Originally Posted by oy

Originally Posted by Sean Love

I'm sure he has his foibles. For all I know, he smokes crack. I do.

Were you clear headed enough to ask that "dbookwoym" guy what that handle means? Everytime I see that name my brain registers dbookyworm, and I imagine some sorta weird kinda guy who's a cross between a bookie and a librarian.

Funny, huh? :wink:

Mr. Woym was also an interesting person and a die-hard T4Ter. All three of us remarked how refreshing it is to talk to other people who "got it", i.e., understand saecular theory. He had some good insights and I hope he will becomes less of an admitted lurker and post more.

Though I didn't ask, I've always assumed his handle was meant to be seen as a mock New York accent for The Bookworm. I am less sure now since the person I met is a life-long Bay Area native of Mexican-American heritage.

What I'm really looking forward to now is meeting the Omniscient Meece (another Bay Area local) so I can worship appropriately at his feet and learn The Truth.

I have to agree with oy... the response is 3Tesque if I ever saw 3Tesque

Originally Posted by Sean Love

Originally Posted by oy

Originally Posted by Sean Love

I'm sure he has his foibles. For all I know, he smokes crack. I do.

Were you clear headed enough to ask that "dbookwoym" guy what that handle means? Everytime I see that name my brain registers dbookyworm, and I imagine some sorta weird kinda guy who's a cross between a bookie and a librarian.

Funny, huh? :wink:

Mr. Woym was also an interesting person and a die-hard T4Ter. All three of us remarked how refreshing it is to talk to other people who "got it", i.e., understand saecular theory. He had some good insights and I hope he will becomes less of an admitted lurker and post more.

Though I didn't ask, I've always assumed his handle was meant to be seen as a mock New York accent for The Bookworm. I am less sure now since the person I met is a life-long Bay Area native of Mexican-American heritage.

What I'm really looking forward to now is meeting the Omniscient Meece (another Bay Area local) so I can worship appropriately at his feet and learn The Truth.

I always pictured dbookwoym as a brainy Jewish nebbish NYC transplant with thick glasses. Not a Chicano! :lol:

Originally Posted by oy

Originally Posted by Sean Love

However, your venom against Brian is, well, odd. I met him yesterday (along with dbookwoym) and I have to say I was disappointed. I was expecting to meet someone with a pitchfork and horns. I observed neither. :wink:

Venom?

Your expectations were naive. I'm the demon-possessed drunk (why else would I try to disclaim it in a disclaimer?). The guy you met out there in la la land is, of course, an angel of light. :wink:

p.s. Btw, thanks for not correcting my spelling on "fouthturning.com." I really appreciated that. 8)

So Marc, are you John the Baptist or The Son of Man? 8)

Originally Posted by The Wonk

Originally Posted by Sean Love

Originally Posted by oy

Originally Posted by Sean Love

I'm sure he has his foibles. For all I know, he smokes crack. I do.

Were you clear headed enough to ask that "dbookwoym" guy what that handle means? Everytime I see that name my brain registers dbookyworm, and I imagine some sorta weird kinda guy who's a cross between a bookie and a librarian.

Funny, huh? :wink:

Mr. Woym was also an interesting person and a die-hard T4Ter. All three of us remarked how refreshing it is to talk to other people who "got it", i.e., understand saecular theory. He had some good insights and I hope he will becomes less of an admitted lurker and post more.

Though I didn't ask, I've always assumed his handle was meant to be seen as a mock New York accent for The Bookworm. I am less sure now since the person I met is a life-long Bay Area native of Mexican-American heritage.

What I'm really looking forward to now is meeting the Omniscient Meece (another Bay Area local) so I can worship appropriately at his feet and learn The Truth.

I always pictured dbookwoym as a brainy Jewish nebbish NYC transplant with thick glasses. Not a Chicano! :lol:

Nope. He's a goy alright. I'll let him speak for himself if he wishes to have anything more known about him on the board. He's an intelligent fellow though, with many interests.

Youth Activists Emerge From San Jose Violence

By RAJ JAYADEV Pacific News Service (03-12-04)

SAN JOSE, Calif.?Once touted as the centerpiece of the Silicon Valley dream, San Jose now seems to be collapsing from the inside. In the past few weeks: A father was mistakenly killed downtown by a state drug agent, a Sikh man killed three other Sikhs in a park, longtime Bay Area families were threatened with deportation, and growing reports of abuse came out of our Santa Clara Juvenile Hall.

I just heard that a man, an ex-DJ and drug counselor, was killed downtown by police last night, within a block of where I am writing this. The police say the man committed ?suicide by cop.?

Perhaps no other tragedy speaks to the chaos more than the killings of Hari Singh, 65, Satnam Singh, 70, and Kulwant Singh, 45, who were shot to death while playing cards at Overfelt Gardens in east San Jose in late February. Had it been a hate crime, we would have had some framework to understand the tragedy and target our outrage. But when the shooter is also Sikh, who can we march against?

Still, despite the confusion, and amid the silence of local city officials, young grassroots leaders are emerging to lead the city out of this morass. Emerging from their jobs selling phones at the mall, or from studying for their next big final, the victims of the chaos have turned into overnight community organizers. While most of us have been keeping our heads down, bracing for more budgets cuts and continuing unemployment, they have fueled movements here that no one saw coming, but we all knew we needed.

A Daughter?s Tale: Regina Cardenas

The last time I saw Regina, at her father?s vigil, she was a mixture of shock, loss and fury. Rudy Cardenas, a father of five, was shot downtown by a state drug agent who mistook him for someone they had been staking out. The agents chased Rudy and shot him in a back alley.

It was just two days after her father?s death, and Regina already sounded part media spokeswoman, part grieving daughter. ?I had never been to any rallies or vigils or anything before this, but I need to start,? she said softly with a slight smile, before walking away to console another relative.

Like many 25-year-olds, Regina?s life was in transition. She was in the middle of moving in with a girlfriend in mid-town San Jose, and had recently picked up a new job as a materials coordinator at a Milpitas medical company. But her life since her father?s death has been about arranging and attending meetings. She meets with lawyers about lawsuits, community organizations about rallies, funeral homes about costs.

Several days after the vigil, Regina is speaking with me by cell phone minutes before a strategy meeting. She has hooked up with a neighborhood association to organize a march to the federal building. ?We just can?t let the awareness die, we need to be constantly in the media for the community to be energized.? Regina hasn?t taken a break raising awareness or organizing since the shooting.

?I feel like I have to be strong for the family. Of course I have breakdowns, but I don?t do it in front of others.? When I ask her how she does it, she says she gets help from friends and family, but her strength surprises even her.

She?s getting a call on the other line and has to go; it?s about the upcoming meeting. As I stumble through another offer of condolence, she interrupts me to make a pitch for my attendance at an upcoming meeting she has organized, on how to hold law agents more accountable. ?Bring anybody, it doesn?t even have to be people who know about my father?s case, but just people for the cause. We want to have a big turnout.?

With family members, Regina organized a vigil with over 150 people, only a week after the first. In the corner, wearing a baseball cap pulled low, Regina raised money for funeral expenses by selling cookies, and shirts with Rudy Cardenas?s image and the words, ?In Loving Memory.?

Weapon of Mass Mobilization: Dale Cuevas

Last December, after Dale took his last final at De Anza Community College, his mother showed him a letter from the Homeland Security?s Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services. It told his family they had 70 days to voluntarily deport themselves to the Philippines. The U.S. government had rejected his family?s appeal for green cards.

?Since that moment it?s been like a dream I can?t wake up from,? says Dale. The voluntary departure day has come and gone. But Dale says he?s too busy saving his family to be deported.

Dale, 23, has lived in Fremont for 19 years, since his parents and two sisters fled political turmoil in the Southern Philippines. He?s about as Bay Area as you can get?he?s slightly hip-hop, knows more Spanglish than Tagalog and makes car payments. He studies business management at San Jose State and is a cell phone salesman.

When I first met Dale at a community forum in a coffee shop in Union City, he was already comfortable with a microphone in his hand. ?Our family?s coming forward may inspire other families to stand up too,? he tells a packed audience of media and immigrant rights organizations. The professional advocates at his side are left with nothing to say; the young man on whose behalf they were to speak is doing just fine himself. Dale lays out plans to put pressure on Sen. Dianne Feinstein to sponsor bill to allow his family to stay, then vanishes into his sea of friends. They look like young Filipinos you usually see at a break-dancing competition, a buzzing of Obey T-shirts and Van Dutch trucker hats. These are the foot soldiers in Dale?s immigrant rights movement.

From the start, Dale has been placing his family story in local and national publications, making the press calls himself. ?I saw how the lawyer?s public relations guy did it with the San Francisco Chronicle, then started calling every media outlet I could think of.? Dale has, in a way, already been trained in community organizing. ?I am able to speak comfortably with people because of my sales background.? He explains to me that there are two types of salesmen: the ?bait-and-switch kind,? who say they are going to give you something and then don?t, and ?the ones with integrity.? Dale says he?s been ?telling it like it is,? speaking on the glaring contradictions of Homeland Security policies that are threatening to deport hard-working families, to whomever will listen. ?I mean, come on, my family is not making weapons of mass destruction,? he says.

The possibility of being deported has brought Dale closer to his Filipino identity. ?I always had all kinds of friends, and never really saw the point of getting together with the Filipino organizations.? But in the past two months, Dale Cuevas arguably has done more to spotlight the plight of Filipino immigrants than any other voice in recent history.

Outside Agitator: Fernando Campos

At 18, Fernando Campos looks at least 20 years younger than everyone else sitting at the meeting of Civil Rights for Children in Tutti?s bar and restaurant in South San Jose. He is not a parent, but an ex-detainee who joined the group that fights abuses within the Santa Clara Juvenile Hall as soon as he got out.

Fernando is busy folding a stack of flyers while the parents are exchanging stories of recent assaults they have heard about from sons and daughters. Norm Towson, the founder, booms, ?I just want them to stop beating up our kids and calling them assholes!? Fernando strolls by my chair and says calmly, ?Don?t worry if it gets a little loud, people here are just passionate because they?re talking about their own kids, you know?? Fernando was incarcerated for seven months and was both witness to and victim of abuses and insults during his stay inside. The Santa Clara Juvenile Hall, once claimed to be the best youth detention center in the country, is now being investigated by the U.S. Department of Justice for abuses of its detainees.

Fernando has no obvious obligation to try to change a system most would try to get away from as quickly as possible. He has a good job at a medical equipment assembly company, which will help him pay for college. He is helping his family pay automobile and home bills. But, he says, ?When I was inside, my mom starting going to these meetings. I was impressed that there was a group like this. Nobody else seemed to care about us.?

Civil Rights for Children has been a vocal critic of the Hall. They have protested in downtown San Jose, brought media attention and investigations, and are now pushing for a ?Juvenile Justice Monitor? program to inspect the institution regularly.

Scanning the room, Fernando says he met most of the sons of these parents in the Hall. ?It was like we had our own little group in there, cause we had parents that were talking about us to each other.? Fernando knows he brings something more to this group than just another pair of hands to fold flyers. ?When the parents see me here, see that I?m staying out of the system, I think it gives them hope because they can see their kids in me.?

Fernando did go back inside the Hall a week later?to attend a meeting between Civil Rights for Children and top juvenile hall administrators. Dressed in a suit, he got off work early to represent the group with his mother. Once again, as tensions flared and voices grew louder, it was Fernando who asked everyone to calm down, speak in turn and respect each other.

The Return of Community Organizing

Tragedy often breeds activism. But within the context of harsh unemployment and budget cuts that have hit San Jose harder than most California cities, most people are scrambling just to get by. This is what makes the emergence of this new generation of San Jose leaders so surprising?they just shouldn?t have this much fight left in them.

The new activists aren?t funded by foundations, don?t have nonprofit tax ID numbers, and don?t ask for permits for their marches. They use bars and coffee shops to hold meetings, sell cookies to fundraise and at times are as much support group as advocacy organization. The return of organizing in Silicon Valley is simply about everyday folks finding that they are stronger together than alone.

I've got news for madscientist, who always seems to be preoccupied with evidence that "Youth Activism" is about to rise.

Organizations like the Pacific News Service have been highlighting this mirage since at least the mid-1980's. I really wish I had saved those old alternative newspapers of the 1980's. Yep, "Youth Activism" has ALWAYS been "just around the corner", at least since the 1980's. (The "Rads", they called them back then. Ever read about them in history books? Thought not.)

Don't hold your breath. If S & H are right, you can count on a big lefty Youth Movement NOT happening. It's not how the Millies do things; they're too sensible for that.

Originally Posted by msm

Don't hold your breath. If S & H are right, you can count on a big lefty Youth Movement NOT happening. It's not how the Millies do things; they're too sensible for that.

I have heard, after discussions of the 60s, the occasional Millie wistfully wishing they hadn't missed the party. In general though, yes, they seem too sensible.

Well, the 60s were highly romanticized after the fact.

When I was middle school, I had my hippie phase where I tried to know everything about the late 60s because it sounded cool. That phase lasted only about a year, and when I was in high school, I was highly disillusioned to the 60s after learning about its chaos and lack of discipline.

You know, it's good to have that counter-culture thing, for kicks, but dang me if the people responsible for it at the time had to let it get out of control at times.

It's just the image thing we're attracted to. Throughout the 90s, the Boomer generation were at the apex waxing nostalgic about this era to the point of viewing everything from that decade (usually the latter half) through rose-colored glasses.

Not to worry though, we are still seeking images to imitate. It seems like the current trend for alternative culture is to look like the 70s, while inroads into 80s sensibilities have been resurrected.

Reminds me of that Tower of Power song "What is Hip?"

A bit too sensible? Maybe. I guess it is a product of the hyperkinetic world we grew up in. We need some anchors to make sure we don't lose ourselves or become spiritual wanderers.

As for the youth activism, I think there is too much expectation for the Millenials to take stands so early in their lives. Too many ideas, too many causes. There is virtually little to unite entire fronts of young people.

My commentary on youth activism is rather annoyed. For example, truth.org is one of the most abnoxious anti-tobacco fronts I have ever seen. Their commercials seem to run the prophetic "my way or the highway" stance on smoking tobacco. What's really interesting is their disregard for dignity. Besides, if they are so against smoking, why aren't they advocating against all smoking, including marijuana (which I believe is something these people won't dream of going against).

Something from the mailing list, in which the commercial broadcasters propose a code to police themselves in order to stave off more government oversight, AKA censorship. Isn't this exactly how the Hayes Code got started? If we've entered 4T, shouldn't this be something we should have expected?

BTW, there is no mention of the Hayes Code in this press release. I guess the broadcasters lack the proper historical perspective. 8)

Standard disclaimers apply.

Broadcasters: We can police ourselves

NAB forms task force to consider voluntary code

Just a day after hearing an earful from its harshest critics, including top officials at the Federal Communications Commission, the broadcast industry is moving to figure ways it can clean up the nation's airwaves of dirty talk and sex-laced programming.
Yesterday the National Association of Broadcasters announced the formation of a task force that will consider creating a voluntary code of conduct for its members in the television and radio industries.
The message, in sum: Let us police ourselves before we get policed by the government.
"Broadcasters are committed to a plan of voluntary action to deal with the issue of responsible programming," reads a statement from Edward O. Fritts, the group's president.
"Given the serious First Amendment concerns surrounding issues related to program content, it is our strong belief that voluntary industry initiatives are far preferable to government regulation."
The Task Force on Responsible Programming, as it will be called, will hold its first meeting at the group's annual convention in Las Vegas in two weeks.
The creation of the task force follows a closed meeting on Wednesday at which television and radio executives heard from their toughest critics over the rising indecency on television and radio. And it was at that meeting that FCC chairman Michael Powell suggested the industry consider policing itself.
Powell warned that if the industry waited for the government to impose decency standards, the outcome would be far more onerous, saying, "Heavier government entanglement through a 'dirty conduct code' will not only chill speech, it may deep-freeze it. It might be an ice age that would last a very long time."
Earlier this week, the Big Four television networks, ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox, announced plans to promote the use of the V-chip in households with children, working with the Advertising Council to come up with a series of public service messages advising parents about use of the program-screening device.
Just how a code of conduct for decency might work, and whether it could work, is unclear. Member groups that signed on would have to have clear guidelines of what would be considered appropriate language and behavior, always a subjective business, and all would have to agree to stick by those standards, even where others, such as non-members, stepped beyond those bounds. Particularly in today's competitive radio environment, that would be asking a lot.
Further, any voluntary program would not halt implementation of harsher penalties for violation of existing FCC decency rules, such as pending legislation that would raise the maximum fine for indecency from $27,500 to $500,000.
Any such code would also have to pass muster under review by the Justice Department. A previous code was abandoned in 1982 under challenge by the department on anti-trust grounds.
But then broadcasters may have little choice, considering the threat of even harsher government controls.
They also don't have very much time. With the elections coming, the fallout from Janet Jackson's Super Bowl boob shot seems only to build, and in the end it is not the sort of issue either party particularly wants to have to address on the campaign trail.

Originally Posted by Vince Lamb '59

Something from the mailing list, in which the commercial broadcasters propose a code to police themselves in order to stave off more government oversight, AKA censorship. Isn't this exactly how the Hayes Code got started? If we've entered 4T, shouldn't this be something we should have expected?

BTW, there is no mention of the Hayes Code in this press release. I guess the broadcasters lack the proper historical perspective. 8)

Standard disclaimers apply.

Broadcasters: We can police ourselves

NAB forms task force to consider voluntary code

Just a day after hearing an earful from its harshest critics, including top officials at the Federal Communications Commission, the broadcast industry is moving to figure ways it can clean up the nation's airwaves of dirty talk and sex-laced programming.
Yesterday the National Association of Broadcasters announced the formation of a task force that will consider creating a voluntary code of conduct for its members in the television and radio industries.
The message, in sum: Let us police ourselves before we get policed by the government.
"Broadcasters are committed to a plan of voluntary action to deal with the issue of responsible programming," reads a statement from Edward O. Fritts, the group's president.
"Given the serious First Amendment concerns surrounding issues related to program content, it is our strong belief that voluntary industry initiatives are far preferable to government regulation."
The Task Force on Responsible Programming, as it will be called, will hold its first meeting at the group's annual convention in Las Vegas in two weeks.
The creation of the task force follows a closed meeting on Wednesday at which television and radio executives heard from their toughest critics over the rising indecency on television and radio. And it was at that meeting that FCC chairman Michael Powell suggested the industry consider policing itself.
Powell warned that if the industry waited for the government to impose decency standards, the outcome would be far more onerous, saying, "Heavier government entanglement through a 'dirty conduct code' will not only chill speech, it may deep-freeze it. It might be an ice age that would last a very long time."
Earlier this week, the Big Four television networks, ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox, announced plans to promote the use of the V-chip in households with children, working with the Advertising Council to come up with a series of public service messages advising parents about use of the program-screening device.
Just how a code of conduct for decency might work, and whether it could work, is unclear. Member groups that signed on would have to have clear guidelines of what would be considered appropriate language and behavior, always a subjective business, and all would have to agree to stick by those standards, even where others, such as non-members, stepped beyond those bounds. Particularly in today's competitive radio environment, that would be asking a lot.
Further, any voluntary program would not halt implementation of harsher penalties for violation of existing FCC decency rules, such as pending legislation that would raise the maximum fine for indecency from $27,500 to $500,000.
Any such code would also have to pass muster under review by the Justice Department. A previous code was abandoned in 1982 under challenge by the department on anti-trust grounds.
But then broadcasters may have little choice, considering the threat of even harsher government controls.
They also don't have very much time. With the elections coming, the fallout from Janet Jackson's Super Bowl boob shot seems only to build, and in the end it is not the sort of issue either party particularly wants to have to address on the campaign trail.

http://www.internetcampus.com/frtv/frtv004.htm

Yes... BUT... hayes got in charge in 1922, and it took EIGHT YEARS of 3T-ish debate for the code to actually get established; unless the code ACTUALLY gets passed soon, this looks more like 1922 than 1930

The media circuses continue. The latest is this outburst of presentations about Jesus, including a brand new movie, several old TV movies, documentaries and news segments, TV specials, and even a tabloid article! ("The 13th Apostle was an Idiot!", in World Weekly News) This is far more than normal for an approaching Easter. The latest tonight was a special on ABC by Peter Jennings on Jesus and Paul. His documentary was excellent. However, apparently people are fixating on Jesus, someone who lived 2000 years ago, rather than on today's problems, such as retirement of baby boomers, the end of cheap oil, global warming, and the deficit, any one of which could be the catalyst or the regeneracy for the upcoming Fourth Turning. So I say that we are still in 3T, the catalyst is still to come, and it could hit hard.

Originally Posted by Jim Blowers

His documentary was excellent. However, apparently people are fixating on Jesus, someone who lived 2000 years ago, rather than on today's problems, such as retirement of baby boomers, the end of cheap oil, global warming, and the deficit, any one of which could be the catalyst or the regeneracy for the upcoming Fourth Turning. So I say that we are still in 3T, the catalyst is still to come, and it could hit hard.

Hey, Jesus returning could be a caalyst too! :wink:

Yes, I suppose Jesus returning could be a catalyst. So also could be six-legged green intelligent beings from a planet 100 light years away landing on Earth, a 20-km asteroid striking the Earth, or the god Vulcan showing up in the heavens and throwing his thunderbolts all over the place. It is still my belief that Jesus and the second coming are distractions, and that obsession with these show that we are still in the 3T.

Originally Posted by Jim Blowers

Yes, I suppose Jesus returning could be a catalyst. So also could be six-legged green intelligent beings from a planet 100 light years away landing on Earth, a 20-km asteroid striking the Earth, or the god Vulcan showing up in the heavens and throwing his thunderbolts all over the place. It is still my belief that Jesus and the second coming are distractions, and that obsession with these show that we are still in the 3T.

I agree. The current Jesus fad feels more like the stories of shark bites making the news through the summer of 2001.

I recently did a Google search on "American Awakening." There are a few folk out there hoping for a religious revival much as we T4T fans might hope for a regeneracy. They are allowed to hope. So far, though, the Jesus fad feels more like shark bites than the Real Thing.

Let me know if anyone sees four horsemen galloping across the clouds blowing horns.

Originally Posted by Jim Blowers

Yes, I suppose Jesus returning could be a catalyst.

Actually, the Catalyst for that particular prophesied 4T would be the Rapture. The Great Tribulation would be the "Regeneracy' (for lack of a better term. 'Degeneracy', perhaps?) The Battle of Armageddon would be the Climax, and the Triumphant Return of Christ, with the casting of the Beast (A-C as GC) into Hell, would be the Resolution. HTH. :wink:

More evidence that at least our Congress is in unravelling mode. From the online Government Executive magazine. Standard disclaimers apply.

The hypocrisy is unmistakable.

Less than two weeks after the House narrowly approved its version of the fiscal 2005 congressional budget resolution with rousing rhetoric calling for spending restraint, members overwhelmingly voted in favor of a transportation bill that would provide a significant increase in spending. The $275 billion called for in the legislation is greater than the $256 billion the White House says the president will approve, but the 357 to 65 vote is more than enough to override a veto.

Many of the House members who wailed so strenuously against higher spending during the budget resolution debate voted for the transportation bill.
Meanwhile, the Senate-passed version of this legislation calls for even more spending -- $318 billion.

This is the best example yet of the problem with the current budget debate in Washington. There is no agreement whatsoever about what "it," is -- that is, what is everyone trying to do. Is it deficit reduction, spending restraint, tax cuts or, as the vote on the transportation bill shows, meeting various national needs or priorities? Each of these is championed by different groups of representatives and senators. As the transportation debate shows, more than one are sometimes championed by the same members, even though the goals absolutely conflict with each other.

None of these goals has yet become commonly embraced, and certainly not accepted to the exclusion of the others. That's why the debate lurches back and forth depending on what is being discussed, and why some members of Congress vote and speak so inconsistently on the budget with a clear conscience.

It is also the main reason that, despite what seems like a great deal of interest in doing so, the federal budget process has not yet been changed. Since Congress doesn't know what to do on the budget, it is hard to figure out what procedural changes to implement to accomplish it.

This was evident at a hearing on the budget process held several weeks ago by the House Rules Committee's Subcommittee on Legislative and Budget Process <http://www.house.gov/rules/sub_lbp.htm>. (Full disclosure: I testified at that hearing). Subcommittee Chairwoman Deborah Price, R-Ohio, and Ranking Democrat Louis Slaughter, D-N.Y., both mentioned several times that Congress frequently talks about changing the budget process but never actually seems to get around to doing it.

The reason is that no one is sure what that "it" should be. If that agreement existed, changing the budget process to make it happen would be easy and would happen quickly.

But without that consensus, a new budget process is not merely hard to conceive -- it will also be close to impossible to implement successfully. A budget process designed to accomplish something that members haven't agreed to do, or haven't agreed to do as the process demands, is the political equivalent of trying to jam a square peg into a round hole -- it is almost certain to fail.

The best example of this is the Budget Enforcement Act <http://www.house.gov/rules/98-97.htm> -- the budget process put in place in 1990 to replace Gramm-Rudman-Hollings that is credited with being so successful. BEA didn't work well because it was skillfully designed; it worked well because there was a commonly accepted agreement that the deficit had to be reduced. That much-applauded process stopped working almost completely when the deficit turned into a surplus -- the commonly accepted problem it was designed to solve no longer existed, and the consensus about what should be accomplished fell apart.

If the agreed-upon problem embodied in BEA was reducing the national debt rather than the deficit, having a surplus would have made little or no difference. The budget goal and commitment to achieving it would have remained.
To a great extent, the consensus that fueled BEA's success has never been replaced. That is why all of the talk about budget process changes that Reps. Pryce and Slaughter mentioned is still premature at best.

Until a real accord develops, there will be a budget goal of the day rather than a new budget process.

That will make the daily debates over spending, taxes, deficits, debt and national priorities more like a schoolyard game. The person leading today's vote will set a goal and fight vociferously for it as if it is what everyone has agreed to do. He or she will then come up to the person managing the next bill and do the budget equivalent of saying "Tag... You get to decide what's 'it'."

In the interest of full disclosure, I will note that the transportation bill funds the activities that my SO works on.

The Taxpayer's Dollars are to build a $ 1 million+ postcard and t-shirt shop on a bicycle/velocipede road in Virginia, MN. If you ever get up this way please buy a card and an I (heart) Da'Range garment so this Bush investment in the economy will provide some return. Thank you.

If we see four horsemen galloping across the clouds blowing horns, almost certainly they will be headed the wrong way.

The period from 1981 or so to about now or so is a turning, not a mode. One problem with our present society is that we keep going into modes. We say "going into a spending mode" instead of "spend". I'm not sure what will happen if turnings turn into modes.

Apparently there is a supernatural. Apparently, supernatural spending cuts exist. Or at least Congress thinks so. Ask any congressman. He or she will say that spending cuts must be made. But they also say don't cut Social Security, don't cut pay for military, don't cut Medicaid, don't cut the space program, don't cut the DES or the EPA or any other alphabet soup. If there exist spending cuts, and they are none of any of these or others, then they must be supernatural. Could supernatural spending cuts be the catalyst or regeneracy for the Fourth Turning?

Originally Posted by Virgil K. Saari

The Taxpayer's Dollars are to build a $ 1 million+ postcard and t-shirt shop on a bicycle/velocipede road in Virginia, MN. If you ever get up this way please buy a card and an I (heart) Da'Range garment so this Bush investment in the economy will provide some return. Thank you.

I will! I will! And if you ever get out to Hanford, WA, please buy a "Richland Bomber" postcard, paid for by taxpayers who make the fuel for said bombs, showing their high-school's proud logo: a mushroom cloud.

A big 4T sign...

Finally! It appears liberals nationwide have reason to finally cheer this morning:

• Voters in Inglewood Turn Away Wal-Mart
  
  Los Angeles Times
  By Sara Lin and Monte Morin Times Staff Writers
  
  A bid by the world's largest corporation to bypass uncooperative elected officials and take its aggressive expansion plans to voters failed Tuesday, as Inglewood residents overwhelmingly rejected Wal-Mart's proposal to build a colossal retail and grocery center without an environmental review or public hearings.

So what does this west coast fourthturning portend for the rest of the country? Well, liberals entered the halls of power in 1933 with the slogan of helping the "forgotten man." Now the sexism aside, unemployment in 1933 was 23%. Seven years later, just before America began turning what little bread and butter there was into bombs and bullets, the unemployment rate was 18%.

Here's the dirty little secret (sexism aside, of course): how many jobs do you suppose Wal-Mart would have created for the "forgotten man" in Inglewood? Well, for the liberals this is a big victory, because those "little people" are much better off on the government dole than working at a Wal-Mart anyway!

someone didn't read the fine print, as usual:

Originally Posted by Devil's Advocate

A bid by the world's largest corporation to bypass uncooperative elected officials and take its aggressive expansion plans to voters failed Tuesday, as Inglewood residents overwhelmingly rejected Wal-Mart's proposal to build a colossal retail and grocery center without an environmental review or public hearings.

Fellow Ranger hawks underpants :arrow: :arrow: :arrow:

Originally Posted by Titus Sabinus Parthicus

Originally Posted by Jim Blowers

Yes, I suppose Jesus returning could be a catalyst.

Actually, the Catalyst for that particular prophesied 4T would be the Rapture. The Great Tribulation would be the "Regeneracy' (for lack of a better term. 'Degeneracy', perhaps?) The Battle of Armageddon would be the Climax, and the Triumphant Return of Christ, with the casting of the Beast (A-C as GC) into Hell, would be the Resolution. HTH. :wink:

See? It is possible to combine quite different models for understanding the world into a coherent whole. :wink:

Presidential Election Is Turning Novices Into Political Advocates

By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL

ESTPORT, Conn. ? For 20 years, Al Puchala was in political hibernation. So was his sometime investment partner, Douglas Korn. They were busy with other things: career, marriage, children, charities. Sure, they voted as a civic duty, but in their world of high finance, politics was considered a private thing ? rude if openly displayed.

But this is 2004. People are mad. The world is scary. So here come two high-powered executives who are friends and associates, jumping into the trenches of American presidential politics on opposite sides.

Mr. Puchala, a private equity fund manager, is vetting position papers for the Democratic National Committee and setting up an issues bank to help Democratic candidates. He is writing checks. He is roping in musician friends to set up benefit concerts.

On a recent Thursday night his stately white colonial here was used for a get-together and fund-raiser for Diane Farrell, a Democratic Congressional candidate. The house, decked out in red, white and blue balloons, overflowed with people like him ? casually dressed, 40-something political first-timers.

Mr. Korn helped organize a reception for President Bush in nearby Greenwich. He is soliciting donations like crazy, raising more than $100,000 and thereby rising to the rank of "Pioneer." A shelf in his office at Bear Stearns sports newly framed photographs showing him with the president and Vice President Dick Cheney.

Both men say the political bug bit them this year because they sensed a new urgency in the post-9/11 world. In 2000, they thought the choice of Bush vs. Gore did not matter. Today, they speak in apocalyptic language of historical turning points, of the desperate need to make the right choice.

Mr. Puchala: "We feel like this administration is really leading the country in the wrong direction. To a fiscal disaster. A foreign policy disaster. And it's kind of our turn to get involved and make a difference. The stakes are really high."

Mr. Korn: "If there ever was a time to get involved it is now, since I think the next five years will be a crucial point in modern history, related to the spread of weapons of mass destruction amidst the dangerous politics of radicalism in the Middle East. And I really believe this administration has the right approach in terms of actively intervening in problems that are easier to ignore. To my mind, if we revert back to failed policies of the past, heaven help us all."

The two men, who remain friendly, are demographically indistinguishable: Ivy League-educated M.B.A.'s in their early 40's with offices in New York and homes and young families in suburban Connecticut. Political moderates, they mostly agree on social issues like welfare and women's rights.

But in this red-and-blue America, they find themselves staring across an ideological Grand Canyon. And they are not alone. After years in the doldrums, membership in local Democratic and Republican clubs has skyrocketed this year, the two parties say. Polls show that voter interest in the presidential race is 20 percent higher than it was at this time in the 2000 campaign.

"I haven't seen this kind of passion and activism in this country since 1968 or '72," said Ken Sherrill, a political scientist at Hunter College in New York. "The sheer intensity of the anger is really extraordinary, the kind of thing you usually associate with the religious right."

Last time, Mr. Puchala voted for Al Gore and Mr. Korn voted for George W. Bush, but who really cared? "People felt really disenfranchised and had kind of given up on the system," Mr. Puchala said. "Now we've gone through four years of war, 9/11, from surplus to deficit. No one can be complacent."

Like many of their successful contemporaries, Mr. Puchala and Mr. Korn went straight from college to law or business school, then dived headlong into remunerative careers. Now they are taking stock.

"You get to a stage in life where you realize that it's not just about you but about your country, your community and the world," Mr. Korn said. "One day you realize that you have the ability to make a meaningful contribution and shame on you if you don't."

The shift is striking in the world of high finance, where politics, once considered bad for business, is now the center of office conversations. Mr. Korn grins and explains that he displays his photos of Republican officials in part to tease the many Democrats in his office.

Mr. Puchala has drawn all his closest friends in Westport into action, tapping in to their various skills. Crispin Cioe, a composer and musician, is organizing a benefit concert for the Democratic Party. Andy Moss, a technology executive and former independent who says he "could have voted either way in the 2000 election," is advising the party on science issues.

Arlo Ellison switched his affiliation to Democrat from Republican just three months ago, dismayed by the Republican record on deficit spending.

"It is a huge move for me to be an active Democrat," Mr. Ellison said in a phone interview. "But as a political rookie, I'll do anything to help out."

At his Harvard Business School reunion last fall, Mr. Korn and his old friend Howard Morgan suddenly found themselves talking politics and discovered they were both enthusiastic Republicans.

"Normally, polite people in our work didn't talk much about politics, but this has been a great opportunity to meet like-minded people," Mr. Morgan recalled. "We both said, `Boy, we wish we could get more involved,' and we've since been sort of mutually supportive in navigating the system."

In January, Mr. Korn and Mr. Morgan were hosts for a huge benefit for President Bush in Greenwich.

On both sides of the fence, there is a snowball effect, as friend infects friend with the political bug.

The two camps have viewed the events of the last four years through very different lenses and hold their political beliefs with the passion of converts.

Those who tend Republican see attacks on the United States as evidence that American values are under a serious threat that demands aggressive action.

Democrats, in contrast, are convinced that the Bush administration's response to terrorism has been intemperate, and say that has made the world dangerous. They also criticize the Republicans as hypocrites for deficit spending.

The rancor is also partly a result of the 2000 election.

"Democrats sit on a high horse and want to say that Bush was not popularly elected," Mr. Morgan said. "I'd love to knock that down."

Many Democrats, meanwhile, have lingering suspicions that treachery and big money stole that election, and are vowing it will never happen again.

Mr. Moss, the technology executive, could have been speaking for the newly energized of both parties when he said: "There are a lot of people like me who grew up just after the 60's, so remember it but weren't part of the process. Somewhere along the way we got detached from the politics. But at some point you wake up and realize that the adults won't do it for you ? that you are the adults. And you can't just sit on the sidelines and comment."