Category Archives: Portrait of America

Notes on the Passing Scene…

Posted on by
Reply

I’ve been thinking about “a lot of different stuff,” as the kids say.

  • It appears our elected officials are doing their level best to prove they are interested more in themselves than in governing. This is nothing new, of course, but it’s reaching epic incestuous proportions – at present, the House is wrapped up in whether it should have an Ethics Committee to investigate itself or not; the Senate is bogged down in endless debate and frequent press potshots on whether it should change its rules on the filibuster; the administration is ga-ga over Social Security “reform”, although it has no actual plan. Meanwhile the rest of us are thinking about–hold on to your hats–the actual issues facing the country.
  • I hear teenage girls are now using steroids to “tone up” or win at sports. Why girls would want to raise their testosterone levels is beyond me, but somehow I’m not surprised. The whole country seems to be on a de-evolutionary binge, trying to become less civilized and more…barbaric. Violent entertainment, violent pastimes, increasingly violent personal interactions, “aggressive” business tactics, a foreign policy based on instigating wars–it goes on. It’s as though we’re all in basic training, toughening ourselves and putting our “game” faces on to get ready to…what?
  • The Republican party appears to have become the official political wing of the religious right. In case anyone wanted to know.
  • Some people don’t take compliments well–inferiority complex. The Democrats don’t take to political advantage well, retaining the politics of “shrill indignation” even when they’re gaining ground–fear of success? Or just plain dumb?
  • I heard some “experts” talking today on why the U.S. cannot seem to find Osama bin Laden, who is, incidentally, living quietly in a condo in northern Pakistan with his two cats. The one expert, an apologist for the government, said essentially that we don’t need to find him–that to spend all our energy trying to capture one man who is not directly involved in current threats to the U.S. would sidetrack more important anti-terror efforts. Funny–that sounds like the case not to go after Saddam Hussein.
  • In a little town out here on the Plains, a teenage girl burned her house down, killing two siblings in the process. She was trying to kill her dad, who was sexually abusing her and taking pictures of the rapes for his personal collection. She’s only about 16, but she’ll be tried as an “adult,” because…well, I guess because no one will stop them. Dad survived–he’s in jail now on child porn charges. Oh, and the attention of the case led authorities to arrest mom on outstanding bad check charges. Just one all-American Iowa family.
  • Around here, folks like to hunt Morrell mushrooms in the spring. This year, they’re getting shot at by nervous farmers who think these folks are setting up meth labs. Three words: know your enemy. One more word: relax.
  • Speaking of meth, a local grade school teacher was just busted for dealing it (though not to her students, apparently). She’s claiming hardship because she couldn’t survive on her $31,000 annual salary–which is about 1,000 times the average Guatemalan’s annual salary.

Logical Conclusions

Posted on by
Reply

On the news is the story of the new self-checkout lanes at the supermarket.

This is another of those examples of self-service that is supposed to make consumers’ lives more convenient. Instead of waiting in line for a checker, you just step up to the scanner and sell yourself some groceries. Scan ’em all in, then bag ’em, then scan your own credit card, then carry your stuff out to the car.

In this way you can complete the entire shopping trip without ever receiving even the smallest amount of service from another human being.

Stories like this bring to mind those quaint old days when you would pull into the gas station, and someone had popped your hood (from the outside–wide open to the public the engine was in those days) and was checking your oil before you could lean out the window and say, “Fill her up.” Then, after making sure your entire car was ready to go, they would bring you the little plastic tray, with your credit card standing at attention in its little slot, so you could conveniently sign the slip and hand it back.

Or the clothing store, where instead of wandering aimlessly amid oceans of hangers, you merely strolled in and affected an air of impatience, whereupon a well-dressed man with a tape measure hanging around his neck would approach and ask how he could help you.

“How may I help you?” That’s what he would say.

And at the hardware store, where the rule now is that no employee may be over age 16 or possess any knowledge of hardware, the old guy who worked there–who had always worked there–actually knew what a ball-peen hammer was. He even knew what “ball-peen” meant. And he was surly, not distracted. There’s a difference.

They had hat stores back then. Stores that actually sold nothing but women’s hats. It was called “the Milliner.” Women had half the day to sit in the Milliner trying on hats. Even men wore hats. Not caps, hats.

Remember milk men? They brought fresh milk right to your door.

I’ve been told–I have no way of independently verifying this–that it used to be you could call a business, and someone would actually answer the phone. Moreover, they would be anxious to assist you.

Anyway, it’s not that I’m some old-timer pining away for the good old days before plastic cars and telemarketing. I’m thinking of logical conclusions. Everything we do now, we do for ourselves. No longer is there such a thing as “customer service.” I think of all the merchant jobs that used to have respectability: grocery clerk, service station attendant, haberdasher, hardware curmudgeon. They’ve all been replaced by either a teenager  in an orange vest covered in buttons proclaiming vapid phrases or, worse, a squat,  off-white credit card reader that doesn’t even say “Have a nice day” after it takes your money.

It’s all part of the larger trend – that of the mega-store grabbing every consumer dollar and shutting down the small shops and local service providers that used to cater to us, advise us on our purchases and help us make wise choices. And as these “big block” national chain stores are top-heavy corporations with executive salaries to cover, costs must be tightly controlled. That means, among other homogenizing factors, eliminating the need for experienced, knowledgeable employees who demand a living wage.

So you can get your contact lenses at Wal-Mart now, just down the aisle from the ill-fitting clothes, the gallon jugs of milk and the ball-peen hammers.

But it’s cash and carry, and you’re on your own.

Got Justice?

Posted on by
Reply

President Bush pledged today that those responsible for suicide bombings in Saudi Arabia that left dozens dead would “learn the meaning of American justice.”

Let’s explore that for a moment.

What I know of American justice can be boiled down into a few basic precepts. This is strictly off the cuff, you understand, but see if it doesn’t ring true.

If you want a big trial with all the trimmings, you have to think big

This observation comes from a number of recent “spectacular” crimes that have resulted in big-budget defense teams or unheard-of indulgence from the court for the accused. For whatever reason, it seems the amount spent on the trial is in direct proportion to the amount of damage you do. Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh was provided a crack defense team and a trial that dragged on for months. Several million dollars later, he was convicted and executed, to no one’s surprise. The trial of the D.C. snipers promises more of the same. Accused 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui has enjoyed every amenity in his never-ending trial, including numerous breaks and advice from the court in spite of his regular digressions into delusional nonsense and anti-American screeds, coupled with his complete lack of expertise regarding court procedures. His lawyer (himself) may have a fool for a client, but the joke is on the taxpayers who are funding this big-budget fiasco.

Contrast this to the regular Joe who guns down his wife or co-workers. He gets a sleepy public defender and the thing is wrapped up in two weeks.

If you’re famous, you can’t be jailed for drugs unless you really want to

I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve heard of entertainment types being dragged into court for serious drug crimes, only to be sentenced to ‘”community service” and fines that are meaningless to millionaires. Eventually, after their fifth or sixth arrest, the judge gets mad and “threatens” actual jail time. But it rarely comes to pass. (Exception: Robert Downey Jr..)

But don’t try this at home. Non-famous people are regularly thrown in the pokey for simple possession.

Murderers are more important than their victims

Some ancient–and modern– justice systems, when dealing with murderers, prescribed restitution as a first remedy. Sometimes the killer was allowed to work in order to pay the family for the loss. The entire tribunal revolved around the wrong done to the victim’s family (acknowledging that the actual victim was beyond such concerns). The family was often consulted for their judgment on what should be done with the guilty party, and their wishes carried out.

Now, the victims’ kin are allowed to sit in the courtroom and watch, but that’s about it. Murderers no longer commit crimes against people – they commit them against “the state.” And the trial is centered around the accused, who is the subject of all aspects of the trial and the main focus of the state’s efforts.

After the trial and sentencing, the killer becomes of even more concern to the state. They house, feed and clothe him. They monitor his behavior. They provide endless appeals. They stage elaborate parole hearings that concentrate on the killer’s progress, the killer’s behavior, the killer’s future. When he’s finally released, they have other folks check in on him, monitor his progress, help him “assimilate.”

The family of the victim gets a letter once in a while.

Some murderers get famous for their inventive crimes. They get clever nicknames like “Son of Sam” and “The Preppy Killer.” Books, movies, cults sometimes follow. I recall that Ted Bundy, who may have killed dozens of young women, supposedly received a bulging bag of love letters and marriage proposals every day in prison. Over time, a killer’s “evilness” can be all but washed away and replaced by a kind of pop culture icon status (as with Charles Manson).  But I can’t recall any victims ever being immortalized or lionized, I guess because being killed doesn’t make you interesting. Just dead.

If you’re a lucky killer, Norman Mailer will find you “intriguing,” and he’ll write a book about you. Then they’ll let you go and you can kill again. Yeah, it happened.

Meanwhile…

Actual innocence of the condemned is not sufficient reason to stop an execution

This was one of the Supreme Court’s shining moments. Back when I did research for a living, I came across  this nugget, which involved a man in Texas who was convicted of murder in your standard non-famous-person trial (see above). The appeals process was exhausted, but new evidence came to light that appeared to exonerate the man. The prosecution, on seeing the new evidence, agreed. So there was really no one in Texas who wanted to carry out the execution anymore. But the “process” took over, the governor refused a stay, and the Supreme Court, answering a final emergency appeal, refused to halt the execution  because “actual innocence is not sufficient reason for this court to delay the timely carrying out of the sentence,” or words to that effect.

So they executed him.