THE ENTERPRISE
A MODERN MORALITY PLAY--24
In a moment of rare frivolity I decided to do something I never imagined I'd do. I confess. I ordered the entire past 5 years of the Fox TV Series "24" on DVD. (Yes, I did the math--that's 80 hours of "boob tube" time.) I had an unusually busy Nov. & Dec. this year, but Jan. turned quiet. With little business going on from Jan. 1-18, all I had to do was grieve Ohio State's humiliating loss to Florida in the BCS National Championship and become a "couch potato" catching up on what is critically acclaimed as the most successful and compelling continuing TV series over the past 5 years.
Those of you who know it and have watched it are probably hooked, like I am now. Those who don't, I don't know what to tell you. There is a web site that will let you catch up on the series, but you'll miss the fun and the suspense. The current season premiered 2 weeks ago, and on one of those 2 episodes, terrorists set off a suitcase Nuke in Valencia, CA. Wow. Chilling. If you like suspense, you'll like 24. If you like morality in the face of terrorism and politics, you'll love it. (http://www.tv.com/24/show/3866/episode_listings.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=episodessh&tag=episodes;more)
Most of all you can watch a superbly done modern "morality play" in which the hero, Jack Bauer,
(a Counter-Terrorism-Unit agent, played superbly by Kiefer Sutherland) and other protagonists are constantly faced with decisions about "right vs. wrong" and "good vs. evil." The most devilish decisions weigh the "greater good--many lives at risk--versus one or a few--or Bauer's). The President, played by Dennis Haysbert in the early seasons, particularly faces some vexing problems, a very realistic scenario. If you haven't seen it, try it. If you have, keep enjoying it. I'll catch up to this year by spring sometime.
ENERGY INDEPENDENCE--OR AT LEAST "LESS-DEPENDENCE"
The President's State of the Union Speech and the reaction of his opponents on the Democratic side of the aisle showed us all what we face in the future. Now that the Democrats have control of Congress, life will be hell for Bush. Even his most important, sensible, middle-of-the-road proposals were (and will be) greeted with a complete rejection--unless they happened to hit a particular legislator's hot button.. Why? They all still hate Bush. And the Democratic credo for now anyway is a strange version of the phrase "first, do no harm"--FIRST, DO NOTHING IF YOU COULD BE BLAMED FOR IT GOING WRONG!" The "First 100 Hours" rush of House legislative activity was all show, with little of substance, and less of it likely to actually pass the Senate.
"Energy Independence" for the US is one of the most important programs the President covered. Sure it falls way behind "what to do in Iraq" on the importance meter, but for the US future, it's critical. Bush's opening proposal was not all that strong, but it was a move in the right direction. For those who have not thought about this topic a lot. Here are a few points. The US four largest sources of Imported Oil are (in order) Canada, Mexico, Venezuela and (mostly unfriendly) OPEC countries. The last 2 are the problem. We buy their oil and fund the rebellious regimes in Iran and Venezuela. The "tree-huggers" enlist Democrat allies to block drilling in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge--a vast wasteland populated with lots more oil and "vast nothingness" than it is with wildlife. Better to drill for oil there and disturb a few moose and elk than be under the thumb of Chavez' Venezuela and Iran.
GLOBAL LUKE-WARMING
Saving oil by reducing auto usage has a second benefit. Two of the larges sources of greenhouse gases are vehicle emissions and coal-fired power plants. If anybody is serious about the US contribution to reducing "greenhouse gas" emissions, they will support two efforts.
--1) Crack down on gas-guzzling cars and trucks--hard--faster than Bush's plan. The auto industry and American public could cut car and light truck emissions by 20% in 3 years, not ten. How? Stop soccer Moms from taking a 5000 lb. 400 HP truck to take a 60 lb. 10-year-old from home to school to soccer practice. How? Add $1/gallon tax on gas for starters. Penalize car makers for missing new, tougher CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standards, and reinstate BIG "gas guzzler penalties on purchase and licensing both. Rush Limbaugh will fuss, but let him.
--2) Cut back use of coal fired power plants. Encourage use of Nuclear Energy and bring as much as capacity on line as fast as possible.. Cut through the red-tape and nonsense to finish the Yucca Mountain site in Nevada for storing and disposal of nuclear waste too. Face the fact that it will be radioactive for centuries, and deal with it.
Every form of energy has consequences. It is a matter of "picking your poison." Buried radioactive waste in an unpopulated area or "global warming." And by the way, the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the next decade will be dirty facilities in underdeveloped countries like India, China, etc.. Forcing them to "clean their act up" is next to impossible, but then US importers cracked down on child labor with some beneficial effect, so why not choose this campaign next.
CHINA'S SPACE SHOT
OK, China can make almost everything we use cheaper and just as well as we did. Why are we surprised that they could shoot down a satellite in low earth orbit? And what group of pacifist "boobs" forced us to stop developing our capabilities in that area? (I don't know...but I bet I could make a short list.) Reagan was right in pushing his missile defense system. Now where did we keep those plans?
GIVE THE UNIONS THE OPPRESSIVE BENEFIT PLANS THEY NEGOTIATED
Smartest move I've heard lately: GM and Ford handing over the ridiculous pension & health care plans negotiated with the UAW--to the UAW--and with funding fixed at current levels. Good idea. Let the Union officials who helped create the mess explain to their members why it can't just keep growing and growing and growing.
NIX ON AIRLINES THAT TREAT CUSTOMERS LIKE DOGS--OR WORSE
I only fly United Airlines when there is no other viable option. In my experience, United's people are inconsiderate and the airline's policies are ridiculous. Delta is vying for a place next on my list. I could fill pages with stories of United's screw-ups and their "we don't really care" attitudes. If they keep saying they are the "Friendly Skies" somebody ought to sue them for false advertising.
HEALTH CARE--A BIG OPPORTUNITY
Finally there is meaningful talk about getting the health care records information systems up to the 21st century--if only the "privacy wonks" don't tangle everything up. There is also talk about making health care prices open and transparent. If that was ever done, it would sure open some eyes. It's way past time for "consumers" who buy health care to be able to see the "price tags" as they are buying..
THE COMMANDER (NO MAKE THAT SENATOR)-IN-CHIEF
If "too many cooks spoil the broth" then the only bigger mess I can imagine than what we have in Iraq, is giving the Congress (regardless of the party in control) too much influence over our military actions. I can hear it now, "Yes, Colonel, you say you are under intense enemy fire? Just a moment, we'll convene a sub-committee or two and discuss what you should do. We'll get back to you in a week or two, if we can reach a decision. Or maybe we won't do anything but pass a resolution condemning the enemy that's firing at you."
2008--WHO WILL IT BE? WHO WILL IT NOT BE?
Want to worry? Here's the Democratic ticket for 2008. Forget all the pretenders--they are just "noise." It will be the 'big dogs"--Clinton-Obama, and for the GOP, probably McCain or Guiliani and Romney. McCain's been running for years--that's his problem too--and he'd be 72 when sworn in if he won. The Presidency ages people fast, so that's not so good for him, or us. Rudy Guiliani has some dirty laundry in his past, but so does Hilllary, and Rudy is a smart, strong, proven leader with broader appeal than many expected.
Mitt Romney is strong, bright and should be the top of the ticket, but the mindless resistance to his Mormon religion will probably hold him back just enough to force him to the second spot. Barack Obama is smooth as silk. He talks well, says popular things and commits to little or nothing. He is not quite as liberal as John Kerry--but almost. If he holds up under pressure--real pressure--of media and opponents, (both from his own party primary opponents and the GOP) he'll take the #2 spot. Hillary can out-spend and out-maneuver him--and assuming Bill wants to be "First Husband" (sure he does)-- she has the most brilliant campaigner and political animal ever--"in bed with her"--literally.
We could be facing 16 years of Democratic control of the White House if Clinton-Obama team up and win. That is a disturbing thought. But consider the "first do no harm, or at least nothing risky" policy of the Democrats. They don't know WHAT to do, so they will lay low, and continue to blame (and subpoena and investigate) Bush for most of the next 2 years. The Republicans, as a party are lost--a little bit like Ohio State was against Florida in the BCS title game. Nothing they try seems to be working. Maybe the other side just wants it too much more. Or maybe being in power for too long takes the edge off. Or both.
If you don't like this scenario, I suggest you get involved somehow in politics and try to make a difference. What other choice do you have, except to endure the consequences? I truly hope I'm wrong on this one.
Best, John
Comments