The True Story of Heidi, Idaho

About a mile downstream from Banks, Idaho, on the Payette River is a spot with picnic tables and a beautiful little sandy beach. Although the sign doesn't say so, it's called Heidi, Idaho... and has been since the early '60s.





Dad loved to fish. But even more, he loved to be with his family.

As did Mom. I don't know about the fishing part... far as I know, she has never stepped foot in Cabela's, or had a fishing license. But she loved to spend time with her kids. Still does.

(I wasn't much of a fisherman, either. I tried a few times, but didn't have the patience for it. If a fish didn't bite my hook RIGHT NOW, I quickly lost interest. I preferred roaming up and down the shore, looking for discarded fish... so I could flip 'em over and look for creepy crawly maggots. Yeah... I was a sick kid. Still am.)

A favorite family outing involved driving in the forest and fishing in a beautiful lake or river.

Although Dad loved to fish, he didn't get much fishing in on these trips. He spent most of his time baiting hooks, clearing snags, untangling lines, rejoicing in the occasional kid-fish caught.

Mom was his assistant.

As I think back, I don't know if Mom EVER fished.

In the early 60s, Mom had six kids... at one point she had six kids aged seven or under. (And none of 'em twins. Think about that.) I was the oldest of the six; Heidi was the youngest.

At the time Heidi, Idaho got its name, I was eight pushing nine; Heidi was 1 1/2.

The day was a perfect spring day; we'd been on our forest drive in the old Plymouth station wagon (three seats - the rearmost seat faced backwards), and were headed back toward Boise, when that beach and that bend in the river beckoned in the mid-to-late afternoon.

We scrambled down to the beach and took our places. As I recall, we were the only ones there; it may be that it was still relatively early in the spring. But I also recall that it was a nice day.

As it was in the springtime; the water was running high and swift from the snow-melt. But we all knew to respect the river, and keep our distance.

Dad was making his rounds up and down the line, baiting hooks, helping the young'uns with their casting, untangling lines, etc. Mom was helping, and trying to keep inventory on her beloved babies.

As she made a head-count, she came up one short. And quickly determined Heidi - the baby - was missing. About the same time... here comes a tiny baby, a couple feet out in that swift-flowing river, floating face-down, drifting away from shore. HEIDI!!!

Dad started pulling off his shoes, removing his wallet, keys, etc., to effect a rescue.

He never got a chance.

Mom didn't have time for those formalities... she immediately waded out into the stream and plucked her tiny child by the arm, pulling her back to shore.

Heidi obviously hadn't been in the water long... she was gasping for breath, but mostly because of the coldness of that melted-snow water. A little wrapped-in-the-blanket time, and a new set of clothes, and she was good as new. We all felt grateful that she had gone in upstream, rather than downstream. Eight of us had left on the family outing... and eight returned home that evening. Mom was our hero. (Dad and Mom were always our heroes, but Mom shone particularly brightly on that day.)

Before we even got into the car and headed home, that beautiful little spot was named Heidi, Idaho.

It's got a nice ring to it.

(Click on either photo for larger viewing options. They were snapped on 21 Sept., 2007)

UPDATE: In my quest to make this story as "true" as possible, I'm adding some clarifications and corrections that my mother has supplied after reading it. (She was a little older than me at the time, and is qualified to make these corrections.)

- We had stopped for a family picnic, and all family members were gathered at the picnic tables up above the beach (minus Heidi... who was drawn to the beautiful water).

- Mom had to run down to the beach from the picnic area, and then swim out into the river to get to Heidi.

- Dad explained his hesitation later. He was mentally reviewing his Boy Scout rescue training... trying to remember if it's better to take shoes off or leave them on... wondering if he could throw his belt for Heidi to grab onto, etc. (Yeah... I can believe that.)

- Following her heroic and successful rescue, the rest of us wanted to eat our picnic, so we ate while Mom sat and shivered. (There was a change of clothes for Heidi, but none for Mom. Funny that she would remember that little "detail" better than me...)

Does religion create misery?

There was a letter in the Idaho Statesman yesterday (September 11, 2007), that I feel compelled to respond to, even though the author of the letter will likely never see my response.

Here's the letter:

So much misery is the result of religion

Today, Sept. 11, marks the anniversary of one of the most perfidious attacks on American citizens.

This was the infamous 1857 Mountain Meadows Massacre, which has been described by historians as the worst Indian massacre in American history — except that it wasn't committed by Indians, it was committed by ordinary Euro-Americans in a frenzy of religious madness working under the orders of a deluded, self-styled man of faith.

Fast forward 144 years to 2001 and once again innocent Americans were murdered by religiously inspired zealots working under the orders of a deluded, self-styled man of faith.

How can so much misery be the result of religion?

First, one must realize that all religions require their adherents to turn off their minds. This makes them more easily susceptible to control by their power-hungry clergy. The Abrahamaic religions go one step further by commanding that there be no other gods.

From this commandment, as Thomas Jefferson so poignantly wrote, "Millions of innocent men, women, and children … have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned."

Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg has concluded that all it takes for good people to do bad things is religion. Now you know why these atrocities occurred.

Gary Bennett, Emmett


Now, first of all, Gary Bennett writes letters regularly. Most are critical of religion or religious people, conservatism, patriotism, etc. He obviously has a burr under his saddle, and views "the root of all problems" far differently from me. Which is his prerogative.

How unfortunate to view religion as an impetus for carnage and misery. Bennett is definitely a "glass-half-empty" kind of guy. Maybe he had a bad personal experience with religion.

The Mountain Meadows Massacre of which he writes - perpetrated by Mormon settlers in southern Utah - has been debated for 150 years. Bennett describes it with authority, as though he is aware of facts that have escaped other historians for all that time. (I s'pose his "deluded, self-styled man of faith" is Brigham Young. Or it could be John D. Lee, a local Mormon who was tried and hanged for the incident.)

Incidentally, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints issued this statement on the anniversary of that tragic occasion: "We express profound regret for the massacre carried out in this valley 150 years ago today, and for the undue and untold suffering experienced by the victims then and by their relatives to the present time." (Delivered by Apostle Henry Eyring at the site of the massacre, where the Church has also erected a monument honoring the victims.)

Indeed, much evil has been perpetrated over the course of history by people who claim to be motivated by their religion. But in almost every case, upon closer inspection those people could also be accused of personal greed, or ambition, or lust for power and influence, and their "religion" is a smokescreen. The radical Islamofacists come immediately to mind (particularly on September 11th). Richard Butler - former leader of the Aryan Nations in northern Idaho - painted himself as a "Christian." What could be farther from the truth? Is it fair to condemn a billion Muslims because of bin Laden? Or all of Christianity on account of Butler's twisted behavior and philosophy?

One could also get a negative view of religion by looking at "Reverend" Fred Phelps and his band of followers who call themselves the Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka. (How is it that he can call himself a Baptist? I'd think they'd disassociate themselves with the likes of Phelps.) In case you're not familiar, his group travels from place to place with brightly-colored signs reading "God hates Fags," and declares that anything bad that happens is God's punishment on society for our tolerance of homosexuals. They are well known for "demonstrating" at funerals for fallen soldiers, etc. (I s'pose he thinks we should round all the homosexuals up and gas 'em, like Hitler did to the Jews. Can you imagine Jesus Christ - the Prince of Peace - endorsing such a message?)

Yeah... people who claim to be religious don't always act religious.

Consider the good that has been done, and is currently being done, by people who are trying to be good Christians.

When disaster strikes, it's almost always religious organizations (and the Red Cross - a private organization), who are the first responders. They don't ask for anything in return. They're just trying to be good neighbors and citizens, and treat folks the way they would like to be treated.

Right here locally, religious people provide shelter for the homeless, clothes for the naked, food for the hungry, care for the needy. They visit people in prison. They create recreational and learning opportunities for children and youth. They seek out those who are hurting, or lonely. I heard about a group of folks - motivated by their religion - who visit the Intensive Care Unit at the hospital once a week to sing to the patients and lift their spirits. I know a group of women who devote every Monday morning to assembling essential supplies for disaster response - "humanitarian kits," they call them - for people they've never met, and will likely never meet.

Yeah... so much misery.

(As for religious adherents "turning off their minds" - that is an entirely different topic. But I can confidently declare that Mr. Bennett's view is distorted. Some of the smartest people I know are deeply religious. A thinking person has no problem reconciling scientific theory with religious belief. Exercising free will by participating in religion does not mean surrendering one's free will. It's difficult for skeptics and cynics to understand that concept.)

I take great satisfaction in being associated with people who are motivated by genuine religious charity, and can't help but feel a bit of pity for Mr. Bennett for his jaded viewpoint. (Although he may be the author of much good in his community; I hope he has such opportunities.)

Royalty returns to Boise

As we grieve the passing of our beloved Princess Diana (can it be 10 years?!!?), Boise's royalty has returned.

I'm talking, of course, about our beloved BSU Bronco football team. They are on a lofty pedestal, and there is some serious Bronco Worship going on about town. (They better not lose, though, or the fickle fans will turn on 'em like a Michael Vick Pit-Bull. I've seen it before, and it's ugly.)

GAME DAY

Actually for a couple days leading up to Game Day, I've been seeing more cars with the tell-tale BSU flags a-fluttering, etc. "WOW! Those people must be BSU fans!" I always think to myself. "And they're serious fans - not just ho-hum fans with maybe a T-shirt, or a bumper sticker."

On Game Day, I decided just for kicks to ride my bicycle around the stadium and absorb some of the tailgate vibe. It was around 3:30pm.

My time wasn't wasted... there was a sea of blue and orange - vehicles, shade awnings, banners and flags. I was picking my way carefully through a sizeable crowd, motor homes, pickups, barbecue grills, souvenir vendors, etc. (Mid-afternoon on a Thursday! Awesome!) Off in the distance, I could hear a man's voice bellowing, "Boiiiiisssseeeeeeeee!" (The first half of the stereophonic Boiiiiseeee.... Staaaaaaateeee! chant that's so popular at the games.) I didn't hear the second half. At 3:30pm, it was probably still an hour or so too early.

THE BIG GAME

Season opener. BSU vs. the Weber State Wildcats.

Let me wax nostalgic for a moment.

Back in the Big Sky days, they played every year, BSU and Weber State. I can remember sitting in the student section. My brother John and I would start a special cheer, just for that game. "Cream o' Weber!!!" (That is a brand-name for a Utah dairy; Cream o' Weber milk could be purchased at the Smith's grocery stores.) At the beginning of the game, people would be lookin' at us funny-like. But by the end of the game, 500 or 1000 rowdy students would be shouting "Cream o' Weber!" in unison. Beautiful thing.

This time around, I watched on the teevee at home. Being there "in person" is way too rich for my blood these days. Bronco Nation will never again be a refuge for po' folk.

It was a lopsided victory for BSU. They looked powerful, and won handily. I believe the score was 56-7. (It was 49-0 going into the locker room at halftime... the fat lady hadn't showed up yet, though, so they came out and went through the motions for another 30 minutes. Everybody on the Bronco team got to play quarterback, for at least a couple downs.)

Ian Johnson is amazing to watch. He seems to be in a different time-dimension from the other 21 players out there. Einstein, and that wheelchair guy, could explain it but I wouldn't understand. When he has the ball, the other 21 go at it for 5 seconds, and then Ian seems to pick his way through the rest of them, as if they're all frozen in stop-motion. (I think his nickname should be "Magic" Johnson. Is that already taken?)

For me, perhaps the most amazing thing about the game was the "sports team" doing coverage for KTVB.

It was the regular guys doing the pressbox-talking - David Augusto and Scott Slant or whatever-his-name is. They do okay, although I think they make WAY too many comparisons with a play they remember from a preseason scrimmage, or a game that BSU played 5 years ago or whatever. Who cares? (They should save that talk for when they're in their rocking chairs on the front porch of the Old Sportscasters' Home, a few years out.)

Some people listen to the radio guy - Paul J. He's been "the voice of the Broncos" since the broncos were roaming among the mastodons and triceratops. But he's an "acquired taste" - a taste I've never acquired. (IMO, he should've taken his place in front of the Old Sportscasters' Home maybe 10 years ago.)

I was truly baffled that KTVB still has oafish-but-lovable second-string weatherman Larry Gebert prowling the sidelines, instead of their new SPORTS-BABE, Kerith. WHAT ARE THEY THINKING??!? She would be perfect for the sidelines - she seems to know her stuff, and I've gotta think the coaches, players, etc. - pretty much EVERYBODY, except possibly for Senator Larry Craig - would enjoy talking to her more than to Gebert.

(CREDITS: Football game photo stolen from the Idaho Statesman website; news-people photos stolen from the KTVB website.)

It's not easy being conservative

Senator Larry Craig has been a "public servant" for the citizens of Idaho his entire professional career. As a general rule, his views have been what most people call "conservative," mirroring those of his consituency. (Much to the chagrin of the folks in Boise's North End, and in Blaine County, Idaho is a "conservative" state.)

Now Craig's career is on the line.

He has pleaded guilty to "disorderly conduct," following an encounter he had with an undercover cop in a restroom of the Minneapolis Air Terminal.

Everybody knows that. It's the lead story on every news/opinion website, every news broadcast, and every newspaper across the Fruited Plain.

What did Craig do?

According to the complaint, he:
- Tapped his foot in a stall of the restroom - a secret gay mating signal, apparently. (Who knew?)
- Played "footsie" with the undercover cop in the next stall (obviously unaware it was an undercover cop).
- Put his hand underneath the partition.

(The lurid details can be read HERE.)

Frankly, I'd ask... where's the crime?

But Craig told the judge he's guilty... a fact that's difficult for even his most ardent supporters to ignore.

(There have been rumors about Craig's sexual orientation for years. If Craig is not gay - and he vehemently denies being gay - I feel sorry for him, because it would be miserable to be deflecting the accusations. If he is gay, I feel equally sorry for him, because it would be miserable to live a double life, being the "conservative" in the public eye, and a whole different person in private.)

When the story broke, a firestorm of indignation followed.

For me, it's most interesting to observe who's indignant.

It's a no-brainer that Craig's liberal detractors would join in the beat-down. His fall from grace is a godsend for them.

They point out the apparent hypocrisy, since Craig has consistently voted against "equal rights" for gays, gay marriage, etc.

But - they are joined by a sustained chorus of conservative voices, who condemn Craig and call for his resignation.

Yep - it's not easy being conservative. Mess up, and both teams pile on!

Let's compare, for a moment, the sad story of Larry Craig with a champion of the liberals, Mr. Al Gore.

(I hope this is a valid comparison. If I'm being unfair, I invite dissenting viewpoints.)

Al "Inconvenient Truth" Gore says all the right things. He preaches the gospel of Global Warming and conservation, and living a "small carbon-footprint" lifestyle.

But then - shockingly! - it comes to light that Gore's Tennesee mansion consumes $36,000 worth of energy per year!

(Not to mention the fossil fuel he burns as he private-jets from lecture to lecture, takes limousines from the airport, etc. Gore explains that he purchases "carbon credits," and that he's trying to cut down on his consumption. I have yet to hear an explanation that I could understand, of how that carbon-credits stuff works. But that's a different topic.)

Who criticizes Algore?

His "conservative" detractors lay it on thick. Like Craig's critics, they point out the hypocrisy of a guy who says one thing in public, while living a private lifestyle that's apparently contradictory to his Good Word.

But strangely, most of his supporters rush to his defense! They are more than happy to give him a pass. After all, he's saying all the right things. And he should be cut some slack because of all the good that he's doing, preaching the Good Word of Global Warming.

(Perhaps the Gore Faithful actually feel relieved that Gore doesn't practice what he preaches. After all, it assuages their guilt for doing the same thing... criticizing SUV drivers, corporations, etc., - the high-visibility offenders - while doing precious little themselves to reduce their Carbon Footprints.)

So, what's the difference?

Well, let's compare the alleged offenses.

Craig is accused of being secretly gay. Algore is accused of being a secret global warmer.

Which is worse? The liberals would say that being a Global Warmer is far worse than being gay! There's nothing wrong with being gay!

They say they're not outraged by Craig's gayness, but rather by his hypocrisy.

So what about Algore?

The difference, it seems, is that liberals don't like what Craig says, and they like what Gore says. It doesn't matter what they do, as long as they're saying the right thing (and Craig isn't). And darn it... conservatives expect you to do what you say!

It's not easy being conservative.

P.S. - I think Craig should step down, or at least declare he won't run for reelection in 2008. I've generally supported him over the years, but these ongoing allegations have become enough of a distraction that he's ineffective representing Idaho's interests in Congress. And if he's gay, he's a hypocrite. (By the way, we're all hypocrites to one degree or another. But when you choose to be in the Public Light, you have a higher duty, in my opinion.)

Public School Insanity

In Mesa, Arizona, a 13-year-old was suspended for sketching a "gun" at school.

Dad went to Payne Junior High to talk about his son's delinquent ways... the public servants at the school cited the Columbine massacre. School district spokesman Terry Locke said the drawing was "absolutely considered a threat."

Click HERE to link to the FoxNews article.

The offending sketch:

(To me, it looks like something out of Napoleon Dynamite's notebook.)

There's a law against that?

Certain members of Congress are threatening to hold certain members of the White House staff in "Contempt of Congress" for not cooperating with Congressional investigations into various sordid affairs of state.

The congressmen are all Democrats... because it's a "partisan" thing, like 99% of what goes on in Congress.

Is there really something wrong with "contempt of congress"? Because I'll admit right up front - I've been guilty of that pretty much since I was old enough to pay attention. They better prepare my prison cell.

But... they'll need a lot of cells. The vast majority of Americans disapprove of Congress. (Compared with Congress, President Bush has a huge approval rating!)

Don't get me wrong - I've been very disappointed by much of what President Bush has done. (I'm a "small government is good government" adherent - and Bush has definitely taken us in the opposite direction. But the blowhards in Congress are so incompetent, and partisan, it's a pathetic joke. About the only meaningful legislation they've accomplished recently was giving themselves a nice raise.)

Our Shrinking Forest

Only yesterday it was a magnificent stand of mixed trees, for almost as far as the eye could see. Today it's a few stumps and slash piles.

THE GREAT CLEAR-CUT OF 2007









Surely this an even worse disaster than hit our urban forest in 2003 or thereabouts, when a careless smoker tossed a smouldering butt into the juniper ground cover.

Where was Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne when this was going on? Talk about being asleep at your post!

If only I'd known! I would've demanded a spotted owl inventory; I'm no owl expert, but I'm sure I've seen 'em nesting in the branches. I would've renamed myself Butterfly Boy, put on an Indian headdress, and lived in a treetop hammock high above the ground, to prevent this from happening.