1001 Ways

My husband and I went to a local casino over the weekend. We don't have big, fancy casinos like in Atlantic City, NJ or Las Vegas. The local casino is small and, currently, has only slot machines. We have never been before, although it is half an hour away, because we aren't gamblers. Also, we don't have the time or the money to sit and spend hours at a casino. But curiosity had gotten the better of us, so off we went. We spent a lot of time walking around the dimly lit building looking at the bright lights on the machines. We watched the people work the machines, hoping that their ship would come in. We learned that you can no longer just drop in a quarter; machines only take bills or vouchers. Finally, we realized that America is an amazing place.

There are 1001 ways of amusing ourselves in America. Depending on the money available, you could go to the mall or go to Disney World. Las Vegas is built around the idea of adult entertainment 24 hours a day. New York never sleeps. But are we trying to entertain ourselves or are we escaping? There is a difference and neither is necessarily bad. But I keep thinking about the one gentleman I saw at the casino. He was playing a slot machine that said he had over $500. I believe the machine was $1 machine. He glared at us as we walked by as if he was concerned that we would try to take his money. And there was a lady who was working two machines. She would punch the buttons on one then the other, frantically trying to win back what she had spent. Were these people having fun or were they desperate for something they would never find there?

Tonight, as I sit here and blog, my daughter is reading a book. My husband is listening to a program on the radio. My other daughter is getting ready for a school trip she is taking. We have had our dinner together at the table, sharing stories from the day. If I were to ask any of them, I think they would say that they were contented and that they were enjoying themselves. Perhaps, entertainment isn't always found in the glitz and the glamour, the hustle and bustle of life. Maybe we have all bought into an idea that is inherently wrong. Maybe happiness isn't found in fancy lights and ringing machines.

For the People, By the People

The Supreme Court has ruled that corporations and labor unions can contribute to election campaigns, lifting restrictions that have been in place for a century. Basically, if a corporation thinks that a candidate would be beneficial to their company, they can pump in as much money as is necessary to the candidate's campaign fund. This ensures the first amendment rights of the corporations.

Now, I am all for the democratic process. I believe that we have the best political system going. What makes it work so well is that we have the ability to listen to various candidates and decide if they are the ones that would best represent our interests. But if corporations put essentially unlimited money behind a candidate of their choice, will we be able to hear the voice of the other candidates? Will it be possible for one candidate to so out-purchase the others that the tv and print ads will only focus on one candidate? Will debates become sponsored by different corporations, like the Bristol-Myers Squibb debate from New Hampshire?

With this ruling, the concept of for the people by the people is now outdated. Government will now be for the corporations by the corporations. The only good thing that has come from this is that the government has officially declared that it is run by special interests; it is no longer hiding the truth.

The Angry Middle?

For the first time in decades, a Republican holds the Senate seat left empty by Sen. Ted Kennedy's death. I have read his acceptance speech and he promises to be the people's senator. He says that he has heard the people say that they don't want new taxes, a back-room health care bill, and lawyers for terrorists. He promises that he will work with Democrats and Republicans to get things done and to support the people of America. He is going to help the angry middle America fight for what they want and need.

The middle America that I know is not angry. They are too busy protecting their jobs and homes and trying to afford their lives to be angry. They might still be able to pay their mortgages and might still have health care but they have a sense that this could go away at any time. They have been convinced from years of Republican rhetoric that taxes are bad but they don't understand why the government can't help. They would love to see some strong actions from Washington to help them protect what they have. But what they see is groups digging in, stubbornly firm in their own ideas without any chance of listening to a different idea. They are aware that big business and big banks run the Congress and wish someone would finally put a stop to it. Many of them realize that it took eight years to get to this point. Although they wish the fix was immediate, they are aware that substantial gains can occur only over time. Many also would like to see the repairs with an eye to the future, willing to accept alternative fuels and sustainable farming practices.

This is why I am concerned about Scott Brown's election. I don't see how he is going to be the people's senator if he doesn't realize we aren't angry. He talks about not "hiding costs, concealing taxes, collaborating with special interests, and leaving more trillions in debt for our children to pay" forgetting that his own party was the one who started these practices in the last presidency. He speaks of "our political leaders have grown aloof from the people, impatient with dissent, and comfortable in the back room making deals" not realizing that he is characterizing the Bush presidency and the image of the Republican party. He also sees his election as the start of things to come. But, if he goes to Washington and doesn't deliver, he will be perceived as another Republican blocking the administration without a clear idea of his own.

I do have some hope though with the results of the elections. Without a filibuster-proof Senate, the Congress might have to actually discuss the health care reform bill. And, as a new Senator, Mr. Brown hasn't been purchased by the lobbies and hasn't been fully indoctrinated by the Republicans ... yet.

I am torn ...

I am torn today because two ideas came to mind while I was watching the news today. I have been debating which one to blog about but couldn't decide. So today's blog is going to be slightly disjointed.

First, I have noticed the news from Haiti is starting to take the back burner. I can't really expect 24/7 coverage until every last person is accounted for and the homes are rebuilt. And there are pressing news items occurring here in America. The race for Ted Kennedy's Senate seat is winding down. The outcome of the election could determine the shape of healthcare reform in America. Another judge in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania is in trouble. He is accused of trying to strangle his wife during a dispute. The Golden Globes were held last night. Many on the red carpet were wearing ribbons in support of Haiti. There was more violence in Afghanistan over night.

Wait, what?! Why should we care about the Golden Globes compared to Haiti? The money that the winners make on their movies would have solved Haiti's problems years ago. I find it obscene that we celebrate multi-million dollar actors and ignore our neighbors living in abject poverty. And although I am touched that many are donating money, donating their outfits and wear ribbons in support of Haiti, I would be more impressed if they were more supportive of the nation long before the earthquake hit. I am upset that the fight for survival was moved to the side for coverage of the Golden Globes. The only way Haiti can really succeed is if we are reminded of the need not just for aid now but in the long-term.

The other thought that struck me as I watched the news this morning was the lack of mention of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The fact that today is a national holiday celebrating his birthday (he would have been 81) was mentioned only a few times in a two-hour broadcast. There was a 5-minutes spot on young boys and girls who gave speeches regarding Dr. King with some video clips of Dr. King interspersed towards the end. But if it wasn't for this man's dynamic presence and his nonviolent ways, the racial picture in this country would look a lot different today than it does. Also, there is still prejudice against and struggles for the people that Dr. King represented. The only way we will ever get beyond the subject of color and see everyone as a person is to be reminded that we still have a long way to go before we have climbed the mountain and have seen the other side that he mentioned in his famous speech.

I felt the news was lacking today. I hope that I can live today in such a way that my life makes up for the loss.

Haiti

I have been glued to the television, watching the images from Haiti. I am compelled to watch like someone who has come upon a horrific murder scene. Over the last few days, I have watched everything from dramatic rescues to immense frustration. I am glad to know that there are people in America who are trained to rescue people and are ready to go at a moment's notice. I am heartened to hear our president pledge immense support for the devastated country.

But I have a few questions.

First, have the reporters done much to help? I know Dr. Gupta has seen to some people. CNN keeps showing him treating a 15-day-old baby. But is he spending the majority of his time assisting or is he wandering around reporting on the most dramatic of the injuries? I have seen Anderson Cooper, for whom I have a lot of respect, report on a rescue of a 13-year-old girl, but did he ever try to help dig? The reporters seem to be going from area to area. Are they carrying food, water and medical supplies? The Haitians will benefit from people on the outside seeing their misery, but they will benefit more from real assistance.

Second, how is it in this era of multi-million dollar bonuses for Wall Street executives, there is a country where 80% of its population lives beneath the poverty level? I know that we can't help everyone everywhere. But it seems incomprehensible to me that such a situation occurs. I wonder how many other countries are like this. Has this disaster made anyone think that perhaps something should be done to make sure that the poorer nations get the assistance they need so that they can be better prepared to deal with disasters?

Third, what is next? I know many people are still struggling to get free of ruble so they aren't thinking about what's next, but I bet many people are. I am sure some people are wondering how they could use this disaster to their advantage. I am sure some people are working on using the instability of the country to reshape the government for their own gains. The Haitians need a plan that will not only ensure their rights are protected but, ideally, would lift them out of the poverty in which they have lived.

The reporters keep saying that there is a spirit of hope still in Haiti. It says something for the human spirit that people can live so meanly yet always have hope of a better future. There is potential right now for that better future to be built for the Haitians. I hope we don't let this opportunity slip away.

Mark McGwire Comes Clean

This headline isn't really news. Many, if not most, people suspected steroid use for years. Many are complimenting his forthright admission and his availability to answer questions regarding his use. Many are also thrilled that he seemed so apologetic. He seemed so sorry that he had taken steroids that his current actions speak more loudly than his previous lack of comment or use of steroids. Obviously, he is doing the right thing now and making amends for his lack of judgement in the past.

My response is "So what?" I am thrilled that he is admitting to his mistakes. I am a big believer in admitting to your mistakes and trying to make them right. A person needs to take responsibility for their actions and this is a great way of doing that. But you can't undo the past no matter how many times you apologize. For years, young people looked up to him. He was a person to be admired for his athletic prowess, for the ability to do what no other ball player has done. But what he really has shown people is that you can break the rules to suit your ambitions, apologize in the appropriate way and get ahead twice.

Earlier blogs have said that we need to be careful who we put on a pedestal and to realize that we are all human. There is a flip side too. Those people who perform great feats need to realize that people are going to idolize them and to hold themselves to higher standards. Presidents need to realize that their job comes with a great deal of power, therefore they should wield it appropriately. Doctors should realize that people will blindly trust them so they should make sure they are mapping out the best care possible based on a solid diagnosis. Top-of-their-sport athletes should realize that everyone who ever dreamed of playing their sport is watching them. Therefore they should behave in a way that they would want every child in the world to behave.

So I am glad that Mr. McGwire finally came clean about his steroid use. We need to see truly apologetic people taking responsibility for their actions. But I wish, before he started, that he had thought about the people who would want to grow up one day and be just like him instead of his own selfish ambitions. Then kids would have learned a better message than the one they learned this week.

Airport Security, Part 2

Yesterday, I mentioned my views on profiling and body scans. A reader commented to me in person last night that, in Israel, although they have no difficulty with terrorists on their planes, they also lack certain civil liberties. This reader also believes that over time, the Israelis will be giving up more liberties in the name of protection. He is concerned that, if we were to adopt similar airport security measures here, we also would be giving up our liberties.

This morning, I woke to NPR, as I do every day. Some gentleman from the ACLU was concerned that full body scans would invade people's privacy. He thought that people who wore adult diapers or had colonostomy bags would be concerned because that information would be revealed.

Again, I hear some valid concerns. We are used to our freedoms. In fact, this country was founded on the principles of freedom and liberty. People have moved here for centuries in search of freedom from oppression and liberty to live the best life they can. I think there is a lack of balance though. Although we have the right to freedoms and liberties, when we start being more concerned over a few people's liberty than the general population's safety, I think we need to rethink our rights and our safety. I am not suggesting that we give up our rights, just bring things into balance. For instance, the number of people wearing adult diapers is relatively low compared to the number of people who fly overall. Is there a way these people can be guaranteed their privacy without potentially harming the other passengers on a plane?

Overall, my original point was that we need to be focusing on certain types of people, not certain products. I think we should start getting smart about security. Let's start looking for the people who fit the profile of a terrorist. Let's start paying attention to the people standing with us in the airport. The young man who tried to blow up the flight to Detroit had no luggage, either checked or carried on. Shouldn't that immediately raise a red flag in someone's mind? Who goes to Detroit in December without a coat? Who travels without at least a toothbrush and clean underwear? Why didn't someone get concerned over these two obvious red flags?

We are so concerned over people's rights, freedoms and liberties, not insulting people, and not causing trouble that we are inviting trouble. We need to start using our brains in a common sense way, paying attention to what is going on around us, and balancing freedom and security. Or else what might happen is that we end up giving up all our rights, freedoms and liberties to be able to fly because that is the only plan left.

Terrorism, Body Scans and PC

Those who know me know that I often try to be as equitable as possible. I'm careful about what I say and to whom I say it. I try to use inclusive language, phrase what needs to be said positively and think of others feelings when I need to criticize. I'm not perfect but I try. So this blog might come as a shock to some. To others, it will not. They have seen this other side of me from time to time and know that it lurks inside of me. Anyway, enough of the fine print. This is what I have to say.

It is time to stop being politically correct when it comes to protecting ourselves from terrorists. Just the other day on the news, people were starting to question whether or not the amount of radiation given off by body scanners would harm them. I dare say, a terrorist strike on their plane could potentially harm them more. If they fly that much that a brief scan of the body is going to somehow damage them, I bet they actually appreciate the level of safety on their planes. If they are somehow upset that they will be slowed down in their travels, I bet they haven't travelled much lately. It is the biggest game of hurry up and wait that I have ever played. If they have a legitimate health concern, there are other options. But a near-miss is too close for comfort for most people. I would rather risk slight damage, if any, to the passengers and catch the next terrorist before he or she boards the plane, than risk the next terrorist getting it right the next time.

Also, I feel badly that many legitimately honest people are upset at being profiled, but sometimes, that's the breaks. I learned at an early age that life isn't fair. Sometimes you get accused of things you know you wouldn't do. So, if you're on the up and up, there is nothing to get upset about. Don't you also want to make sure the plane you are on is safe? If that means that you feel that people are prejudiced against you, well, too bad. I personally have always disliked being labeled as a typical American: greedy, self-centered and loud. But I realize the only way that will change is if I personally behave differently. If you don't like being profiled and you are completely innocent, stop getting upset over being profiled. No one will look at you suspiciously then.

Has anyone noticed yet that there is a definite lack of concern over flights from Israel on El Al? Has anyone wondered why? For over three decades, Israel has conducted intense security at their airport. They question everyone, personal, thorough questioning. They profile. They physically search suspicious people. Luggage is checked before it gets into the airport. Luggage that is left lying around is quickly reported and the area is clear. The security personnel are former members of the army with training in exactly who to look for. And that is one of the keys. They are looking at people, not bottles of shampoo to make sure it's three ounces. Israel, at one time, had a lot of trouble with their flights. Now, they have none.

So why aren't we adopting the same measures? Because we don't want to offend anyone and because we don't want to slow down travelers. Think about this though. In 2007, a high level, retired security agent from Israel, one of those black-clad, spooky people who never describes their job, suggested that someday someone would put explosives in their pants, instead of shoes, and take a plane to America. This is the same guy who warned about the 9/11 terror plot. Someday is here and I don't think the terrorists are concerned about offending anyone.