Say What?

On this Tax Day, file this away: watch what you say.


I'm talking to you, journalists.


As we watch our local news stations deteriorate into Layoff Land, many of us turn to cable, where we're all but guaranteed a 24-hour editorial spin cycle.


Today thousands gathered around the country to protest taxes, big government... but mostly Obama. Demonstrators armed with propaganda even hurled tea boxes onto the North Lawn of the White House.


This afternoon, CNN reporter Susan Roesgen stood surrounded by countless protesters assembled at one of Chicago's Tax Day Tea Parties.

"This is a party for Obama bashers," she began, obviously disgusted with the crowd.

One man had adorned himself with a billboard portraying President Obama as Adolf Hitler, complete with the Sieg Heil salute and toothbrush moustache. The protester repeatedly referred to Obama as a "fascist."


"Why," the reporter demanded several times.

The protester shrugged: "Because he is," a message he simply regurgitated from conservative talk radio and memorized for today's occasion.



Roesgen moved on to another demonstrator, who held his young son and a cardboard sign. It boasted: "I'm not even two years old and I'm already in debt."

The angry father criticized Obama for being very un-Lincoln-like, to which the reporter interrupted, "What does this have to do with your taxes?"


While the protester continued with his tirade, Roesgen again cut him off: "Did you know that the state of Lincoln gets $50 million out of this stimulus?" At this point the reporter was wagging her finger and shouting at the ones who were supposed to be doing the shouting.


Roesgen ended her live report from Obama's home state by dismissing the tea party as "anti-government, anti-CNN," and "highly promoted by the right-wing conservative network, Fox." She deemed the environment unfit for "family viewing" before she tossed back to the studio anchor.


Susan Roesgen broke a lot of journalism rules in two minutes' time: she screamed, she debated, she undermined a protest. She even called out a competitor. And she was smug.


Like it or not, those protesters can legally wear what they want to wear and say what they want to say. They're still U.S. citizens, regardless of whether their hatred of government spending contradicts their support for funding the $10 billion-a-month payment on the Iraq mess.


Simply put, most republicans don't mind spending provided it supports their own selfish interests: faith-based programs, marriage protection initiatives and "the war on terror," to name a few. In the same breath, conservatives will point out their contempt for the government meddling in their personal affairs, as they've articulated in hordes throughout the day.


Today's protesting comes on the same day a memo is leaked from Homeland Security. In it the federal government warns the current economy may create "a fertile recruiting environment for right-wing extremists.''


The department wants to avoid "another Timothy McVeigh-like situation," which it says may have been fueled by similar economic conditions in 1995.


It's truly scary (and ironic) that the department our last president created now worries about right wingers buying up guns in bulk in preparation for a revolution.


In simple terms, they fear Obama will take their Second Amendment right. Quite a paranoid thought, considering these are the same people who'd love to rework the Constitution to define marriage.


Bottom line, you can always bank on this: Opinion should stay out of the news. Hitler should stay out of presidential comparisons. And -- if only for the day -- Obama should probably stay inside.



-P.F.

Pull Out!

You've filed your tax return and cashed your latest unemployment check, but wait. You still owe the Department of Defense.

Let's see: the rent, the car, the gas, the insurance, the food, the utilities... oh, right. The war.

Your share this month: $74.07.

You haven't forgotten your monthly obligation, have you? Your war bill continues to fight a "mission accomplished" six years ago in Iraq, and guess what? The president just asked for more.


Today -- on the anniversary of the fall of Baghdad -- Obama requested more than $83 billion to pick up the war tab in Iraq and Afghanistan through September.

I know, he's desperately trying to pick up after the eight-year frat party. Give him time. Thing is, Obama says our troops will stay put in Iraq until the last day of 2011.

That certainly puts time on the side of Obama's re-election campaign, but it dangerously flirts with more division at a time when we should all be working. Together. With benefits. And without war.


For those 135 million Americans who pay their taxes, their war bill blasts their bottom lines every month. At just over $74, I suppose it beats cable. But, you see, I like cable. And when it's angry, it only deletes that Top Model episode my wife hasn't seen yet.

Folks, we must immediately stop complaining about bailout money and economic turmoil until we decide to stop spending $10 billion dollars on Iraq every month.

Call up your congressman and shout, "Pull out!"

We must redirect to American taxpayers every dollar earmarked for this Iraq disaster, just as Obama pledges to redirect military focus to Afghanistan. Every misspent American dollar in Iraq could bail us out rather than drown us.


Remember: you scoffed when Congress approved a trillion dollars of your money to save A.I.G., Fannie and Freddie. It may have been necessary. But your $74/month sure ain't paying the bills.



-P.F.

Bite Me.

"Well, that's unique," my new dentist mumbles from behind his face mask.

I already know what he's referring to as his metallic hook-like instrument scrapes away.

"Uh huh," I manage through an open jaw while fighting inevitable drool. I've got a tooth (or is it teeth?) that never fails to puzzle and amuse those who practice dentistry. I've come to expect this conversation, much like the one we'll have about sealants, fluoride and anything else I should consider purchasing today.

Turns out my "fused tooth" may be one in a million. The hygienist informs me my lateral incisor fused with its neighboring central incisor while my teeth were budding. Those two teeth sort of partnered up and never let go. My lower left jaw would never be the same.

Dentists in three states have expressed wonder and glee at the sight of my slightly deformed friend. One in Virginia said, "Wow. I haven't seen one of these since medical school!"

Things get really interesting when the hygienist hasn't seen the x-rays and proceeds with trying to floss my funky tooth. There's a groove, but no gap exists. Floss shall never tread on this territory. Fusion!


Ann A. Griffen of The Ohio State University College of Dentistry writes that fusion exists "in about 0.5% of children, so it is not all that unusual." I don't know, half of one percent seems rare. She adds that fused teeth often get cavities. Not to discredit the professor here, but I'm proud to boast I've never had a cavity.


What I do get are questions. My favorite comes from one of the hygienists today: "Did you have those teeth fused voluntarily?"

I nearly fall out of the dentist's chair, x-ray bib and all, while Costanza brags about his Jon Voight car on the t.v. overhead.

"Well," she says, "People with sensitive teeth can choose to fuse them to make them stronger."

Maybe I misunderstood or just misheard her. But I know I didn't choose this path for my incisors. Something in nature got them married during my terrible twos period.

And so it seems I'm a stronger person for all this. And I still manage to keep the experts guessing. There's a partnership in my mouth. But you're not invited.



-P.F.

Got "Milk"?

No? Get some.

You'll find that no shelf life will ever threaten the movie's main ingredient: equality. Time, as they say, heals all wounds. Or does it?

Sean Penn does the gay struggle unparalleled justice as San Francisco supervisor Harvey Milk, who was shot down at the height of his activism for equal rights. At 40 years old, Milk set out to de-sour a city (and country) of its hatred for homosexuals. At 47, he would become the nation's first elected openly-gay politician. He would invoke the "hope" message while Barack Obama was still a teenager. And Milk would be dead within the year.

He wasn't killed because he was gay. No, Harvey Milk was envied. A fellow city supervisor longed for Milk's confidence and poise, his charisma and drive. That other man -- Dan White -- fatally shot Milk and the San Francisco mayor. White would later commit suicide following a brief prison term.

More than 30 years later, our country remains embroiled in a civil rights struggle that -- for many -- is too close for comfort: the gay marriage debate.

While Milk never touches the issue of marriage, the film begs each one of us to consider the way we treat others. Harvey Milk mounted a soapbox and needed no violent demonstration to make himself heard. He had hordes of people behind him in the end. Yet even more people opposed the thought of two men or two women romantically linked.

Homosexuality is not a choice, preference, lifestyle or a sin. It is not contagious. And after all these years, it is still not entirely accepted.


In the last election, Americans voted down gay marriage in all 30 states that put the measure on the ballot. Here in Florida, Amendment 2 passed without a hitch. And in California Prop. 8 sets back decades of Milk's activism there. White voters in California don't support same-sex marriage, and neither do black voters. Eerily, African-Americans overwhelming oppose this constant civil rights struggle.


How is it in the Netherlands and in Belgium gays are allowed to marry and -- here's the best part -- actually call it "marriage"? In Spain marriage has "the same requirements and results when the two people entering into the contract are of the same sex or of different sexes." Back home in the States, though, we're determined to keep "marriage" between one man and one woman. Civil unions, fine, but please... don't mention gay marriage.

Disgusting, isn't it? For the U.S. government to even hint at involvement in sex and marriage would be astounding enough, but when lawmakers exhaust taxpayer time and capital fighting a gay couple's unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then, well... we the people come out the loser every time.

I'd never seen more tap dancing around the issue than when now-Veep Joe Biden and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin debated same-sex rights a month before the election. Palin at least clearly expressed her opposition to "redefining" marriage, while the moderator had to beat it out of ol' Joe: "Barack Obama nor I support redefining, from a civil side, what constitutes marriage." Hmm. Glad the parties could finally agree on something.

Look, if you support a gay couple's right to hospital visitations, home ownership, insurance... why not just let them get married? Adopt children? Start a family?

This was, in essence, Harvey Milk's wish. He wanted to "recruit" so many so that they could learn to embrace everyone. He didn't rebel, he led. Harvey Milk was the original glass-half-full guy. And we sure could use some more.


-P.F.