tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-44366045684309523202018-07-02T00:32:19.416-07:00lieb's logPaul Liebermanhttps://plus.google.com/116323603138300579796noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4436604568430952320.post-69501812622057662832018-03-17T19:17:00.000-07:002018-03-17T19:22:30.906-07:00When the truth is found to be lies ...... and all the joy within you dies. It was 1967 when Grace Slick belted out those lyrics. 1967 certainly was a pivotal year for me. My first daughter was born in April and 4 months later I packed up our young family and left our home town of Long Beach, NY and headed for the sunny shores of San Diego. I don't think I was fully aware of just how deep those lies ran for at least another year or so but when it hit home, it hit hard. Growing up in the 1950s we were all feed this beautiful fantasy about America, the land of the free and the home of the brave. Where all <i>men</i> were equal and no one questioned why that didn't include women or back or brown people. Where any <i>white man</i> could grow up to be president. Where our laws were fair and just. Where we won the war and championed democracy around the world. Where the American dream of a home in the suburbs with a white picket fence and a car in the driveway was available to everyone. We were raised to be proud and never doubt that we lived in the greatest country on earth.<br /><br />The history books we were taught out of were another work of fantasy. First of course it was always 'his' story, never 'her' story. And once again the story was told from the perspective of rich white men. When they first arrived from Europe the first order of business was to help the poor savages who's land we were invading, and of course teach them about Jesus so they could be saved. We were always good to the friendly Indians and only reluctantly had to fight and kill the renegades who threatened our settlers. Wars? oh we only fought defensive wars and never went into another country unless they needed us to defend their democracy against communists or dictators. Oh, and of course, we had God on our side.<br /><br />I won't even get into the crap they feed us on TV.<br /><br />I'm sure I was beginning to realize we were being feed a crock of shit at a pretty young age. I was pretty rebellious in school and always suspected the teachers were lying to us. I was still pretty young when the civil rights movement began to pick up momentum in the early 60's, but I only had to look around me to realize that black people were getting a pretty raw deal. And this was New York, not Mississippi. But of course it was the Vietnam war that really blew things wide open. You could say that the war was the gateway drug that opened our eyes to the way things really were in this country. And speaking of drugs, after that first hit of LSD I, and millions of others, realized that absolutely nothing is as it seems.<br /><br />Waking up and realizing that it was all a lie, that our country had a brutal and sordid history, that we had made a business of overthrowing democracies and installing puppet dictators all over the world, that we had ended slavery but replaced it with a system to make sure black people were always our slaves, that our government was basically for sale to the highest bidder. These realizations took a heavy toll. We were raised to be idealists but many had that idealism shattered by this new reality. And none had it harder than the veterans returning from Vietnam where they witnessed first hand that our country was actually a force of evil in the world and not the wonderful defenders of freedom and democracy. To return to a country that didn't give a shit about you and in many cases vilified you is too much to even imagine. Many of our brightest people fell into depression or drugs or worse. Many resisted and took a lot of different paths to try and right these wrongs. But for all of us, disillusionment is an understatement.<br /><br />Fast forward to today. Many pundits are saying that the biggest damage Trump has done is to obliterate the truth. We now live in a world were instead of just twisting reality and telling plausible if ultimately false stories, as most of our past presidents did, our president tells obvious and verifiable lies. Everyday. And rather than call him out on his lies, most of the rest of the government just pile more lies on top of his. News outlets create elaborate false realities based on what their core audience is willing to believe. Every possible conspiracy theorist has a video on YouTube which can be very convincing even on the most outlandish beliefs. Fake news, alternative facts, the "truth" is under attack from all sides. Reality has once again been shattered. What is one to believe? Can our country survive when people no longer believe anything our leaders tell us? Or will we all learn critical thinking and discernment?<br /><br />I'm counting on the later. We'll be better off if people don't believe anything by default. Question everything. One of my daughters had a bumper sticker that says "Question Reality". Many people give me a puzzled look and say "reality is what's real, you can't question it". No "reality" is just the sum of all the things you <i>believe</i> to be true at a given moment in time. Your reality can be shattered in an instant. I think the scientific method is the best approach. Form theories, not beliefs. Look at the evidence. Test your theories. Don't be too invested in what you believe to be true. Be flexible. Don't follow the crowd. There may yet be some absolute truths out there, but for now we have to learn to live in a world where they don't exist.Paul Liebermanhttps://plus.google.com/116323603138300579796noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4436604568430952320.post-33861298301957957402018-01-03T18:41:00.000-08:002018-01-04T13:33:41.588-08:00He's using a Jedi Mind TrickPsychological manipulation is rampant in social media, we see it all the time, but the ultimate master at this game is none other than the tweeter-in-chief Donald Trump. Take for example this one innocuous sounding tweet "It's okay to say Merry Christmas now". Well of course you think. That sounds totally reasonable. Why shouldn't it be okay to say Merry Christmas? Wait, you mean it wasn't okay before to say Merry Christmas? I didn't know that? So you check it out and soon discover there was a "war on Christmas" led by those godless liberal thought police. Oh no you think. It's a good thing Trump came along and put a end to that.<br /><br />What just happened here? Since Trump is no Jedi I'll just call it the Trump Mind Fuck. He does it all the time. Witness the speech he gave in Utah when he opened up the Bear Ears National Monument and&nbsp;Grand Staircase-Escalante to mining, drilling, and logging. He said he was giving the land back to the people after it had been taken in a land grab by the over reaching federal government. It sounded so reasonable, so benign, almost heroic. Of course it was a totally lie. An insidious, deceptive, cynical, evil lie. But it sounded like such a good thing! You've been mind fucked again.<br /><br />Trump isn't the only one doing this of course. It's all over social media. You know when you come across a post that somehow makes you feel like you must be stupid for not knowing that, or wow this guy must have passed the fourth stage of enlightenment. Posts that make you feel like the poster must really be part of the in crowd and you definitely are not. Or somehow they are privy to some secret knowledge that has been held back from the common folk. It's a trick. They are just fucking with you.<br /><br />I think we have a pretty good understanding about how the press and network news sways public opinion one way or the other by reporting only part of the story, or ignoring important events while focusing on trivial ones. Most people are used to this and try not to let the news media affect them that much. But social media is so new and can be used is so many subtle and deceptive ways, I don't think we are all properly hardened to the ways in which it can affect our thinking. I am not a psychologist. I would very much like to see a study by psychologists on all the various methods being used to manipulate our thinking on social media. What I do know is that now more then ever developing the art of critical thinking is of utmost importance. Be a skeptic. Make your default to not believe anything unless there is a good body of evidence backing it up. Even then question the evidence. Realize that what we believe or disbelieve doesn't make a damn bit of difference in the grand scheme of things. What is is, regardless of our beliefs. However it is when we act or speak for our beliefs that we can get ourselves in trouble or have a negative impact if we are wrong. So believe what you will, but only speak for what you know.Paul Liebermanhttps://plus.google.com/116323603138300579796noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4436604568430952320.post-39552048231344360542017-12-26T19:24:00.001-08:002017-12-26T19:24:47.265-08:00Surviving in a divided countryThe United States is a divided country. Toss out any issue and Americans will split pretty much 50/50 on it. This doesn't have to be a bad thing. The age old favorites, Coke vs. Pepsi, Ford vs. Chevy, just led to more choices without causing any harm. But when it comes to politics we are locked into an two party, either/or, situation that is harming us all. To survive our government is going to need some fundamental changes.<br /><h3>Winner takes all means we all loose.</h3>Most elections in recent years have been very close. Trump lost the popular vote and still became president. Does that give him a mandate to run rampant on our government institutions the way he has? Of course not. Republicans slim majority in the Senate. Do they really think this means all the American people support what they are doing? Of course not. It means maybe half of the people support what they are doing. And when you factor in the margins by which each candidate won, and the percentage of people who voted in each election, their slim majority really represents maybe 30% of Americans at best.&nbsp; So no one has a mandate. If the party in power by the slimmest of margins pushes through their most extreme agenda they are going against the will of the majority of Americans.<br /><br />Recent events bare this out. Polls were very clear that the majority of Americans do not support Trumps's Muslim ban, the Republican tax plan, the FCC repeal of Net Neutrality,&nbsp; or the leasing of public lands for oil and coal extraction. Yet Trump and Republicans moved ahead with these things anyhow. <br /><h3>Intransigent leadership means we all loose.</h3>When President Obama took office he realized that even though he won the popular election by an overwhelming margin, and his party controlled both houses of congress, in order to move forward in a meaningful way would require compromise. He reached out across party lines and tried to find common ground, but Republicans wanted no part of it. They stood firm and stubbornly blocked everything they could. Then when they had full control in 2016 their first move in the Senate was to change the rules and approve a Supreme Court nominee with a simple majority. Surely no one can see this as the will of the people.<br /><h3>Party lines mean we all loose.</h3>When any decision is made along party lines it should automatically be invalidated. If the two parties cannot reach an agreement on something it certainly does not represent the will of the people. Once again at best it represents the minority Americans it took to win the slim margin in congress. Ignoring for the moment that our representatives care more about the will of their campaign donors and powerful lobbyists, they cannot pretend to represent the will of the people if they are not willing to compromise and work with the other party.<br /><h3>The swinging pendulum means we keep going backwards. </h3>Eight years of Clinton, eight years of Bush, eight years of Obama, and now Trump. See a pattern here? The fact that we want to give the other party a chance each time is a good thing. That fact that each new administration immediately attempts to reverse everything done by the previous administration is not. Indeed Trump seems to base every decision on whether or not he can undo something Obama did. One step forward and two steps back is eventually going to lead us back to the dark ages. <br /><h3>United we stand, divided we fall.</h3>We stand at a precipice. The United States of America has fallen from grace and may soon go the way of the Roman Empire and the Soviet Union. Outside of politics people are able to put aside their differences and work together everyday. If we can do this in our daily lives shouldn't we expect it of our elected officials? There is a strong argument to be made that the structure of our democracy is fatally flawed and significant structural change must be made if we are to survive. While I agree that things like the electoral college and two party system are broken and need to be changed, this alone is not going to fix the problem. Our democracy survived many generations with these institutions and managed to succeed because our elected officials understood the importance of putting personal gain and ideologies aside and working together for the good of all. This is what has been totally lost and this is what we must regain if we are going to survive. The question remains are there any leaders among us who can rise to this challenge?<br /><br /><br />Paul Liebermanhttps://plus.google.com/116323603138300579796noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4436604568430952320.post-49766831481232555422017-12-11T13:53:00.002-08:002017-12-11T13:53:32.241-08:00Jerusalem IS the capitol of Israel<div data-contents="true"><div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="7o6ur" data-offset-key="6uv64-0-0"><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6uv64-0-0">Jerusalem is certainly the capitol of Israel, and should be recognized as such by the world. Israel itself however must change. It cannot survive as a "Jewish state". A homeland for Jews, certainly and a place that can celebrate it's many sacred and historical sites which are important to Jews, Muslims, and Christians alike. But the government needs adopt separation of church and state and recognize Jews, Arabs, and Palestinians as equal citizens.</div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6uv64-0-0"><br /></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6uv64-0-0">Before I get branded as anti-Israel let me say that I have always felt a deep connection with Israel. As a Jew I've always felt proud that out of the ashes of WWII a bunch of refugees were able to build such a strong, modern, and thriving society. I was born the same year Israel became a nation, and although I have never been there, have always felt like our lives are intertwined. So please read what I write here with that in mind.</div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6uv64-0-0"><br /></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6uv64-0-0">I've never been a fan of the so-called two state solution. That would just leave two tiny nations with limited resources constantly at war with each other. Even if political peace could ever be established there would always be enmity between them. I'm always of the mind that we are stronger together. In the case of Israel, even if you ignore the Palestinians, Jews will eventually become the minority as the Israeli Arab population is growing at a faster rate. A number of people have said that Israel can continue as a Jewish state, or a democracy, but not both. They must also realize that a Jewish state that is not a democracy will not survive. The wonderful spirit that opened its heart and homes to Jews from all over the world would wither and die, and without it the nation would soon perish.</div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6uv64-0-0"><br /></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6uv64-0-0">In a way this strongly parallels the situation here in the US. America became great by welcoming&nbsp; downtrodden from Europe and beyond. Once you got here you were "one of us now". We grew and prospered from the hard work and dreams of those who came seeking a better life. Same for Israel. Jew who lost their homes in Europe after WWII, who fled communism in the decades after, and even from exotic places like Ethiopia, flocked to Israel and were welcomed. Together they built a great nation.</div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6uv64-0-0"><br /></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6uv64-0-0">Yes Israel has had to remain strong and resolute considering it's neighbors who are committed to it's destruction. But while they are able to defend themselves militarily, they are still loosing the battle for hearts and minds, and are becoming more and more isolated on the world stage. All attempts to make the people more secure are ultimately making them less safe as the Palestinians become more and more desperate. It's time for a change and a new direction.</div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6uv64-0-0"><br /></div><div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="6uv64-0-0">Israel needs to be born again as a secular democracy, with borders that include both Gaza and the West Bank, with it's capitol in Jerusalem. It must immediately grant full citizenship to all of the Palestinians within these borders, and grant a right of return to Palestinians who have fled to other countries. The reborn nation will need a new constitution that grants equal citizenship to all residents, but includes protections to preserve Israel as a homeland for Jews. These protections must prepare for the near future when Jews are a minority. Jews must always feel secure within their homeland, while at the same time reparations need to be made to the Palestinians who have lost so much over so many years. I believe this can be done. All it really takes is good will. In fact if the governments were to just get out of the way, the people would do this on their own. Jerusalem can yet become the City of Peace, and the capitol of a thriving nation that recognizes the rights of all it's citizens to live, love, worship, honor their traditions, and celebrate their unique history and vast contributions to the rest of the world.</div></div></div>Paul Liebermanhttps://plus.google.com/116323603138300579796noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4436604568430952320.post-19231221670237499902017-01-25T20:22:00.002-08:002017-01-25T20:26:04.147-08:00My comment for the DAPL Environmental Impact Statement<span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222;">To: &nbsp;</span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: xx-small;"><span style="font-family: Courier New, Courier, monospace;">gib.a.owen.civ@mail.mil </span><span style="font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;"><gib owen=""></gib></span></span></span><br /><span style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222;">Subject: &nbsp;</span><span style="color: #222222; font-family: Courier New, Courier, monospace; font-size: xx-small;">NOI Comments, Dakota Access Pipeline Crossing</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222;">We are at a crucial moment in the history of the human race. The decisions you make will have grave impact upon your grandchildren and all future generations. it is with this understanding that I urge you to consider carefully the arguments I am about to make.</span></span><br /><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><b><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;">The pipeline will leak.</span></b></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;">They all do, with devastating effect. Hardly a month goes by without a new pipeline leak. Just this week a pipeline in Saskatchewan&nbsp;Canadian leaked 200,000 liters of crude oil on to native lands. When the Colonial Pipeline burst in Alabama last September it jeopardized the survival of many species of endangered wildlife. Suppose it had been a water supply? What would the<b>&nbsp;impact</b>&nbsp;have been?&nbsp;</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;">Any claims by Energy Transfer Partners that this pipeline won't leak must be seen as shear fantasy, wishful thinking, or outright deception. They cannot possibly guarantee that the DAPL won't leak and won't pose a life threatening danger to everyone who depends on the Missouri River for water. There are no 'contingency plans" that are going to help when oil starts leaking into a river. It is not a question of if it will leak, it is just a question of when.</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><b><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;">It is not our land.</span></b></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;">The people who are leading the efforts to stop this pipeline have been living there for thousands of years. They somehow survived the genocide we committed in the early years of our nation. They survived the broken treaties. They survived our attempts to wipe out their culture and languages. They survived the desperate poverty they were thrown into by oppressive government programs. And they survived the drugs and alcohol that consumed many of them due to the hopelessness of their situation. So now here they are today, full of hope, pride, and unity, standing before us and saying "There is a better way. We don't have to destroy the earth. It is our responsibility to leave a healthy planet for our grandchildren."&nbsp;</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;">But instead of listening to their wisdom we respond with overwhelming brutality. Hundreds have been arrested on flimsy riot charges. Some are in jail. they have been subjected to attack dogs, water cannons in freezing temperatures, rubber bullets, stun grenades, and more, all while peacefully protesting or engaged in prayer. This is no way for an enlightened nation to respond to an out cry from people who only want to protect their drinking water. If the people in Flint knew what was going to happen to their water and spoke out would we have jailed them to? Would we have mowed them down with water cannons? Shot rubber bullets at them? The brutality of the response to the Water Protectors must weigh in your decision. These are True Americans. They are defending the land that they have occupied for thousands of years. Isn't that what America is all about? Liberty and Justice? Fighting the oppression of a corrupt political and corporate system?</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;">The&nbsp;<b>impact</b>&nbsp;that continuing the DAPL will have on Native Americans would be devastating. They have lost every battle with the US Army and Government. We have taken so much from them. They deserve a victory. The health and pride of our people is worth so much more than the oil, I'm sure you agree.</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><div><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div><div><b><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;">More oil is the last thing we need.</span></b></div><div><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;">Even if you ignore the science of climate change as a result of fossil fuel burning, you'd have a hard time denying that Americans are too dependent on their cars to the detriment of all of us. Traffic everywhere is insane. The air in all of our major cities and even in most small communities is terrible. More oil means more cars on the road, more traffic, and more pollution. The&nbsp;<b>impact</b>&nbsp;of more oil on our&nbsp;<b>environment&nbsp;</b>can be seen everywhere.&nbsp;</span></div></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;">But if believe the overwhelming evidence and conclusions of the vast majority of climate scientists then your decision is clear. The pipeline must be stopped, and the oil left in the ground if we are to avert a global catastrophe on a scale never before seen. The past three years have set consecutive records as the hottest years ever. Glaciers all over the world are disappearing at an unprecedented rate. Islands and costal communities are being flooded with some having to relocate to higher ground. If we continue on our current path we are condemning future generation to a hellish existence, or even possibly the extinction of the human race. Even if you doubt some of these predictions is the risk really worth it? Do we really need the oil that bad?&nbsp;</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><b><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;">Fossil fuels are going the way of the dinosaurs.</span></b></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;">How much oil do you suppose we have left? We can drill, frack, pump, and pipe like crazy but it's just a matter of time before it's all gone. Why not start preparing now for the future? In fact the oil industry is already on the decline. A world wide oil glut has caused a slow down at the North Dakota’s Bakken oil fields. At the current rate of production DAPL is not even necessary.</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;">The future is in renewable energy resources like wind, solar, and geothermal. This is where the jobs are and this is were we should be investing our resources. The&nbsp;<b>impact</b>&nbsp;of continuing to rely on fossil fuels will be economic collapse when it all runs out and we neglected to develop renewable energy production.</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><b><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;">The pipeline will only benefit the corporations.&nbsp;</span></b></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;">They like to claim they are creating jobs, but these are only temporary jobs. Once the construction is completed these jobs vanish and very few jobs will remain in the areas affected by the pipeline. Once the oil is flowing it does nothing for the local economy but rather just lines the pockets of those that need it the least. The communities of North Dakota will remain in poverty. This has been the pattern of the oil industry around the world. Take the oil and run, with a devastating i<b>mpact</b>&nbsp;on local communities.&nbsp;</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;">For these reasons I urge you to do whatever is in your power to make sure this pipeline never gets built, and to take further actions to shut down the Bakken oil fields and leave what remaining oil we have in the ground.</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;">Thank you for your careful consideration of these statements.</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;">Paul Lieberman</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;arial&quot; , &quot;helvetica&quot; , sans-serif;">Corvallis, OR</span></div>Paul Liebermanhttps://plus.google.com/116323603138300579796noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4436604568430952320.post-20143521050555604402016-07-29T12:19:00.000-07:002016-07-29T12:19:51.406-07:00Remembering 1968 - A history lessonSeeing so many young people get excited about politics this year because of Bernie Sanders made me think of another time and another candidate who inspired young people to get involved. That was in 1968 and that candidate was Eugene McCarthy. There are many similarities between Gene and Bernie, but first a little background on the times.<br /><br />I was 20 years old. The war in Vietnam was raging and so were people at home. The contrasts were incredible. In the ghettoes of our cities Black people were rioting and the police as always were responding with overwhelming force. At the same time Hippies were getting high and discovering a whole new world based on love, beauty, and music. I was somewhere in the middle, awake to the new world we saw being born, but involved in the old world we were trying to save. My biggest role in the anti-war movement was in helping people evade the draft. I gave speeches at the community college I was attending, on the moral obligation we had to evade the draft. I joined demonstrations at some of the navy bases where I was living in San Diego. I played a small role, but a committed one.<br /><br />We had some great leaders in those days. Many of us had first been inspired by John Kennedy and had never fully recovered from his death. Martin Luther King was our spiritual leader and our moral anchor. Had his cause not been rooted in non-violence it would have been a far bloodier time. No message had a greater impact on my life than that for any change to be lasting and meaningful it must be achieved through non-violent means.<br /><br />And it was working. Things were looking up. The protests and demonstrations were having an affect. History will show that Lyndon Johnson was one of the greatest presidents of our time for pushing through the civil rights legislation as JFK's legacy, but at the time we hated him. His stubborn commitment to fighting the war was his undoing. When popular opinion rose up against him he did the honorable thing and stepped aside. We were ecstatic. What a victory. If we could bring down a president surely we could end the war, establish justice, and usher in an age of peace and love. <br /><br />Then the shit hit the fan.&nbsp;Martin Luther&nbsp;King was assassinated on April 4, 1968. If you didn't live through it there is no way I can convey the grief that took hold on us at that time. Here was a man who devoted his live to peace and love. A man who's vision for a better world included all people. A man who fought more valiantly with love and non-violence than any soldier could with guns and bombs. And now he was gone. Many held true to his message and continued the non-violent struggle, but others responded differently. If a paragon of love and non-violence could be brought down by violence, then the only way to fight these forces was through more violence. Riots erupted in most of our major cities. Dark times were upon us.<br /><br />But we still had Gene McCarthy who was leading the charge to bring the Democrats around to the anti-war side. If we could at least end the war surely things would get better. Soon Robert Kennedy threw his hat in the ring. I was very excited about this. Kennedy was also against the war, but he also brought to the table the legacy of fighting for civil rights, equality, and justice. Plus he was much younger than Gene McCarthy. So now we had 2 good candidates in the Democratic presidential race. Both good men that could do much to make the world a better place.<br /><br />June 6, 1968 Bobby Kennedy is shot dead. We were still numb from having lost Martin. This was unbearable. Bobby Kennedy stood for hope. Now all hope was gone. Surely the world was going to hell and there was nothing we could do about.<br /><br />The Democratic Convention was held in Chicago starting August 26 and it would not be a pretty sight. 10,000 protestors were met by 23,000 police and national guard. Think about those numbers for a moment. This year we had what, a couple of hundred protestors show up in Philadelphia. The police riot that ensued is well documented and became a pivotal moment in US history. Watching TV and seeing peaceful protestors, kids mostly, being beaten and gassed by the police had an impact on this county. Unfortunately the image has been largely forgotten and police violence is once again at an all time high.<br /><br />In those days the primaries were just a kind of popularity pole to judge the sentiment of the people and to see how well a person campaigned. The real nominating process happened by the party bosses in the smoke filled rooms. This year people were outraged by the corruption in the nominating process, but it used to be far worse. It was all dirty politics. If you wanted to move up in the ranks you had to do favors and build up political capital. When you had enough people in your debt you could call in the favors and get what you wanted. That is how Lyndon Johnson passed the civil rights legislation. He had been a wheeler and dealer his whole career and had many people that owed him. He was a dirty politician that passed the most progressive legislation of my lifetime.<br /><br />So as the police riot raged outside, the party bosses ignored the people's candidate Gene McCarthy, and marched out their patsy Hubert Humphrey. Did you feel cheated when Bernie was denied the nomination? Been there, know that feeling. Humphrey was not a bad guy. He was much more liberal than most of today's politicians. But as the VP under Johnson he represented the status quo and made no commitment to ending the war or addressing the grievances of Blacks and other minorities.<br /><br />I pray with all my heart and soul that the similarities between now and then end here. In that election the people were so dismayed by the spectacle of the Democratic convention and violence in the streets, that they sought refuge in the law and order candidate Richard Nixon, even though most people were well aware that he was a liar and a cheat. And less than 2 years later our worst fears came to pass when 4 students were shot dead at Kent State by an over zealous national guard that thought they were preserving that law and order. <br /><br />There has been lots of water under the bridge in the 48 years since 1968. In some ways it may seem like nothing has changed and we're still fighting the same battles over and over again. But then a lot has changed. None of our leaders were assassinated this year. The people's candidate, though once again cheated out of the nomination, has had a huge impact on the direction of the Democratic party and future policy. Bernie had opened the door for a whole new generation to step in and start working to make the world a better place. Bernie said it was a revolution. In 1968 we also talked about revolution. But in truth it is evolution. It is slow steady change. The thing about evolution is that you can't stop it. It is inevitable. Yes the pace of change can seem glacial to us mortals who have a hard time seeing before yesterday or after tomorrow. But if you look back it is easy to see how much the world has changed. In 1968 Gays had to stay in the closet or become complete outcasts from society. Today they can marry legally. In 1968 smoking pot would mean jail and in places like Texas, many years of jail. Today marijuana is legal in progressive states and no doubt will soon be legal everywhere. In 1968 women were expected to stay home and be subservient to men. Today they can become president. In 1968 most Blacks would never go to college and could expect to spend their lives working at the lowest rung on the ladder. We still have a long way to go to achieve racial equality but there can be no doubt that the condition of most Black families is far better today than it was in 1968.<br /><br />So if you're feeling bummed by the outcome of Bernie's campaign, or the continued corruption in politics, or the continued racial injustice, or the ongoing wars, please take heart. If you were inspired by Bernie please stay involved in the process. Support candidates at the local and state levels. Maybe run for office yourself. Our best politicians started on city councils, as mayors, etc. We need a new generation to get involved and take us to a whole other level. Look to the past to see where we came from and avoid the mistakes we made, but look to your dreams to lead us on into a better future.Paul Liebermanhttps://plus.google.com/116323603138300579796noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4436604568430952320.post-7290299163744407452016-02-12T20:36:00.000-08:002016-03-04T15:01:40.408-08:00Dear Democratic National Committee<div class="tr_bq">Recently I received a survey from the Democratic National Committee. Most of it was not very relevant to what I care about so I took the opportunity to write them this letter to return with the survey.</div><br /><blockquote class="tr_bq"><span class="s1">When Bill Clinton turned his back on the values that had long been the core of the Democratic party, I became disenchanted with the Democrats and voted for third party candidates whenever possible. The values that I speak of are the social and economic programs enacted by FDR, Truman, Kennedy, and Johnson. Programs that favored working people over rich corporations. Programs that ensured racial and gender equality. Programs that provided a safety net for those facing hard times. Programs that ensured the elderly would not have to live in poverty. It boils down to a party, and a platform of polices, that care about people, all people, and prioritizes people over corporations.</span></blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq"><span class="s1">Bill Clinton sold out the Democratic party by embracing policies that had always been Republican priorities. Policies that favored corporations, banks, and the rich. Sure it made him popular in the short term, but it also allowed the Republicans to shift further to the right. Since the Democrats now stood for all of the things moderate Republicans had always eschewed, the Republicans were now free to pursue their extremist right wing social agenda of rolling back all the progress we had made with civil rights and gender equality. Figures like Newt Gingrich could now rise to power and shift the conversation further and further to the right. The end result is the tea party and now the extremist and racist candidates now dominating the Republican presidential race.</span></blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq"><span class="s1">Hilary Clinton is not the person to revive these traditional Democratic values and restore the party to national prominence. Hilary has continued on the rightward swing that her husband started. But as long as Democrats continue to act like moderate Republicans the Republicans are going to continue down their path towards extremist racist and nationalistic policies. We need someone who can shift the entire conversation to the left and get the country talking about things that will move our country forward once again.</span></blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq"><span class="s1">We are very fortunate, that for the first time in many years, we have such a candidate in Bernie Sanders. Sanders is a bona fide liberal Democrat in the mold of FDR, Kennedy, and Johnson, who can restore our party to greatness and get this country moving in the right direction once again. The huge support that Bernie is generating proves that he has struck a nerve with the American people, who are ready once again to pursue the causes that were once near and dear to Democrats.</span></blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq"><span class="s1">This primary season is not about the two candidates, or just picking the best person to beat the Republicans. This primary race is for the heart and soul of the Democratic party. Hilary on one hand represents business as usual and a continuation of the moderate Republican policies of the Clinton and Obama administrations. Bernie on the other hand represents a rebirth of the values that made the Democratic party great, and the social and economic programs that will float all ships and get us back on the path of equality and opportunity for all.</span></blockquote><div class="p2"><span class="s1"></span></div><blockquote class="tr_bq"><span class="s1">This will not be an easy transition. People like Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and others who are obstructing the course of progress, will have to go. The party big whigs, and the big money people, will have to step aside. The voice of the people is clear. The Democratic party will either return to its core values, or become a footnote in history as the extremist right continues its surge. The battle outside is raging. Don’t stand in the hallways and block up the doors. The times they are changing.</span></blockquote><blockquote class="tr_bq"><span class="s1">Thank you,</span><span class="s1"><br />Paul Lieberman</span></blockquote>Paul Liebermanhttps://plus.google.com/116323603138300579796noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4436604568430952320.post-29360940107231666982016-01-06T22:57:00.000-08:002016-01-06T22:57:55.306-08:00Public LandsThe so called militia that has invaded the&nbsp;Malheur National Wildlife Refuge (can I call them outside agitators?) may be a misguided bunch of angry white men, but their intention to get us to take a close look at how our public lands are managed is worthy of attention. The BLM, and to a lesser extent the Forest Service, have to balance a very diverse set of interests and priorities. While the Bundy bunch want to be able to graze cattle wherever they please at no cost to them, many others feel that the BLM has sold out to the cattle industry using taxpayer dollars to subsidize ranches that could not survive otherwise. Much as the Forest Service did for much of the past 50 years allowing logging companies to reap huge profits while devastating the very forests that they were supposed to be "managing", the BLM has allowed much of the west to be turned into virtual desert through over grazing.<br /><br />At the same time both of these agencies have devoted much energy into wildlife preservation and to provide recreational opportunities. Like the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge much of south eastern Oregon is home to a huge number of migratory birds. A little to the west is Hart Mountain National Antelope Refuge, home to Antelope, Big Horn Sheep, and a lot of other creatures that could not survive if the ranchers had access to this land. If it were not for these federal agencies many more species would be extinct. They may not be doing the best job they can, but they are doing something.<br /><br />So what are the responsibilities as stewards of the land, and who should be these stewards? The Bundy bunch have already stated their desire to turn Malheur National Wildlife Refuge over to ranchers, loggers, and miners. We've seen what the "make a quick buck and get out" attitude has done to the land. Obviously they can not be trusted as stewards, but perhaps the current government agencies can not either. Who then?<br /><br />I nominate the Native Americans. It's their land anyhow, and their culture is based on a oneness with the land and living in harmony with the Earth. If there are any people that can lay claim to be stewards of our public lands it is the Native people. There are many positives to this idea. Firstly it would be a huge step towards making things right in view of our nations's shameful history. We can restore dignity and meaning to a people who's dignity and meaning was stripped away over the past two centuries. We can give our Native people a real role to play in preserving the land for future generations. And we can benefit from their unique understanding of the natural environment to do a much better job than even our best trained biologists and environmentalists.<br /><br />I'm not talking about just turning over the public lands to existing tribal governments, or making them part of any reservations. We should keep our existing agencies and infrastructure in place, only start hiring and training more and more Native Americans until they are running the whole thing. The agencies can then work together with local tribes to manage the land. The lands should remain in the public trust and managed for the benefit of everyone, with priorities adjusted so that preservation and restoration come first, and profit making comes in dead last. What's in it for the tribes? Meaningful employment for one. Employment that could go a long way toward improving morale and living conditions. An assurance that no more treaties will be broken and that Native hunting and fishing rights will be honored. But also an opportunity to work together at the national level and to take their rightful place as Americans.<br /><br />Let's acknowledge the Native Americans as the true stewards of our public lands and give the Bundy bunch and the rest of the angry white men notice that their days of profiting from land their ancestors stole are long over.Paul Liebermanhttps://plus.google.com/116323603138300579796noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4436604568430952320.post-83334666396170655092015-11-03T10:36:00.000-08:002015-11-03T10:41:01.336-08:00Defanging HateRecently I was listening to a news story about how these psychopaths that shoot up schools are often motivated by various websites and social media groups. Evidently there are sites that go so far as to glorify past school shootings. My immediate thought was "why hasn't anyone taken these sites down?" I then realized this is just a technical problem. As someone who worked in technology for many years I've learned that technical problems are the easiest to solve. Consensus, resources, priorities, these are the hard problems. Technical problems can be solved.<br /><br />The New York Times just posted this <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/03/opinion/the-facebook-intifada.html" target="_blank">op-ed piece</a> about how Facebook and Twitter are starting to get serious about eliminating hateful postings on their services. This article refers to the terrorists that have been murdering people in Jerusalem. It is critical that these top-tier social media sites accept their responsibility to curb posts designed to insight violence, but it is not enough. We must take it a lot farther.<br /><br />First we must identify exactly who is the enemy here. Sites that openly, or covertly, promote violence certainly qualify, but many don't need to go that far. Sites that spread lies in order to arouse hatred also qualify. Many of these are racial, but some are just political, but if we adopt a "no tolerance for hate" attitude, then they all most go.<br /><br />The Southern Poverty Law Center is one group that tracks hate groups. They publish a <a href="http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/hate-map" target="_blank">hate map</a>&nbsp;that currently shows 784 hate groups operating in the United States. By now most of these will have websites, or participation in some online forum. We can shut these sites down, but that will just be a starting point. There are probably thousands of other forums online that spread lies and hatred designed to instigate violence. We can locate and take these down as well.<br /><br />Think about how good Google is at finding stuff on the web. Imagine applying that awesome power to identify and locate hate speech on the web. It would not surprise me if Google already indexes these things. Then the work can begin.<br /><br />I am not a hacker, but I have spent a good portion of my career defending websites, servers, and networks from hackers, so I have a pretty good idea of the kind of exploits that are out there. I know that if I don't take the proper precautions my website will be compromised in a matter of hours. And these are just random attacks. I believe there isn't a site or server out there that is safe from a dedicated, prolonged attack. At the very least a denial of service attack can be effective in preventing a site from functioning. This has all been done before.<br /><br />There are of course the ethical implications of what I am proposing, not to mention legal. Certainly it is illegal to hack a website, destroy data, or launch denial of service attacks. There is also the free speech issue, something we are very devoted to in this country. But we're really talking about a war here. Our children are being gunned down at school. Racism, antisemitism, and violent ideologies are running rampant here and around the world. Terror groups use the web as a recruiting tool. I am advocating a NON VIOLENT method of confronting and defeating these groups. Our country has shown it has no problem tossing aside individual rights and moral issues when it comes to defeating an enemy. Free speech should not apply to hate speech, or incite to commit violence. Yes algorithms are not foolproof and there will undoubtably be the collateral damage of blocking legitimate free speech, but we're not talking about killing people here. We're talking about saving lives. We're talking about changing the course of history. Without a means to spread, this disease of hatred can fade away and die. The Internet has made it possible for psychopaths to get their message out far and wide. We can use this same power to shut them down and silence the hatred. It's just a technical problem.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Paul Liebermanhttps://plus.google.com/116323603138300579796noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4436604568430952320.post-21421546665502577582015-10-12T17:30:00.000-07:002015-10-12T17:30:52.915-07:00Stand up for our rightsWhat if I were to tell you that Americans are being held hostage by a terrorist organization, and that these terrorists have enabled the deaths of thousands of Americans, including school children. You'd expect our government to do something about it wouldn't you? What if you then found out that the government won't do anything because this very same terrorist organization has bought out the majority of our representatives through campaign contributions? Time to put an end to this don't you think? So please stand up to terrorism and demand that our government takes down the NRA, and take the guns off our streets and out of the hands of people who would do us harm. Make it clear to your representatives that you will not vote for any candidate that does not make taking down the NRA and passing real gun control legislation their top priority.<br /><br />If there is one right guaranteed to every American it is that of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. It is ingrained in our conciseness. This is the most fundamental part of being an American. But as long as we have to live with in fear of sending our children to school because they could be murdered by a lunatic with guns, we are being denied this right. No American should have to fear that their children are not safe at school. No American should have to fear for their own lives in a movie theater, a mall, or other public place. That is the very definition of terrorism.<br /><br />We have fought wars against foreign terrorists. Spent billions of dollars to defeat them. Sent our sons and daughters off to fight and die, so that the rest of us could feel safer. We can end the domestic terrorism imposed on us by the NRA simply by not voting for any politician that takes money from them. Once we have rid the government of these corrupt politicians they can get to work to craft real laws that will get these guns of the streets and let us feel safe again.Paul Liebermanhttps://plus.google.com/116323603138300579796noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4436604568430952320.post-63558541643645989612015-10-10T08:24:00.001-07:002015-10-10T08:24:47.376-07:00All guns must go<div>We need to repeal the second amendment and eliminate all guns. Here is why.</div><div><br /></div><div>The second amendment was written for another time. After the war for independence our young country wanted to make sure the new government understood that if at anytime things weren't working out, the citizens could take up arms and rebel. This simply does not apply to the 21st century. No one is going to overthrow the United States government via a violent revolution. If we want a revolution that will result in anything like the world we want to live in, it will have to be a non-violent revolution.</div><div><br /></div><div>All of the "sensible" gun measures say they want to protect "legitimate" gun ownership. Things like hunting, target shooting, or as President Obama put it "to protect one's family". Let's examine these.</div><div><br /></div><div>Hunting:</div><div>I respect people that really rely on hunting to feed there family, but have no respect for the average "sport" hunter who goes out to kill animals for the fun of it. There is nothing sporting about using a high powered rifle to kill an animal. Killing other creatures when you don't need their meat for survival is wrong. If you get a "thrill" from taking the life of an animal you become a calloused human being that no longer values life and is one step closer to being able to take a human life. If you really need to hunt, get a bow and arrows.</div><div><br /></div><div>Target shooting:</div><div>Are you the bozo who leaves broken glass and cans scattered through the woods? Or maybe you prefer shooting up road signs as you down a six pack while driving on a country road? Either way we don't need you. Get a life.</div><div><br /></div><div>Protect your family:</div><div>We've all watched the good guys save the day in the movies. Unfortunately real life doesn't always work that way. In most cases having a gun makes it more likely that you will be shot. The presence of guns escalates the situation. Just having a gun in your home puts your family at greater risk. Children are killed all the time by accidental discharge. These parents should be charged with negligent homicide for having a gun in their home.</div><div><br /></div><div>Wildlife control:</div><div>I recently read one person say they needed assault rifles to control the gophers in their fields so that the cattle didn't trip on the gopher holes. For these psychos killing is always the solution. Coyotes, wolves, rabbits, they're all dangerous enemies that need to be shot down. You think maybe there is another way of looking at the world?</div><div><br /></div><div>The radical right would like to paint even the politicians calling for "sensible" gun control as extremists. If there is any legislation at all, it will be for a "compromise" plan, that takes the "sensible" plan likely to be brought forth by Democrats, and cripples it to be completely ineffective. Let's start with a bold plan, so that a compromise will leave us with something that might actually help. More importantly let's get people embracing this idea, to start moving the conversation in the right direction.</div><div><br /></div><div>Guns are created for one purpose only and that is to kill. That is the first thing we need to except. What makes a good gun? One that is more lethal, one that makes it easier to kill. If you own a gun you are making a commitment that you are willing to kill. Is that the country you want for your children? Let's make a commitment to end the killing, and start by getting rid of the guns.</div><div><br /></div><div>Tell your representatives you will not vote for any candidate that doesn't make it their top priority to take down the NRA and put an end to gun violence. Let's repeal the second amendment and replace it with a constitutional right to feel safe in our schools, and in our lives.</div>Paul Liebermanhttps://plus.google.com/116323603138300579796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4436604568430952320.post-11214893794787841812015-08-19T18:59:00.001-07:002015-08-19T18:59:40.378-07:00Why we need to support Bernie SandersPolitics is a spectrum. In the 1970's and into the 80's the Democratic party was dominated by liberals that kept the ideas of social justice, opportunity, and the well being of all of us in the minds of the American people. When there were political debates these issues were always at the forefront. Then along came Bill Clinton. He saw that they only way to get elected was to move to "the middle of the road". So what happens when you walk down the middle of the road? You get run over, which is exactly what happened to the Democrats under Bill Clinton. By moving to the center he shifted the spectrum rightward, allowing extreme voices like Newt Gingrich to become part of the conversation. As the Democrats shut out the voices on the left, the Republicans were able to embrace the voices on the extreme right. Bill Clinton thought he was moving to the middle of the road, but he just enabled the Republicans to move the road farther to the right.<br /><br />And it hasn't stopped moving. Today's Republican candidates are so far to the right that 20 years ago they would have been so fringe as to not be worthy of consideration. But now they are actually being taken seriously. We may laugh at the things they are saying but the press continues to give them coverage as if they were real candidates, and the American people are hearing the garbage they are saying. The conversation has moved way too far to the right. Some one needs to grab that road and yank it leftward a couple of light years so that these right wing extremist wackos fall right off and get drowned out by some reasonable discourse.<br /><br />Enter Bernie Sanders. A true liberal he has not sold out the ideals and values that were once the heart of the Democratic party. &nbsp;And while the mainstream media is doing their best to shut him out, people are listening. He has struck a nerve with millions of Americans that know our country can do better and are tired of having the political process bought and sold by greedy rich people who care only for their own bottom line. But right now Bernie is still the lone voice on the left (along with Elizabeth Warren). The Democratic party machine is still firmly in the center-of-the-road Hilary Clinton camp. We need to support Bernie and start moving the conversation to the left. Bernie Sanders is not a fringe radical. His policies are common sense "let's do the right thing for America". There are plenty of people far to the left of Bernie, but they have been banished from the Democratic party and their voices mostly silenced. &nbsp;Let's help Bernie move the conversation back where it belongs. Instead of having the public discussing wether we should be denying citizenship to the children of immigrants, lets get people talking about how American can once again become the land of opportunity as it was when my immigrant grandparents came here. Let's help Bernie move the conversation back to the unfinished business of ending the institutionalized racism that 50 years after the civil rights legislation is still alive and well. Let's help Bernie move the conversation to the left so that minority voices, now almost completely drowned out, can once again be part to the political process.<br /><br />So please join me in supporting Bernie Sanders for president, and please tell your friends and loved ones to do the same.Paul Liebermanhttps://plus.google.com/116323603138300579796noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4436604568430952320.post-71223630122716013832015-06-12T20:28:00.000-07:002015-06-12T20:28:15.394-07:00How to save the world in 3 easy steps<h3>Step 1: Be nice to each other.&nbsp;</h3>I mean what good is saving the world if we're all going to be assholes. Without this the other steps don't mean much, however steps 2 and 3 can help us achieve step 1. Be nice. Treat everyone with respect and dignity. Or, as has been said, love one another.<br /><br /><h3>Step 2: Plant a garden and grow as much of your own food as possible.&nbsp;</h3>Besides the obvious benefits of fresh healthy food, exercise, and an outdoor lifestyle, growing a garden will fundamentally change you as a human being. I can't really explain it, but ask anyone who grows a garden and they will know what I'm talking about.<br /><br />There are so many ways that growing a garden is critically important. Of course we need to break our dependence on the agribusiness monsters that are raping the earth and destroying the environment. Of course we need to feed our kids the best food possible to build strong minds and bodies. Of course we need to protect the land, feed and nurture it, and put it to the best use possible.<br /><br />How will growing a garden help us be nice to each other? If you grow a garden you will have more food than you know what to do with. You'll be giving vegetables away to everyone you know, and they will love you for it.<br /><br /><h3>Step 3: Ride your bike as much as possible.&nbsp;</h3>You don't have wear spandex and train for the Tour de France, or buy a fancy new bike. Ride in whatever clothes you're wearing. Ride whatever bike you have. Think before you get in the car. Can I get there by bike? &nbsp;Can I run this errand by bike? &nbsp;For so many short trips around town, a bike is a much easier way to get there than a car. But don't just ride for transportation, ride for fun. Do you remember how much fun it is to ride a bike?<br /><br />Riding a bike will fundamentally change you as a human being. I can't explain it, but just ask anyone who rides a bike and they will know what I'm talking about.<br /><br />You may not think that riding a bike will make that much difference if you still have to drive for longer trips. But every short trip you do on a bike adds up, and by the end of the year you'll find you've used a lot less gas. Plus you'll start getting in better shape, which will make you want to ride longer and farther. Pretty soon you'll start wondering if really even need a car.<br /><br />How will riding a bike help us be nice to each other? &nbsp;Riding a bike makes you happy, and happy people are nice people.Paul Liebermanhttps://plus.google.com/116323603138300579796noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4436604568430952320.post-75657644019746338642012-12-22T18:02:00.001-08:002012-12-22T20:46:03.924-08:00Is Sandy Hook a Kent State moment?<div dir="ltr">In my previous post I wrote about a time when change was possible. However it didn't always seem that way at the time. In 1970, after a tumultuous year of protesting the war in Vietnam I was back at school and doing my best to focus on my studies. The anti-war movement was becoming fractured with some people advocating violent revolution (the ring leader of this group turned out to be an under cover cop). I wanted to end violence, not create more of it. The public too was growing tired of the protests. "Law and order" was the theme of the moment. That all changed on May 4th when four college students were killed at Kent State University by National Guard troops trying to protect that law and order.&nbsp; My world was shattered. Sure the country had some problems but this was still the USA. Other countries gunned down their own citizens but surely not our country.&nbsp; But it happened. These were not criminals. They were young college students who only wanted to help make our country a better place.</div><div dir="ltr">I couldn't continue in school. None of that mattered now. The only thing that mattered was to end the war and to put an end to Nixon and the fascist government that could kill it's own youth. I wasn't the only one who felt that way. Kent State was the tipping point. People who had been on the sidelines before came out and said "enough is enough". Momentum to end the war was now unstoppable.</div><div dir="ltr">So is the Sandy Hook massacre enough to wake this country up to the terrible price we are paying for the right to own guns? Have enough of our children died to get our blood boiling? Will this be the tipping point that will finally bring some sanity to the conversation? I certainly hope so.</div>Paul Liebermanhttps://plus.google.com/116323603138300579796noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4436604568430952320.post-68744596955702771192012-12-21T12:52:00.001-08:002015-10-12T17:35:35.135-07:00The NRA is a terrorist organizationShortly after president Obama was elected for his first term I read an&nbsp;<a href="http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2022636,00.html">alarming&nbsp;article</a> in Time magazine about the sharp rise of extremist&nbsp;militia&nbsp;groups. Least we ever get comfortable in the feeling that maybe America has risen above hate and racism stuff like this comes along and slaps you in the face. The Southern Poverty Law Center is a group that tracks hate groups and their <a href="http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/hate-map">hate map</a> for 2011 shows over 1,000 hate groups active in this country. These are vicious, paranoid people dedicated to returning this country to a government of white men, by white men, and for white men. There is no room for Blacks, Jews,&nbsp;Latinos, gays, or uppity women in their world. They hate us, and they are well armed.<br /><br />When the NRA defends it's rigid stance against gun control the&nbsp;rhetoric&nbsp;is always about guns for hunting, or guns to protect your home. Would they ever admit to being the prime enabler of these hate militias? Of course not. Are they ignorant to the fact that they are enabling theses hate militias? Of course not. Why? Because their values are the same. The more right-wing anti-government hate is spewed out on talk radio shows, the more guns are sold, and more money pouring into the pockets of the NRA. We label Iran a terrorist nation because it supplies weapons to Hamas and other terrorist groups. These hate militias <i>are</i> terrorists groups&nbsp;and by extension the NRA is a terrorist organization.<br /><br />So okay, there is always the extremist element, but a large&nbsp;percentage&nbsp;of regular people are in favor of having guns. Yes, but these people aren't asking for automatic weapons with huge magazines capable of mass murder in the blink of an eye. These are the people that maybe want a hunting rifle or a hand gun. So how is it that Republican congressmen can insist that the second amendment means we can't limit access to the most&nbsp;lethal&nbsp;varieties of guns? Could it be that these same&nbsp;politics&nbsp;really sympathize with the hate groups? Think about it. All the Republicans talk about it&nbsp;dismantling&nbsp;the central&nbsp;government&nbsp;and defeating Obama. This is the same thing the hate groups are saying. The Republicans know very well that these hate groups are among their constituents. They count on their votes. Much of their advertising is targeted to appeal to these kinds of people.<br /><br />http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/12/the-nra-and-the-positive-good-of-maximum-guns/266571/<br /><br />http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/files/bulletins_australia_spring_2011.pdf<br /><br /><br /><br />Paul Liebermanhttps://plus.google.com/116323603138300579796noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4436604568430952320.post-17318778904879893162012-12-19T20:14:00.000-08:002012-12-22T17:57:53.660-08:00We really CAN change things<p dir="ltr">I'm re-purposing this blog to talk about the things that have been on my mind lately. I want to keep writing as a way to never forget the children that died at Sandy Hook school. I am outraged at the discourse about how we can never do anything about guns, that gun control will never work, and that its really a mental health issue. It's gotten so that people believe that massacres are just a fact of life in the USA. It's not individuals that need more mental health care, it is our collective consciousness. Our nation is sick and we have to figure out how to heal it. </p><p dir="ltr">People think the problem is just too big to solve. We already have too many guns in this country, and an entrenched gun industry. How can we ever change this? How can we turn a country around that is heading into an abyss of endless violence? </p><p dir="ltr">When I was a much younger man the country faced other seemingly unsolvable problems. Racism was rampant and all attempts to pass equal rights legislation were beat back by segregationists. We were mired in an endless war in Vietnam that was taking a terrible toll in lives and destruction. Our attempts to bring attention to these issues were met with cries of "outside agitators" and calls for "law and order". But we prevailed, and we forced a sitting president to step down, and we forced an end to that war. Most of us were just kids, barely out of high school. We didn't know you couldn't change things. We didn't know the problem was just too big to solve. All we knew was our outrage and our blind conviction that the war was wrong and we had to change it. We were young, idealistic and had a whole lot of energy. </p><p dir="ltr">What we did in protesting and ending the war in Vietnam had far greater reach than just ending the war. It popped the cork that was holding back progress on many social issues like civil rights, and the environment. It opened the door for women to start demanding equal treatment. It changed the way the nation looked at its young people and bumped our consciousness up a notch. Sure, the wave of progress faded after a while. The Reagan years swept in a reactionary mind set which has not yet lost it's grip on our nation. But we did change things. Against insurmountable odds we made a difference. </p><p dir="ltr">So I say now, if we could topple LBJ we can beat the NRA. Stay tuned ... </p>Paul Liebermanhttps://plus.google.com/116323603138300579796noreply@blogger.com0