CommenTerry

The More Recent, the (Apparently) More Important

There is a phenomenon that I call a "recent" bias which is constantly practiced by the media. Here's how it works: less recent events are downplayed in importance in favor more recent events, which are greatly over hyped. We saw this as the year 2000 was approaching. Almost all of the top this-and-that lists of the 20th Century were slanted toward the more recent decades. For example, the 1920's were not represented on those lists nearly as much as the 1980's or the 1990's were.

Likewise, almost all of the top this-and-that lists of the millennium were slanted in such a way that the 20th Century had most of the entries, even though the millennium included nine other centuries. This happens in sports all the time as well. Every year, without fail, I will hear several broadcasters say the game they just finished doing "is the best [baseball, football, basketball, hockey, etc.] game in history." How quickly they forget about the game they gave that accolade to the previous year, or the year before that, or the year before that ...

Random Rants and Raves #96

When and if Barack Obama's presidential campaign crashes and burns, they following one-word headline could be used: Obummer!         

---

A fundamentalist is someone who is absolutely sure that his basic interpretation of scriptures -- out of the hundreds that exist -- is the correct one. This is in spite of the fact that there is just as much scriptural support for many of the others. 

---

When are brow-beaters going to stop being surprised by the backlashes they incite?

---

Another reason I'm not overly impressed with money: Nothing I buy with it ever lasts.

---

To me, the only good fun is safe fun.

---

Message on a bumper sticker: Life was more interesting before I got it all figured out!

---

I would never repeat any bad thing that someone said about me -- especially if it was true! 

---

If a man dies and no one finds out about it, is he really dead?

I'll Put a Stop to That!

Many times in the past, I've been talked out of doing things that I really wanted to do. This occurred because I am not a very strong-willed person and made the mistake of sharing my plans with someone who was strong-willed and who opposed what I wanted to do. I have decided to put my foot down and never let this happen again. From now on, I will not tell anyone about my plans ahead of time!

How to Become a Celebrity in America

In 21st century America, it's no longer a requirement that one be a talented actor or musician, statesman, author, or hero to become a celebrity. Now, there are more ways than ever to achieve dubious celebrity status. Here are just a few of these alternative paths to celebrity:

(1) Be a juror in a high-profile trial.

(2) Do something extremely stupid and survive it.

(3) Be the spouse, child, parent, or sibling of someone who did something extremely stupid and didn't survive it.

(4) Be a victim of some kind of high-profile calamity (natural or manmade) and survive it.

(5) Be the spouse, child, parent, or sibling of a victim of some kind of high-profile calamity (natural or manmade) who didn't survive it.

(6) Be a marginally talented singer or dancer and get discovered by some TV "talent search" show.

(7) Win at least five times in a row on a TV game show.

(8) Appear on any TV reality show.

(9) Become a victim of some great injustice (real or imaginary).

(10)  Be the spouse, child, parent, or sibling of a deceased victim of some great injustice. 

(11) Claim you have some kind of supernatural power and con enough people into believing you.

(12) Write a book promoting some kind of fad diet, snake oil health product, conspiracy theory, or easy path to wealth.

(13) Become the pastor of a megachurch.

(14) Become addicted to something and then overcome that addiction.

(15) Start a new religion.

Bias Against Sick Males?

I don't know if anyone else has ever noticed this, but many female nurses, whether they work at hospitals or doctors' offices, seem to retain a somewhat bigoted and/or condescending attitude toward males between the ages of 14 and 49 who are ill. They do not seem to have this attitude toward males in this age group who have suffered injuries. Perhaps, subconsciously, they think "real men" don't have health problems. Maybe this has been bred into them by our culture.

Voters Should Take This Pledge in 2008

The amount of money that will be raised by the major 2008 presidential candidates borders on obscene. Many of them will raise $100 million or more by the end of this year alone! It's getting to the point where people without access to large sums of money need not apply for the job of U.S. President. As a result, we all lose out because many potentially great presidents do not have this kind of access. Indeed, money is spoiling our political system.

However, as voters, all we do talk is about this issue, but none of us ever does anything about it. It reminds me of the weather. But what if we all decided to quit talking and actually do something? There is something we can do and politicians will have no choice but to take notice.

For the upcoming presidential election, I am taking a personal pledge to not vote for any candidate who raises more than $25 million during the primary season and/or more than $50 million during the general election campaign. Once a candidate exceeds either of these amounts -- even by one dollar -- I will scratch him or her off my list. It will not matter to me how much I agree with them on the issues. Exceed it and they are gone -- no questions asked. By the way, the amount of money these candidates raise is public information that is made available quarterly.

I urge other voters to take a similar pledge and stick with it. If enough of us do, political big-spenders will start going down to defeat on a regular basis and might finally get a clue as to how voters feel about the excessive money in politics.

Don't Go Down That Hole!

You can ruin a great USENET or bulletin board message by not being careful with the use of off-topic or "throw-away" lines or phrases. For example, you could post an expertly-written message about classic automobiles, which you are very proud of. However, if that message contains any reference to, let's say, bubblegum, the other posters in the thread might completely ignore your dissertation on classic automobiles and spin off the entire thread in the direction of bubblegum. This is called "going down a rabbit hole."

Why Hagel Will Run as an Independent -- and Win

Many pundits are expecting Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel to announce his intention to run for the 2oo8 Republican presidential nomination later this year. However, don't expect that to occur any time soon -- don't expect it to happen at all. Ultimately, Hagel will decide not to seek the 2008 GOP presidential nod. Although he is as conservative as they come on social issues like abortion, he has alienated many within the Republican Party with his opposition to President Bush on the war in Iraq. In addition, he has even gone as far as saying that the possibility of impeaching the President is "on the table."

Hagel knows that, should he seek the Republican presidential nomination, he would likely find little sentiment for his candidacy within the party. However, if and when he did begin to show any strength in the polls, it would almost certainly inspire the mounting of a strong "anyone-but-Hagel" campaign, organized by Republican insiders, influential neocons, and Bush administration loyalists. Many of these people are already calling for him to be drummed out of the party and are referring to him as a RINO (Republican in Name Only).

But all of this doesn't mean he won't make a run for the White House in 2008. I think he will still run -- only as an independent candidate. If he does make an independent run, he will have the best chance to win of any independent candidate in recent history. And this includes Ross Perot in 1992, when he declared his candidacy, surged to the top of the polls, abruptly withdrew, and then re-entered the race a few months later, unable to re-capture his original poll standing and ultimately finishing a distant third.

Hagel will likely have two major advantages if he runs as an independent. First, the Republicans are likely to nominate someone who is viewed as not being as conservative as he on the social issues. Look at their top three candidates as it stands now. Rudy Giuliani is certainly no social conservative, by any stretch of the imagination. John McCain is not trusted by many evangelicals and members of the Religious Right, even though he has recently tried to make up with them. Many have not forgotten his past clashes with them over key issues. Mitt Romney, who now claims to be a social conservative, is still having to explain his recent conversion and why he previously supported abortion rights and gay marriage. A great number of social conservatives view him as nothing more than an opportunistic flip-flopper. Hagel could benefit from socially conservative voters, who normally vote Republican for president, not being satisfied with the social conservative credentials of the GOP nominee.

Second, Hillary Clinton is still the odds-on favorite to capture the Democratic presidential nomination. There are many solid liberals and regular Democratic voters who, though they may have loved her husband's presidency, consider her to be just too polarizing and/or power-hungry and will therefore not vote for her under any circumstances. Others just don't like the Clintons in general. Most of these liberal Democrats are strongly opposed to the war and Iraq and are looking for a candidate who will bring it to an end as soon as possible. These voters, although they obviously do not agree with Chuck Hagel on the social issues, might turn to him anyway. In addition, independent voters who oppose the war in Iraq and would never vote for Hillary Clinton would likely support Hagel's candidacy as well.

Chuck Hagel could very well turn out to be America's compromise candidate in 2008. For this reason, I think he will decide to run for president in 2008 as an independent and will ultimately be elected. 

Could It Be the Maternal Instincts?

Some people just don't seem to have enough of their own business to worry about. They have to spend time being concerned about the activities and welfare of everyone around them. There seems to be at least one of these people in every work place. Usually, it's an older female. Perhaps this concern is a manifestation of their deeply seeded maternal instincts.

Dennis Kucinich: Presidential Contender or Pretender?

Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich announced his candidacy for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination back in December. He is now in his sixth term in the House of Representatives and is currently chairman of the Domestic Policy Subcommittee of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

Kucinich entered politics at the age of 23, being elected to the Cleveland City Council. Eight years later, he was elected mayor of Cleveland at age 31, becoming the youngest mayor of a major U.S. city. His mayoral term is best known for the city's bankruptcy, which resulted from his power struggle with the banks with which the city had outstanding loans. He was nearly recalled (avoiding that fate by the narrowest of margins) and was defeated after only one two-year term in office. He was elected to the House in 1996, more than twenty years after two unsuccessful attempts in the early 1970's.

Kucinich ran for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination, but met with very little success. He did not win a single primary or caucus and finished in single digits in most states. However, he did perform respectably in a handful of states, garnering 31% in Hawaii, 17% in Minnesota, and 16% in both Maine and Oregon. Despite his lack of success, he campaigned through the entire primary and caucus season.

As he did in 2004, Kucinich will be running to the left of other Democratic presidential contenders. He is known for his strong anti-war and pro-environmentalism stands. He favors the immediate withdrawal of all U.S. combat troops from Iraq and has been a harsh critic of Democrats who voted in favor of the war, which he voted against, in 2002. In addition, he has voiced concerns that President Bush is building toward a war with Iran. He was one of the few members of Congress who voted against the USA Patriot Act.

Kucinich voted in favor of investigating Bill Clinton the Monica Lewinsky scandal, but voted against his impeachment. He is one of only a few vegan elected officials in the U.S. He is a Roman Catholic who once boasted an anti-abortion voting record. He has since switched positions to pro-choice -- a change that has brought accusations of flip-flopping on the issue. He disagrees with "abstinence-only" sex education, but favors the use of contraception to keep abortions rare, again breaking with the teachings of his Catholic faith.

Once again, Kucinich will have difficultly getting beyond single digits in most states during the nominating process. His far-left stands on most issues make it all but impossible for him to win the nomination. Even most of those Democrats who agree with him will be too pragmatic to give him their votes, knowing his nomination would lead to certain Democratic disaster in the fall of 2008. However, look for Kucinich to be as undeterred as ever, campaigning the entire way through the nominating season, as he did in 2004.