Ridenbaugh Press/publishing

Time 2020-11-09 06:03:08

Web Name: Ridenbaugh Press/publishing

WebSite: http://www.ridenbaugh.com

ID:109755

Keywords:

Ridenbaugh,Press,publishing,

Description:

The new Millerites, maybe The new Millerites, maybe November 8, 2020 Never in the last four years did I believe Donald Trump was likely to win a second term in 2020. But that was not an unshakable conviction. At many points I thought he could have done so - but threw away the opportunity, or made deliberate choices that imploded his own prospects. He entered as the president who owed few people, had fewer obligations, than any in generations at least. The strings on him were few, and his opportunities were large; this was one of the attractions that appealed to many of his supporters four years ago. He could have governed in a way that - practically as well a demonstrably - could have benefited enough people to almost ensure his re-election. In just one of the most obvious examples, he could at the beginning of this year have listened to his health advisors and taken their advice, put the United States in a position better rather worse among its peer countries, and many of the worst pandemic and economic and social troubles attached to it would be behind us by now. If he had, he would have been in a very strong position for re-election. But we all - well, most of us - know what happened instead. And that was only one prominent example. Donald Trump threw away so many opportunities to govern right that he also threw away his political prospects, becoming only the fourth president in the last century defeated for re-election. The surprise for many people is that he still came as close to re-election as he did. But he did come fairly close. On of Trump's most recent tweets, one that (unusually) was actually mostly accurate, he pointed out that he had won the votes of 71 million people. That was fewer than Joe Biden got, but Trump's numbers were large - as he said, record-setting for a president seeking re-election. What all those voters were thinking as they cast those Trump votes will be the subject of much review. And so too what they are thinking now, and what they will be thinking in the weeks ahead. One of the best feature stories I saw this weekend followed the last week in the lifs of a Massachusetts couple, a man and woman both strong Trump supporters. They were convinced, completely certain with no doubt, on Monday that the president would be re-elected. On Tuesday, they thought his re-election likely, and ended the day hopeful. Then, day by day, the news darkened for them. By Saturday morning, it was over, and they were coming to grips with the fact that the world was going to be a lot different than they has thought days before. But this coming to grips was hard, and it led most easily to ideas that might disturb many Americans. "Casting his mind into the future, past this election,” the story said, “he could imagine any number of outcomes. He could imagine the United States splitting into two countries, one governed by Mr. Trump and one not. He could imagine suspending elections so Mr. Trump and his family could rule without interruption for 20 years. ‘I guarantee you, Trump supporters would not care,’ he said. ‘I guarantee you, if you got 69 million Trump supporters, and you said, ‘Would you be good with Donald Trump and Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump and Ivanka Trump as president?’ a lot of people would be 100 percent behind that.’”The sub-cult of Q ought to be stunned by the Trump defeat - doubtless it too was part of the grand plan for how he will overcome all and rear up to defeat the blood-drinking pedophilic cannibals - but it is likely as eerily creative. (One report said, "QAnon followers can’t quite agree on how to process Trump’s likely defeat. As NBC’s Ben Collins reported, Q has not posted anything since Election Day, and his followers are becoming more and more agitated at the silence.")This is scary, but it is not just the ravings of a single person: It is, in much of America, a commonplace. It’s another in the mountain of evidence that a whole lot of people who voted for Donald Trump were believers in him but not in self-government, not in the rule of the people, not in democracy or a democratic republic, not in what many of us long have thought of as the American project, but in rule by an autocrat. You know: The same sort thing the founders of this country founded this country in opposition to.Check out the conservative talk on websites around the country and you’ll find endless descriptions of Trump as the “god-emperor” - as often or more so than as president. Backers of Joe Biden consider him, broadly, as a good and decent man with intelligence, experience and useful perspective, but they do not consider him an all-conquering comic-book hero, all-knowing and incapable of error. They consider him a human being. Too many of Trump’s supporters - how many exactly we will never know, but large in number - appear to see their guy as more than that, as larger than life, larger than human.Maybe some of them have seen a few too many super-hero movies. Now Donald Trump is exposed, indisputably, as something other than the all-conquering leader he was made out to be. Trump, who has always, always, before political life as well as during it, positioned himself a winner, defines himself in that context. Being a “loser” would be, for him, simply horrifying, life-altering, mind-shattering. So too, apparently, for not all but a good many of his supporters. The Trumpite MAGA crowd seems to be breaking apart.Which brings me to the Millerites. William Miller was a religious leader in northern New York state during the period in the early 19th century when the area was called the Burned Over District, as one description had it, because it “had been so heavily evangelized as to have no 'fuel' (i.e., unconverted population) left over to 'burn'(i.e., convert).” Miller had a distinctive take on his evangelism: That Jesus was returning soon, and not just soon, but at a specific time and place. These changed a little over time, but by the time he had a specific location (a few miles from where he preached in New York) and date - October 22, 1844 - he had attracted national interest and support. People came from near and far, left jobs and houses and their possessions, and came to western New York to wait for Jesus to arrive. Instead, October 22, 1844 turned into “the Great Disappointment,” when the day ended much like the day before. And what did the Millerites do? Various things. Some of them continued to wait, in some cases for months. Some turned on Miller (and at least one Millerite church was burned). Some, disgusted, left and tried to resume their abandoned lives, or adopted other theories of the world and revelations to come, and some joined other religious sects with different predictions. Some stuck it out with Miller, though opinions split and varied widely as to what the Great Disappointment was all about what could or should come next. But they did go on with their lives. As will Trump’s supporters. But it will be a life different than the one they were expecting a week ago. And such trauma will have after-effects that will not go away quickly. If Joe Biden is looking to unify the country, he will need all the empathy that is in him, and a good deal of agility as well. And so will we all. What now What now November 7, 2020 I’ve always wondered what it must have been like to be alive in 1860 and experience the American election that created Abraham Lincoln, insured the secession of 11 southern states and spawned the deadliest war in the nation’s history. Lincoln won only 40% of the popular vote in that election – and almost no votes in southern states – and to many of his fellow countrymen the mere thought of his election was cause for panic and eventually dissolution. One side was trying, in the face of enormous odds, to preserve the Union. Another side was willing to risk civil war.This week we all have a better sense of what it must have been like to be alive in 1860. The United States – I hope I’m wrong here – seems to be tottering at a dangerous place we’ve not seen in our lifetimes, or perhaps even in our great grandparents’ lifetimes. Maybe, in fact, not since Lincoln and 1860.The election of 2020, the election we have been preparing to endure for four long years, may only prove one thing: America is even more divided than we imagined. I have to admit I am nostalgic for, if not an entirely better more gentle political time, at least a time with better political expectations, a time when there was still a middle in American politics, a time when we were not just divided tribes. One such time, ironically, was the tumultuous 1960’s, a decade dominated by fights over civil rights, including the murder of the leader of the civil rights movement. The 1960’s where in many ways an ugly time: presidential assassination, campus unrest, urban riots and a senseless war.Yet, against all the odds, many of the nation’s best political leaders, Republicans and Democrats, were equal to the decade’s enormous challenges. The success of American politics in the 1960’s owes much to two partisan politicians who in style and substance could not have been more different. The story of Mike Mansfield of Montana and Everett Dirksen of Illinois, the Senate majority and minority leaders, may seem quaint, even unrecognizable in our divided America of 2020. But it is instructive. Mansfield was a New York-born orphan, packed off to Butte, Montana as a youngster to live with relatives. He hated it. Ran away from what passed for home and ended up doing the nastiest work in the copper mines of the richest hill on earth. Dirksen grew up on a farm outside of Pekin, a town in central Illinois. His Protestant parents were German immigrants. Mansfield’s immigrant roots were Irish-Catholic. Both men served in the Great War and both struggled to gain a higher education. Mansfield’s wife insisted he get a degree and he eventually earned a master’s and taught history. Dirksen sold books and magazines door-to-door to finance his law degree. Dirksen was voluble. One reporter called him “the Wizard of Ooze.” The label stuck because it was true. Mansfield was laconic, given to one-word answers – “yup” and “nope.” It’s often said the most dangerous place in Washington, D.C. is the space between a politician and a television camera, but Mansfield, even at the height of his power as majority leader, a tenure that lasted for 16 years, shunned the spotlight. Imagine such a thing. The political and personal paths of these two remarkable Americans crossed in the United States Senate where they helped civilize our politics and make the place work. Among many enduring bipartisan accomplishments Mansfield and Dirksen led the Senate and their respective parties to pass of the historic Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts, they passed Medicare and created the public broadcasting system. They worked with presidents of both parties. It’s how politics once worked. One story exemplifies how the copper miner from Montana cooperated with the magazine salesman from Illinois. In 1963, Democratic President John Kennedy had negotiated a limited nuclear test ban treaty with the Soviet Union. Kennedy saw the treaty, particularly after the Cuban missile crisis a year earlier, as a step back from an unthinkable nuclear Armageddon. Dirksen, a conservative Republican on foreign policy issues and a man deeply suspicious of the Communist regime in Moscow, was not entirely convinced a treaty was in the nation’s interest. Mansfield insisted he speak directly with Kennedy and the two leaders went to the White House to, well, make a deal. During the ensuing conversation – we know it lasted 33 minutes because it was captured on a White House recording – Kennedy suggested that Dirksen put his reservations in writing, which he had already done. “I hope you don’t mind that this is a little presumptuous on my part,” Dirksen said, as he proceeded to read aloud a copy that he produced from his suit pocket. Dirksen’s draft became the letter Kennedy sent to the Senate. Dirksen then counseled the Democratic president on how to handle Senate opposition from his own party, while explaining that he could convince enough of his fellow Republicans to get the necessary two-thirds vote to ratify the treaty. It wasn’t known until years later when the recording of the meeting became public that the two partisan Senate leaders worked together to help the American president accomplish something that he likely could never have done without their unselfish, non-partisan assistance. The test ban treaty approved by the Senate in 1963 became the foundation of every subsequent nuclear weapons treaty. Kennedy considered it among his greatest, if not the greatest, domestic accomplishments. The basic decency and fair play of Dirksen, Mansfield and Kennedy that is on display in this little story, particularly given our current toxic partisanship, is nothing short of stunning. We struggle ahead as Americans. Yes, we really do have a shared stake in the future of a country that is not just about seeing that our side wins. If there are Dirksens and Mansfields among us, this is their moment. As Lincoln said in his Second Inaugural Address in March, 1865, while the Civil War still raged: “Both parties deprecated war; but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive; and the other would accept war rather than let it perish. And the war came.”Come on America, we used to believe we were all in this together. Every one of us needs to figure out how we can be one country again. Either we revive the spirit of politicians like Dirksen and Mansfield or we are doomed. Another template election Another template election November 6, 2020 For all that this year’s general election was remarkable in many places around the country, it was a boilerplate election in the Northwest. Just call up the usual returns template and tweak the numbers ever so slightly. Surprises in this whole region were, in a word, scarce.If I’d predicted (a habit I continue to try to break myself of) a week before the election not only who would win around the state, down to the legislative level, but also the percentages, I would not have been far wrong on much of anything. That’s not a commentary particular to me. I suspect that would have been true of most reasonably experienced observers who weren’t especially wrapped up in the proceedings.The guesses wouldn’t have been hard to make. Republican incumbents for the four federal offices on the ballot? Landslides in Idaho. In Washington and Oregon, Democratic for president and most of the federal offices (except for those Washington and Oregon congressional districts which are still strongly Republican). The legislatures in the region changed hardly at all. The most notably partisan shift in Idaho may be the Democratic loss of a House seat in west Boise they won for the first time last election; but they kept the second House seat in the same district they also won last time. For a more significant change, the best place to look might be Ada County, where one of the commission seats changed parties. Idaho was Republican before, and Washington and Oregon were Democratic before, and they stayed the same after election night.Considering that the voting populace seemed to be in a lot of churn and angst, and in a time of national crisis, hardly any incumbents - of either party - lost in the Northwest, putting aside the national-level presidential vote. (This was largely true in much of the rest of the country, too. )Maybe fittingly, the ballot issues were among the most interesting items election night, and voters seemed particularly receptive to many of them. Idaho’s one measure on this ballot, which fixed its legislature’s size at 105 members, was a vote for the status quo, and got 68 percent approval. More interesting were some of the items which passed in the other two states. Washington state Referendum 90, requiring public schools to provide comprehensive sex education, might seem edgy but it passed with 58.9%. Oregon set stronger limitations on campaign spending (78.6 percent), increased taxes on tobacco and set them on vaping (passed 66.7 percent) and legalized, on medical supervision, use of psilocybin (“magic mushrooms”) at 55.7 percent.The most contentious ballot issue in the Northwest may have been the other Oregon measure, 110, and it may have been the most surprising of all. What it did was a collection of things that included shifting some marijuana tax revenues toward addiction recovery services which will be expanded as a statewide program, and greatly reduced penalties for possession of small amounts of harder drugs with the hope of encouraging addicts to open up and get some help. It did not “decriminalize hard drugs,” since penalties for trafficking, manufacturing or possessing larger amounts stay in place. The “decriminalize” shorthand was used a lot, though, both in-state and nationally, which means a lot of voters - the measure passed with 58.6 percent - probably took the time to look into the somewhat complex details. That may have been an unusual case in this election. Mostly around the northwest, and in many other places, it was a paint-by-numbers election where you really have to wonder how many voters really carefully thought about what they were doing. P.S. I did it: A column about the election without a single direct reference to either of the two most over-used names in the nation. May that be an indicator of things to come. Health care payments Health care payments November 5, 2020 I’m writing this Sunday night and you won’t read this until Thursday, so let’s skip talking about the election results. But I would like to examine a recent statement by our President. He is our President and will be until January, or for four more years, depending.Mr. Trump said at a rally in Michigan this week, “Our doctors get paid more money if someone dies of Covid. You know that right? Our doctors are very smart people.”The press called the statement false and baseless. It is offensive, unless you think people all act like our President, that is only look to enrich themselves. But it is not entirely baseless, nor false.Here we get to talking about how healthcare is paid for in this country. If you’re filling up your Molotov cocktails or loading your high capacity magazines, you can skip this. But I have been a critic of our health care system for too long to pass up this opportunity. Thank you, Mr. President.When Medicare patients are admitted to a hospital and cared for, the hospital receives payment based on a VERY complicated formula, but the main feature of the payment has to do with the discharge diagnosis. Thus, if you are a Medicare patient, get pneumonia, and are hospitalized, the hospital gets paid a flat amount whether you are there for 2 days or 5 days. The formulas are always being tinkered. Each year an independent body reviews payments and costs and fudges the formula. Most rural hospitals don’t operate under this payment system, since they are designated “Critical Access”.So, what does this have to do with Covid? Well, the $2 Trillion CARES Act, which Congress passed last spring and President Trump signed added a 20% premium to Medicare payments if there was a Covid diagnosis. Here’s the rub: “diagnosis” wasn’t clearly defined. Some states only allow a laboratory confirmed diagnosis, other states use a “provisional” diagnosis. Maybe that’s what our President was alluding to. Honestly, I don’t think he even knows. In fact, this Medicare payment system (not the CARES boost) has kept cost increases to about the rate of inflation. At the same time, private insurance costs have grown at a rate double or triple inflation. So, I’m not suggesting we blow this up. Fifty percent of health care costs go to hospitals and physician payments. Medicare’s cost containment strategies on hospitals has been a long road, but I can say it has had some success.As our President has suggested, some may game the system. But if we pay attention, apply some discipline and keep working at it, the bad actors can be squeezed. I am not unfamiliar with bad behavior in my profession. We did month long rotations in the ER during residency; twelve-hour shifts, seven days a week. I fell asleep standing up late one night while listening to a little old lady. I probably wasn’t making good decisions in that state.There was a new doctor to the group that taught us residents. I examined a little boy with a small cut above his eyebrow. The boy whimpered in his mom’s lap. “Do you think he need stitches?”The cut was about a quarter inch long and not bleeding anymore. I said I’d check with the attending but it didn’t look like it to me.I told the new doc about the kid. “The wound isn’t gaping or bleeding. A band aid will do.”He frowned, came into the ER bay, bent down and pulled the edges of the wound apart and the blood dripped out.“No, that will need a stitch.” He said to the mom.As he left me to sew up the scared little boy he whispered to me, “That’s the fastest $200 I ever earned.” Maybe our President knows this doctor. I no longer do. (9:54) And nationally, the wait goes on, and probably will for a while. Signing off from here ... for now ...Idaho (9:32p) And finally, Idaho, and as in the other two Northwest states, there weren't a lot of surprises. The vote for president was a little surprising: Not that Trump won, which was of course expected, but that his take was just about 57%. That was comparable to the more-modest than usual numbers for Republican Senator Jim Risch and 2nd District Representative Mike Simpson; Republican Russ Fulcher, who faced the most active and organized of the Democrats (Rudu Soto), actually did best (63.6%). On the legislative front, there weren't many big surprises either. In the closely-fought District 15 (west Boise), Republicans clawed back one House seat from a Democrat who won it last time, but Democrat Steve Berch did hang on to the other. A close race for state Senate left that seat in Republican hands. In all, not much legislative change either. Nor will the sizer of the legislature be up for grabs, since a just-approved constitutional amendment will lock it at its current size. Washington (9:04p) Not much by way of a surprise in Washington state either. Biden was heading toward around or north of 60% of the vote, and all 10 of the House seats will stay in the same partisan hands as last time - no flips. (District 10 will have a new occupant due to a retirement, but not a new party.)At last check, Democrat Jay Inslee was getting just about 50% of the vote to become one of the few people elected as governor of Washington three times. Denny Heck, who was the retiring Democratic House member who left Congress, will become lieutenant governor. The other state officials generally remain in place. The legislature is unlikely to change much. Oregon (8:23p) Recognizing that not all votes are in around Oregon, the great bulk of them are, and non-close races are pretty clear. For president, Biden is coming in at about 59%, around what you'd expect (a 21-point lead over Trump). Biden won most of the Willamette Valley (including, in a bit of a surprise, our local Yamhill County, which often goes Republican for president; though it was close). The win and percentages were almost identical, but slightly greater, for Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley. All five U.S. House seats will remain in the same partisan control, though one of them, the second, will change occupants (Republican Greg Walden will be replaced by Republican Cliff Bentz). The one serious challenge, to Democrat Peter DeFazio in the 4th, fell short, as was generally expected. On the state level, the big race was for secretary of state, featuring two candidates new to statewide candidacy: Democrat Shemia Fagan and Republican Kim Thatcher (who has been highly active in statewide Republican activism). Fagan won, unsurprisingly under the conditions, flipping the office from Republican to Democratic control. The other Democratic statewides also won. All of that is more or less of local/state interest for Oregon. But others might take note of the ballot issues Oregonians passed - all with strong, unmistakable margins - on these subjects: imposing campaign finance limitations (or, technically, allowing for more of them); increasing significantly taxes on tobacco and imposing them on vaping; allowing for use of psilocybin under medical supervision; and a scale-back of penalties for small possession of hard drugs coupled with a shift of marijuana tax revenue to help pay for substance abuse treatment. Carlton, Oregon (8:23p) I can report a major win on the local level: Linda Watkins (my wife) was just elected as mayor of Carlton Oregon, defeating an incumbent mayor (Brian Rake) 636-389 (about 61%); two years ago, Rake has won the office in a landslide (62.7%). Linda was also supporting the candidacies of three council challengers, and all three won, ousting two incumbents. Celebration in our house.Northwest (8:03p) The New York Times is calling wins for Jay Inslee, WA/Gov, Jeff Merkley, OR.Sen, and Jinm Risch, ID/Sen. All of those nearly certainly will prove out. But again: Can't you wait until some actual votes appear? President (7:55p) The presidential map is looking a lot close than a lot of people would have expected. The EC still leans toward Biden at this point. Trump has sometimes leads in his three Great Lakes states, but they're all more than fragile (large chunks of blue votes yet to be counted, and a large majority of the Democratic-leaning Pennsylvania vote yet to be counted). He's lost Arizona (almost certainly) and looks on track to lose Iowa. All of this still leaves not a lot of maneuvering room here, but at this hour the odds still slightly favor Biden. But we'll see more in a few more hours. I'll be shifting more attention to the Northwest races shortly, as the balloting ends at 8 p.m. and the first returns should be emerging shortly after. President (7:28p) ISE, Arizona has flipped and voted for a Democrat for president first the first time since 1996, and only the second in much longer. Senate (6:34p) Very little chatter about the Senate, which remains on tenterhooks. So far, with a third of the vote in Colorado, Democrat John Hickenlooper looks well ahead and in solid shape. Arizona is not yet in, should be in another half hour or so. In North Carolina, Democrat Cal Cunningham is narrowly ahead. In Maine, Republican Susan Collins is leading, but mostly Republican voting districts have been reporting it (results so far are small) and her lead will diminish. Suspense junkies will find plenty to like about this evening ...President (6:13p) It's looking close in some interesting places - Texas, Ohio and some others. And a little unclear at this point about exactly what votes (from where and when they were cast) are in and what's yet to come. President (6:03p) The early calls - in advance of actual voting counts being reported - are bad for a number of reasons, but the Nebraska call for Trump is an egregious example. Nebraska overall will almost certainly go to Trump, but its electoral votes are broken out, and one congressional district - in the Omaha area - has been considered competitive. The early call, without reference to any actual votes, ignores it. (5:27p) A lot of what we've been seeing so far is completely expected: candidates for a range of offices winning where you'd expect them to. Not a lot of upsets yet.President (5:25p) We'll see how the rest of it goes, but: a third of the Texas vote is in, widely scattered around that vast state, and Biden leads 52.6% to 46.1%. (5:08p) A critique of CNN on by Steve Morris Twitter: "Just sitting here reflecting on how you can spend your career comparing LGBTQ people to pedophiles and bestialists, lose reelection by a massive, historic margin, lose two presidential campaigns, and still be elevated as a voice Americans *need* to hear on a night like this." Referencing Rick Santorum. My decision to watch no TV tonight stands. President (5:05p) Looking like, of the first three big states, Trump will win two and Biden one. The night will not be short. President (4:46p) The Associated Press has called the race in Virginia for Biden, which is no surprise - all indications have gone that way. But they did it when only a very tiny sliver of votes were in, and those mostly for Trump. They should should wait a bit. President (4:36p) Watching the New York Times needles, which they have up for Florida, Georgia and North Carolina. Only the Florida needle is active at this point, projecting Trump ahead there at 3%. They have Trump up in Georgia at 1.1% and Biden up in North Carolina at 2%. From the Times' description: "If Joe Biden wins one of these three states, he is likely to win the presidency. If President Trump wins all three, it could be days or more before a winner is declared."President (4:20p) And we're getting numbers out of Georgia - amall, but it's something. With 3% in, about 170,000 votes, Biden is at 55.7%. Includes a scattering from north of Atlanta (Cobb, surburban) and along the South Carolina border.President (4:15p) With anti-climax. Trump wins Kentucky, and Biden wins Vermont. As usual, the first states out of the chute. Not remotely a surprise. This isn't exactly leading with something big. But more of note should be coming soon.And so it begins ... I ran across this on the conservative website Townhall:Nothing anyone says, except for hardcore conservatives, should give you any pause. Sure, hardcore conservatives can be substantively wrong, but they will not lie to you. The mainstream media will lie to you precisely because they wish to elicit that sinking feeling in your gut that all is lost so that instead of venturing out to the polls you find a closet and curl up in the bottom in a fetal position.That is cult-speak: You can believe no one but us. (We wan't even get into the 20,000 lies - just in the last four years - of the writer's preferredx candidate, faithfully regurgitated by his followers.) It encapsulates why reasoned discussion has become so difficult in this country: Too many of us has been - yes - programmed to listen to only a narrow band of influencers, and any information which that influencer doesn't want to divulge (or emphasize) is discarded. This is not a phenomenon equally divided between the warring camps; while true in spots on the left, it overwhelms on the right. Tonight, we see what that leads to. As we progress through the coming hours, I will be reading people on the right as well as left. I have encountered no writers on the left urging me not to. During the party conventions some weeks ago, I heard the national Democratic chairman specifically ask viewers of his convention to check out the other side's convention too, and compare them. It did not escape me that I heard no similar invitation from any of the Republican speakers. The conclusions I could draw from that were too obvious to need recitation here. I hope. - rs It's an unusual election day. So, I'll be doing something a little different here this time, though not so different from what some news sites have been doing: Live-blogging election night. I plan to start somewhere around 5 pm; early results from the east should start coming in by then. I'll watch the national component, the presidential and congressional contests. And those in the Northwest. And locally too, since there's a hyperlocal component to this: My wife, Linda Watkins, is on the ballot for mayor of Carlton, seeking to unseat the incumbent mayor. I'll follow that too. I'll be tweeting somewhat as well. If you'd lke to send comments back to me, Twitter will work, and so will email (stapilus@ridenbaugh.com). I'll be tracking the results on somewhere around 15 websites. (The TV will be off, though I'll be checking sites associated with some of the broadcasters.) I'll probably call a number of the races too, just for the hell of it, with the acronym ISE (I've seen enough, a hat tip to the estimable Dave Wasserman). Strap in. It should be a memorable ride. - rs Vote! Vote! November 3, 2020 This isn't really voting day any more, since so many people already have cast ballots. But it is voting deadline day - your last chance to help decide our future. Make sure that by 8 p.m. today (if you're in the Northwest), you do it.See you on the other side ... A sign of hostility A sign of hostility November 2, 2020 Walking the dog a few days ago, I came upon what we here in the desert euphemistically call a “yard” (yards here are crushed rock - not grass) with three Trump signs. Not an unusual sighting hereabouts - those Trump signs. Except one was very different from the other two which were the standard versions. The unusual sign said “MAKE CHRISTIANITY GREAT AGAIN - VOTE FOR DONALD TRUMP.” A garland of flowers was woven - photographically - across the top.“Make Christianity Great Again!” I damned near lost my breakfast! For the first time in my long life, I was overcome with a heated desire to grab that sign and rip it to pieces. Even the dog - Skeezix - could feel my sudden anger.Donald Trump is going to “make Christianity great again?’ Trump? The guy who had dozens of peaceful protesters tear gassed and shoved off public streets so he could stand in front of a church he doesn’t attend, to hold up a Bible (backwards) so he could have a photo op? That serial-lying, mean-spirited, grossly incompetent and incredibly dangerous human being? The guy who pays porn stars thousands of dollars to keep quiet about his sexual activities. Him?No, my foolhardy and incredibly ignorant neighbor! No, not him. Not him ever! Trying to link that political disaster of a presidential aberration to anything Christ-like is absolutely impossible. That sign says more about your out-of-touch political knowledge and your lack of understanding of the Christian way of life than trying to show your neighbors your political presidential preference.Trump has put this nation through dozens and dozens of political indignities and lowered standards in nearly everything he’s touched. Christian?New evidence of how low Trump will go - and how unlike Christ the man is - came several days ago when an April, 2020, conversation between ace reporter Bob Woodward and Trump’s “in-over-his-head” son-in-law, the young Jared Kushner came to light.You don’t have to listen to the entire thing. You need only 30 seconds or so to hear Kushner’s - and Trump’s - depravity. Their plan - when our COVID-19 deaths at the time stood around 40,000 souls - was to make a large government push to open everything back up. Right now! Schools, businesses, manufacturing, airlines, etc. Trump would be the self-proclaimed economic booster. “Open everything up!” “Things will be O.K..” But, if - if - coronavirus cases continued to mount, blame governors! Blame the governors!That’s about the most devious, heinous political thinking I’ve ever heard. And I’ve been around a lot of politicians and political conversations for a long, long time.Imagine. To please his backers - his political “friends” - he planned to reopen a then-shuttered economy so those folks could profit - no matter how many Americans died - then blame the nation’s governors for “acting too soon!” Over the last several years, I’ve not hidden my feelings about Trump. From the git-go, he’s been a political accident, receiving fewer popular votes but winning several key electoral college states. So, the “winner” became the “loser” while the “loser” became the “winner.” From day one, he’s exhibited how lacking he is in leadership qualities, empathy, compassion, knowledge of government, ignorance of the working side of the presidency, how to conduct himself as leader of the world’s most powerful nation. His walk-away from political disasters has mirrored his personal conduct as a private businessman. If you lose, disassociate yourself from the loss, declare you “won” and go on to some other doomed venture. Except, in government - especially at the top of government - it doesn’t work that way.The longer he’s been in office, the more his dangerous qualities are displayed. Un-friending our historic world partners, our treaties and other agreements with them, while cozying up to some of the world’s worst dictators. Openly admiring Vladimir Putin and all things Russian while being told by his own security professionals of the extreme dangers represented by Putin.Now that we’ve had four years of his version of the presidency, we’ve come to know him. Really know him. His complete ignorance of business and ethics - long-known to people who’ve had dealings with him over many years - are now known by other world leaders. And, by us. The governed. His ignorance of the office he holds, his “bull-in-the-china-shop” attitude about relationships and world dealings, his lack of understanding the Constitutional roles of the presidency versus the other two branches of government, the inability to relate to citizens of this country - all this and more has marked his tenure.I guess, given the knowledge of Trump’s publically-known failings, the danger he poses for all Americans, his abuses of power and seeming lack of common values, combined to set me off when it came to someone publically believing he could have a positive affect in matters of Christianity. And, I suspect that sign would bring a lot of laughs in the Vatican. Trump to” make Christianity great again?”Now that I’ve had a few hours to calm down, the anger is less. But, what’s left of it is directed at me for forgetting my own Christian values and the tolerance we’re expected to have for others. “Forgive them, for they know not what they do.”Put THAT on a sign in your gravel yard. In my yard.845Next Statement the freedom of Speech may be taken away — and, dumb silent we may be led, like sheep, to the Slaughter. George Washington, 1783 We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can t have both.   Louis D. BrandeisLosing a shared vocabulary for the world’s problems, for the way we relate to one another and for current events may be the greatest threat to American society. Aaron Hanlon, 2018The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.  F. Scott FitzgeraldGandhi s Seven Sins: Wealth without work; Pleasure without conscience; Knowledge without character; Commerce without morality; Science without humanity; Worship without sacrifice; Politics without principleif you can create an honorable livelihood, where you take your skills and use them and you earn a living from it, it gives you a sense of freedom and allows you to balance your life the way you want. Anita RoddickFor what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Mark 8:36 KJB DONATE! No ads or big money back this site. If you like what you see: OUR BOOKS We ve published books since 1988. Here are some of them.

TAGS:Ridenbaugh Press publishing 

<<< Thank you for your visit >>>

Hot Websites