Russian Hacking and Other Insecurities
It really is beside the point whether the Russian hacking actually helped Trump win the election. I don’t think that the intelligence communities ever claimed that they had such evidence. The CIA, FBI and the other intelligence agencies repeatedly claimed that the evidence only showed that the Russians were responsible for hacking our computer networks and that this effort was intended to benefit Trump. Trump repeatedly denied that the Russians could be responsible; over and over again, doing as much as possible to cast doubt upon and discredit the various intelligence agencies at every chance he could. Now it appears that Trump might concede a little bit by acknowledging that maybe there was some hacking by the Russians but careful to qualify that this hacking didn’t help him win the election.
While it is difficult to quantify, it is not difficult to understand how the result of the collected hacked information appearing on WikiLeaks, each week a new set of hacked data presented during the campaign, kept negative attention focused on Clinton’s e-mail server scandal and alleged Clinton Foundation issues. It is difficult to argue that this did not have an effect on the election. But, even so, the not so easily quantifiable presumption that there may have been an effect on the election is distinct and separate from the election result itself which, obviously, is something we can easily quantify. So, absent other evidence, it could never really be argued that the election result is not valid based upon this presumption alone without a great amount of difficulty.
Regardless, Trump continues to put his self-interests above his country. If the President-Elect is unable to comprehend the duty he has to protect the security of his country even above his own interests, how can he be expected to protect its people and the democratic values our country holds dear? Is this really the type of characteristic we want in a President?
The fact that we have a President-Elect who is so insecure about his own election result that he would think the evidence that implicates that the Russians hacked our systems necessarily implies that his election result is invalid may be another indication of just how lacking in character and unqualified a President-Elect we have. Most normal statesmen (and/or stateswomen) would be more worried about protecting our country rather than protecting some less meaningful election result. The last President that might have been accused of having this much insecurity is Nixon.
Interestingly and similarly, that President also went to great lengths in his efforts to protect his 1972 election result even going as far as becoming involved in a conspiracy to cover-up a crime. It’s amazing how more things change the more they remain the same. So, if anyone had any doubts before, it’s pretty clear to me now where this Presidency is headed.
Things that Might be Beyond Repair
There is still a mistaken belief in some corners of public opinion that there was something offensive and inappropriate about the speech Brandon Dixon gave at the end of the performance of “Hamilton” that Mike Pence attended a few months ago in November. This belief, which gained popular attention by comments Trump made on Twitter, deserves to be properly reconsidered. Mike Pence, in his own words, wasn’t offended nor should he have been. Pence may have recklessly left it open to others regarding judgement, and that might have also propelled this mistaken belief that there was something offensive said, but, the comments made by Dixon were quite benign and perfectly appropriate. Dixon’s brief comments are as follows:
“We, sir — we are the diverse America who are alarmed and anxious that your new administration will not protect us, our planet, our children, our parents, or defend us and uphold our inalienable rights. We truly hope that this show has inspired you to uphold our American values and to work on behalf of all of us.”
It was a short, respectful and positive statement. Additionally, it was a plea intended for proper and respectful consideration. The idea that this is an inappropriate comment is absolutely absurd. The statement promotes the core concept behind the production of “Hamilton.” Ironically, this incident highlights the whole reason why we revolted against England. Our pleas were not being properly considered by the king. The notion that political statements should not be made in this Broadway play is also ridiculous given that the whole play is a political statement that celebrates our American heritage and our American ideals. Our American ideals of liberty and justice can never be inappropriate no matter where they are spoken.
Furthermore, from an interview after the incident, Pence commented, “When we arrived we heard a few boos, and we heard some cheers. I nudged my kids and reminded them that is what freedom sounds like.” Pence’s statement contradicts another prevailing misconception that the “boos” Trump may have tweeted about was a result of the plea made by Dixon at the end of the play (Trump tweeted that the “Hamilton” cast “Harassed” Pence). The “boos,” according to Pence, happened before the play even began, before the statement was read aloud and not by the “Hamilton” cast but by random members of the audience who, obviously, were exercising in their own way, albeit, somewhat unsophisticatedly and not very respectfully, their freedom of speech. In any case, the “boos” definitely were not sponsored by nor were they encouraged by the “Hamilton” cast. And, to be honest, after watching the video, there seemed to be more cheers than “boos” for Mike Pence when he walked into the auditorium.
“Hamilton” is a play about dignity and diversity, how an illegitimate, but brilliant foreign born child of a British merchant from minor aristocratic origins rose to become a founding father of our nation. The comments Dixon made were perfectly legitimate given the content and the context of the play and the nervous aftermath of the recent election. People want reassurance from our President-Elect that he will be what he said he would be: “the President of all.”
But, that is not what we get. What we get instead is the exact opposite. Instead of addressing their legitimate concerns, the President-Elect only re-enforces those concerns with tweets that seem more suited to ones a despot might use to inflame public opinion against his supposed enemies. The statements tweeted by Trump should never come from a President of the United States. Those tweets should never come from someone who is the representative of all Americans and they definitely should not come from someone who is responsible for being the face of American democracy for the next four or eight years.
What we have is a President-Elect who is “Tweeting” the truth and our country away into oblivion with provocative statements that continue to speak only to his base but sometimes sucking in any other poor unsuspecting citizens sitting on the sidelines who fail to wrap their heads around the dangerous game Trump is playing. These are victims who fail to understand how they are being manipulated by Trump’s perverse and un-statesman like comments. Trump has not changed since the election despite the apparent false hope some of his supporters have that he will act more presidential once he takes office.
I am not sure who can persuade Trump to change. But the threat his current actions pose to our republic is real. The statements he makes similar to the ones made about the cast of “Hamilton” are only meant to distract and manipulate the public away from other focuses. It may start out small like removing focus from his Trump University settlement but it may progress into bigger things like the realization our liberties have just been snatched away from us because we were too busy focusing attention on something that required no focus of attention at all.
The comments that former Defense Secretary Robert Gates made before the election that Trump is “beyond repair” should be taken seriously. Because, if that is true, if Trump really is “beyond repair,” it only means one thing for our country: America itself may be “beyond repair” after Trump gets done with it. Unfortunately, by electing Donald Trump as President, America has decided more Polarization is required which is a big enough threat to our country on its own but with that comes this even greater threat to our republic that his reckless tweeting and his provocative statements can permanently damage our democratic institutions and our standing in the world to a point where they become “beyond repair.”
–
Trump’s Tweets about “Hamilton”:
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump 19 Nov 2016
Our wonderful future V.P. Mike Pence was harassed last night at the theater by the cast of Hamilton, cameras blazing.This should not happen!
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump 19 Nov 2016
The Theater must always be a safe and special place.The cast of Hamilton was very rude last night to a very good man, Mike Pence. Apologize!
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump 20 Nov 2016
The cast and producers of Hamilton, which I hear is highly overrated, should immediately apologize to Mike Pence for their terrible behavior
—
Pink Sourcing for the Masses
Consider Kristen Bell’s, Pink Sourcing video:
Pinksourcing With Kristen Bell | Celebs Have Issues Ep. 1
Funny, right? Well, not so fast; not according to this article:
“Another Celebrity Wrong On The Wage Gap” by Karin Agness
What I think is just as funny as Kristen’s video are some of the responses to Kristen’s video and, specifically, this one. Instead of taking Bell’s comedy satire for what it is, the author of this article is a little bent-out of shape that Kristen would make such a “misleading” parody. Sure, the writer for this Forbes piece has a point that the general Census Bureau statistic may not consider other factors like comparing similar jobs, that there may be less women in the workforce than men, that there is no consideration of the job choices women make vs. the job choices men make, etc. There also seems to be a lot of disaffected men out there giving their nod towards this Forbes article who are unhappy that they get paid the same or less than women do in comparable jobs while Kristen has the gall to make fun of a statistic that they are quite certain is false.
But, so what? It’s Kristen Bell! Lighten-up. She is really funny. In addition, the video is not just about men vs. women but also, women vs. women, subtly and, cleverly, highlighting other disparities that exist in the workforce with humor as well. My advice to this columnist and to all the other people who agree with her: “chill-out” and quit making such a big deal over this.
There really is nothing wrong with the point of view being promoted by the video. You cannot escape the fact that there is a real disparity in household incomes between men and women. In the long run, it really doesn’t matter why there are differences if you are truly concerned about a progressive improvement for women in the job market. So, in my humble opinion, regardless of whether you are a conservative or a liberal businessperson, you now have one other real option to consider whenever you get that itching need to exploit somebody: pick up that phone and call Pink Sourcing. Trust me; all your troubles will be solved.
The Business of the United States of America is not to be a Business
Had our forefathers intended our form of government to be run like a business, they would have set it up like a business. But, that is not the purpose of our form of government. A business is not so concerned about protecting liberty, justice and freedom as much as it is concerned about the bottom line. Big Businesses, if left unchecked, more often than not, like totalitarian governments, tend to exploit people, limit their options; they tend to foster an idea that the business is more important than its people. When was the last time Microsoft was concerned about your right to practice a different operating system?
There is always room for efficiency in government and we absolutely need Big Business to progress as any meaningful modern society. The improvements to our lives that can only happen if Big Business exists are apparent. Laws favorable to Big Business should be encouraged but must be applied in the context that they don’t infringe on the rights, freedom and liberty of other American citizens. Only a government independent of thinking like a business can do that.
So, it is absurd to me when people base their reason for selecting a particular candidate on the claim that the candidate will run our government like a business. Our government should not run like a business nor should we trust people who think that it should. If a person believes that government should run like a business, it indicates to me that they have absolutely no understanding of what they are talking about, no understanding of our current form of government or why our forefathers would have thought such a notion to be an absolutely bad idea. Our government is not set up like a business on purpose because our government’s primary directive is to be subservient to its citizens, protector of our liberties and freedom not the other way around. Totalitarianism in any form is a bad idea.
The World is Flat like Obama is a Muslim
There are assertions that I find laughable and also quite disturbing at the same time. One of these is the assertion that Obama is a Muslim. The claim is absurd yet it is still propagated by a small group of people. Some have even gone as far as to splice together a series of video clips, statements Obama has made throughout his public tenure, of course, without presenting these statements in their full context then posting them to YouTube to “prove” to you that Obama is a Muslim. I have to shake my head in disbelief at the whole thing; that anyone would go to all that trouble to promote something so inane. This type of behavior is very similar to the way other fringe groups believe in equally outrageous claims such as the one where the world is flat.
No matter how many different examples you can show members of this group that the world is not flat they still choose to believe that the world is flat. Regardless of how many clear and factual examples you give that Obama, by all the available evidence, is a practicing Christian who attends a Southern Baptist church every Sunday, they still choose to believe that Obama is a Muslim. Funny; because how could it really be true; what Muslim would regularly attend a Christian Church and a Southern Baptist congregation no less? And, disturbing; how and the heck could someone believe this in the face of all the evidence that proves otherwise? But, even if Obama were a Muslim so what? Isn’t this America? Maybe that makes the disturbing part of this all the more disturbing when you consider that someone’s religion in America should even be an issue at all.
Speaker of the Whiners
Last week on “Face the Nation” newly elected House Speaker, Paul Ryan, made this statement when answering a question about what he plans to do about immigration reform:
“I think it would be a ridiculous notion to try and work on an issue like this with a president we simply cannot trust on this issue.”
I was a little suspicious of the accolades Ryan received from both parties when his name was floating around as being a candidate for Speaker of the House earlier this year. In every interview I have seen Ryan do, he has always just reaffirmed my own opinion that he is part of the problem. But, I always give people the benefit of the doubt and, perhaps, with more responsibility and with the important role Ryan is playing, perhaps, he would be more open to compromise and negotiation. But, it seems, with Ryan’s comment about his inability to even consider negotiating with the President, my original assessment of Ryan was not too far off the mark.
It is clear to me we can expect more of the same from Congress with Ryan as Speaker of the House. In fact, I fear Congress will be even more immobile and stuck in the mud of political rhetoric and dysfunction. Ryan has none of John Boehner political sensibilities. These are sensibilities that a Speaker of the House must have. For example, dismissing the one party that is absolutely essential to accomplishing the work that needs to be done in Congress is not the brightest move I have seen a Speaker of the House ever make. But, I suppose I should not be surprised.
The major problem with Ryan is that he seems only willing to negotiate with people he gets along with. To be a good politician, to be a good legislator, to be a good Speaker of the House, to be a good and effective leader, you need to negotiate with the people you don’t get along with. Compromise is the key to the success of our nation. Whining about how untrustworthy somebody is doesn’t cut it. Ryan’s comment about his failure to want to negotiate with the President is just plain and simply irresponsible.
I think Ryan should get a clue, figure it out and quit making excuses why Congress is so unproductive by blaming it on the other guy. Nobody likes a quitter. Nobody likes a whiner.
Taking all their Marbles and Going Home over Climate Change
This has to be the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. I don’t care whether you are Republican or Democrat. If Paul Gosar is representative of the type of thought process we have in Washington, boy, are we in trouble. I think there are legitimate reasons for questioning what is really responsible for Global Warming and how negative its impact will truly be without considering other natural occurrences that might also be taking place.
So, I am not willing to subscribe to the opinion that people against Global Warming don’t have a legitimate right to question its validity. But, boycotting the Pope because he holds an opinion that favors the generally accepted scientific view that Global Warming is a reality and that man is most responsible for its existence? Give me a break.
As a congressman, Gosar has a duty. He has a duty to his country to honor diplomatic missions from other parts of the world and, especially, when our country is officially hosting these diplomatic missions. In my opinion, Gosar, if he goes through with his plan to boycott the Pope’s address to Congress next Thursday, is failing miserably in his duty. In fact, it is a true dereliction of duty in my opinion.
What is truly ironic about this is that Gosar is Catholic. Obviously, I would never nominate Gosar for being congressman of the year. I will, however, make a case that Gosar is probably one of the 535 reasons why Congress is so “Do Nothing.” Whenever somebody has a different opinion, rather than respecting that others have the right to their opinion, that some type of compromise has to take place, these congress members, instead, just put their hands over their ears and start yelling, “La, la, la, la, la…I can’t hear you! La, la, la, la la!” Then they take all their marbles and go home. Nobody talks. Nothing gets done. “Do nothing.”
References:
“Arizona congressman to boycott pope’s address over climate change stance,” the guardian
“Why I Am Boycotting Pope Francis’s Address to Congress,” Time
Weighing the Different Levels of Stupidity
I was unfortunate enough to see this disturbing billboard in my Facebook newsfeed recently:
“DEMOCRAT: a person too stupid to know that they are a communist”
The billboard then went on to further its attack:
“DUMB DEMOCRATS NEED TO WAKE UP!!! What part of Communism don’t you understand? There’s nothing more closed than a liberal mind…”
I’m guessing the part of “communism” that Democrats don’t understand is much different than the part that the poor intellectuals who thought this gem up don’t understand since all the Democrats I know believe in free enterprise and are not very prone to totalitarianism like most actual communists all too often are.
What is most irritating about this distasteful message is the circumstance under which I had to witness it. It was not too long after I posted a brief comment to Facebook indicating how condescending attitudes need to change if we expect our political process to work again. Obviously, some of my Facebook friends seem to think not less but more condescending (and more excessively obnoxious) attitudes are required.
Sentiments like the ones found in the billboard described above may galvanize their target audience but they also alienate people like me, moderates who have had in the past voted for Republicans. The amount of disgust generated in me by that posting is hard to describe in words but it is enough to make me never, ever want to consider voting for another Republican ever again. Why would I ever vote for another Republican if there is a chance they all suffer from such small minded ideas like the ones articulated in that billboard? Also, why would any rational, respectable, responsible person ever think this is an acceptable message to propagate let alone to legitimately think?
While the ideas expressed in the statements of this billboard are riddled with foolishness if not just for the amount of irony they contain, the more important point is that this is exactly the type of thing we can do without in a country that has prided and built itself on compromise. These statements are not only absurd but they apparently demonstrate the limited thinking capacity of the “Right Wing” (assuming the “Right Wing News”, the group sponsoring this billboard, is representative of the “Right Wing” of the Republican Party). Resorting to name calling is quite a simpleminded thing to do but, undoubtedly, juvenile.
The people responsible for the sentiments in this billboard and anybody who has a propensity to find them even remotely appealing are beyond hope. They really have no conceptual understanding that if you insult and offend people with absurd comments lacking in intelligence but plentiful in the amounts of disdain and innuendo they can carry, you are not very likely to achieve any type of productive resolution to anything. In a country built on compromise to finding workable solutions to political problems, such a failure is unforgivable but extremely dangerous to our country’s very existence as a nation.
There are people who really do need to “wake-up.” They are the people who think that the other guy must be the dumbest person around because he doesn’t think like the orthodox men like themselves. And when you really start to think about it: just how smart is it to think that you have all the answers while everybody else who disagrees with you has none of the answers? How many times in history have we seen people who have correctly evaluated the natural order of their environment only to be ridiculed by those who were so sure that their own erroneous view of the world was so much better?
For example, how about we consider the people who advocated that the earth was round or that the earth revolved around the sun? How about we consider how much they were ridiculed by the “Right Wing” of their day? While I am not really proposing that the Democrats have anything in their platform that is as illuminating as some great scientific discovery, the point is that you tend to miss things when you are so clouded by your own orthodox notions of how things are. These unbending absolutes being assumed can and often do prevent you from considering the merits of the other argument being made.
The bottom line is these billboards do nothing to help the dialog that needs to happen between the political parties but, in fact, they only serve to widen the divide making it almost impossible to have any type of discussion at all. This particular instance is the most offensive I have ever encountered. It doesn’t just attack leaders of the opposition party, it attacks the multitude of American citizenry who are the members of the Democratic Party–a party that has a long proven history of promoting the interest of the common man, standing up against tyranny, totalitarianism, including communism, and those who would seek to end our freedom, liberty and religious tolerance.
It really is time to “wake-up” to the notion that we need to promote a more courteous, respectful, less condescending and less confrontational approach to politics if we really expect to get anything done in this country. Doing anything else; now, that really would be “stupid.”
Bob Shieffer: the Last Great American Reporter?
Bob Schieffer’s last day as moderator of “Face the Nation” on CBS is today. I just want to mention that there are not many newscasters left that provide as much integrity as he does. Always respectful and fair in his questioning of both Republicans and Democrats, you never really knew if Schieffer was for his interviewee or against them. But, that’s exactly what all really good reporters are supposed to do: severely limit any personal bias they might have.
Tough questions the audience deserves to know can be asked without asking questions that are irrelevant and unnecessary for the audience to know (regardless of how sensational, ratings increasing that these other questions might allegedly be or how many other reporters seem to be asking them). Finally, good reporters should let the audience decide what they think on their own without telling the audience what they should think. Schieffer did all that and more.
Schieffer belongs to the same class of reporters that Walter Cronkite belonged to. This is a class of reporters that is quickly disappearing. In fact, it is my opinion that Schieffer might be the last one. Can Schieffer’s replacement truly bring the same type of integrity and quality to moderating that Schieffer brought to “Face the Nation?” My answer is, maybe, but Dickerson will have a very tough job in trying to match what Schieffer brought to the show. I have my doubts it can be done.
A New Edict of Milan in America
Tolerance needs to begin with us and we need to start by recognizing that baseless, absurd conclusions with the intent to invoke emotional responses from its target audience is the reason why intolerance begins to take shape in the first place. I recently ran across an article entitled, “Repealing the Edict of Milan: Obama as the Anti-Constantine,” written by either Ralph H. Sidway or Raymond Ibrahim (it’s not entirely clear which), that indicates Obama is the Anti-Constantine because he, supposedly, refuses to help the Syrian Christians against the horrific persecution they are suffering at the hands of ISIS. The argument made is weak containing unconvincing evidence that is irrelevant or inconclusive, full of emotion, yet; still, it will have no problem appealing to a conservative audience anyway.
This idea that Obama is the Anti-Constantine only adds to the intolerance (the intolerance and disdain Republicans have towards Democrats). It does nothing in the way of offering a real compromising solution so that, perhaps, we really can make a change in the Middle East forward towards a fully realized state of religious tolerance. Secondly, the “Edict of Milan,” while an important concept in the formation of our own country’s ideas towards religious tolerance, did not really exist as a historical event.
There was no real edict made in Milan. What is often referred to as being the “Edict of Milan”, instead, was a letter by the Emperor Licinius distributed to the eastern provinces in 313. Although, Constantine’s name may have been referenced in the letter, it was not written by Constantine. Dr. Timothy Barnes states in his book, “Constantine: Dynasty, Religion and Power in the Later Roman Empire:”
“The surviving document often falsely called the ‘Edict of Milan’ is in fact a letter which Licinius sent successively in 313 to the governor of each province of Aisia Minor, the Syrian region and Egypt as they came under his control after he defeated Maximinus.”
In fact, Barnes makes the case that intolerance was nurtured by Constantine in his later reigning years as he consolidated power, as he began to embrace Christianity more fully and as he steered the empire towards a more totalitarianism solution to the problem of governing. So, the premise that Obama is the Anti-Constantine doesn’t make much sense if the intent of “Repealing the Edict of Milan: Obama as the Anti-Constantine” is to prove Obama approves of totalitarianism and intolerance.
How about we make real inroads towards tolerance? For example, let’s respect each other’s politics, quit making inflammatory remarks about the opposition and then sit down at the table and talk about how we can make this world a better place that includes more tolerance (much more tolerance, including the concept that the parties begin to tolerate each other more respectfully than has recently been the case).
- ← Previous
- 1
- …
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next →
The Polarity Resistance 