Please "spread the wealth"

This whacky Presidential campaign continues unabated. In some ways, I can hardly wait for November 5 and the end to this madness. On the other hand, many of us will probably feel like heroin junkies who suddenly don't know where they're going to get their next fix.

The newest whacky issue is that the Democrats are "socialists" who want to "spread the wealth." Say what you will that's unflattering about the Obama campaign, but I don't think simplistic labels and incessant name-calling are at its heart. But McCain/Palin love to throw out nasty labels that are presumed to be negative. With respect to taxes, let's re-consider that "spread the wealth" metaphor and whether Obama is a "socialist."

To be blunt, I think we desperately need to "spread the wealth" a bit. Having lived in L.A. for 16 months way-back-when, I can tell you that one afternoon drive through Beverly Hills ought to convince you that there is an obscene level of wealth in our nation, and an obscene disparity in wealth. Here in the Twin Cities, a leisurely drive through parts of Minnetonka, North Oaks, or Edina will convince you of the same thing.

Enter the Obama tax plan. From the McCain response, you'd think Obama was proposing a 90 percent tax rate for the rich. But the hard reality--the actual numbers--suggest that an Obama tax plan would, at most, tweak those high salaries somewhat. We're talking a very small percentage here--an amount that is just plain affordable and almost inconsequential to these people. Yes, the rich became rich partly because of their drive, their hard work, their creativity, and their willingness to take risks. And they deserve to be rewarded for that--absolutely nobody is saying otherwise. But, when you're making into the 7 figures, you should rightly expect to pay more in taxes than the secretary who's making 38 grand. And, by the way, how did many of these people GET to a 7 figure salary? On the backs of many other people who are often paid peanuts.

So I say, spread the damn wealth a little. We are so far away from "socialism," even with the Obama tax plan, that it isn't even funny. And it really ISN'T funny; in a nation of such alleged wealth, there is a disparity in means that approaches shamefulness.

That dirty word, "eloquence"

One of a zillion interesting and distinctive features of the current Presidential race came into focus during the last "debate" (joint appearance, really) between McCain and Obama. And the lesson here is that anything can be turned on its head; all things, good and bad, are sort of a two-sided coin. It's the sort of thing for which we "Sophists" are notorious: finding what Aristotle would call topoi, the possible lines of argument. It's the kind of argument that can help O.J. beat a murder rap, the kind of argument that says "work will set you free," the kind of argument that morphs into "sophistry," in the pejorative sense of that word.

This week's "morphing" involves the word "eloquent." We haven't had a President or Presidential candidate who's been called "eloquent" since probably JFK. Even Ronald Reagan, often considered a capable speaker and "The Great Communicator," wasn't really "eloquent." But Barack Obama is so regarded.

Now, you'd think that being eloquent was an inherently "good" thing. You'd think that eloquence is to be admired. However, in the case of Obama, eloquence--according to McCain--is essentially a way to "sweet talk" and to mislead an audience. He essentially made that point two or three times in their last meeting. This is all very clever, I must admit: suddenly eloquence is a bad thing. You've got to give those types of spins a tip of the cap. That little bulldog, John McCain, probably managed to make some people re-think his opponent's ability to, of all things, capture the imagination of an audience. I didn't think I'd see the day when eloquence could become a dirty word.

Songs in the Key of Life

Hundreds of notes from coast to coast, all saying the same thing: whatever happened to the Contentious Introvert? He hasn't posted anything in nearly a month! Stop fighting back the tears--I'm here again, if only for a brief post. (Other aspects of life have been time-consuming and demanding; I do have a life beyond cyberspace--well, sort of.)

The only thing that's on my mind at the moment is music--in particular, songs that have a magical quality and seem to last. Since headphones with five pre-set FM stations are an integral part of my running regimen, I listen to music several hours a week as I'm tromping down the street, through Woodlake Nature Center, or around a lake. And I realize that certain songs never fail to grab me. For example:

• "So Hard to Go" by Tower of Power: a winner from start to finish; love them horns
• "Layla" by Derek and the Dominoes: I could listen to the piano solo halfway through over and over
• "Midnight at the Oasis" by Maria Muldaur: sultry and a little quirky
• "This Will Be" by Natalie Cole: my running pace always picks up a bit
• "Been to Canan" by Carole King: has a haunting quality
• "Heat Wave" by Linda Ronstadt: her encore song at an L.A. concert I attended many years ago
• "Somewhere Out There" by Linda Ronstadt & James Ingram: OK, a little corny, but poignant
• "Brown Sugar" by the Rolling Stones: their best song as far as I'm concerned
• "The Long and Winding Road" by the Beatles: wistful
• "In My Life" sung by Judy Collins: equally wistful
• "Greatest Love of All" by Whitney Houston: big pipes!
• "This Kiss" by Faith Hill: got me through mile 25 of the 1998 TC Marathon

Well, those are a few of my nominees. Feel free to nominate your own songs.