In The Year 2026

The Republican president, in the second year of his second term and needing a win, decided to take on immigration policy reform, to win a victory for his “legacy”, something to be remembered by. Presidents usually don’t have much political capital to spend at this point, so a win here would go far in the eyes of the pundits and historians.

The proposed measure was built around amnesty for illegal immigrants currently in the country and increased sanctions for employers who hired illegal immigrants in the future. Many conservatives thought it rewarded illegal behavior and worried about an army of papists overrunning the land. Liberals generally applauded, but felt it didn’t go far enough and worried about employer sanctions justifying workplace discrimination against legal residents. The proposal passed with enough cross party support to override these political concerns.

This isn’t a crystal ball’s look into 2007. It’s a look back to 1986.

We’ve been here before. We’ll no doubt be here again twenty years from now too.The forces pulling at immigration from down south is strong. It’s the only place where the First and Third Worlds live in such close proximity and along such a long border. There’s nothing natural about the border, except a murky ditch along the eastern end which came in handy when drawing lines after the Mexican War but has rarely been much of a hindrance to people going in either direction over it. People are going to come. There’s no stopping it.

So I figure that the “immigration reform” debate is just something we’ll have to put up with every generation. As the economy grows it will require cheap labor, and cheap labor will come to meet the need. Eventually, this will well up into a national debate, frightening many and encouraging others. We’ll have rallies, angry militias and congressional proposals. We’ll come up with a new amnesty, new requirements and sanctions for employers who hire (but unless we adopt a verifiable form of electronic national work I.D, it won’t mean anything) and we’re set for another generation.

So when my son Leroy is watching this play out again in 2026, I can yawn from my rocking chair and say, “been there, done that…twice.” And tell him to mark his calendar for 2046 when he too can see it again.

Family Ties

Ohio candidate's sons cost him county race

The Associated Press
Published 4:55 am PDT
Thursday, May 4, 2006 CASTALIA, Ohio

(AP) - You're both grounded!

Two voting-age sons of a northern Ohio candidate didn't go to the polls Tuesday, and their father's race ended in a tie.

William Crawford, trying to retain his seat on the central committee of the Erie County Democratic Party, and challenger Jean Miller each received 43 votes in the primary balloting.

Officials plan to conduct a recount, but the race may have to be settled by coin flip, said David Giese, the county's Democratic Party chairman and an elections board member.

Crawford was able to laugh about it Wednesday, but he said his sons are going to be getting an earful for skipping the election.

"Oh they will, let me tell you," Crawford said.

Son Jim lives across the street from Crawford's home in Castalia, about 45 miles southeast of Toledo, and son Andy is a college student who lives at home. Both are registered Democrats.

---------------

This is what Dad gets for not getting his sons those race cars they wanted for Xmas back when.

"Revenge is a dish best served cold." - Noonian Khan

The Summer of 1970

A letter to SF Chronicle reporter Steve Tady, aka The Betting Fool:

The Fool Wrote:

A MAYS-ING MEMORY:

The year was 1970. I was getting close to reporting to sixth grade at Portola grammar school in Los Altos, but I went to a ton of Giants games that summer.

On July 18th, I saw Willie Mays poke a grounder to left past Montreal's Coco LaBoy for his 3,000th hit. Ron Hunt was hit by a pitch, Gaylord Perry twirled a masterful four-hitter and less than 30,000 witnessed it all.

The Giants' stock lineup for much of that summer was Bonds-Hunt-Mays-McCovey-Henderson-Hart/Gallagher-Dietz-Fuentes-Lanier. Perry and Marichal were backed by Frank Reberger, Ron Bryant and Skip Pitlock.

Happy birthday, Mr. Mays.

-----------

Dear Fool,

My stars. I remember this game and this year. I was twelve and this was the first year I was old enough to follow the boxscore and the rest of the league. NBC’s “Game of the Week”, Saturdays at 11 am, had meaning. And how could you leave out Frank Johnson, Bobby Taylor and Russ Gibson?

This was the first game I attended on my own, the second game overall (my first was a trip for school crossing guards in ’68). Willie was set to get his 3,000th hit. I had my two younger brothers with me and we were going to have fun at the game like the grown folks. Boy, was I excited.

Except that I never saw the game. General admission tickets sold out and I didn’t have enough money for reserved. So we left. I remember hearing the cheer go up as Willie got his hit. I remember walking down Jamestown to get back on the 15 bus to go home as one of the worst feelings I’ve ever had as a kid. I remember my father asking me why I was home in the seventh inning with the Giants up 10 – nothing or something. I remember swearing that, as God was my witness I’d never miss another game like that as a kid.

So for the next couple of years, esp 1971, when the Giants won the division, I doubled the price of a seat when I asked my folks for a ticket to the game. Sometimes I ended up in general admission and wandered over to reserved (this before the ushers started speaking German and waving nightsticks at morally suspect migrating bleacher creatures). Sometimes I sat in reserved, out of the sun, and ate the sandwich I brought in to save a little money. But I always had enough for a seat.

Thanks for resurrecting the memory. Honestly, those early years of mine at the ‘Stick were great times, and recalling this game, as poor as it was, was a key part of it all. Thanks again. Sincerely.

'Trek' Revisited

From Variety.com

Trekkies have a new leader 'Star' treatment for J.J.
By DAVE MCNARY

J.J. Abrams is becoming the next Gene Roddenberry.

Paramount is breathing life into its "Star Trek" franchise by setting "Mission: Impossible III" helmer J.J. Abrams to produce and direct the 11th "Trek" feature, aiming for a 2008 release. Damon Lindelof and Bryan Burk, Abrams' producing team from "Lost," also will produce the yet-to-be-titled feature.

Project, to be penned by Abrams and "MI3" scribes Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci, will center on the early days of seminal "Trek" characters James T. Kirk and Mr. Spock, including their first meeting at Starfleet Academy and first outer space mission.

---------------------------------

The good news is, the Trek world is returning to me. The bad news is that it's returning the wrong way.

The series' chief problem is that it keeps trying to recapture Kirk/Spock and Co. instead of creatively expanding the Trek universe.

"Voyager" tried to give us Captain Kirk in a skirt. "Enterprise" tried to give us the whole original series crew redrawn, including the Vulcan science officer second-in-command. (Who did look much better in tight outfights than Leonard Nimoy.) Both failed.

"TNG" and "DS9" gave us something a lot more original. Although still TOS-style planet-of-the-week adventure for the most part, the complex characters which made up the crew was a refreshing change from the generally expected, up to having the brash American play second fiddle to a French captain. It worked, and extremely well.

I gave "Emterprise" points for trying to be fresh, and in its last season it actually got there, but by then it was too late.

What's fresh with the proposed movie? Little if anything.

Let's start with where everyone in the TNG/DS9 universe is right now. The TNG movies, with the notable exception of the one with the Borg and Zephram Cochrane in post-WW3 Montana, made the same mistake the TOS flicks did. No one went anywhere. Here you have a shipload of assertive, dynamic people and no one ever gets promoted or transferred. Everyone ends up waddling around covering up middle aged spread and grey touches in the hair. It's silly.

The cast should have changed. A few characters go, a few new charqcters come in, with the old characters referenced in the story for continuity's sake, and to play on the "where are they now?" angle.

Here's LaForge coming in to the scene in command of his Starfleet Engineering ship, here's Admiral Picard in charge of a major diplomatic initiative working with Captains Riker of the Enterprise and Data of some other ship. Meanwhile, former Bajoran Colonel, now Starfleet Commander Kira uncovers evidence of a plot involving renegade Romulans and Cardassians to assassinate Federation President Kathryn Janeway, and has to rely on Cardassian political security chief Elim Garak to deal with it, but Garak, it seems, has his own agenda. Bring it all together without looking back. Time, man, it marches on. Yet it rarely does in a fantasy universe where time travel adventure seems to happen to everyone almost all the time. It makes no sense.

But no, we're going to get Kirk and Spock in diapers, played by actors who certainly won't be Shatner and Nimoy, which will make it laughable as well as disappointing in terms of creative direction.

Sigh. I'd become a Battlestar Galactica freak but it's too dark for just before bedtime. I'm too old for nightmares. My saving grace is my TiVo and the pick of five hours of Star Trek's DS9 and TNG I can record from every weekday for my tuck-myself-in cup of warm milk and fantasy. While the cinema may let me down, cable, where nothing ever truly dies, still knows what I want. It's there for me.

Written in honor of TV Turnoff Week, a despicable un-Trekkie event which the Articles of Federation compel me to turn off and ignore.

Down Home Politics

COMMENTARY: Utah Senator’s Contributions Come From Alcohol, Tobacco, Gambling?“ (from the Interfaith Alliance)

For almost 30 years, Orrin G. Hatch has been an influential representative of Mormon-dominated Utah. Yet he has accepted campaign contributions from wealthy sinners in the alcohol, tobacco and gambling industries -- a fact that may surprise some residents.

These have not been token contributions. We're talking serious money, enough to put Hatch among the top recipients from these industries. In 2000, Hatch received $20,500 from the tobacco industry, putting him in eighth place in the U.S. Senate that year. This year, he received $17,000, putting him in fifth place (but, of course, the year is young).

Representatives of the beer, wine and liquor industries gave Hatch $34,600 in 2000 and $26,000 this year, putting him in 10th and fifth places respectively. The gambling industry contributed $19,182 in 2000, putting Hatch in sixth place in the Senate for gaming dollars… "Religion need not become an issue for public servants because what really matters is how one casts his votes while in office. And sometimes personal beliefs must be set aside in the spirit of compromise, or as a matter of law.” (Daily Herald, “Hatch's donors of ill repute,” 04-21-06)

-----------------------

Good point. As the old Texas saying goes: if you can't drink their beer, smoke their cigars and (fornicate with) their women and still vote against them, you don't deserve to be in politics.

FYI, here's Hatch's voting record, via Project Vote Smart. Among other things, he was consistent in his love of agonizing misery, either through alcoholic poisoning or debilitating illness, expressed through voting down funds for AIDS drug assistance in 2005.

What a man.

The Fall (GOP-style)

There will be calls that the party has lost its way. The party, we will hear, has lost its way. It has lost its connection to the American public, and must suffer the consequences if it doesn’t find new vision, a new commitment to its principles. There will be calls for new leaders to step forward to re-ignite the fire of principle tied to action, to build a new path to political glory. Or else.

The funny part is that they’ll be talking about the Republicans this time.

As a result, the GOP race for the White House looks a helluva lot more entertaining than the Democrats’.

The Dems will have the usual lineup of several moderates, and one or two fire eaters from the left. One of the fire eaters will catch fire with the activist wing, but primary voters will go for “electability” and select someone who will then spend the rest of the year running as far from the fire eaters as possible. And people wonder why MoveOn.org is so successful.

The GOP, on the other hand, will be looking at an intriguing battle for the presumed soul (cold and dark as it is, it’s still in there somewhere) of the party’s principles and nothing’s more brutal than a holy war among holy warriors. Fiscal hawks will fight war against chickenhawks; social conservatives against “limited government” conservatives; moderates will call for reason and get bum rushed out of the door. It’ll be bloody; it’ll be cruel and for a liberal Democrat, just loads of fun.

The skirmishing has already begun. George Will has written extensively on the party’s need to re-affirm its principles. In 1995 he gushed over the radical changes the House Republicans would bring. Political newbies for the most part, they didn’t have the “go along to get along” personal ties to the Washington establishment to hold them down. Oh no, they were going to get things done, or get un-done as the case would be.

Ah, but then … temptation, sweet temptation.

Like all folks who feel they’ve been deprived of power for far too long, the soft chairs of the Big House proved too soft for them to resist. All those billions and billions of nice federal dollars just sitting there. Why shouldn’t the hard working men and women who command American business get their fair share? After all, they’re so generous in patriotically answering our call for support for campaign dollars to win power; they’ve certainly shown their public spirit. Service needs to be rewarded, and business certainly knows how to spend those billions and billions better than mere public employees could.

Perhaps the new GOP logo should be a serpentine Halliburton standing in Eden’s garden handing a nice golden(for money) apple to a naked elephant.

What the GOP doesn’t see is that the larger issue on spending and taxes is the larger issue we Californians are forced to look at. Simply put, Americans like more services than they’d like to pay for. The public service pie doesn’t get bigger because it’s being forced on a poor undesiring public. It’s the collective wishes of what that public wants. So you have even conservative wingnuts like my nearby Rep. John Doolittle saying that the GOP should be appreciated for supposedly holding down spending but don’t say we’re throwing the widows and orphans out on the street because we’ve actually expanded funding for them.

In short, people like spending on widows and orphans. They just don’t want to see the bill. That’s the conundrum in a democratic society where one party constantly hammers at the social contract, yet underneath it all, people still want it because they fundamentally recognize that we need it. Years of GOP hammering at the social insurance network has ended up tying the party into an ideological and governance knot it can’t get out of.

This is why it’s easier to be a nice tax-and-spend liberal. We don’t have to go through all this. Not that I have any sympathy for the Republicans on this one. They brung it on themselves. If they were true and pure they’d tell the public that there’s a gap between our hearts and our pocketbooks and that we need to find ways to bring them into harmony. But pounding on “government”, even when it’s them, and giving tax breaks to the rich are too tempting short term gains, and we see how weak the Republican spirit is in dealing with temptation.

So I get to watch them twist and turn and punch and kick and scream and shout over the next couple of years. Who knows, they may still end up back in the White House in 2009. Odder things have happened. But they’ll be picking over their own scabs after it's all over, which will serve as my consolation prize. I win, whether my party wins or loses.

Rendering Unto Caeser

COMMENTARY: Jesus Was Original Proponent Of Church/State Separation
“There is no such thing as a "Christian politics." If it is a politics, it cannot be Christian. Jesus told Pilate: "My reign is not of this present order. If my reign were of this present order, my supporters would have fought against my being turned over to the Jews. But my reign is not here" (John 18:36). Jesus brought no political message or program. This is a truth that needs emphasis at a time when some Democrats, fearing that the Republicans have advanced over them by the use of religion, want to respond with a claim that Jesus is really on their side. He is not. He avoided those who would trap him into taking sides for or against the Roman occupation of Judea. He paid his taxes to the occupying power but said only, "Let Caesar have what belongs to him, and God have what belongs to him" (Matthew 22:21). He was the original proponent of a separation of church and state.” (New York Times, “Christ Among the Partisans,” 04-09-06)

---------------------------------------------

Mr. Wills makes some interesting points in his commentary. But this isn’t a question of church/state separation. It’s a matter of political philosophy.

A personal decision to go down and volunteer in the storefront soup kitchen down on Skid Row because it’s what Jesus would do is just as valid as if the decision were based on Rousseau’s notion of the social contract or if it’s a nice day and there’s nothing on teevee, so why not? The underlying value which motivates the charitable act is a personal decision everyone has and should have the right to come to by whatever route they see fit. That’s one of the underlying foundations of the First Amendment’s protection of both religion and expression.

That’s the reason both protections sit on top of each other in the Constitution. There is what you value, one’s personal religion, so to speak; it can metaphysics or simple personal charity. There is also the consequent political expression which comes out if it. It can’t and shouldn’t be separated. How and what basis one reaches decisions regarding social and political behavior is a deeply personal matter, and must be respected in a free, democratic society. The Constitution does just that.

The issue is purely where, how and when the government should act for the common good in response to individual and collective expressions of values. The best guideline comes from Revolutionary War propagandist Thomas Paine, who held that your freedom to swing your arms ends at the tip of his nose. The government has the right and duty to step in and protect his nose but no further. Everything must be measured against this guideline. Is the act under question a matter of “arm swinging” or “nose defense?”

Now, proponents of various restrictions, including some feminists who hate girly mags, build ridiculous links between a specific act and social harm. The Socialist Right has us all clusterloving squirrels in the public square on Wednesday if gays are allowed to marry on Tuesday. The answer is just to rebut such silliness with sound argument. But that is the proper guideline to use.

Democracy is essentially an agreement to disagree without killing anyone over the disagreement. Americans have been remarkably tolerant politically over the life of the nation (yeah, we’ve had a couple of Red Scares and all but the overall record is pretty good compared to the rest of what was once called the First World) and I think that a lot of it has to do with the religious freedom provided by the First Amendment. When you agree to disagree on God and the nature of reality, disagreeing on who should serve in the state legislature and whether the road should go this way or that is a lot easier to handle.

I don’t dis the Socialist Right for bringing religion into the discussion. The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr, did that and quite well. And we liberals right properly consider him a hero. I dis them because they’re ideological hypocrites regarding the role of the state and because they don’t see that they’re just being duped by Republican and conservative forces in a massive play to distract the public from what’s really at stake. Most of their ideas are silly too, but I can handle that as long as they aren’t allowed to implement any of them.

So, in the ongoing war over whether or not God and Jesus belong in the public square, I say that that’s not the question. They question is how far we let them swing their arms after they get there.

Now Batting: A Nice Colored Guy

I don’t think Barry Bonds is being picked on just because he’s black. I don’t think the feds and the media and all that are snickering to themselves, “we’ll get that black guy, heh, heh, heh …”.

I do think he’s getting more heat because he’s black, though.

Not directly. Indirectly.

Barry Bonds is an immensely self-involved critter who insists on having it his own way and living by his own rules. White guys can do this and get away with this because it makes ‘em look like cowboys, rugged individualists, real men, guys who do it –their- way.

Black guys act this way and it’s cluck, cluck, tsk, tsk, what kind of role model is that for Tyrone in the ‘hood, oh for shame …

There’s just no room for the black cowboy in our culture or any kind of “rebel, I do it my way” black image. If you’re black and a public figure you’re supposed to be warm, approachable, charitable, gosh darn it, someone the Average (White) Person wouldn’t mind living next door to. Dr. Cliff Huxtable, in other words.

There’s no middle ground. If you’re not Dr. Huxtable you’re Thug Rapper Deelite, a potential threat to all that’s good and decent. And what about poor Tyrone in the ‘hood?

Barry knows this, I can tell. That’s probably one reason why he can blow off the media criticism. He knows it wouldn’t be nearly as rough if he was Scooter Bonds instead of Barry.

Opening Day

One of the many things I just love about Northern California is that we know how to keep things in proper perspective. We know what's really important.

From the local papers, covering the SF Giants Opening Day:

"Anything short of murder or kidnapping", said Bay Area attorney Peter Rendstrom, echoing the sentiments of the majority of the fans in attendance "and we're going to support one of our own. If you're a Giants fan, you're a Barry fan."

"They ain't talking about rape or selling crack, so it ain't nothing", says another fan.

Cary Belzner, 38, was holding one of those signs up as he walked around the outfield wall. It read: "Keep Barry -- trade the media." The word "media" had an asterisk beside it ...,

----------------------------

Play Ball.

April Fool

So my seven-year-old son decided to play a late April Fool's prank on dear old Dad.

What did he do?

He changed my password on my Windows XP login.

I sat there tapping away at the keyboard over and over, wondering what the heck happened.

He started laughing. He shouted "April Fool!" and laughed some more.

So I went in to his login and took away administrator privileges.

That'll show him. Spare the rod, spoil the child, the Good Book says.

Groupthink

There were three ATM’s in a row on the side of the bank, situated on the side of a busy community shopping center parking lot. There was one line of average folks waiting to use them. I noticed that the ATM in the middle of the three wasn’t being used, although it was clearly open for business. So I took my place in line, fourth from the front and awaited further developments.

One of the ATM users finished his work, put away his wallet and strolled off. The next person in line promptly took his place at the ATM on the right side of the three. The person in line behind him took one step forward and waited for another ATM to become available. The unattended ATM in the middle still sat there, waiting. The new person in the front of the line made no move toward it, nor did the person behind her make any comment about the open and available ATM.

The ATM on the left became then available, and the aforementioned person moved up to it and started to do business. The ATM to the right of them, the one in the middle of the three, was still unattended. The next first person in line made no move toward it.

The person at the left ATM got some quick cash and stepped off. The person in front of me stepped forward and took her place. I stepped forward to the middle ATM, entered my card and started punching buttons. The person at the ATM to my left looked at me curiously, looked at the ATM, then went back to finish what she was doing with a quizzical look on her face.

As I tucked my own wallet away, the person who stood behind me in line said, “Hmm, I thought that ATM was broken 'cause no one else was using it.” He looked at it, looked at me and then stared at the ATM's paneling, including the green "open" tag, even more closely, pondering the many apparently deep mysteries of what he'd just seen and experienced.

I’m just glad no one in front of me in the line wanted to walk in front one of the many cars driving by. It would have been ugly.

Where I Hope to Be in Fifty Years

Toward the end of the service, the Minister asked, "How many of you have forgiven your enemies?" About 80% held up their hands.

The Minister then repeated his question. All responded this time, except one small, elderly Lady.

"Mrs. Jones?" asked the Minister. "Are you not willing to forgive your enemies?"

"I don't have any," she replied, smiling sweetly.

"Mrs. Jones, that is very unusual. How old are you?"

"Ninety-eight," she replied. "Okay, Mrs. Jones, would you please come down in front and tell usall how a person can live ninety-eight years an not have an enemy in the world?"

The little sweetheart of a lady tottered down the aisle, faced the congregation, and said:

"I outlived the sons of bitches."

The Book of Daniel

Georgia Bible Bill Heading For Governor’s Desk

“Public school students will be able to take state-funded courses devoted to the Old and New Testaments under a bill that received final legislative approval Monday, making Georgia the first state in the nation to legally sanction Bible classes. "I am confident that the course will pass constitutional muster," Senate Majority Leader Tommie Williams (R-Lyons) said after the Senate approved his proposal 45-2.

"We cannot live in fear of possible lawsuits every time we pass a piece of legislation." If Gov. Sonny Perdue accepts the bill, the State Board of Education must adopt curricula for two high school electives — "History and Literature of the Old Testament Era" and "History and Literature of the New Testament Era" — no later than February.

Local school systems then could decide if they want to offer the classes, which would be optional for students in ninth through 12th grades.” (The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, “Bill for school Bible classes sent to Perdue,” 03-28-06)

---------------------------------------

This is not a bad idea.

My sister-in-law attended a Catholic girls school (by her choice) and says that one of the great things she got out of it was a deep knowledge of world religions. Her curriculum included study of all the major world beliefs as an important part of knowing human history, which the Catholicy educators considered critical. Today, years later, she finds it amazing how little most Americans know about -any- religious faith.

"Try telling a conservative Christian that Jesus didn't speak Roman or Hebrew", she says. "Well, what else would he speak?", they ask.

You really can't understand American culture without understanding the role religion played in its development, both good and ill. The Puritans weren't necessarily looking for "religious freedom" as we understand it. They wanted a place they could practice their own little theocracy without bother. Good for them but bad for anyone who wanted to live near them. On the other hand, the basis of the ideal of human equality comes from the ideas that when God judges on the last day, he'll do it evenhandedly, that all are "equal" in God's eyes, so why shouldn't governments work the same way?

This is also why American slavery could be so brutal. Africans couldn't be "men" without compromising the idea. Besides, the Bible seems to tolerate slavery, right?

The religious right is easily the worst offenders. The Bible proscribes homosexuality, right? It also says that you can kill anyone who works on the Sabbath. So if you're just raring to knock off that noisy neighbor, just catch him in your gunsights while he's mowing his lawn some Sunday and you're doing the Lord's work. (Numbers 15:32-36)

So a little jumpstart here couldn't hurt. The challenge then becomes extending it to other world religions. Even the Muslims. After all, they have something in common with extreme Christians. Many object to pictures of the Prophet. Extreme Xtians don't want anything more than pictures of the Messiah. As the producers of the short-lived TV series Book of Daniel found out, anything more than that brings down fire nd brimstone. So there should be enough for even a fair academic to find common ground between our homegrown religious nuts and those around the world.

"Comparative Jihadism", the course could be called. Yeah, that'll work.

Huddled Masses

Just when you thought national politics couldn’t get any duller, same ol' war in Iraq, same ol' deficits, same ol' Republican lying and corruption, along comes the Bush administration’s push to reform immigration policy.

This one’s great, a true breath of fresh air. It’s got everything.

It’s got liberal churches offering to shield illegal immigrants and liberal labor unions wanting to stop them from undermining wages.

It’s got economic conservatives insisting that guest worker status provides needed labor at affordable rates and social conservatives seeing us turn into “Alta Mexico”.

It’s got moderates who oppose driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants but who support granting access to public health for heath’s sake and moderates who support granting driver’s licenses but don’t want to punish businesses who just didn’t know they were hiring someone illegal.

It’s got blacks and Hispanics talking about South Central L.A. then and South Central L.A. now.

It’s great political drama. Whether it goes anywhere is anyone’s guess.

My guess is that something will happen just because it’s an election year and the GOP needs something to declare victory on. Make illegal entry a felony and they please the Hard Right. Offer a guest worker pass appeases business when you’re also enacting mandatory employment verification checks with the gum’mint. Best of all for the GOP, it splits the Dems while not pissing off their own base enough (like, where are they going anyway?). Demos who support a harder line risk alienating their own base but opposing it loses the moderates.

The bottom line is that without some form of real employment verification, no fence or anything makes a difference. I’ve actually seen the future of employment verification, at a conference I attended in 2004. It’ll work like this.

At some point in the near future, everyone who wants to work will be required to own a state I.D. or driver’s license. That card will have a specific code detailing your work status. When you apply for a job, the card will be read into a computer system which log on to a national network which will do a comprehensive background check across all fifty states and the federal government, and participating foreign governments as well.

This process will record whether or not the employer has performed an actual check. If they have employees on the payroll who haven’t been recorded as verified, then the gum’mint slams the door on the employer. This would address the biggest hole in immigration control, the lack of any incentive for employers to not hire illegal immigrants.

State driver’s licenses were the ticket, it was felt, because they’re something everyone already knows and feels comfortable with. Put in a national work I.D. and everyone screams “Big Brother.” Just up gun the ol’ driver’s license, the national medal of ascending adulthood and no one will say a thing except the usual cranks.

I’ve seen the future and it’s coming on the back of a plastic card. I hear the present and it sounds like a lot of maneuvering for the 2006 midterm elections. Where will it end? We’ll know manana.

Let's Do The Time Warp Again ...

Found on the Internet:

Here's what Republicans said about Clinton and Kosovo:

Why did they second-guess our commitment to freedom from genocide and demand that we cut and run?

"President Clinton is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will beaway from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy."-Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA)

"No goal, no objective, not until we have those things and a compelling case is made, then I say, back out of it, because innocent people are going to die for nothing. That's why I'm against it."-Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/5/99

"American foreign policy is now one huge big mystery. Simply put, the administration is trying to lead the world with a feel-good foreign policy."-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."-Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of presidential candidate George W. Bush

Why did they demoralize our brave men and women in uniform?

"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning...I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area."-Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)

"You think Vietnam was bad? Vietnam is nothing next to Kosovo."-Tony Snow, Fox News 3/24/99

"Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years"-Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

"I'm on the Senate Intelligence Committee, so you can trust me and believe me when I say we're running out of cruise missiles. I can't tell you exactly how many we have left, for security reasons, but we're almost out of cruise missiles."-Senator Inhofe (R-OK )

"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarifiedrules of engagement.

There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our overextended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today"-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

"I don't know that Milosevic will ever raise a white flag"-Senator Don Nickles (R-OK)

"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?"-Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

Why didn't they support our president in a time of war?

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."-Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

"This is President Clinton's war, and when he falls flat on his face, that's his problem."-Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN)

"The two powers that have ICBMs that can reach the United States are Russia and China. Here we go in. We're taking on not just Milosevic. We can't just say, 'that little guy, we can whip him.' We have these two other powers that have missiles that can reach us, and we have zero defense thanks to this president."-Senator James Inhofe (R-OK)

"You can support the troops but not the president"-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

"My job as majority leader is be supportive of our troops, try to have input as decisions are made and to look at those decisions after they're made ... not to march in lock step with everything the president decides to do."-Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)

“For us to call this a victory and to commend the President of the United States as the Commander in Chief showing great leadership in Operation Allied Force is a farce"-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

Why did they blame America first?

"Bombing a sovereign nation for ill-defined reasons with vague objectives undermines the American stature in the world. The international respect and trust for America has diminished every time we casually let the bombs fly."-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

"Once the bombing commenced, I think then Milosevic unleashed his forces, and then that's when the slaughtering and the massive ethnic cleansing really started"-Senator Don Nickles (R-OK) "Clinton's bombing campaign has caused all of these problems to explode"-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

"America has no vital interest in whose flag flies over Kosovo's capital, and no right to attack and kill Serb soldiers fighting on their own soil to preserve the territorial integrity of their own country" -Pat Buchanan (R)

"These international war criminals were led by Gen. Wesley Clark ...who clicked his shiny heels for the commander-in-grief, Bill Clinton."-Michael Savage

"This has been an unmitigated disaster ... Ask the Chinese embassy. Ask all the people in Belgrade that we've killed. Ask the refugees that we've killed. Ask the people in nursing homes. Ask the people in hospitals." -Representative Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

"It is a remarkable spectacle to see the Clinton Administration and NATO taking over from the Soviet Union the role of sponsoring "wars of national liberation." -Representative Helen Chenoweth (R-ID)

"By the order to launch air strikes against Serbia, NATO and President Clinton have entered uncharted territory in mankind's history. Not even Hitler's grab of the Sudetenland in the 1930s, which eventually led to WW II, ranks as a comparable travesty.

For, there are no American interests whatsoever that the NATO bombing will either help, or protect; only needless risks to which it exposes the American soldiers and assets, not to mention the victims on the ground in Serbia." -Bob Djurdjevic, founder of Truth in Media

Firefly

I once dated myself by mentioning offhand at a Star Trek Trek convention that I was one of the kids who saw the original series when it originally aired back in the ‘60s. All conversation around me stopped. Then one fellow looked at me quizzically and asked, “How old –are- you?”

It was an article of Trekkie religion at the time was that almost no one watched the original series (a claim since disproved) and that it revived only by being “discovered” by kids watching second hand teevees during ‘70s syndication. The original series aired in some mystical, long gone time, seen only by time travelers or someone’s grandparents. I wasn't old enough to be a granddaddy, so I must have just beamed in from 1967.

Trekkiers love the show in part because Star Trek set the tone for successful televised science fiction. You get your aliens, half-nekkid green (or blue) women and galactic conflicts between Clearly Good and Clearly Evil and you're off. Star Wars reached ridiculous heights of success because they pared it down to the bare essentials. Recent successes such as Farscape, Andromeda and Stargate finds the formula as good today as it ever was.

The problem is that it’s completely unscientific.

There’s little chance that we’ll find some easy way to zip around space faster than light in vessels seemingly immune to G forces.

There’s no requirement that our civilization can only reach this point must after having developed into an ideal, a la the Federation of Star Trek.

There’s almost no chance that we’ll find dozens of other humanoidish species who just happen to look like us, plus or minus a pointed ear or amplified forehead bone structure, at a technological level amazingly similar to ours.

The biigest reason we won't go bumping into Romulans, Vulcans, Klingons and Andorians out there is time. Carl Sagan drew this out well in his Cosmos series. If humans are any indication, it takes millions and millions of years to stand upright and invent the telephone. Any other race out there is either going to be thousands or millions of years behind us, meaning we’ll be talking to some form of proto-caveman at best; or thousands or millions of years ahead of us, which means us trying to open up conversation with them will be like us trying to make small talk with to an ant.

In short, when we go, there’s going to be nothing more out there to talk to except us.

The distances are so great that communication between solar systems will be sporadic at best. Those who leave Earth to set up colonies out there are leaving to set up whole new worlds, not “colonies” as Europeans put around Earth.

Also, as we certainly saw in Europe, migrating peoples and cultures don’t have to be perfect to decide to move over the next ocean or just the next hill. All they need is motivation and ‘I WANT LAND!!” seems good enough to go on.

So all my life I’ve waited for a TV series which would show the “real” future, real people living in an alien-free environment with all the usual human foibles and failures.

After decades of waiting, I finally got it in Firefly, which debuted in fall 2002. Unfortunately, it was too real and didn’t last past several months. (Maybe if they’d added some half-nekkid alien women …).

The show, in summary, was about a future human civilization (which removed the need for "warp drive" to get around) which has left a thoroughly trashed Earth for a much larger solar system which was terraformed to provide new living space. The more developed worlds coalesced into an Alliance. Thinking that it's wrong to keep a good thing to itself, these planets went on crusade to bring culture and light to the less developed outer colonized worlds, which wanted to go their own way, but needed to get civilized (according to the Alliance) whether they liked it or not. It was good for them.

The key cast members are survivors of the losing side, sort of rootless Confederates after the Civil War. The winning is cast as bad guys, but that’s through the eyes of the losers, like Rebs would see the Yanks in 1870.

But the Alliance is sorta bad, although its badness is hidden under an outward parliamentary democracy. It has a nasty bit of “black ops” arising out of and past the war which is fueled by a missionary zeal that representing the forces of light allows them to do just about any damn thing they want as long as it’s for the right purpose or goal.

Sound familiar?

Fox was leery from the start, according to the directors and all. It didn’t “grab” people quick enough, they said. They wanted, without saying it, half-nekkid women and gun battles to start with. "Grabbers."

The show was certainly action packed. But the appeal was the gradual revealing of the characters and the scenario, the grey area between good and evil based on perspective. There was no Darth Vader or Klingon horde. The Alliance wasn’t “good”, but the heroes weren’t really heroes either, just survivors. It was that moral ambiguity which made the show so damn appealing, along with the realistic scenario of human colonization. But Fox Network, for whom morality is a foreign concept, couldn’t get this and pulled the plug after just a few months.

Fortunately, there are conventions and even more fortunately, there is Netflix. This is a series worth watching. Check out the series, and then follow up with last year’s movie, Serenity, which brings many of the show’s developing themes to a head. This is must see teevee for thinking sci-fi fans.

In fact, half the fun is reading all the fan commentary on the various forums arguing over whether the show promotes socialist, libertarian or conservative values. There's plenty of ammunition (no pun intended) for any, all or none.

There’s talk of it being picked up by Sci-Fi Channel or maybe teevee movies. I dunno. The movie added some twists to the story which will have to be worked around, but it’s still worth trying. I’m still optimistic enough to hope that there’s a real chance for real sci-fi. Heck, if I can believe in Mr. Spock, I can believe in anything.

March Madness

Ah, March Madness is here. And I have to care.

I don't really care. I didn't go to a college with a real basketball team, I've never followed the Warriors or Kings very closely and I can't hit a free throw unless I'm three feet from the basket.

But I'm a tall, African American guy so every stranger assumes I'm following the tournament.

It started years ago while I stood waiting for the bus or train in the S.F. Bay Area. I'm a friendly looking fellow, so friendly strangers came up to me and asked, "Some game between Middle Utah State and Bumphuq U. last night eh? I mean, -triple overtime-! Didja think that last three pointer would go through?"

I had, and still don't have, any idea of what this person's talking about. But I was a captive audience. My back was to the wall. I had nowhere to run, nowhere to hide. So I agreed with him.

"Yep."

This was followed with a little more running commentary from the happy stranger, followed by a couple more "yep"s on my part. In the meantime, I'm scanning what he's saying for the name of a school, any school, I've heard of. If I didn't hear anything, I'd go for some safe diversion.

"I had a friend who went to UCLA."

"UCLA?!", the friendly guy would say. "Why they're (insert commentary about their recent fortunes here)."

If they're in the tournament, I'd say I respect their tradition. If not, then I'd say I miss having that tradition in the tournament.

By this time, if the train or bus is in sight, I smile and move to queue up. If not, then it's time to go for the save.

"The Final Four's cool in that it ends right up against the start of baseball. I thinking of going to the (Giants or A's) opening game. Whaddaya think?"

Whew. That usually ended it. Finally, things returned to normalcy. And usually just in time.

Fortunately, I don't ride transit nearly as much these days. But I still have to dodge this mess at water coolers, over conference calls and at the supermarket. Good thing this "madness" comes once a year. I don't think I could take much more.

How to Make A Statement

Here's why the antiwar movement can't gain traction. It needs to come up with more interesting forms of political expression, like some folks south of the border:

CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) -- More than 1,500 Venezuelans shed their clothes on a main city avenue Sunday to pose for American photographer Spencer Tunick, forming a human mosaic in front of a national symbol: a statue of independence hero Simon Bolivar.

More

------------------------------------------

Meanwhile, we're stuck with Ramsey Clark and ANSWER. We're pathetic.

Xtians on the Down Stroke

From the Interfaith Alliance newsletter:

Momentum, Numbers Wane At Christian Conservative’s Activist Weekend
“In a sanctuary decked with red, white and blue banners, hundreds of Christian activists will gather at Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church in Fort Lauderdale starting today to rally around a common goal: claiming America for Christ. These lobbyists for Jesus want more than souls. For two days, rising stars on the religious right will promote prayer in schools, a ban on gay marriage, an end to abortion and abolition of tax rules preventing pastors from endorsing candidates.

But in a year that has delivered arguable victories to Christian conservatives -- including two Supreme Court appointments -- some leaders on the Christian right say they now face an unexpected challenge: keeping their base motivated for what's shaping up to be a long, difficult and expensive fight. But the momentum that brought record numbers of believers to the polls in 2004 has waned. In a year of large-scale natural disasters, Christian charitable dollars have been redirected from political causes to relief efforts.

And -- perhaps most damaging of all -- scandals involving former House Majority leader Tom DeLay and lobbyist Jack Abramoff have discouraged some Christians.” (Miami Herald, “Christian activism lags as S. Fla. rally opens,” 03-17-06)

----------------------------------

I guess beating up on gays only goes so far. I wonder who's next?

Maybe this explains the growing racket about "immigration reform." The targets both easier to see (brown skin, black hair) yet still frighteningly invisible while near (the guy who mows your lawn).

I'm kind of sad in a way. It's the end of an era. Black folks just aren't scary enough to make good whipping boys anymore. Sigh ...

The Luck of the Irish

I’ll never understand the phrase “the luck of the Irish”. It always sounded more like a curse.

The Irish. Before the English arrived to make them miserable they fought with the Vikings who made them miserable before which they fought among themselves making themselves miserable. In the meantime, they turned self-medicating the misery into a high art form.

What luck? In the movie “The Commitments” the band manager tells the gang that they oughta sing soul music because they’re the “blacks of Europe”. This is lucky?

The only good luck is living in lovely Ireland in the first place. Even that’s qualified because the beauty is due in good part to lousy weather. Which leads to lots of seasonal affect disorder which leads to more self-medication.

Not that I’m complaining. Easter comes late this year so St. Patrick’s Day offers the only holiday for a long month since President’s Day. And we all know how exciting that is. So the Irish “luck” works for me. Even if it doesn’t work for them at all.