Commas, For Better or Worse.

6d0ffa2ed1e59e9f664a7ae434b94c9fFrom time-to-time, I review FirstCameBlue posts with a critical eye.  The exercise is much like reviewing a brief for errors after submission–painful.  This weekend, while laboring away on the elliptical machine at the gym, I had the opportunity to review posts from the past few weeks.  After reading a several posts, I noticed a grimace worthy trend in my writing:  the misuse of the comma.

To be sure, like any writer, I have my favorite punctuation.  In no specific order, the versatile em dash, the ubiquitous comma, and the separating semicolon round out my top three.  And it shows in my writing.

Comma usage is necessary for clear written communication.  Just ask a grammar school student the difference between, “Let’s eat Mom!” and “Let’s eat, Mom!”  But it is precisely because the comma may properly be used frequently that it is oftentimes used without cause, rather than used with a clause.

Without boring readers with details of comma splices, the serial comma, restrictive and non-restrictive appositive phrases, dependent clauses, and introductory adverbs, know that, going forward, I pledge to suppress my inner comma-kaze.

STACK: My New Addiction

We don’t allow [S] to watch television.  She is too young.   But I permit her to look at photos of herself on my iPhone.  (I know, I don’t know if that is much better.) Lately, much to my dismay, she’s been exploring other apps on my phone.  Earlier this week, I found her browsing through the App Store on my phone, something I never do.  After wrestling my phone away from her little, but strong, hands, I took a look at the top free apps.  And there it was.  Standing out like a beacon at number four on the list was the game Stack.  I had no idea what it was, but it was free and the graphic intriguing.  The app sat untouched for 48 hours.  Then, last night, as I struggled to fall asleep, I opened it.

Sliding colored tiles move across the screen in different directions.  The goal?  To stack the moving tile atop the static tile.  Any portion of the tile hanging over the edge is cut off, resulting in smaller and smaller tiles, until it is impossible to stack one atop the next.  Game over.  It appears that if one stacks enough tiles perfectly, the tiles grow back bit by bit.  But I haven’t played the game well enough to know this to be fact.  Rather, it is merely speculation and misplaced hope for possible redemption.  That said, Stack is addictive.  It’s hook?  The game appears far too simple to be as difficult as it is.


A Frightening Concept

Ideal Conceal, a Minnesota startup, is developing a two-shot pistol that folds into a palm-sized square. It can be slipped into a back pocket or displayed openly in a coffee shop with no one the wiser.

“Ingeniously designed to resemble a smartphone, yet with one click of the safety it opens and is ready to fire,” says the company website. “Smartphones are everywhere, so your new pistol will easily blend in with today’s environment. In its locked position it will be virtually undetectable because it hides in plain sight.”

The company said the gun will cost $395 when it becomes available mid-2016. Developer Kirk Kjellberg said he’s already received 2,500 emails from people who want to buy one.

Concealed carry gun looks like a smartphone

RE:PRINT (BloombergView): The Risk I Will Not Take

Americans today face a profound challenge to preserve our common values and national promise.

Wage stagnation at home and our declining influence abroad have left Americans angry and frustrated. And yet Washington, D.C., offers nothing but gridlock and partisan finger-pointing.

Worse, the current presidential candidates are offering scapegoats instead of solutions, and they are promising results that they can’t possibly deliver. Rather than explaining how they will break the fever of partisanship that is crippling Washington, they are doubling down on dysfunction.

Over the course of American history, both parties have tended to nominate presidential candidates who stay close to and build from the center. But that tradition may be breaking down. Extremism is on the march, and unless we stop it, our problems at home and abroad will grow worse.

Many Americans are understandably dismayed by this, and I share their concerns. The leading Democratic candidates have attacked policies that spurred growth and opportunity under President Bill Clinton — support for trade, charter schools, deficit reduction and the financial sector. Meanwhile, the leading Republican candidates have attacked policies that spurred growth and opportunity under President Ronald Reagan, including immigration reform, compromise on taxes and entitlement reform, and support for bipartisan budgets. Both presidents were problem-solvers, not ideological purists. And both moved the country forward in important ways.

Over the last several months, many Americans have urged me to run for president as an independent, and some who don’t like the current candidates have said it is my patriotic duty to do so. I appreciate their appeals, and I have given the question serious consideration. The deadline to answer it is now, because of ballot access requirements.

My parents taught me about the importance of giving back, and public service has been an important part of my life. After 12 years as mayor of New York City, I know the personal sacrifices that campaigns and elected office require, and I would gladly make them again in order to help the country I love.

I’ve always been drawn to impossible challenges, and none today is greater or more important than ending the partisan war in Washington and making government work for the American people — not lobbyists and campaign donors. Bringing about this change will require electing leaders who are more focused on getting results than winning re-election, who have experience building small businesses and creating jobs, who know how to balance budgets and manage large organizations, who aren’t beholden to special interests — and who are honest with the public at every turn. I’m flattered that some think I could provide this kind of leadership.

But when I look at the data, it’s clear to me that if I entered the race, I could not win. I believe I could win a number of diverse states — but not enough to win the 270 Electoral College votes necessary to win the presidency.

In a three-way race, it’s unlikely any candidate would win a majority of electoral votes, and then the power to choose the president would be taken out of the hands of the American people and thrown to Congress. The fact is, even if I were to receive the most popular votes and the most electoral votes, victory would be highly unlikely, because most members of Congress would vote for their party’s nominee. Party loyalists in Congress — not the American people or the Electoral College — would determine the next president.

As the race stands now, with Republicans in charge of both Houses, there is a good chance that my candidacy could lead to the election of Donald Trump or Senator Ted Cruz. That is not a risk I can take in good conscience.

I have known Mr. Trump casually for many years, and we have always been on friendly terms. I even agreed to appear on “The Apprentice” — twice. But he has run the most divisive and demagogic presidential campaign I can remember, preying on people’s prejudices and fears. Abraham Lincoln, the father of the Republican Party, appealed to our “better angels.” Trump appeals to our worst impulses.

Threatening to bar foreign Muslims from entering the country is a direct assault on two of the core values that gave rise to our nation: religious tolerance and the separation of church and state. Attacking and promising to deport millions of Mexicans, feigning ignorance of white supremacists, and threatening China and Japan with a trade war are all dangerously wrong, too. These moves would divide us at home and compromise our moral leadership around the world. The end result would be to embolden our enemies, threaten the security of our allies, and put our own men and women in uniform at greater risk.

Senator Cruz’s pandering on immigration may lack Trump’s rhetorical excess, but it is no less extreme. His refusal to oppose banning foreigners based on their religion may be less bombastic than Trump’s position, but it is no less divisive.

We cannot “make America great again” by turning our backs on the values that made us the world’s greatest nation in the first place. I love our country too much to play a role in electing a candidate who would weaken our unity and darken our future — and so I will not enter the race for president of the United States.

However, nor will I stay silent about the threat that partisan extremism poses to our nation. I am not ready to endorse any candidate, but I will continue urging all voters to reject divisive appeals and demanding that candidates offer intelligent, specific and realistic ideas for bridging divides, solving problems, and giving us the honest and capable government we deserve.

For most Americans, citizenship requires little more than paying taxes. But many have given their lives to defend our nation — and all of us have an obligation as voters to stand up on behalf of ideas and principles that, as Lincoln said, represent “the last best hope of earth.” I hope and pray I’m doing that.

* * *

It’s Never Too Early To Start . . .

We think [S] is adorable.  And on this trip, we learned that we are not the only ones who think so.  As we wandered through the open air markets near Asakusa, a young woman working in a shop, stopped us with a now-familiar call of kawaii (cute), wanting to place kanzashi–traditional Japanese hair ornaments–in [S]’s hair.  [S] was a good sport and passersby smiled at the little one learning the art form.






Trashing the Enemy

SEOUL, South Korea — North Korea likes to call South Korea a land of “political filth” and its leaders, including President Park Geun-hye, “human trash.” Now, apparently to highlight its contempt, it has begun sending balloons into the South loaded with an unusual payload, the police here said on Thursday: cigarette butts.

* * *

The South turned on high-powered loudspeakers to blare pop songs and harsh criticism of the North’s leader, Kim Jong-un, across the border. The North began sending balloons into the South loaded with leaflets.

The balloons were timed to detonate their payloads, scattering thousands of messages that, among other things, called Ms. Park a “filthy president.”

Some of the timers failed to function, however, and the airborne cargo crashed onto rooftops and cars in South Korean villages near the border. Inspecting the debris, military and police personnel discovered that the balloons’ payloads included things they had not seen before.

“We can confirm that they included cigarette butts,” Kim Hak-young, a chief superintendent of the police, said Thursday, though he declined to provide any details.

The police and the Defense Ministry until Thursday had refused to confirm a news report earlier in the week that some North Korean balloons were carrying trash, including used toilet paper.

North Korea Launches Newest Offensive: Cigarette Butts, The New York Times (Feb. 4, 2016).