A Caution to Women Over 50: Our Symptoms are Different

2 Replies

I know there is a lot going on in the world right now, but today’s post will be somewhat brief because I just got out of the hospital last week.  What follows is a health update, but it is also advice for all women over 50, just to keep in the back of your minds.

Tuesday, June 29, I went for a doctor’s appointment so he could schedule an operation to remove my gallbladder.  He looked at the ultrasound and told me he would take it out next week.  Hooray!!

When I got home, I began to feel worse than usual.  I felt as if I had swallowed a bunch of acid of some kind.  Antacids didn’t help, as I couldn’t keep them down.  I couldn’t keep water or anything else down – and those of you with acid indigestion know how awful that feels when your stomach is intent on expelling copious amounts of bile.

And so it went on this way all day and all night on Tuesday, and then on Wednesday at about 11 AM I decided maybe I should call the doctor.  I was sweating and could not stop vomiting (I know, it’s gross, but I promise you I have a good reason to be specific about the symptoms).  I didn’t have any pain, but I did have a slight fever.  I figured it was just a gallbladder attack from hell.

I called my primary care physician – Dr. Wonderful.  I spoke with his nurse (that was disappointing) and she told me to call the gallbladder surgeon to ask what I should do.

So I called Dr. Kaneshiki, the excellent surgeon (I am providing his name as he is highly thought of, and if you ever need a surgeon in Pennsylvania…), and his nurse told me to go to the ER.

I texted Nancy Downstairs and woke her up, and told her I was calling an ambulance.  She said she’d drive me so 10 minutes later we were on our way to the ER at UPMC Altoona.

Thankfully, there were no other patients and they took me back and hooked me up to an EKG, took temp, bp, etc.

Tech: Um, do you normally have a fast heart rate?

I told him I didn’t and they then whisked me off to some room where a nurse was again attaching a heart monitor to me and yelling (yes she was, I am not exaggerating) “Quit moving, you’re messing up the machine”.

I wasn’t squirming or anything but it’s hard to be still when you’re sick to your stomach like that.

I said, “Maybe the lines are all over the place because it’s a heart problem?”

The nurse glared at me.  Touchy!

The ER doctor came in, barking orders at Mean Nurse for meds and such, and he put some pasty stuff on my chest.  He kept asking if I was in pain (I wasn’t).

Doctor:  Really? No pain anywhere?

Me: No.  What’s all this fuss about for a gallbladder?

Doctor: Gallbladder?  You’ve had a minor heart attack.  That’s why we drew all that blood, to look for the enzymes that indicate that.

Me: That’s going to screw up my surgery next week, I bet!

I was quite surprised.

Aside #1: Like most people, I had read things about how women’s symptoms for heart attack are different but I really didn’t internalize that information, I guess, because when I think of “heart attack”, I think of someone turning red in the face, gasping for air, and clutching his chest while stating that his arm and/or neck hurts.

Somewhere in the back of my mind I recall reading that women’s symptoms were different, but I guess maybe I didn’t pay attention.

The cardiologist came in and told me he had to do a heart catheterization on me, to see which (if any) of my arteries were blocked.  Coincidentally, he is also Nancy Downstairs’ cardiologist, so she came down to the waiting room for the cath lab to find out what was going on.

Aside #2: It really helps to have someone do that, as often they will recall things the doctor said that the patient, in her distress, won’t remember.  Our hospitals need patient advocates so that every patient can have someone in that position to assist them.  The only place I know of that has patient advocates is Minneapolis.

I was awake for the heart catheterization, which really hurts a lot.  What they do is run a catheter up the artery in your arm (or groin…fortunately he used my arm) all the way up to your heart.  They are looking to see if there are blockages or anything abnormal.

But of course me being a baby about things like that, I am just repeating “OwOwOwOw” sort of like a mantra, while the cardiologist is telling me, “But look!  You have perfectly clear arteries! That’s really good!”

Aside #3: It wasn’t my finest hour, but at least I didn’t cry or yell or get hysterical.  I did sneak a peek at my arteries and I have to admit, they did look pretty cool.  Must be all those years as a vegetarian. And now I can scratch off “wonder about the plaque in my arteries” on my list of “things I wonder about the older I get”.

Then they took me to some MRI machine, injected some dye, and looked at my neck arteries. That wasn’t too bad except in the beginning, when the tech kept getting the placement wrong, and would move me so far into the machine that it went over my head…which I alerted her to in a voice just slightly shy of full panic mode:

“No no no too far in no it’s over my head no no move it back you’re not MRI-ing my brain you know, I am going to get off this table if you don’t move back!”  Or words to that effect.

Aside #4: I was locked in closets as a child as punishment (yes, really), and have been claustrophobic ever since. No dosage of benzodiazepines works for me when I am approaching full panic mode in that situation, nor do the headphones that some places provide in an attempt to drown out the banging the machines do – they never have Tool or Alice in Chains anyway, which actually might help if I could sing along.

Apparently that test had ok results, too, because I never heard about it again.

I spent 2 nights in the hospital, under observation, and was told at discharge on Friday that I was cleared by the cardiologist for gallbladder surgery the following Wednesday.

On Wednesday, the surgery went as planned and I am now minus one gallbladder.  I feel so much better!  Of course, they have me on more meds, which I am not crazy about (1 for blood pressure, 1 for heart, 1 for the cholesterol problem I don’t have but “just in case”), but…well…doctors.

And the cause of the heart attack?  The consensus, for now, is “stress”.  Eating better and exercising will help a lot, but my main stressors are poverty-related, so I will have to do better coping with these conditions.  Transportation (length and type, I don’t mean “assholes on the bus” lol), living far from family, and not having set goals all take their toll.

Aside #5: After giving it some thought, I am going to add “being single” here to the list.  I don’t like admitting it, but I do think that I am one of these people who is happier when I am in a decent relationship.  “Shared joy is a double joy; shared sorrow is half a sorrow”, or so states a Swedish proverb (ThinkExist.com).  Not everyone is like that, and I wasn’t like that for a long time, but after recovering from domestic violence I think I am ready again to share both joys and sorrows.

Anyway, to the women who read this blog, and to the men who have women in their lives…please pay attention to symptoms such as nausea/vomiting that lasts more than a day, with or without sweating.

I had very bad fatigue also, and had to stop after 2 or 3 steps on the stairs to my apartment (which is only 11 stairs up).

What I did not have was shortness of breath or chest pain.  That’s what tripped me up – I thought I had to have those 2 symptoms!  So, if you or someone you love has weird symptoms, even without chest pain or shortness of breath, go to the emergency room.  Far better to be safe than sorry.

And if you are thinking, “I can’t afford to go the the ER!” then ask yourself this: Can your loved ones afford not to have you around?  Hospital bills can be negotiated; your presence on earth cannot be.  My heartbeats were wildly unstable when I arrived at the ER, and I don’t know if I would have survived if I had just “toughed it out”.

Please just remember that when it comes to heart attacks, things are not always as they seem.

I don’t have any weirdness except for a “sort of” recommendation for a movie called “Oz the Great and Powerful”, starring James Franco.  It’s sappy, it’s happily-ever-after, it’s a morality tale, but I really liked it.  Suitable for kids over, say, 8 or so, and not nearly as scary as “The Wizard of Oz”.   I am a James Franco fan so I enjoyed seeing him in this part.

Be good.  Be kind.  Be mindful.

Lives Ended, Nearly Everyone Offended, and a Wedding Unattended

Leave a reply

This post was written over several days, so might seem a little choppy.  I am still really sick.

On Sunday, June 12, a gunman stormed a gay nightclub and shot 102 people, killing 49 of them. He called 911 and a tv station – and even posted a Facebook message – pledging his allegiance to “ISIS” and said he was killing people because of American foreign policy in Iraq, amongst other things.  I don’t want to get into specifics because I don’t think his “message” is anything more than the hateful ravings of an extremist.

He chose “Latin Night”, and there was some suggestion that he had some problem with Latinos. One of the survivors – Patience Carter, an intern at a Philadelphia Fox TV affiliate – was told by the shooter that she was safe because he wasn’t targeting African-American people (“Patience Carter: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know”, Heavy website, Daniel S. Levine, 6/15/2016).

Other than that, no one is sure why the popular gay nightclub was selected by this creep.  His wife, who is cooperating with the FBI, has stated that she helped her husband “case” the nightclub and also Disney World, and apparently she knew what he was planning to do.

Her excuse for not telling anyone?  She was trying to talk him out of it, she says.

I think – and this is my opinion only – that she knew, she approved of what he was doing, and only after the feds traced the cell phones she and her husband used during the attack (because some self-absorbed young people, no matter how insane, have to jabber on the phone and post things online no matter what they’re doing) did she “cooperate” because she knew they had her dead-to-rights and she didn’t want to get the death penalty.

There is no excuse for not telling anyone when you know for sure that someone is going to kill another person (or 49!).  None!  Some have suggested that maybe she was afraid of him, a battered woman.  But there is no evidence of that, and let me tell you, that as a survivor of some horrific physical abuse…

…one thing – sometimes the ONLY thing – that we survivors have in common is that we are much more likely to run off and tell on the abuser if he is going to target someone else.  I don’t mean “maybe some future victim at some point”, I mean “this person is going to be hurt or killed if I don’t do something”.

Like our kids.  Like our pets.  Like someone the abuser has named to us as his target.  So I don’t buy that she knew but was too afraid to tell the police or the FBI.  I would bet others in his family knew, too.

And this guy was American.  He was born here to immigrants from Afghanistan.  What a way to pay back a country that took your parents in.

His father supports the Taliban and has run for president of Afghanistan, all from the safety of his American home.  He has bank accounts in Germany, and has solicited funds online, according to investigators.  No one seems to know how he supported his family (“Omar Mateen’s Father ‘s Bank Records Eyed, Says Source”, Newsday website, Newsday Staff, 6/16/2016).

But we don’t arrest people for how they think, or for soliciting funds online.  That’s not how our country works.  We don’t hassle people for expressing political views, usually (many on the left might disagree, and I would be one of those I guess).  Some political views.

So there wasn’t really any way to prevent this event, law enforcement says currently.  A few people have stated they told the FBI that this killer was making “radical” statements, or expressing violent ideas and plans, but so far…we hear no response from the FBI.

Of course, this all just fuels xenophobia and anti-Islamic sentiment, both of which I do not feel/think/support.  And, of course, Trump uses this to crow about how he keeps warning the American people about “Islamic terrorists”.  He would just lock everyone up, according to what they believe.

And…the House and Senate argued over 2 gun control bills – and didn’t pass either one. Conservatives made the “slippery slope” argument, and also insisted that semi-automatic assault weapons are “recreational”.

I don’t think we ought to allow anyone – besides our military – to have weapons that are designed to be used in military conflicts.  The idea that the American people have to arm themselves because their own government is going to one day declare martial law and then somehow confiscate over 3 million guns is beyond ridiculous – it’s paranoid and scary that so many people (like the NRA) actually believe this.

Aside #1: Of course, I would prefer not to have any war, ever.  I don’t like the thought of war and I pretty much oppose all of it.  WWII was the only legitimate reason for us to go to war, and I wish we had gone sooner because we might have prevented the Holocaust.  I don’t think, though, we ought to have bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  Every war since WWII has been for the sake of money, and I oppose that vehemently.  Life – all life – is too precious.

These “patriots” actually think that their government is going to attack them, militarily.  And take their guns.  And put them in some kind of camps.  Because the government is their enemy.

They have survivalist organizations.  They have training camps.  They are ignorant, scary people.

You want these people defending you in bars and other public places?  You want more people to die in the crossfire because these “Muricans” feel they have to kill everyone in sight?

Their supporters are Trump, the NRA, Mitch McConnell, and others who spout their support of such lunacy – though usually they couch it in different words.  They imply, they hint, but their crazy gun-nut fans know what they mean.

Why?

When did “patriotism” come to mean “hatred of our own government”, “twisting the constitution so that only certain people have rights”, and “stockpiling assault weapons to shoot anyone I deem suspicious”?

Who lives that way?  And why do people with money and power, i.e., gun manufacturers and politicians, care what these stupid yahoos think?  Certainly they aren’t a majority; most Americans do not want people to own assault weapons (57%, according to a recent poll by CBS news; “Poll: Majority Backs Assault Weapons Ban”, The Hill website, Jessie Hellmann, 6/15/20160).

This gunman got his assault gun (AR 15) and handgun legally, even after passing background checks and some kind of psychological exam (though I can tell you, those are useless) – so “stricter” laws won’t help with this.  The weapon needs to be completely unavailable.  There’s no legitimate use for it besides killing people.

But, despite some elderly Democrats staging a sit-in at the House of Representatives until they get some bills debated and passed, nothing’s being accomplished.  It’s painful to see this group of people – older than I am – sitting on a floor that you know is causing them a lot of physical pain (“A Sit-In on the House Floor Over Gun Control”, The Atlantic website, Nora Kelly, 6/22/2016).

The House has no filibuster rules as the Senate does, so this is what the politicians came up with.  I guess, for some, it’s a throwback to the old days of protesting.

Oh well, if it works…ok.  I will support anything that gets any kind of gun control laws passed.  I am sick of the NRA and their cult of death.

In the background of all this important stuff, we have Trump reading a speech off a teleprompter – part of his “improved, more presidential” so-called change – attacking Mrs. Clinton with no proof of anything he’s said. The only difference now is he yells less.  He is still trying to blame her for everything he thinks her husband did 20 years ago, calling her “lyin’ corrupt Hillary”, blaming her for every conflict the US has gotten into, bringing up things the Republicans have tried to indict her with but can’t (after many investigations and so on), and just making things up.

MSNBC, normally a somewhat liberal channel, is gushing all over this “new Trump”, stating he now has a chance to win and so on.  Claiming that Mrs. Clinton is personally attacking him, rather than pointing out that she is merely exposing his history of failed businesses and quoting him verbatim all the evil that spews forth from his mouth.

Aside #2: It seems to me that MSNBC doesn’t really care who wins, as long as they can get entertainment value out of the candidacy (except maybe for Rachel Maddow and Chris Hayes, who really do seem to care). CNN is not much better, as it seems they have nearly doubled-down on the amount of Trump surrogates they have on their shows.  Really sickening.

Let this idiot pay for his air time, like every other candidate.  Oh wait, he can’t – he only has $1 million left, because he spent much of his campaign money paying himself and his family (“Donald Trump’s Self-Funding Includes Payments to Family and His Companies”, NY Times website, Alan Rappeport, 6/21/2016).  I guess he must still be manipulating the TV press for his own purposes.

And don’t expect him to debate Mrs. Clinton, ever.  I can’t see how he can do that, because she has knowledge about the world and how the US works, and he doesn’t.  He doesn’t even seem to understand the concept of the branches of government and what each one does.  He doesn’t seem familiar with the Constitution.  He doesn’t understand foreign policy or how to treat other world leaders with respect.

She will wipe the floor with him.  Unless he somehow can negotiate to have some aide standing right next to him, passing him notes or whispering in his ear.  Or maybe he can feign having a cold…for months.  Or laryngitis, so his surrogate has to literally speak for him.  I don’t know how he’s going to get out of debating her, but he will try, because he’s stupid.

Yep, he is. He’s not intelligent, he’s not savvy, he’s not educated.

He’s just a guy who inherited a shitload of money from his daddy, who only continues to be rich because he stiffs people, defaults on loans, and pulls his money out before the businesses he mismanages fails.  He also was an obnoxious TV “star” – one of those outrageous and disgusting individuals that a certain percentage of Americans find so amusing (I have never watched any “reality” TV like that, because I find people like that aggravating).

He is free market capitalism personified.  Why anyone, especially working people, would think this guy won’t exploit anyone and anything if he became president, is beyond me.  That’s what he does.  He is in it for HIM, no one else.  He has no love for the people.

Mrs. Clinton needs to keep pointing these things out, things Trump has done to hurt people.  If she and Elizabeth Warren continue to poke his sore spots this way, they will cause him to blow up again and again, until no one can stand to listen to him whenever he opens his mouth.

Already, 70% of Americans hate him.  And still he continues to take every criticism of him – his greed, his arrogance, his hatred of the poor – and says “Oh no, that’s HER, not me!”  As if just saying that makes it true.

I am so proud of Hillary Clinton.  She keeps her cool, her humor, and she hits back and hits back hard.  I cannot wait to see what our president does to Trump!  He will eviscerate him!

And finally…the wedding.  My lovely, wonderful daughter is getting married on Friday the 24th. In Seattle.  And I can’t go, because I am sick.  I am so sad about this, I can’t even express it.  But I can’t even go 5 minutes in a car without vomiting, let alone travel for hours on a plane.

She understands, of course, because she’s that kind of person.  I am, of course, beating myself up about it and crying as I read about her wedding preparations on Facebook.  I hate living so far away and would do anything to move to Seattle to be closer to her and my grandson (who is a teenager now).

This living far from your family really sucks…and to think one of the reasons I moved here from Memphis was because I couldn’t get healthcare to get a kidney stone removed (because Tennessee chooses to not participate in either the ACA or Medicaid).  Now I am stuck here…yes, the healthcare is decent, so is the mass transit, so is the low crime rate…but I miss my kids.  I miss working, I miss having a car, and now I am missing the most important thing of all – my daughter’s wedding.

Be good.  Be kind.  Don’t move far from your family, if possible.

 

 

 

 

Oh, Brothers!

2 Replies

Health update: I called and requested sick leave from my volunteer gig (unpaid, of course) because I am spending most days feeling horrible (imagine motion sickness, 24/7).   I am housebound right now, unless I run out of water or ginger ale (thank goodness for food stamps!), in which case Nancy Downstairs drives me to the store (I have a sick bag in her car, it’s that ridiculous, for a 2 mile car ride!).  I didn’t ask the doctor how big the main gallstone was, he just said it was “enormous” and that I should call the surgeon to get my appointment moved up if possible.  I call every few days, no luck. Life, right now, is miserable.

This puts me in a bad financial situation, as this month I cannot pay all my bills due to the cost of medications (I think I have tried every prescription anti-nausea medication known to humankind – except, of course, for marijuana), and now am short on my bills with no stipend from my volunteer job.  I take ginger caps, which, though not cheap, are still cheaper than prescriptions and they seem to work just as well.

After I wrote my last post, I got some feedback from some fellas I know, so I decided to write this to explain.

The thing that bothered them was my implication that Bernie Sanders is a sexist.

I don’t know him.  I can’t assume that.  I was trying to point out what I see are sexist behaviors, or behaviors that might strike people as such.

It didn’t help that the news reported that Sanders had requested a meeting with President Obama today.  According to the Washington Post, which is apparently based on “sources” in the Sanders campaign, the subject of the meeting will be “how Sanders can assure that his campaign’s agenda has a central place in the Democratic Party’s general-election strategy” (“Bernie Sanders Returns to Vermont Ahead of Meeting with President Obama”, Robert Costa, Washington Post website, 6/8/2016).

On the face of it, and in my opinion, this strikes me as “I’m losing the primary so I am going to meet with the President instead of the DNC chair to talk about the party platform.”  This, despite the Sanders campaign having 5 seats on the platform committee (5 out of 15 seats).

The DNC chair is, of course, Debbie Wasserman Schultz.  This is the woman Sanders got upset with because he blames her for bias (see last post or read PolitiFact for the info on this).  He wants to remove her from her position.

Well, why not then go talk to the vice chair of the DNC then?  Because she resigned, stating the she cannot be neutral as she supports Sanders (“Meet the Force Behind the Democratic National Committee Whom You’ve Never Heard Of”, Maxwell Tani, Business Insider website, 3/2/2016).

But why not her replacement, Amy Dacey (Ibid.)?  Certainly, if there are platform issues that need to be discussed, it makes more sense to talk to the DNC National Committee, doesn’t it?

All 3 are women, obviously.  I can see why the second one resigned, but what did the third one do?  She’s been in politics since she was 8, for goodness sake (Ibid.).

Just doesn’t set right with me.  So, while I would not call Sanders a sexist, I do notice signs of some men on the left, from long ago – who did happen to have a blind spot on “the women’s question” – that are similar to Sanders’.

It’s as if Sanders is, again, making this a “boy’s club” decision.  Let’s leave the women out of it. That’s one way of interpreting this.  Unfortunately, it isn’t the first time Sanders has “left women out of it”, as I detailed before.  He may not mean it, but it comes off as exclusionary and sexist.

Of course, I don’t definitively know why Sanders requested a meeting with the President.  But it made me go “hmm”.  Had it been the President who requested a meeting I would have assumed some sort of advice Mr. Obama would have for Mr. Sanders, regarding bowing out.

Here is what I wanted to say regarding the men who contacted me:

None of you, and indeed none of any of my male friends, have ever treated me or any woman I know with anything but respect and on equal footing.   Especially my Falls Church brothers! Known for their sometimes loud singing and boisterous partying – thankfully most of them sang well – they are some of the most fun people I know.  I remember thinking how respectful of me (and my sister Ginny) they were, and, contrasted with the “more leftist” guys I knew back then, there was really no contest.

It’s as if it just never occurred to them to be sexist, which is wonderful when you think about it. Even the one who classified himself as a conservative.  Not. one. peep. of. sexism.

To be able to say that about a good-sized population of men (we did have some extremely large parties of 100 or more sometimes), in the late 60s and early 70s, is just short of astounding.

So, no, my brothers, I don’t default to the “all men are sexist” point of view.  I look at behavior, and words.  And I would never, ever, classify any of you in that way.

Just wanted to make that clear.

Pages: 1 2

First Sanders, Then Clinton: Why I’m Torn

Leave a reply

Medical note: Doctor Wonderful decided that my gallbladder has to come out. Not sure when that will happen but I have an ultrasound on June 2 and an appointment with a surgeon on June 28.  He was kind enough to refer me to his personal surgeon.

After years of voting – always as an independent but always, inevitably, for the Democratic Party candidates – I switched my affiliation to “Democrat” so I could vote in the Pennsylvania primary for Bernie Sanders.

He lost.  Disappointing, but not surprising.  He did actually win the county I live in, by a decent margin.  It made me wonder, where are these progressives in Blair County?  I never seem to see any.  In fact, I was surprised that the Democratic Party didn’t even run any voter registration drives around here, as Democrats always do better in any election where there is a huge voter turnout.

Just more Pennsylvania weirdness, I guess.  An invisible Democratic Party with invisible Bernie Sanders supporters.  In fact, wherever Nancy Downstairs and I go, we are the only people I see wearing Sanders t-shirts.

Anyway, as I do watch most political things on TV – except Fox – I have found myself drifting more towards the Clinton camp these days.

Aside #1:  I never liked Bill Clinton, especially when he signed a bill establishing “workfare” in 1996 (“From Welfare to Workfare”, no authors cited, The Economist website, 7/27/2006).  “Workfare” was designed to “end welfare as we know it” (“How We Ended Welfare, Together”, Bill Clinton, The New York Times website, 8/22/2006), but all it did was make more people homeless and cut off benefits for those who needed them.

But Hillary Clinton is not her husband, thankfully.  While her husband was trying to placate neo-cons with his workfare bill, Hillary was working on a comprehensive healthcare plan.  She was mocked for her efforts, and told she had stepped out of bounds as her role as First Lady.  I remember being really angry about that.

Then, of course, her husband left office in disgrace.  Why she didn’t divorce him has always been puzzling to me, but that’s her personal business and none of mine.  It did, however, slightly tarnish my opinion of her.

Ok so back to the present day.

I have watched, with growing alarm, the Sanders campaign as we head towards the California primary.  I have felt a growing unease with Sanders as I’ve listened to his speeches and observed the rise of the “Bernie or Bust” sector of his supporters.

Aside #2: This unease began after I kept hearing Bernie refer, in his speeches, to himself in the 3rd person.  A minor thing to some, I know, but it set off alarm bells with me because in my opinion it indicates an ego problem.  Who else refers to himself in the 3rd person?  Trump.  But my objection is based on psychological profiles of patients/clients I am familiar with, and not some knee-jerk objection to Trump and his language. And Sanders’ ego worries me.

I have watched, and listened, with even more growing alarm, as Sanders seemed to be on the brink of at least one utterly disastrous decision regarding a debate with Trump.

Let me explain.

Clinton declined to debate Sanders at this point, and in my opinion this was a very smart decision.  We know her positions on issues, and we know his, too.  There is no need for her to focus on anything but her own campaign at this point.

Also, she is aware, I’m sure, that any criticisms Sanders has of her will make their way to Trump’s tiny mind and big mouth.

Considering that Trump parrots things that Sanders says about Clinton (because he can’t come up with any original opinions about anything), I had visions of an aftermath of a Clinton-Sanders debate that consisted mainly of soundbites of Trump repeating and distorting every criticism of Clinton that Sanders had uttered during his debate with her.

Regarding the Trump-Sanders debate, since Trump has opted out of it i think that this is a lucky break for Clinton and, to a certain extent, for Sanders, too.

Folks, we do not live in a “post-sexist” world.  Bernie needs to be aware that a certain portion of his potential supporters would see him pushing for a debate with Trump as a way of marginalizing Clinton.  Just another couple of good ol’ boys keeping the little woman out of a debate.  He can deny it all he wants but there is a certain visceral reaction that feminists have to stunts like this (myself included).

Couple that with the fact that a Trump-Sanders debate would have projected a false sense of what the general election will consist of (because Sanders is probably not going to win the nomination, he hasn’t enough delegates), and it all left a terrible taste in my mouth.

He needs to be more in tune with women over, say 40 years old, who have seen this type of tactic over and over again.  And, just as whites do not have the right to tell minority people what they can and cannot be offended over, nor can they tell them to “get over it”, so it is with men not being in a position to tell us that “Sanders didn’t mean it that way” or that we are being too sensitive.

I am 100% sure Bernie didn’t mean it that way.  But the effect would have still been the same – two men debating over a contest that they are the only participants in.  It still marginalizes women, intent or not.

Also, I know that his criticism of Debbie Wasserman Schultz is supposedly based on what he calls the “rigged system” of the Democratic Party’s selection of the nominee for president, but he is, himself, running within that system and what did he expect?  He knew – or presumably knew – how the delegate selection process works, yet he didn’t start complaining about it until it became clear that he wasn’t going to win enough delegates to get the nomination.

Aside #3: He is so upset with her that he endorsed her opponent in the Florida congressional race she is in.  Who is a white male.  Come on, Bernie, you have to know that this is starting to look like a pattern.  In fact, all his proposed platform committee members are male, except for one.

Wasserman Schultz also dared to tell him to reign in his supporters, after the minor dustup at the Nevada Primary.  The Sanders supporters were upset because many of their delegates were disqualified for not registering on time, by May 1 (“Allegations of Fraud and Misconduct at Nevada Democratic Convention Unfounded”, Riley Snyder, Politifact website, 5/18/2016).

This is the fault of the Sanders campaign, no one else’s.

Sanders’ supporters were also upset because they lost a “voice-vote” to adopt a preliminary credentials report – which showed there were more Clinton supporters than Sanders supporters present at the convention – and their response was to boo and yell and generally react badly.  A later, “actual” count showed that Clinton supporters did, indeed, outnumber Sanders supporters.

This, too, is the fault of the Sanders campaign, no one else’s.

You have to do the work in elections.  This means voter registration drives, going door-to-door if necessary, and not just working through social media to get the work done.  Until and unless there is a US-wide system (as in Pennsylvania, shockingly) where people can register online, people are still going to have to do the work of registering people in person and even taking them to the polls and conventions if necessary.

Even if all states had online registration, people would still have to post links everywhere, mass email people, hit all social media sites and so on.  People would still need rides to the conventions and/or the polls.  You know, the disenfranchised that Democrats and others are always claiming they care about.

I haven’t seen any party do any of these things.  Republicans won’t, of course, because low voter turnout helps them, but what is the excuse for the Democratic Party?

Instead of addressing the problems with organizing people (that resulted in a lower turnout of supporters), and telling his supporters to stop behaving childishly, Sanders continued to hammer the leadership of the Democratic Party and their rigged elections.

That is 3rd party rhetoric.  We’ve been hearing that for years.  Most of us in the far left know that it’s exceedingly difficult to get a candidate elected who isn’t in the pocket of, well, of everyone basically who would never support a 3rd party candidate.  And we know that running for office takes money, more money than most of us will ever have.

So, while I was initially delighted that a socialist of any kind was able to make it as far as he did, I am very much over that now.

The thing that tipped me over the edge was the “Bernie or Bust” people.  So sure of their moral high ground, they insist that if Sanders isn’t the nominee then they will just not vote. Because…principles.

Well, I would just like to thank those morally superior voters who will stay home and risk a Trump presidency win so that they can feel better about themselves.

I guess they aren’t poor.  I guess they aren’t marginalized.  I guess that, to them, it makes no difference in their daily lives who wins the presidency because they are not on welfare, social security, or medicare/medicaid.

No matter who wins, they will be ok.  Annoyed, maybe, but essentially ok.

Meanwhile, a Trump win will mean that benefits of social programs get cut (he claims he won’t but these programs are seen by his supporters as helping the poor, so you bet he will try to cut them), especially if he has the support of a majority of Congress – and if progressives don’t vote, he will have that support because Republicans will retain their seats.

A Trump win will mean that all that ugly rhetoric about minorities, women, the poor, and the disabled will morph into actions that hurt those people.  Have people not been listening?  This man – and I use that term loosely – thinks protesters should be jailed and/or beaten, and encourages his supporters to do that.

A Trump win will not only mean a reversal of reproductive rights, but maybe jail time for women to “punish” them.  Certainly we will see laws that jail doctors for this.

But that’s ok, I guess, because Sanders supporters can just smugly say “I told you so” as they rant and rave on social media, completely oblivious to the fact that this does not do a damn thing to change anything.

We had a saying, those of us in the old, far left – you know someone by their practice, not by their words.  This is so pertinent to what’s going on today.

I don’t really have a problem with Sanders sticking things out until the end.  What I do have a problem with is his practice, his tendency to ignore everyone but young, white people.  That, to me, speaks volumes…and I find it very disappointing that someone who touts himself as a socialist still is not addressing people who suffer the most under capitalism.

Yes, he does mention us marginalized folks in his stump speeches.  But look at where he campaigns, for the most part.  Look at who his supporters are, for the most part.  Oh, there are occasional minority people who pop up at his rallies, but they are often rich and famous minority people, like Spike Lee.

Aside #4: I know, Clinton does this as well.  But a cursory look at their rallies reveals that Sanders supporters are overwhelmingly white and middle class.  Clinton’s rank and file are more representative of “real” people.

Sanders is still almost entirely focused on his own campaign, his own wish to be the nominee. His speeches consist almost entirely of attacking the Wall St rich backers of candidates (which is a valid point but ok already, people get it), explaining what his presidency will do – in the vaguest of terms, and now taunting Trump because Trump refuses to debate him (because Trump has no ideas to debate).

Where are the real-life examples of what Sanders will do to help the most vulnerable of people in America?  He has stated that he doesn’t understand how anyone can live off of “11,324/year” (“Social Security”, Bernie Sanders, Bernie Quotes for a Better World website, no date).

11,324/year???  Wow, everyone I know – and this includes my clients at my volunteer job who consist of elderly, disabled people – would be over the moon with that monthly payment (~$943/month)!  Why? Because, unless someone has retirement benefits or something, people on SSI/SSDI get $750/month at most.  That is what I get, and that’s what everyone I know gets.

I have no idea where he gets that number, but it shows how out of touch he is with the poor.

I think he, for the most part, cares more about his ego, and his nomination, than he does about the people he supposedly is representing.  I think he would take down the entire Democratic Party if he thought it served his interests, and I come to that conclusion reluctantly.

The most important issue right now is to defeat Trump.  I don’t think I need to explain why.  But, even when Sanders states – over and over again – that polls indicate he would beat Trump in a general election, I think that it’s going to be painfully obvious that the old “anti-American, anti-Communist/Socialist” rhetoric is going to be the Republican Party’s most used weapon against Sanders, were he to get the nomination.

The reason is, the Republican Party and Trump feed on fear and ignorance.  They hate women so Clinton is the enemy, and they hate “commies” so Sanders is the enemy.  Is Bernie going to take great pains to explain why socialism isn’t an evil idea that is, to many people, traitorous and totalitarian?

Clinton has a better chance of making her claim that sexism just won’t fly with most women anymore, and point out that the Republican Party and Trump are reactionary, hateful people. With the exception of some loudmouthed idiots, most people will not openly support blatantly sexist rhetoric or ideas.

Um…ever read the comments sections by “Bernie or Bust” people about Clinton?  “Blatantly sexist” doesn’t even begin to describe that.  Or take the interviews of Sanders supporters you see on TV – yes, they mostly mention Clinton taking a lot of money for speeches to corporations. But there is also a disturbing sub-text, an almost pathological hatred of her because she is female.

I can come to no other conclusion.  I have seen some bitter, contentious political fights but I am always aware that the most virulent and hateful rhetoric is reserved for women and minorities. If they are strong women who dare to stand up to a man (unlike Palin and other right-wing women), they are vilified to an extent that I have only seen reserved for our current president (because of his race).

Sanders needs to get his ego in check and talk – really talk – to his supporters.  Otherwise, when the time comes to unite the party against Trump, we are going to lose a lot of voters due to false morality, sexism, or just sour grapes because Sanders lost the nomination.

It’s not about him, it’s about our country and the gains progressives have made over the years. He needs to change his rhetoric – not only to help defeat Trump, but to educate his supporters that “progressive” does not mean “my special interests” regarding student loans and other millennial concerns, that it means addressing the deepest and sickest problems of the entire country under capitalism.

So, now, I am torn.  If Sanders loses the nomination, as he is predicted to, my vote in the presidential election will be for someone who is bought and paid for by the system.  But at least Clinton has the possibility of being pushed farther to the left, once elected – because I happen to think that Clinton really does care about people and their problems.  She realizes how dangerous Trump is and is urging people to focus on defeating him.

Sanders realizes how dangerous Trump is, too, but his main focus is still on his campaign and the electoral system.  If he doesn’t start addressing, in a clear and principled way, the problems this country has specifically, he is going to send “Never Hillary” people scrambling to vote Libertarian, or to not vote at all – both of which hurt the Democratic Party and ultimately help Trump (though he may also lose votes to Libertarians).

Libertarians – who think that poor people ought to just rely on charities or…or I guess just lay down and die.  Libertarians – who think that a “free market” will solve everything and by God if those poor, elderly, and disabled people weren’t so lazy, they would get jobs that would magically appear if capitalism was unfettered by any controls or checks/balances.

Libertarians – who believe that everyone should just have health insurance savings accounts, but who have no answer as to where we are all supposed to get the money to put in a savings account.  Oh yeah, those magical jobs that will appear to hire those of us who, so far, as so marginalized by society that no one will hire us.

Why do I think a portion of “Never Hillary” or “Bernie or Bust” people will vote Libertarian?  It’s because of the last election that Libertarians ran in, with Ron Paul as their nominee.  I talked to a lot of people who considered themselves “progressive”, who were Libertarians, because of some of the policies Libertarians support (marriage equality and reproductive rights, to mention two).

These so-called progressives, though, also railed against welfare and social security.  Their ideas still only revolved around helping the middle class.  I see the same thing with some Bernie supporters.  Not all of them, of course, but a portion of them.

The election is a few months away.  I hope to see things change and evolve so that we can keep Republicans and fascists out of power.  I still wear my Bernie shirt, and if I had it to do over again I still would have voted for him in the primary.

But I am becoming disillusioned with Sanders.   I will be watching and hoping he changes his tone, and perhaps adds more women to his campaign rolls.  I hope he becomes more specific in his speeches on how he is going to change things.   If by some extraordinary circumstance he is the nominee, I will vote for him and maybe even campaign for him (if I am not sick).

I am also watching Hillary Clinton.  As of this blog post, I have to say that she has displayed a high degree of self-control and has not been distracted by the many criticisms thrown at her. As for her emails, I would venture to guess – based on my experience with one of my tech savvy kids who actually sets up servers – that her server at home was much more secure than the one at the State Dept.  Also, many of these so-called rules she broke were not even in effect when she was Secretary of State.

But I have noticed that there seems to be so much hatred towards Hillary Clinton, so much unreasonable dislike of her (unreasonable in that a lot of people can’t even articulate why they hate her), that I wonder how she will turn that around.  She’s not young, she’s not model pretty, she seems to talk fairly straight when asked questions, and she won’t let Trump bully her.

Maybe we just aren’t ready for a woman president.  I would like to think that this isn’t true.  But, as Nancy Downstairs put it the other day, when I expressed sadness at the sexism I see all around, “It’ll always be that way.”  I sincerely hope not.

Weirdness of the day comes from the Reuters website, just because it shows how easy it is to generate a lot of views over the most stupid of things:

“Texas Woman and Her Chewbacca Mask Go Viral”.  Yes, I know – I’m a grump.  I found this woman annoyingly self-involved.  The fact that she then went on several TV shows just boggles my mind.  But, there you go – you might find it funny.

Recommendation for the week?  Sorry, too sick to recommend anything right now.  In fact, it took several days for me to write this, because I feel so awful.

Be good.  Be kind.  Be well.

 

 

 

“It’s Not Cool To Not Know What You’re Talking About.”

6 Replies

The title is a quote from our president, when he spoke at commencement at Rutger’s (“Full Text of President Obama’s Speech at Rutger’s Commencement”, Mark Mueller, NK Advance Media for NJ.com, 5/15/2016).  You might want to read the whole transcript, as it’s positive and uplifting (and not boring – heck, I don’t even remember who spoke at my commencement, let alone what he said).

This quote just about sums up what a lot of people think, when they watch anything having to do with the presidential election these days.  I happen to think that a majority of Americans think this way, despite the heavy press that seems to suggest that most Americans are…well…stupid.

Turn on the TV these days, and you will see an astoundingly large amount of discussion about Donald Trump and his latest “news”.  But, most of the time, it’s not really news, it’s free publicity. Trump uses the strategy of “say or do at least one outrageous thing each week, so that your name continues to be bandied about in the press.”

There’s a reason he has spent less on ads than any other candidate – it’s because he uses the press and gets publicity for free.  According to the Huffington Post, Trump has received $1.9 billion in free media coverage, but has spent only $10 million on ads (“Donald Trump Has Received Nearly $2 Billion in Free Media Attention”, Michael Calderone, Huffington Post, 3/15/2016). 

The reason he can spend so little is because he is constantly calling attention to himself.  If he doesn’t make some kind of outrageous statement in a speech, he Tweets attention-seeking tidbits or even calls news shows.  He makes himself completely accessible to news media, seemingly at all times.

“But isn’t that clever?” you might be wondering.  Well, I suppose it is, in terms of how to “get stuff free”, but I am banking that this will hurt him in the long run.  For one thing, every time he has to answer for some dumb thing he’s said, he either denies he said it, changes the subject, or in some cases just ends the conversation.

The main reason it bothers me, however, is that I am seeing more and more bias in the media regarding Trump.  As other Republicans fall in line to back Trump – despite the fact that he really doesn’t have a lot of support amongst the general population and despite the fact that he has skewered and bullied every Republican who ran against him or questioned his ideas – I see news outlets doing the same, falling all over Trump (or at least not pushing the hard questions).

They give Trump hour-long interviews, they report on every tiny thing he says, while ignoring the issue-oriented statements and Tweets the two Democratic Party candidates make (Clinton and Sanders).  Then, sometimes, the pundits discuss amongst themselves how uninformed the public is, how “low information” they are (which some even equate to being lower in native intelligence), and so on, without admitting how much they themselves contribute to the problem.

Even if you see a reporter, say, on MSNBC disagreeing with a spokesperson for Trump (because I rarely if ever see them do this to the candidate himself) on a show, it takes the form of that reporter shouting over the other person.  I can’t count how many times I have yelled at my TV, “Let him answer the question!” as Chris Matthews or Joe Scarborough asks a question and then continues to talk when the person tries to answer.

No one learns anything like that.  It’s as if these reporters use Trump supporters to shore up their own egos, nothing more.  They are no more interested in educating the public than Fox News is.  Not that a Trump supporter answering a question would be particularly enlightening, but it might actually tell a voter something about the candidate.  If nothing else, it would provide fodder for the reporter to refute him or her with a fact-check of some sort.

Some might say this indicates a negative bias against Trump.  But I see it as a “wink wink” kind of attitude, the kind of fascination people can have towards celebrities behaving badly, almost as if being a total jerk is endearing somehow.  They’re still not taking him seriously.

He’s not just a celebrity anymore, he’s running for president.  If elected, he can do some real damage to this country, not only domestically but on the international stage.  And sometimes it seems as if the only people who are really worried about this are the Republicans.

Why the Republicans?  Well, they’re afraid Trump is making them, and their candidates for Congress, look bad.  They don’t want to lose control of the Senate and the House, and those with long memories or a knowledge of history do not want a repeat of what Goldwater did in 1964.

I was 8.  I remember this ad:

I remember the “duck and cover” stuff we had to do in school, and I remember adults talking about being scared.  I couldn’t sleep election night, because I was so terrified Goldwater would be elected and my young life would be over.   Even though the ad itself was only shown once (as an ad), the news picked it up and we saw it over and over again.

Goldwater wasn’t elected, obviously.  Also, the GOP lost 36 seats in the House, and dropped 2 seats in the Senate, giving the Democrats a majority in both the House and Senate (“The Goldwater Mirage”, Dennis Sanders, The Moderate Voice website, 2009).  

It was a disaster for the Republican Party.  Due to the extremist positions Goldwater held, particularly his opposition to the Civil Rights Act as “unconstitutional” and his suggestion that “low-yield atomic weapons” could be used in Vietnam (“Barry Goldwater, GOP Hero, Dies”, Bart Barnes, Washington Post, page A01, 5/30/1998), many people described him as a lunatic who had no business being near the “red button”.

In context, this was 3 years after the 1961 Bay of Pigs incident (which led to the Cuban Missile Crisis), which was another extremely scary experience (because people were afraid the Soviets were going to launch nuclear weapons at us from Cuba), and only 19 years after we dropped bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki – which showed the horror those weapons could unleash.

People were very, very afraid of nuclear weapons.

The positive side of that is it spurred people to vote against Goldwater, and it also forced a political dichotomy on the American public (remember the Pete Seeger tune, “Which Side Are You On?” – a pro-miners workers’ union song, it was also sung at anti-war, May Day, and other demonstrations in the 60s and early 70s).

People were very much on “one side” or the other.  Riots were sparked over political stances.

Pages: 1 2

Not Secular, Not Elvis, Not Even Close

Leave a reply

I need an iPod or something.  That way, I don’t have to put my fingers in my ears and sing “la la la la la I can’t hear you”, which I literally did on Wednesday.

Yes, I really did that.  And, though it was done humorously, I did it so I wouldn’t have to hear what I knew was going to be a bunch of pro-Trump drivel from…

…yeah, one of those entitled seniors I wrote about last week.  He’s also the guy who shouts into the microphone at every monthly meeting of the volunteer organization I belong to, when he “leads us all in prayer” before lunch.  He can hear fine, he just shouts a lot, because he’s one of those people who seems to think that “louder” means “important”.

I am going to back up here a bit.

Those who read my Facebook posts were subjected to the shorter version of what happened in my life on Wednesday (feel free to skip).  I had to attend an awards lunch – yes, it was mandatory and yes, I paid the van service $6 for transportation to/from the lunch – which, like all meetings of this volunteer organization, is held in a church.

The senior organization that administers this volunteer program (which is federal) actually owns and runs the van service – but they won’t transport anyone under 65 for free for their mandatory meetings.  It’s ridiculous, and they won’t give any explanation, they just say “no”.  They reimburse gas mileage to people who drive, but do not pay for or reimburse van costs or bus fare.  It doesn’t make any sense to me.

So I walked into the church common room, or whatever they call it, and the first thing I saw was this:

Trump Sign

This is a picture of the “snack table”, where the volunteer organization leaves breakfast bars for us, since the damn meetings start at 8:30 or 9 am.  In case you can’t read this sign, it says “please 1 per person Thank you “Donald Trump” (sic)”.

I suspect it was the pastor of the church who wrote this, because he is present for every meeting (even though he isn’t a member of the program) and he fancies himself a funny guy who occasionally makes jokes about President Obama and “liberals”.

He’s a Methodist minister.  I used to attend a Methodist church, years ago when I was married (long story for another time), and the minister of that church wasn’t anything like this man.  In fact, the Methodist churches in Memphis tend to be fairly liberal.

I don’t know why he should care if anyone takes more than one bar, because as far as I know he doesn’t buy them.  But…seniors are really like children, you see, and it’s up to him to make sure we obey all the rules. *Rolls eyes*

I thought, “Uh oh, this doesn’t bode well.”  Any reference to Trump doesn’t bode well with me.

The program started out with door prizes.  Oddly, in the middle of this, the pastor walked up to the front, took the mic from the volunteer coordinator (who is a member of his church, by the way) and announced…

“There’s been a bus accident.”

Everyone gasped.  As you do, if you think “oh I know people who ride the bus” and so on.

He continued, “It was Hillary Clinton’s campaign bus.”

It dawned on me that this was a joke.  Ha…ha…ha.

He then said, “Three boys pulled Hillary out of the bus.  She says to them, ‘Since you saved my life, I’ll reward you with anything you like.’  He describes what the first two boys want (a car and something else) and said, “The third boy asked for a tombstone.”

His punchline?  “Hillary asked, ‘why a tombstone?’  Because, the boy said, when my father finds out I saved you, he’s going to kill me.”

Everyone laughed heartily, except for the two African-Americans in the room, and me.

The pastor walked back to where he usually stands at the back of the room, a smug smile on his face.

He had to pass me on the way.  I asked him, “Why did you say that?  Not everyone here is a Republican, you know.”

He looked at me as if I had two heads, and kept right on walking.

The other people at my table looked horrified, because I had spoken to the pastor that way. Two of them were my friends (or so I thought) with whom I went through training.

I explained, “There are Democrats in this room, I bet, and Hillary supporters too.  Plus, this was inappropriate, this isn’t the place for partisan politics.  I found it offensive.”

Again, I got the “she’s got two heads” look.  And no response.

Yes, my day was off to a bright start.

The rest of the morning was fairly uneventful.  I won a gift card to a local gas station.

I don’t own a car.

I guess I will give it to Nancy Downstairs.

The volunteer coordinator and her minions assistants, in their usual bumbling way, had not prepared enough door prizes for everyone.  Now, that caused an uproar with the people who didn’t win anything.   They were threatening to write letters (to whom, I have no idea), draw up petitions, and call their local politicians.

I’m serious.  They really did say these things.

Violate church and state?  Who cares?

Don’t get a door prize?  Up in arms!!

Lunch time rolled around – yay, it’s not Meals on Wheels this time – and the volunteer coordinator announced on the mic, “Come lead us all in prayer, Jack.” (Not his real name, by the way)

Jack obliged and shouted into the microphone, ending (of course) with “in Jesus’ name”.

I was so glad he didn’t ask his god to bless Trump or make any political references.  So glad.

Of course, everyone bowed their heads except for me.  I keep hoping one day I will find another person who doesn’t do this, so I can befriend him or her.

While standing in line for lunch, my “friends” and I passed Jack, who was on the verge of telling the “friend” behind me why he voted for Trump.  That’s when I did the finger in ears la la la thing.  That got a few laughs but it really helped me, because I truly could not hear Jack.

“What a blessing”, as they say in Memphis.

After lunch, we were subjected “treated” to the musical stylings of an Elvis impersonator.  Who, for some odd reason, didn’t impersonate Elvis, he just sang some of his songs.  He played guitar and warbled (pretty badly, I might add) accompanied by recorded music.

It was awful.

And there was Jack, in the back, shouting out “Play (insert title of Elvis song here)!” after every song.  Thankfully, he was ignored.

But then it got worse.

Mr. Elvis Impersonator Who Isn’t Really then began to play gospel songs.  And, of course, the majority of the brainwashed seniors sang along, off-key, or just shouted the lyrics.

One of my “friends” turned to me and said…

“Come on, sing!!”

“I’m not Christian,” I replied.

She laughed.

“I’m not kidding,” I said.

She laughed again, and then turned away.

I was dismissed.

Pages: 1 2

Senior Entitlement: No, Not Social Security

2 Replies

Today I am going to address something I see a lot of – entitled behavior on the part of “senior citizens” (basically, anyone 55 or older).  I feel I have every right to comment on this, as I am in that age group.

Every time I interact with most people my age or older, the same refrain runs through my mind:

“I swear I am never going to become like these people.”

And if I ever do start exhibiting these odious behaviors, I want my loved ones to take me to a neuropsychologist to find out why, because it would be a drastic personality change.

I can count on one hand how many older people I deal with who are nice, down-to-earth (not snobby), funny, and kind.   I have friends my age, and they’re great!  But they are not typical of folks our age.

The rest of the seniors I encounter are, quite frankly, jerks.  Many assume everyone else their age is like them, too – so they are rather free in their assertions and hateful talk.  Rather than asking, “What do you think?” they make pronouncements about society that “everyone agrees with.”

Uh-uh, hold on a minute Grandma and Grandpa – not everyone is like you.  I fervently hope most people are not like you.  Keep your voice down and try asking others what they think, instead of being a pompous ass about any given subject (which you may or may not know anything about).

And stop forcing everyone to be quiet while you do things such as require prayer in tax-funded service agencies.  You’re wrong to do this, and you’ve had plenty of time to familiarize yourself with our Constitution to know why this isn’t right.

The attitude that drives “senior entitlement” is this:

“I am elderly, so what I want, and what I think, supersede what everyone else wants and thinks.  I earned it!  And if you don’t do what I want, or you argue with me, you’re being disrespectful.”

Sorry, but I subscribe to the belief that no one gets automatic respect just due to their age.  All it means when someone lives to a ripe old age is…they don’t have major health problems.

That’s not a virtue, that’s just (mostly) luck, perhaps coupled with eating right and taking care of oneself.

It does not follow that older people are any wiser than anyone else.  This is often one reason given why we all should automatically listen to and respect them.

No, quite often if a person is a foolish, selfish jerk when young, they will be a foolish, selfish jerk when they are older – unless there is a major life event that changed them in some way.

But even that isn’t unique to aging, as young people can also have major events that change them for the better.

What prompted this post was either the increasing loudness of seniors voicing their dissatisfaction with the world at large, or my increasing sensitivity to it.  I’m not sure which it is, but I am fed up listening to it.

To those who might argue that these folks are upset because society treats them badly, I must disagree.  I think it’s the other way around.

It’s because their bad attitudes seem so prevalent (because they are so loud) that this affects how the rest of the world treats them – and how it treats everyone else of a certain age, too.

It’s as if people expect us all to be jerks, by default.

I can’t blame them, really.  If every 100 seniors you meet are cranky, bigoted, manipulative, rude, self-centered ninnies, then you might be inclined to assume the 101st one will be like that, too.

Plus, look at Bernie Sanders – loved and respected by many young people.  They aren’t disrespectful to him.  It’s because he is progressive, and has an attitude of acceptance of all people.  If the issue of “disrespect” that older people complain about was due to prejudice against older people in general, Sanders would not have gotten as far as he has.

The “prejudice” lies in older people reinforcing stereotypes of “angry, bitter old people”.

Some examples of things entitled seniors do that make me cringe or make me angry are:

A.  The insistence on (unconstitutional) organized prayer before lunch at senior centers. No, I don’t mean the spontaneous praying over food that many Christians do, I mean a situation where the paid staff person grabs a mic and asks, “Who wants to lead us in The Pledge and prayer?”  This is quite off-putting to people who are not Christians, or to Christians who support the separation of church and state.

Since the senior centers here (and in most places) are funded by the Dept of Aging, which is a state (or commonwealth) entity of the US Administration on Aging, they receive tax dollars and, as such, cannot sponsor or favor one religion over another.

It’s not “a bunch of old dears wanting to express their love for their country and their God”, as so many right-wingers try to spin it.

No, it’s a bunch of old Christians who don’t see a thing wrong with taking over a federally funded organization and making “outsiders” (non-Christians) feel unwelcome.

Because, let me tell you, if you read about attempts to get these senior centers to come into compliance with the Constitution, you’ll see that the Christian seniors scream, yell, and play the age card.  Some really pull out all the stops and play the “age plus veteran” card.

Then, you’re not only hating old people, you’re also un-American and attacking those who fought in wars.

Give me a break.

B.  The racist, nationalistic, jingoistic, xenophobic (except regarding certain European countries such as Ireland, Scotland, Germany, Greece, and Italy), and homophobic views expressed by seniors in the centers, on the bus, or basically anywhere two or more of them congregate.  They are loud about it and they don’t care, because they’re intimidating to younger folks, and they know this.

C.  The stereotypical complaining about “how spoiled young people are”, how the “good old days” were so much better, how no one (except them, of course) has values or morals anymore, how “you can’t say Merry Christmas!” (oddly, I hear that one all year ’round), and how “young people are rude/do drugs/dress ‘funny’/don’t respect elders/(insert other complaint here) because they took prayer out of the schools”.

The basis of this is, they don’t understand the world now, and they don’t want to make any attempt to understand it.  It’s easier to just hang out with other grumpy, uninformed seniors so they don’t have to challenge themselves in any way.

D.  The frequent bashing of other religions, particularly Islam.  (I don’t hear it about pagans but now that I wear a pentacle I suppose I might start hearing it more.)  The frequent bashing of women, and the sexist jokes and comments about women in the public eye (Hillary, and others).

Confront someone about this and you’re “being politically correct”, “being too sensitive”, not understanding “how these people really are”.

E.  The hostility towards technology, and towards the younger people who have jobs in that sector (I take personal umbrage at this, as all my 3 adult kids have technology jobs and college degrees).  The weird attitude that these college-educated younger folks somehow diminish whatever work the senior did when young.  The assertion that younger people are “lazy” because they can use cell phones and computers.  The wrongheaded notion that younger people have fewer social skills because of technology.

I had one woman tell me that younger people can’t spell now because of cell phones and computers, and that conversing via text is somehow an insult to her (just because she doesn’t see the value in text messaging).

The world is changing.  Either get with the program or lay off hating people just because you do not understand it or do not want to participate in it.  Here’s an idea: ask a younger person to help you learn technological stuff.  Most will be flattered you asked.

The attitude about younger people comes off as hateful and bitter.  Here is a good example of a “baby boomer” complaining about millennials that illustrates this pretty well.  It’s called “How Millennials are Ruining the Workforce” (Sandy Hingston, News + Opinion Section of the Philadelphia Magazine online, 1/8/2016).

Oh!  A Pennsylvanian!  How appropriate!

The comments/rebuttals by millennials, progressive baby boomers, and a few by gen x-ers are worth a read as well.  Pity the comments are closed.

Just as we can see the phenomenon of certain groups of people who put whatever pops into their heads online for all to see, it’s evident that older folks do this live and in person.

Heck, at least you can turn off the computer.  With these people, you don’t have any option to stop it (not any legal ones, anyway).

I could blame this on living in a conservative area (central Pennsylvania), except that Sanders won most of the counties around here.  So, that doesn’t explain the phenomenon.

I could write a blog post on how older folks are marginalized by the rest of society, patronized or treated like children, and/or discriminated against in employment.  These are real problems.

They are problems that need to be addressed.  But does it ever occur to the majority of seniors that this is where their energy would be better spent, rather than used to rant and rave about people they perceive as being inferior to them?

Yes, we do have organizations such as the Grey Panthers, but they are not in most places.  I did contact them, actually, long ago…and received no reply.  Good job, folks.

Many senior organizations – the mainstream ones – meant to assist older people do not address the basic problems.  They, too, are often patronizing towards older people, and that will drive the most openminded senior away – because who wants to be treated like that by an agency that is supposed to help you?

The entitled senior loves organizations like those, though, because (for one thing) they have lower expectations for senior behavior.  They expect them to behave like spoiled children, and from what I have seen, this is exactly the behavior they get.  No one challenges it, and seniors who are not like that leave the organization.

I don’t know what the answer to this entitlement problem is.  I do know that I am getting really sick and tired of it.

This week’s weirdness comes from Snopes, and it’s a story about an ancient city being unearthed in someone’s backyard (“Elaborate Roman Villa Found in Man’s Backyard”, Brooke Binkowski, Snopes website, 4/18/16).  The villa was built between 175 AD and 220 AD.  Very cool.

Recommendations?  I have been watching a lot of CNN and MSNBC, and reading websites mostly covering the presidential election, so I don’t have anything to recommend this week.

Be good. Be kind. Don’t be one of “those people”.

 

Extremists Seek to Legalize Discrimination Against LGBT People

5 Replies

First of all, today’s big news was the death of Prince, a musician/singer/songwriter/record producer/actor from Minneapolis, MN.  He was 57.  The press is suggesting that maybe flu was the cause.  Such a shame, he was so talented.

So far this year, we music lovers have lost…

  1.  David Bowie, age 69
  2.  Glenn Frey, age 67
  3.  Paul Kantner, age 74
  4.  Maurice White, age 74
  5.  Frank Sinatra, Jr, age 72
  6.  Merle Haggard, age 79
  7.  Signe Anderson, age 74

This last singer was important to me (as was Kantner) because she was the first lead singer of the Jefferson Airplane, and recorded their first album with them (“Jefferson Airplane Takes Off”). It was released in 1966, when I was 10 and my sister Ginny was 13…Ginny bought it because she had heard the band in San Francisco with some friends.  Memories.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Ok, on to this week’s topic.

Like I stated last week, there are other news stories besides the US presidential election, though you wouldn’t really know it from watching the news here.

Aside #1:  Massive, killer earthquakes in Japan and Ecuador, for example (“Powerful Earthquakes in Japan and Ecuador”, EarthSky website, 4/17/16).  

A couple of stories about recently-passed laws have me shaking my head in disbelief, they are so stupid and hateful.  Again, we have right-wing religious fundamentalists trying to use “religious freedom” as an excuse to discriminate against people they don’t like.

One piece of legislation is HB2 in North Carolina, and the other is HB 1523 in Mississippi.  Both laws have clauses in them about who can and cannot use which bathrooms, amongst other things.

Conservatives, who are constantly screaming that they don’t want the government to tell them what to do, have no problem whatsoever with having the government tell everyone else what to do.

Here’s a summary of these 2 bills…

In Mississippi, there is a “religious liberty bill” that allows social workers, public employees, and businesses to deny services based on their ideas about marriage (only between a man and a woman), sex (only when married), and gender (determined by birth only).

So…someone can refuse to grant a marriage license, deny an adoption based on the parents being a same-sex couple, or even fire LGBT people.  The list of people this involves is endless, from florists and wedding planners to counselors and doctors.

I would love to move back to the area and put a rainbow-colored shingle out, declaring that LGBT people are most welcome for counseling services.  Along with pagans and everyone else.

Aside #2: Unfortunately, long ago the social work lobby succeeded in getting Mississippi’s grandfather clause on licensing tossed out – the one that enabled people with master’s degrees in psychology who do marriage and family therapy to get licensed just by applying. So, unless someone out there already has a counseling business and needs to hire a counselor (so I could work under their license), my whole “Mississippi equal opportunity counseling” dream is just that – a dream – for now.

(Btw, that’s a hint)

Anyway, this law also allows (I would say “encourages”) schools and businesses to “establish sex-specific policies regarding bathrooms and dress” (“Mississippi’s Senate Just Approved a Sweeping ‘Religious Liberty Bill’ that Critics Say is the Worst Yet for LGBT Rights”, Sarah Kaplan, Washington Post website, 3/31/16).

In N. Carolina, the law blocks local governments from passing anti-discrimination laws that protect LGBT people.  This seemed to be in reaction to Charlotte, N. Carolina passing a law that prohibited discrimination against LGBT people.  Apparently one of the big objections to this anti-discrimination bill is the part stating that people can use the bathroom of whatever gender with which they identify.

In fact, a lot of what you hear on the news about either bill is this whole “bathroom controversy”.  It’s just so ridiculous, and I can’t understand what upsets people so much about it.

If someone is dressed like a woman, why would you want that person in the men’s room?  How would you even notice if she was born a man?

I don’t know about you, but when I use public bathrooms my 2 main concerns are 1. will there be an empty stall, and 2.  did the last dumbass decide she had to “avoid germs” by hovering over the toilet seat and pissing all over it?  That happens a lot in women’s bathrooms!

I couldn’t tell you who was in there if my life depended on it.  And I would think this is the norm for most people.  I don’t see why there is an issue.

And how would you enforce this?  Cameras??  Having a towel person, or whatever they’re called, that fancy restaurant bathrooms have?  Except they’d not hand you a towel, their whole job would be to make sure the “right gender” is using the bathroom.

That is unbelievably creepy.  Just imagine who would apply for a job like that.

I would think that this would be a voyeur’s dream job.  Ugh.

Though ridiculous, the main focus should be on the fact that these laws permit discrimination, even encourage it.  This is not ok.  It’s not “religious freedom” to discriminate against others.

The Old Testament, from which many of these “religious ideas” come, also has passages in it about witches and pagans (the most famous one is Exodus 22:18 – “thou shalt not suffer a witch to live”).  Heck, I didn’t even have to look it up, it’s been thrown in my face so many times.

And, although the laws specifically refer to people in the LGBT community, make no mistake that, once these idiots get away with laws like these, others will be next.

Pagans, maybe Muslims, possibly women, atheists…the list goes on and on.  How would these businesses know?

Well, they can ask, of course.  Recall the last time you checked into an outpatient facility for medical tests, or the ER…didn’t they ask you what religion, if any, you prefer?  I’ve been asked this many times, in many states.

Aside #3: Presumably it’s to find out what religious person you want them to call in case you code and are dying in their facility – pretty morbid, if you ask me, and also stupid, as there really isn’t any other witch they could call, in my case.

It is also a routine question asked by therapists while filling out a client’s “psychosocial assessment” – something I have done thousands of times during intake.

With these laws, there’s nothing to prevent landlords and businesses and others from asking questions about sexual orientation, and if the right keeps pushing agendas like this, they will soon be able to ask religious questions as well.

So, if you have to argue the question with someone who says, “I’m not LGBT, why should I care?”, you can point out that they might be next, if they have something about them that offends some fundamentalist Christian.

I have to admit I’m shocked at the nerve these people had to pass laws like this.  Laws that are so basically unfair and bigoted.  But, in the current political climate, where the extreme right feels they can push their agendas hard, and often, it’s important that we push back.

Push back – hard and relentlessly.

Today’s weirdness comes from a site called Daily Grail – and this is also my recommendation for the week.  It’s a rather long, but fascinating, article on mushrooms and fairies, hallucinations, and certain works of literature (yes, “Alice in Wonderland” is mentioned).

The article is titled “Mushrooms in Wonderland”, by Mike Jay (Daily Grail website, 4/15/16).  Well worth a read.

Be good.  Be kind.  Push back.

 

The Price of 29 Deaths: One Year in Prison

3 Replies

With all the brouhaha over the presidential election, it’s understandable that this story would not be discussed much in the news.  However, I think it’s very important, as not only did 29 people die, but it is indicative of a systemic problem in this country – the overriding importance of profit over people’s safety and lives.

I became aware of this as I was puttering about in the kitchen, with the news playing in the background.  I heard a man sobbing, stating how it wasn’t fair that someone got only one year when so many people were dead.

I caught the whole story on the next pass (since CNN and others report the same stories over and over), and also did some internet research on my own.

What I found out was absolutely disgusting.

I’d like to say it was surprising, but considering my past work and the outcomes I saw, time and time again, when profit supersedes peoples’ health, I can’t.

The story: Donald Blankenship, former CEO of Massey Energy Company, was convicted of only one count of conspiracy to violate federal mine safety standards (“Donald Blankenship Sentenced to a Year in Prison in Mine Safety Case”, Alan Blinder, New York Times website, 4/6/2016).

The original charges were conspiracy to defraud the United States, making a false statement to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, and making false statements to investors – all three are felonies; and conspiracy to violate mine safety standards, which is a misdemeanor (“The Don Blankenship Trial – FAQ”, Ken Ward, Jr and Joel Elbert, JoelEbert Atavist website, no date posted).

Aside #1: Joel Ebert is a reporter who often writes about legal cases.

His site adds that, four months later, the government was able to combine the two conspiracy counts into one felony count of conspiracy that includes both the safety violation and defrauding the U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration (Ibid).

If convicted as charged, Blankenship could have been sentenced to 30 years in prison.  But, for some reason, he still was only convicted on the violation of mine safety standards – so he is only facing one year in prison.

I am not a lawyer, and really wish someone who was would explain this to me.  I don’t understand how, if the misdemeanor was essentially rolled into one felony count, Blankenship wasn’t convicted of that.

What, exactly, was the incident that spurred these legal charges?

In April of 2010, the Massey Upper Big Branch Mine exploded, killing 29 miners (“Ex-Coal CEO Convicted of Misdemeanor Conspiracy”, Jonathan Mattise (AP) and John Raby (AP), via the US News and World Report website, 12/3/2015).

29 people.  29 people who were already risking black lung disease and other health issues just to make a living in West Virginia, which is ranked 49th in income (“These Are America’s Richest and Poorest States”, Dora Mekouar, Voice of America website, 9/21/2015).

The poverty rate in West Virginia is 18.3%.  Only Mississippi is poorer – ranked #50 at 21.5% (Ibid).

And, although this CEO got the maximum allowed by law for this charge – which, by the way, was touted as a great victory by the government because no CEO has ever been convicted of this – it’s a huge tragedy for families who have suffered so much already.

People who worked for this guy got stiffer sentences for things like lying about warning miners when inspectors were coming (Hughie Elbert Stover, 36 months), and thwarting federal mine safety regulators (Gary May, 21 months).

One man – David Hughart – got 42 months for thwarting federal mine safety regulators and for conspiracy to violate U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration standards (“The Don Blankenship Trial – FAQ”, Ken Ward, Jr and Joel Elbert, JoelEbert Atavist website, no date posted).

Yes, there’s that charge again – only a misdemeanor.  The other charges are felonies.  That charge should also be a felony.  The law needs to change.

One of the arguments the defense used, apparently successfully, was that the reason the government was prosecuting this CEO was to “bolster the political fortunes of R. Booth Goodwin II, the United States attorney who oversaw the case” (“Donald Blankenship Sentenced to a Year in Prison in Mine Safety Case”, Alan Blinder, New York Times website, 4/6/2016).

Goodwin is a Democrat.  Blankenship is a Republican. So the defense pandered to the “liberals picking on the conservatives” point-of-view that many people hold.

Aside #2: Don’t get me wrong, I do not subscribe to the “Democrats good, Republicans bad” political point-of-view.  To me, when money is involved, partisan politics goes out the window.  It just seems to me that Republicans are more often anti-union and anti-safety-if-it-costs-us-money than Democrats are – but it’s just by a narrow margin.

And Blankenship’s reaction to his conviction?  He winked.

Yes, that’s right – he winked at reporters.  Supposedly this was a reference to his attorney asking a witness if he thought he and Blankenship had a “wink and a nod” that there would be violations of mine safety regulations (“In The United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia at Charleston Transcript of Proceedings”, assets.documentcloud.org, 11/17/2015).

He winked.  Then he laughed (“Ex-Coal CEO Convicted of Misdemeanor Conspiracy”, Jonathan Mattise (AP) and John Raby (AP), via the US News and World Report website, 12/3/2015).

Now there’s a heartless, smug bastard if there ever was one.  And I’m pretty sure he is convinced he will win on appeal.

Sleeping well, with the blood of 29 miners on his hands that he doesn’t even see because, to him, these are not really people.   Miners are only “things” to make profits for him.  He doesn’t care about them or their families.

He doesn’t care about the man who I heard sobbing on national tv.

Something is very wrong with this country when all the networks devote hours of analysis on why Donald Trump is whining about being too damn stupid to understand the Republican rules for nomination, and not have one in-depth report on this mine tragedy and subsequent lack of serious consequences for someone who made massive amounts of money from said mine.

So massive, in fact, that the company that purchased Massey Energy paid in excess of $5.8 million to defend him.  And then declared bankruptcy (“The Don Blankenship Trial – FAQ”, Ken Ward, Jr and Joel Elbert, JoelEbert Atavist website, no date posted).

I can only shake my head and mourn for the loss of these men, and for the families they left behind.

Today’s weirdness comes from UPI.  It’s for those people who are considering a move to Canada if the presidential election doesn’t go as they want:

“Canadian Survey Reports Increased UFO Sightings in 2015”.  So if you’re scared of otherworldly aliens, be forewarned!

I think Cape Breton might be a better bet, actually…

Today’s recommendation is for the FactCheck.org website.  They seem to do a pretty good job of debunking false news stories and false claims made in news stories (such as the one that Hillary Clinton stated about Vermont being the main supplier of guns to New York – not true).

Be good.  Be kind.   Help others whenever you can.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Every Day, A New Jaw-Dropping Event

4 Replies

I wish I hadn’t taken so much time off from writing this blog, because so much has been happening lately in the world of the presidential election.

Donald Trump is ahead in the Republican race for the presidential nomination.

He seems to be losing some ground to Ted Cruz, who is basically “Trump Light”, and that doesn’t make the GOP look much better.

There seems to be a split in the GOP over Trump – one part is organizing an effort to make sure he doesn’t win the nomination, and the other part is folding like a house of cards and rushing to back him.

It’s creepy, seeing people who just a few weeks ago characterized Trump (correctly, in my opinion) as a dangerous blowhard, now basically saying, “Yes, Mr. Trump.  Whatever you say, Mr. Trump.”

Don’t they realize how duplicitous that looks?  Don’t the Republican voters see it?

And still Trump continues his outrageous behavior, inciting his base to assault protesters, refusing to show up at Republican debates (to debate Ted Cruz and John Kasich), and spouting ridiculous rhetoric that still explains nothing about how he is going to implement his crazy ideas.

His latest bout of crazy was today, when Trump released a statement – after losing the Wisconsin primary to Ted Cruz – referring to Cruz as “Lyin’ Ted” and stating that the Wisconsin results were due to a conspiracy between Cruz, “the Republican party bosses”, and conservative talk radio to “steal” delegates from Trump (“Republican Cruz Crushes Trump in Wisconsin, Says Party Will Unite”, Steve Holland, Reuters website, 4/6/2016).

Because, of course, Trump’s loss would have nothing to do with him insulting Wisconsin governor Scott Walker (who is very popular with the tea party/reactionary crowd), coming off like an unprepared schoolyard bully on a conservative talk show (he was so unprepared he didn’t even know the host was a proponent of the “Never Trump” group), and taking several different positions on abortion in about a 72-hour period of time.

Wisconsin conservatives/right-wing reactionaries, who should be part of Trump’s base, turned on him because of these errors.  But, of course, Trump can never take responsibility for anything, not even his own campaign mistakes.

The abortion flip-flops started when Trump stated there “has to be some form of punishment” for women who have abortions (“Trump Call to Punish Women for Illegal Abortions Sparks Firestorm”, Harper Neidig, The Hill website, 3/30/2016).

When pressed, of course Trump couldn’t say what form that would take, nor how he would ban all abortions.

What punishment is he wanting?  Prison terms, hefty fines, public stoning??

Then he tried to fix this when he stated that “it’s a states rights issue”, after he met with the Republican National chairman Reince Priebus on March 31.  He also stated that “it’s the law”, presumably referring to abortion being (barely) legal in most places.

In PA, abortion is technically legal – but not permitted under Medicare/Medicaid except in cases of life endangerment, incest, or rape, unless the woman pays extra.  That basically makes it illegal for poor women.

Anyway, Trump then released another statement saying that he meant that it’s the law now, but when he is president, he will change that.

Because, presumably, Trump believes that presidential powers supersede the Supreme Court, and that he can just overturn Roe v Wade because he wants to.

He never explains what his actual plans are to implement his right-wing ideas, ever – and he excuses his silence by stating he doesn’t want everyone to know what he’s going to do.

He just wants people to trust him.  Trust him, and he’ll fix everything.

75% of women do not like him, and will not vote for him.  That’s the bright spot in all this.

But…when confronted with this fact, Trump stated it wasn’t true.

“No one respects women more than I do,” he crowed.  He says this a lot.  He Tweets this a lot. He thinks, I guess, if he keeps saying it, people will believe it.  Another tactic that bullies use quite often.

I can’t tell you how many times in the past 2 months my mouth has dropped open in astonishment at the things Trump has said.

When asked about who he would consult regarding foreign policy matters, he replied

“I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things.” (“Five Worst Right-Wing Moments This Week: Trump and His Proxies Take Leave of Reality”, Janet Allon, Alternet website, 3/19/2016)

He rambled a bit more and then added

“So I know what I’m doing. I talk to a lot of people and at the appropriate time, I’ll tell you who they are.  My primary consultant is myself and I have a good instinct about this stuff.” (Ibid)

Yeah, who needs information and education, when you have yourself and your “instinct”?

I would encourage you to read the whole Alternet article, because it details other interesting tidbits such as David Duke stating Trump makes Hitler look good, and Republicans trying desperately to spin the physical attacks on protesters by stating they are paid (um no, most of us will pay people for rides just to go and protest) and that the protesters are just like Vietnam War protesters (actually, I think a lot of them are better organized and somewhat braver than we were, and good for them!).

How that translates to the justification for punching and otherwise roughing up protesters is beyond me.  I guess the Republicans were speaking to the now elderly people who used to shout “America, love it or leave it!” and called us “dirty hippies” in the 1960s and 70s.

In fact, one of the last people to assault a protester was a 78-year-old man named John McGraw. He sucker-punched a protester as that protester was being escorted out by the cops (“Trump Supporter Charged After Sucker-Punching Protester at North Carolina Rally”, Justin Wm. Moyer, Jenny Starrs, and Sarah Larimer, Washington Post online, 3/11/2016).

Ol’ reactionary John talked with the press after punching the guy, stating, “Next time we might have to kill him” (Ibid).  He could say that because, you see, the cops jumped on the protester, and not on reactionary John.

The cops have now been suspended – for 3 to 5 days, big deal – for doing what they did (“5 Sheriff’s Deputies Disciplined After Assault at Trump Rally”, Jeremy Diamond, CNN website, 3/16/2016).

To put things in context, Trump has been saying in his speeches that he wants to punch people in the face, makes references to how protesters used to be carried out on stretchers, and offers to pay the legal fees of people who violently attack protesters (“Media Highlight Trump’s Role in Inspiring Violence at his Events”, Julie Alderman, Media Matters website, 3/11/2016).

It’s not clear whether or not Trump has paid reactionary John’s legal fees.  I can’t find any information on that but I would guess not, as Trump would be bragging about it if he had.

Pages: 1 2