He spent hour after hour pitching quarters at the saucers in hopes of winning the grand prize, but all he managed to do was make a lot of noise and spend a lot of quarters.

Who knows why, but the proprietors of the carnival decided that his good intentions (and the quarters) were the finest and most noble thing seen in many months and years of carnival barking.

The young man went home happy, and placed the Noisy, Clattering, Quarter Toss Carnival Prize proudly (but humbly) in the most prominent place in the village, and continued on with his quest to "slow the rise of the oceans, and heal the planet".

I often enjoy reading of the accomplishments of great scientists and researchers. The recognition they get via the Nobel Prize is a good thing, because so often the accomplishments are truly worthy of praise.  But the "Nobel Peace Prize"? Surly this latest folly of the Norwegian committee is completely absurd and laughable.  If you remember back a few years, this is the committee that awarded the prize to Yasser Arafat.  Arafat's core defining characteristic was his absolute hatred for Jews, and his core defining accomplishments were to continue his uncle's plans and actions to murder the Jews, all of the Jews. In case you don't know what I am talking about, Arafat's uncle was the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, and spent a considerable amount of time in Berlin during the late 30's and early 40's collaborating with the Nazi and planning the extermination of the Jews. Benjamin Netanyahu's "have you no shame?" speech before the UN certainly applies to the Nobel Peace Prize  committee in picking characters such as Arafat. I know I am getting dangerously close to a line I don't want to cross, and I am in no way associating President Obama with the Nazi's. Rather, I am trying to point out the mindset of the Nobel committee.

Looking at the committee from a different perspective, look at who they could have selected in the past, but declined to pick; President Ronald  Reagan, Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher or Pope John Paul II for their role in the defeat of the Soviet Union, the end of the Cold War, and the liberation of many millions. Or, President George H.W. Bush for his liberation of Kuwait in 1991. Or President George W. Bush for his liberation of millions  in Iraq and Afghanistan with the dismantling of Al-Qaida, and the establishment of the only democratically elected republic in the middle east.

One could hope that President Obama would refuse the prize on the grounds of accomplishment. The Nobel should be based on the basis of solid past tense accomplishments furthering the cause of a more peaceful world. Mr. Obama does not yet have that record. Secondly, one would hope he would refuse the prize because the prize itself is not worthy to sit on the mantle of the leader of the free world.

Richard Morris (Catastrophe) at the Yale Barnes & Nobel Bookstore. Mr. Morris is a political commentator and author who served as a key advisor to President Clinton. Since then, Mr. Morris has been very active in conservative circles, has authored bestselling books on political issues, and is a frequent contributor to the Fox News Network. Mr. Morris is one of those folks whose commentary and insight I value. You may not agree with him, and he is not always right, but to ignore his knowledge and insight is to your own detriment, because so often he is on the mark. At Yale, Mr. Morris addressed the Yale student body (actually there were only about 20 of us) and took questions and comments from the audience. I had the opportunity to meet him personally, and talked briefly to him. I was especially impressed by a small group of Yale students who invited Mr. Morris to moderate an on campus debate, and also do the book signing event.

Marc Wortman (The Bonfire; The Millionaire's Unit: The Aristocratic Flyboys who Fought the Great War and Invented American Airpower) and Carol Berkin (Civil War Wives: The Lives and Times of Angelina Grimke Weld, Varina Howell Davis, and Julia Dent Grant). at R.J. Julia bookstore in Madison CT. These two authors shared the stage, and their passion for their topics in a most interesting fashion. I have a personal interest in Mr. Wortman, as he is a neighbor and friend here in New Haven. I am currently reading the “Unit”, and find it incredibly fascinating. Mr. Wortman unveils Yale campus life in the pre World War I days in a very detailed and yet intimate fashion. The Yale football juggernaut of those early years was incredible, a three year winning streak of 37 games with 35 shutouts; and a scoring spread of 1,640 to 6. The Yale stadium is a short 10 minute walk from where we live, and holds 62,000+. At the time it was built in 1914, it was the largest outdoor sports stadium in the world since the Roman Empire. Saturday I attended my first game there. It cost me $4.00, but we lost to Lafayette.

Glen Beck (Arguing with Idiots: How to Stop Small Minds and Big Government) at the North Haven Barnes & Noble. This was an amazing event, with Mr. Beck himself being himself a minor part of my experience at the event (he was 90 minutes late at the end of an all day tour to 5 New England stores). The event was very well attended by at least 1,000 people. The signing line snaked though the store, out the door, and down the sidewalk for quite a ways. The store itself was crowded with folks like me who didn’t want to wait all night for a signed copy (we left our copies with the store and picked up signed copies the next day anyway). The crowd was much like myself, mid sixties or thereabouts, well behaved, and I think it would be fair to characterize them as “Tea Party” kinds of folks. I talked to many of them, and like myself, they expressed concern about the direction and future of the nation under the Obama administration. No one seemed to know when the scheduled riots started though; I guess since it was well past nap time for most of us, they must have been postponed.

Old folks weren’t the only ones in attendance however. There were several groups of young people that I talked to as well. One group of about 6 high school students was there with protest signs and received the award for unusual bravery. You see, they were protesting the event, and in particular Mr. Beck. They were civil and respectful in their protest, and the crowd largely ignored them. I talked with them for quite some time, to get a sense of where they were politically. One of the young boys carried a sign that read “Young people for Socialism”, and the general feeling among them was that Mr. Beck was spewing hatred and intolerance. They were also of the mind that the Constitution was outdated, and not of any value in dealing with the problems of the modern world. I didn’t attempt to argue with them, or try to change their minds, but rather encouraged them to study the founding of the nation, and the development of the Constitution, in particular the Federalist Papers by Hamilton, Madison and Jay. I also gave them a copy of Beck’s book “Common Sense”, which contains a copy of Thomas Paine’s Common Sense”. They thanked my, said they would keep an open mind, and read the book.

The other group of young folks was two young high school boys. They had just purchased “Idiots”, and so I asked them why they were attending such an event with such a controversial person such as Beck. They told me that they were basically of a conservative mind set, and had been following Beck since his days at CNN. They felt a resonance with what Beck has to say, and the questions he is asking of the powers to be. One of the boys has plans to enter politics in the future.

All in all, quite an exciting night. I am encouraged to see so many concerned citizens come out to such an event, especially on a rainy night in a part of the country that is known to be very liberal in its politics. Yes, they are “tea party” kinks of folks, just ordinary folks concerned about their nation and its future. They’re my kind of folks, and I’m proud to be part of them.

Best regards,

Don

In praise of the angry man

Don Johnson

September 18, 2009

Garison Keeler is a unique and talented American treasure, and it is a treat to listen to his Prairie Home Companion. He was on PBS recently, and I spent a delightful hour or two listening to his descriptions of American life. Much of what he said and did resonated with my own soul and life experience.

Using this as a springboard, I would like to take issue with Mr. Keeler on his assessment of what makes America great. This is not a huge left/right or theological issue, but rather one that I think Mr. Keeler could easily agree with.  At one point in his show he said something like the following (I’m paraphrasing here, so my apologies to Mr. Keeler). “… America is great because of good and kind people, … I do not believe angry people contribute to the greatness of my America…”. Now who could possible take issue with such a sentiment?

Again, let me point out that my issue with Mr. Keeler is not huge, but rather one of nuance. Rather than making it a “this or that”, or a “this and not that” assessment, my assement is “a lot of this, and, a lot of that”. Life is much more complicated than a series of “this or that”, as much as we would fool ourselves into believing (myself included). What makes America great is many good and kind people, and, many angry people as well.

Can a nation, any nation, be great only because of good and kind people? I think not. While good and kind people are indeed necessary, it is unlikely that a nation can even come into existence with only the good and kind. And if it does, the lifespan of such a nation would indeed be short.

Angry people are necessary for the creation and sustainment of a nation. But the kind of angry people I am talking about are of the righteously angry sort, they see a wrong and direct their anger to correcting that wrong.

America was founded by angry men, in particular the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence, and who stated in writing, “…we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”. These angry men confronted a wrong, and did something about it; they created a new nation “conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal”.  Yes, you may recognize these as the words of another angry man, Abraham Lincoln. Because of his righteous anger, Lincoln saved the Union, and abolished the blight of slavery from the American fabric.

Further along in the American story, angry men confronted and defeated the tyrannies of Nazi Germany, imperial Japan, and the expanding and enslaving empire of the Soviet Union.  

Even though our Civil War abolished slavery from the American story, another angry American by the name of Dr. Martin Luther King confronted the evil of racial bigotry and brought this nation much closer to fulfilling his dream of an America “…where people are judged by the content of their character, and not the color of their skin…”.

Following September 11, 2001 yet another evil was confronted by another group of angry folks, and we are hopefully far along in the quest to throw that evil into the dustpan of history.

There are many other examples of righteous anger contributing to make America a great nation, and I believe, the greatest civilization that has ever existed on this earth.  Not the least of these examples has been the continued existence of a free press and the many angry journalists who have confront the evils and corruption they see in our nation, may they ever be free to do so.

Let me close with another angry man, a man not an American citizen, but one who has been greatly influenced by the greatness of America. On July 4, 2004, this man was honored at a ceremony in Philadelphia for being a true follower of Thomas Jefferson and a model for future Jeffersonian democrats. The man who that day was awarded the Philadelphia Liberty Medal is President Hamid Karzi of Afghanistan. You may be as shocked as I was when I first read this, but check it out for yourself, and read the words of this man.

"Where Liberty dies, evil grows. We Afghans have learned from our historical experiences that liberty does not come easily. We profoundly appreciate the value of liberty…for we have paid for it with our lives. And we will defend liberty with our lives."

The influence of righteously angry men spans centuries, cultures and religions to the good of all mankind, let us never forget that.

Coming to terms with "torture".

Like many Americans, I have been closely following the "torture" debate. There has been much angst and debate, and I have indeed been concerned. Has my government been engaging in the evil of torture? If so, then we have indeed slipped far down a slope that is filthy indeed.

I've heard a lot of the discussions and accusations, and have decided it's time for me to weigh in. I'll do this from several different angles, because for one thing, I don't think the debate is being framed correctly in any way shape or form. The left has pronounced President Bush as a torturer, no black and white here, the verdict is in, and he is guilty. The conservative has yet to mount a defense, except to claim somewhat meekly "we don't torture".

What is torture?

I wish first to come to a working definition of torture. I believe that certain things are black and white, "case closed". Such things as the laws of nature; you jump off a roof, and you fall to the ground, likely breaking a bone or two. Laws of economics; you spend more than you make, and you wind up broke. I believe the ten commandments are black and white, and you break them willfully at your own risk and peril.

I also believe some things have a degree of relativity about them, that certain things are comprised of a spectrum, not so easily qualified or quantified as black or white. The concept and definition of "torture", as it is being bantered around today is in this sort of spectral category.

Growing up in America, I learned about the torture regimes of history. The rack, impaling on stakes, quartering, breaking bones, disfiguring, pulling of fingernails and toenails, burial alive in ant hills, crucifixion, burning at the stake; typically resulting in extreme and prolonged pain followed by an agonizing death. We've all read about them, as well as the horrors of the Nazi and Soviet camps. These kinds of activities are easy to define as "torture", because indeed they are.

Then we come to such things as water-boarding and sleep deprivation, the so called "enhanced interrogation" methods. These actions don't rise to the same level as the others I've described, even though they are rough. There is no prolonged pain, disfigurement or death involved.

Thus, I have come to terms with the Bush "enhanced methods", and do not believe them to rise to a reasonable definition of torture. Further, I object to the perversion of words such as torture. When we give all manner of latitude in defining a word or action, the word itself looses meaning as a useful tool, and it can mean whatever we wish it to be. Words should have meaning.

Motivations.

Motivation is also important when trying to determining what is, and what isn't torture, and here I see several areas.

There is the basest of all motivations for torture; the perverted desire to inflict pain and suffering for the mere pleasure of doing so.

Another motive is control. Those seeking control of others often use torture as a means of keeping them in line with the agenda of the torturing regime. I place torture as punishment in this category.

Partisanship is as old as this nation, and as long as people live in a free society, there will always be partisanship. No matter what the current batch of political candidates tell us.

The good news is that partisanship is fundamentally a good thing, and an attribute that a free society should value and guard. The alternative can easily result in the trampling of liberty. I realize and acknowledge that this position of mine is not iron clad, and there are many instances where we should seek a bi-partisan consensus for the good of society. I would like to offer a suggestion for a bi-partisan speech and action by our new president that would go a lone way in healing our country.

The setting is the White House Oval Office of the President, with a close in shot of the President:

“My fellow Americans, I would like you to join me in a truly historic celebration honoring a fellow American citizen with the nations highest civilian award, the Presidential Medal of Freedom”

The camera widens to include the recipient, and guests.

“Ladies and Gentlemen, may I present to you my choice for this honor, the former President of the United States, the Honorable George W. Bush.

In reviewing the record of this great American, I can point with gratitude to a record of splendid achievement as follows:

·         His steadfast and courageous leadership in the “War against Terror”, which has resulted in victories around the world against Islamic militants that have terrorized innocent nations and people around the world.

·         His leadership in heading off economic disaster in the wake of the attacks of 9/11/2001.

·         His leadership in cutting taxes across the board, which helped the nation recover from the recession of 2000-2001. This tax cut also helped to head off a deeper economic down turn from the 9/11 attacks. These tax cuts allowed the economy to flourish through the majority of his term of office.

·         The dramatic although under reported turn around of a former adversary nation and dictator in the person of Moammar Kadafi. Mr. Kadafi abandoned his terrorist stance, as well as his Weapons of Mass Destruction programs.

·         The liberation of the Afghanistan people from the tyranny of the Taliban, as well as avenging the attacks of 9/11 by way of the defeat of Al-Qaeda in their Afghanistan  safe havens and training camps.

·         When the best intelligence indicated that Saddam Hussein was a gathering threat that most probably had weapons of mass destruction, and may have been close to the production of nuclear weapons, President Bush made the hard but necessary choice of preemption. Had he not done so, and the intelligence proved correct, then it is difficult to ponder the likely catastrophic consequences to the region, and the rest of the world.

·         This preemption brought down one of the worlds most ruthless and dangerous dictatorships, and in it’s place left a freely elected republic for the first time in the mid east region, not withstanding the democratic Israel. This new nation is, at the present time, an example to the rest of the region, and to the world, and is an American Ally.

·         It is my job, and the foreign policy focus of my administration to recognize and solidify these remarkable gains, and to build on them for present and future peace and stability for that fragile region. We have much hard work remaining, and we must be united as a nation during the struggles ahead.

Fellow Americans, join me in celebration as I bestow this great honor on President George W. Bush.

Thank You, and may God bless the United States of America.

The camera pans across the room to the guests which include the former First Lady, President and Mrs. George H.W. Bush, as well as  former Vice President Dick Cheney and his wife