Walkabout Thoughts #97c

Got on Facebook the other day and saw a meme posted by someone about taxation that I thought was typical of a far-right misinterpretation of things as they are today. 

OK so a couple of posts on the creative stuff, today on politics. Sorry for being so graphics-heavy this time.

First, give America our motto back. In God We Trust has diluted (and deluded) who and what we are as America. "Out of Many, One" is important, actually far more important to all of us as a collective whole than "In God We Trust", which has played into a sick Christian Nationalism, White Authoritarianism.

So tired of these alt- and sub-culture delusions I've heard about since I was a kid, that has now evolved into insanity from Tea Party to MAGA and Donald Trump, and the whole mess we're now in because the GOP won't stand up to their nonsense and now it's evolved into, authoritarianism and criminals. 

The GOP did this to us, to themselves. This goes back to the early 1990s, the early 1980s and they, the two disruptions converged to make their "grounds" fertiel for a criminal and autocrat to overtake us.

It's now up to use to correct this. Thanks GOP. all because you were tired of being a minority, you supported a minority with bad ideas. We have to stop this delusion, these bad feelings, this division, this hatred, especially from the right.

We are America, the greatest nation in history and we've got to stop trying to tear ourselves apart, for our enemies, surely not for ourselves. Why would we? Unless we've been indoctrinated to do our enemies work for them. Which is brilliant, but, let's not do that.

This Pod Save America podcast episode is different. 

Why No One’s Winning Young Voters (Ep. 5)

I found this episode enlightening about our situation with Gen X, Gen Z & Millenials on voting, orientation, politics, etc. They have some good direct info and insight. Definitely worth a listen, especially if you're confused about some of the political orientations today. I know a bit about all this but I still found this episode enlightening. Description:

"Jon is joined by youth polling experts John Della Volpe and Kristen Soltis Anderson to talk about apathy among young voters this election cycle. Why are they so disengaged? Are some truly defecting to Trump? And what message, if any, can get them out for the polls? Jon, John, and Kristen dive into the focus group tape to unpack Gen Z’s opinions of our octogenarian presidential candidates, their top economic issues, and the war in Gaza. And Anderson Clayton, the 26-year-old Chair of the North Carolina Democratic Party, joins to talk about Gen Z’s faith in their own ability to improve democracy."

OK then. Democrats have good ideas they're poor at selling, Republicans have bad ideas they're good at selling...like con artists. And here we are. A criminal exPOTUS running again, the GOP, the MAGA GOP incapable of seeing what they are doing to us anymore. 

Marco Rubio on STOU Sunday delusionally claimed things about Trump that were utter nonsense. Actually saying, "I know NOTHING." 

Yeah, anyway, I had to say...something to that post on Facebook. I did my best to put it here and it was a problem. Finally went with cleaned-up screenshots.

Anyway here's what was said. 

In fact, these aren't the brightest bulbs in the pack. But then, neither am I. I have no illusions about that. So I'm taking the entire thread and posting it here so you can make up your own mind. At least to be familiarized with this kind of thinking.

It's not like I whipped them, or I "won" them, or triggered them. Or them me. I thought they were pretty rational and decent. Just a bit lost. It's hard to maintain and not just let the annoyance shine through, I did my best. I think they did too.

When you take decades of that kind of indoctrination, generations of it, and do little or nothing to stop, or correct it, you end up with the mess we have today in politics and America fantasizing about tearing either into "the Other" or simply, apart. I see some of this starting with the additions we once thought good, maybe were for a while. But have led us into weirdness.

We can start with the "Pledge of Allegiance". Subverting...yes, subverting our national motto from "E Pluribus Unum" ("Out of Many, One") to "In God We Trust". Which, while it may seem harmless and I wish it was, it's been weaponized against non-Christian-nationalist-Christians, our other religions and our non-theists.

It's ended us up with an authoritarian who follows the playbook of autocrats. Want to know more? Look up, Timothy Snyder.

Timothy Snyder's Key Tactics of Autocrats should seem familiar in what Trump and his people have been doing to US:

1. Control the Press: Undermine independent media to limit critical reporting.
2. Rewrite History: Manipulate or fabricate historical narratives to legitimize the regime and discredit opponents.
3. Undermine Institutions: Attack and weaken democratic institutions to reduce checks and balances.
4. Establish a Cult of Personality: Promote the leader as an indispensable and almost divine figure.
5. Target Minorities: Use scapegoating and discrimination to unify the majority and distract from real issues.
6. Undermine Truth: Spread misinformation and discredit factual reporting to create confusion and distrust.
7. Manipulate Elections: Rig electoral processes to ensure the regime remains in power.
8. Rule by Emergency: Declare states of emergency to bypass legal constraints and consolidate power.
9. Foster Corruption: Use patronage and corruption to ensure loyalty from key figures and institutions.
10. Suppress Dissent: Use intimidation, imprisonment, and violence to silence opposition.

These tactics create an environment where democratic norms erode, and the autocrat's power becomes increasingly unchallengeable.

So here's how that Facebook thread went. The following is for educational purposes. 

First the meme:

Late addition:

B: Jean Z Murdock your whole premise ignores the fact that people will and do pay for things they want and need that government isn't providing. Any necessary services that can be provided by government can be provided by market means without extortion as the business model. Taxes are what allow the people running the system to spend other people's money the way they want since their revenue chattel have no means to divorce themselves from unsatisfactory services that are monopolized by government rackets that just use them as a front for recurring extortion payments.
They don't want people to be able to "vote" with their money tho because that would expose the true lack of support these "representatives" and their ideas truly have.
That's it. Did I make any headway? Did anyone on that thread, or reading it, reconsider things? Or just dig in deeper.

JZ Murdock:

This argument is a typical libertarian perspective on taxation and government services, emphasizing the belief that market-based solutions can replace government-provided services without the coercion implied by taxation. Better known as pipe dreams.

As a political philosophy advocating for minimal government intervention and maximum individual freedom, can sometimes be seen as an immature orientation for several reasons. These reasons are not universally accepted, but they are often cited by critics of libertarianism:

1. Idealistic Simplification: Libertarianism can be perceived as overly idealistic and simplistic in its assumptions about human nature and society. Critics argue that it assumes people will always act rationally and ethically in a free market, which may not account for complexities such as greed, inequality, and the potential for exploitation.

2. Overreliance on Market Solutions: Libertarians often advocate for market solutions to social problems, assuming that markets will efficiently allocate resources and services. Critics contend that this ignores market failures, such as monopolies, externalities, and the underprovision of public goods, which require government intervention to correct.

3. Neglect of Social Responsibilities: Libertarianism emphasizes individual rights and freedoms, sometimes at the expense of collective responsibilities and social welfare. Critics argue that this perspective can lead to a lack of support for social safety nets and public services, which are essential for addressing inequality and protecting vulnerable populations.

4. Historical Oversights: Critics argue that libertarianism can ignore historical and systemic inequalities that require proactive measures to address. For example, simply removing government intervention without addressing past injustices may not lead to a fair and equitable society.

5. Practical Challenges: Implementing libertarian principles can be challenging in practice, as it requires dismantling established institutions and regulatory frameworks. Critics claim that this can lead to chaos and instability, as well as unintended consequences that may worsen social problems.

6. Conflict with Collective Action Needs: Libertarianism often underestimates the importance of collective action for addressing large-scale problems such as climate change, pandemics, and national defense. Critics argue that these issues require coordinated efforts that individual actions and market mechanisms alone cannot effectively manage.

7. Perceived Selfishness: Libertarianism's strong emphasis on individualism can be seen as promoting selfishness and a lack of concern for community and societal well-being. Critics argue that this focus on personal freedom can undermine social cohesion and collective efforts to improve public welfare.

It's important to note that these criticisms are not definitive judgments but rather perspectives that highlight potential weaknesses in libertarian thought. Proponents of libertarianism offer counterarguments emphasizing personal responsibility, the dangers of government overreach, and the moral imperative of individual freedom. 

What this perspective might be overlooking:

Public Goods and Externalities: Certain goods and services, known as public goods (like national defense, clean air, and public parks), are not easily provided by the market because they are non-excludable and non-rivalrous. This means that once provided, it's difficult to exclude anyone from using them, and one person's use does not reduce availability to others. Markets tend to underprovide these goods because they can't easily charge users directly.

Free Rider Problem: Related to public goods, the free rider problem occurs when individuals have an incentive to avoid paying for a good because they can still benefit without paying. This leads to underfunding and underprovision of essential services like public infrastructure, education, and emergency services.

Inequality and Access: Market solutions often fail to address the needs of the poor and vulnerable, as they might not be able to afford essential services like healthcare, education, or housing. Government intervention through taxation and public spending aims to ensure a minimum standard of living and equal access to necessary services.

Regulation and Standards: Government regulation is often necessary to ensure safety, fairness, and environmental protection. Without government oversight, market-driven solutions might prioritize profit over public welfare, leading to issues like exploitation, pollution, and unsafe products.

Collective Action: Some challenges, such as pandemics, climate change, and natural disasters, require coordinated efforts that are difficult to achieve through decentralized market mechanisms. Government plays a crucial role in organizing and funding these collective actions.

Monopoly and Market Failures: The argument assumes that markets always function efficiently and fairly. However, markets can fail, and monopolies or oligopolies can emerge, leading to higher prices and reduced choices for consumers. Government intervention is often necessary to correct these market failures and promote competition.

Democratic Accountability: While the argument claims that taxes are a form of extortion, it overlooks the democratic processes through which tax policies and public spending are decided. Citizens can vote for representatives who align with their views on taxation and government services, ensuring a degree of accountability and representation.

The argument raises valid concerns about efficiency, accountability, and the role of government, but it might underestimate the complexity of providing public goods, addressing market failures, and ensuring equitable access to essential services.

The debate between libertarianism and other political philosophies often hinges on differing views about the role of government, the nature of freedom, and the best ways to achieve a just and prosperous society.

That's it and this is a problem. 

This is a tip of an "iceberg" where the bulk of it is Donald Trump at titular head of a moronic movement of authoritarianism steeped in a generations long simmering of delusion and misinterpretations of our US Constitution and how government works, how it's relationship to citizens is, a monitor that is victim morning themselves into a fever.

We can do better. We must do better. ASAP.

And we have to protect ourselves from unforeseen groups, at times vastly disinformed...

Rachel Maddow's Podcast Ultra Spectacle.
Been saying this before Rachel's Ultra podcast. 

If you're supporting Repugnant MAGA Trump might as well've supported McCarthy. Sen. Joe McCarthy's "red scare" of the 1950s started in the 40s trying to get Nazis off for their crimes. GOP? Gone unAmerican.

Much of the lies and propaganda of Joe McCarthy we're seeing again, today with Trump's MAGA disinformation, which has infected (easily as usual) Lindsey Graham, Marco Rubio even who I thought years ago, many now, might be an okay guy but now, he's decided how you do politics. Like Trump. Ends justify the means, damn the country, full speed ahead with your career, no matter how later on history, or justice will view you.

Wising us all the very best. Certainly better than this nonsense. 

Cheers! Sláinte! 

Deep State 2.0

All this talk by conservatives about the "Deep State" got me thinking.

First, it was patently funny. There are career government employees who go on administration after administration. They run the government. Thank God for that too. Especially with this new amateur administration who is stumbling along at breakneck speeds.

They have lied. They have cheated. They may have broken the laws and they may have committed treason. Time will tell.

They have done bad things and then pointed fingers claiming the other side did it. That is important. Remember it.

Now we hear talk about a so called "deep state". Nothing like a moniker, a bad guy, an enemy. Otherwise, the Republican party might go poof into a puff of smoke and vanish.

But here's the thing.

"They" actually are the deep state. They are Deep State 2.0.

They are not conservative, or republican and surely they are not democrat or progressive. Best I can figure out is they are simply, capitalists. But even that doesn't explain all their actions. Whenever that happens one has to look beyond money, to power. To the long game. But we're not seeing a long game being played. By the Russians, yes, to e sure.

But "They" now are, as best it can be explained, the Trump administration. Now you are seeing just who they are and how easily they can pull the blinds over their supporter's eyes. But people are beginning to wise up. Still they, are smart. They will find a new crises to distract as they have time and again, even with the help of Russians.

At some point we will have to wake up and ask ourselves, just who IS running America now?

It's not the people. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote. It's not the electoral college. Even though they decided the new president. As the democratic president candidate lost in 2000, so too, with a bigger and better strategy, the wrong guy won yet again.

One has to ask oneself, why does this keep happening? True, President Barack Obama was an outlier THEY didn't foresee. But they woke up from that, just as they began to put to sleep most of America. And the Russians helped. Both with, and without the conscious knowledge of those now holding the White House hostage.

How else could a charlatan like Donald J Trump become the President of the United States of America? Seriously. How is that even possible?

Well, in reality? It's not. But it did happen. It's a conundrum to be sure. One that surprised even Donald J Trump.

Yet again now with this deep state nonsense, they are once more distracting. They are the man behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz. But they are not the kind old loser. Not by a long shot.

Why is it taking government so long to out these guys? Why indeed. Government is designed to move slow. That protects the people. But the people are not the concern anymore. They are only the smoke by which the mirrors are put into place in order to fill out the agenda of those in the public eye, those who are acting right in front of us and we can't even see it.

What are they doing? That is really the question. And it is one we will uncover very soon. Hopefully, before they can lock things down so we can never writggle out from beneath he heavy weight of so much money and power. And stupidity.

Because above all other things, our one saving grace is exactly that. That they are...stupid.

Stupid because the truth always wins out. However, the "winners" also write the history. Still, we are not a one world government...yet. We have different languages, a saving grace. Because with different languages we have different concepts, different points of view. Through those views, some can obviously see what is going on.

Stupid because people are what really matters. Honesty, clarity, productivity for all and not just for some few special ones, are what matter over corporate and wealthy individual needs.

There is a lot going on in the world right now. For two decades we've been told by those in the intelligence community that there are more spies on the ground world wide right now than there ever were during the "cold war" years.

Our intelligence analysts in America have grown exponentially. But they are actually on our side.

What about this, deep state, then? Who's side are they on? An article by Al Jezeera says progressives now see the deep state as being on their side. They too indicate something awry. They too seem confused. Why is that?

It's obvious, if you just stop to think, back up and take a look at the entire picture.

The deep state is what is actually now running things. And they are pointing fingers claiming anyone else is them. They are out in the open. Exposed. Many have fallen already. More are to come. Russia and Vlad Putin have put their fingers on things which further complicated and confused things.

Obfuscation and obstruction are the rules of the day. Ask yourself. Who has been doing that the most? Who benefits the most? Who claimed they would do one thing if elected and have since done exactly the opposite. Supporters still try to rationalize ridiculous actions by their hero. Still claiming hope is solid, even in the face of massive evidence that does not support that and in fact, supports just the opposite.

So no. The deep state is not out savior. But it is also not those who the actual deep state are pointing fingers at, with the help of conservatives and conspiracy nuts, who started all this nonsense and fairy tales. Which they are really so very bad at, and think they are oh so very good at.

And so I give you, the real deep state: Money. Money, and those who control it. We see our government bow down to it, again and again and again. Within confines so it doesn't look obvious just who controls what. And yet, there they are again, and again. Making excuses, using ridiculous ideologies, abusing the system to save money, or make money, or to buy power.

And there we are, caught in the middle, wondering just what in the hell is going on. For some of us, we grab whatever reason we can find, so we feel we have some control, any control and we will believe nearly anything from what we're seeing.

Delusion, upon delusion, upon delusion.

And there is plenty more to come....stay tuned.

Like you can do anything else, right?

Push Button Mentality

What exactly is push button mentality (PBM)?

It is using concept of "buttons" in the mind, in the mindset, in one's ideology, in one's view of the world. Especially useful if one follows an agenda, a platform, a group or belief system. It is what religion depends on.

It is a binary action. On, change happens. Belief is that you can fix things in this way and if you can't, it is desired. If not demanded. People want easy answers. Simple explanations, easy fixes. It is a short cut for initiating a reaction, or action. It is not a deep evocation, it is a shallow one.

It is how Pres. Trump and the Republican party have found their way into being primary in American politics today. The lowest common denominator.

Education is the antithesis of this.

It is a concept that is especially useful to extremists. It is much used in the conservative movement (and religion) where deep thinking is not desired. Where indeed it is antithetical to it. Where accurate information is counter to its sustainment.

Where education is undesirable and while massive or complex information is highly valued, it is only superficially understood. Highly valued because too much information is the same as not enough to most people. Too much or too complicated information leads to paralysis and then people start to demand the push button answers.

It's odd. An odd behavior. But it relates to fight or flight. Another binary decision. Easy. Effective to either remove your threat, or remove yourself so that the threat remains, but you do not. It has led to the dumbing down of America. But not just America. We're seeing these authoritarian platforms growing world wide.

Even the intelligence community has issues with too much information.

In an age where we have massive amounts of data and information, "intelligence", how does one evaluate it all in order to make use of it? ONE, does not. Because that requires many analysts, computers and programs to do the analysis and serve it up in formats that make most needed data available and actionable.

Those who are informed, who are professionals, are then able to make use of it.

But there is no push button mentality involved there.

Where there is, it widely desired and yet, minuscule functional.

Beware when politicians offer quick and easy fixes. Who say, only they can fix things. Who claim what the problems actually are, are not.

Therein lay insanity. If not...evil.

From "The Man in the High Castle" (S2E5):

"Its intentions were pure. But its methods were cruel."

That says so much too about the republican party and many conservative, especially misguided theistic based beliefs.

The ethically blind cannot see where they step, while those around them who can see, can merely try to warn them of the dangers they are approaching.

It is how faith can be used by those who have no shame, just power, in order to convince their blind followers of the grand stairway before them, yet not warn them of the cliff's edge that is actually there. All to their benefit and that of, the Party.

Open your eyes. See the cliff's edge.

Then push those guiding you toward it to the demise they had planned for you.

Rumors and Propaganda

"I've told people that hunting for spies is like trying to find a ghost in the fog. You've got to believe first of all, that they're there. And you have to have enough drive to keep looking."
- Scott Carmichael, Criminal Investigator (Ret.), Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA, the Intelligence arm of the Pentagon).

That is how it is with hunting spies. As confusing as it is, this is also how it is with conspiracy theories or divining political maneuvering in real time. While spy hunters are in dangerous intellectual territory by seeking a foregone conclusion, it is typically after being alerted to an actual threat based on real intelligence, analyzed by actual intelligence, and they then seek more evidence to support it.

Civilians, amateurs, in fact most Americans do not have that expertise and field experience.

So what they "find" is typically mere conjecture, pure and simple. Pattern finding of coincidences or potential for something where there really is no something there to be found. Much of that has to do with "feel good" findings, possible and sometimes not even plausible situations that support their polarized contentions and beliefs about things that simply do not exist.

And I'm not even getting into things like "confirmation bias".

Yet for some, their nice and tidy faux beliefs serve their purpose in the moment, if not in an historical context.

That is to say, it may be information that travels like wildfire across the nation. It may even keep (and has kept) political candidates from office. Only coming out much later that it was false or completely fabricated information, depending on whether it was respectively, rumor or propaganda; misinformation or disinformation submitted out onto civil society with purely partisan political objectives.

Though sometimes it is just a money generating effort, or a publicity stunt by typically right wing media if not by an opponent's political enemies.

This is a problem with much of our news media today as instant information, twenty-four hour news cycles, and for profit news overwhelms facts and reality. They move so quickly that there is little or no time for due diligence on their part, for triangulation of sources and info so that in the end we are getting information that can easily be "off", off kilter, or completely wrong.

The speed of news today can do irrevocable damage before reality hits. Too often too many never hear a retraction, or a rectification. While those who did the damage even if innocently, get completely away with what is in effect a cancer on society. Many times bad information is not later corrected or apologized for at all.

Other we get news that is simply describing what we can clearly see onscreen in a redundant report that truly serves no purpose whatsoever other than to fill air time. All this leads to a bubble, a frustration, a desire in the individual to find closure when much of the time there simply isn't any to be found, and perhaps never will be.

Especially when the information being shared is intentionally wrong.

Do try to be aware, but also try to "find" what really is going on when it truly exists. Speak as if you are offering conjecture when you are, because much of the time that is what you are sharing. Pure conjecture. Do not present it as if it is fact just because you think you have "found" something, have been told by others that it is true, or simply wish it were true out of spite.

Rumors and Propaganda.

When I was in the military one of their biggest efforts on a daily basis was rumors and propaganda running wild. At first I thought it was stupid when I heard of it in basic training. Then with our quarterly security indoctrinations and seeing these things in practice among fellow military and even their families, I came to understand what the military has long known. The sheer destructive power of those two things.

We actively worked to keep rumors and propaganda in check. Because when we didn't, bad things happened. Just as we can see today in America with at times absolute nonsense spreading like wildfire.

Today these are frequently compartmentalized on the internet in graphical memes. Memes as most of us know, can be quite entertaining, funny and useful. Especially in a sharing facts (not factoids, false or unproven facts) even in using sarcasm against lies, propaganda and foolishness. But they can also be destructive as perhaps you have already seen, as most of us have.

When I was young and in the military one of us would tell our Sgt. what we had heard, concerned about it, looking for comment about it. Much of the time he would consider it, then blow it off as just more Rumors and Propaganda. And just about all of the time he was right. It saved us a lot worrying over a lot of nonsense.

It saved us grouping together against the "other", whomever it was the traveling nonsense was about. Much of the time it would be able the higher ups. Therein you get that polarization of us against them and in a structure where there is a command line, control needs to be maintained. Even if it is merely control by truth and reality over that of incorrect information..

We had been told back then that the military was the "perfect society", a microcosm of overall America. We had to keep rumors and such in check or they would be even more devastating than they can and have been in America at large.

If only America at large showed as much attention and concern over rumors and propaganda as we did in the military, we might not be in such a morass of ignorance and even stupidity. Instead sadly, many people latch onto nonsense and share it as fact. The result of which is quite obvious.

We need to try to realize whenever we are hearing or sharing information what might be rumors or propaganda rather than as solid news and information. If we do that, we will save us all a great deal of what is currently going on all across this country. Lies and misery. Lots of confusion and frustration observing whatever information can be found. Even incorrect information, because it is up against such a strong desire for understanding and closure. We may not now or within the timeframe necessary, ever really know the truth.

Especially if we do not have the capacity to understand it in all its complexities.
Especially when at times, simply none can be found.

Let me restate my point and put it into words some will more betterer understand even more clearily....

I'm not saying I'm any kind of a genius here. Or that I'm an expert. Though I do seemingly and not infrequently have more of a handle on the extent and correlation of some of these things than do some who speak so boldly, so loudly, who do not think they can ever be incorrect. Or who admit they can be incorrect, but never really exhibit that.

Sometimes these are people who very possibly do know better, even if they can't openly admit it even to themselves. Sadly, if you are sharp, if you are the type to acknowledge these things, if you do try to curb bad information, then you may be some of those who think this is you too, a part of the masses of people sharing nonsense, when very possibly it's simply not the case.

 That, is the kind of murkiness we're dealing with here. Not all of us realize that and as I have said, some of those who have loudest voices tend to be the most ignorant of their inconsistencies and incorrectness.

All I'm saying really is this, and excuse my vulgar irritation here:

F*cking pay attention people!
Because some of you out there are just spewing total bullsh*t all over the rest of us!
It's damaging what you love most. What we all love most. Our country.

 At times it's even going against your own true desires and best interests.
Not to mention it makes you look like a complete tool to those of us who can see it.
You will lose in the end because reality and truth have to win out. Truth falls into a slot that fits with reality. Lies disintegrate over time because the bulk of history won't fit up to it. It takes time, but  eventually it happens.

 As for those of you who are not sharing all this nonsense....
Speak, the Hell, up! We need you!
Push back against ignorant bullies.
We need you but we need them too!
We need them to start seeing what they are doing
How they are going so far afield into our collective enemy's hands.

 Still there's hope. There's always a sun on the horizon.

 It's just a matter of how soon we want it to arrive. To shine on the lies and expose the truths. To warm us in its brilliance and wrap us in its protective arms of honesty and reality.

 It's really a matter of how long you may want to push back the inevitable in overtaking all the rumors and propaganda that we have been and will continue to be infected with.

 There is still hope. There is always hope.
It's just not based in lies, rumors or propaganda.

Hillary's Emails - Where From Here?

Hillary's emails.

Is that really a topic to bother with? Considering a variety of things, like how this was handled by previous Secretaries, even Republican ones (like Secretary Colin Powell or Condoleezza Rice) who did pretty much the same with their emails. So I ask again, is this really even a thing? Or yet another conservative attempt to attack another Clinton, or just another Democrat?

Because let's face it, almost everytime in recent history Republicans have called for an investigation like this we have later discovered (as we knew to begin with) that was just a partisan political effort and not a true concern as they openly professed. Just a desire to make their job easier (or possible) by taking down a Democrat in their way.

State Department spokesperson Marie Harf said that: "For some historical context, Secretary Kerry is the first secretary of state to rely primarily on a state.gov email account."

Once the FBI found (or was shown?) classified information in Clinton's or her aide's emails, it triggered an investigation. That means nothing at this point until they finish. It's like the IRS auditing you. It happens. Much of the time it goes nowhere, but it's better to review and be wrong than not and be right. But in this case I see this all as more of an historical event than one of criminal actions.

It is also odd how normally in the conservative mindset this kind of a waste of money would be considered, well, a waste of money. It is through their typical fear and paranoia however that we see the conservative mindset trumped over considerations of money saving and big government involvement, IF there is a potential to prove their fears correct, and especially if it can be at the detriment of a political enemy.

Consider how useless Republicans in congress have been in the past two administrative terms of Barack Obama. How obstructive, destructive and regressive Republicans have been and continue to be. How twisted and turned about their political policies and ideals are and have become. How skewed their priorities are, beyond even that of how skewed most American's priorities have become mostly though Republican efforts and those of their supporters in the military \ corporate \ industrial complex.

I would submit that a similar group of High School students could easily have gotten just as much done and more, and more useful issues settled, had we swapped out all of our Republican Congress with kids. Kids who would have worked together simply for a good grade. All with no connections either to the regressive beliefs, greed or political ignorance of either the "Tea Party" or lobbyists.

I met former and only ever head of both the NSA and the CIA, Michael Hayden back in the 90s at the same security cyber group meetings where we used to get briefings in Seattle from so many smart and in-the-know people. His book Playing To The Edge - American Intelligence in the Age of Terror, is definitely worth a read.

People like Richard Clarke, former National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection and Counter-terrorism for the United States and many others who went on to becomes heads of departments and agencies. We got briefings from the DIA, NSA and many others over the years drawing cyber and police people from Canada to Washington D.C. to even Australia

Hayden had something interesting to say on Fareed Zakaria today that changed my mind on Hillary's email situation. But it's not how you might think.

Time as we all know, marches on. Technologies advance faster each year so that most of us find it difficult to keep up with. Government departments and agencies tend to lag behind the citizens on much of this. I know I had the newer flat screen monitor technology at home and at work before many if not most government agencies did.

Only in some departments are they consistently abreast of technology, when it is their prime directive. Such departments as the CIA, DHS, the NSA or other lesser known such alphabet soup named agencies we all know and may never have heard of.

What the Hillary email situation has (and I refuse to call it a "scandal", it's just not) brought up is not whether she shared classified documents in her emails. She didn't, though some documents were later classified as secret in either the natural course of events (few I'm sure if any) and through political maneuverings by Republicans (all of them?). Even Michael Hayden gave a nod to that theory in question of the practice of making documents secret after their creation and dissemination.

What is important in all this is that what Hillary did was not illegal, but from here forward it needs to be.

What is important is that for one of the few times, Republican partisan whining as actually brought to fruition, a change in how things are done. Though as adults they could have gone about this in a far more logical and procedural way. But again rather then just do the job they exist for, they had to go about it in such a way as to attempt to inflict damage on a major member of their opposition political party.

It deeply saddens me that half of our political parties are so destructive and self aggrandizing at almost every turn. Why Republicans can't simply do their job, why they have to do almost anything but simply legislate, is quite beyond me. Seriously, beyond any rational and thinking person who does not see government service as anything but a way to serve the people, all the people, and not only those you think you represent or that you feel support you.

Anyway, what is important in all this is progress and making things better.

What had worked in the not so distant past for those like previous Secretary of State Gen. Colin Powell when he did the same thing, is no longer worth the risk. Technology and cyber hacking have advanced to a point that we need now to start to positively seek security on an "at war-like" basis. We need professionals, in house, running, monitoring and handling these types of email servers FROM NOW ON.

Because the once invisible Cold War has turned into the not so invisible Cyber War.

My suggestion would be to drop this partisan effort to besmirch the reputation of Secretary Clinton and change the laws. Then audit everyone necessary to be sure they are using the correct procedures being handled by the correct people. People who will be running tech that will continue to be handled correctly both during and after those individuals leave their positions so that there is a continuity of security and advancing their technologies, sometimes on a day by day basis.

The issue here is bigger than Hillary, or Republican's juvenile hatred for her or their attempts to waylay her run for the presidency.

That is to say tech and security needs to be handled by a department and not an individual member of government or their own people, even if they are very good. It needs to be handled by a department whose sole responsibility it is to stay on top of technology and security issues.

Seems like a no brainer, right? Sure, now it seems real obvious, and in highsight.

It's possible an individual Secretary or such person could hire even better people than a government department might have available. But that isn't the only consideration. And yes that department needs to be assured they will always have the best minds and best maintenance of those minds and have the abilities to stay as far ahead of technology and security issues as possible.

We need these changes and an audit now. How to ever get it through a republican held, do nothing congress is beyond me though.

I would apply an audit to assure people are adhering to these new changes, deal with the situation, not chastise anyone at this point, but be sure they and their emails and technologies are properly migrated to where they now need to reside. We don't need a massive witch hunt, we don't need people scurrying about trying to save themselves or others. We just need to be sure things are being done properly NOW and then continue to do them properly from now on. We need people to be on board, not looking for ways to abandon ship.

As Hayden put it if he were a foreign intelligence agency he would be on this with everything he had to try to hack technologies that aren't being handled as will as they could be, or by in house security and technology experts. Though don't be fooled, he'd already I'm sure have been working all along (hopefully unsuccessfully) on those in house types, too.

We need to protect our people. We need to protect their work and efforts as related to their emails and technologies with everything we have. We also need to focus on what is most useful for America, to stop wasting time on trying to count coup on our enemies on the other side of the political partisan aisle.

What is important, what our priorities should and need to be, is the security of America, Americans, and our American government employes and chief execs and through them our foreign country friends. And enemies.

If that last statement confused you, then you should now see why this all needs to be handled by the experts. Experts we have constant access to. People who can address not just the tiny miniscule technical issues involved in day by day, minute by minute, and nanosecond by nanosecond administration of email and technologies, but also the macro sized global issues involved in maintaining national security.

Where nowadays in this fearful new world one email can potentially, change the world.

Let me leave you with this thought....

A very brief video about Bernie Sanders by Dick Van Dyke. What he says is true. Whether or not you think he could or should be President, or could handle it or if he's qualified or he most qualified, Dick Van Dyke is absolutely right in what he says.

#BernieSanders #HillaryClinton #Conservatives

Voting for all? Should we limit who votes? Maybe?

Did you know that originally only Land Owners were allowed to vote in America? I've known this for a while but here's a reference for those who need verification.

According to InfoPlease.com:

"When the Constitution was written, only white male property owners (about 10 to 16 percent of the nation's population) had the vote. Over the past two centuries, though, the term "government by the people" has become a reality. During the early 1800s, states gradually dropped property requirements for voting. Later, groups that had been excluded previously gained the right to vote. Other reforms made the process fairer and easier."

That has bugged me for a while now. Why? Well, why do you think that was how it was originally set up? There MUST have been a reason, right? Elitism? Just, elitism? The Founding Fathers were smart guys. Right? I mean, what they had set up has been doing pretty well overall and has been a shining light for equality the world over for a very long time now.

Why then, would they found a country where many were not allowed to vote? I think I have the answer and finally, closure to what has been bugging me more and more over these recent turbulent times. Obviously their justification for not allowing slaves and women to vote, and in many cases, non-land owners, made sense (to them) at the time.

Slaves either didn't understand (lack of education), would do what their owners wanted, or would challenge the concept of slavery in many ways (reasonable assumption and action on the slaves' part). Women would tend to vote their husband's vote (reasonable fear). Non land owners tended to be uneducated and without "stake" in what they would frequently be voting for. All seemed reasonable back then.

I would also argue that had they allowed voting, in time that would all have changed and voters would have become more savvy and interested over time. Especially back then.

Have you heard the nonsense that has been going on in America lately? Voters have been made to have a hard time voting, on purpose. Groups have made it difficult, mostly for certain types of voters, to vote more easily. Something I see as contrary to how it should be. Voting should be getting easier and easier, not harder and harder. Right? But then workers days and hours should also be getting lesser and lesser and they're not.

So what's up?

Have you heard some of the nonsense being touted in the media and our government, mostly from the extreme elements in politics? Why is that, you think?

It is because they want what they want and damn the constituents, what the citizens want, or what is good for the country. Because what is important is only these fringe group's desires and ideals. Mostly issues contrary to public freedoms and based upon religious purposes and agendas.

Not infrequently, ideas have been twisted and raised in such a way as to have people voting against their own best interests and desires. At times elections have been lost, when really they had been won. Gerrymandering has skewed states to one side or the other when really that state was the opposite majority for party. The whole gerrymandering thing has been going on for a very long time and it is, in some situations a good thing, but not when it is abused which it has been and we've been fighting against its misuse from the beginning.

The issue I'm seeing has to do with people realizing they can achieve their own selfish aims if they only push for things that benefit them. This is a format that has always proved to fail in the long term, even for those who push for it. Dictators usually find it doesn't work out so well for them in the end, and we're seeing more and more of that today with instant media (Twitter, Facebook, etc.) because it empowers the people.

On the other hand corporate instant media (like Fox News for instance, even MSNBC in some cases and CNN has turned into a mess), has been working against the people.

Now aside from that, we are seeing more and more people having a voice in the media who should never be talking to anyone outside of their own home. There is a level of ignorance and foolishness in our population that is staggering. Do we really want people like that voting? But it's a Right, you say. How come prisoners can't vote then? Corporations are people and have a right to what, a vote? One vote? How many? Where is THAT headed?

Why aren't people making level headed decisions, casting votes for people and laws who work for them and not against them? Why would women vote for a party that only seems to have their worst interests at heart?

Why are stupid people doing stupid things so much today?

Here, let me give you an example of what I'm talking about. Take a look at this article:

"This Is What Doctors Have To Deal With."

Okay now, do we really need those people voting? Hang on, hang on. Yeah, I know it's a right and all. (Again, can prisoners vote? Why not, if it's a right?)

My point here is things are really screwed up and there's a reason for it. We HAVE to ask ourselves, why? And we have to do something about it. But what?

When you have a group making decisions, and that group fails, what do you do? Change the group, get them better information, acquire subject matter experts.

Do we do that for this? No. Why? Because voting is a "Right" (in quotes because again, prisoners can't vote as well as some others; and well, there's pros and cons to it).

"In 2008 over 5.3 million people in the United States were denied the right to vote because of felony disfranchisement." - Wikipedia

So if they want to vote to make horrible conditions better, they can't. Sounds fair, right?

"Felony disfranchisement was a topic of debate during the 2012 Republican presidential primary. Rick Santorum argued for the restoration of voting rights for ex-offenders." - Wikipedia

So even after you're not a prisoner you may not be allowed to vote. Quite a "Right", right?

So we already restrict people from voting. The question is, do we give them back the vote (yes) or do we eliminate others from voting (probably not, though it runs counter to my argument here, but hey, I'm not stupid). 

My point to sum up as quickly as possible is this... There are too many people who don't know what the hell they are doing who are voting for the wrong things. People are working hard to limit people voting who now have a right to vote.

I have a university degree and sometimes I can't figure out what it is I"m trying to vote for in elections because of how things are worded. Essentially, worded on purpose to make people think that voting one way for something is in reality voting the opposite of what they think they are voting. Nuts, right?

So what do I do? I read, do very little necessary research and just figure it out. 

But we obviously have some very serious problems here. 

People are voting for things and don't know what the hell they are voting for. They are being mislead. They are voting against they own best interests. They do not have a vested interest in some things they are voting for (which is why only land owners used to be allowed to vote). 

Look, I'm not asking for us to start cutting voters. But I am asking for something. Real commissions to look into things like gerrymandering and vetting that one party isn't being set up to win, with due and appropriate considerations of surrounding issues to give the nation and not just the party a fair shake. 

We need to give prisoners they vote back.If it's a right, everyone votes, right? Why is that any kind of question?

We need to make it easy for EVERYONE to vote. I haven't been to a voting booth in more years than I can remember but I vote in every election. 

We need to give serious thought to allowing people to vote who have no clue what they are voting for and we need to be sure they can even understand what voting is about and what they are doing. 

Maybe we need some kind of vetting process so that you are allowed to vote, if you at least have the fundamentals of what the hell you are doing and if not, you don't vote that year. I think it would be burdensome to test for each election. 

Testing isn't ridiculous. They test us for driver's licenses (but not for a concealed weapons permit, don't get me started on that one, but hey, it's a "Right", right?). Tell me that voting isn't as dangerous as driving a car. The danger in driving a car is just more immediate and only affects the number of people you can plow down. But voting affects every citizen and even citizens yet to be form; for the long term and sometimes it kills; sometimes, a lot of people (consider ending abortions, gun laws, etc.). 

We have a lot of stupid politics going on, polarizing politics that has frozen Washington DC politics. A republican party that is useless. A democratic party that always seems to be unsure what to do or afraid to do anything serious. Are they gun shy, or what?

These are serious issues that we need to deal with. Because the longer we put of making some hard changes, it's only going to get worse.

Vote. If you can. But know what you are really voting for. Vote those who are bad for America out of office and KNOW what is bad for America. Because that seems to be a thing too hard for many to comprehend now a days. 

To quote a Time magazine article by Reynolds Holding: 

"We should be finding ways to get more voters to the polls, not looking for excuses to keep them away. So instead of prohibiting felons from voting, let's require them to do it. That way, they will continue to repay their debt to society, long after they walk out of prison."

So, what do I really think? What could we do to fix these things?

Everyone should be allowed to vote, if they have at least at a minimum level of understanding, restricted not for who they are but what they can understand; going to jail shouldn't take away your right to vote; nor should being poor, or uneducated; everyone should be REQUIRED to vote who is allowed to vote.

Finally, it should be painlessly easy for all voters to vote.

People need to understand what the hell it means to vote. They need to understand what it means each time in casting that vote. It needs to be made clear to them, what they are voting for, not obfuscating what they are voting for. This trick of trying to confuse voting, so that vote one way is really voting against your wishes, needs to be made illegal. They should, if they have the ability to understand what they are doing, be required to vote, if they are to be an American citizen.

We need as many people as possible, voting. We need to make it cool, a mandatory thing, so that our country is governed by those who know what they are asking for, and will get what they vote for. We need those who vote, to understand what they are voting for. We need to make voting as easy as possible so they don't find it a burden to vote.

We don't need people voting who have no clue what they are doing, either because they are incapable, have no perceived, vested interest, or no resources to make clear to them what they are voting on. Sound expensive? Sound difficult? Isn't what we are seeing today difficult, and costing us massive amounts of money because of big money taking and not giving back; because of our political leaders entrenched in money problems to maintain their positions, in the back pocket of big money; because of the little guys being stepped on, feeling disenfranchised, jailed within their own lifestyles, while others globetrot on the heads of the bulk of what  and who America is?

Is it the American way to run away from a challenge? A conflict? A danger? How about when the conflict is internal, danger is at home, is our own people, our own ignorant masses? What about reasonableness, rationality, honesty, fairness, honor, clarity, education and intelligence? We need to adjust our priorities and be sure that the most sane, most comprehending, are the ones making the decisions and pushing forward our best foot for the most people and not just the privileged few who hedge their bets on the pain of the People.

We need our most educated but not if they only push agendas only for them. We need our least educated but not if they have no clue what they are doing and are acting against their own best interests, much like the poor who vote the rich elite's agendas. We can fix this.

How about we fix this? 

Three Counters to the Extreme Conservative Mindset

There are three major elements to be aware of in debating the conservative mindset:

• The "Closed Minded" concept
• Specificity vs Generalities
• Jumping Forms of Logic

Now to be fair it's not just conservatives who can have this mindset but also extreme liberals or religious mindsets, too.

If you keep getting into debates (or worse, bickering types of arguments), with people who maintain the extreme conservative mindset, you may find you are getting nowhere with either them. Or their argument is against what seems to be perfectly rational and something settled long ago. Or something that has been proven by perhaps even the majority of scientists in the entire world but is for no apparent reason currently controversial.

What's going on there? Are you feeling frustrated? Part of the problem is, people's tactics have changed therefore, we need to update the meanings of some of the trap words they are using. Words that once meant one thing to all of us, but now are being used against us, in a very different way; thus at times, trapping us in our own arguments.

One tactic they like is to say that it is you how has a closed mind, which let's face it, is pretty irritating. But, just laugh about it when you noticed it. As long as you have made the due diligence to have an informed opinion, that is. And to have an opinion on something means that you have closed your mind (for now) on that topic, by definition. So just tell them that a closed mind means that it can be opened, not that it is locked closed as usually, that would be them, not you. Right?

Don't let people try to mistake confidence for arrogance. Sometimes they will say that you are being arrogant in your solidarity on your opinion, cuz after all, gravity exists, and the Earth has been around longer than 6,0000 years. Look, it's okay to seem a bit arrogant at times when you are either that good, or that correct. It is never okay to be arrogant however, or to seem so when you simply don't deserve that arrogance. See, people who are very good, can seem arrogant to others who are not. It'st that feeling that "you are so much better than me, that you have to be extremely humble around me so I don't feel bad." Hogwash. That's your issue. They are that good, so you be a little humble around them as you're in the presence of  greatness; again, if they truly are that great.

There's an awful lot of people around now a days projecting that kind of arrogance when they have absolutely no right to do so. Like a lot of Americans, when they visit other countries. Okay, maybe America is that great of a country, but it's very likely that you had nothing whatsoever to do with that. I mean, died in any wars lately? Cured cancer? Won in the Olympics?

Anyway, when you know or you are really that good at something, it can seem like you arrogance to others. Or you can feel irritated or annoyed by those others for wasting your time on things, especially as an a priori consideration; where they do not, or can not see that it is due to something they are lacking; like skill, or knowledge.

You mind should only be closed for the time being on any topic, but not entirely closed overall. A permanently closed mind which never updates with new information can actually be quite deadly and the Darwin Awards are full of those types; just as Darwinian selection eliminates those from the gene pools. As long as you have sought the necessary knowledge and found a conclusion, at that point you close your mind on that topic so that you can now progress and take a stand and get things done. The thing about a closed mind is, it can be opened again when new information arrives.

Many forms of belief do not have closed minds, a good thing up to a point but not necessarily. Frequently they require (or desire) a sealed mind. A very different critter from a merely closed mind.

Science requires one to find the best information and synthesize it appropriately along with verification and a conclusion and thus consider for now, that it is a closed topic; so you can do work and progress to a yet newer truth.

Religion generally wants a sealed mind once the basics are put into place. Makes sense as once God gave His word, well, that should be it, right? Except that hasn't panned out very well over time. If it truly is God's word, well, he's been wrong a lot. Another considering is humankind progresses and so God's word needs to be updated from time to time. But he doesn't update it and yet if he tries, religions around the world will fight against it, because after all, the religion is right and unchangeable. Because, it's God's word.

And yeah, I know....

Though some are more reasonable than others, all really seem to want a mind sealed to anything to detract from their teachings and thereby, "shake the faith". Though I would argue that if you can shake faith, it's a defective form of faith and should be updated, which is not readily acceptable for obvious reasons.

Some people will say that science is faulty because it does change and what was once true, is no longer considered valid when replaced by updated information. But our best efforts are always to find a truth and update it with new information as it becomes available; thereby keeping us updated with the best available information.

So when someone tries to shoot down your beliefs that religion leaves much to be desired, relax. A lot of the issue that traps you, are just the traps that have been developed against scientific thinking for thousands of years.

For example, if someone tries to convince me that there is a vacuum in the room we are in and yet I'm breathing air quite easily, I may disagree with them and tell them that, as I know they are incorrect. If they persist I will not go against them on it at that point, as it is obviously not true and if they can't see that, there is really little I can do about it. I'm not going to perpetuate an argument or make up names for my position as I have no position, it is just something that... is. That is the trap they pull you into and then you find you are in a never ending cycle of argumentation with them. They are now wasting your time, and money, and in some cases our nation's money; our money.

There are a growing number of people who take up incorrect positions on things that are obvious, and in many cases obvious to most people as well as experts; and yet they persist on their disagreement and delusions out of mere ego, philosophy, or more frequently, theology.

All I'm saying is, you need to stop going about arguing as you would have done, historically. Things are changing, they have changed. We all have to be aware of this and stop handling it as we have always done. We need to break the cycle of finding new ways to continue believing in things that we have long since proven incorrect. We need to leave those people behind who can't keep up and after a while they will simply disappear through attrition and evolution.

Another issue in arguing with these types of people is the disparity in specificity within the argument. Frequently in arguments (debates that is and hopefully you see the difference) the two or more parties debating are on different planes of the same argument. One may be arguing a broader point and the other may be arguing a more specific, narrow point. When that happens you will seldom resolve the issue and more likely both walk away frustrated.

Finally, this is also true when someone skips logic from one form to another; sometimes within the same sentence. This is an issue either with people who are ignorant about forms of logic (which happens all the time), or those who are more highly skilled in logic, know exactly what they are doing and use it as a tool of obfuscation.

Please understand, this isn't meant to fix all this, but to make it obvious because I suspect once you know about this it will all become much easier and that was really my only content in saying all this. If not to help get around some of the blatant obfuscations on the part of those who are trying to spew nonsense into the mainstream.

So you see, you don't have to walk away frustrated with these kinds of arguments. Merely see what is going on. To just be aware of things kinds of things is a huge benefit and a useful tool to use in order to further spread genuine knowledge and start on the road where this form of behavior goes into the useless bin where all useless forms of thought need to go, along with all those winners of the Darwin Awards.

Of course you can always use something like Snopes.com too and for those who claim that to be a conspiracy you can use A Guide to Arguing With a Snopes-Denier on them....

Cheers!

Gun Registration - What? I mean, Why? Or, why not?

Now before I say anything political, let me remind you that you can still pick up five of my most popular short stories today on Amazon. Check Friday's blog for details. Okay, here we go....

Something just occurred to me, regarding the Second Amendment.

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Doesn't that sound more like it's talking about one state protecting itself from another state, if not the country altogether, from another country. Remember the Civil War? God knows, Canada is a scary place to Americans. Everyone is so damn nice, just how can you trust those nearly Limey bastards? And let's not even talk about Mexico. Then there is North Korea....

The Amendment says "the security of a free state", not the security of a free citizen.

No background checks? Why? First we don't have a "well regulated militia". The Amendment says a "Well Regulated Militia". Isn't registering your gun, "well regulated"? How is it infringing your right to keep and bear them? You can still have them.

As I see it what this outcry is about is because of Czechoslovakia back in 1967 when the Soviets (who don't exist anymore) rolled in with tanks, went to the police stations, gathered up the lists of gun owners, when to those homes, took the guns and therefore, effectively disarmed the entire country. But no one I talk to about this topic, even remembers or knows about that anymore.

So what are they screaming about?

9/11 Was Not Just A Terrorist Attack - The Return of America the Great

9/11 was not just a terrorist attack. At very least, its effects were much more far reaching.

9/11 was an injection of poison that no one seemed to notice. That was the damage that was done, not just the lives lost. America was poisoned with a shot injected into the largest city of this once great country by those deluded with hate, by those who grew to hate us in part from our own actions over the past hundred years of our paying no attention whatsoever to what our actions were doing to those then third world nations of the world. We were injected with a poison that spread out rapidly, reaching across our country, and then spreading out to the world.

In modern pop culture terms it was like we were bit by a zombie and then we bit others conveying the poison to the world. The infection spread partly from fear of terrorism, but also from our own words and actions. America is rather new to the need to protect our homelands from terrorism and sadly, we reacted to it like children.

Fear is contagious and we helped to spread it. This was what FDR meant when he said, "Only Thing We Have to Fear Is Fear Itself."

After 9/11 we were turned into a Zombie country. We were infectious, WE then were dangerous. We went to war against the nearest country that fit our need to kill; someone, anyone We did what was right before we were attacked. We should have cleaned up in Iraq in the 80s, not in 2003. We rightly went into Afghanistan in 2002 and attacked our attackers, Al Qaeda and their associates the Taliban. We nearly devastated them and the Taliban. But then we let Bin Laden escape to Pakistan. Why? Because, we weren't through satiating our revenge. You can blame the Bush Administration, they were the head of the pimple at that time that was America.

What other country has two million people in thousands of prisons and jails in its own country? Who had secret prisons around the world? In Romania, in Poland, in Guantanamo? That poison we were injected with on 9/11 made us go crazy. Our own past with nonsense like our "War on Drugs", a war on many of our own citizenry, gave us a mindset that allowed us to be led into a "War on Terror". So we went into the longest war in our history in Afghanistan, a "war" that spread against a rag tag global group of terrorists and wannabees. We found a way to allow ourselves to torture prisoners, to terrorize individuals in a confined setting. We used things like "extraordinary rendition" to kidnap and torture and when that became too difficult to do, we found other countries who had brutal natures and we allowed them to do those things in our name.

The Bush Administration kept these things going for many of those years. Those secret prisons were shut down in 2006 and in 2009 it became official policy that we do not do that anymore, under a different administration. For years the flag draped coffins at Dover were banned to be photographed when America's children, killed in war, were brought home to their final resting place. The worst thing we can ever do, is to force ourselves away from facing that we are indeed at war. When at war you need it to be painfully obvious. Let that be a lesson to us.

Labeling so many things as "war" allowed us to think as you do in a war. In war we do things that are not normally allowed. Murder, is legal and not even called, "murder". The "Fog of War" includes killing the lame, women, old people, and children. It allows us to kill our own citizens, something that should never happen without due process and judicial interference. And we did that. We killed an American citizen with a missile in another country by first labeling him as traitor. His father even went to court to sue the country to keep it from happening, asking instead that he captured, to bring his son back, give him a trial as he was guaranteed by having been through all his life, a great thing, an American citizen. But in killing him we devalued what we are as Americans.

One of the great things about our Country, about being an American citizen, is the protection of our own country and in having due process, not presidential dictate leading to capital punishment. After we killed that American, we then killed his sixteen year old son, shortly thereafter and in the same manner, using a bomb delivered on the end of a missile.

Is this who we are now?

Is that America? Does that sound like America to you? Is this, what our once "Great Nation" is about now? All this because we were afraid? Because of Fear? When we are afraid does that give us the right to throw our long standing ethical principles, right out the window?

President Obama, as soon as he took office on January 22, 2009, put a stop to our torturing people around the world, on principle. Some people complain a lot about Pres. Obama and what he has done since coming into office. They have various considerations on how we should be rebuilding our economy, treating our citizens, and fighting (or even being in) a war. But the one thing the Obama Administration has been and is doing, is helping our country to heal itself after ten years of our longest war ever (other than our "War" on drugs and the American citizen).

Healing is difficult, it can be painful, but it is necessary.

Look, having a "War" on things is dangerous. That attitude alone is dangerous and we need to stop doing it. Legalizing Marijuana strangely enough, is one way to help end that mindset of having a "war" on something because it means an end to extraordinary actions against something that some only some people don't like. When it leads our own country into rationalizing actions against our own citizens, then we really have gone astray. Whether it is arresting someone in our own country for possessing even small amounts of Cannabis, or in blowing an American up in another country for terrorism and being a traitor, we need to make up our minds who we are and what we are allowed to do, in any circumstance.

As it helped lead us into our, out of context, "War on Terrorism", something that sounds good, feels good but counter-intuitively isn't good, it also led us into something else. Things like the "Tea Party", extremism in our country, the Republican Right taking over to the detriment of our country and even the GOP, their own party. But as things go these types of things tend to be cyclical and the pendulum can only swing so far to one extreme or the other before it either swings back, or simply breaks the mechanism. And we have been far too close to that for far too long now.

Being an American means something. It should mean something, anyway. It should mean something extraordinary and these last ten years and more we have diluted what it means to be an American. We need to stop that. We need to get back on the path and we need to heal. Not only ourselves within our own country, but also in how others view our country and its citizens. We need to get back to the business of being "Great" and not saying it. It's not just about our military power or our economy. It's also about our principles, our existence, our being a leader in doing things around the world, and within our own country. We need to decide what is "right" and stick to it.

Sometimes being that kind of a country is difficult, it can be painful. Lives can be lost over it. But we have in the past been the kind of country that can "take it on the chin" and continue on, even through difficult times, and continue doing what is right.

Which kind of country do you want us to be?

During these past ten years we have at times been, in contemporary parlance a, "chicken shit" country. Literally, we have been scared of our own shadows. Remember the colored, "Shades of Danger" alerts that we stopped using in 2011? As it turned out, we only needed them for feeling all fuzzy safe. The Bush administration had pushed us into an old fashioned Texas style retribution and we all know that revenge destroys both the deserving and the undeserving. It can also make one into the other.

But now we are painfully trying to leave that juvenile opiate of war and the mindset of retribution behind. Shouldn't we now finally go back to being the kind of country we were once again? Shouldn't we allow this healing process that the Obama Administration is trying to help us with, happen? To return to being once again that great nation that we once were?

We have evolved during this process. We are a different country now than we were in 2000. We have entered the 21st Century as a country at war and we need to stop that and become a country that is on the forefront of delivering peace. Of advocating Peace. If we want to be at war then we need to be at war against those who are fighting a war against us. But it is not toward our own citizens. It is not toward those who use recreational drugs. It is not toward terrorists. Terrorists require police actions, intelligence operations, not full scale war actions. Going to war in Iraq when any "war action" was really in Afghanistan, was simply ludicrous.

War against terrorism is a concept that may very will never end. Those wannabees who wish to be terrorists can simply do so. But do they deserve a war? Maybe so, but do WE deserve it? No. Surely we can handle them with smaller, less devastating actions that will not destroy those innocents nearby them as "collateral damage" and create new terrorists in their wake because of our killing their relatives and loved ones, as inadvertently as it may be.

Jeh Johnson, the Defense Department's General Counsel, the head Lawyer for the Defense Department, went out this past week for the Obama Administration to say just this. He spoke at Oxford University in Britain and said that wars against something like terrorism can go on forever and we need to find an end to it. He said that we are fighting against a new kind of thing and that at some point we need to call an end to the "war" actions.

"How will this conflict end. It is an unconventional conflict against an unconventional enemy, and will not end in conventional terms." - Jeh Johnson

At some point he said, this will have to be turned over to police and intelligence agencies, and the sooner the better.

America is finally coming back into its own. We are striving to return to being the once great nation we had been and perhaps in the end, we will become an even greater nation than before.

A lot of what I'm talking about here falls under a single word: Honor. War gives a wink and a nod to acting in dishonorable ways, and that has to stop. We have to acknowledge our past actions but then we have to move on to heal from them.

But we have to allow it to happen, we have to let it happen, and we have to support those who are trying to do this hard work. We have to want it and embrace the change as well as a embrace a different, more mature way of being and looking at things. We have to be brave, to persevere through adversity and no matter what, we have to not allow those fear mongers who have spoken out for so long and have led us astray, to influence us, ever again.

In the end, we have to be Honorable. We have to face it, to admit it, that we were not at some points in these past ten years. And then we have to move on to build ourselves a better way of being, under any situation.

This, is America.

Make that mean something once again. Allow America to again come into its own and to remain so from here forward, no matter what.