Thursday, December 22, 2005
Object lessons for fathers and sons by fathers and sons
By Russell King
Priorities in life Stan Van Gundy, the head coach of the professional basketball team in Miami, recently decided that the rewards of spending time with his family outweighed the rewards of his job. The millions of dollars, the fame, the glitz and the glamour simply were not enough to justify the many weeks on the road away from his family. So he quit.
When reporting the story, one of our so-called newsmen on a local radio station muttered, only half under his breath, "mental deterioration." I figured, afer hearing that comment, that the news dwarf wasn't mentally or morally fit to clean Van Gundy's garage, much less pass judgment on him. Then, when I checked the radio station's web page, I found that he says the best thing about our town is that his wife and kids live here and that his most memorable moment was getting married.
I still think his comment about Van Gundy's choice was downright twisted, but for their sakes (and his!), here's hoping his wife and kids didn't hear it.
Like father like son A few years ago, a neighbor boy ran into my parents' home and told them his aunt's house was on fire. The aunt was handicapped and unable to get out of bed on her own. My father hurried his "senior citizen" self -- complete with bad heart and leukemia -- down the block and into the burning building. He emerged from the blinding, billowing smoke moments later, his white hair now completely black, carrying the aunt in his arms.
It's the sort of heroic act you hear about from time to time, and by which you are left in a half envious, half terrified, awe.
A few weeks ago, my brother Gary looked out his office window and saw a car in flames. He hurried down to the auto and found a man inside. The man was unresponsive, so Gary opened the car and physically removed him -- doubtlessly saving his life. Gary's risk of injury and death from flames, heat, smoke or even explosion was genuine. Precious few of us would have the courage or strength to act as he did.
Now, here's the twist: Less than a year earlier, Gary lost one of his legs in an unexplainable medical fluke. Thanks to the run-around his insurance company gave him, he hadn't yet had all that much experience on his prosthetic leg. Never mind all that, there was a life to save. (This story, too, has an idiot journalist in it: His home town newspaper reported the fire without bothering to mention Gary's heroic act.)
I lay claim to no such heroic impulses; I'm just honored to be swimming around in the same gene pool as these two.
Priorities in life, part II This past weekend, Terry Bradshaw, a former professional football player now providing commentary on televised games, sat down to interview a current player. The questions were dumb things like "What's your favorite cartoon character?" When Bradshaw got to the question "Who would play you in a movie about your life?" he told the player "I'm just going to skip this question, because you haven't done anything yet."
The player looked at him with a steady gaze and said, "Well, not professionally."
Bradshaw, uncomprehending, just stared.
"I think when you're father to four, you've done something," the player said.
At least Bradshaw had the sense to know when he'd made himself look the fool. He smiled, shook his head, and extended his hand to shake.
By Russell King
Priorities in life Stan Van Gundy, the head coach of the professional basketball team in Miami, recently decided that the rewards of spending time with his family outweighed the rewards of his job. The millions of dollars, the fame, the glitz and the glamour simply were not enough to justify the many weeks on the road away from his family. So he quit.
When reporting the story, one of our so-called newsmen on a local radio station muttered, only half under his breath, "mental deterioration." I figured, afer hearing that comment, that the news dwarf wasn't mentally or morally fit to clean Van Gundy's garage, much less pass judgment on him. Then, when I checked the radio station's web page, I found that he says the best thing about our town is that his wife and kids live here and that his most memorable moment was getting married.
I still think his comment about Van Gundy's choice was downright twisted, but for their sakes (and his!), here's hoping his wife and kids didn't hear it.
Like father like son A few years ago, a neighbor boy ran into my parents' home and told them his aunt's house was on fire. The aunt was handicapped and unable to get out of bed on her own. My father hurried his "senior citizen" self -- complete with bad heart and leukemia -- down the block and into the burning building. He emerged from the blinding, billowing smoke moments later, his white hair now completely black, carrying the aunt in his arms.
It's the sort of heroic act you hear about from time to time, and by which you are left in a half envious, half terrified, awe.
A few weeks ago, my brother Gary looked out his office window and saw a car in flames. He hurried down to the auto and found a man inside. The man was unresponsive, so Gary opened the car and physically removed him -- doubtlessly saving his life. Gary's risk of injury and death from flames, heat, smoke or even explosion was genuine. Precious few of us would have the courage or strength to act as he did.
Now, here's the twist: Less than a year earlier, Gary lost one of his legs in an unexplainable medical fluke. Thanks to the run-around his insurance company gave him, he hadn't yet had all that much experience on his prosthetic leg. Never mind all that, there was a life to save. (This story, too, has an idiot journalist in it: His home town newspaper reported the fire without bothering to mention Gary's heroic act.)
I lay claim to no such heroic impulses; I'm just honored to be swimming around in the same gene pool as these two.
Priorities in life, part II This past weekend, Terry Bradshaw, a former professional football player now providing commentary on televised games, sat down to interview a current player. The questions were dumb things like "What's your favorite cartoon character?" When Bradshaw got to the question "Who would play you in a movie about your life?" he told the player "I'm just going to skip this question, because you haven't done anything yet."
The player looked at him with a steady gaze and said, "Well, not professionally."
Bradshaw, uncomprehending, just stared.
"I think when you're father to four, you've done something," the player said.
At least Bradshaw had the sense to know when he'd made himself look the fool. He smiled, shook his head, and extended his hand to shake.
What's it all mean? You decide for yourself. For me, these stories, taken together, suggest: that if you're a dad, nothing else you do will matter as much; that the kind of dad you are will make a big difference in our world; and that, one day, the kind of dad you are just may make the difference between life and death. I'm thinking that maybe those realizations will change the way we do this American dad thing.
Tuesday, December 13, 2005
Feeding the beast in the culture of death
By Russell King
Tookie Williams's plea for his life has been rejected by both the California and U.S. Supreme Courts, and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has refused to grant him clemency, so the convicted killer will be executed at midnight (Tuesday, December 13). By the time most of you read this, he'll be dead. It gives this American dad reason to pause.
Clemency--like "mercy," like "forgiveness"--is one of the sweeter words in the language. It says that the terrible bad acts of the past aren't the final judgment. It says that people can change, and that this change can be acknowledged, and rewarded, and held up as an example. It summons to mind the idea of redemption -- a notion a great many of us have relied on for our own souls.
Clemency, second chances, being "born again" should matter to us. Tookie Williams, who founded the Crips gang and killed as many as four people, reformed himself in prison; he wrote a memoir and some children's books about the dangers of gangs. He was the ideal candidate for clemency. But as a culture, we aren't much interested in reform.
We much prefer revenge. There's something perversely appealing to us about the use of force: Cross us, and we'll nail you. A truck in the parking lot of my church most sunday monrings has one bumper sticker proclaiming allegiance to Christ, the Prince of Peace, right next to another that reads "Don't mess with the US." That's perverse.
That is how we currently have two million Americans--most of them black, most of them male--behind bars. Yes, most of them "did something." But we've sent them there for punishment, not for rehabilitation, not for a second cance. Certainly not for redemption.
Our lust for revenge--almost always on black males--is of great fascination and horror to me, because my eldest son falls into that category. He's run into the law, the system, and I've witnessed first-hand how the eyes of the system view black males. It's a terrifying thing.
Most of these black males, punished by our righteous wrath, will one day get out. A lot of will get out, budgetary reasons, a lot get out earlier than they should. If there is no rehabilitation, no redemption, in prison, what do you think will happen?
The death penalty actually makes redemption and rehabilitation less likely. It has long been demonstrated that executions do not deter others from committing crimes, but after the deed has been done why bother trying to turn your life around if they're going to fry you anyway? An argument can be made that executing Williams makes it more--not less--likely that, in the future, some punk with a gun will pull the trigger and turn an ordinary robbery into a murder. Hey, who wants a living witness who can identify you and testify against you?
I would not have expected the Terminator to see the divine wisdom in clemency, but I did have hope for that his wife, the very Catholic Maria Shriver, might reach him. She knows Arnold's ugly past and his use of women as sex objects. Clearly, she also knows something about forgiveness, because she has forgiven him. You would think she'd put it bluntly to him: You must not do this. And you would think--because with his poll numbers fading, she is his biggest asset--he would listen. But I guess it didn't play out that way. And now the blood of Williams will stain her hands too.
We talk a lot about the culture of life, but we live in a culture of death. Let's recognize that culture for what it is: a big show of questionable manhood and false bravado -- a bluff of courage from people who are deathly afraid of so many things, starting with the harsh fact that there's a bit of Tookie Williams in all of us.
As Jesse Kornbluth writes: "Tonight they'll feed the beast. Tomorrow they'll need new victims. They forget that they’re the ones who say they believe that an all-seeing, all-knowing God will someday judge us all. Good luck to them on that day."
By Russell King
Tookie Williams's plea for his life has been rejected by both the California and U.S. Supreme Courts, and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has refused to grant him clemency, so the convicted killer will be executed at midnight (Tuesday, December 13). By the time most of you read this, he'll be dead. It gives this American dad reason to pause.
Clemency--like "mercy," like "forgiveness"--is one of the sweeter words in the language. It says that the terrible bad acts of the past aren't the final judgment. It says that people can change, and that this change can be acknowledged, and rewarded, and held up as an example. It summons to mind the idea of redemption -- a notion a great many of us have relied on for our own souls.
Clemency, second chances, being "born again" should matter to us. Tookie Williams, who founded the Crips gang and killed as many as four people, reformed himself in prison; he wrote a memoir and some children's books about the dangers of gangs. He was the ideal candidate for clemency. But as a culture, we aren't much interested in reform.
We much prefer revenge. There's something perversely appealing to us about the use of force: Cross us, and we'll nail you. A truck in the parking lot of my church most sunday monrings has one bumper sticker proclaiming allegiance to Christ, the Prince of Peace, right next to another that reads "Don't mess with the US." That's perverse.
That is how we currently have two million Americans--most of them black, most of them male--behind bars. Yes, most of them "did something." But we've sent them there for punishment, not for rehabilitation, not for a second cance. Certainly not for redemption.
Our lust for revenge--almost always on black males--is of great fascination and horror to me, because my eldest son falls into that category. He's run into the law, the system, and I've witnessed first-hand how the eyes of the system view black males. It's a terrifying thing.
Most of these black males, punished by our righteous wrath, will one day get out. A lot of will get out, budgetary reasons, a lot get out earlier than they should. If there is no rehabilitation, no redemption, in prison, what do you think will happen?
The death penalty actually makes redemption and rehabilitation less likely. It has long been demonstrated that executions do not deter others from committing crimes, but after the deed has been done why bother trying to turn your life around if they're going to fry you anyway? An argument can be made that executing Williams makes it more--not less--likely that, in the future, some punk with a gun will pull the trigger and turn an ordinary robbery into a murder. Hey, who wants a living witness who can identify you and testify against you?
I would not have expected the Terminator to see the divine wisdom in clemency, but I did have hope for that his wife, the very Catholic Maria Shriver, might reach him. She knows Arnold's ugly past and his use of women as sex objects. Clearly, she also knows something about forgiveness, because she has forgiven him. You would think she'd put it bluntly to him: You must not do this. And you would think--because with his poll numbers fading, she is his biggest asset--he would listen. But I guess it didn't play out that way. And now the blood of Williams will stain her hands too.
We talk a lot about the culture of life, but we live in a culture of death. Let's recognize that culture for what it is: a big show of questionable manhood and false bravado -- a bluff of courage from people who are deathly afraid of so many things, starting with the harsh fact that there's a bit of Tookie Williams in all of us.
As Jesse Kornbluth writes: "Tonight they'll feed the beast. Tomorrow they'll need new victims. They forget that they’re the ones who say they believe that an all-seeing, all-knowing God will someday judge us all. Good luck to them on that day."
Friday, December 09, 2005
I remember John
By Russell King
Twenty-five years ago today, December 8, John Lennon was killed. I'll not go into details about what his life, words and death meant to me, except to note that my first child is named after him. Instead, I'll leave you with a few of his words on fatherhood.
"The pressures of being a parent are equal to any pressure on earth. To be a conscious parent, and really look to that little being's mental and physical health is a responsibility which most of us, including me, avoid most of the time, because it's too hard. To put it loosely, the reason why kids are crazy is because nobody can face the responsibility of bringing them up..."
"You can't cheat kids. If you cheat them when they're children they'll make you pay when they're 16 or 17 by revolting against you or hating you or all those so-called teenage problems. I think that's finally when they're old enough to stand up to you and say, 'What a hypocrite you've been all this time. You've never given me what I really wanted, which is you."
"I've been baking bread and looking after the baby...Everyone else who has asked me that question over the last few years says. 'But what else have you been doing?' To which I say, 'Are you kidding?' Because bread and babies, as every housewife knows, is a full-time job. After I made the loaves, I felt like I had conquered something. But as I watched the bread being eaten, I thought, Well, don't I get a gold record or knighted or nothing?"
"The joy is still there when I see Sean. He didn't come out of my belly, but my God, I've made his bones, because I've attended to every meal, and how he sleeps, and the fact that he swims like a fish because I took him to the ocean. I'm so proud of all his things. But he is my biggest pride."
"We decided that this is our life. That having a baby was important to us, and that everything else was subsidiary to that, and therefore everything else had to be abandoned. I mean, abandonment gave us the fulfillment we were looking for and the space to breathe."
By Russell King
Twenty-five years ago today, December 8, John Lennon was killed. I'll not go into details about what his life, words and death meant to me, except to note that my first child is named after him. Instead, I'll leave you with a few of his words on fatherhood.
"The pressures of being a parent are equal to any pressure on earth. To be a conscious parent, and really look to that little being's mental and physical health is a responsibility which most of us, including me, avoid most of the time, because it's too hard. To put it loosely, the reason why kids are crazy is because nobody can face the responsibility of bringing them up..."
"You can't cheat kids. If you cheat them when they're children they'll make you pay when they're 16 or 17 by revolting against you or hating you or all those so-called teenage problems. I think that's finally when they're old enough to stand up to you and say, 'What a hypocrite you've been all this time. You've never given me what I really wanted, which is you."
"I've been baking bread and looking after the baby...Everyone else who has asked me that question over the last few years says. 'But what else have you been doing?' To which I say, 'Are you kidding?' Because bread and babies, as every housewife knows, is a full-time job. After I made the loaves, I felt like I had conquered something. But as I watched the bread being eaten, I thought, Well, don't I get a gold record or knighted or nothing?"
"The joy is still there when I see Sean. He didn't come out of my belly, but my God, I've made his bones, because I've attended to every meal, and how he sleeps, and the fact that he swims like a fish because I took him to the ocean. I'm so proud of all his things. But he is my biggest pride."
"We decided that this is our life. That having a baby was important to us, and that everything else was subsidiary to that, and therefore everything else had to be abandoned. I mean, abandonment gave us the fulfillment we were looking for and the space to breathe."
Friday, December 02, 2005
This one should make American dads fighting mad
By Russell King
Just when you thought the world was about as insane as it can get, it goes one step farther and proposes testing chemicals on abused, neglected and orphan children. As absurdly immoral -- as unthinkable -- as that sounds the federal Environmental Protection Agency is indeed revising its testing procedures to allow for just that.
Never mind that Congress ordered the EPA to knock it off, the EPA is moving ahead on opening the door for chemical tesing on kids: if they "cannot be reasonable consulted" — for example, those who are mentally handicapped or newborn orphans; if their guardians' parental competencies are legally compromised, such those deemed negligent; and if the EPA tests are operated outside the U.S., with administrative approval.
The EPA dismissed these concerns, stating in a press release that "EPA will neither conduct nor support any intentional dosing studies that involve pregnant women or children." But the policy stating the contrary is right there in black and white for all the world to see. Draw your own conclusions.
People in government, these days, like to give things names that indicate they are the direct opposite of what they really are, and this instance is no exception: The EPA document is named (try not to laugh out loud here) the Protections for Subjects in Human Research. It was filed with the Federal Register September 12, and it includes the following loopholes (emphasis mine):
The IRB (Independent Review Board) shall determine that adequate provisions are made for soliciting the assent of the children, when in the judgment of the IRB the children are capable of providing assent... If the IRB determines that the capability of some or all of the children is so limited that they cannot reasonably be consulted, the assent of the children is not a necessary condition for proceeding with the research. Even where the IRB determines that the subjects are capable of assenting, the IRB may still waive the assent requirement..."
If the IRB determines that a research protocol is designed for conditions or for a subject population for which parental or guardian permission is not a reasonable requirement to protect the subjects (for example, neglected or abused children), it may waive the consent requirements... "
To What Do These Regulations Apply? It also includes research conducted or supported by EPA outside the United States, but in appropriate circumstances, the Administrator may, under § 26.101(e), waive the applicability of some or all of the requirements of these regulations for research...
An invitation for open public comment on this docket will continue from today until December 12 -- that's just 10 days, so get moving! The Organic Consumer’s Organization, ever alert to chemical regulation, is leading the fight to erase the offending articles with an urgent action alert. (Thanks, too, to the MojoBlog for spreading the word.)
Why are you still reading here? Click on the public comment link and give these clowns a dose of dad's wrath!
By Russell King
Just when you thought the world was about as insane as it can get, it goes one step farther and proposes testing chemicals on abused, neglected and orphan children. As absurdly immoral -- as unthinkable -- as that sounds the federal Environmental Protection Agency is indeed revising its testing procedures to allow for just that.
Never mind that Congress ordered the EPA to knock it off, the EPA is moving ahead on opening the door for chemical tesing on kids: if they "cannot be reasonable consulted" — for example, those who are mentally handicapped or newborn orphans; if their guardians' parental competencies are legally compromised, such those deemed negligent; and if the EPA tests are operated outside the U.S., with administrative approval.
The EPA dismissed these concerns, stating in a press release that "EPA will neither conduct nor support any intentional dosing studies that involve pregnant women or children." But the policy stating the contrary is right there in black and white for all the world to see. Draw your own conclusions.
People in government, these days, like to give things names that indicate they are the direct opposite of what they really are, and this instance is no exception: The EPA document is named (try not to laugh out loud here) the Protections for Subjects in Human Research. It was filed with the Federal Register September 12, and it includes the following loopholes (emphasis mine):
The IRB (Independent Review Board) shall determine that adequate provisions are made for soliciting the assent of the children, when in the judgment of the IRB the children are capable of providing assent... If the IRB determines that the capability of some or all of the children is so limited that they cannot reasonably be consulted, the assent of the children is not a necessary condition for proceeding with the research. Even where the IRB determines that the subjects are capable of assenting, the IRB may still waive the assent requirement..."
If the IRB determines that a research protocol is designed for conditions or for a subject population for which parental or guardian permission is not a reasonable requirement to protect the subjects (for example, neglected or abused children), it may waive the consent requirements... "
To What Do These Regulations Apply? It also includes research conducted or supported by EPA outside the United States, but in appropriate circumstances, the Administrator may, under § 26.101(e), waive the applicability of some or all of the requirements of these regulations for research...
An invitation for open public comment on this docket will continue from today until December 12 -- that's just 10 days, so get moving! The Organic Consumer’s Organization, ever alert to chemical regulation, is leading the fight to erase the offending articles with an urgent action alert. (Thanks, too, to the MojoBlog for spreading the word.)
Why are you still reading here? Click on the public comment link and give these clowns a dose of dad's wrath!
