#1166 – Dick Bernard: The Presidential Debate, and a Look Back at some 1927 Debates in the United States… "And Nothing But The Truth"

/0 Comments/in , , /by

September 27: DID YOU WATCH LAST NIGHT, AND DO YOU HAVE COMMENTS ABOUT THE DEBATE? Let me know. We went to a house party in the area. There were 25 of us, “birds of a feather” I’d guess, all of us serious demeanor and very attentive. I felt Secretary Clinton did a very good job: Mr. Trump was as always; and the audience at Hofstra was relatively well behaved. Lester Holt did the best he could. I still am not sure of the substantive value of political debates as they are now staged. dick_bernardATmsnDOTcom.

Watching the Debate Sep. 26, 2016.

Watching the Debate Sep. 26, 2016.


September 26 Post:
Most likely we will be joining a group to watch the debate tonight. About the only preliminary reading I have done specifically about the debate is here. It speaks for itself.
The “debate” tonight will speak for itself as well.
It seems an appropriate time to recall an interesting round of debates in the year 1927 in the midwest and western United States. The debaters were young graduates of Cambridge University in England. The details follow, if you are interested. The circumstances are a serendipity kind of story.
(click to enlarge)
The itinerary of the Cambridge Union Society debate team, 1927

The itinerary of the Cambridge Union Society debate team, 1927


The teams that they debated against are on page two, here: 1927-debates002
My summary of debater Alan King-Hamiltons Diary of the Debate story is here: 1927-debates003
A photo of the three debaters and their Cambridge Union colleagues is here:
Cambridge Union Society with committee and two guest speakers 8 June, 1927. Debaters in America, Fall 1927: Alan King-Hamilton and H. L. Elvin, front 4&5th from left; H. M Foot, back, 4th from left. From King-Hamilton's book, "And Nothing But the Truth".

Cambridge Union Society with committee and two guest speakers 8 June, 1927. Debaters in America, Fall 1927: Alan King-Hamilton and H. L. Elvin, front 4&5th from left; H. M Foot, back, 4th from left. From King-Hamilton’s book, “And Nothing But the Truth”.


How this 1927 story came to be:
My father and I and four others traveled to Quebec in 1982, and on one day an English lady joined us for our days excursions. We were all staying at Laval University.
Over the years, Mary and I kept in touch by annual greeting cards. I knew little about her except that she was a dealer in old books.
In November 2001 my wife and I went on a trip to London, and I let Mary know we were coming. She volunteered to show us around. At this point, I didn’t know that her father, then still living, was Alan King-Hamilton, a retired judge of the Old Bailey Criminal Court in London.
I don’t recall the sequence, but we met Judge King-Hamilton in person, a most charming gentleman, well into his 90s; and she also showed us Middle Temple, of which her father was a long-time member.
We went into the library, and I was casually browsing, and noted the spine of a book, “And Nothing but the Truth“ by Judge Alan King-Hamilton QC, her father.
I picked the book up, flipped the pages, and the first stop was page 13 where in mid-page was a comment “Our debating tour took us right down the Middle West, from North Dakota….”
North Dakota! That was where I was from. That was where my Dad had planned to go to University in 1927, but had to revise his plans when his Dad’s employer, the flour mill, closed, and the bank that held all their savings also closed within a week of each other.
It all went from there. I received from Mary a book personally autographed by the Judge, and he also privileged me with the 45 page transcript of the diary of he and two colleagues 1927 tour of the midwest and west as part of the Fulbright (then called IIE) exchange program.
Out of the transcript I wrote the summary which you can read above.
There were elements of tonights debate back in 1927, but what was most striking to me is the formality of the competition.
The debaters needed to be completely versed in the affirmative and negative of six potential questions, and weren’t certain of what question they would be debating, whether affirmative or negative, until right before the debate began. Presumably, their competitors were under the same rules, though I’m sure there were temptations to fudge.
Enjoy, and thanks to Alan King-Hamilton and his daughter, Mary, who still lives in suburban London.

#1165 – Dick Bernard: Hillary Clinton, the 2016 United States Elections, with emphasis on the "s".

/0 Comments/in /by

UPDATE: Followup Posts to Sep 24:
27. Related post about the Sep. 26, 2016 Debate A look back at 1927 debates.
28. Oct 8, 2016: The Gathering at the Band Shell.
29. Oct. 11, 2016: The Sunday night debate, two days later.
30. Oct. 18, 2016: “Trustworthy”? “Honesty”?
31. Oct. 22, 2016: “The Times They are a-changing”
32. Oct. 26, 2016: “The Down-Ballot Elections”
33. Nov. 1, 2016: One Week to Election Day
34. Nov. 8, 2016: Election Day, 2016
35. Nov. 9, 2016: The U.S. Election
36. Nov. 10, 2016: After the Shock
37. Nov. 11, 2016: The 98th Armistice Day
Not yet registered to vote, or know someone who isn’t? Here’s the information for wherever you happen to live.
“It’s too bad so many people say that politics is a dirty business, when in reality it is the life-blood of the American government. When they tell me that politics is a dirty business I tell them ‘why don’t you get into politics then and clean it up’?”
(see more, including source, in Postnote 1.)
PRE-NOTE: I am only a single citizen, but I am one. Following are some of many thoughts.
I’d be honored if you passed this post along.
(About the “s”: There are many offices local, state and national, up for election Nov. 8, or other times. They have every bit as much significance as the office of President. Know your offices and the candidates for them and where those candidates stand, and vote well informed.)
SOME OLD, AND POLITICAL, STAMPS (see Postnote 2.)
(click to enlarge any photo)

Some old Stamps

Some old Stamps

MY PERSONAL ENDORSEMENTS. (More about my own philosophy in Postnote 3.)
clinton-kaine001
HILLARY CLINTON for President. I have been on record supporting Hillary Clinton since February, 2008, at the Minnesota Precinct Caucuses. Even then, she impressed me with her competence, her experience and the necessary toughness to take the abuse of contemporary American political campaigns. She is trustworthy, and she is honest, and she is respected. She has an extremely strong background and expertise for the demanding job of President of the United States.
My post about endorsing Hillary can be found at July 31, 2016, here.
More so than ever, the Democratic Party is the voice of moderation, of vision, the party of “WE” as distinguished from “ME”, recognizing we are a diverse nation, committed to Paul Wellstone‘s timeless adage “We all do better when we all do better”, rather than subject to a system which, in effect, reveres winners and despises losers.
hillary-2008001
GRIDLOCK
There is gridlock in Washington, and the blame is not 50-50.
The GOP leadership made it obvious with their very publicly professed intention, acted on when President Obama took office in January, 2009, and ever since, to do their utmost to make him fail, to not cooperate. They continue the practice to this day.
Obama came into office hoping to work together, but the GOP (and unfortunately many on the Left) interpreted a willingness to compromise as a sign of weakness, rather than the strength that it is.
President Obama has done a superb job given a complete lack of bipartisanship.
Hillary Clinton is respected by this opposition, and she should be, as a former U.S. Senator and Secretary of State, but her very strength as a leader terrifies them…
I believe in the value of a strong two party system in this country. Until moderate GOP leaders can once again assume leadership roles in their own party, the GOP will have its current radical right wing cast.
THE ‘TRUTH’ ISSUE AGAINST HILLARY CLINTON.
Labeling Hillary Clinton a liar was a deliberate strategy, but it has been called out, though most true believers won’t read or accept the obvious lie which led to this campaign.
Quite likely, we are a lying society (start with a look at yourself). Maybe it is true that everyone, everywhere, lies. Maybe it is part of the human condition. Any system which relies on negotiations or diplomacy to succeed, from a marriage onward, cannot be totally truthful. Anyone who has ever negotiated anything realizes that complete truth is not possible. Negotiations begins with differences. So, every comment about Truth has to be relative – compared to what?
I have written a great deal about how I saw the 2016 primary campaign (list at the end of this post). The post that most directly addressed the political “truth” issue is this one, “God for President” April 5, 2016. Especially note the Politifact chart about the truthiness of the then primary candidates for President at Dec. 11, 2015. It speaks for itself.
(A textbook study of “truth” as uttered by politicians generally can well be a study of the opinions publicly expressed by 2016 Republican Presidential candidates about each other and by and about themselves during the 2016 Primary and now Election season. The latest example is Sen. Ted Cruz who hated Donald Trump publicly and now has publicly embraced him. What is Cruz’s real opinion? This is only one of a great many “ends justify the means”.)
At minimum, judge the candidates and the parties similarly.
(See Comment 1 and 1A at end of this post.)
[Overnight Monday a.m.m came this commentary on the issue, related to the debates on Monday. It is long, but worth reading.)
“MISTAKES”
There is literally nothing that a person in high office can do which will satisfy everyone, and every decision can be criticized. I am particularly amused by people in influence, in opposition, who say they would have done this or that differently. Certainly. It is easy to say.
THE AGE DEAL
I am at least six years senior to both Presidential candidates, and I feel at the most productive time of my life.
The typical President is much younger (President Obama came into office at age 47, Abraham Lincoln at age 52, died at 55; JFK was 46 when he was assassinated Nov. 22, 1963). Advancing age does remind people of its encroachment. On the other hand, while I haven’t counted, my sense is that most of the memorials I’ve attended in recent years have been for people younger than myself. None of us live forever. And even at 76 I still gather huge wisdom from people older than myself. While it is impossible to have a scaled back political campaign – and it’s a young persons gig – once in office, there are many ways to manage work load without killing oneself by exhaustion.
Age is no more an issue than youth. Anyone of us, at any age, can get notice of a rude ending at any time. Each “season” of our lives has its strengths and its weaknesses.
THE RECORD OF THE TWO MAJOR POLITICAL PARTIES:
If one is to fairly assess the records of the two parties, there are two time periods that need to be factored into the accounting (third or fourth or fifth parties are still only theoretical in American national politics. We are a two party system). A more fair assessment must include two time periods.
2001-2009 – The George W. Bush/Republican years.
2009-2016 – The Barack Obama years, dampened by Republican dominance in Congress.
There seems to be amnesia even amongst liberals about the catastrophic years of 2001-2009 when the choice of the then-Republican administration was to ride the wild horses of war and reckless domestic policy and false prosperity which led very nearly to a bankrupt country by this time in 2008. (It takes time to recover; oddly, the Democrats are blamed for the recovery moving too slowly…more honestly, work towards recovery has been sabotaged by obstruction at most every turn.)
THE POLLS; THE “DEBATES”
The endless polls, and their even more endless analysis, have only one purpose: to make “news” out of non-news. The dedication is to a horse-race, which enhances income for big media (and for endless solicitations from candidates or parties or causes of all sorts).
I think I can recall a single time being interviewed for a poll. It was quite a number of years ago. A typical national poll might interview something over 1,000 people (perhaps 20 of whom might be from my own state, whose population is over 5 million). They are, I suppose, “valid” within the normal range of error, but only for that particular sample for that particular day.
Theoretically, one could dispense with elections entirely…just do a poll…I hope it never comes to that, but every single poll is portrayed as an “election” in itself.
Then there are things like polls of polls….
They are useless.
I have little more confidence in “debates” as reflectors of any reality.
A FINAL THOUGHT: THE RESPONSIBILITY OF EVERY CITIZEN OF THIS DEMOCRACY.
Gov. Nelson Rockefeller said it well that pleasant June day in 1960 in Valley City ND (the quote leading this post).
My great-Uncle Art, who I never met, has a different message in the below letter written in Dubuque Iowa November 13, 1932. (click on the letter to enlarge it)

Portion of letter from my Aunt Lucina's Uncle Art, Nov. 13, 1932

Portion of letter from my Aunt Lucina’s Uncle Art, Nov. 13, 1932

I don’t know what the impediments were to Uncle Art’s voting in 1932. He was obviously literate, and he’d lived in the United States for a great many years at the time of the 1932 election. He was a working man, with a job as a custodian at a college.
1932 happened to be the first election of the Great Depression, the election that brought Franklin Delano Roosevelt to the Presidency.
I know for a fact that in 1933, in that same town of Dubuque, Iowa, Uncle Art’s brother-in-law lost his job in a factory which closed, and almost the entire family was forced to pick up stakes and move back to a farm in North Dakota where, it was reasoned, at least they could have a garden and not starve. The 1930s was a very rough row for them to hoe.
But, for whatever reason, Uncle Art, then perhaps at least 45 years old, decided not to vote.
Show up and vote well informed, November 8. There is plenty of time left. In many states voting is already proceeding. Once again, for registration procedures by state: here.
POSTNOTE 1: Gov. Nelson Rockefeller
The quote at the beginning of this post was by then-Gov. Nelson Rockefeller of New York, then campaigning for the 1960 Republican Presidential nomination. I saw him speak in person that day, and later wrote about it, including the Fargo Forum article including the quote from his speech, which you can see on page two, here: 1996 Political Campaign001
POSTNOTE 2: The Stamps
I continue to go through the remnants of my Aunt and Uncles long lives, and not long ago looked through some old stamps they had kept in a freezer bag, possibly an idea for an album which never materialized. The small bag rapidly became a tiny treasure trove, including stamps like those in the collage above. There is a theme to this: the long road from the founding of our country (1789) to Emancipation of the Slaves (1863) to Suffrage for Women (1920) to the entire Civil Rights movement (1960s) to today. Note especially, Frances Willard, Sojourner Truth, and Mary McLeod Bethune. This is one of those pictures with well over 1,000 words of meaning, and Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton represent the change that their forbears made possible through years and years of effort.
None of us much likes change, I’d guess. Change is risky. But usually on the other end is something better if we follow through.
POSTNOTE 3: Myself, personally.
I pay a great deal of attention to politics, and am reasonably active, and bill myself in the blog as a moderate pragmatic Democrat. I have rarely voted Republican.
On the other hand, I often self-describe myself as a “Dwight Eisenhower Republican”, and my best political friend for a long while was conservative progressive business and civic leader and former legislator and Governor Elmer L. Andersen, a lifelong Republican.
The moderate progressive Republicans have been banished from their own party, and this is a battle remaining to be fought within the Republican party.
*
The below photo: Gerald Ford was the most unintended of Presidents. He moved from Speaker of the House of Representatives to Vice President when Spiro Agnew resigned (1973); then Ford succeeded Richard Nixon who resigned from the Presidency in 1974. This picture was taken in 1975. This is a reminder that the Presidency is not always a simple matter. It matters who occupies every office.

President Gerald Ford August 19, 1975. Photo by Dick Bernard, top of Tom Bernards head just visible in foreground. Tom was 11.

President Gerald Ford August 19, 1975. Photo by Dick Bernard, top of Tom Bernards head just visible in foreground. Tom was 11.

PRIOR POSTS ON ELECTION 2016:
1. June 6, 2015: A Visit to the Commons
2. January 27, 2016: Iowa and What Follows: Revisiting 1984
3. February 3, 2016: The Iowa Primaries and Ourselves
4. February 11, 2016: The New Hampshire Primary…and us.
5. February 13, 2016: Hillary and Bernie (or is it Bernie and Hillary?)
6. March 1, 2016: One View of Minnesota Precinct Caucus on Super Tuesday Mar. 1, 2016
7. March 9, 2016: The Michigan Primary Election
8. April 5, 2016: God for President (or in the alternative….)
9. April 19, 2016: A Culture of Sanctioned Disrespect
10. April 26, 2016: Attending a Political Convention: Does this make me, or us “Party Hacks”?
11. May 3, 2016:: A Political Conversation on the Day of the Indiana Primary.
12. May 11, 2016: West Virginia, and on we go.
13. June 23, 2016: “Politics”, “Politicians”, and “Bureaucrats”
14. July 2, 2016: Dealing with Un-reason
15. July 6, 2016: The State Department E-mails, and a Personal Reflection Back.
16. July 16, 2016: The 2008 Republican Convention. Remembering Peace Island and Other Things.
17. July 19, 2016: The First Night of the RNC 2016
18. July 31, 2016: Why I’m Supporting Hillary Clinton for President of the United States.
19. August 3, 2016: The Newspaper; Government by Twitter.
20. August 9, 2016: The Minnesota Primary Election.
21. August 10, 2016: The Danger of Dog Whistle Politics.
22. August 18, 2016: Changing the Political Conversation: Two Remarkable Events
23. August 26, 2016: The “Swiftboating” of Hillary Clinton: the e-mails and Clinton Global Initiative and whatever else is next.
24. September 1, 2016: Peter Barus on Politics
25. September 13, 2016: U.S. President Candidates Respond to Science Questions.
COMMENTS:
1. from Carl: Disagree-Not everyone lies. Some do and get away with it and others not! Poor Martha Stewart!
1A. Response from Dick: I thought a long time about making the statement to which Carl objects (“everyone lies”). There are endless examples. On a recent evening I was giving a good friend, a retired professor, a ride home and we were talking about diplomacy, which is part of a Secretary of State’s duty. The very nature of negotiations, which diplomacy always is, presumes that neither side is completely truthful. It would be a fool who would presume otherwise.
Along the other end of the spectrum are the so-called “white lies” (“you’re looking very nice today”, when what you mean is not that at all. You’re just trying to be polite.)
In the old Catholic school days, the Nuns taught us about lies of omission (leaving important facts out), or commission (just telling a whopper).
We all lie, including selective accusations about who lies more….
Just an hour or two ago I was on a walk, and ran into a friend, walking in the other direction. We stopped to chat, as people do, and in the process shared some data about someone we both know – useful and new data for both of us, which would be helpful to our mutual friend. If pressed, would I acknowledge there was such a conversation? No, I wouldn’t. Would I be lying? Probably. Things like this happen all of the time, and can, as we know, be set up by someone with malicious intentions towards the other. Such set-ups are staples of dirty politics.
2. from Norm: Right on, Dick, and very well done!
I can remember that highly non-partisan statesman*, Sen. McConnell stating upon the election of President Obama that his/their/GOP job was to make sure that Obama was a one-term president, something that he/they obviously failed miserably at, his thirteen jowls not with standing.
Just another pompous, self-righteous dumb bottom who some how had risen to a position of power in the US Senate.
And, yes, there are too damn many folks on both sides of the aisle who cannot compromise on important issues and, further, who think that any compromising by them and/or the elected officials that they supported is the worst kind of behavior. That includes a hell of a lot of Democrats to be honest about this who get carried away in thinking that whatever position that they hold on an important issue of the day is pure, black and white and should not be modified or changed in anyway.
(Hell, I can remember one avid Obama supporter throwing up her hands in disgust at a DFL (Democratic-Farmer-Labor) event about three months after the 2008 election claiming that Obama had not done everything let alone anything that the had promised that he would do during the campaign!)
“We may not win on this but by god, we know that we have done the right thing and have made the right fight!”
Nothing may get done as a result, of course but SOB, those folks might say, “”at least the other side didn’t win either so…lets hold hands and get into a group hug while singing kumbya and doggone it all, we will feel good about what we have “accomplished!””
The only difference with the other side in the same situation is that they will say that failing to compromise on an important issue from which they would benefit from compromising is that they talked to God and she told them not to compromise.
They wouldn’t do the group hug and singing kumbya while holding hands thing as that is just a little too personal for those folks.Emoji
Nice job once again, Dick.
* Really, Norm!

#1164 – Dick Bernard: A Friend, Annelee Woodstrom, turns 90

/0 Comments/in , , , , , /by

Annelee holds court, August 13, 2016

Annelee holds court, August 13, 2016


Today, up in Ada, MN, there will be a little party for our friend, Annelee (Anneliese Soelch) Woodstrom, who is about to turn 90.
I say “little”, facetiously. When someone has lived in a town for 57 years; was a longtime teacher in the area public schools (Twin Valley); is a well known author, still writing and speaking publicly about her experiences growing up in Nazi Germany, and living as a war bride in post war United States (Crookston and Ada MN), one picks up a friend here or there.
Annelee wrote yesterday “Tonight 11 people will be here, 10 arrive tonight. Well, we will manage. Four of my relatives flew in from Germany.”
A while back she asked for a print of the old barn at the North Dakota farm of my ancestors, so our birthday gift to her, received earlier this week, is
(click to enlarge)
Busch barn, rural Berlin ND, May 24, 2015

Busch barn, rural Berlin ND, May 24, 2015


She said, “Somehow, that photo gives me peace.”
I’m very happy to oblige, with special thanks to the family friend who took the photo in the first place.
I happened across Annelee 13 years ago, when I read in the Fargo (ND) Forum about her new book, “War Child Growing Up in Adolf Hitler’s Germany” (see link above). Our friendship started there, and I was honored to help her with her second, “Empty Chairs”, about her years in Minnesota; and now I’m assisting on her third, as yet untitled, which ties her abundant life learnings together. The reunion today puts the third book in the background, but only for awhile. She’ll be back at it, and I have no doubt it will be completed.
It was her lot in life to begin schooling in Mitterteich Germany, (walking distance from today’s Czech Republic) coincident with Adolf Hitler’s rise to power. Her parents refused to join the Nazi party, and at 13 her formal schooling ended and she was put to work as a telegrapher, living through the worst times of the war, reduced almost to starvation at the end.
Her father, a road engineer by trade, was conscripted into the German Army, and except for one home leave, he was never seen again. They believe he died in Russia, but are not sure.
She met her “Gentleman Soldier” Kenny Woodstrom at war’s end, and in 1947 came to the United States as an “alien” to marry him – a marriage of over 50 years, till his death in 1998.
In the late 1960s, she decided to go to college at Moorhead State, and commuted back and forth from Ada, and for 22 years she taught in Twin Valley Minnesota Public Schools, at one point being recognized as a finalist for Minnesota Teacher of the Year. It was an honor she richly deserved.
nea001
One of her two children, a daughter, Sandy, was killed by a drunken driver, and her son, Roy, was a long-time librarian at a Minneapolis public library. Her son, daughter in law, Linda, grandchildren and great grandchildren and a great many others will be greeting her today in Ada.
Annelee’s is one of many life stories. She still does public speaking, and if you have an opportunity to hear her speak, make it a point….
Happy Birthday, Annelee.

ScienceDebate.org: Released today: U.S. President Candidates Respond to Science Questions.

/0 Comments/in , /by

NOTE: Set aside adequate time to really closely review this link, released today: U.S. Presidential Candidates Answer ScienceDebate 2016 Questions.
ScienceDebate.org has, since before the 2012 Presidential Election, been advocating for candidates for public office to answer specific questions related to Science and public policy.
The above link is a major and long overdue and very positive development, where several of the candidates for U.S. President publicly answer pertinent questions prior to the 2016 election.
A related post about ScienceDebate co-founder Shawn Otto’s new book, “The War on Science”, on the treatment of science in the public policy debate, past and present, is here.

#1163 – Dick Bernard: 9-11-16, and the dark days of 2001-2009

/0 Comments/in , , , , , , , , /by

Friday, my wife and I and our 87 year old neighbor Don, went to the local theatre to be among the first to see the new movie, Sully, the incredible story of the emergency landing of an airliner in the Hudson River off NYC in January, 2009. “How can you take a 90 second event and turn it into a 90 minute movie?” my friend asked.
Very, very easily. Take in the film. The basic true story is here.
*
Of course (I’m certain), the movie was timed to be released on the eve of the 15th anniversary of 9-11-01, even though the near-disaster actually happened in January, 2009.
I have feelings about 9-11-01. At the end of this post, I share a few personal links from that period in time. I will always have doubts about certain and substantial parts of the official narrative about what happened that awful day, though that labels me as a “conspiracy theorist” I suppose. So be it.
*
But what occurs to me this day in 2016 came to mind a few days ago when I found a cardboard envelope in a box, whose contents included this certificate (8 1/2×11 in original size).
Notice the signature on the certificate (Donald Rumsfeld) and the date of the form printed in the lower left corner (July 1, 2001). (Click to enlarge).
cold-war-certificate-001
The full contents of the envelope can be viewed here: cold-war-cert-packet003
Of course, people like myself had no idea why the article appeared in the newspaper, or how this particular project came to be.
It is obvious from the documents themselves that the free certificate was publicized no later than sometime in 1999; and the certificate itself wasn’t mailed until some time in 2001 to my then mailing address…. The original website about the certificate seems no longer accessible, but there is a wikipedia entry about it.
When I revisited the envelope I remembered a working group of powerful people called the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) formed in the late 1990s.
The group as then constituted no longer officially exists, but had (my opinion) huge influence on America’s disastrous response to 9-11-01 (which continues to this day).
Many members of this select group, including Donald Rumsfeld, and Richard B. Cheney, strategized to establish permanent U.S. dominance in the world, and had very high level positions in the administration of George W. Bush, 2001-2009. PNAC was no benign committee of friends meeting for coffee every Saturday. To cement the notion that to have peace you must be stronger than the enemy…there has to be an enemy. If not a hot war, then a cold war will have to do. Keep things unsettled and people will follow some dominant leader more easily.
Their Cold War ended in December, 1991, as you’ll note, which likely was cause for concern. 9-11-01 became the magic elixir for a permanent war with an enemy….
(I happen to be a long-time member of the American Legion also – the Cuban Missile Crisis and the beginning of the Vietnam era were part of my tour of duty in the Army – and much more recently, the Legion magazine
updated talk about the Cold War, here: America at War001.)
My opinion: there remains a desperate and powerful need by powerful entities to sustain an enemy for the U.S. to fight against and, so goes the story, “win”, to borrow a phrase and “make America great again”. As we learned in the years after 9-11-01, dominance has a huge and unsustainable cost. But the idea still lives on.
The mood of the people of this country is for peace – it is simple common sense – but peacemakers have to do much more than simply demonstrate against war to have it come to pass, in a sustainable fashion.
*
Yes, 9-11-01 was very impactful for me. Here are three personal reflections: 1) chez-nous-wtc-2001002; 2) here; and 3) here: Post 9-11-01001.
I have never been comfortable with the official explanations about many aspects of 9-11-01 and what came after. It is not enough to be ridiculed into silence. Eight years ago my friend Dr. Michael Andregg spent a year doing what I consider a scholarly piece of work about some troubling aspects he saw with 9-11-01. You can watch it online in Rethinking 9-11 at the website, Ground Zero Minnesota. Dr. Andregg made this film for those who are open to critical thinking about an extremely important issue. I watched it again, online, in the last couple of days. It is about 54 minutes, and very well done. Take a look.
Let’s make 9-11-01 a day for peace, not for endless and never to be won war. Humanity deserves better.
(click to enlarge. Photos: Dick Bernard, late June, 1972)

World Trade Center Towers late June 1972, New York City

World Trade Center Towers late June 1972, New York City


Twin Towers from Statue of Liberty, late June, 1972. (one tower was newly opened, the other nearly completed)

Twin Towers from Statue of Liberty, late June, 1972. (one tower was newly opened, the other nearly completed)


Here, thanks to a long ago handout at a workshop I took in the early 70s, is a more normal reaction sequence to a crisis. As you’ll note, it is useful to allow 9-11-01 to live on and on and on. It is not healthy.
(click to enlarge)
Handout from a circa 1972 workshop.

Handout from a circa 1972 workshop.

#1162 – Dick Bernard: Labor Day, back to school for most of Minnesota's school kids.

/0 Comments/in , , /by

From Sunday’s Minneapolis Star Tribune about the recovery of Jacob Wetterlings body more than 25 years after he was kidnapped near St. Joseph MN and killed in October, 1979: here is the local news.
Jacob is at peace, and the lessons of his tragic death live on through the dedication of his family and many others who carry forward the message of his tragic death. Here for more information.
*
Most Minnesota schools begin on Tuesday, September 6.
In rough terms, it appears there will be about 900,000 students enrolled this year, with about 125,000 school staff, of which licensed personnel are about half. Roughly one of five Minnesotans will be in public school tomorrow. Here is a snapshot. Public Education is central to a functioning society.
Public Education has been an important part of my entire personal and professional life, from growing up in a family where my parents were both career public school teachers, to, this year, having eight grandchildren in Minnesota public schools.
Each year for many years one of my mandatory stops at the Minnesota State Fair is the booth of Education Minnesota, formerly called MEA (Minnesota Education Association) and MFT (Minnesota Federation of Teachers). This year was no different. Again this year I got my photo at the “Ed MN” booth (see end of post); Saturday, back again, I stopped in and took a photo of a couple of Minnesota Kindergarten teachers.
(click to enlarge)

Minnesota State Fair Sep. 3, 2016, Education Minnesota booth.

Minnesota State Fair Sep. 3, 2016, Education Minnesota booth.


I have great admiration for Minnesota Public Schools and the staff who are their face every day. Being a human institution, they are not perfect, but their charge is to serve children from early childhood through 12th grade. They do it very well.
My experience as a school teacher began in 1963; this year I choose to remember 1969, the year my oldest son began Kindergarten at age 5 in the explosively growing Anoka-Hennepin School District.
Tom attended Franklin Elementary School in Anoka. His teacher that year was Miss Murphy, an older lady who was very kindly and a magician with kids. She retired a year or two later.
Kindergarten at that point in time was half day, as I recall. (Full day kindergarten was years away; kindergarten itself did not exist in my own growing up years.)
In 1969, I recall that Tom’s kindergarten class included 36 youngsters. If you can imagine it, Miss Murphy had no classroom assistance. Her way of coping with this was to work with half of the students at a time, and in some magical way keep the other half occupied more or less by themselves in the same room, all by herself.
That is how I remember it.
Anoka-Hennepin was then an extremely rapidly growing school district, with a very low tax base. I can’t find fault with what today would be considered intolerable conditions. Young families moved in, and the district just couldn’t keep up with the growth.
Fast forward to today, and conditions are better.
And it is now recognized that the earlier a child is exposed to all aspects of education, including socialization, the better off he or she will be in the years that follow.
Money spent on children is money invested, not spent.
I wish all Kindergarten teachers, indeed all teachers, and all of their students, a good year. And I also wish that the certain unforseen events are minimal.
Happy New (School) Year!
Solidarity t-shirt, Fall, 1981

Solidarity t-shirt, Fall, 1981


POSTNOTE:
Sunday afternoon I flipped on the local PBS station, and happened across a sequence of three programs on early U.S. Labor Movement history: Minnesota’s Iron Range; Upper Michigan’s Copper Country; and West Virginia’s Coal Country. It was a gripping two to three hours, with characters like Mother Jones, and John L. Lewis. The programs may be repeated and are well worth watching.
Succinctly, management was terrified of organized labor.
In my opinion, in many ways it still is terrified, to everyone’s detriment, including management itself. (Organized Labor built this country’s middle class, which, in turn, built this country’s economy, both as producers and consumers. It is the most elementary economics.)
The programs caused me to revisit my stop at that Education Minnesota booth on Saturday: Education Minnesota is, I think, Minnesota’s largest single AFL-CIO Union.
A couple of weeks ago I had occasion to revisit my own part in the labor movement, going back to the late 1960s and early 1970s, now near 50 years ago. The short essay was not written for this blog, but nonetheless fits. Here it is, if you’re interested: UniServ, one persons experience, Dick Bernard Aug 19, 2016.
It is easy to criticize unions. As for me, I’m very proud to have been part of the organized labor movement. When Unions die, our society will die along with them.
At the Education Minnesota Booth, September 1, 2014. The hat is for Sykeston ND, where I graduated from HS in 1958 - third in a class of 8.

At the Education Minnesota Booth, September 1, 2014. The hat is for Sykeston ND, where I graduated from HS in 1958 – third in a class of 8.

#1161 – Dick Bernard: Two deaths on a lovely and lonely beach.

/0 Comments/in , , , /by

Thursday morning I woke up to a bit of news that two people had been found by a solitary kayaker, dead on a beach in Washington state.

Solitary Kayaker, from note card of Wenatchee Foothills published by The Trust for Public Land*

Solitary Kayaker, from note card of Wenatchee Foothills published by The Trust for Public Land*


Nothing about that kind of tragedy is particularly unusual: such events are every day on our news. It seemed to have been a murder/suicide. The death was 1500 miles and several states away from me.
But there was something else in this news: one of the dead was a teacher in a nearby Twin Cities suburb in which my daughter is a school board member. He was about to begin his 14th year as a teacher in an outstanding elementary school that has been attended by four of my grandchildren beginning more than 10 years ago. Indeed, two of them will return there with several hundred other students two days from now.
Over the years we’d gone to many school programs there; probably there will be more this year.
Last Wednesday all was probably normal over there. Overnight, everything changed in a single piece of news**.
This will not be a normal beginning to a school year for the young people or their teachers and other school personnel.
The teacher’s Dad had also once been Superintendent of the school district, and in fact, I had met him once or twice when he was employed as an administrator in another nearby school district. He was a decent person, doubtless a good Dad to this teacher who was now dead.
Succinctly, this anonymous tragedy far away had become, for me, a matter of family.
Now these deaths on a Washington beach intersected with my own “circle”, and with the circles of hundreds of others.
There was, of course, more to the story.
The deaths apparently were directly related to apparently credible allegations of sexual exploitation of at least one, and perhaps more, young people by those who were found dead. The couple were male, gay; their alleged victim, a minor male, also gay, probably high school age.
So, into the conversation comes the matter of sexual abuse by people – in this case, a teacher – of vulnerable children. And the business of sex, and gays…inevitable topics.
Suddenly, everybody in the circle becomes at least a little suspect…what did they know about their child, their colleague, their friend?
There is fear, and guilt and all of the attendant negative emotions.
For a period of time, everybody will be ensnared in the web which began for some reason at some point in the past.
Years ago I kept a handout from a workshop on how the response to such a crisis will go. It seems pertinent to share, now.
(click to enlarge)
Handout from a circa 1972 workshop.

Handout from a circa 1972 workshop.


Other than offering support, as a parent, as a grandparent, there is not much I can do.
All I can say is that we are all family, far more than by the narrow definition (parent, child, house).
Life will go on in this fine school, and school district; for the affected families what was normal will forever be changed.
My hope is that there will be lots of serious conversations about how we all can do better.
And my best wishes go out to everyone who is now or will soon be in the schools of America and every country.
Give them even more support than usual this year.
* – Trust for Public Land sent this card some months ago as part of a fundraiser. Their website is here.
** – I am deliberately not printing specific names, places, etc. The news is very well known in this locality. It is the sad nature of the incident and its aftermath that is the topic.

#1160 – Peter Barus on politics; plus, an opportunity to view the entire 2016 Nobel Peace Prize Forum.

/0 Comments/in , , , , , /by

NOTE from Dick Bernard: Peter commented after last weeks post on Swiftboating Hillary Clinton. His always perceptive remarks are below. He writes from Vermont. His previous posts can be found here.
In addition, recently I received the link to all of the plenary session talks at the outstanding 2016 Nobel Peace Prize Forum in Minneapolis. The Forum was outstanding, and I was privileged to attend it. At minimum take a look. The Forum was especially great this year.
PETER BARUS:
In the political discourse effectiveness is measured against what we’re after in the first place. Are we seeking to support a candidate by defending their “narrative” (meaning, the carefully focus-grouped, workshopped and spin-doctored story saturating the corporate media channels)? That’s defending the story, not the candidate. Are we seeking to hold a candidate’s actions and words up to the light of proven fact? Usually we test for consistency of word and deed, and leave fact out of it. Are we hoping for some break in the timeworn, corrupt and entrenched “system” that might finally, for once in all of history, provide for an actual election that is actually free and fair? And results in the elevation of an incorruptible and honest leader? Well, we do almost universally profess to be in favor of exactly that.
The candidates know this terrain very, very well. Bernie Sanders (my Senator) knew from the start that he would fail to be nominated, much less elected: he knows how things are done in America. But it was a kind of reverse-Reagan action: he hoped to shift the center to make an election include values and voices that are always marginalized. Clinton is of course a master of the Way of Washington, and has achieved real and incontestable stature the old fashioned way: she is more “pragmatic” (ruthless and cunning) than all the other aspirants to the Oval Office dare to be. Saving only the Republican Nominee. As for that celebrated personality, his expertise is in fighting by his own rules: on his turf, with him as referee.
In a fight, the first thing is to choose the ground. The Republican did this years ago, and has owned it completely. We may think it is a stupid choice, an insane choice, an immoral choice; but it is the ground on which the candidate stands and hurls his challenges. And it is going to be very tricky for the Democrat to fight him on some other battlefield than the one where he is already fighting. Consider that to hold a debate, the venue will have to be TV, and that’s the ground the Republican has staked out. Clinton’s ground, of international relationships, deep personal understandings with and of world leaders in their political contexts, the management of continual wars around the globe, and the staunch backing of Wall Street – all that is already on TV, and out of her hands. Her ground is part of his ground. Welcome to my world. Said the spider to the fly.
The second thing in a fight is never box a boxer, or wrestle a wrestler. Somebody is going to have to fight a Reality TV host. On Reality TV. That’s two fundamental principles of warfare that he has, and she doesn’t, going in.
The real assets in this campaign are not the money, or the power-brokers, or the smoke-filled rooms. Not the people you insult, or those abandoned by the American Dream, or disparaged for loving Jesus, or too proud to take a government handout. No Minorities or Special Interests matter here. Nor the battle-scars of the top diplomatic office in the United States Government. And most certainly not your “gender”: Lucretia Borgia? Imelda Marcos? Maggie Thatcher for heaven’s sake? What’s sex got to do with it?
No, none of that. What really matters now is attention. Human attention, focused not on the candidate, but on that candidate’s pointing finger, moment by moment. What do they point at? Is it the moon? A reflection? Which candidate will garner the highest ratings while giving us the finger? We will hear all about the type of fake nails on hers, and the exceptional length and girth of his.
There is this funny thing about the human brain. What it perceives it also acts from. This happens before the intellect is engaged. All the intellect can do, after attention has been seized, is rationalize the accompanying behaviors. And there are two basic reactions to the Reality TV candidate’s performances: apathy or outrage. And both of these human responses stoke the fires of his campaign. Outrage for or against, it doesn’t matter at all, the campaign balloons. See, it’s not a “for or against” switch: it’s an On/Off switch. And the light goes on either way while we’re frantically fighting over who gets to flip the switch.
Meanwhile, one candidate trumpets ever more crazy bigotry and xenophobia, and outright lies about economics and his penis; and the other candidate, already trapped in the same discursive space with the opponent’s genital dimensions, sounds like a teacher from a junior high school civics class, going hoarse trying to yell above the noise of excited teenagers as the bell goes off. “DO. YOUR. HOMEWORK! THERE. WILL. BE. A. TEST!”
Whichever candidate’s chosen ground becomes the scene of the big showdown, the real issues will not get any airtime. Instead, one candidate will throw any reasonable discussion into chaos, and the other will flounder helplessly grasping at straws to regain some fraction of public attention. That fraction will hear defensiveness and righteous disdain. And that triumphant, derisive laughter. And the pundits will analyze each nuance of foreign policy, the cost of a wall on the Mexican border, and and whether Clinton killed Bin Laden to silence him about their relationship. But most of the viewers will have passed out by then, after the cathartic relief of seeing the Strict Father put the Nurturant Parent in her place.
Never mind that the former Secretary of State has conducted war after war in precisely that way, sowing chaos. With the Air Force, the Marines, the Army, the Navy, the FBI, the NSA, and the CIA, and organizations that fund aspiring dictators, like the International Republican Institute, and the National Democratic Institute. Pragmatic, utilitarian (non-partisan) tools of State. And her opponent has no experience whatsoever with actual invasions, airstrikes or drone-killings; he just uses metaphorical weapons, like the Big Lie, the verbal sucker-punch, the innuendo, the question-as-fact, the straw-man, the begged question, the categorical denial, the stonewall. And of course, mockery and derision. Tools of Reality TV.
It’s happening on TV. The President is elected on TV. We’re in the domain of attention, remember. In this campaign, a shooting war might get attention, except what’s new about a war? War is just background white-noise now, to most Americans. If it comes up at all it will be to blame the former Secretary for losing it. Whereas a good one-line chant like “lock ‘er up!” will cut to the bone.
But. There is hope. We are not just stimulus-response machines. Your attention please: it is your attention. You can direct it elsewhere. Your attention is yours alone to give. Don’t let them snatch it away. Make them work for it, at least. Take ownership of your attention. Talk with people who are like you, and not like you, face to face. Ask questions, and listen to the answers. We could, theoretically at least, elect a President in an election, and not Reality TV.
Then when those politicians point at something, you can tell whether that’s the moon they’re pointing at, or just the reflection in a mud-puddle.
COMMENTS:
from SAK, in England: Thanks Mr Bernard,
Mr Barus’ comments about choosing the ground for a fight brought to mind part of the reason the UK voted to leave the European Union. The nationalist far right politician Nigel Farage chose the ground to fight on, the same ground Mr Trump has chosen: immigration. The EU means free movement of EU citizens among the member states – it does not mean borders open to all & sundry as the poster Mr Farage hung on his bus seems to imply [hordes of apparent non-natives coming into somewhere]. Furthermore the UK is nowhere near “Breaking Point” as far as welcoming European citizens who wish to live and work there. It seems truth is the first casualty not only of war but of political campaigns as well.
POSTNOTE: Pertinent and timely: Today’s Just Above Sunset, “Under the Volcano“
SECOND POSTNOTE, a column in today’s Minneapolis Star Tribune, the headline says it all: Threats replace political dialogue at State Fair. The exact same example the writer uses in her article was used by some guy I had never seen before out in small town North Dakota in March, 2014, commenting on Hillary Clinton outside a building. At that time, 2 1/2 years ago, Hillary Clinton had not been a politician since being appointed Secretary of State in 2009, and when she was a politician, she was simply one of 535 members of the United States Congress. Hatred without benefit of fact is still easily transmitted. The guy who accosted the woman in the op ed would have been a good candidate for the ruffians who enabled the Third Reich in the early days.