The Liberal Politics & Current Events Book Club discussion
Reality-Based Chat. Speak!
Is the movie "Selma" the one that's being promoted now on TV and everywhere? Have you seen it yet Mary? I didn't want to because I saw Martin Luther King in person several times giving speeches at rallies and I don't feel ready to watch someone else playing the part of him. Were you able to get past that?
No, I haven't seen it, Lisa. I think it's out in only a few theaters right now and is going wide this month. It's getting Oscar buzz, etc. I'll probably catch it when it comes on cable. I'm not sure if all of these back-to-the-past movies--"12 Years a Slave," "The Butler," "42"--are helping the tense racial situation now or hurting it. At any rate, I can't watch movies like that in the theaters right now. But it looks good, and that African actor seems to be doing a credible job as King in the scenes that I've watched during the promotions.
Here is my theory on Dr. Rice, Mark, and I'm saying this without having read her book. She was what we used to call a bourgie black. Although I'm as close to a peer as she has--unwed, black, female, baby boomer with a Ph.D.--, I was born in the working-class, and my parents/grandparents were not educated. Class does make a big difference. I also believe that she and Bush were a couple. She even almost called him her husband (she said "hus--") once. I worked well with quite a few of my white male colleagues and not only never almost called one my husband, I would become annoyed when they compared me to their wives. She and General Powell are still not as bad as Herman Cain and Clarence Thomas.
Mary wrote: "Here is my theory on Dr. Rice, Mark, and I'm saying this without having read her book. She was what we used to call a bourgie black. Although I'm as close to a peer as she has--unwed, black, fema..."I think you're right, Mary. I'd forgotten the "hus-" lapsus linguae, and what did appear to be an adulterous romantic involvement. I don't much care whether she and Bush slept together -- and I never really cared about Monica Lewinsky; infidelity of many kinds seems to be a defining characteristic of politicians (with notable exceptions, but it's certainly commonplace, at all events). I really only care about their policies, though I do have to admit that I'm not a great fan of people who violate the trust of their partners -- in that or other ways. But it explains a great deal about Rice's behavior, and I think your bottom line -- that it's a matter of identification with class as over against ethnicity -- is ultimately the most compelling argument. I agree with you, too, about a line to be drawn between Rice and Powell... and Cain and Thomas. I find both of the latter unspeakably reprehensible, but Thomas, in particular, has done incalculable damage to this country. Powell, I find understandable and in many ways admirable, and you've helped me to understand Rice, whom I can also respect, to some degree. I will never forgive Thomas.
I don't care if they had sex either, Mark, although it lowers my opinion of her. But it bothers me that the press didn't cover their adulterous affair. Another bit of evidence that the affair wasn't all that secret is that when they sneaked off to Iraq that one year, he described them as looking like any other couple. If one of my colleagues had referred to himself and me that way, I would have set him and everyone who heard the comment straight--"We are not a couple." Sex has been used to take down mostly Democrats--Clinton, Edwards, Spitzer, Weiner--and it's been used against powerful black men. Thomas is my least favorite Supreme Court justice, but I didn't like what Biden, Kennedy, and the other Democrats on the Judiciary Committee did to him in 1991. Of course, he didn't handle it as coolly as Obama has the racism he's encountered. I've borrowed that "high-tech lynching" phrase many times and have told conservatives to check out Thomas if they want to see an angry black man. At least Cain has a sense of humor. Thomas always looks angry, maybe because he knows he's on the wrong side.
Mary - I confess I'd forgotten about the "high-tech lynching" (which I really shouldn't have), and Thomas has a right to be angry about that, because I don't think a white nominee accused of sexual misconduct would have been treated in the same way. But since he's lynched America in his capacity as a Federalist Society sock puppet (one of at least four on the court, and Kennedy is de facto), I'm still going to condemn him for it. And you're right: Obama would have been cooler (and, of course, he'd never have betrayed the country*). So it isn't necessary to be perpetually angry whilst wreaking havoc, perhaps retributively, but I hope you're right that Thomas does know he's on the wrong side. He ought to have to live with that, at least.* You know what I'd really like, come to think of it (and there's the Taft precedent)? For another Democratic president to appoint Obama (a legitimate constitutional scholar) to replace a retired Thomas.
Dream on, Mark. I think having Obama replace Thomas is about as likely as my dream of having the White House renamed the Obama House or our country renamed the Obama States of America (since we clearly aren't, and probably have never been, united). Thomas is not just a Federalist puppet; he's Scalia's parrot. He'll probably have to resign when Scalia resigns or dies because Uncle Thomas won't know how to vote without his master. Scalia's theme song should be "Me and My Shadow."
Mary wrote: "Dream on, Mark. I think having Obama replace Thomas is about as likely as my dream of having the White House renamed the Obama House or our country renamed the Obama States of America (since we cl..."Mary - I know. It's a good dream, though, isn't it? And I'd be much happier living in your "Obama States of America." If we're going to fantasize, I think, we might as well go for broke. From my latest reading, Thomas parroted Scalia's vote only 91% of the time. (On the remaining occasions, he misread the hand signals, fell asleep, or thought that Scalia was taking too liberal a position.)
Mary wrote: " Scalia's theme song should be "Me and My Shadow." .."I don't think I've quite captured the spirit of Davis and Sinatra, but how about this:
Me and my shadow,
Obliterating Roe v. Wade,
Me and my shadow,
Do not think that people should be paid.
And when elections come, we like to gloat,
We both agree, poor people can't vote.
Oh, me and and my shadow,
Turn to red the country that was blue...
Dum de dum.
I think you're right, Mark. The rare times when Thomas doesn't vote with his master is probably when he thinks the master is too liberal. I like your rewrite of the song, but I would change "poor people can't vote" to "black and brown people can't vote." They don't mind if poor whites vote since working-class whites tend to vote for Republicans.
You're right, Mary. I'm a bit compulsive about fidelity to the scansion of the original as over against accuracy of content. Should probably have just said, "black people" (or "brown people" -- or maybe "plebeians," which would also fit the meter, but I think it's better with the express mention of racism). It is quite astonishing, the degree to which poor white people have been able to be induced to vote against their own interests. Honestly, I think if Hannity or Limbaugh urged them to, they'd happily march single-file into a live volcano.
Did you ever read "What's the Matter with Kansas"? It explores that phenomenon quite well. "Deer Hunting with Jesus" explores the psyche of the white poor even better doing it from the inside out.
Lisa wrote: "Did you ever read "What's the Matter with Kansas"? It explores that phenomenon quite well. "Deer Hunting with Jesus" explores the psyche of the white poor even better doing it from the inside out."Hi, Lisa!
I've actually read reviews of "Deer Hunting with Jesus," and I considered including it as one of the choices in the poll. But the title, it seemed to me (not that I ever cavil at wreaking incendiary rhetoric) could have been construed as just a tad potentially provocative, since even waxing precatory to the choir, here, it's certainly not the case that all liberals are non-Christians, so I decided (pusillanimously) to err on the side of not offending anyone's religion inadvertently, even though I think the book has much to recommend it, and would welcome your further elaboration (including a link to your review, if you've written one). There isn't any limitation on the books we can discuss here, even if we have two designated "official" choices -- which two I'm about to announce after 38 votes, but as a vague hint, one of them is by Elizabeth Warren and the other is by Naomi Klein... not to get too specific. I regretted, likewise, that I hadn't seen Elizabeth Kolbert's book before issuing the poll, as a possible alternative to Klein's.
I keep saying I'm going to read "What's the Matter with Kansas," so I think I'll put it on my 2015 to-read list. I'm not sure about the other book. I learned all I need to know about the psyche of the poor white when I was watching "Honey Boo Boo." I'm only partly kidding. I like what I learned from reading Faulkner's novels about fictional poor whites in the South during the early 20th Century; I'm not sure I want to know more than I can learn from my adventures on google+ about the real ones living among us today.
I read "What's the Matter With Kansas" several years ago and as a former Kansan, Thomas Frank certainly did a spectacular job of discussing and describing the citizens and their way of thinking; but you know, I can't say that, even after reading the book, that I understand WHY some people tend to vote against themselves!! And "Deer Hunting with Jesus" sounds interesting… think I will add it to my 'to read' list!! Thanks!
Mary wrote: " I'm only partly kidding...."I wouldn't blame you if you weren't kidding at all.
By venturing into the feral wilds of google+, I'm sure you are much more "adventurous" (and exhibit a higher tolerance for reading egregiously misspelled, ungrammatical and rabidly cretinous polemic) than your humble interlocutor. (Though I confess that I have occasionally likewise enjoyed shooting zombie fish in a barrel.) No more could be asked of you. :) :)
Darlene wrote: "I read "What's the Matter With Kansas" several years ago and as a former Kansan, Thomas Frank certainly did a spectacular job of discussing and describing the citizens and their way of thinking; ... I can't say that, even after reading the book, that I understand WHY some people tend to vote against themselves!! ..."Thanks, Darlene, for the confirmation of Frank's observations from an accredited erstwhile Kansan! :) As for why people persistently vote to commit ritual collective economic seppuku... by coincidence, I seem just to have commented on that in the last three posts in the "US politics/Why Government is Important" thread, so being fathomlessly lazy (and to save everyone clicking on a link), I'll just quote myself here:
"The reason they believe it is mind control*: disinformation disseminated 24/7 by the corporate media to a deliberately stultified and lobotomized populace who suckle at the teat of Faux News, revelling in hatred of minorities as they're led complacently to the economic slaughterhouse. God help the sheep, but their stupidity is going to kill us all."
(To be fair, I should probably have said "ignorance" rather than "stupidity," because I don't actually think very many people are natively mentally challenged; it's just that the government and media have striven mightily to impede them from ever reaching the Piagetian "formal operations" stage by underfunding education to the point of extinction and inundating them with toxic, arrant nonsense.)
* I mean this in a literal sense. The technology of mind control -- which has gone immeasurably past the point of the mere subliminal suggestion documented early in Subliminal Seduction and The Clam-Plate Orgy and Other Subliminals the Media Use to Manipulate Your Behavior by Wilson Bryan Key and used ubiquitously for the past 40 years in advertising, both commercial and political -- has, for at least the past 25 years, permeated the mainstream media in a much more sophisticated, aggressive and toxic form, in their ostensible "news" and entertainment programming.
Thanks for giving me a pretext further to fulminate on this subject! :) :)
And by the way, have I mentioned that I love the quote from Einstein on your profile page? (which I think somewhat addresses the question as well) :) :)
Mark wrote: "Darlene wrote: "I read "What's the Matter With Kansas" several years ago and as a former Kansan, Thomas Frank certainly did a spectacular job of discussing and describing the citizens and their way..."Thanks, Mark! First let me clarify…. just in case I WASN'T clear… Thomas Frank stated that he was a native Kansan, I believe. Myself….. I'm a native Pennsylvanian. I have never lived in Kansas… just drove through it many years ago on my way to Colorado!! :)
Honestly, I understand what you are saying and I agree with everything you said. I know that the constant exposure to particular media hell bent on keeping people ignorant is very powerful… and I don't discount that. It just seems to me that after many years of an accumulation of evidence that you have been lied to and cheated, you would at least BEGIN to question what you have been believing? Is that unreasonable? That is the part I don't get!! For example, take a look at your own personal finances/place in society… has what you have been told REALLY working for you? I guess what I'm saying is that I don't understand why certain people blindly believe even in the face of overwhelming evidence against, without ever questioning? Perhaps I just have a mental block in this instance?!!
And I assume you are referring to Einstein's quote… "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe." ??? Yes, I agree .. it certainly DOES seem to apply!! :)
Darlene wrote: "Mark wrote: "Darlene wrote: "I read "What's the Matter With Kansas" several years ago and as a former Kansan, Thomas Frank certainly did a spectacular job of discussing and describing the citizens ..."Hi, Darlene!
First, my apologies for having unjustly linked you in any way, howsoever remotely, to Kansas! I had been aware (from your profile) of your current state of residence (and greater sanity), but it was three in the morning, I was groggy, and I misparsed the deep structure of "and, as a former Kansan, Thomas Frank certainly did a spectacular job" to be "and, as a former Kansan, [I can assure you that] Thomas Frank did a spectacular job." Embarrassing, but I plead particularly severe grogginess. :) My presumption was that you'd at some time had the transient (perhaps surreal) experience of residing there. :)
More to the substance of your post, though, citing Erasmus (citing somebody else, or plagiarizing), "in the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king." This might be true in a literal sense, though I'd hate to see anyone take it past the stage of a Gedankenexperiment, but unfortunately, metaphorically, it isn't true at all. In the kingdom of the intractably politically blind (consumers of Faux News), the two-eyed woman (you) would be the first one to be stoned to death, even if they had to locate you by sonar. They cannot endure the intrusion of reality or clear perception into their bubble of incessantly reinforced denial, and I was deadly serious about the "mind control" business. I could list a plethora of books on the subject here (and perhaps, later, I will*), but the powers that be have been practicing these forms of psychic manipulation on the American public (many originally adopted by our own intelligence services from North Korean intelligence, and then spread into the broader ecosphere of corporatocratic application) for at least four decades. So... between deliberate dumbing down and ultra-sophisticated media manipulation and outright mind control, the ovine segment of the population has been rendered metaphorically blind, and they will not "see" reality if you shove it up their nose. Also, under the "Perry classification," they're "cognitively dualistic," so they don't want to see or think or evaluate, and crave only the "received truth" that drips venomously from the mouths of Faux News anchors. I may be waxing a bit rhetorically intense, but I'm seriously not kidding about any of this.
* Brainwash: The Secret History of Mind Control
The Rape of the Mind: The Psychology of Thought Control, Menticide, and Brainwashing
(ok... so I decided to throw in a few references, but I could provide a few dozen more: ask me; I'll tell you how it works :) :) -- though it's probably not a good subject on which to become an expert)
I think we drove through Kansas in 1972 when my stepfather drove me from Evanston, Illinois, to Los Angeles, but we didn't stop in that state. My knowledge of Kansas is based on reading and teaching Truman Capote's IN COLD BLOOD, so I'm no expert on the Kansas of today. However, it's worth noting that Obama's clearly very tolerant white grandparents were originally from Kansas.To elaborate on what Mark said earlier (and condense what I assume his sources say), the working poor and the less well-educated middle class are tricked into voting against their interests through appeals to their basest instincts--fear and prejudice. While the media demonize the poor and nonwhites, the richest 1% run away with the money and the banks. I've typed the words "The 2008 great recession wasn't caused by poor people getting food stamps and welfare, seniors getting Social Security and Medicare, or teachers, first responders, and government workers being paid too high salaries, but by unregulated Wall Street fat cats and bankers ripping all of us off" so often that I wish I could buy a rubber stamp containing those words to save time.
Mary wrote: "... but by unregulated Wall Street fat cats and bankers ripping all of us off" so often that I wish I could buy a rubber stamp containing those words to save time..."Mary, if you can manage to get that stamp produced in quantity, I would be happy to buy a few (one for myself, and some to be given as gifts)! :) :) I wonder... does cafe-whatever (can't remember the site, and shouldn't advertise, anyway) still produce that sort of thing? At the very least, perhaps we could get t-shirts. :) :) :)
I wish, like Facebook, this thread had a "like" button. I've been reading your posts, Mark and Mary, and all I can say is, amen, amen, amen.
Mary wrote: "Here is my theory on Dr. Rice, Mark, and I'm saying this without having read her book. She was what we used to call a bourgie black. Although I'm as close to a peer as she has--unwed, black, fema..." I noticed she and Bush had something going on just from their body language together. If you looked closely, you could see they were buds - at least.
Hi Mark and Mary!I would love one of those rubber stamps and please put me down for a t-shirt!! :) Mary, you are right.. President Obama's family WAS from Kansas and I really didn't mean to sound as if I was somehow indicting the entire state… although I WILL admit to some serious head scratching after the results of their 2014 governor's race!! :) I just wanted to point out that the observations in "What's the Matter With Kansas" actually came from a native Kansan!:)
Mark, I read the links to the books you suggested and I will have to add those to my ever-growing 'to read' list. I don't mean to come across as a 'Pollyanna' or as delusional. I suppose I have always believed (or HOPED) that if the world could be educated, many of our problems could be solved… or at least we would have a better chance at solving them! But Mary, you are also correct…. appealing to people's basest instincts is VERY effective and I suppose educating people ruled by their fears would be fruitless! It's all very bleak…. very bleak indeed. :( It seems as if we are doomed to live in what looks like two completely separate countries. :(
Barbara wrote: "I wish, like Facebook, this thread had a "like" button. I've been reading your posts, Mark and Mary, and all I can say is, amen, amen, amen."Thanks, Barbara! We only say these things because they're annoyingly true, but your "amen's" are gratefully received! :)
Beverly wrote: "I noticed she and Bush had something going on just from their body language together. If .."Yes, Beverly, the body language was definitely suspicious, but I dunno... do you think it might have been the looks of awestruck adoration that gave away the game? :) I really loved (as I'm sure we all did) her comment that "true racists are liberals who defend the teachers' unions." Someone should put together a collection of her other pithy and endearing statements.
Darlene wrote: "Hi Mark and Mary!I would love one of those rubber stamps and please put me down for a t-shirt!! :) Mary, you are right.. President Obama's family WAS from Kansas and I really didn't mean to sound..."
I don't think you come across as a "Pollyanna," Darlene, and I honestly wish that, as moderator, I could be a more optimistic advocate. But I don't think we can do anything at all without acknowledging the reality of the situation. Even if we're most likely "doomed," we reduce our chances to zero if we don't speak stark and unsparing truth to each other. (And truth to evil, of course, because I think "power" has become an insufficiently negative term to characterize the opposition.) What's most important, though, is that we keep speaking. Somebody has to.
Actually, Beverly, I prefer "amen" or "right on" to "like," so maybe we can add that button to our New Year's wish-list (along with the t-shirts and rubber stamp). I think I can speak for Mark in saying that one reason we continue to type, sometimes making the same points again and again, is because we assume we are speaking for fellow sensible liberals who are too busy teaching or pursuing whatever career they are in to type with us. We're retired. I don't know what else Mark has on his plate, but in addition to making noise on social media in a perhaps vain attempt to change some minds, I'm the sole caretaker for my almost 87-year-old mother. During the last couple of years, she's started to have cognitive problems, and her issues have given me some insight into racism. I may have said this here before, but the point is worth repeating: Racism is a vile form of dementia; it's immune to logic and reason. We probably can make the same point about classism, sexism, and a few other -isms.
And then there's love, which is apparently (I have never been crazy in love) not only blind and crazy but corrupt and stupid. My beautician claimed that she actually saw Rice and Bush holding hands, but I first got the message when he was making a joke about her at a news conference and asked where she was. I saw that twinkle in his eye and the look that she gave him, and said, "Oh, my God, they are flirting." Besides, why else would a smart, well-educated black woman, born in Birmingham, Alabama, during the Jim Crow era, want to spend time with willfully ignorant, faux Good Old Boy Bush? It must be love and lust.
Darlene, if you sound like Pollyanna, it's because you're on a thread with "Paranoid" (Mary) and "Paranoider" (Mark).
Mark, don't apologize for being a pessimist. Remember what happened in November when I tried to be optimistic? Said the California Raven: "Nevermore."
Mary wrote: "Actually, Beverly, I prefer "amen" or "right on" to "like," so maybe we can add that button to our New Year's wish-list (along with the t-shirts and rubber stamp). I think I can speak for Mark in ..."Well Mary, perhaps pessimist is the wrong word… perhaps you and Mark are just more REALISTIC than I am!! Every now and then I enjoy escaping to my parallel universe!! :) And remember…. "Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't after you." !!!! And I love your Poe reference… it's one of my favorites!!
Mary wrote: "Actually, Beverly, I prefer "amen" or "right on" to "like," so maybe we can add that button to our New Year's wish-list (along with the t-shirts and rubber stamp). I think I can speak for Mark in ..."Hi Mary, Given Condoleeza Rice's background, I could never fathom her political views. Her having an affair with Bush is even harder to understand, but I guess anything is possible.
I can sympathize with your care of your mother. It's really hard to cope with dementia. My mother has it too but is in a retirement home so I don't deal with it on a daily basis. I have read several books about Holocaust survivors whose PTSD from then has come back to haunt them as they experience dementia. Some of what's being done to help them may be applicable to your mother. You may want to look up some books on the subject.
Mary wrote: "Actually, Beverly, I prefer "amen" or "right on" to "like," so maybe we can add that button to our New Year's wish-list (along with the t-shirts and rubber stamp). I think I can speak for Mark in ..."Mary, you can feel free to speak for me at any time: I think we are on the same page in all respects. (As the Quakers say, "you speak my mind.") And your inference is correct that I feel as you do: that someone has to do the talking for the professionally active liberals who can't, or who simply lack the time. And I am likewise willing to agitate for an "amen" button :) , so you're "three for three."
I'm extremely sorry to hear about your mother. I've read recently of some new developments about which I'll message you privately later on (I have to go foraging in my various entropy-fraught archives of articles and links to articles) -- though I'm sure you're very much au courant, yourself. In the interim, it occurs to me that I fulminated a bit rabidly on this very subject about 18 months ago, and on this group -- before a medical problem (not Alzheimer's) put me out of commission for a while. In that one respect (prognostications I had made about my own durability), for once in my life, I appear to have been unduly pessimistic... so it can happen. (You'll see in the post, here: https://www.goodreads.com/comment/sho... .) In any case, I deeply sympathize. As for "my plate," I have only my own medical problems and self-caretaking to attend to, so your burden is considerably greater.
I'm certain you're right that the sort of cognitive impairments produced by Alzheimer's might both affect judgment and suppress inhibitions -- and induce rage and frustration -- so it does seem to be a prescription for generating behavioral problems reminiscent of those of the acolytes of Bill O'Reilly. But your mother is the victim of a disease. I think racists and fascists have a problem that is culturally inculcated, but also, to some extent, self-inflicted. It's also a disease, just not one caused by amyloid plaques. But "a vile form of dementia" is still a very apposite description.
As regards "paranoia," I like your proposed nicknames. Perhaps we could create a radio show, akin to that of "Click and Clack**:" "Paranoid Mary and Paranoider Mark." Of course, Darlene does make a telling point: it's not really "paranoia" if it's real, and I don't think either of us is delusional. We've both just seen too much.
For Darlene:
And the Bushes, never flitting,
Still are sitting, still are sitting,
On the putrid heap of composte,
They have dumped upon the poor,
And our soil, out Prescott's shadow,
Who funded Hitler's nifty war,*
Shall be shovelled... Nevermore.
© me, 2 seconds ago, no rights worth preserving
(Too depressing, I know, but it is a parody of "The Raven," after all... so how does that not become morbid?)
* He actually did. As I've mentioned, he was part of a consortium of American and British bankers and fascist sympathizers who funded Thyssen Bank, which in turn funded Hitler's scarcely-noticed little venture into world domination.
** The latter, lamentably, recently deceased, but I think we're safe as long as we don't talk about carburetors.
You're right, Darlene, Mark and I are realistic. I say that a black woman who isn't paranoid is a fool. In fact, anyone living anywhere today who isn't a little paranoid is foolish.Maybe we can start a podcast, Mark. Our similar names and attitudes make us naturals for a satirical political podcast. The last time I had a male partner (we co-coordinated a writing program) with a similar name (Larry), he was a PollyAndy, so I was constantly telling him to stop looking at the beautiful flowers on the Cal Poly campus and smell the manure while he was constantly trying to keep me quiet and peaceful. We got along because we found each other amusing.
Don't worry about my mother and me, everybody (well, worry a little because we are both a mess). Lisa, I'm going to try to find that book by Roz Chast, CAN'T WE TALK ABOUT SOMETHING MORE PLEASANT?" because it's supposed to be funny. But the good thing about having a mother who is only 21 years older than I am is most of my friends have already been through the senile old parents thing and can give me tips and advice. The bad thing is that I am dealing with this problem in my sixties while they handled it when they were in their forties and fifties.
One of the few disadvantages to not being married with children and not having taught elementary or (except for one year) high school is I'm learning patience in my sixties. I'm having to do what Condi and Laura did (and Laura is probably still doing) when dealing with Bush--get annoyed and then let it go. Since I never had a husband or a two-year-old child getting on my last nerve, my mother is teaching me that lesson. Fortunately for her, she's cute and funny, so she gets on my nerves only once or twice a day. And if she gets to be too much for me, she too will be in what we used to call "the old folks home." Claremont has more places for the elderly to live than it does elementary schools.
Hi Mary, It's good that you're taking this all with equanimity. Take care.
Lisa wrote: "Hi Mary, It's good that you're taking this all with equanimity. Take care."Yes, Lisa, it's what we all have to do, and we have to remember that we might need someone to be patient with us some day soon. I'm taking B12 and doing more crossword puzzles, hoping to hold off that day for as long as possible. I noticed that the cover of this month's AARP Bulletin features the faces of Alzheimer's, including not only Reagan and Thatcher, but also former Secretary of State Cyrus Vance, former Senator William Proxmire, and Columnist Abigail Van Buren. As Mark was suggesting in his old post, it's become an epidemic and not just because we are all living longer.
Mary wrote: "You're right, Darlene, Mark and I are realistic. I say that a black woman who isn't paranoid is a fool. In fact, anyone living anywhere today who isn't a little paranoid is foolish.Maybe we can..."
Certainly, any person stigmatized by perceived "otherness" (whether in the form of race, gender, sexual orientation, liberalism, affiliation with academe -- or just an inadmissible level of literacy and sentience) would be insane not to be a little paranoid. The ovine segment of the populace, safely insulated in their impenetrable bubble of ignorance, denial and addiction to Faux News, can probably afford to let down their defenses. They're of interest to no one in the power elite other than as proxies in the voting booth and a source of economic protein, ultimately to be consumed. But their current status is that of toads in water incrementally being heated (sorry to mix animal metaphors), and they're just not going to notice anything until the water boils, or (in the metaphorical alternative) they reach the bottom of the chute and can see the chopping block up ahead.
I'm absolutely up for a podcast, Mary! Truthfully, as a first installment, I think it might suffice to read stretches of the dialogue on this thread, which contains much that I think is not only starkly true and entertainingly incendiary, but also of strategic value to Democratic consultants. We couldn't take calls, but perhaps other regular participants could be standing guests. Later on, we might even invite an inverse Colmes -- some improvidently optimistic TP troll we could amusingly eviscerate. (I know, I know: zombie fish in a barrel, and it's ignoble, but it's also so cathartic! :) :) ) We could also do poetry readings, of course: atrocious parodies mocking Republicans, wrought by your narrator (for whom it's a hobby), and any other willing participants -- virulent essays, and Jon Stewart-inspired comedy bits. You're a lit prof., Mary, so we have academic "street cred" in matters literary and poetic! (We also have street cred in proving the equivalency of the class of languages recognized by nondeterministic pushdown automata to the class of those generated by context-free phrase structure grammars, but somehow, I don't think that's going to help much in the matter of audience appeal. :))
Segueing into a matter both personal and political... I'm sure everyone here is sympathetic to your need to be a caregiver to your mother, later in the game than most of your contemporaries (and I know several of us are your contemporaries, myself included, though my parents are both long deceased, so the issue never arose for me). You're very stoical about it -- which I'd expect from your general grit and determination -- but it's okay to acknowledge that these things are incredibly hard. If we lived in a sane socialist democracy with single-payer healthcare, in-home care for your mother (and assistance for your moderator, for that matter) would be provided for free as a matter of course. And you and I and other childless seniors, perhaps without prospective caregivers (I certainly don't have one, in any case) would not be facing further exacerbation of our various problems by inevitable impending Republican attacks on Medicare. This country did not have to be hell, which is why we need to rage about this. Many more people need to rage about what I see as the Republican plan for senior healthcare: ice floes.
Mary wrote: "Lisa wrote: "Hi Mary, It's good that you're taking this all with equanimity. Take care."Yes, Lisa, it's what we all have to do, and we have to remember that we might need someone to be patient ... I'm taking B12 and doing more crossword puzzles, hoping to hold off that day for as long as possible. ..."
That seems to be the prevailing advice, Mary: I'm taking B12 and vitamin D, as well, though my preference is to inhibit cognitive entropy (with questionable success, it would seem) by playing reckless computer chess and writing vitriolic screeds inimical to Republicans. (I believe this is a time-honored recommendation that can be found in several texts on gerontology. :)) But crossword books are also good, though I find it annoying that it's hard to get the spiral ones, these days. Obviously, though, making obnoxious podcasts might be an especially effective preventive measure, since I think that if you polled prions (the things that cause amyloid plaques), they would turn out to be Republicans. :)
Living in Mexico I find the news about this country printed in U.S. papers and online both interesting and appalling. A lot of play is given to drug arrests and violence in Mexico but almost nothing about drug use in the U.S. despite the facts that tons of cocaine/marijuana/design drugs make it across the border. What happsn to the drugs in the U.S. How are they distributed? It's all very smooth--no capos, no cartels, just an efficient distribution system.According to the figures I have in the past 20 years cocaine use has dropped 4 percent. The 96 percent left provide an ongoing marketthat the billions spent on enforcement haven't altered.
Robert wrote: "Living in Mexico I find the news about this country printed in U.S. papers and online both interesting and appalling. A lot of play is given to drug arrests and violence in Mexico but almost nothin..."Hi, Robert!
Thanks for participating! What is "printed in US papers" is largely a matter of misdirection: "look over there! (at Mexico, at Greenland, at bunny rabbits!)...Under no circumstances take any notice of what's going on around you, or your own current or impending immiseration." Nearly all US media operate under the control of six corporations, and they all serve the corporatocratic agenda. It would seem profoundly illogical to presume that the corporatocracy is not in bed with the various cartels, because, obviously, there are incalculably large quantities of money involved from which banking and other corporate interests would benefit. The last thing anyone would want to do would be to interfere with that flow of money. And it would seem likewise illogical to suppose that a sufficient number of politicians aren't completely owned to interfere with any attempt at legalization of anything that might affect anyone's profits.
Because, very obviously, from a strictly utilitarian, economic and humanitarian standpoint, immeasurably less harm would be wrought through crime necessitated by addiction (and it would be vastly cheaper simply to provide rehab services for addicts), if nearly everything were legalized. But that will never happen, because all the powers that be profit too extravagantly from the prevailing situation, and there's political capital to be made on the right wing by anathematizing addicts (who are disproportionately members of oppressed minorities), and maintaining more prison inmates per capita, by a spectacular margin, than any other country in the world. (And naturally, the privatized prisons also clean up on the arrangement.) It's very convenient, too, to maximize the percentage of minorities who are rendered ineligible to vote. All the kakistocratic influences align. So, as economists would put it, it's "Pareto-optimal" (if what you want to optimize is profit and evil), and nothing is ever going to change. That's my take, anyway.
I love Bill Maher's take on the drug war. He points out how doctors and even television commercials and magazine ads push all of these prescription drugs, most of which can have devastating side effects, while we are locking people up for taking more harmless recreational drugs. Most of the people locked up are poor and nonwhite, but even rich, white (and very talented) Robert Downey Junior spent time in jail for being an addict.And some of these prescription drugs are like chemo for cancer; they can kill the patient while trying to cure the disease. My mother's blood pressure medication was causing her to faint; I read about how people in her age category were having that problem and told her doctor to change her medication. She hasn't fainted since she stopped taking that pill. Fortunately, she takes only one pill, a blood pressure pill without the diuretic, but one of my friends whose mother is in her nineties and has been suffering from dementia for quite a few years said that her mother's mind became clearer when she stopped taking all medication except one pill for gout. I also remember a colleague whose ninety-something father-in-law had a similar reaction when his medication was reduced or changed.
I believe we need to rethink the prison system. People who rape, kill, and steal should go to jail, and so should the white collar criminals (like Bernie Madoff) who destroy people's lives. But I don't think politicians should go to jail unless they are clearly stealing money from people who can't afford to have their money stolen. Martha Stewart should not have been in jail, and neither should that Virginia governor (although I'm certainly no fan of his) or those Illinois governors. Those people should do community service. Now Chris Brown, who beat the crap out of Rihanna, should have gone to jail for that offense.
The one white collar crime that I might consider punishing with jail time is when the news media deliberately lie about a celebrity, thus destroying that person's reputation, or even if they are mistaken (it's kind of like killing someone when you're driving drunk or recklessly)about a story but go all in as happened with Gary Condit, who did not kill Chandra Levy, or that poor man who heroically found the second bomb at the 1996 Atlanta Olympics and was accused by the media of planting the bomb, they need to go to jail. That's one way to stop these high-tech lynchings because the media people obviously don't mind settling defamation lawsuits.
Mary wrote: "I love Bill Maher's take on the drug war. He points out how doctors and even television commercials and magazine ads push all of these prescription drugs, most of which can have devastating side e..."I would like to see consistency. Republicans perpetually insist that "corporations are people." Well, okay. I live in Texas, where we have the death penalty, in which the Repub politicians and their vengeance-obsessed, pro-life (?) constituents seem positively to delight.
Corporations in this state commit crimes that kill people, directly and indirectly, by the hecatombs. And those corporations are people, and people who commit capital crimes obviously need to be executed, so the moral imperative is clear: dismantle those corporations, shred them, decorticate them, demolish them down to the last constituent subatomic particle. (And just incidentally, transfer the entirety of their assets to their victims.) Let's honor them as people -- in just exactly the way that people who behave the way they do are honored in the State of Texas.
Hi Robert, Mark and Mary!Robert, your comment is just more evidence to me that this whole 'war on drugs' in the U.S. has been a complete farce and waste of money!! I have never understood the criminalization of drug use. To me, if we (as a society) wish to deal with addiction, why do we not consider a public health issue and look at it through the prism of some sort of treatment model? Instead, our prisons are full of people who, in my opinion , are not criminal.. at least when they ENTER the criminal justice system, but who may be forced to BECOME criminal when they are released into society…. who is going to employ them? I agree with you, Mary. There are crimes which must be punished with incarceration.. murder, rape, etc…. but the possession, use and distribution of drugs should NOT be!! And look at Colorado, for example.Marijuana was legalized and despite all of the shrill warnings about the moral decay of society, the sky has not fallen and the world has not ended. And the last I checked, Colorado's economy is actually doing quite well. And Mark, I agree with you as well. Whatever decision is reached about these matters, there HAS to be consistency!! And don't get me started on the death penalty and what I consider the absolute gall and hypocrisy of the 'so-called' pro-lifers who can't seem to execute prisoners fast enough… especially in your state of Texas! And what has truly horrified me regarding executions is the fact that the drugs that have been used in the past for lethal injections, are no longer available and states have actually been concocting their own 'experimental cocktails' of drugs which are NOT working. Prisoners are suffering for long periods of time before their eventual deaths. That is SO repulsive to me!!! Okay… I'll climb down off of my soap box.. for now, at least! :)
I read this article today were some governor is wants to make drug testing mandatory for people who want to receive SNAP benefits. All I could think of is wow people who get high are no longer deserving of food. Of course there is no mention of drug counseling or a program to get them on their feet. Simply a penalty for having a problem. Seems like more and more being poor is the crime here. Like oh you impoverished fool if you were any kind of person you would not be down on your luck. What happened to our compassion? Many decades ago when I worked at a restaurant at the end of my shift we would take left over food that could not be served in the restaurant the next day to the soup kitchen and I would just pass out cooked food to the homeless people who slept near the church (same place as the soup kitchen). I recently heard you cannot do this anymore due to regulations - better for you to throw it away.Don't even get me started on prison - I think like 1 in 200 Americans are in jail at the low cost of almost $83 billion. No where in prison do we any longer talk about reform - nope we just lock them up and throw away the key then God help us when they get out. Because you cannot go back to participating in society - if you did not have skills when you went it then you will not have skills when you come out. Getting a job is almost always out of the question - you are a felon - going back to school is out of the question - no financial aid you are a felon - well back to crime it is, then people want to be surprised. Now I will say I am pleased that Marc Levin decided to do something and I think he is still the main conservative guy pushing for reform - not saying we see eye to eye at all but at least his organization is like hey this is a problem and it is not working.
Just a thought here but it seems like the right has a need for serious penalties on any issue be it crime or poverty or birth control. Not sure the right care about making the situation better or worse but justice needs to be served so a perceived bad guy must be punished for their sins. Meanwhile the left wants to control how to make the situation better than to mete out punishment. With the exception of guns then it is reverse. We seem to be loosing the middle ground which I think is important. Ok off my soap box thanks for reading!
Mary wrote: "...I believe we need to rethink the prison system. People who rape, kill, and steal should go to jail, and so should the white collar criminals (like Bernie Madoff) who destroy people's lives..."I emphatically agree with you Mary, though I would also like to see the category of "white collar criminals...who destroy people's lives" construed as broadly as possible. In particular, corporate CEO's (e.g., those of pharmaceutical companies who knowingly make decisions to push drugs with known adverse or lethal effects, which they hide, thereby ultimately effectively killing thousands or millions of people) should go to jail forever. They are much more atrocious criminals than even standard-issue murderers.
And I likewise agree about the anathematization of people by the media (and others), which appears to be a phenomenally popular American sport. It's a really effective way to destroy lives with absolute impunity.
Darlene wrote: "...And don't get me started on the death penalty and what I consider the absolute gall and hypocrisy of the 'so-called' pro-lifers who can't seem to execute prisoners fast enough…"Hi, Darlene!
I completely agree about the barbarism of the local "custom" in this state (and many others). I am, or course, unconditionally opposed to the death penalty at any time for any reason, for actual people, living human beings. I'm a pacifist, I don't believe in retribution, and I think the only legitimate purpose of prosecuting a criminal is to protect future prospective victims by isolating that person. Humanely. So, as you clearly surmised, my call for "consistency" was really just a backhanded, snarky way of calling for the utter destruction of what I consider to be the most heinous criminals in our society: corporations -- and since corporations are not sentient beings, and they're incapable of feeling pain or distress (or anything else, for that matter) -- despite the utterly ridiculous idea that they are "people" -- I have no problem whatever with calling for their "death," if they've committed capital crimes. (Actually, I have no problem with calling for their death if they've committed jaywalking or stepped on a crack in the sidewalk :) :) -- but that's just my personal feeling about corporations, not seriously intended. In any case, I could never countenance state-sanctioned murder of actual human beings, and I profoundly appreciate your passionate expression of horror at the practice.) (You should get up on a soap box more often! :))
Dawn wrote: "...Don't even get me started on prison - I think like 1 in 200 Americans are in jail at the low cost of almost $83 billion. No where in prison do we any longer talk about reform - nope we just lock them up and throw away the key then God help us when they get out..." Hi, Dawn!
I couldn't more profoundly agree with you! This reference is well-worth looking at, just for the map: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o....
With only 4.5% of the world's population, the US has 25% of its prison population... and worse, 1 out of 10 young African-American males are in prison, and 1 out of 15, counting all ages... whereas the corresponding figure for white males is 1 out of 106. It would almost be impossible to devise a more flagrantly unequal application of the criminal "justice" system.
I worked for UPI for 15 years in my youth, and I am very familiar with the functioning of the news media, even today. Despite the fact that there has been enormous consolidation in the media, generally newspaper journalism remains fairly independent. Reporters don't write about the drug business much because it isn't of great interest. The only way to make it interesting would be to penetrate the drug business and that would be very life-threatening - something most middle class people could not do, even if they wanted to. The fact is, the drug business essentially has been legalized. For the most part only users are penalized, and that is diminishing. I think that if the Democrats keep control of the White House for another eight years after Obama, there will not be any more war on drugs and we will see prison populations drop significantly.
The entire thing has been outrageous. But it was the Reagan crime in 1985 that took discretion away from judges and imposed mandatory sentences on drug users. That, alone, is responsible for the enormous increase in the prison population - from 600,000 then to more than 2.2 million now.
Those mandatory sentences have to be repealed. Most drugs have to be decriminalized, and marijuana should be legal. Then, the drug gangs will lose their markets, just like the Mafia lost its liquor market in 1933. It didn't end the Mafia because it found other ways of staying in business - gambling, loansharking, prostitution, etc. Some of these gangs already are involved in prostitution and other activities. So they probably will survive, but the drug wars should end, both here and in Mexico.
In my post above, it should have read x x x the Reagan crime bill x x x
You make some good points, Dan, and I think we should add prostitution to the list of activities that should be decriminalized. But I also think that the media makes news and helps determine what we brainwashed sheep see as "interesting." The whole Ebola scare, for instance, was partly a news-generated "crisis." And I think it's interesting how the latest terrorist attack seems to have garnered more attention than previous ones. That's because the people killed were in the media. Is freedom of the press really more important than the freedom to eat in a restaurant, ride a bus/train, or the freedom to go to school? We consumers of the media can control what is covered to some extent by not buying what the media is selling, but if the media doesn't cover certain events, how are we to know that they are happening? If they don't cover, for instance, Barbara Walters' affair with Republican Senator Ed Brooke or segregationist Strom Thurmond's black daughter, to mention just two of the many political "sex scandals" that the media didn't cover, how will we know about those scandals?
They didn't cover John Kennedy's nude romps with young women in the White House pool, either. There was a time when such activities were considered out of bounds. Ben Bradley, who was close to Kennedy, said later that he regretted the way the media ignored such things. But just because something isn't reported doesn't mean it is being covered up by the media. Some things are very hard to prove, and a good reporter doesn't report rumors and innuendo. I knew that Spiro Agnew was a crook long before it became public. I wrote the first national story that implied he was involved in questionable activities in Maryland, but I couldn't prove that he had taken any money - even though I knew that he had - and so I could not report that.
We have a much different media now that we had when I was in it. Cable news and the Internet have changed everything. When there were just three networks carrying news, they had responsible reporters and they didn't lean one way or the other. Really, they didn't. You cannot imagine how much pressure was put on reporters to keep their opinions out of their stories.
That's much different now, especially with Fox, which clearly intends to be the mouthpiece of the Republican Party, and has no intention to be a serious news organization.
And with the Internet everyone can distribute anything they want, regardless of its veracity. The conspiracy clowns have gone wild with the Internet.
And what has happened is that anyone now can watch TV and go on the Internet and avoid any facts that counter that person's opinions. If you don't like the idea of global warming, watch Fox and go to Newsmax on the Internet - or to the much more extreme sites. If you are a progressive and that's what you want to read, you can watch MSNBC in the afternoon and evening, and listen to Thom Hartmann's radio show, and read any number of web sites. You never have to encounter the madness of the other side.
Because I am writing about all this, I try to keep tabs on all sides, but its hard on the stomach to read some of the extreme right-wing stuff.
The Liberal Politics & Current Events Book Club
Books mentioned in this topic
A Gift Upon the Shore (other topics)Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces (other topics)
Drift (other topics)
Drift (other topics)
What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815 - 1848 (other topics)
More...
Period: Holocene
Extinction: Holocene extinction event
Date: Ongoing
Cause: Humans