I hate to break it to all of you, but it's over! The people of the United States have spoken in our imperfect, geographically weighed, electorate driven system of Democracy we have accepted to be legitimate and teach the rest of the world about. The winner is Donald Trump and there is nothing you can do about that anymore.
However, that does not mean that you should limit your responses to outrage and witty posts of opposition for the next four years. It is time to take action, because this election cycle has reduced our election process into the reality television show that is viewed as a circus around the world.
What we need to do is begin to hold our politicians up to their stated agenda, opposing them where it is unconscionable and unethical. But also, supporting them where it is reasonable and beneficial. What any responsible American should do is learn what your President, Senator and Representative have on their agenda. And do not take it second-hand from the lens of polarizing media, but from the politician's own complete statements.
Let's take our president-elect as an example. One of the things he has promised to do is to curtail freedom of the press through promoting specific libel laws, which would make it very dangerous to publish any editorials and effectively silence opposition. Clearly, this is a serious violation of our nation's constitutional principles. With this kind of agenda, the citizens should fervently oppose his administration through their regional representatives in Washington.
Another item he has promised is the establishment of term limits for elected, as well as appointed, government officials. This would prevent the career politician in Congress, which is currently a person who remains in his or her post until they die, making them a consistent steady target for special interest groups and their lobbyists. Reasonably set term limits would allow these elected officials to be closer in touch with their electorate and with the reality of modern times.
We need to start seeing our politicians the same way they see us (their voters) - what can this person do for us and what should this person not do to us? What the American people can no longer afford to do is oppose a politician's entire agenda, because of certain items that we deem to be unconscionable or unethical. We have done that with George Bush Jr. and Barack Obama for the past sixteen years with the result being a Congress that can hardly get any legislation passed and a bitterly divided nation over a silly ideological boundary. Every politician has points that are good and others that are bad.
So speak to your regional Washington representative. Voice your opposition to the politician's terrible ideas, voice your support for the politician's good ideas, discuss the details of each - you may learn something. But don't sit out the next four years because you are unhappy with the result, do not oppose 100% of any political agenda and do not support 100% of any political agenda. In my experience, almost every politician is a mix of bad ideas and good ideas.
Remember, only a certain type deals in absolutes.
Sunday, December 11, 2016
Wednesday, November 9, 2016
Election Takeaway
What the Trump election run has taught us, is that it doesn't matter how unfavorable the candidate is. What really matters is his/her appeal to the anti-establishment crowd. While the Clinton camp rightfully focused on Donald Trumps apparent flaws, it didn't detract from his appeal to the people who saw him as a change-up to the conventional politicians.
Just look at the number of newly registered Republicans, Democrats and Independents that voted for him. Look at the people who have never voted before - these are the people who have been apathetic towards politicians, because they believed that conventional politics did not serve their needs.
Now Trump will rightfully receive a backlash for not delivering on his outlandish promises, that is certain. But what is also certain is that the landscape of politics in the United States has changed forever. For the first time since I can remember, the politicians have been forced to consider the entire population and not just the target electorate segments. The average American, one who isn't aligned to any of the conventional segments will have to be considered in future elections.
And that is the right way to do things, for all of American people's sake. It is just a shame that we had to take the narcissist Orange Julius Caesar to the Oval Office in order to get people to care enough to get out and vote the establishment out of power.
Where do we go from here? Well that is all up to us - the people. We can either go to our opposite corners and throw feces at each other, or we can come together as a whole and build a broad consensus that moves us forward and forces our representatives to actually represent our interests.
Tuesday, September 20, 2016
Terence, Tulsa and Transparency
I am usually the first person to give police officers the benefit of the doubt. Their job is often dangerous, thankless and lacking proper compensation. Their successes and sacrifices often do not make the news, while their failures are highly scrutinized. I always plead with people to preserve the innocent until proven guilty mentality with the police officers, as they do with any other person accused of criminal conduct.
Having said that, the evidence presented by the police department regarding the events of this past Friday night surrounding the death of Terence Crutcher in Tulsa Oklahoma is overwhelmingly damning. One simply cannot defend a team of officers that do not communicate as to who is the lead in approaching the perceived threat and who is in the role of a backup. Furthermore, the use of deadly force by a police officer should be the last resort and not a coercive instrument of compliance.
Terence Crutcher, aged 40, was returning from class at a Community College. He was attempting to educate himself and make his family proud, when his vehicle broke down. Shortly thereafter, Terence lost his life. At best, this was Police officer's incompetence and negligence. At worst, this was racial discrimination and a lack of value for a man's life.
Based on the information given by the Tulsa police department, officer Betty Shelby arrived at the scene first and found Terence looking intoxicated and unresponsive to her questions. After questioning Terence regarding his ownership of the vehicle and receiving no response, Terence raised his hands high in the air and proceeded to walk away from officer Shelby's vehicle toward his own. By this time, the police team responding to the dispatch call arrived at the scene and Terence continued to walk toward his SUV with his hands still in the air. When he arrived at his vehicle, Terence was seen to either lean against his vehicle or put his hands on the vehicle. Because of his unresponsive, and allegedly unpredictable behavior, officer Tyler Turnbough deployed his taser. At the same time, officer Betty Shelby discharged her firearm and fatally shot Terence.
While officer Tyler Turnbough correctly deployed his taser, in accordance with a non-compliant individual who is perceived as a threat, officer Betty Shelby acted irrationally by using deadly force. The released video and audio can confirm Terence's and the police movements as described by the Tulsa police department. The released video and audio cannot confirm whether or not Terence was intoxicated or unresponsive. What we know for certain is that he did not have a weapon on him or in his vehicle, he did not move toward officers in a threatening manner and he was killed in the process. The video also disproves Shelby's attorney defense that Terence was reaching into the vehicle, because the window on the driver's side of the vehicle is clearly seen as rolled up from the helicopter camera. Lastly, the audio from the helicopter contains a female voice saying 'that looks like a bad dude', which shows that Terence's appearance played into the assessment of at least one officer.
In the name of transparency, the Tulsa police department released video from the dash cam of the second police cruiser, as well as video and audio from the helicopter. I applaud the Tulsa police department for transparency in doing so. However, if you really want to uphold transparency, do so in prosecuting officer Betty Shelby to the fullest extent of the law. You have the responsibility to the people whom you serve - the people of Tulsa Oklahoma.
Having said that, the evidence presented by the police department regarding the events of this past Friday night surrounding the death of Terence Crutcher in Tulsa Oklahoma is overwhelmingly damning. One simply cannot defend a team of officers that do not communicate as to who is the lead in approaching the perceived threat and who is in the role of a backup. Furthermore, the use of deadly force by a police officer should be the last resort and not a coercive instrument of compliance.
Terence Crutcher, aged 40, was returning from class at a Community College. He was attempting to educate himself and make his family proud, when his vehicle broke down. Shortly thereafter, Terence lost his life. At best, this was Police officer's incompetence and negligence. At worst, this was racial discrimination and a lack of value for a man's life.
Based on the information given by the Tulsa police department, officer Betty Shelby arrived at the scene first and found Terence looking intoxicated and unresponsive to her questions. After questioning Terence regarding his ownership of the vehicle and receiving no response, Terence raised his hands high in the air and proceeded to walk away from officer Shelby's vehicle toward his own. By this time, the police team responding to the dispatch call arrived at the scene and Terence continued to walk toward his SUV with his hands still in the air. When he arrived at his vehicle, Terence was seen to either lean against his vehicle or put his hands on the vehicle. Because of his unresponsive, and allegedly unpredictable behavior, officer Tyler Turnbough deployed his taser. At the same time, officer Betty Shelby discharged her firearm and fatally shot Terence.
While officer Tyler Turnbough correctly deployed his taser, in accordance with a non-compliant individual who is perceived as a threat, officer Betty Shelby acted irrationally by using deadly force. The released video and audio can confirm Terence's and the police movements as described by the Tulsa police department. The released video and audio cannot confirm whether or not Terence was intoxicated or unresponsive. What we know for certain is that he did not have a weapon on him or in his vehicle, he did not move toward officers in a threatening manner and he was killed in the process. The video also disproves Shelby's attorney defense that Terence was reaching into the vehicle, because the window on the driver's side of the vehicle is clearly seen as rolled up from the helicopter camera. Lastly, the audio from the helicopter contains a female voice saying 'that looks like a bad dude', which shows that Terence's appearance played into the assessment of at least one officer.
In the name of transparency, the Tulsa police department released video from the dash cam of the second police cruiser, as well as video and audio from the helicopter. I applaud the Tulsa police department for transparency in doing so. However, if you really want to uphold transparency, do so in prosecuting officer Betty Shelby to the fullest extent of the law. You have the responsibility to the people whom you serve - the people of Tulsa Oklahoma.
Sunday, September 11, 2016
In Defense of the Anthem
Today we celebrate the 15th anniversary of a terrible act of terrorism on American soil - the September 11th attacks on the World Trade Center in 2001. Nearly three thousand people lost their lives, because a group of Islamic Extremists took action based on a hateful intolerant ideology and their lack of respect for life.
One of the most memorable and enduring images in the aftermath of those attacks was the torn flag that remained at Ground Zero. The entire nation came together and mourned with symbols of remembrance and American patriotism front and center. We recognized, that despite our differences, we were all Americans and all share in the road to healing from this tragedy.
That message was not lost in the world of sports. The teams of usually hated rivals came together in a show of solidarity with sports teams singing the Star Spangled Banner and America The Beautiful together. They didn't merely 'go through the motions', they showed solidarity with all Americans who recognized and mourned the loss.
This level of solidarity is more important than ever today, with certain groups in our society more entrenched than ever. These groups show layers of division that cannot conceive of a point of view other than their own righteous cause. Furthermore, anyone who dares challenge those views is vilified to the greatest extent of their fact-stretched under-informed opinions. Fifteen year later, we stand more divided than I ever recall in recent history.
So while these groups may see the Anthem or the Flag as a symbol of oppression, many others see them as a sign of hope and memory for those we have lost. Immigrants, such as myself, see these as a symbol of a new life within the adopted country. Servicemen and women see them as a means of pride and paying homage to their fallen friends and those who came to serve before them.
When a protest is made against the Anthem or the Flag, the individuals who do this drive the divisions between the people who respect and honor these patriotic tenets and themselves. If you are serious about bringing awareness to your cause and swaying the opinion of others, your primary purpose is to attract support for your cause. When you protest the Anthem or the Flag, you are automatically driving a significant portion of American people away from the cause you are promoting, before anyone has a chance to hear the message.
In essence, you are defeating your own cause from the very beginning. People tend to confuse popularity for effectiveness in this era of social media and hype. While this campaign has enjoyed great popularity, it's effectiveness has been negligible and even counter-productive for the aforementioned reasons.
Just because you have the freedom to do something, doesn't mean it is a good idea. In the words of Henry DeSalvo from Big Trouble: "There isn't any rule that says I can't come over here and fart on your entree. But I don't do it. And do you know why? Because it would be bad manners"
One of the most memorable and enduring images in the aftermath of those attacks was the torn flag that remained at Ground Zero. The entire nation came together and mourned with symbols of remembrance and American patriotism front and center. We recognized, that despite our differences, we were all Americans and all share in the road to healing from this tragedy.
That message was not lost in the world of sports. The teams of usually hated rivals came together in a show of solidarity with sports teams singing the Star Spangled Banner and America The Beautiful together. They didn't merely 'go through the motions', they showed solidarity with all Americans who recognized and mourned the loss.
This level of solidarity is more important than ever today, with certain groups in our society more entrenched than ever. These groups show layers of division that cannot conceive of a point of view other than their own righteous cause. Furthermore, anyone who dares challenge those views is vilified to the greatest extent of their fact-stretched under-informed opinions. Fifteen year later, we stand more divided than I ever recall in recent history.
So while these groups may see the Anthem or the Flag as a symbol of oppression, many others see them as a sign of hope and memory for those we have lost. Immigrants, such as myself, see these as a symbol of a new life within the adopted country. Servicemen and women see them as a means of pride and paying homage to their fallen friends and those who came to serve before them.
When a protest is made against the Anthem or the Flag, the individuals who do this drive the divisions between the people who respect and honor these patriotic tenets and themselves. If you are serious about bringing awareness to your cause and swaying the opinion of others, your primary purpose is to attract support for your cause. When you protest the Anthem or the Flag, you are automatically driving a significant portion of American people away from the cause you are promoting, before anyone has a chance to hear the message.
In essence, you are defeating your own cause from the very beginning. People tend to confuse popularity for effectiveness in this era of social media and hype. While this campaign has enjoyed great popularity, it's effectiveness has been negligible and even counter-productive for the aforementioned reasons.
Just because you have the freedom to do something, doesn't mean it is a good idea. In the words of Henry DeSalvo from Big Trouble: "There isn't any rule that says I can't come over here and fart on your entree. But I don't do it. And do you know why? Because it would be bad manners"
The Day we call 9/11
It was on this morning 15 years ago, that I awoke just after losing my
grandmother Fira the day before 09.10.2001 and still in mourning. I was
awoken by a phone call from our friends from Israel, asking if everyone
is fine and what is going on in New York?
Still groggy from coming back after a viewing the night before, I turned on the television to see one of the world trade center towers in heavy smoke. As I was on the phone, I stopped talking and just listened to the newscast, occasionally translating over the phone. Then a plane came in and hit the second tower, and we all now knew for certain that this wasn't just some accident - it was a concerted terrorist act by a group of people who don't value life, not even their own.
While calls were made about not singling out Islam, but Islamic extremists/terrorists; the videos on the web, as well as journalist reports, showed Muslim countries' ordinary citizens celebrating and rejoicing at the tragic barbaric act and its aftermath. What's more, we witnessed our own country's Muslim citizens celebrating the destruction and devastation. In this one swept moment, the ordinary Muslim citizens supported their extremists' actions. I'm certain there were other instances, but his one was documented.
If you want respect and tolerance, the least you can do as a human being is show some respect for human life and a tragedy like that. The most would be denouncing the actions of the terrorists and sending heartfelt condolences to the victims' families. What separates us from terrorists is our conscience that respects each others' lives. A terrorist has no conscience like that, and therefore ceases to be human. When you rejoice at the actions of a terrorist, you are closer to that terrorist than to the rest of humanity.
Still groggy from coming back after a viewing the night before, I turned on the television to see one of the world trade center towers in heavy smoke. As I was on the phone, I stopped talking and just listened to the newscast, occasionally translating over the phone. Then a plane came in and hit the second tower, and we all now knew for certain that this wasn't just some accident - it was a concerted terrorist act by a group of people who don't value life, not even their own.
While calls were made about not singling out Islam, but Islamic extremists/terrorists; the videos on the web, as well as journalist reports, showed Muslim countries' ordinary citizens celebrating and rejoicing at the tragic barbaric act and its aftermath. What's more, we witnessed our own country's Muslim citizens celebrating the destruction and devastation. In this one swept moment, the ordinary Muslim citizens supported their extremists' actions. I'm certain there were other instances, but his one was documented.
If you want respect and tolerance, the least you can do as a human being is show some respect for human life and a tragedy like that. The most would be denouncing the actions of the terrorists and sending heartfelt condolences to the victims' families. What separates us from terrorists is our conscience that respects each others' lives. A terrorist has no conscience like that, and therefore ceases to be human. When you rejoice at the actions of a terrorist, you are closer to that terrorist than to the rest of humanity.
Monday, September 5, 2016
"The Lobster" Review
Upon a friend's recommendation I watched a critically acclaimed movie, The Lobster, tonight with my favorite doctor. I liked the movie, but found it to be heavy handed and overly critical of modern society, relationship standards in particular.
The beginning of the movie will open up the viewers to a heartfelt disappointment from the main protagonist's point of view, coupled with an additional burden of having the clock started on him to find a new partner, as well as hunt fellow men and women in the process.
It doesn't take the viewer long to figure out that the popular society norm is for neither men nor women to ever be alone. Moreover, the wrinkle is to find some common disposition between the two partners. The main character finds himself in a remediation camp (hotel), whose goal is for him to either find a suitable match or be turned into an animal of his choice.
He witnesses two other men approach their predicament differently. One is willing to lie in order to forge a relationship, while the other appears to be resigned that there's no hope and time will run out. After the main character's attempt to get in line with societal norms falls apart, he runs out into the wild and meets up with the rebel group of loners.
The loners represent the counterculture group. They are the polar opposite of the accepted society norm, but just as stringent in their rules of remaining separate with no emotions or actions relating to another person. He cannot conform to this group either, as he finds a woman that represents his match, while also 'luckily' having the same disposition as him. Soon, their relationship is exposed to the leader of the group who proceeds to disable the main character's love interest.
Upon learning of his love's fate, he does everything he can for her to provide a better quality of life. But he knows that they can't remain in this counterculture group. Therefore, one night they execute an escape plan into the city. Their plan is to rejoin the popular accepted society as a couple. There's just one problem, they are no longer equals in their disposition. The movie ends with the main character faced with a choice - whether or not to disable himself in order to make him and his love interest equal.
The way I see it, the movie takes a vicious Kubrickesque swing with a baseball bat at what is accepted and not accepted in modern standards of dating and single lifestyles. There are two crude side points made by the author that are a direct critique of the accepted societal myths. One is the use of a child to resolve marital difficulties, which is obviously counter-intuitive. Second is that true happiness is more important than the happiness or well being of your partner, which is true to a degree. However, unless the partner is mentally disturbed, it is not a life or death situation. While I don't see the modern society as polarized or as radical as the movie portrays, it does bring a valid point of what acceptance by culture and counterculture today requires.
The movie's lack of resolution at the end is a rendered judgment upon society - that even though the main character has successfully fled both groups, he still remains a slave to the societal norms that seek a similar disposition between him and his love interest.
I give the movie a 4 out of 5 thumbs up! The movie is funny and contains a number of noteworthy performances. But while the satire is very nicely set up and executed, the societal critique that it deals is only partially justified and is usually not exercised to the abstracted extent.
The beginning of the movie will open up the viewers to a heartfelt disappointment from the main protagonist's point of view, coupled with an additional burden of having the clock started on him to find a new partner, as well as hunt fellow men and women in the process.
It doesn't take the viewer long to figure out that the popular society norm is for neither men nor women to ever be alone. Moreover, the wrinkle is to find some common disposition between the two partners. The main character finds himself in a remediation camp (hotel), whose goal is for him to either find a suitable match or be turned into an animal of his choice.
He witnesses two other men approach their predicament differently. One is willing to lie in order to forge a relationship, while the other appears to be resigned that there's no hope and time will run out. After the main character's attempt to get in line with societal norms falls apart, he runs out into the wild and meets up with the rebel group of loners.
The loners represent the counterculture group. They are the polar opposite of the accepted society norm, but just as stringent in their rules of remaining separate with no emotions or actions relating to another person. He cannot conform to this group either, as he finds a woman that represents his match, while also 'luckily' having the same disposition as him. Soon, their relationship is exposed to the leader of the group who proceeds to disable the main character's love interest.
Upon learning of his love's fate, he does everything he can for her to provide a better quality of life. But he knows that they can't remain in this counterculture group. Therefore, one night they execute an escape plan into the city. Their plan is to rejoin the popular accepted society as a couple. There's just one problem, they are no longer equals in their disposition. The movie ends with the main character faced with a choice - whether or not to disable himself in order to make him and his love interest equal.
The way I see it, the movie takes a vicious Kubrickesque swing with a baseball bat at what is accepted and not accepted in modern standards of dating and single lifestyles. There are two crude side points made by the author that are a direct critique of the accepted societal myths. One is the use of a child to resolve marital difficulties, which is obviously counter-intuitive. Second is that true happiness is more important than the happiness or well being of your partner, which is true to a degree. However, unless the partner is mentally disturbed, it is not a life or death situation. While I don't see the modern society as polarized or as radical as the movie portrays, it does bring a valid point of what acceptance by culture and counterculture today requires.
The movie's lack of resolution at the end is a rendered judgment upon society - that even though the main character has successfully fled both groups, he still remains a slave to the societal norms that seek a similar disposition between him and his love interest.
I give the movie a 4 out of 5 thumbs up! The movie is funny and contains a number of noteworthy performances. But while the satire is very nicely set up and executed, the societal critique that it deals is only partially justified and is usually not exercised to the abstracted extent.
Sunday, September 4, 2016
Colin Kaepernick
An NFL quarterback named Colin Kaepernick decided to sit during the national anthem in a preseason game last week, while the rest of his teammates stood to honor the nation and the flag. The act has drawn both support and condemnation immediately. As a professional athlete, hearing your national anthem is routine at sporting events and is done to honor the country and the people who have served to protect it since its inception.
In a statement given to reporters after the game, he explained that he will not honor the flag in a country that oppresses black people and people of color. He went on further to say that this is bigger than football and that there are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder. He went on to say that if football and endorsements are taken away from him, he will know that he made the right decision.
I don't see a big deal with Colin not standing for the anthem, since it is not required by the league and there's no requirement by the sporting venue, nor the personnel serving the sporting event. You don't want to stand, you don't stand. As long as your teammates are alright with you doing your own thing while the rest of the team stands for the anthem and the team unity is not defined by this act, you're not hurting anyone.
But here are the reasons why this entire episode stinks of opportunism. In 2015, he lost his starting job with the San Francisco 49ers after a long string of underwhelming performances. This followed his request to be traded during the off-season. Without a resolution to the request, during the preseason friction with the management has increased and questions about his future in the NFL became a lot more pronounced. Fighting just to stay on the team, the situation did not look good.
A statement like the one he made during last week's preseason game's national anthem was sure to raise eyebrows and make any decision on Kaepernick's future by the 49ers a lot more scrutinized, if in fact the franchise were to decide to release him. By taking the civil rights stand, his place on the team became secure, at least as a backup quarterback for the time being. No franchise would take a chance at alienating a large portion of its fans by cutting a player who took a civil rights stand.
The civil rights issues he has addressed didn't just occur during this off-season. They have been front and center in every publication and social media site for the past three years. Yet he made no recorded mention in the media with this respect and did not provide anything that could be construed as a distraction to his team until his own future in football was on the line.
Well known NBA athletes like Dwayne Wade, Chris Paul, LeBron James and Carmelo Anthony made more powerful and more effective civil rights statements in the same arena during this year without refusing to stand for the national anthem. Anthony stood proudly for the anthem, as it played during the Olympics in Rio, as he and team USA won the gold. But then again, these athletes didn't have to assure themselves of a roster spot.
Whoever Colin Kaepernick's Public Relations agent is, I believe they are doing a bang-up job of keeping him employed... for now.
In a statement given to reporters after the game, he explained that he will not honor the flag in a country that oppresses black people and people of color. He went on further to say that this is bigger than football and that there are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder. He went on to say that if football and endorsements are taken away from him, he will know that he made the right decision.
I don't see a big deal with Colin not standing for the anthem, since it is not required by the league and there's no requirement by the sporting venue, nor the personnel serving the sporting event. You don't want to stand, you don't stand. As long as your teammates are alright with you doing your own thing while the rest of the team stands for the anthem and the team unity is not defined by this act, you're not hurting anyone.
But here are the reasons why this entire episode stinks of opportunism. In 2015, he lost his starting job with the San Francisco 49ers after a long string of underwhelming performances. This followed his request to be traded during the off-season. Without a resolution to the request, during the preseason friction with the management has increased and questions about his future in the NFL became a lot more pronounced. Fighting just to stay on the team, the situation did not look good.
A statement like the one he made during last week's preseason game's national anthem was sure to raise eyebrows and make any decision on Kaepernick's future by the 49ers a lot more scrutinized, if in fact the franchise were to decide to release him. By taking the civil rights stand, his place on the team became secure, at least as a backup quarterback for the time being. No franchise would take a chance at alienating a large portion of its fans by cutting a player who took a civil rights stand.
The civil rights issues he has addressed didn't just occur during this off-season. They have been front and center in every publication and social media site for the past three years. Yet he made no recorded mention in the media with this respect and did not provide anything that could be construed as a distraction to his team until his own future in football was on the line.
Well known NBA athletes like Dwayne Wade, Chris Paul, LeBron James and Carmelo Anthony made more powerful and more effective civil rights statements in the same arena during this year without refusing to stand for the national anthem. Anthony stood proudly for the anthem, as it played during the Olympics in Rio, as he and team USA won the gold. But then again, these athletes didn't have to assure themselves of a roster spot.
Whoever Colin Kaepernick's Public Relations agent is, I believe they are doing a bang-up job of keeping him employed... for now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)