The opposite of WOKE is ASLEEP. If you are not WOKE, you are asleep. So, either wake up and smell the fertilizer the GOP is spreading or go back to bed and sleep until Big Business Capitalists (BBC) take over the country. Members of the BBC group like Trump, DeSantis, and Ramaswamy are trying to lull America to sleep while they try to enrich themselves even further at your expense. They abhor any capitalistic endeavor that seeks to acknowledge a need for social conscience. Their new mantra is to make WOKE a four-letter word of derision. Those who are WOKE are EVIL; lather, rinse, and repeat.
Sunday, February 19, 2023
WOKE or ASLEEP; The Choice is Yours
Tuesday, February 7, 2023
Keep Them Barefoot and Pregnant
So goes the chauvinistic phrase from the early 20th century about keeping women at home and curbing the threat of divorce. This was apparently taken from a British proverb that held, “Keep her well-shagged and poorly shod and she’ll not wander far.” Aside from being tasteless, it has at its roots a desire for dominance by taking away choice. A newer push from the political establishment seems to be to keep them ignorant and proud of their fate.
How else do we explain the unbridled support of our
underclasses for billionaires who flaunt the need for government austerity by
cutting social programs? Those programs
often provide relief for hard-working families in times of crisis. When man-made or natural disasters strike, it
will generally be the less financially fortunate among us who suffer the
greatest. Cuts in the areas of medicine,
housing, and food welfare are threatened while tax breaks that more widely help
the wealthy, are promoted.
We regularly see some of our poorest states reelect leaders
who wrap themselves in the flag, yell about the need to protect their right to
carry weapons of war, and raise the specter of fear of disease and oppression
from immigrants. I haven’t mentioned a
particular political party, but I think we can guess.
Economic stagnation is the latest form of "barefoot and
pregnant." The 10 states with the lowest
per capita income levels are Mississippi,
Arkansas, Tennessee, West Virginia, Louisiana, Montana, South Carolina,
Kentucky, Alabama, and North Carolina.
Donald Trump carried all 10 of these states in 2016. Then, in the 2020 presidential election,
Donald Trump carried all 10 states again.
After 4 years of Trump’s Republican leadership, they were still the
poorest folks in the nation. In 2022,
North Carolina, Louisiana, and Kentucky all got Democratic governors, but they
are still majority Republican at lower levels of government.
The flip side of this is that nine of the top ten states
with the highest per capita incomes voted Democratic in the presidential
elections of 2008, 2012, 2016, and 2020.
The exception to this was Alaska, a traditionally red state.
Republican leaders hold an American flag, a Bible, or an AR-15
in one hand leaving the other hand free to pick the pockets of their less
fortunate constituents. Like any good
magician, they distract with the pretty baubles while working their true magic
of self-enrichment. They fool the poor
and reward the wealthy. The poor
continue to vote for them and the wealthy contribute a portion of their
winnings back to the “dealer.”
My favorite quote from the old Mary Tyler Moore Show was from
her boss, Lou Grant, who explained his success in management saying, “I know
how to delegate blame.” The GOP uses
this tactic by blaming liberals, immigrants, people of color, Jews, and certain
select (liberal) wealthy individuals, for housing shortages, lackluster job
opportunities, inflation, poor education, and inadequate healthcare.
The GOP will say they are protecting your freedoms while taking
them away. Florida’s Republican governor
Ron DeSantis wants to micromanage the school system. He has gone so far as to emulate Adolf Hitler
who banned all books that were deemed “un-German” on cultural, religious, or
political grounds. In 1933 Nazi Germany,
Hitler publicly burned such offensive books. DeSantis just adopts a vague policy whereby he
outlaws certain books and then threatens school administrators and teachers with
loss of employment, fines, or even jail time if he finds books they didn’t
remove from libraries that offend him.
The Florida school employees are among the worst paid in the nation and now they must filter through millions of books to find any that would make white heterosexual students feel uncomfortable. >In Florida, the terms are CRT and WOKE. Any books that reference social conscience in terms of race (Critical Race Theory) or hint at systemic injustices that may exist in our society, must be removed. DeSantis wants to end anti-white bigotry, at least that’s the red meat he throws out to his audience. He wants to outdo the efforts begun by the team of Donald Trump and Stephen Miller and their America First Legal group. Just keep people ignorant of history and distract white voters with another shiny bauble. DeSantis can then advance to the final round in the American political game show, aka his run for the presidency.
Friday, January 20, 2023
Free Speech Has Limits
As Americans, we cherish all our freedoms and perhaps none so much as our freedom of speech. We, as a nation, will bend over backward to allow all manner of commentary, even that which offends us. Free discourse is the backbone of our democracy.
There is however a line where such speech becomes more than
speech. When words are spoken that are
fashioned to inspire or result in violence, that speech becomes criminal. Drawing that line cannot be arbitrary but I
think rational people, know it when they hear it. This is to paraphrase Supreme Court Justice
Potter Stewart who in 1964 when asked to define obscenity made his now famous declaration,
“I know it when I see it.”
When the First Amendment was written and passed on December
15, 1797, there was no telegraph or telephone to spread this news. Forty-seven years later, in 1844, Samuel F.B.
Morse had come up with the telegraph and had begun stringing a wire between Baltimore
and Washington, DC. At about that time, the
Whig party nominated Henry Clay as its presidential candidate. The news of his appointment was then telegraphed
from Annapolis Junction to Washington. There was an immediate outcry from MAGA Republicans who proclaimed it to be fake
news. This was only remarkable because
the Republican Party would not be founded until 1854, ten years later.
![]() |
Sam Morse and Telegraph |
Yes, we’ve come a long way in delivering information (aka free speech) with a speed and magnitude that 1797 Americans could not have
fathomed. We now have the radio, television,
cell phones, and the Internet. It is today
estimated that 3.2 billion images and 720,000 hours of video are shared on
social media daily. These messages can
travel at the speed of light around the globe.
That’s a lot of free speech.
So, where to draw the line?
For those who would argue that there should be no line, I would counter
that under current case law, there already is a line. It is merely the judging of which acts of communication
violate those laws by crossing that line.
This is where a certain amount of subjectivity comes in and requires that
rare commodity, common sense.
First, we have “true threats” as an exception to First
Amendment protections. These are defined in Virginia v. Black 2003 Supreme
Court decision as, “statements where the speaker means to communicate a serious
expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular
individual or group of individuals.”
Such speech becomes intimidation when a speaker “directs a threat to a
person or group of persons with the intent of placing the victim in fear of
bodily harm or death.” That’s when
speech becomes criminal and not covered by First Amendment protection.
For example, if a president gives a speech to a crowd specifically
gathered to stop the peaceful transition of power, and that person knows that
some of the people in that crowd who are dressed in military attire carry deadly
weapons, and then that person specifically identifies a person we will call
Mike Pence for illustration, as the person who is responsible for their loss in
the last election, and then he tells that crowd to march to where a government body
that includes Mr. Pence are peacefully convened to formalize the will of the majority
of voters, this might be viewed as a “true threat.” His statement that, if his supporters didn’t,
“fight like hell, or you’re not going to have a country anymore,” might even
underscore that “true threat.”
Then, just minutes later, that group of excited individuals
marched on that building and violence erupted. The group of people inside
the building collectively are forced to hide or run for their lives and are
seen calling their loved ones to say their goodbyes. A reasonable person might deduce
that the speech referenced earlier, along with similar speeches from others, was
indeed a “true threat,” now being played out in real-time.
Now we come to the matter of intent. We know that the main speaker at this event should
have reasonably known that his words would result in a violent riot. Even if we give him the benefit of the doubt,
we now know that he watched the resulting violence caused by his speech play
out on live television.
We also now know that people told him that he could stop the
violence with a simple tweet or public announcement but that he refused to do
so for several hours. One might
reasonably surmise that things were all going according to his plan. This is what he intended all along. It was only after someone was shot and killed
that he used the power of his office and his influence to tell the mob to go
home. The mob then followed his
command. That sounds like clear intent.
A second exception to what is considered protected speech is
termed “incitement” when it promotes violence or lawless action. In caselaw, as referenced in the 1969 case Brandenburg
v. Ohio, the court distinguished between mere advocacy and incitement likely to
cause imminent lawless action.
So, when Marjorie Taylor Greene speaks at a conference of
fellow white supremacists and denies responsibility for planning the January 6th
insurrection by stating that if she had been involved, “we would have won…, we
would have been armed.” She is well
within the bounds of protected speech and entitled to be rewarded by Kevin
McCarthy with a seat on the Homeland Security Oversight Committee. The FBI has identified the white supremacy
movement to be one of our most significant sources of domestic terrorism. MTG is a regular speaker at white supremacy conferences
and Homeland Security oversees the FBI.
Unless MTG is an undercover agent working for the FBI to investigate
white supremacy from the inside, appointing her to this oversight committee seems
like a diabolical plot right out of a Tom Clancy novel.
However, when Rudy Giuliani tells the rowdy January 6th
crowd carrying weapons that the folks on Capitol Hill voting to ratify the
election need to see some, “trial by combat,” that may have crossed the line. When the next Trump supporter, Mo Brooks, speaks and
tells this same crowd that if they are true American patriots, they need to, “start kicking ass and taking names,” that line is now in the rear-view
mirror.
![]() |
Rudy, "Trial by combat" |
The referenced caselaw limiting protected speech is however
much harder to use when the targets are more general and the threats are not
necessarily imminent. Radical speech is
protected in this instance. Even speech that
is knowingly false and likely to encourage bad behavior is protected. The fact that elected officials knowingly promote
and support these falsehoods, however, is just something we need to fix at the
ballot box, provided you can find one.
Perhaps it is time to address the harm that careless speech
has caused and provide recourse for those who suffer injury. Should we treat elected officials with a
stricter set of rules whereby they would risk removal from office or suffer other
serious consequences should they be found to knowingly advance falsehoods that are
likely to result in violence? Could this
higher standard not require imminent violence to be a factor?
By this measure you may rightly claim that an election was
fraudulent, but only if you can provide proof or some sound logic behind your
beliefs. Lacking such evidence or logic
all comments would be required to contain such language as, “this is all
conjecture on my part, but…” Elected
officials need to be held to this higher standard. We have too long permitted politicians to “stretch
the truth” and now that rubber band of innuendo has snapped and hit us in the
face.
Just ask Nancy Pelosi’s husband, Paul, who suffered a skull
fracture when a political terrorist, David DePape, attacked him while trying to
kidnap the Speaker of the House. Just
ask Gretchen Whitmer, governor of Michigan, who was the target of a group of 13
political terrorists who wanted to kidnap her to overthrow the state government. Just ask the two county commissioners and two
state legislators in New Mexico who had bullets fly into their homes at the hands
of or at the direction of Solomon Pena, a Republican who lost his election by a
landslide. Mr. Pena jumped on the “fraudulent
election” bandwagon just as his hero, Donald Trump had done two short years
ago. These violent actions were inspired
by lies spread by people who either knew they were lies or had the resources to
verify the information but negligently failed to do so.
What happened to our political system that now allows “free
speech” to embrace conspiracy theories, lies, damned lies, and even THE BIG LIE,
in the name of politics as usual? In a
recent article, a pundit described our once-revered government as a “clown car
at a goat rodeo.” The visual on that is
great but it is not one I would want to use to describe an elected body that has
sworn an oath to uphold our constitution and run our country. Making us Great Again is not on their agenda.
![]() |
Goat Rodeo |
The 1958 French movie by Louis Malle titled, Les Amants (The
Lovers), was judged to be hard-core pornography by the state of Illinois. In 1964, the case against the theatre owner,
Nico Jacobellis, made it to the Supreme Court.
The movie involved adultery, a female appearing to have an orgasm, and the
mere hint of oral sex. Perhaps an R
rating today, or even a PG13. While the
two lower 1964 courts were shocked, the Supremes (not the music group of the
same period with 12 number 1 hits), were not shocked. Two judges had been in the military and had seen
action in WWII. Some of that action was on
the battlefield and some of it was in stag-film projection rooms. They said they had seen pornography and “this
isn’t it.”
The First Amendment and free speech triumphed. This is the source of, “I know it when I see
it.” As subjective as that decision may
sound, it was also a bit convoluted. It
included one majority opinion and four concurring opinions (none supported by
more than two Justices) in which each author attempted to clarify what he
believed was an appropriate characterization of how the First Amendment should
apply to allegedly obscene material.
Leaving the monitoring of free speech up to the likes of
Mark Zuckerberg or Elon Musk doesn’t seem like a particularly good idea either. Neither of them really wants the job unless it
is to filter political commentary that they find personally objectionable.
We also have the flip side of “free speech” where we have
individuals professing to be protecting freedoms while restricting them. Case in point, we have the autocratic
overreach of Ron DeSantis who claims to be protecting our children by shielding
them from a history he has deemed too WOKE.
From his office as Florida’s governor, he is meddling in school curriculums
at all levels including universities. He
is outlawing books in libraries. He also
wants to dictate his restrictions on speech in both public and private business. His personal views on diversity, inclusion and equity in the workplace will be the law of the land in Florida and he will
impose his will on all who reside within its borders. His Republican view of a small government
that leaves businesses to their own devices has an exception. Private businesses must follow the DeSantis mandates
of what they can and cannot say and do with their own employees. By his direction, private businesses may not
discuss race or racial discrimination.
![]() |
Trying to Govern WOKE |
Just as the authors of our US Constitution didn’t anticipate
a “well-trained militia” to include an untrained 18-year-old using a “flintlock”
capable of firing 600 rounds per minute, the free speech of their day was also quite
different. It is now possible for a 16-year-old
“influencer” to sit in his parent’s basement and tweet a message to tens of thousands
of “followers.” That tweet might be
accurate, partially accurate, not very accurate, or just fantasy GS.
Tuesday, January 17, 2023
Deregulation
![]() |
The Swanson “TV Dinner,” which hit grocery store cases on September 10, 1953, was an immediate success. In 1954, Swanson sold more than 10 million units, and the next year, 25 million. |
Saturday, January 7, 2023
National TOAD Day
National TOAD Day
As if the absurdity of American politics couldn’t get much further from the ideals set forth in our Constitution, we have allowed our standards to devolve into the chaos we see in the House of Representatives today. While we should be holding our elected leaders to higher standards than other job holders in our realm, we seem to be heading in the other direction. How would it be that a doctor after reading lab results that showed a potential problem, lied to a patient because they thought that is what they wanted to hear? What if an engineer under-designed a building foundation to save a contractor a few dollars?
We don’t tolerate such lies from other professionals, why do we tolerate them in politicians. First, we let them stretch the truth, then they fabricate the truth, then they begin creating “alternative facts” that they anoint by declaration to be reality. We gave them an inch and they went “to infinity and beyond” like Buzz Lightyear. In the balancing act of unregulated capitalism and business operating in a fair competitive marketplace, we seem to prioritize the bottom line over fairness. We have allowed our political system to be offered to the highest bidder.
The main goal of any politician today is to raise money. Unlike when they had to raise money “the old-fashioned way” from constituents, they now have the deep pockets of anyone in the world with an agenda. Congress has a For Sale sign posted where businesses can buy a position at the trough of government contracts or can get legislation passed that gives them an unfair advantage in their business. Pandora’s Box has been opened and shutting the spigot of free cash is a non-starter. Given the fact that the hand on that valve is the beneficiary of the wealth, what politician would want to want legislation that would make them poorer? It will take some catastrophic event or other external force to make any such change.
The George Santos debacle just goes to show how corrupt the motivation must be to put up with the ridicule of this fraud just because you need even his one vote to function. For part of the day of January 5th, he apparently hid out in a cloakroom in the House chamber. And here we thought he was out of the closet. Actually, being gay is the only thing on his resume that people haven’t found to be a falsehood. Perhaps that is because nobody cares.
Perhaps the House of Representatives could solve its deadlock by having George Santos use his ties with the Jewish community to get them to turn on their Space Laser of Marjorie Taylor Greene fame, to zap Kevin McCarthy to eliminate the problem. Santos would go from zero to hero and could be the new Speaker.
On this, anniversary of the attempted Trump Overthrow of American Democracy (TOAD), we can only rejoice in knowing that he lost another election and came in last. He received but one vote for the Speakership of the House. Of course, Trump will demand a recount, declare the election a fraud, and will want to “find another 217 votes.”
Friday, January 6, 2023
The Country With The Fringe On Top
The Country With The Fringe On Top
Mr. Braddock: Ben, this whole idea sounds pretty half-baked. | Benjamin: Oh, it’s not. It’s completely baked. |
Interesting Times
We live in interesting times. The Republican party is the dog who caught the car. They captured the House but are now having a hard time deciding who will drive it. Kevin McCarthy had the Speaker's chambers cleaned and measured for new curtains, perhaps a bit prematurely. Now he sits in the Republican circular firing squad hoping for a good outcome.
One of McCarthy's big problems is that his opposition hasn't listed anything that they want from him. He has no place to go to negotiate. I am reminded of the scene in Goldfinger when James Bond is strapped to a moving table with an industrial laser cutting metal between his legs and threatening to ruin his day. Bond, looking to negotiate, asks what Goldfinger wants to which Goldfinger replies, "I want you to die."
A Legal System in Peril
Donald J Trump has had his fill of legal problems. He hates judges (except those who side with him) and his wrath knows no bounds. Look ...

-
Donald J Trump has had his fill of legal problems. He hates judges (except those who side with him) and his wrath knows no bounds. Look ...
-
“The economy stupid” phrase was first coined by James Carville in 1992, while he was Bill Clinton’s strategist. It was true then as it wa...
-
Science deniers have been with us for all of recorded history. In the early 17th century, Galileo Galilei created a telescope that allow...