All Hat and No Cattle

Well, Roger Simon had it right when he asked rhetorically on "Inside Washington" a couple months ago http://www.ruralthoughts.net/index.php?q=node/563 , at the time that Rick Perry first announced his candidacy for the republican nomination for the president of the U.S., whether or not Perry was "all hat and no cattle," using an ol' Texas saying. 

Over the months since then, it has appearing as if Perry's hat was growing larger while his cattle was shrinking. After last night, if a person has any doubt they would have to be about as simple minded as Perry. 

In what is bound to become the butt of jokes by everyone from Jay Leno to David Letterman to Jon Daly to SNL, Perry, in another republican presidential primary debate, started to say that if he became president, he would eliminate 3 departments in the federal government, and then he started to name them....commerce, education...and.. and....and. He was forgetting what the third department he was going to eliminate was! One of the other republicans shouted out...EPA? Perry seemed to say "yeah" and immediately the moderator broke in and asked...are you saying that you would eliminate the EPA? Perry said...no...but they need reworking...and then he stammered around a while more while people started laughing and then finally admitted that he couldn't remember. He had lost the game show for sure and he knew it!

We all lose our train of thought from time to time, no doubt about it. But in a U.S. presidential primary debate for one of the major parties is probably one of the worst times - especially if your previous debate performances had catapulted you from the lead to the bottom of the pack. 

I mean, do you want a guy who can't remember whether or not to call in the army or FEMA or the corps of engineers in a natural disaster to be in charge of the whole kit and kaboodle? 

Perry went out today and tried to do damage control. He was taking a good humored approach, but he did try to deflect some of the blame by saying that it showed that the government was too big and complicated to even remember. That was lame. Not good enough. 

With Cain and his female problems, and Perry with his intellectual problems, and Huntsman invisible, it looks like it's going to be Romney by default. In the meantime, I'm not sure how many gallons the biggest texas hat is, but order the biggest that they come for Rick Perry. Ten gallons won't be enough, I'm sure.

Kentucky goes Democrat

As I and many others predicted, Kentucky re-elected easily Steve Beshear as governor. It was an over 20% victory in a 3 man race. Notwithstanding that Bill Bartleman, on WKYX, Paducah's Rush Limbaugh radio station, said that this wasn't a "mandate" for Beshear, I don't know what Bartleman's statement is based on - if this isn't a "mandate" then what is? 

But it wasn't just the governor who won - it was the attorney general, the secretary of state, and the state treasurer. The only republican to win was the agriculture commissioner, and that was because the democratic candidate was a comedian who went around making less than complementary jokes about Kentucky rural folks. Not a good formula for winning an election for agriculture commissioner. 

I have no idea whether or not Beshear will have a good second term. He seems too much beholden to the big corporations to me to make the changes that need to be made. But he is a sight better than David Williams, a sourpuss republican who had no agenda except criticism of Obama. And for those republicans that think that they can win simply by criticizing Obama, this should be a lesson. If it doesn't work in Kentucky, it's not going to work elsewhere.

Sunday News Shows

The most significant thing I heard today on the news shows that I watched was republican presidential candidate Jon Huntsman stating, not in a firey campaign speech, but in a quiet, thoughtful moment in a serious interview, that his fellow Mormon and favorite for the nomination, Mitt Romney, had electability problems because he had flipped-flopped so much on serious issues. 

I thought that was significant because, while Huntsman is a candidate that is looking to sneak in and get the nomination by default at the last minute, he is considered a moderate republican, as Romney, and his branding Romney in that way could only hurt the part overall. However, if Romney is his obstacle to the possibility of his getting the nomination, then that kind of statement would serve to be a call to all those for Romney to back him, because he doesn't have the same flip-flop record.

The press has portrayed Huntsman as the (while sort of lost in the background without the name recognition of Romney and some of the other candidates) intelligent, cultured, flexible, moderate, and perhaps capable of forging a working relationship with democrats candidate. For him to seemingly sincerely state that he thinks Romney has an electability problems to me seems like a sort of bombshell. And the fact that he said on Meet the Press means that it will get a lot of distribution with some oomph behind it. 

The rest of the news shows were predictable. Of course, Cain dominated the discussions in the show, but opinions were mixed on what degree this would hurt Cain. A lot of the reporters think that there is probably more to come out, and that it will over time take it's toll. It is still apparent that many of the top republican pundits and strategists don't consider Cain a serious candidate yet, even though he still leads in most polls.

Also, Greece was discussed in just about every show. It was disappointing that not more pundits stuck up for the referendum. Oh, how democracy is slipping. Floyd Norris in the New York Times did stick up for the referendum, kudos to him! 

Tuesday is the Kentucky election. This was discussed on Comment on Kentucky. All of the polls agree that Beshear is going to win re-election. But you'd never know that from watching the TV ads. David Williams is pouring the money into ads - well, at least his father - in - law is. The guy just comes off as being a bit thugy. If Beshear doesn't win, or only wins by a whisker, that will be big news. We'll see, but I'll be surprised if that happens.

democracy stumbles badly

Wow. I would never have believed it. Now the so-called Greece referendum is cancelled. Just like that. Because Germany, France, and the U.S. didn't want it. So who is running Greece. I guess we will see if the Greeks really wanted a referendum or not. 

So..this leads me to think that if the situation is so bad that it can't go for a referendum - that it's implementation has to be insured - or else some unbelievably horrible thing will happen to everyone if it isn't implemented, then we all need to know what those unbelievably horrible things are. 

We need to know every detail about every deal and debt and gamble that has been made with public resources, and you can be sure that there have been many. Let's open this up. Let's hold people accountable. These backroom deals that can't be challenged are unacceptable in our democracy. We need open government and public participation to the max. I've been in this too long to know exactly what happens when governmental agencies don't think anyone is watching, or don't want anyone watching. It isn't pretty.

So can a Greek president just tell the citizens that they can, and then can't, have a vote on a critical issue affecting their quality of life? We will see. I'm going to bet that a Greek president can't.

Western Democracy

If it wasn't so bad, it would be hilarious from the irony. But it is bad, and it is part and parcel with the protests that are going on in New York and across the country and world. And that is the total hypocricy that our "western democracies" demonstrate when push comes to shove.

Although by no means the first, the latest the media has reported is the collective gasp that Germany, France and others gave when Greek president (or whatever he is) Papondreau, or however you spell it, announced, no, not that he was going to spit on German Chancellor Merkel (what the heck is a chancellor?), oh no...something much worse. He was going to put the deal before the people in a democratic vote. 

Those with interests try to somehow infer that this isn't really a vote - no, it's a "referendum." That sounds like referee, and we have our opinions of referees. Probably ok, but not the greatest. (It's not the referee's fault, it's just that their mistakes have a large consequence.) So when a person hears the word "referendum" it doesn't seem the same as a vote. But it is. It's exactly what it is - a vote on the proposal by the people. Isn't the people voting the heart of democracy?

Of course, the U.S. only likes votes when they know the outcome. That is the U.S. definition of democracy - a vote where we know who is going to win ahead of time - and that person is a friend of ours. In the U.S. model that is done by an infusion of money. That money has been held, by the
"Supreme court" as of now, absurdly and corruptly in my opinion, to be consistent with the U.S. constitution. 

I have written about this before. The idea that "money equals speech" is outrageous. Free speech is much more precious than money. U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell, minority leader from Kentucky, has been one of the main proponents of this, and he got 5 of the justices to go along with it. I haven't heard any opinion from McConnell about the Greek referendum. But he'd only be for it if he knew who was going to win and it was one of our allies.

He has little street cred, though, on open government questions, because he never holds open town hall meetings. I think basically that he is afraid to come out in the public. But he is a very powerful person, and the positions he takes can move the nation. I think the importance of his decisions outweighs whatever personal reasons he has for not ever having any public meetings. He needs to address the issue anyway. Unfortunately, you won't hear the Paducah mainstream media asking McConnell why he never holds open town meetings. They get to go to the Chamber of Commerce meetings or the Rotary meetings that he goes to to meet with the "well-to-do" and "influential." They may not even realize that McConnell never goes public. 

This is all very much tied together with the notion that the great "western democracies" are now unhappy with the Greek leader for calling for a public vote on a very controversial national plan, because it might mean that some of the big banks might (one more time) stretch their boundaries and cause problems. (It's all in the short term debt - and by that I mean 1 day or less (we probably can't even imagine), high stakes loans that these mega institutions make among themselves to keep themselves a float on paper. 

The message there to me, and can it be denied, is that money is more important than voting. But it's not just money that is more valuable than voting - it's military and political dominance. If we have an interest in a country, and we think that a vote of the people would result in a change of a favorable policy toward us, we will try to discourage the vote. The U.S. has done this repeatedly. It's anti-democracy. 

OK, the not-so-funny punchline is that we don't just bring it up, but we rub "democracy" (or what is supposed to pass as our version of it) in the face of a lot of cultures - chastising them for the lack of democracy, violent crackdowns on protesters, and the like. 

But when push comes to shove, we aren't a whole lot better are we? Recently the police have removed "Occupy" protests violently in some U.S. cities. We let money and discrimination rule our politics. We support non-democratic governments when it's "in our interest." (whatever that means). And this latest negative reaction to the Greek "referendum" from our closest allies in Europe is just one more example. We should be supporting the Greek public's right to vote on this and congratulate their leadership for doing it. The fact that it wasn't supported shows that we, Germany, France, and probably others, are two-faced. The are living the adage, "do as I say, not as I do." 

So it's time for reform. It's coming to the government in so many messages, from so many directions. The question is, can these totally selfish, self absorbed and egotistical elected officials who think they know so much better than anyone else, continue to ignore many people whose lives they affect significantly? No, change is needed. The problem is that those that criticize violent means of social change use violence to maintain the status quo. We need talking and other forms of community to avoid violence. And the government needs to repudiate violence. 

It's hard for governments to repudiate violence because they have armies, and those armies live by violence. But the money spent on armies is a lot. If we didn't need to spend on armies, we would, collectively, around the world, have enough money to take care of a lot of social problems. The earth is very fruitful. 

My conclusion on all this is that we need votes, we need non-violence, and we need a sense of justice. For a great nation like the U.S. to be perceived at all as inconsistent in their support of democracy is an insult to us - the citizens. But to not support the Greek referendum is not supporting democracy. Obama hasn't made a statement yet about it that I have seen. Let's hope that Merkel and Sarkozy rethink their positions, and that they will support democracy. Or, if they don't trust democracy under the rules which basically they made, then they need to think seriously about a rule change, and they need to be open about it.

Sunday News Shows

I watched all the news shows that we get today. Of everything that I saw, the most interesting and amazing segment was how irritated Bonnie Erbe, host of "To the Contrary" got at one of her guests. I wasn't watching - I was doing something else and listening. But it was a very amazing exchange. Erbe, who had been absent from the show for quite a few weeks, only to come back recently and inform her viewers that she had been in a horse back riding accident which had almost killed her and left her badly injured, was hosting a spot on the show about the recently reported event of the earth passing the 7 billion mark in human population.

You have to give Erbe credit that, although she seems to be take a somewhat liberal stance on issues, she suppresses her views in order to make sure that her panelists, which are split between conservative and liberal, all get a chance to talk. But in this case, one of her guests, and because I wasn't watching I don't know who it was, started talking about how people were worried about population control. Erbe said that no one was talking about population control, just having a discussion about the population. 

Then the panelist, instead of giving it up, persisted, and said that it was discussions like this that were the first step to population control. Erbe got mad, and said that wasn't true, but the woman wouldn't give it up. Erbe barked, "shut up" and basically cut off the conversation. It was very interesting. Honestly, I don't blame Erbe, but she did kinda lose her cool, which is unusual for her.

David Plouffe, campaign advisor to President Obama, was on Meet the Press. He is truly a fast talker. I'll just leave it at that. What got the play in the media throughout the day was his statements about Romney's flip flops on issues, such as once being pro-choice and now being pro-life. But geez, it isn't news that Romney is flip flopping. He has to because the republican party has moved so far to the right. I didn't think Plouffe's statement was that newsworthy. Shows both what a slow news day it was and how the press doesn't really like Romney.

There was a lot of talk about Cain. His ad with one of his campaign advisors smoking a cigarette got a lot of talk - more than it should. The real talk should be about his policies. The republican pundit establishment still doesn't want to believe that he will be the nominee. In fact, more than once today such pundits still were saying that Cain would not be the nominee. That says something to me. 

I kinda doubt that Cain will end up being the republican nominee also, but then again, we are in uncharted territory here. It would be interesting to have a black on black election...it would take race out of it. I think in the end, Cain is going to come off as the candidate of the rich, which he is. But that isn't a majority position that will win him the election. Of course, I think, short of something really tragic happening, that the republicans don't have much of a chance with their current field of defeating Obama.

the republicans and taxes for the upper income

By Thanksgiving, which is about a month, the so-called "super committee" is going to decide on cuts to the federal budget, has to come forward with bi-partisan budget cuts or so-called "automatic cuts" will go into force. 

Of course, John McCain doesn't want the defense department cut. So he came out with a public video statement where he said that anything that congress does can be undone. That's actually one thing I do agree with McCain about, but isn't it a bit hypocritical? The republicans have made "the debt" their big issue. But now, spending is rearing it's head within the republican ranks. 

And then, in the middle of all this is some kind of agency study that comes out, after decades of study, that shows that the rich are getting richer faster than the working and middle class are gaining in income. Wow, did anyone really doubt that? 

But the republicans still are opposing any kind of "tax" on those upper income folks. It's like less than 1% of the entire population. Can they be serious? They support keeping their reduced tax rate on "investments" for the richest, while they propose to reduce benefits for the average family or people? Are they serious?

The republicans' answer is that this is "class warfare." What a crock that is! It's a crock because, (1), it is absurd not to admit that there are "classes" (based on income) in our society, and that just because people may bring up the inequality, that it amounts to "class warfare." All this is is a matter of linguistics. You just as well call it "equalization" or "levelling" or something like that and all of a sudden it isn't a matter of war at all but a matter of fairness. 

All the polls say that the public doesn't buy the republicans' arguments. I think that is right. The question is whether or not those same people will come out and vote. And if they do, who will they vote for?

Sunday News Show

The Sunday News shows provided nothing very new, for the most part. I guess the one tidbit of brand new information was in a comment by I think Pat Buchanan on the McLaughlin Group. It could have been Mort Zuckerman, but my memory is that it was Buchanan. The discussion was about whether or not Obama's foreign policy was going to significantly help him during the election. The current elections, which have just taken place the last few days, in Tunisia came up. Buchanan, I believe, said something like, "looks like those aren't coming out that good." 

Well, I hadn't heard anything about the outcome of those elections yet. In fact, this afternoon on NPR's
"All Things Considered" they discussed the Tunisian elections, but never ventured a comment on the results. A comment that things are coming out so good means to me that the Muslim fundamentalists have done well. This is the U.S. worst case scenario. As far as our government is considered, democracy is only good when our people get elected. 

I thought it was interesting that Charles Krauthamer admitted that the republican candidates for president were "minor." I think that the republicans are positioning themselves to deal with an Obama second term. Can anyone spell Mondale?

I also thought it was interesting the level of discussion about Romney putting his hand on Perry's shoulder during the debate last week. I thought there would be more talk about it. There was some, and more than one show brought it up. But it shows that Romney can get rattled and do something less than great.

Another topic that was discussed on multiple shows was Obama's announcement that all U.S. troops would be taken out of Iraq by the end of the year. Of course the republicans are criticizing Obama for the announcement. But most U.S. citizens are happy about it, especially the military families. 

McLaughlin himself said that he thought that it would be a significant political plus for Obama. I think he's more right than wrong. Everyone knows that the republicans won't say that much of what Obama does is good. But the republicans are playing a high risk game, and the odds that it will be successful are not that good. People know that Obama had a huge job when he came in, and that he hasn't gotten much, if any, cooperation from the republicans. He certainly hasn't performed as we all had hoped, but he comes off as trying, as being willing to talk to consider other ideas, and as sincere. For those that think Obama has "lost" the independent vote, you are likely going to be wrong.

Libya and CIA

I never knew a guy who was leader of a country that the press couldn't figure out how to spell his name. Was it Quaddafi? Or maybe Khaddafi? Or what about Quaddafy, or Gaddafi?. There's more, but, who knows? In fact, you can never for sure what is going on in foreign places. But, if what we have been hearing in the press is halfway right, one can't blame the Libyian people for wanting a new government. 

Khaddafi, or however you spell it, had worn out his welcome. He would have been much better off to say, "ok, I've been in long enough, let's get some new blood in." But, he succombed to the human frailities and couldn't let go. So he was forced to do so.

One thing I found interesting, was a statement made by Jim Miklashevski, or however you spell, the long time pentagon correspondent for NBC news. On the Today Show yesterday morning, as the news was congealing that Khaddafi had been killed, Matt Lauer went to "Mik," and asked him about whether or not they could confirm the claim that Quaddafi had been killed. "Mik" said that, "no" they couldn't. But then he said something that I bet has gotten him in trouble. And that is, and this isn't an exact quote, but I know that it would be close, "but with the US having CIA folks on the ground there, I'm sure that soon they will know for sure one way or another." 

Oh really? And what ever happened to "no boots on the ground?" I guess the CIA don't wear boots, and so that they don't count as "boots on the ground." Nonetheless, the CIA doesn't like to be "outed" at all, and Mik did just that. I don't recall any other media reporting that. And such a veteran reporter. Anyway, I found it all very fascinating. But I have to congratulate Mik and NBC for having the courage to report it.

 

World Series

Ok, I have to admit. I'm a Cardinals fan...and I have been as long as I can remember. But hey, my dad was a native of E. St. Louis, and an excellent baseball player, coach, and Cards fan. I remember the old Busch Stadium, with the screened in pavillion in right field. I saw Stan Musial break what I recall as the national league RBI record by hitting a home run on top of that pavillion. Curt Flood was and is one of my favorite all time Cards players. I saw him play a number of times. 

But I think the most outstanding Cards game that I saw live was the first game of the 1968 World Series. The world series tickets were advertised as "lottery" and my dad sent in for tickets immediately. Lo and behold, here they came in the mail. Well, my Dad was a teacher in the small town school district. He could get out of a day or two, but he couldn't just take off every game. And, I do think he liked the idea of his sons getting a chance to experience a world series game. It's not something that everyone has gotten to experience.

So he wrote an excuse for us, drove me and my little brother to Belleville, where we got on a bus to St. Louis. I was 15, my kid brother was 13. But I was almost 16. I knew the ropes, and nothing untoward happened. In fact, it was a wonderful day. It was Bob Gibson vs. Denny McClain. That was the last year that a major league pitcher won 30 games, and that was McClain. Years later McClain would go to jail for corruption. What a letdown!

But this game 1, Cards vs. Tigers, was a real pitchers duel. Bob Gibson struck out like 18 or something like that, and broke a world series record. The Cards won 2-1. In fact, they had a 3-1 lead in the series and blew it. But it was an experience to be there for that game. 

I'm sure that the folks in St. Louis are really happy to be there tonight, even though it is chilly. These are the hard core baseball fans that don't care about what it costs or how it feels. But for me, it's listening to it on the radio. When it gets to the playoffs, and then the World Series, I really enjoy it - it reminds me of my childhood. I spent a lot of time listening to the Cards on the radio growing up. 

At the moment, it is the bottom of the 8th, the Cards are ahead 1 - 0. It's been a real pitcher's duel. If the Cards win tonight, it will be hard, but not impossible, for the Rangers to come back. Of course, we don't want that. We want a sweep. The Rangers are the team of "W" and I don't mean win - I mean George W. Bush. Yuck. We just have to win! And I think the Cards probably will. 

Oh darn, I was wrong! As I was typing this, I got a phone call, and as I talked, I listened to the Cards blow it in the top of the 9th. Well, it's a whole new series now - best of 5. The Cards have come back to get to this position by consistently winning 2 of 3. They have shown that they win on the road, and now they have to. But even if they don't win, it still is fun having "your" team in the world series, especially when it seemed just about impossible that it might happen.

RACE files opposition to lifting injunction on the Shawnee National Forest

It's no secret that Kristi and I have been interested in and involved in planning for the Shawnee National Forest for the last...um...let's see...28 years. In that time, we have been involved regionally with various organizations, but the one that we have been most closely associated with is the Regional Association of Concerned Environmentalists, or RACE. 

RACE came about when a group that we formed with some neighbors of ours circa 1983, which we called "the Association of Concerned Environmentalists" or ACE, joined up with folks in the Pomona, Illinois neighborhood, who were very concerned about clearcutting on the national forest in their neighborhood. Joe Glisson came up with the idea for RACE. He said that it showed that ACE had gone regional, and that it had another meaning - that we were in a race against time to save the forest. We all thought it was a great idea.

I've started to write the history of RACE on this blog, and I will finish it. But one of our greatest accomplishments, which I haven't written about yet, is our lawsuit in 1995-97, which successfully challenged the Shawnee's 1992 amended forest management plan. 

I'm going to keep this brief, but the record clearly shows that it was RACE who was primarily responsible for this victory. Every issue raised and won in the lawsuit was an issue brought by RACE in their administrative appeal of the 1992 plan amendment. Other groups signed on, and the Sierra Club even got their name first in the caption by donating several thousand dollars to fund the costs of the litigation, (which we graciously allowed, because we knew that it had political clout). But make mistake about it - without our administrative appeal, written by our attorney, Tom Buchele, with my and Joe Glisson's and other's help, the lawsuit would not have prevailed....period. 

But, in the end, when the case was won, it was "Sierra Club v. USDA," and they used the victory to raise money. I don't recall ever getting any thank you from the Sierra Club, and RACE was never credited in any of their newsletters. But that was ok...we had won and stopped a lot of bad things in our local neighborhoods.

With us working together, we had enough legal, cultural, and political power to get the judge to issue the injunction stopping commercial logging, off-road vehicles, and oil and gas development in the forest. That injunction has been in effect since 1997. 

In 2006, under the Bush administration, the Shawnee issued a revised plan. It's really horrible. It makes these claims that they say are based on science, but the fact is that it was based on their hand-picked scientists. The hand-picking of their scientists was so blatant that a federal judge in Washington D.C. ruled that it violated the Federal Advisory Committee Act. This Act was passed years ago to assure that committees of non-agency people that a federal agency turned to for advice was "fairly balanced" in terms of points of view represented, and held noticed, open meetings where public involvement was required. 

None of that was done. But the agency, after several meetings with the hand-picked scientists, came out with a plan which basically says that they need to log and burn tens of thousands of acres on the Shawnee to make the forest right. They never would have been able to do that if those meetings had been open to the public. 

Nevertheless, all these years after the plan revision was issued, the Forest Service filed a motion with the court to lift the injunction. RACE and co-plaintiff Illinois Audubon Council, kept the original attorney, Tom Buchele, now director the environmental law clinic at Lewis and Clark University in Portland, Oregon. We filed a strong opposition to the Forest Service's motion. I never would try to guess how a court is going to rule, but I know we made strong points. 

The Illinois Sierra Club did not retain Tom Buchele as their attorney. They retained Albert Ettinger, a long time environmental attorney from Chicago. Apparently the Illinois Sierra Club didn't file anything. One would be tempted to throw out the hyperbolic statements about how irresponsible and against the Sierra Club's mission not to stand up for their own injunction which is in their name and which they fund raised upon way back when. But I will resist the temptation and just stick to the facts. The facts are that they did not respond, and thus, will likely not be much of a player in this. 

I don't want to speculate why this might have happened. But I have my theories. Frankly though, the Illinois Chapter of Sierra Club has bad leadership when it comes to the Shawnee. Their main person on the Shawnee has few contacts in the rural counties, and has trouble working effectively with people. This has caused a lot of problems for them. But it seems hardly a reason for the organization as a whole to suffer this kind of embarassment. 

The brief that we filed is attached to this entry.

Kentucky Governor's (partial) debate in Paducah today

I watched the so-called Kentucky governor's race debate this morning sponsored by the Paducah Chamber of Commerce on WPSD-TV's 6-2 station. This is a great use for that station, and kudos to WPSD for doing that. 

I call it a "partial" debate, because one of the candidates didn't appear. Um, not just one of the candidates - THE candidate - the incumbent governor himself, Steve Beshear, democrat, who is running for re-election. The other two candidates are republican state senate president, David Williams and independent Gatewood Galbraith. These two were here in Paducah today and participated in the debate.

Beshear just appeared in a televised debate earlier this week on public television with the other two candidates, and he has made a couple appearances, such as at Fancy Farm, where the other candidates were present. But he's avoided making too many public appearances with them. And why should he, his campaign staff might be asking - he's 26% ahead in recent polls.

Personally, I think that it is a mistake for him not to have come to Paducah for this event. He's good in person, and more than holds his own against Williams and Galbraith. I know that he has lots of things to do, but his failure to appear comes off as a snub - an unnecessary one. No doubt the election is Beshear's to lose, and he probably won't. But, he missed an opportunity to really pile on the mandate.

To the debate, I have to say that I really admired Galbraith's preformance. You have to understand that the Paducah Chamber audience would be a right of center audience, pro-nuclear in support of the gaseous diffusion plant. Yet Galbraith did not try to coddle or play mushy politics with issues such as allowing nuclear power plants in Kentucky, legalization of cannabis, and strong union support. He also spoke out strongly against the influence of money in politics, and pledged to root out corruption and reduce money's influence. Whether or not he could do it, I'm not sure, but I really think he would try. 

The debate was moderated by retired Paducah Sun political writer, Bill Bartleman. I've written of him before. Also, there was a panel of local journalists, including Donna Groves, who I wrote about recently after her appearance on "Comment on Kentucky," Todd Faulkner, local anchor of certain news broadcasts on WPSD, and a young woman named Mallory Panuska. I'm not sure where she was from - probably Kentucky Star, which was also co-sponsoring the event. 

They asked the questions you would expect, and some of them were good. But they didn't ask anything really tough. For example, I would have asked Williams about the $10s of thousands of dollars in gambling losses that he suffered in out-of- state casinos (which came out in court filings in his divorce), at the same time that he was dragging his feet in supporting Beshear's attempt to get gambling legalized in Kentucky. (Not that I'm for that, just stating the facts). 

I think that shows such a flaw in character that it deserved a question. However, the news folks were too squeamish to ask him about it. I have to take at least 10 points from their grade right off the bat for letting that slide. 

I don't even live in Kentucky, and can't vote for Governor. But I think, even though I know that Beshear is going to win short some terrible thing that we can't imagine coming out about him, that I would endorse Galbraith (for what it's worth) for governor. He comes closer to my thinking on more things than the other candidates, although I don't agree with him on everything. I'm glad he is in the race, and it would be great if he could get more votes than Williams.

From Lil Birdie: Stop the killing of Sandhill Cranes in Kentucky!

Lil Birdie met with other members of his flock in Frankfort to protest the planned hunting of Sandhill Cranes in Kentucky. The heartless Kentucky Fish and Wildlife Agency will allow hunters to murder 400 of these majestic birds. Call them and say NO 800-858-1549. 

Our brother and sister cranes mate for life! What will they do if their wife or husband is murdered?!? What will their little chicks do but grieve at this sick inhuman sport that murdered their family members? 

The birds had been hunted to almost extinction until the early 1900s. They have lived in safety and harmony up 'til now and have not been hunted in 100 years!

Our friends the Sandhills are peaceful happy birds. They dance run and leap for pure joy and love of each other. We cannot let thoughtless bloodthirsty humans kill them. Please help.

Nationwide protests: crossroads are here

I was tempted to say that the national "occupy" protests have reached their first crossroads, but I don't think that is accurate. Getting started and maintaining all this time has more than likely had a number of crossroads already. But I see several looming. And, it isn't that the movement can't make it through these junctions intact, but it definitely has some risks.

One of the crossroads that is currently being encountered, at least in some places, is that the "authorities" are going to start trying to clear them out of the ground that they are "occupying" based on this or that local statute. Apparently something along those lines happened in Boston in the last day or so. I would guess that if this makes the protesters "go away" that we will see other mayors take the cue. I am sure that the protesters are aware of this. I get the feeling that they aren't going to go away so easily. Nevertheless, it isn't going to be easy to stay. 

Another crossroads that they are facing, is that, the more that the movement grows, the more difficult it is to control all the actions and messages of folks who are attracted to the spectacle of the ever growing crowds. I have seen this before on a smaller scale, but here it seems to be becoming a national movement, and actions and messages purportedly in conjunction with and in support of the movement are going to be coming in from every direction with increasing frequency - and some of those may be misguided or for the purpose of sabotage. 

These are difficult moments in the progress of a movement, and it will be a challenge to the folks who initiated the protests and are trying to guide it's growth. Hopefully the folks leading have the vision, the compassion, the courage, and persistence to keep it up and keep it focused. They have begun something that has the potential to be a real catalyst for change, but it also could fade away like it never happened, just another segment of the "15 minutes of fame" show. That would be a shame, although those involved in the organizing of this can feel proud for what they have accomplished even if it went no further. 

But the system overreacting to the protests and appearing to want to shut them up stands a good chance of backfiring and creating sympathy and more support. But it is important that the protests not turn violent, be creative in a positive way that captures the public's and the presses' imagination, and casts those trying to silence them as heavy handed and oppressive - some of the very things to which the protesters are trying to bring attention; So while there are crossroads and challenges ahead, there are also opportunities. Good luck to getting it right, and to being able to handle things when they go wrong.

My thoughts on the Occupy Wall Street protests

Like much of the country, I have become very aware and tuned into the Occupy Wall Street protests. I'm very excited about it. If the young people in our country want to have a better country, now is their time to reach for the reins of power and try to change things for the better. Our generation made a valiant attempt, spurred by the military draft and the Vietnam war, but also in response to the general injustices and inequalities that our society has ingrained yet continually tries to deny and avoid being held accountable.

While the young generation of today hasn't had to face the same problems, they have different ones that are just as immediate. While I'm a college drop-out and never had the benefit of the grease that a college degree or degrees gives you in finding employment, I know that most of the people that I know that made it through college at the same time that I would've graduated had I stayed in ended up getting a job, and weren't bogged down with huge college loan debts. So, if you avoided the military, like me, by winning the draft lottery, then you had a good chance of getting a job. The same can't be said of today. 

And not only that, but the economic injustices that are inherent in our society have not gone away - in fact, they have gotten worse. As the famous line in the play "Marat-Sade" says, "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer." That is not a good formula for social stability. So the climate is favorable for social unrest. And with the inspiration of the "Arab Spring" and the protests in Greece, it has all the ingredients for a time of sort of uprising. And I'm not talking about the stale complaints of the so-called "Tea Party" who want to take the U.S. back to the facade that all of our exercises of belligerence and control around the world entitled us to cheap everything and control of the world. Nor, that we are are the greatest nation in everything - that simply isn't true. Sorry, but that's unrealistic. We need a more realistic vision tempered in the ideals of the founding of our nation - equality, freedom, accountability. 

The center of power is only going to be pushed if people stand up, in the streets, in sufficient numbers, and demand it - combined with voting power. And I think that is what the Occupy Wall Street efforts are about, and I applaud it. I also think that those union leaders that have the vision to try and tap into this movement are wise and should continue these efforts. Some nationwide walkout days would shake things up in the US. It should have been done back when Reagan broke the Air Traffic Controllers. But it's never too late to take up a just cause. 

The media is still shortchanging the ralliers, because they continue to report that they "have no agenda." This is totally false. I have gotten several emails about the movement, and they have an agenda. They are broad themes, but they are articulated. The involve worker rights, economic equality, accountability, sustainability, and peace. I agree with that agenda, and the media should call it like it is, not like they want it to be. 

Obama did talk about the protests today in his news conference. He would be well served to go down there and remember his days as a community organizer and meet with them and maybe even march with them. That's his margin of victory that he needs to win re-election - and he needs to fire them back up. 

We'll have our supportive rallies here, and hopefully they will grow, all across the country. It may be too soon to tell whether or not this has staying power. The winter in New York on the streets can be harsh. But spring comes soon enough, and even if they can't hold out all winter, I think many people will be anxiously awaiting their return in the spring, although I bet than many remain through the winter. We need an American spring to turn back the winter that we are already in.

University of Louisville arts dept. recruits in Paducah

Several days ago, Kristi came home from work and said that she heard that there was going to be an event at the Carson Center that night that we might want to go see. It had something to do with the University of Louisville, but she wasn't sure. She thought there would be music, and maybe theater. But she had heard that it would be good, so we cleaned up quickly and headed there. I'm so glad we did.

It turned out that basically it was a sampling of what their arts department can do - it was a recruiting exercise. And a very good one. Besides an appearance and talk by the president of the university, their performance included everything from a large vocal chorale backed up by a full symphony orchestra to a jazz quartet playing authentic and quality swing jazz, to a poetry reading, and even a performance of a shakespeare scene. 

The performances were high quality. I was very impressed. The president of the university said that they had brought over 200 people to do the performance, and I believe it. If I was a young person, and could afford it, and was going to go to college for the arts, I'd have been dazzled by what I saw. Of course, I am a college drop-out, so who am I to say anything? But...it shows that someone at that university is into the arts and has vision about how to recruit people into the program, and is proud of their program - rightfully so. And, it was great for the community to have such a high quality, and free program. Several hundred took advantage of it, but not enough. There should have been more.

Sunday News Shows

There wasn't a lot of new stuff in the sunday news show. They doted over Gov. Christie of New Jersey. Is he or isn't he? Going to run for president that is. Didn't they just go thru this with Gov. Perry of Tex, who has turned out to be all hat and no cattle, at least thus far? 

And whether or not the Obama administration's killing of a US citizen who was an Al-Quaeda leader in Yemen was legal or not is a good question, but a non-starter as far as any kind of smear goes. Already Obama is putting all the republican candidates on defensive as far as his foreign policy goes. Unfortunately for him, foreign policy doesn't appear to be the defining issue in the coming election. But, it does take a grenade out of the republicans weapons cache. 

The rest of it was unmemorable. Gosh, can't they do better?

Conservative African-Americans make the media

Isn't it interesting that Herman Cain wins the Florida straw poll, and granted, that is a very small sample, but that as soon as that happens, no one in the media really takes him serious - instead, in the days that follow - it's all about whether or not Gov. Christie of New Jersey will get in the race. 

But hey, think about it. Maybe an African-American conservative is the best chance to unseat Obama, not that I think it is a very good chance, at least at this time. Cain is well spoken, and has a gimmick, which helps in American politics. That gimmick is the 9 9 9. That refers to his tax rates. 9% sales, income, and business rate. I have no idea whether I'd be paying more or less or whether it would solve our budget woes. But it is an idea and something he can push. The only problem with it, as far as I can see, is that it is too close to the 6 6 6 sign of the devil, that so many in rural areas fear. That may turn some people off. 

Unfortunately, for the republicans, they can't see the forest for the trees. They are ready to push Cain off the stage, even after he did a really good job on the Today Show after they interviewed him in a prime spot after he won the Florida primary. But already he has dropped out of view and apparently is not being taken seriously by the republicans.

Not that I want Cain, but I'm just looking it as an objective observer. If you had an African American to run against Obama, you level that playing field. And then you have a guy who is honestly a "business man," whatever that means, and a lot of people may be thinking that a businessman might not be a bad idea to lead us through our financial woes. I mean, he's definitely a better opponent than Palin, Perry, and Romney, but the republicans apparently have a lot of trouble with diversity. That's their problem. Trying to draft Christie won't solve it.

And then there is the article by Jeffrey Toobim in the New Yorker about Clarence Thomas. OMG!!! I hope that Toobim is wrong. He says that Thomas is the underground main influence on the supreme court and that he is living to kill the health care bill by killing the individual mandate. It's more the influence that I hope isn't right. What the conservatives don't really understand is that if they kill the individual mandate, the only option left is the "public" option - their worst nightmare. But they will press on with their efforts to kill the mandate, and I have to admit that I don't really like it either - not without some price controls on the premiums. But their actions may very well lead to the very result that they are trying to avoid, and that is ironic.

Sunday News Shows

There is one thing I wanted to comment on that I heard on the Sunday News Shows this last Sunday. That was on "Inside Washington." It was Colby King stating that he agreed with James Carville that the Obama administration should in fact "panic" about the administration's public acceptance in relation to their re-election chances. It is very unusual to hear King come down as hard as did on the administration. He usually is very defensive about Obama and doesn't agree with a view that the administration is that far out of a mainstream and may be in trouble. But, he did state pretty emphatically that he agreed with Carville that the administration should be panicing about how things are going. 

I don't necessarily agree, but I did find it interesting. The rest of the discussion was pretty much homogenized mainstream issues.