Skip to main content

The Irony in a Political Piece

Those who know me understand that I've never been a big fan of politics.  I've voted both D and R (and L and G too) over the years, depending on the office and issues. I get to know my Representatives in DC and the state. I really like my Representative now (he's an R by the way) and will be glad to vote for him in November. I cannot think of the last time I voted for a presidential candidate. I've voted against one several times, mostly because I worry about the composition of the Supreme Court and federal benches.  I'm registered as N - no party affiliation.  I don't get to vote in primaries. 

In a country of sharply divided political opinions, don't criticize leadership. You'll tick off 50% of people. That's sad, because we should always hold our leaders most accountable. 

Yesterday I posted an article over on Huffington Post that has sent Trump supporters fuming.  I can't believe the angry emails, the screaming tweets-- especially from friends.

In short, the article was a fictitious speech by Trump, stating that his whole campaign was a sham, that he wanted to teach Americans a lesson-- that national leadership is important and must not be taken lightly.  This act of analyzing our leadership was his genius way to make America great again. His continued abrasive nature and poor discretion were part of his ruse, to see how far he could get based on citizens' loyalty to a party over criticism of a candidate.  Period. 

That is a very important message. Over my voting lifetime both Democrats and Republicans have fielded less-than-stellar choices for the highest office in the known universe.  I especially find family dynasties a bit annoying, both George HW Bush as much as Hillary Clinton.  

Americans make a bad mistake.  They look the other way when their candidate or office holder does something wrong.  We make excuses for them, claim conspiracies, and defend the undefendable. 

It is Cubs-Sox, Ford-Chevy, Coke-Pepsi.  Create a dichotomy, pick a time and blindly defend it. No matter what. 

I think it they know what they are doing, that D's and R's create the divide so that we don't notice what is really happening. I've said that for years.  

But more importantly, this failure to criticize leadership is the undoing of our republic, and that is the point of the piece.  It concludes with an important statement-
"The way to make America great again is to demand more from our leaders. Don’t blindly defend those in your party ― be more critical because they represent YOU."

This is the thesis of the piece that so many found so offensive. Some friends found it unthinkable that I'd criticize Donald Trump, or those in the Republican Party that let the guy destroy the perception of the party itself.  

It is not about Trump, not about Clinton, not about Republicans or Democrats.  This is about a fundamental cornerstone of our representative republic.  It is about the need to hold our leaders accountable for their words and actions.  It is not about free speech-- it is about the necessity to exercise free speech.  We must point out where our leadership (or potential leadership) crosses the line. 

So when Trump trashed McCain about "not being a war hero" I found that horribly offensive.  I thought that he was toast at that point. 

But instead, people stood up and defended him. We've seen it over and over again, he does something that contradicts the alleged Christian values that Party officials claim to be their cornerstone. Even the Republican Party platform states, "Americans also deserve a president who will speak for our nation's history and values..."   I'm not feeling that he is representing mine when he disrespects a war hero or mocks a reporter with a disability.  

Again, we need to hold our leaders accountable.  That was the point of the piece.  It was this spirit that was in the room that laid the foundation of the Constitution. 

So when I criticize Trump, Clinton, Johnson or whoever-- don't send me hate mail.  Tell me why you think my criticism is unwarranted.  Help me see why McCain is not a hero or we should mock the disabled.  I'm open to change, but it will take a lot of convincing in those cases. 

Or better yet, review the words of our Founders. Don't circle the wagons around bad behavior because the letter after their name matches the one on your voter registration card.  They are the ones you should hold most accountable because they represent you.  

That was the point, and I can't believe so many missed it, instead taking this as some sort of political, personal, attack on them and their beliefs.  The guy on the beer bottle got it right. Turns out, I think I'm a patriot.  

"If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
Samuel Adams

Popular posts from this blog

Scientific American Destroys Public Trust in Science

This is a sad epitaph, parting words to an old friend that is now gone, leaving in a puff of bitter betrayal. 
When I was a kid it was common for my mom to buy me a magazine if I was sick and home from school.  I didn't want MAD Magazine or comic books.  I preferred Scientific American
The once stalwart publication held a unique spot at the science-public interface, bringing us interesting and diverse stories of scientific interest, long before the internet made such content instantly accessible.  It was our trusted pipeline to the new edges of scientific discovery, from the mantle of the earth to the reaches of space, and every critter in between.
But like so much of our trusted traditional science media, Scientific American has traded its credibility for the glitz of post-truth non-scientific beliefs and the profits of clickbait.The problem is that when a trusted source publishes false information (or worse, when it hijacked by activists) it destroys trust in science, trust in s…

Chipotle's Ag-vertising to Fix their Anti-Ag Image

After years of anti-farmer rhetoric, disgusting anti-agriculture videos, and trashing farmer seed choice, Chipotle now seems to have found a love for the American farmer that is as warm and inviting as the gooey core of a steak burrito.  Their new "Cultivate the Future of Farming" campaign raises awareness of the hardship being experienced in agriculture, and then offers their thoughts and some seed grants in order to reverse it. 

But are they solving a problem that they were instrumental in creating? 

The crisis in agriculture is real, with farmers suffering from low prices, astronomical costs, and strangling regulation.  Farmer suicides are a barometer of the crisis.  Farms, from commodity crops to dairies, are going out of business daily. It is good to see a company raising awareness. 

From Chipotle's website- The "challenge is real" and "It's a hard living"-- and companies like Chipotle were central in creating those problems. 

However, Chipotle&#…

Mangling Reality and Targeting Scientists

Welcome to 2019, and one thing that remains constant is that scientists engaging the public will continue to be targeted for harassment and attempted reputation harm.  

The good news is that it is not working as well as it used to.  People are disgusted by their tactics, and only a handful of true-believers acknowledge their sites as credible. 

But for those on the fence I thought it might be nice to post how a website like SourceWatch uses a Wikipedia-mimic interface to spread false and/or misleading information about public scientists. 

Don't get me wrong, this is not crying victim.  I'm actually is screaming empowerment.  I spent the time to correct the record, something anyone can check.  Please look into their allegations and mine, and see who has it right. 

This is published by the Center for Media and Democracy.  Sadly, such pages actually threaten democracy by providing a forum for false information that makes evidence-based decisions in policy issues more challenging.  It…