Asking Questions

MY MOTHER, who would now be nearing her one hundredth birthday, once told me that when she was a little girl, her favorite word was "why"? She said she became known for using it, for asking questions about causation. "Why" is always a tough act to follow, a difficult question to answer. Mom had the makings of a scientist, but turned to nursing, succeeding. I take a different approach. I rarely ask anyone "why". I prefer the challenge of answering that for myself, and trusting my conclusions. Instead, a pepper people with questions about themselves. They seem to enjoy it. I do it for all the right reason; genuine interest in people, inherent curiosity, a desire to connect with others. I notice that in general people ask very few questions about me. My oldest and dearest friends seldom ask me anything about my current life. The few questions I receive come from strangers. maybe my friends think they already know all about me, which they don't. Maybe they think they already know enough, and maybe they do. For those who don't ask questions, the loss is theirs. Social psychologists say that people who ask questions of others about others became popular, are perceived as nice, and connect easily. Everyone's favorite of conversation is herself. In a normal, conversation, if you talk about yourself without being asked to, eyes glaze over. Talk about her, she perks right up. Basic human nature. there is, of course, a thin line between curiosity and being nosy. That line is usually drawn very close to the other person's nose, due to vanity. so, go ahead and fire away! Maybe you'll get that first date, or make a new friend. There are hazards, I got kicked out of my local public library for talking too much. this, in a library in which the employees gab like a gaggle of magpies, about nothing. Most libraries prefer quiet. Not only did I talk too much, doing in Rome as the romans do, but I asked too few questions of the library director. I should have encouraged her to talk - about herself. I could have avoided eviction. The deism of Thomas Jefferson or the flat earth paradigm of the bible were topics I should have avoided. I bored and offended her with my sinful blasphemy. I should have talked about her instead. The silver lining is that I am now forced to seek out other libraries, where challenging conversations are acceptable, and I can ask questions of people who are sufficiently interesting to provide worthwhile answers.

Trump, Insulting At Every turn

PRESIDENT TRUMP never misses an opportunity to slander a good person, behave like a barbarian, or emulate an ill mannered petulant child. The more inappropriate the occasion, the more likely the emergence of the tempestuous Trump, as often attested. And why not? The American presidency, more than any other position, is replete with perquisites, pernicious and otherwise. Several days ago, for instance, the contributions of native Americans to the U.S. victory in the pacific in World War Two, which consisted of the Navajo language, linguistically inscrutable, having served as the perfect vehicle for indecipherable encoded messages. There stood the president of prevarication, with guests, with a portrait of Andrew Jackson in the background. Old Hickory, you'll recall, hated Indians, and bullied the Indian Removal Act through a divided congress in 1830, precipitating the great Trail of tears death march of the Cherokee nation from their rightful lands in Georgia, which the U.S. had promised them would remain theirs forever, to Oklahoma. Thus all Indians were relocated west of the Mississippi, as per Jacksonian policy. For decades the Cherokees refused to trade in twenty dollar bills. Davy Crockett, who loved Indians, because they saved his life twice, reminded his congressional colleagues that a promise is a promise, which didn't endear him to his frontier constituency, nor to fellow Tennessee native president Jackson. The two men hated each other, after an auspicious beginning to their political relationship. Crockett took to calling Old Hickory "the government", a grave insult in a time of unpopular government, implying tyranny. Trump could easily have taken the Jackson portrait down for a few minutes, but chose not to, deliberately. why waste an opportunity to insult someone? He wasn't done. His next target was Senator Elizabeth warren, who wasn't even in the room, and irrelevant to the occasion, and therefore a perfect target of trumped up viciousness. Whether or not Senator warren has a single drop of native American blood within, she likes to say that she does, just like we all take pride in our personal heritage. Ancestry matters, particularly to Americans, most of us being, after all, interlopers in our own homes. I'm full blooded Bavarian dairy farmer, and damned proud of it. So what's the point, other than sheer vindictive spite, of slandering Elizabeth Warren in a ceremony intended to honor native Americans by calling her "Pocahontas"? Nobody but Trump and the conservative extremists of questionable character who support him thought it was funny..........................PLEASE TELL YOUR FRIENDS ABOUT THIS WEBSITE! THANKS!

Smoking As Fun and Death

WHEN I WAS NINE YEARS OLD, in 1964, the surgeon general issued the first government warning about cigarettes. I, being gullible and impressionable, took their world for it, and to this day have never smoked a cigarette. I'll have to live with the consequences. I grew up in a cloud of second hand smoke. Apparently everyone assumed that once the smoke was out in the open air, it magically became harmless, and kids were immune to it. In those days a major league baseball game was played in a fog, and the smell of cigar smoke was ambient, as baseball fans of a certain age will recall. I watched my Yankees play shrouded in smoke, and didn't mind, since I knew of no alternative. I lived in a house filled with smoke; mom and dad, and everybody else in America, thought nothing of it. I remember thinking cigarette ads on TV were sexy. a full minute of pretty girls smiling seductively while smoke belched from their noses, handsome cowboys riding into the sunset (of their lives) looking strong, the announcer declaring that he would walk a mile for a Camel, and that Winston tastes good, like a cigarette should. it is not difficult for me to comprehend that in the nineteen twenties smoking was promoted for its health benefits. In the nineteen sixties it was all about sex and self esteem. In all the movies, the cool people smoked, and in all the television shows, likewise. Finally, with people dropping like flies, ciggie advertising on TV was banned, and dire warnings began to appear on packs. At the time, a pack of cigs cost forty five cents. Requiring a business to place warnings on its product about the ill health potential of the product is highly questionable from the standpoint of free enterprise, the first amendment, self incrimination, and government overreach. There are, however, extenuating circumstances. An activity which kills four hundred thousand people every year and costs hundreds of billions in medical expenses, it can be reasonably argued, merits government intervention. Of all the smokers who harm their health and the health of others, few can pay for all the medical expenses. The rest of us do, including non smokers. Classic economic theory holds that the free market works well when everyone behaves rationally. smoking, it can be argued, is not rational behavior. Over the years tobacco companies have been required to put ever more dire warnings on their packaging. May be hazardous to your health has become will kill certainly kill you. Tobacco companies have been hounded for decades by local, state and federal governments, forced to pay hundreds of billions of dollars in punitive damages. and yet, nothing seems to work. people still smoke, although in far fewer numbers, fortunately. Now, after an eleven year court battle, tobacco companies will be forced to condemn themselves on television, using frightening language. That won't help much either. There is nothing new to tell us at this point. Tobacco companies have for decades spiked their punch, adding addictive ingredients, and have lied about it. Their harsh treatment by government can be seen as justice long delayed. We have forced them into attempting corporate suicide, and still they endure, by transferring sales to China. The lesson we have learned is one we already knew; that people cannot be prevented from killing themselves, especially if they are doing it by having a good time.

The True Tragedy Of Trump

TRUMP WAS ELECTED by promising to repeal Obamacare, build a wall, and rebuild infrastructures, among other hollow rhetoric. Over a year later, Obamacare still stands, the wall does not, and it is hoped never will, and there is no sign of any massive infrastructure rebuilding program. Trump has created about as many jobs as anyone else would have by now. Most of his agenda would best serve the country by failing, some of it, especially the infrastructure idea, we need. Republicans assure the great prevaricator that his agenda would pass through smooth as silk, but has bogged down in republican rifts, abusive rhetoric, and potholes. The current hot air trial balloon is tax reform gifting for the corporate wealthy, which has an end of year trumped up deadline. Good luck with that. We want our American corporations to stop keeping their money in other countries, to avoid taxes. They will keep doing this even if we lower their taxes, because they will still prefer to pay no taxes elsewhere. even so, how do we know that money kept in corporate pockets will stimulate the economy, rather than merely enrich the rich? We don't. If we want corporate American money to stay in America to be taxed, require that it be, by law. Simple. But of course that would involve heavy handed government trampling of the freedom of enterprise, a great conservative sin. any business born and raised in America should by law be required to keep a certain percentage of its profits in country, for sharing with the country which enabled the profit. Our right wing talk radio lunatics have only praise for Trump. Praise for ending the 'war on coal", praise for removing the United States from any obligation to cooperate with the rest of the world in fighting climate change. Praise for a policy of blind suicide. Liberals believe in climate change, therefor true conservatives must not, and any cost. I have friends like that, who have now become former friends. Anyone who refuses to save human civilization need not approach me. I have high standards. All of Trump's childish remarks, his verbal attacks on harmless American citizens, his crude behavior, reprehensible though it is, is merely a sideshow. Nor are his destructive policies of racism and class warfare paramount. Let him ridicule Elizabeth warren and others like the child that his emotionally is, and let him accuse Obama of having been born in Africa. let him destroy Obamacare and replace it with nothing. We will still survive. But Trump's approach to climate change, if allowed to flourish, the conservative approach, will kill us all, and prevent our great grandchildren from ever actualizing. That is the true tragedy of Trump and the misguided people who support him.

Governing Ourselves, For A Change

AMERICANS, for all their lip service, have never preferred democracy. This is especially true of the wealthy elite, who quite rightly fear that political power evenly distributed would bring about an egalitarian society and create the unacceptable specter of redistribution of personal wealth. Madison, like Plato and Aristotle long before, and Louis Brandeis long after, understood well that political equality cannot be separated from economic equality. In a true democracy, the two would have to work together. Everybody has his own solution. Plato taught Aristotle that wealth should be shared; Aristotle was skeptical. James Madison, a wealthy man, favored plutocracy, said so, and backed it up in his constitution of 1787, which we so cherish and admire, though we sometimes abuse it, today. Justice Brandeis kept his thoughts to himself. The average American workplace is a dictatorship, as is the average American classroom. Workers and students are constrained to simpering acquiescence and slave wage labor, with little or democratic pretense of amelioration. True democracy is the greatest threat to elite rule, governance from top down. Here are a few relevant quotes. The public are "ignorant and meddlesome outsiders who must be put in their place." Power must be possessed by the "intelligent minority of responsible men" who themselves must be protected "from the trampling and roar of the bewildered herd." The purpose of the herd, the ignorant masses, according to America's founders, is to choose, every few years, from among a carefully limited and selected number of responsible, intelligent men of property, thus relegating the common citizen to a place as spectators, not participants. Accordingly, the unwashed masses are not the best judges of their own interests. Hence, we have a republic, a representative democracy, owned and controlled by our wealthy elite, rather than a direct democracy owned and controlled by the common people which requires popular participation and, as much as possible, a well informed public. We the people seem to be content with our status as spectators, and always have been, just as our founders intended. We simply do not trust ourselves to govern. Nor should we, if we do not care enough to do something about it, to water the tree of liberty, as Jefferson, with a little revolution now and then. Just one more point to ponder. Our leaders today are no different than our previous ones. If America's billionaire corporate masters truly believed in popular participation and democracy in government, they wouldn't spend billions of dollars purchasing political power, and billions more clinging to it. We the common masses are bought and paid for, with our consent This arrangement will continue as long as we agree to it. if you think Donald trump is some kind of "populist", or man of the people, reconsider. There is not a single true populist in the republican party. Trump and the republicans would severely truncate government power, but would do nothing to curtail corporate power, which would fill the vacuum left by a government in exile. Conservatives, much as they rail against the central government, have no objections to corporate power, which to them is freedom, which is actually only another type of tyranny, tyranny of the very wealthy elite. We the people have far greater hope of stealing political power from our corporate masters by working through government than by forcing corporations, which are inherently tyrannical, to democratize. What remains to us the people is to pick our poison.

Showing Us What Is Possible

IF YOU WANT success in Chicago politics, join the democratic party. Then, join the democratic party machine, Richard Daley's political descendants. be a good team player. always be available to work for the big boys, doing them favors. By all means, be white. Polish, Irish, or Italian white is fine, but never African-American white. Pigmentation matters. There is no benefit to being female, attractive or otherwise. Black folk can be good soldiers, followers, but seldom more. as long as they stay in their place, they get by. But in 1983, things changed. Several candidates split the white vote, and Harold Washington became the first black mayor in the city's history. His election triggered a four year slow motion political race war. For the first time in Chicago's colorful and volatile political history, a democratic mayor failed to achieve control of the fifty member city council. Washington's supporters were outnumbered by racists, many in his own party, and the council thwarted his entire agenda. Potholes that any white mayor could have filled became grand canyons. it was a struggle to pass bills providing for basic city services, only because the black mayor put the bills forward. A venerable tradition in Chicago politics is patronage for the mayor's in group homies. Not for Washington. Any African-American appointment, any nod to the black community, and the mayor, who actually went out of his way to avoid racial bias or the appearance of it, was accused of racism. The "N" word became the graffiti motif of choice all across the windy city. Racism, which usually assumes subtle, disguised guises in modern America, emerged in full visible bloom in Chicago of the nineteen eighties, only because of Mayor Washington. But Washington remained undeterred. he shook hands with every cracker in town. He dutifully attended all white functions, accepting all invitations to all events where he might win a few new friends. He spoke at every civic function within shouting distance. he was a funny, charming man, whose demeanor oozed personality, and, he was fair. "fairer than fair", as he put it. Not a trace of bitterness emanated from him. he became, in a sense, the Jackie Robinson of American politics, taking all that was given without dishing it out in return, while still standing tall with grace. And bit by bit, vote by vote, he won the respect and then the admiration of former enemies. Harold Washington won reelection in 1987, then died suddenly just a few days later, the day before Thanksgiving, thirty years ago. Dead people make great heroes. Harold Washington, like Martin Luther King before him, has been venerated in death after being vilified in life. Once again Chicago was returned to white control. the city had been changed forever, in subtle but important ways. Racists were less racist, more willing to give everyone an equal chance. It remained, and remains, a segregated racist city, with poverty concentrated disproportionately in black neighborhoods, but communication between the races was put on a higher level, and a feeling of possibilities and cooperation began to be evident. The African-American community had finally seen what might be possible. Twenty years later, America elected its first black president, a man who moved to Chicago partly due to the inspiring example of Harold Washington, and whose ascent to the top of the political pyramid he attributed to the example he had been shown in his adopted home town.

Breaking The Spell

I WAS AMAZED when I played my first video game, "Pong" I think it was called, a square dot bouncing horizontally across the TV screen, in 1967. I was twelve years old, percipient, and impressionable. The high tech enthralled me, as did the implications for the future. Even then I could discern that video games were her to stay, and would become sophisticated, popular, expensive, and seductive. At some point I decided to stay away from them, knowing that my parents were not going to spend money on them, and that I had other things to do, like spend time outside. The decision held. I was vaguely aware of Pac man, dungeons and dragons, and the others as I avoided my way through the eighties and nineties, the era of the first great video game boom. I was never a participant. Now I suppose the level of technological sophistication has gone beyond my most imaginative imaginations, and that people are online with holograms, interaction, and heaven knows what else. Not long ago our senior center signed up for a Wii bowling tournament, and was one player short. They came to me, imploring. Probably my youthful athleticism, charm, and rugged good looks caught the attention of the other team members. My athleticism failed to manifest, and our eighty year olds couldn't pick up the slack, and their eighty olds kicked our eighty year old tail. But it was good fun, as I knew it would be. I tried trash talking, and when that didn't produce results, I made sure I was the first to congratulate the winners, our opponents in every instance. During my brief pre tournament futile refusal phase, I weakly employed my standard "I don't do video games" ploy, which obviously had no impact. Lady assured me that Wii bowling is no video game. A technical reality aside, common sense succumbed to eighty year old feminine charm, and I played, and enjoyed it. In a parallel universe, I made the same sort of decision regarding social media, namely, not to do it. Another seductive drug, I could sense. I repeated my video game scenario, scoped out the scene, foresaw the forthcoming addictive avalanche, and scrammed. Chat rooms were my pong. I enjoyed them, but saw the trap in time to get out while I still could. My Facebook page lies dormant, much to the annoyance of friends I have never met. I neither tweet, retweet, twitter, nor take pictures of myself for self promotion and ego enhancement. I feel free. But who knows? had pong and chatrooms not gone extinct, forty years apart, only to be supplanted by more sophisticated forms, I might yet be sitting permanently ensconced in front of a screen, surrounded by a pile of empty pizza boxes at my feet, I'm ight weight three hundred pounds with high cholesterol and blood pressure, bouncing a blip back and forth, and multitasking in a romance chat room.

Rethinking America's Place In the World

A U.S. MILITARY PLANE, en route from the American military base on Okinawa, Japan, to the aircraft carrier Ronald Reagan floating in the south china Sea, went missing, and is presumably lost. yet another in a lengthening list of recent U.s. naval accidents in the far pacific, involving loss of life. Thorough investigation and analysis of each of these tragedies is beginning to indicate that t combination of vulnerabilities is the cause, the common denominator. For one, a lack of training. Much of the time, navel personnel are trained for their future assignments as pilots, navigators, or other high tech high responsibility specialties by computer simulation - and little or nothing else. then too, the navy, like the rest of the military, is undermanned and overburdened for the task of carrying out all that is required to accomplish its assignments in the fact of an aggressive, proactive, global American foreign and military policy. And this raises a question: why, exactly, is the American military expected to conduct operations all over the world, engage in perpetual warfare, engage in perpetual monitoring, patrol, and training, when economic and geo-political circumstances often seem to dictate another course of action? The people of Okinawa have fore decades vehemently opposed the presence of American military forces on their land. Protests have often turned violent, and numerous incidents involving American servicemen and Japanese civilians have only made the situation worse. Japan is economically strong, and would seemingly be quite capable of providing for its onw defense needs. since World War Two the U.S. has taken on the responsibility of defending Japan, the initial reason being an American unwillingness to allow japan to rearm. To whatever extent this rationale was justified after World War Two, it certainly no longer is. The United States maintains a global network of over eight hundred military installations in far flung regions - for what purpose? To defend liberty and freedom around the world? If you believe that, go hunting for real estate in central Florida, I have a great bargain for you. The reason, obviously, is to maintain American dominance of the world, to protect and maintain the American empire, and to provide the military might to support America's desire to penetrate markets worldwide, and access to resources, mineral, financial, and human, around the world. America, from the time Americans crossed the Appalachians and heads, to the present, has been an expanding resource hungry corporate empire. Most of us, mearly all of us agree, that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been disastrous for all concerned. The Viet Nam war was a disaster, even it did indeed accomplish its main objective of insinuating American puppet regimes and opening doors to American influence in southeast Asia. American foreign policy, backed by its military, has, historically, been tragic both for the Untied States and for the nations around the world whose resources have bene plundered and its people terrorized. there have been many excellent studies of all this by capable scholars, who support their conclusions with facts. Among the best at "The Tragedy of American Diplomacy", by Wm. A. Williams, and "Who Rules the World", a new book by Noam Chomsky. Maybe its time to rethink the entirety of America's role and position in the world. it might even be time to consider removing American forces from Okinawa, and other places.

Joining Facebook and Having Friends

A GIRLFRIEND had a Facebook page. Or rather, I asked her whether she had one, and she said yes. So I said, may I see it? Sure, she said. Slightly annoyed that she hadn't mentioned it to me before, I pressed on. When can you come by and show it to me, I asked? That isn't the way it works, said she. You get a computer, log onto Facebook, join, get your own page, then, you can look at other people's pages to your heart's desire. I had problems with that. Sounded a bit too impersonal, for one thing. As if by joining a huge online community, I could see her page, but that she had no intention of making me special, and dropping by my house, with her page in hand. I wanted to be special to her. Plus, all that joining Facebook stuff involved work and effort for me, a definite no no. Also, I didn't want to enter the social media swamp, or what I had, by listening to others, gotten the impression was a swamp, full of animosity, bad behavior, trivial, frivolous, foolish nonsense, just like the old chat room days. Half the internet is porn, I have heard. But, long story short, as they say, I got a page, just to look at hers. Hers was great. Full of nice pictures, witty comments, and a list of friends the went on interminably, hundreds of "friends", sharing and trading pics, posting comments, and whatever else people do on Facebook. Made me downright jealous, that she hadn't made a special point of showing me her page, but rather had just assumed that anyone, including me, who wanted to see her page, would simply join Facebook. All these friends made me jealous. I wanted to be special to her, and I thought that by looking at her page, I would be, and then I thought that by having a page of my own I would be, but alas, I began to get the idea I would be to her but another face in the Facebook crowd. Were all these people on her friends list really friends? Sure, se assured me, online friends, people she had never met in person, mostly, mostly people she never would meet in person, but some of them people she had known all her life, people who lived in the same town as she. Her pictures were mostly selfies, and all intended obviously to make her look cute and attractive, attractive to a bunch of people she would probably never meet in person. She was, it seemed to me, sharing more of her life online, and treating people online more as friends, more closely than she treated me, describing events in her life I knew nothing about, sharing pictures and stories about herself I had never seen, and, it seemed, never would see, since she evidently never intended to make any effort to share them with me. Facebook for her was a world unto itself, a world anyone could share, but only on Facebook. She was sharing more with Facebook digital computer friends than she was with me, a person who saw her nearly everyday in person. That hit me hard. It made me feel old, out of touch. I dropped hints about my feelings to her, but she merely reminded me that our relationship was fine the way it was, and that all along I only had to join Facebook to share that aspect of her life. OK, fine, I thought. I had no argument. I still don't. But it still makes me feel creepy, and lonely, and hurt, and my Facebook page still sits neglected, with nothing on it, because my only purpose in getting it was to get closer to her, which never happened. I think I have maybe eight friends on Facebook. By now she must have thousands. I don't even know whether I am one of them.

Believing In Deadly Policies For Pride's Sake

THE PENTAGON lists climate change as the single greatest threat to national security. For climate change deniers who refuse to believe this, a little research should be sufficient to tell you whether this is true. The U'S. Navy says that it will be necessary to relocate the world's largest naval base at Norfolk, Virginia, due to rising sea levels eventually inundating the base's buildings. Several times a month teenagers go kayaking above roads near the beach, as the ocean regularly floods the city sewer system. Every year averages temperatures are hotter than the previous, as the atmosphere's carbon content keeps rising, now well above four hundred parts per million, a dangerous amount. Above four fifty, and the ecosystem cannot bear it, and will collapse. all of these facts can easily be verified, with a little research. And yet, anyone who accepts the reality of human made climate change is not allowed to work in the Trump administration, an administration which was elected by a large plurality of American voters, and which still has the approval of a third of all Americans. Trump has repeatedly declared his intention to "bring back coal", even as cola fired plants shut down one after another. Coal is never coming back, as is obvious to anyone who pays attention, without massive government subsidies, which are anathema among conservatives, and to the spirit of free market capitalism. Does everyone see the problem here? Everyone, at least, with the probably exception of hard right conservatives and Trump supporters, dwindling in number. A massive disconnect between what the world knows to be true, and the policies promulgated by the Trump administration. a massive conflict between what needs to be done, and what the American government is currently doing. The existence and existential threat of climate change was apparent long ago, decades ago. That carbon injected into earth's atmosphere could cause atmospheric warming was known to chemists two hundred years ago, and Einstein actually thought that deliberately adding carbon to increase agricultural yield might be a good idea. Even Einstein was sometimes wrong. The pattern is that American conservatives cling desperately to obviously damaging attitudes because to abandon them would conflict with their ideology. On the issues of climate change, gun control, economic and tax policy, among others, America's right wing refuses to open its mind to better policy, merely for the sake of ideology. On most ideas, the result id greatly detrimental to the health and well being of the nation, In the realm of climate change, the conservative attitude, that it is not a serious problem, more than detrimental; it is lethal.

Giving Thanks

II DON'T GIVE THANKS any more on thanksgiving than I do on any other day, because I give thanks every day, abundantly. I am blessed. daily existence and cognition are for me ample reason alone to give daily thanks. My gratitude is directed towards "the infinitely superior spirit manifest in the laws of the universe", as Einstein said. Recent psychological research strongly suggests that an "attitude of gratitude" nurtures good health, physical and mental, so why not nurture it every day? More specifically, it is easy and appropriate to be grateful for having had loving, caring parents who provided for my every childhood need, and encouraged my healthy maturation through good responsible parenting. My local community gave me a good education,, and my friends have always filled my life with joy. Equally important has been the benefit of living in a country which gave me a chance to flourish, with only a reasonably limited risk of succumbing to violence, accident, or illness. To have been blessed with good health and a sound mind is the greatest blessing of all. Thanksgiving is one of my favorite holidays, for many reasons. Its a great weekend for football and basketball, and I love a good turkey dinner. And since gratitude is so fundamental to my attitude, thanksgiving suits me perfectly. No matter what a person's religious beliefs, giving thanks fits. I know of no religion which does not believe in giving thanks. In the United States, thanksgiving has emerged as a quasi religious quasi civic holiday, a unique. It gives students a nice autumnal break, and my belief is that school should be year round, with a good break in each of the four seasons. The memory of past thanksgivings warms my heart. Mom always cooked a turkey, and when I moved out she always sent a good part of it home with me. Nothing equals the blessings of left over turkey, as everyone knows. On Thanksgiving day 1981 my Chicago bears returned a kickoff for a touchdown in overtime for a game winner. I come from a small family, so my holiday memories tend not to include a large number of people. Now I live aloes, a d last year was invited to, and accepted invitations to four thanksgiving dinners. I spent the rest of the year dieting, by necessity. I learned my lesson. this year I chose to h ide at home, give thanks alone, and avoid the necessity of last year's post thanksgiving fasting.

Getting to the Root Of Endemic Sexual Misconduct

I'VE ONLY BEEN GUILTY OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT once, as far as I can remember, it was a mild infraction, methinks, and I have forgiven myself. A friend asked me to give his girlfriend a ride home. He was too drunk to drive. So was I. Instead of suggesting that she spend the was, as I say, uniquely unqualified. night, on his couch or wherever, I agreed to be the designated driver, though I was, as I say, uniquely unqualified. Drunks make bad decisions. I wanted to please my buddy. She was semiconscious in my car, as as I parked in front of her house, I kissed her. She objected, so I stopped. Pretty mild stuff, in the grand scheme of things, but still, not good. Maybe not even sexual harassment. Maybe inappropriate affection, or excessive French behavior. From this episode I lost a friend, a high price to pay, but avoided any further sexual harassment charges, appropriately. A stolen kiss or casual shoulder rub is best met with a cold stare, and a word of warning, not litigation. I have always tended to avoid that sort of behavior, for fear of face slapping, or incarceration. President Trump takes another approach. he brags about it, citing his wealth and fame as enabling virtues. He has all but endorsed Alabama senatorial candidate Roy Moore, reminding us that Mr. Moore claims to be without sin. A large number of Alabamans, including some within the ministry, have indicated that they intend to support Moore whether or not he is guilty of the accusations levied against him. This is a shocking display of low standards by the Christian right. anything to defeat a democrat. Trump would rather a probable serial serious sexual offender be elected to the U.S. Senate than a democrat, just as the evangelical community would, just at the evangelical community preferred a self proclaimed serial sexual offender as president to a democrat. The values revealed by that speak volumes. Rush Limbaugh, a de facto leader of the conservative movement, is trying to politicize sexual harassment by emphasizing recent allegations against liberals, ignoring those made against conservatives, and claiming that democrats will do anything to protect their own , while the prize for that behavior goes to the supporters of Roy Moore. That Limbaugh is so twisted and dishonest is both humorous and tragic, and that his listeners keep listening again speaks volumes about their integrity. Sexual harassment is not a political issue. even a cursory consideration of the matter should reveal that much. It is not a political issue associated with any particular political ideology. it is a societal and moral issue. Women are attracted to men with resources. Resources include wealth, fame, and power, the "big three". good looks at a factor, but of less importance to women than to men. Thus, women try to look good, and men try to become wealthy, powerful and famous, all for the sake of sex, a fundamental motivator among animals. A culture in which sexual behavior is powerfully associated with morality and religion, and in which the value of exploitation is given free reign, and sexuality is exploited for commercial gain, and a perfect storm is created. Out American epidemic of sexual misconduct, like our national epidemic of gun violence, is a cultural phenomenon directly related to fundamental American values, and hs been a part of American culture since before the nation was a nation. And so it will remain, without fundamental changes in American culture.

Dealing With Nukes, The American Way

OBAMA, and the powers of the earth signed an agreement with Iran several years ago under which Iran agree to wait at least ten years before resuming work on an atomic bomb, in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions, among other stipulations, including United nations inspections and oversight. All facts considered, it is a good agreement, a step in the right denuclearization direction. Meanwhile, during negotiations, Arkansas Senator Tom "tall" Cotton and forty six other Obama- backstabbing republican senators drafted and signed a letter to the Iranian government, reminding them that Obama would soon be gone, and that thereafter any agreements reached with him would be subject to repudiation. A blatant usurpation of the president's constitutional prerogative of making American foreign policy, ostensibly. Iran laughed at the letter, and asked who in hell tom Cotton is. Nobody knows. Now, Obama is long gone, and the treaty with Iran remains fully intact, another example of pompous republican promises, unfulfilled, fortunately. On many occasions, well documented, the world has narrowly, miraculously escaped nuclear devastation due to misunderstandings, computer errors, and strategic insanity by world leaders lacking wit, notably Ronald Reagan, who insisted on continuously, provocatively testing Soviet defenses with aerial penetrations of its air space. See "Who Rules the World", by Noam Chomsky, chapter 22. Not only do North Korea and Iran need to eliminate nuclear weapons for the good of the world, so do all other nations, including and particularly the United States, the only country, so far, to have ever used atomic bombs against an enemy, miraculously. In 1953 the United States overthrew the government of Iran, and installed the Shah, who ruled from 1953 until 1979, and whose appeal to the United States consisted in his loyalty and obedience to America. Little wonder that to this day the Iranian people and government are suspicious and fearful of United States intentions. U.S. intelligence has consistently reported that all Iranian military preparations and strategy are purely defensive in nature, and that Iran poses no threat to American interests. Everyone outside the United States recognizes that the world's leading practitioner of terrorism is the United States, not Iran. These facts are never reported by the U.S. government or media. Throughout the entire twenty six year reign of the Shah of Iran, the encouraged Iran to develop nuclear weapons. This is well documented. Iranian graduate students in nuclear physics studied at major American universities, including M.I.T.. When asked recently to explain this, former Secretary of State henry Kissinger replied: "they were our allies then."

Mr. Carter, Getting Fed Up, Finally

IN A RECENT OP ED, FORMER PRESIDENT JIMMY CARTER (yes, he's still alive) made a shocking announcement. He is resigning the Southern Baptist Convention. In a beautifully written piece, Mr. Carter, now 91 years old and living history for those under the age of forty, describes himself as a born again Christian, whose religion has, like millions of other people around the world, sustained him and given him guidance and inspiration his entire life. He has served as a deacon for decades, as well as teaching Sunday school and attending the same church in Plains, Georgia, almost from the time of Jesus (just joking). His membership in the SBC has lasted sixty years. If I'm not mistaken, the Southern Baptist convention is the caucasian version of the Southern Baptist Leadership conference, which, if memory serves, is Jesse Jackson's outfit, the African-American version. Why there are two racially based organizations within American baptistry shan't be explored here, other than to speculate that since the church is centered in the American south, and since the American south has a history of, shall we say, racial, shall we say, discord and division, that perhaps the church is merely a reflection of that fact. Again, who knows? The reason why Carter is resigning is that over his objections, the SBC, citing biblical scripture, formally declared, or reaffirmed, that woman are to be subservient to men, and therefore cannot hold official positions within the church. With regard to the former president, this begs the question: why now? Or put another way, what took you so long? Or maybe: if this is how you feel, why did you ever become a baptist, let alone a Christian, in the first place, let alone aspire to positions of leadership within the faith? The math indicates that Carter has been a Baptist Christian since, well, about nineteen thirty something, and a member of the SBC since 1957. The Christian faith, biblically, has relegated women to a position of subordination since the Bible first appeared in print, in the fourth century. Not only that, but the bible has condoned slavery since day one. In fact, prior to the Civil War, as Mr. Carter surely knows, all slave owners were Christians, and they all defended owning slaves based on the Bible. For them to do so was perfectly consistent within the context of their religious affiliation, since the Bible, both old and new testaments, clearly condones slavery, as well as a number of other practices which we today generally consider barbaric, such as animal sacrifice, disciplining disobedient children by killing them (Mathew 15:4), among others. are we to assume that prior to just recently the former president agreed with the biblical position that women are by God's command subordinate? Or that he has spent his entire life condoning slavery, because he is a Christian, and believes in the truth of the Bible? these are fair and reasonable questions, question which I have often wanted to ask of any and all Christians, but never have, for fear of arousing great antipathy and wrath, from human and possible divine sources. If you believe that Bible, do you believe the bible is the "Word of God"? If so, do you as a Christian, condone slavery and the subordination of women to men, and all the other biblical injunctions and teachings which to many of us today seem, shall we say, primitive, barbaric, and downright evil? Only Jimmy Cater, 39th president of the United states, can answer for himself. Every justification of ostensible biblical barbarity I have ever heard from devout Christians has seemed unreasonable to me, evasive, illogical, and usually have something to do with "we cannot interpret the Bible in ancient terms; they had different values back then: or each generation must read God's Word from fresh perspective. I never bother to reply that, if this is the case, why not obtain divine inspiration, and produce a new version of scripture which matches our modern values, not those of thousands of years ago. if I did, I can suppose that all I would receive in return would be more evasive, convoluted, rationalizing tripe. But I would love to hear Mr. Carter's answers; my hope is that he would do better.

Looking To the Radical Past For Hope

GOOGLE JOHN DEWEY. He's worth it. A philosopher and writer, his primary concerns were democracy and education. In his day, nobody called Dewey an "anarchist", but easily could have. His idea of democracy was to eliminate all forms of coercion, institutional and systemic, including much law, including domination by "business for private profit through private control of banking, land, industry, reinforced by command of the press and the means of propaganda and publicity." Dewey understood that "power today resides in control of the menas of production, exchange, publicity, transportation, and communication. Whoever owns them rules the life of the community, even if formally democratic systems remain in place." Until the above institutions are publicly owned and controlled, said Dewey, politics will always be a "shadow cast on society by big business." Although Dewey wrote this decades ago, he could have written it today, and it would be true. More recently, writers like gore Vidal and Noam Chomsky have mad the same argument. Dewey went much further, asserting that workers should control their own fate, rather than being, as he said, "tools rented by employers". This is a reference to the hourly wage system, which we have today. He was talking about worker ownership of business, and worker control of business. Our current system is feudalistic, he said, referring to the system in place then but still extant now, and should be replaced with a democratic one. Dewey's ideals sound radical in 2017, in conservative culture in which communism and socialism are considered radical by our prevailing capitalistic values, reinforced by corporate propaganda, and the political leaders who, controlled by corporate money, consider worker democracy a radical concept. But in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, John Dewey was mainstream. In that era, labor unions were large and vigorous, the idea of workplace democracy and ownership were mainstream. In 1920 and again in 1932, socialist and communist candidates for the U.S> presidency got more than one million votes. Eugene V. Debs received a million votes, although he was in jail on election day. Progressive ideals and labor unions have long since been immolated by corporate power, a process which began in earnest after World War Two. since the Reagan administration, both major political parties and the country in general have moved steadily to the right, assisted by a huge wll funded propaganda campaign, financed by billionaires. And so, minimum wage is seven twenty five an hour, Americans are working longer hours for less money, corporations enjoy higher profits than ever, the top one tenth of one percent of the population possesses nearly a quarter of the nation's wealth, and the gap between the rich and the poor is greater than at any time in America history. We the American people have willingly become sheep, placing ourselves at the disposal of the wealthy powerful elite. But there is hope. Phenomena like the occupy Wall Street movement and Bernie Sanders give us hope. But unless the extreme, pro wealth agenda of the republican party, which is truly radical, can be defeated, hope is a mere point of light, rather than the needed roaring blaze.

Putting People, And Society, To work, Prosperously

THE MORE PEOPLE WHO HAVE JOBS, the fewer the number of unemployed, the healthier the economy. The better paid the lowest paid are, the larger the consumer base is, and more people engaged in spending and consuming, and the larger, and healthier the economy. Expand the consumer base through high employment and well paid employment workers, and you expand the consumer base, you increase demand, and supply follows thereafter. this can be called "demand side trickle up economics", or 'economics which works", in sharp contrast to supply side trickle down Reaganomics, which has been proven to be a sham, merely an excuse to transfer wealth from the poor to the rich, through tax policy. Indeed it dies increase wealth, but only among the top one percent, and on one else. As proof, consider that since Reagan, supply side economics has been used, and that during this time, this time, the past thirty five years, the richer have gotten richer, and the poor have gotten poorer, along with the shrinking middle class. Now, as usual, the republican conservatives in congress want to cut taxes on the wealthy, and raise them on everybody else to compensate, another attempt at supply side economics, pure sham, pure evil. The wealthy control this country, and they control our political leaders through bribery, in the form of campaign contributions. Of course the wealthy corporate interests want supply side economics. They assume they can stimulate demand later, through advertising, and consumer debt, while getting their tax cut money now. Anyone who is hired for a job in hired through sheer necessity. Taxing the wealthy does not cause job loss; businesses need workers. Raising minimum wage, and working class wages in general does not cause job loss; the workers are needed, through necessity, at any wage. Raising wages turns subsistence workers into middle consumers, expanding the economy, increasing spending, growing businesses, generating more prosperity for all. In America, it is simply too damned hard to get a job. too many hoops to jump through, too many drug screenings, references, resumes, too much age, gender, and racial discrimination. In almost every sector of the economy turnover is high, job satisfaction and job security are low, and people generally stay at the same job for a few years at most, changing careers more often than the president prevaricates, astonishingly. A healthy infusion of workplace democracy, worker ownership, shareholder workers, stakeholder workers, revenue sharing, and decent health care and pension benefits would stabilize the work force, the economy, producing greater economic equality, which was the original intention of capitalism, in theory, and hence, increase prosperity for all. Our current of slave-wage labor generates as much demoralization among workers as slavery itself. During the late nineteenth century in America, when the industrial revolution was raising up factories with specialization of labor, the hourly wage system was seen by most as "slave labor". Since then,, society has been trained to accept it as normal. It isn't. Adam smith, the intellectual father of capitalism, spoke about extreme labor specialization turning humans into mindless machines, which it does. There will come a time, if civilization evolves into true civilization, when most of our current attitudes and practices regarding to labor and economics are considered primitive and barbaric. may that time arrive soon.

Blaming It All On The Russians

IT IS HARDLY SURPRISING, the increasing awareness that not only did the Russians interfere with the 2016 election using the internet, but that they have been interfering not only with American elections, but American society in general, using less technologically advanced methods, for decades. From their point of view, it makes sense. The United States is their enemy, a capitalistic colossus ideologically and stringently opposed to socialism, a military rival, an empire in direct competition for world influence with what thy have traditionally considered their superior culture, people, and values. The fact that Russia has been invaded, conquered, and virtually destroyed several time adds an overtone of paranoia to their mindset. The fact that American society is relatively open, with a highly visible, constant dialogue of various sorts publicly promulgated through the media makes American culture vulnerable to outside influence. The fact that American society is diverse, with many different competing groups and interests, seemingly always embroiled in conflict and acrimonious disputation, highly visible, create a perfect environment for meddling. The various ways in which this interference has been applied have only recently become known, are still coming to light, and may never be fully revealed. The main emphasis has apparently been to enhance conflict between already opposing segments of society. It now seems likely that some - no one knows how much - of the printed rhetoric attributed to groups like the KKK and aimed at the black community were of Russian origin. What better way to weaken American society than to further stir up already present racial animosity? It may be that already discontent labor unions have been aided in their struggles against the corporate establishment by Russian money or other assistance. In nearly every aspect of cultural endeavor, there is, in America, some sort of conflict either manifest, or lurking just beneath the surface, since America is a land of so many divergent viewpoints and interests, and is based so greatly upon competition and individualism. There are two possible solution sto this, two possible ways in which the United States might eliminate the foreign threat to its domestic tranquility, such as it is. the first would be to close the open society, to lock down the freedom os expression all American's have been accustomed to for the country's entire history. This, however, would obviously bee to too great a sacrifice, and would in effect award the victory to the Russians. the second, and much more tempting, would be to simply blame everything that goes wrong in America, from the smallest to the largest problems, on Russian interference, an audacious presumption of Russian guilt. Can't get along with your neighbors, or a difficult family member? Blame it on the Russians! Dissatisfied with your city council's proposals? obviously, Russian interference. Bad day at the race track? Again, those dammed Russians. if we can blame Trump's election on the Russians, we can blame anything and everything on them. And why not? Fake news and conspiracy theories are all the rage these days; this approach can wrap up all our problems in attribution to s single, sinister source, those Russian rascals. its worth a try; nothing else seems to be working.

Saving The Planet, Improving The Scenery

ABOUT TEN PERCENT of the American people are rock solid hard core unmovable climate change deniers, beyond hope and scientific literacy. another twenty five percent are skeptics, people who just plain don't know, but are doubtful. they are very nearly as useless as the outright deniers. To these people the science is murky (it isn't to most people), and the causal connection dubious (they aren't, to the well educated). Nobody who accepts the reality of human made climate change is allowed to serve in the Trump administration, alarming ini its disregard for human survival. We are confronted in America of being the laughing stock outcast of the civilized world, which includes nearly everybody but us. Worse, the United Stats is potentially the cause of environmental and thus human destruction. Fortunately, the rest of the world is sane, and is proceeding with measure to fight climate change, which are being joined by states, communities, corporations, and individuals in America who are interested in preserving the environment. Noam Chomsky accurately describes the republican party as the most dangerous organization in human history. this is because of its position on climate change, which is well known, and the potential consequences of it, also well known. Chomsky carelessly omits mention of the American conservative movement, unless he has recently expanded his remarks concerning danger to the world. If our republican colleagues will not permit us to elect an administration amenable to human survival, nor allow us to replace fossil fuels with sustainable energy sources, will they at least condescend to allow us to plant trees, say, one trillion, the minimum number needed? We would be willing to promise to leave the government entirely out of the tree planting initiative, to impose no taxes on the very wealthy to pay for the program, to make tree planting on private property entirely optional, and to use funds for the project taken from other social welfare programs, with the labor being done by volunteers, of workers paid minimum wage, from money diverted from the food stamp program. Whatever it takes to persuade our right wing fellow from quenching this desperate plan to save the planet, like they seemed determined to do with all other plans. Maybe some of the new trees would be planted in lawns in front of buildings known to house right wing individuals and organizations, improving the scenery.

Mass Murder; Getting To Root Causes

SO FAR THIS YEAR there have been 389 mass murders in the United States. Gamblers in English pubs are likely doing a lively trade taking wagers on when the next will occur, and how many will die. On this we can all agree: before the end of this year, there will be more, perhaps even a sufficiently murderous one to inspire coverage in the mainstream media, which reserves its attention only for the most gruesome, the most sensational, for entertainment value, the very best. The very nature of the media coverage should serve as a warning sign; these nightmares are, in a sense, nothing more than an additional few minutes of additional morbid entertainment for we the American entertainment addicted, a few million dollars more of commercial value for the vast media corporations which feed us whatever we seem to want, whatever advertising sales and ratings analysts indicate if currently en vogue among the consumers, who spend trillions of dollars annually on entertainment, making their wishes and preferences paramount, and thus highly scrutinized. The advertising you see on this web page, the advertising you see on Facebook, the advertising you see on the outfield walls of televised major league baseball games are not really there; they are ephemeral, designed specifically for you, according to what extensive, detailed research and analysis has revealed about your personal tastes, and likely future purchasing habits. If this does not alarm you, it should. American mass murders, whether we accept this fact or not, are part and parcel of the package. The notion, widely circulated, that the killers are lone wolves with mental problems, and nothing more, is true, yet absurd, in that this convenient explanation leaves out almost all the underlying reasons for ongoing national nightmare, which, upon cursory reflection, are right before our eyes. Nations, like people, who are emotionally proud and brave do not like to admit their weaknesses and sicknesses. So it is in America. We do not take kindly to the idea that this epidemic of violence is in fact but a symptom of far deeper, fundamental characteristics of our culture, which have always existed, and if not altered through direct action will only continue festering, gifting us with a never ending torrent of blood. Ours is a nation founded upon violent conquest, extermination, slavery, and the lust for wealth. That undergirds all else, and cannot be dismissed. These fundamental values have never changed, and are prominent in our current behavior, domestic, and foreign. We hardly need mention the tragedy of American foreign policy, wars of aggression, and our occupation and exploitation of foreign lands worldwide. Excellent scholarship has well documented all this. Interviews with veterans of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan attest to our ongoing violence and anger, turned outward. We turn it inward as well. Our grotesque economic and social inequality are more extreme than at any time during the past one hundred years. Even the successful among us are not satisfied, and you hear their anger on any talk radio program. America's mass murder nightmare is a result not of random behavior by a few deranged people, but rather, the direct result of the fundamental nature of American society, in which we all participate. To the extent that we deny this and refuse to work for the fundamental change that we so desperately need, we are guilty.

Revealing Ourselves, For Whom We Really Are

EVEN MORE HUMOROUSLY, TRAGICALLY reprehensible than Alabama senatorial candidate Roy Moore are his supporters. America's extreme right wing continues to unabashedly expose its evil insanity, unwittingly rendering the country a service. America's right wing, including the evangelical community, was willing to overlook unrepentant series serial sexual misconduct to elect Donald Trump, therefore tacitly condoning his criminal behavior. Self righteously the self righteous conservative Christians talk about forgiving sin. To forgive trump is impossible, because he has failed to admit sin and repent of it. In any event, to forgive someone may be admirable, but to vote to elect a person of and obviously immoral nature is easily avoidable, and much better for the citizenry. To do so reveals poor judgement, questionable character, and a lack of integrity. When Roy Moore acknowledges and repents of his sins, may we all forgive him and provide the help he so desperately needs He needs psychological medical attention, and ethical instruction. Electing him to the United States Senate ia another matter entirely. he should not even be allowed to carry the banner of any self respecting political party, and nobody of good character should vote for him. To the extent, if any, that the republican party continues to support his candidacy of their civic and moral standards. If Moore is elected, those who elect him will have forfeited their privilege of the respect of others, and will have revealed their moral bankruptcy. We might note that Senator Al Franken has already admitted and apologized for his bad sexual behavior. It would seem that liberal democrats and conservative republicans do indeed have different ways of dealing with their personal conduct.

Praying Improperly

AMONG THE PEOPLE at the local senior center, as elsewhere, there are the well and poorly educated, the intelligent and otherwise, the open and narrow minded, a synthesis, to borrow from Wallace Stevens, of hyacinths and biscuits. In the above dualities, I much prefer the former, and they much prefer me. the latter I avoid, and get along reasonably with only because of my effort to do so. When the lesser sort (to borrow from Madison) belatedly perceived that my pre lunch prayers never made explicit references to Christianity, and could in fact be applied to most forms of religion, some of them protested. The director and I agreed that henceforth I would abstain from my place in the prayer rotation. I would rather bow out than cater to the intolerant ignorant. My form of prayer is quite acceptable to anyone with intelligence. The less informed need to be reminded that the senior center, like the United States, is not a Christian entity, but rather, a secular civic one, in which a large majority of membership happens to be Christian. Anyone wo fails to understand this should read the constitution, study government, and remember that the senior center is supported by government funding. Anyone who after a moment's reflection fails to comprehend the folly of protesting my style of prayer wants enlightenment, to borrow from franklin. When throughout your life you are told by people of less intelligence and perception that you should change your religious beliefs in order to become a better person, you eventually los patience, sooner, rather than later in my case. You begin to resent the ignorant nonsense, the arrogance, the intolerance. you grow tiered of being insulted. Anyone engaging in an attempt to influence another person's religious beliefs need not deceive themselves that they are performing a noble function, with good intentions. They are displaying astonishing arrogance, and are noting but a bully. they are the ones who need to fundamentally change, not the ones whom they are trying to change.

Protesting Properly, and Getting To The Top of the Mountain

THE CONTROVERSY engendered by NFL footballs players who are inconveniently aware of African-American historical and contemporary socio-economic reality, in concert with a pervasive arrogant, dismissive, fiction of post-racial America, coupled with a healthy dose of faux self aggrandizing patriotic fervor, lingers, regrettably. If only the right wing nuts would simply acknowledge that the players have a point, that they do not intend to disrespect the national anthem, but that they merely wish to highlight a long standing and huge injustice by attracting as much attention as possible to the situation, this artificially generated controversy would abate. Frankly, the national anthem serves as a fine vehicle for legitimate protest. Kneeling during the national anthem harms no one, diminishes nobody's patriotism, and whether one is sitting or standing, the anthem plays on. Many religious groups in America do not stand for the Star Spangled Banner, for religious reasons, and they are never condemned for it. The outrage over the players is based on racism, and false indignation. Nobody who stands during the national anthem truly cares who does not stand. They care far more about the outcome of the upcoming game, and their own lives. These are people who enjoy taking offense, enjoy becoming a victim of some perceived offense, on order to create debt in others. In order to serve its purpose, all protests must gain attention, otherwise, there is no point. Martin Luther King, fifty years ago, was criticized by conservatives for walking down the middle of the street with his followers. They might have preferred that they gather instead in someone's basement, to enact social change. A solution is needed. During the national anthem, let the players all stand, hands of hearts. then, immediately after the anthem, let them walk to the middle of the football field, stand in a long line, each holding a sign which says "equality for all". In fact, it would probably work better if different players hale different signs. A few suggestions might include: "246 years", referring to the duration of slavery in America, or "1619", referring to the year in which slaves for first brought to America, "Jim Crow", "racism lingers" - the possibilities are numerous. maybe a two to five minute period of protest after the anthem, before the game begins, long enough to gain attention, long enough to outlast commercial breaks, maybe even long enough to arouse the wrath of right wing good ole white boy football fans, which is the central point of the protest. martin Luther King had no attention of accommodating his Caucasian colleagues, rather, he wanted to enhance their awareness, shame them, and motivate a desire to facilitate positive change. There may come a day, fifty years hence, when today's NFL players are enshrined as heroes alongside of MLK, who was no hero in his day, but is now, even among reluctant right wingers, who go along for the ride, or risk criticism. above all, the NFL players must not stop protesting, and if they must do so so as to appease the hostile, hypocritical white right wing of the American citizenry,, so be it. There are many ways to the mountaintop.

Praying Properly and Speaking Acceptably In Provincial America

FORTY YEARS AGO I was in college, and spent some time in New York. One day during a class discussion I made the remark that for my money, New York city, far from being a cosmopolitan mecca of diversity, was maybe the most provincial place I had ever been. By "provincial", here it is meant narrow minded, self absorbed, unwilling to learn, unwilling to accept cultural difference. Guess it depends on how you look at it, who you meet, and your experiences. At one time or another I have described all of the half a dozen places I have ever lived, including the small town where I live now, as "provincial", except maybe Aspen, Colorado, which is in a class by itself, beyond categorization. At the senior center, the director called me in, and asked about my religious beliefs. I gave her the usual response: I follow Jefferson and Einstein, tend towards a deistic pantheistic view. She told me there were members dissatisfied with my style of prayer - we take turns praying before lunch - and asked whether I might be willing to bless the food, or something like that. My thought was that during prayer my thoughts tend more towards scarfing the food in front of me down, and letting my digestive system do the blessing. I long suspected that the seniors would eventually figure out that when I pray I make no mention of Christ's sacrifice or blood, and that therefore my religiosity might be unlike theirs, different, therefore suspect. And so it came to pass. No more praying for me, at least in public. Sad, since I love to pray. To me, their attitudes, about everything from politics to religion to football, are provincial, narrowly constructed, intolerant of diversity. Across the town square, at the quaint cute public library, I noticed when I first stated going that there was no culture of quiet, that all the employees kept up a steady flow of talk; they gabbed like magpies. This differs from all the other libraries I have ever haunted; Library of congress, Harvard, and numerous university research and city public facilities. Always a quiet culture adhered, except here in my small town. So, when in Rome. I couldn't beat 'em, so I joined 'em. Amazingly, I lasted about three years before being tossed out. I talked too much, I was too intellectual, and my comments were too outside the mainstream,, and included too much political history and current events, too many comments about the Bible and religious tolerance and diversity. Expelled for six months. I decided to make it permanent. When they accused me of harassment, I knew I was licked, the victim of a savage smear campaign. I have concluded that the intolerant provincial nature is nation wide, an all American trait. Consider this; a majority of the American people, on surveys, indicate that the reason Bin Laden knocked down the world Trade Center in 2001 was hatred and jealousy of American prosperity, freedom, and virtue. Omitted from mention is any reference to American foreign policy, including sending a half million member army to Saudi Arabia, and using it to attack, conquer, and occupy Iraq for twenty seven years, killing hundreds of thousands of people, mostly civilians. As if what we love to call "Islamic terrorism" has no motivation in our own behavior. Provincial? With blinders. Tragic, almost to the point of being humorous, like all the small towns I have lived in.

Watching the Judiciary, For All the Wrong Reasons

IF YOU ARE NOT FAMILIAR with an organization called "Judicial Watch", you probably should be, for your own safety, rather like one should be aware of an approaching hurricane, or an impending alt right white supremacist rally at a location near you. Being forewarned is a great survival expedient, which is one reason why we have eyes, ears, a nose, and precognition. Watching the judiciary, being aware of its behavior, is among the noblest of causes. Like Jefferson said: "If the people become inattentive to the affairs of government, the legislators and magistrates shall divide society into two classes: wolves, and sheep". Arguably, this has long since happened, and its far too late to change it. There can be little dispute that the American people long ago became inattentive to the affairs of government, or that American society is divided into two classes, the rich and the poor, the middle class having vanished before our very eyes. The question arises: What other purpose can there be for citizen vigilance other than to guard against encroaching government tyranny, or abuse of power? None, one might think. That's where Judicial Watch goes off track; early and often. Their purpose in watching the judiciary has nothing to do with Jeffersonian vigilance, and everything to do with base party politics, and political ideology, motives which to Jefferson and all the other founders would surely seem repugnant, if not traitorous. Jefferson, like all the founders, did not like political parties organized around ideology, considered them a threat to democracy, and would think that any organized group seeking to mold the nation's judicial system based upon ideology to be a great threat to justice itself. Judicial watch wants to stock the judiciary, nationwide, with conservative magistrates, and wants to ensure that decisions rendered from the Supreme Court down reflect conservative values. That is the sole reason for the organization's existence. To them, it is a noble cause, above reproach, for which they incessantly seek monetary contributions from anyone with a checkbook. That, and dredging up the long defunct Hillary Clinton email controversy, which they helped create, in order to put her in jail. No, our conservative colleagues have not given up the ghost on Hillary, even though she has long since faded from the electoral office political scene, and receded into the background, irrelevant to the future. The fools would be humorous, were they not in such deadly earnest, to borrow a quote. Anything to distract attention from Donald Trump, his abuses of power, and the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of the conservative political movement in general. Get conservatives on the bench, and destroy Hillary, that's it, that's their raison d etre. Nothing could be more debauched. No judge should ever be placed on the bench of any court based on his or her ideology, politically. the qualifications should be education, intelligence, integrity, experience, and the demonstrated ability to make wise decisions and render justice fairly, and dispassionately. Liberalism and conservatism should have absolutely nothing to do with it, but in our corrupt culture, political ideology has everything to do with it, among conservatives, even to the point of refusing to perform the constitution function of giving advice and consent for Supreme Court nominees; merely because he isn't sufficiently conservative, as in the case of Merrick Garland. Even more heinous is that the Judicial Watch group, staffed ostensibly by people of erudition, fail to see this, or pretend that they don't see it, or do see it, and simply don't care.

Walking Away From Racists, Whenever Possible

MY MOTIVE was to engage in a moment of pleasant conversation, over a cup of coffee. So, thinking no harm could possibly come of it, I broached the seemingly most innocuous topic imaginable. I asked whether the gentleman to whom I was speaking were a sports fan, and if so, whether he rooted for the athletes of our local university, like everyone around here. Seemed harmless enough, sure to engender a few smiles and male bonding. "Oh hell" he responded, "I don't give a damn. Its just their niggers against our niggers anyway." so much for the harmless chat. Life is full of minefields. I guzzled my coffee, enjoined the gentleman to "have a nice day", and got the hell out of dodge, aka our local senior center. might as well go look for conversation online, maybe read Trump's most recent tweet, or log on to a white supremacist site, or maybe try the alt right site. Racists, most the most part, have gone into hiding in modern politically correct America. When I was a child, fifty some years ago, my racist family members were openly proud of their folly, as was most of conservative white America. but over the decades, they've been driven underground, forced into public denial, while, and this is the crux of the matter, remaining unchanged in their hateful attitude. I have an elderly uncle who lived for years in Minnesota, and when he visited us in the lower Midwest, ridiculed us for "talking like a bunch of niggers", referring to what he thought were our suthin' accents. Now, he's reigned it in, and has become a closet racist, like the rest of them, except for the alt right and fringe lunatic groups, and hides his views around his extended family, knowing racism has never flown with us - but, his own children testify that, yeah, he used the "N" word early and often regarding Obama. The prevailing notion now among the right wing is that we now liv in a "post racism' America, in which racism would never ever rear its ugly head were it not for trouble making liberals who manufacture racism out of the blue by merely making mention of it. a clever ploy for our right wing post racist racists, among whose ranks racism has always found its home, and still does, albeit in disguised guise. the proof in the pudding is that right wing America elected a racist president. yes, racist. Donald J. Trump spent several years telling anyone would listen, and it was the conservative branch of the body politic that listened, that Barack Hussein Obama was in fact not an American citizen, that he had in fact been born in Kenya. There is no other motivation for this than hatred, and racism. Bill or Hillary Clinton would never have been accused of having been born in Ireland. Nobody would have cared, including those who hate them, and tried every lie, trick and tactic known to humankind to destroy them through false attacks, and are still doing it, even after twenty five years of failure. the key ingredient in the claim of Obama's Kenyan birth is Kenya. The motivation is racism. My fellow citizens, our president is a racist, and oh that it were only possible to walk away from the idiot as easily as I walked away from the racist at my local senior center.

Democrats, Bringing Hope To America's Working Poor, If They Choose To

THE GREAT STATES of new Jersey and Virginia, having resoundingly elected democratic governors, have given democrats something upon which they might hang their fedoras. Fedoras, because Trump supporters have for the moment succeeded in coopting the traditional emblem of the working class, which used to support democrats, the great American ball cap, tragically tainting the iconic head gear with the sin of corporate party politics, elite governance, all in the name of something called "conservative populism", whatever that could possibly be. It is the democrats who more represent the interests of the working poor, by favoring policies of taxing the wealthy and raising minimum wage and protecting labor unions against destruction by corporations, and who therefore should properly don ball caps, and leave the suits, ties, and fedoras to the republicans, who dig ever deeper into the pockets of the wealthy. Demographics favor democrats. The fading baby boomer generation trends conservative, the up and coming millennials lean heavily to the left. Every few seconds a republicans ascends to heaven, or goes in the opposite direction, and every few seconds a millennial member comes of voting age. Furthermore, the democratic party is a melting pot of minorities, while the G.O.P. is lily white, and, as right wingers are so apt to switch into panic mode and point out; colored folks are increasing in number, pure white America is steadily sinking into minority-hood. America's future, according to sheer numbers, waxes democratic progressive. The tragic truth is that in America today, there is no representation for the working class. Labor unions represent only about seven percent of the workers, and the socialist and workers parties are but a pathetic drop in the great political ocean of American politics. The United States is the only industrialized country on earth which has no organized, major political party truly representing the interests of the working class, no socialist party, although both democrats and republicans, laughably, claim to fill this role. The mere fact that the poor greatly outnumber the wealthy in America, and that the republicans hold elective offices nationwide, is proof positive that there is no advocacy for the working or the poor in the United States. But there is a glimmer of hope. Bernie sanders gave Hillary Clinton a run for her money, but in the end her money, and the fact that she used it to purchase the controlling apparatus of the democratic party to exclude Sanders from any chance of seriously contending, offer more proof that socialism in America, the only true political philosophy of the working class, is nearly nonexistent in America. We have a conservative party in America, the democrats, and an ultra conservative party, the republicans, both of which serve the interests of the corporate wealthy elite. The people in general are largely without representation. In the past thirty years, both parties have moved markedly to the right. Things look good for the democrats in 2018 and 2020, as witnessed by results in New Jersey and Virginia. But if the democrats don't start moving in the direction of the Bernie Sanders wing, and away from the Clinton Obama wing, it will, as usual, make little or no difference which party prevails.

Arguing With Wyatt Earp and My Grandfather

WITH TYPICAL PENETRATING INSIGHT, skin deep, President Trump proclaimed recently that what we have here is a mental health problem, not a gun problem. He should know. Guns, it seems, have nothing to do with killing people. guns are merely convenient means, among many others. People kill people. Blame people and their mental health issues, blame anything, but not guns. hang on to that conservative NRA base of support. However, if you are a human being, mind, body, and spirit, and have lived longer than a few days, you are going to experience, sooner or later, illness, both physical and mental. Ask any expert. With modern medicine and normal human healing capabilities, we can usually heal, and delay death for decades. To say that our American mass Murder orgy (AMMO) is the product of mental illness is essentially saying that we are all capable of participating in it, responsible for it, and that at any given time anyone is capable of practically anything, which we already knew, or should have known. So, we need to turn to environmental factors, outside the human mind, for possible answers. In the United States of Ammo-rica, personal disputes are a dime a dozen. We Americans can't swing a dead cat, as they crudely say, without knocking down somebody we either hate, have divorced, or have already slandered or beaten up. In America, inter personal conflict is rife, interpersonal conflict is the norm, it is our way of life, it begins in grade school, and extends to the grave. The United States of Animosity is an angry, competitive land, where gangsters gather together. Enter the four million member NRA, with their good guys need guns mentality, wanting us all to be armed and ready to aim and fire. Our conceal and carry culture, with over three hundred million guns, is the law of the land. We already had the motive,now we have the means, far more convenient than rolling pins, knives, and baseball bats. Retribution as a safe distance. Fifty four percent of our mass murders are perpetrated by people who have recently perpetrated an act of domestic violence. Merely slapping one's spouse around a little bit leaves one unsatisfied, still angry, needing to vent more. We are back to square one, with motive and means. Conservatives say gins don't kill people, liberals say that people with guns kill people, people sing guns, people and their weapons working in tandem, as a team. We may never know which paradigm to call correct. My grandfather once said that if you put a gun in a man's hand, the first thing he wants to do is use it. Seems sensible. Wyatt Earp, when he was the law in Dodge City, did not allow guns to be carried in town. You could pick them up on the way out. domestic violence is a problem everywhere, but turns into a gun nightmare far more often in a country where guns are ubiquitous. There is far more gun violence in the U.S. than in England and Australia, where guns are scarce, but the same rate of domestic violence. maybe they know something we don't', or something we are unwilling to accept. For that mater, maybe my grandfather and Wyatt Earp had a point too.

Reading The Bible, Knowing Jesus

THE BIBLE is the most important book in history, the most misunderstood, and although it contains a fascinating insight into the nature of ancient culture and ant the ancient mind set, seldom does anyone read it in its entirety. It has multiple personalities, having been written having been written over a period of centuries by at least forty different authors, all with differing perspectives, most of them unknown, their identities lost in the mists of time, whose various styles reveal them to have been no more or less divinely inspired than any serious, talented author. Anyone who believes that the Bible is the Word of God must come to terms with a god who approves of slavery, gives instructions of the proper treatment of masters by their slaves, insists that disobedient children be put to death, and gratuitously slaughters thousands of innocent people for trivial transgressions unrelated to the victim's of god's wrath. The biblical god reveals itself to be a petty, jealous, vicious tyrant with multiple personalities, a penchant for psychotic behavior, full of unrelenting anger and intolerance, whose arbitrary and erratic behavior fits the profile of a psychotic serial mass murderer. The bible contains more violence than any other book ever published. Mark Twain, an avowed atheist, described the Bible as containing some noble poetry, some clever fables, a great abundance of obscenity, and no less than one thousand blatant lies. This collection of sixty six short books contains so many internal contradictions and errors that many decades ago every credible theological seminary in the world stopped teaching divinity students that the holy scripture is inerrant, and started dealing with the obvious and numerous imperfections honestly, by calling attention to them and including the scrutiny of biblical fallacies in serious, standard courses of study. As a result, many a born again theological student at places like Harvard and Princeton enter seminary as true believers, and leave as agnostics and atheists. Jesus himself is a figure shrouded in mystery, as each of the four gospels seems to be describing a different person, a different life. No one will ever know who wrote Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John, only that their authors were well educated and fluent in ancient Greek, unlike the undoubtedly illiterate disciples themselves, after whom the gospels were named. For certain is that none of the authors ever came close to meeting Jesus, they got their information third or fourth hand, and their books were written several decades after Joshua ben Joseph, aka Jesus died. it took Jesus well over three hundred years to become God, and he was elected to the position by the church Council of Nicea in 325 A.D.. The church leaders also decided which among the dozens of accounts of the life of Christ would be included in the canon, and only the familiar four made the cut. According to these four, Jesus was a working class apocalyptic preacher, among many at the time, endlessly warning his listeners that the world as they knew it would end within their own lifetime, and replaced by God's kingdom, removing all evil from an evil world and replacing it with glorious happy righteousness, and bringing judgment to all. He was dead wrong, it turned out. to his devoted friends he was a wise teacher, and maybe the future king of Israel. They called him "lord" and "master", commonly used terms of respect. To his loving followers he was fully human, and he never claimed otherwise, except in the book of John. Only in John is Jesus loquacious. In the others, he is relatively taciturn. John was the last of the four to have been written, it is universally agreed. Others versions are equally interesting: Peter, Mary, Thomas, Barnabas, and many others, all of which tell a different story. As time passes after His death, the more divinity he acquired. Every wise and beautiful piece of wisdom attributed to Jesus can be found in earlier writings, especially Confucius. A possible reason why he was believed to have risen from the dead by some of his disciples is their love, and simple unwillingness to let him go. The beautiful thing about Jesus is that there is no need to let him go, every reason to embrace him, and to hold him and love him forever.

Is Trump Bending The Rules A Bit?

WJEN DONALD TRUMP BECAMD PRESIDENT, he labored under the misapprehension that the president is responsible for directing and controlling the Department of Justice. Trump, mistaken about something fundamental. how surprising. Someone whispered in his ear, without getting sexually molested, and, to America's good fortune, the new p resident became apprised of the proper, traditional, and very important independence of the Attorney General. The Justice Department must absolutely be independent of executive control, for the sake of justice, without the potential of executive influence. Thank the goddess of justice that the president was disabused of his unbelievable ignorance on the matter. But it might not have done much good, or any good, after all. Donald Trump is no stranger to back room bargaining in matters of business; with Russians, or whomever. A T & T and time Warner, two huge media companies, want to merge, or as Trump might say, "get married", with A T & T taking over the joint venture. Normally this would be no problem,, and would gain the swift approval of the D o J, since the two behemoths operate in separate areas of the media, and thus do not complete, meaning that there merger would not hinder the competitive free market, or violate federal anti-trust law. for forty years such mergers have gone through smoothly, particularly under republicans administration, and in fact nearly all other corporate mergers have sailed smoothly through with easy federal approval, making some observers wonder whatever happened to the Sherman and Clayton Antitrust Acts. Suddenly, things have changed, mysteriously. Trump's Justice Department refuses to allow this marriage unless A T & T agrees to divest itself of the CNN network, which it flatly refuses to do, and threatens legal action. Red flags rise. We small a rat, from the direction of Trump Tower. Trump hates CNN, and accuses them of fabricating "fake news", fake news being defined as any comment of a factual nature which reflects negatively on the president, of which there are many possible. What CNN actually does is tell the truth about Trump, which the multi billionaire can't abide. Tell the truth about Donald Trump, you risk a savage twitter attack, or worse; people have been known to vanish. Does anyone even remotely suspect that the president may have text a terse text over to justice, something to the effect that "we must stop these media people from hurting America". something maudlin, simpering, yet crude. Who knows. perish the thought that someone of Trump's known integrity, honesty and moral rectitude should even consider illicitly intervening in the due process of justice to kick the corporate underpinnings out from under one of his many sworn enemies. But since the president seems to relish making then destroying enemies, who can say?

Trump, Blocking People On Twitter, And Getting Sued

IN A PERHAPS INEVITABLE DEVELOPMENT, a college professor has filed a lawsuit against President Trump, because Trump blocked the professor on twitter, which inspired the academician to an act of clever litigation genius worthy of a scholar, to claim that the president is violating the constitution by limiting free speech and blocking access to what should be unrestricted access to presidential utterances, which are public property, relevant and important to all Americans, who have the right to hear what their president says. or something like that. On the face of it, it sounds pretty well reasoned, and probably is. We'll find out, through due legal process. I have never tweeted, nor shall I. I aint special, but I have standards, standards which prevent my knowingly entering a communications cesspool. I understand that anybody can join Twitter, type in their 140 character comments, which I recently heard was being increased to 280. Whatever happened to that? It might be too many letters for Americans to comprehend (just kidding).You tweet, people read, and if they choose, they respond. Right? Popular or famous people can accumulate millions of people who read their profundities, called "followers". Tweets can be "retweeted", whatever that is. Am I close? So trump has something like 35 million followers, quite naturally, any one of whom can respond. Everyday I am told on the national news what Trump tweets, and I think any intelligent person would be ashamed to say what he says, but that's another matter. Trump, and people like him, guarantee me that I will never join Twitter. The man is pathological, he frightens and repulses me, and he makes me tremble for my country, to borrow a phrase from Jefferson. The ability of every member of Twitter to block any other member from reading and responding is vital, of course. I remember chatrooms, and I know how it goes online. But Trump, so claims the professor's lawsuit, is public domain, and should be available to us all. (be careful what you wish for, professor). One can scarcely imagine how many people Trump blocks, through sheer perceived necessity. Trump's tweets should probably automatically be accompanied by warnings from the Food and Drug Administration concerning content. And warnings from the FBI about the inadvisability if inappropriate responses. In the meantime, we'll wait and see how the lawsuit turns out. It should provide us with a humorous story to tell our grandchildren, if nothing else.

Roy Moore, Profiting Politically Among His Followers, For His Indiscretions

ALABAMA SENATORIAL CANDIDATE ROY MOORE needn't worry about losing voter support, any more than Donald Trump. The national republican party has indeed cut off his campaign funds, but not his enthusiastic base. His democratic opponent, Doug Stone, arranged to have several women fabricate accusations of sexual harassment against this paragon of conservative Christian virtue, and that's that. Case closed. So say his ardent spokespeople. Why would a woman bring forth accusations of sexual misconduct forty years after the fact, were the allegations not "trumped" up (pun intended)? Why now, seemingly timed perfectly to destroy an honorable man's political campaign? The answer should be, and is, obvious. Women who have been molested by powerful men are afraid to come forth, for rear of retaliation. Only when a throng of other women have already come forth is it safe, they correctly think. Also, what better time to do so, than when a man who has sinned greatly and not yet paid for it, seeks to achieve political power for the possible opportunity of sinning yet again, unimpeded? We must ask ourselves, which is more likely: that women fabricate stories years after the fact, stories which humiliate them by bringing negative attention to themselves, or that powerful me seek to take advantage of their position in society by taking advantage of women with less power? Moore's right wing supporters are not to be believed. They are known prevaricators. They voted for Trump, knowing full well of Trump's self described misconduct, yet, they pretended not to hear it. The supporters of Trump and Moore have long since forfeited their credibility, and their integrity. Amid the turmoil of an avalanche of sexual harassment accusation made against male elites, we now know, once and for all, why women tend to attend public restrooms in groups; there is safety in numbers. Meanwhile, in the upcoming special election, the democrats will have to defeat the sanctimonious and libidinous former judge Moore at the ballot box, straight up. His political base will never abandon him. that's not in the right wing DNA, not when the alternative is the election of a non extreme right wing democrat, with good morals. When he was chief Justice of the Alabama supreme court Moore defied a federal order to remove the ten commandments from his judicial domain, an act of lawlessness that only enervated his selectively moral supporters. The defiant act cost him his job, but won the unanimous approval of the far Christian right. Revelations of sexual misconduct can only be expected to enhance his standing among Christian conservatives, to whom morality is relative to political expediency, not absolute, like the ten commandments, which neither they nor Moore have perhaps ever studied in depth. All this is predictable, because the election of Donald trump, facilitated by the same segment of American society, was facilitated by similar circumstances. It must be exciting and fun to be a conservative Christian republican, free of the burdens of genuine moral rectitude, unencumbered by any discernable connection to objective reality.

Telling Unflattering Truth, With Facts, And Making America Great, Finally

IF YOU HAVE A DOCTORATE in linguistics and philosophy, and you spend sixty two years and counting as a professor at M.I.T., and you revolutionize the science of linguistics like Einstein did physics, and you engage in political activism and do research and writing in American history, politics, and current events, and you accuse the United States of murdering and torturing millions of innocent people, and accuse every American president since World War Two of being a war criminal, you had better be able to support your claims, as well as your work, with a considerable amount of verifiable facts, or you will promptly lose your job at M.I.T.., which is currently rated the best university in the United States, with good reason. Institutions like M.I.T. do not like having their reputations besmirched by bad scholarship, or unfounded claims made by radical academicians. Such institutions do not tolerate academic incompetence, dishonesty, nor unsubstantiated accusations by its lecturers. That is why Noam Chomsky, who has been at M.I.T. doing all the above since I was born sixty two yeas ago, is still there, stronger than ever, regarded as the supreme American intellectual everywhere in the world except America, where he is largely ignored by mainstream society, due to his unsettling radicalism. conservative mainstream American do not like being questioned, much less exposed. The only problem with Chomsky is deciding which of his dozens of extraordinary books to read first. It really doesn't matter, as long as you read them all. Permit me to suggest "Manufacturing Consent", "Failed States", "hegemony of survival", or his latest, published in 2016, "Who Rules The World?", a true barn burning eye opener coup de grace. From there, you're on your own. Another problem with Chomsky is that he tells the truth, and backs it up with facts, and the truth he tells about the U.S.A. is far from flattering. We Americans much prefer being flattered. In this world, including the U.S. past and present, the truth is, regrettably, often neither appealing nor flattering. Chomsky redefines patriotism. He replaces blind, pandering loyalty and showy ostentatious display with a sincere attempt to improve one's country through sustained, thoughtful, cogent, courageous analysis, coupled with a willingness to accept what such analysis reveals, including unpleasant national reality, past and present. This improved brand of patriotism leads hopefully to the bringing to fruition our espoused lofty values and virtues, and the desired result of fulfilling finally our true potential for greatness, by making America great, not again, but for the first time ever, such as she has never yet been before.

Teaching Congress To Behave Properly

YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TROUBLE believing this, because its hard to believe. You'll think its funny, in a sardonic sort of way, because it is. And it might make you roll your eyes, or cry, because it should. it can be seen as an indication of just how far American society has sunk, hoe desperately we seek to heal ourselves, and how pathetic our efforts are. Its this" there is a bill being introduced into congress, sponsored by the lady Senator from Minnesota, which would require mandatory sexual harassment training for all members of congress. Not voluntary, not optional, mandatory. Recent revelations of serial sexual harassment among the rich, famous, and powerful are currently all the rage, as anyone who has not spent the last few weeks in Earth orbit doubtless know. Men powerful in corporate, entertainment, and political America, unable or unwilling to accept their limitations and curb their barbarous impulses. We the people seem to love knowing about it, the media seem to think they can profit by telling us all about it, and so we hear about it, with depressingly increasing frequency. The "me too" movement, mostly on social media (where else?), is bringing victims out of the woodwork,, almost like hopefuls in line at the lottery ticket window, or the confessional booth. are we coming out to complain, confess, or to demand something? Why the wait? Fear of retaliation, likely. Our national cathartic moment of therapy! It might help, in the long run. Finally, congress itself, the seat of power, the climax. at least, we hope its nearly run its course. Bear in mind that all this started with the president himself, before he was even elected, and that he was a perpetrator, not a victim, and that he was proud of it, not ashamed. What will sexual harassment "training" for members of congress accomplish or entail? will it be for men only? Gentlemen, we are met here to remind ourselves of the proper way to treat a woman any woman, all women,, for those of us who were either raised wrong, or have forgotten. First, always bow from the waist, as a show of deference. Address all females as "ma'am". Madam congressperson will also suffice. Never touch anyone, never ofer your hand, never kiss hand or cheek. We are not French. Three feet of separation, minimum. No compliments on appearance or attire...Will it work? should a basic sex education class precede the harassment avoidance training? Maybe a brief lesson in common courtesy, like children get at boarding school or in dance class. We have sunk far, and the hopeful part is; surely we can sink no further.