Citizen's Challenge

Wolf Creek Pass, home to some of the deepest snowfalls in Colorado and source waters to the Rio Grande River, has also become home to an epic battle between Reaganomics style developers and old fashioned conservation interests trying to protect a vital resource.

The developer B.J. “Red” McCombs is determined to build his “Village at Wolf Creek”, a speculative town of eight (or ten), thousand residents, located at ten thousand feet elevation to the lee of America’s Great Divide. In 2008 McCombs’ decade long effort resulted in losing his critical court battles and having his original Environmental Impact Statement thrown out because of illegal developer tampering. McCombs has now fallen back on another plan and is pushing Congressman Salazar to do his bidding through a Congressional land swap bill. This bill would trade a large portion of Mr. McCombs Alberta Park parcel, for a neighboring parcel a bit lower on the slope and adjacent to US Highway 160.

Congressman Salazar asked local communities for feedback. In Pagosa Springs, Archuleta County two meetings addressing the question rendered a split decision. The BoCC will send a letter supporting the legislative exchange, while the town declines.

McCombs’ bill would also bypass the National Forest Service’s established procedure for such a land trade request. If successful, in one deft move McCombs would get away from the sensitive fens wetlands and cozy up to US 160. This Congressional edict would also eliminate procedural oversight and unwanted public input to his future development decisions.

What is Mr. McCombs, the mega car dealer, actually planning to build up there on the Great Divide? The developer’s artistic renditions portray a beautiful grand village, harmonious and planned (although when one looks deeper, it’s obvious they are oblivious to the environmental conditions a town perched at the top of the Great Divide is subjected to.). In truth, all that’s really established is “Red” plans to build a hotel, a condo and subdivide a section, build some roads, drive in “For Sale” stakes then wait for the onrush of buyers. Just like dozens of other anemic development tracks throughout our counties.

That is as far as “Red’s” commitment to the local community goes. A number of local representatives publicly commented that both “Red” and Clint Jones, the developer, don’t answer queries and are evasive about plans or giving assurances. Mr. McCombs says: “Give us your commitment first, later we’re sure to consider your community concerns, trust us.”

Where is the “good faith”? For instance, there is still no willingness, on the part of the developer, to concretely acknowledge the vast operational complexity and varied long term commitments needed for an actual community at 10,000’.

All this does nag at public officials. But, in the end most tossed up their arms and with a sigh remark: Well, you know it is his land and his sacred property rights, so there is nothing we can do to stop him.

Problem is, this attitude ignores “the rest of the story.”

You see, back in 1986, through shrewd manipulation of the golden rule, Mr. McCombs wrestled Alberta Park away from its protected fold within the Rio Grande National Forest. Visit FriendsofWolfCreek.org’s Whitepaper, which documents the twisted history. Mike Soraghan’s Denver Post article: “Wolf Creek Development Tangled With Political Ties” (2-5-6) is another eye opener.

Or, go to YouTube.com/westdavies and find “Wolf Creek Village Presentation from Colorado Wild.” Davies is broadcasting a recent presentation by Ryan Bidwell from Colorado Wild — 9 parts and information packed. Interestingly, Clint Jones spoke the next day but refused to allow West Davies to record his presentation ~ again indicating that he refuses to stand behind his word. The significance is: all of this undercuts the developer’s lofty claim of property development rights.

Another more important issue continually ignored is the fact of that land in itself. Its location in the heart of source waters for the Rio Grande River, make it a keystone parcel within that watershed and biological community. The meadow, fens and forest make up a fantastic assortment of biological activity and productivity that ultimately benefits all down stream inhabitants of this interstate, international river. Alberta Park isn’t just another piece of local “real estate.” It belongs to an integral carpet of land, serving a life giving function just as it stands: source waters to the Rio Grande River. It’s part of our national endowment ~ originally set aside for the benefit of all future generations. “Red” wrenched it out of it’s protective fold. Alberta Park is not Mr. B.J. McCombs sacred private property, it is tainted goods!

The other argument in defense of this speculative venture is our need for economic growth. In fact, at one meeting a local representative reminded us: “It’s the economy stupid!” Isn’t it more complicated than a simplistic jingle which implies that building something, anything, so long as we can put a few people to work ~ even if it’s only a couple seasons ~ is good for the community? How does that help the young families who are trying to think in terms of decades?

There is a great deal of avoidance going on these days. No one wants to look our growing economic/biosphere monster in the eye. But, all indications are that society is coming to the end of a creation old spendthrift era.

The incoming economic battle cry is “It’s about the sustainability stupid!” An integral part of sustainability is protecting our resources, especially water. It’s easy for communities near the source waters to overlook what an incredibly precious commodity it is. If you don’t believe it, go down to the Mexican border and watch the people on both sides struggling with a greatly depleted Rio Grande River water supply.

This brings me back to Alberta Park. A couple representatives did muse about their love for that land and if they had their way nothing would be built up there. Then vote against it. Their words indicated they know what a precious commodity Americans have up there. Why don’t they fight for it? Well, one reason is our representatives need our support and pressure. We the people supply the backbone politicians need to stand up to driven billionaires.

Right now, Congressman Salazar is being pressed very hard from many sides of this issue.  The scary thing is, in the real world: money don’t talk, it screams and “Red” is one determined billionaire. More than ever Salazar needs to hear from people who believe that Alberta Park and its surroundings are a national water resource treasure that should remain unmolested.

If you care, please contact Congressman Salazar (and your other representatives) ask them to put some effort into taking this whole issue back to first base. Figure out a way to get that Ill-gotten land back into the protective fold of the RGNF. That land, all of it, deserves to remain unmolested for the greater national good.

Why not switch the focus? Convince Mr. McCombs to STOP. He doesn’t need to be doing this. He should leave that area alone! Those parcels of real estate up near Wolf Creek Pass ~ although I would call them priceless biological gems ~ are serving a useful, life sustaining function just as they are. Instead of saddling our communities with another destructive White Elephant. Why not bequeath his country the B.J. “Red” McCombs’ Sweet Water Biological Resource Preserve: dedicated to all down stream children yet to be born?

Well, it is true that YouTube can be pretty worthless, but it can be very interesting ~ if not enlightening ~ If you are a critical viewer.

A couple days ago I came across a five star channel that’s dedicated to explaining Climate Change and examining naysayer claims, using their own cited sources.  These videos are level headed, clearly delivered and free of polemics.  Peter Sinclair, aka greenman3610, presents the evidence that both sides of the climate argument are presenting, he then examines the evidence.

Here is a ration education of the intricacies of the Global Climate question.  Everyone viewing these videos will benefit from the time spent.

greenman3610  (on YouTube)

Below is a list of his videos along with direct links and the descriptions he provides

{unless they appear within brackets, then it’s my words}

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Below are a couple quotes taken from his mission statement:

“… Constantly updated information, made vivid with striking, clear graphics and animations, many derived from NASA, The National Snow and Ice Data Center, and top international sources, an expert knowledge of the issues of energy and environment, and an informal, good humored delivery, make difficult concepts easy to see and grasp.

” No issue will have a greater impact on the new century than the decisions we make on energy and the impact of global climate change, and Peter Sinclairs presentation makes the critical points dramatically clear and immediate.”  {Peter Sinclair hails from Midland, Michigan}

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Birth of a Climate Crock
October 06, 2009
The observation that natural climate variability exists is not a new one.
Early in September 2009, at a gathering of experts on global climate change, one of the world’s most respected and experienced climate modelers, Mojib Latif, made some observations on climate, media and human nature.

The message seemed clear.
natural variations in the long term warming might be misinterpreted,
by the media. out of ignorance, or malice.

Climate deniers were quick to take Latif’s remarks, and begin
doing exactly that.

All Wet on Sea Level – The Remix
September 24, 2009
Sea level rise.
It’s been the subject of myth, legend and pop culture for millennia.

It is going to be one of the major destructive effects of global climate change.
So naturally, its something that makes deniers do and say crazy things.

Mars Attacks remix
September 12, 2009
It seems to be agreed among deniers, that there is a warming happening on other planets in the solar system. And not just one or two planets.
It is considered climate denier gospel that all the other planets are warming, and that this is proof that some kind of solar activity is warming the whole system.
Let’s look at the evidence.

1998 Revisited
September 05, 2009
One of the enduring myths of climate denialism is that global warming
stopped sometime in the last decade. I see it in the blaring headlines of pseudoscience websites, in comments on my videos, even some of our most distinguished journalists have been taken in.

Denial was a River in Africa
August 21, 2009
In 2 decades of wars for oil and resources, the fossil fuel industry has gotten a lot of bad press.
But climate deniers are people too, and they need to feel good about themselves and what they do. So they’ve worked hard overcome feelings of guilt. It’s a defense I call, “Therapeutic denial”…..
Includes material from Dr Larry Brillliant’s Ted Talk, The Case for Optimism–

Creepy at the EPA
August 03, 2009
In june of 2009, a story surfaced about the alleged suppression by the US EPA of information related to climate change. The source of the information was reported to be one Dr. Alan Carlin, who, although a real EPA analyst, was in fact, an economist, not a scientist.

Watts Up With Watts?
July 13, 2009
{Examining the claims of one Mr. Watts and his claims that US Weather Stations are skewing Global Temperature Data.  This video was also subject to a censorship attack }

Polar Ice Update ✯✯✯✯
July 05, 2009
Sometimes trying to squash the ignorant canards of climate deniers seems hopeless.
For every one you swat, 10 more crop up.
For instance, I still get emails from people convinced that ice in the arctic is recovering and growing.
For this video I’m going to let the scientists speak for themselves.

This Year’s Model
June 26, 2009
Climate science is not completely dependent on climate models. There are many threads of supporting evidence. Still, it is clear that climate models are telling us something important that we cannot afford to ignore.  {At 1:40 There is an incredible demonstration that everyone who wonders about the CO2 ~ atmosphere ~ climate connection ought to see ! }

The Big Swindle Movie
June 12, 2009
When the Great Global Warming Swindle was first broadcast – climate deniers thought that at last they had the definitive polemic to beat back the forces of science and reason…..

Climate Denial Crock of the Week – Don’t it make my Green World Brown
June 02, 2009
Deniers often will tell you that CO2 is a good thing, because it makes plants and crops grow faster.  Under ideal conditions, this is true.  But scientists have been studying the effects of increasing CO2 in the real world….

Sense from Deniers on CO2? Don’t hold your breath….
May 21, 2009
Does breathing really make global warming worse? Don’t let Climate Deniers hand you this load of compostable organic matter. Do conservatives really think CO2 is safe because it doesn’t cause cancer?
All this and more in this weeks Climate Denial Crock of the Week.

Climate Denial Crock of the Week – Party like it’s 1998
April 27, 2009
One of the enduring classics of denialism, “Global warming stopped in 1998″, is of course, nonsense.  Here’s why.

Climate Denial Crock of the Week – The “Temp leads Carbon” Crock
April 20, 2009
Find out what a straw man argument is, and how the most spectacular cherry pick in the history of scientific argument is just part of a day’s work for the professional deniers.

Climate Denial Crock of the Week – “The Medieval Warming Crock”
March 29, 2009
The so called Medieval Warming Period is an article of faith among deniers.
But what does the “Supreme Court of Science” say?
(this is just like the previous “Medieval vid” but corrected for spelling)

Climate Denial Crock of the Week – The Great Petition Fraud
March 29, 2009
We’ve all heard about the “Petitions” of “Scientists” who disagree with Climate Science. This sordid little episode in the history of climate denial points up once again the fundamental dishonesty of the climate denial industry.

Climate Denial Crock of the Week – The “Urban Heat Island” Crock
March 14, 2009
Could the scientists at Nasa, the National academy of science, the American Meteorological Society, and every professional scientific organization on the planet really have been so silly as to miss something this obvious?

Climate Denial Crock of the Week – I Love the 70s!!
March 04, 2009
Everyone has a favorite decade, and for Climate deniers, that decade has got to be, the 70s.  Because in the 70’s, Deniers will tell you, All climate scientists believed an ice age was coming. Those crazy climate scientists! Why can’t they make up their minds?
But is that really true?
Maybe a little historical perspective is in order.

Climate Denial Crock of the Week – That 1500 Year Thing
February 22, 2009
Climate Deniers S. Fred Singer and Dennis Avery make their living by confusing and obfuscating the science of climate change. Their latest book, “Unstoppable Global Warming every 1500 Years”, is a compendium of vintage as well as cutting edge climate crocks. Let’s find out who they are and how they are bamboozling their audience.

Climate Denial Crock of the Week – Solar Schmolar
February 03, 2009
A favorite hobby horse of Climate Denialists is that there is some kind of invisible, undetectable influence from the sun that is responsible for the unequivocal warming of the last century. Let’s put that crock under a microscope and see where the cracks are.

{Check out the graph manipulation that begins at 3:00 ~ this is why many claim right wing claims tend to be built on agenda focused manipulation rather than a full airing of the facts.}
Climate Denial Crock of the Week – Ice Area vs Volume
January 28, 2009
Denialists continually try to confuse the issue of northern polar ice caps. Here are the facts from the National Snow and Ice Data Center.

Climate Denial Crock of the Week- “It’s cold. So there’s no Climate Change”
January 21, 2009
“I looked outside, and it was snowing, therefore, there is no climate change.”
If that’s what passes for rational thought in your social group, you owe it to yourself to watch this edition of Climate Denial Crock of the Week.

As cdk007 puts it: Evolution is a FACT when describing WHAT happened and a THEORY when describing HOW things happened.

His video “Evolution Theory & Fact” is an excellent overview of this simple but often manipulated principle.
PS.  cdk007 speaks with some authority, consider his list of degrees:
Minor Chemistry, Minor Physics (Astro-physics), Bachelors (B.A.) Degree Botany, Ph.D. Molecular Neuroscience
Currently postdoc at an Ivy League University

Getting this posted is long over due.  Originally inspired by a Mike Keefe 5-26-95 cartoon in the Denver Post (one of these days I’ll get that cartoon posted ) and titled  “An Essay Concerning Our Weather,” it was printed in the Nov-Dec 1995 issue of The Humanist.  I was invited by The Humanist to update it ten years later and The Humanist printed this version in Nov-Dec, 2005

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

There has been something missing from the news coverage in the aftermath of 
Hurricanes Katrina’s and Rita.  No one seemed to be reporting on the real story–namely the climate.

  These most recent storms should encourage U.S. citizens to recognize that we are facing a powerful entity that has only begun to barge into our American way.  Look up into that 
beautiful sky overhead and consider its substance, dynamics and might.

Our atmosphere is the product of more than four billion years of ongoing evolution–geological as well as biological.  It’s a tenuous veil of gases that lays upon the surface of our earth, thin as 
the finest silk upon your skin.  This veil has a most interesting structure, one that’s 
worth thinking about.

Our atmosphere is composed almost totally of nitrogen and oxygen.  Interwoven into this 
medium is a gossamer thin admixture of everything else: thousands of different compounds that can be grouped into almost two hundred distinct families.  Combined, these compounds make up less than one percent of our atmosphere’s volume.  Most of this volume is made up of inert compounds and noble gases, so called because they don’t react with their surroundings very much, if at all.

Within this matrix of nonreactive molecules is another, yet thinner community of reactive compounds.  By volume, these reactive components total less than four hundred parts per million.  This is where the action is.  These chemicals are always reacting with each other: they combine, split up, mutate, 
affect neighboring molecules, change characteristics–and they do this at nonstop 
hyper-velocities.

This is the scaffolding over which energy, moisture, and heat perform 
their weather ballet. What’s new is that, over the past two hundred years or so, humanity has been injecting a 
third category of ingredients: human-made and human-generated.  By volume, this new genre consists mainly of substances already present in the atmosphere, only now they are being added to in unfathomable quantities–and they belong to the reactive families.  Then there are the “exotics”: creations of science and industry, that make up a small but usually 
highly reactive percentage.

Many of these compounds are totally new to our atmosphere.  All told, society has been injecting millions upon millions upon millions of tons of these gases and particulates into our atmosphere at ever-increasing rates. So much so that the very composition of our atmosphere–the weave of our atmospheric veil–has been significantly and verifiably altered.

This is cause for concern because our atmosphere is in actuality a heat engine. Its 
matrix of gaseous and particulate components are the valves and pistons.  This engine is 
powered by the sun’s energetic rays and the result is our weather: the global 
distribution of energy, heat, and moisture.  But each compound we’ve introduced interacts 
with the sun’s energy according to its own unique thermo-hygroscopic-chemical profile.

Recent weather fluctuations are little more than a physical reflection of our 
atmosphere’s composition.

  Remember all those environmentalists whining about pollution, global warming, and 
all that?  Well, it isn’t mere delusion.  Scientists have been discovering and recording 
these changes since the end of World War II.

For more than forty years now, satellites 
have been visually recording the stains, rips, and acid burns that we continue to inflict 
upon the veil of our atmosphere. The increasingly sophisticated information they gather 
continues to have ominous implications for the future as well as the present.

While the media discusses global changes in terms of global averages, keep this in mind: there is no “average” patch of ground or water on this planet.  Pollutants aren’t added as amorphous averages.  They are injected into the fabric of our atmosphere as ribbons of varying concentrations and volumes.

It’s true that today scientists have convincing evidence that some global areas are experiencing a warming trend, while others are experiencing a cooling trend.  There is nothing reassuring about this.

Think about our atmosphere as the heat engine whose role it is to seek a globally 
balanced distribution of energy, heat and moisture.  This engine has evolved to a delicate state of dynamic equilibrium.  Remember, it is the profile of temperature gradients and barometric differentials that provide the throttle behind this engine’s drive to maintain its equilibrium.  Inject extremes and it will react in kind–it makes no difference to the engine.

It does, however, make a difference to humans and the biosphere as we know it.  Science has consistently shown that nature is always vastly more complex, interwoven, and unpredictable than the human intellect is capable of imagining.  Why won’t we allow this lesson to sink in?

Why be surprised when weather continues to become more chaotic? 
Admittedly, no one can accurately predict how weather will change.  But, who can deny that it will continue to change, and at an accelerated rate?

We can kid ourselves, but we can’t fool nature.

P M

————————————————————————–

Janine Benyus: 12 sustainable design ideas from nature

This is a nice summation of a new/old approach to dealing with this Earth in a sustainable manner.

Or, as TED puts it:

In this inspiring talk about recent developments in biomimicry, Janine Benyus provides heartening examples of ways in which nature is already influencing the products and systems we build.

Talk given on May 17, 2007.

10-2-9

Dear Honorable Representative Alan Grayson,
I had the great privilege to make your acquaintance through a serendipitous visit to The Young Turk’s broadcast on YouTube.
Then, I went to C-Span to listen to the uninterrupted recording of your presentation before the Congress.

Congressman Grayson, yours was a jaw-droppingly honest, blunt speech that needed to be given before Congress.
Thank you so much ! ! !

Furthermore… Your ability to stand up to the CNN interview assault was even more impressive !

You are a rare spark of hope in our nations struggle towards a more rational approach to dealing with problems.

You nailed the issue on the head and I salute you for your spirited assault upon the Republican penchant for peddling Willful Ignorance.

With best wishes,
From Durango, Colorado

ps. If you are unfamiliar with TheYoungTurk you are missing a very intelligent observer.

9-5-9

In the first days of September the Durango Herald was filled with news about the reawakened push for the Village at Wolf Creek speculative development. First Red McCombs hires Michael Dino a heavy weight Democratic lobbyist. His mission – bring in the money cannons. Dino knows where to aim them for greatest effect in developing political channels for side stepping public review.

As the week unfurled we learned the new plan was hinged on a new land swap effectively moving the development a few hundred yards. Also, ‘Hal Jones Development’ is now proposing a resort merely three-quarters the size of the original ten thousand person conception.

The key ingredient to this new strategy would be Congressman Salazar sponsoring a land-swap bill. As Clint Jones, of HJD, says John Salazar is the only one who could credibly carry the land-exchange act through Congress. This may be true, but credibility is hard won and easily lost.

It seems difficult to believe Congressman Salazar could be swayed into compromising his credibility to join this speculative real estate scheme. Should you oppose the idea of developing Wolf Creek, now would be a good time to drop Congressman Salazar a line at http://www.house.gov/salazar/contact.shtml. or (202) 225-4761 or (970)-245-7107 or (719)-543-8200.

In another article US Senator Bennet speaks of “serious concerns about the potential impacts” and “We need to keep a close eye on the matter and get answers to a number of questions…”

Here are some starter questions: How viable is this eighties pipedream of building a small village at 10,000 elevation to begin with? Look at today’s economic reality and outlook. Consider the under appreciated future ripple effects our continuing rising chronic unemployment will have.

Look at the lower elevation areas around Wolf Creek Pass, Colorado ~ they have a frightening saturation of unsold vacation homes, as documented in a Pagosa Sun article by James Robinson (7-8-9). Why add to the glut?
Also see Mark Pearson’s March 5, 2009 Durango Herald’s story “(Luxury) Resorts morph into “toxic” real estate assets.”

Why risk that high value fresh water resource?

Remember we are talking about source waters to the Rio Grande River. Any digging and construction will disrupt, even destroy portions of an exquisitely tuned biological super-organism, one that produces any number of priceless services for all down stream inhabitants. Moving the project a few hundred yards one way or another doesn’t change that.

When will developers appreciate that some places deserve to be left alone because they are of a caliber that warrants being considered National Security Resources?

There is also the matter of the original “dirty land swap.” Documented in Mike Soraghan’s 2-5-6, Denver Post article: “Wolf Creek development tangled with political ties.”

B.J. Red McCombs may hold legal title but, he does not possess ethical or moral title to that land. Therefore some of us continue to beg Mr. McCombs, and now his daughter, to please revert that land to some Nature Conservancy status, protecting that irreplaceable resource for the greater national good.

The solution really is that simple. Leave that parcel alone to remain an unmolested portion of an indescribably important biological super-organism. It would be a fitting gesture for someone who recently received the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars award for “corporate citizenship.”

If you agree, please encourage Red McCombs to reconsider his priorities. He can be reached through http://www.redmccombsmedia.com/us/contact-us .

Sincerely, Peter Miesler
Durango, Colorado

PS. Mr. McCombs doesn’t “The Billy Joe “Red” McCombs Fresh Water Biological Preserve” ~ dedicated to all down stream children yet to be born, have a nice ring to it?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For more information visit Friends of Wolf Creek at http://www.friendsofwolfcreek.org/

10-1-9

About two weeks after the Sonia Sotomayor confirmation hearing finished, I began writing about it and was immediately kidded: It’s an obsolete topic, no one cares any more, people have moved on.

Now, months later, Justice Sotomayor sits on the bench listening to arguments – so why visit what went on last summer? Because it needs to be pointed out that her questioning exemplified a favorite Republican tactic in dealing with people who have a more progressive, rational world outlook.

Since the same tactic is being used today to combat medical-insurance reform efforts, I believe examining Republican and media behavior during the Sotomayor confirmation hearing is relevant today.

The hearing highlighted the all-too-familiar right-wing “politics by evasion and attack,” which take small tidbits of truth and morph them into deceptive, emotionally supercharged PR bludgeons. Then, the proponents justify their evasive and hostile tactics by reaching back to self-serving faith-based dogma. Unfortunately, religious absolutism, absolutely distorts all attempts at examining the real challenges facing our future.

When President Obama nominated Judge Sotomayor for the US Supreme Court she sounded like a real ‘Mensch’ to me. I remember going on the web and doing some biographical searches on her. They reinforced my original ‘feel good.’ After that I scanned some of the usual right wing suspects to hear their take. Then, I listened to Sotomayor speeches that were available on YouTube.

I noticed the Republicans had no dirt on this lady. Thus, was surprised by the viciousness of their attacks and distortions. Attacks manipulating a very few quotes from speeches that to rational thinkers should have been starting points for a genuine discussion.

Ironically, the most vocal “anti-Sotomayor” Senators supported nominee Roberts who had a mere two years of judicial experience, having previously built his career on steam-rolling his extremely partisan goals. (something reflected in his demonstrably corporate loving approach to running the high court) Yet, today, a nominee with more court room experience than any nominee in a century and no political involvement, someone with overwhelming positive support from her knowledgeable peers ~ is told she’s not worthy because she is willing to recognize and discuss complex aspects of being a person? Whatever happened to ‘fair-play’?

When the Judiciary Committee Hearings began, the News reporting was dismal. Typical of the coverage was WNYC’s ‘On The Media’ which said: “As for the nominee, Slate Senior Editor Dhalia Lithwick says the hearings served as an elaborate calculus of 19 different ways to answer a question at length, without saying anything.
“ ‘You can say the question is too broad so you can’t answer it, you can say the question is too specific, so you can’t answer it. You can say that was so far in the past I can’t talk about it, or it’s so far in the future I can’t talk about it, and so on. You know, there’s this whole formulation of how you don’t answer questions, so why do we spend four days watching this with bated breath is actually the better question.”

Such media reporting inspired me to look up Cspan and listen to some of the Hearing for myself. It was a revelation! Not only did Judge Sotomayor do way less evasion than reporters and Republican Senators were peddling, but her answers were actually interesting. Interesting enough that over a couple weeks I managed to listened to the entire Judiciary Committee Hearing. I also rediscovered what a fantastic resource Cspan is, check it out on the Web. I myself gained a whole new level of appreciation for what a judge is, how the job & process works, and even why circumspection is a necessity in a quality judge. I also learned about why some cases proceed following channels created by the rule of law, even though we on the outside may disagree with that direction.

As for Lithwick’s question, may I suggest reporters should have been “listening” instead of only half watching with distracted minds. This hearing didn’t, and wasn’t supposed to, contain fireworks – instead it was a slow careful examination of the questions asked then answered by an exceptional jurist who wasn’t going to be bullied into dramatizing for the camera.

Mr. Lithwick, a worthier question would have been: Why did Senators Sessions, Grassley, Kyl and Hatch act as though they never heard a single Sotomayor answer? Why did they read through their questions like some sort of preordained scripture, never pausing to consider her words?

These Senators acted more like Officials Brooking No Decent, than men on a fact finding mission. Why does our media allow such Senatorial misbehavior to go unchallenged?

Another question should have been: Why couldn’t Republican Senator’s come up with more meaningful questions? Why where we subjected to cynical simplistic ideological monologues, which were more reminiscent of old plow-horses endlessly plodding the same field with no conception of anything beyond their own furrow. (OK, there where some Republican exceptions, but not near enough.)

Another question for the media’s Litwicks: Why couldn’t any reporter put Judge Sotomayor’s reticence into perspective? The right wing and reporters act as though they expected Sotomayor to expound like some crony at a bar. But, she is a long standing honorable intelligent Judge. Weighing every word is second nature to her and has nothing to do with evasion. We expect nothing less from our judges. Tragically, our politically motivated Republicans would rather label this fine jurist an “enemy” and trash her ~ than allow her to share some refreshing insights.

More and more, Republicans are coming across as though they believe only they have “worthy” answers and anyone who thinks differently must be demonized no matter how many lies need to be fabricated to do so.

Why? By what right or justification? Haven’t Republican senators and media cheerleaders been culpable enough in heinous, astronomically costly mistakes of judgment these past few years that have harmed our country and future? What gives Senator Sessions, et.al., the gaul to act so condescendingly – if not destructively?

For me, watching Supreme Court Justice Sonya Sotomayor traverse the political mine-field during those months of her nomination these past months has put new substance behind the old adage: “Don’t Trust Anyone Over Thirty!” Kids, it has never been more accurate!

I say this because if the level of questioning and thinking by Senators Sessions, Kyl, Grassley, Hatch, along with all too many others, including reporters, is any indication of how these people will meet our oncoming challenges, boy oh boy are you younger generations in trouble.

ps. 8-14-9 was an early draft

At fourteen I got permission to camp out in the living room for three days running, no school, no play, little sleep. Seldom leaving the couch and then only for a quick pitstop, frigstop. Occasionally I went outside to meditate on the actual crescent moon up there in the sky, then back to the TV.

Something fantastic was happening and I didn’t care how many times I listened to repeated news-flashes gone stale because I was determined to hear every next world premiere news-flash as it happened. Besides, the repetitions echoing on the TV networks gave me a chance to digest the story. Even better there were these great side-stories about mission details that never made the news shows.

Come Neal Armstrong’s small step for (a) man, but big leap for mankind and it was my Dad’s Birthday. The living room was full of family and a few hours of celebration infused with the profoundest aura: For the first time ever! People were actually standing on that midnight orb of our imagination ~ while the whole world watched!

After the party I remained glued to that TV until Armstrong & Buzz Aldrin blasted off from the moon to rejoin Michael Collins and begin their return to earth. My, and I dare say humanity’s, gaze upon the moon has never been the same. It was a fantastic achievement, exemplifying America’s ingenuity, can do and promise.

Yet, even at my tender age there was also an unshakable sadness about the moon landing. The man who made it all possible had been taken from us by forces unseen but resented ever after. It felt as though along with Kennedy a certain attitude of solidarity, (or was it just civility?), with the rest of humanity was systematically being abandoned.

Championed by Ronald Reagan and his driven economics ~ along with all the dirty-tricks needed to make it happen. Before our eyes the rest of the world was becoming nothing more than a potential profit point.

I believe it’s this evolution in our collective outlook that has step by step and season by fleeting season, ushered in today’s reality of a world full of intensely pissed off people running amok. Nor to be forgotten is the creation of uncountable masses of dispossessed refugees huddled in destitute pockets throughout the world. For what? So westerners can pretend living has no limits?

For nearly fifty years I’ve listened to the beautiful promises made by politicians, businessmen and scientist. Great strides have undoubtedly been made, but I’ve noticed there has been a tremendous cost attached to everyone of our successes. Disaster after disaster the battle cry remains: “Move along; don’t look back; let’s not dwell on it (read “think” about it); put the past behind you; move along now.” All these years watching “solutions” consistently creating more “unanticipated” problems than anyone of ‘em solved is really disheartening.

All the while the masters of the universe continue selling each other more weaponry and ideological garbage, and our major religions continue playing their role of turning “God’s Will” into bludgeons for beating everyone who makes them uncomfortable.

The moon landing was a political act meant to prove we could do it, thus awarding us a feeling of invincibility. Why than, have our ‘quality of life’ issues imploded?

As much as I loved it back then, today I can’t help but think people would be far better off pulling their heads out of their heavens and refocusing their attention back down here, to this incredible little battered blue gem of a planet.

The one and only speck in the vast void of our Universe that we knows cradles of all life. And, incidentally, the only home our future has.

Those damning words keep ringing in my ears: “ A wise Latina woman would do a better job of judging than a wise white male.” Quite the affront against those powerful white guys who were always convinced they alone possessed omniscient judgement.

On the other hand, one of the hallmarks of a judge is an internalized sense that they, personally, do indeed possess clearer judgement/responsibility skills, along with a greater sense of obligation and duty. Makes me wonder why the right wing knocks Sotomayor for her healthy confidence, when balanced confidence is part and parcel of being a successful judge, let alone Justice of our US Supreme Court.

What’s below the surface? Why are right wing extremists so angry & scared of this confident little lady? Are the likes of Senator Sessions, Coulter, Limbaugh, et. al, too unprepared for allowing a Sotomayor to sit as an equal in this ultimate establishment Club of nine?

Are they worried because they don’t want the like’s of a Sotomayor having a chance to present her perspective directly into the high court? And, what would be wrong with that? Looking at the demography of this country it is hard to understand how people who trumpet “democracy” can despise someone who’s only sin is recognizing who she is and being proud of it.

Sotomayor’s public record reflects decades of honorable, very competent judicial service to her country. Our Supreme Court needs a good shot of main street reality. Left wing, right wing, and all who are in between, need this person, judge Sonia Sotomayor, to take her rightful place at the “round table” of nine respected elders, for all her merits, glowing achievements, intelligence, humanity & pride.

*****************************