Anyone remember Thurston Howell III from Gilligan's Island?  Jim Backus was the actor, I believe, and much like our President he spoke with his chin elevated and with that elegant, aristocratic drawl that is so often used to mock the dialect of the inexplicably wealthy.  Backus' character and his wife, were the wealthy couple in the cast of misfits shipwrecked on a deserted island.  Constantly put upon by the lack of amenities and comforts, luxuries and pleasures that they had become accustomed to.
 
If only Backus had lived long enough to become Speaker of the House.  He would have found himself having to adjust to the excessive showering of amenities, comforts, luxuries and pleasures bestowed upon him.  Our beloved Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, has recently had unearthed to the public her penchant for no-holds-barred travel on military aircraft, most notably the gorgeous and opulent Gulfstream IV.  Any pilot, myself included, genuflects in awe at the passing of a G-5 either on ground or in air, because they are the Rolls Royce of corporate air travel.
 
Pelosi, it seems, likes to block one off for her own use nearly every weekend.  Indeed, emails from military personnel at Travis AFB where the Gulfstreams are based, contained complaints regarding Pelosi's heavy use of the aircraft.  "She blocks one off for the weekend, and then cancels at the last minute, as one might do with a car service.  We have crews drive in, caterers deliver food, pre-flights performed on aircraft...and then she cancels."  Sounds like a dream, doesn't she?
 
It doesn't end there, though.  Our mouse-like Speaker has spent over 2 million dollars of our tax money on private air-taxi service in just two years.  She has spent over 100 thousand dollars on food and booze. Think about it...$1,000. every week.  The list of liquors reads like something from a high-end Manhattan club.  Fine cognacs and vodkas and brandy.  Only the best.  On over a third of the flights she had family members on board.  How impressive she is, commanding such service from the underlings.  Imagine, having a Gulfstream at your disposal, and yet being so intellectually inept, that you don't even consider the cost and inconvenience of having one "on hold" every single weekend, "just in case", I suppose.
 
I don't know about you, but the thought of my tax dollars being spent on as much as a single peanut for that abhorrent woman just makes my blood boil.  In her usual dismissive style, her response to the release of this information is that her "use of military aircraft is in line with what other Speakers have done."  Fantastic.  Let's just hope and pray that prior behavior of politicians does not become the universal benchmark for the rest of us.  Can anyone say "John Edwards"?  "Hey, the last guy that ran for President also had a little action on the side while his wife was battling cancer, extorted money from the aptly named Bunny Mellon to keep his girlfriend in clover, and then paid a sycophant-aide to take the fall for him...so...why shouldn't I do it?"
 
The reason, Minnie Pelosi, is that Americans have had it up to here (I'm holding my hand just below my nose) with the cavalier spending by government and government officials.  While telling the rest of us to continue "tightening our belts", until our legs are pinched off, apparently, their spending continues to expand and grow like a mutant octopus.  Pelosi, ever-watchful of the less fortunate, seems able to forget their plight with ease as soon as the gear goes up on her G-5.  Well, let me correct myself there..."our G-5".  Let's not forget, dear, that those aircraft were bought and paid for by the American people with money borrowed from the Chinese, and we want some respect.  We also would like to see a rapid decompression under her seat, but hey...you can't have everything.  Unless your name is Nancy Pelosi.

As a young musician playing in a band I remember being told that "less is more".  In other words, it wasn't the quantity, but the quality of what you were playing that was important.  I'm sure there are other analogies, but generally speaking, from a mathematical standpoint, less can't be more, or it wouldn't be "less" in the first place.  My head hurts.
 
And your head will hurt, too, if you keep reading.  In Portland, Maine, businesses are outraged that after having been regulated into using less electricity, to diminish their corporate "carbon footprint", they found themselves in a different rate group with their providers and ultimately were paying more money for less electricity.   Ouch!  Talk about cruel irony.  It's hard to imagine that in this dire time for the economy, when most businesses are struggling to remain afloat, that having to pay a higher electric bill for less product would be met with much enthusiasm.  And it wasn't.
 
I've written before that I believe a cleaner planet is a better planet.  I believe, pragmatically, that it is not beyond belief that "man" has impacted the environment negatively.  Just the burning of fossil fuels over the last hundred or so years, at such an enormous rate, could plausibly, in my humble opinion, have some detrimental effect to our environment.  Call me a nut.
 
However I don't buy into the global warming hysteria, nor do I subscribe to any political affiliation that demands I adhere to a pre-determined position.  I don't believe the argument is strengthened either way when it becomes a political football.  Political footballs don't move, they hover.  Nothing ever gets agreed upon, and consequently solutions are rarely manifest.
 
The case in Maine, though, demonstrates how knee-jerk policy often comes back to bite you in the buttocks.  It reminds us how the electric companies weren't born yesterday, and are already anticipating ways to maintain revenue levels in a world where everyone is being told to "use less".  There isn't a father or husband in the world, including me, who is not well versed in the flamingo-like dance of running around the house turning lights out behind other occupants who are less familiar with the electric bill.  Still, on a global level, solid solutions come from reasoned thought that already considered things like "rate groups" and "unintended consequences".
 
Another example of bitten buttocks comes in the form of the increasingly popular LED traffic signals.  They look nice.  They are brighter and use much less electricity to operate than the old-fashioned traffic lights.  They also don't emit any heat, like a regular bulb, and this created problems in parts of the country where snow and ice are part of the weather menu.  During snow storms, the lights became covered with snow and ice and completely ineffectual.  So, in many towns and states that found themselves with these lights at hundreds of intersections, public works and highway crews were forced to go around to these lights during bad weather, and thaw them out with heaters from a bucket truck.  In some areas, they installed small make-shift heaters to keep the lights from icing over.  In other places, they undertook the more (though not much more) humiliating task of replacing the units altogether with...you guessed it...the old ones.  Consider the energy wasted, the muddy "carbon footprint", as a result of hundreds of utility trucks and crews having to be dispatched to "thaw traffic lights" every time there was inclement weather and the temperature was below freezing.  What's the old saying about cutting off your nose?
 
There is something to be learned here and most of us learned it in kindergarten.  Someone wrote a story about it involving a tortoise and a hare.  I'm not sure that book is still available, or if PETA has had it removed from libraries as it depicts turtles as slow-moving, but smart, and rabbits as fast, but not all that bright.  From a pet's standpoint, it uses the worst stereotypes imaginable, but if you can find a copy it's worth the read if only for the valuable lesson.  And read it slowly.  Haste makes waste.

One hand giveth, the other taketh away.  That's how I'm feeling after days of euphoria following the victory of Scott Brown over Martha Coakley in the Massachusetts special election.  A stunning upset that finally tells the world, or more importantly, the Obama administration, that the Tea Party movement is not imaginary.  It's not a bunch of rednecks, it's not a bunch of angry republicans...it's working-class Americans saying "enough is enough".
 
What could be more demonstrative of that fact than a republican winning Ted Kennedy's seat?  I know, I know, it's the people's seat, as Scott Brown reminded us during his debate with the diminutive Martha Coakley.  Better yet, he went on to prove it with a solid win that came with margins that made stealing the election impossible for the corrupt political machine of that state.  Senator Scott Brown, in my humble opinion, may be one of the best things to happen to this country in a long time.  It was more than refreshing to hear him in Washington, speaking in decisive, clear tones and articulating the simple rules of the game that most of us would like to see implemented in our Federal Government.  Fiscal responsibility being first and foremost.
 
Just as I was beginning to wonder if the euphoric feeling would ever subside, the Supreme Court stepped in and squashed it for me with their ruling last week regarding some of the basic tenets of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform bill.  The legislation, originally intended to squeeze corruption from the political donation process, enraged most republicans and further distanced McCain from his party when he introduced it.  We all say we want politicians who "get things done" and who "reach across the aisle" and who "compromise in an effort to produce actual legislation", but be careful if you are a politician who actually does any of those things.
 
Remember when McCain called for the troop surge in Iraq?  This was not a popular notion at the time and his fellow republicans ran in the other direction, but McCain was right.  He put what was best for the country ahead of his own political ambitions, an act that is as rare in Washington, D.C. as are Polar Bear sightings in Hawaii.
 
McCain-Feingold was no exception.  Republicans cried "foul" and felt that free speech was being squashed.  I find that argument ridiculous and invite anybody to find me one person in this country who is not free to speak his or her mind, on any subject, in any media, with fear of repercussion.  I mean, really...look at what transpires in this country.  We have everything and anything available to us 24/7, every conceivable type of information or opinion.  The argument that Free Speech as guaranteed to us in the Constitution, was somehow taken away or diminished by not allowing corporations, groups or lobbyists to offer huge donations to political campaigns, seems ludicrous to me.
 
I don't necessarily want Boeing, AIG, or Wal-Mart to have a bigger voice than the rest of us.  But it wasn't about that, anyway, and we all know it.  It was about big donations being rewarded with big federal contracts and politicians being paid off for the favor.  We all know that.  We all know what McCain-Feingold was meant to do.  We all know why republicans hated it.  It was killing the cash cow, the goose that laid the golden eggs, and again, when it comes down to cash or character, most politicians will take the cash and compromise their character.
 
I laugh at the people I hear celebrating this ruling as some kind of victory.  It's like the chickens celebrating a new dental plan for the fox.  Watch now, as the river of corrupt money again floods the political process.  The very last thing we need right now, and it is odd, also, that the Supreme Court seemed to have missed the "Scott heard 'round the world" from Massachusetts.  Let's see who, during the mid-terms and the campaign of 2012, takes the big money, and how they pay back that favor if and when elected.  Then, put a little star next to their name...and make sure they get booted out next time around, as is about to happen to most of Congress this Fall.

Probably more than you think.  I'm not talking about that popular parcel delivery service with the brown trucks that park in the middle of the road, I'm talking Scott Brown of Massachusetts who is the talk of the country, and for good reason.
 
The coveted U.S. Senate seat left vacant after the passing of Ted Kennedy, and widely assumed to be promptly filled by another well-heeled political hack from the political hack Center of The Universe, Massachusetts, is suddenly in jeopardy.  To the utter dismay of hard-core Massachusetts democrats, the campaign of Attorney General Martha Coakley, is in shambles and by Tuesday night we'll know just how bad.  This doesn't mean she's going to lose, although I hope so, but even if she wins, the campaign has been a train wreck, and the fact that she didn't simply walk away with the election, as most people expected, has shaken the National Democratic Committee to it's core.
 
Instead, she actually had to face a viable opponent, and given the current political climate in the country, Scott Brown was the right guy, in the right place, at the right time.  He has that most important element working for him.  Momentum.  And, it came at just the right time.  Not too early...not too late.  Nearly every poll, save the Boston Globe's, has shown Brown gaining on Coakley.  First fifteen points...then ten...then five...then two...and now a dead heat by nearly every account.
 
It makes sense, as both candidates are emblematic of the political fire that is burning in the country right now.  It's almost like a steel-cage death match.  Coakley, the entrenched pol, steadily climbing the ladder for years, but with a career blemished by bad plays and deal-making.  Brown, on the other hand, the consummate every-man.  Two decades in the National Guard, a family man, still driving an old pick up truck with 200,000 miles on it.  Speaking with conviction about what people want to hear.  Smaller government, "no" to the health care bill, "no" to increased government spending, "no" to the massive over-reaching that is becoming the moniker of the Obama administration.  He answered David Gergen, who moderated a much publicized debate between the two, that the race was for, "not Kennedy's seat, not the democrat's seat, but the people's seat...".  This line went instantly into the campaign-line Hall of Fame, along with Reagan's famous "I paid for this microphone" line from his Presidential campaign.  Gergen, of course, made it easy.  Deeming himself "neutral" but then asking Brown about Roe v. Wade then asking Coakley about her favorite sandwich, the questioning was typically stacked in one sides favor.
 
Still, Brown will have to take it by a wide margin, to off-set the attempts that will be made by corrupt forces to shape the outcome of this election.  Let's not forget, this is a State House with more convicts than most prisons.  Only Chicago conjures up quicker images of political corruption than Massachusetts, and Chicago doesn't hold a candle to Massachusetts in my opinion.  The Big Dig itself is an internationally recognized hallmark of graft, payoffs and corruption.  The state is second only to Vermont in their absolute repudiation of any attempt to capture and convict child-rapists.  Coakley herself, though she has campaigned as one who is tough on child predators, has been benign when it comes to protecting children.  Indeed she was implicit in protecting a police officer who was convicted, finally, of sodomizing his own niece with a curling iron.  She spent weeks in the burn unit at Children's Hospital.  Coakley has been at odds with Rep. Karyn Polito and Wendy Murphy, two of only a small handful of Massachusetts politicos who have faced the problem of child predators head on.
 
Martha Coakley, decent person though she may be, is out of step with average Americans.  Like her political counterparts, she just doesn't get it.  People have had it.  We're rising up.  It's not going to be business as usual anymore. Real hope and change is coming, I expect in the mid-terms this year, only it's not "slogan hope" it's the real deal.  Change?  Oh, yeah...change is coming.  We're going to "change" back to a government that reflects the desires and wishes of the majority of Americans, not the few.  A government that will stop and lend an ear to folks whose parents and grandparents wore, or maybe died wearing, a uniform for this country.  We can have compassion for the less fortunate, we can open our arms to people seeking a better life, but we can also expect them to understand that there are citizens who would like their voice heard as well, maybe even....gulp...first.
 
Win or lose Scott Brown will be a household name from this point forward.  Like Sarah Palin early on, he has captured the imagination of many.  And how refreshing, at least for me, to have someone capturing my imagination for a change, instead of simply straining it.

You're probably thinking this is a confession-type piece, finally coming clean about my foot deformity, but no, that would have been spelled "toes".  This is a reflection-type piece, in keeping with the New Year, as sometimes it is worth a glance back, even while considering the future.
 
Our local newspaper, The Cabinet, ran a photo a few weeks ago of a local ski hill called "Twin Tows", named after it's two...count 'em...two...rope tows.  The picture had been taken in 1964 by the late Bernice Perry, also a New Hampshire treasure.  Twin Tows was a treasure, one of many smaller ski hills that used to be a staple across New Hampshire.  I was fortunate enough to have grown up just several hundred yards from the top of this venerable hill, and it was an integral part of my childhood.
 
This particular picture showed a crowd of several hundred, which was not unusual on the weekends.  There was night skiing, too, on Tuesdays and Thursdays, and tickets were $1.00, daytime or night time.  There was a small warm-up hut at the bottom, a small snack bar with hot dogs, hot chocolate and the like, and a small rental shop.  Looking back, it was very Norman Rockwellesque.  A place where folks from the surrounding communities gathered for good, healthy fun.  Even a few prominent skiers got their start here, including Steve Lathrop of Amherst and George Frost.
 
Grooming the slopes did not include any fancy Sno-Cat, just a row of us kids, side stepping the entire hill.  Just that part would kill me now.  And my kids?  Unless the grooming can be done with a remote...
 
The rope tow was a monument to Yankee ingenuity in itself.  The brainchild of Arthur Hodgen and the late John MacDonald, both of Wilton, NH.  Buick motors, if I remember correctly, and wheel rims for pulleys, tacked to the top of a telephone pole.
Safety procedures at the top of the tow included either John or Arthur grabbing your ankle if you became somehow attached to the rope and were heading for the inner workings of the engine house.  You know what they say about watching sausage being made.
 
Learning the nuance of rope tow riding took some time, too.  Grab too fast and it would pull your arms right out of their sockets.  You had to slowly increase your grip until you started to move, and then hold tight.  Take too long increasing your grip, though, and your mittens will be on fire in no time.  Then there is the matter of keeping your skis in the tracks, as a single ski shooting off in one direction, while being pulled by a Buick-powered rope, can give your groin muscle a lightning strike, so to speak.
 
It was some place.  More memories than I could shake a ski pole at, and friendships forged there that still endure today, some forty five years later.  It's sad, that as a culture, we have litigated ourselves into a corner where such a place could never exist today.  Insurance companies would buckle over in laughter at the very proposal of insuring such a place.  That's too bad.  These places were priceless, they served their communities in many ways, and are generally a part of New Hampshire that I miss.

"Frankly, Scarlett, I don't give a damn!"  Yes, and in this rendition of the timeless classic, "Scarlett" is code for about seventy percent of the country and it is our President making the strident exclamation.  "Blunder Road" might be the title of the musical analogy for the Obama Team.
 
The handling of the terror-attempt over the skies of Detroit is just another example of the incessant fumbling that is quickly becoming the trademark of this President.  A delayed and somewhat cavalier response to the initial event on Christmas Day, followed by an even longer delay in returning with a more forceful performance.
 
And it is a performance, make no doubt about it.  It is becoming increasingly clear that this President is a fine speaker, but there's not a whole lot more than that when you peel back the layers, or rather, as events peel back the layers for us.  Yet, we learned this about him long ago.  His first foray onto the campaign trail left audiences weak and starry-eyed.  And why not, because as we look back now, we see that both the speeches, and the promises made in them, were larger-than-life.  Worse than that, really.  They were pure fantasy.
 
Oh, how we tortured George H.W. Bush for his "read my lips" line which had become the hallmark of his campaign, and when circumstances later forced less enjoyable news to pass from those same lips, he was skewered by the Press.  And yet that renegotiation of a campaign promise seems like child's play now.  This President as left campaign rhetoric so far behind, even the Hubble Telescope can't find it no.  Yes, gone with the wind are the campfire songs that promised "change" and "hope" and "transparency" in government.  The promise of "no more earmarks" and Congressional jockeying being covered live on C-Span.  The halcyon days of simply making promises and effectual speeches are long gone now, replaced with a legislative bulldozer that simply tramples everything in it's path, and dismisses as ignorant or racist, any disagreement with the Obama philosophy.
 
You know things are bad for Obama when his number one sycophant, the abominable Nancy Pelosi, slides in a barb about the President, when questioned about the closed-door dealings of Congress and the campaign promise that those things weren't going to happen anymore, says "he said a lot of things  during the campaign...".  Then again, she was so taken aback by the question that she almost fell over, and she may well not remember saying it.  It's one of few things she has ever said that I remember, because I am usually so stunned while watching any news video of her, that I don't even hear what she is saying.  I find it increasingly marvelous that so many undesirable traits and mannerisms managed to coagulate in one person.  She looks and acts more like a creature one would find nibbling on cheese in a basement, than she does a person who is only slightly less powerful than the President.  How....HOW...does such an insipid, diminutive, shell of a human being ascend to such a position?  Constantly impatient with us stupid-folk who are so concerned with a reliably inept government taking over a tenth of the country's economy, and borrowing a trillion dollars to do it.
 
Janet Napolitano, too entrenched in her own dream to resign after announcing, with a straight face, that "the system worked" in the wake of a suicide bomber travelling half way across the globe with an explosive in his underwear.  Someone who was on a red flag list and a known danger.  Janet, whose own hairstyle should have been the first warning sign that there are some slow moving returns on the radar scope of that brain, had she a shred of dignity, would have spared Obama having to take the sword for her.  They sent her out to try and launch that line.  When it doesn't fly, you take the cyanide.  Then again, we're talking about a woman who looks like "Thing 3" from Cat in the Hat.  Honestly, there just has to be a screw loose there.
 
Sadly, there is much at stake.  The future of the country, for one thing.  A livable future for our children and grandchildren comes to mind as well.  What is more disturbing about this President and his followers, though, at least to me, is the way they love to dismiss the rest of us as too stupid to know what's good for us.  A little humility would go a long way, yet there is not a single person on that staff who even knows the meaning of the word, much lass has a grasp of that concept.  Maybe it's best, because I would hate to see the movement that is afoot, to save this country, fizzle and die because we think things are getting better.  The mid-terms are getting close, Obama and his Flying Monkeys are going to want us to doze off in a field of poppies, sleeping quietly as snowflakes touch our face, while they finish their work of dismantling the Constitution and arranging civilian trials in this country for every two-bit thug that has killed, or wants to kill, Americans.  Don't do it.  This is no time to let up.

Though it is against my nature to be anything other than cynical and jaded, I decided to write my last column for 2009 about something uplifting.  Think "up", and "lift", and airplanes come to mind.  More honestly, as a private pilot for over twenty years, it takes even less than that to get me to think about airplanes, but still, there is an uplifting story readily available.  In a way, it's a story that gave me a sense of hope for the New Year.
 
For anyone interested in aviation, or big-business, Boeing is an icon.  They've been around forever, built  many of the venerable bombers that were so instrumental in our winning World War II, and of course, have designed and manufactured some of the most reliable, safe and efficient aircraft for the commercial transportation industry.  Consider the staple 737, the only aircraft that Southwest operates, and any other of the 700 Series planes that crowd the global airspace on any given day. Remember the unveiling of the 747?  It was, and still is, and incredible machine.
 
Boeing has been home to many of the sharpest minds in the aviation world, from designers, engineers, fabricators and of course, test pilots.  The company history reads like a fine novel, particularly through the post-war years of prosperity and industrial growth.  It seems every decade or so, they roll out something ground-breaking, and their latest addition to the skies is no exception.
 
The 787 Dreamliner has been in the works for years and was late coming out of the hangar, but a few weeks ago at their home field in Washington state, the Dreamliner did indeed roll down that famed runway for her inaugural flight.  Now will begin the gauntlet of rigorous flight testing and Federal Aviation Administration regulatory milestones to be met, or more likely, exceeded.  It is another chapter in the spangled history of a great American company.  A history not void of the occasional scandal, by the way, but nonetheless, a company at the top of the heap in terms of developing and utilizing American ingenuity.
 
The new plane is made nearly exclusively of composites as opposed to aluminum.  "Composite" has become a second word, now considered trade-name for the ingenious material, also bourn of American ingenuity, that layers different materials, mostly plastics, fibers and resin, into a material that is lighter than, and much stronger than, any metal.  It's truly amazing when you think about the environmental stresses that complex, high-altitude airplanes are exposed to.  Temperature variations of 100 degrees or better are commonplace, from the temperature on the ground at the airport, to the temperature at 35,000 feet.  Wind, turbulence, the weight of payload, centrifugal and gravitational forces that are part of any flight, the stresses of landing and departures.  On and on, and this amazing material surpasses everything else in endurance and longevity.
 
They already have orders for some 840 planes, and they don't even have final FAA certification yet.  Above and beyond any of this though, what the Dreamliner also does is allow the rest of us to dream again.  Dream of the days when American know-how was the best in the world.  Our technology and business prowess was the envy of the world.  An idea travels from thought, to paper, to design, construction and then marketing.  Jobs are created.  Not "created" the way we're used to thinking now, like a wand drawn from a wizard's sleeve, but "created" the pure and correct way, a solid business built on a product for which there is demand and need.
 
I guess it's my nostalgic side, but I get a little mushy everytime I see a new plane roll down that field in Washington.  They've been doing it a long time.  There have been dreams that turned into nightmares, and others that exceeded expectation.  Great and courageous men and women have died pressing the dynamic envelope of new airplanes, but did so doing what they love most and understanding the value of their contribution, though it is lost on most of us.  All of these things make it ever more the miracle that they are still building airplanes at Boeing, and still out there on the cutting edge of new technology.
 
Like Jake LaMotta in "Raging Bull", they've been bruised and battered and up against the ropes more than once at Boeing, but also like Jake, they can legitimately make the claim that they "never went down".  Here's wishing Boeing, Inc., another hundred years.

You're probably already groaning, expecting me to launch into some pre-Christmas rant on religion.  We all have our personal reasons for "believing" or not when it comes to a higher power, but I've been offered a reason to believe in something even more elusive these days.  Hope.
 
It comes in the form of an announcement by Bill Wrenn, Department of Corrections Commissioner for the State of New Hampshire.  In the interest of full disclosure, I like Bill Wrenn.  Back when he was the Chief of Police in Hampton, and President of the Chiefs of Police Association, he was one of the first people to call me to support my effort to gather signatures and petition the state to adopt stronger laws protecting children.  He went on to be part of a study/task force, along with former Attorney General Kelly Ayotte, that eventually led to new and enhanced laws in New Hampshire dealing with sexual predators.  So I am not surprised to see Bill thinking out-of-the-box and bringing new ideas to the table.
 
The latest is an effort to allow early release for illegal immigrants, incarcerated in New Hampshire, in exchange for a quick deportation back to their country of origin.  There are caveats.  The applicant must be serving time for a non-violent offense, and must have served at least a third of their prescribed sentence.  Wrenn signed an agreement with federal immigration officials on Friday, December 11th.  Getting rid of some of these guys will save the state money and relieve some of the over-crowding that our prisons, like prisons all over the country, are experiencing.
 
It is odd, though, that there is a "fast-track" deportation option available.  I mean...if we can do it quickly, and without fuss, for these guys, then why not expand that program to include, say...all illegal immigrants?  Somehow, we're not supposed to notice in cases like this, how the government, like when they're granting pay raises for themselves, can act so quickly and decisively.  It's almost as though they're capable of being efficient.  Weird.
 
And the program also glosses over the more laughable probability that, without a secure border and an effective, controlled immigration policy in place, most of these criminals will most likely be back here before their cell is re-painted.  These problems are systemic, and certainly not under Wrenn's domain, but they do call into question the ultimate efficacy of the program.  Still, it is forward-thinking in my view, and is pragmatic.  Why are we feeding and housing these guys?  This program all but eliminates the red-tape in deportation proceedings which, normally, can "take years".  How, may you ask, could it possibly take "years" to deport an illegal immigrant?  Because it's not a congressional pay raise, that's why.
 
The program, in other states, does not require illegals to finish their sentence, but Wrenn felt it was important that they serve at least a third of their time.  The law also requires that illegals who return after deportation, if caught, will serve the balance of their sentence.  If they're found the second time, that is.  Wrenn went on to say that there "are certain benefits to removing these folks from this country who are here illegally and committing crimes."  I would edit that to read that there are "only benefits" to removing these people.
 
In 2005 my wife and I were on vacation with our kids in the Bahamas when we received a phone call.  My wife's cousin, Mary Nagle of New City, New York, had been raped and murdered.  We were devastated.  She and her husband, Danny, had two children, lived in Westchester County, and were not part of a lifestyle or community where you ever expect to get that call.
Danny had gone to work and had hired a friend's company to do some work on the house.  Some power washing and minor deck repair.  The company sent Ronald Herrera Castellanos, an illegal immigrant who would hang on street corners in the mornings to get work.  He had outstanding warrants for assault charges out of New Jersey.  Apparently the cops couldn't find him, but any number of local contractors could find him every morning.
 
Danny got a call at work, after dropping his kids at school.  This animal, Castellanos, had brutally raped and murdered Mary, left the house in Danny's clothes, and called the numbers in Mary's cell phone, including her mother, to boast about his deed.
Castellanos was caught, tried, and sentenced to 133 years.  Danny and his kids got life.
 
You can see, the illegal immigrant issue is a sensitive one with me.  While I am glad to see any program that reduces the number of them here, I am irritated to learn that there is some "special" program to deport them quickly, but it is only available under these most strict circumstances, and, more importantly, only after a crime has been committed.  In that regard, it seems ludicrous.  But maybe that's just me.  I'm thinking, and I bet Danny Nagle would be thinking, it would have been nice if we could have "fast-tracked" Ronald Castellanos back to his homeland before he had a chance to murder a young American mother and wife and ruined the lives of her husband, children, family and friends.

Between health care, Copenhagen and Tiger Woods, I sometimes wonder if there are any politicians who would recognize a salient issue if it bit them on the butt.  Boy, do we get lost in the maze, and it's easy to do.  Whether or not you're a scandal-hound, the implosion of Tiger Woods is hard not to glance at, at least.  The world summit on global warming in Copenhagen is better than Saturday Night Live (which has recently become funny again for some reason...), as scientists, world leaders and hangers-on arrive in an army of private jets and limousines, leaving a carbon-footprint the size of Texas just in transportation needs, never mind the exhausting of hot air that is transpiring there. President Obama receives a Nobel Peace Price at a most awkward time, as Gore's Nobel suddenly becomes biodegradable in the wake of the "warming science" fraud disclosure.
 
And so it is with an even greater sense of relief that I see that at least a couple of our representatives have shown the courage to talk about the pink elephant in the room.  That one, great issue that seems to elude even the most cursory discussion by the liberals...our national debt.
 
Add pride to my sense of relief.  Pride that one of the Senators is our own Judd Gregg.  Gregg and Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., have spearheaded a growing effort to confront the issue of our debt, head on.  They have introduced a bill, already co-sponsored by 27 democrats, to appoint an 18-member commission of lawmakers and executive branch members to address "unsustainable long-term fiscal imbalance", otherwise known as our multi-trillion dollar national debt.
 
Congress, meanwhile, faces a vote on whether or not to raise the federal debt ceiling above the current $12.1 trillion limit.  See if you can guess how that vote will go.  Accordingly, expect the Gregg-Conrad effort to be met with less than unbridled enthusiasm.  Remember...most of these guys talk a good game, but can never pull the trigger that results in the eventual de-feathering of their own lush pillow.  Another shocker?  Speaker Nancy Pelosi has already rejected the idea.  Of course she has.  There's a Republican involved.
 
I'll bet she'll be all in favor of President Obama's idea, just announced, that the $200 billion left over in TARP funds should be used for "job-creating efforts".  His words, not mine.  Ahh...yes...another hundred billion or so, and we should all hope that it is the same grand success that the first $500 billion were.  Just that little shot in the arm helped bring unemployment...woops....hold on a minute.  Let me use another example.  Wait...o.k., I guess there isn't an example.
 
Rather than leave that money there and be relieved that we didn't burn it along with the rest of the TARP money, these idiots can't wait to throw it against the wall and see what sticks.  Stunning.  Astonishing.  Oblivious to the literal cries and whelps of just about half the country that is scared senseless over our debt and spending, the band plays on as the hull fills with water.
 
I hope this task force of Judd's takes shape and that they can develop sound ideas for getting us out of this mess.  I urge everyone to write them, send them an email, let them know you're on board.  They'll need all the support they can get, because the notions of fiscal restraint and balanced budgets are quickly going the way of bobby socks and cherry knee-highs.
 
If Gregg and Conrad fail, I suppose there is always the last hope that the other half of the country will wake up and see what is happening here.  My children will work like indentured servants and keep little of their paychecks.  To acquire and sustain what all of us know as a relatively comfortable, middle-class lifestyle will be all but impossible for them.  We sputter and stumble in our hare-brained attempts at fixes...cash for clunkers comes to mind, with each one failing and only ultimately expanding the debt and worsening the crisis.  There are people who have done everything right, worked and paid their bills, and they are losing everything, while our President lies awake at night wondering how to insure non-citizens, provide trials in America for terrorists and be sure that CEO's don't make too much money.
 
Thank you Judd Gregg.  You may be a lone voice in the wilderness, but it's a heck of a lot better than no voice at all.

No, no, no...it's not a retrospective of Tiger's romance with that Norwegian bombshell,  a somber look back at their engagement.  If it were, though, I would probably title it "Tiger's Wood", however, as titillating as the story is, we've got bigger fish to fry this week.  No, no, no...I was not using the notion of "frying fish" as a segue into the global warming debate, either.  I still consider the term "global warming" to be a euphemism for a man wetting his pants, anyway, or at least that's my idea of warm globes.  There's a connection between warm globes and Tiger Woods somewhere in there, but let's get back on point.
 
I'm talking "engaged", as in military parlance for being actively involved in a battle.  A real-life situation where your life is on the line.  We all know that President Obama has ordered more troops into Afghanistan, giving the military brass almost everything they wanted, troops-wise.  Naturally, the order came with the usual double-talk about predetermined withdrawal dates and how best to "conclude" the war in Afghanistan.  Not one mention of the word "victory" or "winning", just concluding.  This causes me to conclude that some sort of victory will not be a factor in determining when to withdraw.  Just throw more troops in, tip the hour glass...and wait.
 
I am less and less convinced that there is anything "winnable" about Afghanistan.  I find myself more and more in favor of establishing a couple of bases there, our own airfield, and planting a strong military presence, enough to keep some sort of containment there and keep the rampant re-growth of terrorist cells that would be the sure result if we up and left, from happening.  I don't know. I'm not a military strategist.  I'm not even a community organizer.  But unless we get to the heart of the matter, what it is that is truly causing these excruciatingly long and deadly wars in these tiny countries, then we may as well pack up and go home.
 
The problem is our ludicrously stringent "rules of engagement" policy that we harness our soldiers with as they march onto the battlefield.  No where is our over-zealous effort to be loved by the world for our Christ-like compassion, and our penchant for lawyers, laws and liabilities more evident, than in the ridiculous battlefield rules we try to impose on our military.
 
Imagine fighting a war where you cannot fire at the enemy unless he shoots at you first.  As a soldier, your first line of defense is simply hoping he's a bad shot.  We are charging Navy Seals who may have roughed up one of the terrorists who was guilty of burning four Blackwater workers, and then hanging their charred bodies from a bridge as a public and news spectacle.  That's right...we're going after the Navy elite who may have bloodied a lip.  It's not enough, apparently, to have to fear for your life as you protect your country, you must be thinking "lawsuit" or "court martial" in the back of your mind at the same time.
 
It is obscene that we ask our young men and women, who volunteer...that's volunteer...to leave their families, train, sacrifice, risk never coming home or coming home with less limbs, and then ask them not to hurt anyone or damage someone's self-esteem while they are at war.  We could never have won World War II with this mindset, with the media and the lawyers tripping over themselves, busying ourselves with arresting our own soldiers, over the more important task of killing bad guys.
 
I'll never understand why we think it is somehow better, once having made the dreadful decision to use military force against another country, to drag it on and on as opposed to going in hard and getting it over with.  It's like taking six months to rip a band-aid off.  There needs to be some kind of effort made to revisit the military rulebooks, because many of these new rules have "politician" written all over them.  If I had a son or daughter serving our country and looking down the barrel of an enemy rifle, my advice would be to shoot first and worry about the court martial later.
 
And, of course, the last person you'll ever see in combat gear, hunkered down in a foxhole while bullets fly right over head...is a politician or a lawyer.  Then again, they're already using their deadliest weapon right here at home...their pen.

First, in the interest of full disclosure, I am writing my weekly "Sunday" column, on Wednesday, anticipating the time constraints of the next four or five days.  That being said, Thanksgiving will have already passed, so here are a few of the things plan to take note of, thankfully, on Thursday.
 
Without question, family and friends.  There is arguably nothing more important in life than the good health and happiness of those we hold dear.  With a 13, 12 and 4-year old, I'm more than aware of the blessing of healthy kids.  I also will give thanks for another year of general safety within the country.  In the wake of the Ft. Hood disaster, it is no longer possible to say we haven't had a terrorist attack on our soil since 9/11, but we haven't had one of the magnitude of 9/11, and for that I'm thankful.
 
My gratitude this year however, was, and is, tainted by the distant stench of ineptitude.  It's not as distant as I'd like it to be, either, and depending on the wind, it sometimes feels very close.  The almost daily missives from Washington, D.C. leave some of us feeling as though we're stuck in a bad Twilight Zone episode.  The kind of cavalier attitude regarding the events in Ft. Hood, followed, just days later, by the stunning announcement that some 9/11 terrorists will be tried in New York City.  This, followed, just days later, by the announcement that some navy Seals will be tried on assault charges stemming from an arrest incident. Then, the "don't bother getting a mammogram until you're 50"  announcement, just as people are wondering about diminished care being a highlight of the new health care bill.  Some bedside manner, huh?
 
Sometimes I ask my kids, "are you TRYING to tick me off?"  This is how about half of the country, including myself, feel about the Obama administration right now.  A delayed response to the needs of our troops in Afghanistan, on the other hand, fervent pursuit of passage of the health care bill, even including 100 million dollar pay-offs when necessary, in broad daylight.
Misplaced attention, while the economy continues to tank, on pet projects of the majority party, and absent any meaningful dialogue with the other side on concessions or opposing ideas.
 
For me, it's easy to remember why we are fooling ourselves in this vain attempt to demonstrate our "fairness" to the rest of the world.  While our judicial system may be the envy of the world, it is at times equally laughable, for instance, it's inability to convict O.J. Simpson in spite of evidence that was beyond overwhelming.  The world must laugh at us, then, as we parse our legal language down to such tiny snippets that "justice" is little more than a bumper sticker.  I watched a member of the terrorist defense team argue that 3,000 people weren't murdered on 9/11, and besides, it was less than that.
 
Then, I imagine a mother and her daughters leaving Boston on an airliner.  She's getting out books for the kids, or I-Pods and settling in for the beginning of a vacation, or a trip to see relatives.  Somewhere else, her husband is at work, imagining them on the plane, and smiling.  Or maybe a husband, leaving on business, and thinking of his family at home, already anticipating the end of his trip, and wishing he was on his flight home.
 
Then, at the FAA Center in Nashua, something odd occurs.  They lose radio contact with the aircraft.  First, it causes no great concern, but after several attempts, it gains the attention of managers and senior controllers.  Something is wrong.  In what will seem like the blink of en eye, they will have their answer, and it is a heartbreaking one.
 
Back on the plane, something odd has happened and their is some chaos near the cockpit.  The mother tries to divert the children's attention.  Sadly, in the blink of an eye, they, too, will know that something has gone horribly wrong.  In just a short time, those innocent people, and just under 3,000 like them, will endure a brief, and horribly violent death.  A merciless death, preceded by, in the case of the passengers, an ample amount of time to understand the gravity of the situation, and ample amount of time to be completely terrified.  You know you're about to die.  You think of your loved ones.
 
It sucks to think about it, doesn't it?  It hurts to think about it.  But more of us need to, in deference to those who died, we owe them that, and to remind ourselves of the enemy we are facing here.
 
Trials?  Juries?  Defense lawyers paid for by tax dollars?  An almost assured multi-year event costing tens of millions of dollars, which in the end will have been the trial of America, not the terrorists.  And Europe will snicker, as they should, along with the rest of the world as they watch our self-absorbed, narcissistic attempt to demonstrate "justice" to the rest of the world.  You know...Chris Mathews may have a chill running up his leg...I've got one running up my spine.

The Limbo.  The Charleston and the Jitterbug.  Dips and swirls, pirouettes and tangos.  Oh...I never tire of it, entertainment as pure as honey.  Wait...I may have confused you.  You're probably thinking of that popular dancing show.  Celebrities and the occasional politician-gone-awry...think Tom Delay in tight red pants, displaying their dance floor prowess.  In that case, you would have to chain me to my LazyBoy and anchor my feet in concrete.  I don't even channel-surf near those waters.
 
I'm talking about the other dancers.  The liberal intelligentsia dancing around those dreaded words while trying to discuss the tragic event at Ft. Hood in Texas.  Most of us know the characters and scenario by heart now, nonetheless, an Army psychiatrist, Nidal Hasan, opened fire on unarmed comrades killing just over a dozen, many more still critical, and within hours of the massacre we learn that the good doctor had a long paper and electronic trail of red flags.  A long record of hostile remarks to fellow servicemen and women, efforts to contact Al Quada, constant complaining about the United States.  Even witnesses who report he chanted "Allah!" as he opened fire.
 
Still, even our own President could not bring himself to call the act what it so clearly was.  Terrorism.  Muslim terrorism...Radical Islamist Terrorism.  Take your pick.  It is what it is.  The conversation, given the obvious shortcomings of the response by Army brass who clearly knew this guy was imbalanced, at least, should be revolving around the new game of Politically Correct Roulette which is sweeping the nation.  Really, folks...how long are we going to ride this train?  Are we going over the cliff like Thelma and Louise, or might we seize this moment as the bucket of ice water over the head that it should be?
 
Indeed, President Obama, selective in his use of ethics as he has always been, urged us not to "rush to judgment".  We should use the same measured approach he used in, say...the Cambridge Police incident.  You remember...Sgt. James Crowley responded to a report of a burglary, approached a man who had been seen rifling the door, who turned out to be the elite Harvard Professor Henry Gates.  Henry got mouthy, out came the cuffs, and the rest is, literally, history.  We all remember the caution Obama used in that situation, saying the Cambridge Police Department had "acted stupidly".  This, from the man who would "bring us together" with "hope and change".
 
Yet, the Holy Grail of dance steps came last Wednesday night when Bill O'Reilly questioned his guest, Sally Quinn, famed Washington Post columnist, about her take on the Ft. Hood slayings.  O'Reilly walked her through it, Hasan's history of open disdain for this country, in spite of our military having provided him with an education and career.  His attempts to contact Al Quada, his writings, speeches, a litany of facts leading any sane person to one conclusion.  This guy is a terrorist and the act itself was clearly terrorism, rooted in the Islamic belief that we are infidels and that causing our death is a ticket to the Great Beyond.  It took O'Reilly a full six minutes to get Sally to put those words together..."Muslim Terrorist".  You could almost see her physically gagging on the words, the poor thing.
 
I found myself laughing, and even O'Reilly and Quinn herself ended with a smile, each knowing the lunacy of what just happened, and everyone knowing that Sally didn't really mean it.  I'll bet dollars-to-donuts she was in a rest room washing her mouth out with soap as soon as she got her microphone and wire untangled.
 
But the episode said it all.  Sally was, for six minutes, the liberal poster-child of political correctness, head-in-the-sand analysis, and demonstrated in stark terms how very divided this country is.  You know, you just can't argue with someone who refuses to stay on the logic trail.  It's impossible.  I was laughing, watching O'Reilly become increasingly amazed at Sally's tenacity.  It really was a stunning few moments.  It was also frightening in its own way.  These are the people "leading" the country.  These are the people who will be hijacking our health care system, and...gulp...managing it.
 
Mr. Bojangles would have been proud of Sally, and I would sooner have Mr. Bojangles in the White House right now.  Sally did have, as the liberal, elevated thinkers all do, that rather dismissive tone with O'Reilly.   Look...they're smarter than all of us "regular folks", us Tea Party crazies and Town Hall rednecks.  They love making fun of us, it's sport now.  All of us wackos who think a guy who is screaming "Allah" while he guns down unarmed Americans is somehow an Islamic Terrorist.
 
On the other hand, all of us idiots have managed to pay the bills and fight the wars for this country for the last 200 years or so, and we'll probably be doing it for the next 200 as well.  No wonder we're too tired to dance.

It's a bit of conspicuous statement.  Follow the leader.  It implies that anyone with a following is a leader, or that anyone you're following is a leader.  Lemmings prove this to be a falsehood, as do party-loyalists who refuse to think on their own even in the face of the most damning evidence that one's philosophy is flawed.  This is not a phenomenon unique to democrats, both sides of the aisle have their sycophants.  Blind allegiance is certainly more pronounced now than it has been in a long time, though.

President Obama is tireless in the pursuit of his pet legislative projects.  The campaign to pass government-run health care has been stunning in its breadth and magnitude.  Indecisive on matters military, seemingly oblivious to our worsening economy, completely silent on cultural issues such as the demise of the traditional family structure, rampant violence, and a child pornography business that yields tens of billions of dollars a year in business, Obama is myopic, focused on the passage of a massive health care reform bill that half of the country does not want.

Indeed, the Queen of Vapidity herself, the reptilian Nancy Pelosi, scheduled a Congressional vote for, of all days, Saturday.  I imagine the shades will be drawn and all of the lights will be out, too.  In a perfect world, they could vote it in without informing the public at all.  Yes, that would be the same public that will be paying for this 1.2 trillion dollar, 2,000 page, disaster.

I wish I had a buck for every time I have heard the President and his Jonestown-like followers lament the awful stain on America, that not every single person, citizen or not, has health insurance.  I think our wanton disregard for the treatment of children in this country is a much bigger black-eye, as well as our increasingly violent youth.  Even Europe...yes, Europe, agrees with that.  Somehow, though, those issues get left on the bench, game after game after game.

Then again, to pause and reconsider, or to decide that the country can't afford this right now, or to insist that our elected leaders who will vote on this historically expensive legislation actually...gulp...read the bill, well...that kind  of bold decision would require leadership.  Anyone paying attention would have noticed long ago, and many of us did, Obama's inordinate number of "present" votes during his brief tenure in the Senate.  This, more than anything else, made me question his leadership abilities early on.  Frankly, I can't imagine why there is even a "present" button to be pressed.  I would think two buttons, a "yes" and a "no", would suffice.

Leadership is like parenting, in many ways, and imagine parenting your kids this way.  "Dad, someone offered me a cigarette at school today."  "Well, son, let's just say I'm 'present' "  Our President has issues, and one of them is an almost paralyzing fear of making any decision that would offend his "base", or a past donor, or an old friend from Chicago.  Could there be any other reason for his waffling on the Afghanistan decision?   Haven't we learned to let the Generals dictate strategy?  Can he not imagine the agony of our military, waiting for support, or absent support, to come home and end that war?  It is insulting that a Saturday vote is scheduled, not for an important military decision, but for a health care bill that practically nobody wants, absolutely nobody can explain or understand, and I haven't met anyone yet who wants to pay for it, or their kids and grandkids to pay for it.

And you know, it's no wonder we don't recognize leadership anymore, there is so little of it.  We barely seem to miss it, in fact, or perhaps have given up on the notion of great leaders inhabiting the Oval Office.  Just a few years ago we saw true leadership in action, when Senator McCain, to the horror of most of his republican counterparts, demanded that the troop surge be implemented in Iraq.  Republicans ran in the other direction, mortified, that while the entire country had simply had it with the Iraq war,  McCain would call for increasing troops.  He called Rumsfeld the worst Secretary of Defense in the history of the country.  And yet, that is leadership.  He put his political career on the train tracks, because it was more important to do what was best for the country, in his opinion, at that time.  I always smirk at political hacks who only go after corruption on the other side of the aisle.  McCain, like Palin, is an equal-opportunity reformer.  This is as it should be, and it lends credibility to their resume.

I believe fully, as well, had the country not made the inexplicable choice, in the 2000 election, of George Bush over John McCain, that we would not have gone to war in Iraq.  McCain has seen the spoils of war, up close and personal.  I don't believe he would have engaged Iraq with an under-equipped military and a half-hearted effort with no exit-strategy.  He may have engaged, but I believe it would have been a much different action, much more swift and effective, and most importantly, shorter.  We spent four years there treading water, at an incalculable cost in blood and treasure.  Now, we are repeating that history, as we pontificate over the suggestions of the Generals charged with winning the battle.  Either give it everything we've got, give these brave young men and women everything they need, and more, or get out.

Again, leadership is required here.  I am astonished at the tunnel-vision that this administration incorporates.  Much more interested in social engineering and income re-distribution than in making any difficult decisions, especially those that rock the base boat, this President seems increasingly in over his head.  Change?  I never thought I would say it, but that actually seems like a good idea...now.

Increasingly I am reading reports that seem to be trying to give us the "easy let-down" regarding our economic recovery.  Not surprising to many of us pragmatists who have noticed that there really isn't anything going on in this country that would inspire an economic recovery.  A trillion dollar bail out didn't seem to help...well...help middle-class Americans, I mean.  It helped repay lobbyists and their businesses that helped elect our President, but it never seeped down below that top layer, did it?  We are losing our edge in every market, foreclosures continue to mount, so there is no rebound for the construction industry, the tech industry is stagnant, and I can't imagine what it is that is supposed to be the watering can that sprouts the seeds of economic growth.

Republicans were nearly as effective at over-spending under President Bush, but he did have the wild card of 9/11 that carried a price tag that we will never be able to tally accurately.  That dreadful day carried a heavy fiscal price tag, though, and Bush can't be blamed for that.  Still, in recent history, it has become the primary function of both parties in the federal government to spend like loons, and pass the cost on to whichever generation has any money left to pay for it.

What is unique to our current administration is their inimitable expertise with word play, their obsession with, and belief in, their own intellect, and an undying belief that the rest of us can be fooled as simply as the old tap on the left shoulder from the right side of your prank victim.  Nowhere is this more evident than with the new phrase being bandied about in a variety of print stories bracing us for the cold reality that many of us have known is coming.

"The jobs are not coming back as quickly as we thought they would.  In fact, many of the jobs will not be back at all.  What used to be middle-class will become poverty-level.  People will have to make lifestyle changes..."  Like what?  A second husband so we can have three-income families?  What's best is the description that has been applied to this forthcoming "lifestyle adjustment" that working Americans can expect.  It's being called, the "new normal".

Golly.  How come I never thought of this?  Kind of a universal lowering of the bar.  When you can't fix it, just adjust what is "normal".  It's as brilliant as it is perverse.  "Sorry about backing into your car.  That's not a dent, though, its just the new normal."  I'm thinking of the countless times in my life when I unnecessarily held myself accountable for mistakes or poor performance, or any other transgression for that matter.  "It's not that I'm late for work every day, sir, it's just the new normal."  Sure, you worked hard, sacrificed, watched your money, and other people's mistakes are now your responsibility.  You were so good at holding yourself accountable for your own mistakes, and paying for them, that we thought you'd like to do it for everyone else, too.  Citizen or not, by the way.  We feel its important for everyone to have health care, whether or not they work, are citizens, spend their money on drugs and alcohol...whatever.  You need to give more of your paycheck to them.  Don't worry...you'll get used to your "new normal".

And what happens to the "old normal" when we get a new one?  Who gets it, or does it go to the "old normal" junkyard?  Also, isn't adjusting "normal" kind of a Catch-22?  I mean...it's not normal anymore if you change it, right?  The word itself indicates a benchmark.  You can't just move the benchmark, because...well...because it's a benchmark, stupid.  "Normal" is where we measure from, not to.  If we place "normal" on a sliding scale, then, in reality, there is no normal.

These are questions sure to cause headaches, but they are worth asking.  Afterall, it is increasingly clear that our "progressive" administration, the ones who put the "czar" in bizarre, are all about changing "normal".  Indeed, mocking and disparaging "normal" Americans is one of their favorite past times.  They don't like "normal"...it's not progressive enough.

I will close by asking all of you who plan on getting rid of your current "normal" and getting the "new normal", to please keep the old one in your garage for a while.  I have a feeling, it's going to appreciate in value and that there will soon be many people pining for the old normal and willing to pay dearly for it.  Not only is the old normal going to appreciate, we're going to miss appreciating it.

Lions and tigers and bears...oh my!  Even Burt Lahr with his furry hind quarter and over-active tail showed more courage protecting Dorothy from the flying monkeys, than our own President has been able to show protecting himself from...gulp...Fox News.

The missive from the White House last week, distributed via the usual venue...the Sunday morning talk-show circuit, was that other news outlets "should not follow Fox News" and that Fox was not "a real news organization".  Not a real news organization?  That's not what the ratings say.  In yet another stunning display of Obama's incredibly thin skin, the attack on Fox is unsettling in many other ways, not the least of which is the underlying message to other media outlets..."don't get on our enemies list."

First, it is another chorus of whining from a White House, that as Chris Wallace said, is inhabited by the biggest bunch of babies he has ever seen.  It is as American as apple pie to question and be wary of our government.  Certainly, many were cynical during the Bush administration.  What is this child-like aversion to disagreement and complaint?  Particularly from a candidate, and now President, who has had and continues to have nothing short of adulation from nearly every other media outlet.  Chris Mathews' famous "chill" up his leg, and Keith Olberman who is...what...a news man?  You've got to be kidding.  Didn't he recently describe Michelle Bachman as a "bag of meat"?  Yes...he's a regular Walter Cronkite.

And how about the mainstream media's treatment of Sarah Palin?  Serious news people, I suppose.  Fair reporting.

There is no doubt that a few Fox News anchors are decidedly rabid when it comes to Barack Obama, but then again, so is about half of the population.  To paint an entire organization with that brush, however, is ridiculous.  Fox, and Roger Ailes, have built a first-class operation.  Sheppard Smith presents world news with aplomb, Greta Van Sustern is as harmless as they come.  Hannity and Beck are known quantities, but still...enough that the President should try to sway people away from them?  Don't follow them, don't pay any attention.  It reeks of the kind of information control that we might expect from Russia, North Korea or Iran, but not America.

And how about O'Reilly, who gave Obama a very fair interview during the final stages of the campaign and who has been very fair with Obama since he was elected.  How about the stellar work that O'Reilly did with his Jessica's Law campaign, the first time in history that a major news anchor has used his position to try and institute legislative action in every state.  He was tenacious and effective, and we'll never know how many young children were spared a violent nightmare because of his efforts.  There isn't a single politician who committed such time and energy to protecting children.  Yes...that "evil" Fox News.

O'Reilly even managed to get Pepsi to pull an advertisement featuring the vile rap-star Ludicrous who is best known for his lyrics espousing the joys of women as sex toys, killing cops, and putting a "cap" in this, that and the other thing.  Our own President would do himself and the country well to busy himself with such things.  There has been no mention from this administration about the outrageous violence in this country or any of our other myriad social ills.  Indeed, while they fine tune their strategy against Fox News, our own servicemen and women in Afghanistan continue to wait for a decision from him on whether or not they will get the additional troops they so desperately need.  Obama should have been the first one to announce the lunacy of anyone in his administration worrying about a news outlet while so many critical decisions remain in flux.

"Change".  Be careful what you wish for.  Increasingly, it is a shame how this man continues to spend his once significant political capital on pet projects like health care and Guantanamo Bay, while the economy and our culture continue to unspool, states, cities and towns running out of money, schools churning out under-educated and ill-equipped young people, a decaying national infrastructure, and so on and so on.  He has kept one promise, though.  It's not politics as usual.  It's worse.