Not at West Point

The headline: "DoD: Reported Sexual Assaults Up at Service Academies" http://www.military.com/news/article/dod-reported-sexual-assaults-up-at-service-academies.html?ESRC=eb.nl

The article begins: "The number of reported sexual assaults at the nation's three major military academies rose overall in the latest academic year from one year earlier,..."

The article concludes: "West Point reported the same number in both years,..."

The headlining and editing of this article and similar articles at CNN and other news outlets are misleading as they fail to distinguish among the academies by making it clear that the number of reports did NOT rise at West Point which had the lowest number of reports each of the two years. The articles are a wrongful affront to the cadets at West Point and the efforts at this academy to preclude such criminal conduct and foster appropriate relations.

To Those of a Faith II

A friend has asked for a clarification to my last comment ("To Those of a Faith"). On Christmas eve I took a young family member to a church service we had attended annually for the last three years. The Christian service in a group, self-described as a "non-denominational multi-ethnic church, drawn from 20 nationalities," included hymns and Christmas messages familiar to this old Catholic. Without bogging down in detail, suffice to say that I no longer share a belief in fundamental doctrines of Christianity, whether in Catholic or other variations. Nor do I share all the tenets of other major religions. I never challenge the faith held by anyone else. I do believe, however, that the truly fundamental teachings of all major religions are love and compassion for others. Religions seem to set aside or ignore doctrinal differences during periods of "high" Holy days, such as at Christmas for Christians, and return to those fundamentals.

Joining in the singing at the service, however, I wondered whether I was being hypocritical or professing, to my young companion at least, a false piety. After some reflection during the Bible readings, I concluded as I discussed with her following the service and then published here. Where any group meets to declare or solidify an honest message of unselfish love and compassion, whether in a religious or other context, I feel no hypocrisy in joining with them. Christmas eve is, for that reason, my one annual direct involvement with Christianity. My lack of foundation in the specific rituals of other religions precludes my recognition of similar opportunities.

To Those of a Faith

Holding the same doctrines sacred is irrelevant when encouraging and joining with believers who promote unselfish love and compassion. And if many chose only to foster those feelings one day or seven or thirty of the year it is, yet again, a beginning.

Payroll tax extension: Cynicism or Conspiracy

The "Ol' Payroll Tax extension" argument has a sinister feel to it. Now, I have never been a "conspiracy" theorist. Highly cynical, yes. But, does anyone else see the possibility of a Republican conspiracy between their own Senate and House leadership? A brief recap: The President asks for a one year extension of the relief and Republicans recoil in horror. The matter, as required by no less than the Constitution, is handed to Congress and the Republican controlled House passes its own version with reasonable and unreasonable add-ons. A significant number of Republicans go on the record as opposed to the tax relief - go figure on that one. The Senate in a burst of unexpected cooperation by Republicans and after some quiet debate passes its own version with the inclusion of a Republican victory on a pipe-line issue. So, the President gives in on the pipeline and only gets two of the twelve months he asked for earlier. House Speaker Boehner, who we were told had consulted and nodded agreement with the Senate version, then demurs saying that only the twelve month extension would be reasonable and acceptable. The House demands, as might otherwise be normal, a joint committee to resolve the different versions in the remaining 11 days. House Republicans "pack" the committee with seven members, five of whom are on record as opposed to the tax relief extension.

This seems to me to be the situation in a nutshell at the moment. Other twists and turns, of which there are many, are generally irrelevant to my question. The maneuvering of the Republican leadership has placed their Party as the Party fighting for the twelve month extension. Ignoring, as the general population is want to do, their predicate conduct, Republicans may now argue that they are the defenders of the middle class. Please understand that I credit very few Republicans (I speak of a potential Republican conspiracy) in Congress with ability to successfully act clandestinely. I credit more in Congress with the Machiavellian determination and lack of integrity to attempt such a slight of hand.

Isn't it possible that the Senate Republican leadership intended to limit the extension in their negotiations to a two month period and thereby position the issue for the House Republican leadership to take the "higher ground" demanding the President's original twelve month extension? The value to the Republicans is in the rhetoric and not in the substance. The value to the American people is irrelevant.

A Brief Hope Shattered

Leaving the drugstore this morning I glanced at the newsstand and seeing the Washington Post on display I stopped. My eyes fixed on the heavy black print on the left of the front page. I began to smile, do a fist pumping and exclaim loudly "Yes! There can be justice!" Regrettably, the moment passed when I realized that the headline did NOT refer to the Supreme Court Justice.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/todays_paper?dt=2011-12-03&bk=A&pg=1