Friday, February 26, 2016
Like many others, I have been accused
of being a freak. I say that this is a good thing.
Freaks come up with all the original
ideas that move everything forward. Freaks also see where everyone
else is going wrong. When the main thrust of the society is Nazism,
which is wrong about just about everything, the only people who have
a chance to be right are people in disagreement with that society,
who of course are regarded by that society as freaks. While not all
societies are as overtly wrong as the Nazis, most have problems with
them. And it takes someone whom such a society sees as a freak to
notice that and to put into place corrective measures.
If evolution is true, then it is the
freaks – the mutations – that drive the process that is
responsible for all life. And if creationism is true, then from what
we see in the Bible God works in mysterious ways. Specifically, he
works through all sorts of people – such as say David – who are
not respected in their home societies; and who by that standard are
likewise seen as freaks.
If you are a freak: There is a good
reason for it, and there are many good things that you can do with
it. Don't try to negate what you are, make the most of it. The world
needs its freaks, and there is a good reason for their existence.
Embrace being a freak and make the most of it. And in the process do
your part in the cosmic process.
Thursday, February 25, 2016
Jews and Arrogance
One persistent criticism of the Jews is
that they are arrogant and see themselves as being above everyone
else.
The same accusation has been made
against the English, the Americans and the Germans.
The claim is that the Jews, because
they see themselves as chosen people of God, think that they are
better than everyone else. They are hardly alone in that sentiment.
With imperial England's global ambitions, America's Manifest Destiny,
and Nazi Lebensraum, the parties thought themselves better than
others to the point of considering themselves justified in killing
people all over the world and taking their land. Whereas the Jews do
not seek to conquer anyone. There are some who have gone to Israel
and live there, and there are others who live elsewhere in the world
and generally behave themselves much better than its other
inhabitants such as the Muslims.
Really, what matter is it to anyone
whether a person sees himself as better or worse than other people? I
am reminded of a movie about teenage thugs, in which a punk attacked
a girl who was taking school seriously with, “You think you're
better than everyone else?” What gives him the idea that he speaks
for everyone else – 7 billion people, most of whom are nothing like
him? Of whatever arrogance that girl was guilty, his was much
greater.
We see the same thing, at a much more
significant level, with the people who say that Jews think they're
better than everyone else. What gives such a person the right to
claim to speak for everyone else? Does he speak for the guy in China?
The guy in Ethiopia? The guy in Thailand? Even if Jews are arrogant,
the arrogance of such people is far greater.
Are there arrogant Jews? Yes. Do Jews
own arrogance? No. Far greater arrogance belongs with the people who
accuse Jews of thinking they're better than everyone else – and in
this appropriate for themselves a supremely arrogant and completely
unearned right to claim to speak for everyone else.
Obama and Antichrist
A good friend of mine, a devout
Christian who also happens to be gay (non-practicing) and black, said that Obama is
the Antichrist and that he is going to bring on another world war.
In 1990s, Jerry Falwell made a claim
that the Antichrist was a Jewish person from a foreign country, in
his 20s, living in America. That does not apply to Obama, but it does
apply to someone with whom I bear a more than passing acquaintance.
If there was such a person as the
Antichrist, my advice to him would be to simply not do his job. What
matters it to him that he has the running of the world for a couple
of years but finds himself in hell for eternity? Simply refuse to do
your job.
Then maybe the Christians will have to
stop hoping for an Armageddon in their lifetime and will get to work
fixing the planet and making it liveable for their children.
And that will be good for everyone.
Wednesday, February 24, 2016
Quarrelsome Allies and Real Enemies
There are two sources of criticism of
America: From quarrelsome allies and from real enemies. The French
criticize America, but they do not want to see America destroyed.
ISIS, Taliban and Boka Haram do.
Many young people develop anti-American
convictions in their learning stages, but come around when they
realize what other systems look like. Reading Ward Churchill got me
to hate the Western civilization and to drop out of society; but I
found myself in the path of some very good people who helped me out
during that time. From seeing their example I developed respect and
appreciation for America and American people, so now America has my
loyalty.
In addition to quarrelsome allies and
real enemies, there are also powers that are neither. China and
Russia are neither allies nor enemies of America; they pursue their
own interest and work with Americans when it is in their benefit to
do so. When Boris Yeltsin and Jiang Zemin met to create a
multi-polar-bear world, they were articulating something that has
since then become more entrenched. Neither country is crazy enough to
start an outright war against America; but there will always be
people in both countries who are very anti-American and who will want
to influence their countries' policies in that direction.
The quarrelsome allies and real enemies
must be treated differently based on what they are. You don't
carpet-bomb France, nor do you invite terrorists into the US
Congress. Some of the criticisms of the French are legitimate; and
America would in fact benefit from having better art and poetry and
possessing more respect for such things. From those who actually want
to see America destroyed, America has the right to defend itself.
It is imperative to see the difference
between quarrelsome allies and real enemies and treat them
accordingly.
Jews and Crucifixion of Jesus
One justification for anti-Jewish
sentiments is the claim that Jews have crucified Jesus. No they did
not. None of the Jews now alive were alive at the time of Jesus; and
it is wrong that they be blamed for something that they did not do.
As for the Jews contemporary with
Jesus, they were only following the Ten Commandments law. According
to Ten Commandments, the first commandment is “Thou shalt have no
god before me.” Jesus, in claiming to be God, committed the worst
sin in the book: The sin of blasphemy. That is the reason why Jesus's
contemporaries let off a murderer while insisting on crucifying him.
They were not operating from the position of wickedness – any kind
of wickedness. They were operating from the position of the law of
Moses; and their actions can not be called wicked unless the law of
Moses is to be seen as such.
What would happen if Jesus came to
America now and said that he was God? Most likely he would be pumped
full of risperidal. If Jesus appeared before the Jews today, he
likewise would not have gotten crucified. I certainly wouldn't have
crucified him, and I am a Jew. It is important that people are to be
seen for what they are than for what their ancestors have been;
otherwise the Germans are to be forever branded as Nazis, Americans
as slave traders, and the English as colonialists. And all these sins
are far more recent than was the crucifixion of Jesus.
I consider it wrong to blame people for
something that they had nothing to do with and that they, had they
been there at the time, would not have done. I wouldn't have
crucified Jesus; my family wouldn't have crucified Jesus; most Jews I
know would not have crucified Jesus. In the same way as, say, most
today's Germans, if they had been alive at the time of the Second
World War, would not have supported Hitler; in the same way as most
today's Americans would not have taken part in the slave trade; in
the same way as most today's English would not have taken part in
colonialism.
People – whether Jewish or German –
should not be blamed for the sins of their ancestors; and the sins of
the Germans, the Americans and the English are much more recent and
much greater than the sins of the Jews. Today's Jews have not
crucified anyone, nor would they. The Israelis were only following
the Biblical law. And they cannot be considered wicked for it unless
the Biblical law is to itself be seen as wicked.
Tuesday, February 23, 2016
Women, Jews and Guilt by Association
On Google Groups, there is a poster who
keeps claiming that women brought death and suffering into the world.
I ask, Which woman: Hillary Clinton or Brittney Spears? Even if there
was a person such as Eve, she no more speaks for contemporary women
than does Jeffrey Dahmer speak for me as another man. I refuse to be
held accountable for actions of other people; and I refuse to stand
by while all sorts of innocent people are being treated horribly
because of something that they had nothing to do with.
The core error here is that of seeing
all women as being the same, or as a part of the same force. But
women are half of humanity, and there are vast differences among
them. There is not much in common between Anne Coulter and Marie
Curie; or between Sarah Palin and Oprah Winfrey; or between Phyllis
Schafly and Madonna. To see all women as part of the same force is
ridiculous; and treating the next woman based on something that she
had nothing to do with is preposterous.
We see the same thing with people
agitating against the Jews. The Jews are not a uniform entity; there
are vast differences among them, and Jews disagree with one another
all the time on all sorts of subjects. If there had been a Jewish
conspiracy, I would have been invited to be a part of it a long time
ago. I haven't been; so there is no Jewish conspiracy.
If Jews were – as these people claim
– evil, and if Jews were – as these people claim – in control,
then they would be facing a firing squad. That they are instead free
to spread their propaganda shows either that Jews are not in control,
or that the Jews are so good that they would even let live the people
who wish them dead.
There is an unfortunate tendency in
humanity to blame people by association. Many people still see
Germans with aversion because of the Second World War; but the vast
bulk of contemporary Germans were born after the Second World War and
had nothing to do with it. Similarly, many Christians today are
regarded negatively by non-Christians because of the Inquisition and
the Colonialism. These people had nothing to do with these crimes,
but because they are Christians they get the flack.
We also see this problem with those in
the African American community who see the whole system as racist and
exploitative and claim that white people are bad because they benefit
from it. Which white people? When I was in my early 20s and making
good money in the computer industry, I started reading Ward
Churchill. I developed hatred for the Western civilization and for my
role in it, motivating me to drop out, which was a bad experience for
my family. Some of these people would see me as evil just because I
am white, regardless of how I myself treat the black people in my
life; and that is no better than Nazism.
At no point in this do I come from the
position of political correctness. I detest political correctness and
have fought it ever since I knew what it was. I believe that wrong
ideas should be met, not with censorship, but with better ideas; as I
am seeking to do here.
There is absolutely nothing evil, or
immoral, about my Jewish family. They are all hard-working, honest,
ethical people. They have major political differences with one
another, and they remain loyal to one another even in spite of these
differences. And believe me that takes a lot.
So whenever we see someone agitating
against women, or against the Jews, or anything of the sort, what we
are seeing is either an idiot or a conman. There is no Jewish
conspiracy, and there is no woman conspiracy. Jews differ from one
another, and women differ from one another. And until one
acknowledges this basic reality he has no business commenting
negatively about either.
Saturday, February 20, 2016
Quran, Christians and the Devil
Having read the Quran, I can see why it
has so many followers. This is some powerful writing. That does not
mean however that it is right.
I have Christian friends who say
outright that it was Archangel Lucifer, not Archangel Gabriel, who
gave Mohammad the Quran. That some in Islam claim that statements in
the Quran have been truthful before science discovered their validity
does not mean that the Quran comes from God. A naughty spirit would
know that life is based on water as much as God would know that life
is based on water. So there is a possibility that these Christians
are right, and that the Quran comes from the devil.
I reserve the right to doubt both those
people who say that Quran is true and that nothing else is and the
people who say that Quran is a work of Satan. But more people who
stand fanatically by Quran need to have their beliefs brought into
question, and they need to be made to doubt their beliefs. Their
absolute certainty in the rightness of the Quran has lead them to
destroy some of the world's greatest civilizations and leads them now
to wage a war against the Western Civilization while throwing
sulfuric acid into girls' faces and selling children into sexual
slavery. These people want to kill or enslave everyone who does not
believe what they believe; and the more doubt is planted as to the
validity of their convictions the more there is a possibility for
correcting these abuses.
With tolerant religions such as
Buddhism, there is no need to make them doubt their convictions. They
tolerate other creeds, and they do not hurt those who do not
willingly want to be a part of their path. But an aggressive,
militant, intolerant creed such as Islam should be made to doubt its
convictions; and the more this is done the less they have the
justification to indulge in the horrible abuses that they perpetrate.
My advice to the Western world is to
confront the Muslims on their beliefs as much as on their actions.
Their fanatical self-certainty leads them to do horrible things to
people; and for as long as they think that it is God's will for them
to do these horrible things they will continue to do them. Get more
people in Middle East to question the Quran, and get more people
elsewhere in the world to see everything that is wrong with the
Quran. And in this way prevent the rising of an international
tyranny.
Thursday, February 18, 2016
America and Arrogance
After the 9-11 attacks, the son of a
friend of mine asked her why so many people hate America. Her
response was that a lot of Americans had arrogance about them, and
that this arrogance got them hated.
I have myself been accused of
arrogance, even of narcissism; and mostly the people making such
claims did not know what they were talking about. I don't just care
about myself; I care about all sorts of people, including the people
whom those who label me that way don't care about.
Are Americans arrogant? If they are,
they are nowhere close to being alone in it. There are plenty of
populations around the world who think that they are better than
everyone else. Russians, Jews, French, Muslim and any number of other
populations think highly of themselves and low of others. So if
Americans are in fact arrogant, they are nowhere close to being alone
in it.
America is a very big target; and there
are all sorts of people who want to bait it. Some of these people
hate other arrogant populations, and others only hate the Americans.
I was anti-American in my learning stages, but I have developed
respect for America and Americans. They may be arrogant; but they
have done meaningful things.
I think that there are many things that
are worse than arrogance; and that the people who throw sulfuric acid
into girls' faces or sell children into sex slavery are much worse
than the people who think that they are better than these people.
America is on the right side of history in this conflict, and I am
willing to contribute my efforts toward that effect. Brutality is
vastly worse than arrogance, and even if Americans are arrogant they
are better than most people who hate them. And the solution comes in
exposing the sins of these people so that America – and the rest
of the world – can avoid falling the way of the Taliban.
Free Spirited Women and Abuse
Having known any number of
free-spirited women who have had bad experience in relationships, I
have an explanation for why their experience has been this bad.
Men are attracted to free-spirited
women; however what these woman are is against their values. They want and
they hate at the same time. And this combination always leads to
abuse.
The direction of psychology has been
concerned with raising these women's self-esteem. I find that to be a
goose chase. There will always be someone to tear down whatever
self-esteem you build up; and getting these women to work on their
self-esteem is generally unproductive.
What is productive? Getting these women
to be conscious of the dynamics involved. They are attractive, and
they are hated, at the same time. They should be made aware of these
dynamics, so that they know how to deal with the men who are
attracted to them and hate them at the same time.
When values and likes are in discord,
the result is misery for everyone involved. The man wants and he
hates at the same time; which is bad both for him and for the woman.
The solution is to either bring one's likes in accord with one's
values or to bring one's values in accord with one's likes. Man
should either pursue women for whom he has respect, or man should
modify his values to respect the women to whom he is attracted.
Happiness is a function of one's likes
and one's values being in accord with one another; and a man whose
values and likes are in disagreement with one another dooms himself
and his partner to a life of misery. Either respect and value
free-spirited women, or go with a traditional type of woman.
Happiness – for oneself and one's partner – demands nothing less.
Monday, February 15, 2016
Jews and Patriotism
We hear a lot of statements to the
effect of that Jews have too much power, or even that the Jews
control America.
My response is that, in a place that
does not discriminate against them, people who are willing to pursue
education and to work hard rise to the top; and that is what we see
with American Jewry.
Do Jews have a lot of voice in the
American media? Yes; because they are good at it. Do Jews have a
strong presence on Wall Street, in Hollywood, in the academia? Yes;
because they are good at it. Their accomplishments should be
respected rather than demonized. America owes a lot to the Jews; and
it is especially in times like these that it is important that this
be pointed out.
As to the other claim – that Jews are
in control – the response is that, if that had been the case, then
the people saying such things would be facing a firing squad. That
they are instead free to spread their propaganda shows either that
Jews are not in control, or that the Jews are so good that they would
even let live the people who wish them dead.
When one reads Nazi or otherwise
anti-Jewish rants, one finds any number of ridiculous claims,
probably the biggest of which being that there is effectively a
Jewish conspiracy to control the world. Had there been such a
conspiracy, I would have a long time ago been invited to be its
member. There is no such conspiracy; Jews differ from one another
vastly, with Orthodox Jews acting like Muslims, conservative Jews
acting like the Americans, and reform Jews acting like the French.
Jews fight with one another about all sorts of things, and liberal
American Jews and orthodox Israeli Jews have a lot of disagreement
with one another. There is no Jewish conspiracy. There is a sense of
identity with one's people; which Anglo-Saxon people, Greek people,
Hindu people and all sorts of other people have as well. Jews would
fight one another, but they would also stick up for one another. And
that is something from which other people of all races stand to
learn.
There is a vast difference between
identifying with one's people and having some kind of a conspiracy to
control the world. There is benign patriotism and malignant
patriotism. The first seeks the well-being of one's own people; the
other seeks the destruction of someone else. The two must at all
times be distinguished from one another. The first results in
peaceful, prosperous, livable societies. The second results in rape
and pillage. An Anglo-Saxon man who truly is patriotic will seek the
well-being of his own people, not the destruction of others.
The Jews that I know do in fact practice benign patriotism. They seek the well-being of Jewish people; they also seek well-being of the rest of the world. They want to see other people do well; and that is especially the case with people – such as Africans and Native Americans – who have been historically disadvantaged. This stance – seeking well-being for one's own people and seeking well-being for other people – I regard as the definition of true good. The person benefits his own people; he also benefits others. Humanity blossoms through both mechanisms.
The more non-Jewish people adopt the same perspective, the better will be their effect on the world. Benevolence is not limited to the Jews; and a Christian or a Muslim person who is truly benevolent stands a lot to gain from this mentality. Embrace benign patriotism; reject malignant patriotism. And as a result of that see your people grow in liberty and prosperity while having respect of the rest of the world.
Saturday, February 13, 2016
Democrats and Winners
For a long time the Republicans have
been claiming that they were winners and that everyone else were
losers. Then the Democrats got better at business and technology. So
now, the same people who claimed themselves to be winners are
claiming that the world is evil because not everyone who is a winner
practices their beliefs.
I do not see any reason whatsoever why
a winner would have to be a Republican. There are winners and losers
everywhere, from Texas to China. Many of the people who vote
Republican now would be regarded by 80s Republicans to be losers. And
there are plenty of winners among the Democrats.
What we see here is a false worldview
being challenged by reality. A person who thinks that only
Republicans are winners is thrown completely off kilter when a winner
is not a Republican. This causes what I call worldview panic. And the
reaction to that is completely hysterical.
So now we are seeing people blame Jews,
or liberals, for all sorts of problems. The first is the most easy to
refute. If Jews were – as these people say – in control, and if
Jews were – as these people say - evil, then they would be facing a
firing squad. Instead they are free to spread their propaganda; which
shows either that Jews are not in control, or that the Jews are so
good that they would even let live the people who wish them dead.
With treatment of liberals, what we see
is supreme ingratitude. Liberals dominate science, which is at the
root of all technology – meaning, at the root of just about
everything that business sells. Liberals take poorly-paying positions
in education so that they could direct their energies toward
supporting the mental development of the youth. Liberals run
Hollywood, which dominates the world's airwaves. Liberals have
created noble social covenants, and in parts of America where they
are in power women have equal powers with men.
It takes a lot to win while holding
true to noble ideals. The Democrats who are winners do not deserve
demonization; they deserve respect. Having good values, and being in
a position to make these good values matter, creates the best of all
worlds. The more Democrats do well, the more they are in position to
influence matters in right direction. The better becomes the lot of
America.
Wednesday, February 10, 2016
White Racism and Black Racism
I've heard from a number of liberal
white city people that they have been under nasty attacks from some
black people.
My analysis is that the black people
who attack the white city liberals are idiots. The white city
liberals for the most part have good will toward black people. And in
attacking the white people who have good will toward them, while
doing nothing to confront the white people who actually hate them,
the black people who do such a thing are acting in a completely
self-defeating manner.
I am a white man; I make no apologies
for being a white man. I was born that way. I am also a white man who
thinks favorably of black people and wants to see them do well. I
want to see Africa rise out of poverty; I want to see black people in
America do as well as the white people. That does not mean however
that I'm going to let some jerk of any race treat me like trash.
I am in no way a racist. Some of my
best friends are black; and I have respect for them. But I have no
respect for people who are so blinded by their hatred that they
attack their potential allies. Among white people, there are people
who have good will toward black people and there are people who have
ill will toward black people. A black person who is truly interested
in advancing the well-being of his people will be good to the white
people who have good will toward him.
Racism – both white-on-black and
black-on-white – is wrong. I refuse to be held accountable for the
actions of people whom I do not know, and who, if they had run into
me, would have most likely treated me as an enemy. I did not take
part in slavery and colonialism, and if such things existed in my
lifetime I most likely would have fought them. It is imperative that
black people who seek their empowerment would confront those white
people who actually have ill will toward them instead of attacking
the white people who have good will toward them. There are white
people who like black people and there are white people who hate
black people; and black empowerment demands supporting the first and
confronting the second.
Tuesday, February 09, 2016
Communism and My Grandmother
My grandmother was a card-carrying
member of the Soviet Communist Party; but she was nowhere close to
being evil. She worked hard as a math teacher, and when she retired
she continued working hard, cooking dinner, cleaning the apartment
and helping me along with my education to result in me becoming a
star student.
There are many people who see
Communists as evil. Don't say that about my grandmother. She could be
overbearing at times; but she was never malicious, cunning, deceitful, lazy
or anything of that sort.
I am not a Communist. I think that
Communism is very easy to refute. There is no such thing as
historical inevitability; people's choices will take history into any
number of directions for any number of reasons and in any number of
ways. The businessman is not a thief; he is someone who gets things
done. And the same problems that Communists see as being redressible
through class struggle are redressed a lot better through social
mobility.
That does not mean however that
everyone who bought into Communism was a bad person. My grandmother
is one person who bought into Communism who was not evil at all. She
would be seen as having lived an exemplary life by many American
conservatives; and she and people who've made similar choices should
be respected for the good work that they have done.
All sorts of good people fall for all
sorts of bad ideologies. Not everyone who bought into Nazism was a
sociopath or a narcissist; not everyone who bought into European
colonialism was a brute; and not everyone who bought into Communism
was evil. It should be possible to work with the people who've bought
into Communism and direct their capacity for dedication and hard work
toward better causes. That way the world will benefit from these
people's efforts and gain through their efforts instead of spending
its energy grinding these people into dirt.
Monday, February 08, 2016
Misogyny and Love
When I was working for a Lebanese food
place, I had a co-worker, a young man from the Middle East, who
worked hard and was for the most part a kind person. He admitted to
me that he was often verbally abusive to his girlfriend; so I told
him that such behavior made it harder for her to love him.
If you are bad to someone who loves
you, then what message does it send to the world? The message it
sends is that people should not love you and that they should treat
you like trash. I do not think that this is something that many
people understand. They treat people who love them like dirt; nobody
else gives a damn. It teaches people that they should treat the
person like rubbish, as that is how he treats the people who love
him.
This was not an evil person; this was a
confused person. He, like many others in Middle East, had his head
pumped full of misogynistic idiocy, which in places such as the
Middle East trickles down to everyone, including the better-natured
men who under other circumstances would never be abusive. I've known
any number of good-natured men who were influenced to be misogynistic
and nasty to their women. They were not themselves evil; they were
wrongfully influenced.
If anything effective is to be done
against domestic violence, there will be a need to confront these
kinds of influences wherever they are.
And then the good-natured people will
be doing the right thing by the women in their lives, and the
ill-natured people will have to change their ways.
Sunday, February 07, 2016
Feminism and Other Cultures
I've been called everything from a
pussywhipped idiot to a misogynist; and in most cases those claims
say more about people making them than they do about me.
My agenda is simple. I want men and
women to get along. That means the men knowing what women want; women
knowing what men want; and the two negotiating workable solutions.
Ultimately it makes sense to be in
favor of neither men nor women. There will always be both, and some
will choose to act rightfully and others will choose to act wrongly.
It makes sense to support men and women who choose to be good to
their partners; and it makes sense to confront men and women who
choose to treat the other gender like trash.
When the same people who claim to be in
favor of feminism support the most misogynistic ideology on the
planet – Jihadist Islam – we know that we are seeing people not
thinking straight. The white man is not the only possible source of
oppression and misogyny, and there are plenty of people who practice
such things who are not the white man. Compared to ISIS, the white
man is quite mild. There are plenty of white men who do terrible
things to women; but there are many cultures around the world in
which the brutality is worse.
I have known a woman from India who had
feminist views, whose female relatives tried to arrange to get her
raped so that she know the difference between men and women. In
Russia, 14,000 women a year die from domestic violence. In Middle
East, it is worse than in either Russia or in India. A woman who
truly seeks women's well-being will confront these people to the same
extent that she will confront chavinist pigs in the Western world.
And if she fails to do that, then she cannot be claimed to be in
support of women's well-being.
There is a lot that need to be done
around the world to confront these disgusting practices. The problem
is that many women who think themselves feminists are only seeing the
capacity for misogyny in the Western culture and fail to see the
capacity for the same in the rest of the world. In the name of
tolerance they support cultures that are severely misogynistic and
that treat women far worse than women in the West are ever treated.
And that makes these people hypocrites.
Misogyny is not only the artifact of a
Western society; it exists in all sorts of places, and in some of
these places it is much worse than it is in the West. A woman who
truly is in favor of women's rights or women's empowerment will see
this and act accordingly. Much has been done in the West to improve
women's lot, but much less has been done in places such as the Middle
East. And a true feminist will recognize this and direct her efforts
accordingly.
Thursday, February 04, 2016
FDR, Reagan and Present Election
Ronald Reagan and FDR had a lot in
common.
They were both exceptionally strong
people.
Neither of them was seen as
particularly intelligent, but they both had guts.
And both of them were transformative
presidents whose policies continued to dominate America long after
they were gone.
There are many Republicans who are
looking for another Reagan; but I see nobody in the field who begins
to compare to Reagan in character or in personal strength. Bush Jr.
tried to be another Reagan and failed miserably; and Trump, while
obviously an effective person and an excellent businessman, is
rightfully seen as a bully. Democrats, for their part, stopped
looking for another FDR a long time ago, as FDR was dead long before
the bulk of contemporary voters were born.
There is however a recent Democrat who
was a successful president. That was Bill Clinton. He restored fiscal
sanity to America, and under him America added 23 million private
jobs. Hillary Clinton would be expected to restore the successful
economic policies of Bill Clinton. And, not being a playboy like her
husband, she should avoid the attacks on her character that plagued
the Bill Clinton administration.
There is no Reagan in this race, and
there is no FDR in this race. There is however a Clinton in this
race; and many people are longing for the prosperity and fiscal
sanity that existed under Bill Clinton. Facing bullies on the Right
and a socialist on the Left, she is expected to be the moderate
candidate that restores fiscal sanity and prosperity to America. I
hope more people see that and vote accordingly.
Wednesday, February 03, 2016
Juanita Broaddrick and Social Conservatives
There are any number of conservatives
who say that they believe Juanita Broaddrick's accusations of rape
against Bill Clinton. I for one do not believe Juanita Broaddrick. I
think that she is an opportunist who wants to get famous by telling a
bunch of credible lies. The issue however does not end there.
I've seen the legal system –
particularly in socially conservative areas – completely fail women
who have been victims of real rape and real violence. In India,
40,000 women a year die from domestic violence. In Russia, whose
population is one eight that of India, it's 14,000. In Afghanistan,
young men protested against the new anti-rape laws with signs saying
“We want to rape.” In Kenya, a large number of schoolgirls were
raped and killed by their classmates, and the principle excused it
with “Oh, these boys did not want to hurt the girls, they just
wanted to rape.”
In America and Australia I have seen
the system fail real victims many times likewise. I am talking about
men who repeatedly raped the children being awarded full custody of
the child, and the child denied a meaningful interaction with the
parent who tried to protect them. I am talking having a woman who is
an engineer living out of a truck because her entire paycheck has
been garnished to pay child support to a man who beat her and her
children. I am talking having a man who broke his wife's skull so
badly that she needed 40 stitches being awarded full custody of the
child.
Where are conservatives in all of these
situations? Nowhere of course. They only care when the wrongdoing is
alleged to be done by the other side. And to these people I say this.
I will believe Juanita Broaddrick when you believe real victims.
I had a friend from India whose parents
told her that if a woman gets raped it is her own fault. She was a
feminist; so her mother and aunt wanted to arrange to get her raped
so that she know the difference between men and women. All these, and
more, are people who hide behind “family values” and “traditional
values” to excuse their disgusting behavior. Once again, the
conservatives are nowhere when this happens; but they are everywhere
when an opportunist impugns Bill Clinton for much lesser crimes.
Social conservatives – in America and
elsewhere - don't care if children or women get raped. They've proven
that in many courts both inside and outside America. It's only when a
wrongdoing is alleged to a Democrat that they have something to say.
I see no reason at all why Juanita Broaddrick should get preferential
treatment over the many millions of victims of real incest and family
violence. Nor do I see why conservatives should talk about such
things. Not only are they nowhere when a real victim needs help, but
they do everything that they can to silence the real victims.
Even if Clinton had sex with Juanita
Broaddrick, it is nothing compared to the daily hell in which
millions of women and children in America – and outside of America
– live. The banner of family values gets used to prevent victims of
incest and family violence from confronting their perpetrators; and
in this the concept of family values is profaned. A good father would
not be raping or beating his children, and the father who hides
behind family values to excuse such practices is a terrible father.
Which means that the concept of “family values” serves bad people
and nobody else.
It is utter hypocrisy to support
Broaddrick's accusations against Bill Clinton while doing nothing to
fight real abuse and real wrongdoing. Juanita Broaddrick is doing
well enough; but the same cannot be said about many victims of incest
and family violence. When conservatives start confronting these
things in their communities for real, their claims would be more
credible. Until then they are a bunch of hypocrites who would believe
unsubstantiated claims of rape against Bill Clinton while doing nothing to
fight much graver and much more damaging wrongs.