It seems Iranian madman and Holocaust-denier Mahmoud Ahmadinejad feels the need to come to New York to visit Ground Zero (well, okay, there's a brief side-trip to the United Nations, too, and possibly Columbia University).  It seems many people have an issue with his proposed visit to the site of this jihadist assault on American soil.

If I can make a modest proposal, there's a simple solution that will satisfy Ahmadinejad and keep red-blooded Americans happy at the same time.  Why not have the United States military deliver his own personal Ground Zero to downtown Teheran?  That way, assuming for some reason he's still ambulatory, he can make his visit without having to leave the comforts of his own back yard, and patriotic Americans (including some who remember that little problem with our embassy during the Carter administration and his role in it) won't have to deal with the stress of his presence.

Sounds like a win-win for all involved, near as I can tell...

(/satire off)

- Keith

I saw something the other day that caught my attention.

I see a lot of things during my daily commute through the soft underbelly of Los Angeles, but on my drive a few days ago, I found myself following an SUV through the transition road from the westbound I-10 onto the I-710 south.  In the center of the big rear picture window was one of those ubiquitous graphics of Calvin (late of "Calvin and Hobbes") urinating on something the driver doesn't like - in this particular case, the word "Chevy."  I'm a Ford man myself - I surely don't want any of you to think I'm singling this guy out because of his automotive preferences - but the truth is, I simply find these displays of Calvin and his bladder-control problem tasteless.  It is rude.  It is vulgar.  And it is something I've come to expect from the unwashed masses.

But what caught my attention was the juxtaposition of this graphic with another bumper sticker about a foot to the right on the same window.  There, emblazoned for all the world to see, was this message: "got jesus?"

Heartbreak.

What kind of person is it - and if you're reading this and you're the guy in the green SUV, do feel free to share, okay? - who can use his auto to proclaim to the world "Not only am I a Christian, but I am so excited about the Savior and my faith in Him that I put His name on public display as I motor around - and by the way, I'm also comfortable being vulgar and displaying coarse, worldly images"?  Does the incongruity not register with this guy?  Going on the assumption that he parks this thing in the parking lot of some church on Sunday mornings, what kind of comments does he get from his pastor and fellow parishoners?  Do his neighbors and co-workers look at him and admire how Jesus changed his life?

The lovely and talented Cecile and I were invited to visit a church not too long ago.  Situated on the edge of a residential neighborhood, and with insufficient parking to accommodate the entire flock, many of the worshipers resort to parking where they can, sometimes as far as three blocks away.  As we walked back to the car afterwards, Cecile and I were crossing a side-street arm-in-arm, when we heard a woman's voice shout out "Thanks for using the crosswalk.  You're the only ones from that church that do."  It took a couple of moments and some serious neck-craning to spy the woman behind her bushes, watering her lawn and her flowers.  

We smiled and thanked her back, and as we did, we both looked up and down the street; at various places within our line of sight, we saw between thirty and forty people walking through her neighborhood, away from the church, in clusters of two to five.  More than half were in the street at that very moment: crossing mid-block, crossing without regard to the cars they were forcing to stop, some even walking down the center of the street.  Many were walking out in the roadway along the parked cars, ignoring the perfectly good sidewalks the City had thought to construct for their convenience.

It caused us to wonder if widespread jaywalking were this woman's only greivance, or if there were other causes for this woman being so bitter toward this church that she had no qualms about making loud complaints; at least twenty other people heard her say this to us, and if she felt bad about offending them, it didn't show.  It seemed pretty clear she wanted them all to hear.

Saw a teenager at a church recently, wearing a tee-shirt that boldly said "I'm only pretending to listen to you."  If you're thinking my first thought was "how could someone feel comfortable wearing this to church?" then you're wrong.  Surprised?  No, my first thought was "how could someone who calls himself a Christian feel comfortable wearing a shirt with this message anywhere?"  Christians aren't supposed to be living double lives - religious in church and however they want out in the world.  That's superficial hypocrisy.  Obviously, this young man is living a consistent life: the antisocial, worldly, me-centered veneer he portrays in church doubtless accurately mirrors his values and attitudes out in the world.  No hypocrisy there.

"Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship.  And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is,  that which is good and acceptable and perfect."  (Romans 12:1-2, NASB)

Instead, it is a sad observation that a large part of the church in our present age is very conformed to the world - carnal, selfish, thoughtless of others, unholy.  Were we not supposed to be holy, as our Father is holy?  Or when did grace become nothing more than an excuse to dispense with the calling to holy living and considerate behavior, and a license to indulge our base, fallen wants?  The Paul who wrote that we are no longer under law, but under grace, is that same Paul who wrote a great deal about what kind of lives we are to live.  Perhaps we're picking and choosing our faith buffet-style - we like the grace part, but not so much that holiness part.

Or maybe we're just too addicted to a faith that makes no demands of us.

Yes, it's been a while since the last time I was able to post here.  Call it a combination of things: it's what I call seasons of the soul.  In my case, it's been a combination of being too busy at too many things, and being overwhelmed by the feeling that it's just never going to get any better than this.  Put those two together, and it's not long before despair sets in.  When you get ten free minutes, you just feel too tired to do anything constructive, and too drained to believe it would do any good anyway.  That's where I've been, and I'm afraid I haven't been very good company while I've been there.

Right now, I've got a kitchen that I've been trying to remodel, and every time I get a free day to get some more of the work done, somebody needs to take that day away from me.  So most of my kitchen is in my dining room, I'm nearly down to my bare walls in my kitchen, and I wonder when I'm going to get to finish.

Couple that with the fact that halfway into the remodel, my in-laws decided to finally take us up on our offer - which we've been offering for six years - to move in with us.  Don't get me wrong, I love my in-laws, and I'm glad to have them in with us, but it means that everything that was in our guest bedroom is now crowded here into the home office with me.

And I've started a new job, one that keeps me on the road an hour and a half longer every day.  It's a great job, and the only bad part about it is the commute.

And I could go on for another six paragraphs about situations within the church, the dog, the car, taxes, news and politics, and on and on.  It not a good place to dwell.  Were it not for the lovely and talented Cecile, I'm not sure where I'd be.

Then two things happened.

First, I was listening to an on-air interview during my long morning commute; radio host Shawn Parr talking with country artist Collin Raye.  In the course of the interview, there was a moment when they were reminiscing about a private conversation a few months before when they had both been down in the dumps.  Parr's successful gig with station KZLA had suddenly come to an end with ownership's decision to change formats, going from a solid monopoly on Los Angeles' country audience to the same dance club junk that fully half of the area's non-Spanish stations play endlessly; Raye's career seemed to be in a state of permanent doldrums without any real inspiration.  The two of them recollected that as they had been talking together, they had gotten to the point that they were assuring each other that God had plans for them - a personal, powerful God who was intimately concerned with them as individuals.  Fast forward to the interview, with Raye's career back in full swing with the release of "A Soldier's Prayer," and a project in which he was donating the proceeds from the song to a charity for servicemen, and Parr at the helm of the morning drive slot of station KKGO, changing its format from classical to country to meet the needs of the abandoned country audience.  To hear the two of them freely talking about a very real God in whom they believed and who acted in the lives of men, and not on a religious radio station but on a secular one, was a joy to hear.

Second, I found myself hit between the eyes by a set of song lyrics, from a song hereby adopted as the official musical theme of this blog.  I'm not going to allow myself to think for more than about three seconds that Gary LeVox reads this humble blog, but Rascal Flatts had decided to release the first track off their "Me and My Gang" album as a single, and it was getting a lot of air time.  The song lyrics were a perfect description of how I've been feeling.  The title of the song?  STAND.

I've lived too long and seen too many things to believe in coincidences.  The group didn't record the song knowing I was going to need to hear it, and I didn't name the blog after the song.  I'm not going to reproduce the entire song here (hint: go buy the album); the verses are a picture of where I was, and the chorus is where I am right now.  Here are the words from that chorus:

'Cause when push comes to shove
You taste what you're made of
You might bend 'til you break
'Cause it's all you can take
On your knees you look up
Decide you've had enough
You get mad, you get strong
Wipe you hands, shake it off,
Then you stand - then you stand -

If any of you reading this happen to know Gary, Jay and Joe Don, tell them Keith says "thank you very much."  The song was the slap across the face I needed to encourage me to get back to living, and their "Stand" is now the official theme song for this blog.

Life is good again.  More to follow -

- Keith

Faithful Readers: has it really been two months since my last appearance here?  Yes, it's been a busy couple of months, and I apologize for my absence.  More later on our adventures.  But I'm not the only one making a return to the public today - I am absolutely delighted to announce that country music has come back to Los Angeles, and hopefully to stay.

Those of you who know me and my many inconsistencies well know I have a great love for both classical music and country.  I'm not even going to try to explain it.  It's just one of those many things that Cecile and I share.  We both mourned the loss of country broadcasting on Los Angeles radio with the format change of KKLA several months ago (see her November 10 post from last year on the genre).

Ending a short vacation with us, my father had a return flight out of LAX this morning, and I had our clock radio set to go off early so I could drive him to the airport.  Our radio is set for our local classical station, at 105.1 on the FM dial - nothing like waking up to Mozart in the morning, right?  I was surprised to be greeted by the familiar sound of country guitar when the alarm went off.  I eventually asked Cecile if she'd changed the station to KFRG out of San Bernardino, because ordinarily, the reception we get is scratchy, but it was coming through five-by-five.  She said no, and we suddenly found ourselves staring at each other.

Long story short - our classical station has changed format, and has now become KKGO "Go Country" 105 (KKGO was the former callsign of KMZT, our classical station).  If you're a local country fan, you've GOT to tune in.   In fact, you're going to have to excuse me for a couple of minutes - Little Big Town is playing, so I'm going to take a little break.

Okay, I'm back.  I was mystified when KKLA changed format a couple of months back; Los Angeles is a huge country market, and KKLA had a monopoly on it.  Surprised?  You shouldn't be.  Don't forget that famous Los Angeles band The Eagles' music betrayed a lot of their country roots prior to "Hotel California" and "Life In The Fast Lane," and Buck Owens before that virtually invented the Bakersfield sound just a short way north of here.  The performers can count on selling out when their tours come through town.  Country music is great music, and as far as I'm concerned, if you ain't country, you ain't --

Oops, sorry - this IS a family blog, and I was getting carried away there, straying from my PG rating.  But Cecile will tell you, I predicted that we'd have a new country station in sixty to ninety days.  Okay, so it didn't happen quite so fast, but I called it.

Welcome to town, Go Country, and welcome back to the airwaves, Shawn Parr!  It's good having you here; stay a spell, and I can promise you I'll be a faithful listener.  Faithful STAND readers, give them a listen; I'm looking forward to hearing more.  Let me know what you think...

- Keith

Faithful readers: in the wake of leaks by mainstream media outlets (read: New York Times), another large-scale surveillance program has been brought to light.  The scope and ramifications of this one are just short of staggering, and this time, it was exposed not by the legacy media, but by a blogger.  You can read all about it here.  I have no doubt that you'll react to this revelation the same way I did.

Hat tip to one of my daily reads, Day By Day, by the very talented Chris Muir.

I wish you all a truly joyous Christmas, and all the blessings the day may bring.

- Keith

I like to think of myself as a good-natured misanthrope.  You have to understand that being a good-natured misanthrope is a difficult balance to maintain; after all, having a high view of the human race while being (as the lovely and talented Cecile describes it) at war with the world is a full-time job.  It's just that, well, I know people are capable of amazing and wonderful things, and then daily fail to even try.  I could go on for pages.

But every once in a while, something happens to show that glimmer of potential that can make even a hardened misanthrope like me believe that all is not lost.  And sometimes, it can be the littlest things, too.

About a week ago, Cecile and I were having dinner out with a good friend and her two daughters.  We don't get together with Adriana often enough as far as I'm concerned.  Her two daughters, Katherine and Paxton, are a delight (but don't tell them I said that).  A gentleman, of course, never discusses a lady's age, so I'll just tell you they're just about junior high school age, I think.  If they comment on this blog, they may tell you themselves, but that's their business. These are two young ladies who, truth be told, actually read books, don't talk like mallrats, and study.  Therein lies the wonder - studying.

One of these young ladies was exhausted, and it was from staying up late the the night before drilling herself on a class project, doing some memorization.  Of course, I had to ask what it was she was memorizing, and when she answered, it was like the choirs sang and the clouds parted:

"We, the people of the United States, in order to form..."

You could see it was on the tip of her tongue; she had all the elements and wanted to make sure she had them in the right order.  All she needed was a prompt.  "Form a more perfect union," I suggested.

Suddenly her face lit up like she'd just won a prize from the top shelf at the county fair; you could almost read the thought golly, a grown-up knows this?  And not because he has to? written on her face.  Right there in the diner we finished the Preamble to the Constitution together:

"...establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

She was in awe that I knew it from memory, without having studied it the night before; I was in awe that someone in the public schools is still teaching it.  My gosh, there is hope for the world yet.  It may wind up being Katherine and Paxton who have to do it (I'll try to help where I can, of course), but it doesn't look like the lights have gone out just yet.

Intelligent participation in American democracy shouldn't require a degree in history or political science, but it certainly requires common sense.  Today's politicians and punditry seem to feel like they know so much better that that handful of rustics and farmers that actually brought this country into being, but those with some sense of history understand that those rustics were onto something.  Never before had a nation been formed in which the founders sat down together and discussed what the role of government should be.  Take a look at what they decided was the proper role of government:

To form a more perfect union - to manage interactions between the states and between their citizens in a way that encourages a cohesive nation, and to work toward building a government not merely by the consent, but by the consensus, of the governed. 

To establish justice - to maintain a system of laws and courts which would protect the wronged and punish wrongdoers.

To insure domestic tranquility - to keep peace within the collective nation's borders, to quell unrest, and to maintain the new nation as a place unburdened by the wars of Europe.

To provide for the common defense - to secure and protect the borders from invasion from without. 

To promote the general welfare - to enact those laws which would create a better life and a better way of life for the nation's citizens. 

To secure liberty for the present and future generations - to make America a land which would be free not merely in the short-term, but for the long haul.

I submit that the Founding Fathers of this nation knew exactly what they were doing when they drafted a Constitution what started with this passage as their mission statement.  These things, and ONLY these things, are the legitimate roles of government.  In the historical perspective, you need to remember the context in which these words were written: the writers were very familiar with the European concept of government.  Take, for example, the contemporaneous French monarchy, soon to be thrown over by its people as a result of its elitist life of luxury, or the English rulers governing by domination.

It warms a corner of my heart when I hear a young student cherishing these words.  Perhaps, if enough young minds will learn them and make them their own, we might still have a future...

- Keith

Friends: I'm going to take time out to do a shameless plug for a worthy cause.  Yes, you all know I'm a funny guy (note the "Football" and "Pluto" posts) when I want to be, but I'm strictly amateur.  I want to turn you on to a bunch of professionals at it.  You have to - and I mean YOU MUST - visit the guys (and the gal) over at IMAO.  They are among my first reads of the day, and I sneak over when I can throughout the day to keep up to date.  Frank, Sarah, Harvey, Laurence, Spacemonkey and the Duck have to be the funniest group on the net.  If it's in current events, or even close to current events, you can count on them to rightly skewer it.

There is a contest going on right now called The Weblog Awards.  Make sure to visit and vote for IMAO - in fact, vote early and often.  When I'm big like they are, I may be competing with them in the Biting Social Commentary category, but this year, they really, really need you to bring in the win for them.

And read IMAO every day you have electricity and a connection.  They're a hoot -

(By the way, buy Frank's book, too.  And no, I'm not getting a commission on this.)

- Keith

Let me be honest right up front as I write this.  I love football.  I love the game, the strategy, most everything about it.  I confess, I'm between teams right now.  The Cowboys I rooted for in the Eighties ran into a little trouble with the law, and the Forty-Niners to whom I transferred my fandom descended into a protracted mediocrity, and at least for the moment, I've forsworn allegiance to any team.  Now, all I want to see is a good game.

That being said, there are a lot of things I'd really like to see fixed.

First, let's talk about something I've mentioned elsewhere about professional athletes and their teams: their allegiance can be bought and sold.  Shaquille O'Neal's commitment to the fans in Los Angeles ended as soon as his paychecks were being written in another orange-producing state.  That's not to portray O'Neal in a bad light; it's simply a fact of the game.  Even entire teams can trade allegiances by moving; ask any randomly-selected sample of fans of the Cleveland Browns - the OLD Browns - what they think about that.  Ask the Los Angeles fans of the Rams or the Raiders (well, okay, Raiders fans are pretty much a breed unto themselves) how they feel about their teams packing up and leaving town.

So unless you happen to own stock in the team, your team isn't YOUR team, if you know what I mean. I can't remember the last time I heard a player say, "you know, that Mike Brown bought the pennant, the tee-shirt, and the seat cushion, and that really motivates me to play for him."  It would be a great promotional campaign if some team tried it, and if one does, I expect royalties.  Truth be told, the athletes do appreciate a large turnout for them at the game, but beyond that, they have no idea who is buying the merchandise.  And they don't care, except in the sense of aggregate numbers.  A Lakers fan can buy a couple of those purple-and-yellow flags for their car (and let's be real, guys, who picked that color scheme?) and drive all over town, and Kobe will never see it.  Kobe will not thank you, other than a general collective thank-you to "the fans."

Think that's cynical?  I've barely started.

My favorite is the jersey.  The jersey, the one that screams out "I don't have an identity of my own, so I went to the sports mart and bought one for just $32.99 and tax.  This guy whose name and number are on my jersey is so much cooler than me, and I just wish I were him."

But, Keith, you say, it supports the team.  No, Chumley, it makes the team rich.  There's a difference.  It's called merchandizing.  They have a thousand gross of them made up for eight dollars each, and the rest goes into a pot along with the fees paid by sponsors, the take from the broadcast rights, the cut from the concessionaires, and the ticket sales.  Those of you out there who go all apoplectic over The Evil Corporations who exist to make an Ungodly Profit, like WalMart, Halliburton and Starbucks should be marching on sports teams with pitchforks and torches if you were anything like consistent.  Write this down: a sports team is a business just like any other.  They exist to make money for their owners.  What they sell is entertainment.

Nonetheless, I love football.  For that matter, I love baseball.  And for the record, I find myself completely fascinated by curling.

What I can't stand is everything that detracts from the game.

* Do not, under any circumstances, fool with the national anthem.  Ever.  We don't sing it at the beginning of sporting events because there's some law imposed on us that says we have to.  We sing it because gosh darn it, football games and baseball games are just a slice of Americana.  Under ideal circumstances, the game has a Norman Rockwellesque appeal to it that brings us back to better days.  Honor the national anthem by singing it as written if you're the featured celebrity chosen to lead us in it.  Do not Whitnify the song.  It's not being performed so you can impress us with your vocal prowess on arpeggios.  It's not being performed so you can "make it your own."  It's not yours, it's all of ours, and it's fine the way it's written.  This is not All About You.

* I came here for the football.  There are things that go naturally with football.  Cheerleaders go with football, because their job is to lead the fans in cheering for the team.  By "cheerleader," I am not referring to tartlets in hot pants reeking of sexuality.  Sorry, Dallas.  Undulating flesh is a sideshow, and eye-candy like that is a distraction from the game.  Marching bands during halftime go with football; like cheerleaders, marching bands are a holdover from college days, when football was supposed to be all about school pride.  Here are some things that do NOT go with football: aging British rock groups phoning in a crappy performance.  Pretended "wardrobe malfunctions."  In general, any type of extravaganza halftime show with paid celebrities, whether or not the show includes trapeze artists to accompany said singer, paid shills on the playing field pretending to be enrapt spectators, ridiculous choreographed dancers, or any other farce common to the new need for constant entertainment.  These things have nothing to do with football, and I'm here for the football.  Halftime exists so the two teams can regroup, catch their breath, and fine-tune their strategies as needed.  Halftime also exists so the fans can queue up at the restrooms and resupply themselves with overpriced frankfurters and sodas - and for those not in need of either of those comforts, a local marching band fits right in.

* Fans: the purpose of the event is the contest between the two teams on the field.  It is not All About You (see above under "National Anthem").  If you're cursed with one of those juvenile "look-at-me-look-at-me-look-at-me" mentalities, get over yourself.  No one is here to see you.  Not the paint job on your face and chest, not your freakish costume, and not your sign.  Memo to the television networks: stop giving these losers an audience.  I don't care how many cute ways they come up with to spell out ESPN.  For those of us watching on television, we already know what channel we're watching, thank you.  

* Broadcasters: not only do you need to stop paying attention to the above fans, you can also do away with the eyewash cluttering my screen.  Prancing robots with glowing eyes imitating football players, as if they were trying to intimidate opponents before a snap, just detract from the broadcast.  The same goes for flying, whooshing graphics designed to look like something on my computer screen or something inspired by H.R. Giger - I'm not sure which look you were going for - every fresh set of downs.  All it does is block my view of the game.  So does the annoying AFLAC duck that waddles across the screen, and the animation for whatever Tuesday night sitcom you're hyping that's on the same channel.  What do you say we keep the graphics simple?  I'd settle for a score, the quarter and time on the clock, down and yards to go, in one-color text without frames or backgrounds; the same for penalties, player number and name, and other captions when needed.

For the graphics junkies, I say we do with them what we do with closed-captioning for the hearing impaired, and with Spanish-language voice-over; put it on a separate SAP channel, so we only have it imposed on us if we want it.

Also, you networks have just gone fanatical with the statistics overload.  For crying out loud, it's impressive, but it's useless.  A team's won-lost record for successive Novembers is meaningless.  Knowing a team is 14-2 in games where it was leading by 15 or more points going into the fourth quarter is just sort of expected.  I have no idea who cares about average passing yards in the third quarter for Libras.  Keep the historical trends in your pregame show, and analyze details in your postgame show.  Call the plays and let me watch the game.

* Teams: give me a game.  When your fourth-and-three and going for the first down, it just annoys me when your strategy is changing the snap count in hopes of drawing an offsides penalty.  A team playing for the penalty is like a lawyer who gets his guilty client off on a technicality.  A desperation pass when you're in the hole and trying for a pass interference flag instead of trying for a reception is just as bad.  And taking a knee for three plays to kill the clock is cheating fans who paid for a whole game.  Play the game.

* Penalties: maybe it's just me, but changes in officiating have been a drag on the game.  Too many penalties are being called for incidental contact, particularly involving wide receivers and quarterbacks.  Some of this goes back to Joe Namath and rules that were changed to protect his bad knees, but the pendulum has swung way too far.  Also, too many false starts are called; when minor movement was done to draw an opponent offside, this may have been needed, but defensive lines are disciplined and just don't get drawn anymore; it's time to loosen up on unintentional movement.  Finally, too many passes now are ruled incomplete that I would have made receptions; the whole quibbling over "did he have possession" and "did he make a 'football move'" has become too hairsplitting in favor of the incompletion.

But that's just me - after all, I'm only here for the game.

- Keith

Over at the other STAND, you'll find an article on the call to discipleship, and Cecile's thoughts on the Ted Haggard situation.  At Arien's Corner you'll see a delightful piece on country music and what makes it great, as well as a story of a young life that came to an end much too soon. 

At both STANDS, watch for some discussions about going back to basics - civics here and theology there.  Think for a few minutes about what you want out of government; I'll be looking for your ideas and contributions.  Be ready for a surprise or two...

- Keith

Tomorrow will be Veterans' Day, a day set aside for the rememberance of those who have served this nation in its military services - and to each of you who have served, I thank you for it; it is my hope that each person who lives free in this land will remember that their freedom is owed to the many who have been willing to take arms against enemies.

Today, however, is a day I remember for an only slightly different reason; for today, November 10, marks the 231st anniversary of the creation of the United States Marine Corps.  Of all the branches - and no, there will be none of the usual jokes comparing the various branches in this commentary - the Corps has the greatest sense of mission and duty, and the richest traditions.  The mere mention of the word "Marine" conjures up thoughts of far-flung places with names like Mount Suribachi, Chosin Reservoir, and Belleau Wood, where men earned renown that will never end through valor, in the face of hardships and enemies most of us could never imagine.

I never served.  To my dying day, one of the greatest regrets I will ever have is that I allowed myself to be persuaded to go directly from high school to college instead of serving in the military, and perhaps my remorse is a reason I hold America's servicemen in just a bit higher regard.

But I know many who have served, and I thank you all.  Thank you for my freedom, which you earned on my behalf.  Thank you for protecting me and those around me.  And especially the Marines - thank you.

I want to highlight one Marine in particular - my father.  My father served in the Marines for well over twenty years, in the Corps, achieving the rank of Master Gunnery Sergeant, and I believe deep in my heart that he would have become the Sergeant Major of the Corps if the man holding that office would have retired.  My father went off into combat, and was one of the thousands of good men about whom John Kerry lied and smeared in the 1970s, making a public name for himself at the expense of all those men who served honorably.  My father gave two decades of his life and a good part of a third to the service of our nation and its ideals.

My father, like most Marines I have known, is also a good and gentle man, living a quiet life.  He and others like him make a lie out of the stereotype we are fed in the movies.

Through no fault of his own, I and my brothers didn't have the advantage of growing up with my father, much to my loss.  I was never able to really get to know him until I had gone off to college, and I am glad I did.  Without idealizing him, my father came to be one of the best examples of a good man I have had the privilege of knowing.

Dad, I didn't get to learn from you how to change a spark plug or go to my right for a hot grounder as a kid, and that wasn't your choice.  But I and millions of kids like me had you and a Corps of men like to to stand between us and those who would do us harm, and I hope all of us realize what a gift that is.

Dad, and to all the men who have earned the title of United States Marines, thank you for your service.  Tomorrow, this thank you extends to all the branches, but today, this day and my thanks belong to the Marines.  No matter how far this country drifts away from its moorings, somewhere in this country, there will be a metal box on a wall with a sign that says "IN CASE OF EMERGENCY BREAK GLASS."  On the other side of that glass, there will be a Marine, ready to stand in harm's way for this nation.  God bless you and reward you, and may the Corps have many, many more birthdays.

- Keith

Well, it's been an exciting week.  I've managed to navigate yet another birthday (my 49th) while avoiding the usual requisite public humiliation that goes with it.  A pleasant celebration with Sylvia's Small Group, dinner out on the day with my lovely wife Cecile and her brother, and discreet good wishes from a handful of good friends who indulge my pathological desires for what passes for modesty in me.

Another hard week at work, trying to keep up with the unmanageable mountain of tasks.

Final preparations for next week's elections, and my laughter at the bug-eyed surprise at my predictions, including my boss' boss; he is a good guy and a student of both history and politics, but he believes I'm being overly optimistic when I predict Republican wins nationally and in the state.  For your benefit, I'm predicting minor losses in the House, loss of one seat in the Senate, the GOP retains majority control of both houses, and vindication of the party of the right, as well as Republican wins of statewide offices here in California.  When - not if - these predictions come true, I will be feeling lucky enough to buy lottery tickets AND bet on Cal to beat both UCLA and USC.  On that last one, remember you heard it first at STAND.

Before the big announcement to follow, here's a wrap-up of STAND's recommendations:

California and Federal offices:

Governor: Arnold SCHWARZENEGGER
Lt. Governor: Tom McCLINTOCK.  Wish Garamendi a happy retirement from politics while you send the very talented McClintock to the number 2 office, and I want to see him promoted to #1 the next time there's an opening in the Governor's office.
Secretary of State: Bruce McPHERSON
Controller: Tony STRICKLAND
Treasurer: Claude PARRISH.  After what Lockyer has done meddling with Workers' Compensation in the legislature, he's another one that should be enjoying a retirement.
Attorney General: Chuck POOCHIGIAN.  This one is no contest; expecting Brown to enforce laws in which he's proved over and over he doesn't believe is wishful thinking.  Of all the state jobs there are, Attorney General is probably the one for which Brown is least qualified.  Poochigian's performance in the legislature have proved he's up for to job.
Insurance Commisioner: Steve POIZNER.  This race is near and dear to my heart, being in the trade.  The reforms of Workers' Compensation in recent years are an absolutely essential to the economic survival not of my business, but of the State.  The current occupant of that office has done nothing but use it for personal grandstanding, as he did this past week.  Poizner has actually running a business in the private sector, something his opponent, longtime political laughingstock Cruz Bustamante, wouldn't understand.  To regulate business, you need to know how it works.
4th District, Board of Equalization: Glen FORSCH
U.S. Senator: Richard MOUNTJOY.  I once lived in the district in which Mountjoy was a legislator, and he was a great one.  Mountjoy understands the needs of national security, border control, tort reform, fiscal restraint, and was always very much in touch with the citizens he represented.  What a breath of fresh air he'd be replacing Di Fi - and for the record, Barbara Boxer is an embarrassment and needs to be the next to go away.
U.S. Representative: William BODELL.  No disrespect intended to incumbent Adam Schiff, who can actually be one of the most reasonable members of his party (which, at least in this state, is damning with faint praise).  I do wish Schiff well; I simply like Bodell better of the issues.
State Senate, 22nd District: Mike TEN
State Assembly, 49th District: Esthela SIEGRIST.  Readers of STAND already know about Siegrist, and her election to the legislature will be a much-needed change.  MUCH needed.

State Ballot measures (see my post on these for the reasoning):
1A - YES
1B - NO
1C - NO
1D - NO
1E - still no opinion.  Help me out here, friends.
83 - YES
84 - NO
85 - YES
86 - NO
87 - NO
88 - NO
89 - NO
90 - YES

Alhambra City Council (see my recent write-up for the details):

First District: Stephen SHAM
Second District: Barbara MESSINA
Fifth District: Adele ANDRADE-STADLER

You know, to save you all the effort in the voting process, they should really let you just print this post and bring it with you to give to the poll worker.  You could just say "I read STAND, and I agree with his votes."  If you really want to make my day, print a hundred copies of this post and give them to all your friends to help them do the right thing on Election Day.  It's just so well reasoned, there should be a law that would let you press one button that just says "I vote for everything in STAND."  Wouldn't that make voting a much better experience for you?

I'll work on that.

And hey, won't you be glad in just a couple of days, when you get control of your mailbox back, and the calls from the robodialers stop, and the election cycle is over? 

Unless, of course, you count post-election gloating, month-long tirades from sore losers about exit polls, and the unavoidable post-mortem analysis of what happened.  If you all ask really nicely, I'll do one, and then you can just ignore all the others.

Now for the big announcement for which you've all been waiting (note, grammarians, the proper placement of the preposition in that construction):

If you're going to STAND, then you need to have two feet to do it effectively, and STAND now has two feet.  This one, here at Townhall, is going to continue to focus primarily on culture, politics, and the important issues of the day.  A second STAND has been inaugurated over at Blogspot, and it will focus more on issues directly related to faith and philosophy.  Obviously, there's going to be a lot of overlap between the two: they are both subsets of the same worldview.  STAND's central theme is that if you are living consistently, then everything in your life should be a subject to your core beliefs.  Come on over and see what I mean. 

The faith-based STAND is co-hosted by my wife Cecile, and some of you will like her more than you like me, and that's fine with me, because you know, I like her a lot too.  You'll also like a lot of the people you'll get to meet there.  And as always, let us know what you think - that's why we let people comment.  We want to hear from you -

- Keith

At a rally in Pasadena, California - which is to say, closer from where I'm sitting as I write this than he ever got to the Cambodian border while in the service - John Kerry continued his lifelong avocation of slandering and trash-talking the brave members of America's military.

Appearing at Pasadena City in a rally for gubernatorial candidate Phil Angelides, Kerry said this: "You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."  For the full details, and tons of great documentation, visit Michelle Malkin's excellent roundup of the event.

The statement is a slap at the military, and a slap I heard repeatedly in my youth.  I'm sure there are still people who believe, as one once so eloquently put it, that serving in the military is what you do when you're no good at anything else.  But the truth is that our military is the best educated in the world, and has a higher percentage of high-school graduates than the country's general public - and a higher percentage of college diplomas as well.

For my money, I consider Kerry a career-level liar, and he made his career trashing the nation's military.  Though he professed knowledge of numerous atrocities, the best documentation I've seen is that the only one he genuinely can support is the one he committed himself.

Outside of politics, the only thing he has done successfully in this life is marry into money.  He's done it twice.

His comments on behalf of Angelides are an outrage.  Mr Angelides, I call upon you to repudiate Kerry's comments and denounce them for what they are.

Mr. Villaraigosa, you were there on stage and in the pictures with him.  I call upon you to do the honest thing and also repudiate Kerry and his comments.

I was born in Massachusetts.  I call upon the good citizens of my birth state to explain why they send us people like John Kerry and Ted Kennedy.  Surely somewhere within your borders there are two better men than a military-bashing, lying elitist wannabe jet-setter and a bloated, drunken public voluptuary.  If nothing else, follow the lead of nearby New York, and recruit a carpetbagger who can at least put on an effective pretense of decency.

This event will be forever seared, seared into my memory as a defining watershed example of the character of these people.

- Keith

Stay tuned for a new development at STAND!  Within the next few days, loyal readers of the blog will see the first of several enhancements that will add to and enrich your experience at STAND, and at no extra charge to you.

Interested?  Curious?  You know I do it all for you.

- Keith

California has a variety of measures on this November's ballot.  But first, a word about one type of them: bond issues.

Bonds are, for some of you who do not already know, a mechanism by which California's government can raise money it does not yet have for various projects.  For example, imagine California wants to build a dam, but can't afford to do so.  The state has three choices: raise taxes to pay for the dam, borrow the money, or do without the dam.  If the government really wants the dam but isn't willing to raise taxes, that only leaves borrowing.  It can do this by selling a billion dollars' worth of bonds.  People may buy the bonds, but people are entitled to a return on their investment - after all, if I lend the state money, and the state promises to pay me back in fifteen years, I don't want back what I loaned the state; I want it back with some interest.  That's only fair.  If you disagree, and you think expecting interest is wrong and people should only get back what they invest, then I want to borrow money from you for some home improvements, and I'll pay you back in fifteen years.

So, let's continue to imagine that the state sells a billion dollars in bonds (that is, borrows a billion dollars from people willing to lend it), and spends that billion to build the dam.  Let's get really imaginative and pretend there are no cost overruns.  Now the state has a dam and owes a billion dollars, plus interest on that billion.  How will the state ever pay back its debt?  The state has only one method to get the money: through taxes.  

A bond, then, is a gamble by the citizens of a state that, although we don't have enough to pay for a project now because of our financial condition, we'll be in better financial condition fifteen years from now when the debt must be paid.  Not only that, its a gamble that by that time, our financial condition will be so much better that it justifies going into debt now and paying the added money we'll have to tack on in the form of interest.

It is precisely this thinking that has gotten families trapped in unmanageable credit card debt, or enslaved to borrowing against the value of their homes to get things now that they are unwilling to wait for and save for.  It is why so many people are in economic bondage.  It is why so many families wind up choosing between being crushed by their amassed debt and welching on their creditors through bankruptcy.

It is also precisely this thinking that has allowed our legislators to spend our taxes stupidly, with all the restraint of drunken sailors in a foreign port on payday.  When our elected officials piddle away the money we entrust to them because they think to themselves "it's okay, we can always issue bonds and borrow against the taxes on the next generation," then we the taxpayers are in trouble, and we suddenly understand why the Boston Tea Party was such a great idea.  Our legislature is profligate, and I frankly wouldn't lend our government lunch money or cabfare.

For that reason, it is the policy of STAND to oppose bond measures as a general rule.  First, there would need to be an extremely good reason to go into debt, and second, I think we the people are entitled to see some serious financial restraint - that is, to see the legislature demonstrate they are responsible enough in their spending habits to justify an increase in their allowance - before allowing them to borrow against our future.

Finally, voters seem to have a short memory.  Over the last twenty years, how many bond issues have we approved for clean water? For school building repair?  For a variety of other noble causes?  Where did all that money go?  If we've already paid for clean water and fixed up schools, then why don't we have them, and why are we being asked to pay for it again?

Now, to the issues:

Proposition 1A: Transportation Funding Protection.  YES.  Years ago, we agreed to increased taxes on gasoline to be specifically spent on transportation issues - new and repaired roads, for example.  The government, flouting the will of the people, raided these funds for other unintended spending.  We agreed to the taxes for specific purposes, and we're entitled to the government keeping its end of the deal.  A YES vote forces the government to do so.

Proposition 1B: Transportation Bond.  NO.  It's a bond.  See above.

Proposition 1C: Housing and Shelter Bond.  NO.  It's a bond.  See above.  It's not the job of the government to house the public at the expense of those of us who work and pay taxes to pay for our own housing.

Proposition 1D: Education Bond.  NO.  It's a bond.  See above.  And we've paid for this, many times over.  Government does a lousy job of educating, and I for one am tired of pouring money into this varacious black hole.

Proposition 1E: Disaster and Flood Bond.  NO OPINION.  I don't know enough about how bad the condition of the levees really is.  The results of a flood could be catastrophic.  This may be one of those rare situations which justify the indebtedness.  If the roof of your house leaks and the storms are coming, it probably is cost effective to borrow against your house now to put on a new roof.  Let's talk about this.

Proposition 83: Restrictions on Sex Offenders.  YES.  We have an epidemic of perverts who prey on our children.  If they think this is too harsh a punishment, then they need to think twice before diddling your eight-year-old daughter, or go do it somewhere else.

Proposition 84: Water Quality Bond.  NO.  It's a bond.  See above.

Proposition 85: Teen Abortions.  YES.  Not just YES, but HELL, YES.  Opponents of this one have raised lots of straw-man arguments against it.  I would love to debate this one with anyone who disagrees with me.  I dare you.  This proposition acknowledges the right of parents to parental authority in their families.  It's really no more difficult than that.

Proposition 86: Cigarette Tax.  NO.  When the tax on a product is more than the price of the product itself, that's a clear sign of government greed.  Second, taxing a product to support and subsidize a particular industry or to conduct social engineering is simply wrong.

Proposition 87: Energy Tax.  NO.  This will produce no results other than to fund a very expensive and unaccountable bureaucracy, and shows a plain wrong-headed notion than flies in the face of the simplest principles of economics.

Proposition 88: Education Property Tax.  NO.  More money down the rathole of a failed education system.  Period.

Proposition 89: Public Campaign Financing.  NO.  Campaign funding - the voluntary donation of money to conduct a political campaign - is the role of citizens who support a candidacy.  Collectivization of assets and redistribution of them by the government to accomplish this is not where this belongs.  Wait for my discussion of the First Amendment; we'll go into detail on what I mean.

Proposition 90: Eminent Domain.  YES.  Kelo is a blantant abuse of the law of eminent domain.  This measure prohibits the government from more such takings.

The election is just days away.  Read the issues and decide for yourselves.  If you disagree with any position, tell me why - this is the forum to discuss it.  Whichever way you decide, whether you agree with me or not, vote. 

- Keith

The night before last, I had the pleasure of sitting in on a gathering of candidates for the Alhambra City Council, the governing body for our fair city.  At the level of local politics, unless there is a special issue near and dear to the hearts of the citizens, running for a spot on the city council is something of a popularity contest.  Alhambra is no different.

We have a pet issue here, of course - the completion of the 710 Freeway.  The 710, you see, comes north out of Long Beach, crosses the San Bernardino Freeway, and travels briefly along the border between Alhambra and Los Angeles - and ends abruptly, dumping thousands of cars daily onto city streets.  Without belaboring the history of the noncompletion of the 710 through to the Foothill Freeway, suffice it to say that anyone seeking a seat on the City Council must call for the completion of the 710 as frequently as Cato advised the Roman Senate that Carthage must be destroyed.  And moreover, I also advise that the 710 be completed, so I am in agreement.

We also have the issue of the ongoing progress of the city's renovation plans for its business district.  Overall, the problem that no one wants to address is that people want a revitalized business district AND more parking AND less congestion AND more upscale housing AND more "affordable" housing AND preservation of historic architecture AND new buildings AND a new library complex, and no one wants to say the simple fact that unless someone invents a way to create more acreage, we're not going to be able to have it all.  So at the gathering of candidates, the essential bullet points are:

• Be sure to say you want the 710 freeway completed;
• Be in favor of all the things that people want, but never say there will have to be compromises; instead, profess to be a proponent of "smart growth;"
• Offend no one; since we're all pretty much agreed on the issues, you're not going to gain any votes by breaking away from the herd and taking a contrary stand, but you can lose votes by stepping on a land mine.

That being said, most of the candidates' statements about their qualifications amounted to: they've lived here for so many years, they've been married for so many years, their lovely children have done this and that, and Lee Baca has endorsed them (okay, that was unnecessary of me; it only seems like Sheriff Lee Baca endorses everybody).

Understand that I've been bothered at home by robodialers in call centers four times in this campaign season (note for candidates in the future: I do take offense at robodialers), where I get connected to some kid who greets me on a first-name basis as if I knew him, then the kid muddles through the canned script in his hands, and asks me to vote for his candidate.  I always interrupt the canned script and ask three questions: what does your candidate believe are the issues, where does he stand on the issues, and how is he different from his opponents?  Not one of these boiler-room spokeskids has been able to answer these questions.  My figuring is that if you as a candidate have to have people call me who don't know where you stand and what you believe in, you're probably not worth voting for.  One of these kids answered with "Issues?  They don't got no issues; they're cool with everybody."  That made it easy for me; he was calling for a slate of three candidates, and I simply eliminated all three on the strength of that phone call alone.  I gave the kid failing marks on both grammar and comprehension, too.  Oddly enough, two of the candidates fell short at the evening gathering as well, so I didn't feel so badly.

So on to the candidates:

District One: Chavez, Rosas and Sham.  This is the one district in which a clear winner emerged.  Stephen Sham was simply the class act of the entire gathering.  He was the only one who mentioned that balancing the different forces in the renovation plan meant that there would be trade-offs, and he did it without saying how obvious it was if we'd all just think it through.  He also corrected one of his opponents who had made statements that simply were not true, and did it without calling his opponent a liar.  The other candidate had made statements that the police and fire in our city had no benefits, and that the city had no emergency preparedness plan.  Stephen Sham, when his turn came up, simply asserted the truth, without rancor.  This is a man who will be able to work well with other people.  STAND's highest endorsement of the night goes to Stephen Sham.

District Two: Messina, Arguello and Kinman.  Daniel Arguello is the only incumbent in the entire race, and I hate not being able to support a veteran, but this is the second campaign I've seen him in, and the first left a bad taste in my mouth.  He's an excellent speaker, to his credit, but the issues are what matter to me more than speaking talent.  Gay Kinman made a good presentation, but STAND endorses Barbara Messina in this race.  Her experience in civic government gave her the added bump, and Ms. Messina also did her homework - regarding a question posed concerning the infrastructure of education and whether our schools were prepared for growth, she knew at which levels we were actually experiencing declining enrollment.  On the issue of public transportation, she had to remind the audience that the city has no say in the regional bus line routing, and only had direct control over the local city transit bus.

District Five: Beetz, Moreno, McIntosh, Andrade-Stadler, and Ayala.  After eliminating two candidates - Beetz and McIntosh, neither of whom attended, and neither of whom have provided any information on their stances to the public outside the sample ballot (you can't win if you don't campaign); also, Ms. McIntosh's statement provided to the gathering borders on conspiracy theory - this race was reduced to the same number of candidates as the other two districts.  The most memorable of the candidates was Frank Moreno - because of a bombastic, populist style of delivery that is great in sound bites but the kiss of death after about sixty seconds.  He actually stunned me regarding a question about eminent domain what he flatly stated "eminent domain is a bad thing."  Eminent domain has been part of American law since the country's inception, and someone with his experience can't possibly not know that.  Had he said "Kelo is a bad thing," I would have been right there with him, because Kelo is a horrible abuse of eminent domain.  Remind me sometime to write about Dodger Stadium and how it got built, by the way, but that's for another time.  By the time he demanded a moratorium on all building development and proposed creation of new layers of bureaucracy, he'd already long since been eliminated from the running with me.

Adele Andrade-Stadler gets the nod from STAND, in what I'm calling a close one with Luis Ayala.  Both present well and have good ideas, and have some striking similarities.  Oddly, both gave clumsy answers on the issue of diversity: Ms. Andrade-Stadler mentioned that people of all flavors gather at Starbucks, while Mr. Ayala could only cite restaurants and the need for a good mix of a variety of ethnic restaurants.  Ms. Andrade-Stadler wins STAND's endorsement because her experience is more closely tied with the city (Mr. Ayala's is not as local), and because Ms. Andrade-Stadler already has the ties and the working relationships within city government and with other council members, which will benefit the workings of the council.  Besides, if Mr. Ayala wants to be on the city council, he should already know that the Main Street area has one of the best French restaurants around, a great Italian place, a rib restaurant, a sushi joint, some down-home, a great hamburger place, a 50's-style diner, and even Hawaiian, all in close proximity.  Mr. Ayala strikes me as a good guy, as well as a smart one, and my feelings certainly wouldn't be hurt to see him win, but I make him a good second choice.

I took pretty good notes of the night's proceedings, and if you have any questions or another point of view, comment and we can talk about it - the best results of the election will come from an informed electorate discussing and debating the candidates and the issues.

By the way, my delight of the evening was after the event, getting a chance to meet and talk to Gary Yamauchi, a city councilman whose seat isn't up for re-election this time around.  Mr. Yamauchi is doing a great job, and I hope he gets re-elected every time he runs.  If you get a chance to meet him, do so and tell him he's doing a great job.  

Next post: the long-awaited ballot initiatives, and a wrap-up of statewide offices.  If you don't vote, then you've lost all rights to complain if you don't like the results, so take part and vote, and especially make sure to vote for Esthela Siegrist in the 49th Assembly District (box 76 in the sample ballot).  Vote for Stephen Sham (box 238), Barbara Messina (box 239), and Adele Andrada-Stadler (box 245) for Alhambra City Council.

And moreover, the 710 freeway must be completed.

- Keith