly suspended to the dismay of us common folk. But is it worth the risk to your career, reputation, or family? I guess the gamble pays off enough for some.