I am now over my rant of last night about the Kansas City Chiefs’ loss to the Pittsburgh Steelers in the playoffs. Sort of.

My football begins and ends with my team. I don’t have other “favorites,” I don’t play fantasy football, and I’ll probably watch the Super Bowl only if I happen to be in front of the TV and I happen to switch to that station. Football is over for me, and it will begin again in late summer. My sports fan life is now dormant until the Kansas City Royals play their opener. Basketball bores me.

So what happened to the Chiefs? It’s easy to blame the officiating (and I do). It’s easy to blame the underhanded playing by the Steelers which the officials apparently chose not to see (and I do). It’s easy to blame first-round draft pick Eric Fisher for his idiotic holding penalty that cost us our two-point conversion (and I do and they ought to trade him away). I have a half-dozen other things to blame. But this begs the question: Why did I go into this game with them, knowing they were good enough to win?

Because they are good and they should have won.

Here are some football clichés, but maybe the reason they are cliché is because they are so true that we repeat them all the time: Linemen know that they have to break the rules and hold sometimes. The trick is knowing when to do it. Or better said, knowing when it’s important to make no mistakes. Fisher needs to go. He was a great idea who didn’t pan out and serves only as a danger to our quarterback. Trade him, if somebody else will have him. If not, let him be that guy who squirts water bottles on the sideline. Here’s another one: You have to stop the opponent’s running game. You simply have to. Here’s a third one: When you’re paid lots of money to catch passes and you’re in the playoffs, you catch them. Don’t tell me the other guys aren’t playing fair. Don’t tell me it’s cold. Catch the damn ball. Here’s a fourth one: Don’t let your temper override your talent. Travis Kelce, that’s exactly what you did. And I have to admit, even though it’s setting a poor example, I enjoying watching you plant that guy on his backside. I enjoyed every replay of it, because they were all over you all night. But that’s sort of my point; I’m the guy who gets to secretly enjoy it. Not you. They are actually paying you to not do that, and they’re not paying me anything. (But I really did enjoy it).

So, even though all those things went so badly awry, we are still a better team than the Pittsburgh Steelers, and we very definitely could have beaten them soundly. And instead, we beat ourselves. Here’s a final cliché: Any given Sunday, any team can beat any other team. Or on any Sunday, any team can beat itself.

Now I think my rant is over, unless I think of something else.

I watched the Golden Globe awards last night.  I used to love watching the Oscars and other award shows as a child.  Today i’m more likely to turn them off.   That’s partially because I know fewer and fewer of the actors as time goes by.  But a bigger reason I no longer watch is because of the unrelenting and ceaseless political comments.  But then i’m a guy who thinks actors should stick to acting.  it makes sense to me to say that if the country seems to be divided about politics, the wise position for a well-known actor is to be non-partisan, else you run the risk of alienating half of the people who like you.  Why drive away half of your customers?

Last night, i watched one of my favorite actors, Meryl Streep, recognized for a lifetime achievement award.  She deserves it.  Streep is an incredible actor and I very much enjoy watching her work.  I was very happy to see her talent recognized.

But last night, she chose to make comments about Donald Trump, whom she obviously does not like, and clearly does not support.  I don’t know about you, but this causes me to roll my eyes and think about turning the TV off.  Maybe it’s just me, but I want to hear actors of Streep’s preeminence talk about things related to their craft.  About how they’re able to make me suspend my disbelief and enjoy a story.  About how they are able to affect us and make us think.   This is no different than me wanting Eric Clapton to talk about music, or wanting Joe Montana to talk about football.  I want people who are better than me at something to talk about what it is that they do.

One of the items that Hollywood and the press have repeated over and over again, however, has been the accusation that Donald Trump mocked a disabled reporter.  Among most of the media and the darlings of Hollywood, this story has taken on the semblance of fact and talked about as though it was truth.

It isn’t.  He didn’t do it.

If you want to read the real story about what happened, it’s all right here.  If you’re not interested in the details and simply want to believe he mocked a challenged person, then stop reading.  But if you want the truth, read it here, then come back.  I have some more things to say:

https://www.catholics4trump.com/the-true-story-donald-trump-did-not-mock-a-reporters-disability/

https://www.catholics4trump.com/even-more-video-evidence-trump-did-not-mock-reporters-disability/

So does Trump do and say stupid looking things?  Yes.  But does he mock and belittle people because of their physically challenged conditions?  No, he does not, and no, he didn’t.

Here’s the deal:  if you want to criticize Trump for what we call personal or character failures,  there’s a legitimate list a mile long.  Here, I’ll help:  He seems not to have filters.  He has SAID things that are truly demeaning to women.  He appears to be the sort of person who feels the necessity of “striking back” when attacked on minor issues instead of turning the other cheek.  He’s often insulting and boorish.  I could go on.

But I would also say to Trump haters that he hasn’t yet taken the oath of office.  A better time to consider his presidency might be after he’s had a year or so in office.  There are legitimate issues for you to stand upon.  Mocking a disabled reporter is not one of them.  Much as I love Meryll Streep, she ought to stick to acting instead of repeating myths and untruths.  To listen to her accusations about Trump is like listening to Trump’s accusations about actors.  Neither of them know what they’re talking about and they ought to stay in their lanes. Continue reading “Meryl Streep, Stay In Your Lane” →

So let’s talk about the Electoral College. Everybody else is.

A lot of Democrats and/or Hillary Clinton supporters are angry about it right now. I’m guessing that’s because the Democratic candidate received more popular votes, yet lost the election. The Republicans don’t seem to have a problem with it—this time. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Representative Charlie Rangel (D-NY) have both introduced bills to abolish the Electoral College system.

You can read all about it in a million places right now. You can learn why the founding fathers thought it necessary. You can gain a fundamental understanding of how it works and why we haven’t thrown it out yet. I suggest you do that.

A not overly simple explanation is this: it’s a system that weights the influence of sparsely-populated states against states with lots of people in them.

Most historians credit that current star of Broadway, Alexander Hamilton, with the concept of the Electoral College. That’s based on the language and Hamilton’s reference to it in The Federalist Papers. Of course, we’re not quite sure who wrote The Federalist Papers either, but most everybody believes Hamilton wrote the 68^th essay therein, which deals, in part, with the Electoral College. He was for it, and I understand that. I’m generally for everything I’ve written.

In any event, we’ve employed the Electoral College since the constitution was written, and apparently we can’t bring ourselves to throw it out. Five times in our entire history, a presidential candidate has won the popular vote, yet lost the election. Believe it or not, every single time that happened, the losing candidate was not happy at all: Andrew Jackson in 1824, Samuel Tildon in 1876, Grover Cleveland in 1888, Al Gore in 2000 and Hillary Clinton about three weeks ago. Astoundingly, each time this happened, about half the country wanted to get rid of the Electoral College. If you don’t think that’s crazy, consider this: during the exact same elections, the country was almost evenly divided in support of the candidates. That might be another way of saying it happens when both candidates are equally disliked. Go figure.

If history holds true, Boxer and Rangel’s bills will die a lonely death on the floor of whatever committee kills them. That’s what usually happens.

After doing a little research, you may decide that, for all of its clunkiness and inefficiency, the Electoral College is a pretty good thing to have around. Sort of like that unwieldy law that allows us to vote in private. Or that awkward American legal system that protects us if we’re accused. Come to think of it, that pesky, Rube Goldbergesque Bill Of Rights, which protects our freedom of speech, freedom from search and seizure, freedom to bear arms and a few other things, is, by its definition, extremely inefficient in its application. And it does not protect us from foolish ideas. Some of us enjoy looking at Goldberg’s machines. Because of their inefficiency.

Let’s all stay calm, breathe and try not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I waited to write this until everybody calmed down.

Last week, Vice-President Elect Mike Pence, along with his daughter and her cousins, attended a performance of Hamilton: An American Musical on Broadway. To the best of my ability to piece it together from news stories and videos, here’s what happened.

At the show’s end, cast member Brandon Dixon, said the following:

“You know, we have a guest in the audience this evening. Vice-President-elect Pence, I see you walking out but I hope you hear just a few more moments.”

 At this point, a few boos could be heard. I don’t know if they were booing Pence or booing Dixon. Pence apparently leaned to his kids and said “That’s what freedom sounds like.” He turned and politely listened to Dixon.

“There’s nothing to boo, ladies and gentlemen. There’s nothing to boo. We’re all here sharing a story of love. We have a message for you, sir. We hope that you will hear us out. And I encourage everybody to pull out your phones and tweet and post, because this message needs to be spread far and wide, OK? Vice-President-Elect Pence, we welcome you and we truly thank you for joining us here at Hamilton: An American Musical. We really do. We, sir, we are the diverse America who are alarmed and anxious that your new administration will not protect us—our planet, our children, our parents—or defend us and uphold our inalienable rights, sir. But we truly hope that this show has inspired you to uphold our American values and to work on behalf of all of us. All of us. Again, we truly thank you for sharing this show, this wonderful American story told by a diverse group of men and women of different colors, creeds and orientations.”

 Pence smiled, waved and left the theatre.  Then, the storm of Trumps and Tweets and opinions began.

Everyone with a Facebook or Twitter account had an opinion, pro and con. It didn’t just go viral. It went pandemic for a few days. Dixon was either a hero or villain. In a loss of parental control to their errant child, the campaign staff of President-Elect Donald Trump returned his iPhone, and he immediately tweeted:

“Our wonderful future V.P. Mike Pence was harassed last night at the theater by the cast of Hamilton, cameras blazing. This should not happen!”

And a later Trumptwit said:

 “The Theater must always be a safe and special place. The cast of Hamilton was very rude last night to a very good man, Mike Pence. Apologize!” (This statement was so wrong on at least three different levels but I don’t have time to break it down right now.)

 Fox News was apoplectic. I counted five different anchors or pundits who repeatedly referred to Dixon’s words to the Vice-President-Elect as a “lecture,” and did so for several days.

There are 320 million people in this country and I think I heard the opinion of 319,999,999 of them. Finally, someone thought it might be enlightening to ask the Vice-President-Elect’s opinion. You know, to sort of get the opinion of the guy who was actually there and to whom Dixon’s words were addressed.

And here’s a collection of what Mike Pence had to say:

“I wasn’t offended by what was said…”

 “My daughter and I and her cousins really enjoyed the show. ‘Hamilton’ is just an incredible production, incredibly talented people. It was a real joy to be there…”

 So where does this leave us? Maybe it leaves us thinking we should think before we speak or opine. Or post. Or tweet. Take just a moment and re-read Dixon’s verbatim message to Pence. If I might be allowed to paraphrase, the message is pretty simple:

“We welcome you and thank you for being here. We are diverse. We are alarmed and anxious that you won’t protect us. But we hope you do. And we thank you again for being here.”

 I’m not a fan of entertainers who voice their political opinions. These days, I usually turn off the Oscars because of it. I don’t like commercials when I go to the movie theatre. I know times have changed, but when I pay to be entertained, I’m not in the mood to be pitched. A good seat in a Broadway theatre costs several hundred dollars. It’s extremely difficult to come by a Hamilton ticket right now, so I suspect they are considerably higher. So I would have been considerably more irritated that somebody took my “entertainment” time and turned it into a “statement,” regardless of whether or not I agreed with it. That’s just the way I am.

But I believe I have the right to tell the Vice-President-Elect of the United States that I am alarmed and anxious. Or that I’m happy.  Or that I think he’s doing either a great job or a poor job. And if I were searching for a polite and appropriate choice of words, I’d be hard pressed to find better words than Dixon’s.

It was not a “lecture.” It was neither offensive nor impolite. It was appropriate protest and I defend it, because I reserve my right to do the same thing.

A national survey conducted in 2014 by the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania found that potential voters, as a whole, don’t know a lot about our government. I’m sure matters have only gotten worse in the meantime:

• Fourteen percent are illiterate.
• Sixty-four percent cannot name the three branches of the federal government.
• Just over a quarter of Americans (27 percent) know it takes a two-thirds vote of the House and Senate to override a presidential veto.
• One in five Americans (21 percent) incorrectly thinks that a 5-4 Supreme Court decision is sent back to Congress for reconsideration.
• Twenty-six percent think the sun goes round the earth.

The “sun going around the earth” thing doesn’t involve our government, of course. I thought I’d throw that in for perspective.

There’s been a lot of discussion in the news about our “duty to vote.” Let’s talk about that. And by “let’s,” of course it means I am going to talk, and hopefully you are going to read. I like writing to you, because you don’t interrupt. You may, however, respond after you’ve politely listened. I don’t think I’ve ever deleted a comment.

Voting isn’t a duty. It’s a right. Some will accuse me of being un-American when I discourage people from voting. Maybe they should study the Annenberg survey a bit more closely. I cared about this country enough to learn about it. Suggesting that uninformed voters go to the polls is like asking folks to grab hold of an electric fence when they don’t know about electricity. Problems can be solved if they’re wearing rubber gloves or have enough sense to turn the power off first. Otherwise the results are shocking and they’re almost always going to be unhappy. It’s a right. Not a duty. It’s not a moral necessity to grab a live wire.

The people questioned in the Annenberg survey (theoretically, that’s us) prove to a mathematical certainty that a majority of people in this country vote when they don’t know what they’re voting about. Far too many of them vote because they saw “something” on TV or the Internet and believe they’re doing something about it. If you believe the same thing, without having done some research and fact-checking, then I have some attractively-priced swamp land I’d like to show you.

In this day and age, when information is so readily available—when we are able to carry the information in our hip pocket—there is no excuse to be deliberately dull, intentionally ignorant or both. But our laws grant such people the right to vote. Just because you can doesn’t mean you should. They say everybody’s vote counts. That’s precisely why I’ve worked myself into an agitation. There are lots of people talking about the election right now. That doesn’t mean they know anything. When Dorothy asked the Scarecrow “How can you talk without a brain?” he said “I don’t know. But some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don’t they?”

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are the two majority choices for President because we voted for them. Remember? There were primaries. And if you say, “Hey, I didn’t vote for either one of them!” I say: “Then it was the Scarecrows. Stop encouraging the Scarecrows to vote!” This is no straw vote on Tuesday. It counts.

People who vote on the basis of a television “sound bite,” without any kind of serious fact-checking, are doing this country a disservice. You can’t fix “stupid,” but, though legal, it’s illogical and unreasonable to encourage them to vote.

I’m also not a fan of allowing teenagers to vote. I’ll be tarred and feathered for this, but they generally will not vote wisely. It’s pretty simple; they haven’t lived long enough and in all fairness, they have no skin in the game. You could argue that it’s their  future at stake, but does no one remember that their  future is our  responsibility—and that we’re not handling it well? If it were my world, I’d raise the voting age to about 25 to gain some degree of level-headed discrimination. Level-headedness, to me, requires the ability to understand that researching the Trans-Pacific Partnership is a little more important than what Miley Cyrus wore to the Emmys. A lot of people would disagree with that statement.  Most of them are teenagers.

In a recent column, Fred Reed said, “…. During Vietnam, the argument was that if the young were old enough to die in Asia, they were old enough to vote. And if six-year-olds are old enough to die in car accidents, they are old enough to drive.”

Lincoln is quoted as saying, “You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.” There are too many elected officials these days who feel you can fool enough of the people enough of the time.

Mike Rowe, in a recent Facebook post, said “Remember – there’s nothing virtuous or patriotic about voting just for the sake of voting, and the next time someone tells you otherwise, do me a favor – ask them who they’re voting for. Then tell them you’re voting for their opponent. Then, see if they’ll give you a ride to the polls.”

I have tried very hard to avoid politics for many months, but with only a week left, it’s almost unavoidable.  So here I go.

This election is on everybody’s mind. Not because we necessarily want it to be, but because we are battered and mugged by it, even as many of us try to avoid it. All of us except the press will be glad when it’s over. I can’t imagine anyone wanting it go another day more than necessary.

The election cycle is now at least two years long, perhaps three or four years, depending on your opinion of when it begins. Some are already speculating about the candidates for 2020. The electorate (that’s you and me) are beaten up and down by the lengthy process. Maybe that’s what the candidates want. Maybe they want to hound us into an “I don’t even care anymore” attitude. That way, candidates with less than savory reputations can get elected. Maybe that’s an explanation for how we arrived at the ridiculous place we find ourselves today.

Shouldn’t a leader be someone we genuinely like? I’m not sure, since I’m not a leader. But I know an awful lot about following. I have no desire to follow a guy who speaks disrespectfully, can’t complete a sentence and can’t seem to stop himself from hitting back, or  a woman who seems to be a congenital liar, believes she is above the law and is currently under investigation by the FBI. Those are my choices? Seriously?

And how did Anthony Weiner get back in the headlines and involved in all this? Didn’t they throw him down the drain back in 2011? Then he ran for mayor of New York in 2013. More sexting scandals erupted and they threw him out again. And now I learn that his laptop computer holds 650,000 potentially damaging e-mails because he’s married to the top aide of one of the candidates? He’s the Weiner Who Won’t Go Away.

Here we sit, trying to decide on our President, and the answer may very well lie in Anthony Weiner’s laptop. I wouldn’t want to be the one who has to comb through it to find the e-mails. I’d be afraid of seeing something I couldn’t get out of my mind.

Why have politics become absurdist theatre? Does it occur to anyone that, if we spend most of the election cycle caught between the poor decisions of both candidates, we have probably made a wrong turn a few miles back?

You may feel that I’m siding with one particular candidate in all this. I’m not. I tell you, most sincerely, that the other shoe has not yet dropped. It’s only Tuesday and the week is young.

If we’re going to load up the campaigns with Weiners, winners and losers, let’s go whole hog. Let’s throw all the politicians into prison and put the prisoners in Congress and the White House. You may think that’s a crazy suggestion, but if you look at the names currently in the political headlines, you’ll see that we’re halfway there.

A theory I’ve heard says that the good and right candidates won’t run for President; they’re unwilling to deal with the press and the torturous process. That theory makes sense to me; I wouldn’t want to go through a campaign, even if I wanted the job.   The theory would also indicate that our best choice for President might likely be some Trumanesque figure sitting on a tractor in a Kansas wheatfield. He or she is an honest person who knows right from wrong. You remember the sort of person I’m describing. An honorable one.

For those of you outside the St. Joseph area, our local newspaper, the St. Joseph News-Press, always prints traditional letters to the editor. But they have another section titled It’s Your Call. People can phone in and state their opinions without leaving their name or number. It’s apparently very popular, or at least I hear people talk about it a lot. Maybe we enjoy reading opinions that are irresponsible. Here’s a sampling over the past ten days or so. I removed all the Trump/Clinton comments because I’m tired of hearing them. Nothing’s funnier than the truth:

“I sat down today, turned off all my electronic devices and anything that might disturb my concentration and tried to read the amendments as published in Wednesday’s News-Press. I gave up after an hour. Between all the legalese and the “if then” and “shall be,” I had no idea what they said. I have just decided to vote no on everything.”

 (If you understood the logic in that, let me know.)

“I’m all for sending humans to Mars. Let’s start with politicians and convicts.”

(I really don’t know what to think of this one.  I’d like to go to Mars, but not in that company.  I do think they’d get along well together, though.)

“Great job once again, city of St. Joe. We are going to do all that work on Mansfield Road where there are absolutely no people who would ever walk there, from 22nd to 16th Street Terrace. But from 16th Street on where all the houses get shook from all the heavy traffic that goes by there, you are going to do nothing. Awesome.”

(Are the houses “getting shook” from the foot traffic? Seeing that really would be “awesome.”)

“I read your paper every day for many, many years. Thursday’s front page had history of tractors. C’mon, Wikileaks has been dumping a ton of stuff.”

 (What does this writer have against tractors?  Tractors helped to build this country.  In my opinion, this country has waited far too long for an in-depth history on tractors. Why do we have to plow through Wikileaks when we have the Machinery That Built America right in front of us?  C’mon, let’s talk about what’s important!)

“I am calling about the dog shooting down there in Rushville. People, get your dogs on a leash. I don’t care if you are in St. Joe, Cameron or Rushville. Get your dog on a leash. It’s the law and it protects your animal, too. I think this case will prove it.”

 (This makes me think the writer is heading “down there to Rushville” with a gun. My dog Joe is lying quietly beside me as I type this. The leash is hanging in this room somewhere, but I don’t see it. We are not going outside for a week.)

“I find myself wondering very often, looking at all these young ladies in their 20s with tattoos all over their bodies, I often wonder whether or not when they get in their 40s and 50s if they are going to look into the mirror and say, “Why did I do that?”

(I find myself looking in the mirror and wondering the same thing.  And I don’t have any tattoos.)

“I just read the article on the Social Security increase. It said it’s going to be less than $4, but most people are getting $1,200 a month. There are people out there like me who get less than $800 a month. What does the cost of gas have to do with a cost of living increase? Food and everything else is going up, utilities, food, everything. It is getting tougher and tougher. You just can’t live off of this Social Security.”

(I didn’t see the original article, but aren’t gasoline and food and everything else what they mean when they say “cost of living?”  Maybe they’ve changed all that.)

“One of the biggest mistakes this nation has made is electronic voting machines. Hackers can get into anything they want, yet people are dumb enough to trust an electronic voting machine. Thank goodness where I vote, we use paper ballots.”

(Right, and you and I know we never had voter fraud issues with those good old paper ballots. I’m not a hacker, but I have a little experience in protecting against them. Hackers can get into anything they’re smart enough to get into, provided the guy on the other end isn’t smarter than they are.)

“I’m calling in regard to the unattended gardens at certain elementary schools. What is the lesson to be learned from establishing an enclosed, fenced-in garden and then never attending to it? Particularly at Parkway Elementary School, it is truly an eyesore. I guess the lesson could be salvaged is when there is no produce or vegetation you go in there and you clean it out.”

 (I found myself wondering why this person first said “certain elementary schools,” and then later ratted out Parkway.  Surely other schools have ugly gardens.  It took at least a day for this comment to appear in the paper. I’m guessing that “going in there and cleaning it out” would have taken a couple of hours. Why didn’t the writer just go over there and fix it?  Let’s get this hideous garden situation fixed.)

“With the city is spending all this money to fix streets and sidewalks in other parts of town, maybe they would like to fix South 22nd Street and put some sidewalks in. Maybe we would like to do some walking, too.”

(I think I can take a firm position on this. People who would like to do some walking ought to be able to. But I don’t want any houses “getting shook.”)

There’s a part of me that says opinions ought to have a name attached to them.  On the other hand, I suspect these things help to sell newspapers.  It doesn’t make it right, but I’ve had my share of laughs from reading these over the years. If you’re a citizen of my hometown, I hope you enjoyed this. If you were one of the “It’s Your Callers,” relax. I’m just having fun. You have to admit, though: it was better than reading about the election, wasn’t it?

The previous publication of CommonSense had nothing to do with common sense. This one has everything to do with it.

I’ve lived through twelve Presidents. As I do the math, that means I’ve witnessed roughly thirty candidates for the job, give or take. Some of them ran for a second term, and some of them ran more than once. Apparently it’s an important job. I’m not sure it is.

This is the worst choice of candidates I’ve ever witnessed. In fact, if I were voting for the worst possible people  to be President, these would be the candidates I’d choose, and I’d still  have a hard time deciding who is the worst.

If I choose not to vote in the Presidential section of the ballot, I’m wasting my vote. And my vote is something sacred to me. Now it says in the Bible somewhere (and I’m sure I’m paraphrasing) “Don’t give dogs what is sacred.”   I like dogs, but I don’t want to try to sleep at night, knowing I helped put either of these people in office.

When choices are difficult, I try to rely on what I know. Not what I’ve read, or what somebody has told me, or anything second or third-hand. Only what I know for certain. Sometimes that helps.

What I know for certain is that none of the twelve Presidents I’ve lived through has affected me very much. They come, they make a lot of headlines, and they go. What has affected me—shaped my life—are the people I know.  My family, my friends, the people in my town. I didn’t elect them. They simply come with the territory. They will be here before the election, and they’ll be here after. I’ll lose a few, and I’ll gain a few. As I think about it, I care an awful lot more about them than I do the President.

I’m a student of history. The last time this country was so divided was just prior to the Civil War. I don’t need to explain where that  led us. Brother against brother, father against son. We ended up killing over a half million of us. They say that those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it.

This is not a good time. I’ll bet those of you reading this can feel it. It just doesn’t feel  good. Maybe that’s because we’ve allowed ourselves to pit brother against brother and father against son again. That’s what these two candidates represent.  If you squint your eyes and tilt your head a bit, you may see that these two candidates are us, or they are at the very least the result of how we’ve been behaving. It would almost feel good if someone slapped us and sent us to our rooms.

The two Presidents who have inspired me most were two very different people. When I was a very young man, John F. Kennedy explained who we were and why  we were. He said, “We choose to go to the moon and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard.”  Wow. It made us want to be part of it. I feel sorry for people today who missed that, because it was real  leadership.  Ronald Reagan gave us a vision of America as a “shining city on a hill.” We knew that all was not right, but we wanted  it to be so, and with good leadership, that’s half the battle.

We desperately need a leader who will inspire us. A leader who will tell us what’s right with us, not what’s wrong. A leader who speaks carefully and respectfully. A leader we believe is not lying to us. If you can find any of that in our two choices, you’re more perceptive than I. I don’t believe that leader is there, at least not this time around.

So we’ll all go to the polls on November 8, and we will cast our pearls before the swine. We’ll vote however it seems we have to. I don’t need a Presidential candidate to tell me what’s important. My only wish is that we treat the people next door, in our own communities, and our family as the most important people in the world.

Sixty years of Presidents have taught me that they are.

 

Mary and I went to the movies a couple of nights ago. We saw Sully.  It was a good movie.  You should see it.

I still love seeing a great movie in the theatre, but it’s hard to find a good one these days. You have to spot them among the zombies, axe murderers, natural catastrophes and other drivel.

We have a ten-movie multiplex theatre in St. Joseph.  You’d think that more than one in ten good movies could be found in any given week, and you’d mostly be wrong.  Here’s a sampling of new movies from two days ago:

The Disappointments Room

Synopsis:  A mother and her young son release unimaginable horrors from the attic of their rural dream home.

Mary and I went into our attic recently for the first time in twenty years.  We released unimaginable horrors, but we had to carry them out to the curb for the trash guys. I don’t need to spend twenty bucks for a ticket and forty more on food just to see a rehash of that nightmare.

The Wild Life

Synopsis:  Stranded sailor Robinson Crusoe unites with a group of quirky animals to foil two conniving cats.

One, it’s a cartoon.  Two, I’ve read Robinson Crusoe and three, I don’t like cats at all.  Most of them are conniving, so what is so special here?

When The Bough Breaks

Synopsis:  John and Laura Taylor desperately want a baby. After exhausting all other options, they finally hire Anna to be their surrogate – but as she gets further along in her pregnancy, so too does her psychotic and dangerous fixation on the husband.

I don’t know about you, but I know how babies get made.  So after reading the synopsis, I’m wondering if they didn’t have an inkling of how this would end.  I’m a father.  I can tell you for certain that pregnancy causes psychotic stuff.  It’s everything I can do to keep psychotic and dangerous fixations out of my life.  Why would I want to watch someone else’s?

Morgan 

Synopsis: Scientists at a secret facility find themselves in a lockdown with a violent bioengineered child.

Seriously?  Let’s say you are a scientist.  And you work at a secret facility, where you’ve helped to create, oh, let’s say a bioengineered child.  A violent one.  What do you figure are your odds of needing a lockdown in the very near future? I mean, really.  Think ahead, take a personal day and steer clear of what is obviously going to happen.  Avoid the whole thing.  That’s what I did.

Don’t Breathe 

Synopsis:  A group of friends break into the house of a wealthy blind man, thinking they’ll get away with the perfect heist. They’re wrong.

It says “Horror/Suspense/Thriller” so I can only guess at what happens.  Maybe I’m wrong, maybe my moral compass is no longer functioning, but aren’t they wrong to break in to anybody’s house?  You break into my house, I won’t be wealthy, but I’ll be in a blind rage.

Sausage Party 

Synopsis: Frank the sausage and his supermarket pals try to save themselves from becoming a meal.

This happens every two nights at my house.  I don’t want to feel sorry for my food.  That happened to me with Bambi and it’s not happening again.

Suicide Squad

Synopsis: A secret government agency recruits imprisoned super-villains to execute dangerous black ops missions in exchange for clemency.

Do you ever imagine the meetings where they think these things up?  Seated around the table with their FitBits and Monster drinks, texting their BFF and some dweeze says, “Uhhhhhh ok I got it. We could have super-villains executing black ops in exchange for clemency…???”  I want to be the guy who slams his hand on the table and says “Just because you can doesn’t mean you should!”  And then come around the table and start kicking him continuously until he crawls out of the room.

Bad Moms

Synopsis: When three overworked and under-appreciated moms are pushed beyond their limits, they ditch their conventional responsibilities for a jolt of long overdue freedom, fun, and comedic self-indulgence.

I’ve never met a mom who wasn’t overworked. under-appreciated and pushed beyond her limits. So is this what they all ought to do?  Message for moms under 30:  This is what you do so that when you’re fifty, you’ll be well-balanced and just glad to be alive.  Don’t see this movie, because I’m certain it’s a bad idea.

Isn’t real life scary enough?  Do we not have enough trials and tribulations already?  Do we need to capitulate to the highway robbery of a ticket price and a soft drink to soak in a little more mindless garbage? If P.T. Barnum were alive, he’d say “I had no idea the game could be so magnificently played.”

 

 

I’ve tried very hard to steer away from politics in this column.  I’ve pleaded with my social media friends to stop blasting me with their opinions.  I’ve based that on what I thought was a solid premise: that most of us are intelligent enough to make up our own minds, and that their political opinions are unnecessary.  I’m still sure of the second part of that sentence and not at all certain of the first part any longer.

So if you’ll bear with me, I hope you’ll come to see that this is a message for all my friends and readers, regardless of their political leanings.  If, at the end, you find me to be a bit conservative, well, that’s all right.  We can still talk and make common progress toward the things we do agree upon.

I have a much-loved cousin in New Hampshire who will serve very well here as my point-counterpoint partner. She is a wonderful person who has spent her life in politics and some form of public service when and where she is able.  She is family.  She believes my political leanings to be delusional, and I can’t be angry about it, since she’s misguided.  That was humor on my part.  Sometimes it’s hard to spot.

I believe there are two culprits in politics these days, and they aren’t candidates or parties. We don’t talk about either of them enough. We have an extremely irresponsible news media, and I include broadcast and print journalists in their many varieties.  I am sad to say that I believe far too many voters get their information only from television broadcasts—if they read anything, it’s probably only headlines.  Far too many of them can’t even tell me where they learned something, or why they think it’s important.  And let’s realize what journalism, broadcast or otherwise, really is.  It is material placed in a television broadcast or newspaper because someone has paid to advertise.  If they didn’t have advertising dollars, believe me, you wouldn’t be hearing or reading them. They are a business and their first obligation is to their own bottom line.

I am not saying that voters aren’t smart enough to vote.  I am saying that far too many of them have not listened critically  to the candidates and their party platforms.  Of all the things I’ve taught my children, I am proudest that they have learned to listen critically.  That requires nothing more than feeling free to question.  If one hears a candidate make a statement that doesn’t seem right, then for heaven’s sake, check it out.  Ask around. This is 2016.  There’s an Internet out there with all kinds of information, some of it reliable, some of it not.  There are opinions of people we know and trust.  There is a diverse range of reportage and opinion.  One may not find a definitive answer, but he will certainly find out what a lot of people think.  Finding information isn’t the problem; finding people willing to look for it is a different matter.

There are too many people who don’t care  what Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton said yesterday.  They’re too busy playing Pokémon Go. We are raising generations of narcissistic young people who are either completely disconnected with governance of their own lives, or who believe politics to be some form of entertainment. There are far too many people who believe that if Sarah Silverman or Katie Perry appeared at a convention in support of a particular candidate, this must somehow lend massive weight to the debate.  It does not.  It lends one person’s opinion, and it weighs about as much as yours or mine.

My dear cousin says of Trump that we need to “vote to ensure that this arrogant madman doesn’t become President.”  She speaks of his “travesty” and says she is reminded of the Army-McCarthy hearings and quotes attorney Joseph Welch saying “Have you no sense of decency, sir?”  She says “Donald Trump has to be brought down.”  She says “This is “not our parents’…party.”  All well and good, I suppose.  But if she and I each made a laundry list, good and  bad, of the two major candidates, and I reprinted them here, would you  check us out?  Would you investigate on your own to see which, or either of us is correct?  My real  fear is that many of you would not.

With love to my progressive cousin, who is an admirable person, I say the two most disagreeable things about politics are the media—and the voters.

We have found the enemy and he is us.