USS Texas - The Next Generation

I served on the third USS Texas, the nuclear cruiser, and I can bet that the new crew will have a lot of fun in Galveston.

I arrived onboard in 1981 when the few original crewmembers (called "plankowners") still onboard regaled nubs ("non-useful bodies") like me with fantastical tales of shore leave in Galveston on their maiden voyage. Apparently Texans go ga-ga over anything named Texas. For example, a USS Texas ball cap -- a mere $5 in the ship's store -- could get you a night of free drinking at any bar in town. The same ball cap could inflame the ardor of most any true Texan woman, or so I was told. Clearly, sailors had to learn their priorities -- or else carry around a lot of hats.

Some sailors gave away Zippo lighters emblazoned with the ship's crest with the same effect. But, as the lighters cost $7.50, crewmembers turned to ball caps to get more bang for their buck.

Prior to their return trip to Galveston, the ship's store tripled their inventory of ball caps -- and sold them all. Who said sailors aren't trainable?

Ross H. Perot, at the time known only as a millionaire Texan, offered to build the Texas its own facility in Galveston, if only the navy would make Galveston the ship's home port. That's quite a lot of money, given the pier, the connections, the munitions and radiological facilities necessary for a nuclear cruiser. But the navy said no. Instead, Mr. Perot gave the captain a glass case with two chrome-plated, pearl-handled, Colt .45 revolvers. The case was inscribed, "In case of missile failure, break glass." Those revolvers were on display in the trophy case (port side, aft of the mess deck) when I left in 1985. I occasionally wonder what happened to them.

I wonder because CGN-39 was decommissioned and chopped into razor blades in 1993, after the navy decided not to give the ship its 15-year nuclear refueling. It seems that cruisers with new gas-turbine engines were cheaper, more effective targets for enemy missiles. The role of the cruiser, you see, is to "take one for the team" in order to protect the carrier's flight deck -- a fact which seriously affected my re-enlistment plans. Of course, submarines like the new Texas have much less to worry about there.

My advice to the newest Texas plankowners: stock up on ball caps. After all, you have a tradition to uphold.


New Navy nuclear sub debuts in Atlantic - Yahoo! News

The JonBenet case, examined. By James R. Kincaid - Slate Magazine

I have to say that Kincaid is correct -- Americans sexualize our children at very young ages thereby guaranteeing the spectacular coverage of JonBenet's case. We worship youth, don't we? And isn't that worship partly responsible for JonBenet's popularity as well as her murder?

The JonBenet case, examined. By James R. Kincaid - Slate Magazine

Larry Beinhart: Say it Loud, Say it Often, "Republicans are Bad on National Security"

The Republicans have started their 2006 campaign by building fear of terrorism yet again. If you saw Ken Mehlman or Dick Cheney on the Sunday talk shows, you'd have run for the duct tape & plastic sheeting closet.

But it's all so senseless. The GOP have already proven they can't protect Americans and they can't fix us if we are attacked. And yet, I have no faith in Americans' ability to see through the smokescreen. Karl Rove's strategies seem to have produced a Pavlovian response among the electorate: I am afraid. I must vote Republican.

Democrats look like weenies when they try to undermine the logic of the first half of the equation. They should instead work on the second half: voting Republican will not ease your fears.

And that's why I like Larry Beinhart's piece on Huffpo.
The Blog | Larry Beinhart: Say it Loud, Say it Often, "Republicans are Bad on National Security" | The Huffington Post

Good Publicity for One of My Friends.

Jeff is a friend of mine who runs the re-enactment camp at the Heritage Festival. I have tried to joke with him about this so I can safely warn you: do not try to joke with Jeff. Jeff is serious about re-enactment.

Another friend, Andrea, will be playing flute in 19th century garb at the camp on Friday night around 7:30. She's very good. If you see her please tell her that Eric sent you. It will freak her out. :-)

It's time for the Heritage Festival Re-enactors rough it while you have fun

YHS Marching Band Looks Good

Band camp was held at Camp Walden again this year. As Friday was parental unit day, we went to watch them demonstrate what they've been practicing. Mr. Kaz, the new director of bands, put them through all the marching scenarios: half time, parading, the national anthem, etc. Andrew tells me that they lost more than 20 musicians, so I wondered just how polished they would be.

Very polished, as it turns out. Musically they were pretty tight. I didn't notice any missteps, either, not that I have a trained eye or anything. It seems to me that they're further along this year than last. And I've heard nothing but enthusiastic praise for Mr. Kaz.

The weather was perfect, the camp full of gorgeous 60-foot trees -- the kind of scene that makes you say "sun dappled" without embarassment. Yes, sun dappled. It was that pretty.

We shopped a bit in Mackinaw City. I'm always amazed at how much that town has grown since my last visit. Fifteen years ago there were a couple of mega-motels on the water, but there are probably a dozen now. I mean, you can't see the water from the street unless you're looking over a ferry parking lot.

We drove across the Mighty Mac ("the longest suspension bridge in the western hemisphere," intoned the tour guide on the bridge radio station, settling a long-standing debate with Jackson) and had dinner with Andrew in St. Ignace. Then we returned him to camp and sped back home.

I reckon in that 30-hour period we spent 12 hours in the car. Andrew made it all worthwhile by actually smiling when we arrived. Still, I'm glad that band camp parental unit day comes only once a year.

Hot Dog Cage Match: Coney Islands in the Stream

I've been fortunate to live in three regions with distinct hot dog styles: Chicago, North Carolina, and Michigan. Tonight I begin reporting on my quest for the best. Vegetarians prepare to be offended.

Today's contenders: Todoroff's Original Coney Island and Bill's Drive-In

Call me dense, call me inattentive, but I did not realize that Coney Island restaurants, and the hot dogs that give them the name, are unique to Michigan.

Yes, I've lived in Michigan for 20 years--why do you ask?

In my defense, I believed that there must be Coney Islands east of Michigan, particularly in New York, but I was mistaken. Must've thought they came west with the settlers, or something.

According to Wikipedia, that vast source of "better get a second opinion" information, Coney Islands started in Michigan nearly a hundred years ago when some people tried to recreate the chili dogs they ate on Coney Island. Todoroff's of Jackson claims they were the original and they have a meat sauce recipe from 1915 to prove it. Others say the Coney came from Detroit around the same period. Thus began generations of debates over skinless vs. casing hot dogs, and whether a Coney "with everything" is just chili and onions, or chili, onions and mustard.


The waitstaff at Todoroff's is very friendly. The restaurant gleams with silver, gray, stainless steel and chrome throughout. I understand it was designed by a family member who became an architect instead of a hot dog vendor. (The original location in downtown Jackson now serves their corporate offices.)

The hot dog, from the top down, features:
** freshly, finely chopped onions piled quite high
** meat sauce that is more meat than sauce
** standard-issue yellow mustard
** a narrow, skinless all-meat hot dog
** a slightly-steamed white bun, longer than the hot dog

Todoroff's makes a very filling Coney because theirs is more about the toppings and the bun than about the hot dog. (Personally, I'd prefer a smaller bun but then you can't hold as many toppings.) The meat sauce is unique, no question -- very beefy for a Coney -- with mild, slightly tangy spices. It will leave a red-grease stain, so be careful.

I was disappointed by the hot dog -- it seemed rather bland. Todoroff's says they grill rather than boil or steam their dogs, so I expected to find effect of the grill in coloration or flavoring.

Overall, Todoroff's Coney is far above average but not my favorite Coney. The onions and meat sauce make it unique, however, and definitely worth a trip down Parnall Ave. if you're near Jackson.


Bill's Drive-In, (no website) on Michigan Ave. east of Ypsilanti, has been selling hot dogs and root beer since 1935. It served workers from the Willow Run bomber plant in WWII and later the workers from the auto factories that replaced the bomber plant. Not bad for a little mustard-colored house on the side of the road. Although Bill's has changed hands at least once since then, its hot dogs are still made specifically for them in Detroit. Their hot dog chili is handmade using the original recipe, and they still make their unique root beer daily.

Open the paper wrap at Bill's and you'll find a steamed white bun that is shorter than the hot dog. The hot dog is cooked by boiling and kept warm by steam. The meat sauce is tomato-saucier, spicier (and even a bit sweeter) than Todoroff's. The onions are fresh and finely chopped. Todoroff's piles their onions higher, but I found Bill's onions sufficient. Every bite has the same amount of chili and onions with very little spillage. Call me Rain Man but I like that in a chili dog.

The hot dog plays a larger role at Bill's. It doesn't snap back when you bite into it, like aVienna-style frank (Koegel) does, but it's more substantial than Todoroff's -- it has a little "crunch."

To get the full effect of Bill's hot dogs, you have to wash them down with their special recipe root beer. Drinking any common beverage would be criminal.

Okay, so I'm a Bill's booster, but I'm also open-minded. I hope others will share their favorite Coney Island restaurants so that I can try them out.

For example, Thursday I bought a Coney from Mark's Midtown Coney Island on Plymouth Rd.

Bad omen #1: chili dogs served to-go in polystyrene clam-shell containers. Something's wrong with your hot dog if you need a bullet-proof container.

Bad omen #2: they gave me a fork.

The bun is longer than the hot dog. Onions, while fresh, were coarsely chopped squares 1/4" on a side. The chili sauce was light on meat, heavy on orange-y goop -- I'm guessing Hormel, 20-lb can. (Very messy. I actually considered pulling over to eat it. Then I remembered the fork -- d'oh! should've known better.) The hot dog seemed like an all-beef Oscar Mayer and was somewhat rubbery. Overall: Edible but not good.

So, yeah, having "Coney Island" in the restaurant's name is no guarantee of a good hot dog, let alone a great one. But you can't go wrong at Todoroff's or Bill's.

Hard Numbers, Ypsi Mayoral Race

Lois Richardson 455 19%
Steve Pierce 861 37%
Paul Schrieber 1,036 44%

At only 44%, Paul needs to rebuild some bridges.
Too bad for him that his campaign committee can't build 'em back up as well as they can burn 'em.

Ypsilanti Votes for the Status Quo

I was at Pub 13 tonight with the Pierce campaign when Steve announced his loss. According to unofficial results, Paul Schrieber has won by 160 votes in a 2,500-voter primary. Lousy turnout. Larry Kestenbaum's folks don't have any results online yet, but surely the canvass report will be posted soon.

I should be watching Colbert right now, but I have a few thoughts ricocheting around my head.

-- In a three-way race, a 160-vote margin most likely isn't a mandate. (Only hard numbers can bear this out.) If Paul wants to accomplish anything during his tenure, he's going to have to rebuild some bridges. In that regard, his campaign supporters have made his job immeasurably harder. For the sake of the city, he should have pulled their reins at least a month ago. On the other hand, as Karl Rove will tell you, negative campaigning works, and it worked for Paul Schrieber.

-- Paul will never know whether he was elected on his own merits or because he's Not Steve Pierce. I feel sorry for him because he's not a professional politician who wanted to win by any means necessary. I think.

-- Paul, nice guy that he truly is, approached me this evening outside one of the polling places and shook my hand. "We have to talk," he said. "Not tonight, but we have to talk." I agreed. Then, Paul won my Irony of the Year Award by saying: "We're all neighbors after all." Of course, that's what I've been saying publicly for weeks now, and in my personal emails to Paul, that his campaign's personal attacks on Steve Pierce were not something that you do to your neighbor. All I could say in reply was, "Exactly -- we're all neighbors."

-- Mayor Cheryl Farmer's role in this election deserves a full outing. I heard today that she actively recruited candidates to oppose Steve Pierce -- some say she approached two, some say three, people to run against Steve. One bit of gossip I heard today was that a Schrieber campaign member told a Pierce supporter, "I'm voting for your guy because I don't want a puppet of Cheryl Farmer in office." Hey, it's gossip. But my jaw dropped when I heard it.

-- Ypsi has a rich blog world, but a surfeit of political bullshitters. That is, we have too many bloggers who apparently haven't rolled up their sleeves, knocked on doors, crafted campaign strategy, analyzed past voting results, stamped GOTV postcards, or cold-called potential voters. Bloggers who don't know shit about Ypsi politics but who hypothesize and condemn and accuse based on ideology, personal feelings and instincts as if such things were appropriate substitutes for actual campaign experience or (heaven forfend) facts. Bloggers who probably have never attended school board or city council meetings, let alone speak at them. Bloggers -- and blog commenters -- who type the nastiest, most ignorant crap imaginable as though they live in a vacuum and can't possibly harm anyone with their words -- or receive a well-deserved punch in the nose. So, let me summarize for those who would accuse me of being mean-spirited or of shooting the messenger or whatever: get off your asses and contribute to Ypsi or stfu.

-- John Gawlas should watch his council seat.

--

At Long Last, the Polls Are Closed.

I feel a lot better about the mayoral election today after to talking to voters, but I'm still not confident enough to go on record predicting a Pierce win.

Ypsilanti: Vote for Change on August 8

With malice toward none; with charity for all, it's time to shake up City Council and the Mayor's office.

I see a parallel with the Ypsilanti School District circa 2002, when complacency ruled the board room. Suggestions, constructive criticism, proposals and plans were rejected by the board and the superintendent. They thought they knew better than the parents and taxpayers who hired them. They did not want to change, and they thought we couldn't make them change.

They were wrong.

We now have a new superintendent and a new board of education. The new team consulted with parents and faculty and staff, reshaped the district, made it solvent -- with a budget nearly four times greater than that of the City of Ypsilanti.

I've spoken to business owners, homeowners and Ypsilanti boosters who tell a similar story of a complacent city council and an administration that already has its mind made up. The missteps in the Water Street project, decreasing density by downzoning Midtown (an admirable goal but a lousy plan), the seemingly backward logic of punishing good property owners but not enforcing existing ordinances on poorly maintained properties, the rough-handling of the Friends of the Freighthouse and Friends of Rutherford Pool, are a few examples that come to mind.

Perhaps the City of Ypsilanti isn't on the wrong path, but it isn't on the right path, either. And I no longer have faith that the current team can right our course. I see a group that asks why instead of why not and sees the size of the boulder rather than the width of the road.

Now it's time to give someone else a chance.

I entertained the idea of voting for Paul Schrieber until I heard that he is endorsed by the city council and the outgoing mayor.

Nothing says status quo quite so loud as being endorsed by the establishment.

I'm sorry Paul, but I'm voting for the person who has a lot of experience standing up to the establishment. I'm voting for Steve Pierce for Mayor, expecting him to challenge the council and the administration to raise the bar. Visit his campaign website; notice the labor groups backing Steve, and the impressive letters of support.

It's now two days before the primary, and I am sad to say that Paul Schreiber has run a very nasty, sleazy, negative campaign. His supporters have spent more time bashing Steve than talking up their own candidate. I won't repeat their lies, half-truths and disinformation. But I'm truly saddened to see people that I once respected and worked with stoop so very low. Schreiber's campaign is fueled by the anger of a few women who believe that they were slighted four years ago. They want revenge.

Maybe it's true after all: hell hath no fury....

Whether Steve Pierce wins or loses, he can be proud of the positive campaign he has run. I look forward to voting for him on Tuesday. Please join me.

TPMmuckraker: Claude Allen Archives

TPMmuckraker: Claude Allen Archives

Here's the latest on my former classmate, Claude. And no, his excuses haven't improved since his arrest.

E.J. Dionne Jr. | Curtains for Conservatism

E.J. Dionne Jr. | Curtains for Conservatism

One can only hope.

Unfortunately, Dionne considers only intellectual conservatism, which has so far guided all conservatism. However, social conservatives really don't give a shit: having attained the roof, they no longer need the ladder. God will provide.

A Letter Worth Signing.

Here's the letter that the Democrats sent to President Bush on the intolerable situation in Iraq:

Dear President Bush,

While the world has been focused on the crisis in the Middle East, Iraq has exploded in violence. Some 6,000 Iraqis were killed in May and June, and sectarian and insurgent violence continues to claim American and Iraqi lives at an alarming rate. In the face of this onslaught, one can only conclude that the Baghdad security plan you announced five weeks ago is in great jeopardy.

Despite the latest evidence that your Administration lacks a coherent strategy to stabilize Iraq and achieve victory, there has been virtually no diplomatic effort to resolve sectarian differences, no regional effort to establish a broader security framework, and no attempt to revive a struggling reconstruction effort. Instead, we learned of your plans to redeploy an additional 5,000 U.S. troops into an urban war zone in Baghdad. Far from implementing a comprehensive "Strategy for Victory" as you promised months ago, your Administration's strategy appears to be one of trying to avoid defeat.

Meanwhile, U.S. troops and taxpayers continue to pay a high price as your Administration searches for a policy. Over 2,500 Americans have made the ultimate sacrifice and over 18,000 others have been wounded. The Iraq war has also strained our military and constrained our ability to deal with other challenges. Readiness levels for the Army are at lows not seen since Vietnam, as virtually no active Army non-deployed combat brigade is prepared to perform its wartime missions. American taxpayers have already contributed over $300 billion and each week we stay in Iraq adds nearly $3 billion more to our record budget deficit.

In the interests of American national security, our troops, and our taxpayers, the open-ended commitment in Iraq that you have embraced cannot and should not be sustained.

Rather, the Democratic leadership in Congress and I believe that it is time for Iraqis to step forward and take the lead for securing and governing their own country. This is the principle enshrined in the "United States Policy in Iraq Act" enacted last year. This law declares 2006 to be a year of "significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty, with Iraqi security forces taking the lead for the security of a free and sovereign Iraq, thereby creating the conditions for the phased redeployment of United States forces from Iraq." Regrettably, your policy seems to be moving in the opposite direction.

This legislation made clear that Iraqi political leaders must be informed that American patience, blood and treasure are not unlimited. We were disappointed that you did not convey this message to Prime Minister Maliki during his recent visit. Reducing the U.S. footprint in Iraq will not only give the Iraqis a greater incentive to take the lead for the security of their own nation, but will also allow U.S. forces to be able to respond to contingencies affecting the security of the United States elsewhere in the world.

The Democratic Congressional leadership and I believe that a phased redeployment of U.S. forces from Iraq should begin before the end of 2006. U.S. forces in Iraq should transition to a more limited mission focused on counterterrorism, training and logistical support of Iraqi security forces, and force protection of U.S. personnel.

Additionally, every effort should be made to urge the Iraqis to take the steps necessary to achieve a broad-based and sustainable political settlement, including amending the constitution to achieve a fair sharing of power and resources. It is also essential to disarm the militias and ensure forces loyal to the national government. Finally, an international conference should be convened to persuade other governments to be more involved, and to secure the resources necessary to finance Iraq's reconstruction and rebuild its economy.

Mr. President, simply staying the course in Iraq is not working. We need to take a new direction. We believe these recommendations comprise an effective alternative to the current open-ended commitment which is not producing the progress in Iraq we would all like to see. Thank you for your careful consideration of these suggestions.

You can co-sign the letter through Sen. Carl Levin's site here. I did.