End of The Tunnel or the Train

Republicans who represent what used to be the GOP are declining to seek re-nomination for their Congressional seats. Senator Bob Corker of Tennessee and, today, Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona have both announced they will not seek to hold their seats. I won't try to pretend that I was often on the same side of issues with them but they are people that one can respect even if there are differences. These days the rage is to not only be contrary to but to be all disrespectful about it while calling people derogatory names that defy common knowledge. The other day I had to ask just what a

snowflake is. I figured it couldn't be good but just how disrespectful it is surprised me. The same goes for the epithet “libtard.” I figured that one out but it is disgusting. I don't mean to say that I am above a good euphemism from time to time but when referring to the opposition I will use the term “reactionary” or “right wing” but I have to admit they don't carry the same load of degradation as those other terms.

Senator Flake gave an eloquent speech to announce his intentions and he did not mince his words leaving little doubt as to exactly what he felt about our leader and those who support him in his

disrespectful way of communication. I am awaiting news coverage to hear the latest from tweet central concerning this matter. Senators, Flake, McCain and Corker are becoming more emboldened. Not finding it necessary to cater to the strange proclivities of some of the electorate is liberating indeed. Senator McCain is likely to be set free by another means and he seems willing to joust with the devil before yielding to the inevitable. I say God bless them.

We have spent what seems to be an eternity awaiting the rising of the loyal opposition to reclaim its just place in the hierarchy of political discourse. The mutiny that has seized power within the GOP has recently overcome us. It has been stalking our halls of power for decades funded by obscenely wealthy white men who want nothing less than domination of all that they survey. They view any concession made out of compassion or general good will to be a sign of weakness and detrimental to the hegemony of the United States. Our leader believes that any deal made must not be equally advantageous but must always provide a superior benefit to our country. This is not how we became a great nation that professes to not seek empire but strives for an equitable world in which all are given the opportunity to rise to their gifts.

There are a lot of people whose desire it is to toss out the baby with the bath water and do away with the existing political parties and toss incumbents out of Congress. Drain the swamp, if you will. That is a misguided desire and ignores our responsibility to seek change and improvement within

ourselves to repair a damaged political system. Can they really believe that by installing new people without the electorate itself living up to its charge will result in something better? What it seems that people want is some form of fascism to dictate whatever result they deem proper to be enforced. I despair sometimes that we may not be smart enough to rule ourselves but I am yet committed to that principle because anything else is demonstrably worse.

It is my earnest hope that the actions of these Senators will foster a movement that will result in the reclamation of their party and its traditional tenets. Even if I disagree with them they were people who could be relied on to earnestly seek the welfare of the national being. I hope that these few will be the match that lights the fire of democratic expression in the GOP and burns out the fascism that has reared its ugly head.

A political axiom goes that when your opponent is digging himself into a hole then you should get out of the way. If this is what the Democratic Party is using for a guiding principle then it is sorely misguided. The President has a rock solid 35% base that wouldn't care if he blew up Boston. They are going to be with him. As nauseating as that may be it is the political reality that we now face. If the Democratic Party thinks that a successful campaign can be run by just saying they are not Trump then the party is primed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. The Democratic Party must develop a narrative that explains to the American people why they would be better off with them in power than with the GOP. That has not been done to my satisfaction and I doubt that it has for large numbers of

others. Were it so we would not see so many people gravitating to the far left of the party. The Democratic Party must clearly state what its principles are on trade, immigration and global relationships and pray that there are still enough members of the American electorate who can understand or even want to understand that narrative. The attention span of the electorate has degraded to the point that if you can't state a message in 15 seconds you're toast. Remember Ross Perot and that 30 minute commercial complete with charts? The audience would be watching Dancing With The Stars 3 minutes into it. Let's face it. It is harder to build a positive message than it is to just denigrate and tear the other person down. People respond to negative ads and that is a simple truth but if we are to choose leaders based on who is the nastiest then let's just crown Steve Bannon.

I have often said and I believe that the people get the kind of government they ask for. My Take is that they got it in spades this time.

Liberal v. Conservative. Do you have a clue?

Is ‘Classical Liberalism’ Conservative? - WSJ



For the political scientist this kind of stuff is manna cast before the masses.  While I do not agree with every tenet espoused here this exposition illuminates the ignorance so prevalent as to what passes for "liberal" and "conservative" these days.  I have grown weary of people shouting "libtards" and "snowflakes" as if they had any real meaning other than in the pejorative sense and I am just ticked off enough to begin calling people out on this.  Common consensus is no replacement for actual knowledge.  One cannot understand the liberal democratic (note the lack of capital letters) experiment in the United States without understand at least to a small degree the underlying political philosophies underlying the creation of this nation.  Many rail about how we need to get back to our Christian values on which the country was founded but this country was not and has never been a "Christian Country."  The values sometimes are identical but our underlying philosophies are firmly based in property rights and the protection of said rights.  I do not mean to diminish the value of Christianity because it serves a totally separate and distinct purpose but that purpose does not include governing the people of the United States.



If you have the stomach for actually expanding your mind and thinking deeply this article can be a gateway into one of the great learning experiences available to the evolution of modern mankind and by understanding it you may come to understand how our lack of knowledge undermines the very foundations of this republic.



If only a small number of people would read this and become curious, or even a single person, about the rationale for our founding then this diatribe may have been worth it.

Carnage As A Way Of Life

Ooh, see the fire is sweepin'
Our very street today
Burns like a red coal carpet
Mad bull lost its way

Gimme Shelter: Rolling Stones

Guns? Whaddaya gonna do? I own several but only use one. A .22 rifle that I use to take pot shots at things with and to discourage the occasional grackle when it lingers too long at my bird feeders. I am judicious when I use it because I have been known to destroy a perfectly good bird feeder in order to dissuade the bird. I have a .30-.30 that I have only used once to shoot the leg off a robin that kept flying into our window. That was before I got the .22. Americans have a love affair with their guns. There are far more guns than there are people and that even allows for those who do not own guns. I keep them put up and unloaded because I am aware that people are a fractious bunch given to

excitable exhibitions of impulsive behavior. In other words, I am far more fearful of them being used to kill me than I am of some imagined intruder breaking in and killing me before I could run to get one and bring it to bear. As a matter of fact I have tried to imagine a scenario in which I could reach a weapon to deter him from bringing harm to me or mine. I decided that if I kept one tucked into the couch cushion I might be able to get it out and use it before the intruder used his. Now, this is not some idle maundering because I know people who do just that and they scare me. If they are that jumpy then I need to sit out in the car and blow the horn before I approach the door.

We have about 36,000 gun deaths per year here in the land of the free. It seems that almost half of them are from suicides. I've heard a lot of stuff. Probably the most frequently used is that it is not the gun that is the problem, it is the people and their depraved hearts. That is just hard to argue with. It is

almost certainly true but depraved or not if the gun had not been present it may have been a bit harder to come up with another method. One woman who is a friend of mine said that she wanted to have as much firepower as whoever was on the other side of that door. That one sure sounds good but when logic and reason is applied it has to be realized that in the case of an attack a prolonged gunfight is not likely to be the outcome. To be sure, there are reports of people using their personal weapon to fend off an attack on themselves or on others and just knowing that is an option can't be discounted.

Of course, I'm talking about this now because of the massacre in Las Vegas. Some say we shouldn't politicize this horror by bringing up gun control but I say when would be better? Right now when the blood is still fresh and the smoke is in the air. While the horror of knowing 59 people died and over

500 were wounded by ONE man is the perfect time to be discussing this. As far as politicizing it, how is acknowledging the murders and searching for solutions being political? Oh, I know. Many will see this as a conservative/liberal issue because that is the way we are being conditioned to think about everything these days. Most certainly there is a large range of thoughts as to how we can get a handle on this but it is not impossible to come to some agreement.

First we must look for the things on which we can agree. It may be distasteful to some but overall there is room for immediate relief just by sitting down and talking without the lobbyists in the room. It looks like bump stocks (who had ever even heard of that) are one issue we can agree on. Maybe on armor piercing ammunition (I can assure you the police will be in favor of regulating that). To me silencers is a no brainer. The argument is so that gun enthusiasts can protect their hearing. Try ear protection. One of the costs of suppressors is that they degrade performance and who wants that?

The only thing that can stop a bad man with a gun is a good man with a gun. These cute little memes come to you courtesy of the National Rifle Association the purpose of which is to sell more guns for the weapons manufacturers. The gun rights advocates are not going to get what they want and the gun regulation advocates are not going to get what they want either but we have to start somewhere or just accept that mass murder is an integral part of our culture. I can't do that.

If you take the guns away from law abiding people then only criminals will have guns. Another cute

meme designed to remove logic and inject emotion into the argument. First, it will not be possible to take people's guns away from them so don't stress over that but we can begin to reduce the number of guns available over time. Australia used a buy back that had quite an impact. Once laws are on the books to prevent undesirables from obtaining guns then we can begin to reduce the numbers that the bad guys have by taking them away from them whenever they cross paths with the police. Guns are so pervasive in our country that anything we do will take years to accomplish and an unknown time for the deaths to begin to decrease. There is no panacea that is compatible with our Constitution. We have to want it to happen for it to work and there is the elephant in the room. We love our guns.

What are you willing to sacrifice in order to see gun deaths come down? To not hear of mass murders on television and see those victims whose hearts are breaking and whose lives will never be the same? What would it be worth to you to not hear of children killing children in Chicago? Do you have the heart for it or will you cling to your own unwillingness to give up your love? My Take is that I would give a lot. I would sacrifice my own irrational love for my firearms. There will be millions, yes millions, who will reject this out of hand without any thought whatsoever. Will we continue to allow them to permit our children, brothers , sisters to be killed?