My First Long Poem....on a heavier note.

  In my 6th grade English class we were asked to memorize and recite a poem. I chose this one, mostly because it was one of the shortest options. It made such a strong impact on me that, for years after, I continued to write poetry. In fact, by high school, I secretly considered myself a poet. In 2011, I have a very difficult time imagining 6th graders being amazed or entranced by Eugene Field's words, but they had a major impact on me. In a single school year, I experienced Charles Dicken's Great Expectations; took in Romeo & Juliet at a ballet; and was introduced to Edgar Allan Poe. This was in an Oklahoma City Public School.

 Times they are a changin! For my current 7th grader, EAS means "EA Sports, it's in the game". When I was in the 7th grade, EAP meant "Edgar Allan Poe, it's in the book". Of course, I have to admit, the Atari joystick of my day cannot compare with the Playstation 3 (and the awesome graphics of today's games). Maybe that played a small part. But it is distinctly possible that I was just a strange kid. I have tortured my 7th grader through Great Expectations and I plan to introduce Walt Whitman and Edgar Allan Poe this school year. I am pretty sure my son has no desire to be a poet.

 By the time I reached high school, my favorite poets had become people like: Prince, David Lee Roth, Lionel Ritchie, Geddy Lee, Michael Jackson, Steve Perry, and Ronnie James Dio. Things seemed to have required a bit more flare to hold anyone's attention (mine included). Emotional highs that could not be created by a good concert light show, fancy dance moves, or a guitar/drum solo;  were easy enough to find behind a name like Bacardi, Schnapps, or Wellers. But  there was something about the sober intake of words literally centuries old that I enjoyed immensely (and still do). Forgive my digression (and long- windedness), I was only trying to introduce this poem by Eugene Field, which I think helped me to cross some imaginary line (that I did not know existed at the time) and find common ground with people where I might not have expected it. So, without further ado, here is one of many from my 6th grade year:

 Little Boy Blue

The little toy dog is covered with dust

But sturdy and stanch he stands

And the little toy soldier is red with rust
And his musket moulds in his hands

Time was when the little toy dog was new

 And the soldier was passing fair

And that was the time when our Little Boy Blue 

Kissed them and put them there

Now, don't you go till I come, he said

And don't you make any noise

So, toddling off to his trundle-bed

He dreamt of the pretty toys

And, as he was dreaming

an angel song Awakened our Little Boy Blue

Oh! the years are many, the years are long

But the little toy friends are true

Ay, faithful to Little Boy Blue they stand

Each in the same old place

Awaiting the touch of a little hand

The smile of a little face

And they wonder, as waiting the long years through 

In the dust of that little chair

 What has become of our Little Boy Blue

Since he kissed them and put them there


 These words were written almost 130 years ago, at a time when it was not uncommon to lose children from various diseases of that time period. Ironically, Eugene Field lost a small child within a decade of writing these words.

Obama and Capitalism.

 The main tenant of capitalism is private ownership of wealth. So capitalist are the players who take the field each day and do their best to find success (more capital). In this game, the government is charged with maintaining a level playing field and enforcing some basic rules of conduct. Or is it? America, more than most other nations, has a healthy distrust of our government. We want what we want from our government and nothing more. We need our government to protect us against internal threats, external threats, unforeseen catastrophes, and the realities of our system of government (like the fact that capitalism is built on consumption more than savings). Most of all, we need government protection from the government itself. We don't want any usurping of power from any branch of our government; especially the judicial branch which tends to side too often with the little guy (despite the fact that the big guy has paid more taxes and created more jobs). The other branches tend to understand this purchasing power and behave accordingly. 

 As Americans, we always want our government out of the way, until we need it. More importantly, we want the cost of our government to be as small as possible. There was a time, when people felt so fortunate to live in the United States (and bask in the boundless opportunity) that no one considered it too costly. Taxes were the price of admission and everyone was paying that price. The benefits of America were so well documented that no one questioned them: freedom, liberty, justice, and the pursuit of happiness. Rare was the occasion that those with a choice, chose to live outside the U.S. Maybe that is changing? In the new global economy, where multi-national corporations move people overseas regularly, it might be that people are comparing the U.S. to other countries with a little more intelligence about the other countries. Could this have a long-term impact on how Americans see our system of government? Does our tax system seem justified by what it offers in return (military protections, social services, & infrastructure).

  In the past, Americans traveled the vast interstate highway system with very little thought of the cost (some still do). Americans who could afford to fly, rarely considered the cost of a government entity to oversee the airways. People who wanted to live near the ocean or in the mountains, spent their energies finding ways to do it, rather than asking about the wisdom of such choices. Our system was one that reinforced creating the lifestyle and then worrying about the cost to maintain it later. Our elected officials (government) were tolerated only as servants. As such, anyone who dared lecture us about energy efficiency, the downside of rushing to the suburbs, or a carbon footprint was quickly shown the door. The representative servants we elected and re-elected (if they were lucky) were rewarded only if they met our demands.  As a result, they were always stuck in a catch-22. If they gave us what we wanted, they were likely to be re-elected. If they chose instead to try some level of leadership, they were sent packing. Simple system with one small problem: Following orders is not leadership and leadership is our only way out of this mess. That is where we, as Americans, have lived for three decades. We have two gears: 1) over-spending and 2) really, over-spending. We have two parties: 1) over-spenders and 2) real over-spenders. One party created all these "kooky" programs to help the poor and less fortunate. The other party cuts those programs and then spends ten or twenty times as much on the latest weapons system or war. 

 The system is now so absent accountability that the only people we can all agree to take benefits from are the powerless and the voiceless. No one (except yours truly) remembers that we shredded welfare programs in the 1980's and 1990's (under both parties), while cutting taxes and that prescription lead us to where we are now. The system has become so entrenched that the so-called liberals are now proposing tax cuts, while the conservatives cut millions in welfare and replace it with billions in corporate welfare. So, while we have done an excellent job eliminating the waste in programs like welfare, we have created this elaborate system that allows the most powerful among us to now literally write their own laws for unlimited benefits from the government (via tax cuts and loopholes). The best part of this game is that those at the top, can get enough extra money from the government (via tax cuts) to cover the cost of lobbyist (who return to get even more benefits) and advertisers (who rail against the government for providing too many benefits to others).

  Every time this game has been tried in the past, "we the people" have eventually sniffed it out and turned away from it. However, this time things look less certain. Much of the middle class has resigned itself to fact that our best days are behind us, so why not spend what time and energy we have left on racial infighting, to determine who gets the largest slice of the shrinking pie. We have replaced "welfare" (focused on lifting the bottom to the middle) with the new  expenditures for "job creators" (tax cuts and direct payments to the corporations in hopes of impacting the bottom through trickle down). The new phrase of the day is "we cannot raise taxes on the job creators". Really? Last I checked, everyone with a job is a job creator. The productivity of the American worker is the true job creator. Henry Ford, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and even Warren Buffett were not sitting around fancying themselves job creators. The products and services they sought to create required workers. If they could have done the work alone and kept all the money, they surely would have. That is Capitalism!

 Ideas and products are not confined to a single class: top, middle, or bottom. Our history has shown that intelligent people, in all classes, have been job creators. Moreover, people who would not consider themselves particularly intelligent have managed to create a fair number of jobs too. In the fall of every year, we are reminded every Saturday and Sunday that the poorest among us can create jobs for others. Coaches, managers, maintenance workers, parking attendants, and hotel & restaurant workers across this country all owe their jobs to the athletes we flock to see play college football. Imagine the outrage if a single athlete demanded that he be given more money or his family be given a greater tax credit based on the fact that he created jobs for others. Really?


 Fortunately for me, I can see things the way they truly are. That is a major accomplishment, when I spent about 30 years of my life seeing things as I wanted them to be. If only there were a few other people who dared to call a spade a spade. While most of America is distracted with the name we have given our first real attempt to solve our health care problem: Obamacare. We have lost sight of the fact that escalating health care cost threaten the economic future of the entire country. The discussion now has turned from what changes should be made, to solve this growing problem to talks of repeal. Here is my logic: If America started with a problem, proposed a solution, and then repealed the solution, we still have the problem. The underlying excitement, most of which has to do with the color of our current president, gets us no closer to a solution. Unfortunately, this problem has literally eaten our breakfast (the most important meal of the day) and is about to take over the lunch counter.

  As for me, there was nothing about the current plan that excited me, aside from the fact that it made an attempt to solve a real problem. I am watching my friends run to their respective corners (left and right) and completely lose sight of the problem (health care cost), as they focus on how they themselves are positioned (can we afford to be seen supporting the "brown guy" in a "red" state).  

 As Hurricane Irene left behind a new mess on the East coast this past weekend, I felt a strong sense of confidence that no matter what happened, our government would be prepared to handle it.  Why? Because we are the government. A government of Superman like qualities: faster than a speeding bullet (in our technology), able to leap tall buildings in a single bound (from the moon to mars), yet unable to escape the kryptonite we have carried with us for a full century. While I feel confident that the American people will find our footing again and that our best days really are ahead of us. For now, I see that we have fallen in the same rut. In the 1960's, we started a debate that has lasted almost 50 years and always leaves us trapped between our racism and our religion. We have spent 5 decades trying to answer Martin's question, "Are we judging each other by the color of our skin or content of our character".