How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love The Government Shutdown

 

I went to bed last night as the US Government slowly stuttered to a stop. 

I should have known better than to watch the news before bed, because I kept dreaming of the final scene from Planet of the Apes. You know the one, Charlton Heston kneeling on that post-apocalyptic beach before the ruined Statue of Liberty cursing at the sky, “You Maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!”

God damn you all to hell. I’d like to stand on the dais in front of a joint session of Congress and shout that into their drooling fanatical faces. God damn you all to hell, you damned dirty maniacs.

It probably wouldn’t make much difference though, what’s one more screeching monkey in the middle of that shit flinging madness, eh?

Portions of this post appeared here on Stonekettle Station back in 2011 during the last government shutdown and debt ceiling crisis. I was going to write something entirely new, but it sure seems like we’ve been right here before, doesn’t it?

With every day that passes Congress more and more resembles a battered old car with broken brakes packed full of hyperactive monkeys waving their little pipe-stem arms and chattering madly while hurtling obliviously towards a cliff edge over a raging sea full of blood maddened sharks. And you? You’re maybe worried that America is about to become a bankrupt third world soccer playing crap-hole where Spanish speaking chickens wander the street and dysentery is the national pastime?

Well of course you are.

But you know, that’s not necessarily a bad thing.

Becoming a Third World shithole, I mean.

You’ve got to look at the silver lining.

 

What? 

 

Oh for crying out loud.  Look, stop sniffling. Don’t be a wet blanket.

Sure, there’s no doubt this permanent state of emergency can be depressing, what with the Obamacare Standoff Crisis and the looming Debt Ceiling Crisis.  We were just getting over the Benghazi Crisis, and the IRS Crisis, and the NSA Crisis. Before that it was the previous Government Shutdown Crisis and the Budget Emergencies of 2011 and 2010. Somewhere in there it was the Mayan Apocalypse Crisis and the End Times Crisis. Of course there was the First Healthcare Crisis and the Mortgage Crisis. Let’s see, there was the Bailout Crisis, and the Immigration Reform Crisis and the Energy Policy Crisis and the Gun Control Crisis and the Social Security Crisis and the Medicare Crisis and who can forget my favorite, The Defense of Marriage Crisis?  There was the Election Crisis and the Birth Certificate Crisis and There’s A Stinky Black Man in the White House Crisis and well, hell, I forget, it’s all just starting to blur together.

And, of course, there are the Nazis. Because aren’t there always Nazis?

Today it’s the Shutdown Crisis and the coming Debt Ceiling Crisis.

Crisis, crisis, crisis!  It’s always something. What is it this week? War with Eurasia or war with Eastasia?  What’s next?  Show of hands, who really cares? I mean really? So long as they keep the conflict going, that’s the important thing.  It’s not the battles that matter, it’s the war. Got to keep fighting.  Hearts and minds you know.

And hey, so what if we blow up the government and default on America’s debt?

There are a lot of advantages to becoming a Third World country.  Really.

Think about it.

No really think about it. 

If we’re a Third World shithole, guess what?

No pressure! 

No responsibility! 

No expectations!

It’ll be awesome. 

Look at Russia, when they were the Soviet Union it was all ideology this and ideology that.  You’ve got to prop up puppet states, you’ve got to keep outspending the other guy, there’s sneakin’ and spyin’ and repressing to do. Hell your Olympic steroid budget alone can run into the billions.  Man, it just never ends. Being a superpower is hard.  Talk about hypertension. Nowadays, since Russia became a Third World shithole?  Nobody cares! Pass the potato vodka, Tovarich! C’mon, turn on the TV, bare chested Vladimir Putin is going to wrestle a python while riding a grizzly bear and defusing a nuclear bomb at the same time! Awesome!

Personally, I can’t wait to see some of our politicians on TV in a cage full of grizzly bears and nuclear bombs.

Hey! Stop that. What’d I say? Quit your blubbering. Take another hit off the bottle and pass it around the burn barrel.  Stomp your feet, that’ll keep your toes from freezing. Mostly. Probably.

You know what the best part about being a Third World country is?  The Debt! 

No really.

We become a Third World country, we can just forget about the national debt. 

Seriously.  When’s the last time a Third World country paid back their debt? 

When’s the last time anybody actually expected them to?

Never!

No, no, stick with me here, this will be great.  Really.  Screw the debt.  We’ll call it the Tea Party Child Support Plan after the congressman from Wisconsin.

Here’s how it works: We just don’t pay it. 

Screw ‘em. It’s just that simple. Boom! That’s a trillion bucks in our pocket right there.

Seriously, what’s China going to do about it?  Repo?  Bawahaha! Go ahead! Joke’s on them!  Guess what we bought with the money we borrowed from Bejing? Anybody know? I’ll tell you, we bought cheap Chinese goods!  That’s right.  And then we broke them. You want your shit back? Look behind the return counter at Wal-Mart. Help yourself.

What about the money we owe to Social Security? 

That’s the best part, no more musty old people!  Think about it.  You ever hear of old people before Social Security? No, no you did not.  That’s right, Social Security causes old people!  No Social Security, no old people. We’ll live forever!  Get rid of Welfare and we’ll cure poverty too!

Besides, this is about jobs, isn’t it?

That’s what they keep saying, right? Jobs, jobs, jobs, where are all the jobs? Where are they keeping ‘em?

I’ll tell you where the jobs are, they’re in Third World countries. Hello!

Common sense, folks. If we become a Third World country, we’ll get jobs too!

Defaulting will kill jobs? Yeah, in Bolivia! Because all the jobs? They’ll come here! Tell me we can’t out Third World Mexico! USA! USA! Booyah!

By this time next year we’ll be cranking out TV sets and computers and vacuum cleaners and those little shitty cars for consumers in India and Russia!  Made-in-America products will fill Chinese Wal-Marts. Let their kids suck on our lead painted toys for a change, that’s what I’m talking about!

Illegal Immigration. Fixed!  No need for a wall. No need for expensive border security.  Who the heck sneaks into a third world country?  Nobody!  Viva la revolucion, Che! Now, who wants to help me pick these tomatoes?

Seriously, give it a year or two and Columbia will be buying cocaine from us!

Obesity Epidemic? Fixed!  No money to buy food, no fat people! Diabetes cured for free, right there, without any socialist medicine.

And as long as we’re on the subject of healthcare, Third World Countries don’t need no stinking affordable healthcare. It’s survival of the fittest, see? The sick and lame die off as God intended, and only the strong survive. No healthcare, no sick people.  And the best part is that the money we save on not paying for the sickies can be used to buy guns! It’s Somalia Libertarian Utopia!

Hey, here’s something I bet you didn’t think about: Peace!  Yep. 

No shirt, no shoes, no credit? No war.

You want to invade another country? Cash up front.

Looks like you’ll need to find some corporate sponsors, bring in some advertising revenue, and sell those tickets. 

Hot cheerleaders might help, just an idea.  

 

Now if you’ll all excuse me, I’m going to spend the rest of the day sitting on the couch watching reruns of Planet of the Apes and shouting “It’s a mad house! A mad house!”

Conservikaze

In the waning days of World War II, the once mighty forces of Imperial Japan were facing defeat in detail.

It was a situation nearly inconceivable only a few short years before.

The military commanders of Japan, xenophobic Bushido warriors who saw themselves as the spiritual descendants of the fabled Samurai, believed that they were favored by the ancient gods of their religion and as such felt morally superior and exceptional in every regard.  So they confidently and deliberately started a war knowing they were outgunned and short on resources but certain of their victory. They began as a formidable force and they scored solid wins early on, but not in the later critical battles that would ultimately decide the conflict. After a series of rapid victories, Japan’s warriors suffered one bitter setback after another.  It took a while and the fighting grew ever more fierce and brutal, but after Midway the ultimate end of the campaign was never really in doubt – and yet the most extreme elements in Japan’s military government continued to soldier on in a fervent state of denial, futilely praying that some miracle would reverse their fading fortunes. 

Until finally, bloodied and ragged, even the extremists knew that they could not win.

In a sane and rational world they would have cut their losses and stopped fighting then (in a truly sane and rational world, they would have found a way to resolve their problems without going to war in the first place, but I digress). But, of course, we don’t live in a rational world and so the fighting raged on long after the end was no longer in doubt. 

Knowing that they could not win, knowing what was at stake, knowing that millions of lives were hanging in the balance, the extremists choose instead to sacrifice entire populations.

As fate rushed inexorably toward them, they became increasingly desperate.

And desperate men choose desperate solutions.

These desperate men chose suicide.

Not just the small suicide of seppuku and of the kamikaze, but suicide on a grand scale.

They chose to end their way of life.

It was a civilization that had once, long ago, been admirable in it’s own unique way, steeped in honor and duty and selfless obligation enshrined in ancient tradition.  But recently that way of life had been perverted by extremists and had become morally diseased and brutally bankrupt and stripped of all the ideals that had once made it great.

When such a philosophy decays to such a degree it is nearly impossible to reverse course, human nature being what it is, and mass suicide then almost always becomes an attractive option to the extremists.

When it became obvious that they could not win, the extremists of the Rising Sun chose to kill their entire civilization rather than surrender to the inevitable, rather than make an honest peace and seek compromise with their enemies. When those nuclear fireballs blossomed above Hiroshima and Nagasaki, they signaled not just the end of the war, but the end of the warrior.

It was the end of a religious and political philosophy. 

It was the end of a way of life.

And it was the end of extremists who simply could not and would not meet others halfway.

History is replete with such examples big and small.

Always the extremists are willing to commit suicide rather than admit their defeat, rather than compromise.

“Does anyone remember Charlie Sheen when he was kind of going crazy last year? He was going around, jumping around saying ‘winning, winning, we’re winning.’ Well I kind of feel like that. We are winning. And I’m not on drugs but we’re winning, I think we really are.”

That was the Republican from Kentucky, Rand Paul, comparing conservatives to a deluded substance abuser before the Liberty Political Action Conference last Thursday night.

We’re winning, I think we really are. We’re like Charlie Sheen! Winning!

Meanwhile Armageddon falls even now from the sky, but, yeah, we’re winning.

We are a week from yet another self-inflicted disaster, from suicide writ large – and Rand Paul, like a drug-addled sociopath, is convinced that his extremism is winning.

That America is somehow winning.

“I think we’re also winning in regards to cutting spending. Now, I’ll be the first to tell you that the sequester is not actually really cutting spending but it is cutting the rate of growth of spending. I didn’t vote for it because I didn’t think it was enough, but now I’m trying to hold firm to it so we don’t break the sequester and actually spend more than the sequester.”

Sequestration is a winning strategy about the same way as the Japanese sending the Battleship Yamato, alone and unprotected, low on fuel and ammunition, on a one way suicide mission to Okinawa was a winning strategy.  Those who sent the battleship knew that she would not survive, they knew that the battle was lost before it even began, but they told those sailors that their sacrifice would change history and then they sent the ship anyway.  Yamato was destroyed out of hand and went down with most of her crew still bizarrely convinced that they could turn the tide of an already lost war. 

Extremists are always willing to sacrifice their loyal followers, and everybody else, in pursuit of their dogmatic idealism.

I think we’re winning, say the extremists, despite the fact that it’s obvious they are not.

And their fanatical minions charge into battle and commit suicide on command.

Why?

“I think if we approach these issues with passion and zeal…the passion and zeal to defend basic justice and the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, I think we will be the winning party.”

Because they have passion and a zeal to win. Because their hearts are pure. Because they die in the service of right and light. God loves them best.  Blah blah blah, it’s always the same martial drumbeat. The same willingness of their leaders to suicide instead of compromise.

As if the opposition wasn’t just as passionate in their beliefs, wasn’t filled with just as much zeal and just as convinced of their own righteousness.

Passion and zeal, not reason, no compromise, idealism over the greater good. It’s all or nothing as they drive inevitably toward self immolation.

Paul says, “I think we will be the winning party.” 

Party.

And that tells you all that you need to know.

Paul and his fellows are perfectly willing to burn down the country for their idealism, if they can’t have it, no one will.

These are extremists, the political equivalent of bushido warriors. They have seized control of the GOP and the once admirable conservative philosophy of small government and personal freedom, and perverted it into a fanatical xenophobic hatred of any government at all. 

They have replaced reason and compromise with unblinking red-eyed zealotry.

House Republicans have now voted forty-two times to repeal the Affordable Healthcare Act.

Forty-two times.

And last Friday, by a vote of 230-189, the conservative majority in the House of Representatives passed a continuing resolution that would finance the federal government through December 15, but remove all funding for the ACA.

The bill has no chance in the Senate.

The bill has no chance of passing the president’s desk.

House Republicans cannot win no matter how many kamikaze attacks they launch – and yet they continue to throw themselves upon their swords and threaten to kill us all in some quixotic gesture of defiant seppuku. 

Next the Senate, if they bring the bill to the floor at all, will strip out the provisions defunding the ACA and then send the resolution back to the House.  They have less than a week to reach a compromise and if history is any guide, they won’t.

If no deal is struck, the government will shut down on October 1st.

And even if a deal is reached on the continuing resolution, the federal government will hit its borrowing limit, the so-called debt ceiling, a few weeks later. 

The debt ceiling must be raised, there are no other options.  This is not a limit on future spending, but a payment for money Congress – including conservatives members of the House – have already spent.

Republicans, or more correctly the fanatical extremists who hold them hostage, declare that the ACA must be repealed or they will shut down the government and default on the nation’s debt. 

This is the equivalent of killing yourself to keep from losing.

Defaulting on the national debt will do more long term damage to the United States than all of the terrorist attacks we have ever faced, combined.

And yet, this is exactly what Republicans are threatening us with.

The last time republicans threatened to default on our debts, it cost the nation nearly $19 billion, put millions out of work, and resulted in a national credit downgrade. This time it will be far worse. And that is only the result of the threat, not its actual implementation.

Republicans justify this terroristic extremism by saying that we must reduce government spending, or more precisely the national debt.

And yet, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office the estimated budget impact of the ACA is a positive.

When estimates are compared on a year-by-year basis, CBO [Congressional Budget Office] and JCT’s [Joint Committee on Taxation] estimate of the net budgetary impact of the ACA’s insurance coverage provisions has changed little since February 2013 and, indeed, has changed little since the legislation was being considered in March 2010. In March 2010, CBO and JCT projected that the provisions of the ACA related to health insurance coverage would cost the federal government $759 billion during fiscal years 2014 through 2019 (which was the last year in the 10-year budget window being used at that time). The newest projections indicate that those provisions will cost $710 billion over that same period. 

Those amounts do not reflect the total budgetary impact of the ACA. That legislation includes many other provisions that, on net, will reduce budget deficits. Taking the coverage provisions and other provisions together, CBO and JCT have estimated that the ACA will reduce deficits over the next 10 years and in the subsequent decade.

That’s correct, a combined committee – both democrat and republican – continuously working since the ACA’s passage into law, having examined the law in detail, having continuously analyzed the ongoing implementation of the law, and having access to the best economic figures available and the best subject matter expertise in the nation, continue to the report that the ACA will in fact reduce overall government spending over the next twenty years. 

The ACA will reduce government spending and will provide access to healthcare for more than 30 million uninsured Americans.

Conservative extremists know this, and yet still threaten us with suicide if they don’t get their way.

This isn’t about reducing the debt. By Rand Paul’s own admission, it’s about winning – in the Charlie Sheen fashion. QED.

If the continuing resolution is not passed, the government will shut down.

If the debt ceiling is not increased when the bill comes due, the federal government will default on its debts.

House Republicans, held hostage by a handful of Tea Party extremists in thrall to a small minority of libertarian fanatics, have loudly declared that they are perfectly willing to destroy the good faith and credit of the United States of America in utter defiance of the Constitution they claim to revere so very much, solely in order to defund the ACA.

Knowing that they can not win, they are fully willing to commit suicide on a grand scale.

If only they had put one fortieth the effort, one fortieth the passion and the zeal, into actual healthcare reform, into immigration reform, into election reform, into finding solutions to gun violence, into job creation, into creating an actual budget that actually decreased government spending and the national debt in a reasonable and sustainable and logical manner.

But they can not. 

Instead they have chosen the illusion of winning.

Like those battle maddened Imperial Japanese commanders, they are no longer capable of reason.

House Republicans are no longer “the loyal opposition,” they exist only to seek revenge for the shame of their party’s loss to Barack Obama. Their uncompromising extremism drives them forward oblivious to all else, fixed on a single unobtainable goal that they will never reach even as their civilization crumbles unnoticed around them. Their unreasoning rage and boiling arrogance blinds them to the very people who they are supposed to be representing and they leave us all sitting out in the open, unprotected, while death falls from the sky.

Americans as a nation had a clear opportunity to end Obamacare themselves.

Last November they could have elected a president who promised to repeal the ACA by executive fiat on his first day in office.  Instead they overwhelmingly reelected Barack Obama. The message to congress, to conservatives, and most especially to the Tea Party extremists, was clear and unequivocal: their philosophy was soundly rejected by the people and the country they claim to represent.

And yet, the extremists refuse to admit their defeat.

They are pathologically incapable of it, they are pathologically incapable of reason and compromise.

Which is, of course, the very nature of extremism.

Always there are extremists who know that they are on the wrong side of history, they know it, and yet instead of compromise and reason they inevitably choose to ride the last bomb down into oblivion.

This really isn’t about the Affordable Healthcare Act.

It’s about denial.

It’s about arrogance.

It’s about burning obsession

It’s about all consuming hatred.

It is about saving face.

It’s about willful pride.

For these men, it isn’t about winning – because they have already lost.

Rather than admit defeat, these extremes are willing to sacrifice the rest of us upon the altar of their own vainglory.

This isn’t about winning, it is about not having to admit defeat.

When you eliminate all thoughts about life and death, you will be able to totally disregard your earthly life. This will also enable you to concentrate your attention on eradicating the enemy with unwavering determination…
                     - Tokkōtai Pilot’s Manual (Kamikaze), Imperial Japan, 1944

 

 

---

Postscript:  After the bombs fell, the fanatics who had led Imperial Japan into a pointless conflict were gone forever. 

They willingly destroyed themselves and their own followers.

And their way of life was erased from the flow of history.

Interestingly enough, the civilization that emerged from the ruins of their corrupt philosophy was sane and reasonable and willing to coexist with its neighbors in peace. 

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. 

The suicidal conservikazi in Congress should take note – but they probably won’t.

Wright Answers The Mail, Accidentally Triggers Armageddon.

 

Update:  I’m getting mail on this piece.  Some folks feel like I’m mocking all Christians.  Not so. Allow me to clarify: I’m not lumping all Christians together. Nowhere in the text do I say “all Christians.” No where. In fact, if you actually read the post you’ll see that I’m making fun of two people in particular, three or maybe four if you stretch it.  There’s a reference to 22 million Americans with possibly similar views.  There are 265 million self identified Christians in America or about 83% of the total population.  22 million is 1/12 of the total Christian population. 2 people is ~.00000009% of 1/12th of the total Christian population of America – e.g. hardly “all” Christians.  I’m not Anti-Christian any more than I’m anti-Muslim or Anti-Semitic or Anti-any-other-religion. Where I have a problem is when advocates of a particular religion attempt force their beliefs on the rest of us though law, government policy, tradition, or custom. If you’ve read me long enough, if you’ve read my other stuff, it should be readily apparent that the only thing I’m vocally intolerant of is intolerance. Like all of my stuff, this post is an opinion piece, it was intended to provoke laughter and hopefully some introspection and to reiterate the wisdom of separating government from religious belief.

As I said in the comments section: if you see yourself in this piece, well then that’s on you, you deal with it.

  //Jim

 

---

 

hella funny you god(gut)less libbys keep trashing the bible when it is all coming true. whose laughing now?! Syria is the final peace as predicted by God and Jeuss. its all true even if you don’t belive it. You can not denye we are now living in the end Time!  keep laughing libbys your gai boy war mongral owebama was predicted more then 2k years ago! its right there in black &white . sad

I’ve been busy this last month.

Too busy to do much writing.

Which is a damned shame, because the lunatics are out in force.

The above warning was floating in comment moderation under my previous Syria Red Lines post. I read it, chuckled yet again at the childish silliness of Christian Apologetics (It’s all twue! Twue!) and deleted it from the queue without allowing it to post.  I think that’s what Jesus would have done, by most accounts he didn’t have much use for haters and idiots either and quite frankly I seriously doubt he intended heaven to be populated with dimwitted dickheads – honestly, can you imagine spending eternity surrounded by these self-righteous jackasses?

Try to imagine which cheek Jesus would be turning after a couple centuries of having to put up with this crap.

You can’t deny we’re living in the End Times?

The End Times. You can’t deny it.

The. End. Times.

Because Syria, that’s the Sign.

Syria, oh no! Not Syria! It’s the End Of The World! It’s the Apocalypse. Armageddon. The Last Trump. Ook! Ook!

Run for your lives, everybody!

Everything is a sign of the End Times with these people. Everything. Same sex marriage? Ahhhh! It’s the End Times as foretold in the Bible! Black guy in the White House? It’s the Antichrist! Hurricanes? Evolution? Floods? It’s a Satanic Plot to destroy our souls! Abortion? It’s the Rapture! Earthquake? It’s a sign! Thunder? Intestinal bloating? It’s another sign!

Right.

I mean, come on, who actually believes in this ridiculous claptrap? I mean really? What is it? The 14th Century?

 

Sigh. Yes, yes, I know. It was a rhetorical question.

 

Last week Fox News’ Neil Cavuto suggested with a straight face in public on national TV that the Syrian conflict will “bring about the Second Coming of Christ.”

That’s right, we bomb Syria. Jesus shows up. 

We bomb all of Europe into flinters for four damned years. No Jesus. We nuke Japan and vaporize a half million people in two days. No Jesus. We bomb Korea and Vietnam. No Jesus. We bomb Bosnia, Somalia, Libya, Lebanon, Cuba, Panama, Cambodia, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, every country in Central America and half the islands in the Caribbean. No Jesus. But lob a couple Tomahawks into Syria, and Jesus shows up with the Antichrist in tow to destroy the world.

Because, Syria, that’s the sign.

What if Israel bombed Syria? Do they get some Jesus? They’re Jews, what are they going to do with him? Have him crucified again?

What if an Arab country bombs Syria, will Jesus still come to the party?

Why is it always that only American Viagra can bring about The Second Coming?

Suppose Cavuto had looked out of the camera at the Fox News audience and said in all seriousness, “Look, folks, I saw this James Cameron movie once and I’m really scared that if we bomb Syria those weird glassy aliens who look like snot and live in the giant spaceship at the bottom of the ocean will be pissed off and they’ll use their control of water to destroy the world with gigantic tidal waves in some huge flood. And then all the good people will go live on the mothership with the fishy transparent snot aliens in fishy alien paradise forever and ever, and all the bad people will have to listen to that bitchy chick sobbing about her shitty apartment and how she’s all alone in the dark until they want to gouge their own eyeballs out to make it stop. So we shouldn’t bomb Syria no way no how, because, Dude, aliens. It’s true, it’s all true! Cameron is a God!” 

It’s all True! Really it is!

Uh huh. But if you say essentially the same thing except you toss in Jesus, then instead of shooting Cavuto with a tranquilizing dart and dragging him off to a nice place with soft walls and an excess of institutional lime-flavored Jell-O, Fox News gives him an hour-long segment to fondle his psychosis in public.

"This Syria stuff is way old. I mean Old Testament old. That's how old I'm talking about. Don't laugh. Some biblical scholars say it's all there in black and white."

Don’t laugh.

A grown man, scared of campfire ghost stories told by goat herders two thousand years ago. Booga booga! Ook! Ook! It’s all true!

But don’t laugh.

How about if I just point and giggle mockingly? Would that be okay?

Don’t laugh. Right, I can’t help but laugh. It’s either that or cry at the utter stupidity of it all.

Cavuto was talking to born again evangelical Judeo-Christian pundit, former Rush Limbaugh staffer, and general End Times doomsayer Joel C. Rosenberg.

Rosenberg, a part-time Jew who dabbles in Christian Apologetics while writing about Muslims in order to scare the fundamentalism out of evangelicals with his Jihad novels, explained:

"These are prophecies more than 2,700 years old, some of them, but they have not actually been fulfilled.  But this prophecy, as you [Cavuto] just pointed out, talks about the complete and utter destruction of Damascus. That's an End Times or eschatological prophecy. It's a very sobering thought to think that a judgment of a city or a country could happen in which an entire city could be wiped out, but that is, in fact, what the Bible is predicting. I think it's wrong for people who teach Bible prophecies to guess, I mean, in a sense try to say for certain it's going to happen now. But you have seven million Syrians that are already on the run, two million have left the country, five million are internally displaced. That Jeremiah 49 prophecy says that people will flee, but there will still be people in Damascus when the prophecy happens. So, the bottom line is that we don't know if these two prophecies, Isaiah 17 and Jeremiah 49, will happen in our lifetime or soon, but they could because they haven't happened yet."

Hard to argue with that circular logic, eh? The prophecies, see, they could come true but they haven’t yet and because they haven’t yet come true we know that they are true and could happen but they haven’t yet which is how we know they might and remember to keep your arms and legs inside the ride at all times, kids!

Some guy in the Bible predicts that Damascus will be destroyed, and then leaves the timeframe open-ended?

Okay, sure, sooner or later, his prophecy will come true but, c’mon, it ain’t exactly magic.

You know what? I too predict Damascus will be destroyed.

Damascus and every other city on the planet.

Sure, I predict that the sun will eventually use up its hydrogen fuel, clog up with heavy elements, and then swell up into a bloated red beach ball the size of Mars’ orbit swallowing the earth in burning plasma. I predict that when this happens, and it will, whatever is left of Damascus will be utterly obliterated. I predict this will happen sometime between, oh, say tomorrow and eight billion years from now.  Look at me, everybody, I’m a prophet!

You want to impress me, Nostradamus, give me a date and time – oh, and then actually be right.

Anyway, to recap, Rosenberg thinks it wrong to guess … and then goes right ahead and makes a couple of guesses.

I’m not entirely clear on the Jews For Jesus Who Hate Muslims rule, but I think Rosenberg is going to get sent to Scientology hell for that. 

Unless, wait, hang on a minute, unless he meant it was wrong for other people to say one thing and do another – or does that only work for TV preachers?

And isn’t the supposed End Times and the Second Coming predicted in Revelation? And isn’t that, and Jesus, in the New Testament?  Maybe it’s just me, but religion makes my head hurt. Frankly I think the Twilight series makes more sense, it certainly has a better plot, and that pasty stonefaced vampire chick is a marginally more interesting character than anything Rosenberg has managed to crank out.

Twenty-seven hundred years, folks, the “prophecy” still hasn’t been fulfilled – but it could happen, any second now.

Any second now.

Any second.

Any. Second.

Sort of like that two thousand year old Mayan calendar people were talking about last year. Or that whole “bible math” end of the world thing Harold Camping was prophesizing – what was it? Oh yes, “we know without any shadow of a doubt that it’s going to happen…” except it appears old Harold dropped a decimal point along with his marbles. And before that Michelle Bachmann was telling us how the hurricanes and earthquakes were biblical signs of the pending Blue Light Special at the end of the universe. And before that these same people were telling us how Mitt Romney was a sure thing. And before that it was … well, it just never ends with these terrified childish dolts.  Go on, give me some proof, actual no kidding proof, that the bible prophets quoted by Rosenberg are any more accurate than any of these galoots. Go on. I’ll wait.  You’ve already had two thousand years, what’s another week or so?

You have to wonder, you really do. You have to wonder if the reason Jesus was so eager to have himself nailed to a cross was to get the hell away from these unhinged assholes. 

Hey, Jesus, when you coming back? We’ve got some gay hatin’ to do! And then we’re gonna light poor people on fire! Woohoo!

Listen, tell you what, I’ll make a beer run, you guys wait here. If I’m not back between, oh say sometime tomorrow and eight billion years from now, you guys go ahead and Armageddon without me, K?

Okay, Jesus, but don’t be long!

End of the world! End of the world! Ook! Ook! The sky is falling, it’s twue! 

Any second now.

Any second.

Surprisingly, neither Cavuto nor Rosenberg openly named the world leader they suspect of being the Antichrist (who obviously must be afoot in the land even now for the prophecy of the End Times to be fulfilled anywhere in the immediate future), but I’m pretty sure we all know who it must be.  Right? You know. Wink wink. You know, yes you do.

It would be easy to dismiss this ridiculous End Times biblical bilge as the fevered fears of few hysterical dimwits (or the sly opportunism of a hack writer and a news organization who makes a tidy living off those self-same mental patients), but it’s really much worse than that.

Rosenberg gets around.

On his website, Rosenberg explains how he recently spent a couple hours with an unnamed congressman talking biblical prophecy, specifically the “Burden of Damascus” as outlined in the Old Testament’s Isaiah 17. 

The basic idea here is that in the final run up to the end of the world, God will level Damascus in favor of Israel and bring the world within spitting distance of the Rapture.

Now, how Damascus will be destroyed isn’t exactly made clear, the Bible doesn’t explain what method God will use.  Most of Damascus was blown up and burned to the ground by the French in 1926, but I think we can safely say that the French are not God’s favorite people, so I guess that’s why the world didn’t end.  In fact, various parts of the city have been burned, reduced to rubble, and blown up for going on a couple dozen centuries now. What makes today different is beyond me. I did an online search but Bible Gateway Search returned exactly zero hits for “Tomahawk Cruise Missile.” Go figure.

As I said, Rosenberg gets around. Fox News cites him a “nuclear expert,” which is lot like calling Stephen King a “ghost expert” … or for that matter calling Ayn Rand an “economist.”

Last March, Rosenberg met privately with Texas Governor Rick Perry and Representative Louie Gohmert (R-TX). Both of which are big fans of this apocalyptic nonsense. Because, sure, who better to be in charge of our country’s future than a bunch of people who think that the world will shortly be destroyed by mystical forces and that most of us are doomed to eternal damnation anyway.

Ever wonder why these people don’t seem to give a shit about the environment or sustainable energy policies? It’s because they don’t figure to be around long enough for it to matter.

And now they’re basing their foreign policy positions on this dreck? Oh, yeah, nothing to go wrong there.

Rosenberg says,

"The innocent blood shed by the Assad regime is reprehensible and heart-breaking and is setting the stage for a terrible judgment."

A terrible judgment.

You know, you’ve really got to love a religion that is essentially indistinguishable from a mafia protection racket, but I digress.

Look, I’m no expert, but for the sake of argument, let’s just say this silly nonsense has some merit. 

The End Times come, the final Trump is blown, everybody dutifully lines up in front of Jesus for the Big Judgment, Jesus looks sternly down at the first guy in line – just for fun let’s just say it’s Louie Gohmert – raises one eyebrow and asks, “So, you could have done something about all those people suffering and dying, but you didn’t.  And you didn’t because you figured the quicker the everything went to hell, the quicker you got to go to heaven. Is that right? Uh huh. Get in the sack, Louie… .”

Right around seventy-five percent of American Evangelicals believe that they are living in the supposed End Times.

Seventy-five percent, that’s somewhere in the neighborhood of twenty-two million Americans.

Twenty-two million Americans actually believe that two thousand years ago some Bronze Age goat herder who’d spent all day sitting on his ass in the broiling Mediterranean sun while slugging down one skinfull of wine after another really actually talked to a real actual no kidding winged mystical being who really actually told him that “sometime” in the future there was really actually going to be some kind of big battle where a giant demon man would wrestle a smiling bearded non-violent hippy for control of the earth that he, the hippy man, really actually already controls anyway since he’s really actually the supreme being who’s actually his own father who created not only the aforementioned world but the giant demon man too according to his big mysterious plan but never mind that and then all the right thinking people will really actually literally fly naked up into space and live happy lives free of want in some kind of socialist paradise with Hippy Man in the cloudy blue sky forever and ever while everybody else gets cornholed by Satan for all of eternity in lakes of boiling pitch and brimstone. Really. Actually. No foolin’. It’s all twue!

Oh, sure, it does sound frighteningly plausible when you read it out loud, but then again so does the Twilight saga.

Here’s what I don’t get, isn’t the End Times what these people are praying for?

Don’t they all want to be Raptured?

Don’t they want all the rest of us to get cornholed by Satan?

Isn’t that basically their entire religion?

Aren’t they just dying to fly up to hippy heaven and leave all the rest of us behind to eternal torment? Isn’t that exactly what they pray for each and every Sunday, all smug and pious in their pews?

So why don’t they support military action in Syria? If they actually believe in their version of Christianity, I mean really actually believe in their own ridiculous dogmatic mumbo jumbo, if they really believe that military action in Syria will bring about the End Times, shouldn’t they be demanding the total annihilation of Damascus? 

And yet, when polled, more then seventy-five percent of evangelical leaders oppose military action in Syria, action which they claim could lead to a series of preordained events that will bring about their ultimate salvation in accordance with their God’s design.

How come it’s okay for them to thumb their nose at The Big Plan, but not people like us?

And we’re right back to where we started, aren’t we?  Do as I say not as I do.

 

Folks, I hate to say it, but we might need to give up a couple of aircraft carriers and put our money into some kind of massive mental health care program that involves forcible restraints combined with high amperage electrical shocks.

You need me? I’ll be over here hosing out the mailbox.

Causes: Maureen “Mo” Ramey

I make it a point not to solicit for causes on social media.

So when I do, you can bet it's for a good reason.

At the end of the previous century, the suicide rate in the US had been declining.  However, since the beginning of the new millennium that trend has reversed. Over the last decade suicide rates in the US have steadily increased. Today, suicide is the tenth largest cause of death in America. In 2010, the last year complete figures are available, 38,364 Americans died by their own hand - or about one every fourteen minutes.

38,364.

 

 

Why? Well, that's a good question, isn't it?

My friend, Janiece Murphy, recently lost her daughter to suicide. Her grief is still horribly raw and she's trying very hard to find a way to deal with the tragedy. 

Her friends are rallying around her and her family during this terrible time. Two of them, Stacey and J.R. will be participating in the upcoming American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, Westchester County Walk Out of the Darkness Community Walk on October 6th in honor of Janiece's daughter, Maureen "Mo" Ramey.  The walk raises money for the AFSP's ongoing efforts to answer the question posed above, why? And to do something about it. 

I think this is a worthwhile cause. I'd like you to take a moment and visit J.R. and Stacy's pledge page on the AFSP website. I'm NOT demanding that you donate, I'm only asking you to think about it.   Note: If you choose to give, you can elect to keep your donation anonymous. Nobody needs to know how much or how little or even if you did at all. Again, I'm not demanding that you donate, only that you consider it.

You can learn more about Mo and Janiece on the Hot Chicks Dig Smart Men blog, which Janiece writes.

911 Twelve Years On

Note: This essay first appeared on Stonekettle Station on September 11, 2011.  Two more years have passed and I find that I don’t have anything to add //Jim

---

 

It’s been ten years now.

A decade today.

And frankly, I think that’s about enough.

There comes a point where you have to stop reliving horror over and over.

There comes a point where you have to say enough, this and no more.

I think a decade is enough time.

Now, don’t get me wrong, the events of September 11th, 2001 were traumatic on a national scale.  911 was a shock like no other in American history, hell, maybe even in world history.  The modern Information Age saw to that, bringing it right into our living rooms without any delay to soften the impact, live and in horrifying color. 

All of us remember where we were and what we were doing on that terrible morning, I know I certainly do. 

I’m not in any way saying that we should forget, but there comes a point where you have to allow history to become history.

There comes a point where you have to move on.

Today marks a decade now, since 911.  In that time, we went to war and seven thousand more Americans, some of our very best, died.  Tens of thousands more were maimed and scarred and damaged forever.  Hundreds of thousands of innocents died.  Entire countries were laid waste and we became a callous people who could look upon those devastated lands and say, well, you know they had it coming, all of those bastards had it coming including their goddamned children. We became a nation that tortures people and disappears people and detains people, including our citizens, indefinitely without trial or recourse in abject repudiation of the very spirit of our nation’s own founding – and we are unashamed of that and unrepentant.  We have become a nation where, as an American, you must put aside your freedom a dozen times a day. You must show your papers. You must submit to naked body scanners and you must allow unsmiling uniformed men with the force of secret laws behind them to grope the most intimate areas of your children and yourselves. Such has become the price of freedom in America. We have become a nation  where you – as an American – can be detained for a glance or a gesture or a careless word or for checking out the wrong book from the library or for worshipping the wrong God.  We have become a nation where the only acceptable response to uniformed authority is immediate and polite submission, talk back, question, stand pat on the rights of previous generations and you’ll be branded an enemy. We have become a nation that claims to revere liberty and justice, but believes those things can only be had when secret agencies monitor our every email and our every communication without warrant or probable cause. 

The day after 911, September 12th, 2001, Congress stood upon the steps of the Capitol with the smoke of the burning Pentagon still hanging in the air above their heads and solemnly pledged to the American people that they would put aside their partisanship and their personal agendas and work together for the sake of our nation.  And in the decade since we have become a nation divided instead, a nation of partisan rancor writ large – and those who stubbornly proclaim their patriotism loudest are the very ones who would lead us into civil war and secession.  They would destroy what terrorists could not.

In the decade since 911, we have found those responsible, rooted them out, and ground them into dust.  It took ten years, but Osama bin Laden is dead at the hands of Americans.  So is his successor. So are hundreds of his lieutenants.  So are thousands of his foot soldiers.   So are many, many others, including Americans.

But it has not brought us closure.

It has not brought us peace.

It has not healed us as a nation.

911 was horrifying. It was personal to us all, every single American. It left us scarred, as a nation, traumatized.

And we keep using that horror as an excuse to lash out in a massive case of collective post traumatic stress disorder.

The wounds of that event run deep and are still raw a decade later – but those wounds will not heal so long as we keep picking at the scab over and over and over.

Today, we will relive the horror yet again – a fevered nightmare that simply won’t go away because we will not allow it to go away.  

Again, don’t get me wrong, we should always remember the events of September 11th, 2001, just as we remember Pearl Harbor or the assassination of John F. Kennedy or the hundred other events that shocked and traumatized our nation. But if we are to heal, if we are to move on, we have to stop reliving that horror over and over. 

Certainly we should build the memorials and lay the wreaths.

We should always remember the names of the fallen and hold them sacred.

But we need to stop covering ourselves in the blood of that day.

Today, right now as I write this, hundreds of media channels will play the recordings of those trapped in the towers.  They’ll play those recordings over and over and over again. Recordings of the tortured calls to emergency services and the final calls to loved one.  And we’ll listen, yet again, to the intimate agony of those dying people.  They will play on endless loop the videos of those who jumped seventy stories to their death, lingering lovingly on their faces, speculating about their last moments, reveling in the horror. They’ll interview those who witnessed the death and destruction and horror and they’ll beg, “Tell us what you were thinking. Tell us what you were feeling at that very moment.” We don’t need to know what they were feeling, what they were thinking, because we felt the same exact thing. We’re still feeling it. But we’ll listen anyway. And we’ll watch the towers fall. We’ll see the Pentagon crumple and explode.  We’ll hear the tapes of the air traffic controllers, of the horrified confusion in the towers, and the phone calls of those Americans who fought back above the corn fields of Shanksville, Pennsylvania.  

I hear those tortured voices, I see those dying faces, and I don’t feel hate. I don’t feel a need for revenge. Instead I feel revulsion.  There is something obscene about listening to 911 calls, any 911 call.  While those records may have value to history, it is nothing but a voyeuristic grotesquery to broadcast those intimate communications to a public jaded by reality TV and violent slasher flicks. 

It serves no purpose whatsoever but to keep open festering wounds that should be long scabbed over.

Today, pundits and politicians will use this anniversary to drive us further apart, to reopen the wounds, for their own selfish agendas, to further inflame partisan fervor and to brand their neighbors as enemies and un-American. 

And we will let them do it, because in the decade since 911 we’ve become a nation of cutters who hack at our own flesh with mean abandon.

 

Since 911, an entire generation has been born and grown to self-awareness.

Those young Americans have never known their nation at peace. 

They have never known a nation that is not divided.

They have never had a single day where they weren’t told to hate their neighbors and to report them if they don’t seem patriotic enough.

They have never lived a single day in a nation that wasn’t bent to the terrible business of revenge.

They have never known a nation that didn’t roil in fear and cringe in terror every single day.

They have never flown on an airplane without having been treated like a criminal.

They have never checked out a book from the library without having been subject to secret scrutiny.

They never sent an unmonitored email or made an unmonitored phone call.

They have never lived in a house that isn’t subject to unwarranted search.

They have never had the right to redress or legal challenge when their name is placed on secret lists – and in point of fact, they don’t even have the right to know if their name is on that list at all.

They have never lived in a nation where they have the right to confront their accuser and demand proof of more than just suspicion.

They have never lived without the threat, however unlikely, of being disappeared.

They have never lived in a nation that didn’t regard the torture of human beings as an acceptable option.

This new generation has lived under the shadow of those falling towers every single minute of every single day since the moment they were born.

 

The terrorists didn’t do that.

We did it to them.

Labor Day, Then and Now

A version of this essay appeared on Stonekettle Station several years ago.  I was going to write a new post for 2013’s Labor Day, and realized I’d said pretty much everything I have to say on the subject. I’ve cleaned it up, changed a few words, and added some new thoughts. It amuses me when people talk about the good ol’ days.  //Jim

---

---

You ever stop to wonder what you life would be like if you lived a hundred years ago?

Imagine.

Imagine what it was like to be your great grandparents here in America.

A hundred years ago, the United States was in the middle of the Second Industrial Revolution. 

It was a time of wonder and ever advancing technology.

The first Industrial Revolution began in the 1830’s with coal and steam.  The Second Industrial Revolution began in the 1860’s and would last right up until the beginning of World War I. It began with steel, the Bessemer process to be specific, a cheap and easy way to mass produce strong and reasonably lightweight metals.  Strong lightweight steel was the skeleton of the modern age, the core of everything from the new cars to steamships and oil rigs to utensils and lunchboxes, to the machines that manufactured the future, to the finest handgun ever made – Colt’s model 1911, named for its year of first issue and still in production more than a century later.  In 1911 a tall skinny fellow by the name of Eugene Ely landed a Curtiss #2 Naval Pusher on the deck of USS Pennsylvania and took off again – and thus was born naval aviation, a profound moment that would change the very way wars were fought and thus change almost everything else too. Many of the pilots who, a few years later, would fly over the battlefields of WWI carried Colt’s Model 1911.  For the first time, you could buy a Cadillac with an electric starter – and despite the fact that there were still plenty of horses out there on the roads, the car had become so ubiquitous, affordable to almost anyone, that Michigan created the first modern roads when the state started painting white lines down the middle of the more heavily traveled avenues. Electricity itself was no longer a novelty.  Though many factories were still powered by steam, electricity was becoming increasingly common.  The first modern public elevator began operation in London, England, and soon became common everywhere – leading directly to the modern city skyline. 

A century ago America was booming. Her factories were churning out new products at a record pace. The western frontier had all but disappeared – oh, there were still a few bandits and cattle rustlers out there, but the wild wooly west was long gone.  The gold rushes, the boom towns and gun fights were long over.  Hell, Wyatt Earp was living in Los Angeles working as a “trouble-shooter” for the city police department.  He’d fought his last armed battle in 1910 and would soon move to Hollywood as a consultant for the new movie industry. 

It was certainly a marvelous time.

If you could afford it.

If you lived through it.

See, those churning factories were horrible places. 

Most were still powered by a massive central steam engine which drove an enormous flywheel, which in turn powered shafts and belts and pulleys, which finally powered the machines.  And though, as noted above, electricity was becoming increasingly common, most of those factories were gloomy dimly lit dungeons illuminated solely by the light coming in through skylights and banks of single pane glazed windows.  Often boiling hellholes in the summer and freezing dungeons in the winter – both air conditioning and central heating were still decades away – the buildings were filled with smoke and poisonous fumes from the various manufacturing processes, lead vapor, heavy metals, acids, chlorine, bleaches, all were common.  Normal working hours were from dawn to dusk, typically anywhere from twelve to fourteen hours a day, sixty and seventy hours per week for wages that would barely pay the rent and put food on a factory worker’s table.

Child labor was common, especially in the textile industry, though in some states there were supposed to be laws regulating it.  The kids toiled right alongside their parents.  The children typically worked the same hours as adults, but for a quarter, or less, of the pay.  Pictures of the time show children working barefoot among the machines, ragged sleeves flapping near the flying belts and spinning pulleys, squinting in the dim light, eyes tearing from the fumes.  Whole families hired out to the factories, the men doing the heavy labor, the women and children doing the more delicate tasks.

Towns sprang up around the mills, often controlled by the factory owners. Company towns, where workers very often became little more than indentured servants.  Life in a company town was often better than the alternative on the streets or in places like Hell’s Kitchen or out in the fields of the South. Company towns gave workers a higher standard of living than they would otherwise be able to afford.

But the running joke was that while your soul might belong to God, your ass belonged to the company. 

Mill towns and mining towns and factory towns and logging towns were common across America, places where the company owned everything from your house to your job to the church you prayed in to the store you bought your food from. And prices were whatever made the company the most profit, and there was no law regulating what the company could charge or what rules they could impose.  

In fact, in many places there were laws that prevented employees from renting or buying outside the company town. 

The company might pay you a decent wage for the time, but they got a lot of it back too.  Get crosswise of the company and you lost it all.  Get injured on the job and could no longer work, and you lost it all. Get sick, and you could lose it all.  Get killed, and your family was out on the street.  There was no workman’s comp. No insurance. No retirement but what you managed to save – and since you probably owed a significant debt to the company store, your savings were unlikely to go very far.

Of course, you could always take a pass on factory work and return to the land. 

In 1911, millions of Americans were farmers.  Farming was hard back breaking work (it still is, just in a different way) – so hard that seventy hours a week in a smoke filled factory with a high probability of getting maimed or killed looked pretty good in comparison.  The majority of those farmers, especially in the South, didn’t own their fields. They were tenants or, worse, sharecroppers, living in conditions little better than slavery or the serfdom of the Dark Ages.  Of the small farmers who did own their own land or rather owed the bank for their own land, more than half lived in abject poverty.  In the coming decade, the decade of the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl, most would lose everything.

Most of America was powered by coal in those days and if there was anything that would make life in a factory town or in the sweltering fields look good – it was working in a West Virginia coal mining town. 

It was a race to see what would kill you first, explosion, cave-in, or the black lung.  And just like in the fields and factories, children worked alongside their parents – if they had parents, orphanages were also common. And orphan labor was even cheaper than the average child, both in life and in pay. Renting out orphan labor was a good gig, if you could get it.

You could always become a merchant seaman, if you were a man, though life at sea was damned rough.

You could move west and become a logger, though you’d probably live longer in the mines of West Virginia.

You could still be a cowboy, or a cop, or carpenter none which paid worth a good Goddamn and had the added benefit of a short lifespan.

Since people got sick and injured a lot, and most couldn’t afford even rudimentary medical care, many turned to patent medicines.  The pharmaceutical industry was only loosely regulated, but by 1913 there were some few laws in a handful of states regulating the more outrageous claims for the various elixirs. The big medicine shows were gone, but  there were still plenty of drug store shelves stocked with hundreds of varieties of patent medicines. Some were mostly benign – like Coca-Cola – and some were downright toxic – like Radithor, made from water and radioactive radium.  As late as 1917, The Rattlesnake King, Clark Stanley, was still making Stanley’s Snake Oil (and now you know where that phrase came from), a poisonous mixture of mineral oil, turpentine, and red pepper. Stanley fleeced sick people out of their money by making them yet sicker and there wasn’t much the government could do to prevent it.

Hell, as late as the 1960’s TV commercials touted the benefits of smoking for sore throats. And, as late as 1970 there were still devices in use in a handful of shoe stores across America that used massively powerful unshielded X-ray beams to measure your foot but could also give you a terminal dose of ionizing radiation in the process.

In 1913, only a few states mandated that your kids attend school, and then only though elementary grades, the factory owners weren’t interested in an educated workforce.

In the South segregation and Jim Crow Laws were in full force and civil rights were decades away. By the first part of the last century, lynching wasn’t exactly common, but it wasn’t exactly uncommon either.  On the other hand, women could actually vote in six states. 

Maybe three out of ten Americans could ever expect to own a home, most would pay a landlord their whole lives. Few had any rights in those relationships either, you paid the owner and you lived with what you got or you got thrown out. Period.

A lot of Americans were hungry. More than fifty percent of seniors lived in poverty, but then the average lifespan was only about fifty-five, maybe sixty if you hadn’t been breathing coal dust or lead vapor all you life.  Few of those seniors had pensions, most lived on the charity of their families – if they were lucky enough to have families.  Sanatoriums were a common place for the aged and infirm to spend their brief final years. 

If you had ten kids, you might expect six of them to survive to early adulthood.  If you were lucky. Polio, tuberculosis, measles, mumps, pneumonia, whooping cough, hard labor in the mines and factories and fields, lack of social safety nets, lack of proper nutrition, lead paint, food poisoning, poverty, orphaned by parents killed by the same, would probably claim at least four of those kids. Likely more.

 

People from that generation always wax nostalgic for The Good Old Days – and then they immediately proceed to tell you why life was so much harder and more miserable back then.

 

The simple truth of the matter is nowadays, even in this time of economic downturn, we Americans live a pretty damned good life. 

And we live that good life because we’ve put systems and laws and regulations in place to improve life for all of us. 

Programs like Social Security and Medicare have a direct and measurable effect on how long we live, and how well. Regulations governing working conditions and workplace safety have a direct and measurable affect on the probability that we’ll survive to retirement.  Laws that prevent the rich from owning a whole town, or abusing workers, or turning them into indentured servants, or hiring children at pauper’s wages to maintain the machines in their bare feet, have directly benefitted all but the most greedy few. 

The American dream isn’t dead, far from it. 

I’ve been to countries where dreams have died, America is far, far, far removed those hellish places. 

It is a measure of just how far we’ve come, and just how big an impact that those laws, regulations, and social safety programs have had that those who directly benefit from those very same laws, regulations, and programs can complain with full bellies just how terrible they have it.

Things like Social Security, Medicare, Workman’s Compensation Insurance, The Federal Reserve, Federal Deposit Insurance, child labor laws, federal minimum wage, occupational health and safety standards, the Environmental Protection Agency, The Centers for Disease Control, The departments of Education and Health, Labor Unions and workers’ rights, and yes, even Welfare, all of these things were created for a reason. For a good reason. For a compelling reason. 

These things were created because when you leave it up to the church and charity to fed the hungry and clothe the poor and heal the sick, a hell of a lot of people go hungry and cold and ill.  It is really just that brutally simple. 

These things were created because when you leave it up to charity and family to take care of old people, a hell of a lot of old people end up stacked like cordwood in institutions. The moldering remnants of such places are all around us.

These things were created because when you leave it up to people to save for their retirement or a rainy day or for accident and infirmity, a hell of a lot of them don’t, or can’t, or won’t.

These things were put in place because when you leave it solely up to the market to weed out poor products and fake medicine and unsafe machines, they don’t, or can’t, or emphatically won’t. 

These things were put in place because when you leave it up to industrialists and share holders to treat their workers with dignity and respect and to pay them a living wage for their hard work, you end up with indentured servitude.

These things were put in place because when you leave it up to devoutly righteous people who go to church every Sunday to decide what is right and proper and moral, you end up with lynchings and segregation and Jim Crow.  You end up with minorities as less than second class citizens. And that is a Goddamned fact.

These things were put in place because when you leave it up to the benevolence of industrialists to decide fair pay scales and safety and working hours, you get child labor at a pauper’s wages. When you leave it solely up to bankers and the factory owners and the CEOs, well Sir, then what happens is they end up owning it all and you get to pay them for the privilege of eating out of their garbage can.

And right up until very recently that’s exactly how it was.

Don’t get me wrong here, I’m as big of capitalist as any American, I believe in the free market and I’m opposed to regulation for the sake of regulation and government interference in business for the sake of interference, but fundamentally government exists to protect the weak from the ruthless, otherwise what damned good is it?

The question you need to ask yourself, on this of all days, is what century do you want to live in?

 

Happy Labor Day folks.

ddd

---

Caveat: One thing to note, no matter how our future goes from the this point forward, good or bad, sooner or later, we’ll be calling the present the good old days. 

I can’t help but wonder if we shouldn’t maybe try a little harder to make this time, right now, worthy of that distinction.

Red Lines

Update:  The conclusion of this post is deliberately ambiguous.  I wrote it that way to spark discussion.  Thanks for keeping those discussions, both here and on Facebook, polite. I appreciate it.

Comments here, on social media, and in email, expressed disappointment that I didn’t offer a concrete opinion regarding US involvement in Syria.  See the addendum at the end of the post.

//Jim

---

---

 

Tongue firmly in cheek, I suggested on Facebook and Twitter the following:

You know what I'd like to see? A Constitutional Amendment that says before we can invade a country: 95% of both high school students and Congress have to be able to find said country on a blank map without help.

I posted it to social media on purpose, to spark conversation, to see how people honestly felt about involving themselves in yet another conflict, as research for this essay.

Sure, it’s a flippant comment, but think about it.

Ninety-five percent of all high school students, not to mention congress, would have to know the world so well that you could pick any random country from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe and they would be prepared to find it on a map. And not only find the target country in question, but describe its people, its demographics, its place in the world economy, its relationship to its neighbors, its politics, its geography, its general history, its various beefs with the rest of the world, and the particulars of whatever conflict is occurring there.

Imagine what that would take. No really think about what it would actually take to make that happen. No, no, not what it would take to ratify such an Amendment (since, well, yeah, obviously), but what it would take to implement it, to bring our population to that bare minimum level of knowledge.

Oh, sure, wish in one hand, spit in the other, right?

But you know, if we’re going to go to war, if we’re going to send our children to war, if we’re going to drive ourselves further into debt, if we’re going to have to suffer the consequences of our involvement in conflicts for decades to come, shouldn’t we at least know what we’re getting into?

I mean a significant fraction of Americans can’t find America on a map.

Doesn’t it seem reasonable that those who send our soldiers into battle – not to mention the soldiers themselves – at least know where they’re going? Who they’ll be killing? And why?

That doesn’t seem like too onerous of an educational burden to me.

Be nice if the rest of America knew too, wouldn’t it?

 

So, anyway, Syria.

Something has to be done about Syria.

We have to do something, we’re all agreed on that, right?

Right.

Sure we are.

There’s been a war going on in Syria for, what? A year? Two years? Ten years? Twenty? Something like that. It’s a civil war, right? Or is it an uprising? A rebellion maybe? The Indian Summer of the Arab Spring? Whatever you call it, it’s some kind of conflict. It’s difficult to keep up with these things. To be blunt, well, there’s always a war on somewhere, isn’t there? Afghanistan, Iraq, The Kurds, Rwanda, Serbia, Bosnia, Chechnya, the Sudan, Egypt, Mexico, Libya, Darfur, Somalia, Russia and Georgia, Yemen, it’s a constant stream of woe and misery and destruction and death in some distant land far, far away.

And now it’s Syria.

Every single day, the news – whatever channel you happen to be listening to, doesn’t really matter – kicks off with an update on Syria.

Syria, Syria, Syria. 

For most of America, it’s an academic issue, just another brush-fire war in some place that has very little to do with us. We don’t sell anything to Syria. We don’t buy anything from Syria. We don’t visit Syria and they don’t visit us. Frankly, we don’t much like Syria, do we?  They damned sure don’t like us. 

We hear about Syria’s Ba’athist government – though few Americans could tell you what, exactly, the Ba’athists believe in and most of us don’t care enough to Google it.  We hear that Bashar al-Assad, the dictator (or is it Prime Minister? King? President?), is an Alawite – though few Americans could tell you what that means. Alawite, some kind of Arab, right? Some kind of Muslim, the bad kind, I guess.  We hear about the battle for Aleppo, though there are few, very few, Americans who have any idea where that town is or why anybody would fight and die for it. Heck, as long as we’re on the subject, there aren’t very many Americans who could name the capital city of Syria or describe in even the vaguest terms the historical significance of that ancient city.

We hear that al-Assad has committed atrocities, but most Americans can’t really describe what those are beyond the current go-to label “genocide.”

We hear that the rebels aren’t much better. But most Americans couldn’t describe who they are beyond the current go to label “al Qaida” or maybe Hezbollah – and few Americans could describe the current goals of either organization in more detail than “they hate America” and “they hate Israel” respectively.   

And yet, people are dying in Syria.

They’ve been dying, for years. How many have died? I doubt very many Americans could hang a figure on it, a couple hundred? A few thousand? Ten thousand? Beats me. Besides, they’re just Muslims, right? They all hate us anyway.

It’s hasn’t really been our business, this war in Syria.

Oh, sure, it’s terrible – in a distant academic somebody should do something sort of way. But it’s not really our problem, is it?

But now, now, a line has been crossed.

We could mostly ignore the conflict, mostly, just so long as al-Assad stuck to killing his people with guns and bombs, that was okay. Well, maybe not okay okay, but at least we could ignore it, mostly. Shoot ‘em? Burn ‘em? Blow ‘em up? Beat ‘em to death? Blast? Shock? Torture? Starvation? Disease? Exposure? Sure, sure, we’re good with that. Well, not good good, but it’s not really our business. We don’t like it, but it’s not our problem. Makes good news reports though, so there’s that.

Callous? Hey, it’s a tough world. We’ve got our own problems over here in the First World.

And it’s not like we get oil from Syria. Right? Right.

But gas? Boy Howdy, we’re going to draw the line at poison gas.

Because, it’s not the killing, it’s the method.

That’s the real moral issue, isn’t it? The method.

 

Please.

 

Please spare me the hypocrisy.

More than a hundred thousand people have died in Syria over the last two years. Hundreds of thousands more are displaced, homeless, starving, raped, blinded, sickened, crippled, maimed, orphaned, widowed, and without hope. In that they’re little different from the millions of similar refugees elsewhere in the Middle East, in Africa, in Asia, in India, in South America, in Mexico, in Indonesia, and right here in the hearts of our own cities – and you don’t have to look very hard to find them. The Syrians are just like all the other people who aren’t our problem.

But gas, that’s the red line.

For us, it’s not the killing, it’s the method. Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

Gas, that’s what it takes to goad us into self-righteous action.

And there is little doubt that war gases have been used on civilian populations.

And, so, now it appears we must do something.

The question, of course, is what?

We could do nothing, that’s a popular option.

We could denounce the Syrian regime on the floor of the UN. Always an effective tactic.  Then the UN could fight and argue and do nothing.

We could launch a few cruise missiles from Navy ships patrolling offshore, something I have a bit of experience with.  And likely this is indeed what will happen.  It’s a little better than nothing, honor is satisfied, no Americans get hurt, we blow up a “baby milk factory” or an “orphanage,” the Navy crew gets a ribbon, and America rolls over and goes back to watching the game. 

But in reality, those missile strikes do nothing. Who do you aim them at? What are the targets? The country is blown to hell already, what exactly will a few more explosions do?  The Assad government is against the wall, they win or they die. They’re not going into exile. They’re not going to share power, even if they had that option – which they don’t. They win. Or they die. That’s it. Why do you think Assad used gas in the first place? He wins, or he dies, what’s he got to lose?

What?

What’s that?

Some people say it was the rebels who used chemical weapons?

So?

It’s the same answer, they win or they die. They’ve got absolutely nothing to lose.  We kill them. Assad kills them. The only way they live is they win. By whatever means.

At this point, it doesn’t really matter who unleashed the gas, does it?

Certainly not to the dead it doesn’t.

The country is already on fire, a few cruise missiles are going to do what, exactly? 

American cruise missile strikes sure won’t keep anybody from killing anybody else – especially Assad, especially al-Qaida, especially Hezbollah.  Honestly, haven’t you people been paying attention?

If that tactic actually worked, we wouldn’t be having this conversation, would we?

All lobbing missiles at Syria does is make us feel like we’re doing something.

So, what then? Harsh language? Send in the CIA and the drones?

Unless we’re actually willing to commit forces for real and in strength, unless we’re willing to kill a lot of people, there’s not a lot of options beyond harsh language.

If you’re going to start lobbing missiles into Syria with the expectation of actually accomplishing something, then you’re going to have to pick a side. You’re going to have to commit and you’re going to have to follow it up with enough sustained military force to end the conflict and impose a peace on our terms.

And really, good luck with that.

Good luck assembling that coalition of the willing.  I was at the last party, I’m pretty sure we burned those bridges a couple years back.

Be that as it may, if you’re going to start lobbing missiles with the intention of actually doing something other than making yourself feel good, then you’ve only got two choices:

You can point your assault at Assad and go for a decapitating strike, wipe out the current Syrian regime and hand the country over to a dozen different mobs, many of whom are terrorist organizations. 

Or you can point your strike at the rebels, and hand the country back to Assad.

Those are the options. Note that either way, you’re likely to kill a lot of civilians via collateral damage. A lot of civilians – especially if you start firing missiles into chemical weapons storage depots. You should prepare yourself for those TV images accordingly.

Pick Assad, we’d get Russian help and Vladimir Putin’s undying gratitude. That might come in handy one day. We could ask for Snowden back and maybe some discount coupons for rides to the space station.

Pick Hezbollah, and we could demand that the price of toppling Assad is peace with Israel (oh, ho, didn’t think of that, did you?).

Both options have unpleasant side effects. Lots.

Or we could stay out, but that too has unpleasant side effects.

The simple truth of the matter, the ugly brutal terrible truth of Syria, is that for us, there are no good options – certainly not if we go it alone.

Frida Ghitis, World Affairs columnist for the Miami Herald and the World Political Review, outlined five reasons in her article on CNN today to go into Syria: 1) Other Dictators are watching: if we don’t do something, other dictators will use chemical weapons on their own people. 2) There’ll be chemical weapons in the future: if we don’t do something now, not just dictators but everybody will think they’re ok. 3) The war is spreading: i.e. Shit just got real. 4) Inaction hands a victory to al-Assad, Iran, and Hezbollah: if we don’t do something, the terrorists will win (boy, that sure sounds familiar, doesn’t it?). 5) A new generation of haters: The victims of this attack will never give up, neither will their kids.

White House spokesman Jay Carney gave a different reason: Carney said the United States and one hundred and eighty-eight other nations are signatories to the United Nations convention on chemical weapons, which opposes the use of such weapons. Carney said that signatories to that treaty have a duty to ensure “international norms” are respected.  International norms. 

Peter Suderman, senior editor at Reason Magazine gives eight reasons not to get involved: 1) If the rebels win, it’s bad news for us. 2) If al-Assad wins, it’s bad news for us.  3) Limited actions likely won’t have any effect. 4) Limited actions tend not to stay limited.  5) There’s no endgame. 6) Obama’s “red line” has already been crossed. 7) It won’t be easy. 8) The majority of Americans oppose military involvement in Syria.

And, of course, Glenn Beck predicts the end of the world should we get involved in Syria – because, really, isn’t everything about the end of the world in Glenn Beck Land? It amuses me to see conservative pundits siding with Russia and China – and by implication, admitting finally that they fear both because, apparently, their great and glorious God who favors America above all other nations can’t protect us from either Moscow or Beijing. Refreshing, that candor. Apparently God is just fine with what’s happening in Syria, nothing to see here, move along, move along, or I’ll give you a good smiting. 

Conspiracy website Infowars agrees with Beck that any strike on Syria will cause Iran to attack Israel in retaliation and thereby precipitate World War Three.

Rand Paul says, "The United States should never get involved where we have no clear national interest.  We should not intervene militarily in a country like Syria, where we can’t separate friend from foe and might end up arming the very people who hate us the most." Then he called for a “national debate.”  I don’t know that I necessarily disagree with Rand Paul, but it sounds to me like he’s already made up his mind, I’m not really sure what the debate is for – or how a national debate would be different from what we’re all doing right now.  From what I can gather, what Paul really wants is to be the one who gets to decide, not President Obama – but then again, he’s hardly alone as on that one, is he?

Christopher Dickey makes a pretty good case for doing nothing in his article Let It Bleed over on the Daily Beast. Dickey says that no American action can resolve the Syrian conflict.  That’s not entirely true, there are actions we can take, but they require a far, far greater commitment than a couple of cruise missiles. I figure about $1 to $2 trillion, ten years, and say 6,000 American lives – but hey, they’ll cheer us in the streets of Damascus.

Former Vice President Dick Cheney wanted to bomb Syria in 2007, but couldn’t convince George W. Bush.  Today he’s not sure if we should get involved or not. Seems the only thing Dick’s sure of is that Obama is wrong, no matter what he does.

Yeah, but what about the average American? What do they have to say about Syria? As always, let’s look to the comments under some of the above linked articles:

When things go badly - Keep this in mind. It was Obama's idea, his stubboen egotistical mindset, his inexperience and his insatiable need for power that killed more of our sons & daughters. No other nation or government approached and sought America's intervention. It was Obama.

Probably a good thing we’ve already assigned blame.  Proactive, not reactive, isn’t that what they teach in management school?

This is the third regime friendly to the U.S. after Lybia and Egypt that Obama has sought to topple. In each case Obama's actions have favored and supported known terrorists. 90% of Americans oppose this war yet Obama moves forward - What's that tell you?

It tells me somebody needs to let the nurse know it’s time to double up on the meds.

nice false flag operation. Poor Syrians. They're this generations Iraqis. Except their leader held the peace with Israel for 30 years... and we're taking sides with Al qaeda... makes zero sense. Someone at the helm here in the west is getting greedy..

I can’t imagine why this guy’s reasoning make’s zero sense.

It is foretold in the Bible that Damascus will be destroyed and no building left standing. About to become a reality it appears !!

The bible also said two of every kind of animal lived within walking distance of Noah’s house.  I’m just saying, you might want consider the source before you start to panic.

For us to choose a side, in this Civil-war will set the wrong impression for Syria, and the world, that a country can over throw their government and get support form the International community....and that's a message we do not want to send to the world.

I, um, what now? Good thing the French didn’t buy into this idea, we’d still be speaking English, or, well, you know what I mean.

I could go on, there are literally millions of opinions for and against American involvement in Syria. Most from people who can’t even find the goddamned country on a map.

Some of those positions from the professional sources, for or against action, have at least some merit – well, maybe not Glenn Beck’s unless you stay awake for a week on speed washed down with cheap bourbon as a number of those commenters obviously did – but something’s missing.

Did you see it?

For or against, do you see the common thread?

National leaders, pundits, politicians, the media, when these people speak of action, or inaction, one thing is missing.

People.

Human beings.

This red line is about methods, it’s about what other countries think of us, it’s about future wars, it’s about the price of oil, it’s about defending the Holy Land, it’s about the End Times and biblical prophecy, it’s about national interest, it’s about terrorism, it’s about regional stability, it’s about UN treaties, it’s about money and treasure, it’s about making Obama look good or about making him look bad, it’s about the 2016 US presidential election, it’s about hundreds of things for and against our involvement in Syria – but it doesn’t seem to be about people.

Not really.

Should we get involved?

That’s the question, isn’t it?

Should we get involved in Syria.

Either we give a damn about these people, the ones dying, or we don’t.

It’s really just that simple.

Don’t talk to me of military action unless you’re talking about people.  If it’s about political parties, if it’s about scoring points, if it’s about money or defense contracts or any of the usual rhetoric, I’m not interested. Stay out. I’ve been to war, dead by bullets, dead by chemical weapons, dead under the treads of a tank, it’s all the same to me.

Don’t tell me about your loving God or how you believe in the right to life.   If this is about your religion, if this is about protecting some ancient temple in Israel, or bringing about your God’s goofy bullshit apocalyptic vision of the end times, if this is about the voices you hear in your head, I’m not interested. Don’t talk to me about the morality of your religion, unless you want to see me call shenanigans on your hypocrisy.  If your God has an opinion on Syria, he can stop being coy and just come right out and say it, in fact, while he’s at it, he can finally get off his fat useless ass and take an active role. Otherwise he can butt out, he’s got nothing to say about Syria that interests me.

I don’t care about treaties or treasure or politics or religion or even the supposed end of the world, if you’re going to tell me about the morality, the morality, of getting involved in Syria, or not, then talk to me about people.

Do we care about the dying or don’t we?

Do we have a moral obligation to help those caught in the middle of this conflict or don’t we?

Do we as Americans have a moral obligation as a civilized nation to do something about those dying people, or don’t we? Yes or no. There is no grey area here, it’s not a trick question, either we have the moral obligation or we don’t.

So which is it?

Do we have a moral obligation, whether they all hate us or not, to do something?

Does our morality depend on the hatred of others? Does it really? What kind of morality is that?

I know what I think the answer must be.

I know what the answer for a moral and just and civilized nation should be.

Listen, do you run into a burning building to save those inside? Do you run towards danger or away? Do you risk your own life to save others? Or do you stand outside on the sidewalk debating the religious and political worthiness of those trapped inside? Does it matter that the burning building may ignite the whole block? Does it matter that it may explode at any minute? Does it matter that the building owner is a jerk? Does it matter that the tenants, some of them, may hate you? Do you let their kids burn too? Do you?  Do you listen to the screams and say, “well, I don’t live here, it’s not my problem, sorry. I can’t put out all the fires in the world.”

Maybe charging recklessly into that conflagration will get you killed.  It might.  That’s that nature of the beast.  If it was easy,  everybody would do it. Maybe you’ll die and save no one, that’s the risk you take.

Especially if you go it alone.

Or do you just stand there and watch it burn, is that who you are?

 

Sometimes there are no good choices.

Sometimes you just have to do what’s right.

 

---

---

8/30/2013, Addendum to the original essay:

 

Sometimes you just have to do what’s right.

And what is that exactly?

What is right?

What is the right thing to do when it comes to US involvement in Syria?

That’s the question, isn’t it?

What is right?

What is right for us? You and me, individual citizens.

What is right for government?

What is right for the world?

What is right for Syria?

The above essay raises more questions than it answers. 

I used words that are not clearly defined in the context, morals, right. I begin the essay with concepts that would seem to indicate America should stay out of Syria, that there’s nothing we can do except to make it worse unless we’re willing to commit to full scale war … and then managed to work my way around to a conclusion that most of you took to mean that I think we should charge into with Syria guns blazing anyway.

Most of you skimmed over the essay’s lead-in, but that wasn’t fluff. It was there on purpose. The simple truth of the matter is that many of us don’t know enough about the situation, about Syria itself, about its history and people, about the hideously complex nature of the region, to even have an informed opinion. Not really. Not beyond the topical information presented by our news feeds.

The fact is, there are more questions than answers.

From my email, from the comments here and on the associated Facebook thread it seems some of you are confused by what I wrote.

You wanted a clear opinion, you didn’t get one.

That was on purpose.

I don’t have a clear opinion.

Folks, there are no easy answers. I certainly don’t have one. It’s apparent that neither the President nor the US Congress have a clear and unambiguous answer. Nor does the International Community.  The Middle Eastern powers have no easy answers, nor does China, nor Russia.

There is no right answer, only wrong ones.

There are no good choices, only bad ones in varying degrees.

We go in, people will die. We stay out, people will die.  There are moral choices, certainly, but they lead only to immoral consequences. 

If we go in, we should know the cost.

If we stay out, we should know the cost.

Syria is going to burn no matter what we do, it is burning right now. People are going to die, are dying right now. And the truth is that there’s not much we can do to stop it, even if we (however you define “we”) were willing to go all in, which we most certainly are not.

As of this morning, the White House is still indicating that the US will likely take some as yet undefined action. The United Kingdom is out, they will not engage. The UN can’t make up its mind, but the writing is on the wall. Russia is out. China is out. France is in. Israel, well who knows what Israel will do.  The rest of the Middle Eastern Muslim powers aren’t going to help and may, in fact, make it worse.

We go, the US, we go alone.

Whatever form our response takes, it’s going to be on us.

And we’re going to have to live with it.

So be it.

Up above I concluded that we should do what’s right.

But what’s right for individual citizens, isn’t always what is right for nations – in fact, it rarely is.

In the essay I used the analogy of a burning building.  I asked what you would do.  Would you run into the flames to save the people, or would you stand on the sidewalk and watch them burn. 

As an individual, you have a choice.  You can decide to place your safety above that of those in peril. 

The government gets no such choice – or shouldn’t anyway. At least not our government, if indeed we are the nation we claim to be.

But, of course, it’s never as simple as that.

For you and me, we can choose. We can decide to risk our lives for others, or we can decide that we just can’t take the risk – perhaps for good reason. Can we risk running into an inferno to save others when we have family depending upon us? Perhaps we personally lack the courage, and that’s ok for individuals, discretion is often the best part of valor.  Perhaps we know that we are physically incapable of the required heroics. Perhaps we know that it is futile, that it is just too late. We can make that decision for ourselves.

The fire department doesn’t get that option. The fire department must take the risk, they must go into the flames.

We have a choice, government does not.

Whoa, now hold on, I hear you say. You’ve pushed that analogy just about far enough.

Sure, the government, ours anyway, is obligated to save its citizens.

And that’s the point.

The Syrians are not our citizens.

The US government isn’t obligated in any way to come to their rescue.

Well, yes … and not exactly.

See, it’s just never that simple.

Remember what I said about finding Syria on a map?

Because of its strategic location, the war in Syria affects the entire world, physically, economically, politically.  The situation is staggeringly complex, the secondary effects can’t even be calculated beyond vague generalities. 

Syria is a quaking structure made of teetering dominos, when they fall, if they fall, the consequences could be catastrophic.

While the Syrians are not our citizens, the consequences of their conflict already directly affect us.  You don’t need to look any further that the fluctuating price of oil to see that. And yes, that matters. And yes, that is a perfectly moral concern, war for the price of gas. 

Oh yes it is.

Our economy, the world economy, is powered by oil. Like it or not, that’s just how it is.

The price of oil as it relates to the conflict in Syria (and elsewhere) must be considered. The price of oil directly and immediately affects the world economy. People the world over eat or go hungry based on that value.  Considering the the price of oil (and all that follows) when weighing the decision to get involved is no different, morally, than deciding whether to risk your life charging into that burning building by pondering how your risk will affect your loved ones.  If you die saving others, your children may go hungry and homeless. And that’s the real moral quandary here, isn’t it?

In fact, not to consider it is immoral, or at the very least selfish, because that value, the price of oil, affects us all far far beyond Syria.

And it’s not just oil. It’s Israel. It’s Iran. It’s Russia. It is economically vital sea lanes and global commerce. It’s complex international relationships. It’s the world economy. It’s political power and balances at home. It’s the political power and balances abroad. It’s international treaties and long term consequences that may affect our relationship to other nations for decades to come. It’s the economic recovery. It’s the price of food. It’s the will and the wherewithal of American citizens. It’s the lives of millions, perhaps billions, of people. It’s what comes after – something that we failed to consider in Iraq.  It’s the cost, in blood, in our lives, in our money. It’s millions upon millions of possible outcomes and consequences and repercussions and side effects and unexpected unpleasant surprises.

The world is not a simple place.  Actions, and lack of action, have consequences some of which can be predicted, many of which cannot.

This is what the President of the United States is wrestling with right now.

I was asked on Facebook what I would do, if I was standing in Obama’s shoes.

I don’t know.

I don't know what I would do if I was in Obama's shoes, because I'm not in Obama's shoes.

Yes, I know that sounds flip, but bear with me.

The President of the United States sits at the center of a vast, vast, vast web of information, far beyond that of the average citizen, beyond that of the average congressman, beyond that of any other world leader, beyond that of business and religious leaders, certainly beyond that of any blogger or pundit.

I know, I used to be part of that web.

He is surrounded by layer upon layer of advisers and intelligence.

He is the focal point for dozens, hundreds of plans and options military, political, and economic.

He commands vast, vast, vast resources.

And he is rigidly constrained by reality, by law, by political, economic, and military factors that most people simply have no grasp of.

The president's position is complex almost beyond comprehension.

One of the reasons that liberals have taken to hating Obama is that he hasn't made good on certain naive campaign promises – even things that he felt deeply about, such as the closing of the Guantanamo Bay prison or military options or domestic spying. Because once in office, he found his reality far, far different than when he was a Senator, than when he was a mere citizen.

Morality for individuals is rarely the same as it is for government. Obama learned that the hard way.

And the same is true of Bush, of Clinton, of any president past, present, or future.

It's easy for me to say, "Oh sure, I'd do this or I'd do that." In reality, there's no way to know what I'd do, what anybody would do, outside of very, very broad outlines. You’d think most Americans would have figured this out by now, but unfortunately they haven’t.

The world is complex, far, far more complex than the simple choices presented by most “authorities.”

There are no simple answers.

There are no easy choices.

 

Here’s what I think should happen:

I think President Obama should go before the nation and clearly outline the options.

Limited strikes, no fly zones, boots on the ground, invasion and occupation, humanitarian relief only, or no action. Whatever the options his advisers are giving him, A to Z.  I think he should explain as best he is able, in simple terms, the advantages and disadvantages of each, and the expected consequences and outcomes. 

I think he should tell us which option he prefers.

Then I think he should publicly call for a vote in Congress.

I think every member of Congress should go on record, yea or nay, as representatives of the people of the United States.

And then I think the President should abide by that decision.

 

If we’re going to get involved, we should know the cost.

If we’re going to stay out, we should know the cost.

 

Government is not moral, morals are for individuals.

Government may be just, it may be rational, it may be ethical within certain broad guidelines, but it’s not moral. It can’t be. 

Sometimes you have to do what’s right.

And sometimes, the right thing is doing only what you can live with.