Never Surrender

A funny thing happened when I started reading the abridged Memoirs of the Second World War by Winston S. Churchill.

This book takes the six books written by Churchill about the war and combines them into one abridged work. Churchill won the Nobel Prize for Literature for his epic work documenting the earth's most destructive war.

But the part that made me stop was his description on pages 20 and 21 of events that led to the Great Depression. Mr. Churchill reminded me that there are not many things in the world that are truly unique. And, during this time of uncertainty for many, the tried-and-true methods will help get us through. For starters, remember to extend a helping hand, stave off surrender and band together.

In 1959, Churchill wrote the following about the 1920s (complete with British spelling):

"The year 1929 reached almost the end of its third quarter under the promise and appearance of increasing prosperity, particularly in the United States. Extraordinary optimism sustained an orgy of speculation. Books were written to prove that economic crisis was a phase which expanding business organisation and science had at last mastered. "We are apparently finished and done with economic cycles as we have known them," said the President of the New York Stock Exchange in September. But in October a sudden and violent tempest swept over Wall Street. The intervention of the most powerful agencies failed to stem the tide of panic sales. A group of leading banks constituted a milliard-dollar pool to maintain and stabilise the market. All was vain.

"The whole wealth so swiftly gathered in the paper values of previous years vanished. <The prosperity of millions of American homes had grown upon a gigantic structure of inflated credit now suddenly proved phantom. Apart from the nation-wide speculation in shares which even the most famous banks had encouraged by easy loans, a vast system of purchase by instalment of houses, furniture, cars, and numberless kinds of household conveniences and indulgences had grown up. All now fell together. The mighty production plants were thrown into confusion and paralysis. But yesterday there had been the urgent question of parking the motorcars in which thousands of artisans and craftsmen were beginning to travel to their daily work. Today, the grievous pangs of falling wages and rising unemployment afflicted the whole community, engaged till this moment in the most active creation of all kinds of desirable articles for the enjoyment of millions. The American banking system was far less concentrated and solidly based than the British. Twenty thousand local banks suspended payment. The means of exchange of goods and services between man and man was smitten to the ground, and the crash on Wall Street reverberated in modest and rich households alike.

"It should not however be supposed that the fair vision of far greater wealth and comfort ever more widely shared which had entranced the people of the United States had nothing behind it but delusion and market frenzy. Never before had such immense quantities of goods of all kinds been produced, shared, and exchanged in any society. There is in fact no limit to the benefits which human being may bestow upon one another by the highest exertion of their diligence and skill. This splendid manifestation had been shattered and cast down by vain imaginative processes and greed of gain which far outstripped the great achievement itself. In the wake of the collapse of the stock market came during the years between 1929 and 1932 an unrelenting fall in prices and consequent cuts in production causing widespread unemployment."

-- Memoirs of the Second World War, an abridgment of the six volumes of The Second World War, by Winston S. Churchill, pp. 20-21. Mariner Books.

(emphasis added)

Sound familiar? Eerily familiar?

I am not predicting a depression, but I certainly was not comforted by reading the above passage. It made me recall the main theme from the new TV series Battlestar Galactica, which is "All of this has happened before and all of it will happen again."

The economy is bigger than politics, so I am not going to use this post to assign blame or to prescribe some sort of solution. I will even resist the temptation to badger over the glut of non-regulators manning the positions of regulators. The fact remains that our foundational financial institutions found ways to over-indulge and would have found a way in any event.

What matters is that many people are really hurting out there. We all know people who are being ground to dust by circumstances. It's a scary time and unemployment has been rampant.

I am not sure where we go from here, but I hope our populace will resist the usual mud slinging and band together. I hope our leaders can find the strength to tell us what the truth is and not try to sugarcoat it. I hope we can embrace real solutions even if they are difficult or non-compliant with our ideological beliefs.

In any case, such things will take time and no solution will work quickly.

In the meantime, its time for all hands on deck. While bigger solutions are sought to the extent possible in Washington, it's time to help each other. None of us are in this alone and today's hard luck neighbors may end up being the ones who pull you out of the abyss if or when fate changes hands.

I always talk about bootstraps. We can control events to a point. We can make opportunities into successes by our efforts, but we never do anything alone. And, now more than ever, we need each other.

Another lesson we can take from Mr. Churchill is that no matter how bad things get, we must persevere to the end. No one can say that with more authority than the man who rescued England from perils we cannot understand today. His favorite term was "KBO," which means "keep buggering on."

We may not be fighting on the beaches or in the air, but we can fight for homes and for each other. The message is the same in war as in economic turmoil: Never Surrender. And hang in there.

Mapping the Gray

As the new year dawns, I realize that there is almost nothing I really want to change. Yet, like everyone, I will probably make a list of resolutions.

Resolutions are good at "sharpening the saw" and encourage "re dedication" to positive habits that have waned. I'm all for resolutions and no one in the world has attained perfection.

This New Year, however, has me focused on attempts to understand our species. What began as an elaborate attempt to learn about human behavior for a short story has turned into an obsession. I can't stop trying to learn about the rationality employed by people. I'm now getting a second wind on writing, but my study is nowhere close to done.

I recently was exposed to behavior that shocked my conscience, and, as a result, intensified my curiosity. The thought process that followed led to a hashing-out of my concept of truth. I have settled on a "modern" view for now. Allow me to explain.

I was introduced to a situation involving a mother who gave birth to a child while high on meth - and thus imposing upon that child the most uncertain and difficult of futures. My introduction into the scene was on the periphery and I do not really know any of the people involved, but it brought back memories of a similar case I argued and set my mind aflutter.

For reasons I cannot explain, I have never needed to learn the hard way. That is not to say I always learn easily, gracefully or with any special aptitude. I just don't tend to dabble in areas clearly shown to be dangerous. It may be from over-caution; from adept parenting provided to me; or it may be out of cowardice, but I have never flirted with rock bottom. I have never tried any illegal drug, I never picked up smoking, and I do not drink regularly or to excess. Heck, I haven't even gotten a speeding ticket since college and I will do anything possible to avoid snow driving. I guess I play the odds.

I am certain that none of my choices come from any personal superiority, and that is why I have a deep fascination with those who make terrible decisions in life and how that reflects upon greater truths. I always wonder what drives those decisions.

Is it a chemical or biological urge that comes from DNA? Does upbringing overpower nature? More specifically, would someone of my own temperament submit to the pressures if placed in a specific environment? I am sure the answer would be so variable as to be no better than a shrug. All of the above? None of the above? Some of each, but all of none? Every possible answer is on the table.

The mother who gave birth to a child while high on meth can appear normal and even pleasant in casual conversation. I cannot pretend to understand her station in life. I cannot know what the world looks like through her eyes or what she learned (or didn't learn) from her parents or family. But, I do know this: what she did was just about the worst display of judgment I can imagine.

Yet, somehow, decisions like hers aren't nearly as rare as they should be. I know because I can still see the image of a dead child from the file of my first-ever case.

My case involved a mother who was crashing from a meth high. Although a malfunctioning electric blanket inflicted the fatal heat levels, it was the mother who caused a death by placing her drug addiction ahead of the needs of an 11-week-old baby.

Some might call for execution as the only remedy to such horrible judgment as a violation of a basic and indisputable truth. Others will view the mother as a victim who must be rehabilitated as a nod to the uncertainty of greater truths in light of circumstances. Still others will grudgingly advocate rehab to avoid the unhappy consequence of a child without a mother (the pragmatic approach). I have no idea how to look at it, but I will not rationalize her behavior.

I simply cannot fathom such judgment and decision making. All attempts to explain seem like rationalization, which leads me to my greater point and how that relates to a greater truth.

The variations of poor judgment run the gamut. The examples above are extreme, of course. But, I have been considering the notion that we are less a rational species than a "rationalizing" one. This notion is not unique (I read an overview in one of Malcolm Gladwell's many brilliant books), but it is a harsh one that I hope to find unfitting.

When we discuss judgment, degrees are often used to justify behavior we know to be wrong. Maybe one person will say, "well, I did meth, but not while pregnant." Another may say, "I only drink and drive, but I've never killed anyone and I always took the back roads." Degrees aside, all the above involve poor judgment and dangerous behavior no matter how explained. Taken further, this example could lead to, "well, I didn't outright lie by leaving out the obvious relevant tidbit" to justify deception. Each degree takes us closer to what could be labeled the "actual truth."

In years past, I have contemplated some of the post-modern philosophical ideas and their general notion of subjective truths. Specifically, the idea that we can never really know if an action was "wrong" in the greater sense because we can't know all that is behind a given fact pattern. But, although some of those arguments are clever, I cannot shake the older (ironically titled "modern") belief in a firm right and wrong.

There is a lot of gray area between "right" and "wrong." I am certain of that. I am also certain it is not all gray.

I have decided that much of what we all consider gray area is constructed by our own rationalization. There is gray area, but it is smaller than many are willing to accept. That gray area can become as wide as we need it to be so as to justify ourselves. Although every person's map is unique, the larger the gray area, the more we fool ourselves.

My view of the gray area includes the unknowable (such as many religion-based arguments) and moral ambiguities (the "do you kill to potentially save?" type issues). I am sure there are more, but no matter where that difficult-to-find line is, the clearly marked areas cannot be missed.

Not doing drugs is clearly right. Driving while clearly sober is clearly right. Telling the truth even when it hurts is right.

We will all land squarely in the wrong at times. It will always happen. Only when we shade that side with gray and make ourselves comfortable therein do we perpetuate poor judgment. Sometimes we have to accept that "bad things happen," feel shame and re-settle in the clearly marked areas.

Of course, I'm already thinking of rationalizations to broaden my gray area so as not to offend ... and I think maybe therein lies the problem.

Holiday Update

... We are hosting Jen's dad for his holiday visit. In preparation for his visit, we showed Jacob some home movies of when he played trains with his grandfather during the last visit. We talked up the idea of trains and insisted that grandpa's arrival would lead to immense amounts of train play.

As a result, Jacob literally could not wait for Jen's dad to arrive and, once he did, Jacob absolutely pounced. He has referred to grandpa as "my best friend" and gets upset when he goes downstairs to take a break from the train onslaught.

... I learned not to try to explain death to a three year old. I hadn't reviewed that part of the manual. Now, whenever we mention "mommy's daddy" he turns to me and says "your dad is dead." Fun.

... Jacob caused an uproar when he and his cousins were baking with grandpa on Monday. Jacob doesn't like to miss anything with his cousins. So, he brought his training potty (which had been relegated for late-night necessity) into the kitchen and proceeded to do his business in the presence of all parties. The training potty is now hidden.

... Although I'm done with my year's allotment of books, I am still trying to get one more finished before 2010. Malcolm Gladwell literally teaches me about life. What a writer / reporter / journalist. I love his books. They just make you think.

... Gladwell touched on a topic I have taken a keen interest in lately: dancing dialogue. He discusses how people communicate through posture and movements. I always take note of how people compose their bodies, countenances, etc. while interacting. I am trying to utilize those traits for (you guessed it) my ever-in-the-works short story / book. I worked on that a little the other day, and it's moving slowly, but I feel like I know where its going.

... Health care reform is coming. I am glad it is almost here. The misleading information has been exposed, the problems with the bill as a result of compromise are apparent, and its time to start the process. If opponents of any reform at all win, nothing gets solved. It's time to provide options. And, yes, passing health care reform will be a monumental political feather in Obama's cap.

... I am off from work until January 4, 2010 and I plan on enjoying the time off.

... I want to wish everyone a happy holiday season.

End of the Year Book Report

This month ends year two of my "Book challenge" with, well, Book. As always, the goal is 24 per year, but this year we each received two "assignment" reads from the other. I assigned Richard Kluger's "Simple Justice" and Barrack Obama's "Faith of my Fathers" to Book.

I figured this would be a good time to give a rundown of the books I read this year and my thoughts on them. I will try to pick a top five and make notations on most memorable.

** Denotes a top 5 for the year.

THE STAT PADDERS

These books were easy reads, light reads, or whatever you want to use as a euphemism for "short." Hey, I have a job and a family, so I can't read ALL long books.

-- Ernie Davis: The Elmira Express, by Robert Gallagher. The true story of Ernie Davis and a really fun read. It was short if only because Davis' life was short. The most interesting information was from Davis' short pro career and his fight against cancer. There were also great stories about what it was like for the first African American Heisman winner to play games in the deep South. I never cease to be amazed at how relatively recently segregation gripped this nation.

-- Born Standing Up, by Steve Martin. This book included a lot of the behind-the-scenes stories of Martin's rise to fame. I had no idea how long or how diligently he worked to master the craft of comedy. The man worked hard to become funny. He also did drugs. Shocking, I know.

-- Sex, Drugs and Cocoa Puffs, by Chuck Klosterman. An essay book that was great fun to read. Although the essays are not all winners, the vast majority are, and he even managed to reel me into topics I would otherwise never explore. He is a very clever and intelligent writer, and very funny at times. Plus, he picked the right Star Wars movie as the best ever.

-- Me of Little Faith, by Lewis Black. Comedy book. Pretty disappointing on the whole. I should have read a different one by him. Mixing religion and comedy rarely works, and never works for a whole book.

-- Winston Churchill, by John Keegan. I must confess, I really wanted to read a thorough, long and detailed biography of Sir Winston Churchill, but none were available on Kindle, and I've become a Kindle snob, so I will hold out for a Kindle-worthy title. In the meantime, this very short book from the Penguin "biography" series provided me with a working knowledge of a true hero of WWII. Interesting, but more of a long (200 page) book report than a detailed account. Interesting, and informative. It did the job.

JUST A JOY TO READ

These books all contributed to my greater good mood. Each of these were fun to read and hard to put down.

-- Have a Nice Day, a tale of blood and sweat socks, by Mick Foley. Some of the most interesting stories I have ever read. This book kicked off a mini-fascination with pro wrestling for me. It's like watching a train wreck. I got my fill and moved on, but this book was memorable.

-- The Watchmen, by Alan Moore. Loved the movie. Loved the graphic novel. Really smart story and it even satisfied my need for politics.

** -- The Book of Basketball, by Bill Simmons. I love the NBA. I love somewhat off-color humor. I loved this book. One of the top five of the year. I may even read this one again because it has already sparked a number of NBA discussions among the guys. Never hurts that we now have stories to tell from the book signing.

-- Bowls, polls and tattered souls, by Stewart Mandel. I enjoy Mandel's writing. The book was interesting and pretty entertaining. This filled the void since neither Charlottesville, VA, nor Boulder, CO fielded anything close to college football teams in 2009. Seriously, this book WAS my college football season. Well, that and watching my boss get dragged through the mud by Notre Dame.

-- Da Vinci Code, by Dan Brown. Much better than Angels and Demons (which I read last year). I loved the ending and enjoyed the story. Considering I'm usually not a fan of fiction, the fact I liked this book says something.

-- Boys Will Be Boys, by Jeff Pearlman. I've never liked the Dallas Cowboys, but their 90s teams were full of some colorful characters (and that puts it lightly). Just a lot of funny stories, debauchery, and more genital waving that I expected (Seriously, Charles Haley was a Loony Toon... who liked to show everyone his junk).

ULTIMATELY FORGETTABLE

I read less forgettable books this year than last, which is a good thing. Still, they can't all be winners.

-- How to Rig an Election, by Allan Raymond. Very disappointing. There was not much depth to this "inside" story of political espionage. More like one guy who went too far one time and got smacked for it.

-- As They See 'Em, by Bruce Webber. Impulse Kindle purchase. Somewhat interesting look at how umpires are trained. There were some interesting stories from former umps, but the umpire school parts were just ok.

-- The Lost Symbol, by Dan Brown. I have referred to this as "Angels and Da Vinci Lose a Symbol." This was at times compelling, but ultimately disappointing. Dan Brown found a formula and he refuses to deviate from it. Too predictable, too much of the same thing. Not much to the end. Ultimately, it was just one step too far into the conspiracy world. Reached a Tipping Point I think.

LIFE LESSONS

-- Blink, by Malcolm Gladwell. See below.

**-- Outliers, by Malcolm Gladwell. See below.

-- The Tipping Point, by Malcolm Gladwell. These three titles by Gladwell were all spectacular handbooks to life. Outliers supported my belief that you can't just pull yourself up by your bootstraps because we don't control much of what allows success. The Tipping Point can be used to illustrate how most things in life really turn the corner. Blink taught me much about perceptions and how our inherent biases work without our knowledge or control. All three were just spectacular. Outliers gets into the top five because its lessons are the most applicable to everyday life.

**-- Brothers Karamozov, by Fyodore Dostoevsky. This is considered by many to be the greatest novel ever written. It was less a novel than a psychological study of various types of people. This book was very helpful in my slow and deliberate development of characters in my own story. The depth of this book cannot be adequately described. This is truly one of the greatest works ever written.

**-- Crime and Punishment, by Fyodore Dostoevsky. Another masterpiece by Dostoevsky. I LOVED the ending and its simplicity. The main character was completely fascinating and this book explored every inch of him. It also made his crime seem almost understandable considering his circumstances. The mind games he endured while trying to avoid capture were absorbing. Only Dostoevsky could create a character so completely. You will love him, hate him, sympathize with him and condemn him. And, in the end, you will understand him.

**-- Team of Rivals, by Doris Kearns Goodwin. One of the greatest books I have ever read. This wins the award if only because of my preference for nonfiction and for my obsession with politics. Abraham Lincoln was the greatest solver of problems I have ever read about. His deeds, demeanor, methods and overall genuine kindness are shown to the reader. There is less description than illustration. By the end, you will almost find yourself in tears at his assassination. You will also literally watch him save our nation.

THE REST

-- Seabiscuit, by Laura Hillenbrand. This book was assigned by Book, and it was good. He told me I would be rooting for a horse, and, although it didn't go that far for me, it was a well-told story. I enjoyed this book much more than I expected to. The people in the story were fascinating and complemented each other well. That's probably why they were so successful.

-- The Breaks of the Game, by David Halberstam. Simmons calls this the greatest basketball book ever written. It was a fascinating account. I love the idea of a book about a team that did not win a title. Those stories interest me more and there are not many written. I would love to read more books about teams that would be forgettable without a book having been written. It makes the story feel like a snapshot of what "teams" are like. It also included a lot of background information about how the league became what it is today.

-- American Lion, by Jon Meacham. This book won a Pulitzer. I learned a lot about Andrew Jackson and his presidency. I was most surprised about just how much drama soaked his White House. I was not as impressed as I expected to be, but it was a good work based on previously un-published personal writings. At times, the drama gets very soap-opera-ish.

-- Southern Storm, by Noah Andre Trudeau. "The Devil Born to Earth," as a friend once called Gen. Sherman, basically destroyed Georgia. This is a detailed account of his March to the Sea. It was interesting and read surprisingly quickly.

HOME STRETCH

I am finishing my final book and will be reading an extra one or two before the end of the year.

-- Eating the Dinosaur, by Chuck Klosterman. I am almost done with this one, and it is better than "Sex, Drugs and Cocoa Puffs." So far his very best work, and I would include it in the Joy section.

-- The Football Fan's Manifesto, by Michael Tunison. This will go into the forgettable section. I have been "close" to finishing this for quite a while. Just predictable and recycled football humor. I am only finishing it because I started it.

TOP 5

5. Outliers, by Malcolm Gladwell.

4. The Book of Basketball, by Bill Simmons.

3. Brothers Karamozov, by Fyodore Dostoevsky.

2. Crime and Punishment, by Fyodore Dostoevsky.

1. Team of Rivals, by Doris Kearns Goodwin.

It's been another great year of reading. I am already getting the Kindle tuned up for 2010. As always, suggestions are welcome (and will most likely be followed if its available on Kindle).

One Full Weekend

My weekend was awesome.

It started with a book signing in Denver, included my attendance at a dominating performance by the Nuggets at Pepsi Center, and ended with a unique opportunity for me to speak about health care reform with my representative for the U.S. House.

FRIDAY: The Sports Guy Meets Chuck



On Friday, Book, Tom and I all went down to Denver for a book signing by our favorite sports columnist, Bill Simmons. His new book, The Book of Basketball, is informative and hilarious. I have already read the book and it is a great read if you are an NBA fan.

His only egregious error was not including Carmelo Anthony in his list of greatest players. Still, the book was awesome and we were excited to meet Mr. Simmons.

Book and I brought our copies of the book, but Tom brought the best item of all. Simmons ranks Alex English the 65th best basketball player of all time. Simmons references the 1980s movie Amazing Grace and Chuck, featuring Nugget great Alex English, and calls it "hauntingly bad."

Well, Tom brought a VHS video of Amazing Grace and Chuck for Simmons to sign and we were all excited about this (we're dorks, I know). Dave then coined the phrase "everything is 70% more awesome when Tom is involved." And it stuck.

We arrived two hours early - OK, this is my fault because I am extremely anal about being early to things. We browsed for awhile and then got in line. We were among the first 20 in line, but had to get through the "bouncer" who we all agreed to be a jerk.

This very large, effeminate man with an Elvis hairdo was not happy we brought books purchased from elsewhere before coming to the signing. He proceeded to tell us how much work it was to put the event together and how "next time you should really consider buying a book here for these events." We live an hour away, the book came out last month and Simmons' website said outside purchases were fine. Big dumb Elvis didn't get the memo.

We discussed the Nuggets, made fun of androgynous Elvis and waited for the event to start. Simmons started by doing a short monologue about Denver sports, set some ground rules and started signing.

He signed "Bring back the Rainbow Jerseys" in my book as I requested. Book asked him to sign "I hate the Lakers too," in a tip-of-the-hat to our Laker-loving buddy Mike. Instead Simmons wrote "Don't worry, we all hate the Lakers." Then Tom asked him to sign his copy of Amazing Grace and Chuck as "Best NBA movie ever." Simmons obliged and then asked Tom "You don't really think that, do you? You know, I killed this movie in my book." Tom replied, "yeah, I know, that's why I asked you to sign it."

Like we all agreed, 70% more awesome. Thanks Tom.



SATURDAY: Melo Goes Hunting

Book and I went to see the Denver Nuggets play the Chicago Bulls at Pepsi Center on Saturday night. The highlight was watching Carmelo Anthony destroy Luol Deng.

I remember watching John Elway play as a Denver Bronco and feeling privileged to enjoy his unique talents. I've been going to a handful of Nugget games a year since Melo came aboard in 2004. Watching his progression has been amazing.



Against Chicago on Saturday, Melo showed a Michael Jordan-like fire. Luol Deng of Chicago dunked on Melo off a rebound. It wasn't exactly a facial, but Melo took it as such.

Melo then proceeded to destroy Luol Deng.

Melo searched him out. Melo about blew a gasket trying to deny Deng the ball on defense (and nearly took Joachim Noah's arm off in response to a pick attempt). He called for isolation on offense. Deng looked terrified and seemed to implore his teammates to help. I remember Deng parked in the corner waiting for a kick-out three and Melo playing off of him, but barking incessantly in Deng's direction.

It got to the point where switching didn't work because Melo would find him. So, with the game slipping away from Chicago, but still winnable, Deng was pulled. Really, it was the right call. Melo was absolutely ravaging him and the Bulls were better off taking Melo's target from him.

The result? Melo went for 30-11-7. Almost a triple-double. More important, he put his stamp on the NBA as one of its alpha dogs.

Melo has a beautiful jumper, can drive with the best of them, rebounds, and even plays inspired D when motivated. Best of all, he can now impose his will. Deng tore the Nuggets apart early, but was a battered, beaten heap by the end of the game. Melo had destroyed his confidence.

The Nuggets won in a romp and the house was rocking.



SUNDAY: Representin'

A week or two ago, I griped to the right ears about the health care reform vote registered by my congressional representative for CD4, Betsy Markey. She voted no, which upset me in a new way because I actually knocked on doors to get her elected. Somehow, that made her vote personal even though the bill passed (by a mere 5 votes). I voted for change, not another cradle-death for health care reform.

So, by an accident of fortuitous griping, I was afforded the opportunity to go to an event last week where she attempted to explain her vote. There were too many people there with too many soapboxes to get my specific questions answered, so I lamented the missed opportunity. I was not satisfied by the answer even though the reasons given were fair. I think I am just tired of kicking the can down the street.

I know that legislation is never perfect out of the box, but I believe that it must get out of the box if any real change is to happen. Legislation can also be fixed along the way.

My inside source, who was kind enough to inform me of the meeting, seemed to care that I get a better explanation. So, he had Ms. Markey call my office personally and invite me to another event scheduled for this Sunday.

I was caught off guard by the call, but I accepted the invite. I lamented missing another opportunity to get my questions answered, but was determined to have my say on Sunday.

Ms. Markey spoke to the crowd and then mingled. I nosed my way to the front and engaged her for a few minutes on the topic. She was very gracious, engaging and attentive. I was sure to let her know that I still supported her so that she would not be alarmed and then asked two very brief and fair questions. She was straight-forward in her response and answered my questions thoughtfully.

We won't always agree with how our representatives vote, but I believe Ms. Markey gives careful deliberation and she convinced me she is looking for real solutions.

I believe we will have the framework in place for long-term healthcare reform. I appreciate that my representative has been so diligent about hearing from her constituents.

It was one heck of a weekend.

Update

... Basketball season is here. The Nuggets are looking good early and I'm gearing up for the NBA season. I just finished reading The Book of Basketball by Bill Simmons to get me all pumped for the season. I enjoyed the book thoroughly. Book and I are going to go to Denver on November 20 to have our books signed by Simmons. It should be fun. The book was very funny and interesting to boot.

... I had the unique opportunity to hear from my representative from congress about her health care vote. The experience just illustrated to me unmistakably that pulling Democrats together is like herding cats. The gathering was fairly small, but I know many people who were disillusioned by the no vote she cast in the recent House vote for health care reform. I could go deep into this topic, but I'll save it for another time. Apparently Democrats require 90% of seats in any legislative body to comfortably pass anything. To say I am frustrated would be an understatement.

... Jacob went trick-or-treating as Handy Manny. We did not like the "insta-costume" available from Disney. It was really bad. So, we just constructed our own concoction to make him into Handy Manny. Construction hat, tool belt, jeans, tools, brown shoes, green shirt, yellow gloves and he was Handy Manny. See pictures below:

My Take on the Government Question

Break every political argument down in our nation's history and it boils down to one question: What is the proper role of government?

Rarely does one need six degrees of separation to reach this central issue.

Our citizens have argued incessantly about government's role from the beginning via the Federalist Papers, fought a Civil War over the question, and continue to spew ugly rhetoric (again with the socialism label?) over just this one basic issue.

(You care about gay marriage? Well, let me interest you in a vigorous "Defense of Marriage Act" vs. "Full Faith and Credit Clause" debate, which, you guessed it, brings us right back to GO.)

I offer one person's reasoned take on this, our nation's perpetual pebble in the shoe. My short answer is that the people as a whole (although they are loath to admit it) have about the size of government with which they are comfortable. After all, it came from representatives government.

My goals: First, to explain how I see the differences between government and private enterprise. Although they are different, neither is inherently evil, but they both have a vital role to play. Second, to give my take on "the proper role of government."

THE PLAYERS

Both sides boast Nobel winners and celebrated thinkers who advocate each side. Free Marketers point to Milton Friedman as the final voice. New Dealers sing the praises of John Maynard Keynes. Laisse faire vs. New Deal. Roosevelt vs. Reagan. O'Reilly vs. Olbermann. Private business vs. Government regulation. There are plenty of statistics to fuel each side, thus insuring that neither can ever "win" the debate in a measurable sense.

An over-simplification of the two sides can be heard when listening to campaign talk or talk-radio -- that there are those who think government solves all and those who think it solves nothing. I am not sure where the majority stands, but I meet very few who feel government is the exact size it should be. That could be from a love to complain.

Although both sides hold to fallacies that I aim to debunk, only one side (the anti-government types) have chosen to take a no-compromise stance. I consider the strategy to be a feeble attempt to take us back to a time in which we no longer live. It also solves nothing.

THE DIFFERENCE AS I SEE IT

Each part brings its own obstacles, efficiencies and strengths. The difference is in the moral imperative.

Many of the most vocal of a very agitated minority believe in the inherent incompetence of meddling government. National defense excluded, this school of thought essentially demands that government not interfere in anything (or at least a bare minimum). Although I feel safe saying none of them would advocate six-year-old workers in coal mines, their tolerance for government does not raise much further.

There is a feeling that government grew too large over the years and that only blatant attempts to destroy it as an institution will mitigate its further expansion. This assumes also that none of that expansion was necessary to accommodate the many changes inherent in technological advancements, population increase and any other change over the past two centuries.

(I would go into the Commerce Clause, its overuse and the resulting backlash against it, but I want a few people to finish reading this post).

The fallacy is that private enterprise is always preferable. Absolutist arguments really amount to casuistry, so I won't dwell on it.

My take is that the market is amoral. It is not immoral. It is also not moral. It is profit-driven, and, as a result, has allowed our economy to soar. The market is also absolutely not the hand of God - especially considering that the invisible hand likes to dunk us in the mud if left unchecked (see 1929-1938). The fact it can be mitigated at all undermines arguments of divine tampering.

But, although the drive for profit leads to some efficiency advantages and wonderful economic prosperity, the market is less capable of taking morality-driven initiatives and is prone to booms and busts.

This is why the health care debate has been labeled as a moral imperative by supporters of reform. Incentive for profit has absolutely led to higher rates of denials and searches for pre-existing conditions by insurance carriers.

As usual, when there is a hole unfilled by private business that leads to moral outrage, the government attempts to fill the gap without profit. The government acts for the betterment of customers deemed "unprofitable." We do not do this to make a profit, but because it is moral. It must be done with fiscal responsibilty, but it must be done. And, sometimes, that means a tax increase.

Allow me to reiterate that I do not believe private industry has no role to play or that it is anything less than crucial to our system. But it would be foolish to expect the market to account for morality. Government agencies foot the bill to save victims of hurricanes because no money can be made to offer that service privately. (Excuse me sir, but we just saved your family and helicopters aren't cheap... so where do I send the bill?). Still, tea-bag loving folks burn FEMA in effigy. (I am unsure how many of them live in hurricane hot-spots).

The fact that many will point to FEMA's failures as a hole in the argument simply drives home the point that agency heads must believe their departments are important and believe in the role that agency plays. Katrina was, in my view, an example of what happens when people who do not believe in the legitimacy of government or believe it to be inherently meddlesome RUN a government or agency. (Brownie, you did a hell of a job).

SIZE DOES MATTER

Perceived government inefficiency, and that of large private industry, can be attributed to size. Government is further hampered by legislative restrictions simply because moral imperatives come with strings and compromises. I get that. And, in some areas, government is less efficient. That is absolutely true.

Inefficiency is also a product of size. Ideological free marketers too often omit that very large private industries (insurance companies, for example) are every bit as inefficient as a government agency. Anyone who has had to contest a denied claim can attest to that. The idea that "government paperwork" will gum up the works is laughable in light of all the various forms currently needed. At lease government forms will be uniform.

The reason for inefficiency in government and large companies? People run both. The only way to run a big operation is by layering, bureaucracy, committees, etc. That will happen to any very large entity regardless of its status as private or public.

FINAL THOUGHTS

The debate is not helped by anyone who feels the government can never be a part of a solution. The debate is not helped by anyone who feels only complete government takeover will solve either. However, there is ample support for a public "option," which is a compromise. Democrats have pushed a rational solution to preserve private enterprise in health insurance while plugging the holes it has created. The opposition only offers an argument that nothing tainted with government stink can ever work.

So, what is the proper role of government? It's whatever needs to be done to make a profitable system honest and compassionate within the tolerance of the population. In the case of health care, government intervention is long overdue. And the argument that "government is not good at anything" is short on substance.

I know I will never convince the "ideologically certain" who may read this. However, it makes sense to me. I am inherently suspicious of "absolutist" arguments and that is what the tea-baggers bring.

In the meantime, real solutions with all options on the table are being considered. And that makes me happy.