Wandering Wahls

Little ghosts and goblins and Harry Potters were out in bunches last night. We saw them all while we were at a friend’s house so our kids could trick-or-treat with their friends in a real neighborhood (it’s tough trick or treating in our neighborhood with 5 acres between houses).

The kids went off on their own with Anna watching over the young ones. Joe, at almost 15, didn’t make it this year – not because of age but because of a debate tournament; however, he still thinks he’s young enough to trick-or-treat (old enough to start driving and young enough to trick-or-treat – something seems amiss).

Maybe my friends and I are getting to be curmudgeons, but I think there needs to be a litmus test for trick-or-treaters. From kids old enough to know better, to outfits that look like the girl came to party, things are getting out of hand. As a result, we took my old trick-or-treater guidelines and updated them to come up with a 2011 set of requirements for trick-or-treating eligibility.

If the trick-or-treater meets any of these guidelines, they should be the one at home handing out candy and scaring the real trick-or-treaters:

• If you are dependent on breast milk.
• If at any time during the evening you need a diaper change.
• If you are incapable of completing one of these efforts on your own: walk to the door or say “trick-or-treat.” If incapable of both, either mom and dad are just showing off the cute costume bought for the all too adorable 1 year-old, or they are trick-or-treating for their own delight.
• If mom or dad drove the trick-or-treater door-to-door or street-to-street – okay, this is partial ineligibility, but only one piece of candy because if you’re not walking off the calories we must be careful.
• If you are trick-or-treating with no costume. This is what society usually calls “begging.”
• If you are on birth control.
• If you are within 6 months of a graduation ceremony (excluding middle school).
• If you’re able to drive to the store to buy your own candy. Okay, if you do something special beyond saying “trick-or-treat” then you’re good (we did have one group sing a Christmas carol and that was pretty creative).
• If you have any facial hair.
• If you have a criminal history.
• If you bought a costume whose title was prefaced with “Naughty” (Nurse, Cop, Waitress, President, etc.).

Of course it’s easy to have these rules when you’re at someone else’s house handing out candy because it’s not your house that will get egged.

Does anyone have any to add?

I was enjoying some irony while watching the activities at Occupy Wall Street and seeing graying hippies wearing badges supporting Chairman Mao and chanting, “This is our Wall Street.” I had to wonder: do ya really think your public protest would go over well in China?

But it did get me to thinking about how different sides can have different definitions about common topics. In my Business Writing class I teach the theory of Stasis and how writers need to understand their readers’ “definition” of a concept before making an argument.

Using OWS as an example, Luke Johnson of the Financial Times offered some varying interpretations of common concepts among the anti-business protesters and, well, the rest of us:

Banks: institutions that take deposits and make loans; as opposed to casinos run by fat cats, who are engaged in privatizing profits and socializing losses.

Companies: corporate structures that carry out business undertakings; as opposed to inhuman vehicles that despoil the earth and merchandise unwanted products.

Shopping: browsing stores to buy consumer items; as opposed to an unhealthy activity fueled by materialism and false promises.”

You can find the article online, but it takes registration – if you search the author’s name on Google News, you’ll get a direct link bypassing the registration (funny how that works).

Frankly, I’m not totally against some of the OWS interpretations- “shopping” comes to mind. My worst experience on our RV trip was having to spend time at America’s largest shopping mall, the Mall of America.

Since I’m into free-range thinking though, this interpretation game led me to the issue of military retirement reform, which is rearing its ugly head again. Here is MOAA’s Steve Strobridge testifying before the HASC-Subcommittee on Military Personnel:

Here are some different interpretations I have come up with regarding how America sees a few military-related terms versus how the Defense Business Board and some policy wonks interpret the terms:

Military Member: Individual supporting his or her country in a job that has inherent, unique and dangerous personal and family sacrifices, who accepted the sacrifices based on attractive set of benefits; as opposed to an employee in a job no different than others getting more than they deserve.

Retired Military Member: Individual who formerly supported his or her country in a job with inherent, unique and dangerous personal and family sacrifices based on promised benefits; as opposed to a former employee thinking they are owed something (see “healthcare”).

Military Retirement Program: Employment benefit created and promised in order to attract and retain employees for a job that calls for personal sacrifice above and beyond typical employment environment; as opposed to, overly generous perk for an ordinary job with ordinary responsibilities no different than 9 to 5 workers. (Exception: high level executives such as those serving on advisory committees advising politician-types.)

MOAA: Professional association representing the interests of the military community as Congress inches closer to changing military pay, healthcare and benefits; as opposed to, pain in the neck.

I was sitting in the base library the other day with my son as he studied. Maybe I missed the memo on updated library behavior, but I still think that quiet is the right way to be in a library. We had this – until a family of four walked in. The kids were talking at high volume, higher than an “outside voice,” and running around. Their comments were interspersed with loud “SSSHHHH”es from their dad. I have to believe that if the kid doesn’t shut up after 5 “SSSHHHH”es, he’s not going to shut up – dad may as well just “shhhsh” himself up. At this point, dad is just going through the motion hoping that others think he’s trying – but he knows that we know (that he also knows) that his kid is out of control (is this what Rumsfeld meant about knowing some unknowns and not knowing some knowns – I’m lost now).

Anyway, just as the family leaves and quiet comes back the adult next to us takes a phone call. My son and I know his email never went through to this unknown caller and that he is behind on his payment – this isn’t quite the information we were looking for in the library.

After, a friend and I were talking about the library episode and we agreed that there are times when other kids accepted behaviors make it tough for other parents to guide our kids. For example, I’ve always told my kids to talk quietly in the library; however, when I tell them they come back with “but other people are talking loudly.” I need to paraphrase the adage: Do as I say, not as they do.

My friend and I came up with the Top Five areas where our parenting attempts to establish some standards for polite behavior and to not create an “entitled” kid through retail therapy gets sabotaged (i.e., parenting behaviors such as, “no, you’re too young for that,” “that’s too much money to spend,” “sshhh,” etc.):

1. See above.
2. iPhones for middle schoolers – I won’t bemoan a cell phone too much, I can see why some parents like to stay in touch with kids due to activities (our kids have to wait until they’re freshman in high school, but we’re mean – and cheap); but, why do middle schoolers need a phone that requires buying web access? Do they need GPS to access the playground?
3. Sticking with Apple products, iPod Touches for elementary school kids – the kid hasn’t heard enough songs in their lifetime to fill half of the music library.
4. Middle School Formals – why are middle schools trying to treat their students as if they were high schoolers? These kids don’t need to insert the drama of relationships and preening themselves for the opposite sex – there’s enough time for that in high school.
5. Top of the line equipment for youth sports – okay, a $150 pair of sports shoes can help an athlete at the pro or college skill levels, but is a kid’s chance at making the traveling team really going to improve by wearing the same shoe David Beckham wears?

Thanks for listening, I feel better.

I’m pondering the etiquette of what kid-related news it is okay to share with others. It started when my son told us he could get a “letter” in high school for forensics (or, what I used to call “debate”). To be honest, we were a little surprised at lettering in a non-athletic activity.

However, the more I thought about it, I saw the validity of this letter. Why don’t high schools acknowledge intellectual activities as well as athletic? Why not drama, student senate, etc.? It makes perfect sense. That problem solved; however, it led me to another quandary and my etiquette question: when is it okay to tell others of your kids’ academic achievements?

Think about it: We all get news from friends and family about their kids achievements – Facebook, Christmas cards, letters, etc. But what achievements are mentioned? It always sports – football, basketball, soccer, etc. (There seems to be a hierarchy – I don’t read much about cross country or track and field, for instance.) These updates always tell us about Johnny making the travel team, Judy being an all-star, Tommy making the school football team, or Billy kicking the ref. I don’t have a problem with this (maybe the last one), and we all see sports updates as normal news about the kids.

So then, why don’t we hear about Johnny getting straight A’s all year, Judy being selected for Gifted & Talented, Tommy’s winning essay, or Billy embarrassing the quarterback by correcting his spelling in class (I put that in for balance).

Even in parent-chat over a beer or bbq, parents talk about “all star” this or “goal scoring” that. But we parents seem reluctant to say, for instance, Sammy is still getting straight A’s (I let that slip, didn’t I?).

Maybe we don’t read or hear this news because we think it is arrogant (or we view academics as geeky and sports as studly). Or is it that parents are more humble about academics?

It shouldn’t be this way though. If a Christmas newsletter can tell us all about where each kid stands athletically, can’t parents also report on GPAs or academics? We have three decently academically achieving kids who also do sports – I’m not hesitant to say one made the JV soccer team; but, I am hesitant to say my daughter got off the chart grades (well, I let the cat out of the bag there).

Personally, I see an all star ranking as solid as a kid scoring in the top 5 on their high school placement test and getting some scholarship money (that’s the last one – no need to send a Christmas newsletter this year). Seriously though, I’d love to hear about a friend’s child who was accepted at 5 universities and went to Yale on an ROTC scholarship – just as much as I like hearing about the kid whose team won state.

Actually, the college thing would be more impressive.

Anyway, can anyone answer my dilemma: Is it okay to talk about children’s academic pursuits. Is there a parenting “Dear Abby” out there who can address this issue?

It is interesting how events converge. First, we’ve got Occupy Wall Street making the news through their protests on Wall Street. Some of their ideas have merit, but I think they’re in the wrong location. I’d give them more credence if they occupied DC where administrations invite Wall Street execs to play active roles in lawmaking and elected officials on both sides are showered with their “donations.”

Speaking of showers, it seems a few of the OWS group could use one of these. However, their actions do represent a great aspect of our country – the right to protest and speak freely. Jon Huntsman made a great point in contrasting the protesters’ freedom to shout their demands for governmental reform (and more sleeping bags for cold nights) versus his time in China where these actions aren’t allowed. So while we have to put up with some loud protesters in need of some personal hygiene, we need to remember our founders wanted us to have this freedom of speech.

Second, while OWS is demonstrating one of the many rights our country offers, my daughter had to write an essay for school on “Are You Proud of Your Country?” I always enjoy students’ perspectives on our country and their perspectives on what our country offers (beyond hot dogs and amusement parks). So then, I thought I’d offer insight into why a 12 year-old is proud of her country:

Are You Proud of Your Country? By Anna Wahl

When asked, “Are you proud of your country?” I immediately say, “Yes, why wouldn’t I be?” I have never thought about why I say that, but now I know. It is because of the people, especially the ones I saw during 9-11, when my mother was in the Air Force, and at the United States Air Force Academy.

First, everyone who participated in 9-11 makes me proud. I have seen footage of the planes crashing into the twin towers, and then the towers collapsing. I saw and heard how lots of people died to save others. Firefighters especially put themselves in very dangerous situations to rescue others. This reminds me of a quote by President Kennedy: “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.” Those American citizens did a great service to us during 9-11. They were very brave. This makes me proud.

When my mom was in the Air Force, I also saw people who make me proud. My mother served for 22 years, and so did others. Lots of people served in the United States military many years. They want to help our country and our lives. This shows me that America is a wonderful place. The military bases help everyone; the people in there do anything for others; and it makes me realize that the people in out country are great, especially in the military.

The last reason I am proud of my country is by seeing the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA for short). It is a wonderful academy to go to, with a great education and program. Many students apply there. Lots of young adults want to go to USAFA to serve America. This alone makes me proud, that so many Americans want to have the honor of serving our great country. However, the Academy only takes a certain number of students. USAFA wants to ensure that our military consist of strong and smart officers. Cadets have to have great grades and be physically fit. The Academy is a great place that makes Americans ready for a military career helping our country.

That is why I am proud of my country. I am proud because of the people. All their actions are honorary. Now I know exactly why I don’t have to think about the answer to “are you proud of your country?” It’s just too easy.

The title is from an article on kids’ sports. I’ve been thinking about this topic after attending a few youth soccer games and being more intrigued by the parents in the stands than by the game. It’s quite a change from what I was used to from watching my kids’ games in Germany.

First, a little background: In Germany and most of Europe athletic teams are not associated with the schools. Instead, each village, town, city has one or more club teams (our village of 2,000 had one team). Each club has different teams for the age levels and the clubs play other clubs in surrounding villages, towns, cities, etc. (all overseen by a sports agency that sets the rules and guidelines). Additionally, the clubs have their own field and clubhouse.

The last item is important because they use it to sell brats (the hot dog like food, not little kids – though it’s not a bad idea…), french fries, beer, etc. at the games. My son got a great soccer experience and I got an excuse to drink German beer (or warm wine on cold winter nights).

Back to the topic though: The game atmosphere is different stateside, not only from Germany but also from when I was a kid (hence the “way it was, way it’s now” title theme – I thought that was rather pithy). The noticeable difference is the vocal ability of the parents. They’re loud! I’ve seen two parents get at each other – and their kids even played on the same team (one mom was swearing and the other mom took exception to it, and rightly so). Another group of visiting parents were laughing and cheering on their team’s player after he had run into the other team’s goalie and that goalie was lying on the ground injured.

I don’t remember parents acting like this at my youth games (I don’t remember parents being at my games for that matter). Also, overseas, the parents tended to hang around and chat, with the occasional, “Good one, son.” Maybe as a result of the food and drink available, the parents saw the games more as a social time (well, at least I did).

Oh, one last difference. Over there, the players were hitting the showers after practices and games at age 9. Here, even high school kids don’t shower – the kids go home sweaty and stinky. On the other hand, that keeps the girls away so maybe it’s a good thing.

My freshman in high school, Joe, joined forensics – should I be debating the value of this club with him?

My 7th grade daughter’s classmate complained that the whole debt is the President Obama’s fault and if the President is reelected he’s moving to Russia. First, who is this kid – a young version of Alec Baldwin? Alec never did leave the country like he threatened, did he? Second though, Russia?! Of all places to abandon this country for – I could see Australia, Germany, Greek Isles: but Russia!

Speaking of my 7th grader, she is running for student senate. Her campaign slogan: “Don’t go bananas, vote for Anna!” I though it was quite good. She even made her campaign posters into the shape of a banana.

I’ve also been noticing recently that I’m getting ahead of myself more often than usual as I type. I’m sure you know the type of error I mean – typing phrases such as “the item” as “the tem;” or “some types” as “soem tpyeps.” I’m wondering if I either need a keyboard bigger than the on eon (oops, there’s another one: I meant “one on”) my laptop or if I’ve come across a possible new test for Alzheimer’s. I sure hope the problem is the keyboard.

Finally, I see that MOAA has received some coverage in The New York Times regarding the possible changes to the military retirement system and MOAA’s work toward protecting military personnel and readiness:

“’The whole reason military people are willing to pursue a career is because after 20, 30 years of extraordinary sacrifice, there is a package commensurate with that sacrifice upon leaving service,’ said Steven P. Strobridge, a retired Air Force colonel who is the director of government relations for the Military Officers Association of America, which is lobbying against changes to the benefits.”

And, a good friend’s son-in-law and veteran, Steve Griffin, wrote an editorial piece for, and was quoted in, The Times against changing the system. I have to read up on these – I’ll save that for my next entry this week.

I wrote about the potential changes to the military retirement system and what happens – MOAA starts a legislative campaign. I’ll leave it to both my readers to infer the level of influence I have in DC circles. However, this is an important issue that military members need to be on top of. Why?

First, if you’re active duty you stand to possibly lose a few benefits. For one, go to MOAA’s site to see the impact on your future retirement pay if the military raises your eligibility to age 57 or above.

Or, consider another possible impact to active duty members: Is the old system going to be grandfathered in for current members?

Most members have planned on a specific pension for their military retirement (a lot of members use this government site to calculate their retired pay).

Therefore, based on the promised retirement program, members have made long-term life and family plans. Perhaps the member is planning to use this pay as their house payment upon retirement. Or, maybe the member wants to give back to the community and start teaching (knowing the pay is low). With the present retirement system, retirement pay allows members the flexibility to consider a broad range of jobs at a broad range of salary levels; allows members to choose where they want work and live rather than having the job choose these for them (heck, do you work to live or live to work?).

However, the foundation for these plans could disappear if retirement rules are changed and there is no grandfather clause.

Another reason this issue is important is: how will these changes impact the military’s ability to retain and attract people? The MOAA site poses the same question I did previously (there’s that level of influence thing again):

“What choice would you make as a 10-year service member facing a fourth or fifth combat deployment if the military delayed your retired pay eligibility until age 57, 60 or 65?”

I recently talked to a helicopter pilot and a nurse, both at active duty 20 years or more. Both weren’t very sure that they’d still be in the military under the proposed retirement rules – the financial lure of the private sector for their jobs would probably have been too great to pass up.

I’m with MOAA. These proposed rules are shortsighted and, I would add, not realistically thought out (go back and look at my entry on policy wonks). What can you do though? Go to the above MOAA site and: learn how to email Congress; learn how to obtain legislative updates from MOAA; learn how to join MOAA and Voices for America’s Troops.

And, go to MOAA’s Facebook and Twitter pages and express your opinion!

MOAA’s Facebook page has posted a link to the live discussion at the Washington Post concerning military kids and how they handle living the military lifestyle. By the time you read this, the live discussion will probably be over, but you are still able to read the text of the conversations. The title of the discussion is “The Mil Life: Are military kids thriving or just surviving?”

The discussion is hosted by Stephanie Himel-Nelson, herself a military brat (I know this term is used frequently but I do dislike the use of the term “brat” in conjunction with military kids – the kids we met were far from brats; though at least they don’t use “z” in the plural form).

The topic is interesting, especially having three kids of my own who grew up in this lifestyle. Personally, based on our experiences and our friends’, I think military kids thrive, especially when advantages such as overseas travel and cultural experiences are taken advantage of. Be it learning how to surf in Hawaii, attending local schools in a foreign country, or exploring a new country every 4-day weekend while stationed in Europe (as opposed to hitting the BX for whatever holiday sale it is that 4-day weekend).

I know the life of a military family is difficult due to frequent moves and/or overseas assignments, but I have seen kids come through all this as strong, confident, inquisitive, and understanding that there is more to the world than what exists in their local neighborhood. We live in an area where there are a lot of active duty and retired military families, and it is fun to hear the kids talk about rooting for an English soccer team, eating blood sausage in Germany (yuck!), or snorkeling in Hawaii. In the long term, the military life is going to benefit these kids and let them know they don’t live in a vacuum.

By moving around, they’ll know about different areas and cultures of the US and/or the world, and be open to the fact that there are different ideas and ways of doing things.

There is a great article at MOAA’s website titled, “Military Retirement Reform: Who’d Lose What?”

This is an important topic that all members should read given the deficit-reduction proposals coming out of Congress. As the article states, the impact to military members could come from:

• freezing military pay raises and/or reduce military manpower levels
• dramatically reducing the military retirement package
• significantly increasing out-of-pocket healthcare expenses for retirees

The retirement issue perplexes me. It seems that in order to save money the powers-that-be want to cut back the military pension system and make it more like a civilian workforce plan – along the lines of a 401(K) with vested member retirees getting their money at age 60.

So, if the argument is to corporatize the military retirement plan, why is there is no mention of employer provided matching contributions (i.e., for every dollar the member contributes, the employer will contribute a dollar)? These contributions are prevalent in civilian 401(k) programs.

More importantly, serving in the military is not similar to a civilian job – for instance, retired civilians aren’t subject to recall as retired military members are. Therefore, if the job factors are dissimilar, why should the retirement packages be similar?

I do wonder how these types of changes will impact retention and recruiting. As MOAA points out, we’ve been through this before:

“After Congress passed a far less dramatic retirement cut in 1986, it had to be repealed less than 10 years later when the Joint Chiefs of Staff complained it was undermining retention. Can we seriously expect that wouldn’t happen with the QRMC’s far more dramatic cut?”

With the new plan, the carrot of having to stay 20 years to get the retirement pay will be gone. Why will good employees stick around with civilian pay rates enticing them. The current retirement system is what kept my wife in. I’m curious among MOAA readers who are retired:

Would you have stayed in at 10, 11, or 12 years if the retirement plan was the proposed program?

On an ending note, it is ironic that Representatives in Congress who get 100% pension after only 8 years of service are reducing the military retirement program. Maybe it’s time for military members to unionize!