HinesSight

How to give up your socialized government benefits

Yesterday my wife told me about a great web site she'd heard mentioned on the Thom Hartmann program (which originates from KPOJ in nearby Portland, Oregon -- on America's proudly left coast).

It's Stop My Benefits, where the people who are ranting about Obamacare, socialized medicine, and government taking over our freedoms can sign a form asking that their participation in distasteful programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, Veteran's benefits, and Social Security be stopped.

Excellent idea. As the site says: 

It has been apparent that some people think that “government-run, socialized” healthcare programs are bad.  There has even been discussions where people don’t “want the government to take over their Medicare”.  These people fail to understand that Medicare is a form of socialized, government-run healthcare program already.  And it appears that the people who are complaining about the government “taking over healthcare” also love their Medicare and Medicaid.

So it gets down to this.  Either put up or shut up.  If a person wants to complain about “government-run, socialized” healthcare programs, there is a choice that they can make on their own.

By filling out the form (either print or online) on their own, people who disagree with such programs can indeed do everyone else a favor and give up their coverage.  If someone is horrified about “government-run, socialized” healthcare programs, there is now the chance to end the benefits.

 
Thom Hartmann recommended handing out the form at Tea Party events so all the government-haters could demonstrate their commitment to no longer sucking on the taxpayer teat.

Of course, this form needs to be expanded.

Right-wingers also should have an opportunity to decline protection from our socialistic police and fire departments, and to promise that none of their children will ever attend a socialistic public school or check books out of a socialistic public library.

They also would want to promise to never use our taxpayer-constructed public roads, which is going to cut down on attendance at Tea Party rallies, since everybody will have to travel off-road to them.

Southern California or Oregon? Take a guess

It's photo quiz time. See how many questions you answer correctly.

Any Oregonian who gets less than 100% needs to better appreciate the beauties of southern California, which includes my three year old granddaughter.

(Q.1) Was this girl posing provocatively for a photographer on a beach in Lincoln City, Oregon or Malibu, California?

Well, duh. Have you ever observed this scene on an Oregon beach -- especially in late March? While in the LA area to visit my daughter and her family last weekend, I was fortunate to have my camera in hand while in Malibu.

(Q.2) Is my granddaughter, Evelyn, thinking "Wow, my grandpa Brian is so cool! I want to grow up to be just like him, except without the gray hair and beard"?

Of course. What else would be on her mind? (Except...see below)

(Q.3) Is my granddaughter cute, super cute, or amazingly cute when she eats an ice cream cone? You can't make a wrong answer on this question, so long as you stick with my options.

I can't recall the name of the LA area ice cream parlor we stopped at. It was hugely popular on a warm sunny Saturday. Run by some Thai people, this was the first time I've seen a "Thai iced tea" flavor. I'll bet that isn't available anywhere in Oregon. Thumbs up to ethnic multiplicity.

(Q. 4) Does Evelyn already have the moody mysterious model look down? Saying to the world, "My mom may be putting my shoes on, but I am so beyond such trivialities."

Yes. She probably already can express that sentiment in French, since Evelyn has been going to preschool a few days a week. I expect her to resolve the incongruities between relativity theory and quantum mechanics any day now.

(Q.5) Can southern California be beautiful, even through some smog?

Clearly (or semi-clearly), yes. Metro Los Angeles is down the coastline to the east, where the sun is rising through some dirty air.

Porn on iPad will make it more appealing

OK, my first lackadaisical impression of the iPad could be proven wrong.

If Apple promotes an "explicit" App Store category, as seems likely, porn could turn out to be the iPad's killer application.

By enabling developers to publish "explicit" software titles in the App Store, Apple will provide the potential for a new, unanticipated killer app for iPad: digital interactive magazines, comics, and games that present adult subject matter to audiences that want them while also enabling parents to prevent access to such content within iTunes' preferences.

Access to adult content has long been credited with the success and popularity of technology platforms. It is widely held that JVC's VHS videotape format won out over Sony's Betamax due to the fact that JVC did not attempt to block distribution of adult content in the early 80s. The explosion in popularity of the consumer web has also been credited to its ability to deliver unfettered access to adult content.

Some ways the world is getting better

My wife sometimes says, "I'm glad I never had any kids of my own, because the way things are going, soon the world won't be livable for people." I understand her pessimism, given the crappy way we're treating the Earth and all the threats facing humanity.

But one day last week I had a string of experiences that made me think, "Maybe the Beatles were right: it really is getting better all the time."

In the evening I attended a fundraising event here in Salem sponsored by the Democratic Party of Marion County. Carl Wolfson, a talk radio host of Portland's progressive KPOJ, entertained the gathering with witty, inspiring, and humorous remarks.

Wolfson spoke about going to visit his conservative mother in Florida, where he said everybody in New Jersey is required to move when they hit 65. He went with his partner. After some pleasantries, his mother looked at the two of them and said, "Now, which of you is the gay guy?"

Great story. Lots of laughter. And a pointer toward how attitudes have changed in not so many years.

At my increasingly ripe age of 61, I can remember when nobody I was acquainted with openly acknowledged their homosexuality. It was known, but not talked about. In high school we joked about the "queers" who lived in my small town. They had no way to respond, because coming out wasn't a viable option.

So for me to sit in a room and hear Wolfson speak about his partner, and talk about how gays must have always been around, even in the 1950s, because someone had to design those fins that were put on cars -- it suddenly hit me how much societal attitudes toward gays have changed, for the better.

Earlier that day I was killing time at Salem's Toyota dealership, waiting for a side view mirror to be replaced after a deer had decided that it would be fun to run into my car. I got to chatting with the sales manager.

I commiserated with him about the excessively bad rap Toyota was getting for the unintended acceleration incidents, since some of them seemed to be caused (on purpose or accidentally) by the drivers, not faulty technology.

This led me to recall some car safety problems from the old days, such as the infamous exploding Ford Pinto. Which had been preceded by Ralph Nader's groundbreaking book, "Unsafe at Any Speed." 

"In retrospect," I told the guy, "it's amazing that during my high school years I was driving around in a VW bug with not only no engine in the front to protect me in a collision, but also no seat belts."

Now we take seat belts, air bags, antilock breaks, traction control, and other safety features for granted. Just as Rachel Carson woke up the world to pesticide problems with her "Silent Spring," so was Nader instrumental in getting the automotive industry to save a whole bunch of lives.

So here too, things are getting better.

Then I went shopping at a grocery store. And took with me, as is my habit, a reusable bag. A few years ago I never anticipated that I'd be doing this. I'd noticed a few people at the natural food store bringing in cloth bags, but I continued to bring my groceries home in paper.

Until it finally hit me, along with lots of other people: reusable bags make sense. They hold more than paper or plastic bags. They don't rip. They're easier to carry.

Stores started selling them cheaply. Signs began to go up outside of groceries: "did you remember to bring your bag?" What once seemed weird became commonplace. Things got better. 

It's easy to get disillusioned about all of the problems facing our country and the world. But it's also easy to remember how far we've come, how we've successfully dealt with social issues, how the present is an improvement from the past.

Why I'm bothered by another Portland police killing

Much of the furor has died down over the fatal shooting by a Portland (Oregon) police officer of a drunk transient who came out of a public restroom bloodied and holding an x-acto knife.

But I'm still bothered by it, notwithstanding the most press release from the Portland Police Bureau after an interview with the officer, Jason Walters -- which, disturbingly, didn't take place until days had passed after the shooting.
Download 032510_Updated_Hoyt_Arboretum

The transient, Jack "Jackie" Collins, was intoxicated and threatening people at Hoyt Aboretum. After Walters knocked on the restroom door, Collins came out. Pretty clearly, Collins had been cutting on himself. There was no report that he had hurt anybody.

So Walters is faced with a 58 year old drunk guy armed with an x-acto knife. I've got several in my tool box. They're handy for stripping wallpaper and handling other chores. Yes, they have a sharp blade. However, they aren't a "bad guy" weapon of choice.

Walters, after having two days to talk things over with his attorney, says that he was backing up, ran into some barrier, and had no choice but to shoot Collins four times. I find that difficult to believe.

If it's true, then Walters is to blame. Restrooms are for public use. Public walk up to them, and people walk away from them. If Walters made the mistake of backing into a barrier, Collins didn't deserve to die for that.

Walters had called for backup. There was ample opportunity to defuse the situation once the police officer realized that all he was dealing with was a drunk transient, possibly suicidal, who only had an x-acto knife.

I resonated with one of the comments on a KATU story about the killing. 

usually i will be able to somehow reason on the police side. That said however I cannot see how deadly force was needed to take down a guy with a razor knife.
And he was shot 4 times? That to me sounds like a cop who just openned fire and didn't even think about non lethal shots.
Pepper spray and a tazor seem to have been more in order than killing the guy.
While I wasn't there i can tell you that as a bouncer at a bar I had knifes pulled on me more than once and I didn't need to shoot anyone ever who came at me swinging one. And the knifes pulled were not just "razor knifes"
This seems like lack of training to me

I agree.

One of the guys in my martial arts class, who I've trained with for quite a while, also has been a bouncer in several bars. He says that he has had knives pulled on him several times. The guy never had to kill anybody. Nor has he ever been injured.

I understand fear. I don't blame Walters for fearing for his life. But here's the thing: if you sign up to be a police officer, you should be prepared to "protect and serve." That means putting your life on the line in order to protect and serve the public.

Which includes drunk transient guys with mental problems who are out of it and don't know what they're doing. Walters seemed to assume that Collins should have been able to respond to "drop the knife!" just like any normal person would.

Walters wasn't taking into account the specifics of the situation. He seemed to be operating on autopilot, rigidly following some rule that says shoot to kill if someone doesn't obey orders and you feel threatened.

Well, it depends. That's what you learn in martial arts training, as in ballroom dancing training -- which I'm also quite familiar with. There are no rules, except there are no rules.

Guidelines, yes.

But in police work, as elsewhere in life, skill comes from assessing what is really happening in a situation, not what some book or previous rule-based training tells you to do.

The rest of this Portland police killing story is easy to figure out, because it has played out before in other deaths of mentally ill people at the hands of poorly trained officers. Walters will go before a grand jury and tell jurors that he felt his life was threatened by Collins.

The grand jury won't press any charges. Case closed. Another disturbed man killed, another Portland police officer cleared of any wrongdoing.

But something sure seems wrong to me here. Police officers in other areas aren't so prone to shoot first and defuse a situation later. Here's an example. 

Walter's life wasn't in great danger. He had plenty of other options open to him other than killing Collins.

Here's the uncomfortable truth, as I see it: Walters chose to protect and serve himself rather than a disturbed drunk guy who was cutting on himself with an x-acto knife. He could have taken a small risk of being hurt, and have a big chance of saving Collins' life.

The Portland Police Bureau needs an urgent reassessment of its whole approach to dealing with mentally incapacitated people who don't pose an obvious threat. Killing them isn't the answer.

Poll shows Americans support passage of health care bill

Republicans, beware.

Your dream of an angry electorate rising up next November and returning your party to control of Congress probably is as fantastical as your objections to the health care legislation that passed the House of Representatives a few days ago.

Watching the debate on television, and then listening to it on my car radio off and on as I drove around Sunday afternoon, I kept hearing Republicans scream, "People don't want this bill!"

Well, if that was true on the weekend, Americans changed their minds by Tuesday.

A Gallup poll taken after the House vote, on Monday, found that 49% consider it a good thing that the House passed the legislation, while 40% thought it was a bad thing. Democrats favored health care reform 79/9 and Independents 46/45, while Republicans opposed it 14/76.

So if there's anyone out of touch with how Americans feel, it's the R's -- not the D's.

Per usual, 538's Nate Silver does a great job analyzing the bounce in support for health care reform in light of previous polls that showed more opposition. One of his points is so obvious I even thought of it prior to the vote.

Namely, that some people who didn't like the health care bill prior to its passage were disappointed that it didn't go far enough; they wanted it to be more progressive -- with a public option, for example.

When the House approved the bill, many (if not most) of these folks moved into the "good thing" camp. They still were disappointed that Congress caved in on the reforms they wanted, but viewed the legislation as better than the status quo.

Others, according to Silver, were more disapproving of the process being used to move the bill forward than with its substance. Now that the process is largely over, with just some Senate parliamentary wrangling remaining, that reason for not liking the bill takes a back seat to what it actually does.

Which, as I noted before, is pretty darn appealing to most people. Here's a nice summary of the immediate reforms in the legislation and how they'll benefit ordinary Americans.

The stock market seems to be betting that health care companies are going to benefit also, since that sector rose on the day after the reform legislation was approved by the House.

Looks like Wall Street saw through all the socialism! B.S. being spread by Republicans. Just as the American public increasingly will, as the benefits of the bill become apparent while the "sky is falling" fears fail to materialize.

Health care reform: a proud day for progressives

I feel great, knowing that passage of the health care reform bill is virtually assured in the House. All the work and money millions of people put into electing Obama and a solid Democratic majority is paying off for the American people.

It's a big moment, just as the passage of Social Security and Civil Rights legislation was. Soon the United States will be well on the road to assuring that everyone is able to get high quality needed medical care at a reasonable cost.

Political junkie that I am, around 1:00 pm I sat outside a grocery store here in Salem for ten minutes or so, listening to CNN on satellite radio. I wanted to hear Rep. Bart Stupak's press conference.

Stupak is an avid anti-abortion Democrat. He represents several other House members who weren't happy with the abortion related language in the Senate bill, which can't be changed by reconciliation.

It's hard to understand what Stupak and company were so upset about. The House and Senate bills take a similar stand on prohibiting federal funding of abortion. And Catholic hospitals are happy with the Senate language. 

Now that President Obama has agreed to issue an executive order confirming that current federal policy (Hyde amendment) won't change, Stupak says he will vote yes for health care reform. 

It was moving to hear Stupak and other anti-abortion Democrats speak. They made a lot of sense when they pointed out how "pro life" the health care bill is.

Millions of women and children currently don't have health insurance and suffer the consequences: disease, disability, death. Lack of adequate prenatal care causes many babies to be "aborted" through miscarriage, or otherwise have problems reaching a healthy full-term development.

Right away, after Obama signs the final bill, Americans will benefit in important ways:

Insurance companies will be barred from dropping people from coverage when they get sick.

Lifetime coverage limits will be eliminated and annual limits are to be restricted.Insurers will be barred from excluding children for coverage because of pre-existing conditions.

Young adults will be able to stay on their parents' health plans until the age of 26. Many health plans currently drop dependents from coverage when they turn 19 or finish college.

Uninsured adults with pre-existing conditions will be able to obtain health coverage through a new program that will expire once new insurance exchanges begin operating in 2014.

A temporary reinsurance program is created to help companies maintain health coverage for early retirees between the ages of 55 and 64. This also expires in 2014.

Medicare drug beneficiaries who fall into the "doughnut hole" coverage gap will get a $250 rebate. The bill eventually closes that gap which currently begins after $2,700 is spent on drugs. Coverage starts again after $6,154 is spent.

A tax credit becomes available for some small businesses to help provide coverage for workers.

And in a few years other provisions will take effect -- bringing health insurance to at least thirty million Americans, saving tens of thousands of lives.

So yes, progressives -- and everyone else who has supported health insurance reform -- should be proud today.

Every month of every year we suffer the equivalent of a 9/11 attack: over 3,000 Americans die because they don't have health insurance.
Download Health-insurance-and-mortality-in-US-adults

But not for much longer. Which is why it's such a great day.

Big loser in health care reform: Fox News

It looks like health insurance reform legislation is going to pass the House this weekend, and that the Senate will approve it.

Great news -- for the 30 million Americans who will finally get insurance, for the 44,000 who have been dying each year from a lack of insurance, and for the rest of us who will no longer be screwed over in various nasty ways by profit-hungry private insurance companies.

But it won't be pleasant news for Fox News, which will be deeply embarrassed (or at least, should be) by how inaccurate its reporting and prognosticating on this issue has been.

Of course, "accuracy" isn't what comes to mind when I think "Fox News." Nonetheless, any organization with news in its name should be at least a little bit concerned when its viewers have been misled so badly.

I watch Fox News mostly when I use the step climbing machines at our athletic club, which face six televisions. If there's nothing more interesting on, I prefer to watch Fox News over Oprah, CNBC, or some other ghastly boring channel.

Since I put in 90 minutes of machine aerobics a week, I've watched quite a bit of Fox News coverage of health insurance reform over the past year.

What I was told, over and over and over and over, is "reform is dead," "reform is on its last legs," "reform never will pass," "reform is finished."

Today, the Intrade prediction market shows an 80% chance of the reform legislation passing. I'd give it an even higher percentage, but maybe that's my progressive optimism talking.
Regardless, this Intrade chart shows how health insurance reform has risen from a 20% chance of passing early this year to 80% today.

A reputable news organization would focus on reporting and analyzing what is actually happening. That used to be what "news" was all about: current events. But not anymore on cable news generally, and especially not on Fox News.

Since Fox News has a strong and obvious political agenda -- progressives bad; conservatives good -- it isn't capable of dispassionately telling its viewers what is actually happening, as contrasted to what it hopes will happen.

So rather than report "at the moment, the chance of health insurance reform passing is low," we were told "its dead!" Which, of course, was utterly wrong.

Hopefully this journalistic debacle will cause more than a few Fox News viewers to reconsider their loyalty. Reality is a great thing. When we don't live in it, preferring a fantasy, it's tough to prosper in a world that is so different from how we believe it is.

(Amazingly, just nine days ago Fox News was saying the reform legislation passed by the Senate was "dead on arrival" in the House. So much for "fair and balanced," along with accurate.)

April 1? Census Bureau assumes psychic abilities

Geez, I wanted to be a good citizen and mail in my 2010 Census form today. The cover message, dated March 15, said in bold type "Please complete and mail back the enclosed census form today."

OK. I tried. But then I saw that my answers have to reflect the people living or staying in our house on April 1, 2010.

Today is March 18. A lot could change in the next two weeks.

I've written to all of the girls featured in the 2010 Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue, letting them know that we have a empty apartment area in our home that is available for extended stays by bikini-clad supermodels who also like to cook, clean, and do yard work.

How am I supposed to know how many additional young curvaceous females may be residing in our house on April 1? I'm not psychic.

This discrepancy between "return form now" and "base answers on situation as of April 1" has been bothering quite a few others also. A commenter on this blog post wrote:

I just find it a little amusing that the government is asking people to be psychic. They could have timed these forms to arrive on April 1, 2010, but they chose to have them arrive two weeks early. They could have also said on the form to fill it out and send it in as soon as possible and not mention the date of April 1st.

And this Reuters blogger said:

The first question – I’m not making this up – is “How many people were living or staying in this house, apartment or mobile home on April 1, 2010?” WERE? That date is more than two weeks from now. I guess I could wait until April Fool’s Day to count them, but my warning letter said to return the form “promptly.”

I see two possible reasons for this confusion.

(1) The Census Bureau is filled with incompetents who didn't anticipate that citizens would think Huh? if asked to answer questions about the future. (2) The Census Bureau wants to soak Americans for billions of dollars.

Since unfounded conspiracy theories are a lot more appealing than boring logical conclusions, I'm going with (2). This also gives me a much better chance at getting some air time on Fox News.

The Census Bureau web site says:

According to Title 13, Chapter 7, Subtitle 2, anyone who willfully gives an answer that is false could be fined up to $500.

My back-of-the-census-form-envelope calculation is that if 20,000,000 Americans send in their form before April 1, thereby giving false answers (since many of the questions say "on April 1, 2010"), the Census Bureau can bring in a cool $10 billion in fines at $500 a pop.

Well, I'm not going to fall for this ruse. I'll hold on to our form until April 1 and make sure it is postmarked on or after that day.

Good try, Census Bureau, but you're have to do better to pry that $500 out of my non-psychic self.

Facts and fictions about Marion County charter change

The Salem (Oregon) Chamber of Commerce and a member of its Executive Committee, Mark Shipman, need to get their facts straight. People are tired of organizations, politicians, and lobbyists who will say anything to defeat a proposal that benefits the general public rather than special interests.

The Chamber opposes a citizen initiative that would increase the number of Marion County commissioners from three to five, elect them by district, and change the county charter to "home rule."

(For more info, check out Have a Voice Everyone.)

After reading a list of the Chamber's objections to Marion County Measure 24-292, which will be voted on in May, and a commentary on the measure by Shipman that appeared in his law firm's newsletter, I'm struck by how misleading are these reasons for sticking with a "business as usual" approach to county government.
Download OfficialPositionMCCharter
Download Shipman Commentary

Fictions have to be countered with facts. Here goes...
---------------------------
Fiction: Adding two county commissioners will increase costs.

Fact: The commissioners set their own salary/benefits, and hire their own staff. The current commissioners each have a high-paid personal "policy advisor" who makes more money than the commissioners do. If five commissioners tighten their budgetary belt, like almost everyone else has to these days, the cost to the taxpayer won't change when Measure 24-292 is approved. Presently the commissioners pay themselves about as much as the Governor gets, over $100,000 in salary/benefits.
---------------------------
Fiction: Electing commissioners by district will reduce access to local elected officials.

Fact: Currently the three partisan commissioners are elected countywide, so each represents over 300,000 citizens. Measure 24-292 will elect five non-partisan commissioners by district, so each will represent about 60,000 citizens. Strangely, it's argued that the charter change would mean that people "will only have access to the commissioner in their own district, not the entire Board." Obviously this is untrue. Does any local elected official only talk to people in his or her own district? (If so, their closed-mindedness shows they should be voted out of office.)
---------------------------
Fiction: The proposed charter violates the Oregon Constitution.

Fact: The Marion County Clerk and Marion County Legal Counsel reviewed Measure 24-292 and concluded that it meets constitutional standards. So has Bob Cannon, a local government lawyer for 30 years who is a former Marion County Counsel and currently serves on the Salem City Council. He notes that the proposed charter is modeled after the one used in Lane County, which has worked well. See page 9 of Cannon's excellent summary of reasons to vote "yes" on the charter change.
Download Cannon remarks on Marion County charter change
---------------------------
Fiction: If Measure 24-292 passes, you will not see growth in Marion County for some time.

Fact: This is a ridiculous scare tactic, plain and simple. Nothing in the proposed charter changes the county's land use policies. Nor does anything in the proposed charter make it "more difficult for existing businesses to grow and flourish." These are more than fictions. They are purposeful distortions. Mark Shipman also claims that urban growth boundaries won't be expanded if the Measure passes, but there is nothing, zilch, nada in Measure 24-292 about this.
---------------------------
Fiction: If Measure 24-292 passes, Marion County will need to hold a special election immediately to elect two new commissioners at a cost of $100,000 to $250,000.

Fact: Wow. Shipman really got this one wrong. The proposed Charter says in Section 12 (vii) that the new county commissioners will be elected at the next November general election. So there won't be any special election or additional costs. Shouldn't people read the Home Rule Charter before they start to criticize it?
---------------------------

Bottom line: Marion County voters, don't let yourselves be taken in by the fictions being spread by opponents of Measure 24-292. It's time to change our county for the better.

For too long, special interests and career politicians have done their best (often quite successfully, unfortunately) to control local government. This Measure will help make our county commissioners more accountable to citizens by electing them by district.

It also will improve county decision-making, since currently it takes only two people of a like-mind to control the Board of Commissioners.

With five commissioners -- which is the norm in Oregon's more populous counties -- there will be more deliberative give and take before policies are decided on, which is what Marion County needs.

In May vote YES on Measure 24-292.

What today taught me about life

Some days I feel like I've haven't learned anything about life. Other days, like today, I sense some sort of semi-coherent message in disparate events -- with some sort of being a pointer toward my basic cluelessness.

Which, of course, won't stop me from attempting to describe what today taught me. (If bloggers only wrote about what they were sure of, the blogosphere would become a word-vacuum.)

This morning I picked up a book I'd read a while back, "The Untethered Soul." Thumbing through the pages, I came across some highlighted passages that elicited a yes in my psyche.

Billions of things could happen that you haven't even thought of yet. The question is not whether they will happen. Things are going to happen. The real question is whether you want to be happy regardless of what happens. The purpose of your life is to enjoy and learn from your experiences. You were not put on Earth to suffer. You're not helping anyone by being miserable. Regardless of your philosophical beliefs, the fact remains that you were born and you are going to die. During the time in between, you get to choose whether or not you want to enjoy the experience.

And...

Learn to live as though you are facing death at all times, and you'll become bolder and more open. If you live life fully, you won't have any last wishes. You will have lived them every moment. Only then will you have fully experienced life and released the part of you that is afraid of living. There is no reason to be afraid of life.

And...

You have to understand that it is your attempt to get special experiences from life that makes you miss the actual experience of life. Life is not something you get; it's something you experience. Life exists with or without you. It has been going on for billions of years. You simply get the honor of seeing a tiny slice of it. If you're busy trying to get something, you will miss the slice you're actually experiencing.

Later, I headed for my MacBook laptop to check out what was happening in the big wonderful world of the Internet. Google Reader showed me the latest post of Rain, another Oregon blogger.

She wrote about energy, openness, being aware. And shared an image with some adapted lines of a Mary Oliver poem, "The Summer Day." 

The poem actually ends with...

I do know how to pay attention, how to fall down
into the grass, how to kneel down in the grass,
how to be idle and blessed, how to stroll through the fields,
which is what I have been doing all day.
Tell me, what else should I have done?
Doesn't everything die at last, and too soon?
Tell me, what is it you plan to do
with your one wild and precious life?

Well, that was an easy question to answer. It was 60 degrees. No rain in sight. I had to mail some letters, give 2009 tax info to our CPA, go to downtown Salem for my Tai Chi class.

The plan for my one wild and precious life was obvious: Scooter ride!

Some people (otherwise known as "my wife") call my purchase of the world's largest scooter, a Suzuki Burgman 650, a manifestation of a mid-life crisis. I only wish. Since I'm close to becoming eligible for Social Security, I see it more as an end-of-life crisis.

Regardless, mundane errands turn into fun on two motorized wheels.

As soon as I put on my gear, fired up the Burgman, and turned onto the two lane country road that, after six miles, would get me to the Salem city limits, I felt much more alive.

Like Mary Oliver said, I do know how to pay attention.

We all do. We just often lose sight of what life has placed right in front of us. The mind wanders. Perceptions get split between all our multi-taskings.

On a scooter or motorcycle, attention comes front and center -- because the rider knows that if his or her awareness isn't mindful of all the cars and other possible dangers (deer, dogs, potholes, oily spots, etc. etc.), the fall down Oliver speaks of won't be pleasantly voluntary.

I parked on Court Street. Backed my scooter into a diagonal space in front of a beauty school.

Three female students were shooting the breeze, and blowing cigarette smoke, on a bench a few feet away from where I was stowing my helmet and jacket under the seat, replacing the backpack that I carry my Tai Chi shoes in.

One of the girls looked at me after my jacket was off. "Hey, I've got that exact same shirt! It's cool. I love the design, the trees." "Me too," I said. "My wife got it for me." "Must have been Fred Meyer," the girl told me.

We agreed that we both had excellent clothing taste: long-sleeved black 100% cotton, made in India, semi-Goth (in a New Age'y way) gray nature design.

I shared a thought, though: "Since young people mostly wear this sort of shirt, I've worried a bit that some kid who has one will see me, an old guy, with it on and decide that he can never wear his again."

But then I added, "Old is just a frame of mind, though. We're as old as we feel, right?" The girl agreed, saying, "Yeah, I'm thirty. Physically I'm more like thirty-four. Inside, however, I feel seventeen. So I'm never going to die!"

My logical male mind quickly ran through some responses. Hmmmm. If she felt mentally half as old as she felt physically, then if she lived to be 100, she'd feel 50. Or did she mean that she'd always feel like she was seventeen?

I settled on, "Well, at least you won't die mentally. Physically, I wouldn't count on that." Eyeing my longish hair, the girl asked if I was headed for a beauty school haircut. "No, sorry. I've got to get to my Tai Chi class."

She said she'd watch my "bike" for me. It was nice to make a connection with someone a lot unlike me, and also a lot like me. I also feel seventeen much of the time. Hope I always will.

In Tai Chi one of the themes was staying centered. Which doesn't mean fixed in place.

Just the opposite. When you have your center, you can move in any direction. Tai Chi speaks of "eight directions," N, S, E, W and the four directions in between those quadrants.

But really there's a limitless number of directions.

In Tai Chi, as in dance, as in life, we can move so many ways. It all depends on circumstances and what we want to do. Physically, perhaps we are constrained by a bad hip, arthritis, or some other impediment.

Mentally, any limitation largely is of our own making. We're free to plan what we want to do with our one wild and precious life. And then, to do it. Question is: what "it"?

The older I get, the longer I've lived, the less important this rather than that seems. I mean, I used to feel that living life fully meant doing something big, grand, earthshaking, monumental. I wanted to change the world, or at least Oregon, or at least my neighborhood.

Mary Oliver wrote a poem about holding a grasshopper.

This grasshopper, I mean-
the one who has flung herself out of the grass,
the one who is eating sugar out of my hand,
who is moving her jaws back and forth instead of up and down-
who is gazing around with her enormous and complicated eyes.
Now she lifts her pale forearms and thoroughly washes her face.
Now she snaps her wings open, and floats away.

That's life too. Feeding a grasshopper sugar out of one's hand. With attention. With awareness.

I love how I feel the bumps in the road while riding my scooter. How smells enter my helmet in ways unknown to car drivers. How coming to a stop isn't merely a matter of braking with one foot, but involves both hands and feet, four appendages working together to bring me to a balanced state of centered rest, after which a twist of the throttle means I now can go -- any way.

Scootering home today, coming over the last large hill on Liberty Road, I saw two lights close together approaching. A motorcycle. We were the only vehicles on the road. He extended his hand in the motorcycle wave as we passed, as did I. 

For some reason (there's that clueless some sort of again) I felt deeply moved at our gestures. Two helmeted strangers passing each other at fifty miles an hour on a beautiful rural Oregon road, a brief extension of our left hands bridging the gap between us in some fashion I can't describe.

As did Mary Oliver's poem. And Rain's blog post. And the smoking beauty parlor student's comment on the shirt we had in common. And my Tai Chi teacher's thoughts on centering.

I don't know what's going on. I don't know what life is all about. But I learned something today. I just don't know what it is.

Israel and most NATO countries embrace gays in military

It drives me crazy when people (usually right-wingers) ignore what has worked in other countries, wanting the United States to go its own dysfunctional way.

Allowing gays to serve openly in the military is a great example. The first question Congress and Defense Department officials should be asking is, "what do other countries with top-notch forces do?"

Just fine. 

Most Western military forces have now removed policies excluding sexual minority members; of the 26 countries that participate militarily in NATO, more than 20 permit open lesbians, gays, or bisexuals to serve; of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, three (United Kingdom, France, and Russia) do so. The United States (see Don't ask, don't tell) technically permits gays and lesbians to serve, but only in secrecy and celibacy.

In 1993 Israel allowed homosexuals to serve openly in its armed forces, which are damn effective. A 2000 study found that military performance did not decline. 

Yet former Air Force chief of staff Merrill McPeak ignored all this evidence and somehow concluded in a recent New York Times op-ed that allowing gays to serve openly would "weaken the warrior culture."

Tell that to the Israelis, McPeak.

Catholic hospitals are fine with Senate abortion language

Ah, it's nice for my progressive and once-Catholic soul to see the head of the Catholic Health Association coming out in favor of the Senate health insurance reform bill -- the abortion language being just fine with her.

Sister Carol Keehan makes a lot of sense when she says that supporting the bill is a pro-life stance.

In her statement Saturday, Keehan made it clear she thinks any qualms about abortion language in the Senate version can be resolved, and in any event are not enough to justify opposition to what Catholic leaders say is a pro-life issue and a "human right" -- universal and affordable health care.

Well, yeah, when 44,000 Americans are estimated to die each year because they don't have health insurance, universal and affordable health care definitely is pro-life.

So anyone (I'm talking to you, wavering House Democrats) who opposes health insurance reform because of an insignificant difference in the abortion-related provisions in the House and Senate bills is on the pro-death side.

Those who only watch Fox News and listen to right-wing talk radio probably think that the Senate bill allows government funding of abortions, which is prohibited by the Hyde Amendment. 

Not true, as Politics Daily analyzes in detail.

A close reading of the two bills, however, informed by analyses from a range of experts, reveals that the pro-life claims about the Senate bill and its abortion financing provisions are, in fact, mistaken. Indeed, the Senate bill is in some respects arguably stronger in barring abortion financing and in promoting abortion reduction.

The House bill says that women who want abortion coverage in a policy offered through health insurance exchanges have to buy a separate rider. The Senate bill says that a woman has to pay for that element of the coverage with a separate check that goes into a different account.

Either way, there is no government financing of abortions.

Requiring a separate abortion policy rather than a separate premium is an administrative technicality. It merely requires one more piece of paper.

So it's no wonder Catholic hospitals favor the Senate health insurance reform bill that the House will be voting on next week. They're anti-abortion and pro-life, which is exactly what "Obamacare" stands for.

Health care reform will save money and lives

Talk about a no-brainer. Why shouldn't the United States save lots of money and help tens of millions of people?

Today the Congressional Budget Office released an updated analysis of the Senate's health care reform bill, which will be the basis for an improved version planned to be passed through reconciliation.

The bottom line is that the deficit will be reduced by $118 billion over the next ten years, which is just about the same as what the CBO projected in a previous analysis.

So why are Republicans united in their opposition to a bill that markedly reduces the deficit while giving thirty million people health insurance? Unless they like to see 44,000 deaths a year from a lack of insurance, there must be another reason.

Hating Obama and wanting to score electoral victories next November obviously is what comes to mind. Which is shameful, since public officials should be working to benefit all Americans, not just their political party.

You'd think that Tea Party types would be up in arms over Republicans wanting to sacrifice taxpayer money and lives in an effort to win a few elections. In fact, everybody should be outraged about this.

The problem, as Ezra Klein points out, is that not many people have taken the time to learn about what the health care reform bill really does, as opposed to what Republican lies purport it does.

People understand the part of the bill that costs money: We're buying health-care insurance for folks who can't afford it themselves. They don't understand the parts of the bill that save money: We're taxing high-value benefits? We've got a Medicare Commission empowered to make unnamed reforms to the system? We're moving toward bundling for hospital payments in Medicare? And since few know about these policies, much less understand them, the projections that show the bill saving money don't make much sense, and so voters don't believe them.

Well, we can't let social policy be controlled by the least informed among us. When people understand what is in the health care reform legislation, they like many aspects of it.

And polling shows that support is growing for the legislation now that Obama is getting behind it more vigorously. Makes sense: what's not to like about saving money while also saving lives?

Jim Huffman out of touch with Oregonians

I doubt that our senior senator here in Oregon, Ron Wyden, is losing sleep over Jim Huffman's announcement that he's seeking the Republican nomination to challenge Wyden next November.

At least, I assume Huffman is running as a Republican.

You can't tell from his campaign web site, which as far as I could tell doesn't mention his party affiliation at all (a wise move, given the demonstrated inability of R's to win statewide offices).

His web site is rather strangely named jobsfororegonians.com, a URL that has nothing to do with either (1) Jim Huffman or (2) the race for a U.S. Senate seat.

This also isn't an accident, since Huffman is going to have to overcome some major obstacles if he's going to have a chance of winning: himself, and Ron Wyden -- who has beaten the Republican candidate by 27% (1998) and 31% (2004) the last two elections.

Wyden wins because his moderate centrist positions appeal to Oregonians. I predict that Huffman is going to lose, by another substantial margin, because his fervent far right-wing conservatism is way out-of-touch with the majority of this state's voters.

The Democratic Party of Oregon has put up a Meet Jim Huffman site where we learn that Huffman...

-- defends massive Wall Street bonuses to those who engineered this country's financial meltdown

-- wants Social Security to be privatized so seniors can risk their retirement income to the whims of the stock market

-- denies that global warming is occurring and urges that we adapt to horrendous changes to the Earth's climate rather than try to prevent them

-- wants more conservative activist judges who will issue edicts on right-wing issues that voters reject at the ballot box

Regarding judicial activism, Jim Huffman is a big believer in property rights. But only for certain people: those who want to pave over Oregon's irreplaceable farm and forest land.

Huffman strenuously opposed Measure 49, which was supported by 62% of Oregonians, because it restored a balance between protecting the environment and allowing people to do whatever they want with their land.

People in Oregon like political moderation, in land use as elsewhere.

But Huffman says that the clear majority of Oregon voters who favored Measure 49 in 2007 are "party to tyranny." He wants activist judges to overrule land use protections approved via the ballot box (or in this state, the mail box).

Huffman is disturbed that people are starting to talk about his far-right political positions. Well, he should be. Seniors aren't going to be happy to learn that Huffman approves of a plan to dump Medicare and change it to a voucher system that would work like this:

The proposal would shift risk from the federal government to seniors themselves. The money seniors would get to buy their own policies would grow more slowly than their health-care costs, and more slowly than their expected Medicare benefits, which means that they'd need to either cut back on how comprehensive their insurance is or how much health-care they purchase.

Wow.

Huffman likes a not-so-great idea: give Medicare recipients less and less voucher money every year, so they'll have to buy cheaper and cheaper private insurance with fewer and fewer benefits, likely becoming sicker and sicker.

Good luck with your election bid, Mr. Huffman. With positions like that, you'll need it.

2010 Academy Awards lacked passion and unpredictability

Having watched the Academy Awards for many years, this gray-haired observer of countless Oscar presentations feels qualified to say, after watching the 2010 show...

Bring back the vibe of the good old days: wilder, crazier, less structured, more unpredictable. Somehow this year I felt like a lot was missing from the Academy Awards even though it ran three and a half hours.

When Sean Penn walks onto the stage to give an award and is utterly well-behaved, something is wrong. When Steve Martin, the original "wild and crazy guy," is reduced to 99% reading of scripted lines and 1% spontaneity, something is wrong.

When the camera quickly pans away from the single show of genuine social outrage (during the acceptance speech for best Documentary won by makers of a film about Japan's cruel slaughter of dolphins) -- a guy holding up a placard with a save-the-dolphins text message number -- something is wrong.

When the dance/music numbers are ho-hum, and there's no real hilarity, just some mild chuckling moments, something is wrong. When the hugely talented Sasha Baron Cohen is banned from the show because it was feared his Avatar spoof could ruffle James Cameron's feathers, something is wrong.

That said, I found the 2010 Academy Awards to be pleasant and entertaining, as the Oscars show always is. I just frequently thought, as I sat through the 210 minutes, about memorable moments that I remember from past years.

A naked streaker. Jack Palance's one-armed push ups. Roberto Benigni going wild. Sacheen Littlefeather refusing to accept Marlon Brando's best actor award, at his request, because of the film industry's mistreatment of Indians.

These sorts of uncontrolled moments don't happen much any more, because the Academy apparently prefers bland over real.

Sad.

Hollywood is filled with talented actors who make us feel things we've never felt before. But the Academy Awards has turned into a predictable "I've seen this before" show.

Why Salem sucks compared to Portland

One of the favorite activities of people who live in Salem (Oregon) is asking ourselves, "What's wrong with this town?"

My wife and I have a Salem address, though we're outside the city limits, so we're entitled to engage in this ongoing question that lacks a precise answer. Here's my current contribution to coming to grips with Why does Salem suck? 

I'm moved to write about this subject because I just got back from a visit to Portland's Bridgeport Village, a mere 45 minutes driving time from our home -- yet light years distant in terms of energy, interest, positive vibe, and overall entertainment value.

There's nothing like Bridgeport Village in Salem. Or anything like the Pearl District in Salem. Or anything like NW 23rd Street in Salem. (I'm vaguer about Portland's east side, but I'm sure there's plenty of cool areas over there that also put Salem to shame.)

The best way I can describe living in Salem is when you feel rundown and lackluster, but you're not really sick. You just feel out of sorts. It's only when you're back to normal that you truly appreciate the difference between vibrant health and merely getting along.

When I get out of the car in Bridgeport Village, or some other Portland locale my wife and I like to visit, I immediately feel energized. Salem sluggishness lifts for a few hours.

Today I was able to move easily between four favorite stores: the always interesting Apple Store, a great Barnes & Noble, REI, and Whole Foods. Each was filled with people who seemed to express more positivity and a vest for life than Salemites.

One of the theories put forth by locals to explain the Salem sucks phenomenon is that the governmental and institutional side of Salem -- which is significant -- casts some sort of psychological pall (I'm tempted to say "spell," but that would fit better with the Massachusetts Salem) over the city.

We have the main state mental hospital. Penitentiaries. Government offices galore. And of course the Capitol Building, which houses state legislators who often can't be described in any sort of positive terms.

There may be something to this state capital theory. Salem seems to be to Portland as Olympia is to Seattle and Sacramento is to San Francisco: a second-class city that is over-shadowed by it's nearby way cooler metropolitan area.

One problem with Salem, among many, is that there isn't any area or neighborhood -- not one -- which has a critical mass of "must see/go to" places that appeal to a wide variety of people like so many locales in Portland do.

I mean, there are places a Prius-driving, vegetarian, progressive guy, namely me, enjoys a lot in Salem. I like the Great Harvest Bread Company, Venti's, the RJ Dance Studio, and Pacific Martial Arts (where I have my Tai Chi classes).

Each is on the same downtown block of Court Street. The Beanery, my favorite coffee house, is just a short distance away. So this area of Salem is where I hang out the most. But it doesn't draw people the same way a genuine attraction like Bridgeport Village or NW 23rd Street does.

There's just not enough there anywhere in Salem for that. Hopefully one day there will be. The downtown riverfront holds considerable promise, as it has begun to be redeveloped in a mixed use fashion.

For now, though, the present is pretty depressing. Whenever we drive into town we pass the Sunnyslope shopping center in south Salem. A stand alone building with a drive-up window has been under construction there for several months.

Naturally my wife and I have been curious about what it would turn out to be. A week or so ago I came home and said, "There's a sign up on the new Sunnyslope store. You'll be underwhelmed to learn that it's a... Subway."

"Figures," Laurel responded. "Salem loves Subway. Big high calorie uncreative sandwiches. There's plenty of Subway stores in town. Now we've got another one."

Well, people who live in Salem are used to being disappointed. We missed out on a Trader Joes when Corvallis got a store, though Salem has three times more people. On the title of a post about Trader Joes passing up Salem I also used the words, "Salem sucks."

Probably will again.

"Coffee Party" movement fits my tastes

I like coffee more than tea. And I like the Coffee Party movement hugely more than the Tea Party version.

The Coffee Party got brewed up by Annabel Park via a status update on her Facebook page. 

let's start a coffee party . . . smoothie party. red bull party. anything but tea. geez. ooh how about cappuccino party? that would really piss 'em off bec it sounds elitist . . . let's get together and drink cappuccino and have real political dialogue with substance and compassion.

Friends replied, and more friends replied. So last month, in her Silver Spring apartment, Park started a fan page called "Join the Coffee Party Movement." Within weeks, her inbox and page wall were swamped by thousands of comments from strangers in diverse locales, such as the oil fields of west Texas and the suburbs of Chicago.

May the Coffee Party live long and prosper. This country certainly needs it.

Outrage at how things are going isn't limited to the angry, anti-government, Obama-bashing acolytes of the Tea Party movement. I'm convinced that there are just as many -- if not more -- people who are frustrated because they feel that government is key to the solution of our most pressing problems, rather than being the cause of them.

So far the only Coffee Party group within 100 miles of me is being organized in Portland. Oh, well. Progress always comes late to Salem (we're still waiting for a Trader Joes to come to town).

I've signed on to the cause through the Coffee Party Facebook page. And whenever I have a cup of coffee, which is frequent, I'll send out positive caffeinated vibrations to the group.

Here's a five-minute You Tube video that does a good job of communicating why the Coffee Party makes a heck of a lot more sense than the Tea Party.

Exorcise evil Adobe Flash from Safari browser

Ah, I feel purified.

Ever since Apple announced the release of its iPad tablet computer, which notably lacks support for the Adobe Flash Player, I've been wondering whether the ubiquitous Flash is as evil as Apple makes it out to be.

But Apple’s support for Flash has been flagging. While Flash is present on nearly every Apple desktop and laptop computer, the company decided that Flash would not be used on the iPhone. Apple has argued that the Flash technology is too slow and unduly taxes laptops and netbooks. The company also has concerns over Flash’s vulnerability to viruses and other malware, as well as the way Flash-based content can voraciously consume battery life.

So I was primed for an exorcism. I find Flash ads annoying, and they do seem to slow down my MacBook Pro's loading of Flash-heavy web pages.

Browsing the TUAW site for Apple news and gossip this morning, I came across "Browser security: "The main thing is not to install Flash!"

Yikes! I'm insecure! I have Flash!

Fortunately, the recommended solution was easy. Just took a minute or two. I headed over to ClickToFlash, downloaded the free software, restarted Safari, and praise shareware! -- I was free of Flash (unless I wanted it).

I did send $6 to the developer via PayPal, so ClickToFlash was voluntarily non-free for me. After seeing how it worked on a few web sites, I was grateful enough to fork over the cost of a few lattes.

The New York Times home page had three Flash applications; MSNBC, two; CNN, one. I didn't feel like I missed anything when I visited the sites Flashless. And all I had to do was click on the grayed-out box to have ClickToFlash release the exorcism.

Over on YouTube, I conducted some additional most pleasant research: watching Shakira's "She Wolf" video several times -- first in its native Flash format, then in the ClickToFlash H264 (MPEG-4) option.

I'm sort of vague about what H264 is. But if it isn't evil Flash, that must be good. The video played fine with it, absent a pop-up ad that appeared in the usual You Tube player.

So if you use Safari on a Mac, give ClickToFlash a try. If you aren't convinced that Flash is evil, check out a few other opinions here and here.