Monday, July 10, 2017

one man's truth is is another man's lie

What we read or hear for news depends on whether we get multiple sources, whether we go for what we most want to hear, whether when we read something potentially disturbing, we look for more sources. Do we spread around the version we most want or accept there are other possibilities? Are we part of the solution or the problem?

I first heard the following at Facebook, from those who used it as evidence that Trump is crazy or senile and should be replaced. I then went looking for what was online and found many stories describing the event but not adding the crazy part. There are two versions to describe the video that is supposed to be proof of insanity. Which do you believe?
Version 1: Trump got off his plane and walked past the waiting Presidential limousine. A secret service agent stopped him and guided him back to his ride to the White House.

Version 2: Trump walked past the first of two black limos, both awaiting his arrival. Someone guided him back to the first one. Normally, the President would use the second one as the first is subterfuge in keeping attackers from knowing which he is in.
If you hated him, you only heard the first and went out spreading around evidence that he is insane. 

If you don't hate him, don't like him though, you might've ignored the whole story and still won't know the facts, which could have been that cameraman captured the moment where he was wandering around confused or that there are always two limos. Usually he is supposed to ride in the second. This time they wanted him the first. 

The President has to ride in the right one, as it's where the codes are waiting in case of an emergency. In that latter case, he didn't do anything nuts but the media, constantly clipping or using photos to be damaging created this non-story, knowing ordinary people, as well as blogs will spread it around to reassure themselves that they aren't wrong to hate him and to stir up fear.

This is what we face in our times. Is it any wonder many give up on the news? Even a picture today is evidence of nothing!

Monday, July 03, 2017


A friend of mine wrote this on Facebook. I thought it was important to share.
"Interesting points from a Canadian author this morning, talking about the Canadian health care system and the decisions Canadians made to get them there. Essentially he said that there are trade-offs that must be made, and that Canadians decided they wanted health care for all, which means they couldn't have the most modern hospitals, the latest diagnostic tools, the most advanced drugs, etc. Essentially he said they settled for less than great health care to enable it to be given to everyone. 

"He said the problem in America today is that we aren't willing to have that conversation - some of us want health care for all, but we also want the best medical care available, the most advanced techniques and medicines, and we want it quick and responsive. Like a lot of economic decisions, to get to a solution you have to set priorities and make trade-offs. I think he's right.
"So, what are our trade-offs? If you believe health care is a right, are you willing to forego those MRIs and the latest cancer drug and a longer wait list for orthopedic surgery so that your fellow citizens can be covered?" 
He's right because we are encouraged not to consider the costs of anything. We want it all and figure borrowing will get us it-- without worrying about the cost. Politicians, both sides, are good at that game. Words are cheap-- accountability, not so much. That kind of thinking does not work for families and won't for government-- not in the long run. Let's be reasonable and figure out what we're willing to give up to get what we want. It is the responsible way to live.

Saturday, July 01, 2017

voter fraud or suppression?

An issue that has recently arisen is the commission begun by the President to look into voter fraud. Nobody was bothered by this inquiry, until the word went out that they were asking states to give them voter information on all those who voted. Here's what it's about from as unbiased a source as I could find (not easy these days).

The object is the belief that states have been allowing voting by illegals as well as others without a right to vote (including the dead). Oregon was not on the list of those who have refused, but it has now said it won't do it. The objection is that information on party registration, voting record for ten years, part of the Social Security number, should not be held by the government in power. Voter rights are a state issue.

Richardson said, they can get their info the way any other citizen does-- pay $500. (he is by the way a Republican). From that article:
"It would be illegal for Richardson to refuse to release public information, including voter names, addresses, party affiliation and voting history, regardless of who requests it. But Richardson noted that Social Security numbers, driver's license numbers and some of the other data Kobach asked for is confidential under Oregon law and he is duty-bound to keep it private."
 One of the issues apparently relates to allowing felons to vote. This is determined by the states and only 12 deny felons the right to vote in perpetuity. Oregon is not one of them. 

The real fear, of course, is the belief that some states have been allowing non-citizens to vote thereby influencing election results. The voter ID card, which is much fought against by Democrats, would be one way to be sure all who vote have a right-- it also might suppress vote.

With Oregon's vote by mail, we have a pretty high turnout, and it allows ease of voting (still does not get 100% of those entitled). It's hard for me to understand why anybody does not vote. When someone does not, they lose their right to complain about the outcome-- at least until the next election.

Thursday, June 29, 2017

a side note

This email is about what I do when not writing blogs. Creating an imaginary world makes a good escape.  Give it a try!

Rain Trueax's  New Release

Our latest release in the Tucson based Hemstreet Witches. A series combining the family story lines from my Arizona Historicals and the mystery side of the barrio's inhabitants.
Available June 21, 2017.
A Price To Be Paid
The third of the Hemstreet Witches, Paranormal Modern Romances.

This series pulls the locations and character types from the Arizona Historicals into the 21st century.  Living and "reliving"  the energy of the Arizona rim country, the intrigue of Tucson's old Presido, Barrio Viejo and the Tanque Verde.
As a woman with her feet in two worlds,  Devi Hemstreet tries to find peace with the conflicts she feels wishing she had not been born a witch. The youngest of four Hemstreet sisters, that choice was never hers. Working in the family bookstore, trying to move out of the family home, what is hers? And now, to complicate it, she has an unwelcome and persistent suitor.
Asa Taggert has acquired all that a man could want with money, properties, physical beauty, and a son he is raising as a single parent. He is being pressured to run for political office, something he’s unsure he’s suited to do. Still, what challenge is left for him?
When these two come together, a business contract is a vehcile for the passion that lies beneath the surface. Will a marriage by contract ever be enough for either of them? At Willy’s Lake they find the answers-- as well as a life-changing challenge.
Set in Central and Southern Arizona, this contemporary paranormal confronts the question of what is real with a determined ghost , spirit guides, demons, possible monsters, and maybe karma, with a need to fulfill—A Price to be Paid.
Some spice, violence, strong language, and unconventional spirituality. 72,000 words.
 Trailer: .

All books in the Hemstreet series have been refined for content and continuity.
The back story of Asa Taggert and his termination.
Willy's Lake original story.
Hemstreets Book 1   
Hemstreets Book 2,
also a central Arizona connection

Saturday, June 24, 2017

what does it mean?

In a divisive, name-calling time, I thought it'd be interesting to look at what being a conservative or a liberal means in terms of core beliefs. I know what each set out to do, but do the partisan actions fit the supposed beliefs?

Easy to find were core beliefs for conservatives if Kirk has it right.

 I had a harder time coming up with something similar for liberals. There are quotes out there by John F. Kennedy as to what he thought liberalism meant but today he'd have a hard time in the Democratic party as it's gone way far to the left... whatever left and right mean.

Classical liberalism though may have little to do with what passes for liberalism today. It is interesting that both the liberal and conservative core beliefs seem to want to limit the power of government-- but in different arenas. 

Are we left with anarchism if we merge the two?

This leaves what are called moderates or independents. Is there a set of core beliefs for them?

That was actually pretty close as in believing in the need for government but not one that leans too far one way or the other-- as in not throwing out one whole segment of the population in favor of another. It also explains why moderates can vote for either party under certain circumstances-- or at least used to before both parties went to the extremes for who they would run. Trump by the way was not run by the Republican party. Yes, he won their nomination but he ran on his own agenda-- whatever that might be at the moment ;) 

Too bad there is not a moderate party... 


Wednesday, June 14, 2017

what is happening?

A day for thinking when I woke up this morning remembering the film, ‘Genius.' Last night we’d watched as in 1933, Einstein wanted to leave Germany because he saw the political environment was changing with increasing attacks on Jews. It took someone to help him do it—someone who helped other Jews also leave a country where soon the Holocaust was going to happen—an event that most of us today can still not get our head around. I lay in bed wondering how humans reach a point where they could send other, innocent humans to gas chambers. How does that happen? It just is beyond me to understand.

Once I clicked on the computer, I saw that a shooting had happened in Alexandria where a killer targeted GOP legislators practicing for the charitable baseball game for the next night. He began shooting as many as he could before he was blocked by Congressional security, who were there because of a high level GOP legislator at the practice. Without that security, there’d have been more deaths.

My thinking is-- what is it with humans who can do such things? I won’t try to say that the shooting in Alexandria is remotely the equivalent of the Holocaust. Both though separate out compassion for other human beings, using some kind of political aim. 

The shooter was angry, egged on by relentless left wing media, at Republicans and wanted to hurt as many as he could. Somehow or other the Nazi party and Hitler decided they should kill as many Jews as possible, could treat their lives as if they had no value. 

What both events have in common is a lack of concern for human life, for compassion, for seeing a connection between us all. Yes, it takes someone who is mentally off; but the viewers who cheered at the killing of Julius Caesar set in modern times, with Caesar looking like Trump, what about them?

I can’t get my head around why some have so little empathy for anyone but themselves.

Sunday, June 11, 2017

Cultural Issue Alert

If you aren't following the story of Evergreen College and what's happening on campuses across the United States, you may not be in college or have a loved one there. As for me, I am in total amazement in what I've been reading has been going on in our institutions of higher learning. I literally haven't understood how we got there. 

Naively, I thought colleges were to prepare students for a career and life of deeper understanding of how the world operates. It appears that's not what's been one of their primary goals-- many approve totally of what is. Is that a majority or are the majority of Americans more concerned with who won one of the reality shows?

Here are a few links to explain what's happening. Too bad they don't agree on the reasons.

When we let the students take over campuses and issue demands for what must be done does that mean the administrators have lost control or that they have been abusive and the students are finally speaking up for themselves? 

What good does a degree do in terms of jobs for a college like Evergreen with no grades or majors?  If a private college wishes to do that and is privately funded, that's fine with most people. When taxpayers discover schools like this have been spreading a philosophy without offering anything but that indoctrination, what taxpayer will be pleased? Why would parents send their kids to such schools???

From the student newspaper, the Cooper Point Journal:
 “Police are commissioned to maintain order, the current order of the world, and thus always inherently work in favor of the status quo. Police are peace keepers, but the kind of peace they keep is not peace as an end to structural violence, but a peace based in non disruption of the status quo. If you are a member of a group that the status quo does not favor, if you are among other things not white, not wealthy, not straight, or not cisgender, then the cops do not and can not work in your favor.
” … If the status quo at the Evergreen State College is institutional racism, and the police are here [to] protect the institution that shelters that form of institutional violence, they are a white supremacist threat.”
So if you don't want what the culture of your times wants, you must resist and tear apart the order-- and that means attack the police who are paid to keep order...

And what is this about a day without whites on campus? Why is that not racist? I know the liberal answer-- only those in power can be identified as racist.