Barack Obama and Bill Richardson

I don't know a lot about politics.

That said, I think Barack Obama may have missed a good opportunity. This week, he announced Hillary Clinton as his Secretary of State and Bill Richardson as his Secretary of Commerce.

He may find out that the two people should have switched positions.

Richardson has vast foreign policy experience. Far more than Mrs. Clinton. He would have been an excellent choice for that position.

Mrs. Clinton will do well, don't get me wrong. If anything, she will help deflect the news each day from Obama, which he will need heading into this administration. Still, she complained that with Obama there would be "on the job training". I feel we are going to have the same thing with Mrs. Clinton in this position.

Finally, if there were two people capable of "on the job training", it is Obama and Clinton. They have shown the ability to learn and lead. This is far from a gaffe by Obama. Just politics in play where the best choice was set aside.

What troubles me the most is that Richardson is 61. I was hoping he would run again in eight years, but he shouldn't at 69, anymore than McCain should have run in 2008. Still, Richardson will be a strong ally in this administration. The players are just about set. Let's go!!!

Obama's Cabinet

President Obama? (I can't help it. I love saying it!) President Obama, sir?

What about Bill Richardson? I know you feel like you need to offer Hillary Clinton the Secretary of State job, but what about Bill? He has a better resume. Everybody likes him (except the voteing public). If he's not your vice-president, he really should be your Secretary of State.

Agreed, Hillary is my second choice for the spot, but she's the SECOND CHOICE! Offer it to Bill!

Years ago, he worked on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He worked for Kissinger. He's been to Bagdad, North Korea, Nicaragua, etc. He's been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. Three times!!

He's been an United States Ambassador to the United Nations. He was the Secretary of Energy under Bill Clinton.

What more could you want?

Okay, how about this. Let Hillary be Secretary of State during the first term and Bill be Secretary of State during the second term. How's that? Or vice-versa. She can run the Senate during the first term and be your ally there. Huh?

As always, I know you'll make the best choice. Just wanted to let you know where I stand.

Thank you for your time, Mr. President. Have a great day!

President Barack Obama

I am thrilled to use this title for today's blog. If you had asked me a year ago, or two years ago, if this was going to happen, I would have been hopeful, but unsure. Now it's happened and I am elated.

I didn't vote for Barack Obama because he was black and it would be historic. I didn't vote for Barack Obama because he represented my home state of Illinois. I didn't vote for Barack Obama because he was a democrat and I wanted change. I grew up and spent most of my adult life a republican, rarely swaying from party lines. George W. Bush ended that. I half-heartedly supported John Kerry four years ago. Truthfully, I wanted Bush gone more than I wanted Kerry in office. I didn't get my wish.

I looked at all the Republican candidates. I wasn't going to support someone who hates "certain" people the way Mitt Romney does. I wasn't going to support someone who appears to only spout the party line, such as Rudy Giuliani. John McCain came close to someone I could like, but he became a grouchy, unhappy man before our eyes.

I voted for Barack Obama because he was the best candidate. There was never any question. He ran the best campaign. He has good ideas for correcting what is wrong in this country. Is he perfect? No, but I am hard put to find his faults. Smoking? Yes. Bowling? Can't really define that as a fault. More of a shortcoming.

Every step he has taken has the appearance of being well thought out. He doesn't make "knee-jerk" statements or decisions. He listens to those around him, but he appears to have the final say.

I like Barack Obama because he is smarter than I am and I want that in a U.S. President. I like Barack Obama because he wants what is best for our country.

Now, let's see if I'm right.

Don Imus and mediamatter.org

Don Imus has been a regular topic since he uttered a sophomoric description of the Rutgers Women’s Basketball team. It was horrible and stupid and, as I have written here before, he should have been fired.

My wife offered me the April 23, 2007 issue of Newsweek magazine. Keep in mind that Newsweek is a “strategic partner” to NBC, who was one of Imus’ employers.

The article “The Power That Was”, written by Weston Kosova, was mostly a recap of what happened recently regarding Imus’ idiotic attempt at humor and the wrath that poured down upon him afterward.

Kosova makes one point that I did not realize until I read the article. On Wednesday, April 4, 2007, the day of the incident, millions of people listened on the radio and watched on MSNBC. Nobody flinched at the remark.

Okay, maybe somebody flinched, but nothing was said. It was just the I-Man doing his schtick. Imus makes fun of people. It is what he gets paid to do.

It was not until later that things boiled over. An employee of Media Matters, Ryan Chiachiere, watched the show on tape and brought the comment (among others) to his employers. His employers then began make the statement available at their website, but more importantly, added the clip on YouTube.

It was then that the controversy sparked and caught fire. Hours after the program had ended; people had the comment pointed out to them and became incensed.

Think about this for a moment. People who normally do not watch or listen to Don Imus became aware of the comment and became upset. Within a week, Don Imus was out of work.

Even I, who did not watch or listen to Imus regularly, became caught up in the discussion, and I have always stated that I enjoyed Imus when I could listen.

If I run a stop sign, and there are no cars or pedestrians in the area, but a local television crew accidental, but clearly, tape my car running through the intersection, can I get a ticket a week later? I clearly violated the law. Would it be right if the news crew ran a story on the late news that Alexander Dimm ran a stop sign and then the police ticketed me because they heard about the story on the news?

Somehow understanding that the Imus controversy did not spring up from the initial statement bothers me. The fact that his firing was generated, not by regular listeners, but by people who look to the internet for issues they can champion colors the whole affair.

At the core, should Imus have been fired for his statement? Of course. As it states in the Newsweek article, Imus normally saves those kinds of remarks for newsmen, writers and politicians. Still, he should not be making these kinds of remarks about anyone.

Should Media Matters have spread the word once Chiachiere made them aware? Of course. Media Matters is a great organization who works hard to point out the misinformation being spread in the world of news today. Everyday they point out errors by people you would expect and people you would not. If you have not seen it, I urge you to visit their website at http://mediamatters.org/.

Imus was not considered by Media Matters to be a frequent offender. People do not get upset about offensive statements by Howard Stern and/or Glenn Beck because these people, and others like them, are consistent. Everyday they utter things that are offensive and stupid.

Imus did not take a step “over the line”. He took a step “over his own line”. He made a statement he would not normally make. He offended a group of people he would not normally offend. He did it and he paid the price.

There are many others getting paid today who frequently step over the “Imus line” but not over their own line. They are still working, and will likely continue to work. That is the saddest statement about this affair.

Imus, who understood the workings of Washington, did not hold with a political party, and was willing to puncture a republican as easily as a democrat, no longer has a voice. Many others who spew misinformation and venom like it is the weather report will continue to go merrily on their way. They do because their statements are not out of character for them.

If you are unhappy with comments made by any news reporter or political commentator, speak up. Be specific. Tell them what you heard and how you felt. Do not make it a personality issue. Write down what was said and when. Then let those in charge know.

I have already written that I feel Glenn Beck should be removed from his nightly program at CNN Headline News. If you agree and want an opportunity to be heard, contact CNN at this link, http://www.cnn.com/feedback/. You may be surprised what can happen.

Thank you for reading. We’ll talk again soon.

Presidential Debate

The next presidential election is still about nineteen months away. Apparently the Democrats believe they had better get started.

Last night MSNBC broadcast a debate between the democrats. My wife and I would have loved to have watched, but I was unaware of the program and my wife forgot until after it had ended. I assured her that the network would rerun the debate, and then promptly forgot to look for it again.

On one hand, the election is nineteen months away. There will be many, many more debates and speeches in the meantime. On the other hand, I love this stuff and it would have been fun to watch.

It has been awhile since I have written about the candidates. I still encourage everyone to read as much as you can and listen and find your candidate. I have not yet solidified my choice for next fall. We do not have to vote until the spring 2008 primaries, so I am taking my time.

I am keeping my eye on the obvious contenders, including Barack Obama, John Edwards (who gave a great speech recently that is available as a podcast from www.johnedwards.com) and Christopher Dodd on the democrats’ side. I am also keeping my ears open to Sam Brownback, Rudy Giuliani and John McCain among the republicans.

I would love to consider people like Joe Biden and Tommy Thompson, but both have let themselves down by uttering foolishness. Biden attempted to praise Obama and ended up offending previous African-American candidates. Thompson recently offended people of the Jewish faith while attempting to compliment them. If they cannot properly offer words of simple praise to the people of our country, in relatively non-stressful circumstances, are we going to allow them to speak to the leaders of the world?

Then there is Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich (who hasn’t officially announced but acts like he has). These two continue to spout statements that in my mind fuel the fires of hate within this country. Romney has made clear his beliefs regarding the rights of those wishing same-sex marriages. Gingrich is notorious for his attitudes toward women. Neither is worth our time.

Have the candidates I have mentioned favoring uttered foolishness? Occasionally they have, but they have not taken positions that fall totally in my disfavor, although McCain does support the war, and their statements have not done undo harm to their campaign. In the cases of Biden, Thompson, Romney and Gingrich, their past statements will make them easy targets as the months fly by.

I love a good presidential campaign. There is a lot of good information on the internet and some bad information. Never take what I say as gospel. Take what the candidates say and scrutinize it carefully. Understand what they stand for and decide who you would like to see as our next president. If you can choose soon enough, consider volunteering for a campaign, even if typing a few words of support on someone’s blog is all you can afford.

If there is anything you disagree with here, let me know. I would love to hear what you think.

Thank you for reading. We will talk again soon.

Is Glenn Beck a Liberal?

If Don Imus is considered racist, sexist and a misogynist, how do you define Glenn Beck?

Remember when “conservative” meant being careful. Looking at a definition of the word conservative, it states:

1. Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.
2. Traditional or restrained in style: a conservative dark suit.
3. Moderate; cautious: a conservative estimate.

Think about this. It uses words like “cautious” and “restrained”. Yet I notice that many of those who describe themselves as conservative are anything but “cautions” and “restrained”.

Would someone described as “conservative” call anyone a “fat witch”? Glenn Beck does. March 21, 2007.

Would someone go on the radio and refer to a neighboring nation as a “dirtbag country”? Glenn Beck did. April 27, 2006.

On February 28, 2007, Glenn Beck was interviewing an American Idol contestant who had been scandalized by racy photos that had become public. Beck’s “conservative” response? “I’ve got some time and a camera. Why don’t you stop by?”

Is this an example of "traditional values"? Dr. Dobson, are you listening?

Are these types of barbs considered witty? None of this would be funny or thought-provoking if it were uttered by Larry the Cable Guy. Don Imus is a first cousin to Bob Hope compared to the “funny, conservative” humor of Glenn Beck.

How is this for a funny observation: On the August 24, 2006 broadcast of his program on CNN, Beck complained about hotels that put Braille markings next to the doors of the rooms. “Just to piss them [blind people] off, I'm going to put in Braille on the coffee pot ... 'Pot is hot.' "

I wrote recently that I believed a broadcaster I sometimes enjoyed, Don Imus, should have been fired for his recent remarks regarding the students and athletes of Rutgers. I stand by that statement.

The truth remains that if Imus deserves to be sent home, so do many other broadcasters. Glenn Beck is someone who liberally offends and openly hates people. That does not make Beck a liberal. In fact, he is far from being either a good conservative or a good liberal. He is far from being good at anything.

I hope CNN wakes up before he embarrasses their organization any more than he already has.

Child Safety and Attorney General Gonzales

Chicago, Illinois is a friendly town. It is the “windy” city. The home of those loveable Chicago Cubs.

As Carl Sandburg so eloquently stated, “Hog butcher for the world, tool maker, stacker of wheat, player with railroads and the nation’s freight handler.

“Stormy, husky, brawling city of the big shoulders.”

How can anyone not like Chicago and its fun-loving people? Apparently, United States Attorney General Alberto Gonzales does not like Chicago. Gonzales was able to make a brief news conference even briefer, much to the disappointment of Chicago reporters.

Yesterday, Gonzales was scheduled for a fifteen minute news conference. He was there to talk about the safety for children on the internet. Now that is a topic begging to be discussed for at least an hour or more (and no, I am not being sarcastic).

Somehow, however, Gonzales must have believed that all the concern about the fired U.S. attorneys was only in Washington D.C. He must have thought the people in Chicago either had not heard about the controversy, or were so happy and friendly that we did not care.

As it turned out, Gonzales ditched the Chicago reporters once he realized they were aware of the firings. Three pointed questions into the press conference and the U.S. Attorney General was history.

He did get out these verbal jousts, “I look forward to working with Congress. I believe in keeping accountability. Everything that I've done in connection with this matter supports that principle."

If he believes in accountability, why not answer a few, friendly questions? To be fair, Gonzales has likely been told by his own attorneys and others not to say much to the media. After three questions, he had probably used all the stock answers he was provided and decided it best to fold up camp.

Since Gonzales did not have much to say yesterday, we will report on what was said about child safety and the internet. Wait a minute. I am not finding anything in the papers about Gonzales, or anyone else, discussing child safety and the internet.

So what was Gonzales doing in Chicago? Maybe we will never know. In the meantime, if you want to know a little more about child safety and the internet, check out www.safechild.org. It has a lot of good information you may find interesting and/or helpful.

In the meantime, thank you for reading. We’ll talk again soon.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales

Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont has always been a favorite of mine. He just turned 67 so he is likely too old to run for U.S. President, but I would not have minded.

Leahy has been in the Senate since 1974. He understands how things work and how they are supposed to work. Rarely has he stepped into the limelight, quietly accomplishing things in the background. Only when he gets a sense that something is so important he needs to be seen, does he step out and speak.

This appears to be one of those times. Or maybe the Senator is just doing some Democratic Party footwork.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales did something foolish. He probably did it at the insistence of Karl Rove or someone else in the Bush administration. Remember, the Bush White House has never been one to think things through. Once again, they blundered in without an exit strategy.

The firing of federal prosecutors is not unusual. Most administrations take the time and mass remove prosecutors from office. The problem here is that most administrations do the deed during the first few months of gaining office, not six years later. Not after the prosecutors have told them they will or will not pursue legal issues that are purely for the political gain of the White House and/or the Republican Party.

Gonzales could have avoided this mess. There are ways this could have been handled that would have been neat and tidy. Still, when has the Bush administration every done anything “neat and tidy”?

Instead of having a plausible reason for the firings ready for anyone who asked, he tells the public that the prosecutors were fired for doing a poor job. Even Senators Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania will tell you that such a statement is ridiculous.

A statement that they wanted to start fresh with their own people would have been an honest statement and one that likely would have gone unnoticed.

The good news is that this whole debacle is strictly a show. Whether Gonzales stays or goes does not really matter. You know that Rove is not going to appear under oath. Much like the immigrant issue of times past, this is to distract us from important issues, such as the conditions at Walter Reed and the war in Iraq. If we give our attention to a non-issue, such as whether prosecutors were fired correctly, the politicians have more time to play the real war games.

Keep in mind that the older Senators are the ones involved. Patrick Leahy and Arlen Specter are the ones in the public eye. Neither is running for higher office. They are simply being the “magician’s assistant”, keeping the audience distracted while the magician is doing the real deception.

If you notice, Gonzales has not stepped down yet. Much like the departure of former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, he will likely wait until the discussion dies down and then make a big show of leaving. All in the effort to distract the pundits and buy the White House more time.

Nicely played, Karl. Nicely done.

Open Letter to Donald Trump

Dear Mr. Trump:

Please don’t. Don’t even joke about it.

I see where Wolf Blitzer asked you about running for President of the United States. You gave a good answer. You said you were not interested in running. Then you said, “It would certainly be fun. It would certainly be interesting."

Please don’t joke. You are a smart man, but you have no better chance than Ross Perot did in 1992. Actually, you have no better chance than Steve Urkel did in 1992.

Think about what you have said in public. Just recently you said, “If I looked like Rosie, I'd struggle with depression, too" about actress, comic and talk show host Rosie O’Donnell. Then you said, “Not everybody has to be politically correct. I think that's why this so-called feud took on a life of its own, because it wasn't politically correct. In a way it's wonderful that she doesn't like me and I don't like her. There's nothing wrong with that."

You may have to be more diplomatic to be President, Mr. Trump. You have just lost the female vote across the United States. Maybe some male votes too.

About George W. Bush, you said in your interview with Blitzer this past Thursday that he was probably the worst president in the history of the United States. You said Donald Rumsfeld, the former secretary of defense, was a disaster. Now you are losing the conservative right. Remember that a lot of people voted for Bush. No one likes to be told their vote was wrong-headed.

Don’t forget you sang the theme to the sixties comedy “Green Acres” on the Emmys. Do you think those running against you will show that a few hundred times?

Now, I agree with you about Bush and Rumsfeld, and although I disagree with you about Rosie I do have respect for you. I know the show is not going well, but running for President is not going to help things.

Stick with what you know. Run the casinos. Build the hotels.

Leave politics alone. As much fun as it may be, it is not worth it.

Slept Late

There are very few things in this world I despise, but one thing is when I sleep late.

It is my own fault. I forgot to set the alarm. I stayed up too late last night. It makes me goofy and in too much of a hurry. Sometimes I fail to write anything.

This is not one of those days. I may be late, but I am still going to write something.

So what should I write about? Maybe I will offer my best Larry King impression.

* Fred Thompson sounds like he is seriously considering running for the U.S. Presidency. Seems like his part on “Law and Order” is getting to him.
* Is there nothing that can keep Anna Nicole Smith out of the headlines? Now lawyers are fussing about her baby. Please, let the woman rest.
* Officials at the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign have retired Chief Illiniwek and all the logos. Everything that goes with the Chief is now done. I have always been on the fence on this one, but I am glad the issue is considered over. Now to take on the Fighting Irish of Notre Dame!
* I saw the headline yesterday: American Idol is losing viewers.
* Scooter Libby was convicted of lying under perjury and obstructing justice. We still do not know the motivation. Once we can determine motivation, the house of cards that is the Bush Administration could come tumbling down.
* If Bush pardons Libby, we will never know his motivation.
* O.J. Simpson’s “almost” book is going to be auctioned. If you have been following this carefully, we may remember that Simpson did not write one word of the book. He was being paid to attach his name and go on the road to promote the book. Why would anyone care?
Why care if he did write it? Nothing changes.
* Detroit JazzStage has another great podcast available. I hope to write about it before Monday and post it to “A Dimm View of Podcasts”.
* Baseball season cannot come fast enough.

My time is up. Better get to work.

Christopher Dodd

Since we have so much time between now and the primaries, let alone the Presidential Election Day, we have time to look at all the candidates. Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd is worth a good look.

I have written about other candidates and we are a long way away from making final decisions, but I like to write about people who impress me. Dodd currently is not even close to keeping up with Hilary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Edwards, etc. Dodd is keeping closer company right now with Dennis Kucinich in the polls.

Yet Christopher Dodd, and people like him, is the reason I do not consider running for office. Dodd has a lifelong history of public service that would make me look like a complete slacker.

When I think back on my professional career, I see that I worked as a radio announcer, salesman, administrative assistant, hotel manager and currently a customer service specialist. Looking at Dodd’s professional career, I see that he worked in the Peace Corps, joined the Army Reserve, studied and became a lawyer, served as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives and is currently a U.S. Senator.

My biography pales when compared to Dodd. Come to think, most people’s biography pales compared to Dodd.

When looking at his thoughts on the issues and his accomplishments, Dodd has strong views on improving education. In the past he has helped shape the Head Start program. He is already working on increasing the funding and improving the “No Child Left Behind” act. I am not a big believer in NCLB, but we do need something in this country. If Dodd and others can work together, we might see a program that could actually work.

Dodd has the standard Democratic line regarding issues such as Energy and Health Care. I do appreciate his recent comments regarding our involvement in Iraq. In a speech last October at Providence College, he stated, “After more than three years of conflict, anywhere from 60 thousand to 400 thousand Iraqi civilians have lost their lives.

“How can we expect the Iraqi people to put their faith in democracy, when democracy has given them this? Democracy isn’t only—in fact, it isn’t even mostly—about elections for the sake of elections. Democracy is the acceptance of rights and obligations for everyone, a robust debate, a free press, an independent judiciary, and stable, effective institutions that serve the well-being of people.”

He finished his speech by challenging the students, saying: “Our country needs your voice and your intelligence; and while your civic engagement won’t bring an end to all our problems, they can be the beginning of the solutions. So when your sons and daughters ask you what you did at the outset of the 21st century to make America safer, stronger, a more just and prosperous nation, I want each one of you to be able to say, at the very least—‘I told the truth, and demanded nothing less.’.”

I like a candidate who has ideas, who does not tell me what to think, and who challenges us all to become involved. Although I have not committed yet to a single candidate, I like Christopher Dodd. Take a look at his website, www.chrisdodd.com. Read what he has to say and let me know what you think.

Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Continued

Yesterday I posted several questions about the issues regarding Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C. An anonymous reader posted a response which was very helpful to me in understanding more about the situation.

The whole situation peaked my interest so I went back and read the two-part series written by Washington Post reporters Dana Priest and Anne Hull. In paragraph three of the first article, published on February 18th, they write, “The common perception of Walter Reed is of a surgical hospital that shines as the crown jewel of military medicine. But 5 1/2 years of sustained combat have transformed the venerable 113-acre institution into something else entirely -- a holding ground for physically and psychologically damaged outpatients.”

Reading the articles provide more questions, including: “If the hospital is overflowing with patients (‘…they take up every bed and spill into nearby hotels…’), how can the government consider either closure or merger?”

One of the problems pointed out by the Post articles is that bureaucratic tangle that envelopes most of the soldiers. Again, Priest and Hull write, “Life beyond the hospital bed is a frustrating mountain of paperwork. The typical soldier is required to file 22 documents with eight different commands -- most of them off-post -- to enter and exit the medical processing world, according to government investigators.”

My next question is: “Why is the Armed Forces medical system not run like a corporation?” I have been through several mergers for the large telecommunications company where I spend more than forty hours each week. Each company had its own system for its customers. It takes time, but the company is able to merge systems in a way that is nearly invisible to the customer.

Why does the United States Armed Forces have sixteen different information systems that fail to communicate with one another? It appears to be inefficient and the soldiers are the ones who are suffering.

There are a couple of points that need to be made. It would be easy to point fingers at the current administration and say that they caused this situation. The facility is nearly a hundred years old, having opened in 1909. The present situation, including horrible building management and mind-blowing bureaucracy, was not achieved in just six or seven years. There are many administrations that can be blamed for ignoring a poorly managed situation.

What this administration can be called to task for is escalating the seriousness of the problem by engaging in a long term military conflict. U.S. Representative John Murtha of Pennsylvania, an outspoken critic of the war in Iraq, weighed in this past Sunday on Meet the Press, saying: “Why did that happen at Walter Reed? It happened because the resources are so much in, in Iraq. They’ve spent so much money over there, ignored the very thing that’s so important to our troops at home.”

The next point to be made is that the rodent infestation and rotting structures are not common to all of the buildings at the facility. Much has been made of “Building 18”, but you will notice that the President and the Congressmen tend to visit Ward 57 and other well-kept units. As with many situations in life, there appears to be money enough to care for some, but not for all.

The President and others continue to say that our soldiers deserve the best, but actions speak louder than words. Considering the poor training, lack of equipment and now poor medical care, our fighting men are being shown a genuine lack of respect.

According to Murtha on Meet the Press, “We’re the ones—they, they want us out of there; 64 percent of the public in Iraq wants us out of Iraq.”

South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham on the same program said, “I’m no expert, but here’s what I think’s going on, based on conservation talks in South Carolina, is that people are frustrated.”

The government is relying on polls and making interpretations based on what they want the outcomes to be. The only way to get your thoughts and feelings across is to be vocal.

This situation is not solely the responsibility of one person, or one group of people. As members of society, we need to listen closely to what is being said and respond accordingly. If you do, or do not, agree with what is being said, respond with a letter or an email to your representative. If you hear of an action being considered that you support or oppose, let the government know.

Anyone I have spoken to personally or heard about in the media opposing the war is quick to praise our young men and women. People are proud of those who have served our country during this conflict. Today’s soldiers do not have to fear those who oppose the war. The biggest fear today’s soldiers face is from those who say they support it.

Walter Reed Army Medical Center

There are several things I do not understand about the recent fiasco regarding Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C.

1) Mississippi Senator and minority whip Trent Lott stated on “This Week with George Stephanopoulos” that Walter Reed was on a list of possible base closings. At the same time, Walter Reed was described as the “crown jewel” of hospitals serving our wounded military personnel. How could the “crown jewel” wind up on a list of base closings?

2) I understand why our government was closing military bases. Walter Reed is a hospital. Why is a hospital on a list of “base” closings?

3) Lott says that those in charge were reluctant to put too much money into the hospital facility because it was on the list. If Walter Reed was prestigious, why would anyone be concerned about “the list”?

4) If you were in charge at Walter Reed and saw your name was on a potential closing list, wouldn’t you do what you could to make the hospital too important and respected to close?

5) If Walter Reed did close, where would the wounded soldiers who continue to be brought in from Iraq, Afghanistan, etc., be sent to be treated and/or recover?

6) I have read about various politicians visiting the wounded at Walter Reed. Was Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel the first to notice the poor conditions?

7) In a White House briefing on February 21, 2007, White House Press Secretary Tony Snow told reporters that the President was aware of the dismal conditions at Walter Reed. If he knew, why did he choose not to do anything?

These are just a few quick questions I have about the mess that is Walter Reed. There is a lot of finger pointing going on, and will continue for weeks to come.

There are problems in Washington today. It seems like every month or so, another proverbial “hole appears in the dike”. What will be the next crisis? Will it be enough for Congress to take action?

Al Franken

So Al is off and running. Run, Al, Run.

Franken’s books are hilarious and thought provoking. His radio program was fun to listen to before Air America began to charge for downloads. Franken is witty, and more importantly, intelligent.

Minnesota likes to vote for underdogs and odd sorts. They elected a wrestler for a governor. Why not put a comedy writer in the Senate?

That seems to be the gist of Franken’s candidacy to date, now just a few short weeks old. You can find more at www.alfranken.com. Franken has always been more cerebral than the rest of the world, which is why he never quite made it into the upper echelons of comic superstars.

If you examine his career, it is a series of failures and modest accomplishments. He and his writing partner, Tom Davis, were hired to write for "Saturday Night Live". Both were included in the 1980 mass exodus from the show, only to return with Lorne Michaels in 1985.

The most successful bit of television comedy Franken contributed was the character Stuart Smalley. Stuart will always make me laugh. The poor fellow is doing his best, but having a hard time. Sketches with Michael Jordan and a young Macaulay Culkin will always have me in stitches.

He parlayed the Smalley character into a film and appeared in a few other films that never turned into huge hits. He did a sitcom for NBC titled “Lateline” about an evening news program that lasted only a short time. He also did a series of very funny specials for Comedy Central before becoming a radio show host.

Franken’s best success has been as a writer. Starting with a Stuart Smalley diary, Franken has been writing a book every couple of years. The most recent, “The Truth (with jokes)” includes, among other things, a detailed case regarding the sins of Tom DeLay and Jack Abramoff long before any of the scandals hit the mainstream media.

If anything, Franken is sincere in his desire to make the world a better place. He believes in the system and wants to see it work. The only difficult part is that he is a comedy writer. He enjoys a good joke and is good at portraying a good-hearted loser. Time will tell if that works for him or works against him.

Rev. Al Sharpton and "The Daily Show"

The Rev. Al Sharpton made a surprise appearance on “The Daily Show” last night. I continue to be amazed at how much more I can learn from and interview with Jon Stewart than during an interview with most news people.

Sharpton was not funny, but he did not need to be. Stewart was plenty funny for both of them.

The point of the interview was to discuss the appearance of Strom Thurmond in Sharpton’s family tree. It is amazing how a man who ran for President as a segregationist in 1948 and a man who ran for President as a civil rights leader in 2004 could be related.

Stewart ran the line “Ebony and Irony”. The Reverend did not appreciate the humor, but did not blast Stewart. He understood that “The Daily Show” is primarily a comedy show, but one that allows people to share their points of view.

Stewart is amazing. He took a show that had run its course with Craig Kilborn and breathed new life into it. In fact, he made the show bigger and better than it had been with the people who created it. It is more relevant and funnier.

It is even becoming a better breeding ground for talent than “Saturday Night Live”, producing Mo Rocca, Steve Carell, Steven Colbert and others. The latest to attempt to break out is Rob Corddrey, who has a new Fox sitcom titled “The Winner” and appearances in movies including “Failure to Launch” and “Unaccompanied Minors”. He also has appearances in several movies coming out this year and next.

Stewart has had plenty of opportunities to jump ship to network television, but continue on since this gig fits him so well. You never get tired of the blank stare or the self-effacing silliness he provides.

Rev. Al Sharpton and other political figures are smart to appear on Stewart’s show. They know they will be treated fairly and that people will remember them, and what they said, the next day.

Personally, I see no sharks in the future of “The Daily Show”. This one is going to last a long time.

Richard Daley

No matter how you feel about Chicago mayor Richard Daley, Chicago residents still vote for him. Seventy-one percent of Chicago voters agreed that Daley should continue as mayor of the third largest city in the United States.

After listening to WBBM’s At Issue (as a podcast), I thought there may be more of a battle. Dorothy Brown and William “Dock” Walls were both interviewed on the program. Both put up strong arguments for their election.

Neither stood a chance.

Part of me misses the days of the mid to late 70’s and 80’s when the Chicago mayor’s office was a battle. Jane Byrne and Harold Washington really shook up Chicago after the passing of Daley’s father. Today, it is business as usual in Chicago politics.

Not that having Daley for a mayor is bad. Daley has done a lot of good for the city, although I was unhappy about the closing of Meigs field and hate to hear about the contracting scandal.

It is a shame that Byrne and Washington, each ran into criticism and scandal. Both had to scramble to repair their image. Daley seems to consume criticism and scandal and make his image stronger because of it.

On this first day of March 2007, there is no new mayor in town. Any election excitement is going to have to come late next year. In the meantime, I hope he lives up to his promise of more money to public education. That needs to be a 21st century focus throughout the U.S. Chicago, especially, needs to be a part of it.

Delaware's Joe Biden

Senator Joe Biden of Delaware has joined the race for U.S. President. He got off to an inauspicious start by inadvertently insulting former African-American candidates.

Of course, being a long-term Senator does not mean you are perfect.

Biden has been a Senator for close to thirty-five years. He first gained my attention while chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary. During his eight year run as chairman, he presided over two heavily publicized U.S. Supreme Court confirmation hearings when Robert Bork was nominated in 1987 and in 1991 when Clarence Thomas burst on the scene.

In the case of Thomas, the committee was divided by the elder Bush’s nomination. They failed to make a recommendation before sending the candidate before the Senate. In what has been described as the closest vote in the twentieth century, Thomas won approval 52-48.

The Senate hearings in both situations made great television and made temporary stars of such people as Illinois Senator Paul Simon and Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter. Simon parlayed his notoriety into a 1988 Presidential candidacy of his own.

Biden also announced his candidacy in 1988, but the run went down in flames. This was a time when not everything you said and did was video taped, but Biden was caught repeating a speech by British Labour Party leader Neil Kinnock and claiming it for his own.

Aides to eventual Democratic nominee Michael Dukakis spotted the plagiarism and got the media’s attention. Dukakis made a show of reprimanding his team, but their actions did propel the Massachusetts governor into the spotlight.

So what about all this history? What does Biden have today that none of the other candidates have?

If you weigh the pros and cons you will notice that Biden still does not have the best decision making skills. He made a poor choice in 1988 on what speech to deliver. He made a poor choice of comments when asked about Obama.

Sure, one was a speech and the other was off the cuff, but I want a president who is intelligent, whether writing a speech or speaking candidly.

Biden still does not have great leadership skills. He was unable in 1991 to lead the judiciary committee to offer more than a neutral vote on Clarence Thomas. Recently, he was unable to garner support for the non-binding resolution to condemn the Bush build-up of troops in Iraq. He voted among the 56 senators, but even with seven Republican senators joining up, they still fell four votes short.

Now we could blame a lot of Senatorial Presidential candidates for missing the boat, but Biden is a long-term Senator who should be bringing leadership to the table in his run for office. Even if it was a non-binding resolution, would it have been a nice feather to say he helped drove this through?

In the long run, I like Joe Biden. I like what he says about Iraq. I like the five point plan he has presented for finishing the war and leaving Iraq.

Biden may just be the best choice among the candidates for U.S. President. To get there, he will have to make some changes. He will have to speak more eloquently and convince people to change their minds on important issues.

Overall, Biden must be a leader, more than a smiling face. Let’s see what happens.

Words of the Candidates

“The genius of our founders is that they designed a system of government that can be changed. And we should take heart, because we've changed this country before. In the face of tyranny, a band of patriots brought an Empire to its knees. In the face of secession, we unified a nation and set the captives free. In the face of Depression, we put people back to work and lifted millions out of poverty. We welcomed immigrants to our shores, we opened railroads to the west, we landed a man on the moon, and we heard a King's call to let justice roll down like water, and righteousness like a mighty stream.

“Each and every time, a new generation has risen up and done what's needed to be done. Today we are called once more - and it is time for our generation to answer that call.” Barack Obama, February 10, 2007


“That is why this campaign can't only be about me. It must be about us - it must be about what we can do together. This campaign must be the occasion, the vehicle, of your hopes, and your dreams.” Barack Obama, February 10, 2007


“And so I ask you, will you stand up for that tired father forced into emergency rooms to get health care for his little girl?

“Will you stand up for the brave young boy in the refugee camp?

“Will you stand up for the working men and women in our labor movement who have to fight for decent working conditions and living wages?

“Will you stand up for the young man who knows that education is his way out of the cycle of poverty and yet it seems beyond his grasp?

“Will you stand up?

“Will you stand up for America?

“Because if we don’t stand up, who will?” John Edwards, February 2, 2007


“We need to rebuild our families. We need stronger families! We need people belonging and committed! By doing so, we will reduce poverty, strengthen our nation, and increase hope.

“We need to support the foundational institution of marriage as the union of a man and a woman for life. We should support marriage, not tax it? It's wrong to take away welfare benefits just because someone gets married. Marriage remains the best place to raise children—not the only place, but the best.” Sam Brownback, undated letter found at website


“In addition to demographic numbers, we must pay attention to the human condition. The human condition always drives world events. Roughly half of the world’s people live on less than $2 per day. More than one billion people do not have potable drinking water. Two billion people lack proper sanitation, and another 2 billion people do not have electricity.

“All of these numbers tell an important and complicated story that we must pay attention to. The greatest force for change in the world is the next generation. For America and the world to continue to improve the human condition it will require the trust and confidence of the world’s next generation. If we fail, our children and grandchildren will inherit a very dangerous world.” Chuck Hagel, February 10, 2007


“Americans know we need health care. But they doubt Washington understands what it feels like to lie in bed, like 47 million Americans without health insurance, looking over at your pregnant wife, and wondering what happens if your baby is premature. Will I lose my home?

“I understand because I remember being rolled into a operating room 20 years ago, after they told me that my chances weren't good, but thanking God that at least my family wouldn't be left in debt because I had insurance.” Joe Biden, February 3, 2007


Listen to what our candidates are saying. Listen to how they say it.

Before choosing these quotes, I searched several websites for candidates. I was surprised that the democratic candidates had their speeches available and easy to find. The republican candidates rarely had speeches available. After sifting through various candidates I found Chuck Hagel’s site that included recent speeches made.

Please search for information. Find out what they are saying. Decide for yourself what it important to you.

Most importantly, when it is time, go out and vote!

I know it is early in the process, but do not wait until it is too late.

As I write this, it is early Sunday morning. If you have a day off, spend an hour searching for what these people believe.

Below I have included the websites where I found these quotes. Also you will find an excellent website explaining the current presidential race and offering more websites with information about your future leaders.

Please, do not waste the day. Take a hard look for your sake, your family’s sake, and for all of us.


http://www.barackobama.com/
http://www.johnedwards.com/
Sam Brownback
Chuck Hagel
http://www.joebiden.com/

http://www.politics1.com/

Chief Illiniwek

The dance may be over but the “Chief” will live on forever.

Of course, in this case, we are talking about the fictional “Chief Illiniwek” who roamed the halls and sports stadiums at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign since 1926. Since 1988, the question of whether it was morally right to continue to present the Chief during sporting events has been debated.

Let me be more accurate. Whether the University should continue promoting and presenting the Chief and his ceremonial dance at sporting and other activities has been pondered, questioned, argued, discussed, talked about, thrashed about, fought about, bickered, squabbled, disputed and fussed about for close to twenty years.

Let us think about that for a moment. For a quarter of the Chief’s existence, the point of his existence has been under fire.

In Urbana-Champaign, there are two types of people who live there. No, I don’t mean the democrats or republicans. No, I don’t mean the smokers or non-smokers. No I don’t mean those who are pro-choice or pro-life. No, I don’t mean men or women.

In the area you will find those “For the Chief” or those “Against the Chief”. There are few (Outside the Board of Trustees) on the fence.

Those who support the Chief have been called insensitive, arrogant, bigoted, unfeeling, unsympathetic, uncaring, callous, cruel, cold and heartless.

Those who support the retirement of the Chief have been called oversensitive, over politically correct, touchy, prickly, thin-skinned, over-emotional, whiney, moaning, complaining and bleeding hearts.

The debate will never be totally over, but hopefully it has been tempered. The Board of Trustees for the University of Illinois has announced that after Wednesday night’s performance, the Chief will be retired.

I have been one of those who have not voiced their opinion. I have always viewed the Chief as a character, like Paul Bunyan. I never felt he characterized a specific tribe or a specific, “true to life” lifestyle. He has always been a fun story that symbolized strength and pride.

The University could have used space gladiators or Roman gladiators. They could have used a pack animal or revolutionary war soldier. Instead, they chose an American Indian.

Considering the time and non-white attitudes of the day, it was an easy choice. Still, it is not 1926 anymore.

This is the twenty-first century. What our country did to minorities of all types through the past two hundred plus years is reprehensible. We continue to fight with those whose beliefs are contrary to ours overseas. In many ways, we still have not learned our lessons.

In the small community of Urbana-Champaign, the University of Illinois Board of Trustees have taken a brave stand (thanks to a gun to the head by the NCAA) and said that since the Chief is offensive to some, we must find another way to promote bravery, persistence and honor among the students, faculty, alumni and just plain fans of the University.

It is not a popular move, but it is the right move. Maybe the decision was not made for the best reasons, but it was the right decision.

In the hearts of the supporters of the Chief, I hope they will take the good that the Chief represented and find new ways to express themselves. Many things were said that should not have been said. Much money was spent that could have been spent elsewhere.

Let us enjoy the last dance and then move forward. The Chief will always be remembered, if not displayed. That is as it should be.

Long live the Chief.

Recent Comments

Recently, a couple of people have left comments. I thought I would take a moment to respond.

Bryan from Seattle, WA left a comment regarding my recent writing about Barack Obama. He writes, “Don't cut Mitt Romney short either, take a look at him, he has an excellent chance, very well balanced.”

Unfortunately Bryan, I have already spoken up about Romney. Take a glance at a blog I wrote last April titled “Hurtful Things”. In it I write, “During a February speech in West Bloomfield, MI, Govenor Romney stated that he felt his state of Massachusetts “struck a blow against the foundation of the family.” He continued, “The right and idea setting for raising a child is where there is a mother and a father.”

I write more about this in that blog, but my feelings remain the same. Romney’s attitudes towards the issue of same sex marriage and basic rights for homosexual couples remove him from my list of candidates I will consider supporting. We do not need any more closed-minded individuals running our government.

Bryan, please don’t take offense, because I do like some of the other ideas Romney has shared, such as health care reform. I do not feel like he is a horrible person. He is just someone I will not consider supporting.

Bryan also wrote, “As for Obama on the issue of tax reform and how people aren't paying their fair share, well this is kidna complicated. When 5% of the nation pays approx 90% of the taxes, well it isn't fair is it? The 5% being the top 5%, the wealthy, most people disregard this, just thought I'd let you know.”

Again, Bryan wrote a very nice, polite comment and I hate being arguementative. The math Bryan presents may be accurate, but it certainly is short sighted. If the top five percent is paying 90% of the taxes in this country, it is because, being the top five percent, they have most of the money. If you look at how much of the money they spend on taxes relative to their income and compare that to how much money the middle class pays in taxes compared to their income, I think that you would see the unfairness of our current tax system.

Thanks for commenting, Bryan! Just because I see the situations differently does not make me right and you wrong, or vice versa. I like the chance to consider other views. You never know what you might learn.

I also heard from Andrew who said, “If you are interested in the accuracy of House, MD, "The Medical Science of House, M.D." by Andrew Holtz is NOW available.”http://astore.amazon.com/holtzreport-20/detail/0425212300/002-1506485-5696031 or http://doiop.com/HouseBook

He was responding to a blog last August where I wrote about the Fox series “House M.D.”. In a nutshell, I wrote that the storylines were interesting, even is they were implausible. “House” is known for being medically accurate, but the idea that this doctor in one hospital could run into so many crazy illnesses each week is beyond belief. Most doctors are lucky to run into these occasional cases once or twice in their career.

But it is television. It is not supposed to be believable. I have to admit, the recent episode titled “One Day, One Room” was one of their best.

Thanks to Andrew for the tip and good luck with the book. When I get the chance, we will take a look!