Which is it?

July 4, 1912- Huntington Indiana

Photo Courtesy of Indiana Historical Society

   Our session on non-violence veered into the topic of patriotism vs jingoism. An interesting conversation followed, probing, defining, and, I thought, a conversation appropriate for this nation at this time. 
     At the least people could afford themselves time to think about the difference between patriotism and jingoism, in light of their own attitudes. It would be a patriotic thing to do.
    Patriotism, a pride in what this nation has done that is honorable and good and an acknowledgement of errors and wrongs is healthy. One sided patriotism is not healthy. Both the good and the bad need to be measured. 
    Jingoism is dangerous and is the province of the stupid.
    The current president is a jingoist. Dangerous because he suffers a mental illness that distorts reality. But he is also dangerous because he is ill informed and dangerous too because he lies almost all then time. 
     His desire for a military parade is not without precedent, but it is jingoistic, as he is, and it is stupid because he has no concept of the context. Veteran analyst and political correspondent Jeff Greenfield observed this on Politico:  

      "...history also suggests there's a good reason that his plan is rubbing people the wrong way. For one, it really is rare; it; far more common for presidents to vacate Washington on the Fourth of July, or to remain at the White House, than to insert themselves into the proceedings.

            And on a more troubling level, what Trump is doing is wreathing himself in the most potent symbols of American history-delivering a speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, site of the 1963 March on Washington, looking across at a landscape of monuments-without any appreciation for the history that made that whole landscape possible. Perhaps uniquely among American presidents, he sees himself without any connection to the American story, any link to presidents past, other than his manifest superiority to any of them."
         
         Greenfield notes the sure sign we are dealing with 
an unbalanced man who acts as if he aspires to be a dictator, like those he embraces;

         "Trump prefers to think of himself as the lone, overarching figure who can bend history to his will. "I alone can fix it," he said..."

           He offends sensibility and decency which explains the undeniable fact that a majority of Americans voted for someone else, despite the Russian interference. 

         The American pageant has its sordid and despicable chapters and this is the latest. We have survived our past sins and we have worked over the centuries to improve, to broaden human dignity and to extend liberty. We have been courageous and generous and we will be again. But we came upon this continent as terrorists, invaders, practitioners of genocide and ethnic cleansing. We were slavers, chauvinists, sexists, classists, drunks, racists, xenophobes, cheaters and liars. But some two centuries has refined us and forced us into a stream of history where we are bending toward a better nature, a more civilized and decent nation. We will survive and overcome regressives and new racists like Trump and McConnell. 

           As much as we might desire to be like Moses and call down a plague on the house of the Pharaoh, that is not for us.

        We are the heirs of Democratic Republicans who have battled on philosophy, policy, politics and who have changed positions and minds, but have since the beginning been combined in a hatred of tyrants, kings and dictators. That is a common creed we share. The president we see is not "American," his behavior is anathema to our history, he is not us. We are not his minions and not his subjects. We are his employer and we will not forget that, despite what may be seen on TV or read on twitter.

          The Fourth of July reminds of throwing off a tyrant, of declaring Independence, of being ready to stand in the breech to combat evil oppression. In this season, think about patriotism and jingoism and maybe read the Declaration. Happy Fourth!

blooming for the 4th

     

         Cheers!

         See you down the trail.

OLD-HIP-AND NOT SO-PLUS LEAVE GEORGE ALONE

GENERATIONAL

     This is a shirt with a lot of history.  It's a genuine Lyle Tuttle, purchased by Lana in 1970. It's been handed down first to our eldest daughter, then to her sister and has now come back to Lana.

    Tuttle is the famous San Francisco tattoo artist who's own body is the basis for the shirt.

     Lana wore the shirt the other day and I was stunned to see it again. I'm amazed at what great shape it's in after about 45 years! In passing it on to Kristin and Katherine she asked them to care for it. Obviously they listened. 

     The free spirited, colorful, expressive and even a little kooky time of the late 60's and 70's looks great these days and produces a joyful mirth.  And it should not be left unsaid that it's cool how Lana can still rock the shirt! 

      Yeah, we live in California. 

GEORGE AND THE CLINTONS

     Most of the "furor" over George Stephanopoulos and his contribution to the Clinton foundation is more about snark, "gotcha" and buzz than substance.

     First, the ABC Anchor should have acknowledged his contribution, only because he's in a position to be reporting about it. Same would be true if he, or another journalist, were to contribute to the American Heart Association, or Doctors Without Borders, etc. Journalists should not be banished from making charitable contributions simply because of their prominence or likelihood of covering a topic.

     (A Sidebar-I did not vote in primary elections when I was a working reporter, because I did not want to declare a party preference. How I voted in general elections was my own business, same as everyone else. I contributed to charities and if ever the group came up I would add a line in my broadcast- for example, "full disclosure. I contributed to United Way.")

    George did nothing wrong by making the contribution.

He used to work for Bill Clinton and, as he says, believes in some of the issues the Clinton Foundation embraces-aids, deforestation and others. The foundation is not funding Hillary's presidential campaign and Stephanopoulos wouldn't need to gain inside favor any way. 

      The Clinton Foundation is a kind of "boogie man" now and that is especially so with the right wing. Still, there are serious questions about the relationship between Bill's foundation and Hillary and between Bill and Hillary going forward.  What about his agenda's and initiatives should she be in the White House? How will that work?  There are issues about what was expected in return for some of the "gives" when she was Secretary of State. But those are issues related to the former President, his Foundation and Mrs. Clinton.

      Politico's Jack Shafer seems to be on the spear point of being indignant about Stephanopoulos. Shafer is a "pot stirrer." Some times he's right and sometimes he's just a hype merchant looking for the new media currency of buzz and trending. Shafer himself said it when he wrote

"As long as you can do the work, the journalism profession doesn't care if your last port of call was a federal penitentiary."  That says a lot about Shafer and his sensitivities, shared by many who call themselves journalists. Believe me, standards today are much different than they used to be.  

      There is an attitude today that if someone is hit and bleeding, the pack moves in for a kill. That's what this hype is all about. 

       Full disclosure; I'm not a Stephanopoulos fan and thought his hire by ABC was ill advised, but he has worked hard and done a good job to earn his spurs as a real journalist. He is not one of those "party cheerleaders" you see elsewhere.  Yes he should have told us he contributed, but that is no big deal, especially in a world where Pulitzer winner Seymour Hersh has reported the Obama administration engaged in deception about the Bin Laden killing. There are other real stories that need attention and exploration. This is more about modern media entertaining itself or vendetta.

     

OLD BOY SELFIE

    Now, how's this selfie thing supposed to work? Where are you supposed to look?

     See you down the trail.

DOES IT MATTER?-NSA AND FREEDOM-CURIOS AND A THROWBACK

DOES IT MATTER?

       First Amendment rights are being challenged by an information gathering surveillance function of the NSA.
       The First Amendment protects and therefore guarantees freedom of religion, speech, press and the right to assemble to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

VIEW AT YOUR OWN RISK

CURIOS AND KNICKKNACK'S

 Curios are rare objects of value.  Knickknacks are odd, small and supposedly worthless household items. 

 THROWBACK TO LATE 70'S

   Hanging out with Elliot Gould who was passing through on a promotional tour.  Yep that's a chef's jacket I'm wearing. WNAP FM, where I was a newscaster, would frequently choose a location, set up a tent and cook breakfast for anyone who stopped by. We frequently created massive traffic jams.  On this day the crowds were even larger.

   See you down the trail.

TURKEYS-JOURNALISTS AND OTHERWISE & WHAT A SHOT

FIRST, THE AMAZING IMAGE
Unless you have a powerful scope, you probably
missed the fly by of the asteroid 2005 YU55. 
Thanks to NASA's Jet Propulsion Lab here is a short clip.

NOW ABOUT IDIOTS POSING AS JOURNALISTS
SPJ, the Society of Professional Journalists
drew attention when Herman Cain accused reporters
of violating the Journalist's Code.
You can link here to the SPJ blog by Kevin Smith,
SPJ President and Chairman of the Ethics Committee.
In his excellent analysis, Smith provides context and cites two recent examples of national journalists being unaware of the Code of Ethics.
Example 1
Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus went after Cain, defending the paper but admitting she wasn’t familiar with the SPJ Code of Ethics. She wrote: “I suffer from the instinctive journalistic aversion to official codes of conduct.”
Example 2
Later Monday, MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell showed her relative lack of ethical knowledgeby snarking to Politico reporter Jonathan Martin, the reporter who broke the original story, “I assume you’ve read the journalistic code of conduct, whatever that is.” 
Well,
the Mitchell snarking and the Marcus arrogance of destitute ignorance make them poster children of the WORST OF AMERICAN JOURNALISM.  I didn't know they were both
so empty headed, ungrounded and intellectually lazy.
Martin's snide response to Mitchell was also stupid and a disservice to real journalists.
I spent several decades in journalism and the SPJ Code of 
Ethics was something that guided my shops from when
I was a street reporter to my years as a news executive.
True journalists, serious journalists know about and 
abide by the code.  Fools, egotists, gas bags, snark queens,
and posers apparently do not.
SO, THIS IS DEDICATED TO
RUTH MARCUS, ANDREA MITCHELL AND
JONATHAN MARTIN--


THE TURKEY TROT

Perhaps they are not students of irony,

but as we near Thanksgiving, we can count on a 

parade of wild turkeys making their daily

migration across the ridge top.

We noticed that Mr White, the albino, is back.

Like some people, they are not very intelligent and

are ignorant of honor and codes of conduct and leave us

with messes to be cleaned up.

See you down the trail.  Watch your step

especially if Marcus, Mitchell and Martin are around.