Pollution of Public Discourse

Anonymous commented last November, "You seem to be infatuated with Dan Fagan." I had been wondering myself why I was spending so much time on this guy.

Pollution of Public Discourse.

What's that? Suppose some chemical seeps into the water system. You can't drink the water anymore til you take the time to clean out the whole system, if it's even possible.  Or you can drink it and sooner or later it makes you sick.

Well, when we have civic debate, theoretically, the idea is that through debate we can work out our disagreements. Say Sam makes a proposal of some sort. We should do X and these are the reasons why. Ben tries to find flaws in the argument, questions Sam on a few points. Sam responds. He explains his reasoning, pulls out his supporting facts. Ben might challenge the facts, or even the underlying assumptions. They go on until they eventually get to a point where they've worked out a way to do the thing Sam wants to do without messing up Ben's needs.

When people come to the public forum, but insult their fellow citizens, spout half truths and complete lies, don't learn the complexity of issues, they are really civic outlaws who pollute the public forum. I see Dan Fagan in this sort of role. His columns aren't a part of a discourse. They're simple ranting and raving. He's not interested in hearing what others think, he's just interested in venting. I stopped writing about his columns because they were so totally ridiculous, but a few people told me that my posts helped them see the holes in his arguments. That they just hadn't known enough to see through his misleading arguments.

When someone like Fagan makes up facts or throws out false generalizations, he pollutes the public square. Our progress to finding alternatives that we can all reasonably live with is thwarted. Instead, the public forum is cluttered with rhetorical litter - lies, falsehoods - that have to be cleaned up before we can go on. But it's not as simple as picking up trash. We have to disinfect the brains of those who have found his platitudes convenient excuses to continue being noisy and selfish civic outlaws.

Thus, Fagan's column is not some harmless set of paragraphs that shows up in the paper every Sunday. Instead it pollutes our discourse. It pisses off some because of its arrogance and bombast. It encourages others who want to believe simplistic nonsense about how people should live. Our public forum has to be unFaganed before we can have a civil discussion on how to work through the challenges facing the citizens of Anchorage.

OK, I've made some generalizations, let me give some examples from Sunday's column.
[For more detailed critiques of other Fagan columns go here. Then skip down past this post.]

Of all the lessons history teaches, none is more clear than this. When government punishes good decisions and rewards bad ones, that society is doomed to economic failure.

He just says this sort of thing all the time. How did this become the the clearest lesson history teaches us? Simply because Fagan declared it so. I've never heard this one before. Examples please? Not just the historical examples that prove government punishes good decisions, but the other lessons that history teaches us so we can compare to see if there is none more clear.

The problem with the American dream of home ownership: It's not attainable. As least not in Anchorage.

Alaska Housing Finance Corporation's 2004 Annual Report says:

Alaska’s homeownership rate reached an all-time high of 70 percent, exceeding the national rate of 68.3 percent, according to the latest U.S. Census data. Alaska’s homeownership rate was higher than the nation’s once previously, in 1997.

Harvard's diversity data site tells us that in 2000:

HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES: Home ownership rate: 2000 by Race/Ethnicity, 2000
Metro Area
Hispanic 41.9%
Non-Hispanic White 65.3%
Non-Hispanic Black 36.8%
Non-Hispanic Asian 51.3%

Definition: The share of occupied housing units that are owner occupied.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Census Summary File 2

We seemed to be doing pretty well nationally, and Non-Hispanics Whites aren't doing badly at all. Of course, we'd have to compare a lot of things like age, level of education, how long they've been in Anchorage, etc. to figure out what this all means. But contrary to what Fagan says, home ownership seems to be attainable to more Alaskans than in at least half the other states.

So if for the most part poverty is self-inflicted, what business does government have punishing those who make good decisions and rewarding those making bad ones?

He never made anywhere near a convincing argument that most poverty is self-inflicted, and his other idea, that property taxes is government punishing those who make good decisions is another one of his made up truisms. It's true because he says so. First, we are the government. Second, the tax payers approved of the property tax rate. Third,

Alaska was ranked as the most tax-friendly state in the nation, with Alaskans paying 6.3 percent of their income towards taxes. [source]

and if Anchorage property taxes are somewhere in the middle, so what? It's the only tax we pay to an Alaskan entity. And many families get enough through their permanent fund dividend to pay most if not all of their property tax. Dan's solution is an 8% sales tax instead of property tax. Of course, he maybe forgot President Bush said

Consumer spending accounts for about 70 percent of our economy

so as patriotic Americans keeping the economy going we should all be out shopping. If we have to pay a sales tax, it would only be "punishing people for making good decisions." Consistency isn't one of Fagan's weaknesses.

But it's clear that there's a whole political industry creating out-and-out lies (Swiftboat type stuff) to pollute the public forum so that every truth is questioned to divert from realities that might hurt one's position. If you can't win through logic and facts, then trash your opponent to distract people's attention. Everything is about winning, truth has no role. Unless people grow up and face inconvenient truths, the US as we know it will disappear. The Dan Fagans of the world are part of this disintegration of public discourse, the backbone of democracy.


Charles Fox and Hugh Miller suggested some conditions for participation in a public discourse. The participants should all possess the following:

• Sincerity - authentic discourse requires trust between participants that they are being honest and truly wish to find a solution.

Fagan's outrageous statements - both made up homilies and nasty tirades - mean there is absolutely no sincerity in his participation in public discourse. His is a one way rant.

• Focus on specific issue - not simply ideological posturing without reference to some specific situation.

Well, he touches down momentarily on an issue, like property taxes, but then goes off on his ideological tirades that have no link to the world most of us live in.

• Willing attention - Sincerely interested in the problem, willing to do the work necessary to get through the issues seriously, including listening attentively to what others say.

Well, he may be interested in the issue - getting rid of property tax - but he's not willing to listen to someone who would reframe the issue into "How do we fund the services the market can't provide nearly as well as government can?" He's a one track bulldog, he grabs his target and won't let go. No matter how reasonable anyone else is.

• Substantive Contribution - having a unique point of view, specific expertise, or something that helps the discussion move along - even just the ability to express the concerns of a class of people.

The only column I read of his that had a substantive contribution was one about Vic Kohring, because he added his own personal knowledge of Vic's interactions. Otherwise, there is nothing but ill will that Dan contributes.

Basically, Fagan is about winning, not about learning.

That's why I've written so much. To point out the nonsense for those who've watched so much tv that they have trouble thinking critically, but aren't so far gone that they can't see the path toward reason when someone points it out. I don't claim to know all the answers, but I do have a sense of logic and consistency and I know how to look up facts.

Bohemian Waxwings return to the Mountain Ash

The waxwings live through winter harvesting mountain ash berries and similar fruit stored on trees around Anchorage. Swarms of up to 100 or more birds perch on the telephone lines or giant cottonwood. Then small groups swoop down into the tree an pick at the berries. Then fly back as another group takes over. Later, with berries all over the snow below, they return to get what's left.

The video is a compromise between what's reasonable for normal people, and all the video I actually captured for the hard core bird freaks. Well, it's only 3:25 minutes altogether. So view as much as you can take. Catherine and Dianne, enjoy. The slow motion is for you.




The quality is much worse than the original. It's hard because our windows look south, into the light. But the birds are right there. But I'll eventually learn the technical necessities of getting better quality onto the web. This was January 5, 2008. I would have loved to get the natural sounds of the birds, but I was inside and there were in the house noises, so I added the Chinese flute music.

Under 30 at Out North

Under 30 means the piece has to be under 30 minutes. We've gone to a number of these in the past and this set of four pieces was by far the most polished we've seen. For very different, very striking short pieces. B. Hutton's time machine was center stage for the first piece as he explored various aspects of time. Great sounds, including the two violins on stage.

Gabrielle Barnett's riff slid from cliche to cliche spoofing (at least that's what I got out of it) those with simplistic answers to life's complex issues from the environmental/eco crowd to those who invoke Jesus for everything.

These first two are not for those who like concrete linear action.

Allison Warden and Wendy Withrow were much more straight forward. Allison was various arctic players from a polar bear to different villagers as she interpreted different stories about polar bears from her hometown of Kaktovik. In the background on a large screen we saw images of ice and polar bears.

Wendy talked and sang us through her college years 1965-69 in a Christian girls college in Texas.

One test of good theater for me is when you forget there are actors on stage. In each of these the character was real, completely into their parts. B.'s was probably the most abstract, but I like that sort of play of music and sounds and ideas that doesn't necessarily have a beginning or end, and whose meaning isn't obvious.

Good stuff. One more performance as I understanding - Sunday afternoon at Out North (kitty corner from Costco on Bragaw). And in the Q&A at the end, they said they would do this again in Homer late February.

Thailand Teacher of the Year - Somprasong Mang-ana

Old Peace Corps buddy Jim Lehman sent me to Wednesday's Bangkok Post to this story on four Thai teachers who were honored on Teachers' Day as the Thai Teachers of the Year. One of them, Somprasong Mang-ana, was my student when I was a Peace Corps volunteer in Thailand in the late 1960s. We got to visit his school for a few days last March. I certainly was impressed and I'm delighted to see that more important people than me were also impressed. Here's a link to the five posts I have labeled Umphang. There are pictures of the school in the last three posts. From the Bangkok Post article:

Awards given to mark Teachers Day today

SIRIKUL BUNNAG

The Education Ministry has honoured four teachers for their teaching spirit and devotion to their work to mark Teachers Day today. The four are Somprasong Mang-ana, director of Umphang Witthayakhom school in Tak; Pol Sgt-Maj Sophon Ritthisarn, a teacher at Wat Chonglarp school in Ratchaburi; Banchong Sombat, a teacher at Nong Rua Witthaya school in Khon Kaen; and Suleela Chanthanu, director of Ban Samnak in Ranong.

Mr Somprasong has been praised for his campaign to provide education opportunities for marginalised children in Tak while Pol Sgt Maj Sophon developed a remote school into a quality one. . .

Mr Somprasong said he chose to work at Umphang Witthaya school in the remote district of Umphang on the Thai-Burmese border because he was determined to help tribal and marginalised children get access to basic education.

''When I first took up my job at the school, there were 398 students and only seven were tribal or stateless pupils,'' said Mr Somprasong.

''I thought those children deserved an education, so I decided to travel to remote villages to persuade parents to send their children to study at my school, which offers free education.

''Now, our school has a total of 845 students, of whom 284 are stateless hilltribe children.''

He donates his 5,600-baht monthly academic entitlement allowance to cover the expenses of poor students. . . .

Kasama Voravan na Ayudhaya, secretary-general of the Basic Education Commission, said the four teachers would each be granted a certificate of honour, a golden plaque, a golden pin and a 300,000 baht cash from Prime Minister Surayud Chulanont on Teachers Day today.

Congratulations to New US Citizens!

Friday morning we went downtown to the Alaska Lands Information Center in the old Federal Building to see our fellow blogger become a US citizen. Go over and congratulate him.



The ceremony was in the auditorium, but first we gathered in the Information Center, surrounded by stuffed animals. I had to think about why I thought this was different from the two bears at the Hilton. I asked one of the Park Service people here where the animals came from. A group of large ones came from a private collection that was going to be thrown away. It was donated. A taxidermist had stuffed a dead otter that had washed up on the beach. The others had been confiscated from illegal hunters. None had been commissioned or paid for. They were there to help Alaskans and visitors become more aware of the wildlife in the state. He said some places - like Denali - have artificial sculpted models. I saw those in Denali, they just aren't the same. He said they were necessary there because they don't heat the visitor center in the winter and the stuffed animals would burst in the cold.

I have to say that while watching the new citizens was wonderful, the ceremony itself was tired. The opening film was full of the Ellis Island cliche pictures of immigrants of the early 20th Century. Where were the faces of immigrants getting off of jets, the immigrants of today? Most of the government officials who spoke seemed like they were the ones who got stuck with this duty. The guy from the National Archives talked about what you could see in the Archives in Washington DC.





Yes, it's interesting, but hardly a top priority for these new Alaskan Americans. He should have left it with the register of the first new citizens in Anchorage in 1916 - beginning with a Dane. The Park Service could have had some slides to go along with the talk on Alaska's magnificent National Parks. The logistics were clumsy. The oath a little stilted. Why are we making an older woman in a wheelchair from a war torn country swear that she "will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by law?"

The George W. Bush videotape was the most sincere and uplifting greeting of all.

Nevertheless, it was the kind of thing Americans should see once in a while. And I suspect the government officials aren't given much time to prepare for this event or resources to do it better. But we really should make this much warmer, better organized, and congratulatory. The last time I went to one of these at the Federal Court it was much better done.

The Oath of Citizenship

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God. In acknowledgement whereof I have hereunto affixed my signature.

Yippee It's Friday

KSKA went on the air in 1978. One of the Anchorage traditions that I've enjoyed, is hearing Bede Trantina's Friday morning, 9am greeting, "Yippee, it's Friday." It's hidden in there between other announcements. The KSKA website says

Trantina was hired as KSKA’s Morning Edition host in 1980 and “Yippee, it’s Friday” became part of her weekly greeting within a few months of getting up at 4:00 a.m. to sign on.

Yippee, It's Friday recorded by AKRaven
[I thought this got posted this morning as I was leaving, and just found it "Your request could not be processed. Please try again. Sorry.]

Rockin Dentist

I was going to be late if I walked, so I grabbed the bike. Part of the bike walk had been covered by the snow plowed off the street. Now, I think riding your bike on the road in the winter is more than tempting fate, but I did two blocks when the traffic thinned out and found the guy with the plow for the sidewalks. The rest of the short trip was easy. And mine wasn't the only bike in the Prov parking lot.



I didn't know I wasn't going to see my dentist. They usually ask and I always say I want to see Mark. They did ask about the hygienist, but not the dentist. Well as Tom worked on my teeth he told me about a great little concert he heard at Girdwood over the weekend. He's a closet guitarist and all was fine. But he hasn't been able to improve the inhouse music in the office. Without the staff, the dentists can't do much, and when it comes to what station is on in the office, the staff rule.

Conflict of Interest - California Supreme Court Judges' Portfolios Deny Citizen Justice

From and AP story in yesterday's Anchorage Daily News

For years, Braxton Berkley was exposed to chemicals while helping build top-secret military planes at Lockheed Martin's storied Skunk Works plant. He says those chemicals made him ill - but his case reached a dead end at the state's highest court.

The California Supreme Court has refused to hear his appeal not on legal merits, but because four of the seven justices cited a conflict of interest because they controlled stock in oil companies that provided some of the solvents at issue in the case.

Conflicts of interest are natural. They occur when our personal obligations conflict with our public or professional obligations. They aren't inherently bad. They are potentially unavoidable. People's public and private lives sometimes, unforeseeably come into conflict. But people whose personal interests and obligations are going to frequently and significantly interfere with their ability to perform their public duties, simply shouldn't run for office.

The California Supreme Court is an example of personal obligations not only conflicting, but totally thwarting what they are there to do. Mr. Braxton's right to appeal has been denied, because the court members have conflicts of interest. Not all cases get accepted by the Supreme Court. But if this case was otherwise accepted and is now rejected because of the conflict of interest, then this is completely unacceptable. Their portfolios are more important than their duty to provide justice.

The article says:

It's common for at least one justice to bow out of a case because of a financial or personal conflict. California Chief Justice Ron George, for instance, recuses himself from cases handled by the prominent law firm where his son practices. In those situations, an appellate judge is temporarily appointed to the Supreme Court to hear that case.

George said the remaining justices decided to dismiss the case because they were concerned that a Supreme Court ruling made with a majority of temporary justices wouldn't hold the same weight as an opinion of the permanent court.

Maybe it would be a better decision. And what happens to Mr. Braxton is also important.

Other options include selling the offending stock or resigning from the bench and postponing the case until there are enough new justices without such conflicts. I realize that is may sound extreme, but overall, we've become much too forgiving to public office holders' needs to make money outside of their offices.

Regular readers of this blog know I usually attempt to lay out as many of the cards as I can and just let the reader make her own opinion. And I can give lots of reasons why there might be good people kept out of office by the various restrictions and disclosure requirements. And I think we should pay our elected officials enough so they don't have to go looking for outside payments. But overall, people whose work or whose fortunes are going to create conflict after conflict simply shouldn't run for office. The work got done before these justices were on the California Supreme court and it will get done when they leave. They aren't indispensable.

Overall, I think it is a great embarrassment that these justices felt it was ok to dismiss Mr. Braxton's case because, well, you know, too many of us have a conflict of interest. You know, it happens. Well it shouldn't.

OK, I shouldn't get quite so righteous from reading one article which may have left out some crucial information. But this is a sore point for me - officials who think they are so important and so indispensable that we should make allowances so that on the side they can make lots of money. On the other hand, I don't see anything wrong with public officials juggling with the schedule to attend significant events in their families.

Backyard Snow Dragon

with thanks to:

www.xtremesled.com/newtemplate/catalog/images
http://www.freewebs.com/doragon15/snake%20eyes.jpg

Jury Got Filled Without Me

I caught the 7:19 bus (well it came at 7:29) and got to court with 15 minutes to spare.






Here's the jury waiting room. It got packed. The 12 jurors called today for Judge Volland were told at 9 that we could have a break til 10. So I went out and walked in the snow.



There were ice sculptures in the town square.





I stopped in the Hilton to warm up a bit and shake off the snow. I know this guy must be tremendously proud of shooting these bears. And I'm sure some biologist could make an argument about it being ok with the balance of nature. But personally I don't understand why he thinks killing this bear and having it stuffed is a great thing.


Well, sure, I remember the thrill of proving my power by breaking windows and other destructive acts, but I got over that when I was nine or ten. I understand it more when they actually eat what they kill. And I'm sure there's a hunting gene or two that helped humans survive when we had to hunt. But I can't help but think its a sign of arrested moral development when grown men spend tens of thousands of dollars to kill magnificent wild animals for trophies. Do you think he has a trophy wife too? (The sign is in the lower left corner of the bear case)






We had to wait until 12:15 before they told us we could go. But the twelve of us (minus one or two who weren't there) were pretty much the only ones left in the waiting room. And this clock. While being on the jury would have been interesting, this wasn't the right time for a three work trial as we're getting ready to head out for Thailand. So I was glad they were able to fill the jury without even calling us into court.




Well, the next bus wasn't for 30 minutes. I figured I could walk home in an hour, so off I went to the bike trail.





I saw a robin several times around the house last winter, but it is always a little strange to see them here in January. The second one was a little camera shy. It is a Robin, right Catherine? It isn't some bird I never heard of is it?


















Well, I didn't quite make it home in an hour. An old friend, PM, skied past me and then looped back and we talked for nearly half an hour.

[double click on a picture to enlarge it]