Inspirational bumper sticker

This bumper sticker forced me to question my deeply-ingrained Enlightenment values as I navigated between a senior citizen and a cell-phone talking soccer Mom on my evening commute tonight:

"Reason is the illusion of reality"

To the owner of the Plymoth Voyager, thank you for introducing me to the concept of Universal Sufism. My commutes have been such an intellectual dead zone until tonight.

Marketing Genius

I am glad to find out that there is some structure to this marketing campaign. It seems to partake of elements from a standard treasure hunt. When I first heard the ad on the radio, it sounded like a contest devised by aliens who know nothing about the way human beings actually interact. Now I think it is kind of brilliant.

Requiem from a Recent Initiate

Robert Altman just died at the age of 81. I happened to just watch Nashville for the first time the week before Altman died and it really blew me away. It may not be for everyone. There is a LOT of music; there is a lot of characters without a unifying plot; and Altman's technique of recording sound so that the characters on the screen talk only slightly louder than the din of the surrounding crowd may befuddle the hard-of-hearing. But it is truly an artistic vision. If you love artsy movies and my disclaimers dont scare you away, then you may love it also. I have not seen many other of Altman's movies, besides Gosford Park, which I couldnt follow; and Short Cuts, which I was too young to appreciate. In any case, I no longer poo-poo the idea of watching Altman's last movie: A Prairie Home Companion. The concept of that movie struck me as strange and unappealing at first, but having seen Nashville, I think I can envision how Altman could make such material really interesting.

Eventually, we all turn into "The Man"

After 32 years of being completely alienated from the entire world of stocks and bonds, and in fact despising the entire culture of money and business, I recently took the plunge and put some into the market. I can see where people get hooked on this crap. I am fairly confident that the fact I made a 25% profit after 1 month of investing, will turn out to be a REALLY bad thing in the long run for me. But please, while I am busy flagellating myself for betraying my youthful, Liberal, artistic personality, please keep buying the fine products put out there by Apple computer ;)

With No Money We'd All Go Crazy

Today is the latest installment in one of America's most loathsome traditions: the after-Thanksgiving shopping orgy, appropriately known as Black Friday. Anyone who went to a 12:01 sale last night deserves an hour in the stocks. The managers at those chain stores who are so greedy that they flouted Massachusetts law and opened on Thanksgiving deserve a felony caning. I guess I have a modicum of understanding for the Asian grocery chain that opened its doors since most Asian people do not celebrate the holiday anyway. But CompUSA -- shame! Many large retailers only close their doors on 2 days a year: Thanksgiving and Christmas. If 2 days a year is too much of a restriction to place on your unfettered greed, may you hawk your plasma televisions in the 7th citcle of hell! Christmas is obviously next. Corporations are so sociopathic that they cannot tolerate culture, history, tradition, or humanity to inconvenience them in any way. And any of you soulless, retail-shopping junkies who can't resist the sales -- you deserve the Capitalist dystopia you've already got.

Hoop Dreams

Yesterday, I shot baskets with my 64 year old father. He is still a better shooter than me after all these years. Even when I was 16 and was going to basketball camps every Summer and practicing daily, he was a better shooter than me.

I just don't have the correct mechanics in my wrist and elbow and in my guide hand (my left hand). When I was in my twenties, pretty much every Summer, I would make a vow to master these mechanics. I would dilligently trot myself to the park and shoot hoops. But I wouldn't just shoot absent-mindedly: I would try to focus on my form and work out all the kinks. I really believed that I could intellectualize the basketball shot. I would analyze it. I would spend an hour shooting with only one arm, just to make sure that my guide hand was not inappropriately affecting the trajectory of the ball. (This is a nugget of wisdom that a coach at a basketball camp that always stuck with me). I would have brief moments where I truly believed I had figured out how to shoot a ball. I would be up at the park at 10:30 at night, shooting hoops under the lights, with my work clothes on, and I would knock in a dozen in a row, and really feel like I was ready to beat the world. Of course, all that activity was wasted energy. I never got significantly better at shooting. Every Summer, I basically would have to reteach myself how to shoot only to get back to the point I was at the previous Summer. It is the Myth of Sisiphus (sp?) all over again.

We gave my Dad a hoop to put in his driveway for his 62nd birthday. While this is kind of a strange present for a senior citizen, it makes sense to us. I mean, we have been shooting hoops together in his driveway for close to 30 years, and we still enjoy it. Plus, for 20 of those years, my parents had the worst driveway in town. It was a split-level driveway with a 6 inch curb bisecting it. The concrete was never level, and over time, various pits formed in the surface. Eventually, the driveway had more craters than the surface of the moon. When it rained and you stepped out of your car, you were more than likely to step into 6 inches of water, that would flow over the top of your sneaker and ruin your night. Needless to say, this was not an ideal basketball surface. A few years back, he got a decent driveway, and both of us kept proclaiming that we need a new hoops. So voila...2 Thanksgivings ago, me and 4 of my cousins spent the entire period before the meal assembling this monstrously complex hoop. (It eventually took 3 days to assemble)

My Dad beat me again yesterday in a game that we call "Shoot-out", though he did have to invoke a dubious "win-by-two" rule in order to accomplish the task. He always wins. Or at least 90% of the time. The thing is that he has absolutely no extraneous motion in his shot. He balances the shot perfectly like a waiter holding a tray, and without moving his body one iota, he flicks in the shot. My elbow and wrist are all over the place when I shoot.

When I was young, our town's rec department used to have this event called a Turkey Shoot every November. In this event, a parent and a child would enter a free-throw shooting contest as a team. Parent and child each got 10 free throws and the number of shots made represented the team's combined score. The highest scoring team takes home a free Thanksgiving turkey. Both my Dad and I have always been decent free throw shooters -- I have seen my Dad knock in 30 in a row on many occassions and I have become decent by taking 8 million of these shots -- so we should have dominated this event. My Dad claims we DID dominate this event and that we didnt pay for a turkey throughout the 1980's. I think this is pure mythology. I remember winning it once or twice, but I dont remember a Milley Turkey Shoot dynasty like he claims. My memory however is a bit fuzzy on the results however, since it wasnt my money buying the turkey. Our arch-rivals were a family named the McQuilkens. The son was an all-star player on our high school team and should have beaten me easily. The father was...well...not so much. If I remember correctly, however, I usually held up my end of the bargain, knocking in 8 or 9, and my Dad was the choker in the years that we lost.

Forgive my indulgence in these mundane memories. Basketball has provided somewhat of a framework to my life for a long time. Even to this day, the only TV shows I really watch are the 82 regular-season Boston Celtics games. It is really the main thing I have in common with my Dad. We both excitedly watch all the games even though the team has stunk for 20 years. Watching the Celtics in the 1980s was such an unbelievable experience that it has made both of us hardcore fans for life. Now that's brand loyalty. Even as I type, I am on somewhat of an emotional high because the Celts have won 3 in a row to improve to 4 and 6. Boy, do I need a life!

In case you forgot

Yeah, Rush Limbaugh is still a blowhard. When I got into my car, the first thought I heard him express was: "Liberals seek to control these higher offices so that they can thwart the democratic process." Huh? Isn't the act of seeking higher office an inherently democratic process? Give me Michael Savage anyday.

Misguided Rants

When I went to vote at the local elementary school, they had, as they often do, a bakesale in front of the school gym. An older, bearded gentleman, chose this as the forum to complain about his tax burden. He shook his fist and railed at the audacity of the ladies selling the dainties, when our city has been raking in ungodly property taxes to construct a new high school. Now come on, fella.... I'm not a big fan of taxes either, and I understand your frustration at rich communities like ours always voting for Prop 2 1/2 overrides, but you gotta pick and chose your battles. You aint winning any glorious victories at a 5th grade bake table.

Down to the Liquor Store....

...or the "packee" as the locals say.

Today we have a referendum question (question #1) on the ballot as to whether or not grocery and convenience stores should be allowed to sell wine. Massachusetts, like 16 other states, does not permit grocery stores to sell wine, beer, or liquor. Until recently, liquor stores could not open on Sunday either. Obviously, the big grocery chains want to eradicate this artifact of Prohibition. For the past few months, every time I have entered a liquor store (which I do more frequently than I care to admit), there is a sign on the door urging a NO vote, and every time I enter a grocery store (which is a rarer phenomenon) there is a sign urging a YES vote.

I strongly hope that this referendum gets voted down but I suspect it will pass. The reason that it will pass is because most people will not be able to think of a reason why the proposed law change is bad. I believe the referendum is bad because I do not want to allow more consolidation in the retail industries. Why should we allow massive grocery store chains to get bigger and wipe out more small businesses? Unfortunately, that seems to be a perspective on the brink of extinction. In fact, it has not even been mentioned by any of the advertising campaigns urging us to vote no on Question 1. Instead, all the ads have been aimed at the Mothers Against Drunk Driving crowd. The ads all feature a scary cop warning us that a yes vote will result in more drunk driving. Which it might. Or it might not. I consider this aspect of the question an irrelevant smokescreen. I don't want to allow alcohol to be sold in grocery stores, because....gasp....I am happy with the way things are!

People of a generally conservative temperament (lower case 'c') often have a tough time expressing their viewpoint in a convincing manner. In fact, among the people I talk with, very few ever make an appeal to history, tradition, or custom as a valid reason for ever supporting anything. The rhetoric of conservation has little power nowadays. If something adds convenience to our lives, or contributes to public health or safety, or forwards a secular humanist agenda, or enhances the free movement of capital, then we have a convincing argument. "If it aint broke, don't fix it" appeals to very few. As a result, we end up with referendum questions brought by special interest groups.

4 years ago, we ha a referendum question proposing to ban greyhound racing. Why on earth would we end up with such a question on the ballot other than that some radical animal rights groups want to forward their agenda? But, when it gets presented to the voter in a referendum, he gets confused. He analyzes the question as if it was an abstract philisophical question since it has very little bearing on him personally. He probably has never been to a greyhound track; he gets bothered by the idea of mistreated animals; and he blandly votes to ban greyhound races. Now that referendum narrowly avoided passing 4 years ago, but in my opinion it should never have been presented to the voters in the first place. Why should an entire industry, an entire part of state history (albeit a very minor one), be wiped out. along with numerous jobs, just because some small interest group called for a show of hands? I have been to a greyhound track precisely twice in my life...when I turned 21 and when I was 25. (I lost $50 bucks I think). But I breathed a sigh of relief when the referendum was rejected.

I feel the same way about the liquor store question. Going to small liquor stores and chatting with the proprietors, who inevitably work behind the counter, is a pleasant part of my life, and is so for many other people as well. Probably 99% of the people who buy wine on a regular basis have a routine that they enjoy to acquire the wine. Have you ever heard anyone complain about how inconvenient it is that grocery stores do not sell wine? I haven't. Then why change the law? Should we change it just because we cant think of an effective rhetorical response to the question "Why aren't supermarkets allowed to sell wine?" In my opinion, it is a perfectly legitimate response to say: "Because thats the way we like it in Massachusetts."

We have the right to prohibit casinos, neon signs, Walmarts, marijuana, and prostitution. If you want a society where anything goes, move to Amsterdam! We have the right to allow smoking where we want it or ban it if we see fit. We have the right to enforce seatbelt use or we can choose not to enforce it. In this kind of case, I prefer non-draconian laws which preserve custom. Not every issue needs a constitutional argument, or a public health reason to back it up. We have the right to use government to maintain a society that we actually like! And we have the right to preserve some traditions...even if they are quaint relics from a failed social experiment from the 1930's.

Election Day

Today is the big gubernatorial election in Massachusetts. Today is also an important Senate election across the country. If we are lucky, we will replace some greedy, perverted, fiscally irresponsible, Laissez-Faire Republican senators with some greedy, perverted, fiscally irresponsible, Laissez-Faire Democratic senators. I can't pretend to get excited about this 3-card Monte shuffle, but I do believe the current Republican regime has had enough gay-sex scandals, bribery scandals, and money found in freezers, to justify some shakeup. Mass. will return Ted Kennedy without even a whiff of competition.

Locally, it looks like Deval Patrick will win going away if any of the polls are to be trusted. I will be voting for him after much reflection. I have followed the campaign closely, and I have found plenty of truth in the conservative critique of Patrick. (Two hours of conservative talk radio a day will do that to you.) However, most of the criticism seems to rely on standard Republican canards: He will raise your taxes, he is soft on crime, etc, etc. My problem is that I know in my heart that this is all ideological chicanery.

Yes, Patrick will probably not lower my taxes, but, in Massachussets, taxes and fees and tolls increase as inevitably as the amount of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere. One of the Republican's big issues in this campaign is lowering the state income tax from 5.3% to 5%. While I agree that the state govenment owes us this rollback, which it promised 20 years ago, I find it impossible to get excited about the $150 bucks this might put in my pocket over the course of the year. I find it much more relevant to my life that if I max out my 401K, I can save $6000-$7000 in taxes. If I max out my flex spending account for daycare, I can save $1500 - $2000. The micro change to the income tax has very little effect compared with the macro tax picture. I just dont buy Kerry Healey's schtick that a 0.3% tax rollback will provide a major economic stimulus to our economy. Not do I accept that Patrick is somehow inethical for not enthusiastically endorsing the will of the people on this matter.

Patrick, in my opinion, did embarass himself on issues of crime during the campaign. The guy wrote ingratiating personal letters to a convicted rapist in prison, and consistently referred to the perpetrator as "eloquent". He could have explained away 75% of this by just saying frankly -- hey that's what defense attorney's do sometimes. The other 25% could have been a mea culpa. Instead he chose of tack of saying, in effect, "I dont need to be lectured to on crime by anyone because I have been a prosecutor and a victim of crime." It turns out he has never put any criminal in jail, and the only way in which he has been a victim, is that some time in his distant past, he got dinged off the forehead with a tin can. Ooops.

I am much more comfortable with Healey's clear, unambigous response to illegal immigration than with Patrick's nuanced and compassionate view. I am convinced that the massive influx of illegal immigrants into our country is a travesty on every level -- economic, cultural, and political -- and that extending the amount of social benefits to these aliens is the right answer to the wrong question. When Patrick discusses giving drivers licenses and in-state tuition to these immigrants, I squirm. Of course, it is wrong to marginalize and penalize an entire class of people in our society, but shouldnt we prevent the formation of an illegal underclass to begin with? (In general, I find the Liberal attitude towards illegal immigrants more humane but ultimately as destructive as the Conservative attitude that welcomes a pool of exploitable cheap labor, but this is tangential.)

Healey is an attractive candidate in a lot of ways. She is strong-willed, visibly competent, and experienced. Her performance in the debates was very good. I, like so many other people, in Massachusetts, am generally comfortable with having a Republican counterbalance to an overwhelmingly Democratic legislature. So why am I voting for Patrick over Healey? I guess it boils down to two things.

One is Healey's over-reliance on Conservative arguments that I dont believe in. She hammers away on the tax rollback, and her hard stance on crime and illegal immigration. She rails against the teachers unions. Her whole campaign has had an air of Republican ideology to it that I just do not accept. Mitt Romney, I am sure, is far more conservative than Healey, but he was appealing to me as a candidate. Sometimes it is not just your political leanings, but how you present yourself that matters more. If your primary campaign strategy is to bang away at the ideological drum, you might rouse your base, but ultimately you will alienate the less ideological listeners.

Reason number two, I have to admit, is apolitical: Duval is just a more likeable person. He is a Mister Rogers type. He speaks in warm, comforting language, without that shrill ideological veneer. He offers vague but appealing sentiments about our future. ("Together we can") He compliments the other candidates on the debating stage: ("Every one of these candidates has a few good ideas. I've got a few of my own...") He is polished, calm, and articulate. Part of this is just a byproduct of the fact that he was a front-runner. Because of his lead, he had the luxury to be calm and collected, whereas Healey was almost forced to be shrill and go on the attack. And yes, Patrick, is black, which Liberals have to admit, excites them a little bit, even if on a subconscious level. I would be disingenous if I did not admit that I find the image of the articulate, polished, black businessman appealing.

It has been a fun campaign for a political junkie like myself. The debates were numerous and highly watchable. Even the marginal candidates were more entertaining this time around. Christie Mihos is a bit strange and incoherent as a candidate, but does anyone remember the bizarre set of candidates we got 4 years ago? One of them was the Libertaraian candidate, Carla Howell, whose main platform was protecting the rights of gun-holders and who uttered the irrritating phrase "small government is beautiful" at every opportunity. What about Barbara Johnson? I dont remember too much about her other than the fact she reminded me of every middle-aged smoker I have ever seen huddled outside an office building. I also remember that when she was given a minute to make her pitch during one of the debates, she went on some kind of bizarre rant about aqua-culture or marine biology or something. Very peculiar. This time around, Grace Ross, the Green Rainbow party candidate, has had a good presence in the debates, and has ably expressed the Liberal perspective. I find myself agreeing with most everything she expresses on the stage. The marginal Liberal politicians, like Grace Ross and Ralph Nader, articulate the real truth about our society, I believe, while the Democratic vs Republican debate is right out of Gulliver's travels. Unfortunately, in a two party system, we generally only get to choose which side of the toast we want buttered, not whether we want butter or toast at all.

Biorhythms Update

Ever since we set the clocks back an hour, my body has become completely screwed up. I have been generally sleeping from 8:00 PM - 3:00 AM. Now I am convinced I have some form of seasonal affective disorder.