It is hard to envision any path that avoids the accelerating failure that is the US at the moment. This isn't to say that none exist, the country has seen dark days before; the Civil War, WWII, a nearly 50 year Mexican Stand-off with the Soviet Union with each side armed with nukes locked - cocked - and ready to rock, and the end of the Nixon administration. (Which history may one day regard as the beginning of the end of the American empire.) The Civil War was perhaps the darkest since the enemy was within, and it seems like that is where we are once again.
The Civil War ended just 148 years ago this June. Though all wars are complex events the heart of that war was simple, slavery. The Confederacy was determined to continue the practice of treating other human beings as property. The horrors that resulted are well documented and all that a compassionate, thinking, enlightened human being can say now is that it was evil. Yet I wonder if the American experiment in democracy ever fully recovered from having that evil written into its Constitution, only to try and remove it by brute force just 84 years later. Echoes of that conflict reverberate loudly in the attitudes of the Republican / T-party and many people smarter than I have remarked that the Confederacy of old are all "red" states today. Back then the enemy of freedom and humanity was the Confederacy, even if they did claim to have god on their side. The Confederacy was a declared enemy of the United States of America.
The enemy of freedom and humanity today, at least in the West, is the Republican / T-party, even if they do claim to have god on their side. And though it would be a stretch to claim they are the declared enemy of the USA, it isn't Democrats or Independents who are signing the petitions to succeed from the Union. It is the Republican / T-party who are determined to bring the government crashing down even though they lost the last election. That same party openly tried to suppress voter turn out in several states. (Why Obama's DOJ hasn't tossed a bunch of people in jail over that clear violation of both the spirit and the laws of the United States is a mystery.) Some of them actually speak fondly of slavery, suggesting it wasn't a horror after all. They are the party willing to prevent poor people from having access to health care in order to protect the tax cuts of the wealthy and preserve the profits of the insurance companies. Every action they take proves them to be the party of the wealthy over the working class, corporations over unions, and war over peace. What ever it was the Republican Party stood for in the time of President Lincoln, it is long past. And the question is, how does the country survive them?
It isn't clear that we can. The current debacle in Washington over the "fiscal cliff" is just one of an unending failure that is bound to happen when a large portion of the government is determined to see the government fail. Which, lets be clear, is the stated goal of the Republican party. They have no desire to see a capable, working, national government that is responsible to all of its citizens and a beacon of freedom and peace to the world.
(I know it is a bit harsh, labeling the Republican / T-party as enemies. I know a lot of people who vote that way, and they are not my enemies in any way. But I don't know how to avoid the conclusion. It was a Democrat who was gunned down in Arizona after the Republican / T-party types ran an add showing her district as an assault rifle target. It is Republican / T-party wing-nut radio and TV types who depict everyone who is not them as evil and beneath contempt. It isn't liberals who talk of armed revolutions or of turning the USA into an armed camp with the police checking documents at every corner. Who is it talking of succession again? And it is almost exclusively Republicans who support the NRA and its need to hold military assault weapons in order to "protect" themselves from hoards of their fellow citizens.)
The best hope is that the last election was a turning of the tide in Republican / T-party fortune and power and that the elections of 2014 will see the end of them. The problem is 2014 is still 2 years away and there it is no sure thing that the country can endure even with them being in the minority. Given the gerrymandering that all but assures a Republican House until the last vestiges of that party fade completely, it seems likely the country will have to survive much more than 2 years of them trying to destroy the system, and that may be too long. It has been 12 since Bush II took office and 4 since the Republicans made it their stated goal to sabotage anything government might do (other than fight wars and buy weapons). Can any country last 16, 18, or 20 years with its government in complete disarray? Germany lasted just 12 years after Hitler was appointed German Chancellor. I am not - NOT - suggesting that the Republican / T-party are equivalent to the Nazis in any way, only pointing out that it doesn't take long for a Democracy to destroy itself.
Yes, the Republican / T-party badly lost the last election. But that hasn't swayed them the least little bit. Serving the elite, ignoring any vestige of reality that doesn't align with their world view, hating an elected President and opposing anything he suggests with the burning passion of the truly pathological, is still their only real political policy. Democracy, it seems, is left wanting in the face of fundamentalism; be it religious, political or economic.
Yet what other option is there? A democracy that uses force to silence its critics forfeits it legitimacy. Running the the disciples of Grover Norquest and Ayn Rand out of power using anything but the ballot box would spell the end of a free society. Massive demonstrations demanding, say, the resignation of the T-party members of the Supreme Court, would be about as far as a democracy can go in removing people from office by force.
Roger Ailes, Charles and Bill Koch, and a few others, are lynch pins of right wing propaganda machine. If they if dismantled their machine and moved to a tropical island somewhere the US, and probably the world, would be a noticeably better place. Scooping them up at the end of a gun and dropping them off against their will however, would be a false victory. A true democracy shrugs off propaganda with a free press and an educated electorate. (Scooping them up in hand cuffs for a perp-walk would be an entirely different thing IF there is any real evidence that they have broken any laws ... like bribery or influence peddling.)
One might hope for a Paul-on-the-Road-to-Damascus kind of conversion for some of the leaders of the Republican / T-party types. Imagine the shock running through the right wing world that would flow from Roger Ailes being convinced that running a propaganda machine for greed and hate has put his very soul at risk, with an eternity in hell as his final reward? What if the Koch brother's had a vision that reveled to them the god they follow isn't the one who rewards the faithful with riches, but the one who drove the money changers out of the temple with a whip; who taught that the money grubbing and the merciless would never find their way to heaven?
But that seems unlikely. The Christian story suggests that Saul of Tarsus was actually a rather bright guy, something I'm not sure can be said of any leading the conservative movement. (This is the party of Young Earth Creationism, climate change denying, voodoo economics touting, sustainable energy hating twits who claim that pretty women don't really mind being raped but, if they should, they will not get pregnant.) Worse, the Republican / T-party are the party of a god, what are they going to be converted to? According to these true believers, progressive, open minded thinkers who believe that feeding the hungry, nursing the sick, visiting those in prison, demanding a fair legal system, clothing the naked, cherishing the children, and paying workers a fair and living wage are socialists, liberals, the very spawn of hell - the ones who need to be converted. Saul had another advantage over the current backers of Republican / T-party politics when it comes to being open to having his heart touched by grace, he wasn't obnoxiously wealthy and bent on raping as much of the planet as possible for more personal gain.
Untouched by the ballot box, immune to outright force, and beyond the reach of reason and compassion, it would seem there are no real options, no way to prevent the Republican / T- party from dragging the USA off the path of human progress. We are teetering on the edge of that path already, falling behind the rest of the first world by nearly any measure one cares to make.
And yet ... if a democracy can fail in a dozen years or so, why not the enemies of democracy? The Republican / T-party types have done a huge amount of damage, but we haven't fallen just yet. People are turning away from homophobia, racism, sexism, and the worship of wealth above all else. What if enough people turn away? Fifty-three percent wasn't enough to bring the Republican / T-party types to heel, but maybe 70% will get it done, or even 55%. Who knows where the tipping point lie? Gerrymandering has undercut the legitimacy of Congress, but even in a gerrymandered district a Republican / T-party candidate will fail if people actually think about who and what is getting their vote. Just a little bit of information beyond a 30 second sound bite on TV may be all that it takes, or one day of listening to Rush or watching Fox News with the slightest bit of skepticism. It doesn't take much light to chase away the darkness.
And if we can find that much light, maybe we can find enough to move even further away from this bought-and-sold system. Citizen's United is a horridly bad law ... but even the worst laws can be changed. Once upon a time the USA decided that Probation was the will of god, then a few years later decided it wasn't. The KKK and the John Birch Society still quote the Bible, but no one pays them much attention. Quoting the 2ed Amendment doesn't mean the NRA need be any less irrelevant. We will close our prisons and overhaul the justice system as soon as we discover they are evil failures. (Pretty soon we will have so many people in jail that no family will be untouched, and everyone will know just how ugly our current system has become.) The war on drugs will end in failure, just like all of our most recent wars. We will be a better people when it does.
The USA doesn't have much of a record when it comes to peace, but other countries have unlearned the art of war, we aren't necessarily too stupid to do so ourselves. Even if we are, we are about out of money to support our war loving habits. This one fixes itself regardless of what any politician thinks or says.
All of our problems are self-inflicted. That is no guarantee that we will fix them, but it does suggest that they can all be fixed. All we need is a little light to work by.
Sunday, December 30, 2012
Friday, December 28, 2012
Christmas hope
Though not a believer in any of the Christmastime gods, the holidays are still fun simply because most people get some time off of work and families get together. In my house visiting family means Daughters, Sons-in-law, and grand kids, and that means a chance to visit with the next two generations to pick up human history where my generation sets it down.
My Daughters are giving a serious re-think to all of American Society, along with virtually all of their friends and many of the extended family of roughly the same age. This re-evaluation includes rejecting excess consumerism and crass commercialism, and a stated rejection of the politics of money as practiced in the US today. They are bitterly opposed to the manipulations, greed, and lawlessness of Wall Street and understand quite clearly that exponential growth is an unsustainable economic model. They are experimenting with food co-ops and barter economies, and rigorously avoiding credit card debt. They dismiss the idea that banks, bankers, and Wall Street types making fortunes by loaning out other people's money, and then collecting interest on that money, as of limited benefit to society and seriously questionable morally. (College educated with Masters and PhDs in the bunch, they bitterly denounce the commercialization of education and the astounding school loan bills that come with it.)
Those who have bought homes have done so with modesty and efficiency high up on the list of "most important" qualities. Several have decided that, at least for now, owning a home is part of an "American Dream" that they don't share. With all jobs now best considered temporary, offered at the whim of an increasingly corrupt corporate / government system and retracted just as quickly, being tied to a mortgage is seen as unwise. (They may be swayed in that opinion after seeing the beating their parents have taken in this current downturn, along with the loss of about 1/3 of the family income due to "downsizing.") They have absolutely no faith in the idea that the money taken from them for Social Security and Medicare will ever be seen again. They also have no faith in the idea that this system will honor anything like a retirement or pension plan, fully expecting a large portion of such monies to be stolen by officialdom somehow.
They see an FDA that approves drugs much of the rest of the world will not touch, only to then see them pulled off the shelves a few years later due to health risks. (After, of course, the drug companies have made a few billion dollars.) It is their children poisoned by toys painted in China with lead paint and unable to digest the food grown and distributed by Agribusiness. They wish the bus and train systems in the US weren't decades behind the rest of the world because they don't care about cars or big oil profits. None of them believes that the car manufacturers are doing the best they can with fuel economy, and they all suspect that the government and the energy companies are in on the scam. They understand fully that the oil can't last forever and that alternate energy systems must be invented, coupled with massive improvements in efficiency. They don't trust people with guns. (Yes, you can read that in several different ways, they all apply.)
They are anti-war. Many have traveled and lived (or were born) abroad. The languages they speak include German, Spanish, and Korean. Several read Latin and Greek. They are big picture kind of people who know first hand that America's claims of superiority are nothing but propaganda. They have experienced the education and health care systems of other countries, seen the difference between countries that care for the environment and those who exploit it for short term profits with little concern for long term viability. I suspect they don't care much about America being #1 in anything if it comes at the expense of the rest of the people on the planet.
They don't watch much TV. They read a lot of books. They write and paint, play musical instruments and make movies. They are nothing like the society they grew up in and which surrounds them to this day. They may well be in the minority, but there sure seems to be a lot of them around.
They are not rebels or interested in revolutions. I am both puzzled and delighted by the fact that they are not even particularly angry at what they see. Part of that, I suspect, is simply that they don't see the things that are wrong as their fault. They didn't do it we, their parents, did. And they are kind of fond of us in spite of our failures.
Not much interested in the ill society we are handing over to them they basically ignore it; going about their lives in their own time and in their own way. They work around us as best they can, doing without cars, finding good food for their families, staying out of debt, living much lighter and quicker on their feet, and staying much better informed then I was at their age. I'm not sure how they vote, but they don't choose based on 30 second sound bites and are deeply skeptical of the motivations of anyone currently seeking public office.
Lest you conclude that they are simply children of an off-the-reservation-dad, I only raised 3 of the bunch. The rest are extended family. Though many have a take-it-or-leave-it attitude when it comes to churches, some are deeply religious and active participants in main-line Christian organizations. They debate abortion and gay marriage. (Really.) We disagree on a lot of things.
And on quiet holiday evenings they give me hope.
My Daughters are giving a serious re-think to all of American Society, along with virtually all of their friends and many of the extended family of roughly the same age. This re-evaluation includes rejecting excess consumerism and crass commercialism, and a stated rejection of the politics of money as practiced in the US today. They are bitterly opposed to the manipulations, greed, and lawlessness of Wall Street and understand quite clearly that exponential growth is an unsustainable economic model. They are experimenting with food co-ops and barter economies, and rigorously avoiding credit card debt. They dismiss the idea that banks, bankers, and Wall Street types making fortunes by loaning out other people's money, and then collecting interest on that money, as of limited benefit to society and seriously questionable morally. (College educated with Masters and PhDs in the bunch, they bitterly denounce the commercialization of education and the astounding school loan bills that come with it.)
Those who have bought homes have done so with modesty and efficiency high up on the list of "most important" qualities. Several have decided that, at least for now, owning a home is part of an "American Dream" that they don't share. With all jobs now best considered temporary, offered at the whim of an increasingly corrupt corporate / government system and retracted just as quickly, being tied to a mortgage is seen as unwise. (They may be swayed in that opinion after seeing the beating their parents have taken in this current downturn, along with the loss of about 1/3 of the family income due to "downsizing.") They have absolutely no faith in the idea that the money taken from them for Social Security and Medicare will ever be seen again. They also have no faith in the idea that this system will honor anything like a retirement or pension plan, fully expecting a large portion of such monies to be stolen by officialdom somehow.
They see an FDA that approves drugs much of the rest of the world will not touch, only to then see them pulled off the shelves a few years later due to health risks. (After, of course, the drug companies have made a few billion dollars.) It is their children poisoned by toys painted in China with lead paint and unable to digest the food grown and distributed by Agribusiness. They wish the bus and train systems in the US weren't decades behind the rest of the world because they don't care about cars or big oil profits. None of them believes that the car manufacturers are doing the best they can with fuel economy, and they all suspect that the government and the energy companies are in on the scam. They understand fully that the oil can't last forever and that alternate energy systems must be invented, coupled with massive improvements in efficiency. They don't trust people with guns. (Yes, you can read that in several different ways, they all apply.)
They are anti-war. Many have traveled and lived (or were born) abroad. The languages they speak include German, Spanish, and Korean. Several read Latin and Greek. They are big picture kind of people who know first hand that America's claims of superiority are nothing but propaganda. They have experienced the education and health care systems of other countries, seen the difference between countries that care for the environment and those who exploit it for short term profits with little concern for long term viability. I suspect they don't care much about America being #1 in anything if it comes at the expense of the rest of the people on the planet.
They don't watch much TV. They read a lot of books. They write and paint, play musical instruments and make movies. They are nothing like the society they grew up in and which surrounds them to this day. They may well be in the minority, but there sure seems to be a lot of them around.
They are not rebels or interested in revolutions. I am both puzzled and delighted by the fact that they are not even particularly angry at what they see. Part of that, I suspect, is simply that they don't see the things that are wrong as their fault. They didn't do it we, their parents, did. And they are kind of fond of us in spite of our failures.
Not much interested in the ill society we are handing over to them they basically ignore it; going about their lives in their own time and in their own way. They work around us as best they can, doing without cars, finding good food for their families, staying out of debt, living much lighter and quicker on their feet, and staying much better informed then I was at their age. I'm not sure how they vote, but they don't choose based on 30 second sound bites and are deeply skeptical of the motivations of anyone currently seeking public office.
Lest you conclude that they are simply children of an off-the-reservation-dad, I only raised 3 of the bunch. The rest are extended family. Though many have a take-it-or-leave-it attitude when it comes to churches, some are deeply religious and active participants in main-line Christian organizations. They debate abortion and gay marriage. (Really.) We disagree on a lot of things.
And on quiet holiday evenings they give me hope.
Tuesday, December 25, 2012
Build a new house
I am generally of the opinion that the injuries we have inflicted on ourselves as a society are fatal. Over the course of my lifetime we have embraced an ideology of supply side economics and unsustainable growth (like that of a cancerous tumor that grows until it kills), endless war and war profiteering, and the anti-intellectual stance of religious fundamentalism. Hatred is our national motivation and brutal violence its natural expression. Our elected officials can barely stand to talk with each other, let along govern. Not surprising really, we can barely stand each other.
How we made it this far is kind of a wonder. That we can't go much further seems a given.
But once in a while there is a ray of hope. The unimaginable massacre of a room full of kindergarten kids has actually sparked something in America's view of itself, that perhaps we are not the shinning beacon to the world our delusions would have us believe. Though not actually talking about any real gun control, we are talking about maybe talking about it. For this country that is a huge step. (Not that I think any real laws will actually be passed. I give the assault weapons ban about a 1 in 15 chance, the limit of clip size about 1 in 20, and closing the gun show loop-hole about 1 in 25. Even if one or all of the above become law, the 5 Justices of the Supreme Court owned by the NRA will obviously side with the gun manufacturers and declare it / them "Unconstitutional".)
Still, there is a serious, loud and contentious clash of opinions taking place this Holiday. The mass murder of 6 year old kids didn't push the NRA from its official Weapons Manufacturer's Party Line one iota, showing a total lack of compassion that surprised even me. But at least, this time around, a whole lot of people are standing up in open defiance and condemnation of such a brutal display of inhumanity. There is even a Republican or two daring to disagree with the standard party line on guns. That, in and of itself, is rather astonishing. Up until now the Republicans seemed monolithic in their commitment to a weird kind of self-destruction, with the added insanity of thinking that taking the country with them is "progress."
(Not a big fan of hanging people with labels I hate to tar all NRA members with the same brush. I know several and can imagine they winced at the NRA's statement, but ... they are still holding a card that claims they agree with the Associations goals. If a whole bunch of the 4 million members tore up their cards and sent them back? Now that might just mean something real was happening in this country.)
Another small (very small) ray of sunshine is with the budget debate. Not so much what the political parties are saying - they all sing from the same hymnal. But there are a few voices crying loudly that the whole thing is nuts - lets just go off the cliff. At least the out-of-control Pentagon budget takes a hit the Bush insanity tax rates go away. Our whole "fuck the poor" social mentality does get a boost with the cuts in social program - but two out of three is a damn sight better than none out of a million.
Of course these small rays of sunshine and hope do not suggest that American society, as currently expressed, is going to get better. Our American society is ill to its very core. Much like Islamic ideology, there is nothing of the modern American social ideology that has any redeeming value at all. The good that does lurk in our collective souls is just plain humanity, a humanity that is opposed by virtually everything "American."
It is curious that humans continuously create societies that are so hostile to human beings. Like purposely building a house where the doors are too low to fit through without crouching, the floors too tilted to walk on comfortably, the tables too tall to reach, the lights too few to brighten the dark, and the heater too small to keep away the chill. Why would anyone do such a thing? Why do we listen to a Priest who tells us we are horrible creatures doomed to an eternity in hell when we know that we are not so horrible, and that we have done nothing that deserves an eternity in hell? Why do we listen to an Imam who suggests that killing a daughter who was raped will restore our honor? A President makes up an excuse, and we willing send our sons and daughters off to be shredded in his war. A commercial comes on that insists a new red car will make us happier than the blue car sitting in the driveway, and we run out and buy one.
I know there are a few of the truly crazed that would debate otherwise, but is there any real doubt that we would be better off living in a society were there were far fewer guns? Where it would be unthinkable to argue that everyone should carry a concealed weapon in order to protect ourselves from everyone else so armed? Is there any real debate left that the country, let alone the world, can survive unrestrained consumerism? Is there an honest, sane argument for crushing the middle class while moving an even larger percentage of a nation's wealth into the hands of the very few? All of these seem at least as crazy as insisting that a god demands a man kill his sexually assaulted daughter.
We build horrible houses, then wonder why it is we are miserable living in them. So maybe I'm seeing just a ray of sunshine in the fact that at least a few are starting to suggest that this is a really horrible house that we have built. That maybe it is time to tear it down and build a better one. The old house doesn't survive, but the people living there end up much better off.
How we made it this far is kind of a wonder. That we can't go much further seems a given.
But once in a while there is a ray of hope. The unimaginable massacre of a room full of kindergarten kids has actually sparked something in America's view of itself, that perhaps we are not the shinning beacon to the world our delusions would have us believe. Though not actually talking about any real gun control, we are talking about maybe talking about it. For this country that is a huge step. (Not that I think any real laws will actually be passed. I give the assault weapons ban about a 1 in 15 chance, the limit of clip size about 1 in 20, and closing the gun show loop-hole about 1 in 25. Even if one or all of the above become law, the 5 Justices of the Supreme Court owned by the NRA will obviously side with the gun manufacturers and declare it / them "Unconstitutional".)
Still, there is a serious, loud and contentious clash of opinions taking place this Holiday. The mass murder of 6 year old kids didn't push the NRA from its official Weapons Manufacturer's Party Line one iota, showing a total lack of compassion that surprised even me. But at least, this time around, a whole lot of people are standing up in open defiance and condemnation of such a brutal display of inhumanity. There is even a Republican or two daring to disagree with the standard party line on guns. That, in and of itself, is rather astonishing. Up until now the Republicans seemed monolithic in their commitment to a weird kind of self-destruction, with the added insanity of thinking that taking the country with them is "progress."
(Not a big fan of hanging people with labels I hate to tar all NRA members with the same brush. I know several and can imagine they winced at the NRA's statement, but ... they are still holding a card that claims they agree with the Associations goals. If a whole bunch of the 4 million members tore up their cards and sent them back? Now that might just mean something real was happening in this country.)
Another small (very small) ray of sunshine is with the budget debate. Not so much what the political parties are saying - they all sing from the same hymnal. But there are a few voices crying loudly that the whole thing is nuts - lets just go off the cliff. At least the out-of-control Pentagon budget takes a hit the Bush insanity tax rates go away. Our whole "fuck the poor" social mentality does get a boost with the cuts in social program - but two out of three is a damn sight better than none out of a million.
Of course these small rays of sunshine and hope do not suggest that American society, as currently expressed, is going to get better. Our American society is ill to its very core. Much like Islamic ideology, there is nothing of the modern American social ideology that has any redeeming value at all. The good that does lurk in our collective souls is just plain humanity, a humanity that is opposed by virtually everything "American."
It is curious that humans continuously create societies that are so hostile to human beings. Like purposely building a house where the doors are too low to fit through without crouching, the floors too tilted to walk on comfortably, the tables too tall to reach, the lights too few to brighten the dark, and the heater too small to keep away the chill. Why would anyone do such a thing? Why do we listen to a Priest who tells us we are horrible creatures doomed to an eternity in hell when we know that we are not so horrible, and that we have done nothing that deserves an eternity in hell? Why do we listen to an Imam who suggests that killing a daughter who was raped will restore our honor? A President makes up an excuse, and we willing send our sons and daughters off to be shredded in his war. A commercial comes on that insists a new red car will make us happier than the blue car sitting in the driveway, and we run out and buy one.
I know there are a few of the truly crazed that would debate otherwise, but is there any real doubt that we would be better off living in a society were there were far fewer guns? Where it would be unthinkable to argue that everyone should carry a concealed weapon in order to protect ourselves from everyone else so armed? Is there any real debate left that the country, let alone the world, can survive unrestrained consumerism? Is there an honest, sane argument for crushing the middle class while moving an even larger percentage of a nation's wealth into the hands of the very few? All of these seem at least as crazy as insisting that a god demands a man kill his sexually assaulted daughter.
We build horrible houses, then wonder why it is we are miserable living in them. So maybe I'm seeing just a ray of sunshine in the fact that at least a few are starting to suggest that this is a really horrible house that we have built. That maybe it is time to tear it down and build a better one. The old house doesn't survive, but the people living there end up much better off.
Saturday, December 22, 2012
Normal
A friend of mine made a joke the other day about me maybe being normal after all. Co-workers, she doesn't know me all that well, but does have a hint of just how far off the reservation I can go. So her saying I might be normal was a kind of a complement, and I took it that way. Normal though, is problematic.
I make no pretence of being a 2ed Amendment kind of person. I don't care about guns one way or the other, but I'm not particularly thrilled about living in a society that worships violence, hate and mayhem, and then arms itself to the teeth. And while any kind of gun control would be welcome, (seeing as we have little or none at the moment) I don't think we are going to see anything meaningful happen because of this most recent killing spree. Killing sprees are normal in our country.& In fact they happen just about every day. There have been no new laws as a result of the last dozen or so most notorious ones, including the attempted assassination of former Arizona congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. Expecting sanity to suddenly break out and spread though my fellow Americans now seems mostly an act of wishful thinking.
(I haven't seen much indication of sanity among any of the gun people I know. Twenty dead kids and their response is to go out and buy more guns, or even more nuts, more high capacity clips. I love 'em, but they are bat-shit-fucking-crazy, each and every one. An apt analogy might be this; after the Catholic Church being hoist upon its own petard during the child sex scandal, had Catholics everywhere going out to buy more kiddie porn. It is hard to imagine anyone being that twisted, but somehow gun lovers made the leap effortlessly.)
Most people in this country think guns should be accessible, at least to most people, most of time, for just about any reason. No need to be a hunter, a competitive target shooter, or have a job where a gun is part of the tool kit; just wanting one is enough. No need to explain why you think you need a 100 round, rapid fire, high tech killing machine at your finger tips. No need to have training or hold a licence that has to be renewed every few years. No need to know that guns make your house less safe, not more, and that the gun in the house is most likely to be used to shoot a family member or friend. Normal people think is is normal to want to own a gun.
Most of the people in this country (and the world for that matter) believe in a god or higher being or supreme power of some kind. No two of them believe exactly the same things about these gods, though groups of people hold beliefs close enough to the same that they can stand being around each other ... most of the time. Catholics tolerate other Catholics, unless they disagree about something serious like gay people. Protestants will usually abide Protestants of another denomination, giving most at least a chance of being allowed into heaven. They are often less optimistic about a Catholic's chance at passing through the pearly gate but that is okay. Catholics don't give the Protestants much of a chance at all. That doesn't make the Christians any worse than other groups of believers. Muslims barely tolerate each other let alone Christians, Jews or Hindus. Much of the "Muslim World" is pretty busy killing each other off with Islamic governments being fond of supporting terrorist organizations to wage proxy war on other Islamic governments. Of course they take any chance that comes along to kill Christians, Jews and Hindus.
Not to be completely outdone, the US is waging a pretty efficient drone war against Islamic terrorists. The problem is a lot of none terrorists get killed along the way. Not a big problem though, all of the none terrorists are still Muslims. So the killing goes on. Think I'm full of shit on that? Ask yourself what would happen if one of those drone strikes missed and brought down the local Christian church full of believers on a Sunday morning. Chaos. Now miss the target and knock down a Mosque. Less chaos, much much less chaos.
Religion is normal. Assuming all "other" religions are somehow inferior to one's own is normal. Religious intolerance, war, murder and butchery are also normal. It is only abnormal when the other guy does it, and even then only if he is of another religion. Think I'm full of shit on that? Ask a Catholic about the Pope and Galileo or the Inquisition; a Protestant about the Witch Trials, or either one about the war in Ireland. Chances are better than 50 / 50 they will offer a much softer line of criticism when the religion at fault was the one they follow.
Normal people watch 5 hours of mass media propaganda a day. Normal people are crushed under a mound of credit card dept they ran up buying things they never needed and don't often use. There are normal people who think the moon landings (all six of them) were a hoax, that Obama is a foreign born Muslim, that angles watch over their shoulder, and that creationism is a science. Normal people get a flu shot every year, then vote in school boards that think teaching evolution as the myth will improve a child's education. Normal people haven't read a book this past week, or month, or even year.
In Iowa the perfectly normal dentist Dr. James Knight fired a women who had worked for him for 10 years because she was too attractive and threatened his marriage. Mind you, she had not done a single inappropriate thing and was (given that she had been doing her job for 10 years) perfectly capable of doing her job. She was fired because of the good Doctor's moral and emotional failings. (To say nothing of shear arrogance. Apparently he is of the opinion that, should he be unable to control himself and make a play for his assistant, she would certainly fall to his overture. This guy is an asshole on to many levels to count.) Then - and here is the real kicker - the seven completely normal men who make up the Iowa Supreme Court, each and every one of them, decided that the good Dr. is in the right. American judicial system, say hello to the Taliban, who have an identical view of how pretty women are the real reason men act like pigs.
I am a man, husband, father of three daughters and grandfather of three grand daughters. I am completely offended by Dr. James Knight and these supposed "Justices." If I was god and these eight stood before me after death, awaiting on judgment, (and if I were god that would be happening real soon) each would be spending a long, long time in purgatory. There they would discover that anything important to them, a job, house, favorite chair, good food, could be arbitrarily snatched away at the whim of someone who, by any measure, was their inferior in every way. After a few thousand years of this Dr. Knight and the Justices would get a chance to grovel before Mrs. Nelson, with every senescent being in the universe watching, and ask for her forgiveness. (By the way, notice it is Mrs. Nelson. Dr. James Knight is a complete piss-ant excuse for a human being, let alone a man.)
Our society is staggering along like a drunk in the early morning. It is debatable that we will ever make it home. Maybe the real problem is that most of us are "normal." What ever it is that a normal human being is, I would take it as a complement to be labeled "not normal".
I make no pretence of being a 2ed Amendment kind of person. I don't care about guns one way or the other, but I'm not particularly thrilled about living in a society that worships violence, hate and mayhem, and then arms itself to the teeth. And while any kind of gun control would be welcome, (seeing as we have little or none at the moment) I don't think we are going to see anything meaningful happen because of this most recent killing spree. Killing sprees are normal in our country.& In fact they happen just about every day. There have been no new laws as a result of the last dozen or so most notorious ones, including the attempted assassination of former Arizona congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. Expecting sanity to suddenly break out and spread though my fellow Americans now seems mostly an act of wishful thinking.
(I haven't seen much indication of sanity among any of the gun people I know. Twenty dead kids and their response is to go out and buy more guns, or even more nuts, more high capacity clips. I love 'em, but they are bat-shit-fucking-crazy, each and every one. An apt analogy might be this; after the Catholic Church being hoist upon its own petard during the child sex scandal, had Catholics everywhere going out to buy more kiddie porn. It is hard to imagine anyone being that twisted, but somehow gun lovers made the leap effortlessly.)
Most people in this country think guns should be accessible, at least to most people, most of time, for just about any reason. No need to be a hunter, a competitive target shooter, or have a job where a gun is part of the tool kit; just wanting one is enough. No need to explain why you think you need a 100 round, rapid fire, high tech killing machine at your finger tips. No need to have training or hold a licence that has to be renewed every few years. No need to know that guns make your house less safe, not more, and that the gun in the house is most likely to be used to shoot a family member or friend. Normal people think is is normal to want to own a gun.
Most of the people in this country (and the world for that matter) believe in a god or higher being or supreme power of some kind. No two of them believe exactly the same things about these gods, though groups of people hold beliefs close enough to the same that they can stand being around each other ... most of the time. Catholics tolerate other Catholics, unless they disagree about something serious like gay people. Protestants will usually abide Protestants of another denomination, giving most at least a chance of being allowed into heaven. They are often less optimistic about a Catholic's chance at passing through the pearly gate but that is okay. Catholics don't give the Protestants much of a chance at all. That doesn't make the Christians any worse than other groups of believers. Muslims barely tolerate each other let alone Christians, Jews or Hindus. Much of the "Muslim World" is pretty busy killing each other off with Islamic governments being fond of supporting terrorist organizations to wage proxy war on other Islamic governments. Of course they take any chance that comes along to kill Christians, Jews and Hindus.
Not to be completely outdone, the US is waging a pretty efficient drone war against Islamic terrorists. The problem is a lot of none terrorists get killed along the way. Not a big problem though, all of the none terrorists are still Muslims. So the killing goes on. Think I'm full of shit on that? Ask yourself what would happen if one of those drone strikes missed and brought down the local Christian church full of believers on a Sunday morning. Chaos. Now miss the target and knock down a Mosque. Less chaos, much much less chaos.
Religion is normal. Assuming all "other" religions are somehow inferior to one's own is normal. Religious intolerance, war, murder and butchery are also normal. It is only abnormal when the other guy does it, and even then only if he is of another religion. Think I'm full of shit on that? Ask a Catholic about the Pope and Galileo or the Inquisition; a Protestant about the Witch Trials, or either one about the war in Ireland. Chances are better than 50 / 50 they will offer a much softer line of criticism when the religion at fault was the one they follow.
Normal people watch 5 hours of mass media propaganda a day. Normal people are crushed under a mound of credit card dept they ran up buying things they never needed and don't often use. There are normal people who think the moon landings (all six of them) were a hoax, that Obama is a foreign born Muslim, that angles watch over their shoulder, and that creationism is a science. Normal people get a flu shot every year, then vote in school boards that think teaching evolution as the myth will improve a child's education. Normal people haven't read a book this past week, or month, or even year.
In Iowa the perfectly normal dentist Dr. James Knight fired a women who had worked for him for 10 years because she was too attractive and threatened his marriage. Mind you, she had not done a single inappropriate thing and was (given that she had been doing her job for 10 years) perfectly capable of doing her job. She was fired because of the good Doctor's moral and emotional failings. (To say nothing of shear arrogance. Apparently he is of the opinion that, should he be unable to control himself and make a play for his assistant, she would certainly fall to his overture. This guy is an asshole on to many levels to count.) Then - and here is the real kicker - the seven completely normal men who make up the Iowa Supreme Court, each and every one of them, decided that the good Dr. is in the right. American judicial system, say hello to the Taliban, who have an identical view of how pretty women are the real reason men act like pigs.
I am a man, husband, father of three daughters and grandfather of three grand daughters. I am completely offended by Dr. James Knight and these supposed "Justices." If I was god and these eight stood before me after death, awaiting on judgment, (and if I were god that would be happening real soon) each would be spending a long, long time in purgatory. There they would discover that anything important to them, a job, house, favorite chair, good food, could be arbitrarily snatched away at the whim of someone who, by any measure, was their inferior in every way. After a few thousand years of this Dr. Knight and the Justices would get a chance to grovel before Mrs. Nelson, with every senescent being in the universe watching, and ask for her forgiveness. (By the way, notice it is Mrs. Nelson. Dr. James Knight is a complete piss-ant excuse for a human being, let alone a man.)
Our society is staggering along like a drunk in the early morning. It is debatable that we will ever make it home. Maybe the real problem is that most of us are "normal." What ever it is that a normal human being is, I would take it as a complement to be labeled "not normal".
Sunday, December 16, 2012
Taking the Second Amendment ...
... off the Reservation.
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
That's it, 27 words, one sentence, adopted December 15, 1791, just one day shy of exactly 221 years before the massacre in a Connecticut elementary school. Based at least partly on these words, our society is rapidly abandoning any pretense of being a first world, civilized society. Lead by these words there is virtually no chance that the people of the United States will ever take a rational approach to guns and violence. So, just for my own curiosity, I thought I would take these words off the Reservation, see how they fair.
According to Webster: Militia -
1 a : a part of the organized armed forces of a country liable to call only in emergency
b : a body of citizens organized for military service
2 the whole body of able-bodied male citizens declared by law as being subject to call to military service
Though I have read this Amendment many times as the years have rolled by and the death toll mounted, I was a bit thunderstruck at having missed something blindingly obvious. There is no militia in the United States. There is a military, but that is not the same thing. Whatever the Founding Fathers were thinking about 221 years ago, it clearly has no parallel in the country today. None of the weapons sold today are going to a well regulated militia that adds to the security of our free state. NONE! The first four words of the Second Amendment render it completely immaterial to any gun policy or law up for consideration. This does not mean it would be a good policy to ban every gun in America. But if we did decide to pass a law banning every gun in America the Second Amendment would not have any bearing.
(I think it would be a great policy, but I'm pretty sure I am in a minority of one. Truth to tell, if I could council some god somewhere to get off his ass and lend us a hand, I would suggest he need do only one thing; say the word that no gun anywhere in the world would fire and that no armed missile of any type would fly.)
Though there is no militia in the US (thankfully) this isn't to say there are no militias in the modern world. Al Qaeda is a militia. The Taliban are a militia. Hamas. They have a chain of command. They have propaganda departments, intelligence networks, supply lines, training facilities. Yet somehow they don't come across as establishing the security of free states. Indeed, their very existence is a threat to free states, and free people, all over the planet. There are other militias as well, like the private armies of war loads. These are often intertwined with the drug cartels. None are concerned with the security of anything other than the power and greed of the war lords and drug kings.
No free state could last long if it allowed an organized,armed opposition to the government to exist inside its own boarders. (Think The Muslim Brotherhood and the still born democracy of the Egyptian revolution.) What ever militias might have been in the year 1791, in the year 2012 they are terrorist organizations. It is shear lunacy to think the the Founding Fathers would amend the Constitution so an armed militia that acted apart from, and in opposition to, the democratic government they were working so hard to establish, could exist.
The next nine words, "being necessary to the security of a free state..." also struck me with something glaringly obvious, they are simply not true. Free states exist all over the planet. Some of them have militias, but those that do regulate the snot out of them; weapons registration, recurrent training, a solid chain of command tied directly to the government. But many a secure state has no such militia. Militias a just not necessary for security.
There are a lot of things that are. Among them is the rule of law, an independent and uncorrupted judicial system, and checks and balances built into the governing bodies. Perhaps most important is a respect of the citizens for each other, and an appreciation that there is a shared responsibility in building and maintaining a civilized society. Armed-to-the-teeth citizens shooting up the place are not.
But they are a threat to a free people. Those living in the Wild Wild West figured that out more than 100 years ago, and passed the first gun laws keeping weapons out of their towns. Wyatt Earp would throw David Keene in jail.
And so we come to the only phrase the NRA knows, " the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. It is clear that the right is based on there being a need for a well regulated militia to secure the state. Yet there is no militia, and there is no need. It follows that there is no right. Once again the Amendment is not applicable to any debate on gun control.
The most basic of freedoms is the freedom to remain alive. The dead have no freedoms at all. Yet guns in the US have done little to save lives. I know the NRA claims otherwise. I heard again today the claim that, in some country where guns were outlawed the murder rate went up. There are a lot of people in the US that believe this is so. But it can't possibly be true. If it were places like Somalia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Sudan, and the United States would have the lowest murder rates. After all, we have the most guns. Places like Canada, Japan, and Australia would have the highest murder rates since they have the least guns. Yet this is not the case. It is also not the case that weapons inside the house make those in the house safer. In all probability if the gun is used, it will be used on a family member or a friend, not on an intruder. Putting a gun in your home makes you less safe, not more.
So the NRA "statics" can only be pure propaganda. If you believe that more guns leads to less murder and less guns to more murder, or you think your family is safer because of the 9mm you keep under your pillow, you are being played for a fool by the gun manufactures and the NRA. Or you are stupid. I would be much obliged if you would figure out which. A fool with a gun or a stupid person with a gun, neither are necessary for providing the security of a free state. Just the opposite is true. Both are a threat to a free state, and a free people.
Off the reservation, outside of the propaganda sphere of the NRA, apart from the Supreme Court Justices and away from Representatives bought and paid for by the gun manufacturers, the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is complete bullshit. It starts with one false assumption, moves on to one out-right lie, and stumbles to a dubious conclusion.
On the reservation of course, it is as worshiped as any verse in the bible. Which is kind of fitting. Religion is the act of believing things even when the evidence suggests the truth lies elsewhere. Worshiping guns is very much the same. And like the gods, many innocents, including a disproportionate number of children, are sacrificed on the alter of the gun manufacturer's greed.
Just as sad worshiping guns, like worshiping gods, often turns out to be fatal. It proved so for Nancy Lanza. Mother of a murderer who killed her first, she is now reported to have been arming up so she could survive an economic collapse. The muzzle flash from the assault rifle that the NRA and gun manufacturers told her would provide protection from the advancing hoards, was the last thing she ever saw. She believed the lie and it cost her her life. The character of Jesus in the bible is reported to have said, "He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword." Perhaps, were the story written for today, he would say, "She who lives by the Bushmaster .223 assault rifle, dies by the Bushmaster .223 assault rifle." Not as poetic as the original, but more apropos to today's world.
One would hope the NRA is proud of Ms. Lanza. In addition to the assault rifle she had a Sig Sauer, and a Glock. Maybe they will put her picture up on some billboards, or name some piece of pro-gun legislation they pass though one of the state legislature's they own after her. It hasn't been reported, but I would bet a good cup of coffee she was a member in good standing. If she wasn't maybe the NRA will grant her special, posthumous, life-time membership? It seems the least they could do. (I know that sounds a bit silly, buy hey! This is an organization that claims god wants all of his churches packed with people who are packing; "take your assault rifle to Sunday School" kind of people. Giving a life time membership to a dead person would not count as crazy with this bunch.)
There is some truly twisted irony, and maybe just a hint of justice, in that the person who was the source of the high-tech killing machine used to butcher 20 six and seven year old children, was also the weapon's first victim. Her worship of guns not only got a bunch of people dead, it helped to fuel the illness that is killing a once civil society. Guns are the threat, not the salvation. The Second Amendment will not save the country. Instead those 27 words are hastening its demise.
p.s. The truth is I don't know that much about such weapons, so I looked up the respective manufacturer's web sights; here they are in case you are interested. To paraphrase Justice Potter Stewart, "I shall not today attempt further to define ... hard core pornography. But I know it when I see it. I think I just saw some.
http://www.bushmaster.com/index
http://www.sigsauer.com/catalog/pistols
http://us.glock.com/
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
That's it, 27 words, one sentence, adopted December 15, 1791, just one day shy of exactly 221 years before the massacre in a Connecticut elementary school. Based at least partly on these words, our society is rapidly abandoning any pretense of being a first world, civilized society. Lead by these words there is virtually no chance that the people of the United States will ever take a rational approach to guns and violence. So, just for my own curiosity, I thought I would take these words off the Reservation, see how they fair.
According to Webster: Militia -
1 a : a part of the organized armed forces of a country liable to call only in emergency
b : a body of citizens organized for military service
2 the whole body of able-bodied male citizens declared by law as being subject to call to military service
Though I have read this Amendment many times as the years have rolled by and the death toll mounted, I was a bit thunderstruck at having missed something blindingly obvious. There is no militia in the United States. There is a military, but that is not the same thing. Whatever the Founding Fathers were thinking about 221 years ago, it clearly has no parallel in the country today. None of the weapons sold today are going to a well regulated militia that adds to the security of our free state. NONE! The first four words of the Second Amendment render it completely immaterial to any gun policy or law up for consideration. This does not mean it would be a good policy to ban every gun in America. But if we did decide to pass a law banning every gun in America the Second Amendment would not have any bearing.
(I think it would be a great policy, but I'm pretty sure I am in a minority of one. Truth to tell, if I could council some god somewhere to get off his ass and lend us a hand, I would suggest he need do only one thing; say the word that no gun anywhere in the world would fire and that no armed missile of any type would fly.)
Though there is no militia in the US (thankfully) this isn't to say there are no militias in the modern world. Al Qaeda is a militia. The Taliban are a militia. Hamas. They have a chain of command. They have propaganda departments, intelligence networks, supply lines, training facilities. Yet somehow they don't come across as establishing the security of free states. Indeed, their very existence is a threat to free states, and free people, all over the planet. There are other militias as well, like the private armies of war loads. These are often intertwined with the drug cartels. None are concerned with the security of anything other than the power and greed of the war lords and drug kings.
No free state could last long if it allowed an organized,armed opposition to the government to exist inside its own boarders. (Think The Muslim Brotherhood and the still born democracy of the Egyptian revolution.) What ever militias might have been in the year 1791, in the year 2012 they are terrorist organizations. It is shear lunacy to think the the Founding Fathers would amend the Constitution so an armed militia that acted apart from, and in opposition to, the democratic government they were working so hard to establish, could exist.
The next nine words, "being necessary to the security of a free state..." also struck me with something glaringly obvious, they are simply not true. Free states exist all over the planet. Some of them have militias, but those that do regulate the snot out of them; weapons registration, recurrent training, a solid chain of command tied directly to the government. But many a secure state has no such militia. Militias a just not necessary for security.
There are a lot of things that are. Among them is the rule of law, an independent and uncorrupted judicial system, and checks and balances built into the governing bodies. Perhaps most important is a respect of the citizens for each other, and an appreciation that there is a shared responsibility in building and maintaining a civilized society. Armed-to-the-teeth citizens shooting up the place are not.
But they are a threat to a free people. Those living in the Wild Wild West figured that out more than 100 years ago, and passed the first gun laws keeping weapons out of their towns. Wyatt Earp would throw David Keene in jail.
And so we come to the only phrase the NRA knows, " the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. It is clear that the right is based on there being a need for a well regulated militia to secure the state. Yet there is no militia, and there is no need. It follows that there is no right. Once again the Amendment is not applicable to any debate on gun control.
The most basic of freedoms is the freedom to remain alive. The dead have no freedoms at all. Yet guns in the US have done little to save lives. I know the NRA claims otherwise. I heard again today the claim that, in some country where guns were outlawed the murder rate went up. There are a lot of people in the US that believe this is so. But it can't possibly be true. If it were places like Somalia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Sudan, and the United States would have the lowest murder rates. After all, we have the most guns. Places like Canada, Japan, and Australia would have the highest murder rates since they have the least guns. Yet this is not the case. It is also not the case that weapons inside the house make those in the house safer. In all probability if the gun is used, it will be used on a family member or a friend, not on an intruder. Putting a gun in your home makes you less safe, not more.
So the NRA "statics" can only be pure propaganda. If you believe that more guns leads to less murder and less guns to more murder, or you think your family is safer because of the 9mm you keep under your pillow, you are being played for a fool by the gun manufactures and the NRA. Or you are stupid. I would be much obliged if you would figure out which. A fool with a gun or a stupid person with a gun, neither are necessary for providing the security of a free state. Just the opposite is true. Both are a threat to a free state, and a free people.
Off the reservation, outside of the propaganda sphere of the NRA, apart from the Supreme Court Justices and away from Representatives bought and paid for by the gun manufacturers, the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is complete bullshit. It starts with one false assumption, moves on to one out-right lie, and stumbles to a dubious conclusion.
On the reservation of course, it is as worshiped as any verse in the bible. Which is kind of fitting. Religion is the act of believing things even when the evidence suggests the truth lies elsewhere. Worshiping guns is very much the same. And like the gods, many innocents, including a disproportionate number of children, are sacrificed on the alter of the gun manufacturer's greed.
Just as sad worshiping guns, like worshiping gods, often turns out to be fatal. It proved so for Nancy Lanza. Mother of a murderer who killed her first, she is now reported to have been arming up so she could survive an economic collapse. The muzzle flash from the assault rifle that the NRA and gun manufacturers told her would provide protection from the advancing hoards, was the last thing she ever saw. She believed the lie and it cost her her life. The character of Jesus in the bible is reported to have said, "He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword." Perhaps, were the story written for today, he would say, "She who lives by the Bushmaster .223 assault rifle, dies by the Bushmaster .223 assault rifle." Not as poetic as the original, but more apropos to today's world.
One would hope the NRA is proud of Ms. Lanza. In addition to the assault rifle she had a Sig Sauer, and a Glock. Maybe they will put her picture up on some billboards, or name some piece of pro-gun legislation they pass though one of the state legislature's they own after her. It hasn't been reported, but I would bet a good cup of coffee she was a member in good standing. If she wasn't maybe the NRA will grant her special, posthumous, life-time membership? It seems the least they could do. (I know that sounds a bit silly, buy hey! This is an organization that claims god wants all of his churches packed with people who are packing; "take your assault rifle to Sunday School" kind of people. Giving a life time membership to a dead person would not count as crazy with this bunch.)
There is some truly twisted irony, and maybe just a hint of justice, in that the person who was the source of the high-tech killing machine used to butcher 20 six and seven year old children, was also the weapon's first victim. Her worship of guns not only got a bunch of people dead, it helped to fuel the illness that is killing a once civil society. Guns are the threat, not the salvation. The Second Amendment will not save the country. Instead those 27 words are hastening its demise.
p.s. The truth is I don't know that much about such weapons, so I looked up the respective manufacturer's web sights; here they are in case you are interested. To paraphrase Justice Potter Stewart, "I shall not today attempt further to define ... hard core pornography. But I know it when I see it. I think I just saw some.
http://www.bushmaster.com/index
http://www.sigsauer.com/catalog/pistols
http://us.glock.com/
Saturday, December 15, 2012
Is this what its like ...
Is this what it is like to live in a dying culture? And entire class room of Kindergarten kids is butchered by a lunatic reportedly wielding and assault rifle, and the response is a call to arm the teachers? Wouldn't sacrificing the profit margin of the gun manufactures and putting a muzzle on the NRA be a bit more rational (as well as humane)? There are more Americans killed and wounded by gunfire every week than were suffered by the military at the height of the Vietnam war. As a nation we were appalled at those casualties and eventually forced the end of that conflict. Of course passing any real gun laws in this country is a waste of time as long as 5 members of the Supreme Court are in the pockets of the gun lobby. And they clearly are.
(This is just one day after the killing spree, so details such as weapons used and just who was killed where are still sketchy and often incorrect. At this moment it seems the killer got his assault weapon off his Mother. Apparently she fell for the NRA / gun manufacturer propaganda that one must have an arsenal of high tech killing machines in one's home in order to be "safe. Not surprisingly it was a mistake that cost her her life. Most "in-house" weapons that end up being used to kill someone, are used to kill a family member or friend. Tragically, her mistake cost the lives of 26 others as well.)
Even after a so-called "decisive election" our political system is completely dysfunctional. A small faction of Republicans are determined to render the American government inoperable, and they have largely succeeded. This government can't even agree on something they already agree on, holding taxes down on the working class. They can't do something that every single one of them agrees that they should do. That is nothing short of shear lunacy ... madness beyond the pale. Yet this is precisely what their masters, international corporations and the very wealthy want, since a working government is a counter balance to the power of business. And again, those same 5 members of the Supreme Court are complicit in this abortion of governance. (It is impossible to envision that, when history reviews the failure of the American experiment in democracy, the Robert's court is going to escape taking a lot of the blame.)
The "free people" of the US are also the most incarcerated population on the planet. One doesn't go to jail for looting trillions of dollars from the national budget or starting wars based on lies and cherry picked "intelligence". Once doesn't face jail time for trying to buy elections. There is no penalty for making billions operating a relentless propaganda machine that often operates outside of the laws of several nations. One can lie about anything but, so long as it is claimed as "news" there are no limits to the amorality to which one can go. But get caught with a "controlled substance", particularly if one has enough on them to share with friends? Jail time, lots and lots of jail time. (If one is poor. The wealthy mostly flaunt their drug use and, sometimes, go to rehab centers.)
If I tried to describe a dying culture I couldn't do any better than using our society as the template. From the breakdown of nearly ever social structure to the fraying infrastructure, the rampant and unchecked corruption at all levels, burning through finite resources without care ... it seems pretty likely that yes, this is what it's like to live in a dying culture.
(This is just one day after the killing spree, so details such as weapons used and just who was killed where are still sketchy and often incorrect. At this moment it seems the killer got his assault weapon off his Mother. Apparently she fell for the NRA / gun manufacturer propaganda that one must have an arsenal of high tech killing machines in one's home in order to be "safe. Not surprisingly it was a mistake that cost her her life. Most "in-house" weapons that end up being used to kill someone, are used to kill a family member or friend. Tragically, her mistake cost the lives of 26 others as well.)
Even after a so-called "decisive election" our political system is completely dysfunctional. A small faction of Republicans are determined to render the American government inoperable, and they have largely succeeded. This government can't even agree on something they already agree on, holding taxes down on the working class. They can't do something that every single one of them agrees that they should do. That is nothing short of shear lunacy ... madness beyond the pale. Yet this is precisely what their masters, international corporations and the very wealthy want, since a working government is a counter balance to the power of business. And again, those same 5 members of the Supreme Court are complicit in this abortion of governance. (It is impossible to envision that, when history reviews the failure of the American experiment in democracy, the Robert's court is going to escape taking a lot of the blame.)
The "free people" of the US are also the most incarcerated population on the planet. One doesn't go to jail for looting trillions of dollars from the national budget or starting wars based on lies and cherry picked "intelligence". Once doesn't face jail time for trying to buy elections. There is no penalty for making billions operating a relentless propaganda machine that often operates outside of the laws of several nations. One can lie about anything but, so long as it is claimed as "news" there are no limits to the amorality to which one can go. But get caught with a "controlled substance", particularly if one has enough on them to share with friends? Jail time, lots and lots of jail time. (If one is poor. The wealthy mostly flaunt their drug use and, sometimes, go to rehab centers.)
If I tried to describe a dying culture I couldn't do any better than using our society as the template. From the breakdown of nearly ever social structure to the fraying infrastructure, the rampant and unchecked corruption at all levels, burning through finite resources without care ... it seems pretty likely that yes, this is what it's like to live in a dying culture.
Thursday, December 13, 2012
What where they thinking ...
Michigan just passed a so-called "right to work" law. Since I am a big fan of the idea that unions, for all of their problems, are still a good counter weight to the power of well connected corporations, I figure it is just another of the many steps being taken backward by our society. But that is beside the point.
Waiting in a lobby I saw a big news story about the thousands of protesters gathering in the Michigan capitol to protest the law, which I thought was a bit odd. After all, it is a pretty good bet that about half the crowd voted for at least one of the Republicans responsible for writing and passing that bill. What did they think was going to happen?
It isn't like the Republicans are shy about their positions on unions, eviscerating the middle class, protecting the rich, or funding the military / industrial system with endless wars and tax breaks for international corporations. It is what they have consistently stood for since Reagan was elected. They are 100% pro-gun. They are 100% anti-immigration. They openly admit to trying to rig elections by suppressing voter turn out. They hate science (except for the science of war) and are not shy about claiming to know more about physics, geology, weather, and woman's reproductive systems than all of the physicists, geologists, climatologists and doctor's on the planet.
I'll admit that with Democrats it is sometimes hard to tell just what one will get when one votes them into office. (See Obama's first term.) But not so with Republicans.
It isn't only the people in Michigan I wonder about. Fully 48% voted for Romney in the last election. Now some 72% think that taxes should be raised on the wealthy. So nearly 25% of the people who voted Republican in the last election now think the tax policy should be changed? Just what the fuck were they thinking in November?
We voted our country to the corporations many, many years ago. Company pensions went away, replaced by 401K plans ripe to be looted by Wall Street. Unions were busted and working wages have been stagnant ever since. We bitch about the EPA and vote Young Earth Creationists onto our school boards, then worry about the water we drink and bemoan the failure of our school systems. We all still love the military but can't figure out why we have no money.
We have the country we have been voting for for most of my adult life. Why protest about something after an election when the elected are doing exactly what they said they would?
Waiting in a lobby I saw a big news story about the thousands of protesters gathering in the Michigan capitol to protest the law, which I thought was a bit odd. After all, it is a pretty good bet that about half the crowd voted for at least one of the Republicans responsible for writing and passing that bill. What did they think was going to happen?
It isn't like the Republicans are shy about their positions on unions, eviscerating the middle class, protecting the rich, or funding the military / industrial system with endless wars and tax breaks for international corporations. It is what they have consistently stood for since Reagan was elected. They are 100% pro-gun. They are 100% anti-immigration. They openly admit to trying to rig elections by suppressing voter turn out. They hate science (except for the science of war) and are not shy about claiming to know more about physics, geology, weather, and woman's reproductive systems than all of the physicists, geologists, climatologists and doctor's on the planet.
I'll admit that with Democrats it is sometimes hard to tell just what one will get when one votes them into office. (See Obama's first term.) But not so with Republicans.
It isn't only the people in Michigan I wonder about. Fully 48% voted for Romney in the last election. Now some 72% think that taxes should be raised on the wealthy. So nearly 25% of the people who voted Republican in the last election now think the tax policy should be changed? Just what the fuck were they thinking in November?
We voted our country to the corporations many, many years ago. Company pensions went away, replaced by 401K plans ripe to be looted by Wall Street. Unions were busted and working wages have been stagnant ever since. We bitch about the EPA and vote Young Earth Creationists onto our school boards, then worry about the water we drink and bemoan the failure of our school systems. We all still love the military but can't figure out why we have no money.
We have the country we have been voting for for most of my adult life. Why protest about something after an election when the elected are doing exactly what they said they would?
Sunday, December 2, 2012
I think I'm for it
I voted against Bush II, twice. (I voted against his father as well). I was, and am, totally opposed to the wars he started and I was deeply disappointed that Obama carried on with those same war policies. The views expressed by my votes did not carry the day however, and via a twisted, convoluted path we come to the edge of a (so called) fiscal cliff. (Given the hyperbole that is now common in all American politics and media, I would bet a big cup of coffee that there is no cliff involved. A speed bump maybe, a curb perhaps, most likely just a continuation of the downward grassy slope the American economic system has been on for several decades now.) A part of that "cliff" is a raise in every one's taxes, big cuts in defence spending, and equally big cuts in domestic programs.
I think we should just go over the cliff. First, this appears to be the best law this particular congress could come up with. Less than two years ago they fought over this thing for weeks. It isn't likely they are going to do a better job now. Second, my guess it is the only way that military spending will, in fact, be cut.
But mostly I think we should go over this cliff because this is a democracy. Regardless of which individual voted which way, those elected to office made military and economic policies that were enacted on behalf of the USA. All of us are responsible for the consequences of those policies, and one of those consequences is that the country is deeply in debt. Budgets have to be cut and taxes have to be raised, cuts and increases that should touch pretty much every citizen.
This isn't to say I think the tax code is fair. I don't think anyone, left or right, Democrat, Republican or off the reservation, is deluded enough to think that taxes in this country are fairly collected and wisely spent. But that is something we are all in together as well. The fact that rich people pay a lower tax rate than middle class working people is clearly a serious breech in good governing. Fixing that should be a part of all of us paying for the decisions made in our name; middle class taxes go up, upper class taxes go up a lot more.
The Republicans are wrong (as usual) in insisting that all "budget balancing" be born by cuts in programs that mostly benefit the middle class and poor; leaving the rich untouched and accumulating even more of the nation's wealth at the top of the economic pile. It is kind of amazing that, given the outcome of this last election, they are clinging to their "protect the rich at all costs" rhetoric. Then again, the T-party / Conservative / Religious right party walked away from being rational a long time ago. No less a luminary than Mr. Rick Santorum, once serious contender to be the Republican nominee, has said, "We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." I guess he is smart enough to have figured that out.
The Democrats are wrong in insisting that the middle class be spared any responsibility for decisions made, laying the burden mostly at the feet of the rich. Lets be honest, for the most part white, middle class working guys are the foundation of the Republican party and mostly backed Mr. Bush's wars. What kind of warped rational suggests they shouldn't provide a big chunk of the money needed to pay for them? And, much as I don't care about protecting the unearned assets of the rich, simple math reviles that all of the money the rich have isn't enough to pay down the dept being accumulated at the current spending levels.
And, as usual, both are wrong in their desire to protect the military budget.
So, let us all drive off the cliff together. It actually looks like the best alternative to what the Republicans would do if they had their way unchallenged, or what the Democrats would do if they had their way unchallenged. In fact, since both seem to hate the current law equally (though they had equal parts coming up with it) it is probably a pretty good law.
In other words, the Democrats AND the Republicans both hate it? I think I'm for it.
I think we should just go over the cliff. First, this appears to be the best law this particular congress could come up with. Less than two years ago they fought over this thing for weeks. It isn't likely they are going to do a better job now. Second, my guess it is the only way that military spending will, in fact, be cut.
But mostly I think we should go over this cliff because this is a democracy. Regardless of which individual voted which way, those elected to office made military and economic policies that were enacted on behalf of the USA. All of us are responsible for the consequences of those policies, and one of those consequences is that the country is deeply in debt. Budgets have to be cut and taxes have to be raised, cuts and increases that should touch pretty much every citizen.
This isn't to say I think the tax code is fair. I don't think anyone, left or right, Democrat, Republican or off the reservation, is deluded enough to think that taxes in this country are fairly collected and wisely spent. But that is something we are all in together as well. The fact that rich people pay a lower tax rate than middle class working people is clearly a serious breech in good governing. Fixing that should be a part of all of us paying for the decisions made in our name; middle class taxes go up, upper class taxes go up a lot more.
The Republicans are wrong (as usual) in insisting that all "budget balancing" be born by cuts in programs that mostly benefit the middle class and poor; leaving the rich untouched and accumulating even more of the nation's wealth at the top of the economic pile. It is kind of amazing that, given the outcome of this last election, they are clinging to their "protect the rich at all costs" rhetoric. Then again, the T-party / Conservative / Religious right party walked away from being rational a long time ago. No less a luminary than Mr. Rick Santorum, once serious contender to be the Republican nominee, has said, "We will never have the elite, smart people on our side." I guess he is smart enough to have figured that out.
The Democrats are wrong in insisting that the middle class be spared any responsibility for decisions made, laying the burden mostly at the feet of the rich. Lets be honest, for the most part white, middle class working guys are the foundation of the Republican party and mostly backed Mr. Bush's wars. What kind of warped rational suggests they shouldn't provide a big chunk of the money needed to pay for them? And, much as I don't care about protecting the unearned assets of the rich, simple math reviles that all of the money the rich have isn't enough to pay down the dept being accumulated at the current spending levels.
And, as usual, both are wrong in their desire to protect the military budget.
So, let us all drive off the cliff together. It actually looks like the best alternative to what the Republicans would do if they had their way unchallenged, or what the Democrats would do if they had their way unchallenged. In fact, since both seem to hate the current law equally (though they had equal parts coming up with it) it is probably a pretty good law.
In other words, the Democrats AND the Republicans both hate it? I think I'm for it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)