Trump, Suing CNN For Lying

WHEN DONALD TRUMP first trotted out the big lie, on election in the heat of battle before the votes had been counted or it was even possible to know if the election had been stolen, all intellgent, honorable peopleknew it was indeed a lie. That includes, probably, most of the peolpe who chose to believe it, and continue to believe it, for emotional and political reasons. CNN started callign the big lie "the big lie" early and often, as did all honest people. They did it so often for so long that Trump, crazily but entertainingly filed a lawsuit against the network for slander and defamation of character, asking nearly half a billion dollars in punitve damages, to help heal Donald's frandile, damaged ego. Trump's entertainment values increases seemingly on a daily basis, as his candidacy for president escalates, looks stronger by the day, and the indictments against him continue to pile up in number and severity. At this point its hard t imange nayboyd other than Trump getting the Republican presidential nomination, and its hard to imagine his not being convicted on at least one federal felony charge, if not many more, so strong is the evidence the prosecutors have backing them up. Curiosier and curiosier, his continuing strong support. But support for Trump isn't growing, its actually shrinking, although remaining fairly rock solid among his most devout disciples. Trump's fervant followers, as always, are twisting themselves into pretzels using twisted logic justfiying and denying his behavior, pretending that all is well, that they and their cult icon can overcome the witch hunts against him and return him to the presidency, where he could pardon himself and make America great, again. But all this is nothing but a pipe dream, smoke and mirrors, and will ultimately collapse like a house of cards. It has already begun to do so. The other Republican presidential candidates are beginning to come out of their shells in terms of criticizing and taking on Trump. In this, they too are in a quandry: to attack Trump is to risk the enmity of his followers; to not attack him will simmply help hand the nomination to him. Their attacks will have an impct, and that will inevitably whittle Trump's numbers,at least slightly, and significantly among independents. The G.O.P. is in a bind - stuck in a rut, so to speak, with Trump, who is rapidly going down, criminally. Indisputably, the indictmenst against him and the proigious evidence backing them up are a huge problem for the Trump movement, and it won't get any better. The American peopple, by and large, are being and will be forced to recognize Trump's criminailty, including the big lie and the whole stolen election scam.

Dealing, PART II: Going Solar, Saving Ourselves

SOLAR ENERGY is free and unimited, which is exactly what we need. Humanity is steadily increasing its use of solar enrgy, but must increase it much faster, as fast as humanly possible. Imagine a perfetly shaped piece of aluminum foil in orbit, maybe a mile in diameter, collecting sunlight constantly and turning it into electricity for our use. It might not take too many of these to supply all the energy needs for the entire planet, including desalinating and redistributing billions of tons of sea water turned into fresh water, and removing billions of tons of carbon from the ateosphere, our two greatest needs. What is needed is the political will, which means enormous public pressure, especially in the United States, but everywhere else as well. There is no reason why people like Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos, among others, can't get involved and lead the way. Cooperation between the U.S. governments, federal, state, and local, the business community, large and small, and us the American people, plus the same groups, governmental, business, and public, from every other country in the world, and all three can be accomplished. Solar energy replacing fossil fuels, desalination, and sequestration of atmospheric carbon. The technologies for all three are availaible, and the industrial processes needed to build the infrastructure need not be more harmful, will not be more harmful than helpful to the environment. It could all begin with an inspired speech by some powerful, dynamic leader, say, Joe Biden. The proclamation of "Project Sunbeam", the restoration of planetary health. Hell, who cares who gets the ball rolling? Donald Trump or Greta Thunberg would be fine. Good leadership and organization are essential, or course. Where are General Leslie Groves and Robert J. Oppenheimer when you need them? And, unlike, say, The "Manhatten Project", "Project Sunbeam" doesn't have to be top secret, because the purpose isn't to produce a miracle weapon to win a war, but rather, to save the planet's biosphere, its eosytem, and all life on Earth, which icludes us all, on the same team. We are in a war against ourselves, a war between our bad past behavior and our good future behavior, between our worst and our best selves, and we're all on the same side, for once. Spread the word. Do something. What're we waiting for? '

Draining Our Swamp

THE CORRUPTION is so ubiquitous that it runs rampant right in front of our faces am we accept it placidly. The members of the Supremd ourt should be selected based upon thir demonstrated cosistency in rendering equal jusice under law, independent of prsonal ideological considerations.Good justices should be so moderate, or so apolitical that nobody can tell whtehr they are liberal or conservative, and nobody cares. Placing people on the court because and only because they are far right wing politically, for the purpose of creating a conservative majority, in order to remake American society according to the conservative political and economic agenda is not justice. Its corruption, disguised as virtue by the far right. The same would be rue if the liberals wre involved in this sort of corruption, which, I can assure you, they would love to be. Theyhave been before; surely their time will come again. As a society, we the American people must insist on creating real justice in this country by elevating to the bench people who are dispassionate, reasonable, unbiased politically. It wouldn't hurt to do the same thing electing political leaders; reject the extremist ideologues, and elect intelligent, educated, sane, reasonable people to political leadership. We have seen the swamp, and it is us. Lifetime appointments to the bench don't seem to eliminate political corruption; on the contrary, it seems to exacerbate and institutionalize it. The incestuous plutocratic oligarchy, in which billionaire corporations purshase the politicians and enrich them in exchange for policies and legislation which benefits the billionaire corporations and harms everyone else must be destroyed. Voting rigts must be expanded, voting mut be made easier, not harder. Money in politics must be regulated for the benefit os society Just as Chief Justice Louis Brandeis said ong ago: You can have a sociey of concentrated wealth, very wealthy and very poor people, or you can have democracy, but you cannot have both.

Dealing, PART I

THERE ARE TWO THINGS which we the human species must do immediately, if not sooner. One, desalinate sea water, and transport it to regions which need fresh water. The second thing is we need to remove carbon from the atmosphere. Both of these things can be done, both of them must be done. Spread the word. By converting sea water into fresh water, we can neutralize sea level rise, and produce enough frest water for everyone on the planet, totally eliminate water shortages, water the entire planet however we want to, presumably in such a way as to keep verdant regions verdant, nourish semi arid regions to make them more productive and life sustaining as it can be made, and, best of all, reclaim millions of square miles of desert land worldwide, change it to whatever we want, as lush and green as we want, while most likely choosing to leave part of the world's surface in its current desert state, as nature seemingly intends. Reoving carbon, a lot of carbon, directly from the atmosphere, to reverse and eliminate global warming and climate change, is,like desalination well within our near future if not current tehnology. We can already do both, but not efficiently enough; the amount of energy it takes is far more expensive than the value of the amount of claen water produced or carbon removed (sequestered). But the difference between wht we can do and what we need to do is not great enough to stop us, and is getting less every day as better, more energy efficient processes are being developed by rsearchers all over the world. The answer is solar energy. Every hour of every day enough sunlight hits the Earth to run the entire planet, to provide us enough energy to do everything we want, and then some. An unlimited source of free energy, exactly what we need to survive, by using it to clean up the planet, which we can do. All we need to do is exploit it as we are already doing, and can and will do much more. We need anotehr "Manhatten Project", to desalinate sea water and distribute fresh water, and to remove atmospheric carbon, both Maybe two distinct programsn, maybe just one, coodinatd. Whar we need is some dynamic American president, like Roosevelt and Truman, or Joe Biden. to lead the way.

Flushing Out the High Court

BECAUSE of the thoroughly bizarre consttution of the current high court, books by the bushel full are beginning to appear on it, books which are for the most part very well written, incisive, and contribute to scholarship on the topic. Concerning the Current Court, it is especially worthy of scrutiny and analysis precisely because it is going to inexorbly have a fundamentallly prodound impact on the fture of this country, in fact already has, and many if not most of these new books are highly critical of it and the process by which it came into being."Supermajority: How the Supreme Court Divided America: by Michael Waldman, As the title indicates, Waldman's work is no exception. The very first sentence, on the cover, preface to the preface, the author proclaims: "In its first year with a conservative 6-3 supermajority the United States Supreme Court handed down decisions which overturned decades of settled law and radically altered American life. There is more to come." Republicn leadership, including Trump et al, with the enthusiastic aroval of conservative Christian America, atched and successfullly implemente a pot to capture control of not only the SCotus, but the court system in general as much as possilbe, to use in imposing, or reimposing a far right wing agenda of our poor, beseiged Country.Even more terrifyingly, they hav only but begun.There is anear unlimited amount of future damage they can and will do to America. Already the far right SCOTUS has endoresed the reduction of voting rights, rights for LGBTQ people, religius freedom from christianity, and women's reproductive feedom and choice. How mu longer until this gang of exremists approves of book banning and teaching false, hagiographic American history, culture, and politics in public schools? Under this court government is losing the oportunity to combat racism by legislation; soon we will begin to see signs of a newly resegregated America. We are already seeing them, as paritipation of African-Americans in universities and white colla professions begins to decline. America's far right wing, a powerful force, manifested largely in the MAGA ovement, essentilly wanst to return America to the wy it sws in the ninieteen fifties, and the techniues to do so are shockingly remindful of those employed by Hitler and the Nazis in Germany in teh nineteen the thirties. Right wing populism with enemies galore, foreign and domestic, inluding progressives, the media, academia, science, and minorties. They wnt to "Make America great again", the way America used to be, Hitler wanted to "make Germany great again". The current Supreme Court is the best weapon they have, and they are using it very effectively.

Explaining Russia

WAR AND PUNISHMENT, a title which sounds hauntingly like "War and Peace" and "Crime and Punishment", is the title of a new book by Russian writer Mikhail Zygar, who tries to explain the Ukrainian war from the Russian point of view, and succeeds admirably. A definite thumbs up, a must read for the well informed. The work is so honest and insightful that Zygar left Russia to write it and probably won't go back. Putin will probably put a price on his head, no matter where he is. Not only is it devastatingly, negatively critical of Putin, his sycohants, associates, and political and military leaders, but is equally critical of Russian culture and the Russian people in general, which surprised me. My take has long been, and I have often told people this, that the nightmarish War in Ukraine is entirely to work and fault of one man, Putin himself, against whom the rest of the Russian government, civilian and military, and against whom the Russian people are powerless to act. Indeed this is Putin's war, the tragic product of his twisted far right wing views about recent Russian history, current situation, and necessary fate. Putin is another garden variety fascist, a regular Hitler and Trump rolled into one; our great nation was once great, but has been betrayed, sold down the river by those "accursed" (Hitler's term) enemies from within and from foreign enemy countries. Only I, Vladimir Putin, can make Russia great gaain, by restoring it to its former bloated empirial glory. Just like hitler, Trump, and all other far right athoritarian demagogue tyrannical bullies, past and present, Putin comes complete with all the phony historical narratives, the lies and false conspiracy theories and fabricated enemies. But, Zygar asserts, Putin wasn't and isn't alone. His warped view was and still is shared by many powerful people, and Russia's uber class of super wealthy oligarchs bought into Putin's crap, hook, line, sinker, lock, stock, and barrel. And this all draws from Russia's history, literature, and culture, which is full of heroic Russian stirving and perseverence against terrible odds, implacable foes and relentless invaders. Actually, thee is more than a hint of truth to this; Russia's history is indeed ful of all of the above,which any demagogue would easily distort and embellish andexploit for political gain, which people like Putin and Hitler do masterfully. Russian history and culture encourage Putin, and the Russian people in their current incarnation enable him by their timid assivity, content to swill the Koolaid and remains indoor. Yet, says the author, there is hope, becaues the profound, disastrous failure of Putin's War will and already has begun to inspire the necessary reationary within the military and throughout Mother Russia as to engender n ivevitable uprising against Putin. He will be in power no more than another year, says the author.

Buying Barbie

I REMEMBER BARBIE from early in life, which makes sense, since she came out in 1959, and I came out in 1955. I was born to be the perfect age to date Babie. I can't remember whether my big sis, two and a half years my senior, had Barbie; I didn't keep track of my sister's toys - I had enough trouble keeping track of my own. I tend to think that either she had barbie,or something pretty darn close, another version of a female doll, etc. I'm still trying to figure out, as I was then, exactly what people did with dolls, but, that's another matter... I can vaguely recall not having much of a reaction to or opinion about Barbie as a kid, ony that I saw her advertised on television a lot, and, if memory serves, it wasn't all that long thereafter, maybe the late sixties, that Ken entered the magic kingdom. It seems to me, if I recall, that Barbie easn't alone long..I didn't really care about them one way or anther. I recall easily understanding that Barbie was good looking, with a pretty face, hair, and nice figure, a good looking blonde. Blondes were therefore generally good looking. I had a big crush on Nancy Sinatra when I was eleven. Both Barbie and Nancy blended in well with my nascent heterosexuality which I can still vaguely recall by the time I was in first grade. By third grade, for damend sure, I liked girls, majorly. A regular eight year old Cassanova. Like all big corporations and businesses, Mattel, in producing and distributing Barbie, had one thing and one thing alone in mind: of course, profit. The best way was of course to make something that litle girls would want badly, and that the parents would either like or not object to, and let nature take its course, as it were. Mommy mmmy gimme, etc. The American way! It worked like a charm, obviously, and still does. Better than ever so it seems.The whole coutry, groveling at the feet of Barbie, after all these years. Barbie had to be beautuiful, and sweet, inviting, alluring, so everyone would love her. It was a given that litle girls, at least early in their tenure with Barbie, would want to grow up to be like her, or to be like her even before growing up. Then came all the fuss about gender role stereotyping, the inulcationg of false, superficial values, blah bah. When momma walked out of Sears or wherever with Barbie in hand, and perhaps with daughter by her side, nobody was thinking about these abstruse, head scratching, irrelevant matters. Taday we seem to be doing a bit of all of the above: people are loving Barbie, people are hating on barbie and proteting all the bad messages and stereotypes, and Matell and other big companies are raking in the dough. A cultural historian pointed out that from the beginning, Barbie was outfittd with a wardrobe designed for profesional employment and independence, and that she wasn't married; a self made strong successful female role model. So what's all the fuss been about? What's not to like about Barbie?

Knowing People

EVERY INTERACTION we have with other people impacts our opinion of humanit as a whole. Ridiculous as this sometimes seems it is uderstandable, there are reasons for it, and we can learn from them. Wed've probably all had the experience of a bad interaction with someobdy, an unkind, rude exchange with a stranger, a brief convrsation which doesn't go well. When its over, we might thinki something like: godI hate people. People are so rude, arrogant, angry, fearful. You talk to one person, and make sweeping remark about the oerall nature of huminity, of human nature.On the surface this behavior seems utterly irrational, but really makes sense.Other than our interactions with others, the sum total of all our dealins with all other people is what constitutes our general attidude about people. How else could we possibly do it?How could we learn enough people to form opinions without experience? We might benefit from keeping in mind the fact that in the long run our point of view,our attitudes about people is going to beat least somwwhat balanced, because it has to be. We will not find the human race either entirely good or entirely bad.Tere;s n need to plan in advance what the exact balance will be; that will take care of itself. It i to be hoped that for most of us, the human race will end p seeming not all that bad, and in fact, pretty good It is to be hoped that at the end of the day, so to speak, we fundamentally like people, despite a rather long list of folks we do not like, or do not like very well. Perspnally, i recent times, meaning recent years, y peronal tendeny is to have a negative attitude towards my fellow man, based largely on world events and what I observe in my life, my observations of and interactions with the people in my daily envrionmet. So, I'm struggling to keep it positive. Ithink its imiportant to do that, for the sake of happiness and sanity, if nothing else. You want an honest, reasonable attitude which tends towards the positive, the healthy. Oooooone of my closest hildooed, lifelong friends came to visit me, someone I had not seen in almmost tirty years. We he looked great,thirty years older. He has some health issues, as most people our age, but has led a good, productive adult life with family, career, etc,.andis now retired,and happy For about four hours we talkedconstantly,loud and fst, with a l ot of laughing, as we tried to begin the process of "cathing up". After four hours of nonstop talking, reminiscing and o forth, my throat wasvery sore, my voice raspy, and I as worn out, felt as if a thin layer of sweat and body oils had coated my skin. And we barey got started. Barely began the process of catching up, even though we made a helluva start. How my dear friend had grown and evolved! It was great to see, a wonder to behold, a joy to interact with, as I sensed that my own growth and evolution had been pretty good too This whole experience, I think has greatly uplifte me, improved my mood and overallattitude. Yay.

Going Before A Fall

THE DEEPENING ENDURING MYSTERY of Donald Trump's uflagging support despite his blatantly despicable moral character and criminality. has been explainedin terms of the moral bankruptcy of his followers, their intellectual shortcomings, so often that the have long since become redundant. An enqually revealing analysis might be helpful if the situation is seen from the point of view of basic human nature. Pride, and the fear of being vulnerable have been suggested as relevant factors, the feeling of being in a trap with no way to escape except to stay the ourse, consequences by damned ,and if the ship goes down, go down with it, salvaging pride if little else. At this late stage of the game, to renounce Trump after supporting him through his tempestuous political career means that you have been made a fool, have been played like a violin, and are now exposed, your glaring mistake of judgment a weakness there for all to see. When Nixon ran for reelection I was a senior in high school. My friends and I all supported "Trickie Dick" "Reelect the President!" was our rallying cry. We handed out pamphlets and "Nixon now more than ever"lapel buttons, went door to door, touting the virtues of the man we saw as the right leader for America. Boy, were we ever wrong. Nonetheless he won by a landslide. Not only were we wrong, most of America was wrong. By late 1974 Nixon had resiged the presidency in ignomonious humilaion, and was the most hated manin America, and among the most hated in history. Nixon supporters abandoned him with no hesitation, dropped him like a bad habit, as we used to say. I've been a Democrat ever since.But Nison was nothng but a normal politician, who rose and fell with the political tides. Trump is something different. Trump has all the characteristics of a true demagogue, the sort of aura of transcendant importance that Hitler enjoyed. The dynamic, of a great leader of the people, a conservative populist appealing directly to the people, scorning elitism in all its forms, standing tall against the forces of evil, ready, determined, and able to make his country great again,against all oppsition. The fatherland was once great and glorious, but has fallen on hard times and sunk to a low level due to both internal and external enemies, both of which must be vanquished. Hitler's catch phrase? "Make Germany great again". You needn't hate Trump to make and see this comparison.Its too obvious to ignore. We must hope that Trump's inevitable demise, his crashing and burning, now well underway, hits rock bottom and lands more softly and painlessly than did Hitler's.

Drinking the Conservative Kool Aid

RUSH LIMBAUGH, may he rest in peace if he can, did not mince words. He abused them for purposes of near constant prevarication, but he didn't mince them. Unequivocally he insisted to his tens of millions of sycophantic radio listeners that climate change is and will forevver be a liberal hoax, with possible Chinese accomplices. Its purpose, insisted the inhaler of strong cigars in a small unventilated room, was to accrue more power to the government by fabricating a purely mental emergency. The paranoia of the mentally unstable.Just Like they believe Trump's constant cascade of convenient lies, they believed El Rushbo's, and, more tragic still, still do. A majority of American conservatives, and presumably conservatives worldwide, still refuse to accept the blatantly encroaching of climate change by human carbon atmospheric poisoning. Now they are amending their nonsense, claiming that only mother nature changes the climate, without any possibility of human interference, because, as Limbaugh said, humanity is far too puny in the face of mighty mother nature to have even the slighest impact on her. Rush and his benighted crew were and are evidently without access to photographs of forests turned into concrete, rivers on fire, large lakes filled with dead, rotting poisoned fish. In our modern era of environmental devastation, land, water, and air, the smug conservatve community, virulantly resistant to all progress because progress rrequires change, the EPA is made impotent by their malign legislation, the continued burning of fossil fuels is encouraged and celebrated in the name of corporate profit and rising stock prices, and progressive legislation to address and finally attack climate change is resisted like the defenders at the Alamo fought to the death against the army of Santa Anna. Two decades after the U.S. Department of Defense told us that climate change caused by humanity industrial activity is the single greatest threat to American national security, right wing America refuses to take up arms against a rising sea of climatic troubles. What does one call people who refuse to defend their country against its most destructive enemy? Does teh word "traitor" ring a bell? It not, it should. Nonoby should tkae joy that Rush Limbaug is dead. They should simply sip a abit of champagne and soke a mild cigar in a well ventilated room that he no longer spews his multifaceted verbal poison.Concerning the staunch conservative defenders of an unchanged fossil fule economy? May they suffer the same fate as the brave defenders of the Alamo.

Decorating the Rio Grande

ALL IN ALL, it makes for a pretty display, rather like Christmas decorations. A line of big orange plastic floating balls bobbing gracefully atop the gentle currents, truncating, bifurcating the nation's border river, which really isn't much of a river, as far as rivers go. Any decent swimmer or even wader can easily cross it in most places, with or without middle of the river barricades. A salient fact remains, and can never be denied, even by climate, and immigration deniers: against determined huamn immigration, no wall or floating display of neatly arranged beach balls can hold firm. Sufficiently desperate people, hungry, without hope, believing that hope lies elsewhere nearby, as close as the crossing of a river, are going to get to where they want to go, notwithstanding all obstacles thereto. Just as General Patton correctly told us that "fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man", walls, floating or anchored on land, are but inconveniences which at best will only serve to slow folks down in circumventing them, with maybe a few scratches, bruises, and wet or torn clothing. There will of course be a few drownings along the way, death at the hands of stupid, short sighted, vicious people, the erectors of barriers. Here the reference is to the governing Republican party of the former Mexican province of Texas, determined to keep out the descendants of the original owners of what Davy Crockett described as "the garden spot of the world". Crockettt and a few of his friends came to Texas in 1845 for the same reason Latin American immigrants go there now; for opportunity, a chance at a new and better life, which they often fail to find in the land of milk, honey, and opportunity, choosing often to return to their country of origin, where conditions are actually better than in the third world mire of American bigotry and concentrated wealth. Crockett's timing could not have been worse, but, that's another matter for another day. The Mexicans at first, in the eighteen twenties and thirties, invited and welcomed Yankee gringos to populate and economicaly develop their sparsely inhabited northern provinces, dreaming of a treasure in taxes flowing into the coffers in Mexico City. Anglos, confidently ensconced with their stolen land firmly under their caucasian control, had a similar idea about immigration of brown skinned pbople from the south; they make good, cheap labor for corporate exploitation. But like Santa Anna decided in about eighteen thirty, enough is enough, and too many is too much. Among conservatives, the most horrifying idea imaginable is the turning of their fair state to a darker shade of brown. Donald Trump, spokesperson for and cult leader of America's white conservative Christian minority, expressed a definite preference for immigrants from fair skinned places like, say, Norway, to those from what he termed "shit hole countries" of Africa, with their hordes of the much more darkly pigmented. His disciples fervantly agree. We stole this land fair and square in 1846; what's ours is white; if you're not from Norway, stay home. The fly in the ointment is that the federal government and only the federal government is responsible for national border defense, immigration, and security. Federal law may not be usurped by the states, as the civil Wra forcefully and forever enshrined and reinforced. So, here come the Feds, in the form of the United States Department of Justice, brief cases in hand, ready to seek and obtain justice in the form of federal jusridiction where federal jurisdiction is due. Who do you suppose will win the forthcoming battle in federal court? The only question is: will Texas, after its inevitable legal defeat, choose to secede yet again? Predicting the future behavior of far right wing extreists is rather like predicting the future position of an electron using quantum mechanics, but another divorce between the U.S. and Texas is more than mere remote possibility, considering the whimsical nature of its current government. Five'll get you ten that if it does - and good riddance if it does - that it'll fall flat on its arrogant ass economically and come crawling, begging back into the union, just like it did once before.

Keeping My Enemies Close

WHEN THE PRESIDENT of the United States runs for reelection, loses, then claims that he actually won and that the election was stolen from him, he becomes a traitor, a traitor to democracy. When he implements a carefully orchestrated plan to violently overthrow the United States government by inciting a mob to insurrection for the purpose of remaining illegally in power, he becomes a traitor to his country. This is indidputable, applicable to all presidents under all circumstances. Fortunately, traitorous presidents like Trump are few and far between, Jefferson Davis excepted. A project of such insurrectional ambition necessates a large number of accomplices or it will die on the vine. Without substantial support from immediate subordiates and from among the general public, anundertaking of this magnitude will be laughed into oblivion before it even begin. The very monet President Trump announced to the world, on election night, that he actually won the election, he should have been ridiculaed to scorn by the American people, then ignored. Instead he not only was taken seriously by about seventy five million supporters, they continue to support him, and quite possibly will succeed in electing him once again to the presidency. But before that happens, the former president, now under several federal indictments with seemingly more to come, might be convicted of several felonies, and sentenced to prison. Unlikely though this scenario seems, stranger things have happened, as we often say. "We are never deceived, we only deceive ourselves", said Goethe. Trump's supporters, who nearly universally still support his outrageous election lie and most of whom still insist that the insurrection he and they enacted was justified by circumstances, have by their support of Trump's traitorous crimes themselves become traitors. Among them are several of my friends, friends of mine for decades. "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer", said Machiavellii. Although Trump has not yet been convicted of incitement to insurrection or of defrauding the American people of of abuse of public office, there seems to be at least a reasonable chance that eventually he will be. When millions of people witness someone comitting a crime in living color on national television, it is not unreasonable nor unjust to claim that indeed, crimes have been committed. If you see someone kill another person in person, you are not required to await a jury verict before condlucing that a murder has been committed. My former friends are now my enemies politically and civically. Are they not taaitors to demoracy and to their country any less than Trump himself? Socially, personally they are still my friends, if they are willing. I am willing to have social friends who are my civic enemies, if they are. I don't disguise my point of view from them, nor from anybody. I keep my enemies close.

Rewriting History, Conservatively

WHERE, but in Florida? Except maybe Texas. Republican far right delusional extremists, emboldened, are again on the attack. Public school teahers are now requuied to teach their students that enslaved African-American were taught skills which contributed to their potential success after emancipation. Already they (teachers) are required to omit mentioning that racism still exists in these United States, so,why not complete the fictional rewriting of history and contemporary America? Let us stipulate, for the sake of fictional fantasy, that AFricans came to the Unitd States voluntarily, having spent ther life savings to pay for the passage, eager to work for European-Americans as volunteers. That they danced with joy beneath a benevolent sun and master's attentive eye, planting anf reaping for the sheer fun of it,celebrating their good fortune. that they eagerly converted to the true Christian faith of their generous, loving masters, enthusiastically abandoning all vestiges of their primitive, barbaric African culture, eagerly exchanging their own music for gospel songs. And of coure, following the change in the labor laws after the "war between the states, African-Americans cheerfully embraced their new social status, found gainful employment in an atmosphere of racial harmony and equality, and blended into white American culture seemlessly welcomed by whites as brothers and equals, a situation which endures to this day, praise the lord. There is a grain, a tiny grain, of truth to what is otherwise essentially nonsense. Thomas Jefferson had a nail factory atMonticello, and slave labor hammered out nails. Jefferson's lenient tretment of is hundreds of slaves was overwhelmingly the exception, not the rule. The ooe usable skill slaves were taught on antr-bellumplantations was how to pick cotton and tobacco in the hot sun from dawn to dusk, with the whip waiting to dole out punishment to anyone who worked too slowly, or with coplaint. The whip was used so often tha the term "cracker" emerged to describe whie folk generally, and isused todaay, butnot in mixed company. On one occasion Jefferson personally whipped a recalcitrant slave, and reported that the experience disgusted him. George Washington, ever the fastidious organizer, adorned his slaves in uniforms of overalls and straw hats, but didn't have Jefferson's industrial ingenuity; no nail factory was to be seen at Mt. Vernon. Pointing out that slaves were taught marketable skills, and acting as if this was commonly done, that is even remotely justifies slavery, is like remarking that coal miners are given water breaks, and see sunlight on weekends. I recall being taught in school that conditions on plantations for slaves were no worse than those of white factory workers in nineteenth century New England, which says more about the industrial revolution and its brutality towards laborers than it does about any fictitiious benevolence of the slave system. I was also taught that the Civil War was fought over "state's rights", which is to say, the right of the state's white masters to own slaves. That minor detail was not mentioned. Next thing you know, children in conservative America will be taught that Martin Luther King's complaints were mere minor details, and that late twentieth century African-Americans congregated in inner city ghettos by choice.

Unwoking

THEY'RE RELENTLESS, dug in so deep that all the backhoes in the Confederate States of America couldn't dig 'em out. The white boys. The good ole boys... Even after the United States Supreme Court, itself not exatly a bastian of forward thinking progressivism, recognized institutional racism when it saw it, a miracle in and of itself, and issued an order for the great belated state of Allarbammah to cut out the nonsense, it didn't happen, still hasn't happened. Since the end of reconstruction, Alabama, like all conservative states, has gerrymandered its congressional districts to limit the political power of African-Americans to the greatest, meaning least extent possible. This can be done by either of two methods; by cramming them all into one district, or by spreading them so thin that they can never have anything remotely resembling a voting block, and thus can rarely if ever elect their own candidates, even when they constitute a significant part of the state's population, say, twenty five percent, as in Alabama. Twenty five percent black, about ten percent of the power. Crackers in action, Honkies working their standard perfidy. SCOTUS gave the order, and, heavens to betsy, the congressional district with a would be should be could be black majority increased from about thirty percent black to a whopping forty percent. Still a minority, but, hell's a bit bigger one. The district shaped like a salamander has merely rolled over on its bigoted side, and nothing more. And to think, the crackers actually thought they could get away with that, sneak it by the highest court in the land. They won't. The "pushback", to use our currently popular cliche, has but barely begun, and the federal courts will most likely step in again, and show 'em how to do it right. Although you might get shot in white evangelical G.O.P. Dixie for sayin' it, let's say it; Long live Abraham Lincoln.

The Gadget, Destroying Worlds, Part II

ROBERT J. OPPENHEIMER chose the new Mexico desert as the place to build a secret city, build the bomb, and test the bomb, which he from the start called "the gadget", because his parents had sent him to a "Dude Ranch" there to escape New York City in the summers of his childhood, and he liked the scenery. One reason's as good as another, one supposes. Also, because the area was considered to be largely uninhabited, which it most certinly was not, and therefore received the approval of Gen. Leslie Groves, the head of the "Manhatten Project". The city went up in a flash, as the bomb later would. Thousands of twenty and thirty somethings of both genders congregated there and miracle in less than two years, while they engaged in amorous activities and made a bunch of babies. Problem was, the area for a radius of fifty miles around Alamagordo was far from "uninhabited", it being populated by an estimated fifteen thoussnd unwitting souls, scattered among the hills and barren scrub brushed bioregion. The single bomb test, with the bomb sitting and exloding atop a one hundred foot tower, spewed lethal radiation throughout the entire area and far beyond, setting off an epidemmic of cancer which continues to this day, among the ancestors of the original victims. Nuclear radiation lingers essentially forever, and its energy disrupts cellular metabolism and reproduction, which is what cancer is. Today there is an organization of descendants of the original radiation victims, named "The Downwind Society." Hardly anyone knows about them now or knew about them at the time, in all the furor and excitement of the successful bomb test, the "successful" double bombing of Japan, and the end of the second world war. Give them and us credit for this, if nothing else: nobody ever had the temerity to call World War Two "the war to end all wars" like World War One had been called; at least in this morbid regard, we had wized up. Throughout the nineteen fifties and well into the nineteen sixties atomic bomb testing proceeded, as if wewanted to remind ourselves that we adn't lost our touch, and still knew how to kill, but needed practice. Finally, one treaty after another with the soviet Union (Russia today) put an end to it, at least ostensibly. But the damage had been done, and is still being done. A good Geiger counter can detect nuclear radiation in every human being and every living thing on this planet, courtesy nuclear technology and testing. Like Oppenheimer quoted from the Upanishads: "I am death, destroyer of worlds".

The Gadget, Destroying Worlds, Part I

MY FATHER gave me a copy of the first biography to appear about Robert J. Oppenheimer, titled "Oppenheimer", which appeared in 1971, just four years after the scientist's death in 1967. I was sixteen, and the book fascinated and horrifeid me. The new bio, "Amarican Prometheus" probably would too, and is doubtless much better, though I have not read it, and probalby won't. The movie's out, and that's good enough for me at this point in my career as a history buff. The rule of thumb about history books is that revisionist histories are nearly always better than early scholarship in any area, because they have the advantage of standing on the shoulders, so to speak, of the early scholarship. I'll see the movie, but can wait. The great debate about the bomb began early, before it was actually invented, and continues today, without any sign of abating. Truman never had a doubt. Oppenheimer, among others, thought it might be better to merely show it off somewhere in or near Japan where it would harm fewer people, with radiation only instead of enormous heat and blast. Either way, people were going to die; the question was whether the dead would be soldiers or civilians.The civilians lost out in the debate. A mere deonstration would doubtless have made an impression of the Japanese; the question is: would it have been enough of an impression to inspire their surrender? It seems almost certain that it would have not. Edward Teller, the "father" of the even more terrible hydrogen bomb, made an interesting point. He suggested that the first bomb was justified, and that the second was not. Hiroschima, but not Nagasaki. The problem with this argument was that during the three days between the two bomb droppings, no offer of surrender was forthcoming. The notion that the atom bombs saved as many as a million American military lives is still promulgated, but is and always has been nonsense. This false speculation was used to jsutify the bomb by people who wished to assuage their good old fashioned American guilt. It worked as propaganda, and still does, nonsense though it is. The choice was whether to kill civilian men, women and children, or male soldiers, and we (Truman) made our choice. We must live, or die with it, as we must with all our choices. After the war, Oppenheimer, hounded by communist hunters during the McCarthy era because of his very real communist symathies, retreated to aademia, and became the head of Princeton's Institute For Advanced Study, where Albert Einstein "worked", He complained to Einstein about his unfair treatment, being deprived of security clearance, etc., and einstein, who was the victim of similar treatment, advised Oppenheimer not to fight the matter, not to fight a battle he could not possibly win, which Oppenheimer was determined nonetheles to do. As Oppenheimer left Einstein's office, Einstein said to his secretary: "There goes a complete fool". Oppeinheimer felt terrible guilt about his part in inventing the ultimate weapon of mass destruction, and the fact that it killed hundreds of thousands of people, almost all of whom were entirely innocent of any war activties. After the war, he arranged an audience with President Harry Truman. In a feeble attempt to assauge his guilt, he told Truman: "Mr. President, I have blood on my hands" Truman, infuriated, threw Oppenheimer out of the oval office. After all, it was Truman who pulled the trigger, ordered the dropping of both bombs. He hardly needed to be told anything about bloody hands.

Counting Indictments

IF YOU'RE KEEPING TRACK of the accumulating indictments against Trump, it might be time to go fund me a calculator, to upgrade to a larger party sized pop corn popper, and to lay in a supply of snack trays, complete with finger sandwiches, veggie samplers and dip, (ranch, cheese, and guack'll do for starters,) tTe calculator to keep track of the burgeoning, proliferating litany of litigation invoving Donald J., the savory amenities for good hosts to properly entertain guests as the upcoming televised multi part dramatic series begins to air, live and in living red headed color. And don't forget consideration of getting a larger flatscreen; the folks in the back of the room deserve a good view too. The circus has but barely begun, and promises to get better and better as we approach the denouument. To list the growing litany of litigation: Financial fraud of various sorts in New York, not guilty of course...Stolen top secret documents in Florida, to which the witch hunt victim has also pled "not guilty as charged". And, , introducing the latest: an attempt to steal the presidency by prevarication and violent insurrection. But wait; there's at least one more; his attempt to coerce the great state of Georgia to "find" approximately eleven thousand seven hundred and eighty one votes from the depths of rigged voting machines. The perp's face as he walked into the New York City branch was well worth the price of admission, and we can expect even gerater grimaces as the charges against increase in severity. Priceless, as they say. If you haven't upgraded your pop corn popper by now, you'd better hurry before its too late. They're flying off the shelves faster than they can be restocked, as progressives all across America'a fruited plain race to the cash register to shell out big bucks for big machines (party sized) even as the price on them steadily increases, in accordance to the sacred law of supply and demand. The evangelical conservative community, not so much. Among Trumpers, sales of poppersand high def TVs are slow, even as denialism runs rampant, more rampant than usual. Conservative evangelical Trump loving America is turning out conspiracy theories concerning their favorite witch at a break neck pace: the deep state, led by Hnuter Biden and is laptop, or somebody or other, is out to get the representative of Christ on Earth, none other than Don the Con(servative). All four of the grand juries thus far seated and issuing these phony indictments are stocked by radical left wing Trump hating Democrats, socialists, and Chinese spies so the twisted right wing exucse mongering goes. (they are all the same as the fantasy goes). A coteie of alien beings is manipulating the Earth to weaken humanity by making America not so grea tagain. As usual the most disgustingly fascinating aspect of this burgeioning perfidy is not Trump himself, but, his cult, still tens of millions of misguided "Americans" strong. The mathematical expression is that the support Trump continues to receive is directly proportional to the number of crimes with which he is accused and demonstrably committed. Gnagsters have always been heroes in the United States of Criminality. Al Capone, Jesse James, bonnie and Clyde, all heroes of pre -Trmpian perfidy. Now, finally, a high criminal with pretty well dciffed hair pieces. Evangelical Christian conservatives simply love a hard core sinner and cannot resist the necessity of showing moral superiority by doing what God did in both the Old and new Testament; elevate low life scumbags to top positions of eminence for the purpsoe of doing God's work. Oh how the chosen few love a good redemption story! Nobody has yet been able to convince them that trying to emulate the Lord's highy unusual techniques is something which simply should not be attempted at home. It doesn't even pay to try.

Hating Trump With Class

TRUMP HATER that I am, I get a little tired of reading, especially on Facebook, the remarks my fellow Trump haters make about him. The hair. Always the hair. Over the top though it indeed seems to be, a toupe to end all toupes, so what? Let's face it, we are a nation of hirsute happy folks, in which we go to great lengths to coiffe ourselves stylishly. Those of a certain age will remember the "big hair" days of the eighties, when perms larger than life were everywhere on the move. In 1964 the Betles showed up in Shea stadium with hair reaching over their ears, and a ational sensation, for and against, ensued. Then came the late sixties and early seventies, an era of waxen faxen down to our knees long hair, as the song goes in the musical "Hair". When I look at my high school yearbook picture senior year, 1973, I smile at my own mop top. A quick peak at the men's wigs of the eigtheenth century (Geroge Washington never appeared in pblic without his powdered wig, like many other aristocrats of the day), and the goldie locks of George Armstrong Custer in thelong haired nineteenth century, is sufficient to tell you that American culture, like European culture, is in love with hair styles. Finally Michael Jordan had the good sense to shave his head, and end all the Afro fuss, or try to. So, tonsorily, Trump in in large company - we the American people. Let's forget his hair, and give him a pass. Or better yet, let's just ignore it, and, as we like to say, "move on". I posted a short essay exhorting people to criticize Trump on two grounds: his words and deeds. On the tangible, the important, the meaningful. I reminded people that, when you consider the sheer amount of material rife and ripe for the picking, what are we waiting for? Then too there's the constant name calling. A moron will show you his moronity, an idiot will show you his idiocy, We needn't name it. Trump actually said that windmills cause cancer, that "they say" they cause cancer, and that George Washington's army captured airports during the American revolution. He really did. And this is the mere iceberg tip. Thirty thousand blatant, outlandish, documented lies while president. The innumerable criminal acts. A violent incitement to insurretion in living color on national television. Yes, the material is abundant, would and does fill volumes and libraries. Why not remind the world of it? Sadly, strangely, only one lady responded affirmitively to my little morality ploy. My little admonition was largely disregarded. My fellow liberals and anti-MAGA folks simply do not want to abandon their slanderous, insulting methods. The one lqdy who did express agreement with me; know what she said."Yes, I totally agree. Trump is a complete MORON. I told her she seemed to have missed the point. She probably missed it again, after I told her the second time. Resigning myself to the inevitable, all I could do is sigh pensively, and, as we like to say, move on.

Going To Church

I WENT TO CHURCH a coupla weeks ago, a Methodist church with a progressive young lady for a minister and a relatively progressive theological viewpoint. By that I mean that they don't condemn LGBTQ people to eternal damnation, nor anyone else that I can tell. The Methodist church is one of many Protestant demoninations which over the years has fragmented steadily, into liberal and conservative branches, and everything in between. Politics pervades religion these days, to the detriment of both. One begins to wonder which of the ever larger lot the true God, meaning of course the Christian biblical one, prefers, if any. The minister, as I understand it, is in fact a staunch supporter of gay and LGBTQ rights and equality, and it gets better. In the local conservative small town highly conservative newspaper she wrote an op ed in which she condemned book bans of all types. Like most progressives, she believes that teachers, librarians, and parents at the local level are quite capable of generating an appropriate, academically challenging reading list and library inventory, and that the matter should be left in their hands, rather than being subject to legislation by the state. In every state in which book bans are being placed ineffect, you guessed, the bans are being promulgated by conservative Republicans of the Christian conservative kind. You know how those big government Republicans are. They just can't seem to keep their grubby little hands off people's books, bodies, and lives. Doubtless most folks are familiar with developments along those lines in conservative southern states, especially Texas and Florida, where books are banned and female bodies firmly under their control... Up north, things are considerably different; Illinois is proudly proclaiming itself the state which "does not ban books", as is the commonwealth of Massachussets. Thus, there is hope. I assume the the very presence of a female minister here or anywhere has rankled and is rankling the sensitivities of your basic right wing, fundamentalist religious types. The bible says no the ladies of the cloth, let there be no woman on the pulpi, blah blah blah.. Right here it says, the heck with the Bible, the most violent, primitive, and barbaric book on the planet, despite it containing, as Mark Twain described it, some clever fables and noble poetry. Twain also pointed out more than a "thousand outright lies", in scripture, as he put it. They can be easily found and documented. Although I am not religious, never have been, and never will be, I like, from time to time, to skip around and visit various church services, for my own edification. I am just as likely to attend an Islamic, Judiac, ir Wiccan servie as any other, if they would let me. My open mindedness knows no bounds. Why should it? After all is said and done, after all the churches and splinter churches and the th and the wonder thereof, which is embodied in the quote from Einstein: "My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit which reveals itself in what little we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality. I cannot conceive of a personal God who would sit in judgment over creatures of his own creation. Morality is of the nighest importance to man, but not to God." Well said, sir, and thanks you for helping me find and srticulate my true "faith". I must trust that all the Baptists, Methodists, Pentecostals, Jews, Muslims, ad infintum will, if not approve of my beliefs and agree with them,at least tolerate and respect them and accept them as genuine, and genuinely my own. Good luck with that. Maybe they at least won't condemn me to hell, or burn me at the stake like a seventeenth century "witch". Again, good luck with that.

Conserving Insanity

IN PHOENIX, the temperature has risen to nearly one hunred and twenty degrees for how many consecutive days? Twenty, isn't it? In most part of the United States, there is either a prolonged drought, or it rains for days and there is massive flooding, with great loss of life and property. The weather, over a long period of time, is called "climate", and just as scientists have been predicting for decades, the weather has become and is becoming ever more extreme. Science, as usual, got it right. And yet, within and throughout the conservative community, denial of climate science and cimate change remains unfazed. The latest nonsensical denial is the claim that "it was hotter in the nineteen thirties, the dustbowl era, than it is today." That is, of course, untrue, like nearly all conservative lies and beliefs. Statistics, the true cliche goes, do not lie. We have the numbers, all the recorded temperatures from every location in North America and indeed the world, dating back decades, when meteorological record keeping became standard proceedure. You scarcely want to think about the summer heatwaves, droughts, sever floods, and severe storms to come in future years. It is only going to get worse, because we haven't done enough soon enough. Actually, with the friction caused by right wing resistance to action, resistance to the economic reforms necessary to fight and reverse climate change, humanity is so far behind schedule that it may be too late, by being too little. A progressive program of concerted action, undertaken decades ago,would by now have begun the process of climate mitigation, and such a program has been front and center of the progressive agenda for decades. People insufficiently conversant with political reality and fond of saying "both sides are deeply flawed". No, "both sides" are not flawed, wrong, or bad. Not with regard to climate change. It may sound fair and cozy and convenient to attribute blame for our various societal messes equally, so doing may give one a feeling of being noble and fair minded - but it is dead, straight up wrong. We proclaim the virtue of "giving credit where credit is due". Its time to place blame where blame belongs.Only by identifying errors and their source can they be corrrected.

Touching Bumpers, Filing Claims

THE AUTO ACCIDENT WAS UNAVOIDABLE. I was driving on a four lane highway, bumper to bumper rush hour traffic, in a driving rain storm, visibility near zero. Three cars ahead of me the person suddenly slammed on the brakes, as did the car behind it, and the car behind it. Then I did. I had to. I skidded on the slick pavement and made contact with the young lady's rear bumper. She puled off the road and on to the shoulder, called her mother, her father, and the police, who told us to get away from the road and go to a nearby parking lot, which we did. With no damage, it was the kind of "accident" wherein both parties could and probably should sinply have laughed it off and done nothing further, but she wanted to go whole hog, and I was obligated to comply. I wanted to get out of the rain, but by that time was already soaked to the skin, and I knew I could not invite myself to join the young accident victim in her car to get out of the rain, because she was about twenty years old, talking with a stranger-man, me. Then hail began to bounce off my head, and I excused myself and went back to my car, having given her every relevant piece of information about my existence. Name, number, address, insurance policy, email, you name it, she got it from me. I was on the verge of handing her my Medicare card, but realized I had done enough, had given her all relevant information about my existence, and my soaked clothes, like emerging from a swim, were threatening to fall off my shivering body. Her father arrived, as did a nice young police officer. All three of them agreed that there was no damage, and that we should just shake hands and go our separate ways, which we did. The police officer asked no questions, took no names, filed no report. No harm, no foul. We all shook hands, then went home. Except me - I had a dinner date to attend with a beautiful young lady about half my age, and I damned well wasn't going to miss it. I arrived at the restaurant soaking wetnand my date took on look at the mess I was, and asked: "What happened to you"! Oh, I said, I had a wreck, then stood in the pouring rain giving the victim my information. My date offered to allow me to come to her house to clean up before dinner, rather than driing twenty miles back to my house, but I declined the offer, and assured her that, well, I really don't look that bad, I feel fine just a bit slick wearing slick clogting an hair slicked down. I could tell she really wanted to "go to her place", and she sounded saltry, willing. But Ii was a first date, she didn't yet know me well, and, well, I am a gentleman. Teh dinner and date were great, but I needed to got home and out of my clothing, whcih was in any event drying rapidly, but I wanted to make sure I hadn]t contracted pneumonia in the air conditioned restaurant. (I hadn't.) Next day I received an email from my insurance agent, telling me that the family had actually filed an insurance claim. Evidently they had found a scratch, wanted it buffed out by a professional, and wanted me to pay for it. (That's just my guess).

Crusading For Trump's Insurrrection

Christian conservative talk radio, never a dull moment, its entertainment value not exactly valuable in the manner intended. They simply cannot resist combining religion and politics, neither of which should be discussed by polite society or idiots,and which, at all costs, should be kept separate, like church and state. Donald Trump, of course, was annointed by Christ, presumably with the approval of God. Lies? What lies? What criminal activity? Indictments, in this fantastic narrative, become nefarious vengeful witch hunts by the enemies of Trump, and the enemies of Trump are the enemies of God and America. What better proof than the stealing of Trump's election by Biden and two thousnad mulish Democrats? God chose not to intervene, for reasons undisclosed. The Lord allowed the voting machines to be rigged, we know not why. Sinners in teh hands of an angry God, who chose to punt and let Biden get away with a stolen election. The insurrection, say the evangelical radio talkers, resulted in unfair treatment of the insurrectionists. How dare they press lawsuits against so many good Christian souls merely for a bit of rioting here and there! The smashers of the doors and windows of the Capitol, the killers of seven people and maimers of one hundred and forty four police officers were doing the Lord's work, right? Obviously,the entire law enforcement and criminal justice legal system is similarly rigged, and full of Democrats. All a man has to do is smash his way into the Capitol building through broken windows and doors, and put his feet up on the Speaker's office desk, while his friends build a gallows in the parking lot with which to hang the Vice President, and they have th nerve to sentence him to jail time! Trump got a letter today from the prosecutor, which means that he will soon, or later, stand trial for organizing a violent mob to enforce his claim that the presidency was stolen from him- of all the nerve! No matter, evangelical Christianity is waiting in the wings, ready to fight for Jesus Christ, his brother Donald Trump, just as soon as Christ descends from the heavens in a flaming chariot, terrible swift sword in hand, to rapture Don the Con(servative) and his flock into heaven. We can't wait.

Crushing Guilt

WHEN MY MOTHER DIED at ninety three, I grieved, grieved at the loss of my best friend, and I rejoiced at her long life well lived, thanking her for everything. Grief can make one angry, feeling deprived, self pitying, somehow "cheated". Soon, on a dark and grieving night my precious little female cat jumped up on the kitchen counter, screaming, demanding five dollar cat food instead of four dollar cat food. Amazing, how picky a formerly stray cat can be...You little shit! I saved you from a scavenger life on the streets, saved you from the burden of litter bearing, from constant fear, from cars and human beings, and from a lonely unloved life and lonely unloved death. I vaccinated you against nightmare diseases. I feed you good food, I love and protect you. I give you Warmth in winter, air conditioning in summer, a life without parasites. I give you a cat bed made of silk, but you choose to sleep in my bed, and I allow you to snuggle and purr. Now my mother has died, and this? Enraged at an innocent little animal with a brain the size of a walnut, I slapped her off the counter and halfway across the kitchen, where she, true to legend, landed on her feet, and scampered off, yelling and daddy what the helling. Within mere micromoments I was consumed with a self loathing and guilt which would have turned a confessional into a horror story with sequals. I willed myself into hell, far away from my sainted heavenly mother, self immolation. Destroy me, oh Lord! Punishing a sweet cat for my grief. In fact, In fact dear God, i was ashamed. Self loathing unabated, unforgiven, becomes self pity. Goethe said: "Since everyone errs, since even the greatest among us has erred, we have no grounds upon which to regard our own errors as inexcusable" He said: "Only by our errors which really irk us do we advance." Would I have forgiven anyone and everyone else who mistreated a cat, and then remorseful, sought redemption? Yes, everytime. Are my own mistakes of grief and passion any greater, worse, or unforgivable than anyone else's? Was I truly willing and wanting to atone, repent, confess,learn, and become a better person? Why, indisptably. Theodore Roethke wrote: "Dark, dark my light, and darker my desire. My soul, like some heat maddened summerfly, keeps buzzing at the sill. Which I is I? A fallen man, I climb out of my fear. The mind enters itself, and God the mind, and One is One, free in the earing wind...". The forgiving of the self does not erase the memory of our mistakes. But by damn I have learned, and I have grown, and I will not relapse. Mandi, more forgiving than any person on the planet, sleeps and purrs in my arms and in my bed, and all is again well with her sweet world.

Dogmatic Disemblings

AN ATHEIST SAID: "How do you expect Jesus to save you in the real world if he couldn't even save himself"? There eists no religious or philosophical viewpoint from which this question is intelligent. From the Christian perspective, Jesus never had any intention of "saving himself" from a tortorous death; his entire purpose was to sacrifice himself for the salvation of others, "others" meaning only those who worshiped him as their Lord and Savior. The Son of God, paying for the sins of all true believers of all times and places. Salvaion a a price, the price being the surrrender of personal ideologocal and intellectual freedom. Spiritual, intelletual blackmail, in a sense. And of course from the non religious perspective, the critical, historical, scientific perspective, Jesus died not for anyone's salvation, but as a concession to Judaic perfidy, insecurity, and jealousy, and Roman military and political power. A miscarriage of justice bringing about the ceremonial murder of a good man, or at lesst a reasonably harmless one, a man who only preached good moral values and a soon to come apocalypse which never came, and has not yet come...The Christian said: "What if God exists? You non believers are going to be f****d if he does. Again, nonsensical. If God exists, God might not be a Christian god, but rather, a god of of another, more true religion, maybe a religion practiced on a planet with truly intelligent life, in some galaxy far, far away. And if the one true god of the universe is the Christian God ruling over the entire universe, and all lifeforms within? Then we might wish to hope that intelligent creatures on other planets throughout the universe are devout Christians, and that the six billion non Christians on Earth convert to the Christian faith, before its too late. Space travelers from Earth, spreading the gospel throughout the cosmos,"witnessing" to alien beings. Or maybe they, witnessing to us...Bertrand Russell said: "Nobody can sit at the bed side of a dying child and believe in God." Russell wrote the seminal essay "Why I Mm Not a Christian", and the seminal essay "Why I am not a Communist". The Christian God, according to the Christian biblical scripture, clearly not only accepts human suffering and rarely does anything to ameliorate it, but himself doles out a great quantity of it. The behavior of God in the Bible at best must be described as "harsh", and at worst,diabolical, maniacal, psychopathic, tempestuous,murderous,villianous. Petty too. He demands to be worshipped ilke an insecure child craves to be loved. Thomas Paine, who among other things essentially invented the American revolution, thus said in his pamphlet "The Age of Reason" that the "Word of God" seems more like the word of ad emon or monster. Christian believers usually justify god's seemingly insanely violent behavior by claiming that the Bible was written as allegory, not literal fact, which seemingly defeats the entire purpose of the little library of sixty six quirkish books;to reveal the truth, the Holy Word of God. Truth, whatever it is, is reality, not symbolism, not allegory, for the universe and the human species are quite real, whether or not God is.

Controlling The Future

ABOUT TWENTY FIVE YEARS AGO Michio Kaku, professor of theoretical physis as NYU, predicted that within a hundred years, by which he seems to have menat the end of the twenty first century, humanity would have the ability to control the weather. Time's ticking, but we still have seventy five years left, which might not be enough time to reverse climate change sufficiently to save the Earth's ecosystem from disastrous consequences. already the sixth mass extinction is well underway, millions of species of plants and animals from becoming extinct at an alarming rate, in what is now being called the "anthropocene", or "the age of man". The human race has become the single most powerful force shaping environmental conditions on this planet. Scientists tend to agree that the anthrocopene began in the early nineteen fifties, when both nuclear and hydrogen bombs proved that homo sapien sapiens had indeed taken control. Despite the well known Confucion admonition that only fools predict the future, Kaku plunges ahead without trepidation in a ceaseless attempt to do exactly that. His past futuristic ruminations have convered topics ranging from the future of humanity in general: "The Future of Humanity", of human mentality. "The Future of the Mind", the future of physics, "Physics of the Future", and general futuristic speculations: "Visions", all topics ot which he has devoted intriguing, highly speculative, but easily accessible monographs. He even dares to take theoretical physical to future realms "Beyond Einstein", a sequal to his successful work "Einsteins's Cosmos". His latest endeavor, published just this year, is titled "Quantum Supremacy", and, as the title suggests, deals with the future of computers. Kaku does for future science what Carl Sagan did for past and present science, mainly astronomy and physics; elucidates it succinctly. We began our journey with computers with the vacuum tube, when, begining in the nineteen forties, teams of graduate students rolled shopping carts up and down, back nd forth between rows of computer connections in warehouse sized buildings on university campuses and corporate research facilities. Then came the era of transitors, and humanity was on the road to smaller and more powerful computing. finally came the microchip, and its nearly constant redesigning to produce ever smaller, more efficient versions for ever more efficient data storage. But now the era of the microchip is coming to an end, as the devices are reaching the limit of miniaturization and data storage. We are plunging head long into the era of quantum computing, wherein vast amounts of data are stored and transmitted on mere atoms and molecules. Already teh lates computers are perforing at a levelby which comparison teh famous microchiped computer, IBM's "Big Blue" is being made to seem large, slow, cumbersone, and lazy. Beyond this extraordinary level of computer processing capacity not even Michio Kaku would for the time bieng dare to proceed in his musings. There will doubtless soon come a time, however, when he indeed will.

Counting Gods

THERE HAVE BEEN more than three hundred gods so far, but yours actually exists. All the others are silly, superstitious nonsense, but yours actually exists, said the prescient Facebook post. The prescient person had the decency to spare us the cliche "let that sink in". Anything sufficiently substantive to sink will sink of its own accord, and needn't be prodded and cajoled to the bottom of the brain. It sank in, with qualifications. Haven't there been more, may more, than a mere three hundred fabricated deities? Didn't both the ancient Greeks nd ancient Romans achieve something near or exceeding that number? When you consider the sheer number contributed by Hindusim, the total surely well exceeds a mere few hundred. In these contemporary United States there are an estimated fifteen hundred organized religions, organized and registered with the federal government for purposes ot tax evasion. And, arguably, they all worship their own god, or distinct versions of another, ubiquitous one. The Baptist god can, with some vagueness, be distinguished from the Methodist deity; the Baptist God does not dance. Beneath the prescient post somebody percipiently typed in the comment: "All 1", presumably meaning that all the gods are one, all the same god. Even that's questionable. Science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke wrote a short story titled "The Nine Billions Names of god", in which an ascetic philospoher, sitting alons in a cave,recited all nine billion names, after which the universe came to an end. Granted, Zeus and Jupiter, Mars and Ares, Venus, Aphrodite, and Athena can be paired up as represening the same god or goddess. The Romans stole from the Greeks,imitated them and their culture. But even that only goes so far. If the goddess of love and beauty and the god of war are one and the same, they certainly weren't intended to be by their creators. We fashion our gods to suit our purposes. The requirements of our gods invariably match our own desires. I knew a man, an evangelical Christian and, predictably a hard right conservative, who once lamented his inability to completely satisfy the demands of his self styled Christian God."I try hard to do what the Lord wants, to live my life according to scripture and the Lord'scommandments. I don't drink, I don't smoke, I don't swear. But women, that's another matter. I can't stay away from them. I have o have them, I a only hope I don't spend eternity in hell." I was tempted but refrained to suggeest that he get married, fast and soon. He did,then got divorced. At last count he was on his second or third wife, but obedient to the Lord, assuming of course that his evangelical fundamentalist Christ conservative God was willing to sanction divorce, which seems questionable, according to the votaries themselves. Why he didnt simply invent a god who ordains sexual promiscuity I never discerned. Maybe he feared that his church would laugh or pray or drum him out of the congregation, in tongues. Like Goethe said: "When I realized that everyone invents his own religion, I decided to invent my own."

Keeping America Strong, Despite Resistance

THE APOINTMENT OF HIGH RANKING MILITARY OFFICERS is quite obviously of paramount importance to national security. All military organizations require just that; a high degree of organization and a strong chain of command. In these United States, such appointments, the highest of the high, the general staff, require the approval of Congress. Such approval is now lacking, and the military, all branches, is being exposed to an alarming absence of command and control, thanks largely to the misguided efforts of one college football coach turned Senator: Tommy Tuberville of Alabama. He did a much better job at Auburn University than he is in the U.S. Senate. His coaching staff was always solid and complete, staffed with men of the highest quality and capability, and the head coach never refused to name an assistant to any of his staffs because of their sexual orientation, attitudes towards abortion, or attitudes toward LGTBQ people. If he had, he might have found himself alone on the sideline, trying desperately to keep dozens of energetic young men organized and under control. Even worse, he is joined in his dangerous game of obstruction by several other members of Congress, particularly in the House of Rpresentatives; Republicans, mostly from the far right, as you might imagine. The good news is that if only a handful of Republican House members agree to move military appointments forward to the Senate, where they are all likely to pass in the Democratically controlled upper chamber, we will be out of harm's way. The military is assiduous in its inclusion and fair treatment of women service members. It provides travel expenses to those who require an abortion and who must go elsewher, across state lines, to obtain one. The military has also adopted an inclusive policy of admitting and retaining women members, gay members, transgender members, members of color, and members of the LGBTQ community in general. (Long live the American military) This progressive policy has unsurprisingly aroused the wrath of those on not only the far right, but among conservatives in general, who evidently believe that an all white, all male, all heterosexual military, such as that from bygone years, is preferable. But what else are we to expect from the party of retrogression? We are told by our military leaders that it is absolutely essential to maintain a strong, well disciplined military for America's defense, and yet, Republicans seem not to be concerned. And then too, at least sixty duly empowered courts of law declared that Donald Trump indeed lost the election of 2020, and the "party of Law and Order" ignores these rulings, preferring instead to dwell in their fantasy that he in fact won, unsupported by even a trace of evidence. And now, the pernicious conservative war on human beings continues, unabated, and threatens to hobble our nation's military. Here the word "shameful" is inadequate.

Briefly Raining

THE RAIN which mercifully soaked my lawn in the hours before sunrise was to me a great blessing, but soon after sunrise it moved out. The temperature would soon climb to nearly a hundred, More rain was predicted for the next day in this middle of July, and may it blessedly manifest. It almost seems a certainty that a summer drought will take the place of regular rain, and regular rain is a necessity in an area dominated by deciduous forests. Last summer we had not one but two prolonged droughts, punctuated by a short spurt of rainy days. There is an ominous sense that a repeat performance is on the way, for this summer, and for many summers to come. Eighteen summers ago, when I bought about half an acre of land and built a modest home, I, in a fit of arborial enthusiasm, planted more than twenty saplings and filled the yard with nacsent shrubbery. My hope was for a suburban future replete with bucolic wonder, azaleas included. The saplings grew into towering oaks and maples, the shrubbery prolifrated into large, overgrown bushes. The thick field of bermuda grass which I found when I started was, over the years, supplanted with a veriety of grasses, some of which thrived, while some did not. Amazingly, the azaleas srtll remain. This is perhaps due to my having refrained from installing gutters on the roof; the rain is not carried away into the corners of the property, but pours diretly down upon them, when they are lucky enough to receive rain. The trees and shrubs are greedy with the available ground water. I fear for the future of my lawn, and all lawns. I have already decided to do no more tree and shrub planting, and to not try to replace them as they age and die.It may eventuate that my now verdant but once barren yard returns to its previous state, a field of thick bermuda browning in the hot mid summer sun, bereft of other foliage. Or it may be that that this property one day returns to its still earlier state, a construction site wasteland, with glass and metal shards scattered among thick patches of crab grass. Our rolling hills, covered with thick forests, might one day transform into fields of grass, a prairie land where the land is nourished by scant rain sufficient only to sustain tall grasses with a few wildflowers. As for our cities, the increasingly bizarre patterns of extreme weather will bring violent storms, torrential rain, and tornados into their midst. The rising oceans will inundate and eventually engulf them, despite our best efforts to remove them from danger, back, and out of the way. And it may be that, as Bertolt Brecht wrote in a poem: "Of our cities there shall remain but the wind that blew through them.

Friending

THE LADY ON FACEBOOK takes a picture of her lunch every day, and shares it with her friends. She does the same with her cat, a cute one, her swimming pool, and her repotted plants. Also her snacks and drinks; they all show up on the internet, inliving color.The marvels of modern smart phones. Her tastes are of the highest quality, certainly higher than mine. But she never posts any pictures of herself or her house. Wisely, in the omission of home photos, since pictures of houses invite scrutiny and possible crime. It is also perhaps best that she takes no "selfies", for the same reason, although she does have pictures of herself on her profile, taken, one would estimate, about thirty years ago or more. I recall the one time she posted a picture of her current self it was very indistince and blurry, but you could see a woman considerably aged beyond the sultry pictures on her profile. It seems that she wants people to think of her younger self, which to me seems a pity, since current pictures of people do not conceal their inner and outer beauty, but reveal it. I mentioned to her that her swimming pool seems like a bit of a camera hog. That's more than I do. I take no pitures of anything, neither myself nor my house nor cats, and there is essentially nothing on my Facebook profile. I attribute this to lack of interest. Though I have been on Facebook for something between five and seven years, I have never been able to summon the interest in it necessary to motivate me to do the work required to show myself and all about myself. Facebook laziness. I must confess that I am doubtful whether anyone would be interestd in seeing what I had for lunch, where I live, or what I look like, and I vageuly have the same doubs about this lady, and, for tht matter, everyone else. We have an interest in the people we already know, and in our friends from bygone days who are on our "friends" list, but for for friends who are friends on Facebook only and not in real space time, I have my doubts. I tend to think that most Facebok members would disagree, and would proclaim their undying lvoe for all friends, real and Facebook only. I respect that. Often peole take pictures of sunsets, beaches, forests, or beautiful skies, and these are my favorite. There are, however, folks who have expressed agreement with me concerning lunch and drink photos, mainly among those who eschew them themselves. But the people who take and post them are not among them. We enjoy being flattered: "What a lovely lunch"! "My, your seimming pool certainly looks refreshing"! I try to contribute to the flattery, mainly to stay out of trouble. I hit the "like" button, or type in the word "precisely", or "exactly", to preserve peace and prevent war. Any indication of disagreement engenders an angry response, and a potential argument, away from which I hastily run. People prefer flattery, and despise having their sacred shared opions opposed.The only remedy more effective than the like button might well be the "delete Facebook account" button, wherever it might be.

Tolerantly Fellowshiping

MANY YEARS AND SET POINTS AGO our little doubles tennis group included four good friends, two of whom were devout Christians, two of whom were not. (I was among the unsaved, and remain so. A tennis player sans salvation) One Christian and one heathen per team, very evenly matched. The Christians got in trouble at church. They were admonished that they should abandon the tennis, or find a way to play Christian tennis, with Christian tennis players, and should not, under any circumstances, include non Chtistians in the group. They bravely responded by suggesting that we the non religious were excatly the type of folks with whom they should be fellowshiping. Did not Jesus go among the ungodly, spreading the message of God? Does a doctor not attend to the sick, rather than the healthy? Although my Christian friends made me proud by "having my back", as we say today. I was not pleased with the rather condescending implications, as if to be a non Christians were somewhow a sickness, a problem to be corrected. I thanked my devout firend, then suggested what to me was an even better approach. To wit: We play tennis with people who are good tennis players, well matched with us Christian tennis players in terms of skill level, and we play for fun, not salvation. Tennis is not a religious activity. Furthermore, it is not our job as Christians, on or off the court, to judge anyoone else's religiosity. We'll leave that to God. Not only do we tolerate folks of other faiths and belief systems, we accept them as our inherent moral equals. Tolerance, as Goethe said, is an insult, unless it leads to ultimate acceptance. Never mind that the Bible says, no fewer than twenty five times, that it is a "sin" to be lefthanded, or that Jesus said , in Mathew 15;4 that Whoever curses the mother and the father shall be given the death. For me that's a bit harsh. I am free to disagree with any book, or anyone who writes them or speaks in them. My charge is to accept and respect the beliefs of Christians, even though I strongly disagree with them. I do not allow myself to think that they could improve themselves by embracing my beliefs, for that would be an insult, and condescenidngly intolerant. I would be very grateful, eternally so, if my Christian friends and neighbors would stop thinking that something is wrong with me for having beliefs different than their own, and would instead accept me as their spiritual and intellectual equal.My sense is that I will have better luck waiting for hell to freeze over.

Evolving While Having Lunch

THE GENTLEMAN at the senior center with whom I have lunch about once a week is a staucnh Trumper, and says that he would or will vote for him again. We don't talk politics, wisely. Therefore, we get along great, proving that it can be done. These days I stifle any urge I might have to suggest to Trump supporters that they choose a good, solid conservative political candiate who is also a decent human being, assuming they exist. I forget the conversational context, maybe we were discussing what we do or do not believe in, but my friend said: "What about evolution"? I said: "What about livestock breeding? What about hybrid corn? What about breeding wolves into miniature poodles? My point is that these are all examples of evolution in action, evolution by human selection rather than "natural selection". I waited for him to claim that human-made evolution doesn't, somewhow, count, but he never said it. It counts. Humans are part of nature, natural. My next comment was that we are swimming in evolution, verily inundated in it, evolution is all around us, if only we pay attention. My friend and I have developed such great restraint in our associatin that he never stated his view on evolution, but I strongly suspect that he considers it some kind of hoax, like Trump's election defeat, or climate change. He is, after all, a conservative. He gave me a sort of reprieve. He didn't say something like: "If people had evolved from monkeys, there were be no monkeys." Thus, I didn't have to inform him that evolutionary science in fact does not say that humans evolved from monkeys. Nor did I have to say that there is more proof of the reality of evolution than there is for either the holocaust, nuclear physics, or the eelction being stolen from Trump. My tenth grade English teacher made an interesting comment fifty three years ago. She said that to her thinking creationism and evolution harmonize and compliment each other beautifully, and I can recall my sixteen year old self finding that a dubious assertion, if a pleasant one. It still seems dubious, at best. I went on to sing the praises of science to my friend, and further asserted that science is the best method humans have for comprehending the universe, and that religion is the worst. Science improves upon itself, religion refuses to, and so forth. He said something about the Bible. I responded that the Bible, on no fewer than twenty five occasions, says that it is a sin to be left handed, among numerous highly questionable assertions. the same people who believe that the election was stolen from Trump, that climate hange is a liberal hoax designed to give more power over our lives to the government, tend to refuse to believe in the obvious reality of evolution. I recall suggesting that anyone who doubts the reality of human evolution by natural selection should consider taking a high school biology course. I also made the point that evoution among home sapien sapiens is ongoing, that there is no evidence that evolution has stopped dead in its trasks, that we are a transitional animal, evolving into another type of animal right before our very eyes. That, I think was a bit much for him, and for most folks to swallow. But lunch, as usual, was quite enjoyable.

Dispensing Justice, or Politicking?

UNLESS I'M DREAMING, the purpose of the Supreme Court is to render equal justice under law. At least, that's what it says on the top of the stately, bright white granite Supreme court building. "Equal justice under law". Therefore it follows that the people who are appointed to the high court are placed there for that purpose, and that purpose alone. The highest court in the land should be, and in theory is, above and beyoond poltics, above and beyond anybody's political agenda.In reality, its never been that way, and arguably is less that way now than ever before. The hidden but true purpose of the "SCOTUS" is, rather, to impose the political agenda of the party which has the power to place a majority of its messengers on the court. It also follows that any qualified nominee should have no discernble political agenda or ideology, if nothing else, should be a bland moderate. The more demonstrably liberal or conservative a person is, the less qualified, or so it seemingly should be. In reality, the republican party, the conservative movement has but one objective; the make the court as ideologically conservative as posible, the pask it with right wingers, to impose upon America what hit has failed to impose democratically. This, by definition, is corruption. t is corruption which we the Amerian people seem to have grown so accustomed that we accept it as normal. "Normal" is the last thing it is, or should be. The federal and state court systems suffer from the same disease. Consider Arkansas, a deeply "red" state where Trump has sixty percent support, and the governor and legislative branches are hard core conservative, passing laws against acknowledging the existence of racism in America, abridging rights for gay people, as so forth, the whole vile agenda. A vacancy on the state's suprrme court was filled by the Republican governor with none other than the chairperson of the state Republican party. Unabashed corruption. Blatant politicization of the system of justice. Corruption in government and the justice system signals a rotten, declining civilization. When the corruptiion is so deeply embedded that it is accepted as normal, and the corrupt politicians who practice it are accepted as good leaders, the societal decline is severely advanced. A recently published monograph astutely describes the problem with the current court, even only in its title: "The Shadow Docket; How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings To Amass Power and Undermine the Republic", by Stephen Vladeck. Much has been made in recent decades of the amassing of power by the executive branch at the federal level. Vladeck convincingly demonstrates that the behavior of the Supreme Court is no less concerning.

Heating Up on the Fourth

INDEPENDENCE DAY has always been a big part of my life, from the excitement of fireworks in childhood to the present. I rememer that by the time I was fifteen or so I had noticed that every Independence Day the sun shone, and it never rained. This was remarkable in the nineteen sixties, when in the area in which I lived it was normal to have at least a brief pop up rain shower most days. Special days stand out. On July 4, 1989, my thirty four year old self, half a lifetime ago, hiked up Aspen Mountain in Aspen, then was rewarded by a free ride down on the ski lift. In 1976, I was in New YOrk for the Bicentennial, which older people will recall was a relly, really big deal. Tall masted 18th century sailing ships filled New York harbor, and floated up and down the Hudson, to the delight of what was estimated to be about twenty million people in the city. I attended a baseball game between the Yankees and Kansas City Royals. One of the most massive fireworks displays in world history took place that night on Staten Island. But the Independence Day just past was perhaps the most monumental of all, for me, and for everyone, in not so wonderdaul a way. t was the ottest day in teh history of planet eearth, according to scientists. Predictably, percipient people all over the word made the same comment: "This is a record that will soon be broken, and broken often." And indeed it was, on the very next day, July 5th. Then it was broken again on July 6th. Perhps it is now time to begin fervantl hoping and praying that it doesn't continue to be broken every day throughout July, and beyond. It will, of course. People my age will be leaving this world as climate change truly starts to become frightening, more frightening than it is now, which is certainly frightening enough. It would be nice if we could, as we go out, find reason to believe that the human race has built a firm foundation for reversing it, and preserving a future for humanity. Independence from death by heat. independenc Day from our own folly.

Settling

MY BROTHER-in-LAW is a conservative Republican, and Christian. That's my opinion, and I feel confident he would verify its truth. He is among my many ideological opposites, and so be it. He and I get along great, as many of them and I do, becaues we never talk about religion or politics, or at least rarely and in restrained fashion. My sixth grade teacher told us to never discuss religion or politics, and I have spent my entire life opposing this wisdom - until now. Now, i practice it. What I like about my brother-in-law is his intelligence and willingness to listen, open mindedly, without bias, and the fact that he is not an extremist, has not used his enthusiasm for his political and religious beliefs to coalesce into a far right extremist religious-political viewpoint, with religion and politics deeply intertwined. You know the type; the "Trump was put in power by Jesus and the Lord" type, the insufferables. My brother-in law is amazed that so many of his fellow christian conservatives continue to support Trump. HIs notion is that trump's behavior has been so obviousl, veriviably bad on so many occasions, with seemingly more to come, that it makes no sense to support his plitical campaign ambitions, that the time has long since come for Republicans to choose a new leader. To your average secular progressive Democrat, nothing could be more obvious, but to most MAGA members this reasoning is unthinkable, blasphemous, incomprehensible. I have a good friend at the senior center who is my good friend partly because we never talk politics. He says hew would vote for Trump today, and will vote for him in the future. Yes, I fing this amazing. A glance into my friend's mind came the tie he told me that if ttwo men were applying for a job, one white, one black, the he would hire the more qualifiecgentleman, but that if the two we equally qualified, he would hire the white guy. That comment to me is a nearly explicit admission of being a racist. And I would be my house that my friend would insist that there is nothing "racist" about it. Fortunately, we'll never have that conversation. At least, I won't start one.

Finding Writers, Solving Problems

ITS ALWAYS EXCITING finding writers, romance writers, science fiction authors, whatever floats your boat, finding a new one and really likeing him/her, and then discovering that the author has written several books, with more on the way, a whole new universe of reading pleasure for you. Introducing Jeff Goodell, a writer from the S.F. Bay area who focuses on the Earth's ecosystem, and therefore, climate change.C limate change is, above all else, what we eed to be writing about, talking about, doing somethinb about, obviously. Three book by Goodell which seem to be "must reads" are: "The Heat Will Kill You First", his most recent, and, "How To Cool the Planet", and, "The Water Will Rise". Two of the books dal with the two main components of global warming; sea level rise, and burgeoning heat. The former will force humanity to invest untold billions of dollars moving itself back and away from the encroaching oceans worldwide, relocating thousands of cities and billions of people, and the heat is already killing people, more every year. Al that we already know, need to know, and can learn a great deal more about by smmoothly reading Goodells's clear, easy to read prose. For a little bit more optimism, let's try "How To Cool the Planet", in which Goodell claims that for the most part, humanity already has the necessary technologies, or can rapidly develop them, to actually reverse global warming and climate change, and save the planet for future generations. Massive geo-engineering projects, such as removing billions of tons of carbon from the atmosphere, are possible. What we lack presently is teh human political determination and political will to get started, and the comprehensive international cooperation necessary. However, it is comforting to know that intelligent people are researching and explaining the situation to the rest of us; now, its up to the rest of us to take advangae, learn, and take action.

Doing, Or Not Doing Business

IT TURNS OUT that the big Supreme Court decisioin involving whether a business in which the owners are devout Christians, a "Christian business" if you will, is requird by law to do business with people whose lifestyles, behavior, or religious views - or whatever - are so objectioanble to the businessowners as to be unacceptable, invloved not a bakery, but rather, an online enterprise of some sort. Nonetheless, same basic idea. And by now we all know the result, the ruling. I have no trouble understanding it. Hell,a business owner ought to be able, and allowed by law, to do business or to not do busines with whomever he or she damned well pleases. At least, so you might think, so you might imagine. But on the other hand, any business which seeks and obtaines a business license, which is basically permission form government to go into business, the agreement is that the business will serve the public, the whole public, and nothing but the public, so help it God...that the business will not violate federal non-discrimination laws it either stipulated, or implicit. As in most questions involving the effects and desirability of some action, there are many possible ways of looking at and evaluating the situation. It is not illegal to be unkind, or rude, nor insensitive, nor should it be. Arguably, if a gay couple wants to buy a wedding cake from a bakery, the couple is not in any way intending to be disrecpectful of the religious beliefs of the owners, nor do they intend any harm to them or their religious freedom. Of that, you can be assured. What harm does it do Christians to do business with non Christians, or gay people? To not do businees with them damages the business, and the economy, and therefore, society. What is conspicuously lacking is an adequate constituion, especially at the federal level. I'm sure many if not most can be similarly identified, as constitutionally deficient. Trying to decide whether the founders intended abortion to be legal in the twenty first century is a complete waste of it, and yet...and with regard to the second amendment, what we need is a slightly longer, more detailed, more specific version, better suited to the twenty first century, and our technology. Its teim to stop canonizine, revering our past and current constitution, and creat a better one, a much better one. Madison and Jefferson would, I can assure you, wholeheartedly agree.