Left-right, left-right is the first lesson a new military recruit learns. The lesson is so important that farm boys drafted in WWI who didn't know their left from their right wore straw on one foot and hay on the other shoe. The left right cadence became hay foot-straw foot until the boys learned. For militaries left-right lock steps soldiers into easily controlled masses able to respond to all commands.
The recent "Trumpdon'tcare" health debacle demonstrated a party's blatant attempts to lockstep representatives into support of very bad legislation, in the name of party loyalty. The Left (Democrats) weren't really challenged on this issue. Despite the President's alternate reality, it was the Right (Republicans) that failed to lock step off a cliff like lemmings. Maybe he needs to resort to hay foot-straw foot rather than threats and bullying.
The Left doesn't really get a walk on this vote since their was opposition along party lines rather than in the interest of better legislation. An ideological battle over legislation ignores the "v." between left and right. The majority of the people stand between the warring parties becoming ignored as collateral damage to party line votes.
Contrary to shouted claims what's good for the party is not good for the country. The people have every right to expect honest and open debate producing the best possible legislation. They will accept minority descent that produced even better governance. Ideologues do not govern in the long term interest of the country or its people only in the narrow limits of party alternate realities.
The people want to see honor, integrity and an inclusive visions for the future from Washington. Given the recent Russian examples the expectation is that we may soon see opposition journalist and legislators disappear into never, never land. There they will learn to march to straw foot, straw foot cadence responding to twitter commands until only one Voice is heard.
Tuesday, March 28, 2017
Thursday, February 9, 2017
Blind 020917
Party loyalty is commendable for campaigning but once elected, politicians represents all within their respective electorates. Elected officials must put aside blind ideological party support. Lock step votes for extremist positions are bad for the voters and the country. Neither left nor right represents the electorate and extreme party line votes leaves three quarters of the population un-represented. There are two possible outcomes from blind embrace of extreme ideology: Totalitarian suppression of the majority or its embrace of revolution. Either outcome must be avoided. Officials are elected to openly consider the issues and vote for what is best for the majority while protecting the minorities.
Votes to appoint the unqualified, and extremist out of party loyalty insures the ultimate decline and fall of the State. Majorities are slow to react but once aroused they are impossible to stop and the State fragments.
Votes to appoint the unqualified, and extremist out of party loyalty insures the ultimate decline and fall of the State. Majorities are slow to react but once aroused they are impossible to stop and the State fragments.
Sunday, February 5, 2017
Education 013017
The administration's attempts to dismantle the country's public education system insures the ultimate destruction of the country. It must be remembered that America rose to greatness on the shoulders of the greatest generation educated in public schools, often in one-room schools. Teachers dedicated to insuring their charges were prepared to build that future greatness taught classes in those schools.
Those great teachers of the past no longer teach because of low pay and rising bureaucracy inertia. Quality public education has been replaced by the big business of education. There is money to be made by charter schools, endless testing, conferences and production of study aids. Parents, teachers and students are excluded from education processes by businesses that siphon off desperately needed money for public education. While public education deteriorates the business of education is growing, producing only a lowering of the country's literacy standards.
Congress must exercise extreme caution in dealing with proposals that increases the power of the business of education at the cost of equal education for all that insures the great generation's ideals are never lost. Failure to support public education drives a wedge into the heart of the country where many have little chance of clawing their way out of poverty and more under educated slip into that abyss.
Those great teachers of the past no longer teach because of low pay and rising bureaucracy inertia. Quality public education has been replaced by the big business of education. There is money to be made by charter schools, endless testing, conferences and production of study aids. Parents, teachers and students are excluded from education processes by businesses that siphon off desperately needed money for public education. While public education deteriorates the business of education is growing, producing only a lowering of the country's literacy standards.
Congress must exercise extreme caution in dealing with proposals that increases the power of the business of education at the cost of equal education for all that insures the great generation's ideals are never lost. Failure to support public education drives a wedge into the heart of the country where many have little chance of clawing their way out of poverty and more under educated slip into that abyss.
Saturday, November 12, 2016
Get over it 111116
Like it or not the election is over and there is a winner. Both parties are seeking to understand the results, fix the blame and develop new strategies.
The problem, they are looking back not forward. For two days on air pundits have been trying to figure out how they could be so wrong. Clinton supporters have been taking to the streets to change the outcome. Get over it, the election is over and the other guy won.
Now is the time to discover that there are no Democrats or Republicans only Americans that deserve the very best efforts of both parties. Both candidates ran outside their party dragging it along behind. It is a New World out there and the parties will have to adjust rather than the world having to adjust to the party.
Lock step party loyalty is a thing of the past. The party's future lies in a vision rather than a candidate. Both candidates spread fear and hate but now is the time to government to govern for all the people, all the time. Accept the decision move forward, deal with reality and try to get ahead of the problems.
Don't look back, make things work. The will of the people is solve problems not make more.
Thursday, November 10, 2016
Losers 110616
It is still to early to predict the next president of the United States but it easy to forecast the losers of the current election.
With the possible exception of the 4000 or so sycophants the new president gets to appoint, the whole world is a loser in this election. With all the venom left in the air by campaign 16 it may be time replace the Stars and Stripes with the old colonial rattlesnake flag. The new president's major task is to attempt to heal the county and present a united country to the world. Failure to heal the divisions of the country effects the country's soft power.
Soft power comes with the world's respect of just who are the United States. After the bone breaking of campaigning of 15/16 it is obvious that the United States is not the model for democratic reform, or even a democratic process. The candidates ran outside their party and didn't pay any attention to a platform of any kind. The campaign hung on far to long, Conservative estimates are 18 months but reality is that at least one candidate began campaigning four years before the election.
Soft power has been eroding for years as the United States forcefully twisted arms and sent in troops to obtain the unobtainable. Often the objectives of intervention were not defined with the troops left to shoot them all. A philosophy they brought home to the streets of hometown America. The United States today is not your fathers' country and there is no point in trying to return to the "good old days" which weren't really all that good.
The victor of campaign 16 must start from where the county is now. It has been a long time coming as Woodrow Wilson squandered America's soft power at Versailles, FDR constructed the UN as the forum for American soft power but his successors embraced hard intervention.
The new president is faced with two challenges: bring the country back from the precipice and to rebuild the countries' influence in the world. Failure at home may lead to a break up of the United States and another Civil War with states succession following the federal government euphoric model for the break up in other countries. The world will applaud the break up of the United States, Canada and Mexico will reach out to former lands. Foreign countries will be quick to support breakaway states following shortsighted policies of the federal government.
Healing the country is only the first step in regaining international standing. The country must not walk away from the world but lead rather than continue its attempts to force that world into a proven flawed form of government.
The country needs a vision for the future not more power politics that only serves indivual interest. The people need to be led to a better nation not driven by sound bites and demography.
Where do you want to be in 10, 20 years or make losers of your grand kids in the 22d century?
With the possible exception of the 4000 or so sycophants the new president gets to appoint, the whole world is a loser in this election. With all the venom left in the air by campaign 16 it may be time replace the Stars and Stripes with the old colonial rattlesnake flag. The new president's major task is to attempt to heal the county and present a united country to the world. Failure to heal the divisions of the country effects the country's soft power.
Soft power comes with the world's respect of just who are the United States. After the bone breaking of campaigning of 15/16 it is obvious that the United States is not the model for democratic reform, or even a democratic process. The candidates ran outside their party and didn't pay any attention to a platform of any kind. The campaign hung on far to long, Conservative estimates are 18 months but reality is that at least one candidate began campaigning four years before the election.
Soft power has been eroding for years as the United States forcefully twisted arms and sent in troops to obtain the unobtainable. Often the objectives of intervention were not defined with the troops left to shoot them all. A philosophy they brought home to the streets of hometown America. The United States today is not your fathers' country and there is no point in trying to return to the "good old days" which weren't really all that good.
The victor of campaign 16 must start from where the county is now. It has been a long time coming as Woodrow Wilson squandered America's soft power at Versailles, FDR constructed the UN as the forum for American soft power but his successors embraced hard intervention.
The new president is faced with two challenges: bring the country back from the precipice and to rebuild the countries' influence in the world. Failure at home may lead to a break up of the United States and another Civil War with states succession following the federal government euphoric model for the break up in other countries. The world will applaud the break up of the United States, Canada and Mexico will reach out to former lands. Foreign countries will be quick to support breakaway states following shortsighted policies of the federal government.
Healing the country is only the first step in regaining international standing. The country must not walk away from the world but lead rather than continue its attempts to force that world into a proven flawed form of government.
The country needs a vision for the future not more power politics that only serves indivual interest. The people need to be led to a better nation not driven by sound bites and demography.
Where do you want to be in 10, 20 years or make losers of your grand kids in the 22d century?
Thursday, November 3, 2016
Party time 103016
Party time is lots noise, music, balloons, confetti and free flowing champagne. All true but the celebration for this years election finds the noise confused, music off key the balloons popped, confetti littering the floor and champagne flat.
In the United States the two political parties have put forth mutually despised candidates. With little choice voters have fallen back on party labels to cast their votes. The problem is that neither candidate reflects the tradition philosophy of their parties. The reality is that the parties themselves are unsure what their philosophy now embraces. Parties shot themselves in both feet by establishing procedures that limited open choice candidates. Under the two party system viable candidates were unable to get traction for nomination. Even before the conventions the outcomes were forgone conclusions. The reality is that party conventions are relegated to expensive media shows that have become politically irrelevant.
The shows do serve a purpose they delude masses that their opinions matter. The show builds hysterical excitement but allows no choice, candidates and platforms are already determined. It's a campaign extravagance hold over from the old days when state delegates actually openly debated platform planks and chose candidates. The result is that the United States' two party system has evolved into umbrella parties where the loudest control the message, owning both the candidate and platform. The public's lack of free choice is obscured by the professional showmanship. The two party system has actually become a major step away from democracy. A major step to the right where people are given little choice in the next four years of government. Voting a party labels are no help as the labels no longer reflect philosophy.
Third parties may be true to their philosophy but lack the funding to blitz a jaded public. It maybe time for a multi-party system where voters know what candidates really stand for, or at least a ballot option for "None of the Above."
Before embracing multi-party systems take a look at the options. Many countries already have multiple parties which fare little better than the U.S. two parties. Whatever the label, party leaders follow their own agendas that often diverge from that of the rank and file. Membership continues to vote the label out of past loyalty even when party leaders go in a different direction.
Question what the party stands for and if candidates support the platform. Candidates now are independent of party and establish their own agendas forcing allegiance of party loyalty. The news media, enjoying campaign champagne, fails to inform by feeding the horse race excitement.
It is time to reform the two party system or voters must get use to crying over fallen confetti and swilling stale champagne. The bubbles no longer tickle the nose but you can still get drunk over your winner.
Few remember when we voted for someone rather that the lessor of two evils. Wouldn't it be nice to vote for someone? We would really enjoy that party.
In the United States the two political parties have put forth mutually despised candidates. With little choice voters have fallen back on party labels to cast their votes. The problem is that neither candidate reflects the tradition philosophy of their parties. The reality is that the parties themselves are unsure what their philosophy now embraces. Parties shot themselves in both feet by establishing procedures that limited open choice candidates. Under the two party system viable candidates were unable to get traction for nomination. Even before the conventions the outcomes were forgone conclusions. The reality is that party conventions are relegated to expensive media shows that have become politically irrelevant.
The shows do serve a purpose they delude masses that their opinions matter. The show builds hysterical excitement but allows no choice, candidates and platforms are already determined. It's a campaign extravagance hold over from the old days when state delegates actually openly debated platform planks and chose candidates. The result is that the United States' two party system has evolved into umbrella parties where the loudest control the message, owning both the candidate and platform. The public's lack of free choice is obscured by the professional showmanship. The two party system has actually become a major step away from democracy. A major step to the right where people are given little choice in the next four years of government. Voting a party labels are no help as the labels no longer reflect philosophy.
Third parties may be true to their philosophy but lack the funding to blitz a jaded public. It maybe time for a multi-party system where voters know what candidates really stand for, or at least a ballot option for "None of the Above."
Before embracing multi-party systems take a look at the options. Many countries already have multiple parties which fare little better than the U.S. two parties. Whatever the label, party leaders follow their own agendas that often diverge from that of the rank and file. Membership continues to vote the label out of past loyalty even when party leaders go in a different direction.
Question what the party stands for and if candidates support the platform. Candidates now are independent of party and establish their own agendas forcing allegiance of party loyalty. The news media, enjoying campaign champagne, fails to inform by feeding the horse race excitement.
It is time to reform the two party system or voters must get use to crying over fallen confetti and swilling stale champagne. The bubbles no longer tickle the nose but you can still get drunk over your winner.
Few remember when we voted for someone rather that the lessor of two evils. Wouldn't it be nice to vote for someone? We would really enjoy that party.
Tuesday, October 25, 2016
Sad state 081016
This is the time for all good men to come to the of their country. An old typing drill phrase that has taken on new relevance in American 2016 electioneering. It is truly a sad state of affairs for democracy when the will of minority extremes can leave the majority with only bad options. The majority's sadness may lead to an end of the two party system that served as moderator of the electorate's emotional swings.
A key axiom of democracy is that it reflects the will of a well informed majority, it is sad that the majority isn't well informed and abandons honest information for minority rants. How is this possible in the information age? It may actually be a product of the information age that has led to the sad state of the "fourth estate" (journalism). Thoughtful print journalist are a dying breed whose graves are being dug by a public to busy to think or even read, seeing only misleading, flashy sound bites.
Television news opened with great promise as respected print reporters provided depth to the 15 minute news window that interrupted the revenue flow of entertainment. The networks discovered that TV news provided prestige offsetting poor ratings and expanded the news window. Competition between networks' news programs began generating a revenue flow, which lifted news out of public service category. Its new status didn't lead to a better informed public but rather a less knowledgeable one.
Craggy old reporters began to age out of talking head shots replaced by a new breed of "beautiful people journalist." Unable to phantom dynamic news the beautiful people embraced entertainment formats, sadly the sound and fury of sound bites that replace substance mesmerized viewers. "It's not news without video" with spectacular visuals coloring editorial judgements. Conflicting on screen messages where voice, video and visuals don't match confuses viewers. Even if TV journalists manages to get the story they add wild-eyed speculation mudding perceptions. Sadly election "16" is the product of news windows where bad jokes, speculation and self-promoting chitchat of news personalities seeking stardom in larger markets color the news. Sadly this self-aggrandizement also limits the available minutes for even the misleading sound bites. `
All the news that's fit to print died with the broad sheet. News execs quote Thomas Jefferson as the guru of free press but ignore the fact that as president he tried to censor the news and control the message. It's sad that is the only message that came through to politicians was demonizing truth and a free press, works
While newspapers struggle with TV, it struggles against the new Internet news, now competing with social media for market share. Media theorist applauds the proliferation of news outlets as the ultimate guaranteed of democracy. Sadly when tested the theory fails the test of informed polity. Despite all the new outlets the 21st century public is less informed than 19th century's publics.
Social media was credited for the "Arab spring" which failed to bring democracy, only instability. Social media has demonstrated a certain degree of democracy since anyone can incite a mob and fan hate, but mobs go in unexpected direction. In England an unexpected outcome was Brexit, in the United States the results of election are still to be determined but lack of a well-informed electorate results in two despised candidates chosen by social media minorities. The sadness will continue to play out as the voices continue to twist mob opinions. The real sadness is our heritage to the future is destabilization of orders as media flails public knowledge with colorful fun entertainment. States are really in a sad state as they crumble before social media mob voices.
A key axiom of democracy is that it reflects the will of a well informed majority, it is sad that the majority isn't well informed and abandons honest information for minority rants. How is this possible in the information age? It may actually be a product of the information age that has led to the sad state of the "fourth estate" (journalism). Thoughtful print journalist are a dying breed whose graves are being dug by a public to busy to think or even read, seeing only misleading, flashy sound bites.
Television news opened with great promise as respected print reporters provided depth to the 15 minute news window that interrupted the revenue flow of entertainment. The networks discovered that TV news provided prestige offsetting poor ratings and expanded the news window. Competition between networks' news programs began generating a revenue flow, which lifted news out of public service category. Its new status didn't lead to a better informed public but rather a less knowledgeable one.
Craggy old reporters began to age out of talking head shots replaced by a new breed of "beautiful people journalist." Unable to phantom dynamic news the beautiful people embraced entertainment formats, sadly the sound and fury of sound bites that replace substance mesmerized viewers. "It's not news without video" with spectacular visuals coloring editorial judgements. Conflicting on screen messages where voice, video and visuals don't match confuses viewers. Even if TV journalists manages to get the story they add wild-eyed speculation mudding perceptions. Sadly election "16" is the product of news windows where bad jokes, speculation and self-promoting chitchat of news personalities seeking stardom in larger markets color the news. Sadly this self-aggrandizement also limits the available minutes for even the misleading sound bites. `
All the news that's fit to print died with the broad sheet. News execs quote Thomas Jefferson as the guru of free press but ignore the fact that as president he tried to censor the news and control the message. It's sad that is the only message that came through to politicians was demonizing truth and a free press, works
While newspapers struggle with TV, it struggles against the new Internet news, now competing with social media for market share. Media theorist applauds the proliferation of news outlets as the ultimate guaranteed of democracy. Sadly when tested the theory fails the test of informed polity. Despite all the new outlets the 21st century public is less informed than 19th century's publics.
Social media was credited for the "Arab spring" which failed to bring democracy, only instability. Social media has demonstrated a certain degree of democracy since anyone can incite a mob and fan hate, but mobs go in unexpected direction. In England an unexpected outcome was Brexit, in the United States the results of election are still to be determined but lack of a well-informed electorate results in two despised candidates chosen by social media minorities. The sadness will continue to play out as the voices continue to twist mob opinions. The real sadness is our heritage to the future is destabilization of orders as media flails public knowledge with colorful fun entertainment. States are really in a sad state as they crumble before social media mob voices.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)