So the motto of the Coast Guard is "Semper Paratus - Always Prepared". The motto of the Marine Corps is "Semper Fidelis - Always Faithful."
Somebody should be honest about this. I humbly suggest "Semper Aquatus - Always Wet."
R/SCG
Thursday, October 11, 2012
The Possibility of Mobilization
Top of the evening all...
Yes...the balloon could go up. Yes...I can be mobilized. According to federal law, the Department of Defense must give us 30 days notice. Usually, the notice is much longer. Anything less than that requires direct approval of the Secretary of Defense.
Not that it matters. If the phone rang, I can and would be ready tomorrow. Most of us would be. It is the burden of commission and the burden of the oath of office.
Is there fear? Perhaps. Is there trepidation? No. We have a job to do. We get it.
As I mentioned earlier though, goals must be clearly stated. It is not reasonable to ask anyone to risk life and limb without knowing why. It is not fair to our families to borrow us for the necessary amount of time without knowing why. For those of us in the Reserve, it is not fair to our employers to have muddled goals when they are required by law to hold our civilian jobs for us. They have the right to know why they are temporarily parting company with us.
I regret that my mobilization to Afghanistan was taken away. It was the one of the most exciting things I would have done in my rabbinate in many years. As well, we train for it. We expect it. It is like sitting at the starting gate, one foot on the brake, one on the gas pedal, and then being told to turn the car off.
By the way, Jennifer likely would not want me spending too much time in a combat zone. Nonetheless, she has trained for this also. She was somewhat disappointed that I did not go.
There is nothing on the horizon at this moment. Iraq is over. The President intends to remove troops from Afghanistan in 2014. There are hot spots, but nothing that should require the reserve component.
Nonetheless, the motto of the United States Coast Guard stands: Semper Paratus - Always Prepared.
R/SCG
Yes...the balloon could go up. Yes...I can be mobilized. According to federal law, the Department of Defense must give us 30 days notice. Usually, the notice is much longer. Anything less than that requires direct approval of the Secretary of Defense.
Not that it matters. If the phone rang, I can and would be ready tomorrow. Most of us would be. It is the burden of commission and the burden of the oath of office.
Is there fear? Perhaps. Is there trepidation? No. We have a job to do. We get it.
As I mentioned earlier though, goals must be clearly stated. It is not reasonable to ask anyone to risk life and limb without knowing why. It is not fair to our families to borrow us for the necessary amount of time without knowing why. For those of us in the Reserve, it is not fair to our employers to have muddled goals when they are required by law to hold our civilian jobs for us. They have the right to know why they are temporarily parting company with us.
I regret that my mobilization to Afghanistan was taken away. It was the one of the most exciting things I would have done in my rabbinate in many years. As well, we train for it. We expect it. It is like sitting at the starting gate, one foot on the brake, one on the gas pedal, and then being told to turn the car off.
By the way, Jennifer likely would not want me spending too much time in a combat zone. Nonetheless, she has trained for this also. She was somewhat disappointed that I did not go.
There is nothing on the horizon at this moment. Iraq is over. The President intends to remove troops from Afghanistan in 2014. There are hot spots, but nothing that should require the reserve component.
Nonetheless, the motto of the United States Coast Guard stands: Semper Paratus - Always Prepared.
R/SCG
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Politics and the Chain of Command
Top of the evening all...
'Anonymous' has been commenting on my blog over the last few entries. I would like to thank 'Anonymous' for three reasons. The first is for reading and commenting. The second is for making me go back and check what I have written over the last few years. The third is for offering me a topic this evening.
I must assume that I know 'Anonymous' personally. 'Anonymous' has accused me of making political statements. The accusation stands, and is probably accurate. However, there is nothing overly political in this blog. Therefore, 'Anonymous' must have heard me face to face.
I am a Naval officer. As a group, the public demeanour of military personnel tends to be apolitical. The reason is rather simple. It is not that we do not hold strong opinions. To the contrary, we realize that what happens in Washington DC very much affects our lives and the lives of those in our charge. We hold very strong opinions.
Still, to hold a public opinion that is not completely in line with the chain of command, straight up to the President, threatens to erode confidence in that chain of command. When lives are at stake, when the security of a nation is at stake, such erosion of confidence can be lethal. Two years ago, the President had to fire one of the most competent generals ever to wear the uniform for precisely this reason. Despite General McChrystal's unquestioned competence, relieving him of command was the right decision. The President handled it magnificently.
As well, we officers tend not to voice public disagreement for the simple reason of self-preservation. I thought long and hard before publishing my last blog entry. I serve at the leisure of the President. I do not wish to be fired.
I once worked with another chaplain with whom I did not see eye to eye on a great many things. One of the things he said was that President Clinton "was not his President." I have no time for such officers. He may not like whoever the present Commander in Chief is. He may not respect that person. Nonetheless, the President most certainly is his President. To think anything other than that denies the Constitution that we have all affirmed to support and defend.
Good night to all.
R/SCG
Note to 'Anonymous': feel free to disagree with me. Please do not write that I am not being fully honest. The readers of this blog have received only full honesty at every turn.
'Anonymous' has been commenting on my blog over the last few entries. I would like to thank 'Anonymous' for three reasons. The first is for reading and commenting. The second is for making me go back and check what I have written over the last few years. The third is for offering me a topic this evening.
I must assume that I know 'Anonymous' personally. 'Anonymous' has accused me of making political statements. The accusation stands, and is probably accurate. However, there is nothing overly political in this blog. Therefore, 'Anonymous' must have heard me face to face.
I am a Naval officer. As a group, the public demeanour of military personnel tends to be apolitical. The reason is rather simple. It is not that we do not hold strong opinions. To the contrary, we realize that what happens in Washington DC very much affects our lives and the lives of those in our charge. We hold very strong opinions.
Still, to hold a public opinion that is not completely in line with the chain of command, straight up to the President, threatens to erode confidence in that chain of command. When lives are at stake, when the security of a nation is at stake, such erosion of confidence can be lethal. Two years ago, the President had to fire one of the most competent generals ever to wear the uniform for precisely this reason. Despite General McChrystal's unquestioned competence, relieving him of command was the right decision. The President handled it magnificently.
As well, we officers tend not to voice public disagreement for the simple reason of self-preservation. I thought long and hard before publishing my last blog entry. I serve at the leisure of the President. I do not wish to be fired.
I once worked with another chaplain with whom I did not see eye to eye on a great many things. One of the things he said was that President Clinton "was not his President." I have no time for such officers. He may not like whoever the present Commander in Chief is. He may not respect that person. Nonetheless, the President most certainly is his President. To think anything other than that denies the Constitution that we have all affirmed to support and defend.
Good night to all.
R/SCG
Note to 'Anonymous': feel free to disagree with me. Please do not write that I am not being fully honest. The readers of this blog have received only full honesty at every turn.
Thursday, October 4, 2012
I Have a Problem...
Hi all...
I have a problem. A few weeks from now, I have the civic obligation to help the United States choose the next President. I do not know what to do.
I am not thrilled with the current POTUS. To be fair though, I congratulate him for placing the issue of health care on the political map indelibly. Whether or not health care takes shape according to his vision remains to be seen. Still, no President will be able to ignore the issue anymore.
Furthermore, I congratulate him on having the intestinal fortitude to make the final decision on invading a foreign country to remove an avowed enemy of the United States. The list of things that could have gone wrong with that raid is long. It was a gutsy call.
I have three problems right now. The first is the voice vote that happened at the Democratic convention. When the votes were 'counted,' it was clear that a significant group was against the inclusion of the platform item on Jerusalem. While I think that the two parties in the US agree on this, it seems to me that the Democratic party is more and more becoming a home for people with negative views on Israel. That is not the party of my youth. It will not be the party of my old age.
The second problem involves the murder of our Ambassador in Libya. It is coming out now that the 'right people' knew that it was terrorism within 24 hours. The President and his staff maintained for over a week that it was random violence based on stupidity. This affects my life directly. It affects the lives of my Sailors and Marines. I can be called to go to war. Failure to name the enemy leads to confusion as to the goals of war, and whether or not those goals have been met.
The third problem is that being on a talk show should not trump meeting with heads of state in New York.
I am thus not voting for this President.
On the other hand, the only thing I like about Governor Romney is that his views on Israel are much more in line with mine. Otherwise, I am worried about his level of compassion. I am worried that he seems to put his foot in his mouth every time he speaks. He also does not keep such great company. The Tea Party people are as far removed from my belief system as the left wing of the Democrats.
Luckily, with every problem, there is a solution. I have decided to write my own name in for the office of the President of the United States.
(The rest of this is a seamless blend of humour and seriousness.)
I have two platform positions. The first is that I will work to lower the interest rate for federal student loans to 2% retroactively. My second platform position is that I am not either of the other two candidates.
If I am elected, I further promise to take no salary. It is an honour...oops...honor to be the President of the United States. It does not require a paycheque...oops...paycheck.
I have definite views on Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. I also realize that this is an inflammatory issue. I will thus test the cold waters by recognizing the Arctic as part of the United States. I suspect that Ottawa might withdraw my permanent residence status. If that is all that happens though, there should be no problem with Jerusalem.
I understand that there is a world of difference between running for office and being the President. I therefore will make no other promises. It is my clever way of avoiding having to backpedal later.
R/SCG
I have a problem. A few weeks from now, I have the civic obligation to help the United States choose the next President. I do not know what to do.
I am not thrilled with the current POTUS. To be fair though, I congratulate him for placing the issue of health care on the political map indelibly. Whether or not health care takes shape according to his vision remains to be seen. Still, no President will be able to ignore the issue anymore.
Furthermore, I congratulate him on having the intestinal fortitude to make the final decision on invading a foreign country to remove an avowed enemy of the United States. The list of things that could have gone wrong with that raid is long. It was a gutsy call.
I have three problems right now. The first is the voice vote that happened at the Democratic convention. When the votes were 'counted,' it was clear that a significant group was against the inclusion of the platform item on Jerusalem. While I think that the two parties in the US agree on this, it seems to me that the Democratic party is more and more becoming a home for people with negative views on Israel. That is not the party of my youth. It will not be the party of my old age.
The second problem involves the murder of our Ambassador in Libya. It is coming out now that the 'right people' knew that it was terrorism within 24 hours. The President and his staff maintained for over a week that it was random violence based on stupidity. This affects my life directly. It affects the lives of my Sailors and Marines. I can be called to go to war. Failure to name the enemy leads to confusion as to the goals of war, and whether or not those goals have been met.
The third problem is that being on a talk show should not trump meeting with heads of state in New York.
I am thus not voting for this President.
On the other hand, the only thing I like about Governor Romney is that his views on Israel are much more in line with mine. Otherwise, I am worried about his level of compassion. I am worried that he seems to put his foot in his mouth every time he speaks. He also does not keep such great company. The Tea Party people are as far removed from my belief system as the left wing of the Democrats.
Luckily, with every problem, there is a solution. I have decided to write my own name in for the office of the President of the United States.
(The rest of this is a seamless blend of humour and seriousness.)
I have two platform positions. The first is that I will work to lower the interest rate for federal student loans to 2% retroactively. My second platform position is that I am not either of the other two candidates.
If I am elected, I further promise to take no salary. It is an honour...oops...honor to be the President of the United States. It does not require a paycheque...oops...paycheck.
I have definite views on Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. I also realize that this is an inflammatory issue. I will thus test the cold waters by recognizing the Arctic as part of the United States. I suspect that Ottawa might withdraw my permanent residence status. If that is all that happens though, there should be no problem with Jerusalem.
I understand that there is a world of difference between running for office and being the President. I therefore will make no other promises. It is my clever way of avoiding having to backpedal later.
R/SCG
Monday, September 24, 2012
Though I Know I'll Never Lose Affection...
Hi all....
I have never quite understood remaining friends with ex-significant others. It seems insulting to say to someone "you are good enough to be friends, but not a permanent lover." If being taken as a permanent lover is most personal form of acceptance, it stands to reason that being spurned as a permanent lover is the most personal form of rejection.
For you married folks, the presence of a former significant other means that a spouse must live in the shadow of someone who might have been 'the one' in different circumstances. It is not fair to the spouse. One of our responsibilities when we marry to make sure that our spouses know not only that they are the platinum standard of intimate relationships, but also that they are the only standard of intimate relationships.
And the title of this entry...it is from "In My Life," by the Beatles, although it has been covered by Judy Collins and by Bette Midler, among others. Like many things, I have come to appreciate that song more and more as I get a little older. The memories of relationships past are part of who we are. That is okay. "But these memories (should) lose their meanings, when I (we) think of love as something new."
Have a good evening all.
R/SCG
I have never quite understood remaining friends with ex-significant others. It seems insulting to say to someone "you are good enough to be friends, but not a permanent lover." If being taken as a permanent lover is most personal form of acceptance, it stands to reason that being spurned as a permanent lover is the most personal form of rejection.
For you married folks, the presence of a former significant other means that a spouse must live in the shadow of someone who might have been 'the one' in different circumstances. It is not fair to the spouse. One of our responsibilities when we marry to make sure that our spouses know not only that they are the platinum standard of intimate relationships, but also that they are the only standard of intimate relationships.
And the title of this entry...it is from "In My Life," by the Beatles, although it has been covered by Judy Collins and by Bette Midler, among others. Like many things, I have come to appreciate that song more and more as I get a little older. The memories of relationships past are part of who we are. That is okay. "But these memories (should) lose their meanings, when I (we) think of love as something new."
Have a good evening all.
R/SCG
Thursday, September 13, 2012
Licensing of Cyclists
Hi all...
Apparently, there was an article in today's Star. The article reports that a growing number of people around the city believe that cyclists should be licensed. People think that such licensing will make the average cyclist more responsive to the law of the road. I agree and disagree over licensing.
Where do I disagree? The extant laws of the road include bicycles. Enforce them. The reason people pay any attention to the laws of the road is that there is a reasonable possibility of being caught. Increase that possibility. People will respond.
While there is thought that to increase infrastructure requires money, who better to pay it than those who will benefit the most? I agree wholeheartedly. I will happily have my taxes go to that infrastructure, provided that I no longer have to pay for city roads with my taxes. I do not really drive. Beyond that, bicycle lanes do not suffer from the slings and arrows of outrageous numbers of vehicles the way a road does.
Where do I agree? When we lived in Honolulu, there was a law on the books requiring all to register their bicycles. There is a sticker from the City on Honolulu on Jesse's bicycle even as we speak. That allows the city to keep track of how many bicycles are actually on the road, and to build the infrastructure to accommodate them. As well, if the bicycle is ever stolen, there is already a description of the bicycle with the police. This was a one-time registration.
One of the hot issues downtown has been the couriers. They ride downtown like bats out of hell. Here, a different set of laws should be in order. That set of laws requires all couriers to wear clothing identifying the company for which they work. It requires them to produce proof that their bicycles have had service within the last year. It holds their employers accountable for their actions.
That would go a long way. I am a licensed driver. I do not need anything more than that.
Ride carefully folks, and remember to wear a helmet.
R/SCG
Apparently, there was an article in today's Star. The article reports that a growing number of people around the city believe that cyclists should be licensed. People think that such licensing will make the average cyclist more responsive to the law of the road. I agree and disagree over licensing.
Where do I disagree? The extant laws of the road include bicycles. Enforce them. The reason people pay any attention to the laws of the road is that there is a reasonable possibility of being caught. Increase that possibility. People will respond.
While there is thought that to increase infrastructure requires money, who better to pay it than those who will benefit the most? I agree wholeheartedly. I will happily have my taxes go to that infrastructure, provided that I no longer have to pay for city roads with my taxes. I do not really drive. Beyond that, bicycle lanes do not suffer from the slings and arrows of outrageous numbers of vehicles the way a road does.
Where do I agree? When we lived in Honolulu, there was a law on the books requiring all to register their bicycles. There is a sticker from the City on Honolulu on Jesse's bicycle even as we speak. That allows the city to keep track of how many bicycles are actually on the road, and to build the infrastructure to accommodate them. As well, if the bicycle is ever stolen, there is already a description of the bicycle with the police. This was a one-time registration.
One of the hot issues downtown has been the couriers. They ride downtown like bats out of hell. Here, a different set of laws should be in order. That set of laws requires all couriers to wear clothing identifying the company for which they work. It requires them to produce proof that their bicycles have had service within the last year. It holds their employers accountable for their actions.
That would go a long way. I am a licensed driver. I do not need anything more than that.
Ride carefully folks, and remember to wear a helmet.
R/SCG
Monday, September 10, 2012
Cooking for the Holidays
Top of the evening everyone...
Prior to every holiday, Jennifer and I pull out the cookbooks to make menus. It takes hooouuuurrrrss. She constantly complains that I am of little help. I try to fake it to the best of my ability, but she is right.
This evening, she asked me to bring her a cookbook. I brought her "Olives and Honey." It is a kosher vegetarian cookbook, featuring foods from just about everywhere. The author is Gil Marks. He is both a rabbi and a chef.
We always have challenges. For Rosh HaShanah, my parents are coming up. They are peschatarian (fish-eating vegetarians). I do not do dairy so well. Keren is not a huge fan of fish.
Given those restrictions, what would you like to eat if you were coming to my house?
You just read that correctly. I am offering all of you a once-in-a-year chance to suggest what Jennifer and I should serve for the holidays. We have over 100 cookbooks. Do not be bashful.
I am NOT cooking for Yom Kippur.
Good night.
R/SCG
Prior to every holiday, Jennifer and I pull out the cookbooks to make menus. It takes hooouuuurrrrss. She constantly complains that I am of little help. I try to fake it to the best of my ability, but she is right.
This evening, she asked me to bring her a cookbook. I brought her "Olives and Honey." It is a kosher vegetarian cookbook, featuring foods from just about everywhere. The author is Gil Marks. He is both a rabbi and a chef.
We always have challenges. For Rosh HaShanah, my parents are coming up. They are peschatarian (fish-eating vegetarians). I do not do dairy so well. Keren is not a huge fan of fish.
Given those restrictions, what would you like to eat if you were coming to my house?
You just read that correctly. I am offering all of you a once-in-a-year chance to suggest what Jennifer and I should serve for the holidays. We have over 100 cookbooks. Do not be bashful.
I am NOT cooking for Yom Kippur.
Good night.
R/SCG
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)