Archive
Lament of a Philadelphia Eagles Fan – posted 9/29/2013
It is not easy being a Philadelphia Eagles fan while living in New England. You are definitely part of a minority group: a leper in Patriotland. I know there are some geographical transplants who successfully make the transition to rooting for the Patriots. This is harder when you come from Philadelphia and grew up as an Eagles fan.
Patriot fans are passionate but Eagles fans are rabid. I went to my first Eagles game in 1956 when I was 6 years old. The Eagles played the Detroit Lions at the old Shibe Park also known as Connie Mack Stadium. The Lions were led by legendary quarterback Bobby Layne.
The Eagles lost that day and I remember that I cried. It was the first of many losses to come that I witnessed. The Eagles are one of those NFL teams who have never won a Super Bowl, a fact never far from the minds of Eagles fans. In the Philadelphia mind, whatever our success in the Andy Reid era, we are still in sports hell.
I learned about football from my parents. Both were sports nuts. They were hardcore Philadelphia fans, especially the Eagles and Phillies. My dad got season’s tickets to Eagles’ games starting in the late 50’s. He and I used to park far away and schlep across the often freezing bridge to Franklin Field, the University of Pennsylvania stadium, where the Eagles played before they moved to the Vet.
I do want to mention the year 1960. There are some happy Philadelphia football memories. 1960 was the last time the Eagles won the NFL championship. It was in the era before Super Bowls. I was there with my dad, watching the Eagles beat the Packers 17-13.
Quarterback Norm Van Brocklin, nicknamed the Dutchman, led the Eagles. I went to Friends Central School with Van Brocklin’s daughter, Karen. Norm seemed like a really nice guy. When he came to school in the afternoon to pick up Karen, he went to the school playground and he threw the football around with us kids. How cool was that! He also punted to a small army of students who wanted to receive his kicks. Van Brocklin actually was the Eagles punter, something you would never see today. I do not believe there are any pro quarterbacks who double as punters now.
Van Brocklin was surrounded by some great players. I would mention Chuck Bednarik who played both ways, center and middle linebacker; Tommy McDonald,a small, speedy and gifted wide receiver; and tight end Pete Retzlaff, a 5 time pro bowler. The Packers had Bart Starr, Jim Taylor and Paul Hornung. Ray Nitschke anchored their defense. That was a great win with Buck Shaw besting Vince Lombardi.
However, as I noted, it has not been duplicated. Not that it matters but I do not think Patriot fans can understand the feelings of Eagles fans because of all the Patriots success. Patriot fans are spoiled. It is not just the Patriots. In the last decade, Boston has had the Red Sox, Celtics and Bruins all win as well. Before the Phillies won the World Series in 2008, it had been 25 years since any Philly team won a major sports championship. We are talking the 1983 Sixers with Doctor J and Moses Malone as the last winners. That qualifies as a sports drought.
After the 1960’s, I admit I lost interest in football for a long time. I was not at Franklin Field in 1968 when that famous episode in Eagles history happened: the booing of Santa Claus. It was December 15, 1968. The Eagles were 2-11 at the time. They had started the season 0-11. Still, 54,000 loyal Eagles fans showed up. The weather was miserable that day, snowing and sleeting. It was biting cold with a whipping wind chill. Fans had to clear their seats of three inches of snow and slush.
The half time show was supposed to feature Santa making an entrance on an ornate sleigh dragged by eight life-sized fiberglass reindeer. The sleigh float quickly got stuck in the field which had turned to muck. That necessitated the entrance of Santa by foot. The other problem was that the Santa who had been hired for that day was a no-show. Not clear whether Bad Santa was drunk but he did not appear. As a result, the Eagles entertainment director approached a young fan, Frank Olivo, who, in the holiday spirit, had dressed in a red corduroy Santa outfit. Olivo was recruited on the spot to step in and play Santa.
As the 50 piece brass band played “Here Comes Santa Claus”, Olivo entered the field between two columns of Eaglette cheerleaders who were dressed as elves. Olivo recalled what happened next:
“That’s when the booing started (when the band played “Here Comes Santa Claus”). At first, I was scared because it was so loud. But then I figured, hey, it was just good-natured teasing. I’m a Philadelphia fan, I knew what was what. I thought it was funny…
When I hit the end zone and the snow balls started, I was waving my finger at the crowd, saying, “You’re not getting anything for Christmas.”
Olivo says he was actually hit by several dozen snowballs. Maybe 100 were thrown. People joked that some of the people sitting in the upper deck were more accurate passers than the Eagles quarterback. Olivo commented that he was thankful for the snow. When the Eagles entertainment director asked if he wanted to play Santa the next year, he declined. “I told him, no way. If it doesn’t snow, they’ll probably throw beer bottles”.
I know the Eagles made it to the Super Bowl in 1981 under Dick Vermeil although ultimately they lost to the Raiders. I came back to football in the late 80’s/early 90’s. The names Randall Cunningham, Buddy Ryan and Reggie White come to mind. I remember the Fog Bowl in Chicago but not that much else about the team. I did go to a few games at the Vet. The Vet itself deserves a bit of comment. It was famous for its concrete-like turf and its court in the basement.
I never saw the Eagles Court. They were full service: starting in 1998, the Eagles had a court, a judge, and a jail at the stadium. Apparently, justice was dispensed quickly for drunk or unruly fans. Penalties included forcing offenders to give up season’s tickets, pay a $400 fine and sit in jail for the rest of the game. There is no Eagles Court at the Linc.
Philadelphia had so many lean years. All the losing seasons, bad coaches and bad teams are a blur to me. I do remember the name Joe Kuharich which I associate with multiple 2-12 years. Football got somewhat redefined during those years. A good year was not about making the playoffs. A good year would be defined as a year when the Eagles beat the Cowboys or Giants. To some extent, that is still true.
Then along came the Jeff Lurie/Andy Reid era. That changed the Eagles’ fortunes. From being a team of perennial losers, Reid turned the franchise around. Eagles’ fans became used to winning. For almost a decade, the Eagles were contenders and usually they were the best team in the NFC East.
While Eagles fans are typically critical of Reid and quarterback Donovan McNabb for not winning a Super Bowl, by any rational standard, this was a special time in Eagles history. They never won so consistently for so long. They made it to 5 conference championship games and 1 Super Bowl.
If I have any criticism, it was the failure of Reid to surround Donovan with quality wide receivers. With the exception of 2004 and the acquisition of T.O. (admittedly a mixed blessing) the Eagles almost inexplicably failed to give Donovan receivers who were difference-makers. That might have gotten them over the hump.
In his early years, Donovan was a genuinely exciting player. Besides having a great arm, he was a running threat. Repeated injuries took their toll on him but he was a tough guy. I remember him playing in 2002 against the Cardinals and throwing 4 TDs while playing on a broken ankle. Eagles fans tend to remember all the wormburners and the alleged throwing up in the Super Bowl. That is very uncharitable. It was nice to see Donovan and Reid get honored at the recent game against the Chiefs. They both deserved the honor.
My dad used to call me on the phone multiple times during Eagles games to report on developments. That went on through almost the whole Andy Reid time in Philly until my dad died. It was a little before the NFL package came into existence so my dad kept me informed. My dad was a big Donovan fan. We had some wonderful times following those games and the team. I knew a lot without watching myself because of my dad’s reports.
I am not going to say much about the Super Bowl loss to the Patriots. It could have gone the other way. It was a close game and the Eagles lost 24-21. That game was not Andy Reid’s finest hour. That was a tough loss.
One player I do want to mention – Brian Dawkins. For heart, grit, and for giving his all on the field, I would rate Dawk as possibly my favorite Eagle player of all time. I would imagine that opinion is widely shared in Philadelphia.
We now enter a new period. Many question marks. I remain optimistic about Coach Chip Kelly and the future of the team. Kelly appears to be very creative and original. There is nothing boring about his team. Maybe he will turn out to be some kind of football genius and maybe he won’t. I think it takes a couple years to turn a football franchise around. The Eagles had reached a deadened place at the end of Andy Reid’s tenure as coach.
I probably share the doubts of many fans about Mike Vick. It seems unlikely Vick can change his style of play in a way that will lessen his chance of injury. He always tries to stretch plays but he takes so many hits. The idea that he could make it through any season seems like wishful thinking. I hope I am wrong. Vick does have a great arm and he can still move. Turnovers remain his achilles heel.
If Vick is not the quarterback, then who? That is a big question. Nick Foles and Matt Barkley both seem talented to me. The Eagles do have some great offensive players. Desean Jackson and Lesean McCoy are both great. The Jeremy Maclin injury was a killer though. The defense is certainly suspect. Generously put, it is a work in progress. That unit seems a couple years away from being good. Scary to think what Peyton Manning might do to them later today. Again, I hope I am wrong.
Before my dad died, he said, “Jonny, maybe you will get to see the Eagles win a Super Bowl.” I honestly cannot remember if I hid my skepticism. Eagles fans generally expect the worst. I suppose there is the law of averages. Eventually, the Eagles are destined to win a Super Bowl as long as football continues. It is hard to know whether that will be in my lifetime or the lifetime of my children, who, I confess, are not Eagles fans.
Book Review: “The Shadow of the Panther” by Hugh Pearson – posted 9/21/2013
I suppose it is a bit odd to be reviewing a little noticed book that came out about 20 years ago. Sometimes very good books get ignored. Such is the case with Hugh Pearson’s book about the Black Panther Party, “The Shadow of the Panther”.
I was prompted to take a look at the book after reading Steve Wasserman’s excellent review of a new book on the Panthers, “Black Against Empire”. Wasserman’s provocative piece appeared in the June 24th issue of The Nation. He mentioned the Pearson book in the review.
Wasserman’s review was really interesting because most writing about the Panthers is either in the love or hate category. There are not many books or articles about the Panthers in the balanced, shades of gray category.
Hugh Pearson’s obscure book was something of a revelation to me. When I picked it up, I was struck by Ishmael Reed’s blurb inside the cover: “The best book on the Panthers yet published. Explosive is too mild a word with which to describe this book.” Reed was not kidding.
I think the book was brave. It is certainly an illusion smasher. The detail and specificity of many of the allegations in the book make it more difficult to argue with. For folks like myself, more inclined to the heroic narrative about the Panthers, the book was difficult to read.
Pearson delves heavily into the dark side. There are two narratives going on simultaneously. You have the bold Panthers who stand up to police brutality in the Black community. These Panthers ran the breakfast for children program, ran a free medical clinic for the underserved, set up schools, and registered voters. They were a source of pride in the Black community. Then there were the criminal Panthers. Murder, extortion, rape, drug offenses – and that barely begins to touch all the crimes Pearson reported.
Particularly in the Bay Area, the Panthers were portrayed as the equivalent of a gang of thugs. There were a litany of despicable acts Pearson reported. The extent of the thuggery is shocking. It is hard not to think that the public image of the Panthers was at quite a distance from the reality. The Panthers looked better from far off. The problem was that the closer you got, the more seamy underside became visible.
Central to the story is the saga of Huey P. Newton. I think it is fair to say that Huey was the central personality in the party during its heyday. Huey embodied a bundle of contradictions. He learned to fight early in his life. Pearson wrote that he acquired a reputation for being so bad, so quick to the draw, that others on the rough streets of Oakland respected him. He could hang on the street with the brothers but he was also quite intellectual. Pearson showed how Huey valued education and how he ended up getting both a B.A. degree and a Ph. D. later in his life.
Huey led the Panthers to have a class-based politics. He was not anti-white or any kind of cultural nationalist. He was also an internationalist and the Panthers supported many Third World liberation movements.
However, from the perspective of 2013, it is hard to ignore some of the crazy stuff that used to appear in the Black Panther, the party’s paper. I would note the offensive dehumanized pig language which was a regular feature that ran deeply in its pages. I also remember the occasional anti-semitism that would creep in, usually in relation to Israel and the Palestinians. Wasserman mentioned the adulation of totalitarian North Korea and now deceased dictator, Kim Il-Sung. The Panthers somehow thought the North Korean concept of juche could fit here in America. Really that is bizarro world.
There was an element of megalomania with Huey. The titles he endorsed for himself included “Supreme Commander”, “Servant of the People”, “Supreme Servant of the People” and “Servant”. “Minister of Defense” was not enough. Talk about grandiose. After reading the book, the title “Servant” seems like unintended irony. While Huey had guts big time, considering all aspects, a more accurate title might have been “Self-Servant”.
In his personal life, Huey had a huge problem with substance abuse. Really that was what did him in. He had long-term issues with alcohol and cocaine and he siphoned off money collected by the Party to feed his addictions. At the end of his life in 1989, there were contracts out on him and not because of his politics. He had crossed other drug dealers, had tried to muscle them, and they wanted him dead.
Huey and much of the Panther leadership had a ridiculously sexist and abusive treatment of women. Pearson tells many stories. Eldridge Cleaver may have been the worst but Huey’s behavior was out of control. I would note that the picture Pearson presented of Elaine Brown, one of the most prominent female Panther leaders, was not flattering either.
There were any number of stories that freaked me out. The Party’s roles in the execution of their former bookkeeper, Betty Van Patter, is a horrible story. As is the story of Huey’s role in the shooting death of a very young prostitute, Kathleen Smith. The murders aside, the story I found unbelievable was Huey’s bullwhipping of Bobby Seale. Next to Huey, Bobby was the second most famous Panther leader. It is shocking that Huey could have treated his own close comrade so brutally but Huey was frequently erratic. I am hoping someday Bobby writes a memoir that pulls no punches. In Wasserman’s article, it sounded like he was considering that.
There was much competition and rivalry among Panther leaders. They were frequently expelling members or disciplining them for perceived slights. Macho posturing was common. Pearson says that Huey was enamored of the movie The Godfather. He went to see it repeatedly and required Party members to do the same.
Pearson wrote that Huey began dressing in a fedora, cape and tailored suits after seeing the movie. There is a horrifying story about how Huey pistol-whipped a tailor whom he had invited to his penthouse apartment.
The Party became a monstrosity of self-imposed wounds. At the same time, it was a victim of Cointelpro, a covert government effort to discredit and disrupt political organizations like the Panthers. While the Party often pointed to Cointelpro as the basis for many problems, that is clearly a grossly inadequate explanation.
Cointelpro did place informants and agent provocateurs in the Party. They tried to blackmail Party members and they worked to create a climate of fear about their infiltration. Still, it was the clandestine illegal activities of the Party itself which was its real achilles heel. Pearson believed that Betty Van Patter’s murder at the hands of the Panthers was due to the fact she knew too much about the clandestine activities. There was like a mafia goon squad around the Panther leadership.
That is not to say that the police and the FBI did not target the Panthers. FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover had called the Panthers the greatest threat to the internal security of the country. Hoover’s assessment was ludicrous but he followed up on it. The wave of attacks on the Panthers from 1967 to 1969 was hardly an accident. The constant raids on Panther offices across the country capped by the police murder of Fred Hampton and Mark Clark was part of a consistent project. We still only have a partial picture. It is wrong that no one was ever charged in relation to the murders of Hampton and Clark.
A deeper problem with the Panthers was their fixation on the gun and violence. That was so the wrong direction for any progressive political movement trying to gain a popular foothold. It scared far more people than it attracted. The gun stuff was a pose and in my opinion, stupid adventurism. The Panthers would have been far more effective if they had focused on constructively addressing the many social and economic problems in their communities. They could have stood up without the gun emphasis that too often defined them.
I always thought it was strange Huey titled his books “Revolutionary Suicide” and “To Die For the People”. Why would a revolutionary be so fixated on death or suicide? What kind of vision is that? The titles reflected a sort of death wish or prophecy. There was a lack of perspective about how far the Party was from reaching most Americans, let alone African Americans.
Pearson quotes Saul Alinsky about the Panthers:
“I like the Panthers, I really do, They’re nuts of course, but they’re really a fantasy of that senile political paranoid in Washington, J. Edgar Hoover. They haven’t got the numbers and they know nothing about revolutionary tactics. What kind of revolutionary is it who shouts that all power comes out of the muzzle of a gun when he knows damn well the other side’s got all the guns.”
The gun focus pointed the Panthers in the wrong direction. It created a justification for the repression that came down later. I certainly do not deny or disregard the idealism that brought so many good people into the Panthers. The problem was that the Panthers were so alienated that they could not figure out how to constructively advance their agenda.
Pearson argued that the Panthers focused on defiant symbolism rather than concrete achievements. He placed the Panthers in the historical continuum of organizations created to promote civil rights bur he placed them on no pedestal and he did not have a favorable opinion of the Panthers compared to SNCC and earlier civil rights advocates. I would credit the book with presenting a more critical and honest perspective than is the usual fare when the Panthers are discussed. People on the left could learn from this book and it deserves a wider readership than it ever obtained. In my opinion, leftists remain cowardly when it comes to honestly assessing both the strengths and weaknesses of the Panthers.
Unfortunately Hugh Pearson died in 2005. He was only 47 when he died. He deserves credit for taking on such a controversial subject and for moving honest discussion forward.
No Time To Butt Heads: Football, Brain Injury and Public Health – published in the Concord Monitor 9/15/2013
When Junior Seau retired from the the New England Patriots in 2010, he appeared to be in an enviable position. Extremely popular in his home community in the San Diego area, with all the fame and adulation that comes from being a long-time star NFL player, he was finally hanging up his cleats to enjoy retirement. He had made over $50 million in the 20 years he played for the Chargers, the Dolphins and the Pats.
Seau was widely considered one of the greatest linebackers to ever play the game. He was a likely shoo-in for the Pro Football Hall of Fame. He had no Super Bowl ring but he had been to 12 Pro Bowls.
As we all now know, Seau committed suicide in May 2012. He shot himself in the chest. He was 43 years old.
A recent article in GQ magazine chronicled the very tragic end of his life. Seau had been experiencing mood swings, insomnia, depression and forgetfulness. He had withdrawn from family and friends. He abused pills and alcohol. He made bad business decisions and he gambled away huge sums of money.
There was a weird possible suicide attempt in October 2010 after a very uncharacteristic domestic violence arrest. Seau drove his car off a 30 foot beachside cliff. He survived and claimed he had fallen asleep at the wheel.
His former teammate and friend, Aaron Taylor, described Seau at the end as like a beaten down man who had lost all his confidence. He struggled just to articulate his thoughts. It was like the old Junior had disappeared and been replaced by a shell.
After he died, scientists at the National Institute of Health who studied his brain found evidence of CTE – chronic traumatic encephalopathy, a degenerative neurological disease linked to concussions. Interestingly, during his 20 years of pro football, Seau never was diagnosed with a concussion. However, as early as the mid-90’s, he had complained of severe headaches, bouts of dizziness and insomnia.
Seau, through his family, was among the 4500 former NFL players who have tentatively settled a massive federal court lawsuit filed over head injuries sustained while playing football. The players had alleged that the NFL misled them over the long-term dangers of head injuries.
The settlement reached on August 29 provides $675 million to be paid out to former players who have suffered cognitive injuries. Payments to individual players will vary depending on the extent of their injuries. Another $75 million will go toward evaluation, monitoring and treatment of all retired NFL players, not just those in the lawsuit. An additional $10 million goes to unspecified research. Part of the deal is that the NFL makes no admission of fault or liability that plaintiffs’ injuries were caused by football.
The settlement is still pending final court approval. It is possible some former players could object or appeal. The settlement does not apply to college players. There is a separate court case about that.
I would say most commentators think this is a sweet deal for the NFL. For a league that brought in $9.5 billion in revenue last year, $765 million is a relatively low cost to pay considering that quite a few of its former employees are dead, dying, or living horribly damaged lives. Not to mention the harm that went on long before the lawsuit. No one knows how many former players have been adversely affected by brain injuries in the period before the medical world even had the diagnosis of CTE.
It is important to remember that for years the NFL took the public position that there was no substantive link between concussions suffered playing football and long-term brain damage. From 2003-2009, the Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Committee, a body set up by the NFL, wrote that no NFL player experienced chronic brain damage from concussions!
In the world of denial of responsibility, the NFL can hold its own, more than rivalling the behavior of the tobacco companies with cigarettes. The bottom line comes first and nothing the NFL has done challenges that assertion. The league has acknowledged nothing. However, it is paying out some money.
As we head into a new football season, many questions come to mind. What are the effects of multiple hits, even little hits, on the brain? How can CTE be minimized? How can practices be made safer? Can technology design a helmut that can reduce if not eliminate concussions?
One has to wonder what the NFL knows that it is not disclosing. Part of the settlement is that the NFL can maintain a veil of silence and non-disclosure about what its research has shown. I wonder if like the tobacco companies approach to public health, the NFL has a research treasure trove it is holding in abeyance.
There is a growing body of evidence which shows that repetitive trauma, football-related concussions, can cause permanent brain damage. Memory impairment, emotional instability, erratic behavior, depression, and problems with impulse control are all common symptoms. CTE appears to progress to full scale dementia.
As an almost lifelong fan, I take no pleasure in writing this. Still, I think the NFL should reverse course and err on the side of disclosure. Football-related brain trauma is a matter of public health.
Complicating the picture is the reluctance of players to disclose their concussions while they are playing. In a 2012 Sporting News poll, 56% of the NFL players who responded said they would hide symptoms of concussion to stay on the field. In a game defined by toughness, many players apparently feel that disclosure equals weakness. If they can play through, they will.
While it is a different context, it is a bit reminiscent of military veterans and PTSD. Future promotions and hope of advancement mitigate against disclosure of a PTSD problem. NFL players worry that disclosing concussions will put them out of the game and will shorten their football careers. Junior Seau is a perfect example. Given the punishing hits he gave and took, is it possible he had no concussions playing? And why was nothing ever diagnosed?
If you are the parent of a child playing football, I think it is perfectly legitimate to ask if the risks are worth it. Whether it is pee-wee football, Pop Warner, high school, college or the pros, we all, players and family and friends, should at least have full disclosure of the science in order to make informed decisions.
Restaurant Review: Maine Diner, Route One, Wells, Maine – posted 9/1/2013
I have no business writing about food. I certainly have no special knowledge. My wife, Debra, is the real food person. I am usually the person changing the channel away from the Food Network to sports or MSNBC. Still, I like good food as much as the next guy so…
I did want to say the Maine Diner, I like a lot. Located on Route 1 in Wells, Maine, the Maine Diner is a place my wife and I have gone to for years. The sign outside says “Breakfast Anytime”. It is open long hours – 7am-9pm.
The food is consistently great. I think it is a couple notches above usual diner fare. For the volume they do, I find it amazing that it does not falter. They have a big menu, not surprisingly leaning toward seafood but they have many of the dishes you would expect in a diner.
In the truly outstanding department is their seafood chowder. The chowder has lobster, local Maine shrimp, scallops and clams in a delicious clammy broth. It is very rich. The seafood chowder has been voted the best chowder in the Ogunquit Chowderfest for seven years.
Also up there in the food pantheon is their lobster pie. It has been celebrated on the Food Network’s “Diners, Drive-ins and Dives”. The lobster pie includes big and small pieces of lobster meat in a casserole topped in a delicious and buttery crumb mixture. It is kind of like baked stuffed lobster without the shell. They had a Dickie’s Diner Special this last Friday that featured a cup of seafood chowder, lobster pie with choice of vegetable and potato, a non-alcoholic drink, and choice of dessert for $30.95. Considering what it usually costs to get lobster in a restaurant (I never get it), I think that is a pretty good bargain if you are up for a splurge.
All the desserts are homemade. I rarely get dessert when I go out but I did get the blueberry pie. It was difficult to decide between the homemade Indian pudding, the apple crisp and the pies. The blueberry pie was chock full of wild Maine blueberries with a thin flaky crust. It was absolutely delicious.
There are a host of seafood items that are done right. You cannot go wrong with the fried clams, the lobster roll or the crab cake sandwich. Debra also mentions the she-crab soup, a creamy soup with Atlantic rock crabmeat and a bit of sherry. They do lobster in about ten different ways including lobster quiche, lobster club, lobster melt, lobster macaroni and cheese, and lobster benedict. I have never been to a place that served lobster in so many ways.
Being a Jewish guy from Philadelphia, I must acknowledge that Debra, a hardcore New Englander, has greatly furthered my lobster education. I was a lobster illiterate. When I was younger I had heard of Bookbinder’s Restaurant in Philadelphia and I had heard they served lobster but that was about the closest to lobster I got. My idea of seafood was flounder, blue fish, or maybe crab. There was a place near where I grew up close to 54th and City Line in Philly that was run by an an older man named Sam Fishman. (Place is long gone) He had great crab imperial at his restaurant but lobster was way pricey and we never had it. I only mention this because it does reflect my youthful distance from lobster.
I did want to mention the breakfast food too which is also yummy. Debra had the eggs florentine and the poached eggs were perfectly done. I liked the eggs benedict. The hollandaise sauce was rich and the eggs were accompanied by properly done hash brown potatoes.
They do have vegetarian options if you do not do seafood. The salad had fresh baby salad greens and flavorful cherry tomatoes. The cole slaw and baked beans are homemade.
It is a very busy place and you will probably have to wait in the summertime. There is not a huge amount of seating inside. The line goes pretty fast though and it is worth the wait if there is one. The place has a very hospitable, positive vibe. The waitstaff are friendly and chatty. The waiters were hustling but there was no bad attitude I saw. I think it is very customer-friendly and my guess is they are careful about hiring people who are personable. Also, there is none of the pretension that you can find at some fancy, overpriced restaurants. The atmosphere is comfortable and I think their prices are fair.
We sat at the counter and the guy who sat next to us was a talker. He raved about the lobster, mac and cheese. I guess he was a regular. The waitresses all seemed to know him and joked with him. It was the second time he had been there that day!
If you are in southern Maine, it is well worth a trip. I never thought I would write a restaurant review but I guess there is a first time for everything.
Book Review: “Pilgrims’s Wilderness: A True Story of Faith and Madness on the Alaska Frontier” by Tom Kizzia – posted 8/27/2013
I suppose I have a fascination with crazy people who do things that are very out of the ordinary. This book, “Pilgrims’ Wilderness”, by Tom Kizzia has that but it veers in a very dark direction.
The book tells the story of Robert Hale, later known as Papa Pilgrim, and his wife and 15 children who move from New Mexico to Alaska in 2002. We are not talking a move to downtown Anchorage. They moved to McCarthy which is a boondocks town north and east of Anchorage. It is more than 300 miles from Anchorage to McCarthy.
When I lived in Alaska in 2010-11, I drove around some on the weekends. I bought a Honda Fit while I was up there. On one trip, I headed up to Matanuska Glacier to hike around on the glacier. You have to drive through Palmer and head east into some really spectacular country with 13,000 foot mountains in the background and fast running rivers along the road. McCarthy was quite a bit farther east than I ever went. The roads are remote and they get pretty bad from what I have heard. McCarthy is located in the Wrangell-St. Elias National Park. Moving out there was not for the faint of heart.
I am a northeasterner, not a real Alaskan, so I would say McCarthy is a pretty extreme location. Pilgrim said that Alaska was the sweet name whispered by God as his firstborn came of age. That is how Pilgrim said he landed there. Kizzia says that Pilgrim searched around Alaska for 3 years before deciding to settle in Hillbilly Heaven aka McCarthy..
The story of Papa Pilgrim is fundamentally about domestic violence. The family presented to the outside world as hippie back-to-the-landers who were heavy duty Christians. Papa constantly quoted scripture. Country Rose, Papa’s wife, and the children were quiet, well-behaved in public, and quite subordinate There was no doubt Papa was the head of that household. The family played music together and entertained neighbors. The public did not see what was going on behind the scenes.
For a very long time, no one had a clue that Papa Pilgrim viciously beat Country Rose and the children, particularly his oldest daughter legally named Butterfly Sunstar and later called Elishaba. Papa had been secretly raping Elishaba and beating her repeatedly. He hid his actions for a long time but he also used verses of scripture as justification to his family. When his rape behavior became known to the family, he argued that Leviticus allowed father-daughter relationships. This was a guy who had a line of self-justification for everything he did. He actually had other family members refer to him as Lord.
The guy’s dark side included incest, multiple rapes, brutal physical assaults, kidnapping, emotional abuse and manipulation , child abuse, and theft. And all in the name of Jesus. He was finally brought down by the courageous actions of his own children who were able to step outside of Papa’s brainwashing. A criminal case put him away. Papa died in prison in 2008.
Part of Papa’s modus operandi was to isolate his family. He did not allow his children any education. Life was taken up with surviving in the very harsh, separated environment in which they had located.
Papa did work at creating conflict with the National Park Service by bulldozing a road and creating a path through National Park land to the place they settled. He never got a permit for the bulldozing. He would not talk to the National Park people at all and when they investigated, Papa and sons blocked their way. Papa had also posted signs on National Park land saying “No Trespassing NPS”. Coming after Ruby Ridge and Waco, the National Park rangers were very careful about provoking armed response. Ultimately Papa lost in federal court regarding the permit issue.
Papa was briefly a cause celebre for conservative property rights groups who hated the federal government. The Pacific Legal Foundation had taken his case. That was before he was exposed. Kizzia does a good job of pointing out the contradictions between hating the government and depending on the Alaska Permanent Fund to support the family. While Papa actively hated the government, he was happy to take the annual dividend awarded to Alaska residents that could range from $800-$2000 per person. For a family the size of Papa Pilgrim’s that was pretty good money.
Not surprisingly, Papa was a strict disciplinarian. He used a long leather bullwhip on his own family members when he believed they needed “correction”. As his children grew into their later teen years, he taught that lust was an abomination. Papa freaked out about their budding sexuality. There is a brutal description of how Papa turned a barrel on its side and whipped the boys who were made to lie on the barrel. Country Rose held the boys hands and stuffed hankerchiefs in their mouths when they screamed too loud. Papa blamed Country Rose for the boys’ sins. Among Papa’s corrections was the silent treatment. If a child was bad, they could not be spoken to. They might get no food except for bread and water. They could be made to sit out alone in the rain or snow. That treatment could go on for days.
Papa trained the children to report misbehavior and to listen for prideful or rebellious words. He closed the world off so his children had no escape from him.
Because he was a McCarthy neighbor (Kizzia and his wife owned a cabin there) Kizzia gained some degree of trust with Papa. I liked how Kizzia slowly evolved the story so that the abuse did not become apparent until later. I think the hidden aspect of domestic violence in the story is quite consistent with how domestic violence is discovered, if it is discovered. People never know what is going on next door or right down the road. Papa like many abusers was good at facade. He was very self-righteous in public.
I do have a hard time with the notion that Papa was some kind of counterculture figure. Really Papa’s values were loony and once you get past the hippie look, he was simply another deranged Christian lunatic who used biblical verses to justify all kinds of criminality. He was certainly not part of any 60’s style counterculture I would recognize. He was very much a fringe Christian. Unlike Christian homeschoolers who develop educational plans when they homeschool their children, Papa used the Bible to justify ignorance, male supremacy and violence. When you strip away the religious verbiage, he was about maintaining demagogic power and control over his family. Education threatened to expose him so he prevented it.
Papa’s “dream” had a romantic throwback quality that could appeal to those with superficial knowledge of the man. He appeared to be a rebel, living off the grid, defying the modern world. living a self-reliant, subsistence lifestyle, and raising his children by eternal Christian values. When he moved to McCarthy, he conned people into believing his family was something entirely different than what they were. Again, from a distance, his war with the National Park Service appeared to be the justified actions of a brave man striking back against an overreaching bureaucracy.
Things are often not what they seem. Up close, Papa was a nightmare. Behind the seeming god-fearing Christian was a sociopathic megalomaniac who twisted religion to justify his perverse whims. Papa did everything in the name of his religion. How often do we see this or things like it? Kizzia’s book is quite a cautionary tale. I am reminded of this quote from Voltaire: “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.”
Egypt: Cry Beloved Country by Uri Avnery – posted 8/24/2013
I am reprinting a piece written by Uri Avnery, a leader in the Israeli peace movement. Jon
I DIDN’T want to write this article, but I had to.
I love Egypt. I love the Egyptian people. I have spent some of the happiest days of my life there.
My heart bleeds when I think of Egypt. And these days I think about Egypt all the time.
I cannot remain silent when I see what is happening there, an hour’s flight from my home.
LET’S PUT on the table right from the beginning what’s happening there now.
Egypt has fallen into the hands of a brutal, merciless military dictatorship, pure and simple.
Not on the way to democracy. Not a temporary transition regime. Not anything like it.
Like the locusts of old, the military officers have fallen upon the land. They are not likely ever to give it up voluntarily.
Even before, the Egyptian military had enormous assets and privileges. They control vast corporations, are free of any oversight and live off the fat of a skinny land.
Now they control everything. Why should they give it up?
Those who believe that they will do so, of their own free will, should have their head examined.
IT IS enough to look at the pictures. What do they remind us of?
This row of over-decorated, beribboned, well-fed generals who have never fought a war, with their gold-braided, ostentatious peaked hats – where have we seen them before?
In the Greece of the colonels? The Chile of Pinochet? The Argentina of the torturers? Any of a dozen other South-American states? The Congo of Mobutu?
All these generals look the same. The frozen faces. The self-confidence. The total belief that they are the only guardians of the nation. The total belief that all their opponents are traitors who must be caught, imprisoned, tortured, killed.
Poor Egypt.
HOW DID this come about? How did a glorious revolution turn into this disgusting spectacle?
How did the millions of happy people, who had liberated themselves from a brutal dictatorship, who had breathed the first heady whiffs of liberty, who had turned Liberation Square (that’s what Tahrir means) into a beacon of hope for all mankind, slide into this dismal situation?
In the beginning, it seemed that they did all the right things. It was easy to embrace the Arab Spring. They reached out to each other, secular and religious stood together and dared the forces of the aging dictator. The army seemed to support and protect them.
But the fatal faults were already obvious, as we pointed out at the time. Faults that were not particularly Egyptian. They were common to all the recent popular movements for democracy, liberty and social justice throughout the world, including Israel.
These are the faults of a generation brought up on the “social media”, the immediacy of the internet, the effortlessness of instant mass communication. These fostered a sense of empowerment without effort, of the ability to change things without the arduous process of mass-organization, political power-building, of ideology, of leadership, of parties. A happy and anarchistic attitude that, alas, cannot stand up against real power.
When democracy came for a glorious moment and fair elections were in the offing, this whole amorphous mass of young people were faced with a force that had all they themselves lacked: organization, discipline, ideology, leadership, experience, cohesion.
The Muslim Brotherhood.
THE BROTHERHOOD and its Islamist allies easily won the free, fair and
democratic elections against the motley anarchic field of secular and liberal groups and personalities. This has happened before in other Arab countries, such as Algeria and Palestine.
The Islamic Arab masses are not fanatical, but basically religious (as are the Jews who came to Israel from Arab countries.) Voting for the first time in free elections, they tend to vote for religious parties, though they are by no means fundamentalist.
The wise thing for the brotherhood to do was to reach out to other parties, including secular and liberal ones, and lay the foundation for a robust, inclusive democratic regime. This would have been to their own advantage in the long run.
At the beginning it seemed that Mohamed Morsi, the freely elected president, would do so. But he soon changed course, using his democratic powers to change the constitution, exclude everybody else and start to establish the sole domination of his movement.
That was unwise, but understandable. After many decades of suffering from state persecution, including imprisonment, systematic torture and even executions, the movement was thirsty for power. Once it got hold of it, it could not restrain itself. It tried to gobble up everything.
THAT WAS especially unwise, because the brotherhood regime was sitting next to a crocodile, which only seemed to be asleep, as crocodiles often do.
At the beginning of his reign, Morsi drove out the old generals, who had served under Hosni Mubarak. He was applauded. But this just replaced the old, tired crocodile with a young and very hungry one.
It is difficult to guess what was going on in the military mind at the time. The generals sacrificed Mubarak, who was one of them, in order to protect themselves. They became the darling of the people, especially the young, secular, liberal people. “The army and the people are one!” – How nice. How naïve. How utterly inane.
It is quite clear now that during the Morsi months, the generals were waiting for their opportunity. When Morsi made his fatal mistakes and announced that he was going to change the constitution – they pounced.
All military juntas like to pose, in the beginning, as the saviors of democracy.
Abd-al-Fatah al-Sisi does not have an exciting ideology, as did Gamal Abd-al-Nasser (pan-Arabism) when he carried out his bloodless coup in 1952. He has no vision like Anwar al-Sadat (peace), the dictator who inherited power. He was not the anointed heir of his predecessor, sworn to continue his vision, as was Hosni Mubarak. He is a military dictator, pure and simple (or rather, not so pure and not so simple).
ARE WE Israelis to blame? The Turkish Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, says so. It’s all the making of Israel. We engineered the Egyptian coup.
Very flattering, But, I’m afraid, slightly exaggerated.
True, the Israeli establishment is afraid of an Islamic Arab world. It detests the Muslim Brotherhood, the mother of Hamas and other Islamic movements which are committed to fighting Israel. It enjoys a cosy relationship with the Egyptian military.
If the Egyptian generals had asked their Israeli colleagues and friends for advice on the coup, the Israelis would have promised them their enthusiastic support. But there is nothing much they could have done about it.
Except one thing. It is Israel that has assured the Egyptian military for decades its annual big US aid package. Using its control of the US Congress, Israel has prevented the termination of this grant through all these years. At this moment, the huge Israeli power-machine in the US is busy ensuring the continuation of the 1.3 billion or so of US aid to the generals. But this is not crucial, since the Arab Gulf oligarchies are ready to finance the generals to the hilt.
What is crucial for the generals is American political and military support. There cannot be the slightest doubt that before acting, the generals asked for American permission, and that this support was readily given.
The US president does not really direct American policy. He can make beautiful speeches, elevating democracy to divine status, but he cannot do much about it. Policy is made by a political-economic-military complex, for which he is just the figurehead.
This complex does not care a damn for “American Values”. It serves American (and its own) interests. A military dictatorship in Egypt serves these interests – as it does the perceived interests of Israel.
DOES IT really serve them? Perhaps in the short run. But an enduring civil war – on the ground or under ground – will ruin Egypt’s shaky economy and drive away crucial investors and tourists. Military dictatorships are notably incompetent administrations. In a few months or years this dictatorship will crumble – as have all other military dictatorships in the world.
Until that day, I shall weep for Egypt.
Our Secular Heritage – Whitman had it right: ‘Argue not concerning God’ – published in the Concord Monitor 8/9/2013
When Judge John Lewis of Stratford County Superior Court ruled in June that the tax credit program for private religious schools was unconstitutional, he relied on Article 83 of the New Hampshire state constitution. That article plainly states, “no money raised by taxation shall ever be granted or applied for the use of schools or institutions of any religious sect or denomination”.
On its face, that language seems clear. However, the case is being appealed to the state Supreme Court. Like so many other church/state issues, there are always two sides. Both sides appealed Judge Lewis’s ruling.
As Judge Lewis noted, the issue has deep historical roots. Really since the very beginning of the United States, separation of church and state, in multiple contexts, has been highly controversial. The threads of secularism and religion have been closely interwoven in American history. Judge Lewis’s decision is just the latest reflection of that tension.
People on the secular side of the divide have often been put on the defensive by religious fundamentalists and biblical literalists. They are derided and demonized as secular humanists, atheists, and elitists.
The fundamentalists have framed the church/state debate as between the believers (themselves) and the non-believers (the godless). Allegedly, they have values and secularists are value-free. I think this framing is grossly unfair to those of us on the secular side. While there certainly are hardcore atheists like Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Sam Harris, I would stake out a different position on the secular side. It is what I would call the Walt Whitman viewpoint. I actually think this viewpoint is more consistent with the views of many Founding Fathers who were Enlightenment thinkers.
In Leaves of Grass, Whitman famously wrote:
“This is what you shall do: Love the earth and sun and the animals, despise riches, give alms to everyone that asks, stand up for the stupid and crazy, devote your income and labor to others, hate tyranny, argue not concerning God…”
I think there is much wisdom in the advice “argue not concerning God”. Whitman argues for the acceptance and validity of the views of both believers and non-believers. In the face of ultimate mystery, he respects multiple perspectives. In a country as diverse as the United States, Whitman’s perspective makes much sense. Look only as far as Egypt to see the potential for bloodshed and divisiveness when one sectarian religion gains power and tries to consolidate its gains at the expense of others.
The name-calling against American secularists has obscured our secular tradition in America which is honorable and insufficiently appreciated. There is no single repository of this tradition which is part of the reason it is underappreciated.
I wanted to acknowledge some of the contributors to the American secular tradition whom I admire, including a couple who are relatively unknown now. All the secularists I highlight have fought theocracy and have struggled to make America a more egalitarian society. It has to start with Tom Paine. The outstanding propagandist of the American revolution, Paine agitated in both the American and French revolutions and always fought economic privilege. In 1805, John Adams wrote this about Paine:
“I know not whether any man in the world has had more influence on its inhabitants or affairs for the last thirty years than Tom Paine.”
In the 19th century, secularists played a vital role in both the abolitionist and women’s rights movements. I would mention the Grimke sisters, Sarah and Angelina, who were Quakers but who were fiercely anti-clerical and anti-slavery. They publicly spoke out against slavery before interracial audiences of both sexes, a practice that shocked the public of that day.
I also wanted to mention Lucretia Mott and Ernestine Rose. Both have landed in the forgotten category but they also deserve recognition and appreciation. They fought for equal rights for women in a very tough climate. Mott helped found the Philadelphia Anti-Slavery Society and she also helped organize the Seneca Falls Convention in 1848 which was the first public women’s rights meeting in the United States. Rose was the first Jewish immigrant to campaign aggressively for social reform in the United States. In her book, “Freethinkers”, Susan Jacoby describes Rose as “the Emma Goldman of the 1840’s and 1850’s”.
Robert Ingersoll also deserves special mention. Known as “the Great Agnostic”, Ingersoll may be the most famous man of his time who is unknown now. A lawyer and an eloquent orator, Ingersoll made fun of religion, supported the Bill of Rights, and opposed the death penalty. He has been described as the American Voltaire. He spoke widely around the country in the late 19th century and he had a gift for charming audiences by using humor to disarm opponents. Of the Founders, he wrote:
“They knew that to put God in the constitution was to put man out. They knew that the recognition of a Deity would be seized upon by fanatics and zealots as a pretext for destroying the liberty of thought. They knew the terrible history of the church too well to place in her keeping, or in the keeping of her God, the sacred rights of man. They intended that all should have the right to worship, or not to worship; that our laws should make no distinction on account of creed. They intended to found and frame a government for man, and for man alone. They wished to preserve the individuality of all; to prevent the few from governing the many, and the many from persecuting and destroying the few.”
Moving into the 20th century, I will only mention two names – Clarence Darrow and Eugene V. Debs. I know others might question this choice. Darrow is certainly one of the most famous American lawyers of all time. In the Scopes monkey trial, Darrow represented a Tennessee high school biology teacher accused of teaching evolution. Debs, a labor leader who ran for President five times on the Socialist Party ticket, was extremely charismatic and inspirational. He was a die-hard supporter of working class Americans. Later in his career, he went to jail for opposing World War I and the military draft. At his sentencing hearing in November 1918 when he faced ten years in prison, he stated:
“Your honor, years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth. I said then, and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element, I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free.”
I wanted to put in a plug for Susan Jacoby’s book, Freethinkers, that I had mentioned earlier. Freethinkers is a very comprehensive history of American secularism. It is an entertaining read and it gives great background on a far wider range of characters than I acknowledged in this short piece.
Jacoby makes the point that maybe secular humanists should call themselves freethinkers. It might be harder to demonize that term. I think it is past time for freethinkers to be defensive about arguing for reason and science rather than faith in the supernatural. There is nothing wrong with bringing a rationalist approach to fundamental questions of earthly existence. It is really a matter of intellectual integrity.
Lenny Bruce and My Uncle Dave – posted 7/21/2013
When I was 10 years old, I had my first experience with the law. My dad took me to court in downtown Philadelphia. It was the early 1960’s and it was not just any court. It was the court where my uncle, the Honorable E. David Keiser, presided. Uncle Dave was a magistrate in the lower courts in Philadelphia.
I do not remember everything about that day but some details remain vivid. It was right after New Years Day. I sat up on the bench with Uncle Dave which I thought was cool. The only case I remember was a case where the defendant was a transvestite. I think he was being prosecuted for being a transvestite. The case involved some New Years Day revelry. For a sheltered kid from the suburbs, this was some pretty eye-opening stuff. At that point in my life, my knowledge of sexual minorities was zilch.
One other thing I do remember. My dad pointed out a guy in the back of the courtroom. My dad said.”That’s the bagman”. I did not know about courts or bagmen. My dad explained it to me. The bagman was the guy who took bribes and payoffs. Apparently, the magistrate got a cut as did others.
I puzzled over that. The bagman was so publicly out there and he appeared to be just another part of the normal court proceedings. The memory of the bagman stayed with me.
I do not know how Uncle Dave got to be a magistrate. He was not a lawyer. Back in those days, being a lawyer was not a necessary prerequisite for becoming a magistrate in Philadelphia. I believe that was true for becoming a judge in many other places too, including district courts in New Hampshire.
My mom told me Uncle Dave was a neighborhood bigshot, kind of a mini-rock star. He circulated and gave away small amounts of money and candy to neighborhood kids. He was a friendly guy in his circles. He and his girl friend Tina lived in the same building as my grandmother, my Nana Keiser, at 2601 Parkway in Philadelphia. I remember periodically seeing a very dapperly dressed Uncle Dave and Tina there.
Things did not end well for Uncle Dave. Later in the 60’s, Uncle Dave was investigated for corruption. He got indicted and he was removed from the bench. I do remember the screaming large type headlines in the Philadelphia Inquirer as well as the Bulletin. After the charges, my Uncle Dave got sick and he killed himself.
I found out some years back that the legendary comedian Lenny Bruce had appeared before my Uncle Dave. As a fan of comedy, my curiosity was peaked and I was not to be disappointed. It turned out that Lenny has a long bit about his Philadelphia bust and court appearance on his album “Lenny Bruce Live at the Curran Theater”.
For those who may not know anything about Lenny Bruce, some explanation is in order. Before there was Richard Pryor, George Carlin and Chris Rock, there was Lenny Bruce. It seems tame to say he was an original bad boy. Lenny was a fearless boundary pusher, way ahead of his time. He was committed to exposing The Lie. He upset many people in that unforgiving era and he was made to pay. I suppose he was most famous for talking dirty but that is a shallow perspective on his artistry. He was a compulsive, no-holds-barred, truth teller. He wonderfully mixed in yiddish into his performances. He prided himself on not doing the same dopey routines. As his career evolved, he went free form in comedy, talking about whatever was on his mind. He had a reputation for criticizing religion.
During the 5 year period from 1961 until the year he died in 1966, Lenny was actively persecuted and he faced a number of narcotics and obscenity charges. The Philadelphia narcotics bust, along with another 1961 obscenity bust in San Francisco, provide the material for his riff on the lower courts.
Lenny came to Philadelphia to perform at the Red Hill Inn in Pennsauken. He had not been feeling well. He also clearly did have significant substance abuse issues. Lenny went to a local doctor and then a pharmacy to have his prescriptions filled. As Lenny recounts, four Philadelphia police officers came to his hotel room and repeatedly knocked on the door. Lenny was in bed and he yelled back that he did not want to be disturbed. The cops broke the door down. The cops had a search warrant and they were hunting for drugs and drug paraphernalia. One cop said,
“Hey, whaddya doin’ with all these books here? Hee-hee.”
Lenny replied,” I smoke them at night. They’re all dipped in secret sticklach”. Warming up, Lenny said, “…I’ll tell you something if you’re ever in a strange town, just clip the ad for the local jazz club out of the paper, roll it up and smoke it – and you’ll be right out of your kayach.”
After being bailed out, Lenny started calling lawyers. He said he went through 15 and his takedown of the lawyers is funny in itself. He got referred to a criminal defense lawyer named Gary Levy. Lenny asked him, “Okay how much is this going to cost me?”. Levy replied, “Lenny, this will cost you $10,000.” “What”.Lenny exploded, “That’s a telephone number! Are you crazy?”
Levy responded that he had to give money to the D.A.’s Office, to Magistrate Keiser, to the police, the bail bondsman, and he, of course, needed his fee. Lenny then tried to bargain Levy down from $10,000 to $5,000 and then $3,500. No deal was reached and Lenny said he was going to sleep on it. That night he decided to fire Levy and he went to the press. He told reporters, “Magistrate Keiser is a crook”. He had decided to name names and quote prices. He explained that Attorney Levy had made the offer.
When Levy was asked about Lenny’s allegation, Levy said, “He’s a liar. He’s a sick kid. The kid’s crazy.” Levy said he would sue Lenny for slander. Levy went on to say: “I wouldn’t know who to payoff. Payoffs certainly are not going on in the courts of our land.”
When Magistrate Keiser was asked about the bribery charge, he said, “This is the first time I have heard anything of this nature…But it sounds ridiculous”.
Lenny had never been to court before the Philadelphia bust. He described his view of judges this way. “I thought judges were …”I listen, I am wise, the scales. I listen to all, then I weigh what I hear”.
Lenny was indignant at seeing justice turned into a shakedown. It is hard not to wonder about the prevalence of justice for sale in that era. Not exactly the good old days.
When Lenny appeared in court, Magistrate Keiser led off with, “This looks like a sinister character to me.” He was so prejudiced and bugged that Lenny said there was no need for a D.A. Lenny described Keiser as ” a momser. my first villain, and my first lover who did me in and told a lie.” This is how Albert Goldman, Lenny’s biographer described Keiser:
“On a salary of $18,000 a year, he has become a rich man, presiding over his business in bribes and gratuities from a palatially furnished office better suited to a big corporation head than it is to a local judge.”
Lenny realized that if he paid a bribe he would become a mark for crooked cops and judges all over the country. There is a tradition in America of big-name entertainers settling problems by payoffs in order to salvage their careers. Lenny wanted to fight it out on the law which he believed in. I do not know for sure but I would not be surprised if Lenny’s famous saying, “In the halls of justice, the only justice is in the halls” comes from this experience. The case against Lenny was eventually dropped by a grand jury but this was just the beginning of his troubles.
It is now over 50 years past the events I have described. Still, as a relative of Magistrate Keiser, as a judge and as a lawyer, I want to offer a belated but sincere apology to Lenny Bruce. I too saw the bagman in Magistrate Keiser’s court. My uncle disgraced himself and his office. Lenny did not deserve the persecution and mistreatment he received. Years of legal battles broke Lenny and turned him into a self-described “drug addict meshuganah”. Besides taking his mental health, all the fights cost him a fortune and tremendously narrowed his employment opportunities.
Albert Goldman accurately wrote that Lenny worshiped the gods of spontaneity, candor and free association. I think he is an insufficiently appreciated American hero and comic genius. In writing this piece, I wanted to honor his memory and encourage people to listen. He is still funny.
No Good Reason to Cut The Food Stamp Program – published in the Concord Monitor 7/6/2013
Presently at issue before Congress is what will happen to the federal Food Stamp program, now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP. Both branches of Congress have been addressing food stamps in the context of the Farm Bill.
On June 20, the House rejected a version of the Farm Bill that would have resulted in very significant cuts to the Food Stamp program. The House Agriculture Committee bill which came to the floor would have cut two million low income individuals off benefits entirely. Working families with children and senior citizens would have taken the major hit. Another 850,000 households would have had their benefits reduced by $90 a month. The total projected savings in food stamp cuts under the bill would be almost $21 billion over the next decade.
These cuts would follow on the heels of a further food stamp cut. The 2009 Recovery Act had increased household benefits to the tune of $20 to $25 a month or roughly $240 to $300 a year. That increase is slated to expire on November 1 unless Congress acts.
As of January 1, 2013, the Food Stamp program reached 120,000 New Hampshire residents which is 9% of the state population. Nationally, the Food Stamp program serves 47,772,000 participants, 15% of the total population in the United States. The average monthly food stamp benefit is $246 a month. Food Stamps pumped $166 million into the New Hampshire economy in 2012.
How the Food Stamp program is viewed is a rorschach test for politics. On the one hand, you have the Reagan-Gingrich-Romney view which sees food stamp recipients as takers, frauders, and welfare queens. On the other hand, you have people like former Senators George McGovern and Bob Dole who both championed the program and who saw it as a way to feed the needy.
I suppose how you see the Food Stamp program depends on whether you think hunger is a real problem in America.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) says that over 50 million Americans lived in food insecure households in 2011. Food insecurity is defined as the condition of not having regular access to enough nutritious food for a healthy life. Of that 50 million, over 33 million are adults and over 16 million are children. USDA further estimates that about 17 million live in households considered to have very low food security. These are the food stamp recipients with the deepest struggles. These people regularly skip meals or cut the amount eaten below what is minimally needed.
I would argue that food stamps have been the most effective and targeted public benefit ever devised in the United States. The program has played a critical role in lessening hunger and malnutrition. A host of bad consequences can flow from childhood food insecurity including physical, emotional, and cognitive impairment.
In the world of public benefits, food stamps is the current program that is serving the widest number of needy people. Welfare no longer plays that role. Far fewer people get it. Food stamps is the big enchilada as far as benefit programs are concerned.
The logic of cutting the program now escapes me. The need is still there. The economy has only marginally improved. Pretending that need does not exist is a form of denial. If the economy does improve, less people will need the benefit and less people would be on the program. It is worth pointing out the countercyclical nature of food stamps. The program helps the economy since people typically spend their benefits quickly after receipt. They have to – otherwise they will be hungry.
Legislators who favor cutting the food stamp program do not talk about hunger. They try to keep discussion away from the impact on actual human beings. It is about deficit-cutting. You cannot get more abstract than that. How bloodless and how removed!
Talk about politicians who are so out of touch, it is like they live in a bottle. This is a perfect example. The food stamp cutters, a wealthy crowd, are oblivious to hunger, a condition that is, no doubt, quite foreign to them. The cutters offer no alternative for feeding the hungry. More likely, they would talk about fraud in the program or they will highlight a recipient somewhere who used food stamps to buy a lobster. The food stamp cutters are big on passing negative moral judgments on poor people.
The food stamp fraud discussion is one that should be welcomed by food stamp proponents. While no program is without some degree of fraud, the food stamp program has been very good at minimizing fraud and trafficking. The fact there is some small amount of fraud does not negate the need of the overwhelming majority who depend on the program. I would mention that the food stamp program in New Hampshire has been particularly vigilant about fraud and it has a good record in recovering overpayments not only from those who commit intentional program violations but also from those who commit inadvertent household errors.
Although food stamps was designed to be a nutritional supplement and not the sole basis for a monthly diet, it is the bulwark against poor people going hungry. For tons of people, who for whatever reason are lacking in income, food stamps may be the only source of nourishment.
A bunch of years back, I participated in the now defunct state Food Stamp Advisory Council. Made up of advocates, nutritionists, and representatives from the Department of Health and Human Services, we used to discuss the program’s functioning and ideas for improving it. One idea we had back then still resonates: using the Low Cost Food Plan rather than the Thrifty Food Plan for food stamps. The Thrifty Food Plan only gets most families 3/4 or 4/5 of the way through the month. The Low Cost Food Plan is a 25-30% higher allotment than the Thrifty Plan and it is based on a more realistic assessment of actual need. It is more in line with what low and moderate income people report they spend on food and it is more likely to provide the nutrition that will get recipients through the month.
I would suggest that food stamp cuts are not like other budget cuts. This is not like cutting a weapon system or even other social services. Before food stamps are cut, legislators should remember 16 million children potentially going hungry. In this, the richest country in the world, that is an entirely preventable situation.
Birdbrain by Allen Ginsberg – posted 6/23/2013
Not that it matters but…
Watching the New Hampshire Legislature not accept Medicaid expansion this last week was a crime against reason. Medicaid expansion would insure 58,000 uninsured low income people and it would bring $2.5 billion dollars into the state. Somebody needs to tell the NH Senate majority that insuring uninsured people is a good thing, not a problem.
It is hard not to be filled with trepidation waiting for the U.S. Supreme Court to issue rulings on anything, let alone Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.
Anyone who thinks the United States should intervene in Syria must have not been paying attention to what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last 10 years.
The zealous over prosecution and over charging of people like Edward Snowden and Bradley Manning is an embarrassment to the federal government. Really how are they any different than Daniel Ellsberg who is now widely seen as a hero? Charging Snowden with espionage is ridiculous.
Cutting food stamps in the present economic environment makes no sense. Food Stamps is one program that is reaching masses of Americans and providing tangible help. It is counter-cyclical and it immediately puts money back into the economy. One can only hope that when a federal Farm Bill passes, cuts will be minimized.
Cape Cod is lovely in June.
Since I like to share poetry, the political stuff above makes me think of this Ginsberg poem:
Birdbrain by Allen Ginsberg
Birdbrain runs the World!
Birdbrain is the ultimate product of Capitalism
Birdbrain chief bureaucrat of Russia, yawning,
Birdbrain ran FBI 30 years appointed by F. D. Roosevelt and never chased Cosa Nostra!
Birdbrain apportions wheat to be burned, keep prices up on the world market!
Birdbrain lends money to Developing Nation police-states thru the International
Monetary Fund!
Birdbrain never gets laid on his own he depends on his office to pimp for him
Birdbrain offers brain transplants in Switzerland
Birdbrain wakes up in middle of night and arranges his sheets
I am Birdbrain!
I rule Russia Yugoslavia England Poland Argentina United States El Salvador
Birdbrain multiples in China!
Birdbrain inhabits Stalin’s corpse inside the Kremlin wall
Birdbrain dictates petrochemical agriculture in Afric desert regions!
Birdbrain lowers North California’s water table sucking it up for Orange County
Agribusiness Banks
Birdbrain harpoons whales and chews blubber in the tropics
Birdbrain clubs baby harp seals and wears their coats to Paris
Birdbrain runs the Pentagon his brother runs the CIA, Fatass Bucks!
Birdbrain writes and edits Time Newsweek Wall Street Journal Pravda Izvestia
Birdbrain is Pope, Premier, President, Commissar, Chairman, Senator!
Birdbrain voted Reagan President of the United States!
Birdbrain prepares Wonder Bread with refined white flour!
Birdbrain sold slaves, sugar, tobacco, alcohol
Birdbrain conquered the New World and murdered mushroom god Xochopili on
Popocatepetl!
Birdbrain was President when a thousand mysterious students were machinegunned at
Tlatelulco
Birdbrain sent 20,000,000 intellectuals and Jews to Siberia, 15,000,000 never got
back to the Stray Dog Café
Birdbrain wore a mustache & ran Germany on Amphetamines the last year of World War
II
Birdbrain conceived the Final Solution to the Jewish Problem in Europe
Birdbrain carried it out in Gas Chambers
Birdbrain borrowed Lucky Luciano the Mafia from jail to secure Sicily for U.S.
Birdbrain against the Reds
Birdbrain manufactured guns in the Holy Land and sold them to white goyim in South
Birdbrain supplied helicopters to Central America generals, kill a lot of restless Indians,
encourage a favorable business climate
Birdbrain began a war of terror against Israeli Jews
Birdbrain sent out Zionist planes to shoot Palestinian huts outside Beirut
Birdbrain outlawed Opiates on the world market
Birdbrain formed the Black Market in Opium
Birdbrain’s father shot skag in hallways of the lower East Side
Birdbrain organized Operation Condor to spray poison fumes on the marijuana fields of
Sonora
Birdbrain got sick in Harvard Square from smoking Mexican grass
Birdbrain arrived in Europe to Conquer cockroaches with Propaganda
Birdbrain became a great International Poet and went around the world praising the
Glories of Birdbrain
I declare Birdbrain to be victor in the Poetry Contest
He built the World Trade Center on New York Harbor waters without regard where the
toilets emptied—
Birdbrain began chopping down the Amazon Rainforest to build a woodpulp factory on
the river bank
Birdbrain in Iraq attacked Birdbrain in Iran
Birdbrain in Belfast throws bombs at his mother’s ass
Birdbrain wrote Das Kapital ! authored the Bible ! penned The Wealth of Nations !
Birdbrain’s humanity, he built the Rainbow Room on top of Rockefeller Center so we
could dance
He invented the Theory of Relativity so Rockwell Corporation could make Neutron
Bombs at Rocky Flats in Colorado
Birdbrain’s going to see how long he can go without coming
Birdbrain thinks his dong will grow big that way
Birdbrain sees a new Spy in the Market Platz in Dubrovnik outside the Eyeglass Hotel—
Birdbrain wants to suck your cock in Europe, he takes life very seriously, brokenhearted
you won’t cooperate—
Birdbrain goes to heavy duty Communist Countries so he can get KGB girlfriends while
the sky thunders—
Birdbrain realized he was Buddha by meditating
Birdbrain’s afraid he’s going to blow up the planet so he wrote this poem to be
immortal—
Jonathan P. Baird 