Extremities

This landed on my desk from the Relatively Current Affairs department a day or so ago. We have been hesitantly kicking around the idea of commenting on it for the last 24 to 36 hours because, like most good stories, there is more to it than meets the eye. As I wrote to an Eastern correspondent earlier today, "When one decides to enter the fray, one better have his shit together." Or something like that.

First off, Mr. Daniel Lyons's article is well-put and we agree with him entirely. Especially this part:

"A half century ago we had our 'sputnik moment,' when, spurred by fear of falling behind the Soviets, we made big investments in science, technology, and education. But we're a different people now. Cosseted by 50 years of prosperity, we are fearful of change and unwilling to make short-term sacrifice for long-term gain."

An anonymous commenter said the other day that "legislators of today willingly leave their balls at the door, if they brought any to Washington to start with. The lobbyists keep track, you can bet on that." Locally and nationally there seems to be a journalistic agreement on some things, at least.

Mr. Holdren, our nation's top scientific adviser to the President, has received his share of ball-busting. A February 27, 2009 article from FrontPageMagazine.com is informative enough but is cursed by what so many seem to be ailing of in recent times: extremism. We don't believe in extremism. We leave that up to the likes of Fox News. We find that extremism is detrimental. Extremists on either side of the aisle are not wholly educated. Rather, they are blinded by a fear of the unknown. Solutions do not exist in the extremities of a situation. They are born from an intellectual compromise. Contradiction is balance.

Sorry, I have digressed slightly. (The Staff supplied me with many, many notes. Sources are shown in orange.)

What many articles seem to ignore are the accolades that Mr. Holdren has accumulated over the years. Surely, he can be held accountable for discussing extreme ideas. However, it was thirty-two years ago. I reckon we've all had a wild idea or two in our heads before that we've discussed with friends. It irks us somewhat - as we stand around the coffee pot and discuss such things - how some can judge others so easily. These are people who have been charged with running our nation and, by extension, the World. As a Western correspondent put it to me the other night as he took his cowboy hat off and rubbed his head: "Well, hell. Do you want their job?"

We are not naive - or stupid - enough to think that there haven't been egregious errors committed by numerous Administrations past. But that's why this thing has plunked along for the last 235 years or so: it is redeemable. The most important thing to remember is that we, the people are 100% accountable.

(Unless, of course, someone were to rig an election, rape the world economy for eight years or so through various channels and then pass it off on the next guy.)

Shit, sorry. More digression. The Editor Emeritus is out of town so I have run of the mill, as it were. He'll crap plaid Twinkies when he returns and sees how extreme this is...

So I better make the most of my available time: What we enjoy here at the LECR is our freedom to learn for ourselves and make the best possible personal decision from that point without proselytizing or succumbing to paranoia. We have a diverse staff and adhere vehemently to the idea that a well-rounded person results from extensive experience and relentless self-education.