Spice of Life

As a parent, I want my children to be open to new opportunities in life.  I want my kids to experience the joys of discovery, diversity, and culture.  I want them to explore their world.  I want them to take a big bite out of life and let the juices run down their face.  Of course, all this experimentation needs to take place within the confines of legal boundaries.  The behavior should be constructive to the mind and soul, not destructive.  These minor caveats leave a wide selection of new tastes, sights and sounds on the table, and my kids should feel empowered to dig in from time to time.

Life’s lessons in risk taking begin with simply learning to wander beyond the paranoid eyes of your smothering parents and move quickly to the challenge of basic assumptions like “I’ll bet that stove isn’t as hot as Mom says.”  After that, it’s into the deep end of the pool, literally.  Some experiments will sting, but many will enrich.  Those are the experiments I want them to embrace – the enriching ones.

Food isn’t usually dangerous and it does teach us to address our fears in a fairly benign way.  Lima beans can be scary, but tasting them for the first time, while potentially disgusting, usually leaves no permanent scars.  Spicy tacos might burn going down but standard American grocery store hot sauce will not cause injury (unless apply to an open cut).  Trying new foods opens the mind to trying all kinds of new things, but hopefully not bungie jumping over a ravine in South America.

So I have been pleased that my children enjoy watching the show Chopped on the Food Network.    Food is safe, except for apples in the Enchanted Forest, or poultry products under a Republican administration.  I mean, we can always spit food out if we don’t like it.  Once we’re airborne with that parachute strapped to our backs, it’s tough to change your mind.  You can’t jump back into the plane.  Food tasting is a safe experiment that demonstrates incremental risk taking. 

The concept of Chopped is a bit hokey and by that I mean exactly like every other reality competition program.  4 chefs compete by preparing an appetizer, main dish and dessert offering, each in 30 minutes or less incorporating 4 ‘surprise’ ingredients.  The competition tests their creativity, resourcefulness and culinary skills under pressure.  Fun!

For example, one episode asked the contestants to create an appetizer using sea beans, ginger ale and pork tenderloin.  Another episode challenges the chefs to whip up a dessert that included jicama, pepitas, and blueberries.  I mean, who hasn’t run across some celery, blood oranges, frozen pie crust and jaggery in the kitchen and thought – dessert! (Full disclosure: these were actual ingredients on the show, and I have no idea what half of them are let alone what they taste like).

By watching Chopped and its shark-jumping spin-off Chopped Champions, my kids are learning not to fear exotic foods.  They are learning about how different cultures have different palates and how they combine different flavors as a way to express their heritage and identity.  By watching Chopped and seeing the unique dish preparations, my kids are becoming more open to new tastes and I hope new ways of looking at the world.

Now that thanks to the Food Network my children are fearless and bold, a trip to Noodles and Company for a little different taste seemed low stress.  Certainly the menu of sweet soy sauce, broccoli, carrots, and shiitake mushrooms would not intimidate my team that has learned how to fashion a main course that mixes top round of lamb, coconut flakes, snap peas, and quick grits into a delicious meal.

So when faced with the Noodles and Company menu of Asian, Mediterranean, and American creations, here’s what my Chopped kids order:

1.       Mac ‘N Cheese

2.       Pasta with Butter

3.       Spaghetti and Meatballs

I will continue to work with them to wander outside their comfort zones.  Watching TV shows apparently doesn’t teach risk taking the way that I had hoped.  I think it teaches the watching of more TV (and the valuable lesson that Red Lobster serves only the freshest seafood and all-you-can-eat fried shrimp during lunch hour).

My poor kids can watch Chopped all day and see master chefs combine unique ingredients and spices into culinary masterpieces , but deep down inside, authentic Italian will always mean Olive Garden to them, and Chipotle will always represent a Mexican delicacy.  Oh well. 

At least they’ll love the dining hall food, if they aren’t afraid to go to college in the first place.

Shot from a Lugar

“Many conservatives despise government and perhaps for that reason disregard civilities suited to its functioning.  People who despise government should not be entrusted with it.  Important kinds of public spiritedness are foreign to them.” - George Will

Indiana Senator Richard Lugar was defeated in the GOP Senatorial primary yesterday.  I don’t know much about Lugar.  He is the Senate’s most senior Republican, and I believe that he has been a respected voice on issues of foreign relations, national security and nuclear proliferation.  While Lugar’s loss in the primary could be overlooked and Lugar eulogized as just another victim of anti-incumbent fever, there could be more to this story.  Thankfully, Richard Lugar did the analysis for me.

Here in its entirety is the Prepared Statement of Senator Richard G. Lugar on the Concluded Indiana Senate Primary, issued May 8, 2012.  He crystallizes in his remarks the dangers of electing those without an interest in governing to serve in positions of government.  I highlighted (bolded) the good parts so feel free to skip to the sections in bold if your time or attention span is short:

I would like to comment on the Senate race just concluded and the direction of American politics and the Republican Party. I would reiterate from my earlier statement that I have no regrets about choosing to run for office. My health is excellent, I believe that I have been a very effective Senator for Hoosiers and for the country, and I know that the next six years would have been a time of great achievement. Further, I believed that vital national priorities, including job creation, deficit reduction, energy security, agriculture reform, and the Nunn-Lugar program, would benefit from my continued service as a Senator. These goals were worth the risk of an electoral defeat and the costs of a hard campaign.

Analysts will speculate about whether our campaign strategies were wise. Much of this will be based on conjecture by pundits who don’t fully appreciate the choices we had to make based on resource limits, polling data, and other factors. They also will speculate whether we were guilty of overconfidence.

The truth is that the headwinds in this race were abundantly apparent long before Richard Mourdock announced his candidacy. One does not highlight such headwinds publically when one is waging a campaign. But I knew that I would face an extremely strong anti-incumbent mood following a recession. I knew that my work with then-Senator Barack Obama would be used against me, even if our relationship were overhyped. I also knew from the races in 2010 that I was a likely target of Club for Growth, FreedomWorks and other Super Pacs dedicated to defeating at least one Republican as a purification exercise to enhance their influence over other Republican legislators.

We undertook this campaign soberly and we worked very hard in 2010, 2011, and 2012 to overcome these challenges. There never was a moment when my campaign took anything for granted. This is why we put so much effort into our get out the vote operations.

Ultimately, the re-election of an incumbent to Congress usually comes down to whether voters agree with the positions the incumbent has taken. I knew that I had cast recent votes that would be unpopular with some Republicans and that would be targeted by outside groups.

These included my votes for the TARP program, for government support of the auto industry, for the START Treaty, and for the confirmations of Justices Sotomayor and Kagan. I also advanced several propositions that were considered heretical by some, including the thought that Congressional earmarks saved no money and turned spending power over to unelected bureaucrats and that the country should explore options for immigration reform.

It was apparent that these positions would be attacked in a Republican primary. But I believe that they were the right votes for the country, and I stand by them without regrets, as I have throughout the campaign.

From time to time during the last two years I heard from well-meaning individuals who suggested that I ought to consider running as an independent. My response was always the same: I am a Republican now and always have been. I have no desire to run as anything else. All my life, I have believed in the Republican principles of small government, low taxes, a strong national defense, free enterprise, and trade expansion. According to Congressional Quarterly vote studies, I supported President Reagan more often than any other Senator. I want to see a Republican elected President, and I want to see a Republican majority in the Congress. I hope my opponent wins in November to help give my friend Mitch McConnell a majority.

If Mr. Mourdock is elected, I want him to be a good Senator. But that will require him to revise his stated goal of bringing more partisanship to Washington. He and I share many positions, but his embrace of an unrelenting partisan mindset is irreconcilable with my philosophy of governance and my experience of what brings results for Hoosiers in the Senate. In effect, what he has promised in this campaign is reflexive votes for a rejectionist orthodoxy and rigid opposition to the actions and proposals of the other party. His answer to the inevitable roadblocks he will encounter in Congress is merely to campaign for more Republicans who embrace the same partisan outlook. He has pledged his support to groups whose prime mission is to cleanse the Republican party of those who stray from orthodoxy as they see it.

This is not conducive to problem solving and governance. And he will find that unless he modifies his approach, he will achieve little as a legislator. Worse, he will help delay solutions that are totally beyond the capacity of partisan majorities to achieve. The most consequential of these is stabilizing and reversing the Federal debt in an era when millions of baby boomers are retiring. There is little likelihood that either party will be able to impose their favored budget solutions on the other without some degree of compromise.

Unfortunately, we have an increasing number of legislators in both parties who have adopted an unrelenting partisan viewpoint. This shows up in countless vote studies that find diminishing intersections between Democrat and Republican positions. Partisans at both ends of the political spectrum are dominating the political debate in our country. And partisan groups, including outside groups that spent millions against me in this race, are determined to see that this continues. They have worked to make it as difficult as possible for a legislator of either party to hold independent views or engage in constructive compromise. If that attitude prevails in American politics, our government will remain mired in the dysfunction we have witnessed during the last several years. And I believe that if this attitude expands in the Republican Party, we will be relegated to minority status. Parties don’t succeed for long if they stop appealing to voters who may disagree with them on some issues.

Legislators should have an ideological grounding and strong beliefs identifiable to their constituents. I believe I have offered that throughout my career. But ideology cannot be a substitute for a determination to think for yourself, for a willingness to study an issue objectively, and for the fortitude to sometimes disagree with your party or even your constituents. Like Edmund Burke, I believe leaders owe the people they represent their best judgment.

Too often bipartisanship is equated with centrism or deal cutting. Bipartisanship is not the opposite of principle. One can be very conservative or very liberal and still have a bipartisan mindset. Such a mindset acknowledges that the other party is also patriotic and may have some good ideas. It acknowledges that national unity is important, and that aggressive partisanship deepens cynicism, sharpens political vendettas, and depletes the national reserve of good will that is critical to our survival in hard times. Certainly this was understood by President Reagan, who worked with Democrats frequently and showed flexibility that would be ridiculed today – from assenting to tax increases in the 1983 Social Security fix, to compromising on landmark tax reform legislation in 1986, to advancing arms control agreements in his second term.

I don’t remember a time when so many topics have become politically unmentionable in one party or the other. Republicans cannot admit to any nuance in policy on climate change. Republican members are now expected to take pledges against any tax increases. For two consecutive Presidential nomination cycles, GOP candidates competed with one another to express the most strident anti-immigration view, even at the risk of alienating a huge voting bloc. Similarly, most Democrats are constrained when talking about such issues as entitlement cuts, tort reform, and trade agreements. Our political system is losing its ability to even explore alternatives. If fealty to these pledges continues to expand, legislators may pledge their way into irrelevance. Voters will be electing a slate of inflexible positions rather than a leader.

I hope that as a nation we aspire to more than that. I hope we will demand judgment from our leaders. I continue to believe that Hoosiers value constructive leadership. I would not have run for office if I did not believe that.

As someone who has seen much in the politics of our country and our state, I am able to take the long view. I have not lost my enthusiasm for the role played by the United States Senate. Nor has my belief in conservative principles been diminished. I expect great things from my party and my country. I hope all who participated in this election share in this optimism.

Bravo, Sen. Lugar.  In order to prove that Lugar was exactly correct, this was his opponent's idiotic response:
 

“I have a mindset that says bipartisanship ought to consist of Democrats coming to the Republican point of view,” Mourdock said on Fox. “You know, I’ve said many times through this campaign that one of the things I hope to do is to help build a conservative majority in the United States Senate and continue to help the House build a Republican majority and have a Republican White House and then bipartisanship becomes having Democrats come our way.”

Let's start electing people who can govern and lead, not petulant protesters. This guy defines bipartisanship as "my way or the highway".  Excuse me, but who is dumber - Mourdock or those who voted for him?

Tepid

Former GOP contender for the 2012 nomination and conservative firebrand Rick Santorum announced his ringing endorsement of his rival, Mitt Romney, and by “ringing”, I mean “tinkling” not “clanging”. Santorum wanted to be sure that his endorsement capitulation made the maximum noise and moved as many voters as possible into the Romney column.  So enthused was Santorum that his statement was released in the middle of the night via email to dozens of supporters.  Rumor has it that Santorum initially wanted to communicate his grudging support via a text message to a wrong number, but was convinced otherwise by his anxious staff hoping for another bite at the apple in 4 more years.

No joint appearances are scheduled, since these guys actually intensely dislike one another.  The endorsement deed, with one soft and dispassionate click of the “Send” button, is finished. 

  

Romney, who was once called by Santorum the “worst possible candidate” to face Obama in the fall, graciously accepted the endorsement with a shrug of his shoulders and a wry smirk.  “I am proud to have Senator Santorum in the camp of people who are not against me,” Romney likely muttered under his breath, right before one of his servants clicked the “Delete” button.  No doubt Santorum’s future emails will be routed directly to Mitt’s spam folder.

Here is the original text of the email endorsement announcement, as WikiLeaked to MSRP:

From:       Santorum for a Change

RE:          Endorsement of Someone Other Than Me for President 2012

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE (but really no hurry)

May 7, 2012 3:16 AM

I would like to announce that Mitt Romney will be the nominee of the Republican Party in 2012, and you can vote for him if you like.  I can’t stop you. 

 

Mitt Romney embodies everything that true conservatives are looking for in a candidate this year.  For starters, he is not a Muslim and never has been as far as we know.  Also, you can tell that he was born in this country just by looking at him.  Finally, he is not currently the President and is not registered at this time as a Democrat.  This makes him uniquely qualified to not be Barack Obama.

So, this is the endorsement. 

Santorum has not committed to actively campaigning for Romney this fall.  He said that he intends to spend more time with his family and continue his important work in abolishing the snob-producing machine that is public education in America. 

 

*************

At least I have some hope that Ron Paul will stick to his primary positions and not endorse Romney.  Like the majority of Americans, I disagree with Paul’s academic orthodoxy to libertarian principles in practice, but also like most Americans, I appreciate someone who doesn’t pretend to like the candidate they pilloried for 8 months just for appearance's sake.

I will add that Santorum had the good sense to soft pedal his endorsement, thereby making his lie about backing Romney less egregious.  Gotta respect that.  He has to pretend he supports Romney, but he doesn’t have to pretend he likes it.  Bravo, Rick.

Best in Position

My pathological dislike of the Yankee Empire is no secret; however, there are a number of players and former players associated with the NY Death Star that I nonetheless respect and admire for their accomplishments and/or character.  Mariano Rivera is one of those men.  While I have cursed his flawless efficiency on occasion, I cannot hate the man.  I cannot watch him practice his craft without some measure of awe.  He is a professional.  He is a role model.

For this reason, I read about his freak knee injury with some sadness for him and for the game of baseball.  If his ACL injury does accelerate the date for his inevitable retirement, that will be a tragedy.  Without dissent, he is/was the greatest relief pitcher of all-time.

There are precious few athletes in any sport that can make the claim of being inarguably the very best, without peer, in their specific role.  Rivera can make that claim.  There have been great relief pitchers in the history of baseball.  Bruce Sutter was great.  Eckersley was great.  No one is better than the last man to wear the iconic #42.  I have not heard anyone argue for another candidate at his position.

Jerry Rice was the greatest wide receiver in the history of football.  This is without question.  Was he the greatest football player ever at any position?  That cannot be said without a fight, but when the category is wide receiver, the discussion can only be about second place.

Bobby Orr was the greatest defenseman to ever lace up hockey skates.  Larry Robinson, Denis Potvin, Nicholas Lidstrom – all very good, all Hall of Famers.  No one did what Orr did as a defenseman.  Period.

For me, this is where the list the Inarguably the Greatest Ever ends.  Rivera, Orr, Rice.  That’s it.

There are some close honorees. 

 

Babe Ruth.  He was an All-Star pitcher before hitting 714 home runs, a statistic that is even more staggering the more you consider it.  In 1927 when he belted 60 homers, that total was more than all the other American League teams hit COMBINED.  To this day, a gargantuan effort is known as a Ruthian effort.  When your name becomes an adjective, you have arrived.  The question, however, is whether or not Ruth is inarguably the greatest outfielder in the history of baseball.  When you add fielding to the equation, I think other names creep into the conversation.  Few talk about Ruth’s ability to throw out runners or steal bases himself. 

Michael Jordan.  Wilt Chamberlain scored 100 points in a game, and he also had 55 rebounds in a game.  Magic Johnson could play point guard or center.  Kareem scored the most points.  Russell won more cahmpionships.  MJ could be the greatest ever, but you will not make that contention without a fight.

Wayne Gretzky.  The man scored 92 goals in a single season when the previous record had been 76.  He totaled 212 points in a season when this year’s scoring champ will lead the league with barely more than half that total.  When you argue that Gretzky was the greatest ever at his position, many will agree – but no one who is from Pittsburgh.   The current owner of the Penguins has a loyal and vocal following.

There is a case to be made for Jim Thorpe as Inarguably the Greatest Athlete of the 20^th Century.  Ali can enter into the discussion as the greatest heavyweight.  Inarguably?  Not quite at that level.  It is a tough standard to reach.

So here’s to Mariano Rivera.  He is the greatest relief pitcher of all-time.  No one can dispute that.  This fact makes it all the more pleasing to me that I watched Rivera blow a lead against the Washington Nationals in June 2006 and lose the game, 11-9.  Very few can say they saw Rivera blow it...except for the millions who watched him choke away Game 7 of the 2001 World Series because of his own fielding error.

OK, I couldn’t resist that last part.

  

Rock ‘n Roll Heaven

If you believe in forever

Then life is just a one night stand

If there’s a rock ‘n roll heaven

Well you know they’ ve got a helluva band
     - The Righteous Brothers

Last month at the Coachella rock festival in California, the crowd was awed by a live performance from the late Tupac Shakur, a hip hop superstar who has been gone for 16 years.  No, this wasn’t a true life The Walking Dead episode.  Tupac was digitally present as a life-sized hologram singing and moving onstage with Dr. Dre and Snoop Dogg.  Even more amazing, this was not a projection of a former concert performance by Tupac.  It was an entirely new and unique animation technique that allows for customization of the image with cutting edge technology for sound and motion. 

Life after death.  The power of creation.  The human race has arrived.  S‘cuse me while I kiss the sky.  We can now pluck the greatest musical performers of our generation and generations past from their lofty cloud perches and place them back on an earth bound stage. 

 

The advancement from the physical concert performance to metaphysical has been foreshadowed by the decline of physical music sales.  Albums are dead and now compact discs are on life support.  In 2011, digital music sales surpassed physical music sales for the first time in history per Time magazine.  The enjoyment of music has been reduced to a complex series of 1 and 0s.  Programming nerds rock. 

This entire development begs the question for me – who should we digitally resurrect via the hologram?

First I have to eliminate any performer for whom we do not have video images.  A concerto featuring Yo Yo Ma and a digital visage of Mozart is off the table.  Next I would pass on adding one missing band member to a group whose living members appear to be close to becoming holograms themselves.  Conjuring up Keith Moon and John Entwistle to pound out a set with the aging Pete Townsend and Roger Daltrey would only reinforce how close to the end the remaining two Who founders are.  No one goes to see The Who to get depressed.  That’s why we have Pink Floyd and Radiohead.  Finally, there are some performers from the past that will never be done justice by a computer generated remake.  If you didn’t see Janis Joplin the first time, you are out of luck.  No projection can capture and recreate that life force without diminishing its original power.

One more thing – no Beatles.  I don’t think the true fans will not support such a stunt, and let’s face it.  Haven’t we had enough Beatles tribute events to last 10 holographic lifetimes?

Here’s my list:

Elvis – He has become bigger in death than he was in life, and the millions who pilgrimage to Graceland each year to commemorate his birthday and deathday would line up from here to Memphis for a chance to see the King in concert.  I’m all shook up just thinking about it.  The event could singlehandedly revive the Nevada economy.

Michael Jackson – I’m not convinced that he hasn’t been a hologram for over 20 years already.

Bob Marley – Bob Marley, the legend, left us far too soon.  His music has a spiritual element that would only enhance the meditative ambiance of seeing him as a translucent ghost on the stage.  Match the image with his old band the Whaler and son Ziggy, sprinkle in some recreational pharmaceuticals, and you have a concert happening for the ages.

Pink Floyd – Known for their fantastic techno shows, a hologram on stage accompanying the band would work seamless with the eerie hypnotic sounds.  Founding member keyboardist Richard Wright passed in 2006 and could be digitally reunited with the band.  In fact, if Roger Waters and David Gilmour can’t learn to get along, the group could still tour with holograms and those two can remain mad at each other.  See Bob Marley above for the other reason it would work with Floyd’s core loyalists (hint: rhymes with “hugs”).

Hendrix – In life, he seemed otherworldly on the guitar.  An entire generation missed his live performances.  Now it doesn’t need to stay that way.

Who would you pay to see?  Any other suggestions?

After live shows with holograms become passe, the next generation enhancement (H2.0 for Hologram 2.0) would have to be the ability to jam at home with a holographic projection of your favorite performer.  Let’s add hologram capability to the Wii.  How about playing along to Hey Hey My My with Neil Young in the comfort of your basement?  How about jamming the bass track while the holographic members of Led Zeppelin accompany you through a concert worthy rendition of Dazed and Confused in your garage?  After Tupac’s appearance in California, it’s not that far-fetched, and personally, I can’t wait.

Rock and roll heaven on Earth, brought to you by computer nerds.  Sweet irony.

Grease is the Word

In political parlance, it is time for the quadrennial Endorsement Dance of Hypocrisy.  Once one candidate has been all but certified as the party nominee, the vanquished warriors, the Also-Rans, must disavow every attack and every suggestion that the campaign victor is weak, immoral, untrustworthy, or worse, unelectable.  This was easier in the BYT days (Before You Tube). 

“When I said that Mitt Romney was the least conservative candidate in the field and that his election would be as bad as reelecting Barack Obama, those remarks were taken out of context.”

“I never said he was a Massachusetts moderate.  I said he was a Massachusetts ‘moderator’ – he moderated the state’s excessive liberal leanings with his sound and competent conservative management.”

“I might have derisively referred to the Massachusetts health plan as ‘Romneycare’ in the heat of battle, but now I realize that ‘Romney Cares’….about the little people.”

“I once strapped my dog to the roof of my car.  Everybody does it.  No big deal.”

“I personally like him.  I’d love to have a beer with him.”

Everybody does it.  Ted Kennedy stood up at the Democratic Convention in 1980 and assured the nation that Jimmy Carter, the man whose career he spent 6 months destroying, was THE best man to captain the country for 4 more years.  Paul Tsongas changed his mind about Clinton and told us that ‘slick’ was actually better than ‘competence’.  John McCain swallowed his pride and endorsed the man whose campaign allowed rumors that McCain’s adopted daughter was actually a love child from an interracial affair to fester and metastasize.  There is no shame in selling your soul when “everybody does it”.

   

It is a painful dance, but one the public accepts without so much as a whimper of protest.  Ho hum.  After all, deep down we knew they were lying about the other candidate during the debates and the town halls.  Expecting the truth in a heated political battle is the original bridge to nowhere.

Not all, but many reluctant endorsers do the dance in exchange for future benefits.  George H.W. Bush rethought his position on Reagan’s “voodoo economics” and decided that when offered the Vice Presidency, trickle down theory made more empirical sense.  Hillary Clinton demanded assistance in retiring her campaign debt before reneging on her 3 AM phone call advertising slam.  It should then come as no surprise that the multitude of former candidates for the 2012 GOP nomination should get something in exchange for their public displays of affection for Romney and his various amorphous positions on the issues.

This year, it’s Cabinet-level positions that are being dangled in front of the eyes of the fallen.  Of course, to please the base and to allow the endorsers some maneuvering room to argue with a straight face that their flip flop towards Romney is principled not self-aggrandizing, the current Cabinet jobs and departmental missions required some minor adjustments.

Here are the offers on the table:

Rick Perry, Secretary of the Department of Self-Defense:  Described to the Texas governor as slightly less prestigious than the SecDef role, this new job will demand a quick trigger finger on executive orders that expand the rights of gun owners.  Perry’s first assignment will be to reinforce Stand Your Ground laws nationally by allowing justifiable homicide in all states below the Mason-Dixon, a modern interpretation of the Missouri Compromise that worked out so well for the country.

Michelle Bachmann, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Insecurity:  After a careful study of prior Republican administrations, the Romney people saw a need for a single spokesperson to drum up fear and feelings of insecurity in the general population.  When the people are scared and unsure, it looks to Republican ‘strength’ to protect it, regardless of the impact of those policies on the national well-being.  This job calls for weekly announcements about non-specific terrorist threats from foreigners, mysterious outbreaks of illness that might be caused by alternative energy sources, and warnings about walkers coming alive to eat your brains.

Herman Cain, Secretary of the Department of Selling Stuff (formerly Commerce):  This is a perfect role for the man who once said privately to Romney, “If you wanna dance, you gotta pay the band.  If you want my endorsement, you gotta pay the man.”   Cain has also insisted that he conduct all subordinate position interviews personally in a setting that allows for privacy and discretion.

Ron Paul, Secretary of Department of Golden Treasury:  This newly named department reflects a move to the gold standard long supported by Paul, and reminds him of the Golden Treasury book series, a collection of children’s literature that emphasizes the good ol’ days when kids rarely got sick and everyone had a friendly doctor down the street who accepted payment for services in trade.

Jon Huntsman, Body Double:  At a quick glance, it could be hard to tell the two apart in a crowd, and this would give Huntsman an important part in Romney’s physical security and regular access to some of the perks of the job.  It also benefits Romney in a more obvious way. 

   

Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich are not inclined to dance for Romney quite yet.  First, their financial and egotistical demands must be met.  Once proper tribute has been received from Mitt and his people, they’ll come around.  They always do.  Here are the Cabinet carrots for these gentlemen:

Rick Santorum, Secretary of the Department of Home Education:  What better way to get the federal government out of the business of insuring an educated populace and workforce than shifting that burden back to parents?  After all, who best to explain quadratic equations and quantum physics than Mom and Dad?  The Founders learned at home, and that should be good enough for the 99% in a Romney administration. 

Newt Gingrich, Secretary of the Department of State:  The grueling requirements of the SecState job got Hillary out of Barack’s hair for 3 years.  Maybe it will get Newt off of Mitt’s back.  The Romneys considered giving him Secretary of Child Labor but opted for Newt to spend 320 days each year outside the country touring global hot spots instead. 

 

Yup, it’s all falling into place now.

Gateway Activities

A short introductory clip from one of my favorite B-movies, Heaven Help Us.  The story has some serious undertones, but this particular scene always makes me laugh out loud and reminds me of what the social conservative movement may have in store for government mandated family life education in the future.  Heaven help us. 

In 1984, the Kevin Bacon dance movie Footloose was released.  In it, the kids loved to dance but were stymied by a repressed congregation and morally strict parents.  Dirty Dancing in 1987 continued the theme of the decade that dancing would lead our impressionable youth astray from our foundational puritanical values and the unquestioning acceptance of the rigid gender role definitions of the preceding generation.  Patrick Swayze played the snake, and dancing was the forbidden fruit that corrupted poor innocent Jennifer Grey. 

It is quaint and charming to think that back in the 50s and early 60s, dancing was the gateway drug to the hard stuff.  You know, dancing with reckless abandon until you got out of the proverbial batter’s box and raced, mouth wide open, towards first base.  After rounding first, it’s a short 90 feet to second base, and no one wants to stop at second base.  If you give a runner second base, he’s going to want to try for third.
It’s common sense, people.  If you start out foot loose, eventually you end up just ‘loose’.

I thought that we as a nation had made peace with kids and their crazy dancing, but after reading about recent legislation in Tennessee, I must be mistaken.

From Talking Points Memo:

The Tennessee Legislature on Friday sent a bill to Gov. Bill Haslam’s desk that, according to the Tennessean, would require sex-ed classes to “exclusively and emphatically” promote abstinence and ban teachers and outside groups from promoting “gateway sexual activity.” 

The bill defines “gateway sexual activity” as: “sexual conduct encouraging an individual to engage in a non-abstinent behavior.” The bill’s sponsor, Republican Rep. Jim Gotto, said the bill wouldn’t address things as innocuous as holding hands, the Knoxville News Sentinel reports. But critics of the legislation say the offending behavior is not clearly defined. 

It’s been 40+ years since Elvis’ pulsating hips were allowed to appear uncensored on network television.  I thought the advent of American Bandstand had decriminalized the idea of non-abstinent behavior by way of dancing for millions.  Today, Dancing With the Stars is a top rating program that, while highly suggestive and often wildly inappropriate, seems to attract a wide audience even amongst Christian conservative Nielsen families.  Even The Hammer, Tom DeLay, former House Majority Leader, GOP firebrand and King of the Gerrymander, appeared and tried his best to gyrate from the hips.  While watching DeLay shimmy certainly isn’t “encouraging an individual to engage in a non-abstinent behavior” (at least outside the prison walls), his thrusting may nonetheless fit the definition in this law and remember, DeLay already has a criminal record.

So the newest tactic in the Republican War on Sex is the banning of gateway activities which may include the Electric Slide and the Mashed Potato.  Listening to Rihanna and Katy Perry on your iPod encourages a lowering of sexual inhibitions and listening should rightly fit under the category of “sexual conduct encouraging an individual to engage in a non-abstinent behavior”.  Health care insurance mandates are an unwanted intrusion into the personal lives of Americans.  Dancing footloose like Kevin Bacon at a church social?  That cannot be sanctioned, and indeed, must be legislated out of the culture!

I know, I know – is this really another War On…something?  I think it might be.  Earlier this year, the Republican Party in a small, conservative South Carolina county expected its candidates to sign a 28-point pledge that included promises not to watch porn, be faithful to their spouses and not to have sex outside of marriage.  Once they passed this test of purity and chastity, they also had to pledge to lowering taxes and easing regulations on job creators.  Gotta have your priorities in order.

The Laurens County Republican Party originally decided that anyone who wanted to run for office with the GOP's blessing would have to sign this pledge and be approved by party leaders. They backed off that idea after the state party told them it was illegal and the pledge received international attention, becoming another cultural issues nightmare for Republicans.

The 28-point pledge appeared to be at least in part a response to an extramarital affair had by the county sheriff, who was also accused in a lawsuit of driving his mistress to get an abortion in a county-owned vehicle, leading to an inter-party squabble when the local group's leader called for the sheriff to resign.  There is no evidence that the sheriff was encouraged to lower his moral guard after watching a steamy Charlie’s Angels rerun on Nick at Nite.  Signing the pledge now sounds like closing the barn door after the horses have already left, but what do I know.

The pledge included a statement that marriage is "fundamental to the stability, betterment and perpetuation of our society." (Newt Gingrich believes so strongly in that statement that he has practiced the sacrament of marriage as often as possible.  We Americans believe that more is always better, even when it comes to marriage I guess).

If you give a mouse a cookie, he’s going to want a glass of milk.  If you allow kids to touch while dancing, they’re going to want to join the Secret Service.  In the minds of the South Carolina and Tennessee Republicans, touch dancing may be the gateway drug to public service, and that my friends, must be stopped.

Once more, in case you didn’t watch it at the top of the post:

Heaven Help Us