According to rumors, there are a passel of new Star Trek shows under development, including the possibility of Patrick Stewart stepping back into his role as the smoothest of operators, Jean Luc Picard. I’d like to spitball a few ideas I would like to see made into shows.
Star Trek: Ambassador: Jean Luc Picard, now retired from Starfleet, has become the civilian diplomat everyone expected him to be. A gritty drama about the political machinations of the Federation as it deals with the various turmoils in the wake of the Dominion War. Tons of untapped potential to show a very different side of Trek using a fan favorite to secure the initial buy-in.
Star Trek: Dirty Jobs: Imagine Firefly, just in the Trek universe. A small ship with a quirky crew, but instead of quasi-outlaws, they’re a clean-up/salvage crew that’s basically following the Enterprise around, cleaning up various space debris from its encounters. Could be a sidequel to TNG, happening just in the wake of old episodes. Imagine the salvage from Wolf-359!EDIT: You’re welcome for this idea, CBS. Now please option Star Trek: ShiKahr and cast Robert Carlysle.
Star Trek: Me and Q: Wesley Crusher, having been abandoned on the other side of the galaxy by the Traveler, meets up with Q, who realizes that Wes is one finger-snap away from being a Continuum member. Now a Q in his own right, Wes decides to travel the galaxy and is joined by a young Q love interest. A road show, romp through the unexpected. Frequent guest star John de Lancie! Also, and I say this with all seriousness, please put Wil Wheaton back into Trek because he is a treasure.
Star Trek: ShiKahr: A series set on Vulcan in the Surak contemporary period. We get to see the wars that lead to the Romulan exodus and Vulcans in their original, non-logical state.
Governmenting is hard work. Representing hundreds of thousands of people can’t be easy, what with those unwashed masses demanding ‘accountability’ and ‘doing your job’. Sometimes, what that job is might slip a representative’s mind. So, this Valentine’s Day, show you appreciate your U.S. Representative (or closest Republican rep) by sending them a gift. Here’s a suggestion:
All Representatives are sworn in, affirming that they “will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same,” but maybe they don’t remember what that entails, or maybe they just haven’t read it. So get them a copy. It’s not an expensive gift (only $1.00 on Amazon!), but it’s the thought that counts. And don’t worry, I’m sure that if someone else decides to also get a copy for them, they have a few hundred staffers who could also use a copy, so don’t worry about duplicates.
Look, I have an idea. Let’s let the military handle policing.
What, that’s a bad idea? Yes, yes, I know about the Posse Comitatus Act. I know that “military occupation” isn’t exactly a happy thought. But hear me out here – this is actually a legitimate idea.
Let’s be clear, I’m not talking about the Army or the National Guard taking over for the police. I’m talking more about something like the Coast Guard. A new, separate branch of the military. It would have an organizational command structure just like any other branch, with ranks and chain of command. As police forces already have this, I’m not not talking about a huge organizational change at the local level. What I am talking about is a unified entity on a national scale.
Recruits would be drawn from every part of the country, assigned to a training base in a group, and trained as a whole. Initial training would be the same as the military, with less of an emphasis on unit tactics and weaponry. Recruits would be indoctrinated into the rules of military engagement, which are, quite honestly, more civilian-friendly than what’s being taught to the police currently roaming the streets. Once the physical aspect of the training was over, there would be a more intensive criminal justice training. Graduates from this 4-month boot camp would then be assigned to a one-year training cycle with a senior patrol training officer. Assignments would be nationwide, not likely from the recruit’s hometown. A large emphasis on community-based policing would be employed, with patrol officers building relationships.
Once the one-year assignment was up, recruits would become full-fledged patrol officers, and begin working their way up the various ranks. They would be eligible for relocation assignments. Police stations would become micro-bases, and the chain of command would follow up to the Pentagon level. Internal investigations would be handled by a Judge Advocate General, a body far-removed from the patrol level and with much more transparency and oversight.
Military-style force (SWAT interdictions) would require authorization and coordination above the local level – the local police chief wouldn’t be able to call up a tank without going up the chain of command.
Look, we operate military and peacekeeping forces in active warzones, where anyone can be a combatant, and we still wind up with less civilian casualties from ground units. We forge relationships on the ground to help the local populations. When shit gets real and bullets start flying, we have rules for our soldiers, and when they break those rules, they are punished. We don’t have that for our police. We don’t have police forces that integrate with the community. I live in a relatively affluent, largely white area, and I don’t know a single police officer. The ones I’ve interacted with have made me feel uncomfortable and I was just a possible witness. And I’m about as white as there is.
My point is that our individual police forces have failed many communities, particularly communities of color. For those communities, the police are already an occupying force, one that abuses them with impunity. Having the discipline, training, chain of command, transparency, and oversight of a military branch would turn policing into the community defense that it should be.
It’s safe to say there are some problems facing America right now, and here we are in the midst of a presidential election in a year where there is no incumbent running. There will be a change in leadership. This should be a time to reflect on the issues of the day, such as:
Despite the economy being stable and upwardly trending over the past eight years, the middle class is still dealing with the same lack of mobility and wage stagnation that it’s been beset with over the past 40 or so years. The ‘American Dream’, as it were, is more and more just that – a dream – to all but the very well off.
Global terrorism is edging ever closer, affecting our allies in more and more instances. Our attempt to contain the very beast our foreign policy has created over the past handful of decades has failed miserably, and it’s only a matter of time before we bleed for these mistakes again, even as we continue to make them.
Racial issues are approaching a new flashpoint, with a new Civil Rights movement emerging that will either be peacefully resolved or result in increasingly violent confrontation.
Europe is becoming a disorganized mess, and will require strong economic and political guidance from the strongest of its allies, particularly in the face of Russian expansion and sabre-rattling.
One would think that the sober heads in the Republican Party, who have spent the past 8 years dutifully providing loyal opposition, would be using their convention platform to outline their vision for tackling these issues.
But hey, why bother with that shit when you can devote time to addressing the indiscretions of a president who left office 15 years ago? I’m sure that other stuff will solve itself.
So much to unpack in this image. So terribly, terribly much. First off, Jonathan Bachman deserves a Pulitzer for this. I understand right place, right time, perfect timing on the shutter, but this is an iconic photo. Iesha Evans stands like a perfect statue of peace, eyes closed against the oncoming wave, arms crossed in front of her as if containing her power. Her dress is caught ever so lightly by the breeze, giving her an ethereal, almost angelic quality, as if she’s just landed. The riot officers, (thankfully) slowing, appear to be encountering her aura and repulsed by it.
That’s just the composition.
The reality is that Ms. Evans is about to be dragged down and zip-cuffed by two men more heavily armored than combat soldiers, men both nearly twice her size. She represents zero threat. No reasonable onlooker would conclude that she is armed. She is not in any way aggressive. She is peacefully protesting, but committing the ultimate crime of blocking a thoroughfare. For this, the police deemed greater than military force was necessary.
Putting aside that I’m presented with yet another peaceful civilian being brutalized by a police force unconcerned with “serve and protect” and fattened on years of cheap military surplus, I have a different problem with this image and what it represents. It’s almost too perfect. It might actually work. It might start to change public opinion about how policing is handled. That’s great, but my question is: why this one? Why this image? Why this woman?
Because we’re looking for Black Jesus.
These protests arose out of the general impression that minorities, particularly African-Americans, are assumed by the legal system to be guilty until proven innocent, unworthy of justice if they are, subject to summary punishment, that the system is unaccountable when it errs concerning their rights. I could recite a litany of names here, but it would seem incomplete because there will be another one horrifyingly soon. The largest issue is that even when the dead black (typically) man has done nothing to warrant roadside execution, the narrative always circles back to assume he somehow deserved it, somehow brought it on himself. Maybe he was a criminal a decade ago. Maybe he was rude. Maybe he had a toy gun. Maybe he was being suspicious.
In 1956, Rosa Parks was hauled off to jail for not giving up her seat on a bus. Her’s wasn’t the first case, in fact, there was already a case working through the legal system that would successfully end Montgomery’s bus segregation. But why were the women involved in that suit not raised up as icons of the Civil Rights movement like Parks was? The first one to be arrested, Claudette Colvin, well, she was 15 and girl had a mouth on her. She wouldn’t play well in the media. She wasn’t a good face for the movement. She wasn’t the Black Jesus they needed to show the injustice. Similarly, all of these people who’ve wound up dead after interacting non-violently with police have been somehow less-than-holy. Michael Brown may have robbed a store. Freddie Gray was packing a knife. Sandra Bland may have mouthed off to an officer. Eric Garner was selling cigarettes. Alton Sterling had a record. No qualifiers for Black Jesus there.
Now we have Philando Castille, who, by all accounts, was a model citizen. Gunned down without hesitation in his car after informing the officer that he was going to produce his permit to carry, Castille seems like the perfect person to hold up and say “this man did everything right.” He yielded to the officer when pulled over. He informed the officer that he was legally carrying. He followed all of the motions, and still wound up bleeding to death from multiple gunshot wounds.
But, like Jesus, he hung out with a woman who may have been less than the Blessed Virgin Mary herself, and if there’s one thing this Christian Nation cannot tolerate, it’s someone who is not white and less than perfect. So maybe he’s not our Black Jesus after all.
It’s possible that Iesha Evans is the Black Jesus of protesters. Maybe not. I’m sure we’ll hear in the coming days how she once got a B on a midterm or said a bad word once, or was in some way less than perfect, justifying her treatment in the scene in which she’s been immortalized. But maybe we need to stop looking for Black Jesus. Maybe we need to stop looking for that perfection and understand that we’ve already seen enough to know that there is brutal injustice going on in this nation. Half of the country lives in fear of the law, lives with a sense that they are not equal under the law, lives with examples that they can be refused justice without repercussions. Even if this is just a perception problem, it’s a problem. We need to stop looking for a savior to be crucified before our eyes to start working for salvation.
The only thing I know of Kesha’s music is this amazing piece, but I’ve heard a considerable amount about her case, and it’s appalling. The judge said that her “instinct is to do the commercially reasonable thing,” because Sony would suffer “irreparable harm” if Kesha didn’t give them 6 more albums. Mind you, this is a label that has sided wholeheartedly with a man who has been accused of raping her. I can’t imagine she’d be comfortable dealing with any part of that entity, regardless of whether or not they were going to ease up on forcing her to work with the man.
The response from various circles has been loud, with female artists (just now!) lining up to voice their support for Kesha, (not prior to the ruling, but nothing motivates like outrage). The infighting and gatekeeping has already started, as well. Taylor Swift tossed Kesha a quarter million to do what she needs to do. Considering Kesha has only two albums to her credit, and her second, from over three years ago, being a commercial flop partially due to some bad timing, it’s safe to assume that her legal fees alone have her looking at some financial hardship. $250k was probably the best news that she’s had in a long time. But that wasn’t enough for some people, apparently, because Swift didn’t voice her full-throated support for Kesha.
Putting aside that in America, money is speech, so in effect, this was the largest statement possible, there’s a few other considerations here. First, Taylor Swift is also signed to Sony, so coming out in direct support of Kesha has, at the very least, financial concerns above and beyond $250k, and quite possibly has legal ramifications. Second, the statement is pretty clear: that money is a huge show of support, regardless of statement. It says “I am putting my money where my mouth is. I support you in a very real, very tangible sense. I have your back in a non-theoretical way.” Third, and probably most importantly, how Taylor Swift deals with what is a horrible subject is her call. Maybe she’s not comfortable with a statement because of something she’s experienced or someone close to her experienced. No one should be gatekeeping how women deal with sexual assault. No one gets to say that her response is any less appropriate. Her support is there, it shouldn’t be diminished because it wasn’t the exact kind of support that someone else gave.
I made only one official New Year’s resolution last year, which was to lose 30 pounds. Considering the time-worn tradition of making such laughable resolutions and not following through, I figured I’d aim high.
It took me until June to actually attempt to start, so I was off to a good start. However, by October, I was pretty much done. I’ve gained about 3 pounds back from my low, but as of this time last year, I weighed about 210lbs, and I’m at 178 today.
2015 was, by many measures, a year I can only describe with a great deal of profanity, and I will be pleased to see it consigned to to the toilet bowl of history. In that spirit, I have compiled a new list of resolutions for the coming year. We’ll check back in a year to see how I did.
Only wildly overspend and fret over the perfect gift for people who will appreciate it. Do all the rest of my shopping at the dollar store.
I am notorious for overspending on my significant other, even when they do not reciprocate. Now that my significant other is significantly less significant, I need to stop doing that, because they are significantly underspending now.
Keep my friends close, and keep my enemies out of my business. Social media interactions with people I know in real life are being culled to a segment of people who a) want to continue to be linked to me and b) haven’t tried to stick a knife in my back over the last few months.
Lose the last 10 or so pounds I need to lose. Getting to 168 would put me into ‘average weight’ on the BMI chart, which I know is complete nonsense, but it will make me feel better about myself.
Work this ball of flab into some semblance of shape. Despite losing 30 pounds, I am still not what one would consider all that attractive in the midsection. Flatter, to be sure, but still quite slug-like.
Write at least one blog post a month here. Because I need to get back to writing.
That’s it. I’m working on becoming a better human being, but that’s always going to be a work in progress with little in the way of quantifiable success. These are solid goals.
So, as it says at the top of the page, Slàinte Mhath, and a happy New Year.