An Open Letter to Bill and Melinda Gates

Self-image is, indeed, a profound component in one's ability to learn. This revelation can create an entire narrative about our American identity and the means by which so many of our children are afforded an education. I ask you to reflect on the fact that a justice of our Supreme Court posed the narrowest and most unimaginable questions this week. And once the transcripts were made available, our media lauded him for not having made any assumptions, but merely posing questions about what had been deemed a thoughtful academic critique of affirmative action. I ask any white parent to spend time reflecting on having to explain that critique to their children and attributing it to them for their whiteness. I then ask those same parents to have a moment where they can explain to their children (after having found a way to explain it to themselves) why this argument is considered thoughtful and where, in 2015, this would have a place in a Supreme Court proceeding to determine if we are giving an equal chance at education to all of our children.

I could write a book about America's history and only focus on the myriad failings of 'reconstruction' after the Civil War, but its been done. And those who are intelligent can see that it has failed repeatedly and the very least among us with the loudest voices have been those to keep us from ever having found success. Those who take a reasoned look at our history realize that the failings were deliberate and targeted. No one with the capacity for critical thought would accept the stereotypes our society has allowed to permeate our collective psyche. But they are there. As a collective. And their maintenance are an imperative for those who use them to wield power, to the destruction of us all.

I applaud and genuinely respect your global initiative and I ask you to consider the role of America in that initiative. Regardless of whether or not it is warranted, America is seen as a world leader. Possibly the world leader. As such, what progress do you expect to see in the world when its chosen (or at least self-appointed) leader negates the histories and rights of its own citizens? If we cannot bring ourselves to finally offer a sincere Reconstruction 150 years after its initial attempt, what hope does the rest of the world have? One needs only look at the present GOP Presidential campaign field to realize we are regressing. We find the media and the citizens who are given leadership roles are celebrating condemnations of those with no means of defending themselves. We are witnessing expressions of hate with an acceptance of violence and terrorism against people of a specific religion and women who visit health clinics. We are allowing all conversations to end with an insistence that we should be building personal arsenals to defend against those monsters our own society has created. I, too, believe in global citizenship. But I am living in the country that you are compelling toward that understanding which lacks civility, while demanding its exceptionalism.

As you wrote this month regarding the fixed mindset and questioning your own, I ask you to expand that question to that of our nation. What have we accepted as truths about our capacity to move ourselves forward and, thus, determined unattainable? At present, we have inner cities that are falling apart. The children growing in those cities have few opportunities for education, much less advancement. If we allow a fixed mindset to embrace that as a truth, we disavow our own capacity for growth. We have a Supreme Court Justice who does not find it remotely outlandish to question the lesser capacity of those children. If society can accept that as truth, what hope do those children have? If society will dismiss and ridicule those children who march to demand that their lives matter when they come of age, what chance does our society have? I compel you to finance the movement forward that America must have before a global initiative can ever find success. I ask you to fund and expand on the grants you have been given to build our inner cities and make them a priority. I ask you to consider how the rest of your initiative will be successful if, once they find meaningful progress, the world is still led by a backward nation celebrating those who mean to denounce its own citizens and fray the very bootstraps they're meant to be pulling themselves up by.

I have no position in this or any community. I have no agenda beyond that of offering thoughtful discussion to those who hear too many irrational conversations. I have no platform or grant for you to fund. I do, however, have a voice. And I hope that my voice will reach enough people as to raise this idea to you:

(I ask that you allow my own acknowledged naivete and the simplicity in which I offer this plea to be part of my charm and spend no more time on them. Instead, I ask you to spend quiet reflection on the truth I am offering and your own capacity to grant our nation the only chance it will ever have at reparations and genuine progress).

The only way that a society, finding itself content with ignoring its own atrocities and blaming the victims of its arrogance and ignorance, can move forward is for a profound action outside of its own will. No community is going to vote to raise taxes to an extreme so as to correct the failings of a nation blind to its own hypocrisy since its inception. Your foundation can afford to get schools built in neighborhoods with little opportunity. Your foundation can have them peopled with incredible educators and give them otherwise unattainable resources. Your foundation has the voice to compel those surrounding communities to contribute time, wealth and energy to these efforts. You have the voice to remind the country that our only chance for true exceptionalism begins with embracing and lifting up our own children. All of our children. 

Also, if you could fund an initiative to get the word out to the country about the fact that the Equal Rights Amendment was never passed, it'd be great. I feel confident that if women understood this simple truth, we could take it from there.

Thank you. Most sincerely.

1985

There are memories from childhood which are so vivid that when I recount them and find my audience is unable to remember, it pisses me off. It is strange, probably, but it is almost as if that was such a poignant moment in my life, it feels either wasted or less relevant if I cannot share it with someone who was there. Of the many memories from decades ago which seem to live in my mind as a near perfect reel, the one that not only continues to haunt me but seems to have most defined me as a person was in May of 1985. The memory is only mine. My whole family was there and none of them seemed to have experienced it so profoundly as to even remember it with me.

I have relayed this story a lot lately. I was only diagnosed with a panic disorder last year. The fact that it took 41 years to find that diagnosis is, to say the very least, peculiar. My first memory of an attack, of sort, was when I was 12. I was in the living room waiting for the Disney movie to come on (we didn't have on-demand back in the day and were offered a single helping of Disney once a week). I went in to the living room after dinner and whatever was on the television when I turned it on was so upsetting to me that by the time the rest of the family came in to sit down for our Sunday evening entertainment, I was bawling. My dad was angry, as I recall (although I now realize that a lot of his emotions seemed like anger to me then and he was probably frustrated by this child he could not understand), and demanded, "What are you crying about?" I pointed to the black and white footage on the television of a large pit with naked skin-and-bone bodies being bulldozed on top of one another into it.

I had no idea what I was looking at. My fathers curt reply to my response, "What is that?" was a quick, "That is from the Holocaust." I had no idea what the Holocaust was and my plea for him to explain it warranted a, "If you don't want to look at it turn it off." I could not stop crying and as my father was then angry with me for having been upset, my sob turned into that mess where you can't even catch your breath. I set myself off to bed rather than ruin the family's evening with Disney.

I did not sleep that entire night.

The few minutes of footage that I had seen of this film terrified me. It had a name. My father gave it a name. It is called a Holocaust. That means it is a thing that exists in the world. Those people who had families and friends had somehow come to a place in their lives where this was their end. And it had a name. And it existed.

My father checked on me several times that night to see if I had settled down. I was eventually able to stop crying but I had not been able to stop thinking about it and worrying about those people and wondering what you have to do to end up in a place like that. I wanted to protect all of my loved ones from having to die like that. I simply could not grasp the fact that this Holocaust existed. And it must have been a common event or my father wouldn't have explained it to me so casually. The world was terrifying to me in a way that it had never been before (and I had also recently had similar, but not as overwhelming revelations about slavery in history class and children being kidnapped by the movie Adam).

Of course, my fathers quick dismissal didn't mean that the Holocaust was a common occurrence in the world. It only meant that my father saw everything as a matter of fact and had no capacity to deliver information in a way that would be specific to this very sensitive audience. I have been 30 years now on this path to understand the Holocaust. I watch every documentary that I ever learn about. I have read many books. I can now rationalize that neither the next movie nor book will offer me the light bulb to make it all make sense to me. But I can also understand with age and historical context that this was a very specific moment in a very ugly time in World history which is quite singular in its evil and circumstance.

Today I spent the day watching documentaries on Amazon. I happened upon a Frontline video of a documentary they had released about the Holocaust in 1985. I started the movie and thought, 'this could be it.' That would certainly be the year that the memory of my first anxiety attack happened. And I have never been able to tell the story completely because even my own mind always struggled to remember what exactly I had seen. I can now say, without a doubt, that I must have turned the television on after dinner and it would have already been set on PBS.

In 1985, Frontline aired a documentary which had been a project started 40 years prior by a coalition of US and British Army filmmakers. Alfred Hitchcock even participated and refused to take pay for it because of its importance. For reasons unknown (I've found several speculations but nothing seems to have been settled), the film was never finished. In 1985 PBS put the unfinished reels together and left many minutes of completely unnarrated film. It sounds like an unprofessional piece to have not had it completed until many who had been involved were gone and so much was unknown about why the project had been abandoned in the first place. The fact that there are many minutes with no narration certainly seem strange, but that is the strength of the piece. You don't need the words. The entire point of this piece is to document the moment and place in history where humanity had been forfeit.

I can now tell you, having finished this documentary, that the footage at the end is the exact memory I have seen as I retold this story throughout my life. This is the moment in my life where my heart broke and my mind raced and my soul reached out for something to give me understanding of the world. It has haunted me ever since.

After having seen this film in its entirety as an adult, my constant demands that the sonsofbitches on the right who like to compare every aspect of the political world which might not happen to be going their way to the Holocaust must stop is now something more of an insistence. I literally can not abide their hate and conflation of history and propaganda. I can not let it exist.

I beg you to save this on your computer and watch it. It is an hour long and it is probably the most painful thing you can imagine ever seeing. But it is an imperative. We must allow our outrage to equal and exceed their disregard. We must allow our voices to be louder than theirs. There are no words powerful enough to ever explain this film. I feel confident that it would have the same affect if you watched it on mute. Our humanity dissipates a little bit more when we allow this memory to be negated by their drawing unfounded parallels.

Please watch this and shout at the top of your lungs every time Carson, Cruz or Huckabee determine that any perceived slight to their rigid societal standards should be compared to the Holocaust. Every time they get away with this shit, the impact of these truths dissipates a little more. And it creates an environment where we won't see it coming if we ever do find ourselves heading down a similar path.



CLICK HERE TO SEE THE MOVIE OR SAVE IT TO SEE SOON

There Is A War On Women! And We Are Losing!

The right goes out of its way to make a mockery of the phrase 'War on Women.' They are desperate to spread the word that the real war is being waged by the left because by claiming there is a movement against us we are creating victims out of women, instead of heroes. In their conflated logic, either we can promote all women to equality or just celebrate those who have already made it there. This makes as much sense as the rest of their rhetoric so I will just leave it right there. In their desperate attempt to protect American women in this war, the Regressive Party is presently attempting to pass a law that is literally unconstitutional. Although the Supreme Court held in its Roe V Wade decision that abortions were legal and the states could not decide until the time that the fetus could be deemed 'viable,' it offered no specificity on the term. Six years later, in Colautti V Franklin the court told the states (and has not since changed its opinion):  

“[N]either the legislature nor the courts may proclaim one of the elements entering into the ascertainment of viability—be it weeks of gestation or fetal weight or any other single factor—as the determinant of when the State has a compelling interest in the life or health of the fetus.

Abortions after 20 weeks make up 1% of those performed annually. They are done out of necessity, not on a whim. Women have these procedures because they have been determined necessary by the doctor and the patient after having discussed health concerns. Many birth defects cannot even be detected until 20 weeks with an ultrasound. And most insurance companies will not even pay for ultrasounds until 20 weeks so the line is drawn right there, isn't it? What if you can't have a doctors appointment until the very day of your 20 weeks? What if you cannot get in until the following week? What if the doctor tells you on the day of your 20th week that your child has a birth defect and you have to decide immediately? Do you have time to go home and discuss options with your family? Will the doctor perform the surgery that very day? The obvious answer is: NO. Of course, no intelligent person is having this discussion and only irrational people are screaming about nonsense meant to distract anyone from having  meaningful reflection on the human beings (those which are already actually alive) who are left in these situations and what we would be allowing them to go through if this bullshit passes Congress.

These are the women who have 20+ week abortions

All rational discussions can only begin right here: Abortions are a legal medical procedure. Once you begin in the correct frame of mind, a thoughtful human being has a lot of questions to ask themselves and, more importantly, their society:

Why is it that in America we have had legal and safe abortions for over 40 years and have had to fight so hard to maintain that right? Why are our 'representatives' allowed to create laws to limit and restrict our rights? Why are they allowed to go on a witch hunt and determine Planned Parenthood is the purveyor of all evil in the country and attack them so blatantly? None of the funding for abortions is paid for by federal funds. That reminder comes up every time that we have the Planned Parenthood argument. Although it is an important aside to this specific argument, it also begs the question: Why? It is a legal right. Why are they allowed to deny funding of a legally legitimate health care procedure?

Why are states allowed to pass laws to create a waiting period? and consent? and limit where a procedure can be performed? and dictate the policies of the hospitals/clinics performing the surgeries? and force women to listen to an ultrasound or read specific literature? 

The answers are simple. And tragic. 

Roe V Wade was decided by the Supreme Court in 1973. The objective of the anti-choice activists and politicians has been very singular ever since: Have it overturned. They take every opportunity they can find to challenge any aspect of the ruling they think there is a precedent for (or they can have a state create for them) and their steadfast objective has been successful. The Supreme Court has repeatedly allowed the cases to come before it and each time they have the verbiage and the meanings behind those rulings have made the statues more hazy. The Regressives, if nothing else, are masters of word play and repeatedly concoct ways to dismantle the ruling one piece at a time.

In 1992, the Supreme Court ruled on Planned Parenthood of SE Pennsylvania V Casey, where three centrist judges (Kennedy, O'Connor and Souter) wrote a joint opinion which remind us of something that will be true for as long as radicals try to limit women's rights:

"The Constitution serves human values and while the effect of reliance on Roe cannot be exactly measured, neither can the certain costs of overruling Roe for people who have ordered their thinking and living around that case be dismissed.

Although reflection of the opinion quote above can give us all pause and remind us of the truths about objectives, ultimately the Supreme Court decision in Casey created so many holes in the language of Roe V Wade that the entire 23 years since have offered voice to every radical who wanted to find a way to let semantics dictate our rights.

Those presently running for President are falling all over themselves trying to prove that they are the most ardent supporter of the anti-choice movement. This hearing on Congress, no doubt, is a great opportunity for three of them in the Senate to take the spotlight off of Trump for a minute. And the governors can use this time to boast about their own records.

Jeb Bush was able pass a law in Florida where women seeking abortions needed to get consent. Described here, he even went out of his way to stop abortions by women who had been raped (yes, she needed consent from her rapist):

"... involving a 22-year-old rape victim who was both pregnant and developmentally disabled, Bush asked a court to appoint a guardian to represent the woman's fetus. The woman had been raped while living in state-supervised facilities, but did not have the mental capacity to identify her attacker.

And for a child whose parental consent would come from the State ... In 2005, Bush fought to prevent a pregnant 13-year-old girl, who was a ward of the state, from having an abortion. He was overruled by a judge, and CNN later reported that Bush's "abortion activism shocked some state officials who believed he was reaching beyond the powers of his office." 

Jeb Bush, I feel it is important to point out, is a perfect example of why this rhetoric around abortion rights is, indeed, a part of a War on Women. In 1995 he wrote, Profiles in Character, a book meant to explain that society's ills are due to our neglecting our own responsibilities by giving them to the government (its quite contrived but this begins their discussion about why we should have small government so the rich can pay fewer taxes - the latter part, of course, is always omitted from the argument). Society was failing because of the number of unwed pregnancies and the offense here was, quite clearly, society's tolerance of female promiscuity. There is a place for women and in his dark world, it is clear that he thinks its his job to get us back there:

"One of the reasons more young women are giving birth out of wedlock and more young men are walking away from their paternal obligations is that there is no longer a stigma attached to this behavior, no reason to feel shame. Many of these young women and young men look around and see their friends engaged in the same irresponsible conduct. Their parents and neighbors have become ineffective at attaching some sense of ridicule to this behavior. There was a time when neighbors and communities would frown on out of wedlock births and when public condemnation was enough of a stimulus for one to be careful.

Yep. This prefaced his signing a law requiring women to put an ad in the local newspaper listing all of the men she had slept with before being allowed to put her child up for adoption. The notice had to contain a physical description, including, but not limited to age, race, hair and eye color, and approximate height and weight of the mother and of any person the mother reasonably believes may be the father; the child's date of birth; and any date and city, including county and state in which the city is located, in which the conception may have occurred. This had to run every week for a month. No War on Women here. Not from a man who wants to deny funding for your abortions and embarrass you out of even having an adoption. Nothing here but good old fashioned care for unborn 'children.'

In last weeks debate Chris Christie beamed over his own record of having defunded Planned Parenthood and voting against it each of the 8 years since. Glorious! Although this account is actually misleading (I know, you are shocked), it is telling of his role in the War on Women. He eliminated $7.5 million for women's health care funding, none of which went to abortions. 

I live in Ohio. 74% of Ohioans are opposed to shutting down Planned Parenthood. That won't stop our governor and current Presidential candidate, John Kasich, from sticking anti-choice legislation in bills that have nothing to do with health care so no one notices. He has already cut half of the states clinics. This fall he is expected to sign a new bill which will ban women from choosing to terminate because of a prenatal diagnosis of Down's Syndrome. PAUSE. This bill is actually trying to tell women what their reasoning can be for an abortion. If that is not offensive enough for you, consider what precedent that sets. Remember, that is what all of the states have been trying all along: set a precedent to take to the Supreme Court.

Kasich obviously doesn't care about representing 74% of his constituents. This is pervasive with candidates on the right. Even though only the radicals on the right support anti-choice legislation, the candidates will continue to fight. If it is something their electorate does not support then why do they overwhelmingly vote against women's issues? 

BECAUSE THERE IS A FUCKING WAR ON WOMEN. God. Damn. 

Don't allow people to confuse the discussion by throwing a word like 'feminazi' in a sentence or pretending to give a shit about 'life.' We live in a society where the women's movement hasn't moved much at all. We live in a society that accepts condemnation for those who fight for our rights. We live in a society that tells itself the rights guaranteed by the 14th Amendment aren't necessarily attributable to women. Does that sound like bullshit? Is this Mean Progressive being dramatic?Then why have we still not passed the Equal Rights Amendment in nearly 100 years?

Every opportunity that we have had to make a stand and ignored it while hoping others will step up and do their part brought us to this moment. And do not be mistaken, THIS MOMENT is crucial. The House has managed to get enough votes to defund Planned Parenthood. This is a lot more than their usual antics. It is an imperative that this be stopped. Please go to this site and fill in the blanks. It takes only a moment.

Click Here

Go to this site and sign up. I get emails whenever anything big is going on and that is how I know to inform you all. If you ever miss one of my posts (why would anyone ever do that? wink) you will still be able to get information on what is going on.

Click Here

Please donate to them if you can. They have been fighting too hard for too long just for the fucking right to care for our nation's women. They deserve all of the support they can get. 

Donate Here

There are a number of things we can all do to protect this sacred women's health institution which take no time at all. They are outlined here. The most important, however, is to make more women (and men) aware of the movement and the truths behind the stories the media has managed to either mangle or ignore altogether. We Are Losing This War. And that is unacceptable. 

Finally, make it your mission to find 5 (or more) women and make sure they understand how important this is. Make them understand this is not just another rhetorical gesture. Their rights are seriously on the line. And, if you can keep their attention long enough, explain to them the rights they think they have that they really don't. We have to begin moving this conversation along. I can bitch about it to you all every day, but you already know. Ranting isn't going to be enough. We need to make all women as angry as we are. Let's go!


Did you make it all the way to the bottom? I love you :)

Kiss Kiss.
Mean Progressive

The Latest Attack on Planned Parenthood

Just before Paul, Cruz and Rubio went into the debates last month, the Senate determined it would create a big diversion and hold a hearing to get rid of Planned Parenthood funding. They have used the recent release of doctored nonsensical videotapes to stir up those among us who cannot be bothered to think for themselves. They failed.

What else can the Regressive Party possibly come up with to do when they have debates again tomorrow? They desperately need to remind their sheep that they are in line with their agenda. Clinton still hasn't been found guilty of anything. Everyone still has healthcare. The candidates need something.... Shit!  Hey! I know. Let's see if the House can get the funding eliminated for Planned Parenthood. We know they could give a shit about women's health care. We know they could give a shit about children. But they sure do love to create a lot of hype out of nothing to distract the rest of us from the things they are really up to.

Please join me in telling them their distractions won't work on the majority of Americans. Tell them that anti-choice activism has no place in Congress as it has been legal for over 40 years now. Tell them that Women's Healthcare funding is not a game and their dismissal of the importance of this time-honored institution is a dismissal of us all.

Please follow THIS LINK to sign the petition then please pass it on to all who understand or need to understand.

You can also go to THIS LINK and find a list of companies who support Planned Parenthood to send them a tweet or a comment on their Facebook page to thank them for their support. This list was created by the anti-choice activists. It would be nice for them to hear from those of us who aren't out of our minds, too.

Thank you,
Mean Progressive

Are Temper Tantrums A Good Campaign Strategy?

Not gonna lie ... I cannot think of a single physical torture anyone could lay on me that would make me vote for a Republican. However, just watching from the outside, I feel confident that I would not vote for a Democrat or Independent who behaved the way those on the right have behaved this week. What must those in the center be thinking? Honestly!

This was the headline on Mike Huckabee's blog today where he railed over SCOTUS' decision on marriage equality. So, ummm... if you were, say, President, and you decided to resist and reject the judiciary, wouldn't that make you a tyrant? Moron.

He said the court was out of control yesterday, too. When they upheld the Affordable Care Act (say those three words in your head - wonder why they needed to give it another name?) he just wanted to lose his mind. This Christian will not abide living in a country where everyone has access to affordable healthcare. God. Dammit!




Ted Cruz had a fit yesterday, too. He, along with the rest of the GOP hopefuls, cannot interpret what the court ruling said. They all believe that they are going to be able to get rid of Obamacare. Never mind what they said in the ruling. No. Really. You have to have something to rail about, right?

Teddy hasn't commented yet on today's ruling. But last week he did tell a congregation, oops sorry, I mean conference attendees, "I would encourage everyone here to be lifting up in prayer the court that they not engage in an act of lawless judicial activism." So I assume he will be upset. Dick.

Bobby Jindals reply to Obamacare being upheld is almost comical. Its comical in the way that I like to laugh at people who are really assholes and say nonsense, not like a funny joke or anything. He was really pissed off because the Supreme Court didn't take away healthcare from millions of people based on semantics. Jindal demanded that the Supreme Court does not have the final say in the land . because ... yeah.

Of course, Mister Christian was all aflutter over SCOTUS' support of marriage equality today. It is curious. Im not kidding. I cannot have a rational discussion with someone and come out of it understanding how in the FUCK your religious liberties are diminished by another persons happiness.

I don't want to bark too loudly. Maybe they don't realize what they sound like to rational people. I just hope enough of them are paying attention. Good Gravy!

Dear Media: Grow Up!

America has been given yet another opportunity to begin sincere dialogue about the problems we have with racism in our society. We have them at least once a month now. The reason we know about the events is because you report them to us. Then, tragically, you turn every single event into something fantastical that can get you ratings. 

Every. Single. Time.

I feel confident that the reason you ignore important discussions is because you know that most Americans don't want to hear it. They are quite content in their little bubbles where societal issues don't affect them. You fear they will turn the channel and watch some other network give them 24/7 nonsense. As a journalistic outfit, can you not just accept that and do your job? Can you not make it important to give America the information that they need?

Today Marc Maron's podcast, WTF, had an interview with President Obama. The interview was a revelation. We were offered thoughtful and candid reflections from our leader about the issues of race in America. These are issues that are traditionally ignored by those in leadership because they don't want to offend anyone in their base or be called out for saying something insensitive. We finally had a deep conversation with our President. You are all telling us that he used the N- word. Are you fucking kidding me? It literally gave me a vision of you sitting at your desk in third grade, raising your hand with your mouth  making an 'ooo' and begging the teacher to call your name so you can say, "Ooohhhh, teacher, Johnny said the N- word."

GROW UP!

Here is the podcast

The entire point of his having said it was to point out that just because those in society don't hear the words use as often doesn't mean the same supremacy that used to allow it doesn't still exist. He gave you something to tell us. If you truly were journalists the discussion would have started right there. You have plenty of news clips you could've shown of many politicians and pundits on the right using coded language to incite their base.

Here. Let me get you started. Take these videos and begin the dialogue in our discourse regarding why it is still acceptable for Americans to be full of hate and believe that racism is still a part of our political world.

Last week offered us plenty of opportunities to sincerely discuss race with the comments coming from the right. Their inability to empathize about how hurtful the Confederate flag would be to the descendents of slaves while supporting the people who see the flag as a proud symbol of their heritage (a heritage of their ancestors fighting for the right to maintain slavery) should be profound enough, but it was ignored and offered to us as just a matter of fact.

Here we have Lindsey Graham explaining why the Confederate Flag is an important symbol of the South and then he literally waves his hands as if to say 'over there' and says they have an "African American memorial." The memorial is, obviously, a throw away. And the pain the flag causes and its symbolism adopted by racist groups is, too.

Remember Charles Murray? The white trash piece of shit who wrote the Bell Curve? Right. The guy who wrote about how whites are genetically predisposed to superiority over blacks. Just this year in an interview Jeb Bush was questioned about solving the issues of income disparity and he went into a talk about welfare and, without encouragement, went into explaining how his ideas are shaped by Charles Murray. The rest of his answer was about welfare, and because of who he quoted, he was obviously talking about black people being the problem.

Rick Santorum telling a group of white people about how its not fair to give the black people welfare money that white people earn.

Instead of focusing on the President reminding us that racism exists, maybe give America an opportunity to reflect on why it is still deemed socially acceptable. Just last week Donald Trump, while kicking off a campaign to be our President offered us a nice look into the mentality:

Mike Huckabee is forever condemning the President for fighting against the Jews and Christians. This is his dog whistle reminder to their racist base who need to hear reminders about the rumors they started about President Obama being a Muslim and means to support Jihadists. He tells us that everything the President does is against the Jews and Christians (just like Jihadists).

 Here he tells us he was proud to have a black President and now he realizes that Obama doesn't want America to succeed. They are always telling their base that the President is sincerely trying to ruin the country.

The Chinese (all of them, apparently) lack imagination and are thieves

Maybe you could just discuss this for a single moment (from earlier this year):

Oh. By the way. Here is a journalist who gets it. Maybe give him a call and ask how its done. Editorializing is, in fact, necessary sometimes. If you do not editorialize you offer the Republican faithful only the dog whistles they are being sent without offering any rationality or asking thoughtful Americans to consider why they are hearing things they find offensive.

It is unfathomable that you all get to call yourselves journalists and then behave as if you are either employed by a tabloid or the Fox cable channel with the word 'news' in its title. 

As often as the politicians on the right offer us examples of how large swaths of human beings can be immediately dismissed or worse, you never find it important to report on that. You are literally complicit in the racism so pervasive in our society when you give a voice to the racist actors and do not either condemn them or ask your audience for reflection. 

My President

One day, thoughtful historians will chronicle the eight years of President Obama as having been remarkable for many reasons. He walked into the White House during a time when the economy was a disaster and the country was in two wars. His administration was the one who finally caught Osama bin Laden. Against the most absurd opposition, he managed to bring Americans universal healthcare. The auto industry was revitalized under his guidance. This President has been able to display an exceptional gift for thoughtful diplomacy. Against profound Republican resistance, several bills to help Veterans were able to pass and be approved by the President. The list of his accomplishments seems never-ending. The thing that people seem to miss is the fact that he is making good on many of his campaign promises. History will be able to recount every attempt, even if unsuccessful, of a leader who aspired to represent the legacy he meant to create.

At present, much of the narrative around the President is nonsensical rhetoric. Those condemning him have never acknowledged his having had a single accomplishment. The opposition literally determined upon his inauguration that they would derail all of the President's efforts. To just consider half of his accomplishments in light of that fact is remarkable. They have willfully and deliberately hurt this country in order to postpone votes to move the economy forward. They have endangered suicidal veterans by voting against a bill for them. They have endangered children presently being trafficked in the sex trade IN AMERICA because they demand the bill include a denial of their right to terminate any pregnancies that come of their experience. One of the loudest opponents to the President, who believes himself worthy of the same title, actually read a Dr Seuss book in the Senate during a filibuster attempt to keep Americas citizens from having healthcare. Their childish dissent, while demanding Americas exceptionalism, will be remembered as one of the most shameful aspects of American history, to be sure.

As for me, I love my President. There will never be a leader who will do every single thing that I want, I know that. And I certainly don't want the job so I will have to entrust the country I love to someone who is up for the challenge. I can go back to each of our Presidents through Reagan and see that their egos ran for office and determined their actions and defined their character while in office. I can say that I am sure this is not the case with President Obama. He has a humility and grace that I have never seen in a leader. It is unimaginable how much stress the job of President is to any person who takes the job seriously (lets not pretend that all who get the job or aspire toward it do), but to add on top of that the amount of blatant disrespect he is paid every day with every action and you have to be in awe of this man and his strength. As much as the 'representatives' on the right want to ruin him, they are going out of their way to show history what a profound grace he embodies. Those of us who are true patriots are offered sincere pride in America with President Obama at the helm.

This picture was on my Facebook page on Easter. I giggled, at first. It is so sweet and funny. He manages to have a sense of humor through all he has endured. It is also hopeful. He is standing next to a childhood image looking up at the Washington Monument. We are offered a vision of an innocent hope for our country. I love him. And history will, too.

And The Clowns Now Have a Ringleader!

I don't know. The GOP has never failed to leave me open jawed with a shaking head from the gaggle of goons they offer us every 4 years for the presidency. I consider myself a reasonable person. But I am also naive. Every time my naivete tells me that there is no way in hell [fill in the blank] will even make it through the primaries. Then every time I feel a little more detached from the country I love because it is, quite obviously, peopled with dupes and morons. This year is different, though. Somehow the GOP has managed to outdo themselves. This time the hopefuls have been repeatedly called a clown car. There is no better way to explain it.

We have Huckabee and his sincere hate for women. We have Ted Cruz who has promised to take us all back to the 12th century with both his fire and his brimstone. We are getting an opportunity to be reminded just how awful the Bush legacy is and, after six months, Jeb has finally decided that he would like to carry on those proud accomplishments. They are trying to give us Carly Fiorina because she has ovaries, I believe. And there's Ben Carson, a neurosurgeon who is the black man they will offer us this time because the GOP sincerely believes the rest of America is as stupid as their base. For the same reason, apparently, we are also getting a chance to consider Marco Rubio. He is of Cuban heritage and his parents came here to escape Fidel Castro. Except they didn't. Its all just so ridiculous. And, even though most have been running their campaigns for months now, so far we know about little more about them than a universal hatred for President Obama and Secretary Clinton, who have apparently ruined the country. Fabulous.

Today Donald Trump decided he would run, as well. He has fooled us before and tried to convince us that he was going to do it and then changed his mind. But he managed to get attention and I'm sure that is all he wanted. He has his own reality TV show for Christ's sake. He is a ridiculous human being who sincerely promoted the idea of President Obama having fooled us all with a fake birth certificate. He has managed to perpetuate the hateful narrative coming from the far right from a celebrity of his own egotistical creation having nothing to do with politics.

The only people who would actually consider him a viable candidate are the people he pays to support him and the teabaggers who will follow anyone who offers them a platform based solely on hate. Are we supposed to take seriously a man who wants to run our country and demands he can handle this economy he mocks after having filed bankruptcy four times? Or maybe we want our Commander In Chief to have nothing but pained aggression toward women who join the military and all but condone their being raped for having joined in the first place? Are we supposed to hope that the person who holds the veto pen to decide on the laws meant to protect our citizens to have spent many tens of thousands of dollars of his own money to advertise in the New York newspapers to have children be given the death penalty for a crime, it just so turns out, they had nothing to do with? This, the same man who had a public temper tantrum when those grown children finally won a settlement from the city who had abused their rights, with the help of his provocation.

I admit. I am one of those people who sits and whines every 4 years just thinking about what a tragic place we would all be in if whomever I hate most that time gets the job and I will have to end up leaving the country. I don't know how much I have ever really planned on doing it, though. This time my daughter is grown and on her own and my house is paid off. I honestly think that would be it for me. There are plenty of reasons to love my country, but if enough people come together to vote for him (while factoring in all of the bullshit that would have to happen at the polls) and he ends up leading this country, Im gone. I will take Mitt Romney's brilliant advice and self-deport. I'm thinking England. If I'm not mistaken, I'm destined to end up with Jason Statham. So I am going to go get started on making that happen. I'm sure he's been wondering where I am.


Kiss Kiss ... Mean Progressive

Dear Media: I Am Running for President!!

Dear Media:

I have decided to run for President and am inviting you to the kick-off announcement for my campaign. From what I gather in watching all of your coverage, it is a bad idea for a candidate from the left to have amassed any wealth. This is very encouraging for me. Not only am I not well off, but I live in a trailer park. I am hoping to kick my campaign off here this weekend. Although I do not ride a motorcycle like Scott Walker, the guy down the road, we call him Drunk Mike, has a motorcycle. I'll bet he would be glad to ride me through the park with a flag and maybe a bullhorn or something. Would you like to come cover that and ask the Americans who live here what they would like from a leader? Because you all spend so much time finding ways to discount positive economic news that comes out each month, I guess my neighborhood would be a true representation of an American community and its needs would be the perfect projection for your audience.

My neighbors have started a SuperPac to help me get started. They have already raised enough to pay for my internet through the election. I will be running the majority of my campaign online because I don't have a lot of money to pay for travel. You are all welcome to visit me here for interviews, though. Because my time and funds are so limited, however, I would like to get a few tips from you all before you come. I hope you don't mind taking the time to help me understand.

I guess its the campaigning itself that is confusing for me. I am a Democrat and I am a woman. I notice that all of the candidates on the right are men (aside from Fiorina who even you all don't seem to really be taking seriously) and are allowed to pretty much dictate which questions they answer. Will I be afforded that same courtesy? How does it work, exactly? It seems as if I just scowl and refuse to answer or change the subject you will back down. Or do I publicly condemn you for having a conservative bias and shame you into asking me the questions I want to answer? It seems kind of rude, honestly. I would really rather not have to do either. So if you could just stick with questions that are relevant to Americans, I think we would be fine.

Although the questions the candidates on the right seem to favor are those that they can turn into a tirade on Secretary Clinton, I would really rather you just focus on the issues I would like to tackle during my 4 or 8 years leading the country. I hope that you don't spend too much of our time together asking me to trash talk any of the other candidates. I could write you a book. Or a series of books, probably. Okay. I could actually write you a series of tomes, but the point is - if I have less than eighteen months to tell my fellow citizens how I envision our future, I would rather leave my diatribes for 2024.

I sincerely love my country. I guess that I am supposed to start there. From what you have reported to me, I am then supposed to tell America the reasons I love her. I should begin by defining my patriotism. Correct? Well, I do not believe in the idea of American Exceptionalism as those on the right keep defining it. I do hope that we can work toward being exceptional, however, and I have a lot of ideas about how to get us there. Frankly, it is hard to decide how to define my patriotism in a way that your audience will appreciate. It seems that everyone has been conditioned to believe that it is found in things I cannot understand. Please forgive my naivete if I do not come off patriotic. This is all new to me. So, this weekend you all reported that Secretary Clinton was condemned at a Joni Ernst fundraiser for having "Probably never ridden a John Deere," I have! So I am hoping you can report that to Americans for me. But, I am not sure if that experience is relevant as I have never walked to school in a downpour with Wonder Bread bags on my feet. Maybe we could get clarification before you report on that. I wouldn't want a cherished childhood memory of having steered the tractor from my granddady's lap to end up being maligned because my childhood had missed any other important milestones.

I believe that a lot of what Senator Sanders has been saying has been exactly what America needs to hear right now. The word 'socialist' has been bandied about, however, and that has been offered to us as a bad word. I certainly don't want any bad words attributed to me. Can we just stick with something like 'really really worried about taking care of all Americans' or something like that? It sounds a lot better, don't you think?

Of the many issues I am passionate about, the first that I would want to discuss is healthcare. People keep telling us that universal healthcare is a terrible thing. The only terrible things I would like to tell Americans are the horror stories of real people who are suffering because their state has decided to deny people coverage. I want them to know about how 850,000 Floridians have had their medical coverage taken away by their legislatures because they were deemed 'able bodied' even though the only way they can actually be so is by paying $4000/month to cover health costs to enable them to breathe. I am sure that, before Americans go to vote next year, they would want to know the very specific details about their candidates positions on this issue. Wouldn't you think so, as an American?

I am a proud feminist and would want to make women's issues a main focus of my campaign. I am concerned, however, because although I am aware of the rabid opinions those running on the right have espoused about women, I have never heard any in the media report on them. Are those the types of issues the media just doesn't like to cover? Unlike Mike Huckabee, I believe that women are quite capable of multi-tasking, even while on their periods. All of the candidates on the right have said they want to get rid of a woman's right to chose altogether. I would like to really have a discussion about that. Will you be willing to cover it? As yet, I have not heard the media cover any of their extreme ideas about women. It is hard to defend an argument when your audience hasn't even heard it. I hope you will understand this and start reporting on the things they say to their party so the rest of Americans can make an educated choice between my vision and theirs.

Like every other candidate on the left who has ever been interviewed, I believe that we should have laws to restrict gun use by those who have been deemed dangerous. Would you please make a point of specifically telling your audience that I am not interested in getting rid of the Second Amendment? In fact, I would even go a step farther and tell them that if they would stop the discourse about taking away the Constitutional rights of a woman to decide what to do with her own body, I would gladly see to it that they keep their Second Amendment. That seems fair. Then we could knock out two extreme conversations with one sentence and get back to things that the majority of Americans are actually concerned about.

I have been struggling to understand why there is so much coverage on Secretary Clinton in the media and so little on the many candidates on the right? Maybe because there are too many on the right you become overwhelmed and just focus on the left? I hope that my entry to the campaign doesn't create a field so large that it makes you decide to stop covering politics altogether. Information really is supposed to be the service that you give Americans and it would be a shame for you to give up before you even tried.

I lack the grace of President Obama and the experience of Secretary Clinton. I am easily frustrated and get quite defensive when I am dismissed or disrespected. I fear my campaign will end before it has a chance to really begin if you refuse to cover my campaign respectfully. You all are welcome to hours of commentary on what my platform is about. In fact, I would encourage that. Although my life will offer you more than enough truly tabloidesque moments to explore and exploit, I hope that you will keep that to a minimum. I think Americans would like to be able to discern my trustworthiness and intentions with little thought to whether or not I was a jackass as a teenager or took five years to get my two year college degree. My opinions are vastly different from those you have been offering to your audiences so I hope that will be enough to warrant your time and attention.

I'll see you this weekend!

Kiss kiss,

Mean Progressive

You Know Shit About The Constitution

The Tea Party started out as a Libertarian movement which gained popularity during the election of 2008. The Libertarians have since lost any respect and sincerity it would have once been attributed, however, when they started inviting and embracing the evangelical Christians into the party. Many of the views of these two conservative groups are in complete contradiction when the Libertarians seek to demand personal liberties as defined by the Constitution and the evangelicals seek to have them defined by the Bible. No one has offered a legitimate answer to a platform which actually embraces or explains the juxtaposition of those views. None of the followers seem to have noticed or minded, though, because the leaders have been able to keep them active and distracted by ranting about nonsense to get them riled up. They had a black man to oppose on the last two Presidential tickets, you know. They really needed little else.

The entire movement became even more awkward to watch when the GOP at large realized that they were losing a lot of their constituency. They allowed the Tea Party to basically hijack their party and their platform for fear of losing their capacity for reelection. What had once been a nightmare of a neo-Conservative movement has now become a clusterfuck of ideas where no one can really affirm a stance on anything without second guessing themselves. No wonder nothing is getting accomplished in DC.

The Tea Party Platform states "The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land and must be adhered to without exception at all levels of government. This includes the Bill of Rights and other Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and their provisions designed to protect states’ rights and individual liberties."

Any Tea Party fanatic will tell you that their only objective is loyalty to the Constitution and upholding the many rights attributed therein. That seems like a pretty noble ideal, no? LOL. No. They don't actually know anything about the Constitution. They are only really interested in that one right (you know the one) and their very narrow interpretations of the rest of the Amendments which speak to their selfish agenda.

Wait, now that's not fair of me. They do also believe in the 1st Amendment. They are really big on that freedom of religion. They will tell Muslims to leave the country, however. But they really do believe in the right to their religion. Well that's nice.

They also believe in freedom of speech. Whenever you call them out for being a racist, they will either counter by offering their strongest debate tactic, being the "nu'huh you are" defense, or they will remind you that they have a freedom of speech. However, even though the courts have defined flag burning as freedom of speech, if you tell that to a Tea Partier, they will simply tell you that is not true.

Of course, they believe in the right to a free press. They are very concerned about the bias in todays media and want them to be more accountable for the information they disseminate to Americans. We are all being inundated with a liberal bias in our news stories and the Tea Party are trying to let the rest of us understand how foolish we are for listening to it. They know what's really going on, though. They have a cable television channel with the word "news" in it where everything reported there seems to be legitimate.

The freedom to assemble is also a very big deal for them. Recently Tea Partiers used that right to march into the Texas Statehouse office of a Democratic Representative to intimidate him for his opposition to an open-carry proposal. They demanded that he was a tyrant to the Constitution and refused to leave his office. It seems whenever other groups want to use their right to assemble, like a protest against Wall Street or the lost lives of unarmed young black men, those in the Tea Party are so disgusted with that use of the freedom, that they will gather together and actually protest the protesters. As a rational human being, I have no means of explaining that mentality in a thoughtful manner.

Their platform actually states that their mission is to uphold and defend the Constitution. They would really rather get rid of the 14th altogether, though. Not only does it completely belie their constant insistence for states rites in Constitutional matters, but it saves the children of immigrants from being deported. It has also graciously been used to allow rights to those so maligned by the Tea Baggers like gays and immigrants. And let us not forget, it also allows a woman to have an abortion. Absolutely everyone is protected by the 14th. It states, "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States ... nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Thankfully, because they don't actually spend time reading or comprehending the Constitution, their objections to all rights supported by the 14th Amendment due to morality have a little back up and are also negated by the 9th Amendment which literally states that our rights, "shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." This, for any Tea Baggers who have come across this essay, means you cannot use other rights granted to you as an excuse to take away rights of others. But, whatever, I'm sure Indiana isn't bound by the Constitution.

The Constitution is the document that defines taxing our citizenry to ensure the welfare of all. Thus, Social Security and Public Assistance are both guaranteed by the Constitution, as well. I suppose the Tea Party is very concerned about their maintenance as their platform says the Constitution must be upheld without exception. Its curious, but some of the biggest issues of the entire party platform are focused on getting rid of the IRS, the body that collects those taxes, and both Social Security and Public Assistance. They tell people that they shouldn't have to pay for people on welfare or social security. That should be the responsibility of the people. (Because, you know, they are such a selfless and generous bunch, they will make sure that those in need are taken care of).

The Tea Baggers don't really know what they support. They like the bits and pieces that they have a limited understanding of and their narrow interpretations of what each defines, devoid of any Amendments or Supreme Court rulings which have followed regarding that Amendment. They also like the radical mistranslations that the party leaders have offered them. However, they don't actually know what is in the Constitution. If they did, they would probably have to either create another party or demand that their party have a much different approach to defining their rights. Maybe they should focus more of their time rewriting the Constitution? Its a long road to get to change it from Congress, but its sure worth a try. Of course, they could also keep counting on the Supreme Court to hear ridiculous cases in hopes that they will continue to deny all dignity and humanity whenever possible and come up with some brand new interpretations of what America is meant to be. Let us hope they can control themselves to keep her from going over a cliff. Because if left to the Tea Baggers, those rights would most certainly, only be afforded to those who are Christian, heterosexual, white, men.

The truth is, it doesn't matter that they don't have any idea what they're rallying against or for. The people who founded and funded (Koch, Americans for Prosperity) the party from the beginning would never want them to understand why the people they support need to be elected or what their true ambitions are. And how glorious if you are a Koch brother ... it would never occur to a Tea Partier to ask.

Damn... Must be nice to be a billionaire, huh?

American Exceptionalism?

The fact that politicians on the right are espousing a heartfelt belief in American exceptionalism and are bullying those on the left to prove they believe the same is, frankly, disturbing. Although my computer keeps trying to tell me that exceptionalism isn't a word, the concept has been around for a long time. Exceptionalism is a theory where one society, culture, country, etc. is extraordinary above all others, having something unique which makes it shine above the rest. That is ridiculous. Not only are we an adolescent in comparison to the nations they profess superiority over, but those who are making these demands actually behave like adolescents in regard to, and often in the presence of, those other countries.

Several years ago, the President was asked if he believed in American exceptionalism. He basically said that he believed in it the way that other countries believed that they were exceptional. That would be a pretty fair answer for an absurd question at a NATO summit, I would think. He went on to explain his answer in a thoughtful manner, full of words his detractors would have to look up before countering. Of course, they didn't need to counter his contentions, they had what they needed in that one little sound bite. So the far right had a new rallying cry against the President to say that he didn't love America. Most critical thinkers would have agreed with the President. Some might even think he was being generous. But the far right doesn't talk to critical thinkers. They are talking to people who don't want to be bothered to think for themselves. So they were given their talking points and sent on their way.

At present, we are being inundated by the right with their varied definitions of exceptionalism. Ted Cruz had a rather bizarre and, quite obviously, insincere revelation in March where he explained that his people, those who listen to country music, are superior because of the way that industry responded to 9/11. Before then, he explained, he had been a lover of classic rock & roll. But he was off-put by their response to the attacks on 9/11. Apparently the international fundraisers held in both September and October were not, you know, patriotic. Maybe because of his hasty conversion to country music he missed the new songs which came out about the attacks by classic rockers like Bruce Springsteen, Paul McCartney and John Mellencamp. Even Neil Young came out with a song that honored the heroes of flight 93. Cruz's attempts to garner supporters will have certainly fallen on deaf ears. No one who wasn't already going to vote for him would ever fall for that shit.

Mike Huckabee, too, has been all over the media, first promoting his book and now on his campaign for President, explaining that there is something quite ideal about the way they live in the south. Apparently he believes his constituency wants or needs to be pandered to. And, apparently, he believes they are not intelligent enough to realize that's what he's doing. His contention is that their superiority is defined by virtues only southern women possess, like not using birth control because they know how to control their libidos. And those women are also too classy to ever use a curse word like those trashy northern women (we know, Mike, but fuck you for noticing). Southerners are funny, where those outside of "Bubbaville" (I can't make this up) are of less humor. Those red, white & blue Bubbas are God-fearing, principled folk and the over-educated city slickers have had all principle taught right out of them. He is really big on reiterating those over-educated every time you hear him speak. It really is curious. How do southerners like having been condemned to being a comical, yet ignorant, bunch who cannot even reason through rhetoric and see that they are being mocked by the man who is professing their superiority? This is an American society. It cannot be defined by someone who is telling us any exceptionalism found in the society is a narrow subset who adhere to his prescribed ideals.

There is something inherently grotesque about the right demanding a moral or patriotic high ground. It is as if their followers, collectively, have such low self-esteem that they need to be told of their supremacy. Secretary of State John Kerry said that the idea of American exceptionalism makes him uncomfortable. I would think most thoughtful people would agree with that assertion for reasons outlined herein. However, the right jumped all over him suggesting that he and the Liberals don't love America and those on the right are more patriotic. Why do the people on the far right need to hear that? People with actual grace and moral standing don't need to be convinced of it. Nor do they need to be told that they're superior for having attained it.

I am an actual patriot. I don't prove it by putting a flag and an eagle and the Statue of Liberty in my avatar. I prove it by loving my country and my countrymen. I prove it by voting and volunteering in my community. I prove it by sincerely supporting our troops, in wanting them to only have to fight when it is necessary and make sure they are 100% taken care of when they get home. I prove my patriotism by wanting to protect America's land and natural resources. And educate her children. And feed her poor. I prove it by not only learning and understanding my country's history, but by promoting ideas of our improving on it. America cannot be a great society just because I wish it to be so. When my daughter was an adolescent, oftentimes she behaved like an ass. At those times I didn't clap my hands together and throw them in the air to proclaim, "Voila! Perfection!" I sighed, realized I still loved her more than anything and acknowledged I had more work yet to do. I am a patriot who loves my country and wants to see her progress toward something exceptional.

As America's history is short and relatively brutal, her stories of greatness would need to be promoted and her failures denied in order to really promote exceptionalism. And we cannot rewrite our own history in order to create a more appealing chronicle. Last year, however, the RNC resolved that the AP History tests, which had been updated to require critical thinking, as had been added to English and math, were focusing on too many negative aspects of our history. Then states began to follow with their own complaints about information that should be removed: slavery, internment camps, issues of equality, etc. Oklahoma tried to pass a bill that would stop funding of AP tests for their students because they wanted a stronger emphasis on positive aspects of history.

In Colorado, one teacher literally came out and demanded that the new testing was bashing America. As if any of the items given to prepare the students for the tests were created out of thin air or this was an attempt to make students less patriotic? The students in Colorado actually went on strike when they realized what was going on. They were, after all, the ones who would have to go to college having never learned about or been asked to consider the facts of our history. As such, these states were not even asking themselves to be accountable for the education of their children. As a mother and an American, that has to be about the most unexceptional thing I can think of. If the focus is to rewrite our own history to create our greatness, the mission has already denied the objective.

Historically, the civilizations that we exalt and remember as having been exceptional are those which have grown into something substantial and influential. Their history defines struggles and teaches a means of overcoming them. This gives all societies something to reflect on, learn from and grow toward. Those on the right who are presently trying to demand our exceptionalism are not only trying to negate the fact that we have not overcome the trials we have created and endured, but they are working very hard to go back to many of them as if they were never problems to begin with. As long as those same people continue to create a mangled present day narrative of hate, dependency, inequality and injustice, I'm not even convinced we can call ourselves a civilization. But I am quite certain that we are not exceptional.