Bordering on Madness

I'm sure that some of you pumped your fist or nodded your head approvingly when you heard that the Pentagon is sending 52-hundred active duty military troops to the US-Mexico border in advance of the "migrant caravan" making its way through Mexico.  Now that they are there, what do you expect them to do?

There are now two "caravans" in Mexico.  The original was still 900-miles away from the US border as of yesterday.  A second "caravan" just crossed into Mexico yesterday and is more than a thousand miles away.  So what are the assembled troops in Texas supposed to do in the meantime?  At their current rate, the migrants (if they walk all the way) won't get to the US before Thanksgiving.  That's a long time for our servicemen and women to just be standing around.

It's also possible that the migrants could break off into more than two groups--and try to enter the US anywhere along the border.  In case you are wondering, the border with Mexico spans 3201 miles from California to Texas.  With 52-hundred troops deployed to the region, that means each soldier would have to patrol 3/4's of a mile by themselves 24-hours a day.  And some of that land is incredibly rugged and not easily accessed.  Not to mention, much of it is privately owned--and would require permission from the owner to conduct military operations.

But the biggest mystery is what exactly our troops are supposed to do if the caravan actually reaches the border?  If all five or six thousand go to a Customs port, they are legally allowed to ask for asylum and are automatically granted a review of that request (while staying in the US).  Do you want the troops to stand between the border and the Immigration offices and bar anyone from getting past them?  Do you think the migrants are going to see that, just drop their heads, turn around and walk all the way back to Honduras?

And what if the caravan decides to storm the border?  Are you prepared to watch video of our soldiers trying to beat back women with children?  Or do you secretly hope that the troops will open fire on the unarmed masses?  The President has called them "invaders".  Will you just explain that away with "maybe they should have brought guns to protect themselves too"?

Fortunately, we have the better part of a month to reconsider using the Army and the Marines to assist in immigration enforcement.  That's more than enough time for at least 50 other crises to pop up around the Trump administration and distract the President from this half-brained solution.

Rising Together

It was Winston Churchill that gave us the phrase "Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it".  Well folks, we have failed to learn our lessons from post-World War I Europe.  Based on trends in modern politics, it appears I will have to explain.  In the ashes of war-torn Europe--and continuing through the global Great Depression--we saw the joint rise of Socialism and Facism.

While the two social and political ideologies are placed on opposite ends of a straight-line "spectrum", it would be more apropos to see political thought in a circular form--thereby putting the two right next to each other--for they are truly not that far apart.  Both believe in a strong, centralized government that controls many of the aspects of citizens' lives.  Where they differ is who should be feared when it comes to disturbing the social order.  In Socialism, that blame lies with the rich and the elite.  In Fascism, that blame is assigned to those that do not share a common racial, societal or religious history.  It is no coincidence that the Fascism that overtook Italy, Germany, Spain and the Baltics in the build up to World War II came in direct response to the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and the growing strength of the Soviet Socialist Republic.  In fact, Hitler's Nazis gained national prominence with the Brownshirts' attacks on Communists in the streets of Germany.

We all know that it was these competing political ideologies--and their desires to expand and impose those on others--that led to the greatest human tragedies in history.  And that it was only the might of the free-market, democratic society of the United States that beat back the dual threats--both in the campaigns of World War II itself--and then in the extended Cold War that saw the Iron Curtain of Socialism descend across half of Europe and spread to much of Asia as well.

An entire generation bore witness to horrors of the twin terrors of Fascism and Socialism and many vowed to never let that happen again.  But eventually, the members of that generation aged and passed on.  Memories began to fade and the commitment to free-markets and limited government control did too.  New generations of both Europeans and Americans--with no first-hand experience of the Nazi or Soviet models started to rise to power--bringing with them ideas first espoused by Karl Marx that seemed hip and new again.  Soon "socialist democracies" began to sprout in Europe--with all the "benefits" of Socialism--without the Soviet-style gulag system and death squads.

And as long as Germans were taking care of Germans and the French were taking care of the French, it appeared that Socialism was going to work.  But then came the new wave of immigrants--first from Africa and then from the Middle East--and some of those who had heartily endorsed the high taxes and limited freedoms began to question why those spoils should be shard with those who are not "German" or "French"--and the Fascists began to find their footing for their inevitable return.

We here in the US had enjoyed a long immunity from such political forces.  Even until 20-years ago Socialists were just union leaders, hippies that smoked pot and ran co-ops and crazy old men that sounded exactly like Bernie Sanders standing on street corners yelling about the proletariat and the bourgeoisie.  Fascists were a dozen losers that dressed up in Nazi costumes and waved swastika flags in the park on Hitler's birthday every year.  But bolstered by efforts in our education system, Socialism has become the hip new thing in US politics as well--with more young people today preferring that system over free-markets.  Add in the battles over socialized medicine and control of thoughts and words so as not to "offend" anyone, plus the push to eliminate long-held constitutional rights--and you have sown the seeds for the inevitable rise of Fascism, even here in the US.

And that is the path we are now facing.  The question is, where are the people that are willing to fight for freedom going to come from this time?

Who's the Star Here

After three high-profile campaign appearances by heavy hitters in both political parties, I have to wonder what, if anything, our Wisconsin candidates gained from them.  Ostensibly, the visits from Senator Bernie Sanders, President Donald Trump and former President Barack Obama were supposed to boost their parties' respective candidates--but if anything, they magnified some weaknesses--and only served to boost the "big name" instead.

We started last week with the Bernie Sanders appearance in Milwaukee--held on a college campus.  Tony Evers did not appear at this rally--although those there were encouraged to vote for him too.  Tammy Baldwin gave her usual speech in her "I'm your mother and I'm very disappointed in you" tone--with half-hearted attempts from the crowd to whip up some cheers.  Then Bernie took the stage to thunderous applause from the college kids.  He took a few minutes to attack Governor Scott Walker and to tell everyone what a great ally Senator Baldwin is--then he launched into his promoting his own "Medicare For All" program (which Senator Baldwin has distanced herself from on the campaign trail) and his desire to raise taxes on the rich (which Baldwin has also underplayed).  Then he leaves the stage to chants of "Bernie! Bernie! Bernie!" and you wonder, whose campaign rally was this?

Then came the President's appearance in Mosinee.  House Speaker Paul Ryan had to ask for quiet while trying to condemn the mailing of bombs to high-profile Democrats around the country--but the Trump crowd would have none of it.  Governor Walker gave his usual stump speech putting a rosy hue on everything going on in Wisconsin and got a relatively warm response.  State Senator Leah Vukmir then took the stage and delivered her usual "I'm your mother and I'm very upset with you" speech.  And then it was time for the President to arrive (a half-hour late).  He reminded everyone that he beat Scott Walker in the race for the Republican nomination in 2016.  He mispronounced Tony Evers' name and Vukmir's name--TWICE (chuckling about it)--and then launched into a rambling speech about Democrats, some building that he built really cheap, his accomplishments and of course, how the media lies about him all the time.  It was all met with thunderous applause and he returned to Air Force One with the music blasting so loud that people had to cover their ears.

Former President Barack Obama wrapped up the week with a stop at a Milwaukee high school.  Senator Baldwin was there again playing the "disappointed mom".  Tony Evers showed up for this one, delivering his rousing stump speech that reminds everyone of a tenured college professor teaching a 100-level class for the 35th year.  (Kudos for the National Rifle Association for calling Evers' campaign "sleepy" in their TV ad).  And then out came President Obama getting everyone fired up and ready to go.  He too bashed Governor Walker and then he also mispronounced Tony Evers' name--before reminding everyone of the all the "great things" that he accomplished.  I'm sure everyone in attendance was ready to vote for a third Obama term--but weren't quite as excited as for the candidates that are actually on the ballot.

There's an old adage in show business "Never work with kids or animals"--because they will always upstage you.  Perhaps state candidates should add "national party stars" to that list.

S%*t's Getting Real

I hope everyone realizes what happened this week.  We saw attempted widespread political assassination on a scale not seen since John Wilkes Booth shot President Abraham Lincoln at Ford's Theater, while his conspirators tried to kill Vice President Andrew Johnson and Secretary of State William Seward all on the same night.  That was done with the misguided belief that it would resurrect the Confederacy and bring down the Federal Government.

We don't yet know what the motive was for the distribution of pipe bombs to billionaire activist George Soros, President Bill Clinton and Former First Lady Hillary Clinton, Former Attorney General Eric Holder, Former Democratic National Committee Chairperson Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and Congresswoman Maxine Waters.  We do know that each of them has been singled out for criticism and mockery by President Donald Trump and all of the talking heads at Fox News Channel.

While the President addressed the attempted attacks during his rally in Mosinee last night, he lacked the strong statement that would actually condemn the actions of what appears to be one of his supporters.  And he certainly did not accept any blame for the current tone of modern politics.  I did notice there was no mention of "Pocahontas" or "Crooked Hillary" or "Horseface" at last night's rally--but there was still chants of "lock her up" before the event.  The President's strongest condemnation last night was for the media for being the one's getting everyone riled up.

Will the pipe bomb scares bring us all to the realization that a serious cooling off period is needed in our national political dialogue?  Will all-out efforts to demonize and destroy political opponents return to the much more productive presentation of platforms and discussion of real issues?  Unfortunately it will not--as the timing of the attempted attacks could not have been any worse.  Breathless coverage of the news and discussion of the ideas that I just mentioned were interrupted across the country by continuous attack ads for the mid-term elections that don't build up any candidates but rather make their opponents out to be enemies of the state and people that need to be stopped by any means necessary--like sending them pipe bombs in the mail.

Once we are done tearing each other apart in the lead up to November 6th, on November 7th check out the new book by my candidate for President in 2020, Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse entitled Them: Why We Hate Each Other—and How to Heal.  It's a thoughtful examination on how we got to the point that someone would send explosives in an effort to kill the critics of "his President"--and a whole bunch of people would wish that it had been successful--and how we can get back to being "Americans" again.

Protecting the Paint

For the vast majority of us, the white lines are nothing more than paint.  A visual representation of the kind of white noise and distractions that we tune out on a daily basis.  To those with the lines in front of their homes, they are a barrier to enjoying the full use of a public utility.  But to those who demanded they be put down, the white lines are a powerful symbol of what they think society should be like--and they will not stand for seeing them removed.

In case you didn't figure it out, I'm talking about bike lanes here in Oshkosh.  And they are facing their first challenge since being put down--as residents of Westhaven Drive between Witzel Avenue and Highway 21 have petitioned the city to have them removed so they can park in front of their condos.  Those residents point out that they did not ask for bike lanes to be put on Westhaven--and they argue that they are never used by bicyclists--but the Oshkosh Common Council is sending the petition on to three committees filled with members that will fight tooth and nail to keep those lines on that street.

The Advisory Bike and Pedestrian Plan Committee, the Sustainability Committee and the Advisory Traffic Review Board were the architects of the bike lane plan here in Oshkosh.  And for them, those bike lanes are their crowning achievements--monuments to their belief that automobiles are really going to be replaced by non-fossil fuel powered vehicles or government-run mass transit.

In developing their plans, those committees did not conduct bike traffic studies.  And one will not be ordered to determine the need for bike lanes on Westhaven now--because those members know that such a study would show NO bikers using the lanes on Westhaven.  That would be the same result for a traffic study on any of the other bike lanes outside of the streets near the UWO campus, and it's built-in bicycling population. 

Instead, those committee members will echo the sentiments expressed by Council Member Lori Palmeri last night--who did not argue that volumes of bikers use the lanes along Westhaven, nor that the bike lanes have prevented any accidents between vehicles and bikes on any street in Oshkosh--but rather that removing bike lanes anywhere would be a "step backwards for the city".  A "step backwards" from what?  You can't go any more backwards from zero usage!  But if you give in to residents of one street, another will petition to have theirs removed, and another and another--until the beautiful master plan you worked on so hard for so many years is gone--even if just a handful of people will miss it.

I would suggest that the Westhaven residents that appear before Advisory Bike and Pedestrian Plan Committee, the Sustainability Committee and the Advisory Traffic Review Board to ask the members a simple question: When making a right turn on a street with bike lanes, do you always check your passenger side mirror and your blind spot?  Or do you know that there is never going to a be a bike in that lane?  Of course, the members aren't going to give an honest answer.  They feel it's too important to save that paint.

The Employee Caravan

While President Trump wants to send the military to the Mexico border to greet the so-called "Migrant Caravan" from Central America, I think we should send different groups down there to meet them.  Every employment agency and Department of Workforce from the lower 48 states should be on-hand at the border ready to take the "new arrivals" right to businesses that need workers.

We hear all the time how many jobs employers cannot fill.  While most of the focus is on skilled labor, nearly every restaurant, store and farm in this country could use more help.  And that is where the "Migrant Caravan" can come to the rescue.  They claim that they are coming to the US to find a better life--well as our ancestors found out, the best way to build that life is to get right down to work.

So bring those folks here to Northeast Wisconsin and start filling all available positions that you can.  Put the able-bodied men to work on dairy farms in the milkhouses or moving feed and manure.  When my German and Belgian great-great-grandparents came to this area, that is exactly what they did.  Get others set up at retailers needing people to unload trucks or stock shelves during the upcoming busy holiday season.  Find businesses that need cleaning services or laundry staff.  Send them over to restaurants that need dishwashers or line cooks.

If these are only part-time positions, work out schedules so our new arrivals can work two or three jobs a week--because the hours are definitely available and obviously, they need the money.  Don't see this mass of humanity coming to the US as a bunch of charity cases, see them as the workforce that our booming economy needs right now!

The housing part could be a bit tricky, but I see a lot of churches and social justice groups demanding the migrants be allowed in.  Let those supporters open their doors, whether they be shelters, low-rent housing complexes or even their own homes.  We plan to put our new friends to work as soon as they get here--so they should be self-sufficient and able to find their own places in short order.

There is plenty of effort being made to compare the Migrant Caravan with the ships that brought European immigrants to the US throughout the 19th and the early 20th centuries.  And if that is the case, we should welcome our Central American arrivals the same way they did at Ellis Island--"Welcome!  Now find a job."

For Want of a Nail....

When I was a kid I read a nursery rhyme called "For Want of a Nail".  It tells the story of how not having a nail to properly shoe a horse prevents an important message during war from being delivered and a kingdom falling to the enemy.  It was meant to teach us that the least of things can lead to catastrophic results--and that you really should "sweat the small stuff".

I was reminded of that Saturday night as one decision by Milwaukee Brewers Manager Craig Counsell set in motion a chain of events that cost his team a chance to make the World Series for the first time in 36-years.  And that decision was to bring in his best reliever--Josh Hader--in the third inning of a game that the Brewers trailed 2-1.  While Hader pitched three shutout innings--and kept the Brewers just one run behind--what happened after his departure from the game revealed the lasting impact--which I equated on social media to a chess player exposing his Queen early in a match.

I think the Fox TV crew underplayed the most immediate impact the early Hader insertion had on the game.  Dodgers Manager Dave Roberts removed his starting left-fielder, Joc Pedersen, and moved second-baseman Chris Taylor to left.  That paid dividends for the Dodgers in the bottom of the 6th inning--as Taylor--who is faster than Pedersen, and who is also right-handed--made a spectacular running catch in the gap that the slower-footed and left-handed Pedersen would not have made--to preserve the Dodgers' one-run lead.  Had Craig Counsell gone to one of his right-handed relievers (or kept starter Jhoulys Chacin in the game for more than two innings) Pedersen would have watched Christian Yelich's hit bounce off the wall and Lorenzo Cain come streaking home to make it 2-2.

The early Hader insertion then forced Counsell to bring in the struggling Jeremy Jeffress to face the heart of the Dodgers order in the 7th--where he was promptly greeted with a single, a walk and the game-sealing 3-run homer by Yasiel Puig to make it 5-1.  Had a right-hander like Brandon Woodruff been brought in to pitch the three innings that Hader covered, the left-handed Hader would have been in to face Puig--who somehow hits lefties worse than righties despite being right-handed.

Ultimately, the blame for the Brewers losing the series should go on the offense--which features a complete and utter lack of situational hitting and the ability to make productive outs with runners in scoring position .  But Game 7 proved that the smallest of decisions can have huge consequences down the line.

Concerned Man #2

In the new, new, new economy, it's important to have what the millenials like to call a "side hustle"--a part-time job to help you make ends meet--because you can't be expected to pay for your student loans for that advanced degree in a field that you will never be able to find a job in, a thousand dollar smartphone, an unlimited data and talk plan, having two meals delivered to you every day, seven dollars in coffee every morning and Amazon Prime delivering everything else to you so you never have to shop on just one full-time gig.

I'd like to pick up a part-time job as one of the "concerned voters" in the myriad of political commercials flooding the TV airwaves right now.  I don't have any formal acting training--but I doubt anyone else in the ads does either.  Most of them are county party leaders, or members of the League of Women Voters or they are the candidate's family members.  You didn't really believe the candidate showed up at someone's door asking to talk with them about "the issues" and there just happened to be a TV camera crew there ready to shoot, did you?

But I can certainly pretend to be scared or very concerned when the candidate talks about their opponent's evil plans to "take away" some kind of program or "right".  I can also get a big smile on my face and nod approvingly as the candidate talks about how they are going to "fight for me" or make sure I "get what I deserve".  I can clap enthusiastically at the end of the commercial for "my candidate".  The crew can even use my backyard or my living room as the setting for an ad--even though the candidate would never come to my house--unless I was hosting a $1500 a person "cocktail social" for their campaign fund.

The only problem with my "side hustle" idea, is that there doesn't seem to be a role for me in any political ads anymore.  I'm a middle-age, middle-class white guy with no pre-existing medical conditions, no kids that had a porn-watching teacher and I'm not a veteran that got hooked on painkillers.  This election isn't "about me"--and may never be about me again.  One party takes my support for granted and doesn't even try to include me in the message--while the other would consider my presence in a TV ad a "micro-aggression threat" to their supporters.

I guess I'll just have to rehearse my "frustrated" look so I can play the "before guy" in all of the erectile dysfunction ads that will return after the elections.

The Borrower is Slave to the Lender

Here is what the US is going to do about Saudi Arabia's alleged murder of a dissident reporter at its consulate in Turkey: absolutely nothing.  And here is what the US is going to do about the disappearance of the Interpol President in China: absolutely nothing.  It's entirely possible that President Trump or State Department officials will say negative things the rulers of those two countries and their brazen acts, but it's not going to make a lick of difference.

And it's not because the President doesn't care (even though he really doesn't) or because the American people don't care (because we really don't).  It's because we owe those countries one.  Actually, we owe them billions and trillions.  China and Saudi Arabia own vast amounts of US debt.  In the case of Saudis, it's about 168-BILLION dollars.  We owe China the most of any other country at 1.17-TRILLION dollars. 

There's an old Biblical adage that "The borrower is slave to the lender".  And as globalization grows, so too does the power that "lending" countries have over "borrowing" countries.  The weapons of the future may not be pilotless drones or satellites with nuclear weapons on them, but rather the simple threat of calling in debt.

Further complicating matters is that Saudi Arabia and China control large segments of the US economy.  OPEC follows the Saudis' lead.  If they turn off the oil spigot, America is suddenly facing an energy crisis (although we are greatly increasing our own oil and natural gas production as a buffer against this threat).  And China is the leading manufacturer of goods made in this country.  Forget the impact of tariffs by the Chinese, consider instead the potential nationalization of those production facilities and the assembly lines being shut down.

Much like the Mutual Assured Destruction theory of nuclear weapons usage during the Cold War with the Soviet Union, such draconian measures by our bond-holders would do them as much damage as us.  But holding that power in reserve makes countries like Saudi Arabia and China far less responsive to American demands for adhering to human rights and answering for their actions.  It's pretty tough to send out the warplanes and ships against the countries that helped you buy them.

The Greatest Game Nobody Saw

Well that was one hell of a baseball game last night.  You had pressure-packed pitching, outstanding defensive plays, benches clearing after a dirty play, and high-tension drama that ended in 13-innings.  Too bad hardly anyone saw all of it.

As someone who gets up for work at 2:45 am, I knew there was no way I was going to watch any of last night's Brewers/Dodgers game as soon as I saw the first pitch wasn't until 8:04 pm.  Better to be in bed and catching some z's before it starts than to think that I was just going to watch a few innings and then be able to sleep.  Based on my Twitter timeline this morning, all of that stuff I mentioned before happened after 11:00 our time.  The game itself didn't finish until 1:15 am Central Time.  Where else could you get five hours and fifteen minutes of constant drama like that?  Unfortunately all taking place after almost everybody had joined me in bed.

There is absolutely no reason that our sporting events have to start so late.  Yes, the game was in Los Angeles in the Pacific Time Zone.  But baseball is a daytime sport meant to be played in the sun.  Yesterday, they could have played the Astros/Red Sox game in Houston with a 1:00 local start time and the Brewers/Dodgers in LA at a 2:00 local start time.  That would have meant first pitch here in Wisconsin at 4:00--and a conclusion to an epic game at 9:15--still early enough for the kids (and early-rising adults) to get a decent night's sleep.

The idea that all of our sporting events need to take place in TV prime time in all time zones is an antiquated idea based upon the belief that the only way people consume TV is still in their living rooms after work.  Mobile devices and the internet have made viewing of everything ubiquitous.  All of the Brewers fans that went to bed at midnight or earlier last night would have had no problem catching early inning action on their phones or on half their computer screens at work before 5:00 yesterday--and the exciting conclusion sitting on the couch.  And all the same prescription drug commercials that make up every break between innings could have been streamed to them--along with the annoying "Hey Google Assistant, why does everyone hate Joe Buck?" in-game questions.

Ten or twenty years ago, "everything at night on TV" made sense, because that was the only way to watch.  Now if networks want to capture the most eyes possible, why not hold your major sporting events at times when all of them are open?

Profiting Off the Dead

Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen died on Monday, leaving behind a net worth of $20.3 BILLION.  While I'm sure that his family and co-workers are saddened by his passing, those most disappointed are Socialists like Senator Bernie Sanders and likely-Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez--who will see another mega-billionaire not have to pay his "fair share" despite being dead.

The current top estate tax rate in the US is 40%--a pretty good punishment for trying to pass on your wealth to your relatives.  Sanders during his run for President wanted that raised to 65%--meaning the Government would take away 2/3rds of everything you own when you die.  That money was going to pay for his Medicare For All program.  Or was it going to pay for the Free College Tuition For All program?  Or maybe he was using it for the Free Child Care For All program.  Or maybe that money was going to the expanded Social Security Benefits For All.  It's hard to remember because Bernie promised to spend the same money over and over for a lot of things.

But let's consider the nightmare scenario on the horizon as growing numbers of milennials and other young voters see Socialism as a viable economic system for this country.  With the passing of Paul Allen, the Government would cash in 14-billion dollars--if the Allen estate was somehow able to liquidate all of the assets within the next tax year.  Add to that the taxes that would be paid on any capital gains and this little windfall by death just keeps getting better!

But what if the Allen family couldn't find buyers for all of the assets?  Well then, Uncle Sam would become the owner of 65-million shares of Microsoft.  They would also become the majority owner of the Seattle Seahawks NFL team and the Portland Trailblazers NBA franchise.  That would actually be a better proposition for the Socialists--as Allen's death would provide just a one-time payment--but having ownership of private enterprises provides a long-term cash stream.

The Socialists have to be kicking themselves for not getting an earlier start on their American takeover.  Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and Steve Ballmer are all around the same age as Paul Allen--and in Buffett's case much older--and their billions would all become available for the pillaging soon.  If only HIllary Clinton hadn't struck that deal with the Democratic National Committee to shut Bernie Sanders out of the process in 2016!  Oh well, maybe Jeff Bezos will make it another 40-years and they can take back all of the cash the millenials gave him while putting the rest of the retail segment out of business.

Not Helping the Planet a Large Amount at a Time

Because we have been doing it for so long now, sorting your recycling from your garbage seems like more of a chore and a bore than a positive step to "save the planet".  It's a good thing that recycling has become a routine in our lives.  Just this weekend, I felt bad throwing a plastic bottle into a regular garbage can at the golf course because I didn't see anything marked "recyclables" around the clubhouse.  But have you ever thought about what happens to those recyclables once the big truck hauls them away every couple of weeks?

We'd like to think that every single article that we toss in the blue bin is being reused and replaces the manufacture of a new plastic item.  But in many cities and states, that is not even close to being the case.

I came across an article by the Better Government Association that finds just 9% of recyclables put into the blue bins in Chicago actually makes it to recycling centers.  The rest is collected by regular garbage trucks and is taken to the landfill.  The same report finds a number of other cities have ridiculously low recycling rates--like Houston and New York City at just 17%, and Philadelphia at just 18%.  The best recycling city in the country--San Jose--is only at 79%--meaning that one out of every five items put in the blue bins never gets recycled.

In the case of Chicago, the low recycling rate may be the result of fraud.  The city contracts with Waste Management to pick up blue bins in about 40% of the neighborhoods.  And the workers have sole discretion to determine if items will be collected--or rejected for garbage pickup due to "contamination"--meaning non-recyclables mixed in with acceptable items.  Allegedly, Waste Management employees mark the majority of bins as "contaminated" without actually inspecting the contents.  Given Mayor Rahm Emanuel's penchant for covering up negative aspects of his administration, follow up on this will be slow or non-existent until his term ends.

But even where such shenanigans are not taking place, recycling is becoming a greater money-loser for municipalities every year.  The amount collected by cities and counties far exceeds the needs of the plastics and paper industries.  That has driven the price paid for recyclables to lower and lower levels--while expenses for manpower and equipment continue to go up.  Ironically, that makes sustainability unsustainable.  And what is the popular option for unsellable recyclables?  The dump.

I'm not telling you to throw all of your plastics and papers in the garbage.  Reusing even small amount is still better than burying 100% percent.  Just know that you aren't saving as much of the planet as you think you are.

Meekly Staying Where We've Always Been

It is fitting that the Neil Armstrong movie First Man comes to theaters today--just a day after a Soyuz rocket failure leaves humankind with no reliable way to get a person into space.  In just fifty years we have gone from the greatest accomplishment in human history, to settling for low-earth orbit flight, to having to pay the Russians to take us into space, to now being grounded.  If Armstrong was still alive, I'm sure that he would be embarrassed by our regression in both technology and exploratory spirit.

For generations, man was an explorer.  Our earliest ancestors wanted to know if something good to eat or someplace safe to stay was just over that next hill.  We weren't satisfied not knowing what lay on the other side of bodies of water.  We climbed the tallest of mountains, we went to the deepest depths of the oceans.  We not only got off the ground and flew, but we left the atmosphere and with the small steps of Neil Armstrong, we set foot on the next celestial body.  And then we stopped.

We've talked about going further.  We've sent satellites and probes to other planets and now to the very edge of our solar system.  But we as humans haven't gone along for the ride.  We've grown content to let hi-resolution photos and data streams substitute for personal experience.  As part of what will undoubtedly be a failed attempt to send tourists on a joyride around the Moon, Elon Musk says the capsule will be equipped with ultra-high-definition 3D cameras that will allow everyone back here on Earth to experience the trip in virtual reality--without ever leaving the couch.

There was a controversy a few weeks back after advanced screenings of First Man when fake patriots got all up in arms because the scene where Armstrong plants the American flag on the moon was left out of the movie.  The star--Ryan Gosling--fanned the flames by saying that was done intentionally because going to the moon was not an "American achievement".

While Gosling could not be more wrong about why the US is the only country to go to the moon, it's probably best that the flag scene is not included--because the America that sent Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin to the moon 49-years ago is definitely not the America of today.  That America was willing to take risks.  That America was willing to--as President John F Kennedy so perfectly put it--"Do these things not because they are easy, but because they are hard".  And because that America was willing to say "We are number one--and we are about to prove it".

With the impending rise of Socialism here in America, we can forget about going back to the moon or Mars or anywhere else to advance the human species.  There will be too many "economic injustices" here on Earth to consume all of our national resources.  There will always be someone without food or without a home or without access to the internet that should get the money that would be needed for rockets.  Or there will be people getting sick.  Or somebody will have something else that not everyone else has and the Government will have to spend money to make sure that everyone is "equal".  And we will voluntarily leave the natural resources needed to power such machines in the ground because that is "better for the planet".

Hollywood loves sequels.  They could probably start production on the follow up flick called Last Man featuring the heroic tale of the final astronaut to abandon the International Space Station before it fell back to Earth from disrepair.

We've Seen This One Before

Do you ever wonder what Hollywood pitch sessions are like now?  For those not familiar, a pitch session is when producers come in and meet with studio executives to lay out their ideas for potential movies or TV shows.  If the execs like what they hear, they "green light" a project and the producers can start casting for roles and choosing set locations. (The best depiction of this ever was on South Park when Cartman was pretending to be the AWESOMO robot and came up with more than 200 movie ideas all starring Adam Sandler). 

If I was in one those meetings I'd probably be rolling my eyes constantly and asking "Didn't they already make that one?"  Half of all movies are now superhero flicks.  Half of all TV shows are "reboots" of shows we in Generation X watched as kids.  And now we have the fourth incarnation of A Star is Born coming to a theater near you.

Today's moviegoers may vaguely remember the 1976 version starring Kris Kristofferson and Barbara Streisand.  I've always though that Kristofferson should have won an Academy Award for pretending to find Streisand attractive in that movie.  But I doubt many remember that a remake was done in 1954 that starred Judy Garland--who did get an Oscar nomination.  And no one has probably seen the original A Star is Born released in 1937 starring Fredric March and Janet Gaynor.

Little has been done to change the stories in all of these versions.  The first two featured fading male stars that fall in love with rising young starlets and help them further their careers.  The '76 version flipped the script by switching from Hollywood actors to rock and roll stars--and that is the storyline the new re-re-re-remake is sticking with--as Bradley Cooper becomes the new Kris Kristofferson and Lady Gaga replaces Streisand.

I can only assume that Netflix and Hulu aren't streaming any of the first three versions of A Star is Born--and that is why the studio thinks anyone will be interested in version 4.0.  Spoiler alert, just like the first three times we've seen this, the girl becomes the star and the aging man dies in a horribly tragic way.

Now let me tell you about this idea I have for a remake of Ben Hur--but with giant, fighting robots that come from outer space.

D Legit 2 Quit

Someday, political scientists and historians will look back at this time and call it the "Age of Delegitimization".  An era where both political parties sought not to just defeat each other, but to destroy the legitimacy of elected officials, government institutions and other pillars of society in case they lost.

That was accomplished in the Senate confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh--who will forever be referred to as an "accused rapist" who "shouldn't be on the court".  The same goes for Justice Neil Gorsuch, whose seat "legitimately" should have been filled by Merrick Garland--President Obama's nominee that was never given a hearing by Republicans, because they argued a President shouldn't be allowed to make a nomination in the last year of his term--delegitimizing that process.

Of course, the 2016 Presidential elections were delegitimized after the fact by accusations of "Russian meddling" that benefitted the winner--Donald Trump.  That came after Trump tried to delegitimize the election before November by claiming that his expected loss would be due to a "rigged system".  And let's not forget the arguments that the Electoral College undermines the "legitimate will of the people" by not rewarding the winner of the popular vote with the White House.  All of that came after years of claims that Republican majorities in the House of Representatives and most state legislatures were not the result of the actual will of the people but rather the illegitimate process of "gerrymandering districts".

It's not just modern day politics that is being delegitimized.  The Constitution itself is now called into question with claims that because it was drafted by white, racist, slave-holding, misogynist men seeking only to preserve their power over women and people of color, that the document itself is illegitimate.  With that argument, all aspects of Government--Judicial, Executive and Legislative--are delegitimized, destabilizing the democratic institutions all the way down to the local level.--undermining the ability to govern ourselves.

Add to that the concerted efforts to undermine the legitimacy of  police powers, scientific research, free speech rights, and reporting of the news and you are sowing the seeds of the destruction of our society.  Because when you trust no one, you fear everyone.  The question is, how to rebuild something that took more than 230-years to construct when no one will agree on what we should try to create?

Crawling Into the Future

It looks like it will be slow-going in the future.  I'm not talking about how information travels in our society--that continues to get faster.  I'm not talking about the pace of life, as humans adapt to getting less and less sleep or time to relax because we work more and spend more time staring at video screens.  I'm talking about how we transport ourselves from one place to another.

One of the most progressive things done by government in the past decade was to raise the speed limit on our interstates and expressways to 70-miles an hour.  That knocked twenty percent off the travel time needed to get between our major cities.  Oshkosh to Green Bay fell from just over an hour to about 45-minutes.  Oshkosh to Milwaukee from almost an hour and a half to just over an hour.  Double that for a round-trip and you can see what an incredible time (and money) saver that is.

But now "progress" is seen as anything that slows us down.  Outagamie County wants to lower the speed limit on Interstate 41 from Appleton to De Pere back to 55.  That would add another 15 minutes to trips from Oshkosh to Green Bay--each way.  Major cities are dedicating precious street space and public transportation dollars to streetcars--that can only go as fast as the traffic already on the road--and run on limited schedules (or in the case of Cincinnati, if they run at all).  Even here in Oshkosh, traffic lanes are sacrificed for bike lanes.  And everyone wants to spend money on walking paths through cities--the absolute slowest form of transportation. 

As with many things today, the actions of a few are ruining life for the many.  It's just a handful of people that cause accidents along Interstate 41 by driving like idiots.  Just a couple thousand people in major cities want to ride a trolley everyday.  And the few hard-core bikers here in Oshkosh are certainly not wearing out the bike lanes--especially between November and March.

Some think that autonomous cars will put us back on the fast track.  They envision columns of vehicles moving in perfect synchronized speed at regular intervals traversing all of our roads safely.  But as anyone who has ever used a computer knows, the crash--in this case literal--is always just seconds away.  And what do you do with those of us who will never, ever, ever give up control of our vehicles to the machine itself?

No wonder Millenials do all of their shopping, socializing and entertaining on-line nowadays.  They know it's getting harder to get anywhere fast.

This is Unacceptable Part III--Who is Really Failing

This is the third and final My Two Cents on the Student Assessment Data report on the Oshkosh School District

The root of the Oshkosh School District's struggles to get kids up to state standards in key educational areas was hinted at during a recent School Board meeting as Board President Barb Herzog tried to provide some support to teachers after approving a health insurance plan that will end up costing taxpayers a couple million dollars more than an HMO plan opposed by the teachers' union.  Herzog sounded wistful as she told the teachers that had just given the Board a standing ovation, "We realize you have a very hard job.  The kids of today are not like the kids of 20 or even 10 years ago.  It's just.............very hard."

You could tell that Herzog wanted to add more, to take a shot at the real reason why only 40% of kids are proficient at reading and writing, why only 42% can do math and why just half understand science.  But she hesitated, perhaps knowing that identifying the real culprits might lead to backlash when played back here on WOSH--or might undermine the argument that everything that ails public schools today can be fixed by spending more money.  But I am under no such restrictions and I'll gladly identify the underlying problem that continues to decimate our public schools.

Parents are failing their kids--and the rest of us in the Oshkosh School District too.  When I see 60% of kids below proficient in reading, I see 60% of parents not making sure their kids are reading something other than social media posts and writing something other than text messages.  When I see 58% of kids struggling in math, I see 58% of parents not caring that the only numbers their kids deal with are the body counts on Fortnite.  When I see 50% of kids below the grade in science, I see half of parents that keep the TV on Netflix and Hulu all day--and never on Nat Geo or the Smithsonian Channel.

What compounds the problem is that those within education let parents skate on this.  They make the tired arguments that "some kids just don't do well on tests" or that "tests are not a valid measure of knowledge".  Well if I took a test on Mandarin Chinese vocabulary and didn't get any answers right, would you say that I don't do well on tests, or would you say that I don't know Mandarin Chinese.  And you know what, everyday life is a test of what you know.  You can learn how to run a machine or fill out important documents--but unless you do it correctly almost all the time--no one is going to hire you.

And don't use social status as an excuse for our children's failures.  The 60% not up to snuff on reading exceeds the percentage of low-income, minority and special needs students in the district.  Oshkosh parents are sending kids to class now that are not only not prepared to learn, but lack the discipline and social skills to even learn how to learn.  And when those kids fail, those parents just blame the schools themselves--or support the efforts to "spend more to fix this problem" that shifts the blame to taxpayers--who had nothing at all to do with raising those failing students.

It's almost come to the point where I am ready to support the liberal education agenda that calls for children to be taken from their parents as soon as possible for early childhood education and pre-kindergarten programs and before school and after school and summer programs--because it's clear those who should care the most about their kids don't.

This is Unacceptable Part II: Where is the Return on Investment?

This is the second part of a three-part commentary on the results of the Student Assessment Data in the Oshkosh School District.  Part three comes up tomorrow.

Continuous Quality Improvement--better known as CQI
The Student Achievement Guarantee in Education program--better known as SAGE
Everyday Math
Team Teaching
Reading Specialists
Math Specialists
New school buildings
New Math
Chromebooks for all students
Digital Whiteboards
Referenda to fund continuing operations

That list represents some of the "education initiatives" that the Oshkosh School District has adopted in the 18-years that I have been covering schools for WOSH.  Each was going to "revolutionize" the way kids learned and set us on the path to raise low test scores.  Yet here we are 18-years later with test scores that show 60% of grade schoolers can't read or write to grade level.  58% are non-proficient in math and only half understand science.  Many of those programs and initiatives cost us taxpayers additional money, so you have to ask "Where is the return on my investment?"

CQI was the brainchild of former School Board President LuAnn Bird.  After foisting it upon Oshkosh Schools she left to sell the idea to other districts as a "paid consultant".  SAGE was all the rage under Governor Jim Doyle--as schools were getting extra money from the state to reduce elementary school classes to less than 18 students per teacher.  The only problem was, Oshkosh's small neighborhood schools didn't have the classroom space for additional segments--or there were only 23-kids in a grade, making the implementation of SAGE very inefficient (although the District still kept the money).  That's where the idea of Team Teaching came in--putting two teachers into larger classrooms to meet the "spirit" of SAGE.  Adding reading and math specialists in every school was going to allow one-on-one intensive instruction to get everyone up to grade in both subjects.

Everyday math was going to ensure that kids knew the basics of the mathematics that they would actually use "in the real world"--but then the test numbers got worse, so they switched to the new form of math where kids don't just learn that three plus four equals seven--but rather why three plus four equals seven.  We built a new Oaklawn Elementary, completely overhauled Jefferson and Lakeside and sold off Lincoln and Sunset Elementaries--all to improve the efficiency of operations and give kids the best learning environments.

Giving kids their own laptop computers and connected whiteboards would "modernize" teaching and learning--putting the entire world at kids' fingertips and save us so much money on textbooks and homework materials that could be poured back into instruction.

And yet, despite all of that spending, despite all of the hours spent overhauling curriculum, despite the growth in personnel--especially in areas of administration--we still have less than half our kids making the grade.  Is it possible that throwing more and more money at educational problems really isn't the solution?  Tomorrow, we get to the heart of who is really failing our kids here in Oshkosh.

This is Unacceptable Part I--The Numbers

This is the first of what will be a special three-part My Two Cents on Student Assessment Data results released by the state Department of Public Instruction this week.  Part II will come on Thursday and Part III on Friday.

If you are over the age of 40 like I am, I have a question for you: When you were in grade school, can you remember sixty percent of your classmates being unable to read or write at the proper grade level?  Were 58% unable to do math?  Were half failing science class?  Well new results from the 2018 Assessment Data tests show that is the current situation in the Oshkosh School District.

Just 40-percent of kids in grades three thru eight in this district are "proficient or advanced" in English Language Arts.  Only 42% are "proficient or advanced" in math.  Kids in Oshkosh must really like their science classes, because a whopping 50% are "proficient or advanced" in that category.  And please keep in mind that "proficient" means "able to do it".  Anyone below that level has not learned the minimum skills or knowledge for that subject.  They are not just doing "OK".

Hopefully no one at the Oshkosh School District Administration building, the administration offices at the individual schools or in any of the classrooms is celebrating these numbers, because they are embarrassing.  I would say that scoring less than 50% in any of the classes in school would be considering "failing" but it's entirely possible that is considered to be good enough to pass nowadays.  If anything, everyone at OASD should be crying because these numbers make me want to cry and I don't even have kids in the system.

Of course, the press release from the District puts a rosy spin on the numbers.  It claims that the District "continues to make steady gains in the area of English language arts and continues to perform above the state average in math and science".  The Director of Curriculum Julie Conrad is quoted in the release as saying "We understand that students are more than numbers and data points and we strive every day to help students reach their potential and become college, career and community ready."

What college is taking the 60% that can't read or write to grade level?  What career are the 58% that can't do math going to pursue?  And what community thinks any of those numbers are acceptable? 

Tomorrow, who is to blame?  Here's a preview: It's not taxpayers or lawmakers.

Lazy Oshkosh

In case you were wondering, some of your elected officials think you are lazy.  During last week's Common Council discussion on restoring some of the on-street parking lost to the reconstruction and re-striping of Oregon Street, Mayor Steve Cummings used the phrase "Oshkosh doesn't have a parking problem, Oshkosh has a walking problem".  The inference being that Oshkosh residents are too lazy to walk a block or two from an off-street lot along Oregon Street or North Main Street to get to a store or restaurant.  It sounds like a great point--if you are down there on one of the 100 or so nice days that we have weather-wise--but not so great in the bitter cold or the pouring rain.

I have to admit I was surprised to learn that there are any public parking lots near Oregon Street.  And if they hadn't been highlighted on a graphic during the Council meeting, I could never have told you where they are--as they don't seem to be well marked and there are no directional signs pointing you toward them as you drive.  Maybe if people knew about them, they may use them--if they aren't too "lazy".  During that entire discussion I kept waiting for at least one Council member to suggest that Oregon be restriped to include bike lanes--and that the City install bike racks along the sidewalk--to "fix" the parking problem.

But let me tell you who is lazy: WalMart shoppers.  More specifically, WalMart shoppers that take Go Transit.

In an effort to speed up their routes and to improve safety, Go Transit no longer picks up or drops off riders in the parking lots of stores.  They have put up new bus shelters near Pick and Save on both sides of town, at Festival Foods and just recently along South Washburn Street in front of WalMart.  Because that stop is right outside of my office window here at the Radio Ranch--and on my way home--I see what goes on there more than any other bus stop in town.

WalMart may as well put a cart corral right next to that bus shelter, because every day dozens of shopping carts are abandoned on the sidewalk, in the terrace and on the small patch of grass between the driveways.  Last Thursday, there was one up against the curb in the far lane of traffic on Washburn--likely blown there by the wind.  All left by people who didn't want to carry their two bags of items from the store front to the bus stop.  They may want to put a garbage can out there too, because Subway cups and wrappers are left in the shelter and on the ground--along with assorted other junk.  So far, I've only seen a person sleeping in the bus stop on my way into work at 3:00 am just once.

Actually, I am shocked that advocates for those that ride the bus regularly haven't been up in arms about this change.  Why should those that can afford to drive a car get to walk a shorter distance to those stores than those who rely on public transportation?  If anything, Go Transit should be building covered lanes directly into the stores themselves rather than moving their shelters out to the streets.  Mayor Cummings has it all wrong.  On-street parking and giant free lots aren't for the lazy--they are for the socio-economic elite--further repressing the less-fortunate in our society.

Everyone I Talk To

There is a hot new buzzword phrase in the political vernacular: "Everyone I talk to".  Candidates now drop it into all of their rehearsed answers and talking points checklists.  "Everyone I talk to is concerned about education."  "Everyone I talk to doesn't want taxes to go up."  "Everyone I talk to says their street is full of potholes".

Political advisers are pushing their candidates to use this phrase because it accomplishes three goals: One, it gives the impression that the candidate is hearing what people are saying and paying attention to it.  Two, it minimizes the issues favored by one's opponent.  And three, it assures the candidate's own supporters that there is a large group of people that think the same way they do--or gets those with opposing viewpoints to question if they might be in a small minority.

If you pay very close attention to candidates as they actually do talk to voters, you will notice a young person in a suit standing nearby and recording the conversation with a cellphone.  The campaign folks listen back to those, note the person talking and the issue they raise, and file that away for future reference.  That way their candidate can say things in their stump speech like "I spoke with Agnes in Oshkosh and she was concerned about her grand-kids' school"--even though the candidate couldn't tell Agnes in Oshkosh apart from Carrie in Madison or Susan in Superior.

"Everyone I talk to" makes it sound like what the other candidate is talking about is not at all important.  "While he talks about tax breaks, everyone I talk to is concerned about the environment." It's also the perfect deflection away from a question about what a candidate knows is his or her weakest issues.  "How do you plan to pay for all of that extra spending?" can be effectively answered with "Everyone I talk to is more concerned about the quality of their drinking water than what they are paying in taxes" and just like that, you don't even have to answer the question that was posed.

Now it may entirely be possible that candidates are only hearing one point of view on all issues.  Great care is taken nowadays to make sure that only supporters are getting into campaign appearances.  Businesses with owners "friendly to the cause" are selected for visits and candidates have "walking lists" of which doors to knock on while canvassing neighborhoods.  It's a lot more comfortable to be in an echo chamber than have to face tough questions or complaints all day.

So don't believe it when you hear a candidate claim the "Everyone I talk to thinks we should have unlimited spending on public education", or "Everyone I talk to thinks building up our workforce it eh most important issue we face".  Because I don't think that--and it's likely you don't either.