Theology, politics, and the journalists

How Jordan is spending her day

My day

 Every morning I start my day with an online meditation from theologian Richard Rohr. Most days his words help balance me and send me in the direction I want to go. This morning, he wrote about the difference between restorative and exploitive systems of government. Restorative philosophies seek as the name implies to restore earth’s natural resources, from environmental to human. It cares for rivers and lakes and pristine wildernesses, just as it cares for the poor, the sick, the homeless. It builds toward a future. An exploitive government uses up all resources for satisfaction in the moment, with no thought for the future. It ignores all but the rich, whom it coddles, and it destroys the environment for the sake of immediate wealth.

Guess which one I think we’re living in now?

Then a bit later I read an essay about former President Obama’s expected return to politics, in some degree, for the mid-term elections. He was quoted as saying this is not, should not be a dog-eat-dog world in which people are angry all the time. Probably he’s an idealist, but if he can help us restore a bit of loving kindness to our world, I’ll be ever so grateful.

None of us should think we’re helpless in the mess that has become our country these days. We can each begin with kindness and an absence of anger to those around us, even those with whom we bitterly disagree. We can erase anger from our lives, though it isn’t easy. The absence of anger does have great health benefits.

And that brings my thoughts to the sad, sad case of the five journalists killed in Maryland yesterday. The tragedy is horrendous, made even worse if possible by the timing. Trumpf had just called journalists enemies of the people—not of the government, mind you, but of the people. One of his sycophants—apparently a person of some notoriety that I have never heard of and can’t remember or spell his last name; he’s Milo somebody—said he couldn’t wait for people to begin shooting journalists.

And then bam! Five dead.

Liberals were quick to claim that Trump and this Milo person have blood on their hands for inciting violence. That may well yet prove true, and it is horrendous that the president of our country says such things. But if we’re honest, this particular shooting was a grudge act, anger against the specific paper, fueled not by Trumpf’s words or Milo’s but by the obsessive hate of one individual who had been nursing his anger for years.

In these outrageous days, it’s too easy for those of us who resist to leap to blame everything on the president, be he legitimate or not. But if we would strengthen our argument, we must curb the anger and stick to logic, to rational arguments. It is right and good to defend journalists in the face of the awful attacks being hurled at them; it is not right to blame this one episode on Trumpf’s words.

Many will disagree with me. Bring it on. With logic, not anger, please.

Another Dark Day for Dallas

July 8, 2016

Dallas has had dark days. November 22,1963 stands out as the darkest, the day President Kennedy was assassinated. The negative reputation earned that day stayed with Dallas for years. I remember when I first moved to the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex, we drove to Dallas to look at the assassination site. Just the drive made me so nervous I thought my heart would beat out of my chest. Fifty years later, I go by it without a thought, which is a pity.

Now Dallas has another blot on its history—last night’s shooting that killed five and wounded seven, most of them law officers. So much has been said about it that I hesitate to add to the mass. Many people have asked an unanswered question—why Dallas? Some suggest it’s the racist divisiveness fostered by Texas’ extremely conservative state politicians. Other suggest it’s because Dallas has so many underprivileged, angry people with access to guns. (One protestor last night was carrying an AR-15 slung over his back—he supposedly came in peace but one wonders.) And then there are those who blame the racist hate-mongering of President Obama. Pardon me? I must have missed that. I find the president one who embraces all people and stresses the need for unity, not division.

So why Dallas? I suspect it was probably happenstance. The angry young man who was eventually killed in a parking garage could easily have been in Chicago, Seattle, Cleveland or Philadelphia. He just happened to be in Dallas. On the other hand I read somewhere that this was a plot hatched some time ago, waiting for an opportune moment to happen. That would certainly make it more sinister, if such is possible.

As a resident of Fort Worth, some 35 miles to the west, I’m not fond of Dallas. The pace is too hectic, the drivers are rude—though I have to add that the restaurants are really good. My feelings are not based on the traditional rivalry between the two cities (Dallas is where the East peters out; Fort Worth is where the West begins). But a recent poll showed Dallas to be one of the rudest cities, while Fort Worth is one of the friendliest. In Fort Worth, though, we feel the impact of events in Dallas and perhaps none more than today.

We tell ourselves that would never happen in Fort Worth, but that’s head-in-the-sand denial. It could as easily have been an angry young man here. We have a peaceful protest planned for Sunday, and I pray it remains peaceful.

Last weekend, speaking on the occasion of the death of holocaust survivor and activist Elie Wiesel, President Obama delivered a message that is particularly meaningful today: He raised his voice, not just against anti-Semitism, but against hatred, bigotry and intolerance in all its forms. He implored each of us, as nations and as human beings, to do the same, to see ourselves in each other and to make real that pledge of ‘never again.’

It’s a message we all need to take to heart today.

Lovely weekend--and a rant

Potatoes with dirt clinging to them became wonderful mashed potatoes
Jordan is magic

Plenty of company this weekend, which delights me. Jordan, Christian, and Jacob were here for Friday night supper. Jordan has taken to setting a proper table--another thing that delights me. We had mashed potatoes—from my neighbor’s garden—and chicken sausage with a green salad. Saturday Sue and Teddy brought sandwiches and stayed for lunch and a visit—I so appreciate them. Sat.. night after Jacob’s birthday party at Main Event, Jordan, Christian and SuperDave were here for supper---chicken fingers and potato salad. We sat and talked so late that I didn’t get a blog done. When you’re a prisoner in your own house, you really don’t have that much to say anyway. Tonight Jordan is coming for supper while Christian works on their yard. He’s put so much effort into restoring where the foundation work destroyed. And tomorrow we’re back in the regular week.

Big on my mind is my appointment with the trauma reconstructive surgeon on Tuesday—I fully expect him to say surgery and soon, with screws and plates. Really really dread this but you do what you have to do. And I don’t want to spend the rest of my life in a wheelchair or scooting backwards on a walker. Last night I happened to read a warning label on the walker that says, “Do not move Rollaater while seated,” which of course is exactly what I’ve been doing. I tell myself that’s for the elderly who might fall out of it. I’m actually getting pretty good at maneuvering the thing.

I do have something to say tonight, in spite of my housebound status. I am out of patience with people who post on Facebook that Obama is a sleeper for Isis, he is a Muslim, and his sole goal is to destroy the USA. His record certainly indicates that he wants destruction—NOT. I feel sorry for these people. They must live with blind hate and prejudice. One even asked of we could do a citizens’ arrest. Good luck with that.

President Obama receives many more accolades that he does accusations. I have seen the idea floated that he will go down in history as one of our great presidents, and I’m all for it. I’m not good at listing accomplishments, but I do know that the country and individuals are in much better shape than when he took office almost eight years ago. And more secure. If he wanted to destroy us, he certainly waited until the eleventh hour. I refer you to this web site: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/march_april_2012/features/the_incomplete_greatness_of_ba035754.php

He is also one of the most sincere, genuine people I’ve had the privilege to observe. Look at the pictures of him with young kids. Does that look like a sleeper for Isis.

My opinion is that he and his family are a class act, a role model for families, and we are blessed to have him for a leader. Give up the hate, those of you who harbor it, and ask what you can do for our country as we move into a new administration.

This crazy poliitical year

“And now these three things remain: faith, hope, and love. And of these the greatest is love.” I am not a person who quotes the Bible often. Sad truth is that, although a lifelong Christian, I don’t know enough Bible to quote besides the 23 Psalm, the ten commandments, and maybe the Beatitudes. And if I did, I would not push my religion on anyone else. But these lines from 1^st Corinthians 13:13 keep coming back to me, especially when I survey the political world we live in.

Believing as I do that love is the most important value, I am appalled by the hate and vitriol around us. Both Trump and Cruz are promising to bomb the you-know-what out of Isis and the Middle East. Civilian casualties? No matter. And Paul Ryan recently said that the poor are like feral cats—as long as we keep feeding them they’ll be with us forever. Where is the compassion for our fellow human beings?

And the hate for President Obama is appalling. I read someone’s opinion tonight that he has led us down the road to destruction. In my opinion, many of his accomplishments have led us toward love for our fellow Americans—the ACA act, for instance. I am struck by the man who came forward and said he’s always voted Republican but now he thanks President Obama—and the ACA—for saving his life. I truly cannot see a reason to hate Obama unless it’s the color of his skin—and we should be so far beyond that.

Donald Trump is to me the scariest though many say Ted Cruz is more frightening. But Trump’s spectacular brand of hate for everyone from overweight and disabled people to Muslims has attracted the most attention. One can only hope he’s like a carnival barker who sheds his flamboyant ways the minute he’s out of the spotlight. What worries me is the anger he’s aroused in so many Americans—how long has that anger been simmering. And why?

That the anger exists is a great argument for Bernie Sanders campaign. He advocates for change of things that I think make many Americans angry—they feel powerless, they work hard and follow the rules but never get ahead, they feel insignificant as individuals. This is not a campaign speech for the Bern—I love his ideas but will probably vote for Hillary.

Bernie Sanders says we have to educate our young people because they are our future leaders, our doctors, our teachers, the ones who will keep American moving forward. Donald Trump loves the uneducated. Without sounding like a snob, I think that’s significant—the uneducated are angry because they don’t understand how to empower themselves, they haven’t been taught to think critically. Republicans have even been known to say they don’t want people to think critically. We’ll be Neanderthals in a couple of generations if that thinking prevails.

After all is said and done, we’ll be left with a nation of angry people, no matter who is elected president. What do we do then? We reach out with love as our guiding principle. They are our people. We do not need a divided society—we need unity, and that comes with love, not anger and hate.

I’ve lived a wonderful, comfortable life—sometimes I ask the Lord why I have been so blessed.  But I have seven grandchildren, and I want to leave them a world in which they have every opportunity for the same kind of life I’ve lived. So far, they’re all on the right track, but I don’t want them to have to deal with an out-of-control world.

Lord, give us peace and teach us to love one another, regardless of faith, skin color, sexual orientation, and disabilities. And PS Lord, deliver us from Donald Trump.

President Obama and Gun Control

I was proud today to say that I have consistently supported President Obama throughout the seven years of his presidency. His speech on gun control justified that support. We saw a man who cares deeply about the outrageous gun deaths in this country, especially those of the children at Sandy Hook—no, I don’t think even calloused politicians can cry on demand, and yet he wiped away tears as he spoke of that massacre. He presented sensible plans—small steps—toward controlling guns in this country without taking them away from responsible citizens, and, no, it’s not the slippery slope. In spite of what so many have shrilled, he is not coming for everyone’s guns. But it is appalling that we are the only advanced nation with a gun death record so high. You are much more likely to be killed by your neighbor than an ISIS terrorist.

I got some ugly emails already: “Obama is a fraud,” “the only thing he’s compassionate about is the money he gets from the NRA.” The latter amused me—shoe on the wrong foot. Members of the Republican party get NRA funds, not the president. I did hear here and there today that longtime members are dropping out of the NRA. Frankly, from my point of view, I wish we’d follow Australia’s example—after one horrific mass shooting, they outlawed all guns. Haven’t had another mass shooting since, and that was in the ‘90s. I know however some people want to hunt, some farmers in Texas and probably elsewhere need guns to protect their crops and animals against wild hogs. There is however no reason for citizens to have military style weapons. Some people want to protect their families—I’m okay with that as long as they are responsible gun owners, but I don’t know how you separate the wheat from the chaff. How many children have you heard of who picked up a loaded gun carelessly left lying about and shot either themselves or a sibling?

A mass hysteria has swept this country. People are obsessed with their right to bear arms, and in the process they distort the 2^nd Amendment and the intent of the Founders who wrote it. What’s worse is that this hysteria has extended to a kind of “us vs. them” attitude, where people see the government as the big enemy. The Oregon self-styled militia is an extreme example of this kind of thinking.

Do you want to live in a hostile, armed society? I don’t. I keep hearing the President wondering aloud how this became such a partisan issue? Do I know what to do about it? Not a clue, although I thought the speech today was a good start. Do I sometimes want to abandon ship and move to Scotland? You bet!

The Old West ain't dead yet

As a student of the literature of the American West and a Texan, I’ve been watching events at the national sanctuary in Oregon with interest—can come to absolutely no conclusion. Lots of people on Facebook seem to think the protestors should be shot immediately—for treason or some other heinous crime. That seems a bit extreme. Yes, they’ve broken Federal law by occupying the land. Open carry is legal in Oregon so they can’t be punished for being armed. If, as I read tonight, the takeover is to protest the increased jail sentences of a father and son for setting fires to rid property of parasitic growth and prevent fires on their land, it’s a quixotic and futile gesture. Not sure if those fires were on private or Federal land.

I can sort of see the ranchers’ point of view—Federal lands are hemming them in, and small ranches have little chance. But that was true in the late 19^th century—read Elmer Kelton’s The Day the Cowboys Quit. It may be because I’m a progressive liberal, but I always thought government ownership of large portions of the American West was a good thing because it protected land from development. That theory came crashing down this past year when Congress voted to sell land sacred to the Native Americans to a foreign investor. I definitely think that’s wrong, but I don’t like much this Congress has done…or left undone. And the land in Oregon now occupied by protestors is part of a parcel granted the Paiute by Teddy Roosevelt, which further complicates matters.

This is apparently a matter for the FBI, which is strangely silent in spite of calls for immediate action, preferably gunfire (what is wrong with this country with its mania for guns?). I think whatever Federal authorities are in charge are playing it smart. Today one of the Bundy brothers said they don’t want it to come to bloodshed, but I’m not sure. A corner of my mind thinks they want confrontation—some are even willing to die as martyrs. A direct assault would play into their hands. Others would undoubtedly join the protest or stage separate protests—in this world today, we don’t need another civil war.

But that’s sort of the way I feel when people argue that President Obama is weak because he hasn’t sent us back to war in the Middle East. He has a far more decisive program there than critics give him credit for, but he’s not going to send our young men and women into another Iraq or Afghanistan.

I haven’t decided who I’m voting for in the presidential election, but I like the idea of a woman. Less combative, less testosterone. Lord, give us peace.

Pray for Paris

 I have tremendous admiration for the French people—some opened their homes to those who could not get to their own homes, a bookstore hid people among its stacks, taxi drivers turned off their meters to get people safely home. I even heard that as soccer fans exited the soccer stadium, they defiantly sang “La Marseillaise!” They have been our allies for a long time, and I’m sure the United States will stand beside them.

At home, though, reactions have been mixed (granted, I see most of this on Facebook). Prayers for the victims, for Paris, for France and for mankind abound. Some feared for their own safety—not an unreasonable fear since ISIS reportedly said France was being punished for cooperating with the U.S.-led coalition that bombed ISIS sites (why are we always the leader?). Some suggested—and I suspect this is true—that once again, like after Sandy Hook, the world has changed forever.

There were however more knee-jerk reactions. We should condemn all Muslims—there are millions of Muslims throughout the world who have been vocal in their condemnation of this and other acts of terrorism. ISIS is estimated to be about 50,000 strong. Others raised an immediate outcry against President Obama’s plan to accept Syrian refugees into this country. I agree it would take serious vetting, but don’t our citizens realize that those people are fleeing the very same terrorism that hit Paris? ISIS has killed an incredible number of Muslims—these people seek refuge for their families. It’s a dilemma for the human brotherhood. (Okay, sisterhood too)

A Facebook post praising President Obama’s deliberative response rather than rushing into action immediately brought criticism from those who thought we should strike back immediately. And of course, there were those who blamed President Obama for the attacks—I don’t quite understand that because it is generally accepted that President George W. Bush and Veep Dick Cheney exacerbated the instability of the Middle East with the attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq—when history should have taught them were not winnable wars.

And finally there were the gun advocates who boasted if they’d been there, they’d have prevented the bloodbath. Mark Greene, once a candidate for Congress, put it best when he said they probably wouldn’t have to put their beers down to take care of “bidness.”

What is effective reaction to this awful massacre? I read one post that it will never come from an American/European coalition—the Middle East already resents us. Countries in the area need to do their own policing the region. If the Saudis and others suffer economic consequences, they’ll act to control ISIS.

What’s the answer? I don’t know, and I’m glad I don’t have to decide. But the people of France give me hope. We must not live in fear; that’s what terrorists want. What we can do is sing “La Marseillaise” in their faces.

A day far from the madding crowd

Wow! I doubt any of us realize how the world tugs us in this direction and that until we spend a day at home working--which is what I did today. Yes, I skipped church, but I talked to the Lord about it and I'm sure he understood. My only human contact today came when I look out the front window on the way from kitchen to office and saw a strange figure in my front bushes. Turned out to be Susan from next door in ball cap and long-sleeved denim shirt. I threw open the door to yell, "Who is that in my bushes?" Foolish move--Sophie darted out the door. Only she just went next door to say hello to their dogs, Rio and Pearl, and Susan soon corralled her and brought her home. Jay leaned against my porch railing, taking it all in and not at all perturbed. I scolded Sophie, put her in the house, and talked trees and bushes with them for a few minutes.
Started the day as always by going to get the newspaper, reading email and Facebook. I meant to get right to the chili manuscript I was proofing first thing but, as too often happens, Facebook distracted me. I watched clips from President Obama's comments to the White House Correspondents Dinner last night and finally succumbed and watched the whole twenty-two minutes. Whether you love him, like him, are indifferent or intensely dislike him (notice I avoided the word hate--we teach my grandchildren not to use it, and I think it's a good rule for adults), you have to admit he has a great sense of comedic pacing--and he doesn't mind in the least skewering his opponents.
My accomplishments for the day--finished adding many references, etc., to the chili manuscript plus notes to the editor and sent it off; sent off a guest blog; drafted a newsletter. Oh, running the dishwasher and doing a load of laundry--now, dishwasher is not emptied, laundry is not folded. There's always tomorrow.
Rewarded myself with sautéed scallops (I can never get the nice sear on them without turning them tough--these were just right but not brown), a fresh ear of corn, and pea mash--something I've recently discovered to my great joy.
At nine-thirty I'm sitting here with the TV on mute (some awfully bloody program from Biblical times appears to be on), hoping to look up at the right minute to catch the weather radar reports. Tremendous storms to the west and southwest of us. As is often true, anticipation may be worse than reality--but one storm has rotation in it, and we've had some doozies lately. I'm really glad Jacob is home in his own bed--or probably bedded down in his parents closet.
A satisfying day. Hope yours was too, and the world didn't tug you in too many directions.

The Joy (?) of Facebook

Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech brought out the best and the worst of people in Facebook--both conservatives and liberals, and the reaction emphasized something that's been bothering me of late: the unbelievable crudeness of language on Facebook. At the risk of sounding like an the old fuddy-duddy some of my grandkids think I am, I have to say I'm appalled. Of course as a liberal, I'd like to say the conservatives are much worse, but unfortunately it's not true. This language comes from extremists on both sides.
Don't get me wrong. I love Facebook; I'm almost an addict. I've made many new friends there, I've gotten to know acquaintances better, and I've promoted my books, made helpful professional contacts. Sometimes it's the first way I hear of breaking national news since I don't keep the TV on when I'm working, and many times I find intelligent discussion of current economic and political conditions which enlarge my understanding.
But the use of epithets--from comparison to anatomical parts to threats of impeachment and hanging and banning from the country--strike me in terribly poor taste.
I'm afraid--and this isn't a new argument--that it reflects a decline in manners and civility in this day. We all know that were there was once collegiality and cooperation in Congress, now there is open hostility--and followers reflect that hostility in terms that should humiliate the speaker and not the subject. President Obama is of course the primary target--I once had a Facebook friend who referred to the president as the Kenyan until I insisted his mother was American and Anglo; thereafter he called him  the half-Kenyon. And that's the least of the insults. I think it's the anatomical words that bother me most--asshole being one of the milder. And of course liberal use of the F-bomb, which, sorry, I still don't believe belongs in polite society. The boys may say what they like out behind the barn.
Speaker John Boehner and House Majority Leader Mitch McConnell come in for their share of abusive language--and not being at all a fan of either one, I find it tempting to use slurs. But I also know that logical argument, well researched, is the best offense. Not blind accusations that sound wonderful and have more leaks than a fishing net.
Politics has probably always been full of slurs and slam--the Lincoln/Douglas debates come to mind--but frequently I long for the late nineteenth and early twentieth century when gentlemen were gentlemen and women were ladies. And people had respect for the president, elected to lead our country, and for other elected officials.
So here's a question to ponder: Have politicians perhaps brought some of this on themselves, by their behavior?
PS Sorry there was no blog last night. I actually felt creative and knew where I wanted to go next with my novel. Couldn't let go of the thread.

Warning--a political rant

They say it’s impolite to talk about politics on Facebook. I have one friend who implies that I rant without thinking. Well, okay, here goes a rant, and at least I've given warning. I’ve really thought about this. But I don’t think Speaker Boehner is thinking—in fact, I don’t think, as we used to say, his elevator goes all the way to the top. It stops at the floor that houses both his own ego and his hatred for President Obama.

His lawsuit is ridiculous, like a little boy stamping his foot because he can’t get his way. In fact, I saw a political cartoon to that effect the other day. After trying 50 times to kill the Affordable Care Act and failing—at great expense to the American people--he’s suing  the president. For what? Failure to administer the ACA properly. Again at great expense to the American people. I wonder if he’d be so hot about all this if legal fees came out of his pocket, but he has unlimited funds—our tax dollars. And, frankly, that’s not what I pay taxes for. I wanted a better infrastructure, health care for all, education for our children, equal employment, women's rights. Those are the things I pay my taxes for.

Now we hear that the lawsuit is the first step toward impeachment—pray tell, on what grounds? Failure to administer the ACA? Being too aloof (I just read that one on Facebook)? Does he even think, for a minute, about the upheaval such proceedings would throw this country into—upheaval that would reach into all our individuals lives. Financially, socially, and in terms of national security, employment, and dealing with all those “crises” the Republicans are so worried about. The country, just now recovering from a near-depression, would come to a crashing halt.

We live in a turbulent world, and everyone is looking to President Obama to wave a magic wand and rescue Iraq, halt the godawful bloody destruction of Palestine, do something about the sudden influx (it’s not sudden at all, folks—that’s an election-year issue) of children from Central America. How can he, let alone the government, deal with these problems around the world if he’s fighting a lawsuit and possible impeachment at home.

This is a time for all Americans to pull together. I truly don’t think Speaker Boehner has thought through the results of his actions—he sees another election-year ploy. I remember when my nephew, about sixteen, learned the lesson of "actions have consequences"--he ran out of gas and had to walk miles.

I may be preaching to the choir. I know many disagree with me, and they are entitled to their opinion. If expressed in civil terms, without hatred, I will respect it. But I find the president to be a compassionate, capable man, intelligent and thoughtful, more given to negotiation than fight. I can’t say the same for Speaker Boehner. I have no respect for him.

Please make your voices heard.

Terrible times

I went to bed with a heavy heart last night, and it's stayed with me. Had dinner--mostly a lovely pleasant dinner at a wonderful seafood restaurant--with a friend who's a political scientist. She told me of her disappointment with President Obama, and for the first time I got it. He has done so much good--I'll never let go of that--but there are things he hasn't done, such as stand up to Republicans, curtail Wall Street and corporations. He's okayed drone strikes in the mid-East which too often kill civilians.
And the question I hear too often the last couple of days, from both sides of the aisle, is why didn't he go to the border while he was in Texas. I'd like to think he was avoiding the politics of a photo op but I think that's thin. I hear someone (Border Patrol, deportation people--if there are such) is taking immigrants several hundred miles into Mexico and dropping them off. For what? To where? If it's true, it's heartless.
I worry beyond belief at all those children being returned to their dangerous home countries--I very much doubt U.S. authorities will see that they are reunited with their families, so there they are--some as young as five or six--adrift in a dangerous country. I cannot bear to think of it, and I hope the U.S. will show its humanitarian side. Meanwhile Congress is playing politics with the lives of those children.
I don't understand world events as much as some, but I wonder about the current Palestinian/Israeli conflict. Surely the Palestinians knew they were starting a war when they kidnapped and killed three Israeli youths. And surely they knew they'd get pounded. It's all tragic, pointless and a great exercise in wasted human life. Yes, the Palestinians have had a bad deal--their homeland usurped by the Israelis. But that was generations ago--why do they continue the futile battles? Why not negotiate?
As I said I'm no expert on politics either, but I think that's part of the president's problem. Being a good and honorable and reasonable man, he expected everyone to play nice and negotiate. And he came up against the hard reality of partisan politics gone wild. If I were him, I fear I'd issue a whole bunch of executive orders.
The world, as they say, seems to be going to hell in a handbasket. I am glad some of those I loved--my parents, Uncle Charles, and other who cared passionately--are not here to see it.

The power of hate

I try to teach my grandchildren not to use the word "hate." One told me he understood that we shouldn't hate people but wasn't it okay to say "I hate it when my collar is too tight?" How do you answer that, and where do you draw the line? When is hate acceptable and when is it not? Unfortunately, my grandchildren and children everywhere are growing up in a world of hate.
The other day a minister I know announced she was closing her Facebook account because of all the hate she encountered. I happen to enjoy Facebook and I think it helps me tell people about me and my books, so I''m not closing my account. But I'm appalled by the hate I encounter.
This morning, after the State of the Union, it was particularly evident. A man who I occasionally spar with over politics and ethics went way over the line when he posted about "the Kenyan, B. Hussein Obama." He and I have had this discussion and he took to calling the president the half-Kenyan, apparently as a result of my arguments. But now he's regressed. It's a way of reminding people that he's not one of "us." And B. Hussein? He seems to want us to link him mentally with Sadam Hussein and perhaps Osama bin Laden. If I ask if there's a racial implication, he acts offended and says he's never heard one word about Obama's race (has he had his head in the sand?). I thought he was not only filled with hate, he was disrespectful to the president of our country. Disagree with his policies, as a vocal segment of the population does, but please don't carry it to the level of personal hate. What about the Florida politician who called for hanging President Obama? And wasn't there a call for the death of the entire Obama family? And all those calls for impeachment. I have asked on what grounds and been told he's ruining the country (vague at best) and he's violated the Constitution--I'd have to be a constitutional scholar to judge on that one, and I know these people are not scholars of any sort. This same man is compassionate about lost dogs, abused dogs, etc., and quick to praise folk music and hymns. Within the last few days he posted a tribute to Pete Seeger--had he listened to the message in Seeger's music?
State Senator Wendy Davis has come in for her share of hate, from misrepresentation of her family life to the demeaning monicker, "Abortion Barbie." Can people not say they oppose abortion without resorting to personal insults and distortions?
I happen to be a practicing Christian, which really shouldn't bear much one way or the other on this subject of hate. But so much of the hate is couched in terms of "I'm a good Christian." It embarrasses me for my religion to be so distorted. Christ said, "And of these the greatest is love." For hate and Christianity to be tied together makes me think, with fear, of the Westboro Baptist Church.
Rational disagreement is based on thought and reason; hate is a base emotion. Let there be peace. We live in times too filled with partisan hatred, and we can only move forward if we can let go of anger and hate..

Openly political—skip if you want, but I hope you won’t

I try not to devote my blog to politics or the volatile climate in this country and, specifically, in Texas, but there are some things I can’t resist putting into words.

One of my earliest public memories is of seeing a woman jump out of a car and yell, “Hooray! Hooray! Roosevelt is dead.” I went into the house to tell my mother, and she said, “Hush. Don’t talk that way.” I didn’t know then, as I do know, that a lot of people, like my parents, thought he was a god on a pedestal but there were hard-core haters. I suppose they disliked the New Deal, the CCC, Social Security, and other programs designed to protect middle- and low-income Americans.

Since then I have seen dislike, often extreme, for the leaders of our nation. I myself admit to highly negative feelings about Richard Nixon and even more so about George W. Bush, though in the latter case it was less hate that despair at his foolish decisions.

I don’t think, however, I’ve ever seen such unprecedented hate as President Barack Obama is experiencing. It both amused and saddened me a few days before Christmas to see a picture on Facebook of a large, float-like vehicle emblazoned with the slogan, “Impeach Obama!” From time to time you see other calls for impeachment on Facebook.

What I wonder is on what grounds? I still don’t understand the legal grounds for the impeachment charges against Bill Clinton. What would you charge Obama with? Policies you don’t agree with? Don’t think that’s written into the constitution. Lurking always in the background, though many deny it, is the charge of being black. In the land of the free and of equality, that surely is not a crime. Treason? Hardly. Economic misjudgment—that’s in the eye of the beholder and most of us aren’t as knowledgeable as the president is but I’m under the impression that our economic outlook is greatly improved.

Of course that leaves the Affordable Care Act. Republican politicians run ads that say, “Keep Obamacare out of Texas.” Not too long ago, I commented on such a post by David Dewhurst, asking him “Why?” Could he, I challenged, provide statistics. I have not received an answer—does that tell you anything? The ACA seems to be working well in states like Kentucky that have welcomed it; a surprising million and a half or somewhere in that area have enrolled in Texas, where Republicans have made it difficult it to impossible to enroll. They are sacrificing Texans’ health to their urgent desire to weaken our president and make him a failure. Many Texans, bombarded by misleading Facebook posts, editorials, etc., have not even investigated the enrollment procedures. If they did, they might be surprised at the savings and improved coverage they’d find.

I know a man who will say thousands of his clients have lost their policies—yes, they have because those policies did not meet the standards. He quoted astronomical amounts that new insurance will cost these people, but have they investigated the program? I doubt it.

Come on, Texans, get beyond the hate and the misleading media information. Dig into the fact and make your own judgments. Don’t let other people think for you.

And let’s stop the hate on Facebook.