In 1967 I was in the band with Chic Burlingame at Anaheim High School. He was extremely intelligent and loved to laugh, and played the trumpet well. I knew Chic as a classmate, as well as his brother Mark. Mark went on to be a physician and Chic became a naval aviator. When I was in the air wing of the USMC, I got to know a lot of naval aviators, and they were, shall I say, a wild bunch of crazy guys. It takes nerves of steel to crash land millions of dollars of high priced military muscle into the pitching deck of an aircraft carrier, and euphemistically call it a “landing.” The last time I saw Chic was at a high school reunion, probably 1997, the years run together after a while. Anyway, he looked great and still seemed to be enjoying himself. I cannot covey how shocked I was to learn that Chic (Charles F. Burlingame III) was the pilot of flight 77 that crashed into the Pentagon. I know in my heart that he must have already been dead when the plane made contact, because there is simply no way he would have allowed the terrorists to take control. Anyone who knows naval aviators would agree that there just is no surrender in those guys (think John McCain).

There is no way for us to know, I don’t believe, what happened in those last few moments of that flight–I certainly am unaware of a cockpit recording. Chic died a hero, as did so many others that day. I personally resent the conspiracy theorists who try to suggest that he flew that plane into the Pentagon. He worked there and probably knew some of the people who were killed. Even with knives at his throat, they would not have gotten him to cooperate.

That’s why it was such an injustice when the Burlingame family had to go through an incredible ordeal to have him buried near his dad at Arlington National Cemetery. I was friends with Chic’s mom and dad as well, and thought the world of them. Charles F. II was an amazing man and I had tremendous respect for him. His mom always reminded me of Suzanne Pleshette and was truly one of the most unforgettable people I have known.

I know my classmates and all of  Anaheim High School, and the city, have honored his memory. I did not know Chic’s younger siblings Brad and Wendy, because they were probably not at Anaheim High when I was there. For Mark, Brad, and Wendy, I feel badly that they get swept up in all the recurring pain of the annual remembrance of those tragic events. I hope that they have, or may one day find,  peace with all the notoriety that goes along with their family tragedy, and our national wound.

I choose today to remember the man with the infectious smile and the irrepressible laugh, who served and fought for his country because it was in his heart to do so. He is honored now as best his country can do, there among the fallen but not forgotten. I will hear his trumpet when taps is sounded at the memorial. I will hear his mom and dad singing God of Our Fathers as we did at Thanksgiving with the church choir. It is my privilege now, then, and always to say I called Chic Burlingame, my friend. Rest in peace my friend, rest in peace.

One of the problems facing our country is that we do not believe in democracy—majority rule. Ever since Barak Obama was sworn in, those who did not vote for him have sought to de-legitimize his presidency. They have opposed everything he has tried to do, with no respect given to the majority of voters who put him in office. Like it or not, he is the President of the United States of America, elected by a significant majority of voters, unlike his predecessor.

A similar situation has arisen in Wisconsin. A Republican majority took over the governorship and legislature of that state and has enacted laws which many people disagree with. There are recall efforts against nine politicians because people are upset with the decisions they made. Elections have consequences and should be honored, regardless of how upsetting the results. The recall process is meant to remove politicians who have entrenched themselves within a political system that insures their continued re-election, not as a get even strategy for politically unpopular decisions.

In California, a small fraction of the electorate voted to recall Governor Gray Davis, and installed Arnold Schwarzenegger in his place. There were a myriad of factors that went into that particular situation, but as a system issue it was a total failure. Just because a politician is not very good at his job is not a very compelling reason to implement what is in effect a coup. The will of a majority of voters was to have Gray Davis be the Governor; the will of a minority trumped the majority. I contend that is a subversion of democracy at its most fundamental level.

Special elections rarely, if ever, have significant turn out. However, because of the nature of weapons that were intended to break up the hegemony of the railroads over state political processes, the same tools can be used to sabotage democracy itself. Which brings us to Wisconsin.

What the people of Wisconsin are doing is validating the de-legitimization of their election because they do not like the outcome of a perfectly legal process. When the majority can no longer govern without the threat of a coup, our nation is in jeopardy. However much we may not like the decision of the majority, it is either sacred or it is not. We have entered a time when we have to decide which is more important: transient political concerns, or the entire enterprise of democracy itself. If we have faith in our system, all things will be corrected in time. If we do not have faith in our system, our democracy is in jeapordy.

Who could have known in the early days of July in 1776 that the world was about to experience something entirely new? There was no pundit, virtual or otherwise to provide commentary to the momentous events that were about to unfold after the reading of the Declaration of Independence. Now there are pundits to explain virtually every action, thought, or possibility that may or may not unfold in the near or distant future. Has it not all been over thought, over expressed, and over analyzed?

I believe The Virtual Pundit will actually be offering something very different. In conjunction with SeriouslyThinking.com and all the attendant content that provides the background for our thinking, I believe that my analysis and commentary will take you much deeper than most other pundits offer.

My orientation is centerist, but not in the traditional sense. I have developed a theory of “Mythonomics” that looks at the world of finance and monetary policy in a very non-traditional way. Evolutionary Outcome Dynamics is another model of governance that attempts to take a longer, deeper view of current political reality than any other program I am aware of.

Hopefully, the use of these new tools can be helpful in clarifying and reducing impossibly complex problems into more understandable form for people who have neither the time or inclination to develop their own. However, we are not going to allow our readers to engage in intellectual “outsourcing.” The point of our comments is to make you think–not provide anyone with talking pionts. My friends tell my that my expectations are too high. We’ll see.

In the meantime, I hope you will check in with us from time to time to see what things seem most important from our vantage point. Very seldom will we be commenting on sex scandals and stories about human foibles, unless they have deeper or longer lasting consequences than the daily news cycle. Perhaps, you will find this ThoughtWise Analysis helpful.