Bob Babbitt Passes

You may have heard of the passing of Bob Babbitt, the legendary bass guitar player who had the enormous task of filling James Jamerson's shoes at the Motown hit factory. From the NY Times:

James Jamerson was the label’s primary bassist in those years, but Mr. Babbitt provided the bass lines for numerous Motown hits, including Stevie Wonder’s “Signed, Sealed, Delivered,” the Temptations’ “Ball of Confusion,” Marvin Gaye’s “Inner City Blues” and Edwin Starr’s “War.” He later recorded with Barry Manilow, the Spinners, Alice Cooper and many others.

Neither Jamerson nor Babbitt were household names. That was the deal when you were a studio musician. Fortunately, Bob lived long enough to get the recognition he deserved. Sadly, Jamerson did not. From the Detroit Free Press:

Like many studio musicians of the era, Babbitt wasn’t always publicly acknowledged for his work. It wasn’t uncommon for Babbitt’s role to be omitted — or even actively hidden — on record credits.

He told the Free Press in 2003 that his Scorpion was “actually the rhythm section on the first Funkadelic album (in 1970) at Tera Shirma studios, but George (Clinton) gave credit to his band at that time.”

Like his fellow Funk Brothers, Babbitt at last got wider attention via the 2002 documentary “Standing in the Shadows of Motown,” which chronicled the group’s work behind the scenes.

Bob played on more than 200 Top 40 hits. Roll up the Beatles, Elvis, and Michael Jackson, and Bob Babbitt still played on more.

But I knew him as my cousin. His mother and my grandmother were sisters, making him my 1st cousin, once removed. When I was a kid, my mom would tell me about the great musician, our cousin Bob, who was on loads of gold records, and whose bands played the black clubs in the industrial Midwest- Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland, etc. It was positively otherworldly for my mom.

I recall talking bass with him once at a rare family reunion. I was 17 or 18, and playing punk rock bass. The nerve of me, right? He spoke about the gypsy music his mother loved. Bob's mom was "Aunt Margaret" to me, but Margaret Kreinar to a radio audience in Pittsburgh, who listened to her Hungarian language radio show that played plenty of gypsy music. He shared what a big influence it was to him in guiding him to what some referred to as 'black music'- jazz, blues, and early rock 'n' roll. He found that the rhythms and fluid grooves were similar. He fit in perfectly at Motown, despite being the white guy.

Once the film came out to give the Funk Brothers their due, gigs followed. Real showcase gigs, not some rib burnoff in Iowa, or the 250 capacity clubs I favor, but class venues. I loved that for Bob. I loved even more that my mom could see him play live with some regularity.







I am grateful to have known him. Wish I knew him better. So happy he got the recognition he and the Funk Brothers deserved, and that he got to enjoy his last days outside that obscurity.

The Price Of Getting Sick

In my late May hospital stay, I got bored as any recovering patient might, so I turned on the TV and geeked out on Storage Wars.

Can you believe I got a bill for this? $23.50 for watching TV?

I don't object to paying for what I use. I rather insist on it. But, I was in some state of delirium when I arrived and signed the documents. I don't remember any verbal or printed disclosure about any costs for watching TV.

I may have been bored, but I am cheap. Ame brought me a book and my laptop. Given clear notification, this cheapskate would have done without Storage Wars and used the diversions I had instead of the exceptionally overpriced one. The cable TV available to me at home via Comcast goes $100/month, or about 3 bucks a day. I watched on one day, so $23.50? That's BS.

Lucky me, this is the tip of the iceberg. The other bills are going to be rolling in. Can't wait.

Now I'm not going to start calling for socialized medicine just because I feel like I was taken advantage of on the TV viewing. For $23.50, the heaviest my objection will be is this blog post and an 'UP YOURS!' to Good Samaritan Hospital. Maybe a letter to the hospital. Caveat Emptor, as always. If there is a next time, you can bet the TV will not be switched on.

NBA Goes Bush League

The NBA will be the first of the four major North American sports to cave and put corporate advertising on their jerseys. From ESPN:

Come fall, it's highly likely you'll see a small 2-inch-by-2-inch sponsorship patch stitched on the shoulder of your favorite player's game jersey.

"I think it's likely that we'll do something, implement something, some sort of plan for the fall," NBA deputy commissioner Adam Silver said. "I think it's fair to say that our teams were excited about the opportunity and think there is potentially a big opportunity in the marketplace to put a two-by-two patch on the shoulder of our jerseys."

Well, sure. It should fetch a LOT of money.

"Our view is we think, on an aggregate basis, league-wide, our 30 teams could generate in total $100 million by selling that patch on jerseys, per season," Silver said.

And, I have to believe the other sports will quickly follow. It's probably amazing the NBA held off this long, when you consider how difficult it is to see the clothing at all on a NASCAR driver, or European soccer player.

I collect hockey jerseys. Part of it is that when I play recreational hockey, I enjoy wearing an NHL jersey & socks. It's as close as I'm ever going to look like an actual hockey player. I have a few minor league jerseys that do have logo patches on them. They are my least favorite. They appear cluttered and cheap to me.

Once you get past aesthetics, it's difficult to find a rationale against jersey sponsorships. Shorter contracts and increased player movement have given more weight than ever to the Seinfeldian notion that NBA jerseys are just laundry, vessels that carry the true product -- the collective talents of the guys playing the games, jamming the ball, blocking the shots, draining the 3s. If a corporate logo doesn't compromise those skills and actually strengthens the fortunes of the league, then it's an idea that should be carried to fruition.

I've worn my share of t-shirts in my life to get the concept of the walking billboard, but they aren't 'just laundry' if you've laid out $200 for a jersey. I like to promote my team. It doesn't mean I like to also promote that team's corporate sponsors. If you want me, as the wearer of licensed sports apparel to embrace a logo on the jersey, then reduce the price of the jersey, and I won't object so stridently.

The fans are always the last consideration.

I Loves Me Some Conventional Wisdom

The usual saw is that Libertarian candidates 'steal votes' from Republican candidates.

First of all, no candidate steals votes unless they are engaged in voter fraud. A candidate will better compete for votes than others. So, my Republican friends, if you think Ls draw from Rs, you may consider that Ls just do a better job of winning over people who really mean it about smaller government.

But this news from New Mexico Watchdog:

Here are the numbers in the question PPP asked when it included Johnson’s name with Obama and Romney:
Another interesting aspect?
A lot of Republicans have worried that a serious Johnson candidacy would hurt Romney more than Obama but in this particular poll, Johnson pulls down Obama’s numbers from 42 percent to 38 and, as Jensen points out, Johnson “gets 24 percent of the independent vote, and a lot of his support is coming from more Democratic leaning independents.”

Those results echo what Johnson has told reporters this summer — that his presence in the race doesn’t necessarily hurt Romney and appeals to voters who are so turned off by both Democrats and Republicans that a large number of these disaffected voters wouldn’t have voted anyway.

This cuts both ways. I find Democrats cheering on Libertarian candidates, because they perceive Libertarians as opposites of Greens or Democrats, and thinking back Green Party candidate Ralph Nader in 2000? Well, they like to think of Libertarians 'Nadering' Republicans.

Awesome! Keep thinking that way! Those usually Democratic voters who really, really want expanded civil liberties and reduced foreign intervention? They haven't gotten what they want, and they aren't going to in a 2nd Obama term. They know that. The only person running for president who will be on the ballot in their state will likely be Gary Johnson.

Terry Michael, former Press Secretary for the Democratic Party, is supporting Johnson.

I don’t intend to change my registration. I’m still a Democrat. But I’m a small “l” libertarian Democrat, who wants to teach fellow Democrats that 21st century libertarians are not a bunch of selfish, Ayn Rand-style, greedy capitalists. Among the three issue frames of politics—economy, social, and foreign—most rank-and-file Democrats share much in common with modern libertarians. Most libertarians want to keep government out of our bedrooms, away from our bodies, and out of the backyards of the rest of the world. On the economy, while we are for limited spending, taxes, and regulation, we favor free markets—not oligarchic capitalism that uses government to re-distribute tax revenue to the military-industrial-congressional-media complex, the behemoth pharmaceutical companies, or other lobbyists along Washington’s K Street who seek benefits from government and regulations that put competitors at disadvantage.

Why would I abandon the candidate for whom I had great hopes for change in 2008, a president from my own home state of Illinois, Barack Obama? In fact, I even made a libertarian case for Obama in 2008 at Reason.com—which turned out to be hoping against nothing but hope.

For me, that hope turned to despair when President Obama ramped up another hideous elective war, putting tens of thousands of young men and women in harm’s way in Afghanistan; rammed through a taxpayer and deficit-funded corporate welfare program for drug and insurance companies, in the guise of health care reform; and reneged on promises to slow prosecutions in the assault on personal freedom, the violence-creating neo-Prohibition known as the war on drugs.

Obama has had 3+ years to make his case in action. Alas. I do not believe Terry Michael will act alone. I am hoping against hope that many left-of-center voters will look past team and squarely at policy.

Campaign Season In Full Swing

Lately, I find that I've been blogging more at the Hamilton County Libertarian site than here. That's ok. The Season is definitely upon us, and much is happening.

If you are interested in what the Libertarian Party is up to in Hamilton County, the sources you need to follow now through the election are:

Hamilton County LP Blog
Hamilton County Libertarians Facebook Page
Indiana For Gary Johnson Facebook Page

If you have an interest in volunteering with any of the Libertarian campaigns in Indiana, email me and I'll set you up!

I'll now return me to my regularly unscheduled sporadic blogging.

4 Years Later, McCain Begs Again

Can you believe I got another beg letter from John McCain? Apparently, this is what I get for having sent Ron Paul 50 bucks in 2007. Oh, Kole! You donated to a Republican! Let this be a lesson to me.

This one is every bit as hilarious and insulting as the one he sent four years ago. The guffaws start right at the top of Pg 1 of the bulky letter:

I know that every election is important and has consequences, but there have been few times in our nation's history when the political stakes have been higher than they are right now.

Our way of life - the very freedoms, liberty and security - that so many generations of Americans worked to build and fought to protect could all be destroyed if Barack Obama wins reelection. (emphasis as in the letter)

Bwwaaaaahahahahaha! That's a laff riot! McCain, a destroyer of liberty calls out Obama? That's rich!

This Romney-Obama matchup looks exactly like McCain-Obama to me. Two statists, pick one. I'm completely, utterly alienated by both Romney & Obama. To send McCain as the messenger to me? Well, I guess if Obama sent a letter to me from Bernie Sanders, it would be on par.

Now, if only I could fit a brick inside the postage paid return envelope to the Republican National Committee.

No Waste, Huh?

One of the recurring snappy comebacks of the last 3-4 years has been, "There's no waste/fat to cut". Color me unimpressed. From Money/CNN:

Overpayments are a rampant problem in the unemployment insurance system. The federal government and states overpaid an estimated $14 billion in benefits in fiscal 2011, or roughly 11% of all the jobless benefits paid out, according to reports from the U.S. Labor Department.

Of the states, Indiana was the worst offender, making more improper payments than it did correct ones.

So, there's waste. Get over it. Find it, root it out, cut it.

And yes- let's examine our so-called essentials and see if there aren't things that the market could do more efficiently than government. That's waste, too.

Our Inept LNC

The National Libertarian Party issued a statement about the Supreme Court decision on Obamacare, and made the interesting argument that the best thing we can do is get divided government.

Not once did it tout its' own candidate, Gary Johnson.

Look carefully. You won't see the words 'Gary' or 'Johnson', not together or in any form, in the entire press release.

Supreme Court Obamacare Decision Highlights Why a President Romney Would be More Dangerous than President Obama

A President Mitt Romney would not undo ObamaCare. He’d make it permanent.

The Supreme Court Ruling on ObamaCare does not matter. It will make little difference to America in the short run, and no difference in the long run.

Why? Because almost all elected Republicans and Democrats are Big Government politicians – in all things – including health care. After this Supreme Court decision, they will get back to work expanding government involvement in all things – especially health care.

One thing could make things worse. Electing Republican Mitt Romney President.

Why?

Republicans fiercely oppose, and often defeat Democratic Party attempts to massively expand government involvement in Health Care – such as HillaryCare.

But Democrats usually vote for Republican Party legislation to massively expand government’s role in Health Care.

Republican President George Bush’s $1.1 Trillion Government Prescription Drug Program was voted into law by Republicans and Democrats.

Republican Governor Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts state government expansion into Massachusetts health care – RomneyCare – was voted into law by both Republicans and Democrats. With virtually no resistance.

A Republican-controlled House of Representatives and US Senate would oppose Democratic President Barack Obama’s health care proposals.

But a Republican majority House of Representatives and US Senate would support and vote for a Republican President Mitt Romney’s Big Government health care proposals. And most Democrats in the House and Senate would, too.

What Republican Governor Romney did to Massachusetts’ health care, a Republican President Romney would do to America’s health care.

A President Mitt Romney would not undo ObamaCare. He’d make it permanent.

A first-term President Mitt Romney would be far more dangerous to small business, the private sector, and taxpayers than a lame-duck President Obama – no matter what the Supreme Court decided.

###

Hey dummies! Don't call for the status quo. We have a candidate!!! What say you promote him? Hell- mention him, even?!

Update: I brought this to the attention of an LNC member via email, in a very cordial exchange. I'm sure it helped that I left out the 'inept' adjective. The wind-up is that the press releases are the domain of Executive Director Carla Howell. The LNC Chair has some input on them, but the LNC members themselves do not. To the credit of the LNC, they are being mindful not to be micromanagers of the ED. At the same time, a political party MUST, MUST, MUST promote its candidates. I was told this would be a topic for discussion within the LNC. I hope that takes place soon.

Two Things That Go Miserably Together

Yuck. If you dislike heat and running, there's nothing quite like hitting it at 8am when it's only 80 degrees outside.

On the upside, even while feeling like I would suffocate, I got my mile down to 8:35. It's getting to be time to stretch it to two-mile runs.

Face Palm On Ruling

No, the face palm didn't happen because the Supreme Court upheld Obamacare. I expected that. It isn't even that Chief Justice Roberts - the Bush nominee - wrote the majority opinion. I'm not a Bush apologist, so that doesn't sting me. It's that Mitt Romney's fundraising got a major boost in the wake of the decision. From ABC:

In the hours after the Supreme Court ruling, Romney aides were quick to tout a spike in fundraising. According to the campaign, more than $300,000 rolled into the Romney Victory Fund within the first 90 minutes after the ruling. A spokeswoman said the money was raised "organically" and not through a specific fundraising plea.

The staggering ignorance of that caused the face palm. Ok, sure, Republicans are pissed at the ruling. But to support Romney? The architect of Romneycare?

Listen, Republicans. When liberals say that you guys are stupid, and I get evidence like this, I'm joining the choir in alto basso.

Here's part of Gary Johnson's statement on the ruling:

“Whether the Court chooses to call the individual mandate a tax or anything else, allowing it to stand is a truly disturbing decision. The idea that government can require an individual to buy something simply because that individual exists and breathes in America is an incredible blow to the bedrock principles of freedom and liberty. It must be repealed, and Congress needs to get about doing so today."

 Romney may make some noises about how wrong the decision was, but he doesn't have a leg to stand on. I only hope that people who oppose the ruling look at the track records, not just the rhetoric of the moment, and back the candidate who has been consistent in opposition. I can hope, right?

Update: It's now $4.6 million worth of stoopid over at the Romney camp. It makes me want to puke in my soup.

An Encouraging Conflict

I love it when events emerge that brings a group of people to the point of challenging long-held, knee-jerk beliefs.

To this end, I've been watching the growing movement regarding food. While it certainly spans the political spectrum, I'm watching how it affects the left in particular, for the left tends to automatically demand regulation and zoning, insisting on limits on producer freedom in the name of safety and health.

But now people are wanting raw milk. Now they are wanting to grow food in the front yard instead of lawns. Now they want to have some chickens in their suburban backyards. They want these things often in the name of health, wanting to avoid the hormones often put into animals, or the pesticides in food. Or, they want to eliminate transportation and make food more green. Regulations and zoning are thwarting these desires in many areas.

For instance, selling raw milk in Indiana is illegal. If you want it, you can invest in 'cow shares', break the law, or go without. A Detroit area woman's story about facing jail for starting a garden in her front yard was big news last year.

Keeping chickens is coming into vogue. Zoning permits it in Indy, but not in Fishers where I live.

In speaking with local gardeners I am friends with in Fishers, several would like to raise chickens and/or garden in the front yard. They know the zoning is against them. In all likelihood, some will just break the law, while others will shrug with some disappointment and not raise the chickens or put rows of heirloom tomatoes out front. Eggs to all of your neighbors is an excellent form of 'hush money', I hear told.

My interest lies in seeing if those who want to be the law-abiding folks will press for elimination of zoning, changes to zoning, or variances. My hope is for elimination of zoning. I find that nothing tops talking with your neighbors with simple conversations to find if what you want to do would upset them. Now, we apply for permits, and don't talk to the neighbors. I prefer the former. These are the people you have to live with, not some plan reviewer in the Town building.

I suspect that we'll see tweaks in zoning, for the most part. My mother-in-law lives in uber-liberal Cleveland Heights, Ohio and was delighted at the their zoning changes, which cover everything from the food items to production of solar or wind energy on the home property. I'd accept this as a step in the right direction, but would prefer to see zoning eliminated, my home is my castle, screw the nanny state, and all.

On The Other Hand, Fishers

Lest anyone conclude I've made up my mind on the Fishers city vote, I'll now look at the other side of the argument.

City Yes PAC has been advancing the cause of making Fishers a City from the beginning of this latest push to do so. They list five issues on their website:

1. Elect Your Mayor. Every other community in Indiana gets to elect the City executive. As one of the largest communities in Indiana, Fishers should have this basic democratic right.

I completely agree, but this was one of the specific questions of law the lawsuit inexplicably lost on. I thought it was our strongest point. Alas. If the vote for a city wins, the popular vote of the mayor will NOT happen. The Council will then select the mayor. I can't get excited about that.

2. Council Districts. As a City, Fishers would have real district representation, with 6 districts representing their neighborhoods, plus 3 at-large seats.

Again, as Fishers won the lawsuit, I don't see this happening. If they vote for city wins, the voter gets to choose between the Fishers 'hybrid city' and nothing, as I understand it.

I've understood this from the beginning to be the heart and soul of the reason Fishers Democrats want the City form. Currently, all seats on council are elected at-large, which is a sham, for it favors the dominant party. It makes challengers not only win their district, but the entire municipality, which makes campaigning vastly more expensive, and virtually impossible for Democrats or Libertarians to win. It has resulted in very few General Election challenges for Council seats, and very unaccountable Council members.

I could get excited for this change, but again, as I understand it, when Fishers won the suit, they won the ability to present their form of city on the ballot at the exclusion of all others, including that described on this point. Please- someone correct me if I am wrong.

3. Accountability. With an elected Mayor and real district representation, the government of Fishers would be more accountable to the voters.

As shown in my previous post, this has not been the experience in the other similarly Republican dominated cities that were towns not too long ago, Westfield and Carmel. The mayors there are exceptionally unaccountable. The councils have effectively been rubber stamps for the mayors. There are occasionally oppositional members of council, but nothing even approaching effective opposition to provide genuine checks and balances.

Now, I can take the long view, and try to convince myself that over time, as areas urbanize they tend to move to the left, and Dems could win some seats in time. However, if the 'hybrid city' wins at the ballot box, the checks and balances hoped for by real districts aren't any more possible than they are now, reducing this to a nice talking point, and not really viable. Again- correct me if I'm wrong on the form of city that will appear on the ballot in November.

4. Checks and Balance. As a City, the Mayor would have veto power over unwise council actions. With enough votes, the Council can override the veto. This separation of powers is completely absent in Town government.

Completely agree, and this is the one point that keeps me from advocating for defeat of the Yes/No question. The Town Council currently acts as both legislative and executive, utterly lacking checks and balances. This may be the only positive thing that would come out of any vote in favor of the city form. See my concerns above in Points 2 & 3, though, for the real life play out for the next 30 years. The best we can hope for there is one-party factionalism to provide real checks and balances, which isn't really all that exciting.

5. Economic Development. An elected Mayor is the leader of the City and can negotiate with businesses who wish to locate here. The Mayor is the leader for economic development, something we currently lack.

Again, referring back to my previous post, this is exactly what I fear most. I don't want a Mayor Brainard for Fishers. I don't want pet projects that we will subsidize forever. I don't want politically businesses getting tax abatements while the unconnected pay full freight. We're better off for lacking a Mayor on these points.

So, clearly, I'm not sold on the other side, either.

When I joined the lawsuit, I was the odd man, as both Joe Weingarten and Glenn Brown were very much in favor of the city form of government, while my interests were different. I signed the City Yes petition not because I was sold on the city form, but because I believed the people of Fishers had the right to settle the question at the ballot box, and that the Town Council wasn't going to advance the question unless a valid petition went forward. It's all about representative government to me.

Unfortunately, we lost in court and are now left with two very weak choices, in my opinion. I'm open to suggestion from anyone who wishes to make the case for either side, provided you don't lead with "You're wrong". You'll push me to the other side with that.

After The Lawsuit, Now What?

When I joined the lawsuit against the Town of Fishers regarding petitions to become a city, my interest was not entirely towards becoming a city. It was about giving the people of the municipality the ability to vote on the question.

This year's ballot is going to have two questions on the ballot, the way the Town Council wishes to word them. They essentially go like this:

1. We're a Town now, should be become a City: yes or no?
2. If yes, should we become a City with a Mayor picked by the Council?

The first question is the big one for me, because a City form of government includes a mayor, no matter how you look at it.

My long-standing concern about Fishers becoming a City has to do exactly with adding a mayor, because the track record in Carmel and Westfield- two other Hamilton County former towns that are now cities- is less than impressive to me.

How can this be? All shiny and new? Here's how: Mayors have meant expensive, pet projects. Things that should better have been done by the private sector, and are now a huge drain on these cities. From Indianapolis Business Journal:

Carmel Mayor James Brainard wants to give the Center for the Performing Arts another $840,000 to cover its bills through December—on top of a $5.5 million subsidy he orchestrated last fall.

The latest grant is part of a resolution, which will go before the Carmel City Council Monday, to put $1.62 million into the city’s Support for the Arts Fund.

“We had a huge deficit,” Brainard said of the performing arts center, which is run by a separate not-for-profit organization. “Progress is being made.”

These huge shortfalls and subsidies were entirely predictable. It isn't the proper role of government to fund pet projects, but Republicans have proven clueless about this. 7 years ago, I and other Libertarians pointed this out. We were scoffed at.

But this is my point of resistance about supporting a City form of government that necessarily means a Mayor. For my gripes about Fishers, the fact is that the Town Council hasn't launched pet projects on the scale of the region's mayors.

h/t to Advance Indiana and this article about even the tenants getting subsidized!

On The Run

The running program is continuing, with a dusk trot last night. It was again easier to accomplish than the last run, gaining a mile in 9:37.

This was pleasing, because I remember hovering around the 10-minute mark when I started running again some 9 years ago, and being informed that Oprah did a marathon at a 10-minute mile pace. Pace, not first mile.

I know a runner shouldn't compare himself to another runner, but come on- Oprah? I have to be able to move faster than Oprah could. I do have some pride.

Next week's goal will be to double the distance.

Tempting Fate?

A few weeks ago, I decided the extra weight had to go, and that as much as I dislike running, it would be a great way to shed pounds, build endurance, and generally get fit again. So, I set off for a run, and before I could reach the magical distance of a quarter mile, my calves cramped up something fierce. I stopped, stretched the calves, and ran back home. Little did I know, I was sparking a trip to the hospital.

The great danger for me is to 'learn a lesson' from this and go hard the other way. This has happened before. When I was 18, I was hospitalized with an illness and lost a very unhealthy amount of weight, being a skinny kid to begin with. I resolved to not ever allow myself to become dangerously underweight again, and within six months went from 114 pounds to 195. Lesson learned, problem solved.

What an 18-year-old kid doesn't know. In the past several years, I'd been around 190 pounds, much less fit than before. You know, the typical four inch shift, from shoulders & chest to waist. With last year's back injury at hockey, I stopped exercising and quickly gained 15 pounds.

Knowing myself, the lesson learned would be to not run again, because last time I did it, a trip to the hospital followed. But I can't be a 205 pound barrel with legs. So, I ran last night.

I actually made a full mile, and didn't cramp up hard. Of course, I stretched like crazy before and after, ate a banana and pounded the water. I have the added benefit of a follow-up trip to the doctor today for more bloodwork. Hopefully the kidney functions are back to normal now, and that incident was a fluke.

Now, if I really want to tempt fate, I should go to Cincinnati for a Reds-Indians game tomorrow, then to Moerlein's for beer and munchies...

Update: Got the lab results in and despite my fate-tempting run, my liver functions are all back in the normal range. Hooray!

Now to keep up with the fitness plan.

Where's Judge Gray?

I've been very pleased with Gary Johnson's campaign for President since his nomination at the Libertarian convention earlier this month. He's been doing interviews all over the media and generally bringing the right kind of attention to his candidacy and to the Libertarian Party.

Vice Presidential candidate Judge James Gray? Not so much.

Gray has been virtually invisible thus far. No campaign website. Can't find him on the LP's website or Gary Johnson's website. Doesn't have a Facebook page for the campaign. Has a personal website and Facebook page, but not for the campaign? I haven't seen any media clips with interviews.

Such a fuss was made that Gray should get the nomination. He passionately spoke to a private caucus of the Indiana delegates and he begged, promised that he wouldn't disappoint. Well, sorry, so far it's a disappointment. Almost a month has passed, and nothing to show for it. We don't have forever to wait for the action to start- especially if competing against candidate poised to raise a billion dollars each.

Hospitalization Recap

As promised, the story of my hospitalization, illustrated with pictures, in full color.

Was it the beer or the cheese food sauce?

Friend Keith Kohli and I bought tickets to a Reds-Braves game, Keith being a huge Braves fan. We bought the tickets via Stub Hub two months before the game, and got a good deal on seats in the 8th row, by the 3rd base dugout. We went early, went to Jungle Jim's amazing grocery store, the Reds Hall of Fame, then to Moerlein's Lagerhouse, to have one beer and munchies. All is well.

We got to the gate entrance to discover we had tickets for the wrong game! Somehow we both missed this! We had tickets for the following day's game, so at least they knew we were only stupid and not trying to get in on yesterday's stubs. So, we went to ticket window, bought tickets for this game, and suddenly I had huge pain in my gut that felt like gas. The woman at the ticket window told me there was a Walgreens two blocks away, so we head that direction so I could get Gas-X or some antacids.

This is as close as I would get to this game.

We were stopped at the intersection for a light, and suddenly this wave rushes over me. I was sweating profusely and felt faint. I thought I was going to throw up, and since I was leaning on a garbage can to hold me up, I figured I was well situated. But my knees buckled and I really thought I was going to drop. Felt delirious. Keith asked me if I was alright, and who knows what I said. There was a traffic cop nearby. Keith got his attention and he radioed for help.

The first person on the scene gave me oxygen. That was good! Helped a lot! Next guy there asked me if I had any tingling in my left arm. I did. I think this is because I hit myself goddamn hard on the thumb with a claw hammer on the thumb I've broken 7 times about 10 days before. It started then, and stayed with me, in my estimation, because I spend too much time at a computer. I digress, but the EMT thinks 'heart attack' and everything they are doing is geared towards that. I can't complain. Well, I was delirious, and what do I know anyhow. Besides, I was having trouble saying all of this.

They loaded me onto a gurney and wheeled me into the ambulance. Keith rode shotgun. They hit me with an IV to hydrate me. By time we got to the hospital, I was feeling a lot better. But, since I just scared the bejeezus out of everyone, they're going to run tests. The nurse turns me into a pin cushion trying to find a vein. I started singing "Sister Ray". I don't think anyone got the reference, which is a shame, although if the nurse got it he would have been annoyed at the very least.

Everything on this trip had a twist.

The discussions with docs lead to family history, and my dad's recent surgery to repair an aneurysm in the descending aorta. Now all focus goes there, heart attack being cleared. But one doc says that it was probably just indigestion. I was x-rayed. They gave me a CT scan. Don't know if you've ever had one, but they make you drink a quart of chalk-water (helpfully coconut flavored) and then before your second pass through the machine, they hit you with a solution (via the IV) that allows them to see the internal organs. Wow, that hurt the arm! Felt like the vein was going to explode.

Back to the room, and the solution I drank is living up to the nurse's predictions that I was have a violently upset stomach and diarrhea. At least I can count on the nurse's predictions. This is the worst I've felt all week. It passes, and feeling good, I discover cable TV. Storage Wars is really excellent programming when bored out of your skull and you don't have cable at home. But before long, I got to the stage where I felt so well that just being there makes you crazy. I can't wait to see the doc, expecting to hear that they can't figure it out, and I get discharged. 

Another lead followed was for elevated kidney and liver functions. The first blood test revealed activity that was off the charts. I was asked how many beers I had. One. How many did I have yesterday? None. The day before? One. In the past week? Two. In the past month? 3 or 4. I finally asked what this was all about and was told that if only I was a drunk, it would be so easy to explain. Well, damn my eyes and my bad luck at being so sober. It would have explained the elevated kidney and liver function.

Did I just undergo strenuous exercise? Strenuous, no, but I did go for a run two days before for the first time in 8-9 years. I managed all of a half mile before my calves cramped into knots.

Eureka! A broad smile crosses the doctor's face. Well! That explains the elevated kidney and liver functions. I had an episode of rhabdomyolysis. That means the muscle tissue broke down such that proteins were released into the body to the degree that the liver was struggling to break them down. Ok, nice, but why did I faint? And why did I have intense abdominal pain nowhere near the liver or kidneys, but instead right below the sternum?

No explanation. The upside is that I was tested for everything bad- heart disease, cancer, liver failure, kidney stones, gall stones, etc- and everything came back normal. I have relatively low blood pressure, so I get to eat salt without concern.

I felt bad for Keith, having teased him with great tickets for a game. We did get to see much of it on the hospital TVs, and since he was wearing a Braves jersey, the staff helpfully let him know every time the Reds scored a run. But once it was clear I was out of the woods, the realization struck that I drove and the car was back in a garage by the ballpark. He would have to take a cab to the car and drive it home after all this. Thank goodness he drives stick also! 

Back home, I've had a few blood draws to follow up, and the numbers are back near the normal range for the liver and kidneys. The only thing my doctor could offer about the fainting is that my heart does the opposite of what it should in the face of pain. It should pump more blood to the organs, but mine pumps less. I have to be self-aware, and if I feel it coming on, lay down right away because I can't very well cause my heart to pump more blood.

And, quite gratefully, I didn't scare Keith off from future ballpark road trips, though I suspect he will want to drive next time. 

All Is Well

I was recently hospitalized after fainting outside the Great American Ballpark in Cincinnati, prior to a Reds-Braves game. The EMTs on site thought I was having a heart attack. Thank goodness, no.

Short story: I'm okay. Tests revealed nothing alarming, everything back to normal.

I'll post later with an amusing recounting of events, which I will cobble together from my Facebook posts on the subject. Mainly, just wanted to assure folks out there that I am well.

Late Report, Libertarian Convention, Part 2

While I was excited about Johnson's win as nominee for President, I was crushed by Mark Rutherford loss in the election for LNC Chair.

You may recall that I previously endorsed Rutherford. Mark was great for the LPIN, teaching candidates to focus on issues of greatest importance to the voters, not self, first; and of relevance to the office which you seek. He also tried to shape the LPIN's Central Committee to mirror boards of successful civic or public institutions, such as hospital boards of directors. This is important, because Libertarian Party boards tend to focus on the finest points of policy rather than creating a top-notch organization. In my opinion, the LNC has often been the most guilty of all Libertarian Party organizations of this wheel spinning.

After all- the point of a political party is to get people elected towards moving policy in your direction, or to do other things, such as lobbying or issue advocacy that moves policy in your direction.

Internal debate for correctness achieves none of this.

So, on all these considerations, the 2012 LNC elections were a complete wipe-out. It was bad to lose, but bitter because the losses were so narrow.

Several votes were taken, and it was weird. At the end of it all, Rutherford lost to Geoff Neale by 7 votes.

Many thanks to Doug Masson, who followed my Facebook live blogging and summarized here. Also see Reason Hit & Run blog, here and here, with vote totals.

My lasting disappointment is with Geoff Neale's track record and what that portends. When Neale was previously Chair (2002-2004), the LP lost membership and his reputation was that of being stand-offish and uncommunicative. He was remarkably later elected LNC Treasurer (2006) and resigned a year afterwards. As was pointed out to me, a Treasurer of an organization doesn't resign. It's a malfeasance to do so, because it sticks the organization in a perilous position- especially as a political party, where one mistake on a filing can result in the organization being taken down.

And, even at this election, he threw another former Treasurer, Bill Redpath, under the bus, blaming him for the problem that led to his resignation. I thought that pretty well foreshadowed that nothing has changed with Neale- stand-offish, divisive, unable to own up to human shortcomings. In sum, a loser.

Rob Place sat next to me during much of the convention and he remarked in his wry way, "Remember how I was saying the worst case scenario was that Hinkle beat Rutherford? This is ten times worse than that. I wish we could have had yesterday's worst case scenario back." I couldn't have agreed more.

As regards Indiana, fortunately, we have a strong party and will survive and thrive despite the anticipated non-assistance and self-inflicted wounds the next two years will bring. Other state affiliates won't be so lucky.

Fortunately, Gary Johnson has won big elections before, and he has Ron Neilson, his campaign chair from both of Johnson's gubernatorial wins, on board as his chair once again. They will build a strong and potent team without the LNC. 

In one way, the clean sweep of the LNC might be a blessing. The past two years were marked by charges of an 'evil cabal' of Wayne Root, Mark Rutherford, Alicia Mattson, Aaron Starr, and others on the LNC sabotaging Chair Mark Hinkle. While I saw it as Hinkle being a weak Chair and failing to make the case on items to win over the LNC members, the 'evil cabal' charges had an impact on Rutherford's chances. (Remarkably, Wayne Root, the focus of so much antipathy by those who dislike the pragmatic voices in the LNC, was re-elected. The only one of the so-called 'cabal'.) Anyhow, the 'cabal' and the pragmatics are out, and the radicals are in. Divisiveness should not be an issue. That will be a relief.

At the end of the day, if Neale and the radicals fail to accomplish anything in the next two years, they won't be able to blame anyone but themselves. Given the track record, I expect failure once again. I hope that doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results at last comes to fruition, but I won't be holding my breath.

Late Report, Libertarian Party Convention

It's been nearly two weeks since the Libertarian Party's national convention concluded. I probably would have blogged within the hour had Mark Rutherford been elected, as I would have been excited beyond measure. Alas.

First, the good news.

Gary Johnson was made the LP's nominee for President of the United States on the 1st ballot, overwhelmingly. This was very satisfying, as he has a proven executive record as Governor of New Mexico. Johnson was a Republican then, but he governed as a libertarian. What does that mean? He actually used the veto pen. From wikipedia:

As governor, Johnson followed a strict small government approach. According to former New Mexico Republican National Committee member Mickey D. Barnett, "Any time someone approached him about legislation for some purpose, his first response always was to ask if government should be involved in that to begin with."^[25] He vetoed 200 of 424 bills in his first six months in office – a national record of 48% of all legislation – and used the line-item veto on most remaining bills.^[2]

<sup>The usual saw is that a libertarian would end up with the area of governance sinking into the earth's core. Two of his vetoes were over-ridden. The rest held up. Curiously, New Mexico was not swallowed into the abyss. I guess the vetoed bills weren't really that important after all. Johnson was re-elected, and left the state with a surplus.

Johnson doesn't shy away from controversial issues, but nor does he lead with them. He is personable and energetic. I love his comebacks on the drug issues, being that he doesn't even consume caffeine or alcohol, and has been an ironman triathlete. If he gets into the debates, he will fare very well.</sup>

^{Me & Gary Johnson, after his nomination. I'm holding his obligatory 'book written by candidate for president', and wearing my delegate credentials.}

^{(Part 2 will pick up with the election for LNC Chair)}