Battery Park Protest Failure

 

On August 25th of this year, a group of protesters entered Battery Park in Burlington and set up a tent camp. They announced a set of demands, with the primary demand being the firing of three Burlington police officers who had been accused of having used excessive force during the performance of their duties. The group stated that they would continue to occupy the park until their demands were met.

On Wednesday, September 30th without fanfare, the protesters abandoned their camp, leaving over a dozen tents, dozens of homemade signs, and piles of trash. One of the three officers that they demanded be fired had accepted a buyout deal from the city of Burlington,  while the other two officers remained on duty. While I am sympathetic to at least some of the demands from the protesters, it would be hard to describe the protest, considering the original demands, to be a success.

While good intentions are commendable, one needs a lot more than that to be successful in an endeavor like this. Where did things go wrong?

Unrealistic Demands

You can't just fire a police officer. Having been in a leadership position in a union environment (the State of Vermont) I can tell you from experience that the employees have protections under the contract to protect them from arbitrary actions by management (which is a good thing). Due process and discipline are clearly defined and must be followed. The three police officers had gone through the due process defined by the contract, so the matter was closed. Interestingly, a member of the Police Commission resigned, reportedly because he advocated having the city fire the officers anyway, and deal with the consequences. The consequences, once arbitration concluded, would probably have included reinstatement to their jobs, back pay, and punitive damages. I am glad that the city officials did not take him seriously and that he has faded from the spotlight. I have forgotten his name already

The protesters, by making a demand (fire the officers) that the city was not going to accept, combined with a pledge to remain in the park until it happened, set the stage for failure.

A Short-Term Camp and a  Long-Term Commitment

In the beginning, the protesters enjoyed a lot of support. Food was donated, one of the owners of a nearby house allowed them to fill plastic jugs with water for drinking, and there was a lot of positive response with honking of horns when people drove by and saw protesters along the street with their signs.

Over time, though, the Law of Diminishing returns kicked in. People often lose interest in donating to something that does not appear to be reaching a successful conclusion. This protest did not appear to have substantial financial backing to permit ongoing purchase of needed supplies. Also, more protesters may join the camp, while others grow tired of the ongoing status quo and decide to leave. Toward the end, it looked like the exodus had begun well before the last day.

While food and shelter are important, hygiene and sanitation are also necessary for a living situation that needs to be able to continue for a prolonged period. Protesters who plan to live in a tent probably do not bring a large suitcase with a lot of clothing; they are more likely to be traveling light with a few outfits. While there is a laundromat a few blocks away on Pearl street, I am not sure how many protesters chose to utilize it.

For bathrooms, the protesters had Port-a-Potties. While these may be OK for one-time or occasional use, I can't say I would recommend them as the only option for weeks.

As for bathing, there are no facilities in Battery Park. If there was any provision for bathing, it wasn't evident, and the fact that they were filling plastic jugs with water from a  nearby home would indicate that there would have to be a lot of this happening to support regular bathing for dozens of people. How likely is that? 

No "Mission Accomplished"

The way this protest was going, there was a potential for it to look like a modern version of Washington's encampment at Valley Forge. I can totally understand people giving up, but why the messy exit? Why abandon perfectly good tents?

The answer, from my perspective, is that perhaps the tents were not "perfectly good". Picture yourself as a protester. You brought along a couple of changes of clothing. You have been there for over a month, living in close proximity to many others, wearing the same clothes repeatedly, not bathing very well (if at all), and the weather, which was pretty warm at the beginning, is starting to cool off. 

Because of the living conditions, did the protesters begin to experience some public health issues? Bedbugs? Scabies? Why else would you simply leave multiple tents in the park? I do not know for sure, but one certainly wonders.

Fortunately, this protest was non-violent and, with a few exceptions, civil. City officials chose wisely to not confront the protesters for camping illegally in the park and to wait them out. 

If nothing else, the protest serves as an example of good intentions without being well thought out. One of the adult learning principles is "How It's Not Done", and this definitely falls in that category.

And no, I do not want a used tent.

Free Trump Lie Detector

I think it is safe to say that, if lying were an Olympic event, Donald Trump would take the gold medal without much effort. Since taking office, members of the press have identified in excess of 13,000 lies, and the number, like the national deficit, grows daily.

There is a machine called a Lie Detector, but it is neither valid nor reliable. Fortunately, with Trump, you don't need it. All you need are his own words.

Over time, if you have not already noticed, there are certain words or phrases that, when he uses them, the next thing to come out of his mouth adds to the 13,000+ total of whoppers.

Examples include:

- "probably"

- "maybe"

- "I heard..."

- "people say..."

- "I believe" (or "I don't believe")

- "believe me"

Other less subtle examples include:

- "the Democrats..."

- "Obama..."

- "I didn't know him very well"

Unfortunately for him, this, along with being impeached, will most likely be his most memorable legacy as President. 

In the years to come, people may watch video of Trump at one of his rallies and ask themselves, "Is he lying?"

Probably.

Change My Mind. Really?

Being retired and having WAY too much time on my hands, I tend to spend a fair amount of time on the Internet. One of the things I have noticed is photos of individuals standing or sitting with a sign which makes a potentially controversial or inflammatory statement followed by "Change My Mind". While these people are apparently looking for an arguement, I am afraid they do not get the desired reaction from me. 

While I can be very opinionated and judgemental, I don't feel any obligation to inflect myself upon you to try to convince you that I am right and that you should hold the same opinion. If people want to agree with me, that's fine. If they don't, I am not going to be offended.

Because I don't feel like adding to all of the conflict that is already everywhere around me, I don't go bonkers when I see someone with their "Change My Mind" sign. My usual reaction (which I tend to keep to myself), is: "Who cares what you think?" 

The signs are intended to spark conflict and elicit a reaction. It's my belief that these individuals are deeply entrenched in their positions, and no one is going to convince them otherwise. If you happen to feel an obligation to engage these individuals to save them from themselves, feel free. As for me, I will most likely keep my inside thoughts inside.  

Donnie Douchebag

Sometimes, my mind wanders to strange subjects. Today, I was thinking of nicknames. Many people throughout history have had famous nicknames:
- Al "Scarface" Capone
- Richard the Lionhearted
- George "Babe" Ruth
- George "Blood and Guts" Patton
You can probably think of dozens more, belonging to famous people or friends and acquaintances of your. Nicknames are often given because of physical attributes (during WW II, author William Manchester was known as "Tripod" by his fellow Marines; you can probably guess why). Others may earn their nicknames because of their personalities.
Our current president is fond of giving unflattering nicknames to people who piss him off:
-Joe "Sleepy Joe" Biden
- Jeb "Low Energy" Bush
- Elizabeth "Pocahontas" Warren
- Ted "Lyin' Ted" Cruz
and the list goes on and on.
In my musings, I was wondering about a nickname for our President. This week, "Mr. Sharpie" would be fitting, but it would become obsolete as memories fade or move on to whatever stupid thing he says or does the next week.
If you wanted to give him a nickname related to his appearance, something about being orange would be fitting but, in my mind, not good enough.
This leaves his personality, which creates almost endless possibilities. I am somewhat at a loss to list his positive qualities, although I am sure many people can identify something about him that they view as positive. For those who can, you may be a better person than I am, and that's OK.
From my observations, this is what I see:
- lying is like breathing (12,000+ lies since taking office and counting)
- being ethical is a waste of time; it doesn't make money
- he is never wrong (according to him)
- cheating on your spouse (all of them) is normal behavior
- he thinks he is the best at everything (finance, trade, international relations, estimating crowd sizes,
 meteorology, etc.) (I would point out that being modest is not a strength of his.)
The President likes to brag that he has been on the cover of Time magazine more than anyone else. Even among Presidents, he's not even close. Here are some comparisons:
Nixon: 43
Reagan: 39
Clinton: 35
Obama: 23
Trump: 14 (this includes both before and during office)
I came across the above picture of a Time Magazine cover. I am sure it's a fake (Trump was famous for displaying  fakes of Time Magazine covers featuring him at his various properties). Even though I am sure the cover is satire, I think it provides the perfect nickname; one which will stand the test of time.
This week, he may be "Mr. Sharpie", but, to paraphrase Winston Churchill, if the United States would last for a thousand years, he will always be "Donnie Douchebag".

Lincoln for President in 2020?

Other than giving you Bernie Sanders running President, Vermont has not contributed much to politics lately. Much of the time, I have difficulty taking politics seriously, so I found it refreshing that the citizens of Fair Haven chose to elect a Nubian Goat named Lincoln to be their mayor (they have a Town Manager, so the mayor is a ceremonial position). 

Lincoln has great potential as a politician (maybe even President) more for what he doesn't do than what he does do. Unlike the current occupant of the White House, Lincoln is unlikely to bully or demean anyone, is unlikely to lie or to encourage others to be racist or otherwise intolerant. He also won't be considering or granting any pardons to undeserving evil-doers. His attitude toward women? No doubt respectful, especially if they feed him. Building walls? He'd rather not have any.

Would Lincoln be a great President? Perhaps not, but it's too early to tell. Let's see how he does as mayo firstr. If he does OK, he could move up to  maybe Senator (we are basically down to one Senator since Bernie is largely absent campaigning). Eventually, things could fall into place with a run for the White House. We've had two Presidents named Adams, and two named Bush. Why not two named Lincoln?

So far, Lincoln is off to a good start. His first official act after being sworn in as mayor? He pooped.

Giving money and power to govenment is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys

The title of this piece is a quote from political humorist PJ O'Rourke. It pretty much reflects my view toward the Federal government (see my earlier blog entry "Monkeys with Guns") and some State legislatures (like New York and Pennsylvania) who are known for significant levels of corruption.

While there are many smart, ethical, and reliable people who work in State and Federal government (I know many personally) there are others in positions we should be able to trust who can't be relied upon to act in the best interests of the taxpayers.

Examples from past and present administrations are legion: The Bay of Pigs, Watergate, the Iran/Contra Affair, Invasions of Panama, Grenada, Iraq, and Afghanistan, support of corrupt foreign governments (such as Marcos in the Philippines and the current Saudi regime) and many others you can probably name quite easily. 

On a national level, you can look in the news every day to find examples of things you find objectionable: police shooting unarmed people, inept disaster response (Hurricane Katrina and Puerto Rico stand out),  the Border Patrol stopping cars 100 miles from the border to challenge individuals' citizenship, and a plethora of other examples.

Congress serves as an outstanding example of waste and inefficiency. They "work" less than half the days in the year, and would be hard-pressed to identify many real accomplishments. They hold hearings and press conferences, but much of their time and energy is spent bashing members of the opposite political party. On top of that, they have granted themselves perks to create a separate class, such as free unlimited air travel (the bills go to the Department of the Treasury, who pays them without questions), they have a free platinum-level health plan, laws are passed that they are exempt from following (such as insider trading), and they have a pension that any other American citizen would love to have (and which will never be underfunded).

The current administration continues the trend of waste. "Drain the Swamp" has come to mean frequent golf trips, inept and unqualified political appointees, ignoring Federal regulations on such things as air travel and purchasing, telling our allies that they are a threat to our national security, complimenting (and envying) dictators, starting trade wars that are resulting in layoffs and business closing, and a host of other unflattering acts. While I respect the office of the President, I find it challenging to extend that respect to the current occupant, who seems incapable of telling the truth or accepting any responsibility for anything negative he or his minions have said or done.

I guess I can comfort myself in knowing that, based upon how little Congress is in session and that a term for President is only four years, things could be a lot worse. I guess the best we can hope for is to keep the whiskey and car keys are out of reach as much as we can.

Russian Spies in Acadia

The Schoodic Peninsula lies across Frenchman Bay from Mount Desert Island. Both contain parts of Acadia National Park. Up until 2002, the Schoodic Peninsula was also the location for the Schoodic Point Naval Base. Established in the 1920's as a radio station, the base evolved into a sophisticated communication facility that sent and received messages with submerged nuclear submarines. In its' final iteration, it was part of a network who used high frequency direction finding (HFDF) to target "enemy" ships for cruise missile attacks.
So what about Russian spies? During the mid 1990's, I managed an Adolescent Psychiatric Unit at Lehigh Valley Hospital in Allentown, Pennsylvania. Sharon was one of the nurses who worked with me, and her husband, Joe, was an FBI agent.
I met Joe at a party. When he found out that I had lived on Mount Desert Island, he told me of one of his experiences following Russian spies up there. The story starts in New York. Back then, Joe's job was to conduct surveillance on Russian intelligence agents who were part of the Russian diplomatic presence in New York. Joe and his partner were following two Russians, who headed north and ended up in Bar Harbor. It was pretty obvious they intended to gather whatever intelligence they could on the Schoodic Point Naval Base, and staying in Bar Harbor allowed them to blend in with the tourists and not attract a lot of attention.
The Russians checked into a hotel. Joe and his partner were nearby and deployed listening devices so they could eavesdrop on the Russians. The Russians only spoke English, even in private.
Joe described how they had the television on and were watching a Western. Spy #1 reportedly said, "That's John Wayne; I really like his movies." Spy#2 somewhat harshly corrected him, saying, "You asshole; that's not John Wayne, that's East Clintwood!" Joe and his partner were far enough away that their laughter did not give them away.
I doubt that anything amazing or surprising came of the trip to Maine, but it was a common practice for Russia and America to spy on each other and continues today. There's no way to know for sure, but who knows? Perhaps one of the Russian spies was a young Vladimir Putin.