Day 2 -- San Francisco

Summary
(:)(:)(:) Academy of Art and Sciences
(:)(:)(:)(:) Ghostwriter at the Balboa
(:)(:)(:)(:)(:) Shanghai Dumpling King on Balboa in Upper Richmond, SF

Day spent at the recently refurbished Academy of Arts and Sciences. People are right. The building is astonishing, particularly the Living Roof. What a revelation to plant all over the roof. The rainforest, a pretty long wait, was disappointing. The Rainforest in the Buffalo Zoo is much better because it has a jaguar and monkeys. This mostly has 100s of other people in a hot structure with some butterflies. The penguins are worth seeing--hot biologist in a wetsuit and the whole thing. It was really fun to see one male adolescent penguin flit back and forth between two females causing one female to attack they other and pull a huge tuft of feathers out of her--cool! So middle school!

Unexpected successful attempt to see Ghostwriter at the Balboa Theater in the upper Richmond. I really enjoyed this movie. I have to say that escaped criminal notwithstanding, Roman Polanski can direct a film. I really loved that it was edge of your seat suspenseful the whole time with only one very quick incident of violence. That may come from having a really old director going old school like Hitchcock. I wish more movies like this were made. It was too predictable but I so enjoyed the theme and the suspense and Ewen MacGregor (where has he been since Moulin Rouge? and what is the deal with Pierce Brosnan? Is he like in every single movie this year or what?)

Dinner at Shanghai Noodle King nearby the Balboa on Balboa. Our second trip there having learned of it when visiting friends who live nearby. Man, that restaurant is quite the schlepp from downtown SF but pretty much worth it. I don't think I've had better Chinese food on the west coast since the early 80's in Portland, Oregon. The garlic eggplant is out of this world and people swear by their dumplings.

Day 1 -- San Francisco

Staying in a great apartment on Oak Street in Hayes Valley. Day 1, my daughter and I walk down to Union Square to shop -- she needs basically everything. It's cold but the day cooperates mostly, with only a sprinkle. On the way, passing lots of street people, I try to teach her "the face." "The face" was taught to me years ago in NYC by my friend Katie who insisted it was crucial to survival in the Big Apple. Not sure if the big, um, High Heel (?) requires The Face but it seems prudent.

The Face entails not showing any sign of openness or seeing the people around you. The theory is that crazy street people can easily spot a newbie or tourist by their open and amazed countenance and then swoop in for the kill (not literally, but you have conversations you may not want). My daughter, being a teenager and an accomplished frowner, is a natural for The Face. And she loves the concept. I ruin it by periodically saying, "oh, look at that amazing fountain!" and pointing. That is so not Face.

Later we go to a Kabob place in Hayes Valley. I insult the Turk behind the counter by asking for Greek soup (they have other greek things on the menu). We recover and the food is amazing. We end up contracting with them to provide the food for our Good Friday crucifixion feast at the apartment.

Bill and our son try to go see Ghostwriter at a nearby theater but the tickettaker says, "now everyone's 21 with an ID?" and of course, we have a 15 year old. Turns out the Japan town theater has been turned into a bar/theater. Sounds fun. Just no good for the kids.

Today is Golden Gate park museums.

When are WE going to get over it?

Andrew M. Manis is associate professor of history at Macon State College in Georgia and purportedly wrote this for an editorial in the Macon Telegraph (although I haven't been able to find the direct link). It's thought provoking though. Even though it was written over a year ago, I think it pertains to the weird and violent lash (I won't call it backlash, because it seems to have come first) against the Obama administration including violence against congressional members who voted for the health care bill.


Andrew M. Manis: When Are WE Going to Get Over It?

For much of the last forty years, ever since America "fixed" its race problem in the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts, we white people have been impatient with African Americans who continued to blame race for their difficulties. Often we have heard whites ask, "When are African Americans finally going to get over it? Now I want to ask: "When are we White Americans going to get over our ridiculous obsession with skin color?

Recent reports that "Election Spurs Hundreds' of Race Threats, Crimes" should frighten and infuriate every one of us. Having grown up in "Bombingham," Alabama in the 1960s, I remember overhearing an avalanche of comments about what many white classmates and their parents wanted to do to John and Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King. Eventually, as you may recall, in all three cases, someone decided to do more than "talk the talk."

Since our recent presidential election, to our eternal shame we are once again hearing the same reprehensible talk I
remember from my boyhood. We white people have controlled political life in the disunited colonies and United States for some 400 years on this continent. Conservative whites have been in power 28 of the last 40 years. Even during the eight Clinton years, conservatives in Congress blocked most of his agenda and pulled him to the right. Yet never in that period did I read any headlines suggesting that anyone was calling for the assassinations of presidents Nixon, Ford, Reagan, or either of the Bushes. Criticize them, yes. Call for their impeachment, perhaps. But there were no bounties on their heads. And even when someone did try to kill Ronald Reagan, the perpetrator was non-political mental case who wanted merely to impress Jody Foster.

But elect a liberal who happens to be Black and we're back in the sixties again. At this point in our history, we should be proud that we've proven what conservatives are always saying -- that in America anything is possible, EVEN electing a black man as president. But instead we now hear that school children from Maine to California are talking about wanting to "assassinate Obama."

Fighting the urge to throw up, I can only ask, "How long?" How long before we white people realize we can't make our nation, much less the whole world, look like us? How long until we white people can - once and for all - get over this hell-conceived preoccupation with skin color? How long until we white people get over the demonic conviction that white skin makes us superior? How long before we white people get over our bitter resentments about being demoted to the status of equality with non-whites?

How long before we get over our expectations that we should be at the head of the line merely because of our white skin? How long until we white people end our silence and call out our peers when they share the latest racist jokes in the privacy of our white-only conversations?

I believe in free speech, but how long until we white people start making racist loudmouths as socially uncomfortable as we do flag burners? How long until we white people will stop insisting that blacks exercise personal responsibility, build strong families, educate themselves enough to edit the Harvard Law Review, and work hard enough to become President of the United States, only to threaten to assassinate them when they do?

How long before we starting "living out the true meaning" of our creeds, both civil and religious, that all men and women are created equal and that "red and yellow, black and white" all are precious in God's sight?
Until this past November 4, I didn't believe this country would ever elect an African American to the presidency. I still don't believe I'll live long enough to see us white people get over our racism problem. But here's my three-point plan: First, everyday that Barack Obama lives in the White House that Black Slaves Built, I'm going to pray that God (and the Secret Service) will protect him and his family from us white people.

Second, I'm going to report to the FBI any white person I overhear saying, in seriousness or in jest, anything of a threatening nature about President Obama. Third, I'm going to pray to live long enough to see America surprise the world once again, when white people can "in spirit and in truth" sing of our damnable color prejudice, "We HAVE overcome."
**************************************
It takes a Village to protect our President!!!

My take on health care reform

For months I have been assiduously avoiding commenting on the current national health care reform debate. My reasons for this were many: I was too busy; I was cynical about the chances and didn't want to dampen anyone's spirits and most of all, I was out-of-loop and ignorant and didn't want to face the barrage of correctional comments I would invariably receive since, given my background, if I waded into the water of health reform I would be unable to restrain myself from acting like I knew something.

What do I know? Oh, everything and nothing. See my little profile to the right on the blog page if you're not familiar with my background. Suffice it to say that I was a Washington lobbyist for national health insurance in Washington in the early 90's when Clinton tried to pass it and I've worked for arguably the four strongest single payer health care organizations in the country: Public Citizen, Neighbor to Neighbor, California Nurses Association and Physicians for National Health Plan.

Since 2002 when I left the California Nurses Association though, I have floated more and more to the fringes of health politics. Like so many before me, I have believed that we simply can't pass meaningful health care reform in this country without finding a way to counteract the effects of big health care industry campaign dollars on the parameters of the possible. Hence, I have largely confined my efforts to pass national health reform to a) working to pass public financing of elections and b) prayer.

Nonetheless, I couldn't resist a lump in the throat and a feeling of excitement this week as the health care headlines sailed by. From what little I know, I think it's a huge stretch to compare this legislation to Social Security, but it is historic. It's historic largely because it actually passed and for generations little else has (Children's Health Insurance Program and Health Insurance Portability Act notwithstanding).

My standard rant on this subject is that Democrats will never get anywhere on health care reform as long as they run away from government. Obama's effort proves that no matter what the specifics of the bill, Republicans will campaign against it as if its single payer national health insurance. It may be (and to me it looks like this largely is) basic no-brainer insurance reform mostly to increase access, without any major diminution (and perhaps a slight increase) in private sector power/profit and influence and the GOP will still call it socialism, government takeover, government taking away your doctor.

The thing is that if it really is single payer you can counter back with things like: yes, but every man, woman and child cradle to grave will have full health care coverage for the same amount that we're paying now to cover a fraction of the population. No matter where you work or live or who you're married to or what money you make we'll all have an insurance card and we'll take it to any doctor and we will all get coverage of everything we need. I don't think you can say that here. I don't think you can say it by a long shot.

This time around despite (or maybe because of) the win, I am enjoying being peripheral to this process and out of the loop. My strong guess is that if I were working for Public Citizen now I'd trade in the lump in my throat for a pit in my stomach. I can viscerally recall the contempt that familiarity with the Clinton administration bred in me and so many others. It can really be comforting to know nothing.

Postcard from Buffalo

A rare trip to Buffalo, New York in the spring (occasioned by an insurance company flying me out to depose me in a personal injury case in which I am the defendant). It's all Al Gore's fault really. In July of 2006 I took my mother to the venerable Chautauqua Institution near Buffalo, NY to hear/watch Al Gore give his global warming slideshow in person.

The place was mobbed. Apparently it was the largest attendance Chautauqua (aka Disneyland for PBS Seniors) has ever garnered for any one lecture. At that precise moment, I knew in a flash that a Democrat would win the presidency in 2008. If a ballooned-up ex failed presidential candidate can kill in rural Buffalo with a global warming slideshow, it's all over for the guys who pretend there is no global warming.

Global warming (aka climate change) is evident today with a balmy high of 58 and sun in late March. In Buffalo this translates to people walking down bustling Elmwood Avenue in shirtsleeves (significant windchill factor notwithstanding). For this California girl it meant coat, hat and gloves. Still, I did my best to boost the Buffalo economy buying souvenirs for my family. Afterall, they won't be back here until July...they miss it.

Today at 11am--me on Spirt Talk Live

Rabbi Wayne Dosick host of Spirit Talk Live! will air an interview with me on the topic of Pursuing a Ministry in Midlife on his show today, Wednesday, March 10, 2010 from 11:00am to 12:00 noon pacific time. Click here to listen.

Chomsky on The Corporate Takeover of U.S. Democracy

By NOAM CHOMSKY

Jan. 21, 2010, will go down as a dark day in the history of U.S. democracy, and its decline.

On that day the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the government may not ban corporations from political spending on elections—a decision that profoundly affects government policy, both domestic and international.

The decision heralds even further corporate takeover of the U.S. political system.

To the editors of The New York Times, the ruling “strikes at the heart of democracy” by having “paved the way for corporations to use their vast treasuries to overwhelm elections and intimidate elected officials into doing their bidding.”

The court was split, 5-4, with the four reactionary judges (misleadingly called “conservative”) joined by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. selected a case that could easily have been settled on narrow grounds and maneuvered the court into using it to push through a far-reaching decision that overturns a century of precedents restricting corporate contributions to federal campaigns.

Now corporate managers can in effect buy elections directly, bypassing more complex indirect means. It is well-known that corporate contributions, sometimes packaged in complex ways, can tip the balance in elections, hence driving policy. The court has just handed much more power to the small sector of the population that dominates the economy.

Political economist Thomas Ferguson’s “investment theory of politics” is a very successful predictor of government policy over a long period. The theory interprets elections as occasions on which segments of private sector power coalesce to invest to control the state.

The Jan. 21 decision only reinforces the means to undermine functioning democracy.

The background is enlightening. In his dissent, Justice John Paul Stevens acknowledged that “we have long since held that corporations are covered by the First Amendment”—the constitutional guarantee of free speech, which would include support for political candidates.

In the early 20th century, legal theorists and courts implemented the court’s 1886 decision that corporations—these “collectivist legal entities”—have the same rights as persons of flesh and blood.

This attack on classical liberalism was sharply condemned by the vanishing breed of conservatives. Christopher G. Tiedeman described the principle as “a menace to the liberty of the individual, and to the stability of the American states as popular governments.”

Morton Horwitz writes in his standard legal history that the concept of corporate personhood evolved alongside the shift of power from shareholders to managers, and finally to the doctrine that “the powers of the board of directors “are identical with the powers of the corporation.” In later years, corporate rights were expanded far beyond those of persons, notably by the mislabeled “free trade agreements.” Under these agreements, for example, if General Motors establishes a plant in Mexico, it can demand to be treated just like a Mexican business (“national treatment”)—quite unlike a Mexican of flesh and blood who might seek “national treatment” in New York, or even minimal human rights.

A century ago, Woodrow Wilson, then an academic, described an America in which “comparatively small groups of men,” corporate managers, “wield a power and control over the wealth and the business operations of the country,” becoming “rivals of the government itself.”

In reality, these “small groups” increasingly have become government’s masters. The Roberts court gives them even greater scope.

The Jan. 21 decision came three days after another victory for wealth and power: the election of Republican candidate Scott Brown to replace the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, the “liberal lion” of Massachusetts. Brown’s election was depicted as a “populist upsurge” against the liberal elitists who run the government.

The voting data reveal a rather different story.

High turnouts in the wealthy suburbs, and low ones in largely Democratic urban areas, helped elect Brown. “Fifty-five percent of Republican voters said they were `very interested’ in the election,” The Wall St. Journal/NBC poll reported, “compared with 38 percent of Democrats.”

So the results were indeed an uprising against President Obama’s policies: For the wealthy, he was not doing enough to enrich them further, while for the poorer sectors, he was doing too much to achieve that end.

The popular anger is quite understandable, given that the banks are thriving, thanks to bailouts, while unemployment has risen to 10 percent.

In manufacturing, one in six is out of work—unemployment at the level of the Great Depression. With the increasing financialization of the economy and the hollowing out of productive industry, prospects are bleak for recovering the kinds of jobs that were lost.

Brown presented himself as the 41st vote against healthcare—that is, the vote that could undermine majority rule in the U.S. Senate.

It is true that Obama’s healthcare program was a factor in the Massachusetts election. The headlines are correct when they report that the public is turning against the program.

The poll figures explain why: The bill does not go far enough. The Wall St. Journal/NBC poll found that a majority of voters disapprove of the handling of healthcare both by the Republicans and by Obama.

These figures align with recent nationwide polls. The public option was favored by 56 percent of those polled, and the Medicare buy-in at age 55 by 64 percent; both programs were abandoned.

Eighty-five percent believe that the government should have the right to negotiate drug prices, as in other countries; Obama guaranteed Big Pharma that he would not pursue that option.

Large majorities favor cost-cutting, which makes good sense: U.S. per capita costs for healthcare are about twice those of other industrial countries, and health outcomes are at the low end.

But cost-cutting cannot be seriously undertaken when largesse is showered on the drug companies, and healthcare is in the hands of virtually unregulated private insurers—a costly system peculiar to the U.S.

The Jan. 21 decision raises significant new barriers to overcoming the serious crisis of healthcare, or to addressing such critical issues as the looming environmental and energy crises. The gap between public opinion and public policy looms larger. And the damage to American democracy can hardly be overestimated.

Bullocks to Bridges

What a cruel joke that long-overlooked Jeff Bridges had to have his night cheapened by long-overrated Sandra Bullocks. I mean, come on! They aren't even the same league. America's Sweetheart has never been mine. As far as I'm concerned, she's got no special acting talent whatsoever. She's not even particularly special to look at. The most effusive adjective I could apply to Sandra Bullocks is unobjectionable at least prior to last night's Oscars. I object to her being named Best Actress.

Fortunately, from what I could discern of her odd acceptance speech, Sandra Bullocks objects too. She seemed to know that she had no business receiving the honor and that more than anything it may have signaled the end of her career in B movies.

Jeff Bridges on the other hand has been brilliant over the years, most notably in The Big Lebowski which has always been one of my favorite films. Unlike most overdue oscars, this one actually went for a performance worthy of the award--Bridges has never been better than as Bad Blake in Crazy Heart.

Too bad Bullocks winning her award gives an implication that they're both just getting the award for sure stamina, rather than talent.

Buy, Buy American Pie

Speakeasies in Highschool?

Late Friday afternoon our 15-year-old announces that there is a "speakeasy" at his highschool that evening and that he'd like to attend it. Initially that troubles us since our only frame of reference is the speakeasies we frequented in the 1920's during prohibition (those were the days! Actually my grandfather Culver Nichols did used to tell me stories of driving his Model A Ford around the hills of Santa Cruz looking for stills while he was in college at Stanford).

"Will there be cheap gin and cheap women?" we ask our son. He glares at us and maintains his interest in going.

I drop him off without being granted license to come in and inspect the den of iniquity to which I am consigning our first born. When I come back though, he isn't in front of the school and can't stop me from coming to get him. I sneak into the back of the speakeasy hoping to be undetected as I witness the shameful scene.

The bright voice of an English teacher greets me, "come in! we've only got 5 minutes left!" That should have been a clue to me that something was dreadfully wrong.

I sit as my eyes slowly take in the dark room with tables and covered lamps. I detect rhythmic speaking and the sound of boisterous teenage laughter. I get a sick feeling in my throat. If anything, I must have underestimated the level of depravity here.

I take a closer look and listen as a young man in the front of the room gets our attention. He is reading aloud from a book. "What's this?" I ask myself. "What in tarnation is going on here?" (vain attempt at prohibition speak)

It turns out that the whole darn thing is a poetry reading! 15-18 year-olds, male and female, are tumbling all over themselves to get up to the front of the room to read poetry aloud to the group. The rest of them are spread all over the room pouring over poetry tomes searching for the next one to read.

Truth be told, this was just about the sweetest scene I have ever stumbled upon. In 2010, right here in Sacramento, teen-aged kids having the time of their lives fighting to get up on the stool to read.

To celebrate, I think I'll pour myself a tall glass of cheap gin, put on some jazz and do the Charleston.

The Joy of Chemicals

Popular shampoos contain toxic chemicals linked to nerve damage (asthma, and a host of issues--see this article among many others "How Toxic is Your Shampoo?) among them seems to be Propylene Glycol. Paint contains toxic chemicals linked to permanent brain damage, major respiratory problems, etc. According to the EPA, exposure to indoor household paint is one of the top 5 health hazards. Indoor air is more dangerous than outdoor air. See "What are the Long-term Effects of exposure to harmful paint fumes?" so it is no joke to try to protect your family by buying and using green products.

Unfortunately, to paraphrase chemical giant Monsanto, I've learned that without chemicals, life itself would be inconvenient. In the past year, I've been facing the current conundrum of the green consumer: how do you buy safe, green products that don't completely suck?

A few months ago, we were repainting our bathrooms so we bought zero VOC paint from Green Sacramento, an emerging center of environmentally safe building and design products in midtown Sacramento. I was giddy with the idea of protecting the family and the painters we hired from the effects of these fumes. We were willing to pay 3-4 times as much for this paint as we would for regular paint to be safe. And truly, there were no fumes. The zero VOCness of the paint served its intended purpose. Hooray?

Not so fast. The paint may have been safe, but it turned out that the chemicals they put in those paints that cause the fumes that cause the brain damage served a purpose, they kept the paint in a good consistency and they kept it from drying too quickly. This paint was a NIGHTMARE to work with. The job took much longer and was much harder and therefore even more expensive than it already was from the increased cost of the paints.

Fast forward to our current struggle with shampoo, a product I use much more frequently than paint. Finding that there were exactly zero shampoos available in a standard drug store or supermarket without the toxic chemicals, I desperately bought something like Dr. Insane Guy's Peppermint 18 in 1 Soap telling myself that it would suffice as a shampoo while we looked for an alternative.

Needless to say, it did NOT suffice. My daughter and I have come to the conclusion that this soap not only doesn't clean our hair but may have permanently converted our hair to its current greasy, vile, lifeless and strange condition. We have not been able to leave our home for several days and may need care packages. We need a green shampoo that actually works!

Consulting an obsessive and knowledgeable friend who works hard to eliminate toxins from his household revealed this email,

"The "best" two I found were EO and Giovanni. EO shampoos don't lather as well, as they are the most natural. But we like them, esp. the conditioners. We are using a lot of Giovanni (can get at Co-op) and love them. The magnetic shampoo and conditioner are both great. You can see their rating at the EWG database."

We hope he's right. Green scientists take note: we need you hard at work making us functional and affordable green household products. Consumers, what can we do but beware?

Me on Spirit Talk Live 3/10

Rabbi Wayne Dosick host of Spirit Talk Live! will air an interview with me on the topic of Pursuing a Ministry in Midlife on his show Wednesday, March 10, 2010 from 11:00am to 12:00 noon pacific time. Click here to listen.