Dreaming of mini bikes, freedom

Until I stumbled upon this website, I assumed mini bikes were a thing of the past.

They're not.

They are now called "old school" mini bikes, but they look essentially the same as the one you see me sitting on here in the late 1960s. Mine consisted of a lawnmower engine mounted to a crudely welded steel frame (that often cracked and had to be re-welded). No shock absorbers. No lights, horns or turning signals. Small wheels. Questionable brakes. And a very hot muffler.

In terms of safety, a mini bike was an amazingly dangerous vehicle. But these tiny motorcycles also provided the first taste of freedom for many kids my age in that era. You could go farther and faster on a mini bike than on a bicycle. In a pre-Internet, pre-virtual reality time, this was a way to see the world -- or at least the world beyond my school and backyard. There was a bit of an anti-establishment vibe to riding a mini bike, too, which was appealing to anyone over 10 and under 30 years old in the rebellious 60s.

Like other kids, I went everywhere on my mini bike, whether it was legal or not. Cops would chase us. Parents would freak out if they learned about our cruising down Sunrise Highway or along residential streets where adults would wave their arms at us in anger. But we had a blast and weren't confined to the new cookie-cutter neighborhoods that sterilized life on Long Island. For less than 50 cents worth of gas, any day could be turned into the ultimate adventure and escape from whatever we needed to escape from. Regardless of age or circumstances, we all need an escape at times.

The only other material object that I can recall being as cool as a mini bike was an electric guitar. And, in a different way, the electric guitar also represented freedom.

To this day, nothing remains more symbolically cool in my mind than a motorcycle or guitar. A motorcycle can physically transport you in a way that a car, plane or train can't. Its engine rumbling as the wind blows against your face creates quite a feeling -- one that can't be simulated on a computer. Strumming a guitar can also transport me to a good place, particularly if shared with the right people or audience.

Playing music and riding motorcycles can be solitary or group activities, though I suspect doing either is better with people you enjoy being around.

Even though I no longer ride motorcycles of any kind, I am always looking at them -- gazing like I am staring into the past or longing for more freedom in the present -- examining color and chrome. Wanting to reconnect to something that even my guitar doesn't totally allow me to recapture these days.

While the digital age has provided an array of new toys and opportunities, I would gladly turn in my laptop for a Harley and a chance to play music in a dive bar or two a couple times a week with friends. I'd blissfully turn off CNN for a chance to strap a six-string to the back of a motorcycle. I would never give the debt ceiling or politics another thought.

These are the dreams of that kid sitting on that mini bike in the picture above. Dreams of freedom and simple pleasures, not of bills, deteriorating news and colonoscopies. Dreams and desires that settle the soul and ignite the spirt, and that become strangely more vivid as time passes all too quickly.

Bachmann won't back down

You can look at Michelle Bachmann's countless mistakes as petty. Or, if you're like me, you can view these flubs as indicators that she isn't up for the challenge of the campaign trail, let alone the presidency. She can't even admit to a mistake, which is usually a sign of low character and the inability to improve.

Less-than-sharp people tend to surround themselves with even dumber people. And Bachmann's fact-checking crew must rank right at the bottom of the intellectual scale. I sure wouldn't want her choosing a cabinet. You and I can afford the occasional flub or bad advisers. Presidents can't.

The latest error was in getting the anniversary of Elvis Presley's death confused with his birthday. She did it in grand, over-the-top Bachmann style at a rally on Tuesday.

I also noted that Bachmann has stopped using a Tom Petty song at her campaign events. You see, like most (non-country) musicians, Petty doesn't agree with Bachmann or anyone on the far right and has asked her to stop playing his music to promote herself.

Creative types, such as Petty, Bruce Springsteen and others, don't want to be associated with the lunatics on the GOP fringe. Yet, these right-wingers keep using the music of our best creative songwriters to pump up their political rallies. The problem is, creative people tend to loathe everything Republicans stand for these days, leaving candidates only the music of country stars or dead musicians to use as theme music.

I find it interesting that creative folks -- musicians, actors, poets, painters, etc. -- tend to shy away from the political right. With the exception of Ted Nugent, I can't think of a popular rock 'n' roll act that would support a Bachmann, Rick Perry or Sarah Palin. Although I do wonder where ZZ Top stands on Perry? You know, the whole Texas thing.

Our most thought-provoking, substantive songwriters have almost always favored Democratic principles, and so have many college professors, journalists and other thinking, introspective people. I'm not claiming that you can't be a smart, feeling person and be Republican. I am just saying that it's getting harder because of the character decay and extreme political shift in the party.

I am not sure where Elvis would stand on Bachmann politically, but I am guessing "the king" is looking down with a bit of what many of us feel about politics these days -- total disbelief and disgust.

Keep this cowboy away from D.C.

Gov. Rick Perry scares me.

Why?

Well, besides being another Republican governor from Texas (the last one in the White House didn't work out too well), he's the only candidate who could actually beat President Obama in 2012. And that would be a disaster for America.

You see, Perry has one very big gun in his arsenal. He can point to data that supports his claim for having created jobs in Texas -- lots of jobs -- during rough times. That one surface fact, without further examination, could lead Americans to believe that Perry is the solution to our biggest problem, which remains high unemployment.

Perry could become a bumper-sticker candidate for bumper-sticker voters, a champion of the unemployed. His supporters won't bother to look at what kind of jobs have been created in Texas. The fact is, many new jobs in Texas have been at or near the minimum wage level. Some have been public jobs, which I thought was against all that is Republican, and have helped artificially inflate the total figure. But Republicans don't like to be bothered with analysis these days, particularly when they smell Democratic blood in the water.

While I made reference to our previous president, Perry is no George W. Bush. He's worse. Far worse. He fits the new GOP mold better than any Bush ever did. He can appeal to Tea Party fanatics and mainstream Republicans. His pathetic macho swagger often crosses the line and hints of violence. Not real presidential stuff. His flaunting of his time in the military is about as classless as it comes, especially when you consider all the politicians (past and present) who have paid a much more costly price through their military service.

My hope is that Perry self destructs from stupid comments on the campaign trail. However, even if he controls his tongue, there is enough in the Perry record that could give Republican voters some doubts.

Under Perry, Texas ranks as one of the worst states in terms of funding education. At least Bush pretended to care about providing a quality education. For the record, Perry has already criticized Bush for funding educational programs. That's truly remarkable, even for this shallow Texan.

Environmentally speaking, Texas has become the new New Jersey. Perry's hands-off-big-business approach to governing has turned sections of the state into toxic pits inhabited by corporate polluters, who in return create crappy jobs for under-educated Texans. This is the cycle of Texas life for many people.

And this is a feather in Perry's cap?

If I believed in the Biblical prophecy relating to the existence of an "anti-Christ," the words "President Perry" would send chills down my spine. In the race for who is the biggest evangelical candidate since Pat Robertson, Perry wins by a Texas mile. Or does he? (Insert spooky music here).

Republican candidates to this point have been laughable. This GOP field is probably the weakest I've seen in my lifetime. By weakest, I mean clownish, crazy-eyed and just idiotic. I bet even "W" is going to have a hard time endorsing any of these people.

Enter Rick Perry with his big Texas smile and forceful hand gestures, shooting from the hip at every opportunity he gets. His emotions are his strength, and they are also his major weakness. I like to think Americans want a president who is passionate but under control. However, I am not sure enough voters will take the time to distinguish between passion and just plain craziness, especially if we're still sitting at over 9 percent unemployment next year.

While Obama left the door wide open for a GOP win in 2012 by not addressing unemployment from day one in the White House, I can't stomach another president who is going to lean on God, Satan or Dick Cheney types to solve our serious problems. Yes, compared with the rest of the field, Perry and his firm handshakes, jobs talk and longevity in an executive office probably looks pretty good to some people. However, that says a lot more about the other candidates than it tells me about the Texas governor who presides over a state that tends to favor boots and twang over substance and progress. Perry knows how to play to that crowd, but will that cowboy "charm" work on the coasts where Bush fatigue still lingers and basic requirements for living differ vastly from Texas?

• Read more about the importance of creating good jobs
• An ugly start to Rick Perry's campaign

Smirk is worth a thousand words

Today's jobs numbers are disappointing and yesterday's passing of the debt-ceiling/deficit bill will, by all accounts, make things worse. Reports of mass layoffs and businesses closing are beginning to trickle in again, as they did in 2008, and Wall Street seems unimpressed by the legislative actions in Washington this week. The news is quite dire and confidence in government is about as low as it can get.

Yet, there was Republican Speaker of the House, John Boehner, smirking on television on Tuesday, expressing how happy he was that he and the GOP got "98 percent" of what they wanted in the debt-ceiling deal. Within hours of Boehner's bragging, objective economists were lined up warning us that the pulling of billions of dollars out of the economy at this fragile point could send us into a second recession. As the GOP-owned bill was examined, it became clearer that the economy was about to take another hit.

Many experts believe that whatever improvements we saw in the economy in the last year were undone by bickering politicians in recent weeks. The debate, of course, was caused by Republicans bent on ruining a presidency that was beginning to be bolstered by improving economic numbers, not to mention the killing of the architect of the 9/11 attacks and the plans for a drawdown in two wars.

Things were looking up, but Republicans couldn't allow that modest trend to continue. They knew that the one way to beat President Obama in 2012 was for the economy to tank. The way to do that, without bringing America totally to its knees, was to prolong a debate about the debt ceiling that never should have taken more than a few minutes of anyone's time, and to pass a bill that removes just enough money and jobs from the economy to spark more voter fear but avoids a catastrophic depression. It was a brilliant ploy by a Republican Party that has completely lost its soul.

When the recession returns and job numbers continue to fall, who will voters blame? Will they look at the facts and remember how Boehner and his right-wing posse forced a positive momentum-killing bill upon us (and smirked about it on national TV), or will they just continue to believe the mindless, self-centered talking points that Republicans have taken to new lows in this current, Tea Party-driven Congress? Will voters remember how the Republicans said jobs were priority No. 1 after the 2010 election, then proceeded to talk about everything except jobs once elected?

This bill, job growth and the economy from here until the 2012 election is on the Republicans. Period.

Tea Party to blame for bad deal

"The budget deficit is not the biggest obstacle to our prosperity. Lack of jobs and growth is. And the largest threat to our democracy is the emergence of a radical right capable of getting most of the ransom it demands."

– Robert Reich (Click here to read his entire blog posting)

I can't say it any better than Robert Reich stated in his blog today. We went from one crisis – the debt ceiling debate – to another much more disturbing and potentially prolonged reality. Without smart investments, a fair tax code and visionaries instead of obstructionists in Washington, I don't see how America will move forward culturally, economically or educationally. The Tea Party, and those who back it, are blinded by a single issue in which they see no gray areas or alternative solutions. And, for now, they have won.

The Tea Party pridefully doesn't listen to experts like Mr. Reich. They cling to the idea of there being simple answers to complex problems. In fact, any kind of facts, scientific proof or sense of economic reality totally escapes these extremists on the right, who truly seem averse to educating themselves about subjects that require an open mind and a little bit of studying. (See Sarah Palin's dumbest quotes.) They took a nugget of truth – Washington needs to manage its money better – and turned it into a movement that honors some of the least-capable politicians to have ever been elected to state or national offices. These people, with the help of ratings-hungry conservative talk-show hosts, fueled this current, self-inflicted crisis and drove somewhat responsible politicians to a "solution" that does little or nothing to inspire true growth and confidence in America. The only positive thing this deal does is to avoid a sure overnight catastrophe.

Whether the debt ceiling/deficit reducing deal passes the House and Senate is almost moot now. Jobs aren't going to come back as a result of this pending deal, which is exactly what Republicans wanted in order to insure that Obama does not get re-elected in 2012. Remember, the main goal stated by these current Republicans isn't jobs or the economy. It is making Obama a one-term president. No one who goes into a voting booth should ever lose sight of the fact that when the country was down, and people were out of work, the Republicans chose to prolong the agony of many Americans in favor of playing politics. That is a fact – stated on the record in 2010 by top-ranking Republicans – not my opinion.

There is no compromise or country-first angle in this debt ceiling deal. This is a Tea Party-driven pact with budget cuts that will surely hurt the most vulnerable Americans. When it fails, and jobs don't return, voters need to remember whose deal this really was and put the blame where it has belonged for the last 10 years -- on the far right, the right that continues to protect the wealthiest individuals and corporations on the planet while asking the rest of us to sacrifice everything from our paychecks to clean water.

Breaking my limited ties to Twitter

I rarely log into my Twitter account. I never liked tweeting. But this morning, before work, I decided to sign on. Much to my surprised, I was hacked, if that is even the right term.

Yup, someone was tweeting rants in my name. And before you start accusing me of going all Anthony Weiner on you, while the rants were not the kind of things I want said in my name, there were no inappropriate pictures or other personal material. Someone just apparently wanted to make a point about a topic that is not worth even mentioning here. And they made it over and over and over again by linking to related topics on the net. Needless to say, I did not share these views.

After deleting several of the rogue tweets, I just decided to leave the Twitter universe -- deleted my account. It's a useless venue for me. I wasn't following many people, nor did I have any interest in what they said 90 percent of time. Just seems like a lot of gloating and trivial content.

I doubt I will miss Twitter. This hacking episode reaffirms my position that while social media does some good, it's mostly a useless hazard that brings down everyone from politicians to regular folks just innocently trying to stay connected. Twitter in particular, even more than Facebook, seems particularly high on risk and low on value.

A voice that does not need silencing

Whether it's because of my Brooklyn bias, sense of historical perspective or political views, I have to say that the calls for Rep. Anthony Weiner's resignation seem premature.

Yes, I know what he did. It was juvenile. Men, especially under the age of 50, do a lot of juvenile things. But put into context with Sen. Ted Kennedy driving off a bridge and causing the death of a woman, or President Clinton's real-life shenanigans in the Oval Office with an intern, Weiner's cyberspace exploits with a handful of strangers seems pretty tame to me. Unsavory, yes, but not the end of the world. Both Kennedy and Clinton went on to serve the country well. I don't see why Weiner can't do the same.

Yeah, Weiner lied. But since when is a politician lying such a crime or surprise? It's what some politicians do to make a living. Frankly, I rather Weiner lie about his personal Twitter romps than mislead the American people about tax cuts for the wealthy somehow creating jobs for you and me. I rather he lie about his inappropriate photos than lie to us about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. That lie cost a lot of lives.

We are all flawed. Some of our flaws and quirks can ruin lives. But to say that Weiner's lies about tweeting women mean that he must not have any credibility related to trying to get help for 9-11 emergency workers, well, that is simply absurd.

Weiner, like Kennedy, is often on the correct side of fairness. He speaks for the underdogs, the working class. He was born in Brooklyn and had to earn his way in life. This New Yorker is not like Donald Trump. While the congressman appears to have a Big Apple ego, it doesn't seem to prevent him from showing empathy for those in need.

According to some polls, Weiner's constituents in New York still support him despite the Twitter scandal. That does not surprise me at all. If you're in a middle or lower class neighborhood in his district that lies in Brooklyn and Queens, you probably aren't too concerned about Weiner's personal life. He hasn't committed any crimes, unlike a few Republican politicians who have been in the headlines recently. What you are concerned about living in those places, however, is whether or not someone is fighting for you in Washington, trying to get you a fair shake in the workplace and bring a better health-care system to people on the fringe.

To me, the real immoral leaders in Washington aren't the ones who occasionally get tripped up by simply being human. The immoral politicians are the ones who don't care about the elderly, the environment or the jobless. They vote to end unemployment benefits and put the economy in further peril by playing political games with the debt ceiling. The politicians who should resign are the ones voting to end Medicare while cutting teaching jobs and lining the pockets of their most wealthy contributors. These are the real creeps. Even if all creepiness were equal, I would always prefer the creep who is doing more good than harm.

Weiner can text and tweet all he wants as far as I am concerned. I'm not married to him, nor do I seek his spiritual advice. As long as his votes are in line with creating a better, more humane society, and he does not break any laws, I don't really care what he does in his personal life. Unlike a lot of right-wing hypocrites who flaunt their own holier-than-thou claims of virtue, Weiner pretty much sticks to the issues of governing when conducting public business. He does it in a flamboyant style, which is in part why this has gotten so much attention. But sometimes it takes a loud voice to drown out the real bullies in Congress. Weiner, like very few others, has that ability and personality to standup to the powerful. He's forceful and articulate. Like many New Yorkers, he's quick on his feet. He's not an intellectual train wreck like Sarah Palin, at least not in public view. He's smart enough to know when he's made a major blunder. Palin, and her army of airhead followers, wear stupidity like a badge of honor. She's a money-making machine whose central focus is herself, not her country or fellow citizens. Everything about her is as phony as her eyelashes. But I digress...

Do I wish Weiner would not have done what he did? Of course. I also wish Mickey Mantle wasn't an alcoholic. But Weiner's tweeting, like Mantle's flaws off the baseball field, is not a deal-breaker in my mind. Mantle did not cheat in hitting all those home runs. And Weiner, at least as far as we know as of this writing, did not neglect his duty to protect and represent his constituents. Can others in Congress truly make the same claim?

Just because someone doesn't get caught behaving badly doesn't mean they aren't doing something personally offensive to someone. And even if they are as pure as the driven snow, that alone doesn't make them fit for representing me, you or anyone else. We have to start judging political leaders by their votes, legislation they introduce and intelligence. We have too many problems and too few visionaries willing to stand up for common decency and logic. Weeding out people because of some trivial and personal matter isn't good for the political process.

Read another opinion on the Weiner saga.

End times? Not what I expected

The world didn't end yesterday, but my and my wife's little corner of the planet was certainly rocked with a trip to the emergency room -- coincidentally, right about the time we were all suppose to be feeling the doomsday earthquakes. We're not out of the woods yet, but hopefully things will work out. Once again the universe is teaching us how fragile human beings are and how we need to manage stress and treasure our loved ones. More details at an appropriate time.

PART TWO (May 26, 2011)

My wife, Ana, experienced a rapid heart beat last Saturday. It lasted for a good part of the morning and into the afternoon. Her visit to the emergency room that evening included various tests. All but one were negative. She had a very high concentration of a specific enzyme that indicates the heart was severely stressed within the last 24 hours, meaning there could possibly be significant damage to the heart muscle. That set off all kinds of alarms in the ER. She was admitted later that night. She is out of the hospital now and has various appointments and tests lined up with a cardiologist. As of today, there does not appear to have been any permanent damage to her heart, nor does it appear that she had a heart attack. We're grateful for that, but the tests will continue as there are some lingering problems.

This racing heart thing isn't new for her, but it's been dismissed in the past by doctors who were baffled by it and concluded it was nothing serious. I believe everyone, including us, figured it had something to do with stress. Each episode usually came about during high-anxiety times but went away within minutes of striking. Then came last Saturday. The racing heart led to breathing problems, dizziness and other troublesome reactions. The stress level of the previous few weeks leading up to that day was off the charts. In hindsight, this attack was not a surprise. As the doctors told us, extreme fatigue and chronic worrying does all kinds of destructive things to the body.

Like most folks, we've had a lot of anxiety for at least three years. A lot of it relates to the toll the recession has taken on our lives. At 50something, the body does not deal with the stress or anxiety in the resilient manner it did at 20something. So if this turns out to be stress related -- and it very well could because Ana is an otherwise very healthy woman -- it will be time to make some internal and external changes in our world, which include distancing ourselves from toxic situations and people, and processing better what we can't filter out. There is good stress and there is bad stress, and right now we have too much of the latter. We bite the bullet in order to survive day to day, but that strategy may have to be altered.

Getting sick is one of the forgotten byproducts of the recession. You mostly read about savings accounts having been depleted, careers being destroyed and homes falling into foreclosure. Unfortunately, all of these things take a toll on the mind and body. So first comes the economic collapse, then comes the physical and personal problems that we are all prone to.

In a way, we are hoping this was caused mostly by stress and that no further invasive procedures or potent medications are necessary. We can rearrange our lives -- make various sacrifices in order to alleviate some of the pressure -- but we can't turn back the clock to better times when her job was manageable and my career helped us save for the future. I would rather deal with the risk and challenge of creating a less pressure-filled life than for either of us to end up on an operating table. We need to change the lens in which we view ourselves and our situation -- control what we can control -- and live more in the moment. And we need to somehow do all of that without putting more pressure on ourselves in a year that has already included Ana being a donor for her leukemia-stricken brother and the sudden death of my daughter's 16-year-old sibling.

Unpredictability of the "end times"

I'm waiting to see if the world is going to end in a few hours.

I went for a jog this morning and am getting my haircut later this afternoon. Besides that, I have no grand plans for this sunny Virginia day other than to check out CNN around 9 p.m. ET. The end is suppose to start with a major earthquake, somewhere around Australia. Hopefully, CNN hasn't been hit too hard by layoffs and still has some competent reporters down under.

You all have heard the latest "end times" story by now. No need for me to repeat the theory or even link to it. You can believe whatever you want, of course. Go about your business or wait in church for the mega earthquakes to erupt. Remember, this is strictly a Christian-based scenario, so all other denominations are exempt as far as I know.

Frankly, I don't think the world is going to end today. Not in the Biblical sense. You see, if there is a God, he probably is going to take us out at our lowest point, when we just become hopeless morons roaming a planet that we thoroughly trashed. We're close but not quite there yet.

God probably isn't going to torch the place until we've torched ourselves a tad more. I suspect we still have some work to do in that area -- maybe lob a few nukes at each other or, at the very least, wipe out the fish from the oceans. We need another world war or two, not over oil, but over drinking water. Yup, that's what future wars will be about, according to some observers. Water.

Our simply becoming more obnoxious by the year isn't necessarily going to piss off God enough to say "OK, I am done with y'all." Our growing sense of entitlement, bad manners and worsening driving habits are annoying but not worthy of a good Rapture.

According to the Bible, Jesus wasn't much of a fan of wealthy folks but I doubt he'd blow up the place because the rich are getting richer during the last three decades while the rest of us are going broke. That little Gulf of Mexico/BP thing ... well, probably not good in the eyes of the "maker." I mean most people don't want kids walking on their newly sodded lawns or freshly sealed driveways, so can you imagine how God feels when we wreck an entire body of water and most everything He put in it?

Fortunately, God gives us more than our fair share of mulligans. But we're certainly pushing our luck, particularly in recent years where humans behaving badly, from all segments of society, is becoming the new global norm.

When the tigers go extinct and little Johnny can no longer read or write a complete sentence, I think we'll be on the edge of Armageddon. Until then, there is still some hope.

Any signs of optimism for mankind will likely come in various forms, probably starting with a decline in Fox News ratings. Perhaps people will begin using their turn signals again. Young men may pull up their pants at least to mid-buttocks. Employability will be based on competency, not age, race or gender. Young (and not so young) women will stop using the word "like" five times in every sentence. These are the subtle signs that I will look for in order to feel that we're back on the right path.

Here's another reason the world will probably not end tonight. God has to give us more than just a couple extra weeks on the planet than he gave Osama bin Laden. Fair is fair, right?

Personally, I am thinking we need at least another year to begin to correct our course. That will put us right around the next major doomsday prediction -- the 2012 Mayan calendar's last call. If by then Rush Limbaugh remains on the radio, Rep. Paul Ryan's proposed budget is still under consideration by Republicans and cell phones haven't been banned in nice restaurants, well, maybe we deserve to perish.

I am not sure that any god, Christian or otherwise, will ever end the world. I suspect we will do that on our own. It will probably be a slow and painful process. The real end times may even go unnoticed for decades or be mistaken for something else (economic problems, political strife, climate change, dwindling SAT scores, etc). Eventually, after enough religious zealots have cried wolf for their own selfish purposes, we might all discover that the wolf is not a god. Indeed, the wolf might be us.

Hyping the death of a terrorist

As I was driving home from work today, I heard a caller on a radio station say that in the course of his and most people's daily lives, the killing of Osama bin Laden isn't going to make any long-term difference. He spoke of other more pressing priorities and cautioned people and the media (including the dismissive talk show host who obviously wanted to hype the killing) not to make more of this than it deserves.

You know what? He's absolutely right.

It has been a good several days for President Obama. He proved he wasn't born in a foreign country or on another planet by releasing his long-form birth certificate. Then yesterday, he confirmed that he was indeed a patriot and a darn smart strategist by directing the military mission to kill bin Laden in a targeted manner rather than bombing the heck out of the hideaway in Pakistan. It's nice to have a president with guts and brains. Obama's not getting much credit from all the usual idiots, but I think the taking out of bin Laden pretty much sealed the deal for the 2012 election.

Well, maybe sealed is too strong of a word.

Bin Laden swimming with the fishes doesn't really do a lot for me. It's mildly satisfying at best but won't influence my vote. We have worse threats both in the international world of terrorism and in our own domestic backyard. I want my president focused on getting us out of wars and into jobs. I want a fair president who doesn't rob the poor and middle class in order to give to the rich. I want a visionary as a president -- a person with a sense of fairness, honor and respect for the planet.

Symbolic victories are just that -- symbolic. They don't lower gasoline prices. They don't get people back to work, slow down foreclosures or reduce crime. Symbolism doesn't cure cancer, stop corruption on Wall Street, educate young people or prevent oil spills. Those are far tougher problems that if solved would actually change millions of lives in positive, tangible ways for generations to come.

If Obama were to fail in his bid for a second term, it would probably be because of the sluggish economy. He can have bin Laden killed, show his birth certificate and rally young people into a frenzy in front of the White House, but if he doesn't address the economy in a meaningful manner, his re-election will not be a slam dunk. The caller on the radio, I suspect, represents how many Americans will feel once this feel-good moment from Sunday night wears off. As we enter the voting booth, we tend to focus more on what really matters in a practical sense. The demise of bin Laden won't get the potholes fixed. Nor will it stop people from trying to murder Americans.

The killing of bin Laden gives us immediate, primal satisfaction but doesn't put food on the table or teachers in the classrooms. As evil as bin Laden was, comparisons with Adolph Hitler by the media and others are absurd. Stopping Hitler changed the world. Killing bin Laden won't even prevent us from getting frisked at the airport.

We need a little perspective, folks. Seven or eight years ago this would have been a bigger story because bin Laden would have been perceived as a more viable threat. Now, as boxed in as he became, does anyone really think his death in 2011 is a game-changer in the lives of most Americans?