Showing posts with label society. Show all posts
Showing posts with label society. Show all posts

Sunday, November 13, 2016

A 2016 Presidential Election Bestiary

As our great nation riots in the street and slaps digital high-fives on Facebook, there are a number of people who contributed to the popular vote in this country who are trying to figure out what the hell happened on Tuesday.  And as Americans, we have a natural tendency to want to simplify and boil down complex questions into succinct answers, because as a nation, we have the attention span of a goldfish and are desperate to find out who won Dancing With the Stars before we forget why we were watching it in the first place. We are our own worst terrible contradiction, I know.

The reality is that most complex systems that rely on the active participation of millions of people, filtered through fifty state bureaucracies and a host of exterior influences are way too complicated to ascribe a one word explanation that magically covers the letdown like a tiny little Band-Aid. This is not a toaster. We didn’t throw a rod. It’s our messy modern America we’re talking about. And there’s a lot of blame to go around.

To help focus or diffuse some of your rage, I’ve compiled a handy Bestiary of Assholes, Shitheads, and Generally Horrible Institutions for your consideration. I don’t know if I got everyone to blame on the list, but everyone that is on the list is surely to blame.

Some of you may not see it this way. Some of you may find yourselves on this list. Good. That was intentional. We all played a part in this year-long train wreak, and while I don’t wish harm or ill on anyone, I will say that you (the collective You, the inclusive You, the Royal You) gets to bear the your fair share. But we’ll get into that in a minute. Let me say for now that it’s possible—just possible—that President Trump will make good on his promises to bring jobs back, replace Obamacare with something better, make us safer around the world, lower taxes, and in short, Make America Great again. If he does that—I’ll admit that I’m wrong and apologize to you all.

But if that doesn’t happen; in short, if the jobs don’t come back (from vacation, presumably), and if I don’t end up with a better health insurance plan than my current Bronze Level Option, and we find ourselves re-engaged in the Middle East or North Korea, and they have to raise taxes to pay for that war, and American is Not So Great when it’s all over—if THAT happens, you’ll admit that you were wrong, and apologize to me, right?

Okay, let’s pick the scab and see what color the pus is.

A is for Americans
This would be the people that live in the giant swath of red that sits between the East and West coast. What Los Angeles and New York City call “flyover country.” This would include my little town, in North Texas. There’s a lot of people hurting out there, economically speaking. We don’t make stuff anymore. Not really. Not like we used to. That’s a problem, and it’s something that wasn’t really addressed in 2008 and 2012—with good reason.

However, it seems to me that the people in the middle of the East and West coast heard all of the good promises about jobs, and chose not to hear any of the horrible, awful, nasty things President-Elect Trump said about their fellow Americans. Or, maybe they did hear them, but since they weren’t People of Color, members of the LGBT community, immigrants, or some other form of hyphenated American, they figured it wasn’t so big a concern and voted only for their own self-interests. Just like anyone else would have done. Does this make them racist, too? Misogynist? Some people think so. I don’t. But the unfortunate truth of the matter is, for every church going, decent person who voted for Trump as (to their way of thinking) “the lesser of two evils,” there was a guy in a dirty bunker with a tiny bust of Hitler on their television saying, “Finally! Someone who gets us!” And the fact that he never addressed the ugly underbelly of America is a real and legitimate problem for a lot of people. Either way, it speaks volumes about the character of this country, and shines a revealing light on one of our most enduring myths that we tell ourselves.

B is for Bernie
The crushing irony of this is that Bernie Sanders was considered a political outsider (like Trump) for months, until, you know, he started to actually gain real support from real people. I remember all of the flapping-head sock-puppet pundits snickering loudly at Bernie Sanders’ chances in the primaries, because, well, tee hee, just look at him, I mean, really... Barbie and Ken dolls, all of them. Who’s snickering now?

Bernie came from a place of sincerity. Of genuine public service. Of principles and conscience. Of morals and ethics. If you were looking for someone to shake up the political machine as it currently exists, Bernie was your real Molotov cocktail. Maybe he still is. But this would have played out very differently.

C is for Conspiracy Theories
Holy shit, when did we as a nation become so gullible? You know what a conspiracy theory is, right? It’s an outlandish plot conceived to explain an unpopular occurrence that cannot be disproven. That’s how they work. When I was growing up in the 1980s, most conspiracy theories were in the closet of the fringe element, the whackadoos who believe that the Moon landing was faked. That Paul McCartney was killed and replaced with an actor and that’s why the Beatles broke up. Shape-changing lizards are running the government. Fringe nonsense. Here’s why people believe in conspiracy theories, and that’s something to consider when talking about our country in the 21st century.

Let me be very clear about this: every thing that Donald J. Trump accused Hillary Clinton of doing during the campaign (well, except for lying—see below) was actually a conspiracy theory. Here’s a list for you to mull over. And if your reaction to that is, “That’s just what they want you to think,” or if you’ve ever used the word “sheeple” in an online discussion, then you are actively dumbing down the country with your distracting nonsense.

D is for Democrats
When will you guys decide to stop bringing knives to the gunfight? How about now, for instance? Two things need to happen if you ever want to be viable as a political party again. 1. Stop worrying about making grandstanding gestures for posterity and instead focus on passing legislation, enacting forward-thinking public policy and getting stuff done in Congress. 2. Stop going “high.” You’re fighting Republicans. You know, the men who run on the family values platform and then get caught with fishing for dates in the men’s restrooms? Why are you being considerate? They need to be hobbled. Get a bat and start swinging for the kneecaps. We need twenty new seats in the Senate in two years. Start now. Or better yet, do what Michael Moore says. Here’s his prescription. 

E is for Election Reform
For the second time in my lifetime—since I’ve known my wife—I’ve watched the electoral college nullify the popular vote. This is especially egregious, since the popular vote was the bigger number. Something has to change, and I don’t care what. If you won’t abolish the Electoral College, how about removing the “Winner Take All” provision and divide the EC votes according to popular percentage? And don't get me started on the whole mechanism of voting,  either. 

And while we’re at it, how about changing the rules so that Third Party candidates aren’t left out of the process altogether. I think one of the fastest ways to stop this polarization of the country is to give us a few more nuanced choices. The reason why the Powers that Be are reluctant to do this is simple: Money. They lose too much money when their respective parties are gutted from people going to a group that better reflects their needs and interests. The only way to fix it is to even out the process entirely and cap spending on campaigns. Let the messages be about the quality of the ideas, not the frequency with which the candidates are seen bashing their opponents.

F is for Facts
Ah, Facts...those things that were routinely ignored by our President-Elect for over a year. Those things he never let get in the way of a good story. I can’t remember the last time so many people chose to simply stop thinking like a rational person and rely on “gut feelings” and “people are telling me” and “I’m hearing.” What are we, imbeciles? You know, Santa’s not real, either, even though you’ve seen his picture on Coke cans for years. Using a gut check to pick a presidential candidate is not the dumbest thing you can do on this list, but it’s pretty close.

It’s time to start valuing math and science and data again. It’s time to stop playing fast and loose with feelings and opinions spoken with an air of authority. Just because you, average American, didn’t go to college, doesn’t mean you’re not smart. Certainly, you should be smart enough to know a con man when you see one. It reminds me of an old joke: How can you tell when a Politician is lying? His lips are moving! And the moral of this story is: a Campaign Promise is not a Fact. See “L” below.

G is for Gender
There is no way you can convince me that some—some—of the people who cast their “protest vote” for Trump weren’t just doing it because she’s a woman. I just watched a cavalcade of racist vomit for eight years on social media, when so many people were convinced that we’d licked racism because of President Obama in the White House. To the lunatic right and the ultra-conservative Christians and the just plain ol’ misogynists who have been strident in their disapproval of Hillary Clinton this past year, let me say this up front: I will not listen to your bullshit on this. If you think a woman’s place is in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant, you’d best keep it to yourself.

And don’t “Bible” me on this, either. We don't stone people to death for transgressions. There’s no Biblical argument that makes sense anymore. It’s ridiculous, outdated, outmoded, and if you think we won’t push back on this, think again. There will come a day, down the road, when Elizabeth Warren will be offered up as a presidential candidate (or vice-presidential candidate) and she comes without 30 years of conspiracy theories clinging to her. She’ll get in, if it hasn’t happened before then. You are on the wrong side of history on this. Change, or head to the tar pit.

H is for Hillary
You know, I get it. I really do. Hillary Clinton is a divisive figure. I mean, she’s got the taint of Clinton Scandal all over her. But let’s not forget who first sprayed that stink all over her in the first place, right? I know a lot of you were alive in 1992. You must remember when Rush Limbaugh led the charge against them, insisting that they had committed murder in Arkansas. They hadn’t, of course, and there was never any question about it in the eyes of the law, but it started a 30 year full court press that culminated in some of the most hate-filled rhetoric I’ve ever witnessed aimed at a public figure. 

And yet, despite all of the accusations, and the constant investigations—7 or 8 of them, all led by Republicans—they did not find any malfeasance or misconduct. Whatever you want to call it. The only thing that Hillary Clinton is guilty of is being a career politician, with all of the skills and attributes that come with that job. The same skills and attributes that, say, Ted Cruz and Mitch McConnell have, by the way. If you don’t like the way she did things, and think that she didn’t play fair, or think that she got away with something, then congratulations, because you’ve put your finger on the pulse of modern politics and found the institution wanting. Yeah. They all do it. They all did it. Even your guy. Yes, him, too.

I is for Internet
Social Media is, without a doubt, one of our modern devils, responsible for so much evil, pain, and strife, when it’s not distracting us with pictures of kittens and baby otters and people getting hit in the junk with softballs.  Then you drop a petulant narcissist onto Twitter and let him run unfettered, and he gleefully sets himself to the task of trolling the 2016 Election, all while actively encouraging the Russians to Keep. Hacking. The. American. Election. Process. You do know that the Russians are the bad guys again, right? And by the way, since when exactly did a meme, banged out in thirty seconds (eyes closed, judging from the frequent misspellings) constitute a meaningful thought? Memes are the bumper stickers of the Internet. And I don’t mean that in a good way. I mean it as in, you should stop using memes to make your points.

Look, I know you’re reading this online, but want you to understand something: this is not an ideal form of communication. It’s advantages—speed, distance, flexibility, are outweighed by its disadvantages, chief among them—anonymity, security, and obfuscation. There’s a reason why we all seem to become mean, hateful and a little sociopathic, and that’s because it’s a consequence-free environment that we mistake for meaningful discourse. And if you’re a troll, it’s your preferred medium and mode of expression. So, why are we placing such emphasis on social media to help us with the most important political decision we make every four years?

J is for Justices
The Republican controlled Congress, led by the obstructionist Mitch McConnell, has held up the appointment of the ninth Supreme Court Justice for—what? Six, seven months now? Thanks to the Republican Majority in the Senate, and Tea Party dissidents like Theocrat Ted Cruz shutting down Congress because they didn’t get what they wanted, the Supreme Court was the only branch of our government that was still doing its job. And it was doing, more or less, a good job, until Scalia died earlier this year.

In the final gesture of disrespect, Congress has ignored its duty in vetting and approving President Obama’s Supreme Court nomination—a man that even the Republicans agree would be great for the job—so that the honor could go to the next president. Lovely. Once again, held hostage by Republicans so that they can roll back Progress in this country to 1952.

K is for Kangaroo Court
Listening to people chanting “Lock her Up!” was one of the most surreal experiences of my life. Now, in this election, at this time, you’ve all suddenly grown the spine and moral fortitude to hold a politician’s feet to the fire? And for what? Stuff she’s already been cleared of, from multiple sources.

Oh, and all of you “nose holders,” don’t think you’re not part of this, either. “I don’t like Trump, but I really dislike Hillary.”  You’d rather have the Elite Oligarch, the super-rich real estate developer than the career politician who at least doesn’t want to burn it all to the ground, is that your stance? All because you think she did something wrong. You just can’t articulate what. Hmmm. We’re all right with war crimes and war profiteering, but the email server is your line in the sand? Hmmmm.

L is for Lying
Never before have I watched a political campaign spew half-truths and untruths like a firehose, hither and thither, with no real attempt by anyone in opposition to call the liar on their junk. And let me be very clear, here: I’m talking across the board, top to bottom, all along the spectrum, about Donald Trump. I thought initially that it was willful ignorance at work, where he’d just squint and omit the parts of the story he didn’t like. But then he started reshaping the narrative in the most brilliant way; he actually gaslighted the American public. He figured out that if you repeat something often enough to people, they take it as the truth.

Clinton doesn’t get to skate on this, either, but I want to make it clear that her “misspokes” and her “not well articulateds” and all of the other awkwardly-worded things she said only made her look like she was trying to get away with stuff, and it made her seem more untrustworthy. Pretty frustrating, especially when she kept getting investigated and they kept saying, “We didn’t find that she did anything wrong.” Of course she lied in the course of her job. So did every single politician who ever held the office. There was lies a-plenty to go around during the last Republican Presidency. But that never was part of the Democratic narrative, was it? “We want to run a clean campaign,” right? How’s that working out for you? And now it seems that all of the hate and the bile and the venom was nothing more than campaign rhetoric. In other words, more lying. But it’s okay if your candidate wins, right?

M is for Media
Some of the media are already taking their lumps for this, but to be fair, it’s the whole of corporate-owned and ratings-driven news that needs to be nut-punched repeatedly until they agree to start treating the American public like it’s a body politic and not bored Romans thirsting for Christian blood in the Coliseum. We don’t need political analysis from your lantern-headed mouth-flapping correspondents, whose only qualifications seems to be that you’ve had them on the show before. Pundits and bloggers? Are you kidding me?

How about stating facts, telling people what happened, and covering the things that actually matter? Be useful. Stop slanting, shading, and skewing your data. I hate that I see stuff on the BBC news that is never talked about from any of the cable news networks. We deserve better than this. You—the media—are considered part of the public trust. At least, you used to be. Either start helping us all make good choices or get out of our way entirely.

N is for Nationalists
This is where the shame lies. Shame on Donald Trump for not immediately and stridently denouncing the endorsements of the guys living in neo-Nazi encampments in the woods, making their own beef jerky and waiting patiently for the coming race war that’s going to happen...oh...any day now... Of course, these chuckleheads have been predicting something like this for thirty years, to no avail. But now there’s a guy running for president, and he hates brown-skinned people, too! Whoo-Hoo, boys, put on your clean overalls! We’re going to town!

There’s already a “Mexicans Go Home” attitude that’s floating around, and Trump’s not even in office, yet. I live in Texas. The “ex” part of the state is a reminder that our culture and way of life is inextricably tied to Mexico. This is a real problem for me, and it should be for the rest of you, too. Mexicans go home? They are home, Gringo. Aw, it’s just such utter bullshit, this idea that all of these mythical jobs are being appropriated by Hispanics, and our nation of white landscapers and white custodial service workers and white day laborers and white construction workers are starving because of it. Hogwash.

O is for Orange
Demented Cheeto. Walking and Talking Circus Peanut. Parboiled Yam. The color now and forever associated with President-Elect Trump will be orange, thanks to his spray-on bronzing solution. I am sure the glow is healthy in real life, but on naked video, it makes anyone wearing that stuff look foolish and stupid. But that ridiculous skin color is the very least of a whole catalog of problems that are self-evident when considering this man for the highest office in the land.

I never liked him. Not when he was a spoiled rich kid millionaire. Not when he was a reality TV star. Not when he was an agitator for the Republican party. And as much as I didn’t like him then, I hate the thought that this demagogue is the president-elect.  I thought he was a joke, a wastrel, who got lucky. Born with a silver spoon in his mouth and somehow managed to keep the money instead of pissing it away. This is no “Man of the People.” He’s the very person most of us in the South claim to despise. I’m still baffled that a rich, spoiled Yankee who is too big for his britches would somehow win my people over.

P is for Pussy
Here is our National shame, laid bare, that such vulgarity would find its way into the political discourse. And that even this—this tacit admittance to, at the very least, sexual assault—wouldn’t dissuade you from voting for Trump—well, that’s some deep blues, right there. You don’t have to be from the Ivy League to know that’s no way to treat a lady, ever. “Locker Room talk,” my ass. I know bragging when I hear it. He was trying to impress Billy Bush. Billy Bush! Geez, Louise.

Already the children of the hateful people have been sent to school by their proud parents and started yelling at the Hispanic kids to “Go back to Mexico.” How long do you think it’ll be before one of those kids “just can’t help himself,” and decides to help himself, because, you know, this is apparently okay, now, right? I mean, if the president can do it, and get away with it, what kind of message does that send?

Q is for Qualifications
For decades now, I’ve listened to older Republicans lament that “what we really need is a business man in the office. He’d be the one to fix our budget.”  The thinking being, we need a guy who runs the government like he runs a business. Ruthlessly slashing waste, eliminating redundancies, streamlining operations, etc. Not necessarily running the busi—I mean, the government—with strong ethical conviction. That part is never mentioned.

Well, be careful for what you wish for. Here’s your businessman, kinda. Sorta. I guess. I mean, he’s a real estate developer, and he’s worth millions, and he’s got a brand, of sorts, and despite all of the failures along the way, he had enough money to run a protracted political campaign, and, on top of all that, it worked. I will tell you this, right now: he looks like a dog that just caught the car he was chasing. He looks worried. He’s not being presidential, now. He’s looking for the exits so he can ghost at the first chance. We’ll see just how far that business acumen takes him. If only there had been someone else running for office with a laundry list of credentials and actual experience in the White House…

R is for Republicans
You have a lot to answer for. I’m not sure when “the party of principles” decided that anyone could rent space on your platform, but you either need to eject the cranks and whack-jobs in your party or change your name to something else. It’s bad enough that you let the Tea Party radicals in—and I think you already know that your punishment was Ted Cruz, the most hated man in Congress—but you only backed that Orange Horse because you didn’t like any of your rank and file candidates. You even had a Bush in the mix, for crying out loud! But you were afraid he wouldn’t win, because that’s all that matters to you. You obstruct, you shut down, you drag your feet, you waste millions of dollars on needless political stunts, and you have the temerity to blame the Democrats because stuff doesn’t get done at the Congressional level. 

And while we’re on the chopping block here, you need to jettison the social and moral backwater stance, too. If you want to be the party of fiscal responsibility, that’s fine. Be that party. But don’t also lump “family values” into it. You’re always one disgraced Senator away from looking like idiots. And no one trusts you because you always end up looking like the very worst kind of hypocrites. That word is in the Bible a lot. You should look it up.

S is for Scandals
Hopefully this will be the only Presidential election ever where the manufactured scandals got all of the attention and the actual scandals were patently ignored by the voting public. Democrats? You had to know that every ounce of Republican-based dirt reserved for the Clintons over the years would be trucked out and used against Hillary Clinton, right? You had to know that. I knew it. We all knew it. Dogs knew it. Did you think that her record of public service would protect her from a manufactured murder-conspiracy? The opposition just fielded a Reality Television Candidate!

And yet, this guy was tangerine Teflon. Things he actually said and actually did—stuff that, in any other year, under any other circumstance, would have gotten him booted from his own reality show, fired from a corporation, turned him into a social pariah—none of that mattered, because the folks in Trump’s camp were “tired of Hillary (or Killary, or Shillary, or, you know, ‘that c*nt’) getting away with it,” whatever “it” was. Oh, yeah, all of those scandals over the years. The ones that Republicans investigated multiple times, using millions of dollars of the taxpayers money, only to find nothing. Unbelievable. People were more willing to believe that Hillary Clinton murdered people than to admit that Donald Trump was demonstrably guilty of sexual assault.

T is for Third Party
Dan Savage is right.  Before you start throwing wide-eyed, earnest-looking imbeciles at us every four years, how about fielding a few candidates at the local level, hmmm? Maybe work up to state senate? Congress? We don’t know anything about your party, because we’ve never seen it in action. Why keep swinging for the fences and missing? How about you assholes get some people on base, first? Because all you’re really doing, in the end, is jacking up the big game by insisting that you have a turn at bat.

It only really matters during times of extreme duress, like, you know, the past twenty years, now, when those people who voted for third party candidates actually made their point at the end of a barrel of an important gun. I say this as someone who voted for Ross Perot in the 1990s, to no avail, and who saw a lot of people try to defend their choice for Nader in 2000, when the election was too close to call, and now, sixteen years later, staring at the 1.7 percent of the vote that sure did tell a story, and that story ends with a Trump presidency. I’m not saying you Green Party and Libertarian Party people are wrong; we do need to break up the two-party system. But this was not the year to try that, obviously. Put the work in, first, and you’ll find a more receptive electorate in, say, 2020 or 2024.

U is for Undecided
Really, undecided? You have been on this Earth for how long, exactly? Oh, all of your life. Right. Gotcha. So, then, why is this something that happens every four years, as if you have emerged from a chrysalis state, newly-minted, full of wonder and gentle good humor at our funny Earthling ways? The thing about experience is that it’s supposed to stick with you. Moreover, you should ideally use that experience to make informed decisions.

I don’t buy that there wasn’t enough for you to hang an informed decision from July onward. There was plenty of substantial, concrete information to base your choice on, without even cracking the surface of the muckracking and filth that coated this election like fried chicken batter. I don’t know where you’re at, or what this says, that so many people who were registered to vote simply didn’t, and even more people stayed home because they didn’t think it would matter one way or another. Maybe this will go away in four years, or even two. But I think as long as nothing above changes, we’re going have to deal with the Undecideds for a while longer.

V is for Vocabulary Words
“Dog Whistle.” “Micro-Aggression.” Clinton pulled a good one out of her hat: “Basket of Deplorables.” Now, we all know what she really meant by that, and it’s willfully ignorant to pretend anything different. But the first thing Trump said that actually got the attention of his base was that he was tired of being “Politically Correct.” And while everyone looked shocked and horrified (or cheered because they could say vulgar things in public again), no one looked past what that really meant; namely, the notion that the Extreme Left loves to talk down its nose at people who are not in the same Pullman car on the Train of Progress as themselves. This usually manifests itself on places like Twitter, where they actively lock horns with the Internet trolls, but it spills over onto all over aspects of American life. People who simply aren’t up on the latest Mercurial changes in terminology get labeled “racist” or get admonished for “mansplaining.” No one catches flies with honey on the Extreme Left. Everyone has a flame thrower, and they burn bridges daily. Patton Oswalt has the right idea about this phenomenon.  

There is another culprit here, as well. The media just loves its jargon, doesn’t it? If it’s not phrase-making it’s phrase-borrowing. POTUS. SCOTUS. “Full-throated endorsement.” “Down ballot.” How about you stick to reporting facts and learned opinions and leave the wordsmithing to the professional poets and dreamer of the world, hmmm? Instead of trying to show you have insider knowledge, work on delivering the news in the format and with the simplicity of a sixth grade Spelling Bee. Especially now our president, who uses words like “bigly,” and can’t articulate complex thoughts and must rely on hyperbole and repeated phrases for emphasis, isn’t much of a “reader.”

W is for Wall
This was the whole of Trump’s political platform, writ large: “I’m gonna build a wall. And Mexico is going to pay for it.” This statement has been walked back, reworked, and massaged from every possible angle, and no matter what metric you use to examine it, it’s clear that the idea is ludicrous in the extreme. Anyone from Texas who thinks that such an idea is practical, and yet doesn’t read science fiction, or have collections of old issues of Popular Mechanics where those vastly impractical airships of the future are shown as concept drawings is just delusional, because we know what the border of Texas actually looks like. For the rest of the world, trust us on this; there’s no way a physical barrier could ever run the length of the Texas-Mexico border, never mind the rest of the United States. But that’s one of those “Big Concept” ideas that seems so easy to so many. Yeah. Just, you know, build a wall. With cheap labor, so it don’t cost as much. You know, like those undocumented… oh, wait…

Now people are insisting that this wall was actually a “metaphor” for some sort of combination of security systems and plans and programs that would be implemented. Pfft. Whatever, dude. You know what he meant. I know what he meant. Stop trying to make him smarter after the fact. It’s pretty obvious that immigration is a hot button topic, but there’s so many other ways to handle the volatile and uncertain situation that involve diplomacy, good policy, and thinking long-term. I realize these are not strengths of the incoming President. And I’m not a political junkie. But I have been watching this clown since the 1980s. I know an asshole when I see one.

X is for Xenophobia
Speaking of assholes, I’m shocked (and this is my own confirmation bias showing, here) that the various disenfranchised white people are clumping up around Nazi flags. Still. To this day. In 2016. I honestly thought that there wasn’t a member of the KKK under the age of 85. This is my naiveté, I know. However, I wasn’t blind to the number of people who don’t like all Muslim people because of what happened on 9-11. And it’s an extremely touchy subject.

In so many ways, I feel like we’ve come full circle by jumping back in time a hundred years, to when Immigrants were pouring into this country to work the factory jobs, and, well, you’ve seen this Schoolhouse Rock short, I know. We all have. Of course, what that lovely cartoon never mentioned was the “No Irish Need Apply” signs and the anti-Jew and anti-Italian and anti-immigrant sentiment that was a nasty backlash to what amounts to most of our ancestors moving to America so we can be having the same arguments 120 years after the fact.

Y is for Youth
Oh, you precocious little Special Snowflakes. We, the members of Generation X, were once like you. Our guy was Bill Clinton, in 1992. We used to be the Youth Vote. And with the help of MTV, we Rocked It.  And then our guy got caught…well, it doesn’t matter. We realized, because we grew up jaded, that all of these bastards had feet of clay. They were fallible. Imperfect. Human.

That’s why your principled stance really stuck in my craw. But I can’t make you do anything, really. No one can. No one ever did. But your insistence in voting for a third party candidate or worse, not voting at all, despite a cavalcade of credible information on both candidates, just baffled me. Maybe this is a good thing. You need to see for yourself what’s happening next. What’s coming up. Then, maybe you can put cause and effect together and make better choices next time. Provided we can beam that information to you in 140 characters or less.

Z is for Zeitgeist
The zeitgeist, for those you unfamiliar with the term is “the defining spirit or mood of a particular period of history as shown by the ideas and beliefs of the time.” What that means on this list is, we are all to blame for what happened. Our need to be entertained instead of informed and enlightened. Our muted anger and frustrated feelings of having no control. Media streams blasting at us from so many directions. Stress. Fear. Cynicism.

We have turned into really shitty people, you know that? It didn’t happen overnight. All of this innovation seemed like a good idea. From the late 1980s on, there’s been a slow, glacier-like creep towards becoming bored, entitled, ignorant, naval-gazing, self-important turds. We didn’t used to be this way. I’m not romanticizing the past, either. We’ve been our better selves, but usually only for a short time—during Christmas, or national tragedies. We profess to be a Christian country, but we are the most un-Christian-like people when it comes to the way we treat others. It’s no wonder that the current champion of the oppressed is a rich, bigoted, narcissistic, borderline fascist with no impulse control and a sense of entitlement to rival English royalty. He's us, write large. He is the Uber-American. 
__________________________________________

Sorry if I got any of that on you, personally. But this has been building up for almost a year, now, and I needed to lance that boil, because it was killing me, literally. We all made ourselves sick, worrying about this stuff. And in the end, we missed the mark, but good. I don't blame any one thing on this list, so much as I see it for the Gordian Knot that it really is. 

So, what's the answer? I don't know. I have no earthly idea. Everyone is saying, "Get Organized! Rebel! Resist! Fight Back!" Yeah, great ideas. Pick a monster and have at it. There's a lot to throw your weight against. Me? I'm wearing my safety pin. I'm going to continue to comment on the things that matter to me. I'm not going to make assumptions about people, but I will not stand for open displays of bigotry, intolerance, or hatred. Your answer will undoubtedly be different, and your path is not my path, and, provided no one is hurt and no laws are broken, I wish you well. One thing is certain: this was only the first of what feels like a five act Shakespearean tragedy. Let's all hope that's not the case. 



Saturday, August 25, 2012

Living with Women: Bathoom Time

If you should hear in the upcoming weeks about me being found dead on the toilet, and authorities are baffled as to what might have killed me, I want you to copy and paste this article into the Crimestoppers tip line and pick up a quick hundred bucks. It'll be my parting gift to you, and it will also allow my spirit to rest from beyond the pale, with you having solved the mystery of my toilet death.

The following is a true story:

My home is entangled with estrogen. My wife is a woman. Our niece, currently living in the guest bedroom, is a woman. My dog is a teenage girl. The Bunker of Love is literally festooned with womanly accoutrements. Chief among them are candles. This is closely followed by scented oils and a tinderbox worth of incense. These things are deployed swiftly and often, usually shortly after I walk in the door from a day of running around and being sweaty.

Thursday, August 2, 2012

Chicken Pride Day and What It All Means

No doubt, the memes and cartoons and movies and sniglets and bumpersticker wisdom that has choked FaceBook over the last week regarding Chick-Fil-A and its owner's conservative values have managed to once again polarize friends and families alike, and polarize them where they hurt the most--in their stomach.

I won't recap the battle, because all you have to do is log into FaceBook and scroll down for six or seven seconds until you find examples of what I'm talking about above, and probably links to the story of how the Muppets ditched Chick-Fil-A after what their owner said, because, well, it's not widely known, but Jim Henson was gay.  And since the Muppets are about everyone getting along together with no hang-ups, you can see how some people close to the creator of Sesame Street and Kermit the Frog might have gotten their noses Gonzo'ed out of shape over that.

This, to me, is a rare peek at a much, much larger concern: who we are doing business with as consumers. I know it's not a pleasant conversation to have, and moreso because no one has ever asked us, as Americans, to have it. In fact, there's been a lot of effort to suppress it. Anytime slave labor or grossly inadequate wages regarding goods and services are brought up (usually in a Wal-Mart discussion), someone who doesn't want to have to make a choice about where their $8 t-shirt comes from will pipe up and accuse someone of being a Communist, a Socialist, or Anti-Capitalism in general. This, of course, derails the conversation completely as the accused now has to assure everyone that they are not, in fact, a Pinko. And so the topic seems to sit out there, bobbing in the mainstream, and only occasionally nudged to the right or the left as it suits people.

Well, in fact, it's not a red or a blue issue. It's a voting issue. It's democracy 101, and most especially since we don't elect presidents anymore, but the Electoral College does, and most people can't name their state senators, and wouldn't take the time to write them a letter if their head was on fire and the politician had the last glass of water in the world. No, I'm talking about the only votes that ever seem to matter in America: the bottom line. The Red and the Black. Profit and Loss. These are our new Overlords, and I do not welcome them. But they are here, nonetheless.

It's really simple: since corporations exist as a firewall between themselves and their shareholders, and the stated intent of all corporations is to make money for their shareholders, you cannot really punish a corporation the way you punish a person (and Mitt Romney is wrong--about so many things--but most emphatically that "corporations are people"). All you can do to send them a punitive or encouraging message is to vote with your dollar. Spend it or withhold it as you deem necessary. When the shareholders see the bump, or the dip, the next quarter, they will know why, and they will correct whatever is causing the bump. And it's just that easy.

There were lines around Chick-Fil-A restaurants across America yesterday, and I suspect they were all in line for one of three reasons:

1. Their chicken is delicious and they wanted a sandwich. This would have been the smallest group yesterday, incidentally.

2. They felt that poor old Chick-Fil-A had gotten beat up over the past week and they were making a show of supporting them (really a sympathy purchase) to help them in these trying economic times. I need a minute after that last sentence; it's hard to type while laughing out loud.

3. They honestly, earnestly believed in the sanctity of Chick-Fil-A's stated policies of not being open on Sunday to observe the Sabbath, giving donations to Right to Life organizations, and admonishing the gay and lesbian community in general for their hedonistic ways. These would have been largely the politicians and pundits who needed a photo-op and something to Tweet about.

I've known about Chick-Fil-A's practices for some time, and I've curtailed 98% of my spending there, which amounts to doodley squat for their bottom line, but it mattered to me. It meant the chicken sandwich I bought didn't contribute to a Right to Life group, however legitimate, who may have taken a donation from Chick-Fil-A, and then that money somehow got handed off to a more radical sect, who thinks it's okay to firebomb clinics and kill doctors and nurses in order to justify the existence of what amounts to a parasite growing in someone's body. An extreme example? You betcha. But understand this: I have no say in how Chick-Fil-A spends its money. None whatsoever. And neither do you.

If a corporation wants to fund overseas heroin farms with its profits, then I don't want anything to do with that corporation. And neither should you.  Another extreme example, but I'm making a point. It DOES matter where and how we spend our money. In the wake of scant to no regulation of things like investment banks, companies doing business overseas, and so forth, it seems clear to me that the message is not self-regulation but fiscal regulation. We send the message with our purchases, or lack thereof.  We the people tell the corporations what we will and will not accept.

Think about it: no matter how many negative Wal-Mart stories you see on the news about cheap Chinese labor, they don't change. Why? Because people are still buying $8 shirts, whether they need them or not, because "it's a good deal!" Consider what would happen if Wal-Mart got 10 million signatures asking to buy clothes made in the USA again, and that we'll stop buying t-shirts from them until they do: they'd laugh at first, but after one month of their t-shirt sales being down 75%, they'd have a textiles factory in the midwest up and running in a fortnight. Think about it. Does Wal-Mart like to leave money on the table? They do not.

The problem is, we've never really used that power. Not until this, until now. And it was kind of a bust, really--so many people signed on for a Chick-Fil-A sandwich yesterday in some kind of righteous indignation, even as this picture made its way across FaceBook. And this is always--ALWAYS--an option for Christians to lead through action rather than to get drawn into a debate with other people. I would think that if someone was really passionate about their beliefs and the opportunity to both support a multi-million dollar chicken restaurant and also feed the homeless with delicious sandwiches presented itself, it would be a real win-win for everyone else involved, including the homeless. But of course, the last thing a lot of the people who espouse these values  seem to care about is putting a sandwich into a needy person's hand. There's irony in there, somewhere, I'm sure of it.

So, now the door is open. You can peek inside and see how they make the sausage, and if you don't like it, you don't have to buy it. You can even tell them why. My suggestion is that you start doing that very thing. Of course, most of the people who read this blog already do things like this anyway, so I'm just preaching to the choir. Therefore I have to ask you to start talking this idea up with the people you know who don't know any better. It's time America started thinking for itself again.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go figure out how to reverse engineer their secret recipe so I can make Chick-Fil-A sandwiches at home.

Sunday, November 6, 2011

If You're Upset by the Kardashian Divorce, Then the Problem is YOU

I've watched with wry amusement as the much-publicized Kardashian divorce has been co-opted by the Interwebs as a stick in the eye for the folks who argue for the sanctity of marriage being between a man and a woman. It's a conversation that the nation has needed to have for a while, and the politicized elements of that argument have little choice but to hunker down and take the body blows raining down on them right now. They have no defense for this.

Now that everything is televised, even the great and grand lie that is one of our most entrenched and enduring myths, that of a storybook romance, those that would claim that the people who can't legally marry are somehow cheapening the act for those who legally can is absurd. With the divorce rate at 50%, and with celebritiy's personal lives literally documented in closer detail than an average day in Congress, the message isn't so much mixed as it is garbled. If marriage is so bloody wonderful, how come no celebrity alive can keep one together for more than six months?

My short answer is this: we're oppressively conditioned by every romantic comedy, every romance novel, every story told to us by our mother and grandmother, every Barbie scenario, and now every single reality televsion show that's not on the Cooking Channel that marriage is the end of the story. It's the Taa-Daaah moment. And it may well be a great ending for a story, at that. It's the promise of a future in bliss, but also a closing ceremony, borne out of happiness at getting together, especially after all that's happened in the story.

Then, while America closes the book and picks up another story that will undoubtedly end the exact same way, those who got married have to figure out how to live together. Let me suggest to the shell-shocked teenagers of the world that ordinary people have a tough enough time of trying to figure out all of that stuff. If you put an entire television production crew in our living room and had producers try to steer everything you did in a certain direction, it's probably ten times more difficult.

Isn't it funny that all of the fans of people like, say, Sandra Bullock, and the media who labels her "America's Sweetheart," are waiting with baited breath to see and when she'll get married, when the reality is that one of the least-suited professions to the institutions of marriage is that of actors, celebrities, and other public figures. The reasons for this should be obvious. And yet, for the largest Christian religion in the world, the spiritual advisors whose job it is to council couples on love, marriage, and fidelity are actually forbidden to marry and have to take a vow of chastity. I've never understood that.

Studies have shown that people don't tend to engage their brains on new concepts and ideas when they can instead read, watch, and otherwise engage on concepts that reinforce their existing ideas. In other words, if you are a seventeen year old girl, and you've already got your wedding planned out, and you cannot WAIT for the NBA player of your choice to ask you for your hand in marriage, then you are not remotely interested in watching a documentary about the divorce rate. Or, if you do, you'll just think, "Well, that won't be ME. After all, I'll have a fairy tale romance. Those don't end in divorce."

Yeah, they do. Everything is susceptible to human frailty. If millions of dollars can't keep a functionally retarded NBA baskeball player and the world's hottest tulpa together for more than two and half months, then what chance does anyone have? 

Honestly, if we would just turn off the reality television, the romance novel, and tune out the overwhelming pressure to not only get married, but as soon as possible, then maybe we'd have a better shot at it. Maybe then we could all talk about the realities of how to make a marriage work, and not focus so much on how much the wedding dress cost.

But I'm not done talking about the Kardashians yet. Nor any of their fans. More on this later.

Thursday, October 27, 2011

My New Business Idea

Me: So, I've been thinking...

Cathy: Oh, no.

Me: What? You always do that when I start to tell you my great ideas!

Cathy: Honey, it's not that you're...okay, go ahead.

Me: No, forget it. I'll just do it without you, now.

Cathy: Noooo, now you'd better tell me.

Me: Okay. Fine. So, I've been thinking...

Cathy: We got that part already.

Me: I've been thinking about going into business as a wedding planner.

Cathy: (stunned silence)

Me: See, the way I figure it--

Cathy: (interrupting) What on EARTH makes you think up this stuff?

Me: It's simple, really. I see the women of the world as being divided into two camps: those who have had their wedding planned out since they were thirteen years old, down to the tux color and the cake flavor...and those who haven't.

Cathy: Uh huh.

Me: Well, clearly, I've got zero interest in dealing with Bridezillas. That's not something I want to deal with when it's someone I know, much less a stranger.

Cathy: Yeah, that's not your strength.

Me: Buuuuuut...on the other hand...I've got serious planning skills when it comes to doing weddingly things. Which is perfect for the woman who doesn't know and/or doesn't really care, she just wants to be married.

Cathy: Um, Honey...

Me: Or what about those nerd girls who want a Star Trek wedding? I'd be perfect for that! I speak their language.

Cathy: I'm not so sure that's ever the woman's idea...

Me: Think about it! 'Custom-designed wedding ceremonies that reflect your true selves.' I'm telling you, I think I can do this.

Cathy: Okay, do you have any idea how much that--or the time--*sigh* you know what? Sure. Sounds great.

Me: Of course, I'll need a website. Maybe a picture of me, only with six arms, like an aspect of Shiva.

Cathy: What?

Me: Yeah! In the palm of each hand will be something you can click on. Writing, consulting, Wedding Planning...

Cathy: Okay, now I need a drink.

Sunday, October 16, 2011

My thoughts on Occupy Wall Street

I don't know if I've ever liked the big banks. I'm talking Bank of America and so forth. Despite all of their warm, professionally printed and market-researched signage in the lobby, I always did, in fact, feel like a number and not a name. And while we're at it, I've never fully understood why Wall Street is the backbone of our economy. I'll be the first to admit that I don't fully understand all of the ins and outs of it, but my gut reaction is that anything that is designed to spike wildly up and down, and actually CRASH from time to time cannot possibly be a good and stable thing to base an economy on. A side-venture? Sure, okay, if you've got the money to lose. Maybe at one time, we did. We certainly don't now.

It's taken me a while to educate myself  on the bailouts in 2008, and all of the fallout that followed. It's not light reading, but it is stomach-churning. Not just because of how much money we gave these financial institutions and what they in turn did with that cash, but mostly the shennanigans that led up to the crash just made me so angry. I nearly ran out into the street and protested, myself, but I thought, Nah, no one cares what I think. I'm just the one guy, over here, whose concerns are never ever addressed by national political candidates of any kind.

How little did I know.

Maybe you're not following the OWS movement, because it's already white noise in the media--check that--the corporate-controlled media. Maybe you've already seen pictures of unwashed youngsters in hemp clothing playing the bongo drums. Yeah, I know, it's not exactly the best foot forward to be taken seriously, but I submit to you that neither was that guy with teabags hanging off his tricorn hat at the Tea Party rallies, either. That's never the norm. It's always the nuts on the fringe that the news guys just love to cover. It's so much easier to shoot the freaks than it is to try and break down a complex issue for people who are just wanting to watch the weather and get the sports scores.

Yeah, I'm having problems with TV news, too.

OWS and the Tea Party have--or had--one thing in common, at least initially: they all came together and fairly calmly rioted over the amount of money we just handed the big banks, with no accountability, no reprisals, no strings attached. I got the distinct impression that the Powers That Be didn't know what they were going to do with the money, either.  It was just, "Um, do what you need to do, okay? And hurry!"

Now there's riots, and police are herding people away, and everyone is in an uproar, and they are even allegedly arresting protesters who are closing their CitiBank accounts. Wow. I don't like sounding like one of those conspiracy theory guys, but what else does it sound like to you? Big Brother? Oh, it's way past that, now.

I've read some of the demands of the protestors, and I've heard some of the statements, and while I am not questioning the moral and ethical truth of what they are saying, this isn't something that can happen overnight. These issues have GOT to be folded into the political process. And if a candidate isn't willing to talk about them, then guess what? He doesn't get our vote. It's that simple. It's pretty clear to me that we've all been focusing on the wrong stuff for the past couple of decades.

In the midst of all this bumper sticker political canvassing that has gone on across FaceBook and the blogosphere these last couple of weeks, I want to put forth my two demands. These aren't simple things. Lots has to happen, and I know that. But unless we start asking for what we really want from a politician, and unless we start prioritizing what's most important to us as Americans and demanding it from our public servents, then the debate over gay marriage will continue, and corporations and banks will run amok all over us.

My demands for the movement:

1. Strip away all laws and legal rulings stating that corporations are people. Replace with a set of concrete guidelines for what corporations can and can't do, and what they are responsible for regarding their actions.

This should never have gotten to this level, and we should all be ashamed of ourselves for letting it. Mitt Romney actually said "corporations are people." And he was serious. Now, this is not to say that every corporation is bad. There are some really good, responible ones out there. But due to how they are currently structured, it's very easy for a not-so-scrupulous corporation to, say, anonymously fund political candidates, giving them literally millions of dollars that do not have to be disclosed. If I'm handing someone millions of dollars, how much do you want to bet that I have a list of conditions that goes along with that cash? Congratulations, we have just cut ourselves out of our own political process.

2. Reform banking, finance, and the stock market with a concrete set of rules as to what can and cannot be done with the people's money. Break up the monopolies so that the big banks cannot grow past a certain size. Set limits and caps on what they can do, and how.

Honestly, after all this time, after so many sayings such as "money is the root of all evil," you'd think that people would have learned. Jesus didn't even like these guys! Come on! It's our money, and we're just letting them play with it as if it wasn't.

Again, I don't presume to think that the above two things fixes everything. But it would fix alot. I'm in the 99%, as is literally everyone I know. We've all had to work our whole lives. Some of us are still working. I don't know of anyone who's doing super great right now. I only know of a few, maybe a dozen or more, who are actually sitting on Middle Class right now. And you know what? They keep their mouths shut and their heads down, because they don't want to crow about it. Yeah, it's gotten that bad. I'm not telling you anything you don't know already.

So, what are you gonna do about it? Are we going to keep letting ourselves be distracted by things like "the war on Christmas," if there ever really was such a thing? Or are we going to start looking for politicans who really want to change the system? Because that's what it's going to take. We need people who can change the system from within, gradually over time.

Of course, that would mean that everyone will have to work together. This whole two party system we have would need to...oh, wait, I'll finish this blog post later. Boardwalk Empire is on HBO right now...yeah, we'll just, um...

Viva El Revolution, OWS! You've got your work cut out for you.

Tuesday, September 27, 2011

"Like" Us if You Needlessly Debate...

Oh Boy...

You have just got to see this: http://www.facebook.com/Anonymous?sk=wall

For those of you who don't trust to blindly click through on a posted link in a blog, this goes to the FaceBook page created for the movie, Anonymous. In brief, it's the true story of who author's Shakespeare's plays, directed by Roland Emmerich. For those of you who's brains DIDN'T derail at that sentence, I'll break it down for you.

1. "Who wrote Shakespeare's plays" is a debate that is maybe not-quite-as-old as Coke vs. Pepsi, but close, and among academics, just as fiercely debated. At least this fight deals with facts and literary interpretation as opposed to, say, nothing tangible.

2. The idea a "true story" around Shakespeare and his plays is laughable, since there's not really any concensus about any of the above, and especially nothing pertaining to Elizabeth I, and moreover, we're dealing with a movie, one of the most shortcut-taking mediums in storytelling. They can't manage to get details right about a made-up story taken from a book, much less history and literary theory. So, we know going in that this will have as much historical credibility as a John Wayne World War II movie.

3. Directed by Roland Emmerich. The guy who gave us Stargate (and an ad campaign that kept asking, "Is Stargate this generation's Star Wars?" and the answer to that was, of course, NO), Independence Day (and an ad campaign that kept asking, "Is Independence Day this generation's Star Wars?" and the answer to that was, of course, NO), and finally a Godzilla movie so horrible, terrible, no good, and very bad that he hid his name in shame for several years before he made the passable film, The Patriot. In fact, there's probably as much historical accuracy in The Patriot as there is in Anonymous. Okay, so he's no Francis Ford Coppola. It's only in his last couple of films that he started giving himself a director's credit in the previews again. But I remember Godzilla, pal. We will never forget...

So, based on all of the above, you're either really excited about seeing Anonymous, which opens at the end of October, or you're going to smirk and give it a pass (and either wait for the DVD or just rewatch Shakespeare in Love). Either way, what you're probably not going to do is start a balls-to-the-wall FaceBook debate on the movie's page.

Seriously.

You've got to read the Internet Nerd-Rage that these Oxford and Cambridge alumni are throwing on one another. They aren't mad at the movie. They are royally pissed off at each other. And it's a debate that is raging all over the page, teleporting from wall post to wall post like Nightcrawler assaulting the White House in X-Men II.

It's frankly awesome. The righteous indignation, the ad hominim attacks, and the palpable disdain for anyone who isn't them...it reminds me of, oh, I don't know, just about every single one of my friends.

Oh yeah. Where's the Robert E. Howard people in the house? Or, as we're occasionally called, the Howard Purists. Where's the Star Trekkers (don't call 'em Trekkies!)? Where's my Old Star Wars Fans? You know, the "Han Shot First" crowd? Holler if you recognize! Marvel Zombies? Firefly fans? Battlestar Galactica ballers?

If you've ever had one of these heated debates, go read the Anonymous FaceBook page. That's what we look like when we fight with one another. If you have ever been in one of these debates, it's very hard not to get worked up. After all, there's suddenly, without warning, someone being wrong on the Internet! And what's worse, they are making themselves heard through FaceBook! Why, their wrong-headed and overly-simplifed conclusions could potentially infect...everyone who uses a computer! It's got to be stopped!

I know, it's crazy. And if you're chuckling silently to yourself, thinking "Oh, boy, what geeks! I'd never get that worked up about anything so ridiculous..."

Oh, reeeeeeally?

Then allow me to ask you how you feel about Medicare and Social Security. Or the flat tax rate. Or corporate bailouts. Or anything having to to with politics, religion, and society. Did your brain explode? Or did you just shut down completely.

You know, I get it, I really do. Sometimes it's easier to debate about the trivial stuff (relatively speaking; I know that Han shooting first is more akin to scripture) rather than try to wrestle with the big, complicated issues. What's wrong with just saying, "You know what? This is big and complicated and I don't understand it all." But if we get frothing mad about a Roland Emmerich movie, what won't we fight about? Sometimes being scrappy because it's part of our "American character," whatever that means, can become really tedious.

Monday, September 19, 2011

Reclaiming Retard

I have come to hate political correctness for a number of reasons, most of them reactionary and contrarian in nature. The very idea of someone telling me that I just can't say something because I shouldn't really bothers me and makes me want to just scream it in their face instead. I also firmly believe that by outlawing certain words, you create the opposite in thought. That is, people still think horrible things in their heads all of the time, even as they are mouthing the "correct" words.  It seems to me the idea should be to change that way of thinking by explaining or showing how X can be damaging to Y and so on and so forth. I understand why some things have become culturally insensitive, and on the basis of not wanting to offend friends and family, I have cheerfully gone along with with whatever the enlightened thinking of the day is.

But there's one word that's become capitalized and hyphenated lately that I really have a problem with. Retarded, or retard, has become the "R-word." Oh, boy. This one I'm going to fight for.

I should tell you first that I have people in my life who have family members with some form of intellectual disability. That's the new term for it. It's a good one, I think; it encapsulates neatly what the problem is with a kind of clinical precision. My wife used to work with kids with a variety of LD, ED, and RD issues. Some of them had problems that registered somewhere on the spectrum of Autism, or Asperger's syndrome. And while I don't know anyone personally dealing with anyone with Down's syndrome, I recognize all of the above for their unique gifts, their personal challenges, and their daily triumphs. This is not what this is about.

This is about the right to call a friend of mine who is chronically unable to deal with women slow.

See, 'retarded' used to be the correct term for people with intellectual disabilities. It was a step up from moron or imbecile. But it really wasn't correct enough, mostly because the language was imprecise. We all know that the word "retarded" refers to "retardation" but the root of the word, to retard, is to "delay the development or progress of (an action, process, etc.)" Most dictionaries consider it desparaging slang and then show what I believe to be its NEW correct usage; you have to modify the word retard or retarded with an adverb, such as socially, emotionally, intellectually, and ideally, the phrase should speak to a person's specific actions.

This is NOT making fun of intellectually disabled people. Big difference. What I'm proposing gives a word to your boneheaded friend who keeps dating the same terrible people and never learning from the experience.  Retard=slow is a perfectly good word. It just needs to be repurposed, now that it no longer refers to a specific group of people. More to the point, I need that word back, thank you very much. I won't, and I don't, use it to refer to that group of people that I don't know. But it's very accurate when it comes to talking about people I do know, and know very well.

Many of my friends are socially retarded in one or more area of development. Some of them are so far behind the rest of us that they should just stop shaving and start picking food up off the ground. I know a few women who were at one point (and a couple who still are) emotionally retarded. They just don't get it when it comes to men. They have these ridiculous ideas and expectations that they should have grown out of by the time they turned seventeen. Instead, they are thirty or forty years old and wondering why they can't find someone to date them for more than three months at a time. And if you want a good example of someone who is intellectually retarded may I humbly suggest six or seven of the Republican party presidential nominees?

I'm sorry, but the word is just fine. Repurposed to cleave more closely to its original meaning, it's no less disparaging, but also not really insulting to a larger group of people because I'm not confusing the two. I'm not really expecting a fight on this, but hey, you never know. I had no problem with Rosa's Law.  I have no problem with the Special Olympics. And I'm all for anyone who is intellectually challenged getting a job or doing whatever the want to and can to contribute to society. I think it's awesome, frankly. The more, the merrier.

But I need something precise to use when I'm dealing with some of my peer group who are high functioning in most other areas of their life, except one. Retard is just a word. Used correctly, and with no malice intended, there's no reason why it can't stay in the zeitgeist.