School of Hard…Locks?

Imagine showing up for school bright and early on a Monday morning only to find the “campus” locked and shuttered. This was the fate of hundreds of students in Oregon and Washington who attended the Business Career Training Institute (BCTI).

According to articles in both the Statesman Journal and Oregonian, BCTI was under investigation for numerous violations in both Oregon and Washington. They also face several lawsuits by former students and workers.

Many students, only a few weeks or months away from receiving their certificate of completion, now have nothing to show for all their hard work and financial debt. While it is certainly understandable that BCTI officials may have wished to cut their losses by instituting these abrupt closures, it shows an utter disregard for the lives of their students.

One of the allegations, which has led to the current investigations by Oregon and Washington, concerns BCTI’s recruiting practices. BCTI recruiters were known to frequent local employment and welfare offices trying to lure people, down on their luck, with promises of little out-of-pocket expenses (federal loans or grants) and the opportunity for career placement assistance in high paying fields.

While I can’t know what state investigators ultimately will find in this regard, I do know from personal experience that BCTI’s overall recruitment process bordered on hucksterism.

A few years ago my wife, who works as an Assistant Teacher for an area Head Start program, went down to our local employment office looking for job possibilities during the summer break. As we left the building, we were approached by a BCTI recruiter. This fellow had a slick sales pitch and several colorful brochures. He provided a lot of vague information and seemed a bit annoyed with me when I asked him pointed questions.

For the heck of it, we scheduled an appointment at BCTI. They gave my wife the grand tour – I stayed in the car reading the paper. At the conclusion of the tour, my wife fetched me to go with her to meet with the financial aid person. This friendly woman told us how EASY it would be to obtain federal loans and how it would mean little out-of-pocket expense for us.

So, the woman said, classes will be starting very soon. Do you want to sign on the dotted line? Not so fast, I replied. How much money are we talking about? She tried to sidestep my question, but quickly discovered I wasn’t about to be sidestepped.

When she finally produced some documentation on the costs, my eyes almost popped out of their sockets. BCTI charges around $10,000 per term for a bunch of courses anyone could take at a high school or community college. Not only that, but the so-called generous financial aid only covered about one-half of the costs.

It was then and there I realized that my initial perception of BCTI was on target – In my estimation, this “school” was more about laundering federal and state financial aid monies than educating students for a better career.

We tried to leave gracefully, but it was difficult. The financial aide person acted like we weren’t going to be allowed to exit the building UNTIL we signed up. I thanked the woman for her time, but said we wanted to examine all options before coming to a decision. Like the recruiter before, this tact seemed to annoy her greatly.

Despite my own reservations regarding BCTI, I still feel very bad for the students who are now left in the lurch. Though there is some possibility that many may be able to get their federal loans canceled and/or recoup a portion of their out-of-pocket tuition money, there is no program that will help them recover from the psychological blow of putting so much time and energy into activity that will result in so little.

It’s a sad day indeed when the chief lesson learned is that some schools have little interest in education and every interest in ripping off their students and taxpayers.

Update: To read about some of BCTI's unscrupulous practices, see Geeekgirl's post, "Sally Struthers Would Not Approve". The author is a former employee of BCTI.

Educational Doubletalk

In today’s edition of the Statesman Journal, education reporter Tara McLain writes about State Senate Bill 755 which seeks to limit sweetheart “end-of-contract” payments to administrators of school district and education service districts (ESD). This issue has resonance in the Salem area as the former Superintendent of the Willamette ESD received a few extraordinary perks upon his resignation.

What I found to be most interesting about the article were the arguments by the opponents of the bill. While not agreeing with their initial argument, I can at least understand it. It is the position of the Oregon School Board Association that the problem that SB 755 seeks to address is a rare one and is generally corrected by the districts themselves.

If they had stopped right there, then I would feel their position was logical and rational. Unfortunately, they felt the need to add a second prong to their attack. Not only is the problem rare, BUT, they argue, it would devastate the ability of these districts to attract qualified administrators to open positions.

At this juncture, the addition of this second line of reasoning would lead the prudent person to ask: If sweetheart deals are rare and, when they do occur, are typically self-corrected by the districts themselves, why should this be a defining issue in the recruitment process?

It would seem that school boards want to have the option to use these sweetheart deals as a lure. If used as a lure, then it undermines the contention that the problem both is rare and self-corrected by the districts themselves. In essence, the opponent's two-pronged strategy is nothing more than doubletalk with each prong contradicting the other.

Out of Balance

Most people will agree that something is amiss in our world. One of the ways people try to explain societal problems is through the use of buzzwords. Two that have been very prevalent over the past decade are “family values” and “terrorism”. Others believe the problem has more to do with the “gay agenda” or “secular” forces.

As a Taoist, I don’t get caught up in the buzzwords of the day. From my vantage point, humanity has always suffered from the same problem – We’re out of balance.

We always seem to be tilting too far in one direction or the other, both collectively and individually. We either behave too rationally or too emotionally.

The secret of life is both unimaginably simple and yet amazingly difficult. That secret is balance.

We see this principle at work everywhere around us. Our bodies balance a complex matrix of chemicals and processes which allow us to breath, eat, move, think and sleep. If a particular chemical or process becomes out of balance, we don’t feel as well as we might. Sometimes, it even causes our bodies to die.

The natural world is all about balance. If a certain animal species becomes too numerous, its numbers are pared back through disease, reduced birth rates, predators or climate change and this is done, by the way, without the need for human planning and strategizing.

The chief problem for humans (with our over-thinking minds) is that it is so difficult for us to understand where the midpoint is for anything at any given time. Our world is not static – it’s constantly changing moment by moment. Consequently, in light of any particular circumstance or situation, what may achieve balance right now may become out of balance two seconds or two minutes later.

This singular fact drives us absolutely bonkers. We like hard and fast rules. We like standards that are permanent, in nature. This desire of ours helps to explain the popularity of religion.

Most established religions promote a “code of conduct”. These codes contain rules, procedures, rituals and creeds that somebody formulated long ago. People like to follow these standards because a) They don’t have to spend the time creating them themselves and b) They offer a sense of permanency and rigidity in an impermanent and fluid world.

Yet, despite the steadfast observance of these artificial edifices of proper standards, all of the people who adhere to such beliefs nonetheless find they suffer from the very same kinds of imbalance as the rest of us. It would seem that all their devotion and faith still doesn’t get them where they crave to be – in balance.

I’m not here to offer a roadmap to where balance is for any given person in any given situation. In fact, the wise person knows that there is NO roadmap. Finding AND achieving balance is a moment to moment endeavor. And, just because a certain action causes me to be in balance at this singular point in time, this doesn’t mean that if you replicate my action it will put you in balance OR if I replicate the same action tomorrow I will still be in balance.

Balance is elusive. We can only hope to find it, IF we ACTIVELY look for it. Even when we look for it, it can still prove elusive, but, at least, we’re on the right track.

Ignore balance AND balance will ignore you.

The Bull in the China Shop

We’ve all had dealings with these kinds of people. They view the world as moving too slowly. They believe that everyone but themselves is inept, on the take, dimwitted, shortsighted or a combination of all four. These individuals believe, that to get things accomplished, only a no-holds-barred approach is reasonable. And, not surprisingly, most of these individuals will proudly tell you that they are like “A Bull in a China Shop”.

Frankly, in superficial ways, it’s fun being the bull. You can thrash around all you want. Knock over and break the china – Who cares? It’s not YOUR problem! Hurt a few feelings or ruin a few reputations – So what? It’s not YOUR concern.

Invariably though, the problem identified by the bull personality doesn’t get resolved in the manner they desired or expected. In fact, it is not infrequent that the perceived problem continues on as before with the only change being that the bull has ostracized him/herself from the group.

I had a dear friend who continually behaved like the proverbial bull in a china shop. When things weren’t moving at the speed or in the direction he wanted, he would spring into action. He would do whatever he felt necessary to achieve his desired ends. Quite often, he would defy common ethics to try to get what he wanted, all the while telling himself that it was okay for HIM to bend or break the rules – it was NOT alright for anyone else – because his desired ends were noble.

Our friendship ended because of his continuing smug and self-righteous actions. Again and again, I tried to impress upon him that HOW we try to obtain what we feel is right and fair is just as important as WHAT we are trying to accomplish.

If your goal is peace, you can’t get there through violence. If your objective is honesty, you won’t reach it through dishonesty. If your aim is justice, you won’t ever gain it through injustice. If your purpose is love, hate will push you away from it.

And this represents the great irony of the “bull in the china shop” mentality. Such individuals tend to rail against the inequities of our society, yet use the very same means to try to bring about their lofty visions. What most of them seem incapable of comprehending is that, if you utilize the very same strategy of those you disagree with, you become an adversary of your own self.

In other words, you become the very thing you oppose.

Wringing of Twisted Hands

One of the stories on the front page of this week's Sunday Oregonian talks about how many in the Pentagon have acknowledged that they may need to "rethink" the quick-hit attack plan in light of their difficulties in implementing this plan successfully in Iraq. In fact, this is just the tip of the iceberg. There has been a lot of hand wringing lately about a bevy of miscalculations concerning the war in Iraq.

But let's get real. The failure of the US strategy in Iraq has nothing whatsoever to do with overly optimistic thinking or strategic miscalculations. No, the problem is that reality -- and an easily FORESEEABLE reality at that -- has caught up with the Bush architects of war. In other words, the Bush Administration is now coming face-to-face with the scores of lies they consciously told as a lead up to the Iraq invasion.

I realize some of you may be upset with me for characterizing these things as lies. You may well argue that none of us possesses a crystal ball and reasonable people can look at a situation and make honest miscalculations.

I will grant this fact, but not in this particular situation. Almost every negative aspect that has come to pass in relation to the Iraq War was predicted by peace activists and the alternative media. And, each time we brought up any of these legitimate concerns, we were shot down by the Bushies, the mainstream media and a lot of the general public. It was said that we were unpatriotic and simple-minded.

Initially, the Bush Administration told us that the “war” would cost no more than $80 billion. We countered that it would most likely cost $100-$200 billion and more. Unfortunately, we turned out to be correct.

The Bush Administration characterized the military plan as a quick-in, quick-out operation. We countered that it would turn into another Vietnam, with US soldiers facing a guerilla-style opposition, and our forces would get bogged down in Iraq for YEARS. This is precisely what is taking place.

The Bush Administration told us that Saddam HAD WMDs and “we” knew where they were. We countered that it was very unlikely that Iraq had any WMDs and that the UN inspectors should be given the chance to prove this. As we all know, after months and months of searching for what we were told was definitely there, NO WMDs were found.

The Bush Administration said that an attack on Iraq would lessen the terrorist threat. We countered that it would fuel it due to increased anti-American sentiment. Yet again, we have proven to be on-target as the nation’s terrorist alert status has bobbed up and down like a yo-yo and even the Bush Administration now admits that foreign terrorists…surprise, surprise… are streaming into Iraq to help in the resistance movement.

This list could go on and on, but the point is made. Each of these observations was there for anyone to see prior to the Iraq invasion. If a bunch of us “left wing kooks” could readily figure all this out, don’t you think the Bush Administration had it figured out too?

If some of you still wish to cling to the idea that Dubya and his minions simply made a lot of unfortunate miscalculations, then I guess it means that we peaceniks are far more intelligent than our government leaders. We figured things out at the very beginning and what we figured out has been right on target.

Since we appear to be so bright, you should be electing us to run the country!

No Death with Dignity…in Iraq

While the Oregon media focuses on a showdown between the Bush Administration and the will of Oregon voters over the Death with Dignity Act in a showdown in the US Supreme Court, thousands upon thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens go to their deaths each day without a semblance of dignity.

Across this nation the mainstream media painstakingly details the deaths of each and every US military death. Most newspapers, television stations and web sites featured an ongoing up-to-the-minute tally. The same is true for our counterparts in Britain.

Yet, the very people suffering the most through death and disabling injury – innocent Iraqi women, children and men – go largely unreported. This point was driven home in an article which appears in today’s Guardian Unlimited, “Iraq Allies Accused of Failing to Investigate Civilian Deaths”:

Experts in public health from six countries, including the UK, today castigate the British and American governments for failing to investigate the deaths of civilians caught up in the conflict in Iraq.

Twenty-four experts from the UK, the US, Australia, Canada, Spain and Italy say the attitude of the governments is "wholly irresponsible". They say the UK government's reliance on "extremely limited data" from the Iraqi ministry of health is "unacceptable" because it is likely to seriously underestimate the casualties.

Not only is this behavior “irresponsible”, but it smacks of nationalism and ethnocentrism. It’s as if to say that some deaths (ours) matter, but others (yours) don’t.

Regardless of one’s religious or philosophical perspective, it is generally agreed upon that each human life is precious. We each get one shot at making this life meaningful and productive. When someone is robbed of this opportunity, through no fault of their own, it amounts to a tragedy; a life cut short.

It doesn’t matter if one’s life is cut short by a natural disaster, a senseless accident, disease, poverty OR via armed conflict. The end result is the same – the individual’s potential for self-realization is taken away from them.

Almost every person on this planet deserves some dignity with death. We could move far closer to this ideal if we afforded each individual a strong measure of dignity during life. Sadly, most of the Iraqi people are receiving neither.

Their innocent blood is on our shamed hands.

Religious or Historical?

One of the great facets of the blogosphere is having the marvelous opportunity to converse with and to learn from others who we may have not come in contact with otherwise. In response to my recent post Coming to Your Local Courthouse, Tao Te Lex offers the opinion that the 10 Commandments might be viewed as an historical document rather than merely a religious one.

I will be the first to admit that this is an interesting point and one that I had not considered previously. After mulling it over in my brain (I tried to leave my mind out of the discussion as much as possible), I arrived at the question of what is religious and what is historical?

From my perspective, it would initially seem very difficult to separate the two. Any religious document that hails from the past would appear to be both religious AND historical. It’s religious because it expresses a viewpoint from a particular belief-based perspective. It could concurrently be viewed as historical because it originated in the past and it provides the evidence or source for a fact and/or something that occurred.

The problem with viewing the 10 Commandments as purely historical is that one must subscribe to the Judeo-Christian perspective in order to agree that it does indeed provide the evidence or source of a KNOWN fact.

From the Judeo-Christian viewpoint, the 10 Commandments were written by God himself onto stone tablets and presented to the people by Moses. IF God – as perceived by Jews & Christians – was a verifiable fact, then I think almost anyone would agree that the 10 Commandments were indeed historical.

But the God of the Judeo-Christian religions is NOT a proven fact. Many other religions view the Almighty in vastly different ways. Taoists don’t accept the notion of a personal god at all – for us the ultimate reality is beyond human comprehension and the bare hints of it are found in ourselves and everything else.

Consequently, if the entity that allegedly authored the document in question is ITSELF in question, it makes it next to impossible to accept a religious instrument as a historical document. If one doesn’t believe in God or in the Judeo-Christian version of God, then the very premise of the creation of the document itself would be viewed as inauthentic.

Since there is no religious document that I know of that is accepted as authentic by all people, we then find ourselves left with one of two options: either ALL religious documents are historical or none of them are.

Harkening back to the discussion of religious documents being showcased in public buildings, either ALL religious documents should be afforded this opportunity or none of them should.

Universal Health Care -- US Style

For years, if someone brings up the idea of universal health care, opponents say it would never work in the the 'ol US of A. Yet, as it turns out, this isn't true at all. The US does IN FACT have a universal health care system for one segment of the population -- the VA system for our military.

Not only do we have such a system, but, according to Phillip Longman in an article in Washington Monthly, it's proven to be very successful.

If you have any doubts that "socialized medicine" can work in this country, I urge you to read this excellent article.

Dribbling While Black

In an all too frequent occurrence in our society, it has been reported that students from a predominantly white high school –– Lake Oswego –– engaged in racial taunting of a black student-athlete during a basketball game this past weekend. As Lincoln High School senior Omar Leary prepared to attempt two free throws, chants of “"You can’'t read"” and “"Sixth-year senior"” were heard from the partisan crowd.

It is certainly not surprising that, in a society still deeply divided along racial lines, racism would play a role in high school sports. Though we might like to think that the days of Jackie Robinson are far behind us, it is more than evident that the vestiges of that era still remain intact.

One telling comment came from a Lake Oswego senior. While he felt the chants were “"thoughtless [and] classless"”, he didn'’t consider them racist. Obviously, to people like this young man, a racist slur needs to be more explicit, like referring to this black high school student-athlete as a "“spear chucker" or “"nigger"”.

Yet, as this example illustrates, it is the implicit comments that can prove to be most insulting. Comments like these show extreme –– and possibly unconscious –– prejudice. Without explicitly mentioning the player’'s name or race, these chants underscored to many in the crowd the belief that blacks, as a race, are not very bright.

What could be more racist than that?

Fed Minimum Wage Remains Minimal

The chances of the federal minimum wage of a paltry $5.15 per hour increasing anytime soon doesn’t appear to be on a near horizon. Sen. Edward Kennedy introduced legislation to raise it by over $2, but it was beaten back by the conservative majority because, they say, it would unduly harm small and mid-sized businesses.

I have a very terse response to such rationale – Tough!

I’ve always been flabbergasted by this line of reasoning. From my humble perspective, if any business can’t stay afloat by paying its workers enough money to subsist, then such businesses have NO business being IN business.

Think about the rationale a little more deeply. What it states is that, in order for a particular enterprise to turn a profit AND allow the owners/managers to meet THEIR needs, it must concurrently under-value and underpay its workers so they cannot meet their BASIC needs. It is saying, in essence, that one group’s needs – the owners/managers – matter, while the workers needs don’t.

To drive home my point, let’s alter this formula by replacing the idea of a minimum wage with the concept of slavery. The conservative rationale would then read something like this: We can’t abolish slavery because it would unduly harm the financial bottom line of small and mid-sized businesses. Such enterprises can’t be expected to turn a profit if they are forced to PAY their workers.

If it were framed in these stark terms, I genuinely believe far more people would be outraged. While minimum wage workers are certainly not slaves, they ARE, in reality, not that far above them.

People trying to subsist on a minimum wage that falls BELOW the subsistence level are more likely to make use of public assistance and food banks, forgo needed medical care or seek it and not be able to pay for it (which increases medical costs for everyone) and, for some, to turn to a life of crime – all the things that conservatives rail against.

Hmm. Maybe that’s what this is all about. Conservatives need to keep the minimum wage depressed so that social services and crime continue to be major issues because, if they were not major issues, what would conservatives rail against? Who would they beat up on? How could the GOP stay in business?

My Heroes? Adam & Eve

Some people seem to get stuck with a bad rep. Take poor ‘ol Adam & Eve. From the Judeo-Christian perspective, these two were the very first screw ups. Because of one little indiscretion, they were tossed out of the Garden of Eden. Even worse, THEIR fall from grace became EVERYBODY’S fall from grace.

I think we should cut these two some slack. In fact, I think these two brave souls should be commended for their independence. Had they not eaten from the Tree of Knowledge, can you imagine how drab and mundane our lives would be today?

I realize that a lot people think that living in paradise would be great – having no concerns or worries. Everything, at any time, would be idyllic and carefree. However, as Taoists and many others have aptly pointed out, a person can’t understand anything UNLESS a person understand its opposite.

Had Adam and Eve not eaten the forbidden fruit, they wouldn’t have had any way of knowing that they were IN paradise. Paradise only has any resonance IF you understand what isn’t paradise. If paradise is ALL you know, then what exactly is it?

None of us can understand good if we don’t concurrently understand evil. Happiness only has meaning if you have felt sadness before. Light only makes sense juxtaposed to darkness. Tall can only be significant compared to short. Forward can only be forward if something else is left behind.

If lemons were the only food you had ever consumed during your lifetime and you met someone who only ate peaches, how would either of you explain to the other what your particular fruit tasted like?

You wouldn’t know to say that a lemon is sour because the taste of the lemon is all you know. In order for you to characterize it AS sour, it must be sour compared to something else. Likewise, your new acquaintance wouldn’t know to say that a peach is sweeter than a lemon simply because she has no idea what a lemon tastes like.

As I think it should be easy to see, we owe a debt of gratitude to Adam & Eve (and, to be honest, most of the credit SHOULD go to Eve). Their singular act of disobedience is what gives each of our lives meaning. Their defiance is what gives each of our lives definition.

If there was no meaning and no definition, would any of us even be conscious that we’re alive?

Coming to Your Local Courthouse!

Sometime this year the US Supreme Court will decide if exhibiting the Judeo-Christian 10 Commandments in courthouses and other publicly-supported venues is constitutional. While I certainly hope they uphold the doctrine of separation between church and state, I won’t be at all surprised if they decide to blur the lines just a tad.

However, if this is the way we’re going to play the game, then I plan to bring my own ball and bat to the playing field. I will march myself down to the Salem City Hall and the Oregon State Capitol to demand that they erect a monument or place behind a shiny glass window selected verses of the Tao Te Ching.

I’m a tax-paying American citizen. If they’re going to force non-Christians like me to have to navigate around documents, portraits, monuments and nativity scenes from a religion that I don’t subscribe to, then I think all the Christians in the City of Salem and the State of Oregon should be afforded the same opportunity vis-à-vis a belief system different from theirs.

In fact, I’m going to encourage ALL of my non-Christian comrades to seek the same kind of remedy. I have friends who are Muslims, Buddhists, Pagans, Wiccans, Hindus, and Humanists. If it’s a-ok to have the 10 Commandments shown in public buildings, then I think we should openly allow tracts from ALL religions and belief systems!

Hey, in time, each and every public structure across the nation can become quasi-religious institutions. Instead of going to the public library, taking a course at a local community college or university, or surfing the web, people can trot themselves down to the nearest taxpayer-supported building to learn about all things religious.

Who knows? There may come a day when we can dispense with all the churches, synagogues and mosques. We won’t need ‘em. We can simply go to the County Courthouse or local City Hall to hold our prayer services. We could even provide for joint offerings – half would go to the religion of your choice and half would go to the local government. And, maybe we can get rid of all these silly elections too. Rather than cast votes for our leaders, we could just let the local religious institutions appoint them for us.

Of course, if this kind of WILD thinking worries you, then you better pray – pray really hard – that the High Court decides that the separation of church and state needs to be upheld. If not, I and my fellow Taoists will work to insure you’re exposed to far more Taoism than you ever thought possible.

Don’t Shoot, I’m Not the Enemy!

Here’s the situation: You’ve been held hostage by desperate men. You’ve lived in fear for your life 24/7. YOUR government, unlike the US government, negotiates with your captors and pays a sizeable ransom for your release. And, to your utter surprise, your captors genuinely release you! You think you’re home free…

Not so fast. You still need to get out of the country and that means running a gauntlet of trigger-happy US soldiers.

Most people have heard about the sordid and tragic situation of Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena. Released by her captors and trying to make her way to the Baghdad airport to fly home, the car carrying her and others was strafed with gunfire from US military personnel.

Some people are charging that US troops specifically are targeting journalists, particularly journalists the Bush Administration is not happy with. While I certainly wouldn’t put this past our government, I’m willing – for now – to give our soldiers the benefit of the doubt.

If there isn’t some sinister conspiracy afoot, what could explain this kind of grievous error?

While it is a well known fact that I am vehemently opposed to the “war” in Iraq, I must admit I really feel compassion for the impossible situation US troops find themselves in. Told by the Bush cabal that they would be warmly greeted as liberators, I’m sure it has come as an utter shock that most Iraqis loathe them and that a significant number of Iraqis wished that each soldier would keel over dead.

Every Iraqi they meet on the street could be a potential suicide bomber or assassin – they could just as easily be someone trying to go about their daily routine. The problem is that suicide bombers, for example, are not known to wear nametags (Ahmad, Suicide Bomber) or carry signs that read, “Hi, I’m REALLY wired today”.

Consequently, not knowing who is friend and who is foe would tend to make any one of us a tad bit jumpy. In such cases, it’s somewhat understandable if a person chooses to be slightly more proactive than reactive.

Think about this in terms of normal everyday life. When we are anxious or frustrated or just having a bad day, most of us tend to be quick to snap at others. We often snap at people who haven’t done anything to deserve it. In most situations, we snap with words. We can each say some fairly nasty things to our coworkers or family members. While words can certainly be hurtful, by themselves they are not life threatening.

Unfortunately, when you’re put in the position that our troops find themselves in, you snap at people with guns. Unlike words, guns can be VERY life threatening. In fact, in the case cited above, the use of guns turned out to be deadly for one member of Sgrena’s entourage.

Who knows what caused the troops to decide to fire on this vehicle. Maybe the make of the car was similar to one used in a recent suicide bombing. Maybe one soldier was suspicious of the driver. Maybe the soldiers weren’t expecting a car on the road at that hour. Maybe the first person to fire was having a really bad day and doesn’t even know why he fired his gun. Or maybe the troops knew exactly who was in the vehicle and fired on it from orders from up the chain of command.

Hopefully, we will one day know. For now, however, I fear we will soon hear of other similar cases. Our troops are in a no-win situation. If they don’t act on their instincts, it could well mean their own death or that of their comrades. If they play a hunch and they’re sadly off-base, it will usually mean the death of one or more innocent people.

For me, the best solution to end the possibility of these kinds of situations from occurring is to get our troops out of there.

Support our beleaguered soldiers. Bring them home NOW!

Great Food Drive on Wrong Road

One of our local television stations (Northwest News Channel 8/NBC affiliate) is teaming up with several local corporations to sponsor a massive food drive to benefit the Oregon Food Bank. The stated goal is to raise 1 million pounds of food by March 31. Not only is the station running multitudes of self-promoting PSAs, but they have the governor shrilling for them too.

Now don’t get me wrong. As far as the food drive goes, it’s not necessarily such a bad thing. There are thousands upon thousands of hungry people in our state and many local food banks strain to keep up with the ever increasing demand. So, encouraging people and business to make needed donations can only help the present situation.

However, the food drive – like too many initiatives in our society – places far too much emphasis at the wrong point in the process. Projects such as food drives deal with the hunger issue at the back end. If, instead, we would place more emphasis on alleviating the circumstances that lead to hunger, then we would not only help to feed the hungry amongst us today, but we would also work to PREVENT more people from joining their ranks.

At this juncture, it’s easy to blame this whole predicament on our elected officials and Corporate America.

For the government’s part, the laws that govern our land don’t do nearly enough to create the kinds of opportunities needed so that most people can earn a living wage, receive adequate health care and, thus, enjoy secure and well-fed lives. Too often, it is the government's policies themselves that create the necessary dynamics that spur poverty and hunger.

Corporate America has worked diligently to depress wages and benefits, outsource jobs to the far corners of the planet (which has destroyed the concept of job security), undermine LEGAL union activities, and employ shortcuts in the use of materials and safety measures which have endangered not only their own workers but the general public as well.

But it’s simply a copout to lay the blame at their feet alone. If we, the people, started clamoring for REAL bona fide changes in the way our society confronts the problems of hunger and poverty, then many changes would be implemented. It is our collective silence that has provided both the government and big business with the needed cover to allow this problem to fester and deepen.

While I urge my fellow Oregonians to make a generous donation to the Great Food Drive, I also implore each of you to not stop at this token effort. One million pounds of food sounds like a tremendous amount, but it pales in comparison to what is needed over the long haul.

The better solution is to work to END THE NEED. If no one is hungry, then we can utilize our collective efforts for worthy projects other than food drives.

It Could Be the Guy Next Door

[Continuing on from the previous entry]

Why are some people sexual predators? This is a question with no simple and ready-made answers. There is no definitive checklist that can be used to determine who will and who won’t sexually victimize others. And, despite the assumptions of some members of the general public, you can’t easily spot them in a crowd.

For the most part – and I’m not including those predators who are the most violent and antisocial – people who sexually abuse and victimize others are everyday people. Most of their desires, aspirations, dreams and needs are the same as yours and mine. They can be well-educated or uneducated, rich or poor, good looking or not so good looking, kind or mean, and funny or boring.

In general, they DO share two things in common – they are almost always males and, more often than not, they were once the victims of some manner of abuse, particularly sexual abuse. By victim, I don’t necessarily mean that someone directly abused them.

For example, if a father is physically, emotionally, verbally or sexually abusive toward his wife or significant other, the children are still victims too. Though daddy dear may have never laid a hand on them nor touched them in an inappropriate manner, they still have been victimized because they don’t have an adequate role model to show them how a mature father should relate with others.

The male children often grow up with a subconscious belief that violent or sexually exploitive behavior is a-ok and it is the proper means by which the adult male expresses his wants and needs. Conversely, the female children grow up with a subconscious belief that they need to find a man who expresses himself in the same violent or sexually exploitive ways as dear old dad.

It should be very obvious that the best mechanism for reducing the amount of sexual abuse in the world is TO BREAK the cycle of abuse. If more children were afforded the opportunity to grow up in loving and nurturing homes with adequate role models – whether in two-parent, single-parent or extended-family homes – then less of them would continue to incorporate the behavior flaws that lead them from moving from the role of victim to abuser as adults.

Once these flaws have been assimilated into the growing child’s personality makeup, it becomes that much more difficult to remove them. In some cases – particularly true for pedophiles and serial rapists – it becomes virtually impossible.

While I certainly like to believe that every life can be redeemed and rebalanced in relation to the Tao, my experience in this field has certainly challenged that belief.

Fiction Not Always Stranger Than Truth

One frequent complaint about the mainstream media is that it has a tendency to sensationalize humanity’s foibles. It’s not uncommon for an historic or current event to be portrayed with a grain of truth along with a healthy dose of melodrama and contrived plot lines.

That said, fiction is not always stranger than truth -- truth is OFTEN stranger than fiction.

I address this topic after watching my weekly dose of the NBC franchise-series, Law & Order (L&0). In this particular instance, I was watching a rerun of L&O SVU (Sexual Victims Unit).

The intro to each edition of SVU stresses that crimes of sexual victimization are particularly heinous and, as with all versions of L&O, the baseline for each story is ripped from the headlines.

To be certain, every week the SVU team seems to deal with some of the most heinous (there’s that word again) sex crimes. In real life, these would be interspersed with more run-of-the-mill types – though to each individual victim NO case is run-of-the-mill. Still, what is portrayed in a 60-minute format on the TV screen often pales when compared to reality.

I’m not speaking here of my theoretical conception of what reality might hold. For over 5 years, I worked for state social service agencies in Arkansas and Missouri as both a caseworker and child abuse investigator. It should not come as a surprise to anyone, in this day and age, that a significant number of my cases involved sexual abuse.

My caseload was often even more sensational than anything depicted on television or movie screen. I investigated allegations pertaining to father-daughter incest, brother-sister or brother-brother incest, stranger/acquaintance rape and sodomy, indecent exposure and voyeurism, prostitution and pimping, and one case involving suspected mother-son incest.

The most disturbing case I investigated concerned a father who was alleged to have raped and sodomized his 9 month old daughter (that’s no misprint – 9 MONTHS old). Actually, I shouldn’t say this was merely an allegation; the guy freely copped to it. It was definitely the strangest interrogation I ever participated in.

In a subsequent entry, I’ll tackle the issue of why some people commit these heinous acts. It’s certainly not as cut-and-dry as many in the general public might think. For now, I think it’s enough just to reiterate that truth is often stranger than fiction.

Guilt by Association

Recently, I was reading one of my favorite blogs, Church of the Churchless. In his February 2 entry, author Brian Hines made some remarks about the supposed Second Coming and it got me to thinking about the same topic.

I’ve read several items lately that suggest that many fundamentalist Christians believe the Second Coming is near and so they are making every effort to hasten the Messiah’s arrival. This perspective helps to explain why such individuals don’t seem interested in saving the environment – it will all be burned to a crisp any day now as the Lord comes marching down from the clouds.

One of the key problems with this dire expectation is that some folks in EVERY generation stridently believe they are on the precipice of the End Time. Look back throughout the annals of history and anyone can find numerous individuals and groups – pointing to the Bible in relation to then-current affairs – who sounded the clarion call of the impending death knell.

You can even find such inferences in the New Testament itself. I tend to think that it often sounded like both Jesus and Paul thought the end of the human society was only a generation or two away. There was an immediate sense of urgency in their messages, one that sounds quite reasonable IF you think the world, as we know it, will cease to exist in the next 50 years or so.

But there’s yet another problem with the concept of hastening the Apocalypse – it directly contradicts a telling dictum from Jesus. Jesus told his followers that they would not know the hour or day of the Second Coming. If they expected it at a certain time or within a particular time frame, it definitely wouldn’t be then. (If you’re interested in the reference, go to Mt. 24:36.)

In other words, the divine shepherd of the VERY people who are forecasting the imminent “end of days” is forewarning the rest of us that these people are horribly wrong! He’s letting it be known right off the bat that they are deluding themselves and anyone who cares to listen.

Finally, there’s a third problem to consider. From the viewpoint of contemporary Christiandom, biblical characters like Judas Iscariot, the Sadducees and the Pharisees were unholy folks because they worked diligently to hasten the end days of Jesus himself. Wouldn’t it follow then that these current day hasteners are guilty of the same misdeeds as this unsavory group?

I’m sure all three of these points will be lost on those who believe what they believe is above reproach. At least it gives the rest of us some fat to chew on.

The Power of Mercy

There is a marvelous essay, Tough Test of Faith, in the current edition of The Progressive Populist by a South Carolina minister, Rev. Allen Brill.

At the conclusion of the article Brill comments

Some Americans may believe that we stand in the place of the Israelites as God's favored people. There are even those who believe that some among us &emdash; political or religious leaders &emdash; may indeed be "men of God." The true biblical call and test, according not only to this old Elisha story but also Jesus' command to love our enemies, is not whether we are powerful enough to make those who oppose us suffer, but whether we are trusting enough in God to show God's mercy even to those who would harm us. Elisha recognized and passed the test. Will we?

One of the great hallmarks of the human condition is inflicting pain, injury or distress on others (and even ourselves). Often, because we are wrapped up in our own little worlds, such inflictions are innocent and unintentional. Just as frequently, however, due to a variety of perceived and self-defined rationalizations, the distress we cause others is not only intentional but vicious.

As I've often pondered, which is worse – – Transgressing against others or transgressing against others who have transgressed against you?

In my book, the latter is by far the MORE guilty party.

When we have suffered some sort of injury –– whether it be physical, emotional, cultural, economic or spiritual –– we KNOW the depth of the pain. It often shakes us to our very core.

If we then try to turn the tables, we lower ourselves to the level of the initial transgressor AND we intuitively understand the level of pain that will be inflicted. We thus become the aggressor times two!

In such a situation, it becomes impossible for us to claim any manner of moral or ethical superiority. In essence, we have allowed our adversary to win because we have assumed the adversary's cloak.

Despite this fact, many Christians are wholesale supporters of military retribution. Though Jesus, the Jewish carpenter, implored them to learn to treat their enemies as they would treat themselves, far too many of his followers seem tied to the Old Testament dictum of "an eye for an eye".

The Tao Te Ching recommends that as little force be used as necessary and that mercy be shown to one's adversaries. It would seem that Taoists are more in line with Jesus' thinking than his own church brethren.

It Ain’t John Boy’s Waltons

For those of you old enough to remember (or those of you who watch Nickelodeon), the CBS TV drama, The Walton’s, depicted a hardworking, Depression-era family who was willing to give everyone a fair shake.

Their namesakes in the ruthless word of Big Business don’t share this kind of egalitarian outlook at all. The real-life Walton family – the ones who lord over the ubiquitous Walmart empire – possess a “take no prisoners” kind of mentality.

As reported in the March 14 edition of In These Times, “Walmart Canada announced that it is closing its first North American outlet where workers successfully unionized”. Yes, rather than deal with their employees on equal terms, this behemoth simply decided to stick out their slimy corporate tongue in deviance.

I hate to admit it, but I was once a big cheerleader of the Walmart leviathan. Back in the 70s and 80s, I called Arkansas – the Natural State – home. Since Arkansas was viewed by many across the nation as a the state in which “guys liked to go to family reunions to pickup girls”, we Arkansans relished the fact that one of the up-and-coming economic powers in the retail world hailed from our neck of the [back]woods.

I only developed genuine social consciousness after earning my Master’s degree in Social Science (political philosophy emphasis) from Pittsburg State University in 1992. It was then that the scales fell from my eyes and I came to realize that Sam Walton was nothing more than a very power-hungry and enormously greedy man.

He operated an empire that

• squashed its competition
• destroyed local business
• promoted urban sprawl
• paid the vast majority of his workers as little as legally possible
• provided little in the way of benefits and real job security
• suckled at the nipple of public subsidies
• detested unions AND
• pocketed billions and billions of dollars into his fat pocket.

Imagine how different Walmart would be today if its founder had been the fictitious John Boy Walton instead of malicious Sam Walton! I bet John Boy would have struck a deal with his UNIONIZED workforce.

The Phantom Menace

There’s a fantastic article in this month’s E Magazine, "New Lessons from the Old World: The European Model for Falling in Love with Your Hometown”. Written by former Utne Reader Editor Jay Wallsjasper, the piece explores the significant differences between urban growth perspectives in Europe and the U.S.

While reading it, I was struck by an unmentioned, yet pervasive, theme that runs throughout American economic thought – We Yankees put a lot more emphasis on vacuous numbers than do most other societies. Put another way, far too many Americans seem to value numbers over tangible reality.

Under American capitalism, the drive to accumulate money and wealth is paramount. People desire jobs that pay in the 6 figures or more and bank accounts, stocks, treasury notes and bonds that would make Ebenezer Scrooge blush.

The inherent problem with this mad rush toward a form of economic dominance is that, truth be told, money (and the wealth it generates) genuinely doesn’t exist.

Money is nothing more than an agreed obligation between members of a society. In fact, in this day and age, actual bills and coinage don’t even factor into the equation that much. More often, egregious amounts of wealth tend to be represented by numbers with lots of commas and zeroes written or printed on a piece of paper (e.g., bank statements, stock reports, etc.)

Money has no practical application. You can’t hop on a ten dollar bill for a quick jaunt to the Oregon coast and you’d be foolish to whip up a salad of romaine, tomatoes and greenbacks.

Yet, despite the fact that money is nothing more than a conceptual construct, American capitalists honor and desire to possess it more than almost all the tangible elements in our society.

More than anything else, I believe that understanding what drives the American economic model is important when you juxtapose it against the ways other nation work to solve problems that are shared across national boundaries.

Returning to Walljasper's article in E Magazine, it's interesting to note that, while Europeans are working diligently to control and rein in urban sprawl, American developers tend to induce it!

Europeans seem to understand that true wealth – distinguished from make-believe monetary wealth – is best defined by creating healthy and sustainable communities. They more readily accept the notion that clean air and water, reduced traffic, public transportation, adequate green spaces and friendly neighborhoods generate a kind of wealth that will be shared, possessed and cherished by all.