BACK AND FORTH

 A few days ago, I was quite surprised to see that the difficulty of high-powered, highly intelligent and, presumably, good-hearted women in finding a partner is still out there! Will and Ariel Durant mentioned this when they wrote a century ago!
But then, why should I be? The recent election showed that we still have more than our share of the type of male wuss I call 'doughfaced dinkyjohnnies'. They'd rather vote for a hereditarily rich white male (he is no man by my definition of that worthy thing!) who is also a convicted criminal and knows only how to make our government a private enricher for himself, rather than a woman of color who, all her working life, has had only one boss: WE! THE! PEOPLE! First, the people of San Francisco, then of Alameda County, then the state of California and finally the whole country!
And she has served each very well!
However, I've found that not all the onus is on we males. Let me ask the women out there a question: if a man (and I mean a real man; that is, one who lives with integrity, responsibility and courtesy) told you he could be a good and able househusband (a redundancy, really, as 'husband' means 'home manager') and was willing to be the primary caretaker for any children you might have---how many of you would want to take him up on that? Even if you are a high-powered, highly-salaried person?
I mean, look at his place by all means! If he says he'll clean, see if his place confirms that. If he puts himself forward as a cook, check his kitchen. If he has pets, check them out too. Not to mention his way with little young people.
But, having done all that and pretty much finding it all 'checks', will you still feel he's 'less of a man' because his monetary worth is judged less than yours? If you do, guess what: you're shooting yourself somewhere between the foot and your female parts, to use a dated description.
Again: if an adult male hominid lives his life with integrity, responsibility and courtesy (and works on all three) he is a man. And, so long as they are men according to this definition, none of them are 'manlier' than any other. Indeed, the only billionaires I'd dignify with that description are Nick Hanauer, Uncle Warren (Buffett) and maybe Bill Gates.
I was fourteen years old in 1970, when late 20th century feminism came center stage and TIME magazine 'ratified' it by featuring Kate Millett on its cover. I thought, now it'll all change.
I and my brother babysat for a number of families during our teens, mostly (but not exclusively) for families with boys. But the 1980s, in this respect, was a 'retro' decade. Some reasons for that were 1) inflation and 2) GOP giveaways to the already obscenely rich. Such giveaways tend to take money out of circulation. I remember when Bush II did the same thing in 2003; almost immediately in its wake the local economy felt like it had less 'oxygen' in it.
But as a result of the factors mentioned here, a two-earner family started to go from a luxury to a necessity. Thus, only now do ads feature husbands who are cooks and/or see to the laundry and even apply good old Vicks VapoRub on a sick child.
Anyhow, I hope my guideline for manly character and behavior proves useful for both males and women.
Before I go, let me tell my fellow males this: in the end, you will find being a man according to this definition more satisfying, in and of itself, than any other way of living. Also remember the great Lord Acton's maxim: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." If we are to save the souls of the wealthy, we must curb their earthly power. For our earthly good and their spiritual health!

TRANSCENDING BONELESS DISLIKE

 This is an open letter to all the traitors (imo) who either voted for MAGA or who did not vote at all:
I probably don't like any of you, especially the ones who see the only point to helping others is to make yourselves look 'good'. I think of you and then I remember John 1:5. "For the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not."
That darkness is y'all. Not that we're a set of particularly bright lights, but for good or ill, y'all put the bar plenty low! Y'all are used to squelching most, maybe not all, common human or even fellow-mammal feelings. Maybe if you have pets you're partially open to those feelings. I know many's the time I look at our two dogs in loving wonderment and appreciation, including and perhaps especially when I compare them with humans and it's us who come up short! I strongly suspect that those of you who have pets have known the same feeling, perhaps more often than I have.
As you are in the darkness, you can't comprehend kindly feelings for any human unlike yourselves. And so, you can only comprehend showing such feelings as being what you call 'virtue signalling'. That is, we're trying to show you benighted wicked fools how much better we are than you!
I admit, that's exactly what some of us are trying to do. But only some of us, and a minority among us at that. If it weren't so, we 'scalawags' would have bolted from their camp a long time ago!
And I'll let you in on a little secret: you don't need to 'love' nobody in order to do right by them as God gives us the light to see, understand and do what's right!
First, get--and keep--this straight: the God who brings up the sun on both the good (us) and evil (y'all) and brings the rain down on both the just and the unjust (harder to decipher who's who here) has NOT appointed you to say who's deserving of help in obtaining life's basics (decent food, clothing and shelter, health care, clean air and water) and who isn't! If God considers us all as equally deserving,
then who the hell (literally) are you to say who's deserving and who isn't?!
I know, pretty certainly, that it is possible to have no tender feelings for this or that set of bipeds in order not to maim them, internally or externally, in order to 'save' them, or because someone told you, "Never give nuthin' to no n***er, s**c, 'injun' or k**e", to make sure they, too, are decently fed and sheltered, etc. All you need to do--and you can do this, certainly if you ask God's help to do so, He will extend it--is remember how you would want to be treated.
And it doesn't hurt to recall this line from Proverbs--yes, I said Proverbs!--"If your enemy is hungry, give him something to eat, and if he is thirsty, give him water to drink. In doing so, you will heap glowing coals on his head." At least, if your enemy has a conscience, you'll be doing that. Because a human with a conscience, helped by you, her enemy, will probably ask, "Why are we enemies? This person just fed me and/or gave me water." If s/he has no conscience, then that's another matter for another time. I think I can confidently say, virtually all of us do have consciences. Some of us have such overweening consciences that they bid fair to drive the rest of us nuts, but, again, that too is for another time.
How do I know God will help you in this? I'll tell you: right now, he's helping me transcend my anger at and, indeed, my utter disgust for all you traitors--that is, traitors to our common birthright and to the promise of our country becoming something never before seen in human history: a multiracial, multiethnic, multi-faith democratic representative republic where there is no hierarchy save that of true knowledge and ability!
If you need help and we come across each other, I will do what I can and not mention politics. If you need more than I can do, I'll point you to where you might find what you need and, again, make no inquiry as to your politics. Get it?
That's what it comes down to: recognizing and honoring the things all living things have in common and the connections between us. That is, if I inflict real injury (by which I don't mean butthurt) on you, it'll come back somehow to bite me in my hairy ass. And the same applies to you, however frenetically you try to deny it.
In any case, the crew you've elected, that is, the Orange Ogre and his MAGAts, are poised to make some of those connections quite painfully clear to you and us. And that's why we are poised to fight them every millimeter of the way.
Many of us see the connections you either don't see or refuse to acknowledge. If we can, we'll save your asses as well as our own--but for you, the price may be to have the butts of your egos crimsoned; your egos might not be able to sit for a year. Be ready for that!

ESAUS--OR WHAT?

To all who gave a con their vote on Tuesday or before: do you know what you've done?
Do you really know for what you've voted?
To those who've sold our common birthright for the false promise of lower prices for milk, eggs, bread and gas: you have been hornswoggled by this con. Indeed, if he legislates the McKinley-era type tariffs he wants into law, expect to be paying a lot more for the goods you need and want!
That big plasma TV screen you'd like to buy? If it's made anywhere but in the good ol' USA, you'd better buy it now because anything made anywhere else, starting next year, will be 20 to maybe 100 percent more expensive! And why? Tariffs, that's why!
I need to ask God's forgiveness on a fairly constant basis because I am looking forward to, a year or so hence, to drinking your bitter tears over seriously high prices and smacking my lips to boot!
Then again, I might have tears enough to shed myself at the same time if Project 2025 gets its greedy hands on our SSI and thereby impoverishes us--and tens of millions of others! How many people do y'all know who rely on Social Security for at least a large chunk of their income, if not necessarily the bulk of it? Do your parents of grandparents rely on that? Know anyone incapacitated in an industrial accident who now needs that income? Or who do you know with chronic illnesses? Mike Johnson, Repiglican Speaker of the House, looks forward to ending the Affordable Care Act and having those people thrown out on the street to die. Very likely he and his political owners will dance on their graves as well, after making sure you're not looking. If you are, they know how to assume pious poses with remarkable speed!
And how many hunters have voted for the Orange Con? I got news for you: the policies that he means to pursue via Project 2025 will probably denude your favorite hunting grounds and eventually make them disappear. Do you think that preserving those areas is not connected with being 'green'? Well, enjoy (Muhahahahahahaha!) the consequences of your seriously large mistake! This might be a really serious matter; I've no idea how many impoverished rural fellow citizens rely on hunting to put meat on the family table. Will they be able to keep doing so? I wonder; so should you.
Last but by no means least: how many of you showed what dough-faced dinkyjohnnies you really are by not being able to bring yourself to vote for a woman at all, never mind a woman of color, however capable she might be? Wisconsin, Michigan and (I am bitterly ashamed to list a home state here!) Pennsylvania, ye all have shown yourselves to have more than your share of such dinkyjohnnies--and probably not all of you dough-faced as well. I saw the percentages of African-American and Hispanic males who fell for the con's scam! In any case, you showed us, both on Tuesday and before then, eight years ago, what your real problem is!
The only thing I have to say to those who've voted to make us cry is: boy, have you ever missed the point! We almost never cry for ourselves, but almost always for people, creatures and other life-forms in greater danger, and less able to help themselves, than are we. Including....y'all!
Do you really think that deluding yourselves that others are suffering more will ease yours? When your children cry from hunger, will it ease your mind to think that blacks and browns are hurting more?
Y'all remind me of John 1:5: 'The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not.'
But to be fair, we are not completely enlightened either. Certain Yankees (and by that I mean New Englanders, not generic Northerners) act as if their region has a patent on virtue, and that addytood (to put it in 'Philadelphian') seems to have largely infected our educated class. David Brooks is right to point out that our educated class doesn't seem to see or comprehend how much working people require serious respect, not condescension, from them. Our educated class needs to listen to working people of all colors with much more open minds--and not with any predetermined agenda of our own. Brooks is right about that.
You've voted against your own actual interests with remarkable ignorance, and perhaps malicious ignorance, at that. Our educated class is by no means guiltless in this; I admit that. But in the end, it was you who sold our common birthright for what amounts to cheaper French toast, which is equivalent to a mess of pottage all right!
And I thought you all hated French things!

DEATH TO ALL SHARIAHS, BY WHATEVER LABEL!

 As propounded by nearly all Islamists, 'shariah' law is of the Devil.
That's right. You read that right.
Why do I say that? Simply this. As I contemplate those societies ruled by it, I notice that nearly everything in that code is directed towards keeping all the real power in the hands of a few males my age and older, including many of the young women.
Thus, a secondary aim of 'shariah' law is to keep the males between the ages of 18 and 25 from seizing what the older males have (mostly) stolen and divvying it among themselves, including and, perhaps, especially, the young women.
And to this end, they seek to outlaw music and, of all things, female laughter! Why? Because these might EXCITE the young males, who are such babies that they have NO self-control whatsoever! Of course, they are probably also jealous of the simple joy of life that such laughter can, and often does, betoken!
We who live in countries where more female flesh is seen ought to drive it into the heads and hearts of these diabolically-inspired male bipeds that we, not they, are the manlier ones: are we excited to the point of rape by bikini-ed women? For a preponderance of men here and elsewhere, the answer is a definite NO.
We, not they, are the ones who have learned (I admit, to varying extents) to control our hormones rather than be blown about by them!
I can hear a foaming reply from some of them, viz. "You have NO manly hormones in you; there is nothing you need resist! WE are the manliest; liquid fire runs through our veins!!"
I think the best answer to this and other such garbage is, "Ye-ah, dude. Whatever." Then, as they dance with foaming from their mouths, pass the popcorn and the iced tea. Then get ready for some serious conflict.
I say anyone and everyone living in any democracy who says democracy should be killed and shariah 'law' take its place ought to be immediately deported to a country so ruled! Then we'll all be quite happy, won't we?
Warning: we do have those here who seek to institute a 'Christian' version of shariah law. The best-known plan now goes by the name of Project 2025. Advocates of that can be deported to Russia, which is probably the closest thing to what they lust to do to us here.

TRIBES AND FAMILIES

More thoughts stringing themselves together. This particular string starts with why, in today's world, people leave their native countries to go and live elsewhere. As a general rule, people tend to leave places that feel as if they are 'closing in' on their inhabitants and seek out places with both more room to breathe and more secure ground under their feet. These two things are not contradictory, as some ignorant Randians might think, but rather complementary. For without the security afforded by a rule of law and some measure of popular participation in the making of those laws,  safety for one's life, limbs and goods becomes a horrifyingly chancy matter for an individual and her family.
People migrate to where they can breathe easier in terms of safety and/or can be better fed, clothed and sheltered than in the native lands. Or they migrate in pursuit of a particular ideal, whether it be making a new nation or resurrecting an old one. But I suspect such migration as that to be relatively rare.
In any case, for a society to be attractive to immigrants a rule of law, trusted and upheld by the large majority of its citizens, seems to be a prerequisite.
It follows that whatever evaporates or vitiates trust of that rule will, if unchecked, impoverish and re-tribalize a modern society. Such theft of trust re-converts a polyglot federation to a collection of mutually hostile and perpetually warring tribes. This includes all that discourages wide participation in politics and government and which discourages civil discussion of issues about which most of us feel pretty deeply. The so-called Republican party and the noise machine of Faux News, Rush Limburger and all his mimics are indescribably guilty, guilty, GUILTY of such discouragement and, to a dangerously snowballing extent, have been guilty of such discouragement for at least forty years and probably more. Their attempt to put themselves above the law and then to use the law as a club to beat all non-white non-straights-and-males down is a big part of this as well.
Jew-haters claim that Jews break up other 'tribes' while keeping their own intact. Intact? Just how intact are they, one can wonder, when there are probably above 100 million people on this globe with some ancestral connection to ancient Israel, yet who do not call themselves Jews, Israelites or even Hebrews?
The reason for why some remnant of the nation of ancient Israel still calls itself that is probably The Tetragrammaton, aka YHWH. Get it?
I can think of another nation whose beginning includes at least the partial abandonment of tribalism based on DNA, on the 'sib' which was the first political unit of most Teutonic tribes including the Angles, Saxons and Jutes. When those three tribes conquered and settled the greater part of Britain and began the stop-and-go of making it into something called 'England', many sibs were broken up. A man might be a resident of, say, Sussex while his brother or cousin lived many miles away in Essex. And so on. And so the basic societal unit changed from one based on DNA to one based on proximity, on shared residence. As settlements settled, DNA crept back as at least a partial determinant, but not necessarily the primary one.
That process was repeated as first Englishmen, then Dutchmen and, later, border English, Scots, and Scotch-Irish settled along the Atlantic seaboard.
In the last case, whole communities crossed the Pond and went west looking to grab land from the natives. It can be argued they never abandoned the sib or clan as the basic societal unit and thus remained at a more primitive stage of development than other colonial societies. Sarah Huckabee Sanders, and those who agree with her, seem to underline this as they don't acknowledge anything but 'blood', aka DNA, as the maker of what they call 'families' but might better be called 'relational clusters'.
'Family', as Robert Frost wrote, is 'the place where they have to take you in', where they acknowledge you as 'one of us' although years might have gone by. But DNA ain't necessarily the determinant. I suggest the determinant is how much love we feel among our 'families'. If, when we're there, it's more a matter of compulsion of some kind (including 'family duty') than wanting or needing to be there--well, I will be bold and say this: that ain't no 'family'; just a common DNA, or, 'relational' cluster of bipeds! Most relational clusters at least attempt to be families, to give credit where it's due.
The extent to which that ideal is realized is certainly highly debatable.
Democrats seem to at least begin to understand that family is where we each feel safe and cared for in ways which we need and can best get there. Where we are built (back?) up and not torn down, but where we're also kindly called on our particular forms of b.s. 'Republicans' at least act as if they don't understand this and don't want to. It must be plain that the Democrats are the ones who are, in the best and broadest sense, the genuinely 'pro-family' party.

FACTS & TRUTHS

 

I just heard Professor Tim Snyder explain that, for democracy to survive and flourish, we need a common understanding of the facts and the truths they show us. Quite true.

And for that to happen, any society needs a vigorous self-critical component. Part of why Western societies and culture still dominate the globe is that the West's common culture may not have been born in the next thing I'll mention, but it was definitely fostered and nurtured in the creative tension between two highly self-critical societies. One (Athens) is characterized by rigorous empirical observation. The other (Jerusalem) is typified by its understandings of divine revelation.

Both societies were and are highly self-critical; I might almost say exceptionally so. The late Samuel Huntington commented; Western superiority primarily emanates from our superiority in organized violence--that is, our armed strength. But whence cometh that superiority but from our scientific primacy? And whence comes THAT but in our willingness to test new ideas and, thus, either make new tools OR adapt tools from elsewhere?

Our diversity and willingness to try what's new are strengths, not weaknesses. One real weakness we might have is forgetfulness of our societies' underpinnings--that is, we forget how rooted both in Scriptural understandings and empirical science we are!

I defy anyone to show me any society, at anytime, anywhere, that has a self-critical sector as vigorous as do Western societies and cultures. And yes, I admit that sometimes that sector is shortsighted sometimes and goes overboard in its criticism of its own mother cultures. And that it takes a liberal to admit that--most harmfully in its response to Israel's defending itself in this current war.

Any society's self-critical sector needs to defend the best in that culture while going at those parts of the culture which are actually hangovers from times not as 'enlightened' as our own and which contradict those things for which we say we stand!

At the same time, we dare not ('dasn't' for old-time Yankees) admit individuals from other societies who are dedicated to the destruction of ours. I support a wholesale expulsion of Islamists (not Muslims per se) from ALL Western nations! We can know them because, when we bring up their uncomfortable truths, they start 'screaming' in one way or another. We also have such truths, but some of us at least are working on them. Are their societies?

I don't think so!

Anyhow, as we prepare to vote, ponder this post, and beware of all those who duck from the light of truth, be they Islamists from elsewhere or our own native fascisti, whatever they call themselves!

Vote for she who does not duck from truth--Kamala and Tim!

  ·

TRUTHS ABOUT DEMOCRACY & AUTOCRACY

 It seems like this is the time to write such a post as this.
Back during the tie of our revolution and what is now called our 'Federal' era, there was quite a bit of talk about comparing, to quote Sam Adams, 'the tranquillity of servitude to the animating contest of liberty'.
What it seems didn't occur to anyone was, servitude ain't tranquillity. I wrote such a post and titled it so; here is a link to it.
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/1544353602029642191/8505401765231773381
And one thing even I didn't mention much was, how stressful it can be to 'dance attendance' on a thoroughly corrupted despot of either sex. Which is probably why many wise men and women kept away from princely courts and the like and were also often careful to stay out of the sight and hearing of such despots.
Now, democracy is by no means based on any Rousseauvian Enlightenment claptrap such as the Inherent Goodness of Humankind. We are nowhere near that good, and democracy knows this. Indeed, it's based on the sound ground that none of us corruptible bipeds deserve to be trusted with anything near absolute power and that, accordingly, power ought to be divided in such a way that no one has anywhere near more power than is good for them (or the rest of us) and, also, that no one is left without a voice and some chance to exercise it. This is true not only of mere political but also of economic and financial power; perhaps especially true of the last two types of power.
"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."
This all-too-true saying was coined and popularized by the great Lord Acton, a mid-Victorian political luminary. In the past, we have assumed that the wealthy will be less open to corruption as they already have all the material benefits they may want. This has also proven to be only a partial truth. Yes, we have had such public-spirited rich folks as the Cecils, many of our Founders such as Washington, Jefferson and Madison and, later, the Roosevelts, Kennedys and (let's be fair) the Lodges and Cabots.
However, in recent years we have seem far too much of what Teddy Roosevelt justly called the 'malefactors of great wealth' who are indeed quite corrupted by the possession of too much wealth and too much power. Those such as Musk and Trump and the latter's supporters seem driven by a lust for absolute power, including a desire to bring feudalism into the 21st century USA!
While autocracy cherishes outward (and often phony and misleading) signs of religious devotion, democracy is actually essential for the growth and strengthening of true religion. In direct proportion to any faith being part of the governmental establishment anywhere, its religious fervor will be largely persecutorial and, thus, contrary to the will of God. Real faith is fostered in an atmosphere of liberty of conscience and only in that atmosphere!
Democracy also necessitates a number of things without which autocracy can muddle along and which it indeed fears and tries to suppress: first, a citizenry educated in the spirit of science and which seeks real truth, which has as little to do as possible with telling thugs what they and their toadies want to hear! And they never want both the good and bad of any story, never mind the ugly. (Wah-WAH-wah!) But all three elements, along with the beauty often created by the struggle between them, are necessary so that the good from history can be strengthened and the bad needn't be repeated. (Wah-WAH-wah-wah!)
Second, a press unafraid to ferret out corruption (which is just about necessary for autocracy!) among those entrusted with power by the public and still more among those possessed with great private power. We need a truth-in-reporting law and maybe a set of them!
Democracy is the only form of government capable of correcting its mistakes--and mistakes there will be, always, this side of Judgment, in any government. All of us are susceptible to corruption or just being badly informed; yes, myself included. Let's remember that even Jesus addressed a rich young man thus: "Why do you call me 'good'? There is none good but God."
But this should be no excuse for not trying to be good; we only need to remember that mistakes on our parts will be inevitable. And democracy gives us the means of correction. It can take a while but is far less dependent on the whims of we corruptibles than is autocracy.
And that is why we need anti-lobbying laws and publicly financed election campaigns too.
Some may think this a paradox, but it is no such thing in a system which needs truthful information to run well. We also need civil servants who know their actual jobs and who can explain in plain language, with a minimum of 'shop talk' (if any) how they serve We The People!
I feel a bit like I'm bouncing these points around; it may be that other fingers can articulate these matters better than this aging pale male. Still, I hope that this at least begins to make the case for the defense, preservation and, yea, the extension of democracy and the continual push-back against autocracy!
Remember something ol' Harry (Truman) once said: "If you want to live like a Republican, vote for the Democrats." Rarely was a truer word spoken, even by that blessedly blunt president.
I think in 1980, too many of us thought we were aristocrats and voted accordingly. We can never afford to forget how plebian nearly all of us are. Real aristocrats look after the real welfare of those lower down the ladder. They (we?) understand that, 'When we all do better, we all do better.'
Not to mention that, by removing the 'super' from 'super-rich', we actually help to save their precious souls from absolute corruption and them toppling over into the fiery Pit on the lip of which they walk! Seriously; think about it!

BEHIND WHICH EYES?

 As the Democratic ticket hangs between its choices, certain questions must be asked: of the thirty-some representatives and four senators begging Biden to withdraw, how many have significant racial minority populations in their districts? What are they afraid of? Do they think their soccer moms will either go the other way or stay home in November? Allow me to suggest that, if the party keeps the issues of reproductive choice, public education (for) and a vibrant economy alive, that happening gets less and less likely? Or are they afraid that the cash spigots from what are still probably mostly neo-liberal donors for them may dry up?
Or do their districts still have relatively large percentages of those pale males I call doughfaced dinkyjohnnies? How many 'shiny object' voters might these districts have who will respond more positively to someone who only looks and sounds 'commanding' but with no truth behind it as opposed to a commander who is sometimes not very commander-like, but who knows his/her business thoroughly and has used, and continues to use, that knowledge for the benefit of the people s/he serves?
Maybe we should push harder on that point. The representatives who serve districts with either high racial minority populations or even high proportions of struggling whites within the Democrats (looking at those Philly suburban districts which were red and are now blue) are still silent or, now, openly supportive of Biden/Harris. This ought not to be ignored; no block of voters is more loyal to or works harder for Democratic candidates across the ballot than politically engaged African-American women, especially (I guess) the church ladies among them.
There was once another Democrat at the top of the ticket who many 'pros' thought would go down in thumping defeat and they were terrified lest he should take the party with him. But he ran--and he won. And this was with defections on both the party's right and left! Anyone care to guess this man's name?
Harry S. Truman. Good ol' Harry.
And now we hear rumors that the 'Republicans' now want to force an outright resignation from Biden!
I think only Roger Daltrey and The Who have words for whence this noxious nonsense emanates!
Allow me to explain: the MAGAts, who now own and run the formerly Republican party, are lineal (mostly political) descendants of those who wanted ol' Milhous to fight to a finish and who probably bear a mighty grudge against onetime Establishment Republicans as well as nearly everyone else who ain't one of them! So, to The Who's lyrics from the song with the intriguing title of Behind Blue Eyes:

I have hours only lonely
My love is vengeance that's never free

Remember, vengeance is what Trump and indeed most MAGAts, now live for! And a few more interesting lyrics which stir the pot:

No one knows what it's like to be the bad man
To be the sad man behind blue eyes

And a little further on:

No one knows what it's like to feel these feelings
Like I do--and I blame you!


Do you understand? They blame us for their half-century of butthurt and they now seek any kind of revenge including forcing the resignation of a well-working Democratic president! And also they blame anyone else but themselves for something else. Back to Roger again:

No one knows what it's like to be hated
To be fated to telling only lies

FATED? Like hell, you doughfaced dinkyjohnnies! NO ONE is FATED to that! You--yes, YOU--have CHOSEN to be among the ones who, according to the Book of Revelation, 'loveth and maketh a LIE'
You have the power to turn and repent as have a growing number formerly among y'all--but yet you cling to the lies which act as walls between us all!
Well, let me tell y'all something: those to whom you've made yourself feel superior by hating them know very well how it feels to be hated for something about your person you cannot change! Nearly everyone with skin darker than raw dough knows how that feels, beginning with Jews and going right on through skin shades to Africans and those of African heritage in our common hemisphere!
And so your toxic bread which YOU have cast upon the waters comes back to you now! I am also a pale male and any patience I might have had for your butthurt whining is LONG gone! And Trump also lies to you when he says, it's all right to hate. Now you know the feeling you've inflicted on others and, Jaye (my late first wife), forgive me for using a phrase you never liked to hear from me--you are justly served!
Forgive this digression; I mean my point to be that, while the African-American community, especially the women, stand with Biden/Harris, so will I. It is they that uphold democracy, the rule of law and the truth in general most steadfastly and among whom big mouths with fat wallets and shiny-object chasers seem to have the least influence. And no group works harder for Democratic candidates up and down the ballot. And that those calling for Biden to withdraw are those least influenced by these worthy women. We cannot afford to mutilate their enthusiasm in the way some neo-liberals seem to want to do, because without that--it they stay home--we really are done for!

LADIES, FORWARD MARCH!

 Yesterday, I heard there was a new petition signed by above fourteen hundred African-American ladies which expressed a disinclination to have Biden step down from the nomination. I don't know what else that petition contains yet, but I've also heard a rumor or two that, behind the mostly elite clamor for that action, is the desire to remove Kamala from contention for the top spot.
I don't know about any other pale males, but this one smells a large white rat at this point.
On my dad's side, I come from the Southern white minority that were called 'scalawags' by the ex-planters during Reconstruction. The ex-planters called them that because they were willing and able to participate in the Reconstruction state governments which also included freed people and Yankee carpetbagger transplants. They were mostly independent farmers, artisans and shopkeepers who refused to use slave labor and whose voices had been muzzled in nearly all the slave states by 1840. That is, before the war.
If anyone reading these words cares to, y'all just try and convince this scalawag in his late sixties that something other than racism and sexism are in motion here!
I am only too used to party bigwigs, most of whom are still also pale males, living in terror of more doughfaced dinkyjohnnies skittering away from tickets headed by anyone other than a pale male who at least can convince others he's more than just another d.d. But now we must all ask ourselves, aren't most of our d.d.s already gone, either to MAGA or the next world? I mean, if Georgia--Georgia, for Pete's sake!--can elect Jon Ossoff and Rev. Raphael Warnock, albeit by squeaker margins, maybe we'd better re-examine our old assumptions!
If Biden really has to go, maybe it really is time for a Democratic ticket headed by Kamala and with, say, Governor Josh Shapiro or maybe Mark Kelly as her Number Two! If Georgia can elect both a Jew and an African-American as its U.S. senators, why not?
But I also strongly suggest that, nobody knows the answer to this, be it affirmative or negative, better than politically engaged African-American women. And I also strongly suspect that being one of their church's ladies also helps in this respect. Or, sometimes, even a rabbi. Tamar, could I possibly forget you? Jamais de ma vie!
Is any group of voters more loyal to the Democratic party than these good ladies? And who does more of the legwork for, spends more time on (including persuading others to vote and vote our way) campaigns for Democratic contenders at all levels of the ballot? And who contributes a growing proportion of campaign budgets to boot?
One mistake too many 'officers' make, in nearly any organization, is: they don't listen enough to the foot soldiers and the non-coms (or their counterparts)!PleasepleasePLEASE, let's not be making that hoary, ancient mistake yet AGAIN!I just heard some members of the CBC might be wavering; but this aging 'scalawag' will wait until the good African-American ladies--those most loyal of party members, who are probably the most hardworking, at least proportionally and who are the canniest pragmatists of voters themselves--speak out, one way or another.
These black pearls certainly have been in the background much too long, but it's not for me, nor any other pale male, to 'put them up where they belong' or to do anything but make way for them and welcome them to all our ranks, including the top ones! And this pale male, for one, waits your call!

A MESSAGE FOR A CRUCIAL FOURTH

    Fellow citizens, this is a crucial July 4th.
Either this will be the start of a rejuvenation of democracy or it will mark the last time the 4th was celebrated under a democracy for the foreseeable future.
The election still looks like it will be uncomfortably close. Not a good thing when one of the two major parties is openly fascistic and six 'justices' on the Supreme Kangaroo Court have begun the process of shaping a crown and sceptre, and mixing some decidedly unholy chrism, for the crowning and anointing of a King-Emperor.
Our fascists act as if they cannot but win, although they also know that if enough of you knew what they really intend, they'd be headed towards a public rendezvous with Madame!
Fascism is fueled by a sense of losing power and/or security of 'place' in society. The current fueling of Fascism began when Reagan started to sponsor greater and greater accumulation of wealth at the tippy-top of our society, with, initially, 'Christian' white nationalist words for those whose buying power was, and still is to some extent, shrinking. Now, in the wake of the election of the first African-American president and our hidden racial hysteria boiling over, those anti-Christians are now howling for blood which their Orange Julius Caesar has promised them they'll be able to shed with impunity if he wins.
Howling for the blood of uppity (fill in the blank, really, with racial, religious, sexually-oriented, and, yes, political designations as well. I'm an aging pale male, yet they'd be glad to have at me because I actually believe in equal justice under law, for example) whomevers!
The victory of the Democrats, and of democracy, needs to be as crushing as We The People can possibly make it! All of us, and everyone we can reach by any means, needs this message shared with them with this addition: fascists are bullies and the toadies of bullies. If you, a free American citizen, want to be part of the spirit of the Declaration whose adoption we celebrate today, you will vote straight Democratic on all levels from president on down to the lowest-level local officials! If you're a mewling toady of bullies, be they political, economic, social or anything else, then you're also a MAGAt!
Somehow, I think this approach might prove pretty effective!
If anyone brings up the recent debate, ask them: how can anyone debate when one party in the debate is throwing lies like a wheel of buckets can throw dirt (or s**t) unrelentingly? That's not an easy thing to do, is it?
MAGA cares nothing for fairness, nor for the truth: they don't even wish to serve you but to rule over you. And if their rule immiserates you, they take it as evidence they're succeeding!! They want to rule us all with the Rod of Iron they convince themselves that GAWD Himself has given them!
I am a believer myself, and I tell you that MAGAts are blasphemous liars in this and nearly all other matters except when they tell us who they really are!!
Who do you want at the ticket's top? A decent man who has served We The People for most of his adult life and who has proven himself quite able in the Oval Office, or a failed businessman, a rapist, an inheritor who lies as easily as he breathes and produced little else but chaos when he was president?
And are you free American citizens or subjects-in-waiting for a wannabe despot? If you're free citizens then vote straight Democratic this November and advise everyone you know to do likewise! Share this message with them and tell them that, if they want July 4, 2025, to be worth celebrating at all, we will crush fascism with our votes! Because if we don't, that date may not be worth celebrating at all. And that'll probably be true of July 4th for at least a generation.

AN ALL-PURPOSE PROGRESSIVE STEMWINDER?

 This is planned to be an all-purpose speech for our side. I'm not sure how long it will be but I'll do my best to keep it from being a stemwinder, that is, a speech that lasts too long.
Ronald Reagan once said, he wanted an America where anyone could get rich. Anyone?
What do all of you think of that? I want an America where anyone, including minimum wage workers, can earn a decent living.Where everyone can have enough nutritious and good-tasting food, a decent roof over their heads which can have a controlled temperature, be dressed decently, can actually retire and not have the threat of ruin hanging over our heads in the event of serious illness.
Which America do you think is closer to the Founders' vision? Let me give you a quote or two from those Founders which I hope will help:
"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of moneyed corporations, which....bid defiance already to the laws of this country."
And again:
"All the property that is necessary to the Preservation of the [Person] and the propagation of the Species is [a person's] natural right which none can deprive [them] of, but property superfluous to that Purpose is by right the property of the Public who by their laws have created it and, whenever the Public may so desire, may otherwise dispose of it."
Pretty revolutionary, no? What this Founder says is, we all have a right to as much resources as we need to maintain ourselves without unnecessary discomfort and to bring up (and educate?) a family in at least modest comfort, but more than that is by right the property of the public, that is, you, me and all of us!
I don't know about you, but it looks to me as if our Founders were not too keen on a country where  anyone could get rich by almost any legal, but mostly unethical, means. Which, I suggest to you, is what Ronnie and his puppet-masters wanted.
Again, I don't know about you but I have no desire to be a 21st century planter with thousands of effective slaves, although we don't call them that nowadays. But that is a legal fiction; all of the 78% of us who live from paycheck to paycheck know we can't afford to be without our jobs!
No, it would be enough for me to have a somewhat larger house with a fenced-in yard for our doggies and not have to pinch every penny till it screams. As a cook, I confess I would really love a large kitchen so I could make anything I wanted. I have no desire to 'live large' and I tend to dislike those to whom such a thing is important, but not because of jealousy. It is because those that do want that seem to believe they have some sort of divine mandate to rule the rest of us in the worst medieval style imaginable!
The great Lord Acton once said and/or wrote: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." In addition to the means of exchange, is wealth anything but power? And when you look at Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, the Koch family, the Prince/DeVos families, Wayne LaPierre, do you see anything in them that makes them fit to rule the rest of us? Or are they all absolutely corrupted by the power we the people have allowed them to stealthily seize, including their ability to own the 'Republican' party and all its representatives at nearly all levels? And make such inroads into the Democratic party as well?
It also looks as though the Gateses and uncle Warren (Buffett) at least make some efforts against being so corrupted themselves, but that might need further investigation.
I have nothing against there being those who are wealthier than the rest of us, but as Justice Brandeis wrote, "We can either have a few fabulously wealthy people, or we can have democracy, but we cannot have both." I agree. What about y'all?
If we tax correctly, the rich will still be rich. Just not rich enough to buy our government and all of us into the bargain! And when we all do better, well, we all do better. Even the rich do better in strictly numerical terms; they're just not as high above the rest of us as many want to be. Trump is their natural leader; most of them are greedy bullies dangerously close to absolutely corrupt!
And another benefit of taking away the 'super' from 'superrich': as they'll have less power, they'll be less corrupted! Think of it, fellow citizens! We may be saving their souls by taxing them properly, pulling them back from the mouth of the Pit where they currently saunter, foolishly believing themselves immune! Can I have some 'amens' from the crowd?
If you want a country closer to the Founders' hopes than those of a boughten Grade B washed-up ham, vote Democratic at all levels this November! Vote as progressively as you can while looking out for bad
actors (that is, haters of Israel and Jews) trying to use progressive causes as a stalking-horse.
Let's renew our country as a good place for all of us as we save the souls of the Pit-hung rich as well!
Oh well: I hope this reads well enough so that it doesn't feel like a stemwinder, at least!
The two quotations are, respectively, from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson in 1814 and one written by Dr. Benjamin Franklin to Robert Morris on December 25, 1783.

A VERY NECESSARY DISTINCTION

 Trump does not say to his cultists, 'Be of good cheer; your sins are forgiven'. He says, 'Don't be ashamed; your 'sins' are not sins. You can be as bigoted as you please and still be Good People'. That is a lie!
When Jesus said the first to the poor and the outcasts, I guess we're given to understand that being forgiven was supposed to give them strength and inspiration to mend their ways and leave their sins. Am I right? If I'm mistaken, please say so and tell me why.
At least, it seems I sort of assume that, although it could also be said that Jesus was telling his hearers that God knew what they were up against and how they were pressed into their sinful lives.
But tell me: What are bigots who seem to delight in trampling on others who have darker hair, eyes, skin, or whose faiths are expressed differently (aside from Christian Nationalists/Islamists) or have different sexual preferences and all of whom must bear the legacy of generations of such racism/sexism/etc against those more privileged--well, what, literally, in God's Name are these b*****ds up against? Having to share their wealth and power with others?
If this is a necessary component of democracy (and I believe it it) no wonder these lucky b*****ds are souring on it!
What Trump gives them is not the freedom to turn from their sins but the false assurance that they are not sinners! Oh, no! They are the best and most beautiful blue-eyed volks that ever was--such Good People, better than Jesus who 1)was probably dark-haired, eyed and skinned and 2) asked a rich young ruler "Why do you call me 'good'? There is none good save God."
It is important, I think, for those of us who make serious efforts to follow Jesus's teachings to distinguish between the two: Jesus's Good News and Trump's...well, his trumperies. Meaning his lies and deceits!
And no, I'm definitely not saying that everyone with light hair, eyes or skin are biped devils. But I do believe, by attaching undue importance to those articles--such as allowing them to determine who gets what, when and how--we can either lose a large chunk of our humanity or, if we go far enough, forfeit it entirely. I believe Hamas has gone that far and our neo-Nazis are right there with 'em!
We need to act on this as best we can as we work and vote to put Trump and his cult not six, but twelve, feet under with a stake through the space where a heart should be but isn't.

'ENTITLEDS' AND THE RULE OF LAW

 Allow me to put a suggestion before you, gentle (or otherwise) reader:
Those who seek to destroy the rule of law and fully reinstate the rule of the biggest bully should not be allowed to hide behind that same rule of law when defeated and cornered.
Yes, go ahead and read it again. Read it as many times as you need to have it sink in.
Resistance, while it remains nonviolent or clearly defensive (that is, does not fire the first shot) is not against the rule of law; such resistance seeks to uphold and strengthen the true rule of law.
Mere table-turning, as opposed to making a new table where all may have seats, is just part of the biggest-bully law. Same s**t, just different throwers and catchers.
Nonviolent resistance failed among the 'Palestinians' because seeing the Israelis and other Jews as human beings has never been part of the program for them. They are still too caught up in their own colonist mentality which tells them they are superior and deserve everything they can take and that the proper place for Jews is that of 'common n***ers' in the Jim Crow South. Not to mention that any Jew should be thankful they haven't been sent up the chimneys as they all deserve!
Meanwhile, we have our own problems with our 'entitleds'. Most of them are what I call pale males (I am one) who think no one else but them should have any power, be it political, economic or cultural.
Question for all my readers: should we really be surprised that the 'entitleds' of the Middle East are befriended by our 'entitleds'?
In any case, those who tell us not to assume good faith on the part of any 'Republican' candidate are only too spot-on. However, if we assume bad faith on all their parts, that will probably lead posthaste to full-scale civil war. No, we must find, hold and vigorously patrol a middle ground where we neither assume good or bad faith on their part. We must watch them very, very carefully and vigilantly and let them know that any suspicious move on their parts will be met by full-scale alarms!
Any attempt on their part to make the rule of law into a cudgel for us and, indeed, most of the nation, must be met with all-out resistance--including, if and when necessary, hot lead and cold steel.
And I for one say that no mercy should be extended to any of whom it is known that, were they in our position, would have no mercy themselves. The most I would do is allow African-American clerics to plead for the traitors' lives if they chose to. But it would be public and the traitors would know, until their (possibly) natural passings, that they owed their lives to those whom they held in contempt!
Let me also repeat here that the two different groups of 'entitleds' are bound by, consciously or unconsciously, hating the same people: Jews.
They both hate the (to them) bitter fact that now, shedding Jewish blood can be very, very costly. And so it ought to be, sez I. I think Jews and other BIPOCs should all be armed and know how to use firearms, wherever they live.

A PLEA FOR PRO-DEMOCRACY UNITY

 I am confused and worried.
We cannot, under any--I repeat, any--circumstances countenance a second Trump term. For one thing, it's very likely to be a life term, after which Junior will have himself crowned emperor of North America.
And once that happens, democracies around the globe are likely to start falling like dominoes.
We have seen the rebirth of right-wing thuggery which Trumpelthinskin and his henchmen continue to encourage. We have also, most recently, seen the same pattern on the left as I remember seeing in the late sixties and early seventies, back when I was in junior high school. It starts with nonviolent resistance to injustice; well and good. When George Floyd was murdered, any burning or looting was mostly courtesy of right-wing moles! But then, neo-Marxist and/or Islamist fringe groups worm their way in and start to add violence, especially, now, anti-Jewish violence so that protests that started nonviolently wind up as pogroms, or the next thing to them.
I hope, in the current mosh-pit of protest ostensibly on Gaza's behalf, one thing is not forgotten: Hamas began this war, without any excuse. They also care nothing for the Gazans except to use them as human shields and to make as many of them into shahids (martyrs). Without their utter and total defeat, there can be no new day for the wretchedly unfortunate Gazans! Even many advocates for Palestinian rights say so; Bassem Eid for one!
A cease-fire may stop the shooting, but will it leave Hamas clinging to power or not? Can any honest-hearted protestor against the current Israel-Hamas war give me, or anyone else, an answer to that?
I can tell you straight up, a cease-fire which does leave Hamas clinging to power will not--repeat, not--end the killing! It'll just be Hamas doing the killing of more Gazans who have had enough of Hamas up to their gullets! And many such corpses are now coming to light!
One wicked (and probably Islamist) fool said he thinks he can get along better with an openly hostile president (Trump) than one 'who pretends to be our friend' (Biden). Listen, you slave-trading fool, and listen good! Yeah, you and your minions survived one Trump term--but you won't survive another!
I promise you that! Why not, say you? A few reasons: when Trumpelthinskin first came in, there were still guardrails. There were still some 'adults in the room' (and you ain't one), as we say. This time, those guardrails are gone or wrecked, there will be no 'adults' to hold Trump back but only those willing to be even worse than he is!
Now, wicked, precious, self-important infidel fool, contemplate an executive order, constitutional or no, which strips all recent Muslim immigrants of their citizenship and renders them liable to immediate deportation! Think that's impossible? Think you have friends who will fight that? Even after you do your part to bring down the free world? Allow me to suggest, even you--heck, I'm not sure that even Trump--cannot concoct such lies as will save you from the consequences of you helping to end democracy over the globe!
Your former allies will remember your part in killing democracy and you will not be saved from being deported to, say, Yemen. You will have no allies then!
You're not the first ethnic group to see their tax dollars used to kill their cousins. Talk to those Americans of German, Italian, or Japanese ancestry. Clear out your head if you can, and be sure to put all the pieces together.
I've said this before and I'll say it again as often as I think I need to: vote Democratic this fall, and then you can think about candidates, within the party or independent, for offices in 2026 and 2028. Stay home or help Trump win in other ways and there may well be no free elections again within our lifetimes and no point in thinking about future candidates. And you, and many others like you, may well be deported.
And I for one will point you and your flock out as traitors to democracy. Nor do I expect to be the only one doing so. Think about that, too.
Think you're ready for that? I say, yeah, suuuure you are!

WHAT WE COULD LOSE IN NOVEMBER--AND A QUESTION

    What could we lose?
Well, of course, our individual freedoms of speech, faith, etc. We could set democracy worldwide on a downward path. We could lose the rule of law to the rule of the biggest and nastiest bullies.
We could lose hope of seeing a more multiracial, multiethnic, multi-faith democratic republic--a first in human history--within our lifetimes, if ever.
Certain people are so angry now that they are, apparently, ready to bring all these hopes crashing down for the rest of us and, yes, for themselves as well.
Never mind us: don't these spiteful, splenetic critters understand that a fascist Trump government would probably revoke their citizenship and then deport them as potential terrorists? And that Trumpelthinskin would also give The Cheltenham Kid, aka Netanyahu, the green light to obliterate and largely depopulate Gaza? Do they care that little about those they claim to care about? Or are they preparing for something else? In such anarchy, do they really think they'd prevail and establish Sharia here and in Europe?
Sorry, dudes, got really bad news for y'all. We're at least as good as scapegoating as are your relations, and if we lose these precious articles come November, would you like to know who will be in the sights of many of us as scapegoats? Y'all, that's who. Y'all ready for that?
Think, and think hard. First, if you feel Israel has no right to defend itself, then GIT! Right now!
We neither want nor need YOU!
Second, I want to believe most of you don't feel that way but you feel Israeli retaliation has gone too far. Most military men--that is, those who know what war is--who have been observers in Gaza tell us that no army has ever done, or does, as much as the IDF to avoid civilian or other unnecessary loss of life. I hope you're not just furious at armed, victorious Jews. Because if you are, you got some serious internal work to do! Not to mention, of course, that Hamas uses its own people as human shields like the cowardly filth they really are! And more dead Gazans actually please them because they use even those Gazans murdered by Hamas as 'examples of Zionist savagery'. As Rachel Maddow says, bullpuckey!
Third, on-camera war is never a happy sight. But tear yourself away from the grisly images for a while, and do some serious thinking. I'll also mention in passing that this is really what MAGA is all about: nursing real or imaginary grievances to the point where they want to burn down democracy's house without regard to how even they will suffer (or lying to themselves that they won't) just so long as those they hate at least look like they're suffering at least as much!
Well, if we lose democracy and all its benefits, and target you as scapegoats....who do you think will suffer most? Think about that! So should your on-Spring Break sympathizers!
You might be disappointed in Biden and the Democrats, but what else can we do but vote for them? That is, if we want real elections, democracy, etc., to continue at all, let alone grow stronger?
So, uninstructed and uncommitteds, think about these things and do what, in your minds and hearts (and NOT in your spleen, where angry pride was thought to reside once) you know to be right. And not just for all of us, but for you and your families as well. And for Gaza too, for that matter.
Parting question: today, just about half of Jewish Israelis have either returned, or their parents and grandparents, to Israel from elsewhere in the MENA (Middle East/North Africa) region. Most of them have, and still do, vote Likud or further right. Many of the descendants of the first Ashkenazic returnees still incline to the center or the left. Why do you think that is? Don't the Mizrahim know Arabs better, having lived among them for centuries? Think about that too; take all the time you need.

THE NYT PUNDITS: RIGHT OR WRONG?

Most of the Times's columnists this morning have been panicking over President Biden's age and, rather worryingly, about how obvious his age is. This is where I hope that they only think they know some things the rest of us don't. The fact that I never hear back from any pundit with whom I've shared what I hope is some useful information in my own writings seems to support that hunch. No feedback, no nothing. Kind of makes me wonder how much of an echo chamber they inhabit. Certainly much less of one than the fascist Faux News and networks further right have constructed, but still without much said by people like you and me.
For myself, I hope my fellow citizens may have learned a hard lesson or two since too many of my 'fellow' Boomer palefaces fell for the soothing tones and the hair dye of a Grade B Dr. Feelgood in 1980 and opened the door to the rollback of too much of the New Deal, Fair Deal and the Great Society!
I hope my fellow citizens can see beneath the seeming vigor of Orange Julius Sawdust Caesar and that they hear how seriously he garbles his thoughts and words. I hope my fellow citizens can understand that our current president reserves his vigor for the quiet and largely unheralded work he does on behalf of all of us and for democracy all over the globe.
I hope my current fellow citizens can see and hear beneath the surface of the (actually really panicky) shouting and roaring of O.J.S.C. and that it connotes panic for himself rather than vigor on behalf of all of us. I hope they can see the good works that the Biden administration has begun and how important it is to all of us that they continue.
And I also hope that they haven't given up on being the linchpin, albeit a very humanly imperfect one, of democracy across the globe. Besides which, here's a tasty tidbit for some who might be reading this: re-elect Biden and vote straight Democratic all the way down the ticket and you will have proven many of the Times's pundits as being much mistaken about you because it seems as though many of them expect many of y'all to repeat your 1980 mistake and vote for appearance rather than the actual reality.
I can't really blame the Millennials and Zoomers for being fed up with old white men (So am I, if truth be known, and I'm an old white man myself) but your choices, however distasteful, are before you: will you vote for the appearance of 'vigor' and the reality of creeping and malignant senility, and the probable dissolution of the Free World, or will you vote for the old fellow who works long, hard and quietly for all of us and who will keep democracy alive and, one hopes, flourishing worldwide?
All hands to repel fascists here; let there be no one still on the sofa and not having voted come Election Day! To stay on the sofa will be a vote against democracy as will be all votes for anyone--repeat, ANYONE--known to be a MAGAt!
And I venture that any vote against democracy is effective, although, unfortunately, not technical, treason against not only the United States, but against the entire Free World and indeed against the very planet on which the Creator has placed us! And however 'Christian' such folks might think themselves, by voting for one who will reconnect religion and state they show themselves Judases as well!
Remember, when Jesus heard that a crowd wanted to force an actual regal crown onto his head, he hightailed it into the mountains to pray! Think about that too!
Let's show the Times's pundits how mistaken they are this time (many of them will be relieved to be thus mistaken) and show that we understand that our diversity is a major strength of ours and that a primary purpose of our country is to be pioneers of democracy, to listen to the so-far unheard! Vote MAGA fascism down so low that they creep back under their rocks!

MERCY ME?

 I ponder what was said by a trumpolater on television about how he thinks we need a dictatorship which will 'give us a good paddling'. I'd admire to ask that fool, who does he think needs paddling and why?
If he thinks big corporations who have all but entirely bought up our political process so they can become even more obscenely rich and never have to clean up the lethal pollution messes they love to make are the ones in need of chastisement, then the man's onto something real. But he's dangerously mistaken if he thinks Trump will ever paddle that lot; for that we need Bernie or one of his acolytes.
On the other hand, he might be brainwashed enough to want the 'Myrka of 1953 back again and nailed into place permanently. Well, we certainly should up the tax rates and union-belonging percentage of the working people to what they were back then. But we neither can nor should cement the social relations to what they were back then. I suspect that's really what that fool and his like yearn for!                                   

I wouldn't call myself a merciful man by nature. I also always ask myself, is it wise to extend mercy to those who will almost certainly see it as weakness and will break the peace as soon as they think they can get away with it? My hatred for bullies may well be pathological and my initial impulse is to wrench a horse-doctor's dose of their toxins down their own throats. But at least these days, somewhere in the middle of all that and probably Deo Gratias, I ask myself: What else have these poor lumps of mostly unbaked dough ever known but such brutality? And why am I reinforcing it?
Then the question becomes, what else can I, and others like me, do? One ugly fact of life which my fellow liberals and progressives have been, and may still be, reluctant to face (except, for some of them, when Jews appear to be 'bullies') is this: we need to insist on good order and everyone being given a chance to speak--and the flip side of this is no one, and no group, gets to crowd out anyone else--and that those norms need to be enforced, at times harshly so. We've been far too reluctant to do that. And we also need to show quite plainly the 'tinfoil' quality of the 'arguments' of those who are either maliciously self-interested or, to use one of my dad's expressions, don't know their a**es from holes in the ground!

Also, at the same time, we need to insist that part of the education of experts (if it isn't already) must be the ability, as Lord Rutherford said, to put their knowledge into language understandable to all, or as near to all as we can get. I suggest this is necessary to restore trust in experts.
Finally, if we are not to use worse brutality in reinforcing and expending democratic norms, we need to find other ways. Arguments are one; so too is asking questions of those who have either lost, or never really had, faith in democracy. We need to say, often and loudly, that God, Who is Love, is no bully, too many 'religious' leaders to the contrary. For one thing, doesn't God choose the smallest and ostensibly weakest to hear, speak and live His message on a seriously consistent basis? And for another, did not he who is named the Word made flesh agree to die like an uncommon criminal (the Romans employed crucifixion only for political and economic rebels or those who arguably spoke such rebellion) as part of drawing all of us to God?
We also need to say loudly that God favors the honest questioners and that those covens where questions are frowned upon at best cannot be where His Spirit is. And let's keep asking honest questions of those who have turned their backs on democracy. If they continue to insist on their own Great Importance, Dunning-Kruger style, let's remember something said by Martin Luther:
"The best way to drive out the devil, if he will not yield to texts or Scripture, is to jeer and flout at him, for he cannot bear scorn." 

 We need to keep our powder ready and dry even while we hope we'll only need some custard pies. Trump knows the power of ridicule; why else would he want to stomp anyone who tosses eggs, tomatoes OR custard pies at him? By this, perhaps more than anything else except his unceasing lying, he shows who he follows and to whom he leads his idolaters.
We need to repeat all this endlessly, possibly for years until the anti-democrats among us are (again?) a tiny, insignificant and powerless minority.