Tag: Politics

LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION

~ Jnana Hodson ~ Leave a comment

Noticing the first few lawn signs for a particular presidential hopeful the other day demanded a second look.

Yes, they were brand new. Sparkling. So who was endorsing him?

Nobody, apparently. Only his staff.

Years ago I learned to pay attention to just where the roadside signs were being planted. If they’re popping up on people’s lawns, you can assume some support for the candidate. But placed on public right of way or at intersections or uninhabited stretches of roadway, it’s only somebody doing a job. (In this case, the signs were in front of the parking lot of an abandoned church. So much for separation of church and state?)

Some of us have learned not to be fooled. And some of us have learned to seriously consider a candidate, based on the lawns where their names are appearing.

CAN ONE CANDIDATE REALLY DICTATE THE NEWS?

~ Jnana Hodson ~ Leave a comment

As we’ve noted, Donald Trump has a very thin skin. Add to that his obsession with, well, himself as he imagines himself, brooking no dissension. It’s said he dictates the position of television cameras at public events to enhance the likelihood of only flattering images.

And now that the New Hampshire Union Leader has endorsed Chris Christie in the Republican presidential primary, Trump is taking credit for getting the state’s largest newspaper dumped from participating in an upcoming debate in its home city. The ABC network, it appears, simply caved in to the candidate’s demands. (For the record, it’s not the first. Let’s hope, though, it’s the last.)

Perhaps as part of his shallow understanding of the workings of the public sphere, Trump apparently cannot separate the news gathering and reporting side of journalism from the opinions expressed in its editorial columns. Now, it seems, neither can ABC News, which puts its own credibility in question. More to the point, where does the network separate news from entertainment? Is it as soft and spineless as Trump just accused the American public of being?

Where’s the truth in all of Trump’s image-building? Who’s to separate the reality before us from an increasingly weird fiction? Is it going to be left to the legions of National Football League fans he’s just insulted? Or is the court jester really in line for his own coronation?

One way to take down a bully, as we recall, is for everyone to pile on together. So who will take the first move – and who will be second? After that, you can imagine what happens. Right?

WHY I’M MORE OR LESS IN FAVOR OF A BALANCED-BUDGET AMENDMENT

~ Jnana Hodson ~ Leave a comment

Those of us on the peacemaking side of armaments debates have usually resisted calls that would require a balanced budget, usually because of our concerns about what would happen to the poor and oppressed during economic downturns. It’s not that we’re against a balanced budget, mind you – many of us would favor a budget surplus and reserves.

Curiously, however, those who have been most vocal in their demands for a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced federal budget have also proclaimed strong support for large military outlays.

Here’s their unintentional bind: Some historians and economists have noted that without the ability to borrow money, America would never have been able to enter into armed conflict. Perhaps that’s universally true among nations, not just mine.

If that’s the case, perhaps we have our lines tangled. Would a balanced-budget requirement have prevented the U.S. buildup in Vietnam as well as both wars in Iraq?

Remember, too, we were on track to eliminate the federal deficit before 9/11 overturned everything.

The war costs were, in effect, put on a national credit card the hawks were never willing to pay off.

Is this a game we’re willing to play – a kind of chicken? (No pun intended.)

The concept certainly thickens the plot, even before we get to name-calling.

WHAT GAME? WHAT TEAM?

~ Jnana Hodson ~ Leave a comment

A bit of news over coffee came as a question. “Did you know Bill Clinton was in town yesterday?”

No, I had no idea. Turns out it was an unannounced stop at his wife’s campaign headquarters about a mile from our house. Fire up the troops. Support the loyalists. Show some spirit. A smart move between appearances elsewhere in the state that day.

It’s also the sort of thing that can make the New Hampshire first-in-the-nation presidential primary a lively affair. You just might be greeted by one of the White House hopefuls in your favorite diner or convenience store. You just might ask a question that generates headlines. Or you might accept a campaign button or bumper sticker or sign up to help. It’s all face-to-face, even hand-to-hand connection. You get a real-life measure of the person.

Usually, we’re aflutter in action this close to the actual voting. At least Hillary and Bernie are in traditional mode, but the Republican side is utterly baffling. I’m still not seeing much in the way of ground action. Very few bumper stickers or lawn signs, for one thing. No downtown rallies with enthusiasts waving “totem poles” of posters. No canvassers going door to door, either. Just what’s going on? Where’s the enthusiasm? The real enthusiasm?

My guess is the managers think they can do it all with television clips, mailings, radio advertising, and the like. Things they can, uh, manage. No surprises. And nothing personal.

Think of watching a professional football or baseball game and noticing there are no fans in the stands. No cheering or booing, for that matter. It would be deadly dull. And then, a moment later, realizing there are no live figures on the field, either. It’s all for appearances. Now, to the ads. The endless ads. At some point, you need a product — the one you tuned in to view.

There are good reasons to play the actual games rather than rely on the stats (or, in the political realm, rely on surveys). Upsets and unpredictable flashes make the day. The mouth-running coach may be good for building anticipation, but the quiet, calculating rival may deflate all that pregame hype and bombast. So everyone shows up for the contest. Or that’s what I’d expect.

TRUMPETS OF THE COMING STORM

~ Jnana Hodson ~ Leave a comment

My title is drawn from a line in John Greenleaf Whittier’s “The Last Walk in Autumn, XXV,” which echoes “blow the trumpet” in Ezekiel 33:3 “and the watchman cried” of 2 Samuel 18:25, followed by “I saw a great tumult, but I knew not what it was” in verse 29.

There were thunders and lightnings,
and a thick cloud upon the mount,
and the voice of the trumpet exceeding loud;
so that all the people that was in the camp trembled.
– Exodus 19:17

We, too, live in a tumultuous time, but in the crush of news and entertainment, the trumpets are muted. Prophets are neglected, and analysts and vapid pundits hold forth in their stead. Perhaps the rappers are too angry or too monotonous to cut through. The wheels spin and spin without a destination.

For my part, acknowledging Whittier fits my own turns in this writing. While serious American poetry typically turns away from anything touching on religious faith or political awareness (the exceptions are telling), both have been central to my life. Like Whittier – and Whitman, a step removed – Quaker practice has shaped my vision and voice. Nor is true faith distanced from social conditions. Closer to home, Whittier was a frequent visitor to the room where I worship weekly, and his parents married from the bench where I sit. To read Whittier with any appreciation in today’s literary perspective, though, I find I must break the cloying monotony of his simple rhyme schemes – recasting the lines will usually do the trick. What I then find is a surprising freshness within each line, a much more vigorous reach than is typical for the period. We forget that Whittier is the springboard for Robert Frost and all who follow in that vein. We also forget that Whittier was essentially a topical poet, immersed in the political and economic struggles of his time. Even Snowbound, for all of its seeming nostalgia, is an acknowledgment of technological advance and its impact.

Here, then, begins my cry.

IF YOU’RE CALLING FOR REAL, JUST SAY SO

~ Jnana Hodson ~ 1 Comment

Here in the midst of presidential primary season, I’m especially grateful to have caller ID on our phone. Yes, the voice part can be amusing, “Call from Chick-O, Chee Eh,” for instance. That’s Chico, California. Nobody we know.

We don’t pick up on the Unknown Caller, either. If they won’t leave a voicemail, we won’t deal with them. Period. Same for Wireless or Cell Phone, which has become another way for candidates’ campaigns and polling services to try to get through to us again.

Having a registered number adds to the problem. As more and more people switch to cell phones, the phone book gets slimmer – even before the printer switched to the tiniest type in existence for the White Pages. So the pollsters are sampling a shrinking pool of the public, which means, well, the same folks again and again.

Hey, usually the folks we want to hear from are shooting us emails anyway. So when are you using the telephone these days? Or how? And then? Does texting count, too?

SECOND TAKE ON THAT BUMPER SLOGAN

~ Jnana Hodson ~ 5 Comments

I’ll admit I laughed when I saw the sticker:

WHEN RELIGION RULED THE WORLD
THEY CALLED IT THE DARK AGES

But then I started thinking of the ongoing reconsideration of the era itself, which suggests a far richer and more varied culture than we’ve admitted. Just look at the glorious cathedrals, for starters.

Add to that an awareness of the atheistic evils of the 20th century, beginning with Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and others. How many millions were murdered as their victims?

The sticker was on a tiny van parked at the trail head, and a bit further I came across its owner in a cloud of smoke.

Not to be judgmental, but I found myself wondering about his alternative. It looked pretty dark. As for me, I’ve seen enough to suggest religion – true religion – can release us from darkness as a people.

Let’s start with the civil rights movement, if you wish. But there are many others.

Think of religion as a sword that cuts both ways, depending on its user and that matter of love. And then ask, How else are we to aspire to a better world?

MORE THAN SNOW IN THE AIR, AT LAST

~ Jnana Hodson ~ Leave a comment

Just as the first snowstorm of the season has finally hit New Hampshire, the state’s first-in-the-nation presidential primary is beginning to show some flickering flames. The kind that produce both heat and light. Up till now, it’s been only smoke, mostly on the Republican side. (The Democrats have been politely, though passionately, lined up behind Hillary or Bernie, recognizing the battle they’ll share together after the national convention.) The Granite State’s winnowing function has worked best when some unanticipated turn reveals a candidate’s true character for the public to see, either with devastating consequences for the campaign or its big breakthrough moment.

To be candid, I’m surprised we got through the autumn without seeing one or two of these. Yes, Trump came close when he attacked a St. Anselm college student as a “Bush plant” after she asked him a question, but the story never gained traction. The rest of the pack of candidates never picked up on the theme or any other, for that matter. The race to date has been pretty bland, all too predictable, little to set one apart from the other. Where’s the genuine courage or bold intelligence been? Talk all you want about the Trump-Carson-Fiorina outsider role, the pros in the lineup have been notable mostly in their failure to connect as seasoned campaigners rather than slick packaging alone. We’ll probably see some fascinating postmortems when it’s all over, but for now the scene’s been pretty befuddling.

We did awaken to an unexpected surprise November 28 when Joseph W. McQuaid, publisher of the state’s largest newspaper, endorsed Chris Christie. While the Union Leader and its New Hampshire Sunday News hold staunchly conservative editorial pages, there are Republicans in the state who insist these are liberal media. Ahem. True, McQuaid has often marched out of step with many of the state’s right-wing voters – anyone remember Malcom Forbes, for instance? – but you can assume Joe’s never, ever voted for a Democrat.

Yesterday morning, though, came the startling headline across the top of the front page: “Trump campaign insults NH voters’ intelligence,” an editorial by McQuaid noting Trump’s resemblance to bully “Biff” in the “Back to the Future” series. As McQuaid wrote, “Trump has shown himself to be a crude blowhard with no clear philosophy and no deeper understanding of the important and serious role of President of the United States than one of the goons he lets rough up protesters in his crowds.”

You get the idea.

And Trump’s response?

As this morning’s top of the front page headline announces, “Trump calls McQuaid ‘lowlife.'”

Of the many things you might accuse the publisher, “lowlife” is not one that springs to my mind, especially when coming from the lips of someone like Trump. The inaccurate retort carries the air of desperation – and flailing.

We’re still six weeks away from the voting booths, and Trump’s starting to show his central weakness. Am I wrong in seeing him as thin-skinned, someone who can’t take criticism or a well-aimed insult? Who can’t take what he routinely dishes out? Is this a wakeup call to his rivals to get their punches in, too, now that they see he’s not invincible? For that matter, what will their responses reveal about them?

Sure looks like it’s about to get interesting. Maybe even exciting. But first, I need to shovel some snow.

NOT EXACTLY BIGALOW?

~ Jnana Hodson ~ 2 Comments

 

The more I listen, the more I perceive the Tea Party agenda is ultimately an attack on democracy in America. Unlike the Founding Fathers, they have no respect for the necessity of government.

And a position of no compromise is the essence of tyrannical dictatorship.

What’s left would be brutal and cruel. Especially, for many of them, without their Social Security, in the aftermath.

And they’re afraid of socialism as an attack on the nation and its values? Think again.

ARE YOU SAFER?

~ Jnana Hodson ~ 4 Comments

That’s what the big red headline said on the large card we got in the mail. The headline was underscored by the line, “Are you safer now than you were just one year ago?”

Before answering, note that the lines were accompanied by a large photo of masked men waving Arabic flags from a parade of pickup trucks. No way to tell where the photo was taken, by the way – it could have been from the movement that toppled dictators across northern Africa for all we know.

The mailing, from the self-proclaimed Conservative Solutions Project, is attempting to restore excessive national security measures many conservatives successfully clamored to remove. And now? They want it back. Or some of them do. Or maybe a group of retired intelligence officers, now living in Florida, are trying to stir something up.

The text on the back includes the misleading statement, “Conservatives know that we can never preserve the American Dream if we can not first preserve our National Security.” No, that’s a pathway to dictatorship and its police-state terror. Wasn’t that what both Iraq wars were supposed to obliterate?

The American Dream rests on civil liberties and economic opportunity. That’s what needs to be protected, first and foremost.

What truly annoys me about this bombastic mailing is its blatant fear-mongering. I can answer that I don’t feel safer than I did a year ago, but it’s not because of the 2015 USA Freedom Act. It’s because too many nutty Americans are carrying guns they can obtain all too easily, and attempts to limit that keep getting rolled back. I’m concerned that some kid stealing quarters out of unlocked cars in our generally quiet neighborhood is going to get blasted away by a self-appointed vigilante walking his dog in the night. Or that the bullet will fly off to unintended mischief.

Look, I’m not against gun ownership – I’ve lived in rural areas where hunting puts food on the table. But let’s get real. How many of the 12,413 firearm deaths so far this year involve national security issues, anyway? How many of the 312 mass shooting incidents? How many of the 650 children and 2,452 teens killed? (These statistics do not include suicides — 21,175 in 2013). Talk all you want about radicalized Muslims, they’re not the big problem.

So, to the political groups, let’s just say this. Don’t play the “safer than a year ago” card unless you have some concrete proposals for dealing with rampant gun violence in this country. Something that makes sense without undermining our trust.