A Plan for Winning, not Whining

Updating my list of suggestions for the Democratic Party on how to win future elections.

Democrats will:

1 –Aid and protect you with:

- better access to affordable health care

- free hands-on job-training in the fields of plumbing, electrical, mechanical, HVAC, etc.

- free adult education of any kind, including

    - classes on job-related computer skills, from spreadsheets to coding

    - classes at community colleges or job-training-related adult evening classes at local high schools

2 - Reduce the strangulating power that corporations have over our lives that keep all of us from a better life

3 - Reject corporate welfare (subsidies and tax credits to companies and industries unrelated to the common good)

4 - Incentivize corporations to share their profits with their workers

5 - Cut off the limit on employer contributions to your personal Social Security fund and reinstate the social security tax for earners over $150,000

6 - Put American citizens’ needs ahead of anyone entering our country illegally

7 - Limit the power of investment houses to buy up houses and hold them from the market in order to force an increase in the price of housing 

8 - Pass laws requiring term limits for all federal and state level politicians

9 - Institute age-limits for Supreme Court justices

10 - Nominate justices who will overturn Citizens United reducing the role of money from billionaires and corporations in politics

11 - Only involve our military fighting wars that have an impact on our own national security

12 – Reduce unnecessary overseas military installations and use the money to strengthen our factory towns

13 – Commit to a full audit of the nation’s drinking water systems and make repairs a top priority, giving everyone access to clean water

14 - Oppose hate speech against people who have different political opinions from ours, no matter how much we disagree. Our fellow American citizens are not the enemy within

15 - Will do everything we can to keep the government out of your life…unless you actually need or want its help. If the private sector can do it better and for less cost, the government shouldn’t be doing it at all

16 –Will give special attention to supporting small businesses, which create more jobs than all the Fortune 500 companies combined. This includes removing burdensome regulations and unnecessary government-imposed requirements

17 – Will make sure all spending on our national defense is spent efficiently and is directed toward the most up-to-date weaponry

18 – Make sure our veterans have access to free mental healthcare for life

19 – Give incentives to corporations of any size to provide free onsite childcare

And 20th, never forget to remind people how wonderful they are. The best of what makes America great isn’t based on how we vote. It’s what we do every day regardless of our party affiliation: getting our kids off to school, shopping, making dinner, going to religious services, volunteering at the food bank, cutting the grass for a sick friend or neighbor regardless of what their voter registration card says, caring for our elderly parents, and yes, maybe even running for public office.  

As James Brown said, “People feel you before they hear you.” I have plenty of people in my life whom I love and respect, who are thoughtful, loving, supportive people…who vote straight Republican, yes, even including for Donald Trump. We need to validate and try to understand their feelings and beliefs, just as we’d ask that they do the same of us. 

This is an excerpt from an email I recently sent to a friend:

I have lots of takeaways about the election. One can correctly blame Biden; Kamala's emphasis on joy while ignoring people's pain; paying Beyonce and Oprah $1m to endorse her; worry about the border (why?!); the Dems fascination with people's identities, from gender to race; along with the list you included above. 

I think it's every single one of those things.

Thing is, we Dems need a candidate who has many of the same goals as the absolute political genius lunkhead in the oval office right now - questioning everything about the way our government works and playing more hardball than many Ds are comfortable with.

What annoys me about the Ds right now is we are doing so much navel gazing, philosophizing, ruminating, discerning and threshing, but not coming up with specific plans instead of general ones, that speak the language of the guy at the end of the bar. Or maybe just the bartender. 

FCNL had a call the other night of actions we can take to fight back. I signed up for it but opted to get the transcript. It's 33 pages long. I've read, or at least breezed through, the first 16 pages and so far, the only thing they've said is to lobby moderate Republicans. Genius! The rest of it is thanking each other and explaining problems we all already knew about. I'm not going to read the rest, but if you do, let me know if it gets more constructive.

I am working on my own list of things that Dems should be pimping left and, especially, right - specifics, that speak the human language, with no references to ad hoc stopgap subcommittee bipartisan blue ribbon adjunct hardworking American roll up our sleeves best practice bread and butter existential inflection point game changer kitchen table common sense initiatives. (Did I forget anything?!)

 Another home photo I love, taken during a small snowstorm at 2am.

Ruben Gallego for President!

I used to post articles like this, with my comments, on Facebook, but for some reason, I'm just not into doing that anymore. In fact, the last post below this, I put on FB and a few days later deleted it I guess because I don't want and care for, approval from the masses and I don't feel like pushing my political views on anyone anymore. Or at least not to the extent I had been. I still post (political) things there from time, but not generally and definitely not to the extent I had been leading up to the election.

And why I even post them here I'm not entirely sure. My blog data says that anywhere from 5-20 people look at my posts and honestly, as far as I can tell, really only 1 or 2 do: my dear niece Becca, bless her heart, actually truly does read them, though I think my sister Laurie checks in from time to time. So who I'm writing for, I'm not really sure, especially the political stuff. But I enjoy it. Maybe it's for venting. I really don't know.

Anyway, here are the two excerpts from this interview with Ruben Gallego that I like best, with my favorite parts in red:

"You won Latino men by 30 points in an election in which Trump dominated that group. I know men are a very broad group, but what do you think Democrats have misunderstood about them? 

That we could be working to make the status of men better without diminishing the status of women. 

A lot of times we forget that we still need men to vote for us. That’s how we still win elections. But we don’t really talk about making the lives of men better, working to make sure that they have wages so they can support their families. I also think some of this is purely psychological — like we just can’t put our finger on it. During my campaign, I noticed when I was talking to men, especially Latino men, about the feeling of pride, bringing money home, being able to support your family, the feeling of bringing security — they wanted to hear that someone understood that need. And a lot of times we are so afraid of communicating that to men, because we think somehow we’re going to also diminish the status of women. That’s going to end up being a problem. The fact that we don’t talk this way to them makes them think we don’t really care about them, when in fact the Democrats on par are actually very good about the status of working-class men. It was a joke, but I said a lot when I was talking to Latino men: “I’m going to make sure you get out of your mom’s house, get your troquita.” For English speakers, that means your truck. Every Latino man wants a big-ass truck, which, nothing wrong with that. “And you’re gonna go start your own job, and you’re gonna become rich, right?” These are the conversations that we should be having. We’re afraid of saying, like, “Hey, let’s help you get a job so you can become rich.” We use terms like “bring more economic stability.” These guys don’t want that. They don’t want “economic stability.” They want to really live the American dream."

And:

"How do Democrats stand for what they believe in without being seen by voters as outside the mainstream? 

"It’s easier for us to be hit as being extremists if we’re not also known for something, if we’re not fighting to make someone’s life better, to bring down the cost of living, raise wages. 

If we’re not actively fighting for that, it’s going to be easier for people to take the most extreme positions and say, “Well, that’s actually what the Democrats are.” I think most Americans are very much pro-L.G.B.T. I think they are pro-women’s rights. I think they’re more aligned with Democrats than with where Republicans are. But when we aren’t identified as doing something for the grander America, they’re just going to be able to say, “They’re just so focused on these small little niche groups instead of you.” And that resonated.

I know someone’s going to say: “Well, the G.D.P. under Biden was the highest. And we had the lowest unemployment ever. Ruben Gallego is wrong.” Yes, that was all true. But people were not feeling it. People were just not feeling it. If we want to lie to ourselves and say, “Well, things were really good, the economy was really good” when people were telling us it was not, we’re going to continue having this problem. It’s going to be easier for people to take away some of these basic rights if we allow the middle of America to continue to suffer economically."

This column really spoke to me. I know there are plenty of my friends who are so ready to fight, resist, activate and push. God bless them. I'm behind them. Like way way behind them. I'm not there. My goal is to try to be a better person. To be kind. To plant seeds of joy and love and return to basics. Friends, family, every person I know or even meet for the first time. A smile. A conversation. A hug when appropriate. And someday, I'll be ready to reactivate. Just not now.

"Now is a time of quiet. A passionate activist friend told me she doesn’t feel very resisty yet, but one thing that characterizes deserts is the stillness, until the wind blows. And, boy, when it blows, it’s like an organ. You can hear its shape and power because everything else is so still. How or when will the wind start up? How could we know? But it always does. Spring is less than two months away — warmth, light, daffodils, life bursting into its most show-offy self.

“Give me those far away in the desert,” Saint Augustine said, “who are thirsty and sigh for the spring of the eternal country.”

"I can tell you this: The resistance will be peaceful, nonviolent, colorful, multigenerational — we older people will march with you, no matter our sore feet and creaky joints. There will be beautiful old music. There will also be the usual haranguing through terrible sound systems, but oh well. Until then, this will be my fight song: left foot, right foot, breathe. Help the poor however you can, plant bulbs right now in the cold rocky soil, and rest."

In case you aren't tired of me expounding more on validation

Thinking more about my posts a few weeks back about no longer needing validation, this article impressed upon me the other side of that thinking which is that if one doesn’t need to be stroked, as it were, one also eliminates, at least theoretically, any need to be defensive or to feel (negatively) judged. If someone speaks to or of me unkindly, it wouldn’t/shouldn’t matter. If I don’t need or seek validation, it doesn’t just mean I don’t need to be judged positively, it also means I don’t care if I’m judged negatively.

That article helped drive that point home for me, where the husband, who came to admit the problem in his marriage was himself, was at his worst when he was criticized, or felt judged by his wife. As I read it and he gave an example, I thought, “Dude. Either accept it or ignore it and move on.” Easier said than done, of course, but that’s what I strive for, not always successfully, I admit, or as Cheryl can tell you (but probably wouldn’t).

The other thing from that article that stood out to me, is the impact of one’s childhood on how healthy one’s adult relationship with a partner might be.  For me, as my sister Laurie used to frequently remind me, I was annoying as hell as a 12-14 year old, ok, maybe 11-15 year old…and sometimes 68 year old…before I began around age 15-16 to retreat semi-permanently into my bedroom, coming out only for meals.

The root of my being annoying was a quest for attention, negative being better than none at all. I grew up in a very loving, supportive household, but as wonderful a man as my dad was, my tween years sensed that his interest in his art superseded his interest in being a present dad, though I suspect that is what he likely learned from his dad. (And my greatest fear might be that my kids feel the same about me and my interest in sports. It’s not true, you guys! Being a dad was my favorite thing ever in my entire life!)

And so, as I moved into adulthood, I believe I probably brought some of that need with me, hard as it is to admit, or put in permanent writing. Close friends of mine once called me a gadfly, and, once I looked it up, it hurt, but if that is their or anyone else’s perspective, I can’t help that. It does regretfully though fit my narrative.

Finally, if one accepts the idea that one’s childhood will impact one’s relationship with a partner in adulthood, then I have one last observation.

I remember in my 20’s being confused by women who, while we were still in bed after sex, possibly at my/our most vulnerable, asking me personal questions about former girlfriends.

I think it was my aforementioned sister Laurie who I asked at some point what the heck that was all about and she said it was probably so they could find out what I might say about them someday if things didn’t work out. In the bigger picture, maybe they were trying to probe my emotional depths as to whether I portrayed likely negative (break-up) experiences in any kind of angry, vengeful tone or if I thought of them positively (which I did, in every case) to see what kind of person I really was. (I mean, it’s not like guys’ personalities change any once they achieved conquest…orgasm…had a mutually beneficial loving intimate interaction with a girl! Amirite?!) Or heck, maybe they just wanted to know if they had any competition to worry about.

So now I’m thinking that if their goal was to get some sense of what I might be like as a long-term partner, they’d be better off asking about my childhood and how happy I was and how validated I felt.

In a family where the youngest got the most positive attention (and not without reason, Judy was everything I was not – happy, positive, fun to be around, full of joy) and the oldest, Laurie, got plenty of negative attention in my tween years, I felt very loved but not often terribly happy, and rarely validated.

 I just love this picture for so many reasons, I just gotta include it here.

Cheryl working from home on an icy day.

Father and son at 2006 opening day

I love the simplicity of this special day that I summarized in an email on 4/4/2006 to a group of people I thought might enjoy it:

Sherry called me today and suggested that I write an email to everyone about my day with Trev yesterday, and since I have some time to kill - what a concept! - between work and a political meetin' (Gone With the Wind reference) at 7, I’ll do it now.  The meeting at 7 is with a Democratic Party group whose main goal is to defeat Rick Santorum. Yolanda, if you don't know who he is, he's our senator and maybe be politically to the right of GW. He’s a very, very bad man.

 

Anyway, yesterday, Trev and I did our annual day together - his 7th opening day, which is pretty impressive when you consider he's only 5 years old (one in utero, obviously).  (Opening Day is the first day of baseball season - the first Phillies home game of the year.)

 

Last year was the first time it was just Trev and me, Cheryl very nicely agreeing that between the expense and the hassle of taking both Trev and Emma, and likely Evelyn too, it would be easier to have it just be a dad/son thing.  And as with last year, I took the full day off from work. Of course, Opening Day should be a national holiday, but we won’t get into that right now.

 

Last year we stopped first at the Reading Terminal Market and pretty much got there and Trev wanted to leave to get to the game, which was still 2 hours from starting which was just too much time to kill with a 4-yr old in a crowd of 45,000+.  But this year, we went again and it went much better.  We had lunch from one of the many homemade food-type vendors– macaroni and cheese and a big delicious piece of cornbread (When I asked Trev if it was better than mommy’s, he said, Yes, but don’t tell her!) and pink lemonade, which we agreed was actually red, since that is the Phillies color.  Then we got some Bassett’s ice cream (I have a picture of me with Anneke eating ice cream there) and then some of the amazing double chocolate chip cookies from the Famous Deli, which I believe is what they’re famous for. I took them home for Ev and Cheryl and brought the rest in to work, where they were quickly gobbled up.

 

Geez, I need to leave soon, so I better speed this up.

 

So we left and got to the game pretty quickly with about 20 minutes to spare, which was good cuz it gave us time to get the most important thing of the day – cotton candy, of course! And we saw the guys parachute in with the ceremonial first ball, which was then thrown out by Kimmy Meissner who just won the world figure skating championship and trains nearby. (Art Garfunkel sang God Bless America at the 7^th inning stretch, but we were long gone by then).  And they had a huge flag covering center field carried by a hundred military types and the Phila Boys Choir sang the national anthem and the Phillie Phanatic was all over the place – all quite the spectacle.

 

Let’s see, well, by the fourth inning, the Phillies were losing 10-0! But more importantly, we had time to go out and get hot dogs and more lemonade and walk all the way around the stadium with Trev on my shoulders most of the way. We only actually sat in our seats for about an inning, which happened to be the inning the dumb cardinals scored 8 runs! And Trev just squirmed the whole time, climbing on me, running up and down the aisle, literally poking the 20-something year old in the seat next to him in the shoulder with his finger and then looking away. And he was showing off his shiny penny that he had gotten squished flat into a pig at the Reading Terminal (long story) to anyone who would look. And generally just being very excitable, not bad, just uh…active. So we left about half way through the game, Trev falling asleep on the almost 2-hour ride home (big traffic jam).

 

So the best part of the whole story is last night, I was carrying Trev into bed, and I told him what a great day it had been even if the Phillies had lost. He paused for a moment and said “They did?!”

I just laughed and told him I loved him and gave him a huge hug.

 

Perfect.

 

Oh yeah, and of course the only bad news is that they won’t be able sell beer at the Phillies games the rest of the year. Why? All together now: “Cuz they lost the opener!!!!!!!”

 

(Uncle Art told me that joke about 40 years ago.)

 

Love to you all.

 - Jame

As the pendulum swings...

Just a few thoughts about a topic that I find to be an almost universal concern among the males of a wide age range I've brought this topic up to: What it means to be a male right now. A concern that I believe had a great deal of influence on the unfortunate outcome of the 2024 election.

Men are confused right now, which is a bad thing, but some of the reasons are good ones, including the fact (opinion, actually) that men's roles needed to be shaken up.

Here are a few links that I found interesting or just fun:

This article "outlines the current state of America’s working class men and describes recent trends in the key areas of employment, earnings, health, and family."

From the article:

- Working class men face alarmingly high risks of dying young, particularly from “deaths of despair” such as suicide, drug overdoses, and alcohol-related deaths. 

- They are also more vulnerable to other health challenges, including workplace injuries and chronic diseases. 

- Young working class men (aged 25 to 34) are more likely to die than middle-aged non-working class men (aged 45 to 54).

- Employment rates for working class men have significantly declined over the past four decades. 

- Black working class men have persistently faced the greatest hurdles in the labor market, while white working class men have experienced the most dramatic recent declines in employment rates.

- Meanwhile, wages for working class men have been stagnant.

- Marriage and family formation rates have declined significantly among working class men. 

- Social isolation is on the rise, with fewer close friendships and weakened social bonds, contributing to a deeper sense of loneliness and disconnection. In the past there was hardly any class gap in marriage and family-formation. Today there is a huge one.

So those are all the problems, but here is one definite solution! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XOt2Vh0T8w

And finally, for those who think there's some advantage or in any way that it’s still better to be a man than a woman, I have two words for you: multiple orgasms.

 

Sometimes I wonder if I'm being pranked by making me think Cheryl is actually my wife. I’m just not worthy.

I love that girl.

We have met the monsters and they are not disambiguates

I’m not going to write much about this, except to excerpt from this interview two things:

Take a look in the mirror. Might that be a monster looking back at you?

In her wide-ranging, weirdly fascinating new book, Humans: A Monstrous History, historian of science Surekha Davies tells the story of humanity as an epic of monstrification, following the evolving definitions of what it means to be human, and of what it means to be placed outside of that definition. Davies describes how Westerners saw that the places they colonized were populated by beings who looked, ate, spoke, and behaved differently — and to fill the gaps in their understanding, imagined them as monsters, beyond the limits of humanity. She traces how that impulse underlies how humans have built nations, drawn borders, created scapegoats, and justified the destruction and enslavement of whole populations.

But monsters are us, writes Davies, and understanding the process by which we make them and how they continue to dominate our imaginations is a key to recognizing our mutual humanity. She proposes that people might reclaim monstrification to embrace difference, rather than reject it — first by recognizing that the boundaries between the human and monstrous are drawn, by humans, for human purposes — and that it’s possible to draw those boundaries differently, or not at all. Understanding humanity, that is to say, means understanding monstrosity

And this:

You bring up in the book that humanity is good at dehumanizing people and humanizing non-humans. And you can see this in capitalist work relationships, in the evolving idea of who is allowed to have free speech in the United States; increasingly it's these corporate beings, while people are dehumanized, made into numbers, made into raw material, made into resources.

That's an interesting question. I think the category of the human has always been like growing and shrinking, growing and shrinking. In certain times and places, only if you were a male property owner, could you vote. In the early 17th century, in the British Caribbean colonies, these slave and servant acts were written to disambiguate the Christian servant from the black enslaved person. There are these moments when stories are told in order to separate groups, to make it easier to exploit one group of people, to divide up groups that actually had a lot in common.

Or maybe I just like it because I’m in the third season of Dr. Who which is chock full of monsters!

Or…or…maybe I just love the word disambiguate. I would love to find a time and place to use that in a sentence.