Airport scans or scams?

On Sept. 11, 2001, I became painfully aware that I'd be writing the phrase "On Sept. 11, 2001..." for years to come. It was pretty obvious by brunch time that day that we were living through zeitgeist-altering events that would shape the new millennium pretty drastically and for quite a while, too. What we didn't know at the time, what we could not have predicted, was that our country would turn into a Terry Gilliam inspired paranoid comedy where business-as-usual would be the real devil in the details.

Take the current state of our nation's airports. Now, if you're like me -- and I know I am -- then you don't mind being publically groped by strangers or photographed in the nude by them so long as they have plausible deniability or an abundance of natural charisma. Protests about civil liberties aside, most of us don't mind a few silly security measures or even a host of monotonous questions and inspections. But what is difficult to come to terms with is when these measures become so laughably predictable in their knee-jerk responsiveness to grand failures that they offend reason and undermine the system they purport to protect.

As I learned at Iowa State, a little depravity goes a long way whether safety is an issue or not. But even if full body scans and prurient pat downs were able to keep us perfectly safe in flight, these measures stop no one from walking into an airport with a steamer trunk full of nitrogen-rich fertilizer, a gasoline can and a Zippo. For all the security on the concourse between you and your plane there is nothing more daunting than a couple of stupid questions from a bored ticket agent before that. Wile E. Coyote could successfully execute a terror plot at an airport without a ticket for a flight. It just isn't that hard and anyone with an imagination could cook up a scheme.

And yet every time some fool or zealot attempts to detonate their clothing in flight, we invest in millions of dollars worth of equipment and procedures experts admit aren't actually keeping us safe. The underwear bomber would have made his way easily through an x-ray scanner and an aggressive pat down. Airports are as vulnerable as they ever were and jets are only moderately safer due to a more vigilant flying public.

What we have here is business-as-usual dressed up as "new and improved." It's the same scam ad men use to sell detergent. We don't have safety so much as the illusion of safety. Something bad happened and it made us feel better for a while to know somebody somewhere was doing something. So long as nothing really bad happened again, we were content to take off our shoes in public and believe with all our might that double-checking everyone with a beard was working.

The problem is that crises always prompts the greedy to find the profit in our fear. Every industry in this nation has a lobby in Washington and security is no different. Manufacturers of the "naked scanner," awkwardly named Rapiscan, have a contract worth $173 million and employ former Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff as a consultant. According to reports in USA Today and the Washington Examiner, security firms have been doubling their efforts and dollars in D.C. There's lucre to be made in security and you had better believe your privacy and safety are the last things on anyone's mind but yours.

Tweet

10/17/10 Spank your kids

You know you are getting old when you start thinking of college students as the "kids these days." I suppose it was inevitable I would hit an age when I could no longer prop up my hipness in the face of change. I have tried for as long as possible to maintain youthfulness. I have used a combination of staying in school for an obscenely long time, only making friends with people 10 years or more younger than myself, avoiding long-term employment and never saying things like "well, THAT'S different."
 
Most importantly, I remain willing to adapt to new trends like swearing on basic cable, social networking, sandwiches with chicken breast buns, the "Star Trek" reboot, green technologies, the information age and even "Jackass" in 3D."

Failing to keep up with change will give you a case of future shock big enough to kill a llama. The worst cases leave you a broken shut-in afraid to leave the house, but the mild cases are almost as bad. They create in some minds the idea that coolness peaked when they did. That is never the case.

People stuck in another decade will tell you no good music has been made since Starship broke up and that rap cannot possibly last even though it has been around since the 70s.

I will admit that I am more old-fashioned than I care to admit in some areas and on one subject in particular. That subject is more taboo than strip poker on Sunday. If you are sensitive, turn away now because no one wants to force you to absorb the following opinion. Ready?
 
I have a lingering attachment to corporal punishment. We need to bring back into vogue the well-measured, non-angry form of physical repercussion for failure to acceed to demands that was last popular when I was a kid.   

Just to be clear, I despise abuse as well as the abusive, but I think it is wrong to equate simple spanking with abuse. To the contrary, sparing the rod spoils the child, but more importantly it just feels right to advocate a modicum of physically-imposed discipline. It was good enough for grandma and she raised six kids with relative success.
  
Grandma was right to spank because children are not morally responsible individuals capable of understanding the difference between right and wrong when presented as mere theory. You cannot have an intelligent discussion with a five-year-old about the ethical consequences of their actions. You cannot explain to someone who has no real understanding of pain let alone a realistic concept of mortality why they should not run out into traffic. "Why" shouldn't enter into it, only "because I said so."

There are plenty of good kids out there and I don't intend to demean them in any way. Quite the opposite. Kids who misbehave around adults are anything from a bad example to a torment to good kids. Good kids know as well as adults do that ill-mannered children lack discipline. They want us to make those kids behave for their own benefit.
 
By the time kids get to their teens these days, they are uncontrollable if they haven't learned proper etiquette already. I do not blame the media, sugar or whatever reality star is the haps this week. I blame the namby-pamby policies that make it impossible for a parent to grab their kids by the arm in a public place and tell them if they do not stop screaming, they are going to get paddled in front of the whole store.

What happened to the America of the past, the one I knew and loved growing up? When parents could spank their kids for pushing at the public pool or give them a mild slap on the mouth for cussing? What happened to that country where parents could threaten their kids to keep them in line? Does anyone honestly think we are living in a better country for sparing the rod? 
I believe wholeheartedly that there is nothing wrong with your kids knowing that if they cross the line, they've got a whoopin' coming to them. Respect, common courtesy and healthy fear are not always things you can teach a child about. Sometimes it takes a spanking. 

10/25/10: Vote 'yes' to keep Iowa justice uncorrupted

Thinking about this week's election topic, I could not help but remember a touching, personal story. When I was 6, my grandmother pulled one of my teeth out. The tooth she removed, with surprisingly little effort on her part, was right next to the loose one she had intended to pull. There was much wailing and not so much with the gnashing of teeth. Within the hour, the loose tooth I had been "fiddling" with fell out on its own. This resulted in two very important lessons being learned, in a very visceral way, by me. The first lesson is to never underestimate an old woman with a powerful grip, a clean, dry handkerchief and no patience. The second is never trust an interloper.

Of course, my grandmother felt terrible about what would constitute torture under the Geneva Convention. I know her regret was earnest because back in those days you could just about smack a kid with a log chain at a grocery store in front of a cop and not get so much as a ticket for noise pollution. She never said as much and I may be reading into things, but I believe if she could remember the incident, she would say she acted rashly out of personal irritation as opposed to a legitimate interest in what was best for everyone.

So it goes. Every generation has growing pains, obstacles and noisome interference to deal with. In this upcoming election, Iowans are being bombarded by outside interests to remove three Iowa Supreme Court justices for ruling unanimously a year and a half ago that the state has no vested interest in prohibiting same sex couples from entering into wedded bliss, such as it is. Having read the ruling and being a fan of well-written jurisprudence, I can find nothing particularly biased about the decision. In fact, it's a model of pure legal reasoning so airtight you could can tomatoes in it. It's probably the best written legal opinion since Brown v. Board of Education. It makes me emotional just thinking about it and the best part? It's pure Iowa values written by Iowans for Iowans with no interference from outsiders (http://www.politico.com/static/PPM104_090403_iowacourt.html).     

Agree or disagree, but in an impartial system you win some and you lose some. That's how you know it's impartial. If you get your way all the time, then something IS wrong.  

Do Iowans need help deciding Iowa issues from groups based, according to The Iowa Independent, in Mississippi (American Family Association), Washington, D.C. (Family Research Council), Arizona (Alliance Defense Fund), Georgia (Faith & Freedom Coalition) and New Jersey (National Organization for Marriage)? I don't think so, but then I have faith in Iowans to decide their own fate unlikepIpes Rep. Steve King who is happy to collaborate with interloping outsiders.

The most offensive piece of doublespeak being pushed this season is the "Vote NO to Activist Judges" campaign which would have us destroy our great tradition of a non-political judiciary in the name of keeping our courts "activist free" through political scheming which would virtually guarantee that any future judges would have to be political, partisan campaigners. The kindest thing anyone can say about this campaign is it's like pulling perfectly good teeth.

So let's set aside agendas for one moment and operate from a place of pure, unadulturated, utilitarian pragmatism. Let's use the kind of "enlightened self-interest" that would have made Ayn Rand smile quietly to herself.

According to Jennifer Merriman, communications/new media organizer for OneIowa, there are very good reasons of self-interest why no one should consider politicizing Iowa justices. They are: "Voting out the justices will not reverse the marriage decision. It will not change how justices are chosen. Voting out the justices will make them more likely to take popular opinion into account when making decisions. If one is opposed to gay marriage, one should know that popular opinion is weighing more and more toward gay marriage every day. Voting out the justices WILL make it more likely that a defendant will face a prosecution that's donated to the justice's campaign."

Connie Ryan Terrell of Interfaith Alliance Iowa offered good questions voters should ask themselves when deciding how to vote.

"Do voters really want to have this battle every two years? Do they really want to have to spend millions every two years? Do they really want judges who blow with the wind on whatever 'popular' opinion is every two years? Do they really want judges who are beholden to the other side’s special interest (whatever that happens to be) every two years?"

Greg Jerrett is a freelance writer and marketing consultant. He can be contacted at gjerrett@gmail.com.

Ignore the narrative, process is the point of elections

Possible column topics whirled around my head while re-organizing my library this week. There is something humbling about being the caretaker of many great volumes of philosophy, science, politics and literature. It's not just the dusting involved -- though I confess it can be tedious -- rather it is the sheer magnificent weight of great historical thinkers that makes one feel as significant as a dirty penny in a jar of new nickels. Especially when one lives in an age of spare change.

With a Templeton  Rye in one hand and a homeless copy of "Moby Dick" in the other, I was struck by the notion that no one knows ahead of time just how important their work will be when viewed in hindsight. Nor should we focus so hard on outcomes that we short change the process. Had someone told Melville he'd die broke, he might have chosen another line of work. Had he known his work's future worth, he might have written a sequel ("Moby Dick 2: They Still Call Me Ishmael") gutting our love for the original. 

We live inside the big picture we help to create. We spring from cultural traditions we maintain as much as change. For better or for worse, we build the future from the bricks of the past and the mortar of right now. The quality of our work will be judged by generations yet unborn to parents and grandparents yet to be. We have an obligation to do our best because the only condemnation the future can ever teally saddle the the pastwith is that "the people of that time didn't try hard enough to be better."        

So as we approach Nov. 2, I feel ethically, if not morally, obligated to discuss the election. First up, broad strokes. In bombastic times, I feel the need to make my positions as entertaining as possible without yielding too much dignity to populism. But then I remember that popularity, populism and politics are all rooted in the same notion of people-pleasing. It is no coincidence that people love to watch and vote for the next "American Idol" pop singer more often and more consistently than they pay attention and vote in boring local, state and mid-term national elections. These merely effect our lives. 

It's about perception, investment and return. Even if one pays each time to vote for the next "idol" and their choice doesn't win, most viewer-voters don't feel they've wasted their time -- ironic as this might seem to Ruben Studdard fans. This is because no one perceives that they've been robbed. They were going to watch anyway. No one lives or dies by the outcome and if their contestant wins, they feel a part of that success. A week later, they can forget all about it and move on to the next reality/talent show. 

Politics and talent shows can both be entertaining, but political contests rarely result in victory for the most talented participant. The only commonality between talent shows and politics is they both make good use of narrative to change the outcome.

"A narrative" is just a fancy way of saying "a story" without it sounding like a complete fiction. We all have a story, but how we tell it changes how we are perceived. Sometimes, people fudge the details, highlight their best points or just lie with varying levels of success. Sometimes, storytellers are so good at telling their story it doesn't matter so much what the truth is. Anyone who's read Hunter S. Thompson knows this.

An entertaining story overshadows dry issues and confuses voters. Political action groups depend on it to get their way. They're convinced of their righteousness so it doesn't matter if you are too so long as you vote the way they want you to.   

Political victories can be hollow ones. Even the best are about as hair-raising as paying your bills on time but the long-term goal of a stable democracy is worth our diligence. 

This election, please familiarize yourself with the issues. Vote your conscience, ignore the noise of outside influence and remember that process is the point with history our only judge.   

Greg Jerrett is a freelance writer, marketing consultant and not a paid spokesman for Templeton. He can be contacted at gjerrett@gmail.com. 

Sneak peak

I'm often fascinated by how parochial our coastal cousins appear when talking about those of us living in what they condescendingly refer to as "the fly-over states" and patronizingly as "Middle America." They mean "hicks," of course, but like to think we don't "get it." They know nothing of our ways and lump us all together. They don't appreciate the diversity out here or the complexities of our lives, which aren't mysterious or idyllic, just different from theirs. And only a bit.

Things going bump in the night (Saturday, October 04, 2003)

I want to just keep on saying this every day until Thanksgiving. You'd think by age, 57 and a half, it wouldn't come as such a surprise any more that the days get shorter and shorter as winter approaches, but every year ... "I can't believe how dark it is already."

I also can't believe how Halloween seems to get started earlier and earlier every year now, too, like it's Christmas. That starts unreasonably early every year as well, but at least with Christmas there are great fat gobs of cash to be made. If there's one thing I know about human beings it's that we will do anything for cash or - as the kids are calling it this month - "cheese" or "cheddar."

But is there really that much cheddar cheese to be made with Halloween? Sure, it's a bump for the economy, but there are only so many costumes, bags of miniature candy bars and plastic skulls one can buy unless one happens to be Rob Zombie.

Even Loan City on 35th and W. Broadway seems to have gotten into the spirit of Halloween, and I must admit I can't wait to see what they do for Christmas that will liven up our city's entrance way.

You can only do so much for Halloween a full month in advance of the actual holiday, because it is a very time-specific holiday. The spirits don't even start THINKING about getting out of the house until after the 5 o'clock news.

Halloween is definitely one of my top three favorite holidays of the year. The other two are Boxing Day and Ascension Sunday.

Halloween is the last of the great pagan brouhahas that still has any notion of "getting a little worked up" left in it. Not that long ago, Christmas was the biggest night to raise hell. I'm not even kidding about that.

Today, all of our holy days are boring. They are just becoming days when we repress our emotions even more than the rest of year. Thank God we can still have a good family argument at Thanksgiving. "Eating and crying ... you're like a crazy person! What's wrong with you? Have some more gravy and stop that!"

Ah gravy, is there nothing you cannot cure?

Halloween is one of those holidays where we do all sorts of stuff for reasons that completely baffle us if we bother to think about it. The answers are pretty interesting, too, I must say.

First off, Halloween is not really a dark or evil custom. It comes from the Celtic feast of Samhain (pronounced SOW-win or SOW-ween and definitely not SAM-hane), according to Peg Aloi, associate editor of Obsidian Magazine and an expert on pagan customs. Oct. 31 is right between the autumnal equinox and the winter solstice. It is a conceptual, celestial tug o'war. Most of our ancestors really paid attention to astrology because they lived off the land and in compliance with the seasons. Also because indoor plumbing, heated office buildings and TV had not yet been invented.

It was a time to "commune with the dead," a practice that was viewed with particular suspicion by the Church, but was probably no more bizarre than our practice of leaving cookies out for Santa Claus or flowers on graves. In fact, leaving food out for deceased ancestors or inviting them to dinner was just part of the spirit of the holiday.

Because the veil between the worlds was thin, fortune-telling was also big at this time of year. Bobbing for apples is traditionally a way of telling if someone would have good fortune or not. It stands to reason since having a big mouth has always been a pretty good indication of one's BS-ing skills.

And talk about fun ... check out this speed-reasoning:

Squash make for good lanterns. They are plentiful, cheap, last a reasonably long time and taste great baked. Spirits in Irish folklore were often given names such as Jack of the Green, John O'Dreams, Jack in the Pulpit. A flame that flickers on Samhain night is supposedly one that is being touched by a spirit. According to Aloi, "Jack-O-Lantern" or "Jack of the Lantern" is an old Irish folktale about a man who is unable to enter heaven or hell and so is condemned to wander the night with only a candle in a turnip by which to see. So by extension, one might carve a pumpkin and put a candle in it just to see if those ancestors have dropped by or not.

Breathe!

Dressing up like ghosts was seen as a way to lead spirits back out of town once you were done with them, and many cultures have begged for candy and other treats for a variety of reasons. There really isn't any mystery there. Bribing people not to vandalize your house? Same thing, only it used to be much bigger at Christmas time.

This is a fine time of the year, though. Even with all our streetlights and modern, food-storing appliances, it's easy to see how our ancestors could get all riled up and spiritual at this time of year. As the days grow shorter and the nights get longer, the mind - conditioned by eons of instinct - cannot help but offer forth its darkest thoughts.

So, if you've gotten this far, I want you to call or write me with your ghost stories. The good stuff. The real southwest Iowa, swear-to-God-it's-true stories of ghosts and other bizarre happenings of the season. Then, I will write about them. Sound good? You bet it does.

- Greg Jerrett is a Nonpareil staff writer.

Corporate morality and other oxymorons (corporate morality)7.9.02

> Here is my favorite serious George Bush quote so far in what I am sure will ultimately be three or four terms of great quotes once we get that pesky two-term limit abolished.
> Addressing the Association for a Better New York Monday, Dubya said: > "> At this moment, America> '> s greatest economic need is higher ethical standards, enforced by strict laws and upheld by responsible business leaders. In the end, there is no capitalism without conscience, no wealth without character.> ">
> The first sentence is true or at least wishful thinking. The second one should read: > "> In the end there SHOULD BE no capitalism without conscience, no wealth without character because that> '> s the way it was in the beginning ... of American capitalism anyway.> ">
> American capitalism was pretty much the invention of Calvinists who were able to accumulate huge amounts of wealth or > "> capital> "> because they believed in working themselves silly, never having any fun and saving all their money.
> There is a great misconception in the United States as to our economic system. We believe in capitalism as much as we believe in democracy, which is funny since we don> '> t live in pure forms of either one.
> We live in a republic, a representative democracy, but since most of us DON> '> T vote, that is questionable as well. Our economic system is decidedly based on consumerism and credit. Our government is so far in debt that no matter how bad your credit might be, Uncle Sam (were he an actual guy) would not only be getting calls from collection agencies during dinner, he> '> d have his car repossessed, his wages garnished and find himself on > "> America> '> s Most Wanted> "> for writing bad checks. He would also not be wearing a shirt.
> Our economy> '> s lead indicators of prosperity are all based on how much money people spend whether they earned it or not. How many new cars did we buy? How many washing machines? When our economy took its post 9/11 dip, what was the answer? Spend money for the love of God! Of course, that god was Mammon.
> Capitalism is based in self-denial and the accumulation of capital through thrift, hard work and frugality. There is precious little of that in a country that> '> s all about instant gratification. From the fast food we suck down our throats to the fat bodies we suck out of our fat bodies, America is all about instant satisfaction.
> More than that, even if any of us actually wanted to live simply, off the land or without money and consumer goods, we couldn> '> t. There is nothing wild or unowned. We do not have the division of labor that existed in the old days. We would have to do everything ourselves.
> Even if you didn> '> t bother anyone, your existence would bug enough people that they> '> d have to get you somehow. That> '> s what the ATF is for. If you live off the land, the ATF will break into your cabin and shoot you on suspicion of hording weapons. Either that or IRS agents will come to collect the taxes you owe on your nuts and berries because technically they are considered income.
> Now, I like my fast food culture as much as the next junk food/video game addict. I want my stuff. Credit, space-age polymers, new sneakers, a kickin> '> sound system, honeys on both arms, power, influence, love, respect, happiness ... all the things money can buy. It is the natural caveman inclination to take as much as we can get.
> But the world is not the unlimited grab bag it once was. There are 6 billion people living on this spaceship earth. Even 10 percent of Americans live in poverty and poverty is calculated as a family of four living on $17,000 a year.
> The pursuit of wealth has left us spent. It has hit its limits. It always does.
> Corporate greed is the bugaboo of the future. Far scarier than Robber Baron lust because it has no face, only an image and a bottom line. No individual is accountable.
> When a Republican president with an MBA chastises American business, you KNOW the problem is not just serious, it> '> s likely much worse than we suspect. If Enron and Worldcom can get rich off the illusion of wealth, the idea is just too good to pass on.
> Penalties for white collar criminals are a joke because no one can really wrap their head around them. So here is a good way to conceptualize it. If I mug an old lady for her purse, I have committed a crime for which I should be punished. If I come up with an accounting scam that puts thousands of trusting employees on the street, tanks investors and trashes the economy forcing others to commit crimes like mugging an old woman, I get probation.
> If we want to make the business world a moral place then there have to be harsh penalties for criminals of this stripe. No more country club treatment. Stick them in a cell with bank robbers, rapists and murderers. These guys aren> '> t special.
> It> '> s not just the prosperity bubble that burst, it was the morality bubble. The super-rich live in a world where people like us are just cannon fodder. They trade inside information like we trade recipes and talk about sitcoms.
> It should be an established fact that wealth, conscience and character do not necessarily go hand in hand ... in hand.
> What it really comes down to is that in spite of 2,000 years of Christianity, moral philosophizing and ethical debate, Mammon is still the most popular god in Western culture.
> -> Greg Jerrett is a Nonpareil staff writer. His column runs on Wednesdays and Saturdays. He may be contacted at 328-1811, Ext. 279, or by e-mail at gjerrett@nonpareilonline.com.
>
>

Drug addicts complain about ban (smoking ban) 8.27.02

> New York> '> s Mayor Mike Bloomberg has managed to get the price of cigarettes jacked up to $7.50 PER PACK. Can you believe it? Remember when you could get cancer sticks for a buck? From a vending machine? At work? So you could smoke WHILE you worked? I bet you do.
> Nothing said good morning, America like that first smoke as you rolled out of bed, shaved, showered, had another smoke, poured a cup of coffee, smoked a cigarette and then headed off to the bomber plant to do your part for the war effort ... while smoking.
> Time was, any 12-year-old with a notion to could walk into the general store, get a handful of jaw breakers and a carton of Lucky Strikes for a penny. And why not? If you> '> re old enough to work 14 hours a day, by God you should be old enough to smoke, too.
> Soon, Bloomberg will manage to make it illegal to smoke even in New York bars. Can you imagine walking into a transvestite, S&M, biker bar on branding night and not being able to smoke? Me neither.
> Lots of people, well, not people so much as smokers, don> '> t like that one bit. > "> It> '> s a violation of our civil rights,> "> they shout while frantically reaching for another bullet and one of those tacky, red disposable, child-proof lighters they bought at a convenience store for 50 cents that barely works. Flick, flick, flick. Flick ... flick ... FLICK. > "> I have rights, too, you know.> "> Puff ... fuuuuuu.
> I have to agree with the sentiment behind those words. It really isn> '> t a bar if people aren> '> t smoking in it. One can hardly argue that a bar is such a healthy environment that it is wrong to poison other people> '> s lungs while those people are poisoning their livers. Besides, smoking and drinking go together like Martin and Lewis, Lewis & Clark, Lois and Clark and Clark Bars and Vodka which leads us back to smoking and drinking.
> Why should what goes on New York concern those of us who live in the rational epicenter of common sense and libertarianism that is the Midwest? Because what New York does, we> '> ll be doing six months after that. If the largest city in our country pulls off this coup with little or no rankle, then the motivation will be there for every city and state government to drop the hammer on smoking as well.
> Ames already has a ban in restaurants before 8:30 p.m. and Iowa City is working on one, too. More and more people are warming to the idea of simply outlawing cigarettes altogether, a feat that is looking more plausible every day. Smoking is going the way of the dodo and one day in our > "> Star Trek> "> future we will look back in wonder at this primitive behavior.
> Smoking tobacco is not significantly different than smoking crack or shooting heroin. In fact, studies have shown that cigarettes are at least as addictive as cocaine. Don> '> t believe me? Try quitting. People can say they like smoking all they want, but the sad fact is they are just as addicted to that drug as any back alley dope fiend.
> If you had a monkey on your back digging his nails into your neck until you fed him bananas, would that mean you really liked bananas? Of course not. You were just feeding the monkey.
> Remember the first time you inhaled smoke? That is how you really feel about cigarettes.
> When you wake up because you are having a > "> nic fit,> "> those are the same feelings junkies get when they need to spike a vein. The reason smokers so often look like death warmed over is no more complicated than why crackheads, tweekers and dopers look like hell. Poison will do that to you.
> Smokers get upset at smoking bans because they are hooked on a drug. I got hooked at 18 and even though I don> '> t want to smoke today, I like the idea of going into a bar, having a beer and stepping off the wagon.
> When I got the diabetes, my doctor said give up cheese and never smoke again. OK, I said. Now, let> '> s get something straight. I love cheese. For six months, I had no cheese and not one smoke. Then I went to the airport. After a stressful check-in, I hit the bar and found a mark to bum me just one smoke. >
> Nearly a year later, I have not so much as bought a small quantity of cheddar cheese unless it was fat free and taste free, but I still buy smokes from my co-workers on a regular basis.
> One day, the world will look upon tobacco with at least as much disdain as it views marijuana, not because all the non-smokers will make the lives of smokers miserable, but because EX-smokers, high on zealotry, will call for its ban to keep temptation at bay.
> Smoking is not pleasurable, it is not relaxing, it doesn> '> t feel good, smoke doesn> '> t taste refreshing. Smoking is a drug and smokers are drug users. As long as people are comfortable with that notion, so be it.
> With that said, public interference should really be kept to a minimum. Smoking will die on its own the less we do. In-your-face measures will act as life support. Stop Big Tobacco from selling to kids, keep the ads down, but leave the smoking sections alone and quit jacking with the prices. The only thing legislators and city councils will manage to do is make smoking even cooler than it already is. That> '> s half the reason people started anyway.
> > -> Greg Jerrett is a Nonpareil staff writer. His column runs on Wednesdays and Saturdays. He may be contacted at 328-1811, Ext. 279, or by e-mail at gjerrett@nonpareilonline.com.
>
>
>

Dennis Miller ranting no more (Dennis Miller)7.16.02

I found out last week that Dennis Miller, the bon mot-spouting pragmatist of "Dennis Miller Live," formerly of "Saturday Night Live's" Weekend Update fame, is getting the axe from HBO. I gotta tell you, this is a world-class bummer for me.
Every writer can tell you who inspired them to do what they do and I'm not shy about the list of muckraking scribes I call influences, but I have not done enough to put Dennis Miller on that list. Primarily, I think of him as a comedian and while he has books to his credit, most of them are transcripts of his televised rants from "Dennis Miller Live."
When I started writing columns in college, it was with a copy of "Rants" and "Ranting Again" right by my side and if I had to do it all over again, the only thing I would change would be to add "I Rant, Therefore I Am" and "The Rant Zone" to that stack.
I have not subscribed to HBO once in the nine season run of "Dennis Miller Live." Luckily, I have always been able to catch up online, at a friend's house or by catching the audio-only version on scrambled HBO channels. It's just that good.
Miller has a cadence and rhythm that are surpassed only by his arcane references, practical politics and hardcore style of diatribe. He is the perfect American social commentator in my humble opinion. He is caustic, intelligent, vulgar, self-deprecating, honest and only just this side of aging hipster. He changes his position, admits when he screws up and sees life's details with magnificent clarity translating complex issues for a wider audience.
I trust a guy like Miller because when he does a commercial for 10-10-220, shills for HBO, gets canned from "Monday Night Football" or does a movie that tanks, he has no problem pointing the finger squarely at his own chest while calling himself a prostitute, a hack, an egotist all while making better use of four-letter words than the TV Guide crossword puzzle. When he opened last week's show only a few days after being nixed from HBO and a few months after being dropped from "Monday Night Football," Miller said, "How many jobs can a guy %#$@!%& lose in one year?" breaking the tension before going on to rant about corporate and personal responsibility. What style.
My early columns were practically an homage to Dennis Miller and while I will always have that taint, today I thought I would break out an old-school, Miller-esque tirade in honor of the man I hope will always be able to espouse his views in some forum.
Now, I don't want to get off on a rant here, but if any country at any time ever needed outspoken social critics it is the United States at the start of the 21st century. American political discourse today has about as much meat in it as Harrah's Buffet after a visit by the three tenors, Louie Anderson and Gorak the Carnivore of Meatus IX.
Dissension, competition and debate, once the foundations of American democracy have taken more hits than a drunken sorority girl on Ladies Night at the Virginia Military Institute. Our country was founded on certain principles: freedom of religion, the pursuit of happiness, the right to own property, one man one vote and that what the Indians didn't know couldn't hurt us.
But freedom of the press, the right to assemble and the need for dissent have become about as popular as Jerry Falwell at the Moonlight Bunny Ranch.
No one needs to take away Americans rights to say what they want because the sad fact is that we are sheep that like to be shorn. At no time in our history has that been more obvious than after 9/11. Americans lined up to hand over their rights to individual thought so fast even a few reactionary demagogues were shocked and appalled.
After decades of main stream America shutting down and tuning out vocal minorities like the Peace Movement, Civil Rights Movement, Animal Rights, Free Tibet, Free Quebec and people who prefer non-dairy creamer to half and half, discourse and opinion are doing about as well as Keith Richard's liver at the V.I.P. tent at Oktoberfest.
Will Rogers, Woody Guthrie and Mark Twain used to rile people up and Americans liked it. Today, we like our controversy subdued and our scandals in neat, little sound bites so we can easily digest them. Newspaper readership is sinking faster than the Edmund Fitzgerald and even hard news magazines are adopting a more "reader friendly" format which is code for fewer words, bigger print and more pictures of half naked celebrities.
We should learn to love debate again, mis amigos invisibles, because disagreeing with everybody is as American as apple pie in the hands of female body builder with a bald eagle tattoo playing baseball in a red, white and blue bikini singing "Born in the U.S.A." as she slides into home plate. If that's what you think.
Of course, that's just my opinion, I could be wrong. Dennis Miller still rules.
- Greg Jerrett is a Nonpareil staff writer. His column runs on Wednesdays and Saturdays. He may be contacted at 328-1811, Ext. 279, or by e-mail at gjerrett@nonpareilonline.com.

Council Bluffs man loses well (Ras man well) 8.30.02

While you're barbecuing and enjoying the last three-day weekend of the summer that Labor Day is all about the struggles and triumphs of the working men and women of the United States who put their backs into it, build things, move things and keep America on top.
Listen to some Woody Guthrie or at least some Bruce Springsteen, read "The Jungle" or "The Grapes of Wrath," maybe rent "Norma Rae" or "Matewan." Then lift a glass to people who made sure the average American doesn't have live like an indentured servant and maybe lift one for yourself too. I know you will.

*****

And now for you Labor Day weekend entertainment. A story of one working man's search for glory based VERY loosely on read events that occurred last Tuesday night in Omaha
The following news story is a parable. It is also satirical, which means it tells a greater truth than the facts allow for i.e. the thing is made up.
Now that all our legal bases are covered ...
Growing old is a pain, a fact to which the "hero" of this story can testify.
It also teaches other great working class lessons such as "never let your mouth write a check the other end of you can't cash." "Never talk yourself into believing you are tougher than you really are" and "just because they sell it, doesn't mean you have to drink it."
Read on.

OMAHA, Neb. - Kevin "The Rasmanian Devil" Rasmussen, 34, of Council Bluffs was beaten into submission Tuesday night during an exhibition of Omaha Fight Club held at Club Amnesia in Omaha. Amateur fighters and members of the audience "faced off" in submission wrestling, kick boxing and no-holds-barred brawling for the entertainment of patrons. Fights lasted up to three rounds or nine minutes.
Rasmussen's fight lasted for two minutes and three seconds and was the second longest fight of the evening.
Going into the fight, Rasmussen said he had certain reservations about his chances for victory against his opponent, a much younger, leaner man.
"Going in, I knew I was gonna get my butt kicked," said Rasmussen, who thanked God profusely for allowing him to "survive at all" his match with four-time national college wrestling champion Rob "Choir Boy" Van Garcia, 22, of Hogswallow, Vermont.
Olsen registered a complete lack of surprise at his win, but did say his opponent was much "wilier and harder to pin down" than he anticipated.
"He kept running away, but it was still pretty much over before it started," said Olsen as he wiped Rasmussen's blood and tears from his wrestling shoes. "I took one look at this old guy and I reckoned I had him. Then I saw him smoke about a pack and half of Kools while talking to some fat guy and a couple ring girls. It was at that point I was just hoping I wouldn't accidentally kill him. There is nothing more embarrassing than to have an opponent stroke out while you have him in a full nelson. Oh and he made me promise to tell everybody he looked good getting beat, can I say that here?"
Greg Jerrett, 23, of Council Bluffs was Rasmussen's ring manager. Jerrett said he had "no fears at all" going into the match that Rasmussen was going to lose.
"I had no fears at all that Kevin was going to lose," Jerrett said. "I was absolutely certain he would lose, it was just a question of how fast and how bad. I'm just glad the other guy didn't get hurt when he was kicking Kevin in the ribs. He could have easily stubbed. Luckily, Rasmussen is soft. Poor Kevin, I mean, I threw the towel in kinda fast. I almost hit him with it. That terry cloth was kinda rough, no fabric softener or anything. He could have been killed! Oh, but he looked good getting his butt kicked. Is that OK, Kev?"
During the match, Rasmussen was visibly angered by the way in which Jerrett threw in the towel.
"I told Jerrett to throw in the towel at the FIRST sign I was going to lose, not wait to see how many times this wrestler could pick me up and drop me on my head," Rasmussen said with a boldness he lacked IN the ring. Wiping a tear from his good eye, Rasmussen said, "I could have really gotten hurt! Yumpin' yiminy, didn't he see me tapping out? TAP TAP TAP! I almost broke my fingers on the mat!"
Rasmussen then began writing furiously into a folder to make sure his Dungeons and Dragons character "got the experience points for this one."
Jerrett said he would have thrown in the towel sooner had the nachos he ordered for himself and the ring girls not arrived.
"Bad timing on my part, but to be fair to me, I didn't realize he was tapping out, I thought he was convulsing," said Jerrett wiping cheese from his fingers and placing them back on the ring girl. "I guess I was focused on those nachos. They were very good nachos. I can't be expected to pay attention EVERY time Kevin Rasmussen gets beat in a fight. I'm only human. I paid attention the first 30 or 40 times I saw it, but after that, well ... you've seen it, you know what I mean."
Rasmussen swore vengeance loudly before the crowd of nearly two dozen Nebraskans for the embarrassing public beating he received.
"If it is the last thing I do, I will have my revenge for this," Rasmussen said as Life Flight paramedics restrained him for take off. "Do you hear me, Jerrett? I will get you for this!"
Rasmussen is listed in stable condition though doctors say he will be unable to wear hats for some time.
Jerrett is currently hiding at an undisclosed location in the hills of Crescent. He communicates using only smoke signals, courier pigeons and a Nokia 5800 series cell phone so he can reassure Rasmussen almost daily that even though he had his butt kicked, he "looked good any way."
- Greg Jerrett is a Nonpareil staff writer. His column runs on Wednesdays and Saturdays. He may be contacted at 328-1811, Ext. 279, or by e-mail at gjerrett@nonpareilonline.com.

Can you live this fantasy life? (fantasy life) 8.20.02

Ah, romance. Romance is one of those things you never really have to have, like cheese, but it just makes everything it touches so much better ... like cheese.
My buddy, Pete, is one of those great catches, smart, good-looking, independently wealthy. Like most guys, he's about as thoughtless as a tzitzi fly when it comes to the ladies. Luckily for Pete, he's already married and so has no need for romance. Or so he thinks.
I called Pete the other day and got to talking about what he was doing for his ninth wedding anniversary. Nothing, he says, probably stay home. You're kidding me, I says to him I say, you think that is not a one-way trip to distaster?
Operating under the delusion that because his wife SAID she didn't want to do anything for their anniversary, Pete took that to mean that she actually MEANT she didn't want to do anything for their anniversary. Like I said, Pete is an intelligent guy, but he lacks the kind of street smarts to really keep a marriage in fine tune .
Luckily, he has me to make stuff up. I don't need any more women any closer to me than the ones I have now, so it is nice to play Cyrano de Bergerac occasionally. Some guys play fantasy baseball; I can sit back and watch how someone else's love life works under my guidance without all the fuss and extra cleaning associated with human contact.
Romance isn't just what you do to woo a woman. Romance isn't just about love and seduction. The term "romance" actually applies to an entire category of medieval tales based on legend, chivalric love and adventure. King Arthur is a prime example. Romance tales were fantasies dealing with heroism and the mysterious, they lacked a certain basis in fact.
Which is why, years later, the term has been narrowed by common usage to refer almost exclusively to the flowers and candy maneuvering men do to make women feel extra special.
Of course, modern romance is not supposed to just be some underhanded ploy to deceive the ladies, at least not so far as the ladies are concerned, it's supposed to be a genuine outpouring of uncontrollable affection that makes men act in a fashion that is counter to their base nature. "You complete me," "You make me want to be a better man," "Without you I am lost," "You clean my socks like it ain't nobody's business, baby," things like that.
In most tales of medieval fancy, romance was about killing dragons and kicking dude's butts then going off to pick daisies for some chick. They had no TV, radio or magazines so they had to do something to kill time. Occasionally, they killed each other to kill time.
Some dude tried to kick my butt the other day to look cool in front of his "lady." He gave me the time-honored Council Bluffs signal that he wanted to engage in fisticuffs, namely, he took off his shirt to show me his flabby gut and complete lack of hair.
Guys with no body hair just aren't scary, they're like furless Mexican cats, featherless Israeli chickens or N'Sync, an aberration of nature pleasing to young girls who want to keep them as pets, but hardly frightening. I dispatched him readily enough with the flat side of my longsword whilst his girlfriend didst hold my jacket.
I dig romance. I am quite the romantic. Actually, I am quite the disappointed romantic, which means my card is officially stamped "cynic," but life is still a little more interesting with the proper amount of fantasy added to the mix.
Fantasy/romance is why we flirt with people who are WAY too good-looking to condone interfering with us physically in the first place. It's why we get dressed up to go out for a night of fancy living. It's why middle-aged men drive Corvettes and why no woman on the planet wears a shoe larger than 6 or 7 unless it's the store's fault. Half the time, it's what gets us out of bed in the morning knowing that after a day of pretending everyone we work with doesn't hate us, we can spend the night at a watering hole pretending people there do more than barely tolerate us. It's why we nose dive into a book or try to reach level 10 in some electronic reality.
Fantasy is self-medication for the soul. Losing yourself in your own diversions passes the time, but making someone else's fantasies real, well that's just pure altruism. It's also vicarious living - another kind of fantasy.
So I told Pete that if he didn't want to spend the next two months wondering why his wife was mad at him, he better make some kind of effort, preferably in public, to demonstrate that he still goes weak in the knees whenever he thinks about the mother of his children.
I recommended a pizza delivered to the office that said "you rock!" in pepperoni followed 15 minutes later by flowers with a card that said "Just kidding - I love you, baby." Pete opted out of the pie and went for an arrangement so huge they had their own ecosystem and a bottle of cold duck. Six of one, half dozen of the other, I suppose.
- Greg Jerrett is a Nonpareil staff writer. His column runs on Wednesdays and Saturdays. He may be contacted at 328-1811, Ext. 279, or by e-mail at gjerrett@nonpareilonline.com.

Executing retarded people wrong (executing retards) 6.25.02

So last Thursday, six Supreme Court justices out of nine made the call that executing mentally retarded individuals - generally regarded as those with I.Q.s of 70 or lower - might be cruel and unusual (thus violating the Eighth Amendment) and should be put on hold. As a unit, the court tends to believe the death penalty is not in and of itself cruel or unusual. So let's go with that.
O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, Bader Ginsburg, Breyer and Stevens said "we are not persuaded that the execution of mentally retarded criminals will measurably advance the deterrent or the retributive purpose of the death penalty."
Scalia, Thomas and Rehnquist were so outraged at this decision that their rebuttal - called scathing and scoffing - said: "If one is to say as the court does today that ALL executions of the mentally retarded are so morally repugnant as to violate our national standards of decency, surely the consensus it points to must be one that has set its righteous face against ALL such executions."
In short, they are saying the other six are obviously yet secretly opposed to the death penalty and must be soft-on-crime pinkos. Scalia refused to sign the dissent "respectfully dissenting" to let everyone know they meant business.
Scalia mocked what he referred to as the "the 47 percent consensus" pointing out that only 18 states of the 38 allowing capital punishment don't execute the retarded and that is way less than half.
I would suggest it is safe to say the 12 states that don't allow capital punishment at all could legitimately and safely be counted with the 18 bringing the consensus to 30 states against executing the retarded to 20 that allow it and may or may not like being referred to as "IN FAVOR of executing the retarded."
Call me crazy, but I think that not executing retarded people is a good thing and is not the drawback to law and order critics suggest.
"Now everybody that commits murder will claim to be retarded," is the rallying cry. Yeah, because we'll never see through that.
Have we gotten so hung up on payback that we just want to kill anyone and everyone that crosses the line regardless of their capacity to know right from wrong? At some point, it is important to establish that justice can be served short of death rather than seeking the most extreme punishment in as many cases as possible.
Well, I'm with Dubya on this one, executing retarded folks is just plain wrong.
The problem is that "justice" has become synonymous with "retribution" in America. It is time to maybe step back a pace and look at what the whole point of executing people is supposed to be.
Regardless of your stance on capital punishment, whether you believe that no civilized nation should use death as a punishment, whether you think we should kill 'em all and let God figure out whose guilty or whether you think you could think of 20 things worse to do to a murderer than giving him the quick release of death, one thing seems pretty clear: if there is no chance of securing the public from future, similar crimes or of meaningfully punishing an individual in a way they and others like them are capable of understanding, then the punishment is not only unjust it runs the risk of making the public less secure.
Example. In Henry VIII's England, capital crimes were extended to include highway robbery. The logic was this would curb highway robbery by scaring the robbers straight. What it did was jack up the murder rate as highway robbers began killing everyone they robbed to keep witnesses to a minimum.
In the current case, executing a retarded guy who may or may not appreciate his crime does little to teach him an important lesson about what it's like to be an upstanding member of society nor does it send a clear message to other retarded people to behave since the idea of clearly communicating concepts to retarded people is at the heart of the matter. What do they understand? Is it reasonable to expect someone with an I.Q. of 70 or less to always appreciate the consequences of their actions?
Good and evil, that's the heart of the matter. We want to punish evil, keep it in line. Does everyone always know when they are being evil?
I appreciate that evil, if left unchecked, can spread like a virus. I also believe good people can be capable of evil and still be good. Continuing to check ourselves MAKES us good.
Good people who see nothing wrong with executing retarded people might need to do a check, that's all I'm saying. People who stand around with frying pans shouting "burn, baby, burn" at executions have definitely crossed a line somewhere. Either that or their hometowns don't have cable.
Before writing this column, I asked myself "what would Jesus do?" and funny enough Jesus wouldn't pull the switch on a retarded guy either so... safe for one more day I guess.
Granted, the Eighth Amendment is a bit vague. "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." It doesn't say what cruel or unusual is because they either had a general understanding of "cruel and unusual" in December, 1791 when the Bill of Rights was adopted or they wanted to let successive generations decide for themselves.
They didn't have electricity, I.Q. tests or psychiatrists in 1791 so they could not be expected to determine whether sending a charge through a retarded guy was cruel or unusual. Lucky for us, we have all of these things and should be able to either breathe a sigh of relief that something good has been done in a world full of badness or, at the very least, let it slide and respectfully dissent.
- Greg Jerrett is a Nonpareil staff writer. His column runs on Wednesdays and Saturdays. He may be contacted at 328-1811, Ext. 279, or by e-mail at gjerrett@nonpareilonline.com.

Summer re-runs, games shows and hot topics (pledges) 6.27.02

Time to circle the wagons, load your guns and hide the kids 'n' women folk, it's political litmus test time again.
Every summer, when the sun takes longer to set, the days are hot and humid and the reality TV shows are in full bloom, some issue or other rears its head to get everyone all het up.
Wednesday, some guy (Michael Newdow) in the Wild West (Sacremento, Calif.) managed to stir up debate over the Pledge of Allegiance by getting the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to declare the current form of the Pledge unconstitutional - in particular, the part added in 1954 during the height of the Red Scare that says "under God."
Now, I suppose it is expected that all professional purveyors of opinion should be getting themselves worked up about this issue on one side or the other. For me, it's just too hot and what with the humidity turning my biscuits into dumplings, I flatly refuse to get worked up over this issue.
Chances are it is just covering up for some other much more important scandal anyway that is now buried under a morass of media flurry as pundits debate and the man on the street gives his opinion in spite of the fact that the average man on the street has never voted in any election any where at any time more important than senior class president and even then he probably voted "straight party."
I don't think anybody should be casually changing the Pledge of Allegiance from how it was written by a minister in 1892 who did not write it with "under God." That when the 1954 Congress took a statement of pure patriotism and added "under God" during the Red Scare to boost their own images in the eyes of a nation scared of communists.
They messed with the Pledge and pretty much this brouhaha inevitable. Why it took until 2002 is the only thing that really surprises me.
I would actually like to go back in time and undo everything that happened between 1945 and 1954. The United States would be much better off if we could have gone straight from kicking the hell out of the Nazis to Rock 'n' Roll, wouldn't we?
Unfortunately, we had the Red Scare in there to cast long shadows over our nation's integrity. Americans of all stripes were victimized by the ambitions of a few piggish men who ran this country ragged looking for communists, ruining careers and ultimately accomplishing nothing more than the destabilization of civil liberties by making them a privilege of the few instead of the right of all.
You know, I give my allegiance to the United States, but I won't be saying any pledges any time soon with or without the phrase "under God" in them because I am flat offended at the notion that anybody else in this country thinks I need to live up to THEIR standard of patriotism.
Pledges inherently contain the idea that there is someone saying it and someone listening to it, otherwise there would be little point in saying it at all unless one contends that saying a thing over and over again has the effect of ingraining that sentiment deeply into the subconscious.
Writing it is the same thing. You write it, for someone else to read. And who is that someone else?
Tell me, exactly what other human being of United States citizenry do you hold in such high regard that you feel you must prove yourself to them? Who do you willingly turn your fate over to? By a man's actions, that's how you know him, not a few words he can recite. That's not proof. Even the Devil can quote Scripture if he needs to.
My allegiance to the United States is not in question until somebody else tries establishing rules, tests and measures to sum up how patriotic I am in comparison to them.
Take a minute right now and make a list of every person you know whose patriotism you honestly feel is superior to yours. Use whatever criteria you wish to make that determination. Are school teachers on that list? Principles? Employers? Cops? Firemen? Congressmen? Members of various branches of government? Servicemen?
And of those people, how many are sworn to serve the public interest, the same public to which you and I belong? Even the President of the United States serves us so why should we prove ourselves to him?
Simple fact of the matter is the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that "under God" is unconstitutional is just going to give everybody yet another chance to line up and beat their chests once again before the new fall lineup of TV shows starts and they realize they don't say the Pledge, haven't said it for decades and even if they did, it doesn't prove anything and that the Supreme Court will more than likely overturn the lower court ruling for a few kudos.
These things always heat up in the summer when there is nothing but re-runs, game shows and "reality" TV to distract us. Three summers ago, the flag-burning amendment was big news after nearly 10 years of dormancy even though no one saw anyone born in the United States burn a flag in person or on TV. Why? Somebody stirred up some stuff.
The extent to which the American public cares about any political issue is in direct inverse proportion to how many of us want to know what happens on tonight's episode of "Friends." Personally, I always thought Ross and Monica would get together.
- Greg Jerrett is a Nonpareil staff writer. His column runs on Wednesdays and Saturdays. He may be contacted at 328-1811, Ext. 279, or by e-mail at gjerrett@nonpareilonline.com.

staying informed is our patriotic duty (ignorance) 5.31.02

There is a meanness in the air today, I can feel it. It could just be me, but I doubt it. Just as the atmosphere of love and peace around the holidays demands our respect, so too does that ornery spirit some days take on. No time to bury one's head in the sand, but let's face it, sometimes it's nice to stay out of sight until the bad mojo passes. To do otherwise is foolhardy.
Speaking of mean-spirited humors, ever watch these spots on "The Tonight Show" where Jay Leno asks people on the street or college campuses a few obvious questions like "who was Louis Armstrong?" Answers range from "the first man to walk on the moon" to "the king of France."
Jay rolls his eyes and we laugh at how stupid these people are. But last time I checked, Leno wasn't exactly the Noam Chomsky of Late Night talk show hosts - that honor went to Bob Costas years ago.
Leno is still doing Bill Clinton jokes over a year after the fact. George Carlin he is not. Luckily the Robert Blake case came along so he could dust off those O.J. jokes, but I hear he has some good material on Teapot Dome and what a lard butt President Taft is.
Leno is not doing "Nightline" and that's OK when Carrot Top is on to plug his latest failure, but when Dick Cheney shows up for a quick boost to his approval rating, I think we can do better than heart attack jokes, can't we?
Commentary on the American intellect from a man whose show is almost as challenging as the TV Guide crossword puzzle does serve as a great example of the intellectual rift in American culture.
We hate smart people as much as we hate dumb people. We don't trust people who come off too smart. What do they know they we don't? Why do they know things we don't? Who says what they know is better than what we know?
Since Noam Chomsky is already on the table, a CNN interview with Chomsky, a professor of linguistics and prolific social critic, and William Bennett, former drug czar and co-founder of Empower America, this week served as a great demonstration for why this gulf exists. It's nurtured.
These two discussed 9-11 and what it means. Bennett platitudes and perspectives typically rally us all in a patriotic fervor, while Chomsky and his book "9-11" are typically critical of American political policy, something akin to treason these days.
No matter where one stands on the political spectrum or geopolitical affairs, it helps to take note when people like Bennett try to get a man like Chomsky dismissed out-of-hand because he is one of the dirtiest words going: an intellectual.
Anyone watching would get the impression that intellectuals are inherently unpatriotic and while Chomsky does not aspire to patriotism, I would submit there is nothing inherently unpatriotic about being informed, asking questions, pointing the finger squarely at ourselves occasionally and correcting our course.
Tell that to the powers that be.
No, I would assert that knowing what is going on in the world, reading a book on complex subjects occasionally, keeping up with the news - understanding it not just staring at the spectacle of it all - is our patriotic duty.
Our forebears wanted public education because only in a country where the average person is educated can the sweet bud of democracy flourish. You cannot oust someone with your vote if you don't know who he is, what he stands for and what he has done while in office. I mean the boring stuff like how he voted not just how many interns he bedded or killed.
Patriots come in many sizes and forms.
A patriot does not have to be a booster for his country 24-7 nor does a patriot have to support his country's government, foreign policy, wars, laws or popular mind set.
Thomas Jefferson would likely be arrested as a terrorist were he alive today, because he advocated violent revolution on a regular basis just to keep our elected leaders in line. Since he obviously had the gumption to make it happen once, there is no telling what he would get up to today.
Of course, all of this gets spun in the retelling.
Chomsky's whole gig is about words ultimately. He understands language in a way most of us don't and aren't likely to any time soon, but words are at the heart of not just American politics, but politics as far back as politics go.
It serves the ends of the powerful to keep us all ignorant and since most Americans are so put off by smart folks, the chances of the masses ever listening to well-heeled social critics with a point to make is so slim it makes Calista Flockhardt look like Mama Cass.
It is our all-too-common pride of ignorance that is the real danger to America, but here is the first step to getting back on track. Listen to people you wouldn't normally, read people you're told to dismiss and trust no one - right, left or in-between - who tries to convince you it's your patriotic duty to keep the blinders on.
- Greg Jerrett is a Nonpareil staff writer. His column runs on Wednesdays and Saturdays. He may be contacted at 328-1811, Ext. 279, or by e-mail at gjerrett@nonpareilonline.com.

'ironic' doesn't mean 'weird' (advice) 5.24.02

For the graduating class of 2002, a few words of advice:
Don't use the word "ironic" when all you mean is "weird" or "coincidental." It's not ironic that you ran into your friends at the mall.
Only when the literal meaning is the opposite of the intended meaning or when a series of dramatic events results in circumstances that are incongruous with the expected outcome of those events is something "ironic."
And dance. Dance like you haven't got a brain in your head ... unless people are watching, then act like you just tripped.
Never support a Constitutional Amendment to make something illegal that isn't a problem in the first place.
"Facetious" is not the same as "funny." You aren't being facetious when you tell a bad joke at a party, you are being facetious when you tell a bad joke at a funeral.
Enjoy your body, but don't ever let anyone else enjoy it. There is no such thing as "a good touch," especially at a fraternity party
Don't move to a big city to be cool. That doesn't work. Cool people are cool no matter where they live.
Don't wait to be discovered. Instead, make a huge ass of yourself until people either dismiss you as annoying or accept you as bold.
Vanilla Coke. It's Coke and vanilla. Don't get excited.
If you THINK you might like sky-diving, you probably won't. If you KNOW you would like sky-diving, you definitely won't.
Why buy used when new smells so much better.
Fashion is for pop culture victims. Never do anything just because everyone else is doing it.
Don't think too much about being popular. Popular people don't.
A simple box fan makes the voices in your head be quiet ... for a little while any way.
When writing your manifesto, a shack in the woods is as good a place as any. It offers both privacy and mystique.
Never believe that serious issues can only be addressed seriously. Comedy is the greatest weapon we have against tyranny.
Don't hate people because they are different from you. Hate people because they are just like you.
If a train leaves Lincoln heading east at 60 m.p.h. at the same time a car leaves Des Moines heading west at 75 m.p.h. does anyone really care how long it takes them to meet as long so long as they both stop and play the slots?
Margarine is no damn good.
Never put off until tomorrow what can be done today unless you are absolutely sure you can get away with it.
Nobody knows the trouble you've seen if you don't tell them about it every chance you get.
"Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn" is the single greatest science fiction movie ever made right behind "Bladerunner," "2001: A Space Odyssey," "Soylent Green" and "Westworld."
Travel as much as you can. See the world in all its glory because you never know how long it or you will be here.
Cats are not smarter than dogs just because they poop in a box.
The less a person has to say, the louder they are likely to say it. Listen more than you speak. Don't assume loud is right. That's how fascism gets rolling.
You don't need all that sugar. Have a piece of fruit.
And dance. Dance like your tip depends on it.
Spanking ... ain't nothing wrong with that!
"Made in America" means something again with no small thanks to the Japanese. Makes you think.
Nine times out of 10, if you are the same but everyone else is different, you are in the Twilight Zone.
Why run when you can walk? Why read when you can see the movie? Why cook when you can eat out? Why stand when you can sit? Why try when giving up is so easy?
Don't be linear when you can work in circles. The greatest minds in history never did things the easy way.
Tacos are supposed to be soft. That crispy shell thing is an abomination.
Sometimes doing the right thing takes great effort. Sometimes doing the right thing takes no effort at all. Knowing when to act and when not to act is the key.
Everything is better in moderation except for cheese.
Credit cards are the devil's plastic.
Listen to college radio every chance you get.
There is no such thing as a stupid question, just questions asked by stupid people.
You cannot succeed if you do not try, but on the other hand you can't fail either.
No one likes a whiner unless she is an extremely attractive woman, then no one seems to mind that much.
Six of one, half dozen of the other.
Being folksy is a good way to make people trust you. Being rich is a good way to make sure people do what you want whether they trust you or not.
Never say "I love you" unless you really mean it or if someone says it to you first. You can always take it back later.
And dance. Dance like a monkey with its tail on fire.
- Greg Jerrett is a Nonpareil staff writer. His column runs on Wednesdays and Saturdays. He may be contacted at 328-1811, Ext. 279, or by e-mail at gjerrett@nonpareilonline.com.

Peace sells and we better be buying (iraq) 9.3.02

Going to war with Iraq is such a monumentally bad idea that I am suddenly left without the capacity for rational self expression. So I will just grunt and stamp for the length of this column in the hopes that my moral point of view or MPOV will spread via osmosis.
Right now, we are on the "brink" of war. The brink of war is a funny place to sit, because this is the point historians look back and wonder what exactly we were all thinking we were about to do; what was going through our minds before X happened?
No one "wants" war. Even the people who really, really do want war so bad they can taste it like a big juicy burger will tell us they don't want it. They will tell us that war is one of those inevitable eventualities of life to which old men commit - if not condemn - young men. War is something required in the struggle of right vs. wrong, good vs. evil, the light side of the force vs. the dark side of the force. It never ends.
And the truth is that some wars certainly are inevitable. I would even go so far as to say that as bad as war is, it can even be necessary.
But war with Iraq? Is it necessary or would it just feel good? War with Iraq is about as necessary as your typical bar brawl. The only reason to go at it with Iraq is to make us look cool in front of our girlfriends and buddies who had too many Jagermeisters.
People will argue about the necessity of war from now until the moment it gets started and the Desert Storm II: Electric Boogalo T-shirts, hats and bumper stickers go on sale. At that point, the debate will cease, Dubya's ratings will skyrocket, people will talk about the amazing resurgence of patriotism and how great it is that we are all on the same page "at last."
The problem is that Iraq is like one of those bullies you went to high school with. You know the guy, the one nobody liked who smoked weed during gym class. Everybody wanted to beat him up, but he had a lot of older cousins.
No one really likes Iraq including his cousins and while they would like to see him get a beat down they can't let it happen because moms would get mad.
Of course, at this point in history, it doesn't require 20/20 hindsight to know that Iraq is not so much the problem as the guy in charge, Saddam Hussein. The guy is a pathological freak and most Iraqis, like most Americans, would be happier without him. They are also like us in that they get up and go to work every day and just want to not be blown up on the way to the market one day. They would have taken care of this in 1991, too, if we hadn't pulled out leaving Saddam in power.
A regime change is needed in Iraq and Saddam Hussein and a few cronies are about the only people who disagree with that statement. He destabilizes the Middle East more than it already is and even the Saudis would like see him gone, but they can't just give us the thumbs up, because they have an image to maintain. It's like taking taking sides against your family.
Right now, we're the toughest kid on the block that everybody seems annoyed with. Even the guys we hang out with like England are telling us to "chill out 'cause the guy ain't worth it." But we really want to beat somebody up and we really want to make him swing first (casus belli-an event that justifies war).
In this case, the casus belli is that Iraq might be in possession of weapons of mass destruction or harboring al-Qaida. Whatever gets the job done. We aren't sure, but we do know they keep looking at us funny, i.e. they want really badly to be in possession of said weapons so no one will mess with them.
Different experts say different things. One expert says Iraq doesn't have jack for weapons while others says they could have a working nuke by 2005. Either way, most everyone agrees Saddam Hussein is a loose cannon. Not so much like "Die Hard," but more like Charles Manson, the Son of Sam or Napoleon.
This would all be much easier if we knew we had the support of anti-Hussein forces in Iraq, but unfortunately they haven't known what to make of us since 1991 when we pulled out and left them on their own - a curious move to say the least. This would all be a tad less difficult with the support of Arab countries in the region. This would almost be a no-brainer if a few of our allies were down with us, but they aren't.
What we do have is a slim possibility for a peaceful solution, but even that might just end up being a "prelude" to war. Vigorous weapons inspection backed by military force. No firing, just huge threats. We go in no holds barred, no shenanigans, no spontaneous civilian protests ... nothing. No rock left unturned, no door left locked, no falafel left untested for small pox and THEN maybe we can avoid a 10-year commitment and possible worldwide immolation. Perhaps with Saddam totally controlled, meaningful change in Iraq will be possible without war.
It is quite an investment, but then peace, usually is.
- Greg Jerrett is a Nonpareil staff writer. His column runs on Wednesdays and Saturdays. He may be contacted at 328-1811, Ext. 279, or by e-mail at gjerrett@nonpareilonline.com.

Politics nothing but G-thang (gang politics) 8.16.02

Since the dawn of history, mankind has run in gangs of one kind or another. Any excuse to draw distinctions between us and them. Tribes, clans, nations and within, nations, political parties. It's part of our human need to identify ourselves with a greater entity for protection.
Parties are a big part of the problem with our current system of government. Instead of spending time debating issues on their merit, finding practical solutions for modern living and getting something, anything done, we waste what little political effort we are willing to make on defending our parties of choice.
Right now we have a two-party system that takes money from the same corporate sponsors in an effort to keep things as homogeneous as possible. Straying too far from the pack is a death sentence.
These parties don't matter. The Republican Party hasn't done anything truly great since Lincoln freed the slaves and the Democratic Party should have folded up shop the second Bobby Kennedy was shot. Two-party mud-slinging is all we really have.
We might just as well go back to the Whig and Bull Moose parties, at least their names put things in perspective. Who could get seriously worked up about being a member of these parties? "Whigs rule!" "I'm a proud Bull Moose." Of course, you are.
Lord knows Hitler would never have gotten as far as he did if the National Socialist German Worker's Party had been called Dolfie und die Apfelstrudel Miststücken. It's all about image, substance got lost in the shuffle so long ago even its mother has moved on.
The purpose of any political parties, first and foremost, is to consolidate power. Sure, most of them start out with the best intentions, namely, to shift power from someone else who is hording it. Political movements start out seeking change and turn into political parties that want to maintain the status quo. The parties have sought power for so long they forgot what they wanted the power for in the first place.
Under the best of circumstances, a party needs a simple majority to take charge. A mandate from the people, control of the executive and legislative branches is needed to make any real progress, but when that happens, the party in charge is so worried about maintaining their control they soft pedal themselves out of office because the people generally believe it isn't good to have one party with too much power. So what is the point to parties? No one has even gotten it all and proved that yes, indeed, they were right all along. They won't it isn't possible.
Right now, the two major American political parties have things evenly divided between them. We can argue and quibble over who has a slight lead at any given time and believe me, we DO and WILL argue about who squeaks by with a few heads as if a few thousand one way or the other in a country of over 200 million people matters much.
Debating about whose gang is bigger and badder is ultimately pointless because in 25, 50 or 100 years there could be two other parties vying for the same mandate from the same people who don't see that our system doesn't care about who is right and who is wrong so much as who can get what from whom and how fast.
What are we, Bloods and Crips? Basically ... yes. Reds vs. blues. Republicans vs. Democrats. You could meet people all the time who agree with you on a vast majority of issues who just have to know what political party you belong to so they can know whether or not it's OK to agree with you or dismiss you out of hand.
Does it really matter if your produce manager is a liberal or conservative? A Republican or Democrat? He could be SLA, Quebec Liberte´ or a boy from Brazil so long as he keeps the cabbage stocked, what do we care?
City politics are the same thing. Who cares what party a city mayor votes in national elections? That has nothing to do with maintaining the streets, sewers and tourist industry.
I myself can say 1+1=2 time and time again and it doesn't matter how sound the logic is, somebody still wants to know how I'm registered before they buy into my line of reasoning ... such as it is. Why does that matter? Is it OK for me to say spanking is OK as long as I'm a Republican? Is it suddenly wrong if I'm a Democrat who says the same thing?
I am fiercely independent and will remain so. I vote the issues and the candidate, never straight party. I encourage you to do the same. We don't need term limits because voting is all the limitation we should need. If a professional politician is good, he should stay in office for as long as we keep pulling the lever by his name. If he stinks, we should vote him out.
If you want political change, drop out of the two-party rut, because honestly, when was the last time you were even invited to the party?
Thank you, thank you very much. Elvis has left the building.
- Greg Jerrett is a Nonpareil staff writer. His column runs on Wednesdays and Saturdays. He may be contacted at 328-1811, Ext. 279, or by e-mail at gjerrett@nonpareilonline.com.

i waste, therefore i am (i waste...redux) 8.15.02

I was watching a documentary about the Iceman, a guy who fell asleep on a snow-covered mountain in Europe some 5,200 years ago only to be thawed out in the 20th Century. To answer your question, no, he wasn't still alive. He did have a few lessons for us though. Scientists picked him apart from top to bottom... literally. This man's colon told a story like "War and Peace."
As far as documentaries go, it was pretty sweet. It had dramatic reenactments of life in 3200 B.C. and believe me, life back then was not pretty and slick like it is today.
Iceman was something of a stud and he told these scientists a great deal For example, he had a copper axe 1,000 years before it was thought possible to have copper. That's like finding a TV in the Dark Ages or strong leadership in the Democratic Party. Amazing!
Iceman was decked out in his finest goin'-to-the-sacred-tree clothes. Before this, no one had a clue what Neolithic men wore. Apparently they wore animal skins and not polyester, but hey, the man had a copper axe so anything is possible.
The Iceman - let's call him Brian - was 45. That is old for a Neolithic man. Three times before he died, Brian's fingernails stopped growing. This is significant because one's fingernails only stop growing when one is suffering a severe illness. THIS is significant because it means Brian was sick enough to die three times and DIDN'T. THAT is significant because Brian either had access to medicinal herbs or the European healthcare system is just that good. My money is on echinacea. That stuff works!
Wear on Brian's teeth showed he ate a rough bread product. Fascinating.
The commercials were almost as educational as the documentary itself. One was for Chili and Scoops - corn chip scoops with a tiny bowl of chili in a plastic container inside a brightly painted cardboard box. Microwave the chili, eat it with the scoops - it's fun! I bet the Brian would be miffed he missed this one.
Why would anyone pay for a single serving of chili and a handful of corn chips? Our Neolithic ancestors killed bears for dinner and we can't get it together enough to buy our own can of chili and bag of chips?
Then there was one for Kraft cheese cubes. Just cubes of cheddar cheese in a bag. As if cheese weren't expensive enough, I am going to pay someone else to cube it?
Recipe for cubed cheese: 1) Buy cheese. 2) Cube it! If you can't do that, you should avoid cheese anyway.
If you have money to spend on pre-cubed cheese and never give to charity, you might want to rethink this in case Jesus is watching.
And Lunchables, aren't these pretty much crackers and cheese in a box? When I was a kid, if you sent your kid to school with nothing but crackers and cheese, the teacher called social services.
Are they still selling the single-serving cereal bowls in the refrigerated section with the milk? They sell these things so kids can help themselves, but if a kid can't open a box of cereal how can one crack three layers of cardboard and safety seals to get at a couple ounces of Frosted Flakes?
If your kids aren't old enough to figure out a box of cereal, they shouldn't be in the kitchen by themselves. Besides, what kid can't polish off three bowls of sugar-coated anything while watching cartoons?
Maybe it started with canned soup, sliced bread and TV dinners. Was that the beginning of the end of self-reliance in America? Or maybe it goes back to the beginning of agrarian society itself.
We accept a lot of waste in America: Cans, plastic, aluminum, Robert Downey Jr. episodes of "Ally McBeal," but even so, these products go beyond the pale. Small units increase your cost per unit so where is the up side?
I've got to think there is psychological damage as well. Consuming these prepackaged food items is a weird placebo telling us falsely we are better than lesser men. I waste, therefore I am.
I am not completely above all this, no one is. Maybe my objection is a working-class thing. When I was a kid, my mom would rather have cut her hands off than buy tiny bags of chips.
"Why would I want to spend good money on little bags of chips when we got a whole bag in the cupboard?"
I couldn't believe she didn't get it. Didn't she know chips taste better when they come in designer bags for others to see you have enough money to spend on shiny things?
Maybe cheese tastes better when somebody else cubes it, too. Who knows? Not me, because I would never buy pre-cubed cheese.
At the end of the Brian's documentary, the narrator put all of the information into perspective for us.
"What would the Iceman (Brian) think about all this scientific investigation? He wouldn't know what to make of it."
Oh, that poor, primitive Iceman. What would he think if he knew his story were paid for by people who sell pre-cubed cheese to his descendants?
What would he think of descendants who couldn't kill their own bears let alone cube their own cheese?
The Iceman would probably be glad he lived 5,200 years ago, free and capable.
We gaze in wonder at how far we have come in 5,000 years. I have to wonder at how far we have fallen.
If I needed to survive in the wilderness for a few days, I'd up and die from shock. I couldn't start a fire with sticks. I know there is more to it than that.
Rest in peace, Iceman, you were as good as any of us.
Homework assignment: Read "Fight Club" by Chuck Palahniuk while eating a block of cheese you cubed YOURSELF (vegetarians) or an animal you killed yourself (carnivores).
- Greg Jerrett is a Nonpareil staff writer. His column runs on Wednesdays and Saturdays. He may be contacted at 328-1811, Ext. 279, or by e-mail at gjerrett@nonpareilonline.com.

Crisp, refreshing Greg goes down easy (advertising) 8.13.02

There is a homework assignment at the end of today's column. Don't worry, it involves watching TV not doing calculus.
A British marketing firm working for video game manufacturer Acclaim UK is looking for people who will legally change their identities to that of one of their most popular characters, Turok, a time-travelling American Indian who hunts bionically-enhanced dinosaurs. I know what you're thinking: where is a pre-contact Indian supposed to get a time machine and why would he kill dinosaurs bionic or otherwise?
The process is called identity marketing and is just the latest abomination to come out of the minds and wallets of marketing folk who act more and more like characters from Revelations every day.
How it works is you go online and apply. You have to be willing to not just change your name legally to "Turok" for one year, you have to be willing to live your life as a walking talking advertisement for the game. Dress like Turok, talk like Turok. Kill bionic dinosaurs should they show up at your place of work.
Oh, you can keep your job at McDonald's. Mickey Ds would probably be obligated to keep you on the payroll too. As an equal opportunity employer, it would be illegal for them to fire an employee just because he is a time-traveling Indian who kills bionic dinosaurs. That's in the Constitution presumably.
You will need to keep your day job as well because in exchange for abandon your true identity for a year, you will make a whopping $800, according to the Associated Press. Well, NEARLY $800. Apparently making an enormous jackass out of yourself for an entire year is only worth about $785 ... before taxes.
Why such a silly ploy to promote a video game? Apparently, the average consumer (which is what corporate executives call human beings) are "too dulled to conventional advertising." To put it succinctly, our attention spans have become so short (due in no small part to advertising) that we don't pay enough attention to conventional advertising that interrupts our TV shows, falls out of our magazines, kicks up the wait time before our movies to 20 minutes, changes the names of stadiums and litters walkways, roadways and schools to sell us things we don't need and can't afford. Or worse, just to create "an image" for some product.
Newer and "better" ways of advertising have to be developed to get people to look at ads, ESPECIALLY when they don't want to.
For example, product placements began hardcore when Reese's Pieces played a large role the alien's favorite snack in "E.T." Now it's sad and commonplace, but luckily it only happens in movies that are total crap like everything made by an SNL Alum or its producer Lorne Michaels.
Recently Michaels put a Sobe soft drink ad right in the middle of an SNL sketch of a fake talk show. It was supposed to be funny.
A couple in Kansas named their son Iuma after the Internet Underground Music Archive. They were paid $5,000 for this bit of abuse.
Superbowl winners shouting "I'm going to Disneyland!" during interviews for cash is demeaning to them, their sport and our intelligence. Come on, does anyone really believe a professional quarterback is going to take a pass on all the champagne, drugs and women that come with victory to hop on Mr. Toad's Wild Ride?
Garbage is a GREAT way to advertise. Fast food wrappers are emblazoned with logos not for the five minutes we see them AFTER we buy fries, but because much of that garbage gets tossed out of car windows and sits on the ground for days.
Schemes like these are viewed even by advertising executives as a way to "get their message heard" over the white noise of TV commercials, magazine inserts, junk mail, billboards, signs on busses, bus stops, cabs, buildings, over urinals, on web sites and in your face 24/7.
Let's face it, it works. It's working right now.
By talking about how brutally stupid anyone would have to be to change their identity to that of a video game character, I help Acclaim sell their worthless game. For every 20 or 30 people who tsk along with me there will be one or two people who think to themselves, "A game about a time-traveling Indian? Who kills Dinosaurs?! BIONIC DINOSAURS!?! Sign me up for that!" Fait accompli. The deed is done.
The only way to win is to move to a cabin in the woods for 30 or 40 years and even then you will catch yourself singing the words to the only song you know: "Fee-lin' 7UP, I'm feelin' 7UP. It's the crisp refreshing feeling, crystal clear and light. America's turning 7UP and it sure fe-els right. Feelin' like a 7, feelin' 7UP."
That's from memory, folks. A commercial that has not been on the air since the early '80s.
Homework assignment: Go out and rent the original "Rollerball" this weekend, the one starring James Caan, not the hideous remake that came out six months ago. Watch it, learn from it and discuss.
- Greg Jerrett is a Nonpareil staff writer. His column runs on Wednesdays and Saturdays. He may be contacted at 328-1811, Ext. 279, or by e-mail at gjerrett@nonpareilonline.com.

Solving Iowa's problems the old fashioned way (legalized prostitution) 8.8.02

[Stay tuned 'till the end of this week's column for an EXCITING READER'S POLL.]

Lately, my friends and I have been overcome with a most unusual sense of nostalgia. It is unusual because we are all between 33 and 35 and have not felt the need to look backwards until now. It's all "weren't the '80s great!" and "If I knew then what I know now, well..."
When one works long hours and feels his mortality in aching muscles and joints while explaining why things are the way they are to one's kids, one starts to get all funky and emotional. It's nature's way. One day, while wondering what happened to that Loverboy headband you wore to school four months straight in the ninth grade, you get hit by a bus to make way for the next generation.
For my part, I have enjoyed looking at old pictures of Council Bluffs throughout the ages (and if anyone has pictures they would like to share, they can e-mail them to me at the Nonpareil).
Looking at the same streets I've roamed in stark black and white makes me feel connected to something greater. Reading of the exploits of Council Bluffs residents makes me feel as though anything is possible.
Which brings me to this weeks big question: Why is prostitution illegal and why can't Iowa figure out a way to profit from it?
Ben and Mary Marks, formerly of Council Bluffs, made their money in the entertainment business around the turn of the century. Ben ran several successful gambling establishments while Mary ran a whorehouse on Vine Street. It seems to me if we can have three major casinos in Council Bluffs to fill the various coffers that they fill, then we, as intelligent, morally flexible individuals should have no problem figuring out a way to not only make prostitution legal, but to score huge greasy wads of dough of it as well.
Fact: Council Bluffs has twice the national crime rate. Fact: Council Bluffs lacks night life. Fact: One affects the other.
We need to get the crime rate down. We need a nightlife. Now we can accomplish both.
Take something that is illegal, make it NOT illegal any more and watch our crime rate plummet. No extra cops, just pure mental gymnastics. Clean up illegal prostitution by making it legal.
What's that? Prostitution is immoral, you say? Well, last time I checked, so was gambling until we realized how much money we could make from it. Let's not get bogged down now. Technically, gambling is still illegal. I can't run a casino out of my house, can I? We can do the same thing with prostitution. We keep the skanky, nasty truck stop variety and independent pros illegal then we rent out some space in the Omni Center and set up the sweetest, little state-sponsored cathouse this side of the Missouri! YEEE-HAAAW! The parking is awesome!
This doesn't have to just be a Council Bluffs thing. You could take any empty storefront in any small town around southwest Iowa and convert it for the purposes of legalized, sanitary, stress-relieving prostitution. Walnut would be perfect, but I suspect quite a few cities 'round these parts could do it.
Isn't prostitution bad for women? No little girl says "I want to be a prostitute when I grow up." Isn't hooking a shameful occupation? Forced prostitution IS wrong. Pimping is wrong. No diggity. But lots of people have jobs they hate or find shameful. I know, I used to do telemarketing.
You know something else you never hear a little girl say? "I want to clean toilets when I grow up," "I want to be financially dependent on a man," "I want to make french fries all day" or "I want to have my 401(K) mismanaged by a Fortune 500 company," but it happens.
Besides, men can be prostitutes as well. In my vision of financial security for the great state of Iowa, men and women will all have an equal opportunity to make whores of themselves for cash in a clean, safe, medically-regulated environment. They will put books in our schools, open free clinics, fund sexual addiction counseling to handle the sudden, but acceptable, increase in that affliction.
People will come for miles around to make us rich. Forget libraries, entryways and small civic improvements, this plan is bigger than all that. Iowa will be able to afford world-class medical centers, the biggest mall in the universe, underground asteroid shelters, our own space program, gold-plated hubcaps and furry hats for every city council member, city manager and big pimpin' mayor in the state.
It's the 2K2, Iowa, let's look to the past to solve the problems of today and - I'd guess - tomorrow. Leave your hangups in Nebraska and let's get this fiscal party started, right?
On a related note, I am conducting my own reader's survey. Send me the name of your favorite southwest Iowa "go-go club" by Aug. 16 at 9 a.m. The password is "Fidelio." You must be at least, oh, 16, let's say to vote, but no older than 116. Contestants must speak English, Spanish, French, German, Latin or Sanskrit. Call/e-mail Greg Jerrett at the number/address below. Don't cheat. It's no fun if you cheat. All results are final. Results will be announced Saturday, Aug. 17 in this column unless I call in sick after my birthday. Contest is open to all Nonpareil readers, employees, their family members and clergy.
Next week's contest: The worst thing you ever did to another human being. Password is "Who are you to judge me?"
- Greg Jerrett is a Nonpareil staff writer. His column runs on Wednesdays and Saturdays. He may be contacted at 328-1811, Ext. 279, or by e-mail at gjerrett@nonpareilonline.com.