This
post was originally published on April 7. In light of the attention
recently given to masks and Americans' responses to using them, we have
updated it.
In
his 1982 novel "The White Plague" Frank Herbert writes about a mad
scientist who develops a pathogen that kills women. Men are asymptomatic
carriers. His intended target is Ireland, because his wife and children
were killed by an IRA bomb. But viruses don't observe borders, and the
virus spreads rapidly and easily, passing through filters with ease. The
result is global gendercide.
COVID-19
is far less selective. Its victims include the rich and the poor, the
intelligent and the moronic, the religious and the atheistic, the royal
and the commoner. It is an equal opportunity pathogen, making no
distinction of race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation. No one is
immune.
But
there is one class of Americans who choose to put themselves at
increased risk by willfully and deliberately ignoring the best medical
advice: There is no word for such behavior other than stupid.
In
a White House press briefing on April 3, the Great Pretender discussed
the CDC advisory that all Americans wear face masks when around others
to help stop the spread of the virus.
That was when a true leader would have pulled out a mask and put it on.
But
after repeatedly assuring Americans that wearing a mask is voluntary
because he doesn't want us to think the CDC has any authority, he went
on to say that he would not be wearing a mask because "I think wearing a face mask as I greet presidents, prime ministers,
dictators, kings, queens. I don’t know, somehow I don’t see it for
myself."¹
Excuse me? There hasn't been a state visit to
the White House since before COVID-19 appeared. His excuses range from
silly to petty, like saying he "didn't want to give the press the
pleasure of seeing it"² during a visit to a Ford plant in Michigan.
As
Biden aide TJ Ducklo noted, "Presidents lead by example, and wearing a
mask helps protect others, . . . Donald Trump should try it, because his
failure to act early on
producing [personal protective equipment], on ramping up testing, and
implementing a coherent national response to this crisis has cost
thousands of Americans their lives."As if the Unspeakable Unmasked
cared.
Unfortunately, the Chucklehead-in-Chief's "do as
I say, not as I do" attitude will no doubt be adopted by those who
accept him as a role model, needlessly increasing the death toll. His
followers, who seem to tend to blind allegiance, either to the GOP or to
Trump, as opposed to independent thought and decision making, may well
be hit the hardest.
With COVID-19 we might finally have a cure for stupidity--dare we hope it begins at the top?
---Diogenes, 4/7/20; republished 5/28/20
¹https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-coronavirus-briefing-transcript-april-3-new-cdc-face-mask-recommendation
²https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-mocks-joe-biden-wear-face-mask-public/
³https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-mocks-joe-biden-wear-face-mask-public/
U.S. Constitution
The voice of the people
28 May 2020
26 May 2020
Gimme Shelter
We live in a county which the board of supervisors has declared a "Second Amendment Sanctuary."
What's happened to the Second Amendment that it needs sanctuary? Does it fear editing? Has it tired of being abused by Boobus Americanus Militante and gone into hiding? What on earth could have made a short paragraph seek shelter?
If I were the Second, I just might have taken it on the lam after all the misuse I had suffered at the hands of the gun lobby. And this nonsense about Second Amendment "sanctuaries" might have been the last straw.
Of all the subspecies of Boobus Americanus, the gun-toters who think they should be able to carry openly any firearm they can lift are by far the least evolved. Unable to make their case to most legislatures, they have brought their scare campaign to local and county governments, urging them to adopt a "sanctuary" measure to ensure the safety--or as they would probably say, the sanctity--of the Second Amendment.
This is without doubt one of the most ludicrous, absurd, harebrained, risible, ridiculous, foolish, silly, puerile, goofy, and preposterous schemes ever foisted on the American people. It's appalling that anyone, let alone elected officials, who are supposed to have some semblance of intelligence, could fall for it. As P. T. Barnum may have said, "There's a sucker born every minute."
First, the Second Amendment doesn't need a sanctuary. It is safely embedded in the root and base of our legal system, the Constitution. If it needs sanctuary from anyone, it is the leadership of the NRA, who have the gall to call themselves a civil rights organization, and have somehow brainwashed hundreds of thousands of Americans into the idea that their rights--well, specifically their rights to gun ownership--are in danger. Hogwash.
The NRA claims their rights are endangered because there is a move afoot to repeal the Second Amendment. No, there isn't. I have to seriously doubt that any of them have ever read the Constitution. If they had, they would have an idea just how difficult it is to repeal an amendment.
Since the first ten amendments were published in 1791, only one amendment has been repealed. That was the 18th, which established Prohibition, and getting it out of the way was a cakewalk. It wouldn't be so for any others, and especially not for those first ten, enshrined as the Bill of Rights.
The portion of the Second that the NRA sometimes speaks of as God-given is the sentence fragment that goes " . . . the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed," written by James Madison, not the Almighty.
Rehearsing all the reasons why the NRA is wrong on this issue will be the content of another blog when I can get it down to manageable size. I started on the idea of sanctuary and got carried away.
Should your local government look into the idea of becoming a "sanctuary", please bring them to their senses and remind them that anything they pass in opposition to any existing state law will be quickly overturned.
The United States of America is the home and sanctuary of the Constitution and its Amendments, and it's all that is needed.
--- Diogenes, 5/26/20
What's happened to the Second Amendment that it needs sanctuary? Does it fear editing? Has it tired of being abused by Boobus Americanus Militante and gone into hiding? What on earth could have made a short paragraph seek shelter?
If I were the Second, I just might have taken it on the lam after all the misuse I had suffered at the hands of the gun lobby. And this nonsense about Second Amendment "sanctuaries" might have been the last straw.
Of all the subspecies of Boobus Americanus, the gun-toters who think they should be able to carry openly any firearm they can lift are by far the least evolved. Unable to make their case to most legislatures, they have brought their scare campaign to local and county governments, urging them to adopt a "sanctuary" measure to ensure the safety--or as they would probably say, the sanctity--of the Second Amendment.
This is without doubt one of the most ludicrous, absurd, harebrained, risible, ridiculous, foolish, silly, puerile, goofy, and preposterous schemes ever foisted on the American people. It's appalling that anyone, let alone elected officials, who are supposed to have some semblance of intelligence, could fall for it. As P. T. Barnum may have said, "There's a sucker born every minute."
First, the Second Amendment doesn't need a sanctuary. It is safely embedded in the root and base of our legal system, the Constitution. If it needs sanctuary from anyone, it is the leadership of the NRA, who have the gall to call themselves a civil rights organization, and have somehow brainwashed hundreds of thousands of Americans into the idea that their rights--well, specifically their rights to gun ownership--are in danger. Hogwash.
The NRA claims their rights are endangered because there is a move afoot to repeal the Second Amendment. No, there isn't. I have to seriously doubt that any of them have ever read the Constitution. If they had, they would have an idea just how difficult it is to repeal an amendment.
Since the first ten amendments were published in 1791, only one amendment has been repealed. That was the 18th, which established Prohibition, and getting it out of the way was a cakewalk. It wouldn't be so for any others, and especially not for those first ten, enshrined as the Bill of Rights.
The portion of the Second that the NRA sometimes speaks of as God-given is the sentence fragment that goes " . . . the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed," written by James Madison, not the Almighty.
Rehearsing all the reasons why the NRA is wrong on this issue will be the content of another blog when I can get it down to manageable size. I started on the idea of sanctuary and got carried away.
Should your local government look into the idea of becoming a "sanctuary", please bring them to their senses and remind them that anything they pass in opposition to any existing state law will be quickly overturned.
The United States of America is the home and sanctuary of the Constitution and its Amendments, and it's all that is needed.
--- Diogenes, 5/26/20
25 May 2020
Too Stupid To Live?
"Some people are too stupid to live" was a favorite saying of a former coworker.
It was the first thing that came to mind when I saw a photo this morning of people crowded into a swimming pool at a Lake of the Ozarks venue.
It's true that COVID-19 doesn't spread in water, as far as anyone yet knows. But in a pool environment people pop up snorting, spitting and blowing. That's a lot of potentially infected air moving around, and the chlorine in the water will have no effect on it.
"Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die" has been another phrase running around my head since the well-publicized opening of bars in Wisconsin on May 14. Just about a week later, Wisconsin saw a spike in new COVID-19 cases almost doubling the number before the opening, and the state's numbers remain high.¹
This Memorial Day weekend will be another key date to watch. The traditional opening day of summer is bringing Americans out in droves where weather permits. One can hardly blame them after months of isolation, but one can at least hope they wear masks and keep their social distance. But we know they won't.
People who seek out beaches, bars, and other crowd-oriented venues tend to be gregarious. It is not in their nature to stand apart. They like to congregate, mix, and mingle. That isn't a judgment, just a statement of fact. They can do so masked, but it's hard to drink wearing a mask, and dancing wouldn't be much fun, either. They also enjoy physical contact--the "rubbing elbows" effect. Despite best intentions, after trying to sip a drink around a mask, almost anyone would ditch the mask.
It's difficult not to have some sympathy for governors who are doing their best to manage this mess. Absent any guidance--indeed, with contrariness--from the alleged chief executive they have to rely on the best teams they can put together.
We're Americans, and we don't like being told we can't carry on as usual. As the saying goes, this is a free country. But we are not free to shout "Fire!" in a crowded auditorium or to bring a valise labeled "BOMB" onto an airliner, which I have actually seen.
We should be savvy enough to know that endangering public health is tantamount to endangering public safety. Adapting to a new status quo isn't easy. It's inconvenient and uncomfortable and weird in some cases, but we have to get it through our heads that there is a potentially deadly pathogen floating around everywhere, and it's easy to catch.
COVID-19 kills about 6% of the people who get it.² By contrast, the annual flu that the Pretender-in-Chief likes to compare it to kills only about 2/10 of one percent of its victims.³ That makes COVID-19 about 54 times more deadly than any garden variety flu.
If we can keep those numbers in mind, maybe we can be smart enough to live.
--- Diogenes, 5/25/20
¹ Disclaimer: The numbers in this paragraph are based on a New York Times database of Wisconsin cases. Other sources differ in the actual numbers but not in the shape of the curve. The spike may be coincidental and/or may be the result of factors other than tavern attendance.
² https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/?utm_campaign=homeAdvegas1?
³ https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/preliminary-in-season-estimates.htm
It was the first thing that came to mind when I saw a photo this morning of people crowded into a swimming pool at a Lake of the Ozarks venue.
It's true that COVID-19 doesn't spread in water, as far as anyone yet knows. But in a pool environment people pop up snorting, spitting and blowing. That's a lot of potentially infected air moving around, and the chlorine in the water will have no effect on it.
"Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die" has been another phrase running around my head since the well-publicized opening of bars in Wisconsin on May 14. Just about a week later, Wisconsin saw a spike in new COVID-19 cases almost doubling the number before the opening, and the state's numbers remain high.¹
This Memorial Day weekend will be another key date to watch. The traditional opening day of summer is bringing Americans out in droves where weather permits. One can hardly blame them after months of isolation, but one can at least hope they wear masks and keep their social distance. But we know they won't.
People who seek out beaches, bars, and other crowd-oriented venues tend to be gregarious. It is not in their nature to stand apart. They like to congregate, mix, and mingle. That isn't a judgment, just a statement of fact. They can do so masked, but it's hard to drink wearing a mask, and dancing wouldn't be much fun, either. They also enjoy physical contact--the "rubbing elbows" effect. Despite best intentions, after trying to sip a drink around a mask, almost anyone would ditch the mask.
It's difficult not to have some sympathy for governors who are doing their best to manage this mess. Absent any guidance--indeed, with contrariness--from the alleged chief executive they have to rely on the best teams they can put together.
We're Americans, and we don't like being told we can't carry on as usual. As the saying goes, this is a free country. But we are not free to shout "Fire!" in a crowded auditorium or to bring a valise labeled "BOMB" onto an airliner, which I have actually seen.
We should be savvy enough to know that endangering public health is tantamount to endangering public safety. Adapting to a new status quo isn't easy. It's inconvenient and uncomfortable and weird in some cases, but we have to get it through our heads that there is a potentially deadly pathogen floating around everywhere, and it's easy to catch.
COVID-19 kills about 6% of the people who get it.² By contrast, the annual flu that the Pretender-in-Chief likes to compare it to kills only about 2/10 of one percent of its victims.³ That makes COVID-19 about 54 times more deadly than any garden variety flu.
If we can keep those numbers in mind, maybe we can be smart enough to live.
--- Diogenes, 5/25/20
¹ Disclaimer: The numbers in this paragraph are based on a New York Times database of Wisconsin cases. Other sources differ in the actual numbers but not in the shape of the curve. The spike may be coincidental and/or may be the result of factors other than tavern attendance.
² https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/?utm_campaign=homeAdvegas1?
³ https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/preliminary-in-season-estimates.htm
23 May 2020
Smite The Unbeliever!
Unbeliever-in-Chief Donald Trump says he will order churches to open. Ha!
He knows his base is heavily peopled with conservative Christians. He has also no doubt received heavy pressure from the likes of Jerry Falwell jr., Steve Pettit, and Franklin Graham, who will show us the way according to them, in return for our personal check, to paraphrase Mary Chapin Carpenter.
He plays to that audience not because he shares their beliefs, but because they comprise a large chunk of the white conservative vote. He couldn't care less what they believe, but they will support him come hell or high water, and he is desperate for their help.
That pesky First Amendment gets in his way of trying to strongarm the churches directly, so he wants governors to declare churches essential: “The governors need to do the right thing and allow these very important, essential places of faith to open right now for this weekend, . . . if they don’t do it, I will override the governors. In America, we need more prayer, not less.”
Right. Good luck with that. We have plenty of prayer, thank you. What the preachers are missing is hands dropping money into offering baskets.
There is no hierarchical structure outside martial law that compels governors to obey the president. And considering that the president left the governors leaderless and swinging in the wind early on in the pandemic, few are likely to be amenable to his "orders."
In any event, I'm pretty sure the governors' actions are supported by the Tenth Amendment, and not subject to override by federal power.
The lockdown hasn't put a damper on prayer or praise. Christians of faith know they don't need buildings, or crowds, or even ministers, to worship. They can commune with their Lord singly and quietly, anywhere.
The Unbeliever-in-Chief should try it.
--- Diogenes, 5/23/20
¹ https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/22/us/politics/trump-churches-coronavirus.html
He knows his base is heavily peopled with conservative Christians. He has also no doubt received heavy pressure from the likes of Jerry Falwell jr., Steve Pettit, and Franklin Graham, who will show us the way according to them, in return for our personal check, to paraphrase Mary Chapin Carpenter.
He plays to that audience not because he shares their beliefs, but because they comprise a large chunk of the white conservative vote. He couldn't care less what they believe, but they will support him come hell or high water, and he is desperate for their help.
That pesky First Amendment gets in his way of trying to strongarm the churches directly, so he wants governors to declare churches essential: “The governors need to do the right thing and allow these very important, essential places of faith to open right now for this weekend, . . . if they don’t do it, I will override the governors. In America, we need more prayer, not less.”
Right. Good luck with that. We have plenty of prayer, thank you. What the preachers are missing is hands dropping money into offering baskets.
There is no hierarchical structure outside martial law that compels governors to obey the president. And considering that the president left the governors leaderless and swinging in the wind early on in the pandemic, few are likely to be amenable to his "orders."
In any event, I'm pretty sure the governors' actions are supported by the Tenth Amendment, and not subject to override by federal power.
The lockdown hasn't put a damper on prayer or praise. Christians of faith know they don't need buildings, or crowds, or even ministers, to worship. They can commune with their Lord singly and quietly, anywhere.
The Unbeliever-in-Chief should try it.
--- Diogenes, 5/23/20
¹ https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/22/us/politics/trump-churches-coronavirus.html
22 May 2020
Boobus Redux
Boobus Americanus was H. L. Mencken's pet name for the American people.
Of the "plain people," the middle class, he said, "No one . . . has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people.”
He was right.
Yes, I said that.
Few people outside journalism and academia spend much time on Mencken. For most, his writing is too predictable and his personality too prickly. He had deeply held views on almost everything, was critical and/or intolerant of almost everything, and he was a snob.
He was also probably a genius. Mencken wrote nearly 30 books including the first English language study of Friedrich Nietzsche's philosophy in 1907. In 1919 he published The American Language, a study of the dialects of English spoken by Americans. He wrote in many genres including drama and poetry, and was an exceptionally prolific journalist.
Throughout his work he held to a belief in Social Darwinism: the doctrine that the rich are rich precisely because they are smarter and/or harder working than the poor.¹ Mencken saw society in layers of castes to which one belonged by virtue of birth. The poor were poor, the rich were rich, and that was that. Being of privileged birth, Mencken naturally saw himself in the upper layer.
We at Vox Populi hold to a narrow and specific message: we promote and support the overthrow of Donald Trump as president of the United States. We assume that our readers share the same view, which leads us to assume that we share the same demographic.
Let's consider the circles of friends and acquaintances with whom we share social activities. Ours includes academics, educators, lawyers, funeral directors, pastors, musicians, journalists, writers, artists, physicians, etc. Are we similar? If so, we're all snobs--that's our caste.
We, and most of you, I expect, value learning, knowledge, and professional expertise. I submit that many of the people who support Trump do not. They think those values are elitist and they distrust them. It was no accident that intellectuals and artists were targeted by Sen. Joseph McCarthy. Educated and creative people question authority and don't do as they're told. They look for options to the status quo, and those options might include unfriendly systems of government. They tend to upset the apple cart.
Trump's brashness, his affected "plain guy" attitude, his disrespect of the press and of his staff, his disdain for any rule he doesn't like, his open anger and abrasiveness, are embraced by those who think such behavior is somehow masculine, American, and therefore admirable.
Mencken foresaw how a real estate salesman could be elected president with no political experience: "In small areas, before small electorates, a first-rate man occasionally fights his way through, carrying even the mob with him by force of his personality. But when the field is nationwide, and the fight must be waged chiefly at second and third hand, and the force of personality cannot so readily make itself felt, then all the odds are on the man who is . . . the most devious and mediocre—the man who can most easily adeptly disperse the notion that his mind is a virtual vacuum."²
We admire intellect, poise, erudition, and eloquence. As a class we tend to political correctness and conflict avoidance. We drink artisanal beer with our panini while discussing Annie Proulx's latest book. We bemoan having a fatuous idiot as president.
If we don't push back hard, if we don't call out Trump on every lie, if we don't back the Democratic nominee 100% with no defections, if we don't find ways to convince Trump's supporters of the real truth, we'll be doing the same things for four more years.
Boobus Americanus will prevail again.
--- Diogenes, 5/22/20
¹ https://seesharppress.wordpress.com/2014/02/20/nietzsche-and-mencken/
² https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._L._Mencken#Books
Of the "plain people," the middle class, he said, "No one . . . has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people.”
He was right.
Yes, I said that.
Few people outside journalism and academia spend much time on Mencken. For most, his writing is too predictable and his personality too prickly. He had deeply held views on almost everything, was critical and/or intolerant of almost everything, and he was a snob.
He was also probably a genius. Mencken wrote nearly 30 books including the first English language study of Friedrich Nietzsche's philosophy in 1907. In 1919 he published The American Language, a study of the dialects of English spoken by Americans. He wrote in many genres including drama and poetry, and was an exceptionally prolific journalist.
Throughout his work he held to a belief in Social Darwinism: the doctrine that the rich are rich precisely because they are smarter and/or harder working than the poor.¹ Mencken saw society in layers of castes to which one belonged by virtue of birth. The poor were poor, the rich were rich, and that was that. Being of privileged birth, Mencken naturally saw himself in the upper layer.
We at Vox Populi hold to a narrow and specific message: we promote and support the overthrow of Donald Trump as president of the United States. We assume that our readers share the same view, which leads us to assume that we share the same demographic.
Let's consider the circles of friends and acquaintances with whom we share social activities. Ours includes academics, educators, lawyers, funeral directors, pastors, musicians, journalists, writers, artists, physicians, etc. Are we similar? If so, we're all snobs--that's our caste.
We, and most of you, I expect, value learning, knowledge, and professional expertise. I submit that many of the people who support Trump do not. They think those values are elitist and they distrust them. It was no accident that intellectuals and artists were targeted by Sen. Joseph McCarthy. Educated and creative people question authority and don't do as they're told. They look for options to the status quo, and those options might include unfriendly systems of government. They tend to upset the apple cart.
Trump's brashness, his affected "plain guy" attitude, his disrespect of the press and of his staff, his disdain for any rule he doesn't like, his open anger and abrasiveness, are embraced by those who think such behavior is somehow masculine, American, and therefore admirable.
Mencken foresaw how a real estate salesman could be elected president with no political experience: "In small areas, before small electorates, a first-rate man occasionally fights his way through, carrying even the mob with him by force of his personality. But when the field is nationwide, and the fight must be waged chiefly at second and third hand, and the force of personality cannot so readily make itself felt, then all the odds are on the man who is . . . the most devious and mediocre—the man who can most easily adeptly disperse the notion that his mind is a virtual vacuum."²
We admire intellect, poise, erudition, and eloquence. As a class we tend to political correctness and conflict avoidance. We drink artisanal beer with our panini while discussing Annie Proulx's latest book. We bemoan having a fatuous idiot as president.
If we don't push back hard, if we don't call out Trump on every lie, if we don't back the Democratic nominee 100% with no defections, if we don't find ways to convince Trump's supporters of the real truth, we'll be doing the same things for four more years.
Boobus Americanus will prevail again.
--- Diogenes, 5/22/20
¹ https://seesharppress.wordpress.com/2014/02/20/nietzsche-and-mencken/
² https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._L._Mencken#Books
20 May 2020
Poor Donald, Part 3
I've recently written about ways in which Donald Trump is poor. Not in money, to be sure, but in empathy, understanding, affirmation, and self-esteem. Today I want to talk about his poverty of intellect.
I'm not going to borrow from his own playbook and call him stupid. Like it or not, no one who can reach his level in business, then parlay his personality into a successful presidential campaign is stupid. At the very least he is smart enough to hire the right people to tell him what to say and do. The problem is, he doesn't like to listen to them and usually ends up firing them.
The nature of both intellect and intelligence has been heavily studied, and there are several theories and models of both. One area where most theories agree is that the ability to recognize and solve problems effectively is important to a mature intellect.
It is that area where Donald Trump's intellect appears to have been shortchanged.
Solving problems is a routine matter, something we all do hundreds of times a day. We may not call it problem-solving, but every time we make a decision to do one thing and not another, every time we face a challenge, however slight, we are identifying and solving a problem. The magnificent quantum computer we call our brain does it all for us unconsciously, and usually effortlessly.
The unpresident's brain may not work all that smoothly. Most of us aren't privy to decision making in the White House, but we have witnessed the effects of some problems with decisiveness there. In the three years the Trump administration has been in charge, it has seen an 85%¹ turnover in upper-level staff--an unenviable record in a place that should be a model of stability. Who knows what secrets those people are carrying away with them?
Every entry/exit through the administration's revolving door is a decision the Addlepate-in-Chief couldn't make, couldn't live with, or simply didn't like.
We see it more directly in his spoken language, particularly in press briefings and similar venues. His inability to complete sentences, his detours into unrelated subjects, his limited attention span, and his occasional outright incoherence raise serious concern about his fitness for any position potentially involving the use of weapons.
Testing and psychometric evaluation from Trump's youth could shed a great deal of useful light on these questions, but Trump has threatened to sue any school that releases his records.²
Getting to those records should be the goal of every investigative reporter in America. There's unquestionably a Pulitzer prize waiting. And I'll bet there's a "Deep Throat" out there with the information.
Everyone has a price.
--- Diogenes, 5/20/20
¹ https://www.brookings.edu/research/tracking-turnover-in-the-trump-administration/
² https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-world/ct-trump-high-school-transcript-20190305-story.html
I'm not going to borrow from his own playbook and call him stupid. Like it or not, no one who can reach his level in business, then parlay his personality into a successful presidential campaign is stupid. At the very least he is smart enough to hire the right people to tell him what to say and do. The problem is, he doesn't like to listen to them and usually ends up firing them.
The nature of both intellect and intelligence has been heavily studied, and there are several theories and models of both. One area where most theories agree is that the ability to recognize and solve problems effectively is important to a mature intellect.
It is that area where Donald Trump's intellect appears to have been shortchanged.
Solving problems is a routine matter, something we all do hundreds of times a day. We may not call it problem-solving, but every time we make a decision to do one thing and not another, every time we face a challenge, however slight, we are identifying and solving a problem. The magnificent quantum computer we call our brain does it all for us unconsciously, and usually effortlessly.
The unpresident's brain may not work all that smoothly. Most of us aren't privy to decision making in the White House, but we have witnessed the effects of some problems with decisiveness there. In the three years the Trump administration has been in charge, it has seen an 85%¹ turnover in upper-level staff--an unenviable record in a place that should be a model of stability. Who knows what secrets those people are carrying away with them?
Every entry/exit through the administration's revolving door is a decision the Addlepate-in-Chief couldn't make, couldn't live with, or simply didn't like.
We see it more directly in his spoken language, particularly in press briefings and similar venues. His inability to complete sentences, his detours into unrelated subjects, his limited attention span, and his occasional outright incoherence raise serious concern about his fitness for any position potentially involving the use of weapons.
Testing and psychometric evaluation from Trump's youth could shed a great deal of useful light on these questions, but Trump has threatened to sue any school that releases his records.²
Getting to those records should be the goal of every investigative reporter in America. There's unquestionably a Pulitzer prize waiting. And I'll bet there's a "Deep Throat" out there with the information.
Everyone has a price.
--- Diogenes, 5/20/20
¹ https://www.brookings.edu/research/tracking-turnover-in-the-trump-administration/
² https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-world/ct-trump-high-school-transcript-20190305-story.html
19 May 2020
Poor Donald, Part 2
"Despite his wealth, the trappings of his office, and his attempts to
appear otherwise, in the final analysis, his behavior reveals Donald
Trump to be a poor man."
So ended Part One of this series. If you haven't read it I urge you to do so before getting into this one.
Donald Trump doesn't lack money or resources or housing or any of the basics of life, but he is still poor.
Remember that I came to this conclusion considering his physical behavior and body language, not his wealth or trappings. There are many kinds of non-material poverty: of spirit, of affection, of companionship, of self worth.
Let's look at an easy one: poverty of affirmation. Trump is so hungry for praise and acceptance that if he can't get it from the outside he makes up his own. This also speaks to a lack of self esteem and a sense of insecurity. He is a braggart and a boaster: the behavior of someone who desperately needs to hear himself praised, even if the words come from his own mouth.
That is classic Narcissism, and it points to the emotional emptiness of his condition. Most serious Narcissists hate themselves, recognizing the poverty of spirit and sense of worthlessness that gnaws at them.
It is that poverty that leads him so often to adopt defensive postures, specifically the crossed arms protecting his vital organs and the pout that acts as a symbolic seal on his mouth. He is signaling that he has walls up and will neither act nor speak.
But then what about the obvious, sometimes explosive behavior directed outward? It's bullying, and it's all part of the same package. Bullying isn't just a matter of being mean:
"Research finds that bullies have a distinct psychological makeup. They lack prosocial behavior, are untroubled by anxiety, and do not understand others' feelings. They exhibit a distinctive cognitive feature, a kind of paranoia: They misread the intentions of others, often imputing hostility in neutral situations."¹
In the unpresident's case, bullying is a form of defensive behavior. When he yells at a reporter or reels off a string of insults, he is trying to avoid input. When you see that behavior, the image you should have in your mind is that of a little boy with his fingers in his ears saying bla-bla-bla-bla-bla.
Last episode tomorrow: The Poverty of Intellect.
--- Diogenes, 5/19/20
¹https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/bullying
So ended Part One of this series. If you haven't read it I urge you to do so before getting into this one.
Donald Trump doesn't lack money or resources or housing or any of the basics of life, but he is still poor.
Remember that I came to this conclusion considering his physical behavior and body language, not his wealth or trappings. There are many kinds of non-material poverty: of spirit, of affection, of companionship, of self worth.
Let's look at an easy one: poverty of affirmation. Trump is so hungry for praise and acceptance that if he can't get it from the outside he makes up his own. This also speaks to a lack of self esteem and a sense of insecurity. He is a braggart and a boaster: the behavior of someone who desperately needs to hear himself praised, even if the words come from his own mouth.
That is classic Narcissism, and it points to the emotional emptiness of his condition. Most serious Narcissists hate themselves, recognizing the poverty of spirit and sense of worthlessness that gnaws at them.
It is that poverty that leads him so often to adopt defensive postures, specifically the crossed arms protecting his vital organs and the pout that acts as a symbolic seal on his mouth. He is signaling that he has walls up and will neither act nor speak.
But then what about the obvious, sometimes explosive behavior directed outward? It's bullying, and it's all part of the same package. Bullying isn't just a matter of being mean:
"Research finds that bullies have a distinct psychological makeup. They lack prosocial behavior, are untroubled by anxiety, and do not understand others' feelings. They exhibit a distinctive cognitive feature, a kind of paranoia: They misread the intentions of others, often imputing hostility in neutral situations."¹
In the unpresident's case, bullying is a form of defensive behavior. When he yells at a reporter or reels off a string of insults, he is trying to avoid input. When you see that behavior, the image you should have in your mind is that of a little boy with his fingers in his ears saying bla-bla-bla-bla-bla.
Last episode tomorrow: The Poverty of Intellect.
--- Diogenes, 5/19/20
¹https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/bullying
17 May 2020
Poor Donald, Part 1
The Roman playwright Terence wrote, "I am human, and I think nothing human is alien to me." I discovered that quote back when I was studying Latin, and it stuck with me. These days, however, I find myself wondering about the nature of humanity.
Specifically, I wonder about Donald Trump. I can't seem to reconcile my humanness with his. It's not the money or the trappings. I've rubbed shoulders with millionaires and "personalities." Ho-hum. Nor do I think he's not human, although the thought sometimes flashes across my mind.
Still, it is the money and the trappings that make the behavior difficult to understand. Then it struck me: I've been tying him to the wrong demographic.
This is not a happy man. The crossed arms are a classic defensive position, a barrier against interaction, a fence to keep the world out. The facial expression, with eyes open and mouth downturned, expresses contempt of whatever or whoever is the subject of dislike. In public appearances he is seen more often in this pose than in any other.
I have seen this defensive posture frequently, but not in people who are wealthy and/or who exercise power. Their postures are typically open and confident. This image is everything but.
These postures are clearly practiced. For Trump the crossed arms are not defensive but an aggressive posture such as that used by animals trying to make themselves look bigger to a foe. Then there are the facial gestures. Most notable is the rosette mouth that he wields aggressively. It is a gesture that he shares with other primates:
Trump likes to think he is a unique creature, but his behavior and choice of gestures reveal a universal truth: he, we, and our cousin species are inextricably linked in uncountable ways, right down to our DNA. And whether the unpresident likes it or not, "I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together¹."
Specifically, I wonder about Donald Trump. I can't seem to reconcile my humanness with his. It's not the money or the trappings. I've rubbed shoulders with millionaires and "personalities." Ho-hum. Nor do I think he's not human, although the thought sometimes flashes across my mind.
Still, it is the money and the trappings that make the behavior difficult to understand. Then it struck me: I've been tying him to the wrong demographic.
I have seen this defensive posture frequently, but not in people who are wealthy and/or who exercise power. Their postures are typically open and confident. This image is everything but.
These postures are clearly practiced. For Trump the crossed arms are not defensive but an aggressive posture such as that used by animals trying to make themselves look bigger to a foe. Then there are the facial gestures. Most notable is the rosette mouth that he wields aggressively. It is a gesture that he shares with other primates:
Trump likes to think he is a unique creature, but his behavior and choice of gestures reveal a universal truth: he, we, and our cousin species are inextricably linked in uncountable ways, right down to our DNA. And whether the unpresident likes it or not, "I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together¹."
OK, this has been a long digression. I started talking about human behavior and demographics and landed up somewhere else. I said that I had been considering Trump in the context of the wrong demographic. What I was leading to was this: Despite his wealth, the trappings of his office, and his attempts to appear otherwise, in the final analysis, his behavior reveals Donald Trump to be a poor man.
Stay tuned.
--- Diogenes, 5/17/20
¹ The Beatles, "I Am The Walrus," 1967.
15 May 2020
SHAME!
The McCarthy unAmerican madness ended abruptly on June 9, 1954 during the Army-McCarthy hearings when Boston lawyer Joseph Welch, finally outraged by Sen. Joseph McCarthy's baseless accusations, said, "Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty
or your recklessness. You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency? At long last, have you no sense of decency?"
Trump has now committed an outrage worthy of McCarthy. He is blaming former President Obama for virtually all the problems that have plagued his administration and demanding that Obama testify to sabotaging his administration before he assumed office.
Enough is enough. We must all call out to Trump, "Have you no sense of decency? At long last, have you no sense of decency?" To which we should add "Have you no shame?" We must shout it in the millions of our voices from the rooftops, from town squares and from city plazas, and we must be heard.
--- Diogenes, 5/15/20
Trump has now committed an outrage worthy of McCarthy. He is blaming former President Obama for virtually all the problems that have plagued his administration and demanding that Obama testify to sabotaging his administration before he assumed office.
Enough is enough. We must all call out to Trump, "Have you no sense of decency? At long last, have you no sense of decency?" To which we should add "Have you no shame?" We must shout it in the millions of our voices from the rooftops, from town squares and from city plazas, and we must be heard.
--- Diogenes, 5/15/20
14 May 2020
How long?
This is a rant. Yes, I've said some of this before. Please indulge me.
It is customary to blame the president for everything we don't like. Well, why not? He is the most visible public servant we have, and everyone can remember his name. We should rather remember the name of our Congressional representative, who is from our community and may even live on our block. Well, no matter. We don't.
The fact is, most of what goes on in the country is guided by Congress. They are our elected representatives and it is their Constitutional duty to make laws. Congress is a big, slow ship that doesn't maneuver quickly, so there is always time to contact your representative or senator to suggest mid-course corrections.
Where the office of president becomes useful is in times of emergency or disaster. He can, by executive declaration, make any number of things happen. Any fallout may later have to be sorted out with Congress, but urgent needs can be timely met.
It is in those moments that the mettle of any true leader is tested. High public office is not for the faint of heart. Enormous trust is placed in the executive--trust that he will respect those who put him in office and will see, to the best of his ability, to their welfare and protection--especially at times when the world changes.
America's involvement in WWII began and ended with two world-changing decisions from two strong presidents. Both were made and followed through with certainty and confidence.
Following Pearl Harbor, President Franklin D. Roosevelt acted with alacrity, declaring war on Japan, ending America's neutrality, and plunging the nation into a war it was not prepared to fight. He did so in the knowledge of mutual trust between him and the people, a trust that roused an entire nation to action.
Upon FDR's death Harry Truman took up the war, and brought it to an emphatic conclusion by deploying atomic weapons. Neither president's decision was taken recklessly or out of emotion, but after careful consideration, which lent them the strength of sure authority,
Many such moments and decisions have punctuated the history of the presidency.
Until now.
How long shall the wicked triumph?
--Diogenes, 5/14/20
¹ https://blog.factba.se/2018/01/08/stable-genius-lets-go-to-the-data/
² https://www.brookings.edu/research/tracking-turnover-in-the-trump-administration/
It is customary to blame the president for everything we don't like. Well, why not? He is the most visible public servant we have, and everyone can remember his name. We should rather remember the name of our Congressional representative, who is from our community and may even live on our block. Well, no matter. We don't.
The fact is, most of what goes on in the country is guided by Congress. They are our elected representatives and it is their Constitutional duty to make laws. Congress is a big, slow ship that doesn't maneuver quickly, so there is always time to contact your representative or senator to suggest mid-course corrections.
Where the office of president becomes useful is in times of emergency or disaster. He can, by executive declaration, make any number of things happen. Any fallout may later have to be sorted out with Congress, but urgent needs can be timely met.
It is in those moments that the mettle of any true leader is tested. High public office is not for the faint of heart. Enormous trust is placed in the executive--trust that he will respect those who put him in office and will see, to the best of his ability, to their welfare and protection--especially at times when the world changes.
America's involvement in WWII began and ended with two world-changing decisions from two strong presidents. Both were made and followed through with certainty and confidence.
Following Pearl Harbor, President Franklin D. Roosevelt acted with alacrity, declaring war on Japan, ending America's neutrality, and plunging the nation into a war it was not prepared to fight. He did so in the knowledge of mutual trust between him and the people, a trust that roused an entire nation to action.
Upon FDR's death Harry Truman took up the war, and brought it to an emphatic conclusion by deploying atomic weapons. Neither president's decision was taken recklessly or out of emotion, but after careful consideration, which lent them the strength of sure authority,
Many such moments and decisions have punctuated the history of the presidency.
Until now.
- We are shackled with a president who has neither respect for nor trust in anyone who does not share his skin color, his ideas, his ethnicity, his party, his beliefs, his wealth, or his favorite color of tie. In short, no one.
- Gone is the eloquence of his predecessors in office; a recent study determined that he speaks at about a fourth-grade level.¹
- He has no use for people who are not puppets or toadies, or anyone who differs from him in the slightest way; his upper-level staff has seen an 85% turnover since his election.² Does anyone know who's watching the store?
- His mental state is clearly and obviously unstable.
- He lacks the ability to make decisions and stand by them.
- He cannot control COVID-19 and the inability to control any entity is so far from his life experience that it is likely unraveling his sanity.
- His body language speaks volumes. He frequently appears with arms crossed--closed off to the world, a defensive posture; and a downward gaze with downturned mouth, signaling contempt.
How long shall the wicked triumph?
--Diogenes, 5/14/20
¹ https://blog.factba.se/2018/01/08/stable-genius-lets-go-to-the-data/
² https://www.brookings.edu/research/tracking-turnover-in-the-trump-administration/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)