Real Problems Are Too Hard to Understand; Give Us Easy Ones

Someone (Marilyn L.) brought this post by Robert Reich to my attention, and a veil was lifted.

I have pondered why it is that the masses seem to focus on the trivial concerns toward which they are misdirected instead of on the larger concerns that may actually impact the 313 million Americans among 7 billion earthlings. The thing is that understanding international finance or corporate finance or financial markets is hard, and there is a whole crapload of money being made by people who fund super-PACs for (primarily) Republican candidates.

On the other hand, we understand "sin," and are mostly in general agreement that it is "bad" (or, at least, it isn't "good"). We've experienced lust, gluttony, greed, envy, sloth, pride, and anger ourselves. Even people who work on Wall Street, and in finance, don't understand "derivatives."

You put super-PAC money into the hands of America's top ad-men, and a shell-shocked population is going to listen to a consistent story that our god has us on a time-out because of sin and socialism in our community (especially those already gullible enough to believe the entire universe was created for the benefit of American male WASPs). We've been hearing that since we were seven.

Robin Andrea shared this blog post on Facebook about us being too dumb for democracy; and, while it sounds true, I don't like it. I'm still disappointed that more people can't seem grasp anything more complicated than "Dancing With the Stars."

There's real stuff going on around us, stuff that's actually going to change our lives forever for better or worse, and it has very little to do with anything that establishment politicians are talking about. International corporations are not "job creators" unless you're Malaysian or Vietnamese and they haven't roboticized the job. International bankers are not the nice people at your local credit union. Insurance companies don't provide medical care.

There; I've said it and I feel a little better for that.

Is It True; Is It Useful

I was reading something from Thich Nhat Hanh awhile ago, and made a note of his litmus test for "right speech;" ask "Is it true?" and then "Is it useful?" If both of these conditions are met, then I can generally be pretty comfortable saying it. I taped these two questions to the top of my monitor.

I mention this because I've been troubled for some time by a sense that those who would lead us seem to favor trying to scare us witless, and then offering some draconian "solution" that we'd have to be witless to adopt. Yesterday I noted that it was World Day Against Cyber Censorship, and I got two responses about the need to censor bullies and pedophiles and naive teens. Really? None of those are issues unique to the cyber era.

Today, Sean Dustman (Doc in the Box) pointed me to this blog post from The Economist back on March 2nd, and I just wanted to share it. I feel like we're circling the bowl myself now and then, so I get that we might feel overwhelmed; but is it true? Is what we feel is happening really happening on such a scale that we need to reset?

Sadly, the Republicans don't seem to carry many tools on their belts, and they seem to me to rely heavily on trying to scare us into accepting that we need to restore America to the way it was in the Coolidge administration. The MSM seem to be complicit in that, probably because it's good for ratings for their "news" programs. The questions I ask when I hear such talk are "Is it true" and "Is it useful." More often than not, it isn't even true.

Speaking of Really Bad Ideas...

I know that I need to work on not just wildly ranting here if I care at all about anyone ever reading this, but in 2006 with not one but two dumb-ass wars going on, massive Reagan-esque deficits, and millions of Americans reduced to planning their lives around oil company profits I learn that Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) wants to usurp a national park to open a recreational killing field for military personnel.
I lived in Mr. Hunter's gerrymandered district for a number of years. He does have a distinguished military record, but every once in awhile you see him in the Alec Baldwin role in Mercury Rising.
I don't presume to speak for all veterans... or for any veterans other than myself... but it strikes me as a little... more than a little... sick to expropriate one of the beautiful Channel Islands from the National Park system, transport populations of non-native deer and elk onto it, and then to invite people... even military people who arguably deserve recreational opportunities... to kill those populations just for the hell of it.
Geez, Duncan, call the animal shelter in El Cajon and maybe they'll let you gas some puppies or something. Better still, get some help.

Doing What's Right

Someone... okay, it was Joared... asked if I had any thoughts on the stories about Wellpoint's Blue Cross of California and Blue Shield denying coverage to beneficiaries.
This item in the April 26 L.A. Times (registration required) presents information given by Blue Cross employees during depositions. This second item in the April 28 L.A. Times reveals that Blue Shield has also been named as a defendant in three similar suits.
Let me just say at the outset that... to me... this stinks. Maybe it's just that no one has ever loved me as much as Mr. Shernoff, the attorney making his living from these cases and similar cases over the years, apparently loves his clients. Maybe it's that I deal with temptation pretty regularly since I now have a history of cancer that makes applying for life insurance... problematic.
The plaintiffs, bless their hearts, have purchased individual coverage policies all of which require a detailed medical history and most of which offer limited coverage for pre-existing conditions. Mr. Norris, one of the plaintiffs, would have the reader believe that he had no idea that disclosure of his son's history of ear aches and speech problems was important for the application, and is aghast that Blue Cross has denied coverage for the $15,000 surgery to remove the child's adenoids.
Listen I know why people do it... and I know why insurance companies have become suspicious when chronic disease suddenly and acutely rears its ugly head immediately after the insurance coverage kicks in. The plaintiffs probably aren't bad people... they are people in need. The insurance companies may very well be run by bad people, but they aren't in business to lose money; and if they don't catch fraudulent (or "oops" or whatever) applications at the front end then they have to raise all of our premiums to cover the losses. Consumer needs versus corporate fiduciary duty... or greed.
What we need is Universal Health Coverage. Until we get that these stories are going to go on and on.
Oh, and I'm happy that Mr. Shernoff and Mr. Flanagan got their names in the paper. Way to go, guys!

Thoughts on Lies and Liars

More or less as an aside, I need to say this about the dust-up from the item regarding desecration of the Quran reported in Newsweek.
Mark Whitaker says that the piece was legitimate and vetted, but that now their anonymous source has wavered... is no longer sure he read what he said he'd read. Newsweek has retracted the story and apologized.
In my opinion, Newsweek has just been punked. You get a piece, you run the piece, the crap hits the fan in part because of the piece... and suddenly your anonymous inside source isn't sure anymore. Gotcha!
In a time when God knows how many are dead because of the lies of the Bush administration, they are using you as a pinata because of a blurb that was entirely plausible based on proven disregard for Muslim beliefs and institutions at Gitmo and Abu Ghraib, and you have no defense because you can't name your source.
Now the White House is saying that an apology isn't enough and you must do more to make up for the real consequences of your "lie." They want you to help them tell their version of the truth. One might reasonably ask when the White House will begin to make up for their lies.
Newsweek got burned on a blurb in its Periscope section... probably, again in my opinion, by the White House. One would hope they will have the confidence and courage to work through this without becoming another conduit for administration propaganda and disinformation.

Reflections on a Past Perspective

It has occurred to me (it's up at the top of the page) that my political awareness began with Barry Goldwater's 1964 campaign. Barry Goldwater seemed, to me at the time, to represent how we did things in Iowa. In particular (because I already had a sense of where I'd be the following September), if we were going to engage the communists in Southeast Asia then let's commit to that and get 'er done.
I've been thinking back to those times, not so much in nostalgia but to try to regain the perspective I had at the time on issues that now separate America. What were you people who voted for Bush thinking? Did I used to think that way?
My great-uncle believed that internal combustion engines were bad for crops. He parked his Ford in a shed down next to the road, and he farmed with two Belgian horses. Seven days a week, fifty-two weeks a year, things had to be done.The cows had to be milked twice a day. The livestock had to be fed. You don't feel well? It's dark/cold/hailing? Well, tell that to the livestock, and if it's okay with them then it's okay to skip your chores. Bucket's too heavy? Don't fill it so full and make two trips.
When it came time for harvest, the nearby farmers would all work together to get everyone's crops in... but as time passed there were fewer and fewer neighbors who farmed with horses. If you got sick or hurt, your neighbors had your back... but if you weren't able to make it anymore then it was time to "move into town."
He and his wife went to church every Sunday, a little one-room church you could see from his farm, but their mantra was "The Lord helps those who help themselves."
His son was a different sort of farmer. He embraced mechanization and technology, and bought the latest equipment... on credit, of course. A gamble? Farming is a gamble. He'd rent out the equipment he wasn't using himself. He knew all of the programs there were for paying farmers not go grow surplus crops.
When I went to live with the foster family many of the same themes continued. They had a cow, a pony, and poultry; and they had a couple of large garden plots on the edge of town. We all had our chores, and the chores all had to be done every day by someone.
I learned about gleaning there. The farmers outside of town would harvest their corn, but there was always corn that the reaper didn't get. We'd all go out and walk the fields and pick up the "missed" corn for our livestock. It was actually a win-win because we got the corn, and the farmer didn't have to hire kids to come out the next year to cut corn out of his beans. I also learned about hunting for wild mushrooms and berries in season.
We went to church on Sunday, morning and evening, and on Wednesday nights; but we didn't go to the "revival" meetings. They only had about one a year come into town. They did watch Billy Graham on television.
I was aware of the second Eisenhower/Stevenson campaign, and I recall that it was generally accepted as a foregone conclusion that General Eisenhower would win.
I remember, of course, the Kennedy/Nixon campaign. Both had paid their dues, serving in the War. Nixon looked unshaven... unkempt... but Kennedy was... you know... Catholic.
I moved into town in the summer of '61, but still worked farms in the summer doing yardwork in town the other three seasons until I was sixteen.
At that point in my life I didn't understand welfare. You worked. If you couldn't work then you found something you could do, but you worked. I'd had a paid job since I was eleven.
At that point in my life I never thought about abortion. There's not a farm kid in the world who doesn't know that sex is for reproduction. If you had unprotected sex and got pregnant you simply started your family a little earlier than you planned. (One store, in a town where everyone knew everyone else and their business, sold condoms.)
It never occurred to me not to fulfill my military obligation. It scared me when I got my draft notice toward the end of my second week in boot camp and realized that I wouldn't be able to report. My Company Commander explained to a few of us who'd received them that we'd be okay, and that we were no longer subject to the draft. (We burned our draft cards!)
I mean to continue to reflect on this... if toward no other end than my own peace of mind. I still don't know where the anger between right and left... between red and blue comes from. I wonder how much of it is manufactured in order to emphasize our differences.
There are right answers upon which we should all be able to agree. My understanding is that Buddhists believe one knows the truth because it is always and invariably true. In that context, can one be "pro-life" if one kills under certain circumstances? Is it rational for someone who is "pro-choice" to oppose the death penalty under any circumstances?
I think we should stop shouting and discuss these things.
By the way, in any election prior to 1964 I don't think there's any way that George would've beat a combat veteran. I could be wrong... again.

Thoughts on Place

This could turn out to be an introductory post, but I don't know that yet... I never know what I'm going to write about next. Ronni Bennett over at Time Goes By has been forced into the realization that she has to change her venue from her beloved New York to... where?
Appalachian Intellectual posted regarding some of hatefulness that has been vented toward the people of East Waynesville, N.C. (It was the pastor at the Baptist Church and he's resigned!) There are conservative Republicans in California and there are liberal Democrats in North Carolina. We may need to work on our tolerance.
Finally, I have been thinking about posting on my reflections about some of differences between red states and blue states... an issue with me as my intention is to move from the ultimate blue state smack into the middle of a bunch of red states. It came to me that my roots are in red states and that with a little reflection I can still see where they're coming from... for the most part.
I had an epiphany of sorts early last year... that I was never going to be able to retire in California, that I was working full time at a job that I do not relish in order to be able to live in California, and that I really don't care to live in California. I've lived in California since 1970 when I got back to the States. My last fifteen years in the Navy were in and out of San Diego. My kids were born in San Diego and I went to college in San Diego and after college I finally found a job in Southern California... not in San Diego, of course! I was already 42!
I grew up in the rural midwest... central Illinois and Iowa... a million years ago but I have never had a desire to return to the bitter winters or the hot, humid summers there.
My father's family was from Henry County, Georgia, and my only memories of it were of the summer. I got a chance to go back there last May, but it's become so... metropolitan Atlanta that it's just not an option.
During my drive through America last May I looked around, stopped by coffee shops, smelled the air... Tennessee sang to me... the Smoky Mountains sang to me... when I met my wife she said the Smoky Mountains sang to her (but her preference is for the Georgia side of them... she's from Clayton County, Georgia and had vacationed up around Rabun Gap). Today I'll be dipped if the MSNBC Travel Section didn't have a piece on 25 Things to Love About Asheville.
I know guys who are making it on their military retirement... but not in California. Worse, California has never really sung to me. This is where I got off the ship in 1985 and I stayed here, but I'm not a Californian. It remains to be seen whether or not I'll become at home in the Smokies, but they are calling me... and it's time.
In eighteen months I'll be 59 and a half, and I promised my wife's family that I'd have her back home in time for her birthday in 2006. I just need to hold off on breaking stuff for awhile.

I want to mention HM3 Jeffery Wiener. Petty Officer Third Class Jeffery L. Wiener, 32, of Louisville, Ky., died May 7, in a combat related incident. Weiner was a Navy hospital corpsman assigned to II Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF). Here is the piece they wrote up on him in the Lexington, KY paper.

Thoughts on This and That

Today my ortho surgeon signed off on my return to work this coming Monday. I'm running the wheels off of my walker and am just a hair away from switching to a single crutch or a cane.
The urologist, on the other hand, has said he won't even think about doing surgery on me until I'm at least eight weeks post-op from the femoral rod. He says the risk of emboli is too great. Objectively, I can see his point. Subjectively, it occurs to me that six months (at least) will have passed since my biopsy. I've been racking my brain without success for a potential upside to leaving a cancer to do its work for six months.
Speaking of faith, I did see a couple of items in my reading today.
From WLOS in Asheville, N.C.: "East Waynesville Baptist asked nine members to leave. Now 40 more have left the church in protest. Former members say Pastor Chan Chandler gave them the ultimatum, saying if they didn't support George Bush, they should resign or repent. The minister declined an interview with News 13. But he did say "the actions were not politically motivated."
If you're okay with that tidbit, then you're going to love what they're doing in Kansas (and elsewhere). The Kansas State Board of Education wants to "alter the definition of science, not limiting it to theories based on natural explanations." Yes, it's another run at passing off creationism/"intelligent design" as science.
I'm not going to be hypercritical today. I suspect that defending the conceit that the entire universe was created for the pleasure and benefit of those humans of the Judeo-Christian faiths must be extremely hard work... although it has to be somewhat easier under the current Administration.

Thoughts on Values

I keep thinking that I'm going to get more disciplined in my writing. There are several things I mean to address, but then I get distracted as something catches my eye and then things seem to coalesce into another subject entirely... or perhaps not entirely.
I've been ruminating on Tamar's post the other day regarding the pervasive nature and global extent of politics. The next thing I'm reading is this piece in The Guardian about U.S.-Sudanese cooperation in the "Global War on Terror." Now today's MSN Quote of the Day is from Emmanuel Levinas: "Politics is opposed to morality, as philosophy to naïveté." It came to me that this could account for a lot.
I had intended to ask the six percent of voters who voted for GW six months ago but who now feel that he sucks in his job for an explanation. What changed? What was concealed from them in November that is apparent to them now? (Like they're all reading my blog!) It came to me that in run-up to November the talk was all about "values." The neocons just did a superb job of distracting people from their politics. Men who never served a minute in combat... who avoided service... were able to impugn the character of a decorated veteran by challenging his freedom of speech. They had better salesmen.
No WMD? Never mind because Saddam was a dictator and the U.S. doesn't do dictators... except throughout the 1980's when he was gassing Iranians, Shi'ites and Kurds somewhat indiscriminately. The U.S. is all about human rights and the principles of democracy... except in Saudi Arabia and China and Russia because business is business. In public we seek to condemn the Sudanese government in the U.N. for genocide while in the background we still do business with their intelligence apparatus.
Core values dictate that we must not take life, that we must not steal, that we must not bear false witness, etc. Politics dictate that "you have to go along to get along" and that the end justifies the means. You clean up Iraq as much as you can before you leave and you can write off the whole damn war as a humanitarian effort, and in a few years who will remember the lies?
Does it make any sense then for me to rant because politicians are amoral? Yeah, it does. It does because this is a republic, and these people do not in fact represent my values. From elementary school I've been told that we hold certain truths to be self evident, but there is little testament that our government values those truths. Our government is made up of politicians. Our government is made up of politicians because we are too damn lazy or distracted or otherwise engaged to think beyond buzzwords and sound bites.
Would it kill us to make the effort to identify and elect people to represent us who weren't so flagrantly for sale? I refuse to believe that George W. and Arnold Schwarzenegger represent our best and our brightest hopes for the future. Is it not possible to elect people you would allow to sit your kids?