You never know what we'll churn up in cleaning a stall
As I noted at the time …
How do we deal with a segment of the public that has no interest in factual reality? Where belief, unsupported by critical reasoning, crosses into outright superstition? Too often, alas, it’s even wrapped in religious trappings – tainting both church and state with irrational fervor or madness.
And that’s what we have in the aftermath of Donald Trump’s campaign. The lies and half-truths will be hard to wash clean. The stench will remain even longer.
Yes, the underlying hurt runs deep, but Bernie Sanders tagged the causes of the problems accurately and pointed to joint collective action to repair the damage and heal the common good. Not so Trump or his legions.
There was nothing pragmatic or even logical in Trump’s babbling, no matter how many were deluded by his initial snake-oil charm. He was not telling it like it was but rather how they imagined life that might have been had they not been passed by. And then, toward the end, he was denying so much of what he’d told them in the first place or that his words had been just a joke. Locker room banter, as he claimed, not that many of us white guys recognized anything of the sort.
Now, no matter the outcome of the election, the nation’s divided by what he’s encouraged.
It’s not just racism, though those who think it’s fine for police to murder unarmed citizens is justifiable go about stealing Black Lives Matter lawn signs and then are alarmed if blacks take up the right-wing’s interpretation of the Second Amendment in self-defense. Folks, what would you do in that situation?
I’ll return to Bernie’s to-do list. I don’t think he was the administrator to push the goals through, but he certainly did an admirable job in articulating them. May he continue, building a base to take both houses of Congress in 2018.
Meanwhile, I’ll lament for what passes for national debate these days in all the tumult. We need honest dialogue to advance. And that will include admission of fault where it’s dues, rather than more blaming others.
After reading a post by Jonathan Caswell of the blog, A Mighty Mumford, I’m wondering about reviving a practice from Colonial America – a day of prayer and fasting.
The idea would be for people of faith in America, across religious denominations and faiths and political identifications, to set aside time to pray for the future of the country. Not in negatives, but in visions that call for greater love, justice, peace, and compassion throughout the land. (No “Smite My Enemies,” for starters.)
Prayer, as Caswell observes, is difficult, for many reasons. And done truly, it leaves each of us exposed and humbled. To which I would add, praying truly also means listening and waiting rather than ordering the Holy One what to do.
There’s much to be done, including turning swords into ploughshares. I’d say, Let us begin.
Usually, I’m tight-lipped about how I’ve voted. But once, my now ex-father-in-law (the retired colonel) and I (still the hippie in the workplace) compared the ballots we cast. To our mutual surprise, we discovered we supported the same candidates – some Republican, some Democrat.
Our reasons were identical: we turned to individuals of character who were interested in solving problems rather than acting on ideology. It helped that we knew many of them – pro and con.
There’s a reason the Big Money’s paying for those nasty campaign attack ads – they’re expecting you to repay them through your taxes. Vote FOR the candidate they’re attacking. You’ll nip their greed in the butt.
Woodpecker’s finding worms everywhere under the bark.
Every time Republicans accuse Hillary, the old bird’s find much juicier stuff lingering on the Republican tree.
She’s Little League by comparison. In that way, she hardly measures up to the rot.
Still makes one wonder about the partisan obsession and the witch hunts, all the same. Or Newt Gingrich’s hypocritical envy.
Contrary to right-wing proclamations, today’s Silent Majority runs independent, in the middle, far to left of the GOP. The rabid right wing, in fact, is anything but silent. Just listen to AM radio, if you must, or the Fox News propaganda machine.
No wonder they decry independent survey results that fail to support their fantasies, even while they continue to bray loudly.
(Remember, Hillary Clinton did win the popular vote for president. The Electoral College, however, is the one that counts.)
I remain concerned that in focusing so much on the surveys, the mass media introduced one more variable to the equation. In a multi-party race, if you’re assuming one candidate will win, is there a chance that entice casting a “conscience” vote elsewhere? And if so, how many would it take to sway the actual outcome?
Or, might it even have an impact if you’re assuming one candidate will lose, and if so, might enough “conscience” votes seal the deal?
In other words, it’s a case where the experiment itself might alter the results. I’d love to hear of cases in the physical sciences where this has happened. Meanwhile, back to the social sciences, I’ve long wondered about this, but the current situation magnifies the impact – and potential devastation.
Let’s just say looking at current political campaigning, Woodpecker has a headache.
How about you?
We want our money back.
From the super-rich and their lackeys.
When I first started working at what was widely labeled an archconservative newspaper, a reality hit me: I was the most conservative person in the newsroom. Not in what’s considered political conservatism today, but as someone who values and preserves a stream of the Old Ways. For me that’s meant radical Christianity of a Quaker-Mennonite-Dunker vein and practice, frugality and simplicity, acting respectfully and with manners, upholding honesty and learning, an appreciation of high culture, a distrust of the military-industrial-financial complex, a preference for small-is-beautiful economics, environmental and ecological sustainability …
So what do we call those who have purloined the conservative label, at least since the days of Barry Goldwater? The gas-guzzling, loud-mouthed and obnoxious know-nothings? The ones, especially, who act and sound like anarchists or Huns?
Jnana's Red Barn 