Far from Father's Day today and thinking again about my Dad. He used to recite all kinds of poems and songs, and was reminded about several today as I searched for an old document of jokes. This was a favorite. Take a minute, If you have, to read it - and imagine it in meter, while driving on some long trip... and a smile at the end, from the irony of the story. Happy Saturday!


Ivan Skavinsky Skavar


The sons of the Prophet are brave men and bold
and quite unaccustomed to fear,
But the bravest by far in the ranks of the shah,
Was Abdul Abulbul Amir.


If you wanted a man to encourage the van,
Or harass the foe from the rear,
Storm fort or redoubt, you had only to shout
for Abdul Abulbul Amir.


Now the heroes were plenty and well known to fame
in the troops that were led by the Czar,
And the bravest of these was a man by the name
of Ivan Skavinsky Skavar.


One day this bold Russian, he shouldered his gun
and donned his most truculent sneer,
Downtown he did go where he tred on the sheet
of Abdul Abulbul Amir.


"Young man," quote Abdul,"has life grown so dull
That you wish to end your career?
Vile infidel know, you have trod on the toe
Of Abdul Abulbul Amir.


So take your last look at the sunshine and brook
And send your regrets to the Czar
For by this I imply, you are going to die,
Count Ivan Skavinsky Skavar."


Then this bold Mameluke drew his trusty skibouk,
Singing, "Allah! Il Allah! Al-lah!"
And with murderous intent he ferociously went
for Ivan Skavinsky Skavar.


They parried and thrust, they side-stepped and cussed,
Of blood they spilled a great part;
The philologist blokes, who seldom crack jokes,
Say that hash was first made on the spot.


They fought all that night neath the pale yellow moon;
The din, it was heard from afar,
And huge multitudes came, so great was the fame,
of Abdul and Ivan Skavar.


As Abdul's long knife was extracting the life,
In fact he was shouting, "Huzzah!"
He felt himself struck by that wily Calmuck,
Count Ivan Skavinsky Skavar.


The Sultan drove by in his red-breasted fly,
Expecting the victor to cheer,
But he only drew nigh to hear the last sigh,
Of Abdul Abulbul Amir.


There's a tomb rises up where the Blue Danube rolls,
And graved there in characters clear,
Is, "Stranger, when passing, oh pray for the soul
Of Abdul Abulbul Amir."


A splash in the Black Sea one dark moonless night
Caused ripples to spread wide and far,
It was made by a sack fitting close to the back,
of Ivan Skavinsky Skavar.


A Muscovite maiden her lone vigil keeps,
Neath the light of the cold northern star,


[Now slow for effect]


And the name that she repeats…


as a ghost tugs the sheets…


is Ivan Skavinsky Skavar.

Father's Day

My Dad, who passed abruptly in 1999 at 63, would have had a hard time with the world as it is today. Part of my reasoning is not knowing how he might evolve over 22 additional years, but he was progressive for his time, so I'd like to think he would likely be horrified by some of the backwards steps we've taken - and delight by some of the advancements. I'm less than a decade away from 63 and I'm there myself. 

My parents encouraged my music at a young age and my dad individually did a lot towards that, funding my first electrics, building an amp for me with a rewired stereo (and buying my Fender Princeton when the homemade amp fried my first electric). He bought me and Ibanez - which I still have - and recently worked back into playing shape - and a Les Paul Jr. that was lost in a loan to a family friend (My Buddy, Adam Sachs gifted me a replacement Junior a number of years ago which is happily in use to this day). 

 

My Dad built his Glass studio, pursuing his dreams, from stained glass to lamp work, to classes at Cleveland State and then the Glass Piper, which was a passion driven feat. He pursued it to the exclusion of his own long-term interest. He taught me to follow my passions, but he also taught me to look for balance - which he frequently talked about but discovered a little too late through hard lessons. 

 

I'm incredibly privileged to have my loving family, friends, and life. I'm passionate about them and about guitar, music and writing. All gifts from my parents in one way or another. I'm in frequent awe that I get to live it - lots of good points (certainly some rough and tough spots too).

 

I am fortunate enough to know he loved me - and to have been able to tell him the same - and to have thanked him. I wish he was still here to share in it a bit more. I feel his presence still, in thoughts and actions and in the retelling of his jokes. 

 

I'm also fortunate enough to be a dad, of a wonderful, caring, and talented child. Gabriel, if you're reading, I want you to know I love you and am proud of you. And if you're not hope to catch up with you at some point today. 

 

And to all of those fathers and children of fathers today, take time to think and celebrate - and maybe more than once a year. Happy Father’s Day all.

 

Memorial Day

In memory of those who served and lost their lives. I honor your service and sacrifice – it is beyond anything my thanks is worthy of – but you have it.

I do this in many cases, without honoring the root cause of your death. You did not die, ultimately, because of your bravery and valor. Your sacrifices included saving the lives of your friends. But this was not the cause. Your service, and ultimately life, was likely called into need because of war.

War is not a noble thing. There are no just wars, only intractable positions. Yes, some end up being necessary. WWII is the example I will always use. Stopping the Nazi machine was one of the most important things to ever happen.

The world needed the US in the conflict. It was a battle of good an evil. Many wars before and since have turned out to be for gain – for land, oil and other reasons which hold no justification for the violence that ensued. WWII was a war against Genocide and the potential slavery of the planet. So it was necessary. But even then, War is not noble.

But volunteering to put one’s life on the line in the service of others – in serving and protecting during peacetime and wartime is noble. For those that lost their life in the service of our country, I thank you for your sacrifice and I honor your memory. I am sorry that decisions were made that ended up requiring that sacrifice. I promise to never vote intentionally for those who would squander that sacrifice for gain, for show. It is too great a cost to bear even when the cause is honorable, let alone, when it is war.

Expediency

One of the giant fears I have is the short term, small picture, expedient view our leadership and many Americans have. Everything is in faster cycles now, 6 month product cycles in technology, Wall Street’s preoccupation with the present cycle.

Speed, when it sacrifices process, where process is necessary to the outcome, is a problem. That's the definition of expedience. I don't want expedient. I want efficient (for things) and effective (for people).

Slowness, when process isn't complex or is ubiquitous is also problem.

But it is important we differentiate when each of these is the case. It requires critical thinking.

During Covid, process was highlighted in vaccine approval. They went as fast as they could but they determined essential process, given the risks, and moved forward. It was not expedient, despite the political pressure for expedience. One of the problems is that many Americans saw the political push for expedience and subsequently related that to the vaccine development and approval process, which was not the case.

Something in a similar vein is happening with re-opening. 

There's been a constant push to re-open when the science didn't support it and because it was such a fight for public health a conservative stance by the CDC developed - because any little hint that things were getting better was construed as the ability to abandon public health measures.

The political pressure to allow "no mask" between vaccinated individuals was heavy, but when finally announced was so sudden it seemed like it was expediency, not based in science, but based on buckling to the political pressure, when in fact as part of the conservative stance it was held back until the number of vaccinations started diminishing and the hope was (and is, seeing this is relatively recent) that this would incent additional individuals to vaccinate. That has yet to be seen. 

Expediency occurs for several reasons, most of them at least morally corrupt if not logically;

To produce what looks like due process but skipping the steps to actually be due process in an effort to placate process while r ushing an outcome. Willful indifference to the impact of skipping the steps.
In ignorance of the proper steps - or in oversimplification (intentional or due to misunderstanding) of those steps, skipping due process or involving fewer stakeholders than needed for due process, in order to speed things along.
A wish for something other than reality, which can at times, be slow, painful and a lot of work. Hint: Reality always wins in the end.

There are tons of variations and other reasons, but most of the impedance comes for a wish for speed. Understandable - as human beings, we have an urge for immediate gratification, physically (sex, food, other bodily functions) to economic philosophy, speed is frequently seen as the desirable attribute. 

Our ability to master ourselves is limited and in the face of pressure (in business for instance) gives way to pressure on due process. 

And this folks, is why business cannot dictate things like healthcare, welfare and education. Business will build amazing things and services - which survive just as long as they can resist expedience in development, manufacture, in service. And then, like a show whose ratings have dropped, they are eliminated in favor of some new hope for profit. Problem is people get discarded in that process and that cannot happen in people support systems. 

In people systems, process matters. Nuance matters. And in fact, frequently, speed manners which necessitates things like advanced planning, risk assessment and even, gulp, inventory - all of which push against the expedient.

Stephen Covey said this - and also indicated that you cannot be efficient with people, you need to strive for efficiency with things, effectiveness with people.

Efficiency can also be the enemy in people systems. What seems like a proper paring down to minimum essentials can lock a people system up. People systems frequently need lubrication - like forgiveness, time, second and third chances, a bit more than is expected. 

People systems need to be effective. Which is why government and non-profits are where people systems live. Because their goal is not to be profitable. It’s to be effective.

Which is also why, when we try to run these things like for-profit business, we often fail to deliver - and why those who would rather not spend money on helping people will use examples of inefficiency as reasons to cancel programs altogether. That should not be the default.

Certainly these systems must maintain effectiveness. They need to be thrifty where they can. But if your remove money or any resource without due process, the system can be caused to be ineffective or to fail altogether. 

We should look at people systems with an eye for the effective, with a nod to efficiency and completely eliminating expedience. And even in business, when looking from an HR perspective, we should use this as at least one perspective, along with efficiency.

We have to make sure not to confuse expedience with effective or efficient. It is neither - it is an illusion of both, without the good result.

Cancel Culture

Cancel Culture is a term that is used by propagandists to dismiss any change in the current cultural narrative they don't agree with.

Those propagandists and people who either choose to ignore others or are unaware, tend to state that concerns raised about cultural issues are just groups or individuals being offended, unreasonably or are taking advantage of outrage for personal recognition or gain.

But what using a term - a label like "Cancel Culture" or "Woke" does is ignore the reason people are asking for help, removal, apology, or retraction. It generally isn't just because they find something offensive. It's because it perpetuates a cultural "norm" that is harmful to members of our mutual culture.

Beyond being dismissive - labels like this moves the focus from the issue at hand to the opposite of your requested action, skipping the issue altogether.

A person of color asking the state they live in to remove the confederate flag from their statehouse brings cries of cancellation. Of "Woke" culture trying to cancel (erase) history. It shifts the emphasis from the person who has called out the inappropriate and makes the offender appear to be a victim. Which they clearly are not. It's used to emphasize a divide, to fight change.

The idea doesn't even have to be ethnic, sexual preference, religion, age or gender oriented - that I want others to wear masks in public places or get vaccinated until determined by the CDC they are not needed is not centered in my wish to take away someone's "Freedom" or cancel them. It's rooted in the idea that the science shows it reduces the danger and mortality rate of this disease.

Some pundits are saying that we are trying to change to fast - that "woke culture" (I hate this term too) will result in the alienation of half of the country. But guess what…

… this has been a tune that's been played for 100 years or more. Labels have been used to propagandize change points and make the offenders look like victims for a long time.

White people, being called racists because they are racists, hide behind the label of victim because immigrants and people of color are generalized as violent criminals.

Straight people persecuting LGBTQ+ persons hide behind the label of religious freedom, claiming to be victims, having to accept these people as human and equal.

The terms Cancel Culture and Woke Culture generalize and twist in this same way. They make sure the issue itself isn't dealt with. They promote stagnation. And this is where freedom actually gets subjugated. This is where it gets lost. When we fail to recognize real boundaries and infringe upon others we fail to recognize "me first" as the tool of hate and oppression it is.

This is the Orwellian truth from 1984. Not someone forcing you to wear a mask. But someone getting you to think you're a victim and actively hate those asking for change. This is drinking victory gin and ignoring the dreams and ambitions of whole groups of people, because they threaten to change us.

The only way we become better is to recognize our differences and acknowledge that some things we do might not be good for others - and that in agreeing to live in society. our freedoms are limited to the exact point before we infringe upon others freedoms. When we choose to acknowledge each other, we are all free.

America First is code for "my right to hate"

The Republican Party's America First "Anglo Saxon" platform is code for "my right to hate". 

We live in a nation that is 70% white, and is based in the idea that "All men are created equal". We've known in the past that this is an ideal and certainly not prompted in it's entirety by even the individuals that composed the idea.

But that's the thing. Ideals, while not reality until they are, are goals held out to understand where we need to be. In this case, we need to acknowledge that this ideal comes with the idea of diversity built in. It does not say "All white men are created equal". It ignores race. It ignores sex (although even that took a long time for us to acknowledge). It ignores sexual preference, gender identity, age, religion or any other differentiator under the sun.

So it's sad that we see yet again, a "Conservative" (in quotes because real conservatives, who value our constitutional ideals, don't shrug off the meaning) are pushing an idea that the white man is being attacked by foreigners, by other races and religions, merely by their existing in this country. A country that already sees our minorities underprivileged and dying at much higher rates, imprisoned at hire rates, impoverished and under the thumb of the white majority.

Look - I'm a white male. I have come to terms with the privilege I have and understand that I don't have the same struggles as others with different color skin, a different sex, a different orientation or religion. Yes, I still have struggles (every human does) but I can understand that mine are not rooted in someone equal trying to be understood that way by a society that doesn't.

This "America first caucus" is a fear driven narrative, counting on the idea that Americans are not self aware. It will speak of white people being "canceled" by narratives of diversity. It will speak of "religion" being under attack by not allowing prayer in schools, it will speak of "equality" already being achieved and simultaneously try to play minorities out as leeches and criminals, as inferior and present equal opportunity initiatives as "reverse discrimination". It will push the false narrative that opportunity for others takes away opportunity from "us".

It is another example of a hate narrative and a very old set of arguments for keeping others under the thumb. And it needs to be stopped. It needs to be exposed. And these people need to be seen for the evil they are. And they are.

They are the Joseph McCarthy's, Nazi's, KKK's of the world. They are wrong. The last administration was evil and tiring - the propaganda and hate. This is an attempt to extend that mission.

Our great opportunity as privileged society is to get where we are going by helping others get where they are going, understanding our success as a country is based on the success of all of our people, not the "majority".

We have to do better. Their message will resonate with some, perhaps even many. We need to tear away the propaganda and expose the devil that drives the narrative. We need to elect representatives that value everyone. We need to teach our children to value their fellow humans. We need to continue to fight.

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/gop-s-new-america-first-caucus-follows-some-blatantly-white-n1264361?icid=msd_topgrid

We need to stop pretending voter suppression is an opinon.

A little less sensationalism and a little more straight talk. A little simplification of process and a less money. Our participative democratic process needs reform. Because it’s designed to not allow participation.

 

A brief disclaimer: When I talk about Republicans in this piece, I am talking about politicians – to be clear, I’m not talking about individuals who tie themselves to the party, unless they support gerrymandering, racism and white supremacy. So if you’re a Republican and an un-biased, good human, please don’t feel I’m talking about you.

 

~~~

 

One of the problems with the media is the sensationalized handling of information. Another is the constant “if the facts prove out” approach to things where the facts are already there. 

 

Sensationalism sells. But it’s overamplification ends up obliterating important aspects of the information or even other stories. And the treatment of issues like racism as “yet to be proven” is troubling.

 

We consider, by law, individuals as innocent until proven guilty, which is fair. There are lawyers and an absolute chance to tell the story in front of as reasonably an impartial audience as can be found.

 

I think that should be the case in media handling of news. But when an issue like a Republican State Assembly closing 50% of the voting centers in minority communities only, just before a vote and the news says it “might be done to suppress minority voting” when there are no ifs about it. Objectivity is valuable when there is a real question.

 

Certainly, some will start down the road of “it’s a matter of opinion” and therefore, is still subject to a brand-new inquiry into proof. But that is a fallacy – the issue is not brand new, in fact these practices trend back to the post-Civil War south.

 

Additionally, Republican politicians and operatives have already confirmed suppression, gerrymandering and intimidation as techniques they use routinely. This isn’t a question. It’s fact. So why do we – and the media, treat something that is in plain sight as yet to be proven, let alone let the GOP go on about voter fraud as if it is something that really exists – sensationalized to the point where a large number of people are convinced that it – not the oppression of minorities, is a problem. That the election was thrown by illegitimate votes, when the facts reveal that suppression, through a number of means, not fraud, is our biggest voting issue.

 

The problem is complex. The mainstream media, in an effort to remain objective, treat these facts as tentative, when they’re not. The biased media factories for the right generate propaganda to spin the opposite (there’s so much voter fraud, the election isn’t valid” without any proof and the voice of reason is canceled because it’s speaking at a normal volume. 

 

Closing voting centers, limiting registration (making college or church assisted registration illegal, for instance), requiring lengthy and costly processes for burden of proof of identity (if your state requires everyone to have an official ID then your state should be funding a push to get that done for every resident) – any attempt to limit someone’s legitimate right to vote is in all ways anti-democracy. Voting should not be a middle class and up privilege. It should not be a white privilege.  By making it expensive either in time spent away from work or in fees or in transportation, we turn it into a privileged activity. 

 

Making registration easier doesn’t improve the chance of fraud. It just improves the number of ways a person can prove they are who they say they are. And, if you think identify theft, which is monetarily motivated, not politically is a big problem in your state, you should be looking for ways to help people prove their identity, not make it more daunting a process. If a teenager can get a credit card, the elderly, the poor should be able to get state identification without having to take off of work, without having to stand in line for hours, without having to go to a central office, without having to pay a large fee – and without it taking weeks or months.

 

There are also issues with campaign funding – Citizens United essentially allowed unlimited campaign financing and limited accountability. We need legislation that reduces third party money in the game and allows voters voices to once again be amplified at least on par and hopefully above those of business and special interests. 

 

Right now, lies can be sensationalized and pushed above the truth, through media – and those purveyors – from television to Social Media have largely claimed that they must remain objective and allow and equal voice for “opinions” – because those opinions are paying customers. But there needs to be accountability – where does the money come from and what is the agenda behind it - and there needs to be a limit on what can be spent to push a lie.

 

Which is why HR1, the “For the people act” is so important. It is setting at least some of this to right. Every Republican politician in the house of representatives voted against it. Because even though it is the right thing to do for our representative democracy, it reduces their ability to win. And here’s my advice to them:

 

If you cannot win on your platform – on the basis of what you plan to do, then maybe you should change that plan. If you win using gerrymandering and counting on voters not showing to the polls, you are not representing the will of the people. You are in fact trying to subvert it.

 

If you cannot successfully and convincingly argue your point, then either you are not a good proponent, or your point is invalid or non-inclusive. 

 

Those are rules both parties, in a level field have to play to. Forget party. If you have good, honest ideas that the people subscribe to, and you can effectively represent your voters, then you should be elected. It shouldn’t be up to the $$ spent or the twisting of facts or the moving of lines to the improving of party outcomes. 

 

So – tell your Senators that HR1 needs to be passed. It does not ignore the minority – not if their ideas are valid. It helps us ignore those that would sell our democracy for money and power.

 

*Aside from the link to HR1 the following are informational and a sample of articles – there is exhaustive evidence of voter suppression and racism in the process. 

 

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1/text

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/03/us/politics/house-voting-rights-bill.html

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/leaked-audio-trump-adviser-republicans-rely-voter-suppression-justin-clark-2019-12

 

https://www.teenvogue.com/story/for-the-people-act-voter-suppression-bills

 

https://www.npr.org/2018/10/23/659784277/republican-voter-suppression-efforts-are-targeting-minorities-journalist-says

 

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-campaign-2020-voter-suppression-consent-decree-1028988/

 

Ahmir

 This young man I knew lost his life last night - Ahmir Tuli was my next door neighbor along with his mother, Preeti, who is a neighbor and a friend. We met when he was a youngster and I’d watched him grow up. He was a good kid. Still a teen in the true sense but kind, laughing and considerate, Smart and learning the world

He was shot in the head by a man who wasn’t permitted to carry a gun anymore, who had been thrown out of Preeti’s restaurant for arguing with other customers, and came back, argued with him and shot him in the head.

He was his mother’s pride and she loves him more than any teenager can understand. Our hearts break for him and for her, her loss and her family’s loss. 

The senselessness of his murder leaves me in shock. Impossible to fathom how a single bad human can in an instant change the world for him and his family so ruthlessly, so impossible to fathom. I can only slightly understand the true impact of the loss. And one hopes they catch the murderer, who is known. And he hopefully pays for his crime. But it doesn’t bring Ahmir back. 

I ask that you leave condolences for his Mom and family, if you leave condolences. I felt the need to write about this but it’s not about me. I’d like to go on a diatribe about guns and who should have them. I’d like to truly scream and convey my anger. Another time.

He didn’t deserve this. Nobody does, but he especially didn’t. His Mom didn’t deserve this. Nobody does, but especially not her. 

We need to love each other, not this. I’m a private person religiously, but my prayer for him and his mother and family are public tonight. May they find peace and think of him with love and eventually without so much grief. And in the meantime, may they find comfort in each other and their faith.

The Internal Mirror

Self examination is not an easy process. In fact, it's one of the harder things an individual can go through, even if your actions line up well with your convictions. 

Purely speculative on my part, however, is the idea that politicians in general do not spend time looking inside in regards to their choices versus convictions when they don't line up. And there's too little questioning of why those convictions are held in the first place.

Because it's painful to see that some things you believe, turn out to be seeds you didn't plant. They may have been planted by parents or your cultural upbringing. They may be Pavlovian responses to your education or bullying. They may have been drummed in by a preacher or may be a reaction to an abuse.

To step back and ask yourself - why do I think this way is difficult and legitimate. It may be better to look at these things a little at a time. But it's worth the look. 

Part of the anti-intellectual argument is that Universities produce liberals. I'll argue that Universities are intended to induce inspection and introspect, to teach critical thinking - and yes, the produce "liberals" because when you look at humanity through a broader lens, you tend to find you are not so important in the scheme of things and that wider views really do tend to provide greater perspective. Learning is changing yourself.

Examples:

If you think that all folks on public assistance, for instance, are lazy, why is that? The facts don't support that generalization. Empirical evidence in some cases does - and those are used to support the points of view of people with agendas, good or bad. But if you think this, examining why you think this may lead you to a better understanding of yourself - and potentially a re-scripting of this belief, if you dig into the facts (and depends on finding good information, rather than propaganda).

Another: Pro-life vs Pro-choice - for some this is a religious choice, some ethical, but again, you need to look inside to understand why you feel like you do. My Journey with this question started with my upbringing and was furthered by my experience and understanding others thoughts and ideas about this. Also, see if you can separate the arguments in your mind. Pro-choice is not the same as Pro-abortion. And Pro-life is not the same as Humanitarianism or Universalism. Oversimplification of arguments allows misalignment between your convictions and what you espouse. I'm not judging you , just suggesting introspection, whatever your belief.

The ability to examine , understand and potentially change our point of view is directly proportional to caring about how we impact others in the world.  Many, many people choose not to ever do this and offhand, it's easy to understand why. It makes it easier to hold belief even in the face of evidence to the contrary. But there are enough of us who will self examine - I just wish there were more.

And if I sound like people who do this and are able to learn are better than others, I will say this;

One is not better than someone else in the grand scheme. We are created equal.  We all deserve to pursue life, liberty and happiness. If you are able to learn and adapt you can better serve your own self and others. "Am I my brother's keeper?" Cain famously said. Well, yes, in the sense that we all impact each other. 

And that does not mean that a person that self examines is better than someone else - we are all still imperfect - and will be. That individual is just more likely to be self fulfilled and be able to help others do the same, while respecting the boundaries of human rights.

Is that better? Well, maybe. I respect that person more. They respect others more and subsequently add more value to the community, the country and the planet.

and learning. I've read anti-intellectual articles accusing colleges of producing "liberals". Education is intended to cause you to question. That process produces thinking and self examination which may separate a person from their scripted understanding. That's not political. It's growth. It's exposure to points of view, but ultimately it is the consumers choice to decide what to think. The experience of questioning is how mankind has continued to survive and get ahead. 

But fundamentally it still comes back to equality.  We are. Our experiences are different and our contributions and lives are different. So in a sense, the value is that we give back to others, in whatever way we can - as well as what we do for ourselves. It's in that balance, which ebbs and flows, that our humanity lives and hopefully flourishes. Exercising it is the key to maintaining it. 

What I want is accountability in Congress

Regardless which house, which party, I want them free from special interest $$ and influence. All of them. NRA, OIL, Pharma, Insurance, Agra, Wall Street.  Business does need a voice, but right now they control.

Congress can have panels to solicit opinion from business, from individuals. No campaign contributions above individual levels (like the old $2500). None. I want them free of agendas that hurt our health, destroy our environment. 

There are 25 (or 100, or 1000) ways to solve a problem. We need to consider all ideas and find those that meet these needs. But the laws themselves need to be authored and vetted by accountable representatives and their staff. Legislation that isn't written by lawmakers should not make it to congress. 

No business should sponsor onboarding for Congresspersons (they do now). Training congresspersons should be funded by the American people and trained in an unbiased fashion to understand congressional procedure.

Campaigns should be limited to 4 weeks prior to an election, preparations limited to 6 weeks before that. Most members of the house spend half their term campaigning for their next term. There should be a cap on the $$ they can spend, per capita of their state population on advertisements and outside interests should not be allowed to fund political campaigns.

We need campaign reform. If we take the money out of politics we remove a lot of the impotence to push agendas that are contrary to the well being of the Republic.

Inaugural Thoughts

Today I celebrate the inauguration of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. It marks the spring coming out  of our struggle for the past four years. It marks a return of sanity, human rights and the first female and minority Vice President. No small thing.

I do not celebrate the leaving of Trump. It’s welcome relief, without doubt, but it feels like it’s too serious an occasion to dance on a grave - partially because I mourn the death and destruction he left in his wake, partially to mourn former brothers and sisters who succumbed to the propaganda and turned on their fellow human. I cannot celebrate anything close to an end while their intolerance and Ill will still pushes the agenda, sits in shadows today licking wounds, looking for ways to return that sickness to power.

I’m not looking to rub salt into wounds. I’m looking to find ways to help the good led astray to find their way back - truly back, to reason. I don’t need or want revenge but I’m not giving amnesty - I need people to live with what they supported in the knowledge it was wrong. I’m looking to make sure that those who persist cannot find their way into power. Accountability must win the day. And then we need to focus on ourselves.

At the base problem is the whole idea that it’s unfair to people who struggled to ease struggle for others (in a way that impacts their money or time or sense of fairness), to pay it forward. We have to get over fairness- not everybody finds the same life and it’s not only ok to have a society where part of our contribution goes to someone other than ourselves and our companies - we improve our own lives when we improve the world, even if it impedes our struggle for self achievement. We instead work for equality - everybody has an equal chance - and at the base can eat, have shelter, live and love. We remove the impediments of discrimination and poverty.

This isn’t asking for anything we don’t already know is right. Every religion in the world proposes this. But we have a long, long way to go - farther than we did 4 years ago.

So - I celebrate the change, the good. I celebrate the new and welcome relief. I support the way of human rights, as I’ve always supported and I hope for my fellow humans, that we see clearly that our future is not independent from one another. Regardless of where your head is at, reality throws us together. Embrace it and know your success and the Success of the human race is one in the same. Our circumstances are not always the same, but our lives are inexorably intertwined.

Happy Inauguration day - in the spirit of the day, we’re just getting started. 

Peace

Martin Luther King Jr. understood that violence precipitates non-accord. You cannot violently seek peace and expect lasting peace as a result. 

Look at the middle east. 

Look at Kashmir.

And on and on.

Having outlined many times, the steps to non-violence as correcting an issue, his first steps were to gather facts to show injustice exists.

In the case of racial inequality this is unfortunately easy. Less easy today - we don’t have racist signs up in most businesses, we don’t have laws promoting segregation. But we still have black people dying at the hands of the establishment, which is, even if strictly by populace, 70% white.

We cannot effect change with violence. Our protesting must be disciplined and well documented. We need to purge those who would do violence from the protest, by organizing, and purifying for our cause. Those that cannot hold back, cannot take being hit and arrested need to be kindly thanked for their passion, but sent home. Otherwise we have no moral ground from which to stand. 

Dr. King had to deal with mis-information too. Racists and the KKK pushed a hate campaign that has had a lasting effect on so many Americans - hate that continues to exist today. Hate that has been fed recently and renewed through propaganda.

But violence will not end that hate. Violence will not win their cause. It will only beget more hate. And lives are lost - and not until the body count and pain get to be enough does the process de-escalate, sometimes, and allow another chance at peace, but now with battle scars and hate boiling in the background. 

Education, patience, perseverance and non-violence are the only way we are going to get to a lasting peace. 

It’s hard to convince a nation of gun owners, of rugged independent scripting, of national heritage rooted in our own self image of defying odds. Our ancestors did that to a large extent so we don’t have to. 

What we have to defy is misinformation. Our life and death struggle today, in this rich country will be to recognize when we’ve been lied to and when we’re being manipulated and to stop the manipulators.  It’s a mental struggle. It’s an economic struggle (there is money behind misinformation, frequently). It requires significant thinking. It requires education. It requires discipline. It requires critical thinking. It requires discussion. 

Before we ever get to have our voices heard we have to be able to show, without a doubt, that injustice has occurred and then we get to start negotiations. Dr. King followed Gandhi. We need to follow their example if we are to get to a meaningful next point. We need new laws that help press the telling of truths. We need places for people to air grievances and we also need people who are grieving to be open to having their ideas challenged for truth. It’s easy to distract majorities from looking at system oppression of a minority by telling the majority they are the ones who are being oppressed. Classic misdirection. We fall for it often.

As I experience my privileged life - which I indeed worked and work hard for, but is easily understood to be privileged (one only has to look at oneself and understand if you have food, shelter, things you enjoy) - I have to step back to continuously understand that and contextualize myself. 

Only then can I start helping others think about how to change society so that everyone enjoys their right to love, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Dr. King is integral in all of it and his legacy and influence have weighed on my mind for a number of years now, prompting change in who I am and how I perceive my fellow humans. I hope he has a similar impact on you.

“The past is prophetic in that it asserts loudly that wars are poor chisels for carving out peaceful tomorrows”. Martin Luther King, Jr.

https://soundcloud.com/tobias-venar/peace

Remember who we are talking about.

Mitch McConnell, according to sources close to him, wants Donald Trump removed from the Republican party. This I don’t doubt.

Trump is a distraction for the Republican party. He’s too divisive to carry out a lasting agenda.He bashed through the walls but now he and his children have announced the Republican party doesn’t belong to the Republicans anymore - it’s the party of Trump (they have literally said this).

No vote for conviction in the senate will take place before Biden is in office because Republicans would have to take responsibility for removing this president from power along with Democrats. He claims he’s not sure how he will vote, but the President has committed impeachable offenses. 

If he waits until Dems have the majority, he gets - the removal of Trump and the possibility of him running in the future - so help in extricating him from the party, and he gets to blame Democrats since they will hold the majority. That will, in his hopes, distract the base and allow them to still consider themselves Republican (rather than shatter into the Trump Party and the Republican party - if that happens, they have no chance in the foreseeable future to control power.

He’s pretending he could lead Republicans to convict the President so he can get the Dems onboard. And I wish I could believe in good intentions, except I remember who we are talking about. 

This is an attempt to get what he wants (control of the Republican party, with the Trump base, more or less intact, without responsibility - he can point at Trump, but more importantly, he can point at hated Democrats. 

This is also why Dems are pushing for this to happen now, while Republicans still hold some political responsibility - Trump won’t be convicted with the current majority unless they have a hand in it.

I think our strategy needs to be clear. We need to make sure either it happens right away, or McConnell’s strategy is clearly known and understood by the Trump base. He cannot succeed if Trump supporters abandon him. 

Yes, Dems will have to make sure the country is safe (at least in this way) once again at political expense. But we don’t need to hand the keys to Mitch willingly to try to carry out legislation in a way that eventually concatenates Trumpian demolition of things like the EPA, The Post Office, Voters rights into law.

Not only do we need to remove Trump, we need to reign in the radical Republicans and help them get back to being true conservatives and moderates. People who have their different agenda but have America, not just themselves, truly at heart.

Free speech is not freedom from accountability.

Politicians like a microphone, a megaphone, a bully pulpit (a phrase coined by Teddy Roosevelt). How do I know?

For several years I had the joy of being a member of a band - The Blues Devils, here in Pittsburgh that started by playing Democratic party fundraisers called "Blues for Blues" and in the course of those events (we played many others too) there would come time in the evening for the guests of honor to talk.

Once the Microphone was handed to a politician, we knew the evening, musically was either over or it was going to be a long time before we got it back.

Not that we didn't want to here what these folks had to say. Just saying, politicians are attracted to situations where they can speak.

To me, this explains why some world leaders have decried the twitter ban of the President. Some have said it should be a public vote. Some have said big tech needs to be regulated rather than having their own rules.

For me, taking that particular microphone away, when the person is using the platform in a manipulative, dangerous way - and has done so multiple times - well, it's perfectly OK.

They still have mechanisms to speak to everyone in the country. Mechanisms, like a press room, that have more accountability - they have to answer tough questions, from multiple angles.

We should be worried when these folks get unlimited access to platforms to deliver messages. Where there is no accountability for what is said.

Free speech says you say what you feel. You have that right. But free speech is not free from consequences. If you incite people to violence, if you do things that smack of sedition, you have to be prepared to deal with the seeds you have sown.

It is why free speech can exist. We think about what we are going to say, how it will effect people. We weigh what it will do and mean. If you don't, then you are living in a self centered universe that makes everyone else less important - that person is a sociopath at the least. Giving sociopaths unlimited voice is a tremendous mistake. There needs to be checks and balances - accountability - for how they move the public, because their moral self won't provide restraint.

Not all politicians are sociopaths. But all of them are attracted to the Bully Pulpit, in a way similar to an alcoholic looking for a drink. It's OK to cut them off and send them home to sleep it off. It will keep them from driving drunk. They'll get to speak another day.

I believe social media needs to be moderated. And I do think we can come to some legal ways to do that - but it cannot be in the hands of the politicians and likely should not be left in the hands of the general public.

Tech companies having individual choice allows us, at this point, a check and balance. Like our three branches of government, it provides accountability. Until we figure out a way to regulate without giving direct control to the politicians, it's protection we need to preserve.

Addressing the propaganda

The following was posted by a well intentioned friend. This piece of propaganda below is actually crafted to make it seem like we must accept our current condition or make a win/lose decision for our country. I’m going to address these point by point - my comments follow **, the paragraphs without them are the originals. 

From a Friend:

I didn’t write this but it needs to be shared. 

"This morning, I realized that everything is about to change. No matter how I vote, no matter what I say, lives are never going to be the same. ** True enough. That’s the case every day in a changing world.

I have been confused by the hostility of friends. I look at people I have known all my life so hate-filled that they agree with opinions they would never express as their own. I think that I may well have entered the Twilight Zone. 

** There is a lot of animosity amongst us - it has to do with the approach we take to humanity. And a lot of these views have been repressed by wanting to “fit in” or “not get political”. But we are past a time when we can turn blind eyes. A difference of opinion over what clothes we like is not the same as our difference in how minorities, LGBTQ+, people of non-christian faith and  immigrants are treated - for instance.

They are so filled with hatred for one man that they are willing to sell their own country away.  

** Here is where reality really departs. Democrats views are not for hatred of Trump. The hatred of Trump comes from viewpoints he is enabling - but are coming from people that are trying to control outcomes to maintain racism, to maintain class gaps, to make the wealthy wealthier and keep the poor in their place. The viewpoint uses religion as a seperator rather than following the principles of religion. Please indulge me for a couple of minutes through the rest of these comments.

**The country is being sold away by the Republicans as we speak. They are disassembling the government and society that Franklin Roosevelt helped initiate in the forties. The rich and the powerful know that you cannot have a well educated, well maintained middle class and be able to keep cheap sources of labor and low taxes on the rich. They view the common man as a leach - and I’m not just talking about the poor. I’m talking about people demanding clean air and safe drinking water. About demanding affordable health care. 

You can't justify this insanity. We have become a nation that has lost its collective mind.

** What insanity? People demanding racial justice? Health care? A common set of laws that works for equality? The protests you see are the effect of decades of repression and systems that are left to management by the greedy.  Fantastic profits can be made without abandoning the public good. It’s only when you subvert the public good for more profit that you get what we have.

We see other countries going Socialist and collapsing, but it seems like a great plan to us.

** Socialisms and Democracies both succeed and fail. But nothing has been proposed to socialize our government. Universal healthcare is an idea that has been used in socialisms but is not socialist itself. We do this in business all the time. My company insures itself, cutting out the middleman and taking on it’s own risk in order to keep costs low. They do this by cutting out some of the profit. That’s what universal health care proposes - same doctors, just a payment mechanism that says we don’t make money off of the management of the payments.

Somehow it’s un-American for the census to count how many Americans are in America.

** It is un-American to only count Americans and ignore the fact that we have a population of legal immigrants - and some illegals. Regardless, they are humans and we need to plan with everyone in mind. The fear is that the information is used to only consider citizens and then we have a system that is built for oppression.

People who say there is no such thing as gender are demanding a female President.

** Nobody says there is no such thing as gender. What they are saying is that gender is more complex than just a physical body. There’s a large part of the population that understands that those that are in a body other than the physical gender they identify with are treated as a second class - are forced into the shadows. This is called gender identity. The same concerns are there for secual preference. These are part of a person's identity and they should not be discriminated against based on who they are.

Universities that advocate equality, discriminate against Asian-Americans in favor of African-Americans. 

** There can be instances of problems with rules we put in place to work towards equality. They have to be fixed. Nobody in the Democratic world is advocating discrimination.

Criminals are caught-and-released to hurt more people, but stopping them is bad because it's a violation of THEIR rights.

** We can have law enforcement without abuse, without murder. Nobody argues against stopping criminals, but we do maintain laws to make sure people are considered innocent until proven guilty - and that includes treating them humanely - even after they are incarcerated. We also know that many are imprisoned for non-violent crime - like smoking Marijuana and that these and other non-violent offenders can be released safely and where needed, included in programs that help them be productive members of society.

A victim is held responsible for defending themselves from a Criminal and the criminal is then considered the victim. 

** We have prosecutors who are advocates for victims. They are not left defending themselves - this is clearly a lie. We appoint lawyers to defend criminals that cannot defend themselves because they are considered innocent until proven guilty. This is a justice system that we developed over centuries. It is not perfect and is subject to racism and other issues - which we continue to work to correct. 

People who have never owned slaves should pay slavery reparations to people who have never been slaves.

**Reparations are a complex issue. And although it’s been discussed, nobody so far has been made to pay reparations. But just because you personal have not owned slaves doesn’t mean these people and families haven’t been affected. This holds true for slaves - it holds true for native americans. It is only a discussion right now and we should reflect on and discuss how to best address the sins of the past.

After legislating gender, if a dude pretends to be a woman, you are required to pretend with him.

** This is incredibly insensitive and wrong. Transsexuals are not “Dudes pretending to be women”. They are people that consider themselves misgendered. There are many aspects to this but to reduce it to this is to say “I don’t care about who you are”. And that is not who we are.

It was cool for Joe Biden to "blackmail" the President of Ukraine, but it’s an impeachable offense if Donald Trump inquiries about it.

** This is a lie. Read about what Biden did. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/10/us/politics/joe-biden-ukraine.html

People who have never been to college should pay the debts of college students who took out huge loans for their choice and their degrees.

** Public education is the bedrock of a democracy and society has evolved to a point where a k-12 education no longer guarantees a job. Many countries provide college education for all that are interested and able to meet the academic standards. In most cases doctorates and other programs after that are privately funded. In regards to loan forgiveness - we need to understand that we need doctors, for instance, more than ever and that there are vast disparities in what it costs to get a medical education and what it now pays (while $80k a year seems like an excellent starting salary, if you have to pay $400k to get that education, spend and additional 6 years in school, with interest, that becomes close to a million dollars which might take that person 20 years to pay off. We need to get to a situation where education is reasonable. And yes, we fund education for all because it improves the conditions we all live in. Education is a cornerstone of civilization.

Immigrants with tuberculosis and polio are welcome, but you’d better be able to prove your dog is vaccinated.

** Come on. This is a false comparison and a lie. Yes, your dog needs to be vaccinated. People come to this country for healthcare and we vaccinate against polio and tuberculosis here - not everyone has that luxury - but we can still treat people. These are very few. In general, we don’t let people in this country with know communicable issues. 

Irish doctors and German engineers who want to immigrate to the US must go through a rigorous vetting process, but any illiterate gang-bangers who jump the southern fence are welcomed.

** illegal immigration is a reality. But to portray south of the border immigrants as gang bangers is clearly a racist trope and we need to understand how to work with the situation. The doctors and engineers, etc… who are going through rigorous processes are being subjected to this to ensure they’re not taking our high paying jobs without bringing a unique skill that is needed. We do need immigration reform, but it needs to come in human forms. An illegal immigrant is still a human, first and foremost and we recognize human rights in our constitution. And this statement is racist.

$5 billion for border security is too expensive, but $1.5 trillion for “free” health care for illegal immigrants is not.

** I could make the same comparison of 750 trillion in military spending and 1.5 trillion for healthcare for all of our people. It’s a false comparison. We could do both if it made sense - but walls will not prevent illegal immigration. It will actually make it into a less human situation than it already is. It will force people to live through torture and get involved in human trafficking, which the Republicans claim to be against.

If you cheat to get into college you go to prison, but if you cheat to get into the country you go to college for free.

** this is false. We should prosecute those who fraudulently bribe their way into schools, but the federal government does not offer funding or scholarships for undocumented  immigrants. There are some private scholarships for this - but there are few.

And, pointing out all this hypocrisy somehow makes us "racists"!

** The claims of racism come from the efforts that have been made to discount discrimination, to suppress voting in communities with higher minority populations. Racism because look at the statement above “Irish doctors and German engineers who want to immigrate to the US must go through a rigorous vetting process, but any illiterate gang-bangers who jump the southern fence ...” portrays people from Mexico and central/South America as “Gang Bangers”. That’s racism.

Nothing makes sense anymore, no values, no morals, no civility.

** How can we be civil when you are trying to enforce laws that separate families, that allow the poor to starve, that put white lives over minority lives, that discount people’s fundamental identities, who the love, how they love, work to keep them poor and uneducated, deny basic human rights. There are values. Human values. There are morals, but they are secular so they can be applied to all people, from every religion. People need to be held as equals - which we still don’t do and see repeated attacks on rights of women, minorities, those with alternate sexuality, gender identity, religious beliefs.

We are clearly living in an upside-down world where right is wrong and wrong is right, where moral is immoral and immoral is moral, where good is evil and evil is good, where killing murderers is wrong, but killing innocent babies is right.

** This is an Orwellian misrepresentation and false equivalents. In order to be part of our world, our laws need to be secular. They cannot follow a particular religion and your morality is tied up in your religion in terms of the finer point. Abortion has always been a trigger point. So is capital punishment. Those fall into a Woman’s choice for their body and human rights respectively. It’s not upside down because not everyone feels the same way about these things. That is why there is no pro-abortion standpoint. It’s pro-choice - each person decides for themselves. When life starts is a religious and scientific arguement. Most folks that are against capital punishment are against it because it is dealing with a human life that has been confirmed and we have an imperfect justice system where mistakes are made. So we say we don’t kill people - where there is concern we lock them up for life. But it’s again, not upside down - it’s just complex and requires each person to think about what it means.

Wake up America. The great unsinkable ship Titanic America has hit an iceberg, is taking on water and sinking fast.

**Bullshit. Wake up America - we have a diverse population that needs to able to pursue life and liberty without having to worry about someone persecuting them for the color of their skin, their religion, gender identity, sexuality, age, country of origin. It says that even criminals in our country get a fair trial and that we welcome people from all cultures - including the tired and poor into our shores. It means we take care of everyone - nobody’s starves and people don’t die because they cannot afford medical attention.

**This country isn’t going down. It’s working and changing, as our forefathers intended to constantly become a better version of itself. We only see setback when 

Self centered people believe the scarcity myth and think that someone always has to lose in order to win - or that their winning means have to oppress another.

**Our freedoms depend on our understanding our rights and privileges stop as soon as they infringe on others - not offering formalized prayer in schools isn’t prevent schoolchildren from praying. It’s not forcing them to pray to a god they don’t worship. It’s not religious discrimination. The twisting of words, as above, to make decency seem like madness are exactly what Democrats are fighting. 

Copied and pasted. I suggest you do the same!

** sure, feel free to send with my annotations. Thanks.