Who Should Be Held Responsible?

Since the recent past, there seems to be confusion as to who should be held responsible.

 A few years ago, a woman brought her four-year-old and two year-old children to a water park. She let them enjoy the water park on their own. The two year old got into the water that has artificial waves. Her sibling was there to supervise. The young one drowned. The mother sued.

A young man committed mass murder. This has become a frequent event. The shooter is responsible but what could have prevented them? A wife of a mass assassin lived with him. He had all kinds of weapons. Should she should have called the police and stopped him? Another school shooter was raised by a mother who decided that her son could overcome his mental challenges by learning to shoot guns. He killed her first and then went on a rampage. The families of the victims could not sue his family because they were dead, so they tried to sue that gun manufacturer saying it was their fault because they make guns that were responsible for their childrens' death.

Several shooters were known to have severe psychological problems but those who knew didn't tell police because his danger was confidential. Schools knew about the shooters in several cases but tried counseling rather than alerting the authorities.

A group that represents 13% of the U.S. population accounts for the majority of homicide victims each year and are killed by their own people. We are told that the shooters are not responsible either because they had psychological problems, or they are still mad that their ancestors might have been slaves more than 300 years ago and that they were raised by single mothers. Are the mothers responsible or are the absent fathers? Now 74% of that population is raised by a single mother. 

What about the rest of the world? Why do those in Mexico and Central American countries live in poverty? Is it the parents' fault for having more children than they possibly afford or is it the Spanish who ruled Mexico from 1520 to the early 1800s. It's been 200 years of independence. Was it the Mexican government's fault for massive corruption and mismanagement? Is the U.S. to blame because some citizens buy drugs from Mexico? 

Why is Africa so poor? Is it because they were occupied for many years by European nations? They left a long time ago. Or is it that they sold most of their slaves to the U.S. at least 200 years ago and now are down to only 600,000 slaves. Is it the lack of slaves that causes widespread poverty, corruption and violence or could it be that Africans have some responsiblity for their present condition? 

Can India still blame the English for occupying their country until 70 years ago or is part of the problem that people are having more kids than they can afford and that girls do not get enough education?

What about problems in the Middle East? Is the Middle East so filled with dictators or is it because that has made them more engaged in violence as they are in Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Egypt etc. Should the U.S, the world's 911, have done more to effect change in this countries or did we do too much? 

We invaded Iraq because we felt that the leader did not share our values. That created the Arab Spring. Populations in each of these Arab countries revolted. Now Yemen, Syria, Libya, and Afghanistan are failed states with no leadership and the birthplace of ISIS. In Syria, hundreds of thousands of Syria's population demonstrated insisting that their longtime leader step down, possibly knowing this would not happen without violence. Now 400,000 thousand Syrians have died and 400,000 are suffering after losing their homes and being surrounded by troops killing each other as best they can. Should America have done more or did we do too much?

Who takes responsibility for all these problems and do we even dare think about it? If those who won't take responsibility and blame outside influences that occurred as many as hundreds of years ago, how will situations improve?  

Truth and Beauty

About 200 years ago, a poet named John Keats wrote a poem titled “Ode to a Grecian Urn.” The long poem ends with “Beauty is truth, truth is beauty. That is all ye know on earth, all ye need to know.”

About 40 years ago, a young American spiritual leader named Steven Gaskin, proclaimed that beauty, truth, love, joy, and oneness are simply different sides of G-d. Gaskin went on to lead a group of mandala covered buses filled with followers to start a commune in the country.

How many of us believe what Keats and Gaskin did about truth and beauty?

Marie Kondo has published a book advising us to simplify our lives by getting rid of all our possessions that do not bring us joy and beauty.

How many of us keep only that which brings us joy by being something beautiful that we love?

How many of us have lived too long not thinking we need truth or beauty in our lives to experience joy?

Where do we find truth today in our world of political correctness born of a sincere desire to do and be good? We look for it in our political leaders. We recently had the major candidates of our two parties running for President while the majority of voters did not think that they were telling the truth and had a lot of reason to think so. 

We look to the fourth estate to work hard to find and present the truth to its readers. We find that too often journalists are motivated to present the sensational more than the actual, the partial rather than the whole story. The truth gets lost in the translation.

The mainstream media is on a mission and it isn’t about revealing the truth but rather about creating impressions that reinforce biases and effect change. That is a proper function for opinion columns that have an important place in journalism, but not for straight news reports. The examples are numerous.

The media was excited about what was called stand-your-ground case gone bad in Florida a few years ago. We were told that a young, unarmed teenager was shot in the back in what was being called a stand-your-ground that showed what was wrong with the Florida law that allowed someone to shoot and kill another if he felt his life was threatened. 

After months of daily news coverage and destruction of the accused’s life, the killer was finally vindicated. Police photos that were taken shortly after the shooting showed that the accused had a broken nose and the back of his head was covered in blood. The murder victim only had bruises on his knuckles from beating the older man. The teen was shot in the chest at close range not in the back while walking away. A jury, including six mothers, found the defendant innocent, having killed in self defense. All this was forensic evidence of self defense was known to police moments after the event. 

The media had access to this evidence but chose not to seek or share it. The story would not be sensational and whatever point was wanted would not be made. We didn’t get the truth. The media was very quiet about the shooter's innocence. So to this day, the person who killed in self defense is the villain and the teen who died while trying to kill an older, smaller man because the man asked him a question, is still a martyr. 

Something similar happened a few years ago. A town was up at arms because they thought that a police officer killed an innocent teen. We were told that the young, six foot-five inch former high school football player had his hands up and was surrendering when he was shot and killed. After a three month grand jury investigation, the officer was found not guilty. The forensic evidence and the honest testimony of a few residents revealed that the story about there being hands up in surrender was an absolute lie. The U.S.Attorney General investigated and also found the officer innocent. The residents violently rioted for four months looting and sometimes totally destroying businesses. The media showed the riots almost every day and seemed to revel in them. The media was quiet about the fact that the officer was clearly innocent.  

But the most glaring instance of a dishonest mainstream media is its handling of the 2016 Presidential election. 

 I have claimed that the mainstream media is sensationalist, superficial and subjective. All three characteristics also make it dishonest. In order to be sensational, the issue needs to be presented in black and white. It needs to be superficial. And choosing what to make sensational, journalists become subjective, deciding what to cover and what to ignore. Ignoring important stories or details of a story is dishonest.

In this latest example of American journalism at work, we saw media’s subjectivity trumping and causing the sensational and superficial.

The people in the mainstream media decided early and nakedly that they favored one presidential candidate over the other and that they would use their power to make their candidate victorious. They failed, but they keep trying coming out with negative issues to blame the President for. The didn't want him to be President and they still don't. If they were truthful they would start issue with an admittance that they will write whatever is negative about him, regardless.

What about beauty? It is an end in itself as well as a means? 

When we dress do we wear clothes that we love because of their beauty or wear just anything that is easily available? The tend now unbelievably is to buy ripped and dirty jeans for high prices. When we choose a home, do we love the place for its beauty or is it just a place to live in? When choosing a car do we choose one that we consider beautiful or whatever is available in our price range? And why do people wear body piercing in their nose and lips? 

 Are American cars still beautiful?

I grew up in the eartly 1950s. American cars were beautiful, from 1953 on all the way to 1979. Every August, I would go to the dealerships and check out the latest models which were unique and always changing from year to year. We had the Thunderbird, Corvette, Cadillac,  Lincoln Continental, Buick, especially 1953, and other great American cars. People bought cars based in large part on beauty. What has happened?

Are today’s American cars beautiful, unique or changing yearly? Can we tell the difference between a Chevy or a Kia?

America seems to have given up on competing in the family car business. Name an American car that you would buy at least in part for its beauty - not counting the Tesla. We’re not talking pick-up trucks and SUVs. 

Now name five foreign cars that appeal to your aesthetic.  

I would name the VW, Audi , Mazda, BMW, Mercedes, Accura and Lexis (seven cars) to name a few. Some of these foreign makes include several desirable models like VW with its Beetle, Golf, Jetta station wagon, and the CC also the Audi A3, Audi A4. To me they are beautiful not just something to drive to get somewhere. They are a means to an end but should also be ends in themselves - if we love them.

Look at our motorcycles. While Hartlery Davidson has kept the faith, most foreign manufacturers have sacrificed beauty for function. The BMW of the 60s was regal. It was usually black with white striping. It was elegant and quiet. Today's version is neither. Like so many other motorcycles, it looks today more like an erector set than a motorcycle. 

And what about hair styles? Young women used to do whatever was necessary to have a hairstyle that looked best on them. Today, I see many women apparently unwilling to make this effort, wear their hair in a bun atop their head or scrunced up on the back of their head. Some seem to not even brush their hair wearing it as it dried naturally. 

And then there are the bizarre hairstyles. Some people choose to have their hair dyed in unnatural colors like pink and purple. There are the men who wear Mohawks, shave their heads, or wear dreadlocks or braided hair down to their shoulders. Does anyone think that those styles are really attractive and make the wearers look their best? Some men and women are considerate enough to wear their hair short and manageable and, not amazingly, also look really good.  Other women have enough pride to take the time to make their hairdo complement the face and not cover it with unruly hair. Remember when professional athletes wore short hair and were clean shaven?  Nowadays it seems to be "anything goes."

Truth still is beauty, beauty is truth. 

  

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

  

New Laws That Will Never Happen but Should.

If I were in charge of this country I would make the following laws mindful that if I never become the one in charge, they will never happen.

Make it a law that every package of consumer goods like milk, cheese, sauces, etc. be easy to open and does not require a pair of scissors. 

Make it a law that no movie or T.V. show can play background music during dialogue.

Eliminate the penny and nickel; they cost more to make than they're worth, no one uses them anymore. Billing will be made with 10 cent increments, not one or five.

Eliminate robo calls by making it easier to avoid them and harder for businesses to get away with them without paying a huge fine.

Change the H-1B to never allow a person from another country come and replace any American worker no matter how much they make. Currently American employees who make more than $60,000 can be replaced.

Forbid businesses to use automated answering systems that try to get you to tell the computer rather than a human what the reason for the call is and then try to answer questions. More people need to be hired to answer the calls. Using the computerized system would be OK as long as it is used only to properly direct the call - as in press "1" for shoes, "2" for clothing, etc.

Discourage all outsourcing and tell foreign manufacturers that they must produce their products for Americans in America and U.S. manufacturers will make their products near to its foreign consumers.

End illegal immigration by making entry next to impossible and sending all those who get through back to their home countries. Those wishing asylum must do so in an American embassy or consulate in their native land.

Make it possible for private insurers to reject any applicant for medical reasons. Those denied coverage would then be eligible to the "public option"- a share-of-cost federal program which would also cover those in states that did not extend Medicaid. We would stop paying insurers $7 billion a year to cover their losses because of medical needy applicants. I would also crack down on Medicare/caid fraud and waste which is estimated to be $100 billion a year. 

Reduce or eliminate foreign aid to countries that do not use it to improve conditions but rather to be kept by their leaders or to be used for destructive purposes.

Change the tax code to make the standard deduction of $40,000 for families, $20,000 for single filers, except for self employment and corporate returns. All sources of income would be equally taxable. Have only six brackets from 10% to 35%. Those making $500,000 would pay a straight 30%, Those making $1 million or more would pay a straight 35% with no standard deduction. This would make filing so easy that it could be done in minutes and the overworked IRS would only focus on self employment and corporate taxes.

End football, boxing and fraternities. The first two are too violent and with too many injuries, especially to the brain and to the spouses. Fraternities are elitist and exist for only one reason: to have parties to get coeds, preferably, sorority girls, to succumb to the boys' advances. We would still have baseball, basketball, soccer, tennis, hockey (without the fighting) and lacrosse. No other country has a football league and yet the people have survived and found different ways to spend their spare time. This would be one of the most controversial changes.