Rally Round the Flag Boys and Girls. Time to Attack IRAN!

I am re-posting this information which is from Wikipedia.  I have not written one word of this blog, but I think it is important enough to post.  The President of the USA may now be using this tactic with IRAN.  It has been used before and Americans will fall prey to it again unless people are aware of the tactic and stand up to it.

Estoy re-publicando esta información que es de Wikipedia. No he escrito una palabra de este blog, pero creo que es lo suficientemente importante como para publicar. El presidente de los EE. UU. Ahora puede estar usando esta táctica con IRAN. Se ha usado antes y los estadounidenses volverán a ser presa de él a menos que la gente esté consciente de la táctica y la haga frente.

我正在重新發布來自維基百科的這些信息。 我沒有寫過這個博客的一個詞,但我認為發布這個詞非常重要。 美國總統現在可能正在與伊朗使用這種策略。 它已經被使用過了,除非人們意識到這種策略並且能夠堅持下去,否則美國人將再次成為它的犧牲品。

Ich poste diese Informationen, die aus Wikipedia stammen, erneut. Ich habe kein Wort dieses Blogs geschrieben, aber ich denke, es ist wichtig genug, um etwas zu posten. Der Präsident der USA könnte diese Taktik jetzt mit dem IRAN anwenden. Es wurde schon früher benutzt und die Amerikaner werden wieder Opfer davon werden, es sei denn, die Leute sind sich der Taktik bewusst und halten sich dagegen.

Rally ’round the flag effect

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to search

President Bush approval rating from 2001 to 2006. Spikes in approval coincide with the September 11 attacks, the invasion of Iraq, and the capture of Saddam Hussein.

The rally ’round the flag effect (or syndrome) is a concept used in political science and international relations to explain increased short-run popular support of the President of the United States during periods of international crisis or war.[1]Because rally ’round The Flag effect can reduce criticism of governmental policies, it can be seen as a factor of diversionary foreign policy.[1]

Mueller’s definition[edit]

Political scientist John Mueller suggested the effect in 1970, in a landmark paper called “Presidential Popularity from Truman to Johnson”. He defined it as coming from an event with three qualities:[2]

  1. “Is international”
  2. “Involves the United States and particularly the President directly”
  3. “Specific, dramatic, and sharply focused”

Causes and durations[edit]

Since Mueller’s original theories, two schools of thought have emerged to explain the causes of the effect. The first, “The Patriotism School of Thought” holds that in times of crisis, the American public sees the President as the embodiment of national unity. The second, “The Opinion Leadership School” believes that the rally emerges from a lack of criticism from members of the opposition party, most often in the United States Congress. If opposition party members appear to support the president, the media has no conflict to report, thus it appears to the public that all is well with the performance of the president.[4]

The two theories have both been criticized, but it is generally accepted that the Patriotism School of thought is better to explain causes of rallies, while the Opinion Leadership School of thought is better to explain duration of rallies.[3] It is also believed that the lower the presidential approval rating before the crisis, the larger the increase will be in terms of percentage points because it leaves the president more room for improvement. For example, Franklin Roosevelt only had a 12% increase in approval from 72% to 84% following the Attack on Pearl Harbor, whereas George W. Bush had a 39% increase from 51% to 90% following the September 11 attacks.[5]

Another theory about the cause of the effect is believed to be embedded in the US Constitution. Unlike in other countries, the constitution makes the President both head of government and head of state. Because of this, the president receives a temporary boost in popularity because his Head of State role gives him symbolic importance to the American people. However, as time goes on his duties as Head of Government require partisan decisions that polarize opposition parties and diminish popularity. This theory falls in line more with the Opinion Leadership School.

Due to the highly statistical nature of presidential polls, University of Alabama political scientist John O’Neal has approached the study of rally ’round the flag using mathematics. O’Neal has postulated that the Opinion Leadership School is the more accurate of the two using mathematical equations. These equations are based on quantified factors such as the number of headlines from the New York Times about the crisis, the presence of bipartisan support or hostility, and prior popularity of the president.[6]

Political Scientist from The University of California Los Angeles, Matthew A. Baum found that the source of a rally ’round the flag effect is from independents and members of the opposition party shifting their support behind the President after the rallying effect. Baum also found that when the country is more divided or in a worse economic state then the rally effect is larger. This is because more people who are against the president before the rallying event switch to support him afterwards. When the country is divided before the rallying event there is a higher potential increase in support for the President after the rallying event.[7]

In a study by Political Scientist Terrence L. Chapman and Dan Reiter, rallies in Presidential approval ratings were found to be bigger when there was U.N. Security Council supported Militarized interstate disputes (MIDs). Having U.N. Security Council support was found to increase the rally effect in presidential approval by 8 to 9 points compared to when there wasn’t U.N. Security Council support.[5]

According to a 2019 study of ten countries in the period 1990-2014, there is evidence of a rally-around-the-flag effect early on in an intervention with casualties (in at least the first year) but voters begin to punish the governing parties after 4.5 years.[8]

Historical examples[edit]

The effect has been examined within the context of nearly every major foreign policy crisis since World War II. Some notable examples:

  • Cuban Missile Crisis: According to Gallup polls, President John F. Kennedy‘s approval rating in early October 1962 was at 61%. By November, after the crisis had passed, Kennedy’s approval rose to 74%. The spike in approval peaked in December 1962 at 76%. Kennedy’s approval rating slowly decreased again until it reached the pre-crisis level of 61% in June 1963.[3][9]
  • Iran hostage crisis: According to Gallup polls, President Jimmy Carter quickly gained 26 percentage points, jumping from 32 to 58% approval following the initial seizure of the U.S. embassy in Tehran in November 1979. However, Carter’s handling of the crisis caused popular support to decrease, and by November 1980 Carter had returned to his pre-crisis approval rating.[10]
  • Operation Desert Storm (Persian Gulf War): According to Gallup polls, President George H. W. Bush was rated at 59% approval in January 1991, but following the success of Operation Desert Storm, Bush enjoyed a peak 89% approval rating in February 1991. From there, Bush’s approval rating slowly decreased, reaching the pre-crisis level of 61% in October 1991.[3][11]
  • Following the September 11 attacks in 2001, President George W. Bush received an unprecedented increase in his approval rating. On September 10, Bush had a Gallup Poll rating of 51%. By September 15, his approval rate had increased by 34 percentage points to 85%. Just a week later, Bush was at 90%, the highest presidential approval rating ever. Over a year after the attacks occurred, Bush still received higher approval than he did before 9/11 (68% in November 2002). Both the size and duration of Bush’s popularity after 9/11 are believed to be the largest of any post-crisis boost. Many people believe that this popularity gave Bush a mandate and eventually the political leverage to begin the War in Iraq.[3][12]
  • Death of Osama bin Laden: According to Gallup polls, President Barack Obama received a 6% jump in his Presidential approving ratings, jumping from 46% in the three days before the mission (April 29 – May 1) to a 52% in the 3 days after the mission (May 2–4).[13] The rally effect didn’t last long, as Obama’s approval ratings were back down to 46% by June 30.

Controversy and Fears of Misuse[edit]

There are fears that the president will misuse the rally ’round the flag effect. These fears come from the “diversionary theory of war” in which the President creates an international crisis in order to distract from domestic affairs and to increase their approval ratings through a rally ’round the flag effect. The fear associated with this theory is that a President can create international crisis to avoid dealing with serious domestic issues or to increase their approval rating when it begins to drop.[14]

“Of course the people don’t want war. But after all, it’s the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it’s a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.  Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.  That is easy.  All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger.”  — Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials 

 

3627– Monday, May 27, 2019 – Jesus Christ versus Donald Trump

Why do I get these crazy writing ideas when I am running?  I get some of what I consider my best ideas while I am out jogging.  Sometimes, my brain solves problems when I am running, sometimes it comes up with thoughts on things to do and other times I get ideas to write about. I was out running yesterday when the following thought flashed into my mind:  What if Jesus entered the presidential race on the Democratic side?  What would people say about this?  I assume that it would get attention from a wide range of commentators.  Just for fun, I decided to “put words into their mouths.”  The result is the following “Fake News.”  If you want to add your comments on what or how you would think about such an event, please do.  I always welcome comments.  So here we go!

News Flash!  Breaking news on CNN and Fox News.  Jesus of Nazareth, AKA, Son of God, Man from Galilee, Jesus Christ and King of the Jews has recently thrown his hat or crown into the ring to run for president against Donald Trump in 2020.  A quick Pew Poll shows him trailing Joe Biden and Sanders in popularity but leading the other 22 Democratic candidates.

jesuspresident

“We are bringing you some recent comments concerning this new event.  First, from the Republican side:”

Donald Trump: “Fake, Fake, Fake. I don’t believe it is the real Jesus.  But even if it was, I will kick his butt back to Crown Heights or wherever else he is from.”

Mitch McConnell: “This is another desperate gamble on the part of the Democratic Party.  I don’t care if he is the real Jesus or not.  There is no way that we are giving any of our hard-earned tax money to the poor people in this country.”

Lindsey Graham: “Well, you all know that I am a man of honor and integrity.  However, I do not think it is right that Jesus should try to stick his nose into something that should not matter to him.  We in the Republican Party have been doing a good job of running this country and I think Jesus would be better off working with the Pope to improve things in the Vatican.  Let us politicians run this country.”

Sarah Huckabee Sanders: “I know Jesus has quite a reputation, but I think he is a sell-out for joining the Democrats.  I am a Christian, but I will still vote for Donald.  He is the man.”

Devin Nunes: “I think there is some kind of a conspiracy afoot here.  I don’t know this Jesus guy very well, but I suspect that if he is a Democrat, he is also a closet commie and closet homosexual.  You can’t trust any Democrat.  I plan to head a committee to see if this Jesus has a bonafide birth certificate and is really an American.”

Bill Hannity: “Fox News says he is a fake and a charlatan.  Who ever heard of anyone in their right mind wanting to take money from the rich to help the poor, the lame and the sick?  Maybe he is Jesus, but this is the 21st Century and he is long past his prime.  He might have been able to sell that message in 20 BC, but this is 2020 and that dog doesn’t point any more.  If I were Jesus, I would go back to selling alms or something to help the poor and stay out of politics.”

“Now for some comments from the Democratic side.” 

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: “I have great respect for Jesus, but I don’t think he has a chance. First of all, he is a White guy.  Second, he is old.  I mean he is really old.  You put it all together and he is an “Old White Guy.”  Not enough Democrats will identify with him.  He is a nice guy, but you know what they say about nice guys.”

Nancy Pelosi: “I am not going to play any favorites here.  As long as he doesn’t push for impeachment and as long as he remembers that I run the Democratic party, I won’t have a problem with him.”

Ilhan Omar: “I want to know where he stands on Israel.  Is he for a two state or a one state solution?  These Jewish politicians are all the same.  Everything for Israel and nothing for Palestine.  If he wants my support, he is going to have to show his support for the Palestinians.”

Chuck Schumer: “I agree with Nancy.” 

Joe Biden: “I think Jesus could have a lot going for him, but he lacks my experience.  He might make a good Vice President, but he will need to pay his dues. I have been in the Democratic party for over thirty years and I have the track record that this country needs.  I will get behind Jesus if he is the party’s choice as I have got behind every other Democrat that my party chose.

Bernie Sanders: “I have said it once and I will say it again.  Election days come and go.  But the struggle of the people to create a government which represents all of us and not just the one percent – a government based on the principles of economic, social, racial and environmental justice – that struggle continues.  I have been on the forefront of this struggle for many years.  I have nothing against Jesus, but you did not see him on the Civil Rights marches when I marched along with Dr. Martin Luther King and you did not see him on the Vietnam War protest marches when I marched facing police batons and tear gas.  We need someone who will stand up to this corrupt government and I have demonstrated that I am willing to do that.”

“That’s all for now.  We will bring you updates on the Democratic nomination process as events happen.  Rumors are that Buddha and Moses are considering entering the race.”

“You’ll have a good, secure life when being alive means more to you than security, love more than money, your freedom more than public or partisan opinion, when the mood of Beethoven’s or Bach’s music becomes the mood of your whole life … when your thinking is in harmony, and no longer in conflict, with your feelings … when you let yourself be guided by the thoughts of great sages and no longer by the crimes of great warriors … when you pay the men and women who teach your children better than the politicians; when truths inspire you and empty formulas repel you; when you communicate with your fellow workers in foreign countries directly, and no longer through diplomats…”  ― Wilhelm Reich, Listen, Little Man!

 

 

 

 

Is Civility Overrated?

be fucking civil

All the talk these days by political pundits, news reporters, columnists, journalists and of course politicians seems directed towards decrying the lack of civility in politics.  It is common knowledge that there is a war between the Democrats and Republicans going on.  Each side sees the other as bent on destroying democracy, mom, god and apple pie.  They have become bitter enemies, and no one is taking prisoners.

To study this problem more, I decided to invoke Santayana’s famous dictum on “those who forget the past.”  I fired up my trusty time machine and selected four eras and events from the past where it seems civility had also been called for.  As you perhaps know, when journeying to the past, you become invisible and there is no way that you can influence any past events.  This is in accord with Novikov’s Self-Consistency Principle.  I report on these events in the following four narratives as I witnessed and remembered the discussions.

Moses and Rameses – 1440 BCE

Moses:  Let my people go

Rameses:   Not on your life

Moses:  Then I will bring numerous plagues to smite you Egyptians

Rameses:  Go ahead.  See if I give a dam

A few weeks later:

Rameses:  Look Moses, can’t we be civil about this

Moses:  Sure, let my people go

Rameses:  Not happening

Moses:  Then I will bring a new plague that will strike all first-born Egyptians dead

Rameses:  I thought we agreed to be civil.  Can’t we discuss this more?

Moses:  Let my people go

Rameses:  The hell with you Israelites

One week later:

Rameses:  Moses, I thought we agreed to be civil.  Look how many of my people you killed

Moses:  Let my people go

Rameses:  To hell with you, get out and don’t come back.  I hope I never see you again

Moses:  Now that is what I call being civil.  Goodbye!

in pursuit of civility

War of Independence – 1776 CE

King George:  You dam colonists.  Who do you think you are?

Benjamin Franklin:  We are your loyal servants my lord, who merely want to be treated with the same rights as Englishmen in your country

King George:  You are low-lifes with no civility.  I can’t believe you dumped all that tea in the harbor?  Furthermore, you don’t even have tea-time each day like we do.

Benjamin Franklin:  My lord, the customs in our country are very different

King George:  Different my ass, you people are nothing but barbarians

Benjamin Franklin:  All we want is to eliminate taxation without representation

King George:  Do I look like I care what you want?  I’m the king

Benjamin Franklin:  I am afraid we are prepared to go to war over this issue my lord

King George:  We want to have a civil discussion and you dare to threaten me?

Benjamin Franklin:  What does civility mean to you my lord?

King George:  Your people stop whining about our taxes and get their asses back to work

Benjamin Franklin:  I will bring your message to my people your lord, but I don’t think they will agree

King George:  Then we will crush them like we crush all the enemies of the empire.  They will be begging for tea and not coffee.  You are dismissed.

12-years-slave

 

Somewhere in Mississippi – 1860 CE

Plantation Overseer:  How many times Moses have I told you that you can’t run away?  You are going to get another whipping boy

Moses:  Yes, master

Plantation Overseer:  How many lashes do you think you should get Moses?

Moses:  I don’t rightly know master

Plantation Overseer:  Look Moses, I want to be civil about this, so I am asking your opinion.  I was thinking that since it was fifty last time, we should add ten making it sixty.  That would be ten for each time you ran away – agree?

Moses:  Go to hell!

Plantation Overseer:  Mind your mouth boy.  I thought we were having a civil and friendly conversation and now you go ahead and insult me with your vile mouth.  I am going to add ten lashes to your whipping.  That will teach you to be more civil!

Moses:  Go to hell!

four-components-of-etiquette-33-638

Hollywood Producers Office – March 15, 2018 CE

Producer:  Look Emily, I would like for you to get on the couch and take your clothes off

Emily (Aspiring actress): I don’t understand what taking my clothes off has to do with an audition

Producer:  Well, you have heard of “quid pro quo” right?  Well, I just want you to do me a little favor and then I will do you a bigger favor

Emily:  And what if I refuse?

Producer:  Can’t we be civil about this?  We are both adults

Emily:  I do not plan to screw my way to a role in your production

Producer:  I am tired of trying to be civil, now get your ass on that couch

Emily:  Unlock the door!  Please let go of me!

Producer:  Just relax, you will enjoy it more

Emily:  Get off me, I will scream!

Producer:  Can’t you be more civil Emily?  I am just doing this for your own good

Emily:  Fuck you, get off me!

Producer:  Not until I finish what we started

Emily:  Crying

Producer:  See it wasn’t so bad was it? Maybe after this we can be more civil to each other

Emily:  Screw you!

trump on civility

Well, that is all the time I had for my time journeys. I report the above narratives to the best of my memory.  I was wondering what messages or meaning I could ascribe to these events in terms of the problem of civility that I mentioned earlier.  I know Trump, McConnell, Graham and many others on both sides of the aisle have all called for more civility in politics.

Somehow though, I question when and where civility is appropriate and where a good “Screw you” is more appropriate.  I have no doubt that civility is of value in some circumstances but like any value, perhaps it can be overdone.

death of civility

Webster’s defines the term Civility as: 

1:  Archaic training in the humanities

2a: Civilized conduct, especially COURTESYPOLITENESS

b: A polite act or expression

If we dismiss the first definition, we are left with courtesy and politeness as being the sine qua non of civility.  But I ask, who and when should we be courteous to?  Should we be courteous to:

  • Someone who is robbing us
  • Someone who is trying to kill us
  • Someone who is obviously lying to us
  • Someone who is preaching hate and fear
  • Someone who is taking money from the poor to give to the rich
  • Someone who will deny others the chance for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness

sarahhuckabeesanders1

There is a time for civility.  I have no doubt.  But there is a time for anger and indignation.

It takes more courage to stand up to bullies and wrong doers than to merely stand passively by and acquiesce to calls for civility.  To conclude, I observe this about civility:

  • It is often a call by the more powerful to the weaker to be subdued and humbled
  • It can be used to hide evil of the first order and should be suspect
  • It is of merit only when it is reciprocated

Beware the Trojan horse!  Beware those who want civility without justice, truth and freedom!

Time for Questions:

Are you always civil?  When are you not civil?  Why?  Do you agree that civility is not always a virtue?  Why or why not?

Life is just beginning.

“In politics, disagreements between opponents is the sign of a healthy and flourishing democracy. When politicians show too much deference to each other, fundamental ethical questions are likely to get buried and power can go unchecked. Meyer points out that insults are a non-violent way of curbing the excesses of the powerful, and he argues that politics must therefore ‘allow for a boorishness typically at odds with polite society’. Similarly, Kennedy argues: ‘The civility movement is deeply at odds with what an invigorated liberalism requires: intellectual clarity; an insistence upon grappling with the substance of controversies; and a willingness to fight loudly, openly, militantly, even rudely for policies and values….” Meyer, ‘Liberal Civility and the Civility of Etiquette’, 79; Kennedy, ‘The Case against “Civility”’, 85.

The above exercpt is from:  “Six Questions About Civility” by Nicole Billante and Peter Saunders, 2002

 

 

 

Thinking about Immigration – Part 1: We Need a Fair Immigration Policy – Not an Anti-Immigration Policy!

Immigration-logoThe topic of immigration today is one of the most important subjects for all Americans.  Studies in productivity show that increases in productivity are due to two major factors:  Education and Immigration.  Once upon a time we had a system for both of these objectives which helped make our country great.  Today, both of these systems are broke and need reform.  If we are to compete in a global economy, we must have a 21st Century immigration policy that meets the needs of employers and those immigrants that want to or need to come to the USA.  I had already decided to write about this subject when I found myself between the proverbial rock and a hard place.   Immigration has become a key weapon in the mouths of people like Trump and many other politicians.  A climate of fear which has pervaded this country since 911 has been spread to link the problems of terrorism with the problems of immigration. The Anti-Immigration people want you to think that immigration and terrorism are synonymous.  They want you to believe that only by keeping all immigrants out of the USA can we keep our country safe.  The key question I want to answer in my three part blog is as follows:  Do too many immigrants erode our standard of living and contribute to rising crime and increased taxes or do too few immigrants create a lack of needed employees for new jobs and a a lack of vitality for the economy?  

immigrants taking the pledgeI have heard so many arguments one way or the other about the subject that I decided to educate myself about the issues and try to find some “truth” for myself.  My self-education began with a trip to the library where I requested about a dozen books on immigration.  They all came in from different libraries about a week later.  I had finished about nine of them when the urge to summarize my ideas and weigh in with my opinions just gripped me.  This subject is fairly complex as it must cover social, political, economic and legal issues.  I would like to do some justice to the subject, so my blog on this issue soon became three blogs.  Too much for one too read in one setting so I will publish this in 3 Parts.  Please feel free to weigh in on the comments section with your opinions, thoughts and feelings. 

Many people have said that this issue should be decided on the basis of facts and not prejudices and antipathies however that would be like asking for the snow to fall when it was warm outside or for hell to be a nice place to visit.  It is not going to happen.  So realistically, I would like to look at this issue from both a logical factual perspective and also from an illogical or emotional perspective.  Often our gut feelings may be trying to tell us some important truths.  It does not hurt to listen to our feelings as long as we moderate our feelings with our brains.  

Immigration-reform-rally-APMost of the books I selected looked at immigration from a wide range of perspectives.  There were pros and cons of immigration policy, some that were totally against immigration and others that were for a liberal immigration policy.  Several books dealt with the history of US immigration and others dealt with more of the legislative issues around immigration.  Books such as: Immigration Policy: Point/Counterpoint by Allport and Ferguson, Illegal Immigration by Miller, Mexican Immigration by Stuart Anderson and Immigration: Opposing Viewpoints, edited by Leone were among a few of the titles I selected to provide me with a wide range of viewpoints.  I started out with the intention to reject any bias I had one way or the other on the issue.  One of my caveats though was to try to separate fact from emotion.   I think perhaps one danger to seeing any “truths” is when facts try to hide as emotions or emotions try to hide as facts.  Much so called data that I read would not stand up to any statistical validity in terms of evidence or proof.  Much of the emotions out there also try to hide behind facts and present themselves as logical arguments when they are based on bias and prejudice.  My object in my reading and research was to sort through the rhetoric, and vitriol to see what we as American citizens really need to do about immigration.  What is in our best interests both short-term and long-term?  What obligations (if any) do we owe to other peoples of the world?  Do we need to worry about the quote inside the Statue of Liberty?

The New Collossus:  

stature of libertyNot like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

 —Emma Lazarus, 1883

 Perhaps we need to erase this quote inside the statue and substitute it with the following:

 The Scum of the Earth:

Stay home; you wretched curs,

We are sick and tired of being the dumping grounds for the world.

We have enough poor and tired masses.

We have enough yearning to be rich and well off.

old picture of immigrationStay home; we have enough problems of our own,

We already have too many here who can’t speak English.

Even many Americans can’t speak good English.

Where will we find enough ESL teachers?

Stay home; find work or jobs in your own land,

Give us a break, taxes are high enough here already.

We have our own culture, you would not fit in.

We don’t need more criminals and illiterates.

 Stay home; don’t come unless you are needed,

We will post for those aliens that fit our job requirements.

We only want those who are educated and creative.

The rest of you need not apply. 

Stay home!

The two sides as represented in both poems would seem to be galaxies apart.  Is there really any middle ground?  Are there any solutions to the issue of immigration?  Some of the key questions which I have found and which need to be answered are:

 ·        Do we already have too many immigrants here?

·         What do we do about illegal immigrants?  How do we keep them out?

·         How many immigrants should we allow in?

·         Who should we allow in?

·         What do we do with the ones (both legal and illegal) already here?

·         Will too much immigration ruin our culture and values?

·         Will the wrong type of immigrants be bad for our country?

·         How long will it take for them to be assimilated?

·         How much immigration can our education institutions handle?

·         How can we afford health care and social services for those in need?

·         How do we keep out criminals and terrorists while letting respectable immigrants in?

·         Should we give amnesty to those already here?

·         What are the best ways to control our borders?

·         What is a fair immigration policy?

·         What role do drugs have in encouraging illegal immigration?

Are there solutions to these questions?  On the positive side, I believe that there are.  I believe history can show us a path through the web of confusion that seems to surround these questions.  The great philosopher Santayana noted:  “Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it.”  The past has many lessons on the issue of immigration that we need to pay attention to.  On the negative side, we will not be able to solve these questions as long as we are basing our decisions on emotions masquerading as facts.  We need to sort out prejudice, discrimination, intolerance and xenophobia from the questions and decisions surrounding the issue of immigration.

immigration-reformOver the next three blogs, I would like to share with you some of the answers I have found to the above questions.  However, do not rely on my perspective alone.  Do not trust the Buddha on the road.  Go to your local library and find some of the same books I have found.  Read the opinions and viewpoints for and against immigration.  Democracy only works with an informed citizenry. As long as only our politicians have the “facts”,  the rest of us will remain gullible and stupid on this issue. As such, we have no way to guard the guardians.  We all must be vigilant when it comes to decisions affecting our lives and the very foundation of our nation.  None of us would be here if it were not for immigration.  I presume this even applies to Native Americans to some degree.

Let’s all take our responsibility to keep this nation strong and democratic. Take some time today to inform yourself about some of the issues I noted above.  Go online and read some of the history or policies of immigration in this country in the past.

Time for Questions:

How much do you care about this issue?  Do you care enough to spend perhaps an hour each week for the next four weeks becoming more informed about this issue?  If not, are you willing to trust your political representative to make the decision for you?  Are you willing to let these questions be decided by others?  Are you an immigrant?  How did your family or ancestors get to this country?

Life is just beginning. 

New Revelations from a Senior Trump Aide: The Man has no Morality!

This is an op-ed piece from the NY Times written by an anonymous senior aide inside the White House.  Never before has anyone written anything about a President like this.  This clearly shows the incompetence of the man who is President of the United States of America. 

Please share, post, retweet this to everyone you can.  We need to show the world that there are millions of us who do not support this man or his policies.  We need to either impeach him or indict him.  He can and has done real damage to the United States of America.  The longer he remains in office, the more damage he will do.

I Am Part of the Resistance Inside the Trump Administration

I work for the president, but like-minded colleagues and I have vowed to thwart parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.

President Trump is facing a test to his presidency unlike any faced by a modern American leader.

It’s not just that the special counsel looms large. Or that the country is bitterly divided over Mr. Trump’s leadership. Or even that his party might well lose the House to an opposition hellbent on his downfall.

The dilemma — which he does not fully grasp — is that many of the senior officials in his own administration are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.

I would know. I am one of them.

To be clear, ours is not the popular “resistance” of the left. We want the administration to succeed and think that many of its policies have already made America safer and more prosperous.

But we believe our first duty is to this country, and the president continues to act in a manner that is detrimental to the health of our republic.

That is why many Trump appointees have vowed to do what we can to preserve our democratic institutions while thwarting Mr. Trump’s more misguided impulses until he is out of office.

The root of the problem is the president’s amorality. Anyone who works with him knows he is not moored to any discernible first principles that guide his decision making.

Although he was elected as a Republican, the president shows little affinity for ideals long espoused by conservatives: free minds, free markets and free people. At best, he has invoked these ideals in scripted settings. At worst, he has attacked them outright.

In addition to his mass-marketing of the notion that the press is the “enemy of the people,” President Trump’s impulses are generally anti-trade and anti-democratic.

Don’t get me wrong. There are bright spots that the near-ceaseless negative coverage of the administration fails to capture: effective deregulation, historic tax reform, a more robust military and more.

But these successes have come despite — not because of — the president’s leadership style, which is impetuous, adversarial, petty and ineffective.

From the White House to executive branch departments and agencies, senior officials will privately admit their daily disbelief at the commander in chief’s comments and actions. Most are working to insulate their operations from his whims.

Meetings with him veer off topic and off the rails, he engages in repetitive rants, and his impulsiveness results in half-baked, ill-informed and occasionally reckless decisions that have to be walked back.

trump-hitler-400x274

“There is literally no telling whether he might change his mind from one minute to the next,” a top official complained to me recently, exasperated by an Oval Office meeting at which the president flip-flopped on a major policy decision he’d made only a week earlier.

The erratic behavior would be more concerning if it weren’t for unsung heroes in and around the White House. Some of his aides have been cast as villains by the media. But in private, they have gone to great lengths to keep bad decisions contained to the West Wing, though they are clearly not always successful.

It may be cold comfort in this chaotic era, but Americans should know that there are adults in the room. We fully recognize what is happening. And we are trying to do what’s right even when Donald Trump won’t.

The result is a two-track presidency.

Take foreign policy: In public and in private, President Trump shows a preference for autocrats and dictators, such as President Vladimir Putin of Russia and North Korea’s leader, Kim Jong-un, and displays little genuine appreciation for the ties that bind us to allied, like-minded nations.

Astute observers have noted, though, that the rest of the administration is operating on another track, one where countries like Russia are called out for meddling and punished accordingly, and where allies around the world are engaged as peers rather than ridiculed as rivals.

On Russia, for instance, the president was reluctant to expel so many of Mr. Putin’s spies as punishment for the poisoning of a former Russian spy in Britain. He complained for weeks about senior staff members letting him get boxed into further confrontation with Russia, and he expressed frustration that the United States continued to impose sanctions on the country for its malign behavior. But his national security team knew better — such actions had to be taken, to hold Moscow accountable.

This isn’t the work of the so-called deep state. It’s the work of the steady state.

Given the instability many witnessed, there were early whispers within the cabinet of invoking the 25th Amendment, which would start a complex process for removing the president. But no one wanted to precipitate a constitutional crisis. So we will do what we can to steer the administration in the right direction until — one way or another — it’s over.

The bigger concern is not what Mr. Trump has done to the presidency but rather what we as a nation have allowed him to do to us. We have sunk low with him and allowed our discourse to be stripped of civility.

Senator John McCain put it best in his farewell letter. All Americans should heed his words and break free of the tribalism trap, with the high aim of uniting through our shared values and love of this great nation.

We may no longer have Senator McCain. But we will always have his example — a lodestar for restoring honor to public life and our national dialogue. Mr. Trump may fear such honorable men, but we should revere them.

There is a quiet resistance within the administration of people choosing to put country first. But the real difference will be made by everyday citizens rising above politics, reaching across the aisle and resolving to shed the labels in favor of a single one: Americans.

The writer is a senior official in the Trump administration.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTopinion).

 

Four Things You Should Know About Facebook and the World

I have lost track of how many years I have been using Facebook.  However, I have not lost track of all the times that people say to me “I never use Facebook (FB) because it is etc., etc.”  They then proceed to give me a litany of reasons why they: 1. Have never used Facebook or 2. Why they think Facebook is useless.  I have found the following four beliefs to predominate among the reasons why Facebook has been deemed as either useless or even dangerous.

  1. Facebook is a waste of time. It has too much stupid stuff and trivia.

I would be richer than Mark Zuckerberg if I had a dollar for every time I have heard “What do I care about what people had for breakfast today.”  Great, you don’t want to know where I went, what I did, who I saw and what I eat?  Use your little finger to scroll down or push delete or go to another site.  I have lots of friends who do care and who want to know what I am doing.  I have had many comments on my FB site such as “It was so much fun to follow you on your trip.”  “I love your postings.”  “Thanks for sharing.”

If you think my postings are trivial, meaningless, inane, or asinine, great.  I respect your opinion.  So “Defriend” me.  Go elsewhere for your trivia.  Find your daily dose of bullshit someplace else.  But don’t criticize something you have never tried or condemn others because you find their lives not worth knowing about.

  1. Facebook can’t be trusted. They will sell valuable information about me.

Facebook is a business first and foremost.  How do you think Zuckerberg got so rich?  FB is full of advertising and advertisers want to know everything about you, so they can sell you stuff you don’t think you really need.  They will convince you that you really need it.  This has been going on since Moses convinced Pharaoh to let his people go.

Do I trust FB not to sell my innermost secrets?  Do I trust Zuckerberg not to share information about me with advertisers, political marketers, vendors, pollsters and other information seekers?  No more than I would trust hanging from the Empire State Building with my wife’s sewing thread.  You must either be deaf, dumb or blind if you think you can trust anyone selling you something or giving you something for free not to have some hidden catch or some gimmick to get more money from you.  Did you ever notice that FB is free or has that escaped your attention?  What is free?  Do you really believe it is free?

As far as information privacy goes, observe the following that I tell all my students and you will probably not have much to worry about.  It goes like this: “If you want to protect your privacy, then do not text, tweet, photo, Instagram, email, voicemail or say anything in public that you would not put up on a billboard in downtown New York.”  Period.  That is the only way that you will protect your privacy today and I doubt even this admonition is full proof.

  1. Facebook is full of lies and “false” facts.

So, you want to make decisions based on evidence, data and facts?  Facebook is no doubt full of bullshit, opinions, innuendo, conspiracies, lies and unsubstantiated claims beyond counting.  The lies on FB are more numerous than the stars in the sky or the molecules in the universe.  However, I will tell you a secret. There is no evidence, data or facts that are 100 percent true.  Everything we know about the world is only based on theories buttressed by repetition or replication.  The more our predictions happen, they more confident we are they are accurate.  However, science in like the weather.  You don’t count on the weather forecaster being 100 percent accurate unless you are a fool.

Throughout history, we have seen theories and facts overthrown by newer theories, newer facts and newer evidence that help better match reality with theory.  The world was once flat, then it was round, now it is more elliptical.  Our knowledge of everything keeps evolving and changing.  Some people see it as a search for the TRUTH.  However, the TRUTH does not exist or if it does, it is only like the wind.  It will blow one way today and another way tomorrow.  Facts, data and evidence have a probability of being accurate.  They will never be 100 percent true.  My father used to say, “believe nothing of what you hear and only half of what you see.”  I have found this to be moderately good advice.  It works very well on FB and on the Internet in general.

  1. Facebook should be a social media and not political.

“John, you are too political.”  “I don’t want to hear your rants and raves.”  “Why can’t you keep your politics out of your Facebook site.”  “Facebook is for family and friends and should not be political.”

The splash page on my FB site now shows a picture of Elie Wiesel and a quote by him that reads “To remain silent and indifferent is the greatest sin of all.”  He also said, “We must take sides.  Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.”  Before this, my splash page had a picture of Martin Luther King and a quote by him that read, “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” “In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”

I believe that living in a society and hence to be social means to be political.  If you live in a society, politics is the coin of the realm that defines the rules and procedures that govern the interactions between human beings.  No one can be apolitical in a society.  To believe so is to lie to yourself.  I put my politics out there.  I don’t care if you like them or if you don’t.  I want others to know that there is someone in the universe who probably feels like they do.

Before Trump was elected, I put up a Hillary sign in my front yard.  My neighbor who was also a Hillary supporter came over to warn me.  She said “John, I would not put that sign up in this town if I were you.  It could be dangerous.”  I decided to talk this over with my wife Karen.  I did not feel that I had the right to jeopardize her safety as well mine.  She said that she supported keeping the sign up.  My decision was sealed by her willingness to risk whatever might happen by putting a sign up in a mostly pro-Trump rural town in Arizona.  A week or so later, one of my good friends who lived nearby saw my sign.  She asked me to if I could get her one.  I did get her a sign and I think we might have had the only two Hillary signs up in our town.

I use FB as a means to share with others who in these rather trying times might have fears of speaking out or who might feel that they are alone.  I want my friends to know that I am political and that I share with some of them the same beliefs, values and ideas that they have.  I firmly believe that we cannot change our present problems or deal with issues by silence.  However, if you don’t like my politics or ideas then you can do as so many others have and simply defriend me.  Frankly, they say we are defined by the company we keep.  I would rather keep company with those who share similar convictions about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Time for Questions:

Do you use Facebook?  Why or why not

Life is just beginning.

“You should protest about the views of people you disagree with over major moral issues, and argue them down, but you should not try to silence them, however repugnant you find them. That is the bitter pill free speech requires us to swallow.” — Julian Baggini

 

 

 

The Seven Categories of Morons

morons

There is an epidemic sweeping America.  It is an epidemic of stupidity, naivete and short-sightedness. It has infected between 25 to 40 percent of the American people.  Higher numbers can be found in some sub-groups which seem particularly vulnerable.  I call this disease “Moronitus.”  You may well ask where I get my numbers from.  The bottom figure for this disease (25%) is the number of people who voted for Trump.  The top figure is the number of Americans who in the last Pew Poll gave Trump a high approval rating.  I mention some sub-groups have even more Morons.  This would include the Republican Party with 73% of its members approving of Trump and certainly groups like the KKK, neo-Nazis, neo-Confederates and other Alt-Right groups which no doubt are almost 100 percent infected by Moronitus.

You may think you know what a moron is, but I doubt it.  The conventional definition of a Moron has to do with intelligence.  This is wrong.  Intelligence is a passé and incorrect means of identifying someone suffering from Moronitus.  IQ has nothing to do with being a moron.  Let me clarify this.

Morons can be highly intelligent.  Morons can be rich.  Morons can be good people who love their family and give money to charities.  Morons can be lawyers, teachers, judges, blue collar or white-collar workers.  Morons can hold high and low positions in our societies.  Morons can be greedy, or they can be generous.  What then is a Moron?

Well, first, a Moron is a person suffering from Moronitus.  Of course, that is a circular definition.  More definitively, a moron is a person who believes something without thinking.  The three major symptoms of Moronitus are:

  1. A belief in something without any substantive facts or evidence.
  2. A belief in something simply because someone told you it was true.
  3. An unwillingness to change a belief when confronted by overwhelming facts or data.

Those who suffer from the disease of Moronitus tend to fall into seven major categories.  There are several other categories, but a clear majority of Morons can be found in the seven categories I am going to describe.  Many of the people suffering from Moronitus will be found in more than one category.  Some of the other categories I might mention that have many Morons would include:

  • Those who believe that guns deter crime
  • Those who believe that throwing money at social problems will improve things
  • Those who believe that the more military/police we have the safer we will be
  • Those who believe that all criminals or people who break the law should be thrown in jail
  • Those who believe that we can stop people from taking drugs

The categories above would be interesting to explore, but I want to stick to the seven major categories of Morons.  In the remainder of this blog, we will look in more depth at each of the seven categories of Morons or should I say those who suffer from Moronitus.

(A Disclaimer, if you find yourself in one of these categories and are offended — TOUGH SHIT.  The truth may just set you free.  If not, I don’t give a fuck.  If you are my mother, father, sister, brother, aunt, uncle or best friend, a Moron is a Moron.)

The good news is you don’t have to suffer from Moronitus.  It can be overcome.  However, it will require you to exercise your brain.  If you are like so many lazy Americans who can’t get off the couch to get some exercise, exercising your brain might prove to be a very difficult task.  Help can be found to those who really want to overcome the disease.

Here then, are the Seven Categories of Morons:

racists

  1. Racist:

If you believe that some people because of color or ethnicity are either superior or inferior to others, you are a Moron.  If you think that people who look like you are entitled to more privileges than others, you are a Moron.  If you think, that the only thing needed to overcome racism is to forget the past and move on, you are a Moron.

Racism is not a disease.  It is an action of a mind that is warped by Moronitus.  A group of people who either believe all the negative things they read about others or who simply accept malicious intolerance that benefits their tribe at the expense of other tribes.  Racism looks at the world through the opposite of the proverbial “rose colored” glasses.  Racists see everything different than they are as somehow threatening their existence.  The racist wants those who are different than they are to be isolated and destroyed.

religous zealots

  1. Religious Zealot:

If you believe that your GOD is the only God, you are a Moron.  If you think that those who don’t believe in your GOD will be smitten and go to hell, you are a Moron.  If you think that practicing your religion makes you superior to other people, you are a moron.

God save us from the “True Believers” (To use the phrase from Eric Hoffer) because they are willing to destroy everyone and everything in the name of their beliefs.  A True Believer justifies their intolerance and bigotry by the belief that their GOD would want to destroy the “unbelievers.”  A religious zealot or True Believer can belong to any religion.  Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Jews, Hindus can all be religious zealots.  Look at the world around you and you can see the mayhem caused by these religious zealots.  All in the name of promoting “THEIR GOD.”

climate denying caucus

  1. Anti-Environmentalist or Climate Denier:

If you think that short-term economic gains are more important than long-term environmental planning, you are a Moron.  If you think that humans are not wreaking havoc on the environment with a result of global climatic change, you are a Moron.  If your think that Capitalism will do what’s best for the world if left unregulated, you are a Moron.

I could present all manner of scientific data in the hope of convincing a Moron that climate change and global warming are real and are impacts caused by human mismanagement.  However, if you are a Moron it would not have one iota of impact on your belief system.  Facts, science, evidence and data have absolutely no impact on the thinking of a Moron.  Immediate benefits, opportunism, greed, personal advantage and short-term thinking are the only factors that matter to a Moron.

sexism

  1. Sexist:

If you think that men are superior to women, you are a Moron.  If you think that women exist for the purpose of taking care of and pleasing men, you are a Moron.  If you think that women are too emotional and cannot make good decisions, you are a Moron.

America is not the first, last or only nation to be infected by sexism.  However, to this date, America has not had a woman president.  According to the World Economic Forum (WEF), which, as part of its annual Global Gender Gap Report (2017), ranked almost 150 countries on gender equality, the USA ranked 49th out of 144 countries in terms of gender equality.

We have too many Morons in this country who think women have come far enough or even who feel that women have gone too far.  How many people have rejected the right of women to marry other women or who make jokes about women in non-traditional positions?  The #MeToo Movement has shown the low regard that many men in positions of power have towards women.  Male icons are falling faster than the one can count as women keep coming forward with accusations of abuse and sexual harassment by men in power.  This includes men in high positions in politics, high positions in religious organizations and high positions in corporations.  The adage that “power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely” would certainly seem to apply to the use of power to take advantage of women, children and other men.

trickle down theory

  1. Trickle Down Economist:

If you think that poor people are poor because of bad choices, you are a Moron.  If you think that the best way to help the poor is by helping the rich, you are a Moron.  If you think that a society is better with no rules or regulations to manage income inequality, you are a Moron.

The famous historian and philosopher Henry David Thoreau said that “That government is best which governs least.”  Too many so called “free market supporters” think that this means “No government rules or regulations are needed.”  They seem to conveniently or ignorantly overlook the last word in Thoreau’s quote which is “least.”  Least does not men “none” or not at all.

Adam Smith, known to most students of economics as the Father of Free Market Economics or the invisible hand of the market place (Laissez Faire Theory is beloved by conservatives and those who support the idea of little or no government interference in the market place).  However, a reading of his most important work (The Wealth of Nations) would show that Smith was far from adverse to the role of government in the market.  The following is a list of government activities which Smith noted in his book as appropriate for government.  Keep in mind that when Smith wrote his book, society and the world was a much simpler place than it is now.  One can only wonder how long Smith’s list would be today.

Here is a list of appropriate Government activities taken from Smith’s book “The Wealth of Nations”:

  • The Navigation Acts, blessed by Smith under the assertion that ‘defense, however, is of much more importance than opulence’ (WN464);
  • Sterling marks on plate and stamps on linen and woolen cloth (WN138–9);
  • Enforcement of contracts by a system of justice (WN720);
  • Wages to be paid in money, not goods;
  • Regulations of paper money in banking (WN437);
  • Obligations to build party walls to prevent the spread of fire (WN324);
  • Rights of farmers to send farm produce to the best market (except ‘only in the most urgent necessity’) (WN539);
  • ‘Premiums and other encouragements to advance the linen and woolen industries’ (TMS185);
  • ‘Police’, or preservation of the ‘cleanliness of roads, streets, and to prevent the bad effects of corruption and putrefying substances’;
  • Ensuring the ‘cheapness or plenty [of provisions]’ (LJ6; 331);
  • Patrols by town guards and fire fighters to watch for hazardous accidents (LJ331–2);
  • Erecting and maintaining certain public works and public institutions intended to facilitate commerce (roads, bridges, canals and harbors) (WN723);
  • Coinage and the mint (WN478; 1724);
  • Post office (WN724);
  • Regulation of institutions, such as company structures (joint- stock companies, co-partners, regulated companies and so on) (WN731–58);
  • Temporary monopolies, including copyright and patents, of fixed duration (WN754);
  • Education of youth (‘village schools’, curriculum design and so on) (WN758–89);
  • Education of people of all ages (tythes or land tax) (WN788);
  • Encouragement of ‘the frequency and gaiety of publick diversions’(WN796);
  • The prevention of ‘leprosy or any other loathsome and offensive disease’ from spreading among the population (WN787–88);
  • Encouragement of martial exercises (WN786);
  • Registration of mortgages for land, houses and boats over two tons (WN861, 863);
  • Government restrictions on interest for borrowing (usury laws) to overcome investor ‘stupidity’ (WN356–7);
  • Laws against banks issuing low-denomination promissory notes (WN324);
  • Natural liberty may be breached if individuals ‘endanger the security of the whole society’ (WN324);
  • Limiting ‘free exportation of corn’ only ‘in cases of the most urgent necessity’ (‘dearth’ turning into ‘famine’) (WN539); and
  • Moderate export taxes on wool exports for government revenue (WN879).

The above list is taken from the paper:  What Adam Smith Actually Identified as the Appropriate Roles for 18-century Governments, by Gavin Kennedy

Kennedy has said that

“Smith’s ideas are still not faithfully represented in modern economics….I am skeptical of classical economists claiming to be his ‘intellectual heirs.’  Even today the ‘neo-classical’ perpetuate the myth of the ‘invisible hand’ and ascribe it to the market.  All markets work using visible prices (and cannot work without them!). What then is the role of an invisible hand?  That even Nobel Prize winners repeat the canard of the ‘invisible hand’ is disappointing, to say the least. The Austrian School likewise promotes the myth of the ‘’invisible hand’ which is also disappointing.” — Grasping Reality with Both Hands.

patriotism

  1. The Patriot:

If you think that Americans are somehow superior to other people or that other nations are inferior to the United States, you are a Moron.  If you think that the United States has a right to coerce, interfere with or preach our way of living to other nations, you are a Moron.  If you think that God prefers America to other nations, you are a Moron.

It has been said that “Patriotism is the Last Refuge of a Scoundrel” (Samuel Johnson).  When all thinking fails whether in diplomacy or politics, fall back upon a belief that your country is exceptional or superior to other countries.  You can use this belief as a justification for war, preemptive attacks, embargos, tariffs or undermining the duly elected government of another nation.

Patriotic Zealots have a great deal in common with Religious Zealots.  In the name of their country rather than their God, they believe that they have the right to impose their will and ideas on other people.  My Country is synonymous with MY GOD.  God Bless America and screw the other countries of the world.  God prays for victory for America and defeat for its enemies. We are justified in whatever we do in the world because we are superior.  In the name of patriotism, religious leaders line up to say victory prayers for Americans because we are the “Chosen People.”

trump supporter.jpeg

  1. Trumpists:

If you voted for Trump and still support him, you are a Moron.  If you think that because Trump is rich that he is smarter than other people, you are a Moron.  If you think that Trump cares about the poor, lower classes or common person, you are a Moron.

Trump has according to the Southern Poverty Law Center (America the Trumped) been able to achieve the following in only his first 2 years of holding office:

  • Promoted White Nationalism
  • Slashed Civil Rights Enforcement
  • Created a Deportation Machine
  • Banned Muslims
  • Attacked Voting Rights
  • Shredded LGBT Protections
  • Encouraged Police Abuses
  • Revived Debtor’s Prisons
  • Undermined Public Education
  • Eroded the Rights of Students with Disabilities

I would add to this list:

  • Sanctioned Sexism towards Women
  • Dismantled Environmental Protections
  • Created Greater Income Inequality
  • Placed the USA in a Position of Lower Esteem with other Nations

There are those supporters who believe that Trump has managed to improve the economy (A myth fostered by those with little or no economic education) and those who believe that Trump has helped restore America’s Stature with the rest of the world, another myth.  In fact, the economic recovery started under President Obama and Trump has merely jumped on its tail end.  As for American stature with the rest of the world, we now have the lowest approval rating in recent American history.

“The survey of opinion in 134 countries showed a record collapse in approval for the US role in the world, from 48% under Obama to 30% after one year of Donald Trump – the lowest level Gallup has recorded since beginning its global leadership poll over a decade ago.”

Trump is an unrepentant liar.  The sad part is that his Moronic Supporters believe everything he says.  Anything he does is viewed by his supporters as being great and wonderful.  Most of his supporters are about as simplistic in their thinking as Trump is in his.  No amount of evidence or facts will change the mind of a Trump supporter. They are the Penultimate Morons.  There has never been a category of Morons in history who are more simplistic and myopic in their thinking than a Trump Supporter.

Well, there you have it.  My Seven Categories of Morons.  I sincerely hope that you did not fall into one of my categories above.  But if you did, there is still hope.  You can overcome the Disease of Moronitus by doing the following:

  1. Question everything
  2. Look for evidence to confirm or disconfirm your opinions
  3. Look for opposing viewpoints
  4. Question authorities
  5. Read

I fear that I may be preaching to the choir here.  If so, please feel free to share this blog with anyone you know who may be suffering from Moronitus.  Good Luck. 

Time for Questions:

Why should we challenge our thinking?  What are the limitations of facts and data?  How do we know who or even what to believe?  How can we change our world for the better?  What difference can we make?  Can we make a difference?

Life is just beginning.

“We are in danger of destroying ourselves by our greed and stupidity.  We cannot remain looking inwards at ourselves on a small and increasingly polluted and overcrowded planet.” — Stephen Hawking

 

 

 

Previous Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: