Huffington Post Column 23: Why Single Out Muslim Women?

The controversy over Muslim women's dress is taking on global proportions. France, some time ago, banned the wearing of hijab, the head scarf in public, and now Syria, that most secular of Arab nations, has banned the niqab or full-face veil in schools. In a report on NPR the head of the Syrian Women's Observatory (sic), whatever that is, a man, made the dubious claim that the niqab constitutes "violence against women."

 

Let me be clear – I don't support anyone being required to wear or not wear anything against their will. I agree that if a woman is forced to wear a head scarf or veil by her government or her husband or her father, that is wrong and should not be allowed. But I've heard and read interviews with women who wear the hijab and even the niqab voluntarily, who want to wear it, and who feel religiously bound to wear it by their own beliefs. On what grounds can a government or institution require that they not wear it, and isn't such a requirement the equivalent of requiring someone who does not want to wear it to do so?

 

I suppose the argument will be made that women in the latter group have been brainwashed or some such thing and need to be protected, but even if we grant that (and I don't), isn't that the selfsame paternalistic and patronizing attitude that the women's movement has always been against?

 

More broadly, why is this group being singled out? Other religious groups – maybe every religious group – have groups that adopt a particular garment or style of dress. Some Hasidic Jews dress in clothes that were common in 14th Century Poland. Mormons wear "temple garments," albeit under their clothes, Buddhist monks and nuns wear robes, Hare Krishna adherents wear a queue with the rest of their head shaved, Orthodox Jewish men wear skullcaps, and the women dress modestly in long sleeved blouses and long skirts, and often wear a head scarf over their ritually required wigs. Then there are priests' collars, nun's habits, monk's robes, and on and on. Why is no one proposing banning all those as well as that most visible of symbols, the Hindu bindi or dot on the forehead?

 

Sadly, I think the answer is that we are all too ready to conflate religious fundamentalism, or even orthodoxy or conservatism with terrorism where Muslims are concerned, though we don't do so nearly as much when it comes to other faiths. Every religion has its fundamentalists, and terrorists have perverted every world religion except maybe Quakerism to justify their crimes. Terrorists who act in the name of Islam are only the most recent and currently active example.

 

But to tar all Muslims (or in this case Muslim women) with the brush of terrorism is racist, anti-Muslim and, dare I say, sexist on the part of those who claim to be acting in these "oppressed" women's interests.

 

Again, I am not advocating that one person in the world be required to wear or refrain from wearing anything against their will. I'm not even crazy about school uniforms or dress codes for the same reason. I am saying that I'm equally opposed to anyone being required to wear something they don't want to or to refrain from wearing something that, as an adult, they choose for whatever reason to wear.

Bonanza Column 194 – A Time for Unity

I don't know anyone who is not, by their own lights at least, an environmentalist. I have never met anyone who advocates destroying the environment, though some, like BP, may put other priorities such as profit ahead of it, they will find some rationale for doing so. That said, in many cases those who take on "The Environment" as with most people who take on a cause, have a tendency to see things in black and white terms and, as this week's editorial in papers around the Lake puts it, to "judge a book by its cover."

That editorial went on line at the end of the week and has already as of this writing on Saturday begun to draw fire from people and organizations whose identity (and in some cases salary) depends on their position on the environment. When the papers come out in print it's likely that it will draw more. As an unpaid columnist I have no obligation to agree with the paper's position on anything and sometimes I don't. In this case, though, I think the editorial staff hit the nail on the head and if you haven't read the editorial, I recommend you stop here and do so (then come back to this column).

Economists are currently debating two dangers inherent in economic recovery – inflation and deflation. I would submit that in the environment "debates" in our community we have another danger – conflation. Conflation occurs when the identities of two or more individuals, concepts, or places, become confused until there seems to be only a single identity — the differences appear to become lost.

As an example, I attended the presentation last week by the Lake Tahoe Basin Prosperity Plan that is reported on elsewhere this week. That presentation was not without its flaws – not enough time for public input, for example, but it was mostly very well done. The stated vision of the LTBPP in the draft plan is:

"The Lake Tahoe Basin is a world class center of innovation around green tourism, green building and sustainable design, scientific research and applications for environmental resource renewal and management, renewable energies, and health and wellness. "It is the sustainability powerhouse of the nation."

In two slides out of sixty-two in the presentation, workforce housing was mentioned as one of a number of bullet points – one mentioned as a basin-wide issue "Lack of financing for businesses and community development/infrastructure/workforce housing" and the other reported that the "cluster group" on tourism and visitor issues included as one bullet point in one of four proposed strategic initiatives "Create a basin-wide workforce housing strategy."

Despite the tiny percentage of the draft plan that even mentioned workforce housing at all, one of the first people to comment objected to this and focused on it as if it were the core of the plan. In other words, the speaker conflated workforce housing with the whole plan and treated them as one issue (see my earlier column on "Trotsky was killed with an ice axe"). I mention this not so much to criticize this individual as to illustrate how common it is. Housing (and workforce, affordable, low-income, moderate-income are not the same thing, but subject to conflation), tourism, the canard of "becoming like South Shore," building height, and other issues are argued about as global matters without regard to individual cases.

I propose that it's time for a more intelligent and rational debate about the future of the Basin and Incline Village/Crystal Bay in particular. If we don't get serious about determining our future and putting our communities' destinies into the hands of the people who are affected by it, those futures will be determined for us, and not in a good way. For example, the Washoe County Board of Supervisors has, by a vote of 4-1, authorized an advisory ballot question for the November election to give the Legislature guidance on whether to approve a merger of Reno & Unincorporated Washoe County. In case you're not clear about this, IV/CB are "unincorporated Washoe County."

I wonder how much a Reno-dominated Washoe County will care about the Lake and IV/CB as anything but a cash cow to finance underfunded areas. It's time for obstruction in the name of the environment or anything else to stop. As Ben Franklin said, we must hang together or we will surely hang separately.

Bonanza Column 193 – The GOP Won’t “Spoil” Americans

Summertime, even in an election year, is not the best time to write a column at Tahoe. In the winter, when it's cold and dark, or even when it's sunny but there's snow on the ground, it seems easier to find things to write about, but when it's 80 degrees and the sun is shining, the breezes blowing and the lake is there in all its azure splendor, somehow it's harder.

Even more so after a successful Independence Day celebration – record crowds, great events and fireworks, beautiful weather. I keep wondering, as I did in my Independence Day column two weeks ago about what the Founding Fathers (and Mothers) would make of America today. What would those Easterners make of Lake Tahoe in the summer, or of San Francisco or Seattle or San Diego? All these places would, I suspect, seem very strange and foreign to them. What would they make of a society that, even though racist and sexist attitudes persist, has de-institutionalized discrimination to the point where we have an African-American President, a woman Secretary of State (who was a close second for the Presidency), a population growing to the point where Hispanics are headed for the majority, and an economy that, even when it's in trouble, dwarfs anything that would have been in their reality.

What, also would they make of double-digit unemployment? I listened to a story on NPR on Sunday about a woman in a small town in Georgia – she was an Assistant Manager at a bank and was let go when the bank was bought by a larger bank. She has a 17-year old son and an older daughter who has two small children, all of whom she supports, and her unemployment benefits have run out. She has been looking for a job for over six months in an economy where there are, on average, 6 applicants for every available job, she is behind in her rent and facing eviction, and in disconnect territory with her utilities (which I guess won't matter if she's evicted). She is qualified, willing – no, eager – to find any kind of job and so far has not found one. And her unemployment, which she figures paid her about $8.40 an hour or $17,470 a year (she was making $41,000 plus benefits in her job) is about to expire.

In time of high unemployment, Congress has traditionally extended the 26-week limit on unemployment benefits to as much as a year. Now, however, the GOP minority in the Senate is using the filibuster to block any such extension – I guess they agree with candidate Sharron Angle that the woman in Georgia is "spoiled" by her "benefits," which are 42% of what she was making in her modest job. I wonder if they think her children and grandchildren are spoiled also.

Republican Senatorial leadership are piously avowing that they are not opposed to extending unemployment but simply want to see cuts elsewhere so that they don't add to the deficit the estimated $3 trillion it would cost . (They had no such reservations about the deficit when they voted a similar amount for war funding, despite there being nothing in the budget to cover it.)

Economists are as close to unanimous as economists get that extending unemployment would provide a stimulus to the economy. It's simple: if you give tax cuts to the well-off, they are likely as not to save or invest their gains. Those who have been unemployed for six months or so do not have the luxury of saving – they will spend the money on food and rent and utilities and maybe consumer goods, and that money will instantly come right back into the economy, creating jobs which will, in the long run, obviate the need for further unemployment benefits.

But the Party of No doesn't seem to care. They will do anything they can to prevent the government's helping anyone other than the wealthy and the big corporations in whose pockets they live. I wonder what the writers of the Declaration of Independence, who said that the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are self-evidently inalienable and who said that the proper function of government is to secure these rights for its people, would think of all this. I fancy that, like the Native American in the old "don't litter" ad, they would weep to see how their ideals have been perverted by people who claim to speak in their name.

Bonanza Column 192 - A Great Small-Town Fourth

Basking in the afterglow of Independence Day Weekend this will be a column of kudos. Full disclosure: I am a founding member and current member of the Red, White, and Tahoe Blue Board, and make no claim to be unbiased. I will, however, for reasons of good taste, refrain from commenting on any of the events I was accountable for.

This fourth RWTB was, arguably, the best yet. The weather and the calendar conspired to give us record crowds, and all the events were terrific – the wine and cheese tasting, under April Marriner's able management had more wineries and more attending than ever before – the biggest problem was getting people to go home afterward. The well-attended Beer and Brats (that's bratwurst, not nasty kids) tasting was also April's idea and production – congrats to her and to Amy and Will from Incline Wine & Spirits for two great events. Joanne Devine and her committee produced a spectacular (and huge) parade, the Duck races sold out (thanks, Rotary), and the fireworks thanks to Jim Smith, Greg McKay, and others were appropriately spectacular. Thanks also to Chris Talbot for arranging great entertainment including the wonderful Sigtuna Brass Sextet (I guess they don't count the drummer – only the brass – or it would be a septet). Also our dedicated Americorps volunteers led by Katy Washington who put on an outstanding Village Fair on the Green. And finally thanks to Bill Horn, Hal Paris, Shelia Leijon, and all of the IVGID staff who must be breathing a sigh of relief today and who did their usual outstanding job along with the Sheriff's Department in managing the whole event.

But in all this there is one group that often goes unnoticed and that deserves a shout-out. Every year, Boy Scout Troop 37 under the dedicated leadership of Kim and Jim Schmidt and their able Assistant Scoutmasters raises and lowers the flag each day, carries the colors in the veterans salute, and this year did something that didn't get enough notice. Title Four of the US Code, called the "Flag Code" was adopted in 1923 and governs almost everything about the flag including display, but also including how to properly dispose of a flag that has become so worn or tattered that it should no longer be displayed. On Friday evening on the Village Green, Troop 37 conducted the little-known Flag Retirement Ceremony. They began with a very respectful retirement of a large flag that had flown in front to the Rec Center – a large wood fire was lit, a color guard marched the flag in, Gen. Hal Strack (USA ret.) played "Taps" on the bugle, and the flag was burned while all saluted until it was gone. A similar ceremony gave those present who had brought flags an opportunity to retire them as well. A great, moving ceremony that should be an annual event – thanks to all concerned for reminding us of what Independence Day is really about.

Lastly, the regular reader of this column will know that I am one of TOCCATA's biggest fans. By the time this comes out, you will have missed the opportunity, but I have to tell you that in this year's celebration concert they outdid themselves. Maestro James Rawie and his very capable partner Nancy have an uncanny gift for attracting world-class talent. In this show, in addition to a somewhat smaller Tahoe Symphony (they were competing with the Reno Phil for musicians this weekend) and the TOCCATA Chorus, local soprano Joy Strotz and her sister, a Broadway performer Melody Moore (with their mother on harp with the orchestra) performed songs from Wicked, nationally-known (but Tahoe-based) musician Donna Axton did a performance of Gershwin's Rhapsody in Blue that was as good as or better than any I have ever heard, and the whole program was up to that standard. If you are not a fan and supporter of TOCCATA you are missing the opportunity to participate in something that makes living here truly special.

Next week it's back to politics, but for this week, it's just great to live in a small town that knows how to celebrate.

Bonanza Column 191 – Not just Independence – Human Rights

The Auto-Summarize tool on Microsoft Word is pretty good at getting the gist of a document and distilling it down. Just for fun, I asked it to summarize the Declaration of Independence in 100 words or less, and this is what it gave back:

 

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

 

Pretty interesting – asked for 100 words, it came back with 20. Asked for 500 words or less, it included the above and the rest was related to declaring "that these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES: that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved."

 

When we think of the Declaration we tend to think of the declaration of human equality – "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." These are the rights referred to in the first summary, and given that the writers of the Declaration held "these truths to be self-evident" they didn't devote a great deal of discussion to the rights themselves, but to the role of government in securing these rights and the failures of the British Crown to have done so.

 

It was to that model of government that the signers pledged "their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor, and for which many of them did indeed pay with their lives and their fortunes – their honor remained intact.

 

We forget that while the American Revolution was basically about the rights, it was really about the duty of government to secure these rights. The signers recognized that, while the rights might be a self-evident endowment, people living in society needed assistance in securing them. Today we recognize that the reasons for this need are rooted in both our physical and social evolution over hundreds of thousands of years – the signers knew from their study of history and human nature that while the rights may be inalienable, the strong, the rich, and the privileged could and would use force to alienate others from those rights unless there were agencies to hold them in check. Hence government.

 

There are those today who, while claiming the mantle of the Founding Fathers would have us believe that the best government is no government at all. Not only does this go counter to the exact reasons the country was founded, it goes against the wisdom of the Founders whose legacy they are trying to usurp.

 

It's crucial that we remember that Independence Day is more than a celebration of an historic event, the signing of the Declaration of Independence. That document was an unprecedented historical event. Prior to its publication, conventional wisdom held that kings had rights, nobles had rights (though fewer than kings), popes had rights, priests had rights (ditto for popes) but "all men are created equal?" Unheard of! Serfs and vassals had no rights. Commoners had few if any, and merchants' rights were in proportion to their wealth, but universal rights were unknown. It is that statement that is at the heart of the Declaration of Independence – the Independence part followed naturally from the connection between inalienable rights and the proper function of government – these made a break with England necessary and set the stage for the formation of the world's first democratic republic with the adoption of the Constitution in 1789.

 

From a 2010 perspective, it may be that the event of independence, the Revolutionary War, Continental Congress, etc. are secondary to the creation of a new possibility – the possibility of human rights. The United States more than any other country in the world has spent the past 234 years making that possibility into a reality – in 1776 the ideal of universal rights did not include non-whites such as Native Americans and African-Americans, it did not include women, and did not include even white males who did not own property. Over the next two-plus centuries we have kept living into the ideal and running up against those who would redefine "all [people] are created equal] as "but some are more equal than others. The good news is we keep defeating them. So it has been, so may it ever be. Have a great Independence Day.

Bonanza Column 190 – TRPA and the Gulf

What does the Gulf oil disaster mean to us here at Lake Tahoe? In a sense that may seem somewhat abstract, it affects everyone in the world – the destruction of human, animal, and plant life and the prospect of a long recovery with concomitant economic effects will reach to everyone in the US, and really in the world. It also once again brings home the disastrous consequences of our national addiction to oil and fossil fuels, and that will affect us here as well.

But I want to consider it in a less abstract sense. On the one hand, we don't drill for oil in the lake, so the likelihood of a sudden destruction of the lake and the shoreline is negligible. On the other hand, there may be lessons to be learned from the Gulf that are very relevant to the Tahoe Basin.

We know that the Lake is losing clarity. Contributors to this include runoff of various materials from the land as well as non-native vegetable and animal species that have found their way into the Lake by various means. It is extremely unlikely that, once these species are in the water, we will ever get them out – the best we can do is manage them so that they don't get worse. We can do and are doing something about runoff, and there is evidence that the rate of decline of the Lake's clarity is decreasing.

Still, it is not outside the realm of possibility that we will fail – that the Lake will lose its clarity and the non-native species will spread and take over and the character of the Lake will change dramatically if not in our lifetime, then in our children's lifetimes, and that the impact of such a decline would not be much less impactful than the disaster in the Gulf.

The one thing we have that the states bordering the Gulf of Mexico don't have is an interstate compact that established an agency to be accountable for the clarity of the Lake and the scenic beauty of the Basin. That agency is, of course, TRPA.

In the famous old saw, a camel is what you would get if a horse were designed by a committee, and for much of its 40-year history, TRPA has functioned like that metaphorical camel. Overseen by a Board of Governors many of whom do not live anywhere near the Basin, and many of whom have seemed to see their job as to protect the interest of their state against the other state, sometimes at the expense of their mission, the Agency has seemed at times (to use another old metaphor) like a librarian who thinks his job is to keep books on the shelves.

Others, including commercial interests, environmental organizations, and self-styled protectors of the Lake, have opposed TRPA, some saying the Agency doesn't do enough, some that it does too much, and all informed by agendas that have less to do with balancing nature's needs with human interests than with what would benefit them. A combination of PR from these narrow interests and the Agency's history of often ensnarling projects in red tape has given residents of the Basin a view of TRPA that is jaundiced at best.

Beginning with John Singlaub's appointment as Executive Director in 2004, and continuing or even accelerating with Joanne Marchetta's succeeding John last year, TRPA has been working hard not just to change its image, but to be more effective in its mission of balancing the "triple bottom line" – people, environment, and business. It's said that a reputation takes years to be established and can be destroyed in a minute. I think it's equally true that a bad reputation can be established in a minute and can take years to be changed. Because of this it's too easy for those individuals and groups who are reflexively opposed to TRPA in pursuit of their own agenda to rally public support for their views, even when those views are wrong or are supported by inaccurate data. TRPA is too often "guilty until proven innocent."

If Florida, Louisiana, et al., had had an agency like TRPA it's possible that the current disaster could have been averted. Maybe it's time we appreciated what we have in TRPA and gave the Agency's new direction a chance.

Bonanza Column 189 – The November Elections

Well, the primaries are over and the threat of no seaplane landings on the lake has been repelled, so now we can get down to the serious business of summer, which may have, however tentatively, arrived. Schools are out, the tourists are arriving, and Independence Day is on the horizon.

Still, though, it is an election year, one that is shaping up in an interesting way. The media wisdom about anti-incumbent rage mostly did not pan out in the primaries, though we won't have Jim Gibbons to kick around anymore. Who we will have is, of course, still up for grabs between Brian. Sandoval, and Rory Reid who is, at least for us in Northern Nevada, not exactly a household name. While I am constitutionally inclined to support Reid, I've been impressed with Sandoval when he was Attorney General and that he gave up a lifetime appointment to the Federal Bench to run for Governor is a strong statement, though what that statement is remains to be seen.

More interesting to me is the race for the U.S. Senate. I've said it before and I will continue to say it, Nevada would have to be crazy to trade the most senior position in the Senate for electing what will be one of the most junior Senators in that body. Wherever you stand on Harry Reid's national leadership, there is not denying the facts that he has brought jobs to the state, been proactive on behalf of our senior population, and held Yucca Mountain at bay. If you don't like Reid, put your dislike on hold for as long as it takes to review his actual accomplishments, then see if you want to give up that level of influence for our state.

Then look who you'd be giving it up to get. I can't imagine the Reid campaign would have been unhappy had Sue (chickens for doctors) Lowden had won the primary, but they've got to be ecstatic about Sharron Angle. While she is the darling of the tea party crowd, even if you are a tea partier again set that aside for a few minutes and look at what (besides cutting taxes, which she'll hardly be in a position to do) Ms Angle has publicly advocated – from making alcohol illegal to cutting Social Security, to less (yes, less!) regulation for the banks and oil companies that have been running rampant over the economy and the environment.

Finally, I agree with Jim Clark that it's time for a change in the Washoe County District Attorney's office, though at the end of the day we will probably disagree about who to replace him with, DA Gammick seems to think his job is to stall and obfuscate rather than to execute on the court's decisions in the matter if Incline's tax overpayments. It strikes me as very strange that the chief legal officer of the County seems to think it is his job to use legal chicanery to subvert what the courts, through due process, have found to be the appropriate legal action.

Lord Acton famously said "power corrupts," and for the most part we think of this as moral corruption. Officials of the Minerals Management Service cavorting with oil company executives comes to mind as an example. But there is another, more pernicious form of corruption that occurs when highly placed officials forget who they work for. When corporate executives put profits ahead of the public good (think BP) or when an elected official like Gammick thinks it is his job to protect the county's coffers rather than execute the office to which he was elected, it seems to me that that is as corrupt as any of the other actions.

The question to be asked of the candidates for DA in November election is "do you intend to execute the courts' orders with regard to refunding tax overpayments from IV/CB?"If you are not satisfied with Gammick's response, I recommend to your attention Roger Whomes – he has stated that he is on our side, so let's give him a chance to prove it;

Bonanza Column 188 – Trotsky Was Killed with an Ice Axe

I knew a guy who, back in the '60's used to sell encyclopedias door to door (remember door to door salespeople?). All the salesmen would get together about once a week to play poker, and among them was a guy named Fred, who was a Communist, and not just a Communist, but a Trotskyite, and Trotskyite Communism was about all Fred talked about. Consequently, particularly during poker games, Fred was pretty quiet, because while he knew a lot about his favorite subject, it's pretty hard to work into the conversation at a poker game.

Well, at one of these poker games, the talk turned to people's upcoming vacations, and one of the fellows mentioned he was going camping. As will happen in idle conversation, there ensued a kind of free association, that brought the talk around to winter camping, and from there to the equipment you need for winter camping, and one of the guys mentioned that the most important thing to bring for winter camping was an ice axe. At which point, Fred joined in the conversation, saying "and Trotsky was killed with an ice axe!"
My point is that when you have a particular point of view, you can find a way to use almost anything to bring it up. For example, on the Bonanza's web site this week, the crime log is headlined "Latest Incline crime log includes man cited for stealing a salad." Now anyone who's read this newspaper for any amount of time knows that the Crime Log includes a heavy dose of whimsy – for years now, rather than just listing the crime report, the paper has included some humor – not at the expense of reporting serious crimes, but as a way of lightening it up a bit with what I would call some small-town flavor.

So in this week's report, at the very bottom, after some straightforward reports of some serious incidents, there was the eponymous story of a fellow who had stolen a salad from a convenience store. This is where some of our local "Freds" come in. One commenter on the Bonanza's site cited this headline as proof that the Bonanza doesn't know what journalism is about. Another, in a stretch worthy of Plastic Man (remember Plastic Man?) tied this to the Bonanza's supposed endorsement of IB (though there has been no such endorsement).

Well, it just goes to show you that no attempt at a good deed goes unpunished. The Bonanza tries to retain a "local" flavor and to represent all sides of living here in what Joe Tahoe used to call Tilted Village. Jean Eick does a yeoman's (yeoperson's? yeowoman's?) job of reporting on the community-minded activities and social life of the village, Mac Avoy Layne, the ghost of Mark Twain contributes his unique take on events, Jim Clark and I try to present some aspects of political life here, and the news reporters focus on local events of moment. The Crime Log is kind of like the listing of births at the local hospital that my home-town paper ran every day – just a way of keeping people up on what's happening.

C'mon, Fred(s), lighten up. Serious crime and incidents get covered in the news – arrests, indictments, convictions, ranging from assault to murder, from embezzlement to fraud. You don't have to like it, and I don't know anyone who likes 100% of it, and lest you consider this self-serving, I write a volunteer column here – I have nothing to do with the rest of the paper except to read it as you do, but I think that overall, given the economic and political realities in which they have to work, the folks at the Bonanza do a pretty fair job, including giving the "Freds" among us ample opportunity to swing their particular hammer at anything vaguely resembling what they consider a nail.

Bonanza Column 187 (rev.) – The Technicality Generation

Dear Readers: It turns out that my original Bonanza column posted 5/31, violated the Paper's policy of not publishing direct attacks on candidates within a couple weeks of the election, so I've had to write a new one. I'll re-post my column on Dick Gammick after the primary, assuming he is voted the GOP candidate for Washoe County DA. So you get a bonus column this week. Thanks for reading.

Ed

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

In a recent op-ed in the New York Times, Larry Pressler, a former Republican senator from South Dakota, made a convincing case for the idea that people around his and my age, who were draft-eligible during the Vietnam War, created what he called "The Technicality Generation." In the article, he explained that, for many of us, we avoided being called up using technicalities in the law (student deferments, faked physical or psychiatric disabilities, etc.) while cloaking our aversion to serving in a pretense of idealism – being morally against that war or all wars. He contrasts this with people who (like himself) opposed the war but served when called and others who opposed the war and either left the country or maintained Conscientious Objector status.

Pressler's point is not really about what anyone did or didn't do then – it's actually more important than that. Psychologists have long been aware of the phenomenon called cognitive dissonance – the uncomfortable feeling caused by holding two contradictory ideas. Studies of this phenomenon since the 1950's have concluded that people are driven to reduce dissonance by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors, so that the two ideas come into harmony with each other (think Aesop's fable of the fox and the "sour grapes"). In the Vietnam Draft case, if a person holds himself to be a moral human being and at the same time knows he used the law to avoid serving (and as a result someone who was less equipped to use the law served in his stead), he will have to find a way to justify or rationalize his behavior. Pressler says, and I agree, that many people used the "letter of the law" as this justification. Technically
they did nothing wrong, so their view of themselves as moral is undisturbed.

As Pressler points out, many of these people, who evaded service while falsely claiming idealism are now leaders in government and elite institutions, and, he goes on, "the concept of using legal technicalities to evade responsibility has been carried over to playing with derivatives, or to short-changing shareholders. Once my generation got in the habit of saying one thing and believing another, it couldn't stop."

As an aside, I want to be clear that neither Pressler nor I are painting all those who did not serve as hypocrites, but in his experience as in mine, there were plenty of our classmates who espoused idealism in public but who, in private, would unself-consciously admit that they did not want to take the time from their academic or career development or just plain did not want to go in harm's way. Eventually they began to believe their own hypocrisy and many came to believe that their "idealism" made them superior to those who did serve, and it is that resolution that is what Pressler refers to as "a deeply insidious thing" that too many in our generation did and got away with.

So we have the current spectacle of BP, Halliburton, et al. hiding behind the letter of the law and evading responsibility, and locally we have Washoe County manipulating the legal system to avoid refunding what court after court have ruled were over-collections of taxes here in Incline, environmental groups trying to block legitimate improvement projects, and on and on.

It's time to put a stop to the antics of "the technicality generation." The Western tradition of the rule of law has always made clear the distinction between the letter and the spirit of the law, going back to King Solomon's demonstration ("cut the baby in half") of the difference and before. Laws and regulations are a means to an end, not an end in themselves – they are there to ensure equality and "liberty and justice for all." Einstein said that "all means are but a blunt instrument unless they are infused with a living spirit." The letter of the law taken by itself is indeed blunt and, one might add, cold. When the law is infused with the living spirit of compassion, justice, and equality –t he values we will celebrate on Independence Day when we celebrate the founding of this great experiment in democracy, it can prevent the kind of disasters we have seen over the past ten years of so. If we continue to be "technically correct" without being morally centered as well, I can't help but recall with dread the old proverb: If we don't change our direction, we're liable to get where we're headed.

Bonanza Column 187 – The Washoe County DA

This column began some years ago as a point-counterpoint between Jim Clark and me, representing the right and left, respectively. We quickly discovered, however, that while Jim and I may disagree on political issues on the State and National level, more often than not we are pretty close on local matters.
In his column last week, Jim asserted that it's time for a change in the Washoe County District Attorney's office, and on this one I couldn't agree with him more, though at the end of the day we will probably disagree about who to replace him with, Jim and I are of one mind that Dick Gammick should go. (Though by the way, Jim, it's the Black Knight in Monty Python who keeps getting limbs hacked off and keeps on coming, proclaiming "I'm alright!" The French Knight stays in the castle and hurls first imprecations ("Your parents were silly people" and then a cow.)
Despite Jim's weak knowledge of the Monty Python canon, he's quite right about DA Gammick, who seems to think his job is to stall and obfuscate rather than to execute on the court's decision, no matter how many times the various courts tell him he must. It strikes me as very strange that the chief legal officer of the County seems to think it is his job to use legal chicanery to subvert what the courts, through due process, have found to be the appropriate legal action.
Lord Acton famously said "power corrupts," and for the most part we think of this as moral corruption. Officials of the Minerals Management Service cavorting with oil company executives comes to mind as an example. But there is another, more pernicious form of corruption that occurs when highly placed officials forget who they work for. When corporate executives put profits ahead of the public good (think BP) or when an elected official like Gammick thinks it is his job to protect the county's coffers rather than execute the office to which he was elected, it seems to me that that is as corrupt as any of the other actions.
It's time for the courts to put an end to this foolishness and dismiss these transparent attempts to stall the process. I know the County will take a financial hit from having to provide the refunds, but we in Incline, to whom the refunds are due, have absorbed our own financial hit for years as the County Assessor systematically milked the supposed Incline cash cow for the County's benefit. It's also time for the County to recognize that, like the explorer who was captured by cannibals and bled for their ceremonies, we are tired of getting stuck for the drinks. If you look at the rate of short sales and foreclosures in IV/CB, at the number of properties for sale, at the growing vacancies of commercial space, we are at least as hard-hit by the economic turmoil as the rest of the County, and while I for one don't mind paying my fair share, if I'm going to do more than that, I'd like it to be by my choice.
I sincerely hope that DA Gammick will be defeated in the primary next week. Either way, the question to be asked of candidates for the November election is "do you intend to execute the courts' orders with regard to refunding tax overpayments from IV/CB?" Hopefully we will have two good candidates to whom we can direct this question. If, however, one of the candidates is Dick Gammick, I recommend to your attention Roger Whomes – he has stated that he is on our side, so let's give him a chance to prove it;

Huffington Post Column 19 – What Will We Learn from the Gulf Oil Spill?

The tragedy of the Gulf oil spill has, predictably, raised cries from environmentalists to end offshore drilling once and for all, with corresponding escalation of "drill, baby, drill" from those who would oppose motherhood if environmentalists came out for it.

I'm no fan of offshore drilling – or of oil as our primary energy source. Experiences prior to the Gulf such as Santa Barbara, the Exxon Valdez, etc., make it clear to me that as long as we are dependent on oil, foreign or domestic, there will inevitably be environmental damage.

Most endeavors entail an element of risk, no matter how well they are managed. Despite that, after the Challenger disaster in 1986, NASA instituted a "Zero Defect" program and maintained a flawless safety record until relaxed vigilance led to the Columbia's destruction in 2003. Still, 17 years is an impressive run, by and large. By contrast, the Mariner Group documented a history of some 120 oil spills worldwide between 1967 and 2004 and about a billion gallons spilled since 2000. It's hard to assess these data without comparing it to the total amount of offshore drilling, but the raw amount spilled and number of spills seems undeniably consequential. That combined with the geopolitical results of our dependency on foreign oil is sufficient to persuade me that we need to accelerate our research into alternative energy sources.

But evidence is mounting that the BP Deepwater Horizon spill may have been the result of negligence and corner-cutting both by BP and by some government agencies, and if that is the case, it takes it out of the realm of accidents and into that of criminal liability. While it will take some time for a full investigation, and current priority is rightly on stopping the undersea gusher, the presumptive evidence is mounting. Whistle blowers are coming forward who suggest that BP knew of potential problems and ignored them, up to just before the blowout. BP's estimate of the damage have been consistently well below those of government and independent assessors, and a pattern of buck-passing is already well under way.

If, as seems likely, it is the case that BP was negligent and/or attempted to cover up or dodge their accountability, it seems to me that several actions are called for: First, Congress should immediately rescind the cap on liability judgments – if BP turns out not to have been negligent or is not liable, this will do no harm, but if they are, it is a necessary protection for families in the Gulf who have lost income, property, and even lives to the spill and its aftermath . Second, the Federal Government should vigorously pursue criminal charges against all concerned, and should demonstrate once and for all that it is no longer in thrall to Halliburton, big oil, or anyone else. Finally, the administration should vigorously clean its own house, particularly in the Department of the Interior, particularly the corruption in the Minerals Management Service.

Most importantly, though, we must derive from this colossal failure lessons learned and put into action that are commensurate with the loss of life, property, and environmental security. We have available numerous alternative sources of energy that, while none of them is perfect, are cleaner and safer than fossil fuels. Wind, solar, and even nuclear (to the horror of my environmentalist friends) seem preferable to me and would free us of the political and environmental difficulties inherent in what the former President termed our "addiction to oil," an addiction that is fueled by big oil and its ability to corrupt elected officials and government agencies.

Bonanza Column 186 – Memorial Day 2010

When I was a kid, growing up in the Adirondacks, it was called Decoration Day and in addition to a parade and a day with no school, it was observed by decorating the graves of war dead with flowers. In our town, the war dead went back to the Revolution, and included a number of graves of Civil War veterans, World War One soldiers, and most poignantly in those days when we could still remember it and we knew people who fought and some who died in World War Two, that recent war as well.

In 1967 it was officially renamed Memorial Day and moved from the traditional May 30 to the last Monday in May, but it remains what it was – a time for a nation that has not fought a war on its home soil since 1865 – and so could easily distance itself from the wars it has and does fight – to pause and remember those who fought and died to give us that luxury.

Patriotism, support for the military, and honoring the dead and missing has, sadly, become a partisan issue in recent years. One side stakes a proprietary claim to these virtues and the other has become accustomed to being on the defensive about it. That's both a shame and a sham. No ideology, neither end of the avian spectrum from hawks to doves has the rights to love of country or to appreciation of the sacrifices our military people, past, present, and future make. A person can hate war in general or any given war in particular, but that's about war and conflict as a means of resolving differences, not about love of country and certainly not in any way related to how they feel about the people who, voluntarily or by conscription, fight the wars that are waged.

In our community we have a very active group of veterans that spans the eras from WW 2 to Afghanistan – men and women who served in peace and in war and who continue to serve by looking after each other and veterans who are less fortunate than they are. We also have a local firm that makes it their business each Memorial Day to see to it that there is a community observance to honor veterans and remember the fallen and missing. This year that community observance will be combined with a celebration of the anniversary of our community's founding, making an entire day of activity on Saturday, followed by the veteran's association holding a dinner.

In front of the high school in my home town there was a statue of a World War One doughboy, weary, exhausted. Engraved on the base of the statue were the words "Lest We Forget," and at the cemetery each Memorial Day someone would read the most famous of the Poems that came out of that war, John MacRae's "In Flanders Fields." I always recall the closing lines of that poem: "If ye break faith with us who die/We shall not sleep, though poppies grow/In Flanders fields."

I for one would like to see a return to Memorial Day being more than simply the "official beginning of Summer" – to its being the holiday when we remember MacRae's admonition and Lincoln's words at Gettysburg, "that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

Huffington Post Column 18 - To the Tea Party - It's Not Your Country

In the late 1950's I attended and then worked at a Jewish camp in the Delaware Water Gap area where New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey come together. Near the camp was a town that, we were told, was the headquarters (national or local I'm not sure) of the German-American Bund, a pro-Nazi organization, during the war. In that town was a hotel that explicitly refused to serve Jews and with which we made great sport of going to and getting thrown out of.

 

That was, as I said, in the late '50's. In 1964, the Civil Rights Act became law in the United States, and what was legal in 1958 became illegal. Like it or not, that hotel would serve Jews, African-Americans, and anyone else that came through its doors, and, I believe, the US became a better place for that.

 

All of this came up for me as I watched Rachel Maddow interview Rand Paul after his primary victory in Kentucky (see the interview here). In what may have been one of the best TV interviews ever, Rachel, for 15 minutes, without interrupting or being rude, without raising her voice or being in any way unpleasant, asked one question: "Do you believe stores and restaurants should be allowed to deny service based on race, gender, sexual preference, etc.?" She asked it in as many different ways she could, and tried to get an answer from Dr. Paul who bobbed and weaved in an equal number of ways, doing anything he could other than answering the question yes or no.

 

I don't know much about Rand Paul. He's a physician and is the son of Libertarian Ron Paul. He ran in the Kentucky GOP primary to run for Sen. Jim Bunning's seat, and won the primary by 23% over his closest opponent, running as a "Tea Party" candidate. He began his acceptance speech after the primary victory by saying "I have a message from the Tea Party – we've come to take our country back," leavin very little doubt as to where he stands and whom he represents. In fact, he mentioned the Tea Party nine times and Kentucky only once in his four-minute speech.

 

So I don't think it's a leap to go from Paul's evasiveness on the subject of discrimination in public accommodations to the Tea Party's being populated overwhelmingly by white people, to a concern for a return to the bad old days that had Rebers Hotel refuse service to me and my fellow counselors.

 

It would be way too ironic if the election of an African-American President is the stimulus for undoing fifty years of progress in Civil Rights, but I really can't account for the sudden and virulent resurgence of the Radical Right any other way. Granted, best estimates of the Tea Party's membership puts it at between 15 and 20% of the electorate at most, and even Mitch McConnell, no mean rightie in his own right, opposed Paul's nomination, and mainstream Republicans (whatever that means) like Michael Steele and Karl Rove (did I just say Karl Rove is mainstream?) haven't rushed to defend him. Still, I find it worrisome.

 

The bottom line is I don't buy that the country is theirs to take back, unless by "take back" they mean back to the days of the Bund and the KKK. That's not the country that my parents emigrated to in the 1920's, and it's not the country I grew up to believe in, even growing up in those same bad old days. We have a teacher teaching geometry using angles for assassinating the President as his case in point, we have the President being burned in effigy in Wisconsin, but I refuse to believe that this is any more powerful a lunatic fringe than was the Bund in its effort to vilify FDR ("President Rosenfeld") and to get the US to either stay out of the war in Europe or to enter it on the Nazi's side.

 

I have a message for Rand Paul and the Tea Party: "It's not your country, and we, the true heirs of Jefferson and Lincoln, aren't giving it up." November is the election that counts, and we need to make it a clear statement to the bullies on the Right that they are not in charge.

 

Bonanza Column 185 – Trustees, not Representatives

Before I get to this week's subject, a personal note. Very often when I'm out and about in the community, people will tell me that they like my columns, or even that while they don't always agree with me, they appreciate the way I approach my topics. On the other hand, there are people who post on the Bonanza website and are just insulting – my favorite is the person who said "no one cares what you think, Ed" (well, you did – enough to read and comment). Sometimes people will say I don't have my facts straight – when they correct something I got wrong, I appreciate it, but mostly they just make the accusation, which suggests to me that (a) they don't like the facts I cite or (b) they don't know the difference between facts and interpretations. In any case, thanks to all of you who read thoughtfully. For the others, be assured, I'm not going anywhere. Live with it.

Now to business: With the primary and the election coming up, it seems worthwhile to me to review some things about the IVGID Board of Trustees.

First of all, there's that term "Trustees." A trustee is "a … person to whom property is legally committed to be administered for the benefit of a beneficiary." There's something important to notice there – a trustee administers on behalf of the beneficiary. They don't represent the beneficiary and they're not accountable to the beneficiary. The IVGID Board is charged with administering the assets of the District, but they're not our representatives. – we get to elect them every two years, and so if we don't feel they're operating for our benefit, we can replace them, and as public officials they are required to give us the opportunity to be heard on issues we're concerned about, but if, in the last analysis, they decide that what is going to benefit the District has them act contrary to what some or many people want, they not only have the right to do that, but they have a legal obligation to do that.

A representative, for example in Congress, on the other hand is supposed to do just that – represent the views of his or her constituents. We can't all be there to vote on the laws, so we elect someone to represent us. Since this is a democratic republic, the majority rules, and so it's not unreasonable for a congressperson to represent the majority view in his or her district, perhaps to the detriment of the minority. That's pretty much what democracy is about – the rule of the majority, with the courts there to watch to protect the rights of the minority if the representatives go against the founding principles of the republic.

So what we are electing in November is Trustees, not Representatives. Years ago, the people who then lived in the area decided that a GID was the form of government they wanted, and instituted it. Since then many people living here have tried to change that to a different form of government – a town, a county – that would expand the purview of the governing body beyond water, sewer, trash, and recreation and would provide for a governing body that would be more accountable as representatives, but so far that hasn't gone anywhere.

So when we judge an incumbent like Gene Brockman or any of the aspirant candidates, we should judge Gene's record and the statements and proposals of all of the candidates based on what the job is – to hold our community assets in trust and to be good stewards – to administer them for our benefit. One measure of stewardship is that a good steward leaves the assets entrusted to him or her more valuable than they were when the steward took office. When I hear about so-called "financial conservatism" that sounds a lot like "don't spend any money," I wonder if that will leave the community's assets more valuable. When I look at the Trustees spending money to fight lawsuits that would devalue our beaches, I see them doing their job.

Last week's Bonanza's "Word on the Street" asked "Does the IVGID Board Represent you?" With all due respect to my colleagues, I think this was the wrong question – I would have asked "Does the IVGID Board Do a Good Job of Caring for the Community's Assets?" That's the question. Now, on June 8 and in November, let's answer that question the only way that matters – at the ballot box.

Bonanza Column 184 – IVGID Candidates and a Quick Note on the Governor

Last Monday's IVGID Candidate Forum sponsored by the Chamber of Commerce and the Bonanza was, overall, very informative and well done. Most of the six candidates (the June 8 primary will eliminate two) for the two open seats were thoughtful and conducted themselves well, keeping to the issues and the questions put to them and refraining from attacking each other.

Some themes emerged from the questions and answers. One obvious concern was finances – IVGID has an aging infrastructure that will cost money to repair, and this raises concerns and questions about where the money is going to come from, etc.

It was clear that most of the candidates had done their homework and they were able to answer some complex questions pretty cogently. Because questions were formulated in advance, mostly by Bonanza readers with some by Bonanza staff, many addressed candidates' previous statements and positions, and here in some cases the candidates acquitted themselves less well. Particularly this early in the game I don't expect candidates to be thoroughly versed in the minutiae of the IVGID budget etc., but if a candidate has made it a plank in their platform to improve something, I think it's reasonable to expect them to provide some specifics on how they will do that, and in this some of the candidates' answers were woefully insufficient.

There was one trend I found disturbing on a couple of levels. It's one thing, and I think it's fair game, to run against the record of the current Board of Trustees – to cite, for example, some instances where you think they have spent money unwisely and to say how you would have handled it. I don't think, however, that it's fair or wise to run against the IVGID staff. It's easy to criticize, but the staff works under the Board's direction. In my experience the IVGID staff are to a person hard-working, dedicated, and competent, and where the candidates are concerned the staff are not in a position to defend themselves. More importantly, candidates, if you are elected you will be working with this staff – are you sure you want to start off in an antagonistic relationship with them?

Some minor fuss has been made of one candidate's mention of the General Manager's salary and the budget item for IVGID to provide the GM with a vehicle every few years. Again, if you want to get people's attention, it's easy to do that by talking about money, but both items are, in my view, specious. The GM makes as much as the Governor of Nevada – so what? He also makes orders of magnitude less than officers in the private sector who manage smaller organizations and smaller budgets and who have a lot fewer resource constraints. Of what possible relevance is the comparison to the Governor. A company car is not at all unusual as a benefit for someone whose job is 24/7 and takes him all over the district. Most companies and agencies consider it more economical than trying to figure out how to reimburse such an official for use of his private vehicle.

The point, candidates, is this: tell us what you're for, not what you're against. Offer solutions, not criticism or problems. If there are areas you think you can make work better for us, the residents whose assets you propose to hold in trust, tell us how, and be specific. Don't get sucked into the temptation to just criticize and complain – we have enough of that around this community; let's hear how you'll make it better.

●●●

On another quick note, Governor Dim Gibbons seems to have stepped in it again. He took an answer that his opponent, Brian Sandoval, gave to an inane interview question some years ago, took it out of context, and is trying to use it to label Sandoval an anti-Semite. I guess the guv's getting desperate. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see Gibbons as the GOP candidate – I'm a Rory Reid supporter – but really, Sandoval is very good and would be a better governor than Gibbons has been on his best day, and he doesn't deserve this level of mud-slinging.

HuffPo Column 17 – Who’s the Bigger Threat: Shahzad or McCain and Lieberman?

After 9/11 we heard from a great many public figures that if we changed our way of life, if we allowed that incident to cause us to live in fear, "the terrorists will have won." Now almost ten years later, it seems that, in the minds of many on the right, the terrorists have, by that definition, won.

In the wake of the failed Times Square car bomb, we have heard from John McCain, Joe Lieberman, and many others on the right that Faisal Shahzad should not have been given his Miranda rights, that he should be tried by a military tribunal, that the FBI and NYPD should have deferred to the intelligence community in the investigation, etc. Given the apparent lag between his being put on the no-fly list and his boarding the airplane at JFK, we can expect to hear more justification for profiling, etc.

Let's assume, as seems very likely, that Faisal Shahzad did all the things he is accused of having done – and let's assume that he did so with training and some sort of support from terrorist groups in Pakistan or Afghanistan. He is an American citizen and the US Constitution guarantees to anyone accused of a crime in the United States, regardless of citizenship, the presumption of innocence, the right to due process, etc. What McCain, Lieberman, and the others are saying, in effect, is "damn the Constitution; when we are in danger, all that goes by the boards." If we buy that, then the terrorists will, indeed have won.

Bear in mind that this is not your father's war. In the World Wars, in Korea, even in Vietnam, the issue was occupation of territory. World domination would go to whichever power occupied (and therefore ruled) the largest area of the world. The goal of the so-called Islamic Fundamentalists (and any serious student of Islam will tell you they are neither) is not primarily to occupy territory, it is to destroy any way of life, any view of the world that is not in accord with theirs. They want to destroy the State of Israel not so they can occupy that sliver of land, but to strike a blow to the heart of Judaism. They have no designs on occupying the United States – they want to undermine the Western way of life – freedom, equality, democracy – and they believe that if they can fatally wound those principles in the US, the rest of the West will fall with us.

Given that, those on the Right who call for dealing with Shahzad, the underwear bomber, and others by extra-constitutional means are playing right into their hands, Guantanamo, waterboarding and other "extraordinary methods," rendition, all work perfectly for the terrorists. If I were Osama bin Laden I would not see the Times Square bomb as a failure – sure, if it went off, thousands of people would have been killed and damage would have been done; maybe Shahzad would even have got away; but none of that would do the damage to America that would be done if we listen to the chicken hawks on the Right and abrogate the Constitution.

The United States Constitution is the charter document of democracy in America and a model of what is possible for the world. Notwithstanding the places where we fall short of its ideals and principles – notwithstanding Arizona, Goldman Sachs, the Tea Parties, and the lunatic fringes on the Right and the Left, it is what makes us who we are, and we go outside the boundaries of that charter at our peril.

So who is the bigger threat to the American way of life? An inept 30-year old loser who could barely find his ass with both hands if you spotted him a cheek or two US Senators who rose to be candidates for President and Vice President of the United States who publicly call for disregarding the Constitution?

Bonanza Column 183 – STAR Follies!

I go to Star Follies every year to support our schools and to enjoy it – I never intend to write about it and every year I do because I can't not. It is just about the best thing that this community has to offer.

Over the past couple of months I've spent two weeks in New York at a program for business executives that has as its purpose nothing less than a complete reinvention of who its (already very successful) participants are being in the world. The methodology used is not new to me – I've been working with it in one form or another for about 30 years. What is different is that the methodology of personal transformation is combined with that of the theater. The designer of the program has a long and successful background as an acting coach, and she has brought together some of the finest acting coaches and actors around – people you would know if you watch TV.

In that program I watched as executives who have never had a thought of being on stage took on an assigned project – a song or reading – that they were to perform, with coaching, at the level of a Broadway performance, and I saw them do it – the last evening of the program was in a theater and they performed – brilliantly and movingly. I performed myself and it was a life-changing experience.

So when I went to the Follies this year I watched the performances through the eyes of one who knows what it takes to get up on stage and get way far outside your comfort zone, and I was just knocked out. My purpose here is not to review the Follies – I'm not a critic or a reviewer, and there's no point anyhow. Unlike a Broadway performance, this one is new – new material, new cast, new everything every year. But as someone whose first love was acting and directing, I can't let something as remarkable as this go without comment.

I want to appreciate the great work by everyone involved. Sure, you could say, they lip-sync. But let me tell you from personal experience, if you're not a natural dancer, choreography is much harder than singing or acting, and these folks were step-perfect as well as great in their acting and their lip-syncing. No surprise that the biggest group behind the scenes is the Choreographers.

And the kids. My oh my, the kids – from 5^th grade through high school they were amazing. Please – don't talk to me about sullen, withdrawn teenagers. These kids were OUT THERE!!!! And the adults – teachers, principals, professionals, you name it. I won't single anyone out by name – it would be unfair to the others – but I'll make one exception. Gene Brockman was born to play Officer Krupke!

The folks who make the Follies happen – Producer Ron Stichter, Director Don Hertel, and particularly Assistant Director Kathie Goldberg who makes it all work, and the Board of Directors, the Crew, the school liaisons, and all the volunteers, thank you. And I would be remiss if I didn't mention Linda Offerdahl – the costumes were funny, topical and above all professional-grade.

I don't often claim to speak for others, but in this I'm confident that I am speaking for our whole community when I say Thank You, from the bottom of our hearts not only to this year's cast and crew, but to everyone who, for the past 11 years has taken part in this great event.. You give us hope, joy, and peace in our town, at least for a couple of nights, and you contribute to our kids – our future – immeasurably.

If you haven't gone to Star Follies, mark your calendar now for next year, and if you want to have a life-changing experience of going beyond what you think you can do, sign up to perform. You'll love it.

Bonanza Column 182 – The New Crime in Arizona - WWH

One of the great paradoxes of America is that the country as we know it is completely the product of immigrants and the descendents of immigrants. The Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Emancipation Proclamation, the National Anthem (and we could go on and on) were all conceived and written by immigrants or their descendents. Every single president and an overwhelming majority of legislators at the national, state, and local level were immigrants or descendents of immigrants Add to the list almost everything we can call "American Culture," whether that is regional or national, all our national treasures with the exception of the Statue of Liberty, our most treasured music and literature.

Early immigrants and their immediate descendents worked systematically to create an America that started in the 16^th Century, disconnected from anything that might have been here before European colonists arrived. Very little of Native American culture survives except for a few pockets, most notably in Alaska and Hawai'i, but unless you are 100% Native American in your family history, your people came here from somewhere – long ago or recently, but you are a descendent of immigrants.

The paradox comes when these same descendents of immigrants somehow claim for their own the mantle of "real Americans" and take it as their right and duty to be sure that this culture, which is an amalgam of all the cultural strains that have gone into it over the past 500 years, isn't contaminated by any current input. When they want to close the borders to people who, but for the grace of God and timing, could be their grandparents.

Like many Incline residents, I spend a lot of time in Arizona – working there. I don't find Arizonans, at least in Phoenix and Tucson where I hang out, to be very different from people I meet elsewhere in the country. Nonetheless, they seem to have a predilection for going out on some fairly loony limbs. They keep electing Joe Arpaio Sheriff in Maricopa County, for example, despite the fact that in any other state the only thing he'd be a candidate for is a rubber room. Now they've passed a law making it a state crime to be an illegal immigrant, requiring that immigrants carry proof of their legality at all times (I'm pretty sure these same folks would reach for their guns if anyone suggested a required national ID card), and allowing police to stop anyone at any time if they suspect they might be an illegal alien.

So now in addition to the nationwide unwritten law making DWB (driving while Black) cause for random stops and searches, we have in one state legislated WWH (working while Hispanic). We could, I suppose, write it off to one more bit of Arizona craziness – the Right has AZ, the left has CA, and leave it at that. But TV stations in Las Vegas (channel 5) and Reno (channel 4) are conducting online polls, and as of now both show majorities (very strong in LV and substantial in Reno) of those responding approving of the Arizona law.

Lots of folks aren't going to like my saying this, but just as poll taxes and "literacy tests" were ostensibly aimed at unqualified voters but were really attempts to keep any African-Americans from voting, and same-sex marriage bans are ostensibly to protect the "sanctity of marriage" but are really an expression of homophobia, the fuss over illegal immigration has at its roots anti-Hispanic racism. Yeah, yeah, I know, it's ostensibly about their not paying taxes (catch-22: they can't pay taxes because if they did we'd know they were here) and overtaxing services (which mostly they don't do for the same reason) but I don't buy it any more than I bought that the reason country clubs didn't allow Jews was because they didn't mix well and were pushy.

The Roman Empire operated on the principle that the way to world peace and order was to (a) conquer everybody else and (b) make them become Romans. It didn't turn out well for them and it's unlikely to turn out well for the US.

Bonanza Column 181 – Gibbons and the Tea Partiers

While there is a lot you can say about Governor Jim Gibbons, I don't think anyone could accuse him of being: smart, low-profile, or rational.

Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto correctly refused to join an ill-advised lawsuit filed by some states' attorneys general against the anemic health care reform bill passed by Congress and signed into law by President Obama. You don't need to agree with the bill to support Masto's logic in refusing – in the unlikely event that the other states' suit is successful, the results of that suit would apply nationwide including Nevada, so there is no reason to expend state resources. Gibbons, naturally, attacked Masto for doing her job and vowed to soldier on alone if need be. He has now started a fund to do that and named a Las Vegas attorney as special counsel to pursue the suit.

Gibbons is not, to my knowledge starting any funds to improve education, hire more teachers, prevent furloughs and outright layoffs of state employees, or for any other purpose that might actually benefit the state.

Instead, the Governor is grandstanding as part of his campaign for re-election. After all, even if the other states' suits were to win, how can he claim any credit for it or curry favor with the tea party crowd if he didn't visibly take action – never mind what's good for the state or where else he might spend his time on business that is actually needed. No, Gibbons, along with Sue Lowden, the massively unqualified candidate for Harry Reid's seat, is out there working the tea party circuit.

There is very little possibility that the Tea Party "movement" will be a major factor in any of this year's elections. A recent study by the Winston Group, a conservative-leaning polling and strategy firm run by the former director of planning for former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, found that the portion of the public that identifies with the Tea Parties is around 17%. 65% of Tea Partiers self-identify as "conservative" as compared with 33% of the electorate at large. 81% of Tea Party respondents expressed very little approval of Barack Obama's job as president, which exceeded disapproval levels held even by Republicans (77%) and conservatives (79%).

All this suggests that the Tea Party crowd is comprised predominantly of ultra-conservatives, and that despite their insistence that they are the "real Americans" who will "take their country back," they are in fact a fringe movement whose views are not shared wholeheartedly even by others who are with them on the right side of center. One has to question, then, the wisdom of Gibbons' aligning himself with the movement and with Lowden, whose record in business is already being exposed as at odds with her stated positions as a candidate.

The Tea Partiers, though, are right about one thing – it's time for a change. Gibbons and his GOP crowd have failed to lead in Nevada – we remain at the bottom of the heap in education, we have record unemployment levels, and are failing to attract new business to the state. Rory Reid, the leading Democratic candidate for Governor, is young and largely untested, but if you listen to what he has to say, there is at least the possibility of something different. His father, Harry Reid, is, of course also up for re-election to the Senate, and has done more for Nevada from Washington than Gibbons (and for that matter the ethically-challenged John Ensign) have come close to doing. Reid's seat is one area where we don't need, and can't afford change.

But as for Gibbons, remember the old saying – if we don't change our direction, we're liable to get where we're headed – and on almost any measure you can hold the Governor accountable for, where we're headed ain't pretty.

Bonanza Column 180 – Public Service or Indentured Servitude?

A recent letter to the Bonanza took the "spendthrifts" on the IVGID Board of Trustees to task for considering a 3 percent raise in salary for District staff, characterizing the salary and benefits of the staff as "generous."

I'm writing this from Hawai'i, where furloughs for state employees including teachers and librarians have resulted in cutbacks in services, closing of libraries, cuts in school hours for education and activities, and a general decline in public services, statewide. I suppose we could do that in IVGID – cut back on salaries and staff, have less frequent garbage pickup, close the rec center, tennis courts, and golf or skiing a couple of days a week, and generally skimp, but I'd be willing to bet almost anything that the same people that are complaining about the rec fee and staff benefits would demand that the level of services be maintained. You can't have it both ways.

Personally, I'm glad that we are able to provide what I think are adequately competitive compensation packages to IVGID staff – they provide outstanding services, are genuinely customer-centered, and are on the whole a cut above most municipal employees, and that goes from the folks who pick up the trash and keep the grounds to the executive level, in my experience without exception. IVGID has taken some steps to cut costs without diminution of services, e.g., by offering various food services to local restaurants and caterers if they want to bid for the opportunity to provide them. The General Manager and the staff have been appropriately cognizant of and conservative about needed renovations and improvements while being clear what would be lost if these are not done. I know something about management in both the public and private sectors, and I think IVGID does one of the better jobs I've seen of managing money, facilities, and people.

As I pointed out in last week's column, the facilities in the Village contribute both directly and indirectly to our property values, and to the quality of life here. The sentiment of a significant portion, maybe even a majority, of residents, against affordable housing makes it necessary to compensate District staff who cannot afford to live here for the added expense and inconvenience of having to commute. All told, I think the proposal to the Board of a 3 percent (i.e., cost of living) raise is reasonable and prudent.

Mostly, though, it's important to recognize that we can't have it both ways – we can't have world class facilities and services and at the same time cut back the way Hawai'i and California have done. We can't continue to pay those we consider "public servants" as if they were indentured servants and not lose them to the private sector – that goes for teachers, IVGID staff, police, and fire as well. After one of my columns on the future of IV/CB, one resident called and in all sincerity made the argument that we should not have anything but the most basic services, no businesses, and be a purely residential community like, for example, Sea Ranch. OK, I suppose that's one way to go, but I predict that if we go that way there will be no "here" here in twenty years or so, and then what would the bears do for food?

Huffington Post Column 13 – Political Dialogue: Too Important to be Hijacked

Writing about politics from a perspective that is pretty far left of Center, I frequently hear from readers on both sides of the political spectrum that things will not work politically in the US until everyone thinks as they do – they seem to feel that those they disagree with should be done away with in some way – deported, voluntarily leave the country, die, and then all would be right with the world.

There has always been this strain at the fringes of American politics and neither side has a monopoly on it. From time to time there have been movements to send the Irish back to Ireland, the Jews back to Europe, the Blacks back to Africa and the American Indians back to … well, no one's quite sure about that one. Notwithstanding that, these have always been the ideas of ideologues and extremists. The vast majority of Americans have, historically, been proponents of the sentiment attributed (perhaps wrongly) to Voltaire: "I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

It seems to me, though, that in recent years American political dialogue has degenerated into a war that has as its object the demolition of the other side. I think it is absolutely crucial that we nip this trend in the bud. So far this war has been mostly rhetorical, but recently the rhetoric has escalated to unwarranted insults ('you lie," "baby killer"), racial slurs, and homophobic slurs directed at members of Congress. And it seems to be heating up to the point of bricks through windows and assassination plots, and lest we forget, people on both sides have been injured or killed, though so far, thankfully, this has been rare. Nonetheless, it seems to be heating up.

Readers, apparently stung by my criticism of hypocrisy on the Right often accuse me of wanting the Right to disappear. On the contrary, I think that would be a very bad thing, just as bad as if the Left disappeared. In my work with corporations one of the key principles I teach, one for which there is clear scientific evidence, is that in order for any group to come up with ideas that are smarter than its smartest members would have come up with on their own, it must have a wide range of diverse viewpoints. I am convinced that one of the reasons that the US has been a consistent world leader in innovation, quality, human rights, standard of living, and on and on is that we have had a lively and vibrant dialogue among wide-ranging points of view.

Another principle of group intelligence is that the extremes cannot be allowed to hijack the debate. During the Vietnam War era, the anti-war left took control of the debate. While the view is not popular on the left, it is my firm belief that, despite the best of intentions, our taking over that debate from Nixon et al. had them resist all the more and thus prolonged the war and cost countless lives. This is not something of which I am proud – it is something I try to make up for in my life and in my writing.

Today the anti-government Right has an influence in current political debates that is, by all indications, all out of proportion to its actual numbers or popular support. Just as the Left in the 70's attracted all kinds of ideas that were irrelevant to being against the war – Leary's "tune in, turn on, drop out" comes to mind as do Kesey's Acid Tests and others – the anti-government Right finds itself in bed with the insanity of the birthers, racists, militia extremists, and a whole clown car of idiots and nutcases.

Just as the Left had to get itself straightened out in the post-Vietnam dialogue, it's time for those on the Right who know the value of the dialogue to retake control of it from the extremists, both those in the Tea Party movement and those in Congress. We need two sides or we will become very dumb indeed at a time when we need every ounce of intelligence and wisdom we can find.

Bonanza Column 178 – Boulder Bay and IVGID

I yield to no one about my credentials as an environmentalist. I have been a consultant to both the executives and Board of Directors of the Sierra Club, and consider myself to have been "green" before green was fashionable. This long-standing interest in and commitment to the environment makes the attitude of the League to Save Lake Tahoe, Tahoe Area Sierra Club, and other local groups toward the Boulder Bay project baffling to me.

In other parts of the country, environmental organizations seem to take a fairly rational view of the need to balance progress and change with environmental concerns. Unless there are clear indications that irreparable damage will be done with no compensating environmental benefit, these organizations, the Sierra Club among them, generally work with government and private interests to find acceptable solutions. The environmental organizations here at Lake Tahoe, however, seem to have as their objective to turn everything here back to a "natural" state and to oppose any change that does not simply remove people and human habitation.

TRPA has been very open to input on the Boulder Bay EIS – they have made many changes based on that input and are in the process of one more revision of the draft study. While I don't advocate making environmental or societal decisions based on public sentiment alone, it's worth noting that the input TRPA received was overwhelmingly in support of the project, particularly alternative C, and where substantive questions and objections were raised, TRPA has been responsive. Nonetheless, at what is probably the eleventh hour, a coalition of the League, the Sierra Club, the California Watershed Network and local groups of questionable provenance has come forward with objections, but no alternative solutions.

I question the provenance of the local groups because at least one of them, the North Tahoe Preservation Alliance, seems to have been formed for the express purpose of opposing the Boulder Bay project and has had a problematic relationship with the facts in its arguments. The others, "Friends of the West Shore," "Friends of Tahoe Vista," and "Friends of Crystal Bay/Brockway," are unknown to us and we have no indication of who they represent, how many they represent, or whether they know what they're talking about.

The Boulder Bay project, particularly alternative C, is a huge improvement over the current dinosaur on the property, which is an environmental disaster on almost every count you can think of. While the Wittenbergs are great people, I think it's extremely unlikely that they will level the property, plant grass, trees, and flowers, and stock it with Bambi-esque forest creatures. They are business people, and it is a given that they will run a business on the property. That being the case, they have done a terrific job of designing and redesigning a property and amenities that will be eco-friendly, down to plans for bicycles, car-sharing programs, shuttle service, etc., as well as health and wellness facilities and an aesthetically pleasant and non-intrusive design. But it seems nothing will satisfy our local environmentalists. If Roger Wittenberg were a spiteful man, which I know him not to be, he would say to hell with all of them and leave the current monstrosity in place. Thank heavens he's smarter than they are.

On another note, the IVGID budgeting process has been remarkably open and transparent. Still, they have done the unthinkable and are considering an increase in the rec fee, so naturally people are up in arms, with the shopworn argument "I don't use the facilities, why should I pay?" OK, listen carefully, here's why: whether you use the facilities or not, access to them significantly increases the value of your property. If they are not kept up or in some cases renovated, they will deteriorate and so will the value of your property. When you moved here you knew that part of what you were getting was a set of community amenities. Those require maintenance and upkeep. The Board and staff of IVGID are doing everything in their power to keep the budget process rational – let's try to keep the discussion of the process the same.

Bonanza Column 177 – The 2010 Elections

Along with Daylight Savings Time and March Madness, Spring brings with it (at least every other year) the beginning of election season.

While 2010 is technically an "off-year" election, this particular off year brings us some interesting and important choices. In Incline Village/Crystal Bay we will elect two IVGID Trustees, at least one of whom will be new to the Board, and statewide Nevada will elect or re-elect a Senator, a Governor, and most of the rest of the State government.

This is important because, even though we are stuck with John Ensign for another couple of years (unless the current ethics investigation results in his removal), we have the opportunity to unseat Governor Jim Gibbons and to return Harry Reid to the Senate for six more years.

Traditionally, turnout for off-year elections is low compared to Presidential years, and turnout for the primaries, which will be June 8 this year, even lower. This is a good year to make an exception to that rule given what is at stake.

It's too early to make judgments about most of the offices, but I think it's fair to say that there is the opportunity to make some important changes and also to keep some very good people in office. The field for the Governor's race is, as usual, broad and colorful. We have the hapless Mr. Gibbons running for re-election and a whole bunch of Republicans challenging him in the primary including the very well-qualified Brian Sandoval who gave up a lifetime appointment as a Federal Judge to try to unseat the Governor. On the Democratic side there is Rory Reid who, while not widely known in Northern Nevada, looks like a good choice as well.

I've written before in this space about the importance of returning Harry Reid to Washington. We have in Washington right now a junior senator who has shown so little personal integrity that he should resign, yet he refuses to. If we are foolish enough to defeat Reid, then Nevada will be represented by a brand-new junior senator and a senior senator who is under an ethical cloud. Why would we trade being represented by the most powerful member of the Senate for that? Reid has done a good job for Nevada, most recently in the areas of jobs and tourism, and we should retain him and find him a working partner who will do a better job than the feckless Mr. Ensign.

Locally we have Frank Wright of Crystal Bay running for State Senate. Apparently Mr. Wright finds no inconsistency in bringing suit against IVGID and running for public office himself. We'll see if the voters agree. And speaking of IVGID, we have Gene Brockman running for re-election and while most of the rest of the field have not distinguished themselves by local service, there is the surprising entry of Dennis Oliver into the race. Dennis will have to establish an identity for himself as an Incline resident that is separate from his job as spokesperson for TRPA, but if he can do that he could bring a fresh and important perspective to the IVGID Board.

So we'll see how it goes. The first milestone in the various races will be March 23, the last day for candidates who have filed to change their mind and remove their name from the ballot. Then for most races there is the primary election to narrow the field on June 8, after which the races will be on in earnest leading up to election day in November. Hopefully we'll see some real debate on the issues rather than partisan appeals, name-calling, and negative ads and we'll have the opportunity to do some good for our community, state, and the nation.

Bonanza Column 176 – IB Resolved

When I first heard about the IB program being planned for Incline's schools I was uncertain about my view of it. On the one hand it sounded like a good program – very good, actually; on the other hand I have worked with the AP program at HIS, particularly our nationally ranked We the People program, and was unsure of what value IB would add. So I set about talking to people on both sides of the issue and reading up on the pros and cons of IB, and I made no secret of my being undecided – in fact, I devoted several columns to it. I also partnered with the Bonanza to propose a community forum the ground rules of which were designed to ensure a debate on the merits with minimal unsupported opining. The group in favor of IB responded enthusiastically to this proposal and provided a surplus of potential panelists. The group against IB was nominally enthusiastic, but failed to propose a panel despite numerous concessions. In the process they accused me of being biased in favor of IB and, in demanding someone else moderate, called into question my fairness and integrity. At the end of the day, though, despite getting everything they asked for, they failed to take the field and the forum was cancelled. Now that same group wants to know "What do we need to do to stop the madness and have the community discussion that is so badly needed?" Huh?

Well, I've made up my mind. I am for the IB program in Incline schools. I'll tell you why in a minute, but indulge me in a short digression. I haven't been able to find who first said "a person is known by the enemies he/she makes," but I've always hesitated to subscribe to that idea. Still it's an appealing idea – Joe Lieberman infamously invoked it to justify his opposition to the public option – liberals were for it, and that was enough for him to go against it. I've found myself tempted by it in this IB debate. So much of the opposition to IB ranges from ignorant (it will compromise separation of church and state because it's a religion-based program – it must be – there are Baccalaureate Services in churches at graduation time) to ridiculous (it's a liberal plot to have the UN take over our schools in service of creating a world government to rule over the US) that I have to struggle not to just favor IB because it's opponents are either plain silly or so far out in the tea party sea of the Right that they can't see land. If you don't believe me, look at this column on line on www.tahoebonanza.com and read the comments. I mean, I don't read them but I guarantee they'll be there.

Now back to our story. Why am I coming down in favor of IB? Not, as you might think, because of its benefits at the High School level. I'm still not sold that it will add value where AP doesn't already. I see its greatest value at the Elementary level where the IB curriculum, including dual-immersion language programs, seems to me to be clearly superior to any other public school curriculum I've seen. It will send our kids to Middle and High School with a really solid educational foundation on which to move into AP, IB Diploma, or for that matter Technical or Business Programs, and it will give English Language Learners real skills and power in English and English native speakers the same foundation in Spanish. I think that's a really good thing, particularly given the data on the benefits of early language education and bilingualism on learning in general.

Brian Sandoval, a Republican candidate for Governor endorsed IB in a speech to local Republicans last week. Sandoval is a member of that endangered species, moderate Republicans, but he is clearly a Republican and a Conservative. Hopefully that will put the lie to the crazies who keep trying to pull a McCarthyesque red scare in opposing IB. The school district has said that IB is a done deal – it will be here. In that case, it seems to me it behooves us as a community to (a) learn the facts about it and (b) get behind it – the people we elect and those we pay to make decisions on education for our kids have given the opinion they are accountable for. Let's move on.

Bonanza Column 174 - ARC

For the past few years, I have had the privilege of working with some of the most dynamic and inspirational young people I have ever met. Year after year, participants in the ARC (Adventure, Risk, Challenge) Program amaze me with their courage, determination, and commitment to their future, their family, and their community.

 

ARC is a program for ELL (English Language Learner) high school students that combines summer leadership and literacy immersions in the outdoors with year-round mentoring and academic support. Working with students who lack access to enrichment of any kind, ARC has guided 80% of its graduates to pursue some form of higher education, a remarkable outcome for this population.

 

As part of their work, ARC participants prepare video essays on topics of concern to our community. This year's video essays will be presented by the kids at ARC's annual Food for Thought Tamale Dinner on March 13, 2010, from 6 to 10 p.m. at the North Tahoe Boys & Girls Club.

 

ARC participants' video essays are the result of the students' actively exploring and examining their personal lives, their families, and their neighborhoods to identify issues that directly affect them and their community. Over the course of the project, as students have explored critical concerns within our community, they have generated a rich collection of stories and have developed multiple literacy skills using digital media tools to express their voice and content through writing text and incorporating sound, images, and graphics.

 

ELL high school students in the Tahoe/Truckee region have a multitude of obstacles to overcome: they have identified literacy gaps, come from families living below the poverty line, and in many ways live in the margins of our community. They lack access to local resources due to language, transportation, and economic barriers. Many of their parents lack formal education, are ill-equipped to support their children's learning at home, and cannot help their children navigate the public school system. This results in academic failure, making higher education opportunities inaccessible. Students who fail high school lack incentive to further their learning through vocational or academic training, and have little chance for self-sufficiency. Essentially, there is no pathway to living wage careers that could ultimately break the cycle of poverty for the next generation.

 

ARC began in 2004 to address these significant barriers with a curriculum that incorporates the study of self, family, and community action, gearing participants toward meaningful civic contributions as they transition into adulthood. ARC links wilderness to academics, adventure to leadership, environmental science to literacy, and confidence to activism.

 

Like most programs of its type, ARC is continuously raising funds, both from foundations and from local sources. Events like the tamale dinner help, but they're not sufficient – if you or someone you know wants to support this worthwhile program, let me know and I'll see that they contact you.

 

The food at this dinner is great - homemade tamales, rice, and beans as well as soft drinks will be served at the dinner, with all proceeds benefiting the program.

 

Tamales can be ordered (by the dozen) in advance by visiting the ARC website (www.arcprogram.org) and downloading an order form. ARC participants have requested that guests bring two cans of food to support Project Mana, and in return, they will receive a free drink. The students also will be collecting spare change to send to Haiti. Immediately following dinner, they will premiere their video essays. This event is free and open to the public. I hope to see you there.