Good manners are made up of petty sacrifices

by reenee, Santa Maria

I'm still so aghast at how people behave towards those in wheelchairs that I posted this here and on my own blog. I can usually tolerate ill-mannered boorish behavior by chalking it up to the fact that they are more than likely peasants, unrefined and unaware of niceties like simple common courtesy.

As I mentioned yesterday on my blog, I went to the Old Spanish Days Fiesta to specifically attend the Mariachi Festival. I went with two friends and Mom. Although she won't admit it, Mom is a little bit slower at walking than the rest of us, so knowing that the huddled masses would be teeming, we decided that putting her in a wheelchair was our best option, and hers, due to her bad knees. Not only that, our parking space would be greatly improved, thus aiding the rest of us with our own physical deficits. Okay, mine. Hey, one has to use all of their advantages when among the unwashed. Anyways, getting into the Santa Barbara Bowl was not a problem, we arrived early enough to make it easy. Getting out was another thing. People were stampeding to the exits, as if their lives depended upon it. One woman almost beaned Mom with her cane as I tried to navigate through these peasants. One of the security guards had to scream at them to allow us though the gate. Once we'd made it down the elevator it was another trauma for Mom. As I was hollering for people to get out of the way, a young man saw my predicament and offered to help me. When I agreed, he took hold of the arm of the wheelchair and began to push his way though the crowd propelling us through as he hollered, "Make way! Wheelchair coming through!" Let me tell you, the crowd parted for him. I think it was not only due to him pushing through, but also because of his friend who was at least 6'4" and built like a refrigerator and hollering, "La Señora!" These two young men saved us, otherwise we might still be there.
Perhaps if these rude people were to put in some time in a wheelchair, they'd understand. However, I'm not going to hold my breath.

The County Split

By reenee, Santa Maria

For a long time now I've been railing against splitting the county of Santa Barbara. However, I've been at a loss for words over this entire subject in polite company. None of it has ever made sense to me. The first issue is the least important. The name: Mission County? Whose bright idea was that one? The second issue: Who benefits? Not me, I'm not a big oil company, nor am I a developer who stands to reap millions more if this boneheaded idea goes forth. Anyway, I'd begin to unravel every time I thought about it, then I found this fine editorial by Marianne Partridge, dated May 11, 2006 in the Santa Barbara Independent. So naturally I ripped it off, after condensing it a wee bit here and there, and adding my own thoughts hoping that she doesn't mind, since I included her link. So, here it is:

"If Measure H passes, it would be a disaster of epic proportions for everyone. In particular, those of us stuck in the economic chaos of the new Mission County and then those stranded in what would be left of Santa Barbara County. If you care about the environment, good government, the plight of the poor, regional planning, or common sense, then splitting Santa Barbara County would be an assault on any rational thought. Surely we all understand by now that a new county would be very good for private developers like Jim Diani, who has underwritten loans to the county split effort totaling $240,000."

Hmmm, I wonder, who would get those contracts for new county buildings?

"The proposed plan is to split Santa Barbara County at the Gaviota Pass. The new county would include Hollister Ranch, Point Conception, the Santa Ynez Valley, Santa Maria, the majority of agricultural land, rolling hills, and open space. And it would include Lake Cachuma, the single most important humanmade source of water for the entire South Coast. Why would the south county vote to be separated from Lake Cachuma? To believe proponents of Measure H, with their bland assurances that the new county will honor Santa Barbara’s old water contracts, flies in the face of reason. It also defies California’s entire history of water, politics, and power.

If the proposed Mission County were to be approved, it would begin with a $30 million budget shortfall. Nice huh? The Governor's special commission concluded that the whole idea was economically unviable. Even if its sales taxes were raised by one cent it wouldn't be enough. The only way to balance the budget would be to cut services at least 35 percent. That means less law enforcement, less fire protection, less help for the poor, and fewer road repairs."

Not a problem for those that don't have these issues.

"Another thing, the new county would be forced to pay its fair share of the old Santa Barbara County’s capital debt, its workers’ pensions, and other retirement costs. Hotel bed taxes won't help raise money because it has few of the tourist attractions found in the South County, most notably accessible beach frontage. So how will Mission County ever be able to pay for anything?"

Oil companies, of course.

"The most immediate and lucrative way to increase property tax revenue would be to allow offshore oil development and the building of its requisite onshore processing facilities. Why would this be a problem? Aside from the obvious concerns of air and water quality, the biggest problem is the profile of oil companies operating in Santa Barbara County today. Instead of the old energy companies like Exxon and Chevron, we’re seeing smaller, more opportunistic companies fighting for the last drops of oil. Even if the new county had the will to implement strict environmental standards, most of these companies wouldn’t have the money to comply with them.

Those are just a few reasons why anyone living north of Gaviota should vote against the split. But why should South County voters care? In fact, it’s no secret that some environmentalists are quietly hoping the split occurs. The reasoning is that all the pro-growth lobbyists will suddenly leave the slow-growth residents of southern Santa Barbara alone: “If we never have to hear that obnoxious Andy Caldwell whine again, so be it! Let them build and pollute to their hearts’ content.” It might sound appealing, but it plays out badly.

Air, water, and ecosystems do not recognize county lines. Traffic, pollution, and toxins travel. Those environmentalists hoping to preserve valley oaks, steelhead trout, or other endangered species should remember that most of these still exist only because of the wild, open ranchlands in the north. The irreparable damage that a desperate new county government could do — goaded by developers spouting property-rights jingoisms while actually promoting get-rich schemes to build cluster-housing on agricultural land — will truly be awesome. For the wildlife — flora, fauna, and cowboy alike — it will be a death sentence: one passed, in part, by any South County environmentalist voting for the county split.

And what will happen to the funding necessary for commuter rail or other new transportation options? All those commuters from the north will not be quitting their jobs down south. To do anything about traffic, we must use the whole tax base of the present Santa Barbara County.

But perhaps the most moral, principled reason for anyone to vote against a county split is the recognition that the majority of our poor will be isolated in a virtually bankrupt new county. Surely this would be an act of cruelty."

See? Wasn't that better than me simply saying "Aaacckk!! Vote NO!!"

So now I'm asking, are the proponents of the split really all that focused on those that will be hurt the most, or are they focused on dollar signs?

The failed presidency

By reenee, Santa Maria

Wowsers! It's been a while since I've been here. Looks like everyone else has taken a powder as well, huh? I've been doing most of my ranting, raving and angst filled posting on a site I maintain with my sister/co-blogger. I don't have to be quite as polite over there. The added bonus is that I can blame her for quite a few things. We finally decided that important conversations about deeply held opinions go a lot better when you conduct them outside your own head, hence, the birth of the blog.

So where was I? Oh yeah, the failed presidency. A 29 percent approval rating for the White House occupant. Yanno, if more people had listened to my rantings before the 2000 elections, none of this would be happening right now. This new rating reflects a seven point drop since April. Why did it take six years for people in the country to wake up to the fact that this president is terrifyingly moronic? Could it be because there is no real plan in Iraq? Could it be because those pesky Mexicans are showing themselves too loudly? Good thing my grandparents didn't hear that one. Could it be that gasoline is now close to $3.50+ a gallon? Could it be that people have noticed that nothing has been done to secure health insurance for the huddled masses? Could it be that the country is waking up to the fact that there is no real leadership in our government? Quoting Randy Alcorn, in today's Santa Barbara News-Press: "Given the people that Americans have allowed to take leadership positions in our society, one has to wonder if the average quotient of common sense in America is in severe decline. No matter what your political affiliation, an empirical examination of the state of American political leadership reveals dreadful mediocrity, and even outright incompetence." I must also agree with him when he says, "I don't want to belabor the deficiencies of the Bush administration, but these people couldn't lead ants to a picnic." If you subscribe to the News-Press then you can register online for free, and if you don't, then you might want to, it's better than being stuck with the local rag. Anyways, whatever the reason, only one quarter of Americans agree that the country is headed in the right direction. Worse yet is that less than half of Republicans say that things are headed in the right direction.

Congress fared even worse, they have an 18 percent approval rating. No one is getting any breaks there. The Republicans are rated 20 percent positive and 76 percent negative while the Democrats who have been either passive or comatose got a rating of 23 percent positive and 72 percent negative. In an effort to save themselves, Republicans are trying to distance themselves from Dubya on several different fronts. The latest sign of rebellion is their move to break with the administration's position that the enrollment deadline for the Medicare perscription plan and late penalty should remain. There's a 10% per 12 month period penalty for late enrollment of Part B Medicare already, so what's a few more dollars for the financially strapped seniors? Oh wait! It's an election year! Now I get it.

Oh well, at least the dutiful wife is supporting her husband. She says that she doesn't believe the polls that show such a low approval rating. I suppose I'd not believe it either if I lived in the Lalaland of denial. Added to that, her audiences are hand picked for her. Most of the people that will trip over themselves because they want to personally meet her and shake her hand are not the kind of people that will look her in the eye and say that her husband is a loser.

Political operatives that prepare each locale in advance are worth their weight in gold.

Oh yeah, Happy Mother's Day!

Socrates said that the hallmark of wisdom is knowing what you don't know.

By reenee, Santa Maria

Way back in the Dark Ages when I was a kid in school, there was never a good reason for students to get up from their desks and wander around at will. Permission was required to even scratch our noses, so if we did get up, we'd better be on fire. If the teachers were scary and humorless nuns, we'd have willingly burned sitting at our desks, it would have been a less painful death than to cross them. Most all of us students would simply sit there and do what we were told. If we didn't study, we were given a failing grade. If we failed to learn, we flunked. Ah yes, memories of accountability.

These days however, there's an experiment going on in Rochester, Minnesota, where kids are allowed to stand, sit or lie on the floor. The last time I actually saw a student on the floor was during a tantrum. One of the goals in this classroom is to get kids to move around. In a study that might even combat childhood obesity which in itself has become a big problem, researchers are trying to figure out the reasons for the general slippage of what is learned by students in twelve years of school. This classroom allows children to walk around, balance on big exercise balls, or even lie down on mats. In addition to being allowed to move around, they have access to laptop computers, a wireless network and iPods.

So far, the classroom teacher, Phil Rynearson and Superintendent Jerry Williams say that these fourth and fifth grade students are more focused on the subjects being taught than their peers in a comparison group in an ordinary classroom. Plus, there are fewer distractions than in the traditional setup, where a lot of time is spent trying to get children to sit still. Interesting. To be sure, something has to be done, now that children are advanced to the next level whether they learn or not. If you check out the average high school kid, you will see quite a few deficits in their abilities. I'm talking about the average kid here, not the ones that remain focused on their studies either out of an innate ability to do so, or because they are encouraged and helped by their parents.

Let's face it, not enough parents are invested in their child's education. There are some that feel that getting their children to school every morning ends their participation and responsibility. You know the ones, they blame the schools when their child fails to learn. I certainly do not have all of the answers, but I spent ten years in the school system working with parents of fifth and sixth grade students, trying to get them involved, and I made one important discovery: You cannot fix stupid. I have seen college educated parents who remain clueless and disinterested about their children or their education, and I have seen high school dropouts who are extremely involved in their children's education, because they desire something better for them.

This study is at least a good start into how they learn, or at the very least, why they don't. The added plus is combating obesity. My humble opinion on that of course is the fast food available in an age where both parents are required to have jobs just to keep their heads above water, along with the technology that allows kids to remain in one spot all day long. Nothing like a good bag of chips or a hamburger and a Gameboy to deaden the brain. Ah yes, gaming, now that's a good skill to have to enable a student to go to college and then someday get a good paying job, huh?

Extremists and Terrorists

By reenee, Santa Maria

Reading about the riots over caricatures of Mohammed I got to thinking about what exactly defines an extremist, or a terrorist. Extremism is of course going to great or exaggerated lengths, exceeding the ordinary, usual, or expected to make a point, while terrorism is the systematic use of terror as a means of coercion. Which of these defines the individuals rioting in the Middle East? People have been rioting, fire bombing and burning buildings in those countries for weeks now over what they percieve as blasphemy, and instead of lessening over time, they seem to be gaining momentum. It was almost laughable to hear Condo Rice say that the rioters "might spin out of control." These people are already angry, so to hear her also suggest that "they ought to organize peacefully" was not helpful. These are people that gather by the millions for the annual hajj. They all believe that each one of them, at least once in their lives, must take part in the pilgrimage. At the stoning of the devil ritual, the massive crowd is so out of control that hundreds end up dying in a stampede, yet they all attend the following year. Anyone saying that they should gather peacefully to protest is seriously out of touch. These people take their religion and their prophet very seriously. Does anyone wonder why the rioters are now targeting the west? We don't have to agree with this behavior to try to understand it enough to quit making bizarre suggestions.

As I continued reading the news, the nine church bombings in Alabama and Mississippi since February 2nd, reminded me that we have our own terrorists and extremists in this country. Who could be bombing those churches? Perhaps extremists, terrorists, idiots? Some of these churches have black members, some have white members. I guess that the person or persons responsible for this dabble in equal opportunity hatred and intolerance. Whoever is doing this surely feels justified in some way. Apparently, believing that you have a one-way ticket to the hereafter where you'll be fed peeled grapes by seven virgins is not a requirement to be a terrorist. When and if we ever find out the reasons for destroying these churches, will it make a difference in stopping this kind of behavior? Probably not. We cannot control thoughts, despite the last general election results. We can have gun control laws, but people will still rampage through post offices, other places of business and schools. We can prosecute vigorously any and all hate crimes, but people will still seek out some ethnic group to bully, attack or kill. People will simply continue to think and do things that they feel justified in thinking or doing to others that do not fit their idea of "what is right" in their minds. So, while we might discover that organized terrorists or extremists are bombing churches, we might also discover that these "terrorists" are idiots with too much time on their hands.

Another excellent yet disturbing example of home grown extremism/terrorism is the Westboro Baptist Church. These people do not toss bombs at churches, nor do they shoot at people, that we know of. They are however extremists and terrorists. They like to stand outside of churches with signs that advertise hatred, intolerance and ignorance. Yep, this shining example is Fred Phelps. The Reverend Phelps is the leader of the virulently homophobic Westboro Baptist Church, in Topeka, Kansas. His church has about 100 members, and of those, at least 90 of them are related to him through blood or marriage. This scary guy has a website that claims to have staged "20,000" protests across the nation and around the world in the last decade. At the funeral of murder victim Matthew Shepard, they held up signs reading "No Fags in Heaven" and "God Hates Fags." He not only told the mourners that Matthew went to Hell, but that they would be there to join him when they died. It's obvious that hatred and intolerance motivates this guy. His church website is: Godhatesfags.com. He also has a website named: Godhatesamerica.com, where he contends that the United States is "doomed" because it supports gays. According to Fred Phelps, "God invented the Internet for us to preach on." They also demonstrated at the funerals of the miners killed at the Sago Mine. They held signs that said these men were killed because our government tolerates homosexuals. These people call themselves Christians. Hey Fred, what would Jesus do? Lest you think I'm making this stuff up, go here.

How about someone like Eric Robert Rudolph? Rudolph is described as an American Christian terrorist who committed a series of bombings across the southern United States, murdering three people and injuring at least 150 others. Yep, he was the Olympic Bomber. Rudolph declared his bombings as part of a guerrilla campaign against abortion, "the homosexual agenda" and perceived support for them from the United States government. Rudolph purports to have committed his crimes for religious reasons.

Then there's Timothy McVeigh. Would he qualify? Well maybe, the FBI describes him as an "American domestic terrorist." He did blow up a building that 167 people died in, children, men and women. How does anyone get to that point? People from all walks of life say that there is no room in a civilized nation for terrorism, yet here we are. We have our own versions of extremists and terrorists here, yet when people think of terrorists or extremists, they look to September 11th, or the USS Cole or the rioters in the Middle East.