Democratic Primary Musings
People who are following the
campaigning for the Democratic Presidential nomination see it coming down to a
race among three candidates, Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth
Warren. Which one emerges as the nominee
will depend on one and only one factor. (Choosing any of the others still in the race would only happen if the Party failed to come together on one of the leaders and settled on a compromise candidate, probably at their Convention. Highly unlikely.)
Forget the nationally based
polls. Forget the State primaries and
caucuses … unless they are in the States I am about to mention. They are the
crucial ones. Whichever one of the
Democratic possible candidates that can win the electoral votes of States like
Florida, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin should be the Democratic
nominee.
Right now, that is the best
path to the nomination for Joe Biden.
But we should not overlook the math, as it applies to the crucial States
mentioned above. The combined support
for Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, whose agendas are similar, may equal
or exceed Biden’s. When one of them
drops out, the remaining one’s support may double. But will it in these crucial States? That is what will be important. The decision to drop out might be predicated
by poor performances in the early primaries and caucuses. If neither Warren nor Sanders drop out, the
nomination will be Biden’s for the taking.
If Sanders remains as Biden’s
challenger, his doctrinaire positions on social issues may hurt him. If Warren survives, on the other hand, she
seems more adept at pivoting and competing with Biden on issues. I think the Democratic nomination will go to
either Biden or the Sanders/Warren survivor and that nominee will be the one
that is thought best by Democrats for the job of convincing the voters of these
five States, as evidenced by polling in those States, that he or she can beat Trump there.
* * *
What’s Up with Donald Lately
President Trump is running a
bit more off the tracks these days then he customarily does. He has told Jews that they are being disloyal
to themselves and to Israel if they vote Democratic. He cancelled a visit to Denmark when their
Prime Minister refused his supposedly joking offer to purchase Greenland. (Have you ever heard him joke? Seriously, he is a humorless man.) He told four Congresswomen to “Go Back Where
They Came From,” a long-time taunt of racists toward immigrants. His tariff proposals are falling apart, as the money comes out of American consumers' pocketbooks, and he
lacks the ability to negotiate with China, North Korea or the European nations
effectively. Most recently, he ordered that his “wall” be built, implying even
if it required breaking laws concerning private property rights and
environmental protection with the possibility of pardons for the law breakers.
(although he has supposedly backed off on this). Was this another of his supposed jokes?
The President does a lot of
dancing around statements so he cannot be held responsible for them, implying
things, becoming a cheerleader at rallies, and attributing his ideas
to “what people are saying.” This is how
he got away with his dishonesty at Trump University and many of the shady ‘deals’
he masterminded for years, resulting in the frequent loss of other people’s
money. But supposedly, a President
shouldn’t get away with this because it is Congress’ job to stop him from such
tactics.
He is off the rails and the
sooner Democrats start impeachment proceedings, the better. This stuff is just
icing on the justification already in the Mueller Report and his violation of
the “emoluments” prohibition in the Constitution. The reason for this behavior on his part is
clearly his fear of not being re-elected in 2020. He is willing to do anything to hang on to
his “base.” Why? I think it is beginning to enter his mind
that after a defeat in 2020, when all the dirt is exposed, he will be hearing
chants of “Lock him up,” and they won’t be joking.
JL
* * *
(A few years back, this blog included a general summary of the religions practiced in the Western world. We called it "Religion 101." Here is "Religion 201" which is certain to be more controversal.)
Western monotheistic religious belief in
one all-powerful deity is something Jews, Christians and Muslims have in common and ought
to be enough, by itself, upon which these believers can anchor their faith. But it isn’t.
Without formalization and organization into ritual and observance,
people do not readily adopt what is referred to as faith in God. And that formalization requires
documentation. Such documentation
exists.
- For
Jews, it is the five holy books comprising the Torah or the Pentateuch:
Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. Oh, there is more, but this “scripture”
is the required basis.
- For
Christians, it is the “Gospels,” (the ‘good news’ about the coming of the
Messiah) which builds upon the Pentateuch in the form of the Gospels of
the Apostles Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and the epistles (writings) of
Paul. Supplementing the Hebrew
scriptures, this is known as the New Testament.
- For
Muslims, it is the Koran, the words of God given to the Prophet Muhammad
and spoken by him, and later compiled in a holy book.
The authorship of this documentation has been
interpreted in many ways. Some believers
consider it the “word of God” and even if God did not write it, God certainly
inspired it for whomever did and that’s enough for them. They accept it
literally. All of it. Others do not.
Jews generally accept the idea that the five books of the Pentateuch, the Torah, was written by Moses. That is
sometimes hard to take since things that happened before and after Moses’ time,
including the description of his own death, are covered in it, so how could he
have written it? Some believe that the words were
given orally to Moses by God to write down and pass on and therefore what Moses wrote transcended time, as only God could do. Forget about impossible chronology. Moses was just the “scribe.” Understandably, some claim there were authors
in addition to Moses. And subsequent
“holy” writings such as those of the Prophets, while inspired by God, are credited
to individual authors such as Isaiah and Jerimiah as well.
Christians accept the New Testament even though
the story of Jesus, whose birth, life, death and resurrection is described somewhat
differently in the several “Gospels” authored by different apostles and written
anywhere from 20 to 90 years after the events they describe took place. None of them were there so it is logical to
expect that inconsistencies would exist. Smoothing over these differences,
Christians accept the formalization of what happened as documented in the
“Gospels” as the basis of their faith.
Muslims accept the fact that the Prophet
Muhammad spoke the words given to him over a thirty-year period by God, and
those words were dutifully written down by his followers, not by him. After his death, Islamic scribes organized
these writings into what is known as the Koran.
Islam also includes, with some modification, the core beliefs of Judaism
and Christianity but its basic tenet involves a total submission, if not a
surrender, to God.
In all these situations, there is
a common thread. And that is that what
was written down, the documentation upon which ritual and observance were
based, was obtained “second hand.” No one was with Moses
up on Mount Sinai taking notes. Matthew,
Mark, Luke and John didn’t conduct interviews with those who were in the manger
with Mary and Joseph or present at the crucifixion and resurrection. Paul didn’t carry a tape recorder with
him. And it’s hard to believe the words
of Muhammad, carved in stone and written on papyrus by his listeners over
thirty years were neatly stored and cataloged waiting for subsequent editors. Over
the centuries, these various editors and interpreters of all faiths have added
their flavor, perspective and ideas to the documentation, making even the
original “second-hand” writings difficult to separate from later versions.
But for those seeking the strength and support that
the ultimate formalization of religion which these second-hand “writings,”
provide to Judaism, Christianity and Islam, it is enough. They accept it as
divine in its own right, the word of God not to be questioned, or similarly
divine because of the inspiration that motivated its acknowledged documenters.
So we end up with a community of believers in
one God, not all of whom base their beliefs on the same “second-hand”
documentation. It amounts to numerous
formulas arriving at the same answer.
It is wrong for someone believing in one faith to
see those of other faiths who believe differently as “infidels.” Historically, many faiths have countenanced
the murder of infidels. “My way or the
highway!” … or sometimes much worse. Such
zealotry was, and is, wrong. The early
Jews stoned them to death. Christians
burned them at the stake. Muslims
continue to blow them up.
I am certain that this kind of thing was not
included in the original creation of any religion’s system of belief in God but
was something added along the way as “second-hand” documentation was written, discovered
and amalgamated into the faith. If this is ever to be straightened out, it will
take a few millenniums, at least.
But that would be just a few droplets in the ocean of time. After all, the universe existed for a very long time before our species turned up, asking hard questions, the replies to which demand faith, not proof, because of the finite capabilities of the human mind.
But that would be just a few droplets in the ocean of time. After all, the universe existed for a very long time before our species turned up, asking hard questions, the replies to which demand faith, not proof, because of the finite capabilities of the human mind.
JL
* * *
My Chinese Waterpik
About five years ago, I purchased a “Waterpik
Flosser” which I use on my teeth several times a week. Finally, the tube which carries the
water through the device to its brush or the “squirters” (an assortment of which
came with the item) broke. I went online
and found replacing the Flosser would run about $60 and was about to do
it. Taking a look at the device, it
looked like the broken tube could be easily replaced since the piece it was
part of was held on by two screws. So I
went online and found that Amazon was selling that replacement part for just
under $10. So I ordered it. Oddly, delivery was indicated as taking two
to three weeks. Well, I just got the
replacement part by U.S. Mail and have installed it. It works fine.
But what took so long?
But what took so long?
The original device was probably made in China,
so it was logical that was where the replacement part would have to come
from. But it wasn’t a matter of an
American vendor importing it and selling it to me as would usually be the case
in such situations. Apparently, I was
dealing directly with the Chinese company which was selling it. That’s why the delivery took so long. And here’s part of the label from the
envelope in which the part came to make that point clear.
This is when it hit me that in addition to our
trade with China being something that
involves American consumers every day, it is already so deeply
institutionalized that the Post Office Departments of both countries even have
a common label indicating both are sharing in the delivery of the item. Wow! Dropping it off at a post office in
China somewhere in Hunan province was sufficient to put it in the hands of the
United States Postal Service. The
systems work together! (For those
studying the label, Changsha is the capital of Hunan province and has a
population of about seven and a half million.)
World trade is something good and should not be
restricted by tariffs, something they probably taught at Wharton for those who went to classes there.
JL
No comments:
Post a Comment