Totally St. Augustine (#39) Nov. 7, 2016

The fruits of writer’s block

Returned home from a family vacation 10 days ago and have been suffering a major case of writer’s block ever since. As a cure I decided to park myself in front of a keyboard and let fly until I got to about 500 words. Don’t know where this is leading.

Since I am retired from paying jobs am I even allowed to have vacations? Or do I simply accompany my wife on her vacation. My daughter’s participation was, more or less, parent-sanctioned hooky. This, despite a couple of hour’s schoolwork each day while poolside.

I write this less than a week before the presidential election. We are truly a nation divided and I have a feeling we are headed for some rough times ahead no matter who wins.

Those close to me know where my loyalties lie but I have (mostly) withstood the temptation to preach to my friends, or anyone else who might listen, about which lever to pull when voting.

Speaking of which, I can’t remember the last time I actually pulled a lever when voting. I think it might have been during student elections at the University of Florida in the early 1970s.

I ran one of those elections and can still remember the embarrassment I suffered when I left two student senate candidates in the College of Engineering off the ballot. Or maybe it was another one of the colleges. Who can remember?

My mug shot was on the front page of the Independent Florida Alligator with a cutline that read, “no defense.” I didn’t have one.

But back to the voting machines with levers. I think they were donated to the university by Alachua County after they adopted new voting procedures. About all I can remember about the machines was they were a bear to program. And, of course, it wasn’t difficult to mistakenly leave candidates off the ballot.

Many political pundits say this has been the strangest presidential election in history and the first that has been so heavily impacted by the existence of social media. Imagine someone predicting in 2006 that a presidential election 10 years in the future would be heavily influenced by a candidate’s tweets and trending social media issues. Say what?

And just to demonstrate where stream-of-consciousness writing can lead you, wasn’t Hurricane Matthew a thoroughly unwelcome distraction?

We were fortunate to get through it pretty much unscathed mostly because, I presume, we decided to purchase flood insurance about a year ago. Had we not done so we would have shared the fate of some of our friends and had to deal with several inches (or feet) of water in our homes.

I have been blown away by the concern and generosity by community members who rushed to help those most severely impacted by the storm. It is another one of the reasons why I believe we live in one of the best places on the planet.

And it is because of that I have been able to end this column to nowhere with a reference to St. Augustine, thereby fulfilling a major writing prerequisite for a community columnist.

When my writer’s block is cured I’ll try to do better. I promise.

Totally St. Augustine #21 (April 20, 2015)

Will pigs fly for Rubio once again?

I normally do not cover politics in my role as a community columnist. I think I touched on the subject one time so far and that was after an election had concluded. But I was most impressed earlier this week when one of Florida’s U.S. senators announced his candidacy for our nation’s presidency.

There’s even somewhat of a local angle for this column since, while working for another publication, I covered Marco Rubio’s visit to St. Augustine in the spring 2011. There’s also another personal connection, which puts me on a spectrum somewhere between prophetic political pundit and lucky guesser.

First, to the latter. It was early 2010 and I was having lunch with my co-workers at the Florida Farm Bureau cafeteria in Gainesville. As often happens, the subject turned to politics. Florida’s then Gov. Charlie Crist had recently announced that he was giving up his job as governor to pursue a vacant U.S. Senate seat.

Former Florida Speaker Marco Rubio was also seeking the Republican nomination and was trailing badly in the polls to Crist.

One of my colleagues was assessing how Crist would do in the general election when I suggested he might not even get the Republican nomination. This made my colleague gag and say something akin to, “when pigs fly.” About six months later, Porky had taken flight.

Fast forward to April 2011 when newly elected Sen. Marco Rubio was in the midst of a series of town hall meetings, one of which was scheduled for St. Augustine. The meeting was to take place at the Council on Aging’s River House and even I was surprised to see the standing-room-only crowd that had gathered.

The 2012 presidential election was taking shape at the time and Rubio’s name was being thrown around as a potential vice-presidential running mate for whomever the Republicans nominated.

The lead in the story I wrote about his appearance noted that just about the only thing Rubio said that disappointed the crowd was that he wasn’t seeking to be on the presidential ticket in 2012.

If you listened to what Rubio said when he declared for president on April 13, 2015, it wasn’t too different than what he told his St. Augustine audience four years earlier.

Back then Rubio said, “For the last 100 years Americans have been an inspiration to the rest of the world.” He then added, “Exceptionalism comes with a price. There’s nothing wrong with our people but there’s a lot wrong with our government.”

His 2011 remarks also covered some of his thoughts on taxes. He said, “We should be cautious when political leaders believe you have earned enough money. I think the role of government is to make it easier for you to succeed, not get in your way.”

The 2016 presidential election is still a long way off but I think Rubio has as good a chance as any to get the Republican nomination and, at age 44, become the third youngest U.S. president in history.

I’m old enough to remember folks saying that John F. Kennedy was too young to be president and, for that matter, Ronald Reagan was too old. We all know where those thoughts led.

I closed my story about Rubio’s 2011 visit to St. Augustine with a quote relating to the problems America was facing and how it made him feel.

Rubio said, “I would still rather be us than anyone else. I pray and hope that I will be able to be part of the solution.”

Be on the lookout for flying pigs because, four years later, Rubio might just get his chance.

Totally St. Augustine #7 (Aug. 4. 2014)

Why voting is like growing a beard

Just finished filling out my absentee ballot. As a registered Republican from Precinct 304, I was able to vote for governor, state senator, two county commissioners, three circuit judges and one school board member.

I won’t list whom I voted for but I think it’s OK if I share some of my personal demographics.

Six of eight races had incumbents. I voted for four incumbents and against two others. The last time two of these incumbents were on the ballot, I voted for their unsuccessful opponents. Six races (with a total of 16 candidates) included seven women among the hopefuls. I voted for five men and one woman.

To my knowledge, I do not think any candidate for whom I voted was ever elected because of my one vote. I feel pretty confident my 42-year streak will not be broken this year. Why then do I vote?

There are two primary (no pun intended) reasons. First and foremost I believe it is the obligation of all citizens to exercise their proxy at election time. This pays homage to all those who came before us and made sacrifices to ensure that we are able to live in a free society that facilitates taking for granted our right to vote.

The second reason I vote is related to something called “the argument of the beard.” I learned about this argument in my freshman logic class at the University of Florida a few years before I was able to legally cast my first vote.

The argument goes like this: If you shave one hair off a beard it will not eliminate the beard. What difference does one hair make? Shave off another hair. You still have a beard. And another, and another and another.

At some point the beard will be gone even though you are shaving hairs off in “inconsequential” one-hair increments.

Individual hairs have meaning when it comes to beards and individual votes have meaning when it comes to elections. At least that’s my theory.

This year’s first primary is scheduled for Aug. 26. Absentee and early voting could mean many races will be decided before Election Day. Yet every vote is important and I urge those who are duly registered (and have a clue whom they’re voting for) to exercise their civic duty and cast their ballots.

In a future column I’ll report on how many of those who received my vote finished on top. I’m predicting six winners, one loser and one making a runoff. Readers should be warned, however, my voting success and my predicting prowess are historically both wanting.

It’s everyone’s fault; it’s nobody’s fault

The government is open again and my perception is that if all sides spent as much time and effort finding solutions as they did in pinning the blame on someone else, then this crisis may have been over a lot sooner.

I often have a feeling of ambivalence when it comes to the folks who seek and attain elected office. Sometimes I think they’re the scum of the earth whose major function is raising money for the next election while they sleepwalk through the jobs they were elected to perform. I guess there’s a thin line between doing something that is truly the right thing to do and doing something simply because you think it will garner you support and votes.

At other times I have true admiration for those who seek and are elected to public office. Let’s put aside the requisite large ego that is needed for just a minute. At best it is truly a thankless job that will have you making roughly half your constituency angry with you at any particular moment.

Those on the other end of the political spectrum will castigate you for nearly every move you make. Your base will express displeasure when you’re not forceful enough in your words, deeds and votes. Those in the middle will take the pontifical high road as the rest of us wait with bated breath to see what they think. It’s almost a little bit surprising that more progress hasn’t been made on immigration reform because you would think, along with sugar cane cutters, strawberry pickers, hotel housekeepers and minimum-wage manual workers, being elected to office is a job that Americans simply would not do. Only problem with that is most elected offices require citizenship.

I have definite opinions of my own relative to who should be blamed for the recent mess for which we were granted a three-month pass. My reasoning is certainly as logical as someone who has an opinion that is 180 degrees from mine. We could debate for hours and (excuse my triteness) at the end of the day we would go to the scorecards and the battle would be proclaimed a draw. Or it might be like one of those football games where the team who last has the ball wins.

My wish is that all parties could gather up the gumption to put political agendas aside and come up with a plan to accomplish a hierarchy of goals that everyone could agree upon. I might suggest three goals. Really fix ObamaCare, or ditch it. Slow down and eventually reverse the movement of the national debt. Ensure that taxing and spending do not bankrupt the current and future generations.

It’s a short list, albeit a very challenging one. Unfortunately my best guess is that those in charge will decide that it’s easier to continue pointing fingers at each other. Remember to wear eye protection.

Tax increases will affect everyone

(This is an advance preview of my Editor’s Corner column that will appear in the December 2010 issue of FloridAgriculture.)

Perhaps I am self-centered and greedy but I am one of the throngs of middle-class citizens who believes that most of us already pay more than our fair share of taxes.

Therefore I was somewhat surprised when a few of my (presumably) middle-class friends on Facebook essentially told me that Americans did not pay enough taxes.

Amy, a colleague from Jacksonville, told me: “Our deficit was caused by too much spending and not enough taxing. I think the rate cuts should be extended but not for people making over $250,000 a year. It’s highway robbery that they don’t pay their fair share.”

Angela, a high school friend from Boynton Beach, had this to say: “The Bush tax cuts mainly benefitted the wealthiest people. Higher taxes for the wealthy is just a start.”

Ellen, another high school friend from Long Island, chimed in with this: “There is no reason why the current temporary tax cut should not be allowed to expire by law – especially for people at the top level of income.”

Now before some of my readers suggest that I get new Facebook friends let me say that I don’t pick my friends based on political or religious beliefs. And in addition to being Facebook friends, these three women are also personal friends (those of you familiar with social media know that such is not always the case).

The banter which bounced back and forth between us (and others) on my Facebook page was lively and interesting. Through it all there were two points that I couldn’t get these ladies to acknowledge or seriously address.

First was Amy’s reference to “highway robbery.” I repeatedly asked whom was being robbed. No one ever addressed my question because doing so would involve admitting that taxes are paid by taxpayers and having to pay less taxes doesn’t involve robbing anyone.

Second was the idea that the “wealthy” were not paying their fair share because of the cuts. The Bush tax cuts lowered the marginal tax rate at every income level. If they are allowed to expire the 10 percent bracket rises to 15 percent, the 25 percent bracket rises to 28 percent, the 28 percent bracket rises to 31 percent, the 33 percent bracket rises to 36 percent and the 35 percent bracket rises to 39.6 percent.

Here is other relief that the Bush tax cuts provided for all taxpayers:
• The child tax credit was increased from $500 to $1,000 per child.
• Marriage penalty relief; the standard deduction for married couples was increased, easing the tax hit on many married couples.
• Capital gains taxes were cut, with the top rate dropping from 20 percent to 15 percent.

I haven’t even talked about the Estate Tax and the Alternative Minimum Tax. No need to. If you agree that all of us already pay enough taxes, pass the word on to your Washington officials.

Shocking Stuff on Treasury website

(This is an advance preview of my Editor’s Corner column that will appear in the October 2010 issue of FloridAgriculture.)

In doing a little bit of online research on the Federal estate tax I found something on a government website that absolutely shocked me.

Now I am not easily shocked but, as the folks in the Long Island community where I grew up would have undoubtedly said, “It takes a lot of ‘chutzpah’ to come up with something like this.”

The good people at the U.S. Department of the Treasury put our tax dollars to work by compiling a set of “frequently asked questions” regarding the collection of taxes. One such question posed was, “I want to know about the origin of the Federal estate tax. Can you tell me when it became part of the tax code and the rationale behind it?”

I won’t reproduce the entire answer that was provided but there is one part that sent shockwaves through my brain. I had to re-read it a couple of times to make sure I was wasn’t inadvertenly leaving out a verb, pronoun or other critical part of speech. Are you ready?

We, the taxpayers, are told (emphasis added), “ … a new type of tax was needed, because the ‘consumption taxes’ in effect at that time bore most heavily upon those least able to pay them. The Committee further explained that the revenue system should be more evenly and equitably balanced and ‘a larger portion of our necessary revenues collected from the incomes and inheritances of those deriving the most benefit and protection from the government.’”

Now maybe I’m missing something here. Was the government collecting taxes back in 1916 and then turning around and providing the bulk of services and entitlements to rich folks? I don’t think it was, but if so, then maybe heavier taxing of those who benefitted the most made sense back then. Less clear is how that translates into a fairness rationale for levying an estate tax.

At about the same time the progressive income tax kicked in, with those earning more paying a progressively larger portion of their incomes in taxes as the years went by. Between 1913 and 1961, the top tax bracket went from 7 percent to 91 percent. Today the top bracket is 35 percent, although if some politicians have their way there’s a danger it may rise to 39.5 percent in 2011.

But I digress, as often happens when I get on a roll about taxes. There is absolutely no reasonable rationale for the levying of a Federal estate tax other than the government’s unending hunger for revenue. Why should a death in the family trigger a payment to the government? The simple answer – the only answer – is that it shouldn’t.

Unfortunately the government doesn’t look at it that way. It simply sees a decreasing revenue stream if reforms are made to this unfair and nonsensical taxing scheme. I applaud the members of Congress who are attempting to change this mindset and allow estate tax reform that will move us further along the differential to fairness.

Barack: Babyface to heel?

When I was younger I used to enjoy watching professional wrestling. I never thought it was real but it was interesting to see how the script writers created and developed storylines and feuds. I became pretty good at guessing how the scripted plots would play out. It was also interesting to watch the fans, many of whom were convinced they were seeing legitimate, unscripted competitions.

Sometime in the 1990s, professional wrestling got too stupid, even for me. The increased abuse of steroids and other illegal substances, over-the-top storylines, the incongruous emergence of shapely, gorgeous female wrestlers into the professional wrestling mainstream (well, maybe this wasn’t so bad) and the lifestyles that would contribute to so many untimely deaths for performers left me less interested in tuning in to all the nonsense.

Most every wrestler who was a crowd favorite would undergo personality changes throughout his career. Often this would involve a good guy (babyface) morphing into a bad guy (heel). Such was the case with Hulk Hogan. He actually went back and forth several times. Sometimes a wrestler would establish himself as a heel and then transform into a babyface as was the case with Ric Flair. Some heels would remain heels, but attract a whole new legion of fans. The best example of this I can think of is Stone Cold Steve Austin.

The interesting part of transformation from babyface to heel is that it’s often insidious. Although sometime the change is immediate and comes from out of the blue, the more likely scenario is gradual changes in the wrestler’s demeanor over a period of several weeks or months. Gradually the wrestler might be seen enjoying himself in the company of well-known heels. He might show favoritism to commentators who are the most supportive of his style and agenda. He might begin employing a wrestling style that doesn’t match the style he professed when he was climbing up the ladder of fan popularity.

Some fans will be oblivious to these subtle changes and their loyalty will never falter. Some are clueless when it comes to understanding the nature of the wrestling game and will never abandon their guy. Others understand the game but will reluctantly stick with their guy because goodness or badness was never an issue for them. Another subgroup will actually relish the fact that their man seems to be moving closer to the dark side.

There will, however, be a group of fans who will be upset, disappointed and perhaps sickened that their guy is turning his back on many of the qualities that attracted them to this performer in the first place. The may be clueless when it comes to the way the world of professional wrestling operates but they are good people with good hearts and they don’t like or understand what is happening. These fans were likely devastated when babyface, Brian Pillman, turned heel and teemed with Steve Austin to form the Hollywood Blondes tag team. When Hulk Hogan, an extremely popular babyface, turned heel and joined the New World Order in the 1990s, thousand of his “Hulkamaniac” fans felt abandoned by someone they had trusted and supported for so many years.

News flash: A liberal blog (TPM) reports that, ”  … an undisclosed new diplomatic collaboration replacing the constant tensions and CIA foreknowledge of the brief 2002 coup against the Venezuelan leader. It is too early to define a new era, but something profoundly new began developing between Obama and Chavez at the hemispheric conference in April in Trinidad.”

News flash: Conservative writer Carolyn Fosdick reported, “In an unprecedented move, never before done in the history of America, Obama announced his plans to get government control of private businesses. The two companies in question are GMC and Chrysler. …  Although Obama repeatedly said he does not want to have the government running the auto industry, this is exactly what he is doing. In fact, he is getting into micromanaging GMC by such actions as the government guaranteeing GMC’s service contracts.”

News flash: Even members of the liberal mainstream media question Obama’s advance cherry picking of questions for a health care town hall meeting.  CBS’s Chip Reid pressed White House Spokesman Robert Gibbs for prepackaging events and not allowing open questioning . Helen Thomas said, “I’m amazed that you people … call for openness and transparency.”

News Flash: Obama promised not to raise taxes on anyone earning less than $250,000 per year (or maybe it was $200,000). Well everyone knows about this one and, if you don’t, just do a Google search.

So to use terms made popular by professional wrestling, is Obama making the change from babyface to heel? Sure seems that way. Those of us who have not supported him from the beginning should not be surprised or aghast at the transformation. The ones to watch are his supporters. And if recent polls are any indication, there’s an increasing number of them whose blind support isn’t so blind.

But before we start rejoicing that 2010 will be a repeat of 1994, remember that Hulk Hogan eventually left the New World Order and regained the love and adoration of his legions of Hulkamaniacs.

There are parallels in the worlds of politics and professional wrestling. It will be interesting to see how the Obamamaniacs react to this developing storyline.