Fit the Power

Public Enemy famously rapped back in 1989 "Fight the power, we've got to fight the powers that be" as a rallying cry to Black Americans. These days it seems like many kinds of people aspire to be the power that is by fitting themselves into the mold du jour. If you are a Republican wannabe, you are likely tearing a page from the Book of Trump to rabble rouse yourself to a place of importance/power (e.g., Josh Hawley, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Matt Gaetz). If you are a Democrat, you are likely trying to decide between the more diverse Bernie Sanders/The Squad model or the whiter M.O.R. model that Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema are driving. In other words, whomever you are, you've got to fit the powers that be.

By doing so, you create and build on a set of calculating core beliefs that give you amplification and the perception of power in the form of fundraising, public voice, and social media notoriety. Borrowing again from Public Enemy, "You've got to give the Peeps what they need" is the mantra that rallies the mob (corporate or public) to your side. 

We have a vortex of power, a massive wave of energy that is largely like a stalled hurricane, always a threat, but more likely to peter out in the end. Do enough of this and a person might believe that democracy is failing. A question I'd raise is "Maybe democracy has not happened yet?"

If we stop trying to fight the power and come at it with our own power, what then? For one thing, we have to join forces over lines of division. Color, culture, economics have got to be approached with a sense of purpose. We the people are just people who want to get along and have peaceful lives free of violence and exploitation. As long as we continue to fit the power, the power wins. When we realize that we are the power, then we all are on the road to giving the people what we need.

The Copification of America

 In America, we used to trust the police department to deal with enforcing the law. Today, thanks to more lax gun laws and even more lax criteria for self-defense pleas, we have created a nation of deputies-in-waiting. Armed people essentially looking for a fight. Take Kyle Rittenhouse (please), the 17-year-old cause celebre who was acquitted of killing two men and badly injuring another in Kenosha, Wisconsin--a city not best known for being the hometown of Orson Welles, Mark Ruffalo, and Al Molinaro (from TV's "Happy Days"). You may recall that Rittenhouse's dad lived in Kenosha and young Kyle moved by the left-winged rioting and right-winged social media to walk the streets and offer to render medical aid while toting an illegally acquired AR-15 style weapon. 

Not surprisingly, young Kyle alarmed protestors by appearing to be a loner gunman and leading to three altercations that ended up in the deaths of Joseph Rosenbaum, Anthony Huber, and the shooting of Gaige Grosskreutz. Ironically, both Rittenhouse and Grosskreutz were there to provide medical assistance and both were armed, albeit in Grosskreutz's case with a concealed weapon drawn only to confront an armed attacker. A sympathetic jury dismissed all charges against Rittenhouse who testified for his defense team and whose almost semi-epileptic breakdowns on and off the witness stand (and upon the reading of the verdicts) were convincing enough for the jury to let him go and to get on with his plans for an appearance on Tucker Carlson's low-key Fox Network show.

Thanks to Republican-led statehouses, people like Rittenhouse are presumed innocent even when they cross state lines and shoot a rifle that their friend illegally bought for them. It turns out that the prosecution has to prove that you did not shoot to defend yourself. You can say a lot about this case, but the people who were shot by Rittenhouse definitely went after him because they perceived him to be a threat and he shot them because he could.

Imagine for a moment that Rittenhouse had arrived in Kenosha with nothing but his medical kit and just cleaned graffiti (as he had done earlier in the day). Would any of these three men see a reason to scrap with him? Chances are very unlikely that he would have been in a situation to defend himself. But, he was armed and in a chaotic situation. He had been told by a police officer that guys like him were appreciated for being there--and defending a used car lot from vandals and looters that he volunteered to do to an owner of the lot (who also claimed did not ask him to do it or even agreed to allow). 

Kyle Rittenhouse may have seen himself as a good guy with a gun, but how was anyone else to know that? Tensions in the community were running high and it was just as reasonable for the men shot to think that Rittenhouse was more likely a danger as a protector. Rittenhouse was Paul Blart, Melee Cop--a self-appointed deputy in the service of keeping the peace by all means necessary. 

How many more Charles Bronson vigilantes will be claiming self-defense when they show up in your town? It doesn't matter. What matters is it is the Wild West and frontier justice is being doled out by a leaderless posse that thinks it is making America great again by fanboying the police. Let's see if Rittenhouse joins the thin blue line or merely uses his newly found fame to get rich quick. Certainly, he will not be the first person to claim to be a hero, he was just doin' his job, ma'am. Heck, even the Gunowners of America is giving him an award--an AR-15.

Build Back Biden

The President is literally down for the count as he is having a routine colonoscopy done today. However, while time will tell if the wins on the infrastructure bill and, as of this morning, the House passing the social spending bill which includes reforms to immigration, climate change, and goodies like child care subsidies, universal preschool, paid family leave, renewable energy tax incentives and extensions of both the expanded child tax credit, efforts to slash prescription drug prices, and enhanced health care subsidies spell a needed lift for Biden. Using a cheap colonoscopy metaphor, Biden and his surgeon are getting a little behind (in polling number terms).  

As we have seen, you can't keep Joe Biden down and as his policies take hold, barring cold feet from the Senate, he should see an ascendency to his popularity. Still, this is not foolproof, as the Republicans will keep beating the drum about inflation, the debt, illegal immigrants, socialism, and so on. The election theme that Biden would be a steady hand on the wheel, for the Republicans is replaced by the new theme of taking the car keys away from Grandpa. But, you can't argue with Biden's success since in less than a year many of his policies have been wrangled through the sausage grinder that is Congress. Sure it has been herky-jerky and with a lot of self-inflicted wounds by his own party, but the change he has promised is coming to fruition. Not Everything. Not perfectly. And hopefully, like his colonoscopy, everything will work out at the end.

Iowa's State Government (almost) One Party System

 With the exception of State Auditor and Treasurer and discounting the State's Attorney General, largely defanged by the Party That Be, Iowa's state government is run by Republicans. They run the House, Senate, Governor's Office, and Secretary of State's Office. In actuality, the House, Senate, and Governor's offices have been in lockstep since 2017. It is not likely to change much unless Iowans gain control of their senses (and as my previous column suggests, there seems not much chance of that happening). So in a span of five years, the Republicans have managed to run the table (save the aforementioned offices that Democrats have yet to lose). 

 In 2022, you can bet that the goal will be to gain the omnipresent Tom Miller's AG's office and, probably more importantly to this crew, regain the auditor's office where Rob Sand has actually done the credible job an auditor is supposed to do--which is to point out mishandling of the public's dollars (or make sense of the non-cents). But that is not making Glorious Leader Kim and her island of broken toys under the rotunda very happy. How dare he point out that she used funds inappropriately to pay for her staff's unreported raises. That was so partisan of him to call out her partisanship. It is safe to say that Sand has a larger target on him than the retail chain by the same name has on their stores.

And this is an example of what happens when one party is entrusted to run the whole show--no checks and definitely no balances. To the citizenry of Iowa who still likes to say their liberties they prize and their rights they will maintain, um--how? You see when there is limited opposition, you kind of get a pass on legalities and ethics because, you know, you don't really need 'em since you are in charge.

You know how we don't want to become like North Korea or be one of those one-party states? Well, we kind of are. The only way out of this is to vote for change (or for a change, if you are one of those seasonal voters). Buddy, can you spare the time?

We Built It, They Won't Come

 I am not a native Iowan, but unless you are from an indigenous tribe, who is? However, when my wife and I moved here in 1999, we liked the idea of reforming our midwestern roots in a state that was known for having common sense and basic decency. Little did we know that Iowa would become less about "live and let live" and more "it's my way or the highway", especially about guns and women's reproductive rights. While today's version of the GOP wants to make it sound like Democrats are authoritarian Socialists, their party has become the party of Patriarchal Nationalist authoritarians where the rights of immigrants,  most minorities, and many women are trampled for their version of a free America and our state has become a laboratory toward their national goals. 

How can I say this with a woman governor who is likely to be re-elected next year?  Governor Reynolds checks a box, but she is not necessarily pro-all women. What has she really done for women who have families to care for or for women who are in the difficult decision of what to do with a pregnancy that they do not wish to bring to term for a plethora of reasons, including child care and support for single-parented households. She is not pro-anybody when it has come to her handling of the pandemic choosing to put commerce before health and using federal funds meant to support Iowans as a way to make more tax cuts knowing that Uncle Sam has backfilled revenue lost. Her partisanship is glaring as she rubber stamps bill after bill that the party puts on her desk; including making it hard for the blue lives that she says matter from getting shot by a citizen who can now able to tote his or her piece without a permit. 

Our state has become like the fans that support sports teams at all levels, a little too dependent on the kool-aid that they are drinking. Even things that are intentionally non-partisan have to take a turn in that direction, such as when the Republican legislators had the Congressional maps redrawn to favor them and made election tougher to participate in due to legal wrangling under the Golden Dome. 

As my working days are drawing to an end, there is a part of me that does not want to continue to see the political erosion that has occurred in this state. To those who already consider this a flyover zone, we have done nothing to change their mind. I have rethought the whole "If you build it, they will come" idea. What we have built is a state of discord, a field of schemes, and of small-mindedness. That is bad for all of us.

Taking a Knee versus Taking a Needle

 Normally, I would let this go, but I got to thinking about quarterback-in-exile Colin Kaepernick and how he basically got sidelined by the NFL for taking a knee to protest police brutality and has yet to see another game day snap.  Aaron Rodgers, on the other hand, got sidelined for not taking a needle and was fined for violating NFL protocol, but will likely be back on the field in the next week or two. And, if history has anything to say about it, if the Packers make the playoffs, all will be forgotten and forgiven by the average Packer fan.

Kaepernick taking a knee caused no injury to anyone, as the First Amendment allows all the right to protest (though not the right for everyone to agree with it). Rodgers says that he is a "critical thinker" and he had the right not to be vaccinated. You might say he is protesting against vaccination/taking a knee against those who would want anyone who can be vaccinated to do it. The difference is that while both players could be labeled as "selfish" for their actions, only Rodgers legitimately endangered the lives of his co-workers/teammates. Worse still is that Rodgers was given a megaphone to articulate his beliefs by his celebrity so that other similarly-minded persons can do the same thing and claim, "Hey, if Aaron Rodgers can do it, so can I"--like it is a virtuous thing. Meanwhile, in the metropolitan area of Green Bay, almost 58,000 people have contracted COVID-19 and 443 people have died from it as of 11/4. As far as I know, nobody in San Francisco died from Colin Kaepernick taking a knee.

Woke Mob, MLK, and Critical Thinking

 Aaron Rodgers, who I hear is a quarterback for the Green Bay Packers--I accept this because I am a Chicago Bears fan and there are no other players in the NFL that matter to me (I kid, a little bit)--apparently thought it was a good idea to go on a SiriusXM talk show and call people who think he was duplicitous for not revealing he was unvaccinated for COVID-19 until after he contracted it, a "woke mob". He also claims to be a "critical thinker" (who critically and evasively used immunized instead of vaccinated earlier in the pre-season to answer the question "Have you been vaccinated?") and who got treatment advice from Joe Rogan, who I hear is a radio personality, though I vaguely remember him from a funny sit-com called "News Radio" where no one let him near the dials. 

So, those confounding variables aside, Rodgers then went on to invoke Martin Luther King during the interview by paraphrasing him thusly,  “The great MLK said you have a moral obligation to object to unjust rules and rules that make no sense.”  In Letter from a Birmingham Jail, Rev. King wrote: “One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that ‘an unjust law is no law at all.” 

In the case of Rodgers, it was a policy of the NFL player's association he violated. Rodgers is part of the player's union who agrees or disagrees with management decisions via collective bargaining. The NFL mandates that all employees who have contact with players to be fully vaccinated, but the players and coaches are not subject to any mandates due to "labor concerns." It would seem that the NFLPA has not decided whether vaccine mandates are just, but are very okay with everybody else having them. As for the players, they have informally agreed either to be vaccinated or be tested every day, if they are unvaccinated. Also, according to the USA Today:

Unvaccinated players are required to wear face masks at all times while at the team's facilities and are also required to observe social distancing. The mask usage also applies when in teams' weight rooms. Unvaccinated players are not allowed to eat meals with teammates and cannot do any media or marketing opportunities when traveling. They also aren't allowed to use the sauna or steam rooms in the team facilities and are not allowed to leave the team hotel or have any outside interactions with people on the road who are not affiliated with their respective team.

The lockers of unvaccinated players are required to be six feet apart from the ones of other players. Unvaccinated players are also prohibited from traveling on team charters and must make their way to road games separately. Upon landing, they need to show negative COVID-19 tests in order to rejoin the team. Upon arrival, unvaccinated players are not allowed to eat with the rest of their teammates and are not allowed to mingle with other teammates. They also are barred from using a hotel's common spaces, such as the pool.

They are restricted from attending indoor events — such as bars, nightclubs, concerts or other events — with more than 15 people where masks were not being worn.

Unvaccinated players are also subject to a five-day quarantine period if they are deemed to be close contacts of a person infected with COVID-19.

Presuming the NFLPA is acting in good faith, the only "woke mob" that Rodgers should be concerned about is likely the players themselves who are vaccinated at a rate of 94.1%--much higher than the general population. As for Martin Luther King's thoughts on this subject, he once said, “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.”

We Need Hearing Aides

Some members of Congress who bear a "D: next to their name can be horribly hard of hearing when it comes to their constituencies who don't or can't write big checks. Take the esteemed senators Manchin and Sinema who apparently are unaware that paid family leave is more popular than strip mining and the Diamondbacks. It seems that these members of Congress need a pair of hearing aides, these would be people who, like their constituents are dealing with living in poverty, have kids to consider, and have a job that sucks--currently they are called interns. Interns are notoriously underpaid and over-used so they would be perfect to play the part of the conscience for these two if they weren't social climbing to join the machine.

So dear everyday people in West Virginia and  Arizona, please consider going to their websites and applying for an internship. You are our best hope for helping Americans to get the things that we really need:

Senator Joe Manchin

Senator Kyrsten Sinema

Backing Off Backlash

Isaac Newton's 3rd law of motion is "for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction". Where social movements are concerned, for every Black life that matters, there is a Blue life that matters. More broadly, for every progressive step forward, there is a regressive step backward. And so it goes on in equilibrium and disequilibrium. Everybody feels backlash, but not everybody experiences it personally or as deeply. Why is this?

I think that it is largely socioeconomic--the whiter and richer you are, the more insulated you are from the effects of backlash. The so-called cancel culture is real, but it is a two-sided coin.  Left- and right-winged people cancel on a regular basis, but the idea of cancel culture is owned by the right-leaning folks by the way they frame it. Cancel culture from the left to them is anti-freedom, but when they do it, it is pro-freedom. Kind of slick to use the idea of freedom as a bludgeon and a value, right?

The corrosive thing about backlash is that it cedes no middle ground. It takes complex ideas and complex people and reduces them to doing good or evil. Well-meaning people can do and say very uninformed things and can even act in ways that are heinous in the eye of the beholder. But rather than to see it as a moment to clarify and educate, quite often, it is a moment of condemnation. While I believe that there are absolutely good reasons to ultimately condemn others who are creating real harm, in most cases, there is room for helpful dialogue.

So how do we go from the backlash to finding common ground? First, we recognize that canceling others is a politically motivated act; that is, we hold our viewpoint to be superior to another no matter what because our side is right and they are wrong. What if both of our viewpoints are flawed? Two, we recognize our humanity--we are all people who have pain points and each of us makes our stands based on what we know or are told. Third, we have a common enemy--misinformation. If we are using the same information, then our reactions are based on our philosophical differences, not the source of information.

Will this be easy? I'll readily agree it will not be. For one reason, we lack trust and everything ultimately can be politicized or worse, turned partisan. This is why I think it has to begin with pairs of differing people rather than a large group process. Trust in a group is harder to form than a one-on-one interaction. I think back to the former governor of Alabama, George Wallace, a staunch segregationist, who ultimately renounced his position largely due to the efforts of Shirley Chisholm who visited him after he survived an assassination attempt and shocked him by being at his side despite his stances.  Through this encounter, his stances drastically changed to the point that, in his last term as governor, he nominated a record number of Black people to state commissions and renounced segregation. Dr. Martin Luther King once said, “Forgiveness does not mean ignoring what has been done or putting a false label on an evil act. Rather, it means that the evil act no longer remains as a barrier to the relationship. Forgiveness is a catalyst creating the atmosphere necessary for a fresh start and a new beginning. Forgiveness means reconciliation, a coming together again. Without this, no man can love his enemies.”

Arise Ye Authoritarians!

 Last night's election headlines bore out that, for the moment, Dad jokes and bods are back, baby! From Virginia to NYC, it was a good night to be pro-authority (aka pro-parent). In Minneapolis, the electorate of those who fought against authority to remake their police force into a public safety department was served notice 56% - 43% that "the blue" is backed by the majority. The overall message seemed to be: these are serious times and we need serious people in charge.

What this means for 2022 is uncertain. It seems that only a year or so ago, we were fighting to wrestle democracy from an authoritarian-in-chief only to reward his ilk-lite in this cycle. As a progressive, this rightfully scares me. Certainly, the barbarians at the gate against true representative democracy are showing up in force to make this country divide itself into factions, but let's also face it, progressives are not doing what they need to do to keep the ground from slipping out from under us. Whether we like to think it is so or not, we need to harness the moderate voices to our wagon for some important wins. The fact that popular policy is being whittled away by internal politics is proof that some would prefer to set themselves on fire than to hold power. If our elected representatives don't show people that Democrats can govern within themselves, we can look forward to a rise of Trumpians in better packages that will make things worse for many people who aren't seeing any results from the D-crew.

We like to think of the Republicans as being all "me and mine"--but the truth is likely that liberals can be that too and the more moderate will vote against for their interests, like in Minneapolis. As it turns out, the people who want revolution the most are on the right and have the firepower to scare the bejeezus out of many. No, if progressives want to win the hearts and minds of moderates, they have to be willing for a slower-moving revolution of better policies being enacted. Because, as the move toward universal healthcare has shown us, if you build it (and protect it), they will come--slowly, but surely, they will come.

Ugly Politics with Unintended Consequences

 When is bipartisanship not bipartisanship? When it is Iowa House File 902 which was passed in a record time. This bill allows exemptions for medical and religious reasons for employees to not be vaccinated for COVID-19. And yes, Democrats did vote for it, but not for the reasons Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds would like you to think. Reynolds said of the bill, “I am proud to sign this bipartisan piece of legislation today. This is a major step forward in protecting Iowans’ freedoms and their abilities to make healthcare decisions based on what’s best for themselves and their families. This legislation also gives employees the assurance that they will still receive unemployment benefits despite being fired for standing up for their beliefs. As I’ve stated publicly numerous times, I believe the vaccine is the best defense against COVID-19 and we’ve provided Iowans with the information they need to determine what’s best for themselves and their families, but no Iowan should be forced to lose their job or livelihood over the COVID-19 vaccine."

So let's dissect this. Will Iowans not lose their jobs if their employer chooses to terminate employment (in compliance with the Federal mandate) for them not getting it? The answer so far is yes, they will lose their jobs, but thanks to this bill, they will still be able to claim unemployment benefits which typically are about $200 a week. Not the same thing.  The truth is people can be fired and likely will be.

Secondly, Reynolds says that she believes the vaccine to be the best defense against the virus but won't support the employers who want to protect their employees. How pro-business is that? Frankly, how pro-people is that?

Thirdly, is this a bipartisan bill? No, it was drafted entirely by the Republican membership and thrust for a vote. True that Democrats voted for it, but it was for the part that made sure that people were able to still qualify for unemployment despite their beliefs. It will be interesting to explore when Democrats ask Republicans to support a bill that allows an employee to collect unemployment for quitting to protest a company policy that does not align with their personal, religious, or medical beliefs (e.g., when their company dumps swine waste into the water supply).

To be sure, this bill is wrong for Iowans for a lot of reasons, but at the end of the day, it is worse because it really did not take into account bipartisan positions. People having to share their religious beliefs or medical backgrounds is a slippery slope for the freedom-loving Republicans, but it was the Democrats that had to remind them of this. I recommend that you read the Bleeding Heartland's story on this and then ask yourself, is this the kind of politics Iowa needs?