Protesting is not Rioting

 Everyone has the right to assemble and protest according to the Constitution while no one has the right to riot and plunder.  The fact that some take advantage on a situation to do the latter is simply a reflection of our society.

Protesters and Rioters are not the same.  Sometimes a person may start as a protester and turn to rioting, but mostly that is not the case.  The fact that a rioter may assume the guise of a protester does not make him a protester.

Still we see people attack any protest as unlawful and riotous.  Situations are different everywhere, but in almost every situation there is a large group of organized protesters exercising their constitutional rights to protest.  It really doesn't matter what they are protesting, it is their right.

That event obviously has to be publicized and provides opportunities for counter-protesters, subversive groups and criminal to use it as a distraction.  In fact some may join the protest planning to break away to cause mischief or to plunder.

The simple fact is that protesters are protected by the constitution and are not responsible for criminals or anarchist groups that use them as a distraction.  The rhetoric equating protesters and rioters is simply wrong and distorts the situation.

We are starting to see violence increase at these events and there is a danger of that escalating.  This is still not the fault of the protesters.  

The people organizing these protests need to decide if they are effective in drawing attention to their issues.  

Fixing the situation is the objective after all.

Choice is Simple

 Americans of all faiths, colors, national backgrounds and sexual preferences are entitled to make up their own minds about who or what to support.  When it turns out that an overwhelming majority of a group support a particular candidate or party, there has to be a reason.

Democrats for the most part are in favor of greater economic and social equality while Republicans favor the status quo.  Is success in America something anyone can achieve or is the playing field stacked?

If you have a great talent like sports or perhaps unusual dedication and some help you can climb the social hierarchy and succeed.  The problem with this is that it represents a small sample of the population.  Study after study has shown that the best predictor of how most people will do is to look at their parents social status.

If you are born into the middle class or above, the odds are that you went to better schools, had more support at home, fit in better and ultimately ended up with a good job.  You were also likely to get financial support for your pursuits.

On the other hand, if you were born into the working class or the dependent class you went to bad schools, had more opportunity to be involved in drugs, poor support at home and a good chance of getting into trouble with the law.

Some escape their fates but it is a lot harder for the second group.

Programs aimed to help even the playing field, like affirmative action or universal health care are supported by Democrats and opposed by Republicans.

Republicans want to see the rich get richer and let everyone else fight over the scraps.  Democrats want the rich to share their wealth.

Simple choice.

Big Brother is Watching?

One of the concerns of the modern age is the intrusiveness of Government.  When I was young there was strong objection to the idea of being tracked by the Government.  This was something they did in Fascist Germany or Communist Russia.  The idea of a Government official demanding to see your papers was a threat.

Yes driver's licences and passports existed but the need for them was very specific.  You only got a social security number when you needed it for work.

Now of course it gets issued to you at birth. People who in the older days were against Government intrusion now demand people have picture IDs to vote among other things.

This may simply be a transition into the modern world but there is less and less privacy every year.

Fingerprint were the big identifier at one time now we have DNA.

In where we walk and drive there is a good chance we are on camera.

Look, in all honesty I can't decide why this bothers me.  Maybe it was just the image of the unformed Nazi demanding papers and taking people.

I doubt it even resonates in the modern generation where they share so much of what used to be private lives with everybody.

It just seemed un-American at one point for the Government to spy on us.

The Grid is everywhere.

Politicians and Lying

 People sometimes excuse egregious behavior by our current President by saying well all politicians lie.

Actually they don't.  A lie requires that you deliberately tell something that is simply not true.  We tend to call things lies that fall into other categories, repeating a statement that is believed to be true at the time, but turns out to be wrong and puffery.

An example of the first was what happened with Benghazi when at first it was believed by some that the protests were inspired by perceive disrespect to the Koran.  This was actually true, but the protests were then used as a cover by a terrorist organization to attack the Embassy.  When certain administration spokespeople said it was the first event when it turned out to be the second, they were accused of lying.  This is a harsh take on it since the desire to address the press is well, pressing, at times like those.  

Inaccurate information is only really a lie when you know it is false.  Providing a narrative that turns out to be wrong because more information is later uncovered is not a lie, it is an inaccuracy.

Take some of the current administrations falsehoods.  If the President believes that the doctor who believes in demons is actually correct, repeating her theories, while silly, are not lies.  It reveals why he is completely unqualified to be President because his judgement is terrible, but repeating something you think is true is not a lie.  

When he said, although he now denies it, that Mexico would pay for the wall, he knew they wouldn't and it was simply a lie.  It is hard to determine the difference sometimes, but when he denies doing something that he clearly did on camera he is either lying or suffering from dementia.

Puffery is when you emphasize good qualities in order to sell an idea or an object.  For example when the President says his health plan will be better, cheaper and more inclusive than what we have, it is Puffery, especially since he doesn't even have one.

The way he described his big beautiful wall was puffery which is a type of lie but one which is understood.  It falls closer to exaggeration than lying but that is really in the eye of the beholder.  If someone running for office tells his audience he will eliminate all corruption in Government, it is puffery, they should know that isn't likely or even possible.

So do all politicians lie?  Depends on how strict you want to be.  Do all politician tell deliberate falsehood that they clearly know to be false?  No, most actually don't.  

I Support Police Protecting All People

 Whenever I see people out to support the police I am mystified.

I support the police and I want them to do the job they were hired for.  It has danger associated with it and for that we let them retire earlier than most and provide good benefits.  When one of them get hurt or killed in the line of duty they should get all the care we can provide to them and their familie.

They are still our employees, hired to protect all of us, not some of us against others.  Any time they use lethal force they need to do so as the very last resort, not because they imagine things that could happen.

Honest mistakes might happen and they are entitled to consideration for that.  Shooting unarmed suspects in the back or kneeling on their throats until they die is just not acceptable.

Executing a search warrant without allowing the innocent people inside time to respond and then shooting them is problematic.

The life of everyone is precious, police and suspects.  Unfortunately we now see over and over that the police treat black lives as if they don't matter.

They do.

Cautious behavior is not risky behavior.  Getting additional support if needed should be an accepted part of the job.

I can't imagine the impact of seeing their father shot in the back seven times is going to have on his children who were in the car.  As much as I try to imagine the imminent threat that officer felt I just can't.  It has been reported that he might have had a knife but even if he did, backing up a safe distance while the other police there supported you would have been quite effective.

I don't support the police who kill citizens because they somehow think their lives matter more.  These are the citizens they are hired to protect, although not all of them feel that way.

If you want to hold up a sign supporting the police, fine you have the right to peacefully assemble, but are you supporting them even when they murder people?

Law and Order?

 I was reading an article where some middle class Trump supporters were upset that they are being categorized as racists, homophobes, xenophobes and misogynist.  They don't think they are and maybe they aren't, but can they be sure?  They support someone who is apparently because they lie his positions on immigration and abortion and believe he can fix the economy.

They are of course entitled to believe what they believe and vote for whomever they want, but as they are supporting a man who has absolutely no sense of values.  When you lie down with dogs you are likely to get fleas.

Sadly they seem to inhabit a world which conveniently filters reality for them.  We saw another black man shot seven or eight times for the crime of trying to get into his car.  The response is that the people there shouldn't protest?  What exactly should they do since the video is pretty clear that he was doing nothing to provoke getting shot.

It is probable, although unclear, that he was ignoring some police commands.  What is know is that he was only involved because he was trying to break up the dispute and had his children in the car.  They got to see the police gun down their father.

Is that the approved resolution now for a black man disrespecting a police?  I see some of my compatriots argue he brought this on himself although at this time we don't even know what they were telling him to do.

I can imagine some scenarios where the shooting would be justified, if he was reaching for a weapon but there is no evidence of that.  

Hopefully more details will come out, but right now it looks pretty unjust.  

Is this the Republican version of law and order?  Shoot innocent people in the street if they don't respond correctly?  

I don't think it is what this country stands for, at least I hope not.

One and Done

 So after four years of destructive behavior, the curren admnistration wants 4 mor to fix it.

That's begging the court for mercy because you're an orphan after killing your parents.

Outside of appointing two questionable Supreme Court Justices, its hard to find an accomplishment.

He has rolled back environmental and social protections to help his oil buddies and because he is opposed to individual liberty but they won't last.

Foreign policy there is nothing of note.  

He has managed to antagonize our allies and trading partners while following Putin's directions.

Health care is not better and while you can't blame him for the Covid 19 you can blame him for how we havdle it.

He managed to keep the Obama economy going until it collapsed because of his incompetance.

So why would anyone give him another four years?

Got me!