Reversal of Fortune

Some work from last year turned up some fossils of Homo Sapiens in Morocco dated to 315,000 years. This pushes back the earliest know evidence of the species more than 100,000 years. During the process of considering this anthropological revelation I was led to consider what humans have been doing over the past thousands of centuries. History written in some form only dates back about 3000 years and we believe the oral tradition goes a bit further to about 6,000 years ago. Evidence is

that it was about 10,000 years ago that homo sapiens began living in communal groups and began to undertake agriculture. That step gave humans the time necessary to form social groups and thus the first crude systems of government came to be. They were no doubt tribal and not very complicated. Very likely they held no lofty ideals and were often based on who or what sub-group could force control over the others but it was a necessary primitive step.

But I began to wonder about the pitfalls the human race must have encountered on its journey to the present. This Moroccan fossil is the first evidence that humanity migrated into the furthest parts of Africa from the Great Rift Valley where it is thought the species originated. Previously we had thought the migration into the Middle East was the direction that the earliest pilgrims made their journey.

I have always found the study of anthropology to be fascinating ever since Dick Lewis taught a number of classes at Somerset Community College. In that earlier life I was even less disciplined than I now am and paid little heed to courses that were necessary to the furtherance of my major studies. I took every class he taught. Later I became a little more focused and became enamored with the study of political science. Neither of these aforementioned fields have been what one could call useful in my pursuit of financial remuneration but I am pretty good at crossword puzzles.

Democracies have only existed for a few hundreds of years. The Greek example and the Romans seem more to be oligarchies or aristocracies than democracies. Post WWII it seemed that democracies were taking root everywhere even if there were notable exceptions like the Soviet Union and Communist China but here, some 70 years later we see democracies struggling under the strain of inequalities of opportunity and gross disparities in wealth. To quote some of my favorite philosophers, Led Zeppelin, it makes me wonder.

How many times did homo sapiens rise to new heights only to fall back to some previous level of achievement. And if it were possible then can it still be possible to repeat that pattern? After rising this far (we have an extraordinarily high opinion of ourselves) is it possible to fall back into some previous form of government such as feudalism or monarchies? Could we still be unable to temper our desires and prejudices and thence fall prey to some model more fascist in nature? Did homo sapiens ever rise to communal life only to be faced with ecological disaster or other tribes more warlike and thus lose the gleam of society?

We are faced with some scenarios in this time that have the potential to exert just such an influence on the species. Climate change has the potential to disrupt the flow of commerce to the point of subsistence existence. People don't consider how tenuous the thread of civilized behavior is and how little it would take to sever it. What would happen if you were unable to go to the grocery for 2 weeks, a month. Would you resort to stealing food, would others steal yours. Climate change is already forcing mass migrations and will soon begin consuming resources as we attempt to hold back the seas from seaports and we find food scarce when the California farms begin to not produce.

What about nuclear holocaust that has the potential to kill hundreds of millions instantly and most certainly billions in a short while. How would that disrupt our threads of civilization? Would we revert to some previous time when it took strength and power to feed and clothe ourselves. What kind of government could survive that?

Or what if our talent for war consumes resources that could have been used for society, for building schools or providing health care? We are near that now. Dwight D. Eisenhower, President of the United States and a Republican said, “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.”

Will we pay heed or will we revert? Again?

My Take? Time to choose.

Overlord

Mitch McConnell is a master of his craft. As a matter of fact he frequently gets away with stuff that seems outrageous through political cunning and an intimate knowledge of exactly how the Senate works. He is an expert at using some of the arcane rules of the Senate to guide his programs through a maze of procedure or how to use that maze to trap other bills in limbo forever. It has taken him some 30 years to reach the pinnacle of power from which he now exercises control over legislation that can and will affect our nation for a half century to come.

His uncanny sense of what the public will tolerate has allowed him to proceed through election after election without ever facing a serious chance of losing. He knows when to attack and he knows when to ignore and has defied all predictions of his political demise and, from all indications, may ride to his eternal reward directly from the steps of the Senate.

He reached the position of Minority Leader of his Republican Party in 2007 and in 2016 rose to Majority Leader. In his position of Minority Leader he led a program of devout opposition to anything that President Obama or the Democratic Party proposed regardless of the propriety or the well-being of the nation. He promised upon President Obama's election to do whatever it would take to make sure that he was an one term President. He did fail at that but he led the charge of obstructionism and the rise of the right wing fringe to a victory for Donald Trump in 2016. No doubt he would have preferred any other GOP candidate that could have won and who would have been instilled with Republican dogma but he has shown a flexibility to use what is given to outlast and then defeat his opponents that would unseat him.

His self-serving obstruction prevented any Republicans from crossing the aisle to strike a deal of compromise with the Affordable Care Act even after many concessions were made to increase the chances of a bipartisan effort. He understood that even defeat on this matter would lead to his personal agenda being afforded a chance to eventually win out. Consequently the Affordable Care Act was passed without any Republican votes and McConnell led the campaign that used it as the primary tool for attacking the Democrats running for office. A shameful tactic that prevented bipartisan legislation that could have gone a great distance to lessening the divide that plagues our country. He forced almost all legislation to require a 60 vote majority by threatening filibuster and by doing so prevented our country from beginning an infrastructure program that would have brought the nation out of recession years sooner. He realized, correctly, that the success of such a program would cement Democratic victories and prevent his rise to the apex of power. Now that the GOP holds the majority he wants to cut Social Services to fund an infrastructure bill but you can bet it will be one that funnels public funds into private corporations. The hypocrisy is not lost on many but he has calculated that the public's memory is far too short and that the voter is always amenable to promises of prosperity.

Perhaps the most ignominious act of all was his refusal to allow President Obama's nominee to replace Justice Scalia to even be allowed the dignity of a debate and vote on the Senate floor. In the past it has been considered a prerogative of the President to make nominations and, if there is no serious malfeasance found, to vote on the nominee. McConnell steadfastly stood against the welfare of the nation and promoted partisan behavior to a fever pitch in his refusal to even allow the nominee to be debated, much less voted on.

With the election of Donald Trump it seemed that McConnell had lost his mojo. The new gang in the White House led by former Breitbart News editor Steve Bannon seemed to have the bosses ear and the will to appeal to the most derogatory elements of our people to instigate a rebellion that would place in power a publicly elected government approaching the classic definitions of fascism.

Economic Nationalism he said. Use American power to drive bargains that would always place America in the winner's circle never mind that our beloved country has been, since World War II, the greatest force for shared prosperity and peace in the world. He lauded the destruction of that model and was unapologetic for it but then Bannon ran afoul of the patience and guile of McConnell. After a few blunders by the administration McConnell's stock rose as one who could calm the storm and bring results. Then Bannon and his patron, the President, supported a couple of candidates who lost while campaigning against not only the Democratic opponent but also McConnell himself. Guess who came out smelling like a rose and who was shown the door. N

Bannon was not only banished from the White House but also from his power base at Breitbart while McConnell shepherded the Great Tax Give Away of 2017 through not only the Senate but the House of Representatives and put it on the President's desk for his signature.

A day hadn't passed before the GOP was talking about entitlement reform. Entitlements, you know, that pittance that you are given, hopefully before you die, to live out your final years, nevermind that you paid taxes to support it, Social Security and Medicare. Well, the money has to come from somewhere and the big money is in Social Services and Military and everyone knows that we have to fight wars all over the world to keep our country safe from the heathen horde.

Make no mistake about it. It has always been the goal of the GOP to eliminate Social Security and

Medicare as we know it. The programs passed into law with minimal Republican support and have been under attack ever since. Republican dogma just does not allow for programs that may even hint of socialism.

With the tax giveaway and its concessions a large part of the American budget income was eliminated which means that the money to replace it has to come from somewhere. They wanted to get the money by repealing the Affordable Care Act but the people wouldn't allow it and now they want to begin the infrastructure plan but where is the money to come from? Well, what else is left?

McConnell is near to achieving the Holy Grail for Republicans. My Take is that he just might get there.

Requiem and Exordium

You saw them. The endless ads on social media prior to the General Election last year. The endless attack ads from sites like redstateusa or takebackourcountry or hillaryforjail that incessantly pounded away with ridiculous allegations that were easily disproved. When you responded with Snopes or FactCheck those who posted just said that those were liberal sites that could not be trusted. Vaunted news sources such at The New York Times and Washington Post and even the right leaning Wall Street Journal were and still are dismissed as “fake news.” The endless sprawl of sources that no one had ever heard of before were received as gospel only because they pandered to those who had

already succumbed to the false narrative. Not only were they received by the public as gospel but they found their way into marginally more reliable resources such as Breitbart and Newsmax and The Blaze and thence into campaign pronouncements by the candidate himself. Candidate Trump seemed to accept any allegation that made its way into print, no matter the veracity, as suitable fodder for his campaign rallies and he used them to stoke the flames.

Perhaps 10 days before the election polls showed Hillary Rodham Clinton leading by as much as 10 points. Donald Trump had been slammed by the Access Hollywood revelations of his audio recordings in which he described groping women in a very crude manner. At the same time Wikileaks began the dribble of emails hacked from the DNC. Just a few each day to keep the pot boiling. Did anyone ask where the leaks were coming from? Why, yes, they did but those questions were met with an uproar from those haters of Hillary Rodham Clinton and she has many. Thirty years of recorded government service makes it almost impossible for anyone who has been in the public eye to be elected these days. But the questions remain. Who is responsible for dribbling these nuggets out to Wikileaks to be distributed?

Just a few weeks before the election FBI director James Comey, who had recently cleared Hillary Rodham Clinton of wrongdoing in her email fiasco, said he was reopening the case due to recently discovered emails that may or may not bear on that investigation. About 10 days before the election he stated that no, they did not but by then the damage was done. Even proven revelations that Russia was interfering in our electoral process were ignored.

I bring this up at this time, far too late for any correction, because I finally got around to watching Frontline's two episode expose entitled “Putin's Revenge.”   Link to Frontline  Step by step it revealed
how attempts at lying and misinformation during the Ukrainian violence and the interjection of Russian forces into Syria clouded judgment on how to respond and, finally, nothing was done. Then as the campaigns heated up in 2015 Putin, who despises Hillary Rodham Clinton, and Russian intelligence services began to inject mechanisms that would stoke the flames of conspiracies and hatred into social media. Have you wondered whatever happened to all those crazy postings that disappeared after the election? Well, now you know.

Something like 80,000 votes spread over 3 states tipped the electoral college. Hillary Rodham Clinton went on to outpoll Donald Trump by some 3,000,000 votes. Mostly from the west coast.

Til now I have refrained from speaking on the validity of the election but the Frontline series is so damning using facts that are verifiable and confirmed by our leading intelligence agencies' directors that the knowledge must become widespread in order to avoid the influence of nefarious actors in our elections. It is critical that we trust our electoral process and believe that our decisions are based on truthful evidence.

Of course, these allegations are cheapened by the attempted humor of those who benefited, some of them exclaiming “I didn't see no Russians where I voted” as if that was a statement with any meaning other than to thumb their noses at the opposition.

And now we have a few Congressional committees looking into the allegations of impropriety with the majority party doing its best to put a clowns face on those who bring the charges. The investigation that finally matters is the one conducted by Director Mueller who, from all appearances, is digging deep.

Here is My Take. I don't think that Donald Trump met with the Russians and hatched out a plan to subvert the election. However, I do think that it is possible that some in his campaign did. I don't think that the Trump campaign went out and dug up dirt wherever they could get it because it is obvious that their tactic was just to lie about it. What I believe is that the Russians did use Russian resources to contaminate social media and I believe that they were the suppliers of “leaks” to Wikileaks and were exceptionally creative with the timing of the leaks. What I believe is most damning is that Donald Trump and his campaign were aware of the spurious nature of this information and used it anyway. A clear indication of what his administration would be like. It has become the least trusted and most dramatically incompetent administration seen in the modern age, maybe in our history.

Yes, Donald Trump won the election. The ballots were not fudged nor boxes stuffed. Yes, enough of our fellow citizens bought the lies and misdirection to elect him, heaven help us. Now we have to hope against hope that there are still enough honest and patriotic men and women in Congress to save us. Yes, that body that only a couple of years ago had the lowest polling numbers in government is now our bastion of hope.

Don't take my word for it. Read some trustworthy news source but, at the very least, watch the Frontline report I mentioned.

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?

Taking Prayer for a Walk

Taking Prayer for a Walk

I once had a Pastor that was truly a man of prayer but he always mentioned that “we need to put legs on those prayers.” I took that to mean that it was all good to pray but that prayers worked better with some action.

After a period of trying to reason with people who are not racist as far as I know that white privilege does exist and that the statues of the Confederacy are symbols of that privilege I have given up. I can't penetrate the armor that protects people from the hard facts of racism. So many continue to say that the statues aren't the problem, that the hardness of people's hearts is the problem. Well, duh. But for the time being the statues are part of the problem. As is the meme floating around about never owning any slaves so just get over it.

So, I really want to request prayer for those cops that beat Freddie Gray to death. Even though they can't be convicted in a court of law maybe they can be convicted in their hearts. And I want to ask for prayer for Freddie Gray's family so that they can have peace knowing that people are praying for them.

Also for Tamir Rice who was killed by cops seconds after pulling up on him. Maybe those prayers will change the hearts of people who weren't appalled by his death. Too late for Tamir but better late than never.

And instead of people who are angry that anti-semitics, nazis and white supremacists are marching through our streets spouting hateful rhetoric I would like to ask for prayer for those skinheads, etc. to see the light and go home and do good works. No need to protest against them. Just stay home and watch television.

Personally, I'm a big fan of prayer but I'm also a big fan of action. Legs on the prayers. I don't think they are mutually exclusive.

My Take is that people sometimes hide behind prayer to keep from taking action. That's not right.