Andrew Hill is a fan of

83 Degrees

Create your Fan Badge

Not Dying This Week

Although it might seem odd to some, there's a certain sense of relief upon learning that one is not on the verge of death. In the past few weeks I've visited members of the medical profession for the first time in many years. At forty-six with a family history of heart disease and a personal run in with melanoma, I feared the worst.

At first, I was not convinced that this emerging attention to health matters was at all a good thing. Certainly , my mother was healthy as could be before they ran that MRI to see what her vertigo symptoms would reveal. Sure enough, there's an embolism on her brain that could pop at any second. Or never. That's not something I'd want to think about. In fact, for all they can tell, it's been there for years and years.

After the first visit, I had to start taking blood pressure medication, lose a lot of weight, stop exercising, come back for blood work and ponder the 'ridge' that the good doctor had discovered on my prostate. The blood work, of course, revealed that my 'PSA' (prostate's sick alright) test revealed what it is intended to reveal and prompted yesterday's visit to the urologist. (I scored a 3.7 out of 4.0 -- not bad if I were still in school.)

Now, why anyone in his right mind would become a urologist is beyond me. There are things that even gobs of money out not to incite. But anyway, Dr. Jellyfinger and I had an intimate moment while 'The Mrs.' waited outside the exam room. He could feel the ridge, but commented that it didn't seem like much of anything to worry about. Of course, he added, the only way to know for sure is to have a biopsy. That's my next stop.
Some Monday morning in September, I'll shuffle up to the outpatient surgical office her prefers and have twelve tissue samples taken. Twelve. Not one. Not even five. Twelve! I'll be sure to let you know how the rest of that day goes.

The moral of the story, I guess, is that one ought not visit the doctor unless one is prepared to hear bad news and visit more doctors. While ignorance surely can lead to an early demise, knowledge can sure as heck put a strain on whatever time one has left. Will I ever have pizza again?

First Monday of the Year

Themes of World History . . . what a day! Lots of smiles, yawns and quizzical looks. I did my annual "There is no contemporary event that can't be directly linked to World History" schtick today. Always a crowd pleaser as the kids rummage through their brains for something . . . anything . . . that happened in a historical vacuum. Again, no luck.

We also had some fun with "universal absolutes." Nothing like infanticide and disfigurement to get the attention of a room of sleep deprived 10th graders. In a few weeks, when they are back on a regular schedule, there will be lots to discover. Perhaps even a few will realize that the "least relevant course" in high school is, as I've told them, the one that will enrich their day-to-day lives in many, many ways.

We shall see.

Honduran President

So who are the good guys here? Is this another case of a liberal/progressive/socialist/Marxist (you pick) state being returned to the powers of internally sanctioned colonialism. A state in which the economically privileged act as overseers for the global industrialist class.

Memorial Day

No politics today. Just a simple thank you to those who have given their lives in service of our great nation. Whatever side one is on, may we all use today to remind each other that we are all, in fact, on the same side.

Democrats, Republicans and everyone in between and beyond have the same debt to the men and women who died and continue to die in the belief that those of us on the home front have the RIGHT to disagree -- even when we are wrong.

My Summer Vacation

Hmm . . . some things are best written about after they occur. Good thing this ain't one of 'em.

So far, my vacation has consisted of grading exams, writing comments, getting ready for summer school, prepping for in-law visits, worrying about money and feeling anxious about how all this unscheduled time is playing upon my peace of mind.

God, I can't wait for school to start.

Up and Running

After a months long hiatus during the midst of "election fever" I've returned to the blogosphere with words of wisdom. Well, maybe just words.

For example:

The stimulus package is being labeled by its opponents as a "spending package" although no member of the Republic Party has yet offered a manner in which a stimulus package can exist absent of spending provisions.

Rush Limbaugh has emerged as a de facto spokesperson for the Republic Party, thus assuring its complete and inevitable relegation to the fringe of American politics. Let us all just hope that the devil we know is NOT, in fact, better than that whom we have not yet met. (Although I must admit that it'll be tough to top El Rushbo's racist, fascistic rantings.)

My state, Florida, is now "blue." I'm not yet sure what that means. It's still a place of Confederate Flags and anti-immigrant sentiments. We have a Republic governor, a Republic-controlled legislature and a continuing love affair with all things regressive. I'm guessing the Kennedys will continue to visit the West Palm place infrequently.

Progress is a difficult phenomenon to quantify. Obama's election: progress. Florida voting for Democrats: progress . . . ? Rush Limbaugh emerging as a bona fide political figure: ?

LifeinSeminoleHeights: So much for the "straight talk express"

LifeinSeminoleHeights: So much for the "straight talk express"

. . . and now this

Never underestimate the lengths to which people will go to gain power. From the Clinton camp . . . a picture of Senator Obama in traditional Kenyan dress during a visit to that country during 2006. The best the Clinton camp can do is state that there are plenty of pictures of Senator Clinton in the native dress of the countries she has visited in the past.

Frankly, anything short of a denial confirms the Clinton campaign's initiation of this obvious attempt to portray Senator Obama as something other than American and something other than Christian.

Shame on you Hillary.

Obama's Patriotism Questioned?

It is sad to have to admit to this, but I am no longer surprised at the depths to which the radical right will go to discredit its opponents. Now, it appears, they are going to bring Senator Obama's patriotism into question.

Like the Christian who thinks wearing a big cross of gold about his neck makes him a good Christian, our fellow citizens on the right have convinced themselves and their sheep-like followers that wearing a lapel pin with an American flag emblazoned upon it makes one a patriot. Come again? How does sticking a piece of metal through a bit of fabric relate to one's commitment to the ideals of one's country? Are we so superficial that we actually buy into this garbage? I suppose next they will expose the lack of a magnetic, yellow "Support Our Troops" ribbon on his car as proof positive of the senator's subversive, anti-soldier intentions.

It is clear that symbols have come to replace the actual values for which they once stood. The American flag waving in the breeze above Guantanamo Bay no longer stands for opposition to torture and a commitment to the rule of law. The Christian cross has been subverted to stand for economic prosperity and a focus on often violent self-righteousness that would have horrified the humble, loving, impoverished founder of the sect. Even the quintessential symbol of American consumption and arrogance, the Hummer, is now being presented as a tool by which those wealthy enough to afford one can help the "little guy" in times of crisis. I'll bet there were oodles of Hummers in the 9th Ward during Katrina and helping to evacuate families during the recent wildfires in California. (I bet Obama even wants to increase the mileage these tools of salvation get!)

Expect more of this. Lots more. The "conservative" movement is ethically and politically bankrupt and has nothing to present as positive evidence for its claim to power. All that's left is for them to attack the ideals and commitment of those whom they hate so deeply. It's a dark time for America.

"Bush - McCain"

On the February 17th episode of NBC's Meet the Press during a discussion of the problems the Democrats face as they get closer to the convention without a definite nominee, Senator Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) used the phrase "Bush-McCain" to refer to the candidacy of the presumed Republican nominee, John McCain. Simply brilliant.

The more the Democrats can connect John McCain to George W. Bush, the better off they will be. Forcing McCain to distinguish himself from President Bush will reveal the essentially identical policy positions of the pair. I doubt very much that John McCain wants to focus on the fact that he would want more troops in Iraq and is more inclined to take military action against Iran. Similarly, it is doubtful that the senator from Arizona wants to focus too much on his willingness to blur the lines between church and state or trumpet his commitment to an overturn of Roe v Wade. No matter how one slices it, linkage to Bush will hurt McCain where he lives -- with the independents and the cross-over voters -- all of whom have had enough of the Bush family.

It will be interesting to see if the phrase catches on.

The Liberal Gun Nut

Who would have guessed that I, Mr. Liberal from "Up North," would have come to love handguns? I know, I know, it's shocking to me as well. In any case, the journey started, I suppose, many years ago with boyish curiosity about the mysterious power that guns posses. Laying dormant for years under a patina of knee-jerk anti-gun sentiments (now known for the anti-violence sentiments that they truly were) my interest re-emerged late last year.

Inexplicably, I started to research handguns on the Internet. Glock, Walther, Kel-Tec and SigArms became names with which I was intimate. Caliber was no longer a descriptive term used to define value, but a measurement of specific size and power. 9mm., .38, .40S&W, 357 Magnum. I knew what double-action, backstrap and 1911 meant. I entered a new world.

On Christmas morning, I opened a gift from Mary Beth to find a $35 gift certificate from Shoot Straight in Tampa. Not coincidentally, this particular amount was the exact price for a month's membership at the range. I was on my way. Being the cautious type, I thought I better get some lessons before I headed out to blow my fingers off -- or worse. So, Kelly (who also got a $35 gift certificate) and I signed up for an N.R.A. (yeah, that N.R.A.) course at The Indoor Shooting Company, a nearby range. (One nice thing about Florida is that with the liberal gun laws, there are gun stores and ranges all over the place.) After our lessons, I took my first trip to the range. I felt as if I had moved to a country where I didn't speak the language. Men, women, kids -- all buying, shooting and admiring guns! We're not in Boston anymore, Toto.

Anyway, to make a long story short, I LOVE handguns! I've only shot a few times, but I'm hooked. I'm not sure whether I want a Glock 19 (shown above) or the smaller Glock 26. In Florida, I can get a permit to carry the darn thing with me wherever I go. How cool is that? For my Concealed Weapon license, all I need do is take a course (done), get fingerprinted (doing next week) and pass a background check (do the words "been there, done that" mean anything to you?) As a teacher, I've been checked out so many times I feel like the library's copy of Harry Potter.

Perhaps I'll write more one day about the thinking that has gone into this dramatic turnaround, but for now, let's just leave it alone and scratch our heads regarding how to label a Kennedy-loving, Obama-supporting, 9mm packing, 45 year-old white male. If you think of anything that fits, let me know.

Endorsement: Obama

Obama-Clinton. Clinton-Obama. What's a Democrat to do? On the one hand, Hilary Clinton has a grasp of policy and politics rivaled by none (excepting, perhaps her husband.) On the other hand, Barack Obama presents the country with a chance for real change. Obama's electable. Hilary has high disapproval ratings. Obama lacks experience. Absent some fast-track genetic manipulation, there is no clear answer to the question.

I've lined up with the Obama movement for several reasons. First off, I think he can win. Convictions, expertise and loyalty are great, but if it all leads to defeat, it begs the question of their value. In a race between Clinton and McCain, McCain will be able to present himself as more experienced, more likeable, a break from the past (neither a Bush nor a Clinton) and male. That's right, male. Despite the nation's determination to embrace the notion of women in positions of power, the reality of a female Commander-in-Chief of the world's largest military doesn't pass muster with a large segment of the population. Hilary comes across has having all the negative qualities of a strong woman (domineering, vindictive, sharp-tounged) but few from the positive side of the register (protective, loyal, supportive.) In the end, the American people will choose McCain over Clinton.

Also near the top of my list of reasons is the sense that Barack Obama truly presents a chance for change. I'll grant that it's all a bit murky and that the change might be more superficial than substantive. Nevertheless, this country needs something new. I'm willing to take a chance on Obama. He's smart, compassionate, not a son of privilege, and a compelling orator. I see shades of Ich bin ein Berliner when I hear him speak. It's a shame that he'll have to rebuild our ties with the civilized world, but I believe he's up to the task.

Anyway, it'll all get solved one way or the other in November. At least this time around the opposition is someone with whom I can honestly disagree but not fear. That's already a change for the better.

"Circle the Wagons" Culture

Everywhere one looks these days there are examples of individuals and organizations taking extraordinary measures to keep secrets. Otherwise honest individuals, when confronted with a choice between making the "right" choice and making the choice that will best protect themselves and their organization are choosing the latter. When the two options follow the same path, there is no problem. All too often, however, the options which present themselves are at opposite ends of the ethical spectrum.

Take, for example, the executive branch of our government. It should come as no surprise that an administration headed by our first MBA President and a former Fortune 500 Vice President would be reluctant to share information with the public. The number one concern among private sector actors from large corporations to LLC's is the avoidance of "legal trouble." Whether the trouble is justified or, as so-called conservatives like to call it "frivolous" is immaterial. Being under the gun from an outside entity is time and revenue negative. The safe course of action is to play one's cards close to the vest and keep as much potentially damaging information in-house. Obviously, this business model should not be applied (as it has been for the past seven years) to the activities of public sector institutions -- as they are, by definition, public. There is no excuse for our secretive administration hidden in these lines, but there is a kernel of understanding for their motivation perhaps.

How did we get to this point? It's quite simple, really. We sued our way here. The litigious nature of our culture has spawned a culture in which every negative event calls for multiple lawsuits. We are engaged in the pointless pursuit of risk-free living. As part of our efforts to improve our chances for success in this doomed endeavor, we make anyone who has in any way, no matter how inadvertantly or marginally, contributed to our misfortune pay a price. A steep one, too. If every mistake and oversight is grounds for large penalties, it is small wonder we have all started to be more secretive than we used to be.

It's not just the big organizations whose share prices rise and fall on the dreaded news of legal trouble either. In schools across the country, administrators do daily battle with parents and the press who, it seems, spend a great deal of their time watching for even the smallest misstep by a coach or a teacher. An inadvertant remark to a student that is interpreted as negative or a reading assignment that is viewed as biased can open the school to all sorts of negative consequences. Most times, the reaction to the transgression is all out of proportion to the infraction. In an independent school, there can also be devastating financial repurcussions. It's small wonder then, that our school leaders are reluctant to share publicly (or even internally) when something goes awry. The unfortunate result of that "circle the wagons" mentality is that when an event occurs that ought to be brought into the light, those same able, well-intentioned administrators who are conditioned to keep quiet for fear of litigation and the consequences it inevitably brings, fail to speak up. That's when serious problems occur.

How, then, can the problem be fixed? It has to be cultural. It can't be a forced change. There's no law that can make people allow for each other's imperfections. Neither is "tort reform" the answer. Taking away legal recourse will only protect those who are truly at fault in a given situation. Each of us, one by one, must look in the mirror and see another person. That other person must have faults like ours. Bad days, occasionally poor judgement, misstatements and all the other warts that we so earnestly wish for others to accept in ourselves. Then, and only then, can safety and sanity determine the options we choose rather than avoidance and secrecy. Then and only then will we empower our leaders in business, government and education to speak up when something goes wrong. Only then will those about whom we care the most, our children, be safe. I'm game, are you?

Cruel and Unusual? Who Cares?

I oppose the death penalty in all cases. There, that's out of the way. Readers can stop searching for "liberal" bias or hidden agenda. The purpose here is not to drag out my various convincing (to me anyway) arguments against legally killing other people but, rather, to gain some insight into a perplexing issue that has come to the fore as various states search for ways to legally murder citizens without, it appears, causing them any "undue" distress. More specifically, here's my question. Why, if someone has been determined to have no value as a human being, do we care whether or not he dies painlessly or in great distress. I just don't get it.

In order to justify the killing of another human being without falling prey to accusations of murder, one must offer convincing proof that the target of one's vengeance is without redeeming merit as a human being. If the target is found to be posessed of human worth, then charges of murder could surely gain traction and derail attempts to kill. Scary as this ability to dehumanize seems to me, a majority of the American people are able to convince themselves (and others) that certain crimes are so heinous in their brutality and or cruelty that they render the perpetrator, quite literally, inhuman.

With me so far? We are executing only those from whom we have stripped the most basic elements of humanity -- including the right to remain alive. Why, then is there any concern about the pain these beings suffer when they are put down? Surely, advocates of "kind" lethal injections are not arguing that Constitutional freedoms and rights apply to individual beings from whom even the right to keep breathing has been removed. If that is the case, then what about voting rights, free speech, gun ownership and all the other rights enshrined in our Consitution? Why, if an individual is condemned to be killed are his other, less essential rights preserved? It makes no sense whatsoever. Unless . . .

What if the condemned is not, in fact, inhuman? What if he still has enough value as a member of the species to be deserving of Consitutional protection against cruel and unusual punishmment? Well, then, what about his most basic right -- that which prevents others, no matter how justified they may feel or how much anger they may exhibit, from killing him? Hmm . . . but that would draw the entire issue of execution into question. That, dear reader, is my point.

Those who support the death penalty and at the same time support the condemned's right to constitutional protection from cruel and unusual punishment are in an unteneble position. To avoid legitimate accusations that execution is murder, the executioners must strip the condemned of all rights and human worth, up to and including the ultimate right - the right to live. Once so stripped, continued concern about the rights of the condemned becomes moot. If one has no rights (as evidenced by the fact that one's death is about to be caused with government sanction) one has no rights (such as that which protects from cruel and unusual punishment.)

So, where does this leave the argument. Opponents of the death penalty may be pleased with a view that continued Constituional protection from cruel and unusual punishment trumps execution and, therefore, will continue to press for abolition. On the other hand, they may fear that in the current political climate, this arguemtn is simply an opening for additional excesses in the disposition of death row prisoners.

With luck, proponents of the death penalty will at least stop and consider the conundrum. If its not human, it doesn't deserve rights. If he is human, then to kill him is murder. It can't be both. There is always hope that humanity will prevail.

Iraq Funding Showdown: False Arguments Abound

The looming showdown over the funding of U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan is dragging into the light of day some time-tested, specious arguments about how the relationship bewteen the legislative and executive branches is constructed.

The President continues to state that Congress ought to just send him a "bill I can sign." Come again? The responsibility of the United States Congress is to draft legislation that is responsive to their constituents wishes without regard for the President's preference. If Congress were to tailor its legislation to reflect the desires of the President rather than those of the citizenry, I fail to see the continuing need for a legislative branch. The balance of powers is intended to place checks upon the various branches of our government. There is no check if the legislative branch only sends bills that the President desires.

Another false premise that is being offered to the American public as fact is that a stated, planned withdrawal of troops allows our enemies (whoever they may be) to "mark their calendars and plan their takeover" accordingly. The insurgents ARE simply waiting until we leave to make their move -- this is true whether they know exactly when we are leaving or not. The fact that a timetable would make the date of our withdrawal public changes this fact not one iota. What does change once a timetable is introduced, is the amount of pressure exerted upon the Iraqi government and other interested parties (Arab regimes, NGO's, etc.) to get their ducks in a row. Without a timetable for withdrawal, America is left holding the bag for this quagmire indefinitely and earning all the international hatred that comes with being an uninvited occupying force. A lack of a timetable also further erodes domestic support and puts additional strain upon our troops.

Finally, Vice President Cheney dragged out the tired, old argument today that by sending an "unacceptable" bill to the President, the Congress is underrmining the troops. Our Constitution demands that the Congress spend money in accordance with the wishes of the American people. That is what they are doing. If the President vetoes the bill -- as is certainly his right -- then it is he who is responsible for whatever fallout may occur. If the President wants a different bill, then it is incumbent upon him to work to change the wishes of the American people. Failing that, he can either sign the legislation or, standing on principle, veto it. In either case, it is the President who must bear the ultimate responsibility.

Oh yeah, and by the way, unless the plan is to remain in Iraq forever, then how is planning our departure a failure?

Let's just hope that the American people have the insight and information to see through this shell game and remember the basic civics that they were taught in school. Too bad the President seems to have forgotten.

Water Tower Park

I've been living in the Seminole Heights neghborhood here in Tampa for a little more than a year now. Every week or so, when I venture north on Florida Avenue and cross the Hillsborough River, I notice a wonderful, open piece of riverfront property. Not once, however, have I seen a human being or an animal making use of this great, urban greenspace.

Surrounded on all sides by a chain link fence, this multi-acre parcel sits empty. Why? The grass is mowed, the beatiful Live Oaks are mulched and pruned. The water tower seems (from a distance) to be secure and provided with adequate bars and locks. What, then, is the reason for the apparent lack of use? Anyone? Bueller?

Podcasting

Okay, so while it's not news to anyone who's likely to read a blog, podcasting is a revolutionary innovation. I don't mean it in the way that Starbucks "revolutionized" the coffee business or even in the sense that radio "revolutionized" commmunication. Rather, podcasting will change not only the means by which we communicate or get our caffeine, it will change the very essense of what it means to interact with others. In other words, values, institutions, law and commerce will all face fundamental change.

Today, we stil talk about "going to school." Podcasting makes the idea of spending large sums of money on the bricks and mortar of the educational universe seem foolishly wasteful. A combination of podcast-based lectures, instructions, demonstrationns and occasional gatherings could easily beat the low efficiency of our current system. Think of the money spent on transporting all those millions of young people to school each day accross this nation. Think of the hours spent by the youngsters on those big yellow busses that could be much better spent actually learning something or on the dying art of play.

The wrench in the works will be the baby-sitting aspect of our current system. Whatever would families do if the state were no longer prepared to take care of their kids everyday of the week? Hmm . . . perhaps this would force our economy to reinvigorate the idea that children should spend time with their parents. That, however, is a subject for another day.

Honeymoon Delight

Mary Beth and I just returned from a three night stay at a fantastic B & B in St. Augustine. As the picture shows, we were right on the water and the end of a five minute walk found us in the heart of the old city. It was a fantastic getaway. Nothing political, nothing controversial. Just a few days of rest and relaxation. Tomorrow, I'm off to DisneyQuest with Ethan -- a pre-birthday surprise that will include and overnight at one of his favorite hotels . . . The Wyndham Palace in Walt Disney World. Tuesday and it's back to school.

Headline: Pot Calls Kettle Black (or, Israel Calls for Iran Sanctions)

They're kidding right? Surely even Israel, a country which has produced and maintains a stockpile of nuclear weapons in defiance of international law, UN restrictions and various treaty obligations, is not sufficiently arrogant to call on the international community to impose sanctions on Iran for following the same path. I have no problem with Israel's desire to maintain a nuclear free Iran. I also have no problem with Israel working legally toward that end. Frankly, the fewer nuclear weapons, the better is a general tenet I hold dear.

My problem is that the Israeli government will not submit to the same restrictions, inspections and conditions that they are calling for with respect to Iran. Israel and her supporters claim frequently that they are victims of unfair treatment. There are certainly cases in which that may be true. The situation, however, is now entirely reversed. Israel wants Iran to comply with regulations to which Israel will not and furthermore insists that Iran be punished.

I'll support any reasonable, serious response to the illicit production of nuclear technology that is apllied equally among all nations. Other than that, any response will only serve to further deepen the existing rifts and perceived unfair treatment.