The Game Needs to Change—We Need to Put the Civil Back into Civil Society

I am deeply tired of the "who can be uglier" race that we currently have going on in both parties. On the Republican side, it is the candidates themselves that have tried to prove that they are MORE racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, and greedy than the next guy. On the Democratic side, we have the spectacle of the candidates being relatively cordial and actually talking about (to be honest, rather minor) differences of opinion while their partisans on social media bend over backwards to be the most offensive, outrageous, hate mongers and conspiracy theorists, outdoing the Republican machine in their trashing of the other's candidate. It's like the idiotic anger and elation at a mindless and meaningless sporting event except, in this game, the opponent is, obviously, the Devil incarnate.

This election is serious, perhaps the most serious in my experience with politics, and I remember the Eisenhower/Stevenson contest in 1956. The first time that I was eligible to vote for Governor was 1970, and I voted against Ronald Reagan. I have voted in every election since then. I have also watched the intentional dumbing down and incivility of the electoral process since the Republicans lost so badly with Goldwater in 1964. The rhetoric of Nixon but especially Agnew took the discussion to a new level of vitriol. Reagan continued the all out assault on "liberals," but it was the election of Bill Clinton that ushered in the new era of Conservative talk radio and, with the deregulation and consolidation of media, the advent of NEWSCorp, FOX News, Clear Channel, and and the no-holds barred, partisan, mischaracterization, distortion, and outright lying that has simply come to be accepted as spin. The media, including social media, has been not merely complicit but instrumental in this negative transformation. Just like Scalia's court decision about innocence, the actual truth is completely irrelevant. The news no longer presents actual perspective or context. They don't even try to find and present the truth. They merely offer a "he said/he said" paraphrased report or 3-seconds of edited footage with whichever slant their corporate masters have demanded.

Unfortunately, most people have not demanded better; instead, we have bought into their game. We do not find ourselves talking about what really matters and our vison of what this country should be or how we might get there. We simply post ridiculous graphics with false quotes and sarcastic gibes to make the other side look foolish or corrupt and then gleefully attack the other side for their obvious ignorance, stupidity or evil.

I posit the following. I don't care if you are for Sanders, Clinton, Warren or Obama, Trump, Cruz, Kasich or Paul. The only way that we will ever crawl out of the miasmic mire in which we have sunk ourselves is to begin to actually think deeply, discuss civilly, and listen carefully—repeating the process indefinitely—until the fog of corrupt corporate control has lifted, and we can return to the business of creating a civil civil society (This is not a mistaken repetition—"civil" needs to be at the heart of a progressive civilization).

Truth is Nearly Always One-sided.

This is the graphic to which I alluded in my previous blog post. The comment to which I responded said, "Isn't this about a one sided as it gets. "Liberals Taking Our Country Back" by Cynthia Yanez. They don't bang the drum they use C4."

You make an interesting point, David, a point that the far right is generally unwilling to admit: Truth is nearly always one-sided. The graphic makes three statements of fact reflecting well-known Republican positions, but you deem it "a (sic) one sided (sic) as it gets."

Unfortunately, you fail to make any actual assertion about error in the claims; you only suggest that these political claims are not impartial or that they are hyperbolic in the extreme.

1. "Republicans voted against equal pay for women although it passed anyway. " This is clearly in reference to the Ledbetter Act, which was defeated in 2008 by the Republican minority, but passed with a vote along party lines in 2009. It can't have been about the Paycheck Fairness Act of 2014 because that was blocked by every member of the Republican minority in the Senate participating in the procedural filibuster to prevent it from being brought to a vote.

2. "Republicans are against a woman's right to choose." Is there any doubt about this one? The Republican Party Platform of 2012 states, “We support a human life amendment to the Constitution and endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children.” Paul Ryan, the Republican vice-presidential candidate in 2012, was quite explicit about his opposition to abortion, even in the case of rape or incest.

3. They want to force women to have kids when raped (see Republican Platform and Ryan note above) and give the rapist visitation and custody rights. These "rapist's rights" already exist in 31 states. In Ohio, a law has been introduced to overturn the parental rights of the rapist prompted by the kidnapper who kept two women captive for ten years and who fathered a child by raping one of them; he has demanded to see his "daughter." The legislation has been blocked in committee by the Republican committee chairman.

Apparently, you were looking for something more balanced, something like this:

1. "Republicans voted against equal pay." True, but those sluts don't deserve equal pay to a man: after all, the man is the breadwinner; the woman is subservient to the wishes of the man. It says so, right there in the bible, about a thousand times. Here's one fine example: 

1 Timothy Chapter 2
11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the 
man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was 
in the transgression.
15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they 
continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

2. "Republicans are against a woman's right to choose." Damn right, they are against all those baby-murdering Democrats and those whores and doctors of whores who want to kill their zygotes and fetuses; those women and health care providers are criminals and murderers who deserve to be imprisoned or even killed, by terrorist vigilantes if necessary, to carry out the Lord's work [See Timothy 1:2:15 above].

3. "They want to force women to have kids when raped and give the rapist visitation and custody rights." Well, DUH! See number one and two above. Hell, "If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down" (Rep. Claude Akin, Republican ), and "The incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low" (Rep. Trent Franks, Republican) [Actually, about 32,100 pregnancies result from rape each year]. "The facts show that people who are raped — who are truly raped — the juices don't flow, the body functions don't work and they don't get pregnant....To get pregnant, it takes a little cooperation. And there ain’t much cooperation in a rape” (Rep. Henry Aldridge, Republican)

According to the San Francisco Gate, "Aldridge had the floor during the committee meeting as he was trying to apologize for earlier remarks implying that victims of rape or incest are sexually promiscuous" (as quoted in policy.mic).

As for Rapist's rights, Paul Ryan's Fetus Rights Bill (aka, Sanctity of Human Life Act) H.R. 23, which he has repeatedly submitted to Congress intends: "To provide that human life shall be deemed to begin with fertilization."

Section 2(2) states, “The Congress affirms that the Congress, each State, the District of Columbia, and all United States territories have the authority to protect the lives of all human beings residing in its respective jurisdictions.” Initially, this asserts that this is a states' rights issue; however, taken to its logical conclusion, the rapist has a right to prevent his rape victim from terminating her pregnancy, even if she resides in a state where abortions are still legal. Having thus prevented the abortion sought by the woman, he could then claim visitation and custody rights in at least 31 states that currently do not bar such action.

So, there you go, David, both sides get to speak for themselves. And thanks for the invitation to C4. Now let's try to Cclearly.

"The Greatest Threat to Democracy is Hypocrisy! Seek Truth! Speak Truth!" 
Tim McMullen

"I'm the Bain of My Existence"

I agree with Mitt Romney: 

There are a lot of reasons not to elect him!

Why I am Voting in the Next Election...An Answer to a Democratic Query

Today, the "Democratic Party," in an obvious fund-raising ploy, asked me to commit to voting in the next election, and, if I wanted, to add a brief explanation as to why I was voting. Their example was: "I'm voting because I want to move America forward." My explanation, the one that follows here, may have been a bit more than they expected, but I really do think that we could all help to bring about more substantial and positive changes if we committed ourselves to a more conscious and thoughtful political life. I encourage you to contact your representatives, your party, and yes, to give money to the causes that advocate for your beliefs.

I am voting in the next election and in every election because "The Greatest Threat to Democracy is Hypocrisy!" I want the United States to regain a commitment to its original vision, and I want the Democratic Party to return to its own most important principles. The writers of the Declaration of Independence removed "the protection of property" and replaced it with "the pursuit of happiness" because they realized that the defense of property and the inevitable domination by wealth would trump all of the other more fundamental rights and principles.

Since the 80's, the Democratic Party has been complicit in elevating the interests of corporations and the wealthy while decimating the interests of workers. Milton Friedman's proudly immoral stance on the lack of corporate responsibility, and the fact that his philosophy has been ruthlessly championed by both parties, has lead us to our present precipice. Recent and repeated capitulation by Democrats has gutted each piece of legislation intended to help the people.

Capitulation on principles over the last forty years has ultimately led us to the bald-faced absurdity, though perfectly Friedmanesque decision, of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. Democrats and the American people have allowed unfettered media deregulation and general political discourse to be dragged so far to the right that it is no longer about evening the playing field; it's about allowing workers and the common man to even be in the game.

Corporate tax breaks, tax shelters, deregulation, unchecked fraud and corporate handouts have allowed trillions of dollars to be taken from the working class in the form of unprotected job loss created by outsourcing and so-called "improved efficiency"; by the elimination of pensions and reduction or elimination of healthcare; by laws designed to allow and encourage union busting; by the creative use of "bankruptcy" to break union contracts and to reduce workers' rights and benefits; by unconscionable CEO compensation; and by reductions to basic governmental protections and services, ad infinitum, while putting these trillions in the hands of a miniscule percentage of the wealthiest.

It is important to vote and to speak out on these issues in order to allow America to regain its moral integrity and reclaim its international stature.

I reiterate my motto, “The Greatest Threat to Democracy is Hypocrisy! Seek Truth! Speak Truth!”
Tim McMullen