A Gathering of Kindred Souls!

Several years ago, a group of ladies from a Bible study group at St. Mark's Methodist Church in Brandon, Mississippi, thought it would be a good idea to have a "retreat." The first such gathering of members and spouses was on the Gulf Coast of Alabama. The following year it was in the Smokey Mountains. In subsequent years, gatherings have been at Bed and Breakfast locations throughout the Smokies and the Ozarks. Most of the members of this group have retired and scattered to points as diverse as Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, Texas, and South Dakota. A few remain in the Brandon area.

This photo is from our most recent "retreat" at a Bed and Breakfast near Heber Springs, Arkansas. Alas, Bob & Jimmie Ray and Janis were unable to attend this year. And Pat & Linda had to duck out early, so they weren't captured in this group photo. Next year, we hope for a "full house" as we plan to gather back on the beautiful Gulf Coast! And, as I reflect on this photo, we should have put the beauties in the front and the beasts in the back.

Return to Civil Discourse?

The firing of Don Imus was covered extensively by the media – and probably would still be a “front page” item, were it not for the shootings at Virginia Tech.

Sadly, Imus’ characterization of the women who play basketball for Rutgers as “nappy-headed hos,” was not atypical for Imus. A bright and articulate guy, Imus has traded in “edgy” comments for years, apparently emboldened by getting away with ever-increasing gross and/or offensive remarks, More sadly, he is not alone.

The airwaves remain filled with language and topics that perpetrators exchange for tidy paychecks from companies that trade in the business of bad taste. Of course, these same entities – like CBS and MSNBC – have done some good things over the years, too. That’s no excuse for tolerating, even encouraging and nurturing, program content that would never have been broadcast in days gone by.

Last week, I doubt that there was a broadcast market in the country not subjected to a poll asking, “Should Don Imus be fired?” Then later, after he was fired by both MSNBC and CBS, “Should Don Imus have been fired.”

The answer, of course, is yes. But the better question is: Does the firing of Don Imus signal an end to the trashy talk espoused by Imus, Howard Stern, and dozens of wannabe so-called “shock jocks”?

Broadcasting would do well to consider a return to the days when the National Association of Broadcasters issued its “seal of approval” for stations that subscribed to the NAB Code of Conduct. Find out more about the "Code of Conduct."

Some would contend that such a return to yesteryear is absurd, that it would fly in the face of the First Amendment, and that it would be unenforceable. I plead guilty to being a bit nostalgic, but I doubt that our forefathers envisioned the kind of filth being spewed over the airwaves of the 21st century. Enforcing such a code probably is a big stretch, especially in a day when “local” broadcasters responsible to local audiences are nearly impossible to find.

Perhaps we’ll just have to settle for banishing such trash to satellite radio services, which seem to have found a revenue stream from audiences that like such programming. Just as pornography has always had an audience, I suspect such “pay” satellite channels might survive – even thrive.

Better there than on the free over-the-air channels that belong to the public. It would be refreshing to see a return to relative civility by those broadcast media outlets that have spewed trash over our public airwaves in recent years.

Tippecanoe and Tyler, Too!

Is it important that a president have military experience?

An AP analysis caught my attention in the Rapid City Journal yesterday morning (April 10, 2007). “Few candidates have military record,” read the headline. The piece gave a good synopsis of military experience – more accurately, the lack of it – among presidential candidates.

Apart from John McCain, there’s no real breadth or depth of military experience among the many candidates who’ve already announced for 2008. But just how important is it for a president to have served?

While our constitution gives only Congress the power to declare war, the reality is that there are hundreds of examples where the president has directed our forces in “police actions” and “peace-keeping” missions as Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces.

Of course, the constitution also entrusts the Executive Branch to set foreign policy, but Speaker Nancy Pelosi has demonstrated that the Legislative Branch can also push the envelope in interpreting the constitution. But that’s another issue.

If history is an indication, serving in the military has been a big deal in getting elected over the course of our history – even if it is now falling out of favor.

American Diplomacy editor Henry Mattox cites examples of how most U.S. Presidents have served in the military – but often such service has been fleeting or inconsequential. He points to President James Buchanan, who enlisted as a Pennsylvania volunteer during the War of 1812, but served only a few weeks. Abe Lincoln spent not much more time than that in the Illinois militia during the Black Hawk War of 1832. And Ronald Reagan’s military experience was primarily served in his hometown (Hollywood) assigned to making training films.

Of course, there were the few whose service in uniform is unquestionable, starting with George Washington’s 15 years – all in leadership positions. Fellow professional soldiers who rose to flag rank included Zachary Taylor, Ulysses Grant, and Dwight Eisenhower. Some 20 presidents served during war time, many capitalizing upon that fact in their campaigns. The earliest, perhaps, was William Henry Harrison.

The oldest man ever elected president (he was 68 ), Harrison hearkened back nearly 30 years – when he was a General, and his troops defeated the Shawnee Indians at the Battle of Tippacanoe. The 1840 campaign slogan “Tippacanoe and Tyler, too” was a key factor in his election as president.

Numerous 20th century presidents laid claim to service in war time: Teddy Roosevelt in the Spanish American War, and Harry Truman in World War II. And no fewer than six presidents were able to point to war-time service in the Second World War: Dwight Eisehnower, John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and George Bush.

But the question remains; how important is military experience?

With burgeoning health care issues, do we look to the medical profession for presidential material? Does it take a teacher to successfully grapple with reforming education? Of course, few things are more important than national security – in which the military plays an integral role.

It seems to me that military service can be helpful, but certainly is not essential. Rather, we should seek intelligent, thoughtful, and decisive individuals to fill the highest office in the land. Those experienced few who have demonstrated their management and leadership capabilities, whether it’s been on the battlefield, in the classroom, or – yes, even on the big screen. Maturity and wisdom will count more than piloting or sharpshooting skills.

But, of course, the military has been a leading arena for developing leadership skills and measuring the worth of a person by his or her abilities and skills. Hundreds of thousands of men and women will attribute their maturity to lesson learned in the service of their country.

Mississippi writer Bill Minor, who served on a Navy destroyer in the South Pacific in World War II, recalled the words of his commanding officer at a reunion of the USS Potter some four decades later.

“I took a group of boys to sea, and they became men.”

To be sure, there are many ways to gain maturity and develop leadership skills, but military experience remains among the best. Military experience can be a plus – but it is not essential – for those who would be president of these United States.

The Death of...

You’ll find genealogy sites linked to the Black Hills Monitor, because I’ve been afflicted with the genealogy bug for a long time. In recent years, I’ve come to the conclusion that good obituaries have been dying off more rapidly than the poor souls they recognize.

The first sign was when a few enterprising newspapers figured out they could make a buck by selling obituary space to families of the deceased. When the newspaper business hit upon hard times, more and more papers looked to cut costs and eke out dollars wherever they could. The result was fewer newspaper-generated obituaries and more family-authored pieces that, while usually a bit longer and flowerier than the paper would generate, would put a few nickels in the coffers to help pay the rising costs of newsprint. These days, the Rapid City Journal will even put you on a guilt trip for not “showing how much you care” for a deceased pet by buying a pet obituary.

But that’s another story.

Today I refer to two obituaries about the same man. Jack Tatum. Not that Jack died. He didn’t. But he’s prominently discussed in obituaries written about former New England Patriot receiver Darryl Stingley, who died April 5. Stingley had been a quadriplegic since a tragic 1978 football game in which he collided with Oakland Raider safety Tatum. His football injuries apparently contributed directly to his cause of death.

I read about this in both the New York Times, one of my favorite papers, and the weekend USA Today, which I often pick up when I’m on the road. Both obituaries gave me the essential facts, but they diverged significantly when talking about Tatum.

Although I played a lot of football as a kid, I’m not a big fan of professional football, so I knew little about Stingley and nothing about Tatum. Both obituaries left me with a great deal of respect for the way Stingley chose to live his life after this horrific incident. As for Tatum, I’m not sure.

What I am certain of is the dramatic contrast between the Times and USA Today over the kind of guy Tatum was or is. The Times reported that Tatum never contacted Stingley after the incident. It quoted Tatum in his 1980 autobiography as saying, “This is the way the game is played…I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault.” The Times obituary of Darryl Stingley ended by drawing a stark contrast between a forgiving Stingley and an indifferent Tatum.

Frank Litsky of the Times ended the obituary, “Similar sentiments appeared in Stingley’s 1983 autobiography, ‘Happy to Be Alive.’ Tatum’s autobiography was titled ‘They Call Me Assassin.’”

The USA Today obituary painted a different picture of Tatum. It noted that although there was debate about the intensity of the hit, there was no flag thrown, and Patriot’s coach Chuck Fairbanks said nothing illegal happened. Unlike the Times story, USA Today carried a quote from Tatum that read, “I am deeply saddened by the death of Darryl Stingley…Darryl will be forever remembered for his strength and courage. My thoughts and prayers go out to his family.”

Same guys. Same-day obituaries. Different papers. And certainly a different portrayal of Tatum, depending on which paper you read.

It reminds me of the blind men who each touched a different part of an elephant and then described the elephant, resulting in huge disagreements about what an elephant is. How many other newspapers need to be read before we have an accurate assessment of Jack Tatum?

Please hand me my white cane.

Sweepers...Man Your Brooms!

As a young sailor in the 1960s, I remember an evening at rest on the fantail of the USS Saratoga – at anchor in the Mediterranean Sea – gazing at the reflection of the moon atop a seemingly endless ocean. Heady stuff for a kid from landlocked Nebraska.

“Jeez, Chief,” I commented to a salty Chief Petty Officer next to me, “that’s a lot of water.”

“Yup, son,” he drawled in his crusty but authoritative style, “and that's just the top of it.”

That fleeting moment left me with a lingering respect for the enormity and wonder of our planet. That perspective, however, didn’t stop me or any of the thousands of sailors aboard hundreds of ships in our navy, from throwing trash off the stern of the ship. It was, after all, a nightly routine we were directed to follow – instigated by the Boatswains Mate’s nightly announcement over the 1MC speaker system. “Sweepers, sweepers, man your brooms and give the ship a clean sweepdown fore and aft. Take all trash to the fantail.” And take it…and more…. we did. I shudder when I think about the many items given the “Deep Six.” Some “garbage” had to be taken to the fantail with a hand truck!

But my conversion to treating Mother Earth more kindly didn’t occur overnight. Largely through the unflagging efforts of my wife over many years, I became a believer in recycling. And appropriately disposing of batteries, spent oil, etc.

I recall the devastation and loss of lives (some 250,000) from the tsunamis that swelled from the 2004 earthquake in the Indian Ocean. The sobering experience from the eruption of Mount St. Helen’s in 1980. Of course, these occurred in the short snippet of history called “my lifetime,” and I was keenly aware of them, due largely to a modern communications system that spewed out more facts, history, video and still photos than most of us could absorb.

Having become a believer in environmentalism, I have not become a believer in Al Gore’s gloom and doom. His film, “An Inconvenient Truth,” is conveniently focused upon Al Gore. From nostalgic childhood memories to a his touching self-described survival of difficult personal losses that many of us have or will come to experience in our lives. It was…..well, it was…..Gorey.

I believe in global warming. I believe earlier in this century, many scientists were equally concerned about a coming “ice age.” However, there does appear to be unrefutable evidence that we are in a period of global warming. Key questions for me are:

What is the cause of this global warming?
How much of the cause is “man-made”?
How long will it last?
How does human activity compare with “natural” forces of nature in climate change?
Can we make a difference?

My view is that we humans DO participate in a wide range of environmental misdeeds. I also believe that those misdeeds, including exorbitant carbon dioxide emissions, pale when compared to the forces of Mother Nature.

Of course, we know it’s not nice to fool Mother Nature, and some would say it’s even more foolish that we humans should think we can significantly alter the forces of our global environment.

Perhaps the most nagging question for me is the final one. Can we make a difference? I believe we can, however miniscule it might be. So I’ll continue to recycle and find other ways I can be friendly to the environement.

But don’t expect me to fall for Al Gore’s gloom and doom. The cataclysmic events he unveils in his self-aggrandizing movie may well occur. But they’ll not be caused by man.
In the meantime, I don’t want to be even a minor, unwitting participant, in such an event. So please help me find a recycling center that’s closer than 50 miles from home!

Back in the Saddle....Again!

Even as a 10-year-old growing up in Nebraska, I knew that Gene Autry had his title "King of the Cowboys" stolen from him by that upstart Leonard Slye (Roy Rogers). And how unfair it was, I thought.

After all, Gene had heroicly volunteered for the Army Air Corps in World War II, leaving his royal cowboy throne - only to have Roy steal it from him. Gene was flying "the Hump" in the China-Burma-India theatre, defending his country, while Roy was back home staging a coup!

With the recent release of Holly George-Warren's biography of Gene, Public Cowboy No. 1, all those old memories of my childhood hero were re-awakened. Not only was I among the millions of lads glued to the Gene Autry radio broadcasts from Melody Ranch, I must have had at least three autographed photos of Gene tucked away in my bedroom. I wouldn't miss any of his movies, which I still re-visit on DVD from time to time, sometimes a bit disappointed with the plot -- but never with Gene!

In the late 1940s and early '50s, kids in our neighborhood fell into one of two categories: Roy fans -- or Gene fans. I opted for the somewhat less flamboyant Gene Autry, whose humble beginnings in Texas and Oklahoma gave rise to a hero we (Gene fans) admired and tried to emulate. Roy, on the other hand, was just too flashy! Both had cool horses and pretty female sidekicks -- and that was usually the order in which we measured the good taste and wisdom of our Saturday afternoon idols.

Gene Autry came back from the war, re-established himself at the box office, and went on to amass a fortune in the record industry, real estate, broadcasting, and sports. He achieved a long-time goal of owning a major league baseball team, the California Angels.

In later years, of course, I came to admire Roy Rogers, too. His devotion to his adopted family and enduring benevolence was truly remarkable. But he would never supplant those early memories of my real hero, Gene Autry.

Some 50 years after I had put Gene up on his pedestal, and after raising my own family and traversing the country in search of a "career," the unthinkable happened. As a manager with the Oklahoma Educational Televison Authority (OETA, the state public TV network), my boss, Bob Allen, and I were invited to an open house at neighboring Oklahoma City station KAUT-TV, owned by Gene Autry's Golden West Broadcasting. Late for the gathering, we slipped in through a side door and were navigating the hallways in search of the official reception. As we turned a corner, we came face-to-face with....yup....Gene Autry. Conducting his own solo examination of the newest Golden West property, Gene obliged us, nonetheless, with a warm greeting and a handshake.

We had exchanged pleasantries, but there was no time for me to tell Gene how much he had affected my young life. I, and millions of other cowboy wannabes, grew up wanting to be just like our hero. Well, I never quite made it as cowboy hero, but for those few short moments, I was "back in the saddle again"!

Thanks for the memories, Gene.

America at a Crossroads

Public broadcasting has always had a slight tilt to the left, but it remains the best U.S. broadcast news service available. While the BBC has lost ground, its international coverage is second to none. I spend most of my broadcast listening time with National Public Radio, but I'm about to invest a significant block of time watching "America at a Crossroads" on PBS later this month.

Not surprisingly, the New York Times dedicated most of its Television page on April Fools Day to PBS. And this time it's worth the ink. Reporter Elizabeth Jensen outlined the forthcoming bloc of independent documentaries that will likely range from the far left to the "neo-conservative" right. PBS has dubbed the twelver hours of diverse views "America at a Crossroads," and just which way she will go we can't be certain.

We can, however, take solace in the fact that this series of programs will be tied together by the thoughtful introductions of Robert MacNeil, long-time journalist with PBS and the BBC. It's hard to believe that MacNeil would risk his well-earned credibility becoming associated with a project without merit. His participation -- for many of us -- is a testament to the quality of the project.

Not that we'll all like everything we see and hear. More likely, it will offend those with extreme views on both sides, who will then try to enliven the perennial question regarding federal funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB). Jensen reports that the concept of "Crossroads" emanated at CPB, which plowed $20 million into helping make the concept a meaningful reality.

Viewers with strong opinions on the war in Iraq will find much fodder for debate in this six-day series. Let's hope they find merit in diverse examinations of the war, Islam, and the sharpening conflict between national security and personal liberties.

And let's hope they're more tolerant than John Schidlovsky, an outside adviser to the "Crossroads" project. Founding director of the International Reporting Project at Johns Hopkins University, Schidlovsky resigned as an adviser, apparently because a "neo-conservative" film featuring former Bush advisor Richard Perle was given the green light for broadcast on "Crossroads." Never mind that it's just one of numerous perspectives to be aired.

The anticipated diverse content of "America at a Crossroads" is the kind of thing that we seldom find anywhere on television.....except at PBS. The first broadcast will be Sunday evening, April 15th. Kudos to CPB and PBS for taking on what will undoubtedly cause a stir along the Potomac.

Tune In...Take Drugs...

I take an aspirin a day, so I'm reluctant to be a radical on the the subject of "big drug companies" ruining our lives. But I do believe they've had a profound negative effect on our quality of life. How is that possible you may ask, given the development of life-saving drugs that have also provided healthier lives for millions of Americans?

Let's clearly distinguish between the drugs themselves and their marketers.

A generation or more ago, the corner drugstore was a community gathering place, where you could visit with friends, pick up a prescription, and perhaps enjoy a milk shake at the soda fountain. Clearly, there were pharmaceutical companies -- even large ones, but they were not driven by the fierce market forces of the 21st century.

Some of you will remember the days of Huntley-Brinkley and Walter Cronkite, when the evening network news was replete with commercials for soap, breakfast food, automobiles, beer, and -- yes -- pharmaceuticals. Fast forward 50 years and discover that the Hamm's bears have gone into permanent hibernation from the airwaves, and that drug companies have come to dominate commercial time not just during the evening news -- but throughout the evening television schedule.

The enormity of the economic force wielded by big drug companies is reflected in a bit of research done by the Center for Public Integrity, a non-profit and non-partisan public policy organization in Washington, D.C. They report that big drug company lobbyists in Washington easily outnumber members of Congress, and that those lobbyists spent some $155 million between January 2005 and June 2006. It's little wonder that they were successful in beating back efforts by Congress to revisit a provision in the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 that barred the federal government from negotiating on Medicare drug prices. The Center for Public Integrity further reports that drug lobbyists also worked hard for the protection of lucrative drug patents and the prevention of the importation of lower-priced Canadian drugs.

Three cheers to the Center for Public Integrity for its investigative efforts focusing on this timely issue. A situation that threatens to push costs for health care even farther out of sight......alongside drug company profits. You can read more about it at: http://secure.publicintegrity.org/ It's enough to give a fella a headache. Would you please pass the aspirin?

Sex Sells -- Even fro the Journal

(Friday, March 9, 2007) -- Above the front-page fold, in headline type that dwarfs the "Dems propose Iraq withdrawal date" headline stuck back on page 3, the Rapid City Journal knows opportunity when it sees it.

Scott Aust's story about two French artists who "shocked the crowd and even the promoter at the Dahl Arts Center on Wednesday" with nudity and simulated violence and sex acts was given top position with an above the fold headline: "Nude show shocks Dahl." Replete with three not-so-revealing photographs, the story seems justifiable -- but not as the front-page lead.

Aust's description of events at the Dahl Arts Center -- we don't know how many folks witnessed the performance -- makes clear that the two performers stepped way over the line of what most Dakotans would consider acceptable "art."One photo cutline noted that the French duo "took off their clothes, simulated sex acts and toosed fake feces and urine at a show that was halted...."

While promoter Kevin Dorsman was reportedly apologetic and said he was blindsided, he defended performer Jean-Louis. "Great guy. Very intense, very dedicated to his art form. However, I don't think Rapid City is quite ready for it."Oh? And just when WILL Rapid City "be ready for it."? This story, unfortunately, was too easy a target. It should've been done -- but better placed in the local section.

Ah, well. As we said, "sex sells."