Beware of Newspaper Grammar

 News headline:

Gunmen arrested by Kavanaugh's home

My response:

Just as Jesus said that if the people of Jerusalem did not praise Him then the stones would rise up in praise (Luke 19:40), so you see the same truth repeated again and again in different ways.  This time it's if the policemen fail to arrest the would-be assassins, then the homes themselves shall rise up and do so.

With so much rage on the loose, fueled by authoritarian approval, I'll have to teach my home to do the same.  One never knows when it might come in handy.

Just an Idea

Countless words have been wasted in responding to the political situation of our time, criticizing all the errors, rebuking the miscreants, slandering those on the Right and the Left, and otherwise drawing attention not to the Good, the True, and the Beautiful, but to the Bad, the False, and the Ugly.  These are the times in which we live: the times in which the mainstream media, along with all the offshoot resistance media outlets, rely on fear, alarm, and other negative emotions to draw us in.  Such emotional hooks plunge us further into the divide.

These past months, especially since the coronavirus arrived on our shores, leading to extensive lockdowns mandated by the government, have brought a new array of dramatic stories to our attention.  I need not repeat those.  Anyone who has seen the news in the past months knows what they are.

Rather I want to bring your attention to a certain issue and propose a solution.  Perhaps I may be biased due to earning my bachelor's degree in drama, but it concerns me that months of theatre productions have been cancelled, leaving actors—who already struggle to make a decent living from pouring out their hearts in becoming some character or other for your entertainment and edification—unemployed, facing the real possibility that months or even years may pass before they can give themselves again to their work.

There is the issue.

Now the solution: could not these actors be hired to perform more exciting stories that the media could present to us?

Let me explain further.  I have heard several people remark upon how watching the news brings them down and I suspect that reflects the experience of more than a few people.  Yet people keep going back again and again to the news.  Doubtless they will continue to do so.  Consequently, they will keep being dragged down by the rising numbers of coronavirus cases, the violent protests, murders, police shootings, and so on unless something changes.

The change is what I propose.  Rather than focus on the negative, what if we focused on the positive?  What if the media told stories meant to bring us hope rather than fear?

If I had the money for it, I would be seriously tempted to follow through with what I propose, but since such funds lie far outside my means at present, I will merely proffer the idea in case it should happen to come to the eyes of someone who does have such financial weight.  Let me therefore state the idea again most simply: to hire actors to act out stories that would give us hope.  Let them show us actions of heroic virtue.

Perhaps I dream a dream too lofty when I dream of all the good actions that could come from those seeking to imitate these beautiful stories and acts of virtue.  Yet I will dream it and invite you to dream it with me and perhaps someday a piece of our dream might come true.

If you would like to participate in this dream, please share your ideas for scripts in the comments.  What would you like to see the media portray through the talents of all our nation's best actors?

Handy Political Definitions

 From the Halfwise Dictionary:

REPUBLIC: A state in which supreme power belongs to the public and to elected politicians and to anyone who has enough money to corrupt the system.

ELECTION: An institutionalized system of voting for candidates to fill political offices according to their apparent powerfulness and warmth.

POLITICAL PLATFORM: A political party's version of creative writing.

PRESIDENT: The country's scapegoat.

MEDIOCRACY: A government system in which the media tells people for whom to vote, calls the winners of elections, and otherwise takes authority over the democratic voting process, which often occurs through emotional manipulation, shaming, and other similar techniques.  To be distinguished from MEDIOCRITY.

You Voted Him In

Although perhaps the steady rush of time and the busyness of modern life has dulled somewhat the outrage regarding the election of Donald Trump to the presidency, media coverage helps to keep the flame of hatred alive.  After all, that is the right of every civilized person in this country of liberty: to hate the leader of its government.  How do you prove your freedom better than to mock your own president?

Now I have little reason to defend President Trump on any basis other than his office.  For if we make of that office a laughing stock, then how can anyone ever hold it without expecting a barrage of rotted vegetables in his face, if only metaphorically so?

Still, I will make no paltry defense of that once noble office for I doubt that anyone cares.  It is more satisfying to tear down than to build up.  It gives one a feeling of greater power to denigrate another for his stupidity than to compliment the other's good points, however few they may be.

I cannot claim vast knowledge of the actions of our current president.  I prefer to spend my time upon other more beneficial endeavors.  The actions of the president, no matter who he happens to be, make very little difference in my day to day life.

So, go ahead, cast your stones.  Burn your buildings.  Express your displeasure in all the mature ways of an educated society.

But I will point out that you voted him in.

You can argue with me if you wish.  You can tell me you voted for Hillary Clinton.  If you should chance to make such a foolish claim, however, I must correct your misunderstandings: if you voted for Hillary Clinton, you voted for Donald Trump.

They like to tell you that a vote for a third party candidate is a vote for the candidate of the party opposite the main party you prefer to support.  That, however, is slightly flawed logic.  It may happen to carry some weight when it passes from the theoretical world of statistics to the world of reality, but very little. 

The greater reality is this: if you vote for a candidate in the two-party system, you vote for the system.  You give your assent to the victory of the majority candidate whether or not you wish him to hold the office.

(And in truth how much difference is there these days between Democrats and Republicans?)

It is remarkable how little it would take to break that system so firmly entrenched.

Yet I doubt it will happen.  I have little confidence in the American spirit of independence as anything other than a choice to exhibit opinions on social media sites about everything from food to film.  I believe you are free to say what you want about your dog and look pretty in your favorite pose, but forgive me if I think the likelihood that you will think independently upon the most important issues of our time rather than merely bashing your favorite roasting candidate are not worth mentioning.

In fact, what are the odds that you will even bother to look up what must be done to implement more choices into our supposedly-democratic election process?

Of course you have two years until you have to worry about it again.  So perhaps you might say my "time is out of joint," but if so I will respond that "something is rotten in the state" of America.  You have been fair warned.

So prepare your 2020 vision!

Draft Bill for Equality

WHEREAS the Declaration of Independence clearly states that "all men are created equal," and 

WHEREAS we clearly understand that statement to refer to all people without needing to mince words about its political correctness; and

WHEREAS we certainly believe that all are indeed equal and consequently deserving of equal opportunities in the area of education and elsewhere; and

WHEREAS equal obviously means the same; and

WHEREAS it is entirely unfair to ignore the needs of equality by allowing some to be superior to others or to permit the emotional trauma caused by feelings of inferiority; and

WHEREAS no one's equality to another should be threatened by pretended superiority in terms of greater knowledge or advanced learning or greater competency or any other area of higher status caused by greater exertion of effort or natural merit; now

THEREFORE, the government of the United States of America hereby takes into its jurisdiction the proper distribution of justice by ensuring the equality of each citizen of this nation.  By these rights, the government shall permit none to rise above the bar of equality set for the lowest possible denominator that all may be equal and none may be made to feel inferior by the speech or position of another, including, but not limited to, the following areas:

1. Education: no person shall know more of any subject than any other person.  No advanced degrees shall be permissible.

2. Speech: no person shall use advanced grammar or quote distinguished writers or other languages or speak in any other language but the simplest English.  Slang is permissible only if it be widespread and suitable for all persons.

3. Argument: no person shall apply logical principles to the argument of another nor argue to deconstruct another's argument lest the other be proved less by losing the argument and therefore becoming subject to feelings of inferiority.

FURTHERMORE, anyone who fails to meet the bar of equality by selfishly rising above it must seek to give restitution by regressing immediately or be subject to fine or imprisonment according to the severity and number of offenses.