Sadman

There he was on my Sunday-morning TV screen, Saddam Hussein looking more like a Deadhead in the midst of a 30-city tour than a former U.S.-supported despot, later declared enemy. He gave up without a fight. Some criticized him for that, saying it only proved he was a classic school-yard bully, collapsing when finally challenged. Now we talk of how to try him for his alleged crimes. Do we give him Western-style justice? An Iraqi tribunal? An international court? Do we get to decide because we spent so much money and spilled so much blood getting him? Though it took a lot longer and caused more U.S. casualties, this “arrest” reminds me of when Bush Sr. went into Panama City in 1989 and arrested Manuel Noriega under operation “Just cause (we can).” Thousands of Panamanians died in the apprehension of that strong-armed thug who also was once on the U.S. payroll.

I think Saddam might fare best with Western-style justice, with which a guy with a lot of money—he’s got at least $750,000—stands a much better chance in court than some poor schmuck. And in this country the accused is considered innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. (Some Americans think that lofty sentiment is fixed in one of the amendments to the Constitution. Not true. Actually a newspaper columnist coined those words many years ago.) Maybe Saddam gave up without a fight because he wants his day in court so he can prove his innocence. Of course, America’s big-time attorneys kind of have their hands full right now with Kobe, Michael and Scott and their respective legal battles.

Nice place to visit—or work. In last week’s paper I innocently, and apparently insensitively, dissed the fine city of Oroville in an interview with local actress Samantha Perry. She mentioned the yellow bike program launched in Chico a few years ago that soon failed once all the bikes were gone. I suggested, jokingly, that they all ended up in Oroville. I could have said Paradise, but Oroville just seemed a more likely destination, what with that steep climb up the Skyway and all. This week I got a letter from Tao Stadler, publications editor of the Oroville Chamber of Commerce. Stadler said he was offended by the Oroville reference. “Obviously—and unfairly—you insinuate that the communal bikes were stolen by Oroville residents,” he wrote.

He goes on to say, “thousands of people who live in Chico work in Oroville, and vice versa. What is good for Chico is good for Oroville, and vice-versa. And while many of us are trying to move on with our lives and build a strong business- and community-based relationship between the two cities, you seem happy to throw a barb in just for fun, ignoring the fact that you have an ethical responsibility to respect your own community. Many of your readers and advertisers live or work in Oroville. Why disrespect them?” For the record, Mr. Stadler, while respecting and working in Oroville, chooses to live in Chico.

The prescription drug ads on TV continue to evolve. Those ads, which began airing a few years ago, allow the pharmaceutical companies to cut out the middle man (doctors) and appeal directly to the consumer. To make claims of symptom relief or cure, the Federal Communication Commission requires that the ads also list all of the possible side-effects, such as diarrhea, stomach bleeding, nausea and so forth. Now comes the ad for Levitra, which shows some middle-aged guy trying to throw a football through a tire swing. He performs poorly at first. Then, I assume, he takes the drug because suddenly he’s running around and throwing the football with the enthusiasm and accuracy of a Brett Favre. Turns out Levitra is like Viagra, which makes the football passing through the tire very symbolic. But since the message here is sent by body language with no verbal claims as to its effectiveness, there is no requirement to list the possible side-effects, which are headache, flushing, runny nose, heart attack or stroke. To be fair, I think the ad should show the guy rubbing his forehead, blowing his nose and then clutching his chest and falling to the ground.