Hill Yes

I will vote for Hillary Clinton.  That should come as no surprise to those who have been reading this blog and Tardy Belle before this one.  But I live in Texas and that means most of my friends and neighbors, people I know and like, will either enthusiastically vote for Donald Trump or will vote for him as the lesser of two perceived evils.  This post is for my conservative friends, the folks who plan to vote for Trump, and serves less as an apology and more as an explanation of my Hillary support.  I believe I am not crazy and it is important to me that you know that I am not crazy.

I start with the following assumptions, any one of which you may challenge, but to practice full disclosure I must declare these up front.  Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are both human beings.  Ambitious human beings.  Neither are perfect.  Both have proven their humanity through a series of mistakes and half-truths and misdirections.  If we wait for a candidate who is perfect we will never vote.  Therefore, as I make a decision about voting, I discount the claims from the other side about the evil in each candidate.  I set their human traits aside.  I set aside the Republican talk about emails and Benghazi and the Democratic talk about walls, discrimination and tax returns.  I set their looks aside.  I set their ethnicity aside.  I set their gender aside.  They are human.  That should not be a variable in my decision making unless it is an extreme example of flawed human behavior like child molestation, murder, etc. 

So, unlike many of my fellow Americans, I do not believe in voting for the “best person”.  (I think it is real progress that we used to say we will vote for the best man.  Not this year.)  All candidates are human.  And it is impossible to really know a candidate.  We may know what their campaign headquarters wants us to know about both the candidate and the competition, but I really do not know Trump or Clinton as people.  To say I will vote for this person over that person because they are a better person is ludicrous.  To say I will vote for this person because of their gender or race or religious belief is an admission of prejudice, pre-judging, a practice I will not support.  And so, if I will not attempt to select a candidate based on what I think of them as people, how shall I choose?

The key variable in the selection process for me is philosophy.  I see myself as a protestant Christian.  When I move to a new town I do not check out the Catholic churches, the synagogues, or the mosques.  I check out protestant churches even if the most dynamic, impressive pastor around is Jewish I will not attend that church as it is not of my faith.  It is the same with politics.  I will not vote for the person based on affability or my personal connectivity to them, it will be the person who believes as I believe.

There are two major prevailing beliefs or philosophies in our nation, conservative and liberal.  Once I know if I am a conservative or a liberal, candidate selection and support becomes simple.  I see these philosophies through the following lens.  Both philosophies look to a system to resolve conflict, make decisions and promote health and well-being.  The conservative philosophy looks to the individual first to solve his or her own problems, and then to the market place to resolve all other issues and provide all other services.  The system conservatives fear the most and oppose the most is the “government.”  They oppose the growth of government and the intervention of government and the services provided by the government.  They would much prefer that individuals take care of themselves and that free enterprise take care of everything else.

Liberals on the other hand look to the government to solve problems, resolve conflicts and provide services.  Liberals do not fear government intervention, in fact, they support it in areas of injustice and poverty.  Liberals do not oppose the market in the ways that conservatives oppose the government, but liberals are skeptical of the market because those who make market decisions are not elected by the voters and those who control the market are more interested in making money than providing for the common good.  Hence, liberals see the market as immoral, an entity to be monitored.  If one can make money by cutting corners on production, paying labor less money, moving production overseas, ignoring consumer and worker safety, etc., etc. then the market will do so in the name of monetary gain regardless of the human cost .  Liberals will support market oversight and regulation, they will support providing aid to the hungry and shelter for the homeless and mental health support for the disturbed.  Liberals will support governmental provided services such as public education, law enforcement, water certification, food inspection, highway construction, and universal health care while conservatives tend to see all those programs as boondoggles at the expense of the tax payer.  If the government provided fewer services it would be smaller and cheaper leaving more money in the hands of those who have more money to begin with and need those services the least.

(As an aside, several things have fascinated me over the years.  First, conservatives perceive themselves to be the American super patriots while attacking their own government, shrinking their own government, and even shutting down their own government.  Second, despite all the research on government provided services, conservatives still believe that public sector services should be provided by the private sector.  They support charter schools and private sector prisons, etc.  And most amazing to me of all is that citizens who are employed by the government consider themselves conservatives despite the fact that their checks come from the government and from tax payers.  Teachers and law enforcement folks who consistently vote conservatively clearly must support the reactionary interpretation of the second amendment or they could not do such a good job of shooting themselves in the foot.)

As you know, or may have guessed, I am a liberal.  I have seen first-hand what happens when market forces are not monitored, when schools are not funded, when food inspection is not thorough, when work place safety is not enforced and when industry lays off American workers to move overseas to make more profit.  Our economical crash in 1929 happened after 8 years of conservative policies that were summarized by the expression, “What is good for business is good for the USA.”  Our economical crash in 2008 happened after 8 years of conservative policies that dramatically reduced government oversight of Wall Street and the banking industry.  Clearly every time we do that we head for a crash because the market is not ethical, it is not moral, and it will do whatever makes the most money for some very few people.

I love our country.  I love our government.  I love knowing I can turn on the faucet and drink the water.  I can safely buy meat and vegetables.  I can drive a car with required safety and anti-pollution features.  I can apply for work, attend school, open a bank account, and/or buy property without concern regarding my race, gender or religious preference.  I love driving down the interstate highways and seeing power grids.  I do not feel as though my freedom has been limited by the fact that I stop on red and go on green.  Yep, I’m a liberal. 

I understand if you make more than $350,000 per year voting conservative may be tempting in a self-serving sort of way.  If you make less than that and vote conservatively you are hurting yourself, but that is your prerogative.  I understand that if you think the main role of government should be to provide for the common defense and the government should get out of every other facet that you are a conservative.  If so, it is my hope that you have the funds to provide all your own health care and safe water and safe food and private education and your own law enforcement.  I do not understand if you are a conservative and oppose human beings coming to the this country who are responding either to the market, i.e., they come for more economical opportunity, or people who come here pursued and persecuted by terrorists and madmen who rule other governments.  It would seem to me that conservative philosophy would most support an influx of cheap labor and those who are persecuted by their governments.  But it is the liberals who have a hard time labeling human beings born on planet earth as aliens.

Bottom line is to whom do you turn to solve our problems, resolve conflicts, set foreign policy, and implement strategies to improve life in America?  If it is mostly private sector and you fear the government you are likely a conservative.  If it is the government and you believe we should monitor the private sector you are most likely a liberal.

So, Donald Trump is for the most part a conservative.  Hillary Clinton for the most part is a liberal.  Trump is not as conservative as Barry Goldwater, nor is Hillary as liberal as Bernie Sanders.  But Trump leans right and Clinton leans left.  My decision to support Hillary is based on my philosophy and the fact that she is most likely to implement my philosophy.  If that sounds logical to you, then you know I am not crazy.

If not, if you believe you should vote based on your guts and your bias, then I probably still seem crazy to you.  Just know, however, I may not be the crazy one.

Worder Boreding and Other Professional Development Tortures

Soon, if not already, teachers will be reporting back to work to initiate school year 2016-2017.  This annual migration is always full of anticipation, anxiety and dread.  There will be new staff to meet, a room to get ready, and plans to be made.  There will also likely be donuts and luncheons and that will be a good thing because it won’t be provided again for months and months.  And while teachers are totally mentally pre-occupied with preparing their rooms and organizing for kids yet to come, administrators may be planning a host of activities, presentations, speakers, etc., that will do more than rob teachers of the precious time they need.  Such activities may be pointless, or worse, harmful to the professional staff. 

The worst atrocities committed against professional educators may occur in the time set aside for their professional preparation.  Professional Development may earn the descriptor, “oxymoron” if non-professionals have planned it, or school administrators without training in staff development have planned it.  In many cases it is designed to meet the wants, wishes and needs of the administrators and the requirements of the state, and has virtually no benefit at all to the teachers. 

For a professional educator to return to work after a summer break, full of energy and ideas for his or her classroom and learn that the next few days will be spent in professional development hell is one of the great discouragers of teachers.  Some of these sessions will be excruciating.  They will be professional development torture.  I have identified and named a few:

Media Misery

Somebody, somewhere thought it would be a good idea to show a tape, a DVD, a movie to either inform or inspire staff.  So a bunch of people with college degrees gather in some spot where all can see or hear and sit zombie-like while some media plays.  Sadly, the research is very clear.  Such a shotgun approach is rarely heard by teachers.  Why would I want to know what motivates football teams when I teach 6^th grade math?  Why would I want to know how to clean blood borne pathogens when I will never be called on to do so?  This does not apply to me and I turn it off in my head.  And sadly if I am called on to address the issue because a kid has a nosebleed I do not remember what to do because the professional development was more like media misery than learning.  Some, however, will be seriously listening and taking notes.  They will be surprised to know that by the time kids show up they have forgotten all about the media, and come next June when they find the notes they will simply throw them away. 

This all makes perfect sense.  Asking returning staff to watch a disconnected movie while they are already feeling stress about the preparation for the coming year is like forcing a bride to watch an investment strategy tape at the rehearsal dinner.  She just doesn’t care.  Not now.  Other things are much more important.  Media misery is planned by folks who do not know professional development and thereby they torture their staff before the year really begins.

Computer Cruciation

Oh boy!  We bought new software this summer to take care of the problems we were having with the old software.  Of course, by the end of the year we all found work-arounds and everything was humming right along.  But we decided to install an entirely new system so that everyone can look like an idiot other than the IT guys and the superintendent who was told by other superintendents who do not have a clue that this is the software to have.  Teachers must learn this to report attendance, grades, etc. but they resent having this task forced on them when they have so much else to do.  Can’t we ever wait and let teachers select the software and plan the implementation process?  No.  Involving teachers in decision-making is too threatening to someone with a clipboard somewhere.  So even if the software is the latest and greatest and should help kids, handing it to me, telling me I have to learn it, and taking up my time before school really upsets teachers and rightly so.  So we torture teachers on a desktop, or a lap top, or on a tablet of some sort. Regardless, it is torture. 

(If teachers are required to watch something on a computer to learn it, perhaps to take a test at the end, then all the comments about media misery apply plus testing people like giant Accelerated Reader kids.  How insulting!)

PowerPoint Persecution

I was the director of staff development in a large mid-urban school district in 1987.  I remember the arrival of a Macintosh computer on my desk in central office.  It had the first iteration of PowerPoint installed, as the software was written first for the Mac.  It was so easy and intuitive.  I could develop a presentation, add media, move slides around, etc., and print my presentation as a handout.  In other words, everything I knew to be wrong with presentations was now made easier by PowerPoint and I used it because it was so pretty and easy.  I used it for years and years until it dawned on me that by projecting stuff I might be undermining what I knew to be good professional development techniques. 

It is hard to go to a convention, a workshop or a faculty meeting without seeing a PowerPoint. In some cases these projections promote real learning and real professional development.  In other cases they are just fancy ways to tell participants to sit down and shut up because I know stuff you don’t know and I’m going to tell you using these fancy slides on my computer.  In such a case, teachers and others suffer from PowerPoint Persecution, another form of professional development torture.

Worder Boreding

I have saved the most typical and most tortuous strategy for last.  Talking.  Speaking.  Lecturing.  Using words to bore teachers to near death.  Worder boreding.  Invite a guest speaker or a so-called motivational speaker, have a captive audience sit at his or her feet, and for 30 minutes to hours on end have him or her tell them their story, their specialness, and what the audience ought to do because the speaker is so special. 

If this strategy worked it would work at church.  It doesn’t.  People do not leave church, sell all they have and hop on the next boat to remote regions to witness.  If it does not happen in church, it is not going to happen.  A motivational speaker is not hired to motivate staff because he or she cannot and their mere presence makes it less likely that staff will be motivated.  A motivational speaker is a person who is motivated to entertain an audience at some exorbitant fee and never be held accountable for outcomes.  It is a great life to be a motivational speaker.  And yet it eventually dawns on the audience that if I am in an organization where I am not valued, where promotion is based on who you know rather than what you do, where prestige is determined by how well one brown-noses, then no amount of motivational speakers are going to encourage me this coming year.  If the boss hires a motivational speaker it is an admission that the boss cannot motivate.  In fact, because the boss brought them in is an admission that something is wrong.  Frequently, what is wrong is a total misunderstanding of a professional organization devoted to learning.  If there is a morale problem or a motivation problem let’s take the easy way out and hire a speaker rather than really address the issues.  I have observed that the weaker the system the more they talk about motivation.  Stronger systems that exist to promote involvement, purposeful work, and shared decision-making do not evidence poor motivation and do not seek to import such a quack.  Easy for me to say as I made quite a bit of money as a motivational speaker, but that is another story.

Anyone who believes what they say to a group is likely to make a difference is deceiving themselves and torturing the group.  That is not how a sermon works.  That is not how a lecture in a classroom works.  That is not how a good faculty meeting works.  It takes leaders trained in collaborative decision making and not leaders trained in water boarding or worder boreding.

So, what are some good professional development techniques?  Glad you asked. 

Content specific staff development is almost always powerful.  Let the English teachers meet with each other and perhaps an outside facilitator to talk about the issues in teaching English and where they might find new resources to help.  That strategy works great

Study groups work great.  A group of professionals adopt a source of inspiration and read it and talk about it and seek to apply it to their professional lives.

Shared observation works, sometimes with mentors, sometimes with coaches.  When a teacher knows he or she has a professional friend who is more experienced and more successful then helpful ideas are welcomed.  Not so much if it is a guru from the state education agency or a Hollywood star neither of whom have ever taught what I teach.

Action research works.  Teachers are puzzled by either the success or lack of success of something they are doing in the classroom.  As a group they seek to discover research relevant to their puzzle and collect their own data to form their own research conclusions.  This can be so powerful that it is scary.

Sharing days where teachers of similar subjects and similar kids can share what they do, how they do it, and what resources they have.  Technology can be embedded in such a day.  The most powerful staff development is when teachers talk with fellow teachers.

Perhaps you noticed that in none of those powerful, successful professional development strategies is an administrator required to say or do anything other than unlock the doors, turn on the lights and make sure the resources are available.  That is very, very hard for some administrators who suffer from the notion that they were promoted to administration because they knew something teachers did not know and teachers were eager to sit at their feet and learn.  Poppycock.  Want to be a successful administrator?  Serve teachers, serve kids.  Bossing teachers and bossing kids does not work.

It is my fervent wish that every teacher returning for duty this fall walks into a building and/or a system that understands the above and is not likely to torture them in professional development.  If the administration has been trained, has knowledge, and has wisdom there is an odds on chance that teachers will in fact grow in such a rich environment.  The opposite, sadly, is also true.

If we plan pre-school days to support and serve teachers rather than to give them some administrative message we are light years ahead in the process of establishing a successful school system.  Any other strategy may work at General Motors or Alcoa, but those are not professional organizations and to take advice from folks in the private sector on such critical issues is tantamount to allowing the mother of the groom to run the wedding. 

Big mistake.

Donald Trump and Archie Bunker

The Norman Lear TV show, “All in the Family” was on the air throughout my twenties.  From 1971 to 1979 Archie Bunker played brilliantly by Carroll O’Connor, embodied the persona of an angry, working class, uneducated bigot.  He assumed the absolute worst about anyone who was not like him and his bombasts were classic.  His son-in-law, Meathead played by Rob Reiner, was the voice of reason, education and open-mindedness.  Meathead cornered Archie all the time and though Archie was a bigot it was pretty clear that thanks to his son-in-law he was coming around if only a little bit.

Some of the time I watched the show I laughed, but I was more prone to get angry at Archie and his angry, negative, prejudicial outlook on the world.  The anger did me no good and surely did not change Archie.  At other times I was just sad knowing there were American citizens who felt this way about women, and minorities, and poor people and the government.  But as I reflect on Archie Bunker I came to a realization.

Donald Trump is Archie Bunker.  His angry, negative, bombastic view of the world totally aligns with Archie’s view of the world 45 years ago, and his speech at the RNC could have played as a political rally in Archie’s neighborhood in Queens.  The biggest difference is Carroll O’Connor knew better and was just playing a part on a TV show.  When Archie and Edith sang the theme song, “Those Were the Days,” they were reflecting on a time gone by when things were good.  And that was In 1971!  Makes sense that Trump continues the theme in the same ignorant vein as Archie.

Theme Song Lyrics:

Boy the way Glen Miller played 

Songs that made the hit parade. 

Guys like us we had it made, 

Those were the days. 

And you knew who you were then, 

Girls were girls and men were men, 

Mister we could use a man 

Like Herbert Hoover again. 

Didn't need no welfare state, 

Everybody pulled his weight. 

Gee our old LaSalle ran great. 

Those were the days.

I have been in shock at the Trump candidacy.  In my wildest dreams I never thought he had a chance.  Surely there was nowhere near enough American citizens who are that angry, that ill-informed, that prejudiced.  And yet, here he is, an Archie Trumper, running for President. 

Sadly, there is no Meathead that Donald hears.  There are no Jeffersons next door as Donald is ensconced in wealth.  He lacks an Edith who will subtly point out his logical flaws.  When he sings “All in the Family” there are more people excluded than included.  Nothing and no one will move Donald Trump toward awakening and enlightenment and any effort to do so will result in a firing or a divorce.  In that way he remains a character sadder and more despicable than Archie Bunker.  

Newt Thinking

Newt Gingrich, the former Republican Speaker of the House, has proposed that we (the FBI, NSA?) interview every Muslim in the USA and ask if they support Sharia, or Islamic Law.  If so, they should be deported.  When I stopped laughing I started crying.  If this is in any way a good idea on moral grounds, legal grounds or religious grounds then it should be applied in other ways as well.

This is what I propose:  We (whoever that is) should interview every Christian in the USA and ask if they believe the Bible is the word of God, inerrant, and should be taken literally.  If so, they should be deported.  Why would we want folks here who clearly are delusional, uneducated, supporters of child abuse, gender abuse, slavery and the death penalty without trial?  Sounds like a really scary, unhealthy group to me so let’s get them out of here.

I am not sure how far Newt has thought this through, but whatever strategy he has for deporting Muslims should work with fundamentalist Christians as well.  We should deport them to their country of origin whether it be Iraq, Britain, or the Philippines regardless of the number of generations that have lived here as Americans.  We should strip them of their American citizenship because they believe something that we perceive to be harmful to the rest of us.  We should abolish the notion that individuals have the fundamental right to believe what they choose to believe.  If individuals believe something that is not consistent with what we call our best interest we should banish them. 

This perspective is so extreme, so un-American, so immoral, and so un-constitutional that any nation that would take such suggestions seriously is in no way a democratic free nation.  It is a nation that practices “right think” and the consequences of enacting such legislation is more totalitarian than anything we have seen since Adolph Hitler and Idi Amin.  Those men are of the same mind as Newt.

If a recognized leader and spokesperson of a major political party can propose such an atrocity we should be afraid.  Be very afraid.  In terms of philosophy and morality, Newt resides at about the same rung on the evolutionary thought ladder as his name sake amphibian does on the evolutionary animal kingdom ladder.  His proposal is a tail that should not have been generated.

Obama is God

We are experiencing trying times.  Law enforcement officers are shot on the job.  Horrible, scary events that should never happen.  Unarmed men and women are shot by police.  Horrible, scary events that should never happen.  We see all this as a new problem.  It is not.  We have had separate but unequal races in this country for generations.  More of one race in prison.  More of one race dies via gunshot wounds.  More of one race experiences unemployment.  More of one race in colleges.  More of one race teaching in the classrooms.  More of one race in law enforcement.  We are lopsided.  We can scream all day that these differences are due to the behaviors of one race more than another.  Perhaps.  But we should be screaming that we must stop judging people by skin pigment, hair style, holes poked in their bodies, ink injected under their skin, and the relationship between their belly buttons and the top of their pants.  (I have contended all along that if teenage girls simply laughed at and refused to date any teenage boy who allowed his underwear to show above his belt the fad would disappear quickly.)

The problems are huge, both races have responsibilities.  Both races have tough steps to take to fix it because both races must modify their culture and their beliefs to end the disparity in data that confirms one race is treated differently and/or behaves differently than another.  That will be very hard.  Or so I thought.

Until I listened to my conservative friends.  Perhaps I should say my very conservative friends.  My moderately conservative friends and my liberal friends are not promoting the same message.  Just those folks on the far right.  Only they have seen the light.  And here is what they are saying.

The violence in our country is Obama’s fault.  Shooting police officers is Obama’s fault.  Increased racial tension is Obama’s fault.  Still no affordable universal health insurance is Obama’s fault.  Proliferation of semi-automatic rifles is Obama’s fault.  Probably sexual harassment at Fox News is Obama’s fault.  He caused it all.  He did it.  He is the villain!

If they are right, then Obama is God.  I have been praying to God to stop the violence, but Obama still made it happen.  I have been praying to God to stop senseless shootings of suspects and police, but Obama still made it happen.  Therefore I guess I should agree with my conservative friends that not only is Obama at fault, he is more powerful than we ever imagined.  More powerful than the God I followed.  It is time to worship Obama, pray to Obama, and ask him please to stop all the violence, all the killings.  If he caused it, he can stop it.  I am so surprised that enterprising right wingers have not marched out evidence of Obama’s deity status which should be easier for them to get than his birth certificate, and establish the Church of Obama, tax free. 

Why, now that we know Obama is a god the violence in France must be his fault too!  In fact, violence everywhere must be his doing.  Intolerance of other races everywhere must be his fault too!  Even global warming must be his fault. 

Yes dear conservatives, such a powerful deity merits our awe and respect.  Thank you for enlightening me.

21st Century Myths

We have parked a spaceship in orbit around Jupiter, discovered the gene attributed to aging, found a 9^th planet orbiting our sun, call almost anyone anywhere any time, seek and find information in microseconds, and developed self-driving cars.  Sounds like a scientific renaissance beyond the wildest dreams of folks a century ago.  And yet, I believe it is not our science that continues to keep us in turmoil.  It is our mythology.  These myths are so deeply held that for some even the possibility of questioning the myths leads to anger and outrage by the high priests of the myth.  And yet, until we release the myths from our belief systems we will be stuck in a state of constant conflict and self-destruction. 

A myth is a deeply held belief that is not grounded in fact, but is used to explain events and processes that are not superficially understood.  Myths can be self-fulfilling.  If I believe everything you say is a falsehood, then I will continue to find your statements to be false whether they are or not.  If a police officer believes you merit a ticket and follows you long enough, you will receive a ticket.  Neither of these beliefs are necessarily true, but can be self-fulfilling and thereby create a stronger bond between the myth and the myth believer.  Attempting to apply reason to the bond between myth and myth believer is a painful process often rejected by the myth believer.  Those who hold myths to be true relinquish their belief only in extreme circumstances and with much pain.  I believe the vast majority of the conflicts observed on the nightly news and our inability to work collaboratively together is due to those myths that are so deeply ingrained that we cannot fathom the truth.

Here are, as I see them, the major myths of this century:

Myth 1:  Competition is a good thing.  Through competition all things improve.

No matter how much data we have that shows this myth to be false the myth continues to be widely held.  Though competition may be a good thing when playing games, it tends to be destructive in every other arena.  The drive to “win” and the fear of “loss” embolden the myth holders to believe that any behavior is alright if it is in the name of winning.  Cheating, lying, misleading are all tolerable in a culture obsessed with competition and winning.  Professional sports are riddled with examples of such behavior.  The market is competitive, but it is immoral.  If winning means making more money then immoral acts are sure to follow in the practice of the myth holders.  If anyone wins, everyone else loses.  The end result of all competition is one winner and we know how monopolies operate.

Competition is destructive in all the areas we value most.  It is destructive in families.  It is destructive in relationships.  It is destructive in public schools.  It is destructive in religious belief systems.  It is destructive among nations.  Until we recognize that there is only a small set of circumstances in which competition may be a good thing and recognize the myth for what it is, a myth, then we will continue to have conflict and self-destruction.  We desperately need an era of collaboration.

Myth 2:  Knowledge is a synonym for wisdom.

The availability of Google, Siri, Cortana, Watson, et. al is wonderful.  At no other time in our history has the accumulated knowledge of human beings been so readily accessible.  But accessing facts is not wisdom.  Because I can instantly look up the number of students who failed a state standardized math test last year does not begin to truly provide insight into the nature of the test, the nature of the instruction, and the nature of the student.  Each of those variables are highly complex; so complex they produce a virtual infinite array of possibilities.  And yet there are so many who will look at those test data and assume they understand, assume they know all they need to know, and then pretend to propose strategies for improvement.  Such folks are truly fact morons.  If I hear one more legislator, one more billionaire, one more free enterprise charter school shyster announce that they have the answer I will bust.  These folks are morons.  They have stepped outside their field of knowledge, assumed that armed with Cliff’s Notes of facts they know all they possess the encyclopedia of knowledge need to know and proceed to continue the destruction of public schools via ignorance.  These folks do not know what they do not know and they do not know that there is such a thing as stuff they do not know.  Google cannot tell you what love feels like any more than it can tell you what a year of academic success looks like.  If you think it can, you too are a fact moron.

And yet for folks like Dan Patrick and Arne Duncan and John King and Bill Gates, etc., moron based fact finding is a hobby that hurts us.  Please stop.  Please know that you do not know.  That what you do know is not wisdom.  What you do not know you do not know is the core of the matter.  For every simple problem there is a simple solution and it is wrong.  Knowledge and facts are great, but it takes time and synthesis to grow wise with this knowledge.  We can ill afford further decisions or plans proposed by the un-wise.

Myth 3:  Accumulating personal wealth and/or power is the purpose of life.

In our secular, consumer based economic system acquiring stuff is viewed as success.  Million dollar homes, yachts, fleets of cars, etc., are sources of envy and yearning.  So much so that when there were little to no restrictions on banks and consumers borrowed way over their heads to acquire those goodies our entire economic system almost collapsed.  We have not learned.  We ship the labor portion of operations overseas because it is cheaper.  If it is cheaper, while triggering unemployment here we have created more wealth among the management of the company.  If wealth is the purpose of life, then any responsibility for our fellow human beings must take second place.  Or lower.  Sadly some do not learn this until much later as they face serious disease and the death that will come to us all.  Pursuit of wealth at the expense of values is simple prostitution.

Myth 4:  My belief system is right no matter what the facts are.

Both the Quran and the Bible make it clear that people who believe differently than the proponents of those two faiths may be subject to slavery and execution.  In that case, if for Muslims it is OK to kill Christians and for Christians it is OK to kill Muslims we will have an ongoing holy war.  Worse, the jihad fuels internal inquisitions.  How Christian are you?  Which sect of which belief do you follow?  While some Christians attempt to have the government reflect and support their version of Christianity some Muslims are warring to establish Muslim law as the law of their land.  There is little or no difference in those who want Sharia and those who want Christian principles and icons supported by the government.  Regardless of your belief, my belief system is right no matter what you believe or what the facts are.

I know folks who still believe Obama is a non-American Muslim.  There will never be enough facts to convince such morons that the truth lies elsewhere.  I know folks who still believe the earth is 6,000 years old and humans and dinosaurs simultaneously shared the planet.  There will never be enough facts to convince such fools that the truth lies elsewhere.  Yes, evolution is real and it is factually accurate.  And to make it worse, each of these irrational, idiotic belief systems holds up those who most stridently defend their ignorance as heroes or martyrs.  

Belief systems are myths.  Simple.  It is as hard to convince a Muslim that they believe just one of several sets of beliefs on planet earth and that no one can “prove” if any of the beliefs are true, other than the self-fulfilling mythology I discussed before.  Regardless, our underlying conflicts on the planet revolve around conflicting belief systems whether they are religious, economic or political.  In each arena, the believers of the myth hold so fast to their beliefs that solutions grow more and more impossible to attain.  In the Middle East it is OK to marry a 10 year old girl, beat your wife and execute infidels.  It is bad to dance, drink and have fun.

What shall we do?  What shall rational, thinking, open, honest folks do when confronted with these myths?  There is, I know, a temptation to run, to hide, to isolate, especially from the standard bearers of whatever myth you encountered.  We cannot do that.  To succumb to mythology ensures our future will not be rational.  Our future will be bloody and backward.  Despite our technology, we can easily enter another middle ages.

We should do two things.  First, we must recognize that each of these myths benefits someone, especially if everyone believes the myth.  Secondly, we must shift the burden of proof from the rational folks to the myth holders.  That can be done fairly simply.  I do not have to prove Zeus does not exist.  If you believe in Zeus then the burden of proof lies with you to prove he is real, not just that you believe he is real and you have personal internal non-observable interactions with him, but proof that we all can see.  If you believe that belief in Zeus is superior to belief in Ra, then you must first accomplish the proof outlined above, then a similar proof for Ra, and then demonstrate in what ways Zeus is superior.  If you believe all democrats simply want is to tax the rich, fund the poor and make government huge thereby taking away the rights of Americans, you are going to have to prove that, not just think it or believe it.  If you believe all Republicans are bigoted, white, rich people who do not want to pay taxes and want the government off their backs so they can make more money you are going to have to prove that.  If you believe that a socialist approach to solving economic issues is evil, you will have to prove that.  If you believe that a free enterprise approach to solving economic issues is moral, you will have to prove that.  And on and on.

Clearly, no one who believes these myths will be able to prove they are correct.  Hopefully, learning that we are all human and we each carry around a set of beliefs that inhibit us from working together successfully will be enlightening.  Hopefully, in time of conflict, solutions will appear from reason, not from enforcement of one mythology over another. Myth based decision making and action must stop.  We must view it as uncivilized, backward and harmful.  If we can do that, there is truly hope for the future.

Orlando Lament

I am sick to my stomach about the shootings in Orlando.  I am deeply saddened.  I am angry.  There can be no rational excuse for this behavior.  There can only be sick, intolerant, sociopathic reasons a person with a gun shot and killed Christian Grimmie after a concert, and a person with two guns shot and killed 49 people in a nightclub.  If I am sick, if I am mourning, if I am angry, there must be people who are celebrating.

We know the nightclub shooter was an ISIS supporter.  ISIS is celebrating.  Here was an attack on American infidels made more justifiable in that the club catered to LGBT customers.  ISIS has absolutely no tolerance for people who do not believe as they believe and the murder of those who think differently than them is religiously justified.  I suspect, however, that ISIS has no celebration over Christina’s death other than their deep belief that women should remain covered and obedient and low profile and subservient.  Christina was none of those things.  For some reason this gunman was anti-Christina and we do not know why, but like the nightclub gunman he had issues with Christina so he killed her.  I do not like you, you should die.  I do not agree with you, you should die.  I do not support what you stand for, you should die.  Sick, sick, sick.  More so if religion somehow provides the justification for such hideous action.

But none of these celebratory groups are a great surprise.  They are so far removed from mainstream American thought that we expect deviant, socially ill behavior from them.  But what about groups that may celebrate who are more mainstream?  What about the groups that support the pre-requisites for such killings?

For example, I am heterosexual but I support lesbian, bisexual, gay and transgender rights.  I do not believe folks should be punished for their sexual orientation or identity.  Therefore, I celebrated the new bathroom guidelines allowing folks to use a restroom based on their sexual identity.  I support the right, I support the result.  I do not celebrate the hostility that has emerged from these rules, but I support the daily choice that people with different sexual identities can practice.  Every male who sees himself as a female in a ladies’ room and every female who sees herself as a male in a men’s room becomes cause for celebration, not fear or anger or attack.  That is not true for the intolerant.  Like ISIS they have a set of beliefs and if one does not subscribe to those beliefs one is subject to discrimination, harassment, even attacks.  Again, all made worse by their religious beliefs.  I see no difference in the men guarding women’s bathrooms than ISIS members attacking infidels.

The Bible and the Quran agree on the nature of homosexuality.  Both the Old and New Testament declare such action as sinful, so much so that homosexuals should be stoned to death.  The Quran says exactly the same thing.  The modern day Christian, however, has cherry-picked the Bible so that only modern belief systems are supported.  Modern day Muslims not so much.

And about the guns:  I am simply flabbergasted by the defense of easy access to firearms.  I see no logic, except perhaps fear and power, two not so grand motivations.  If we can agree that mentally disturbed people and people with violent tendencies should not own weapons, then does it not follow that anyone who wants an AR-15 is mentally disturbed with violent tendencies?  Applying for a license with a background check and eliminating the purchase of semi-automatic military grade weapons is not in any way an effort to take guns out of the hands of hunters and sportsmen.  (I do believe there is a good argument regarding the stability of people who shoot mammals with high-powered rifles from a safe distance.  So sad.  You want to mount a buffalo head in your office?  Get on a horse with a bow and arrow and chase one down.  You cannot claim testosterone or skill for high powered weaponry shot from a distance any more than there is credit for shooting fish in a barrel.)

If your religious beliefs promote the hatred and scorn of some people and not others, it is time to consider changing beliefs.  If your sense of constitutional rights includes the purchase of weapons anytime, anywhere by anyone, then you should be an equally strong supporter of other constitutional rights like freedom of speech, freedom from religion, freedom from self-incrimination, and protection of minority rights.  My sense is that the very people who want unlimited interpretation of the 2^nd amendment are very quick to oppose 1^st and 14^th amendment rights.

Anytime anyone, anywhere shoots and kills others, or promotes the shooting and killing of others, or supports the banishment of others who simply have a different belief system, such a person proves themselves to be anti-religious and anti-American.  I’m sick of such folks.  I shall not attack them, I shall not harass them and I definitely shall not shoot them.  I hope to provoke their thinking.  They have an absolute right to such an opinion even if they are wrong.

And that is what real freedom is.