Hi Marty,
I just heard the piece on NPR about your Pledge of Allegiance efforts. Good for you and your group! You need some support, with all the nasty things people say to you. You are correct that their response makes your case for you. If you object to a loyalty oath and you get responses like that, the loyalty oath is objectionable. Moreover, if something deserves loyalty, you don't need a pledge to enforce it or reinforce it. Loyalty comes from your heart.
Thanks for standing up,
/Steve
Monday, September 19, 2011
Saturday, August 27, 2011
Monday, August 08, 2011
Sunday, August 07, 2011
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Saturday, July 23, 2011
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Wednesday, July 06, 2011
14 Propaganda Techniques Fox "News" Uses to Brainwash Americans | Truthout
Hi Rob,
This one caught my eye because we've talked about Fox news in our family before:
http://www.truth-out.org/14-propaganda-techniques-fox-news-uses-brainwash-americans/1309612678
I did not, however, scan much past the opening two or three paragraphs. The author has no sense of the history of American journalism. From the start – 1776 and before – we have had propaganda, innuendo, lies, appalling or laughable attacks, subjective analysis, distortion, defamation, and all manner of vicious material in our democratic journalism. That’s what you get with free speech. We’ve had good and bad journalism in our national conversation forever. The difference now, with the internet and digital communication in general, is that we have much more of each – good and bad. Citizens always had to sort out truth and falsehood in the nation’s collective consciousness. The job may be harder now because the quantity is greater, but for me it’s feels like the opposite. The more bad journalism I’m exposed to, the easier it becomes to recognize it.
I know we’ve differed on the general question of citizens’ abilities in this area, but I figured I’d make my contrarian case anyway!
Love,
Dad
This one caught my eye because we've talked about Fox news in our family before:
http://www.truth-out.org/14-propaganda-techniques-fox-news-uses-brainwash-americans/1309612678
I did not, however, scan much past the opening two or three paragraphs. The author has no sense of the history of American journalism. From the start – 1776 and before – we have had propaganda, innuendo, lies, appalling or laughable attacks, subjective analysis, distortion, defamation, and all manner of vicious material in our democratic journalism. That’s what you get with free speech. We’ve had good and bad journalism in our national conversation forever. The difference now, with the internet and digital communication in general, is that we have much more of each – good and bad. Citizens always had to sort out truth and falsehood in the nation’s collective consciousness. The job may be harder now because the quantity is greater, but for me it’s feels like the opposite. The more bad journalism I’m exposed to, the easier it becomes to recognize it.
I know we’ve differed on the general question of citizens’ abilities in this area, but I figured I’d make my contrarian case anyway!
Love,
Dad
Tuesday, July 05, 2011
Michele Bachmann’s ‘Constitutional Conservatism': The Hidden Meaning | The New Republic
Michele Bachmann’s ‘Constitutional Conservatism': The Hidden Meaning | The New Republic:
"Bachmann’s own intimate connections to the more radical strains of conservative thinking, which long predate the Tea Party movement, are there for anyone to see. And there is only so much mileage she can gain from her so-far successful efforts to exceed the expectations of those who had the vague but erroneous impression that her extremist tendencies are the product of stupidity or indiscipline."
"Bachmann’s own intimate connections to the more radical strains of conservative thinking, which long predate the Tea Party movement, are there for anyone to see. And there is only so much mileage she can gain from her so-far successful efforts to exceed the expectations of those who had the vague but erroneous impression that her extremist tendencies are the product of stupidity or indiscipline."
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Sunday, June 05, 2011
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Tuesday, May 03, 2011
Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com
Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com: "It's been a long time since Americans felt this good and strong about themselves -- nothing like putting bullets in someone's skull and dumping their corpse into an ocean to rejuvenate that can-do American sense of optimism."
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Power and Struggle
Amazon.com: Power and Struggle (Politics of Nonviolent Action, Part 1): Gene Sharp
As a military officer I studied and implemented violence for twenty-six years. Thanks to the movie "Friendly Persuasion" and my introduction to Quakers, I began to wonder if there wasn't a better way. That eventually brought me to Gene Sharp's book.
The first volume is rather short and summarizes. It is well worth the read. The second volume is rather dull from a reading standpoint but very necessary. Probably only an academe or tactician could really get enthused about it. The third volume is a good read. I found it very informative and useful.
Before reading this book, my answer to peaceniks would have been that the only true peace was that of the battlefield -- when everything is quiet and dead. I imaged nonviolence as capitulation. Now I see it as conflict by other means: a means of struggle requiring high courage, strict discipline, and thoughtful strategy.
I believe that two conditions are required for nonviolence to succeed: 1) there must be sufficient information flow between the populations of the nonviolent group and the aggressor group, and 2) some proportion of the aggressor group must be able to identify with members of the nonviolent group. If news of the struggle never circulates, bureaucracy can structure violence to continue indefinitely; if the aggressors see others as less than animals, the violence will also continue without end.
In violent struggle at least 50% of the participants lose. Sometimes the costs are so high that everybody loses. In nonviolent struggle, at most 50% of the participants lose and often not so severely. Sometimes both sides seem to come out ahead.
Emotionally, I'm still very much in touch with the hubris of violence. Intellectually, nonviolence offers strategies and approaches not otherwise available. Both those who extol nonviolence and those who denigrate it as folly should read this book. Otherwise, I think they speak from the most desperate ignorance.
As a military officer I studied and implemented violence for twenty-six years. Thanks to the movie "Friendly Persuasion" and my introduction to Quakers, I began to wonder if there wasn't a better way. That eventually brought me to Gene Sharp's book.
The first volume is rather short and summarizes. It is well worth the read. The second volume is rather dull from a reading standpoint but very necessary. Probably only an academe or tactician could really get enthused about it. The third volume is a good read. I found it very informative and useful.
Before reading this book, my answer to peaceniks would have been that the only true peace was that of the battlefield -- when everything is quiet and dead. I imaged nonviolence as capitulation. Now I see it as conflict by other means: a means of struggle requiring high courage, strict discipline, and thoughtful strategy.
I believe that two conditions are required for nonviolence to succeed: 1) there must be sufficient information flow between the populations of the nonviolent group and the aggressor group, and 2) some proportion of the aggressor group must be able to identify with members of the nonviolent group. If news of the struggle never circulates, bureaucracy can structure violence to continue indefinitely; if the aggressors see others as less than animals, the violence will also continue without end.
In violent struggle at least 50% of the participants lose. Sometimes the costs are so high that everybody loses. In nonviolent struggle, at most 50% of the participants lose and often not so severely. Sometimes both sides seem to come out ahead.
Emotionally, I'm still very much in touch with the hubris of violence. Intellectually, nonviolence offers strategies and approaches not otherwise available. Both those who extol nonviolence and those who denigrate it as folly should read this book. Otherwise, I think they speak from the most desperate ignorance.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Monday, February 14, 2011
Saturday, February 05, 2011
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Friday, January 28, 2011
Friday, January 21, 2011
Sunday, January 09, 2011
Sheriff Dupnik's criticism of political 'vitriol' resonates with public
Sheriff Dupnik&'s criticism of political vitriol resonates with public
Sheriff Dupnik calls Arizona's policy toward immigrants political fornickaboobery.
Sheriff Dupnik calls Arizona's policy toward immigrants political fornickaboobery.
