It's not often that I make my sports loyalties known in print (sorta) because as a former sports writer and college baseball umpire, I don't want to give an impression of bias, but it's hard for me to restrain myself when it comes to the Miami Heat.
Truth be told, I have great respect for D-Wade. I know of the work he does here in Chicago, and I admire his commitment to his home town. Likewise, I have similar thoughts about LeBron James and what he's done for the Canton Akron area of Northeast Ohio. But there's something about the team that's built around these two that just sticks in my craw.
So when the Bulls beat the Heat tonight without Rose or Noah, I felt like I'd hit the number. The streak is stopped. And for no particular reason, I'm happy.
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
DOMA at SCOTUS
It isn't often that cases before the US Supreme Court are easily understood by the average American, but United States v Windsor, the case involving the Defense of Marriage Act or DOMA, is one such case.
The respondent in this case, Edith Windsor, was married to Thea Spyer in Canada in 2007. The couple's marriage was legally recognized by the state of New York where they lived. When Spyer died in 2009, Windsor should have been entitled to inherit her wife's estate without tax penalty, but because DOMA prohibits the Federal government from recognizing any marriage that involves people of the same gender, Windsor was on the hook to the IRS for more than $360,000. She sued in Federal District Court based on the equal protection clause of the US Constitution. When the US Department of Justice notified the court that it was unwilling to defend the government in the suit, a strange thing happened: The House of Representatives intervened using the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG) to defend the government. This was an extraordinary event for BLAG, a group that prior to Windsor had filed mostly amicus briefs, because instead of advising the Congress about legal issues, it was fulfilling a role of the executive branch as defined by the Judiciary Act of 1789. In spite of this monumental shift in the separation of powers, the Court nonetheless found that Section III of DOMA was unconstitutional, and Windsor was entitled to a refund.
DOJ, on behalf of BLAG, appealed to the 2d Circuit Court of Appeals, where Windsor again prevailed, the Court again citing the equal protection clause of the Fifth Amendment. The 2-1 majority found that, "(h)omosexuals are not in a position to adequately protect themselves from the discriminatory wishes of the majoritarian public." Essentially saying that allowing voters to decide this case was unfair because it made partners in same-sex marriages a quasi-suspect class.
Should the SCOTUS reverse the lower courts, it would require them to rule in favor of Federal law superseding state law. This would be especially surprising given that the current Court has a history of favoring states' rights.
The respondent in this case, Edith Windsor, was married to Thea Spyer in Canada in 2007. The couple's marriage was legally recognized by the state of New York where they lived. When Spyer died in 2009, Windsor should have been entitled to inherit her wife's estate without tax penalty, but because DOMA prohibits the Federal government from recognizing any marriage that involves people of the same gender, Windsor was on the hook to the IRS for more than $360,000. She sued in Federal District Court based on the equal protection clause of the US Constitution. When the US Department of Justice notified the court that it was unwilling to defend the government in the suit, a strange thing happened: The House of Representatives intervened using the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG) to defend the government. This was an extraordinary event for BLAG, a group that prior to Windsor had filed mostly amicus briefs, because instead of advising the Congress about legal issues, it was fulfilling a role of the executive branch as defined by the Judiciary Act of 1789. In spite of this monumental shift in the separation of powers, the Court nonetheless found that Section III of DOMA was unconstitutional, and Windsor was entitled to a refund.
DOJ, on behalf of BLAG, appealed to the 2d Circuit Court of Appeals, where Windsor again prevailed, the Court again citing the equal protection clause of the Fifth Amendment. The 2-1 majority found that, "(h)omosexuals are not in a position to adequately protect themselves from the discriminatory wishes of the majoritarian public." Essentially saying that allowing voters to decide this case was unfair because it made partners in same-sex marriages a quasi-suspect class.
Should the SCOTUS reverse the lower courts, it would require them to rule in favor of Federal law superseding state law. This would be especially surprising given that the current Court has a history of favoring states' rights.
Monday, February 06, 2012
Madonna Wags the Dog
Although I didn't watch the game or the halftime show on Sunday, I saw the 'controversial' video of the bird flipping Sri Lankan singer M.I.A. performing "Give Me All Your Luvin." I wasn't shocked or offended: it was part of the show, the spectacle of a Madonna TV appearance. I think the NFL is woofing when it calls M.I.A.'s gesture "obscene", and I certainly don't believe the NBC presser that calls it a "spontaneous gesture."
I watched the YouTube video of the performance a couple of times to see how spontaneous the gesture seemed, and it was much as a part of the show as the lyric "I don't give a sh--," which was bleeped at the game and is part of the original song (it appears in the official video). I wouldn't be surprised if the NFL told NBC before Sunday that it was going to be included in the show so have the pixelation ready. The fact that they missed it was just poor timing.
For me the only really surprising thing about the bird here is that it came from M.I.A. and not Madonna.
It's the same old thing from her, the same as the 'shocking' kiss at the Grammys, the same as the fellated Evian bottle in her 1991 'documentary' Truth or Dare. And let's be completely honest, Madonna was the focus of the broadcast, not Cee-Lo, not M.I.A., not Nicki Minaj, and certainly not LMFAO, who I initially mistook for clownish looking extras until they began using microphones. (I had to look them up because I didn't know who they were).
For the purpose of full disclosure, I am a fan of M.I.A., which is to say that I own a couple of her albums and enjoy them if they pop up on my Shuffle. She's the daughter of a Tamil Tiger rebel and an ex-pat Sri Lankan. Her political background is completely centered on the Tamil's revolutionary struggle for equality in her native country. She's certainly not as sophisticated, nor as cognizant of FCC regulations, as Madonna, which is why I believe her flipping the bird wasn't anymore spontaneous than Howard Stern's appearing as Fartman at the MTV awards in 1992.
I think Madonna put M.I.A. up to it because the younger singer didn't know that the gesture isn't kosher on TV in the United States. Afterall, she grew up in England where people use the word the gesture represents without the shock that accompanies it here.
Now I'm sure the FCC will have a much dimmer view of it than I do, which will of course prompt lots of talk show appearances for Madonna, lots of mention of the song, lots of replaying of the video of the game day performance (with pixelation in place, of course). Her album will be as hot as a two-dollar pistol on a Saturday night in the city, and she'll be laughing all the way to the bank.
So spare me the outrage, people, it's just another case of the Madonna tail wagging the dog.
I watched the YouTube video of the performance a couple of times to see how spontaneous the gesture seemed, and it was much as a part of the show as the lyric "I don't give a sh--," which was bleeped at the game and is part of the original song (it appears in the official video). I wouldn't be surprised if the NFL told NBC before Sunday that it was going to be included in the show so have the pixelation ready. The fact that they missed it was just poor timing.
For me the only really surprising thing about the bird here is that it came from M.I.A. and not Madonna.
It's the same old thing from her, the same as the 'shocking' kiss at the Grammys, the same as the fellated Evian bottle in her 1991 'documentary' Truth or Dare. And let's be completely honest, Madonna was the focus of the broadcast, not Cee-Lo, not M.I.A., not Nicki Minaj, and certainly not LMFAO, who I initially mistook for clownish looking extras until they began using microphones. (I had to look them up because I didn't know who they were).
For the purpose of full disclosure, I am a fan of M.I.A., which is to say that I own a couple of her albums and enjoy them if they pop up on my Shuffle. She's the daughter of a Tamil Tiger rebel and an ex-pat Sri Lankan. Her political background is completely centered on the Tamil's revolutionary struggle for equality in her native country. She's certainly not as sophisticated, nor as cognizant of FCC regulations, as Madonna, which is why I believe her flipping the bird wasn't anymore spontaneous than Howard Stern's appearing as Fartman at the MTV awards in 1992.
I think Madonna put M.I.A. up to it because the younger singer didn't know that the gesture isn't kosher on TV in the United States. Afterall, she grew up in England where people use the word the gesture represents without the shock that accompanies it here.
Now I'm sure the FCC will have a much dimmer view of it than I do, which will of course prompt lots of talk show appearances for Madonna, lots of mention of the song, lots of replaying of the video of the game day performance (with pixelation in place, of course). Her album will be as hot as a two-dollar pistol on a Saturday night in the city, and she'll be laughing all the way to the bank.
So spare me the outrage, people, it's just another case of the Madonna tail wagging the dog.
Wednesday, February 01, 2012
Why I won't put fiction here
I've been getting a lot of rejections lately for my fiction work, which, according to some writers' resources, means I'm one step closer to getting my next piece published.
Since most of my writing experience comes from journalism, the urge to revisit pieces, to edit, to make changes, to improve, passes quickly once I finish the story. Journalism doesn't lend itself to lingering or self-reflection: You tell the story in the most compelling way, and you move along. Visit almost any news room in the world, and you'll be hard pressed to find a writer who worries about a piece more than a couple of days after it ran in print.
Not so with fiction writers.
The apocryphal tales of fiction writers' obsessions about their work are as profuse as the number of writers. The French realist, Guy de Maupassant, died in an institution supposedly driven to madness by trying to create the perfect story. Franz Kafka left deathbed instructions to his friend, Max Brod, to destroy all of his writing. American author, F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote two complete drafts of his most famous work, The Great Gatsby (first titled Trimalchio) and rewrote the novel Tender is the Night so frequently that his editor felt compelled to publish one of the later drafts twenty years after the original was published. Before he shot himself with the same gun that his father used to commit suicide, Hemingway was said to lament that his best writing was a six word short story. Notorious recluse J.D. Salinger allegedly wrote 15 unpublished novels because he felt publishing them would be a nuisance. There is a conceit within each of these legends, and quite possibly more than a modicum of truth as well.
That conceit is likely present in all writers, whether producing fact or fiction or a blending of both, but as a former journalist, I feel a great deal of pressure to publish whatever I write. There's one theory on this need to publish that suggests that writing is a relationship, a conversation between writer and reader, and without the latter half of this binary, nothing remains. I've ignored this blog for a couple of years now, too busy scratching out my fiction to dedicate time to this endeavor, but recently I had the thought that I could just as easily publish my fiction here and hope to develop a following for it. But the problem is that in the arcana of fiction publishing, anything I include here is unlikely to be accepted elsewhere because few publications accept previously published work.
And so while I'd love to use this space for the latest short story to be rejected, I fear that if i ever succeed in publishing something, I won't be able to reuse any work that you'd see here.
So as much as I'd like to entertain my blog's one visitor per year, I'll refrain from it, and instead use this space as I have in the past, for commentary and essay and some amalgam of both.
Since most of my writing experience comes from journalism, the urge to revisit pieces, to edit, to make changes, to improve, passes quickly once I finish the story. Journalism doesn't lend itself to lingering or self-reflection: You tell the story in the most compelling way, and you move along. Visit almost any news room in the world, and you'll be hard pressed to find a writer who worries about a piece more than a couple of days after it ran in print.
Not so with fiction writers.
The apocryphal tales of fiction writers' obsessions about their work are as profuse as the number of writers. The French realist, Guy de Maupassant, died in an institution supposedly driven to madness by trying to create the perfect story. Franz Kafka left deathbed instructions to his friend, Max Brod, to destroy all of his writing. American author, F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote two complete drafts of his most famous work, The Great Gatsby (first titled Trimalchio) and rewrote the novel Tender is the Night so frequently that his editor felt compelled to publish one of the later drafts twenty years after the original was published. Before he shot himself with the same gun that his father used to commit suicide, Hemingway was said to lament that his best writing was a six word short story. Notorious recluse J.D. Salinger allegedly wrote 15 unpublished novels because he felt publishing them would be a nuisance. There is a conceit within each of these legends, and quite possibly more than a modicum of truth as well.
That conceit is likely present in all writers, whether producing fact or fiction or a blending of both, but as a former journalist, I feel a great deal of pressure to publish whatever I write. There's one theory on this need to publish that suggests that writing is a relationship, a conversation between writer and reader, and without the latter half of this binary, nothing remains. I've ignored this blog for a couple of years now, too busy scratching out my fiction to dedicate time to this endeavor, but recently I had the thought that I could just as easily publish my fiction here and hope to develop a following for it. But the problem is that in the arcana of fiction publishing, anything I include here is unlikely to be accepted elsewhere because few publications accept previously published work.
And so while I'd love to use this space for the latest short story to be rejected, I fear that if i ever succeed in publishing something, I won't be able to reuse any work that you'd see here.
So as much as I'd like to entertain my blog's one visitor per year, I'll refrain from it, and instead use this space as I have in the past, for commentary and essay and some amalgam of both.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Tell it to the Marines
I am posting here a column a wrote for a newspaper in Cleveland in 2002. Happy Birthday to the United States Marine Corps.
Thank You Vets (published November 12, 2002)
I had brunch Sunday with my parents at the Harp, an Irish pub on the West Side near downtown. With living across town from them added to my class and work loads, I haven't seen them very much recently. They are both retired and travel quite a bit to see my siblings who live all over the country. So Sunday was special for us all. My girlfriend and the only other local sibling were there too.
My father has six children, five sons and one daughter. When I was a kid in the 70s my mother would say that with all these boys she worried about war more than usual. She prayed that none of us would have to experience war first hand. My father was just worried about bankruptcy at the cost of putting us through college. Years later, neither horror realized, we are as close as a family can be.
More than just getting together with my family, Sunday was special for another reason. November 10 is the birthday of the United States Marine Corps. The great coincidence of history was that Armistice Day—which we now celebrate as Veterans' Day—was declared on the day following the anniversary of the Marine Corps. Separated by 143 years, the two days honor two different groups of warriors. The US Marine Corps is arguably the toughest military organization in the world, known for its tenacity in combat and its bravery under fire. By the time the World War I Armistice was declared, the USMC was legendary, gaining a new moniker during the struggle.
The German soldiers at Belleau Woods referred to the Marines who first assaulted then defended the five-mile stretch of woods as "Teufel Hunden—(Devil Dogs)." The name comes from a legendary Bavarian breed of wild dog. The Marines unofficially adopted the name as they did most insults directed at them. Five months after the battle, the war ended.
So the first Armistice Day, the cease-fire that ended the First World War fell on the day after the Marine Corps celebrated its 143d birthday.
For me the two days are linked by more than coincidence of calendar because my father was a US Marine. He enlisted in 1951 shortly after the outbreak of war in Korea. He landed at Inchon and spent the rest of the war doing his duty as a Marine. He has spoken of it very little and never directly. One time he admitted to having trouble sleeping after reading a book about a WWII winter battle. Another time he told me about a Captain who lost his legs from a mine explosion. But when asked directly about combat, he would tell a joke or change the subject.
I know at one point he was wounded, but he refused a Purple Heart. He knew that the Defense Department would send a telegram home to his mother announcing his medal. He didn't want to worry her.
Veteran's Day is supposed to honor men like my father. Men who did their duty and thought about the family at home, men who overcame incredible odds and came home.
Sitting in the Harp Sunday, I'm sure no one thought that the old guy having lunch was remarkable in any way. That's what makes veterans so special. They are just regular people even after facing the very real possibility that they would be killed in combat.
The United States is yet again poised to put lives at risk. Whether the mission is appropriate or ill advised, men and women will go into harm's way and some will not return. Those who survive will someday eat a quiet brunch with their children in an unremarkable way.
On behalf of the staff of The Cauldron I'd like to thank all veterans, the ones who saw combat and the ones who served during peace-time. Especially my dad.
______________________________________________
My father is doing well, I spoke with him by telephone today. Retired and age 75, I asked what he planned to do for the Marine Corp's 233d birthday.
"Sleep," he said. "A good Marine never stands when he may sit and never stays awake when he may sleep."
Thanks again to all the Marines past and present who continue to inspire us all. Especially my dad.
Thank You Vets (published November 12, 2002)
I had brunch Sunday with my parents at the Harp, an Irish pub on the West Side near downtown. With living across town from them added to my class and work loads, I haven't seen them very much recently. They are both retired and travel quite a bit to see my siblings who live all over the country. So Sunday was special for us all. My girlfriend and the only other local sibling were there too.
My father has six children, five sons and one daughter. When I was a kid in the 70s my mother would say that with all these boys she worried about war more than usual. She prayed that none of us would have to experience war first hand. My father was just worried about bankruptcy at the cost of putting us through college. Years later, neither horror realized, we are as close as a family can be.
More than just getting together with my family, Sunday was special for another reason. November 10 is the birthday of the United States Marine Corps. The great coincidence of history was that Armistice Day—which we now celebrate as Veterans' Day—was declared on the day following the anniversary of the Marine Corps. Separated by 143 years, the two days honor two different groups of warriors. The US Marine Corps is arguably the toughest military organization in the world, known for its tenacity in combat and its bravery under fire. By the time the World War I Armistice was declared, the USMC was legendary, gaining a new moniker during the struggle.
The German soldiers at Belleau Woods referred to the Marines who first assaulted then defended the five-mile stretch of woods as "Teufel Hunden—(Devil Dogs)." The name comes from a legendary Bavarian breed of wild dog. The Marines unofficially adopted the name as they did most insults directed at them. Five months after the battle, the war ended.
So the first Armistice Day, the cease-fire that ended the First World War fell on the day after the Marine Corps celebrated its 143d birthday.
For me the two days are linked by more than coincidence of calendar because my father was a US Marine. He enlisted in 1951 shortly after the outbreak of war in Korea. He landed at Inchon and spent the rest of the war doing his duty as a Marine. He has spoken of it very little and never directly. One time he admitted to having trouble sleeping after reading a book about a WWII winter battle. Another time he told me about a Captain who lost his legs from a mine explosion. But when asked directly about combat, he would tell a joke or change the subject.
I know at one point he was wounded, but he refused a Purple Heart. He knew that the Defense Department would send a telegram home to his mother announcing his medal. He didn't want to worry her.
Veteran's Day is supposed to honor men like my father. Men who did their duty and thought about the family at home, men who overcame incredible odds and came home.
Sitting in the Harp Sunday, I'm sure no one thought that the old guy having lunch was remarkable in any way. That's what makes veterans so special. They are just regular people even after facing the very real possibility that they would be killed in combat.
The United States is yet again poised to put lives at risk. Whether the mission is appropriate or ill advised, men and women will go into harm's way and some will not return. Those who survive will someday eat a quiet brunch with their children in an unremarkable way.
On behalf of the staff of The Cauldron I'd like to thank all veterans, the ones who saw combat and the ones who served during peace-time. Especially my dad.
______________________________________________
My father is doing well, I spoke with him by telephone today. Retired and age 75, I asked what he planned to do for the Marine Corp's 233d birthday.
"Sleep," he said. "A good Marine never stands when he may sit and never stays awake when he may sleep."
Thanks again to all the Marines past and present who continue to inspire us all. Especially my dad.
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
My fear of fear politics
The day before the election, I took a break from calling folks in Virginia and Ohio for Sen. Obama to get my haircut. At 42, it takes a really creative barber to make it actually seem like work, but I feel terrible when what little hair I have gets shaggy.
I went to a Hair Cuttery in the suburbs of Chicago wearing an "Obama '08" sweatshirt. I sat down in the chair and listened as my stylist, Kara, told me that Obama was a Muslim, and that she wasn't even sure he was an American citizen because no one has seen his birth certificate.
She told me that she listens to Fox News each morning. "It's like my alarm clock," she said.
Looking for common ground, we both agreed that we would be happy when the election was over because we were tired of all of the smear ads on the radio and TV.
The thing that surprised me was when we started talking about the economy. Now I don't have any independent varification of Kara's story, but this is what she told me:
"We're one of those family's that shouldn't have gotten a loan. My husband's dad died and left us $100,000. So we had $50,000 for a down payment. The mortgage company said, 'Great. Here's a house' and never even looked at whether we could afford the payments.
"We've been doing everything we can to keep up the payments," she told me. "We're behind on all our credit cards and now (DuPage) County is going to take the house if we don't come up with $4,000 for the property taxes. We tried to get the mortgage company to escrow the taxes, but they said, 'We'd need you to give us $4,000 to do that.' If we had the four thousand, we would pay the taxes with it. The county is gonna foreclose for the taxes."
She told me that her husband got hurt and missed two months of work, but since he was new to the job, they let him go rather than pay workers comp. Kara's family doesn't have health care, and she worries that if they lose the house the kids will "have to go to a school near my mom's, (which) is filled with gang bangers and drugs."
I told her about the Mr. Obama's health care proposals. We talked about the bailout and the fallout of the market crisis. I expressed my belief that an Obama presidency would help working folks more than a McCain presidency would, but Kara insisted that she was too scared of Obama's "terrorism" to vote for him.
She's been fed a steady diet of fear and cannot see past it to recognize that it is in her own interest to vote for Democrats because "they hate America." FDR was right about fearing fear. It is the fear of terror that makes it such an affective tool.
For Kara and the millions like her who are afraid, let's hope that tomorrow's dawn brings with it hope for the country and the world.
Thursday, May 22, 2008
McCain doesn't support the troops
The new GI Bill overwhelmingly passed the Senate today by a 75-22 margin. One Democratic senator and two Republican senators did not vote.
The Dem who didn't vote on the resolution was Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts who was diagnosed Tuesday with malignant glioma, which is a type of brain tumor normally found in children. Although the family isn't saying so, doctors have privately said that the senator's prognosis can't be good.
The two GOP senators who did not vote were Senator Tom Coburn, R-OK, and Senator John McCain, R-AZ.
"To the soldiers and families who have sacrificed so much in this war, especially our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines from Oklahoma, I say thank you," says Sen. Coburn in a letter dated Feb. 27, 2008, which appears on his web page. Thanks from a senator doesn't pay for a single text book , let alone a bachelor's degree, but perhaps Sen. Coburn had a good reason not to vote today. There isn't anything to suggest that his absence wasn't legitimate.
But the so-called straight talking Sen. McCain wasn't available to vote for veterans benefits because he was busy interviewing candidates for vice president and appearing on the Ellen DeGeneres show.
Some commander-in-chief he's gonna be. Wow, I'll bet the kids in Iraq are hoping that Gen. David Petraeus is right and Pres. Bush is wrong, but either way they can't be feeling very confident that the leading candidate for president will bring them home soon.
Maybe he'll get Ellen to do a USO tour.
The Dem who didn't vote on the resolution was Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts who was diagnosed Tuesday with malignant glioma, which is a type of brain tumor normally found in children. Although the family isn't saying so, doctors have privately said that the senator's prognosis can't be good.
The two GOP senators who did not vote were Senator Tom Coburn, R-OK, and Senator John McCain, R-AZ.
"To the soldiers and families who have sacrificed so much in this war, especially our soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines from Oklahoma, I say thank you," says Sen. Coburn in a letter dated Feb. 27, 2008, which appears on his web page. Thanks from a senator doesn't pay for a single text book , let alone a bachelor's degree, but perhaps Sen. Coburn had a good reason not to vote today. There isn't anything to suggest that his absence wasn't legitimate.
But the so-called straight talking Sen. McCain wasn't available to vote for veterans benefits because he was busy interviewing candidates for vice president and appearing on the Ellen DeGeneres show.
Some commander-in-chief he's gonna be. Wow, I'll bet the kids in Iraq are hoping that Gen. David Petraeus is right and Pres. Bush is wrong, but either way they can't be feeling very confident that the leading candidate for president will bring them home soon.
Maybe he'll get Ellen to do a USO tour.
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
For Clinton, $11 a month is all the help we need
It's no secret by now that Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, would rather destroy the Democratic Party than concede the nomination to Sen. Barack Obama, D-IL, but when she contends that Mr. Obama is out of touch with ordinary Americans because he doesn't think that saving folks an average of $11 a month for gasoline is worth the trouble, Mrs. Clinton reveals her contempt for the working class.
According to the Department of Energy, the average cost of a gallon of gasoline in the United States is $3.60, which means that Mrs. Clinton's suggestion that a "holiday" for the Federal excise tax on gasoline would allow consumers to buy about three more gallons a month for the average vehicle.
Mrs. Clinton's campaign—and supporting 527s—are running TV ads in Indiana continuing with the mantra that Mr. Obama is out of touch with the average American.
This from the woman who once defiantly declared that her independence by saying she "could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas"—implying that was what the average married woman in America was doing—at a time when nearly two-thirds of American families had both parents working outside of the home and still hurting from the economic disaster of Reaganomics. This from the candidate who in 1999 was able to buy a $1.7 million house in Chappaqua, N.Y. with a loan guaranteed by someone else's collateral. How's that for being in touch with the American people?
Every aspect of Mrs. Clinton's attacks on Mr. Obama seem to come for the GOP play book, and yet she sees nothing disingenuous about suggesting that the media has treated her unfairly.
According to the Department of Energy, the average cost of a gallon of gasoline in the United States is $3.60, which means that Mrs. Clinton's suggestion that a "holiday" for the Federal excise tax on gasoline would allow consumers to buy about three more gallons a month for the average vehicle.
Mrs. Clinton's campaign—and supporting 527s—are running TV ads in Indiana continuing with the mantra that Mr. Obama is out of touch with the average American.
This from the woman who once defiantly declared that her independence by saying she "could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas"—implying that was what the average married woman in America was doing—at a time when nearly two-thirds of American families had both parents working outside of the home and still hurting from the economic disaster of Reaganomics. This from the candidate who in 1999 was able to buy a $1.7 million house in Chappaqua, N.Y. with a loan guaranteed by someone else's collateral. How's that for being in touch with the American people?
Every aspect of Mrs. Clinton's attacks on Mr. Obama seem to come for the GOP play book, and yet she sees nothing disingenuous about suggesting that the media has treated her unfairly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)