Greensite… back next week… Steinbruner… BESS, Park in Aptos? … Hayes… Civilization… Patton… What’s a Bureaucrat to do?… Matlock… back off…shut up…fade to black…sir… Eagan… Subconscious Comics and Deep Cover … Webmistress serves you… microclimate diversity… Quotes on… “Trees”
|
Dateline: May 28, 2025
CLIMATE SHOCK So, for the last ten years, I’ve been living in Aptos. Hidden Beach was a ten minute walk, and I could hear the waves from my house at night. I would usually dress too warmly, because my bedroom was always cold. Now, starting this weekend, I’ll be up among the trees in Ben Lomond. I asked Alexa this morning what the weather was like, and she claimed, “mostly sunny skies with a high of 70 degrees” etc etc. I then asked her about the weather in Ben Lomond, and got back, “sunny with a high of 95 degrees”! Holy cow, I guess we’re not in Kansas anymore! 😀 Santa Cruz County’s diversity in microclimates truly blows me away… I’ll let you know how I’m handling the heat!
Have a great weekend!
~Webmistress

SNOW WHITE. In theatres. Movie (1.7 IMDb) ![]()
I’m not one of those people who worships at the altar of Disney. I’ve been watching their films for over 50 years, so my ambivalence isn’t from lack of exposure. I genuinely enjoy many of their movies; The Jungle Book was a childhood favorite (though I’m still salty that Mowgli ditched the jungle for a girl…).
That said, changes to Snow White don’t bother me. Disney has been rewriting traditional tales since day one! Remember the stepsisters slicing off toes and heels to fit in the glass slipper in the original story of Cinderella? Yeah, that didn’t make the cut.
The music? Pleasant enough, but nothing that stuck with me. The dwarves (yes, Tolkien says that’s the plural) veer into uncanny valley territory… not stylized enough to feel intentional, but not realistic enough to work. Visually odd.
Otherwise, it’s Snow White. Rachel Zegler gives a solid, competent performance—and no, I’m not bothered that she’s Colombian and Polish. If she can sing, act, and dance, we’re good.
Overall? It’s a “meh” from me. Harmless, and musical fans will probably have a good time. Worth a watch if that’s your thing. (the 1.7 on IMDB is likely heavily skewed by anti-woke snowflakes sitting at the their keyboard, listing multiple negative votes. Adaptions always reflect the world they come from. Deal with it.)
~Sarge
SINNERS. In theatres. Movie. (8.1 IMDb) ![]()
Sweat, dust, and sweet, sweet blues pour through this story of twin brothers returning from WWI—veterans-turned-mob-enforcers in Chicago—who head back to their Mississippi hometown to open a juke joint. It’s part roadhouse, part sanctuary for the Black community, and it becomes the stage for the rise (and fall) of “Preacher Boy” Moore, a young blues guitarist with something close to magic in his fingers.
There’s a stunning musical stretch in the middle where the film lets the music breathe—past, present, and future all moving together, dancing in time. It’s pure poetry.
And then… there are vampires.
Honestly, the movie would’ve been stronger without them. They don’t matter until the third act, and when they show up, it’s like a genre switch that crashes the vibe. The first two-thirds are rich and immersive. The final third? Not bad exactly, but it turns the film into something less interesting than it started out as.
Michael B. Jordan does solid double duty as the twins, Smoke and Stack, and newcomer Miles Caton is fantastic as Preacher Boy. You believe every note he plays.
So I’m torn. I can wholeheartedly recommend the first two-thirds. The final act? I can tolerate it—but I wouldn’t push it on anyone else. Taster’s choice.
~Sarge
LOVE, DEATH + ROBOTS. Netflix. Series (8.4 IMDb) ![]()
This show first dropped in 2019. I ignored it. Then two more seasons came and went — I still didn’t watch. But when I heard a fourth season was finally on the way, I figured it was time to see what the fuss was about.
Now I get it.
And so should you.
It’s an anthology, so technically you can jump in anywhere. But honestly? Start from the beginning. There’s so much to see here, and the clunker-to-gem ratio is shockingly low. Nearly every segment hits—hard.
Unlike most anthologies that reuse the same look and crew across episodes, Love, Death + Robots is a true anthology. Every short is handled by a different animation team, each with its own distinct style. Some look like high-end video game cutscenes. Others are pure painterly dreamscapes. Some mix live action and animation. There’s hand-drawn 2D, hyperreal 3D, and everything in between. There’s a Red Hot Chili Peppers video, done entirely as marionettes.
As the title suggests, every segment centers on love, death, robots—or some mix of the three. What you get ranges wildly: dark comedy, cosmic philosophy, dystopian morality tales, sci-fi speculation, brutal war stories, existential horror, and moments of real beauty. It’s a refreshing, unapologetic mix of graphic violence, sex, and nudity (there is a difference) —sometimes all at once, sometimes none at all. I reiterate: sometimes none at all. Some just go for a vibe, or something sweet, or funny.
And yes, there’s equal-opportunity nudity. If you’re cool with boobs but squirm at male parts waving about (or vice versa), maybe keep the skip button handy.
Think of it as a more mature, mostly less juvenile Heavy Metal — or Black Mirror – with no censors and a better visual imagination.
Very much worth a watch.
~Sarge
THE MINECRAFT MOVIE. In theatres. Movie (5.9 IMDb) ![]()
Okay, so here’s the deal: I’ve played Minecraft before, so I am familar enough to know the mechanics of its universe, but equally, not SO in love with it that I’m going to freak about any cinematic storytelling compromises. Also, aside from studying film in college, I worked for 15+ years in visual effects for film and tv, as a compositor (I took the cg and the live action and mushed them together, added some blood and dust and blur and film grain etc so that it looked like one image).
This film was an actual disaster. OK cast. Meh story. But the choices made while bringing it all together were BAFFLING. I’ve seen films where janky effects and weird dialoge were a CHOICE – I get it, it can be fun. However, there is no rhyme or reason to the uneven storytelling and effects. In some scenes, the animation does not include mouth movement, and yet later, that same character CAN move their mouth. Some scenes have totally passable blue/green screen extraction, others have completely visible wires and it looks like the crudest animatic. And that’s very much what the film feels like: an animatic. An animatic is a pre-visualization version of a film that may or may not have effects, or rough acting shot to just show what is supposed to happen here – in some cases it’s literally just voices over a series of drawings. What should have been a modestly entertaining b-grade “Jumanji” (real people in a video-game world) instead comes across as Jack Black and friends improv brainstorming, then handing it off to someone’s 15 year old YouTuber nephew to assemble and do … something … with the effects.
NOT worth a watch. Not a “so bad it’s good”, but a “so bad, why am I watching this?”. DO NOT let your kids watch it and have it become their favorite film, because you will end up wanting to strangle them.
I stuck it out for you.
You’re welcome.
~Sarge
DEATH OF A UNICORN. Prime TV. Movie (6.1 IMDb) ![]()
Thank you, Alex Scharfman, for opening people’s eyes to the truth: unicorns were never sweet, cuddly ponies — they’re magical beasts; basically angry horses with a murder stick on their foreheads.
Paul Rudd and Jenna Ortega star as a father-daughter duo who find themselves in way over their heads after accidentally running over a unicorn. Between the vengeful parents of the mythical creature and the greedy interests of Rudd’s pharma overlords (played with relish by Richard E. Grant, Téa Leoni, and Will Poulter, as the Leopolds), chaos — and carnage — ensue.
A literal “eat the rich” horror/comedy, this film is sharp, absurd, and unapologetically dark. Rudd and Ortega have great chemistry, and the Leopolds are delightfully despicable.
Not for the squeamish, but absolutely worth a watch.
~Sarge
MINDHUNTER. Netflix. Series. (8.6 IMDb) ![]()
Not a new one – just happened to watch it again, and thought it relevant for locals. Mindhunter, a docucrama based on the non-fiction account of FBI Special Agent John Douglas (renamed Holden Ford in the show) and his trials and tribulations to get the FBI to accept the concept of a “serial killer” back in ’77, and the idea that they could be profiled. Pursuant of this is a recreated serial killer fan-service list including Manson, Berkowitz, and particularly relevant for locals, Big Ed Kemper (for those tuning in late, Ed “The CoEd Killer” Kemper was the best known contributor to Santa Cruz being “affectionately” dubbed “Murder Capital of the World” back in the early ’70s). The show recreates the time and lifestyle of the time remarkably well, and the uneasy partnership of straight-laced Holt McCallany and earnest Jonathan Groff as the leads is well cast. Definitely worth a watch.
~Sarge
THE RESIDENCE. Netflix. Series. (7.8 IMDb) ![]()
I’m happy to see the return of the cozy mystery – Knives Out, Death and Other Details, and even Only Murders in the Building. Sure, Hallmark churns out an endless stream of formulaic/hygienic perky upper middle class “professional women” who solve mysteries while hygienically engaging in romance with some square jawed cop/firefighter/architect, but they lack any sort of charm or character. The Residence gives us Cordelia Cupp (Orange is the New Black’s Uzo Aduba): an acclaimed detective, and stout birder, who finds herself wader deep in drama and intrigue surrounding a murder in the White House. Giving absolutely zero f***s about titles and position, she pursues the truth through a cast of notables: Giancarlo Esposito, Jason Lee, Bronson Pinchot, Molly Griggs, and even Al Franken, reprising his role as a Senator. Might have been a few episodes too long, but worth the wait. Definite watch.
~Sarge
STAR TREK: SECTION 31. Paramount+. Movie. (3.8 IMDb) ![]()
I know I’m late to the table for this, but we decided to finally sit down and watch Star Trek: Section 31. Empress Georgiou (the mirror-universe evil counterpart of heroic Capt. Georgiou from Star Trek: Discovery) is pressed back into service with Section 31 – the black-ops division of Starfleet – for essentially a caper “mission”. Things go wrong, and she and a band of misfit specialists have to make it right. Michelle Yeoh is wonderful, as she always is. What she’s given to work with is tepid at best. I’m not a toxic fan – I’ve liked a lot of Trek related stuff that people kvetch about, but I do recognize when they miss the mark. Not just “doesn’t feel like Star Trek”, but feels like a fairly average caper film. No brilliant gotcha moments, no delicious red herrings. Just bland. Which is hard to do with Michelle Yeoh! It doesn’t quite make me feel like I was robbed of an hour and a half, but I was not really entertained. Highlight for the geek crowd: a Cheronian waiter. Watch only for a completionist compulsion.
~Sarge
NO OTHER LAND. In theaters. Movie (8.3 IMDb) ![]()
Academy Award-winning documentary, No Other Land, highlights the impact of political conflicts on everyday people. Co-directed by Palestinian filmmaker Basel Adra and Israeli journalist Yuval Abraham, the film follows them in the forced displacement of the small settlement of Masafer Yatta by Israeli forces. The view we get, from the “street” as it were, brings home the workaday world that is being unceremoniously wiped out by forces beyond shame or consequence. It makes it difficult to maintain an objective view of chess pieces being neatly moved around a board – it’s hard and personal, and as foreign as it should feel, hitting you right in the hometown. After winning the award, another co-director, Hamdan Ballal, was arrested and detained by Israeli authorities. The academy’s reaction: a tepid equivalent of “there are good people on both sides”. Definitely requires a watch.
~Sarge
THE ELECTRIC STATE. Netflix Movie (6 IMDb)
This has the energy of ’80s adventure films, like Batteries Not Included and War Games, with a touch of Fallout retro-futurism. Here’s the deal: In the ’50s, Walt Disney sparked a robot boom, leading to a robot rebellion in the ’90s. After the war, robots were confined to a walled-off Midwest wasteland. Michelle (Millie Bobby Brown) discovers her genius brother, supposedly dead, stuck in a robot shell and searching for a mysterious doctor. Keats (Chris Pratt) and his robot sidekick help her break into the wasteland. They’re pursued by a robot exterminator (Giancarlo Esposito) working for a tech billionaire, Skate (Stanley Tucci), who wants Michelle’s brother. Fun, nostalgic, and spot-on art direction. Worth a watch. ~Sarge
Gillian will be back net week!
| Gillian Greensite is a long time local activist, a member of Save Our Big Trees and the Santa Cruz chapter of IDA, International Dark Sky Association http://darksky.org Plus she’s an avid ocean swimmer, hiker and lover of all things wild. |
It makes good sense to hold off approving new utility-scale battery energy storage system (BESS) facilities in California until the State Fire Codes are updated this year, and will include new safety requirements for BESS facilities. But Santa Cruz County and many others like it that are being wooed by the big money behind the outrageously hazardous lithium battery technology industry are being pressured to move fast…at the expense of long-term disasters the likes of Vistra’s Battery Fire in Moss Landing this year.
However, AB 434, (Carl DeMaio) and AB 303 (Dawn Addis) make sense in pushing back with a temporary moratorium on new BESS until new State Fire Codes are adopted, and to claw back local jurisdictional discretion over these facilities, while requiring 3,200′ setbacks from schools, residential zones, medical facilities and sensitive environmental areas.
Please write elected representatives and ask that they support AB 303 and AB 434 because they would actually make a difference. The problem with Senator Laird’s SB38 is that it only adds on more rules that companies simply ignore…with no consequence. Such is the case with Vistra at Moss Landing.
Assemblymember Dawn Addis
Assemblymember Gail Pellerin
Assemblymember and Speaker Robert Rivas
Finally, write and ask the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors to send letters of support of these two bills: <BoardofSupervisors@santacruzcountyca.gov>
COUNTY REJECTS PARK PARCEL IN APTOS VILLAGE PROJECT
The Aptos Village Project Phase ii is nearly complete, but what about the park parcel that Swenson dangled in front of the County to justify not paying any developer park fees ($1,000/bedroom) and to get free easement to trench across the Aptos Village Park lawn for a large stormwater drain pipe, dumping parking lot effluent into Aptos Creek?
I wrote Mr. Jeff Gaffney, Director of County Parks, to ask the status of that Park Parcel, and how it would be used to satisfy the Condition of Project Approval to create an active recreation area. The Planning Commission required this, to compensate for the destruction of the world-famous Post Office Bike Jumps.
Here is Mr. Gaffney’s reply:
“Aptos Village LLC irrevocably offered to dedicate a parcel as open space to the County in lieu of paying park impact fees. This agreement was negotiated between former CAO Susan Mauriello and Aptos Village LLC, before my tenure here and at a time when the Parks department had been dissolved. By 2019 and after County Parks was once again a stand alone agency it was determined that the parcel had no open space benefits for the community and would instead become a significant liability for the County to maintain.
AS a result, when the parcel map was approved by the Board of Supervisors (BOS) in January 2020, the BOS rejected the Offer to Dedicate (OTD) (see page 1 of attached parcel map). The development permit conditions (attached, see pages 4-5) stipulate that the developer offer the parcel to the County, but do not require the County to accept the parcel. The OTD satisfies the permit conditions and the County is not obligated to accept the OTD.
The Parks Department will not be assuming management of this property nor the associated liabilities.”
I still have questions….
• Who determined in 2020 that the park parcel had no potential open space benefit to the Community? Were there any public meetings to allow Community input?
• Was Swenson Builders required to post a performance bond for the appraised value of the parcel? County Assessor records show the appraised value for taxes is $733,277.
• The Condition of Approval on pages 4-5 state that after five years, the County could extend acceptance of the park dedication. Is this what happened in 2020?
• If the County rejected ownership of the park parcel in 2020, why didn’t County Parks assess a drainage easement through Aptos Village Park to help offset the significant damage caused to that Park’s irrigation system by the drain pipe installation in 2024?
• How is the Aptos Village Project Condition of Approval to provide active recreational space now going to be met? Will Swenson Builder be required to provide active recreation in another area, perhaps developing land that the County already owns?
• Finally, since the County has seemingly rejected taking ownership of the park parcel, who in fact now owns the parcel, and who will assume weed abatement for fire risk reduction?
I am still waiting for Mr. Gaffney’s reply.
Below is a photo of the hillside Park Parcel…No archaeologist on duty during excavation in the known Native American site, even though it is required that there is one present during excavation and earth moving.


Visibility and public safety on Aptos Creek Road are impaired.
Please ask Second District County Supervisor Kim DeSerpa why she appointed former Swenson VP Jesse Nickell to the Planning Commission…even though he lives in the City of Santa Cruz (District 3). kimberly.deserpa@santacruzcountyca.gov
WRITE ONE LETTER. MAKE ONE CALL. ATTEND A PUBLIC HEARING ON SOMETHING YOU CARE ABOUT AND ASK QUESTIONS.
MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE THIS WEEK BY DOING JUST ONE THING.
|
Becky Steinbruner is a 30+ year resident of Aptos. She has fought for water, fire, emergency preparedness, and for road repair. She ran for Second District County Supervisor in 2016 on a shoestring and got nearly 20% of the votes. She ran again in 2020 on a slightly bigger shoestring and got 1/3 of the votes.
Email Becky at KI6TKB@yahoo.com |
“Premise One: Civilization is not and can never be sustainable. This is especially true for industrial civilization.”
“Premise Two: Traditional communities do not often voluntarily give up or sell the resources on which their communities are based until their communities have been destroyed. They also do not willingly allow their landbases to be damaged so that other resources – gold, oil, and so on – can be extracted. It follows that those who want the resources will do what they can to destroy traditional communities.”
- Derrick Jensen “Endgame” volume II, Resistance.
Derrick Jensen’s Endgame volumes are, to me, the most important pieces of environmental writing of our time. I hope you take the time to read them.
“Sustainability” is a word that is important to consider. Your relationship to that concept is something I hope you are working out. The idea is that what you take gets replaced in a way that doesn’t harm humans, non-humans, or the environment in general, and the things you produce do the same. To pursue these ideas, one must at every purchase ask difficult questions. One must also inquire about our trash, emissions, ideas, means of making an income, relationships, etc. Do we make the best choices, are we moving in the right direction? Each day, are we improving our sustainability or degrading it from our own personal choices and the choices made by those we elect to represent us?
I understand the criticisms of the concept, the difficulty of measuring such things. Those I’ve encountered who raise those arguments the most are the ones most likely to throw aluminum cans in the garbage, abuse others in their self-centered relationships, and generally see the world as a dog-eat-dog fight for their own betterment without consideration of the potential to affect future generations. Otherwise, many of us more thoughtful people want to know things like is ‘organic’ food certification more sustainable than conventionally produced agricultural products? Or, are paper or wood products with the Forest Stewardship Council logo really that much more sustainable? And even, is ‘Shade Grown’ coffee truly conserving tropical bird species? These types of questions can be answered, it just takes time to research the peer-reviewed literature. And, if one were to find questionable outcomes of that review, it takes only the slightest bit more effort to raise the issue with people that might help improve the situation.
Jensen’s Premise One shouldn’t be considered as an argument to avoid making our lives more sustainable, rather it should help us to consider the problem of civilization as a whole. What is civilization and do we enjoy it? I have heard people refer to the polarity between civilization and barbarism, as if the two were inalienable opposites of the human situation. This false notion plays out in media constantly, an argument against government reform as if what we have collectively created is good and well and any redesign threatens to send us towards barbarism. Statements like “Make America Somalia Again” resonate, making people chuckle. Really, though, civilization is about separating people from nature, altering ecology for short-term creature comforts, harvesting Earth’s riches broadly, depositing that production in subhuman consumption areas, and jettisoning any byproducts into sacrifice zones. In short, civilization takes more than it gives, by its very nature.
As communities settle into places, they come to realize the conundrum of civilization and start to reign in their impacts. Traditional communities, having been ensconced in place for hundreds of generations, have taken this relationship farther than any other types of more recently settled communities. Jensen points out that traditional communities are likely to reject proposals that negatively impact their “landbases.” I would add that even more recently settled people will find it natural to awaken to this attitude.
Hopefully, many readers align themselves towards being more ‘aware’ of environmental issues and are willing to steward that notion with actions. Let’s take Jensen’s second premise personally and ask ourselves if there are resources “on which our community is based” that are being sold or otherwise taken from us without our consent. We could ask that about water. We might ask that about peace, and we should definitely ask that about the soil itself, for food’s sake. In every case, I suspect such things are being taken without anyone asking us for our consent. The antidote to such things is the strengthening of community so that together we can protect what is ours, the things that will keep our community vital for generations to come. Where is that movement? What is preventing such things?
I hope you will reconsider your relationship with civilization and take daily steps to remove yourself further from that entrapment. This is good for you, your community, and for the Earth.
|
Grey Hayes is a fervent speaker for all things wild, and his occupations have included land stewardship with UC Natural Reserves, large-scale monitoring and strategic planning with The Nature Conservancy, professional education with the Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve, and teaching undergraduates at UC Santa Cruz. Visit his website at: www.greyhayes.net
Email Grey at coastalprairie@aol.com |
Tuesday, May 27, 2025

The picture, above, comes from an online article, dated in 2012, which carried the following, provoking title: “Hang The Last Bureaucrat?” The author, whose name is undisclosed, is writing from a “far-left” perspective. The website from which I retrieved the article (and the picture) is identified as follows: “M-L-M MAYHEM! – Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Reflections.” The title of the article is explained as follows:
Perhaps the most famous piece of graffiti from the May 1968 uprising in Paris was the aphorism “humanity won’t be happy until the last capitalist is hung with the guts of the last bureaucrat.” Here was the statement that equated capitalism with bureaucracy, a slogan for the angry rebels building barricades in the streets that felt almost as vital as the most important May 1968 slogan, “demand the impossible.” And all of us who have been inspired, most probably in our student youth, by May 1968 are usually aware of this violent demand to strangle capitalists with the viscera of bureaucrats.
Even the unnamed Marxist-Leninist-Maoist writer responsible for the article I am referencing notes that bureaucrats may actually be needed – hence the question mark appended to the end of the title. Hang the bureaucrats? Maybe not!
A second article about bureaucracy – not from a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist perspective – also employed a question mark at the end of the title: “What’s A Bureaucrat To Do?” That second article was originally written in 2016, by Stephen G. Harding, an adjunct professor in the master of public policy and administration program at Northwestern University. I have reprinted Harding’s article in full at the end of this blog posting.
Given what the president and his henchmen are doing, waging war on the so-called “Deep State,” attacks on “bureaucrats” are back in season – and from all sides. It turns out that the author of the second article, professsor Harding, pretty much shares the perspective of the unnamed Marxist-Leninist-Maoist author of the first article. From whatever direction we approach “bureaucracy,” we end up with the same mixed feelings. We may not like those bureaucrats very much, and what they’re doing, but maybe we do need them, after all. Given what is going on in government today, Harding recently recirculated his article, which is how I came across it. Harding felt, clearly, that it was time to raise his question again: “What’s a bureaucrat to do?”
Let’s think about that!
If we do think about that question, as posed by the professor, it seems to me that any honest contemplation leads us back to the real question. It’s not what the “bureaucrats” should do (they already have their directions), it’s what we should do. We need to title our inquiry this way: “Bureaucracy, What Should We Do?”
Self-government requires “we, the people,” to be in charge of the government. If we are going to govern by employing people to carry out work on our behalf (those “bureaucrats”) then we need to know what’s happening, and stay on top of those people who do wield such immense power over the programs that they undertake on our behalf, and at our direction.
We could set up a system that would much more directly involve members of the public in the operation of the “bureaucracy” that is supposed to be carrying out our own aims and ambitions. Fact is, mostly, we don’t have a clue.
Do we blame the “bureaucrats” for that? That’s not really fair, as the outrageous actions of Mr. Musk and his “doggy” deputees have demonstrated.
I haven’t forgotten that Michael Jackson song I have mentioned in this blog before, and I haven’t forgotten the impression that it made on me. Strictly speaking, Jackson’s song is not about “bureaucracy.” However, it is about our failure to achieve the kind of society we want, and to assign blame for that failure. When we don’t like what’s going on – if we actually honor the idea that we are a “self-governing” people – we need to take a look in that Michael Jackson mirror.
If our bureaucrats are failing us, we don’t “hang” them. And we don’t ask them, the “bureaucrats,” to solve the problems that we have created by our own lack of governmental direction and supervision.
Here is what we do. We get engaged, and give our governmental employees (those “bureaucrats”) directions that will satisfy us. “We, the people,” the people who are paying the bills and who are having to follow the rules that the “bureaucrats” are employing to achieve the goals that we have told them we want to achieve, need actually to be in charge of those “bureaucrats.” What the Musk-Trump efforts are doing is, most emphatically, NOT putting the people in charge of the government. What those billionaire buddies are doing is stripping away our efforts at self-government, and arrogating all our power to themselves.
More public involvement, not denunciations of the so-called “bureaucrats,” and not a sense of despondent defeatism, is what is required.
And that is not impossible, either!
The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ASPA as an organization.
By Stephen G. Harding
December 6, 2016
It’s no surprise that the governed seem none too happy with their government. Of course, this attitude is not new given an American brand of democratic angst has historically been woven into our collective DNA. Yet this contemporary rancor runs uncomfortably high. The corners of society are making it abundantly clear of their fragmented, yet almost universal, unhappiness with something more than national politics.
Populism notwithstanding, it can be argued that another causation of the national dissatisfaction points to the country’s discord with governmental bureaucracy itself. There exists a perception that an untouchable, uncaring, unresponsive, power centered system of government is partially culpable for this very visible anger. Not that the nonelected face of government has not been called out before, it is still disconcerting when elected officials, such as the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Paul Ryan state:
“We’re restoring accountability to the federal government. When we say ‘drain the swamp’ that means stop giving all this power to unelected people to micromanage our society, our economy and our lives.”
It would be naïve for state and local officials to think this attitude ends at the federal level. With a focus on data driven managerial efficiencies and performance-based measurement, governmental agencies are still pressed to meet the oftentimes conflicting expectations of elected officials, let alone the competing interests of a socio-economic diverse and stratified society. This suggests that bureaucracy’s focus on perfecting the rules and methodologies of governance does not address or satisfy the democratic needs of the people.
Images of Concern?
Maybe a line from the film “Gladiator” will help the analysis. In his role as Senator Gaius Tiberius Gracchus, Derek Jacobi states:
“I don’t pretend to be a man of the people. But I do try to be a man for the people.”
This quote, even with its seemingly good intentions, implies a sense of superiority and an acknowledged separation between government and the governed. There are numerous thoughts and inferences that can be made from this statement. Here are just a few:
(A) With some clear exceptions, rule-driven governmental bureaucracies tend to display a somewhat superficial interest in the individual and common needs and motivations of their constituents.
(B) Outside the confines of its own organizational interests, government has a tendency to lack an intrinsic understanding of: (1) the public’s need to maximize individualism and self-governance; (2) the need to minimize external control; (3) the importance of society’s egalitarian notion of fairness that transcends programmatic efficiency, fiscal responsibility, and even adherence to the law; and (3) society’s need to itself induce public discourse.
(C) With the government/governed divide comes the notion of elitism. In his 1979 text, “The Culture of Narcissism-American Life in An Age of Diminishing Expectations,” Christopher Lasch declared the managerial and professional elite as a paternalistic ruling class. This is partially evidenced when community dialog is replaced by government’s tendency to conduct, usually unintentionally, patronizing monologs. In some ways, this alludes to the blind side of meritocracy. Unlike the authority granted to elected officials, career bureaucrats, regardless of position, educational attainment, managerial proficiency or financial acumen, do not enjoy the legitimacy of a popular mandate validated by the voting process.
What to Do—Earning the Equivalent of a Popular Mandate
Bureaucracy needs to take responsibility in reducing the level of societal consternation. This starts by balancing the needs of the community with the needs of the organization, and with the personal needs and career aspirations of individual professionals. Well-intentioned and technically competent bureaucrats need to publicly demonstrate dedication to public service and not just to their corporate structures or the mandates of their professional associations. Many certainly do, yet organizational demands and a narrow focus in the pursuit of technical and managerial skills may not be enough. A broader focus requires an expanded definition of what constitutes merit. Patricia Ingraham may have said it best in her text, Foundation of Merit: Public Service in American Democracy:
Merit is having not only the necessary skills and competencies to fill the job in question but also a public service character—a desire to act, not for individual self-interest but for a broader good. Merit is related to values, ideals and ethics, to the appropriate role of the civil service in democracy, and thus to governance in a democratic society.”
James L. Perry underscores this concept in his essay, Federalist No. 72: What Happened to the Public Service Ideal? As a portion of his suggested appendix to Alexander Hamilton’s paper, he states:
“Attending to the competence of civil servants without attending to their relatedness to the executive and the citizenry is a formula for incomplete and inadequate behavior, behavior that citizens will come to view as bad behavior. Civil servants must be selected and nurtured not only for their competence but for their public service. Developing public service as the core value is the bulwark of a system of administration that will motivate civil servants to do the right thing.”
Subscription to these ideals just might prove to be an effective way in garnering the equivalency of a popular mandate.
Author: Stephen G. Harding is an adjunct professor in the master of public policy and administration program at Northwestern University. Previously he served in various senior management capacities in the California cities of San Diego, Pasadena and Santa Ana. His private sector experience includes vice presidencies in the real estate development and municipal consulting industries. Email: Stephen.harding@northwestern.edu.
|
Gary Patton is a former Santa Cruz County Supervisor (20 years) and an attorney for individuals and community groups on land use and environmental issues. The opinions expressed are Mr. Patton’s. You can read and subscribe to his daily blog at www.gapatton.net
Email Gary at gapatton@mac.com |
GIVING NOTHING, WHO’S ON FIRST, WINGED PALACE, TROPHIES
For a short time it was nice for followers of President Trump’s Truth Social media platform, when they read his simple message, “`HAPPY MEMORIAL DAY!” However, his short wish was actually a temporary replacement for an earlier, typical, Trumpian all-caps, ugly screed unleashed upon the opposition, which was full of typos that needed corrections by his handlers. Upon reposting the edited original, Trump added more all-caps sentences, perhaps toning it down only marginally, with praise for himself and his administration’s “great progress.” A post on Sunday night found The Don going after Vladimir Putin for escalating Russian attacks on Kyiv, Ukraine, dubbing him as “absolutely crazy,” rebuking the largest drone attack in the three-year war. The month of May marks the bombardments on Ukraine as record-setting, with Russia breaking its record on aerial attacks three times, as it assembles forces for a summer offensive according to analysts. Trump has threatened more sanctions for Russia as he loses patience with Vlad, but he also is critical of Ukraine’s Zelensky who is being too verbose in his criticism of lack of global support, in Trump’s view. So, Putin needs to back off, Zelensky needs to shut his mouth, or Trump’s coveted Nobel Peace Prize fades to black — a trophy that holds the highest significance in settling the war to our dear leader.
Satirist Andy Borowitz writes in The Borowitz Report of Trump’s Memorial Day activity: “In what has become a Memorial Day tradition for him, on Monday Donald J. Trump laid a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Podiatrist. Trump made his annual pilgrimage to pay homage to the heroic doctors who issued bogus diagnoses to ensure that their privileged patients never answered the call of duty. In an emotional tribute, Trump thanked the fallen foot specialists who bravely risked their medical licenses so that others facing military service could be free. Choking back tears, he said, “They gave everything so people like me could give nothing.”
Observers are being wary about who is actually in charge in the Oval Office, with the president signing over 150 executive orders in the same ritualized event — cameras present, staff standing by along with invited guests — and the chief executive appearing to barely know what he is signing. Trump is marginally attentive as the White House Staff Secretary reads a brief summary of the order, as the president interjects with a question or two which may indicate he hasn’t read it or is unfamiliar with it, whether only a few pages or many. The Daily Beast reports of one instance when Trump asked, “Are we doing something about the regulatory here?” Answering were several businessmen who were in attendance, and Interior Secretary Burgum, with a “you are sir,” followed by Trump asking, “Is that it?” “That’s all we have for you now, sir,” came the answer, as Trump then invited questions about the orders to be addressed to the “brilliant” experts, rather than toward him. Critic Fred Wellman, a graduate of West Point (and an Army vet of 22 years service), political consultant, and graduate of the Harvard Kennedy School, simply says, “He is not in charge.” Investment banker Evaristus Odinikaeze, remarked, “‘Is that it?’ while signing orders he doesn’t understand, parroting talking points he didn’t write, and pretending it’s leadership — peak performative confusion.”
Former running mate of Robert F. Kennedy Jr, Nicole Shanahan, recently speculated that somebody is “controlling” Kennedy’s decisions in his role at the Department of Health and Human Services, following the announcement that Dr. Casey Means was named to become the next Surgeon General. Shanahan says she was promised that neither Casey nor her brother, Calley, would be working in HHS, if she gave her support toward Kennedy’s Senate confirmation, being assured that much more qualified people would be considered. She said, “I don’t know if RFK lied to me, or what is going on. It has been clear in recent conversations that he is reporting to someone regularly who is controlling his decisions — and it isn’t President Trump.” Could it be the infamous brain worm?
Politico reports that after the DOGE/Elon Musk destruction of government agencies, Trump and his gang “have gone awfully quiet on the world’s richest man.” Musk was a constant at the White House, always given space on the president’s social media posts and in his fundraising email grifts, the Tesla/X-world CEO has fallen into disfavor, hardly mentioned in briefings, with only quietude among congressional members. Musk could only serve as a special government employee for 130 days, ending in late May, but he leaves in his wake the DOGE staff who will continue to work with Trump’s cabinet “to make our government more efficient,” says Press Secretary Leavitt. It has become apparent that the $2 trillion savings promised will not come about. It also seems that Trump started a Truth Social blackout of Musk after he experienced a 10 point, humiliating loss in the Wisconsin Supreme Court race after plunking down $21 million for Trump’s preferred candidate in a low-profile, non-partisan judicial contest. Without a doubt, Wisconsin’s electorate found Musk’s onstage cheesehead antics, and his handing out checks for a million bucks to some voters to be over the top. “He’s finished, done, gone. He polls terrible. People hate him. He’d go to Wisconsin thinking he can buy people’s votes, wear the cheese hat, act like a 9-year old…it doesn’t work. It’s offensive to people,” said an anonymous GOP operative. A Marquette University Law School poll found that 58% of respondents disapproved of Musk and his DOGE-boys secretive task force, and 60% disapproved of Musk personally. Musk himself is likely pulling away due to his personal business downturns, with Tesla profits plummeting 71% in the first quarter, and with grumblings emanating from the board members in all his holdings. He and Trump don’t see eye to eye on the new tariffs, with Trump continuing to stir up more confusion globally.
Politico sees Republicans still are attempting to stay in the good graces of Musk, hoping his massive fortune and X social media platform continue to support their campaigns, even as he signals that he might wind down his political activity which would be a big blow after his massive support in 2024. GOP strategist Alex Conant said, “Anytime the biggest donor says he’s going to pull back, that’s a concern for the party. These megadonors, you have to earn their support every cycle. He says he’s planning to pull back, but if we have a presidential nominee in ’28 that excites Musk, you can see him doubling down.” Musk was asked if his decision was because of blowback, saying, “If I see a reason to do political spending in the future, I will do it. I do not currently see a reason. In terms of political spending, I’m going to do a lot less in the future. I think I’ve done enough.” Republican strategist Brian Seitchik argues, “Musk has the luxury of changing his mind at a moment’s notice. He has the luxury of being angry, irritated or inspired in the coming months and will decide how to spend. It would simply mean that Republicans have less money. It’s not as though they have no money.” Democratic Representative Greg Casar of Texas pointed out that Musk was recently on Capitol Hill, meeting with Republicans on energy and artificial intelligence, saying on X, “Elon Musk isn’t gone, and we can’t let Republicans pretend he is, just because he’s unpopular now. We have to keep the pressure until we actually Fire Elon Musk.” “Anyone actually believe he’s stepping back?” asks Representative Mark Pocan. “Musk is just hiding in the closet, but he’s still in the room.”
Musk’s troubles were exacerbated this past weekend, when social media platform X went down temporarily, along with other glitches, resulting in a multitude of complaints and comments by users. He posted that, “I’m back to spending 24/7 at work and sleeping in conference/server/factory rooms. I must be super focused on X/xAI and Tesla (plus Starship launch), as we have critical technologies rolling out. As evidenced by the X uptime issues this week, major operational improvements need to be made.” One commenter posted, “And, this was the guy Trump brought in to make government more efficient?” The Washington Post wrote, “Politics has been central to Musk’s identity over much of the past year, but his latest obsession has faded into disenchantment over the personal costs and difficulties in producing results. Musk has also become deeply concerned for the personal safety of his family. He also did not anticipate the level of backlash against him personally or against his companies, including incidents of violence at Tesla facilities.” Musk was present at a Cabinet meeting on April 30, where President Trump told him, “We all want to thank you for your help. You really have sacrificed a lot.” But as Janna Brancolini wrote on The Daily Beast, “Everyone knows, though, how strongly Trump feels about losers.”
Andy Borowitz found another topic that deserves one of his satirical treatments: “Vowing to usher in a ‘golden age of chocolate,’ on Wednesday Donald J. Trump called for Willy Wonka’s chocolate factory to be reopened. ‘I saw a show about it on TV, and it never should have been allowed to close down,’ he said. ‘It never would have happened if I was president. What was done to Willy Wonka was a disgrace,’ he said, adding that the chocolatier had been ‘treated very unfairly.’ We used to make beautiful chocolate in this country,’ he said. ‘We’re not winning at chocolate anymore.'” Anybody? Mary Rose and Ian Mackenzie?
One thing — for real — that Trump sees as a winning move is acceptance of the Boeing 747 ‘Flying Palace’ luxury jet from Qatar that he insists will be converted into Air Force One — after taxpayers foot the bill for a $1 billion+ makeover to meet security regulations for a US president. The bribe was formally confirmed by NewsNation as the Defense Department and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth took possession “in accordance with all federal rules and regulations” this past week. Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said in his statement, “The Department of Defense will work to ensure proper security measures and functional-mission requirements are considered for an aircraft used to transport the President of the United States,” referring further questions to the US Air Force. The $400 million bribe for the 13 year-old jet is akin to accepting the castoff socks and underwear for an item that is no longer good enough for the royal family of Qatar, but our orange-hued president sees the gold fixtures and trappings to be fit for his kingly aspirations. The upgrade to the ‘Flying Palace’ is estimated to be a three- or four-year project, ready for use about the same time as the two new Boeing jets that have been on order since the first Oval Office desecration of Trump Inc. Boeing attributes their three-year production delay to a worker’s strike, complicated nature of new upgrades such as enhanced self-defense systems, and completing security clearances of the various contractors.
According to a Civiqs poll for Daily Kos, 55% of registered voters believe it to be unethical for Trump to accept the plane, which he claims will temporarily serve as the new Air Force One, which would then be transferred into the ownership of his future presidential library, BUT made available for his private use after leaving office! Only 19% of voters believe the bribe to be ethical, and another 22% don’t see it as an ethics issue, but Democrats are overwhelmingly critical — 92% saying it’s unethical, and even 55% of independents agree it crosses the line. Trump defends the ‘transferral,’ saying it would be “stupid” not to accept the “gift,” but he insists upon ignoring the emoluments clause of the Constitution which bans federal officials from accepting gifts, payments, or favors from foreign powers without Congressional approval. The White House and Department of Justice argue that the gift was not unconstitutional because it was not given to an individual — so it becomes a gift to an individual when the taxpayers GIVE it to an ex-president? King Donald is the only modern US president to challenge the restrictions, but then he’s been allowed to profit from all his side hustles of Bibles, guitars, meme coins, and taking advantage of that official presidential seal. Democratic voters refuse to let this slide, and if the rest of the electorate can catch up, the Trump Crime Family may find the ConGame to be nearing a finale. Andy Borowitz writes that, “Qatar inked a historic agreement to acquire a president of the United States, but critics argued that the president it bought was in poor condition and not fully functional. Additionally, the critics noted, he was preowned, having previously been purchased by Vladimir Putin, Elon Musk, and dozens of others. For his part, the emir brushed off such criticism, telling reporters,’He can’t possibly be worth less than that [crappy] old 747.'” One critic commented, “This is like a combination of ‘Fixer Upper’ and ‘Pimp My Ride.’ It’s going to cost a lot of money.” Considering that the aircraft will need to be stripped of its interior, its outer skin and down to the airframe for retrofitting and reassembly of the gold toilets, who wants to place bets on the timeline?
NBC News reports that “the White House has scrubbed its website of transcripts from President Trump’s speeches and appearances, hiding his lies, unhinged comments, and even moments when world leaders have rebuked his statements.” Those transcripts were on the website as recently as last week, but a shift in the administration’s communications policy, leaving only videos of those moments with no accompanying transcripts. While the transcripts exist, with official government stenographers recording Trump’s public appearances, nothing appears on the website. So, the question is — what is being hidden? Does this further tighten control over Trump’s image, even with mainstream media declining to report stories that may be critical of him? Or are larger issues concerning the president’s mental and physical health prompting the White House to obscure his blathering from the public? Aren’t we entitled to see the colorful rant about washing his hair, as he signed an executive order on water pressure? How about the one closer to home, when he raved about “invading Los Angeles to open up the water”? Or the one about his promise to bring down the price of eggs, which he said he accomplished with a 93% reduction? Know anybody out there who bought eggs for $0.13 per dozen? And of course, who wouldn’t want to read the transcript of his discourse on the word ‘groceries‘? Also missing is the recent Oval Office ambush of South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, when Trump presented his “white genocide” diatribe with fake web pages to embarrass his guest, who was obviously taken aback. Those transcript omissions make it perfectly clear that the White House wants to hide the president from his critics.
One recent appearance that Trump’s handlers would like to be erased completely is his speech to the West Point graduates last weekend, a speech that appropriately fell on its face with the audience. Again, the president tried to make his attendance into a political rally, airing grievances, drifting off-script into the brambles, bragging about his election victory in November and whining about being investigated. He had to be thoroughly disappointed in the response, which resulted in his leaving the event quickly without shaking the hands of the graduates, to get to the golf course. Wearing his red MAGA cap, Trump delivered what strategist and lawyer Aaron Parnas called a “‘strikingly unconventional’ school address, blending political rhetoric, off-the-cuff remarks, and personal anecdotes, deviating sharply from the traditional tone of such events.” The Don made headlines with his ‘trophy wives’ comments, one observer calling it a complete lack of presidential decorum. His opinion given to the grads on marrying “trophy wives,” when he advised them, “A lot of trophy wives doesn’t (sic) work out,” raised not a few eyebrows. Minor league baseball franchise owner, Lou DiBella, posted on X, “Ladies and Gentlemen, the President of the United States! A lesson on trophy wives; how inspiring for our future Army officers at their commencement. Nice MAGA hat…how appropriate! Consider this one instead on next graduation day.” Economist Patrick Chovanec suggested, “The only difference between a MAGA hat and KKK hood is that the KKK were ashamed to show their faces.” Veteran Daniel Larsen added, “Orange blob menace psychopath convicted felon MAGA cult leader rambled and dissembled. Wearing that hat to a West Point commencement is high crimes and misdemeanors. Impeach this idiot.”
And speaking of Melania, sources say that she has spent fewer than two weeks at the White House since inauguration day in January, appearing with the president at the Pope’s funeral and at the annual White House Easter Egg Roll. Some sources say that her fourteen day presence might be a generous estimate, but is discounted by Paolo Zampolli, a modeling agent, who says, “She loves the White House and loves her role of serving as our First Lady.” Just not living there full time? Even regulars at Mar-a-Lago say she is scarce around the Florida resort. Melania just announced she is releasing a new audiobook in a few months — to be narrated in an artificial intelligence version of her voice — not a new offering, only her 2024 memoir which was entitled ‘Melania.’ The English version is on sale for $25, a seven hour slog, with various foreign language versions expected in the future. Admirers have written, “Thanks for making America elegant again!” Something’s missing there!
Writer Fran Lebowitz doesn’t mention anything about the term ‘First Lady,’ but in the Fran Lebowitz Reader, she says, “Lest you get the impression that I am totally opposed to the word ‘lady,’ I rush to assure you that I think it is a perfectly nice word when used correctly. The word ‘lady’ is used correctly only as follows: a) To refer to certain female members of the English aristocracy. b) In reference to girls who stand behind lingerie counters in department stores, but only when preceded by the word ‘sales.’ c) To alert a member of the gentle sex to the fact that she is no longer playing with a full deck. As in, ‘Lady, what are you — nuts or something?’ d) To differentiate between girls who [are ‘easy’] and girls who [aren’t]. Girls who are ‘easy’ are tramps. Girls who aren’t are ladies. This is, however, an archaic usage of the word. Should one of you boys happen upon a girl who [isn’t ‘easy’], do not jump to the conclusion that you have found a lady. What you have probably found is a lesbian.” A favorite Fran quote: “Original thought is like original sin: both happened before you were born to people you could not possibly have met.” Fran gets the last word.
|
Dale Matlock, a Santa Cruz County resident since 1968, is the former owner of The Print Gallery, a screenprinting establishment. He is an adherent of The George Vermosky school of journalism, and a follower of too many news shows, newspapers, and political publications, and a some-time resident of Moloka’i, Hawaii, U.S.A., serving on the Board of Directors of Kepuhi Beach Resort. Email: cornerspot14@yahoo.com. |

EAGAN’S SUBCONSCIOUS COMICS. View classic inner-view ideas and thoughts with Subconscious Comics a few flips down.
EAGAN’S DEEP COVER. See Eagan’s “Deep Cover” down a few pages. As always, at TimEagan.com you will find his most recent Deep Cover, the latest installment from the archives of Subconscious Comics, and the ever entertaining Eaganblog.
Trees
“Give me six hours to chop down a tree and I will spend the first four sharpening the axe.”
~Abraham Lincoln
“A sure cure for seasickness is to sit under a tree.”
~Spike Milligan
“I think that I shall never see a billboard lovely as a tree. Perhaps, unless the billboards fall, I’ll never see a tree at all.”
~Ogden Nash
“If you don’t like how things are, change it! You’re not a tree.”
~Jim Rohn
“All religions, arts and sciences are branches of the same tree.”
~Albert Einstein
|
This guy! He has tons of tips and tricks about growing things, cleaning things, reusing things… and he makes very entertaining videos. |
Direct questions and comments to webmistress@BrattonOnline.com
(Gunilla Leavitt)









