Now a question. How many more presidents, Republican or Democrat, will have to reorder those words and give the same speech with the same emotion and sincerity before we demand Congress does something? Before we demand that the “gun culture” in America is a failure that does not provide security to its citizens and that we embrace legislation similar to other industrialized nations who neither suffer our gun caused carnage nor understand our acceptance of it in the name of some bastardized definition of freedom? How long?
Speaker John Woods, whose girlfriend was murdered at the Virginia Tech massacre listens to John MacLean perform his incredibly moving tribute to the children of Sandy Hook Elementary called Six. Photo credit: Austin Dowling
To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture. Enjoy, sir, your insensibility of feeling and reflecting. It is the prerogative of animals. And no man will envy you these honors, in which a savage only can be your rival and a bear your master.
Thomas Paine, The American Crisis, March 21, 1778
There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one’s safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn’t, but if he were sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn’t have to; but if he didn’t want to he was sane and had to. Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle.
Joseph Heller, Catch-22, Chapter 3, 1961
The gun “debate” in the United States pits two sides against one another which could not be more different had they hailed from different edges of the ever expanding universe. One side uses rationality, compassion and fact, believing that life is paramount and government’s supreme priority is the defense of its citizens. The other side uses paranoia, fear and hyperbole, gets exorcised at the words “tyranny,” “Obama,” and “confiscation,” and is armed to the teeth to defend themselves against the very republic which they claim to love. Logic would tell you that the fight is not fair. Logic would suggest that reason and compassion would reign over hysteria and fear. Logic would be wrong.
This country finds itself at a moral crossroad at a time when it also intersects with a political movement bent on a systemic abdication of empathy in favor of some financial utopia; an Ayn Randian egoism on steroids. Let us assume that the Tea Party faction of the Republican Party was formed with the intention of restoring the federal government’s financial ledger. Let’s also ignore that the ledger wasn’t upended in the first place by Republicans plunging us into two wars based on specious arguments and bloodlust following 9/11. Place into that caustic mixture a society where the internet has led to more granularization of beliefs and less debate and compassion, a youth with the responsibility memory of a fruit fly and the belief that there is a cosmic “reset” button on life, a proliferation of 300,000,000 guns with no oversight because of a lobbying group with rabid members who salivate at the concepts of “tyranny” or “confiscation” and cannot hide their racial/political hatred for our sitting president and would burn the country down to see him fail and you have a toxic environment where compassion and logic are trounced by hysteria and hyperbole.
Nowhere is this confluence of concepts more evident than in Texas, a state being torn from the safety of republican clutches and turning purple before our eyes. While the cities are democratic strongholds, the rural areas are staunchly red. Unfortunately for Republicans, the urbanization of the country, combined with the influx of citizens relocating from democratic northern states and the burgeoning immigrant population arriving from the south clash in a cultural maelstrom which will result in a blue Texas. Once that happens (and assuming California and New York remain blue), there is no mathematical formula that wins Republicans the White House. The only question is when Texas turns blue, not if.
In the gun debate the lines are equally color coded. Red states love their guns. Blue states don’t. Which leaves Texas in the unenviable position of being the stage from which we all get to watch Republicans pander to the NRA and their rabid, and predominantly white constituency, who ignore the impending tsunami in hopes of returning to the “glory” days of the wild west where guns were plenty and white men ruled the world. Everywhere there can be seen the angry clamoring for this return to Mitt Romney’s 1950’s America. “Secede” bumper stickers jockey for placement on pickup trucks already adorned with Browning logos, Keep Christ in Christmas clings, and that little imp peeing on the words “Gun Control” next to a picture of a cannon and the Greek words Molon Labe (Come and Take It).
Lawmakers, both on the local, state and national level from Texas enrobe themselves in the American flag in order to conceal the Texas flag they truly wear, as if one is not part of the other. They are increasingly suspicious of the United States Constitution and make legislative overtures ignorant of the Supremacy Clause in feel-good measures enabled to allow Texas to enjoy the fruits of the US Constitution a la carte while simultaneously ignoring the burden borne equally by the 50 states to uphold the union.
Beyond the Ted Nugent’s and Alex Jonses’ of the Loon Star State, it is also home to other less colorful, but potentially more damaging (and entertaining, were it not people’s lives hanging in the balance) due to their lawmaking potential. These include:
Governor Rick Perry whose solution to gun violence following the sickening murder of 20 first graders in Newtown Connecticut was to pray and who is wooing gun manufacturers to relocate to good-ole-boy Texas.
Attorney General Greg Abbott who has advertised in New York newspapers for New Yorkers upset at the impending sensible gun legislation to relocate to good-ole-boy Texas where EVERYBODY has at least one gun and “gun control is when you use both hands.”
US Rep Steve Stockman who invited twisted has-been rocker Ted Nugent to the State of the Union speech in violation of all common decency and decorum in front of the families of Newtown in attendance, and who is also pursuing the “persecuted” gun manufacturers to relocate to good-ole-boy Texas. As a member of the House, he has pledged to prevent any gun legislation from being voted on. A true patriot.
State Rep. Steve Toth, (a minister) and Tea Party sycophant who in the weeks following Newtown held a “Gun Appreciation Day” on the steps of the state capital in Austin and has introduced his version of cafeteria style US Constitution adherence legislation called the “Firearm Protection Act” prohibiting local law enforcement from implementing federal gun laws. He appreciates guns and protects firearms. Did I mention he’s a minister? To bastardize the murdered John Lennon’s quip “Guns are bigger than Jesus.” Welcome to the Church of Glock. This is also the same “representative of the people” who cancelled his appearance on a local PBS television show when he found out he had to debate me, a “far left wing radical!” You see, he wants to represent the people, just not talk with them.
US Senator Ted Cruz, another Tea Party twit who joined Senators Rand Paul and Mike Lee (and 11 other senators) in a ridiculous filibuster designed to prevent any gun legislation from being voted on by the senate. He claims he will do whatever is necessary to defend the Second Amendment, which is Tin Foil Hat language for “I’m going to do everything I can to prevent the “libtards” from starting down the path toward registration and confiscation.” Again, they defend the gun and every nutjob’s right to them with callous disregard to the carnage caused by these “good, honest, law abiding Americans.”
Here is a breakdown of the campaign funding various Texas legislators have received from the NRA since 1990:
Legislator
District
Party
Amount
NRA Grade
Ted Cruz
Junior
Republican
$ 9,900
A+
John Cornyn
Senior
Republican
$ 17,850
A
Louie Gohmert
1
Republican
$ 11,450
A
Ted Poe
2
Republican
$ 9,500
A+
Sam Johnson
3
Republican
$ 23,450
A
Ralph Hall
4
Republican
$ 25,450
A
Jeb Hensarling
5
Republican
$ 20,900
A
Joe Barton
6
Republican
$ 47,948
A
John Culberson
7
Republican
$ 22,550
A
Kevin Brady
8
Republican
$ 17,500
A
Al Green
9
Democrat
$ –
F
Michael McCaul
10
Republican
$ 19,500
A
K. Michael Conaway
11
Republican
$ 11,000
A
Kay Granger
12
Republican
$ 13,950
A
Mac Thornberry
13
Republican
$ 27,450
A
Randy Weber
14
Republican
$ –
A
Ruben Hinojosa
15
Democrat
$ –
D
Beto O’Rourke
16
Democrat
$ –
N/A
Bill Flores
17
Republican
$ 7,000
A
Sheila Jackson Lee
18
Democrat
$ –
F
Randy Neugebauer
19
Republican
$ 16,950
A
Joaquin Castro
20
Democrat
$ –
C
Lamar Smith
21
Republican
$ 30,750
A+
Pete Olson
22
Republican
$ 12,450
A
Pete Gallego
23
Democrat
$ 1,000
A-
Kenny Marchant
24
Republican
$ 10,750
A
Roger Williams
25
Republican
$ 2,000
AQ
Michael Burgess
26
Republican
$ 13,150
A
Blake Farenthold
27
Republican
$ 4,500
A
Henry Cuellar
28
Democrat
$ 18,350
A-
Gene Green
29
Democrat
$ 12,950
A-
Eddie Johnson
30
Democrat
$ –
F
John Carter
31
Republican
$ 22,450
A+
Pete Sessions
32
Republican
$ 64,000
A+
Marc Veasey
33
Democrat
$ –
B
Filemon Vela
34
Democrat
$ 1,000
AQ
Lloyd Doggett
35
Democrat
$ –
F
Steve Stockman
36
Republican
$ 1,000
A
The total here is almost $500,000, and this counts only the contributions made to those currently holding office. It does not count the amounts contributed to unsuccessful candidates or those who previously held office. It does make me wonder why the NRA would spend so much money in a state so gun hungry as Texas.
Former Virginia Tech student and EMT Kathy Staats who responded to the shooting there on April 16, 2007. Photo credit: Austin Dowling
Which brings me to Texas George. You see, there was a Gun Sense rally sponsored by Moms Demand Action at the Texas capital in Austin last weekend. Hundreds of people attended to listen to the reasoned and compassionate speeches of victims, family member, first responders and legislators. While one young woman, a volunteer EMT at Virginia Tech who responded to the mass shooting on the morning of April 16, 2007, relayed to us her attempts to secure an oxygen mask to a student whose jaw had been blown off by a bullet and who later died, a local genius who called himself Texas George walked up to the front of the crowd holding a sign with the nonsensical message “Stop Gun Ban.” As other people in the crowd tried to get in front of him to block his asinine, attention seeking stunt, I noticed the sickest part of this display. While he held the nonsensical sign in his right hand, he held the hand of his no more than 6 year old grandson in his left. Two thoughts rang through my head. First, how insensitive and callous to bring your grandson to such an event where his grandfather was being berated and shouted down (by me in addition to others), but that his grandson was roughly the same age as the 20 children blown apart in Newtown, Connecticut. And while that juxtaposition played around inside my head, the most poignant image of that day would have to wait for me to see it the following day.
Texas George and his inane sign. There are 300,000,000 guns in America. What gun ban?
The image below shows my child standing behind a woman holding a sign denouncing the murder of 8 children a day in America. My initial (and eternal) pride in seeing my son stand up for something he believes in and which saves lives gave way to the sick feeling that slammed into my stomach when I linked the message about children to the sight of my child. Something I will never forget and something Texas George, Ted Cruz, Steve Stockman, Steve Toth, Rick Perry, Greg Abbott and any other defender of our “God given” right to blow away any of His creatures will never understand. Joseph Heller’s protagonist would question everybody’s sanity in this drama. Logical discourse with these people is like administering medicine to the victims of Newtown.
My son, Cameron (left) and his friend Austin listen to speeches while a woman holds a poignant sign.
It is the inevitable third act of every recent election. The defeated side demands a recount or legal recourse. It’s the adult version of “It’s not fair. Do over!” Whether it’s the Democrats (remember Florida in 2000 with their “dangling” and “pregnant” chads) or Karl Rove’s on-air hissy-fit last Tuesday, sometimes facts are ignored and argued as if unfixed.
The presidential election last Tuesday saw a decisive win for President Obama, winning 332 to 206 in the Electoral College and 62,613,406 to 59,140,591 in the popular vote, garnering 62 more electoral votes than he required and winning the popular vote by 3,472,815 (roughly the same as the populations of Alaska, North Dakota, Vermont, Washington, D.C. and Wyoming combined). These are the facts. To ignore them or dispute them is unproductive folly. Like it or not, President Obama (and the Democrats) will continue to control the White House for four more years. But before the Republicans began to lick their wounds and regroup, or begin the painful process of self-exploration, too many of their adherents have taken to crying publicly and stomping their feet.
Bertrand Russell said, “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.” Truer words have never been uttered. When someone is convinced of the sanctity of their position with absolute certainty, expounding with vitriol and ferocity against the “uneducated masses,” I instinctively dismiss them, protect my children and grab for my wallet.
I always thought that the young, in their idealistic naiveté of wanting to save the world voted Democratic until they began to make some money of their own. Gradually, their position would change from “save the world” and “help the downtrodden” to “not another slice of my pie” and a NIMBY attitude. I used to think of Republicans as the party of Alex P. Keaton and Gordon Gecko; market-based capitalists firmly in the Ayn Rand camp of egoism, self-control and material gain. Perhaps it is a consequence of my having to relocate to Texas in search of the country’s best medical care for my wife, but I now find myself redefining my definition of Republicans. Nationwide, there has been a shift in the ideals of the Republican Party, carried on the heels of right-wing Christians centered in the Bible-belt. Every Republican running since Ronald Reagan has run on an outdated, idealistic, fantastic, revisionist historian view of American life in the 1950’s. “If only we could go back to the way it used to be.” Forgetting, for example, the treatment of women, homosexuals, blacks, Asians, Hispanics, Native Americans, (essentially, everybody who was not a white man), a government that took us to the brink of nuclear annihilation and created a foundation of lies for what would become the Viet Nam war.
Having learned our lessons, through the hard fought civil rights movement, the women’s liberation movement and the return of 11,000 body bags from Viet Nam, Cambodia and Laos (and a generationally divided country where the youth (who were called upon to fight in the war) mistrusted a government that abused it), capitalistic market forces marched on, taking us from the upheaval of the 1960’s to the anti-war crescendo of the mid-1970’s with the overthrow of a sitting president, to the debauchery of the 1970’s and drug-addled 1980’s. The 1990’s saw baby boomers acknowledge that they were the capitalists after all and return to making money, content that they could save the world once their summer home in Maui was paid off. This brings us to that historical fulcrum, September 11, 2001. All at once, as the second plane hit the South tower, our insulated, global ignorance shattered with the World Trade Tower glass. When 3,000 of our neighbors were incinerated that day, we saw in all its naked anger the effects radical religion can have on society. We did not deserve this assault, but neither did we prevent its happening. Content to let our government back one Middle Eastern dictator after another (from the Shah in Iran to Saddam Hussein in Iraq, from the Saudi family to Mubarak in Egypt) we lived our lives in happy oblivion under the dated misconception that we were protected by two oceans. Once we circled the wagons and held each other for comfort in the new and terrifying world order where enemies did not march under a recognized flag and so-called “smart bombs” assuaged any guilt we had bombing civilian neighborhoods where our enemies used schools and hospitals as human shields, the Republican party reverted back to a world view that neither existed nor should have existed; a world where minorities, women and homosexuals were heeled under by white middle-aged men and religious zeal validated any injustices. Unfortunately, or fortunately, the ensuing six decades since the 1950’s saw the “melting pot” of America change the flavors of the stew. As the number of Asians and Hispanics increased, the percent of the population comprised of whites diminished accordingly. Republicans continued to ignore this demographic paradigm shift and catered to an ever decreasing slice of Americans. Emboldened by the Christian right and using all manner of euphemisms for “middle aged white men,” the soundly beaten Republican Party now finds itself at a crossroads. One road leads to a future based on personal responsibility and social accountability while the other terminates in a dead end in less than ten years.
Nowhere is this battle more evident than in Texas. In fact, with California (and its 55 electoral votes) and New York (and its 29 electoral votes) solidly blue, Texas (and its 38 electoral votes) is the future of the Republican Party. As the immigration wave continues to push northward through the country and the young migrate south, typically Republican Texas demographics dwindle. Seen as reliably red since Lyndon Johnson proclaimed to Bill Moyers after signing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, “I think we just delivered the South to the Republican Party for a long time to come,” minorities now hold sway over the party’s very existence. And rather than face this fact, some Texans threaten to do again what they did in 1861, that is to say secede.
Welcome to the new country of MadaNASCAR!
The White House website has created a “We the People” site allowing citizens to create petitions for government consideration. A cursory view of the site shows that forty-two states have petitions (some multiple as if their citizens cannot read) requesting to “peacefully be allowed to secede from the United States and form their own government.” However, while most of these petitions will fail to reach the 25,000 signature threshold, upon which a formal response will be generated by the administration, the Texas petition is closing in on 100,000 signatures as of this writing. Only those petitions from Georgia, Tennessee, Florida, Alabama, Texas and Louisiana have eclipsed the 25,000 signature mark, the second highest tally being Louisiana with just over 33,000 signatures. Ironically, and no doubt created with some caprice, there is a petition which has gathered over 4,000 signatures requesting that the city of Austin be allowed “to withdraw from the state of Texas and remain part of the United States!”
Current Republican intransigence and Texan hubris guarantee the party’s extinction. There are estimates that Texas will transition to a blue state within the course of the next presidential election cycle. If that is allowed to occur, if California, Texas and New York are solidly blue, there is virtually no mathematical chance for a Republican to garner the requisite 270 electoral votes to become president. Covering one’s eyes does not prevent the bus from hitting you. Threatening to secede does nothing to prevent your losing your seat at the table. Republicans must acknowledge that it is not 1950 any longer and that minorities (who will not remain “minor” for very much longer), women and homosexuals may soon make up the lion’s share of the electorate and have learned to make their voices known. Mitt Romney won the male vote 52% to 45%, the 65 and older vote 56% to 44%, the white vote 59% to 39%, the religious vote 59% to 39%, the anti-immigrant (self-deporting is a good and viable idea) vote 73% to 24% and married people vote 56% to 42%. However, it was clearly not enough. Will we look back upon the 2012 election as the last run by Republicans using the old game plan, having embraced change while encouraging personal responsibility or as a sacrosanct platform used again in 2016 and saw the party of Lincoln fade from relevance and disappear? In a word, should we help those wanting to secede pack or show them their seat at the new American table?
Perhaps the Republican Party will reflect on this election loss and consider its implications on their future.
Perhaps the religious right will no longer be the centerpiece of the Republican Party. America largely ignored Romney’s Mormonism as an issue. Perhaps Republicans can learn to ignore everybody else’s religion (or lack thereof). As America becomes increasingly secular, perhaps we can dispense with the politically correct insipidness that it is alright for anybody to believe in creationism after they have attained the age of two and played with a toy dinosaur. Perhaps the fanaticism employed by the right in their attempts to include God in every discussion should be left to the Islamic fanatics of the Middle East. Perhaps the frenzied somnambulist’s nightmare of sharia law infiltrating American jurisprudence can be left to the conspiracy theorists. Surely we can agree that while American’s rejected Romney’s attempt to return the United States to the social constructs of the year 1950, are there any circumstances under which we would accept a return to the Islamic laws of the year 632? Someone once said that one conspiracy theorist is a schizophrenic, whereas a group of them is a Republican convention. Perhaps it is time to change that.
Perhaps the right wing will clear themselves of their paranoid miasma of a national “confiscation day,” where President Obama personally goes door-to-door collecting every gun from the self-proclaimed “sane,” 2nd amendment loving, NRA financing, gun lovers. Perhaps we can have a rational discussion on gun control and agree that ordinary citizens probably do not need a semi-automatic assault rifle with a 100 round clip in order to defend themselves from a burglar, unless the burglar is China, in which case we have an exceedingly well armored military.
Perhaps Republicans can agree that rape is not a topic on which there can be two rational sides.
Perhaps Republicans will see women’s rights and control over their own bodies as sacrosanct and not fodder for white men to debate.
Perhaps marriage equality will extend its foothold in the less religiously rigid states and plant the seeds for a national discussion devoid of homosexuality being considered a moral abomination and “curable.”
Perhaps Republicans will see Latino’s not as a monolithic Democratic voting block consisting of “wetbacks” and illegal (I hate this term) aliens, but rather Americans. A look at any of the maps used by the networks in last night’s election coverage shows that America, beyond Tim Russert’s Red State/Blue State analogy is really about urban versus suburban, white versus everybody else (captured as that all-encompassing and grossly misrepresentative term “ethnic”). For example, white suburban Virginia versus the “ethnic” northern part of the state, white suburban Ohio versus the “ethnic,” blue-collared northern part of the state, white suburban western Pennsylvania versus the “ethnic” Philadelphia region. See a pattern? White’s comprise huge swaths of territory, but with few inhabitants versus the “ethnic” and densely populated cities. The Red State/Blue State paradigm is flawed. Perhaps, it should be county based, or perhaps it is time for white Americans to stop trying to return America to the “good old days” of segregation and oppressive “white power” and embrace their place in the prismatic colors that are America’s skin tones.
Perhaps Republicans will take this opportunity to unite with Democrats and engage in meaningful arguments about the cataclysmic topics facing America, represent their constituents without abandoning the greater good and moving the needle on America’s march into an energy independent future. Perhaps we can dispense with the banal name calling and talentless idolatry rampant in America and engender personal responsibility as a manifesto for our children.
Perhaps Donald Trump will donate his $5 million to a charity of his choice and sit down.
The election is finally upon us. We vote today and await the results tonight. Tomorrow all the political placards will vanish from our lawns. All of the candidate commercials on television will give way and our TV’s will once again be bombarded with advertisements for erectile dysfunction prescriptions, Fords, Chevy’s, pizza and college football promotions. Before we move on to another sporting season, here are a few select quotes on the political process for your amusement and consideration. As always, comments are appreciated.
“Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve.” ― George Bernard Shaw
“I do not know if the people of the United States would vote for superior men if they ran for office, but there can be no doubt that such men do not run.” ― Alexis de Tocqueville
“Our great democracies still tend to think that a stupid man is more likely to be honest than a clever man.” ― Bertrand Russell
“Democracy is reproached with saying that the majority is always right. But progress says that the minority is always right.” ― G.K. Chesterton
“Every election is determined by the people who show up.” ― Larry J. Sabato
“In a republican nation, whose citizens are to be led by reason and persuasion and not by force, the art of reasoning becomes of first importance” ― Thomas Jefferson
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
“Omnia praeclara tam difficilia quam rara sunt (All things excellent are as difficult as they are rare)” ― Baruch Spinoza
“We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson
“I ask you to judge me by the enemies I have made.” ― Franklin D. Roosevelt
“Those who will not reason, perish in the act. Those who will not act, perish for that reason.” ― W.H. Auden
“All I have is a voice.” ― W.H. Auden
“The governor of Texas, who, when asked if the Bible should also be taught in Spanish, replied that ‘if English was good enough for Jesus, then it’s good enough for me.” ― Christopher Hitchens
“The essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks, but in how it thinks.” ― Christopher Hitchens
“When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross.” ― Sinclair Lewis
“If you are bored and disgusted by politics and don’t bother to vote, you are in effect voting for the entrenched Establishments of the two major parties, who please rest assured are not dumb, and who are keenly aware that it is in their interests to keep you disgusted and bored and cynical and to give you every possible reason to stay at home doing one-hitters and watching MTV on primary day. By all means stay home if you want, but don’t bullshit yourself that you’re not voting. In reality, there is no such thing as not voting: you either vote by voting, or you vote by staying home and tacitly doubling the value of some Diehard’s vote.” ― David Foster Wallace
“You have to remember one thing about the will of the people: it wasn’t that long ago that we were swept away by the Macarena.” ― Jon Stewart
“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.” ― Edward R. Murrow
“On Undecided Voters: “To put them in perspective, I think of being on an airplane. The flight attendant comes down the aisle with her food cart and, eventually, parks it beside my seat. “Can I interest you in the chicken?” she asks. “Or would you prefer the platter of shit with bits of broken glass in it?” To be undecided in this election is to pause for a moment and then ask how the chicken is cooked.” ― David Sedaris
“In politics we presume that everyone who knows how to get votes knows how to administer a city or a state. When we are ill… we do not ask for the handsomest physician, or the most eloquent one.” ― Plato
“If pro is the opposite of con, what is the opposite of Congress?” ― Will Rogers
“If you actually are an educated, thinking person, you will not be welcome in Washington, D.C. I know a couple of bright seventh graders who would not be welcome in Washington D.C.” ― Kurt Vonnegut
“The whole dream of democracy is to raise the proletariat to the level of stupidity attained by the bourgeoisie.” ― Gustave Flaubert
“Come senators, congressmen
Please heed the call
Don’t stand in the doorway
Don’t block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There’s a battle outside ragin’.
It’ll soon shake your windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin’.” ― Bob Dylan
“Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied.” ― Otto von Bismarck
“If you want to make peace with your enemy, you have to work with your enemy. Then he becomes your partner. – Nelson Mandela
“It is a great danger for everyone when what is shocking changes.” ― Graham Greene
“But, Jefferson worried that the people – and the argument goes back to Thucydides and Aristotle – are easily misled. He also stressed, passionately and repeatedly, that it was essential for the people to understand the risks and benefits of government, to educate themselves, and to involve themselves in the political process. Without that, he said, the wolves will take over.” ― Carl Sagan
“Even a purely moral act that has no hope of any immediate and visible political effect can gradually and indirectly, over time, gain in political significance.” ― Václav Havel
“They deem him their worst enemy who tells them the truth.” –Plato
“In a democracy, the most important office is the office of citizen.” ― Louis Brandeis
“Ideology is the science of idiots.” ― John Adams
“History is changed by martyrs who tell the truth.” ― Miguel Syjuco
“A thinking man never be a party man.” ― Friedrich Nietzsche
“Let no one misunderstand our idea; we do not confound what are called ‘political opinions’ with that grand aspiration after progress with that sublime patriotic, democratic, and human faith, which, in our days, should be the very foundation of all generous intelligence.” ― Victor Hugo
“I take criticism so seriously as to believe that, even in the midst of a battle in which one is unmistakably on one side against another, there should be criticism, because there must be critical consciousness if there are to be issues, problems, values, even lives to be fought for… Criticism must think of itself as life-enhancing and constitutively opposed to every form of tyranny, domination, and abuse; its social goals are noncoercive knowledge produced in the interests of human freedom.” ― Edward W. Said
“In the early ages of the world, according to the scripture chronology, there were no kings; the consequence of which was there were no wars; it is the pride of kings which throws mankind into confusion.” ― Thomas Paine
The presidential election is in four days and the divide in America has once again been colorized for our dim amusement. It’s the red states versus the blue states! We should all get t-shirts for the $10 billion being spent on the race, a patriotic “shirts versus skins” game for the world to observe. Is this a case of north versus south, east versus west, the egomaniacal one-per-centers versus the torpid proletariat, big business versus farmers, cities versus the heartland? Classify it however you want. Categorize it until it meets your expectations. But the differences are there. First, the facts:
Blue States
Red States
Population
63.4%
36.4%
Land Mass
35.9%
64.1%
Population Density, people per sq. mile
659
75
Median Age
37.4
36.0
White America
67.9%
73.8%
Black America
10.6%
11.7%
Latino America
12.6%
8.3%
Asian America
5.4%
1.8%
Foreign Born Americans
11.5%
5.5%
High School Graduation Rates
87.4%
85.5%
Bachelor’s Degrees
30.6%
24.2%
Home of Top 50 Universities
40
10
Veterans
62.2%
37.8%
Military Recruits, per 1,000 eligible 18-24
2.07
2.49
Median Home Value
$260,089
$141,129
Median Household Income
$56,293
$46,696
Unemployment
7.8%
7.0%
Poverty Rate
12.2%
14.9%
Obesity Rate
25.5%
28.7%
Businesses
66.8%
33.2%
Women-Owned Businesses
15.7%
15.2%
New Home Construction
50.8%
49.2%
Marriage Rates, per 100,000
7.9%
7.3%
Divorce Rates, per 100,000
3.5%
4.1%
Belief in God
66%
78%
Gun Ownership
28.0%
47.1%
Deaths by Firearm, per 100,000
9.5
13.7
One could spend all day searching for correlations among these characteristics; however, a few do stand out more prominently than others. For example, combining several characteristics, one can state that the Blue States tend to be better educated with higher high school graduation rates, more bachelor degrees and more of the top universities. Blue States also tend to spend more on their houses (4.6 times their median income) versus Red States who spend only 3.0 times their income on a home. True, this could be due to the fact that there is more available land in the Red States presumably making lots cheaper to build on. However, then isn’t it strange that new home constructions are split about evenly between Blue and Red? And while the overwhelming numbers of businesses reside in the Blue States, their unemployment rate is higher than in the Red States. However, the poverty rate and obesity rate is higher in Red States. There is also a strange dichotomy in the Red States. While being comprised of the “Bible Belt,” they yet have lower marriage rates, higher divorce rates, higher gun ownership and more deaths caused by firearms. What would God think of that combination?
Blue State Propaganda
Politically, it is also a mixed bag. When polled, Americans consider the economy to be the overriding theme of this presidential election season. To borrow a phrase from Bill Clinton’s White House, “It’s the economy, stupid.” But while you would think the states with the highest unemployment would lean toward Mitt Romney and his job creating (albeit mathematically mystical) juggernaut, it is quite the opposite. Is this a case of mass delusion or a schadenfreude miasma? Similarly, if Barack Obama is the embodiment of a socialistic welfare state, why then would the region with the highest household income, the most businesses and a lower poverty rate bother to look at him? Were they all working late and missed his soporific first debate?
Red State Propaganda
It is in these mysteries that this election is wrapped. God bless the RED, white and BLUE. Now go vote.
My son, a freshman in college, and I were on the phone last night discussing our impressions of the latest town hall debate between President Barack Obama and former governor Mitt Romney. Given the particularly rancorous tone the debate had, a mirrored reflection of the actual campaign, I commented that I found it hard to believe that there were enough undecided voters in the country to fill the audience, let alone that many in Nassau County; but there they were.
Rabid, robotic sycophants in each party leave no room for the truly undecided voter to express their uncertainty with a candidate lest they be subjected to immediate internment in the opposing camp, suddenly responsible for each plank in a platform in which they are ill-prepared and unwilling to defend. Are these undecided voters genuinely inquisitive, searching for positions on a myriad of issues or are they the dull, unread and oblivious? For the sake of the future of the United States, I hope it is the former while concerned it is the later.
The polarization of politics, the fracturing of consensus and absence of debate, the removal of concession as a tool toward progress has paralyzed politics. A shattered media, where any myopic obsession with one particular issue is rewarded with its own cable channel and a thousand militant websites, encourages the electorate to choose a candidate for their position on a single issue and while ignoring the candidate’s position on every other issue as “somebody else’s problem.” You’re concerned about the economy? The environment be damned. You’re concerned about healthcare? Jobs be damned. And so on…
Neither candidate has successfully escaped this reality. In a perfect world, Mitt Romney would be able to express the desire for small business (“the economic engine of the country”) to thrive and grow. He would be able to encourage the celebration of the individual based on their genius and initiative (not their celebrity quotient), rewarded with the fruits of a capitalistic marketplace or starved by the same; where wealth is seen, not as the unconscionable greed plundered by the mindless “looters” of Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged, but celebrated as the moral destination of individual gain. In this perfect world there would be more Hank Rearden’s and Dagny Taggart’s and fewer Wesley Mouch’s and Jim Taggarts. Unfortunately, this industrial utopia ignores the choices people make. Atlas Shrugged spends an exhaustive number of pages explaining that the choice a mother makes to give the last piece of bread to her child is not a sacrifice and not given out of pity, but the rational choice of a rational mind. In the real world, choices like this are made by individuals on a daily basis with no expectation of societal support in return. Honor is held internally by these individuals, as they navigate life’s course, carved by the choices they have made and determined to persevere. There are no children in Atlas Shrugged and no characters ravaged by illness, excepting, of course, that a conscious refusal to think for one’s self is terminal. In reality, there are those whom Fortune has betrayed, felled by disease or events beyond their control for whom that proverbial “governmental safety net” should be axiomatic.
Conversely, President Obama has not been able to effectively convey a perfect world where government involvement in the minds and pocketbooks of citizens is not for the benefit of the lazy takers and looters, but where an “audacity of hope” lifts all boats; where society’s infrastructure is measured in the tons of steel and yards of cement in our roads and bridges and not in the number of governmental agencies handing out food stamps and welfare checks to the unworthy. He has not been able to sell his opponents on a middle class worthy of the platitudes bestowed upon it by Democrats as the hardworking backbone of America, and not the resource-sponging Pablum vilified by Republicans. To assume that every citizen is doing their best and ignoring society’s leeches does nothing but invite deserved criticism. No amount of rhetoric can make up for the picture of the able-bodied young man who has fathered countless children without concern for their future, waiting in line for a government check rather than searching for work, laughing in full belief that the government “owes” him. Nor has the president escaped the portrait, painted in dazzlingly surreal colors by the “Confiscation Day” fear-mongering NRA, of him as a soft, yellow, liberal hoplophobe, as opposed to a father and leader legitimately questioning why regular citizens need to own AR-15’s with 100 round drums.
Each side sees only the idealized version of themselves in the mirror and ignores the Dorian Gray painting in the corner while only seeing the Dorian Gray painting of their opponent.
My son suggested that the town hall format, while colloquial and folksy did little to further either candidate’s command of the undecided. He, himself an accomplished high school debater, suggested that there be two debates scheduled for future presidential campaigns. Each candidate selects the most partisan member of the media they can find, crafts pointed questions and directs them at their opponent, knowing that their opponent will have the same opportunity in the next round. In fact, why not remove the commentator altogether? This would eliminate the bias claims leveled at every commentator by partisan hacks and conspiracy theorists. Simply have one debate where the Republican candidate asks questions directly to the Democratic candidate and a second debate where the Democratic candidate asks questions directly to the Republican candidate. These debates should be limited to six hours in length and broadcast on every cable and radio station. Proof of viewership (of both debates) should be required of every voter on election night, thus ensuring that an informed electorate is a prepared electorate, undecided no more.
Thoughts at Large 