tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-113592362024-03-07T03:41:08.283-05:00Horse PoupThe weekly, OK, monthly, OK quarterly ramblings of a regular guy with a mildly liberal bent, who is sick of BOTH parties and their BS. For those of you just joining us, click on the March 2005 archive, scroll to the bottom of the posts, and read your way back up... or at least read that first one to see how this mess got started out of fear and boredom in Iraq.Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.comBlogger236125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-82962000050225904992023-10-16T14:55:00.001-04:002023-10-16T14:55:46.448-04:00Life Moves Pretty Fast: Why Gen-X “Got it” Before the Rest of You If you are thinking “got what?” you’ve already proved my point.<p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="3f4b">I posted this on the FB a while back and upon revisiting, realized it's now behind a free, but password required platform. I didn't want it to be lost, so I'm putting it here as well. You can find the original, and sign up for a free (or pay, if you want) Medium membership.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="3f4b">https://medium.com/equality-includes-you/life-moves-pretty-fast-why-gen-x-got-it-before-the-rest-of-you-c07cf6c52904</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="3f4b"><br /></p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="3f4b">By <a class="eb el" href="https://goodmenproject.com/author/kara-post-kennedy/" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">Kara Post-Kennedy</a></p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="d8d1">Look, we have heard all the jokes. We know how you talk about us. And now you are saying <a class="eb el" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/gen-x-president-millennials-baby-boomers-generations-elections-2022-8" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">there might never be a Gen-X President</a> (as if Donald Trump did some sort of credit to his generation in that role).</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="998e">The thing is, WE DON’T CARE. You know this about us. Because we get it, and you likely don’t.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="61d3">We
have been described as some kind of neglected middle child between
boomers and the Millennials, but we are not your mother’s Jan Brady (or
our own, frankly). We were the first generation to experience a high
volume of moms working outside the home, divorced parents and friends
coming safely out of the closet. We were the last generation to have a
technology free childhood and to learn patience waiting for Saturday
morning cartoons or a favorite song to come on the radio.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="ea61">We
were the first generation to write papers on computers and the last
generation to use typewriters. We were the last generation to know a
time when a missed call was a missed call and the first generation to
play video games. We were the last generation who spent a largely
unsupervised childhood on dangerous playground equipment.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="85de">We were the first generation to grow up with the diversity of <em class="rx">Sesame Street,</em> the lessons in community from<em class="rx"> Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood</em> and the brilliant bonkers of <em class="rx">Electric Company</em>.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="1ffd">We GET IT.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="3eba">Our
unique positioning in history gave us a perspective that some of you
are still struggling to understand — and this spans ALL generations, not
just those older than us. Because some of you who are younger than we
are just don’t get what it was like BEFORE we came along and some of you
who are older than us refuse to process new information, So let me
break this down for you — we did a LOT of heavy lifting so you all
didn’t have to.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="0739">And we’re exhausted.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="b665">You
know that statistic that people love to quote (even if it is no longer
true?) You know, the one about 50% of marriages ending in divorce? Yeah,
well — that <a class="eb el" href="https://ourworldindata.org/marriages-and-divorces#:~:text=We%20can%20see%20here%20where,for%20those%20in%20the%201990s." rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">was OUR parents</a>. So we “got” that marriage was a social construct and not a holy mandate WAY before the rest of you.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="1a39">The first openly <a class="eb el" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soap_(TV_series)" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">gay TV character</a> appeared during our childhoods. Ditto for the first openly <a class="eb el" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Milk" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">gay elected official.</a> <a class="eb el" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_HIV/AIDS" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">AIDS was first detected</a>
as we were entering our adolescence and sexual awakening years — we
were the first generation to become sexually active with this specter
over our heads.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="8710">“<a class="eb el" href="https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/roots-premieres-on-television#:~:text=January%2023%2C%201977%20sees%20the,end%20of%20the%20Civil%20War." rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">Roots</a>”
was first aired during our childhoods. We were the generation that grew
up watching “The Jeffersons”, “What’s Happening”, “Good Times” and
“Sanford and Son”. We were the first kids who grew up in a country with <a class="eb el" href="https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/civil-rights-center/statutes/civil-rights-act-of-1964#:~:text=In%201964%2C%20Congress%20passed%20Public,hiring%2C%20promoting%2C%20and%20firing." rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">civil rights laws</a>.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="b82b">We were the first generation to grow up back when <a class="eb el" href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/410/113/" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">Roe v. Wade was the law of the land</a>. Not that we took it for granted; we marched (yes, I personally) in D.C. in 1989 in what was at the time one of the<a class="eb el" href="https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/fl-xpm-1989-04-10-8901180910-story.html" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank"> largest political rallies in U.S. history</a>..</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="3420">We were the first generation that grew up knowing Mom could <a class="eb el" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3N9K7eoVtm0" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">bring home the bacon</a>.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="45b4">We were <a class="eb el" href="https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20130425006486/en/The-MTV-Generation-Grows-Up" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">the MTV Generation</a>; our teenage years were flooded with images of gender fluid icons like Bowie, Boy George, Grace Jones and Prince.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="39ab">We were the first generation that saw <a class="eb el" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_education_in_the_United_States" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">men and women enrolled in college in equal numbers</a>.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="8dca">We were the first generation<a class="eb el" href="https://grist.org/climate-energy/2011-11-07-gen-y-and-gen-x-get-it-right-on-the-environment-old-folks-dont/" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank"> to be taught about environmental sustainability</a> from a young age — <a class="eb el" href="https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/how-1970s-created-recycling-we-know-it-180967179/" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">that’s recycling</a> and land management to global warming. We are the generation MOST likely to consider <a class="eb el" href="https://www.schroders.com/en-gb/uk/individual/insights/gen-xers-care-more-about-sustainability-than-millennials/#:~:text=Nearly%20two%2Dthirds%20of%20Gen,The%20Global%20average%20was%2061%25." rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">sustainability factors when investing</a>.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="f346">WE. GET. IT.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="7670">Our childhoods featured the <a class="eb el" href="https://www.britannica.com/event/Vietnam-War" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">end of the Vietnam War</a>, the <a class="eb el" href="https://www.history.com/topics/1970s/watergate" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">Watergate scandal</a>, <a class="eb el" href="https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/three-mile-island-accident.aspx" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">Three Mile Island meltdown</a>, the <a class="eb el" href="https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/mass-suicide-at-jonestown" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">Jonestown massacre</a>, and <a class="eb el" href="https://www.britannica.com/event/Iran-hostage-crisis" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">Iranian hostage crisis</a>. <a class="eb el" href="https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/piapeterson/photos-1970s-fuel-shortage-prices" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">We waited in the backseat of the car for hours just to get gas.</a></p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="4441">Our teenage years saw the <a class="eb el" href="https://www.britannica.com/event/Challenger-disaster" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">Challenger disaster,</a> <a class="eb el" href="https://www.history.com/topics/1980s/exxon-valdez-oil-spill" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">Exxon Valdez oil tanker spill</a>, and the<a class="eb el" href="https://www.history.com/topics/cold-war/berlin-wall#:~:text=at%20high%20speeds.-,The%20Berlin%20Wall%3A%20The%20Fall%20of%20the%20Wall,to%20cross%20the%20country's%20borders." rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank"> Fall of the Berlin Wall.</a></p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="fb96">As young adults, we were in the cross hairs of <a class="eb el" href="https://history.army.mil/html/bookshelves/resmat/desert-storm/index.html" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">Operation Desert Storm.</a></p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="e085">When 9/11 happened, we were most of the boots on the ground. We were many of the victims.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="1c1d">We were the last generation to graduate from high school before the escalation of <a class="eb el" href="https://www.history.com/topics/1990s/columbine-high-school-shootings" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">school shootings began</a> and the first generation to send our children into schools with this threat hanging over us as the norm.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="c613"><mark class="xy xz br">Trickle Down Economics (the other big lie) destroyed the middle class before we even had our sea legs underneath us. We are </mark><mark class="xy xz br"><a class="eb el" href="https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/trend/archive/winter-2018/how-generation-x-could-change-the-american-dream" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">the first American generation who have not improved on our parent’s financial situation</a></mark><mark class="xy xz br"> because wages stagnated while inflation skyrocketed. We were the last generation to get an affordable college education.</mark></p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="ac21">Gen-X
broke new ground in music (RIP Kurt Cobain and Tupac Shakur), comedy
(Chris Rock, Dave Chappelle, Tina Fey, Jon Stewart, Mindy Kaling),
innovation (Elon Musk, <a class="eb el" href="https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/4/20994361/google-alphabet-larry-page-sergey-brin-sundar-pichai-co-founders-ceo-timeline" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">Sergey Brin & Larry Page</a>,
), athletics (Tiger Woods, Kobe Bryant, Venus and Serena Williams),
journalism (Julian Assange, Anderson Cooper), film and TV (Joss Whedon,
Kevin Williamson, JJ Abrams, Wes Anderson) and where would we be without
John Cusack, Julia Roberts, Robert Downey Jr, Christian Bale, Will
Smith, Ryan Gosling, Christina Ricci, Uma Thurman, Drew Barrymore and
literally 100s of others of what will most likely be t<a class="eb el" href="https://www.flicks.co.uk/features/does-tom-cruise-represent-the-last-generation-of-flesh-and-blood-movie-stars/" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">he final generation of true Hollywood stars</a>.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="4e55">And the <a class="eb el" href="https://www.familyeducation.com/family-life/a-look-at-the-different-generations-and-how-they-parent" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">children we have raised</a>
are groundbreakers — rejecting gender stereotypes, patriarchal rule and
systemic discrimination in very loud voices. They GET that <a class="eb el" href="https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/you-said-race-but-are-you-actually-talking-about-race/" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">race</a>, <a class="eb el" href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/old-school-parenting-modern-day-families/201907/time-move-beyond-gender-is-socially-constructed" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">gender</a> and even <a class="eb el" href="https://goodmenproject.com/featured-content/heterosexuality-is-a-construct/" rel="noopener ugc nofollow" target="_blank">heterosexuality</a> are social constructs.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="45c4">We raised them this way because WE GET IT.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="fa8e">And
while you were making those “you want fries with that?” jokes about us,
we were quietly living up to one of the anthems of our youth: <em class="rx">Everybody Wants to Rule the World.</em></p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="485d">We did it so quietly, you never even noticed. We barely noticed ourselves. Because we were just being who we are.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="e180">If you doubt any of what I am saying here, you can just Google it. Thanks to Gen X.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="c85e">And now we can unapologetically say — YOU’RE WELCOME.</p><p class="pw-post-body-paragraph rb rc kf rd b kz re rf rg lc rh ri rj rk rl rm rn ro rp rq rr rs rt ru rv rw ka bc" data-selectable-paragraph="" id="644f">And if you don’t know why, it’s just because you don’t get it.</p><p> </p>Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-36885824543025344732023-10-07T10:30:00.002-04:002023-10-07T10:30:41.052-04:00Is it really a "witch hunt" if you've invited it?<p>There's a life lesson most of us learned during our rebellious teen years: if you constantly toe the line, push limits, challenge rules, publicly challenge authority, you will inevitably amass a large number of people who are just drooling while waiting for you to slip up and actually cross that line. When you do, no matter how mildly or insignificantly, those people will race in to make an example of you. You will face punishment, ridicule, embarrassment, humiliation, condemnation, etc. completely out of proportion to the slip up. </p><p>It's like that old "I'm not touching you" game where siblings taunt each other, usually after driving their parents crazy until one parent explodes out the "STOP TOUCHING EACH OTHER NOW" command, and since the order was screamed in that desperate frustration all kids recognize as "oh no, they're really angry now, we'd better listen," you finally sit back in that spacious rear seat of the car you've been stuck in for 6 or 8 or 10 hours, and decide to listen ...for a minute. Then you hold your hand directly in your brother's face, but NOT touching him, just because what else is there to do in that back seat? (I actually believe this is why car seats were invented) And of course, your brother does the same thing to you, but NOT actually touching you, and you both realize this game is even more annoying than the fighting that took place before the STOP TOUCHING command was given. And of course, you slip up and touch each other and the actual fighting begins all over again, only this time, dad has had enough. He pulls the car over, and drags you both out of the back seat, and the real beatings commence. It was just a matter of time.<br /></p><p>As stated, most of us learned this during the teen years. Then most of us grew up and either stopped challenging everything all the time, picking our battles, saving our energy for prioritized fights, or we just got too busy with our lives, making a living, contributing to society in other ways, etc. and so on. Either way, MOST of us learned the lesson as we became adults. One might even posit that this is one of the lessons that makes us an adult. So why then do so many people believe a man who failed to learned this lesson in seven decades on the planet is the victim of a "political witch hunt?"</p><p>There's nothing political about it. It wasn't political when we were 15, before we learned this lesson everyone learns. The only thing different here is that TinyD never seems to have learned the lesson. Anyone remotely curious about the world's events knows that TinyD has squandered his inheritance in ways that always border on the illegal, dive deeply into the unethical, and are considered squarely immoral by most of the population. You cannot have been alive during the TinyD era and not know his tax dodge schemes, his inflated net worth, his hiring of undocumented immigrants and his failure to pay them, his illegal dumping, mishandling of hazardous materials, his shady real estate deals, his lawsuits against orphanages and school districts, his fake charities and donations. I mean, there really is just too much to list. There's no question, for those of us with our heads not buried in sand, that TinyD is and remains a scum bag - not always a criminal, but certainly someone who publicly, willingly, unashamedly, even boastfully toed every line he ever encountered. And we all know that when you make that your practice, you occasionally slip over that line, even if it's just one toe. We also all know that when you make that your practice, and you inevitably slip up, there will be a crowd cheering for you to be made an example of. <br /></p><p>So, again, for most of us, we learn this lesson during our high school years. That first time we slip up and get caught, we feel like it's us against the world, that everyone is suddenly against us ...almost like it was a witch hunt! Some of us never learn and keep getting beat down by what in reality are our own mistakes from which we refuse to learn. We call those people who can't learn from their own mistakes or accept the consequences of their own actions "rebels" when they are teenagers, but when they refuse to learn well into adulthood - into their seventies, for instance - well then we call them psychopaths.</p><p>Anyhoo, like I said, once you learn this lesson, you realize there's nothing "political" about it. It's not a "witch hunt." It's just the consequence of one's actions. Most of us learned that when we were teens.</p><p>Luth</p><p>Out<br /></p>Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-43634456441736229322023-06-27T20:26:00.001-04:002023-06-27T20:29:36.858-04:00Sinners in the hands of an angry oligarch<p>While I'm pretty sure he's never actually read (or understood) Jonathan Edwards, TinyD's latest campaign con is that it is only by his hands that we're all spared from the flames of hell. He tells us not to worry about the witch hunts after him, because <i><b>they're</b></i> not really after him - <i><b>they're</b></i> after us (you and me) and he's just in the way, holding <i><b>them</b></i> back, saving us from the heat of those flames.</p><p>Here's the problem with that theory - a problem TinyD's followers can't seem to comprehend - his protection only works in a lawless society, and only if you remain outwardly loyal to <i><b>him</b></i>. (see also: Putin's Russia, Qaddafi's Lybia, Noriega's Panama, Cedras's Haiti, Hitler's Germany...)</p><p>Here's another problem with it: who are <i><b>they</b></i>? ...but we should probably be asking Tucker Carlson who <i><b>they</b></i> are, since he's never written anything not centered on this us v them premise.<br /></p><p>OK, OK, I get it. THAT'S why seemingly rational people choose to continue to fall for the con. They believe this protection is the only protection an average Joe can get in this corrupt world. Sure, the US is a nation of laws, but all other politicians and cops and every other government employee is so corrupt and the laws are clearly written by the rich to the point where their only hope is to pledge their allegiance not to the flag of the nation for which it stands, but to this savior who promises them everything they want. <br /></p><p>In other words, it's the modern assertion of the rise of fascism. (His expressed admiration for the things Putin can get away with is no coincidence. It's him saying the quiet parts out loud.). Only in a lawless society would any of us need this kind of "protection." In our society, in a nation of laws, we're all protected already by little things like the Constitution - a document created by -gasp- GOVERNMENT! ...but only if we remain a nation of laws where every citizen gets due process, a day in court. For most Americans, our Constitution is the only protection we can count on or afford. It's the system of laws that keeps individuals free, protected, able to have a voice. Americans don't need TinyD's protection. We have a system of laws that functions for all of us as long as we elect people committed to maintaining it. Anyone offering protection in a system where it is guaranteed for all citizens is running a con. Anyone choosing that con has given up on democracy.<br /></p><p></p><p>The joke is now, and ever was on them. This guy who has made a career believing that the rules are for suckers not born into money openly tells wealthier audiences that the people he's promising to protect, but who can't afford the membership fees for his club, are the very suckers for whom the rules are made. He's counting on those suckers to keep on buying his con so he can continue to suck money from public office and avoid prosecution. And if those suckers choose to double down on the con rather than admitting they've been played, then the joke's on all of us if we don't show up and vote to counter their dwindling numbers.</p><p>There, but for the grace of TinyD's protection, goes democracy.</p><p>Luth</p><p>Out<br /></p>Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-85734094371467347202020-09-07T16:51:00.008-04:002023-06-27T20:30:30.680-04:00TinyD Through The Decades<p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">For those of you who can’t seem to understand why so many Americans are hesitant to trust our current president, here’s a look back at the decades that shaped our opinions. Turns out he didn’t just appear out of nowhere on The Apprentice!<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><u><o:p> </o:p></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><u>Trump in the 50s<o:p></o:p></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">Caught by neighbor tossing rocks at a toddler in a play pen.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">First becomes a millionaire even though he won’t turn 14 until the end of the decade, he’s on the family business’s payroll to the tune of $250,000 per year. This fairly common method of legal money laundering/tax evasion isn’t unique to the Trumps, but it does fly in the face of the “self-made” myth our trust fund baby president seems to like repeating.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.politicalflare.com/2019/10/biographer-reveals-trump-was-a-vicious-bully-as-a-child-who-threw-rocks-at-babies/" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.politicalflare.com/2019/10/biographer-reveals-trump-was-a-vicious-bully-as-a-child-who-threw-rocks-at-babies/</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6232985/Trumps-DADS-tax-returns-revealing-president-earning-200-000-year-aged-THREE.html" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6232985/Trumps-DADS-tax-returns-revealing-president-earning-200-000-year-aged-THREE.html</a> (see also <i>The Economist</i>, later in this thread)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><u>Trump in the 60’s<o:p></o:p></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">Five-time draft dodger – again, not unique to the Trumps since many families with money attempted various forms of it, but a pattern is clearly starting to emerge. In fact, Joe Biden’s draft record includes 5 deferments as well (asthma as a teenager). The difference is that Joe Biden doesn’t denigrate or belittle the sacrifices of our troops, and his own son paid the ultimate price serving our nation.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.archives.gov/foia/donald-trump-selective-service-draft-card.html" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.archives.gov/foia/donald-trump-selective-service-draft-card.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.insidesources.com/joe-bidens-draft-record-looks-a-lot-like-donald-trumps-do-democrats-care/" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.insidesources.com/joe-bidens-draft-record-looks-a-lot-like-donald-trumps-do-democrats-care/</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><u>Trump in the 70’s<o:p></o:p></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgDtjwNHDHFmk_18mQQqPKi_zXEzbQ4IWZFUUMQF0y18612Ml78PyquXd6Spdp0kDBYNr58YoEgNMhWC-3QUyutxqSZj-Q-O-krdea2WBp62uNm-BWW3vkvIGA3S8Ya6gLlGls6/s974/RacistLandlord.png" style="font-family: -webkit-standard; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" data-original-height="464" data-original-width="974" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgDtjwNHDHFmk_18mQQqPKi_zXEzbQ4IWZFUUMQF0y18612Ml78PyquXd6Spdp0kDBYNr58YoEgNMhWC-3QUyutxqSZj-Q-O-krdea2WBp62uNm-BWW3vkvIGA3S8Ya6gLlGls6/s320/RacistLandlord.png" width="320" /></a> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">DOJ sues Trump Mgt. Co. for illegal, racist rent practices. Trump counter-sues for $100 million, (loses) settles with DOJ, agrees to provide Urban League with listings of all vacancies, and to offer every 5<sup>th</sup>vacancy to minority applicants in any buildings with less than 10% minority occupancy …but does not admit guilt. TMC is defended by Roy Cohen, of McCarthyism and mafia notoriety. Cohen becomes firmly established as TMC lawyer over a 13-year period.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">First marriage (Ivana). Estimates of the cost of the wedding are tough to find, but the divorce settlement was $25 million.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><u>Trump in the 1980s<o:p></o:p></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">Trump tells Rona Barrett the US should have invaded Iran, using US hostages as an excuse to take over the sovereign nation, to get oil and “respect.” Also predicts a president with “no great brain, but a big smile” could get elected. Says he wouldn’t ever run because it’s “too mean a business,” but he’d like to help select a president.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">During a break in his affair with Marla Maples, Trump dates tennis player/model, Gabriela Sabatini, all while still married to Ivana.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">Misrepresents his share of his family’s $200 million estimated worth in order to appear on 1982 Forbes List of wealthiest Americans, claiming to be worth $100 million. Later investigation revealed Trump’s personal worth at the time may have been $5 million. (this, after receiving an estimated $413 million from his father)<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-wealth-fred-trump.html" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-wealth-fred-trump.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><a href="https://youtu.be/nAgJAxkALyc" style="color: #954f72;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;">https://youtu.be/nAgJAxkALyc</span></a><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><a href="https://money.cnn.com/2016/03/28/news/trump-apartment-tenants/index.html" style="color: #954f72;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;">https://money.cnn.com/2016/03/28/news/trump-apartment-tenants/index.html</span></a><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">In 1985, New York City brought a lawsuit against Trump for allegedly using tactics to force out tenants of 100 Central Park South, which he intended to demolish together with the building next door. After ten years in court, the two sides negotiated a deal allowing the building to stand as condominiums. <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1985/03/09/opinion/new-york-doer-and-slumlord-both.html" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.nytimes.com/1985/03/09/opinion/new-york-doer-and-slumlord-both.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1998/03/26/nyregion/win-trump-no-tenants-battle-80-s-ends-with-glad-handing-all-around.html" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.nytimes.com/1998/03/26/nyregion/win-trump-no-tenants-battle-80-s-ends-with-glad-handing-all-around.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="caret-color: rgb(32, 33, 34); font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">In 1988, the Justice Department sued Trump for violating procedures related to public notifications when buying voting stock in a company related to his attempted takeovers of Holiday Corporation and Bally Manufacturing Corporation in 1986. On April 5, 1988, Trump agreed to pay $750,000 to settle the civil penalties of the antitrust lawsuit. <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://apnews.com/54ea0dc590fc97d9e9e86c65336649a1" style="color: #954f72;">https://apnews.com/54ea0dc590fc97d9e9e86c65336649a1</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><u>Trump in the1990s<o:p></o:p></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">Trump’s dad sends an attorney to buy $3.35 million worth of chips at Trump Castle Casino in order to prevent the casino from missing an interest payment on a bond and going into default. The move to hide the loan was investigated resulting in a $30,000 fine, but successfully completing the loan. Fred Trump was later licensed by New Jersey to be able to make loans to casinos. Good thing, because Donald’s casinos would soon need more loans like this to avoid default. <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://pressofatlanticcity.com/news/how-donald-trumps-father-once-bailed-out-his-casino/article_934cb836-2c1d-11e6-8a13-173759856fe0.html" style="color: #954f72;">https://pressofatlanticcity.com/news/how-donald-trumps-father-once-bailed-out-his-casino/article_934cb836-2c1d-11e6-8a13-173759856fe0.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><a href="https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/09/trump-files-fred-trump-funneled-cash-donald-using-casino-chips/" style="color: #954f72;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;">https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/09/trump-files-fred-trump-funneled-cash-donald-using-casino-chips/</span></a><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">Trump’s first bankruptcy (1991) as Trump Taj Mahal is unable to service its debt. Forbes says this is the ONLY bankruptcy (of 5) involving Donald’s personal assets. While there is some debate over that, it’s clear Donald doesn’t like to put his own skin in the game.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><a href="https://time.com/4343030/donald-trump-failures/" style="color: #954f72;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;">https://time.com/4343030/donald-trump-failures/</span></a><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">Trump, now long associated with Cohen, uses mafia connected construction firms to build Trump Plaza and Trump Tower, grossly overpaying for supplies like concrete (money laundering?) and cutting corners/breaking the law, while other firms in the city pleaded with the FBI to be freed of mafia control. <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p style="font-family: "times new roman", serif; margin: 0in 27pt 15pt 0.25in;"><span style="color: white; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 10pt;">According to a Newsweek source who asked not to be identified because his family is well-known in the construction business, the asbestos and concrete were dumped near abandoned docks in Brooklyn and other discrete places instead of prescribed sites farther away—saving time and money. The White House referred Newsweek to the Trump Organization, which did not respond to an inquiry.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style="font-family: "times new roman", serif; margin: 0in 27pt 15pt 0.25in;"><span style="font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="color: white;">"On paper," as one of several news accounts put it, the demolition workers were members of Local 95, a Genovese-controlled union. But in reality, they were undocumented workers from Poland and South Korea. Ronald Fino, son of a Buffalo, New York, Mafia capo, told Newsweek they were known as "the sneaker brigade" for "remov[ing] the asbestos illegally." (Through the years, Trump denied knowing about the illegal workers, but in 1998, after years of litigation, he quietly paid a total of $1.38 million "to settle the case, with $500,000 of it going to a union benefits fund and the rest to pay lawyers' fees and expenses," The New York Times revealed in 2017.)</span><span style="color: #222222;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p style="font-family: "times new roman", serif; margin: 0in 27pt 15pt 0.25in;"><a href="https://www.newsweek.com/2019/01/18/donald-trump-mafia-connections-decades-later-linked-mob-1285771.html" style="color: #954f72;"><span style="font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 10pt;">https://www.newsweek.com/2019/01/18/donald-trump-mafia-connections-decades-later-linked-mob-1285771.html</span></a><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Helvetica Neue"; font-size: 10pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_Plaza_Hotel_and_Casino" style="color: #954f72;" title="Trump Plaza Hotel and Casino"><span color="" style="text-decoration: none;">Trump’s 2<sup>nd</sup> bankruptcy. Trump Plaza Hotel</span></a>, Trump lost his 49 percent stake in the luxury hotel to <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citibank" style="color: #954f72;" title="Citibank"><span color="" style="text-decoration: none;">Citibank</span></a> and five other lenders. In return Trump received more favorable terms on the remaining $550+ million owed to the lenders, and retain his position as “chief executive,” though he would not be paid and would not have a role in day-to-day operations.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_affairs_of_Donald_Trump#cite_note-NYTimes2-226" style="color: #954f72;"></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">Donald attempts to rewrite his father’s will in 1997, without Fred’s knowledge or consent, in order to use family business assets to get out of debt, attempts to name himself executor so he has full control of family assets. Fails. Denies any of it ever happened.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/nyt-trump-tried-change-fred-trump-will-2018-10?op=1" style="color: #954f72;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;">https://www.businessinsider.com/nyt-trump-tried-change-fred-trump-will-2018-10?op=1</span></a><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><a href="https://www.rawstory.com/2018/10/donald-trump-tried-scam-father-removed-executor-will-nyt-report/" style="color: #954f72;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;">https://www.rawstory.com/2018/10/donald-trump-tried-scam-father-removed-executor-will-nyt-report/</span></a><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">Divorces Ivana in 1992, marries Marla Maples in 1992, divorces her in 1999, although he is rumored to have begun dating Melania in 1998.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-melania-stormy-daniels-affairs-marriages-timeline-2018-3?op=1#trump-wasnt-single-for-long-in-1998-he-met-model-melania-knauss-the-pair-married-in-january-2005-8" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-melania-stormy-daniels-affairs-marriages-timeline-2018-3?op=1#trump-wasnt-single-for-long-in-1998-he-met-model-melania-knauss-the-pair-married-in-january-2005-8</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><u>Trump in the 2000s (this was a busy decade, so here’s just a sampling)<o:p></o:p></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">Trump pays $250,000 fine (3x the largest fine ever issued) for illegal lobbying trying to persuade NY Commission to deny a casino license for an Indian-run casino in the Catskills.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><a href="https://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/trump-250g-fine-lobbying-article-1.885295" style="color: #954f72;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;">https://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/trump-250g-fine-lobbying-article-1.885295</span></a><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><a href="https://nypost.com/2000/07/17/trump-probed-in-casino-lobbying-blitz/" style="color: #954f72;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;">https://nypost.com/2000/07/17/trump-probed-in-casino-lobbying-blitz/</span></a><span class="MsoHyperlink" style="color: #0563c1; text-decoration: underline;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">In 2001, Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts Inc. consented to the US Securities and Exchange Commission's cease-and-desist order regarding fraudulent statements in the company’s reports, said the culprit had been dismissed, and that Trump had personally been unaware of the matter. <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="caret-color: rgb(32, 33, 34); font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.sec.gov/news/headlines/trumphotels.htm" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.sec.gov/news/headlines/trumphotels.htm</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">In 2003, Trump sued A LOCAL PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT in Palos Verdes, CA, in order to get out of paying fees to the district per the terms of the lease he bought from the golf course’s previous owners.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.kpbs.org/news/2017/oct/12/insults-lawsuits-and-broken-rules-how-trump-built/" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.kpbs.org/news/2017/oct/12/insults-lawsuits-and-broken-rules-how-trump-built/</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-trump-tries-to-lock-school-district-out-of-2003dec03-story.html" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-trump-tries-to-lock-school-district-out-of-2003dec03-story.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">A failed 2004 Trump Organization/<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayrock_Group" style="color: #954f72;" title="Bayrock Group"><span color="" style="text-decoration: none;">Bayrock Group</span></a> venture defaulted on a $139 million loan in 2010. The failed project resulted in at least 10 lawsuits, including accusations of fraud from initial investors, some of which were still not settled in early 2016. <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/election/article63879697.html" style="color: #954f72;">http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/election/article63879697.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/17/nyregion/17trump.html" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/17/nyregion/17trump.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/failed-donald-trump-tower-thrust-into-gop-campaign-for-presidency/2269121" style="color: #954f72;">http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/failed-donald-trump-tower-thrust-into-gop-campaign-for-presidency/2269121</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">In 2005, the German state attorney prosecuted Trump Deutschland and its partners for accounting fraud. This followed Trump suing the city of Stuttgart (losing,) and Trump’s German partner suing Trump for the return of a EUR 200 million pre-payment. (oh, and he marries Melania)<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="caret-color: rgb(32, 33, 34); font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.dw.com/en/donald-trumps-castles-in-the-german-sky/a-36472081" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.dw.com/en/donald-trumps-castles-in-the-german-sky/a-36472081</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><a href="https://www.newsweek.com/all-women-trump-has-dated-married-or-been-linked-sexually-783370" style="color: #954f72;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;">https://www.newsweek.com/all-women-trump-has-dated-married-or-been-linked-sexually-783370</span></a><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="caret-color: rgb(32, 33, 34); font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">2008-<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Bank" style="color: #954f72;" title="Deutsche Bank"><span color="" style="text-decoration: none;">Deutsche Bank</span></a> attempts to collect $40 million<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Bank#Relationship_with_Donald_Trump" style="color: #954f72;" title="Deutsche Bank"><span color="" style="text-decoration: none;"> Trump</span></a> personally guaranteed against their $640 million loan for <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_International_Hotel_and_Tower_(Chicago)" style="color: #954f72;" title="Trump International Hotel and Tower (Chicago)"><span color="" style="text-decoration: none;">Trump International Hotel and Tower</span></a> in Chicago. Rather than paying the debt, Trump sued Deutsche Bank for $3 billion for undermining the project and damage to his reputation. Deutsche Bank then filed suit to obtain the $40 million. The two parties settled in 2010 with Deutsche Bank extending the loan term by five years. <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/05/business/05norris.html" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/05/business/05norris.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/03/the-lawsuits-of-donald-trump/273819/" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/03/the-lawsuits-of-donald-trump/273819/</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="caret-color: rgb(32, 33, 34); font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">In 2008, Trump filed a $100 million lawsuit for alleged fraud and CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS!<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_affairs_of_Donald_Trump#cite_note-Kim20Dec-78" style="color: #954f72;"><span color="" style="text-decoration: none;">[78]</span></a> against the California city of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rancho_Palos_Verdes,_California" style="color: #954f72;" title="Rancho Palos Verdes, California"><span color="" style="text-decoration: none;">Rancho Palos Verdes</span></a>, over a landslide-prone golf course in the area, which was purchased by Trump in 2002 for $27 million.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_affairs_of_Donald_Trump#cite_note-Kim20Dec-78" style="color: #954f72;"><span color="" style="text-decoration: none;">[78]</span></a> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2008/dec/20/local/me-trump20" style="color: #954f72;">http://articles.latimes.com/2008/dec/20/local/me-trump20</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/technology/20110113/trump-loses-round-in-a-local-lawsuit" style="color: #954f72;">http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/technology/20110113/trump-loses-round-in-a-local-lawsuit</a> (obtained from archive)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">2009-<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_Ocean_Resort_Baja_Mexico" style="color: #954f72;" title="Trump Ocean Resort Baja Mexico"><span color="" style="text-decoration: none;">Trump Ocean Resort Baja Mexico</span></a> investors sue for the return of deposits for condos in the failed project, claiming Trump misrepresented his role in the project. After its failure Trump claimed he had been little more than a spokesperson for the entire venture, disavowing any financial responsibility. Trump settled with over a hundred investors in 2013. <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2009-mar-07-fi-trump7-story.html" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2009-mar-07-fi-trump7-story.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/13/nyregion/feeling-deceived-over-homes-that-were-trump-in-name-only.html" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/13/nyregion/feeling-deceived-over-homes-that-were-trump-in-name-only.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-mo-donald-trump-settles-baja-mexico-condo-resort-lawsuit-20131127-story.html" style="color: #954f72;">http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-mo-donald-trump-settles-baja-mexico-condo-resort-lawsuit-20131127-story.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"> <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><u>Trump in the 2010s<o:p></o:p></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">The Economist reports that Trump’s business performance since 1985 is “mediocre compared to the stock market and New York property values.” Suggesting he’d be better off had he invested his estimated $100 million net worth in 1985 into a standard retirement account, which would be worth $6 billion in 2016.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.economist.com/united-states/2016/02/20/from-the-tower-to-the-white-house" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.economist.com/united-states/2016/02/20/from-the-tower-to-the-white-house</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">2011-Trump tells Good Morning America he’s skeptical of Obama’s birthplace, and that we shouldn’t dismiss such sceptics as “idiots.” (his word, not mine) <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2011/03/donald-trump-birther-051473" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.politico.com/story/2011/03/donald-trump-birther-051473</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">2012- Trump offers to donate $5 million to the charity of Obama’s choice if Obama will publish his college and passport application records.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/donald-trump-fails-drop-bombshell-offers-cash-obama/story?id=17553670" style="color: #954f72;">https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/donald-trump-fails-drop-bombshell-offers-cash-obama/story?id=17553670</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">2016-Trump finally concedes, “President Obama was born in the United States. Period.”<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/16/trump-president-obama-was-born-in-the-united-states-period.html" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/16/trump-president-obama-was-born-in-the-united-states-period.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">In 2018, the Trump Charitable Foundation agreed to shut down, facing a civil lawsuit by the New York attorney general that alleged "persistently illegal conduct" including self-dealing and funneling campaign contributions. Furthermore, it had never been properly certified in New York and did not submit to the annual audit that would have been required. The foundation did give away $2.8 million during the 2000s, or about 1/3 of what Trump had promised. He stopped contributing to the fund in 2008, but continued to accept donor funds, at least once claiming them as his own by taking a tax deduction.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/11/08/trump-foundation-saga-troubled-charity-ends-2-million-judgment/2532798001/" style="color: #954f72;">https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/11/08/trump-foundation-saga-troubled-charity-ends-2-million-judgment/2532798001/</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">…and you know the rest.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">Luth,<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;">Out.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="font-family: calibri, sans-serif; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt;"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"> </span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><br />Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-1231511589310971712019-12-23T08:53:00.000-05:002019-12-23T08:53:26.625-05:00Let’s Talk About Walls<br /><div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">
Shortly after World War II, the Allies split up what was left of Germany into four zones, one controlled by each of the Allies who had participated:<span> </span>US, UK, France, and the USSR, per the Potsdam Agreement.<span> </span>The city of Berlin was also divided into these same four zones even though it was within the USSR’s zone of Germany.<span> </span>Basically, the allies all raced to Berlin in order to be able to shape the way this new country (and influence how all of Europe) would be built after the war.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">
It’s interesting that the Soviets were the first to suggest walling any of these zones off, specifically Berlin.<span> </span>In fact, they quickly constructed barriers and sent their military to enforce them leading to the Berlin Blockade in the hopes that preventing food and supplies from reaching the non-communists in West Berlin might cause them the rethink their occupation.<span> </span>Of course, as history tells us, the blockade was easily defeated by the Berlin Airlift, further proving that walls can’t stop airplanes …or ladders …or anyone determined to seek freedom.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">
The Soviets were a bit embarrassed by the fact that many of their people decided to flee the Soviet zone of this new Germany.<span> </span>They were probably a little embarrassed by the Berlin Airlift as well, so they decided to build a more formidable wall in Berlin to try to prevent their people from seeking freedom in the West.<span> </span>In 1961, the Berlin Wall, as it was known for almost 30 years, was completed, to include a “death strip” down the middle, manned by machine gun towers and constantly patrolled.<span> </span>This at least slowed their best and brightest from defecting to the west. (slowed, but it did not stop them)<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">
Thirty years ago this year, (demolition began on June 13, 1990) that embarrassing failure of statesmanship finally fell.<span> </span>Turns out the only folks who wanted it in the first place were socialist communists trying to inflate the benefits of a culture that has failed them to this day.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">
So, what did the Berlin Wall teach us?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">1.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Only communists think walls will preserve their “treasured lifestyle”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">2.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></span><!--[endif]-->That “treasured lifestyle” was so great, thousands of people risked their lives to flee it before the wall was finished, (and more continued to do so after – see also “Brain drain”)<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">3.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Walls don’t work<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">4.<span style="font: 7.0pt "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></span><!--[endif]-->They’re a waste of time, money, effort, all of which distracts from the real work of nation building/growing<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">
<o:p><br /></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">
That concludes this holiday history lesson about walls.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt; text-align: start; text-decoration: none; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">
Luth <o:p></o:p></div>
<style class="WebKit-mso-list-quirks-style">
<!--
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-add-space:auto;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
p.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-add-space:auto;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
p.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-add-space:auto;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
p.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:0in;
margin-right:0in;
margin-bottom:0in;
margin-left:.5in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-add-space:auto;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
mso-default-props:yes;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri;
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:72508062;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:549204174 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l0:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l0:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
-->
</style><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="font-size: medium;">
Out <o:p></o:p></div>
Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-78001915013749769352018-08-29T16:58:00.000-04:002018-08-29T17:00:01.476-04:00A religion I can get behind<a href="https://www.venganza.org/" target="_blank">Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster</a><br />
<br />
Look, are there parts of this religion that sound irrational, crazy even? Yep! That's how you know it's a real religion.<br />
<br />
If I ever decide atheism, rational thought, being amazed at the wonders of the universe, curiosity, critical thinking skills, and my job, family, etc. aren't enough for me, then this might be the religion I try on for a while.<br />
<br />
Until then,<br />
Luth<br />
Out Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-48564378614072007282018-06-07T18:33:00.000-04:002018-06-07T18:35:06.243-04:00Credit Where Credit Is Due: Colorado Baker and Sincere Religious Beliefs<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:TrackMoves/>
<w:TrackFormatting/>
<w:PunctuationKerning/>
<w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>
<w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>
<w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>
<w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>
<w:DoNotPromoteQF/>
<w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther>
<w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian>
<w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:DontGrowAutofit/>
<w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/>
<w:DontVertAlignCellWithSp/>
<w:DontBreakConstrainedForcedTables/>
<w:DontVertAlignInTxbx/>
<w:Word11KerningPairs/>
<w:CachedColBalance/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
<m:mathPr>
<m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/>
<m:brkBin m:val="before"/>
<m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/>
<m:smallFrac m:val="off"/>
<m:dispDef/>
<m:lMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:rMargin m:val="0"/>
<m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/>
<m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/>
<m:intLim m:val="subSup"/>
<m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/>
</m:mathPr></w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" DefUnhideWhenUsed="true"
DefSemiHidden="true" DefQFormat="false" DefPriority="99"
LatentStyleCount="267">
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="0" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Normal"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="heading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="9" QFormat="true" Name="heading 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 7"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 8"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" Name="toc 9"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="35" QFormat="true" Name="caption"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="10" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" Name="Default Paragraph Font"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="11" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtitle"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="22" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Strong"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="20" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="59" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Table Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Placeholder Text"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="1" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="No Spacing"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Revision"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="34" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="List Paragraph"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="29" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="30" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Quote"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 1"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 2"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 3"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 4"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 5"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="60" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="61" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="62" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Light Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="63" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="64" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Shading 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="65" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="66" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium List 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="67" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 1 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="68" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 2 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="69" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Medium Grid 3 Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="70" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Dark List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="71" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Shading Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="72" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful List Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="73" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" Name="Colorful Grid Accent 6"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="19" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="21" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Emphasis"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="31" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Subtle Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="32" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Intense Reference"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="33" SemiHidden="false"
UnhideWhenUsed="false" QFormat="true" Name="Book Title"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="37" Name="Bibliography"/>
<w:LsdException Locked="false" Priority="39" QFormat="true" Name="TOC Heading"/>
</w:LatentStyles>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">The US Supreme Court stopped short of establishing much of a
precedent when they sided with Colorado Baker, Jack Phillips, who refused to
bake a cake for a gay couple’s wedding. The basis, they said was that forcing
Phillips to violate his “sincere religious beliefs” was an attack on his 1<sup>st</sup>
amendment rights.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What this means is
that this case doesn’t exactly absolve all commercial operations from discriminating
on the basis of sexual orientation, since it did not rule that his refusal was
a civil rights violation, but that’s what it meant for the original plaintiffs.</span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">I am sincere when I recognize the court’s restraint in their
narrowly defined decision, but I can’t help but wonder if, despite this
restraint, they’ve still created a fairly broad, potentially dangerous
precedent.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Their decision makes me
wonder how one proves “sincere religious beliefs,” and thus how far those
beliefs might extend when denying business to anyone else.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It also makes me wonder how they know just
how sincere Mr. Phillips’s beliefs are.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Did they test him?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">Did they ask him if he would also apply biblical rules to
straight couples?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">Here are a few I’d have asked about:</span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">Does Mr. Phillips refuse to take orders from women, since 1
Timothy 12 tells us, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority
over a man; she must be quiet.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>And if
you don’t like that one, how about, “They are not allowed to speak, but must be
in submission, as the law says.” 1 Corinthians 14:34</span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">If he takes orders from women (violating what we must assume
are two of his “sincere religious beliefs” does he only do so when the woman’s
husband or father is present, since, a woman’s vow is basically meaningless
unless approved by her husband or father. Numbers 30:1-16</span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">Does Mr. Phillips prohibit menstruating women from entering
his bakery, or does he allow it to be unclean, as described by Leviticus 15:
19-31? (does the health department know?)<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>By the way, men sleeping with women is also “dirty” according to
Revelation 14, since only the 144,000 men who had never been with a woman were
given an early pass to the afterlife.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>They were the “first fruits.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Hmmm. Revelation doesn’t say they couldn’t be with other men.</span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">Mr. Phillips clearly won’t violate his beliefs about gay
couples, even though the bible NEVER actually mentions or prohibits them, but
is he cool making a cake for a rapist as long as the rapist buys the woman from
her father, thus making her is heterosexual wife/property like Deuteronomy
22:28-29 advises?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Will he bake a cake
for a virgin woman taken as “spoils of war,” and the man who took her?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I’m sure they’re a lovely hetero couple.
Numbers 31</span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">What about a little earlier Deuteronomy…the part about how “used
wives” should be stoned to death?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Surely
he wouldn’t make a cake for any bride who can’t prove her virginity as these
verses explain.</span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">What about the dudes?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>How does Mr. Phillips de-conflict the Leviticus advice to “not round the
corners of your heads, nor mar the corners of your beards” with Paul’s
suggestion that men “naturally” have short hair and women have long hair?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What, exactly, do Mr. Phillips “sincere
religious beliefs” require of his patrons when it comes to hair care?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Is there a barber nearby Mr. Phillips might
recommend?</span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">Is there a dress code at this bakery?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>(back to Deuteronomy and Leviticus…) Is it
cool to wear clothes woven from two different materials or no?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Does Phillips have staff who check this at
the door?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I’m only asking because I don’t
want to piss him off.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I’m in a
heterosexual marriage and all, but this stuff is tough to keep track of and I
don’t want to attack his sincere religious beliefs.</span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">Perhaps it would be easier for all of us, if Phillips’s
sincere religious beliefs focused a little more on John 13:34, “as I have loved
you, love each other,” because I’m pretty sure Jesus would’ve just baked the
cake.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Mark 12:31 helps de-conflict
everything: “love thy neighbor as thyself, there is no greater commandment.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I’d bake a cake for my neighbor.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Mr. Phillips would not.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>So how serious are those beliefs?</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">Luth</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif; font-size: large;">Out </span></div>
Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-72278507024363189752017-04-22T11:31:00.000-04:002017-04-22T11:31:34.785-04:00The Death Penalty, again, really Arkansas?<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As Arkansas and Kansas battle each other to be the US
sibling we most want to hide in the basement as company arrives, the rest of us
should thank them for providing us with a picture of the end result of our
collective national stupidity. These
conjoined twin states are fighting each other to be the poster child of
amalgamated national dumb. (Wisconsin gets a little time off from this competition
for now.) Kansas did it by proving (again, only at a state level) that trickle-down
economics is a thinly veiled myth dreamed up to transfer wealth to the
wealthy. Arkansas did it by showing us
what killing people (to prove that killing people is wrong) really looks like.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The beauty of Arkansas’s twisted desire to kill 8 people (to
prove that killing people is wrong) was thwarted by their own (and the nation’s
own) hypocrisy. In spite of our love
affair with guns and how precious they are, Arkansas will only shoot death row
inmates as a last resort. After all, it’s
not the killing them (to show that killing is wrong) that’s the problem, that’s
inhumane, or cruel and unusual, it’s just HOW we kill them that’s so
horrible. We Americans can’t stand the
thought that someone we’ve condemned to death at our hands might experience a
few moments of suffering before they actually expire. What a bunch of pussies. You can’t take my guns, but you also can’t
shoot someone we say must die with them!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
And then there are the pharmacy companies and THEIR moral limits. That’s right, the folks who have made deadly-overdose-leading
opiates their number one sellers. The folks
who marked up epipens 700%. The folks
who lobby to keep marijuana illegal while advertising addictive pain killing products
directly to consumers with no medical or pharmacy degrees. The folks who take tax funded grant money to “experiment”
with “new uses” of their already highly profitable, market-cornering drugs. The folks who take and take and take from US
consumers, only to move manufacturing overseas to avoid taxes and fair labor
and environmental responsibilities, but who enjoyed our stability and military
protection while growing rich enough to put that whole dodgy deal together, but
who couldn’t bear their civic responsibility when it cut into their cash flow…
yeah, THOSE moral kingpins object to their drugs being used in capital
punishment! </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I guess it’s OK to advertise and promote addictive drugs
that ended up killing 50,000 Americans by overdose last year, but not to use
their anesthetics to kill 8 convicted death row inmates. Makes perfect sense.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So yeah, in a country who loves our guns, and loves
believing in the myth of infallible justice, we won’t shoot death row inmates,
and only when our Drug Lord Pharmacy CEOs express some misgiving, do we stop
and think. Hmmmm, maybe killing people
isn’t the best way to demonstrate that killing people is wrong.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But here’s the bigger point:
if we’re gonna keep the death penalty as a humane option, then we should
worry only about the speed with which it happens, not how we do it. We’re willing to sacrifice anyone who breaks
into our home by arming every man, woman, child without a background check,
licensing, or even the most basic instruction in how to safely use, store,
maintain firearms, but we’re not willing to shoot the people we condemn to
death?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What a bunch of spoiled children who can’t think beyond the
immediate results of our incompetent misinformed daydreams. We’ve been so trained by the oversimplification
media that we’ve forgotten how to actually think beyond something that sounds
good when you first hear it. We’ve forgotten
that arguments continue to build out of premises, that one idea connects to the
next, and that eventually a conclusion must arise out of the non-thinking haze.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So here we are in Arkansas, torn between a state trying to
prove how committed to justice they are by racing to kill 8 humans, and the
moral high ground of an industry that killed 50,000 people with ONE of their
products last year, and who continues to hold our nation’s healthcare industry
(and elected officials) hostage with their lobby money.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Here we are, a nation who still pretends we believe so much
in our justice system’s output that we insist on a permanent sentence (8 of
them in one week in Arkansas) while saying with our other face that we don’t trust
our government to the point we’ll elect a clown in protest.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Here we are, a nation of gun nuts who lack the balls to use
those guns to carry out the death penalty we all insist demonstrates our
commitment to the sanctity of human life.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What a bunch of confused, frightened children we’ve grown up
to become.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Luth,</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Out</div>
Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-80318596237272404202016-12-31T15:56:00.001-05:002016-12-31T18:41:06.634-05:00No wonder you don't trust government!<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , "serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">I’m
always amazed at the capacity of humans to learn at any age. All it takes is a little curiosity and
humility – admitting there might still be something out there we don’t
know. Granted, this goes against some of
what we’ve learned. We could look foolish
if we open ourselves to learning something new.
We could make ourselves vulnerable, subject to ridicule, or even danger,
but hey, that’s how it works.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , "serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">Of
course I’m talking about myself, and something that just occurred to me
recently as I try to remain a knowledgeable citizen of the world.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , "serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">Here
it is: When people say they don’t trust
the government is it because in their own narrow-mindedness they assume
everyone (public servants and otherwise) is as greedy and self-centered as they
are? If so, I finally get it. No wonder
they don’t trust government, or anyone else!<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , "serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">Now
before you get your conservative panties bunched up, hear me out. Let me start with “narrow-mindedness.” What I
mean by this is an inability to acknowledge or understand the validity of any
perspective beyond one’s own experience.
A good example might be Ohio Senator Rob Portman’s once anti-gay
stance. Because he wasn’t gay, and
didn’t know anyone close to him who was gay, he couldn’t believe that someone
else might be, that his God made someone that way, unless there was something
wrong with them. It was beyond the realm
of his personal experience and so he was convinced that it was just wrong. (either that or he was flat out lying in
order to boost his VP chances)<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , "serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">Then
his son came out.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , "serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">Suddenly
Senator Portman’s worldview was expanded. Now that he had some up close and
personal experience with an actual gay person he was able to see that being gay
isn’t some character flaw or choice any more than being born into a Republican
household might (or might not) be! …or being born with different colored hair,
or skin, or height, or weight, or gender or any other genetic result. Why
couldn’t he see this before it was personal to him? Because he was narrow-minded. My assumption is that he still is, but he’s
learning!<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , "serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">We’re
all subject to such prejudices, and to a degree, they help keep us alive and
safe, but we also have to constantly question them as we proceed through life
or we risk being limited in our contributions and our own personal achievement
and happiness. Senator Portman was
unwilling to question his former ideas about homosexuality until it became
personal. That’s what I mean by
narrow-minded – the inability to see other’s beliefs, traits, characteristics,
ideas, etc. as valid when they differ from our own personal experiences. Again, we all face this kind of
thinking. It’s a survival instinct, but
at some point, as adults, as we develop the ability to think rationally, we
have to overcome them and challenge them in order to develop beyond a level of
basic, caveman-like survival, and grow to fit into the modern world that exists
around us today - where cavemen no longer exist, and where we move beyond basic
survival in order to advance socially, technologically, financially,
culturally, or in all ways that matter.
If you can’t get beyond the limitations of your own personal experience,
you are doomed to never being any better (by any measurement) than you are
right now. THAT is the definition of a
miserable life!<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , "serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">OK,
so that’s the narrow-mindedness. It’s
important to start with that because, while it is inextricably associated with
self-centeredness, particularly in the form of greed, it is a separate
characteristic. Greed, as a specific
form of self-centeredness, is a whole other ballgame. Greed has to do with getting mine, often at
the expense of others. Sure, there’s a
lot lacking in that definition, but I’m trying to keep this explanation
simple. I could add that greed requires
a lot of false zero-sum mythological economic thinking, probably resulting in
the related lack of curiosity, and thus being satisfied with the simplest
economic theory one has ever read and then misapplying it to far more complex
real life situations simply because one cannot be bothered to apply rational
thought to the more complex situation and thus sticks with what one knows –
kind of like looking for the keys one dropped in the driveway in the living
room because the light is better in there – but that won’t help keep it simple. (here’s an example of that kind of ridiculous
oversimplification: )<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , serif; font-size: 12pt; letter-spacing: 0.35pt;">In
the meantime, dig into “Economics in One Lesson,” by Henry Hazlitt. It sounds
like a snooze but it really is a page turner, and you can download it for
free. <a href="http://mikerowe.com/2016/08/otw-economicsinonelesson/" style="color: #333333;">http://mikerowe.com/2016/08/otw-economicsinonelesson/</a></span><span style="font-family: "times new roman" , "serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , "serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">(note: it’s NOT a page turner, and it contains fatal
oversimplification errors almost from the very start, which is what makes it such a great example here)<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , "serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">Back
to the point: greed sneaks into one’s world view like poison and then clouds
one’s thinking at every turn thereafter.
Much like narrow-mindedness, there’s some value in limited doses of
greed. It too can be a survival instinct. Charity begins at home. You’re no good to anyone else if you don’t
first take care of yourself, etc. and so on, but when one allows greed to taint
all other decision making, that’s where the trouble starts. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , "serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">Like
any other unquestioned dogma (yes, that’s redundant, but people misuse language
so much in these “post-fact, post-knowledge” times I figured this post is a
good place for otherwise unnecessary emphasis) greed prevents us from thinking
rationally in other areas of thinking as well.
Once greed becomes one’s primary motivator, it can block out all
possibility of win-win situations. It
actually fools us into thinking that if someone else wins, I must have
lost. We know this isn’t true, but
that’s what too much greed does to our thought process. (We’ve seen this with our president-elect on
several occasions. Those who seem to be
able to have real discussions with him must first acknowledge that he is a
“winner”…by a landslide…bigly, and only then will he listen to them regardless
of their expertise, experience, education or value of their ideas.) <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , "serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">Greed
corrupts our thinking to the point that we assume everyone else is just as
greedy as we are. This false (in many
cases, but not always) assumption thus creates competition with others where no
competition actually exists. Instead of
being able to work together, greedy people automatically assume they are always
competing for something. Instead of
considering the possibility of better results as a synthesis of combined
thinking, cooperation, broad experiences and training coming together, greedy
folks see only that they might not get all there is to have. This is the zero-sum myth, especially when it
comes to ideas. (but also when it comes
to wealth in most cases)<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , "serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">Like
any other pattern of thinking, when you do it long enough it not only becomes
habit forming, it becomes who you are.
What’s worse is that it combines with that narrow-mindedness and
convinces you that everyone else is the same way. You assume no one can be trusted because
everyone thinks exactly like you do – everyone else, like you, is out to get
theirs, and probably at your expense.
When you’re already susceptible to projecting ONLY your experiences onto
others, you naturally assume everyone thinks the way you think.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , "serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">As
I mentioned, this just dawned on me. How
it took me half a decade on the planet to realize it seems rather baffling, but
now it all makes sense. Before this
realization, I could never understand how anyone could be so suspicious and
pessimistic about his fellow man. My
experience on this planet tells me otherwise. (“Trust, but verify,” a wise
fellow one said) Sure, I’ve been burned before, (most often as a result of my
own lazy thinking or actions) but for the most part, I’ve found common ground
with just about everyone I’ve met in just about every corner of the
planet. It’s been my experience that we
have more in common than contrast when it comes to other humans. We all need
oxygen …and a nice, clean, private, preferably flushable toilet once in a while
is really nice too! It’s been my
experience that two heads are better than one, not something to be feared. I guess I have been guilty of assuming
everyone would want the benefit of that, and so I have projected my thoughts
too – that better solutions generally arise when you have as many perspectives
and as much information as you can before making up your mind – is what it
means to be a grown up. It still seems like a better way of doing anything, but
now I understand why greedy, narrow-minded people think otherwise.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "times new roman" , "serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">So
now I understand what people mean when they say they are distrustful of
government, or other humans in general.
It’s not that they don’t grasp the concept that in America, WE ARE “the
government,” it’s that they simply assume the worst in anyone else, precisely
because that’s how they see themselves, and thus they project their own misery,
greed, narrow-mindedness onto others. It
also just occurred to me as I write this that the only solution for people who
think like this is some sort of authoritarian dictatorship, but each one of
them would have to be a dictator, so it would have to be anarchy, with each
individual a sovereign entity, but that brings up issues of property rights,
which would severely dampen the gathering of wealth, and that’s kind of at odds
with the whole selfishness thing. (if there were no government, then how would
we establish and record deeds? The real estate market would never work like
that!) I suppose the only way we can
make them happy is if they find some surrogate whom they believe can represent
their narrow-minded greed. I guess we’ll
see how that works out.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
Luth<br />
Out<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-32458696882815211512016-05-20T23:01:00.001-04:002016-05-20T23:01:21.500-04:00Socialism: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."To be honest, there's a lot about socialism that really does suck. Like not being able to attend a high school football game in Texas because the tyrant in charge is so angry at anyone with an Arab sounding name, he actually thought for a minute that Al Jazeera English flew kamikaze missions into American buildings.
It sucks when an elderly man leaves his phone on a table at the Mall of America food court, is later questioned, along with the rest of his American family, by the FBI, and even after the entire situation is cleared, still has an 11-page police report on file with the Minneapolis police as well as an FBI report documenting his "suspicious person" incident at the mall, even though he wasn't even there when his suspicious phone was observed.
It sucks when you're told who you're allowed to marry or what kind of birth control you can or can't use. It sucks when the only way to be right, to fly below the suspicion and scrutiny, to not have your patriotism questioned is to just be like everyone else around you...dress like them, pray like them, talk like them, think like them.
It sucks to have to wear a uniform and proclaim your allegiance to something lock, stock, and barrel even when you know there are cracks in the gild, aspects you feel could be improved, or things that are just flat out wrong.
So, yeah. If that's what you mean by socialism, then it sucks, but that's not socialism, that's tyranny, fascism, or, in the case of those particular examples, an ignorant citizenry run amok in an age of fear, right here in the good old, capitalist US of A!<br />
<br />
And what is the target of this fear-mongering of late? That's right, the evils of socialism, even though most of those trying to spread fear of it seem to have never really known what it means.<br />
<br />
Why would anyone fear making the world around you a better place through collective funding and coordination of effort? It's a lot closer to what the founders of this nation had in mind than the Corporate Republic we seem to have ended up with. After all, they decided to form a union, collectively. They knew that a lot of the infrastructure a nation needs is better achieved through collective efforts. It wasn't about giving away half of anything to anyone who didn't work for it, it was about efficiency and effectiveness. There are simply some things that don't make any sense for individuals to repeatedly spend their efforts on when they can be accomplished as a group better, faster, cheaper. <br />
<br />
The highway system in this country is kind of cool, and it was, for the most part, a socialist undertaking. Pretty much everyone in America relies on it for supplies, for customers, for their complete existence. Ditto for the railroads. After years of discussion, no private enterprise was willing to take the risk on such a large undertaking, so our government did. That's right! The single biggest influence in the industrial expansion and the tying of a young nation's two separate halves together was the result of Big Government speculation when private industry wanted nothing to do with it. Of course all our Big Government did was give away land, low interest loans, and further subsidize the endeavor. And, of course, the minute the recipients of that land and loans and cash started making their own profit from those subsidies, they started complaining about having to pay the loans back, and having to pay taxes on the profits they now only made thanks to that Big Government investment, but hey, who are we to call them hypocrites as long as they use the words "big government" in their whiny complaints? Ayn Rand seems to have forgotten that "the producers" balked at building railroads on their own for years until government took it on for them. Only after the Transcontinental was built were Dagney and Hank able to forget and exploit the rail and steel industry for their own profit and pleasure.<br />
<br />
The electrical grid in this country is pretty cool too. As is the stability of our government, the protection of our military, the reliability of police and fire services...and all manner of other socialist endeavors we seem to take for granted when pretending we (meaning some rugged individual) built this. The truth is, no individual built any of it without the support of collective advantages this nation provides. We, as a nation, built the infrastructure that so many of us now take for granted. It made more sense that way. And whenever WE do something together, it's called socialist. I don't know what you thought it meant, but it's really not all that bad. So the next time you want to spread fear about some misguided idea of what socialism is, spread it about that socialist snow plow clearing your street at 4 a.m. the socialist cop walking your daughter to her car after the closing shift, or the socialist EMT saving your loved one's life, or all those socialist troops defending our way of life. <br />
<br />
When you really think about it, it's rarely the "socialist" who wants something for nothing. Socialists understand that taxes pay for all of these things we now take for granted. It tends to be the so-called capitalists who want those advantages without having to pay for them. It's capitalists who start a business in the US, where these advantages make it possible, but then move their headquarters overseas in order to avoid paying taxes that paid for the advantages they took for granted and now no longer want to pay for. The railroad barons were cool with socialism when it gave them cheap loans and land, but as soon as they became wealthy from that government benefit, they started complaining about having to pay back the loans, and pay taxes on the immense wealth the government's investment helped create for them. They got theirs, no one else should! It's always private industry who expects government to bail them out when they mismanage everything from their own by-products and pollution to their general finances, but they never want to pay the taxes that allow government to be there for them when it reaches a breaking point.<br />
<br />
So the next time you go mindlessly repeating something you heard from Bill O'Reilly about socialists expecting something for nothing, remember that GE paid NO taxes while taking full advantage of the benefits our nation provided. Remember the next time a school levy shows up on a ballot, that you can read said ballot thanks to the free, public (socialist) education that was there for you, but which you now think is some kind of handout for the rest of the country's kids. Remember that our founding fathers, by "forming a more perfect union," understood that collective (socialist) efforts made a lot of sense and provided advantages for all of us, and that we should all continue to pay for them...not expect them for free!<br />
<br />
Luth<br />
OutLuthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-67028174873281866492016-04-17T10:05:00.001-04:002016-05-18T08:11:05.611-04:00It's actually pretty conservative, when you think about it.<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">The latest bankruptcy of coal giant, Peabody Energy, clashes
with conservative claims that Obama is killing the energy industry in the
US. Peabody’s list of reasons for the
filing reads like the ingredients of kid’s cereal: the first one is the one in most abundance;
the last one is barely there. So it
probably breaks Mitch McConnell’s heart to learn that Peabody tossed in
“tougher regulatory environment” as their last reason for their failure. It was almost obligatory, and the ranking
Peabody gave it indicates as much.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">The primary/first reason Peabody gave: the market. In other words, in Peabody’s own words,
they’re getting out of coal because it just isn’t marketable anymore. Market forces, capitalism at work. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Sure, we could continue to subsidize the coal industry so
the corporations who still employ folks in it can keep those jobs on life
support for a while longer, and lot of coal’s money has been spent lobbying
toward that end, but subsidies like that sound like big government. Subsidizing a failing enterprise (no matter
how much they contribute toward your campaign) doesn’t sound very conservative
at all, except in the sense that it’s just not smart or rational, ignores the
facts before its eyes, blames the subsequent mess on Obama. I guess in that sense it would be
“conservative,” but not in any sense remotely related to any actual
definition. On the contrary, for coal,
or Big Energy in general to expect such subsidies would seem like they have a
sense of entitlement.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">But Mitch says it’s all Obama’s fault. Dear Mitch, Obama picked up the mantle
(reality) every modern president before him also carried: the size and scope of
our energy needs has grown to the point at which we can no longer ignore ALL of
the costs of its production – not just the direct costs of materials and labor
and delivery, but the costs of what that industry historically does to the
surrounding land and to the planet in general – the cost of cleaning up after
itself. At the core of this idea, it’s a
very conservative concept: clean up your own mess as soon as you’re done making
it. Not after you go outside and play
with your friends, but AS SOON AS YOU’RE DONE MAKING IT. Put your school
clothes away as soon as you’ve changed into your play clothes. Put the Legos away before getting out
Monopoly. Put your tools away when the job is done. Sweep the kitchen after you’re done making
cookies. Mop up that mess after you’re
done changing the oil. Pick up after
yourself. Don’t squander your (or
everyone’s) resources. There’s really no
denying that this is among the most core of conservative principles. Except for some reason, when asked to apply
it to corporations, it becomes liberal, intrusive, nanny-state. WTF?!</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">So even though the “regulatory environment” was the last
reason cited for Peabody’s failure, all it really means is after years of not
cleaning up their own mess while they were making it, they’re now being forced
to. After years of failing to factor in
the cost of cleaning up after themselves, they suddenly legally compelled to.
(Blame big government all you want, but if you refuse to live up to your
responsibilities on your own, and expect someone else to take care of your mess
for you, then the law must make you.) After years of letting the rest of
American taxpayers pay to restore what Big Energy has destroyed, the rules now
force them to take care of it themselves – as they should have all along. (and the move to that direction, fortunately,
started well before Obama was elected) The messes our energy industry has made,
but have left for others to clean up, range from negligently dangerous work
environments killing off heads of households in the form of black lung, cave
ins, explosions, etc. to the complete destruction of the tops of mountains, to
spill sites, to poisoned rivers and entire watersheds, to abandoned pit mines
left dangerously open. If Peabody made
messes like that, (messes inherent to coal) why are they surprised that they
should have to clean them up? Why did
they not factor in the cost of cleaning up after themselves all along?
Expecting the rest of the nation to clean up after them so as not to infringe
on their profits is the ultimate example of entitlement!</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">So as we listen to Senator McConnell pin this latest example
of capitalism at work entirely on Obama, remember what your mom would tell you
if you asked if you could go out and play while your school clothes and all
your toys were still scattered all over your room. If that’s all on Obama, then he’s pretty
conservative. He and Mitch McConnell should
get along a lot better than they do.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Luth</span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Out</span></div>
Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-68376569183317562412016-04-09T10:23:00.000-04:002016-04-09T10:23:45.156-04:00Things Republicans Say<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 14.4pt;">
<span style="font-family: Times, serif; font-size: 12pt;">“We may congratulate ourselves that this cruel war is nearing its
end. <br />
It has cost a vast amount of treasure and blood. . . . <br />
It has indeed been a trying hour for the Republic; but <br />
I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes <br />
me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, <br />
corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places <br />
will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong <br />
its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth <br />
is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. <br />
I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety <br />
of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war. <br />
God grant that my suspicions may prove groundless.” <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 14.4pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">From a letter from President Lincoln to (Col.) William F. Elkins, Nov.
21, 1864. </span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 130%; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Unfortunately, it appears as though Lincoln’s suspicions
have not proven groundless. Not only was
Lincoln right about the aggregation of the “money power of the country,” but he
was dead on in how it came about; “corruption in high places…working on the
prejudices of the people.” In our current
presidential race, the top three establishment candidates are products of this very
aggregation cycle. They are created by
and therefore programmed to perpetuate it.
Clinton and Cruz may as well be twin siblings whose mom can only tell
apart when one wears a red lapel pin and the other blue. They couldn’t break this cycle if they wanted
to because breaking it would mean breaking themselves. And the orange man has
been eugenically created in the image of Lincoln’s biggest fear – born with
money, on third base, selling himself as though he made his own bat from the
oak tree out back and taught himself how to hit home runs. All three of these folks (and most of those
trailing them) are products of this aggregation of wealth. The question is, what has it gotten the rest
of us?</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">In other words, how is this whole trickle down thing working
for you?</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Economists often argue that they can’t really test a theory
because there’s no way to run any kind of meaningful, controlled experiment in
a living economy. We’ll never actually
balance a federal budget. We’ll never
lower taxes significantly enough to truly test the trickle-down theory without
wiping out programs the nation – its individuals AND its corporations – have
come to rely on. But we’ve basically
been trending toward trickle-down economics since the Reagan era, and all it’s
done thus far is exactly what Lincoln, America’s most universally beloved
Republican, most feared: “until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands.” In case you’re not following, those few hands
are America’s top 1%...or the top percentile of income earners who, in this
country, currently hold almost 40% of its wealth (according to
BusinessInsider.com, last August,) as Lincoln predicted it might.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So the experiment in trickle-down economics, in spite of all
of the detracting uncontrolled factors, has worked to do exactly what Lincoln
predicted. It has aggregated money power into the hands of very few. Proponents may argue that it hasn’t actually
trickled down yet only because taxes STILL aren’t low enough, or because there
are STILL too many regulations on these people and their industries, but it
sure seems like the regulations we’ve done away with have worked to the
advantage of that top 1% (and no one else.) In other words, it’s worked to make
the rich way richer, even during our recent recession…so why haven’t they
invested in capital or hired thousands of employees? …and actually boosted the
economy that’s now working solely to their benefit? If they’re still
consistently and wildly rich, then why hasn’t anything trickled down yet? Imperfect experiment, indeed.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Kansas is probably as good an example of the trickle-down as
we’ll ever get in the real world. In his first two years as governor, former
conservative Senator Sam Brownback dramatically slashed taxes in the state also
known as Koch country. He promised this
would fertilize economic growth that would more than make up for the immediate
loss in revenue. He said it would take
time. Apparently it’s going to take more
than the 5 years since because even after narrowly securing a second term,
Brownback himself is backpedaling, asking the legislature to slow further
planned cuts, and even raising some taxes.
The state is so broke as a result of this experiment, the once
pro-education Brownback has been forced to cut the states already basement
education funding even further. Members
of his own party are quoted by The Atlantic as saying, "He’s lived and
died by this philosophy, and it’s becoming more and more obvious that it is not
going to be successful." (Rochelle Chronister, former Kansas Republican
state chair per <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/kansass-failed-experiment/389874/">http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/kansass-failed-experiment/389874/</a>)</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"> But that’s just
Kansas, right? Surely if this theory
works, other states have proven it.
Turns out most Republican governors seem to have taken the Kansas warning
to heart. Ohio, New Jersey, Indiana,
Louisiana, and even South Carolina, whose governor, Nikki Haley said
specifically, “we’re not going to do what Kansas did,” have taken a far less
conservative approach to reducing taxes over time rather than insisting the
failed Kansas and Wisconsin experiments have worked. Currently, the Kansas
budget woes are trailed only by Louisiana and Alaska. Economists may not want to admit trickle-down
hasn’t worked, or may continue to insist it hasn’t been adequately tested, but
sensible Republican governors who have watched Kansas and Wisconsin’s budgets crumble
seem to have formed their own conclusions.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">So, when it comes to what you want to see in the next four
years, you have to ask yourself if it’s more of the same – from a Democrat or a
Republican – i.e. handing over even more of the entire nation’s wealth to the
top 1%, systematically, by law and tax code, as establishment candidates have
led since the Reagan era, or if it’s time to change that system up to avoid
furthering what Lincoln feared, and to finally admit that if the market won’t
govern itself, won’t allow all that wealth at the top to trickle down, no
matter how long or how much we continue to pump cash up there, then we, the
people, need to step in and create the necessary adjustments. We need to put
some of that regulation back, even out the tax code so that the 1% pays a share
similar to what we pay, with no exceptions. If we don’t, it won’t be long
before we can’t buy any of the products our corporate overlords are making and
selling anyway – and I’m pretty sure that won’t be the trigger to start the
trickling! You have to ask yourself if
you want to keep on loading 16 tons only to owe your soul to the company store.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Luth<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="_GoBack"></a></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Out</span></div>
Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-66468855474219066622016-03-11T21:06:00.000-05:002016-03-11T21:31:28.535-05:00Why “Not Feeling The Bern” (for these reasons) is misinformed, at best<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Some Facebook friends of mine shared this brief article<a href="http://theodysseyonline.com/ole-miss/why-im-not-feeling-the-bern/321355" target="_blank">http://theodysseyonline.com/ole-miss/why-im-not-feeling-the-bern/321355</a> about why some dude is "Not feeling the Bern" and I wanted to reply there, but Facebook just ain't the place for real conversations. The following is a little more info than you're likely to hear on Fox, or in a 140-character-limited exchange. I've quoted the dude's headings, then added my response.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“I’m not a Socialist”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Bernie’s not a Socialist, either. He’s a Democratic
Socialist. It’s a lot like the system of government our founding fathers
had in mind wherein some pursuits just make more sense to manage collectively:
military, police, fire, roads, eventually railroads, power grids, water and
sewer…these are all "socialist" provisions of our current system. Even the economist Adam Smith, oft-cited by conservatives, clearly
made the case for pursuits best handled by government, not for profit. At
its simplest distillation, why form a nation at all if you don’t agree there
are some things worth doing <i>as a society</i>? </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Sadly, the system our founding fathers established has been
twisted into something more like a Corporate Democracy wherein our government
serves corporations rather than people. The establishment candidates from
both parties perpetuate this system because the money they need to campaign
comes from those corporations. Bernie is the first guy to make a
legitimate challenge to that system. He embodies the non-violent
revolution our system so desperately needs.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;"> </span><!--[endif]--> 1. "College shouldn’t be free" ("education is not an entitlement")</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in;">
By most state charters (after the
first 13 colonies) education IS an entitlement. The founding fathers knew
the value of an educated electorate and they specifically included state-funded
education in the conditions for statehood. When states fail to meet these
requirements, the federal government must step up. <br />
In addition, up
until our parents’ generation, a high school diploma was sufficient to earn a
family a decent living, but that standard is outdated. Today, an
associate degree, or a technical school certificate is the bare minimum
required to join a professional workforce. Bernie is not the first
candidate to propose community colleges find ways to make this bare minimum
achievable to all, he’s just saying we finally accept the reality of it and raise the
bar officially…and stop pretending the free education public schools provided for everyone up to this point is sufficient in stopping at 12<sup>th</sup> grade.</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]-->2.<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;"> " </span><!--[endif]-->Please don’t raise taxes"</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; text-align: justify;">
Bernie won’t,
at least for most Americans, and certainly not for Criminal Justice majors, as
you note. Only those who have seen a dramatic decrease (since the Great
Depression) in the taxes they pay will see them go up. I know there are
candidates (usually Republican, but not always) who like to say they won’t
raise taxes, but they all have. Reagan did. Bush 41 did after
promising he wouldn’t. The average middle class citizen pays around 20%. Shouldn’t the folks with the most to spare contribute at least that much as
well? <a href="http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/04/09/15-Fortune-500-Companies-Paid-No-Federal-Income-Taxes-2014" target="_blank">http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/04/09/15-Fortune-500-Companies-Paid-No-Federal-Income-Taxes-2014</a> The only taxes Bernie will raise will be on those who have played
our corporate-leaning system to NOT pay that share. The rest of us will pay the same or less than we've always paid, and we should
demand more for our money, not less. (for real - read his plan...and notice Trump still doesn't have one available, and for pete's sake, stop getting your info from Facebook!)</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-align: justify; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]-->3.<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;"> </span><!--[endif]--> "I
don’t like big government"</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; text-align: justify;">
Neither does
Bernie, and he wants it to stay out of your life as much as possible, but your
argument here is basically a repeat of your item 2 (taxes). Again, only
the absolute wealthiest, whose teams of lawyers and tax accountants can’t show
they’ve reinvested that wealth into capital or labor, would ever pay the 52% you cite.
(remember that idea about reinvesting wealth into capital and labor – it will
be important later) Seriously, Addison, have you ever read anything about New Hampshire or Vermont? They don't like big government either, and they've elected Bernie for a looooong time.</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-align: justify; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]-->4.<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;"> " </span><!--[endif]-->Social
Security shouldn’t exist in the first place…"</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; text-align: justify;">
Social Security
Insurance is insurance. Why should insurance not exist? If properly
managed, it will be there for you. Most who propose doing away with it
don’t want to do the work of managing it. That’s no excuse. Others
prefer the management of it go to for-profit entities wherein chunks of the
premiums end up in already rich folks’ pockets, making it even less likely that
the fund will survive. (because when profit is the #1 priority, you are not) This is simply another case of something that
makes more sense as a non-profit, collectively, in order to serve the interest
of all. Social Security is a minimum insurance program. You’re free
to invest in commercial insurance or retirement programs that go beyond this minimum, but this one provides a
safety net for those who were disabled, or for their widows/widowers or
orphans. Tell me again why the richest country in the world shouldn’t provide
this self-funded, bare-minimum insurance for its citizens?</div>
<div class="MsoListParagraph" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-align: justify; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]-->5.<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal;"> " </span><!--[endif]-->I
don’t believe in wage regulation."</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; text-align: justify;">
How then should
wages be established? Before you answer, keep this in mind: since the Great
Depression, the minimum wage, if left to its own market devices, adjusted for
standard inflation, should/would currently be hovering somewhere between $15
and $20 per hour. That’s IF LEFT TO THE MARKET, “unregulated” so to
speak. So how has the minimum wage remained so artificially low?
Government doesn’t LIMIT wages, so the de facto cap must be coming from
somewhere else. If the market wage hasn’t borne itself out, and government
hasn’t regulated a cap, then some other force must be “regulating” wages.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; text-align: justify;">
What could that
force possibly be? Here are some observations: some of the same companies who
posted profits during the 2009 recession laid off thousands of workers. When these companies “recovered” (even though they posted
profits throughout) they hired back these skilled laborers, but at drastically
reduced wages. Skilled technicians who lost $20/hour jobs are now lucky
to get them back for $10/hour. Same jobs, same consistently profitable
corporations, lower wages. That doesn’t sound like market forces. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; text-align: justify;">
In addition,
since President Reagan fired those air traffic controllers for trying to
negotiate their wages and conditions (eliminating one natural force in a free
market) more and more lobbyist-written legislation has been passed by politicians (whose campaigns were funded by the employers of those lobbyists) resulting in
the biggest attack on and subsequent decline in union membership in our
nation’s history. Kansas, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin all fell to lobbyist
influence and legislated away the rights of state employees to negotiate their
wages and conditions. The trend is obvious – labor’s input is no longer a factor, no longer a market force in establishing labor’s wages. The vast majority of Americans lost their voice. This
leaves large corporations an artificially large influence in “regulating”
wages. An individual can either accept the offered wage, or be
unemployed. (any other job an individual accepts will also be for an
artificially low wage due to the standard set by corporations, so “get another
job somewhere else” doesn’t change the equation) If labor can’t negotiate
as a group against the corporations whose lobbyists now write the laws, then
INDUSTRY REGULATES WAGES. (oh, and for those of you with short attention spans...it has done so by shrinking the expense of labor! A day's work used to be worth a day's wage, but it's not anymore, according to these companies who still manage to pay their CEOs 7 figures) These companies claim that taxes have eaten into their profits, so they can't afford to pay decent wages anymore, but most of them find ways to pay NO taxes at all. <a href="http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/04/09/15-Fortune-500-Companies-Paid-No-Federal-Income-Taxes-2014" target="_blank">http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/04/09/15-Fortune-500-Companies-Paid-No-Federal-Income-Taxes-2014</a> (in case you forgot) Can you or I do that? Wanna know a great way to avoid paying taxes? Post a HIGHER LABOR EXPENSE, or REINVEST IN CAPITAL EXPANSION AND CREATE JOBS!<br />
Anyhoo...Since you
oppose wage regulation, you actually side with Bernie in preventing this
artificial regulation of the market in which those wages would otherwise be
naturally set. The establishment candidate from both sides is too wrapped
up in corporate money to ever challenge this tilted system.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .25in; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Look, do I believe Bernie can wave a wand and fix problems
slowly created over the better part of the last century? No, but I do
believe he’s the only candidate who might actually try, and most importantly, he
will try because he’s beholden to NO ONE…for more than about $35 anyway! He
works for US, not his anonymous superpac sponsors. His fundraising alone
has revolutionized our process…even while the wildly inappropriate Citizens
United/Corporations are People/Money=Speech=Votes bullshit still stands!
Bernie is running the way ALL candidates for public office should run.</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
I suppose you could make the argument that Trump is too, but
there’s a YUGE difference between using your own money to bully people into
supporting you and convincing people with your ideas to support you with their
money $25 at a time.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Luth</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Out</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-54465819627110318402016-02-10T23:14:00.000-05:002016-02-10T23:14:20.482-05:00Making Friends In A Small World aka 2B1ask1Prologue: I'm on travel for work. Work that I enjoy, with people for whom I have a lot of respect, and with whom I enjoy spending time, doing something that feels like it makes a difference (however small) in the world. This travel has already brought me into contact with some old friends from in and out of work, and I haven't done any of this for a couple of years. I'm extremely grateful to be doing this. (Life's pretty good.)<br />
<br />
After a rather satisfying, though fairly long, fairly high-stakes day, my colleagues and I pick a spot and have dinner together. We duck in out of the cold and await our turn at the restaurant's host stand. The fellow in front of us asks for a table for one.<br />
<br />
<em>Side note: When traveling alone, I'd ask this fellow if he's interested in sharing a table. I'm fine eating dinner alone, but making a new friend is better. Even if we don't end up as friends, I'd still do this. I would. Really. I've seen me. </em><br />
<em>He might say "no," and that's fine too. I'd be no worse off than before, but in this case, I'm not dining alone, and I know that some people consider this behavior weird or disconcerting, so I keep quiet.</em><br />
<br />
As I'm going through the contents of that side note in my head, one of my colleagues says to the other, "He just asked for a table for one. We should invite him to join us." There's little further discussion among our group. Colleague 1 speaks to this fellow and the hostess. <br />
<br />
The fellow accepts our offer and the four of us follow the hostess to a table, take our seats, and begin the introductions. WARNING: Henceforth this true story proves that truth is most certainly stranger than fiction, or at the very least, that it is indeed a small world.<br />
<br />
I look over the menu and spot a dish that looks amazingly like a dish I've only ever seen on a menu in a tiny little restaurant in tiny Tirrenia, Italy. I don't speak Italian, but I know some Spanish, and since they're both Latin-based, I assume it's a giant pile of seafood, mostly still in original shells, and I'm pretty sure I want it. Sure, it brings back wonderful memories. Sure, it sounds delicious. Sure, it'll go great with a local brew, but I decide to order SOLELY to be supportive of my colleagues' paleo diets. Except for the bread. I'm gonna eat all the bread. No, that's not entirely true. Our new friend, who, like me, is not on the paleo diet, offers to help me eat the bread so my colleagues aren't tempted by it. <br />
<br />
We've already formed a bond.<br />
<br />
The introduction/speed dating conversation with our new friend continues. We discuss the significance of the DC area to the Free Masons, American History, politics, religion, healthcare, service before self, kids...pretty much everything we're told people should never discuss, and from my selfish perspective, this is among the top ten dinners I've ever had with folks outside my family or close circle of friends. (and my meal and beer are excellent!)<br />
<br />
As dinner continues, (and for the sake of brevity, I'll use bullets rather than prose) we discover that this dude<br />
<ul>
<li>probably worked with colleague 2's dad </li>
<li>worked for the guy who is currently our CEO</li>
<li>is a member of, and is in the DC area for a meeting of a fraternal organization</li>
<li>formed his own group within this organization based on a historical figure with whom colleague 1 is strangely familiar (this part of the story is way more fun than brevity allows)</li>
<li>has a son who was in, and now works for the national headquarters of my fraternity</li>
<li>has a son who thus probably works with my former fraternity advisor</li>
</ul>
I don't remember now if it was the fraternity talk, or if it was the fact that both of my colleagues were Navy folk, that led to the discovery that colleague 2 served with one of my fraternity brothers. (I've worked with this woman for four years and only discovered this because we invited this stranger to dinner with us.)<br />
<br />
I also don't remember if we actually solved ALL of the world's problems, or if we just solved the bigger ones and vowed to email each other about the rest. (you'll know soon enough) Until then, suffice it to say: life is good...if you choose to make it so.<br />
<br />
We paid our tabs and headed back out into the winter. He headed for his hotel, and we; ours. I still needed 4,000 steps to make my quota for the day, and we all had work to finish up. (and then I was compelled to write this)<br />
<br />
There are people who would say we took a "risk" inviting this guy to join us. If you subscribe to the co-opting of our language that formal "Risk Managers" use, then we did. We risked being rejected, but according to the definition of "risk" I grew up with, there was none. My belly would still be full. My per diem would still be shot, and the evening would still have ended pretty much like one would expect. Through our "risk," we made a new friend, a story we'll remember far longer than just the dinner would have created, and we've expanded our network through which we may still bring about world peace.<br />
<br />
Risk THAT!<br />
Luth,<br />
Out<br />
<br />
<br />
Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-1037331096074523122015-12-24T06:40:00.001-05:002015-12-24T06:40:56.632-05:00Joy to the World<div class="MsoNormal">
The particular event doesn’t matter as much as the
reaction. In the case that finally moved
me to write this, it was a gift, but it could just as easily have been any
pleasant surprise, or event. In
this case it was a gift. A simple,
inexpensive, but thoughtful and personalized gift from good friends. Because the gift came just before Christmas,
these friends very intentionally made very clear that this gift was NOT a
Christmas present, but rather a token of appreciation for… well, basically for
our friendship. They mentioned various
acts, but each fell under what I would simply consider “friendship,” and so
we’ll leave it at that for now. What’s
important in this story is not the gift, but my dearly beloved’s anticipated
reaction.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As long as I’ve known my dearly beloved, she has been the
worrier. I may be the analyzer who
cannot be content with the surface of anything without wanting to dive into it
and ponder its essence, but that’s very different from worry. I actually enjoy digging around for the “how”
or the “why” of something. For me, it is a
self-sustaining, perpetual source of joy and wonder, just as it is often a
source of consternation to those around me.
To say that my analyzing reduces stress for me is to under-emphasize how
pleasurable I actually find it. My
wife, on the other hand, is a worrier, and from what I can see, it’s not
because she derives pleasure from it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
When I got home with the gift, she was already in worry
mode. It was 2 days before a Christmas Eve
get together of mostly family and close friends – the kind of non-judgmental
people who would show up in any situation under any circumstances and just be
there and enjoy themselves and each other.
These are people who accept others (us, anyway) for who we are. They are free of affectation,
salt of the earth, easy going, unpretentious, friendly people who have known us
most of our lives. They do a good job of at least pretending to love us, warts
and all. There would be no “business
associates” or “potential clients” or employers. There would be no need for
“acting” or “behaving.” There was no reason to try to impress anyone, and no
one expecting to be impressed. We weren’t planning this event due to societal
pressure or expectation. There would be no speech-making or performances. In
fact, we’ve NEVER planned any events like that at home. (Those kinds of events
could be legitimately stressful. This
one would not.) This was going to be as casual and relaxed as a get together could be. We still had a couple of days to finish
getting ready, although “getting ready” basically meant being here, making sure
the holiday lights were on outside, and having some snacks and beverages ready.
She had just hauled in the first load of groceries, putting us that much closer
to being as ready as we could be for this non-event event. Naturally, she was worrying about it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I purposefully chose to not mention the gift at that moment
because I knew the stress of bringing in the rest of the groceries and getting
them put away was too much competition.
We hauled in the groceries. On
the last trip, with counter space running low, she grabbed the gift to move it
out of the way but stopped to say, “what IS this?” </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It was my fault. I
shouldn’t have left it on top of the mail – another source of worry – on the
kitchen island, but I didn’t want to put it with presents under the tree since
I’d been instructed to emphasize that it was NOT a Christmas gift, and because
I feared I’d forget about it when just such a crisis as this inevitably popped
up, and we’d end up finding it there, under the tree, Christmas morning, which
would really defeat any attempt to emphasize that it was NOT a Christmas gift,
and so I sat it on the counter and forgot about it for the moment. Now, trapped by my own lack of planning, and
the crisis of having groceries to put away,
I simply said, “open it.” As she
unfolded the tissue paper, I told her "it's from Ryan and Sandy and they
specifically instructed me to tell you it is NOT a Christmas gift. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“We didn’t get them anything.” she said. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“I don’t think we were supposed to. They said it was a 'thank you' for our help with their recent move and some of the work on their new place and because we are friends. Isn’t it neat?” I replied.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“We didn't even get them a housewarming present. What is it?”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“It’s a, __(<i>it really
doesn’t matter what it is, I promise</i>)__, pretty cool, huh?” I said,
attempting to remain in what should have been a pleasant moment.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Oh, yeah. That is
neat.” (and therein did the pleasantry
cease and desist) “They got us a Christmas present last year too. They even gave each of the girls gift
cards. We’ve never gotten them
anything.” </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“It’s NOT a Christmas gift.
Sandy specifically, emphatically told me to tell you that.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
“Well why did they give it to us? I feel really bad. We didn’t even get them a housewarming
present.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
"You already said that."</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This went on for a little longer as we put the groceries
away and she thought out loud about not knowing what we should get them for
their new house, but clearly worrying about how important it is that we do, and
sooner rather than later. Soon after,
her need for a different source of worry turned back to the party, wrapping
presents, food prep, and the usual weeknight evening stuff.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A few hours later, lying in bed, watching Comedians in Cars
Getting Coffee, me, relaxing before sleep, her, worrying about something else
before sleep, on the TV, Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Jerry Seinfeld talked about
the oddities of marriage, conflicts, and the like. Dreyfus shared with Seinfeld her grandmother’s
advice: “always have something to look forward to.”</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In that context, I woke up this morning realizing just how special the gift had actually become. I now have
something truly epic to look forward to. (aside from actually looking forward
to our get-together, which I truly do and would even more if it didn’t worry my
dearly beloved so much)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
How many people seem to have no purpose in life? How empty must a life like that be? How many
marriages dissolve simply because folks forget to find something to look
forward to with each other? How fortunate am I to have
finally stumbled upon an endeavor that solves all of that pointless wandering,
and guarantees I will always have a direction…a purpose? I will never be
without something to look forward to, something to work toward, and something
that rededicates me to the dearly beloved woman I married more than two decades
ago. My life’s work has finally dawned
on me. Before I leave this current
configuration, I will teach (convince, cajole, coerce…??) my wife to be able to
accept an act of kindness, or an opportunity to have fun, or experience joy for
what it is – an act of kindness, or an opportunity to have fun, or experience
joy - rather than as a source of worry and fret, or a trigger to examine one’s
own perceived flaws…or I’ll die trying!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If I’m successful,
one day I will have the pleasure of seeing my wife’s face light up (I’ve seen
this before, I know it can happen) without that light immediately turning to a
cloud of worry about all of the subsequent implications. One day I will experience the joy of seeing
her experience joy. Just joy. Not fear, worry, or stress over the
infinitely-possible-and-thus-not-worth-considering possibilities for next
steps. Just joy. Joy, that for a moment, has no implications,
costs no one else anything, has no consequences. I really think that’s how joy is supposed to
work and I now know it’s my life’s purpose to prove that to her. Joy is not one shoe, always followed by the other, more ominous shoe. It's just joy.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
As adults and parents, I think we're all a little conditioned to think this way. Joy at the birth of our
wonderful kids is naturally followed by the fear of how we will screw them
up. Joy at the purchase of our first
home is naturally followed by the stress of making payments and maintaining it. Joy as they're accepted to college is followed by sadness that they're leaving. Joy at each milestone is coupled with the inevitable, unavoidable recognition of time passing, but the joy, in and of itself is pure, and need not be associated with anything other than joy. What comes after it could actually be more joy. That's up to us. The joy (and
honor and privilege) of having guests in our warm, comfortable home, for no
other reason than to acknowledge what a blessing it is to have a home and
friends and family to share it with, should not be a source of stress. There should be no implications. There are no consequences. There should only be joy.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
I now have a mission of convincing my wife of this. As proud as I am of some of the cool stuff
we’ve accomplished, together and alone, I don’t think I’ve ever had a more
important mission than this one I’ve just discovered: unencumbered joy, first to my wife and then
to the world!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So thank you, a second time, for the wonderful gift, and happy holidays everyone!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Luth</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Out</div>
Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-25681122517161126172015-11-04T17:00:00.000-05:002015-11-05T07:44:24.634-05:00Don't Read Too Much Into Yesterday's Election ResultsDear Ohio Legislators,<br />
Please don’t read too much into yesterday’s elections. Even though we voted down Issue 3, which some called the “legal weed” issue, a lot of Ohioans still think we should quit wasting precious resources enforcing outdated, biased, irrational, inefficient weed prohibition and the resulting prison cycle. We just don’t think we need to amend the Ohio Constitution, or grant an Ohio Code-endorsed monopoly to a handful of “investors” (like we did with the casinos) to do it. We made that mistake once.<br />
<br />
And even though we approved Issue 2, the so called “anti-monopoly” issue, we now know (or will soon learn) that Issue 2 actually paves the way for future monopolies by placing the decision into the hands of voters rather than the Ohio Supreme Court. Confused? Let me clarify before we move on. We rejected legal weed because it came with a monopoly, but then we paved the way for future monopolies by approving “anti-monopoly” legislation (Issue 2,) which will allow us to approve future monopolies proposed by future “investors.” Clear as mud, eh? Nice work legislating!<br />
<br />
What have we learned from this nonsense? First, that clever and deceptive names for bills work. I can’t blame you for that. After all, we’re the ones who elected you. But don’t take too much from that either. You may recall that the prevailing sentiment during the last mid-term elections during which you came into power was “re-elect no one,” so all you had to do was show up and you were in. We Ohioans voted not based on your qualifications or willingness or ability to legislate, but solely on getting rid of the incumbents (as long as they were Democrats.) We got what we paid for with that strategy.<br />
<br />
Instead of writing effective new laws or getting rid of outdated, costly, inefficient ones that have proven their lack of value over time, you sat back and let 10 weed investors (ResponsibleOhio) write proposed legislation, and then you sponsored it. Then, when you realized what you'd done, other folks ran out and created Issue 2, and you sponsored it too. What made it to the ballot yesterday was a mess of nonsense most folks didn’t even bother to try to fully understand. Who can blame them?<br />
<br />
Issues 2 & 3 were in conflict with each other…how is a voter to make sense of them? Editorials across the state said “vote YES on 2, NO on 3 if you don't want your toddlers to eat weed-sicles” but they never bothered to mention that we didn’t need Issue 2 in order for the monopoly part of Issue 3 to be illegal. Others said “vote NO on 2 and YES on 3 if you want to end the costly and ineffective prohibition on weed” but they didn’t really mention that in order to do so, you’d be approving a monopoly for 10 investors, which was likely going to be struck down by the Ohio Supreme Court since Ohio has anti-trust/monopoly laws in place already, with or without Issue 2.<br />
<br />
So here’s what we really said: (as if you care). We may still want old marijuana laws to be overturned, but we don’t want to do so by granting a grow-and-distribute monopoly to the 10 organizations who wrote these ridiculous laws like we did with the casino laws, nor do we want the monopoly part of that to become part of Ohio’s Constitution, even though casino owners were successful in that same effort. So we rejected that proposed monopoly even though it would have legalized weed. We’ll keep pestering you to get the weed part right and leave out the “grant a monopoly to our rich sponsors as a constitutional amendment” part, and if you continue to ignore us, we’ll elect someone else.<br />
<br />
But on Issue 2, you really fooled us and now the result of that deception is part of Ohio’s Constitution. Rather than beefing up Ohio’s anti-trust/monopoly laws, (which is what we were really supporting when we shot down Issue 3...wondering how it ever happened with the casinos) or leaving well enough alone, we voted into law a means of violating existing anti-trust laws as long as the Secretary of State’s (un-elected) five-member committee puts the monopolistic issue on a ballot and voters approve it. Notice it doesn’t say we’ll allow a monopoly if there’s a sound, compelling, or even legal reason to do so, as determined by legal experts like Ohio’s Supreme Court, only that voters approve it. So your “anti-monopoly” law gives voters the power to create future monopolies. Hooray! Way to go Ohio voters! Here's how it could work: say Responsible Ohio wants to try again, since they know most Ohioans actually do support legalizing weed. They get the ear of the Secretary of State whose commission agrees to put their issue on the ballot AGAIN, only this time, instead of it being paired with Issue 2, it gets paired with what Issue 2 created: a twin proposal. Half of the twin proposal is a flat out repeat of Issue 3 - legalizing a weed monopoly...and weed. The other half is a ballot issue asking voters to decide whether or not to allow Issue 3's exception to Ohio's anti-trust laws. Voters would first have to approve the exception (thus approving the monopoly part in general) and then they could approve (or reject) the actual Issue 3. That's right, the "anti-monopoly"law sets up a process whereby voters can approve a new monopoly. Should that be in the voter's hands? Perhaps, but those same voters are the ones who couldn't even grasp that this anti-monopoly proposal codifies the approval of future monopolies! I think it was better off left to the Supreme Court. Either way, and yes I'm repeating it again, our approval of the "anti-monopoly" law establishes a procedure for future monopolies.<br />
<br />
So, we rejected monopolies in Issue 3 (and killed a veiled attempt at legal weed in doing so)... sacrificing the long overdue decriminalization of marijuana because it was wrapped up in pro-rich and powerful legal monopoly bullshit. Then we approved Issue 2, which will allow us to create monopolies by ballot issue in the future, probably, I’m guessing here, because YOU called it an “anti-monopoly issue.”<br />
<br />
How did we come to this last step before total Idiocracy? I’m gonna guess this is what happens when we choose legislators not based on their ability to legislate, but based only on the fact that they weren’t there before. Turns out that’s a worse qualification than “seems fun to have a beer with,” and now we’re stuck with the resulting mess. We are idiots for electing you.<br />
<br />
<u>PS to the Media:</u> STOP saying Ohio voters rejected a proposal to legalize weed. We didn't...well, some of us probably did, but the vast majority of us didn't. We rejected a proposal to monopolize legal weed! Big difference. Most Ohioans support, at the very least, medicinal weed, and most Ohio cities have all but decriminalized weed, making minor possession a misdemeanor, and the penalty a fine, in many cases lower than that for a speeding or parking ticket. ...and yet the boogie man has been notably absent. High school and college kids no longer go to jail for having a joint. Baby steps...baby steps. For god's sake, don't make us sound any dumber than we are.<br />
<br />
Sincerely,<br />
An Ohio Voter<br />
aka<br />
LUTH<br />
Out<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-69401555614425743682015-05-13T08:14:00.000-04:002015-05-13T08:25:01.526-04:00The Idiocracy (again)<br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">From Carl Sagan's <b>The Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark</b></span><br />
<div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /><i>“I have a foreboding of an America in my children's or grandchildren's time -- when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and nervously consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what's true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness...<br /><br />The dumbing down of American is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media, the 30 second sound bites (now down to 10 seconds or less), lowest common denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudoscience and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance”</i><br /><br />Sagan's book came out mid-1990, before the movie version of The Idiocracy, before Jon Stewart even thought about retiring from The Daily Show. Now that Sagan is gone, and Stewart is hanging up the word processor, who will remind us that we should embrace rather than fear intellectual pursuits, skepticism, and continuous improvement?</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">As we approach this next round of presidential nominations and elections, can we please agree that the whole "best one to have a beer with" requirement was never a good idea? Don't we want a president who is smarter than the rest of us? It's no guarantee that he or she will solve all of our problems, but it's a good hedge against his or her doing something irrational and really stupid.</span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">TLDR: If you're only happy being the smartest guy in the room, you should just kick everyone else out and lock the door.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Luth</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">Out</span><br />
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-32335830470986677072015-01-08T17:09:00.002-05:002015-01-08T17:09:49.867-05:00Where Can I Gets Me One Of Them There Charlie Hebdo Cartoons?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgvxRukOwhPKp26uTl9zUC3ygV-YP2axkCxSCdiB0wmDIK0FW4HqR99zaEgUMzSKZqkfx44nTfiKypgmJWWrhMxfXoyr4BJusq-cqFGfwzZclLJIEKEuV1vRQtB9hNU3pyUuspf/s1600/crayon.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgvxRukOwhPKp26uTl9zUC3ygV-YP2axkCxSCdiB0wmDIK0FW4HqR99zaEgUMzSKZqkfx44nTfiKypgmJWWrhMxfXoyr4BJusq-cqFGfwzZclLJIEKEuV1vRQtB9hNU3pyUuspf/s1600/crayon.png" height="268" width="320" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://www.charliehebdo.fr/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.charliehebdo.fr/index.html</a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
I say we all visit the Charlie Hebdo web site and try to buy every cartoon they've run in the past year, set off a bidding war until these dangerous cartoonists can retire peacefully and maybe enough to establish A Satirist's Security Fund.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Please join Horsepoup in contributing to ASS Fund today!</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
This effort aims to unite those who value speech as well as those who want the cartoonists to just stop it. It's a Win-Win, and that's what Horsepoupers are all about!</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Let's go...get off your chair and try to make this the biggest ASS anyone's ever seen.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Luth</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Out</div>
Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-39226330021787478152014-09-18T11:57:00.000-04:002014-09-18T11:57:07.324-04:00Apple, U2’s “Gift” Not Welcome <div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
So Apple and U2 thought it would be cool to give every
iTunes user a free copy of the super group’s latest album, eh? How silly of them to think folks might
welcome 11 free songs! In fact, what
kind of nerve do these giant corporate monsters have to have to take up that
much room on the free cloud space they’ve provided us in the first place? And free music? Americans don’t want free music. We recognize the effort artists put into
making it, record companies put into manufacturing, promoting, and
distributing it, radio stations put into
disseminating it, etc. and so on. No way
do we expect to get that for free! NEVER!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Do these bon-bon-eating, yacht-sailing billionaires not
realize the burden they’ve imposed on folks who, for a variety of reasons,
simply cannot have free music on their devices? Really…the NERVE… forcing people to have to
delete content if they don’t want it!
That could take seconds out of our busy days! This invasion is almost as evil as including
sample songs or pictures or videos in a copy of Windows! It’s as invasive as buying a computer with a
web browser or security software already installed! It’s almost as evil as a 90-day trial version
of productivity suite software that lets you use it to create all kinds of
useful content, but then requires you to buy it AFTER you’ve created that
content IF you want to maintain access to those things you’ve created! What blatant disregard for our valuable
memory space and personal time! This
ranks right up there with McD’s handing out free coffee for two weeks, or advertisers
flooding our snail mail boxes with flyers and free offers that we then have to
pass on to overcrowded landfills. We haven’t seen such disregard for personal
privacy and safety since Little Caesar’s Pizza gave customers a second pizza
for the price of the first! That 2<sup>nd</sup>
pizza was clearly a ploy to get customers used to getting something for
nothing, setting the stage for a communist deluge wherein people actually
expect to receive the fruits of no one’s labor!
That would be like Burger King getting all the benefits of running a
business in America – military protection, safe drinking water, regulated
sewage, highways, power grids, stable government, police and fire protection,
hundreds of millions of customers who can afford their products, etc. – and yet
not having to pay their share of maintaining all of those benefits! As Americans, the very thought simply sickens
us!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Or do we just like to pretend it does? </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I work for an organization with over a quarter of a million
employees. All too often, folks will
“reply to all” on an email sent out to a large chunk of those employees. Shortly thereafter, someone else will “reply
to all” with a message asking to be removed from that particular thread of
messages, as if it actually took less time to type that message and send it
than it would to simply ignore, or delete the original message in the first
place. But that’s not why they send the
message asking to be left out. They send
that message (and take more time to do so than just deleting it would) in order
to tell everyone on the list that their time is more important than anyone
else’s, and surely more important than this message someone thought might apply
to everyone on the mail list in the first place.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Oh sure, some of the whiners are complaining that it’s
simply a matter of U2 or Apple being presumptuous by assuming that anyone could
possibly like this U2 album in the first place.
As individuals, we like to pretend that our musical tastes are so
refined and so important that receiving free, unsolicited music is an affront
to our highly refined taste…that we may succumb to something new or different…
and that such acquiescence would somehow have detrimental sway over the
delicate balance of the universe. We use
the opportunity to rail against “sell outs” like U2 (or any other artist who
has toiled away for years to gain some tiny little place, and – the horror –
make a lot of money, in an industry that
breeds homogeneity.) But that’s just
another way of “replying to all” in order to demonstrate to the captive
audience how important we are…how delicate our sensibility is…how much we need
our insignificant complaint to be heard by ALL!</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The uproar over having to do something with a free gift (other
than just ignore or delete it) has become our forum to tell the world to LOOK
AT ME. I’m too important to get free
music and my time is too important to be used by deleting or ignoring it. I
didn’t get selected for a reality TV show, not enough people have seen my new
tattoo…or beard…or newly adopted clothing fad or precious car. I’m too important to have to ignore an email
or music download that only slightly pertains to me, but the world will only
know this if I reply to all and complain about it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What people are really saying when they are offended,
bothered, interrupted (or whatever the actual complaint is supposed to be) when
they sound off about the burden of receiving free music on their iTunes device
is this: I am an ungrateful, whiny, low-self-esteemed
cog in a giant wheel who wants some grease…not THIS grease that U2 and Apple
teamed up to give me at significant expense, but some other grease that I’m not
really willing to pay for except through my whiny complaining and all that it’s
worth. (ha! The uproar is a lot like this ‘blog! …and yet
here you are, reading it!)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Unlike U2 and Apple, who provided no possible method for the
world to hear what people actually think about their generosity, I offer my
many readers an easy-to-use comments section wherein you can tell me how much
this post has benefited you and made your life better. Feel free to use it, but please do NOT reply
to ALL! (my readers are WAY too busy
doing important things to have to deal with that!)</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Luth</div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Out</div>
Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-61377959862695448192014-06-13T13:58:00.001-04:002014-09-18T10:42:48.996-04:00Why Are We Here<br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">It’s a rather arrogant question
when you think about it, as if everything that makes up the universe is
supposed to have some neat, tidy, rational, and for humans, powerful reason for
being. How full of yourself do you need to be to continue asking this
question? Squirrels don’t ask it. Rocks don’t ask it. Neither wind, nor musical
notes, nor joy, nor sorrow ask it. How much must one’s self esteem be suffering
in order to need an answer to such a useless question?</span><o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";"> </span> <br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Sam Harris has even rededicated
himself to the study of neuroscience to try to better understand why so many of
us fill this void with religion. In doing so, he has proposed
groundbreaking ideas in the pursuit of ethics, and yet he seems to ignore the
fact that Walt Whitman re-phrased the question so we could all understand it,
and provided an answer over a century ago. </span><o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";"> </span> <br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">In his poem O Me! O Life!
Whitman puts into words the thoughts of the curious. I use that word
because in a philosophical sense, curiosity certainly has its place. The
problem as Harris and I see it comes when, in the absence of easy answers, we
create systematic mythology and then try to get everyone to live according to
it as though an answer exists, or is even necessary. Beyond
philosophical consideration, the question serves no purpose. As such,
Whitman asks and answers to such a degree that I am fascinated by the fact that
we’re still even talking about it.</span><o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">O Me! O Life!</span> <br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">By Walt Whitman </span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";"> </span> <br />
<em><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Oh me! Oh life! of the questions
of these recurring,</span> <br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Of the endless trains of the
faithless, of cities fill’d with the foolish,</span> <br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Of myself forever reproaching
myself, (for who more foolish than I, and who more faithless?)</span> <br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Of eyes that vainly crave the
light, of the objects mean, of the struggle ever renew’d,</span> <br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Of the poor results of all, of
the plodding and sordid crowds I see around me,</span> <br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Of the empty and useless years
of the rest, with the rest me intertwined,</span> <br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">The question, O me! so sad,
recurring—What good amid these, O me, O life?</span> <br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";"> </span> <br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">
Answer.</span> <br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">That you are here—that life
exists and identity,</span> <br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">That the powerful play goes on,
and you may contribute a verse.</span></em> <br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";"> </span> <br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">from Leaves of Grass (1892)</span>
<br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";"> </span> <br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Even the non-English majors
among us may recognize this poem as it was reintroduced into pop culture by the
movie <em>Dead Poets Society</em>. More recently, Robin Williams’s voice repeats
the movie character’s lines for a television commercial for iPads. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Harris's (no-longer, may he rest in peace) contemporary, Christopher Hitchens, notes that literature was far more suited to and effective at settling life's toughest questions than religion. His eloquence bears more than paraphrase:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";"><em>...we (atheists) have music and art </em>and<em> literature, and find that the serious ethical dilemmas
are better handled by Shakespeare and Tolstoy and Shiller and Dostoyevsky and
George Eliot than in the mythical morality tales of the holy books. Literature,
not scripture, sustains the mind and -- since there is no other metaphor -- also
the soul.</em></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";"><em></em></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Had Hitch included Whitman in that quote from <em>God is Not Great: How Religion Spoils Everything,</em> I might not have been as compelled to create this 'blog entry, but who knows. It is, after all, Friday the 13th, the day of a "super full moon." I'm not sure what that even means, but it apparently hasn't happened in decades. If there's anything an atheist believes, it's that the powers of the universe are likely beyond our comprehension.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">But this is not: The answer is clear, obvious, and only overlooked by fools who cannot see it in front of their faces, and who squander what time they have looking for it. It is this:</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">That you are here--that life exists and identity,</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">That the powerful play goes on, and you may contribue a verse.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Luth</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";">Out</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif";"></span><br />Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-50901066995998854292013-10-08T13:30:00.004-04:002013-10-08T13:41:18.690-04:00Just vote NO!<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;">Here’s
why I believe House Republicans are to blame for Congress’s latest failure to
do their job and pass a budget:<o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;">As paid,
elected representatives, just voting “no” is not an option. It’s ok for the dirtbag whose sole
participation in our representative democracy is paying taxes. He’s allowed to come home from work, strip
down to his boxers, crack open a Milwaukee’s Best, and watch TV all night in
his recliner, isolated from, and not contributing to the outside world. In fact, if he could
squeeze in the occasional casting of a ballot among his commute and his beer
runs, he’d be more involved than about half the population, and I’d be
impressed, but our paid, elected, “professional” representatives have a
slightly higher expectation of performance.
They can vote “no,” but they have to propose an alternative to that
which they rejected.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;">So when
it comes to this year’s version of Tea Party-induced debt ceiling hostage
taking, the fault lies entirely with the House Republicans who have caved to
this minority faction by submitting a budget they know won’t pass in an attempt
to gain politically in the next election, mount at least the 42<sup>nd</sup>
failed attempt at blocking the Affordable Healthcare Act, and who offer up
nothing in the way of real compromise or alternatives. House Republicans have in effect just voted “no”
by shutting down our government and they’ve failed to propose any alternative
plan. Again, acceptable for beer
swilling recliner guy. Unacceptable from
paid elected officials.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;">You can
say neither party is willing to compromise but the fact is, there’s a plan on
the table. The Affordable Healthcare Act
is not only a compromise years in the making, it originated as a Republican
idea. It was passed by both houses of
Congress and signed into law in 2010.
Regardless of what today’s House Republicans (influenced by a marginal
group) think of it, (now that it’s too late to keep thinking about) they must
either support it, work to improve it, or propose their own version that can be
implemented in place of it. Simply
holding the nation hostage arguing over the routine approval of a debt ceiling
increase isn’t living up to their responsibility. It is the equivalent of holding their breath until
they get their way.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;">To those
of you who consider the status quo an alternative proposed by House Republicans,
consider this: America’s failed 60-year
experiment in for-profit medicine will bankrupt us – individuals and the
country – faster than the inevitable $1000 barrel of oil. Medical care bankruptcy is a recognized
specialty these days. According to CDC and
U.S. Court data compiled by <a href="http://nerdwallet.com/">NerdWallet.com</a>, it’s the number one reason why individuals
file for bankruptcy. <a href="http://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/health/2013/06/19/nerdwallet-health-study-estimates-56-million-americans-65-struggle-medical-bills-2013/" target="_blank">http://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/health/2013/06/19/nerdwallet-health-study-estimates-56-million-americans-65-struggle-medical-bills-2013/ </a></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;">Economic
experts from varied political backgrounds agree individual bankruptcies are the
least of our worries. According to
<a href="http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2011/0314/health-care-recession-expenditure-bankrupt-america.html" target="_blank">Forbes</a> online U.S. healthcare costs rose 4% even during the worst economic downturn
in several generations (2009) to 17.6% of our GDP. This prompted the article to begin with “Health
costs are by far the biggest threat to the nation’s fiscal health in the long
run.” <a href="http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2011/0314/health-care-recession-expenditure-bankrupt-america.html">http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2011/0314/health-care-recession-expenditure-bankrupt-america.html</a>
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;">We’re
all prone to ignoring economists, but you can’t ignore this: the U.S. spends twice as much of its GDP on healthcare
as the next closest industrialized country but we’ve got very little to show
for it. Our longevity, chronic disease,
and even infant mortality rates fall short of countries most Americans can’t
find on a map. The average American
family spends $16,000.00 <a href="http://www.statisticbrain.com/health-insurance-cost-statistics/">http://www.statisticbrain.com/health-insurance-cost-statistics/</a>
on health insurance per year, but that number
is deceptive. First of all, the average American
typically pays less than half of the total premium, while an employer pays the
rest. Second, there are about 47 million
non-elderly, uninsured Americans, according to U.S. Census data compiled by the
Kaiser Foundation, which means those folks paying that $16,000 per year (and
their employers) for insurance are footing some of the bill for the uninsured
as well. Wait you say, that’s
contradictory. Nope. The under/uninsured
only file for bankruptcy when they can’t pay the part we don’t already
subsidize – talk about socialized medicine!<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;">It comes
down to this: the cost of healthcare in
the U.S. is higher than in any other country on Earth and it continues to
rise. The quality of healthcare in the
U.S. remains embarrassingly lower than in countries who spend less than half
what we do. In other words, our
free-market system is not working.
Unless you mean in terms of pure profit for the giant corporations who lobby
Congress to maintain it. When profit is
what drives the healthcare industry, your health falls elsewhere on the
priority list. What’s worse, many of
these Tea Party folks who inspired our current government shutdown stand to gain
the most from full implementation of the Affordable Care Act. (And once again, ACA began as a Republican
plan that encourages participation in the free market healthcare industry.) According to The Atlantic, “slightly more
Republicans (107) than Democrats (99) represent districts where the uninsured
percentage is above the national average.” More than half of the most conservative
Republicans represent districts who would benefit from ACA. Ideology trumps reality every time. Just as most Americans have no idea what we
actually pay for healthcare, we’re too dumb to recognize any attempt at
reigning those costs in as beneficial enough to outweigh the corporate lobbyist
view. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;">Regardless,
just voting no and shutting down the entire government, at a cost of around
$500 million per day, ain’t helpin’ the already struggling economy. Just voting no without proposing a real
alternative is not acceptable. Holding
the nation hostage in order to counteract a law you’ve already passed is not
acceptable. Waging political warfare
while millions of Americans go without just to set yourself up as the ideologue
some tiny fraction of the electorate wants to see in the next election is
shameful. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span>
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: large;">I sincerely
hope we remember this longer than we did the last time Congress shut down our
government because there’s only a few places where just voting no is
acceptable. Let your Representative know
you’ll send him back to the recliner if he doesn’t earn his
(or her) keep by ending this sand-kicking soon.</span><o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: large;">Luth</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: large;">Out</span></div>
Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-436227258028929442013-07-18T21:52:00.000-04:002013-07-31T20:31:05.750-04:00Can o’ worms<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">7/31 edit: Um...so... turns out Stand Your Ground didn't play a role in the trial at all. The defense went with a straight self defense argument and created sufficient doubt with it to avoid conviction. So there you go. Justice is abstract. Our legal system is concrete. Zimmerman got his speedy trial and a jury of our peers decided he should walk. I still have some questions, and the original post below still asks them, but I stand corrected when it comes to Florida's Stand Your Ground laws. (do I at least get a chit for posting my correction at THE TOP rather than burying it in the comments?!)</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">Does the trial of George Zimmerman suggest that Florida’s Stand Your Ground laws place too high a burden on the prosecution?</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<u></u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
Under normal circumstances, doesn’t the prosecution “simply” have to demonstrate that the defendant committed the act in question beyond the shadow of a doubt? And don’t we know this much beyond that shadow: George Zimmerman shot and killed an unarmed Trayvon Martin?<u></u><u></u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
Ah but then Zimmerman claims it was self defense! Fair enough, but now, with one dude dead, and the other admitting to have shot him, shouldn’t the degree of certainty regarding the claim of self defense meet a similarly high standard? One would think. And I’d like to believe that it normally does.<u></u><u></u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
Then comes the 911 call clearly demonstrating that Zimmerman PURSUED Martin. Without the strange twist of Stand Your Ground, this is the kind of evidence that absolutely destroys any claim of self defense. You do not pursue someone whom you mortally fear. You do not pursue someone you mortally fear when a law enforcement officer is telling you to stop. If you do pursue them, and you continue to ignore the directive of the law enforcement officer, then you give up your claim of self defense and your presumed innocence. If defense was truly your concern, you run the other direction. If you don't listen to the dispatcher telling you not to chase down the guy you later claim you were deathly afraid of, then you absolutely have given up the assumption of innocence and taken on the burden of proving how these strange sounding circumstances justify your pursuit and killing of an unarmed man.<u></u><u></u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
That is, until we wave the magic wand of Stand Your Ground over all of this. Suddenly the prosecutor must prove more than that you pursued and killed an unarmed man. Now the prosecutor must prove, in spite of the fact that you actively went after this guy, that you were NOT frightened for your life, while the jury, apparently, has to assume you were, even though you chased after him instead of running away.<u></u><u></u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
I don’t get it.<u></u><u></u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
One thing I do get: I’ve spent enough time in places where the local authority sanctions the chasing down and killing of people for reasons I never completely understood. Those places are not pleasant. I won’t be visiting Florida again real soon.<u></u><u></u></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
Luth,</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
Out</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-79524372871443807802013-03-30T12:47:00.001-04:002013-07-31T20:36:43.022-04:00Electing Sociopaths<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
Ohio Senator Rob Portman’s change of heart on gay marriage
does in fact represent an admirable degree of open-mindedness, but why did it
take him so long? (turns out he knew his son was gay and never mentioned it while he was being considered as a VP candidate) Of course I don’t know
him, and it might be a tad presumptuous of me to speculate, but hey, that’s what
we do here.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Here’s what I suspect of most Republicans and how Portman’s
new perspective seems so representative of it:
prior to his son’s coming out, Portman, like many Republicans, was
convinced he knew better than anyone else.
He was sure that being gay was just wrong, morally, legally,
fundamentally wrong. In his mind, prior
to his son’s announcement, Portman’s beliefs had very little to do with anyone
other than Rob Portman. If your life
didn’t look like his life, you were probably wrong. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
That probably sounds worse than it is, after all, we can
only see the world through our own eyes and compare it to our own
experience. But at some point we have to
grow up and accept the fact that just as we can ONLY see the world through our
own eyes, every other individual in the world can only see it through his or
her own eyes as well. No one has our
same experience nor do we have the exact same experience as anyone else. In Senator Portman’s case, prior to his son’s
epiphany, he apparently never considered that someone else’s experience might
actually lead to a different perspective than the one he held. Until it affected him personally, it was not
an experience he was capable of or willing to accept or consider. I think it’s
safe to say Dick Cheney’s experience was similar. Ditto Mark Sanford whose Appalachian Trail
lie covered up the kind of sin that he so loudly protested before he got
caught. That is, until it affected him
personally, before it became part of his own experience. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The problem as I see it is in this “growing up” part of the
equation. As mentioned, we all see the
world from our own limited perspective, but as adults seeking to function in
the larger world, we have the burden of acknowledging other perspectives exist,
and accepting they may even have as much merit as our own. I know this argument won’t convince some
people that gay marriage should exist, but it is an argument far more basic
than that. It’s called empathy, and when
adults don’t have it, we generally consider them sociopaths. Even worse, adults who can’t or won’t (and what’s
the difference?) acknowledge the merit of different ideas purposefully limit
their own ability and experience in the world. They limit what contributions
they make to the world and they limit what they can get from the world. If you can’t imagine a world other than your
own, it’s as if you’re admitting you are incapable of solving any problem that
you personally have never encountered.
It’s closing yourself off to creativity or new ideas or
discoveries. After all, these things
were not part of the past you experienced, and you won’t consider ideas,
thoughts, concepts that aren’t already part of your past experience. You have basically reduced yourself to a
drone, plodding along, marching toward your own death. No wonder so few Republicans are
atheists! I’d want to believe in an
afterlife too if that’s how I lived this one.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This issue isn’t just an abstraction either. In concrete terms, the inability to imagine a
life other than our own plays out on a tactical level. It’s hard to imagine that the ability to
afford a car and insurance payment makes me richer than most of the people in
the world. (According to the CIA
Factbook, the worldwide average annual
income is around $5500.) For even lower middle class Americans, this is simply
unfathomable. We can’t begin to imagine
what that kind of life might be like. So
folks who cannot acknowledge something like that can’t possibly understand why
those folks might not see college as a viable or even desirable option. Folks who can only relate to their own
experience fail to understand why these people can’t just pick themselves up by
their bootstraps and build a business and end up millionaires because, after
all, America is the land of opportunity.
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It’s hard for even lower middle class Americans to imagine
growing up in a bad neighborhood where getting killed or going to prison before
your 18<sup>th</sup> birthday is 10 times more likely than graduating from high
school. For too many of us, such a life
simply doesn’t exist, except, maybe, for people who CHOOSE to live it for some
unknown reason. When you can’t imagine
those circumstances then you can’t understand why those people also don’t see
college as an option..because baic survivial takes up all their philosophical thought
time. And when you can’t see that, you
naturally blame them for the circumstances surrounding them. You wonder, often aloud, why can’t these
people just work harder and make something of themselves? Wouldn’t they feel more self-respect from a
minimum wage job than from public assistance?
You can’t imagine that some kind of public healthcare for their kids
(since for-profit healthcare is neither affordable nor available to folks with
minimum wage jobs) might be more important to them than their own self respect
or resume building.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
If you didn’t grow up in a town where everyone worked in the
mill, or the steel plant, or the auto factory, or the farm, standing, using
their hands and backs, heavy lifting, hard work, long days, for generations,
where it has long been instilled that “real work” makes you sore and tired at
the end of the day, then you probably can’t understand why the idea of a desk
job NEVER factored in to their post high school plans, and thus you can’t
possibly empathize with the fact that they simply don’t know where to turn now
that the farm is a golf course, the mill, factory, plant have been moved to
China or somewhere where worker safety and environmental stewardship have yet
to figure into the cost of doing business.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Even if you worked in a clean, safe, well-lit American
factory, you probably can’t understand why workers elsewhere might believe
their ability to unite is a matter of life and death, rather than just whining for a raise (because whining for a raise is the only idea in your experience).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Until something happens to you personally, you can’t seem to
wrap your brain around it. It’s kind of
childish or at least immature. So
forgive me for not celebrating Senator Portman’s sudden enlightenment. My question remains: if a person hasn’t matured enough to be able
to consider the perspectives of others, what makes them think they’re capable
of leading others? And if people who
lack empathy are considered sociopaths, then how are they even eligible for and
how do they keep winning elections to public office?</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Luth,</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Out.</div>
Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-72356980548281146832013-02-28T20:04:00.001-05:002013-02-28T20:04:30.619-05:00Lawyer Language: from "budget" to "sequester"<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Ever wonder where the term “sequestration” as used by Congress these days came from?</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">What’s being sequestered, and why, and how?</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">The explanation serves as proof – as if we needed more – that lawyers in general (probably), but especially the ones who become politicians, are snake oil salesman who manipulate language, or even create it like J.R.R.</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Tolkien</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">using it to lend credence to an imaginary world, in order to create a world in which they are required to interpret it back to the people it is supposed to serve.</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Gotta</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">give them credit for the</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">ingenious</span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">approach to job security!</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Sequestration refers to the legal act of holding property (not money; property) in trust, in order to prevent squabbling parties from destroying it while the real ownership is legally determined. So far it makes perfect sense. We can all imagine scenarios in which this seems like a reasonable action to take. Picture your 5 year old little brother holding your Cal Ripken, Jr. rookie card over a candle, claiming that it belongs to him because he found it (…in your shoebox, on the top shelf in your room). Since it is in his possession, your claim to its ownership is in question. It makes perfect sense for your parents to step in, rescue the card from the flame, and hold onto it until its true ownership can be worked out. Did your brother really “find” it? Had you, via gross neglect, legally abandoned your claim to it? Everyone agrees the card is worthy of being rescued. Likewise, most would agree that its owner should be allowed to burn it, or anything else the legal owner wants to do with it. Sequestration is a good idea, and thus far, it’s even a good word to describe the process. It is a word that matches a definition most humans can understand.<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Here’s the problem with Congress (lawyers) adopting the term in their annual budget cat fight: it no longer refers to property in any kind of jeopardy. It’s money. In fact, it’s not even money, really; it’s a forecast of money. Back in 1985, the Gramm Rudman Hollings Deficit Reduction Act tried to fix a flaw that had grown out of another lawyer-created process – the national budget. The way the budget worked before Gramm Rudman Hollings was that various unrelated appropriations bills got added into the overall budget discussion thereby guaranteeing that the total proposed spending would exceed revenue because no one oversaw the big picture. Each bill’s sponsor was focused solely on his or her own priorities, and they operated outside of the budget committees. When all of these bills got lumped together into the budget, unsurprisingly, the checkbook didn’t balance. So Gramm Rudman Hollings basically said from now on when this happens, if Congress can’t figure out how to make it work by a specified deadline, an amount equal to the deficit will be set aside – sequestered – until this extra deficit is cut OR until the debt limit is raised. If no agreement is reached, this “sequestered amount” will be deducted from all programs across the board until the checkbook is “balanced.” Except for the fact that Congress considers at least some deficit spending to be “balanced” and the fact that several budget areas (military, Social Security…) are exempt from these automatic cuts, leaving the remaining programs to share far larger cuts, it’s kind of a good idea. Gramm Rudman Hollings certainly didn’t solve or prohibit deficit spending, but at least it forced Congress to look at it, and agree to the extent of it. <u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">That was then.<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Before I continue down the trite “let’s kill all the lawyers” path, I should mention this: Lawyers are English teachers at heart. (and I have a special place in my heart for English teachers) They discuss, analyze, and interpret literature (stories, legal precedents, laws…same thing) in order to find meaning and guidance for the rest of us. Literature provides a discussion point from which we can debate and discuss the most important issues to mankind without the constraints of personal and emotional involvement – without having suffered the experiences ourselves. With the personal and emotional removed, we can then apply logic to the discussion and arrive at a mutually agreed upon better understanding of what we’ve learned, how to apply it in our lives. It’s identical to the way religious people derive moral guidance from their various religious texts, only lawyers (and English teachers, Literature buffs, book club members, and atheists) do it without the cognitive dissonance resulting from literal belief in fictional tales. Lawyers do this with stories and laws men have created, stories and laws which, with any luck, have been arrived at via similarly unemotional, rational discussion and debate.<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">This is now. <u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Gramm Rudman Hollings remains a decent band aid to put on the bleeding wound of a budget process grown too big to be workable (lawyer-designed), but we seem to have forgotten that the use of the term “sequestration” was, and I’m giving Congress the benefit of the doubt here, metaphorical. It was a nickname applied because of the vague similarity of the process to actual legal sequestration of property. You don’t sequester money! You can’t sequester forecast borrowed (and therefore imaginary) money. This money doesn’t exist. It’s not in a lock box and sequestration won’t protect it, nor will it take any actual money from even the non-exempt budget areas in order to stay below the debt ceiling… because it’s not money… it’s a budget outlining how money we haven’t borrowed yet might be appropriated. Likewise the “debt ceiling” – that boundary line of borrowed money that sequestration intends to maintain – is also figurative. These terms were used as shorthand to ease the discussion, simplify and expedite the explanation of how they work. The amounts in question are rather arbitrarily created. The checkbook is never literally balanced. The federal budget has always included borrowed money in its definition of “balanced checkbook.” And that’s fine and dandy… until we start interpreting these figurative terms as literal or pretending the nicknames for these conceptual abstractions are the hard nouns identifying actual concrete things.<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">A literal perspective of an actual budget looks like this: Money comes in. Money goes out. When those two pools of actual money are equal, that budget is literally balanced. Whether it’s a kid’s lemonade stand, Microsoft, or the USA, that is literally what we mean when we say budget. Enter the lawyers who became politicians. Rather than risking losing an election by administering literal budget practices and angering constituents when actual programs must be cut, they went the Tolkien route and created their own language. This new language allows them to describe “balancing the budget” even when expenses far exceed revenue. Obviously anyone with 6<sup>th</sup> grade math skills knows that’s not possible and so the new language adds layers and layers of complexity so that the appearance of college math is require to understand it. Few people who aren’t math teachers even remember the titles of college math courses and the problem is instantly solved. Our budget process isn’t ridiculous and arbitrary, it’s complex, beyond a lehman’s grasp.<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">That’s not only bullshit, it’s also a little unfair on my part. The budget of a nation of over 300 million people is a little more complex than that of a kid’s lemonade stand. The depth and breadth of what that budget covers, from the security of a ready and well-equipped military to a single Head Start breakfast is massive by scale alone, even without considering the complex formulas by which it must be derived in pursuit of equity and fiscal responsibility. But that’s just it. The misuse of these mangled terms is specifically to avoid responsibility. For Congressmen.<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">To have settled on the misnomer of “sequestration” was a handy expedient, but to have forgotten that it is merely a nickname, and to now hold the nation hostage over a process created by the same body who are now the hostage takers, and who suddenly believe the term is literal is irrational…the opposite of what we expect from lawyer language.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Luth,</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 12pt;">Out</span></div>
Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11359236.post-54987081217636773062013-02-03T18:12:00.001-05:002013-02-04T18:16:01.641-05:00It's about our culture, not our laws<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">There’s a Sylvester
Stallone movie coming out soon titled BULLET TO THE HEAD. </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">I haven’t seen it, but the trailers indicate
it’s like every other action movie out there…glorified violence and
revenge. </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">I don’t for one minute
suspect that the niche market such movies serve actually plays any kind of
direct connection to gun violence. </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">I don’t think such movies should be banned.</span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> Hell,</span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">I might even like it, but
the entire notion of a title like that getting</span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">green-lighted</span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">as a full budget
endeavor featuring a major star is a perfect indicator of just how different
our culture is from any other country with legal guns.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">BULLET TO THE HEAD is
based on a graphic novel, so its treatment of violence is a comic book’s
treatment of violence – that of a two-dimensional, oversimplified world that
only a child or someone whose capacities are severely limited would ever
confuse with the real world. One other
fun fact is that the original graphic novel on which it is based is
French! (and everyone in the NRA knows
the French are sissies!)<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">What’s any of this got
to do with the NRA or gun laws? Well,
I’ve been thinking lately… for the first time in my life I might actually agree
with something NRA President, Wayne LaPierre, said. At least in part.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">I don’t think it’s
about our gun laws; it’s about our gun culture.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">I’ve only recently
arrived at this new conclusion and the realization that it means I agree with Mr. LaPierre. I’ve had guns in my household all my life, but
I’ve never once been tempted to join the NRA. </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">During the years in which this opinion was
formed, Charlton</span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Heston</span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">represented that organization. </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">As I watched him slowly prove through frequent
public tirades that he’d lost sight of the distinction between playing Moses in
a movie and actually being Moses, I also saw signs that many of his
followers were under similar delusions. </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">I was disheartened and embarrassed</span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">at my fellow gun owners for their inability to rationally
discuss gun laws. </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Even among close
friends, and after taking pains to keep partisan politics out of the private
discussions, folks I knew and trusted seemed to have drunk the Kool-Aid and
refused to even consider that this nation might be able to come up with better
gun laws than we have. Period. Not necessarily stricter, not necessarily
banning any particular model or type, just better laws. I believe my countrymen
are bright enough to take this on. Many
of my fellow gun owners, and the public sentiment of the NRA indicate
otherwise.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">For most of my life,
the public face of the NRA seemed dead set against even having that conversation.
Under President Heston, they proved themselves to be something far more
frightening than an assault rifle. They helped create a culture of fear. They established themselves as a giant, rich,
and therefore powerful lobby 100% committed to NOT having a discussion. Nothing
pushes a paranoid public toward their guns more than fear and a sense of
powerlessness. This was a brilliant
strategy for the NRA. It’s a brilliant strategy for niche movies like the
Charles Bronson franchises of the 80s, and just about every Sylvester Stallone
movie. It’s had terrible results on our
nation and our political process. </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> T</span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">here is little wiggle room in that kind of stance. </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">If you won’t discuss our disagreement, you
are, by definition irrational, and you offer no contribution to a potential
solution. </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">You ARE part of the
problem. </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">In its own way, my own
acquiescence to this stereotype (of the NRA and its members) distracted me from
actually looking at the issue. </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">I was content to know (and I still KNOW this) that anyone not
willing to talk is not rational, not worth talking to, and so went the NRA.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Sure, I knew the NRA
sponsored and promoted safe gun handling and practices. </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Though I’d had a hunting license long before
the state of Ohio required completion of a hunter safety course to get one, I
took the NRA course anyway and found it very well done. </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">But no good deed goes unpunished, and where
your public face is clearly as insane as your refusal to talk, I had no use for
such an organization outside of that classroom.
In fact, I simply couldn’t connect anything about the NRA with my
experience in that classroom. The class
was good, sound, logical. It didn’t in
any way match with the NRA I‘d come to know.
Just like many of my smart, educated, logical friends who owned guns…I
couldn’t connect what I knew about them in just about any other circumstance
with how stupid they acted at the mere mention of the words “gun control.” </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> Suddenly they
lost all critical thinking skills, listening skills, the ability to even have a
conversation. So I’m hoping this
revelation of mine represents some kind of meeting at the crossroads. That we’re finally ready to have this
conversation.</span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">That may not sound
like I’ve reached any new conclusions, and as I sit back and think about it,
maybe I haven’t. </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Maybe I’ve agreed all
along that the law doesn’t much matter. Gun laws really do only affect law
abiding citizens. </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">But if that’s the
case, then why does the NRA so fear any new or revised gun law? </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">It’s NEVER even been hinted at during my
lifetime that anyone, even the most liberal presidential hopeful would EVER try
to outlaw guns. </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">EVER. Except by
the NRA, which means their entire argument is fully encased in logical fallacy
– the slippery slope.</span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">And
if you think the now expired definition of “assault rifle” is a tad ridiculous,
like I do, then why won’t you help craft a better one instead of refusing to
talk at all?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">There I go again,
getting distracted by the opposition’s weakness to the point that I’m blind or
deaf to the rare, few valid points they make. </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">It’s not about the law; </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size: 11.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">i</span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">t’s about the culture.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">On that note Wayne
LaPierre and I completely agree. If only life were oversimplified and
2-dimensional enough to leave it at that. If only life were just a movie based
on a French comic book. OR, if only we could work together and figure out a better way forward. Remember how cool smoking used to be? Had we, as a nation tried to simply outlaw
it, we NEVER would have reduced the health problems we have by reducing the
number of smokers in our population. We’d still be arguing about it today. We’d have polarized groups of tobacco
manufacturers and consumers on one side and tree hugging health nuts (and some
consumers too) on the other, even though the extremes of those groups only
represent a tiny fraction of society. Had we tried to ban a certain type of
cigarette, such an effort would have failed from the start, and that tiny
fraction would have held our nation hostage and prevented any progress. The
tobacco shift was a cultural shift, not a legal shift. Wayne and I would have been simpatico
throughout it up to a point. However, in
order for that cultural shift to gain enough momentum to work, some laws had to
change too. In order for our society to be able to weigh the importance of individual
freedoms, the rights of industry, and the associated public costs, we had to
have a conversation and leave laws on the table. Even if they</span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"> squeeze out a few individual freedoms, or threaten some industry profits</span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;"> </span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">That’s how law works in a country like ours. People
(and corporations are people now) share individual sacrifice for the greater
good. But it can't happen if major players simply refuse to talk.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">So
we’re gonna have to talk about laws in order to talk about creating a similar
shift in our values when it comes to guns.
Poll after poll tells us the NRA is just plain wrong when it comes to
the public sentiment regarding gun regulation – the vast majority of Americans
really do favor sensible gun law. Too
bad we haven’t been able to come up with any.
Too bad the NRA has made it its mission to prevent that very
conversation. At some point, even
fence-riding NRA members are going to decide that one too many malls, movie
theaters, or schools have been shot up.
At some point, things will become so extreme that the decision will get
forced, and so it won’t be as a good a decision as our nation could actually
make.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">At
some point, our gun laws will change and so will the NRA. Will it be forced,
and will we take what we get, or will we participate responsibly in the
planning for it?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Luth</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 10.0pt; line-height: 115%; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Out</span></div>
Luthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13601861375176626651noreply@blogger.com2