Skip to main content

Thoughts - Part II

Continuing from http://used-ideas.blogspot.com/2013/03/thoughts-part-1.html

K.  All I here these days on political news is talking points from both the left and the right. On the left there must be solidarity of the President's message. No deviations.  No doubts. No alternatives are allowed.  The rich must pay their fair share; you may have "built" it but the government supplied the schools, roads, and other infrastructure.  Obamacare is clearly controlling and even reducing costs.  We must invest in America.  On the right most talking points concern taxes (i.e. no new ones), the magnitude of the debt, the repeal of Obamacare, the massive regulations, and of course gun control.    There is not one hint, one scintilla of compromise, excepting on immigration reform, a quest issue by both for votes. 

L.  We have always had conservatives and liberals.  The one is much like the other, with differences measured slightly in the degrees of the programs they pass. This is why they could do business - get along, pass legislation, fight another day.  Now we have the right and the left, both extreme versions, respectively. These groups don't like each other, and don't get along.  Both have strong beliefs they are on the side of the just.  Both believe they have found the only solution(s).  And both believe they are reasonable about it; only the other side will not compromise, code for fall over.   Recently emerged in the USA are the far right and the far left. These ultra-extreme groups despise each other. They have no interest in compromise or agreement. Their interest is in power.  These are the polarizing forces in our politics, each trying to literally suck in their more moderate colleagues. And each is succeeding in far greater measure than one might imagine.

Case-in-point.  Rham Emanuel, mayor of Chicago, made the now infamous statement, "Never let a crisis go to waste."  We have a crisis at hand with the bombing in Boston.  How will this horrific tragedy be used by the extreme groups, far left and far right?  Is it too soon to ask?  Probably.  After all, there is no longer any grace period given for healing, or for mourning.  No time is given to bury the dead.  No time is given for reflection and meditation. This event, like others, is quickly wrapped into patented and mindless talking points.

It has already happened.  Steny Hoyer, House minority Whip, indicates the fault lies with the sequester.  Amazing as it sounds, there it is.  The precise quote, made by Hoyer at his weekly press conference is ""I think there are multiple reasons for ensuring that we invest in our security both domestic and international security. That we invest in the education of our children, that we invest in growing jobs in America and don't pursue any irrational policy of cutting the highest priorities and the lowest priorities by essentially the same percentage... "I think this is another proof of that, if proof is needed, which I don't think frankly it is."
We are not here to criticize Hoyer or his comments, just to recount them.  We are considering the larger issues of politicization of this crisis.  Let's look at the possibilities.

From the left:
  • The public deprivation of funds owing to the sequestration has led to a diminished security vigilance of possible threats.  
  • We clearly need the need for a national police force to oversee potential domestic terrorism. 
  • We need more cameras everywhere to thwart covert attempts at terrorism.  
  • We need the constant surveillance of our cities by drones.  
  • We need to invest more funds in national security.
  • With more gun control, this clearly would not have happened.  (A stretch but someone will point to it.) (Juan Williams)
  • This is why immigration reform is so important.  (Chuck Schummer)
  • Domestic extremists tend to be on the far right. (Chris Matthews)
  • Pressure cookers should be regulated.
From the right:
  • Obviously, the weak foreign policy of the President has encouraged such bold acts of terrorism.  The USA is neither respected nor feared by any terrorist.
  • The war on terrorism must be prosecuted robustly both here and internationally. It is not. Look at the tragedy in Benghazi.  Terrorists killed key US personal with no fear of reprisal. They were correct.
  • Terrorists, knowing they will be prosecuted with US citizens rights, have been emboldened to perpetrate any acts of terrorism - and live to rejoice in their heinous acts. 
  • American homeland security is an abject failure.  Compared with the vigilance of other nations, this is just another example of leading from behind, or worse, not leading at all.
  • Mirandizing these terrorists is misguided.
It is as though all these camps have are their talking points.  Every event must be muscled into one of them. Every event must be contained within the scope (or depth) of their thinking.  Originality?  Forget it.  Reflection?  Never.  Independent observation?  What's that?  There is no point, no crisis, no news story that will not so fit. If you want evidence we now live in the PUSA (the Polarized United States of America), you have it.
M.  Trust, as a currency in political agreement and compromise, has vanished.

N. At times the news channels obsess too much over a single event - almost always a tragedy.  Endless interviews are scheduled with almost anyone willing to face the camera.  Video shots are reviewed time and time again.  But they cannot do otherwise lest being charged with insensitivity.  Only when the ratings drop off do the channels restore normal news coverage.

O. One thing I've learned about some people over the years, is that if they hate you and wish to destroy you, there is nothing you can do to alter that wish.  For some there is no forgiveness and no forgetting.  There is no act of kindness, no helping lift them from suffering, no rewards or awards that will alter the wish.  The only limitation on what they will do is constrained by their personal moral ceiling - namely just how far they will go. This applies to individuals, to groups, and to nations with targets the same.

P. Four nice things about checking out of the hotel.  You're going home.  You don't mind if you've used up all the coffee packets supplied. You don't have to tidy up. You get an extra free mini-bar of soap. :)
As wonderful as checking out may be that one doesn't want to do it too often.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels.  One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four.  Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of  information  of any kind become a kind of  truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not.   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03

Your Brain Within Your Brain

  Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget.   Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

  Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view