Category Archives: Blogs' Archive

Potluck and Politics

I just got back from a potluck dinner for Democrats Abroad.  I’m not sure how much I have in common with this group, that is to say, with the Democratic party, but I figured there needed to be some Berniecrats there.

I  like a good potluck.  There is always plenty to eat and generally two or three standout dishes.  I made a pasta salad, which was not a big success and I wound up bringing most of it back home, but it was a success in the sense that I liked it, and Helena likes it, so we’ll have  it tomorrow and nothing goes to waste.
I was expecting some political arguments, and had  mentally rehearsed  a few zingers, but I didn’t want to be the one to start any conflict, and none ever arose.  I spent a fair bit of time talking to the other Berniecrats there, but with most of the people, I  didn’t ask which side they were on and nobody asked me, either.

We made small talk about the food, and about  kids and education, and stuff like that.

There was a short speech by the chairperson, but she didn’t mention the evil one’s name, so I decided to be  satisfied with that.  Everybody was happy with the Democratic wins yesterday, although we weren’t all focused on the same races.
The taco pie was excellent.  The Italian style quesadillas were very interesting, had three of those.  The cheesecake was my very favorite.
It was a good evening.

Leave a comment

Filed under Blogs' Archive

Thoughts on Watts and Wilber

Quotes from famous people is not my favorite type  of Facebook post.  Often they are platitudinous, repetitive (the most platitudinous tend to be the most often  repeated, the lowest common denominator draws  the biggest crowd) and I’ve seen a few people on Facebook who post nothing but that. That disturbs me – do they have no thoughts of their own?  Why am I in communication with this person at all?
But, I came across a good  quote about half  an hour ago, just as I was in need of  a blog  topic, so right  place at the right time and all that: We are a function of what the whole universe is doing in the same way a wave is a function of what the whole ocean is doing. -Alan Watts
That Alan Watts was a mighty cool dude.  Each of us is a microcosm of the universe.  All waves of light are made up of particles.  Things can be subdivided into smaller and smaller units but it’s all working together.  It fits into Ken Wilber’s four quadrants philosophy nicely as well. (Yikes, I just looked that up, just to check, since I’m writing about it, and realized it’s not what I  thought it was at all.  Wilber divides everything into Individual/Interior, Individual/Exterior, Collective/Interior, and Collective/Exterior and while Watts’ quote doesn’t contradict that, that’s not the connection I was trying to make.
What I had thought it was was:  Everything is what it is, Everything is the parts it contains, Everything is a part of something bigger, and Everything is …well, that’s why I was looking it up.
I don’t know if Wilber ever  said anything like that, or if Alan Watts would have agreed that what I’m saying is at all relevant to what he said, but… everything in the universe is interconnected, that’s just sort of a bland thing to say, and obvious…the interesting part is figuring out how.

Leave a comment

Filed under Blogs' Archive

Side Issues

The other day I posted a post which has  gotten more comments than any other post I’ve ever posted, which I’m kind of happy about, but none of them actually related to the point of the post, which is that Hillary voters were also disenfranchised by Hillary Clinton, since the pre-determination of her nomination rendered their support meaningless as well.  It’s like sitting at home watching Peter Pan and clapping for Tinker Belle.  She was going to live anyway – it’s written.
The conversation eventually devolved to guns because wherever there is one 2nd amendment absolutist, that is what the conversation is going to be about.

There are a lot of topics like that.  Issues which are extremely important to a dedicated group of people – sometimes very important issues, admittedly.  But not more important than the economy, the environment, and the fairness of the electoral process.  I really would like to keep these issues compartmentalized, so they don’t dominate all debate and allow politicians to throw up a smoke screen whenever they need one, which is precisely when they shouldn’t have one.

The  list includes abortion, guns, Israel, gay rights, gender issues, even marijuana which is an issue I’m very interested in, and anything related to the flag or other symbols.

When a politician starts talking too  much about any one of these issues, you know two things.  First, they are pandering to a specific group.  Second, they are trying to avoid talking about the real issues.

Leave a comment

Filed under Blogs' Archive

Remember, Remember…

Today is the 5th of November, Guy Fawkes day, a fact which almost passed me by.  I do have some British friends on Facebook, but they mostly post about Brexit, or about  football, and none of them even  mentioned it.

It is the  day that I write, once a year, of my favorite conspiracy theory:  the Gunpowder Plot was a false flag.  Of course, there is absolutely no evidence of this  but, there’s no evidence of the opposite, either.  No photographs, we cannot examine the gunpowder, nothing.  Sure, there was motive.  A lot of people hated James, a lot of people had hated Elizabeth, too, and she survived a couple of assassination attempts.  But, James had motive, too.  He was viewed  as a weak  king pretty much from the moment he sat down on the throne.  (Elizabeth Rex fut; Nunc Jacobus Regina  Est)  My Latin is probably rubbish, but basically:  Elizabeth was King, now James is Queen.  Same kind of a joke people would make today.  Putting down a Catholic plot against him would make him look strong and, more importantly, make him look Protestant, which  wasn’t easy, being Scottish and  all.  Also, he had this bible sale racket going on, and it would probably help with that.  Sure, they caught a lot of conspirators and they confessed, but they had this thing they used to do back  then to get confessions: torture.  We’ve got waterboarding.  They had the  iron maiden, the  rack,  and a red  hot  poker  up the butt.  Also, if you think the government has too much control of the press today, back  then  there wasn’t any press.  The king could say whatever he bloody  well pleased and it was not a good idea to contradict him (see torture, above)
So, basically, we can’t believe any history back further than a hundred years or so and since we know governments are still  lying to us, we can’t believe much history at all.

In other news, Nancy Pelosi says she doesn’t care what happened during the primary.  Howard Dean said “Nobody’s saying the primaries were rigged” despite the fact that everybody’s saying the primaries were rigged.  And lots of Clinton staffers are accusing Donna Brazile of being influenced by Russians.  Seriously.  Russians again.

The technology is  a bit more advanced than it was  in  the early 1600s, but politicians will still  lie right  in your face.  Thus it has always been.

Leave a comment

Filed under Blogs' Archive

Will The Realest Progressive Please Stand Up?

Politics is crazy.  Even though some women are in the business now, and hopefully more and more will be, it’s still basically an alpha-male, jostling for dominance inside the tribe sort of exercise.

There are very few  politicians who are willing  to put the welfare of the voter ahead of their  own personal ambitions.  Hillary Clinton is not unique in this.   Bernie Sanders is the one who’s an outlier.  He’s been championing social inequality his whole  career, and it wasn’t a winning proposition in the beginning.
Generally, when there is an opening, when there is blood in the  water, politicians flock in for the kill.  Witness the California Senate race.  Everybody hates Dianne Feinstein.  Her main argument for getting elected and re-elected and re-elected has always  been “We need to have a Democrat  in that seat.”  So, she’s been there for decades, making her husband extremely wealthy with no-bid government contracts, and supporting Republicans on all the things they really cared about, like war.
So, after 2016, with the resurgence of the angry  left, and  especially with the recent revelations of just how insanely anti-Democratic the Democratic party  has  become, she is vulnerable.

One Berniecrat, David Hildebrand, announced weeks ago that he was  going to go up against Feinstein.  Progressives should be rallying  around him.  Then, a guy named Kevin de Leon entered the  race.  He’s for universal health care, so that’s good, but I get the feeling that he is an acceptable candidate for the DNC, put out there to split the left and let DiFi get  in, or, if he wins, they probably think he’s controllable.  Sort of the way they’re promoting the hell out of Kamala Harris for  president, as a pre-emptive strike against Tulsi Gabbard, who is loved by all progressives, popular with the military, and won her district with over 80% of the vote.  Corporate Democrats are scared shitless of Tulsi.

Then, the other  day, Cenk Uygur announced  the candidacy of Alison Hartson.  Now, I generally like Cenk Uygur.  I don’t blame him for  supporting Clinton in the general.  As much as I’m glad she didn’t win, the argument  that ‘she’s not Trump’ was enough for some people, and we still want them on our side.   Besides, Cenk is progressive as hell.

But why in the world  would he put up a progressive candidate in a race in which there is already a progressive candidate?  I don’t get that.

Then there is Tom Steyer, a billionaire whose main issue at the moment is getting Donald Trump impeached.  It’s a good issue, I’m all  for it, but  I’d like to know where he stands on  some other issues, like taxing the rich.
But, my main argument, the case that I’m trying to make tonight, is that progressives are likely to stir up the waters, cause a hell of a lot of confusion, and allow Dianne Feinstein to  keep her seat.
Here’s what I suggest.  About a week or two before the primary, there should be a ‘progressive primary.’  All democratic candidates who are  not Dianne Feinstein should participate,  it could even be  done informally, on line, and there should be an agreement  that the winner stays in and the others  drop out.

Maybe they could even have debates beforehand.  Extra publicity for everyone.

Leave a comment

Filed under Blogs' Archive