I value "learning" but I value "education" more. What is the difference? Well, learning is the result of studies in a very wide range of topics and fields. Education is learning that addresses specific needs that have been established by people whose wisdom we trust.
When I came to Harvey Mudd College in 1961, there was a required program of studies through the first two years called the Common Core. At the end of the second year, students could select a major course of study for their final two years. The major, needless to say, was also largely a required set of studies. In other words, all four years of study at Harvey Mudd was largely directed study in specific fields, a program of study that would educate young mathematicians, scientists, and engineeers.
As an example, the State of California, at that time, required undergraduate programs to include a course of study in US history. It seemed wise for students to go out into the world with an understanding of their own history.
What has happened at Harvey Mudd as well as at most other institutions, is that our confidence has been shaken. Fewer faculty are inclined to make a claim of wisdom with regard to learning. The US history requirement disappeared decades ago. Faculty backed up from specific fields and content to defend only specific techniques. So, as time went by, we were willing only to require that historical studies should be a part of one's program. As a consequence, students go out in the world understanding Asian history (for instance) but not their own history. I have no problem with the study of Asian history as such but I do have a real problem with the general ignorance of US history that has been a result.
In a similar way, the Common Core has been eroded and degraded over the years. The faculty is unwilling to stand up for it's beliefs and the general direction is one of pacifying student protests. After all, they are paying for their education. But that is very ironic because, if they really want an education, why are they unwilling to respect the wisdom of the faculty. The answer, I guess, is that respect has little to do with actions among many students today.
Monday, August 14, 2017
Saturday, July 15, 2017
On Government
I have often argued that government is the way in which we (the people) come together to solve our mutual problems. And I still believe that; however, government in that sense in our country has completely failed. Government as people coming together requires education and participation so that the people have an understanding of what their mutual problems are and try to find the best solutions. People in the US have largely ceased educating themselves and participation has fallen to ridiculous lows. So the result is that very wealthy people get elected to office by a small percentage of the population and these “representatives” take over “government” in their own interests and the interests of those who pay their way. In the US, government is an oligarchy that has little to do with what we like to call “the common good.”
Liberal democrats, like myself, continue to vote for candidates who, they think, will support the common good. Conservative republicans seem to vote in multiple paths that are not always logically consistent. One group seems to support “moral values” although they seem to have in mind merely a very limited number of issues such as abortion and gay/lesbian lifestyles while ignoring core principles of Christian faith. Another group seems merely interested in “law and order” and added to that a fear of world-wide terrorism. Yet a third group seems only concerned with the “free market” which translates into taxation and business regulation. The reality of this, it seems to me, is that both groups — Republicans and Democrats — believe in certain policies that politicians are expert at using to their advantage. The resulting government really fails to satisfy any of these goals.
What all of this seems to have brought us down to is a national movement that hates the Federal government and would prefer to just retreat into state-run societies. Having grown up in Illinois, I can’t say that I have much faith in state government. One might think this is just a resurgence of the Civil War but the movement is far larger than just a North/South matter. One might also think that it is a resurgence of the Articles of Confederation and anti-Federalism from the 1780s but few are well schooled in the Federalist Papers and other arguments with regard to the Articles. The only power of the Federal government that people seem happy about is defense, which may be why they are willing to pay almost half of their income taxes directly to the military.
The sad aspect of this movement to undermine Federal government and to inflate state governments is the loss of any “national character.” But perhaps a national character was an illusion sheltered by naive people like myself. Perhaps we have been ignoring the large differences in character that are evident as we travel around the country. What is happening right now is a backlash of those differences against a nationally motivated attempt to secure a common character.
Liberal democrats, like myself, continue to vote for candidates who, they think, will support the common good. Conservative republicans seem to vote in multiple paths that are not always logically consistent. One group seems to support “moral values” although they seem to have in mind merely a very limited number of issues such as abortion and gay/lesbian lifestyles while ignoring core principles of Christian faith. Another group seems merely interested in “law and order” and added to that a fear of world-wide terrorism. Yet a third group seems only concerned with the “free market” which translates into taxation and business regulation. The reality of this, it seems to me, is that both groups — Republicans and Democrats — believe in certain policies that politicians are expert at using to their advantage. The resulting government really fails to satisfy any of these goals.
What all of this seems to have brought us down to is a national movement that hates the Federal government and would prefer to just retreat into state-run societies. Having grown up in Illinois, I can’t say that I have much faith in state government. One might think this is just a resurgence of the Civil War but the movement is far larger than just a North/South matter. One might also think that it is a resurgence of the Articles of Confederation and anti-Federalism from the 1780s but few are well schooled in the Federalist Papers and other arguments with regard to the Articles. The only power of the Federal government that people seem happy about is defense, which may be why they are willing to pay almost half of their income taxes directly to the military.
The sad aspect of this movement to undermine Federal government and to inflate state governments is the loss of any “national character.” But perhaps a national character was an illusion sheltered by naive people like myself. Perhaps we have been ignoring the large differences in character that are evident as we travel around the country. What is happening right now is a backlash of those differences against a nationally motivated attempt to secure a common character.
Wednesday, June 7, 2017
Protecting Our earth
Global Warming is a scientific fact. Temperature readings from around the world and over a long period of time have been collected and analyzed. The average temperature of our earth is increasing. You cannot call that "BS".
Climate Change is more speculative. Rather than being a fact, it is a well developed theory, based on documented climate events.
The human origin of global warming and climate change is more speculative yet. Nevertheless, what other factors can we seriously propose as causes of these changes? Skeptics like to believe that human behaviors do not have that much effect on global phenomena. However, one of the classic examples of human impact is the presence of lead in the polar ice cap. When cores are drilled in the ice cap and analyzed, there is no lead found until around 1930s and then the amount of lead increases radically. It was in the 1930s that tetra-ethyl lead was introduced in motor fuels to solve the problem of "knocking". Auto engineers knew that it would be bad if the lead remained in the engines so they also introduced ethylene dichloride. Lead chloride is gaseous at high temperatures and takes the lead out the exhaust system of the vehicle into the atmosphere. Methane and carbon dioxide emissions are definitely a major result of our behaviors as well.
Perhaps we can all live with global warming, but climate change, if genuine, is a major problem. Agriculture, as one example, is hugely dependent on climate. A large part of California's economy is based on agriculture, thus alteration of California's traditional climate could have a major impact on our economy. Climate change can potentially make some parts of the world unlivable and cause major disruption of human life. Rising ocean waters are already problematic in some coastline areas.
It seems obvious to me that, if we can avoid damaging the earth, which is our home, we should do so. We did do away with lead in our gasoline. Perhaps we can also stop throwing so much methane and carbon dioxide into our atmosphere as well. Eat less beef; walk more (it's good for us); and use green energy when possible.
Climate Change is more speculative. Rather than being a fact, it is a well developed theory, based on documented climate events.
The human origin of global warming and climate change is more speculative yet. Nevertheless, what other factors can we seriously propose as causes of these changes? Skeptics like to believe that human behaviors do not have that much effect on global phenomena. However, one of the classic examples of human impact is the presence of lead in the polar ice cap. When cores are drilled in the ice cap and analyzed, there is no lead found until around 1930s and then the amount of lead increases radically. It was in the 1930s that tetra-ethyl lead was introduced in motor fuels to solve the problem of "knocking". Auto engineers knew that it would be bad if the lead remained in the engines so they also introduced ethylene dichloride. Lead chloride is gaseous at high temperatures and takes the lead out the exhaust system of the vehicle into the atmosphere. Methane and carbon dioxide emissions are definitely a major result of our behaviors as well.
Perhaps we can all live with global warming, but climate change, if genuine, is a major problem. Agriculture, as one example, is hugely dependent on climate. A large part of California's economy is based on agriculture, thus alteration of California's traditional climate could have a major impact on our economy. Climate change can potentially make some parts of the world unlivable and cause major disruption of human life. Rising ocean waters are already problematic in some coastline areas.
It seems obvious to me that, if we can avoid damaging the earth, which is our home, we should do so. We did do away with lead in our gasoline. Perhaps we can also stop throwing so much methane and carbon dioxide into our atmosphere as well. Eat less beef; walk more (it's good for us); and use green energy when possible.
Friday, May 12, 2017
The Absurdity of Trump's "Religious Freedom" Order
Some American Christians have been whining a lot about their religious freedom. Supposedly their religious freedom is being hampered because they are not free to discriminate against gays and lesbians. Of course, they are completely free to think what they like about gays and lesbians; but because we live in a "civil" society, they must conform to how we are expected to treat gays and lesbians. Comparable issues arise with birth control and abortion.
Our Constitution provides the freedom to practice the religion of one's choice (or, for that matter, the freedom to practice no religion at all). So the real question at the bottom of all this is what actually constitutes "practice." It seems to me that practicing a religion means having certain beliefs and, perhaps, taking part in organized groups who share those beliefs. Many people would also suggest that sharing one's beliefs with others or even helping others to understand similar beliefs is part of practice. In my opinion, that can become a bit "edgy;" people who want to share their beliefs at my front door are really violating my privacy.
The problem with religious practice is that some groups seem to think that they should be allowed to treat others in our society consistent with their special beliefs instead of treating them within the norms of civil society. This, of course, amounts to a demand that their beliefs trump (excuse the pun) all the rest. That really means that others should not have the same freedom of religious belief.
The irony is that Christians are not at all ready to allow other religious groups to behave according to their own private beliefs in our society --- especially not Muslims. Freedom of religion depends upon being in a free civil society; but that means that many behaviors, especially toward other people, are controlled by the rules of that society and not by private religious beliefs.
Our Constitution provides the freedom to practice the religion of one's choice (or, for that matter, the freedom to practice no religion at all). So the real question at the bottom of all this is what actually constitutes "practice." It seems to me that practicing a religion means having certain beliefs and, perhaps, taking part in organized groups who share those beliefs. Many people would also suggest that sharing one's beliefs with others or even helping others to understand similar beliefs is part of practice. In my opinion, that can become a bit "edgy;" people who want to share their beliefs at my front door are really violating my privacy.
The problem with religious practice is that some groups seem to think that they should be allowed to treat others in our society consistent with their special beliefs instead of treating them within the norms of civil society. This, of course, amounts to a demand that their beliefs trump (excuse the pun) all the rest. That really means that others should not have the same freedom of religious belief.
The irony is that Christians are not at all ready to allow other religious groups to behave according to their own private beliefs in our society --- especially not Muslims. Freedom of religion depends upon being in a free civil society; but that means that many behaviors, especially toward other people, are controlled by the rules of that society and not by private religious beliefs.
Wednesday, March 15, 2017
It's a Mystery to Me
What I find truly appalling and beyond understanding is the Republican abhorrence for helping people. The whole discussion of our Affordable Care Act, from its inception to the present day, is a vast canvass of Republican attitudes strewn over the field of Democratic struggles to bring Americans up to the standards of the rest of the developed world. Even the nickname “Obama Care” is an attempt to defame the act by association with their racist hatred of our 44th President.
One could try to justify the Republican attitude by aligning it with their time-worn hatred of Federal government versus state’s rights. But Republican states are no more likely to advance health care legislation either. One could also suggest that it is a matter of budget control. Republicans hate what they like to call “entitlement programs” and will do anything to eliminate them supposedly because they want to control spending and reduce the national debt. But, in fact, the idea that Republicans want to reduce the national debt by lowering spending is pure fantasy. History shows that every Republican administration since Regan has spent large and put us deeper in debt while every Democratic administration has brought spending down and reduced the debt. The Republican abhorrence for helping people runs deeper than all of this. I believe it is an essentially anti-social attitude built on an extreme fantasy of independence.
What is mysterious to me is where in our history this attitude began. Looking at our origin documents, the Declaration of Independence says, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” That is a basic belief that government is created to secure “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” Thirteen years later, our Constitution says, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” That is, one of the principal reasons for our government is to “promote the general welfare.” Nothing in all of this suggests that promoting the general welfare should detract from the “blessings of liberty” or other personal freedom and independence.
It seems obvious to me that taking care of our fellow citizens is entirely consistent with, indeed a fundamental part of, promoting the general welfare. Where are all those Republicans who adore the Constitution in all of its original words and notions?
One could try to justify the Republican attitude by aligning it with their time-worn hatred of Federal government versus state’s rights. But Republican states are no more likely to advance health care legislation either. One could also suggest that it is a matter of budget control. Republicans hate what they like to call “entitlement programs” and will do anything to eliminate them supposedly because they want to control spending and reduce the national debt. But, in fact, the idea that Republicans want to reduce the national debt by lowering spending is pure fantasy. History shows that every Republican administration since Regan has spent large and put us deeper in debt while every Democratic administration has brought spending down and reduced the debt. The Republican abhorrence for helping people runs deeper than all of this. I believe it is an essentially anti-social attitude built on an extreme fantasy of independence.
What is mysterious to me is where in our history this attitude began. Looking at our origin documents, the Declaration of Independence says, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” That is a basic belief that government is created to secure “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” Thirteen years later, our Constitution says, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” That is, one of the principal reasons for our government is to “promote the general welfare.” Nothing in all of this suggests that promoting the general welfare should detract from the “blessings of liberty” or other personal freedom and independence.
It seems obvious to me that taking care of our fellow citizens is entirely consistent with, indeed a fundamental part of, promoting the general welfare. Where are all those Republicans who adore the Constitution in all of its original words and notions?
Sunday, February 19, 2017
That's the GOP
Between the GOP in general and Donald Trump we are in for a very rough ride. The Donald wants us all to believe that the media produces nothing but fake news and constantly lies. (Donald should know something about that since he lies constantly!) Meanwhile, the GOP Congress, aided by Trump's cabinet choices, has set about shutting down reporting to the public about everything from climate change to toxic spills in rivers and streams. Even NASA can't show us pictures of temperature gradients across the world.
So this is a government based on eliminating a free press and keeping hazardous news from the public. Do the 48% of Americans who voted for Trump really think that is a good idea? Do they really think a dumb and uninformed public is the best way to run a "democracy"? Actually, that is precisely the way dictatorships are run.
After the press is torn apart, they will turn to the universities and then the students. If you think this is not going to happen (can't happen here), follow the money. When the GOP starts re-routing the money (as they clearly can), the press and the universities will collapse.
So this is a government based on eliminating a free press and keeping hazardous news from the public. Do the 48% of Americans who voted for Trump really think that is a good idea? Do they really think a dumb and uninformed public is the best way to run a "democracy"? Actually, that is precisely the way dictatorships are run.
After the press is torn apart, they will turn to the universities and then the students. If you think this is not going to happen (can't happen here), follow the money. When the GOP starts re-routing the money (as they clearly can), the press and the universities will collapse.
Sunday, February 12, 2017
Give Trump a Break? Really?
There are a few people out there who are actively telling us to give Trump a break. I'm all for that if we can see some kind of learning curve. But really, there is no visible learning curve at this point. Trump is going about business just as he did throughout the campaign period --- all kinds of disrespect for other people, childish name calling, and delusional claims of fake news and rigged electoral processes.
When the chief executive is a compulsive liar, doesn't seem to understand basic government, disregards the Constitution, wants to grasp complete power, and belittles anyone who dares to criticize him, you do not give him a break; you call him for what he is.
Believe me, I wish that Donald Trump would somehow grow up and become an intelligent adult and grow into the highest office in our government. I am waiting, but I am not optimistic.
When the chief executive is a compulsive liar, doesn't seem to understand basic government, disregards the Constitution, wants to grasp complete power, and belittles anyone who dares to criticize him, you do not give him a break; you call him for what he is.
Believe me, I wish that Donald Trump would somehow grow up and become an intelligent adult and grow into the highest office in our government. I am waiting, but I am not optimistic.
Sunday, January 22, 2017
Trump's Actions vs. Trump's Talk
I am going to keep a running record of Trump's actions here. So far there is little that coincides with his populist talk.
------------------------------
In his inaugural address he said the "anti-police attitudes stop here" --- of course, it hasn't been "anti-police" but rather criticism of policing. So Trump wants an obedient and uncritical attitude toward police which turns into a police state.
Filled his cabinet with billionaires and others who want to end regulation of foods and drugs, abandon public education, and limit women's health protections.
Signed an order to suspend Obama's reduction of FHA payments which would have saved the average FHA household $500 this year.
Signed an executive order that begins the process of taking down the Affordable Care Act which may eventually take away health care from 30 million people. [By the way, the reason why simply revoking the ACA is so troubling is that the Republicans will never be able to replace it with anything because they don't have the votes to do anything constructive. They can easily throw out the ACA because they have a horde of ultra right-wing nuts who will vote against it. But the same right-wing nuts will not vote for anything positive.]
Went to the CIA his first full day in office where he proceeded to deny that he's ever had a problem with them, then got off on "false reporting" of the people count on inauguration day, and finally assailed the media (again). Trump's war against the media is one key thing that all dictators do; they take down the media. Next it will be the universities and science in particular.
1/23: Trump reinstated a Reagan-era ban on funding international health organizations that mention abortion as options to women's health issues.
1/24: Today he gave the green light to both the Keystone and the Dakota Access pipelines. So much for the environment! But probably the scariest thing that Trump has done in his first few days is attempt to gag Federal employees. Yes, no one can talk to outside agencies (like the free press) about what the government is doing. If you can't stop the press, you can try to hide everything from them and that means hiding everything from the people of our country. When government is no longer transparent a lot of bad stuff can happen.
1/25: Having put a freeze on Federal hiring, he wants to mount a huge investigation of voter fraud (because of his obsession about losing to Hillary by almost 3 million votes) and he wants to go ahead with the infamous wall (granting that was a campaign promise). These, of course, will cost taxpayers millions of dollars and, since the ultra rich like him are not really taxpayers, you know who is actually paying his bills.
1/27: Well Trump continued his governance-by-executive-order today by terminating immigration by refugees from seven different Muslim majority countries (except, of course, those countries with which he does business). So much for "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" It was HUGE while it lasted. Meanwhile, it seems to me that his ban violates the Constitution by making an executive order that mentions a religion. It even suggests that preferential treatment might be given to Christians.
1/30: Trump fired the acting attorney general who had announced she would not defend his immigration ban for fear of it's violation of the Constitution. He quickly replaced her with an older white male acting AG who said he would defend Trump's action. What is happening here (though it will take a while) is that Trump is going to corrupt the entire government. In these first few weeks, there is resistance because many Federal employees and officials are carry-overs from Obama's administration. But once Trump has weeded these people out, there will be no internal resistance. What we are looking at is the process of creating a government that can do anything it wishes and is impenetrable to resistance.
2/6: Thus far, I see very little that Trump has done to improve the lives of the people who voted for him. He loves to take credit for the current job growth and unemployment statistics but all that happened under Obama's administration. Let's wait and see what Trumps stats look like. He also loves to have us think that he has personally brought jobs back into the US but, in fact, all of these decisions were made well before the election and the numbers involved are hardly significant. Meanwhile, he and his GOP Congress has stripped financial restraints and begun to take apart the EPA, including allowing mining companies to dump wastes into local rivers. Is that really going to help those people?
------------------------------
In his inaugural address he said the "anti-police attitudes stop here" --- of course, it hasn't been "anti-police" but rather criticism of policing. So Trump wants an obedient and uncritical attitude toward police which turns into a police state.
Filled his cabinet with billionaires and others who want to end regulation of foods and drugs, abandon public education, and limit women's health protections.
Signed an order to suspend Obama's reduction of FHA payments which would have saved the average FHA household $500 this year.
Signed an executive order that begins the process of taking down the Affordable Care Act which may eventually take away health care from 30 million people. [By the way, the reason why simply revoking the ACA is so troubling is that the Republicans will never be able to replace it with anything because they don't have the votes to do anything constructive. They can easily throw out the ACA because they have a horde of ultra right-wing nuts who will vote against it. But the same right-wing nuts will not vote for anything positive.]
Went to the CIA his first full day in office where he proceeded to deny that he's ever had a problem with them, then got off on "false reporting" of the people count on inauguration day, and finally assailed the media (again). Trump's war against the media is one key thing that all dictators do; they take down the media. Next it will be the universities and science in particular.
1/23: Trump reinstated a Reagan-era ban on funding international health organizations that mention abortion as options to women's health issues.
1/24: Today he gave the green light to both the Keystone and the Dakota Access pipelines. So much for the environment! But probably the scariest thing that Trump has done in his first few days is attempt to gag Federal employees. Yes, no one can talk to outside agencies (like the free press) about what the government is doing. If you can't stop the press, you can try to hide everything from them and that means hiding everything from the people of our country. When government is no longer transparent a lot of bad stuff can happen.
1/25: Having put a freeze on Federal hiring, he wants to mount a huge investigation of voter fraud (because of his obsession about losing to Hillary by almost 3 million votes) and he wants to go ahead with the infamous wall (granting that was a campaign promise). These, of course, will cost taxpayers millions of dollars and, since the ultra rich like him are not really taxpayers, you know who is actually paying his bills.
1/27: Well Trump continued his governance-by-executive-order today by terminating immigration by refugees from seven different Muslim majority countries (except, of course, those countries with which he does business). So much for "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" It was HUGE while it lasted. Meanwhile, it seems to me that his ban violates the Constitution by making an executive order that mentions a religion. It even suggests that preferential treatment might be given to Christians.
1/30: Trump fired the acting attorney general who had announced she would not defend his immigration ban for fear of it's violation of the Constitution. He quickly replaced her with an older white male acting AG who said he would defend Trump's action. What is happening here (though it will take a while) is that Trump is going to corrupt the entire government. In these first few weeks, there is resistance because many Federal employees and officials are carry-overs from Obama's administration. But once Trump has weeded these people out, there will be no internal resistance. What we are looking at is the process of creating a government that can do anything it wishes and is impenetrable to resistance.
2/6: Thus far, I see very little that Trump has done to improve the lives of the people who voted for him. He loves to take credit for the current job growth and unemployment statistics but all that happened under Obama's administration. Let's wait and see what Trumps stats look like. He also loves to have us think that he has personally brought jobs back into the US but, in fact, all of these decisions were made well before the election and the numbers involved are hardly significant. Meanwhile, he and his GOP Congress has stripped financial restraints and begun to take apart the EPA, including allowing mining companies to dump wastes into local rivers. Is that really going to help those people?
Thursday, January 12, 2017
Liberals and Elites
For a long time now Republicans have used the term ‘liberal’ as a swear word. Liberals, they say, have caused everything bad in the country. I suppose that “making America great again” sort of means getting rid of liberals and everything they stand for. It takes gumption to stand up and say that you are a liberal.
But our recent election and the various analyses of this catastrophe have produced a new swear word to replace ‘liberal’. Now, we are elites. It is as though the Republicans now want to identify with the Third Estate and the whole French Revolution. They see themselves as the great leaders who will carry the poor and down trodden to victory over the elite First Estate. How absurd is that! Look at Trump’s cabinet choices; this is not the poor and down trodden taking over Washington. This is Trump’s billionaire buddies taking over Washington. As a friend of mine says, “Democrats in office try to help the people; Republicans in office try to help themselves.”
But who are the elites and why should they shut up? They are the well educated, the professionals, the scientists, etc. And the Republicans’ disregard for facts and reasoned discussion is why they think the elites should shut up.
After Meryl Streep’s criticism of Trump on TV the other night, Megan McCain tweeted, in effect, that elites better learn to shut up or they would lose the next election as well. But that is really the last thing they should do. If this is really a war on reason and truth, we must not give in.
Sunday, January 1, 2017
2016
OK this past year was not all bad. We made several nice trips to our condo in Mammoth Lakes and to Santa Barbara and Santa Ynez. We consumed a lot of really great wine and some great food. In March, we went to Phoenix to spend a week watching spring practice, and that was fun. This summer, we took a Viking river cruise on the Danube and that proved to be a lot of fun and very interesting. Then we flew to Ireland and spent two weeks in our favorite places. Five times in Ireland! Why don’t they just give us passports! We also spent a week going from Boston to Chicago and seeing my Chicago relatives was wonderful. and, finally, our Christmas week in the Seattle area was great. I should mention, too, that we bought both a new dishwasher and a new refrigerator and think they are both incredible.
So what made 2016 seem so bad? Well, the presidential election of course. The whole period of advertisements and debates was terrible. We wondered how the political process could become so debased in a country that is supposedly the world leader. We shared the general optimism that Clinton would be elected right up to the evening of election day when it became brutally obvious that she was going to lose. Of course, we were then traumatized by the fact that she won the popular vote by almost 3 million votes and, also, that Russia seems to have had a major role in turning the process toward Trump. But alas Trump will become president of the United States this month and his selections of cabinet members foretell a disastrous destruction of our national government, something Republicans have been wanting to do for years.
So I cry for my country. It is not the country I thought it was or hoped it might be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)