First Think, THEN Ink.

When I'm not here, I do make appearances on other parts of the internet. I like to keep a finger on the pulse of what conservatives are thinking and saying to each other so I have a place I visit. Of course, I'm not going to Breitbart. That would be truly asking for abuse. Though I do occasionally see an epic Don Quixote type attempting to take on that massive element there. That's truly yeoman's work.

The most I can muster is Scott Adams' Blog.

Scott Adams, the creator of the comic strip "Dilbert" (one of my all-time least favorite comics) got a boost during the 2016 election as he started talking about Donald Trump as the best candidate to be the next president, and went into descriptions about why that was the case. The media picked it up and Adams, who proclaims himself an expert in persuasion and a trained hypnotist, became a bit more of a celeb because of his posts.

Of course, when Trump won, Adams had gloating rights and conservatives praised him for being a visionary. I go there to get a taste of what people are discussing and to contribute some thoughts.

Obviously, the talk these past couple of days has been about the latest massacre in our country where a gunman went in and killed seventeen high school students and faculty, wounding more in Parkland, Florida. Conversations about possible changes in laws or the extreme resistance to such changes sparks a lot of comments.

I remember when I first wrote a piece about gun control. It was an opinion piece after John Hinckley shot President Reagan in 1981. At the time, I suggested that guns were too pervasive in our country and that we need to figure out a better approach to keep everyone safer. 1981 was thirty-seven years ago. How many people have been shot and killed since Reagan caught that bullet?

So after the commentary about how there is continual lip service being paid to the victims and their families, the typical thoughts and prayers, I suggested that something has to change because this continues to happen.

But one guy gave me an answer like no other, and I have to share it here. The guy's handle is Richardwicks and I'm pretty certain that's not his real name. Here's his quote back to me:

I'm pointing out that this government is ENTIRELY corrupt and the very idea of giving those assholes exclusive access to weaponry is absolutely off the table.

You have a government that just spent 18 months trying to get Trump thrown out of office based on a complete scam of an investigation over Russian collusion. You think you can trust them?

We're teetering on being Nazi Germany NOW. You think this is just outrageous. But - we have a complete propaganda press, a government that does stuff like invade Iraq to "liberate it" (remember when Nazi Germany invaded Poland to liberate them?), we have a government that uses tax payer funds to give to certain favored businesses that just happen to have a ton of cross over of employees that moved from that business to government in the banking system.

We're fascists NOW. You stupid shit.

Oh, and they are doing everything and anything to try to divide the population. Black lives matter! All Lives Matter is racist!

Fuck you stupid ignorant dumbshits who know NOTHING of history.

Why do you think that for 16 years, even after it's OBVIOUS that Bush Jr. lied this nation into a war, we're still at fucking war? Why has ever goddamned candidate, with the exception of Trump who the government is trying to bake up some cockamamie excuse to remove, on board for more war on the campaign trail?

Why do you think that is?

You don't realize, there's an absolute position with regard to gun rights. Absolute, no compromise and there is going to be no "reasonable discussion" about this at all. Talk is over.

My response back to him:

Okay!

*slowly backs away*

Yes, sir. You... keep fighting the good fight!

Yesterday, there was this video clip:



The father of three victims of that Olympic Doctor who molested all those athletes reacted to him.

A friend asked about why this kind of anger and response wasn't there at the very start, and it took all of these people coming forward to share their harrowing tales of abuse to finally bring about this reaction. After giving it a bit of thought, here's what I came up with...

Expectations.

I think, as a starting point, we have certain expectations about what our lives are all about, how things function, and who the people we encounter are. We also have an expectation that the people in our lives, most especially professionals, always behave in an ethical manner. After all, they have worked to get to the place where they are. They wouldn't jeopardize that position by doing something that might take everything they had done, away.

So, when we begin looking at a circumstance like the one where we have a doctor sexually molesting how many? Over one-hundred and fifty (and counting) young athletes, women and girls, the first thought is that this doctor isn't going to do that. That goes against logic and reason.

Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein, Matt Lauer, Roy Moore and this guy, among a bunch of men that were admired for so very long are the people of that sort in question. And, at first glance, our society just couldn't quite believe that these guys would do anything like that. Their personalities away from these accusations fell within the spectrum of normal, even friendly and affable. And they were at the top of their fields.

This way of thinking, this expectation of "how things work" comes into play in a lot of ways in our society. It allows us to believe that the police are always correct in whatever action they take during any routine traffic stop. It permits us to say that a political leader would never place his personal interests ahead of the nation he has sworn to protect. And it definitely affects our view of these people, like all of the Catholic Priests who were accused of molesting altar boys, who were then reassigned to other parishes in other states to avoid the scandal.

When you view these guys, when you consider their position, and assume they must have behaved ethically to get as far as they did, that's where the veil is pulled across our eyes. Surely THEY aren't going to behave that way. So, the issue must be with the accuser. The accusers are not powerful people with clout in the community. They aren't people who have lived as long and may not understand just what they are suggesting with their statements, or they might misread signals they received from their encounter with this person. So, either the accuser simply made a mistake, or it wasn't as bad as described, or it was a false accusation as a prank, or a false accusation to be malicious. Because, if it's none of those things?

We want our world to make sense.

We want our world to make sense.

But, if someone we know and like, a family friend, a trusted confidant, a professional that is noted for their exemplary work... does... this?

It doesn't make sense.

And that's how blaming the victim becomes a thing. We just want the world to make sense and we will do whatever it takes to make that happen.

Eventually, however, the ostriches must lift their heads from the sand, and usually that means looking at a world that is far worse than if they had dealt with the situation when it was first noticed.

I hope we can continue to move forward, that there can be some true healing for everyone harmed because of these events, that the perpetrators can feel some empathy for their victims and can understand the affect they have had by their selfish and unwanted actions. I hope there can be forgiveness, because holding anger, pain and rage only harms the person who feels that even more. And I hope there can be a sense of closure for everyone affected.

But most of all, I'm hoping that we won't make the assumption that just because someone has reached a certain stature in life, doesn't mean they could not or would not be the perpetrator of a heinous act.

Our ostrich days are over.

ETA: Uma Thurman's story about Weinstein, which appears in the Feburary 4, 2018 issue of The New York Times also echoes the point I made here; Ms. Thurman states the following:

“The complicated feeling I have about Harvey is how bad I feel about all the women that were attacked after I was,” she told me one recent night, looking anguished in her elegant apartment in River House on Manhattan’s East Side, as she vaped tobacco, sipped white wine and fed empty pizza boxes into the fireplace.

“I am one of the reasons that a young girl would walk into his room alone, the way I did. Quentin used Harvey as the executive producer of ‘Kill Bill,’ a movie that symbolizes female empowerment. And all these lambs walked into slaughter because they were convinced nobody rises to such a position who would do something illegal to you, but they do.”

Thurman stresses that Creative Artists Agency, her former agency, was connected to Weinstein’s predatory behavior. It has since issued a public apology. “I stand as both a person who was subjected to it and a person who was then also part of the cloud cover, so that’s a super weird split to have,” she says.

Maureen Dowd's interview with Uma Thurman is up on The Times Website

I know that a lot of elements involved in the realm of politics are confusing, arcane, even designed to be misunderstood by the general public. But can we at least get this one basic fact right:

An affiliate of a political party's actions vis a vis sexual misconduct is not a "partisan" issue. Just because a man has acted in a way that is sexually abusive toward someone else that action is, in no way, reflective of a political party.

There are enough examples on both sides of the aisle to support this concept. So, I hope that we can at least agree on that. We can run down the names if you want, but we can easily do that. And the point that needs making is these are just the things we know. There are abuses that have been buried for ten, twenty, thirty years that are just beginning to come to light. Assuredly, as with all the previous cases, those that have committed these acts will not all be from one political party.

But by making it into an accusatory element that somehow reflects on the politics of one party or the other does two negative things. First, it turns the issue into something that it is not. This isn't about being a Democrat or a Republican. This is a method of power and abuse that these men, not just in politics, but as we have seen, in Hollywood, in big business, in small business, in colleges and universities and even in high schools, have used to have their way with other people who have been in positions of weakness against someone who had an image of an upstanding citizen who achieved success for the general public.

But it also diminishes the issue that we need to examine, which is how our society permits men to act in ways that are more related to our caveman ancestors than to persons from a modern day society.

The "Boys with be boys" excuse still gets used and that not only allowed "boys" (aka adult men), to act in this way, it made women and girls feel there was nothing that could be done! This is just reality so you better just lie back and enjoy it.

And really, that was the system of control, tolerance, and method of oppression that occurred for centuries. Women were not seen as equals to men, so what they said, what they thought, how they acted, likewise were not treated equally.

Here's the issue that needs to be examined. Our society has helped to perpetrate this system. In many ways, it's like racism. The oppressed group is diminished, treated like an "other," is frequently assumed to have "participated" in some way which allowed this to happen, and is questioned as if they are the perpetrator, not the victim.

And the problem we see, when we have a system that functions like that is that more and more men will want to participate in it. It becomes an expectation, an opportunity, a right. I can do it because every man in every generation before me did it.

That brings me to the crucial element that we must keep in mind. And the problem is the same for sexism and racism if we want to actually dismantle these cruel aspects of our society.

We need to have closure for victims, and for that, at the very least, apologies should be forthcoming from those that have acted inappropriately, or criminally, no matter if the Statute of Limitations has expired (because, after all, the victims have lived with these actions all this while). But to make the changes in our society that need to happen to stop it, to close the door on this behavior in the future, requires us to dismantle the elements that have permitted it, and that is a different element.

In that sense, we have to look less at individual acts, specifically because this is a macro problem that needs to be resolved. It involves teaching small boys about how to behave, what is appropriate, why certain actions should never be done to someone else without asking. It's about teaching children that if you were physically abused by someone, you need to say so and that adults will believe you. We need to begin this immediately because the longer we wait, the more abusers can still be created.

Ultimately, there is a cultural issue here. These guys may not have been taught that they have permission to do what they did, but they learned it by osmosis, based on how our societal norms treated others who acted the same way. And that's where the main focus needs to be if we are to bring an end to these issues. In no way does this absolve anyone who did anything before, but the most important idea we need to collectively focus on is keeping it from happening again to anyone. That means all of us need to start changing our behaviors for the sake of all of us.

I previously mentioned I quit Facebook again this past week. It's not the first time I quit but hopefully it will be the last (in that I'll never go back). I can't foresee returning but I never thought I was going to return about a year ago when I did, so there is a slim possibility.

One of my friends from the juggling group that I regularly attend talked with me about leaving. See, there is a Facebook group for our juggling community and one of the things that is lost when you leave that platform is that you are removed from all of those groups as well.

I mentioned the time suck that Facebook requires, and frankly it is a bigger time suck than LJ could ever be, if only because there are so many people that you feel compelled to interact with on a regular basis, and there are news sources and other stuff and the app constantly sends notifications about what stuff your friends are sending. Insidious doesn't even begin to cover it.

But then I also mentioned how being on Facebook really wasn't all that much fun for me. Really, if something is taking up a portion of your life, you better be having fun in somewhat equal proportions to the amount of time you're spending. Otherwise, that's time badly spent. And my friend said something interesting. He said "You like to post those social change issues. I don't think that stuff really plays on there."

He went on to say that "you can't change anyone's mind about things, certainly not in a format like that." That wasn't specifically why I quit, but I was taken somewhat aback by the statement anyway. He typically didn't comment on anything in my feed at all, sticking with just commenting to things in the juggling group. It was rather an interesting insight specifically because he obviously saw what I posted but never commented. And that's a reflection on the nature of social media, generally. I think when I post comments, it is going to rub some people the wrong way, specifically because that is the nature of politics and the nature of what our politics is doing to the people of this country. Life isn't as simple as many believe it is for many citizens of this land.

I responded that the problem when we talk about "social change" issues is that there are a lot of people that don't even know a problem exists. People live their lives with the assumption that everyone is dealing with the circumstances they face in about the same way.

THAT ISN'T TRUE.

And the first step in hoping to fix that is through discussing it, because why would anyone who has been insulated and is busy trying to live their life know or understand the circumstances of someone else who has a very different experience? The only way to start is by talking about the facts of a situation, at least letting people hear about it, seeing if they understand it and reaching out to others for help and support. It's how we erase assumptions and replace those with facts.

He agreed with my points, so that was a small victory, but it made me think about everything to do with social media and how difficult it can be. I'm sure there are people on LJ who do not agree with my politics. Certainly at least one person removed me from their LJ specifically because of that element, and likely others have as well along the way. And that's the segregation of social media. People who do not share the same thoughts and values as you do typically don't belong on your feed because that will just cause annoyance or anger. It will make you upset and you don't use social media to get upset. Unless you do. But that's a different kind of circumstance.

I do visit a couple of message boards that are specifically political and are mostly conservative. I go there for a couple of reasons. First, I like to read what someone who has a different point of view is saying about various topics. If I want some culture shock, I visit Breitbart, a site that I guess is back under the control of former Trump aide, Steve Bannon, but was run in the interim by a guy who graduated from my Alma Mater, much to my shame and regret.

I never comment to anything at that board because that would be begging for abuse. People there have views of reality that are so distorted, it doesn't make sense to attempt to engage them in rational discourse. Just treat it like an horrific traffic accident, slow down, view it, shake your head, say a prayer and keep moving.

But there are a couple of boards that are a little more to the center and I will bat some concepts back and forth with some of the people on those boards. The one I most frequently attend is Scott Adams' blog. Adams, who draws the "Dilbert" comic strip, has become something of a political savant after his commentary about how he thought Trump would do during the 2016 election turned him into a Cable News talking head, a year ago. He's now trying to convert his success into a payday by getting his readers to join him on some other social media platform where he'll likely get a payday for bringing new eyeballs to see ads on the other site he's coercing folks to join.

The point is that most people who post on Adams' current blog don't quite expect someone with a liberal, or as they prefer, "libtard" mindset to come to that group and start posting stuff that doesn't align with their opinions. But I've had some successes along the way, or at least the people I converse with said they understood what I was saying, which is a pretty big step, from my POV, or better, if they don't respond to the point, it means they have no response, and that's a victory, too.

This is the issue when it comes to social change. We can't stay segregated. That's helping fuel the problem. Everyone needs to hear what the aggrieved are saying when it comes to how society is treating them, and then we have to do something to help them. Unless we are not acting in the way we claim we intend to be. How do we face the view of ourselves if we're being honest about what we believe?

But at the very least, we have to keep talking with one another. Cutting off communication, choosing to insulate around only people that believe everything that you do? That's creating an echo chamber, a situation where we can only hear our own beliefs, and everything becomes warped when we have a situation like that. We have to continue to challenge each other, to be willing to state what we actually think and to listen when someone has a different view. That's the way to help the country and continue to move forward.

There's a famous quote that reads "My country, right or wrong." But there's another part to that famed phrase: "if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right."

Here's hoping.

Feardeal Academy was a Boarding School in Massachusetts where many of New York’s well-to-do families sent their progeny for their undergraduate studies. It was an institution that taught discipline and obedience but also gave students skills and understanding. It also allowed those parents the ability to have some time to themselves for the bulk of the year at least until June, when there were three weeks between school and the start of Summer Sleepaway Camp season. But it was really about the learning that these second-generation future leaders and future absentee parents were getting that made it worth the exorbitant cost.

By all rights, Tronald Dump probably should not have been permitted to even apply to the school. His parents net income from their real estate business was barely passable at the time of his enrollment. But thanks to Tronald’s father, the real estate developer, Tred Frump (there was a name change along the way, let’s not dwell on it), who got a couple of Feardeal’s board members some commercial property in Manhattan, young Tronald found his way in to the school.

Early on, Young Tronald was quiet and pensive, content to remain an observer, based on how his father demanded he be when they were together. But soon, Tronald was becoming a voice to be heard and a force to be noted. He began becoming a notable classroom commenter and forming coalitions with his fellow students. After a few semesters, the name of Tronald Dump was known by every administration, faculty and student body member.

One day Tronald and some of his pals went to a local eatery, as they would do on a regular basis, taking a Saturday to spend some time off campus. At some point after the crab cakes and before the bananas foster, the conversation turned to the topic of ethics, which was one of the points of discussion on an upcoming exam.

“What is ethics, really?” Tronald asked the collective. “Is it a system of ‘right’ and ‘wrong,’ or is it an obstacle to success that we must move beyond to reach a greater truth?”

His friends sat silently, mulling over the concept. Dump jumped in again.

“I think it’s the ladder,” he said. “It’s the way of climbing over and beyond to succeed in a way no one has done before, and in a way no one has thought to try before.”

One fellow was about to reply, when Tronald continued his musing.

“Ethics is something that other people need to deal with in their daily lives. It’s the rules that they have to follow because they don’t know any better!” Dump smiled and sliced into his tenderloin, the blood still dripping from its center and daubed a bit of A-1 Sauce on it before popping it into his mouth. “That isn’t us. That isn’t us. As the future leaders of this country, we have to be able to explore everything. And because we have the money, the intellect and the know-how, we do.”

At first the others remained still, but then a couple began to nod, until all of them were in agreement.

Tronald smiled as he speared a succulent piece of lobster and dipped it into some butter sauce.

“Let me ask you this one, gentlemen,” Dump continued. “We’re starting to see the Negroes getting more vocal. The Negroes of the nineteen-sixties might be trying to get special privileges from the government. Maybe they’ll be moving into your neighborhood? What do we do? How do we handle this?”

Again the rest of the table remained silent as they all thought about the question.

“I’ll tell you what we do,” Tronald said. “We just continue to make and support laws that are to the benefit of those in charge, because that is how we can continue to keep an advantage.” Dump shrugged as he first glanced, then looked deeply into the eyes of the others, making sure he didn’t see any twinge of doubt coming from them.

“I’m glad to see you all are in agreement,” Dump said, finishing off his last savory bite of steak. “To me, it’s important to have a coalition of right thinking, same thinking people who can accomplish a lot. It’s necessary to have that kind of a group because anyone who isn’t thinking the same way is thinking differently, and that gets in the way of getting to the same place, you know what I mean?”

“My father was instrumental, in-stru-men-tal, mind you, about making sure the laws that are on the books are there to help the people they need to help and to not help the people we don’t want them to help,” Dump stated. “My father gave me a lot of good advice as well, and that includes a lot of things that only we should know,” Tronald smiled as he looked around the table at his supporters.

Still later, after the meal was over, Dump had a few more points to make.

“Lads, and I mean this with a great deal of respect, You are a great part of who I am. No! I mean that. Whether you know it or not, you inspire me, you motivate me, you help me. And because of that, I want you to always be a part of my Inner Circle.”

Trump was glowing as he pointed at each of them, until they each broke out into a grin.

“You guys are going to stay with me, because you understand and appreciate me. And I know that many times, many times after graduation, people lose track of one another, or don’t really have time… I’ll always have time for you. I’ll always support you and I’ll always be there for you because you have always been there for me.”

The waiter walked over to the booth with the check, then wordlessly turned and walked away.

“The only thing you guys don’t ever do is cover the bill!” Tronald laughed and went for his wallet. “It’s okay. I’ve got this.”

“We are definitely on the cutting edge. We are on the way to this new decade and beyond,” he winked.

The waiter came and took the bill.

“You can keep that.” Trump called as he stood up and straightened his school uniform, which he wore, even on a Saturday, and waved again to the waiter.

The waiter waved back. Despite his lack of stature relative to the high schooler, the waiter couldn’t help but feel a bit sorry for Tronald Dump, who always came in, just as he did today, always to dine, always all alone.

//

This work of fiction was written for LJ Idol using the prompt Going forward

For a moment, let’s forget everything we know (and let’s definitely forget everything we DON’T know) about the 2016 United States Presidential Election. Let’s forget the people chosen to be cabinet members of this administration. Let’s forget the inane and sometimes seriously flawed tweets, the blatant attacks against the press, the awkward meetings with heads of state that are our allies, the inexplicable meetings with heads of state that are our adversaries, the policies that clearly are not in the spirit of our country. Let’s forget the maxims and slogans that are meaningless, let’s not think about the continual weekends away from DC, the lack of knowledge of basic geography, basic diplomacy, basic government policy, or the revolving door of White House staffers that is spinning like a merry-go-round powered by a warp drive engine. Forget. It. All.

We are left with Number Forty-Five. And without all of the negative banter, the attempts to control everything around him, the continual contradictory statements, the constant demands for loyalty, we can now clearly see one fact that is crystal clear:

Donald J. Trump is a terrible president.

Now, I know what you’re thinking, if you’re a supporter of Trump. You’re thinking, this is another “libtard,” “sore loser” commentary coming from a “snowflake” about how you “can’t get over” the fact that he “beat” Hillary and you just won’t shut up and let him “run the country” the way he wants. You’re also probably thinking that “this kind of commentary” is “dividing the country” and that we “can’t move forward” if you aren’t willing to accept “President Trump” for what he is, the guy who is going to “Make America Great Again.”

But, here’s the crux of the issue when we are talking about Trump’s presidency to date. During the election, people are generally divided along party lines: Democrats and Republicans mostly, though certainly Libertarians and Independents were heard from as well. However, when the election is over, the winner must become President of the United States, not President of the People Who Voted For Him.

The problem isn’t that Liberals are “cry babies,” it’s that the President has chosen to ignore anyone who doesn’t agree with his policies and rhetoric. In other words, he is still playing to his base and ignoring everybody who isn’t already in his camp.

Donald Trump candidly admitted that he really didn’t know or understand what being President was all about before he started to run for the office. That’s usually a dangerous indicator, especially in a job that has so many moving parts and is so very important for both the image of our country with the rest of the world (as the most visible representation of the nation, POTUS is the filter through which the rest of the citizenry is viewed by people in other locales). But, it’s also a problem for those that live here. The policies, the concepts, the elements of knowing what to do are crucial in maintaining a sense of control, of steadiness, of caring, of expertise.

The issue is Trump has never stopped being the Republican Nominee. Everything he has planned, everything he has said, everything he has done was to the liking of the GOP, and nothing of any kind to even attempt to reach out to the Democrats, who, despite all of the conservative talk suggesting otherwise, are still intelligent minded citizens of this country.

Again, this is a demonstration of how little Mr. Trump knows about how government works. Those people that didn’t vote for him are not expected to suddenly be supportive of everything the president says and does, just because he took the oath of office. It is up to him to reach out in word and deed and act like he cares about the entirety of the country.

That’s why there are constant outcries from the liberal side of things over just about everything Trump is doing. When we say “He’s Not My President,” that’s really because of what the man, himself, is saying or trying to accomplish. The phrase, more accurately stated, is “He’s Not BEING My President.”

Every candidate has to pivot, at least a little bit, toward the center when they become the president, if they intend to include all citizens. And the president really must include all citizens if that person intends to govern properly. There is no way around it. President Obama did not dismantle the NRA or hand out Reparations to African American families, as many conservative commenters all over the internet were anxious about during his tenure in office. In fact, President Obama had a rather moderate term, not doing anything so far left it would create some angered response from conservatives. But then again, for most of Obama’s term, he had a Republican Congress to deal with, and they were not about to give him any bills that he actually wanted to sign.

When you look at everything that Donald Trump wants to do, it slams Democrats/Liberals in a way that makes them seem like he views them as “the enemy.” While that might delight everyone who voted GOP, who are still pushing the partisan agenda, who are still trying to trash and bash Hillary, that does not endear him to the rest of the nation who are feeling as if this is turning into a game of “Keep Away.” And the fact that this seems like it’s being treated like a game itself is problematic.

Worse yet, The Donald was partially responsible for the atmosphere that we are currently in: as his suggestion that Barack Obama perhaps was not born on United States soil meant that maybe he should not be the president at all, and that maybe all of the bills he signed into law should be considered void. With his constant comments and calls for President Obama’s Birth Certificate, Trump definitely helped to divide the nation and to became the darling of conservative commentators around the country, eventually leading to his candidacy, the Anti-Obama crusader.

And conservative commentators also make a mint from tapping into a portion of the population all too eager to hear and believe what they are saying. People using political speak for personal gain don’t understand how that creates a rift in the country because they remain unaffected. They won’t be harmed by the policies this administration pushes forward, so to them, it’s that previously referred to game, a chance to whip up the ire of their viewers or listeners for clickbait on websites or commercial sponsors on TV or radio programming. Ka-ching.

During President Obama’s time in office, we know that a small group of Republicans broke off and formed what they called the “Tea Party,” an offshoot of the GOP that was determined to undermine President Obama at every possible opportunity. And this group grew and blossomed, just like a weed, feeding off of other disgruntled conservatives, spouting negative commentary and just like Breitbart, which also began as a website around that same time, wanted to do as much as they could to characterize Obama as being a negative influence on the country and to rally support for all things conservative.

When Donald Trump took the oath of office, it was time for The Closer to take over. Just one problem: being POTUS is not the same as running a corporation. You don’t get to boss everyone around and do things your own way. You don’t get to act unilaterally. And as Trump himself should have known, just from his own constant tweets about Barack Obama, you don’t get to avoid criticism from the people who do not agree with your policies and decisions.

But all of these things are being used as reasons why he hasn’t accomplished more of his agenda, this though he has a friendly Congress, a conservative Supreme Court and pens aplenty to sign his Executive Orders.

Still, Trump remains unapologetic in his complete and utter disregard for anyone that was not a supporter of his during the election and seems intent on working exclusively for those that were. Certainly, his appointment to the Supreme Court, Neil Gorsuch, is a blatant example of that. Where Barack Obama nominated a slightly right leaning judge, Merrick Garland, a person most Republicans suggested would be a good or at least reasonable selection to their liking, Trump’s appointment was as far right as possible, again, supporting his base and thumbing his nose at the left.

The hate is the element that overwhelms – hate of the party that does something different from what you like. While conservatives may be inconvenienced by policies introduced by liberals, more taxes, programs that benefit other groups, liberals are often threatened directly by policies introduced by conservatives: defunding Planned Parenthood, repealing laws permitting gay people to marry as a couple of examples that may do legitimate harm to people, either through economics or the appearance of segmenting our country into groups that deserve fair treatment and others who do not.

Ultimately, the President of the United States is there to set a tone, to frame some parameters. POTUS helps to point out what is important, what we should be thinking about. The president is like a scoutmaster, constantly showing us what we need to do, and what we need to avoid. Unless he's so self-interested that you don't know what that is.

If there is any positive from Trump’s presidency, it’s that people are starting to come together and organize. Indivisible, a group created specifically to fight against the policies and agendas that Trump has been pushing has been slowly gathering support since the election and now numbers nearly six thousand separate affiliate organizations across the country. Their website is chock full of information about contacting local representatives, how to set up peaceful protests and has information about events, news about successes achieved through these grass roots efforts and updates you with info about bills up for debate that can have an impact on your local legislatures among a very extensive list of useful facts. It is worth a bookmark.

The fact is, politicians are here to work for us, not the other way around. And they are here to work for ALL of us, not just the ones with the big bank accounts or the ones that already agree with the people elected. It is up to us, the constituents, to hold their feet to the fire and make sure they do what we want, because that is their role. And if they don’t perform their role properly, it is up to us, the constituents, to vote them out of office, because that is our role.

The 2018 Midterm elections are fifteen months away.

//

This thinkpost was written for LJ Idol using the prompt: Be patient and tough; someday this pain will be useful to you

This thinkpost is the responsibility of one suricattus. She wrote the following:

What frustrates me about too much of the world (and specifically the American populace, since that's what I'm dealing with) is that there are SO MANY ways to get involved in the world, to try and change things for the better, and yet people are still "well, I'm upset, but I'll post about it, or make a comment somewhere else, and that's enough."

No, it really isn't.
Change isn't a passive event.

"Oh, but doing X would cause problems, it's difficult, it's inconvenient."

Dog knows, I've been guilty of that myself, more than once.

Yeah, shit's annoying, it's inconvenient, it's scheduled at a bad time, or it causes traffic jams.
Protest is supposed to be disruptive, and upsetting. It's meant to force everyone out of passive acceptance and drive us to ask "what is this anger about? How can we fix it, so there's less anger "- and so they will stop being inconvenient, yes.

And yes that means forcing ourselves to act, not just the people who haven't thought about it before, or were standing in opposition. Good intentions and righteous anger don't do shit on their own.


/vent

And I was originally going to make this a private post, but you know what? No. I feel like yelling this from my porch.

I intended to write a comment back, but it just kept growing, so I brought it here.

This is a standard complaint and a valid one and a needed one. Here's my take on it.

People, at heart, are self-interested. This is a survival mechanism built into the DNA. However, this can be overcome. As long as they feel safe, good about themselves, and capable of accomplishing things, they are willing to push forward. And it's in those circumstances that people are more willing to be generous with time, money and effort.

Not to say that some people are willing to do those things without the feel good elements I'm noting, because there certainly are those people. There are a lot of folks who will put the interests of themselves on the back burner because they understand it's for the Greater Good. Let's take those people out of this equation. They're already hard at work anyhow. We're talking the average person or, for this example, the famed "Average American."

We elect people to public office. Or, some of us do. Even getting people to vote can be a difficult process, which really is an ancillary thinkpost for some other vent. But those that become elected members of our city, county, state or federal governments are called "representatives." These people are in their jobs to represent the wishes of their constituents. The problem is, along the way, these people may not really be doing what they should for the citizens they report to, because of how our system of government runs. With lobbyists representing the interests of organizations, and how those people run interference for the groups they represent, a lot of the time work simply doesn't get done when it should, which causes an even larger problem, later.

So, for example, we want to reduce the amount of Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere. Planting trees helps with that a bit, as they convert CO2 into Oxygen. But trees need to be near where the source of the gas is from to be most effective. And a lot of that source is from manufacturing companies. So we can't plant on the land owned by the manufacturer in question. We have to plant ten miles away.

We can have our Senator or Congress Rep issue a bill that intends to increase regulations, preventing these plants from pumping Carbon dioxide into the atmosphere at current levels. But that will cost those companies money - potentially hurting their profit margin and possibly reducing the price of their stock. So rather than pay the exorbitant pricetag to retrofit their factories with the technology to lower their CO2 emmissions immediately, they lobby Congress to change the bill or toss it out altogether. They are willing to pay a lot of individuals smaller sums so that they don't have to change anything.

The weak link in the chain is that our representatives go for the lobby money. They have killed bills in Congress that could have helped change and improve our world. Of course, they're perhaps feeling a little vulnerable themselves, as they have to run for re-election in a year or two or four...

This isn't "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington."

So, with a system that has corruption built into how it functions, is there any way to resolve any of these potential human life destruction issues (and I say that because it's highly likely that once humans are no longer a part of the equation, the Earth will continue on, unless the planet itself is disintegrated) without fixing the system that makes them so damned difficult to prevent?

This isn't to reduce the value of an individual's contribution; we need people to be advocates and to set examples for the rest of us. But it's a little Quixotic to think that the biggest problem is how each and every citizen isn't doing enough when, if we look closer, we can clearly see that sometimes government isn't just doing nothing - it's actually working against us to the profit of the people purportedly in office as our voices.

How do we end the corruption in government, especially now, when it appears that the current administration has been set up, like an elaborate dominoes display, to fall into the laps of the people running the show, leaving the rest of us flat on the floor?

Money. More is never enough. And with money comes the ability to run and hide from trouble. You can live in a gated community. You can vacation in clean and beautiful regions of the planet. You can afford to buy that hybrid vehicle and park it right next to your SUV.

As the cost of running a campaign continues to soar higher and higher, only wealthy people have a reasonable expectation of being elected. And those people will support the interests of the wealthy because that's who they are. We're seeing that in action, right now. Just on the issue of Trumpcare, the new Republican health care bill designed to "replace" the ACA, it's unclear that the people responsible for it even know what their constituents need from this plan. But it would be a boon to the super rich in our country, as they would get a massive tax break from it.

This is an elaborate puzzle with all sorts of elements that shift: as you move to correct one, another falls out of place. In a situation like this, it's really going to take continued effort, pressure and action to collectively start to hammer out a fix.

Which is my long-winded way of saying, I agree.

Just about nine months ago, I wrote a thinkpost called Why "President Trump" Is NOT As Far-Fetched As You Think", which outlined the basics of why a nonsensical candidate who had no political experience of any kind could wind up being the Republican Nominee for President during this election cycle.

( At the time I wrote that piece... )

This is a challenge, since there's a lot going on, but is there a phrase or sentence that really sums up this photograph?