May 1, 2007

  • What Does Freedom Mean to My Worthless Ass?

    What Does Freedom
    Mean To Me?

    I guess because Independence Day is just around the corner,
    the exquisite CynaraJane has asked her readers to discourse a bit on the topic
    of :

                                 freedom

    Although I am not and have never been a card-carrying
    member of CynaraJane’s Scurvy Dogs and Salty Wenches Blogring, I figured I’d
    give it a try.

    One can go in a lot of different directions with this, so I
    thought I’d write on a topic I’ve been meaning to write on anyway.  Most of the other entries seem to be reading like American high
    school civics assignments, but I digress.

    College afforded me the opportunity to escape the white
    working-class cocoon of my youth, and become intimately acquainted with people
    of a wide range of racial and ethnic heritages. 
    I had a Canadian and a Japanese roommate, both of whom were delightful
    in every respect.  I spent three months
    living in France
    with a French family who loved me as their very own son, and I traveled
    briefly to London and Amsterdam.  After taking the most illuminating course I have ever
    taken in life, a Sociology course entitled “Race and Minority Group Relations”,
    I did three-month teaching internships in two different inner-city American schools.  While I got mugged and robbed a couple of
    times, an impoverished black family was gracious enough to invite me into their home for Thanksgiving
    dinner, and another black guy, an auto mechanic on disability, had the kindness to repair my old
    Rambler free of charge.

    During my college years the war in Viet
    Nam was going on.  I was being told by my government that the
    North Vietnamese were my “enemies”; many Americans called them “gooks” to
    dehumanize them in order to kill them with a greater detachment.  The American government had, of course, its
    rationale, its “Domino Theory”.  But what
    I saw with my own eyes was my government invading a sovereign nation, while at
    the same time murdering my fellow college students and fellow citizens who were
    peacefully protesting at Kent State
    and Jackson State
    Universities, right here at home.

    So I never bought into the official propaganda.  Though I did not yet know any Vietnamese personally, my life experiences enabled me to
    extrapolate, and to conclude that the Vietnamese were in all probability people
    very much like me, just wanting to live and let live.  There was a time not long before I was born
    when the Japanese were likewise our “enemies”, yet I could find nothing to hate about my
    Japanese roommate.  If the French were
    warm and gracious and loving people, then so in all likelihood were the
    Germans.  Experience had taught me that
    black people, who were still considered sub-human in some quarters of the United
    States, were on the whole a pure pleasure to be
    around.

    Through all this I learned several very important
    lessons, lessons which have never left me. 
    I have subsequently gone back to France,
    visited Italy,
    and spent six weeks in the Slovak Republic,
    a former “Iron Curtain” country.  I have
    been married to a Filipina, making my daughter half Filipina.  I have had many more positive experiences
    with blacks and other minority groups.  I
    have had close relationships with people who differ markedly from me in race
    and ethnicity, in language and culture, in religious belief and sexual
    orientation.

    I have been enriched by all of these experiences, and through
    them I have learned that I am a citizen of the world, and more particularly of the common, ordinary people.  I have concluded that wars are fought between
    the ruling elites of various countries, and have very little to do with
    me.  Their interests are generally not my
    interests, and their skein of lies and propaganda has grown increasingly easy
    to see through.  No one is ever going to
    tell me, “If you’re not with us, you’re with the terrorists”.  Or at least no one is ever going to make me
    believe it for even a single moment. 

    Therefore freedom for me is primarily the power to think for myself,
    and not to allow anyone else to determine for me whom I should like and whom I
    should dislike; who my enemies are at any given time; to whom I owe my allegiance
    and whom I should fear.  It is the power to deconstruct propaganda and seek the attainment of true wisdom.  This power to
    think for myself in turn affords me the freedom to reach across artificial
    barriers of race, culture, and ethnicity; to try to build bridges rather than walls;
    to work at making this world a little better place for ALL of us.  It just makes me sad that so many of my fellow humans allow themselves to be led around by the nose, to be manipulated shamelessly by cynical, self-serving "leaders" whose thinly-veiled agendas include not a scintilla of concern for the general, collective welfare.

    EDIT:  I feel constrained to add, just in case it isn't obvious to some, that this power to think for oneself is a "natural right" that must be apprehended by and for oneself.  It is not a freedom that can be conferred by any government or Constitution, and while it may be encouraged in principle by certain Constitutional provisions such as our First Amendment, in practice it is strongly discouraged by those in power.  Woe unto you if you engage in thinking or speaking that is too far outside, in the words of Noam Chomsky, "the limits of allowable discourse".

April 21, 2007

  • A Brief Homage to Kurt Vonnegut

    Well, we had fun with my little True Friends test, but it appears to have about run its course.  The fun with the test, that is.  Not your friendship, for which I am most grateful and desirous of its continuation.

    Often, as I am reading certain books, I will take the time to type out quotes from the book that have particularly impressed or affected me.  I do this mostly for your edification, since I am not the type of blogger who would blog in the absence of you my readers; nor would I be inclined to read the quotes again unless there was some external reason for doing so.

    Such a book was Timequake, a rather odd rambling novelette of relatively recent (1997) vintage, considerably less well-known than many of his earlier works, by the inimitable Kurt Vonnegut.  Happy 10th anniversary, Timequake.  The book reads much like Vonnegut's speeches and interviews, sort of disjointed and whimsical but containing nuggets of pure wisdom. 

    Given Vonnegut's recent passing, now seems as good a time as any to trot out the passages from Timequake that I thought were worth sharing.  Please note that Kilgore Trout is a fictional character whom Vonnegut uses as a literary device to sort of hold the book together.  Note also that I, unlike Vonnegut and Kilgore Trout, occasionally use semicolons; I have an eccentric fondness, let us say, for transvestite hermaphrodites.

    Enjoy.

    **********

               
    I am too
    lazy to chase down the exact quotation, but the British astronomer Fred Hoyle
    said something to this effect: That believing in Darwin’s theoretical
    mechanisms of evolution was like believing that a hurricane could blow through
    a junkyard and build a Boeing 747.
               
    No matter
    what is doing the creating, I have to say that the giraffe and the rhinoceros
    are ridiculous.
               
    And so is
    the human brain, capable, in cahoots with the more sensitive parts of the body,
    such as the ding-dong, of hating life while pretending to love it, and behaving
    accordingly: “Somebody shoot me while I’m happy!”

                Kilgore
    Trout, the ornithologist’s son, wrote in My Ten Years On Automatic Pilot:
    “The Fiduciary is a mythological bird. 
    It has never existed in Nature, never could, never will.”
                Trout is
    the only person who ever said a fiduciary was any sort of bird.  The noun (from the Latin fiducia,
    confidence, trust) in fact identifies a sort of Homo sapiens who will
    conserve the property, and nowadays especially paper or computer
    representations of wealth, belonging to other people, including the treasuries
    of their governments.
                He or she
    or it cannot exist, thanks to the brain and the ding-dong, et cetera.  So we have in this summer of 1996, rerun or
    not, and as always, faithless custodians of capital making themselves multimillionaires
    and multibillionaires, while playing beanbag with money better spent on
    creating meaningful jobs and training people to fill them, and raising our
    young and retiring our old in surroundings of respect and safety.
                For
    Christ’s sake, let’s help more of our frightened people get through this thing,
    whatever it is.

                Why throw
    money at problems?  That is what money is
    for.
                Should the
    nation’s wealth be redistributed?  It has
    been and continues to be redistributed to a few people in a manner strikingly
    unhelpful.

                Let me note
    that Kilgore Trout and I have never used semicolons.  They don’t do anything, don’t suggest
    anything.  They are transvestite
    hermaphrodites.

                Yes, and
    any dream of taking better care of our people might as well be a transvestite
    hermaphrodite without some scheme for giving us all the support and
    companionship of extended families, within which sharing and compassion are
    more plausible than in an enormous nation, and a Fiduciary may not be as
    mythical as the Roc and the Phoenix after all.

    - Kurt Vonnegut, Timequake (1997), pages 162-164

April 16, 2007

April 10, 2007

  • Hang Up on War: Get a Tax Refund

    Well, it seems that y'all quit talking to me if I don't post something new every once in a while.    And I like to hear from you my readers; it's the only way I have of knowing that I'm still alive.  So here's a timely and fascinating and even remunerative tidbit for you.  Tell 'em you heard it first right here....

    **********

    Hang Up on War: Get a Tax Refund

    By Amy Goodman 
    King Features Syndicate
    Posted April 5, 2007.
    If you are upset that Congress won't defund the war
    in
    Iraq, there's something you can do: Stop paying a
    tax.
    Legally.
    The Internal Revenue Service is giving a rebate
    this
    year on a telephone war tax. This is one of those
    line
    items at the bottom of your phone bill. The tax
    was
    instituted in 1898 to help the United States pay
    for
    the Spanish-American War. Individuals and
    businesses
    have one chance to obtain a refund on this
    telephone
    war tax, by asking for it in their 2006 income
    tax
    returns.
    Remarkably, the Internal Revenue Service has made
    it
    easy to request the refund, yet IRS Commissioner
    Mark
    Everson says that many taxpayers are overlooking
    it.
    Obtaining the refund is easy. But first, a little
    history.
    The Spanish-American War lasted from April to August
    of
    1898 and was predicated on a U.S. government
    demand
    that Spain abandon its colony in Cuba, which the
    U.S.
    subsequently occupied. By the end of 1898, the
    United
    States had also taken over the Philippines, Guam
    and
    Puerto Rico.
    The war was also used as an official pretext to
    take
    over Hawaii. The Senate debated over the annexation
    in
    secret, some arguing for total annexation, others
    for
    just Pearl Harbor. Sen. Richard Pettigrew of
    South
    Dakota derided the annexation plan as money
    "thrown
    away in the interest of a few sugar planters and
    adventurers in Hawaii." Military bases and raw
    materials -- sound familiar?
    The telephone tax was instituted as part of the
    War
    Revenue Bill, which expanded the government's
    ability
    to collect taxes, ostensibly to pay for the war.
    As
    with the myriad controversial "pork" items added to
    the
    recent Iraq war funding authorization, the 1898
    bill
    was the subject of scores of amendments that
    benefited
    big business. These included tax breaks for
    powerful
    industries like the insurance companies and
    tobacco
    dealers.
    The telephone tax of 1 cent per call targeted the
    wealthy, who were generally the only ones who had
    telephone access in 1898. After the war, the tax
    was
    eventually raised to 3 percent. Since the Vietnam
    War,
    it has been the target of war tax resisters, people
    who
    refuse to pay taxes because they do not want to
    fund
    war.
    Tax resistance has a long history. Henry David
    Thoreau
    promoted it in his essay "Civil Disobedience" to
    fight
    slavery: "If a thousand men were not to pay their
    tax
    bills this year, that would not be a violent and
    bloody
    measure, as it would be to pay them, and enable
    the
    State to commit violence and shed innocent
    blood."
    The IRS has vigorously targeted full-fledged tax
    resisters -- ranging from those refusing to pay
    the
    Pentagon's percentage of their taxes, to those
    who
    outright refuse to pay anything to the government
    --
    making an example of them by garnishing wages,
    sending
    them to prison for tax evasion and confiscating
    their
    homes.
    Tax resisters figured out that they could protest
    the
    telephone tax simply by writing their checks to
    the
    phone company, withholding the amount of the tax.
    The
    IRS deemed the collection of the tax too
    expensive,
    relative to the small amount of the tax itself.
    According to the National War Tax Resistance
    Coordinating Committee, early collection efforts by
    the
    IRS included the auctioning of Jim Glock's bicycle
    for
    $22 in 1973 and of George and Lillian Willoughby's
    VW
    Bug in 1971 for $123 (in 2004, Lillian, at 89, with
    the
    support of her husband, George, 94, was jailed
    for
    protesting the Iraq war).
    Court losses convinced the IRS to dump the
    telephone
    war tax in 2006 and to offer the retroactive rebate
    for
    phone taxes paid between March 1, 2003, and July
    31,
    2006. Typical refunds will be between $30 and
    $60.
    Ironically, while the IRS has dropped the tax on
    long-
    distance and "bundled" services, like high-speed
    Internet, the tax remains for older, standard
    local
    phone services and rental of equipment that enables
    the
    disabled to use phones.
    Thus, this tax on the rich is now a tax on the
    poor.
    Congressman John Lewis, D-Ga., has submitted a bill
    to
    permanently wipe this remnant clean. Two-thirds of
    the
    bill's co-sponsors are anti-tax Republicans, so
    Democrats might be leery about passing it.
    The website, www.refundsforgood.org, lists
    step-by-step
    instructions on how to recoup the telephone tax
    rebate,
    and recommends donating it to charity.
    While Congress and President Bush trade barbs over
    war
    funding, with a simple check mark on your tax
    return
    you can help to defund the war. Claim your
    telephone
    tax rebate. Let the Pentagon hold a bake sale.
    --------------
    Amy Goodman is the host of the nationally
    syndicated
    radio news program, Democracy Now!

April 2, 2007

  • Why George Bush is Insane

    Why George Bush is Insane
    by Harold Pinter; March 30, 2007

    (NOTE:  Harold Pinter is a British playwright, born in 1930 and winner of the Nobel Prize for literature in 2005.  He's still alive.  This was originally published in 2002.  Change the word "Iraq" to "Iran" near the end of the article, and it's just as relevant today as it was then.)

    Earlier this year I had a major operation for cancer. The operation and its
    after-effects were something of a nightmare. I felt I was a man unable to swim
    bobbing about under water in a deep dark endless ocean. But I did not drown and
    I am very glad to be alive.
     
    However, I found that to emerge from a personal nightmare was to enter an
    infinitely more pervasive public nightmare - the nightmare of American hysteria,
    ignorance, arrogance, stupidity and belligerence; the most powerful nation the
    world has ever known effectively waging war against the rest of the world. "If
    you are not with us you are against us" President Bush has said. He has also
    said "We will not allow the world's worst weapons to remain in the hands of the
    world's worst leaders". Quite right. Look in the mirror chum. That's you.
     
    The US is at this moment developing advanced systems of "weapons of mass
    destruction" and it prepared to use them where it sees fit. It has more of them
    than the rest of the world put together. It has walked away from international
    agreements on biological and chemical weapons, refusing to allow inspection of
    its own factories. The hypocrisy behind its public declarations and its own
    actions is almost a joke.
     
    The United States believes that the three thousand deaths in New York are
    the only deaths that count, the only deaths that matter. They are American
    deaths. Other deaths are unreal, abstract, of no consequence.
     
    The three thousand deaths in Afghanistan are never referred to.
     
    The hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children dead through US and British
    sanctions which have deprived them of essential medicines are never referred
    to.
     
    The effect of depleted uranium, used by America in the Gulf War, is never
    referred to. Radiation levels in Iraq are appallingly high. Babies are born with
    no brain, no eyes, no genitals. Where they do have ears, mouths or rectums, all
    that issues from these orifices is blood.
     
    The two hundred thousand deaths in East Timor in 1975 brought about by the
    Indonesian government but inspired and supported by the United States are never
    referred to.
     
    The half a million deaths in Guatemala, Chile, El Salvador, Nicaragua,
    Uruguay, Argentina and Haiti, in actions supported and subsidised by the United
    States are never referred to.
     
    The millions of deaths in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia are no longer referred
    to.
     
    The desperate plight of the Palestinian people, the central factor in world
    unrest, is hardly referred to.
     
    But what a misjudgement of the present and what a misreading of history
    this is.
     
    People do not forget. They do not forget the death of their fellows, they
    do not forget torture and mutilation, they do not forget injustice, they do not
    forget oppression, they do not forget the terrorism of mighty powers. They not
    only don't forget. They strike back.
     
    The atrocity in New York was predictable and inevitable. It was an act of
    retaliation against constant and systematic manifestations of state terrorism on
    the part of the United States over many years, in all parts of the world.
     
    In Britain the public is now being warned to be "vigilant" in preparation
    for potential terrorist acts. The language is in itself preposterous.
     
    How will - or can - public vigilance be embodied? Wearing a scarf over your
    mouth to keep out poison gas? However, terrorist attacks are quite likely, the
    inevitable result of our Prime Minister's contemptible and shameful subservience
    to the United States. Apparently, a terrorist poison gas attack on the London
    Underground system was recently prevented. But such an act may indeed take
    place. Thousands of school children travel on the London Underground every day.
    If there is a poison gas attack from which they die, the responsibility will
    rest entirely on the shoulders of our Prime Minister. Needless to say, the Prime
    Minister does not travel on the underground himself.
     
    The planned war against Iraq is in fact a plan for premeditated murder of
    thousands of civilians in order, apparently, to rescue them from their
    dictator.
     
    The United States and Britain are pursuing a course which can lead only to
    an escalation of violence throughout the world and finally to catastrophe.
     
    It is obvious, however, that the United States is bursting at the seams to
    attack Iraq. I believe that it will do this - not just to take control of Iraqi
    oil - but because the US administration is now a bloodthirsty wild animal. Bombs
    are its only vocabulary. Many Americans, we know, are horrified by the posture
    of their government but seem to be helpless.
     
    Unless Europe finds the solidarity, intelligence, courage and will to
    challenge and resist US power Europe itself will deserve Alexander Herzen's
    definition (as quoted in the Guardian newspaper in London recently) "We are not
    the doctors. We are the disease."
     
    Harold Pinter
    The Assassinated Press

March 25, 2007

  • The Long Walk

    A phone call from an old high school classmate, and an
    article in the most recent issue of Time Magazine: two threads that evoke
    memories forming a complex tapestry of gain and loss.

    The classmate, the older sister of my "main squeeze" in high school, is eagerly anticipating her 40th high school
    reunion.  She and I hadn’t spoken in
    probably 30 years.  It was one of those
    lovely conversations where two aging people, without hidden agendas, reminisce
    and reprise their lives.

    The article, in the April
    2, 2007 issue of Time Magazine, is entitled “What Women Have Done
    to Art”.  It chronicles the impact of the
    feminist movement on the world of art, focusing on a 1979 tour de force called
    “The Dinner Party” by Judy Chicago. 
    Parenthetically, I learn from the article that until the mid-1980s, the
    standard college textbook on the history of art included not a single woman
    among the 2,300 artists mentioned in its pages. 
    In 1986 nineteen female artists were added.

    But what’s the connection? you ask.  Where is the tapestry?  It is this, as best as I can explain it:

    In my final two years of high school I dated a slightly
    younger girl – let’s call her Sandra – who wooed me initially with an anonymous
    home-made Valentine containing clever clues that led me to her identity.  We dated steadily, went to parties and dances
    and the prom, took a high school trip to Washington
    D.C. and New York City
    together, “made out” extensively but rather chastely, got arrested for
    violating Chicago’s curfew
    laws.  As a seventeenth birthday gift she
    gave me a leather-bound dictionary which I still have, almost 40 years later.  It is chastely inscribed “To my friend John,
    with my friendship forever.”  I love
    words just as much now as I did back then.

    Sandra was overly pretty, wore too much makeup and hair
    spray, spoke in a high squeaky little-girl voice.  I was tall and gawky, with wild red hair, a
    giraffe neck, pants that were several inches too short, and a deep bass voice
    that didn’t fit my nerdy appearance.  We
    thought we were in love, I guess. 
    Talking to her sister yesterday, I realized how little I really knew back
    in high school who Sandra actually was as a person.

    I went away to college, but Sandra and I remained in
    touch.  She sent me cookies once, I
    think.  When she informed me that she had
    become “sexually liberated”, I invited her to come and visit me in
    college.  The plan was that she was going
    to relieve me of my virginity. 

    But as soon as she arrived, I realized that I wasn’t quite as
    excited to see her as I thought I would be. 
    She must have sensed it too. 
    While I was taking an exam the following day, she screwed my best
    friend.  Later in the day he confessed
    his indiscretion to me.  When I
    confronted Sandra with it, she denied the accusation.  I believed him, since it seemed that he had
    risked our friendship by telling the truth, while she had every reason to
    lie.  Hurt and confused, I kicked her out
    of my dorm room and out of my life.  She
    spent the rest of the week with a third guy in my dorm whom she had never met
    before her visit.  They slept
    together.  I have a photo to prove
    it.  Don’t ask.

    Time passed.  I became
    a born-again Christian, and graduated from college.  Stumbling across Sandra’s older sister in the
    Chicago phone book, I called her to
    see how Sandra was.  She told me that
    Sandra was just at that moment getting ready to leave for England,
    where she would marry a British doctor and live happily ever after.  The sister invited me to the going-away
    party.  I accepted, with the thought that
    I would test by fire, as it were, whether or not I had truly forgiven
    Sandra.  At the party I found that I had
    no residual hard feelings.  We had a nice
    chat, and I wished Sandra well in her new life.

    More time passed.  I got
    married, but the marriage foundered. 
    Somehow I learned that Sandra too had gotten divorced and was back in Chicago.  I looked her up.

    As friends we got along famously for a brief time.  I have two salient memories of that
    period.  Sandra took me to an art exhibit
    entitled “The Dinner Party”.  I had never
    heard of it, and had no idea that it was the seminal (please pardon the pun)
    feminist art exhibit of its time – indeed of all time.  But I was intrigued by the panorama of
    women’s history as depicted on the long hand-made tablecloth, and by the brightly-painted
    flowers on the ceramic dinner plates that looked for all the world like vaginas,
    as indeed they were supposed to.  As the
    Time article suggests, it was the AIDS quilt of the feminist movement.

    Sandra also persisted in her denial that anything
    inappropriate had transpired during her visit to me in college.  I was dumbfounded, since to my mind she no
    longer had any reason to conceal the truth of what had happened.

    More time passed.  She
    and I lost touch again.  Then I heard
    that Sandra (a psych nurse) was marrying a radio DJ, and they were moving to a
    small town in Iowa where they
    would buy and run a general store. 
    Several letters to Sandra in Iowa
    went unanswered, and I basically forgot about her for 25 years.  Meanwhile in the decade of my thirties, as
    many of you already know, I lost two wives, my child, my health, my career, and
    my house. 

    Fast forward to the present. 
    The Invisible Man, I sit now in a basement apartment with little
    external light, living for Thursday afternoons when I do a world music show on
    community radio.  The rest of the week is
    a slow, steady descent into physical and mental oblivion.

    Enter the phone call. 
    “How is Sandra?” I finally asked her sister.  “What’s she up to these days?”

    Well, it appears that she’s no longer the overly pretty girl
    I knew in high school.  She’s long divorced
    and out of the general store business, but she still lives in the same
    small town in Iowa, raising her
    only child, a son who is a senior in high school.  She weighs even more than I do, it sounds
    like, and has lost most of her hearing. 
    Disenchanted with men, she has become for all intents and purposes a
    lesbian.  She too stands at the abyss,
    free to reinvent herself when her son goes to college, if she can muster the
    courage and the energy and the vision to do so.

    “The Dinner Party” by Judy Chicago, I learn in Time
    Magazine, has after a controversial 30-year peregrination now been enshrined as
    a permanent exhibit within the new Elizabeth
    A. Sackler Center
    for Feminist Art at the Brooklyn Museum.  Having finally found a home, it is, as the
    Time writer puts it, “the Liberty Bell of women’s history.”  The feminist movement has matured, and left
    its permanent mark on history.  And I was
    a very brief, peripheral, essentially invisible part of it.

    Sandra and I also have a history, in part a shared one, and
    we too are slowly but inexorably heading home. 
    But we are limping badly, and the final destination is uncertain.  The tears of memory and longing evaporate as
    quickly as they strike the scorching sands of our own pilgrimage, and leave no
    trace of our passing.

March 11, 2007

  • Pay"Pal"

    Pay“Pal” – Sodomized by a Fair-weather Friend

                 We now interrupt our regularly-scheduled programming to bring you a cautionary tale about your twin buddies eBay and Pay“Pal”, and how they turn on you when the going gets rough.  Very much like the American government, they behave in an extremely refined and civilized manner, but God help you if you haven’t read the fine print.  My manner is not quite so refined, and this post may contain some strong language that might be offensive to our younger or more effete readers.  Be forewarned.

                Our story begins when I was foolish enough to purchase a 4-gigabyte no-name  mp3 player on eBay from a merchant in Hong Kong.  The merchant had dozens of identical mp3 players listed on eBay, and his seller feedback was 100% positive at the time I made my purchase, with 98 sales to his credit at that time.  His ad oozed with unctuous concern for my customer satisfaction.  And best of all, the ad proclaimed that I was protected by PayPal Buyer Protection, free coverage up to 500 British pounds!  When I won the item for a price of 26 British pounds (a little over $52.00), I was pretty happy.  Even when the item took almost a month to arrive, my enthusiasm was relatively undiminished.

                Then I opened the package.  All of the parts were there.  But the manual, while technically in English, was utterly incomprehensible.  Here’s an example from one of the introductory bullet points:

    ·        Break to order to sow continuously: Broadcast the stop hour remembers to broadcast the position, the some song orders to a time while broadcast the some catalogue up is shut down, switch on after then park the last time of time order, Play after order to start broadcast from now on.

    As you can see, I was left very much on my own.

    Through experimentation, I managed to input a number of songs into the mp3 player, arranged in folders.  I figured out how to turn the unit on, and get it to play a song.  But I learned after much trial and error  that I couldn’t maneuver around through the folders.  The only thing I could do was to go forward to the next song or backward to the previous song.  Not terribly helpful if you have 1,000 songs and you want to skip around.

    It got worse.  I discovered that the battery would hold a charge for only an hour or two, in part because the lighted screen stayed lit all the time.  I learned that the plug-in charger wouldn’t charge the battery at all, so I had to rely on the USB cord to charge the battery.  There were other problems too numerous to mention.  Some were merely annoying but a couple, like the battery not holding a charge, were deal-killers.

    In short, the mp3 player wasn’t worth a damn.  I contacted the seller by e-mail, as eBay advised me to do, and waited several days.  No reply.  I e-mailed him again, more adamant this time.  The second time I got an automatic reply from him saying that he was swamped with orders and that he was doing the best he could to get caught up.  So I waited a few more days before deciding, as any good consumer would, to invoke the eBay Standard Purchase Protection Program.  I filed a complaint, as instructed, and was required to wait 10 days for the seller to respond before escalating the complaint to a claim.  By this time the seller was no longer a registered eBay user, and his approval rating had fallen from 100% to 84.3% in a little over a month, with 407 sales.  But I still had to wait the 10 days to allow eBay’s process to work.

    When I went back after 10 days to escalate my complaint to a claim, I discovered two things.  First, IF my claim was found to be valid, eBay would charge me a 15-pound “processing fee” – around $30.00.  This represented about 60% of the amount I had spent for the mp3 player, and meant that I would get only about $22.00 back on my $52.00 purchase.  Second, I discovered in the fine print the merest suggestion that this eBay Standard Purchase Protection Program was DIFFERENT FROM and INFERIOR TO the PayPal Buyer Protection Plan, which would pay a successful claimant up to 500 pounds sterling and charged no processing fee.  So I headed over to the PayPal web site, and spent a couple of hours printing out pages and reading all the fine print.  Let me emphasize that on the eBay web site, where I had purchased the product, there was only the slightest and most obscure mention of a PayPal Buyer Protection Plan that might be different from the eBay plan.

    Come to find out, the PayPal plan, while much more generous that the eBay plan, had a “window” of only 45 days from the date of purchase in which to file your claim.  I e-mailed the folks at PayPal and explained my situation.  If it had been a telephone conversation, it might have gone something like this:

    Me:  Hi, PayPal.  I bought this mp3 player from a merchant in Hong Kong, and it doesn’t work.  I’d like to get my money back.

    PayPal:  Has it been more than 45 days since you made the purchase, sir?

    Me:  Yes, but the merchant was in HONG KONG, and it took…

    PayPal:  Gee, we’re terribly sorry.

    Me:  …a MONTH for the item to even arrive!

    PayPal:  Has it been more than 45 days since you made the purchase, sir?

    Me:  Yes, but as I said…

    PayPal:  Then we can’t help you, sir.

    Me:   Look.  Not only did it take a month to arrive, but then I had to check the item out to see whether it worked or not, and when I found out it was a lemon, I e-mailed the merchant just like your web site says to do, and waited for his response.

    PayPal:  Has it been more than 45 days since you made the purchase, sir?

    Me:  YES, dammit!  But I’m telling you…

    PayPal:  Then I’m afraid you’re shit out of luck, sir.

    Me:  God damn it!  I wasted ten fucking days fucking around with eBay’s buyer protection plan, before discovering that it’s different from yours!  It’s not at all clear that they’re two separate plans.

    PayPal:  Our plan is clearly spelled out on our web site, sir.

    Me:  But I was on eBay’s fucking web site!  And PayPal is OWNED by eBay!  Why don’t they make it clear that there are two separate plans??

    PayPal:  I don’t know sir.  But we can’t help you.  (And here I quote PayPal’s service rep verbatim: “With millions of users, PayPal cannot make exceptions of this policy on an individual basis, as doing so would be an unfair business practice.”)

    Me:  Jesus fucking Christ!  It’s not an unfair business practice!  It’s GOOD BUSINESS!!!!

    So I was thrown back on the eBay Standard Purchase Protection Program, with its $30.00 “processing fee”.  But it looks like I’m not going to get anything from them, either.  They say they’re going to require, among other things, a “Letter of Authenticity or Appraisal” from an “independent authenticator’s physical inspection”, presumably to verify my claim that my mp3 player doesn’t work right.  I’ll probably have to ship my mp3 player to this “independent authenticator” at my own expense, which I will refuse to do.  Rather than accept a refund of about $10.00 on a $52.00 item, IF the “independent authenticator” finds that my claim has validity, I’ll keep the mp3 player for use as a very large and expensive 4-gigabyte flash drive.  It does hold data, presumably even without a functioning battery.

    Meanwhile that prick in Hong Kong is probably already back on eBay, selling more defective goods under another name.

    To add insult to injury, I attempted to withdraw the $7.95 balance that I had sitting in PayPal, drawing interest income FOR THOSE BASTARDS.  (Think about it; MILLIONS of people have cash balances sitting in their PayPal accounts, paying income TO PAYPAL.)  Come to find out, the MINIMUM I can withdraw from my OWN PayPal account is $10.00.  So I had to DEPOSIT $2.05 INTO my PayPal account, just so that I can withdraw the total amount next week sometime.

    I post this as my only recourse against eBay and PayPal.  I post to let you know in no uncertain terms that PayPal is emphatically NOT your “pal”. 

    I hope that sufficient numbers of you who read this will cease to patronize eBay and PayPal, at least enough to cost them far more than the measly $52.00 that they should have cheerfully paid me. 

    If you can’t live without eBay, then I hope that you won’t purchase anything from overseas.  And if you can’t live without the latest toy from Hong Kong, I hope I’ve helped you to become more aware of what will happen to you if a purchase goes awry, and you haven’t read all the fine print.  Or even if you HAVE read all the fine print.  As usual, caveat emptor.  Let the buyer beware.

    Me?  I don’t need eBay or PayPal that badly.  I’m shopping locally from now on.  Say what you will about Wal-Mart, they’ll generally bend their rules enough to let you return a defective item and get your money back.  They seem to understand the importance of a satisfied customer, whose word of mouth can make them or break them in the long run.

    EDIT:  I learned from one of my readers that there's an actual web site called paypalsucks.com .  While any disgruntled person can throw up a web site, it appears that quite a bit of work has gone into this one, and that a significant number of people have had far worse problems with PayPal than I have.  There's also a web site called ebaysucks.com , but it's a little more dated and less helpful.  Anyway, once again, caveat emptor.

March 7, 2007

  • Personals

    How many of you have posted your profile on a dating/personals web site?  After getting past the photo of the man or woman, have you read the profiles posted by your contemporaries?  Notice, if you haven't already, how many of their self-descriptions are a variation - but almost word for word, really - on the following theme:

    "Hmmm...how would I describe myself?  I just like to have fun, chillin with my friendz n stuff.  If u want 2 know more, just ask."

    Helpful, isn't it?  With a description like that, who could possibly think of anything additional to ask?    Even older people, while they are on average a little more descriptive, post things very similar to the above.

    So here's what I once posted for my own profile on one site:

    "But what went ye out for to see?  A man clothed in soft raiment?  Behold, they that wear soft clothing are in kings' houses.
     But what went ye out for to see?  A prophet?  Yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet..."

    This, in case you don't know, is a quote from the Bible.  I figured that it at least distinguished me - rather sharply - from all the other yo-yos out there.  But surprisingly, I got very few hits from any females other than Filipinas looking for a one-way ticket to the USA. 

    What did I do wrong? 

    Sorry I don't have anything profound to post today about the war in Iraq or Ann Coulter.  (I do have plenty of stuff, actually, but I didn't want to bore you.  Anna_lanche asked for something "mind bending and beautiful.  Sorry to disappoint, Anna.  )  I just figured it was time for an update, ya know?

February 26, 2007

  • It's time for me to update AGAIN!  My Lord!  How do people do a DAILY
    newspaper column?  Maybe the PAY serves as something of an incentive,
    huh?

    Anyway, the other night I watched two back-to-back documentaries on
    PBS.  The first was really more of a propaganda film about The
    Marines.  A little about their history and tradition; the kinds of
    rigorous training that Marine recruits and prospective officers go through; their total devotion to "the
    mission" and to their code of ethics; what an honor it is to serve
    one's country (i.e., the U.S.) in the Marines; etc.

    The second film, immediately following the first, was the story of the
    "Bonus Army".  The Bonus Army was a group of ragtag World War I
    veterans who, jobless and homeless during the Depression, journeyed
    from all over the U.S. to camp out and march in Washington, DC, to try
    to get money owed them from serving in the U.S. military back in
    1914-1918.  It wasn't really even a "bonus" as such; it was just money
    they had never been paid. 

    Well, I'm sure you can imagine the outcome.  Congress ended its session
    without voting to pay them, and snuck out of town.  Then a young Douglas McArthur and an even
    younger Dwight D. Eisenhower, in command of the military, chased the hapless veterans out of Washington, tear-gassing them and burning their makeshift "village" to the ground in
    the process.  The Bonus Army finally got paid after FDR replaced
    Herbert Hoover as President, a year or two later and not quite twenty years after they had served
    their country honorably and well in World War I.  One member of the
    rebuffed Bonus Army was a veteran who had been highly decorated for saving the
    life of General Patton.

    I wonder how many viewers besides me noticed the highly ironic (intentional,
    you reckon?) juxtaposition of the two films.  The shit is still going
    on today, of course.  It took many years for the U.S. government to
    recognize Viet Nam vets' exposure to Agent Orange as a legitimate
    problem; and they still haven't, to my knowledge, officially recognized
    the horrific effects of depleted uranium and other poisons used in the
    two Iraq wars.

    If you've read this far, here's your reward: a couple of cartoons by a
    very talented gentleman named, apparently, David Rees.  He's as perspicacious as I am, plus he has the ability to draw!  He calls this
    particular set of cartoons (which he started about a month after
    9/11/01 and continues to the present day, though somewhat less prolifically  than at the beginning) "Get Your War On".  There are 62 screens full of the
    cartoons now, and some of them are simply hilarious if you like
    political satire.  He's right up there with Tom Tomorrow as a political satirist.  Here's the link to his home page (he has other
    cartoons also):  http://www.mnftiu.cc/mnftiu.cc/home.html .  And here are his two most recent cartoons:

                                  
    gywo

                                   gywo

    If it's hard for you to read these, then check them and the others out at the Get Your War On web site.  You won't be sorry.