The Symptoms and the Problem

If you've been following this blog very long, you have a pretty good idea of where I stand politically. You know that I absolutely detest Der Furor and all of his hateful enablers and supporters. You know that I despise brainless and hypocritical figures like Louis Gohmert, Mo Brooks, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert, Mitch McConnell, Kevin McCarthy, Madison Cawthorne, Rudy Giuliani, Matt Gaetz, Devin Nunes, and ... well ... the list goes on and on and you probably don't have the time or desire to get your blood pressure up reading it.

Yes, I utterly detest all of these people. But they're really not the problem. They're the symptom of the problem. And the problem is that the America we thought we knew doesn't exist.

Underneath the relatively placid surface of the America I grew up in, the America I love, the America I served for 23 years as an Air Force officer, ugly things were bubbling and churning. But the structure of our society and our shared belief in the American ideal tended to keep those ugly things in check. But over time a few things came together to turn over the rocks of our common consensus and let the ugly things out.

One was the Vietnam War, which was wildly unpopular and which showed us that the government we trusted (well, most of us, anyhow) was willing and able to lie to us.

Another was the rise of the Internet, which allowed instant communication and the immediate, widespread sharing of unfiltered information. It gave the most ludicrous of ideas an audience that wasn't bothered by pesky things like accuracy and truth.

A third was the introduction and proliferation of camera-equipped smartphones, that allowed ordinary people to capture on video (and disseminate uncensored on the Internet) the ugly things that were not being reported by the major news networks - in particular the casual cruelty of some police officers toward minorities.

The rise of specialized news networks was another. The general homogeneity of the news as presented by the traditional networks (ABC, CBS, NBC) and newcomers like CNN - which contributed to a shared reality and world view most Americans understood and accepted - was undermined by new networks like Fox News and OANN that offered not only a different perspective, but a completely different and often totally unhinged reality based on anger and grievance rather than evidence and perspective.

The next one was the election of Der Furor as president in 2016. A majority of Americans, fired up in large part by the first five items on this list, voted for an odious, narcissistic, bombastic, openly racist buffoon who convinced them that he alone understood their anger and resentments and could restore the America of their fevered dreams. He was an utterly unqualified president who trampled over every line of honor, decency, and competence while ruining our standing in the world, and whose rhetoric told the angry mob not only that it was all right to hate, but that it was the truly American thing to do.

And the last one was Der Furor's loud and angry refusal to acknowledge his loss to Joe Biden in the 2020 election. This refusal - supported by not the least shred of evidence - has undermined faith in our system of voting, and of our government in general. The fact that a great many Americans still send this odious creature money and show up at his rallies to sing his praises is a sad commentary on the state of our education, our politics, and our society.

So, Dear Friends, the problem isn't the loons in Congress  ... it's us. We just see it now because the worst of us believe they've been empowered by a failed former president. They wave their Confederate flags next to the American flags and gaudy Der Furor vanity flags on their pickup trucks, send their hard-earned dollars to a fake billionaire with a string of bankruptcies, go to church and mouth the words, yet believe that God sent them a savior who has openly violated every one of the Ten Commandments, and hate their neighbors because they need someone to blame for their own problems and shortcomings. 

I don't know where we go from here, but I don't see any evidence that the tsunami of anger, intolerance, and resentment that's been unleashed is going to go away any time soon. I hope that better people will prevail, but I wonder what sort of America we are leaving for my grandchildren.

Have a good day. More thoughts later, after I calm down.

Bilbo

Guest Post

Well, hello again! Long time, no see! Gloria here, the top chicken of the coop, here to bring you a poultry point of view. I don't often get to do a guest post, but since Bilbo has been here house-sitting for his daughter and all her animals, I took the opportunity to do a little hunt-and-pecking on the keyboard (ha, ha!) to share my observations from the run.

The last time I posted was back in January of last year, when I asked you to support my run for the presidency. I didn't win, of course ... the election was obviously rigged against me, with millions of my votes illegally switched to other, less-deserving poultry ... but I'm over the loss now. You elected Joe Biden, who seems like a good egg and is doing a pretty good job. Of course, after that last guy, the bar for acceptable performance hasn't been very hard to cross.

Anyhow, I wanted to talk to you about an important topic on which we chickens have a lot to teach you: pecking orders.

If you're interested, you can read how one of your more chicken-literate (chick-lit, if you will!) farmers explains our pecking order here, but I think you need to consider the advantages of our system in light of how you've messed up your own politics. 

The basic idea is simple: we peck at each other, and the strongest, most aggressive chicken becomes the leader - she (he, if it happens to be a rooster) pecks everyone else, and nobody pecks back. The number two chicken gets pecked by the leader, but gets to peck everyone else, and so on down the line until you reach the poor chicken at the bottom, who has nobody to peck and is generally pretty miserable.

It's a tough system, but it works well to help us keep our social and political stability. Occasionally, a chicken farther down the pecking order will try to unseat the leader, but usually gets put back in her place quickly and stability returns. 

Your human idea of the pecking order seems to be focused on what you call elections, in which you substitute votes for pecks. It's not a bad system, but it only works when the number-two peck- ... uh ... vote-getter understands why the system is important, accepts his or her place, and pecks everyone further down the flock to keep things orderly. It's worked more or less well for you so far, but now you have a noisy, strutting bantam rooster who can't accept that he was out-pecked and wants to overturn the pecking order and just cock-a-doodle-doo himself back onto the top roost. This is not good, and a lot of you don't seem to understand it.

We chickens get along well with each other because we understand and respect the pecking order. Obviously, each of us would rather rule the roost, but we understand that our system keeps things orderly and keeps the feathers from flying. It would be good thing for your humans to learn that lesson and start pecking back at noisily-aggressive bantamweights who think they should be the cock of the walk, no matter what anyone else thinks.

And that's your reality check from the coop. Time to turn things back over to Bilbo and get back to work in the yard. Those lesser chickens aren't going to peck themselves.

Have a good day. Bilbo will be back with more thoughts later. 'Til then, buck, buck, BUCKAWWWW!

Gloria

Poetry Sunday

Two weeks ago, on, June 14th, we celebrated Flag Day here in the United States, commemorating the date in 1777 on which the Continental Congress adopted the flag of the United States with the words

“... the flag of the United States [shall] be 13 stripes, alternate red and white,” and “the union [shall] be 13 stars, white in a blue field, representing a new constellation.”

Flag Day isn't celebrated as much as it used to be when I was young, a decline that probably began with the opposition to the war in Vietnam; the display of flags is nowadays more common on Memorial Day and the Fourth of July. I personally only fly my flag on those two dates because display of the flag has become a symbol of the ostentatious but empty patriotism of those who fly a flag the size of Wyoming from their pickup trucks, but decline to serve their country or honor its aspirations to justice and equality.

But all that having been said, let's strike up the band and remember this classic patriotic poem about our flag as a symbol of our aspirations ...

The Flag Goes By

by Henry Holcomb Bennett

Hats off!

Along the street there comes

A blare of bugles, a ruffle of drums,

A dash of color beneath the sky:

Hats off!

The flag is passing by!

Blue and crimson and white it shines,

Over the steel-tipped, ordered lines.

Hats off!

The colors before us fly;

But more than the flag is passing by.

Sea-fights and land-fights, grim and great,

Fought to make and to save the State:

Weary marches and sinking ships;

Cheers of victory on dying lips;

Days of plenty and years of peace;

March of a strong land's swift increase;

Equal justice, right and law,

Stately honor and reverend awe;

Sign of a nation, great and strong

To ward her people from foreign wrong:

Pride and glory and honor,--all

Live in the colors to stand or fall.

Hats off!

Along the street there comes

A blare of bugles, a ruffle of drums;

And loyal hearts are beating high:

Hats off!

The flag is passing by!

The Stars and Stripes represent many things: not just the nation per se, but its ideals and those who serve their fellow citizens in the military and other ways. Hats off! - not just to a waving flag, but to all that it represents.

Have a good day. More thoughts coming.

Bilbo

Cartoon Saturday

It's been quite a week, hasn't it? ...

Senate Republicans voted en bloc to refuse to even discuss the voting reforms of the For the People Act; more than 20 Russian aircraft and two coast guard ships shadowed a British warship sailing near Crimea, and the UK government denied Russian reports that a Russian ship had fired warning shots and a jet had  dropped bombs in the path of HMS Defender as it sailed some 12 miles (19km) off Crimea's coast; the Subway sandwich chain is again under investigation over suspicion that its tuna salad contains no identifiable tuna; Rudy Giuliani, Der Furor's former lawyer and die-hard supporter, has been suspended from practicing law in New York State*; and at Iran's Dezful Vahdati Air Force Base, two pilots were killed when they accidentally fired their ejection seats while their aircraft was still in the hangar, blasting both men through the hangar roof.

This week, in honor of all the batshit crazy people out there believing in Q-anon and every other wacky conspiracy theory, here's a collection of cartoons about the tinfoil hat crowd.

It's a popular end-of-year program on Faux News and OAN ...  

Hmmm ...

I'd be worried, too ...

Everybody starts somewhere ...

It's progress, of a sort ...

It's all in how you think the dots ought to be connected ...

As if the religious nuts weren't bad enough ...

This one won't be showing up at our family game nights ...

Mine is ignoring him ...

If you're going to be batshit crazy, you may as well do it with style ...

And that's it for this edition of Cartoon Saturday. New thoughts come tomorrow**, when Poetry Sunday returns. Be here.

Bilbo

* The Appellate Court decision read in part: “We conclude that there is uncontroverted evidence that respondent communicated demonstrably false and misleading statements to courts, lawmakers and the public at large in his capacity as lawyer for former President Donald J. Trump and the Trump campaign in connection with Trump’s failed effort at re-election in 2020. These false statements were made to improperly bolster respondent’s narrative that due to widespread voter fraud, victory in the 2020 United States presidential election was stolen from his client.” 

** Aha! That's just what Bilbo wants you to believe ...

Great Moments in Editing and Signage

And awaaaay we go!

"Relish your wiener" ... why not? ...

I like the price, but can we do more than see the food? ...

The Chevy Colorado apparently comes in a wide range of models ...

They're graded "win," "place," and "show" rather than "good," "choice," and "prime" ...

You get what you pay for ...

So, how does that work? ...

Thanks, but I'll pass ...

Well, where else would they be from? ...

From the Stupid Criminals Database ...

You'd have thought she'd remembered sooner ...

And there you go - the last collection of Great Moments in Editing and Signage for June. I hope you enjoyed them, and will be careful in the yard with that bargain lawn mower. Come back tomorrow for Cartoon Saturday ... more thoughts then.

Bilbo

Ass Clown Special Award

Although I normally present my Ass Clown awards every other Friday, such is the degree and extent of ass clownery in modern America that I occasionally feel the need to present an out-of-cycle special award, and so it is today.

My friend Gail, in response to my invitation to nominate other candidates, suggested one that I had completely overlooked among the floating chunks in the Swirling Cesspool of Ass Clownery ... one who is, indeed, a prime representative of the dangerous stupidity that marks many of today's ass clowns. Ladies and Gentlemen, Dear Readers, I present an

Ass Clown Special Award

to

Dr Sherri Tenpenny

Dr Tenpenny is a Cleveland-based osteopathic doctor and anti-vaccination activist who was recently invited by GOP legislators in Ohio to present "expert testimony" on a proposed "Vaccine Choice and Anti-Discrimination Act." During her testimony, in which she claimed to have spent 10,000 hours researching vaccines since the beginning of the pandemic, she made the following claim:

“I’m sure you’ve seen the pictures all over the Internet of people who have had these shots and now they’re magnetized ... They can put a key on their forehead. It sticks. They can put spoons and forks all over them and they can stick, because now we think that there’s a metal piece to that.”

She also suggested that vaccines “interface” with 5G cellular towers to create dangerous side effects of Covid-19 immunization*.

Later on in the hearing, a person claiming to be a nurse tried to prove Tenpenny’s theory by trying to stick a key and a bobby pin to her neck. "Explain to me why the key sticks to me. It sticks to my neck too," she said, even though it actually failed to stick.

You can read the evaluations of Tenpenny's ridiculous claims by PolitiFact here.

For the record, both my wife and I have been fully vaccinated (with the Pfizer vaccine) since late last month. Although we remain strongly attracted to each other, we do not stick to the refrigerator, the car, or any other metal items. And while my cell phone uses 5G technology, I have not noted any particular effects that cannot be explained by my already well-developed and acknowledged eccentricity and general orneriness. 

It's one thing for an uneducated and uninformed layman to spread dangerous misinformation about protection against a virus that has killed more than 600,000 Americans. It's irresponsible and extremely dangerous for a person claiming to be a doctor - responsible for healing and care of the sick - to do the same.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Dear Readers, "Doctor" Sherri Tenpenny has earned an Ass Clown Special Award and a Gohmert Stupidity Scale rating of 2,000,000 ghm - near the top end of the scale based on the danger her irresponsible rhetoric poses to persons who believe her ridiculous ideas, but still allowing for expected future growth.

Have a good day. Get vaccinated, to protect yourself and those around you. More thoughts coming.

Bilbo

* You can read a thorough analysis and debunking of the Covid-19/5G connection here. It's long and dense with scientific terminology, but the bottom line is that there is no such connection. Where I come from, we call such baseless claims "bullshit."

Why Augment Reality?

One of the latest tech fads is augmented reality, or "AR*." This is a technology which allows one to see the surrounding real-life environment with useful additional digital information overlaid on it. For instance, you might wear a pair of AR glasses which show the hours of operation or daily specials of a restaurant as you walk past it. AR goggles are used by some mechanics or technicians to let them read instruction manuals or order parts without using their hands while they work on your car. The Pokemon Go game which was (and still is, for all I know) popular uses AR technology to display the Pokemon creatures players try to capture.

I can see the value of AR for entertainment and for some jobs, but on the other hand, actual reality tends to suck, so why would we want to augment it?

Really useful AR would be more helpful on a regular basis if it provided immediately useful information, like hoods over the heads of passing racists, the location of the nearest bathroom**, or pop-up fact checking bubbles over the heads of bloviating politicians. The latter, though, is probably beyond the capability of current computer processing capability. Other useful AR functions might overlay danger symbols on people carrying concealed weapons, or flag people whose ability to drive is impaired by drugs or alcohol. 

We're not there, yet, though. There's only so much technology can do to compensate for the shortcomings of idiots, and we already have enough stupidity augmented by Fox News, OAN, and the crazier members of the GOP.

I'll just stick with plain old reality. If it needs augmenting, I'll do it myself. But if you find that AR program that shows where the nearest bathrooms are, let me know.

Have a good day. More thoughts coming.

Bilbo

* Not to be confused with the class of powerful semiautomatic weapons worshipped by many Americans.

** As an old guy, I could really use that!

Nobody Here, Nothing to See, Please Move On

Unidentified Flying Objects (UFOs), Unexplained Aerial Phenomena (UAPs), flying saucers, or whatever you choose to call them, are experiencing a surge in public interest of late, spurred by military pilot reports of inexplicable things they've seen by eye or by radar, like this one. 

Inexplicable things have always been seen in the sky, and interest in them has waxed and waned over time, from Ezekiel's Wheels to the Roswell Incident to the Air Force's Project Blue Book. The question of whether or not we are alone in the universe exerts a powerful pull on many people, and has provided rich veins of ore for science fiction authors to mine.

But have you noticed that most science fiction movies which depict aliens from outer space arriving on Earth don't usually end up well for Earth? For example, here's the famous scene from the 1996 movie Independence Day which shows the White House being totally destroyed by an alien spacecraft ... even more damage than Der Furor was able to do, though he tried his best.

How about the 1953 classic The War of the Worlds? ...

Or its 2005 remake with Tom Cruise ...

Or the 1956 epic, Earth vs the Flying Saucers?

The potential danger of alien visitors has long been present on television as well, with Outer Limits episodes like The Zanti Misfits and Twilight Zone episodes like To Serve Man. And we haven't even mentioned novels like Harry Turtledove's Worldwar Saga and Footfall, by Jerry Pournelle and Larry Niven.

Yes, in most science fiction films, poor Earth doesn't do very well against aliens ... which may explain why most conservatives are reflexively opposed to allowing any of them into the country, regardless of where they're from south of the border or from the outer limits of space.

So why we are trying so hard to let those potential enemies know we're here?

In a recent Op-Ed article in the Washington Post, physicist and science writer Mark Buchanan suggests that attempting to communicate with extraterrestrials - as proposed by the "Messaging Extraterrestrial Intelligence (METI)" program - could be extremely dangerous, and that we need to decide whether it’s very smart or very safe to do so without careful thought and preparation.

I'm of two minds on the subject. On the one hand, it would be amazing to know if there were intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, there not being all that much here on Earth lately. Think of what we could learn from them! On the other, though, any alien race technologically able to come visiting across the unimaginable vastness of space would be so far ahead of us in technology that we would likely be as  insignificant to them as most insects and small animals are to us. And we know how we tend to treat insects and small animals not suitable for food or pets.

On balance, I think Mr Buchanan is probably right. We've been radiating electronic signals out into space for well over a hundred years, and eventually someone "out there" is likely to intercept them and wonder about their source, even as we wonder about the occasional odd signal we hear from a distant star. But that's not the same thing as trying to beam messages directly to star systems we think might be inhabited by someone who might understand or be curious enough to visit. 

After all, you never know who might respond to the invitation.

Have a good day. More thoughts coming.

Bilbo

Fathers Day, 2021

If you were looking for Poetry Sunday, don’t despair – I have my traditional (and slightly updated) tribute to fathers today, so you'll have to wait until next Sunday for your poetry fix. You'll survive.

Today is Fathers’ Day, the day we honor the man who contributed half of our chromosomes and many of the life lessons that shaped us into who we are.

Fathers don’t get the same degree of respect that mothers do. They work in design, rather than production, after all, and don’t earn the credit that mothers do for going through nine months of pregnancy followed by months of sleepless nights and years of worry. And truth be told, many fathers don’t earn that respect. For all too many men, fatherhood is an unfortunate side effect of good sex, and a child is an impediment to the enjoyment of life. For many men, fathering a lot of children by a lot of women is the imagined sign of a manly stud ... not of lives betrayed by a thoughtless ass who thinks with his man parts* instead of his brain and heart.

Luckily, though, there are many good men out there trying their best to be good fathers. It’s not an easy job, and not everyone is good at it ... but fortunately, enough do.

I have often reflected back on the course of my life, and I've come to the conclusion I’ve been a better grandfather than I was a father. This is probably normal. You’ve seen more of life, and had more experiences – good and bad – to share. If you’re the grandfather, you get to be the gentle, wise, let-‘em-do-what-they-want fellow the grandchildren love to see, rather than the grouchy, tired father who has to put bread on the table, crack the whip, and enforce the discipline. You get all the joy of holding and loving the children with none of the negatives ... when the baby needs changing, for instance, there's none of that messy fuss - you just give her back to her mother. What's not to like?

I think that, from the father's perspective, we have our children too early in life. We're still learning how to be adults, and all of a sudden we're fathers, responsible for teaching our children all the lessons of life that we haven't even learned yet. Our children grow up as much in spite of our mistakes as because of our excellence in parenting.

When you get to be a father, you look at your own father differently. It was Mark Twain who supposedly once said, "When I was a boy of fourteen, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be twenty-one, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years."

It's true.

A good father, as I came in time to understand, is a gift beyond all price. The gold standard for fatherhood is, of course, my own father. He fought the Nazis** in the skies over World War II Europe, ran his own business, raised four children and buried one, and cared for mom through the long years of misery as Alzheimer's gradually destroyed the mind of the dynamic and witty woman he loved. Dad left us five years ago, and I no longer get to hear his jokes and stories and learn the lessons he still had to teach, yet he remains the man to whom I owe whatever shreds of honor, decency, and ... well ... manhood that I can claim.

This was the man who took the war in the air to the Nazis in 1944 ...

After the war, he turned successful businessman, running his own photographic studio and drawing the attention of the ladies ...

In 1974, he was able to celebrate the birth of his first grandchild, Jason - who is now a father with four children of his own. Yes, the geek on the left is me, and Dad's mother - my paternal grandmother - is in the middle.

And the years rolled on ... here he is in December of 2013 at his 90th birthday party in Pittsburgh, two years before his death, surrounded by the friends, fishing partners, and family members who came out to honor him in spite of some really ghastly winter weather ...

I'd like to think I made him satisfied, if not proud.

If you’d like to know more about the life of this wonderful man, you can read my remembrance here.

It's politically correct (bordering on mandatory) nowadays to say that a child can grow up just fine in a household with same-sex parents, but you'll never be able to convince me that it's the same as being raised by a father and a mother who love each other, treat each other with dignity and respect, set a good example, teach their gender-specific life lessons, and subordinate their own dreams and desires to the momentous task of raising a brand new human being.

Have a good day. Honor your father. And if you're a father, be a good one ... preferably a better one than I was. Your children ... and indeed, the future ... are depending on you.

More thoughts coming.

Bilbo

* As the late Missandei would have said. If you're into "Game of Thrones," you'll get it.

** The real ones, the ones that murdered millions of innocent people and destroyed most of Europe, not the imaginary ones to which ignorant people in this country compare their political opponents.

Cartoon Saturday

Don't you sometimes wish weeks could be returned and exchanged?

President Biden signed into law a new national holiday to honor the end of slavery in the United States, and 14 GOP members of the House of Representatives voted against it; the Supreme Court voted 7-2 to reject the latest GOP attempt to kill the Affordable Care Act; California has declared a state of emergency as a result of the massive heat wave baking the western US; President Biden and Russian President Putin conducted their first summit meeting in Geneva, and the perception of the outcome depends on your source of news and opinion; and in Ukraine, a couple who handcuffed themselves together for 123 days in an attempt to save their relationship broke up as soon as the handcuffs were removed.

This week, in honor of the Supreme Court decision favoring religious freedom over the rights of LGBT individuals, I thought a few cartoons on the subject of religion might be appropriate ...

I'll bet a lot of people wish there were ...  

There's a lot of money to be made from preaching to the gullible ...

That's appropriate ...

Do not touch or else ...

Lots of evangelical truth, there ...

The major religions all agree on something, anyhow ...

The pun of the day ..

I suppose it saves ink ...

So's mine ...

It was God's big campaign promise ...

And there it is ... your next-to-last Cartoon Saturday for June. I hope it brought a bit of levity to your week.

Have a good day and a great weekend. Come back tomorrow for my annual Fathers Day post, which bumps Poetry Sunday this week.

Bilbo

The Left-Cheek Ass Clown for June, 2021

It gets harder every time to pick one (or two, or a group of) ass clown(s) to represent the swirling maelstrom of ass clownery plaguing the nation, but here we are again. I resisted this time giving the award to Mitch McConnell (who is eminently deserving, but has nine previous awards, including twice winning Ass Clown of the Year),  Marjorie Taylor-Greene (who has a paltry one award, but could easily earn one each voting period until she dies of old age), and the Republican Party (which has ten previous awards and seems to be lobbying hard for recognition).

But I've decided to select a new winner for this period, one who has not yet received an award, and yet deserves it every bit as much as any previous winner. Ladies and Gentlemen, Dear Readers, 

The Left-Cheek Ass Clown Award

for

June, 2021

is presented to 

Representative Lauren Boebert (R, CO-3)

Already recognized as one of the most ignorant and unqualified, if heavily armed, members of the House of Representatives, Ms Boebert far exceeded even the low bar of stupidity set by her Republican colleagues when she tweeted on June 16th: 

"I surely hope Joe Biden doesn’t accidentally return the state of Alaska to Putin in their meeting. 

I’m praying for America today, because there has never been a more unqualified person negotiating on our behalf." 

Not only is it a predictably stupid comment in general, there are two specific issues with it ... one in each sentence.

First of all, I think we can all agree that Der Furor, adored by Boebert and widely recognized as being fawningly subservient to Putin, would have been far more likely than President Biden (or any competent president) to return Alaska to the Russian leader. And secondly, I don't know how any rational person could compare Joe Biden - a man with decades of experience in public service and international negotiation - to Der Furor - a man with a string of failed businesses and a buffoonish liar who is a laughingstock among our allies and enemies alike - and claim with a straight face that the latter is more unqualified to negotiate our vital interests on the world stage than the former.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Dear Readers, with an initial Gohmert Stupidity Scale rating of 100,000 ghm (high enough to denote Real Stupidity, yet low enough to allow for expected future growth), Lauren Boebert is named the Left-Cheek Ass Clown for June, 2021.

It's difficult to imagine a person this ignorant being elected to Congress, but this is America in 2021. Let's hope for a sudden surge in voter IQ in the coming elections, even if we don't expect to see it.

Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow, when Cartoon Saturday returns.

Bilbo

Sticks, Stones, Words, and Guns

The classic expression "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me" is meant to teach children that they cannot be hurt ... at least, physically ... by unpleasant things that are said to or about them. Unfortunately, words can hurt us, in many different ways.

There are a lot of ways to look at this, but the one that got me off on this tangent was consideration of the gun violence crisis in America. The importance of language in the context of this discussion is evident from one simple example: use of the term assault rifle to describe a civilian firearm derived from a military weapon and retaining various military characteristics. Firearms advocates believe persons using this term are ignorant and cannot be taken seriously in debate because there's no such precisely-defined thing as an assault rifle. To gun safety advocates, on the other hand, this insistence on linguistic purity obscures legitimate concern over the dangers posed by high-powered semiautomatic weapons, whatever they're called, in ordinary society.

While preparing this post, I spent some time reading the Supreme Court's 5-4 decision in the famous case of District of Columbia v. Heller, which struck down the DC ban on ownership and storage of handguns. The original DC law was intended to help reduce gun violence on the streets of the nation's capitol, but it was opposed by those who believed they needed guns to protect themselves from other people with guns. When the case reached the Supreme Court and was finally decided, the 157-page decision (including dissents) was loaded not only with the usual dense legal analysis but, oddly enough, dense semantic analysis. The justices devoted page after page to parsing the exact meaning of the individual words of the Second Amendment - militia, state, keep, bear, keep and bear, arms, and people - as they were understood in 1789. Such linguistic exactitude is important to those who believe the Constitution means only and exactly what those who wrote it meant in the 18th century. 

Of course, 2021 is a bit removed from 1789, and the technology and power of weapons commonly available to the average citizen is quite a bit different. The justices halfheartedly acknowledged this when they wrote 

"It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks ..."

Nevertheless, the words of the Second Amendment have been construed by the 21st century Supreme Court to mean the exact same thing they would have meant to a citizen of the 18th century.

The Court also wrote (somewhat disingenuously, in my opinion), in the Heller decision, 

"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by

felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of fire arms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those 'in common use at the time' finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons."

And we enter the realm of semantics once again, as lawyers buy big houses, cars, and yachts on their earnings from the endless parsing of phrases like common use and dangerous and unusual. Is an AR-15 dangerous and unusual? Dangerous? Absolutely. Unusual? As a weapon designed to provide maximum personal firepower on the battlefield, not at all; for personal protection at the local Starbucks, perhaps. Is it in common use? It certainly is, although one might reasonably ask whether it ought to be in common use on America's streets rather than wartime battlefields.

Want to spend more time down the rabbit hole of Second Amendment semantics? One of the references cited by the Supreme Court in the Heller decision is a study by attorney Stephen Halbrook titled What the Framers Intended: A Linguistic Analysis of the Right to "Bear Arms." Although the document is fairly short (only 12 pages, including 78 footnotes), it addresses in succinct but comprehensive detail the historical meaning of the key terms contained in the Second Amendment, and concludes that

"The framers of the second and fourteenth amendments intended to guarantee an individual right to carry firearms and other common hand-carried arms."

And there's that sneaky word common again. Time to deploy the reinforced platoons of lawyers to breach the ramparts of its intended meaning.

So, my bottom line is ...

Words can, in fact, hurt you. Not by themselves, but by the passions they release and the weapons they are used to justify. Be careful how you use them.

Have a good day. More thoughts coming.

Bilbo

Centibillionaires

At the intersection of linguistics and economics we have an interesting and depressing new word: centibillionaire, defined as "a person with assets worth more than 100 billion dollars, pounds, euros, etc."*

How sad (or amazing, depending on your personal financial and socio-political outlook) is it that we need a word to denote the fact that we have at least five persons (as of this writing) who have such enormous wealth? That they can buy their own flight into space? That they can own multiple huge houses on several continents? That their wealth - in comparison to that of the average person working for them - is literally beyond comprehension?

The real question, which has been asked by people more educated than I in the science of economics and the morality of wealth, is how much is enough? How large does one's asset list need to be? How many homes, yachts, sports teams, paramours, and members of Congress does one person need to own?

The average Republican (who probably earns not much over minimum wage) would tell you that rugged individualism coupled with unbridled capitalism built the American society we all enjoy, and that those who have amassed staggering fortunes have earned the right to their luxuries by providing the wealth that has "trickled down" to the rest of us. They are not bothered by the fact that this is clearly hogwash.

Although it may seem like it, I really don't begrudge the wealthy their fortunes, to the extent that those fortunes have actually been earned rather than inherited. I do believe, however, that those who have amassed enormous fortunes have an obligation to see to the well-being of those whose work built those fortunes. If you're a Jeff Bezos with a fortune nearly beyond calculation, paying the workers in your fulfillment centers an average of $15 per hour is, at the very least, fair.

How much should an average worker be paid? That's a good question, and one on which there will never be agreement. In general, it's clear that a worker should be paid based on the level of skill and education required to do the job ... the chemical engineer who designs and operates production lines for critical vaccines probably deserves to be paid more per hour than the person sweeping the floors and cleaning the toilets at the factory ... even though both of those persons play important roles in the economic ecology. The idea of a minimum wage is not all bad, but ignores the economic fact that no one can support a family on $7.25/hour anywhere in the United States.

A better idea might be the living wage, which would allow a person to support a family of four, but - like the minimum wage - it will be different in different parts of the country, and it would be difficult to agree on what that wage might be and who should be empowered to calculate it. 

Which brings us back to the centibillionaires.

I personally think there's something wrong with the fact that many people in this country (including both members of many households with two working parents) must work multiple jobs to pay for food, rent, medical insurance, and utilities, with little left over to save for things like vacations and the education of their children. Do centibillionaires have a responsibility to share their wealth with those less fortunate? Legally, no. Morally, probably. How would they do it?

By paying their share of taxes, for one thing. Recent reports based on leaked IRS records show that the super-rich pay little - often no - taxes on their income, using a wide range of tax law advantages and loopholes not available to the average American. There is wide disagreement on what constitutes a fair level of taxation for the vastly wealthy, but the simple fact is that there has never been a serious attempt to address the issue. Our tax laws help the wealthy to increase their fortunes simply by allowing them to avoid taxes commensurate with the extent of their wealth.

I suppose this makes me a ... gasp! ... socialist (at least in the eyes of those who howl about socialism but really don't understand what it is). But I can live with that. I pay hefty taxes on my relatively small retirement investment returns and my military pension, and I can live with that, too. I don't need to be a centibillionaire ... I just want to be able to support my wife and I and live without fear that an unexpected bill will wipe us out.

If you're a centibillionaire, you don't worry much about that.

Have a good day. More thoughts coming.

Bilbo

* Contrary to what you might have thought, a "centibillionaire" is not one in need of more or better deodorant.

The New Official Unit of Stupidity, Explained

You may recall that last Thursday I introduced my proposal for an official unit of stupidity, which I named the Gohmert (abbreviated ghm) in honor of the proudly intellectually challenged representative from Texas. Since then, rainy weather which kept me out of my garden has allowed me time to give the issue some additional thought, and I am ready to present my formal initial concept for what I have named the Gohmert Stupidity Scale.

One problem with establishing a scale of stupidity, as my friend and fellow blogger John has pointed out, is deciding what constitutes the baseline level of stupidity. I have tried to address this problem by relating stupidity to ignorance (which may be unintentional and correctable) and the degree of willingness to change one's opinion in response to facts and evidence. Thus, a lower Gohmert rating would represent honest error and the willingness to correct it, while a higher score would reflect stubborn resistance to changing one's mind in the face of updated information. 

John also suggested modeling the system on the Richter Scale, which measures the strength of earthquakes and uses a logarithmic scale in which each increasing level reflects a tenfold (or more) increase in power. This idea had considerable merit, as it allowed for the measurement of the rapidly-increasing levels of current stupidity. In a subsequent comment, John also suggested that the scale allow for negative values, which would represent good ideas and lack of stupidity. That's a good idea, but I need to think about it some more, and will address it in a future modification of the Gohmert Stupidity Scale.

My original idea visualized a simple one-to-ten scale, but I soon realized that this lacked the flexibility to account for the broad range of stupidity plaguing the nation. I moved on to a concept similar to the Scoville Scale which measures the degree of heat in chili peppers, although fellow blogger Mike has noted that the Scoville Scale currently has an upper measurement of more than 2.5 million units, which may not be high enough to account for the present need. 

After much thought and doodling and consideration of the inputs from Mike and John, here's my concept. As I noted above, it is based on a combination of the Scoville Scale, which is open-ended and allows for a wide gradation in values, and the Richter Scale, which allows for huge increases in value at higher levels. It is designed to measure the stupidity of individuals, rather than of specific ideas or actions, although it can be modified to address the latter ... it's easy enough to come up with ideas. Your comments and suggestions are welcome ... 

The Gohmert Stupidity Scale, v.1

(Measurements expressed in ghm, followed by a General Description)

0 -100: Normal behavior. Able to recognize, admit, and self-correct occasional errors without harm to self or others.

100-1,000: Silly, but harmless. Able to admit error and self-correct once action has been recognized as dumb.

1,000-2,500: Ignorant. Commits dumb acts out of non-malicious ignorance, and can self-correct when stupid action is pointed out.

2,500-10,000: Really Ignorant. Commits dumb acts out of ignorance and resists changing mind when faced with proof of error.

10,000-25,000: Extremely Ignorant. Commits dumb acts out of ignorance and refuses to change mind when faced with proof of error.

25,000-50,000: Stupid. Views own opinions and those of persons with similar beliefs as gospel and rejects contrary information. This is the level at which stupidity begins to have harmful consequences.

50,000-100,000: Really Stupid. Doubles down on stupid actions and beliefs when confronted with evidence; believes persons with contrary positions are obviously wrong.

100,000-350,000: Extremely Stupid. Easily swayed by individuals or groups that reinforce personal beliefs. Believes individuals or groups holding contrary points of view are not only wrong, but deliberately malicious.

350,000-750,000: Amazingly Stupid. Utterly devoid of self-doubt. Refuses to listen to other points of view and is totally convinced of the infallibility of deeply-held personal positions. Potential for danger to self and others.

750,000-1,500,000: Dangerously stupid. Aggressively rejects any other point of view and refuses to acknowledge any possibility of personal error or responsibility. May be dangerous to self and others when contradicted.

1,500,000-3,000,000: Normal extreme upper limit of stupidity. Refuses to accept validity of any contradictory point of view and rejects all contrary information and evidence as “fake news.” Believes  aggressive and confrontational response to opposing views, up to and including physical violence, is justified. Clearly dangerous to self and others.

> 3,000,000: Level of stupidity is no longer measurable by rational standards. Individual should not be allowed to breed.

So, Dear Readers, what do you think? Leave a comment with any suggestions for improvement ... we're filling a need, here.

Have a good day. More thoughts coming. 

Bilbo

Musical Sunday

This past Monday we celebrated the birthday of singer George Ezra, noteworthy for (as far as I know) only one hit song, which we share with you today on our trip to Budapest ...

It's a weird video, but the song is great.

Have a good day, and enjoy the rest of your weekend. More thoughts coming.

Bilbo

Cartoon Saturday

I think we need to find the guy who designs these weeks and just shoot him ...

The Justice Department Inspector General has launched an investigation into reports that Der Furor's administration secretly seized phone data from at least two House Democrats, their aides, and their family members (including children) as part of an aggressive attempt to stop leaks of information; a Minnesota State Police officer pleaded guilty to having mailed himself nude photos he found while searching the phone of a woman he had arrested; three people, including a child, were murdered by gunfire in a Florida Publix store; a replica of Noah's Ark, designed as a Bible museum, has been prevented by Britain's Maritime and Coastguard Agency from being towed from it's location in Ipswich, UK, to the Netherlands because it is not seaworthy; and in Stafford County, Virginia, police are searching for two women wanted for shoplifting from several stores while wearing “pajamas and animal onesies.”

Sheep have been in the news quite a bit for the last few years, as conservatives and liberals each accuse the other of being sheep ... that is, of blindly following dumb ideas. This being the case, I thought I might as well dedicate a Cartoon Saturday to a collection of baaaaad cartoons about sheep ...

Who knew you could be put on hold even while counting sheep? ...

Little Bo Peep finally checked the right place ...

How else would you move your flock? ...

Where we get the wool for ugly holiday sweaters ...

That would explain it ...

Overheard at quitting time ...

Nude modeling for sheep art classes ...

What do you want to bet his name is "Ebenezer?" ...

Sheep parents worry, too ...

Why they decided to go with sled dogs, instead ...

And so ends another sheepish Cartoon Saturday ... hope you didn't mind having the wool pulled over your eyes. Have a good day and a great weekend, and come back tomorrow for Musical Sunday, in which we'll visit a singer who celebrated a birthday this past week. More thoughts then.

Bilbo