Man Who Crossed Nation In Balloon Only Wants To Talk About Horse Abuse

By Peter Buknatski

(Editor’s note: Yes, this was submitted as a comment. But it’s too damn good not to bring it up front and center. And yes, Peter, this means you owe me a beer.)

no
I told you
we can’t do
a revolution today
daddy’s sick
and he’s got to work
on the taxes
go watch TV
play with the cat
what?
kitty wants
to do a revolution too?
that’s nice
go tell kitty
we’ll do it
tomorrow
daddy’s stressed
no daddy’s dressed
he’s just s-t-r-e-s-s-e-d
go google it
play with the new toy
daddy bought you
what?
who’s stressed?
oh Gaza
never mind that
we can’t do anything
about it
find something nice
on the computer
what?
no NOT THAT!
Jesus why do they
put this stuff on
where little kids
can see it?
now listen
daddy has to do
these ‘cough’ taxes
so why don’t you
read the book mommy
got you for Christmas
here it is
Revolution In Pooh Land?
ah shit…………….

– PeteySweety

Here’s the new snowplow, being pulled by the fabulous Big Jim. Jim’s all business when there’s work to be done. He’s an ornery fellow with the herd, chasing them and acting like I did with my classmates when I was in fifth grade (yeah, you know the story: pinch and hide, poke and run, push and deny, etc.), but once the halter, harness, and bridle are on him, he’s all business.

The plow was designed with much assistance from the omnipresent Boots – his lady friend shoves his ass out of the house at least once a week and, usually, that means he lands at my place. And it was built with wood that we cut, Big Jim pulled, and the local sawyer milled.

Much of the labor, however, was done by my friend and neighbor, Chris Eaton, who welded the metal frame that – unfortunately — can’t be seen from this angle.

Currently, it’s being used to clear our recreation and logging trails – a mile and a half of winter wonderland, for sure. Big Jim can pull it on his own. We take our time. I get the job of walking behind it, taking in the magnificent views, and reassuring Big Jim that it is, indeed, the good life.

But if we ever get around to building the dream cabin in the woods (seven years in planning), it will be enlarged and used to plow the “driveway.”

All praise to Big Jim, Boots and Chris. I’m a lucky man.

I hate being a leftist. Let’s face it, it sucks.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for the issues. Redistribution of wealth from those with means to those in need? Hell yes. Civil rights? Of course. Universal health care? Duh. Peace? Please. The environment? Save it.

I mean, come on, I voted for Nader. Which means, of course, that I’m both a good lefty and a loser. Yep, I’m a lefty. And I’m tired of losing.

But next to almost perfecting the art of being ignored, losing is what lefties do best. And when you combine being ignored and losing…(whew)…there’s some talent for you.

Empowering it is not. In fact, I’ve come to notice that about the only time liberals even bother to communicate with lefties is when they’re telling us to “be quiet.” You know, as in: “Don’t let the others know we’re talking to you.”

Remember, the anti-war lefties were told to “be quiet” about the war during the election so it wouldn’t mess up the mass Obama hallucination. Ditto when it came to all the lefty issues: Economic justice for the real victims of this depression we’re in, the people being tossed from their home and jobs? Universal health care? A clear declaration against all forms of war mongering, including Israel’s and our own? Civil rights for gays and lesbians? Shhh, lefties were told, don’t interrupt the dream of hope.

But now that the Obama dream is now the Obama reality, lefties can begin to see the benefits of all that silence during the campaign, right? Wrong. Quick, name one gesture that the Obama transition team has made to the left since winning in November? An appointment? A statement of support? A whisper? A wink? A nod? Nope. Nothing.

Instead, Obama has gone out of his way to extend one gesture after another to about every other political constituency. The Clinton liberals, of course, have been the most gestured to – and genuflected in front of – by the new Obama team. But Republicans and right-wing evangelicals (Rick Warren) have also been invited to stand in the warm glow of the new administration.

But the left? Nothing but more exhortations to “be quiet.” But it’s no longer about us spoiling the election, now it’s about us spoiling the first 100 days. Next it’ll be about the first term. And then the re-election.

Obama’s gesturing to nearly every political constituency but the left is most galling when it comes to the war issue. As we all remember, Obama’s initial campaign ascendancy was about his position against the Iraq War and the near instant grassroots base that his position afforded him with the anti-war left.

But, once elected, Obama decided that the leader of the big, bad Bush war machine, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, could stay on and run the new, improved Obama war machine. Hmm, change we can get dizzy from. Or ill.

The left gets nothing. Just another hand over our mouths and boot to our asses.

Well, until enough of us decide “we’re mad as hell and we aren’t gonna take it anymore.” Takers?

–

Speaking of liberals, I chimed in on the debate over at 7 Days about the “timing” of the gay marriage issue here in Vermont. Click here for the read. Cathy Resmer’s argument that it’s just not a convenient time for the issue to be broached is a prime symptom of today’s liberal lethargy. It seems like there’s never a time when liberals want to actually draw a line in the sand and fight for something. Not with the war. Not with health care. Not with economic justice. And now not with civil rights for gays and lesbians.

As I argue in my response to Resmer, it’s always the right time to fight for basic rights. Sure, it may be inconvenient, but to delay such fundamental advancements is to continue to be an accomplice in the application of the injustice. Enough already. I mean, we’re not talking about some comparatively trivial piece of legislation like Act 250, Act 68, or Act 60. We’re talking about granting and acknowledging basic human rights.

Just my two cents.

–

While doing some research on the FDR and Kennedy presidencies over the weekend, I bumped into Irving Howe’s “Steady Work” on my bookshelf. It’s his collection of what he called “essays in the politics of democratic radicalism” from 1953-1966. Good stuff, especially from the historical perspective of where we stand now politically.

The political meme of Obama being this generation’s Kennedy is about as rooted and sprouted as can be. And while it’s propagators are intending the notion to be all-things-positive, it should give those of us on the left more than a moment’s worth of pause.

Kennedy, of course, was the original modern-liberal-foot-dragger. Unlike FDR, Kennedy shunned his leftist constituency. Worse, he authorized outright spying on them, not to mention harassment and arrest. I’m thinking about the civil rights advocates, of course.

Here’s how Howe described the Kennedy administration:

“…Kennedy works almost entirely through a slick bureaucratic style: he is committed to the politics of caution and compromise…It fails to understand that there are times when a good hard fight, even if momentarily lost, is of great political and educative value than brilliant but confusing maneuvers.”

Sound familiar? Sounds a lot like Obama to me.

–

Like most Vermonters I’ve all but given up on expecting much of substance from our mainstream media. They’re a dwindling lot and, worse, the few that remain seem hell-bent on keeping their journalistic noses deeply embedded into the gluteus maximus of the political and economic elite.

If you want to see just how dull and chicken-hearted Vermont’s political media is, just watch an episode of “Vermont This Week” on Vermont Public Television. But, be warned, it’s painful. Because they talk a lot but they say nothing, each seemingly fearful while they’re moving their lips that something of substance might accidentally fall out. Oops.

And if a guest with something to say actually gets on the show, the rest giggle nervously through the substance. I’m reminded of an appearance by Jon Margolis during the last election season. He tried to cut through the dizzying nonsense of contemplating and re-contemplating the dynamics of a “three-way race for governor” by trying to talk about the ideological positions of the actual candidates. I remember, for example, that he wanted to know why Pollina wasn’t really talking about progressive issues. You could hear the crickets chirping. Nothing but silence from the rest of them. And I don’t believe Margolis has been invited back since.

The absolute champion of appearing on Vermont This Week and saying nothing is Sue Allen of the Times Argus. She’s uncanny in her ability to do nothing but parrot tired conventional wisdom and regurgitate political press releases. She was, after all, Howard Dean’s media puppet for years.

Allen is on my mind this morning because I stumbled across an editorial in her Times Argus this morning that I’m certain she wrote. It’s called “An end to the flimflam,” and it’s all about what the editorial correctly called “this peculiar interregnum between the expired Bush and nascent Obama administrations…”

It’s journalistic kindergarten, too. It has, for example, this “stunning” revelation:

“Obama continues to impress observers by the way he is taking his responsibilities seriously.”

Say what? I wasn’t aware of any “observers” who were expecting him to break into a comedy routine after he was elected. Of course he’s taking it seriously. He’s not Richard Pryor, you fool. He’s the president-elect, just like all the serious white people who became president before him.

–

Now get to work

Vermont’s Governor, Jim Douglas, took the podium and the state’s attention yesterday to spill forth with his plans for rescuing our moribund economy. Being the good Republican that he is, Douglas did his best imitation of his long-time hero, Ronald Reagan. Yeah, you know the routine: In tough times, cut social services for the poor. It’s when Republicans are at their most sinister.

While declaring that we all must sacrifice during these tough times, Douglas zeroed in on those with the least resources and the most need for government services. In Douglas’ world of “sharing the pain,” education and health services were dressed up as the true villains of the economy, needing to be cut, cut and cut, if not killed altogether.

Reactionary Republicans like Douglas – again, with visions of Reagan dancing in their heads – seem to relish the opportunities of tough economic times. It’s their chance to slash and burn the programs they despise most, usually anything and everything that offers assistance to those in need or puts checks and balances on the economic elite.

It’s a two-pronged saber they rattle: Cuts for the poor, and no more sacrifices (read: taxes) for the rich. All in the name of “sharing the pain.” Go figure.

But the Democrats remain frightened little mice, unwilling to speak or act with the ideological clarity of the Republicans. They won’t even, for example, state the obvious in the most obvious terms: Just as you wouldn’t head to the desert for water, you shouldn’t head to the poor in search of money.

Regardless of its obvious wrongness, the Republicans’ gleeful scissoring of the programs people rely upon for food, shelter, and health care continues with little more than half-hearted and half-assed opposition from the majority-party Democrats. Proving, once again, that while the Democrats may control Vermont’s state legislature and the U.S. Congress, it’s the Republicans who are still controlling the debate and, even more importantly, the language of the debate.

Proof? In Vermont, there hasn’t been one leading Democratic figure who has stepped forward to include even the smallest income tax increase into the mix of economic solutions for the state’s serious money shortfall. Instead, they remain irrationally shackled to the Republican rules of the debate: Taxes shall not be mentioned.

But that’s not “sharing the pain.” It’s economic redistribution from the bottom up. It’s searching for water in a desert. It’s our government at its cruelest. It’s a sharpened ideological sword flailing wildly at our most vulnerable. It is despicable.

But nothing seems to wake the Democrats from their own ideological slumber — not the losses of years past, nor the recent victories. Their ideological flagpole remains bare. They refuse to draw a line in the sand, instead letting the sand get repeatedly kicked in their faces while claiming “victories” from time to time if it feels like a little less sand is coming their way.

Hey Democrats, how about this: It’s patriotic to help each other. To love one’s country and state means to be willing to dig deep to help – not hurt – those in need. And “sharing the pain” cannot continue to mean inflicting more pain on those already in pain.

The pain of putting a child to bed without a meal or a needed trip to the doctor is real. And it must not be allowed to be equated in any way, shape or form with the “pain” of a millionaire being asked to fork over a few more tax dollars. That equation should be as dead as Ronald Reagan.

Okay, okay, enough already. The self-induced sleigh-ride coma is now over. I feel like a child swimming up from the deep end after that first touch of the bottom. Yeah, you remember: Your ears popped; you worried about what was lurking down there; you thought about the monstrous creatures that could emerge from the drain cover; and you propelled yourself back to the top with the frantic speed of child wanting-just-one-more-breath. Then it was done.

I guess the biggest difference is that I’m returning to the surface with a nice wad of cash. Thanks, tourists! Bad economy? Hah! Not to the folks gallivanting in Stowe over the holiday weekend. They were – as they say – “making it rain.” In dollars, that is.

I have many stories and many experiences to impart to you, dear readers. Upon my return from each of the eight days of my dawn to dusk adventures, I sat dutifully with my journal and recorded my encounters. There were marriage proposals (three, one unaccepted), stories of far-away places, little brats who kept their faces in their hand-held video devices during the entire trip, made-up stories about celebrities, and eight (mostly) wonderful horses that were hitched and un-hitched daily in order to fulfill the work requirements of the drivers and the checklists of the tourists.

Yep, we all played our roles. Life, uninterrupted.

I’m working on a collection of short stories about the experience, with a working title of “I’ll Be Your Driver.” Each twenty-minute trip was like a short play in and of itself. Each had its stories. Each had its characters. Each had the constraints of time and setting. And everyone had their expectations from the beginning to the end.

It was an interesting experience to say the least, with the biggest surprise – rather naively – was that human interactions far overshadowed the horse interactions. I went seeking to be around the horses, but found myself mostly engulfed in the immediate needs and demands of the two-legged riders. They paid good money for an “experience.” And the good driver (hint: the one with the tips) was the one who could deliver the “experience,” no matter how far from reality we ventured.

And when one story – er, I mean ride – ended, it was on to the next. “Hello, I’m Mike, and I’ll be your driver,” I’d say, and off we would go. Every twenty minutes. All. Day. Long.

Let’s just say I made the best of it. And I look forward to sharing the stories.