Category: rant

Yesterday, a Conservative friend of mine began a political post (wherein he shared a link from Fox News) as follows: “Whereupon liberal heads explode…”. This is a style of rhetoric I’ve seen from the right before: Doing things just to “make Liberal heads explode”. There’s so much anger and hatred expressed towards a broad group. It is as if they were _______-ist. But what gets me most is this attitude of hate towards groups.

Further, if you think I’m letting my side off the hook, you’re wrong. I get equally annoyed when I see on the Liberal forums that a read: “Oh, that will piss them off” or other things that express hatred towards all Trump supporters or all Conservatives. Of course, these are Liberals, so we know there’s no hate or _______-ism in them. Right? But for Conservatives? [In fact, there’s a cartoon going around Facebook making just that point — of how Liberals are accepting of anyone … except Conservatives].

Hate. Hate. Hate.

I just hate hate.

Seriously: If we are to move this country forward, we’ve got to get past this hatred of groups of people. Yes, people can choose their politics, unlike their skin color, sex, gender, orientation, or other protected classes. But that’s not a reason to hate people as an entire group. Hate and protest ideas and political positions. Dislike individuals. But don’t do things just because you don’t like broad groups, or just to piss off broad groups.

Doing things to piss of groups of people — doing things to make others angry — that’s just being a bully. You are better than that.

Just stop it. In Jewish tradition, tomorrow is the day of repentance — a day to commit to make changes in your behavior. Take advantage of it, and vow to stop this senseless hatred of groups, and doing things just because it will piss someone else off. You’re better than being one of the “Get off my lawn” nasty old men.

G’mar Chatima Tovah.

No, Folks, I do NOT want this to become a full-on Socialist Country.

I want the beautiful balance of Capitalism and Socialism that we had back before Nixon and Reagan, when we looked out for Rich and Poor, back when a one-income working person’s salary meant he or she could afford to rent – or even BUY – a nice little 2-bedroom house with a little bit of yard. I want the days when kids could learn a trade or go to college, or both, without spending a fortune, and usually ended up living as well as their parents within 10 years or so. I want days when people could afford to go to the doctor and get the medical treatment they needed, and there was confidence in the quality of that treatment.

If only this system had worked for everyone!

The blot on this sunny scenario was … Racism. Non-white people were treated badly and paid far worse and jailed far more often than white folks, even with other factors (intelligence, work ethic, education, nature of infraction, etc.) being equal. What’s worse is that this still goes on. At times, I seems that the Far Right’s entire purpose has been, since the 1950s, to make sure this state of affairs continues. If not for the Civil Rights Act — an act brought forward by Democrats that lost them the Southern Vote to this day — we would still have legally separated neighborhoods!!!

You should SEE the bullshit in the original CCRs (from the 1940s and NULLIFIED BY THE CRA) for the neighborhood I grew up in the Crestwood Hills community in West Los Angeles! These state that no one of Asian, Negroid, or Hispanic heritage could own or rent in our neighborhood. I even recall that there were initially covenants against Jews. In other neighborhoods, POC were not allowed to SLEEP in the neighborhood unless they were household servants living in separate quarters on the property.

This was an era when the best position to be was White, Male, and Christian. Those who were not in those categories were viewed — either explicitly or implicitly — as “beneath”. There was implicit privilege in three attributes: you got the better jobs, you got better treatment from law enforcement, you got the better pay, you got the better working conditions, you got accepted at the better colleges, you could join the right clubs and organizations — all without you having to do anything.

The GOP, which was once the anti-Slavery Party, is now the chief supporter of discriminatory actions in policing, in housing, in hiring, in firing.

Notice the completely different rules THEY follow when THEY are in power (e.g. “No criticism of US; To HELL with the First Amendment!”) versus when they are OUT of power. When they are out of power, they criticize, they investigate, and they complain about the corrupt ethics of those in power. When they gain power, that goes out the window. No criticism is permitted, despite what the First Amendment says; investigations into corruption are “witch hunts”, and there is a distinct lack of ethics.

From what I can tell, the GOP now represents only the those that have money, privilege, or position, and those that want to preserve their money, privileges, and/or positions. I’ve seen this characterized as the “Richies and the Racists”.

If we REALLY want America to be “great again”, we need to truly crown our good with brotherhood and knock off the racist crap,  We need to go beyond the “under God” in the pledge, and focus on the “liberty and justice for all.” We need to move beyond the constant fearmongering and international saber-rattling that make us cut beneficial social programs so we can spend insane amounts on the military … all while military families struggle MORE than the rest of the middle class. We need to truly and realistically understand the external risks that this nation faces, and use our military power to defend against those realistic risks, and as a way to help other nations protect and promote freedom, which benefits this country through the reduction of overall risk.

I have no idea how we can fix this, when when we live in a country where a large portion believe it to be a Christian Nation (despite what is written in the Constitution), where Christian values are to be legislated in statute and imposed on all. When we live in a country where Black Men Kneeling during the flag salute is treated as a soulless act of disrespect, but White Men marching to support White Privilege and re-segregation of society, and deliberately killing a counter demonstrator with one of their cars during the process, is treated as merely a product of understandable frustration. When our leadership proclaims that there is equal wrong on both sides.

The Right has gone insane, thanks to twisted religion, racism, greed, bully-worship, and fear. They have abandoned the values of their once respectable party to the cult of personality, and the worship of power and privilege.

Luckily, there is one way to bring us back to where we need to be. Please, Sane People! GET OUT AND VOTE! Every Primary. Every Election. Your vote is the difference.

[Note: This was adapted from a post by my friend Mary W. over on Facebook. Shared and adapted with permission.]

A few simple questions for my Republican and Trump-supporting friends. But first, let’s enter the Wayback Machine, shall we? (harp music plays). Just imagine. It is Summer 2014, four short years ago. Obama is President; Kerry is at State. While investigating Benghazi, the FBI uncovers information about the President and follows the leads:

• They discover that during the 2012 campaign, President Obama’s lawyer illegally paid off two women who had threatened to expose sexual affairs with President Obama, and that such payments were “in coordination with and at the direction of a candidate for federal office” and had been done “for the principal purpose of influencing the election”.  What would you demand to be done about Obama’s behavior?
• They discover that Obama’s campaign advisor had comitted bank and tax fraud, and was subsuquently indicted and found guilty of those crimes.  What would you demand to be done about Obama’s behavior?
• They discover that Obama and top members of his campaign team had met with the Russian government to obtain information on Mitt Romney in order to influence the election?  What would you demand to be done about Obama’s behavior?
• They discover that Russia, immediately after President Obama made a call for them find Romney’s smoking gun, had broken into Romney’s campaign servers.  What would you demand to be done about Obama’s behavior?
• They discover that Russia was still attempting to influence American elections and was hacking into election systems and state and local voting systems to influence the 2014 elections.  What would you demand to be done about Obama’s behavior?
• They discover that Obama is trying to influence the investigation and publicly discredit it, and is attempting to influence witnesses through any means at his disposal.  What would you demand to be done about Obama’s behavior?

I truly doubt that, in such a situation, Obama and the Obama administration would get a “pass”. I doubt that you would consider the investigation a “witch hunt”. After all, Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about a cigar.

What you would demand be done about Obama in such a situation?

What does the fact you are not demanding the same thing be done about Trump say about you?

If some action is wrong, it is wrong no matter who does it. People of your party do not get a pass just so they stay in power. Corruption in government and foreign influence of our elections is wrong whether it is done for or by the opposition party or your party. If you don’t speak up about it, and demand action, further investigations, and potentially the President’s impeachment, you are at minimum hypocritical. You are at minimum putting political parties over the nation’s welfare. And, if you are doing it because you didn’t like that black man in the White House, you could be racist.

If your white son and his black friend both stole cars, and then used them to steal money from a bank, and you don’t think they should get the same penalty for the same crime, what does that say about you?

 

Reading today’s non-editorial about the importance of a Free Press in the LA Times this morning* got me thinking about journalism and science. Both are evidence and science based (which is perhaps why the President hates both). Both go wherever the evidence takes them, even if it goes against the theory they are trying to provide or the story they want to tell. Both focus on fact, not fiction. Both respect peer review and independent confirmation of facts. Both encourage others to verify their results and findings.
——————
(*: Wherein the LA Times said, a free press is important, but dammit we’re so free that we’re not going to let anyone else tell us when to editorialize about it)

Both also have factions that push fictional science for agendas, that publish papers where the evidence is questionable or the conclusions are unsupported by the data, but that purport to be true (cough, anti-vaxxers, cough). These factions have ardent believers, who through intricate conspiracy theories believe the world is against them because the non-believers dispute their fraudulent findings. Even when confronted with evidence from multiple independent reputable sources, they cry “fake” at the truth, put on their tin-foil hats, and continue to march along the path of ignorance.

But focusing on the evidence, following the evidence, is the hallmark of both. So let’s follow the evidence:

• Hillary Clinton. “Lock her up”, they say. “Investigate her crimes”, they say. “Follow the evidence”, I say. There have been numerous investigations — both Congressional and FBI — into her purported crimes. There has been Congressional testimony. However, there has been no sufficiently strong evidence uncovered — evidence that will stand up in court — to indict and try. Without evidence, in this country, we do not lock people up. Without a trial, with sufficiently strong evidence to convince a jury, we do not lock people up. But Congress is free — if there is sufficient evidence — to start up a new investigation. Congress is also controlled by the party that ran against Hillary. But they do not start the investigation, even though they have the majority to do so. What does that evidence say about the evidence they do have? Conclusion: There is insufficient evidence to investigate further.
• Robert Mueller. “It’s a witch hunt”, they say. “It’s a fake investigation”, they say. “Kill the investigation,” they say. “Follow the evidence”, I say. If, as with Hillary Clinton, there is insufficient evidence to indict, there will be no indictments. If there was nothing wrong, why fear the investigation. After all, did Hillary Clinton say “Stop the investigation, it’s a witch hunt”? Hillary Clinton knew she did no wrong, and thus had nothing to fear from the investigation. Donald Trump is surely better than Hillary, and should be able withstand a deep investigation. After all, if he did nothing wrong, then there will be no evidence he did anything wrong. Follow the evidence. [Never mind that the evidence is certainly finding indictable offenses from those under him, and it is certainly finding evidence of contact between the Trump team and Russia, and it certainly finding evidence that Russia wanted to elect Trump and manipulated — through propaganda and cyberattack — the election to that end. There may not be collusion in the end, but they were working towards the same goal, and the evidence uncovered is certainly troubling and would be a major problem if any other President had done it — and that should be the standard.]
• Fake News. There have been numerous cries from the President that any news media that reports unflattering stories about him is fake. However, the hallmark of a strong democracy is its free press that investigates its leaders, that reports on their follies, foibles, mistakes, and yes, crimes. It has been that way in America since its birth — some press more muckraking and sensational than others, perhaps. But is mainstream media fake? “Follow the evidence”, I say. If the press was fake, there would be ample evidence that what was reported was false. There would be no videos or reporting to back it up. There would be discrepancies in the various reports — after all, if it is false, then multiple parties need to come up with the exact same lie and stick to it, without variance. There would be no corroboration from multiple sources. But that’s not the case. The essence of what is reported is based on evidence from multiple sources, and multiple journalistic outlets investigate and come up with the same stories. That’s preponderance of the evidence. Sure, some outlets may have more spin on the news than others, and some spin left, and some spin right. But spin is not falsehood — it is reviewing the evidence and drawing a conclusion. And even then, the spin can be confirmed with evidence, and one needs to look at how the same evidence is interpreted by multiple sources, and look at where the consensus is. Doing that makes clear that the bulk of what is out there in the news — I’d guess 80% to 85% percent, with the fringes being non-journalistic internet sources — are not fake news. That also puts the President’s claims — and the claims of groups like Infowars — into the fictional category.

If you take away something from today, it should be the importance of evidence-based reporting — be it science or journalism. It should be the importance of peer review and independent confirmation. It should be that our news media is not fake, and those making the claim are doing it to both push their particular agenda, and to create a smokescreen to hide the truth of that agenda from you.