Media Bias

In yesterday's Hartford Courant, there were eleven editorials in the Commentary section, seven of which involved national politics.  Of those seven, four were attacking Trump. The others dealt with ObamaCare and its different potential futures, why Governor Molloy might not be the best person to stump for Hillary, and one lone piece laying out the many reasons why the writer would be voting for Trump.  Additionally, there were five political cartoons (six if you count the weekly Caption Contest), three of which (four if you count the Caption Contest winner) were anti-Trump. Even in the hard news section, there was only one overtly political story, and that one dealt with Trump's allegedly falling poll numbers.  All week there has been an endless reliving of Trump's verbal gaffs, while there has been no reporting about Hillary's email problems, or her continued attempts to deny that she did anything wrong, in spite of the FBI Director's assertion that she did. She cast aspersions on the families of the Benghazi massacre and indicated that they were either lying or delusional for saying that she blames a video for the deaths, yet there has been no mention of that, but Trump defending himself against the callous remarks by the Muslim Gold Star father has been all over the news for days. Personally, I'm not as concerned with what either of them say except as their remarks relate to their actions.  So far I have not seen or heard that Trump is anything but a successful business owner who has made a positive impact on cities across the country and the world, while Mrs. Clinton has accomplished nothing positive to show for all her experience. The Hartford Courant isn't even a major national newspaper, but it still reads like a Democratic mouthpiece. Of course, this is Connecticut, one of the bluest states in the nation, and also one of the most poorly run, with an economy and a tax base in shambles. I wonder if there is any connection?

Why We Can't Compromise on Gun Control - or anything else, for that matter.

Artificial flowers on an artificial tree

The candle is real

It seems that in our society today there is not much chance of compromise, mainly because there are competing philosophies that are diametrically opposed to each other. For instance, regarding gun control, if you are a person who believes in taking personal responsibility for your actions, then you believe that people kill people.The killer is the target of your anger, and the one who should be punished. You know that there will always be people who do bad things, and you want to make it harder for them to do too much damage. You believe in punishing those who do wrong, but not at the expense of law-abiding people who never have, and never would, commit a violent crime with a gun. You believe that if there are enough good people armed and ready to defend themselves, their family and/or their attackers, then the damage will be less, and the killer will more quickly be captured or killed. An example of this in Europe is the legal drinking age in Ireland, which is 18.  There are no restrictions on buying or drinking alcohol at that age, but if you get caught driving or committing any crime while intoxicated, the penalties are severe. People in America who believe similarly believe that there should be few restrictions on gun ownership, but if you commit a crime with a gun, the punishment should likewise be severe.

On the other hand, if you are a person who does not  believe in taking responsibility for your actions, then you believe that guns kill people, that people only commit these crimes because they have easy access to guns, if they couldn't get their hands on a gun then they would not be able to commit these crimes, and the only way to lessen the damage in this instance is to severely restrict who can buy or own a gun, and what kind they can own. In your ideal world, the Second Amendment is a real impediment in your desire to ban guns altogether, as is the case in many European countries, so you espouse workarounds like background checks, limiting magazine rounds, banning certain types of guns, etc.. You believe that if no one had guns, then no one could get killed by guns. The problem with this theory is that history had shown that (1),the bad guys will always be able to get guns, and (2), even if they can't get guns,  they will always find another way to carry out their crimes, as with knives or bombs, or planes or cars. Maybe we should ban planes and  cars,  too.

Then there's abortion.  If you believe that all life is precious, then you are against abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide and capital punishment.  If you believe that only some lives are precious, then you are probably not against any of the above, or you may support abortion while being against the death penalty - choose the applicable combination.

Both of these examples boil down to an emerging war between religious and secular beliefs in this country which, up until recently, were much more in sync with each other than they are now. The code of behavior ascribed to us by our various religions is now very different to that which is granted by the secular society. I believe that this divergence is at the core of why compromise is not possible: people trying to stay true to their religious beliefs cannot in good conscience agree to actions which those religious teachings deem to be wrong, while people who have little or no particular religious beliefs believe that everyone must accept and adhere to the definitions of permissible behavior deemed by the secular government to be right.  It is at the point where Hillary Clinton herself was recently quoted as advocating that religion must be eliminated from the discussion. I don't know how or when this will be resolved, but sooner or later, those who have sought to silence the opposition will push too far, and there will be a great push-back.  Maybe that time is coming. We live in hope.

Thinking and Writing Are Two Different Animals

                ( A beautifully lit staircase in a hotel in St. Louis. I went there in early May.)

I don't know why it always takes me so long to add a post to this blog: I started it originally because I thought I always had something that I wanted to get off my chest, and wanted someplace to get it out there. Turns out I really don't have that much to say, and when I do think of something that I want to write about, I don't have the time to do it right then, and eventually forget what it was that I wanted to express. I haven't added to this blog in over two months. I will have to do better. Until next time....

On Being Shallow, Part Two

Well, I checked my Facebook page yesterday morning, and found that my daughter had indeed posted a nice acknowledgement to me late on Mother's Day night. I thought I should feel guilty for casting aspersions on my children earlier, but I actually felt relieved, and a little curious.  It's almost as if Jenny, at least, might be reading my blog posts, although I'm pretty sure that none of my kids even knows I have one. In any case, my bruised ego has been assuaged, and I take back everything I said about my allegedly ungrateful children. I was just in a bad mood. There is both pain and joy in loving. On Sunday I was feeling the pain; today I feel the joy.

On Being Shallow and Petty

I have a Facebook page that I sometimes post comments on. As of now I have more than 150 friends connected to me on Facebook.  Most of them are either mothers themselves or have mothers, and many of them posted lovely comments to and/or about their mothers on this Mother's Day.  I put a remembrance about my mother, and even got likes and comments in return. Most of my relatives acknowledged it, but not my children. Not one of my children posted anything about having a Happy Mother's Day to me. Fortunately, I have a very loving daughter-in-law who was the only one to recognize me on Facebook. I am feeling sorry for myself, I know that, but it doesn't do one thing to make me feel any better. My children are the reason I joined Facebook in the first place: Jenny said it was the only way to know what they were doing, as they didn't call much.  My cousin Annie also supported the idea.  I don't know why this means so much to me - it seems so petty on the surface - but nevertheless it stings a lot not to be recognized on Facebook by my kids. I'm just feeling sorry for myself, but it hurts to have done so much and made so many sacrifices for my children, and not have any of that acknowledged. I never got a mention on my birthday, either.  Somehow it has become important to me that my children post a Facebook message to me or about me on my birthday, or Mother's Day, or other holiday, like so many other children do.  Stupid, I know. Selfish, too. Shallow, even. After all, they did call.  Kevin has never been great about family connections anyway, so I wouldn't expect him to make a fuss on Facebook. Ryan and Jenny have their reasons, I guess. Love hurts.

The Assault on the American Economy: a Dearth of Education

Why isn't economics taught in high schools any more? It seems from the news about protesters and government regulations running amok and the vilification of business, casting the capital system as the villain in the income inequality wars, that no one understands the basic rules of economics: first, that companies create jobs and employ workers; second, that workers and companies pay taxes to the government; and third, the government needs taxes in order to provide for the common good, as required by our Constitution. It seems logical to assume that the more companies there are and the more jobs there are,then the more tax revenue the government receives, especially if companies are allowed to grow unchained by so many crushing rules and regulations that only the largest can afford to survive. If we want companies to remain in the US, we have to give them incentive to do so. Why is "profitability" such a dirty word in politics?  The screamers in this country are beginning to sound more and more like members of the Proletariat of the Communist Era. This is truly frightening, and our government seems to be either the perpetrator or a willing participant in this delusion. In a truly free-market society, wealth is not finite, and anyone can create wealth, given the tools and incentive to do so. Anyone who has studied economics knows that the Free-Market System of Capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty and created more wealth for more people than any other economic or political system in the history of the world. It may not be perfect, but financially it is way ahead of whatever is in second place. In a truly free-market environment, anyone can have a local tag sale and not have to pay the city for a permit to do it; the kids running their lemonade stand don't have to notify the Department of Public Health before they open; and the farmer who just wants to sell his home-grown vegetables and fruits to the poor people in the city doesn't have to worry about being fined or jailed because his vegetable cart is not allowed on city streets. Income Inequality is a false argument, as the discussion should be about how much a given JOB is worth, not how much a worker is worth. Any job that requires little or no skill should be worth an amount of pay relative to the number of people who could perform that job. The more skills and/or education and/or experience a job requires, the fewer people there are to perform them, and therefore the higher the pay should be. In the simplest of terms, this is how the system should work, and as people develop more skills, education or experience, they should be able to move into higher-paying jobs. Of course, in a real economics class, this lesson would be the first minute of the first day of a semester- or year-long course, as there really is much more to the subject, but perhaps you get the idea. For the record, I live in Connecticut, which by all financial measures is one of the worst-run states in the country, with a deficit presently in the tens of millions and growing rapidly.  Companies are leaving regularly, including high-profile ones like GE and Pfizer, leading to less revenue for the state, more people left behind and on unemployment, creating more expense for the same state that is losing jobs because of all the regulations meant, ironically, to "protect" the workers from the big, bad businesses. Where is the logic in this?

Family Distances

I haven't heard from my daughter in weeks. In fact, I can't remember when the last time was that we had an actual conversation. It doesn't help that she lives in Virginia, a nine-hour trip by car from here. I miss her. It's not that we were ever close, exactly, except for the period of time when she was involved with Adam- we talked almost every day during the planning of the wedding, and before that at least twice a week- it's just that not talking at all has created a rising wall between us that will continue to grow as long as she fails to make contact. I have no idea if her divorce is final yet, or if her new boyfriend, Thomas, is living with her, or if his divorce is final yet, or if her other friends know about him yet, or if she and Adam have had any conversations or encounters since he moved out, or if she ever told Adam that the reason she wanted the divorce in the first place was because she met her soul-mate in the desert and therefore did not love Adam any more.

 I don't call her because I don't have anything to say to her, and I don't feel that I should be the one to ask for answers to these questions. She is the one who should have things to tell us, but she is apparently not of the opinion that information like this should be shared with one's family. I see her Facebook posts and have a general idea of what she thinks is important, and can infer her other choices from the things that are not mentioned in her posts, like anything about Thomas, for example, but that is no substitute for really talking things out and clearing the air.  We are the ones who have been excruciatingly hurt by her recent decisions, and yet she does not want to accept that these things need to be resolved by her, not by us. She absolves herself from accepting any responsibility for fixing the situation by believing that "Mom and Dad hate me" (she and Ryan had a conversation about that, according to him), and, I guess, is just waiting for us to get over it. Not so easy when we have no communication with her. 

I have not seen her since the trip to Spain in October; she opted not to come home for any of the Holidays, preferring to spend them with Thomas rather than us. There used to be a saying that a relationship is good if it makes you a better person. Jenny's new relationship has made her into someone I don't even know, and can't imagine even wanting to know, but I will have to get to know her anyway, if she is to remain as a welcome member of the family.  I just don't know how to do that, given the present situation. Maybe this, too, shall pass. I really hope so.