Texas Secession

Two things you need to know about Texans:

1. Most of us subscribe to the “I wasn't born in Texas, but I got here as fast as I could,” dictum.
2. “You can always tell a Texan, but you can't tell him much.”

The 2012 U.S. Census projection, aka “the Texas count,” is 25,145,561 citizens in the Lone Star State (Republic). The current count on the secession petition located at https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petitions (You have to click through a few screens.) is 116,181 names. By my math (Let me get the calculator out. Sorry, I was educated before no child was left behind.) that is 0.46 hundredths of 1 percent of the “states'” population.

Of those 0.46% names on the petition I wonder how many voted in the November 2012 election? I wonder how many of those names would have been allowed to vote under the new Texas voter fraud guidelines that the U.S. Supreme Court put on hold. (My guess is 102% of them.)

Please do not misunderstand me, I am proud to live in Texas. I am proud that my children are natural born citizens of Texas, none were delivered by Cesarean. But if Texas should secede from the Union I am moving to Austin. Their petition to secede from the secession is currently at a 0.45 hundredths of 1 percent count.

George W. Parker

Flaubert vs. Chandler

Fundamentally a car is a means of transportation. A motor and seats on wheels you use to get yourself around town. Ultimately it is judged by its ability to fulfill that function. If your Lamborghini has starter problems, or a grind in the gear box as you shift into third, maybe even a rattle in the door at 180 mph, you may not find it a satisfying ride despite all its style.

A novel is in a similar situation. It should tell a story and tell it well. Regardless of the first person-third person structure, or its stream of consciousness, or its exotic locale, a novel without the foundation of a solid story will leave you dissatisfied.

Often in “literature” it is okay to have style but no substance. I tried to read Flaubert's Bouvard and Pecuchet last month. Maybe I stopped too soon but after a while I got tired of the title characters. They stopped being funny and Flaubert started looking mean to me.

On the opposite side I reread Raymond Chandler's Lady in the Lake this week. Although Chandler ties the story together all too neatly and in too short a time frame I still found the story and characters interesting, although I've read it multiple times.

I'll give you that the two stories are not on the same plane. And that they have different artistic goals. But if you don't finish reading a book did the author do a good job of writing? If the goal was a Lamborghini or a Chevy does it matter if the car won't start or if you can't make it to the grocery store?

A broken Lamborghini is still, after all, just a broken car.

The Second Half of Infinity

∞

That is the symbol for infinity (Alt+236 on my Windows 7 system.) Besides the counter clockwise rotation is there any difference between it and an 8? They are both like a Hot Wheels over and under race track aren't they? And that over and under race track is my point.

I am sure that what happened to me is nothing new in the world. But when something new happens to you personally, it is new. My epiphany was simple. It was a remembrance of my walking along a tree lined street in Fayetteville, Arkansas.

The importance of that moment was that I then and there decided not to attend college. That day led directly to this day. (I understand that everyday leads to the next day but you know what I mean.) That was the proverbial first step in the thousand mile journey. (According to auto odometers its been more than a thousand miles.)

So where am I now? That's where the over and under race track comes in. The epiphany was that my current spot was directly above that previous spot. One and the same place put spatially separate. From those spots I can view that section of the journey. That is the spot where what went around came around.

What does all that mean. Who knows? But it was weird. Now to take a look at the other loop.

Next Stop : The Fiscal Cliff

With the election over it's finally time to talk about the 800 lb gorilla in the room. The gorilla that both candidates and parties refused to acknowledge during the recent campaign, the fiscal cliff.

With the makeup of the House and Senate fundamentally unchanged can we really expect any different behavior from them in the next six weeks or the next two years? What political incentive does the Republican Party have for compromise? Why would the Democrats compromise in the wake of their win?

Mitt Romney was considered a “moderate” Republican. The young and upcoming Republican leaders, the potential 2016 presidential candidates, are all farther to the right than Romney. Aren't they better served by holding their current fiscal positions, not compromising an inch, and using the cliff as a threat?

I think the Republican Party has more to gain if the political situation plays out along the worst case scenario. The nation falls off the fiscal cliff. The economy pulls back into recession. Congress remains at loggerheads for the next two years. Then the Republicans will blame the Democrats for a lack of leadership and direction.

In 2014 the Republicans will take control of the Senate while retaining the House. The Democrat White House will use it's veto powers repeatedly during the final years of its term and the US voter will get angrier and angrier at the political stalemate. This allows the Republicans to capture the Presidency in 2016.

It is a terrible scenario for the American public. But what incentive does either party have for compromise? Are you ready to compromise?

George W Parker