Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘politics’

Walter Wofford’s sculpture of Harriet Tubman as the “Beacon of Hope,” installed at Lake Placid, NY
Enterprise photo — Delainey Muscato

Hope and I have had a long and complicated relationship, one punctuated by frustration, despair, anger, and (occasionally) joy.

For many, Hope is an emotion of wishes and prayers, of what-might-be‘s and wouldn’t-it-be-nice‘s. Hope personified, for such folks, is often depicted as angelic or maternal, protective and supporting. Sweet, embracing, serene.

Not for me. My relationship with Hope has usually been adversarial. Many times, I—having striven toward a goal with zero success—have fallen into the shadowed abyss of anguish and surrendered myself to failure. It is at such times that Hope (damnable Hope) has ridden onto the stage clad in armor, grabbed me by the scruff, and thrust me forward once more unto the breach. For me, Hope is not a thing of winged feathers and soft, motherly caresses but, as musician/writer/actor Nick Cave described it in Issue #190 of The Red Hand Files, Hope is “the warrior emotion that can lay waste to cynicism.” Hope is the creature of sharp insistence, unseen kindnesses, and the whispered encouragement of ultimate victory.

In the last ten years, I have often felt despair. I’ve felt it for most of that time. It has been a harsh, brutal, sorrowful decade, both personally and (more consequentially) on a global scale. Politically, Hope has become a stranger to me, as my nation fell into a vortex of recrimination, grievance, division, and blatant partisanship.

But then something happened. About six weeks ago, our president (bless him), seeing the trend-lines and poll numbers auguring his defeat, decided to bow out and pass the torch.

It was then that Hope—the Warrior Emotion—woke from her slumber, shook the dust of years from off her armor, and sounded the call.

Hope is not heavy-handed. Hope does not have to bash us over the head to get her point across.

Hope is the hand on the shoulder, the confident smile, the steely gaze and the wink. Rather than a wouldn’t-it-be-nice, Hope is the we’ve-got-this.

As the scales fall from our eyes and we see the right-wing contenders for what they are, as we learn of their vision for our future, and as we read what it is that they intend to do should they be returned to power, Hope exhorts us once again to rise, to stand, to speak out, and to vote for a future that benefits us all, rather than just the privileged few and the people who look, love, and think as they do.

For the first time in a very long time, I am filled with Hope, eager to instill that Hope in others, and willing to believe that, this time, we might have a real Hope of success.

k

Read Full Post »

Well, that was a bloody disaster.

I’m talking, of course, about last night’s “debate” between Biden and Trump. While Trump played the usual bloviating, grievance-fueled prevaricator who couldn’t manage to actually address 90% of the questions put to him, Biden’s performance was—there’s no way to sugar-coat it—feeble, stumbling, and unfocused.

While I don’t see the event as having helped either candidate, I know it hurt Biden, and that pumps up my already elevated cortisol levels into the red.

Democrats are in freak-out mode, and I am not about to attempt a prediction as to how this will play out. What I do want to do is throw a lifeline to those who are understandably concerned, who like neither of the candidates, and who are genuinely worried about the GOP’s right-hand trend toward lawless autocracy and unabashed theocracy.

We must, as a good friend of mine said, change the narrative.

Here’s my suggestion of how we can do this.

Vote for the Agenda, Not the Candidate

American politics took a wrong turn back when voters began to use the “Who would you rather have a beer with?” metric for deciding on a candidate. It was arguably the first misstep that put us on the path to where we are today, where we vote solely on who the candidate is (or appears to be), and not how they will govern. This is a critical distinction, as the person who is president is much less important than the agenda that person brings into office.

So, if you’ll indulge me, let’s do a little thought experiment. Take the candidates out of the equation—no Trump, and no Biden—and compare just the agenda that each major party is working toward. This is actually an easy thing to do as both parties have manifestos and a track record.

————

For the GOP, one need look no further than Project 2025. This 900+ page roadmap is the product of The Heritage Foundation, a highly influential ultra-conservative think tank that has been fighting against reproductive rights, LGBTQ+ rights, civil rights, and climate change for decades. Aiding and abetting this project are over a hundred other right-wing groups such as Stephen Miller’s (he of the “family separation” immigration policy) America First Legal, and the book-banning, racism-denying Moms for Liberty. While Project 2025 is not officially the platform of the GOP’s campaigns, we hear them use its talking points in their rhetoric, see the actions they’ve already taken in support of it, and read about the steps they are taking toward a fuller implementation of its goals.

It’s impossible to accurately summarize this incredibly broad-based agenda, but let’s at least point to a few examples of where they’re going:

  • Christian nationalism is a driving force in the Project’s philosophy. We see already the attempts to erode the separation of church and state, with Christian teachings being mandated in schools (see Oklahoma, Louisiana) and attempts to eliminate the long-standing ban on churches endorsing candidates.
  • Climate change mitigation efforts should be abandoned by repealing regulations that curb emissions, downsizing the EPA, and abolishing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which the Project calls “one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry.”
  • Reproductive health is on the block, as the Project insists that life begins at conception, and intends to explicitly reject “the notion that abortion is health care.” This, includes the withdrawal of FDA approval of (and funding for) medical abortion drugs and the “morning after” pill. One spokesperson has said that the Department of Health and Human Services should require that “every state report exactly how many abortions take place within its borders, at what gestational age of the child, for what reason, the mother’s state of residence, and by what method.” General healthcare, too, is up for changes, as the Project wants to rescind Medicare’s ability to negotiate drug prices (which recently brought the monthly price of insulin down to $35) and eliminate gender-affirming care.
  • Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) projgrams, which have far-reaching positive effects for many vulnerable minorities, will be removed and federal employees who have participated in such programs can be fired.  The Project proposes the recognition of only heterosexual men and women, the removal of protection against discrimination on the basis of sexual or gender identity, and promotion of a government that will “maintain a biblically based, social-science-reinforced definition of marriage and family.”

These are highlights only, and do not paint a complete picture, as we also need to keep in mind that the GOP talks openly about more tax cuts that primarily benefit the wealthy and corporations, about eliminating the ACA that provides healthcare for millions, and about letting Putin and Russia do “whatever the hell they want” and walk all over Ukraine (and wherever they want to go next).

————

On the Democrat side, it’s pretty much the opposite: religion has no place in government, climate change is real and must be combated, reproductive rights are essential healthcare, prescription drugs should be cheaper for everyone, and America is stronger because of our diversity.

In addition, the Democrats:

  • Have been working toward immigration reform and border security (though the GOP killed a bill they’d already agreed to, because it’s a good political football)
  • Have helped eliminate or reduce student loan debt for millions (though the GOP has worked hard to thwart every attempt)
  • Were able to bring down gas prices about 40 cents/gallon through a savvy set of maneuvers using the Strategic Petroleum Reserve
  • Have passed bills on infrastructure and manufacturing that have brought thousands of jobs and billions of investment dollars back to the states
  • Want to raise the minimum wage, fight for higher tax credits to offset child-care costs, and support workers who want to unionize
  • Support the fight against autocracy, be it against Putin’s imperialistic goals in Ukraine, or Iran’s proxies in the Middle East

————

Regardless of who is at the top of the ticket, these are the agendas, and one will win in November.

My vote will go toward the Democrat’s agenda, up and down the ticket, because:

  • Even though I live in a reliably “blue state,” I want to repudiate the GOP agenda.
    • I don’t want to win by a squeak; I want to win by a lot. I don’t want anyone to stay home or vote for a third party candidate because I want this extreme GOP agenda to be resoundingly defeated. I want the Democrat agenda to be given a mandate to proceed.
  • I want to give the Democrat agenda the tools it needs to realize these goals.
    • That means a majority in the House and the Senate, as well as control of the Executive branch. The GOP has proven it cannot/will not compromise. Hell, even when they did agree to a bill that gave them almost everything they wanted (i.e., this year’s immigration/border security bill), they killed it rather than give any kind of a “win” to the Dems. So I want a government that can actually do something, instead of being stuck in gridlock.
  • I want the Democrat agenda to have a chance to re-balance the Supreme Court (or at least maintain status quo).
    • If the GOP comes into power again, they’ll be able to replace aging conservatives Thomas and Alito with younger, more rabid justices, who will give us retrograde decisions like Dobbs for decades to come. And let’s not even think of them expanding the conservative majority on the bench, should one of the liberal justices retire.

There’s a lot at stake this election. We’re reaching a fever pitch and the results will shape our nation for decades.

One of these agendas will win, come November, and we don’t have the luxury of letting others decide for us.

If you’ve read this far, I thank you for your indulgence, and I greatly appreciate your time and attention.

k

Read Full Post »

you stand there
like Leonardo’s man
center of all
surrounded by
perfect Aristotelian
spheres of control
reaching out
from Self
to Heaven
and in these realms
you have arrayed
the spectra of the world
expertly arranged
perfectly codified
to the most trifling degree
from Those Held Dear
to the Alien Other
from Loved
to Hated
from Defended
to Attacked
but where
is the line
the demarcation
the boundary
between what realms
do you divide
the Worthy
from Undeserving
and why
for there is no line
that separates us
save the one
you draw

Read Full Post »

Is there no coming back,
no retreat from this landscape of ire,
this canyon of sorrow

Far beyond the limits of hope,
bordered by despairing walls,
unable to care

Except for our own kind,
our own mind-like echoes,
our mirror selves

Where every difference,
each flower of nuance,
challenges the power

Born of our righteous rage,
grown fat on bias and lies,
clothed in trappings of heaven

Armed with tools of denial,
building myriad barricades,
but never a bridge

To link us,
to lift us,
to exalt

In all that we are?

k

 

 

Read Full Post »

This is who we want to be

We want our neighbors to go hungry
So we can enjoy the myth of our exceptional diligence

We want people to die of a preventable disease
So we don’t have to suffer the discomfort of a filter mask

We want kids to be stigmatized, bullied, and ashamed
So we can believe in the binary nature of gender

We want the oppressed to shut up and take a seat in the back
So we don’t have to think about the crimes of our ancestors

We want people to work long hours in unsafe conditions for paltry wages
So we can promote the fairy tale of corporate benevolence

We want women to bear babies, even if it kills them
So we can revel in our prideful righteousness

We want nothing to change, even for the better
So we can remain faithful to the tribe of our forebears

We want our children to be traumatized, maimed, and murdered
So we can have our guns

This

This is who we want to be

A nation without compassion, without sense
A nation without morality beyond our own selfish wants
A nation without shame, without courage

And we are succeeding

Read Full Post »

06Jan2022

One year ago today, my journal entry ended with: “Self-medication was required.”

This year, it’s still too early to know what the day will bring.

What today is supposed to bring is suffused in mundanity—an appointment with a chimney sweep, a couple of deliveries, an inch of rain—but if 2021 taught me anything, it’s that we can never really know what the world at large will toss into the mix.

Looking back on the year between, though, I’d have to say the auspices are not promising.

Monday, we both got our COVID booster shots. Our immune systems kicked into high gear, building the desired antibodies and so, by Tuesday, as expected, we were a bit under the weather. Some of our social media contacts chided us for putting such “poison” into our bodies; one even sent us a ten-minute video on how it magnetizes our bodies. (FYI: it doesn’t.)

In a friend’s most recent letter, she told me that some people in her circle—all functional adults capable of holding down a full-time job—upon reading a book that could be classified as “magic realism,” were of the belief that because “back then, people were closer to nature,” the magic described in the book was real. (FYI: it wasn’t.)

Recently, heavy snows—in winter—are being pointed to as clear evidence that climate change is a hoax, while tornadoes and wildfires in December are dismissed with the label “God’s will.” (FYI: it isn’t and they aren’t.)

And, to bring it back around, two in five Americanstwo in five—believe that hundreds of individuals across the nation somehow conspired to flawlessly submit thousands of fraudulent ballots, all without leaving the slightest trace of their crimes, all to oust a sitting president whose approval rating on its best day couldn’t touch the 50% mark. (FYI: they didn’t.)

“I did my own research” has become the mantra of the age, with grand swathes of the American population opting to trust a few hours spent on Google, searching for what they want to hear, rather than give an iota of credence to the knowledge and experience of experts who’ve studied these topics for decades.

We are in a Desert of Reason, where logic and critical thought are as rare and precious as water in the Sahara. Common sense is not only uncommon, it is strenuouslyand at times violentlyeschewed.

Today will play itself out, ending as it will with a bang or a whimper, but either way, as it was last year, self-medication may be required.

k

Read Full Post »

We’ve had a few tense weeks here, and not because of current events. Short version: My wife had a cancer scare, but thankfully it was only a scare.

The past eight weeks, and especially the last two weeks, were filled with appointments and waiting and procedures and more waiting and biopsies and even more waiting. As you can probably imagine, during that waiting, all that downtime when the “What if?” scenarios bounce around your head like a ping-pong ball at a championship match, we desperately needed something to occupy our brains.

My wife (the one in greatest need of distraction) found her solace in Blue Bloods. It’s a show we’ve never watched before, and she now had eleven seasons (!!) to binge on.

And binge, she did (with me at her side, for much of it).

For those unfamiliar with Blue Bloods, it follows a family of Irish Catholic police officers in New York City. Gramps (Len Cariou) is retired, Dad (Tom Selleck) is the police commissioner, and the boys (Donnie Wahlberg and Will Estes) are cops. My wife was there primarily for Tom Selleck as the gruff but gentle patriarch. For my part, I was there solely for Bridget Moynahan, who plays the daughter, an Assistant DA for the city.

The shows are simple. There’s an A plot and a B plot in each episode. The family always gets together for Sunday dinner. There is ongoing character development, but for the most part, it’s purely episodic. It’s a dependable show. Dependably good. Dependably homey. Dependably entertaining.

During one episode’s Sunday dinner scene, I turned to my wife and said, “One thing I like about this show: they’re all Republicans.”

She looked at me like I had suggested they were all rabid dogs, a look that said, “Are you crazy? That’s impossible. I like these people!”

Given recent events, this reaction can be forgiven, but I stand by my opinion. Law enforcement skews strongly toward the GOP. Catholics lean conservative. Taken with the characters’ commentary about political and social issues (e.g., stop and frisk, personal responsibility, etc.), it was clear that this family had a strong conservative viewpoint. Doing the math, it was clear to me that the characters would probably vote Republican.

This deduction, however, was not offered up as an insult. As I said, I liked that aspect of the show. As a staunch liberal, a guy whose father campaigned for Adlai Stevenson (twice!), you might think it odd that I like watching a show about a family of Republicans, but it’s not odd. Not odd at all.

Why? Because these characters are old-school GOP, like the Republicans of my youth. Conservative? Yes. Tough on crime? You bet. Fiscally tight-fisted? Damned straight. But they are also capable of compassion, of seeing the gradients between black and white, of taking into account mitigating circumstances, and (above all) the necessity to compromise. They care for people as people, seeing the world not just as cops and robbers, heroes and zeroes.

In short, they are not of the rabid Jim Jordan GOP, nor the morally relativistic Lindsey Graham GOP. The Blue Bloods family is more akin to the Eisenhower GOP.

And I miss that GOP.

I miss the GOP with whom you could actually debate, the GOP that wasn’t blind to the massive common ground between the extremes. I miss the GOP that understood that politics is ideology but governing is compromise. I miss the GOP that was willing to give something up, to negotiate in good faith, in order to advance what they saw as the greater good.

Yes, polarization exists on both sides, these days, but if there’s one party that owns the centrist, moderate ground, well, it ain’t today’s GOP. Today’s GOP has been moving off that part of the field for over a decade, and in the past four years, they ceded it completely. Today’s GOP is all about power and money and control and is nothing about governing. Today’s GOP is the party of the Big Lie, conspiracy theories, and slavering devotion to Dear Leader. And sadly, of sedition.

I know there are some exceptions to this new norm in the GOP, and I feel for them. They are grossly outnumbered by the wild-eyed cohort that has shifted the GOP so far to the right. These few, these moderate few, are trapped between the mob their party has built and the abyss that now exists between our parties’ ideologies.

I miss the GOP, and I suspect perhaps some of these politicians do, as well.

k

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »