Friday, October 26, 2018

Republican Lies (In the Manner of One Mr. D. Trump)


Republicans running for election or re-election in next month's election have been getting feedback and even static from their constituents over the issue of whether they want a government-supported health care plan to cover pre-existing conditions.

The Affordable Care Act (so-called Obamacare) provides that the insurance plans offered by private insurers who offer health insurance to individuals under the Act must cover pre-existing conditions. Republicans have tried, sixty times, to repeal Obamacare and replace it with something else. The exact details of the replacement plan have never been made public (as I understand it), but it is widely believed that it would not require coverage of pre-existing conditions.

Now we see that this has become a big issue, and Republicans are getting a lot of pushback over the pre-existing conditions thing. Their response to this, and their campaign strategy? To claim that they support coverage for pre-existing conditions and that the Democrats do not.

If this were true, they would simply need to leave Obamacare alone and not try to repeal it, as they have done 60 times.

Evidently Republican congressional candidates are trying to copy a strategy so often used by Donald Trump, which I think I can describe as "Lie to them and they will believe it, 99% of the time." This cynical approach is based on the belief that the electorate is stupid or at least incapable of critically examining what is told to them. Unfortunately that often seems to be true.

Copyright © 2018.

Wednesday, October 17, 2018

New Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh

Please scroll down to July 5 posting.

Republicans: Friend of the Rich, No Friend to Seniors


Today's news says that Mitch McConnell (a Republican senator from Kentucky and the U.S. Senate majority leader) wants to cut Social Security and Medicare benefits. The reason? To alleviate the deficit in the US budget. And the reason for the deficit? Because Donald Trump's (and Republicans') tax cut has benefited corporations and the ultra-wealthy but reduced the government's income (i.e., worsened the budgetary deficit).

McConnell, not unreasonably, feels that the loss of revenue due to the tax cut should be made up somewhere, somehow. But it should be clear to anyone that cutting taxes on the very rich and corporations, if that loss of revenue has to be made up by cutting programs like Medicare and Social Security, is favoring the rich at the expense of the elderly for whom Social Security may be a chief, or only, source of income, and who also greatly benefit from Medicare.

The moral is this: If you are a recipient of Social Security and/or Medicare--or even if you are not but are simply someone other than a member of the "One Percent" (that is, the very richest in our society)--you should not be voting Republican, because you are not voting in accordance with your own interests.

The Republicans have long been the party of and for the rich. For people who have not seen that, it should be more obvious now.

If you're one of the One Percent, I'm actually going to tell you that you should vote Republican; it's in your interests. If you're not, remember that the Republican philosophy is help the rich and screw the poor. And, they have huge amounts of money with which to influence elections. So--support the other side.

Copyright © 2018

Monday, September 17, 2018

Donald Trump's Style


No, not his style of dress but his style of argumentation.

As many people know, Trump is fond of using Twitter ("tweeting"). It is said that late at night, alone in the residence areas of the White House, he tweets away to his heart's content. If any other US president has used Twitter at all, none has used it so much.

He has no tolerance for criticism of himself (someone recently said he has the sensitivity of a teen-age girl), and so he lashes out at anyone who attacks him. A favorite tactic is to apply negative adjectives to anyone who has criticized him. The New York Times recently published an op-ed piece written by an anonymous White House insider who claimed that Trump's staff tries to thwart some of his ill-advised decisions and actions. In Trump's attack on the  NYT he called the paper "failing." A politician who criticized him he called "weak." These are two examples out of perhaps hundreds.

These tactics of Trump's became very obvious to those who watched him during his political campaign for the Presidency. But to attack someone's argument by attaching negative adjectives to him was known even to the ancients as a fallacious type of argument. The  Romans called it argumentum ad hominen--that is, rather then rebutting or refuting a man's argument, you attack the man himself.

It saddens and amazes me that nothing Trump does or says seems to reduce the support he receives from his followers and supporters: not his actions, which have served to help corporations and wealthy individuals at the expense of the common man and may  have brought us close to nuclear war with North Korea at least once; not his encouraging of white supremacists and other racists; not his surrounding himself with crooks and criminals in his government; and certainly not his lies, which at least a few times he has had to "walk back" (as the current jargon would have it). As I think I have said elsewhere, too many people are not critical of what they hear and read. They are ready to believe anything Trump says and don't seem to care when it's been shown that he lied.

Copyright © 2018


Friday, September 7, 2018

Reason for the Catholic Church's Priest Sex Abuse Problem


Stories--you could say scandals--involving sexual abuse of young persons by Roman Catholic priests have been in the news lately, and this is not the first time by any means. It's been a repeated story and by now a long-standing vexation for the Church.

Now, I want to say as soon as I can and as strongly and emphatically as I can that pedophilia (sexual attraction to children) and homosexuality are two different phenomena and not connected. In fact, studies have shown that most men who have a sexual attraction to very young persons are heterosexual. However, I discuss both of these sexual inclinations here because I believe the Church is seen as a refuge for both of these categories of people.

Quite a few years ago, as a result of a position I then held, I was sent, anonymously, an article--also anonymous but supposedly written by an insider--with estimates of the percentages of homosexuals in the priesthood, in monasteries and convents, and in seminaries. The numbers were estimates, and even so I don't have them at my fingertips. Suffice to say they were surprisingly, amazingly high.

I have what I believe is a very reasonable explanation for these data.

What I believe happens is this: A (probably young) man or woman perceives in him/herself urges or attractions--for the same sex, for minors, or for both--which he has been taught (sometimes very emphatically) are wrong, shameful, sinful. He  sees the Church as a solution, believing that once he has taken his celibacy vows, his efforts and desire to remain true to those vows will help him to suppress those unacceptable desires.

Unfortunately, and very sadly, it typically does not work.

Copyright © 2018.

Wednesday, August 29, 2018

People Are the Problem--I Mean, Human Numbers


Many of the problems of our planet--depletion of fish in the ocean, extinction of animal species, pollution, climate change, scarcity of resources such as water--can be traced to a root cause: people. That is, too many people, or overpopulation. How so?


  • Fish are being depleted simply because there are too many people who want to catch and eat those fish, in relation to the number of fish there are. Supplies of fish are not unlimited, and many fish species are close to exhaustion.
  • Animal species are being lost from the ecosystem due to loss of habitat (due to natural areas being turned into housing tracts and shopping centers--so called "development") and also hunting, which often is for food for people.
  • Pollution, simply, is due to people and their activities: their manufacturing, their burning fossil fuels, their producing all forms of waste.
  • Climate change, as many people understand, is due to the production of greenhouse gases, which is due mainly to our burning of fossil fuels but also to other causes such as raising of livestock (cattle emit methane, which is a greenhouse gas).
  • Scarcity of water is due to human activities: drinking bathing and cooking, of course, but also manufacturing and agriculture. Of course more people means more water consumed and this is already a critical problem in some places.


In some parts of the world, such as Latin America, where the birth rate is producing a growing population, a serious obstacle to controlling population has been the Catholic Church.

In America, we have many single mothers who have four, five, or six children. (I hope it will not sound racist if I say that these are often "minority" women.) When there is no father in the home, this is a recipe for poverty. Some of these women work two or even three jobs to try to support their children, and their jobs are often low-paying. Also, their children are apt to receive a less-than-ideal amount of supervision and thus they get into trouble.

I don't know why these women don't use birth control more. I can only guess. Some of them may be Catholic (but what percentage?). Many presumably don't know enough about the available means of artificial birth control or are the victims of misconceptions and misinformation.

If they work at jobs that provide health insurance (and, surely, many of them do not), they should have access to birth control through their employer-provided health insurance. However, the Trump administration is doing what it can to worsen the population problem. Under former President Obama's health care plan (often nicknamed "Obamacare"), employers, through their employee health insurance plans, made access to birth control easier. But Trump and his cabinet want to make it easier for employers to opt out of providing this coverage on "conscience" grounds, i.e., they can claim it violates their religious beliefs. (In the interest of the greatest accuracy possible and to avoid over-simplification: there was provision for such objections, which involved submitting a form, but some employers--for example, Catholic  hospitals--object even to doing that, and Trump is trying to make greater accommodation for these employers.)

And, perhaps even worse, Trump has undermined, curtailed, and even eliminated US aid to family planning programs in other countries.

Copyright © 2018

Wednesday, July 11, 2018

Your SUV Is Helping to Destroy the Planet


Transportation in the US--that includes all our cars plus, of course, trucks, buses, and so forth--is responsible for 20% of greenhouse-gas production. (And, as nearly all scientists will tell you, greenhouse gases produced by burning fossil fuels contribute to climate change.)

And people do not realize that, when they buy a big SUV that is thirsty for gas, they may be producing more than their share of CO₂.

The equation is very simple: More gasoline consumed equals more greenhouse gases out the tailpipe.

So, please, to avoid doing your share to destroy the planet, please think twice when purchasing that SUV. Ask yourself whether you really need such a big one, and look at the gas mileage of any model you're considering.

Copyright © 2018.