When I retired, a slice of my identity died. For the first time in 40 years, I was unemployed. What would I do the rest of my life? The question lingered for months while I over indulged in my favorite pastime golf. Soon almost daily rounds of golf became too much like a job. Now what?
Then one day a thunderbolt of inspiration struck. My passion has always been writing. No longer shackled to an office desk, I could pursue my dream of becoming an author. Fantasies of a best-selling novel danced in my head. Book tours. Autographs. A blockbuster movie. I was smitten.
My first move was to gather data. I pored over books on how to become a published author. I boned up on what themes and genres appealed to publishing houses. Along the way, I discovered the odds of getting a novel published are astronomical.
Consider the facts: there are a few thousand literary agents. Each one receives an estimated 10,000 queries from aspiring writers. Do the math. About 65,000 new books are published annually, most by established authors. A new writer has a better chance of winning the lottery.
Undeterred, my fingers flew across my keyboard as I drafted my first novel. It was exhilarating as the shape of a book appeared on my computer screen. After I completed the masterpiece, I handed it to Dianna to read, expecting breathless praise. Instead, she uttered the sad truth. It reeked. Skunky.
My ego shattered, I stewed over her assessment. In reviewing the work, I arrived at the same conclusion. It lacked drama, empathetic characters, structure and a few colons. It was consigned to the trash along with leftover pizza. In hindsight, I had little enthusiasm for the subject matter.
Being an author was harder work than I imagined. Just before admitting defeat, we were vacationing in New York City when Dianna announced she had a dream the previous night about diamonds. She thought it would be a good subject for a book. I politely smiled and nodded absently. Whatever.
While she shopped, I ducked into a book store and scanned the shelves for tomes about diamonds to satisfy my curiosity. I flipped the pages of a few books. Then I spotted a magazine with an article speculating that Bin Laden had been peddling raw diamonds to finance his terror network.
Arriving back in San Antonio, I researched every news article, book and archive for information about the Bin Laden story. There were tantalizing tidbits but mostly hearsey. That meant, as a novelist, I had a license to write my own fictionalized story based on a smidgen of facts.
As I dug deeper, I discovered evidence. According to news reports, Bin Laden's jihadists had struck deals to acquire $30 million in so-called blood diamonds before the attacks of 9/11. The diamonds came from mines in Sierra Leone. The stones route from Africa to Bin Laden remained a mystery.
I pounded the keyboard for nearly a year, writing chapter-after-chapter. The pacing of the book was much faster than my flawed original. I wanted a page-turner no reader could snooze through. The copy was littered with facts about diamonds, ruthless dealers and secretive diamond trading.
The finished product in hand, I began the process of marketing the book, contacting a carefully researched cadre of agents who handled new authors. A one-page letter and a one-page synopsis of the book was shipped to a dozen literary highbrows. Then the waiting game began.
Agent replies dribbled into the mailbox. The first to land were a couple of form letters with the salutation, "Dear Author." That was the certain kiss of death. Then a few brighter notes showed up. One agent praised the idea of the book, but declined because she wasn't accepting new clients.
Just when my hopes were fading, two agents dispatched encouraging letters seeking the first two chapters of my book, titled "Terror Diamonds." My pulsed quickened. My ego soared. I dashed off the chapters and waited. And anxiously fretted. Finally, two emails dropped into my inbox.
There were platitudes about the writing style, the plot and the research. But the two agents passed. No reasons were given for their decisions. I fumed for a couple of weeks before working up the courage to query the agents for explanations. Both declined. "We don't do that," was the answer.
In a last ditch attempt to salvage my book, I fired off another round of letters to dozens of agents. More rejections knocked the stuffing out of my ego. Deflated, I reluctantly surrendered my dream. I wasn't going to be a best-selling author. I wasn't even going to get a single word published.
Today I have reconciled myself to treasure the experience of writing a book. Lots of folks talk about penning a novel. Not many actually finish one. I feel better for having tried and failed. I never have to regret what might have been. That provides a scintilla of balm for my journalistic self esteem.
I remain a voracious consumer of books. Once in a while, when I read a novel I discern a fuzzy plot or misplaced comma. I think, "My book is better than this dribble." But so what? This writer won the publishing lottery. That's something to admire because most of us will never experience it.
Monday, February 4, 2019
Monday, January 28, 2019
Media Shame: Savage Attacks on Catholic Teens
Wearing a red hat in America has been demonized by the news media and those who hate the president. A small group of teens recently discovered the depth of this loathing . They were mocked, taunted and verbally assaulted for the crime of donning Make America Great Again hats.
For their grievous sin, these students from a Kentucky Catholic high school have endured media smears, death threats and character assassination. The media fueled furor over the incident at the national March for Life forced the school to shutter its doors for fear of violence against its students.
How could this happen in America? The blame rests squarely on the stoop shouldered news media. Journalists, a misnomer if there ever was one, jumped to conclusions based on their own biases and spread a false narrative about an incident involving the school kids, endangering their lives.
A small group of Covington Catholic High School youngsters were peacefully leaving the pro-life rally in Washington, D.C when a handful of black Hebrew Israelites and left-wing activists hurled insults at the students. In response, the students sang their school song, refusing the hateful bait.
Then a self-appointed Native American activist entered the fray, banging a drum and confronting one of the students. To his credit, the student only smiled without uttering a word. Within minutes, a video appeared on social media that exploded into bombastic news coverage by the media.
America's media, its reputation for fairness long ago shredded, based its reporting mostly on a snippet of video and the comments of Native American Nathan Phillips, who claimed to be a a Vietnam War veteran. News commentators inflamed passions by hastily condemning the kids.
Television reporters denounced the youngsters as bigots. Journalists called them "privileged" white elitists. Hollywood actors suggested they kids should be hunted down and punched in the face. Some on social media called for the youngsters to be killed.
Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar, an anti-Semite serving her first term in the U.S. Congress, tweeted: "The boys were protesting a woman's right to choose & yelled, "It's not rape if you enjoy it." They were taunting 5 Black men before they surrounded Phillips and led racist chants."
NBC called the incident "a troubling scene many are calling racist played out in Washington." CNN, the network no one should trust, described the scene as a "mob of MAGA hat-wearing high school students." An MSNBC news panelist compared the students to neo-Nazis.
USA Today featured an interview with Phillips, who belittled the youngsters as "beastly" and having a "mob mentality." The New York Times labeled the teenagers "racists" for mocking a veteran. The Washington Post lambasted the Catholic Church's sordid history of Native American abuses.
These choir boy-faced high school youths overnight became the most hated figures in America. Then the media story began to unravel. As more video surfaced of the incident near the Lincoln Memorial, it became obvious the teenagers were passive bystanders, not the aggressors.
No video evidence exists showing the kids shouting anything racist or mentioning rape. The adult sponsors accompanying the youngsters publicly discredited the media's version. A youth wearing the MAGA hat was interviewed and refuted the remarks that the activists claimed he made.
Why didn't the news media interview the sponsors and the youngsters before they rushed to judgment? The answer is obvious. There were not interested in the truth. They wanted to advance the narrative of MAGA hats being a symbol of bigotry. Their hatred for Trump was bared.
The Native American Philips was unmasked as a career provocateur who regularly shows up a protests, representing himself. He is not an Vietnam veteran as he claims. He served in the Marine Reserves, spending most of his time in sunny California instead of the steamy jungles of Vietnam.
A day after the confrontation Phillips disrupted mass at Washington's Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, beating his drum and marching down the aisles. Phillips is a trouble maker not a peacemaker. He is a charlatan. His real name is Nathaniel R. Stanard.
As the truth emerged, some media outlets tried to walk back the story in an attempt to salvage their tattered reputations. But too many newsrooms decided to just let the story fade away rather than apologizing to the school and the teenagers they ran roughshod over.
Beside the obvious malicious reporting, there are two recurring themes this incident illuminates. The first is the media has abandoned all pretense of being unbiased. Journalists are out to tarnish the president even if a falsehood has to be dressed up as legitimate news. It is shameful and indefensible.
The second is a virulent strain of anti-Catholicism is rising in the country. These youngsters were singled out because of their religion as much as for their alleged behavior. This bigoted religious bias also reared its ugly head during the confirmation of Justice Gorsuch and other Catholic judges.
The Covington Catholic High School recently reopened its doors to students. But the fallout from the media coverage of the pro-life rally will haunt these youngsters for the remainder of their lives. They have been permanently tarnished as extremists and racists. The stain will linger.
Meanwhile, the media will turn its attention to the next scandal, unconcerned about the damage its erroneous reporting inflicted on innocent young people. Polling shows Americans' trust in the media has sunk to an all-time low. In the current environment, it is a race to rock bottom.
For their grievous sin, these students from a Kentucky Catholic high school have endured media smears, death threats and character assassination. The media fueled furor over the incident at the national March for Life forced the school to shutter its doors for fear of violence against its students.
How could this happen in America? The blame rests squarely on the stoop shouldered news media. Journalists, a misnomer if there ever was one, jumped to conclusions based on their own biases and spread a false narrative about an incident involving the school kids, endangering their lives.
A small group of Covington Catholic High School youngsters were peacefully leaving the pro-life rally in Washington, D.C when a handful of black Hebrew Israelites and left-wing activists hurled insults at the students. In response, the students sang their school song, refusing the hateful bait.
Then a self-appointed Native American activist entered the fray, banging a drum and confronting one of the students. To his credit, the student only smiled without uttering a word. Within minutes, a video appeared on social media that exploded into bombastic news coverage by the media.
America's media, its reputation for fairness long ago shredded, based its reporting mostly on a snippet of video and the comments of Native American Nathan Phillips, who claimed to be a a Vietnam War veteran. News commentators inflamed passions by hastily condemning the kids.
Television reporters denounced the youngsters as bigots. Journalists called them "privileged" white elitists. Hollywood actors suggested they kids should be hunted down and punched in the face. Some on social media called for the youngsters to be killed.
Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar, an anti-Semite serving her first term in the U.S. Congress, tweeted: "The boys were protesting a woman's right to choose & yelled, "It's not rape if you enjoy it." They were taunting 5 Black men before they surrounded Phillips and led racist chants."
NBC called the incident "a troubling scene many are calling racist played out in Washington." CNN, the network no one should trust, described the scene as a "mob of MAGA hat-wearing high school students." An MSNBC news panelist compared the students to neo-Nazis.
USA Today featured an interview with Phillips, who belittled the youngsters as "beastly" and having a "mob mentality." The New York Times labeled the teenagers "racists" for mocking a veteran. The Washington Post lambasted the Catholic Church's sordid history of Native American abuses.
These choir boy-faced high school youths overnight became the most hated figures in America. Then the media story began to unravel. As more video surfaced of the incident near the Lincoln Memorial, it became obvious the teenagers were passive bystanders, not the aggressors.
No video evidence exists showing the kids shouting anything racist or mentioning rape. The adult sponsors accompanying the youngsters publicly discredited the media's version. A youth wearing the MAGA hat was interviewed and refuted the remarks that the activists claimed he made.
Why didn't the news media interview the sponsors and the youngsters before they rushed to judgment? The answer is obvious. There were not interested in the truth. They wanted to advance the narrative of MAGA hats being a symbol of bigotry. Their hatred for Trump was bared.
The Native American Philips was unmasked as a career provocateur who regularly shows up a protests, representing himself. He is not an Vietnam veteran as he claims. He served in the Marine Reserves, spending most of his time in sunny California instead of the steamy jungles of Vietnam.
A day after the confrontation Phillips disrupted mass at Washington's Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, beating his drum and marching down the aisles. Phillips is a trouble maker not a peacemaker. He is a charlatan. His real name is Nathaniel R. Stanard.
As the truth emerged, some media outlets tried to walk back the story in an attempt to salvage their tattered reputations. But too many newsrooms decided to just let the story fade away rather than apologizing to the school and the teenagers they ran roughshod over.
Beside the obvious malicious reporting, there are two recurring themes this incident illuminates. The first is the media has abandoned all pretense of being unbiased. Journalists are out to tarnish the president even if a falsehood has to be dressed up as legitimate news. It is shameful and indefensible.
The second is a virulent strain of anti-Catholicism is rising in the country. These youngsters were singled out because of their religion as much as for their alleged behavior. This bigoted religious bias also reared its ugly head during the confirmation of Justice Gorsuch and other Catholic judges.
The Covington Catholic High School recently reopened its doors to students. But the fallout from the media coverage of the pro-life rally will haunt these youngsters for the remainder of their lives. They have been permanently tarnished as extremists and racists. The stain will linger.
Meanwhile, the media will turn its attention to the next scandal, unconcerned about the damage its erroneous reporting inflicted on innocent young people. Polling shows Americans' trust in the media has sunk to an all-time low. In the current environment, it is a race to rock bottom.
Monday, January 21, 2019
AT&T: A Cautionary Tale For Big Tech
Three American technology titans are locked in a race to become the nation's most valuable firm. Apple, Microsoft and Amazon are jockeying for the No. 1 spot. Apple and Amazon have reached $1 trillion in market capitalization before backpedalling as the overall stock market stumbled.
The trio are seemingly bulletproof, outperforming their peers by wide margins and posting eyeopening earnings that are the envy of corporate America. Financial analysts are betting Apple, Microsoft and Amazon are on a trajectory that will propel the firms into the value stratosphere.
Market cap is one measure of a listed company's size and value. The number is derived by multiplying the total outstanding shares of a firm by the current market price of a single share. The result is the market capitalization expressed in dollars.
Observing the three Goliath's reminds me of AT&T. At one time, American Telephone and Telegraph was the biggest corporation on planet Earth. The telecommunications giant ruled over an empire that spanned the globe. Its corporate brand was the best known in America.
AT&T stock has existed in one form or another for more than 130 years. The first shares were issued in 1877 to seven original owners. For decades AT&T was a market bellwether, it's performance watched closely as a proxy of the country's economic health.
From the 1920's through the 1950's, AT&T or General Motors swapped places regularly as the No. 1 or No. 2 most valuable company. In 1932, AT&T represented 13 percent of the total value of the stock market. By 1983, it was earning more than $15 million every day or $11,000 per minute.
In 1983, the communications powerhouse's assets of $150 billion exceeded those of GM, Ford, GE, IBM, Xerox and Coca-Cola combined. It had 182 million telephone customers and a wired network of more than one billion miles. It was the nation's largest employer with 1,009,000 workers.
One man birthed the telephony revolution. In 1876 Alexander Graham Bell was granted Patent No. 174,465 for his invention, the telephone. For many years, it was considered the most valuable patent ever issued. With two financial backers, Bell started the company that would become AT&T.
Over the decades, AT&T churned our inventions such as the transistor, fiber optics and cellular telephony. Its scientists earned seven Nobel Prizes. It demonstrated the first television service, opened the first radio station and inaugurated transpacific telephone service across the Pacific Ocean.
It was a technological juggernaut that spread its telecommunications tentacles from coast to coast and throughout the world. Its staggering size and market dominance dwarfed its competitors in the communications industry. Eventually that proved to be its undoing.
The Department of Justice filed an anti-trust suit in 1974 against AT&T. A settlement was eventually reached and in 1984 the Bell System was given a corporate burial. In its place, Ma Bell became a long distance company and released its seven children: the operating telephone companies.
One of those offspring, Southwestern Bell Telephone, soon began a string of mergers with other Bell siblings. With the added financial muscle, the firm--then known as SBC--purchased its former parent AT&T in 2005 for $16 billion, completing one of the strangest corporate family episodes.
The "new" AT&T was no longer one of the country's biggest firms. In its place, new technologies and e-commerce spawned corporate colossus, such as Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook and Google (Alphabet). They would be well advised to learn from AT&T.
The first lesson is that size matters to trustbusters. Each tech firm has near monopolistic share of its market. Amazon controls 43 percent of all online sales, soaring from 25 percent in 2012. Goggle has a domineering presence online with a 78.8 percent share of all search traffic.
Microsoft rules the desktop personal computer space. The firm's signature product Windows is the operating system of choice on 82 percent of desktop PC's. The next closest competitor is Apple's MAC OSX operating system with just a 12.9 percent share.
The Department of Justice has already shown interest in the hiring, anti-competitive and privacy policies of these high-tech companies, especially Facebook. How long will it be before the government lawyers begin sticking their noses into the firms' virtual market monopolies?
The leaders of high tech companies should study how a dominant position in a market can evaporate overnight with a single anti-trust suit lodged by the DOJ. What are the firms' plans if they are forced to shed assets or open up large swaths of their businesses to more competition? A plan B is a must.
Antitrust is not the only threat to tech Titans. The tempo of innovation in Silicon Valley, Austin and other technology hotspots can disrupt an entire industry. Look how Uber and Lyft have upended the taxi business. Change is occurring at the speed of light and those who resist lose.
Just as an AT&T innovative device the telephone propelled the company's early growth, Apple has owned the smart phone market since the introduction of its iPhone 12 years ago. But the market for the once-revolutionary device is saturated and sales are beginning to falter for the first time.
Although the iPhone outsells 96 percent of the companies on the Fortune 500, its market share has slipped to 15.6 percent of all smart phones purchased worldwide. Industry analysts are beginning to fret that Apple cannot depend on its iPhones to drive its long term growth.
It is eerily similar to AT&T's dilemma. The telephone was an AT&T invention that spawned an industry, just as the iPhone built robust demand for a rich-featured wireless device that connected seamlessly to the Internet. Creating a market does not guarantee it will be yours forever.
AT&T has withstood antitrust suits, erosion of market share, disruptive technology and the rise of competitors for 130 years. Will today's tech Godzilla's--Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook, and Google--be around for another century?
Given the simmering pace of inventions and technology and the prying eyes of the Department of Justice, it seems like a stretch today. Survival in today's corporate world requires visionary leadership, nimble competitive response, constant innovation and less government interference.
The trio are seemingly bulletproof, outperforming their peers by wide margins and posting eyeopening earnings that are the envy of corporate America. Financial analysts are betting Apple, Microsoft and Amazon are on a trajectory that will propel the firms into the value stratosphere.
Market cap is one measure of a listed company's size and value. The number is derived by multiplying the total outstanding shares of a firm by the current market price of a single share. The result is the market capitalization expressed in dollars.
Observing the three Goliath's reminds me of AT&T. At one time, American Telephone and Telegraph was the biggest corporation on planet Earth. The telecommunications giant ruled over an empire that spanned the globe. Its corporate brand was the best known in America.
AT&T stock has existed in one form or another for more than 130 years. The first shares were issued in 1877 to seven original owners. For decades AT&T was a market bellwether, it's performance watched closely as a proxy of the country's economic health.
From the 1920's through the 1950's, AT&T or General Motors swapped places regularly as the No. 1 or No. 2 most valuable company. In 1932, AT&T represented 13 percent of the total value of the stock market. By 1983, it was earning more than $15 million every day or $11,000 per minute.
In 1983, the communications powerhouse's assets of $150 billion exceeded those of GM, Ford, GE, IBM, Xerox and Coca-Cola combined. It had 182 million telephone customers and a wired network of more than one billion miles. It was the nation's largest employer with 1,009,000 workers.
One man birthed the telephony revolution. In 1876 Alexander Graham Bell was granted Patent No. 174,465 for his invention, the telephone. For many years, it was considered the most valuable patent ever issued. With two financial backers, Bell started the company that would become AT&T.
Over the decades, AT&T churned our inventions such as the transistor, fiber optics and cellular telephony. Its scientists earned seven Nobel Prizes. It demonstrated the first television service, opened the first radio station and inaugurated transpacific telephone service across the Pacific Ocean.
It was a technological juggernaut that spread its telecommunications tentacles from coast to coast and throughout the world. Its staggering size and market dominance dwarfed its competitors in the communications industry. Eventually that proved to be its undoing.
The Department of Justice filed an anti-trust suit in 1974 against AT&T. A settlement was eventually reached and in 1984 the Bell System was given a corporate burial. In its place, Ma Bell became a long distance company and released its seven children: the operating telephone companies.
One of those offspring, Southwestern Bell Telephone, soon began a string of mergers with other Bell siblings. With the added financial muscle, the firm--then known as SBC--purchased its former parent AT&T in 2005 for $16 billion, completing one of the strangest corporate family episodes.
The "new" AT&T was no longer one of the country's biggest firms. In its place, new technologies and e-commerce spawned corporate colossus, such as Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook and Google (Alphabet). They would be well advised to learn from AT&T.
The first lesson is that size matters to trustbusters. Each tech firm has near monopolistic share of its market. Amazon controls 43 percent of all online sales, soaring from 25 percent in 2012. Goggle has a domineering presence online with a 78.8 percent share of all search traffic.
Microsoft rules the desktop personal computer space. The firm's signature product Windows is the operating system of choice on 82 percent of desktop PC's. The next closest competitor is Apple's MAC OSX operating system with just a 12.9 percent share.
The Department of Justice has already shown interest in the hiring, anti-competitive and privacy policies of these high-tech companies, especially Facebook. How long will it be before the government lawyers begin sticking their noses into the firms' virtual market monopolies?
The leaders of high tech companies should study how a dominant position in a market can evaporate overnight with a single anti-trust suit lodged by the DOJ. What are the firms' plans if they are forced to shed assets or open up large swaths of their businesses to more competition? A plan B is a must.
Antitrust is not the only threat to tech Titans. The tempo of innovation in Silicon Valley, Austin and other technology hotspots can disrupt an entire industry. Look how Uber and Lyft have upended the taxi business. Change is occurring at the speed of light and those who resist lose.
Just as an AT&T innovative device the telephone propelled the company's early growth, Apple has owned the smart phone market since the introduction of its iPhone 12 years ago. But the market for the once-revolutionary device is saturated and sales are beginning to falter for the first time.
Although the iPhone outsells 96 percent of the companies on the Fortune 500, its market share has slipped to 15.6 percent of all smart phones purchased worldwide. Industry analysts are beginning to fret that Apple cannot depend on its iPhones to drive its long term growth.
It is eerily similar to AT&T's dilemma. The telephone was an AT&T invention that spawned an industry, just as the iPhone built robust demand for a rich-featured wireless device that connected seamlessly to the Internet. Creating a market does not guarantee it will be yours forever.
AT&T has withstood antitrust suits, erosion of market share, disruptive technology and the rise of competitors for 130 years. Will today's tech Godzilla's--Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Facebook, and Google--be around for another century?
Given the simmering pace of inventions and technology and the prying eyes of the Department of Justice, it seems like a stretch today. Survival in today's corporate world requires visionary leadership, nimble competitive response, constant innovation and less government interference.
Monday, January 14, 2019
Drew's View: Fear Grips Stock Market
Since October, prices of stocks have been on a roller coaster ride. The market soars to dizzying heights before plunging to nauseous depths. Investors are left with churning stomachs and hand-wringing anxiety. Even the stock experts are left shaking in their shiny cap toe shoes.
What makes the current market gyrations so incomprehensible is the booming economy. Market experts subscribe to the theory that stock price increases follow real growth in the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), a barometer of economic health. However, the correlation doesn't apply today.
From 2006 to 2014, the average growth of the stock market increased at a rate four times higher than the average GDP. In the second quarter last year, real GDP growth zoomed to 4.2 percent, the highest in more than a decade. The third quarter was a robust 3.5 percent. But stocks nosedived.
Stock prices also have plummeted in the face of climbing corporate profits. American companies posted corporate profits of $3.5 trillion in the third quarter of last year, an increase of $69.3 billion. It marked an all-time high for corporate profits. This should translate into higher stock prices.
Some economists blame the sagging world economy for the downturn. Others cite the trade war with China. Many theorists also point to the uncertainty over interest rates and unrest in the Middle East. The worry list stretches into infinity. Stock brokers act as befuddled as the average investor.
Businesses reporting fourth quarter earnings are fueling apprehension. Apple recently attributed the China trade crisis for its tepid results. Market gurus accepted the thesis. The truth is the price of Apple's iPhone is five times more expensive than its Chinese competitor's. Trade is not the issue.
You can bet in the coming weeks every American firm with weak earnings will lay it off on the China trade squabble. Analysts will nod without challenging the premise. There is no question China's tariffs are a negative, but China's economy has softened, especially consumer spending.
No pinstriped suit on Wall Street will confess the real reason for the market skid. It is plain old fashioned fear. Astute market players aren't supposed to be swayed by emotions. That's for the great unwashed individual stock pickers. But it's the most logical explanation for the up-and-down market.
Their worst nightmare is the length of the current Bull market. In March of 2009, the Dow Jones stood at 8,599. On January 11, the Dow was teetering at 23,995 after soaring as high 26,186 on February 1 of last year. That is an astounding gain of 15,396 points or 179% in 118 months.
The previous record Bull market rumbled for 113 months from October, 1990 through March, 2000. During that stretch, the Dow rose 417 percent. That still stands as the top gain in history. Market technicians are certain the Bulls can't run forever. Duh. But no one can predict the expiration date.
That accounts for the wild swings in the market. A day when stocks begin falling at the opening bell turns into a rout as big institutions get nervous that a huge sell-off will lay waste to the market. If the market trends upward, all the investment whales swim in and swallow up stocks to lift prices.
This see-saw effect is a classic example of fear ruling the market. Forget the age old investment hypothesis about efficient markets. No one wants to be caught fully invested in the market when it plunges 20-percent that would signal the return of the hibernating Bears.
The market follows this volatility with a popular measurement known as the VIX or CBOE Volatility Index. Most specialists call it by another name: Wall Street's fear index. The last time the index performed this way it triggered a crippling sell off. Fear can make the savviest investor panic sell.
Stock market insiders often pooh-pooh the fear factor. They point out that most trading in the markets is orchestrated by computers running sophisticated algorithms. But when market trends spike, computerized trading triggers selling or buying that exacerbates the market oscillation.
A couple of indicators to watch over the coming weeks and months are measurements that make up the VIX gauge. One is the spread between yields on invest grade bonds and junk bonds. The other is money leaving the stock market for higher returns in Treasuries and other safe haven investments.
When you listen to the talking heads on television and read the financial pages, discount most of the skittish news about the market. There will always be speculation about a market meltdown. Uncertainty exists even in Bull markets. Instead look for signals indicating increasing fear.
That is all you need to know to understand today's stock market. So cancel your subscription to the Wall Street Journal and turn off CNBC business. Be content knowing that all the knowledgeable investment experts have no more insight than you do about the future of the stock market index.
What makes the current market gyrations so incomprehensible is the booming economy. Market experts subscribe to the theory that stock price increases follow real growth in the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), a barometer of economic health. However, the correlation doesn't apply today.
From 2006 to 2014, the average growth of the stock market increased at a rate four times higher than the average GDP. In the second quarter last year, real GDP growth zoomed to 4.2 percent, the highest in more than a decade. The third quarter was a robust 3.5 percent. But stocks nosedived.
Stock prices also have plummeted in the face of climbing corporate profits. American companies posted corporate profits of $3.5 trillion in the third quarter of last year, an increase of $69.3 billion. It marked an all-time high for corporate profits. This should translate into higher stock prices.
Some economists blame the sagging world economy for the downturn. Others cite the trade war with China. Many theorists also point to the uncertainty over interest rates and unrest in the Middle East. The worry list stretches into infinity. Stock brokers act as befuddled as the average investor.
Businesses reporting fourth quarter earnings are fueling apprehension. Apple recently attributed the China trade crisis for its tepid results. Market gurus accepted the thesis. The truth is the price of Apple's iPhone is five times more expensive than its Chinese competitor's. Trade is not the issue.
You can bet in the coming weeks every American firm with weak earnings will lay it off on the China trade squabble. Analysts will nod without challenging the premise. There is no question China's tariffs are a negative, but China's economy has softened, especially consumer spending.
No pinstriped suit on Wall Street will confess the real reason for the market skid. It is plain old fashioned fear. Astute market players aren't supposed to be swayed by emotions. That's for the great unwashed individual stock pickers. But it's the most logical explanation for the up-and-down market.
Their worst nightmare is the length of the current Bull market. In March of 2009, the Dow Jones stood at 8,599. On January 11, the Dow was teetering at 23,995 after soaring as high 26,186 on February 1 of last year. That is an astounding gain of 15,396 points or 179% in 118 months.
The previous record Bull market rumbled for 113 months from October, 1990 through March, 2000. During that stretch, the Dow rose 417 percent. That still stands as the top gain in history. Market technicians are certain the Bulls can't run forever. Duh. But no one can predict the expiration date.
That accounts for the wild swings in the market. A day when stocks begin falling at the opening bell turns into a rout as big institutions get nervous that a huge sell-off will lay waste to the market. If the market trends upward, all the investment whales swim in and swallow up stocks to lift prices.
This see-saw effect is a classic example of fear ruling the market. Forget the age old investment hypothesis about efficient markets. No one wants to be caught fully invested in the market when it plunges 20-percent that would signal the return of the hibernating Bears.
The market follows this volatility with a popular measurement known as the VIX or CBOE Volatility Index. Most specialists call it by another name: Wall Street's fear index. The last time the index performed this way it triggered a crippling sell off. Fear can make the savviest investor panic sell.
Stock market insiders often pooh-pooh the fear factor. They point out that most trading in the markets is orchestrated by computers running sophisticated algorithms. But when market trends spike, computerized trading triggers selling or buying that exacerbates the market oscillation.
A couple of indicators to watch over the coming weeks and months are measurements that make up the VIX gauge. One is the spread between yields on invest grade bonds and junk bonds. The other is money leaving the stock market for higher returns in Treasuries and other safe haven investments.
When you listen to the talking heads on television and read the financial pages, discount most of the skittish news about the market. There will always be speculation about a market meltdown. Uncertainty exists even in Bull markets. Instead look for signals indicating increasing fear.
That is all you need to know to understand today's stock market. So cancel your subscription to the Wall Street Journal and turn off CNBC business. Be content knowing that all the knowledgeable investment experts have no more insight than you do about the future of the stock market index.
Monday, January 7, 2019
Immunotherapy: New Hope For Treating Cancer
He has been dubbed "The Texas T Cell Mechanic." For the last 30 years, he has relentlessly studied this particular cell from every angle. His dogged pursuit of knowledge has produced breakthroughs in the treatment of cancer. This researcher's name is Dr. Jim Allison, a pioneer in immunotherapy.
The innovator was recognized in December with the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine for his discovery of a cancer treatment that frees a patient's immune system to attack cancerous tumors. The Nobel committee lauded his research efforts as a "landmark in our fight against cancer."
Editor's Note: Dr. Allison shared the award with Tasuku Honjo, M.D., Ph.D., of Kyoto University in Japan.
Editor's Note: Dr. Allison shared the award with Tasuku Honjo, M.D., Ph.D., of Kyoto University in Japan.
Dr. Allison's journey from the South Texas town of Alice to the Nobel ceremony in Stockholm, Sweden, began 70 years ago. He acquired his interest in medicine observing his father, who was the country doctor in Alice, population 19,100. His mother died of cancer when he was 10-years old.
Those experiences shaped his passion for medicine, which began at the University of Texas, where he earned a degree in microbiology and then a doctorate in biological sciences. After college, he pursued his fervor for research in the cancer field, eventually concentrating on T-Cells.
T-Cells, a type of white blood cell, play a key role in the body's immune system. The cells act as soldiers, patrolling the body, attacking old cells that have reached their expiration date. But the cells also stalk intruders, such as bacteria, fungi, parasites and viruses, destroying these hostile invaders.
The T-Cell warriors face a formidable task policing an estimated 30 trillion cells in the average human body. And T-Cells are just one of 200 cells living in our body. Isolating and studying T-Cells was once viewed by experts as nearly an impossible mission. But Dr. Allison persevered.
Through years of painstaking research, Dr. Allison discovered that T-Cells do not kill every bad guy. In fact, he found T-Cells have a braking mechanism that restricts it from attacking every cell in the body, the fit ones as well as the diseased cells. But the brakes allow cancer cells to flourish.
A determined man, Dr. Allison wanted to learn how to ease off the brakes on T-Cells to allow the cells to demolish cancer cells. The researcher uncovered a protein CTLA-4, found on the surface of T-Cells, which act as the cell's brakes. Then he zeroed in on how to manipulate the brakes.
Toiling late hours in the lab, he developed an antibody to block CTLA-4, thus removing the brakes and unleashing the T-Cells to attack the marauding cancer cells. His work paid off with the development of the drug Ipilimumab, the first in a category of drugs known as checkpoint inhibitors.
Dr. Allison, who published a paper on his ingenious finding in 1995, points out that it took "way too long" for the Federal Food and Drug Administration to finally approve the drug in 2011 to treat late-stage melanoma. There results were unprecedented.
Twenty percent of the patients who took the drug lived for at least three years and many patients survived 10 years and beyond. He remains humble about his achievements, calling it an "emotional privilege to meet cancer patients" who have been successfully treated with the inhibitors.
His pioneering research sparked fellow scientists to study other immune system brakes, which paved the way to the development of drugs to treat other cancers, such as lung, kidney, bladder, gastric, liver, cervical, colorectal, head and neck as well as Hodgkin's lymphoma.
These discoveries have opened a whole new field of immunotherapy, using the body's immune system to battle cancers. Until now, there were basically three ways for doctors to tackle cancer: surgery, chemotherapy and radiation. Now doctors have a fourth option with fewer side effects.
Even more promising, Dr. Allison believes the T-Cells will continue working long after the treatment has ended. "The immune cells remain in the body. If the cancer comes back, the immune cells will attack it," he was quoted on the MD Anderson website.
Dr. Allison's success led to his appointment as director at the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy at the University of Texas-MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston. He captains a team dedicated to expanding the uses of immunotherapy to not only treat but one day cure cancer.
By disabling the T-Cell brakes, Dr. Allison has toppled one more barrier in the war on cancer. As his career illustrates, breakthroughs often take decades. But with an estimated 609,000 cancer deaths last year alone in the U.S., time is not an ally for those suffering with the disease.
More research and experimentation urgently needs to be done. But the FDA also must dispense with regulatory red tape to speed up approval of drugs. Allowing potential life saving drugs to languish in research laboratories robs cancer victims of an opportunity to extend their lives.
Those experiences shaped his passion for medicine, which began at the University of Texas, where he earned a degree in microbiology and then a doctorate in biological sciences. After college, he pursued his fervor for research in the cancer field, eventually concentrating on T-Cells.
T-Cells, a type of white blood cell, play a key role in the body's immune system. The cells act as soldiers, patrolling the body, attacking old cells that have reached their expiration date. But the cells also stalk intruders, such as bacteria, fungi, parasites and viruses, destroying these hostile invaders.
The T-Cell warriors face a formidable task policing an estimated 30 trillion cells in the average human body. And T-Cells are just one of 200 cells living in our body. Isolating and studying T-Cells was once viewed by experts as nearly an impossible mission. But Dr. Allison persevered.
Through years of painstaking research, Dr. Allison discovered that T-Cells do not kill every bad guy. In fact, he found T-Cells have a braking mechanism that restricts it from attacking every cell in the body, the fit ones as well as the diseased cells. But the brakes allow cancer cells to flourish.
A determined man, Dr. Allison wanted to learn how to ease off the brakes on T-Cells to allow the cells to demolish cancer cells. The researcher uncovered a protein CTLA-4, found on the surface of T-Cells, which act as the cell's brakes. Then he zeroed in on how to manipulate the brakes.
Toiling late hours in the lab, he developed an antibody to block CTLA-4, thus removing the brakes and unleashing the T-Cells to attack the marauding cancer cells. His work paid off with the development of the drug Ipilimumab, the first in a category of drugs known as checkpoint inhibitors.
Dr. Allison, who published a paper on his ingenious finding in 1995, points out that it took "way too long" for the Federal Food and Drug Administration to finally approve the drug in 2011 to treat late-stage melanoma. There results were unprecedented.
Twenty percent of the patients who took the drug lived for at least three years and many patients survived 10 years and beyond. He remains humble about his achievements, calling it an "emotional privilege to meet cancer patients" who have been successfully treated with the inhibitors.
His pioneering research sparked fellow scientists to study other immune system brakes, which paved the way to the development of drugs to treat other cancers, such as lung, kidney, bladder, gastric, liver, cervical, colorectal, head and neck as well as Hodgkin's lymphoma.
These discoveries have opened a whole new field of immunotherapy, using the body's immune system to battle cancers. Until now, there were basically three ways for doctors to tackle cancer: surgery, chemotherapy and radiation. Now doctors have a fourth option with fewer side effects.
Even more promising, Dr. Allison believes the T-Cells will continue working long after the treatment has ended. "The immune cells remain in the body. If the cancer comes back, the immune cells will attack it," he was quoted on the MD Anderson website.
Dr. Allison's success led to his appointment as director at the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy at the University of Texas-MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston. He captains a team dedicated to expanding the uses of immunotherapy to not only treat but one day cure cancer.
By disabling the T-Cell brakes, Dr. Allison has toppled one more barrier in the war on cancer. As his career illustrates, breakthroughs often take decades. But with an estimated 609,000 cancer deaths last year alone in the U.S., time is not an ally for those suffering with the disease.
More research and experimentation urgently needs to be done. But the FDA also must dispense with regulatory red tape to speed up approval of drugs. Allowing potential life saving drugs to languish in research laboratories robs cancer victims of an opportunity to extend their lives.
Monday, December 31, 2018
Top Ten Predictions For 2019
As the curtain falls on another year, the spotlight shines on the beginning of the Prediction Season. Self-proclaimed experts forecast the outlook for the stock market, economy and which Hollywood stars are headed for divorce court. Most prognosis are bunk. But this one is the genuine article.
How can you be certain? Your journalist ditched his ancient crystal ball this year and decided to consult the Chinese Zodiac sign. This is the year of...wait for it...The Pig. The animal, according to the horoscope, represents honesty, trust and bravery. That bodes well for the New Year.
But there also is a dark side to The Pig. The animal also has characteristics of self-indulgence, naivete, stubbornness and laziness. Ah, forget all those attributes. All you need to remember is that the animal ends up as bacon on your plate. Hmmmm. Bacon! Now there's a reason for optimism.
The piggish forecast for 2019 is not as slovenly as the pessimists among you expect:
1. Despite gloomy forecasts from the likes of Goldman Sachs and other money firms, strong consumer spending spurs an annual gain of 2.9 percent in the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), after posting two quarters of 3+ percent growth early in 2019, outperforming most world economies.
2. With its stock market sinking and its economic growth underperforming expectations, China signs a trade deal with the United States but before the ink is dry the CIA reveals the Asian country has launched a cyber intrusion on our government that approaches a Category 1 attack.
3. Federal Reserve interest rate hikes in the new year continue to be an anchor on the U.S. stock markets as the Dow enters bear territory, igniting a very public feud between President Trump and Fed chairman Jerome Powell. The tension ends in Powell's resignation, calming markets.
4. Special counsel Robert Mueller, appointed in March 2017, finally issues his report on Russian interference in the 2016 election after the new Congress is sworn in. His report is littered with innuendoes about Trump campaign conduct but offers no proof of collusion with Russia.
5. The Democratic Party-controlled House launches a series of investigations aimed at President Trump and his campaign associates, using the Mueller report as its excuse for additional probes. At the urging of Speaker Pelosi, the House takes up articles of impeachment against the president.
6. With a March deadline approaching, a disheartened Prime Minister Theresa May calls for a public referendum on the Brexit deal she negotiated with the European Union after failing to get approval from Parliament. Voters reject the exit settlement, leaving the plan to leave the EU in limbo.
7. Electric car manufacturer Tesla fails to fulfill its commitment to produce 500,000 cars, sending the firm's stock in a nosedive and forcing CEO Elon Musk to give up the company reigns to an executive with auto experience to quiet the financial crisis.
8. Despite most political pundits debunking her chances, Hillary Clinton announces she will run for the presidency igniting a wild scramble among Democrats to come up with a more electable candidate. Former San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro throws his hat in the ring, becoming the favorite.
9. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who recently underwent cancer surgery, attempts to hang on to her seat on the High Court despite failing health before succumbing to the disease. President Trump nominates former Notre Dame law professor Amy Barrett as her replacement.
10. As the cost of health care and insurance continue to climb, industry giants Goggle, Amazon and Apple jump start more research and development on the use of virtual intelligence for applications in drug development, health diagnosis and personal health care, gaining a new revenue wellspring.
I can hear what your are thinking. These predictions are pig-headed, the figment of a bacon-lover's imagination. You could be right. But the good news is that when 2019 ends, you won't remember these forecasts. So go ahead. Have a wiggly piggly New Year!
How can you be certain? Your journalist ditched his ancient crystal ball this year and decided to consult the Chinese Zodiac sign. This is the year of...wait for it...The Pig. The animal, according to the horoscope, represents honesty, trust and bravery. That bodes well for the New Year.
But there also is a dark side to The Pig. The animal also has characteristics of self-indulgence, naivete, stubbornness and laziness. Ah, forget all those attributes. All you need to remember is that the animal ends up as bacon on your plate. Hmmmm. Bacon! Now there's a reason for optimism.
The piggish forecast for 2019 is not as slovenly as the pessimists among you expect:
1. Despite gloomy forecasts from the likes of Goldman Sachs and other money firms, strong consumer spending spurs an annual gain of 2.9 percent in the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), after posting two quarters of 3+ percent growth early in 2019, outperforming most world economies.
2. With its stock market sinking and its economic growth underperforming expectations, China signs a trade deal with the United States but before the ink is dry the CIA reveals the Asian country has launched a cyber intrusion on our government that approaches a Category 1 attack.
3. Federal Reserve interest rate hikes in the new year continue to be an anchor on the U.S. stock markets as the Dow enters bear territory, igniting a very public feud between President Trump and Fed chairman Jerome Powell. The tension ends in Powell's resignation, calming markets.
4. Special counsel Robert Mueller, appointed in March 2017, finally issues his report on Russian interference in the 2016 election after the new Congress is sworn in. His report is littered with innuendoes about Trump campaign conduct but offers no proof of collusion with Russia.
5. The Democratic Party-controlled House launches a series of investigations aimed at President Trump and his campaign associates, using the Mueller report as its excuse for additional probes. At the urging of Speaker Pelosi, the House takes up articles of impeachment against the president.
6. With a March deadline approaching, a disheartened Prime Minister Theresa May calls for a public referendum on the Brexit deal she negotiated with the European Union after failing to get approval from Parliament. Voters reject the exit settlement, leaving the plan to leave the EU in limbo.
7. Electric car manufacturer Tesla fails to fulfill its commitment to produce 500,000 cars, sending the firm's stock in a nosedive and forcing CEO Elon Musk to give up the company reigns to an executive with auto experience to quiet the financial crisis.
8. Despite most political pundits debunking her chances, Hillary Clinton announces she will run for the presidency igniting a wild scramble among Democrats to come up with a more electable candidate. Former San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro throws his hat in the ring, becoming the favorite.
9. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who recently underwent cancer surgery, attempts to hang on to her seat on the High Court despite failing health before succumbing to the disease. President Trump nominates former Notre Dame law professor Amy Barrett as her replacement.
10. As the cost of health care and insurance continue to climb, industry giants Goggle, Amazon and Apple jump start more research and development on the use of virtual intelligence for applications in drug development, health diagnosis and personal health care, gaining a new revenue wellspring.
I can hear what your are thinking. These predictions are pig-headed, the figment of a bacon-lover's imagination. You could be right. But the good news is that when 2019 ends, you won't remember these forecasts. So go ahead. Have a wiggly piggly New Year!
Sunday, December 16, 2018
Santa's Crisis: Deer In The Headlights
A highly contagious virus known as political correctness has infected the reindeer at the North Pole leading to a near mutiny. Some reindeer, wearing yellow vests, even tried to set fire to the elves' workshop, forcing Santa Claus to mobilize the Polar National Guard. Tensions remain high.
The discontent began innocently enough about a month ago. The reindeer were practicing pulling a sleigh piled with toys when Mrs. Claus piped Christmas music over the loudspeaker. When the song "We Wish You a Merry Christmas" began playing, the reindeer Blitzen took a knee.
The other reindeer, including their leader Rudolph, joined the protest. A shocked Mrs. Claus summoned Santa, who was checking one of his famous lists. "It's scandalous," Santa yelped. "We Wish You a Merry Christmas" is the North Pole's national anthem," he pointed out.
Santa confronted Blitzen, a former walk-on as a linebacker with Marshal University's Thundering Herd football team. "What's your beef," Santa asked gruffly. Blizten cast his eyes downward and pawed the ground. "I find offensive the line 'Bring us pudding,'" he answered.
"Why on earth would you object to that?" a dumbfounded Santa inquired. Blitzen flicked his tail and replied: "It smacks of White Beard Privilege. No reindeer has ever eaten pudding. That's for rich folks like you. We are lucky to have a few leafy greens or arctic char," Blitzen pouted.
To keep the peace, Santa reluctantly agreed the reindeer could remain on bended knee during the playing of the song but only at the North Pole. That seemed to placate the reindeer and Santa left relieved. However, tranquility lasted only two days. Another Christmas song rattled the peace.
When "Baby It's Cold Outside" blared over the loudspeaker, Cupid went berserk. She bolted from the reindeer games and locked herself inside the gender neutral restroom. Tears flowed and wailing could be heard for miles. Santa was alerted and rushed to find out what was wrong.
The bearded man with the ample belled softly knocked on the restroom door. "Go away," Cupid sobbed. A perplexed Santa tried soothing Cupid. "I hate that song," Cupid shrieked. "It is sexist and demeaning. If Mrs. Claus plays it one more time, I will quit the reindeer team."
Santa threw up his hands. "Ok, Ok. No more 'Baby It's Cold Outside.' Now can you come out into the cold, baby?" Cupid pranced out of the restroom into the snow and sauntered past Santa without acknowledging his presence. After the dust-up, Santa ordered Mrs. Claus to burn the loudspeaker.
For a solid week, toy production was humming, the reindeer were practicing wind sprints and the sleigh had received a fresh coat of red paint. Then it happened. A North Pole merchant erected a billboard in an empty lot with the words to the song "I'm Dreaming of a White Christmas."
Dasher, who participated in the Million Reindeer March several years ago, was apoplectic. "How come no one dreams of a Black Christmas?" he demanded of the merchant with the Russian accent. "Why does Christmas always have to be White? This smacks of racial discrimination."
The worried merchant telephoned Santa, interrupting the jolly old man's afternoon cocktail, a Frozen Daiquiri. "You're kidding me?" an exasperated Santa said in a shrill voice. "That's A Christmas classic. It has nothing to do with race. It's about white snow for goodness sake."
Santa tried his best to explain the origin of the song to Dasher, who was clearly annoyed to have to listen to such dribble. After several hours of back-and-forth barbs, Santa shook his head in surrender. "I'll tell the merchant Mr. Gorbachev to tear down that billboard," Santa promised.
A few reindeer weren't mollified. Donner donned a yellow vest he found in a suit shop on North Pole Avenue. He urged the other reindeer to follow suit and before you knew it the herd was clomping to the elves' workshop with torches before the Polar National Guard barricaded their progress.
Order seemed to be restored after that incident. With Christmas a week away, serenity reigned among the reindeer. They appeared to never have been so content to mill around and eat bird eggs and mushrooms. A relaxed Santa held one last dress rehearsal for the reindeer before Christmas eve.
After the drill, Santa made the mistake of asking the reindeer if they had any questions. Dancer, the deer with the happy feet, stepped forward. "I was just wondering if you're going to shout: "Merry Christmas to all and to all a Good Night" this year."
Santa rubbed at the bridge of his nose. "Of course! Surely no one can object to that," Santa said. Dancer frowned, a first for a reindeer. "Not everyone celebrates Christmas, Santa. Can't you just say, "Happy Holidays to all and to all a Good Night?"
Santa glared at the assembled troop of reindeer. He was treading on dangerous ground here. Who would pull his sleigh if all his reindeer decided to remain at the North Pole in protest? Santa pondered Dancer's question. The reindeer began to shift from hoof to hoof awaiting an answer.
"Tell you what," Santa huffed. "There is a herd of moose south of the North Pole, who are larger and stronger than any of you puny reindeer. Their antlers are huge and they cut a striking figure. I think I'm going to replace all of you. Moose are a happier than this bunch of complainers."
Rudolph was first to speak. "Oh, come on Santa. Moose don't have red noses." Santa laughed. "Reindeer don't have red noses either, you ninny. You had a nose job when you were just six days old. I know a plastic surgeon who specializes in Moose nose jobs."
Suddenly, the herd appeared nervous. There was whispering among the reindeer. Comet seemed unusually aggravated. Santa watched with his arms folded, thinking the group had that "Deer In The Headlights" look. Rudolph eased to the front of the herd. His nose was blinking red.
"Moose would ruin Christmas for the kids," Rudolph complained. "They will likely be frightened by those huge antlers. Children expect us to show up. They know every one of our names. Plus, can you imagine a herd of moose landing on the roof of a house? It could collapse under the weight."
Santa smiled. "Then you will show up Christmas eve and forget all your grievances?" Rudolph turned and saw the other reindeer nodding. "Yes," Rudolph said in a barely audible voice. And that's how Santa saved Christmas and stopped the spread of political correctness.
The discontent began innocently enough about a month ago. The reindeer were practicing pulling a sleigh piled with toys when Mrs. Claus piped Christmas music over the loudspeaker. When the song "We Wish You a Merry Christmas" began playing, the reindeer Blitzen took a knee.
The other reindeer, including their leader Rudolph, joined the protest. A shocked Mrs. Claus summoned Santa, who was checking one of his famous lists. "It's scandalous," Santa yelped. "We Wish You a Merry Christmas" is the North Pole's national anthem," he pointed out.
Santa confronted Blitzen, a former walk-on as a linebacker with Marshal University's Thundering Herd football team. "What's your beef," Santa asked gruffly. Blizten cast his eyes downward and pawed the ground. "I find offensive the line 'Bring us pudding,'" he answered.
"Why on earth would you object to that?" a dumbfounded Santa inquired. Blitzen flicked his tail and replied: "It smacks of White Beard Privilege. No reindeer has ever eaten pudding. That's for rich folks like you. We are lucky to have a few leafy greens or arctic char," Blitzen pouted.
To keep the peace, Santa reluctantly agreed the reindeer could remain on bended knee during the playing of the song but only at the North Pole. That seemed to placate the reindeer and Santa left relieved. However, tranquility lasted only two days. Another Christmas song rattled the peace.
When "Baby It's Cold Outside" blared over the loudspeaker, Cupid went berserk. She bolted from the reindeer games and locked herself inside the gender neutral restroom. Tears flowed and wailing could be heard for miles. Santa was alerted and rushed to find out what was wrong.
The bearded man with the ample belled softly knocked on the restroom door. "Go away," Cupid sobbed. A perplexed Santa tried soothing Cupid. "I hate that song," Cupid shrieked. "It is sexist and demeaning. If Mrs. Claus plays it one more time, I will quit the reindeer team."
Santa threw up his hands. "Ok, Ok. No more 'Baby It's Cold Outside.' Now can you come out into the cold, baby?" Cupid pranced out of the restroom into the snow and sauntered past Santa without acknowledging his presence. After the dust-up, Santa ordered Mrs. Claus to burn the loudspeaker.
For a solid week, toy production was humming, the reindeer were practicing wind sprints and the sleigh had received a fresh coat of red paint. Then it happened. A North Pole merchant erected a billboard in an empty lot with the words to the song "I'm Dreaming of a White Christmas."
Dasher, who participated in the Million Reindeer March several years ago, was apoplectic. "How come no one dreams of a Black Christmas?" he demanded of the merchant with the Russian accent. "Why does Christmas always have to be White? This smacks of racial discrimination."
The worried merchant telephoned Santa, interrupting the jolly old man's afternoon cocktail, a Frozen Daiquiri. "You're kidding me?" an exasperated Santa said in a shrill voice. "That's A Christmas classic. It has nothing to do with race. It's about white snow for goodness sake."
Santa tried his best to explain the origin of the song to Dasher, who was clearly annoyed to have to listen to such dribble. After several hours of back-and-forth barbs, Santa shook his head in surrender. "I'll tell the merchant Mr. Gorbachev to tear down that billboard," Santa promised.
A few reindeer weren't mollified. Donner donned a yellow vest he found in a suit shop on North Pole Avenue. He urged the other reindeer to follow suit and before you knew it the herd was clomping to the elves' workshop with torches before the Polar National Guard barricaded their progress.
Order seemed to be restored after that incident. With Christmas a week away, serenity reigned among the reindeer. They appeared to never have been so content to mill around and eat bird eggs and mushrooms. A relaxed Santa held one last dress rehearsal for the reindeer before Christmas eve.
After the drill, Santa made the mistake of asking the reindeer if they had any questions. Dancer, the deer with the happy feet, stepped forward. "I was just wondering if you're going to shout: "Merry Christmas to all and to all a Good Night" this year."
Santa rubbed at the bridge of his nose. "Of course! Surely no one can object to that," Santa said. Dancer frowned, a first for a reindeer. "Not everyone celebrates Christmas, Santa. Can't you just say, "Happy Holidays to all and to all a Good Night?"
Santa glared at the assembled troop of reindeer. He was treading on dangerous ground here. Who would pull his sleigh if all his reindeer decided to remain at the North Pole in protest? Santa pondered Dancer's question. The reindeer began to shift from hoof to hoof awaiting an answer.
"Tell you what," Santa huffed. "There is a herd of moose south of the North Pole, who are larger and stronger than any of you puny reindeer. Their antlers are huge and they cut a striking figure. I think I'm going to replace all of you. Moose are a happier than this bunch of complainers."
Rudolph was first to speak. "Oh, come on Santa. Moose don't have red noses." Santa laughed. "Reindeer don't have red noses either, you ninny. You had a nose job when you were just six days old. I know a plastic surgeon who specializes in Moose nose jobs."
Suddenly, the herd appeared nervous. There was whispering among the reindeer. Comet seemed unusually aggravated. Santa watched with his arms folded, thinking the group had that "Deer In The Headlights" look. Rudolph eased to the front of the herd. His nose was blinking red.
"Moose would ruin Christmas for the kids," Rudolph complained. "They will likely be frightened by those huge antlers. Children expect us to show up. They know every one of our names. Plus, can you imagine a herd of moose landing on the roof of a house? It could collapse under the weight."
Santa smiled. "Then you will show up Christmas eve and forget all your grievances?" Rudolph turned and saw the other reindeer nodding. "Yes," Rudolph said in a barely audible voice. And that's how Santa saved Christmas and stopped the spread of political correctness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)