I'm Just Wild About Saffron

Well, I've just been gallivanting around, that's all. Not doing the things I should. Not bettering myself or making the world a better place to live. You know, just wasting my time, living the life of Riley, and not even bothering to check if I spelled "gallivanting" correctly.

Which reminds me. Did you see those kids on the National Spelling Bee? What was the point of all that? Was I supposed to be impressed by that? I watched that thing on TV and all I kept thinking was "Geez, don't these kids have computers? Don't they know how to use a spellchecker?" Well, apparently not, or why would they go to all the trouble of memorizing the dictionary. If you ask me, knowing how to spell some Latin medical term has nothing to do with wisdom or intellect or intelligence at all. It's just a bunch of rote memorization and scholastic drudgery, and completely pointless. Those poor kids. What future could they possibly have except as sorters and classifiers of data. They'll probably all end up as librarians or accountants or non-fiction writers or something. My God, is that what you want for your children?

(By the way, I'm a horrible speller)

But where was I...

Oh yeah, I was gallivanting around. You see, the thing is, I'm not being lazy. It's just that I got this new bike. You remember I've been riding around on that old GZ250 of mine? (You do? Why?) Well, I'd had the GZ for about a year, and I decided it was time for an upgrade. I know I said I was gallivanting, but what I've actually been doing is motorcycle shopping. A lot of motorcycle shopping, in fact.

Wait a minute, maybe I should back up a bit.

If you have been down to your motorcycle dealership lately, let me fill you in on what's been going on. As some of you may have heard, there's been this thing happening with the price of gasoline. Namely, it's been going through the roof - four bucks a gallon in most places, four-and-a-half bucks here in California. Of course, with prices like that you'd expect a lot of people to be scrambling for some other means of transportation. Some are looking at hybrids, some are looking at bicycles, and some, it turns out, are looking at motorcycles. Particularly the little ones that get 60-100 miles per gallon. So now dealers, who a year ago couldn't give away scooters and motorcycles, are finding their showrooms full of people and their inventory of little bikes all but depleted.

I went to one dealer up in Hayward and literally had to drive around the parking lot waiting for someone to leave before I could find a place to park. It was like the Saturday before Christmas. Sure, there are still plenty of people looking for a sportbike or cruiser, but it seemed like every salesman I talked to said the same thing - "we can't keep the scooters in stock", and just driving around town I'm noticing more and more people tooling around on their Vespas and Piaggios and Burgmans and whatever.

Man, it's great. I love it. Instead of guzzling gas in their SUV's, people are actually starting to discover the joy of motorcycling. They're getting out of their motorized living rooms and starting to enjoy a little sunshine and fresh air (okay, fresh air/exhaust fumes). I've been seeing what's happening and figured now would be a pretty good time to trade in my little GZ because, believe me, dealers want 'em. In fact, as I was driving out of the lot after I bought my new bike there were already two people talking to the salesman about buying the bike I just traded in an hour before. Damn, I should have put the thing on Craigslist and sold it for full price instead of trading it in, but then I hate dealing with crazy people who answer ads on Craigslist.

Anyway, it was a good time to trade in and I got a good deal and that's why I'm happily gallivanting around on my brand new, 2008 Suzuki Bumblebee. That's not the official title, mind you, but that's what people are calling them. The official moniker is a Suzuki Boulevard M50. The "Boulevard" part means it's a cruiser, the "M" means it's a so-called "muscle cruiser", the the "50" means it has a 50 cubic inch engine (around 800 cc). They call them Bumblebees because they're painted black and yellow and they look like...well, you know.

Well, not all the M50's are painted black and yellow. Most are painted either all black or black and silver, but I didn't want one of those. I wanted one of the Bumblebees, and when I walked into a showroom and saw they had one, that pretty much cinched the deal. It was pretty cool too because after I'd signed the papers a couple of other people walked in and saw my bike sitting in the showroom and started asking a lot of interested questions about it. Huh, sorry, too late. That bike is mine, sucka! One lady who was in there with her son saw them wheeling my bike out the door to get prepped and the strangest expression came over her face like "the hell with shopping for my son. I want to buy me one of those."

Ah, it was a great look. Made me feel good, you know, and when I drove it home I just kept getting the kinds of looks I never got when I was riding around on my GZ. A couple of guys on Harleys even gave me the little motorcyclist's wave when I passed by. That was really strange. I never had that happen before. I always got the impression that HD guys are a bit cliquish and tend to look down their noses at metrics, but maybe they just look down their noses at guys riding GZ's.

Either way, it was a proud ride home. Here's a picture of a Bumblebee so you can see what they look like, although I don't think it's a very good picture. It's not my Bumblebee. It's just a stock photo, but you get the idea. I know looks are subjective, but I like it, and so far it's proven to be quite an attention getter. Especially for a stock cruiser, and especially at this price level.

But how does it ride? I would say it's a big bike that rides "small", except that it's not really a "big" bike. It's strictly midrange with a nice little electronically fuel-injected, liquid cooled V twin that puts out about 45 horsepower and pushes it's 544 pound dry weight through a shaft-driven final drive. It's no sportbike, but it's got more than enough power to get me around town and up and down the freeway. I don't know it's top speed because I don't drive like a maniac, but 70-75 on the freeway comes solid and easy with lots of throttle left if I need it. Running through the curves or putt-putting around the parking lot feels light and nimble, yet it still has enough weight to feel steady in crosswinds and freeway turbulence. All in all, it's a nice midrange ride that may not win a stoplight drag race against a Hayabusa, but feels just about perfect for normal day-to-day riding or a Sunday cruise to the beach.

On the downside the seat sucks, but then I'm getting the impression that all stock motorcycle seats suck. Luckily, there are plenty of aftermarket options out there and I'll probably be looking into one of those. Other than that I've got no complaints. Pricewise, the M50 is about $300 more than the Harley Sportster 883XL, but when you compare features they are really pretty comparable. My bet is that if someone ever does a side-by-side comparison of the two, the M50 will come out on top, but who am I to say. All I want to do is fire up the engine and do some gallivanting.

See you later, sucka.

Class of Aught '08

Are you like me? Are you sitting around on a balmy June night and thinking about John Glenn? Yeah, it's strange how we're both thinking the same thing, isn't it? What do you remember about John Glenn? Hmmm..., really? Yeah, I remember that, but I was thinking about something else.

I was remembering being a little kid standing in the backyard looking up at the sky and hoping to see John Glenn as he passed over our house. You see, my dad told me that Glenn was in a spaceship that was circling around the earth, so naturally I thought I'd be able to just look up in the sky and see this big spaceship flying by. Unfortunately, it never happened. I stood there for about 5 minutes and when I didn't see anything I just figured that my dad didn't know what he was talking about (and not the last time I'd come to that conclusion, especially as I got older).

That all happened back in 1962, and for the 50%, 60%, or 70% of the current population that wasn't alive back then (I don't know the exact figure), turns out my dad was right and Glenn did orbit the earth a few times. Then, a few years later, we landed a man on the moon and all that other stuff you were probably taught back in grade school.

It was an exciting time, especially for us Americans, and there was this feeling in the air that the future was ours and there was nothing we couldn't do if we were determined to get it done. Now, for some reason, that feeling seems to have gone away. I'm not exactly sure where it went, but sometimes if feels like that America, the America that went to space, is gone forever.

But is it? Let me ask you. Do still feel that American technology is leading the world? Is that how most Americans feel, or do we look at European cars and Asian electronics and wonder why it is we can't build stuff like that? Do Americans really "buy American" because we think American technology is better, or rather out of a sense of duty.

Yep, we landed a man on the moon alright, yet the best we can do these days is build a phone with a built-in gps that can help us find the nearest Starbucks. It was our father's and our grandfather's who united the world, at least symbolically, by extending man's grasp and reaching out into space, and now it is our generation that has found a way to look really cool around the office or at the airport. Doesn't seem the same, does it?

Sure, we've got probes and shuttles and we're building a space station, but that's just adding to the accomplishments of the past - the ground that's already been broken. It' the new frontiers we seem unable to conquer and the new challenges we seem unable to meet. How does America respond to global warming and tight fuel supplies? Why, we pass a new tax on oil companies that's how. That'll solve the problem.

You know back in the sixties a President once asked us to "pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship." How different that is from the leaders of today who only ask "if we stick it to the oil companies will you vote for us in November?" That's the kind of bold vision we get now, and instead of Walter Cronkite giving us the latest news on America's space program, we get Katie Couric giving us the closing numbers from the stock exchanges and the latest housing news. Seems we've replaced the "building of things" with the "moving money of things", and, after all, isn't that really more about being clever than being good.

I'm going to my niece's high school graduation tonight, and I'm sure the speeches will go on and on and talk about how our children are our future, which kind of goes without saying if you ask me. What I'd be more interested in hearing is what these bright young grads are really thinking about as they look down from the stage at the people sitting in the audience? I think if they've got any sense at all they'll look at us, the so-called "boomer" generation, and think "what have you done with your lives that entitles you to give us, or anyone else for that matter, any advice about the anything. Sure, you've gotten fat and rich, but look at this country you're now turning over to us. Can you honestly say that it a better country now than the country your parents left to you?"

Well, yeah, in some ways it's much better, and in some ways it's a lot worse. All I can tell you kid is that we did what we could, but we let ourselves get down on ourselves and we left a lot undone. What can I say? We got busy and so wrapped up in our own little differences that we just sort of lost sight of the big picture. I know it's not fair, but you're just going to have to deal with that.

And that doesn't mean we still can't give advice. For example, if I were you I'd start by reforming the political system. No matter what there is that needs to get done, our experience has proved that nothing gets done when you have a dysfunctional government. It doesn't matter how vital or necessary the need for action, if responsibility can be shirked and blame placed on the other party then your government will rest proudly upon it's laurels. Maybe that's our fault for letting our focus become too partisan and narrow. Maybe we would have done better had we not elected so many ideologues and figureheads. The bottom line is that voter apathy eventually leads to Administrations and Congresses incapable of dealing with anything more complex than looking good on the evening news.

All I can say is what's done is done, and our generations legacy to you is a government of itself, by itself and for itself. If you can manage somehow to pick up the pieces and make it whole again, and if you succeed in nothing else, then your generation will have accomplished more than we. Other than that, my only other advice would be to just do what we did - live beyond your means, watch too much TV, drive your kids crazy, and most of all -

enjoy your new Iphones.

For A Change

After being ignored all these years, it looks like the chickens have finally come home to roost. Always too moderate to be "true" conservatives and too grounded to be "true" liberals, the independents will get to have their say in 2008, and not be forced to choose between a bible-thumping Republican or a matronly Democrat as we have in the past. This time, it seems like both sides may come a-courting.

I'm not sure why. It seems like the Democrats would have to shoot themselves in both feet, and both hands and all twenty fingers and toes as well, to lose the presidential election this time, but then these are. Maybe they need us because both of these candidates seem to at least have some passing acquaintance with the middle-of-the-road moderate types, and are each unwillingly to cede their vote to the other.

Being the independent type myself, I'm glad for their attention and happy that this election seems to promise some interesting changes. That's why I was watching the Obama speech last night, and I have to say he gave a hell of a speech. He's definitely got the gift of oratory and, you know, he kind of reminds me of those other two great Democratic orator presidents from Illinois - Stephen Douglas and William Jennings Bryan.

Problem is, despite all his speechifying, I'm never quite sure if Obama really understands the implications of all he's promising to deliver or if he's just playing us. For some reason I just kept thinking "if this guy hadn't decided to go into politics he would have made a great mortgage broker." You know, promising people that they could have the house of their dreams right now for no money down and low, low payments for the first 5 years. Yeah, sounds great, until your 5 years are up.

McCain, on the other hand, well...who knows. I always liked the antecampaign McCain, the fiscally responsible one who was strong on defense and sensible on immigration, but this new McCain sees to be drifting more and more towards that same old Republicanism that seems to be is such good favor around the country these days. If I were him I'd just run as myself, but then I never claimed to know anything about political campaigns. I guess the thing to do is solidify your base and then try to win the votes of independently minded people like me.

The unfortunate thing for McCain, of course, is that the surge in Iraq seems to be working - not spectacularly, mind you, but steadily in the right direction. You'd think that would be a good thing for both McCain and the country, but I don't think the country (and particularly the Democrats) really want the surge to work right now. At least it seems that way because the only time the Iraq War ever makes the news is when an American dies or somebody blows themselves up. The rest of the time the war is back there on page A33 next to the liposuction ads. For some reason only defeat and setback make the news. Success just seems to stick in our craw. It's almost like this war isn't even our war anyway. Nope, it's Bush's war, and we've got nothing to do with it. Hell, it'd probably serve Bush and Cheney and all those other warmongers right if we got the hell kicked out of us, and doesn't it just piss us off when things start to go right.

Funny how things can get turned around like that sometimes. Ever see The Bridge on the River Kwai?

Well, the war is a whole different topic and I don't want to get into it right now. All I'm saying is that either way the war is a no-win situation for McCain. If America makes some progress in Iraq, it's not news. If America suffers a reversal, then the headlines make him look blustering and misguided. Personally, I think foreign policy under McCain will look more like Bush I then Bush II, but that's neither here nor there because in the end reality will settle in and Obama foreign policy won't be much different either. I could be wrong of course. Obama is pretty liberal and if he's anything like the liberals we have around San Francisco then that would be something to worry about. I tell you what. If Obama's first acts as president are to disband the military, raise tariffs and turn the Pentagon into a big homeless shelter, then we'll know just how liberal he really is.

(then everyone around the world will join hands and sing folk songs and form a giant human chain for peace)

Anyway, did you catch that reference to education in the Obama speech. I think it went something like "more money." Now wasn't it just yesterday that we got some report telling us that America ranks number 2 in the world in per pupil eduction spending? Was I just dreaming that? No, it was the 2003 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development study that found that although America trails only South Korea among the industrialized nations in per pupil education spending, it continues to decline and rank near the middle in student performance. Remember that report? The one that the education establishment dismissed as flawed for failing to take into account America's diverse student population (it must be all those Asian immigrants who are dragging America's ranking down)?

Yeah, you remember it because it got a lot of people wondering why it is we spend all this money on schools for such meager results. In a way it's kind of what the whole "No Child Left Behind" movement was all about. That is, instead of just shoveling more money into our schools, why not ask them to be accountable in some way for the results they achieve? If I understand Obama correctly, we're going to scrap that idea and just start dealing out the dough.

If I were going to ask Obama a question then I'd ask him what he thinks of merit pay for teachers. I know what his response would be. He'd be opposed to it. Why? Because the teacher's unions are opposed to it, that's why. The idea that good teachers should be paid more than bad ones is anathema to teachers. Their position has always been that it's unfair to punish teachers if their students aren't learning to read and write and do math. It's a thankless job and all teachers should be paid more, regardless if they are any good or not.

To their credit, the teacher's unions have been very effective in getting parents and the public to buy into this concept, and you don't have to look very hard to see the results. You ever hear parent's talk about teachers? Why it's a wonder that the Pope doesn't canonize the whole lot of them when you hear parents talk about them. "Why Mrs. Jones is so wonderful and dedicated and committed and selfless and never receives any thanks from anyone for all the sacrifices she makes. My little Suzie just loves her and has learned so much, and I don't mind a bit that she's still reading at 4 years below grade level." Well, instead of putting them on pedestals maybe some parents should start being a little more critical and demanding. Sure, there are lots of good teachers. I was a student once, you know, and I had some good teachers, and some real clunkers too. So why not reward the good ones and get rid of the bad? Why shouldn't teachers be accountable to the taxpayers for their job performance? How do you feel about merit pay for teachers, Obama? That's what I'd like to know.

And my question for McCain? Why not universal health coverage? Why not join the rest of the advanced nations of the world and declare health care a basic human right? No, just don't dismiss it as "big government". That doesn't answer the question. What do you do if a major illness strikes and you don't have insurance or your insurance isn't adequate to cover the expenses or if the insurance company declines coverage? What do you do if you can't pay for that expensive operation or if your insurance company won't pay for it? Are you supposed to be comforted by the knowledge that somewhere there are shareholders who can take comfort knowing their United Healthcare dividend is safe? Tell me Senator McCain, why is universal healthcare really so awful?

Questions, questions...sure voting's easy when all you have to know is the red from the blue, but we independents have some questions.