Monthly Archives: August 2019

When Symbols Become Cymbals

The signal is the truth. The noise is what distracts us from the truth.

~Nate Silver/FiveThirtyEight.COM

Two totally unconnected news stories this week affirm how much we have been distracted by the noise when we should be focusing on the signal.  The first started as a joke and ended up making national news.  The second involved actions by a local school teacher.  However, as Carl Jung reminded us, synchronicity runs deep.  There is always a connection or narrative if you just look for it.

Story #1:  Rename a Segment of 5th Avenue After Barack Obama

It began when Los Angeles resident Elizabeth Rowin, noting how cities often rename streets to honor individuals for their achievements, e.g. Cesar Chavez Avenue in her home town, created the following petition on MoveOn.org.

We request the New York City Mayor and City Council do the same by renaming a block of Fifth Avenue after the former president whose many accomplishments include: saving our nation from the Great Recession; serving two completely scandal-free terms in office; and taking out Osama bin Laden, the mastermind behind September 11th, which killed over 3,000 New Yorkers.

And the block referenced in the petition just happens to be between 56th and 57th Streets which includes Trump Tower, a move that a Scottish tweeter Donald McKenzie described as, “Poetic Justice or what…?”  In line with U.S. Postal Service guidelines the building’s mailing address would become “725 President Barack H. Obama Avenue.”  One can only imagine the Twitter-storm which would blow through mid-town Manhattan if the change was approved.

Poetic justice?  Yes!  Clever?  Absolutely.  Helpful in returning to a state of normalcy and sanity after the reign of terror led by Donald the Destroyer and Moscow/Massacre Mitch?  Not likely. So why did I just use nicknames or include a PhotoShopped movie poster which was triggered when I started drafting another potential blog post about values and institutions Trump has castrated in the last two and a half years?  Because it’s fun and a hard habit to break.  So let me get one more out of my system before getting serious.

Sesame Street lesson of the day based on the regular feature where Ernie sings, “One of These Things (Is Not Like the Others.)”  During the song, Ernie holds up three images.  Melania.  A medical deferment.  And a map of Greenland.  As the song ends, several Muppets blurt out in unison, “We know.  We know.  Greenland can’t be bought!”

While I hope you enjoyed the comic interval, it does nothing to achieve the goal of a Trump-less White House.  And unfortunately, news media which are more interested in ratings than reporting news will spend more time on Tweets and Greenland becoming the 51st state (because Montana isn’t white enough?) than on the impact of Trump and EPA administrator Andrew Wheeler (aka former lobbyist for coal producer Murray Energy) gutting the Endangered Species Act.

Changing Trump Tower’s address may bring some momentary mental relief to the 250,000 plus petitioners who have added their names.  But it is just noise.  Imagine if, instead, that same quarter of a million people went out and each registered two or more new voters.  That would send a signal.

Story #2: Teacher Shames Students for Not Standing for Pledge of Allegiance

On the second day of class at First Coast High School in Duval County, Florida (metro Jacksonville), a biology teacher posted the following hand-written note on the white board in his classroom.

THINK: We had about a half million Americans die in our Civil War, which was largely to get rid of slavery. There are no longer separate water fountains and bathrooms in Jacksonville for “white” and “colored,” as Mr. Goodman remembers from the 1960’s. We had an amendment to the U.S. Constitution allowing women the right to vote. We have had a Black president, the superintendent of Duval Schools is a Black woman. Mr. Fluent, our principal, replaced a Black man, Mr. Simmons, who is now a D.C.P.S. administrator.

MY POINT? You are all extremely lucky to be living in the U.S.A. If you refuse to stand during the Pledge of Allegiance or our National Anthem, are you revealing maturity and wisdom? Actually, you are displaying the opposite. (As some pampered arrogant celebrities and athletes tend to do.)

The missive appeared because one or more students on the first day of class chose not to stand during the pledge of allegiance despite the fact Duval County’s Code of Student Conduct includes the following.

Pursuant to Florida Statutes, students have the right not to participate in reciting the pledge. Upon written request by his or her parent, a student must be excused from reciting the pledge, including standing and placing the right hand over his or her heart.

There is no question who is the “You” in the second paragraph.  Despite efforts by the “fine people on both sides” believers to defend the teacher, every reference why “You” should feel lucky refers to evidence that America has made some progress in atoning for the nation’s original sin slavery or previous suppression of women’s rights. Nothing about America’s economic miracle even though white households make up 96.1 of the top one percent.  And how unfortunate the teacher suggested the students were lucky instead of highlighting the individuals responsible for changing the cultural landscape. A good argument STEM education without exposure to the humanities produces technically trained workers who lack critical thinking skills.

But even the “lucky” reference was too subtle.  Just to make sure his students understood he added the parenthetical reference to “pampered arrogant celebrities and athletes.”  Where could he have possibly come up with that language? Image result for trump hugging flagThis is what happens when the measurement of one’s sense of patriotism is based on symbols and not actions.  Trump can thumb his nose at the Constitution and tell natural born citizens to go back to where they came from.  But as long as he literally hugs the flag and tweets about athlete protests despite the fact they are protected by the First Amendment, we are distracted by his cacophony of noise and ignore the signals.

In contrast, kudos to Stacey Abrams.  While the media spent their energy speculating whether she would throw her hat into the presidential fray, she chose to devote her energy ensuring every citizen’s right to vote is protected and preserved.  On Friday, Melanye (not a typo) Price penned an opinion piece in the New York Times which included the following.

I and all my friends wanted her to jump into the presidential race. Instead, she’s doing something more important. She’s creating an apparatus to fight voter suppression across the country, a prize that’s essential to a fair and functioning democracy.

This is what I would call true American patriotism.  As for the teacher at First Coast High School, I say to him.  “Why do I feel LUCKY?  Because there are still individuals like Stacey Abrams who rise above the noise and send a clear signal what makes the United States of America a truly great nation.”

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

Birth of a Nation II

We do not fear censorship, for we have no wish to offend with improprieties or obscenities, but we do demand, as a right, the liberty to show the dark side of wrong, that we may illuminate the bright side of virtue–the same liberty that is conceded to the art of the written word–the art to which we owe the Bible and the works of Shakespeare.

Introduction, Birth of a Nation (1915)

WGriffithith the above words, D. W. Griffith justifies production of his silent epic which portrayed black men (portrayed by white actors) in post-Civil War America as unintelligent and sexually aggressive toward white women.  The film glorifies the rise of the Ku Klux Klan as indicated by the following “title card,” the filmed printed text used for dialogue or to highlight the action.

The white men were roused by a mere instinct of self-preservation… until at last there had sprung into existence a great Ku Klux Klan, a veritable empire of the South, to protect the Southern country.

Special attention is paid to Reconstruction, the emphasis placed on a perception Northern abolitionists were determined to replace native Southern leaders with black men who were beholden to the North for having ended slavery as explained in this title card from the movie.

The policy of the congressional leaders wrought… a veritable overthrow of civilization in the South… in their determination to ‘put the white South under the heel of the black South.’ 

One might call it the origins of the replacement conspiracy movement.

Image result for Birth of a nationTo  further convince the audience this is a rigged scam, one scene depicts black voters stuffing ballot boxes to ensure the election of the protégé of a Northern carpetbagger, a mulatto named Silas (are you ready?) LYNCH.

Despite it’s controversial content and efforts by the NAACP to ban future showings, the Library of Congress, in 1992, declared the film to be “culturally, historically or aesthetically significant” and announced it would be preserved as part of the National Film Registry. In addition to the content, there were other factors leading up to the designation.

  • Birth of a Nation was the first 12-reel film, with a running time of over three hours.
  • It was the first movie to be shown in two parts separated by an intermission.
  • It was the first film accompanied by an orchestrated musical score.
  • It introduced cinematic techniques such as close-ups and fade outs.

As one might expect, the designation was greeted with protests by the NAACP and others.  In response, the Registry Board affirmed its decision in a January 4, 1993 article in the Los Angeles Times.

As we see it, the selection and preservation of “The Birth of a Nation” is no insult to anyone. Nor is it an accolade to racism. As (board member and African American director John) Singleton noted, the film is a vivid reminder of the dark side of American history.

[NOTE:  A month earlier, Singleton told the Hollywood Reporter he had personally nominated the film for the Registry, despite its racist themes, to serve as a “history lesson.”]

It is therefore, with great trepidation, I announce that I have begun drafting a screenplay for a sequel, Birth of a Nation II.  Unlike the original in which Part I ends with the assassination of President Lincoln, the first half of my version concludes with the pending end of the Obama administration and the beginning of the 2016 campaign.  The second half continues with the emergence of a new force led by Donald Trump which, this time, portrays Hispanics as the ne’er do wells who threaten true Americans’ hope to return to an imagined golden era.  Now it is not black men who are coming for your women, murdering your children and flooding the streets with drugs.  The others are now brown-skinned.  Instead of title cards, we hear the protagonist articulate this threat.

When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.

These words become the clarion call which re-energizes the white supremacist movement.  And like their 19th century ancestors, these faux patriots adopt the replacement directive.  At first the attacks are verbal, marching to the chants of “They will not replace us!” But that is not satisfying enough.  Enabled and emboldened by their leaders, sympathetic media outlets and social media, the chants morph into lethal violence.  First, a single death at a Unite the Right rally in a college community.  Two years later, inspired by the rhetoric warning of invasions and replacement, a gunman targets Hispanics in a city along the Southern boarder.

To further demonstrate the lengths to which his enemies will go to stop Trump’s vision of what will make America great again, he echoes the 1915 rendition of illegal voting.  The scene takes place at a 2019 conference of young Caucasians.

Illegals get out and vote.  Those numbers in California and numerous other states, they’re rigged. They’ve got people voting that shouldn’t be voting. They vote many times, not just twice, not just three times. It’s like a circle. They come back, they put a new hat on. They come back, they put a new shirt on. And in many cases, they don’t even do that. You know what’s going on. It’s a rigged deal.

The ending of this cinematic portrait of our times is yet to be penned.  Will it result in a parade of white supremacists and neo-Nazis being cheered as frightened Hispanics retreat to their homes, reminiscent of the final scenes in the 1915 narrative?  Or will this period of division reach a tipping point when the vast majority of Americans declare enough is enough?  This is not who we are.  In the latter case, the closing credits are flanked by two flags.  To the left, the stars and stripes.  To the right, one with the words, “E pluribus unum!”

Regardless of the final scenes, there will be one major difference between the original and a sequel?  Woodrow Wilson only screened the 1915 movie in the White House.  The current occupant is the producer, director, writer and star of the contemporary version.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

 

With Friends Like Mine

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

~Presidential Oath of Office

I often wondered why every federal legislative and judicial official, every member of the armed services and every naturalized citizen takes an oath of national allegiance which includes the words “against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” while the commander-in-chief does not.  The technical answer is simple.  The oath for everyone except the president is found in 5 U.S. Code §3331.  In fact, the code explicitly states, “An individual, except the president, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services, shall take the following oath.”

In stark contrast, the language contained in the presidential oath is prescribed in Article II, Section One, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution.  Adding the words “against all enemies, foreign and domestic” would require a Constitutional amendment.  Good luck with that especially when Trumpist legislators would label such an effort as a political stunt by Democrats to embarrass the incumbent.  As Trump would say, “I don’t need any help. I alone can do that.  Believe me.”

The significance of this anomaly resurfaced in my head this morning when the panel on Morning Joe found it somewhat odd that Trump and Moscow Mitch would still be a captive of the National Rifle Association (NRA) when the organization is losing members and is embroiled in its own financial scandal.  How could Trump accommodate a call from NRA executive director Wayne LaPierre when he told El Paso’s representative in Congress Veronica Escobar he was too busy to talk with her?

A logical explanation was voiced by guests on yesterday’s Deadline White House with Nicolle Wallace.  Trump’s path to re-election in 2020 is so narrow he cannot afford to lose the votes of a single Second Amendment purist, or for that matter, a single white nationalist.  Makes sense.  Except, it is not enough to ensure victory.  He still needs a handful of independents and moderate Republicans to cross the finish line.

Which is why it makes no difference if Trump has to take an oath against American’s enemies domestic or foreign.  He is much more worried about his “friends” who could become his “enemies.”  This morning’s panel speculated the phone call between Trump and LaPierre went something like this.

LaPierre: Donald, my boy, do you remember how much money we spent on you in 2016 and how many of our members voted for you?

Trump: Yes, sir.

LaPierre:  Do you want us to do the same thing in 2020?

Trump: Yes, sir.

LaPierre: I’m not sure we can do that if you support universal background checks.  Capiche?

Trump: Yes, sir.

Yet, even after making the case if Trump could not survive without NRA members, they reminded viewers 69 percent of NRA members support universal background checks (Source: March 2018 Monmouth University Poll).  How tough would it have been to tell LaPierre his membership did not share his position on the issue?  In what must have sent Trump off the rails, one of the panelists asked, “How weak do you have to be not to stand up to the NRA leadership when their own members would agree with you?”

Image result for lapierre on phoneWeak, maybe?  I think it is more about fear.  Not fear of NRA members.  Most will still pull the Trump lever regardless of what he does on background checks.  Trump’s bigger enemy is LaPierre for a totally different reason.  Imagine if their conversation sounded more like this than a discussion of NRA member preferences.

LaPierre:  Donnie, my boy, can I remind you of a couple of things?

Trump: Sure.

LaPierre: Do you remember that $100 million we spent in 2016?

Trump: Yes, sir.

LaPierre:  And do you remember where most of that money came from?

Trump:  Yes, but we shouldn’t be talking about that.  You never know who’s listening.

LaPierre:  Unless you block any legislation requiring more background checks or, God forbid, a ban on assault weapons, I am going to talk about it.  To anybody who is interested.  Anybody!  Capiche?

Trump: Yes, sir.

And I suspect Vladimir Putin, Jerry Fallwell, Jr., Mark Burnett (producer of “The Apprentice”) and a majority of Trump’s “friends” could have similar conversations.  There is no telling how many of his past “supporters” could destroy him on a moment’s notice.  Fox News viewers can ignore Bob Mueller, Jerry Nadler or Elijah Cummings.  Not the case if LaPierre confirms the truth about Russian interference in 2016 and documents NRA laundering of foreign contributions.  But he’ll never have to do that.  Because he owns Trump and Trump knows it.

Amending the Constitution to require a president to include the words “against enemies domestic and foreign” is not Trump-specific.  In his case, the oath would read:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully sit in the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend myself against my friends and enemies, foreign and domestic.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

Life Imitating Comedy

If you’re a regular reader of this blog, you already know a lot of the inspiration comes from my obsession with comedy and comedians. And for most successful stand-up comics, the prime directive is, “When it comes to comedy, anything and everything is fair game.”  As a result we are exposed to some pretty raw humor which sometimes touches a nerve.  Comedians will tell you, the audience also believes in the prime directive, UNTIL you make fun of them or someone close to them.  Cancer patients will laugh at jokes about Lupus or M.S., but fail to see the humor when someone like the late Harry Anderson jokes, “For our anniversary, my wife wanted something expensive that she’d never buy for herself.  So I signed her up for chemotherapy.”

As Dana Gould makes clear.  You don’t need to tell him he’s crossed the line.  He knows it.  But that doesn’t mean comics don’t have a conscience and sometimes wish they could take it back.  Or at a minimum realize in hindsight they come off as a jerk.  I’ll give you two examples.

Image result for kevin pollak a little off the topOn his 2004 album “A Little Off the Top,” Kevin Pollak takes aim at airline safety announcements.  In this particular routine, the target is using one’s seat cushion as a flotation device.

It’s such a pain to get on a plane I don’t give a damn if my seat floats.  Seat floats?  When?  Oh, right.  In case of a water landing.  Cause that’s gonna happen.  Apparently, we’re going to morph into a hover craft and whoosh to safety.  They’d like us to still believe we’ll be landing on the water.  Hey Bright Eyes, it’s a JET!  And when you hear that old smelly piece of foam you’re sitting on is a flotation device, your eyes well up, don’t they?  What else have you got for me?  Is the drink cart a shark cage?

Fortunately, U.S. Airways captain Chesley “Sully” Sullenberg never listened to, or if he did, paid little attention to Pollak’s rant.  And since the “Miracle on the Hudson” on January 15, 2009, I suspect audiences at his live performances never chant, “Do the water landing routine.”

But, the all-time classic entry in the “Wish I Hadn’t Said That” Hall of Fame is a 1999 routine in which Bill Cosby shares his fascination with Spanish Fly.  It begins when he first learns about the legendary aphrodisiac from a stranger on a street corner who tells him:

“There’s a girl named Crazy Mary.  You put some in her drink and she goes ahhhh-ahhhh-ahhh.”

Yeah, that’s really groovy man.  From then on, every time I’d see a girl I’d say, “I wish I had some Spanish Fly.”  Go to a party, see five girls standing alone.  I wish I had a whole jug of Spanish Fly.  I’d light that corner up over there.

I thought it only existed in Philadelphia.  So I’m working on “I Spy.”  And Bob (Culp) and I are working together and Sheldon Leonard (the producer) comes up and says, “Boys, ‘I Spy’ is going to Spain.”  A childhood dream come true.

Related imageA transcript of the routine was introduced into evidence at Cosby’s sexual assault trial.  [IRONIC FOOTNOTE:  The album on which this story appears is called, “It’s True!  It’s True!”]

Both of the above examples are unfortunate.  One is merely embarrassing in hindsight.  The other is tragic with profound consequences for both Cosby and his victims.  But they pale in comparison to the damage done when amateurs think they have the same license to offend for the sake of entertainment.  Even when the stand-up wannabe tries to convince us, “Lighten up, it’s just a joke.”

Such was the case when Donald Trump brought his “Invasion Tour” to Pensacola last May.  Trump promoted the event on Facebook as though it were a rock concert.  “Join me LIVE for a rally in Pensacola, FL.”  In what can only be called Trump’s “Bill Cosby Moment,” he telegraphs both his determination to keep people of color out of the country and an admission he doesn’t have the slightest idea how to do it.

First he regrets that he does not have the same tools at his disposal as so many of his autocratic compadres (pun intended).  Referring to restrictions against lethal force placed on the border patrol:

We don’t let them, and we can’t let them, use weapons.  We can’t.  Other countries do.  We can’t.  But how do you stop these people.  You can’t.

Then came every stand-up comic’s dream.  A heckler who helps set up the punchline. “Shoot em'” yells a supporter.  Trump responds with a 13 second pause that would put Jack Benny to shame while the crowd cheers.  A smirk.  And then the zinger.

That’s only in the Panhandle you can get away with this stuff. Only in the Panhandle.”

If only there had been a drummer to offer the obligatory rim shot.

As we now know, Trump was wrong.  It’s not only true in the Florida Panhandle.  It’s true in Pittsburgh, Gilroy, El Paso and dozens of other cities across America.  A professional comic might admit the routine was in bad taste.  All it took was one incident for Pollak to expunge the “water landing” bit from his repertoire and to make him realize “A Little Off the Top” may have ventured a little OVER the top. But not this amateur.  Even following mass shooting after mass shooting, Trump still cannot understand why he needs to let go of this greatest hit.  Which makes one thing perfectly clear.

Instead of “Lighten up, it’s a joke,” we know what Trump’s real message is.  “Whiten up, and I’m not joking.”

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

QED

Today is another one of those days when the challenge of writing this blog depends on finding a back story or angle that has been overlooked by professional journalists and pundits who make their living trying to decipher events and the vagaries of society.  The key is often to forego one’s first instincts.

Image result for malcolm mcdowell clockwork orangeThat was the case when House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy went on the Sunday talk shows and pointed the finger at video games as the culprit behind the mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton.  I and everyone else, except Trumpist purveyors of pseudo-science, immediately thought, if only we had a control group to test McCarthy’s hypothesis.  What if we selected a random sample of young people, exposed them to violent video games a la Malcolm McDowell’s violent behavior therapy in A Clockwork Orange, but restricted their access to semi-automatic weapons?  How would that affect their propensity to commit mass shootings?

Oh, wait!  We already have such a control group.  In fact, we have several.  Every other civilized country on earth. They have impressionable young people who play violent video games.  Some are even predominantly white and speak English as their primary language.  No need to call Mr. Obvious to determine the differential factor between the United States and these multiple control groups. Cable news and late-night talk show hosts have already made this case.  Last night Seth Meyers used the following Vox.com graphic which represents the relationship between gun deaths and gun ownership by nation. He then pointed out, “We’re farther away from the UK on this chart than we are in real life.”

But that’s not what I came here to talk about.  I would prefer to set up a new controlled experiment.  One with a dual hypothesis.  Hypothesis #1: Donald Trump will admit he is responsible for the hate-fueled massacre in El Paso.  No, he is not going to say it out loud.  But empirical evidence will make the case.

We start with the null hypothesis.  Donald Trump’s tweets and rallies are not a factor in the increase of white supremacy inspired violence.  If that is true, there is NO reason for Trump to stop vilifying people of color or using immigration as a scapegoat and distraction from his own failings.  So Donald, if you honestly believe it’s not you, don’t change a damn thing.  Keep mentioning the invasion and infestation.  Keep inviting alt-right commentators and white nationalists to the White House (is that redundant?)

But what if he does tone down the rhetoric?  What if he actually asks rally attendees to cut back on the racist chants?  What if future tweets are devoid of verbal attacks against people of color or references to invasions at our Southern border?   Why would he possibly do that unless he knew he was complicit in the increase in white supremacy domestic terrorism as reported by his own FBI director.  One can argue he already implicitly admitted guilt with yesterday’s scripted condemnation of racism and white supremacy.

My question.  Will the press recognize this concession for what it is.  Unfortunately, if the banner headline in this morning’s New York Times is any indication, the answer is no.  “TRUMP URGES UNITY VS. RACISM” (Their all-caps, not mine.)  Within an hour of hitting the streets, the Times announced the same story would have a different headline in the second edition, “Trump Assails Hate But Not Guns.”  Another example which proves the above argument.  If there was nothing wrong with the original headline, why did you change it?

Which brings me to Hypothesis #2: Hillary Clinton was largely correct; a majority of  Trump supporters are deplorables.  To test this theory, we need to look at three data points.  First, is there a drop-off in attendance at Trump rallies if he no longer uses these venues to promote racist animus?  Will they still come to hear their glorious leader ramble about health care, universal background checks, mental health or record stock prices?  Or will they stay home when their political rock star refuses to play his greatest hits?  A Trump rally without racial dog whistles is like a Stones concert without “Satisfaction.”

Second, how will yesterday’s “pivot” affect Trump’s approval ratings?  Many were stunned when there was a slight uptick when he suggested four members of Congress, American citizens of color, should go back to where they came from.  As several comedians joked, “It’s as though some folks on the fence previously wondered if Trump was racist enough for them.  Now they’re sure he is.”  The obvious corollary?  If his disapproval rating climbs, is it because these Trump late adopters jumped ship when they realized he is sometimes “racist enough” but they want someone who is “racist enough all the time?”

Third, will previously pro-Trump social media turn on him even if his change of heart about white supremacy is temporary?  Will the people who have looked to Trump to validate their own bigotry realize they have been tossed aside when politically expedient like so many other Trump associates?  Can you say Alex Acosta or John Ratcliffe? Of course they may brush it off, knowing as in the case of Charlottesville, Trump will “repent” once off script.

Remember, his critics do not make the best argument Trump is a racist.  Self-identified racists do. They believe he is a racist, one of them.  Will they feel betrayed by any indication he is having second thoughts about his race-based strategy to energize his base, regardless of his sincerity?

Quod erat demonstrandum!

POSTSCRIPT

At dinner last night, my wife posed a most insightful question.  While everyone was talking about Trump’s comments, did any media outlet mention the detention center in Homestead, Florida has been closed?  And did anyone ask what happened to the children who were being held there?  Members of our community have been visiting detainees at Homestead and are now at a loss as to what happened to them.

Which raises a more important question.  Will journalist and pundits primarily focus on what Trump’s says but not what he does, ignoring the administration’s continued racist and anti-immigrant policies and actions?

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP