Posts
There once was a blogger from away, who got paid to blog. She developed a large following, mostly because she wrote with enthusiasm and wit about many things that locals got jaded about, or no longer took the time to seek out. In fact, some of us thought she captured the unique qualities of the Pine Tree State better than many of us who have lived here forever.
People regularly visited her employer's site, people who ordinarily didn't give two sh*ts about most of the rest of the lame ass content at that site. As happens, the blogger got a new job and she was off to New Jersey, to discover new things about a brand new adopted state.
Much to the excitement of her readers (dare I say, fans?), the blogger began a new blog, which fanned the flames of anticipation for stories from the land of Tony Soprano, urban crime and the Meadowlands. At first, our former daily detour included us in those first early days, unpacking and setting up her new life in Jersey City—tales of journeys across the river, exploring the Big Apple, her new landlord and the first things of a new chapter, thus begun.
Our former online compatriot from away, no longer paid to blog as part of her job, grew tired, or found other things to do with the time she once spent blogging. If other former readers were like me, they continued to check her new blog, hoping to glean what new things she was learning in the new land to our south, told with her unique voice and self-deprecating way of seeing things. Unfortunately, despite posts insisting that she wouldn't forget us, the posts stopped. Oh, there was the recent one telling us that she was too busy, too tired, too whatever, to post even occasionally. C'est la vie, as they say.
It makes you appreciate those bloggers, who also spend their days in front of a computer for work, or even write for a living, who for whatever reason, find the time and the urgency to continue to share their thoughts. As a friend once told me, when I was growing weary of the blog—you've got to write for yourself first—if you can do that, more likely than not, you'll continue to crank out posts, frequently, or even semi-frequently. In my way of thinking that makes it more authentic and in line with "keeping it real."
Monday, January 22, 2007
Sunday, January 21, 2007
HIllary joins the 2008 field of candidates
It's now official—Hillary’s entered the horserace. Just like Obama, who didn't come off particularly presidential, with his hemming and hawing about his own announcement, the senator from New York has kept us waiting longer than was necessary.
Both Senators Clinton and Obama contend that they are still in the exploratory stages of whether to run or not, having each formed perfunctory “presidential exploratory committees,” which has now become commonplace in our media-driven, candidate-handled, image-focused world of politics, making a run for president look more like The Truman Show, every four years.
People who get paid big bucks to handicap the circus, have guaranteed us plenty of early Clinton/Obama drama on the Democratic side. While no fan of the GOP myself, I’d have to say at this stage, the Republican field brings plenty of intrigue and interest to their own bid to crown a contender, particularly in light of President Bush’s dreadful poll ratings, the war in Iraq and candidates like Chuck Hagel, who incredibly is running as an anti-war Republican, of all things.
Senator Sam Brownback, who makes our current president seem like a progressive cut from LaFollette’s cloth, has thrown his hat in the ring and will curry much favor with the far right Christian, Left Behind crowd, hoping to get their annointed one to Pennsylvania Avenue before the rapture.
Intent to take issues of morality and run with them, Brownback could prove an interesting opponent for the likes of Giuliani, McCain and Romney, although it appears that McCain, the former “maverick” has suddenly become a born-again conservative, trying to run right of the rest of the most rabid right-wing contingent of contenders.
There is no doubt that Obama’s entry into the mix threw an unexpected wrinkle into Clinton’s bid for the presidency and forced her hand earlier than I think she intended to announce. Still, her online announcement was well done and humanized her, which is something that will be imperative for her to be successful in gaining the Democratic nomination and more important, having a legitimate chance at the presidency. Team Clinton brings a team of seasoned political operatives, including her former ex-president husband, as well as an expected war chest that will probably raise $100 million in 2007, alone, making her a formidable opponent, regardless of her tendency to be one of the most polarizing figures in post-modern American politics. The fact that she supported the war could also cause her problems, as it will for much of the pack of contenders and presidential wannabes.
In addition to Clinton and Obama, former Kerry running mate, John Edwards, as well as New Mexico governor Bill Richardson will be nipping at the heels of the appointed leaders of the pack, waiting for some scandal, or some other X-factor to allow them their window of opportunity.
Russ Feingold, who has said he won't run, could bring some progressive values to the race and force fellow Democrats to face, rather than dodge real issues—plus, he'd be a legitimate anti-war Democrat. Speaking of issues, here's a short list of things that Democrats better be talking about—things like the spending on the war (now topping $360 billion), healthcare, education and particularly the American workforce’s inability to compete with much of the industrialized world, as evidenced by several recent reports. Additionally, finding an alternative to oil needs to be put on the front burner, as American cannot continue to depend on fossil fuel to power our cars, heat our homes and prop up our system of commerce.
It’s still early, but for those of us who follow the race, there is plenty of interest already. And since its only the first lap of the race, those of us who follow these things know that anything can and probably will happen.
Both Senators Clinton and Obama contend that they are still in the exploratory stages of whether to run or not, having each formed perfunctory “presidential exploratory committees,” which has now become commonplace in our media-driven, candidate-handled, image-focused world of politics, making a run for president look more like The Truman Show, every four years.
People who get paid big bucks to handicap the circus, have guaranteed us plenty of early Clinton/Obama drama on the Democratic side. While no fan of the GOP myself, I’d have to say at this stage, the Republican field brings plenty of intrigue and interest to their own bid to crown a contender, particularly in light of President Bush’s dreadful poll ratings, the war in Iraq and candidates like Chuck Hagel, who incredibly is running as an anti-war Republican, of all things.
Senator Sam Brownback, who makes our current president seem like a progressive cut from LaFollette’s cloth, has thrown his hat in the ring and will curry much favor with the far right Christian, Left Behind crowd, hoping to get their annointed one to Pennsylvania Avenue before the rapture.
Intent to take issues of morality and run with them, Brownback could prove an interesting opponent for the likes of Giuliani, McCain and Romney, although it appears that McCain, the former “maverick” has suddenly become a born-again conservative, trying to run right of the rest of the most rabid right-wing contingent of contenders.
There is no doubt that Obama’s entry into the mix threw an unexpected wrinkle into Clinton’s bid for the presidency and forced her hand earlier than I think she intended to announce. Still, her online announcement was well done and humanized her, which is something that will be imperative for her to be successful in gaining the Democratic nomination and more important, having a legitimate chance at the presidency. Team Clinton brings a team of seasoned political operatives, including her former ex-president husband, as well as an expected war chest that will probably raise $100 million in 2007, alone, making her a formidable opponent, regardless of her tendency to be one of the most polarizing figures in post-modern American politics. The fact that she supported the war could also cause her problems, as it will for much of the pack of contenders and presidential wannabes.
In addition to Clinton and Obama, former Kerry running mate, John Edwards, as well as New Mexico governor Bill Richardson will be nipping at the heels of the appointed leaders of the pack, waiting for some scandal, or some other X-factor to allow them their window of opportunity.
Russ Feingold, who has said he won't run, could bring some progressive values to the race and force fellow Democrats to face, rather than dodge real issues—plus, he'd be a legitimate anti-war Democrat. Speaking of issues, here's a short list of things that Democrats better be talking about—things like the spending on the war (now topping $360 billion), healthcare, education and particularly the American workforce’s inability to compete with much of the industrialized world, as evidenced by several recent reports. Additionally, finding an alternative to oil needs to be put on the front burner, as American cannot continue to depend on fossil fuel to power our cars, heat our homes and prop up our system of commerce.
It’s still early, but for those of us who follow the race, there is plenty of interest already. And since its only the first lap of the race, those of us who follow these things know that anything can and probably will happen.
Friday, January 19, 2007
IRS/Govt. practices selective enforcment
I ran across this story on the back page of my local newspaper, tucked away in the lower right-hand corner of the business section. The only reason I saw it at all was that the term “bureaucratic bungling” happened to catch my eye. In fact, the only reason I paid this much scrutiny to this meager (one page) attempt at business reporting was because I was searching to see if the editor had run a press release that I had sent them for a training initiative I’ve been working on, in Lewiston/Auburn. Not able to find it anywhere in local news, I thought there might be an outside chance it might make the business page, due to business-centered nature of our program.
The paper, probably in an attempt to fill some copy space (heck, they ran my 250-word press release, in its entirety, above the fold), grabbed this Newhouse News Service wire story and “buried” it. As hard as I’ve worked to get my current training initiative off the ground, in my opinion, this brazen bureaucratic snafu is more newsworthy than a local press release.
According to the Newhouse wire story, Johnnie Burton, Director of the Minerals Management Service, one of nine operating units that make up the Department of the Interior, failed to insure that 1,032 leases granted to oil and gas drilling firms contained royalty provisions and price thresholds, which would have allowed the IRS to properly collect some $10 billion dollars in royalties that the U.S. Treasury should have received under the 1995 Deep Water Royalty Relief Act.
Bill Walsh, a Newhouse reporter, filed the story, which reports that Inspector General Earl Devaney found no evidence of criminal wrongdoing but criticized the ``cavalier management'' of the director of the Minerals Management Service, who Devaney said ignored the blunder for more than a year.
In his testimony before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Devaney questioned whether, even now, taxpayers are getting what they are owed from private energy companies operating in the Gulf of Mexico. He called the royalty-collection process "basically an honor system," a characterization that sparked a strong response from Democrats.
“The IRS has no problem sending out a tax bill with interest down to the very penny, but we have a problem doing that with big oil companies,'' said Sen. Robert Menendez, (D-N.J.) “Ask the taxpayers how they feel about that.”
Since you asked, Mr. Menendez, this taxpayer, who now works closer to state bureaucracy than he cares for at times, thinks it is absolute BS!! Furthermore, as a small business person (micro-business, actually) who constantly has been harassed by the IRS over the past five years for minor issues that cost me more in time and money than they were probably worth fighting, knows firsthand the selective policies that the IRS administers.
In my opinion, rather than hassle and harangue honest business people, just trying to make a living, if you really want to put a feather in your bureaucratic fedora, then go after the real malicious cheats, the companies who are perpetuating fraud, or at the very least, getting a free pass from an agency that knows better, but seems to be serving the benefactors of the administration in charge, whether it be Republican, or Democrat.
In another tax-related story, the House voted on Thursday to roll back billions in oil company subsidies (or as I prefer to characterize them, corporate welfare). To Nancy Pelosi’s credit, this was the last of six high-priority issues that the speaker pledged, upon assuming her position, to push through during the first 100 hours of assuming control from Republicans.
Typically, oil-friendly Republican hacks, like Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and Don Young (R-Alaska) were found bitching and moaning about this possible new direction in energy policy.
Majority Leader, Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) spoke for many Americans, at least folks who feel like I do, when he said, “The oil industry doesn’t need the taxpayers help…There isn’t an American that goes to the pump that doesn’t know that.”
While gas prices have fallen dramatically the past few weeks, it wasn’t long ago that most of us were paying close to $3/gallon to fill our tanks.
While I applaud Democrats for pushing this vote through the House, there is a lot more that they need to do before I’ll stand up and cheerlead for a party that too often appears more interested in keep bipartisan than it does on protecting us from the corporate bullies that keep stealing our lunch money and pushing us in the mud.
The paper, probably in an attempt to fill some copy space (heck, they ran my 250-word press release, in its entirety, above the fold), grabbed this Newhouse News Service wire story and “buried” it. As hard as I’ve worked to get my current training initiative off the ground, in my opinion, this brazen bureaucratic snafu is more newsworthy than a local press release.
According to the Newhouse wire story, Johnnie Burton, Director of the Minerals Management Service, one of nine operating units that make up the Department of the Interior, failed to insure that 1,032 leases granted to oil and gas drilling firms contained royalty provisions and price thresholds, which would have allowed the IRS to properly collect some $10 billion dollars in royalties that the U.S. Treasury should have received under the 1995 Deep Water Royalty Relief Act.
Bill Walsh, a Newhouse reporter, filed the story, which reports that Inspector General Earl Devaney found no evidence of criminal wrongdoing but criticized the ``cavalier management'' of the director of the Minerals Management Service, who Devaney said ignored the blunder for more than a year.
In his testimony before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Devaney questioned whether, even now, taxpayers are getting what they are owed from private energy companies operating in the Gulf of Mexico. He called the royalty-collection process "basically an honor system," a characterization that sparked a strong response from Democrats.
“The IRS has no problem sending out a tax bill with interest down to the very penny, but we have a problem doing that with big oil companies,'' said Sen. Robert Menendez, (D-N.J.) “Ask the taxpayers how they feel about that.”
Since you asked, Mr. Menendez, this taxpayer, who now works closer to state bureaucracy than he cares for at times, thinks it is absolute BS!! Furthermore, as a small business person (micro-business, actually) who constantly has been harassed by the IRS over the past five years for minor issues that cost me more in time and money than they were probably worth fighting, knows firsthand the selective policies that the IRS administers.
In my opinion, rather than hassle and harangue honest business people, just trying to make a living, if you really want to put a feather in your bureaucratic fedora, then go after the real malicious cheats, the companies who are perpetuating fraud, or at the very least, getting a free pass from an agency that knows better, but seems to be serving the benefactors of the administration in charge, whether it be Republican, or Democrat.
In another tax-related story, the House voted on Thursday to roll back billions in oil company subsidies (or as I prefer to characterize them, corporate welfare). To Nancy Pelosi’s credit, this was the last of six high-priority issues that the speaker pledged, upon assuming her position, to push through during the first 100 hours of assuming control from Republicans.
Typically, oil-friendly Republican hacks, like Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and Don Young (R-Alaska) were found bitching and moaning about this possible new direction in energy policy.
Majority Leader, Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) spoke for many Americans, at least folks who feel like I do, when he said, “The oil industry doesn’t need the taxpayers help…There isn’t an American that goes to the pump that doesn’t know that.”
While gas prices have fallen dramatically the past few weeks, it wasn’t long ago that most of us were paying close to $3/gallon to fill our tanks.
While I applaud Democrats for pushing this vote through the House, there is a lot more that they need to do before I’ll stand up and cheerlead for a party that too often appears more interested in keep bipartisan than it does on protecting us from the corporate bullies that keep stealing our lunch money and pushing us in the mud.
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
Mush! Sledders trek eastward
What happens when you live in Maine, love snowmobiles and global warming has robbed you of your snow—hell, dude, head to Alaska—at least that’s what two Sanford snowmobilers have done.
Steve McKenna and Tony Wolfinger traveled to Alaska, where they have begun an epic journey eastward. They began their trek Friday and expect to arrive back in Maine after being on the trail for about eight weeks.
McKenna, a local contractor and Wolfinger, who owns Sanford Radiator, decided to do it for a variety of reasons. For Wolfinger, the trip is a “dream come true” for the longtime outdoor enthusiast, as he had hoped to make a trip across Alaska and Canada at some point in his life. McKenna, on the other hand, is no stranger to the open road. In 1992, while living in Hawaii, he shipped his motorcycle to Washington and completing a 9,500 mile trek cross-country to Maine. In 2002, he packed up the family in a motor home and took off on a 10,000 mile adventure, traveling through 23 states and 3 Canadian provinces.
If both men are able to complete the 9,000 mile journey, they will set a Guinness Book World Record.
While wanderlust and a healthy sense of adventure will propel these two hearty souls, they also hope to raise awareness about autism and have indicated that fans and interested parties may send donations to the Autism Society of Maine.
You can follow the trek via their website.
Steve McKenna and Tony Wolfinger traveled to Alaska, where they have begun an epic journey eastward. They began their trek Friday and expect to arrive back in Maine after being on the trail for about eight weeks.
McKenna, a local contractor and Wolfinger, who owns Sanford Radiator, decided to do it for a variety of reasons. For Wolfinger, the trip is a “dream come true” for the longtime outdoor enthusiast, as he had hoped to make a trip across Alaska and Canada at some point in his life. McKenna, on the other hand, is no stranger to the open road. In 1992, while living in Hawaii, he shipped his motorcycle to Washington and completing a 9,500 mile trek cross-country to Maine. In 2002, he packed up the family in a motor home and took off on a 10,000 mile adventure, traveling through 23 states and 3 Canadian provinces.
If both men are able to complete the 9,000 mile journey, they will set a Guinness Book World Record.
While wanderlust and a healthy sense of adventure will propel these two hearty souls, they also hope to raise awareness about autism and have indicated that fans and interested parties may send donations to the Autism Society of Maine.
You can follow the trek via their website.
Monday, January 15, 2007
King's legacy: What it means for us today
When I was a young man, “Letters From a Birmingham Jail” had a profound affect on my developing worldview. Martin Luther King, Jr., in answering calls by local leaders of the clergy, to “tone down” his rhetoric and his direct action, laid the underpinnings of why he continued to fight for justice—both economic and racial—at a cost to himself and his family. In so doing this, he paid the ultimate price, by offering his life.
I wrote an op-ed back in 2004, about this great leader, and champion of causes that are still important today. This ran at the time in the Maine Voices section of the Maine Sunday Telegram. I reworked it a bit last year and posted it here. I’m proud of what I wrote, because I think it accurately reflects what King’s legacy means for us today.
As a nation, our materialism, our militarism and our racism (while much less blatant than during King’s day, but still a reality) all indicate a need to reexamine our priorities and focus on what King was talking about when he issued his clarion call for justice. As Americans, we ignore that call at our peril.
"The Legacy of Martin Luther King, Jr. and What It Means To Us Today"
by, Jim Baumer
Once again, we come upon the celebration of the birthday of a truly great human being, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. It has been more than 30 years since an assassin's bullet stole from us one of our greatest champions of social and economic justice. Like many, I have been thinking about his legacy and what it means to those of us committed to building a just society today.
I think it is important that we not relegate his memory to the dusty corridors of history. While canonization may have been inevitable for one so prophetic in addressing a nation's besetting sins, we cannot allow the sanitization of his memory to lessen the intensity of his light, or to diminish the volume of his oratory.
While many today would laud King for his success in bringing about desegregation and championing civil rights, he spoke to issues much broader than race. And while race was, and still is a problem in America, to say that King was merely a champion for African-Americans in their quest for equal rights and access, is to rob him of the greater substance of what he stood for.
In an address delivered at the Riverside Church in New York, April 4, 1967, exactly one year to the day before he would be martyred, King laid down what he saw as the triumvirate of sins besetting the American culture.
In his impassioned oratory, he lashed out at racism, rampant materialism, and militarism. In his unique and prophetic way, he made the connection between the obscene amounts being spent to bludgeon a culture across the globe in Vietnam, and our success in affecting the war on poverty at home. He saw that divisions between the classes, fed by greed and materialism, were just as ugly a scar on the American psyche, as divisions between the races.
It was an economic cause that brought King to Memphis on that fateful day of April 4, 1968. King had come to show solidarity for the 1,300 striking sanitation workers that led him to this southern city, where he was ultimately gunned down and martyred for his cause.
Many within the leadership of the civil rights movement were troubled by his belief that the most important issue affecting America was more than race. He was severely criticized by several prominent members of that very leadership, after giving his address at the Riverside Church. This criticism ate at King and kept him awake many a night in prayer and reflection. Yet, he knew his cause was just, and that it was greater than he was. It was the visionary character of King's message and his understanding of the issues that separated him from the pack.
Looking back at his life, what do we see today that needs our attention in order to properly honor his memory? Has his mantle been taken up? Unfortunately, I think that there is still much work to be done.
We have seen our nation plunged into a costly and unjust war in Iraq. We see economic fragmentation. The ever-widening chasm between the haves and have-nots has created the greatest disparity of wealth in our country in more than 100 years. Many of the poorest in our country go without because of our misplaced national priorities. Never before has conspicuous consumption been lifted up and exalted like during our present day. While more and more of our citizens lack food, shelter and clothing, there continues to be those that are searching for bigger and better toys. Sadly, we have not done a very good job at heeding the words of one of our nation's most prophetic voices.
If Dr. King were alive today, I believe he would be commenting on these very same issues—racism, militarism, and rampant materialism—social and economic justice. He wouldn’t be timid, either. He would offer us a voice of reason in a cacophony of madness, telling us that the only way to bring about peace isn't by sacrificing our young men, and killing all of our enemies. He would be a counter-weight to the cowboy diplomacy of our current administration.
Let us honor his memory by committing ourselves to the causes of racial equality, economic justice, and peaceful co-existence. We must build economically self-sustaining communities that are based on meaningful jobs that pay a living wage. To do anything less is to allow his light to flicker and fade from our national consciousness.
© Jim Baumer, 2006
I wrote an op-ed back in 2004, about this great leader, and champion of causes that are still important today. This ran at the time in the Maine Voices section of the Maine Sunday Telegram. I reworked it a bit last year and posted it here. I’m proud of what I wrote, because I think it accurately reflects what King’s legacy means for us today.
As a nation, our materialism, our militarism and our racism (while much less blatant than during King’s day, but still a reality) all indicate a need to reexamine our priorities and focus on what King was talking about when he issued his clarion call for justice. As Americans, we ignore that call at our peril.
"The Legacy of Martin Luther King, Jr. and What It Means To Us Today"
by, Jim Baumer
Once again, we come upon the celebration of the birthday of a truly great human being, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. It has been more than 30 years since an assassin's bullet stole from us one of our greatest champions of social and economic justice. Like many, I have been thinking about his legacy and what it means to those of us committed to building a just society today.
I think it is important that we not relegate his memory to the dusty corridors of history. While canonization may have been inevitable for one so prophetic in addressing a nation's besetting sins, we cannot allow the sanitization of his memory to lessen the intensity of his light, or to diminish the volume of his oratory.
While many today would laud King for his success in bringing about desegregation and championing civil rights, he spoke to issues much broader than race. And while race was, and still is a problem in America, to say that King was merely a champion for African-Americans in their quest for equal rights and access, is to rob him of the greater substance of what he stood for.
In an address delivered at the Riverside Church in New York, April 4, 1967, exactly one year to the day before he would be martyred, King laid down what he saw as the triumvirate of sins besetting the American culture.
In his impassioned oratory, he lashed out at racism, rampant materialism, and militarism. In his unique and prophetic way, he made the connection between the obscene amounts being spent to bludgeon a culture across the globe in Vietnam, and our success in affecting the war on poverty at home. He saw that divisions between the classes, fed by greed and materialism, were just as ugly a scar on the American psyche, as divisions between the races.
It was an economic cause that brought King to Memphis on that fateful day of April 4, 1968. King had come to show solidarity for the 1,300 striking sanitation workers that led him to this southern city, where he was ultimately gunned down and martyred for his cause.
Many within the leadership of the civil rights movement were troubled by his belief that the most important issue affecting America was more than race. He was severely criticized by several prominent members of that very leadership, after giving his address at the Riverside Church. This criticism ate at King and kept him awake many a night in prayer and reflection. Yet, he knew his cause was just, and that it was greater than he was. It was the visionary character of King's message and his understanding of the issues that separated him from the pack.
Looking back at his life, what do we see today that needs our attention in order to properly honor his memory? Has his mantle been taken up? Unfortunately, I think that there is still much work to be done.
We have seen our nation plunged into a costly and unjust war in Iraq. We see economic fragmentation. The ever-widening chasm between the haves and have-nots has created the greatest disparity of wealth in our country in more than 100 years. Many of the poorest in our country go without because of our misplaced national priorities. Never before has conspicuous consumption been lifted up and exalted like during our present day. While more and more of our citizens lack food, shelter and clothing, there continues to be those that are searching for bigger and better toys. Sadly, we have not done a very good job at heeding the words of one of our nation's most prophetic voices.
If Dr. King were alive today, I believe he would be commenting on these very same issues—racism, militarism, and rampant materialism—social and economic justice. He wouldn’t be timid, either. He would offer us a voice of reason in a cacophony of madness, telling us that the only way to bring about peace isn't by sacrificing our young men, and killing all of our enemies. He would be a counter-weight to the cowboy diplomacy of our current administration.
Let us honor his memory by committing ourselves to the causes of racial equality, economic justice, and peaceful co-existence. We must build economically self-sustaining communities that are based on meaningful jobs that pay a living wage. To do anything less is to allow his light to flicker and fade from our national consciousness.
© Jim Baumer, 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)