MorningBird

Have you seen any good news lately?

Why is bad news more interesting than good news? The local TV news is about fires, rapes and murders—and weather. Have you ever seen anything on a local TV newscast but disasters, criminal events, and weather? (Some would classify weather forecasting as a criminal event.)

And newspapers are no more cheerful. But I’ll cut newspapers some slack on the weather. Your house could blow away before the newspaper arrives, and so we don’t pay much attention to weather reports in the newspaper. But newspapers print the same dreadful news, along with the national dreads, which local TV rarely mentions (the local dreads, the weather and the commercials don’t leave much time for national news on Channel X).

The daily newspaper national news usually includes a mix of sports, business and politics from Washington, London, Sri Lanka, Sao Paolo, and other places we can’t pronounce or locate on a map. Of course if your newspaper is a weekly, the weather section is ludicrous. But weekly newspapers have an especially sobering section that warrants extra space—the obituaries.

We don't pay enough attention to the good stuff. And so, I put together a sampling of news that I think should merit attention. These are listed in no particular order; simply as they fell from my still functioning, 67 year-old, non-Alzheimer affected brain.

Dateline: Durham, NC. "The Duke University Lacrosse team had a 100% graduation rate this year." It's true. Did you know that? We hear a lot about dumb jocks that can’t get to the verb, but not much about student-athletes who go to class, study, and earn a diploma. The Duke Lacrosse Team's academic achievements will be good news for some, but bad news for others; depending on their persuasion about that dreadful event with the dancer.

Dateline: Washington, DC: The National Center for Health Statistics: "In 2002, 2.6 million babies were born to parents with a marriage contract." The report said that another 1.4 million children were born out of wedlock that year. (And 1.4 million were killed in the womb.) Why don’t we celebrate parents who don't kill their babies? I don't care if they have a marriage contract; although I wonder why one would bring a child into this world without a social and legal umbrella. Note: 2002 is the most recent period I could find statistics for. Maybe it's better now.

Dateline: Atlantic City, NJ: "Last night, in Atlantic City, Bill Cosby held forth with two hours of non-profanity laced stories. They were rolling in the aisles." Mr. Cosby is dealing with his own set of dreads at the moment, but we should not forget the wholesome humor he has entertained us with for decades. He is a funny man and he does it without four-letter words.

Dateline: Philadelphia, PA. "Not one Philadelphia city official was indicted yesterday." (OK, I made this one up, but I'm sure there were a few days in the recent past when that statement would have been true.) Unless you live in Philadelphia, you cannot appreciate what a joyous reception that headline would receive. Of course, no one would believe it. Maybe they could run it in the funnies section.

Enough. I don't purposefully watch the local news on TV, but occasionally it drifts into my space, and without exception, I am amazed at the negative content. Maybe I should say the continuity, for it never changes: fires, rapes and murders. Local newspapers are no different; they too headline the dreads.

But the dreads can mean different things to different people. For some, they can be happy events, in a perverse sort of way. Take the NY Times for example. A few weeks ago a low level White House official was convicted of something to do with the Jack Abramoff scandal. You know the guy in Washington who bought off some Republican Congressmen? (They don't tell us that he bought off some Democrats, too.) Anyway this low level White House official got caught with his hand in the cookie jar, or his ass in a G-5, I'm not sure what. I had never heard of him before that event, and I can't remember his name now. I'm sure you can't either. And that's my point. The NY Times had this poor slob's color photo ON THE FRONT PAGE ABOVE THE FOLD, a space normally reserved for stock market crashes, declarations of war, and the death of world leaders. So much for objectivity in the newsroom. I assume this sad event was a happy one for The New York Times. (I'm not taking sides; I could pull a similar story from Fox News.)

This is one--but only one--of the reasons TV, newspapers, and news magazines are threatened. Not because they are partisan, but because they attempt to hide it. The Internet is a refreshing change. Amateur news on the web is unabashedly awash with opinions, and it is delivered head-on, not cloaked in oblique language. It comes from the bottom up, not top down from the editor's desks of the establishment news industry. And it is delivered in real time, not shackled to the 6:00 newscast, or the lumbering printing press.

The rise of the Internet and specifically the blogging format will surely go down as one of the most important events in news gathering history; perhaps all of history. It has liberated thought. Expression is unstructured, even out of control at times; uncontrollable might be a better description. But this medium has revealed some very good thinkers--and exceptional writers. And it has shrunk the world like nothing else in history. The establishment should be worried.

That is the good news.

REASONABLE DOUBT

We are a nation of laws, not of men.  Every citizen has the right to be judged by his peers. The accused is assumed to be innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Do you believe Michael Schiavo could convince a jury of his peers, beyond a reasonable doubt, that his wife, Terry, executed a verbal, but unwritten living will? 

Apparently most Americans do, because the polls support Mr. Schiavo’s death wish for his wife. (Don’t bet the ranch on polls; ask Mr. Kerry.)

The press is eating it up.  They can barely hide their glee as they smugly opine about, “the price to be paid in the next election”.  They assume the religious right (read Republican’s) will pay that price.

I don’t deny the shameless Republican grandstanding going on in Congress, and led by some who might do better to put their own house in order before they meet their maker.  Those do-gooders won’t even make it to Purgatory; they have express tickets for the hot ride.

But what about the congressmen and women who stood silently on the sidelines, and allowed Terry Schiavo’s parents to be shoved aside by a verbal statement heard only by a man with a new life and a soon-to-be new wife? 

I agree; there will be a price to pay.  But I’m not so sure who will pay it.

Donate Terry Schiavo to the S.P.C.A.

Should Terri Schiavo be kept alive or be allowed to die? I admit to not being up-to-date on this case; I am not a student of death and think about it as little as I can, but the latest media blitz got my attention.

This struggle seems to be not about Terry Schiavo, but about her legal guardians and the people who love her—not to be confused as one in the same. Her husband, Michael Schiavo, wants her verbalized, but undocumented living will executed ASAP. He has a new life and a new woman and Terry's persistent breathing prevents him from making the new lady an honest woman.

On the other hand Terry’s parents, Bob and Mary Schindler, want Terry to be allowed to live (what a novel idea), and as far as I know, they are not asking Mr. Schiavo to contribute one dime to her support.

It’s too bad, the Schindler’s couldn’t have foreseen this mess before Terry was born; her mother could have aborted the poor soul and none of this would have happened—and no one would have complained; after all, in that nether world of uncertainty on the backside of the birth canal, the carrier’s rights trump the cargo’s rights.

Now it’s a mess and the courts, the Congress, the newspapers, the bloggers and the cable channels are in an uproar.

About what? Answer: Legal control over an unconscious, and if you believe the doctors, brain-dead person. Like the woman who woke up last week, after twenty years in a coma?

We treat animals better than this.

They should turn Terry over to the S.P.C.A. At least the animal shelter would wait a reasonable period of time to allow someone to adopt her. But in the event that no one wanted her, the shelter would not starve her to death, but mercifully put her to sleep with a painless injection.

What has happened to us?

A Tsunami of Money

A tsunami of money is headed for Southeast Asia. The largest natural disaster in our time created the largest outpouring of generosity in modern history. Government pledges are pouring in and charities and individuals around the globe are writing checks in record amounts. One group has more than it can spend; "No Mas," pleaded Doctors without Borders.

Satellites and fibre optics transmitted the horror to our living rooms, pubs, and places of work. It was the first calamity for HDTV and we watched spellbound as the death scenes filled the screen, each event seemingly more destructive than the one before.

The killer has no name only the generic term "tsunami." Perhaps that is fitting; it would be frivilous to hang a cutsey moniker on it like we do for hurricanes.

In Sri Lanka a soldier and a Tamil Tiger rebel worked side by side as they administered medical aid to victims. In another place a young boy wearing an Osama T-shirt was treated by a U.S. Marine. Nationality, politics, language and color, matter not; in this we are one world.

But our compassion is limited to the moment. Meanwhile in Iraq, Gaza, the West Bank, and Sudan, the killing goes on. We, the intelligent species, kill our brothers and neighbors, but we send aid halfway around the world to heip people we do not know.

The American Family Is Headed Where?

Pre-nups, divorce, abortion; we live in a disposable world. Serial marriage is the norm . The pre-nuptial predicts a temporary union and greases the slide to divorce. Her kids, his kids, their kids; you need a scorecard to keep track.

The traditional American family is being assaulted from all sides and at every generational level. Start with money. The average couple believes it cannot provide the necessities of life unless both partners’ work, and the two-earner household is now the American standard. Day-care, nannies, TV, the Internet, the mall and other after school diversions have replaced the stay-at-home mom.

Parents are on a treadmill. Most spouses work full time, some more than one job. Lengthy commutes are the norm. Schedules are hectic and juggled to accommodate the needs of family and work. The family dinner table is history; too many meals are brought home from the fast-food lane and consumed in front of the TV.

Kids can't be kids anymore. The pressure to excel starts before they enter school. Everything is organized—and competitive. Soccer and hockey are as serious as math and history. The players need a PDA to keep up with their schedule and a chauffer to get there. Where is the time to hang out and do nothing; or simply play a pick-up game in the neighborhood?

Technology doesn't help. Mobile phones, e-mail, and instant messaging are marvelous communications tools, but their personal nature promotes isolation. Wireless talk has replaced face-to-face dialogue.

The government plays an important role in the disintegration of the family. I'll give you two examples:

1) Regardless of economic status, every student in the New York Public School system is entitled to a free breakfast—every day. They can't teach, but they can feed? A noble cause, but another family intrusion if you ask me. My prediction? Next they will deliver the meal to the kid’s house. Meals-on-wheels for the junior generation. That will create delivery jobs for the uneducated and unemployable students that previously passed through the school system on social merit, but without learning anything. And it will give the government-paid delivery boy an opportunity to observe the recipient's living conditions. You think I'm crazy? Hide and watch.

2) Have you heard about the movement underway to weigh school kids? Yep, the principal will tell you when your kid is too fat and the school will prescribe a diet for you to administer. Presumably someone will follow-up to weigh the kid, chart his progress and check-up on your performance as the calorie counter. Never occurred to them to put gym back in the curriculum.

The Department of Education—a $40 billion federal bureaucracy that didn't exist before Jimmy Carter—dangles ever-increasing subsidies in front of public school administrators; all of them accompanied by golden handcuffs that dictate what will be taught and how it will be measured. Even so, test scores are falling as steadily as pupil costs are rising. Parents, especially those poor souls trapped in the inner cities, are shackled to inferior schools while the politicians, who are beholden to teacher's union campaign contributions, deny access to vouchers that would allow students to transfer to better schools. Meanwhile, the same politicians send their children to elite private academies.

$40 billion this year, $40 billion next year. For what? If they shut down The Department of Education, it would pay for Iraq in three years, and after that we would save $40 billion a year. Every year. You ever met a government program that had an end to it?

What are they teaching our kids? Calculators and computers have replaced simple math skills. Across the land, school boards have censured Huckleberry Finn. Anything that offends anyone is given the boot. The homogenization of education is underway.

And what do they do with those rambunctious young boys who can't sit still in class? Or, heaven forbid, who want to play physical boy-type games at recess? Answer: Ritalin.

Teacher's unions—more about the teacher than the student—cater to the very lowest common denominator; mediocrity is the standard. The unions deserve large credit for the decline in test scores. Competent teachers are retiring in droves. (It's always the best that leave; the slugs stick around for the paycheck.)

The schools are not alone. Everywhere you look, public institutions are running from traditional values:

The American Flag? Wear it, burn it, wipe with it, but don't salute it.
The Pledge of Allegiance? OK if you must, but take out the reference to God.
The Ten Commandments? OUTTA HERE! Not in the people's palace.
English Language? Still in first place, but rapidly losing ground to Spanish and the 70+ other languages that we print election ballots in now.

One subject the schools have been slow to adopt is sex. Lot's of reasons for that, not the least one being uptight parents. But sex is in our face; it can't be avoided. You'll find condoms on TV, in magazines and next to the aspirin in the supermarket. Condoms are fashion statements, produced in an array of colors and shapes, reservoirs and other appendages to tickle your fancy. Culinary hits too; they come in a myriad of flavors. I guess we should thank President Clinton for that. Remember, he assured America's school children that oral sex was not sex.

We should not be surprised by the epidemic in out-of-wedlock births; the mainstream merchandising of condoms to teenagers carries an implied acceptance that sex is OK. (It is harder for them to buy cigarettes.)

So, how do our children get pregnant? Good question. Could it be that the kids who are birthing more kids are desperately searching for love, and ignore birth control? Maybe, but if the teen-age mother changes her mind and decides to abort the child, she can do it without her parent's consent—and without the father's permission. In our land the decision to give birth or to abort is none of their business; it's a matter only for the pregnant child and her doctor. We teach children to murder before they learn to give life.

Meanwhile their grandparents are shuffled off to nursing homes, and today, bookend generations that historically shared the same house, don't live in the same community. The window on our heritage is closing.

I don't know where we are headed, but I sense that parents are losing control. We run about in a frenzy trying to keep up with the Jones's. Meanwhile our kids drive better cars than their teachers, and they buy their drugs in the parking lot. Well-meaning government agencies monitor and measure their behavior and our behavior, and when permitted, they ease in and substitute programs for parenting. The bureaucrats think they know best and the government has an agenda for almost any social activity you can think of. They are not evil people; they probably have the same behavioral conditions in their own families, but they aren't paid to look there.

America is losing the family. Can the country be far behind?