Just the Way it is....

People have some deeply held convictions.

Convictions that they allow to influence all they see, know and feel.

I've said before that I live at a kind of crossroads.  People show up who need a shoulder for a little while then they make their way to whatever.

I think my last brush with so-called "romance" was the most stark example of that.

Oh lord!  We're not going there again!  No worries...

But it did show me just how deeply divided otherwise like-minded people can be.  The sin of ideology I call it. 

A sin that takes one small aspect of someone's makeup and inflates it into a lifestyle.  A insular cocoon of circular logic and prejudicial perspectives impenetrable by anything that threatens the ideology.

We are what we are no matter what...That's just the way it is...

No, that's the way you want it.

The saddest part of it all is that the world quickly goes from a wide vista of opportunity to tunnel vision.  Creative thought, compassion, insight is all framed within a narrow view.

I've looked at the other side.  Tried to understand what it was that was so different about me and them.  Spoiler alert, it aint much.

What I found wasn't a pack of rabid savages.  Just fear.  Fear of losing what never really existed.  At least not without acknowledging what the real cost of their utopian vision was.  A vision that wasn't their own by the way. 

We tend to divide ourselves into tribes based on...whatever...

Far more scholarly authorities than I have written a mountain of tomes on the subject.  You've no doubt already seen their work.  I won't bother to rehash it here.

We live in a society that recognizes that we tend to seek out only that which supports our own world view.  The dangerous part is that the media has seized on that premise and eschewed objectivity for a tantalizing revenue stream that preys not on facts but fears.

Conservatives do it.  Liberals are no better.  So long as the other guy is the boogeyman we are sufficiently distracted to cede our own power to propaganda and rhetoric.

The propaganda feeds the machine.  The machine pumps out endless rhetoric and red meat. 

There is no compromise so long as the machine is churning.

Your heroes?  Your pillars of democracy?  They're the face of the machine.  A construct to divide otherwise like-minded people.  To keep poking that sore spot until you wretch and scream in pain.

The drug?  The cure?  Throw a bone to salve the wounds they created.  Just enough relief to keep the faithful working toward their own destruction.

We are in this country literally in the grip of mass scale Stockholm Syndrome.  I don't care what color the map says your state is.  Neither side will ever do anything to upset the machine.

Examples?  Glad you asked...

Obama claimed to fix Student Loans.  Nothing really happened and millions are still indebted to a corrupt system that enslaves borrowers for debt that should never have existed in the first place.

Trump promised prosperity with protectionism the result of which has nearly bankrupted thousands of small businesses and farmers who suddenly find no markets for their goods.  Multinational corporations can care less.  But Mom and Pop?

The saddest thing is that all the time we were waving our banners and wearing our MAGA hats we were surrendering our own power in favor of a fantasy.

A fantasy that will deprive you of life, love and occupation should you identify with the wrong side.

Nothing will change so long as we continue to exist in a fog of ideology political or otherwise. 

This is the true challenge to the evolution of the human race. 

To resist the urges of the lizard brain.  We are where we are because of what we allowed to happen.

This is on me, you and those that came before you. 

But if you're committed to your ideology, have no fear.  Reason has no value and facts are malleable.  Enjoy the appearance of a civil society and the shiny chains you've made for yourself.

Some of us knew but nobody cared to do anything about it.

Ideology...

I did something tonight that anyone that knows me would find shocking...

I went with a friend to see a political documentary, Death of A Nation.

A film that, to be honest, doesn't quite fall within my sphere of beliefs.  Which by the way happen to lie somewhere in the middle.

But...

I'm a strong believer that what we have in common is far greater than what divides.  So as I sat quietly and attentively watching the screen I suspended any pangs of my own ideological leanings in hopes of finding that common ground.

Thing is, strong ideologies tend to dismiss such hopes and this movie ultimately left me feeling like I was watching less documentary and more propaganda piece.

...and I was disappointed.

I was hoping to find that common ground, see an intelligent presentation of an alternative view not colored by extremist ideologies and conspiracy theory.  

That's not what I got.  Instead it was little more than red meat for a political base.  That it was seen in any other light by otherwise well meaning, intelligent people was discouraging. 

I was hoping the overwhelmingly negative reviews that used words like "laughable" and "preaching to the mentally unsound" were unfairly leveled.  

Hard to rebuke such barbs when the core message of the film was that Democrats were aligned with the like of Hitler, Mussolini and ultimately Satan while Republicans walked in the glow of the almighty.  

Not exactly a call to unity...

So at the end when my friend asked what I thought my only response was...

"Interesting"  

Let me be fair here.  If such a presentation had the opposite political bend I'd be just as disappointed.  

I have a real problem with extreme ideology and a strong believer that truth lies somewhere near if not at the middle.

My friend went on to emphasize her belief in the  "truths" portrayed in the film.  My response...

"Truth is malleable"

"I'm sorry you feel that way,"  said she...

I was sorry she didn't understand what it was I was actually saying.  In case you're wondering what that is it's simply this.  I feel that such a work, regardless of its political bend, is less interested in truth than an agenda.

We all have our own agendas even if we don't acknowledge them.  But agendas are inherently selfish things. Existing often for no other purpose than to manipulate others to get our own way even at their expense if necessary.

In the end I kept my opinions neutral.  I'm not interested in throwing away a relationship over one aspect of someone's personality.

Nor do I evaluate the value of a relationship by such a narrow aspect as politics.  

...but many do.

So here we are.  

Embracing ideologies with no more value than dust in the wind.  

Embrace the wind and you're touched by nothing.

Raincheck on the Fiscal Cliff

Article originally posted on Technorati as Raincheck on the Fiscal Cliff

If your thoughts have been occupied by the "fiscal cliff"  like a bad New Year's hangover there is some relief, at least for now.  Today's passage of HR-8 (The Tax relief Extension Act) provides among other things a 1 year extension to Federal emergency unemployment benefits as well as a permanent extension of tax cuts for those making less than $400,000.  Both measures that could keep the economy from slipping back into recession in the near term. 

Still, on both sides of the aisle this last minute bipartisan agreement comes up far short of the "Grand Bargain."  Spending cuts are only "deferred" for two months leaving plenty of debate for the incoming 113th congress.  It seems the only part of a comprehensive overhaul of government spending cuts and revenue increases that either side can agree on is the name.

To most Republicans on the hill, a "Grand Bargain" must include severe cuts in funding and tighter eligibility requirements for "entitlement" programs including Social security and Medicare.  Any new government program must have a corresponding funding source either from cuts in other entitlements or quantifiable revenue streams otherwise known as tax increases.  With most of the House Republicans still adhering to the Norquist pledge they're going to need different shorthand for "revenue." 

Republicans also chafe at the prospect of "overburdening" the well heeled with a bigger tax bill for fear of hurting job creation.  It is large, not small business that drives the economy in the conservative view.   Increasing taxes on them can only result in economic retaliation.  If it sounds familiar it is indeed the theory of trickledown economics from the Reagan era.

To most Democrats in congress, a "Grand Bargain" encourages investment in social programs, protection of entitlements and increased taxation on high earners.  Incidentally, what constitutes a "High earner" has been a major bone of contention during the haggling over the fiscal cliff.  Tax loopholes long employed by businesses to shelter income as well as subsidies to large corporations like big oil would also be eliminated under the "ideal" democratic plan.  

All of this under the banner of "tax fairness" which asks more of those who have "benefitted the most"  to help those who have not.  Of course bearing the label of "tax and spend" democrats makes their proposals subject to increased scrutiny from their Republican counterparts. A condemnation seemingly validated by funding sources that often look more like a sidewalk shell game than a legitimate revenue stream.  Republicans often cite President Obama's$700 billion Medicare savings plan as a revenue source as an example. 

Where republicans now argue the need for "fiscal responsibility" in funding social programs,  Democrats are quick to remind them of their lack of the virtue in recent history.   A 4trillion dollar price tag for the Iraq war and 1.2trillion for the Afghan war to date has only added to the balance on the national "credit card."  Numbers republicans refuse to address and democrats love to remind them of.

While disaster has been averted for now expect little in the way of increased cooperation going forward.  The deal passed Tuesday night by the House was born more of self-preservation than magnanimity.  None in congress wanted to bear the heat of a constituency thrown back into a crippling recession born out of legislative inaction. 

The logjam of the "Fiscal Cliff"  is born once again out of political dogma.  Where Democrats believe in government being a catalyst for economic growth Republicans see it as an impediment.  Not since the Civil war has a congressional body been so divided by ideology and put the fortunes of the country in such peril. 

If you require evidence, look no further than the close  of Tuesday night's House session.

Amidst impassioned pleas to act on a Senate bill that would authorize 60.4 billion in Sandy relief, the Republican leadership decided instead to end the session.  Cries of "Speaker!, Speaker!" left hanging in the air as the Speaker pro tempore Steve Womack (R-Ar) quickly left the chair, his only response a shrug and outstretched hands.

Fanatical ideology still holds the reigns of congress.  It remains to be seen if progress can replace it.  

Everything in Moderation, Politics on the Brink

Article first published as Everything in Moderation, Politics on the Brink on Technorati.

American political coverage is best consumed raw and in small doses free of commercial influence.   I'm not a political junkie by any means so I choose my sources carefully.  Lately it's seems the arguments have degenerated into nothing more than skewed utopian fantasies packaged for traditional media sources.  That leads me to C-span for what I at least believe to be unfiltered political news and events.

The first bit of programming I encountered in my latest consumption was coverage of the Arizona Republican party's Lincoln day lunch and straw poll with guest of honor Rick Santorum, darling of the Tea Party conservatives.

 After his speech the local right wing heroes were paraded up one by one starting with the recently recalled Arizona State Senator, Russell Pearce.  Badly in need of a speechwriter, his poorly constructed message included sexual references and a joke about somebody's scrotum as well as the obligatory "yay for us" message.  No substance there.

He was followed by the equally infamous Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio (currently under Federal investigation for criminal abuse of power) who spent most of his time at the podium playing the wounded victim of all those "nasty Democrats."  Not much of substance there either aside from his announcement that he's going to present his report on President Obama's birth certificate on March 1st. In the same breath he proclaimed how he didn't go looking for media attention.   Truly your tax dollars at work.

It's no wonder Arizona was the last territory to achieve statehood in the continental 48. 

Later on I watched part of a program on the Occupy Wall Street Strategy forum where a collection of progressive activists calling themselves the San Francisco 99 percent Coalition spoke of the current ills of capitalism and government in general. 

At a forum held at a San Francisco Unitarian church, guests included: Democrat Rocky Anderson,( Salt Lake City Mayor from 2000 to 2008), Dave Welsh (US Labor Against the War and the San Francisco Labor council), Margaret Flowers (Pres. Candidate and Occupy DC organizer) as well as Tom Gallagher (former Mass. state rep and Progressive Democrats of America . 

The meeting was moderated by Rose Aguilar of KALW Radio and was a veritable gallery of Left wing activists with representation ranging from Democrats to self-proclaimed Socialists.  There was no room for moderates with more than one participant accusing President Barack Obama of being a Republican.  Another audience member overtly suggested the end of capitalism in Toto. 

What was striking in both examples was the extreme viewpoints being offered as a moderate position.  Nothing short of complete capitulation to their ideology would satisfy either assembly.  Should these two groups ever occupy the same room I have no doubt that blood would spill.

It's almost amusing when you consider that both sides basically want the same thing.  Both seek to throw the proverbial baby out with the bath water.  Of course the most heated exchanges generally concern what constitutes a baby.

There was another program I watched between these two.  It was a discussion with Peter Orszag (Former director of the Office and Management and Budget under the Obama Administration) on the economy and reasons for its slow recovery.  Like any presentation on economics there were lots of charts and references to indicators of one sort or another.  There was one chart I found particularly interesting, however.  The chart showed a relationship between the decline of political moderates and the economy.  It seems there is a direct relationship between political ideology in Washington and the speed and strength of an economic recovery. 

With division in congress rising to a level on par with the first Continental Congress circa 1786, it appears that extreme ideology not only degenerates the discussion but the economy as well.  With the decline in political moderates and the polarization of the two dominant political parties it's no surprise that compromise comes only after brinkmanship. 

Ultimately it seems that extreme political views serve no productive purpose other than to foster political gridlock and sound bites for a depraved mass media.  In a country with a voracious appetite for reality shows that sensationalize conflict it's not surprising that political antagonism is so popular on the news.  Both political camps use ever escalating rhetoric to espouse radical views they can't reasonably hold.

 It's unlikely that extreme conservatives at the Lincoln day luncheon would choose to live in Hitler's Germany any more than progressives at the occupy wall street event would choose Soviet Russia.  In that light, extremism has no merit as "My way or the highway" rarely provides either outcome.

State of the Union 2012 (Updated)

Funny how a year later almost nothing has changed...

Item's in parentheses are updated information.

Originally published on Technorati as State of the Union 2012.

At least nobody shouted "You Lie!" during the speech.  

Still, it wasn't difficult to distinguish party affiliation during the hour long oratory.  Most Republican's remained seated for most of it with politely folded hands and a 10000 yard stare.

With at least a cursory level of decorum on display in the House chambers last night we witnessed the 2012 edition of the State of The Union with President Barack Obama presiding.

The economy took precedence as the primary focus of the speech with new tax incentives for companies that create jobs domestically while removing them from those that create them elsewhere.    A new investigative unit called the Trade Enforcement Unit is charged with investigating unfair trade practices and monitoring the flow of counterfeit  and unsafe products into the U.S.

Free trade agreements between the U.S. and South Korea, Colombia and Panama were also touted as helping to increase trade and move American products into foreign markets.
(During the election these agreements that had bipartisan support in both houses were used as political barbs by the Republican party)

The president also encouraged private/public partnerships to retrain unemployed workers for technical jobs that otherwise remain unfilled.  He went on to cite the example of a single mother displaced from her job as a mechanic in North Carolina.

" Jackie Bray is a single mom from North Carolina who was laid off from her job as a mechanic. Then Siemens opened a gas turbine factory in Charlotte, and formed a partnership with Central Piedmont Community College. The company helped the college design courses in laser and robotics training. It paid Jackie’s tuition, then hired her to help operate their plant."

(This initiative has gone nowhere sacrificed on the altar of the year's budget wrangling)

The cost of higher education was also addressed with an admonition to post secondary institutions to keep tuition costs down or risk the loss of public funding. 
(A great idea but a toothless mandate although new Federal student loans are no longer administered by private servicers.  Pre-existing loans have seen little to no change)

There was also mention of the need to address immigration issues regarding foreign born students studying in the U.S. who are deported because of their technically illegal status.  The President used this as an example to highlight the need for immigration reform.  From the Speech,

 " The opponents of action are out of excuses. We should be working on comprehensive immigration reform right now. But if election-year politics keeps Congress from acting on a comprehensive plan (It did) , let’s at least agree to stop expelling responsible young people who want to staff our labs, start new businesses, and defend this country"

The President also encouraged support for small businesses by allowing easier access to financing and tax incentives for providing better wages and job creation.  He went on to propose the elimination of unnecessary and cumbersome Federal regulations exemplified by the example of dairy farmer's requirement to comply with federal regulations regarding cleanup after a milk spillage because milk was classified as an oil. 

He went on to mention the need for investment in renewable energy and cited support of domestic exploration of energy resources.
(So long as oil, coal or natural gas is considered renewable, there isn't a problem for conservative lawmakers.  Public investment has been largely blocked by congressional deadlock)

The President also called for investigation of risky and abusive behavior of those in the financial industry by  a new Financial Crimes Unit under the supervision of the Attorney General of The U.S.

(Apart from heated questioning of mortgage bankers during Senate hearings, this too was largely a toothless mandate)

In his speech he highlighted the need for cooperation across party lines concerning budgetary and tax fairness issues.  The President also proposed a ban on insider trading for members of congress to curtail the influence of business lobbyists on politicians. 
("Fairness" is apparently an ambiguous term even a year later)

The measure would prevent members of congress from owning stocks in companies that they have a direct influence over or from.

(This did get through congress)

Recognition of the Military's success in eliminating Osama Bin Laden  was mentioned when the President said,

 "For the first time in two decades, Osama bin Laden is not a threat to this country."

(Even conservatives had to admit this fact but the political machine did its best to bury it)

The President also stressed  the need to support returning Veterans with funding for the VA and tax incentives to employers who hire veterans returning from service.

(Current budget negotiations still have VA funding on the chopping block.  A number of private funding organizations have sprang up to try to fill the gap)

As with any State of the Union we've come to expect a high level of political ideology and a wish list of associated ideals from the Executive branch.  Regardless of the motivations that craft the annual Presidential address it's understood that most of the admonitions will not come to pass. 

The Republican response to the speech from Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, for example,  was either diametrically opposed to the majority of the content or focused on election year political rhetoric.   A notable quote from the governor, "  he cannot claim that the last three years have made things anything but worse:"

(Neither can you you governor)

For the previous 4 decades the ideologies of both political parties have prevented true bi-partisanship. The result had been either congressional deadlock or biased legislation in favor of the ideals of the party in power.  

Unfortunately we are a nation of strong ideologies with political parties locked in a battle between the 20th century's New Deal and the 19th Century's industrial expansion.  Both have their merits and deficiencies but neither  is compatible with the other.  Unfortunately, more often than not this makes for an environment hostile to compromise that no well crafted oratory can overcome.

If the State of the Union serves no other purpose it at least exemplifies the constituent components  of the ideologies that prevent progress.