Edu-tax-cation

So I came home last week to a piece of mail that surprised me.

No, it wasn’t a delayed-delivery Christmas card with a crisp C-note in it…Darn it.

Instead, it was a ballot.

I had no idea there was a special election taking place and opened the ballot to see what pointless recount/initiative was causing all of the hullabaloo.

Color me embarrassed, but I soon realized the special election was about something I value greatly, education. The election was simple, the Seattle School District offered-up two levies for approval.

On the face, these levies appeared to be the Seattle School District foisting even more taxes upon the over-burdened citizens of Seattle. *I should say, the Seattle School District foisting even more taxes upon the over-burdened Property-Owning citizens of Seattle.

I note that last distinction because I’ve previously been a property owner and now understand what property taxes are. They can be a rather foreign concept to a renter, and my previous stance was to approve any property tax increases as it didn’t affect me…I also think kids deserve books and enjoy paved streets/public transit. So why not approve everything and let someone else foot the bill?

But I digress, as I delved into the nuts and bolts of the levies being proposed, I noted they were not proposing any new taxes, but simply requesting to maintain existing, but expiring levies.

Now that I am back to renting, I am on-board with approving property tax hikes, as long as they make sense. So I am not going to tell you how I voted, but I think you can figure it out. *I will note that even when I was a property owner, I stayed pretty true to my blue-state leanings and usually sided with tax increases, as long as I thought they served a greater good. By the way, Education = a greater good in my book.

There is no such thing as a free lunch. I hate the saying, as it’s pretty cliché, but it’s so damn true. As I hear of cuts to what I consider vital social programs: education, mental health, social services, all in the name of a balanced budget that is anything but, I get a lil fired-up. It is akin to cutting off the nose despite the face.

These programs (education especially) are in no less demand than this time last year, 4, or even 10 years ago. So why are they on the chopping block?

Simple answer- Politics.

Letting a levy expire is a backdoor way of lowering education spending without having to take the PR-hit that goes along with actually cutting education spending.

I’ll grant that every levy is a term-limited proposition. As such, everyone knows the levy will expire at some point. But I see levies as band-aids, not solutions. A levy is a short-term fix as a (hopefully) better long-term solution is researched and implemented.

That obviously hasn’t happened here. And the economy has worsened, so offsets to budget shortfalls by donations from the private sector have disappeared. Which only increases the need to, at a minimum, maintain current spending on education.

Not that any of this matters to me anyway.

I am a single fella with no kids who rents his house. So the tax hike won’t burden me, much the same way letting the levy expire won’t benefit me.

Yet here I am ranting away, Why?

Because a poorly educated populace does no one any favors. Isn’t giving kids a decent education worth a couple hundred bucks a year?

Poor education is not a blue or red issue. It’s a societal issue. Everyone is entitled to the right of being able to “read, write and arithmetic” regardless of political leanings. Kids are not a political token and education is not a place to cut corners, Period.

Maybe forcing senators and other such elected officials to take some of the unpaid furlough days they’ve forced on other lower-level public servants will drive the point home…

Coming clean.

Not sure if you heard the news, but Mark McGwire recently came clean about his use of steroids during his professional baseball career.

We all knew he did it. So why does the admission matter?

Well, the short answer is that the guy is trying to get into Baseball’s Hall of Fame and missed election again this year, going 0-for-4.

So much like Michael Vick’s ‘apology’ after getting caught, I see McGwire’s ‘seemingly sincere apology’ as nothing more than a PR-ploy.

McGwire, seeing his chance to make some money/stay relevant begin to fade, simply did what he had to do.

He lied. Again.

I doubt that McGwire is sincerely sorry about using steroids. (If he really was sorry, wouldn’t he have stopped using or admitted it sooner?)

However, I have no doubt that he’s sorry he got caught.

So why babble-on about it?

Simply, the guy put-up monster numbers while he was juiced. Without question, he was an exciting player to watch. And like it or not, his record-breaking pursuit of the single-season home run record did help bring Major League Baseball back from the brink after the strike of the early ‘90s. He was also elected to the All-Star team 12 times. That brief list didn’t do his career justice, as it is an impressive resume and one worthy of HOF discussion. However, the HOF also takes off-the-field actions into account as well. Just ask Pete Rose.

*I’ll note that McGwire wasn’t the only steroid-user to don a cap during his career. But he did lie, when he had the chance to come clean. And in doing so, has undoubtedly hurt his HOF chances.

So the major argument(s) for McGwire being admitted to the HOF is that juiced or not, he accomplished some unheard of feats. And he did so in a league where steroid use was rampant. Basically, he wasn’t the only one doing it and he was the best of those who were. So why penalize him alone and not the others who have yet to be caught?

To which I respond: What if I pose the same question to a different scenario—

Pablo Escobar wasn’t the only cartel boss in Central America, so why should he have been unfairly targeted for scrutiny by the government?

Some may think that is overly dramatic. But the logic is sound.

A fundamental principle was violated when McGwire took steroids. Whether there was a rule against using/testing for steroids is irrelevant. If in his mind, McGwire did nothing wrong, then why deny the actions until now?

The answer is simple -- Because he knew he was in the wrong.

McGwire is a cheater.

There is no lower form of athlete than a liar and a cheat.

And McGwire is both.

Both Escobar and McGwire were among the best at what they did. But, they attained such heights by employing illegal and immoral tactics and had no problem accepting the accolades as they were doled-out.

If you are bold enough to cheat, you should be man enough to accept the punishment.

But then again, if you are bold enough to cheat, you aren’t much of a man at all.

The Hall of Fame is for great men, and Mark McGwire is obviously neither.

The 1st year…

Well I can’t believe it, but it’s been a year since Barack Obama rode the wave of change to the office of President.

No, this is not going to be a ‘coulda woulda shoulda’ column, nor is it going to be an ‘Obama is the best thing since sliced bread’ piece either.

It’s going to be yet another piece on the further disillusionment of a formerly idealistic young(er) American.

My disillusionment is not solely directed at Obama, but were I to omit the fact that I am utterly underwhelmed by him and his administration would be dishonest on my part.

However, the roots of my melancholy lie in the politics that rule the day. They are the same politics that have ruled the day for as long as I can remember. They are the same politics I thought I was voting-out when voting for Obama.

So here we are a year later and as usual, the American political machine has left me confused, unfulfilled and wondering why I even bother.

But for me, politics are a lot like women, though I rarely get the end-result I am looking for, I am utterly intrigued and keep coming back for more.

So most Sunday mornings I sit on my couch, sipping overpriced coffee in a high-rise apartment downtown, seemingly in the lap of middle class luxury, watching the political pundit shows and get pissed-off.

I saw a snipit of a speech, from of all people, Jon Voight, that I think perfectly illustrates the return to the ‘business as usual’ ’us versus them’ politics that I thought Obama’s election would curb.

Voight stated that Obama is: “Taking America apart piece by piece" and suggesting he "had 20 years of subconscious programming by Reverend Wright to damn America."

It’s the old tactic of extremism. Nowhere is there a shred of evidence to back Voight’s rants, but there he was on national TV getting face time spreading nothing more than gossip.

Now I understand politics, and there is always going to be an element of mud-slinging and creative license taken when anyone is out drumming for support, be they Republican or Democrat. Where I draw the line is at lying or defamation/character assignation. Simply put, neither has a place in American political discourse.

And here’s the odd thing about this whole Jon Voight issue, this personal attack on Obama was given as Voight was trotted out by Republicans to defeat Obama’s universal healthcare bill. I have hard time seeing any logical line of reasoning that leads from universal healthcare to Obama’s former pastor.

Now, for what it’s worth, I’ve always thought of Jon Voight as a less-than-stable individual. I didn’t know of his conservative leanings until I saw the snipit of his speech. So while I don’t think all Republicans are zealots in the vein of Voight, someone decided to put him behind a podium with the proposed healthcare bill planted squarely in front of him.

This ploy to paint Obama as a leftist Black Panther anarchist ideologue is bypassing the real debate and downright silly. Where is the substantive debate? What are the legitimate Republican objections to the bill in its current incarnation? *You can see my prior post on lack of objectivity in the media as to why modern discourse has been oversimplified to sound bites instead of full disclosure.

In debate, you address the issue being debated, not the debater. This critical aspect of political debate seems to have been forgotten by those taking part in modern political discourse.

I, while on-board with the idea of universal healthcare, am not sold on the bill in its current incarnation. I thought some disclosure was due, as I hammered Mr. Voight pretty good there. But oddly enough, he and I agree in our displeasure with the bill. Though I will note that our reasons for disliking the bill most assuredly vary greatly.

Later-on in the political pundit show, I saw a discussion between a democratic governor and a Republican Party representative and was again appalled. Here were two grown men, seemingly respectable enough, who were so embittered and entrenched on their respective sides that neither would let the other so much as finish a sentence. I felt like I was watching two 4-year-olds try to out tantrum one another. It was a downright pathetic display from both gentlemen.

My how far the mighty have fallen…if our elected officials are unwilling to listen to anyone but those of their own ilk, how can they be true representatives?

I voted for Obama because I thought he represented a break for the ‘tow the party line at all costs’ style of politics that had caused Washington to grind to halt. But it looks like I was wrong. Obama has yet to exhibit the coalition-building and reaching across the aisle that won my vote.

I guess I should have known better. He’s got three more years to win it back, but at this point, Obama’s lost my vote.

News Flash...

Earlier this week I stayed home sick. Something about a sore throat and my being a phone answering monkey just didn’t jive. So while sitting on my couch, nursing said sore throat, I came across the cable news channels. And remembered why I now keep the fact that I earned a journalism degree under wraps…

The hubbub of the day was the tiff between the Obama Administration and Fox News. For those unfamiliar with the story here is a link for a breakdown.

In short, the Obama Administration has taken-on Fox News and labeled them ‘opinion journalists’ and ‘a wing of the Republican party’ basically alluding to the fact that Fox is anything but ‘Fair and Balanced.’

Now I am not going to get into the political stupidity/public relations debacle this fight will prove to be for the Obama Administration, that sentence gives you and idea of where I stand, but what I am gonna delve into is the lack of true journalism (at least as I was taught) in America today.

*Disclosure: I am willing to note the irony of a blogger/poorly-researched but ideological rant writer like myself discussing such matters as objective journalism. But I am not now, nor have I ever purported to be, a reporter. I am not employed by any journalistic outlet and therefore see no problem with my pointing-out flaws in the world as I see it. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, I just am up-front about when I am sharing mine and don’t try to mask anything I post here as ‘objective’ reporting.

So I ended-up spending more of my sick day than I’d like to admit, watching the cable news channels. In doing so, I came to one conclusion- Fox News is not alone in its naked political bias. MSNBC would have to be considered the 'Yin' to Fox News 'Yang.'

It’s not a shock that I disagreed with a lot of the points and was off-put by some of the tactics employed by Fox’s talking-heads.

What surprised me was my reaction to MSNBC.

Now I am a liberal, and a pretty left-leaning semi-socialist one at that. So MSNBC should feel like home. It should be my own little bastion of sanity in a sea of partisanism and over-the-top headlines. But somehow, I didn’t feel at home, at all.

In fact, I was more disgusted by MSMBC than when I was by Fox. I felt lost, betrayed, bamboozled. It’s kinda like finding-out the girl you’ve been seeing smokes or is an unquestioning Bible-thumper…just a game-changing realization.

One historical note, American Journalism started as an unapologetically partisan endeavor. Newspapers were founded to disseminate information of a partisan nature to inform those who were party members and recruit more to the cause. So for American journalists to show their political stripes is no less an American tradition than apple pie or blowing things up on the 4^th of July.

But as with all things American, there has been progress. The idea of objectivity wound its way into the fabric of American journalism within the past hundred-or-so years. Much to the betterment of society. Such things as food safety, monopoly-busting and government accountability can all be directly attributed to strong reporting by transformative journalists.

Objectivity is a tough goal. It is like utopia, something to strive for, but something that can never really be obtained. As long as there is a human being tapping-out a story on a keyboard, their personal feelings/opinions/stances will leech their way into a story. Whether it be the questions they ask, how they frame a quote or the overall tone of the story, there will always be a subjective element to journalism. It’s just one of the character flaws of being human. And that is just fine.

What has been lost, or at least what I haven’t seen in journalism and the cable news networks of late, is an honest attempt to keep that subjectivity at bay. And that is worrisome.

As America continues its cultural shift towards a culture of consumption, this progression of journalism to nothing more than a steady stream of Youtube clips with talking head ‘reporters’ noting how ‘Awesome’ they are, makes perfect sense. American society is fading away from its former spot at the center of the world ideological and political stage to that of a decadent and crumbling empire. The American empire is perfectly content to rest on it laurels instead of continue with the spirit of progress and improvement that allowed it to gain that seat at the top in the first place.

I have always been a firm believer in the concept of journalism/the media as the fourth branch of government. Especially as American politics have grown from a network of local municipal/state governments to a national-scale political scene. Given that backdrop it becomes even more critical for strong, objective reporting. For example, how else would I, sitting here in my little apartment in Seattle, be kept abreast of what is happening in Washington, DC? Government has gotten too big to be accessible by the average American, this is where journalists must step-in.

I don’t need someone to tell me my opinion. I need someone to give me enough information so that I can form one.

Then again, maybe I am the odd man out. Perhaps Americans are just too busy to care anymore. They seem to be OK with being told what products to buy by advertisers and how to look by magazines. Why not be told how to vote?

It does leave a lot more free-time to watch Youtube and hit the mall…

Maybe Mike Judge had it right in Idiocracy, but I am not so sure that’s an America I want to be a part of.

Actively Inactive

So for those of you who are Facebook members like myself, you may have seen the following status come-up a lot lately-

“Enter name here thinks that no one should be afraid to go to the doctor because they can’t afford it, no one should go broke because they got sick, and no one should die because they could not afford care. If you agree, please post this as your status for the rest of the day.”

The status update was a modern version of a chain letter. And while I agree with the sentiment behind the ‘movement’ I was really bothered by it.

So my response to the so-called movement was this-

JR. Cook People should die, because it is their time to die. If they want insurance, OK. But I recommend putting down the cheeseburgers, beers and cigarettes first. And try taking a damn walk.

My response garnered hot and cold reactions. Either folks were on-board or they thought I was the devil.

And I cannot lie, awhile after updating my status, I looked at it and was disappointed in myself. I sounded like a pundit for FOX.

But I, as with any of the letters foisted on society by these pudgy digits, stand by what I posted.

Logic trumps partisan-ism, at least in the world according to Homer. And my statement was based on logic.

Insurance is pretty simple. Risk versus reward. The more of a risk you are, the more expensive it is to be insured.

Cheeseburger lover? High cholesterol and heart attack are pretty sure to follow. Insurance cost uptick.

Smoker? Ahoy, Cancer and Emphysema. Bigger insurance cost uptick.

Beer? Well, I love beer. So I cannot knock it…but it is a less than healthy choice.

So the point of my Facebook status retort was to exhibit how personal responsibility cannot be substituted by government.

If I choose to ride a motorcycle at 140 mph and end-up crashing and dying, no one would feel sorry for me. That’d say that what you get for going 140 mph on a motorcycle -- Just a dumb decision.

The same can be said for the average American’s lifestyle. It’s comfortable, but not so healthy.

But the point of this rant is not to solve the insurance issue. I am not that bright of a bulb.

My gripe is not with the movement to insure all Americans, which by the way I don’t think is too bad. My issue is with this pseudo-activism.

Copy-and-pasting some text into a web browser does not an action make.

Much the same way no one is getting rich from the Nigerian lottery, nothing comes from a mouse-click and no action.

Such hollow moves just garner head-shakes by yours truly.

I respond to these copy-and-pasters the same way I responded to a mass of pissed-off parents who had gathered to steam-roll school district representatives when I was in the audience for a taping of ‘Town Meeting’ when I was in high school.

“How many of you are attending meetings? I see many of you here complaining, but how many of you are doing something to fix the issue?”

Being 17 at the time, I was written-off by the vast majority of ‘adults’ in the audience even as the show’s host gave me kudos for the cut-to-the-quick question.

And to all of you copy-and-pasters out there I ask the same thing-

What are you doing to fix the issue? (That you are advocating for/complaining about.)

I have no real issues with the system as it is. With the exception of one item- Prenatal care. If a gal is pregnant she should get anything she needs. It’s not the child’s fault they ended-up in a womb and properly caring for developing fetuses (not people, but that’s a whole other topic) can save everyone a ton of money by preventing issues after the child is born…again pure logic is pretty sound. And I sound like one hell of a nice guy.

But back to the system, I have yet to hear of anyone getting turned away from a hospital.

Though I have heard of many folks being in financial ruin as a result of not being turned away.

To which I note- They are still alive to be in financial ruin, a much better outcome than the alternative.

So yeah, I am not starting any petitions or attending any town hall meetings. So I am as guilty as those I am calling-out in this post…But then again, I am not complaining about the system as it is.

What I am complaining about is this faux-activism.

If you have a stance on something, make it known, in the real world. And do something about it.

Until you do, you are just an enabler for the status quo.

But then again, maybe you are fine with that.

CoffeerightInfringment

After reading a few of my posts, it may surprise folks to learn that for the most part, I am a fella who avoids confrontation (in the real world) like the plague.

But recently, I went counter to my natural inclinations and sought-out some controversy.

I found myself headed to a coffee shop that had become quite a central figure in a good old-fashioned dust-up here in our burgeoning ‘burg.

I headed to the epicenter of gentrified hipsterdom in Seattle, 15^th Ave on Capitol Hill. Now don’t get me wrong, it’s a fun strip – such staples of (high-priced) Seattle-only greatness like Café Victrola and The Coastal Kitchen anchor this mostly chain/franchise-free neighborhood.

Decent food, good beer, high prices and snooty attitudes are all served here as the clientele is all-to-happy to pay the price to be seen.

If you sense a wee lil bit of distain, good. You should.

But back to the controversy. I headed to the area to visit a coffee shop- 15^th Ave Coffee & Tea. The faux independent coffee shop was nice enough, offering 15 kinds of whole bean coffee, numerous kinds of loose leaf tea and they even served beer!

So, you may ask- What’s the big-deal about this coffee shop? And what the hell do you mean by Faux independent?

Well this coffee shop wasn’t what it appeared to be. It was actually owned by none other than Starbuck’s. Yes, that Starbuck’s.

Per the Starbuck’s brass, this was Starbuck’s attempt to ‘blend into the neighborhood’ as opposed to simply running the local independent coffee guys out of town.

The fact that this shop was a Starbuck’s-in-disguise is what has the neighbors all riled-up.

Which brings me to my point: Since when did Seattle become populated by such exclusive unoriginal lameasses?

I headed to the coffee shop looking for a fight. This hipster idea of independent-or-die, just seems dumb to me.

*Disclosure: I am one of the seemingly few native Seattleites who unapologetically enjoys Starbuck’s. I’ve never been able to wrap my head around the idea of hating the big company simply because they are successful.

The Seattle I grew-up in while a bit stand-offish, was mostly all-inclusive. Especially when compared to the separation (by race, economic class) that I had seen in cities back East- NYC, St. Louis & Chicago.

At some point, Starbuck’s was a Café Vivace or a Stumptown. It still blows my mind to see the lil independent guy so revered, yet the local company who made good, so reviled.

Granted, this most recent attempt to ‘fit-in’ by Starbuck’s could have been handled with a bit more tact. Starbuck’s, a long-time staunch defender of corporate trademarks, pretty much ripped-off the design/décor of 15^th Ave Coffee & Tea from Smith, the bar next door. So creating a carbon-copy of the neighbor, all the way down to asking where Smith bought their awnings, was a pretty hypocritical move by a company known for suing TM-infringers.

All that being said, Starbuck’s as usual, did a fine job.

I used to be a coffee elitist, simply because everyone else was. In Bellingham, it was Tony’s Coffee, in Seattle it was Vivace and in Portland it’s Stumptown (though from what I hear, even the beloved Stumptown is beginning to get too big to be liked anymore). But after going to independent coffee house after independent coffee house, I realized something- The coffee at all of these joints was consistently horrible.

I began to ask myself: Why pay for an inferior product?

In my ‘independent coffee shop days’ was used to giving the glare as the soulless drones paid their toll to the Starbuck’s Siren.

Where it got a lil odd, was when I became one of the drones.

Trust me, I’ve noticed the glares, even got some nasty posts on my Facebook page when I noted that I was at Starbuck’s. The glares were even worse as I visited 15^th Ave Coffee & Tea on Capitol Hill. I purposefully sat outside on the street to see what kind of reception I’d receive. And the blind corporation-hating hipsters didn’t let me down. I got a lot of glares, a couple head-shakes and a few sighs…Just as I’d expected.

I wasn’t making any political statements. I just wanted a decent cup of coffee. I guess that’s the lesson to be learned-

Turns-out it wasn’t just the coffee that was bitter…and a bit of the Seattle I used to know and love seems to have disappeared just as the coffee in my cup had.

Cops on Campus

I am not sure if you have heard the latest hullabaloo to come out of Cambridge, MA. But if you haven’t here’s a link to the story.

The long and the short of it is that a Harvard Professor, who happens to be black, was arrested for trying to get into his own house.

Well, OK, he didn’t get arrested for trying to get into his own house, he got arrested for being a jerk to a police officer, who just so happened to be white.

I only bring it up as it was quite a hot button issue on the Sunday morning political pundit shows.

The pundits weren’t debating who was in the right, the cop or the professor, they were debating President Barack Obama’s reaction to the incident.

Obama said he thought that the policeman acted ‘Stupidly,’ which it sounds like he may have. But I, like Obama at the time he made the comment, don’t have all the facts.

But for these pundits to get upset that Obama is being bothered with such ‘trivial’ matters gets me pretty fired-up.

Here’s my point- Just because America finally elected a black man to the Presidency doesn’t mean America’s long-standing racial ills have been corrected.

Obama was asked about the situation because racism is still alive and well in America. I being a white guy, have been the beneficiary of racial profiling many times. I have many minority friends who have been victims of it. So I have seen first-hand that the problem still exists.

Granted, we have Russia making some worrisome moves and North Korea threatening to drop bombs like Hiroshima. And damn near everyone seems to either be unemployed, in foreclosure or worse.

So a guy getting arrested, without and charges being pressed, seems pretty trivial by comparison.

But it isn’t.

America took a big step forward in electing Barack Obama, but it was only a step. Addressing America’s deep-seeded racial issues/divide is going to take a Lewis and Clark-esque expedition, not just a couple steps.

Should the guy have been arrested? Is it ever OK to talk to a policeman with anything but respect? Did the cop over-step his bounds?

The one black person on the panel of ‘This Week with George Stephanopoulos’ noted that from an early age, she was taught to talk to police officers with nothing but respect. She stated that as a black person in America, you had to be trained to do so, in order to avoid any problems with police…the insinuation being that cops were looking for any reason to bust a black person.

While that may be the case, I’ll just add that as a (white) kid I was raised to interact with police the exact same way the black woman described: With Respect.

While I’ll agree with the sentiment and have personally witnessed bias on the part of the police depending on race, I will also note, that I am never combative or aggressive towards police. Which is part of the reason why I think I have gotten out of a couple tough situations with police, not that I get a pass solely because I am white.

Now don’t get me wrong. I have seen cops who are simply power-abusing jerks. But cops are people…people who have a pretty tough job. But the cop in this case is a 16-year veteran who just so happened to be the first-responder on the day that former NBA Star Reggie Lewis died. The officer attempted CPR when he found Lewis collapsed on the floor. Hardly the actions of a bigoted power abuser.

Granted the Lewis incident was a long-time ago and people change. But there is nothing in the officer’s history that would indicate the officer is anything other than a good, decent, public servant. And if there was, you can be sure the stories would be all over the news.

I don’t know much about the professor ‘victim’ in this story, but I know that he specializes in racial profiling. While I think such work needs to be done, as it obviously still takes place daily here in America. I wonder if the gentleman allowed his passion for the focus of his life’s work to get the better of his judgment.

I think he over reacted. And while the cop is trained to deal with such situations, he is human. And if the professor got overzealous towards law enforcement, which is sounds like he did, he’s subject to the same rules as everyone else.

It’s sad that we are still having this conversation today-

Did the white cop treat the black man unfairly? But we are.

The only saving grace of this particular instance is that it looks like it was just a matter of the cops dealing with a jerk as opposed to the cops preying on a black man.

And that is a step forward. As pathetic as it is to say that.