Boson, quarks and hadrons for an escapist

I'VE JUST READ a piece in The Economist that was all about the Higgs boson, hadrons and quarks. Don't go away. I was lured by the headline: Enemy in sight?, which is a fitting reference to any story out of the Nation's Capital these days. Happily for me, the magazine article had nothing to do with alarmingly wretched politics but rather it dealt with the 40-year search for something called the Higgs boson. Don't go away.

As I burrowed through the exotic language for an atom of meaning , I finally conceded that for one who didn't do well in high school physics, the tale of the Higgs boson left me at the starting gate. Still, everything has a purpose, I suppose. For me in times like these, it was good to read something that was an unintelligible escape from the otherwise inexplicable folly of our everyday world. To show my appreciation, I may try to work quarks and hadrons into my later posts if I ever figure out what they mean.

The British have a new princely diversion

THE BRITISH have long substituted royalty for reality. Something about the divine right of kings (or queens) passed down through the ages as the Great Chain of Being. The monarchy was temporarily interrupted when Charles I got into a war with Parliament and ended up without a head in 1649. Among the common folks as well as the gallery at-large, the fascination with the pompous and prim culture of Buckingham Palace continues to this day with the spate of press reports of a new chapter in princely affairs.

I refer, of course, to Prince William, who's smartly perched on the second rung to the throne. His recently announced fiancee, Kate Middleton, is in the non-regal class, which adds to the suspicions that princes have slim pickings among upper-class royalists in the eligible ranks. On a scale of one-to-ten, this social item might crowd out soccer as Britain's top diversion during the gloomy winter months. As the British magazine The Economist put it, the public is "bored" with rehashing the late Diana's tragic chronicles. "The Royals" it observed, "need a woman with Diana's glamour but without her instability. Kate Middleton...might well fit the bill."

Marriage between social equals is hardly a family value among the enthroned true believers. Henry VIII plucked his stable of wives wherever and whenever they became available without asking too many questions about the stock. And now a dashing young prince has set the stage for his own mate, upgrading their acquaintance at college

So far, things are looking bloody well for the couple who are sending good vibes to the jurors.

As The Economist succinctly noted, "Miss Middleton is very pretty and the newspapers like her."

Betty Sutton: Don't just stand up to fight

REP. BETTY SUTTON reset the boundaries of this year's election in a few sharp words at the Akron Press Club yesterday. Dismissing the aimless rhetoric that has sent too many fearful politicians to their hideouts, Sutton asserted that our critical need today is for some plain talk, a vanishing ingredient in the flow of laundered comments from rostrums across the political landscape. Instead, Sutton, a Democrat, asserted that our representatives in

Washington need to "stand up and fight for solutions, not just stand up to fight."

That message would extend to both sides of the aisle. It hasn't been surprising that Republicans have used health care reform and other progressive breakthroughs as weapons against their opponents. But there's evidence everywhere that Democrats who voted for these measures have been seeking lower ground when challenged. As The Economist magazine observed in a review of the political season: "...most Democrats running for re-election are staying mum or apologizing for their votes for reform." That would dramatically exclude Sutton, who has been on the cutting edge of many issues (including Cash for Clunkers) from job creation to health care.

The problems with strategic retreats is that voters can rightfully ask why the candidates voted for this measure or that one in the first place. It's a sign of weakness that has given the Party of No new opportunities to pursue its mulishness with still greater zeal (if that's possible!).

It has been an election in which Republicans have called for solutions without a hint of specifics, and squirmy Democrats have meekly stood aside and conceded that even without those specifics, their rivals might be right. What a way to lose an election!

The Economist: Intelligence vs. ignorance, period!

AFTER WITNESSING the astonishing number of trash-talking candidates and their followers on the fringe, I think we might want to consider the profound mission statement of The Economist magazine. It says its goal is to

"take part in a severe contest between intelligence, which presses forward, and an unworthy, timid ignorance obstructing our progress."'

That's worthy of posting on your refrigerator.

Someone once aptly described the media's role as "comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable."

But as we continue to realize today, those days are gone forever.