To Facebook or Not to Facebook and the First Bachman Rant

I have a Facebook page. Unlike my students I haven't opened it for over a year. My family consists of cousins who are scattered from Alabama to Utah so Facebook looked like a good way to communicate. Then there were the long lost former students. Surprisingly, there were students in my past who still wanted to stay in touch. As a late arriver to social networking things quickly got overwhelming, however. The etiquette of friending, what happens when you write on a wall, what are gifts like purple flowers or cuddly koalas, and too many news reports on what Facebook was doing with all my data quickly drove me away.

Linked In was an alternative, but it's focus on building business contacts isn't the social network I need. Unfortunately, I had no choice but to join since I let some Linked In people use me as a reference. At least there aren't any walls.

Now Google is launching a new social networking system called Google+. It's in testing mode right now and available by invitation only (you can ask to be invited) so someone like me can get in on the ground floor before the elevator goes up (cliches are available on the second floor). One obvious advantage is the concept of circles where you can create smaller groups to hear specific things-the Pope in one circle and Whitey Bulger in another-should reduce the possibility of Weiner moments where I'd send inappropriate pictures of Maggie bullying other dogs to the cousins and the MSPCA. Google+ also has a teleconferencing feature where up to ten people can see each other at one time or so the ad says. Preliminary reports emphasize the privacy of the system, but I don't see Google not using data for commercial purposes. Type the word dog in a Google search and you're likely to discover where you can buy doggie toys in South Easton. Still Google+ does seem like something that might work for this geezer. I'll ask for an invitation and get back to you.

Note to Republicans. There's nothing wrong with expanding the brand, but you have to do it the right way. First, there was Budweiser and then there was Bud Lite; first there was Sam Adams and then there was Sam Lite. First there was Sarah Palin and then there was Michelle Bachman. Clearly the light version of Sarah Palin should be called Sarah Lite. When you're marketing to folks who can't meet the heavy intellectual standards of Mama Grizzly, you shouldn't confuse them with another name! At least Sarah had Paul Revere and the British in Boston at the right time. Ms. Bachman, in announcing her presidential campaign, told the world she was proud of her home town which was also the home of American icon John Wayne. Unfortunately, it was actually the home of John Wayne Gacy, the killer clown serial killer. I'll refrain from killer clown comparisons, but I hope that the arrival of Ms. Bachman won't drive the more mainstream Republican candidates to pander even more to the lunatic fringe of the party who dominate the primaries.

Bachman like most Republicans want to take the Sheriff of Nottingham approach to solving our economic woes by robbing the poor to pay the rich. For example, she bemoans our 35% corporate tax rate as too high while suggesting we eliminate the minimum wage. She doesn't tell you that with deductions the corporate tax rate drops to around 27% and that the largest corporations seldom pay more than 15%. The Bachman plan calls for rolling back the tax which would presumably give the largest corporations an even bigger break. What these figures tell me is that there is room to reduce the taxes of small corporations which are engines of job creation while fixing the system so the large corporations with the biggest lobbying staffs and the biggest role in outsourcing American jobs pay their fair share. Clearly, this would require thought, something in short supply on both sides of Congress. It would be nice if Republicans could find their way back to being the party of Main Street, not Wall Street and Wackos.