2006-04-12
Yesterday and today I spent all day at the Conference. Evening, too, yesterday, for the annual Jazz Concert featuring, as it does most years, Don and Dave Grusin, both from Colorado. Dave is the better-known of the brothers. IMDB lists him as the composer for 99 film scores, including Mulholland Falls, The Firm (the whole score is piano, played by him), The Milagro Beanfield War (for which he won an Oscar), and On Golden Pond.
The highlight for me yesterday (other than the concert) was Marine Colonel Bryan McCoy talking about "The Passion of Command: The Moral Imperative of Leadership." He talked not at all about the causes of the war, or how it was being fought, or any strategic subjects. His subject was how you keep your Marines alive and functioning when they haven't slept in days, are hungry, cold, and are being shot at. (Hint: Using your power as their Colonel is of no help.) I'm against McCoy and his Marines having to be in Iraq, but I went away from the talk glad that we had Colonels like McCoy. I hope we have a lot more like him.
Today the highlight was a talk given by Anthony Romero, director of the (national) ACLU. I got to chat with him for few minutes before his talk (opportunities like that are one of the great things about the CWA), and told him that, while I'd been a member for years, I never carried a card until I heard George H. W. Bush make a disparaging remark in one of his debates about "card-carrying ACLU members." (Said sarcastically, with a scowl on his face.) As soon as the debate was over, I went rummaging through my file cabinet to find my card, and have been carrying one ever since. Romero reached into his wallet and showed me his card!
In his talk, Romero told us that since 9/11 membership in the ACLU has doubled, to something like 600,000. I'm sure you can figure out why.
During the Q&A for a panel that followed, with Romero and two other speakers, I said that many people who believe strongly in the broadest application of the 14th Amendment and the Bill of Rights (Amendments 1 - 10) -- the people I know, anyway -- actually only think 9/10 of the Bill of Rights should be interpreted broadly. They think the 2nd Amendment (right to bear arms) should be interpreted narrowly. Since any right is only meaningful when it's exercised in a way that we find objectionable (e.g., distasteful speech), I asked, wouldn't it make more sense for one who believes in civil liberties to support the NRA in their interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, even though one might be against what the NRA is trying to do?
The panelists thought I had a good point. Not sure about the audience, though... this is Boulder, after all. I heard a few people muttering something about "militias." There's been talk in Boulder, too, about limiting "hate speech." Too bad there were only a few hundred people there to hear Romero, and not the whole town.